This Just In…Keith Olbermann Just Scored….Again!!!

This rout would be seriously funny….weren’t it be so true, and the stakes so high.

Here’s my question:  Why aren’t the freakin’ Dimocrats as willing as KO to lay such truth down?? Why does he have to carry all of the water for the “progressive” media??

Maybe KO should produce another “Special Comment” for the Bush Dogs and their enablers Pelosi and Reid….they are as much responsible for Dubya’s myopia getting a free ride as the Repugs are.

Either way….here’s Olbermann going off once again on Dubya on Iraq.

Countdown with Keith Olbermann: Special Comment 9/5/07 (Dubya’s Credibility on Iraq/”Playing Us”) 

“That’s Emperor Chucklenuts To You, Fat Head!!!”

Oh, but you will not believe this…but if this article represents the overwhelming sentiment of the 24% of the population who still manages beyond a glimmer of working brain cells to support Dubya’s war games, then we are so totally screwed over….and not in the good way, either.

An outfit called Family Security Matters, which claims to be a right-wing thinktank which boasts the likes of Frank Gaffney, Monica Crowley, Laura Ingraham, and James Woolsey on its Board of Directors, originally published this magnificent tome to the outstanding leadership qualities of our President-Select and the inadequacies of our present system of democracy to match his greatness.  Unfortunately, the original site decided that it was a bit too magnificent and pulled it from the site…but not before some of the liberal blogosphere cached it for posterity. Digby from Hullabaloo was one of them; she even felt so moved that she reprinted the whole entire article at her site; from whence I will borrow to post for your entertainment. As always, I’ll add my commentary and annotations within brackets where feasible.

Exclusive: Conquering the Drawbacks of Democracy
Philip Atkinson

Author: Philip Atkinson
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: August 3, 2007

While democratic government is better than dictatorships and theocracies, it has its pitfalls. FSM Contributing Editor Philip Atkinson describes some of the difficulties facing President Bush today.

Conquering the Drawbacks of Democracy
By Philip Atkinson

President George W. Bush is the 43rd President of the United States. He was sworn in for a second term on January 20, 2005 after being chosen by the majority of citizens in America to be president.

Yet in 2007 he is generally despised, with many citizens of Western civilization expressing contempt for his person and his policies, sentiments which now abound on the Internet. This rage at President Bush is an inevitable result of the system of government demanded by the people, which is Democracy.

[Let’s just say that Dubya’s not too well liked by the majority, shall we?? For some, that might be a natural outcome of his policies..but Mr. Atkinson has a slightly different perspective…]

The inadequacy of Democracy, rule by the majority, is undeniable – for it demands adopting ideas because they are popular, rather than because they are wise. This means that any man chosen to act as an agent of the people is placed in an invidious position: if he commits folly because it is popular, then he will be held responsible for the inevitable result. If he refuses to commit folly, then he will be detested by most citizens because he is frustrating their demands.

[Ohhhhhhh-kay… when this president was near 60-70% popularity right after September 11, 2001, that would indicate just as much the fickleness of the public…right, Mr. Atkinson??? Or does popular opinion and “democracy” only work well when your side controls all of the seats of power, as it was before November of last year??  (And considering the Dimocrats’ record of caving in to all of Dubya’s demands so far, even that minor glitch of losing the Congress doesn’t seem to matter much anyway.)]

When faced with the possible threat that the Iraqis might be amassing terrible weapons that could be used to slay millions of citizens of Western Civilization, President Bush took the only action prudence demanded and the electorate allowed: he conquered Iraq with an army.

This dangerous and expensive act did destroy the Iraqi regime, but left an American army without any clear purpose in a hostile country and subject to attack. If the Army merely returns to its home, then the threat it ended would simply return.

[Oh, yeah….those weapons of mass destuction that we know Saddam had that he was going to unleash on us any time back then…..if only we could have found them.  And this notion of “the threat returning if the Army “merely returns to its home”….which threat would that be, Mr. Atkinson?? al-Queda (who hated Saddam with a passion and called him an “infidel” and a Communist)??  The Iranians?? bin Laden (whom apparantly wasn’t enough of a threat in Afghanistan when your favorite government was supporting and financing him and his band of “freedom fighters” against the Soviets)??? Or was it really the real threat of Saddam cutting off the US from Iraqi oil and trading in euros instead of petrodollars?? Oh, but wait…I’m getting ahead of myself; onward ho….]

The wisest course would have been for President Bush to use his nuclear weapons to slaughter Iraqis until they complied with his demands, or until they were all dead. Then there would be little risk or expense and no American army would be left exposed. But if he did this, his cowardly electorate would have instantly ended his term of office, if not his freedom or his life.

[Not to mention that the nuclear fallout would make it a bit messy to clean up and dig up all that oil….and there is that slight possibility of China and Russia aiming their nukes at us in response…but why let facts get in the way of a wonderful empire??]

The simple truth that modern weapons now mean a nation must practice genocide or commit suicide. Israel provides the perfect example. If the Israelis do not raze Iran, the Iranians will fulfill their boast and wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Yet Israel is not popular, and so is denied permission to defend itself. In the same vein, President Bush cannot do what is necessary for the survival of Americans. He cannot use the nation’s powerful weapons. All he can do is try and discover a result that will be popular with Americans.

[Somebody probably needs to remind Mr. Atkinson that Israel has all the nukes in the region, while Iran has…..none. And, regardless of Iran’s boasting, they probably won’t be able to even get enough nuclear power for a power plant, if past reaction from Israel means anything.]

As there appears to be no sensible result of the invasion of Iraq that will be popular with his countrymen other than retreat, President Bush is reviled; he has become another victim of Democracy.

[Oh, but ye of little faith, Mr. Atkinson…..surely, you saw the President’s stirring speech in front of the VFW, where he remains quite the optimist about absolute and total victory in Iraq; regardless of the public’s disapproval.]

By elevating popular fancy over truth, Democracy is clearly an enemy of not just truth, but duty and justice, which makes it the worst form of government. President Bush must overcome not just the situation in Iraq, but democratic government.

However, President Bush has a valuable historical example that he could choose to follow.

When the ancient Roman general Julius Caesar was struggling to conquer ancient Gaul, he not only had to defeat the Gauls, but he also had to defeat his political enemies in Rome who would destroy him the moment his tenure as consul (president) ended.

Caesar pacified Gaul by mass slaughter; he then used his successful army to crush all political opposition at home and establish himself as permanent ruler of ancient Rome. This brilliant action not only ended the personal threat to Caesar, but ended the civil chaos that was threatening anarchy in ancient Rome – thus marking the start of the ancient Roman Empire that gave peace and prosperity to the known world.

[Of course, this ignores the fact that the Roman Empire ultimately collasped from exactly the “peace and prosperity” that Caeser provided and extended to his successors…or the fact that Caesar ended up assassinated.]

If President Bush copied Julius Caesar by ordering his army to empty Iraq of Arabs and repopulate the country with Americans, he would achieve immediate results: popularity with his military; enrichment of America by converting an Arabian Iraq into an American Iraq (therefore turning it from a liability to an asset); and boost American prestiege while terrifying American enemies.

[Oh, yeah….Iraq, the Fifty-First State of the Union!!! And where would all those new Americans come from, incidentially???  Those “illegal aliens” that you wish to throw out of the mainland???  The detainees out of Guamtamano Bay and Abu Ghraib?? The entire Black population of the US???]

He could then follow Caesar’s example and use his newfound popularity with the military to wield military power to become the first permanent president of America, and end the civil chaos caused by the continually squabbling Congress and the out-of-control Supreme Court.

[Yeah, right….a military coup that would suspend the Congress and the SCOTUS.  What kind of crack is this guy smoking??? He does know that most of the military would more than likely revolt the other way if such a “coup” would happen, right??  And he does know about this thing called “Federalism” which devolves political power to the States…and a certain constitutional amendment which limits Presidential terms to two consecutive four-year terms, right??? Boy, some folk do dream mighty dreams..mighty stupid dreams!!!]

President Bush can fail in his duty to himself, his country, and his God, by becoming “ex-president” Bush or he can become “President-for-Life” Bush: the conqueror of Iraq, who brings sense to the Congress and sanity to the Supreme Court. Then who would be able to stop Bush from emulating Augustus Caesar and becoming ruler of the world? For only an America united under one ruler has the power to save humanity from the threat of a new Dark Age wrought by terrorists armed with nuclear weapons.

 Hold up…I thought that conservatives were supposed to be strict construtionists who opposed such concentration of power in one person, right???

If this was written by some tin-foil hat wingnut from Christian Identity or the MiNUTeKKKlan, it could be dismissable as certified crank lube….but this is coming from a serious neo-CON organization (although, they were pretty quick to clip Atkinson’s wings and repudiate in public his flights of fancy. And it does give great pause to what it says for some of the others in power who may share his myopia that going “Papa Doc for Life” might just be the ticket for avoiding the inevitable political ass kicking that the Repubs and ultra-cons are scheduled to recieve in November of next year.

Perhaps that may be Unkla Karl’s last parting gift to his President and his country.  Let’s hope not.

Racist Right-wing Sex Freakery: Chapter 245 (The Bob Allen Files)

Just when I thought that the freakery of right-wing Republican sexual closet cases can’t get any loonier….here comes one for the record books.

You may have heard of the story of poor Florida state senator Bob Allen, who was at one time co-chair of John McCain’s state presidential campaign orgainzation, and a loud and frequent voice for all things moral and pure. 

At least, he was….until he got his ass caught and arrested in a Titusville park public restroom for soliciting an undercover cop for a blowjob.

You may even have heard of the excuse he gave for his innocence, too….except that it is so freakin’ whack that it deserves a replay.  This is from the Orlando Sentinel:

TITUSVILLE – State Rep. Bob Allen told police he was just playing along when a undercover officer suggested in a public restroom that the legislator give him oral sex and $20 because he was intimidated, according to a taped statement and other documents released Thursday.

Allen has already denied any wrongdoing, but the recordings and documents offered new details about what he and police say happened on July 11 inside the men’s room at Veterans Memorial Park.

“I certainly wasn’t there to have sex with anybody and certainly wasn’t there to exchange money for it,” said Allen, R-Merritt Island, who was arrested on charges of soliciting prostitution. 

“This was a pretty stocky black guy, and there was nothing but other black guys around in the park,” Allen, who is white, told police in a taped statement after his arrest. Allen said he feared he “was about to be a statistic” and would have said anything just to get away.

Allen, who couldn’t be reached for comment Thursday, has repeatedly declared his innocence, his intention to fight the charges and his desire to stay in office.

Uh-huh.  Sure.  Right, Senator. I feel your pain.  I mean, there’s just no reason for you to be out there in a public park with all those evil “stocky” Black men threatening your life…unless you really, really, really have a hunger for a piece of that thick, juicy dark meat.

Problem for him is, the police reports tell a somewhat different story.

Three undercover officers said they were staking out a nearby condo hoping to catch a burglar when Allen entered a park bathroom at about 3:30 p.m. 

The officers, who didn’t recognize the seven-year legislator, said they thought he was behaving suspiciously and thought that he was looking for a sexual partner, according to the reports released by the Brevard-Seminole State Attorney’s Office.

In a written statement released Thursday, Titusville Officer Danny Kavanaugh recalled entering the restroom twice and said he was drying his hands in a stall when Allen peered over the stall door.

After peering over the stall a second time, Allen pushed open the door and joined Kavanaugh inside, the officer wrote. Allen muttered ” ‘hi,’ ” and then said, ” ‘this is kind of a public place, isn’t it,’ ” the report said.

The officer said he asked Allen about going somewhere else and that the legislator suggested going “across the bridge, it’s quieter over there.”

“Well look, man, I’m trying to make some money; you think you can hook me up with 20 bucks?” Kavanaugh asked Allen.

The officer said Allen responded, “Sure, I can do that, but this place is too public.”

Then Kavanaugh said he told Allen, “I wanna know what I gotta do for 20 bucks before we leave.’ ” He said Allen replied: “I don’t know what you’re into.”

According to Kavanaugh’s statement, the officer said, “do you want just [oral sex]?” and Allen replied, “I was thinking you would want one.”

The officer said he then asked Allen, “but you’ll still give me the 20 bucks for that . . . and that the legislator said, “yeah, I wouldn’t argue with that.”

As Allen turned and motioned for the officer to follow him to his car, Kavanaugh identified himself as a police officer by raising his shirt and exposing his badge. 

Oh, shit….busted!!!

But give him credit, he did try the “Do you know who I am?” defense:

When Allen was being placed in a marked patrol car, he asked whether “it would help” if he was a state legislator, according to a police report. The officer replied, “No.” 

Now….the racist “blame the stocky evil Black men” angle has already been beaten (off) to death in several venues; and the “hidden gay desire to devour dark manmeat” angle will be left to more suitable commentators. 

For me, though, the fascinating thing is the fact that Allen (allegedly) solicited the cop not to get blown, but to blow.  I guess that he thought that if he was the initiator of the action, then he would be exempted from solicitation laws??  Or maybe, he was sooooo desperate for dark mantube (and the bigger the better, I’d think, considering his love of racist stereotyping) that he was willing to pay to relieve his hunger??

(But….twenty bucks?!?!?! For a state senator who happens to be a co-chair for a major Presidential candidate?? What….couldn’t he afford to rent a prostitute for one night?? Or is he really that cheap??)

But no…not even that surprises me that much….Florida is still part of the South, and uptown Klan racism flows through there no less than any other state of the region.

Nope….the real stunner is this: How in the HELL did  this fool get to be associated with John McCain’s campaign???  You know….”Straight Talk” McCain, the political “moderate” who disdains “extremism”??  Whom was at one time the frontrunner for the Republican nomination mostly because he was considered “electable” from the “center”??? Then again, this was the same McCain who sucked up to Jerry Falwell just before his passing; and whom stood by harmlessly in ’00 when Dubya’s forces savaged him for his adoption of a child of color during the primaries. I guess that such is the costs of getting the nomination, perhaps.

Then again, David Vitter was Rudy Giuliani’s mouthpiece and relay to the Christian Right…his love of diapers and hookas notwithstanding…so that might just be a trend for “moderate conservative” Repubs.

Goodness.  Some people just can’t control themselves…..maybe that’s why they so much want to control others??

This Is Your Democracy, People. Use It, Or Lose It.

Well….between the US Supreme Court transforming itself into the executuve wing of the Federalist Society, King Dubya deciding that Scooter Libby should not be punished with jail time for outing an CIA agent to cover up the propaganda war preceding the real war in Iraq, and the usual cravenness of the Dimocrats in responding to such with empty cries signifying nothing…well, this year’s Fourth of July isn’t feeling so jolly to me today.

Especially since it takes a TV journalist to say the things that our supposed quasi-liberal “opposition” party should have been screaming in unison from the very beginning.

Paraphrasing the immortal words of Arsenio Hall: Kick it, KO.

From Countdown with Keith Olbermann: Special Comment on Scooter Libby Commutation (7/3/07) via YouTube, with the usual h/t to Crooks and Liars)

Though I’m not hitching my hopes on Dubya or Big Dick resigning in disgrace (more likely, they’ll sooner be dragged out of the White House kicking and screaming, or hatch another terrorist plot to suspend the elections for good), resignation seems to be looking pretty good as an option. Especially since the Dimocrats aren’t going to revive impeachment any time soon……damn them to hell.

Dimocrat Cave-In Smothers Cindy Sheehan

Well, well, well…guess who became the  first announced public victim of the Great Dimocratic Iraqi Cave-In???  None other than the patron saint of war mom protesters herself, Cindy Sheehan.

From her blog entry at

I have endured a lot of smear and hatred since Casey was killed and especially since I became the so-called “Face” of the American anti-war movement. Especially since I renounced any tie I have remaining with the Democratic Party, I have been further trashed on such “liberal blogs” as the Democratic Underground. Being called an “attention whore” and being told “good riddance” are some of the more milder rebukes.

I have come to some heartbreaking conclusions this Memorial Day Morning. These are not spur of the moment reflections, but things I have been meditating on for about a year now. The conclusions that I have slowly and very reluctantly come to are very heartbreaking to me.

The first conclusion is that I was the darling of the so-called left as long as I limited my protests to George Bush and the Republican Party. Of course, I was slandered and libeled by the right as a “tool” of the Democratic Party. This label was to marginalize me and my message. How could a woman have an original thought, or be working outside of our “two-party” system?

However, when I started to hold the Democratic Party to the same standards that I held the Republican Party, support for my cause started to erode and the “left” started labeling me with the same slurs that the right used. I guess no one paid attention to me when I said that the issue of peace and people dying for no reason is not a matter of “right or left”, but “right and wrong.”

I am deemed a radical because I believe that partisan politics should be left to the wayside when hundreds of thousands of people are dying for a war based on lies that is supported by Democrats and Republican alike. It amazes me that people who are sharp on the issues and can zero in like a laser beam on lies, misrepresentations, and political expediency when it comes to one party refuse to recognize it in their own party. Blind party loyalty is dangerous whatever side it occurs on. People of the world look on us Americans as jokes because we allow our political leaders so much murderous latitude and if we don’t find alternatives to this corrupt “two” party system our Representative Republic will die and be replaced with what we are rapidly descending into with nary a check or balance: a fascist corporate wasteland. I am demonized because I don’t see party affiliation or nationality when I look at a person, I see that person’s heart. If someone looks, dresses, acts, talks and votes like a Republican, then why do they deserve support just because he/she calls him/herself a Democrat?


The most devastating conclusion that I reached this morning, however, was that Casey did indeed die for nothing. His precious lifeblood drained out in a country far away from his family who loves him, killed by his own country which is beholden to and run by a war machine that even controls what we think. I have tried every since he died to make his sacrifice meaningful. Casey died for a country which cares more about who will be the next American Idol than how many people will be killed in the next few months while Democrats and Republicans play politics with human lives. It is so painful to me to know that I bought into this system for so many years and Casey paid the price for that allegiance. I failed my boy and that hurts the most.

I have also tried to work within a peace movement that often puts personal egos above peace and human life. This group won’t work with that group; he won’t attend an event if she is going to be there; and why does Cindy Sheehan get all the attention anyway? It is hard to work for peace when the very movement that is named after it has so many divisions.


This is my resignation letter as the “face” of the American anti-war movement. This is not my “Checkers” moment, because I will never give up trying to help people in the world who are harmed by the empire of the good old US of A, but I am finished working in, or outside of this system. This system forcefully resists being helped and eats up the people who try to help it. I am getting out before it totally consumes me or anymore people that I love and the rest of my resources.

Good-bye, America…you are not the country that I love and I finally realized no matter how much I sacrifice, I can’t make you be that country unless you want it.

It’s up to you now.

And Mrs. Sheehan didn’t stop there, either….in a special open letter resignation to the Dimocrat leadership, posted in CounterPunch today, she tore new ones into them:


Naively, I set off on my tireless campaign calling on Congress to rescind George’s authority to wage his war of terror while asking him "for what noble cause" did Casey and thousands of other have to die. Now, with Democrats in control of Congress, I have lost my optimistic naiveté and have become cynically pessimistic as I see you all caving into "Mr. 28%"

There is absolutely no sane or defensible reason for you to hand Bloody King George more money to condemn more of our brave, tired, and damaged soldiers and the people of Iraq to more death and carnage. You think giving him more money is politically expedient, but it is a moral abomination and every second the occupation of Iraq endures, you all have more blood on your hands.

Ms. Pelosi, Speaker of the House, said after George signed the new weak as a newborn baby funding authorization bill: "Now, I think the president’s policy will begin to unravel." Begin to unravel? How many more of our children will have to be killed and how much more of Iraq will have to be demolished before you all think enough unraveling has occurred? How many more crimes will BushCo be allowed to commit while their poll numbers are crumbling before you all gain the political "courage" to hold them accountable. If Iraq hasn’t unraveled in Ms. Pelosi’s mind, what will it take? With almost 700,000 Iraqis dead and four million refugees (which the US refuses to admit) how could it get worse? Well, it is getting worse and it can get much worse thanks to your complicity.


So, Democratic Congress, with the current daily death toll of 3.72 troops per day, you have condemned 473 more to these early graves. 473 more lives wasted for your political greed: Thousands of broken hearts because of your cowardice and avarice. How can you even go to sleep at night or look at yourselves in a mirror? How do you put behind you the screaming mothers on both sides of the conflict? How does the agony you have created escape you? It will never escape me…I can’t run far enough or hide well enough to get away from it.

By the end of September, we will be about 80 troops short of another bloody milestone: 4000, and will hold nationwide candlelight vigils and you all will be busy passing legislation that will snuff the lights out of thousands more human beings.

Congratulations Congress, you have bought yourself a few more months of an illegal and immoral bloodbath. And you know you mean to continue it indefinitely so "other presidents" can solve the horrid problem BushCo forced our world into.

It used to be George Bush’s war. You could have ended it honorably. Now it is yours and you all will descend into calumnious history with BushCo.

Pretty sad to see, I’d say, and quite painful to watch…..but more than necessary to break through the psychological chains and see the truth.

I’m sure that we will be seeing the "attention whore traitor" smack from the "lesser evil" Dimocrat loyalists any time now….as if Cindy Sheehan would be held personally responsible for allowing Dubya to get his blank check.

Only message that I’d send to Mrs. Sheehan would be this: Welcome to the club….and there is an alternative.


…And While Dimocrats Retreat; Dubya Surges…Again

And. right on the cue, this is how Dubya rewards the Dimocrats for giving him basically all he wants: by grabbing more and more.

Say hello to the "second surge" plan…thanks to the San Francisco Chronicle:


Bush could double force by Christmas

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

(05-22) 04:00 PDT Washington — The Bush administration is quietly on track to nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year, an analysis of Pentagon deployment orders showed Monday.

The little-noticed second surge, designed to reinforce U.S. troops in Iraq, is being executed by sending more combat brigades and extending tours of duty for troops already there.

The actions could boost the number of combat soldiers from 52,500 in early January to as many as 98,000 by the end of this year if the Pentagon overlaps arriving and departing combat brigades.

Separately, when additional support troops are included in this second troop increase, the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq could increase from 162,000 now to more than 200,000 — a record-high number — by the end of the year.

The numbers were arrived at by an analysis of deployment orders by Hearst Newspapers.

"It doesn’t surprise me that they’re not talking about it," said retired Army Maj. Gen. William Nash, a former U.S. commander of NATO troops in Bosnia, referring to the Bush administration. "I think they would be very happy not to have any more attention paid to this."

The first surge was prominently announced by President Bush in a nationally televised address on Jan. 10, when he ordered five more combat brigades to join 15 brigades already in Iraq.

The buildup was designed to give commanders the 20 combat brigades Pentagon planners said were needed to provide security in Baghdad and western Anbar province.

Since then, the Pentagon has extended combat tours for units in Iraq from 12 months to 15 months and announced the deployment of additional brigades.

Taken together, the steps could put elements of as many as 28 combat brigades in Iraq by Christmas, according the deployment orders examined by Hearst Newspapers.

Army spokesman Lt. Col. Carl S. Ey said there was no effort by the Army to carry out "a secret surge" beyond the 20 combat brigades ordered by Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

"There isn’t a second surge going on; we’ve got what we’ve got," Ey said. "The idea that there are ever going to be more combat brigades in theater in the future than the secretary of defense has authorized is pure speculation."

Ey attributed the increase in troops to "temporary increases that typically occur during the crossover period" as arriving combat brigades move into position to replace departing combat brigades.

He said that only elements of the eight additional combat brigades beyond the 20 already authorized would actually be in Iraq in December.

The U.S. Joint Forces Command, based in Norfolk, Va., that tracks combat forces heading to and returning from Iraq, declined to discuss unit-by-unit deployments.

"Due to operational security, we cannot confirm or discuss military unit movements or schedules," Navy Lt. Jereal Dorsey said in an e-mail.

The Pentagon has repeatedly extended unit tours in Iraq during the past four years to achieve temporary increases in combat power. For example, three combat brigades were extended up to three months in November 2004 to boost the number of U.S. troops from 138,000 to 150,000 before, during and after the Jan. 30, 2005, Iraqi national elections.

Lawrence Korb, an assistant defense secretary for manpower during the Reagan administration, said the Pentagon deployment schedule enables the Bush administration to achieve quick increases in combat forces in the future by delaying units’ scheduled departures from Iraq and overlapping them with arriving replacement forces.

"The administration is giving itself the capability to increase the number of troops in Iraq," Korb said. "It remains to be seen whether they actually choose to do that."

Nash said the capability could reflect an effort by the Bush administration to "get the number of troops into Iraq that we’ve needed there all along."

I’m sure if this strategy works as well as the first "surge" did (like, not at all), then the next step will be formal reinstatement of the military draft.  I wonder how many Dimocrats will cave in on that??

Two-party system, my ass. Maybe time for an alternative.


Nez Kicks, Ren Rocks, BfP Flames, BA Whacks….and J-Val Merely Sucks

[UPDATE (5-14-07): Thanks to some recent clarifications by ‘Da Queer Bitch; I’ve gotten some second thoughts on Jessica Valenti that may have made my critique of her a bit too strong and off the mark…more on that in a future post. I’m retracting my original critique of her pending a further review of her book, and making editing adjustments thereof to this post.]

I am writing this at around 1 AM (Lafayette time), just off a shift from work, while my mind is still awake before the sheep start barging in….so excuse the stream of conscious thought.

To say that it’s been an interesting week around the Prog 101 Fighting Headbussa Brigade ranks would be a freakin’ understatement.

First, there’s The Badassssssss Mexicano known as Nezua over at The Unapologetic Mexican , who’s been taking the names and kicking the asses with a series of pinpoint accurate posts on not only the react to the May Day LA police riot, but the seeming lack of action amongst certain A-list liberal bloggers….not to mention the overall attitude of what he derides as the “WHITEPROGRESSIVE”(tm) attitude towards issues affecting people of color and poor people.

I find it very interesting, as a hallmark of this “White Lens” that I continually speak of that one group of people is allowed to decide the reality for another group (or many groups), as well as what is best for them. True, it’s infuriating, but more than that, it’s sad. It’s frustrating. It’s challenging. Because the very dynamic that continues harm on the Brown™ prevents the mind suffering behind the dynamic from coming to awareness of same. So tricky.

This “knowing what’s best for all” is typically White® and what I call “the colonizer’s” view. If you grok my use there, you understand better the controversial post I wrote about Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt’s transracial adoption habit, titled Nezua’s 2006 Colonizers of the Year.. When understanding this “colonizer’s view,” as I call it, we can just hear Kirk on the bridge, talking about some good but primitive group of aliens that need the Federation’s intervention to find their way. This is part of why some grow so very offended and befuddled by my take on Jolie. In their eyes, I am attacking benevolence. How gross. What on earth is wrong with me? How DARE I posit that placing a brown baby from some “third world country” and immersing them in the home and culture of an American celebrity, giving them a snazzy new name and a place in the roost of our collective dreams—American celebrity—was not THE MOST bestest thing you could ever do? What am I? Some kind of Jolie-hater? Some kind of woman-hater? Some kind of commie?

A recent comment on the post asked me “where’s the data to support the claim that kids uprooted from their ‘true’ cultural/ethnic heritage and raised in the US suffer/are alienated/resent their colonizing parents?” And I have to assume they did not read the thread. And thus, don’t really want to learn about what we are discussing.

“Data” they want, so they say. And what would this be? Books housed in accredited libraries, perhaps, they want. Science journals measuring the fractions that add up to a pile of sharp-edged and fractured identity and pain in an individual. I don’t have that data. What I do have are numerous blogs that swarmed to link to me after that post. Blogs like The Transracial Korean Adoptee Nexus and Twice the Rice and Racilicious. I got letters from transracial adoptees thanking me profusely for making the post. I dug up wounds, and posts ensued where memories, and pain and anger poured out, and others reading got to understand a bit of what was behind such a seemingly benign and benevolent act as the wiping out of a person’s culture in the name of “colorblindness.” Those who wanted to understand, that is. Because like that commenter’s rebuttal to the post, most challenges such as this—”prove to me that my view on others is wrong”—come in the form of an impossible request. There is no “proving” to these people that their views on others are not the end-all-be-all on that issue. If I point them to personal stories, they say that this is “largely speculative and anecdotal.” Very snazzy English. Very arrogant Deciders. They refuse to consider that they may not understand everything in the world, even when at issue is the lives of others, the thoughts of others, the feelings of others.

This is the White Lens. And it will not be pried off. This is why my brown friends do not engage in trying to change any minds on it. The owner must one day turn and realize there is a painful glare in their eye. Then, they can do the work of tearing it away themselves. And just as my verb choice indicates, there will be pain in this loss of vantage point, as it implies a loss of privilege.

— excerpted from “The Unapologetic Mexican: The True Front of Progressivism”; reposted at Jesus General and CorrenteWire

I’d rather that you go over there to Nez’s blog and read up the whole post and the commentary…I can’t do the man more justice than that.

Segue over to the lucious and lovely — but very deadly, if you push her too far — Renegade Evolution, who has been spreading her…..errrrrrrr…..wings of late on almost everything.  Like, for instance, the apparant conflict amongst some feminists between freedom of choice concerning abortion and reproductive rights, and the supposed lack thereof concerning consuming and producing porn.

When it comes to abortion, the battle cry is often “Her body, her choice! Her right! You do not get to question! How dare you judge? How dare you ask? How dare you seek to control, influence, shame, or otherwise do anything to this woman? It is Her Choice!”

But when it comes to porn, well…it’s not her choice! She’s been duped, controlled, has no choice! She cannot be expected to think and decide for herself! There must be something wrong with her! She must have been abused, or on drugs, or tricked! We must ask! We can judge! It is our business! She did not make a choice, there is no such thing as a choice when it comes to this, no one would make this choice! No one would willingly and with forethought do that with their body! There is something wrong with her! This is not a choice!

Well, see, I find that ironic, and little sickening, actually. Truth is both are choices women make, in a variety of conditions, for a variety of reasons. No choice is made in a vacuum, but both are choices. Her choice. Yet one is supported, defended, and protected without question in a great many circles. The other is not accorded that same consideration, at all, in those same circles. Both come down to the same thing…the idea of a woman’s right and ability to choose what to do with her body and what happens to and in it…yet…

One choice is a sacred, personal, and rallying point choice.

The other is decidedly…not.

Why is that? Do tell. Call me curious.

— excerpted from Renegade Evolution: Abortion and Porn: Choice Revisited

And then, there is BlackAmazon, who always seems to find the perfect stream-of-conscious phrase to put some jackass fool in his or her place….especially when she gets really pissed off.  Like this throuogh ass-whupping leveled at Feministing’s Jessica Valenti for her recently released bromide for rich Valley Girl slut wannabes book,  Full Frontal Feminism:

Nubian who has of course left for her sanity was right about this six months ago


But this has nothing to do with me.

As a woman of color

As a woman of a certain class

As a woman of a certain education level and mindset

As a woman of a certain faith

So officially when I say

I’m not a feminist but,

If this is how you will be introducing “feminism” to young women,

Ms Valenti

When I say this is not me,

I would appreciate if you not be so brilliantly uninformed as to try and disrespectful as to try and dismiss offhand like I was some recalcitrant toddler or couch your condescension by only quoting the most baseless ( yet the fact it comes up in every piece you talk about ) homophobic bile in an effort to make yourself look better.

As a 22 year old women reading this book , I felt disrespected. As a teacher of nearly 9 years especially of “at risk ” youth, I was appalled.

Young women do not need friends who reduce their problems with feminism to some issue with the coolness factor.

The definitely do not need it from people who would choose a very specific half naked torso and various approximations of Valley girl lingo .

I am a young woman who is NOT a feminist. I am a young woman who is one of many young women who has disagreed ,disengaged, delinked, and been disrespected by many of the feminist sisterhood.

I am part of a much longer line of women who has been caricatured, stolen from, and used .

— excerpted from Having Read The Fine Print….: Imperative of the Life

BA has a hell of a lot more to say about J-Val and her brand of feminism…but you get the gist of where’s she coming from.  Ren gets in her licks as well here.

And then there is the saddest part of this post….namely, that Brownfemipower may have had enough of blogging; mostly from a combination of continuously banging her head against the wall from frustration over the constant racist barbs she recieves for defending herself as a radical Latina.  As in…this nice masterpiece love letter to her that she posted yesterday:

I am tired of reading sob stories detailing how these criminal aliens are “invisible” and must “live in the shadows.”

Myself, I see them everywhere. Target. Walmart. Mobil gas station. My apartment complex. My place of employment.

They talk loud in Mexican and advertise their lawless presence here in the US. They move into our neighborhoods though we make it obvious we don’t want them. They march openly and defiantly against America yet they survive chiefly as a parasite to America’s public assistance programs.

UGH! What an ugly race!!!!
Ms Taletha of Texas | | IP:

Such deep affection for the human race, no??? Could have been written 40 years ago about Black folk…or gay/lesbian folk, or Native Americans, or…..

But it may have been something else that finally snapped Bfp over the edge…something related to J-Val’s brand of poor rich Valley Girl feminism. Quoteh Bfp in her “Fuck this shit, I’m outa here” post today:

[…]  * white women continue to be the dirty little slut of color at their oh-so-funny south of the border parties…

* but will it make a difference to anybody that most latinas have had to deal with the “HOTT” mamacita stereotype most of their lives? that white women express their sexuality by being “exotic” and “spicy” like the dirty little slut mexicans (or black women, asian women, arab women etc)–and that their sexuality is based on nothing more than our embarrassment and shame? does it make a difference at all? Does it make a difference that it’s NOT the patriarchy that is fucking up latina’s sexuality in this case–and that it’s NOT “just sex” either–that I’m not slut-shaming, I’m not sucking the patriarchy’s dick–I’m just sick and fucking TIRED IN MY BONES of racist white women making me feel ashamed and horrified to be Latina? And scared to death that my daughter is going to hook up with some racist white man or woman who thinks that she’s a dirty hot mamacita that loves to fuck like crazy? Your sexuality makes me fear for my daughters mental and physical well being BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT IT’S DONE TO ME–does that mean nothing to you???


* I just don’t have the drive any more–nobody gives a shit about mother’s being ripped from their children, nobody gives a shit if the cockroach slut is “rounded up” (and i don’t care if you hate that term, you’re still a bitch for saying it) and incarcerated like an animal, and EVERYBODY considers that a criminal latina may be lying when she speaks her fucking reality–oh, and I forgot–centralizing women in the immigration debate is dividing the community, letting the whites win, blah blah blah (as told to me by both male and female Latin@s).

I’m beginning to think that nubian was right–that there really is no place for a woman of color to speak specifically AS A WOMAN OF COLOR in this blogging world–blog posts directed solely toward other women of color get a handful of comments–blog posts to anybody, begging somebody to please, for god’s sake, pay attention–only get attention if they are angry and hostile and contain more energy than I’m willing to put into any more.

* And goddamn it, yes it bothers the shit out of me that when black or white women are shit on by sexism, men of color have something to say about it, but when latin@ mothers are fucking ripped from their children, imprisoned, deported–there’s silence–silence that is interrupted by nationalistic fuckheads that call me traitor and vendida. Is it being a traitor to remember your own? It’s being a traitor to love the your sisters and mothers and aunts and grandmothers?

I’ll just let her words speak for themselves….although BA’s words in response can speak volumes, too.

I notice that no matter how many times Twisty degrades and insults you yoou make sure you keep her as a high respected blogosphere link.

No matter how many times you steal form BFP and report race issues smugly with little consideration, you can’t be arsed to put up one sentence when she’s gone?

Stumbling into conversations about memories of bar and fictitious happy childhoods and I’m not evil I swear it while she and others fight for our lives.

You talk about wanting to hold media responsible yet the only attention you pay is to ” big fish ” while women who claim to be fore literally face death and fury and threats for putting words to page.

How many times does KOS of Firedoglake have to do dumbshit before the price of it to real people is less than the opportunity to mug with Hilary Clinton or have a new byline ?

Links for us and comments are not about traffic. Links are what makes it known that you cant come to a certain place and degrade our lines. comments are the voices that let the trolls and the assholes know you will be reckoned with.

They are the things that keep us from disappearing in the night. You can’t be bothered to be challenged or discuss or even say

We’re here so you don’t have to be alone in front of a motherfucking keyboard.

While debate dissecting our shit for your own self glorification

and you know this when you joke at calling people sluts. You know this when you sit and talka bout how much smarter you are than the discourse, you know this when you call us stupid, or misquote us , or mischaracterize us , or deliberately disrespect or requests for privacy and autonomy.

Use our names and bodies for press or conveniently rember how important it is to be one of us when you can get paid.

But it’s not really powerful until then,

We can’t organize till then

Our lives aren’t worth it till then


You know how little it takes to not feel alone or left out

You know how powerful a simple I’m here can be

And you fail

you fail us time and time again

Clavicles are more important than bombs, than children

Torsos need more defense than the first amendment

with I don’t have the time or I didn’t know or I can’t I can’t or oops I missed it

but never a chance to get paid for it or worshipped for it?

Time and time a gain the ball seems to get dropped with no steps towards being better


Fuck you .


This, friends, neighbors, and Clones, is the very reason I am a radical, not a liberal.

An Independent Leftist, not just a liberal Democrat.

A (pro-)sex radical, not just a libertarian.

A democratic socialist, not just a social democrat.

A Black man, not only an African American.

Because I know more than anything else that it’s not just right-wingers and Klan bigots who use and abuse Black  folk and Brown folk and female folk and sexual outcasts.

They are just the most boisterous and open about their hatred.

It’s the pseudo-“liberals” who mask their loathing of us outlaws behind the sacchrine of “unity” and “equality” and “human rights” and “colorblindness” and “let’s all get along” and vote for the lesser evil because the Republicans are pure evil”…yet are the first to grip an moan about “why you talking about us; we’re your saviors?” when called out for their presumptions of speaking for the outlaws.

And yet, for all their preening and squawking, they still can’t beat the conservatives and “centrists” at anything.

No thank you, J-Val, Kos, and the rest.  We outlaws aren’t playing this game least, not with your rules.

Between Feministing Ariel Levy and Genderberg; Daily Kos and Townhall; Democrat and Republican; Radfem, Liberfem, and AntiFem; MRA and Burning Man, Randi Rhodes and Bill O’Reilly, there is only a flip of the same tired coin of traditional White privilege.  For the rest of humanity, there is only the basic principle of social solidarity, struggle, and the queer notion that humanity is non-negotiable, and not subject to either debate or majority vote. 

To Nez, BfP, BA, Ren, Nina, and all the other outlaws:  may you ride long, fly high, and kick ass….and smile, laugh, and fuck a hellava lot during the journey, too.

The DC Madam Scandal: Linkage To Some Sex-Poz/”Whore’s Eye” Perspectives

I could write a great deal more on the fallout from this :"DC Madam" scandal that’s doing such a cock-block on Capitol Hill….but I know of some very deep sex intellectuals (some of whom also happen to be quite sexy, even) who can do the job better than I ever could.  So, here’s some linkage to articles you should be reading:

Dr. Susan Block:
Strangelove Hookergate II
(the original from Doc Suzy’s "Bloggamy"; the reprint from Counterpunch)

Dr. Carol Queen:
Hip-Hip-Hypocrisy!! With A Paean To Prostitutes (from her own blog)

Melissa Gira (from Sexerati) [with h/t’s to Ren and Jill B]:
Johns Gone Wild: The DC Madam’s Gift To Sexual Health

Elizabeth Wood (Sex In The Public Square):
Will The "Washington Madam" Case Destigmatize Sex Work? 

If you know of any other articles out there from a sex-poz perspective, just holla ’em back at me.


FauxNewsChannel Whacks The Oxy(contin) Addict On Serial Killers Being Liberals

Thanks to ‘Bina Becker for granting me permission to post this video.

Sooooo…Rushbo says that the Va Tech shooter was a liberal trained by liberals to hate the rich, right????


Does he know about the history of serial killers??

Does he really want to go there??

Thankfully for us, (a spoof of the original FOXNews site) has the facts…as stated in this YouTube video.  Take that along with your bootleg Viagra on your next sex trip to the Bahamas, Fat-Ass:


 And let’s not forget about Eric Rudolph, Andrea Yates, Ted Bundy, Susan Smith, and on, and on, etc., etc., ….


Time For A Little Catch-Up: COPA Struck Again; Dems Flash Cut-n-Run Asses…Again

First some good news on the sex war front:

Judge strikes down ’98 law aimed at online porn

Associated Press
San Jose Mercury News
Article Launched:03/22/2007 06:35:49 AM PDT

PHILADELPHIA – A 1998 law designed to keep pornography away from children on the Internet infringes on free-speech rights and is easily sidestepped, a federal judge ruled Thursday.

The judge blocked enforcement of the Child Online Protection Act, Congress’ second attempt to protect children from online porn.

The law, which has never been enforced, is unconstitutionally vague and fails to address current concerns about online predators, social networking sites and chat rooms, Senior U.S. District Judge Lowell Reed Jr. wrote.

"Even defendant’s own study shows that all but the worst performing (software) filters are far more effective than COPA would be at protecting children from sexually explicit material on the Web," said Reed, who presided over a monthlong trial in the fall.

The law would criminalize Web sites that allow children to access material deemed "harmful to minors" by "contemporary community standards." The sites would be expected to require a credit card number or other proof of age. Penalties include a $50,000 fine and up to six months in prison.

Sexual health sites, and other Web publishers backed by the American Civil Liberties Union challenged the law on grounds it would have a chilling effect on speech. Reed agreed it would.

"Perhaps we do the minors of this country harm if First Amendment protections, which they will with age inherit fully, are chipped away in the name of their protection," he wrote.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a temporary injunction in 2004 on grounds the law was likely to be struck down and was perhaps outdated.

Daniel Weiss of Focus on the Family Action, a lobbying arm of the conservative Christian group, said it would continue to press Congress for a workable law.

"The judge seems to indicate there’s really no way for Congress to pass a good law to protect kids online. I just think that’s not a good response," Weiss said.

To defend the nine-year-old law, government lawyers attacked software filters as burdensome and less effective, even though they have previously defended their use in public schools and libraries.

The plaintiffs expect the Justice Department to appeal. Justice spokesman Charles Miller did not immediately return a phone message Thursday.

"I would hope that Attorney General Gonzalez would save the U.S. public’s money and not try to further defend what is an unconstitutional statute," said lawyer John Morris of the Center for Democracy and Technology, which wrote a brief in the case.

"That money could better be used to help educate kids about Internet safety issues," he said.

The plaintiffs argued that filters work best because they let parents set limits based on their own values and a child’s age.

Reed concluded that filters have become highly effective and that the government – if it wants to protect children – could do more to promote or subsidize them.

The law addresses material accessed by children under 17, but only applies to content hosted in the United States.

The Web sites that challenged the law said fear of prosecution might lead them to shut down or move their operations offshore, beyond the reach of the U.S. law. They also said the Justice Department could do more to enforce obscenity laws already on the books.

Judge Reed noted in his 83-page ruling that, since 2000, the Justice Department has initiated fewer than 20 prosecutions for obscenity that did not also involve other charges such as child pornography or attempts to have sex with minors.

While the government argued for the use of credit cards as a screening device, Reed concluded from the evidence that there is currently no accurate way to verify the age of Internet users. And he agreed that sites that require a credit-card to view certain pages would see a sharp drop-off in users.

The 1998 law followed the Communications Decency Act of 1996, Congress’ first attempt to regulate online pornography. The Supreme Court in 1997 deemed key portions of that law unconstitutional because it was too vague and trampled on adults’ rights.

COPA narrowed the restrictions to commercial Web sites and defined indecency more specifically.

"This is the second time Congress has tried this, and both times the courts have struck it down. I don’t see how Congress could write a constitutional statute," the ACLU’s Chris Hansen, a lead attorney on the case, said.

In 2000, Congress passed a law requiring schools and libraries to use software filters if they receive certain federal funds. The high court upheld that law in 2003.

Joan Walsh,’s editor-in-chief, said she was deposed at about the same time the magazine was deciding to publish photos of naked prisoners at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison.

"This law would have let any one of 93 U.S. attorneys … (say) our Abu Ghraib photos were harmful to minors, and the burden would have been on us to prove that they weren’t," Walsh said.

Somewhere, on this earth tonight, Barbara Nitke is celebrating….but I’ll hold my breath until Abu Gonzales loses the expected appeals to the higher courts.

Not so good news, though, is the final resolution of the Great Democratic Party Cave-In on funding the war in Iraq and any future adventures in Iran..and as before, Richard of American Leftist has the story:

The supplemental funding bill has cleared the House with exactly the number of votes required for passage:

The House of Representatives voted today, by the narrowest possible margin and after an unusually emotional debate, to set a timetable for bringing American troops home from Iraq.

The bill received 218 votes in favor, the minimum needed for passage in the 435-seat chamber. There were 212 votes opposed. The Democratic leadership held the voting open for two additional minutes past the originally scheduled 15 to lock up the majority. Vote-counters had predicted beforehand that the outcome would be very close.


Of course, the timetables are not binding upon the President, as he now has the funds to continue to do as he wishes in Iraq and Afghanistan, and, even, when the mood strikes, Iran, assuming, of course, that they survive the Senate, which is doubtful.

Who made this victory for the proponents of perpetual war in the Middle East possible? It’s shocking, and should never be forgotten:

With Democrats holding 233 seats and Republicans with 201, Democrats were able to afford only 15 "no" votes. Accordingly, Pelosi, and her leadership team spent days trying to convince members that the bill was Congress’ best chance of forcing Bush to change course—an argument that was aided when they added more than $20 billion in domestic spending in an effort to lure votes.

They got a breakthrough Thursday when four of the bill’s most consistent critics said they would not stand in its way. California Democrats Lynn Woolsey, Diane Watson, Barbara Lee and Maxine Waters said they would help round up support for the bill despite their intention to personally vote against it because it would not end the war immediately. "Despite my steadfast opposition, I have told the speaker that I will work with her to obtain the needed votes to pass the supplemental, but that in the end I must vote my conscience," said Rep. Diane Watson, D- Calif.


Is there any need to comment upon such self-serving personal and political expendiency? No doubt all four forcefully went about the task of persuading others to vote for the bill, because, if they failed, they would have then faced the prospect of drawing straws to determine who would be required to vote against their conscience for Pelosi. Rarely has there been such a compelling example of the much maligned situational ethics associated with some Californians.

Woolsey, Watson, Lee and Waters, the Gang of Four that rescued funding for the President’s wars in the Middle East, while keeping their own voting records scrupulously clean. The Iraqis and the Afghans will have to liberate themselves, as there is no prospect that the American political system will relinquish its grip upon their countries. A revolt within the US military is possible, probably more so as a consequence of this vote, but remote.

War with Iran is now a near certainty, as it provides an escape route for those who voted for this measure as well as those who only worked for its passage. Defeat of the bill was not only essential for the ongoing vitality of the antiwar movement in this country, as discussed here yesterday, but to also impair the ability of the President to expand the war. The Iranians, like the Iraqis and the Afghans, have been left to their own devices. We will have nothing to say about the decisions they make as to how to best defend themselves. No doubt the Gang of Four will express appropriate sentiments of sadness as violence in the Middle East intensifies as a consequence of their actions.

Naturally, much of the A-list liberal blogosphere has a slightly different view of the supplemental bill’s passage. Raw Story headlined their article of the bill’s passage "House Passes Iraq Pullout Bill" (conveniently ignoring that the "timetables" set were entirely voluntary and negotiable based on the word of Dubya…who has renewed his threat to veto the bill anyway as another "liberal cut-and-run" measure); and Chris Bowers of MyDD was waxing enthusiastic about the great victory of "progressives" (despite the shameful political ball-squeezing and heavy-handed tactics used by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to jerk those progressives wanting a more solid bill for pullout into line).

Problem is, this bill probably won’t even get to Dubya’s desk in its current form anyway for the veto, because the Senate (49 Republicans and Joe Lieberman) will more than likely gut even those weak "timetables" and force the Dems to accept a "clean" bill fully supporting and enabling Dubya’s war games….and I won’t even get into the atrocious surrender to the right-wing Israeli lobbyists in not including wordage seeking Congressional approval for any invasion of Iran..basically giving a green light to any such action. 

So much for progressive principles within the Democratic Party.  I guess that not even Maxine Waters or Barbara Lee can avoid the ultimate folly of attempting to reform a centrist (and rapidly rightward-tacking) party from within. The money and the power of the corporate warmongers are simply too great.

The only way for true "progressives" and legitimate Leftists to really change the Democratic Party is to get the fuck out and form a REAL Left independent party…or better yet, a real movement.  Cold-War liberalism just won’t cut it anymore.