Congressman Ron Paul’s (R-TX) latest opinion piece is up — Hands Off the Electoral College — and he has a bit to say about how the electoral college ties in with state rights. I’m actually kind of suprised that he brings this up at all since this bill really doesn’t have much chance of being pushed through. From the article:

Not surprisingly, calls to abolish the Electoral College system are heard most loudly among left elites concentrated largely on the two coasts. Liberals favor a very strong centralized federal government, and have contempt for the concept of states’ rights (a contempt now shared, unfortunately, by the Republican Party). They believe in federalizing virtually every area of law, leaving states powerless to challenge directives sent down from Washington. The Electoral College system threatens liberals because it allows states to elect the president, and in many states the majority of voters still believe in limited government and the Constitution.

I’m glad to see Paul point out that Republicans have an eerily similar anti-federalist agenda as the Democrats. In fact, Republicans have been whittling away at state-rights for some time now, with the federal mandate madness and regulation in every industry that exists. Whether it’s opening a business or applying for a home loan, the federal government is involved in some legal manner that cannot be circumvented. It seems that he’s attacking a federal strawman argument with the electoral college, one that few will argue with (I’m actually in favor of instant runoff voting, but the EC would not need to be abolished), when he should aim his sights a little higher.

Then again, he could be pissed about this particular bill if he’s seriously considering a run for the president in 2008 and sees it as a major hurdle.

Right-wingers, we have a product that you might just want! Are you having problems with propaganda? Do journalists not seem as interested in the wonderful new water purification system as they are in that pointless story about some people shot in the fucking head? Are they investigating historical documents that would make your politicians looks bad? Does the whole world seem out to get you?

Congratulations, they are! Thanks to Blame The Liberal Media.

With this foolproof plan, you too can wrestle control over what’s in the news by letting everyone know that when the news is not in your favor, it’s that damned liberal media making shit up again.

Did some insurgents blow away election workers in the middle of downtown Baghdad in broad daylight? Fuck yeah, and it’s because the liberal media was there to photograph it, those assholes! Not only that, but the liberal media is working with the terrorists! Facts, truth, reality? No, just twist whatever is written to fit your notion of what happened.

There, now you have it. Now go forth, and destroy the liberal press, it’s getting in the way of the good news that you so desperately need.

You see, with this easy-to-understand strategy, even with mountains of bad news and documents, one fuck-up on their part is your chance to pounce and cast dispersions on every other story they run, simply because they are liberal. And the best part is, because you are a blogger, and bloggers are now cool because they took down Dan Rather, the liberal media has to take whatever opinion or theory you have and respond to it. So even if you are wrong, they have to spend time responding to you instead of doing more liberal journalism. SCORE!

If you’ve been paying close attention to China, you might have noticed a flurry of oil deals in 2004: Mexico, Russia, Sudan, Iran, Iraq (tenative), Kuwait, Nigeria, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Canada, and recently Venezuela to name a few. Basically, if they have oil in the ground, they are now shipping part of it to China. And many are worrying this may have echoing geo-political reverberations as the US becomes it’s biggest competitor (and is seen as a greater threat to the stability of the MideEast than terrorists). China has been stocking up on it’s reserves, announcing recently that it was building a 90-day strategic reserve. China currently consumes 6.3 million barrels per day. In contrast, the US consumes roughly 20 million bpd and has a strategic reserve at two-months capacity.

Recently, China is showing that it’s becoming a player in the world oil market, specifically through rhetoric at the US and its sheltering of financial-powerhouse and disputed territory, Taiwan. But Taiwan has merely a bit-role in the global game, and may end up being a very benign event if China does indeed decide to lay claim to the island. More disturbing is China’s race to become an economic superpower that would rival, and eventually threaten, the US — and the terrorism it is supporting while it works towards that goal. According to a study by the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security — Fueling the Dragon — China is becoming a defacto threat to US interests and confrontation may escalate sooner rather than later:

China’s relations with state sponsors of terrorism has provided these countries a great deal of money, allowing them to continue to harbor terrorist organizations and to maintain a policy of oppression and exploitation of their people. China’s cooperation with terrorist-sponsoring states has also helped create a group of nations with the capability to produce weapons of mass destruction and the ballistic missiles to deliver them. China is known to be a provider of such technologies to rouge states including North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Sudan. China is Iran’s number one supplier of unconventional arms. It negotiated deals to supply Iran with equipment and technology useful for making nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, despite having signed international agreements prohibiting the proliferation of such technologies. This arms trafficking presents an increasing threat to U.S. global security interests, particularly in the Middle East and Asia.

With shady deals like these going on and the lack of interest shown by the Bush administration, it’s clear that the US is less interested in confronting terrorism at its source (as they profess) and is instead playing a dangerous game in oil-rich countries like Iraq, to what ends it seems obvious: strategic oil domination.

Now, I’m not one to start yelling “no blood for oil,” because I realize it’s more complex than a stupid one-liner. But, something is definitely amiss if ignoring China’s arming and supporting of terrorist states (which is a policy of thumbing their nose at our reasoning for the Iraq invasion) is the norm. Certainly this myopic view of China, in conjunction with the enormous trade deficit and reliance on China to continue supporting national debts. At some point in the future, this will turn ugly when China realizes it can financially cripple the US.

Whatever occurs, I can bet it will be increasingly difficult for Bush to continue his “War on Terror” in the face of such blatant assistance by China in their own strategic positioning in the world. It looks as though there’s two divergent ideologies that will eventually clash. China’s willingness to trade with any country it can and support terrorists so long as oil flows constantly, and the US’s hope to promote democracy towards those same ends. It seems that at this juncture, China has chosen the strategy that pays quite lucratively in the short-term, and may be better positioned to force our hand on the issue as well.

I’ll be gone until Monday or so, I hope everyone has a good holiday. Thanks for the wild ride in 2004 and I look forward to a wonderful 2005, when the Democrats and Republicans finally kill each other off and leave the rest of us alone.

Image courtesy of this Fark photoshop.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies gives a scathing review of the Iraq situation in a recent report. The Australian has the news in US account of Iraq threat ‘fantasy’:

“It did not see the threat level that would emerge if it did not provide jobs or pensions for Iraqi career officers or co-opt them into the nation-building effort. … It acted as if it had years to rebuild Iraq using its own plans, rather than months to shape the climate in which Iraqis could do it,” he said.

Mr Cordesman said in the first year of the US occupation, Washington “failed to come to grips with the Iraqi insurgency … in virtually every important dimension”.

Under the heading Denial as a method of counter-insurgency warfare, the report accused the United States of minimising the insurgent and criminal threat in Iraq and of exaggerating popular support for US and coalition efforts.

Where there was once Baghdad Bob, there is now DC Don.

Related, the recent attack against the mess hall in Mosul points out how vulnerable the troops are and how savvy the insurgency has become. Insurgents picked the busiest time of day when the most people would be off-guard and in a single location.

The initial report of a rocket or mortar attack has morphed into a suicide bombing as the military begins to shape the story. I’m a tad incredulous to the suicide bomb story, as a report from a chaplain describes how a mortar team began firing on the casualties at the triage location near the hospital down the street (I’m guessing 30-45 minutes after):

Regardless of what some may say, these are not stupid people. Any attack with casualties will naturally mean that eventually a very large number of care givers will be concentrated in one location. They took full advantage of that. In the middle of the mayhem the first mortar round hit about 100 to 200 meters away. Everyone started shouting to get the wounded into the hospital which is solid concrete and much safer than being in the open. Soon, the next mortar hit quite a bit closer than the first as they “walked” their rounds toward their intended target…us. Everyone began to rush toward the building. I stood at the door shoving as many people inside as I could. Just before heading in myself, the last one hit directly on top of the hospital.

So there you have it. The military says an insurgent killed himself in a suicide attack, yet a mortar team was set up to fire on the triage site soon after? Now, it’s likely that it was a suicide bombing, but I’m betting it was the same mortar team and they just followed the action to get another hit in.

If this is any indication of how the insurgents are adapting to our procedures, then we are dealing with a far more sophisticated and intelligent rebel fighting force than our military gives credit for.

UPDATE: Gotta love The Poor Man for pointing out a fine example of how you can take this same event and butcher it with hoity-toity writing, not to mention blatant right-wing spin.

But the enemy ability to exploit the limits of American response and attack medical personnel with public relations impunity are examples of military advantages that arise from political restraints. To the extent the blogosphere can dispel the propaganda cover willingly provided by the Left, people on the home front can help the soldiers in the field. It is necessary to link the war criminal behavior of the enemy with the studied blindness of ‘sophisticates’ towards their most heinous crimes. They are twinned; with the former made possible by the latter.

And they call the left elitists? Too funny.

I have to admit, I enjoy watching how ignorantly the personalities of FOXNews can wax on about things they really have no understanding of. They spew opinionated rhetoric and hope no one will do any fact-checking on their asses and handily serve them some humble pie. That is of course, why I also like it when Neil Cavuto goes on the air to say things like this:

So let’s cut to the chase: The problem isn’t our buying. It’s their “not” buying.

Nothing’s wrong with our economy. A lot is wrong with their economies.

They criticize our budget deficit. But as a percentage of GDP, they know full well they have even bigger deficits. But you don’t hear that.

Just like you “don’t” hear them owning up to their costly and out-dated socialist societies that sap every government dollar and hurt every European citizen.

Now, Neil may have a little economic knowledge [edit: I'd bet the only economics PhD that's been in his head was the time he sucked off Ben Stein], but he’s a partisan hack by trade. So it’s funny when an economist with no axe to grind writes on the issue and has a rebuttal that succinctly refutes Cavuto’s “it’s their fault, not ours” talking points. Along comes an excellent article from the Economist that blows poor little Cavuto’s argument clear out of the water in The passing of the buck?:

What about the second argument, that sluggish demand in the rest of the world is to blame for America’s external deficit? If only Europe and Asia would save less, spend more and so import more from America, it is argued, the deficit would simply vanish. Martin Barnes, an economist at the Bank Credit Analyst, a Canadian investment-research firm, reckons that this is much exaggerated. In 2001, when domestic demand did grow slightly faster in Europe and Japan than in America, America’s deficit barely budged.

The problem is that America’s imports are 50% bigger than its exports, so if exports and imports simply grow at the same pace, the trade deficit automatically widens. If imports rise by, say 10%, then exports need to grow by 15% just to prevent the deficit from widening. This means that while stronger foreign demand would undoubtedly help, it would be virtually impossible for America to reduce its deficit significantly through stronger exports alone. Li Ruogu, the deputy governor of the People’s Bank of China, said last week that America should put its own house in order–ie, save more–and stop blaming others for its problems. He was right.

[...]
Some economies, such as Australia and New Zealand, have built up bigger debt ratios without obvious adverse economic consequences, but they are small countries so their current-account deficits absorb only a tiny fraction of global saving. This year alone, America’s new borrowing from abroad will mop up a massive 75% of the world’s surplus saving.

I think it’s disingenious for Cavuto to spout one-liners without bothering to qualify his statements with uh… fact, but that’s what makes him popular to to watch. Of course, no media outlet is tackling this economic issue head on in any substantial way, but at least the other outlets aren’t out there saying things that are so patently false.

Neil Cavuto is clearly wrong, and is stupid for yammering on about things he has no clue about.

I think this story about the multi-billion dollar sale of Yukos Oil to an unknown buyer deserves more investigation my world media. A few of them are poking around the edges, but the story — Putin hints at China alliance for Yukos oil — by Financial Times caught my eye:

Yegor Gaidar, Russia’s most prominent liberal economist and a former acting prime minister, said: “If one accepts that the government has any strategy in regard to Yukos, a joint venture with China signifies a long-term change of focus towards Asian markets.”

[...]
Mr Putin did not say who owned Baikal Finance Group, which last weekend bid $9.35bn (£4.85bn) for Yuganskneftegas. However, he said behind it stood a “group of individuals with experience in the oil sector”.

The backstory is that Yukos Oil was riddled with fraud and bilked investors out of millions of dollars, and now it it being sold to an unknown company, and suddenly there are strong ties between Russia and China. I’d bet dollars to donuts that the company buying the assets of Yukos is a front for the Chinese government.

There’s a real rush going on in the world right now between Russia, China and the US (and the EU to a lesser extent) to secure oil sources and strategically position themselves as the controller of this resource.

UPDATE: Looks like the Russian state-owned Rosneft has now bought the Yukos assets from the shell company, BaikalFinansGroup. Could this have been a power play by China that was thwarted by Russian government insiders? I’m just trying to keep the names straight myself, why are Russian company names so damned complicated?

UPDATE: Mike nailed it, they are all pictures of Iraqi police (yes, trick question). And Eric had the most thought-provoking comment, writing “Iraqi ‘police’ ARE insurgents,” which was kinda my thought as well when I originally ran across the photos. Actually, my first thought was if I can’t tell who them apart, how do the people living there? They must live in constant fear of both sides. Personally, I’d shoot anything in a black mask weilding a gun if I were an Iraqi.

–
Here’s a fun little game for everyone, I provide 6 pictures from Iraq without captions and you say whether they (the men in masks) are insurgents or Iraqi police. Put your answers in the comments (I’ve numbered them so it’s easier).

Some are easy (like the first one), the others are harder. Now on with the pictures:

see more…

Hint: They’re not in power and it’s not Republicans or Democrats. Kevin Tuma dissects the definition and how it applies in today’s world with his excellent essay What is a Conservative?

Bush is a happy socialist who has yet to veto a single spending bill. He has maintained a massive post-Clinton bureaucracy without even giving lip service to reducing the size and scope of federal government. Bush has greatly expanded the government’s role in our lives. He has thrown tidal waves of money at education, medicare, and farm subsidies. He has monstrously inflated the government’s police powers, in complete contravention to the Bill of Rights. He has racked up the biggest deficit in American history. A small tax cut or two, perched decoratively atop a towering mountain of free spending and federal expansionism, does not make the mountain into a conservative one.

Even John Kerry, a Massachusetts liberal ideologue, figured out that Bush isn’t a conservative. People often allude to the fact that Bush and Kerry were both members of the conspiratorial fraternal organization “Skull & Bones”. Skull & Bones is trivia. Of much greater importance to us is the fact that the two candidates had no real ideological differences. The bitterly fought race for the White House in 2004 was a contest between two liberal socialists with minor variations in their personal rhetoric.

By his definitions, the only people who are true conservatives these days would be sporting the title “libertarian,” and indeed Ron Paul’s name pops up as a prominant example of a true conservative. I still think Paul would make an excellent Libertarian Party choice for president, and would gladly vote for him if he ran as a Republican.

Small caveat: I nitpick at his use of the term isolationism: “The second necessary ingredient for a conservative is a belief in national sovereignty and isolationism.” I think the term non-interventialism is more appropriate, as a true conservative does not want to isolate themselves from foreign economies, but does not wish to poke their nose into sovereign nation’s business (alliances, “aid,” posting of military personnel, etc). Though non-interventionalism has it’s pitfalls (the rise of Nazi Germany), if it can be heeded as a primary foreign policy, it should.

From Representative Ron Paul’s (R-TX) article on LewRockwell.com, It Can’t Happen Here:

Washington DC provides a vivid illustration of what our future might look like. Visitors to Capitol Hill encounter police barricades, metal detectors, paramilitary officers carrying fully automatic rifles, police dogs, ID checks, and vehicle stops. The people are totally disarmed; only the police and criminals have guns. Surveillance cameras are everywhere, monitoring street activity, subway travel, parks, and federal buildings. There’s not much evidence of an open society in Washington, DC, yet most folks do not complain — anything goes if it’s for government-provided safety and security.

He then went on urge Americans to “rise up, burn down Washington and overthrow the government while we still have a chance,” shortly before he was tackled by a free speech task force and spirited away to a secret location.

UPDATE: I am calling on libertarian bloggers to link to every new article that Rep. Ron Paul writes. I would like to see some high penetration in the Blogdex top 50 and other popularity ranking engines and I think Paul’s weekly column makes a very good candidate for it. LewRockwell.com will usually repost his columns on their site so if you subscribe to their RSS feed, you should be able to stay on top of it.

The world is saying no more to US dollars. Thanks to the abrasive foreign policies of the Bush administration, the Federal Reserve pumping billions of dollars into the economy and Congress’s uninhibited spending spree, the world is shying away from US investments. Many investors view America as being a “rogue nation” saying that “the free ride is over.” More from the Forbes editorial U.S. Rogue Nation Image Hurts Dollar in Asia:

And is all this negativity manifesting itself economically? Yes, argues Joseph Quinlan, chief market strategist of Banc of America Capital Management in New York. It won’t make him many friends in Middle America, but Quinlan thinks the U.S. image as a “rogue nation” is a key force behind the dollar’s decline.

But things are getting worse at home, too.

The National Low Income Housing Coaliton (NLIHC) released it’s 2004 report on state-by-state housing costs. The data shows a growing gap between minimum wages and living wages, with the average minimum wage worker having to put in 72 hours of work per week just to make a livable wage and afford a zero bedroom apartment (ie a studio or effiency where the living area is also the bedroom).

While the minimum wage varies for each state, across the board it was far lower than livable wages. This shows two things: 1)minimum wage is a failure and does not keep up with livable wages; 2) inflation is growing and it’s causing more “working poor.”

This is about to reach epidemic proportions, as people who have been using credit to create an unrealistic buffer between actual wages and livable wages will continue to feel the squeeze. With the value of the dollar showing that inflation is indeed occuring, how long until this becomes a crisis?

If anyone is interested or know anyone who might be, I am parting with a couple of paintings via eBay. These are high quality and the price does not reflect the amount of time I put into them (30 to 40 hours apiece).

It’s pixel porn, made in homage to Adam Connelly. The style isn’t quite abstract, but it’s too modern to be Impressionism, so I’ve dubbed it Techno-Impressionism. Anyways, I hope you like them, and in case any bachelors are worrying… I get a lot of positive comments from girls on this.

I don’t try to hawk a lot of stuff here and have a ton of other paintings I’ve done (different styles), but these are by far the most popular and I figured I’d give it a shot and see if anyone was interested. Click on the images above and place a bid if want one. The money raised will go towards funding the libertarian PAC I’ve been working on for the past couple of months, and maybe some beer, too.

George W. Bush now joins the ranks of previous two-time “Person/Man of the Year” winners, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, Franklin Roosevelt (three times), and of course, Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin. The best part of the accompanying article is this conspicuous closing line:

For sharpening the debate until the choices bled, for reframing reality to match his design, for gambling his fortunes-and ours-on his faith in the power of leadership, George W. Bush is TIME’s 2004 Person of the Year.

Who says Time Magazine doesn’t have a sense of humor?

And of course, don’t miss the tagline for the front cover, which boldly declares Bush to be an “American Revolutionary.” What else could you call the policies which have been so effective at repealing 227 years of Constitutional restrictions on government authority, laying the foundation for authoritarian control? Revolutionary indeed, but not all revolutions are good.

Funny quote from the Washington Post on the brouhaha that arose from Rumsfeld using a machine to sign the letters to the families of soldiers killed in action — After Outcry, Rumsfeld Says He Will Sign Condolence Letters:

“While I have not individually signed each one, in the interest of ensuring expeditious contact with grieving family members, I have directed that in the future I sign each letter.”

Rumsfeld promised to follow his own directions, for some reason speaking only in the third person, saying “when Rumsfeld orders himself to do something, you bet Rumsfeld will follow those orders.” He then put on a latex S&M body-suit and began whipping himself and yelled “who’s your daddy? I am!”.

This is little more than a wrap-up of events that solidify the coming fiscal crisis. The image today is courtesy of a real AP photo from the White House Conference on the Economy and has not been photoshopped.

First, and seemingly offtopic, there’s this video from Iraq: A Message From The Iraq Resistance. While it’s not an overtly economic item per se, it’s an interesting piece of propaganda from the insurgency. What’s so interesting about it is the fact that it’s so well-produced, above and beyond previous videos. And, while the music is over-the-top and parts of the message are blatant propaganda, the underlying message is one of liberty and self-determination (“We have not crossed the oceans and seas to occupy Britain or the U.S. nor are we responsible for 9/11.”), which shatters the assertion that the rebels hate freedom. Of financial interest is the fact that they seem to be in touch with world events, calling on those who don’t support the war to switch from the dollar and British pound to the euro in order to explicitly harm the US and Britain.

But back to the photo above, and the conference Bush spoke at which Bush and other members spoke about the deficit. From the Slate article — How To Talk About the Deficit — comes this pithy remark: “Amazingly, the White House economic conferees managed to conduct an entire pseudoscholarly discussion about the deficit today without stating, in dollar terms, its size.”

Of course, the budget deficit isn’t our only worry, there’s also the record trade deficit, looming at $164.7B. Wells Fargo Banks chief economist Sung Won Sohn, saying of the news, “I think it is very worrisome,” and “I think the outlook is going to get worse, not better.” Full story from AFP in US trade deficit bulges to record, fear grows for dollar.

And there’s concern that things are indeed going to get worse in the financial world, as witnessed by insider selling that has matched levels seen in 2000 right before the dot com crash. With a buy to sell ratio that has many on Wall Street responding accordingly, $6.6B in stock was dumped in October alone by insiders. Forbes has the worrying remarks in Rampant Insider Selling Raises Red Flags.

Also on the crash watch is this analysis by a stock analyst, who contends that we are headed for a major crash very soon. Based on previous trends, the analyst says “we are being forewarned of another major top, one that will be followed by a decline of perhaps as much as 30 to 50 percent.” Such a crash is forcasted to take place shortly into 2005 and continue for most of the year.

Interestingly, the government has chosen to ignore these warnings, and wants to move forward with it’s Social Security reform plan, which would dump billions into the stock market. There’s an obvious urgency to the reforms as you can expect, with Bush saying “the crisis is now.” A telling remark earlier in the speech was how he views his role in things, “a lot of government, if the truth be known, is crisis-oriented management. You know, we wait and wait and wait, and then the crisis is upon us and everybody demands a solution.” Or, you perpetuate a crisis and respond with unnecessary government action when it comes to fruition. My guess is that the billions in Social Security is being looked at as a way to prop up the financial markets for a little while longer and stave off the looming economic disaster.

Previous Hammer of Truth reports on the economic decline can be found here and here.

It’s rather saddening that there’s been little humanity in the coverage of the soldiers who have died in Iraq. There’s a distinctive pattern of self-censorship that has been occuring, using only numbers and vague reports of attacks instead of showing the true cost of the war.

The Memory Hole once again brings us news of funeral photos that the media won’t touch:

Photographer-photojournalist Aaron Huey writes to tell us that his website has a new, ongoing series of photos he’s taken at funerals for military personnel killed in Iraq. He says that “the magazines are afraid of these pictures.”

Even though his work has been published in ‘Smithsonian’ magazine and ‘Photographer’s International,’ and he was an assistant to a ‘National Geographic’ photographer, and he has his own online forum at Kodak’s website, only one news outlet (‘Seattle Post-Intelligencer’) has had the guts to run one of his funeral photos

You can view Aaron Huey’s photo-essay online, it’s very heart-wrenching.

[Below is a transcript from a Department of Faith marriage class that was recorded in February of 2008. The location has been left out and instructor's name changed due to concerns of possible reprisal against the citizen journalist who brought us this report.]

“Hello everyone and welcome to the marriage planning class. My name is Saul, your government appointed counselor from the Department, here to teach you about the process of getting married. But first, I want to start with a prayer to the Almighty, thanking him for bringing us here today.” [At this point, we all stood up and joined hands. There were a lot of nervous looks but very little hesitation.]

“Father God, in the name of Jesus Christ, we pray for the United States of America. Father, we ask that You graciously impart and release to the people and leaders of America Your Integrity, Truth, Holiness, Purity, Anointing, Righteousness, Healing, Restoration, Joy, Love, and Wisdom. We thank You for the great prophetic heritage that is within this land. We proclaim that which has been prophesied: The life of the land is perpetuated in righteousness. Father, we thank you for the extravagant beauty of the land and the people, which bring peace, love and joy to all who come for rest. Father, we ask that Your Will be done, and that You come to rule and reign in the hearts of the people of America. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Father, we plead the blood of Jesus over the land and the people of America for Your glory alone! Amen!”

see more…

Note: this article contains dead links, the url is still in the hover/alt text. Keep the web working, curate content well!

It’s always nice to know that, even though Cuba is a communist country that somehow defies economic logic and somehow trudges on, they won’t take shit from the US when we point out their political arrests.

From the AP come this story, Cuba Erects Sign Linking U.S. and Nazis (via BoingBoing):

Cuba retaliated for the U.S. diplomatic mission’s Christmas display supporting Cuban dissidents by putting up a billboard Friday emblazoned with photographs of American soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners and a huge swastika overlaid with a “Made in the U.S.A” stamp. [...] The [US] trimmings included … and a sign reading “75,” a reference to the 75 Cuban dissidents jailed last year.

It’s kinda sad that we have no moral footing to denounce dissidents jailed in Cuba for political reasons, when the mote called Guantanamo prison is located on the same island.

Well, not my MTV generation, I mean the one that came right after me, the one that never realized MTV used to be cool. Probably the one that watches MTV now and thinks it’s still cool and hip even though they only play crappy videos like once a week or something. Anyways, I digress.

A media group called Ignited Minds has created a spoof boy band music video where the group boy o boy sings against war. Apparently the members have just found out there is a war going on after watching an MTV News alert, and they want to solve the world’s problem by making terrorists commit suicide instead of watching this video.

I’m not exaggerating . . . this is quite possibly the most annoying thing I have ever seen in my life, which is why I expect it to air on MTV any day now.

… But that’s not what they do. One of these days these missiles might launch and Bush will say “Told you!”

Maybe. One day. Certainly not today.

Another Missile Defense Shield test has failed spectacularly this morning; The target missile (the one meant to be shot down) launched just fine, 16 minutes later, the interceptor blue-screened (or whatever they call it when missile software crashes) and remained in it’s silo as the target missile lit up Los Angeles and surrounding counties in dazzling radioactive mushroom clouds.

The Pentagon, realizing they were now 0 for 3 in the past couple weeks, decided to tuck tail and head back to their secret underground bunker to patch the missile with the latest Windows service pack. Philip Coyle, the Pentagon’s former chief of testing who has become a critic of the Bush administration’s missile defense plans, said, “This latest failure to intercept a target shows again that the system being deployed in Alaska has no demonstrated capability to work.” Pentagon officals responded, saying “Thank-you Captain Obvious.”

In related news, for some unexplicable reason, Canada said it will not put any money into building the missile shield and it will not allow interceptor rockets on Canadian soil as the price of participation in the multibillion-dollar program. Future test-target missiles are slated to use Canadian metro cities as their destination points.

“For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” Luke 18:25

Just one camel? How about a whole caravan of the damn things? Ooh, Jesus just got totally fucking 0wn3d.

Someone better tell St. Peter to roll out the red carpet and set out some caviar, and let Dick Cheney know it’s safe to unplug his pacemaker.

Not many people are aware that December 16th is a day to be celebrated as Boston Tea Party Day. It’s the day that American insurgents called The Sons of Liberty, fed up with the burden of egregious taxes and demands on their livelihood, lashed out against their own government (colonialists were indeed British subjects) one evening — dumping the tea cargo from the Dartmouth, the Eleanor and the Beaver into the Boston harbor while disguising themselves as indian natives.

According to the Patriot Act, terrorism is defined as having any of the following:

• threatening, conspiring or attempting to hijack airplanes, boats, buses or other vehicles.
• threatening, conspiring or attempting to commit acts of violence on any “protected” persons, such as government officials
• any crime committed with “the use of any weapon or dangerous device,” when the intent of the crime is determined to be the endangerment of public safety or substantial property damage rather than for “mere personal monetary gain”

Our band of misfits — who called themselves the Sons of Liberty — easily captured all three criteria. They hijacked boats, committed acts of violence (tar and feathering) against tax collectors (de facto government officials) and willfully destroyed property, often burning down buildings and destroying the properties of British loyalists. By today’s metrics, these were dangerous terrorists who hated freedom.

In this context of hyper-vigilance, it’s no wonder that there’s no national holiday to celebrate their crowning achievement in rebellion that wintry eve in Boston. Banks are open, the congressional calendar is void of any recognition of the day, and people are expected to show up to work, not parades.

But today, we again face similar grievances with our government. Federal taxes and regulations blanket the nation, stifling innovation and creativity in the cradle. With international corporations (that eerily resemble the British East India Company) nestled deep in the government process — lobbying for laws that benefit their coffers at the expense of small competitors and consumer alike — it’s only natural that we ask: where are our Son’s of Liberty?

Nay, we are not in need of another national holiday to memorialize their triumph, or a statue in the center of Washington, DC celebrating the dumping of tea. We are in need of their spirit and soul, and those who are willing to materialize it once again against an increasingly tyrannous government.

Sadly, any talk of such hopes is itself a likely candidate for another provision of the Patriot Act: material support. According to the About.com page, “if you openly represent or seek community support for terrorist acts or a known terrorist organization, you could be declared a terrorist. In writing this article and saluting our rebellious ancestors, I am very likely breaking the law.” So be it.

The fact is, our generation is adverse to personal risk and messy confrontation when it comes to standing up to the government, and we’d rather go through the motions with protests in the street — holding up signs and yelling slogans that denounce the behemoth our government has grown into — than to confront our government in an act of defiance. Simply put, we are cowards, and something needs to be done.

But what can be done? After all, when colonial insurgents rose up against the British forces, it took months for King George to respond by sending troops to quell the insurrection. In today’s technologically advanced world, it would be ludicrous for a ragtag group to form a firing line with rifles and wait for a SWAT team to send them to their deaths with automatic machine guns. In fact, even in colonial times this was a ridiculous notion, as witnessed by the Boston Massacre and the sound defeat at Lexington. Our roots are in guerilla warfare and shady fighting tactics.

Any rebellion today would also be guerilla in nature and accurately labeled terrorism; although in reality it wouldn’t need to involve mass death or wanton destruction. In fact, it could be entirely bloodless.

The target of rebellious aggression is still clearly the town tax collectors (Internal Revenue Service), and a small group could easily afflict massive damage simply by bombing or burning down a few IRS buildings. But that’s a disregard for innocent bystanders and the uninvolved, and such destruction is unpopular in today’s society.

As I mentioned before, our generation is adverse to messy confrontation. A more logical approach would be electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) devices, or a HERF/HPM gun (high-energy radio frequency). While you’re unlikely to find such a device at your local Home Depot, a home-made EMP device with a range of a few hundred feet could render electronic devices (read: computers, watches, pacemakers) useless by overloading their circuitry, while remaining completely harmless to humans (unless they have a pacemaker, of course). An electrical engineer could construct one out of a microwave oven for less than a thousand dollars.

If a group today used such a device, specifically against the IRS and with a clear publicity response, there would likely be applause from the silent majority, yet the government itself would not simply fade away without revenue. Indeed, it would likely trigger retaliation in the form of martial law. But with the ability to level the playing field while removing the specter of destruction against a government many have come to distrust and loathe, modern day rebels would gain valuable public approval. But this is all conjecture and posturing, simply put: this generation is cowardly and won’t consider taking a stand in any fashion until it’s too late.

Now that I’m fully into the realm of “saying too much,” I think it’s important to note that we once regarded such conversation and speculation as patriotic and cheered revolutionary rhetoric. Our founding fathers actively encouraged us to always be a little bit rebellious against our government, just to keep them honest. But as time marches on, it seems we’ve forgotten just why we’re a nation that drinks coffee, and not tea, and we’re slowly forgetting our roots in terrorism and our appreciation of what it means.

So, Happy Boston Tea Party Day (a.k.a. Sons of Liberty Day), but dare I ask: where are our modern day patriots? Have we already locked them up under this aptly titled “Patriot” Act?

The FOXBlocker (via The Decadent West) is a beauty of capitalism intended to be bought by brainwashed lefties (read: socialists who hate commercialism) who hate right-wingers (read: fascist capitalists who flaunt commercialism). Ah, irony is not a lost art:

FOXBlocker is an innovative new product that filters out the FOX News network. Simply screw the filter into the back of your TV and never be exposed to right wing propaganda again (at least through FOX News). Using a proprietary technology, the FOXBlocker works to filter out FOX News from your cable lineup.

If someone truly needs a device to ensure that they aren’t tempted to watch FOXNews and yell at the TV, then by all means, they should buy this device. If I see this item taking off, I swear by god I’m going to exploit the reverse of it and market a CNNBlocker so those brainwashed folks on the right can be duly exploited as well.