I see where Mohamed ElBaradei has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. While I'm more than a little skeptical about the value of this prize, and of the appropriateness of some of the past choices of recipients, this year Mr. ElBaradei is a pretty reasonable choice. At least, he seems that way to me. But to the professionally-disgruntled Leo Morris, the award seems to have been quite offensive. Mr. Morris complains that Mr. ElBaradei was unsuccessful in preventing Iran and North Korea from constructing nuclear weapons. (Does Iran, in fact, have nukes? Uncle Leo doesn't exactly claim that they have; he merely makes a weaselly implication to that effect.) Mr. ElBaradei's real offense, however, was in saying that the Wee Emperor, George II, was talking nonsense about what Iraq had and didn't have -- and being correct about it. Some things just can't be forgiven.
Perhaps Mr. Morris is correct, though, when he says Mr. ElBaradei was not successful in restraining those who should have been restrained in the interest of peace. After all, he failed miserably to prevent President Chickenhawk from painting the ground red, in Afghanistan and Iraq, with other people's blood. Of course, Mr. Baradei could claim that he was as powerless to control Mr. Bush's bloodthirstiness as he was to prevent unapproved regimes from getting unapproved weapons. But it's never too late for the U.N. to mend its ways. Some sort of international alliance -- a Coalition of the Willing -- should come together to put a "coercive inspections" program in place to get nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons out of the Pentagon's hands. After all, the regime on the Potomac has actually proved, over and over again, that it cannot be trusted with WMDs.
Saturday, October 08, 2005
Thursday, October 06, 2005
It Speaks. Oh, Yes, It Speaks.
Well, well, folks. Just lookie here. Chimpy's been chittering again.
Many accuse Dear Leader of "cronyism," of filling government positions with incompetent sycophants who've provided The Great Man with agreeable company, flattery, boozing companionship, nose candy, whatever. I haven't much cared, truth to tell; to the extent that we must live under tyrants, I suppose I'd generally prefer that they were motivated by simple greed or the quest for pharmacological bliss, instead of the direct pleasures of exerting power over their subjects. A buffoon may sprawl, scratching himself and belching, in the seat of power; but at least he's usually less efficient, and less wholehearted, than a True Believer. But after hearing radio excerpts of the Wee Emperor's remarks today, and then having read them at the above link, I do wish he'd either hire a sane speechwriter, or that he'd just shut the hell up. The latter, tragically, is far too much to hope for.
Who put these words in his mouth?
The terrorists regard Iraq as the central front in their war against humanity.
Now, say what you will about "terrorists" (that is, men who bomb innocent people without the benefit of aircraft or automated, target-seeking bombs, and who don't wear snappy uniforms). But who regards himself as being at war "against humanity?" Does Gee-Dub's Minion of the Word Processor think we're all completely stupid?
Oh, wait ... we are still voting for major-brand candidates, aren't we? Uh, just never mind that question. Instead, hearken as Dear Leader tells us what a crazy fanatic Osama bin Laden is:
Bin Laden has stated: "The whole world is watching this war and the two adversaries. It's either victory and glory, or misery and humiliation."
This in the same speech in which Our Glorious Wartime Prez declares:
We will never back down, never give in, and never accept anything less than complete victory.
So, if OBL's a maniac (and he may well be), what does that make Smirk? His indispensable ally, that's what. But if bin Laden thinks that our synthetic Tough Texan is finished with him, why, he has another think coming. Dubya has that despicable ex-Saudi coward all figured out:
Bin Laden says his own role is to tell Muslims, quote, "what is good for them and what is not." And what this man who grew up in wealth and privilege considers good for poor Muslims is that they become killers and suicide bombers. He assures them that his -- that this is the road to paradise -- though he never offers to go along for the ride.
Yes, bin Laden's hypocritical personal cowardice stands in stark contrast to the well-proven valor of our Chickenhawk-in-Chief -- that battle-scarred veteran of the Texas skies during the Viet Cong assault on Dallas. When the chips are down, when danger threatens, our Prez doesn't merely order others to run at top speed for the safety of an undisclosed SAC base in Nebraska somewhere. Oh, no ... George the Lionhearted leads from the front! He hits that undisclosed secure location first. He has to make sure it's safe for the rest of us, don't you know.
I'm recalling the days of the Clinton junta, in which I thought that maybe God was inflicting Bubba-of-the-Hair-Spray on America as a disciplinary measure for our sin and decadence. And really, I still think that. But it's just such a shame that, after eight years of Clintonista rule, we didn't get the divine message. Now, it seems to me, God has punished us even more severely, by visiting Chimpy upon us for another eight. We'd better straighten up and fly right before 2008. Who knows what sort of evil clown could be awaiting us then?
Many accuse Dear Leader of "cronyism," of filling government positions with incompetent sycophants who've provided The Great Man with agreeable company, flattery, boozing companionship, nose candy, whatever. I haven't much cared, truth to tell; to the extent that we must live under tyrants, I suppose I'd generally prefer that they were motivated by simple greed or the quest for pharmacological bliss, instead of the direct pleasures of exerting power over their subjects. A buffoon may sprawl, scratching himself and belching, in the seat of power; but at least he's usually less efficient, and less wholehearted, than a True Believer. But after hearing radio excerpts of the Wee Emperor's remarks today, and then having read them at the above link, I do wish he'd either hire a sane speechwriter, or that he'd just shut the hell up. The latter, tragically, is far too much to hope for.
Who put these words in his mouth?
The terrorists regard Iraq as the central front in their war against humanity.
Now, say what you will about "terrorists" (that is, men who bomb innocent people without the benefit of aircraft or automated, target-seeking bombs, and who don't wear snappy uniforms). But who regards himself as being at war "against humanity?" Does Gee-Dub's Minion of the Word Processor think we're all completely stupid?
Oh, wait ... we are still voting for major-brand candidates, aren't we? Uh, just never mind that question. Instead, hearken as Dear Leader tells us what a crazy fanatic Osama bin Laden is:
Bin Laden has stated: "The whole world is watching this war and the two adversaries. It's either victory and glory, or misery and humiliation."
This in the same speech in which Our Glorious Wartime Prez declares:
We will never back down, never give in, and never accept anything less than complete victory.
So, if OBL's a maniac (and he may well be), what does that make Smirk? His indispensable ally, that's what. But if bin Laden thinks that our synthetic Tough Texan is finished with him, why, he has another think coming. Dubya has that despicable ex-Saudi coward all figured out:
Bin Laden says his own role is to tell Muslims, quote, "what is good for them and what is not." And what this man who grew up in wealth and privilege considers good for poor Muslims is that they become killers and suicide bombers. He assures them that his -- that this is the road to paradise -- though he never offers to go along for the ride.
Yes, bin Laden's hypocritical personal cowardice stands in stark contrast to the well-proven valor of our Chickenhawk-in-Chief -- that battle-scarred veteran of the Texas skies during the Viet Cong assault on Dallas. When the chips are down, when danger threatens, our Prez doesn't merely order others to run at top speed for the safety of an undisclosed SAC base in Nebraska somewhere. Oh, no ... George the Lionhearted leads from the front! He hits that undisclosed secure location first. He has to make sure it's safe for the rest of us, don't you know.
I'm recalling the days of the Clinton junta, in which I thought that maybe God was inflicting Bubba-of-the-Hair-Spray on America as a disciplinary measure for our sin and decadence. And really, I still think that. But it's just such a shame that, after eight years of Clintonista rule, we didn't get the divine message. Now, it seems to me, God has punished us even more severely, by visiting Chimpy upon us for another eight. We'd better straighten up and fly right before 2008. Who knows what sort of evil clown could be awaiting us then?
Wednesday, October 05, 2005
It's All Good ... Really!
Sad but true: many ungrateful, untrusting, and critical people are complaining about the Dear Leader's choice of Ms. Miers as our (prospective) newest Supreme. But not me. I regard this as a healthy development.
In my thoughts, this nomination is linked with the recent announcement that the ten-dollar bill is about to take on the same pseudocolored, asymmetric, Euro-ish, Monopoly-money look as we currently enjoy on its twenty-dollar counterpart. I'm sure that some traditionalist stick-in-the-muds are unhappy about that, too. But not me. I have been blessed with a vision of the subtle and profound linkage between these two developments.
Ms. Miers, you see, is being derided as an unqualified beneficiary of the legendary Dubya Cronyism. The critics seem to think she's never been a judge at all, not even at the traffic-court level. They seem concerned that she's never even argued a case before the Supremes. They seem concerned that she's an opponent of -- or a proponent of -- sodomatrimony. No one seems to be sure about what her attitude might be toward the last publicly-recognized sacrament in America: baby sacrifice, otherwise known as A Woman's Right to Choose, Reproductive Choice, etc. Since she's a nominee to be our latest Philosopher-King (errrr, -Queen), these things seem terribly, terribly important. The Court, after all, rightly orders all of American life. The critics seem to think that Dear Leader ought to show the appropriate seriousness in discharging his sacred duty of proposing new philosopher-kings to replace the ones who've moved on to Judicial Valhalla.
Similarly, some are bound to be upset as our paper currency changes its appearance yet again. After all, this is Legal Tender that we're talking about: for all debts, public and private. It's backed by the Full Faith and Credit of that famously faithful and credit-worthy institution, the United State Government. "In God we trust, all others pay cash" -- well, this is the cash they're fooling with. The worrywarts ask: do we want our Federal Reserve Notes to look like some kind of peso or yen some other kind of comedy "money," that you have to have the proverbial wheelbarrow full of to buy a loaf of bread?
But I hold the "don't worry ... be happy" view of these things. In the supreme court, I see a near-worthless collection of Constitution-usurpers and -defilers. Its power to usurp and defile grows substantially from a spurious public perception of its legitimacy -- a legitimacy of which it rightfully has little or none. And in our paper money, I see ... well, I started to type "a liar's promise to pay," but it's no longer even that. The old "silver certificates" were liars' promises to pay, but our current paper promises nothing. It's money because it says it's money, and implies a vague threat to punish you if you refuse to go along with the gag. It's money exactly to the extent that We The Sheeple accept it as such, and no more. Worthless paper money, backed by nothing ... a judiciary that claims some gnostic right of saying what the constitution means ... both are simply aspects of the shell game by which we rubes are fleeced of our liberties, our cultural heritage, and our wealth, while being temporarily distracted by low entertainment.
So, why am I happy? It's simple. The shell game works because almost no one sees it for what it is. The regime stands on a false image of seriousness and dignity. And the first step toward the collapse of the regime, if it happens at all, is the disillusionment of the sheeple. (Don't misunderstand: I'm not saying this will happen. It is, I think, highly unlikely; but it's a wistfully-pleasant thought, nonetheless.) Thus, I applaud whatever happens that strips away a shred or two of the facade of seriousness. Minnesota wants to elect a former fake pro wrestler as its Guv? Sure -- go for it, guys! California elects its second movie-actor Guv (this one with a comedy accent and a, well, colorful history)? You should have done it a long time ago, Golden Staters! Why should the Wee Emperor content himself with nominating a staff operative to the supremes? Go all the way, Dear Leader! Nominate ... oh, I don't know, how about O.J. Simpson? He's got some legal experience! Want to make the ten-spot look like play money? So what -- it is play money. Have at it!
Maybe somebody will put two and two together.
Well, all right, so they won't. I can dream, can't I?
In my thoughts, this nomination is linked with the recent announcement that the ten-dollar bill is about to take on the same pseudocolored, asymmetric, Euro-ish, Monopoly-money look as we currently enjoy on its twenty-dollar counterpart. I'm sure that some traditionalist stick-in-the-muds are unhappy about that, too. But not me. I have been blessed with a vision of the subtle and profound linkage between these two developments.
Ms. Miers, you see, is being derided as an unqualified beneficiary of the legendary Dubya Cronyism. The critics seem to think she's never been a judge at all, not even at the traffic-court level. They seem concerned that she's never even argued a case before the Supremes. They seem concerned that she's an opponent of -- or a proponent of -- sodomatrimony. No one seems to be sure about what her attitude might be toward the last publicly-recognized sacrament in America: baby sacrifice, otherwise known as A Woman's Right to Choose, Reproductive Choice, etc. Since she's a nominee to be our latest Philosopher-King (errrr, -Queen), these things seem terribly, terribly important. The Court, after all, rightly orders all of American life. The critics seem to think that Dear Leader ought to show the appropriate seriousness in discharging his sacred duty of proposing new philosopher-kings to replace the ones who've moved on to Judicial Valhalla.
Similarly, some are bound to be upset as our paper currency changes its appearance yet again. After all, this is Legal Tender that we're talking about: for all debts, public and private. It's backed by the Full Faith and Credit of that famously faithful and credit-worthy institution, the United State Government. "In God we trust, all others pay cash" -- well, this is the cash they're fooling with. The worrywarts ask: do we want our Federal Reserve Notes to look like some kind of peso or yen some other kind of comedy "money," that you have to have the proverbial wheelbarrow full of to buy a loaf of bread?
But I hold the "don't worry ... be happy" view of these things. In the supreme court, I see a near-worthless collection of Constitution-usurpers and -defilers. Its power to usurp and defile grows substantially from a spurious public perception of its legitimacy -- a legitimacy of which it rightfully has little or none. And in our paper money, I see ... well, I started to type "a liar's promise to pay," but it's no longer even that. The old "silver certificates" were liars' promises to pay, but our current paper promises nothing. It's money because it says it's money, and implies a vague threat to punish you if you refuse to go along with the gag. It's money exactly to the extent that We The Sheeple accept it as such, and no more. Worthless paper money, backed by nothing ... a judiciary that claims some gnostic right of saying what the constitution means ... both are simply aspects of the shell game by which we rubes are fleeced of our liberties, our cultural heritage, and our wealth, while being temporarily distracted by low entertainment.
So, why am I happy? It's simple. The shell game works because almost no one sees it for what it is. The regime stands on a false image of seriousness and dignity. And the first step toward the collapse of the regime, if it happens at all, is the disillusionment of the sheeple. (Don't misunderstand: I'm not saying this will happen. It is, I think, highly unlikely; but it's a wistfully-pleasant thought, nonetheless.) Thus, I applaud whatever happens that strips away a shred or two of the facade of seriousness. Minnesota wants to elect a former fake pro wrestler as its Guv? Sure -- go for it, guys! California elects its second movie-actor Guv (this one with a comedy accent and a, well, colorful history)? You should have done it a long time ago, Golden Staters! Why should the Wee Emperor content himself with nominating a staff operative to the supremes? Go all the way, Dear Leader! Nominate ... oh, I don't know, how about O.J. Simpson? He's got some legal experience! Want to make the ten-spot look like play money? So what -- it is play money. Have at it!
Maybe somebody will put two and two together.
Well, all right, so they won't. I can dream, can't I?
Thursday, September 29, 2005
Another Fragrant Whiff From the Rotting Corpse
The United State is a constitutional republic. It is, it is, it is. It has to be so, because I learned it in school. It says so right here on the label. Isn't it just about time for National Constitution Appreciation Week or something? I hope so, because news stories like this one tempt me to have doubts. They tempt me to crimethink.
We live in a country that is $7.9 trillion (that's $7.9E+12, mind you) in debt. That debt increases by $1.5 billion each and every day. We are taxed according to a "code" of such labyrinthine complexity that, it is generally conceded, no single living human anywhere understands it. We live in a country that is completely unable to control its southern "border," yet maintains a vast military establishment all over the planet so that we may order the affairs of all the Earth's people. And yet, the glorious supervisors of this childish madhouse, our saintly and intelligent Senators, heroic geniuses on the order of Senator "Psycho" John McCain, Senator Jim "Call Me Jim" Bunning, and Senator Conrad "Oh God Please Don't Send Me Back to Montana" Burns, certainly find the time to concern themselves with the vital question: are our naughty millionaire professional baseballers being sufficiently deterred from using the Eee-vill Steeeeroids by their wealthy employers? Or is it necessary for the Empire to handle things?
A couple of questions come to mind.
1. How long after they are elected to public office do these egregious jackasses have the surgery that permanently and completely takes away any sense of the ridiculous that they might ever have had?
2. What part of Our Famous Dead and Rotting Constitution authorizes our supervisors to manage the affairs of professional entertainers?
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. And yes, oh yes, how intensely I do love Big Brother. Yowza.
We live in a country that is $7.9 trillion (that's $7.9E+12, mind you) in debt. That debt increases by $1.5 billion each and every day. We are taxed according to a "code" of such labyrinthine complexity that, it is generally conceded, no single living human anywhere understands it. We live in a country that is completely unable to control its southern "border," yet maintains a vast military establishment all over the planet so that we may order the affairs of all the Earth's people. And yet, the glorious supervisors of this childish madhouse, our saintly and intelligent Senators, heroic geniuses on the order of Senator "Psycho" John McCain, Senator Jim "Call Me Jim" Bunning, and Senator Conrad "Oh God Please Don't Send Me Back to Montana" Burns, certainly find the time to concern themselves with the vital question: are our naughty millionaire professional baseballers being sufficiently deterred from using the Eee-vill Steeeeroids by their wealthy employers? Or is it necessary for the Empire to handle things?
A couple of questions come to mind.
1. How long after they are elected to public office do these egregious jackasses have the surgery that permanently and completely takes away any sense of the ridiculous that they might ever have had?
2. What part of Our Famous Dead and Rotting Constitution authorizes our supervisors to manage the affairs of professional entertainers?
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. And yes, oh yes, how intensely I do love Big Brother. Yowza.
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
It Says In the Bible Somewhere ...
I'm looking for the Scripture that says this is OK:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- The Federal Emergency Management Agency will reimburse churches and other religious organizations that have provided shelter, food and supplies to the victims of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.
The payments with taxpayer money would mark the first time that the government has made such payments to faith-based groups at a time following natural disasters, the newspaper reported, citing FEMA officials.
FEMA is a division within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
According to the article, religious groups that operated emergency shelters, food distribution centers or medical facilities at the request of state and local governments in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama would be eligible.
( ... )
Kinerney said they would include "labor costs incurred in excess of normal operations, rent for the facility and delivery of essential needs like food and water," the report said.
The policy was outlined in a September 9 internal memorandum, titled "Eligible Costs for Emergency Sheltering Declarations."
Under the policy, religious groups, like secular nonprofit groups, will be required to document their costs and file for reimbursement from state and local emergency management agencies, which in turn will seek funds from FEMA, the report said.
Wasn't there a chapter in the Book of Hezekiah somewhere, in which God directed the Levitical priests to tax the people, under threat of force, to finance benevolences? I thought there was. Seems like I read it once. But I can't find the chapter. (Can't find the whole book, as far as that goes, but that's another issue.)
Maybe it was in Paul's first epistle to the church at Miletus. Let's see, 1 Miletians 2:15, if I remember correctly ... it says, "And I urge you, brothers, in view of the manifold mercies and rich provisions of our God, to file with Caesar without delay, for reimbursement of the denarii that you have expended to feed and clothe and shelter the hungry and naked and homeless, making certain to conform in your papyrus-work to all applicable Imperial standards." At least, that's what I think it said. But I can't find that one either. Must have been back there near Philemon or one of those other short ones.
This puts me in mind of the conservative analysis of the emergence of the large and increasingly alienated underclass during and after the 1960s, in spite of (or perhaps because of) the Great Society, the War on Poverty, etc. The idea was that the functional urban black family pretty much ceased to exist when the various poverty programs offered cash assistance to mothers only if the fathers were absent from the home. The analysis said that the government had effectively displaced and replaced the low-income father, causing (or at least facilitating and exacerbating) the whole familiar set of social pathologies that became widespread among poor blacks, and is now becoming characteristic of a fast-growing white underclass, also. (This was back when "conservative" meant something other than "mindless cheerleader for any war, anywhere, anytime, at any cost to anybody except me.") The mom, supposedly, found the government to be a better and more reliable provider than the father was, and so he was replaced.
Well, the Christian church is supposed to be the "bride of Christ" and is supposed to depend on Him for provision. Ah, but now, a different deal is being offered ... now the church can be the bride of FEMA! It's bad enough, I think, that the government puts the gun to everyone's head to shake loose tax money, allegedly for "benevolence" which, somehow, is always preceded by the muzzle of an M-16. Now, though, it invites the Church to become an accessory and beneficiary of its crimes. Again, from the news story:
The report cited a FEMA official in Louisiana as saying it is too early to know how many groups will seek reimbursement under the new program.
I'll be interested to find out just which "groups" sign up for the mammon of unrighteousness.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- The Federal Emergency Management Agency will reimburse churches and other religious organizations that have provided shelter, food and supplies to the victims of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.
The payments with taxpayer money would mark the first time that the government has made such payments to faith-based groups at a time following natural disasters, the newspaper reported, citing FEMA officials.
FEMA is a division within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
According to the article, religious groups that operated emergency shelters, food distribution centers or medical facilities at the request of state and local governments in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama would be eligible.
( ... )
Kinerney said they would include "labor costs incurred in excess of normal operations, rent for the facility and delivery of essential needs like food and water," the report said.
The policy was outlined in a September 9 internal memorandum, titled "Eligible Costs for Emergency Sheltering Declarations."
Under the policy, religious groups, like secular nonprofit groups, will be required to document their costs and file for reimbursement from state and local emergency management agencies, which in turn will seek funds from FEMA, the report said.
Wasn't there a chapter in the Book of Hezekiah somewhere, in which God directed the Levitical priests to tax the people, under threat of force, to finance benevolences? I thought there was. Seems like I read it once. But I can't find the chapter. (Can't find the whole book, as far as that goes, but that's another issue.)
Maybe it was in Paul's first epistle to the church at Miletus. Let's see, 1 Miletians 2:15, if I remember correctly ... it says, "And I urge you, brothers, in view of the manifold mercies and rich provisions of our God, to file with Caesar without delay, for reimbursement of the denarii that you have expended to feed and clothe and shelter the hungry and naked and homeless, making certain to conform in your papyrus-work to all applicable Imperial standards." At least, that's what I think it said. But I can't find that one either. Must have been back there near Philemon or one of those other short ones.
This puts me in mind of the conservative analysis of the emergence of the large and increasingly alienated underclass during and after the 1960s, in spite of (or perhaps because of) the Great Society, the War on Poverty, etc. The idea was that the functional urban black family pretty much ceased to exist when the various poverty programs offered cash assistance to mothers only if the fathers were absent from the home. The analysis said that the government had effectively displaced and replaced the low-income father, causing (or at least facilitating and exacerbating) the whole familiar set of social pathologies that became widespread among poor blacks, and is now becoming characteristic of a fast-growing white underclass, also. (This was back when "conservative" meant something other than "mindless cheerleader for any war, anywhere, anytime, at any cost to anybody except me.") The mom, supposedly, found the government to be a better and more reliable provider than the father was, and so he was replaced.
Well, the Christian church is supposed to be the "bride of Christ" and is supposed to depend on Him for provision. Ah, but now, a different deal is being offered ... now the church can be the bride of FEMA! It's bad enough, I think, that the government puts the gun to everyone's head to shake loose tax money, allegedly for "benevolence" which, somehow, is always preceded by the muzzle of an M-16. Now, though, it invites the Church to become an accessory and beneficiary of its crimes. Again, from the news story:
The report cited a FEMA official in Louisiana as saying it is too early to know how many groups will seek reimbursement under the new program.
I'll be interested to find out just which "groups" sign up for the mammon of unrighteousness.
Thursday, September 22, 2005
Now, Here's a Really Good Idea
Slacktivist has an idea I really like. America's Wartime Patriots currently think "supporting the troops" consists of buying one of those 99-cent magnetic ribbons at the Gas 'n' Go and slapping it on the trunk lid. Meanwhile, they're putting George's War on our grandkids' credit cards. Slacktivist suggests that the USO sell these fine magnet-ribbons for $500 for a "full-sized" one, and maybe a mere $100 for a little one -- the proceeds presumably to pay for the war. That way, we could see who really supports the war, even to the modest extent of ponying up some bucks.
After all, what's five hundred clams, compared with your life ... or your kid's ... or maybe "just" a lifetime, disfiguring wound?
If I know my 'Murikkan People, I could live with a war that could be financed in this way. It'd be so small, you couldn't tell it was going on. It wouldn't be much more than a few rude postcards per month, addressed to "Osama bin Laden, General Delivery, Some -Stan Or Other. And maybe a few forceful minutes in Pig-Boy Limbaugh's monologue, once a week.
Let's do it ... today!
After all, what's five hundred clams, compared with your life ... or your kid's ... or maybe "just" a lifetime, disfiguring wound?
If I know my 'Murikkan People, I could live with a war that could be financed in this way. It'd be so small, you couldn't tell it was going on. It wouldn't be much more than a few rude postcards per month, addressed to "Osama bin Laden, General Delivery, Some -Stan Or Other. And maybe a few forceful minutes in Pig-Boy Limbaugh's monologue, once a week.
Let's do it ... today!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)