Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
In my mind, it wasn’t exactly the election of Barack Obama that did it.
It was this notion that anything that might be called “torture” is an extreme thing, therefore anyone who argues against it is being a moderate. That just isn’t right. For one thing, if things are being called “torture” when there’s nothing torturous about them other than the fact they’re uncomfortable, then you can call anything torture that isn’t fun. Secondly, the argument’s been used that our fighting men and women are exposed to danger if we continue these practices…which doesn’t mean anything. And that isn’t my opinion, it’s the opinion of people arguing this way. Just ask ’em “So if we put a stop to these practices that makes our troops safer?” Just take the argument seriously. And you’ll be called a big ol’ dummy. Okay, so we’re not after results here when we stop this “torture.” It’s just a thing to do to make some unnamed people happy with us; and the people we’re fighting are not the people we’re supposed to be making happy.
Thirdly, it is a skewed representation of what we should be calling “civilized.” In this sense, a yawning gulf is defined between red America and blue America. Someone threatens or injures someone else who is entirely innocent. We’re going to do something meaningful about this, or we’ll do something ritualistic about it. This demonstrates our civilization, or lack thereof — but which is which? Is it more civilized to conduct some ritual and then allow the danger to continue walking among us, unabated?
This stuff starts on the playground, really. Who among us hasn’t been hauled to the principal’s office after hitting back at the school bully — and then told, gosh darn it, he’s here all the time but you’re supposed to be better! It’s the tactic of the thoroughly cowardly bureaucrat.
Some of us want punishment for whoever started the fight; some of us want punishment for whoever finished it.
This is why so many wars have been started under democrat Presidents. It’s also why, the wars our country fought that finished with a lasting, enduring, durable peace, were fought before we had the United Nations. Since then, every wildfire around the globe, rather than being altogether extinguished, just subsides into a smoldering slow burn ready to erupt into an inferno at any time.
The reason is simple. When your policy is opposed to the true eradication of bad guys, you’re always going to be up to your eyeballs in bad guys. Being liberal means there’s always another excuse for a little bit more chaos the next day.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
…then you can call anything torture that isn’t fun.
Like being forced to watch John King… or most anyone on CNN. That IS torture.
I’m also thinking Cheney should have reached out and bitch-slapped King, just for his tone. The composure of both Cheney and Bush in the face of aggressive disrespect from clue-impaired people “speaking truth to power” is simply amazing, in my book. And just slightly misplaced.
- bpenni | 03/15/2009 @ 15:30WTF? Moderation… again? I might stop commenting here, Morgan. It’s getting to be more trouble than it’s worth.
- bpenni | 03/15/2009 @ 15:31Probably triggered by that word “bitch-slapped,” which I’m including here as a test.
On my own site, I have one word that automatically kicks you into the moderation queue, though it’s uncommon enough (saints be praised) that I haven’t actually had to check for it in the last six months.
- CGHill | 03/15/2009 @ 19:24I miss the Bush Administration already. I’m really disappointed that Cheney didn’t run for his boss’ job…I would have campaigned for him and donated money. I remember as far back as election night 2000, wishing it had been him instead of Bush, who had just been elected.
The man had a fire and a passion (and a hatred for the country’s enemies, and for liberals, and the press) that the president just didn’t. Cheney always seemed like the kind of guy that would do want I want to see done – the US reach out and simply crush its enemies without reservation, remorse, or concern for what the rest of the world thought about it. And along the way, not even try to hide his utter contempt for the mainstream media or his political enemies at home. The kind of president who would say, “You don’t like it? F**k you. This is what I was elected to do; deal with it.”
Besides, there’s just something about a president who hunts. Maybe it’s one reason I like Palin so much.
- cylarz | 03/17/2009 @ 00:16