Did I ever tell you that my guardian angel always appears to me in the form of Colonel Klink? It's true. So if you're going to be compared to a Nazi prison guard, you could do no worse than Klink.

Okay, maybe Schultz would be better. But Klink is a close second.

Colonel Klink, why hast thou forsaken me!

Posted by: Rusty at 09:16 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 75 words, total size 1 kb.

THIS is how it happened in Nazi Germany, Its over.

More.

UPDATE: I'm registering Independent tomorrow. You're welcome to join me.

Even more.

Posted by: Rusty at 08:03 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

An excerpt from my soon te be released autobiography:

My life as the son of a sharecropper was no picnic. In town there was always the worry that Boss Hogg and the powers that be would take some offense and confiscate what little we had to themselves under the perversity that was Jim Crow.

And home was no better. Emasculated by a system that drained by father of all that was manly dignity, he found his only solace was the bottle. And when my father drank, he was mean. Real mean.

And if Timothy P. Barrus, a white guy from Lansing, Michigan, can win awards for writing about growing up on the Navajo Reservation, why can't I shoot for the same? He's pretty much my new hero, anyhow. Except for the gay porn thing. Can't say that I know enough about that to make up a true sounding story.

Hat tip to Confederate Yankee for the e-mail.

Posted by: Rusty at 02:47 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 1 kb.

Life imitating Chappelle.

Belch has the details:

He said police had heard for some time that Williams had been selling drugs in the area. “Then we heard that he was handing out business cards,” the officer said. “In the course of our investigation we were fortunate to come up with one, and we gave him a call.”

Kitchens said the business card had an image of what appeared to be an alarm clock being hit by a boxing glove and said: “For a quick hit on time call the boss.”

“When he answered, we agreed to buy some crack from him, we went up there, and we arrested him,” Kitchens said.

Posted by: Rusty at 11:01 AM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.

Q: Where do Mexican Generals keep their armies?

A1: In their sleavies

A2: No, you dimwit, in our sleavies. In addition to constantly violating the border, it looks like they are helping smuggle drugs in too.

UPDATE BY SEE-DUBYA: Much more info in this Ontario (CA) Daily Bulletin article that made the rounds last week. There have been 216 documented incursions by the Mexican military since 1996.

Posted by: Rusty at 02:51 PM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 77 words, total size 1 kb.

1 And what could possibly be wrong with that, Rusty?

Posted by: See-Dubya at January 24, 2006 03:12 PM (IDj0S)

2 But their our sleavies, that's what!

Posted by: Rusty at January 24, 2006 03:14 PM (JQjhA)

3 Competition for the gringo/cartel dollars is heating up, some units now seem willing "to go the extra mile" in servicing their favored clients.

Posted by: john Ryan at January 24, 2006 03:19 PM (TcoRJ)

4 Lets be honest - this is not the actions of the Mexican Govt - if they are military - then they're rogues and criminals within its ranks (which is not a shocker). This is not good for Mexico - it makes them look like a 3rd rate banana republic. These guys are criminal gangs - if they assist in smuggling here, imagine what other criminal activity they engage in Mexico! The biggest threat they pose is to Mexico itself.

Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 03:27 PM (3aakz)

5 This is not good for Mexico - it makes them look like a 3rd rate banana republic. Quack quack....

Posted by: Brian B at January 24, 2006 03:32 PM (rGfpg)

6 So when did they stop smuggling tequila?

Posted by: Howie at January 24, 2006 03:58 PM (D3+20)

7 Sorry hondo, but you're dead wrong. Not only is this old news to some of us, but it is well known that Mexican Generals and politicians directly control, and profit from, drug smuggling. The entire Mexican government is nothing but a criminal organization, and for some reason, our government is trying to pretend nothing is happening. It kinda makes me wonder who's getting a cut on this side of the border.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 04:02 PM (0yYS2)

8 Actually, these incursions have been going on for quite some time. Reports from So. Texas and Arizona tell of Mexicans in military uniforms providing protection and riding shotgun for drug smugglers and illegal immigrants. The Mexican government is bound to be aware of what is going on, but to tell you the truth, both the drug smuggling and illegal crossings of the border are beneficial to the Mexican government. Both of these illegal activities provide Mexico with dollars, and prop up a government that might otherwise fail. Why do you think the Mexican government so forcibly opposes border security on the part of the US?

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 24, 2006 04:03 PM (rUyw4)

9 Don't doubt higher ups have knowledge/involvement. Mexican Govt is in sad shape - a never ending cycle of going nowhere on the richest continent on the planet. I'm just sympathetic for the average Mexican - if this is bad for us - its a nightmare for them. Pity - there never was any real reason (other that their own failings) why Mexico never matched the achievements and status of the US and Canada.

Posted by: hondo at January 24, 2006 04:10 PM (3aakz)

10 Only poor government and stupid economic policies kept Mexicans from succeeding. I know many Mexicans who have come to the US and become very successful, and great citizens. I truly feel sorry for the average Mexican who is forced to live in the present circumstances in Mexico.

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 24, 2006 04:57 PM (rUyw4)

11 Mexico used to be ruled by France and Spain, two nations which never even managed well at home, much less abroad. In fact, the only post-colonial nations that ever truly succeeded are the ones that the British had. Any nation which was ever ruled or even partly ruled by France or Spain during its formative years is a de facto basket case today. The only hope for Mexico is that enough Mexicans will learn proper civics in El Norte, and return home to eventually straighten things out. This should happen right about the time Osama bin Laden converts to Judaism I should say.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 07:51 PM (0yYS2)

12 Gee, Maxi, you're confidence level is real high on a turnaround in Mexico. Lol!

Posted by: jesusland joe at January 24, 2006 07:54 PM (rUyw4)

13 Well, we pessimists are rarely disappointed, but often pleasantly surprised. We must not forget that Americans have a long relationship with the ideals that are at the very heart of Western civilization, whereas the people of the rest of our hemisphere still mostly live in some state of post-colonialism, in which societies are stratified, and there is no hope for liberty for the masses. To make things worse, almost every other nation in our hemisphere, including Canada, is infected with the disease of Marxism, and so given these two factors, it will take much longer than anyone can imagine to spread Enlightenment ideals to every corner of the globe.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 24, 2006 08:14 PM (0yYS2)

14 Why has the President let this go on for so long? Has he forgot that 19 of the 21 Fasists 911 attackers were illegal aliens? Most if no all snuck in via Mexico in 2001. What is he waiting for? Another attack?

Posted by: Jo macDougal at January 26, 2006 03:30 PM (xcy9v)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Rusty and Howie have already commented on the latest communique from Dr. Demento (or his stand in) but I thought I'd like to make a further observation about the lack of political acumen that this proposal suggests. It reveals someone who doesn't have the slightest idea how alliances and factions work within a democracy. The "truce proposal" makes the critical mistake of simply adopting all of the MOVEON/KOS talking points:

1. The US effort in Iraq is a "disaster" for the US, and only serves to antagonize the locals.
2. US troop morale is terrible, as exemplified by idiosyncratic and out-of-context evidence that runs counter to what the troops actually say in milblogs, during interviews, and in polls of military personnel. We (Al Qaeda) get stronger as you (the US and pro-democracy Arabs) get weaker. [Actually the evidence says the opposite, and the primary negative influence on troop morale appears to be the defeatist attitude and rhetoric of our own fifth column left.]
3. If the US leaves, abandoning its imperialistic ways, the turmoil in the Islamic world will eventually resolve itself. It's only our intervention that keeps things stirred up.
4. The Bush administration is lying to Americans, both about the condition of the war and about their own intentions. The majority of Americans now agree with this assessment and want to skedaddle. [Note: Since the polls no longer suggest this, the tape may well have been produced some time ago, as Howie, Rusty and a number of others suggest.]
5. The US has split its resources, allowing Al Qaeda to become stronger in Afghanistan as well as Iraq.
6. The primary beneficiaries of the US war in the Middle East are the Halliburtonesque war profiteers and the oil capitalists.

Even though he makes all these points without attribution to Moore, Galloway, or Zuniga the effect cannot be viewed as beneficial to the cause of our domestic masochists, because it makes the task of distinguishing their positions from those of the Islamofascists nearly impossible. The association delegitimizes them in ways that none of their political opponents could possibly manage on their own. This makes the following offer startlingly ironic:

We are a nation that Allah banned from lying and stabbing others in the back, hence both parties of the truce will enjoy stability and security to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, which were destroyed by war.

(Cross-posted to Demosophia)

Posted by: Demosophist at 01:27 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 388 words, total size 3 kb.

Oh my G*d, they killed Kenny. And they let him vote. In Tennessee. You bastards!

Posted by: Rusty at 01:36 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.

Seriously*. Kevin McCullogh gets censored for suggesting Kennedy deserves a beating. Buckley F. Williams has the top nine statements that would make Ted cry.

Posted by: Rusty at 10:17 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.

The final word on the Alito hearings.

Posted by: Rusty at 04:31 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 23 words, total size 1 kb.

I don't get the Abramoff "scandall". Seriously.

I've been on vacation for a few weeks, so the only news I've been paying attention to is a bit here and there from TV and radio. Because of this, I'm assuming that I'm about as informed as the average American on the Abramoff scandal right now. That is, I know that there is this guy named Jack Abramoff, that he has been indicted for some reason or another, that he has admitted to guilt, and that he has been a major contributor to the Republican party and a minor contributor to the Democratic party.

From this, the MSM has been running story after story raising 'questions' about those associated with Abramoff. The 'questions' mainly revolve around those who received campaign contributions from Abramoff and his Native American backers. The stories seem to focus on the 'fall out' from the Abramoff scandal rather than the scandal itself. In fact, I know next to nothing about the scandal itself, but I know an awful lot about the 'fall out' from it.

Can somebody please refer me to a good story that will explain the actual crimes committed rather than the 'fall out' from the crimes? I've been way out of the loop, so an MSM story or a blog post would be good. Seriously, I haven't seen a single news story on TV or heard one on the radio that actually explains what crimes Abramoff committed. None.

Editors at MSM outlets have been derelict in their duties--or worse. Imagine if CNN had done weeks and weeks of stories on the "fall out" from the 9/11 attacks, but ran nothing on the attacks themselves. Tonight on Anderson Cooper 360, a roundtable discussion on the Bush Administration's reaction to the al Qaeda attacks. What does this mean to the electoral prospects of the Republican Party?

The only thing I know about the Abramoff case is that he seems to have pled guilty to crimes that are in no way connected with illegal campaign contributions. I only know that because the only substantive discussion of the actual crimes came in a 15 second blurb by Tom DeLay in which he mentioned this. Of course, the news story on Fox in which I saw the bulrb wasn't about the substance of what DeLay mentioned, but about whether or not DeLay would be forced to step down because he had taken free trips paid by Abramoff. DeLay claimed that Abramoff had pled guilty to some scam completely unrelated to campaign finance. Is this tru?

If Abramoff's crimes were unrelated to illegal campaign finance contributions, then what, exactly, is the scandal? Seriously? Is this a simple guilt-by-association type of scandal? So large campaign-donors that turns out to be fellons taints all of those who they give money to? If so, I wonder if Martha Stewart gave money to any politician?

There seems to be some kind of 'scandal' going on here, but for the likes of me I don't seem to see one. The only scandal I see here is poor reporting, coupled with overblown headlines, poured on top of shallow interviews with politicians masquerading as 'tough questions'. I don't get it.

--------

I'm going to spend the afternoon going through e-mail and checking out recent blog posts here and elsewhere. I'll addend this post as I find interersting or relevant articles/posts.

Posted by: Rusty at 11:16 PM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 586 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Well, it turns out that I get a Comment Submission Error and the Alterne+ dot org site with the summary is questionable. I have tried to post this message several times but have been rejected. Try searching the .org site for ...story/29827.... I hope this helps you.

Posted by: Dale at January 08, 2006 05:52 PM (Dujiz)

2 Well, he admitted to BRIBING the Chairman of the House Administration Committee, Bob Ney (Republican-Ohio). There's a lot more that's going to come out--he's now a cooperating witness.

Posted by: Geek, Esq. at January 08, 2006 06:47 PM (oNxRU)

3 I'm in the same boat as you. I read the initial indictment about SunCruz and couldn't detect the underlying crime. Mail and Wire fraud are nebulous crimes. The actual transmissions don't even have to be fraudulent. The Information about the Indian Casino deal seems to be, in part, about Abramoff overcharging the tribe. Given the amount of money that the tribes saved--or made--as a result of Abramoff, I don't see a crime. Geek, where in the plea deal does it say he admitted to bribing Ney? http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/abramoff/abr10406plea.pdf The job of a lobbyist is to gain influence with legislators and to persuade them that their client's position is the right one. I don't see how it can be proved that Ney was bribed. I also don't trust Federal Prosecutors.

Posted by: Sue Bob at January 08, 2006 07:13 PM (cskP4)

4 Please don't quote me, but I seem to remember hearing something about the creation of fake Corporations, and using them for fraudulent billing.

Posted by: dave at January 08, 2006 08:11 PM (CcXvt)

5 I guess Libs are under the impression this makes any difference.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at January 08, 2006 08:24 PM (8e/V4)

6 Corruption seems to be the new cornerstone of the Republican Party. Abramoff is hardly the only corrupt republican to get caught or caught up in corruption/ethics scandals, or investigations lately - google - cunningham, pombo, ney, noe, scanlon, delay, doolittle, rove, libby, this list could go on for pages and it will. Tha's the Republican Culture of Corruption and Cronyism.

Posted by: steve at January 08, 2006 08:57 PM (6hT/C)

7 Hope you get up to speed soon. It's breathtaking. I've been blogging Abramoff for over a year now. Where've you been? Check out Mohammad Atta being on Abramoff's Sun Cruz gambling boat, and check out the murder of Abramoff's partner, Gus Boulis. For sure the Florida prosecutor will be questioning Abramoff and the other surviving partner Kidan soon.

Posted by: Maezeppa at January 08, 2006 09:15 PM (AsrJM)

8 Three federal counts: Conspiracy, tax evasion and mail fraud stemming from Capitol Hill influence peddling on behalf of Indian gaming clients.

Posted by: Drew at January 08, 2006 10:53 PM (oxMjD)

9 I saw the McLaughlin Report this morning and it convinced me that there's something pretty rotten here. For one thing, there was apparently a murder involving people that Abramoff had hired to protect from from the person murdered. Maybe there's an explanation, but it looks dark indeed. But more to the point, the speed with which the Republican leadership has managed to produce this level of corruption is staggering, since it took the Dems roughly 50 years to achieve the same level of corruption. My point isn't that Republicans are more vulnerable to corruption, but that something is seriously wrong with "the system." I have no doubt that Dems will succumb just as quickly (or even more quickly) if they come to power. It may simply be that Qutb was right, that there's a "horrible schizophrenia" at the core of western liberalism. It may also be that we can overcome it. (I think we can.) But so far, we haven't even begun. The "ownership society" is, I think, the "way out." But someone had better start taking that seriously pretty soon, or we're really screwed. I feel almost transcendentally angry, and it's not about Michael Moore. Abramoff was one of the people that I'd have trusted implicitly. I was simply gullible, and kind of stupid. His ilk ought never to have been trusted.

Posted by: Demosophist at January 08, 2006 11:42 PM (iObV6)

10 So, do the Indians get their money back or what? How much money are we talking about here? With all this influence peddlin' - did the Indians get their money's worth? - or did they simply get screwed again?

Posted by: hondo at January 09, 2006 12:05 AM (3aakz)

11 indeed, that is why I said not to quote me I was half listening while reading, and I thought they had said something in regards to him setting up Corporations, and using those Corporations to bill clients for services that he did not perform [fake billing?]. My bad.

Posted by: dave at January 09, 2006 12:15 AM (CcXvt)

12 It appears in the plea agreement that he only pled guilty to conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud and wire fraud. That's not the same thing as being convicted of influence peddling. The Government hasn't proven bribery or cheating the Indians and they have dismissed all such charges. Wire and mail fraud are pretty malleable charges. The actual transmissions don't actually have to be fraudulant. They just have to be tied to transactions the government says are fraudulent. This is another instance of a man being convicted (albeit through a plea) without the underlying crime being proved.

Posted by: Sue Bob at January 09, 2006 07:49 AM (cskP4)

13 Demophist, What I read in the Weekly Standard article I linked above, was that at a meeting between Kidan and Boulis (Abramoff was not there), Boulis became angry and allegedly stabbed Kidan in the neck with a pen or pencil. Kidan is the person who hired people to protect him from Boulis, not Abramoff. I'm just trying to parse through all this to see exactly what Abramoff is actually tied to. The MSM is terrible at that.

Posted by: Sue Bob at January 09, 2006 08:42 AM (cskP4)

14 US News & World Report had an informing article on this late last year. Not sure of the exact date but I honestly hadn't heard of any of it till I read their article. Personally I tired of the Dems complaining when you look at their rolls of who took money and how much. Both sides are dirty, period. I'm all for term limits, no long term benefits, and make it where they have to come home and go to work thru the year. It would stream-line the gov't, save tons of money and cut out much of the corruption that is rampant today with the current system.

Posted by: Debby at January 09, 2006 08:43 AM (DbBZu)

15 The scandal is that every sonofabitch in Congress is bought and paid for, regardless of party affiliation, and always have been, always will be. It's really a shame that the plane that crashed in Shanksville didn't make it to the Capitol building, and find every lowlife crapweasel Congrescritter inside; the damned jihadis trying to do us a favor by taking out Congress, though they thought they were hurting us. Just think, no more Kennedy, Pelosi, Kerry, et al. They almost saved us that day, but the passengers stopped them in an act of bravery that in retrospect was misguided.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 09, 2006 09:32 AM (0yYS2)

16 Doh! Typo alert:"the damned jihadis trying to do us a favor" should read "the damned jihadis tried to do us a favor"

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 09, 2006 10:25 AM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

It used to be that it took over 50 years in power for one of the major political parties to become so corrupt that they had to be replaced, and during that time the opposition was compelled to actually learn something of benefit to the culture in order to deserve the mantle. But the Abramoff scandal comes barely ten years after the Republicans finally achieved power in Congress... and even that wasn't absolute. Even as late as 2000 the Democrats were competitive, and even now Democrats have a slight edge in party registration. Yet, the Republicans have managed to manifest one of the most profound corruption scandals in US history and the democrats will have to re-assume control of congress without having introduced a single new idea in 50 years, and during an era in which most Americans simply don't trust them (with good reason) with the security of the nation.

A year ago I would have said that the Democrats were on the verge of extinction as a party, and that by 2008 the future would involve a single-party "unity" government that would eventually spilt into two competing factions, both of Republican origin. Moreover, I don't regard the failure of the Republicans as a misreading of history. They have failed. As far as the economy is concerned they've simply demurred, barely even bothering to pay lip service to some good ideas (originally introduced by a Democrat, Patrick Moynihan). There really is no such thing as the "ownership society" you know, nor is there likely to be within our lifetime. And not only have they done nothing to diminish the deficit, they've done nothing to so much as recognize the primary challenge. For all the good they've done, they might as well have been Democrats.

While it's true that most of the new ideas in governance have come from Republican think tanks, they haven't even addressed the central issue: the comparative nonproductivity of US labor compared to a combination of technological capital and offshore labor. So we now have a situation, in the midst of what appears to be a genuine war (and not, as Michael Moore would have us believe, a "war mirage") where we'll be compelled to switch from one barely competent party, to another decidedly incompetent party, simply because we have no other options. The "engine of competitiveness" has simply not worked and both parties are out-to-lunch. We are sorely bereft of leaders, and of ideas... with an implacable enemy looking down our throats, cocked and ready. Anyone inclined to rejoice had better think again. And there's really no reason to believe we're at the bottom of the curve, either. While the Chinese are scaling up their human potential, we're scaling down. While they're investing we're divesting.

I, for one, am unsure. It's hard for me to even imagine a place for myself, let alone a bright future. I have some ideas, but haven't sold any, let alone myself. Like many in my generation I'm grievously underemployed, and my impression of the thirty-something generation that's currently ready to assume power is that they're impressed by superficial appearance but have not a clue what "substance" means. They're even more vain and distracted than my own generation, if that's possible. They amount to the equivalent of what R.B. Fuller once described as "Industrial Designers" who, if they were tasked with building a ship, would produce a sinking raft of toilet plumbing and wallpaper designs floating down the Hudson to the sea. For the most part they're rather mean-spirited and ignorant brats who will be compelled to learn 40 years of life in 10 just to survive, and who have been handicapped with an unserious attitude about serious things. They'll end up killing most of us before our time.

But you know, I don't really mean that... I'm just saying it for dramatic effect.

Sure I am.

(Cross-posted to Demosophia)

Posted by: Demosophist at 08:28 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 660 words, total size 4 kb.

James Risen, the New York Times reporter who willfully damaged national security interests by reporting on NSA intercepts of al Qaeda cellphone and email communications with American citizens, has released his new book to take financial advantage of the furor surrounding the NYT story. Here's how Time describes the book, State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration:

Risen's chief target is the CIA, where, he argues, institutional dysfunction and feckless leadership after 9/11 led to intelligence breakdowns that continue to haunt the U.S. Though much of State of War covers ground that is broadly familiar, the book is punctuated with a wealth of previously unreported tidbits about covert meetings, aborted CIA operations and Oval Office outbursts. The result is a brisk, if dispiriting, chronicle of how, since 9/11, the "most covert tools of national-security policy have been misused."

It's almost possible to respect a person who betrays this country because he is motivated by ideology. At least that can indicate noble intent, if flawed reasoning. But who can have any respect for someone who puts his countrymen at risk for the sake of personal enrichment?

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Bluto at 02:37 PM | Comments (20) | Add Comment
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.