|
Expect Hell ♦
Nostalgia ♦
Komrades ♦
Alias ♦
Spyder Webs
|
| IT HAS BEGUN (or Presidential Nominees '08! 1-07 Edition) |
[[01.26.2007]] |
Well, since everyone else is doing it, I might as well jump on the bandwagon. Even though it's only January 2007, and elections aren't until November 2008, everyone is so fucking sick of Bush's bullshit that they want to ignore him and focus on the future. So here it is, my countdown (so far) of a little game I like to call:
"Who Wants To Be President 2008?!?"
Senator Barack Obama, Democrat, Illinois-
Okay, I know I'm biased because he's from my state of origin, but I like Obama. I really like him. I'd buy the man ice cream without him asking. I've liked him since I first heard about him when he was running for Senator of Illinois. He says all the right things, pisses off all the right people, and looks damn good doing it. He's one of, if not the best speaker on the list of democrat nominees, and there's a sense of opportunity and optimism to his campaign that hasn't been seen in a president since Kennedy. The downside? He hasn't finished his first Senate term yet. He's young, inexperienced, and he's opposed to just about everything that the average Republican is for. Now that's good for me, but it's bad for him in red states. And he's going to have to deal with the more experienced contenders with their loyal guards of successful fundraisers if he's going to win the Democrat bid.
Senator John Edwards, Democrat, North Carolina-
I'm the first to admit that the Democrat candidates didn't overly thrill me initially for President and VP in 2004. But by about September, after they'd kicked their campaign up a notch and were starting to hit at Bush and Co real hard, they started to really gain my support, rather then simply being the lesser of two evils. I could see Edwards as President. I think he'd do a good job. Mind you, I'm still all gung-ho about Edwards from his debate with Cheney in 2004. Edwards is (so far) keeping out of the Obama/Clinton spectacle, which is probably the smartest thing for him to do right now.
Senator Hillary Clinton, Democrat, New York-
I know she's the number one choice on everyone else's list, but I'd really much rather have Obama or Edwards on the ticket than her. Do we really need a return to the Clinton White House? I know political dynasties are hard to avoid, but for 20 years of politics to be divided into the Bush family on the right and the Clintons on the left, it just seems kind of outlandish. And while Hillary has all the connections and is deeply rooted in the party, frankly she comes off as much more harsh and cold than either of the other two top three. I know she can do the job, I just would prefer someone else.
Senator Chuck Hagel, Republican, Nebraska-
Oh, if a Republican must become President in '08, let it be Chuck Hagel. Hagel has been against the Iraq war for a quite a long time. He's considering running as an Independent. He's getting lots of press because he is A.) a Republican and B.) opposed to the war. He doesn't stand a chance, of course, but there you have it.
Senator John McCain, Republican, Arizona-
In 2004 if you had asked me would I support a John McCain presidency over a Democrat who I consider weak or unqualified, the answer would have quickly been yes. McCain was a moderate, he was pro-prisoner rights, vehemently opposed to Guantanamo Bay, and he wasn't afraid to piss off the Christian Right. He was a good moderate, and by all accounts one of the few voices of reason that the GOP had left during the heyday of Bush's first term. Oh, how the world has changed. First off, I think the odds of the Democrats putting forth a candidate I consider "weak" next year are pretty much slim to none. Second of all, the John McCain of 2007 is not the John McCain of 2004. In his efforts to woo the public's support, McCain has gone from being a vocal critic of the Bush administration to being one of its biggest supporters in Iraq. By becoming more conservative, McCain is hoping to take back the voters he lost to Bush in 2000. He's also lost some of respect, I'm afraid.
Ex-Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Republican, New York City-
There are things about Rudy Giuliani that I like, and things I really don't like. But the really important question for him, I think, is just how qualified is he? I realize that New York is the biggest city in the country, but it's still just a city. He has virtually no experience in Washington, or even as a governor. I personally think he needs to pursue one of those two choices before he tries to bite off more than he can chew.
Senator Sam Brownback, Republican, Kansas-
I don't care for Brownback, and never have. I find his views on things like "family values" and reproductive rights to be positively medieval. And he's very loud about what he thinks. But he's setting himself in opposition to McCain on Iraq, and just as McCain has tried to get closer to Christian Conservatives, Brownback is trying to come off as more moderate. The thing is, I don't fall for it for a second. Brownback’s official Presidential Entry speech brought up his belief that America needed to become more religious and less secular, and I know all about Brownback's breed of religion.
There are a whole bunch of other candidates, on both sides, but I honestly don't know enough about most of them to comment yet. Of the Democrats I haven't mentioned, Joe Biden (Delaware Senator) probably is the name most frequently heard, with Christopher Dodd (Connecticut Senator) and Tom Vilsack (ex-Governor of Iowa) after that. On the Republican side, Mitt Romney (ex-Massachusetts Governor) is getting some press, but I haven't looked into him at all yet. With any luck, Newt Gingrich (ex-House Speaker and World Class Jerkwad) will just keep his mouth shot. If there's one person I disdain more than Dick Cheney and George Bush…
|
|
|
| How Perverted Is This Justice? |
[[01.21.2007]] |
When you work in television, nothing is more important than ratings. Not artistic integrity, nor common sense and reasonability, and certainly not journalistic credibility. Here’s looking at you, Bill O’Reilly (actually, I try not to look at him, as his visage is so dark and tormented that it’s been known to make my eyes bleed). But no, I’m not going to make this into another bitch-fest about Fox News, because frankly, I’m rather of the opinion that if Fox News is your main source of media, you really have no one to blame but yourself. No, I’m talking about NBC his time.
Specifically, I have a problem with a segment Dateline has been running for the last several years. If you haven’t seen it you’ve certainly heard of it. It’s called “To Catch A Predator”, and it’s gotten a ton of media coverage ever since it began. See, what happens is this: A task force called “Perverted Justice” has people go into chat rooms, pretending to be preteen girls. These decoy teens engage in explicit conversations with adults, eventually convincing them to meet with the “teen”. The trap is set, and when the would-be child molesters are lured into a specially set up house, they encounter Dateline correspondent Chris Hansen (A poor man’s Stone Phillips) who chastises them for being bad people. And then as they try to leave with there tail between their legs, they’re arrested.
Hmm.
Well, it all sounds good on the surface, I suppose. I mean, I love a good NAMBLA joke as much as anyone. And the show gets wild ratings (that’s why they’ve done, like, 28 different segments of it), and that’s not really a surprise. People love to see something creepy on television, it thrills them. And nothing is more sick and disgusting than a child molester (for good reasons). So, you have your heroes, the Perverted Justice team and Chris Hansen, tricking the disgusting perverts into outing themselves on national television for millions to see right before the police nab them. Sounds like a brilliant plan, because sure, lives are totally ruined, but they’re the bad guys lives, not real people. And better yet, you add another level of fear to all this, because most of the people they catch are fairly average looking, “normal” people. Even your neighbor could be one of them. And fear sells real good. Yes it does.
However, more and more “To Catch A Predator” is receiving criticism. The main reason for this has to do with altruism. It’s been argued that Dateline keeps doing this segment, not out of a sense of civic duty, but because every time they do they get a ratings spike. And I do agree, that’s exactly why NBC has these segments, because they’re profitable. But just because money is the reason they show these things, that doesn’t negate the “good” that these segments do. I’m not convinced that profiting by doing something positive for the community necessarily negates the positive-ness of doing that same community service.
What does trouble me, though, is the total acceptance at face value that what “To Catch A Predator” does is, in fact, good. In my mind, the whole concept of what happens here brings up a host of entrapment and due process issues, and that makes me feel a bit icky. And not “child molester” icky, I mean “Bill of Rights” icky. Here’s a perfect example of why: Friday night I caught a repeat of an episode that took place in Petaluma, California. Here’s an interview between the detective in charge of the sting, and one of those bastard child-molesting crazies. The catch? This guy is a prominent San Francisco doctor. We begin right after he has stupidly waved his Miranda Rights to an attorney.
Det. Nelson: Why did you come to the house in Petaluma today?
Wolin: I was curious.
Det. Nelson: Okay. Curious about what?
Wolin: I chatted with someone online. She asked to meet me on several occasions. I declined. And today again she asked. I had a little bit of time, not very much.
Det. Nelson: Okay.
Wolin: And so I thought I would come out and meet her and nothing more.
Det. Nelson: Okay. How old was the person you were chatting with?
Wolin: I’m not sure. I know she was young and I know that—
Det. Nelson: Under 18?
Wolin: I’m not sure.
Det. Nelson: Did you talk to her about “touching and kissing and making each other feel good”?
Wolin: I remember she’s saying that she had trouble finding somebody to make her feel good.
Det. Nelson: Okay.
Wolin: I was playing with her.
Det. Nelson: And then you typed to her “I wouldn’t stop until you came over and over.”
Wolin: Remember saying that.
Det. Nelson: Then you talked to her about kissing her chest?
Wolin: I don’t remember.
Det. Nelson: And then you told her, “No I’m real but you’re under 18 and I’m over. We would have to be so careful.”
Wolin: I don’t remember saying that. But I told her that she needed to be—I was concerned about her. She needed to be careful.
Det. Nelson: So you commented about her body lookin’ pretty—
Wolin: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Det. Nelson: Okay.
Wolin: I don’t remember.
Det. Nelson: And then you asked her what bra size she wore? And she said, “30 B but it kinda big on me right now. I’m still growin’.”
Wolin: I don’t remember her saying that.
Det. Nelson: Okay. And saying that you will kiss them?
Wolin: I don’t remember. The only reason I came today I was curious that I wasn’t going to do anything. And if you read that you can tell that over and over again I said that both I shouldn’t come. She should be careful.
Det. Nelson: But I’m also reading, I mean correct me if I’m wrong, you’re talking about you want her to take your pants off.
Wolin: When?
Det. Nelson: You talk about you know, “What will you wear?” “I don’t know what—whatever—whatever’s clean. Something sexy.” Then you said, “Will you take it off for me?” And then you ask her then, “Do you want her to take your pants off also?”
Wolin: It was just wa—
Det. Nelson: And, “You can—you can take mine off if you want.”
Wolin: I wasn’t so—
Det. Nelson: How do you wanna do it?
Wolin: I wasn’t going to do anything. It was not appropriate. Officer Nelson, I shouldn’t have talked to her. You’re right. I wasn’t—
Det. Nelson: Okay.
Wolin: --going to do anything with her.
Det. Nelson: So you drove 40 minutes from Piedmont to meet a 13-year-old—
Wolin: I didn’t know she was 13.
Nelson: --that nothing would’ve happened.
Wolin: That’s right.
Det. Nelson: And you expect me to believe that?
Wolin: It’s true.
Det. Nelson: After you talk about having—
Wolin: It’s the truth.
Det. Nelson: --different sexual—
Wolin: It’s the truth.
Det. Nelson: --acts with her?
Dr. Wolin: It’s the truth. She begged me to come. And I know that doesn’t make it right but I never would’ve done anything.
Det. Nelson: Okay. All right. The time’s approximately 14:38 and I conclude the interview.
Now, while Dr. Wolin did something incredibly stupid, yes, did he do anything that was legally wrong? While solicitation to a minor is a federal offense, neither the Detective nor Hansen earlier in the show debate with the Doctor about whether he did or did not know the “girl” was 13. He might have, but there’s nothing in the transcripts that are given that prove it. There is one instance in these transcripts of the doctor saying she’s under 18, but nothing is embellished upon.
More to the point, though, is the claim that the girl “begged” him repeatedly to come to the house. You’ll notice the detective doesn’t debate this either. If this is true, this is clearly entrapment. I’ll begrudgingly let it slide that Dateline admits that usually the sting operators themselves are the first to bring up an in-person meeting, but if they repeatedly attempted to get this Doctor to enter their trap and it was after several refusals that he finally caved in, that’s entrapment, plain and simple. It seems likely to me that Dr. Wolin has long held closeted pedophilic urges and fantasies, and after many years of wondering he saw an opportunity with someone who really wanted to experiment. I’m not saying it’s morally right, and certainly if he had ended up acting on these feelings it would have been illegal. But talking to a 13 year old on the internet about sex is not illegal (usually). And meeting someone you meet online is not illegal. And proving someone intended to meet a minor for the purpose of sexual intercourse is difficult, to say the least.
I don’t condone what these people who are arrested did, but I do think a television broadcast like this brings up some serious questions. The thing that Dateline likes to tiptoe around is that Perverted Justice is a vigilante-activist organization. They are not recognized officers of the law, nor do they have government backing. I mean, when your whole mission statement is to help protect children and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has criticized your methods and said they won’t support you, you’d think that would say something to them. And I’m sorry, but isn’t it possible that this is causing more problems than it solves? Sure, really stupid would-be child molesters are arrested (and I’m going to keep mostly quiet about the logical problems with “molesting” someone who asks you to come have sex with them, because consent laws are a different matter entirely). But who’s to say that Perverted Justice is really doing anything more than thinning out the herd? Sure, the ones dumb enough to fall for this are caught, but what about the smart ones with lots of experience at this? Well, it teaches them to be smarter, doesn’t it? Everyone in the US knows about this program, and honestly, who has the most to learn from this? Not the parents, no, but the would-be child abductors. Because they see what’s happening, and that teaches them to be more careful.
But they allegedly stop child molesters. So, you see, legal process and common sense rarely affect people’s judgment. People see this report on heroic citizen volunteers stopping the bad, horrible pedophiles, and that’s all they see. Most people can’t look at the big picture, and this shortsightedness is, in my opinion, the heart of what wrong about Perverted Justice and “To Catch A Predator”. We can not just abandon entrapment laws because the particular crime is so horrible, and we can’t ignore rationality because a particular group of vigilantes goes after a particularly seedy group of bad guys. Enforcing the law is supposed to be the job of officers of the law. The system isn’t perfect, but ignoring the rules of the system isn’t the answer either. And I’m sorry, but Perverted Justice can claim they’d sent 127 perverts to prison all they want. The people they’re arrested may very well have done something dreadfully wrong. That doesn’t make what Perverted Justice does right.
|
|
|
| Less Than Happy News… |
[[12.15.2006]] |
Well, it’s official. The most endangered species of marine animal in the world, the Chinese River Dolphin, is extinct.
A species found only in the Yangtze River, the dolphin has long been critically endangered. Despite the adamant statements by the Chinese government that they would do everything they could to protect them, apparently the construction of the Three Gorges Dam (the largest dam in the world, some 5 times the size of the Hoover Dam, and the less-than-successful answer to Shanghai’s ever increasing power problems) was considered more important. This seems to be the final straw for the nearly blind dolphin, who’s population ten years ago was estimated at only 50 animals. There are no living specimens in captivity. The world is a lesser place for this loss.
|
|
|
| Much Later: I Shall Become A Bat! |
[[12.07.2006]] |
I'm having a not-happy week. So maybe this will cheer me up:
|
|
|
| Huzzah And Such!!! |
[[11.08.2006]] |
| [ |
mood |
| |
 ecstatic |
] |
Today is going to be a good day. The bad guys have lost the house, and may yet loose the senate. Not only did we take the house, the democrats have a 234-201 lead on the house seats. That’s quite a lead, considering before we were at 232-202-1 for the republicans. Not only that, but the democrats have taken majority over the state governorships, for the first time in 12 years (and even though our own governor is a total twit, at least he’s a twit who reports to my team).
What does this mean? Well, time will tell, really, but considering Shruby’s polls have been lingering under 40% for the better part of a year and that his entire agenda was based around forcing congress to his will, well, things have looked better for him.
Heh. Jackass.
UPDATE (12:15 PM, 11/8/06)
What’s that? Rumsfeld? Leaving? Gasp! What sad, sad news. No wait. That other thing. It goes something like “Holy shit! Yes! Yes! Yes!”
And Montana goes to the Dems as well. The only thing left is Virginia. If the state votes in Jim Webb- deposing racist, anti-semitic and gay-bashing prick George Allen- The Senate will be split 49-49-2, with both independents being more than just a little liberal leaning. Come on, Virginia. I know he waves that Confederate Flag of slavery and oppression that you guys love so much, but can’t you see past that and realize that he’s a douche bag? I know you can….
|
|
|
| Public Service Announcement Time |
[[10.13.2006]] |
Happy 699th Anniversary of the Original Friday the Thirteenth Everyone!!!
It’s the not-quite-700th Anniversary, so it seems a good idea to celebrate. However, I have a million things to do, what with *ahem* editing Pantheon and being swapped at work and all. So, if you want to know more about this momentous day and just why the hell it scares our culture so much, I suggest you look here and here. And a Happy 699th Anniversary of the Fall of the Knights Templar to you all!
|
|
|
| Fetch… The Comfy Chair!!! *Jarring Chord* |
[[10.10.2006]] |
Wheeeeee!!!!
Sorry, I’m still feeling pretty good over the fact that Friday I finished Book One of Pantheon!!!!!!!
Okay, that’s not strictly true, as in fact I only finished a draft of the script of Pantheon. But still! Despite a few script contradictions and character modification, the first book’s script is actually completed. I’ve got some editing to do, but how many other 20 year olds have written a novel dealing with philosophy, religion, and culture painted as a backdrop to an action/adventure epic filled with political intrigue and wonder? The answer: Not very many. So that means in a few short weeks I’m going to have a few people read the script for me, edit the beejeezus out of it, and tell me what rocks and what sucks. It’ll be fun! So, ah, hmm… volunteers?
I’m lacking much else to say, other than I have a number of devilish schemes in place which I shan’t speak of publicly, but get me in a good mood and I might discuss them privately. So, rather than ramble on with random nonsense you don’t really care about,
I thought I’d substitute it with someone else’s random nonsense!
(Chapman enters living room, where Cleveland is sitting.)
Chapman: Trouble at mill.
Cleveland: Oh no - what kind of trouble?
Chapman: One on't cross beams gone owt askew on treadle.
Cleveland: Pardon?
Chapman: One on't cross beams gone owt askew on treadle.
Cleveland: I don't understand what you're saying.
Chapman: (slightly irritatedly and with exaggeratedly clear accent) One of the cross beams has gone out askew on the treadle.
Cleveland: Well what on earth does that mean?
Chapman: *I* don't know - Mr Wentworth just told me to come in here and say that there was trouble at the mill, that's all - I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition.
(Jarring Chord. The door flies open and Cardinal Ximinez of Spain enters, flanked by two junior cardinals. Cardinal Biggles has goggles pushed over his forehead. Cardinal Fang is just Cardinal Fang.)
Ximinez: NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.
(The Inquisition exits)
Chapman: (Deadpan.)I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition.
(Jarring Chord. The cardinals burst in)
Ximinez: NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition! Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as: fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope, and nice red uniforms - Oh damn! (To Cardinal Biggles) I can't say it - you'll have to say it.
|
|
|
| And Now for a Brief Public Service Announcement |
[[10.04.2006]] |
|
Just so you know, both Nip/Tuck and the season premiere of Veronica Mars rocked so very hard last night. That is all.
|
|
|
| And The World Just Got A Hell Of A Lot Scarier… |
[[10.02.2006]] |
In 1859, a Swiss businessman named Jean Henri Dunant witnessed the aftermath of the Battle of Solferino in the Austro-Sardinian War. After seeing the suffering of tens of thousands of wounded soldiers, Dunant went on to form the Red Cross and conceive the original Geneva Conventions. Dunant would go on to be awarded the first ever Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts. Originally conceived as a way to protect injured and captive soldiers in wartime, the Geneva Conventions were greatly expanded upon, especially after World War 2, and have become the backbone of modern international law.
Leave it to George W. Bush to fuck everything up.
Ever since the official outing of the ‘secret’ CIA prisons in Cuba and other parts of the world, Bush & Co. have done everything in their power to convince the American public that torturing prisoners held without trial or access to legal assistance is some how a good thing. And apparently the majority of the House and Senate agree with the bastards. Last week the Senate, after some very minor changes, approved the bill.
So that you can see what I’m talking about, here’s the important part of bill in question. Gaze upon thy works and despair, oh citizens of these United States:
AGREEMENT UPON COMMON ARTICLE 3
SEC. 7. TREATY OBLIGATIONS NOT ESTABLISHING GROUNDS FOR CERTAIN CLAIMS.
(a) IN GENERAL. No person may invoke the Geneva Conventions or any protocols thereto in any habeas or civil action or proceeding to which the United States, or a current or former officer, employee, member of the Armed Forces, or other agent of the United States, is a party as a source of rights, in any court of the United States or its States or territories.
…
SEC. 8. IMPLEMENTATION OF TREATY OBLIGATIONS.
(a)(1) IN GENERAL. The acts enumerated in subsection 2441(d) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by subsection (b) of this section, and in subsection (c) of this section, constitute violations of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions prohibited by United States law.
(2) PROHIBITION ON GRAVE BREACHES. The provisions in section 2441 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by this section, fully satisfy the obligation under Article 129 of the Third Geneva Convention for the United States to provide effective penal sanctions for grave breaches which are encompassed in Common Article 3 in the context of an armed conflict not of an international character. No foreign or international sources of law shall supply a basis for a rule of decision in the courts of the United States in interpreting the prohibitions enumerated in subsection 2441(d).
(3)INTERPRETATION BY THE PRESIDENT. (A) As provided by the
Constitution and by this section, the President has the authority for the United States to interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions and to promulgate higher standards and administrative regulations for violations of treaty obligations which are not grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions.
(B) The President shall issue such interpretations by Executive
Order published in the Federal Register, and such orders shall be
authoritative (as to non-grave breach provisions) as a matter of United States law, in the same manner as other administrative regulations.
(C) Nothing in this section shall affect the constitutional
functions and responsibilities of Congress and the judicial branch of the United States.
…
Pretty scary shit. The President of the United States now gets to interpret the Geneva Conventions (because “outrages upon human dignity” is too “vague and undefined” for the president, apparently). This would be the same man behind the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and quite possibly Iran if things don’t start changing real soon; behind “Mission Accomplished” in Iraq three years ago; behind the general government incompetence during the numerous hurricane disasters last fall; and- just for good measure- let’s not forget being behind numerous attempts to declare homosexual marriage illegal, proving he is just a world class jerk. Yes, clearly this is the man most qualified to determine what the Geneva Convention writers really meant when they said “outrages upon human dignity”. Of course.
The real tragedy, (other than the hundreds of people who will now “legally” be brutalized because of this insanity, of course) is that Congress let him do this. Oh that’s right, I went there. See, Bush and company are historically a group of sociopathic fucktards who are obsessed with gaining more and more power for themselves. And after six bloody years (Ha! Syntax! Take the meaning of that as you will!) of the Bush machine ruining virtually everything they touch like some sort of weird anti-Midas, CONGRESS SHOULD KNOW BETTER! Essentially, they just handed the reigns of international law over to a moron who, quite frankly, cares nothing at all for international law (or international relations, for that matter). Why the hell did anyone think this was a good idea?
Well, the answer to that is that there’s this really irritating trump card Bush likes to flash anytime he feels a bit of pressure, called “American Security”. For some reason, all the dick has to do is say something is for “American Security”, and he gets anything he wants. Anything. No matter how horrible. And no matter how many more laws that are made and liberties that are crushed by the Bush machine, actual national security doesn’t really seem to change. The only thing that really changes is how many metaphorical cameras are watching us at any given time. And considering how frequently this country seems to come under direct assault from “terrorists”, for some reason the current administration seems a lot more scary to me than the people we’re supposed to be afraid of.
Ever wonder what it looks like when the bad guys are winning? I’m thinking it’s pretty much like this.
|
|
|
| navigation |
| [ |
viewing |
| |
most recent entries |
] |
| [ |
go |
| |
earlier |
] |
|
|
|