Corporate whores need proper uniforms.

In the wake of the Supreme Court's Citizen's United case, it's clear that the people need to strike back. Here's one solution that I heard from a caller to the Diane Rehm Show today: legislators need to wear sponsorship patches on their suits.

Institutional analysis becomes conspiracy theory when the government says so.

At least, Cass Sunstein would like to make that official. Papa Cass is one of Obama's closest confidants and head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. He's considered to be a major contender for the next Supreme Court opening, which should really scare the shit out of both liberals and conservatives because he's open to the idea of "cognitive infiltration" of those who investigate or foster conspiracy theories. Cass Sunstein is not crazy by the way -- well, yes he is. What I mean is, he acknowledge's that several bad conspiracy theories turned out to be true during the Cold War, like the one about the DOD manufacturing terrorist plots and blaming them on Castro. It's just that now is the present, which as every Serious government official knows has nothing to do with the future. Anyway, why would someone who acknowledges that many government conspiracy theories have been verified as accurate want to have the same government interfere with the public dialogue -- that is, any more than it already has through the MSM? Well, that's an easy one. Glenn Greenwald explores Cass's reasoning behind "cognitive infiltration" in the first link, and I largely agree with his analysis. I think that what it boils down to is this: Cass Sunstein is a bad elitist, which is worse than a neutral elitist. Here are my definitions: 

elitism (neutral) - the belief that elites (those who have distinguished themselves based on merit or subjective criteria) should lead, teach or otherwise influence society in a non-deceptive manner and that this elite guidance achieves the most favorable results for society as a whole.

bad elitism - the belief that elites must deceive the public or conduct covert propaganda in order to achieve the most favorable results for society as a whole.

Does this make sense?  I found the dictionary definitions inadequate. One could write a PhD dissertation on the modern conceptions of elitism, but I've chosen to draw the line between neutral and bad elitism at the point of deception. In this construction, Cass is (not coincidentally) a bad elitist.

P.S. - Do try to muddle through the abstract of Cass's paper in the second link. I think Cass accurately describes most conspiracy theorists as "typically suffer[ing] from a crippled epistemology," but Cass needs to take a timeout and realize that covert government interference in public debate is designed to cripple epistemology in society at-large. If it indeed becomes standard practice to make undisclosed payments to experts who are willing or pleased to tow the government line, then every expert opinion becomes fair game for government skeptics. Now, you could argue that we've been dealing with this sort of corruption for a long time and no epistemological crises have crippled society yet, but Cass seems to be open to the idea that cognitive infiltration be legalized and accepted by the high courts as Constitutional.

the Haitian Earthquake

As with the devastation wrought by Katrina, I hope that our thoughts of Haiti turn to the inconvenient fact that natural disasters are often anything but. Haitians are dying in disproportionate numbers right now because they are poor and oppressed. The oppression came first, then the poverty, then more oppression. It's a positive feedback loop. Poor people are not only easy to oppress (keep up the good work Iraq and Afghanistan), they seem to literally beg for it. So in Haiti's time of need, know that they need more than the world's temporary relief efforts. They need the world -- namely us -- to finally leave them the hell alone.

update: There are more Haitian history sources at the end of this wonderful post at Reclusive Leftist.

update 2: The folks at Credo, the progressive phone company, sent me an email with two ways to help Haiti: give to Doctors Without Borders, and tell Obama to grant temporary protected status to Haitians living in the U.S.

George Will's Freaky Voyage

George Will celebrates the New Year by taking a massive hit off his life-sized Ayn Rand-shaped gravity bong and writes about the nature of the universe:

Already 99.9 (and about 58 more 9s) percent of the universe - it is expanding lickety-split - is beyond Earth's atmosphere. Into what is it expanding? Hard to say. We can say there is lots of stuff in space: Hold up a penny at arm's length and you block from your field of vision three galaxies - billions of stars and other things - 350 million light-years away, which is right next door in our wee corner of the universe.

Get that? There's lots of stuff in space, and it's beyond our so-called "warming" atmosphere. This means that if global warming is a problem, rich people can always expand, like the universe, into the great unknown! But fear not intrepid voyagers, this column is not simply about dog whistle-politics and fancy science talk, it is about the indomitable human spirit:

Before Darwin, many people believed that no species could become extinct because this would mean there had been an imperfection in God's original handiwork. Yet 104 years before publication of "On the Origin of Species," the Lisbon earthquake of 1755 had caused some people to doubt that God has ordained a benevolently ordered universe. Nevertheless, in 1787 other people - Americans call them the Founding Fathers - who were influenced by Newtonian physics and the deist idea of God as cosmic clockmaker, devised a constitutional system of separated powers, checking and balancing one another, mimicking what they considered our solar system's clocklike mechanics.

Today, we know there is a lot of play in the joints of the Constitution, and that every 40 million years or so asteroids of more than half a mile in diameter strike Earth. Yet the Constitution still constitutes, and the fact that flora and fauna have survived Earth's episodes of extreme violence testifies to the extraordinary imperative of life.

Yes, George, certainty exists beyond the bong smoke. Happy New Year, you crazy bastard!

2000 - 2009 in Memoriam: Fuck You.

Fuck you, 2000 - 2009. You were definitely the shittiest decade since the 1930s. Everyone knows about the DOW going nowhere, but this decade was worthless politically as well. Again, it was not nearly as bad as the 1930s, which saw the disintegration of the peace following WWI and the rise of Hitler, but it was pretty horrible nonetheless. The decade basically started on September 11, which sucked. However, history will record that our reaction to those attacks precipitated much more death and destruction than Osama bin Laden could have ever dreamed of. Republicans and their allies in dank think-tanks like the Project for the New American Century thought they could turn a stolen election in 2000 into a new mandate for world domination. September 11 was their trigger -- their Pearl Harbor. It started two Middle Eastern wars that were basically about oil and hegemony. The rest is history. The only good thing about this decade was that the aggressor finally lost. The belligerent nation, the United States of America, will fall by the wayside. This century will belong to others. We don't deserve it.

Good Riddance, You Fat Fuck

Seems like most folks are taking the high road when it comes to Rush Limbaugh's health troubles. Digby's all like, "I won't gloat but I'll just remind everyone of Michael J. Fox." And that liberal den of sin at Wonkette is waiting until the fat bastard actually dies until they start in with the death jokes. Well, Great Justice places no special importance on the value of human life. Not that we're sociopaths, it's just that we think ideas and institutions are the only important things, and Rush Limbaugh is simply a meat puppet filled with wretched prejudices and reactionary politics. Great Justice wishes that Rush Limbaugh would take a substantial proportion of the world's hate, ignorance and greed with him when he dies, but alas he will not. He won't even take right-wing radio. So Rush, go and die -- or not. It really doesn't matter.

The Deal -- well, a deal

Here at Great Justice, we -- the royal we -- have several acquaintances who argue with us incessantly. We think of this as blogging practice. During a recent argument about geostrategery with someone who thinks FDR "gave away" the eastern bloc to the Ruskies, I made an interesting agreement: We get the fuck out of every country that plays "host" to our fine men and women in uniform and put the defense industry out of business for good, and conservatives get to have unemployed illegal immigrants deported and the border strengthened with moats and alligators and shit. I think it's a pretty good deal. Course, I'm not someone who could easily be confused as an illegal immigrant. Is that racist?

Cal Thomas: "Obama tells kids about Jesus; Jesus rolls in grave -- wait..."

Cal Thomas, who is a syndicated columnist and not an anonymous pussy blogger, is outraged about Obama's lesson to children about the true meaning of Christmas, which is apparently that Jesus was a hippy: 

The president spoke of what Jesus "symbolizes for people all around the world," which he said, "is the possibility of peace and people treating each other with respect." And then, in the best tradition of a community organizer, the president said Jesus is about "doing something for other people." Even the "three wise men" were invoked to support the president's idea of wealth redistribution: "...these guys ... have all this money, they've got all this wealth and power, and they took a long trip to a manger just to see a little baby."

And what conclusion should be drawn from that journey? The president told the children, "...it just shows you that because you're powerful or you're wealthy, that's not what's important. What's important is ... the kind of spirit you have."

To the president, this means the spirit of government taking from the productive and giving to the nonproductive. To him, Jesus is a socialist, or perhaps an early Robin Hood. Any first-year seminarian (if the seminary is a good one) could destroy this flawed exegesis.

Jesus of Nazareth was not a symbol. Neither was He just a good teacher as some who do not fully accept His teachings about Himself like to claim. As Paul the Apostle put it, "Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners -- of whom I am the worst." (1Timothy 1:15)

(Yeah, Paul was a douche.) Anyway, Cal Thomas is clearly the Antichrist, but if you don't believe in that sort of thing, he's also just plain mean-- and crazy.

This is the end, my friend

Krugman says

If the bill is passed, it will make health insurance available to millions of people who can’t get it now either because of preexisting conditions, or because they just don’t make enough: community rating and the subsidies — remember, we’re talking about almost $900 billion in aid — will make a huge difference. Yes, there will be some people forced to buy insurance by the individual mandate; everything I’ve seen says that the number of people for whom this will be a real hardship will be far less than the shouting suggests.

Krugman is a smart, committed liberal, and if he says its time to pass the health care bill, then it's time. Even the most angry, spiteful liberals who want health insurance companies and all the people who work for them to be sent to gulags will probably respond kindly to Krugman's slightly more reasonable approach. Yes, the bill has been watered down with shitty toilet water, and the insurance companies stand to make immediate gains, but it's time for liberals to accept the best argument for passing this bill now: it will probably improve.

Fuck the War Pigs

... and Merry Christmas.

The Good War and You

There's one aspect of the Obama Nobel Award story that I haven't heard much about. I haven't heard the usual suspects like Greenwald, Digby, Chris Floyd, etc., ask the question, "Now that a president can win the Peace Prize despite escalating a dirty war, is the Bush Doctrine here to stay?" You know the Bush Doctrine (because you're not Sarah Palin): It's our post-9/11 ad hoc foreign policy of preventative war (and preventative detention and torture). There was a brief debate about it pretty early on because Bush and Co. was trying to distract the public from another debate that should have been taking place: whether or not the Iraq War casus belli was complete crap. Anyway, I know Afghanistan is the "good war" and all, but frankly I feel really, really, viscerally enraged with the conduct of this administration, so I'm searching for a way to compare this Afghan escalation to the Iraq invasion. Won't you join me?

Disclaimer: Before I proceed, don't tell me I should not have been surprised by this escalation, because I'm not. I'm enraged; there's a huge difference. I voted for Black Jesus because Hilary was channeling Giuliani in the Primary and McCain-- well, if McCain were President we would all be in Iran right now, and it might look something like this:

Battle of Jerusalem - MyVideo
(Only I don't think McCain knows his way around scaffolding and siegecraft. I could be wrong though. He is old as fuck.)

In his speech on the escalation, Obama actually addressed his liberal critics, trying to convince them of how Afghanistan is not Vietnam. The reasons he gave were surficially reasonable: 

Unlike Vietnam, we are joined by a broad coalition of 43 nations that recognizes the legitimacy of our action.

Correction: They recognized-- past-tense-- the legitamacy of our action. Now how gung-ho are they? Not very. Except perhaps for Britain, to the dismay of its people. 

Unlike Vietnam, we are not facing a broad-based popular insurgency. 

Correction: How do we know? Soldiers aren't getting killed as much as they were in Iraq? Whatever. Obama might add that we're not facing the armed forces of another country, which North Vietnam was. I think they earned the right to call themselves a country once they kicked the French out.

And most importantly, unlike Vietnam, the American people were viciously attacked from Afghanistan, and remain a target for those same extremists who are plotting along its border. To abandon this area now – and to rely only on efforts against al Qaeda from a distance – would significantly hamper our ability to keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and create an unacceptable risk of additional attacks on our homeland and our allies.  

Correction:  He's basically saying here that if we don't fight them there, they'll kill us here. That argument was bullshit when Bush made it, and it remains wet and steamy to this day. The Taliban were not "harboring" Al Qaeda. That's like saying Woodstock harbored the brown acid. If we're going to blame the Taliban for harboring Al Qaeda, then when are we going to blame Saudi Arabia for nurturing the reactionary, theocratic cultural environment that produced the 9/11 hijackers?

Vietnam and Iraq were all about sending a message (Specifically, "Suck on this.") to our shadowy enemies. We settled for those pitiful actions because we can't very well attack shadows-- only send them stern messages. Now tell me: how has this eight-year-old Afghan war not reached the point where we are vainly and haggardly trying to get our terrorist enemies to "suck on this"? 

Now what about this Bush Doctrine? I think I've shown that Afghanistan, at this point in the war, is basically the same as Iraq and Vietnam. However, I also feel that it's necessary to throw the Bush Doctrine albatross around Obama's neck for good measure. But I can't. I've realized that there was no such thing as the Bush Doctrine. It was just a euphemism for wild ejaculation and feces-tossing. The real villain in American foreign policy has always been imperialism, which is of course nothing new, except that now they give out Nobel Peace Prizes for it.

God damnit, Harry!

This post will probably be the first in a series of posts describing exactly why Democrats suck at politics and how this country's dispossessed are being fucked because of it. Any reader of the liberal blogosphere during the past five or so years already has a few ideas of their own about why the Democrats can't serve their traditional constituencies, including the trivial answer, which is that their constituencies are often not the dispossessed but the monied elites. Of course, this trivial answer holds in many cases, but sometimes liberals within the Democratic Party cannot be ignored, and incremental reform is forced through. This post is a short analysis of one of those cases in which a Democrat takes a short break from whoring themselves out, and instead tries to advance a liberal cause. I will try to explain how a relatively simple exercise in describing an injustice and what you plan to do about it turns into a shitstorm:

This morning, Senate majority leader Harry Reid got up in front of a Senate microphone to speak about the opposition to health care reform and this happened:

"You think you've heard these same excuses before? You're right," [Reid] continued. "In this country...there were those who dug in their heels and said, 'Slow down, it's too early. Let's wait. Things aren't bad enough' " - about slavery.

When women wanted to vote, he went on, opponents said, " 'Slow down, there will be a better day to do that -- the day isn't quite right.' "

He finished with: "When this body was on the verge of guaranteeing equal civil rights to everyone, regardless of the color of their skin, some senators resorted to the same filibuster threats that we hear today."

There are those who would say that Harry Reid was simply describing conservatism, that he was simply drawing historical parallels, not comparing degrees of wrongness. They are right of course. Conservatism is, by definition, always on the wrong side of history in every single matter of importance in American society. Conservatism is not a set of principles. It is defined by the defense of the status quo, whatever that may be. The American Revolution was liberal because it resulted in freedom from a monarchy. Unions are liberal because they result in freedom from economic exploitaition. Universal health care, Medicare for all, or the more limited public option are liberal because they will result in freedom from corporate abuse and corporate "death panels".

However, what Harry Reid said was incredibly stupid because the American people do not learn political history in school. That is, they do not learn about politics in the context of society. They do not learn the various ways in which power is controlled and abused in a democracy. Instead, they are taught that democracy is simply government by the people. So what the American people heard in Harry Reid's above quote was not a reminder of the history of American reactionary politics and how it has manifested itself today, but simple hyperbole.

The Democratic Party can't or won't teach the people about the role of the elite in democracy, so the public is not prepared to hear strong condemnations of power coming from the powerful. Instead, the public has been dicked around so much from thirty years of entrenched conservative governance that they fail to notice when their interests are being advanced. Instead, they think that everything their government does is an abuse of power. Right now, Jeffrey Dommer could convince people that health insurance companies are villains. Harry Reid can't. Why is this? Maybe it has to do with the fact that deep down, under all of the centrist whoredom is a pissed-off liberal fighter. Sometimes that liberal fighter is let out screaming, but unfortunately the political context into which the fighting words are loosed is devoid of understanding. I would advise Democrats to shut up about history. Americans don't understand it. What Americans do understand is being fucked around with, and I suggest the Democrats learn how to tell it to people straight.

Potato Chips

I have just witnessed, quite possibly, the funniest SNL sketch ever. It is entitled "Potato Chip." It shall be remembered alongside "More Cowbell", "Celebrity Jeopardy", "Van Down by the River", "Toonces", "Mr. Bill" and "Landshark". Yes, it is that good:

Who says the MSM's sole concen is ratings, and that's why they suck? Who would not tune in to see a bunch of stoned Afghans trying to be an army?

The Justice Party

I created this blog less than a week ago and then I find this. Baby Jesus does exist! (Sorry O'Reilly).

Conditions are ripe for a liberal third-party. Course, if you ask me, it should be called the Liberal Party, but whatevuh. Violet's proposal is pie-in-the-sky, and I've never heard of her blog before, but it's an idea that could spread because it's what every liberal is thinking anyway. The Democrats are already fractured into a progressive wing, the Blue Dogs, and people who don't give a shit about policy, just whether or not they get theirs, which of course includes the Blue Dogs.

Obama has had his chance to implement the kumbaya strategy of governance, and it has not produced great justice.

Tradition- now for everyone!

Protector of Baby Jesus, Bill O'Reilly, has started his annual jihad against humanists, atheists, and goblins. As a humanist atheist goblin, I object to this perennial campaign against my people and what we hold dear, which is apparently shitting all over Christmas. This time he's gone too far:

Bill said that atheists are jealous because Christians and Jews are “having a great time and [atheists are] sitting around watching Rosie O’Donnell tapes."

You shut your whore mouth Bill! I would not be caught dead listening to Rosie O'Donnell.

That's it. I propose a new Christmas holiday. First there was Christmas, then there was Corporate Christmas, then there was Bill O'Reilly's defense of Corporate Christmas. Now, I propose a holiday that will really scare old crotchety fucks like O'Reilly. I call it Ramadan-kwanza-jihadmas. It celebrates the birth of my nephew, Khalid Sheik Obama bin-Mohammed, who is assiduously being groomed for the Presidency of the United States of America despite the fact that he was born in Mosul of an ex-Baathist whore and a deserted U.S. soldier. He will be taught the backward culture of his imperialist overlords by blending in with them in the States-- joining an elite frat, snorting coke, punching hippies, and dodging the draft (when WWIII comes). He'll really learn to act like a complete dick. No one will ever see him coming! Then, in 40 or 50 years, he will be ready for his meteoric rise to power. But this time, we're not going to fuck it up like Obama's groomers. We're gonna be Republicans. Just like only Nixon could go to China, only Republicans will be able to hand over U.S. sovereignty to the WTO and Middle East Royalty.

Apologies! On the internets?! No- just- no.

I just saw an apology in a youtube comment:

I'm sorry for telling you to shut you ignorant face, that was wrong and surely untrue.

This cannot stand. Apologies are for centrist Democrats and Catholic priests. They have no place on teh internets.

Global Anarchy, aka., free trade

I'm listening to the BBC right now, hearing about the Bhopal gas leak. It's the 25th anniversery. It remains the most deadly industrial disaster ever, worse than Chernobyl. What made it so devastating was the fact that factory workers lived right next to the factory when the leak occurred. A deadly gas leaked from holding towers, fell to the ground, and spread throughout the slums around the factory. The gas killed thousands. Twenty-five years later, the groundwater is deadly. The Indian government provides the locals with water that is trucked in from elsewhere, but it's never enough. On the BBC, I'm now listening to the ridiculous irony of a BBC reporter, from the West, grilling an Indian official about the plight of the locals.

Laws of war.

Who says "soft" sciences like political science don't have laws?

They've even got the same damn slope!! Then there's this:

End of liveblogging.

Don Ganja (NPR): "This address was seriose bizniss"

Some Republican: "But I want more troops NOW-ah!!!! We can't set a timetable, EVAR!! We have to stay in Iraq-- I mean, Afghanistan."

Bernie Fuckin' Sanders [!!!!!]: Why isn't everyone else sending troops? I'll tell you why: they know what's up. And how do we pay for this? Chinese credit and the backs of the poor. Suck ma balls, Sanders out!

A real American hero!!!! [GI JOE!!!]: "This address was seriose bizniss."

And now, NPR presents the asshattery of EJ Dionne and Matt Continetti: [I'm not even going to try to parse their shit.]

Me: Well liberals, we had a good run there for about 5 minutes during the primaries, I think. But now, the Obama presidency is over. I thought he would last at least as long as Clinton, I really did. In the end, I think the minefield set by Bush (Iraq, tax cuts, torture, tanking the economy) was just too much. The Village refuses to allow bold change, and Dems are too cowardly to resist them and do what needs to be done. Today, we saw the successful completion of a coup that started a while ago. We now have a new president. This one is only a quarter black: