My ramblings on whatever I feel like rambling on about… music, politics, current affairs, the Zeitgeist. A commonplace site. All original content and photos copyright Christopher Randolph 2005.
City Paper printed my Saddam Hussein letter, minus the final paragraph. I think I have the formula down now to say what I want for the most part in their letters section:
Get my digs in on the paper itself in long referencing sentences (article in question, issue at hand) comprising a short introductory paragraph. This is difficult to edit out if you construct the sentences with properly dependent clauses.
Mix equal parts fact and snark in tight paragraphs in the creamy center of the letter. Feel free to use metaphor and comparison.
Take another independent potshot at the paper’s journalistic integrity and ability at the end of the letter. Although true, this will be edited out. It’s like the lizard yielding its twitching tail; let them take this part, it makes them feel in control.
Feel free to practice this method as frequently as you like.
President Clinton is arriving back in D.C. after a trip to his home
state of Arkansas.He steps out of the plane carrying two pigs, one
under each arm. When he reaches the bottom of the stairs the Marine sharply salutes him
as usual. Clinton says: "I’d salute you back son, but as you can see my
hands are full."
The Marine replies: "Yes Sir!, mighty fine Pigs sir!"
President Clinton responds:"These aren’t just ordinary pigs Marine, they are pure Arkansas Razorback Pigs!!"
The Marine replies: "Yes Sir!, mighty fine Razorbacks Sir!"
The President then responds: "I got this one for Hillary, and this one for Chelsea!"
The Marine replies: "Yes Sir!, Good Trade Sir!".
Ba-dump-bump.
Now for the Real-Life Actual News Item:
Twenty cows, 40 goats for Chelsea Clinton’s hand!
True, it’s cows and goats and not pigs, but still…
I was offered my choice of daughters (the 13 year old or the 15 year old) in Tunisia on a train between Sfax and Gabes. Not being Roman Polanski, I decllined. As a white American with upwards of 28 teeth, it appeared the usual livestock cost was being waived. Later in the same trip, outside of Douz with a Berber guide in the Great Oriental Erg, I was offered 10 camels by that guide in exchange for an American gal’s hand in marriage. So far as I know this offer still stands. Said guide had 4 camels for trade on hand and the cash and credit to obtain the remainder. I’m willing to take the low, low transfer fee of 2 camels in exchange for my services. Applicants should enjoy the outdoors, sun and sand, and carrying large quantities of water for miles. Good birthing hips a plus. Apply to me directly, labelling your email "New Opportunities Dept."
Mike Ewall, the Green Party of Philadelphia’s energy and environmental policy guru (as well as the last person they ran for the 1st District Pennsylvania seat in a non-presidential election year) passed along this urgent message:
——–
** PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY **
ENERGY BILL ACTION ALERT! 7/27/2005
Without exaggeration, the single most environmentally-destructive national legislation ever — the Energy Bill — is close to being approved for Bush’s signature.
Late Monday night, the House-Senate conference committee approved a final version of the energy bill. We expect the bill to cruise through the House very soon, and to come to a vote in the Senate possibly by the end of this week - despite the fact that most legislators have not even seen the 1,000+ page bill yet!
PLEASE CALL YOUR U.S. SENATOR’S OFFICE IN DC THIS WEEK!!
ASK THEM TO SUPPORT A FILIBUSTER OF THE ENERGY BILL!
The Senate should delay their vote until after the August recess, so they have time to learn what is actually in the bill.
Your message to your Senators is simple: No taxpayer funding for dirty energy (nuclear power, coal, oil, etc. — more ideas below). Support a Filibuster of the Energy Bill. …and READ the bill before voting on it!
If calling Democratic Senators, tell them that the conference report (current version of the energy bill) does not meet the criteria that Sen. Reid laid out for a Democratic Commitment To Energy Independence.
The Energy Bill would:
* increase gasoline prices (according to Bush’s own Department of Energy) * do nothing to reduce our reliance on oil imports * do nothing to increase auto fuel efficiency * do nothing to transition our electricity sector towards clean renewable energy * make us more vulnerable to terrorism by building more juicy terrorist targets (new nuclear reactors and a new gas pipeline from Alaska) * throw many billions of tax dollars into the nuclear industry * promote nuclear proliferation by reversing long-standing U.S. policy against reprocessing waste from commercial nuclear reactors, and using plutonium to generate commercial energy * trample state’s rights to protect their coasts from liquefied natural gas terminals (used so we can go to war for gas as well as oil, now that we’re running out of natural gas in North America) * inventory the U.S. coastlines for oil and gas, to make way for future drilling in our coastal waters * promote building more coal power plants * provide incentives to cut down our national forests for energy * create demand for building many more polluting ethanol "biorefineries" * subsidize landfills, incinerators and other waste facilities * support far too many other horrible ideas to name here…
The Democratic Commitment To Energy Independence: http://democrats.senate.gov/~dpc/press/05/2005516616.html (Many points that the Democrats say they’re committed to… if they’re really committed to them, they should block the energy bill.)
Well, of course they haven’t read the legislation; their PAC donors have already told them how to vote. In fact, an earlier version of the same type of bill, before aligning details with the House, already passed weeks ago 85-12. That’s not the worst of it; only 7 of those 12 were Democrats, the other 5 were Republicans. That bill encourages heavier investment in ethanol, which has long been proven to use more energy (fossil fuels at that!) to create than it saves. This is basicially a massive pork subsidy for one powerful corporation, one of the most powerful (some would say evil) in fact, ADM. The House is more bought out by the oil industry, which likely wants more pork than the Senate was already giving them. It’s Aliens vs. Predators. Renewables, and - perish the thought! - reduction of energy use aren’t seriously on the table (in fact, the last article linked to there notes that was specifically rejected…). Not enough money in that for the piggies.
Thus about 1 in 6.5 Democratic senators are willing to even vote against this sort of pork-laden, polluting energy bill, let alone filibuster against it. I don’t see citizen action at this late date doing much on this front, what with this set of folks in office. Clearly no one has been pressured on any front, not by their own parties, not in the popular press and not by voters taking a serious look at alternative choices, to hold their feet to the fire. But as always I applaud the effort as necessary and, hopefully, um, instructional … in a "good lord these people are weasels" sort of way.
There is another pervasive silence on the issue from all of the usual Democratic shill groups, as always happens when the overwhelming majority of the elected party officials line up with the Bush agenda against their own voting constituents. I imagine it becomes necessary for folks like MoveOn (who have nothing about any of this on their website) to remain silent as attempting to motivate their donation base of actual progressives on issues like these would only lead to a healthy, proper cynicism about the party to which MoveOn transfers their money.
Senator Rodham-Clinton’s (D-IL/AR/DC/NY) major contribution to energy and environmental policy of late has been supporting tire burns at a New York facility not designed for that purpose, a move so cartoonishly anti-environment ("dirtier than coal") that she’s making a neighboring Republican governor look like a champion of the people for opposing the idea. (You might not have a great deal of success learning this sort of thing via Google…)
We don’t have the time or space for a complete list, but this excellent article in The American Prospect connects some of the dots between thd DLC and the Fortune 500. Read on if you dare.
When push comes to shove, who gets more attention on the Hill when it comes time to vote on privatizing Social Security or passing a wretched energy bill - you and your $50 donation or AT&T and their hundreds of thousands of dollars and power lunches?
While we don’t know if the policy will do anything to combat terrorism,we feel it’s essential to dispel the dangerous rumor that our 4th Amendment Rights have been entirely repealed. As you’ll see in "The Guide" there are some easy ways to protect your rights when traveling on the New York subway.
This policy is constitutionally suspect and unambiguously inconvenient. But for what it’s worth, here’s a great opportunity to practice a little rights-flexing in a real life police encounter with lots of cameras tomake sure everyone plays fair.
By learning and sharing this information you can help to ensure that this unprecedented event does not further indulge that defeatist attitude towards the 4th Amendment that causes so many Americans to consent to suspicionless searches wherever and whenever they’re asked.
For their part the media is largely reporting the unofficial repeal of the 4th Amendment as both fait accompli and popular.
This requires some interesting avoidance of fact, such as when an article titled N.Y., N.J. commuters OK with bag searches says precisely the opposite in some of its text:
"Some commuters have called [the ACLU], saying they believed they were stopped because of
their race…"
All logic has gone out the window on this one. Some more quotes:
"I think it’s necessary," [commuter Roberta] Nelson, 30, said. "But I agree with a lot of people that it’s not going to be a deterrent."
… which means you really think it’s completely unnecessary.
We can’t seem to work logic into a full sentence, all the way through, as cited right above or in the following, from the same article:
Passengers do not have to submit to the searches, but those who refuse will not be allowed to board.
If you’re not allowed on board, guess what? You’re not a passenger.
The ACLU may attempt legal action, but at least they’re speaking out:
"If we’re going to spend the money, we should spend it on something that’s going
to stop a terrorist attack, and random searches of 4 to 6 million transit riders
between New York and New Jersey is not the way to do it," said Deborah Jacobs,
executive director of the ACLU of New Jersey.
Almost all I’ve received in my inbox from the alphabet soup of other liberal (and ‘liberal’) mailing lists lately has been Karl Rove-related. This will not save us, it will not help us. Nothing about the searches, nothing on the renewal of the PATRIOT Act by the House (before, during or after), nothing (save from Jobs with Justice, as cited below) on CAFTA. Those were the big, combatable issues of the week, and have been met with a great silence on the "center-left" and through all the byways of Liberalville, following the lead of Democratic House leadership (using the term loosely).
"If somebody wants to blow themselves up, there’s nothing that anyone can
do," Howard Moscoe, chair of the Toronto Transit Commission, says in an
exclusive interview with CTV’s Question Period, to be broadcast
Sunday.
He added that the TTC has been preparing itself for how to respond to the
aftermath of a terrorist attack. "You can react effectively after the fact; it’s very difficult to prevent any
of this kind of thing from happening," Moscoe says.
Moscoe also says he doesn’t want to become involved in the "politics of
fear," and believes random searches would play into the hands of terrorists.
function doInstacomposeReply()
{
var urlExtras = “box=Inbox&Mid=9589_20606115_2932576_2843_798_0_91284_1425_3616192024&inc=&Search=&Idx=3&YY=49538&order=down&sort=date&pos=0&view=a&head=b”
var b = document.showLetter.ICReplyBody.value;
if (b != “”) {
b = “\n— Flex Your Rights wrote:\n” + b;
}
parent.showCompose( b,
document.showLetter.ICReplyTo.value,
document.showLetter.FromAddress.value,
document.showLetter.ICReplySubj.value,
”,
‘Reply’,
urlExtras);
};
function doInstacomposeReplyAll()
{
var urlExtras = “box=Inbox&Mid=9589_20606115_2932576_2843_798_0_91284_1425_3616192024&inc=&Search=&Idx=3&YY=49538&order=down&sort=date&pos=0&view=a&head=b”
var b = document.showLetter.ICReplyBody.value;
if (b != “”) {
b = “\n— Flex Your Rights wrote:\n” + b;
}
parent.showCompose( b,
document.showLetter.ICReplyAllTo.value,
document.showLetter.FromAddress.value,
document.showLetter.ICReplySubj.value,
document.showLetter.ICReplyAllCc.value,
‘Reply’,
urlExtras );
};
function doInstacomposeForward()
{
var urlExtras = “box=Inbox&Mid=9589_20606115_2932576_2843_798_0_91284_1425_3616192024&inc=&Search=&Idx=3&YY=49538&order=down&sort=date&pos=0&view=a&head=b”
var b = document.showLetter.ICFwdBody.value;
b = “\n— Flex Your Rights wrote:\n” + b;
Can we please end the ‘liberal’ chorus of voices trying to make some sort of limited, short-term political advantage out of coddling the C.I.A.? For those who’ve been living in a cave for the past few weeks, I’m referring to the Plame/Rove/Novak flap.
Best excerpt:
While undercover, she had described herself as an "energy analyst" for the private company "Brewster Jennigs & Associates," which the CIA later acknowledged was a front company for certain investigations. … A $1000 donation was made to Al Gore’s presidential primary campaign on April 22, 1999under the citation "Ms. Wilson, Valerie E. of Washington, DC 20007, President of Brewster-Jennings & Assoc."
Heh.
Seems you can’t swing a cat the past few weeks without hitting a Democrat who wants the White House to work extra hard to keep the identities of C.I.A. agents secret. I’m not in this camp. By all means, let’s expose the bastards. America needs to have an honest foreign policy run by elected officials, not a national security state run by the cloak-and-dagger types with black budgets and zero regard for democratic process.
Blowing Valerie Plame’s cover? Totally cool. It’s a small accidental gift of honesty from the federal government. Let the rats rat each other out. If Rove starts doing it on a mass scale for altruistic reasons instead of his short-term advantage I’d almost even start to like him.
Popular joke: What do you call ten dead lawyers?
A: A good start.
Q: What do you call one exposed C.I.A. operative?
A: Another good start.
Never forget:
"From 1945 to the end of the [20th] century, the USA attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments, and to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements struggling against intolerable regimes. In the process,the USA caused the end of life for several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair." - William Blum, writing inRogue State
The CIA of course, played an integral role in all of these bloody coups. In 1949 the CIA successfully helped to change the government in Syria, as well as in Greece that same year. They did the same in Cuba in 1952 and Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, South Vietnam in 1955, Haiti in 1957, Laos in 1958, South Korea and Ecuador in 1960, the Dominican Republic and Honduras in 1963, Brazil and Bolivia in 1964, Zaire in 1965, Ghana in 1966, Cambodia in 1970, El Salvador in 1972, Chile in 1973, South Korea in 1979, Liberia in 1980, Chad in 1982, Grenada in 1983, Fiji in 1987, Venezuela in 2002 and Haiti in 2004. And this only represents a list of "successful" US interventions. Many others have failed. Let us not overlook what the CIA has done here in the United States under the guise of "national security."
CIA operatives plant news stories to confuse public opinion and distort fact. They engage in espionage and sabotage, physical and psychological. They are not on "our" side.
And the ‘liberal’ press, MoveOn and Congressional Democrats want to establish this standard as a sacrosanct area of enforced secrecy, an important national tradition we need to maintain? Why? For the alleged short-term political advantage of having an elected lame-duck president technically fire one advisor he can still just call up and ask advice anyway? Why anyone interested in a better world still takes these people seriously is well beyond me.
How are we doing over here at Randolph Publishing? Are we meeting your blog needs? Are we infotaining and entermational? Do tell. Leave any feedback as comments to this post, or email me.
As you may already know, in response to the London terror attacks New York City police began randomly searching bags of people entering the subway system. You can read our response to this on our new Flex Your Rights blog: http://www.flexyourrights.org/blog.
In the coming days and weeks it’s likely that similar policies will be implemented in major cities around the county. As this happens, you can stay updated on events and our response by checking the blog at http://www.flexyourrights.org/blog or the bottom of our homepage at http://www.flexyourrights.org.
BTW: We’ve been blogging for a few weeks now. In fact, we got a lot of attention from our July 7th post about tweeked-out meth dealers entitled "Is that a rocket in your trunk, or are you just happy to see me?"
So if you like our blog, please help us spread the word by linking to it and forwarding it to your blogger friends.
I’m going to post this dispatch from Jobs with Justice, even though they just end up supporting the very party which defeats labor from the inside year after year. I’ll take them seriously when they don’t unquestioningly get out the vote for people who voted for NAFTA to begin with, but at least they’re on the right side of this issue:
———
If we don’t stop CAFTA this week, we will be stuck with a job-killing trade deal just like NAFTA.
CAFTA—the Dominican Republic-Central America Free Trade
Agreement—would extend NAFTA’s disastrous job
loss, workers’ rights abuses and environmental damage
throughout Central America.
Your
U.S. representative needs to hear from you NOW. Urge him or her
to oppose CAFTA by calling this number toll-free:
1-800-718-1008
Tell your Representative:
“I strongly urge you to oppose
CAFTA. CAFTA is based on the failed NAFTA and will expand
NAFTA’s legacy of lost jobs, low wages and trampled
workers’ rights to six more countries.”
Just like NAFTA, CAFTA does not include meaningful
protections of workers’ rights—but it gives trade
breaks to countries that violate workers’ rights.
Highlight these points when you call your representative’s
office:
CAFTA is based on the failed NAFTA, and it will expand
NAFTA’s legacy of lost jobs, low wages and trampled
workers’ rights to six more countries.
Under NAFTA and other failed U.S. trade policies, the U.S.
trade deficit reached a record $600 billion last year as
American companies relocated to take advantage of lower wages,
weaker worker and environmental protections and improved access
to the U.S. market. Even companies that didn’t destroy
jobs used the threat of leaving the United States to break union
organizing drives and win concessions at the bargaining
table.
The NAFTA-related trade deficit cost U.S. workers nearly
900,000 net jobs through 2002—and the trade deficit only
has grown since then, despite predictions by NAFTA
supporters in the 1990s that the agreement would generate
trade surpluses for another 15 years.
We can’t afford another NAFTA. Please call your
representative now and urge him or her to oppose CAFTA.
Your U.S. representative needs to hear from you NOW. Urge him or
her to oppose CAFTA by calling this toll-free number:
1-800-718-1008
Thank you for working to stop another job-killing trade deal.
