Rumsfield - Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing!

I love the fact that Donald Rumsfeld now feels obligated to criticize President Obama for seeking bipartisan consensus and seeking to do whatever is correct in Syria, vice what ever makes our testosterone surge. "Rummy" (yeah, really, "W" sometimes called him that!) was one of the principal architects of the disaster that was the Bush invasion of Iraq and was the prime mover behind ousting the original American civilian placed in control of the post invasion rebuilding in favor of his own hyper draconian measures which instantly alienated many Iraqis who might have helped rebuild instead of design IEDs. Loathed by the Pentagon almost down to the least two star,  Rumsfeld is probably the last person after Dick Cheyney who should have a microphone placed anywhere near them regarding matters military. One actually hoped at one time that temporal displacement and a change of perspective might make Rumsfeld reflect, repent and admit his colossal failings as a strategist, leader and administrator, as did Robert MacNamara (see "The Fog of War" if you haven't), but alas, like his President after Hurricans Katrina, his propensity for denial, backbiting and whiney carping seem to be boundless. 
Donald Rumsfeld has actually managed to become as irrelevant to civil, informed discourse as Al Sharpton, Pat Robertson and Al Sharpton and that's damned hard to do! 

Miley ain't the worst of the litter!

 

I get that many were disgusted by the almost kiddy porn nature of the pathetic post Hannah Montana Ms.  Cyrus bumping and grinding her way across the stage as if she were in estrus. What I find harder to grasp is the “shock” and dismay of persons in the industry who apparently have been out of touch with their world for about the last ten years.

By comparison with some other examples we have seen recently, Miley was pitiful, but by no means the worst of the lot. A partial list follows:

Miley Cyrus can, at least nominally, sing.  Kim Kardashian’s sole talent is (apparently to date) sexual intercourse, either on camera or with her beau du jour. All through the recent pregnancy, we were treated to ever more revealing photos of her burgeoning body parts crammed into bikinis that made Miley’s VMA outfit look like a nun’s habit (ok, ok, that’s a stretch, but permit me license for effect). Where was the outrage?

Honey Boo Boo’s pathetic child abuser of a mother (yeah, it’s child abuse) continues to have the bully pulpit offered by TV producers with no taste and even less restraint. Where’s the public outcry?

Donald Trump, replete with  blonde wombat apparently stapled to his scalp, continues to be provided a TV platform from which to spew his blither and blather about his “genius” and the egotistic fantasy that he, in some indeterminable fashion, serves a purpose on the planet other than a receptacle for ridicule. Why are Americans watching this blowhard who has nothing but contempt for most of them?

The Batchelor, and its ilk show the absolute worst side of real relationships and yet the ratings keep it alive despite its status as barely concealed serial prostitution.    

Americans continue to attach entertainment value to toothless, semi literates who: swim with alligators, subsist on a diet of catfish and grits,  gull tons of people into buying duck calls or threaten to shoot trespassers when the world ends. Why?

Former Congressman  Weiner and the recently disgraced mayor of San Diego actually have scores of ardent supporters who are apparently fine with their sexual peregrinations, and want them to retain positions of authority.

The fact that any sentient human has ever watched any episode of “The Real Housewives of (your town here)” is proof of a gap in social taste through which the QE2 could safely sail.

 All these references are provided simply to show that while Ms. Cyrus’ antics may have been offensive to some (me included),  the bar has been lowered so much and in so many worse ways by the media in response to the vast unwashed masses of people with nothing better to do, that it would be hard to project how much worse it could become.

That said, however, It is fun to speculate what might be next. Here are some reality shows being considered by those network genii who actually believed Kris Jenner had talent.

 

“Celebrity I-Spy”:   The Kardashian girls are placed in a small motel room.  After Kim gets dressed (false alarm, no movies today),  The first one who can find the door and leave wins a date with block b at Pelican Bay super max. The first of the remaining ones to correctly guess who  left gets to leave the state  and try to forget their years at home.

“Coordination Countown”: The Real Housewives (funny, I just misspelled “housewives” as “hosewives” – Freudian slip?) of Las Vegas are dropped in front of a CVS. The first to find chewing gum, unwrap it,  and walk ten steps while chewing without falling wins.

“Trick or Tweet”: Elliot Weiner and three underage girls are left alone in a motel room. If he can actually be “ready to perform” before the girls can tweet their disgust and call the police, they all win. If not, they all still win as he is taken away by the police.

“What’s up, Chuck?” : A group of rational adults are placed in a screening room  and an episode of “Here comes Honey Boo Boo” is screened. Last one to puke gets to sit through another episode, the rest may leave as soon as they have cleaned themselves up.

“Orange Crush”: Three large African American Clemson football players play rock, scissors and paper. Last man standing gets to cram a basketball (or whatever) up Rush Limbaugh’s buttocks.    

“ Backside Brothers”:  Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Rick Perry are put in a pitch black room and each is given a flashlight and a mirror.  At the signal, the one who finds his own ass first wins a date with Michelle Bachmann, the losers….well, maybe the winner is the loser!

These are just a few in the planning stages, there will surely be more and worse to come.

If you want to respond write it yourself!

      

                                  Whether we like it or not

I got a response from a good friend to yesterday's post, citing an article by Christopher Hedges filled with flamboyant and inflammatory exaggerations related to the Manning trial. My friend cites Hedges as a "respected" source. I responded as follows: 

  Christopher Hedges -  respected ?  By whom? Certainly not his former employers at the NY times “His newspaper, The New York Times, criticized his statements and issued him a formal reprimand for "public remarks that could undermine public trust in the paper's impartiality." which is why he changed jobs.

Hedges is as extremist to the far left as Wayne La Pierre is to the far right. Where he was educated or his religious background does not automatically earn him respect. The contradiction of Hedges is that he cut his teeth  on the subject of global terrorism, and is properly considered an expert in the field. So his understanding of the threat should, one might suppose, also give him some sense of the measures which might be necessary to protect Americans for the greater good. Yet, he says: “….. the nation’s citizens—the most spied upon, monitored and controlled population in human history—to the judicial lynching of Manning means they will be next.” Not only massively untrue (Britain has much more overt and covert intelligence gathering and control of their population and that is almost surely dwarfed by China and Russia) but based on really little more than Hedges' already established point of view re: Manning’s offence(s).  Blatant exaggeration is, or should be, beneath legitimate journalists.

Hedges is one of those who dislikes authority in any form and has the perfect bully pulpit: “If we are attacked. It’s the Government’s fault because they didn’t do enough to prevent it. If we take somewhat draconian steps to prevent it, the Government is the enemy.” It’s perfect. Either way,  Hedges and his ilk are free to attack the Government.

Let’s start with this statement:  “Under the military code of conduct and international law, the soldier had a moral and legal obligation to report the war crimes he witnessed.”  Manning actually "witnessed" nothing, Period (can you say "artistic license and editorial hyperbole?") . Manning’s position certainly would have allowed him to tell his story as he viewed it  after he no longer was in uniform, and even then there is a question of legality; but there is no overarching right for a serving member of the Armed forces to violate the National Security  Act by releasing classified documents to the general public. In Hedges Land, free press literally means that there would be no such thing as legitimate classified material, Which mimics Assange of Wiki leaks.  

     The problem here is that it is a legally simplistic case. Did PFC Manning knowingly and with appreciation for the possible consequences break the law? Yes, he did. Could he have been imprisoned for the rest of his life (75 years) Yes, he could have . Does Chris Hedges have a history of grossly exaggerated and inflammatory anti-military and anti establishment rhetoric?” Yes, he certainly does.

Are these thing related? Of course they are, but that simply allows  Chris Hedges to use Bradley Manning in much the same way Al Sharpton used  Tawana Brawley – as a public soapbox for his own agenda. Manning got a fair and open trial. From the get go, there was no question of his culpability, and the Military judge was actually merciful. In “Hedges’ World” where laws need not be obeyed and the establishment is always maleficent, the sentence of PFC Manning signals  “The end of the rule of law!”  In the real  world (you know, the one where we are actually accountable for our actions?) it is precisely the opposite – the rule of law applied, consistent with the facts, rather than with the emotions. 

I had to write this, but I didn't want to

So, Bradley Manning now wishes to be known as Chelsea Manning?  While I am sensitive to issues such as gender dysphoria, I am also possessed of a perceptive sense of appreciation for theater and timing.  DSM V discusses gender dysphoria as being a condition wherein  from “earliest childhood”  the subject has a keen sense of  incongruity between their emotional and physical gender roles.  It is all too convenient that PFC Manning grew to adulthood and voluntarily enlisted in the US Army while dealing with (whatever that might mean)  this psycho-physical contradiction  but now, hard  on the heels of a 35 year  prison sentence, feels compelled to share his alter ego with the world. Even more suspicious is his attorney’s statement of his hopes that he will receive hormone replacement therapy (HRT) while in Leavenworth.

Let’s get this straight. If PFC Manning  is a “good soldier” and completes his enlistment as a man, and is discharged honorably, he would, presumably have to then deal with HRT and such other alterations as he might desire, on his own dime. If he announces his gender dysphoria and attempts to live as a woman while in uniform, he will probably be administratively discharged, and again, have to foot the bill for lifestyle changes he might wish. However, if he is a traitor who decides that he is the arbiter of national intelligence and needs to release to the world information he is legally bound to maintain secure, he wants that government which he has betrayed to pay for HRT etc.?  

       This seems a desperate ploy to gain sympathy and perhaps impetus from whatever source for early parole and/or pardon.  Manning’s attorney had even hinted that he hopes for a Presidential pardon, which I hope with all my heart is not forthcoming. There is no debate over the illegality of Manning’s actions, since a military judge has ruled him guilty.  Even such a radical defense advocate   as F. Lee Bailey said years ago, that he would rather be tried in a military court than any other because of the burden of proof and due process.

       I and the Bradley Mannings of this world am allowed to live my life as I/we wish, and many of us choose to do so advocating for liberal issues in many areas. Taking the oath as Manning and many of us did, does hold us accountable to that oath while we remain subject to it and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. If Manning had the perception from early childhood to realize he is gender dysphoric, as he would now have us believe, then he is certainly perceptive enough to have appreciated the consequence of his criminal actions as an adult. It would be a travesty if, in an era when the LBGT community is making strides in equal rights and opportunity in so many areas, if that community came to Manning’s aid in any sense. Years ago, in a darker time, a man named McCarthy and his ilk led a “crusade,” assisted by the religious right, to purge gays from government service as security risks. What a shame and huge step backward it would be now if anyone where to, in any sense, claim that Bradley Manning should be held even one iota less accountable (or due special treatment) for his  actions because he is gender dysphoric.        

Talkabouts

                                  “Talkabouts”

 

There are many phrases in colloquial English which may not be as comprehensible as we might desire to non-Americans. In an effort to bridge the gap, I offer the following. Others will, I am sure come to mind. To add interest, I will post the updated, syntactically correct version and at the end of the list I’ll post the current slang phrases.

1.   “I am unable to determine the gist of your conversation, Willis”

2.   “Mentally challenged to the extent of a portmanteau laden with peened or clawed implements”

3.   “He has accumulated personal organic excreta in a central repository”

4.   “More slothful than a group of carapaced reptiles”

5.   “It precipitates as if a bovine micturating upon a tabular plinth”

6.   “That lad would be unable to locate his nether region with both forelimbs and an electric torch”

7.   “In a state of  dishabille resembling a potage and bread concoction”

8.   “Demonstrating  a buccal rictus similar to a hybrid equine ruminating  Cirsium vulgare.”

9.   “ He appears to be incapable of perambulatory locomotion   and masticatication of  chicle simultaneously.”

10. “Her physical from resembles a rural adobe latrine”

11. As irate as a drenched Gallus domesticus”

12. “As praiseworthy as an indefinite article is capable of becoming”

13. “As physically repugnant as a barrier formed of dampened earth”

14. “So pusillanimous as to be devoid of organic waste”

                               Real analogies:

1.   What you talkin’ about, Willis?”  2. “As dumb as a bag of hammers”   3. “He has his shit together”    4. “Slower than a herd of turtles”     5. “Raining like a cow pissing on a flat rock”   6. “He couldn’t find his ass with both hands and a flashlight”    7. “As f****d up as a soup sandwich”             8. “Grinning like a jackass chewing thistle”     9. “He can’t walk and chew gum”    10. “She’s built like a brick shithouse”   11. “Mad as a wet hen”    12. “As good as it gets”      13. “As ugly as a mud fence”    14. “Scared shitless”

 

A bit of baseball trivia

So, My bro and I were discussing the relative merits of Willy Mays and Mickey Mantle. I posed the proposition that I’d as soon have Miguel Cabrera as either one, which might be regarded as heresy by some. The facts are that we left out (in the Mays/Mantle discussion) two of their contemporaries who were probably better all around baseball players anyway! To stretch it out a bit I’ll call one player B and the other, player S.

S – Full Seasons played, career,

 BA –batting average, lifetime

OBP – On base  percentage, lifetime, 

SLG – slugging average , lifetime

>100 – seasons with more than 100 RBIs 

 >300 – seasons hitting over .300

                          S          BA        OBP      SLG      >100      >.300

 Mantle             18         .298       .421      .557        4(!)         10

Mays                 23         .302      .384      .557         10           10

Cabrera             11         .321       .399     .569         11           8

Player B            17         .344       .482     .634          9            16

Player S             22        .331       .417      .559         10          18

 

Still want Mays or Mantle first?  As it stands, Cabrera in 11 seasons has a better everything than Mays, and beats Mantle in BA, Slugging (averages) and RBI production. (by the way, Cabrera is only 30!) The surprise is that Player B and Player S are better than all of them ! Who are they?   

I'm Baaaack! (and I'm still pissed off!)

I just posted to my Facebook time line comments related to a recent post below re: the Sea World ruling that Sewa World is a better judge of things Orca than are  OSHA bureaucrats. In that post, I referred to a "documentary" called "Blackfish" regarding Orcas and (by extension) all animals bred or kept in captivity. A few facts are in order.

1: The film focuses a lot on Tillikum, and uses him and the deaths of three persons associated with him, as a great deal of the  justification for their thesis. Tillikum was wild captured at the age of three, and treated poorly by his original "owners" in California, never having been socialized by human contact in the water and dominated by two older females. The death in California, although largely attributed to Tillikum (the other two whales being dead, now) was a joint effort by all three whales - note: all wild caught, all kept in small enclosures and all unsocialized. The second death related to Tillikum was essentially suicide by hypothermia. In this case a significantly pharmaceutically impaired man hid in the park (Sea World , now) and got in the tank, going over a three foot high barricade to do so. This imbecile had previously been found swimming with the manatees!. The water temp (far lower than expected) probably killed him, not the whale.  If the whale had decided to maul him, he’d have been unrecognizable after a night in the tank, which he wasn’t.  Dawn Brancheau’s death , lamentably  is squarely at the feet of the whale.

                The movie uses as the subtitle,  “Never Capture What you Can’t Control.”   I suppose this also means every animal in every zoo in America. PETA’s stamp is all over this propaganda film. Here’s what’s grossly inaccurate about it.  It uses Tillikum and several other wild adult captured whales as examples, and, to a degree, the norm, when in fact, today, and for the last 25 years, the vast majority of Orcas in captivity are captive bred and born.

2: Marine parks around the world are now breeding in house, and in some instances artificially, to minimize inbreeding. In fact, Tillikum actually has sired 21 offspring, so there is something at which he excels!   Wild capture no longer is necessary, and/or considering the difficulties involved, is financially daunting. These captive bred whales are socialized in a way wild captures never have or could be.  At least one male was captured after an artificial, human induced  “stranding” at age 5. Of course he’s pissed!   Analogizing Tillikum and his wild capture peers to   captive bred  Orcas is rather like comparing my Bassett Hound to a wild wolf. Domestic dogs are different, as are most domestic animals when compared to wild or wild capture counterparts.

3: There is some claim that Captive orcas live shorter lifespans. The problem here is that there is a relatively small population in captivity, all of which are known and meticulously tracked, , and a huge undetermined number in the wild, most of whose lifespans are conjecture at best. Statistically it  is ridiculous to note that one wild Orca allegedly living to an age of 90 (“Old Tom” seen for decades off Australia)  constitutes  a standard of average lifespan. No one, absolutely no one, has realistic data regarding stillbirths and other deaths in the wild due to natural causes. Again, the movie (Blackfish)  will  mislead   theatergoers regarding the life span controversy without having either the numbers or the means of obtaining them, and will have their own “experts” who  make lofty pronouncements regarding captive lifespan with no real or even reasonable means of comparison.