Monday, November 27, 2006

Kramer Vs. Kramer

(I flirted with titling this post "Kramer Vs. Nigger," but thought that might be easily misunderstood, enamored as I am of shock value. I have no sympathy for racial hatred, but I also refuse to be cowed by empty-headed liberal pieties on race-- it's a balancing act.)

Once more, we see an obviously already troubled and psychologically unstable celebrity destroy his career before our eyes by doing the one unforgivable thing: insult a racial or ethnic group designated as "extra-special protected." The guy from Seinfeld and Weird Al Yankovic's underrated comedy classic "UHF" is catching all kinds of hell for responding to hecklers at a stand-up comedy show with the dreaded "n-word." Of course, the guy from Seinfeld was also called a "cracker" over the course of this exchange, but equally of course, that's considered utterly irrelevant to the story. The use of the word that cannot be named but which rhymes with "trigger" is the main point here. Nothing else matters.

To be fair, I don't know who started slinging the racial epithets first, the black hecklers or the white comedian. The question of "who started it" is not irrelevant, and I don't mean to dismiss it here, but I do know one thing damn well: were it a black comedian getting called "snigger without the s" by a white heckler, it wouldn't matter if the comedian started the ugliness by calling the heckler a "cracker" (notice how I don't have to disguise the epithet for white people? Gee, why is that-- perhaps because whites aren't stamped "extra-special protected" in today's world the way many other groups are?) first-- the story would be about how the black comedian was called a name that no black person, under any circumstances, should ever, ever-- EVER!!!-- be called, no matter what.

Kramer is no Mel Gibson, but like Mel, he's likely to be ostracized by "respecable" people from here on in, no matter how much he apologizes for his rash and imprudent behavior on this one occasion. Like Mel, he's got tons of cash, so the end of his career really shouldn't be regarded as too great a tragedy. Still, fair is fair, and double standards are double standards; the upshot of events like this is to further fuel resentment among white working folks who can't just retire with their millions, like Kramer and Gibson can. This reasonable resentment, in turn, can only be exploited by true apostles of racial hatred-- Nazis and Klansmen and what-not. It ultimately benefits nobody to hold the screws to one racial group while giving everyone else a pass.

No Holiday Felgercarb Here

"Felgercarb," as I knew back when I was a sci-fi nerd, was the ridiculous invented profanity used in the old (and to my mind, the only true) version of BATTLESTAR GALACTICA. Used here, it is meant to indicate that I have no intention of stopping down my incisive cultural commentary or whatever it is I do here in order to bore everybody by expostulating on What I Am Thankful For or What Christmas Means to Me or any other such thing. Holiday season is an excuse to get unbearably hokey for a lot of folks. Not moi. I plan to be as rude and as plain spoken as ever for the next few weeks and beyond.

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Another Latest at The Last Ditch

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Abortion: Blame the Judges, Blame the Politicians, Blame the People, Blame Everybody!

Republicans have made a lot of political hay with conservative religious types with the "judge" issue. And from a sheer Realpolitik standpoint, they have been wise so to do. After all, Roe V. Wade was an unconstitutional travesty, as well as a moral atrocity, and right-thinking folks are well aware of the slide towards totalitarianism implicit in the "living document" school of constitution-parsing which birthed (pardon the bitterly ironic pun) decisions like Roe. The GOP might not care too much about the tens of millions of bloody and mangled baby corpses that have piled up in this country since 1973, but they know a political opportunity when they see it. So Republicans have banged the gong of judge-appointments, saying in effect, "If you're against abortion, vote for us! We'll give you judges and justices that will overturn Roe and other instances of judicial tyranny."

But voting Republican won't end legalized abortion. Republicans need abortion to be around so they can appeal to their base. They are also aware that most people aren't thoroughly anti-abortion, even if they aren't entirely comfortable with abortion on demand; thus, they are leery about doing anything other than making oblique gestures towards restoring a culture of life. G.W. Bush is a prime example. While a candidate for president, he declared himself, when asked in an interview, to be "pro-life," but he didn't elaborate. The vagueness was deliberate, and so is his consistent refusal to stick his neck out on this matter since taking office. Bush, like all Republicans, knows where his bread is buttered. In a democracy (duh mockery-acy) a politician can only prostitute himself to his constituents. It's the American way. Cue theToby Keith soundtrack, or the Lee Greenwood, if you prefer.

The point is, it's shortsighted to blame judges for our country's moral depravity. It's far worse than that. Abortion isn't legal just because judges disengenously "re-interpreted" the Constitution and "disovered" a right to murder babies. They certainly did so, and consequently they have a lot of innocent blood on their hands. But abortion wouldn't still be legal today if most Americans didn't want it to remain legal. Can we please get off the populist soapbox, fellow conservatives? It's not an issue of Judges Vs. America or Hollywood vs. America (TM Michael Medved) or Elites Vs. America. It's Voting Americans Vs. Unborn Americans. And given that it's a battle between the murderously-inclined and the helpless, guess who's winning? Guess who'll continue to win?

Our nation's moral conscience has been dulled; our collective heart has been hardened against our own children; if such lives prove "inconvenient" to us, we have few compunctions about hiring a contract killer to wipe them out. And given what we have become, I'm supposed to want to see us win victories abroad? Count me out. I'm not sure that we're any better than the jihadists. I'm not at all sure it wouldn't be best if they won and we lost.

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

I Haven't Voted, And I Won't, So F___ Off! rejoinder to all of the smug little stickers that people like to wear on their chests on days like this.

Dumb-ocracy. Duh-mocracy. Demon-ocracy.

Fug it.

I wrote this over two years ago, and it's as true today as ever:

Sunday, November 05, 2006

New Chapter of POSSESSED BY DEATH posted

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

"Now let it work. Mischief, thou art afoot"

So said Mark Antony after successfully rousing the rabble against Brutus and Cassius in Shakespeare's JULIUS CAESAR. Antony's speech, in which he incited a riot against his enemies, all the while protesting that they were "honorable men," is a masterpiece of wicked and sly demaogogery. Its sheer disengenousness is grimly hilarious; Antony clearly wants the men who assassinated Casear to run afoul of a hateful mob, to be lynched, tortured, drawn and quartered, or worse... but he keeps insisting that he has nothing against Caesar's killers, all the while stirring up resentment against them through masterfully underhanded rhetoric.

Today, mischief is afoot. The Republicans smell blood. Poor, hapless, pompous fool John F. Kerry has given the long-embattled GOP a chance to rally their forces a mere week prior to midterm elections. His seemingly snotty comments about U.S. troops in Iraq, apparently implying that they were stupid failures (in spite of ineffectual post-speech spin during which he claimed merely to have botched a joke intended to be about President Bush) has helped to reinforce the image of Democratic elites as rich, snotty people who look down their noses at common folk, i.e., churchgoing country hicks who do things like live in red states and watch professional wrestling and shop at Walmart and join the military. Likely Republican voters whose predominant inclination had been disenchantment with the performance of their own party now seem to have rediscovered their fear and loathing of the opposition. People are calling talk radio and angrily insisting, "My son/my dad/my uncle/my nephew is serving in Iraq and he isn't stupid-- I don't care what Kerry says!" Bush and his people have expertly stoked the fires of people's indignation; indeed, they would have been stupid not to. Whether it will ultimately save the GOP from defeat remains to be seen, but it certainly seems as though Senior "Lurch" has awakened the sleeping, if not comatose, giant that is the Republican base.

Now, little as I respect the Republicans, corrupt and useless as they mostly are, I despise the Democrats. I hope the Repugs pull it out, if only for the sake of the appointment of judges that may have a chance of actually upholding Constitutional law and ending the unconsitutional travesty (and moral atrocity) that was Roe V Wade. Not that I think the GOP really cares a fig about the evil of abortion, but I know the Deathocrats don't.

Still, minimally heartened as I am by the prospect of the lesser of two evils winning, I am less impressed than ever with this "democratic process" thing. For voters aren't much better than Mark Antony's mob. They do little more than "sway in the wind like a field of ripe corn," favoring one party when the other does or says something tacky, then blowing the other way when the other party says or does something no more tacky, but closer in temporal proximity to election day. If the GOP holds the House and Senate this year, it will be because Mark Foley was outed as a perv slightly before John Kerry was confirmed to be an ass. Why is that supposed to make me proud to be an American?