A series of quick hits - some on which I may follow up.

1. Rosie O'Donnell vs. Elisabeth Hasselbeck - only one person could make me feel sorry for Rosie, and for that I hold an enormous grudge against the most annoying Republican Party parrot this side of Ann Coulter. I have really had enough of people who argue that "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists," and that's what people of Hasselbeck's ilk argue. If you're remotely critical of American policy, you're with the terrorists. If you believe the Bush admistration has squandered an incredible amount of good will in the world, you're with the terrorists. More than that, these hacks think you cannot possibly be opposed to policy and actions and still be for the troops. Rosie O'Donnell made an incredibly ill-advised remark by saying "who are the terrorists" but her point was nonetheless an important one - we have made enemies region-wide courtesy of the Iraq War. Our policies, designed to stabilize, have had the exact opposite impact, as the terrotists "we" planned to keep out have found a wide-open door. I can't believe even the most jaded critic would truly call our servicemen and women "terrorists," and there is no question Rosie O'Donnell was speaking about US policies and the way "Americans" in general are portrayed - but anyone who believes she meant the troops is flat out stupid. And when Hasselbeck refused to stand up for her alleged "friend," Rosie rightly called Hasselbeck a coward.

2. Jimmy Carter - Speaking of cowards...well, I'm only partly kidding. In the May 19, 2007 edition of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, President Carter, speaking on President Bush said,"as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world [i.e. - how the rest of the world percieves the United States] this administration has been the worst in history." This was not a particularly shocking pronouncement, as any number of administration critics have made similar statements - but this was a former president, which made the declaration remarkable (Carter went on to say several other things about the Bush administration, and in a separate interview with the BBC torched the Bush relationship with outgoing Prime Minister Tony Blair). One day later, Bush spokesman Tony Fratto carried out the type of hatchet job that has become all too typical of this gang of fools. Fratto said to the assembled media at Bush's Crawford, TX ranch, "I think it's sad that President Carter's reckless personal criticism is out there. I think it's unfortunate. And I think he is proving to be increasingly irrelevant with these kinds of comments." Sadly, instead of standing by the comments, in the wake of Bush's attack by proxy, Carter claimed on May 21 broadcast of the Today Show that the remarks were "careless or misinterpreted" - worse when Meredith Viera asked Carter if the comments themselves were irresponsible, Carter replied, "I think they were, yes because they were interpreted as comparing this whole administration to all other administrations." Jimmy Carter had a horrible record as president for condoning human rights violations in Nicaragua, Panama, and Iraq, while publicly excorciating Iran, yet in the past several years, particularly with his critique of Israel's Palestine policy, Carter was somewhat redeemed, but no longer. Tony Fratto was right, Carter became irrelevant. Not because of his criticism of George Bush, but because when the Bush administration huffed and puffed, Carter rolled over for them.

3. HR 1252 - For those unaware, the House of Representatives has a plan to deal with potential price gauging on gasoline, a resolution introduced last week, HR 1252. It proposes severe penalties for those found guilty of gouging, as well as giving state attorneys general and the Federal Trade Commission the ability to enforce this should it become law. MoveOn.org has engaged in a tremendous campaign to enourage people to let their representatives know they are in favor of it - however they did not provide the text of the bill or a link, which made me curious.

In speaking with some people last week, we discussed the ideas of consumer gas "strikes" - a day where everyone refuses to purchase gasoline from their evil oil corporation of choice to "stick it to them." The problem is this - Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, BP, Royal Dutch Shell, et al are all horrible, and their executives undoubtedly are lying at worst, manipulative at best, scumbags. But any one who thinks that going on "strike" hurts these people is deluded. No, the one who suffers is the poor shmuck who owns that gas station, the Gus Opeldopels (a Gulf gas station owner I knew of as a child) of the world, the honest hard-working guy, who owns a gas station and happens to be caught between the oil companies, the gasoline brokers who really determine the prices, and pissed off consumers who only see poor Gus when they're filling up their tank.

I urge anyone who reads this, go to the link below, and read HR 1252. I have serious reservations, becasue I think the bill poorly defines who would be held responsible - if it is clowns like David O'Reilly (the CEO of Chevron, the company that acquired Gulf) then I've got no problem with HR 1252. If it's people like Gus Opeldopel, then it's an ill-coneived farce.

The bill - http://www.sigma.org/publications/legal-memos/HR-1252.pdf

4. Funding of the Iraq War by Congress - needless to say, I am beyond pissed. I will have much more to say about this on my Sunday blog post, but suffice to say the Democrats showed their true colors once again - anyone who claims the Democrats are a true alternative is either intellectually dishonest or extremely susceptible to bullshit. The Dems screwed this up big - roughly 160 of them maintained their convictions in the House, and to give credit where credit is due, Barack Obama (D-IL) and HillaryRodham Clinton (D-NY) voted against the funding, but I suspect it was because they were painted into a corner, rather than their voting their convictions.

Come back Sunday, when I will discuss the war appropriations bill at length and take aim at the cowards of the Democratic Party, and the miserable followers in the Republican Party. I'll also offer my take on the Sunday news programs.

I heard this on the Dan Patrick show on ESPN radio today, from his guest host, Michael Kay, and I'll use it to close this post. Quoting Billy Joel, "life is a series of hellos and goodbyes - I'm afraid it's time for goodbye again."

CBS and Leslie Moonves Cowards and Hypocrites

CBS's recent decision to fire General John Batiste was appalling on numerous levels. Presumably, the venerable network hired Batiste as an expert in his field, a field in which he has few peers. By firing him, CBS deprived their viewers of expert knowledge and perspective, and was, in a word, irresponsible.

CBS Television President Les Moonves fired General Batiste for his comments in a recent commercial for VoteVets, comments which Mr. Moonves called"advocacy." Mr. Moonves is certainly correct, it is advocacy, but Mr. Moonves apparently believes in different standards for different people employed by his company.
§ Mandy Patinkin has long endorsed pharmaceuticals and has been an "advocate" for a group called "Americans For Peace Now" - yet Mr. Moonves has not seen fit to fire Mr. Patinkin -nor should he.
§ Bob Schieffer of Face the Nation wrote The Acting President, a book that argued in part that the Reagan administration created an environment "ripe for misadventure." Again, this is advocacy (i.e., making an argument, advocating a position), but nothing wrong with that apparently.

Moreover CBS News retains both Michael O'Hanlon and Nicholle Wallace as consultants, but apparently the same high "standards Mr. Moonves applied to General Batiste disappear when applied to those who suck at the teat of the the Bush administration. Mr. O'Hanlon penned an editorial for the Washington Post (among many) in which he advocated the troop surge proposed by President Bush's administration (this one specifically is Washington Post, January 14, 2007 http://http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/12/AR2007011201950.html). Ms. Wallace, a former Bush staffer consistently argues the administration's positions to the point that it seems sometimes that CBS news ought to be considered the press arm of the Bush White House. At one point in the lead up to the recent mid-term elections, Ms. Wallace stated on the CBS Evening News that Americans "really don't want to see Democrats in control of Congress" (CBS Evening News With Katie Couric, October 23, 2006, video at http://http://mediamatters.org/items/200610240005). Bad enough, but made worse by the revelation that Ms. Wallace is now an aide to Senator John McCain's (R-AZ) presidential campaign. Now THAT is advocacy - on one of their news programs!

To fire General Batiste is hypocritical and beneath the dignity of a news division that is the "heir" to Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite. I can only imagine what Murrow would have thought of the treatment of General Batiste were he alive today, but it seems patently clear that he would not have been allowed to express those thoughts for fear of his termination (not that he would have given a damn).

The Official Historian of the Ruling Class

Welcome to my blog. As the official historian of the ruling class, I am making it my goal to point out the foibles and idiocy of those in power. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans are safe, as I have allegiance to neither party. It is my firm belief that the differences between these two parties are minor to the point of being insignificant - they are both beholden to the same "master" for lack of a better term. It is my fervent hope that at some point, both parties will go away, and real change will come to the United States - only then can we fulfill some of the lofty pretensions we claim for ourselves (life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness - whatever that means).

Finally, before I make a single post I need to make the following clear:
The views, opinions, and political beliefs espoused on this blog belong to Clayton E. Lust, and no one else. Moreover, those views, opinions, and political beliefs are not necessarily endorsed by any groups, organizations, be they political or otherwise, with which I am affiliated.