Ruh-roh!
Strange things are in the skies over our pointy little heads for Halloween night, and I wonder what it all portends. For example, we have the generally beneficent aspect known as ye Trine, which is when two planets are four signs apart separated by nine degrees or less. In this case, Mars in Scorpio is in Trine with Uranus in Pisces in an almost perfect trine. This is augmented by a sextile involving Mars with Saturn in Virgo, which hints that the night of smooth sailing offers potential for great possibilities, if we only know how to patiently and determinedly reach for it. Of course, there is an inherent problem here with Uranus in opposition to Saturn, but this as well heralds the potential to tap into great reserves of power.
So far so good, but then we are hit with the aspect of Jupiter sextile to both Mars and Uranus and trine with Saturn. This makes a good aspect even better. But of course, no night is not without its share of potential problems.
This brings us to the influence of Neptune, which is squared Mars, warning of the potential for deceit and manipulation, especially when paired with the trine Neptune will enjoy with Mercury which is at the 22nd degree of Libra, which is-yikes-from where it had just started to go retrograde during our last reading, during Mabon. A perusal of the news of that day might be in order, as well as the news of events that might have occurred during the sixth-seventh of this month (when the Sun came into inferior conjunction with retrograde Mercury).
More important than the national news, this might be a time to reflect on the personal events of ones own life during these periods, in addition to the period from around the 14th through the 18th. What of importance has been relevant to your life during these periods on a consistent basis? It could all congeal tonight into an answer of personal importance.
One other aspect to take special note of is that of Venus which at fourteen degrees in Sagittarius is in conjunction with the lunar node. This might be the night to meet a new love, or to become reacquainted with one from the past. However, since there are no other aspects to this pairing, it might not be apparent at first.
The Sun, at roughly seven degrees of Scorpio, stands alone, as does the Moon as it traverse the first twelve or so degrees of Sagittarius, drawing to a close conjunction with Venus’s node enchantment by about midnight on Halloween.
When the Sun god dies this year, he dies alone, apparently, though the Goddess watches his departure and urges him gently on from afar, while Pluto also stands alone in wait to greet him, only to herald and hasten his return to the land of the living at the onset of Yule.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Drinks For Halloween And/Or Samhain
It's hard to come up with the perfect Halloween drink, or one for Samhain for that matter, but it's especially difficult to come up with one that might be appropriate for either one, or both. I think I might have hit on a couple of ideas that might do the trick as well as the treat.
Strega, known in America simply as "The Witch" is good as a dessert drink in it's own right. Add it to taste to a mug of steaming hot coffee and you can't go wrong. Flavored with numerous aromatic herbs and spices, it's a witches brew of great power.
Add it to coffee and you have "Witch's Coffee" or, as it is known in some circles "The Kennedy Assassin". The poster to the left, by the way, is an old Strega poster from the fifties, a collector's item among aficionados
Another coffee drink of note is the Monkarita, made up of a delicious and wildly popular regional coffee liquor from Kansas known as The Evil Monk. Named after Rasputin, it is made of a secret recipe inspired by the classic Black Russian drink. Unfortunately, being a regional product it is only availiable in Kansas and parts of Missouri, so in order to appreciate the full effects of this drink, you might have to make some adapatations should you decide to make-
The Monkarita
One part Evil Monk
One part Cherry Vanilla Coke
Drink from a Margarita glass (or any other kind, for that matter) after lining the rim of the glass with sugar and cinnamon.
Advisory-The Evil Monk advertises itself as having more caffeine and potency than Red Bull Energy Drink, so as you can see, this would be the perfect accompaniment to a night of Halloween hi-jinks, or would provide sufficient energy for a coven ritual gathering for Samhain.
In the unfortunate event that The Evil Monk is not available to you, substitute Kahlua Coffee Liqueur, and add just a dash of flavored vodka. Or, just enjoy Kahlua for its own special character.
Naturally, no Halloween list of drinks would be complete without the mention of chocolate. Luckily, there are many chocolate liqueurs available. This, or an anise based licqueur, such as Ouzo or Anissette, would also do well mixed with coffee.
This Year's Halloween Joke
This guy decided he was going to the neighborhood Halloween costume party, and worked hard at assembling the various items he would need to win the "Halloween Costume Prize".
Finding a can of black shoe polish, he set it off to the side as he sucked on one lemon after another, until his lips were swollen to more than twice their normal size. He then applied the black shoe polish until his face was black as pitch.
He then found some white greasepaint and applied it around his eyes and lips. He then applied red lipstick to his swollen lips. He then picked up an old raggedy banjo he found at a flea market and headed to the contest, dressed in his baggy pants with a rope tied around the waist and an old worn out pair of tap-dancing shoes.
He knocked on the door and, when the door opened, he started strumming the banjo and, to the horror of the party's host at the door, he began tap dancing.
"What in the hell are you doing?" the man asked. "Are you trying to be a smart-ass or something?"
"Why, Nawssuh," the young gentlemen replied with a broad grin. "I'sa jess lookin fer my friend Razmus. We's a' spose to go get us some watermelons to have for dee-sert after our fried-chicken and chitlins dinner."
A crowd gathered at the door, trying to get a peek at the commotion, but the doorkeeper motioned them away.
"Young man, I don't know what you're trying to prove, but we don't tolerate racist stereotypes at this party. I'm going to have to ask you to kindly leave, or I will call the police."
Dejectedly, the young man turned and walked away as the door-keeper and host of the party shut the door in obvious disgust, only to turn to meet the questioning gaze of his wife.
"What was that all about?" she asked. "Who was that?"
"Oh, it was just some smart-ass racist kid dressed as a racist stereotype," he replied.
"What was he dressed as?"
"A socialist."
Monday, October 27, 2008
Vincent Price's Halloween Special
This Saturday Night Live sketch is a hilarious send-up of television holiday specials. In this one, the ghost of Vincent Price hosts a Halloween Special with "guest stars" the ghosts of James Mason (played by guest-host John Hamm), Gloria Swanson, and Liberace. One of the funniest skits I've seen in a long time.
Possum Kingdom
"I promise you I will treat you well
My sweet angel
So help me Jesus"
What better way to start off this years Halloween/Samhain season than with a kick-ass song about a psycho-sexual serial killer.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA
My sweet angel
So help me Jesus"
What better way to start off this years Halloween/Samhain season than with a kick-ass song about a psycho-sexual serial killer.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA
Friday, October 24, 2008
Anne Pressly, Little Rock News Anchor Beaten, Near Death
UPDATE-Anne Pressly has died of her attacks, after a brief period of seeming recovery. The swelling in her brain had gone down considerably, which the doctor's took as an encouraging sign. Her pain medication was lowered, but unfortunately, she never regained consciousness or communicated with anyone. Obviously, she was unable to identify her attacker, who the police suspects was a burglar. There is evidence that whoever the perpetrator was used her credit card Monday at a gas station a few miles from her home.
The following is taken from the KATV news website. Pressly was a popular local morning news anchor for the station, and recently had a small role in the recently released Oliver Stone film W, in which she portrayed conservative pundit Anne Coulter.
Little Rock - A Little Rock police spokeswoman says detectives still haven't been able to speak with a television anchorwoman critically injured in an attack earlier this week.
Sgt. Cassandra Davis says Anne Pressly's medical condition still stops investigators from asking who attacked her and what happened at her home. Pressly's mother found her daughter battered and bleeding early Monday morning in bed at her home.
Davis says investigators have "no idea when we'll be able to talk to her."
Davis says detectives continue to search for the blunt object used to beat Pressly, 26, around her head and upper body. The sergeant wouldn't say what evidence officers recovered from Pressly's home or searches of her neighborhood near the Little Rock Country Club.
Could be any number of things. A tire iron, baseball bat, hammer, or even a pistol. One thing is for sure, whoever did this wanted to make sure that Pressly was either incapacitated, dead, or disfigured, or any combination thereof. Since everyone who knows her insists that she had no enemies, nor so far as any of them know, any stalkers, it could just be a simple matter of an amateur burglary that got out of hand.
It seems unlikely to have a connection to the movie, although her status as something of a celebrity in the area, and the fact that she lived alone, might have made her something of a target.
I also doubt there is any connections to any news stories she worked on, as she basically just reported the news, which in her case for the most part consisted of restaurants and events, and other kinds of human interest stories. In the picture above, she is seen with a co-worker and wrestling legend Ric Flair.
She did however interview Dick Cheney after meeting him by happenstance, as described here, from the station's website profile page.
Anne Pressly has had more job titles than she can count at KATV, but the one she loves most is Reporter. In her years at Channel Seven, Anne has covered everything from former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee’s run for the White House to Toad Suck Daze in Conway. She has traveled to farthest corners of the Natural State, and has interviewed such notables as Bill Clinton, Maya Angelou, and Alberto Gonzalez.
One of her most memorable interviews happened by chance. On the return trip from a news story in Humphrey, Arkansas, the highway was blocked in front of waterfowl outfitter Mack’s Prairie Wings in Stuttgart. Turns out, Vice President Dick Cheney was inside shopping. He allowed Anne to interview him while he was on the ammo aisle. Cheney told Channel Seven he loves Arkansas. Not as much as Anne does.
Naturally, there is speculation that this might be a hate crime connected to her movie role and, while that seems unlikely and even far-fetched, it does seem strange that it has received little notice in the national press. That hasn't stopped some on the left from speculating that it might be a right-winger angered at her appearance in an alegedly anti-Bush film, nor has it discouraged some on the right from theorizing that it might be a leftist wanting to lash out at a symbol of the despised Coulter.
Neither would seem to make much sense, but on the other hand, neither does the assault, for whatever reason it occurred.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Electoral Magical Mischief III-Obamabot Temper Tantrum
I have to thank Mr. Beamish of The Crank Files for this beauty. A pretty accurate depiction of an Obamabot. Do you really want these people to have their way? If not, send this video to everybody you know, and just remind them how much fun it will be to listen to them whine like this if Obama loses.
No ritual required, in fact it might be superfluous.
No ritual required, in fact it might be superfluous.
Bonewitz Banishing Magic-Censorship And Making Money Disappear (From Your Wallet To Theirs)
Due possibly to some complaints from the predominantly leftist pagan blogosphere, or maybe just because he can, Isaac Bonewitz has censored my last two comments from his blog, both here and here. In the last case, he left his own reply to my previous comments, where he says-
They don’t mind if they purge some of their own, as long as most of the folks they purge were likely to vote Democratic.
This was his response to my statement that, since according to him the election officials were supposedly planning on purging Democratic voters from the roles, and since I myself am a registered Democrat, I should call and let them know ahead of time that I intend to vote McCain-Palin, as it would be most ironic were they to purge me from the rolls.
In the meantime, Bonewitz is spreading the malicious rumors of a widespread racist assassination plot against Obama, and urges all the little leftist pagans to cast protection spells. Actually, I think I'll have to pass, as I'm too busy these days casting protective spells against the sexist and unfair attacks aimed at Sarah Palin and her family, which many of them and others have engaged in with such vicious glee since the Republican convention.
In his latest post here, he is heading off to Amsterdam and, as usual, asks for contributions for his trip. For such a successful witch this guy sure does seem to have a hard time making it. I guess you could call him and Phaedra the Jim and Tammy Faye Baker of Paganism.
At any rate, it seems the crux of Bonewitz spell-casting abilities revolves around censoring dissenting voices on his blog, and bumming money. I think I'll follow suit by excluding him from my new blog roll. Nothing much there anyway.
If you need a reminder of what it is he felt (or maybe was convinced by others) should be censored, here it is reproduced and expanded on in an earlier post from this blog.
No cussing, though admittedly somewhat of a smart-ass response to what was, after all, a silly post to begin with. Typical leftist attitude, and just a small example of what we'll have to contend with if the Democratic Party wins this election. Censor dissent while hypocritically ranting about freedom and democracy, and in the meantime try to get your hands in peoples wallets any way you can.
They don’t mind if they purge some of their own, as long as most of the folks they purge were likely to vote Democratic.
This was his response to my statement that, since according to him the election officials were supposedly planning on purging Democratic voters from the roles, and since I myself am a registered Democrat, I should call and let them know ahead of time that I intend to vote McCain-Palin, as it would be most ironic were they to purge me from the rolls.
In the meantime, Bonewitz is spreading the malicious rumors of a widespread racist assassination plot against Obama, and urges all the little leftist pagans to cast protection spells. Actually, I think I'll have to pass, as I'm too busy these days casting protective spells against the sexist and unfair attacks aimed at Sarah Palin and her family, which many of them and others have engaged in with such vicious glee since the Republican convention.
In his latest post here, he is heading off to Amsterdam and, as usual, asks for contributions for his trip. For such a successful witch this guy sure does seem to have a hard time making it. I guess you could call him and Phaedra the Jim and Tammy Faye Baker of Paganism.
At any rate, it seems the crux of Bonewitz spell-casting abilities revolves around censoring dissenting voices on his blog, and bumming money. I think I'll follow suit by excluding him from my new blog roll. Nothing much there anyway.
If you need a reminder of what it is he felt (or maybe was convinced by others) should be censored, here it is reproduced and expanded on in an earlier post from this blog.
No cussing, though admittedly somewhat of a smart-ass response to what was, after all, a silly post to begin with. Typical leftist attitude, and just a small example of what we'll have to contend with if the Democratic Party wins this election. Censor dissent while hypocritically ranting about freedom and democracy, and in the meantime try to get your hands in peoples wallets any way you can.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Alec Baldwin Answers Criticism From His Fans
I was a little wary about Sara Palin's appearance on Saturday Night Live, and honestly, I think it helped their ratings more than it helped her or the McCain-Palin campaign. She was just okay, nothing spectacular, but the main thing that struck me was the lack of interaction between her and Tina Fey. I could not help but think, here are two people that don't really like each other.
The Weekend Update Skit with Amy Poehler doing a rap that Sarah supposedly refused to do was standout hilarious. Of course Sarah Palin probably is not suited for rap, which is a very complicated skill. Even if she had the talent, she would not have had the time to learn and rehearse the verses. That's too bad, because it was a bad ass routine. The bit with the moose dancing and then falling to the sound of gunshots was especially hilarious. Overall, Amy Poehler has a career in rap if she wants one. She was that good.
Perhaps the most amusing part of the show, however, occurred off-camera in liberal homes across America, later played out on the pages of the Huffington Post. Alec Baldwin's fans were angered at Baldwin, a noted and outspoken liberal, for appearing with Palin. Leave it to the left to resent someone actually humanizing someone they disagree with, as opposed to demonizing them.
I don't like his politics, but both the left and the right could learn something from the gentlemanly behavior of ALec Baldwin, who in response to the criticism from a large segment of his and the SNL fan base, published this post in the Huffington Post where he pretty much called them out for their juvenile attitudes.
You might as well face facts, Alec. A good many of your fans are what I might call fucking pigs-if I might be so bold, sir.
The Weekend Update Skit with Amy Poehler doing a rap that Sarah supposedly refused to do was standout hilarious. Of course Sarah Palin probably is not suited for rap, which is a very complicated skill. Even if she had the talent, she would not have had the time to learn and rehearse the verses. That's too bad, because it was a bad ass routine. The bit with the moose dancing and then falling to the sound of gunshots was especially hilarious. Overall, Amy Poehler has a career in rap if she wants one. She was that good.
Perhaps the most amusing part of the show, however, occurred off-camera in liberal homes across America, later played out on the pages of the Huffington Post. Alec Baldwin's fans were angered at Baldwin, a noted and outspoken liberal, for appearing with Palin. Leave it to the left to resent someone actually humanizing someone they disagree with, as opposed to demonizing them.
I don't like his politics, but both the left and the right could learn something from the gentlemanly behavior of ALec Baldwin, who in response to the criticism from a large segment of his and the SNL fan base, published this post in the Huffington Post where he pretty much called them out for their juvenile attitudes.
You might as well face facts, Alec. A good many of your fans are what I might call fucking pigs-if I might be so bold, sir.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Sarah Palin-Its Now Or never
I hate to break it to all you Sarah Palin fans, which does include me, but if you have the slightest idea that she will be the Republican Presidential nominee in 2012 if she and McCain lose the 2008 election, you are seriously deluded. It's not going to happen.
If McCain-Palin lose this election, which as of now seems more and more likely, start making plans to support the 2012 ticket of Mitt Romney and Bobby Jindal. Barring any unforeseeable eventualities, that is your 2012 ticket.
If McCain-Palin loses this election, she will run for re-election to Alaska, and will win handily. Her career following this will probably consist of three or four terms in the US Senate from Alaska.
I just had to say this because I've been reading posts from some well-intentioned bloggers who consider Palin the next Ronald Reagan. There is a flaw in this reasoning. The woman has no support from anyone with the power and finacial clout to put her over the top in a race for a presidential major party nomination against the likes of not only Romney, but a myriad of others who would come much closer to garnering the support of the Republican establishement. The last thing this group wants is another reformer. They went along with McCain this time because-and only because-they saw him as their one and only hope of overcoming dissastisfaction with the Republican Party among the general electorate, the independents and Reagan Democrats whom they must win in order to-well, win.
McCain still yet paid dearly for their tepid support this year, as he put his Maverick credentials under serious debate in order to garner their support. Now, that is coming back to bite him. We've all seen the ads I'm sure where McCain is seen in the last debate telling Obama he is not George Bush, and then the voice over reminding us how he did vote with Bush over ninety percent of the time, and then McCain bragging that he voted with Bush more often than even some of his fellow Republicans did. The last four years has consisted of McCain trying to make nice with the Republican establishment in order to win the election, even though he still almost torpedoed his chances with support of the constroversial Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill.
Because of things such as this, and despite his other efforts at reconciliation with his party, he still might not have won the nomination if other conservatives had not divided the vote. Even Duncan Hunter, a relative unknown to most Americans, would have won if he had been McCains sole opponent. Still, the Republican establishment hoped to benefit from McCain's maverick status, and so they overlooked a lot they will not be so unwilling to overlook from Palin. In fact, some of them, such as George Will, are already among her most ardent detractors.
Yes, she would win easily if it were a matter of popularity among the Republican base. I think its safe to say, however, that it takes a lot more than that. It takes money and an appreciable amount of financial support which she just does not and will not have.
Therefore, I am telling you all, in all earnesty, if you want to see Palin in the White House, you had better concentrate your efforts on seeing her and John McCain win this coming election. If they do, there is a very good chance that McCain would step down after one term, at which point Palin would have the power of incumbency to see her through to winning the nomination. That is the only way you will ever see it happen.
If they dont win, there's at least the very real plus that she can continue to reform and build up Alaska to where it could easily become one of our most important states in a variety of ways. There is the further plus that she would probably be one hell of a great US Seantor at some point after that.
Just don't expect to ever see her as Presdient if she and McCain don't win this year.
Let that be motivation for you to get back out there, forget the nonsense about a future that will never be, and work your conservative asses off for McCain-Palin '08.
If McCain-Palin lose this election, which as of now seems more and more likely, start making plans to support the 2012 ticket of Mitt Romney and Bobby Jindal. Barring any unforeseeable eventualities, that is your 2012 ticket.
If McCain-Palin loses this election, she will run for re-election to Alaska, and will win handily. Her career following this will probably consist of three or four terms in the US Senate from Alaska.
I just had to say this because I've been reading posts from some well-intentioned bloggers who consider Palin the next Ronald Reagan. There is a flaw in this reasoning. The woman has no support from anyone with the power and finacial clout to put her over the top in a race for a presidential major party nomination against the likes of not only Romney, but a myriad of others who would come much closer to garnering the support of the Republican establishement. The last thing this group wants is another reformer. They went along with McCain this time because-and only because-they saw him as their one and only hope of overcoming dissastisfaction with the Republican Party among the general electorate, the independents and Reagan Democrats whom they must win in order to-well, win.
McCain still yet paid dearly for their tepid support this year, as he put his Maverick credentials under serious debate in order to garner their support. Now, that is coming back to bite him. We've all seen the ads I'm sure where McCain is seen in the last debate telling Obama he is not George Bush, and then the voice over reminding us how he did vote with Bush over ninety percent of the time, and then McCain bragging that he voted with Bush more often than even some of his fellow Republicans did. The last four years has consisted of McCain trying to make nice with the Republican establishment in order to win the election, even though he still almost torpedoed his chances with support of the constroversial Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill.
Because of things such as this, and despite his other efforts at reconciliation with his party, he still might not have won the nomination if other conservatives had not divided the vote. Even Duncan Hunter, a relative unknown to most Americans, would have won if he had been McCains sole opponent. Still, the Republican establishment hoped to benefit from McCain's maverick status, and so they overlooked a lot they will not be so unwilling to overlook from Palin. In fact, some of them, such as George Will, are already among her most ardent detractors.
Yes, she would win easily if it were a matter of popularity among the Republican base. I think its safe to say, however, that it takes a lot more than that. It takes money and an appreciable amount of financial support which she just does not and will not have.
Therefore, I am telling you all, in all earnesty, if you want to see Palin in the White House, you had better concentrate your efforts on seeing her and John McCain win this coming election. If they do, there is a very good chance that McCain would step down after one term, at which point Palin would have the power of incumbency to see her through to winning the nomination. That is the only way you will ever see it happen.
If they dont win, there's at least the very real plus that she can continue to reform and build up Alaska to where it could easily become one of our most important states in a variety of ways. There is the further plus that she would probably be one hell of a great US Seantor at some point after that.
Just don't expect to ever see her as Presdient if she and McCain don't win this year.
Let that be motivation for you to get back out there, forget the nonsense about a future that will never be, and work your conservative asses off for McCain-Palin '08.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Colin Powell's Endorsement of Obama-Just Another Skirmish In The Ongoing Civil War Between The Rival Foreign Policy Factions Of The Republican Party
It looks like there is a big split in the military wing of the Republican Party, and it might result in the end of Republican domination of the military. We should have seen that coming a long time ago. People generally make a big mistake when they refer to the military wing of the party as “foreign policy conservatives”. This is actually more of a contradiction in terms than the old joke about “military intelligence”, maybe on a par with “conservative Democrat”. Like it or not, if you want to find a true foreign policy conservative, you are required to venture into Patrick Buchanan territory. I have, and intend to stay there.
Unfortunately, this sector of American politics is as welcome in American political life as the KKK at an Obama rally. If you adhere to the principles of true foreign policy conservatism, the naysayers immediately tar you with the brush of isolationism. I prefer another, more accurate label-Washingtonian.
Be that as it may, when the internationalists took over the Department of Defense, sometime during the Truman presidency, they grew roots which have grown so deep it will be probably impossible to dislodge them, at least in the short term. The closest anybody has come to venturing into realization of the reality of the attitude of entitlement that has permeated the military-industrial complex was Dwight D. Eisenhower, when he gave his farewell address at the end of his second term. Ironically, liberal Democrats of the sixties and seventies were much more conservative in economic terms regarding military spending than their conservative Republican opponents. Of course, this was chiefly because they had other more urgent spending priorities of their own.
Both parties are unfortunately internationalist. Both parties have experienced divisions in their foreign policy wings, one made up of what we usually call hawks, which tend to dominate the Republicans, and the doves, which tend to dominate the Democrats, in both cases in terms of foreign policy and military affairs.
Now, Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barak Obama has signaled a potential shift along the fragile fault line of American international affairs that could result in a massive earthquake, one that goes beyond the simplistic view that Powell’s support for Obama is based solely on race.
Race is of course a part of it. Just as important as race is the fact that both men are outsiders in regards to their race. They are both a son of immigrants, Powell’s parents having emigrated from the Caribbean. As for their connections to slavery, no word yet on whether any of Powell’s white ancestors, if he had any, were slave owners. There will of course be the inevitable backlash among those who resent the accusation that their refusal to support Obama is racist. It is all too tempting to point out that Obama’s support amongst blacks is of course race based.
There is actually no way of resolving this to anyone’s satisfaction. I might point out, for example, that I would gladly vote for a conservative black candidate over a liberal white one, but then of course you will hear something along the lines, “oh sure you would vote for that god damn Uncle Tom over a decent white man or woman that wants to help black people.”
The obvious slur aside, this is in fact getting closer to the root of the problem. It is a matter of ideology, and I am reasonably convinced this is the case with Colin Powell. Powell has been a fixture in Washington for decades and began his official career under the Carter Administration. A vocal supporter of Affirmative Action, he is a known moderate, more left than right of center on economic and social issues and, of course, he is an internationalist.
However, so in fact were most of the foreign policy experts and officials of preceding Republican administrations, beginning with Nixon, and on through Ford, Reagan, and Bush I. The only difference with Reagan was a determination to go beyond mere containment of the old Soviet Union. He openly sought its destruction, and succeeded beyond his or anyone else’s wildest dreams.
So where did the split come in, and how did it come about? After all, true foreign policy conservatives have been as rare in Washington inner circles and official decision-making processes as John Birch Society members in a multi-cultural think-tank.
Remember, however, how I said that there have always been factions in both parties? The hawks controlled the Republican foreign policy wing while the doves came to control the Democratic foreign policy wing. Still, both parties had stalwart members of both sides of the equation. It was the Democratic Party hawks who bolted and went to the Republican side and began to influence policy for the first time during the George Bush II Administration, where they became known as Neo-cons.
Much has been made, by some of their detractors, of their domination by American Jews and Zionist Israeli supporters. As sure as night follows day, this has culminated in a charge of anti-Semitism thrown at anyone who disagrees with, opposes, or otherwise disparages Neo-con policies, which is a bit of nonsense engaged in even by some otherwise intelligent, reasonable, and thoughtful people (you know who you are).
The fact remains, it is Neo-con policies which has resulted in the shift and possibly, maybe even probably, realignment of military party loyalties. The Democratic Party knows they can only go so far in reducing military spending, even in those areas where restraint is appropriate. It is too easy to tar them with the brush of anti-Americanism, and the Republicans have used that tactic to great effect. The Democratic Party has learned from this and will probably use at least some caution, at least at the outset of the likely on-coming new Democratic Party dominated Washington power structure.
The great irony is that the debacle in Bush Administration foreign policy that has resulted in widespread dissatisfaction with the party, even among party regulars and the rank-and-file, owes its origins to the same Kennedyesque foreign policy philosophies and adventures that brought us the Bay of Pigs, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Vietnam. It is the same kind of foreign policy blunders under a different banner-the Republican label.
Colin Powell held off his endorsement of Obama for some time, and I have no doubt he will figure prominently in a prospective Obama presidency, doubtless at the cabinet level-possibly as Secretary of Defense, maybe even reinstated as Secretary of State (although I would not be greatly surprised if Obama retained Condoleeza Rice in that position). Whatever position Powell might find himself in, we can assume this had a lot to do with his endorsement as well as the other things I mentioned, to say nothing of some degree of resentment over his treatment in the Bush Administration.
It might have been John McCain, however, who gave Powell the final shove, during the last debate, when he said there should be some spending cuts in defense, along with his assertion of waste and corruption in the awarding of contracts. This is in fact McCain’s one legitimate claim to a conservative foreign policy position. It may be the one thing that ultimately served to cost him the support of Colin Powell, however tenuous and unlikely that potential support might have always been.
Even at this, the Neo-cons will not go away easily or quickly. They will hold tenaciously to their grip on power until the last possible moment. What you are seeing is a civil war in the form of an inter-party rivalry for control of foreign policy of the Republican Party, but these two rival sets of internationalist hawks do not fight over ideology so much as military spending contracts, in my opinion.
Still, there is a profound ideological divide between them. One of them believes in the old Republican ideal of continued and growing defense spending and international American leadership of traditional treaty allies such as NATO. The other believes in controlled chaos, in upheaval and sustained and on-going crisis management and manipulation. The Democratic foreign policy, meanwhile, consists principally of moderate defense spending with a posture aimed at leadership by way of international cooperation. It will be as easy, and possibly even as necessary, for the Republican traditional foreign policy wing to gravitate to the Democratic Party as it once was for the old Democratic Party war philosophy adherents, inspired by the ideals of the early Vietnam era, to migrate to the Republican Party.
The Neo-cons have almost single-handedly wrecked the Republican Party, and despite the potential for backlash, they have induced Colin Powell to hand the Democrats and Obama a vital and important strategic and symbolic victory.
In the meantime, George Washington is still spinning in his grave for going on sixty years now. Some people say we are heading toward a new world, a new America, one that would be unrecognizable to our founding fathers.
Don’t look now, but that already happened long before most of us were ever born. I just happen to be one of the very small percentage of people that want to take us back. I won’t be holding my breath waiting for any mass movement to join with me, and that includes so-called “conservatives”.
Conservatives, like liberals, will always go where the money is. Their only ideological difference when it comes to defense spending isn’t so much how much to spend, but simply how and where to spend it. It still spends, and whoever doles it out will still spin it to look like its in America’s vital national interests, whether it is or not. If it is not, it can be made to be so. Perception is reality.
That’s why I have no doubt our allies will love and respect us more if a Democrat such as Obama takes power this year. It might be true that you can’t buy love, but you can lease a degree of temporary loyalty, while not in reality changing anything.
Unfortunately, this sector of American politics is as welcome in American political life as the KKK at an Obama rally. If you adhere to the principles of true foreign policy conservatism, the naysayers immediately tar you with the brush of isolationism. I prefer another, more accurate label-Washingtonian.
Be that as it may, when the internationalists took over the Department of Defense, sometime during the Truman presidency, they grew roots which have grown so deep it will be probably impossible to dislodge them, at least in the short term. The closest anybody has come to venturing into realization of the reality of the attitude of entitlement that has permeated the military-industrial complex was Dwight D. Eisenhower, when he gave his farewell address at the end of his second term. Ironically, liberal Democrats of the sixties and seventies were much more conservative in economic terms regarding military spending than their conservative Republican opponents. Of course, this was chiefly because they had other more urgent spending priorities of their own.
Both parties are unfortunately internationalist. Both parties have experienced divisions in their foreign policy wings, one made up of what we usually call hawks, which tend to dominate the Republicans, and the doves, which tend to dominate the Democrats, in both cases in terms of foreign policy and military affairs.
Now, Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barak Obama has signaled a potential shift along the fragile fault line of American international affairs that could result in a massive earthquake, one that goes beyond the simplistic view that Powell’s support for Obama is based solely on race.
Race is of course a part of it. Just as important as race is the fact that both men are outsiders in regards to their race. They are both a son of immigrants, Powell’s parents having emigrated from the Caribbean. As for their connections to slavery, no word yet on whether any of Powell’s white ancestors, if he had any, were slave owners. There will of course be the inevitable backlash among those who resent the accusation that their refusal to support Obama is racist. It is all too tempting to point out that Obama’s support amongst blacks is of course race based.
There is actually no way of resolving this to anyone’s satisfaction. I might point out, for example, that I would gladly vote for a conservative black candidate over a liberal white one, but then of course you will hear something along the lines, “oh sure you would vote for that god damn Uncle Tom over a decent white man or woman that wants to help black people.”
The obvious slur aside, this is in fact getting closer to the root of the problem. It is a matter of ideology, and I am reasonably convinced this is the case with Colin Powell. Powell has been a fixture in Washington for decades and began his official career under the Carter Administration. A vocal supporter of Affirmative Action, he is a known moderate, more left than right of center on economic and social issues and, of course, he is an internationalist.
However, so in fact were most of the foreign policy experts and officials of preceding Republican administrations, beginning with Nixon, and on through Ford, Reagan, and Bush I. The only difference with Reagan was a determination to go beyond mere containment of the old Soviet Union. He openly sought its destruction, and succeeded beyond his or anyone else’s wildest dreams.
So where did the split come in, and how did it come about? After all, true foreign policy conservatives have been as rare in Washington inner circles and official decision-making processes as John Birch Society members in a multi-cultural think-tank.
Remember, however, how I said that there have always been factions in both parties? The hawks controlled the Republican foreign policy wing while the doves came to control the Democratic foreign policy wing. Still, both parties had stalwart members of both sides of the equation. It was the Democratic Party hawks who bolted and went to the Republican side and began to influence policy for the first time during the George Bush II Administration, where they became known as Neo-cons.
Much has been made, by some of their detractors, of their domination by American Jews and Zionist Israeli supporters. As sure as night follows day, this has culminated in a charge of anti-Semitism thrown at anyone who disagrees with, opposes, or otherwise disparages Neo-con policies, which is a bit of nonsense engaged in even by some otherwise intelligent, reasonable, and thoughtful people (you know who you are).
The fact remains, it is Neo-con policies which has resulted in the shift and possibly, maybe even probably, realignment of military party loyalties. The Democratic Party knows they can only go so far in reducing military spending, even in those areas where restraint is appropriate. It is too easy to tar them with the brush of anti-Americanism, and the Republicans have used that tactic to great effect. The Democratic Party has learned from this and will probably use at least some caution, at least at the outset of the likely on-coming new Democratic Party dominated Washington power structure.
The great irony is that the debacle in Bush Administration foreign policy that has resulted in widespread dissatisfaction with the party, even among party regulars and the rank-and-file, owes its origins to the same Kennedyesque foreign policy philosophies and adventures that brought us the Bay of Pigs, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Vietnam. It is the same kind of foreign policy blunders under a different banner-the Republican label.
Colin Powell held off his endorsement of Obama for some time, and I have no doubt he will figure prominently in a prospective Obama presidency, doubtless at the cabinet level-possibly as Secretary of Defense, maybe even reinstated as Secretary of State (although I would not be greatly surprised if Obama retained Condoleeza Rice in that position). Whatever position Powell might find himself in, we can assume this had a lot to do with his endorsement as well as the other things I mentioned, to say nothing of some degree of resentment over his treatment in the Bush Administration.
It might have been John McCain, however, who gave Powell the final shove, during the last debate, when he said there should be some spending cuts in defense, along with his assertion of waste and corruption in the awarding of contracts. This is in fact McCain’s one legitimate claim to a conservative foreign policy position. It may be the one thing that ultimately served to cost him the support of Colin Powell, however tenuous and unlikely that potential support might have always been.
Even at this, the Neo-cons will not go away easily or quickly. They will hold tenaciously to their grip on power until the last possible moment. What you are seeing is a civil war in the form of an inter-party rivalry for control of foreign policy of the Republican Party, but these two rival sets of internationalist hawks do not fight over ideology so much as military spending contracts, in my opinion.
Still, there is a profound ideological divide between them. One of them believes in the old Republican ideal of continued and growing defense spending and international American leadership of traditional treaty allies such as NATO. The other believes in controlled chaos, in upheaval and sustained and on-going crisis management and manipulation. The Democratic foreign policy, meanwhile, consists principally of moderate defense spending with a posture aimed at leadership by way of international cooperation. It will be as easy, and possibly even as necessary, for the Republican traditional foreign policy wing to gravitate to the Democratic Party as it once was for the old Democratic Party war philosophy adherents, inspired by the ideals of the early Vietnam era, to migrate to the Republican Party.
The Neo-cons have almost single-handedly wrecked the Republican Party, and despite the potential for backlash, they have induced Colin Powell to hand the Democrats and Obama a vital and important strategic and symbolic victory.
In the meantime, George Washington is still spinning in his grave for going on sixty years now. Some people say we are heading toward a new world, a new America, one that would be unrecognizable to our founding fathers.
Don’t look now, but that already happened long before most of us were ever born. I just happen to be one of the very small percentage of people that want to take us back. I won’t be holding my breath waiting for any mass movement to join with me, and that includes so-called “conservatives”.
Conservatives, like liberals, will always go where the money is. Their only ideological difference when it comes to defense spending isn’t so much how much to spend, but simply how and where to spend it. It still spends, and whoever doles it out will still spin it to look like its in America’s vital national interests, whether it is or not. If it is not, it can be made to be so. Perception is reality.
That’s why I have no doubt our allies will love and respect us more if a Democrat such as Obama takes power this year. It might be true that you can’t buy love, but you can lease a degree of temporary loyalty, while not in reality changing anything.
Friday, October 17, 2008
The Devil Wears Pravda
Man, I had this weird dream last night that the media, all of them-CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, and even MSNBC, all went out in force armed with the bulwarks of the print journalism establishment-The New York Times, the Washington Post, etc.-all united in a quest to learn the truth. Was Barak Obama on the level when, during last night's final debate, he denied that his political career began in the living room of the home of former Weather Underground leader and domestic terrorist bomber William Ayers and his Charles Manson adoring wife Bernadine Dohrn? Was McCain's assertion to this effect actually the truth of the matter? Did Obama begin his career by seeking and obtaining the blessing, encouragement, and support of Ayers and Dohrn, or not?
In my surrealistic dream, all of the media journalists were crawling all over each other in their mad scramble for the truth. When I woke up to realize it was only a dream, I pondered the possibility that I had in fact experienced some rare form of psychic vision, and ran to my television eager to catch a glimpse of the morning news.
No such luck. Nothing whatsoever about the truth of the extent of Obama's relationship with Ayers and Dohrn.
I did however learn that Joe The Plumber, who asserted that Barak Obama's tax plan was a socialist scheme, made only 40,000 dollars a year, owed over a thousand dollars in as yet unpaid taxes, had a lien placed on his home, and was not really a license plumber after all.
So it wasn't such a loss at that. I did learn some things to be facts, things I had previously only strongly suspected.
Thank you media.
In my surrealistic dream, all of the media journalists were crawling all over each other in their mad scramble for the truth. When I woke up to realize it was only a dream, I pondered the possibility that I had in fact experienced some rare form of psychic vision, and ran to my television eager to catch a glimpse of the morning news.
No such luck. Nothing whatsoever about the truth of the extent of Obama's relationship with Ayers and Dohrn.
I did however learn that Joe The Plumber, who asserted that Barak Obama's tax plan was a socialist scheme, made only 40,000 dollars a year, owed over a thousand dollars in as yet unpaid taxes, had a lien placed on his home, and was not really a license plumber after all.
So it wasn't such a loss at that. I did learn some things to be facts, things I had previously only strongly suspected.
Thank you media.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
The Final Straw
UPDATE:
Well, so far so good. I've re-entered twenty six blogs on my new blogroll, and I might add a few more from the old Blogrolling program, but there will be some I'll probably exclude, in some cases because I decided they aren't anything I care to promote, and in others for the simple fact that they have gotten to the point where they rarely if ever update. The bad thing about that is, they amount to dead weight, even in those cases where they were, at one time, decent and even good blogs. There's just no use in having them around.
As for Blogrolling, the only thing I will miss about them is that, when they did work right, they let your reader know when a blog on your blogroll updated. This widget doesn't do that. There is a different blogrolling widget that does do that, and more. It even shows the first two or three lines of the latest post, if you choose that function.
The only problem with that widget is, unlike this one, it does not allow you to alphabetize your blogs. Alphabetizing helps you to have some kind of sense of order, and makes it easier on me when I want to link to a particular blog. So, for now, I'm going with that one, which means I'm probably going to stick with it from now on. This shit has just been a little too much like work for me to even think about doing it again.
And, if you wonder just what the hell I'm talking about, well, just read the rest of the post. I've kicked Blogrolling under the curve. Why? Well-
Bye bye Blogrolling don't let the door hit your worthless ass on the way out.
As for those of you on it, I've already made some headway in putting a good many of the blogs back on via the Blogger widget function, where I don't have to worry about it being hacked-I hope. I was all set to let it go, then they up and let this shit happen again, so I'm done with them. The new blogroll will be fairly trimmed in comparison. Some old crap ain't coming back, and will probably be replaced eventually by some new crap. Those of you whom I visit on a fairly consistent basis will be back up fairly quickly, if you're not already.
Well, so far so good. I've re-entered twenty six blogs on my new blogroll, and I might add a few more from the old Blogrolling program, but there will be some I'll probably exclude, in some cases because I decided they aren't anything I care to promote, and in others for the simple fact that they have gotten to the point where they rarely if ever update. The bad thing about that is, they amount to dead weight, even in those cases where they were, at one time, decent and even good blogs. There's just no use in having them around.
As for Blogrolling, the only thing I will miss about them is that, when they did work right, they let your reader know when a blog on your blogroll updated. This widget doesn't do that. There is a different blogrolling widget that does do that, and more. It even shows the first two or three lines of the latest post, if you choose that function.
The only problem with that widget is, unlike this one, it does not allow you to alphabetize your blogs. Alphabetizing helps you to have some kind of sense of order, and makes it easier on me when I want to link to a particular blog. So, for now, I'm going with that one, which means I'm probably going to stick with it from now on. This shit has just been a little too much like work for me to even think about doing it again.
And, if you wonder just what the hell I'm talking about, well, just read the rest of the post. I've kicked Blogrolling under the curve. Why? Well-
Bye bye Blogrolling don't let the door hit your worthless ass on the way out.
As for those of you on it, I've already made some headway in putting a good many of the blogs back on via the Blogger widget function, where I don't have to worry about it being hacked-I hope. I was all set to let it go, then they up and let this shit happen again, so I'm done with them. The new blogroll will be fairly trimmed in comparison. Some old crap ain't coming back, and will probably be replaced eventually by some new crap. Those of you whom I visit on a fairly consistent basis will be back up fairly quickly, if you're not already.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Electoral Magical Mischief II-The True Face of Obama
It's against the law, or so I've been told, to use subliminal messages of any kind in commercials, as this amounts to a kind of mind control, or at least mental manipulation. What if you could implant a subconscious image in a person's mind that they subconsciously identified with the candidate against whom you wanted them to vote. We'll use Obama as the main example here, though of course you could use the image in question to represent any Democratic candidate, or merely as "the true face of the left".
How then can you implant this subconscious image? This brings us to the technique of visualization in conjunction with power raising and the sending of magical energy, all in conjunction.
To perfrom this spell the following optional items will provide you with a reservoir of energy to which to focus your spell-
1. A picture of the candidate taken from a news or magazine photo.
2. A large black or a white candle and four smaller candles in a circle at points North, East, South, and West.
3. One stick of sandalwood, lavender, or cinnamon incense
4. Cinnamon leaf (preferable, though stick is acceptable) essential oil.
The most important item, however, and the one that is absolutely essential, in fact, is the image itself that you wish to implant within the subconscious minds of the objects of your spell, which should be independent or other undecided or "soft" voters.
I have here provided an image which should do nicely. Behold, the-
THE TRUE FACE OF OBAMA
Invoke the elements at the proper directional points as you walk the circle. Earth in the North, Air in the East, Fire in the South, and Water in the West, taking the time to use objects appropriate for these elements, such as a bowl of earth or salt at the North for Earth, a censor or secure wand of incense (spearate fromt he primary one) at the East for air, a separate red candle or brazier of fire for Fire at the SOuth, and a cup of water or wine for Water in the West. As you cast the circle, feel the energy building up a you visualize yourself forming the circle around you.
In the center have the picture of Obama by the primary candle as the primary wand of incense wafts through the air. Hold the picture over the smoke of this incense, and then inhale the aroma of the essential oil. Light the primary candle and then, as you focus on the picture of Obama, drop a few drops of the incense on the lighted flame. As the dark smoke wafts upward, hold the picture up over the wafting smoke, high enough so that it doesn't singe, and yet closely enough for the power of the flame's heat to permeate the picture.
Then, with your visualization, watch as the picture of Obama changes in your mind's eyes through the power of visualization, into the image of our horrific friend pictured above.
Continue with your visualization as you prepare a small bottle with two ounces of preferably olive oil (or vegetable or canola, etc.) to whichyou will add about six frops of the essential oil. Inhale the scent. All the time you are doing this maintain your visualization to the point that you are now seeing the face of Obama but at the same time can see the iamge of the demon behind the facade.
You might wish to add the following invocation, to a deity of your choice, but preferably to someone along the lines of Loki, Hecate, Eris, or Hermes.
Oh great God (or Goddess), I ask thy divine aid in this worthy endeavor. Imbue thy power unto me, to put across in the minds of those to whom I speak, that they may see, the nature true of the one they see, as the hope and change, is this ravenous beast.
Bless this working, three times three
This my will
So mote it be.
(At the end of the ritual be certain to release the circle and thanking the elemental powers for their presence, making certain all candles and incenses, etc are propwerly extinguished.)
Make certain that you imbue the essential oil blend with the essence of the personal power you have raised for this ritual. As you go out and about the following days, wear a slight amount of the essential oil blend on your forehead, and trust that it will lead you into contact with those with whom you need to speak. For when you feel the urge to discuss with them, you will know it, and you must then use your visualization to see the face of the demon peering out from behind the facade that is Barak Obama.
Bear in mind, this is not merely the true face of barak Obama, but is in fact the true face of the Left, and specifically of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, of which Barak Obama is now the leader and standard bearer. When you speak to any person, you must visualize the image flowing from yourself into the subconscious mind of the person with whom you are speaking.
A sense of humor might be helpful. If somebody asks you what you think of Barak Obama, or the Democratic Party, you might smile or even chuckle as though in jest and say something like-
"Oh I think he's a demon from hell myself".
As you speak, know through the energy of your personal power and visualization that the inmage will take root and have an influence on the person's subconscious mind, and hopefully even that he or she might even in turn spread unknowingly spread the subconscious image to others with whom he speaks, when it matters most-in the polling booth on election day.
Warning-any attempts to use this spell against John McCain or any Republican candidates will result in a backlash against the practitioner in the form of rashes and debilitating nightmares of two weeks duration.
So mote it be!
How then can you implant this subconscious image? This brings us to the technique of visualization in conjunction with power raising and the sending of magical energy, all in conjunction.
To perfrom this spell the following optional items will provide you with a reservoir of energy to which to focus your spell-
1. A picture of the candidate taken from a news or magazine photo.
2. A large black or a white candle and four smaller candles in a circle at points North, East, South, and West.
3. One stick of sandalwood, lavender, or cinnamon incense
4. Cinnamon leaf (preferable, though stick is acceptable) essential oil.
The most important item, however, and the one that is absolutely essential, in fact, is the image itself that you wish to implant within the subconscious minds of the objects of your spell, which should be independent or other undecided or "soft" voters.
I have here provided an image which should do nicely. Behold, the-
THE TRUE FACE OF OBAMA
Invoke the elements at the proper directional points as you walk the circle. Earth in the North, Air in the East, Fire in the South, and Water in the West, taking the time to use objects appropriate for these elements, such as a bowl of earth or salt at the North for Earth, a censor or secure wand of incense (spearate fromt he primary one) at the East for air, a separate red candle or brazier of fire for Fire at the SOuth, and a cup of water or wine for Water in the West. As you cast the circle, feel the energy building up a you visualize yourself forming the circle around you.
In the center have the picture of Obama by the primary candle as the primary wand of incense wafts through the air. Hold the picture over the smoke of this incense, and then inhale the aroma of the essential oil. Light the primary candle and then, as you focus on the picture of Obama, drop a few drops of the incense on the lighted flame. As the dark smoke wafts upward, hold the picture up over the wafting smoke, high enough so that it doesn't singe, and yet closely enough for the power of the flame's heat to permeate the picture.
Then, with your visualization, watch as the picture of Obama changes in your mind's eyes through the power of visualization, into the image of our horrific friend pictured above.
Continue with your visualization as you prepare a small bottle with two ounces of preferably olive oil (or vegetable or canola, etc.) to whichyou will add about six frops of the essential oil. Inhale the scent. All the time you are doing this maintain your visualization to the point that you are now seeing the face of Obama but at the same time can see the iamge of the demon behind the facade.
You might wish to add the following invocation, to a deity of your choice, but preferably to someone along the lines of Loki, Hecate, Eris, or Hermes.
Oh great God (or Goddess), I ask thy divine aid in this worthy endeavor. Imbue thy power unto me, to put across in the minds of those to whom I speak, that they may see, the nature true of the one they see, as the hope and change, is this ravenous beast.
Bless this working, three times three
This my will
So mote it be.
(At the end of the ritual be certain to release the circle and thanking the elemental powers for their presence, making certain all candles and incenses, etc are propwerly extinguished.)
Make certain that you imbue the essential oil blend with the essence of the personal power you have raised for this ritual. As you go out and about the following days, wear a slight amount of the essential oil blend on your forehead, and trust that it will lead you into contact with those with whom you need to speak. For when you feel the urge to discuss with them, you will know it, and you must then use your visualization to see the face of the demon peering out from behind the facade that is Barak Obama.
Bear in mind, this is not merely the true face of barak Obama, but is in fact the true face of the Left, and specifically of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, of which Barak Obama is now the leader and standard bearer. When you speak to any person, you must visualize the image flowing from yourself into the subconscious mind of the person with whom you are speaking.
A sense of humor might be helpful. If somebody asks you what you think of Barak Obama, or the Democratic Party, you might smile or even chuckle as though in jest and say something like-
"Oh I think he's a demon from hell myself".
As you speak, know through the energy of your personal power and visualization that the inmage will take root and have an influence on the person's subconscious mind, and hopefully even that he or she might even in turn spread unknowingly spread the subconscious image to others with whom he speaks, when it matters most-in the polling booth on election day.
Warning-any attempts to use this spell against John McCain or any Republican candidates will result in a backlash against the practitioner in the form of rashes and debilitating nightmares of two weeks duration.
So mote it be!
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Electoral Magical Mischief
Isaac Bonewitz has posted a magical strategy to help win the election for the Democratic Party. Not negative magic, mind you, but purely ethical, positive magic to insure everybody knows everything about the candidates, that there is no skulduggery at poling places, etc.
Ordinarily, I would consider this kind of stuff dumb as hell, but on the other hand, maybe I’m being too harsh. Maybe there’s something to it, and if enough people go along, it could have an impact. I am, however, struck by the inconsistencies involved. You have some people wailing about how Sarah Palin hates witches and pagans and how she even went to the extent of receiving a blessing and a prayer for protection from witchcraft from some African Christian minister. The minister in question at one point encouraged people of an African village that had fallen on hard times to run a witch out of the town, blaming their troubles on her. That Sarah Palin received a blessing from him, at about the time of her successful run for the governor’s seat of Alaska, is supposedly proof that Sarah Palin will assault the civil liberties of pagans in this country.
They accuse her of belonging to a rabidly fundamentalist sect of Christians who engage in a type of spiritual warfare against the “Queen of Heaven” which they interpret to mean the “Goddess” and who interestingly enough others say is the Catholic version of the Virgin Mary-actually the Goddess Ishtar in disguise, you might say.
Of course, Palin’s ties to these kinds of people are tentative at best, and she states that she is no longer a member of that church. Nevertheless, since she is a Republican, and John McCain’s running mate, and is a Pro-Life fundamentalist Christian, then everything about her is fair game-including everything about her family and every conceivable bit of dirt they can dig up about her and them, real or imagined. Most if not all of it is made up out of thin air, but hey-all in a “good cause”-right, guys and girls?
Now, Bonewitz is actively encouraging participating in magical rituals meant to influence the election. It would seem that Palin’s blessing for protection from witchcraft might not have been so off the wall after all.
Well, two or more can play that game, so I think I’ll join in. This might well be the first of a series. However, hate to break it to you folks, but I don’t intend to limit myself to “positive” or “ethical” magic. I’m going to do what it takes to get the job done, and what better way to start than with my own response to Bonetwitz’s post, all of which I here reproduce.
Boneheads states-
We’re coming down to the end of the campaigns and the actual voting. Here’s what we need to be doing in the next few weeks to assure a fair and honest election. Pick one and get to work!
Do the mundane stuff: Make sure you and your friends and neighbors are registered to vote and have not been accidentally-on-purpose purged from the voting rolls (see previous blog post). Volunteer to work at the polls. If you have a legal background, volunteer with the ACLU and other groups keeping an eye on the process.
Do the magical stuff
“Volunteer with the ACLU?” So much for ethical and positive endeavors.
Following is his list of suggestions, which I place in italics, followed by my responses in bold. But first, I suggested what might be the most appropriate magic ritual of all-
How about a spell on the news media to make them as objective as they like to pretend they are? Failing that, how about a spell to make Keith Olbermann’s tongue swell up to ten times its normal size, for Charlie Gibson to suddenly fall victim to spontaneous combustion, for that thrill running down Chris Matthews leg to rare up and rip through his slacks, and for Katie Couric to suddenly be afflicted with Tourette’s SYndrome, all on live television.
As for-
“Continue with protection spells on the candidates.”
Been there done that. I’ve been calling on Artemis to grant Palin her protection and a degree of her power
“Continue with revelation spells on the candidates and the White House, so that everyone’s true intentions are made public.”
Apollo is appropriate for this to make sure that everyone in America becomes familiar with the name Saul Alinsky, as well as the true degree of association between terrorist Bill Ayers and Barak Obama over the years.
While we’re at it, maybe its time everybody was made aware of the true extent of Democratic policies as the cause of the current housing/banking/Wall Street/mortgage etc. financial crisis, vis-a vie forcing banks to make dubious at best loans to poor borrowers whom they knew had questionable ability to pay them off, and threatening them with sanctions if they refused to do so.
How about we make sure ol’ Apollo points out how Chris Dodd, the largest recipient of largesse from Freddie Mae and Fannie Mac, was the Democratic chairman of the sub-committee charged with oversight of these quasi-governmental institutions. How about the fact the Barnie Frank, the House chairman of the Committee charged with their oversight, refused to allow any bills to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to come to the floor of the House for debate, as did Chris Dodd in the Senate?
And then there’s Barak Obama-who was not only the third largest recipient of their largesse, but included high ranking officials, including a former CEO of one of them, as high ranking officials on his campaign staff?
(Additionally, although I did not think of this at the time, we might also incoke Apollo to bring the facts to light regarding the extent of Obama's associations with Acorn, and that those facts are known to the general public, especially to undecided voters in swing states).
“Find your local polling place(s) and do protection and honesty spells on the buildings.”
What better deity than Hermes to make sure Democratic voters are aware they are risking their freedom by entering any building inhabited by “corrupt” voting officials eager to find evidence of unpaid fines or court date appearance violations?
“Do binding spells on the warmongers in the White House and the Pentagon to prevent any last minute “surprises” that would “justify” postponing or canceling the elections.”
Although this has never happened in the entire history of the United States, including during the Civil War, the Depression, World War II, or the Vietnam conflict with all its attendant Civil Rights and other such civil unrest and outright riots, you make a good point. To this end, lets invoke Ares to mop up the floor with our enemies in Iraq and “Af-han-ees-tawn”, including Al-Queda and the “Tall-ee-bawn”, therefore lessening the likelihood that such a scenario would be deemed necessary and appropriate.
“Remember, if the spell you want to do would be ethical if done physically, then it’s ethical to do it magically”
Hey, I’m all about ethical. What could possibly be more ethical than Katie Couric coming down with Tourette’s Syndrome, or for the things I said should happen to the folks at MSNBC?. The have tanked so much in recent years it might be good for their ratings.
IN CONCLUSION:
So there you have it. Of course, these initial suggestions of mine are not so much magical rituals as they are along the lines of invoking the aid of specific deities.
Like I said, though, I might get into this and offer more spell suggestions. After all, if the Bonewitz's are going to go to this extent for the sake of one candidate and one party, it's only right that I offer some degree of balance.
I understand of course I don't have the reputation or the experience of an Isaac Bonewitz, but on the other hand-this might be loads of fun, and I am under no constraints whatsoever to exercise any modicum of self-control or decorum, or for that matter common decency.
I'm out to win.
Ordinarily, I would consider this kind of stuff dumb as hell, but on the other hand, maybe I’m being too harsh. Maybe there’s something to it, and if enough people go along, it could have an impact. I am, however, struck by the inconsistencies involved. You have some people wailing about how Sarah Palin hates witches and pagans and how she even went to the extent of receiving a blessing and a prayer for protection from witchcraft from some African Christian minister. The minister in question at one point encouraged people of an African village that had fallen on hard times to run a witch out of the town, blaming their troubles on her. That Sarah Palin received a blessing from him, at about the time of her successful run for the governor’s seat of Alaska, is supposedly proof that Sarah Palin will assault the civil liberties of pagans in this country.
They accuse her of belonging to a rabidly fundamentalist sect of Christians who engage in a type of spiritual warfare against the “Queen of Heaven” which they interpret to mean the “Goddess” and who interestingly enough others say is the Catholic version of the Virgin Mary-actually the Goddess Ishtar in disguise, you might say.
Of course, Palin’s ties to these kinds of people are tentative at best, and she states that she is no longer a member of that church. Nevertheless, since she is a Republican, and John McCain’s running mate, and is a Pro-Life fundamentalist Christian, then everything about her is fair game-including everything about her family and every conceivable bit of dirt they can dig up about her and them, real or imagined. Most if not all of it is made up out of thin air, but hey-all in a “good cause”-right, guys and girls?
Now, Bonewitz is actively encouraging participating in magical rituals meant to influence the election. It would seem that Palin’s blessing for protection from witchcraft might not have been so off the wall after all.
Well, two or more can play that game, so I think I’ll join in. This might well be the first of a series. However, hate to break it to you folks, but I don’t intend to limit myself to “positive” or “ethical” magic. I’m going to do what it takes to get the job done, and what better way to start than with my own response to Bonetwitz’s post, all of which I here reproduce.
Boneheads states-
We’re coming down to the end of the campaigns and the actual voting. Here’s what we need to be doing in the next few weeks to assure a fair and honest election. Pick one and get to work!
Do the mundane stuff: Make sure you and your friends and neighbors are registered to vote and have not been accidentally-on-purpose purged from the voting rolls (see previous blog post). Volunteer to work at the polls. If you have a legal background, volunteer with the ACLU and other groups keeping an eye on the process.
Do the magical stuff
“Volunteer with the ACLU?” So much for ethical and positive endeavors.
Following is his list of suggestions, which I place in italics, followed by my responses in bold. But first, I suggested what might be the most appropriate magic ritual of all-
How about a spell on the news media to make them as objective as they like to pretend they are? Failing that, how about a spell to make Keith Olbermann’s tongue swell up to ten times its normal size, for Charlie Gibson to suddenly fall victim to spontaneous combustion, for that thrill running down Chris Matthews leg to rare up and rip through his slacks, and for Katie Couric to suddenly be afflicted with Tourette’s SYndrome, all on live television.
As for-
“Continue with protection spells on the candidates.”
Been there done that. I’ve been calling on Artemis to grant Palin her protection and a degree of her power
“Continue with revelation spells on the candidates and the White House, so that everyone’s true intentions are made public.”
Apollo is appropriate for this to make sure that everyone in America becomes familiar with the name Saul Alinsky, as well as the true degree of association between terrorist Bill Ayers and Barak Obama over the years.
While we’re at it, maybe its time everybody was made aware of the true extent of Democratic policies as the cause of the current housing/banking/Wall Street/mortgage etc. financial crisis, vis-a vie forcing banks to make dubious at best loans to poor borrowers whom they knew had questionable ability to pay them off, and threatening them with sanctions if they refused to do so.
How about we make sure ol’ Apollo points out how Chris Dodd, the largest recipient of largesse from Freddie Mae and Fannie Mac, was the Democratic chairman of the sub-committee charged with oversight of these quasi-governmental institutions. How about the fact the Barnie Frank, the House chairman of the Committee charged with their oversight, refused to allow any bills to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to come to the floor of the House for debate, as did Chris Dodd in the Senate?
And then there’s Barak Obama-who was not only the third largest recipient of their largesse, but included high ranking officials, including a former CEO of one of them, as high ranking officials on his campaign staff?
(Additionally, although I did not think of this at the time, we might also incoke Apollo to bring the facts to light regarding the extent of Obama's associations with Acorn, and that those facts are known to the general public, especially to undecided voters in swing states).
“Find your local polling place(s) and do protection and honesty spells on the buildings.”
What better deity than Hermes to make sure Democratic voters are aware they are risking their freedom by entering any building inhabited by “corrupt” voting officials eager to find evidence of unpaid fines or court date appearance violations?
“Do binding spells on the warmongers in the White House and the Pentagon to prevent any last minute “surprises” that would “justify” postponing or canceling the elections.”
Although this has never happened in the entire history of the United States, including during the Civil War, the Depression, World War II, or the Vietnam conflict with all its attendant Civil Rights and other such civil unrest and outright riots, you make a good point. To this end, lets invoke Ares to mop up the floor with our enemies in Iraq and “Af-han-ees-tawn”, including Al-Queda and the “Tall-ee-bawn”, therefore lessening the likelihood that such a scenario would be deemed necessary and appropriate.
“Remember, if the spell you want to do would be ethical if done physically, then it’s ethical to do it magically”
Hey, I’m all about ethical. What could possibly be more ethical than Katie Couric coming down with Tourette’s Syndrome, or for the things I said should happen to the folks at MSNBC?. The have tanked so much in recent years it might be good for their ratings.
IN CONCLUSION:
So there you have it. Of course, these initial suggestions of mine are not so much magical rituals as they are along the lines of invoking the aid of specific deities.
Like I said, though, I might get into this and offer more spell suggestions. After all, if the Bonewitz's are going to go to this extent for the sake of one candidate and one party, it's only right that I offer some degree of balance.
I understand of course I don't have the reputation or the experience of an Isaac Bonewitz, but on the other hand-this might be loads of fun, and I am under no constraints whatsoever to exercise any modicum of self-control or decorum, or for that matter common decency.
I'm out to win.
Monday, October 13, 2008
My Open Apology To Shadowhawk-I'm Sorry I Called You A Fat Bitch
Sometimes I tend to get a little carried away when I engage in a disagreement with somebody, but I am hopeful that Shadowhawk understands that I respect his rights to his beliefs, and would never intentionally speak to him or of him in a derogatory manner. After all, he knows himself that I have defended the First Amendment rights of many with whom I have had disagreements. He and I became acquainted due to my vociferous defense of Gavin and Yvonne Frost, who seem to be about as leftist as they come, from fellow leftist A J Drew.
However, in response to my last post, Shadowhawk sent me a comment which understandably got my dander up. In a reply to my post which pointed out how John McCain wrote a letter to Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist in 2006 urging reform of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and also urging steps be taken to protect the American taxpayer in the event these entities fell, Shadowhawk made the following comment-
You know i would give him the benefit of the doubt, EXCEPT he is on Camera caught saying he was ALL FOR ..deregulation, not once but several times.. His senility has caused him to be the worst flip flopper ever..NOW the other night at the debates he wants to take 300 billion and thats a lowball estimate and buy up ALL the bad mortgages in America..Mccains OWN economists have said that his plan is ATE THE FUCK UP, and yet they are still gonna vote for him..By Mccain buying up all these bad mortgages hes REWARDING people for poor judgement.. His Hail Mary pass made it about 2 feet. I really cant see how people in there right minds are gonna vote for this guy..!!!
11:19 PM
I couldn't believe what I was seeing. Of course, I reasoned that if Obama had made the exact same proposal, Shadowhawk and others on the left would have been trumpeting this as a "progressive" policy worthy of commendation. (If this seems confusing, you must remember that in the leftist lexicon, the term "progressive" is not a pejorative.)
The more I thought about it, the more I realized I just couldn't let this stand without a response. I replied as follows-
Shadowhawk-
"I really cant see how people in there right minds are gonna vote for this guy..!!!"
Me personally, I would have preferred Fred Thompson or Rudy Giuliani, but the main reason I decided to stick with voting Republican in general is because they are less likely to appoint judges that will trash the constitution. Here's the difference between the two, in their own words paraphrased-
McCain-I will appoint judges who will follow and apply the law.
Obama-I will appoint judges who have empathy for the poor and working mothers, etc.
Errr, excuse the fuck out of me, but its not the place of a judge to apply "empathy" towards ANY group as a basis for a judicial ruling. Their function is to apply the law, in every case, just like McCain said.
As far as anything else goes, its inconsequential by comparison. A bad law can be repealed any time, and the damage done even by the worse of them can be eventually reversed.
A judge is appointed until he dies or resigns and their rulings are extremely difficult to overturn.
I could go into more detail about gun laws, the death penalty, cigarette taxes, and the myriads of other things Democrats want to do that they trust their judges to uphold. Or in some cases they can trust the most extreme of their judicial appointees to do their dirty work for them outright through the work of proxies, such as for example upholding lawsuits against gun manufacturers in an effort to regulate them and price them out of range of the average American. But I'm sure you get the point.
Sorry, but if it gets right down to the nitty gritty, and I have to choose between my constitutional rights and the whims of special interest groups, gays and witches can stay in the closets where they were probably not only better off but probably happier anyway, and if a woman needs an abortion, just make sure she sterilizes her bicycle spokes and she should be all right.
It's a shame it has to be that way, but don't blame me, blame the leftist judges who seem to have never seen a leftist interpretation to the constitution that didn't love.
Maybe one of these days leftist judges will catch on and realize, "hey, maybe if we stopped fucking with the Second Amendment and people's individual liberties and stopped trying to turn the United States of Amrica into the Socialist States of America, then maybe most Americans wouldn't give a big rats ass if two homosexuals got married, or if a group of self-styled or even real witches wanted to conduct rituals to Hecate, and by and large they would probably be tickled pink at the thought of leftist women pureeing their own babies in their own wombs. In fact their attitudes would probably be "the more the merrier".
I know that's pretty much the way it works with me.
That would have been more than sufficient, but something inside of me would just not let it rest at that. Following a reply to a couple of comments by Mr. Beamish, I found myself yet fuming over Shadowhawk's apparent unfairness. Finally, unable to contain myself any longer, I made the following all-together uncalled-for comment-
By the way, Starhawk-
Check out my response to the last post (as of now) by Isaac Bonewitz on Views From The Cyberhinge. I'm declaring war on this idea that all pagans should vote leftist, and I'm taking no prisoners, and that's including pagan "leaders".
Cast spells for democracy?
Haruumph.
I gleefully posted this comment, laughing with devilish glee at the thought that he would not be able to resist heading over to the blog in question to see what bilge I spewed on the post written by one of the most respected of pagan elders. Wait till he gets a load of that, I thought-and then it finally occurred to me. What have I come to? Have I finally descended so low that even I am shocked?
I referred to my general cordial acquaintance and at times ally Shadowhawk as-GASP-STARHAWK
Now those are fighting words. Therefore, in the interests of promoting peace, tolerance, and understanding, I hereby now offer this apology to Shadowhawk-
My sincerest apologies, Shadowhawk. I know that you are a practicing and devout Druid, and a male. I know that you are not, by any stretch of the imagination, a morbidly obese, fat-ass bitch with a cunt that probably smells like the fertilizer you dragged to Saint Paul during the Republican convention pretending to teach organic gardening but actually hoping you would be arrested on suspicion of being in possession of potential bomb making material so you could cry about how your constitutional rights have been trampled.
I further assert that as a practicing Druid of many years duration, your magical skill is probably considerable, and I would imagine that your greatest magical power is not limited to the magical ability to talk out of your fat ass.
Again, my apologies, buddy.
However, in response to my last post, Shadowhawk sent me a comment which understandably got my dander up. In a reply to my post which pointed out how John McCain wrote a letter to Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist in 2006 urging reform of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and also urging steps be taken to protect the American taxpayer in the event these entities fell, Shadowhawk made the following comment-
You know i would give him the benefit of the doubt, EXCEPT he is on Camera caught saying he was ALL FOR ..deregulation, not once but several times.. His senility has caused him to be the worst flip flopper ever..NOW the other night at the debates he wants to take 300 billion and thats a lowball estimate and buy up ALL the bad mortgages in America..Mccains OWN economists have said that his plan is ATE THE FUCK UP, and yet they are still gonna vote for him..By Mccain buying up all these bad mortgages hes REWARDING people for poor judgement.. His Hail Mary pass made it about 2 feet. I really cant see how people in there right minds are gonna vote for this guy..!!!
11:19 PM
I couldn't believe what I was seeing. Of course, I reasoned that if Obama had made the exact same proposal, Shadowhawk and others on the left would have been trumpeting this as a "progressive" policy worthy of commendation. (If this seems confusing, you must remember that in the leftist lexicon, the term "progressive" is not a pejorative.)
The more I thought about it, the more I realized I just couldn't let this stand without a response. I replied as follows-
Shadowhawk-
"I really cant see how people in there right minds are gonna vote for this guy..!!!"
Me personally, I would have preferred Fred Thompson or Rudy Giuliani, but the main reason I decided to stick with voting Republican in general is because they are less likely to appoint judges that will trash the constitution. Here's the difference between the two, in their own words paraphrased-
McCain-I will appoint judges who will follow and apply the law.
Obama-I will appoint judges who have empathy for the poor and working mothers, etc.
Errr, excuse the fuck out of me, but its not the place of a judge to apply "empathy" towards ANY group as a basis for a judicial ruling. Their function is to apply the law, in every case, just like McCain said.
As far as anything else goes, its inconsequential by comparison. A bad law can be repealed any time, and the damage done even by the worse of them can be eventually reversed.
A judge is appointed until he dies or resigns and their rulings are extremely difficult to overturn.
I could go into more detail about gun laws, the death penalty, cigarette taxes, and the myriads of other things Democrats want to do that they trust their judges to uphold. Or in some cases they can trust the most extreme of their judicial appointees to do their dirty work for them outright through the work of proxies, such as for example upholding lawsuits against gun manufacturers in an effort to regulate them and price them out of range of the average American. But I'm sure you get the point.
Sorry, but if it gets right down to the nitty gritty, and I have to choose between my constitutional rights and the whims of special interest groups, gays and witches can stay in the closets where they were probably not only better off but probably happier anyway, and if a woman needs an abortion, just make sure she sterilizes her bicycle spokes and she should be all right.
It's a shame it has to be that way, but don't blame me, blame the leftist judges who seem to have never seen a leftist interpretation to the constitution that didn't love.
Maybe one of these days leftist judges will catch on and realize, "hey, maybe if we stopped fucking with the Second Amendment and people's individual liberties and stopped trying to turn the United States of Amrica into the Socialist States of America, then maybe most Americans wouldn't give a big rats ass if two homosexuals got married, or if a group of self-styled or even real witches wanted to conduct rituals to Hecate, and by and large they would probably be tickled pink at the thought of leftist women pureeing their own babies in their own wombs. In fact their attitudes would probably be "the more the merrier".
I know that's pretty much the way it works with me.
That would have been more than sufficient, but something inside of me would just not let it rest at that. Following a reply to a couple of comments by Mr. Beamish, I found myself yet fuming over Shadowhawk's apparent unfairness. Finally, unable to contain myself any longer, I made the following all-together uncalled-for comment-
By the way, Starhawk-
Check out my response to the last post (as of now) by Isaac Bonewitz on Views From The Cyberhinge. I'm declaring war on this idea that all pagans should vote leftist, and I'm taking no prisoners, and that's including pagan "leaders".
Cast spells for democracy?
Haruumph.
I gleefully posted this comment, laughing with devilish glee at the thought that he would not be able to resist heading over to the blog in question to see what bilge I spewed on the post written by one of the most respected of pagan elders. Wait till he gets a load of that, I thought-and then it finally occurred to me. What have I come to? Have I finally descended so low that even I am shocked?
I referred to my general cordial acquaintance and at times ally Shadowhawk as-GASP-STARHAWK
Now those are fighting words. Therefore, in the interests of promoting peace, tolerance, and understanding, I hereby now offer this apology to Shadowhawk-
My sincerest apologies, Shadowhawk. I know that you are a practicing and devout Druid, and a male. I know that you are not, by any stretch of the imagination, a morbidly obese, fat-ass bitch with a cunt that probably smells like the fertilizer you dragged to Saint Paul during the Republican convention pretending to teach organic gardening but actually hoping you would be arrested on suspicion of being in possession of potential bomb making material so you could cry about how your constitutional rights have been trampled.
I further assert that as a practicing Druid of many years duration, your magical skill is probably considerable, and I would imagine that your greatest magical power is not limited to the magical ability to talk out of your fat ass.
Again, my apologies, buddy.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Fannie, Freddie, And John McCain
John McCain wrote a letter in 2006 strongly urging that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac be regulated and brought in line, and that steps were taken in the meantime to insure protection of the American taxpayer in the event they failed. Nineteen other Senators, all Republicans, signed the letter. Senator Obama did not sign it, nor did any other Democrat.
You can read the complete text of the letter here.
Following is the main gist of the letter, pretty much as I outlined above, as provided by The Anchoress-
“…vitally important that Congress take the necessary steps to ensure that [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac]…operate in a safe and sound manner.[and]..More importantly, Congress must ensure that the American taxpayer is protected in the event that either…should fail.”
So let's see, what are we to make from this? Hey, I know, let's look at it this way. McCain was warning about Fannie and Freddie's excesses two years ago and was urging action.
Senator Obama was the third largest recipient of their largesse and had former top-level officials of at least one of the companies on his campaign staff up until just recently. One of them was a former CEO now under investigation, and who might soon be indicted. He refused to do or say anything while efforts were blocked to look into the dealings of these entities. He may well have participated in blocking any such motions. Somebody certainly did. At the very least, he made no effort to join in any reform of these quasi governmental institutions, which is understandable, owing to his cozy relationship with them.
Some "Hope" and "Change"-If Obama is elected, I hope we end up with some change to spare.
You can read the complete text of the letter here.
Following is the main gist of the letter, pretty much as I outlined above, as provided by The Anchoress-
“…vitally important that Congress take the necessary steps to ensure that [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac]…operate in a safe and sound manner.[and]..More importantly, Congress must ensure that the American taxpayer is protected in the event that either…should fail.”
So let's see, what are we to make from this? Hey, I know, let's look at it this way. McCain was warning about Fannie and Freddie's excesses two years ago and was urging action.
Senator Obama was the third largest recipient of their largesse and had former top-level officials of at least one of the companies on his campaign staff up until just recently. One of them was a former CEO now under investigation, and who might soon be indicted. He refused to do or say anything while efforts were blocked to look into the dealings of these entities. He may well have participated in blocking any such motions. Somebody certainly did. At the very least, he made no effort to join in any reform of these quasi governmental institutions, which is understandable, owing to his cozy relationship with them.
Some "Hope" and "Change"-If Obama is elected, I hope we end up with some change to spare.
Improving On Mother Nature-The World's Oldest Endeavor
Speaking of PETA and, as per the subject of the last post, the prospect of Ben And Jerry's making their ice cream out of human breast milk as opposed to cows milk, the question occurred to me-
WOULD YOU BUY A MILKSHAKE FROM THIS WOMAN?
Evidently a lot of people are concerned that the upcoming W Magazine cover, which features Angelina Jolie breastfeeding one of her two newborn infants, will be perceived in a sexualized manner. I've seen the picture, and of course this is nonsense. You barely see just a hint of breast, and even less of the infant. All you see is a tiny hand-well, clutching something.
The idea of this picture perceived in a sexual manner is absurd enough, but the other end of the extreme seems to hold that this might do wonders for promoting breast-feeding.
"Breast-feeding in public reveals a whole lot less than what has been revealed on the red carpet. ... I think we do need more role models like Angelina Jolie willing to be photographed and say, `Hey look, it can be done, it oughta be done,'" said La Leche spokeswoman Jane Crouse.
Unfortunately, while this might be a viable option for many mothers, a significant amount of them do not produce the vitamins and nutrients in their breast milk sufficient for the needs of a newborn infant. Even in the best of circumstances, the healthiest of mother's breast milk could not hope to compare with the formulas created and approved by pediatricians. Although it is expensive, in most cases for a mother to produce something remotely in that range of nutritional value would require significant consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables. Over time, of course, this would amount to a similar expense.
The best that could be said for breast feeding is that it enhances the bonding between a mother and child, and might have other additional physical and psychological health benefits as well. Therefore, perhaps it is to be encouraged for this reason, and to help moderate the expense of formula feeding, but it should remain a supplementary nursing measure, not the primary one.
Of course, the nuttiest among breast feeding advocacy groups insist, among other things, that mothers should continue to breast feed their children as long as the child wishes to continue the practice-even if the child happens to be seven or eight years old, or older. Surprisingly, going by this it would seem that a woman produces breast milk for as long as her child engages in regular feeding.
I guess their point is this is a function of nature. Luckily, in the case of most women, mother nature will also kick in at least by the time the child reaches the terrible twos and, just like your average house cat, the mother will eventually say enough is enough. In almost every case this will be well before we are treated to the sight of a prepubescent child nursing from his mother's breast in a stall of your local MacDonalds.
I guess what irks me more than anything is that this is yet more proof that, in the minds of people that promote almost any movement, the idea that a famous celebrity endorses it is enough to make everybody else go along with it.
If I ever become a dad I would just as soon fork my money over for baby formula. I can easily make it up by cutting out unnecessary expenses. Eliminating movie and concert attendance is one thing that comes to mind.
WOULD YOU BUY A MILKSHAKE FROM THIS WOMAN?
Evidently a lot of people are concerned that the upcoming W Magazine cover, which features Angelina Jolie breastfeeding one of her two newborn infants, will be perceived in a sexualized manner. I've seen the picture, and of course this is nonsense. You barely see just a hint of breast, and even less of the infant. All you see is a tiny hand-well, clutching something.
The idea of this picture perceived in a sexual manner is absurd enough, but the other end of the extreme seems to hold that this might do wonders for promoting breast-feeding.
"Breast-feeding in public reveals a whole lot less than what has been revealed on the red carpet. ... I think we do need more role models like Angelina Jolie willing to be photographed and say, `Hey look, it can be done, it oughta be done,'" said La Leche spokeswoman Jane Crouse.
Unfortunately, while this might be a viable option for many mothers, a significant amount of them do not produce the vitamins and nutrients in their breast milk sufficient for the needs of a newborn infant. Even in the best of circumstances, the healthiest of mother's breast milk could not hope to compare with the formulas created and approved by pediatricians. Although it is expensive, in most cases for a mother to produce something remotely in that range of nutritional value would require significant consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables. Over time, of course, this would amount to a similar expense.
The best that could be said for breast feeding is that it enhances the bonding between a mother and child, and might have other additional physical and psychological health benefits as well. Therefore, perhaps it is to be encouraged for this reason, and to help moderate the expense of formula feeding, but it should remain a supplementary nursing measure, not the primary one.
Of course, the nuttiest among breast feeding advocacy groups insist, among other things, that mothers should continue to breast feed their children as long as the child wishes to continue the practice-even if the child happens to be seven or eight years old, or older. Surprisingly, going by this it would seem that a woman produces breast milk for as long as her child engages in regular feeding.
I guess their point is this is a function of nature. Luckily, in the case of most women, mother nature will also kick in at least by the time the child reaches the terrible twos and, just like your average house cat, the mother will eventually say enough is enough. In almost every case this will be well before we are treated to the sight of a prepubescent child nursing from his mother's breast in a stall of your local MacDonalds.
I guess what irks me more than anything is that this is yet more proof that, in the minds of people that promote almost any movement, the idea that a famous celebrity endorses it is enough to make everybody else go along with it.
If I ever become a dad I would just as soon fork my money over for baby formula. I can easily make it up by cutting out unnecessary expenses. Eliminating movie and concert attendance is one thing that comes to mind.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
PETA Urges Ben And Jerry's To Use Human Breast Milk
Can you imagine how expensive Ben And Jerry's ice cream would be if they actually did this? Not only would it be inordinantly expensive due to the relative scarcity of human breast milk, but there would by necessity be health screenings involved that would add to the expense. Where do they think the breast milk would come from? Half of it would probably be from HIV infected crack whores or other addicts needing a fix.
Then you would have the added expense of the different additives required to modify the taste, which is probably significantly different from cow's milk, especially in the case of those donors selling their breast milk for the unsavory purposes I mentioned.
This is just a stupid idea, and I doubt many people would go for it. It shouldn't really come as a surprise to anybody that PETA would come up with something like this. The only really surprising thing is that Ben and Jerry rejected the idea, as they are about loony enough in their own right to jump right on this. I would have expected them to at least test market the idea.
To tell you the truth, I thought this was a joke when I first heard about it, but it's true. Here's the actual letter written to Ben Cohen And Jerry Greenfield, co-founders and owners of Ben And Jerry's.
September 23, 2008
Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, Cofounders
Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc.
Dear Mr. Cohen and Mr. Greenfield,
On behalf of PETA and our more than 2 million members and supporters, I'd like to bring your attention to an innovative new idea from Switzerland that would bring a unique twist to Ben and Jerry's.
Storchen restaurant is set to unveil a menu that includes soups, stews, and sauces made with at least 75 percent breast milk procured from human donors who are paid in exchange for their milk. If Ben and Jerry's replaced the cow's milk in its ice cream with breast milk, your customers-and cows-would reap the benefits.
Using cow's milk for your ice cream is a hazard to your customer's health. Dairy products have been linked to juvenile diabetes, allergies, constipation, obesity, and prostate and ovarian cancer. The late Dr. Benjamin Spock, America's leading authority on child care, spoke out against feeding cow's milk to children, saying it may play a role in anemia, allergies, and juvenile diabetes and in the long term, will set kids up for obesity and heart disease-America's number one cause of death.
Animals will also benefit from the switch to breast milk. Like all mammals, cows only produce milk during and after pregnancy, so to be able to constantly milk them, cows are forcefully impregnated every nine months. After several years of living in filthy conditions and being forced to produce 10 times more milk than they would naturally, their exhausted bodies are turned into hamburgers or ground up for soup.
And of course, the veal industry could not survive without the dairy industry. Because male calves can't produce milk, dairy farmers take them from their mothers immediately after birth and sell them to veal farms, where they endure 14 to17 weeks of torment chained inside a crate so small that they can't even turn around.
The breast is best! Won't you give cows and their babies a break and our health a boost by switching from cow's milk to breast milk in Ben and Jerry's ice cream? Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Tracy Reiman
Executive Vice President
I want to add one more thought. It is true that cow's milk might have a connection to certain health problems, but this is mainly due to people overindulging in the product, not because cow's milk is itself inherently unhealthy for human consumption.
The Swiss example aside, this is a problem that is best solved by engaging in moderate consuption, like almost everything else diet and health related.
Then you would have the added expense of the different additives required to modify the taste, which is probably significantly different from cow's milk, especially in the case of those donors selling their breast milk for the unsavory purposes I mentioned.
This is just a stupid idea, and I doubt many people would go for it. It shouldn't really come as a surprise to anybody that PETA would come up with something like this. The only really surprising thing is that Ben and Jerry rejected the idea, as they are about loony enough in their own right to jump right on this. I would have expected them to at least test market the idea.
To tell you the truth, I thought this was a joke when I first heard about it, but it's true. Here's the actual letter written to Ben Cohen And Jerry Greenfield, co-founders and owners of Ben And Jerry's.
September 23, 2008
Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, Cofounders
Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc.
Dear Mr. Cohen and Mr. Greenfield,
On behalf of PETA and our more than 2 million members and supporters, I'd like to bring your attention to an innovative new idea from Switzerland that would bring a unique twist to Ben and Jerry's.
Storchen restaurant is set to unveil a menu that includes soups, stews, and sauces made with at least 75 percent breast milk procured from human donors who are paid in exchange for their milk. If Ben and Jerry's replaced the cow's milk in its ice cream with breast milk, your customers-and cows-would reap the benefits.
Using cow's milk for your ice cream is a hazard to your customer's health. Dairy products have been linked to juvenile diabetes, allergies, constipation, obesity, and prostate and ovarian cancer. The late Dr. Benjamin Spock, America's leading authority on child care, spoke out against feeding cow's milk to children, saying it may play a role in anemia, allergies, and juvenile diabetes and in the long term, will set kids up for obesity and heart disease-America's number one cause of death.
Animals will also benefit from the switch to breast milk. Like all mammals, cows only produce milk during and after pregnancy, so to be able to constantly milk them, cows are forcefully impregnated every nine months. After several years of living in filthy conditions and being forced to produce 10 times more milk than they would naturally, their exhausted bodies are turned into hamburgers or ground up for soup.
And of course, the veal industry could not survive without the dairy industry. Because male calves can't produce milk, dairy farmers take them from their mothers immediately after birth and sell them to veal farms, where they endure 14 to17 weeks of torment chained inside a crate so small that they can't even turn around.
The breast is best! Won't you give cows and their babies a break and our health a boost by switching from cow's milk to breast milk in Ben and Jerry's ice cream? Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Tracy Reiman
Executive Vice President
I want to add one more thought. It is true that cow's milk might have a connection to certain health problems, but this is mainly due to people overindulging in the product, not because cow's milk is itself inherently unhealthy for human consumption.
The Swiss example aside, this is a problem that is best solved by engaging in moderate consuption, like almost everything else diet and health related.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)