Hi. I used to use this blog a lot more than i do now. I don't agree with much of what i've posted here, but such is the nature of time. :) My instagram & facebook are likely to be more up to date.

giant political post... ugh.

>> Friday, May 30, 2008


a great image from the new york times a while back...


let's play catch up here...

george w. bush - you shouldn't have missed the big tell-all book by scott mcclellan, the former bush press secretary. the reaction has been somewhat predictable. there was also, of course, his lie about quitting golf for the troops (which was a ridiculous gesture anyway, considering he didn't give up mountain biking). also ridiculous was his comparison of negotiating with iran with appeasing hitler (both of the last stories very well mocked by jon stewart here)

dick cheney - you can look at this swell expanding map of his political connections (a la mark lombardi), watch him speak with lie-detector analysis, or just plain impeach him (click this!) scumbag.

donald rumsfeld and friends - former commander of the u.s. forces in iraq, ricardo sanchez blows the whistle on rummy covering his ass for something or other. some spanish journalists (with help from an american intelligence analyst) blow a big story of the pentagon intentionally killing war journalists in the movie "hotel palestine - killing the witness". you'll be appalled to know five hundred million dollars were spent building the world's largest u.s. embassy in iraq, complete with hundreds of apartments and an olympic-sized swimming pool. your tax dollars at play... in other miltary news, the HUGE story of pentagon sponsored propaganda broken by the new york times was nearly ignored by almost all the corporate media, but you can read the military's confessions here, or oggle the immense scope of the misinformation campaign here. surprisingly, one of the only people pushing for action on this is john kerry... you can read his initial action call here, and check for updates here. oh, and a proxy war with iran is going down in lebanon (also in iran through various u.s.-backed militia groups on several borders...)

john mccain - the man with eight houses still tries to appear un-elitist and a "maverick", post-partisan visionary. that post-partisanship thing is a joke with him. he's siding with bush again with voting against the immensely popular bi-partisan g.i. bill that would guarantee a college educations for veterans after three years of service. anyway, there is a good website where you can go to learn about mccain's untruths. i still can't get enough of "the straight face express" as my favorite mocking of mccain's meme of "the straight talk express". what's your favorite?

hillary clinton - i gravitate towards this woman's fairly sexist analysis of why hillary failed. it's really essentializing, but probably close to the truth. i think honesty (or lack there-of as displayed by her situational ethics) were the single biggest reason, but the article makes some good points.

barack obama - oh yeah, that guy. well when he's not getting adopted into the crow nation (i couldn't help myself here) or brokering "peace" in nigeria, he's consolidating the democratic party, clinton supporters and potentially the country... let's hope the secret service gets a little less racist when he's the president. more facts to help unravel slanderous lies about him can be found on this website.

if you haven't had enough politics yet (masochist!), you can read arriana's great essay "probing a political paradox: why the discredited right still sets the agenda and dominates the debate" or ponder why the republicans might be against a bill allowing election recounts (or even weirder, why they crowned a king!?!?!)

2 comments:

laura May 31, 2008 at 3:20 PM  

i don't like the way that article suggests that hillary, as a woman, should campaign in a certain way, but i do think it's close to the truth that there are different expectations about men's and women's behavior, and hillary is judged by a different set of standards than a male candidate would be.

that is the conversation that i would love to be having about this election, but unfortunately she's made it impossible by being a lying, cheating, untrustworthy person, which is a much bigger issue.

james gyre... May 31, 2008 at 3:41 PM  

totally agree... that's the way i felt it was essentializing. you would think though that with all the shrewdness she's shown she didn't even pick up on these techniques. if she's willing to lie, or even over-amplify her "dominant" qualities, then why not jsut display her actual level of "feminine" qualities? it doens't make any sense. i honestly think if she had played it true (both with honesty and with her real gender preferences) she'd would be winning now...

got money? feed kids!

  © Blogger templates Romantico by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP