gonzalo boye, spanish human rights lawyer and co-plaintiff filing torture and war crimes charges against the bush white house:
if they are innocent, they shouldn’t be afraid.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
Friday, March 20, 2009
... as enscribed in the year of our lord two-thousand-and-nine by the nimble penne of a most concerned defender of the fate of alle that is constitutional and deare to the heartes of alle patriotic natural-bourne citizens of this christian republic, he bearing witness from within the very crucible of justice itself:
* * * prologue * * *
lindsey had suggested the night before, “we’re the only ones standing between the attorneys for the government and the constitution,” and he had complete confidence we would acquit ourselves well. that turned out to be true.
* * * parte the first * * *
thursday, february 26, the elector suit in the state of indiana came up for a motions hearing.
counsel for the governor had filed a motion to dismiss on the basis of mootness (all statutory requirements had been completed, too late for remedy), lack of subject-matter jurisdiction (failure to state a claim upon which the court or governor could grant relief) and laches (slept on our rights by bringing the suit too late).
plaintiffs opposed the motion by suggesting the issues would never be moot and by invoking the exceptions to mootness, (1) the challenged action was too short in duration to fully litigate the issues and (2) there was a reasonable expectation the same complaint would result in the same action (capable of repetition yet evading review).
... let me state here that one thing you must always do is find a way to trap the opposition into either admitting your case, addressing issues in a way that leads to admission, or making allegations irrelevant to your case. then, you can take the gleanings from one case and apply it to another, until you get what you originally desired. it’s the best way.
you lead the opposition and the court one step at a time until you arrive where you wish to be.
my co-plaintiff arrived during the judge’s questioning of counsel, and the first thing he noticed was the judge’s reaction. it was clear that the issues before the judge were compelling, and that we had a much better case than expected.
when my turn came to speak, i immediately corrected counsel’s perception of our motives for bringing the suit, and i jumped all over his statement the electoral college arose in article II of the constitution. i directed him to the thought that whatever mechanism was put in place by the states could not deviate from the text of the constitution.
i proceeded to disassemble the rest of his arguments. i found myself drawing counsel into my argument by addressing him as, “esteemed counsel,” and referring to his statements as, “opinions.” this played a part later when counsel for the governor made another error in regard to the supremacy clause. i was gently chiding him for his errors.
both he and the judge found that amusing, as evidenced by their chuckles.
* * * parte the second * * *
... it appeared to both co-plaintiff and myself that the judge understood the form and substance of the “general election.” and, that’s the real issue in the elector suits. it’s to draw attention to the true substance of the election.
... whatever form and substance (mechanism) put in place by the states must be in agreement with the plain text, and that’s where the electoral college faces a question of unconstitutionality when it deviates from the text and intent.
the most important position anyone can take is to stand for the text and intent of the constitution.
in regard to the “natural born” question, i read from the law of nations, “the natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens,” and prefaced my remarks with the statement, “whatever the words, ‘natural born,’ mean, they must mean whatever they meant at the time the constitution was ratified.”
congress has no enumerated power to change the meaning of the words, “natural born,” just as they have no enumerated power to change the substance of “chusing of electors,” and neither do the states. that intrigued the judge.
... and, on that basis, i believe we won the judge’s heart and that of counsel. we may not prevail in our suit, but we’ve made the argument that needs to go forward in whatever case comes after. and, “oh, yes!” we told the judge up front that whatever decision he might make in regard to our suit, it would certainly not end the controversy.
... my co-plaintiff made that clear when he spoke near the end of the hearing and drew attention to our desire for trial.
he argued it would be in everyone’s best interest, including the court, the governor and the people, to face the issues now, discover the truth and move on. otherwise, there’s an unresolved controversy that will continue. my co-plaintiff balanced my passionate argument, in that, he brought a calm reasoning of explosive issues to the hearing.
* * * parte the third * * *
counsel for the governor responded at one point that pursuant to the supremacy clause, “congress was the proper forum to hear these issues, as the decisions of congress had supremacy over the governor of the state.”
when i had an opportunity to speak, i objected saying, “unlike esteemed counsel, i am not an attorney, nor a part of the attorney general’s office, neither am i a constitutional scholar, but my understanding of the supremacy clause was that ‘this’ constitution, and laws pursuant thereto, were the law of the land and supreme in every way.”
that drew chuckles from both counsel for the governor and the judge. it was very clear i was correct.
as the hearing ending, the judge thanked both counsel for the governor and plaintiffs for well-written briefs, outlining the issues, and indicated he appreciated the fact we were very well prepared for the hearing. he thanked us for our time and indicated he would review various statutes before making his decision. both tables thanked him.
... my co-plaintiff and i want to thank his friends for their support. we could not do it without them.
i wish to thank those who prayed. and, i wish to remind people it’s important that we continue praying for the judge. his eyes were opened, and i want very much to take these issues to trial. i cannot see how he can disagree with the united states supreme court, indiana supreme court, article ii or counsel for the governor.
* * * epilogue * * *
judge dismisses suit on obama’s citizenship
[march 16] a marion superior court judge today dismissed a lawsuit brought by two indiana men seeking to invalidate indiana’s election results based on president barack obama’s citizenship status.
at a hearing last month, attorneys representing gov. mitch daniels asked judge david dreyer to dismiss the lawsuit. filed in december, it is one of dozens across the country that have challenged obama’s eligibility to hold office based on his status as a “natural born citizen.” all have been unsuccessful.
... dreyer’s order today says the issue raised by the plaintiffs, steve ankeny, new castle, and bill kruse, roselawn, now is moot. it also says they have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and that they are barred from bringing the action under the legal doctrine of laches, which means the plaintiffs waited too long to assert a time-sensitive claim.
the suit said indiana’s 11 democratic electors weren’t properly chosen because daniels didn’t first verify the eligibility of obama or sen. john mccain, his republican opponent, to be president.
the indiana attorney general’s lawyers argued the suit should be tossed because the governor and the electors already had carried out their duties under election law. they said the u.s. congress would be the proper venue for a debate over how to verify the eligibility of candidates.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
his case was supposed to be their best shot, delivered by their nimblest and most decorated player. but alas, the mighty keyes has struck out.
... this lawsuit is moot as to issues concerning president obama. the court on this date is prepared to sustain demurrers to the petition without leave to amend.
but hey, considering that we're dealing with a bunch of delusional soreheads, i'd say it was a pretty good outing!
perennial also-ran alan keyes wanted to stop california secretary of state debra bowen and future secretaries from certifying the state's electors without verifying the eligibility of the candidates. thus far challengers to obama's eligibility have all failed to demonstrate legal standing, which is, ironically, one of the initial hurdles a plaintiff must clear to prove their own eligibility to sue. one element in particuler prevents every tom, dick and harry from suing every other tom, dick and harry:
prohibition of generalized grievances:
a plaintiff cannot sue if the injury is widely shared in an undifferentiated way with many people. for example, the general rule is that there is no federal taxpayer standing, as complaints about the spending of federal funds are too remote from the process of acquiring them. such grievances are ordinarily more appropriately addressed in the representative branches.
... an element specifically designed as a sandbag against exactly the kind of litigious tsunami the "birthers" would rain down upon the entire system:
if X is to be my president, then how can i not have standing to demand proof of elegibility?
i do not understand why each and every taxpayer/voter in the united states is denied “standing” by the supreme court
the american people should have standing in this matter. it is OUR CONSTITUTION AND OUR COUNTRY.
but as a rival candidate on the california ballot for the white house, keyes had the most uniquely arguable claim to sue. indeed, standing was never raised as an issue by either the defendants or the court. unfortunately for keyes, he neglected to bring with him a convincing argument. in his response to the defendants' motions to dismiss (herein called "demurrers"), judge michael kenny wholeheartedly agreed:
secty of state bowen's demurrer to the complaint (failure to state a cause of action): SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND
obama & biden's demurrer: SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND
... petitioners have not met their burden of demonstrating that the secretary of state has a clear or present ministerial duty to demand documentary proof that any future presidential candidate is qualified to serve as president of the united states. such a duty is not imposed by elections code section 12172.5 which provides that the secretary of state “shall see that state election laws are enforced.”
... the case is clearly moot. the secretary of state already placed the candidates’ names on the ballot, the election has already taken place, the electors were certified elected by the secretary of state, met and cast their votes, the governor certified those results and transmitted them to the president of the senate, and president obama and vice president biden have now been inaugurated and are engaged in the duties of their offices. it is too late for relief against the secretary of state and the california electors as to the 2008 general election. and as to any future election, the claims are not ripe. ...
... [to be "ripe", keyes' claims] must be framed with sufficient concreteness and immediacy to allow the court to render a conclusive and definitive judgment, rather than an advisory opinion based on hypothetical facts or speculative future events.
shorter judge kenny: there's no specific law or statute requiring bowen to vet obama's credentials, and it's too late anyway.
keyes thought he could serve a subpoena for obama's occidental college records, in hopes of unearthing obama's ever-elusive kenyan-indo-cuban-wtf human potluck connection, but ...
obama & biden's motion to quash subpoena for occidental college records: GRANTED
... the court further finds that the two categories of documents petitioners seek are vague, overbroad, and are of no relevance to this litigation. petitioners demand access to all of president obama’s “academic and housing records.” however, the relevance of such records is not established.
... petitioners’ argument that they could have sought even more documents is not persuasive ...
putting on my best vinny gambini accent: "well geez, yer honor, we just want half a loaf — just to show youse what reas'nable people we are!"
ding! ding! ding! now that's a winning argument.
the judge considered keyes' suit so fundamentally flawed that he's not willing to look at any attempts to polish this turd, hence his pointed and repeated punctuation of his dismissal with the phrase "without leave to amend".
the court is not persuaded that petitioners will be able to amend their first amended petition to state a cause of action against the secretary of state.
good news is there's no homework! class dismissed ... without leave. there will be no make-up exam.
birthers do have one thing they can take away from this ruling: they got a certifigate case decided on its merits, instead of being summarily disposed of — something they've been demanding more loudly with each dismissal. i guess this means we won't be hearing them whine about this any more, will we?
okay ... just kidding.
and now, an obligatory word from the uber-patriots at our favorite wingnut watering-hole. let the sweet symphony of gnashing, wailing and rending of garments begin ...
john mccain provided 14,000 pages of medical history, zero provided ONE doctor’s note of ONE paragraph on ONE visit that stated his BP was okay.
john mccain had to PROVE he was born on a U.S. military base to two natural born U.S. citizens, ZERO REFUSES to provide a $10.00 birth certificate! ZERO’S father made ZERO a foreign citizen!
ZERO was obviously FORCED to give up his LAW LICENSE!
ZERO HIDES all of his college records!
ZERO hides or DESTROYED ALL of his illinois senate records!
ZERO hides or destroyed ALL of his driving records prior to 1996!
ZERO HIDES ALL OF HIS PASSPORT RECORDS PRIOR TO BECOMING A U.S. SENATOR!
DOES SOMETHING STINK HERE? WHY WILL NO REPORTER LOOK INTO THIS CESSPOOL? WHERE IS OLD DAN RATHER NOW ON THE RIGHTS OF U.S. CITIZENS TO KNOW ABOUT THEIR PUBLIC OFFICIALS?
oh yes, there was definitely something vile stinking up the joint. and the judge just flushed it out of its misery! next ...
NO judge is going to hear this case...ever.
every despicable decision that pushes this controversy further and further under the rug of socialism is another nail in the coffin in which we are allowing the us constitution to be buried.
it is sad that the judiciary refuses to do its job, and continues to find ways to ensure that 0bama doesn’t have to answer to the people regarding his origins and his background.
that's not hyperbole or polemics, either. no regard for the rule of law is inherent in their worldview. the utterances of elite intellectuals are all that matters, not the writings of stodgy old white guys in history who obviously CAN'T know as much as the modern day elites.there will never be a democrat-appointed judge in this country that’ll rule against 0bama in any circumstance.
we are no longer one nation. the rule of law means nothing to libs.
waaah! they won't play by calvinball roolz!
dimmocrat librul activist judges are such stinkers, aren't they?
when the truth comes out, and it will, there will be hell to pay for our legislators for allowing this to occur. everyone of them should be brought up on charges for what they’ve have spinelessly have allowed to happen. who in the senate/congress is potentially using this info for their own self interest? because you know someone knows, and has probably made it known that they know. there is no more “we the people”, only us vs. them. useless courts, useless representatives and a nation dying on the vine before our very eyes.
brought up on charges? um, isn't that what these all lawsuits are about? oh that's right, i guess someone forgot to convict ... again!
the constitution is dead. god save our republic.
hey, i'll let you in on a little secret: i think the honorable judge kenny just did.
Monday, March 09, 2009
"design artwork for a shrinking album cover" by steven heller @ wired documents the lamentable demise of the 12" canvas once enjoyed by album art — real estate that now seems glorious compared to the 500x500 pixel graphic (at best) that accompanies most digital music these days:
in the late '80s and '90s, when the cd replaced vinyl as the format of choice, the new 5.5- by 5.5-inch jewel case was a far less luscious canvas.
... when the mp3 gained popularity in the late '90s, it seemed that the album — and its cover — would join the moldering 45s, 78s, and 8-tracks in the format graveyard. the first incarnation of napster made no accommodation for album art at all, and itunes shrank covers into dispiriting splotches.
... happily, technologies like cover flow, the visual navigation interface apple dropped into itunes in late 2006 — not to mention the iphone and ipod touch screens — have given album art some renewed prominence.
as heller notes, cover flow made me a bit happier if a bit more obsessive: of the nearly 5800 tracks on my ipod, comprising nearly 1160 albums, all but 2 albums have cover art, all of which i spent months hunting for, or scanning myself. the few tracks that never had any art to begin with got a picture of the artist. now if there were some way to rescue liner notes ...
a few favorites:
in the court of the crimson king, king crimson (1969)
unsettling and mesmerizing, by barry godber.
are you experienced?, jimi hendrix (1993 rerelease)
hendrix and crew beam-in from outer space. scifi-kedelic.
born to run, bruce springsteen (1975)
i had to reformat this one, including new titling. if there is a good reproduction of eric meola's full size gatefold cover on the net, i've yet to find it. it would be nice to find a decent print to scan, sans crease. update: finally — decent art found!
a million in prizes: the anthology, iggy pop (2005)
iggy looking like he was carved from granite.
aqualung, jethro tull (1971)
great drybrush technique, by burton silverman.
blues for allah, grateful dead (1975)
one of the dead's finest covers, by philip garris.
because the night, patti smith (single from the album easter, 1978)
rare cheesecake, by lynn goldsmith, for the high priestess of punk, who usually did everything she could to not look sexy. she usually succeeded.
Saturday, March 07, 2009
warning: the following report is an unexpurgated account of the unfortunate consequences of obama derangement syndrome when left untreated. don't let this happen to you!
united state district court
for the district of columbia
date: 03/05/09 case no.: 08-cv-2254-jr decedent: hollister v. soetoro et. al cause of death: improper procedure; neglect of life-saving procedures; multiple secondary wounds, self-inflicted verdict: accidental, but unable to rule out suicide
on december 29, 2008, the decedent was brought forward by attorneys john hemenway, philip berg and lawrence joyce seeking an interpleader action on behalf of retired ready reserve air force colonel gregory hollister. only hemenway was licensed to practice in d.c., but the others sought permission by filing a routine pro hac vice request.
attorneys argued that hollister, as "subject to presidential recall for the rest of his life", held an asset (his military duty) deliverable only to its lawful recipient, the president, who must demonstrate the legitimacy of his claim to the asset, in order to resolve perceived constitutional issues.
in short notice the decedent developed critical life-threatening complications. on february 4, 2009, decedent's heart, lungs and brains were evulsed:the decedent was then placed on life support pending a competency hearing for the attorneys.plaintiff’s motion to file interpleader and deposit funds with the court [#2] is frivolous and is denied. his motion to shorten time for defendants to respond to his complaint [#3] is moot and is denied.by this time, opposing counsel had already filed their motion to dismiss.the motions of his counsel [#4, #5] for the admission pro hac vice of philip j. berg and lawrence j. joyce are in abeyance until the court has had the opportunity, in open court, to examine their credentials, their competence, their good faith, and the factual and legal bases of the complaint they have signed.
ironically, the competency hearing represented the best chance not only for the victim's survival, but for its vindication. the hearing would allow the attorneys to argue the case on the merits. issues of standing that have abruptly terminated the progress every known prior case were suddenly set aside, if only for this one instance. presumably, this development was everything the attorneys (and their followers) had been waiting for. considering the direness of the situation, the worst possible outcome could have been turned into the best.
curiously, the attorneys never administered this critical life-saving procedure. no hearing was ever scheduled. no explanations have been forthcoming.
instead what followed were a series of further unnecessary injuries committed upon the decedent. one is reminded of the criminal malpractice that led to the death of president garfield following his attempted assassination. given the demonstrated skills of the attorneys, the decedent was probably doomed regardless.
instead of responding to the defendant's motion to dismiss, the attorneys refiled what can only be charitably called an amended version of the original complaint. in the judge's words:instead of the opposition plaintiff was ordered to file by 2/13/09 (or defendants' motion to dismiss would be granted as conceded, see [#10]), what plaintiff filed was (a) the affidavit of a paralegal (who works in the office of a pennsylvania lawyer who has not been admitted to practice in this court), complaining about her treatment by an employee of the clerk's office, and (b) many blank pages, decorated only by what appear to be botanical drawings and the illegible photocopy of an hawaiian certificate of live birth. (a) the affidavit was apparently intended as a response to my earlier observation that plaintiff's motion to file interpleader was frivolous, see [#2], [#10], the argument being, "maureen higgins made me do it." what was frivolous about the motion, however, was not the fact that it was filed, but the suggestion that "duties" could be filed in the registry of this court. (b) the blank pages were either somebody's idea of a joke (in which case i don't get it) or a mistake. if the latter, plaintiffs have until 5:00 pm est on 2/26/09 to correct it, by re-filing their points and authorities in opposition to the pending motion to dismiss (in the .pdf format required by the court's cm/edf system), or otherwise to show cause why that motion should not now be granted as conceded. it is so ordered.
the attorneys' response:translation: "hey, don't look at us, yer honor!"counsel for plaintiff would never file blank pages or attempt to play any type of a joke on this honorable court as counsel for plaintiff have too much respect for the judicial system.
twice more the attorneys attempted to submit their response, which continued to be plagued by, at the very least, technical issues. finally, the judge, after having twice extended their deadline to file, simply gave up:translation: "ok, ok! stop sending me this crap! i'll work with what i've got!"plaintiff's opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss [#13] was illegible on most of the court's computers, as was plaintiff's response to the court's order to show cause [#15], because plaintiff filed documents scanned with resolutions so fine that they overwhelmed the court's cm/ecf system. on the court's website, go to ecf filing pointers and then to attorney's checklist, for instructions. the court's order to show cause [#14] is discharged.
having thus successfully demonstrated their competence, the attorneys then filed on 03/02/09 a motion to vacate the competency hearing and henceforth grant berg and joyce permission to litigate sans hearing. because, after all, they've been trying, really really trying, so hard to follow procedure. translation: "ain't none o' this our fault, yer honor ... so, we cool, aight?"
the decedent never recovered from the initial injuries or the subsequent malpractice. the decedent was removed from life-support and declared dead on 03/05/09:from the judge's memorandum:for the reasons set forth in the following memorandum, the defendants' motion to dismiss [#9] is granted ...the judge rendered his own conclusions on the decedent and the attorneys' unorthodox prescriptions and procedures:this case, if it were allowed to proceed, would deserve mention in one of those books that seek to prove that the law is foolish or that america has too many lawyers with not enough to do. even in its relatively short life the case has excited the blogosphere and the conspiracy theorists. the right thing to do is to bring it to an early end.the judge then levied court costs and attorneys' fees and legal sanctions against the local counsel:mr. hollister is apparently mr. berg’s fallback brainstorm, essentially a straw plaintiff, one who could tee mr. berg’s native-born issue up for decision on a new theoryit appears mr. hemenway has been left holding the bag. in retrospect, attorneys berg and joyce may have been wise to postpone getting permission to practice in d.c..mr. berg and lawrence j. joyce, an attorney who lives in tucson, arizona, signed the complaint in this case. (they have been filing electronically although they have not been admitted pro hac vice, see [#10].) they are agents provocateurs –- and any attempt to sanction them for misuse of the public and private resources that have had to be devoted to this case would only give them a forum to continue their provocation.
john d. hemenway, on the other hand, is a member of the bar of this court. he may have been enlisted by messrs. berg and joyce as a foot soldier in their crusade, but he is nevertheless directly responsible to this court for the pleadings that have been filed on behalf of the plaintiff. because it appears that the complaint in this case may have been presented for an improper purpose such as to harass...
... the accompanying order of dismissal requires mr. hemenway to show cause why he has not violated rules 11(b)(1) and 11(b)(2) of the federal rules of civil procedure, and why he should not be required to pay reasonable attorneys fees and other expenses to counsel for the defendants.
perhaps those two are not quite so incompetent after all ...
what follows are statements from the bereaved. directions regarding where to send flowers and condolences are to be announced:FLOOD THE DOCKETS MY FELLOW PATRIOTS!!!!!!!!!it figures rat judge.ruh roh. sanctions for this attorney are unavoidable. disbarment isn’t out of the question. federal courts don’t play games.i wondered how long it would take for them to use rule 11, to go after the attorneys as a means of protecting barry.JUST WHO IN THE HELL DOES HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASK FOR PROOF THAT A PRESIDENT IS ACTUALLY A CITIZEN IF NOT THE US CITIZENS???????????????????it amazes me how judges, allegedly devoted to fair and just proceedings, just blow these cases out the door with no more basis than reading doonesbury.wow. what a surprise...not.it might be impossible to get the decision overturned but I’ll bet any sanctions could be successfully fought. the judge might have been a little too cute for his own goodthis 71-year-old judge has sipped the kool-aid and has decided to drop on bended knee to “The One.”hollister should consider signing onto orly’s lawsuit.
footnote: as tragic as the hollister case might appear, it is not the most severe incident of obama derangement syndrome ever documented. that singular honor belongs to roy v. obama. this filing is not for the rationally inclined. from the judge's dismissal:so if you should find yourself wondering whether the president is an illegal alien or a manchurian marxist, do yourself a favor. check yourself into a hospital — without delay. because ods kills.... utterly confusing, consists of illegible handwritten notations, and is incomprehensible.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
well, as everyone seems to be saying this week, that was quick, wasn't it?
but i'm not talking just about the apology. i'm talking about the whole transparent charade that the g.o.p. has been staging over the last month.
when michael steele proudly beat crypto-racist katon dawson after six contentious rounds of committee voting, conservatives heralded his victory as a bona fide statement that republicans were ready to "rebrand themselves" and reach out to the hearts and minds of voters outside the shrinking circle of old white men now composing the increasingly bitter rump of the party.
the georgetown university-trained lawyer and seasoned veteran of television talk shows is expected to become a highly visible spokesman for republicans. his moderate views and charisma could help the party combat the impression that it is insensitive to minorities, working people and those with divergent views on social and economic issues. he's also likely to bring more openness and diversity to the rnc.
in his victory speech, mr. steele promised something else that rank-and-file republicans are hungry for — election wins.
who knows if steele really believed his own pandering hip-hop hype, but he certainly believed he had new muscles to flex and new capital to spend, presumably bestowed upon him by the shiny new epaulets he'd just won. it was a belief brought abjectly to its knees just 31 days later.
even if the u.s.s. g.o.p. weren't already imploding on seemingly a dozen different decks, whatever's left is in no danger of being overrun by eager multiethnic recruits after steele's groveling performance. he'd bragged, just a day earlier, in front of millions of viewers, that he was the commander, and lord limbaugh showed him, just a day later, in front of millions of listeners, that the crew belonged to him, as it always did, and that steele was just another one of his cabin boys, a punk, a wayward prag.
yeah, that's the kind of ship i want to serve, where an ambitious cadet, from any background, can move up the ranks on his own merit — all the way up to cabin boy. where race truly no longer matters, because now anyone can work hard for a place in line servicing a loud, loathsome, bloated bigoted gasbag.
no, steele won't be winning over any new hearts or minds, which renders him useless, since that was the whole point of his election — expanding the party base. groveling eunuchs don't inspire enlistment, so his emasculation is complete. he didn't bring with him anybody who wasn't already on board and who hadn't already pledged their allegiance to lord limbaugh, who with the back of his hand, and with everyone watching, showed steele what steele had either forgotten or pretended wasn't true. now no one can pretend any longer.
in hemingway's "the short happy life of francis macomber" the title figure is pitied by his game guide as a "boy-man", after macomber succumbs to panic during a close call in the field, then loses his wife to the guide. but when macomber helps kill two buffalo the next day, he gains a measure of manhood, enough to stand up to his contemptuous wife:
... some of them stay little boys so long, wilson thought. sometimes all their lives. their figures stay boyish when they're fifty. the great american boy-men. damned strange people. but he liked this macomber now. damned strange fellow. probably meant the end of cuckoldry too. well, that would be a damned good thing. damned good thing. beggar had probably been afraid all his life. don't know what started it. but over now. hadn't had time to be afraid with the buff. that and being angry too. motor car too. motor cars made it familiar. be a damn fire eater now.
however, macomber's newfound "happy life" is cut short when his wife shoots him as a buffalo charges — and not quite by accident, the guide suspects.
the weekend drama "the short happy life of chairman steele" illustrates a sad reversal: the title figure gains a measure of manhood after a close contest. he succumbs to over-confidence and publicly insults his contemptuous patron. a swift edifying bitchslap forces him to publicly renounce his pretend manhood and affirm his cabin boyhood. thus ends steele's "happy life".
lord limbaugh's bitchslap educated steele at a time when the world's most famous and most popular non-white leader is exercising, in stark contrast, not pretend power, but real, far-reaching power, not only over his own party but also keenly felt by his rivals, who are desperately trying to pretend that their own "magic negro" is just as good. even now, nancy pelosi, the first female house speaker, is batting away divisive rumors that she herself is wielding too much power of her own.
so, really, which ship would you rather sign up with?
the one looking for just a few good "boys" ... ?
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
josh marshall @ talking points memo:
dems gloat after rush awards himself sole custody of steele's testicles.
i'm loving michael steele.
i mean, i'm not sure how else to put it. this guy has to be about the worst, most embarrassing party chair we've seen in recent memory. it's embarrassing enough that steele is like, what? ... the third republican to criticize rush and then make it less than 36 hours before being forced to undergo the 21st century republican version of a maoist self-criticism session. it's sad for the republican party that no one can criticize rush without having to be hauled out for this sort of humiliation a day or so later. but for steele not to have realized that or not to have been sufficiently in control of his mouth to avoid saying this just shows once again that this dude is really, really not ready for prime time.
digby @ hullaballoo:
but [limbaugh] is, as some of us have been pointing for years, the true leader of the republican party and we were told that he was a harmless, mainstream entertainer and we should all just lighten up, even as luminaries of the republican party and the luminaries of the conservative movement bowed and scraped like abused streetwalkers at the feet of their violent pimp. they defended his comments about abu ghraib, fergawdsake. he can literally do no wrong.
andrew sullivan @ the atlantic:
comrade steele dutifully apologizes to the great leader and offer his regrets to his fellow comrades in the movement. re-education camp will follow shortly. this climb-down marks the end of establishment republican resistance to the poujadist pontificator. it’s rush’s party now. so why shouldn’t he run for president in 2012? make palin his veep — and be done with it.
dnc chairman tim kaine:
chairman steele’s reversal this evening and his apology to limbaugh proves the unfortunate point that limbaugh is the leading force behind the republican party, its politics and its obstruction of president obama’s agenda in washington.
white house press secretary robert gibbs:
i was a little surprised at the speed in which mr. steele, the head of the RNC, apologized to the head of the republican party.
mark silva @ the chicago tribune:
the democrats are laughing all the way to the blood-sport bank.
dittohead central @ free republic:
... this makes steele even look weaker. we need someone with cojones to lead the RNC, not a backstabber like steele. he had no business going on hugley’s CNN show ...
next time you go on a talk show or news program and another “brotha” tries to turn you against limbaugh...i want to hear you scream from the mountain tops, that limbaugh is a force to be reckoned with and is right 98.8% of the time.
to see the way the CNN host was manipulating steele so easy was just horrible. hughley heaps praise on him and speaks about his new level of respect for steele. steele's response was a pie eyed nod in agreement. hughley could have had him agreeing to recreational drug use in the whitehouse if he wanted.
unless blacks start seeing themselves as men, and not blacks, then nothing will change.
michael steele is the one that took the bait and helped the democrats with this whole thing. they have been baiting for weeks now..surely steele is not that clueless.
wow! that inspires confidence.i went back at that tape and i realized words that i said weren’t what i was thinking
one of those things? happens to everybody all the time, huh? sure, malapropisms, a lapsus linguae now and then, but no, no one says "bite me" when they mean to say "i love you."one of those things where i thinking i was saying one thing, and it came out differently
hey a-hole: you're the chairman of the republican national committee. you can't afford to be "maybe a little bit inarticulate." you know, don't you, that media whores from CNN to CNBC to god knows where are quoting you and using your "little bit inarticulate" stupidity to hang racism around your party's neck? you do know that, right?i was maybe a little bit inarticulate.
why are we cursed with dumb f*ckwads for "leaders." i give up.
nothing says you’re sorry like, “i resign”.
rush had his “A game” today, but is still man enough and smart enough to accept the apology from steele.
i left the GOP today and i’ll be damned if i go back. i’ve had it. perhaps one day with god’s grace the grand old party will learn how to treat conservatives who fight the hardest, vote in droves and give freely pf time, talent and cold hard cash.
Monday, March 02, 2009
white house chief of staff rahm emanuel shoots ... and scores!
(okay ... i'll admit it, this one was a gimmie, big time.)
rnc chairman michael steele, yesterday:
hughley: you know what we do, we talk like we’re talking now. you have your view. i have mine. we don’t need incendiary rhetoric. steele: exactly. hughley: like rush limbaugh, who is the de facto leader of the republican party. steele: no, he’s not.... i’m the de facto leader of the republican party. hughley: you know what? i can appreciate that. but no one will actually decry down some of the things he says. [ ... ] steele: ... let’s put it into context here. rush limbaugh is an entertainer. rush limbaugh, his whole thing is entertainment. yes, it’s incendiary. yes, it’s ugly.
schieffer: we talked about newt gingrich a lot this morning and now you bring up rush limbaugh. who do you think now speaks for the republican party? emanuel: you just named him: it is rush limbaugh. he has laid out his vision, in my view. and he said it clearly. ... and whenever a republican criticizes him, they have to run back and apologize to him and say they were misunderstood. he is the voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the republican party.
so i am an entertainer and i have 20 million listeners because of my great song and dance routine ... michael steele, you are head of the republican national committee. you are not head of the republican party. tens of millions of conservatives and republicans have nothing to do with the republican national committee ... and when you call them asking for money, they hang up on you!
my intent was not to go after rush — i have enormous respect for rush limbaugh ... i was maybe a little bit inarticulate. ... there was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership.
... i went back at that tape and i realized words that i said weren't what i was thinking ... it was one of those things where i thinking i was saying one thing, and it came out differently. what i was trying to say was a lot of people ... want to make rush the scapegoat, the bogeyman, and he's not.
bobby jindal's presidential aspirations may have hit a particularly painful and publicized-all-too-well speed bump with his loudly-ridiculed response to obama's address to congress, but the news cycle is moving on and conservatives thankfully enjoy such therapeutically short memories — as illustrated by this weekend's conservative political action conference (cpac) presidential straw poll:
- mitt romney 20%
- bobby jindal 14%
- sarah palin, ron paul 13% each
- newt gingrich 10%
- undecided 9%
- mike huckabee 7%
- mark sanford 4%
- rudy guiliani 3%
- tim pawlenty 2%
- charlie crist 1%
with the campaign rhetoric for 2012 kicking into gear, the nomination still looks within jindal's reach, especially with rush limbaugh lionizing him as the second coming of conservative demi-god ronald reagan:
i'm going to give you a name that would make me jump for joy — bobby jindal. i did an interview with bobby jindal. he is the next ronald reagan if he does not change.
continuing to stake out his territory as conservatives' alpha-demagogue, limbaugh pissed all over any fellow wingnuts daring to nay-say the golden child:
i love bobby jindal, and that did not change after last night ...
... people on our side are really making a mistake if they go after bobby jindal on the basis of style. because if you think — people on our side i’m talking to you — those of you who think jindal was horrible, you think — in fact, i don’t ever want to hear from you ever again. ... i’ve spoken to him numerous times, he’s brilliant. he’s the real deal.
conservatives are hoping jindal's speech will remain nothing more than a fading nightmare ... that is, as long as they can help a particularly patriotic and usurper-hating wing of the movement ignore his opening paean to the ineligible one:
regardless of party, all americans are moved by the president's personal story — the son of an american mother and a kenyan father, who grew up to become leader of the free world. like the president's father, my own parents came to this country from a distant land. when they arrived in baton rouge, my mother was already 4½ months pregnant. i was what folks in the insurance industry now call a "pre-existing condition."
it's bad enough suggesting that everybody should get all verklempt over superboy's origin story, but ... telling the world that the next great champion for a conservative renaissance is ... (gasp!) an anchor baby?!!?
welcome to bizarro world, america!
for many certifigaters the issues of documentation or place of birth are but tangents. to borrow shakespeare: "his pop's the thing, wherein we'll catch the conscience of the king". they've twisted their knickers into gordian jockstraps over the horrifying fact that obama's father was not a citizen. many insist that his mother was too young to confer citizenship to her son, or better yet, that she renounced her citizenship by marrying his father. ultimately, birthplace is irrelevant:
everyone should understand and KNOW the answer to the question of what country is the country of which obama was a natural born citizen. It is IMPOSSIBLE for barry obama, barry soetoro, or barack hussein obama junior, to be a natural born united states citizen. he can NOT POSSIBLY be a "natural born citizen" of the US because his father, barack hussein obama senior, was a citizen of UK and/or kenya. barcak hussein obama junior could be a natural born british citizen or a natural born kenyan citizen. there is NO possible way barack hussein obama junior could be a natural born US citizen; because, at the time of barack hussein obama junior was born, his father, barack hussein obama senior was a british and/or kenyan citizen. whether barack hussein obama junior was born in hawaii, kenya, or the moon, is irrelevant.
so what about bobby, who proudly boasts of having neither parent as a citizen at the time of his birth? the issue was recently posed in what turned out to be an uncharacteristically short thread at our favorite hardcore wingnut blog and certifigater watering hole. and i'm shocked, i tell you, just shocked at the level of disinterest in the question:
not a natural-citizen, according to the birthers.jindal/palin
jindal was born in baton rouge
... the allegation is also that That One was born abroad. jindal was definitely born within US territory.
of foreign-born parents. hey, it's not my theory. but the birthers are going on and on about obama not being a natural born citizen because his father was kenyan.
there is proof of his birth and residency here. all that was hashed out when he first ran for governor in 2003. then again in 2007. the louisiana democratic party is real nasty.
the problem with zer0 is that he will not provide the real proof and that alone was what keeps the issue alive.
apparently, jindal's parents could've been born on krypton — and it won't matter as long as he's being reeled out as the conservatives' last lifeline to political relevancy.
certifigaters also accuse the usurper of identity fraud, referring to him derisively, as illustrated above, by his stepfather's surname as "barry soetoro" or his mother's maiden name "barry dunham" and other "aliases". perennial also-ran alan keyes, for one, has filed a subpoena for obama's college records, which he claims will prove that:
- obama attended school as a foreign exchange student and
- obama was an indonesian citizen and
- obama was registered under his "alias" soetoro
thank god piyush — oops, i meant "bobby" — doesn't have issues as bizarre as this simmering on the back burner for jindal-deranged moonbats to make a stink of ...
so here's to the next great conservative hero:
inspired by my friend margie's facebook note "25 formative life-changing albums". click images to enlarge. dates are release dates.
peter and the wolf (1957)
the version currently on my ipod is by leonard bernstein and the ny philharmonic.
the three little pigs: favorite children stories (1961)
mother goose favorites (1965)
sesame street original cast record (1970)
the amazing spider-man: a rockomic! (1972) — now this was awesome!
some stuff from my parents' collection that in some part made it onto the ipod:
whipped cream and other delights (1965)
"whipped cream" and "a taste of honey" were the big hits but the masterpiece is the criminally short (1:32) "green peppers".
the best of sam cooke (1962)
four tops: second album (1965)
temptations: gettin' ready (1966)
jackson 5: abc (1970)
note: they also owned a (relatively) sizable collection of popular classical recordings that i don't remember hearing them play, many of which nonetheless made it to the ipod.