None of Your Fucking Business

One of the reasons I haven't been heard from much lately around my own place is the simple fact of feeling utterly, totally, completely and irredeemably fucking helpless over the massive conflagration in the Middle East. And it seems almost -- ALMOST -- silly to be writing about anything else, when World War III would appear to be making everything else moot.

Of course, that's a stupid fucking way to live; if the world is really coming to an end momentarily, why am I still going to the goddamned gym every morning? Why not just bury myself in a mountain of tiramisu and mashed potatoes, for chrissakes?

Anyway. Irrespective of the end of the world being nigh and all that horseshit, it's still spinning, and while my heart fucking shrieks in empathic agony for every mother watching her baby die, there is other work to be done here i the good ole US of freaking A, where we can actually do something about it.

Every time I hear some sanctimonious fuck spit out, "Marriage is between a man and a woman, in God's eyes," I think of the Max von Sydow line in “Hannah and Her Sisters:”

“If Jesus Christ came back and saw what people have been doing in his name, he would never stop throwing up.”

This is one of many issues that make me weep for humanity. When an entire minority is still disenfranchised in terms of civil rights and adequate political representation, I weep. The fact that so many otherwise intelligent, educated people still believe who someone sleeps with should determine his human rights, still believe that their God considers homosexuality an aberration worthy of eternal damnation to that imaginary construct they call “Hell,” I weep. I rage, too.

Pragmatism seems to demand that liberal politicians tread carefully on this land mine-filled territory. I suppose I understand that. Certainly no one politician thinks s/he can afford to speak the truth and survive, politically. Witness the outrage over "don't ask, don't tell," that misguided and cowardly step in the right direction.

But…

The time has come for a man or woman of conscience to stand before the cameras and tell the truth: that homosexuality, regardless of it being a biological imperative or a "lifestyle choice," is not a crime against man or god. That all men and women, irrespective of their sexual partners, are created equal and have equal rights under every law. That the dark ages are long gone and so should be every vestige of the fear, hatred and judgment of "different."

The time has come for the collective liberal leadership of this backassward fucking country to tell it to grow the fuck up. Tell Mrs. Kravitz to get her nose out of other people's (literal) fucking business, and stop trying to monitor what her neighbours are doing with their genitals. As long as those genitals belong to consenting adults, it ain't none of your motherfucking business where they're going, Gladys. And maybe if you spent a little more time blowing the spousal unit instead of peering out those crappy chintz curtains, you wouldn't feel the need to keep up with the Joneses's joneses.

Perhaps we might discover that the vast majority of people, when introduced to The Truth by articulate, passionate leaders of conscience and courage, will open up their eyes, ears, minds and hearts to that Truth. Just perhaps, mind you.

I am not a Christian or Jew or Muslim. While I occasionally have a conception of a Higher Power that I choose to call god -- simply because it's a lot fucking shorter than "Spirit of the Universe" or even "Higher Power" -- I practice no religion. Further, I do not hold any part of the Bible or the Koran to be the word of god.

One of the basic fucking tenets of the separation of Church and State is that at no time should the government of the United States of America be countenanced as a theocracy. Our laws, while oftentimes influenced by religious beliefs, are not dictated by the Bible (Old or New testament) or any religious text.

The definition of marriage in a religious context is not the definition of marriage in a legal context -- period. I cite the words of the civil marriage ceremony: "By the power vested in me by the (Commonwealth of Massachusetts)..." NOT: "By the power vested in me by God..."

Separation of Church and State, while difficult to maintain at times, is crucial to the continuing evolution of a nation. As a person who does not recognize the validity of the Bible or any other religious text as being the word of god, I DEMAND that the government I support with my taxes and by whose laws I abide leave the religious beliefs of its members out of the equation when making those laws. I do not demand equality or even consideration from any religion; I consider myself and every other person not affiliated with a religion to be outside the sphere of those religions.

When the laws by which I am supposed to abide are dictated by those who would encroach upon my rights as a human being through their own religious beliefs, I must and will protest. I will fight. I am not a Christian, I am not a Jew, I am not a Muslim. I am a human being, and I WILL fight for my fellow human beings.

To the frighteningly large number of politicians and religious leaders who would dictate to the rest of the world that their religious beliefs be enshrined in the Constitution and supported by draconian laws of exclusion and persecution of those who do not share their religious beliefs: You are engaged in malfeasance according to the very same God in whom you profess to believe.


And to every politician of conscience, regardless of religion: Stick to the Constitution.

Amendment XIV
 * Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Blacks, Gays, Jews, Native Americans, Christians, Muslims, Japanese-Americans, Hispanics, Irish, Italians... oh, and Women

Have I left anyone out?

Because I know the aforementioned groups have all been, at one time or another (or all times) left out. Disenfranchised. Dismissed. Oppressed. Repressed. Persecuted. Enslaved. Brutalized.

 Of course, one needn't summon empathy for (let alone, come to the aid of) another segment of the world's population that has suffered or is suffering what one's own segment has suffered. No, no -- This is different, after all. This group is completely different. These circumstances mustn't be compared to ours.

 Such was the message transmitted by the 50 odd African-American religious leaders gathered in Washington, D.C. last year, on the 50th anniversary of the Brown V. Board of Education decision that began in earnest the battle for the civil rights of African-Americans.

 Denouncing the comparison between the struggle for African-American rights and gay rights, the most prominent rationale proposed by these so-called "men of god" turned out to be... "Homosexuality is an abomination."

  Correct me if I am wrong, but at one time in this country, "miscegenation" was also considered (by a majority of the public, no less) to be "an abomination."

 Reverend Joseph Fuiten: "All of Western civilization has been a part of this idea going back to Plato and the Greeks and the Romans. Now, we have activist judges and renegade politicians who want to overthrow Western civilization, federal and state laws, and change the definition of marriage."

 Pardon me? Okay, let's just bypass the obvious argument about Plato and the Greeks and all those little boys. Too, let us bypass the argument against Western "civilization" and the Catholic Church and all those little boys. I'll even let slide the fact that most of the positive changes in Western Civilization and in federal and state laws were made by "activist judges and renegade politicians."

 Let's concentrate on the fact that The Reverend and his peers in the African American religious community are using the same motherfucking arguments against gay marriage that were used against civil rights. I don't know how anyone can argue that this isn't comparable. Gay people want equal protection and rights as promised them under the law. Blacks wanted equal rights and protections as promised them under the law. Gay rights opponents claim that the law is being warped to give special rights to gays. Civil rights opponents... well, you get the picture. Even the religious arguments are the same.

And if it weren't for activist goddamned judges, Reverend, Loving v. Virginia wouldn't have turned out quite the same way, and you and I might be having this conversation in a VERY different circumstance.

 Oh, toss it -- I'll leave the rational arguments to those better qualified. This is a rant, goddamnit.

 If anything makes me crazier than ignorance driven persecution, it is ignorance driven persecution perpetrated by a group of people who ought to know better.

 Humans are one fucked up species. We use our religions, our pocketbooks and our vicious rhetoric to attack anything we perceive as a threat to our status quo, irrespective of logic -- let alone compassion. Change is a scary, scary thing. We just hate it when we're asked to change our views, let alone our lives. And it appears we are willing to do just about anything to avoid dealing with it.

 That includes engaging in behaviours that put our very own lives in misery when they were practiced against us. Hatred born of fear rules the day; deliberate blindness to our own fear based hatred enables it to go unchecked -- by us, at least. We are dragged, kicking and screaming, into change that in retrospect was long overdue. Fifty years later, high school children have absolutely no concept of how revolutionary Brown v. Board of Education was; they look upon the facts of life fifty years ago with the same sort of bemused astonishment that we feel when we watch a period film and realize that birthmarks were for centuries considered to be a sign of demonic possession.

 In fifty years, the only people against gay marriage will be those relegated to the marginalized closets of homophobia where they belong; I'm sure they will have some racist company in there. Hatred never dies completely -- it goes on life support underground, awaiting its chance to emerge and be fed.

 For what is their actual argument, after all? If they would make legal unions between gay people illegal, and deny those gay people equal protection under the law, would they not, by extension, make homosexuality itself illegal? If it is, as they claim, "an abomination," then they must, ipso facto, demand the illegality of homosexuality. You cannot call something an abomination in one breath and in the next admit you are willing to overlook it if the state refuses to sanction its legitimacy. You must demand a return to sodomy laws.

 Which makes you no better than those who would have liked to return to the days of slavery. No better. Possibly worse -- at least they had ignorance on their side, the easier to forgive  when they saw the light, if they ever did. You who would hide your hatred in the pages of your religious texts, knowing full well the volumes of data that prove a homosexual can no more change his sexuality than you can the colour of your skin -- you are in the wrong.

 And I would submit that the God you profess to worship would tell you the same. (These texts you laud as the word of god are, to many others, merely your interpretation of the word of your god, in whom may of us believe not a whit. But leave that aside for the moment.)

If you insist upon using those texts to rationalize your arguments of hatred, I will happily take up that challenge. Nowhere in the New Testament of the Bible does your purported saviour, Jesus Christ, denounce homosexuality. He makes a good argument for homosexual marriage, in fact, in denouncing extra-marital sex.  

 He also says a few things about judging your neighbour and loving your neighbour. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

 He makes a pretty good argument for separating church and state, too -- "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's."

 But most important: "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thy say to thy brother, "Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?" Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

 If your brother does, indeed, have a mote in his eye, I submit that you are too blind to judge it accurately, since the beam in your own spans continents and centuries.


PEDANT ALERT


Contrary to popular myth, "marriage" and "civil unions" are not the same; changing the term drastically changes the meaning as well. As mentioned above, marriage is approximately 1,500 reciprocal rights, privileges and obligations, 1,000 from the feds and about 500 from the state. A civil union, on the other hand, is a term coined by the Vermont legislature to avoid granting the "m" word to gay and lesbian couples. Because federal law does not recognize civil unions, a civil union provides only the 500 state conferred rights, privileges and obligations associated with marriage with none of the 1,000+ federal benefits.


But that is not the only difference. In addition to being denied federal benefits, rights and responsibilities, civil unions lack portability - so couples do not have the security of relationship recognition when traveling to other states. Although civil unions may provide a couple some protections at home, when they go on vacation, travel on business or otherwise leave the state, the couple will likely once again be relegated to the status of legal strangers.


Domestic partnership laws provide even fewer protections than civil unions and can vary dramatically depending on the jurisdiction that enacts the law. In some jurisdictions, domestic partner registries do not confer any rights or responsibilities at all and are simply a registration. In other jurisdictions, domestic partners are given a few protections, such as the right to hospital visitation. (The most generous local domestic partnership laws only provide about 10-15 rights). Currently, only three states, Hawaii, New Jersey and California, provide more comprehensive rights and responsibilities under their domestic partnership registration systems. At the local level, most domestic partnership laws provide benefits for public employees and little or nothing else.


So, to return to the initial question, why not just settle for civil unions or domestic partnerships? 1,500 (M) vs. 500 (CU) vs. 10-15 (DP). But what's in a name, right? As the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts recently pointed out, "The history of our nation has demonstrated that separate is seldom, if ever, equal."


Now, then. Leaving aside the fact that the federal government does not explicitly recognize civil unions and therefore none of the 1000 or so federal rights accorded married persons will ever be accorded to “civilly united” persons…


The Musgrave amendment (only the first of many such egregious motherfucking attempts to deny gay people their equal fucking civil rights ) stated that:

"Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."

That proposed amendment would have done far more than simply deny same-sex couples marriage equality. According to Evan Wolfson, a leading legal expert on marriage and executive director of Freedom to Marry, an organization which supports marriage rights for same sex couples, the White House and "the Christian right" are "being deliberately deceptive." According to Wolfson, the "vague and sweeping language" of the proposed amendment's second sentence "is intended to deny any other measure of protection, including civil unions and domestic partnerships."


If the Musgrave amendment had passed, the issue before us would no longer be whether same-sex couples should receive 1,500 or 500 or 10-15 rights. If passed, the amendment would mean that same sex couples would be denied ALL of the federal AND state rights, privileges and obligations of marriage. Families headed by same-sex couples would be officially denied equal treatment and constitutionally branded as second class citizens.


And… voila. Now not only does the federal government not RECOGNIZE civil unions, but the MUSGRAVE Amendment would have just invalidated all the rights accorded the “civilly united.”


Now tell me again how there’s no fucking difference.


Shameless Plug: If this particular offering ain't your cup of tea, My Left Wing offers a veritable plethora of brilliant political and social commentary -- not only on the Front Page, which features a cornucopia of writings on issues as varied as the Middle East, the U.S. economy, immigration and abortion -- but also in the Community Diaries section, which attracts the best and the brightest of the blogosphere -- and I'm not just saying that because it's true, but also because I love these people.

Hi, Cutie!

Is that snot hanging from your nostril? No, not the one in the middle, the left one. Oh, my bad. It's just an abnormally long nose hair.

What fun this rudeness thing! Many thanks to the Rude One for inviting me to thumb my nose at you all. Just kidding, of course, or rather practising rudeness before I get to the meat of my post.

Which is a nice, old-fashioned rant on the corrupt and/or insipid politicians of this country. Take the Democrats first, if you please. They are pink jelly kept upright by sincere ties or underwire bras. They are sooo domesticated to be the underdogs in politics, well fed by the corpocracy and occasionally belly-rubbed by the wingnuts in the Republican party. The vast majority of establishment Democrats are cuddly money-grabbing unprincipled specks of do-not-hear-evil, not because they are good, but because it's so comfy there in the laps of wingnuttery. Too much trouble to actually go out to find what Americans might need. There are exceptions to this rule, true, but too few to make a dent in this post. And even the good ones can't get it up or get up off their tender asses.

But if the Democrats are tame pups or little motes- in- my- eye, the Republicans are rabid rats and as big as any Biblical mote they might use as a beam. Picture that: Gigantic rabid Bible-thumping money-grabbing rats. Most likely infected with the plague, too, or at least greed and pseudofundamentalism. And they run our country, this world and our lives. Aren't you happy to live in such interesting times?

Up is down these days, and we have always been at war with Oceania. The American "left" is treasonous, doubleplus anti-good, and this post is now an example of hate speech. Any criticism of the administration is treason. There are no longer facts in international politics, just opinions, and all problems can be solved by killing lots of innocent bystanders, or if that fails, by applying corporate marketing strategies. Why do they hate our freedoms? Let's get a better brand image! Let's not bother with the boring stuff like learning history of an area we attack or the languages the brown people there might speak. Let's just awe them to acquiescence.

Aren't you happy to have the world's most powerful country led by a guy who is somewhat lacking in the sorts of skills one expects from the Leader of an Empire? You know, ability to spell, ability to find various countries in a map, knowledge of some basic history and other such trivialities. Ability to walk upright. -- At least he would be fun to have a beer with, they say. I beg to disagree. He'd spew it all over me trying to get a peek at my cleavage. That's who is running our lives, my dears.

And how. The last six years have seen us start a totally inexplicable war but not finish it. They have also seen the insitutions and laws of this country, including the Bill of Rights, under continous assault from the rabid rats, and all this has an enormous price tag. Not only have needless lives been lost but the very foundations of this nation are trembling. Trembling. Still, the rich are getting richer and everybody else is getting shafted. So there is that.

And soon we will have the Laws of the Jungle in operation in the United States of Talibamerica, with armed enclaves for the very rich and the opportunity for lots of exercize running away from drug dealers and such for the rest of us. Women will be well cared for in Talibamerica. We will also have Bible schools instead of education, though the bits about the camel and the eye of the needle will be cut out of the Bible school textbooks. Unless some Republican entrepreneur manages to breed miniature camels.

That last paragraph could be an exaggeration. But the media isn't helping to keep us from veering towards the United States of Wingnuttia. Time and time again they describe the heinous deeds of the rabid rats from the right and then ask: "But what do the Democrats STAND for?" As if there is no better plan for the future than destroying the world while waiting for the apocalypse to happen. Or rather, while helping it all along. Imagine what these journalists would have asked about the opposition to Ghenghis Khan. Sure, he kills and spits people and such. Sure, he gets his kicks from torture. But do you present any credible alternative at all? Do you have a plan?

Isn't trying to keep this country going a credible alternative? Isn't trying to conserve what is worth conserving (now that the conservatives stand for destruction instead) a credible alternative? Isn't sanity a credible alternative to madness? I guess not.

And yes, I described Democrats as having been punched out from pink jelly by molds shaped like suits, but even jelly can do a better job than the wackos currently in power in this country. Or put in another way: What other fucking chance do we have?

That was fun.

Oops! I nearly forgot to invite you all over to my blog.

Bitched off in London

I've spent the day being particularly bitched off about the news, even though the news is always fucking outrageous and you'd think by now I'd be, y'know, comfortably numb.

And the truth is, there are days when I am indeed numbed by it all before noon. I look at one news site after another, blogging one thing and another, and I'm thinking, "My, that's horrific. If I let myself think about it for a minute I would probably burst into tears and run around screaming. Fortunately, I don't have time."

Sometimes I settle for having fifteen minutes of hate for the newspaper that delivered absolutely fucking terrifying news as if it were a report on the opening of a new municipal building or something.

This morning, The Washington Post relegated such a story to page 4. I'd already bitched about it earlier today, along with other things that I guess aren't important for us to know. But it just wouldn't leave me alone all day, I kept coming back to it and fuming.

I always wonder what those media fuckwits think will protect them if they keep giving the administration a pass while they dismantle the Bill of Rights. We're already seeing whistleblowers investigated and persecuted for trying to expose BushCo's crimes. Real whistleblowers - that's what "sources" is supposed to mean. It's increasingly clear that better journalists than Judith Miller could end up in a "tribunal" if they don't play along.

"Then they came for the journalists, and I said nothing because I did not work for The New York Times...."

A truly good newspaper would have a daily item on its front page under the heading "In the Dock", or maybe "Articles of Impeachment", with a list of the previous day's work by our leaders to destroy our country.

But they don't. And so the Republicans continue to strip the country of everything that once made it an enviable place to live, and have a good smirk while they're doing it, because they know the press will let them get away with it.

The quote of the week came from Karl Rove:

"There are practitioners of politics who hold that voters are dumb, ill-informed and easily misled, that voters can be manipulated by a clever ad or smart money," Rove said.

But Rove, seen as the mastermind behind President George W. Bush’s White House victories in 2000 and 2004, said, "It’s wrong to underestimate the intelligence of the American voter."

Actually, I don't think most voters are as dumb as Rove thinks they are. But I think Rove knows that even that doesn't matter if you can cow the American editor.

[Complain here about lack of sufficient rudeness and my failure to unleash my routine rant that people use the word "cunt" incorrectly.]

I’ll Go With the Trained Primate

There are some journalism rules that are steadfastly unbreakable. Bush administration reports will contain at least one lie. Anything written by Christopher Hitchens will be complete horseshit. Monkeys are always funny. So I like to start my day with a headline like this: India tries to chase monkeys from trains.

The authorities, I read, have hired a langur wrangler to keep the monkeys off the trains, because the monkeys are scared of langurs. I don’t know what the hell a langur is, so I look it up.


Am I not a fucking monkey?
No, evidently you’re a primate. Although, I grant you, you really look like a fucking monkey.

So, Mr. Vidyacharan Patel of Mumbai has the choice of sharing his train with a wild monkey (who will probably try to steal his cigarettes) or a primate that looks like a monkey on a leash. It’s not much of a choice, but anyone with any sense would choose the primate on a leash.

Which is why, when every election rolls around, I vote for the Democrats.

There are a lot of apathetic jerkoffs in this country who love to take a long slug of shitty beer and utter what they consider the epitome of nuanced political thought: “There’s no difference between the two parties, anyway.” Stunningly original, I’ll acquiesce, but incorrect nonetheless. That this tired drip of dogwank wisdom is still hanging around after six years of indisputable evidence that there was indeed a great deal of difference between George Bush and Al Gore, whose contest in 2000 was defined by that nugget of nonsense, is indicative of how lazy and unengaged the people who employ it really are. I’d have more respect for them if they were honest enough to admit, “I don’t care enough to pay attention, so I don’t have an opinion.” And if they were brave enough to add, “Which makes me a completely useless fuck who has no basis for complaint,” I’d give them a bloody medal.

Because there is, after all, a difference between a wild monkey and a trained primate on a leash. Sure, the latter might give you a surly look you don’t like or scratch his balls at embarrassing moments or have the temerity to do something a bit clever and remind you rather uncomfortably of how little DNA actually separates your hairless ass from his, but a wild monkey is quite likely to throw his shit at you, then screech and jump around maniacally in celebration. And if that doesn’t remind you of the marauding band of wild monkeys known as the GOP Congressional majority, then you really haven’t been paying attention.

To wit, the American Values Agenda, which was the centerpiece of House legislation before the hardworking wankers of Congress left for their much-needed break, new raise in hand. The retrofuck jackholes known as the House GOP debated the federal marriage amendment, which had not a Republican’s chance in heaven of passing, but did it anyway, because it’s fun to fling poo at the gays. They debated the Pledge Protection Act, designed to protect the Pledge of Allegiance from legal challenges to the phrase “under God,” because it’s fun to fling poo at the atheists. The American Values Agenda also included bills to ban human cloning, require women seeking late-term abortions to be informed that the fetus feels pain, ban internet gambling, and protect gun rights, because what Americans are really worried about these days is making sure they have guns to fight to married gay clones who convince women to have whimsical late-term abortions so they can dedicate their days to online gambling instead of mothering a future generation of voter monkeys who will screech with delight at all the poo-launching.

American values, bitchez! Ooh-ooh-ooh ahh-ahh-ahh!

Personally, I’d prefer to look down at my voting card and see some grown-up humans as options. (I’ve heard they’ve got them in Europe; maybe we can import some.) But failing that, I’ll go for the primate on a leash, who might not be ready for dinner with adults, but will at least be discrete with his excrement, because all I really want is to ride the train in peace, with some decent healthcare coverage, an alternative energy plan, a functioning foreign policy, and no wild monkeys blocking the door if I want to get off at Gay Rights Gully, Abortion Junction, or Stem Cell Station. Is that really so much to ask?

There Will Be No Ceasefire
I am not one to use the word EVIL. Like any good bleeding heart liberal, I’m afflicted with the tendency to see nuance, a multiplicity of shades of gray. In my humble opinion, since everyone does not see the world from the view of an East Nashville loft, the only sane way to solve disagreements is to try to understand another's view by listening, by talking, by negotiating with those who differ from me.

That's the theory.

It doesn't work with George W. Asshole. I look at him, and I see Pure Unadulterated EVIL.

George W. Asshole is ruining my life, my country, and the entire fucking world. Children are dying because an asshole who can't wipe his own butt is sitting on a Throne in Washington while his warmongering mental superiors stroke his inflated ego and pull his slimey strings.

Time and time again, George W. Asshole has proven himself to be incapable of listening to anyone who differs from his morally-challenged self-absorbed self.

Maybe there is Pure Unadulterated EVIL, an EVIL so malignant that it infects all who come near. Colin Powell got too close. Condoleezza Rice's apparent efforts to subvert the cowboy diplomacy have been snuffed out.

Sorry, too bad, la de da, there will be no ceasefire folks. All the little sleeping children will just have to die until we can, uhm, you know, uhm, come up with, er, a long-lasting peace, a sustainable ceasefire, uhm, cause, see, there is an urgent need for a permanent plan for an everfuckinglasting peace. Then, and only then, will the bombs stop falling on all the little sleeping children's heads.

Some fools might think that stopping the killing with an immediate ceasefire might facilitate the conversation, enable the listening, promote the negotiation, which might then all lead to something resembling a sustainable ceasefire. Those fools might not realize that just because there is an urgent need for a sustainable ceasefire does not fucking mean that there will be any fucking talking to Syria, to Iran, or, gawd forbid, to Hezbollah.

"You know, as we listen to our "National Anthem," it reminds us how blessed we are to live in a land where our boys and girls can grow up in a peaceful world. And on today, our hopes for peace for boys and girls everywhere extends across the world, especially in the Middle East." --George W. Asshole

Yeah, George W. Asshole, our boys and girls are blessed because no one is yet powerful or evil enough to fuck up our entire country with a lethal dose of our own special poisonous recipe of pre-emptive shock and awe.

Guess what, moron? If anyone is blessing us, it's the fucking devil.

The "Pro-Life" Movement, in a Nutshell.

First, a big thanks to the Rude One for turning his site over to the ladies this week, and for inviting me to guest-post today. I'm looking forward to the rest of the week.

I blog regularly at Feministe, where I share a space with two fabulous co-bloggers. We focus on feminist/gender issues and other lefty stuff, but write about everything from disability awareness, law and LGBT issues to Middle Eastern politics, upcoming elections and our pets. I hope you'll drop by sometime. I'm currently in Istanbul, so if the characters or links come out wonky, I apologize and I blame the Turks. And I hope you'll indulge me as I go on an extended rant about the current Culture of Life in the United States, complete with intense blog-whoring, as my limited time in this internet cafe is preventing me from doing real research and it's easier to just utilize the Feministe search function.

This week, my co-blogger Zuzu writes about the most recent attacks against Planned Parenthood, in which the organization was accused of promoting beastiality -- for having animals featured in two of their online cartoons. Her post is one example of the lengths to which anti-choicers will go in order to attack reproductive rights -- all reproductive rights, not just abortion. This is about sex education, access to birth control, healthcare for all, the right to have children, and the right to have private sexual relationships with other consenting adults.

If you've been around Feministe, you probably know how I feel about reproductive rights and the so-called "Culture of Life" in the United States. We've heard a lot in the past year about how it might benefit the left if we over-turned Roe and left abortion up to the states; how progressives need to moderate on the abortion issue; and how "pro-life" people are really just trying to save babies.

It wouldn't, we don't, and they aren't.

The "pro-life" movement isn't about valuing life at all. It's not about babies, and it's certainly not about any other born humans. It's about social control, and dictating your sexual choices. Life has almost nothing to do with it -- rather, it's about limiting personal and sexual choices as much as possible, and using legal and legislative means to insure that there's only one choice available to everyone: Sex within the context of a heterosexual marriage for procreative purposes only.

This is part of the reason why they go after groups like Planned Parenthood. Yes, Planned Parenthood provides abortions at some of its locations -- but the organization dedicates far greater resources to education, healthcare and pregnancy-prevention programs. They just refuse to tell their clients that there's only one best way to live, and if you make choices that differ from a very narrow ideal, then you deserve the "consequences."

And the consequences of anti-choice policies are obvious. They cause more uninteded pregnancies, and therefore more abortions, than they prevent. They put women and girls in desperate situations, sometimes with tragic results. They kill women and girls around the world.


One of the more egregious anti-choice examples is the Global Gag Rule, a policy that is trumpeted as "pro-life" but which in fact contributes to the deaths of thousands of women every year. George W. Bush instituted the gag rule on his first day in office. It bars United States international family planning funding from contributing to any organization that so much as mentions abortion as an option to its clients, advocates for abortion rights, or performs abortions, even if they do so with their own non-U.S. funds (U.S. funds have been barred from paying for abortions abroad since the 1970s). So if a family planning organization in, say, El Salvador -- where women who terminate pregnancies go to prison for as long as 30 to 50 years, and if a botched illegal abortion requires a hysterectomy, the woman's uterus can be used in court as evidence against her -- petitions their government for abortion rights, they lose U.S. funding.

Today, 90 African women will die from illegal abortions. Ninety more will die tomorrow, and 90 more will die the day after that. While only 10% of the world's abortions happen in Africa, that continent accounts for about 50% of abortion-related deaths. One in 12 women who have abortions in Africa die. For every woman who dies, 20 to 30 women have their reproductive systems permanently damaged.

This is what happens when abortion is illegal and birth control is difficult to obtain. This is what "pro-life" policies bring.

In other countries, women go to jail for having abortions, and doctors go to jail for performing them. Because international anti-choice policies focus on marriage and abstinence, and de-fund organizations that don't tailor their programs to U.S. ideals, many women abroad lack access to information about their bodies and are unable to obtain a slew of other reproductive health services. After all, in rural areas of developing nations, the same clinic that provides information about abortion also provides HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention information, well-baby care, pre-natal care, condoms, and general healthcare. Shut down that single clinic, and you've cut out all of those services in the name of "life."

But it's become fairly apparent that "life" has very little to do with being "pro-life." After all, Viagra kills a whole lot more people who use it than RU-486, or the "abortion pill" (not to be confused with emergency contraception, the "morning-after pill") does. For that matter, so does childbirth. And one would imagine that if we wanted to lower the abortion rate, the best way to do that would be to prevent unintended pregnancies from occuring in the first place. We all know that dictating that everyone should wait until marriage to have sex isn't going to work -- as far as I'm aware, there has never been a society in all of human history in which that method succeeded in preventing fornication. But certain modern societies have been very good at decreasing the abortion rate. Belguim, the Netherlands, and various other northern European countries have the lowest abortion rates in the world -- and some of the most permissive abortion laws. Their secret? Sex education starting very early. Accessible and affordable contraception. Fewer taboos around human sexuality.

By contrast, a country like Brazil has one of the highest abortion rates in the world -- higher than the United States. And the procedure is illegal there.

Reproductive rights have done amazing things for American women and families. They've helped to decrease poverty, allowed women access to college and the workforce, and given us greater autonomy in our romantic and personal lives. But that doesn't stop our own anti-choicers from doing their damndest to raise the abortion rate in the name of all the little babies. They outlaw abortion in places like South Dakota, and only lament that the law is imperfect because it doesn't also ban contraception. They refuse to fill prescriptions coming from reproductive health clinics -- even prescriptions for antibiotics and pre-natal vitamins. They cut funding for contraception, because giving women the right to prevent pregnancy means that you're promoting promiscuity (married and/or monogamous women have apparently never tried to prevent pregnancy). Indeed, they've declared a full-on war against contraception. They oppose programs that give accurate information about reproductive health and sexuality, opting instead for failed "abstinence-only" ideology. Some of them even go so far as to oppose a cancer vaccine, because apparently preventing death from cervical cancer would remove one of those icky "consqeuences" of fornication, and that just ain't right.

And when it comes to abortion, there are some interesting positions. There are those who oppose abortion in all cases, even when continuing the pregnancy will kill the pregnant woman -- because after all, a woman should sacrifice for her children. And of course there are those who would outlaw abortion except for cases of rape and incest, which is perhaps the position that interests me most, as it's the most transparent -- it makes clear that outlawing abortion isn't about fetal life, but rather about making pregnancy a punishment for women. So if you didn't "do anything" to get yourself pregnant, then you have an out. But if, God forbid, you had sex because you wanted to, then you certainly deserve to deal with the consequences.

But the consequences of the anti-choice movement extend far beyond individual women and legally requiring us to carry pregnancies to term. The consequences of this very narrow worldview affect all of us whose personal decisions and identities differ from the hetero virgin-till-marriage, never-using-contraception mold. They affect science and progress, like stem cell research and in-vitro fertilization. They affect women who need to terminate pregnancies for medical reasons. After all, not every pregnancy complication will kill you, but they may make you go blind, or damage your kidneys bad enough to kill you later on, or force you have a hysterectomy. All of these things fall under the health exception to abortion laws -- that is, if an abortion procedure is illegalized, it must allow an "out" for the health and life of the pregnant woman. Anti-choice groups would like to do away with the health exception, claiming that it's a loophole. Which is why there is no health exception to the so-called "Partial Birth" Abortion Ban Act passed by Congress last year. Some loophole. They're also perfectly happy to compromise basic healthcare, lie to women and completely ignore medical ethics to save them some babies through their Crisis Pregnancy Centers -- until the babies are a year or so old, and then they tell the mother that she made her choice and she needs to take personal responsibility for it (and they're doing this with taxpayer dollars).

So what does the anti-choice movement want? Illegal abortion -- all abortion, no health exception. No contraception. No sex outside of marriage, and even within marriage, sex only for procreative purposes. And certainly no homos running around throwing a wrench in things.

One of the tricks to all of this is "natural family planning," in which you take your temperature before sex and moniter your fertile days to make sure that you only do it when you're least likely to get pregnant. It's one of the least effective contraceptive methods around and, in an interesting twist, perhaps the one that kills the most blastocyst babies. But that's ok because what matters are the good intentions, not the actual results (what do they say about the road to Hell?).

But then, this isn't a movement that's actually so opposed to killing. And they certainly aren't opposed to harassing, stalking and intimidating people who disagree with them. Think it's just the fringe anti-choice groups that do things like stalk abortion providers and threaten them with violence? Think again. The "fringe" organizations are well-supported by mainstream groups like Concerned Women for America and Focus on the Family.

Bottom line: The "pro-life" movement could give two shits about "life." And while the pro-choice movement isn't perfect, it does embody the basic values of human rights. It supports individual self-determination. Pro-choice advocates envision a world where all people have a wide range of reproductive options, and can make the decisions that best suit them at different points in their lives. This means comprehensive sex education, accessible and affordable contraception, abortion rights, universeal healthcare, aid to low-income families so that women can actually afford to carry wanted pregnancies to term, and a society which values all of its members equally.

Too much to ask? Maybe. But in the meantime, we can support pro-choice policies, and stop suggesting that overturning Roe would bring anyone any real benefit. And we can take a strong stance against an ideology that's more about controlling who, how and when we fuck than it has ever been about protecting life.

Allow me to introduce myself…

My name is AngryBlackBitch and my ass is guest posting for a certain Rude One this morning.

Shall we proceed?

Yes indeed!

Maybe it’s the heat…or maybe a bitch has watched one episode too many of the Dog Whisperer…but this bitch is beginning to think that motherfucker could end the current crisis in the Middle East.

Okay, maybe not end it…but some Cesar Millan-esque conflict resolving diplomacy couldn’t hurt!

If you don’t watch the Dog Whisperer this may not make sense. Cesar Millan is a dog shrink who works with people to help them establish positive dog relationships.

Anyhoo, each episode of the Dog Whisperer follows the same formula. They profile a conflict, introduce the players (dog and human) and explain each side of the drama. Cesar arrives and consults with dog and human…diagnoses the issue and helps them adjust in such a way as to establish a…well, a lasting settlement (wink) without any blood being shed.

The fascinating thing is that most dog aggression can be linked to a fucked up human in the mix. Mmmhmmm, some human guardian who has been enabling all manner of bad assed dog behavior gets tired of the mess they created and calls up Cesar, blames the dog for it all and then has the audacity to look shocked when Cesar turns to them and tells them they fucked that shit up...big time.

Cesar is quick to call bullshit…and he is also quick to establish a cease fire so that the underlying issues can be addressed. It seems that one can not address fear based aggression while the dog in question is aggressing. Calm the fearfully aggressive dog…introduce the warring parties and get down to the bitness of establishing a relationship and a dialogue (okay, not a dialogue but a series of butt sniffs and tail wags…shit, that’s how dogs communicate) then move towards building trust.

Mayhap we should give the Dog Whisperer a shot at it!

Fuck it all, at least he’s got a resume with some resolved conflicts on it.

And catch that knee before it jerks. No, a bitch is not so naive as to believe that peace in the Middle East can be achieved in one 30 minute episode of the Dog Whisperer…including several commercial breaks...and a promotion for some dog show that a bitch forgot to TiVo.

But this bitch is wise enough to know that dialogue doesn’t happen when two parties in conflict are actively at each others throats. Every bite…every painful wound results in lasting scars and makes the road between conflict and peace more difficult to navigate.

Bend Over, Baby, So I Can Reach Your Wallet
You really have to admire the frank fuck-you attitude of our elected representatives, who are taking a month's much-deserved vacation after the House said, yeah, you hourly-wage earning bastards can have an extra couple bucks an hour three years from now, but only if the Senate gives the people who really count a ten million dollar tax exemption. Oh, and the next fifteen million gets taxed at 15%. Which is only fair, because you wage slaves working for a generous $7.25 an hour will only be paying 15% on your annual (vacation-free!) income of $15,000! Which is well above the poverty line of $9,800. Really, who needs more than that?

Oh right, rich kids. Well, it's only fair, after all. Y'all on the minimum wage ought not be breeding anyway, and if you're gonna have kids, you really should accomodate their palates to dumpster food early. Whereas these parasites couldn't survive under such adverse conditions.

Plus, as long as you commoners are preoccupied with how to make fifteen thou a year buy enough gas to keep getting you to work on time--better not be late again, buddy, if you want to keep that minimum-wage job--you'll be way too busy to pay any attention to oh, say how the State Department's been keeping its books. Now that Ken Lay's "retired" to the Dick Cheney Underground Bunker (avoiding prison and protecting his estate, if you recall), he's got more time for teaching those seminars on pocket-lining, insider contracts, and accounting shell games, and we want to make sure that y'all keep our wage costs down and our interest payments up buying those plasma televisions keeping a roof over your heads.

So stop wasting your employer's time and money reading about "ballooning cost overruns" and "withheld information on schedule delays" and "federal audits," peasants, and get back to work. The NSA is reporting your blog-reading time to your boss, and your paychecks will be docked accordingly.

Fun With Republican Wives - Fran Dewine's Cooking Sucks:
Trawling through the websites of Republican candidates, as the Rude Pundit's been doing for the last few days, you can come up with some pretty wretched information, like learning about every town's festival where the candidates will justifiably show up. You can bet that if, say, Clute, Texas hosted the Dirt Farm and Syphilis Festival, Representative Ron Paul would be there shaking hands and eating mud pies.

By now, most of Left Blogsylvania has commented on ultra-creepy Senator Mike Dewine's ultra-creepy use of a doctored photo of 9/11 in a campaign ad. 'Cause, you know, if aesthetically the smoke of one of the burning towers isn't blowing the right way, what's a scum-sucking ad agency to do? Photoshop that horrible motherfucker. And, of course, per recent law, Mike Dewine said he approved the message.

So, yeah, that was bad enough. But if you head on over to ultra-creepy Mike Dewine's website, with an ultra-creepy image of Mike Dewine seated in front of changing Ohio images (which, you know, makes it look like he's visited places he probably hasn't), you can discover the proudly displayed handwritten recipe book of Mrs. Mike herself, Fran Dewine. And, man, oh, man, it's a list of every bland church picnic recipe you ever wanted, with the ethnic food having been drained of any hint of flavor or, say, ethnicity.

Yeah, the Rude Pundit's no food critic, he ain't givin' stars at Charlie Trotter's latest beyond haute cuisine establishment, and he's as likely to make a dinner of day-old hash brownies and milk as he is to treat himself to sushi so tender it's like feeling the labia of that incredibly generous schoolteacher he met the night before at the tip of his tongue. But he knows suck ass food when he sees it. And he can declare, without even making a single one of the recipes, that Fran Dewine's cooking sucks monkey balls. In fact, if you go to the Columbus Zoo and you see that the monkeys' balls are hairless, you'll know that Fran Dewine's been cooking nearby.

Take, for instance, her recipe for Amish Barn Soup. It's a rich combination of Velveeta cubes, chicken bouillon cubes, and frozen broccoli (presumably not cubed) cooked togther to create concoction so salty that it'd make real Amish people beat down tourists, steal their cars, and race to the local liquor store for twelve-packs of Schaefer's they can down to get the vile taste out of their mouths.

Or there's My Favorite Lasagna, a piquant casserole made with Prego or Ragu (mixed with water, because jarred Prego is just too rich) and cottage cheese (because...why? ricotta's too hard to pronounce?), the sort of thing that's served in the trattorias in Hell alongside platters of rat innards on bruschetta.

You may whine and complain and say, "Jesus, Rude Pundit, beating up on Mike Dewine's wife is sure unfair." And, after slapping you with overboiled lasagna noodles, the Rude Pundit would point out that once her "Family Favorites Cookbook" was posted, well, welcome to the party, motherfucker.

But also, the food a person eats says a lot about that person, and either Mike Dewine's a fuckin' liar who dines at the finest bistros Akron has to offer or he regularly eats crap denuded of flavor. And what could be more appropriate for a savagely anti-choice white guy, someone who on his issues page has "Learn More" only for his "Protecting the Unborn" crazyworld cred.

So what can we conclude about Mike Dewine, ultra-creepy-looking, photo doctoring, high-fat eating defender of the bewombed and/or frozen? That pro-lifers really just don't know how to live.

Note: The Rude Pundit's taking a week off (though, if driven to, he may drop by). However, he is leaving you in the incredible hands of nearly a dozen of the best practitioners of bloggery out there. Enjoy the many joyously rude voices here all next week.

Republicans Running From Bush, Part 3 - Wherein Michael Steele Meets Karl Rove's Sodomizin' Stormtroopers:
In the annals of punk-ass bitchery - an encyclopedic collection of toadies, cavers, and cowerers - an entire page will be devoted to Maryland's Lieutenant Governor and Republican Senate Candidate Michael Steele. For, indeed, if evolution worked the way Michael Steele does, early humans would have stood upright, bumped into a tree limb, and decided it was better to slink around hunched over. Surely, that is what Steele would have done, considering his collapse from mensch to putz in a little less than 48 hours.

Let us not praise Steele too much for his steak lunch with reporters where he went to town on the Bush administration and the Republican Congress he hopes to join. Because Steele decided to speak truth about the powers only on condition that he remain anonymous. Still, despite that pussy aspect of his interview, we can say, goddamn, it at least took a single cojone to say, as Steele did, that the Iraq War "didn't work. . . . We didn't prepare for the peace," that his being a Republican is a "scarlet letter," an R that he must wear. Asked if he would want Bush to campaign for him, Steele said, "To be honest with you, probably not." Hey, people have said far milder things under the veil of anonymity.

But, oh, when you are a Republican, and you tell the truth, well, you must get a visit from Karl Rove's Sodomizin' Stormtroopers. Dressed in black leather, with black-shaded helmets, bearing black batons and ten-inch black strap-ons, Karl Rove's Sodomizin' Stormtroopers are the flying monkeys of the White House, sent out by Rove to, well, fuck in the ass anyone who dares cross the President. Jesus, the horrible yowls that are heard around D.C. and Georgetown whenever their dreaded black Hummer o' Doom is dispatched. Ask Paul O'Neill, ask John McCain, ask poor Arlen Specter, who now leaves his doors unlocked because he was tired of replacing them - just look around that humid fuckin' city and you'll see politicos big and small walking like they just got off their stallion after riding the Oregon Trail. When the SS got a hold of Steele, they gathered his campaign staff around, under threat of mass sodomizin', and roughly gang-dildoed Steele, forcing him to fellate their hard plastic crotch rockets. Oh, yes, oh, yes, by the end, with a rectally-bleeding Steele curled up on the floor of his campaign headquarters, Karl Rove himself walked in, shoved a gloved hand into the African American Lieutenant Governor's aching sphincter, and whispered to him, "You're not only gonna make it right, you're gonna get all jigaboo, too. Georgie likes his Negroes to dance." Then, with a wave of his blood and shit-covered gloved hand, Rove and his SS disappeared into the Baltimore night.

It was simple. While Steele recovered - Rove sent his personal proctologist over (Rove is a savage man, but generous to a fault) - his scared shitless campaign quickly said that it was Steele who made the remarks, but, no, listen, he also praised Bush. And then yesterday, Steele himself, in an interview with a conservative talk show, shucked, "I've been quoted before as calling the president my homeboy, you know, and that's how I feel." He said he was joking about that scarlet letter stuff, and he more or less said that he loves Bush so much, he'd blow the President on stage. "I'm not trying to dis the president," Steele jived. Back in the White House, Bush said that he still supports Steele, especially now that he's been such a good boy. Karl Rove put his defiled glove in a drawer next to all the other ones he's got.

Steele also said on WBAL, "If I'm not free to share that as a candidate for the U.S. Senate, how can people expect me to share that and express that as a United States senator?" Well, sure, as long as he can express it anonymously, just like a good and brave Republican Senator.

Republicans Running From Bush (Part 2, briefly):
While the Rude Pundit continues to research the ways that Republicans in close races deal with the cement shoes that the Bush administration has put on incumbents, another interesting trend is the outright denial of the President by Republicans.

For instance, Rob Simmons of Connecticut, in a tight race with Joe Courtney, proudly displays his anti-Bush street cred in articles like "Even When It Means Crossing Political Lines in Washington," describing Simmons as a Republican who doesn't flinch from "crossing the Bush Administration and the Tom DeLay wing of the House of Representatives on tight, party-line votes." Oooh, he's a badass motherfucker every once in a blue moon when he doesn't follow marching orders from Rove.

Considering that for so many elections back in the 1990s, Democrats ran away from Bill Clinton like giant-craniumed scientists from a group of zombies, it's vaguely satisfying to see this President become, to at least some candidates, an electoral pariah, an albatross that's starting to rot.

More tomorrow.

Next Week: Big Time Fun at the Rude Pundit's Place:
Next week, the Rude Pundit's taking one of his twice (or so) yearly sojourns to Red State America. And this time he wants it to be at least a semi-vacation. So he e-mailed a few of his favorite rude bloggers to write some guest posts. Starting on Monday, July 31, until Friday, August 4, regular (and irregular) readers of this postage stamp of Left Blogsylvania will have the following to look forward to:

Monday, July 31:
Bitch Phd and Angry Black Bitch (it wasn't intentional to have a day of the "Bitch," but sometimes chaos works out that way)

Tuesday, August 1:
Jill Filipovic of Feministe and Egalia of Tennessee Guerilla Women

Wednesday, August 2:
Avedon Carol of the Sideshow and Shakespeare's Sister

Thursday, August 3:
Maryscott O'Connor of My Left Wing and Echidne of the Snakes

Friday, August 4:
Lindsay Beyerstein of Majikthise, Lauren Bruce of Feministe, and Pam Spaulding of Pam's House Blend and Pandagon

Oh, and before someone points out the obvious, yeah, they're all female bloggers. And they're major Buffy-style ass kickers. So while the Rude Pundit is wandering the byways of the South (including heading back to New Orleans for some firsthand reportage-type shit like in January), come on in to the house party, the beer in the fridge and the dope in the carved-out Bible is for everyone, and keep reading for a daily dose of awesome.

(Oh, before someone asks, the Rude Pundit will continue posting through Friday this week.)

Clark Kent Duty Calls - Late Post Today:
The Rude Pundit must put back on his dark-rimmed glasses, for Perry White is bellowing in the background. Later today: more scatterin' Republican candidates and a super-cool announcement.

Republicans Running From Bush (Part 1, Updated):
So, so, so Senator John Thune, the Republican who defeated Tom Daschle in 2004, had one of those rare moments of DC honesty last week when he said, "If I were running in the state this year, you obviously don't embrace the president and his agenda." And, if you look at the Republican candidates' websites in some of the truly close races, man, you can barely tell that a Republican is President.

Like, for instance, check out the site for Indiana congressman Mike Sodrel, in a tight race against Democrat Baron Hill, who proudly has a picture of himself with Bill Clinton on his home page. You can dig, into Sodrel's photo section, or the On the Issues section, and, while it may be there somewhere, damned if the Rude Pundit can find the words "George Bush," let alone an image of the man that's ostensibly Sodrel's party's leader.

But if you go back, via Archive.org's Wayback Machine, why you can find that back in June of 2004, why Mike Sodrel had Bush's grinnin' puss on his home page. Hell, Sodrel even touted his closeness to President Bush, with the chair of the Indiana Republican Party promising that Sodrel "will fight alongside President Bush" on defense issues. And, at one point, Sodrel had a section just for pictures of himself with the Bush/Cheney campaign. What a difference two years makes, huh? To go from proud and open butt boy to cowering closeted cretin in so short a time, despite the fact that there's little evidence that Sodrel ever actually opposed Bush on anything.

And that's the way it goes for so many Republicans, running away from Bush like so many rats on so many ships heading into the drink. Back in 2002, to continue picking on Indiana, Chris Chocola prominently featured Tom DeLay and Dick Cheney on his campaign site's homepage, with Bush mentioned throughout. Now, much like Sodrel, the Rude Pundit can't find hide nor hair of the President on Chocola's website in his campaign against Joe Donnelly.

Let's keep this party going - but, fuck, it'll have to wait because Archive.org just got all flaky and is rejecting the Rude Pundit's advances.

More as soon as it's back.

Update: According to Google, Chris Chocola's entire site mentions the word "Bush" only once. The same thing goes for Mike Sodrel's site. One mention. That ain't runnin'. It's screaming crazy to get away.

Thanks to rude reader Leighton for the heads up.

Umm, CNN, Isn't There Still a War in Iraq?:
Now, the Rude Pundit ain't a stinkin' head-up-his-ass nationalist, nor is he a "USA, USA" chantin' buffoon. But one doesn't have to be a pledge takin', anthem singin' xenophobe to think that it's just entirely fucked-up that the three cable "news" networks have decided to cover the Israel-Lebanon/Israel-Gaza conflicts almost non-fuckin-stop for the last dozen days while making the Iraq War - you remember, the one where nearly 150,000 Americans are fighting - a story that comes somewhere between Indiana highway snipers and how much M. Night Shamalamadindong's latest film twaddle sucks balls.

This is not to say that what's going on over in Israel and just above and below it isn't horrible. It is. It's fucking gut-wrenching and hideous, as every regional conflict is, as every time some nation blows the fuck out of another nation is. But it's a rerun, and even though summer is the time for reruns of our favorite TV shows, we should probably pay a little more attention to our long-running programs that don't take the summer off.

Seriously, check out CNN's transcript index for yesterday. The only story worth individual mention from Iraq is the hospitalization of Saddam Hussein. Otherwise, Iraq is shoved aside quite literally to "in other news" or one badly put transition or another. Check out the program This Week at War. On yesterday's edition, John "Behold My Magnificent Grey Helmet o' Hair" Roberts reported, like just about everyone else on the CNN payroll, from the border between Lebanon and Israel, and after going on a bit about that conflict, added, "There was also a lot of bad news in Baghdad. Some 50 people killed, 165 wounded in a series of suicide car bombings." He spoke for the next 15 seconds about Iraq before devoting nearly all of the hour to the Israeli battles, except for a few minutes about Afghanistan.

What the fuck? No, really, and, c'mon, what the fuck? Our little attempt to completely mash down and rebuild Iraq like it's so much Play-Doh on the kiddie room craft table has been relegated to afterthought, much like the post-invasion planning. And it certainly ain't just CNN. MSNBC and Fox "News" have more or less declared the Iraq War old and tired, while the Israel/Lebanon/Gaza blow-up is the new hotness.

It's like a form of denial or overcompensation. See, every group of friends has the pal who is so fuckin' good at solvin' everyone else's problems: "Oh, yeah, Greg, fuck that bitch - dump her and you'll be a new man. Of course you should take that new job, Julio; you're goin' nowhere fast at anonymous corporate entity #45. No, no, Tom, that just looks like a regular lump to me, but, you know, I'm not a doctor." Yeah, advisor-buddy can be awesome to have around, but advisor-buddy sucks at cleaning up his own shit - his refusal to stand up for himself at work, his dead-end marriage, his issues with his parents. But if he can't handle his own problems, the ones that he thinks will never go away, well, you know, at least he can deal with yours.

So we get to hear about every warning siren that goes off in Haifa, and the deaths of two U.S. soldiers and hundreds and hundreds of Iraqis now becomes "in other news," the explosions of cars and suiciders so much white noise against the rockets falling in Northern Israel and in Beirut.

Howzabout this: yeah, we know, we know, Iraq and Afghanistan have had their day in the media spotlight. But Americans oughta care first about our own messes. Maybe the news networks could put our story first - the Israeli conflicts can be a close second. But just for some kind of statement that the tens of thousands of Americans over in Iraq and Afghanistan, still risking their lives for the neocons quixotic nightmare, for the miasma of blood and violence we have created, still matter.

A Response To Ann Coulter's Plagiarism From One of Her Uncited Sources:
A Portland Press Herald columnist says that the newspaper's staff doesn't wanna call it "plagiarism," but they do find it curious. And he tried to ask Ann Coulter about it, but she wouldn't respond, so he just made up a conversation with her "since this newspaper is already in the business of putting words in your mouth."

(Tip of the rude hat to Richard Wolfe, who blogs at Random Punditry and Maine Liberty, for the heads up.)

George Bush Comes Down To the Quarters:
The worst thing about George W. Bush's speech to the NAACP yesterday is it was just a pussy speech. It was filled with an idiot's view of history, the kind of "Oh-shit-here's-what-I-just-learned" bullshit that you get in a college freshman history course, the kind of dawning enlightenment horny white dudes use at the bar to try to impress the black chicks they wanna bang. Talking about slaves as "founders" of America, Bush said, "These founders literally helped build our country. They chopped the wood, they built the homes, they tilled the fields, and they reaped the harvest. They raised children of others, even though their own children had been ripped away and sold to strangers." Oh, really? Hey, welcome to the party, motherfucker.

And then there were the usual absurd feints at religiosity, statements so self-evidently lies that somewhere up above, St. Peter gently held back Jesus's hair while he puked into the Ark of the Convenant (why not?). Said the President, "My faith tells me that we're all children of God, equally loved, equally cherished, equally entitled to the rights He grants us all." Somewhere, in a secret prison in Crazystan, Eastern Europe, a captured Afghani getting his nuts power-drilled by a CIA agent is awfully happy to hear that Bush's faith guides him in such a strong moral direction.

Taken as a whole, the speech was meant to demonstrate that Bush "gets it" or some such shit. See? He knows things sucked for black people back in the day: "Slavery was legal for nearly a hundred years, and discrimination legal in many places for nearly a hundred years more." See? He gets that the majority of the black community thinks Republicans are savage wannabe slaveowners who'd just as well create a legal caste system in the nation. Talking about the Medicare prescription drug "program," Bush said, "Look, I understand that we had a political disagreement on the bill. I know that." See? He knows it. He said he knows it. Don't start tellin' him he doesn't know it, 'cause he'll let you know: he knows.

And our goddamn President clings to a catchphrase like that old lady yellin' "Where's the beef?" until the day she died. Here's Bush on education: "I like to call it this: We need to challenge the soft bigotry of low expectations. If you have low expectations, you're going to get lousy results." C'mon, at this point it's like hearing Steve Martin say, "Well, excuuuuse me." Just sad.

The whole speech was just a campaign stop. Bush may as well have said, "Here's all the shit I've done for you people - with home and business ownership, with AIDS, with other shit, shit you know about. Why don't you negroes love me? Why?" No challenge, no confrontation, no defiance, just an incompetent attempt to appease and get some good photos surrounded by the darkeys.

If you go back to Bill Clinton's 1996 speech to the NAACP's national convention, you read the words of a man who doesn't need to try to demonstrate to African Americans that he understands the absolute basics of history and struggle. What you got was the moral authority (yeah, that's right) of a man who put race less in terms of "here's what I can do for you people" and instead in terms of a struggle that all of America has a stake in. Qualitatively, the difference between Clinton and Bush talking to the NAACP is the difference between listening to Carnegie Hall concerts by Gerry Mulligan and Kenny G. They're playing jazz on roughly the same instruments in the same space. But only one of them gets it.

Reminder To German Readers:
Or at least the ones in Germany. The Rude Pundit will be appearing on ZDF (a German TV network) tonight at 10:15 p.m. The show is titled Megacitys and is about a day of media in New York City. Although, really, the Rude Pundit has no idea how the thing turned out and if he'll be portrayed as a raving lunatic or a mellow lunatic. Either way, he speaks no German.

Drop the Rude Pundit a note if you check it out.

Ten Ways You'd Act If You Were the Republican-Led Congress:
(In honor of our hardworking members of the legislative branch)

1. If your pipes were leaking to the point that your basement was flooded and your foundation was going to crumble, you'd order out for pizza and argue with the delivery guy over whether or not you wanted anchovies on the pie. You wouldn't tip.

2. If your computer hard drive crashed, taking with it all the digital photos of your kids and your vacations, you'd write an angry letter to Ronald McDonald, demanding to know if the McDLT is ever coming back. You like hot and cold separate.

3. If a garbage truck ran over your foot, you'd go shopping for a new hat. A jaunty summer beret, perhaps.

4. If five men with clubs killed your sister's dog and then raped her, you'd reorganize your copies of People magazine alphabetically by cover celebrity rather than by date. You'd argue with your spouse over using first or last names.

5. If your credit cards were maxed out and your debit card was used to empty your bank account by someone who stole the numbers and you didn't have anything left to cover the cost of formula for your baby, you'd go sing Christmas carols at the Alzheimer's wing of the nursing home. Even though it's July.

6. If your car was on fire at a gas station with your three children unconscious inside, you'd play Tetris on your cell phone. You'd curse Jesus whenever you missed the chance to make three rows disappear.

7. If you caught your husband cheating on you with the 15-year old boy who mows your lawn, you'd buy flowers for Barbaro, the horse with a hoof healing. Even though Barbaro just eats every daisy he can.

8. If your doctor told you that you had inoperable breast cancer that had spread to your lungs and wrapped itself around your heart, you'd write a dirty limerick about two lesbian midgets that rhymed the words "dykey" and "psyche." You'd be upset that very few funny or dirty things rhyme with "midget."

9. If your parents committed double suicide with razors and left a note in blood declaring that they were doing so because they couldn't stand the agony of watching you die from your horrible disease, you'd hire a fat clown to do pratfalls for all the Korean ladies at the local nail salon. They need a good laugh.

10. If you were on your deathbed, all alone, everyone you know dead or gone, you'd watch infomercials until the final mortal pain gripped you. You'd die thinking you should have done more to clear up the blemishes on your skin.

The George Bush Merry-Go-Round of Fucktardery:
So we've finally come full circle in the presidency of George W. Bush, back to those heady pre-9/11 days, and just five murderous years later. Remember that summer beforeeverythingchanged? God, it was fun. When his job approval ratings hovered ominously near 50 percent and trending downward. When Comedy Central could have an entire show dedicated to mocking him (and it wasn't The Daily Show). When the issue of the day that Bush was considering with all the thinkin' his head could manage was stem cell research.

It'd be so fuckin' poetic if Bush used his first veto on August 9, the fifth anniversary of his bullshit little speech declaring the use of embryos for fetal stem cell experiments off limits for federal funding, acting as if he had really gone on some monk-like retreat, wandering into the Texas scrub to consider the ethical dilemma of the matter, delving into Kierkegaard and Aquinas as he sought a utilitarian answer to what he said he considered the most profound questions of the truths of existence, of the meaning of ethics and morality. Instead, he treated us, the citizens of the nation, like dogs that had shit on the kitchen floor, rubbing our noses in his bible, saying, "[I] believe human life is a sacred gift from our Creator. I worry about a culture that devalues life." At least there was an attempt at subtlety.

Now his thuggish press secretary is telling the media that embryonic stem cell research is "murder" even as a just-short-of-two-thirds of the Senate approves federal funding for the research after a debate that flirted with respectability. And because he can't actually issue a signing statement that says he thinks he can stop the funding because he is constitutionally empowered to protect the nation, Bush will use his first veto. As he promised back when he had just a smidge more power than he does now.

And as for the G-8 buffoonery, goddamnit, puking in the lap of the Japanese prime minister seems positively dignified in retrospect. Beyond the little bit of dialogue picked up by a mike, where Bush said, "Shit" (does he get fined by the FCC?) and he acted like the spazzy kid with ADD playin' the President at United Nations Day in third grade, there was his bizarro treatment of the elected Chancellor of Germany like she was a secretary who had typed too many letters. Look at the pictures of this President Bush as he heads over to Angela Merkel to give her a brief shoulder grab/rub. First look at his eyes, those dead, cold eyes, like Karloff's Frankenstein's monster, or the kind of eyes of someone so immune to human contact and warmth that he only wakes up when watching a particularly gruesome snuff film, where sick fucks jack off on the body parts of a Mexican woman they just chopped up. Look at his hands on her shoulders. He doesn't even know what he's doing. He doesn't even know that unless he warms up her shoulder muscles first, he's just gonna give her one hell of a cramp. Circular movements with the thumbs, motherfucker, not whole hand squeezing. Christ, no wonder Laura spends more time with her waterproof vibrator in the tub than in bed with her husband.

Merkel's reaction, though, is not just one of pain, not just one of "What the fuck do you think you're doing?" It's a look of frustration, of supreme irritation, of having picked up after a child time and time again but the little fucker just thinks it's funny to keep dumping shit on the floor. It's almost like she wants to say, "Focus, you dumb fuckin' shitkicker wannabe. There's goddamn wars going on and you're wanderin' around, acting like we're a toilet paper corporation deciding if we wanna put flowers or butterflies on our new brand." And then Bush walks off with his zombie stagger, blank stare drawing him to the next embarassment. Shit, Bush got off easy. If Ronald Reagan had tried to massage Margaret Thatcher, he'd've pulled back nubs.

So, if there was any doubt left, for anyone, all the shine and polish and spin in the world ain't gonna cover-up the fact that we are back to where we were, that pre-9/11 mindset that made us think, "God, just don't let him blow up the whole fuckin' world before he's outta there."