To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

]]> http://fairlane.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/everything-went-black/feed/ 39 fairlane http://fairlane.wordpress.com/2009/01/04/superficial/ http://fairlane.wordpress.com/2009/01/04/superficial/#comments Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:10:43 +0000 cdash http://fairlane.wordpress.com/?p=2047 ]]>

Dashiell

As a film lover, and a critic, it has become impossible to ignore the ever-increasing presence of the comic book superhero on the screen. Of course this is not a new phenomenon, but it is obvious that in the last few years Hollywood has been making movies from the Marvel Comics catalogue at an unprecedented rate, along with other superhero and comic book characters.

I’m not going to take the position that comic books rot the minds of the young. I read them myself when I was a pre-teen, and occasionally even later. An industry expert might argue that the adolescent and “young adult” market is the primary targeted demographic of Hollywood, and that therefore it makes perfect sense that it would latch on to this genre, which also happens to involve a popular element from videogames: computer-generated imagery. In terms of cinema history, this is another example of the tension between film as commercial product and art form. Hollywood’s investment in a blockbuster strategy, in which huge sums are spent on a film in the hopes of massive profits, has meant that the creative aspect of cinema keeps getting pushed farther onto the margins. It also indicates a state of “mainstream” film craft that is increasingly out of touch with what I would call “literary” ideas. Industry filmmakers seem to live in a world without books—we witness instead a steady stream of TV show remakes and adaptations of comic books and graphic novels.

What I find more interesting is how film fans and reviewers manage to convince themselves that superheroes are invested with more significance or insight when they are adapted into films. The daily newspaper reviewers, and those for major magazines and media outlets (I don’t say critics, for that’s a different matter) are going to pay attention to these money-making films or else be out of a job. Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight has gotten this treatment, and plenty of rave reviews. The film struck me as a repellent mélange of sadism, sensory over-stimulation, and traditional simplistic action-movie tropes.

What I call sadism in the movies is the exploitation of the “thrill” of witnessing immoral, amoral, or extremely taboo behavior—in short, brutal violence for its own sake, for the sake of excitement in the spectator rather than as an integral element in a story idea or theme. It took off in the horror genre, and has since migrated to the action/adventure and suspense films. This aspect has come to overshadow narrative itself in many cases. The amped-up “aesthetic” of a film like The Dark Knight reminds me of stronger, more potent forms of drugs that are made to provide a greater “hit” for the addict who has already developed a tolerance for previous forms. In any case, fans and reviewers praise the way Nolan (and the late brilliant actor Heath Ledger) invests this superhero story with “darkness.” I would argue, however, that the nature of the superhero genre itself resists any deeper meanings, either associated with dark themes, or any meaningful themes at all.

Superhero comic books express an adolescent fantasy that is a reaction against fear and powerlessness. A child is confronted with control and interference from adults and from the powerful influence of society. This becomes something of a conflict when the child reaches pre-teen age, about eleven years old, sometimes earlier. We crave autonomy, but we’re not old enough to exercise it wisely. Adolescent rebellion is in large part a striving for separation from the controlling adult forces.

In literary fiction, and in all forms of art that are meaningful and of high quality, the desires of human beings are portrayed and expressed in the context of real life realities. A primary reality is pain and mortality—in other words, the natural limitations of any sentient being or in fact any existing thing or condition. I don’t restrict this to realism or naturalism in the arts. Symbolist or mythic art engages with reality. Lewis Carroll’s playful fantasy, and even the best science or fantasy fiction, engages the human condition in some way that is meaningful.

With modern popular genres, however, we observe a steady flattening effect, a reduction of human reality to much smaller dimensions. In simplest form, genre becomes an expression of wish-fulfillment fantasy. The romance novel or the paperback western don’t give us the unexpected—what the reader wants is the same thing over and over. The good guy beats the bad guy. The woman meets and marries the prince. And so forth. The pleasure of repetitive genre is very crude, but effective. It feels good to see good triumph over evil because it’s a fantasy. In reality, things aren’t that clear cut. Art forms that seek to express the truth is not “clear cut” are often rejected by the genre lover. The common aversion to the “unhappy” ending, for instance, is really the genre lover objecting to the wish fulfillment being frustrated.

There is a distinct pleasure involved in the literary or non-genre arts. It is the perception of truth. An increase in awareness, which usually involves an increase in emotional presence, is pleasurable, but it is a pleasure that needs to be learned. It is more complex than genre pleasure, and needs more time to develop. The fact, however, is that both elements are often blended together in works of art. Some filmmakers, for example, have employed genre structure while also expressing truth—the results can be very effective. Wishes, desires, are an important part of human nature, so it’s only natural that they should take a prominent place in art.

The superhero tale is a genre in which wish-fulfillment no longer tries to conceal itself within physical reality. H.G. Wells’ Invisible Man had a mythic precursor: the folklore hero with the magic cloak that makes him invisible. But then there’s The Time Machine. It’s curious that no author in all of recorded history ever conceived of time travel before. The scientific and industrial revolutions solidified a world-view in which magic no longer had a place. There’s a sense in which science fiction explored the possibilities within that world-view. But there was also a strong impulse to defy this new regime of thought.

In a popular form of the superhero tale, the main character is a nebbish, a loser who is often bullied by stronger people. Somehow this loser gains supernatural powers. He puts on a costume and fights crime—a hero in disguise. Meanwhile he maintains his old identity as a loser, continuing to be slighted and ignored while secretly knowing that he is a super-powered hero. This isn’t the only form, though. Batman is a rich playboy in “real” life, and he has no supernatural powers, only far-advanced technology and fighting skills. Still, in most cases there’s a “secret” identity (the ordinary identity he was born with) and a separate superhero identity.

Why would this genre originally be aimed at pre-teens and adolescents? Because the peculiar frustration of this group is that they are prevented from exercising autonomy in the world even though they feel the need to express it somehow. And the forces arrayed against their autonomy are so powerful that there is no hope for the child to prevail. The fantasy, then, requires extraordinary powers, powers that defy physical reality, in order for the hero to triumph over the forces that oppose him. The ordinary frustrating life, the real life of the child, is preserved in the story by a secret identity, with the superhero identity expressing the wish for power. (With time, when the readers became thoroughly accustomed to the genre, it became impossible to abandon the “secret identity” altogether. The reader could still identify with the superhero without having to keep a foot in reality.)

I no longer read superhero comic books, for a few reasons. The main reason is that as an adult I have developed a need for the awareness of truth, an engagement with reality through the transforming power of art. I haven’t lost all my wish-fulfillment tendencies—they’ve simply taken a less central role. As a critic, I now view genre fiction and other pure forms of genre narrative, as less interesting, less vital, less important. Therefore I get accused of being a snob, which I’ve co-opted in a humorous way as part of my identity as a critic. Personally, I can’t do much about this. It’s as if I’ve dined regularly on filet mignon and can therefore no longer find the appetite for a Burger King “whopper,” to which the whopper lovers respond by calling me an elitist. But the truth is that I don’t consider the pleasures of genre to be worthless, and I even partake of them sometimes, though less often. I simply think that they are less meaningful and less important than art forms that engage with the truth of human life in an honest and uncompromising fashion, and that an art form that becomes dominated by genre to the point where reality becomes a dirty word is an art form that is in poor health. In terms of film, then, I don’t see anything wrong with superhero films per se. But when the film industry devotes a huge percentage of its resources to the creation of superhero films, I sense something wrong, in fact something dishonest.

I don’t refer to graphic novels in general, but only to the superhero narrative. The notion of the super-powered individual as hero is based, I believe, on a fantasy, and it’s a fantasy of the impossible. When this story emerges from its adolescent origins into the cultural mainstream, what it tells me is that frustration and powerlessness are expanding elements of our experience. The only form of wish-fulfillment that can remedy this is an impossible infusion of power. There is no balance between the autonomy and capabilities of the individual and the powers that restrict him. In social terms, the national security state and the advanced technical power of destruction achieved by the armed forces reduces the powers of the individual protagonist to insignificant proportions. Even the non-superpower action heroes, such as Jason Bourne in the Bourne movies, regularly perform and endure things that are beyond belief. The demands of wish-fulfillment, in short, become more and more exaggerated as our actual powerlessness increases.

The pretensions of a film like The Dark Knight are insurmountable, simply put, because the hero, wearing tights and a cape, is an adolescent fantasy that cannot be transformed into meaningful content since it defies the core human reality of death and limitation. For the same reason, the exaltation of violence in Hollywood cinema, not just in superhero or action films but in almost every genre, is meaningless because it is intended as an addictive hit for a powerless spectator rather than as a truth that actually engages us.

A vital art, a vital literature or cinema of the future, would need to explore the actual power and capabilities of human beings without giving way to nihilism and despair. The superhero narrative reduces all power to the physical—it’s the counterpart to the doctrine of pure force and domination that is destroying the world. Higher art forms present wisdom, intelligence, love, emotion, presence, connection, and engagement as forms of true power and meaning in the world. The hero himself, or herself, has long ago lost relevance to the degree that he or she has lost human fallibility, and with it human depth and complexity. The story that Joyce tried to tell in Ulysses, that the mythic hero was a lie that needed to be transcended in favor of the “ordinary” (yet marvelous) narrative of real life, has not yet been absorbed into mass culture. Perhaps it is an adjustment that must come from social conditions as a whole. When the fantasy bubble bursts, there is a chance for light to come in. One of the tasks of art nowadays is to burst the bubble. And it doesn’t take superpowers to do it—just a commitment to honesty.

So my sister got me Denis Leary’s new book Why We Suck for Christmas.

I love my sister, but Denis Leary?

Yep, he’s a real Fucking Riot.

I stopped reading after about 20 pages, because there was simply no reason to continue wasting my time.

Denis Leary is NOT FUNNY.

Never Was.

I hate these Fucking “Comedians” who present themselves as, “Straight Shooters.”

If that were true, the first, and only sentence in Leary’s book would be-

I was going to write a book about why Americans Suck, but then it dawned on me, I SUCK TEN TIMES MORE, I apologize.

What really sent me over the edge was the Preface.

In it, Leary warns his audience to prepare themselves to be “Shocked,” “Angered,” and “Offended.”

In other words, he’s really going to Lay It Out, and “Shoot from the Hip” without any regard for “Political Correctness.”

Christ, what a Cunt.

“Political Correctness?”

Who the Fuck uses that Phrase?

Douche Bags, Drug Addled Wingnuts, and Unfunny Comedians who still think the word “Pussy” is Shocking.

You wanna know why Americans Suck?

I’ll tell you why-

Americans Suck because they give Chain Smoking Cliches like Denis Leary, Book Deals.

That’s Why.

Yes, Denis, Americans are “Fat, Lazy, Self-Absorbed, Semi-Comatose, Under Educated, Marginally Literate, Bitterly Unhappy, and Addicted to Simple Carbohydrates.”

I can only assume you missed the Memo back in ‘81 because, Brother, that information is more played out than Pics of Brittney Spears’ Un-Pantied Pussy.

Oh, did I mention he dedicates a section in his book to Brittney Spears’ Twat?

He does.

Did.

Hilarious.

Speaking of Worn Out Pussies getting Book Deals-

What’s up with the Duggar Family?

Just what the World Needs-Eighteen more Incurious White People

I heard they actually had 21 kids, but three of them made the mistake of sitting on mom’s lap, and were never seen or heard from, again-

Whoooooshhhhh!!

Here’s an interesting Factoid-

The Duggar’s no longer bring tents along when they take the Kids Camping.

They just have Mom drop her pants, and spread her legs; then they Stake her Labia to the Ground.

But they’re Famous.

For what?

Spitting out kids?

Is that even a Skill?

I’m fairly certain you can become Pregnant, Accidentally.

Would Van Gogh still be considered a “Genius” if Art Historians discovered he  “Accidentally” painted Starry Night by spilling some paint onto a canvas?

I mean, isn’t that what a Pregnancy, for many people, really is, an Accidental Spillage?

Ooops, I think the Condom Broke.

No worries, we’re sure to Get a Book Deal Now!!!

I’m not saying Kids are not Wonderful Creations, some of them are-

But…

Come On, Duggars.

The DNA was already a Tad Thin before you Started Shitting’em Out like someone with Cholera.

Right, Denis Leary (I almost wrote “Timothy Leary.” Damn, if only he were still around. At least LSD was Funny).

The Coup de’ Grace came when I read this “joke”-

If they build a wall to keep out the Mexicans, who’s going to build the wall?

Aaaaarrrrgggggghhhhhhh!!!!!

I’m sure Rush Limbaugh considers that Zinger to be a “Classic,” but Rush Limbaugh is so Emotionally Fragile he can’t Hack living without the Assistance of Cheeseburgers, and Oxycontin.

His opinion, unless it’s on the Subject of Being a Guilt Riddled, Obese,  Sanctimonious Junkie, is, Irrelevant.

It’s not that I disagree with Leary’s Thesis-

Yes, We, Americans, Suck.

Everything he says is True.

However-

People like Leary, who get Book Deals only because They’re Famous, are a HUGE Contributing Factor to our Suckedness.

He’s done nothing in his Career to Warrant a Book Deal.

Nothing.

As revenge, Next Christmas, I plan on purchasing my sister Michelle Malkin’s latest book.

I’m sure she has one, after all, God knows Shrill Bitches are a Dying Breed, and we’d better get what one of them has to say on paper before they All Disappear.

Dashiell

Chris Wallace asked Dick Cheney what his “highest moment” in the last eight years was, and he answered “9/11.”

You know, it’s become easy to just dismiss Cheney as a bizarre Darth Vader figure, but people should pay more attention to this answer. All the Bush years are succinctly contained in it. These ghouls, these spooks who somehow gained a grip on power in the United States, were overjoyed at the events of September 11, 2001. They saw it as a great opportunity to be exploited. I’ve said this before, and for those of us who are sane it still might sound extreme, but really, it’s right there in the record. These men exploited this horrific atrocity for their own benefit—and a majority of the American people let them. Like sheep, the majority went along with using a single disaster as an excuse for overturning two hundred years of democratic tradition. They bought into Cheney’s lie about “extraordinary” and “dangerous times” that required the exercise of unfettered executive power. And after five plus years of death in Afghanistan and Iraq, and corruption and criminal incompetence at home, it still took an economic collapse for the voters to turn against the monsters that usurped their country.

I won’t take the time to analyze Cheney’s interview further—he reiterated his dishonest arguments for torture and dictatorship. Dahlia Lithwick lays it out nicely for you at Slate (not exactly a radical left-wing site), and her main point is a most dispiriting one, i.e. Cheney’s views on everything have long been thoroughly discredited, yet there he remains, giving interviews and repeating the Orwellian lies that have surrounded us like a fog.

Let’s be absolutely clear. Richard Cheney should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity, and for treason. As detestable a human being as he is, revenge is really not the point. Justice requires that when an individual holding high office in this land violates his oath of office, causes the deaths of untold thousands, and threatens the very foundation of constitutional government, there should be an accounting. Not for his sake—he’s incapable of remorse or apparently even of the recognition of ethical values—but for our sake and the sake of the country. If there’s no accountability for criminal behavior on the part of the most powerful people in the nation, then the law itself becomes hypocritical when applied to lesser crimes. Silence equals approval. If Cheney walks away with no consequences, then it’s essentially a win for fascism because it opens the door to future abuse.

I do not propose submitting Cheney to beatings, sleep deprivation, water torture, sexual mutilation, or any of the other methods he so enthusiastically promoted to be inflicted on others. I do not propose that he be imprisoned indefinitely without trial, kept in isolation until he goes insane, and then tried in a military court where he is denied the basic rights and elements of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence. I would not propose that for anyone, because I believe in the Constitution of the United States, even for those who try to destroy it. No, I would like to see Dick Cheney tried in a regular court of law, with full right to counsel, and all other rights that are supposed to be guaranteed to someone accused of a crime. That’s not too much to ask. The victims of 9/11, who have been so disgracefully used by this man and his accomplices, deserve that much. So do the victims in Iraq. We all deserve some closure. I don’t want to hear any nonsense about “putting the past behind us.” The past never gets behind us unless there is some resolution.

The political establishment is afraid of bringing the Bush-Cheney crimes to account because they fear “instability.” The two parties are more interested in prestige than justice, so they maintain the false respectability of the status quo rather than bringing criminals in high places to justice. There is probably also a fear of being caught in the net—many members of Congress have been complicit in one way or another in the blood and corruption. So the consensus seems to be that nothing will be done. There will be no trials for Cheney, or Stephen Hadley, or Doug Feith, or Donald Rumsfeld. There may even be pardons—pardons before anyone has even been charged, which is a travesty.

So much the worse for us. But even given this probability, we need all the facts to come out. We need to know exactly what these men said and did. The secrecy must stop, or else it will continue to poison our society. We can’t just put our trust in some new “good” guy like Obama and leave it at that. Even if Obama turns out to be a good president, accountability and justice are structural needs that can’t be met with rhetoric or personalities. In politics, as in life, as in recovery—you don’t grow unless you first clean house.

Johnny Wingnut
This just in from the AP: “More than half of all homeowners who had their loans modified to make the payments more affordable in the first half of the year are already in default again.” Imagine that. This is exactly what any normal well adjusted intelligent human being would expect. Yet, somehow Uncle Sugar never saw it coming. And that’s not the worst of it. They plan on rewarding the attendant bad behavior of mortgage holders by giving away more of your money.

One article had the audacity to print this “The main goal of the program is to get financial institutions to lend money more freely again, which would help revive the economy.” Yeah…that makes a lot of sense to me. Let’s “lend” (wink wink, nod nod) more tax payer money to those who can’t or won’t pay that money back. I mean, it’s working already isn’t it?  This is insanity.

And now the Bush administration with the connivance of liberal democrats are poised to lend tax payer money to the auto industry. This is all under the auspices of saving jobs. Jobs for which employees are overpaid, CEO’s are overpaid, and for a company infrastructure which has failed to remain competitive. I’m wondering, if the auto industry was ever going to get their act together, wouldn’t they have done it already?  So why or how is another taxpayer funded handout going to get them to fix their broken machine now? Here, I’ll make a little prediction: This loan isn’t going to fix anything. It’s just going to prolong certain death. Just as the $700 billion bailout isn’t fixing anything, but only prolonging the inevitable. The reason none of this is going to work is because bad choices (behavior) is largely behind it all. The money won’ t change the behavior that led lenders into the shape they were in. It won’t change the behavior of irresponsible mortgage holders and it won’t change the behavior of the fat cats running the auto industry. It will merely enable these people to continue behaving in ways which harm themselves and others.

But even if these spending policies worked. Is it right to give away someone else’s money without their consent, especially, when that money is being used to enable the bad choices of others? I don’t think so. I think what our “representatives” are doing is morally wrong and I am outraged. You should be too.

Still, our fearless leaders press onward seemingly oblivious to the fact that the house is coming down all around them. They remain deaf to the cries of a majority of Americans who are begging them to, “Please, for the love of God, STOP!” Their stealing from public coffers so they can sink their teeth into private enterprise won’t save them or us. What it will do is make things worse by enabling mediocrity at taxpayer expense. Yes, it’s sick; it’s obscene; it’s immoral…and what’s worse is that, practically speaking, those of us who are paying the tab are powerless to stop it.

Dashiell

Tolstoy wrote a tale called Esarhaddon, in which a king is in bed thinking about how he will order the torture and execution of his chief enemy the next day. He wakes up to discover that he is no longer himself, but his enemy, and as such he experiences the entire process by which he is captured, put in a cage, and then led to the stake to be executed. From this waking dream he also awakes, as the king again. Horrified by what he has learned, he frees his prisoner and gives up his crown.

Miracle stories like this express, among other things, a desire that the truth could be directly known and grasped by supernatural means, thus making the world a far better place than it is. Conscience has not proven to be a strong enough force to contend with the desire for gain. In the corporate world, for instance, money has lulled conscience safely to sleep.

I wish that the CEOs of Wal-Mart, Nike, Reebok, Guess? Jeans, JC Penney, and Bloomingdale’s (to mention only a few) would wake up some morning as a 12-year-old kid working in a foreign sweatshop, or a Mexican immigrant sewing clothes in L.A. for minimum wage and supporting two kids. Because I’m sure these guys don’t think about those people–to them, the workers are just a means towards the end of profit, and their struggles and suffering don’t matter.

And I wish that Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, William Kristol, Douglas Feith, Elliott Abrams, and the rest of those fine, upstanding men who got us into this marvelous war would wake up tomorrow as Iraqi civilians, who have seen family members killed, their society destroyed, their country soaked in blood, and for what? Because I’m also sure these guys don’t think about their victims. Everything is abstract to them–ordinary people are just units in a geopolitical game. They can write the suffering off as “collateral damage,” justified for what they consider a noble end, which happens to coincide with American hegemony, as well as their own power and influence.

I thought of Esarhaddon whenever I saw George W. Bush being interviewed in recent days. It’s obvious he’s on a last-minute mission to spruce up his image, trying to appear like a decent, thoughtful person. It’s impossible, of course. Whether he’s saying, “Obviously I don’t like the idea of people losing jobs, or being worried about their 401(k)s” (a far cry from admitting any responsibility for these developments) or naming his biggest regret as “the intelligence failure in Iraq” (when in fact he deliberately bent the intelligence to fit the policy of invasion, as we all should know by now), there’s simply no room for real honesty when you’re sitting on a mountain of lies.

I never dreamed I would be saying this, but there’s something absolutely perfect about George W. Bush as a representative both of U.S. power and the conservative political class. He is the end product of years of political image-making: the elevation of the talking point and the attack narrative over actual discussion, the reduction of ideology to its most basic (and stupid) elements, the shallow pseudo-patriotic rhetoric of Reaganist “pride” in country, the equation of naked greed with “principles.” Behold the apotheosis, the final incarnation of the right-wing ideal, summed up with an almost classical concision in one man, one “decider.” Leaving aside the policies (wrong and destructive 100% of the time, which I would have though a statistical impossibility), and the corruption (as close to total as we can expect to see in American history), let us look at the man himself. The overriding characteristic is self-centeredness; indeed, narcissism of the most degraded variety. With an utter lack of self-knowledge, and certainly no awareness of an actual moral dimension to human life, Bush is all about himself–his own paltry emotions and thoughts, his image, his role, his “legacy.”

This would be a terrible shortcoming in a talented person, but in Bush’s case we see self-regard combined with a personality so mediocre, so lacking in distinction, that it should make anyone who has learned to read above the 6th grade level experience a cold shudder of fear. This is the end result, embodied in a kind of historical logic that seems eerie in its perfection, of the phony “conservative” movement–a complete cipher, an empty man, a man with no insides, no conscience, no reflection, no shadow. A grinning, head-bobbing, self-regarding fool, who doesn’t even know that he’s done incalculable harm, but thinks that the harm somehow just happened independently of him, and is therefore incapable of true remorse. If Bush woke up, like Tolstoy’s character, as a tortured Guantanamo prisoner, he would lack the ability even then to make the connection. The level of selfishness achieved here, and symbolized for all of us, is itself the true engine of capitalism, the real power behind American imperial ambition. The world’s great superpower is a feckless frat boy trying to impress his drunken friends—oh boy, I get to be the President! The specialness of Bush is not that he is different from other figures in the political establishment, but that he is such a perfect symbol of their secret aims and desires.

You see, the CEOs of Wal-Mart, Nike, and the rest–and the pack of neocons too–are no doubt family men who love their kids, and their pets too. I don’t believe in the Illuminati or any of that diabolical crap. The hidden meaning of Arendt’s “banality of evil” is that banality is the purest (and stupidest, and dullest) avenue of harm in this world. Self-interest, so called, is the most banal motive of all, and the most universal. Only rarely do we see this banality portrayed with such impeccable accuracy by the (harrumph!) “leader of the free world” as we have since 2001. Most of the time I would get so angry watching Bush that I’d switch the channel before the man had said more than two or three sentences. As it turns out, however, there was something to be learned (yet at such cost!).

It is not enough to imagine ourselves in someone else’s shoes. Or to be more accurate, it may be sufficient for those who have taken care to develop a strong conscience, but not for the rest. Why? Because power in the modern age, the age of arrogance, the tragic age when entire peoples can be vaporized with the flip of a switch–power has become synonymous with a failure of imagination.

We are all the same person, not in imagination alone, but in reality. This is the fact, a spiritual fact (dare I say a religious fact), the heaven, the nirvana, the whatever you want to call it, that we eventually confront with our own death but which we are called upon to experience today in order to truly know ourselves. As Tolstoy wrote: “You thought life dwelt in you alone, but I have drawn aside the veil of delusion, and you have seen that in doing evil to others you have done it to yourself as well. Life is one in everything, and within yourself you manifest but a portion of this one life. And only in that portion that is within you can you make life better or worse, magnify or diminish it. To destroy the life that dwells in others is not within your power. The life that was in those you have slain has not been destroyed: it has merely vanished from before your eyes. You thought to prolong your life and to shorten the lives of others, but you cannot do this. For life there is neither time nor space. The life of a moment and the life of thousands of years, your life and the lives of all creatures seen and unseen, is one. To destroy life, even to alter it, is impossible, for life alone exists. All else only seems to be.”

Time for a little Local News-

Marine Recruiter Charged with Rape-

Arthur Pledger Jr., 27 year old Marine Recruiter, was charged with Two Counts of Third Degree Rape after evidence surfaced that he had Sex with a 15 Year Old High School Student.

This comes on the heels of a Report by the Miles Foundation that Incidences of Sexual Assault within the Military are on the Rise.

Gee, could there be a Link between Training People to Kill, and Rape?

Nah, that’s Crazy Talk.

“Shave my Head, Sleep with Men, Where Do I Sign?”

Louisville Woman Accused of Stealing $15,000 from Little League-

Forty Three Year Old Theresa Reece was arrested on Suspicion that she Jacked 15 Grand from a Local Little League while working there as a Temp.

Don’t hate the Playa’,  Hate the Game.

Gov. Beshear Proposes Hike in Cigarette Tax-

Facing a $456 Million Deficit, Governor Steve Beshear is looking into possibly raising the Tax on Cigarettes by Thirty Cents.

Cigarette Manufacturers are not exactly thrilled, and claim the Tax Might Dampen Cigarette Sales.

Yep, because Addicts, more than Anything Else, Worry about the Cost of their Addiction.

“What, you raised the Price of Heroin? I draw the line at $25. That’s It, I’m Through!”

What a Crock of Shit.

Don’t be Surprised if these Assholes show up in Washington some day with their Tar Stained Hands Out.

I’m sick of Politics.

Let’s see what’s going on in the World of Sports.

O.J. Simpson Sentenced to Prison

O.J. Simpson was sentenced to serve at least Nine Years in Prison on Friday. The sentencing comes after Simpson was convicted on 12 charges stemming from his participation in a Robbery/Kidnapping dating back to September of last year.

In his Remarks, Judge Jackie Glass said,

At a bail hearing, I said to Mr. Simpson that I didn’t know if he was arrogant, ignorant, or both. During the trail I got my answer, and it was both.

According to statements made by O.J., he simply wanted to retrieve Personal Belongings he felt were Stolen from Him, and that he never Intended to Harm Anyone.

He also claimed he had No Idea it was Illegal to Show Up in a Hotel with an Armed Goon Squad.

To say O.J.’s fall from Grace is both Tragic, and Pitiful, is an Understatement.

He “Had Everything,” as the saying goes, and he Pissed It Away.

Manny Pacquiao Beats Down Oscar De La Hoya

I can’t Express How Happy I am with This Result.

Oscar De La Hoya has to be one of the most Overrated Boxers/Human Beings in History, and I can only Hope the Ass Kicking He Received Last Night Sends Him, at long last, into Permanent Retirement.

What Really Irks me is, even after losing to a man who spent 75% of his Career at Super Bantamweight (122 lbs.) or Lower, many people continue to call De La Hoya one of the “Greatest Boxers in History.”

Bullshit.

To be considered an “All Time Great,” you MUST Defeat other “All Time Greats.”

In his Fights against other “Sure Fire Hall of Famers,” De La Hoya is an Uninspiring Zippo for Six-

“Sugar” Shane Mosely (Split Decision, Unianimous Decision)

Felix Trinidad (Majority Decision)

Bernard Hopkins (KO Rd. Nine)

Floyd Mayweather Jr. (Split Decision)

Manny Pacquiao (TKO Rd. Eight)

Calling Oscar De La Hoya an “All Time Great” is a Travesty.

Maybe “All Time Good.”

But an “All Time Great?”

No Fucking Way.

The Truth Is, De La Hoya was more Talented than Most Fighters, but not as Talented as the Best. His Fighting Style was Often One Dimensional, and he tended to Cower when Faced with a Powerful Opponent.

The Good News?

After delivering a Beat Down of Epic Proportions, Manny Pacquiao Established Himself as a “Sure Fire Hall of Famer.”

Pacquiao’s Speed, Skill, and Power were Too Much for the “Golden Boy,” and after Eight Rounds of watching his man get Knocked Around the Ring like a Punching Dummy, Nacho Beristain (Oscar’s Trainer) asked the Referee to Stop the Fight.

The Win was Especially Gratifying for Pac Man because, for months, the “Experts” had deemed the Fight a “Mismatch” due to De La Hoya’s decided Size Advantage (Oscar spent the last seven years fighting at 160 lbs).

I guess they never heard of David v. Goliath.

Let’s hope Oscar joins O.J., and they both, out of Humility if nothing else, decide to Leave the Spotlight to those More Deserving.

Yeah, Right.

Dashiell

I watched the unveiling of Barack Obama’s “national security team,” and I have some questions for him.

Why is there not a single person on the team who opposed the invasion of Iraq in 2003? I’m not suggesting that every person you appoint should have been right about the war, but I think it’s reasonable to expect at least one non-hawk appointee. One of your main selling points in the campaign was that you were opposed to this war. I don’t see why your appointments shouldn’t reflect that position in some way.

Why should we put up with having Bush appointee Robert Gates continue at Defense? As an old crony of Reagan spook William Casey, he was deeply involved in Iran-Contra and other dirty covert operations. Under Gates, the corruption and looting by war contractors in Iraq has not abated. He continues to push for massive budget increases at Defense, which does not represent any change from the past. And what about all the Rumsfeld parasites still on the Pentagon staff? Do they stay too? Really, sir, are we supposed to believe that you can’t find anyone better than this Bush toady to run Defense? If there was one chance to show courage and determination in appointments, it would be the Pentagon. All this signals is more of the same. I consider any person who worked for Bush-Cheney as already morally compromised.

Speaking of the Pentagon, will you take a good hard look at cutting the Defense budget? I realize that it’s considered politically dangerous to do so, but I don’t think it’s a coincidence that we happen to be having an economic meltdown after throwing away our resources on an illegal war. The war industry is in fact a drag on the economy—we can have a strong defense without having to waste billions of dollars making weapons manufacturers filthy rich. Moderate cuts in the Defense budget, including clamping down on the massive waste and fraud, will be needed if we’re going to restore the economy. If we can’t challenge this sacred cow, all the economic stimulus packages in the world aren’t going to do the trick.

What about Blackwater and the other private mercenary forces that are a stain on our honor and a threat to freedom? Will you please cancel their contracts?

Will there be accountability for the crimes and corrupt practices of KBR and other Iraq War contractors who have been looting billions from our Treasury?

You have nominated Janet Napolitano to run Homeland Security. This is a huge department created as part of Bush’s so-called “War on Terror.” Are you planning on continuing this so-called “war” which by definition can never end? Do you support the Patriot Act, one of the key items in Bush’s attack on the Bill of Rights? Do you plan to continue the illegal NSA spying “program” which uses the pretense of “terrorist surveillance” to violate the rights of our own citizens? Why is it called “Homeland Security” anyway? This is colonialist language that implies that we have other lands to administer—couldn’t we just call it domestic security?

You have said that you oppose the shameful use of torture by the Bush-Cheney regime, and that torture will end under your administration. Will you also end the so-called “renditions” in which human beings are kidnapped and sent to other countries who then torture these prisoners? Will you end secret prisons and indefinite detention without charges? Will you call for the repeal of the Military Commissions Act, which denies the age-old right of habeas corpus and violates the Bill of Rights?

Will there be any accountability for the crimes against humanity committed by the Bush administration? Will there be investigations into the unlawful actions of these people? If not, doesn’t that send the message that future Presidents can fail to uphold their oaths of office without fear of any consequences? How does sweeping these crimes under the rug help this country to change for the better?

I noticed that there was no nomination for CIA director. Does that mean that Bush appointee Michael Hayden, who has supported all the illegal and immoral foreign policy doctrines of the Bush-Cheney regime, is staying on at CIA? Isn’t it time for thorough reform of the CIA, NSA, and other intelligence agencies, especially following a period when a covert agent’s identity was exposed for political reasons by the administration, with minimal consequences?

I hear you talking about the danger of Iran getting a nuclear weapon. Could we also talk about the danger of any country at all having a nuclear weapon? How can we tell other countries not to get nukes when we’re not doing anything to reduce our own? Are we supposed to think that somehow we have the moral right and the inherent ability to wield these weapons, but other countries don’t? Will you lead by example and create a plan for gradual de-escalation of our nuclear arsenal, thereby lending legitimacy to our professed concerns about proliferation?

I haven’t heard you or Hillary Clinton questioning any of the policies of the Israeli government. Why should criticizing these policies be taboo and equated with hating Israel or being antisemitic? We can criticize the Mexican government’s policies without being accused of hating Mexicans, can’t we? Are you willing to admit that the Palestinians have rights too? This endless conflict in the West Bank and Gaza doesn’t make me feel safer—it makes everybody less safe, in fact. What do you plan to do to help Israel and the Palestinians make peace?

American politicians have been talking about supporting freedom and democracy for as long as I can remember. Why, then, do we pump arms and money into repressive authoritarian governments such as Egypt, Indonesia, or Uzbekistan? Will you end funding of such regimes?

We still hear anti-Cuban rhetoric every election cycle. Yet we continue to treat China, a totalitarian government, as a favored nation. Will you challenge China on its numerous violations of human rights? Will you open dialogue with Cuba?

The Bush administration expressed constant contempt for the United Nations. Will your administration recommit to the principles of international law and cooperation? Will you accept the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, or will you continue the Bush policy of defying the court, the Geneva Conventions, and other international standards of human rights and responsibilities?

The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have contributed to the drastic poverty and debt of the developing world by using so-called “neoliberal” economic policies to maintain the power and privileges of rich countries and international corporations. Would you consider policies of debt forgiveness for the Third World in order to free poor countries from burdens unfairly placed on their people by corrupt leaders? Would you oppose the predatory economic strategies of international corporations that are impoverishing millions in Latin America, Africa, and Asia?

I expect the answers to a lot of these questions are going to be “no.” I know that there are great political constraints on a President in this country. Some are theorizing that you are bringing the establishment under your tent so that you can govern with less disruption than previous Democratic presidents. You’ve proven yourself to be a brilliant politician, which is a definite plus if you really want to create change. Nevertheless, I think these questions need to be asked, because change has to involve the challenging of preconceptions. And the level of disintegration we are witnessing today, socially and economically, makes this even more vital. You talk about unity, and I appreciate the sentiment, but you know, there are powerful groups who don’t want anything more than a cosmetic change, if that. And they aren’t giving up without a fight. If you just give in to these interests without confronting them, I think that there won’t be a significant enough change. This is true in every area of policy, but since I’m focusing on national security in this case, I will say that we need to make peace our priority, first and foremost. That means shifting away from our war-based social and economic structures. That means letting go of the illusion that we can be the world’s policeman. That means ending the madness of trying to exploit the world’s resources and people for the exclusive benefit of the U.S. and the international corporate classes. That means coming to our senses and recognizing our country as a republic, a nation among nations, and not an empire or superpower.

I wish you luck. I hope you prove yourself worthy of your promises.

No one can ever accuse Chimpy of being Inconsistent-

He Made Up His Mind-

The Bush administration backed off proposed crackdowns on no-money-down, interest-only mortgages years before the economy collapsed, buckling to pressure from some of the same banks that have now failed.

He Was Warned-

“Expect fallout, expect foreclosures, expect horror stories,” California mortgage lender Paris Welch wrote to U.S. regulators in January 2006, about one year before the housing implosion cost her a job.

He Listened to Fools-

“These mortgages have been considered more safe and sound for portfolio lenders than many fixed rate mortgages,” David Schneider, Home Loan President of Washington Mutual, to Federal Regulators in 2006. (When Wa-Mu collapsed, some two years later, it was the Largest Banking Failure in U.S. History).

Suggested Rule Changes Were Ignored-

In 2005, faced with ominous signs the housing market was in jeopardy, bank regulators proposed new guidelines for banks writing risky loans. Today, in the midst of the worst housing recession in a generation, the proposal reads like a list of what-ifs:

_Regulators told bankers exotic mortgages were often inappropriate for buyers with bad credit.

_Banks would have been required to increase efforts to verify that buyers actually had jobs and could afford houses.

_Regulators proposed a cap on risky mortgages so a string of defaults wouldn’t be crippling.

_Banks that bundled and sold mortgages were told to be sure investors knew exactly what they were buying.

_Regulators urged banks to help buyers make responsible decisions and clearly advise them that interest rates might skyrocket and huge payments might be due sooner than expected.

He put his faith in the Free Marketeers-

“An open market will mean that different institutions will develop different methodologies for achieving this goal,” Joseph Polizzotto. (Old Joe Represented the now Defunct Lehman-Brothers).

“Appears excessive and will inhibit future innovation in the marketplace,” Mary Jane Seebach, Managing Director of Public Affairs at Countrywide Financial Corporation, in response to the Proposal from Federal Regulators.

“To conclude that ‘nontraditional’ equates to higher risk does not appropriately balance risk and compensating factors of these products,” Lillian Gavin, Chief Credit Officer at Downey Savings, which joined the Growing List of Failed Banks Last Week.

I could on, but…

Let’s Review-

-Chimpy received Warning that a Potential Catastrophe Was on the Horizon, but, Per usual, he said, “Nah, everything’s going according to plan.”

-Lenders knew a Potential Catastrophe Was on the Horizon, but told Washington, “Don’t worry we Got This. Trust the Free Market, Baby.”

-Regulators attempted to Tigthen the Reins, but were Rebuffed by the Great Chimpleton.

-American Tax Payers were Forced to Eat 7 Trillion Pounds of Shit.

Ladies, and Gentlemen-

A Round of Applause for One of the Most INEPT Men to Ever Walk The Earth

Oh-

Having an Old Milk Jug Filled with Ron Paul’s Duck Butter does not make you an Economist.