BartBlog

July 14, 2010

Ye Olde Scribe Presents: A Neo Con Take on Curious George

Filed under: Commentary,Guest Comment,Monkey Mail — Ye Olde Scribe @ 2:12 pm

Better days,: back when Curious George actually basked under the “glorious” picture of Junior’s Mommy at the White House during his maladministration.
300px-whitehousecuriousgeorge2003

This is a take off of an actual book about our adventurous simian.

Curious George went to the museum of Natural History. Apparently he hadn’t heard that God created the whole damn planet in a week, more or less, and then relaxed to have a deity strength doobie. You really should try them. When the blessed Saint Dean entered Heaven he introduced God to this all powerful herb. Ever since then they’ve been doing concerts for the angels singing, “Doobie doobie do….”

Curious George wandered amongst the exhibits. He was really interested in a big dinosaur called Tyrannosaurus Rex, right next to Michael the Savage Weiner Rex and Rex Harrison. So he hid in a bathroom and do what monkeys often do… until closing time. If you don’t know what monkeys “often do,” let’s just say that Curious George was very sore, especially when he tried to do number one, after waiting in the bathroom so long.

Once the museum was closed he climbed aboard Rex and started whooping as the bomb dropped down to the ground….

Sorry. That wasn’t George, but it was a famous movie.

He climbed aboard dino Rex and dino Rex broke. Alarms went off. Homeland Security showed up. They dragged off Curious George to Gitmo where they did far worse unspeakable things to George than George did to himself. By the time they got through with him he had admitted to plotting 9/11, murdering Michael Jackson, causing his sister’s wardrobe “malfunction,” sabotaging BPs well and being Satan himself. Proving once again that Neo Cons know how to protect America and anyone who dares to disagree with them needs to join Curious George.

There, now wasn’t that a nice little story, boys and girls?

Next we’ll read from another Neo Con children’s book: Bessie the Sheep and Lush Dimbulb Get Married Then Go to Neo Con College.
Subtitle: Flock Ewe.

July 7, 2010

War Casualty?

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , — Bob Patterson @ 9:26 pm

dscn2332
Are America’s homeless additional victims of the Bush wars?

June 27, 2010

Do Republicans have a God-given right to be disingenuous?

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , — Bob Patterson @ 3:34 pm

Last week while most Americans were fretting about the oil spill and a change in personnel, the Supreme Court of the United States was looking (askance) at Section 18 of the US Code and the results of their ruling may let some high profile prisoners walk free in the sunshine sooner than expected.

The broad implication of the decision might give Republicans more latitude in making reality gelatinous. Democrats hold themselves to a higher standard and won’t be inclined to indulge in any chance to avail themselves of the possibility to find some wriggle room regarding the issue concerning an opportunity to “deprive another of the intangible right to honest services.”

Some people might assume with all the laws about fraud and a certain religious commandment that there is, in any business dealing, an implicit right to honest services.

Wrong! Does the reverse corollary apply? Do Republicans now know that they have an intangible right to deliver dishonest service? When a Republican candidate for office says that he (hypothetical example) had the training to be an F-102 pilot does that mean that he actually was one?

We know a fellow whose identity revolves around his training and expertise in the martial arts. He will often drop the fact that he taught Bruce Lee into the conversation. Often it comes right after he has listed his qualifications for being an authority on the martial arts. He does not say what he taught Mr. Lee and so if he taught Bruce Lee to change a tire on his car and you leap to the assumption that the fellow taught Lee everything he knew about karate, the misperception is your fault because you have made an assumption.

Recently we picked up a bargain copy of the book which was the basis for the move “Catch Me If You Can.” The book was a bit different from the movie hence the movie carried the tag line: “based on a true story.”

The author, Frank Abignale, would ask people “can you cash a check for me?” and then present a slip of paper which was not a genuine check. Since when is a question a lie?

Do you want the evidence to be in the form of a mushroom cloud? Since the invasion of Iraq, it has become the custom to refer to hand grenades as weapons of mass destruction. If you didn’t realize that it was necessary to invade oil rich Iraq because they had hand grenades, that was your own fault for not being a weapons expert and fully able to parse the talking points offered as sound logical reasons for invading Iraq. Little did America realize that the Bush team was composed of cunning linguists dead set on going to war.

In ethics class, students are presented with the concept of “the greater good.” Suppose a man who wanted to kill you entered (another hypothetical) your office and informed your secretary that he wanted to see you so that he could kill you. Should she say that you called in sick today, point to the inner office where you work, or should she use the intercom to ask if you could squeeze an unscheduled visitor into your schedule? Some ethics experts say that the greater good of saving your life outweighs the obligation to adhere to the Commandment that gives the flat fiat that you must always tell the truth.

So it’s OK to lie sometimes and the Supreme Court has rendered the concept of “deprive another of the intangible right to honest services” moot; so truth, justice and the American way have just seen one of the team go missing in action.

The headline for this column asks a question. We have presented several relevant items for your consideration and now invite you to draw your own conclusions . . . or . . . you can wait and see if the Republicans act as if they have a God-given right to lull you into adoring acquiescence.

Americans have no right to know what went on in the meeting between Dick Cheney and the energy companies. Americans have no right to know how the programs used in the electronic voting machines work. Americans have no right to know what BP is doing or plans to do regarding the oil spill. As a matter of fact, Americans have no right to go to public parks and see the oil spill clean up work being done. It would seem that other than being used to print the coming tsunami of corporate financed campaign ads, America has no want or need for a free press to keep citizens informed so that they can vote intelligently.

It would also seem that the Supreme Court based their decision on the old folk wisdom: “After you shake hands with a Republican, count your fingers.”

Cynical curmudgeons will continue to regard all politicians as they would a snake oil salesman as portrayed by W. C. Fields. Dittoheads will be the first to second the Charles Dickens Republican attitude of “God bless us every one.” (Was Dickens predicting Uncle Rushbo when he wrote: “He is an honorable, obstinate, truthful, high-spirited, intensely prejudiced, perfectly reasonable man.” in Bleak House?)

Perhaps it is time to change the motto on money from “In God We Trust” to “Caveat Emptor.”

Rudyard Kipling was ahead of his time when he wrote
“If any question why we died,
Tell them, because our fathers lied.”

Now the disk jockey will play: “the theme from Elvira Madigan,” “Green Fields,” and Shirley Temple’s version of “On the Good Ship Lollipop.” We have to go write a letter to Santa Claus. Have a “smile when you say that” type week.

June 24, 2010

Edward R. Murrow vs. the Cheshire Cat

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , — Bob Patterson @ 10:55 am

The Quislings who tout America’s free press seem to have forgotten or are ignoring the dire predictions in the 1947 Hutchins Commission’s Report on the press which warned: “As the importance of communication has increased, its control has come into fewer hands.”

In analyzing the Hutchins Report, Louis M. Lyons said: “It is directly because newspaper publishers as a class are among the most conservative groups in America that newspaper performance is as uninspired, as unoriginal, and uninformed as it is.”

Zechariah Chaffee, Jr. agreed: “The sovereign press for the most part acknowledge accountability to no one except its owners and publishers.”

In an effort to compile an accurate assessment of the quality of Rupert Murdock’s job performance as America’s Editor-in-chief, we picked up a copy of Carl Jensen’s book, “20 Years of Censored News” (copyrighted 1997), and started to see if the underreported stories from 1976 to 1995 indicate that the Hitchins Commission was a misguided example of ducky-lucky style overreaction or if it was a spot-on example of prescient concern.

Project Censored in those twenty years focused attention on stories that are still not going to get much time on Fox.

In 1976 their number four story was “Why oil prices go up.”

The topic of Illegal aliens was their number ten story in 1977. Since 1977 the USA has been under the control of Republican Presidents for ten of the ensuing 33 years. Apparently the Republicans have gotten their act together now and will solve this problem if they can get their guy into the White House in 2012.

Project Censored’s number three story in 1978 was “The Government’s War on Scientist Who Know Too Much.” Were they worried about the polar bears back then? No. They thought radiation in a workplace might cause cancer.

PBS as the “oil network” was the Project Censored number eight story for 1979. The ads don’t have any effect on editorial content now do they?

In 1980 the number two stories was about NSA eavesdropping on Americans. How else where they going to protect us from a potential 9-11?

1981 #3 The story asserted that Camp Libertad in Florida was training folks to become terrorists.

1982 # 6 The story was Ronald Reagan as America’s Chief censor. David Burnham, in the New York Times reported: “In its first 21 months in office, the Reagan Administration has taken several actions that reduce the information available to the public about the operation of the government, the economy, the environment, and public health.” Wasn’t he just trying to help Rupert protect you from news that would spoil your digestion?

1983 #10 “The DOD’s Cost-plus Contracting System Taxpayer Swindle” How ya gonna make a profit on World Peace?

1984 # CIA and the Death Squads – Immoral and Illegal

1985 #5 Media Merger Mania Threatens Free Flow of Information

1986 #2 Official U.S. Censorship: Less Access to Less Information

1987 #1 The Information Monopoly #4 Reagan’s Mania for Secrecy: Decisions Without Democracy

1988 #1 George (H. W.) Bush’s Dirty Big Secrects #2 How the EPA Pollutes the News and the Dioxin Cover-up #6 America’s Secret Police Network – LEIU Part II (It was also their #6 story in 1978) #9 U.S. Refuses to Abide by International Court of Justice (Whew! Thank God for that. Otherwise George W. Bush Jr. might be dragged off and be subjected to a War Crimes Trial conducted by foreigners!)

1989 #1 Global Media Lords Threaten Open Marketplace of Ideas #8 Biased and Censored News at CBS and the Wall Street Journal

1990 #1 The Gulf War: Truth was the First Casualty #3 The CIA Role in the Savings and Loan Crisis #5 Continued Media Blackout of Drug War Fraud #9 Where Was George (H. W. Bush) During the Iran-contra Affair?

1991 #1 CBS and NBC Spiked Footage of Iraq Bombing Carnage #2 Operation Censored War #6 No Evidence of Iraqi Threat to Saudi Arabia #10 The Bush Family and Its Conflicts of Interest

1992 #The Great Media Sell-Out to Reaganism #3 Censored Election Year Issues #7 Trashing Federal Regulations for Corporate Contributions #8 Government secrecy Makes a Mockery of Democracy #9 How Advertising Pressure Can Corrupt a Free Press

1993 # The Real Welfare Cheats: America’s Corporations

1994 #9 The Pentagon’s Mysterious HAARP Project

1995 #4 The Privatization of the Internet

This list was compiled in a capricious and arbitrary manner from the book which lists ten under reported stories for each of the twenty years covered in the book. Add to that the fact that they have listed ten stories for each of the intervening fifteen years, and you would have a list of 350 topics, which is way to long to hold most readers’ interest; hence the abbreviated list.

Does it seem like this list is a quant exorcize in nostalgia or is it closer to an accurate forecast of what was to be expected during the George W. Bush era?

Ironically, Project Censored is currently (like many websites delivering progressive punditry) seeking contributions to continue their efforts to circumvent a complete bamboozlement of the public while conservative media seem immune to the harsh effects of Bush’s economic legacy.

Newspaper and TV station owners are strongly denying that the Supreme Court decision permitting corporations to pay for ads aimed at voters will be a windfall to them and their businesses. Is it logical to think that running the ads will add to those media’s overhead costs and are not to be perceived as unexpected bonuses. Extra ads won’t be a bonus? If you believe that you’ll believe that George W. Bush was an F-102 pilot.

Where is America’s free press?

Edward R. Murrow, in a speech title “Why Should News Come in 5-Minute Packages?,” (efforts to find a transcript online were unsuccessful) said: “For if the premise upon which our pluralistic society rests – which, as I understand it, is that if the people are given sufficient undiluted information, they will then somehow, even after long sober, second thoughts, reach the right decision – if that premise is wrong, then not only the corporate image but the corporations are done for.”

Little did he realize that it was news delivered by a free press that was doomed.

Charles Lutwidge Dodgson (AKA Lewis Carroll), in “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland” wrote: “‘All right,’ said the Cat; and this time it vanished quite slowly, beginning with the end of the tail, and ending with the grin, which remained some time after the rest of it had gone.”

Now the disk jockey will play the soundtrack album from “Newsies,” Roy Orbison’s “Paper Boy,” and the Beatles’ “A day in the life.” We have to go search for a scoop. Have a “stop the press!” type week.

June 20, 2010

Didn’t Jean Valjean know about dumpster diving?

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , , — Bob Patterson @ 4:35 pm

Connoisseurs of symbolism were delighted to see that Rush Limbaugh’s suggestion that hungry kids should resort to dumpster diving came at the same time as when progressive websites were struggling with fund raising efforts. Starving for food or money? Rush will laugh at either predicament and urge his listeners to chortle along with him.

On the one hand millionaires make sure that their puppet spokesman has a lavish lifestyle in return for convincing the voters that more tax cuts for the rich are the humane thing to do, while on the other hand, people who want the public to be informed about home foreclosures, reduced social services, and oil spills are foraging for funds to sustain their efforts to suggest that maybe corporations (since they are now considered “persons”) should pay taxes just like their workers do.

(Has the Billionaires for Bush organization changed their name to Billionaires for Obama, yet? A bit of fact checking reveals that their website has not been updated since the 2008 Presidential election was held.)

Would it be overdoing sarcasm to call the hawkish corpulent conservative Christian spokesman by the code name used to designate one of the atomic bombs dropped on Japan?

The fact that what the fat man said was the antithesis of what Christ taught but that Rush’s holds a great appeal for Christians might baffle some folks attempting to analyze Limbaugh’s popularity. It’s as if dittowers and the dittowettes were enthusiastic members of the Unquestioning Dimwits’ Club.

When this columnist was in parochial grade school, one of the nuns told about a group of people who would torment the Christians being led to the Coliseum. According to her, there were some of the tormentors who got so involved in the vitriol that they didn’t notice that the Roman soldiers had let the harassers enter the “green room” with the condemned. The soldiers considered that a bit of rowdy and raucous humor. The folks, who were the targets for the joke, apparently didn’t leave posterity any reaction quotes.

If any tea bagger has a home that goes into foreclosure, they might get an inkling of how the duped Roman hecklers felt.

Anyone who joins in Rush’s ridicule of the hungry should keep the anecdote about duped Romans in mind because if they ever fall on hard times, they would be well advised to not expect any sympathy or help from the Excellence in Broadcasting staff and management.

In the book “Seven Pillars of Wisdom,” T. E. Lawrence notes that in a desert caravan, if someone falls behind the pack or got lost, the leader won’t stop or turn around or make any attempt to find the stray. Same rules apply when you throw your lot in with El Rushbo.

For Rush aren’t yachts like food? If you have to ask “How much is it?;” you can’t afford it!

Has any of America’s most prominent clergy chastised the man, who has just taken the “until death do we part” vow for the forth time, for his attitude which would fall short of the old “whatever you do to the least of my brethren” frame of mind urged by Christ? Of course not! They would no more criticize the patron saint of gluttony than they would give teabaggers the “don’t take your gun to town” advice.

Didn’t Ernest Hemingway say something about the pigeons of Paris sustaining him and his wife during the “starving artist” phase of his writing career?

In the book “Paris-Underground,” an American, Etta Shiber, describes life in Paris before and after the USA entered WWII. Ms. Shiber was given passage back to the United States as part of a prisoner exchange in 1943.

At one point, after Ms. Shiber gets out of prison, she asks her landlord about her dogs. On page 382 (Charles Scribner’s Sons hardback), she is told: “I don’t know if you noticed, Madame. There isn’t a dog in Paris any more. When there isn’t even enough to eat for human beings, what can you do about dogs?”

Mrs. Shiber then asks about the possibility her dogs were used as food and is given a vehement denial. The landlady does add: “I tell you, there are people who ate their dogs.” Wouldn’t that passage send Rush into hysterical laughter?

That opens up a whole new aspect for Uncle Rushbo’s brand of sick humor. Will America’s favorite “news man” soon be reminding the Democrats, after their unemployment checks run out, of the oriental wisdom: “Black dog tastes best!”?

(Would Lenny Bruce be proud of Rush Limbaugh’s efforts to revive and carry on the tradition of “sick humor”?)

Does Rush’s Florida seaside mansion have a vomitorium or would that be too decadent even for him? Will Rush hold a “tar balls arrive” fundraiser at his place for the good Republican candidates who apologize to BP? He will laugh off the arrival at his pad of the oil slick, won’t he? Shouldn’t the oil slick’s arrival make him laugh just as much as Jean Valjean’s prison sentence did?

How long will it be before Uncle Rushbo plays the “pile of little arms” speech from “Apocalypse Now” and adds his own laugh track?

Can a Christian minister preach the principles advocated by the Prince of Peace and still expect to get an invitation to the White House at Christmas time? If they are aware of the folk wisdom: “Ya gotta go along to get along!;” they’ll keep their mouths shut.

Speaking of misguided religious principles, this writer expects to do a column about the new book “God and His Demons” and a public appearance in Berkeley later this week by the author of that book.

Somewhere this columnist ran across a quote wherein a rich lady was reminded of the plight of the hungry to which she replied: “Well, why don’t they ring the bell?” She was referring to the servant’s bell which would summon a butler who would be assigned the task of fetching a meal from the kitchen. It’s that easy for the rich. We couldn’t find the source of that quote online. Shouldn’t that quote and the source be available on Jon Winokur’s twitter page?

http://twitter.com/dailycurmudgeon

A boy who is rumored to be the grandson of Eisenhower’s ambassador to India and who, according to unsubstantiated internet scuttlebutt, got his first gig as a disk jockey soon after his family bought a radio station, would just naturally assume that a well stocked refrigerator is as ubiquitous in American homes as is indoor plumbing. Such a lad might sound a bit disingenuous if he touted the philosophy of self reliance. Roger that, dittoheads?

We’ll use an ending quote that has an easier to identify source. In “Oliver Twist,” Charles Dickens wrote the line: “Please, sir, I want some more.” Will Uncle Rushbo add T-shirts with that quote to the page on his website that offers online huckstering? Did he or did he not realize that his line about dumpster diving would inevitably lead to comparisons to the “beat ‘em and starve ‘em” philosophy in “Oliver Twist”?

Now the disk jockey will play “Big Rock Candy Mountain,” Roger Miller’s “Dang Me,” and “Delicious” done by Jim Backus and friend. We gotta go work off a few excess calories. Have an “all you can eat” type week and, if you can, donate some money to web sites that are trying to refute the millionaire misanthrope. Maybe the next time it’s your turn to buy a round of drinks at the country club, you can get a laugh by telling your buddies what you did with the money in lieu of taking your turn.

June 6, 2010

Trouble over BART cop case?

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , , — Bob Patterson @ 4:32 pm

Early on the morning of January 1, 2009, Oscar Grant was returning home in the east bay area of Northern California. He had been out celebrating the start of a new year. While traveling on the light rail system (BART = Bay Area Rapid Transit), an incident occurred at the Fruitvale station and a BART police officer started arrest proceedings. When it was over, Grant was dead of a bullet wound in the back.

Officer Johnannes Mehserle asserts that he intended to use his taser gun to subdue Grant, and mistakenly drew his pistol instead of the taser gun. When he fired the gun, it was a mistake.

The specifics of what precisely happened, who did what, and how much resistance was the suspect offering will be topics for debate during a trial that is just starting the jury selection process in Los Angeles.

On Wednesday, June 2, 2010, while doing some radio station surfing we came across one replaying a tape, recorded the previous day in Oakland, of an activist throwing down the gauntlet saying that any violence resulting from an acquittal would have to rest on the consciences of the members for the jury.

Will Uncle Rushbo use this conflict to advance his policies or will he (and Bill O.) continue to focus their attention on the laws in Arizona? Will the trial, which was moved in a change of venue effort to lower public concern about the specifics of this unfolding story, deliver a verdict that sparks a new example of civil unrest?

Is there a possibility that an activist, such as the aforementioned one heard on the radio, might be accused of using a thinly disguised bit of extortion to achieve a stealth bit of jury tampering? Would that exacerbate a situation that is already dangerous?

There is a bit of graffiti in front of the South Branch of the Berkeley Public Library that proclaims: “Law Enforcement is a hate crime.” That would seem to be an extreme liberal sentiment, but it is an indication of local sentiment.

The conservative point of view will be to have police in riot gear standing by to maintain law and order in the hours after the verdict is read. This potential for high tension may come after the city of Oakland cuts costs by laying off police officers. The layoffs issue will be addressed later this month.

There are no predictions online concerning when the trial in Los Angeles may reach the verdict stage.

The folks who specialize in extreme conjecture (AKA conspiracy theories) will attribute all kinds of motivations for any delays in the trial’s time line. Would a bit of civil unrest, which gets saturation coverage on the cable TV news networks, be perceived as a way to influence the November election results if it occurs in mid or late October? Would some authorities be more pleased if an emotional response to the verdict occurs in late summer?

When one realizes that the resources for liberal theme talk shows are being stretched to their limits while the ranks of the conservative talk show hosts are massive, then one gets a limited idea of why a national debate about the particulars of this case might only serve to advance the conservative agenda.

Since the conservatives prefer to shape the public discourse on all levels for all topics, it might be best for liberals pundits to acquaint themselves with the particulars of Oscar Grant’s death now rather than having to do a crash course on it if and when things get out of hand. (Does Bob Herbert of the New York Times read my columns? It’s only fair because I read his.)

Obviously liberals have their hands full trying to cope with Sarah Palin, BP and the oil spill, Arizona’s illegal aliens, terrorists slipping into the USA for more than a vacation, and gun control issues, but when the liberal resources are spread so thin, that is exactly the kind of situation that he conservatives will perceive as a chance to exploit the liberals’ vulnerability due to a lack of resources to meet an additional challenge.

When one looks at the topic of right vs. left on the radio dial, images of Col. Houston drawing a line in the sand may come to mind.

A reference to the Alamo of course brings to mind the issue of immigration, which, in turn, brings us back to the dire predictions (from compassionate Christian conservatives?) of an impending wave of civil unrest before the elections.

A quick Google search indicated that the topic of the Oscar Grant trial had not been mentioned on this web site and so we thought the readers would rather get a hasty, quick take, column on it so that they can monitor the trial as it proceeds. Giving readers a heads-up now would be better than waiting until folks like Uncle Rushbo can, if the verdict displeases activists, skip over the particulars and cut to civil unrest itself as the topic of the day.

Traditionally the Republicans prefer to act and let the Democrats react. With that strategy in mind, it may be best for Democrats to read up on the case and the issues involved now rather than later.

Links for additional information on the Oscar Grant trial

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_15205891?nclick_check=1

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15193890

and this one

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15239646

The trial has opened and one reporter says that: “A number of pretrial rulings by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert Perry have been made in favor of the defense”

http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/localnews/ci_15230888

Meanwhile Oakland is considering laying off 200 police officers.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/inoakland/detail?&entry_id=64574

Rodney King said: “Can’t we all get along?”

Now the disk jockey will play: “Wild in the Streets,” “Kung fu Fighting,” and Frankie Lane’s theme song from “High Noon,” titled “Do Not Forsake Me.” We have to go check the teletype because we just heard a four bell alert. Have a “Who saw that coming?” type week.

May 22, 2010

Arnieville pops up in Berkeley

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , , — Bob Patterson @ 3:50 pm

dscn1577

dscn1575

Activissts in Berkeley have set up a tent city, called “Arnieville,” to protest recent budget cuts in California. Photos were taken on Saturday morning, May 22, 2010.

May 16, 2010

Them’s fightin’ words . . .

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , — Bob Patterson @ 4:36 pm

dscn1448

Is this sign, seen recently in Berkeley, from people who are for or against gun control?

March 18, 2010

America’s Missing National War Museum

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , — Bob Patterson @ 2:19 pm

[If you are going to visit the White House in the next few days, would you please print out a copy of this column and put it into the White House suggestion box, while your are there? Thanks!]

An Australian pointed out to this columnist, that the first thing an American will do after visiting a tourist attraction in their country is to strongly assert that, back home, Americans have done the same thing bigger and better.

If President Obama when he visits Canberra to address the Australian Parliament next week, takes the opportunity to visit the Australian National War Museum, there will be absolutely no danger that President Obama will tell his hosts that the United States has done it better because there ain’t no National War Museum in the USA. There are, to be sure, a great number of specialized museums in the states. There’s a museum of desert warfare in Southern California, the 3rd Cavalry Museum is in El Paso, TX, a Museum is at West Point, and the D-Day Museum is in New Orleans.

To the best of this columnist’s fact checking ability to determine, the United States does not have one central museum that honors all the combatants who have fought in all the wars waged by the U. S. A. If Australia can do that, why can the USA?

Due to bad timing, President Obama will not be in Canberra at the same time that the Aussie hot rodders hold their annual Summer Nats event. This year’s installment was held in early January, when it was summer in that hemisphere. [That, in turn, reminds us that we have recently learned (while Reading James Michener’s “Return to Paradise”) that a broken beer bottle is called “an Australian boxing glove.”]

The Hog’s Breath Cafe in Canberra boasts that they serve the best steak in Australia and maybe President Obama can take the time to put that claim to a taste test.

The last time this columnist heard the song “Santa Monica Boulevard,” we were in Canberra and as we listened to the tune, it made us wonder how many Aussies know that the road being honored used to be called “Oregon St.”?

One of the advantages of being a blogger is that the writer can tell the President of the United States, how he (the blogger) would do things differently. The White House does have a suggestion box, doesn’t it?

The Republicans, according to some recent scuttlebutt on the Internets, will use the period between the day after this year’s midterm elections and election day in 2012 to set the agenda and put the incumbent, President Obama, on the defensive. Since they intend to use a racist tactic, which will leave the President with a task that will be impossible. If the Republicans say that the President is incompetent because he is the first African-American President, any attempts to refute that will have to assert that he is incompetent for some other reason or that he isn’t an African-American. It seems that either response will be inadequate for winning re-election.

If President Obama wants to seize the initiative, set the agenda, and put the Republicans on the defensive; he could visit Australia’s National War Museum and then immediately suggest that it is time for the United States to honor its history by establishing a similar site in the United States.

If he moves fast, that would leave the Republicans in a bind. If the Republicans want to continue their sit-down strike in the legislative branch of America’s government, then they would have to vote against the suggestion of an American National War Museum or at least not vote for it. If they did that their ownership of the “Support the Troops” issue would start to evaporate quickly. If, on the other hand, they quickly followed President Obama’s lead and voted for a National War Museum for the USA, then it would look like the commitment to wage their sit-down strike was crumbling. It would look like President Obama was leading them around like puppies on leashes and they wouldn’t like that, either.

President Obama could go into Republican congressional districts and appeal to the local voters to replace any Republican who didn’t quickly and strongly support an Obama program to erect a National War Museum.

Australia’s National War Museum is open 364 days a year (closed on Christmas) and is considered by some to be Australia’s best tourist attraction. (Like the guy said in “Catch Me if You Can,” this columnist concurs.)

The Australian National War Museum, which is noted for the quality of its scholarly research department, informs visitors that the American success at the Battle of the Coral Sea and the Battle of Midway was due to the fact that the Americans had broken the Japanese code and knew what radio orders were being given. American history books say those battles were won by American officers who made shrewd guesses about what to do in the midst of the evolving situation. Whatever. The U. S. won, and that’s the bottom line.

Australian entertainer Little Patty was given a military medal. Did any USO performers get a similar honor? (Do a Google search with her name and add: “Battle Long Tan.”)

Obviously, President Obama will not visit the secret American military base just West of Alice Springs. They don’t want or need the publicity a Presidential visit would precipitate.

It seems unlikely that President Obama will take the suggestion for a National War Museum for the United States. If he becomes a one term President, don’t say we didn’t offer any suggestions to prevent it.

For this column’s closing quote we’ll turn to the Narrator, in Mad Max 2 (an Australian film), who says: “For reasons long forgotten, two mighty warrior tribes went to war and touched off a blaze which engulfed them all. Without fuel, they were nothing. They built a house of straw. The thundering machines sputtered and stopped. Their leaders talked and talked and talked. But nothing could stem the avalanche. Their world crumbled. The cities exploded. A whirlwind of looting, a firestorm of fear.”

Now the disk jockey will play “Please Mr. Please,” “Stayin’ Alive,” and “Dirty Deed Done Dirt Cheap.” We have to go see if The Enemy Belligerant Interogation Detention, and Proscecution Act of 2010 (S3081) will bring Gleichschaltung. Have a Big Brother Approved type week.

March 5, 2010

Watching student protest

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , , — Bob Patterson @ 11:22 am

mvc-008f

In Berkeley, police watch the students at the Sather Gate on the UCB campus, protest budget cuts.

Students protest budget cuts

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , , — Bob Patterson @ 11:18 am

mvc-001f

Photos of the students at Sather Gate on the University of California Berkeley campus have become an comon news media icon of Thursday’s protests.

February 28, 2010

One for the Conspiracy Theory Hall of Fame?

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , , — Bob Patterson @ 5:01 pm

[Note: Conspiracy theories, like astrological forecasts, should be read only for their entertainment value. They belong in the file labeled: “fictionalized speculation.”]

When the Ayatollah Khomeini shot to the top of the current events chart for his shenanigans in Iran, it seemed to this columnist, like we had seen him before. One day while plowing through our massive collection of totally irrelevant cultural events file, we stumbled upon a photo of
Howard Hughes.

Voila! It wasn’t just one of those identical twins separated at birth things; it was a “same guy, different photos at different ages” type deal (IMHO). Just compare a photo of the Ayatollah and one of Hughes. Note the similarity of the folds in the ears, the nostrils, and the eyes. Eliminatory, my dear Watson, it’s obviously the same guy in different stages in his life.

We asked around. No one had ever seen Howie (we used to live in Marina del Rey, which has Hughes Aircraft as an adjacent neighbor) and the Ayatollah in the same room at the same time.

“Lois, have you ever noticed how Clark Kent always misses being able to write an eyewitness account of Superman’s greatest feats?” Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink. If you know what we mean.

We tried our best to pedal our theory to the mavens of contemporary American culture but alas we garnered as much attention as a voice crying in the wilderness would.

If a conspiracy theory (CT) is to flourish, it has to be theoretically possible. You can’t go for stories about the captain of the Titanic being found 60 years later with his pipe still lit. You have to cook up something that just might squeak by on a level of marginal feasibility.

We went back to the drawing board.

James Dean and Elvis were rumored to be still alive long after their deaths had been reported in the news media. So we asked our self: How much documentation was there for the death of Che Guevara?

What if he had promised to turn states evidence and rat out his amigos in the Cuban Revolution in return for amnesty? Could he have been taken in to the “Witness Protection Program” and given some phony ID and a few bucks to start life over after allegedly being “shot down in an attempt to flee”?

We came up with a mental image of Che being on a city council in a small University somewhere in California and fighting with the college kids. (Gosh now that we live in such a city, maybe one of these Tueday nights, we should skip Qi Gong class and attend a city council meeting?)

We ran this bit of unsubstantiated speculation past a high school buddy, several years ago, and he did his best to refute our theory. He reassured us that he personally had seen a photo on the desk of the guy who worked next to his that showed Che dead on the ground. Our good buddy mumbled some esoteric exotica about JM/Wave, Ted Shackley, Phat City, and the like as his evidence to substantiate his claim that Che was buried in Bolivia.

We countered that this guy, whom he called Felix Rodriguez, was most likely in on the ruse and had agreed to pose with Che’s prone figure for the photographic proof that the revolutionary had been mortally wounded while attempting to flee. (Didja know that in the days of B&W movies Hershey’s chocolate syrup was often used to simulate blood?) In return, we asserted, Che spilled the beans about such things as the kidnapping of Juan Manuel Fangio and other historic Cuban events which preceded Fidel’s putsch.

Now that photoshopping changes are readily available to any photographer with the bucks to buy the program and a lap top where he can run it, photographs are (to the best of our knowledge) no longer accepted as evidence in any court proceedings.

We used to work with an ad sales rep who, we adamantly asserted, used an assumed identity that had been provided by the witness protection program folks. They had assisted her in the efforts to erase all traces of her life as “Eva Braun.” She did a Dr. Strangelove-like denial of the idea.

Our efforts to dabble in a one man plot to concoct something that would be described as a cutting edge conspiracy theory that belongs in the Conspiracy Theory Hall of Fame pale in comparison to what we have recently found on online. We were Googling around with things like “Blond Ghost” and “Dealey Plaza” when we stumbled on the most outrageous conspiracy theory we’ve ever encountered in a lifelong fascination with conspiracy theories for fun and profit.

If we couch the views in the form of a question that means that this columnist doesn’t personally substantiate their wild assertions. We just want to bring some new theories to the attention of the people who are connoisseurs of concocted conjecture.

Cub reporters are always urged, for legal reasons, to pepper their stories with words like “allegedly,” “reportedly,” “assert,” and to inundate the readers with phrases like “according to a police spokesman,” and “unsubstantiated conjecture.”

So we were sure that we found the next candidate for the Conspiracy Theory Hall of Fame when we found folks asking: “Was George W. Bush’s real father JFK?” They follow that up by asking “Did George H. W. Bush, play the role of jealous husband, and hire killers to rub him out in Dallas?”

Their wild assertions do seem to tie up loose ends and nagging question concerning JFK’s assassination in Dallas on November 22, 1963, in an Occam’s razor sort of way.
Folks (not just the good ole boys in Texas) can readily comprehend the “jealous husband” rational for using a gun.

According to this new way of explaining the Dallas Assassination, the common connecting thread is the CIA. Here are some links for readers who want to do their own play-along-at-home sleuthing and fact checking about this wild bit of speculation. (Embedded links seem so Tyler Durdin-ish.)

http://www.aviationbanter.com/showthread.php?t=4080

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://bottleofbits.info/econ/faces/Lf-Ts.jpg&imgrefurl=http://bottleofbits.info/econ/faces/familiar_faces.htm&usg=__ZsOYgQppbwST7wF9SI28FdzQSPQ=&h=64&w=243&sz=9&hl=en&start=19&itbs=1&tbnid=gF8fVyuzydd8bM:&tbnh=29&tbnw=110&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dblond%2Bghost%2Bdealy%2Bplaza%26hl%3Den%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D20%26tbs%3Disch:1

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/custom/JFKsealgoss.jpg

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.rumormillnews.com/pix5/bush_kennedy_assassination_dallas_11.22.63.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi%3Fnoframes%3Bread%3D161548&usg=__uQ0GAzNWQj3DAUbA6WOQ6_uQ6i0=&h=510&w=372&sz=42&hl=en&start=15&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=jB5qGponYyUeBM:&tbnh=131&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3Ddealey%2Bplaza%2Bbarbara%2Bpierce%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26tbs%3Disch:1

If a columnist writes about a new dance craze sweeping the discos, that doesn’t mean he has to be the fellow who “invented” the dance. It doesn’t mean that he has to be able to do the dance. It just means that, as a reporter and critic of the contemporary culture, he wants to point out what the latest development in that sphere of culture is. For those who are fascinated by conspiracy theories, this columnist just wants to bring their wild, intriguing question to the attention conspiracy theory fans. When it comes to drawing conclusions; you are on your own.

Herb Caen, who has his own room in the (imaginary) Columnists’ Hall of Fame, defended his columnistic style thus (From “Don’t Call it Frisco” Doubleday hardback pages 25 – 26): “That brings us to the third type – the “scattershot” column, crammed with short items on a variety of subjects. This kind of column is, obviously, a lot more work, but it attracts a wider audience, at least theoretically. As that great practitioner of the art, Walter Winchell, once expressed it: ‘People don’t get bored if you change the subject often enough.’”

Now, our disk jockey will play: Jimmy Dean’s song “Big, Bad John,” Dion’s song “Abraham, Martin, and John,” and Tom Clay’s overdubbed version of “What the World Needs Now.” (It is on Youtube and guaranteed to make surviving hippies weep.) Now, we gotta skedaddle. Have a “you’re not gonna believe this . . .” type of week.

February 22, 2010

Back when the good guys were the good guys

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , , , — Bob Patterson @ 7:24 pm

Since it is slowly becoming obvious that the Bush Administration will accomplish what the Nazis couldn’t (be forgiven for committing war crimes); it seems concomitant to find some other topics for columns to be posted online. It would be best to come up with topics which will be previously untouched but will proved a “Eurika!” moment/reaction with this site’s regulars.

One hypothetical question which has always been a concern for this columnist has been: “If you could travel back in time to anyplace to see history happen; where would you be going when (not if) they actually invent and activate the “Wayback Machine”?

At this point we direct readers’ attention to the comments section below.

For this columnist, the first response has always been: I’d go to Paris to watch the Liberation during WWII occur.

We used to work with a guy who was, according to the judgment of the other workers, very boring. We made a specific effort to get to know him hoping that he would have some hidden trove of memories that we could get him to share. We’ve always been anxious to hear the experiences of the men who fought in WWII. When this fellow mentioned the Army, we hauled out our verbal questionnaire form. What theater of operations, what unit, what time frame, etc.

The guy didn’t offer any spectacular possibilities for combat stories. He had been wounded in action but it wasn’t life threatening. Then he proved my point by dropping a game winner: while he was in a military hospital, he and a nurse who spoke French went AWOL and snuck into Paris three weeks after the Liberation. He succinctly reported “We had a good time.”

The highlight, according to his reminiscences, occurred when he went into one of the best restaurants and ordered up a “once in a lifetime” dining experience. When the bill wasn’t presented, he asked for it. The waiter explained that it was impossible to present a bill to a member of the very same Army that had Liberated Paris. Sweet.

One might assume that living in Berkeley wouldn’t offer much possibility for finding some vicarious material for flashbacks to the aforementioned historical series of events that transpired in August 1944. Thanks to some items found in the Berkeley Public Library book store, such an assumption would be misguided.

In a copy of “By-line: Ernest Hemingway,” we found (on pages 382 – 3): “We ran through the road where the munitions dump was exploding, with Archie (his driver), who has bright red hair, six years of regular Army, four words of French, a missing front tooth, and a Frere in a guerrilla outfit, laughing heartily at the noise the big stuff was making as it blew. . . .

“We were going downhill now, and I knew that road and what we could see when we made the next turn. . . .

“‘Yeah,’ I said. I couldn’t say anything more then, because I had a funny choke in my throat and I had to clean my glasses because there now, below us, gray and always beautiful, was spread the city I love best in all the world.”

A day or so later, in “Wayward Reporter: The Life of A. J. Liebling,” we found (pages 4 – 5): “For the first time in my life and probably the last, I have lived for a week in a great city where everybody is happy. Moreover, since this city is Paris, everybody makes this euphoria manifest.”

We’ve read some of the articles that Albert Camus wrote for Combat, the resistance newspaper, but were surprised to find that Liebling had written a book that critically evaluated the journalism produced in Paris during the Occupation. Where the heck are we ever going to find a copy of “The Republic of Silence”? Now we have a reason to go to bookstores.

Somehow George W. Bush thought that the troops he sent into Baghdad would get the same tumultuous reception that the Parisians gave to the American troops who arrived in Paris in 1944. Unfortunately, Bush miscalculated. Bush ultimately came off looking like a guy standing in the rain watching his girlfriend and her husband boarding a train that was leaving Paris.

When we started flipping through a recently acquired copy of “Anthology: Selected essays from the first 30 years of The New York Review of Books,” we came across Bruce Chatwin’s piece titled “An Aesthete at War.” It tells about the life of Captain Ernst Junger who won Iron Crosses in both World Wars.

Part of fact finding for our imaginary time travel trip had been a reading of “Is Paris Burning?” many years ago. “An Aesthete at War” mentions that General Speidel “forgot” the order to V-bomb Paris. How did we miss that bit of trivia? It seems that Paris was doubly lucky to survive the Liberation relatively unscathed. We also just read (In Joseph Harsch’s book about covering WWII?) that the night they left Paris, the Germans did send some airplanes on a bombing raid over Paris’ outskirts.

Junger loved war, but he also loved Paris. According to Chatwin’s article it seems likely that Rush Limbaugh would cherish Junger’s book about WWI titled “Storm of Steel.” Apparently, if you like war; you will love Junger’s book “Storm of Steel.” A guy who was wounded 14 times in World War I and then fought again in World War II would be the kind of guy Uncle Rushbo would urge all American kids to emulate. Uncle Rushbo would agree with the warmonger aspect of Junger’s personality and it isn’t hard to imagine the fat man also wishing for an alternative history where Paris was leveled by the retreating German Army.

It seems that Dick Cheney will never stand trial for war crimes and that time travel back to the days when the Americans were “the good guys” will never be perfected, but a columnist can dream, can’t he?

Chatwin delivers an occupation era quote from Madame (Mrs. Paul) Morand: “For me the art of living is the art of making other people work and keeping pleasure for myself.” (Does Uncle Rushbo need a motto for his radio program?)

Now, we’ll pry the disk jockey away from his transistor radio (where the True Oldies Channel delivers a limited dose of time travel) and have him play “The Last Time I Saw Paris (the song was inspired by the fall of France),” “Paris vor Hundert Jahren” and Waylon Jenning’s song, “He Went to Paris.” (What? You were expecting “As Time Goes By”? The boss don’t like to hear that song.) It’s time for us to go do some fact finding about the new John Cusack movie with the intriguing title “Hot Tub Time Machine.” Have a “filled with those events which alter and illuminate our times” type week.

February 10, 2010

The case of the vanishing WMD’s

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , , — Bob Patterson @ 2:04 pm

[Note: Spoiler warning: Some of Houdini’s methods will be revealed below in this column. If you don’t want to lose the wonder of “how did he do that?” stop reading this column now.]

Recently, when this columnist saw a used copy of Jim Steinmeyer’s 2003 copyrighted book, “Hiding the Elephant,” for sale, we had a dual motivation for glomming on to it; we’ve always been interested in how to saw a woman in half and there was a chance that, perhaps, if the author explained how Houdini made an elephant disappear, there would be the basis for a column explaining how Generalisimo Bush was able to perform the magic needed to get a gentle and peace loving nation to invading Iraq.

By page 13, Steinmeyer is extolling the qualities that made Howard Thurston a much more superior magician than Houdini. He notes the irony of Thurston telling his audience “I wouldn’t deceive you for the world” knowing that they had paid good hard earned dollars just to be there when he did exactly that.

On page 17, all tricks are explained: “The audience is taken by the hand and led to deceive themselves.” Ahhhh, now we see how Bush did it. America had regressed to the days of the Roman gladiators and given Dubya the signal that is copyrighted by Roger Ebert to designate approval for a bloodbath. (Does Ebert get royalties from the Caesar Agustus family estate?)

When the “Shock and Awe” TV special was being broadcast live; this columnist went to the home of a friend and found him cheering wildly while watching the carnage being delivered. My buddy has long been a big Ed Gein fan.

Obviously some of the Liberals have been a bit slower than others in accepting the “Immaculate Deception” lesson in their hearts. President Obama seems to have become hip to the message: America wanted the war with Iraq.

Now, as the slow on the uptake Liberals try to object to the use of depleted uranium, because of the allegations of a perceptible increase in birth defects in areas where that substance has been used, they are still trying to use facts and logic to persuade the Conservatives that such material should be banned from the battlefield.

The Liberals petition the media with requests to delineate the effects that depleted uranium causes. “Oh, please tell us how Houdini made the Elephant disappear!” Boys and girls: “You cannot petition the media with prayers!” The New York Times public editor will only read letters pertaining to stories that publication has run. Trying to bring stories that need to be covered to their attention is a “Myth of Sisyphus” task. Don’t waste your time or his.

This year as the world celebrates another Valentine’s Day, note the complete lack of enthusiasm the media has for the topic of using depleted uranium in the war zones. Think of it as America’s Valentine’s Day gift to the world.

Steinmeyer notes that Houdini’s appeal was derived from his skill as a master escape artist.

Walter Gibson wrote books about magic and one in particular explains some of the secrets to Houdini’s escapes. If you are of a mind to learn all about how magicians work their magic, you can acquire much of that esoteric knowledge, if you read enough books.

If you do go to the trouble of learning the secrets of magic, you will then watch magicians from a completely different viewpoint. You will pay attention to the way they distract an audience’s attention. Magician assistants (usually very attractive women in scanty costumes) are called “box jumpers.” You will appreciate them as showmen and not people who can perform impossible feats.

Sometimes when Houdini was about to perform a dangerous escape, his wife would give him a passionate kiss as a show of support and encouragement. She would (sometimes) also pass a key from her mouth to his during the steamy public display of affection.

In an effort to show that “there’s nothing hidden up my sleeves,” Houdini would sometimes perform his escapes clad only in shorts which preserved his modesty. If, for instance, his hands were tied spread eagle fashion to the floor, the audience wouldn’t get to see that he was agile and flexible and could untie knots with his bare feet. Many people who don’t have hands develop a similar level of agility for using their feet.

Ohhhhh Kay! So people want to be fooled and join with my buddy in making a festival setting for watching “Shock and Awe.”

In other words: no body gave a fig about the possibility that there were no WMD’s in Iraq. America wanted to see a tyrant get spanked and the WMD excuse was good enough for them. The crybaby liberals who fretted about a long and costly war were just trying to run interference for their pet social programs which (obviously) are destined to become metaphorical casualties in a long, expensive war. Boo-hoo!

Liberals are decrying the rising costs of a college education. Wake up, people! Cannon fodder doesn’t need the chance to be given an affordable college degree. The sons and daughters of millionaire politicians need not be concerned about such mundane matters as what it costs to go to a fine University. Hence rising tuition costs are a non-issue.

This year, as the world celebrates another St. Valentine’s Day, there won’t be but a handful of mentions from “bleeding heart liberals” about the use of depleted uranium in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the land where Jesus walked. Want to know the secret behind that trick? How can concern for such a serious topic vanish? Americans don’t care about deformed babies in other countries.

Young folks recently were reminded that the movie “Love Story” spawned the popularity for the line “Love means never having to say you’re sorry.” War crimes trials? Hell, no! Not even an apology. (Did you see the photos of the “
Do you miss me yet?
” billboard?)

Now, the disk jockey will play “Please Mr. Custer,” “Bless ‘em all” (ask a WWII vet about the way they changed that song’s lyrics) and “Praise the Lord and Pass the ammunition.” Now, it’s time to say abracadabra and disappear. Have a week full of magic and wonderment.

February 1, 2010

Bush as Existentialist

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , — Bob Patterson @ 2:29 pm

If you think that it is highly likely that it will be a very long time until the Republicans and Democrats agree on anything whatsoever, then there is an experiment you should try.
If you make a serious suggestion that former President George W. Bush deserves a place of honor in the Existentialists Hall of Fame; Democrats will want to tar and feather you, and Republicans will form a lynch mob. Both will be very adamant and be in full agreement that you shouldn’t say that.

The Republicans are trying so hard to disavow any hints of elitisim in their agenda and conduct and, instead, want to do the branding necessary to firmly establish their political party as a populist movement that only wants to improve the lot of the union worker and the bank clerk. There’s a rumor (which is being started right here) that the theme song for the Next Republican National Convention will be the Rolling Stones rendition of “Salt of the Earth.”

A Republican consulting firm has established the guiding principle that more Americans like corn than caviar.

The concept of lumping George W. Bush in with the likes of French Intellectuals such as Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre will be sufficient to send most of Ronald Reagan’s disciples staggering off to the nearest emergency room (where all immigrants and some Americans get free medical services?).

Democrats, on the other hand, will recoil in horror at any hint of seriousness in the suggestion that George W. Bush is an Existentialist because it will be misinterpreted to mean that they think that you think George W. Bush was smart enough to be ranked as a genius deserving a place alongside the likes of Camus or Sartre. The Democrats will react as quickly and as energetically as a bull at the rodeo when the gate is opened.

It would be easier to preach the gospel of Ferdinand at a bull fight than it would be to get the Hartman, Maddow, and Malloy fans to second the idea that Bush was an outstanding example of Existentialism in action. Note the words “in action.” Isn’t a part of Existentialism the “to be is to do” school of thought? If George W. Bush instinctively acted in an Existential way, without bothering to put “Being and Nothingness” on his famed reading list, then he was an Existentialist and thus eligible for membership in the Existentialists Hall of Fame.

Didn’t 43 cause a ruckus when he casually mentioned that “Le Stranger” was on his reading list?

On the web site for Princeton University this definition of an existentialist will be found: “a philosopher who emphasizes freedom of choice and personal responsibility but who regards human existence in a hostile universe as unexplainable.” So Bush and Cheney decide they gonna kick Saddam’s ass, they get a convenient excuse, they replace a Congressional Declaration of War with a clause in the doctrine of Executive Privilege, they replace the Chancellor-for-life title with Commander-in-Chief, and then when the war goes into extra innings, they hide behind a tsunami of “no one could have possibly forseen” bullshit, and if that doesn’t fit the definition of Existentialist, then this columnist had better start singing the song with the line about “gimme three steps towards the door.”

In “The Rebel,” Camus wrote: “The advocate of crime really only respects two kinds of power: one, which he finds in his own class, founded on the accident of birth, and the other by which, through sheer villainy, an underdog raises himself to the level of the libertines of noble birth whom Sade makes his heroes.” Do you seriously think, if Camus were alive today, that he would be doing political punditry for Fox. They just couldn’t hire the man who said: “A free press can, of course, be good or bad, but, most certainly without freedom, the press will never be anything but bad.”

Camus again: “I have seen people behave badly with great morality and I note every day that integrity has no need of rules.” Does that mean that sidestepping the Geneva conventions and leading the Christians for Torture posse qualifies Dubya for membership in the Existentialists Hall of Fame? Isn’t the Bush Family motto: “Fuck your rules!”?

“When one has served in a war, one hardly knows what a dead man is, after a while. And since a dead man has no substance unless one has actually seen him dead, a hundred million corpses broadcast through history are no more than a puff of smoke in the imagination.” Isn’t it obvious that George W. Bush would concur completely with that Camus quote? When one has served as a pilot in an Air National Guard unit that can’t provide the type of aircraft that one had been trained to fly, doesn’t that leave the fellow free to choose to become the Commander-in-chief and thus be free of messy encumbrances derived from dead bodies?

George W. Bush might not agree that he is an existentialist, but most of the existentialists also rejected the suggestion that they be dumped into that category.

Sartre said: “Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. Such is the first principle of existentialism.” Thus if a man becomes the Commander-in-Chief by fiat of the United States Supreme Court, that’s just as good and better than being elected by the voters.

Can we get a witness from Nietzsche? In “Thus Spoke Zarathustra,” Nietzsche said: “But thus I counsel you, my friends: Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful. They are people of a low sort and stock; the hangman and the bloodhound look out of their faces. Mistrust all who talk much of their justice! Verily, their souls lack more than honey. And when they call themselves the good and the just, do not forget that they would be Pharisees, if only they had – power.” Sometimes, by God, they get it!

So would that be referring to the members of the Bush family?

When Camus said “You know what charm is: a way of getting the answer yes without having asked any clear question” was he referring to the Dubya challenge to America: “Come on, what say, we invade Iraq!”?

Wasn’t saying “I’m the decider” tantamount to openly declaring himself to be an Existentialist of the highest rank and thus qualified to be considered for a place in the Existentialists Hall of Fame?

At this point some readers may challenge the columnist’s credentials to elaborate on the subject of Existentialism. If a man chooses to call himself an expert on Existentialism; isn’t that sufficient? Isn’t a self-proclaimed expert on Existentialism a walking, talking personification of the philosophy of “to do is to be”? Would it be better to get a philosophy professor from Cal Berkeley to fact check this column? Wouldn’t that be a repudiation of the Republican/Existentialist heroic reliance on the code of self determination? “If I say this beach is safe to surf; it’s safe to surf!”

It was best said in some graffiti from the Sixties:
Camus: “To do is to be.”
Sartre: “To be is to do.”
Sinatra: “To be, do be, do.”

Now, the disk jockey will play Edith Piaf’s “Non, je ne regretted rien” (Bush’s theme song?), Les Baxter’s “Poor People of Paris,” and Bobby Darren’s “Mack the Knife.” It’s time for us to cut out. Have a “le jazz hot” type week.

January 24, 2010

Breaking the Monty Python Argument addiction

Filed under: Guest Comment — Tags: , , , , , — Bob Patterson @ 5:12 pm

The famous philosopher Montague Python devised the most popular circular argument of all times when he posited the hypotheses that contradicting is a legitimate, scholarly method of argumentation and he subsequently spawned a cottage industry in academic circles for professors and PhD candidates to assert the converse theorem: “No; it isn’t!”

The Republicans have adapted the Python-esque attitude regarding the possibility that global warming will kill off all the polar bears (even the massive colony of expat white bears living in zoos around the world?) by disqualifying any scientific preditions designed to elicit sympathy for the gigantic brutes.

The Democrats have embraced the challenge in such a wholehearted and enthusiastic way that some observers are alarmed about the possibility that the Democrats are showing symptoms of addiction in their compulsive responses to the Republican invitations to put aside substantive topics and, instead, waste some campaign time by continually injecting new scientific information into the argument which, by the Republican ground rules, automatically disqualifies the material that is (in the Republicans’ august opinion) worthy of a room of its own in the Mad Scientists Hall of Fame.

Here is a hypothetical transcript of how to play the game:
Dem: A new scientific report says that all polar bears will drown because the polar ice cap is melting.
Rep: Where does it say that in the Bible?
Dem: But if you read the report, surely, you will admit that without a polar ice cap, the polar bears will soon disappear form this earth.
Rep: Don’t call me Shirley.
Dem: So you don’t care if all the polar bears drown?
Rep: Polar bears are known for their remarkable long distance swimming ability, polar bear skeletons have been found on Samoa. (Republicans are not confined to reality. For Democrats, truth is a self imposed restriction limiting their retorts.)
Dem: Don’t you care about Global Warming?
Rep: If you could prove it exists, I most certainly would, but for now, I think it’s like the “theory” that if I flap my arms fast enough, I’ll start to fly. Aren’t scientists the ones who say that, according to the laws of aerodynamics, bees can’t fly?
Dem: I’ll do anything I have to, to prove that Global Warming really exists.
Rep: Anything? . . . ?
Dem: Science has proved conclusively that global warming is occurring and that polar bears are in peril.
Rep: No! It doesn’t!

Here’s a suggestion for Democrats who want to argue logically and simultaneously break out of their addiction to the Monty Python game: issue this challenge: given the fact that you don’t believe in Global Warming because you don’t’ believe in science, how about this: The Democratic Party will build you a World Headquarters for the Science Skeptics (AKA the Republican elite SS Society) Association on the atomic proving ground’s “Ground Zero” conveniently located close to Las Vegas! Whatcha say? Free!

At that point the Republicans would face a philosophic crisis. They must accept the dare because if they decline the offer, the discussion will then put them on the defensive. If they want to decline the offer based on any scientific reasons, then they have been proven to be hypocrites; if they decline and attribute it to “common sense,” then they can be asked what common sense tells them about the photos that show a shrinking polar icecap. If they don’t believe in photos; ask them if you can buy all their family album photos, home movies, and negatives. Do they use family snapshots to remind themselves that grandpa and grandma really existed (and looked groovy in their youth?)? If they don’t believe in photographic evidence, then they don’t need family snapshots and should jump at the chance to sell them off. Isn’t offering a Republican a chance to make some easy money just like offering a drink to an alcoholic?

If they accept the offer, the Democrats should use reconciliation to get legal permission to build such a facility and then they should build it and turn it over to the Republican Society of Science Skeptics.

If the Democrats wanted to use methodology as mean and crooked as the Republicans utilize, they might want to run ads showing victims of disabilities acquired by fighting in territory where Agent Orange was used. The spokesmen could then say that only scientists disapproved of using Agent Orange and that there was absolutely nothing in the Bible that would indicate that there was any reason to avoid waging war with or living where it had been used for defoliation. Has the use Agent Orange been abandoned in the Bush Wars just because of scientific evidence? (Have you noticed that there are no trees or vegetables growing in the Tora Bora pass?)

What does the Bible say about accepting this generous offer (a free headquarters building on Ground Zero) from the Democrats? Did any polar bears offer to testify at the Scope’s Trial?

Question: If Bible thumping conservatives are diagnosed with cancer do they seek help by going to an African witch doctor or do they head for an American doctor who relies heavily on science? What does the Bible say about chemo-therapy? Shouldn’t Republican Christians turn down any and all recommendations for such cancer treatments?

The Global warming circular argument might, in the final inning, boil down to an old Republican election slogan’s advise: “If God meant for man to fly; He would have given him wings!” Amen, brother!

Now, the disk jockey will play the Foreigner’s song “Blinded by Science,” Thomas Dolby’s “She Blinded Me With Science,” and Elvis’ “Viva Las Vegas.” Whew, we need to go take a reinvigorating look at some photos taken back when it was clever to ask a girl: “Wanna see my Walmetto?” Have a “Sock it to me!” type week.

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress