One Fine Jay

A few mornings ago my sister put her foot down on the Iraqi prison scandal by saying the following in Filipino, which I gladly translated for you all, dear friends: We all know that stuff is happening, it’s only that people were stupid enough to take pictures and leak this out.

Her words surprised me a little bit, but it put my feet back on the ground in considering this Prison Abuse Scandal™ that has gripped the rest of us for a very long time, it seems. The truth is, I don’t know where the high and lofty outrage really is coming from. Winky winky, are we that naive? Winky winky, come on now, we know it doesn’t happen, right? Winky winky, dear friends.

Now, I won’t argue whether such actions are unconscionable or not; for me they are inexcusable. But as I have written before, in every war there are war criminals: schoolyard bullies with power trips who know nothing about restraint much less a larger respect for the Uniform. At least they will be gone.

Irreperable damage? Well, that’s how the shit goes down. But as Sissy Willis noted very quickly, it’s almost “expected” in the Arab world that “torture” and torture and Torture and TORTURE happen. They have not viewed the evnts of Abu Ghraib with French — nay, American — eyes, or at least most of them, to who this “culture” of military abuse is next to normal.

Yes, it stinks. It really does, and I have been completely out of the loop the past few days from the news, the media, and what have you, but again, winky winky, did we really think this wasn’t going on? Better than Saddam may not be good enough, but could it really be a step in a good, if not better direction? Winky winky.

Doc J lists seven articles on MSNBC about the sitcom that just can’t die soon enough. I found out last night that the series finale is a whopping two hours of, well, Friends. I think I’ll have more tears running down my face watching Extreme Makeover than saying goodbye to that sitcom.

Speaking of Extreme Makeover, I saw the season finale last night and Marilynda completely pushed the envelope. (Her photo gallery still isn’t up, perhaps waiting for a rerun or two, but you can see her before and after on the front page of the before and after gallery.)

Let it be known: Pride is the first to go for a good cause; the last for a bad one.

Also see: Para Bill.

Shelly Powers was upset because Glenn Reynolds and other warbloggers like myself want more Iraqis who want us dead dead, and complained that he hasn’t written about the abuses in Abu Ghraib when she wrote her Instafuckyou post (though he did, at 540p, post hockey ergo propter hockey credit to Shelley, yeah sweetie you made him write about it). Later on she is shocked, shocked, that so many of us think we’re right. Not “Right” like right-winging deathbeasts — we scare her bad enough — but that we are so goddamned sure and proud of our opinions. A word to the wise, Shelley. Do not confuse humility with a lack of conviction; nor confidence with hubris. I write what I believe is right and do so because I believe it’s right. Day by day I question my own beliefs and they come up valid. I present my opinions with humility, because I call them opinions. No one has to agree with me. And for as long as my opinions are well-founded they are not “wrong.” Should I, then, present them to the world with my head down? Whatever. Last night I went to a bar and had two Irish Car Bombs, a Red-Headed Slut and three budweisers. It was karaoke night; I sang, I was terrible, and I got drunk in public for the first time in a very long time.

This is not exactly the most original thought out there, but I’ll echo it anyway. There is one particular episode of the Mad Bill show that I want to see, but it is a mere suggestion. I want Ted Rall, and Rene Gonzalez as guests in the same studio as Pat Tillman’s bereaved family members.

UPDATE: Here’s a quick thought. I’m not one to give out death wishes onto people who are not heinous criminals. I’ll take an exception for Ted Rall over here, because he is a vile piece of filth who, for me, has forfeited his humanity. However, he does not deserve the honor of being killed by someone, and especially not in Pat Tillman’s honor.

The following is a parody brought to you by a very bored Jay:

In a surprising turn of events, the Washington Post journalist who blew wide open the fraud known as Micah Ian Wright has now come forward with his own apology:

”‘Micah Ian Wright’ is not a real human being. He is the product of fraud. He is my creation, a fraud created by a fraud. I created him because I needed to make a buck. I lied to my editors, I lied to the American people, and I lied to myself. And when I discovered that if I made him pretend to be a turncoat, treasonous Army Ranger, the allure of my fraud became too irresistible.

“Now, I have made ‘Micah Ian Wright’ issue a non-apology of some sort to all those that he has lied to. Only, he has not lied to anyone. How can someone who is not really someone lie? My entire life is a tissue of lies, and instead of waiting for the next person to come forward and confess that I myself am not a real person, I am doing it pre-emptively.

“I, Richard Leiby, am not a real person. I am only a creation of yet another person’s creation, who happens to be yet another person’s creation…”

[end parody]

I have never heard of MI Wright before, until news of this broke at Michele’s. Since then I have spent most of the day reading up on him, if I wasn’t doing some very important work for someone. This shitbag really makes the pretend world of The Matrix pale in comparison. Greatest of thanks to the hard work of Richard Leiby who really is a real person, for weeding out this crapweasel.

The reprisal party at Michele’s is a glorious sight.

Let us take a present, tragic situation: A five year old boy gets killed by shrapnel from a grenade thrown by a US Marine. Totally hypothetical, but completely possible. I will show you how a Capital-L Liberal would blame, ultimately, God.

This marine serves in the United States Marine Corps. The USMC is a branch of the military. The military is led by a civilian, the commander-in-chief, who happens to be the President. The man occupying the Office Of The President is George W. Bush.

George W. Bush was “selected” by an imperial body of nine judges in the Supreme Court Of The United States. At least one of these judges is Caucasian. As such, said judge is probably descended from the Pilgrims that came her on the Mayflower, or subsequent immigration attempts.

(to cut a very long-ass story short)

“God” created the world. If he did not create the world, then this would not have happened. Blame “God!”

Or better yet, since some Capital-L Liberals cannot even stomach the idea of a supreme theos, then they can blame it on the Big Bang. Blame the start of the universe!

An even better, concrete, and real-life example:

“I have to march because my mother could not have an abortion.”
–US Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif) at Pro-Abortion Rally Sunday, April 25

Thanks Rob P for that one.

I have been pondering about Shelley Powers’ question in her long-ish essay, Can We Still Be Friends, where she asks: “If Bush is re-elected, can we still be friends?”

My short answer is pretty evident in the title, but it needs a bit of explaining. When Bill Clinton won for the second time, the Right was divided into two camps: those that foamed in the mouth, and those that didn’t. The Clinton bashers of that day have remained the same. Those that didn’t sat down, got their heads together, and came up with a plan, a platform that could actually be sold to the American public. Behold, George W. Bush.

My greatest fear in a John Kerry victory is that the fringes of the Left, the same ones that have been pushed into the mainstream and given mainstream validation, will throw the greatest orgiastic party of deconstruction and unravelling of everything that this administration has done. Taxes? Raise them to lower the deficit. Never mind that the more money remains in the hands of the private sector, the greater the growth of the economy could be. War On Terror? Oh, no such thing under the Kerry administration. Never mind that the leadership of radical Islamists want us blown to bits; what is more important to the Victorious Left, 2004 is that there are no more dead M14 fedayeen infiltrators in civilian clothes holding concealed weapons firing at our stationed troops.

The Left’s paradigm of government is that there can be not enough things to improve. In the quest to make things the best way they can be, they will trample on the Constitution, our existing laws and standards, as well as disrespect the beliefs and humanity of those they are willing to trample on in the never-ending quest for the holy grail called justice.

George Bush needs to win thisyear, in order for the Left to reevalute its priorities. Yes, we will all be stuck with George W. Bush, a president whose certain policies and beliefs I disagree with too, on some degree, but one whose “side” I generally am on. It is the only way for The Left to actually calm down and stop foaming at the mouth like beached crabs. Only then will they be taken seriously by The Rest Of Us.

That, or like the commenters on her site have indicated, there’s always Canada. Which really is a sad reaction; if there is a matter to change and a case to be made, I think the moral duty of such strong believers is to try and go ahead and duke it out in Congress. Besides, four more years of George Bush and he’ll be gone, and then there will be the rise of The Great Hillary! Clinton. Bring it on; I hope to see Ollie North and Condi Rice against her in 2008, and then we’ll really see if sanity has gripped The Left.

One of the advantages of having studied “small-e” ecology — and science, in general — is that one gains the important skill of discernment between what is and what is not valid science. The scientific method is the base methodology on how the understanding of the world, and the universe, or at least our understanding of it, changes dramatically as a result of its results.

In his Caltech lecture Michael Crichton argues:

I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.

Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

This particular passage has been jumped upon by commentators out and about and yet they are missing the context at which it is considered: particularly because the historical development of science — the knowledge that is gained through causes — is marred by politics and “consensus science.” “Consensus science” is where new science is stifled because the guardians of old science have been faced with a set of facts, data, and subsequent conclusions that challenge their old science.

The history of how the bacterial origins of peptic ulcers was discovered is an excellent example. The medical community had a consensus science that said that bacteria could not possibly live in the stomach and cause ulcers. When Barry Marshall ingested an H. pylori culture and developed ulcers, the road to changing the paradigm has been paved. I did not follow the entire history of Marshall’s challenge to consensus science. I suppose proof of its results exist today. Between then and now the medical community has reevaluated its consensus and has found it to be false.

This is the challenge that capital-e Environmentalists face today. Armed with suspect methodologies, insufficient data that the scientific community is at a loss to handle, and vile rhetoric as well as alarmist propaganda, they seem to get a pass at “proving” their suspect science and nonetheless are able to sell it to the public. Let us take note that “scientific conservatives” who approach the matter of climate change with great suspicion do not form a legendary and shadowy cabal of lab rats opposed to the betterment of the envrionment (ad hominem, particularly poisoning the well), rather they are scientists who know the scientific method and that under the guidelines of discovery and experimentation find evidence to be lacking. The two questions that keep Environmentalists bothered are “wheres the beef” and “how did you cook what little beef you’re showing us?”

Amusingly enough, just as capital-l Liberals who cannot make their case in Congress run to the Supreme Court for massive upheavals in social engineering, capital-e Environmentalists who cannot make their case in the scientific community run to the court of public opinion to scare the living daylights out of the The People and teach them to hate themselves because they happen to have been born human.

(I make no pretense that there will be those scientists who will oppose anything new despite the presence of irrefutible proof; they are not who I consider among the “scientific conservatives” as they are as religious about their views in their staunchness as those who challenge it.)

The upcoming movie, The Day After Tomorrow, has gained momentum as a result of the blogosphere’s dismissal of the junk science surrounding, as well as Al Gore’s histrionic reaction to this histrionic movie. Here is my prediction as to how the public will turn out, after seeing this movie. They will be in awe of the special effects, the booming sound, they will feel gripped by the pretend deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. They will witness the symbol of capitalistic success freeze over. Then after approximately two hours of this “visually stunning” showcase, these Americans who have seen this movie will step out the movie theatres. Majority will ride in their fossil-fuel combustion-engine automobiles. Some will light up their tobacco products. They will proceed to eat the products of free markets, capitalist ventures that have ensured food safety, and ingenuity that provides convenience (think: McDonald’s; think: Burger King; think: PB&J sandwiches). I am also convinced that the one or two self-hating human beings who would destroy their evil cars after seing this movie will get extensive media coverage. They’d have had discovered the folly of their ways just as the criminals who confessesed did so after seeing The Passion Of The Christ.

In all of this, I am more than amused that the clown that wanted to be president is now leveraging on a movie that is dripping with assclownery of the highest scientific order. We human beings are such complex organisms, are we not?

Rantblogging Aaron has an excellent point:

Has ANYONE mentioned the possibility that the reason the Iraqis want the US out now is that they KNOW they have WMDs and that they want them for themselves for a post-Saddam Iraq?

It’d be quite a coup for a new Iraqi government (one man, one vote, one time in the usual Islamic fashion, no doubt) to have a “surprise” for the region a few years from now.

[…] I have NO idea WHY we’re engaged in nation building, even $5 worth, before we have an unconditional surrender to the degree that Iraqis are turning in their own monsters for military justice. We’re not close to that. Yet.

It is said that power corrupts, but actually it’s more true that power attracts the corruptible. I find myself quoting that too many times today. Either way, I have not been introduced to the devious concept of the hudna until a few days ago. Tactically sound, totally dishonorable, and not something we should really be considering when dealing with al-Sadr.

This recipe from the New York Times for New England Clam Chowder was a harrowing experience to read. Final step in the procedure:

Assemble servings in 6 small shallow bowls. Spoon 2 tablespoons warm potato purée into each bowl. Add 1 tablespoon of warm onion jam, slightly off-center. Spoon 1 tablespoon bacon cream around edge of purées. Place a room-temperature clam in center of bowl. If clam broth jelly has solidified, pulse it with an immersion blender or whisk it until it is a loose gel, and spoon 1 teaspoon directly over clam in each bowl. Drizzle chive oil over dish. Garnish with reserved diced bacon and with pinches of crushed potato chips.

Campbell’s Select has got nothing on that bitch.

UPDATE: I felt a parody of Rene Gonzalez’s “apologetic non-apology” creeping up while chatting about this recipe with some friends. To channel Scrappleface:

The rogue chef by the name of Jose Andres has issued an apology to all residents of the New England region for publishing a recipe that these residents called “offensive,” “disgusting” “arrogant,” and “immature.” In a statement to the Culinary Institute of America, read on Food TV by Wolfgang Puck, Chef Andres says, “I am more than aware that one cooks soup by bringing things slowly together over time, as opposed to blowing the flavors apart and putting them back together again. But, I felt that New England Clam Chowder has been treated like a lowly dish, and I felt that American society had arrived at that conclusion without much thinking, but rather as a knee-jerk reaction to the way classic American dishes are made. I felt the need to elevate it to the heights of pretentious haute cuisine in order to give it some justice, but I did it in such an insensitive way, that my recipe is not worth publishing.”

As of press time Jose Andres could not be reached for comment. He has not returned phone calls nor e-mails, and his restaurant is boarded up with duct tape. Reportedly he has received threats from Maine residents for a “crash course” in cooking clam chowder.

[end parody] More background info on the newest kid to feel the full force of freedom of speech courtesy of Guy, of North Georgia Dogma. And just as an aside. Whoever is threatening that kid’s life is still committing a crime. I find it beneath me to call for violence upon this shitbag.

UPDATE II: I look forward to Dave Neiwert writing a collegiate-paper–length blog entry on how the reaction to Rene “Tillman is a not a hero” Gonzalez is an indicator of the creeping fascism that is slowly tightening its grip on this country. He used IMAO as an example before; why stop there, eh?

My eyes seem to be failing me as I read this article’s title off my Sharpreader as “Just How [’Histrionic’] Can an Oval Office Interview Be if It’s Not Recorded?” [As opposed to “Historic."]

Maybe when two inquisitors walk out before it’s even over. What a pair of drama queens.

John Cole mourns the absolutely deplorable actions by some of our soldiers and opines:

Several commenters have noted in previous posts that at least it appears the military is taking this seriously and reacting appropriately. That is scant solace.

Do these soldiers understand how many of their brothers-in-arms they have just executed?

Do they understand how many Improved Explosive Devices they just built?

Do the recognize how many random grenade attacks they have just inititated?

And on a simply human level- Have they no sense of fundamental decency?

I am so ashamed. That is my uniform they are wearing.

It reminds me of this classic quote by David Brin: It is said that power corrupts, but actually it’s more true that power attracts the corruptible. Behold the corruptible. Too sad that all of their brothers-in-arms will face the greater conequences of their actions.

Care of Michele, a musical meme. Here are the rules to play:

1. Grab the nearest CD.
2. Put it in your CD-Player (or start your mp3-player, I-tunes, etc.).
3. Skip to Song 3 (or load the 3rd song in your 3rd playlist)
4. Post the first verse in your journal along with these instructions. Don’t name the band, nor the album-title.

Mary heard boys talkin’ in voices low
Saying she weren’t no spring chicken
Like she didn’t already know
So she called up Jack from a few years back
She turned him down once in his one-room shack
She said, “Now baby, you don’t look that bad”

All right, dear friends, start guessing.

Let me borrow from Gerard Van Der Leun:

“But what can I do?”
“Do what God puts in front of you.”

Michele has a thank-you card for everyone who has done anything towards the goals of the Spirit Of America. I share my thanks, not only for the donations that are for a good cause, but also for everyone who has given up something “quid pro quo” for a little bit of help. For me to list them down would be for me to forfeit my entire morning copying and pasting, typing and correcting, linking and tracking blogs back. I am too lazy for this. Even at the beginning of it all I was floored by the creativity and the approach that we took. We offered a part of our selves for greater rewards than simple matters of exchange and commerce. And for once I felt a rush, an unfamiliar high that doesn’t usually hit me.

I spent a little bit of last night pondering as to when it was that it felt the same, and when I figured it out I just had to pause a little and smile. It was like when I was in college again, working with other people in my class to go ahead and work towards a common goal. I was pretty active in my college organization as well as some extracurricular activities. We would hold all sorts of activities: contests, symposia, talks, and throughout these events leaders and followers alike would experience the depths of stress when something goes wrong. Everyone would be taut as violin strings, and nerves would be frazzled. However, at the end of it all was that deep sigh of relief, a cathartic release of tension upon looking at the empty conference hall: chalkboards to be erased, stray papers to be picked up, materials to be placed in order, and chairs to straighten out. Sometimes we were too tired to even sit down and say, “hey that was good,” and that all we wanted was to go home. Other times, lunch out with the team members was the order of the day. Whether we wanted to all just go home, or hang out afterwards, what mattered was that there was the acknowledgement of a job well done.

It really has been a long time since I have felt the way I did yesterday. Thank you all, solicitors and donors, dear friends, for the chance to experience it all over again, if but for a few hours. My best wishes to the SOA leadership, and my greatest thanks to our Marines.

In closing, from Gerard yet again:

And I have to think that no matter what I am doing to help, no matter what I ever manage to do, I’m still going to hear:

“It’s not enough. It’s not enough.”

My only answer to his creeping doubt: That something has been done, that a step has been taken, and that a personal sacrifice has been made, may perhaps be enough.

Here’s a quick quiz about our big-media talking heads:.

Question: What’s the difference between Ted Koppel reading out the names of the dead, and possibly Shepard Smith doing it?

Friend’s answer: One’s an ass and the other’s not.

No I really don’t want to add fuel to the fire, and I am biting my tongue a lot, but I need to give Kevin Aylward a heads-up and a public note that I am sad, sad, saaaaaaad at this moment because some of our sacrifices are being used as examples to prove points that are totally tangent to the situation. Not to mention that the fact that the exchange of comments at Kevin’s post even happened is just, disgraceful. I feel icky now.

When Terry comes crawling home again, hurrah, hurrah:

Democrats began a weeklong attack on Vice President Dick Cheney’s record yesterday, with party chief Terry McAuliffe calling him “the last guy who should be lecturing John Kerry” and a Democrat-leaning group suggesting that Mr. Cheney’s wife became pregnant to help her husband avoid serving in Vietnam.

Mr. McAuliffe, speaking at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in Washington, called Mr. Cheney “the Bush campaign’s attack dog in chief,” and questioned whether he had the credentials to make his speech yesterday criticizing Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry’s voting record on defense — policywise as well as personally.

Dodd Harris is just… Dodd Harris is just… Dodd Harris is just… Heck, I’m just… I’m just… I’m just…

Oh my good lord. What the hell is wrong with these people? Attack dogs my ass, we attack people on the merits of their actions and this is the kind of rhetoric that backflows in our direction? All the kiddos out there who are deathly afraid of the draft boogeyman have Terry Mac to thank. They need look no further than the closest vagina to go ahead and dodge the draft that will never come.

Not that this day is a once-yearly thing, by any means. It seems to come in waves and we are all the m ore ready to go ahead and take it on. Mister Words on the “chickenhawk” argument:

That’s also the logic behind the now-classic “chickenhawk” accusation rather routinely leveled against many advocates of war by those who opposed it: “If you favor war, why haven’t you signed up yourself and volunteered for combat? If you’re unwilling to do that, why do you think you have any right to advocate sending other people to war to die in your place?”

There are a number of answers to those questions, all more than sufficient, but none are actually needed, because those questions are irrelevant, and the basic logic behind that objection is invalid.

The value of a question or a policy is not affected to the qualifications or personal characteristics of the person who voiced it. A liar can make a true statement; a fool can propose a wise policy; an idiot can ask a good question.

And popes still don’t have to be crucified to comment on matters of Christianity.

Den Beste goes on to say a lot more things — like that was a big surprise — and all of them pretty good. But remember, there’s not point trying to convince fixed minds.

(Link thanks to Aaron The Rantblogger.)

I suppose Rene Gonzales — who by the way is a man despite his name — knows how it is to be a chicken and knows how to act like one too. I’m not jumping on him because he’s insulting Pat Tillman. Heck, all that needs happen is for his words to float in the air as the miasma of his insults exposes itself to as many people as he can.

He has all the right to comment on Pat Tillman’s death, the war in Iraq, et cetera, et cetera, peter cetera. I wouldn’t deprive him of that right simply for being a college student. He is, however, more than qualified to write a treatise on cowardice, 20th century tactics in a 21st-century war, as well as a manual on how to spit on dead soldiers’ graves. This kid needs a book, any editors out there want to help him publish the next roll of luxury fish wrapper?

(Link thanks to Jeff Goldstein)

An aside to that young student: Welcome to the blogging age, kiddo. Where legions of people who are free to write what they think of your opinions can share theirs and tell you just how much they hate you. Oh, and if anyone threatens your life, it’s still against the law. Just so we’re clear. That’s why I’m steering clear of any rhetoric to that effect.