Just Another Day

"Any idiot can handle a crisis, it's day to day living that wears you out." - Chekhov

Thursday, February 03, 2005

US, EU and China

Somehow or another, the Bush administration expects us to believe that it is concerned with human rights in China. The EU wants to lift the arms embargo on China in exchange for China signing on to arms sales limitations. Condi Rice says that this will "send the wrong signal about human rights." Now, in case the Bush administration has not noticed, it has no credibility to talk about China and human rights. The fact that it is sending up Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General is abhorrent enough, given his involvement in interpretations of the law that Bush is somehow above the law and can authorize torture, and discredits its claims that it is concerned about human rights. The fact that the Bush administration needs China to buy up the debt that its irresponsible, runaway spending and unecessary war require means that it has little, very little, leverage with what China does or does not want. Of course, China needs America to keep buying its slave-labor goods so can't really complain too much about America but there are other markets for Chinese goods than America so we need them more than they need us. In the end, having squandered moral authority by lying to Americans, as well as the rest of the world, about the reasons for war in Iraq and by endorsing torture at Abu Ghraib, Gitmo and in Afghanistan, we have little room to talk about human rights. Having squandered economic authority by swinging a surplus to a massive debt which Bush only wants to make bigger by making the tax cuts permanent and privatizing Social Security, we have little room to negotiate economically on human rights issues.

Bush has run out of cards so he has pulled out the pistol in his boot again and is waving it around in an attempt to threaten everyone at the table. Unfortunately, the others at the table have more than just their hidden pistol with which to defend themselves. We're a spent deck thanks to the impudence and incompetence of Bush and his people.

|

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

Damned "r" key

Junior had a little go at the keyboard and now I find that the 'r' doesn't always appear when I wish it to. So, if you see that this letter is missing, it's not because I am trying to sound like Kerry in his early days, it's because the key isn't fully attached. I'll see if I can fix it.

|

The 'Cost' of Making Sense

So, now, it turns out that the people over at Polipundit are sending emails to one another about me. Not that I am so important they need to talk about me but it is just a general note to not respond to my comments lest I hijack a thread. Hijack? I always thought I was taking part in a conversation, whether or not one agrees with me, but they apparently are more concerned with echoing their unipolar viewpoints so I get bored and go away and they aren't troubled by reality, truth, facts, sound reasoning, or logic (yes, I know it is redundant but emphasis is an alowable tool). It works, I do get bored and go away. It's happened before and they do it so they don't appear as Stalinist as the owners of places such as Free Republic or LGF who erase your existence from the thread and the history of their web site. I will admit that the owners at Polipundit are better than most of the right wing sites but their readers are the same.

Update: OK, it was only one who wanted to try to freeze me out. The rest are still talking.

|

As A Point of Clarification

I have been (pa)trolling over at Polipundit the last few weeks and recently got engaged with someone that the wingnuts there hailed as their saviour and someone who would put me in my place. Needless to say he wasn't much to speak of and couldn't respond to my comments, instead spouting off his line of thinking repeatedly, when not descending into the usual rhetoric found there about how, as an expat, I am a "visceral anti-American." Anyway, the conversation went into why a group of chicken hawks have or have not the credibility to send our military into conflict. Now, generally, I would agree with him that it is the argument in question that counts rather than the person behind the argument. However, I also believe that the credibility of the person making the argument counts and the chicken hawks in the Bush administration, those that I define as not having served when the nation called in a combat with which they agreed was just, don't have that credibility when it comes to this war in Iraq. Beyond the litany of lies that got us into this folly in Iraq (and elections don't make the obfuscations or the administration somehow magically exhonerated) is the argument in question. When someone had the chance to serve, in this case Vietnam for these chicken hawks, in a war they thought was the right one and one which obviously needed more warm bodies, they decided to show their yellow bellys (Cheney, the king of government teat sucking, said he had "other priorities"; Bush told a Houston newspaper, in 1994, that he wasn't going to shoot out his eardrum or run to Canada so he "signed up" for TANG - and, upon entry, he checked a box specifically refusing overseas duty - then proceeded to not complete his commitment; I don't know what Wolfowitz' excuse was). Those are the three that I used as examples; there are more. So, what right do they have to send our troops into a war that is, at the very best, contentious because of the litany of justifications that even previous to the war were doubted by many and one which was not considered worth the cost by many (prior) and most (recently, I am guessing until they sheepishly believed the hype that the elections made the war just). Any thoughts?

|

Monday, January 31, 2005

Happy Birthday, Dude

Number 46??!! Holy cow, we're getting up there!


|

Sunday, January 30, 2005

Worried About Freedom

Pat Roberts explains the real GOP worry about the situation in Iraq. Despite Wolfowitz' idiotic statement that there isn't a history of ethnic strife in Iraq, and I thought he was supposed to be smart, there have always been very serious problems between the ethnicities/religions in what we know of as Iraq. They have always been worried about this, I am sure, but this is the first time one of them has actually come out and said it. In other words, they want freedom for the Iraqis but only their own specific idea of what freedom is for them, i.e., they want them to have freedom if they agree with the decisions made. We've known for a long time that the GOP are full of hypocrites but they never cease to amaze. Then again, they elected an idiot to lead their party and, ostensibly at least, the nation.

|