Monday, December 27, 2004

short duration tag line

"Three cents a day, and worth every penny"


What this is, is a three cent response to the Macho Response. You may notice that the title of each entry is linked to an entry on my friend Crack Emcee's own blog. I'll try to keep up.

not for everybody....just the sexy people!

Growing up, I was beaten just as often as CMC for the Sin of Inappropriate Music. Depressed Mode? You must be a fag POW! Dead KennyG's? Trying to destroy society POW! P-Fonque? Nigger-lover POW! And on, and on, andonandonandonandonandonandonandonandonandonandon. But as I played more music, an amazing thing happened- I completely lost the ability to distinguish any difference between any of it. I mean, genres are a figment of some beancounting marketers imagination (what's left of it). And the only way I can interface with it is directly- if you say to me, "make a jazz noise here", I won't know what the fucque you're talking about. If, on the other hand, you tell me to deliver three notes in the Mezzrow style, and to do it presto, then we got something. Genres should be abolished- ask any musician what their real, day-to-day utility is. This is because music is a language, and if you restrict your dialectic to metalinguistic terms, you are stuck jerking off in a Frederick Jameson po-mo mobius strip. Where the soundtrack is A-Ha and Abba. But if you wanna get some work done, if you wanna get things jerking back and forth, you've got to approach your instrument with sincerity and commitment. Some sympathy, and some taste.

a little terminology please

Let's take "Guilty, guilty..." first. Crack, everything you say is correct, of course, but this doesn't mean it's right. Point by point, I agree with you, and with your overarching theme; to wit, the Left sold out long ago and is way past being relevant. Proof? Their inability to unseat a dimwitted Texan, twice. Further proof? The ascendancy of Bill Clinton- a "liberal" filtered through a Reagan lens. But your points belabor the obvious:

One: Bush, Inc. did steal the 2000 race. I'll admit that against someone as arrogant and lackluster as Gore, it was Bush's race to lose. But that doesn't add any legitimacy to the actual proceedings- a "legal" solution to a constitutional problem, delivered by Bush41's appointees. A cliche from the 80's rears its ugly head- if the Ukrainians can have another election, why can't we?

Your next two points: regarding Gay Marriage, everyone's credibility was lost due to excessive posturing. And Bush lied? So what. Presidents Lie, that's what they do. Anyone who says they're shocked suffers from excessive coyness, and should get over it. So I'm with you on both items here.

But the Kicker: It is a frequent error of armchair generals to confuse tactics with strategy. Our strategy- our global response- was never in doubt from the moment those planes hit the WTC. Realpolitik demands that we slap somebody down for being too bold, and that holds for whomever is in the Oval Office. But tactics matter- under Clinton, we had these fuckers running scared and running out of money. Bush, on the other hand, has a tantrum in public. Which is more effective? Under Clinton, sure, the WTC was bombed; but the perpetrators have been arrested, and more to the point, Clinton never lost his cool in the global arena. If the Shrub had merely paid attention, then operations might have continued as before; Delta Force would still be "kickin' down doors and sweepin' out corners", and these networks would have been rolled back. But NO! Dicknbush had their eyes on the Oil, and that's how Mohammed Atta slipped under the wire. And if you think we're winning, then you really don't understand Terrorism. How many days have gone by where you didn't think about 9/11? Be honest.

Wednesday, December 22, 2004

That's more like it!

Thanks, CMC, for gettin' down to the nitty gritty and talking like the honest broker we all know you are. No one but a lily-livered pansy could argue the fact that we need to slap down these terrorists like a bunch of spoiled teenagers- the stakes in this game are Civilization itself, make no mistake. I still maintain, however, that Bush is not the man for the job. He's technically retarded, he's deep in the pocket of the worst corporate fascists I've ever heard of, and his attitude sucks. He's a public relations disaster for the U.S., and I have no problem voting him out even in the middle of a war- provided, of course, that my vote is counted.

You're definitely a voice worth listening to- brutality in one's life has a way of opening your eyes. I've had maybe a tenth of your hardships (heroin in the family, suicide, abuse of one form or another) so I can dig it, at least a little bit. And you're on the money when you call all these whiners on the carpet and insist that they start identifying as Americans, rather than separating themselves in the name of dubious identity movements.

But a fight for our lives needs to be conducted in a far more serious manner than what we're doing now. What we're doing in Iraq is totally half-assed (as a former Squid, you know that), and would have been accomplished handily by a Democratic president- with a greater emphasis on covert and Special operations, a more tailored approach. When a president must appear less warlike to his constituents, the path left available to conduct the necessities of realpolitik is covert ops, and that is nearly always more efficient.

But this is really arguing over trifles. I contend that 9/11 would not have happened if Gore were in office at the time. The Shrub's cabinet just wasn't thinking about the world in the way they should have been. It's a failure of imagination on their part, and we need leaders with imagination.

Monday, December 20, 2004

Allow me to expand...

Excuse me... I'll need a little room here... but my friend CmC is full of shit. Never mind that we effete Ivory Tower bleeding heart liberals just don't get it. Forget (for a moment) that we who live in a city chock full o' fags are completely out of touch with the Heartland of America. It's time for a slight interlude:

Gene Wilder, as The Kid, speaking to Cleavon Little, as Sheriff Bart:
"Salt of the know....morons!"

I digress. Yes, the burning issue is terrorism and what to do about it. But people who trot out the old saw about "not changing generals in midstream" (thank you Yogi Berra) are the types who would be considered excess baggage in combat. Y'ever hear of fragging? A highly effective technique, despite any drawbacks. ABSOLUTELY we should change commanders, if and when those commanders prove themselves to be less than effective. And this "president" is anything but effective in the war on Terror. Public perception to the contrary is only that- perception. The Shrub has but one goal: enriching his cabal of corporate goons, at the expense of John and Jane Taxpayer. It is eminently in his interest to foment a Spectacle (see Situationism) of Terror, a shitstorm of fear and violence, in order to control the emotions of our retarded cousins quivering in the center of the Big Chicken. Of course this "values" bullshit is a farragoe, yet another distraction in the War for the Mind of America. Go on, call me paranoid.

This is all academic now, anyway. The Shrubs' victory is complete: the Diebolds have delivered the verdict they were programmed for, and the White House is still standing, with nary a pitchfork or improvised torch having touched its hallowed tapestries. And there won't be any rock throwing on Inauguration Day, either- all those with little enough common sense to risk their freedom for a trifling thing like the will of the people (should be will o' the wisp, now) have been subdued, either by the Prozac floating down from the chemtrails coming out of those C-130s out of March AFB, or the HAARP emissions coming out of Montauk. Go on, call me paranoid.

Look, maaaaaaaannnnn....

Crack Emcee is a friend of mine, so I take his recent conversion to the Dark Side with equanimity. That said- WHAT THE FUCQUE, ARE YOU BACK ON THE PIPE?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


Blog Archive