I realize my blogging is not as prolific as it has been in the past. There are several reasons for this – most of them lame – but I’m listing them here anyway.
- I have a life
- I have a job
- I’m working on a new project at said job that has me waking up at all sorts of odd hours, getting to work when most people aren’t even considering waking up, and popping Ambien (it’s prescribed and legal – shut it!) just to fall asleep early enough to be functional when I wake up.
- I have kids
- I have dog
Shall I go on?
I realize the maximum effective range of an excuse is… well… zero, but it’s my blog. Deal with it.
Do I sound cranky? Well, I am.
Reason #1: Julian Assange is one of the biggest, most rancid assbags on the planet.
WikiLeaks spokesman Julian Assange said Thursday his organization is preparing to release the rest of the secret Afghan war documents it has on file. The Pentagon warned that would be more damaging to security and risk more lives than the organization’s initial release of some 76,000 war documents.
That extraordinary disclosure, which laid bare classified military documents covering the war in Afghanistan from 2004 to 2010, has angered U.S. officials, energized critics of the NATO-led campaign, and drawn the attention of the Taliban, which has promised to use the material to track down people it considers traitors.
The Pentagon says it believes it has identified the additional 15,000 classified documents, and said Thursday that their exposure would be even more damaging to the military than what has already been published.
Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell described the prospective publication as the “height of irresponsibility.”
I’m all for freedom of the press. I understand and respect the importance of the First Amendment, and I fully support it. I do, however, believe that with freedom comes great responsibility, and just because you have access to certain information, doesn’t mean you should publish it just because you can.
Assange has no idea how documents can be exploited and what kind of information can be gleaned from them by the enemy! He looks at these records, and he probably thinks, “So what! There’s nothing here that’s earth-shattering! I just want to show the world that governments need transparency and accountability!” Yeah, great. If the enemy can glean critical information about operating procedures just by rifling through trash, what the blazing fuck do you think they can do with nearly 100 thousand reports?
Again, just because you have the information, doesn’t mean you should use it. I’m sure Assange is loving the attention right now, but in the end, all he’s doing is hurting people with his complete lack of responsibility. And frankly, if one Soldier or civilian dies because of what this pestilent fuckbubble has exposed, here’s hoping he burns in a special kind of hell for it.
Reason #2: Obama defends the right to build a mosque at Ground Zero.
This is again one of those things… Just because you have the right to do something, doesn’t mean it’s a decent idea.
Standing up for the right to put a mosque near the site of the Sept. 11 attacks in New York, President Obama on Saturday warned that the country risks losing its distinct identity if it ignores basic American values such as religious freedom.
Obama spoke about the proposed mosque for the second time in two days, breaking a long silence on the controversy.
He told reporters after an event in Florida that his purpose in speaking out was to “simply let people know what I thought.”
Let’s be honest here. The murdering sub-human scum that flew planes into those buildings were FUNDAMENTALIST MUSLIMS. Yes, they were Muslims. Yes, they practiced the kind of Islam that likes to chop heads off its victims, dress women in gunny sacks, because God and Goddess forbid they tempt some hairy, goat-smelling motherfucker into raping them, and wants to subjugate non-believers. It is a bad kind of Islam, but it’s Islam nonetheless, perverted though it may be.
And putting a mosque near that site is insulting, insensitive and downright indecent.
Yes, I know I’m the last one who should be talking about sensitivity issues, seeing as my idea of sensitivity involves actually refraining from punching someone who annoys me in the face, but really… this is a little much even for me. It’s about as decent as us building a gargantuan monument to Fat Man and Little Boy in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Is it legal? I’m sure it is, although I’m no attorney, and I wouldn’t know. Do they have a right to do it? Sure, I guess so. Not sure how the zoning laws work in NYC, but probably. Is it a matter of exercising freedom of religion? No. Fucking. Way. No one is preventing Muslims from exercising their faith in New York City, and prohibiting this mosque from being built wouldn’t be a First Amendment violation. Preventing the erection of a structure does not in any way establish a national religion or prohibit the free exercise thereof. It’s a zoning issue, nothing more. But hey – they have the right to build it, and that has apparently been confirmed. OK, fine. Let’s go with that premise.
But is it decent to do so, right near a site where those who practice a version of your faith murdered thousands in cold blood? Is it right? I don’t think so. This is not a matter of the free exercise of faith, it’s just a matter of decency. The same people who go apeshit over some cartoons of Mohammed have absolutely no sense of sensitivity when it comes to shoving their faith into the faces of those to whom some practitioners of that faith did irrevocable harm. These same people who screech at the top of their lungs that the First Amendment shouldn’t protect insults to their prophet have absolutely no problem using that same amendment to protect their lack of respect and sensitivity to those who were killed on my son’s fourth birthday.
Reason #3: Some conservative bloggers are just downright embarrassing. When asked for a list of the worst figures in American history, most of them came up with this?
The list, compiled from the responses of 43 right-of-center bloggers by John Hawkins:
* 23) Saul Alinsky
* 23) Bill Clinton
* 23) Hillary Clinton
* 19) Michael Moore
* 19) George Soros (8)
* 19) Alger Hiss (8)
* 19) Al Sharpton (8)
* 13) Al Gore (9)
* 13) Noam Chomsky (9)
* 13) Richard Nixon (9)
* 13) Jane Fonda (9)
* 13) Harry Reid (9)
* 13) Nancy Pelosi (9)
* 11) John Wilkes Booth (10)
* 11) Margaret Sanger (10)
* 9) Aldrich Ames (11)
* 9) Timothy McVeigh (11)
* 7) Ted Kennedy (14)
* 7) Lyndon Johnson (14)
* 5) Benedict Arnold (17)
* 5) Woodrow Wilson (17)
* 4) The Rosenbergs (19)
* 3) Franklin Delano Roosevelt (21)
* 2) Barack Obama (23)
* 1) Jimmy Carter (25)
Really? No Robert Hanssen, who sold sensitive information to the Russians? No Ted Bundy? No Jeffrey Dahmer? I would think that killing people and eating their body parts would at least earn you the consternation of the vast majority of Americans – more so than Barack Obama or even Skeletor Pelosi, ferpetessake!
Some perspective would be nice, people! As Jim Geraghty rightly points out:
I’m no fan of most of the Democrats on the list, and there are some good picks. But most of the modern political figures look ridiculous when we compare their actions to some of America’s most really notorious figures.
No Charles Manson? Come on. You’re really telling me Al Sharpton and Michael Moore outrank somebody like Jeffrey Dahmer, who ate people? Race-baiting and rabble-rousing outrank cannibalism?
Let’s gain some perspective here, people. Really. Nancy Pelosi may be a daft, power hungry, clueless twit, but does she really deserve to be on the list of the worst figures in American history? When we knee-jerk into reactions such as the inclusion of the obese, unwashed, untalented and less than influential Michael Moore on the list of the worst figures in American history, is it any wonder that we get tainted with the broad brush of idiocy?
Reason #4: This crazy bitch needs to go away. Far away.
No, I’m not calling Justice Alito a crazy bitch. I’m calling Orly Taitz a crazy bitch. Although, I’m really questioning Alito’s sanity on this one.
A request to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito by “birther” attorney Orly Taitz asking that $20,000 in sanctions against her be reversed was referred on Tuesday to the entire court.
U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land imposed the sanctions last year after he warned her and then gave her a time limit to explain why he shouldn’t fine her in the September 2009 case of Capt. Connie Rhodes, who questioned the legitimacy of Barack Obama’s presidency.
Taitz appealed the sanctions to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta. That court upheld the sanctions in March, and Taitz sent an application for stay to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on July 8. Thomas denied it a week later.
Taitz then refiled it with Alito on Aug. 4. That request was referred on Tuesday to the entire nine-member court, the Supreme Court’s website states.
The beauty of this nation is that even the crazies get their day in court. But why, oh why is this nutbag is being allowed to waste the time and resources of the U.S. judicial system?
There are other things that are pissing me off: the economy (no, you can’t blame it on Bush any longer!), Rangel, Waters, the Congressional “swamp,” the list goes on… No, I don’t have PMS. I’m just kind of appalled at what’s going on around us. And tired.
Averaging 3 hours of sleep is no way to spend your life. Trust me.