Tag Archives: George W. Bush

Hug a Tree and Kiss Your A– Goodbye

Sometimes you just reach a point when you need to respond to something although you full well know that whatever you say won’t adequately make the point. But that’s never stopped me from opening my big mouth or, in this case, my keyboard. I’ve had so many people suggest to me that I “get a life” instead of spending my time thinking up these lame responses to minutia and other meaningless things. But if I were to get that said “life” I would then have to continue to absorb the “logic” spouted self-absorbed activists trying to make themselves feel better about themselves and then try to secure their 15 minutes of fame on NPR, CNN, MSNBC, Oprah or the View, not to mention the multitudinous Blog sites of other people’s opinions. And I’d like to thank our magnanimous former Vice President, Al Gore, first for inventing this internet thing which we all so pleasantly communicate with in vitriolic anonymity (and being of the Conservative bent, I fully accept my essence as “vitriolic” while acquiescing the “rational,” “tempered” and “meaningful” terms to the posters at “Daily KOS,” “Huffington Post,” et. al., who have many more clues than those who are unlucky enough to have the surnames of Bush, Cheney and/or Rove. Oh, and Mr. Gore, about that SPAM thing you inadvertently created many years ago when you were assembling your ones and zeroes to connect the world . . . putz!

Of course, that wasn’t his fault because those on the other side of the aisle–the side which owns panacea, utopia and the Land of Oz–only create Munchkins and Straw Men (with all due apologies former Secretary of Commerce, Robert Reich. There was no pun intended) while this side is solely responsible for the Wicked President of the West and his band of evil flying monkeys led by King Kong himself, Karl Rove. (By the way, Leftists, is Dubya really stupid since Karl supposedly has his hand up Dubya’s back pulling the mouth tab and spinning George’s head around like Linda Blair searching for the next word to say, or is Karl just a really poor ventriloquist? You gotta choose; you can’t have it both ways!)

Back to our former V.P., the brilliant IP God of this world. Gates did really well inventing one thing and running with it. He didn’t try to be everything to everybody (except for his operating system trying to be everything to everybody and bogging itself down mercilessly) but you, Al, can’t take your success with the most revolutionary communication concept since the Geico caveman spoke his first word on national TV last year and leave well enough alone for just a few years. A wise man once said “When you chose to ride two horses at the same time and they decide to go different ways, you quit making sense.” Alright, I made that up but it does beg the point I’m getting to.

Global warming. Since you really had little to nothing to do with the internet, why should we follow you down the myopic, slippery slope of things we could never hope to control? I beg your pardon, sir, but a different Messiah was promised a few millenniums ago. You are too late. And your influence in this matter cannot seek and can never hope to adequately influence the outcome you strive for. I shouldn’t be so sure, though. I concede it is possible Dan Brown’s research may trace your bloodline back to a great-great-great-great . . . (you get the point!) grandmother from Magdala and, by the way, that gal at the final dinner table does have that Gore-y aura to her but so does Mona in the Louvre. But we can’t worship you, and the hotter it gets the less I’ll feel like it just the same. If things made good sense, it might be different. But when logic gives way to lunacy, something’s got to go. And if you couldn’t muster up enough charisma to defeat a bumbling, word assassin that allegedly can’t walk and find Bin Laden at the same time except to recount little itty-bitty pieces of paper that your constituents couldn’t even skewer effectively in their patriotic effort to anoint their God-given prince the title of king, then why should we put a whole lot of stock into what you say now?

Just one good reason that has nothing to do with blind faith and I’m yours. Instead I am barraged day after day with a chads worth of evidence to build a consensus of science. Remember, your “people” couldn’t punch holes in paper, Al, so what should make me think your educated “people” can predict climate change to a reliability greater than TWC who can only give me a percentage chance of rain tomorrow yet promise me ten years from now I will be toast in my SUV? I’m looking for evidence not consensus. I get consensus from the Weather Channel. But the evidence overrides consensus when I’m ringing out my socks because Weather jocks guessed wrongly. Those with myopia typically can see nearby objects clearly but distant objects appear blurred.

That’s the official definition from Wikipedia dealing with eyesight but it is directly relevant to the myopic vision of ideologues also. Remember the adage “Can’t see the forest for the trees?” If Gorean philosophy requires logic just like other systems require, let’s extend the analogy to a logical end encompassing all factors to their “natural” extensions instead of focusing on just a portion of a scenario to proselytize the brainless. Following is a response to someone who stated something on the order of “well, both sides have a point, but the evidence warrants playing it safe on the global warming side and what would that hurt?

Oh, maybe hugging a tree could cause you to follow-up with kissing your ass goodbye . . . maybe? If you deal with all the ramifications of your actions, that is. Kind of like admiring those trees and forgetting that a forest can only exist and thrive when some of the trees are eventually taken out. You can either cut them down to thin the forest and keep it healthy or Mother Nature will do it in her own way just as she has done it for millenniums . . . without our help.

[Don’t mean to butt in the conversation, but I’d like to add a little information along with logic. It’s just an idea and I don’t want to poo-poo the theory of Mankind adding carbon dioxide and other pollutants to the atmosphere because that’s a given: we did and we do. It’s only logical it will have some kind of effect however little.]

The theory just a few short years ago was that this additional carbon dioxide was breaking open the Ozone layer and allowing in more ultraviolet rays. So is CO2 the culprit? Mechanization and fossil fuels are likely contributors as well as the Sun itself which can never be regulated.

In 1970, the Earth population was just below 4 billion persons. In 2007, it’s rapidly approaching 7 billion and surely will double the 1970 mark sometime in the next few years. And since we human beings breathe in oxygen and then expire CO2 into the atmosphere ourselves–now at a rate almost twice the amount of 40 years ago–how much of a contribution do we as living organisms contribute to the degeneration of our own planet? If we eliminate all of the fossil fuel contributors to global warming, how long will it be–since the resulting Utopia will surely make life “heaven on earth” by the standards of Green thinkers–our own population will strangle this planet with own emissions naturally occurring, and not even considering spatial, nourishment and natural resource consumption?

Nature has its own way of adjusting itself no matter what our contribution and wanting to conserve energy, find better ways to fuel our endeavors and having a desire to be relevant to the planet we live on is a noble idea by any measure. But the same people who strive to control our lives today with the assumption that the answer lies in controlling nature will also be the ones once our population reaches the breaking point that will want to decide which segment of the billions must be disposable to relieve this earth of its natural population. The fear of global warming today will soon give way to the terror of over population in the coming centuries because we as a world society continually strive to override Nature with our narcissistic belief that we are the masters of our own Fate when all we are momentary little pissants who think we know better.

What happens when the herd gets too big on the Savannah? Lack of food and resources starve the weakest and Nature makes her adjustment. It’s not a rule I concocted. It’s the way Nature rules. But now our advances in technology, medicine, food production, energy, et al., have disturbed the natural balance of nature by allowing us to live longer, more comfortably, etc. At a population of 1 billion, not a big deal. But now since we’re having a problem taking care of our own in Darfur, the call to quell the Earth’s heat with a mythical devotion to conservation for the planet is logically a non-sequitur if one considers that such an action will only propel this planet toward another horrible catastrophe since with such improved conditions, population would continue or accelerate to a different but nonetheless merciless end.

Solution? Do we exterminate people now or later? Better yet, let’s just get on the Global Warming Bus and wave exuberantly as we pass by Mother Nature on our way to self-aggrandizement. Of course, She has that wry smile on her face full well knowing that once we reach our final destination, it will be us searching our souls for another different solution when She’s had the answer all along: the natural way of survival of the fittest. Self-regulating and unforgiving.

“Real evidence on both sides.” The only thing “real” is like statistics interpretation; it depends entirely on how a question is asked and then interpreted. And if you don’t take into account all the ramifications of your conclusion, you might as well hug a tree. At least the tree might get something out of it because the other few billions (and multiplying exponentially) of people won’t be giving a damn because you feel good.

It’s really not necessary in the grander scheme of things to hug a tree and cut down those who disagree with you. The tree is more likely to give you a splinter, but your opponent is more likely to give you a hug.

Leave a comment

Posted by on May 14, 2007 in Politics


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,


Isn’t this internet communication wonderful? We can instantly send a message, instantly get a reply and instantly blog the entire world with our mundane little thoughts. Unless, you have dial-up then you might as well snail-mail the stuff; it’s faster. Just kidding, of course. After all we are talking U.S.P.S. so you may never get it at all!

This past week, though, I have come across a very disturbing method of communication promulgated by what we call PAC (Political Action Committees) and I’m not intending to be partisan because all sides are capable of abusing our freedom of speech equally, but I was drawn to one instance which broke the straw on this camel’s back. I had previously encountered another example a few weeks back also and I’m quite sure many more like it exist in the realm of internet communications.

I’m sure most of you are all too well familiar with SPAM. You know, the offers to enlarge (insert your smallest body part here . . . figuratively, of course!) anything, increase your wealth to staggering proportions for only $9.95 (and if it were that easy why aren’t the solicitors spending more of their time doing so?), purchase wonder drugs for 1/10 the cost of store prices, and you know the rest, I’m sure. I just read that about 85% of all e-mail delivered today is SPAM. Maybe our wonderfully geeky virus creators could refrain from screwing up our lives with their junk and spend more time focusing their attentions on converting e-mail SPAM into real Spam and that would solve two other major problems: we wouldn’t have to listen to self-righteous multi-millionaire rock stars whining about how much they care about feeding the world because surely the converted Spam would obfuscate the need for them to spend their precious time away from their mansions and teeny-bopper entourages. And the world’s hungry would have a new source of nourishment that the dictators and despots could steal away from them. But at least we will have tried once again in vain.

Unfortunately, SPAM is a necessary part of lives these days. And in their infinite wisdom of caring to get the “necessary” word to the masses, our wonderful PAC’s have now embarked on the process in a somewhat inverted SPAM tact. And this is precisely why I’m looking into a new domain which could make communication easier for all of us in the same style our “caring and concerned” political demagogues among us. Free speech was intended to be a just way to communicate ideas without government interference or retribution, but now the propagandizing and plagiarizing have smacked our freedom full tilt under the guise of concern for the good of America. So will be capitalizing on their ideas for the benefit of the non-political communicators in internet land.

Let me explain what has happened. If you visit certain websites (and I’ve only investigated the Left side, if you know what I mean) like NARAL, MoveOn, and others like it (You figure out how to get there. If you can’t, you won’t understand what I’m talking about anyway!), you now have the ability to become part of the political process and express free speech. Not necessarily your free speech, but free speech nonetheless. Doesn’t cost anything. You will have to learn how to spell your name and memorize your address. I guess that also implies you will have to learn to read also. And once you’ve done that you might need to acquire some government funding so you can buy a computer, then spend a few dollars a month on an ISP and they’ll provide you with a free e-mail address you can insert into the proper space on the sites since it is required so you can be spammed like every other American. (Just a little thought while you’re waiting for TigerDirect to deliver your E-machine: since you’re so politically active now, use this time to practice punching out your chads so our next election will not be “stolen” by people who do have a little more upstairs than you.) I know. You thought this was going to be easy. There is a price for freedom, though.

Once you have accomplished these heartless and elitist tasks, you’re almost home, that is, once you’ve figured out how to use a browser to get to the sites. My suggestion is you call the person who told you who to vote for in the last election and chances are they have at least an average knowledge of computer workings to get you through. Don’t call me. I probably didn’t vote the way you did. I’d be glad to help but surely the first time something would go wrong you’d blame it on the person I voted for last election and I don’t want to hear it, please. Besides Halliburton probably had something to do in the manufacture of your computer, so face it, they’re all out to get you. You can’t win. And it ain’t getting any better is it? That should tell you something.

Back to the issue. The PAC of your choice has taken SPAM to a level even the lowest on our food chain can successfully speak freely with. With the efficiency of Edgar Bergen and the political virtue of Michael Moore, the masses of the “politically” deformed will now be able to speak directly to their congressman (once they figure out what district they’re in, maybe even if they can remember what state they live in) and voice their valuable and cogent opinions in the spirit of freedom provided by our forefathers. Most of the PAC’s have made the process “brainless.” I can only wonder why they felt the need since people political involved should actually have thinking as a prerequisite. But that’s just me. And I don’t consign myself to most of these sites’ political beliefs so why should I be so bold to feel my rights are trampled upon when someone else intends to speak for someone else with someone else’s idea of what truth and the American Way is all about. If you disagree with me, fine. As long as you say it in your own words. Like I’m doing here, I hope.

Yes, America, you now have the chance to go to any of these sites I mentioned—and you can surely find more either Left or Right—and e-mail your elected official with “meaningful, heartfelt” demagoguery from someone else’s mouth since you obviously are not bright enough to form your own opinion. It’d be kind of like walking into Mickey D’s and having the clerk say “And you’d probably like fries with that!” and you respond “Well, sure.” The logical progression then would be that they eat them for you and absorb all the non-saturated fats and salts into their system, but sacrifice only goes so far. Some things you should have to do for yourself, right? Ideally, anyway.

On the NARAL site, the current topic happened to be the presidential nomination of Judge Roberts to the Supreme Court, a common topic for every talk show in America on air today. I heard mention of opposition by NARAL so I decided to see what they thought and why they thought it. Besides the warped “logic” and hyperbolic innuendo intended to break both knee caps of a distinguished jurist, I was stunned to see mindlessness even more exposed by the method they were attempting to employ in their campaign meant to derail the nomination. Mind you, my opinion of what they say is my opinion so I’m not trying to influence you on what to think about the Judge. I don’t care. But my horror came when I discovered the mindless, deceitful tactics devised to disseminate possibly manufactured opinions to the elected officials of our nation.

I remember statistics discussions many years ago where it was said that a chimpanzee given a typewriter and enough time (and I don’t believe he was employed by the New York Times or CBS News) could successfully type enough legible words that could be combined into a cogent novel. Obviously, NARAL and others have enough constituents of the same order that would make their campaign a successful one, presupposing they could figure out how to turn on the E-machine, anyway, you see. Exercising freedom of speech, this PAC has provided anyone who wants to “express” themselves the way to contact their Congressional representative by providing a template (complete with content) saving them valuable time and preventing them from getting a splitting migraine while thinking for themselves. You can fill in your name, address and e-mail address. Next you can drop down a little window, find your state and listing of your representative (Advil is not provided by the site so just pick anybody. It’s still a vote, right?) In fact, you can select a few representatives a mass mail them all. And in the message window:

Dear Senator,
As your constituent, I am urging you to oppose John Roberts, President Bush’s nominee to the Supreme Court.

If Roberts is confirmed to a lifetime appointment, there is little doubt that he will work to overturn Roe v. Wade. As Deputy Solicitor General under the first President Bush, he argued to the Supreme Court that “Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled….”

Appointment to the Supreme Court allows unparalleled power and opportunity to shape national law and policy for generations. An anti-choice judge, if elevated to the Supreme Court, could tip the balance in many cases dealing with reproductive rights and other personal freedoms. Roberts, who has demonstrated hostility to the right to choose, will very likely be such a judge. The American public deserves a nominee that can be counted on to uphold constitutional rights.


[Your name]
[Your address]

How good can freedom get? Why waste time thinking about it? He’s a Bush nominee, so what more is there to say?

You may agree with NARAL’s position. But to influence the vote of a representative of the U.S. representative with inverted SPAM? That’s freedom? That’s propaganda straight out of Mein Kampf or the Communist Manifesto.

I used the opportunity to make use of this convenient template to contact my representatives. I just changed it a little as well as sending it to the NARAL contact. Here is what I said:

“It is quite curious that the intellectualism of your supporters is held in question simply from the fact that you do not have the faith in them to compose their own verbiage communicating their opinions with which to contact elected officials and influence opinion and legislation. Your provisions for force-feeding your clientele with pre-canned dissertations of well-worn talking points which they, no doubt, are incapable of formulating themselves simply because truth rarely needs clarification and, where as, lies can often become entangled webs which can hang the unsuspected, it is quite interesting that the phrases “leading sheep to slaughter” or the activity of lemmings leaping to their death from the heights of Britannia’s cliffs remind me of the shallow and manipulating tactics used by your organization to mislead people who ignorantly and childishly hold noble causes but are too robotic to realize that what an organization says and what an organization really values, in a political sense, are not necessarily the same in scope and content. Perhaps you would be much more effective in your campaign using one of the e-mail viruses that hijack addresses and do the bulk mailing yourself to ensure that your message will get to the officials in a timelier manner. With that tactic, you could save a lot of your supporters the necessary brain power of typing their name in your spaces with your mealy-mouthed pre-typed “thoughts” below. After all pressing the “Send” button could unintentionally cause their heads to swell thinking they are contributing to the welfare of the world which may generate a massive migraine causing them to take an unscheduled nap thus missing the next crucial campaign you generate for them to sign on to. And we really don’t want all that brainpower to go to waste, now would we?”

Is this what the founders meant by the word “freedom?’ That rumbling you feel may be my stomach churning from the thought of the gall of PAC’s to presume that putting words in peoples’ mouth is tantamount to handing out typewriters to chimps, but more likely it’s Hancock, Jefferson, Franklin and others shifting positions once again. And I’m not talking about their political views either.

So, as non-self-serving as many of you know me to be, I have concocted a way to help you, my treasured and valuable friends, to descend downward to the depths of mindlessness with a service I will provide to you free of charge to help you communicate to the most precious ones in your entourage on a regular basis. I call it and I’m sure you can make good use of it on those occasions when communication in a timely fashion is vital. You just need to e-mail me your entire address book. At appropriate times (see below) I will e-mail your sentiments (actually they will be mine, but get in the groove for goodness sake) to the respective individuals and keep you dear in their hearts and minds with your (my) heart-felt emotions. Here a few examples:

“I’ve been thinking of you a lot lately…” (This sentiment can be augmented with the phrases “And I really need to get a life because you’re really not worth the effort,” Or “Have you been thinking of me or that trashy little blonde hussy I last saw you with, scum bag?” Or “So send me enough money to cover my Prozac bill!”

“You’re not getting older. You’re getting better…” (I’ll randomly add phrases like “with everything except hiding those advanced years.” Or “at lying through your teeth to cover it up, though.” Maybe even “but you still have a way to go to reach ‘human’.”)

“I can’t wait until I see you again…”(Depending on how much I like you, I will insert “Cause I lay awake nights wishing I could beat the crap out of you!” How about “and don’t forget to bring the $100 you borrowed from me 12 years ago.” Possibly “because you’re the best thing that ever happened to me. Damn! I lead a miserable life, don’t I?”

All you have to do is sign your name on the dotted line and your true feelings will be zapped to your loved ones just like the PAC’s do it. Ain’t it great to be Americans?! Why waste time thinking when blabbering gets the job done just as well?

Next discussion: Voting absentee for you and all of your friends. Be a pal and fill them all out for free. (Chadless districts only, please.)

Leave a comment

Posted by on August 14, 2005 in Politics


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,