Breaking: National Utopian Telegenic Socialists party to launch in Hollywood

RUMORED: Sean Penn, Janine Garofalo, Rosy O'Donnell, Whoopie Goldberg, Joy Behar and several other celebrities are reportedly under discussion to launch National Utopian Telegenic Socialists party, or the Hollywood NUTS.

Their political platform is said to be in the midst of a vocal sorting out by the well-known actors and entertainers. Negotiations on the group's official stand on a broad group of issues aren't expected to be completed until sometime in 2010.


- j Ruse, aka AirFarceOne (Twitter)




Powered by ScribeFire.

Are nuclear weapons deserving of a Nobel Prize? Obama vowed to earn his, the Bomb already has

It's refreshing to see that, over at the oft-slobbering news rag TIME, someone can manage to offer thoughts that are based on reality, not wishful thinking, in the always-vital area of nuclear proliferation. (The emphases below are mine.)

From TIME magazine, 'Why the Nobel Peace Prize Should Go to Nuclear Weapons':

As long as a nukeless world remains wishful thinking and pastoral rhetoric, we'll be all right. But if the Nobel committee truly cares about peace, they will think a little harder about actually trying to make it a reality. Open a history book and you'll see what the modern world looks like without nuclear weapons. It is horrible beyond description.

During the 31 years leading up to the first atomic bomb, the world without nuclear weapons engaged in two global wars resulting in the deaths of an estimated 78 million to 95 million people, uniformed and civilian. "

Somewhere above 78 million people died in two world wars, within 31 years. Since 1945, how are we doing? Better, I'd say.

Is it impossible for anyone to see that so long as nukes are CONTROLLED, thus, not in the hands of those who will use them simply to advance their religious or power-hungry zealotry, that the THREAT of them in the world actually makes it a safer place? What exactly is the educational background of the dunces who think the US is a bigger threat with nuclear weapons than another country? Only the powerful, sociopathic zealots who are now kept -- barely -- in check by our having them.

Amazingly, there are calls for more centralized governing, even in what started out as what you could call the individualism center of the planet, the United States. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Bigger government is corrupt -- absolutely. Especially in the still-kicking power center of the world, the United States.

Please, wake up, or take your voice out of the argument, thanks, if you think some hands-holding, rainbows-without-storms, birds-chirping, floating cars fantasy is going to happen in your lifetime. Not going to come out of human effort alone. It's a nice sentiment. Sadly, it always reminds me of the outset of the original Battlestar Galactica, when the human powers-that-be insist, despite advice otherwise, that they can live peacefully with their aggressive enemy. Also, it reminds me of the cliche, but not irrelevant, historic blunder of UK PM Chamberlain who signed (with France) an agreement with Adolf Hitler that gave part of Czechoslovakia to the Nazis. Hitler invaded Poland only months later.

Only a stubborn cynic refuses to hope for a time of peace, but only a perfect fool believes they will be living in one sometime soon.

The world is getting more complex at the same time it is shrinking. We are in the midst of a shaping global economy that differs from the one that existed even 25 years ago. The requirement needs to be that the real troublemakers -- the centralized control dictators/theocracies, the extreme zealots, the terrorism-supporting factions -- prove to the truly democracy-oriented that they are willing to play far nicer. It is not to be the other way around. The US and its less imposing allies don't owe these people anything. But some leaders disagree. In fact, Obama seems to think the US was on a track of empire-building up to and until he became president. That's interesting from a man who uses the word "I" far more than "we".

A nuclear-free world is the fantasy of goofballs and academic arguments, yet, in the States, we now have a platitude-rich president who joins that crowd as a true believer, by his words.

Holocaust-denying, genocidal, mass-dog-killing, political-foe-assassinating, gross-poverty-concealing, terrorist-supporting, and/or Third World-resource-grifting, and other far-flung governments centered on abuses, not embarrassed by its exposure, are not interested in getting along with us. We are spoiled, misinformed, TV comedy show informed go-alongs, to them. Even those of us disgusted by the spoiled, misinformed, TV comedy show informed go-alongs. Their idea of peace is a world without your spoiled asses in it, or indoctrinated into their way of thinking.

They aren't interested in giving their people the freedoms the spoiled brats -- the super rich AND the car-driving, jeans-wearing, mobile texters -- in the First World enjoy. They are fighting for their ideals to win out, and for at-home survival. If America has its nuclear arsenal to lean on, like some bartender leaning on his 12-gauge letting the rough drunks know he means business, we might as well invite all the openness that cultural pluralism offers, invite the combustible mix of legalized recreational pot, a trust system for violent convicts, sharia law, and the wife-killing machismo of Brazil. Why not? If we cannot live by the ideas that exist, why not just live by whatever feels like it'll work, for a year, a month, a week? Why not make it a cage fight of bad social practices? Openness to the point of life-meaninglessness. In the end, the ones with some self-control and the most discipline will win. Is that you?

You best hope that living in a world like The Road Warrior is as fun to live as it is (at least for some) to watch.

Read on at the link: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1929553,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

---------------------------------

Portions delivered by Delicious.com
The tastiest bookmarks on the web


-- AirFarceOne (follow on twitter)


Bloggers report nut-jobs poll created on Facebook, then offer creepy anti-conservative diatribe

(A comment on a good move that instantaneously turns smelly-bad by authors of a rail-jumping 'Slobbering Blog')

An idiot Facebook user created a poll asking users if our president, Barack Obama, should be violently offed, wasted, done away. Pure madness, right? Happily, some loyal Obama supporters with a blog were aware and activist enough, when they noticed this thing, to not vote in it (I assume they didn't), but instead report it to the Secret Service.

What an adult, awesome thing to do, huh? I thought so too. Then I read their blog.

Say these saviors of all of us from a vile FB weeny, on their blog:

"The hate speech, the threats have gotten completely out of hand. And those who have incited viewers and listeners.. (here I omitted the non-liberal targets of their opinions)... are responsible for a good part of this horrific activity."

Oh, COMPLETELY out of hand! Yes! Horrible! This FB poll by some college dweeb, this is just one tiny little SIGN that the nation is much more dangerous with conservatives saying things of a broad, anti-leftist and/or anti-statist variety! They marched, for goodness sake! And in Washington, DC! Who marches in DC but scary people! (Like Christian fathers, or a million -- or so -- black men, or ... members of the military.)

These Thomas Paines of blogging go on, with great knowing: "No, it is not 'grassroots', not even close. It is a sick, terrifying, dangerous movement toward violence and the worst kind of civil unrest."

You know, that worst kind of civil unrest: the organized, overwhelmingly tame, and nonpolluting kind. Why, what else could that be but the WORST? Else the accusations and paranoia of these bloggers would be ... completely illogical, utter silliness! (Note: the impish exception is not the rule; the rule is the rule. Look into it.)

These modern Samuel Adamses go on: "The same "party leaders" who get their rocks off by pretending to be macho and exerting their windbaggy, wrongheaded power will one day come to realize that killing is real, not just a word on a Facebook poll."

Huh! So what these people are saying is, life ISN'T video game! I've learned something here! I wonder if those guys who created that Bush assassination film (YouTube clip only) realized this? No way. They would never have made that movie if they understood death is REAL. I think these bloggers must be the first in years to appreciate the difference between irate stooges' antics and reality, in fact. They seem so sure if it, at least.

And finally, these entirely rational American heroes state, of the obvious leaders of all these millions of dangerous anti-tax, anti-big government activists (all actually racists longing for the days of separate water coolers and when only white blues musicians got paid fairly, it's sooo obvious): "Time to tame them. And time to demand that they tame their deranged, diseased herd of blind followers."

Oh, most definitely. Taming them and their millions of deranged, diseased followers!!!!!!

I am sooo glad the Internet has rational people like these bloggers around to help us all keep our rational, aluminum-foil-laced cowboy hat-covered noggins.

Here's the full post by these brainiacs, which effectively gets interesting at "Okay, that's it, I've had it."

- jR AirFarceOne (Twitter)



Powered by ScribeFire.

White House Idiots: 'A New Beginning' ... subcategorizing the world

I am disappointed. 

If this is the tone that the current Administration wishes to set, then removing them ought to be not just a priority for conservatives and the GOP, but to remove them in 2012 ought to be a central goal for anyone who prefers to keep shallow cheerleading at sports and not in world policy. 

This was offensive to me as someone who tries to be fair-minded when I can stomach it, against the offensive bias of people such as this Axelrod guy. I have conservative views, but incredibly, I am not a far right extremist (yeah, the two aren't automatically inclusive, go figure). This was offensive to me as someone who does not truly judge whole collections of people based on one fact about their life, in a broad stroke (in other words, I do not practice prejudiced and bigoted and illogical judgement of certain groups; in this case, Muslims). 

Who, exactly, are the people that the Obama Admin is talking to -- and about, through these words? The tone was pandering, unaccomplished and lightheaded. Who are they trying to change? One sad old woman at a McCain campaign stop in 2008? A few ignorant Christian preachers in some backwards church in the U.S.? A white supremacist leader and his angry, damaged followers hiding in hills somewhere? Who are they trying to "convert" to "progressive" ideals (so-called) with this language?

The Presumptuous Presidency. That's what we ought to start calling this administration and its myopic legions, if this is the extent of communiques from the road at the breach of an important -- allegedly so -- speech. Read the message from the White House, and tell me if you HONESTLY think someone would disagree. Anyone, that is, that isn't living a foul, bigoted, closed life. In other words, what is there to disagree with but for the most foul bigot (and, sorry, that blatantly means the obtuse majority of conservatives, too, you "open-minded" liberals), and what in it was not part of the policy in the past? These folks believe their own fallacies, it seems. Fully! But what could possibly be offensive about the White House's bid to communicate with the greater Muslim world?

For one, Axelrod called Americans who are Muslims "Muslim Americans". Excuse me? SO, clearly, by labeling, by categorizing, by dividing they are uniting. That is what we learn from this statement, plain and simple. 

Tagging everyone with "[_____] American" labeling that does nothing but make us seem like a country overseen by untreated obsessive compulsives who are hopelessly labeling everything. 

I am then going to preemptively label myself a "Disappointed American" then, till the Obama Admin's insulting and pandering lecturing goes away. 

This, immediately below, is an abbreviation of the mindless and offensive part, to me, of the Axelrod message:

"Muslim countries ... are filled with extraordinary people who ... want to live their lives ... just as in America. Part of what makes America great is ... seven million Muslim Americans living here today and enriching [us]. 

We can extend that ... abroad. It won't always be easy, but if we make an effort to bridge our differences rather than resigning ourselves to animosity, we can move toward a more peaceful world over time. "


Duh. 

When has this kind of policy has NOT been our attitude -- throughout the Bush Administration, and prior? Wishing it were the view does not make it true. And all the arguing about it, all the attempting to link war to it, still does not make it so. Afghanistan and Iraq wars and reorganization nightmares they became are not joyous events, but they are not the foul, self-interested events that Obama's friends want, backhandedly, for everyone to believe them to be. Obama reminds that he inherited these wars. Thanks for stepping up to the plate, sir. 

It bothers me for how it simply points out the obvious, and brings one to the only conclusion for someone who is not a blatant, ignorant bigot and anti-Muslim (rather than anti-terrorist or anti-extremist Muslim zealot). So how many blatant bigots are out there influencing everyone in America, exactly? Only those fooling themselves are convinced that they are loudly influencing America. Look at the foolishness from the White House. 

So, where have you been living, Obama Admin folks, with crazies who think all Muslims are bad people, or terrorists? Let me know where that is, as I don't want to live there. 

This is a most arrogant, self-anointing presidency, judging from such presumptuous, egotistical, statements backhandedly offensive to those outside their fanatic followers ("believers"?) such as this message. 

It appears they blatantly believe that GW Bush found all Muslims to be evil, then, judging from this, but like true propagandists, they don't come out and say it, they just lead you from the position that they want you to believe GW and conservatives have, to what view they have, with such a "letter" to American people. 

That, or "wake up, America! September 11 happened a whopping eight years ago, so get over it now!" 

What a shame. 


Here's the whole message, in entirety:

Hello - 

As a Senior Advisor to the President, I'm here in Cairo, Egypt where I watched President Obama deliver an unprecedented speech calling for a new beginning for the United States and Muslim communities around the world. 

We all know that there has been tension between the United States and some Muslim communities. But, as the President said this morning, if all sides face the sources of tension squarely and focus on mutual interests, we can find a new way forward. 

The President outlined some big goals for this new beginning in his speech -- including disrupting, dismantling, and defeating violent extremism. It was a historic speech, and since many Americans were asleep at the time it was given we wanted to make sure you had a chance to see it: 
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/NewBeginning/

Majority-Muslim countries around the world are filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives, just as in America. Indeed, part of what makes America great is having nearly seven million Muslim Americans living here today and enriching our culture and communities. 

We can extend that kind of relationship abroad. It won't always be easy, but if we make an effort to bridge our differences rather than resigning ourselves to animosity, we can move toward a more peaceful world over time. 

Thank you, 
David Axelrod 
Senior Advisor to the President 

---


Life, liberty and the pursuit of bigger government? Can you try again, please?

How does one go from small government to the massive joke we are now under? It's called power-seeking folks all palling around and taking from the rest of us who wish to think for ourselves, and enjoy some idea of freedom. Freedom is an illusion, they say. Sadly, it is becoming more and more an illusion these days.

If you want the government to help you, be careful what you ask for. The government should be there for LIMITED reasons. Not for what it's been turned into for the last 60 and more years. This could have been a time to pull back from the big gov't that Roosevelt started. Instead, we're going even farther into it. Not just the Democrats to blame, mind you! This has been ongoing for a long time. Remember that, and remember it, too, when you vote, and when you have a chance to have your views known.

Smaller the government, the bigger the freedoms for ALL. The poor will always be poor is the government is walfaring them, and corporations will always be greedy so long at the gov't rewards it.

Shame.


Click the link at bottom to read the whole piece. This is from GetLiberty.org.

Forgotten Founding Wisdom

By Howard Rich

“Sacred and undeniable.”

That’s how Thomas Jefferson originally described the basic American rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Of course, Ben Franklin changed these to “inalienable” rights, and a printer’s error resulted in them becoming “unalienable.”

Still, the meaning was clear. Or at least it was 233 years ago—when the U.S. government existed as a “necessary evil” that lived within its means, not a self-perpetuating Orwellian nightmare propped up by trillions of dollars in bad debt.

At its inception, American government was created to protect life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness—and yet sadly, today it is more often than not a force against these elemental American rights.

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined,” James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 45. “Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”

Really? Then how are we to explain the unprecedented centralization of power we now see in Washington D.C. -- a process fueled by billions in unfunded mandates and strings-attached bailouts?
Get the full story here.

jR, aka AirFarceOne (twitter)



Powered by ScribeFire.