Mike Wallace: Mr. Thurm, let's be honest. We've seen the people working for pennies, making defective novelty items, which, at best, don't work, and don't provide hours of family fun; at worst, creating serious injuries.

Nathan Thurm: [ pause ] So, what are you saying?

Mike Wallace: I'm saying that your boss, Mr. Lee, is, in effect, the Mr. Big of the pirate novelty business.

Nathan Thurm: No, he isn't! You're just saying that to get higher ratings on your TV show!

Mike Wallace: No, I wish I were, but.. we saw your people making pirate Mickman schnozzes.

Nathan Thurm: [ shakes head ] I don't know what you're talking about. [ smiles ] It's funnythat you would say that! They don't make schnozzes. They make semiconductors for a very reputable computer company. What's wrong with that? Is there something wrong with that? Why, why, why is that something wrong to do? I don't understnad that. Why are you pointing the finger at other people all the time? Why don't you point the finger at yourself? Do a little more reading, maybe? Some time in court - maybe that would be effective for you!

Mike Wallace: Pardon me for saying this, but you seem defensive.

Nathan Thurm: I'm not being defensive! You're the one who's being defensive! Why is always the other person who's being defensive? Have you ever asked yourself that? Why don't you ask yourself that?

Mike Wallace: [ holds out paper ] This is an affadavit..

Nathan Thurm: I know that!

Mike Wallace: Well, let me finish. This is an affidavit from a woman who has severe nerve damage, on her upper thigh, from sitting on one of your defective whoopie cushions. Here, read it.

Nathan Thurm: You read it!

Mike Wallace: Well, I have read it.

Nathan Thurm: So, why do I have to read it?

Mike Wallace: Well, it does pertain to your company.

Nathan Thurm: I know that! Why wouldn't I know that? It's my company, I'm quite aware of that! [ looks at the camera ] Is it me? It's him, right?

During the election, Atrios wasn't somewhere I'd normally go.  But now that the political cultural war is the coin of the realm, no one beats his combination of snark and irony.

Sometimes you have to admit that you will never say it better:

Reader D writes in:

Hey, Atrios. The "wingnut debating school" thread was hilarious. I compiled the best ones (which was most of `em, actually) in case you want to repost the entire collection. My only criteria were that a) the term had to specifically reference a right-wing person or "institution" and b) the term could not just be the name alone (eg, "to Sullivan" wouldn't cut it). I also confess to "punching up" some of them, such as Acoulteration, Malkinization & Zellots, but I only gave credit to the original authors.

In alphabetical order:

Acoulteration (n.) - The act of adding copious endnotes in an attempt to give the sham appearance that one's writings are scholarly, methodically researched and based in fact. From Coulter, Ann. (Renato)

Audio'reilly (v.) - To adjust the sound level relative to the opponent, either electronically or vocally, to make one's argument appear stronger. From O'Reilly, Bill. (PapaJijo)

Cheney's Razor (n.) - A philosophic rule that the most complex explanation of an unknown phenomenon is probably correct. From Cheney, Dick. (CF)

Cotton Dandy (n.) - One who attributes greatness to his political patrons in the most saccharine, cliched, idealistic prose available, which under even mild scrutiny, fails to have any substance behind it. From Sullivan, Andrew. (Anon.)

Den Beste ex Machina (n.) - The creation of a fake political movement, such as Transnational Progressivism, that has virtually no basis in reality in order to disparage ideological opponents. From Den Beste, Steven. (Jesse Taylor)

Disinglennuousness (n.) - The practice of saying, after the fact, that just because you linked to something outrageous with "THIS IS INTERESTING" or "EVERYONE SHOULD READ THIS", you don't necessarily agree with the linked sentiments, their having been exposed as utter pig-bollocks. From Reynolds, Glenn. (Nick Sweeney)

Freepler Shift (n.) - Claiming a source is further in one partisan direction than can reasonably be claimed. From Free Republic. (Lakema/Renato)

Glenndemma (n.) - When the disconnect between what you believe in and reality grows to such a degree that you become confused and either docile or unusually aggressive. Symptoms of Glenndemma include arguing that Bill Clinton and Paul Krugman are responsible for troop deaths (angry reaction) in Iraq, or refusing to discuss any issue relevant to global climate change (docile reaction). Bizarre leaps in logic are usually a certain sign of Glenndemma. Construction: "Reaching a" or "being in a". From Reynolds, Glenn. (RulerOfMyApartmentstania)

Glennuendo (n.) - The act of drawing a darkly ominous inference from an opponent's failure to discuss a political issue. From Reynolds, Glenn. (Vaara)

Grain of Galt (n.) - No matter the topic area, the assertion that you know someone who works in/is deeply involved in it, and therefore you know what you're talking about. From Galt, Jane. (Jesse Taylor)

Malkinization (n.) - Usage of questionable or irrelevant anecdotes in support of a position when statistics disprove the position. Cognates: Malkious, malkiniously. From Malkin, Michelle. (Hesiod)

O'Reillyus Interruptus (v.) - To be cut off from making a really good point or argument by a radio or cable TV talk show host. Usually involves being loudly shouted down, having one's mic cut (if in a studio), or being "potted down" (if calling in to a radio program). Odds of this happening are greatly increased the closer one gets to the truth. From O'Reilly, Bill. (Renato)

Penis Glennvy (n.) - The belief that by linking to Instapundit and his posts, rightwing bloggers can extend their influence and reputation into the
blogosphere. Indeed. From Reynolds, Glenn. (GFW)

Reductio ad Hannitum (n.) - To ask your evil liberal guest something patently ridiculous, then, while they roll their eyes, accuse them of "dodging the question". From Hannity, Sean. (Leo)

Rosh Herring (n.) - A post by a person, supporting himself, but posted under a pseudonym and pretending to be someone else. From Lott, John (aka Mary Rosh). (JH)

Sully (v.) - To pretend people who were clearly speaking metaphorically were speaking literally, and criticize them based on that. Also known as the "War on Metaphor". From Sullivan, Andrew. (Matthew Yglesias/Andrew Northrup)

Tucker Gambit (n.) - Baiting your opponent into a seemingly hypocritical position by using an irrelevant triviality as if it were germane to the topic; usually followed by shock and outrage at opponent's (expected) response. From Carlson, Tucker. (Kherr)

Zellmanella (n.) - Afflication whereby you claim that you are a "life-long Democrat", but now you're disgusted by the party's negativity, and you've fallen for the steely-eyed Dubya. Sufferers are known as "Zellots". From Miller, Zell.

The fundamental problem with Republican strategy is this: When you're strategy is to portray every Democrat as the farthest-to-the-left nutcase in existence, your strategy will fail when you make the nutcase tinfoil-hat conspiracy of far left come true.

For maximum effect, insert "Bush" in place of "Clinton" and "Iraq" in place of "Kosovo."

Please check your own rules on granting source anonymity before waxing whiny about your reporter in jail for refusing to divulge the name of a source.

"The Times's policy does not permit the granting of anonymity to confidential news sources 'as cover for a personal or partisan attack,' (Registration Required)

I can understand why the President wouldn't want to meet with Cindy Sheehan, after all it seems like a no-win situation from a public relations standpoint and the man is much better at letting others defend his actions, but this is probably the wrong way to explain it.  We're not talking about a failed relationship here?  What's worse is it sounds like the half-hearted bookend to another famous Bush quote from Bob Woodward's Bush At War:

 “I'm the commander. See, I don't have to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don’t feel like I owe anybody an explanation.”

Anyway, a friend and avid Ironmouth reader sent me this link to a blog set up to push Cindy's cause and give updates on goings on in Crawford, TX.  Feel free to call or write the White House and tell the President he can get on with his life when his term in office is over. 

 

 

You can tell the March of Democracy is off the rails when you read from friendsoffemocracy.info

Our Staff & People

Friends of Democracy Staff, Volunteers and Correspondents

Only first names are provided for security reasons.

STAFF

Dalia:

Ghassan:

Ihsan:

Ahmed:

FRIENDS OF DEMOCRACY CORRESPONDENTS

... coming ...

It gets pretty damn truthful though:

Multinational forces in Samawa consist of forces from four countries: USA, Britain, Japan and Australia. Four countries have failed to restore electric power and basic infrastructure in the governorate. This should require only minor funds and effort. The only reconstruction noticed were paint jobs for schools and refurbished governmental offices.

I've never seen a three in that position on a gas station sign.

When the only defense you ever see put up to pointing this out is a comparison to the inflation-adjusted price of gas during the Arab Oil Embargo, you are really hurting.

From the first column by CBS Sportsline's newest writer, Lloyd Garver:

The Designated Hitter rule sends a terrible message to kids. It says that you don't have to do your whole job, just the part that's easy for you. Life's not like that -- or, at least it shouldn't be.

Many people feel that in the past 30 years, the moral fabric of America has been weakened.

Presidents have lied to us, and zillionaire CEOs have cheated the average citizen. Young people have been perceived as irresponsible, lazy, and disrespectful. We've experienced the "me generation," slackers, and a flight from responsibility. And what institution has flourished while personal responsibility has often fallen by the wayside? That's right -- the Designated Hitter rule.

I see, so the Designated Hitter rule is somehow corrupting our youth.  Whatever happened to sex, drugs, rock 'n roll and the poor role models many parents themselves provide?  Not only that but I'm a 37 year old man who has lived the vast majority of his life with the DH and I'm not morally debased.  Hell, there are more important sports stories that deal with our society.  What's really wrong with this country is people who can't tell the difference between what they feel is personally important to them and what is important to the world in general.  I'm not suprised at all that Lloyd Garver is a Cub fan.

Its bad enough that over $1 billion dollars just goes missing under the watchful eyes of American picked Iraqi government officials, but I can't quite figure out why they're spending so much money buying weapons from arms merchants for a country that was only a couple years ago literally one big weapons depot? 

WMD jokes aside, I was always under the impression that since Saddam spent most of the country's wealth buying weapons and building the largest military in the Middle East that much of that equipment would still be left over, after all the Iraqis really didn't use any of it up during the invasion.  In fact, there were stories of US military units being surprised at the vast quantities of munitions they found hidden just about everywhere they went after the invasion.  Sure over time some of those weapons and military equipment will need to be replaced, but what happened?  Did we destroy a lot of that equipment during and after the invasion, and if so, why? 

A number of weeks ago there was a great stir over a story that the new President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejab, had been one of the radical students that seized the US embassy in Tehran twenty-five years ago.  This story rested on comparisons of a grainy black and white photo and the recollection of a very small number of the former hostages but it seems to keep popping up here and there. 

Just today, CNN tells us that the CIA believes Ahmadinejab wasn't involved but the bigger question hasn't been answered:  What the hell difference does it make if he was or wasn't involved in seizing the US embassy? 

Why is this even a story?  Sure relations between the US and Iran are not very good right now, but last I noticed we don't get to pick who becomes President in Iran.  For better or for worse that is determined by Iranians, through an admittedly flawed political process, developed also by Iranians, and although we might not like that the man is a hardliner and anti-American, he still won by a landslide and there's really very little we can do about it.  Stories like this are cute and typical of our personality obsessed news cycle, but even if they are true, no matter how defiant or anti-American Ahmadinejab is we would still have to find a way of realistically dealing with Iran and their new President.  That's the story that's missing.

All apologies to the Boss:

We sit in the car outside your house
I can feel the heat coming 'round,

I'm sick and tired of you setting me up
Setting me up just to knock-a knock-a knock-a me down, down, down, down,

I'm going down, down, down, down,

I'm going down, down, down, down,

I'm going down, down, down, down Hey!

Since being gay is apparently a choice, James Dobson, how did you finally decide not to be gay?

Is My Child Becoming Homosexual?

Evidences of gender confusion or doubt in boys ages 5 to 11 may include:

1. A strong feeling that they are “different” from other boys.

2. A tendency to cry easily, be less athletic, and dislike the roughhousing that other boys enjoy.

Damn,  the fact that I batted .000 in the first year of little leauge must of meant I was gay!  Don't tell my girlfriends!

Rob's post about Baghdad mayor, Dr. Alaa al-Tamimi, being removed from office by a local SCIRI-sponsored Shiite militia and the subsequent installation of the Shiite governor of Baghdad province, Hussein al-Tahaan, as mayor reminded me of this Christopher Hitchens article from Slate a couple days ago.  The article itself is sad lament to the possibility that we might lose in Iraq and reminds us that the consequences could be worse than imagined.  But more importantly for Hitchens it is another chance to take a swipe at opponents of the war, humanitarian groups and those on the "left" who he feels haven't done enough support the efforts of the American occupation and the Iraqi people.  I suspect if one did a search they would actually find plenty of stories of aid workers killed in Iraq working for organizations that opposed the Iraq War who are there nonetheless.  Marla Ruzicka comes to mind, killed by an IED last April near the Baghdad airport, although for her troubles she was described as "the Jane Fonda of our war on terror" by our friends at Free Republic.  Actually its interesting if you read the London Telegraph report of her death closely, you see the first line says, "One of the last western aid workers still in Iraq..." suggesting to me that most Western humanitarian organizations don't find it safe enough to operate in Iraq. 

I understand Hitchens' point, however, which is the "Left" needs to get over its squeamishness about imperialism and see that their own interests obviously lie with supporting those fighting "Islamic fascism" and that compassion and solidarity with the Iraqi people means trying to help people like Dr. Alaa al-Tamimi.  Now that Dr. al-Tamimi has been removed in such an illegitimate fashion, we can see how complicated things are in Iraq.  As an exile appointed by Viceroy Bremer, Dr. al-Tamimi was already at a disadvantage but saddle him with the problems cause by the ever expanding fortifications in the Green Zone, a small-town budget for a city the size of Los Angeles and constant pressure from militant Shiite on the City Council and the man didn't have a chance. 

Sadly I suspect since our presence in Iraq rests on not alienating the Shiites anymore than necessary our hands are pretty well tied in this matter but let's get back to Hitchen's critique: I think the main thing Hitchens misses is that almost nobody in the US beyond the military and their familiesis is being asked to do or sacrifice anything to support the Iraqi people.  Collectively we Americans don't truly understand or even care about what happens to the Iraqi people and that sentiment seems to be growing as we see more America casualties and no exit strategy.

Let's admit it, we're all "spectators" when it comes to Iraq.  This includes conservatives too, after all there's nothing preventing say Cincinnati, Salt Lake City or even Knoxville from becoming Baghdad sister cities but I haven't seen anybody in those conservative Republican bastions take Hitchens' suggestion and jump at the opportunity.  The closest you'll come are groups raising money to support the troops and their families but very little concern for the material, political or spiritual well-being of the Iraqi people.  The most the US government is asking us to do is attend events like "America Supports Your Freedom Walk" or at the very least hug a veteran or something. The government can't even bring itself to fund our Iraqi enterprise via the regular budget process, relying on supplemental spending so as not to draw too much attention to the mounting cost.  Maybe we should be ashamed but there's a lot more shame to go around then Mr. Hitchens is willing to admit. 

Armed men entered Baghdad's municipal building during a blinding dust storm on Monday, deposed the city's mayor and installed a member of Iraq's most powerful Shiite militia.

"This is the new Iraq," said Mr. Tamimi, a secular engineer with no party affiliation. "They use force to achieve their goal."

The group that ousted him insisted that it had the authority to assume control of Iraq's capital city and that Mr. Tamimi was in no danger. The man the group installed, Hussein al-Tahaan, is a member of the Badr Organization, the armed militia of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, known as Sciri.

P.S.  Who trained the Badr Brigades?  Why the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, of course.

In the summer of 2003, the UN mission in Iraq undergoes a number of setbacks:

• After passage of UN Security Council Resolution 1483 recognizing the US and Britain as "occupying powers" in Iraq, Special Representative Sergio Viera de Mello and his team assume they will be part of helping with the transition to an Iraqi government but are often kept at arms length by Bremer and others at CPA.  US administrators are far more focused on specific goals and only appreciate the UN contingent when it publicly supports US policy. (p.53-56)
• UN staff conflicted on role.  de Mello's staff are adamant that US needs a neutral party to bring as wide a selection of Iraqi groups and politicians into the process, are unsure the US can accomplish this and worry that a prolonged occupation will only give more fuel to the insurgency.  Since the UN has no experience running a post-conflict country the size of Iraq they ultimately recommend a faster transition to a new Iraqi government. (p.55-57)
• de Mello instrumental in helping get Bremer's Governing Council together but is unsuccessful in persuading others in the region and at the UN to recognize it.  When Governing Council members arrive at the UN in July, they are not formally recognized as representatives of an Iraqi government. (p.57)
• On August 19th, de Mello and twenty-one others working for the UN are killed in a suicide car-bombing of the UN compound.  This throws whole UN into turmoil as de Mello was one of the most respected diplomats and administrators it had.  UN mission is pulled out of Iraq and top officials wary of continued help for US efforts having very little to show for sacrifices made thus far.  US administration of Iraq seen as conflicted by its need for unilateral control over everything while at the same time being tasked with encouraging a legitimate broad-based Iraqi lead political process. (p.57-61)

By November 2004, some at the UN are again putting out feelers to the US government for a renewed UN role in Iraq.  Former de Mello assistant, Jamal Benomar is instrumental in floating the idea of  special representative Lahkdar Brahimi helping mediate disputes among different groups during the Iraq transition process.  Brahimi at the time was overseeing the Loya Jirga process in Afghanistan and is well-respected by the US.  Diamond consults with Benomar before leaving for Iraq.  His report to Secretary Rice about possible renewed UN help in the coming year is enthusiastically received and encouraged.  (p.62-66)