Right Thinking From The Left Coast
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. - Albert Einstein

Monday, October 02, 2006

Drinking with Teenage Boys
by Lee

Drudge is reporting that Foley has entered rehab.

Painfully, the events that led to my resignation have crystalized recognition of my longstanding significant alcohol and emotional difficulties.

I strongly believe that I am an alcoholic and have accepted the need for immediate treatment for alcoholism and related behavioral problems.

On Saturday, with the loving support of my family and friends, I made arrangements to enter a renowned in-patient facility to address my disease and related issues.

I love that.  “And related issues.” Gee, could the issues “related” to his alcoholism involve his predilection for supple young boys and their slender, muscular bodies?

As Hollywood has shown us over the years, there is nothing you cannot blame on an addiction.  Mel Gibson goes on an anti-Jew rant?  Oh, it was the booze.  Foley tries to pick up teenage boys?  Oh, that was the booze, too.  Yeah, yeah, that’s it. I’m not a gay old pervert, no, I’m just a drunk.  Yeah, that’s the ticket, a drunk.  It was the booze who turned me into a homosexual pederast, yeah.

Posted by Lee on 10/02/06 at 08:01 AM in Decline of Western Civilization  • (2) TrackbacksPermalink

A Soft Green Glow
by Lee

As usual, it’s the environmentalist lunatics who are going to destroy the world.

ENVIRONMENTAL groups are setting back the fight against global warming with misguided and irrational objections to nuclear power, according to Britain’s leading thinker about the future.

Climate change will be the greatest of many significant challenges for humanity over the next century, and every tool available, including nuclear energy, will be needed to prevent it wrecking the planet, James Martin told The Times.

While the anti-nuclear campaign is well-intentioned, it fundamentally misunderstands the safety of the latest generation of reactors and threatens to hold back a technology that could be critical to the world’s future, he said.

The criticism of groups such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth by Dr Martin, a computer scientist and physicist, will be keenly felt as he is himself a prominent green who has spent much of his large IT and publishing fortune on research into global warming and environmental science.

Last year, he donated £60 million to the University of Oxford to found the James Martin Institute for Science and Civilisation, the first school of its kind dedicated to studying problems of the future such as climate change and emerging technologies.

Though nuclear power generates very low carbon emissions, most green lobby groups are opposed to it because of the problem of disposing of waste that remains radioactive for thousands of years, and the risks of an accident.

In The Meaning of the 21st Century, his new book published today, he names climate change as the greatest challenge currently facing humanity, and openly endorses nuclear power as part of the solution.

The “fourth-generation” nuclear plants that could be built now are profoundly different from older designs, with safety features that make meltdown impossible, low waste output, and fuel that is not suitable for bombs, Dr Martin said.

He is keen on the pebble bed reactor, an experimental South African and Chinese design, in which the fuel is incapable of melting. A prototype has been built in Beijing. “With the pebble bed reactor, the fuel is easily disposed of, and it can be divorced absolutely from the bomb industry,” he said.

But this is where the fatal flaw comes in.  He assumes that the environmentalists actually want cheap, clean energy.  They don’t.  That’s never been the goal of the environmentalist movement.  The treehuggers have always been about one thing—retarding human growth.  Environmentalism has always been used primarily as a justification for the general socialist idea that people should be restricted from living the best lives they can.  This is why America is so looked down upon in some circles.  We don’t believe in the idea of the common good, we believe in everyone living the best life they can make for themselves.  If that means buying a massive house and a Hummer and a speedboat so be it.  The environmentalist looks at those items as a waste of resources.  Why, 30 families could live inside that big house.  And think of the energy wasted on cooling it!  And the Hummer could be replaced with a bicycle, or public transportation.  And the speedboat?  What a complete extravagance.

The reason the Greens are so terrified of nuclear power is, in part, because of their irrational fear of anything with the word “nuclear” in it.  But it’s also because the idea of humans having enough clean, abundant energy to live the type of lifestyle they wish to live is absolutely abhorrent to them.

Posted by Lee on 10/02/06 at 07:45 AM in Left Wing Idiocy  • (4) TrackbacksPermalink

Sunday, October 01, 2006

Pallywood
by Lee

Make sure you watch this.

Make sure you send this link to all your liberal friends and coworkers who are convinced that the eeeeeeevil Joooooos are slaughtering the peaceful, fun-loving Palestinians.

Posted by Lee on 10/01/06 at 11:12 PM in The Religion of Peace™  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Doin’ tha Butt
by Lee

It looks like the Nation of Islam is about to go tits-up.

Minister Louis Farrakhan, ailing and in seclusion at his Michigan home, has ceded leadership of the Nation of Islam to an executive board while he recovers, saying the movement must prove that it “is more than the charisma, eloquence and personality” of one person.

But those who have watched the Nation evolve over decades believe that the organization - known as much for the dark suits and bow ties of its followers as for its doctrine of black supremacy - will falter without a dynamic figure like the minister in charge.

“When Farrakhan dies, my prediction is the movement will split,” said Lawrence Mamiya, a Vassar College professor and an expert on African-American religion. “I don’t think this movement can be governed by a board. It runs off the charismatic energy of one person.”

So, what’s wrong with the former calypso singer?

The 73-year-old Farrakhan wrote in a Sept. 11 letter to followers that he was anemic and 20 pounds lighter because of complications from an ulcer in the anal area.

An anal ulcer.  Can you think of a more appropriate disease for a rancid asshole like Farrakhan to be afflicted with?

Posted by Lee on 10/01/06 at 09:02 PM in Decline of Western Civilization  • (1) TrackbacksPermalink

Where You At?
by Lee

My governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, is seen by many in the right-wing blogosphere as the exemplar of everything that’s wrong with the Republican Party.  If only it wasn’t for recalcitrant turncoats like Arnie or Giuliani, we would have ideological purity, which would in turn bring about a new era of peace and prosperity.  In other words, it’s RINOs like Arnie who are the real problem, what with their refusal to denounce those evil fags and to declare stem cells the equivalent of a delivered, living human baby.

Arnie is essentially a conservative Democrat.  I don’t like everything he believes or does, but I think that when you’re in a state as liberal as this one, you’re never going to get anywhere if you come out as a fire-breathing religious right-winger.  The current race for governor therefore comes down to choosing between the moderate Democrat (Arnie) or the tax-rasing socialist (Angelides).

For conservatives outside of California, Arnie is a turncoat, a liberal betrayer of the Republican cause.  Here in California he’s an arch conservative.  Consider this campaign commercial put out by the California Democrats.

It’s strange how a little geography can change perspective so much.  This is the reason that I go to work and I’m considered the rabid right-winger, then I come home to the blog and I’m a Christ-hating leftie.  In both instances I’m expressing exactly the same views, the only thing that’s changed is the geography of the person making the evaluation.

Posted by Lee on 10/01/06 at 08:20 PM in Cullyforneah  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

D-Minus
by Lee

Let anyone think that things in Iraq were unable to be anticipated

On June 18, 2003, Jay Garner went to see Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to report on his brief tenure in Iraq as head of the postwar planning office. Throughout the invasion and the early days of the war, Garner, a retired Army lieutenant general, had struggled just to get his team into Iraq. Two days after he arrived, Rumsfeld called to tell him that L. Paul “Jerry” Bremer, a 61-year-old terrorism expert and protege of Henry A. Kissinger, would be coming over as the presidential envoy, effectively replacing Garner.

“We’ve made three tragic decisions,” Garner told Rumsfeld.

“Really?” Rumsfeld asked.

“Three terrible mistakes,” Garner said.

He cited the first two orders Bremer signed when he arrived, the first one banning as many as 50,000 members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party from government jobs and the second disbanding the Iraqi military. Now there were hundreds of thousands of disorganized, unemployed, armed Iraqis running around.

Third, Garner said, Bremer had summarily dismissed an interim Iraqi leadership group that had been eager to help the United States administer the country in the short term. “Jerry Bremer can’t be the face of the government to the Iraqi people. You’ve got to have an Iraqi face for the Iraqi people.”

Garner made his final point: “There’s still time to rectify this. There’s still time to turn it around.”

Rumsfeld looked at Garner for a moment with his take-no-prisoners gaze. “Well,” he said, “I don’t think there is anything we can do, because we are where we are.”

He thinks I’ve lost it, Garner thought. He thinks I’m absolutely wrong. Garner didn’t want it to sound like sour grapes, but facts were facts. “They’re all reversible,” Garner said again.

“We’re not going to go back,” Rumsfeld said emphatically.

Later that day, Garner went with Rumsfeld to the White House. But in a meeting with Bush, he made no mention of mistakes. Instead he regaled the president with stories from his time in Baghdad.

In an interview last December, I asked Garner if he had any regrets in not telling the president about his misgivings.

“You know, I don’t know if I had that moment to live over again, I don’t know if I’d do that or not. But if I had done that—and quite frankly, I mean, I wouldn’t have had a problem doing that—but in my thinking, the door’s closed. I mean, there’s nothing I can do to open this door again. And I think if I had said that to the president in front of Cheney and Condoleezza Rice and Rumsfeld in there, the president would have looked at them and they would have rolled their eyes back and he would have thought, ‘Boy, I wonder why we didn’t get rid of this guy sooner?’ “

“They didn’t see it coming,” Garner added. “As the troops said, they drank the Kool-Aid.”

Just in case you don’t get the reference, drinking the Kool-Aid is a reference to the 1978 Jonestown Massacre, where almost a thousand people, all members of a cult, drank poisoned Kool-Aid at the order of their beloved leader.  This is about the best example I can think of to describe the relationship of the Bush administration to the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld team.  Consider Steven Hadley:

Returning from a visit to Iraq, Robert D. Blackwill, the NSC’s top official for Iraq, was deeply disturbed by what he considered the inadequate number of troops on the ground there. He told Rice and Stephen J. Hadley, her deputy, that the NSC needed to do a military review.

“If we have a military strategy, I can’t identify it,” Hadley said. “I don’t know what’s worse—that they have one and won’t tell us or that they don’t have one.”

Rice had made it clear that her authority did not extend to Rumsfeld or the military, so Blackwill never forced the issue with her. Still, he wondered why the president never challenged the military. Why didn’t he say to Gen. John P. Abizaid at the end of one of his secure video briefings, “John, let’s have another of these on Thursday and what I really want from you is please explain to me, let’s take an hour and a half, your military strategy for victory.”

After Bush’s reelection, Hadley replaced Rice as national security adviser. He made an assessment of the problems from the first term.

“I give us a B-minus for policy development,” he told a colleague on Feb. 5, 2005, “and a D-minus for policy execution.”

In other words, they’re all talk and no action, exactly what pro-war critics of the administration (like me) have been saying for years.  They talk a good rhetorical game, but I have yet to see even the slightest evidence that they have any real desire to do what is necessary to win.

Posted by Lee on 10/01/06 at 08:05 PM in War on Terror/Axis of Evil  • (1) TrackbacksPermalink
Page 11 of 11 pages « First  <  9 10 11