December 15, 2008
Article by NYTimes: Shoe-Hurling Iraqi becomes a Folk Hero
The Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at President Bush while shouting, “This is a gift from the Iraqis; this is the farewell kiss, you dog!” has folk hero status in much of the Arab world. The extent of his popularity is evident in the fact Libya has bestowed upon him a medal of courage – for whatever it is worth.
“Mr. Zaidi, a correspondent for an independent Iraqi television station, Al-Baghdadia, remained in Iraqi custody on Monday. While he has not been formally charged, Iraqi officials said he faced up to seven years in prison if convicted of committing an act of aggression against a visiting head of state.
Hitting someone with a shoe is a deep insult in the Arab world, signifying that the person being struck is as low as the dirt underneath the sole of a shoe. Compounding the insult were Mr. Zaidi’s words as he hurled his footwear at President Bush: “This is a gift from the Iraqis; this is the farewell kiss, you dog!” While calling someone a dog is never polite, among Arabs, who traditionally consider dogs unclean, the words were an even stronger slight.
The incident has been a source of embarrassment for the government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, who, in a statement on Monday, called the shoe throwing a “a shameful savage act” and demanded a public apology from Al-Baghdadia.”
I say: What else can the Iraqi prime minister do, say nothing? Considering there are probably many Americans who now give this guy folk hero status too, perhaps saying nothing is better?
One has to question this tradition of Iraqi culture, however…
“But praise for Mr. Zaidi was not universal. His action ran counter to deeply held Iraqi traditions of hospitality toward guests, even if they are enemies. Those who have cooperated with or welcomed the American presence in Iraq were more apt to side with the government in their condemnation.
Ahmad Abu Risha, the leader of the Awakening Council in Anbar Province, a group of local tribal leaders that started a wave of popular opposition against Al Qaeda fighters in Iraq, said that he Mr. Zaidi’s actions were inappropriate “because the American president is the guest of all Iraqis. The Iraqi government has to choose good journalists to attend such conferences.””
Is it also Iraqi tradition to show up at ones home unannounced? That is exactly what Bush did by flying in unannounced. You pull this shit at my house I won’t let you in for starters. Then see if I answer the phone next time you call. Fucker. Pick up the damn phone and let me know you are coming over for tea so I can put a pot on or tell you to go to hell. But I guess Bush can’t do that, considering it would be highly likely a shoe would not have been the weapon of choice if the Iraqi had time to prepare a bit longer…
December 15, 2008
Article by Julian Zelizer: Obama can learn from Bush’s failures
The bigger question is, does he have enough time to review each failure and learn from it? Or better yet, considering Obama is smarter than Bush, can we assume he won’t make the same mistakes? Look, Bush is a complete failure with his best and only good attribute being a solid duck-er and weave-er when an Iraqi reporters chuck shoes at him. I was thoroughly impressed with Bush’s reaction time and fluidity of his movement was unparrelled, don’t you think? The down side is; wouldn’t it have been great to see that “size 10″ hit him smack dab inbetween those beady little eyes?
Now to reader commentary:
Franks says: “…The CEOs and other corporate leaders should not only take zero salary, they should have no stock options or other income off the company until it turns a profit, without the chance of making any of that back. It’s their terrible leadership that’s done this damage, and they need to acknowledge that and suck it up.”
What if CEO’s worked on commission? That would be cool. I bet the market would flourish, and a whole lot of people would fail too.
Moe says: “What can he learn? Don’t use your ego as precedence for going to war and claim other paltry, pathetic, unsubstantiated excuses as your reasons. Just because “Daddy” couldn’t get the job done when he was in office, doesn’t give Jr. the right to try again.”
If I’m not mistaken, Papa Bush recommended against invading Iraq the second time. Personally, I think Papa Bush did the right thing by not taking Bahgdad the first time. Saddam was the evil dictator we knew, and he was a stabilizing force in this part of the world.
Centervoice says: “I’m not saying one way or the other whether the policies were good or bad, but, relative, to, say, Clinton (healthcare reform), Bush did a lot more of what he said he was going to do if you ask me.”
Sure, he did alot, but most of his policies are bad. You cannot separate the quality of a policy decision from the act of doing it. Giving you a check is not a tax cut. An insufficient drug program is not a solution for Medicare. And, “No Child Left Behind” promotes mediocrity. This is not a way to lead our country into the future – however, to the last point, I suspect my children will be better off because they will go to private school if public education aint cutting it.
December 12, 2008
Article at CNN: Illinois Democratic Lawmakers begin impeachment effort for gov
Obviously this is a huge news story just about anywhere in the US, but living just about 60 miles from downtown Chicago the news, the uproar, is almost overwhelming. Understandably so, the focus is on Chicago “pay-to-play” politics. Chicago has a long lineage of dirty politicians and unfortunately some good politicians get wrapped up in the fray, and might do so this time. Now, I’m am not implying Blagojevich is a good guy or even a good politician. On the contrary, his record speaks for itself – he has a 13% approval rating in the State of Illinois, the lowest of any governor to hold the seat. That’s not good considering the proceeding governor, George Ryan, is currently serving time for lying to investigators for taking cash and gifts while serving as governor.
Which begs the question, “How fucking stupid is this guy?” That is, if he is guilty of a crime. Based upon the fact the Feds have arrested him and will likely charge Blagojevich within the next thirty days, one can only assume the Feds have a pretty good case. You don’t just arrest and ultimately charge a governor of a state unless you have airtight facts to back you up.
This is what I think will happen…
Within the next month or so, the Feds will charge Blagojevich with using his position for the purpose of financial gain. Then, over the next few months, maybe even sooner, Blagojevich lawyers will work with the Feds to come up with a plea deal. The deal will include, perhaps, a minimal amount of financial restitution – considering it does not seem like he had actually taking any money on the attempt to sell Obama’s senate seat. However, all of this; investigation, bringing him up on charges, bargaining back and forth for a plea deal, it all costs money and my guess is they will have Blagojevich pony up some dough to offset costs – not to mention what he will have to pay to cover his lawyers.
Additionally, Blagojevich will resign his governorship. However, he will not do this until he has a plea deal – he would be stupid to do so, as then he would not have the governors seat as leverage in the plea deal. All of the political players calling for his resignation right now is just a show, a way for Dems to distance themselves from the new pariah, that is Blagojevich. Regardless of whether he is guilty or innocent of the crime, the status quo has already convicted him – as is the case with our system in general. You see, people are actually guilty until they prove themselves innocent. I imply of such in my prior paragraph.
Anyhow, Blagojevich will remain governor until he gets a good plea deal, which may amount to a small amount of prison time and restitition of some sort. He has two years remaining on his governorship, so I have to image this may get stringed out for the next year or so, but beyond that Blagojevich will need to make a deal so he can leverage his position.
December 5, 2008
Article by Mallory Simon: Atheists take aim at Christmas
Atheists from around the country are implementing a new campaign to dispel God-believers, in an effort to push the word of God. You see, God has been speaking to atheists for the better part of a year now, since His disgust with starting the Christmas holiday earlier and earlier each year, boiled over. His master plan is to have the atheists convince the fundamentalists He does not exist so they will stop using Jesus as an excuse to give gifts to one another and take a couple days off work.
The atheists, who claim they do not believe in God, actually have a direct line to God now and are wholehearted believers. The problem they face, as pointed out by God, is most people just wouldn’t get it. Consider this; Christians believe Jesus is the Son of God, which Jesus never claimed, and DNA evidence now indicates is not true. Jesus’ birthday was actually in April, but they celebrate his birth in December. And God notes religion was made up by people, who couldn’t possibly understand what He is or what He may or may not stand for. Those are made up human things.
Further complicating issues is this idea of “faith,” which is a non-instinctual trustworthiness of an idea which was manufactured by humans who, as noted above, do not have the capacity to explain what God is in the first place.
The atheists are attempting to promote goodness for goodness sake, rather than using fear to instill a sense of purpose in people. They are working toward convincing people morality is not mutually dependent upon religion, and in fact, is often mutually exclusive of it. Furthermore, by the grace of God, they are hearing first hand how to combat fundamentalists from God, Himself.
Through the new ad campaign, atheists can now have the wisdom to promote their cause while having the big guys support, and God can go about his business without having some group of idiots claim they know who He is. This looks to be a win-win. Now, if we could only convince the “fundies.”
Update: One atheist placard, stationed in the legislative building of Olympia, Washington was found in a ditch just an hour after being placed next to a nativity scene. I guess nothing shocks me these days…
Upon finding out about the removal of the sign, the athesists placed a temporary sign in it’s place: “The incident will not stifle the group’s message, Gaylor said. Before reports of the placard’s recovery, she said a temporary sign with the same message would be placed in the building’s Rotunda. Gaylor said a note would be attached saying, “Thou shalt not steal.”“
Look, I’m not an atheist, but you can’t help but howl out loud when you read the comments made by Mrs. Gaylor. Talk about sticking it to em. Everyone has their right to free speech in this country and fundamentalists who choose to deface or take away a persons right to free speech is a hypochrite. Look, you go ahead and believe in your God, I will try not to knock you for it. But don’t turn around and break your own rules because it doesn’t mesh with what I believe. Granted, the sign does slam those who follow religion but there is nothing slanderous or libelous about the sign. The State of Washington – City of Olympia allowed it, so leave it be morons!
December 5th, 2008 in
Commentary,
Culture,
Humor,
Immigration,
Religion,
Technology,
Uncategorized | tags:
atheists,
Christians,
Christmas,
faith,
fundies,
God,
Jesus |
No Comments
December 4, 2008
Article by Stephanie Brien: City Council will wait on Prayer Decision
The city I live in is going to vote on the issue of praying before city council meetings, apparently the vote has been postponed until next year. An alderman by the name of Jim Kaplan has proposed the council say a prayer or have a moment of silence prior to start of every city council meeting. It appears there is already a split, as some alderman have come out against praying before each meeting.
“9th District Alderman Terry McCarthy said religion should be kept private and said they should leave the meetings the way they are.”
Although I agree religion is a private matter, one could argue this prayer or “moment of silence” to be used as a way for some people to prepare for the meeting. The problem I have is, why implement this as a part of the council meeting when you are more than welcome to take a moment of silence or pray on your own?
The Jim Kaplan argument is; “Kaplan has watched the way that Congress has conducted a prayer and he believes a moment of reflection is a good thing for the City Council. “If it’s good enough for both houses of Congress … then I don’t see why we should be any different,” Kaplan said.”
Here is the problem with this argument Jim, this assumes there is a connection bewteen a “good thing” and the houses of Congress. Furthermore, this assumes what the houses practice is actually the right thing to do. I know from personal experience, and suspect you have to, the houses of Congress are often far from right. And more often than not, they are far from representative of the People.
Personally, I like a moment of silence from time to time. I’m agnostic, so praying is not really my thing, but I know it is for others. I certainly would not want to take prayer away from those who feel it enlightens them or serves a purpose in their lives. However, is there not a short period of time prior to your city council meetings in which you could say a few words to yourself, or whomever it is you pray to? Why impose extra time on what I can only assume is a very tight schedule for the city council – considering all the things wrong with our city, I hope the time is used wisely to address really important issues taxing our city-folk.
