Jus' tellin it like it is

Today, Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld held a press conference regarding the restructuring of the services and other timely subjects. At one point a reporter asked a speculative question regarding a future hypothetical situation and Rummy's response was:

"Why don't you just report the news instead of reporting possible news?"

BINGO! Even though I'm not the greatest fan of the Old Guard Rockefeller Republicans, this is the kinda' reaction that illustrates Sec. Rumsfeld is now firmly in the fold of the Reagan/GW Renaissance Republican wing.
I'll hafta' write a whole blog entry on the different definitions of "Old Guard", "NeoCons", and "Reagan Republicans" - or in my words a "Renaissance Republican."... .later
-
But I think it boils down to this... for those who think there is some great black cloak shadow government with this current administration, I present to you this fact:
-
***** The members of this administration (Particularly Sec. Rumsfeld) are often chastised for speaking their mind, as Rummy did today. An underhanded, nefarious government would be more smooth than that. If you are trying to "sneak something by" the American people, you would have to be very slick in order to "sucker" the people. This Administration is anything but slick. The mental gymnastics required to speak so passionately about freedom, patriotism, and altruistic motives while actually being an evil power-grabbing, dictatorial group of thugs is not in the realm of possibility with these folks. They are just not that crafty! It goes beyond just having two faces. In order to be successfully duplicitious, one needs to be in charge of their faculties to the extent of a professional actor. Heck! Even professional actors like George Cloony who spend 24 hours a day immersed in the craft of acting can't master it! And the Bush haters expect us to believe that Bush has all the acting ability of Laurence Oliver, Cheney is as adept as James Dean, Rumsfeld is the next Humphrey Bogart... Sorry, guys .... they are just not that talented in the field of legerdemain.
-
In this sense, Bushisms actually reassure me! They reassure me that GW and his administration aren't pulling the wool over my eyes. Perhaps it's because I, too, am from the west where a plain spoken gent is valued INFINATELY over some slick east coast salesman who has got all the patter down and the perfect words at their fingertips.
Ladies, if you are out on a first date and the guy your with is just sooooooooooo perfect.... perfect car, perfect hair, says just the right thing at the right time, wears the most stylish clothes.... and is just flawless. You may get temporarily caught up in the "perfectness" of it all .... but don't you start wondering ... and worrying.... when the other shoe is gunna' fall? Don't those questions about skeletons in the closet start rising? "Why is he trying so hard to be perfect?" "What he compensating for... and hiding.. beneath this perfect facade?"
Well, I think I can safely say that a "perfect facade" is not exactly an arrow in GW Bush's quiver.

There's a BOGEYMAN in that movie!!!!!

Alright, perhaps you should click the link first, so you have some idea what madness I'm referring to.
Someone is actually talking about how there are "racial overtones" in King Kong! Actually, it's not just "somebody"... it's Newsday and USAToday columnist Sheryl McCarthy.
.
The premise is this ... enormous big black ape falls for young, pale, blonde woman.
.
PRESTO! It's a commentary on black men seducing white women.
.
HUH? What?? Where did ya' get that? Run that by me again?!?!?!? Are you KIDDING me ??? Then what is The Phantom of the Opera about? Disabled or deformed white guys get their kicks playing "father figure" to young girls?? Good luck finding something in Creature from the Black Lagoon. Now, I have no idea if Ms. McCarthy is black, white, polka-dotted, European or Venusian.... and I really don't care. What I do know is that she's an idiot... regardless of race, creed, or color.
GIVE IT A REST, People! The race card is NOT applicable in all cases, and looking to interject "racial overtones" where there are none only makes YOU (the "enlightened observer") look like an idiot.
King Kong is a classic retelling of the fable "Beauty and the Beast"... hmmmm maybe she thinks that Beauty and the Beast has racial overtones... I'm sure we could ruminate on plenty of insane "parallels" and innuendos THERE! Good grief! We, as a society will never get to an altruistic "color blindness" if people are finding "bigotry" where there is none!
-Someone might want to pass this note onto Senator Teddy Kennedy while you're at it.-

I'm going out on a limb here, but I'd bet money the heretofore unknown (to me) Ms McCarthy is a well established liberal. Heaven knows, if a conservative drew a parallel between an ape and a black man he/she would be lynched, tarred and feathered... drawn and quartered, and featured for 2 weeks straight on Hardball.

Methinks thou protest too much

The link is to just ONE poll, that happens to be Zogby. Overwhelmingly, however polls indicate that the warrantless tapping of suspected terrorists is NOT the huge deal the press is making out to be.
.
Granted, some are comparing it to Nixon, however the spying on terrorists wanting to do harm to you and me - and the spying on political opponents is VASTLY different!
.
If GW was spying on Michael Moore-on or George Soros, I would be as up in arms as anyone... but spying on known Al Queda members or associates?? C'MON!
.
In fact, the only ones seemingly bent out of shape over all this are the media, the Democrats, and the ACLU.... hmmmmmmm... perhaps they've been calling Afghanistan lately.... do THEY have something to hide??????

Yes, I can rip on the GOP as well

Have you ever spoken to a ProPol...err... I mean a professional politico? I've met more than my fair share in the last few years... performing at political events from Memphis to Vegas... holiday parades... victory parties... fundraisers... phone banks. Not to mention I grew UP in the freaking arena of politics and tagged along with my Dad when he had government business in New York, DC, Chicago....etc...etc.... I've met 3 Presidents personally, and so many Senators and Congressmen I've lost count.

Maybe you don't know what I mean by a "professional politico", so let me paint a picture first.... chances are they claim to be from a particular state... but the truth is they are more at home within the District of Columbia than Pope Benedict is at St. Peter's. If you attempt to be so presumptuous as to discuss politics with them, a pall drops over their face, they get this smirk and non-verbally say "Oh! How cute! This simpleton from a fly-over state is trying to talk about politics... isn't that just precious? I best nod and appear concerned, after all... it's a potential vote."

Of course, since they come from DC, they don't have the integrity to say it out loud, so they do their best to cover an overflowing sense of contempt and condescending arrogance. But only the true masters like Bill Clinton can accomplish this successfully without giving away the loathing within. For the record, Ken Salazar has a GREAT DEAL of learning to do in this arena. They will respond to you in answers learned by rote and entirely vented and politically correct. I've found one of the easiest ways to identify a "ProPol" is to measure just how glib and spontaneous these responses sound. In short, however, you will be talked down to for a period of 2.5 seconds through brilliant white teeth and an all-too-Cheshire like smile. For the most part, you walk away feeling embarrassed, very humbled, and a growing sense that maybe the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Carlyle Group, the Rockefellers or some other shadow government really DOES control Washington D.C. After all... why would someone like you - a fairly well read, informed, and passionate individual with a true love of American civics and history be so summarily dismissed as a "know-nothing."

Another dead giveaway of a ProPol is the impassionate, cold, and unflappable "businesslike" demeanor. Like David Gergan they don't seem to have a passion for one party or another, one ideology or another... they are a corporate cog whoring themselves out to their particular party out of convenience or career-path-of-greatest-potential. (see: Alec Newbery in "St. Elmo's Fire") To them, government is nothing more a chess game involving competing poll numbers, sound bites, and pawns called "voters." IT'S ALL calculations and mathematics... x-number of votes here, subtract y and multiply by pi divided by the number of likely voters.... gives you the outcome. Don't refer to Jefferson, Monroe, or Henry Clay unless it directly effects the equation. They're nothing more than old dead guys and only useful if repeating their quotes can attract a demographic voter bloc and gain you more pawns in your game.

I am left with the distinct impression that to their way of thinking:

A citizen is NOT important in any shape or form except that they can give you a vote, in which case they are called a "voter." "Voter" is actually Washingtonese for "ignorant pawn that is used to obtain victory."

"A citizen is not the basis of this country as Thomas Jefferson so naively dreamed. A citizen is an ignorant, malleable, foolish variable. If you believe that this is a country based upon the ingenuity, the passion, the imagination and hard work of free individuals, of citizens, then you best wake up, son! 'Cause you're deluded into thinking your opinion matters and your hard work is significant."

"Leave the governing to us, you're not qualified."

And this is from the REPUBLICAN ProPol's I've met!

So give me a moment in my frustration to point out the greatest flaws in the Republican Party of 2006 as I see them.
1. A party run by ProPols, not unlike those described above. Our leaders need to pay heed to Newt Gingrinch's passion for the individual American citizen. The value he (like Jefferson) placed in the "American" rather than one voter bloc or another.
2. Didn't ANYONE teach these supposedly learned men how to identify a fallacy in an argument, call it for what it is, and address the TURE issue at hand?

False Premise: "The Clinton impeachment was all about
sex, sex, sex." No, it was about sexual harassment, lying to a grand jury,
and obstruction of justice.
Ad hominem: "Bush mispronounces 'nuclear' and constantly speaks
malapropisms, so he's an idiot" No, many great men in history have been
brilliant, but poor public speakers
Appeal to Anonymous Authority: "Experts say Bush stole the 2000 election" No, actually the Washington Post concluded that Gore would only have won had one UNASKED FOR recount taken place. The four recount methods used ALL would have awarded the election to GW Bush in varying degrees.
Fallacy Of The Crucial Experiment: "There were no WMD's in Iraq." As I
have pointed out in a previous post, over 20 MIG fighters were found buried in
the Iraqi sand. There is NO proof that 35-gallon drums of VX or Sarin
chemicals are not similarly buried in the sand.
There are so many more examples... but since the GOP can't identify the most obvious, there seems to be little point in going further

3. Allowing the Democrats to frame the debate. A perfect example is the Valerie Plame "outing." Scooter Libby was a whistle blower - pointing out that Joe Wilson was terribly unqualified for the trip to Niger and only got that paid vacation through familial contacts. THAT is where the debate should have been. Instead, through their silence and "taking the bait" to discuss whether Valerie Plame was "outed" out of vengeance... they completely missed the debate that SHOULD have been discussed... Joe Wilson should never have gone on that trip in the first place. Another example? During the impeachment of Bubba Clinton Republicans allowed the phrase of the moment to be "high crimes and misdemeanors" as pushed by the Democrats. Did anyone ONCE mention "ethical"? What Clinton did was HIGHLY unethical! Prove the lack of ethics and you've proven a "misdemeanor." By not framing the discussion, the GOP was left with splitting hairs on legal definitions.
4. Hey, guys! It's the DEMOCRAT Party, NOT the DEMOCRATIC party. By letting THIS slip a few hundred times a day, you are allowing an Orwellian rewrite to subtly tell Americans that the Democrats are democratic... which is a laughable concept. Repeat something enough times... and soon people will associate the democratic elections in Iraq with the Democrats. Again, laughable.
5.The biggest difference between the Republican Party and the Democrat Party? Democrats place loyalty above ethics. Republicans have to look up the word "loyalty" in the dictionary. Don't believe me? The only reason Clinton wasn't convicted during the impeachment was that Democrats were willing to ignore the unethical actions and vote their loyalty over their morals. Loyalty on the side of the GOP? Ask Gingrich, Lott, Nunn, and now Delay. Most Republicans don't "eat their own" any more, they just cut them loose and let the sharks have 'em. McCain, however still eats other Republicans.
6. Doesn't ANYONE in the Republican Party remember the 11th Commandment?
7. Identify Democrat hypocrisy just ONCE! Please! John Kerry was a "war hero" and Bob Dole WASN'T? George Bush Sr. WASN'T? For 8 years the Dems praised a draft dodger as the 2nd coming (no pun intended) and then in 2004 "War Hero" meant something to them? I never ONCE heard this hypocrisy called out for what it was. Nor have I heard ONE Republican mention that those who are saying Judge Alito "should respect precedent" re: Roe v. Wade - are the SAME ones ignoring 200 years of precedent by even threatening a filibuster of a judicial nominee.
8. What's the difference between Zell Miller and John McCain? One is a moderate with integrity, strong convictions, and a backbone who speaks from his heart and the other is running for President in 2008
9. STOP prepping GW Bush before appearances! Just STOP it right now! When GW is speaking extemporaneously and off-the cuff, he mangles words and shows his emotions. This allows his true beliefs, candor, and passion to show forth, and is exactly why many of us voted for him! He is most effective when his words are his own and heartfelt. When he's prepped he looks stilted and uncomfortable. Didn't you guys learn ANYTHING from the first two 2004 debates????

With the Professional Politicos running the party, it's AMAZING we've kept the House, the Senate, The White House and the Governorships that we HAVE!

Are you now, or have you ever been ...

... a member of......
This singular phrase resonates echoes of Joseph McCarthy and undoubtedly, if you have even a smidgen of historical knowledge, you are waiting for the other shoe to drop... the rest of the sentence.... "... a member of the Communist Party?"

However, our favorite UBoat commander and drunken senior senator of Massachusetts, Teddy Kennedy has revamped the phrase to ".... a member of the Concerned Alumnus of Princeton?"

In over 4000 cases and over 300 opinions, the liberals can't find a SINGLE issue on which to hang a reasonable objection to Supreme Court Samuel Alito's confirmation.

And so, they go after a single sentence on a 25-year-old job application and a cursory membership to an Alumni group at Princeton. This would be acceptable liberal politics of mass distraction if Teddy hadn't tried to turn it into a bigotry based McCarthyesque witch-hunt by suggesting that:
A) One opinion piece in a C.A.P. newsletter reflected the opinions of the ENTIRE membership
and
B) Since this one article reflected ALL Concerned Alumnus of Princeton, it must reflect Judge Alito's position as well.

Once you learn your debating fallacies, it's not so difficult to read most Democrat demagoguery. This particular fallacy is two fold. 1) Guilt by association. and 2) False premise.

Guilt By Association: Because an individual is a member of a particular organization, it holds (by the fallacy) that the individual is comfortable or associates himself with ALL aspects of that organization. Teddy Kennedy, for example, is a strong supporter of the ACLU (as was Justice Ginsburg). The ACLU is now defending a group called NAMBLA. This is the "North American Man Boy Love Association" which advocates the legalizing of man-on-boy(down to age 12) sex and the legalization of what is currently considered child pornography. To follow Senator Kennedy's own logic, one must assume that as a supporter of the ACLU, Kennedy must also support man-boy sex.
False Premise: First false premise was that the quoted piece was CAP policy - IT WAS NOT! Actually, the entire article was satire (or "tounge-in-cheek" for those of you that went throught the California public school system). The CAP organization fought against quotas at Princeton. It did not fight against admitting women or minorities, only arguing that standards of entrance regarding grade-point averages, test scores, and class ratings shouldn't be lowered just to allow less qualified (but ethnically and gender-ly diverse) applicants an easier chance at entering Princeton. CAP had no problem with admitting more minorities and more women who qualified under the stringent educational standards... they just didn't want those educational standards lowered. This did NOT mean they were discriminatory against minorities... they just discriminated against those without high educational standards regardless of race, color, creed, or gender. The second false premise was that Judge Alito considered this as "standing policy" of CAP and joined to support those standards... WHICH IS EQUALLY UNTRUE!

Where the insinuations and allusions went over the line and became more McCarthyesque than even Senator Joe McCarthy would have gone was in that in the 25+ years since this ONE mention on ONE job application, Judge Alito has hundreds of opinions and written case law, thousands of co-workers, employees and judicial appointees that testify to his integrity and LACK of bigotry in ANY manner. Senator Kennedy ignored those THOUSANDS of pieces of evidentiary material and went for the smallest of notations as his basis for argument. He then took that imaginary ant hill and built it into a mountain RANGE of delusional and imaginary machinations to support his faulty assumption - Judge Alito is a bigot. Even Joe McCarthy never built so much accusation out of so little!

Once again, Senator Kennedy is "all wet" .... ummm .... so to speak

A VERY Happy 2006 to all!

I sang on Newsradio 850 KOA on New Year's eve and was asked what my wish would be for the new year. The only wish I can think of is for a return to civility! We all have differences of opinion, but can't we express them without the vicious, personal HATEfilled rhetoric?

I would like to be even handed and say both the left and right sides of the political aisle are responsible for the current vitriol in the public square.
I'd like to, but damn it, I can't!
I have yet to hear one Republican call Pilosi or any other Democrat a "liar", even though they certainly deserve the label!

And where did it start? If we can get into the pointing of fingers and say "He did it first".. who, exactly would have the last finger pointing at THEM?
How about....

"I'm thinking to myself, if we were in other countries, we would all right now
all of us together would go down to Washington and we would stone Henry Hyde to
death! We would stone him to death! We would stone Henry Hyde to death and we
would go to their homes and we'd kill their wives and their children. We would
kill their families."

Alec Baldwin (1998) on Conan O'Brian

I remember watching Conan that night. Baldwin was a man nearly foaming at the mouth... not smooth, comedic, nor satirical... he was fuming and Howard Dean-esque!
I'm not sure I've heard anything this vicious before OR since, but I certainly can't point to any Republican with such venom before this statement. Correct me, if you can.
So congratulations, Mr. Baldwin. The situation we are now in can be traced back to your evil, disgusting remarks. Why don't you just leave the country.. after all , George Bush IS the President!