Saturday, December 30, 2006

We kill for our future. We kill for peace.

It's long past time that anybody try to make sense of President CooCoo Bananas incoherent babblings but having accidentally read this in the middle of an article on Saddam's execution I'm simply left saying "WTF?"

Mr Bush said Saddam's execution was "the kind of justice he denied the victims of his brutal regime".

Saddam's victims were denied show-trials followed by speedy executions?

Friday, December 29, 2006

This is down to the line, folks, this is down to the line. There can be no more divisions among the living!

I've got zombies on the mind.

Overdroid's lovely girlfriend presented me with a copy of Max Brook's "World War Z" for Christmas and I've found myself *ahem* devouring it.

Brooks tells the tale of a zombie apocalypse that engulfs the earth and almost wipes out humanity. The story is related as a series of post-war interviews Brooks conducted with the survivors for a report to the United Nations. It may sound cheesy but it's utterly engrossing. Probably partly because the zombies are really not that important to the story and partly because Brooks seems to have thought of everything when it comes to how such a fictional war would play out.

What I really love about the book is that it's seeped into my subconscious in all sorts of insidious ways. I'm finding myself analyzing what the best places in the Portland/ Metro area would be to defend against the zombie hordes. Brooks points out that zombies can't climb so tall buildings are a good idea as long as they're clear of infection and the stairwells have all been disabled.

There's a former federal treasury building only a couple of blocks from my office which has bars, bullet proof glass and steel shutters on the windows and 6" thick solid steel stores without handles that looked like a good place to hole-up. The problem is it's awfully close to downtown and that's where all the undead will concentrated.

Ultimately the safest place in Oregon in the even of a zombie uprising would probably be Timberline lodge. It's not as secure of a building but the zombies have a lot of trouble with cold weather and freeze. Just thought I'd share that important safety tip.

Admit so, sir. This is some new form of torture. Say it, Brother Sir.

A friend recently asked me who I thought would take the Democratic nomination in '08. I haven't the foggiest. If you believe the press then it'll be Hillary or Obama. Yawn. Here's my personal take on the candidates and potential candidates so far...

Hillary Clinton - No, no, just NO. The appeal seems to be her profile, her enormous campaign war chest with would presumably give her an advantage in the general, and the "two-fer" we'd get from having Bill Clinton back in the Whitehouse as the First Spouse. So what?

Hillary has been a huge disappointment as a Senator. She represents a solidly blue state yet has continued to put her national political ambitions ahead of what's good for the country or what's good for the Democratic party. Her support for the war or, at the very least, her failure to criticize it's prosecution, should automatically disqualify her from the nomination as demonstratably lacking the judgment necessary to be President.

Barack Obama - Look, I loved his keynote speech at the convention, although it was delivered before the the wrong audience. Democrats aren't the ones pushing the red/ blue America meme.

Putting that aside the guy just hasn't lived up to the hype. There was a particularly memorable moment when he got Pwned by John McCain over torture that comes to mind. He just comes across as too nice a guy to deal realistically with Republicans who favor eliminationist policies towards Democrats.

John Edwards - I like the populist message and like seeing someone focus on economic concerns but the fact is he did very poorly in his debate with V.P. Yosemite Sam. If you can't face down the Prince of Darkness, who can you face down.

Dennis Kucinich - Love his policitics but don't think he has a serious chance at fundraising and the nomination. Would love to be wrong on this.

John Kerry and Al Gore - I'm lumping these guys together not just because they share the dubious honor of already having been the Democratic candidate for the Presidency but they also both failed to understand the depths Republicans would go to to steal the Presidency nor be willing to put up a real fight. Kerry sins on this issue are particularly unforgivable.

I know I left a ton of potential candidates off this list the whole exercise is beginning to leave me depressed. I'm really hoping for a white horse this year to come in and shake things up.

Thursday, December 28, 2006

Let a man die, right away he's "good, old Claude". How was he *before* he bucked out?

One more observation on the death of President Ford.The headline in today's Big O reads "Ford again stirs unity, this time to grieve." This seems to be the prevailing public stance on the former President.

But I'm having a difficult time imagining that same sentiment will be extended by the press to former President Clinton when he passes. In fact - I can't imagine there will be a headline or article that doesn't lead with the Lewinsky matter and refer to the impeachment in one way or another.

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

When they look at me, they see what they are.

I really try to live by the adage to never speak ill of the dead but I can't be the only one finding the adjective "brave" a little tough to swallow when referring to Gerald Ford. His crowning achievement was his pardon of Richard Nixon- an act that won him a "Profile in Courage" award from the Kennedy foundation a few years ago. Ted Kennedy said he spoke out against the pardon at the time but realizes now that it was a brave act that will be looked on favorably by history. He may be speaking too soon.

It's too soon to tell for sure, but it seems to me that history will judge that the scorch-and-burn political strategy really came into it's own under Nixon and Ford's pardon did nothing but push it out of sight. It continued to fester and plague our political system for the next thirty years. Had Nixon actually been tried and convicted we MAY not have had to suffer through the likes of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove with the damage they've done to America and our political system.

Tuesday, December 26, 2006

I can't be responsible for what my goons are ordered to do.


I hope everybody had a wonderful holiday. I know I sure had a great time goofing with Overdroid and his gal, Don and his fam, the fam, HJ and everybody else and I suppose it's time to get back to work and post a couple of things since I'm out of blackberry wine anyway.

So right out of the gate I give you this article covering Saddam losing his death-sentence appeal in Iraq. I recall quite a few Western legal analysts saying the conviction would probably be overturned on appeal considering what a farce the actual trial was. Suckers.

Seems there's this section of Iraqi law in which a death sentence must be ratified by the President and two Vice Presidents of Iraq. There was some question as to whether President Talabani would sign the death warrant since he generally opposses the death penalty but the Appeals court wasn't about to let that technicality get in the way of a good hangin' --

Raed Juhi, a spokesman for the High Tribunal court that convicted Saddam, said the Iraqi judicial system would ensure that Saddam is executed even if Talabani and the two vice presidents do not ratify the decision.

“We’ll implement the verdict by the power of the law,” Juhi said without elaborating.

At least it's not like Washington is pushing the High Tribunal to ignore the countries' laws and push through this execution. Our hands are clean, at least.

Excuse me while I clean off my keyboard. I just re-read the paragraph before this.