Monday, July 28, 2008

Psychopaths are us?

Anyone who *orders* torture must have some degree of psychopathic personality disorder, at the least, especially in the knowledge that torture produces garbage "intelligence". Torture is fundamentally against any principles of civilized human conduct. Those who *execute* methods of torture would, of course, benefit from having a psychopathic kind of personality, but the consequences of disobeying orders is likely to be considered more important than any moral issues raised by torturing people; in the military, shit rolls downhill, (aka chain of command).

There are people in very senior positions in this administration who exhibit psychopathic traits. Furthermore, when many of the neoconservatives within (and associated with) the Bush Administration have a blatant track record of hatred and phobia towards arabs and muslims, and that a principle aim of the neoconservatives within this administration is to demonize the muslim community worldwide..... it's hardly surprising that torture would be part of their M.O. They probably even derive pleasure from the knowledge that they have the power and motivation to inflict great pain from the comfort of their offices and executive suites.

Monday, March 31, 2008

Fred Phelps and inverted Christianity...


Today, gays and lesbians protested outside the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka KS, bastion of the "Rev". Fred Phelps' agenda of bile and hatred spewing. Its amazingly odd that such bizarre interpretations of Christianity can gain mainstream traction...but I guess in Kansas, anything goes?

These hatemongers cherrypick the bible looking for whatever fits their preordained agenda, while ignoring the legion of material that contradicts, or is inconvenient. If these folk are so entangled with following Biblical dogma to the letter, then they should perhaps be demonstrating other such "abominations" such as working on the Sabbath, or eating shellfish etc. Why this medieval old Testament focus on gay and lesbian people, especially considering that Jesus himself never said anything against homosexuality?

Cherrypicking the most convenient or conclusion-friendly facts is the same method used by the 9/11 Commission regarding their fatally flawed "investigation" into the September 11, 2001 attacks, or the Bush Administration's methods when it came to justifying their preordained war against Iraq. The pre-selection of material that fits a pre-ordained conclusion, or agenda (while ignoring everything that doesn't fit) is the classic methodology of bad science. But since we live in times of a War Against Science™ on many fronts, such manipulation and distortions of reality are par for the course.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

McCain and the media vultures

I have no love for McCain, and I really dread the possibility of a "President McCain"... but this nascent media circus re. a "possible affair with a lobbyist" is as much BS as the other "sex scandal" that everyone was obsessing about 9 years ago. IF McCain had had an affair with a lobbyist, so fucking what? It's McCain's (alleged) business, his wife's business, and the lobbyist's (alleged) business, and nobody else's! When we get so bent out of shape regarding gossipy trivia, an indiscretion in the PRIVATE LIFE of a politician (and not even proven), while all the real gnarly stuff gets glossed over and ignored, things are in a really sad way.

Our nation's consciousness is a mess, and our priorities seem to be more ass backwards than ever before.

Thursday, February 07, 2008

Obama for "change"? Pull the other one!

"CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN.... STAND FOR CHANGE" .....

Amongst the current crop of front-running candidates, who is going to represent and support "change"? Obama talks part of the talk, and makes it appear on the surface as if he is for the people...(he's damned good at it, he is an excellent orator). However, if he prevails in November, he will not walk any of the walk (let alone half of it). He's 2 moves in front of the rest of us, and the muscle that will be assembled in an Obama White House are 5 moves in front of him.

There will be no change, apart from the spokesperson in the form of the CEO. It will remain business as usual. Another 4 years of the current "in pur faces" approach could result in civil unrest, and the most effective way of defusing that potential is to get behind a charismatic intelligent person with communication skills (albeit insincere ones), i.e. someone who can string a sentence together, to present a fresh, more velvet gloved approach to towards whatever kind of society that the powers-that-be would like to realize, or impose upon us.

Having said this about Obama... Clinton would be several degrees worse. I also believe that the majority of America isn't ready for a black person of any gender, or a woman of any race (sadly).

Hence my prediction that McCain will win in November, by fair means or foul.

Let's see.

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Election Observations....

There is no doubt about the Democratic Party's ability to select two candidates to run for president and vice president. However, can a nontraditional/unconventional team consisting of a white woman and a black man win the hearts of "middle America" over a traditional/conventional Republican pair; I have my doubts, unfortunately. I don't have a list of democratic "electables": any candidate which represents the base, or core values of the party (for example Dennis Kucinich), as opposed to "Republican-Lite", have been been ignored by the media, and thus been denied the publicity and face recognition required for any hope as a front-runner. The lion's share of the attention has been given to Clinton and Obama. Similarly on the the Republican side, the candidate closest to traditional values of the party, Ron Paul, has been actively shut out of the circus by the media.

The majority of the voting public are starved for the time to do the necessary reading/research into the strengths and weaknesses of the candidates. Had these two designated outsiders (Paul and Kucinich) been given the same degree of attention and publicity given by the media to the favorites (Romney/Huckabee/McCain Clinton/Obama), then maybe we would see their percentages up in a similar range? I guess we will never know, because the media will continue to ignore them. Why does the media ignore them?.... now that's a hard one to know, but I very much doubt that "merit" comes within several light years of being a parameter in that equation.......