I also meant to say...

I truly think that I could take Ken Jennings. I wish that it would be a little bit easier to get the chance. I could take him.

Discovered at a right-wing lunatic site that rhymes with pabaah.com...

Regarding Doonesbury being dropped by Continental Features:

"I am really happy that we are dropping that comic because first of all it is not even written by an American! Why on earth would we want any subversive un-American comics in our American newspapers anyway? It doesn't make any sense! I think we ought to throw Truedo in the jail with other traitors to our Freedom like Michael More. I think we should havea Constitutional Amenment which gives the President the right to jail or interrogate any suspected traitor."

I had to gently remind the individual in question about the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 and the Sedition Act of 1918. To borrow a line from an A&W commercial... What a dumbass! Even MOST of the Bushies I know aren't this ludicrous. I'm sure there are more lurking about, but I believe that even Dubya himself would have a laugh at the individual's apparent contempt for the United States Constitution (well, maybe not considering how much the Constitution is being bent as I type). Treason is already covered in the Constitution and this individual probably skipped the First Amendment lesson in Civics class. One thing I know I'll always get at the aforementioned website is a laugh from dorks like this.

This is social engineering with a gory side.

So long, farewell, Auf Wiedersehen, good night...

Damn, the 9/11 report is long...

There's a whole hell of a lot of information to take in. I might actually get the book version just for posterity.

Now for that bastion of "fair and balanced"-ness...

I didn't happen to hear it, but supposedly Bill O'Reilly had claimed on air that he'd debate anyone about the Patriot Act. Someone took him up on the offer. Who? The challenger is Michael Badnarik. Unfortunately, in following up on the challenge, Bill and/or the individuals at Fox say that the challenge was "misunderstood". Even if it was a misunderstanding, I doubt that O'Reilly would have Badnarik on. The only Republicrat alternative to see much media coverage is Nader. Besides, the excuse sounds like a lame-ass copout to me. I just think that O'Reilly and some of the other Foxies might actually be a little scared that Badnarik would wipe the floor with their collective asses when it comes to Constitutional issues. After all, O'Reilly is proud to have Pat Boone on his show. Pat Boone recently said the following things:

"I don't think censorship is a bad word, but it has become a bad word because everybody associates it with some kind of restriction on liberty,"

"But we do know that at some point a line that has to be drawn between one man's liberty and another man's license."

Mr. Boone said that if he were in charge of standards, there would be stringent controls on material. "It must be majority approved ... voluntary ... and self-imposed,"

"Censorship is healthy for any society, and that goes for arts, entertainment, anything. Self-imposed means that the majority of people say that is what we want, and it can be changed if people's attitudes change, which is how a democratic society works."

That's nice to know...try to censor me, assclown!

Dubya is legitimately concerned about atrocities and human rights. After all, that's why we went to Iraq (save for those pesky disappearing WMD), isn't it? The Darfur conflict began in early 2003. What's being done about that? If Dubya and friends are so concerned about putting an end to human suffering, we should be leading the charge to resolve the continuing problems in Darfur. I suppose that's just not as high on the priority list.

I just read about the PantsOnFire-mobile...

What gives? It's a (actually two POF-mobiles) car towing a trailer with a 12' statue of Dubya with his pants "on fire". The itineraries for the two PantsOnFire-mobiles can be viewed here. I think that it would KICK ASS to tool this thing around Cedar Rapids, IA in the run-up to the election in November.

I often bring up Libertarians here. Having thought about it, I don't think I've ever really pointed to anything that talks about Libertarianism. For a site with some good explanations (or links to explanations), go here. Most simply put (if you don't feel like reading a lot), libertarians believe that individuals are best suited to determine the courses of their lives (rather than a large and over-taxing bureaucracy) in a society of laws under the Constitution. As the Wiccans say, "An Ye Harm None, Do What Ye Will." (no, I'm not a Wiccan)

Applied to government:

Welfare? Privatize it or make it charitable. Education? Make it private. Income tax? Abolish it! The "war on drugs"? That's worked very well now, hasn't it? Many parts of the government are bloated and wasteful and their functions would be best carried out by private entities much more efficiently (making it possible to slash or abolish income taxes). Only those things which state governments couldn't accomplish (e.g. defense of the country and perhaps a few other things) would be maintained at a federal level. With smaller government, there would be less government regulation. Libertarians tend to believe that markets and industry (and on the micro-scale individuals) can regulate themselves in order to stay competitive and maintain high quality, eradicating the need for government involvement (and added cost). There's a hell of a lot more to it than that...

Want an easy way to see where your politics might lie? Click here and answer the ten questions.

I actually considered taking a drive to Cedar Rapids to see Dubya today...

Unfortunately, my sleep habits are such that I didn't feel that it would be safe. Besides, I didn't even really know about his visit until this morning. I don't frequent the campaign website or the blog (hell, they don't even allow comments) so I was late. Anyway, it would have been interesting to see (or picket or quietly chuckle about). I found it particularly interesting that Dubya's venue was Kirkwood Community College. The Libertarian VP candidate happens to teach there (a search of the faculty only pulls up his wife). Here's Campagna's blog...

I love the political games that are already being played with this Sandy Berger thing. Shows with hosts like Joe Scarborough have those flashy graphics that say "Another Clinton Scandal?". Some sites/news outlets mention that only copies are missing and others say that critical original documents from the Clinton Administration are MISSING. This IS a serious problem. The former National Security Advisor should have a damn clue about how to handle classified documentation. I just think it's too early to start blaming Berger's stupidity on Slick Willy.

Dude! Duke had better be careful. They might be issuing a deadly weapon.

I don't necessarily feel a year older...

Tempus fugit!

We decided to check out Version 2 of Exotic Thai for dinner. We tried Exotic Thai (the one in Davenport, IA) a couple of months ago. If you enjoy Asian food and haven't been there, give it a shot. "Version 2" is on the Illinois side of the water on John Deere across from Wal-Hell. The food was great. Now we just need an Outback on this side of the Mississippi River.

Someone is finally calling Fox on their "fair and balanced"-ness. Like I tell the people I know, I don't care if most of the people at Fox are foaming-at-the-mouth conservatives and they often make it obvious. Just say it! Say, "Hell yes we're conservative! Here's why..." That's all I want. I might not agree but at least I'd know that the individuals in question acknowledge what they believe.

I'm liberal in some ways (some might say) and conservative in others. I believe that most people are capable of taking care of their own lives and that the government shouldn't have the job of protecting everyone from themselves. Unfortunately, I don't know if America has the stomach to allow this. People often bring up the intense hatred of Libertarians for the "war on drugs". Libertarians don't want people to use drugs any more than Democrats, Republicans, or any other political body does. They just think that the war on drugs is a failure and skirts dangerously close (if not over the line) to allowing some violations of the Constitution. Besides, why are some drugs legal? Alcohol and tobacco cause deaths every year. They're still legal...

We just went and saw The Day After Tomorrow...

Suzanne just mentioned it here. I was not highly impressed. This movie followed a formulaic cataclysmic event followed by "lesson learned". The amount of "cheese" in this movie was just enough to make it seem silly to me. The effects were good but effects alone don't make a movie. However, even the US military is thinking about the implications of climate change. I hope that as we progress forward we consider the longer-term implications of the choices we make (as a country). This applies to energy production, national security, and much more. Unfortunately, I don't know if we will ever choose patience over pragmatism. I hope that we can learn.