« Fairies! | Main | A Garden »

April 28, 2006

Comments

If there are good pictures, I might change my prediction about the midterms.

Sex Pistols

Billmon, pausing the hilarity and schadenfruede, notes a serious possibility:

"But, if it turns out to be true, the implications really will take us into Clancy and Ludlum territory. The blackmail potential alone is worth a chapter in anyone's paranoid conspiracy thriller.

Who else might have known about Porter's semi-alleged extracurricular activities, and what price would they have been in a position to charge for that information? And how would that price have been paid? The Cheneyites obviously put Goss at the agency because they believed he would be their loyal henchman (and he's certainly proved them right) but did they have the added security of knowing where, and with whom, their boy was spending his Saturday nights?"

Bottom line, I've never trusted this generation of Republican officeholders because they seemed incorruptible in all of the usual fun ways. They've always seemed to look down on the time-tested human frailties normal men and women have used to relieve stress.

They had bigger fish to fry and were damned earnest about it. Unlike Bill Clinton, who could read a pizza joint menu AND govern effectively and simultaneously, these new prigs seemed intent on saving their virginity
until after they destroyed the financial standing of the United States Government, wrecked FEMA, melted the polar ice caps, and bogarted Baghdad.

The thought of Ralph Reed caught in mid-satyrism in a photograph renews my faith in human nature. And who is that squat, hairy guy there in the corner, wearing only a concealed holster? That couldn't be Grover Norquist? If you turn the photograph sideways that creature he is with is still a little difficult to sex. They like goats, too?!. Yay! And Yech!

Porter Goss' possible involvement adds a frisson of British spy scandal to the entire spectacle. God, I hope it's true.

As the Jack Nicholson character said to the Shirley MacLaine character in "Terms of Endearment": "I think you need a drink."

"Why?, she asks.

Nicholson: eyebrows flying out the window "To kill that bug you have up your ass!"

I can think of a conservative blogger or two out there who should have six drinks right now, so I can respect their humanity.

May many vaginas begin to chatter as the F.B.I fans outs among the underfunded monuments in Washington D.C.

At last!

Some potential for eye candy in the scandals!

I mean, they've kept running the same photos of Valerie Plame over and over again. She's a handsome woman, but sometimes the news consumer needs something a bit less classy and more trashy.

There must be champagne glasses clinking all around Langley as right now, as agency staffers celebrate hearing about their boss's manly potency.

Bottom line, I've never trusted this generation of Republican officeholders because they seemed incorruptible in all of the usual fun ways. They've always seemed to look down on the time-tested human frailties normal men and women have used to relieve stress.

All I've got to say about this is that I don't regard cheating on one's spouse as one of those time-honored means of relieving stress. It's not for me, regardless of who else is doing it. Other people may have different arrangements, or more comfortable with covertly violating the trust of the person they've chosen as their mate.

"God, was she a good player. I was so fascinated in watching her bid and play that I could hardly concentrate on her breasts."

I had never heard this one. Way to throw in the bridge humor! Where did I put my bridge article?

Seb: I have always loved that quote; it's sort of the Platonic form of a certain kind of awfulness.

Slart:

Hey, me too!

I guess it must be the haughty, public disdain for the human spectacle while covertly having more fun than the two of us ("fun" being things bad boys do that we good boys try our best to avoid) and giving the country a good rogering in the bargain.

Besides, liberal, non-judgmental, relativist me would find covert fooling around in a marriage a resume bullet point for a guy like Goss who heads up a bunch of sneaky-Petes like the CIA. The fact that he may have been caught (if you can't sneak into the house at 3 am without alarming the wife and waking up all of the neighbor's pets, how do you expect to find those WMD?) doing the former doesn't give me much confidence that he can function effectively at the latter. If he's on film at the Watergate, was he in Saddam's movie collection?

In other words, what McManus said in the first entry in the thread.

My comments are better salted.

What is the emoticon for "grain of salt"? 8I

I might finally get to play some tonight; I'll try to remember the phrasing correctly.

Since the last post was about Crony Fairies, how about the one that picked Shirlington Limousine and Transportation for $21,000,000 in Homeland Security contracts?

Isn't great that the limousine company for Wade's prostitutes is also on the inside track for such business?

I would add that Joe Wilson's loyalty to HIS wife is the way I try to conduct my life.

Red Staters, (not Slart) however, are so hung up on slinging around the "traitor" and "cheater" charges at 49% of the electorate that they forgot to notice their trousers down around their ankles and their skirts over their heads.

O.K. I'm done for the day.

OK, it's funny. But I wouldn't want the FBI looking into my personal life. Not that it's so different from anyone else's. But every one of us has something to hide somewhere.

Sorry, I am compelled to pass on this link to Colbert's interview of Kristol.

And also this

I'm not suggesting that Kristol or Rushbo are into prostitutes, but the end of that Colbert interview sort of confirms my feeling that what is going to happen is that all these conservatives are going to fall into a bed of their own making, and we liberals are going to say 'well, gee, that's just human frailty' and help them up. I really despair (and this is in opposition to all my personal feelings and the way I try to conduct my life) that the left side is going to pull up at the last minute and say 'we understand, all is forgiven'. That's how I would like to conduct my personal life, but given the state of current politics, I don't think we should stop. I hesitate to use any historical metaphors (heads on pikes, a long line of crucified along the Appian Way, never taken down) lest they be interpreted as calls for violence, but I'm not sure how to express 'absolutely no possibility of any kind of rehabilitation whatsoever' without using those kinds of terms.

Great that we are getting some sex in this though...

lj: I'm fine with forgiving people, as long as we remember that forgiving someone and allowing them to occupy a position of trust in the foreseeable future are two entirely different things.

"...lest they be interpreted as calls for violence"

An opening! A little local f-word ...Ann Coulter incites a crowd. I do not exaggerate. And with the Malkin/Santa Cruz incident, I sense a pattern. The Brownshirts were useful precisely because the mass and top of the movement could avoid responsibility. And I am sure Coulter and Malkin represent none of the posters and commenters around here.

But ya know, if Ann is feeling that kind of confident and frisky, maybe it is time to get serious.

Hey Hil,
not to pick a nit, but doesn't the concept of forgiveness necessarily imply a second chance? And, following the McManus thesis™, what seems to distinguish the current crop of conservatives from previous iterations is that ability to never forgive and never forget.

Smileys all around with that observation, mind you.

Am fascinated...what the hell is "Oral Sodomy"??? Lipstick round the pucker'd ring?...gaaaaarrrrgh... too much information...too much information...

lj: it might involve a willingness to give them a second chance at being a decent human being. But I can't imagine it involves giving them a second chance at exercising a position of power or trust. Thus, I might forgive my financial manager for embezzlement, but that would not mean I had to hire her again.

Likewise here. Though for myself, I tend to think some evidence of having recognized one's faults is important to being forgiven, and such evidence hasn't been forthcoming yet.

But really I just meant: forgiving is a matter of my attitude towards someone; what matters is not our attitudes, but our never ever ever electing them to public office again. If we send them off into retirement, then as far as I'm concerned we can just overflow with good feelings -- as long as we don't let them un-retire.

"...then as far as I'm concerned we can just overflow with good feelings -- as long as we don't let them un-retire."

Oh, hilzoy, after about my fifth round with these guys or guys like them, this just makes me inexpressibly sad. I did an 8th grade paper on Nixon and HUAC.

The question now isn't Cheney or Rumsfeld or Rove. There are litte functionaries down in the bowels of the Pentagon, and interns at the Capital, and young law clerks at SCOTUS and these kids are watching and learning and picking up tips and lessons. These are the people I worry about, though they may yet have done nothing wrong. I believe it is possible to save them, to instruct the young with kindness and responsibility.

For Cheney and Rumsfeld were once those young petty bureaucrats who watched Watergate and Iran-Contra and learned lessons. But very obviously they learned the wrong lessons.

Where did we go wrong in the early 70s and late 80s? We must learn from our previous mistakes, for the sake of the children.

No sex? So what were "Bulldog" Gannon's White House sleepovers? Chopped liver?

(That brings up a mental image I *don't* want to deal with ... :-)

If you want sex scandal in politics, you can always rely on the British:

Prescott a 'serial groper'

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2158097,00.html

I'd just like to say that Helen Gahagan Douglas, and Jerry Voorhis, were household names in my house.

Of course, my mother was, in the Thirties, a card-carrying member of the Communist Party of America, and someone who forbade me until the Seventies to ever hint at such to anyone, for fear of losing her jobs for the NYC Board of Education, at which she retired after years as Chair of the Reading Department at Erasamus High School in Brooklyn.

Which is also why I grew up learning about the actual evils of Communism, and what anti-Communist liberalism was about, in fact, unlike those unfamiliar with actual Communism, who seemed to think it was simply some sort of extra-strong liberalism, rather than tyranny and a horror and Gulags (and that's without getting into Maoism, or my acquaintanceship with members of the RCP, and the Revolutionary Youth Brigades, or into Pol Pot, and so on).

"Which is also why I grew up learning about the actual evils of Communism, and what anti-Communist liberalism was about,"

Hmm. I'd always thought of the US as having a very strong strain of anti-communism in its left tradition (Sidney Hook, Irving Howe, 'Partisan Review'. etc.), as the CP was even weaker in the US than in the UK (where although the CP was nowhere electorally, it did have influence in the Trade Unions).

Glad you explained it. I thought it was a plate of dogshit.

"Glad you explained it. I thought it was a plate of dogsh*t."

Although I have no idea what your point is, I'm quite sure you violated the posting rules.

A twofer. Offensive *and* boring.

The neat thing is, I'd almost forgotten this comment. And so had everyone else. Thanks to "rocky" for calling attention to it! Woo!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad