Archive for May, 2009



May 28, 2009


…out to lunch?

*     *     *     *     *

“C, you slapped Powell around pretty good the other day on Scheiffer’s show,” says N.

“That son-of-a-bitch needs to be knocked down a few notches. Who the hell does he think he is – votin’ for a f—ing Dem. I don’t care if he is black!”

“That’s right!” says R through a puff of cigar smoke. “We have to keep these whimps in line. They need to know who’s in charge.”

“And now we have a racist Latino woman nominated for the Supreme Court,” notes N. “That sure gives you plenty to talk about on your show, doesn’t it R?”

“I’ve always got plenty to talk about. When you make it up, you never run out of material.”

“HA!” snorts C. “And we have to keep “makin’ it up,” too. Our way is the ONLY way back to power.”

“Damn right!” huffs N. “Say, how about you and I runnin’ in 2012? With R promoting us, we can’t lose. The party would come ROARING back!”

“You might have somethin’ there N,” C agrees. “I get the top of the ticket. I’m probably only good for one term anyway.”

“What about Palin?” asks R.

“We can give her a job in our administration. She’d take Secretary of State,” C replies.

“I’m not sure she’s ready,” N says questioningly.

“SURE she is!” blurts R, still enamoured with her from the 2008 election. “State’s a cake-walk. Have somebody tell her what to say, show her how to dress, and make sure her family stays home!”

“I hate to break up this Sarah love-fest, but what’s next for us and the party?” N asks.

“I’ll keep pounding away at national security. Since I started runnin’ my mouth, my ratings have gone from sixteen to twenty-nine percent. I keep this up and I’ll be over fifty in no time,” says C.

“I’ll keep going after the SCOTUS nominee,” N chimes in. “By the time I’m done with her, she’ll be apologizing for being Latino. That’ll send that socialist President we have back to the drawing board to look for someone who thinks like us.”

“And looks like us, too!” R says.

“How about you, R?’ asks N. “Are you planning anything special to help revive our party?”

“I’ll do what I do best. I’ll keep bullshitin’ my way through a radio show everyday. The hours are good, they pay ain’t bad, and…”

“AIN’T BAD? You think fifty million a year ‘ain’t bad’ for runnin’ your mouth three hours a day, makin’ shit up as you go?” snaps C.

“It’s okay” says R, smiling. “But I’m gonna ask for a pay raise if you guys win. After all, we’re in a recession.”

“We’re gonna win!” N gloats. “There’s no way this party is gonna become extinct.

 *     *     *     *     *

Hmm. Sometimes, you can make this stuff up. 🙂



PS – Special thanks to Jonathan Alter for the R (Rush), N (Newt), C (Cheney) idea.



May 26, 2009


I know very little about Erich Muller. I don’t listen to political talk radio in the morning, I prefer comedy on my way to work.

Until his recent exploit into water-boarding, Erich “Mancow” Muller was just another name in the seemingly never-ending list of talk radio show hosts. It’s been my experience that most hosts are not willing to back up their words with actions. Erich Muller is obviously the exception.

He was convinced that water-boarding was not torture. He apparently talked about it on his show and decided to get water-boarded to prove it wasn’t torture – a good move for all of us on all sides of the debate.

In 2007, Christopher Hitchens, who, in my opinion, is as arrogant as Dick Cheney and who is certainly not a friend of liberalism, experienced water-boarding.

There are others who denounced water-boarding as torture and then completely reversed their thinking after the experience. A simple Google/YouTube search will reveal these cases.

There’s plenty of evidence  that water-boarding is torture. We also know it yields no reliable results.

So can we finally put the argument to rest?

Can we please go back to the country we were before these policies were implemented?

Are we done now?





May 24, 2009


It was bound to happen sooner or later.

In a brilliant move by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, Rush Limbaugh was revealed for the intellectual field mouse that he is. Combine that “attribute” with the personality of a rake and his Jabba-the-Hut posture as seen on  his “Ditto Cam” and you have the buffoon that conservatives are inexplicably afraid to defy.

Many think Rush is a genius when it comes to how well he markets himself, but let’s give credit where credit is due. ClearChannel Communications through its subsidiary, Premiere Radio Networks, markets Rush’s show free of charge to hundreds of radio stations. Because Rush’s popularity is barely 20%, Premiere uses his show as a loss-leader to obtain advertising time for national sponsors. In other words, radio stations don’t pay a dime for three hours of national programming. They simply trade for 45 minutes of advertising in that three hour time slot. None of this was Rush’s idea.

Olbermann has gone after Rush in the past for some of his insulting, racist, and incendiary rants. Here’s Keith highlighting some of Rush’s “greatest hits.”

Rush has now challenged MSNBC. He believes they can’t go 30 days without talking about him.

This was a bad idea.

What Rush didn’t expect was Olbermann throwing the same challenge back on him in his “WTF!?! Moment” on May 21st, which featured Keith saying… you guessed it… “F. U.”  to Rush. (Not the actual words – just the letters.)

Rush responded by saying that Olbermann’s “back-at-you” challenge was incoherent.  That’s rich. The man with no ability for thoughtful discernment calls the highly educated and intellectually superior MSNBC host “incoherent.”

Never give Keith Olbermann a second chance to make a fool of you. He’s too good at it the first time. Olbermann not only re-issued and re-aired his challenge the next night, calling it the “WTF Coherency Test,” but had his graphics team create a new “Bouncing Rush” logo from Rush’s entrance at the CPAC Convention earlier this year.

Maybe “buffoon” is too generous.






May 22, 2009


We humans have our “moments” – some intentional, some unintentional and some… well… stupid.

This will be an ongoing series as new material comes my way.

For Vol. 1, we’ll go with signs.


Can Vol. 2 be far behind?





May 21, 2009


This post will not be easy to write.

My faith is very personal. I don’t spew it onto others and I do not respond when others try to spew theirs onto me. In fact, I find it somewhat uncomfortable to even discuss my faith unless I’m in a “safe” environment such as my church or home.

It is my experience that most practicing Christians walk with calm, quite strength through their daily routines and a reasonably clear understanding about the natural and spiritual order of life. I also find that each person experiences these differently, through his or her own personal aperture and no two understandings are exactly alike.

It is not surprising that some wear religion “on their sleeve” often quoting Biblical Scripture in nearly every situation. I don’t begrudge them. I’m simply stating my personal lack of comfort with the practice.

I do, however, take serious issue with public policy being directed by one’s personal interpretation of the Bible – a group of 66 individual books written in different parts of the world, at different times, most of which were literally spoken to scribes, in different languages, who then wrote what they heard. Contradictions within the Bible aside, the very fact that there are so many interpretations of the Bible and therefore different Christian denominations, convinces me that any elected official using his or her interpretation to make public policy is highly inappropriate.

So imagine my surprise when I read “And He Shall Be Judged,” an article by Robert Draper published this week. Draper is the author of Dead Certain: The Presidency of George W. Bush  and a correspondent covering John McCain’s campaign.

As much as I don’t want you to stop reading this page, I highly recommend taking a few minutes to read Draper’s article. I’ll wait. 🙂

Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, allowed the use of Biblical Scripture on the covers of top secret Worldwide Intelligence Updates prepared for the President and others to reinforce the belief that invading a sovereign nation was the Christian thing to do, much like the warring Christians and Muslims during the Crusades.

Here are some of the covers as reported by GQ Magazine online.













Apparently, Bush liked the idea, using the term “Crusade” when he addressed the public on the invasion.

He continued applying religious terms to justify the War on Terror.

His certitude was complimented by his admirers. They believed that Bush’s application of his Biblical knowledge towards public policy was the proper way to lead our nation.

Bush continued to gain confidence about his decisions, with an arrogance no leader should ever display. Here are some quick clips.

I will NEVER discount or criticize the beliefs of others. This nation was founded on the concept of individual freedoms – religious faith being one of them.

But we are a SECULAR Republic functioning as a Democracy, not a Theocracy. Our forefathers specifically stayed away from religious teachings when creating our Constitution. This is how the separation of church and state is implied and applied in our form of government.

The idea that Donald Rumsfeld allowed CHRISTIAN Scripture on the covers of top secret Intelligence Updates to help justify a military action is abominable.

I pray it never happens again.





May 15, 2009






I know the last line doesn’t fit, but it makes my point: how is it that the man who stayed in his “cave” for nearly eight years is now more visible than clouds during a thunderstorm?

Here are some highlights from Dick’s Doomsday Tour:

The former VP admits to authorizing torture.

Torture is ILLEGAL regardless of what Bush Administration lawyers concocted to the contrary. Calling it “Enhanced Interrogation Techniques,” does not make it legal. We have prosecuted and convicted people for torturing – specifically water-boarding. John McCain called water-boarding torture during the campaign of 2008 – he should know.  We’ve also prosecuted our own soldiers for water-boarding.

If you are one of the “…ends justifies the means…” crowd, then imagine your son or daughter in Afghanistan captured and tortured by the Taliban. Are the actions justified? Do they have a right to treat your child inhumanely? Do we have the right to ask them to spare your child this suffering? If so, on what basis? Is “what’s good for the goose” suddenly not good for the gander? And what about “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you?”

Scott McClellan says Bush knew everything. Dick Cheney said the same thing.

Dick Cheney believes that unless a President is impeached, he has not done anything illegal.

He says he would “talk” to congress, with pre-conditions – my term, not his.

Dick Cheney is never going to testify under oath to congress. He has no respect for the institution. He’ll have to be subpoenaed by a Federal Prosecutor under threat of incarceration before he raises his right hand in a courtroom.

The Obama Administration is making us less safe?

The argument that the Bush-Cheney Administration kept us safe is flawed. Let’s not forget: OUR COUNTRY WAS HIT – FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER – DURING THE BUSH-CHENEY YEARS. We now know the attacks on September 11, 2001 could have been prevented had the warnings not been ignored. But don’t take my word for it. Read for yourself:

Article 1, Article 2, Article 3, Article 4, Article 5, Article 6, Article 7, Article 8, Article 9, Article 10   

CheneylooksatBushIn addition, we also know that Bush and Cheney had every intention of invading Iraq, one year before the invasion took place, thanks to the Downing Street Memos, and this exhaustive report from the Washington Post on the memos. Continued research reveals far more than I’ve indicated here.


Once we invaded Iraq, Cheney went into hiding – revealing the character of a morally bankrupt coward – not a patriot, as he would have us believe.

The idea that he is somehow concerned about the safety of our country is laughable. From his five military deferments to his fear-based tactics as VP that led to the death of 4,500 (and still counting) of this country’s finest in an unnecessary “war,” it is obvious that Cheney is only concerned about one thing – Dick Cheney.

In case you’re wondering:




My military eligibility years were during the Vietnam War. I was classified 1H and would have gone in the Army had my number been called in the draft lottery.

Because I was older than the 18-year-olds that were picked first, I was never called. I was against the war, to be sure, but I did not try to hide from military service. On a very personal and sad note, I lost a good friend in that war. Another friend that did make it back was never the same after his tour. He came home with deep psychological issues from all of the violence, death and destruction that he witnessed.

As I’ve said before, the truth always reveals itself no matter how hard people try to hide it. The title of this post only reflects what Cheney is saying, and not what he is really doing.

His motive for speaking now is clear to me. He’s sees himself as the defendant in what I hope will be a case against him for war crimes. Cheney is trying to influence the jury pool – TV and radio audiences – before the trial begins.

At a time when the Republican Party is trying to find its voice, the last thing it needs is a fear-mongering, draft-dodging, hypocrite who’s trying to stay out of jail. Saying that Rush Limbaugh is a better Republican than Colin Powell doesn’t help either.

For all Cheney’s efforts to defend the use of torture, there is far more evidence that it is indefensible. And now, investigations have begun.

Cheney’s daughter, Liz, has joined the tour. She mentions that others may be talking to their lawyers, which is why no one else is coming out to defend her father. (Note the 3:21 mark in the video.)

None of us knows where this will end. What we do know is our credibility as the world’s beacon for peace and hope must be restored. We should always persevere until the truth is fully revealed and the rule of law is applied to all involved.

In much the same way when I grew up, I want future generations to grow up in a country they can be proud to call home.



PS – A special thanks to Maureen Dowd for the “Doomsday Dick” title idea. 




May 11, 2009


Apparently, it is now possible to go “over the top” in comedy.


When did that change? There didn’t used to be an “over the top” in comedy. Since when did comedy have to be politically correct? We’ve all heard comedians say crude things about different ethnicities, religious leaders, politicians and themselves.

But God forbid you say something  slightly distasteful about  Rush Limbaugh?


The Washington Correspondents Dinner was held this past Saturday night. President Obama was his usual funny self. He has the unique ability to deliver a line, and if it starts to fall short of the expected response, he smiles, and people start laughing. This is not something that can be taught. It’s one of many gifts this President brings when he addresses an audience.

Even the previous president was pretty good at delivering lines at these dinners, although he did have a way of indicating when the punch line was coming.

Wanda Sykes followed President Obama and apparently, she is not a fan of Rush Limbaugh. Duh. Is anyone surprised? She made a JOKE about Rush getting kidney failure as a retort to his comment about wanting Obama to fail, thereby wanting the country to fail. (Treason anyone?) This was after she brought up Rush’s admitted drug abuse. Kidney’s fail with heavy drug usage, much like they fail with heavy alcohol usage. So do livers, spleens and pancreases.

Listening to Rush’s fans, you would think she cut off his genitalia with a machete. Rush’s racists comments alone should keep anyone from critisizing Sykes. Here’ some examples:

Here’s the song called “Barack the Magic Negro” that Rush Limbaugh DEFENDED on his show. First, the song:

Now, here’s two clips of Rush’s defense of the song – one video, one audio:

To be fair, Sykes knew she had gone to that “hmmm… maybe I shouldn’t go there” area in her commentary when she turned to Michelle Obama and asked “Too much?” – which also got a great response from the audience.

I don’t know if Rush will respond to Sykes, but I would not be surprised if he did.

You know what I’m going to say next.

Okay, just in case you don’t: If you can’t take the heat, get out of the oven!