The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by Anarch:

Born 1976. I dimly remember the Mt St Helens eruption (1980) -- more accurately, I remember being fascinated with footage of the explosion during the aftermath, so this was possibly early 1981 -- and vividly remember the assassination of Ninoy Aquino (late 1983) since I was living in the Philippines at the time.

Erik Olson @ 12: I hate Cinco-de-Mayo, almost as much as I hate St. Patricks's day, or even worse (shudder) New Year's Eve. Then, I worked in a bar for a long time.I hate Cinco-de-Mayo, almost as much as I hate St. Patricks's day, or even worse (shudder) New Year's Eve. Then, I worked in a bar for a long time.

Strangely, I used to love working the bar during St Patrick's Day. It was one of the few days in the year when people were just looking to have a good time, instead of concentrating on getting drunk/looking good/hooking up/whatever.

Xopher @ 103: Or alternatively, Iain M Banks' convergent timelines in "Use of Weapons". Which also speaks to Malthus (ha! nice) @ 137, as I believe the Banks explicitly notes on occasion that the Culture derives its social tendencies in large part from being post-scarcity.

Favorite opening line is a hard call for me, so I'll throw my dad's into the ring: "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."

That's the part that has so many people's knickers in a twist. Craig's having fun, doing good, and living comfortably. He's not trying to build a mansion the size of Bill Gates', and a lot of people are going nuts over that. That's their problem.

There's a similar sort of idea in a thread on Obsidian Wings, to the effect that a large number of people -- particularly conservative and libertarian types -- only pay lip-service to the supposed benefits of the free market. In Donald Johnson's wonderful paraphrasing of their mindset: "If someone brings up a way to use consumer choice in a non-selfish way, it hurts the cause and sullies the doctrinal purity of the Church of Rand." I think the same is true here: because Craig Newmark could be profiting more, or at least be more aggressive in pursuit of profits, the fact that he isn't is similarly sullying of that Randian purity. As if "selfishness" isn't just a virtue, it's the sole virtue to which all other purposes must be subordinated.

Anyone know a good, single online source -- preferably written in that "serious" or "sober" style oft-mistaken for factuality -- that I can send my friends to for the real scoop on McCain? He's awfully popular around here and I'm getting tired of trying to stomp down the individual misimpressions one at a time...

Peasant (2), I've been female for half a century, and I don't recall having trouble with homosexuality, the size of my penis, or gender confusion.

Whether or not you're troubled by it, I'm willing to bet that you've had trouble with it...

I don't have sources handy, but I was under the impression that Ann Heche started out identifying as straight and made a notable exception for a while.

I had a friend who did something like that. Straight as an arrow until her senior year when she, pretty much out of the blue, moved in with a girl and had crazy lesbian sex for about six months; and as soon as she graduated, went straight back to being straight again. IIRC, when asked about her affair/liaison/whatever the hell it was, she said "I dunno, it just feels right."

She's now in the military and married to a Marine, I think. Have no clue how she was going to explain that to him...

Teresa: I can think of worse places to be :)

Until then, I have no reason to believe that Mad George won't outlaw the senate and declare himself Supreme Chancellor before he's out of office.

Will this be before or after Obama Windu melts his face with reflected Force Lightning?

[Yes, yes, I know that Palpatine was already Supreme Chancellor by that point in the movies. I just want to imagine Bush getting melted by the force of his own malevolence.]

I know you people here loathe Dick Cheney, but consider this: he hasn't rejected his lesbian daughter, as far as I know.

This doesn't surprise me in the slightest. One rule for me and mine, another for everyone else; alternatively, one rule for the hoi polloi, another for the aristocracy. It's like folks I went to college with who were all for "traditional family values", then went out and got plastered and naked with random strangers that night. [As I think I mentioned here some months ago.] It's like all the rabidly conservative anti-drug folks who gave Rush Limbaugh a pass because "he's been through so much". It's a general symptom of the Accountability For Other People disease that's been plaguing modern conservatism the past 40 years or so; Cheney's affliction is just more obvious because of his position.

Lea: you've found the musical accompaniment to your next excursion into the exciting realm of Finger-Puppet Shakespeare?

I'm a huge fan of totom's mash-ups...

Another technique is to verbally hit back harder, and refuse to back down. I know it can be distressing for onlookers, but I'm convinced that it can an appropriate response. For instance, I'll sometimes use it on ill-behaved members of the community whom I don't want to ban outright. I also use it in important arguments in venues I don't control.

My experience -- and this could just be a function of inferior verbal skills -- is that that's generally what they're looking for and it only makes the problem worse. I'd be interested in seeing examples where this reaction accomplished something other than personal catharsis, which is all I ever seem to get out of it.

but this is why they recruit 18-year-old kids who don't have the experience or cojones to call them out.

It's the lack of (substantive) cojones that made them attractive in the first place...

Paula: did you click the link?

DaveL: To back up what Terry Karney has written, I agree with you that if the Bush Administration were to adhere to the exact letter of the law and not make any mistakes, the new bill wouldn't apply to citizens and would probably pass constitutional muster. [I'd still think it was vile but for different reasons.] The problem isn't what the law provides for but what it fails to provide for and, in fact, specifically disallows: redress for citizens imprisoned as aliens.

Functionally then, according to the law, the Bush Administration could simply declare anyone it doesn't like an alien enemy combatant and that's the end of it. No appeals, no nothing. I don't expect this to happen to any of us, mind, but the possibility exists. That's the abuse I see and, frankly, it's the explicit disallowance of any habeas hearings that makes it both unconstitutional and warrants the descriptor fascist.

Although, for that matter, consider David Neiwert's accounting of Waco. In particular:

What is not known about Waco is that the final assault plan was amended on the ground by the tactical field commanders on the very day of the assault. That alteration had been discussed and rejected by the FBI brass over several weeks. Nonetheless, the FBI HRT commander, Richard Rogers implemented the rejected plan via a loophole signed by Janet Reno the morning of the final assault on April 19. That alteration was identical to the gassing and demolition plan that two Delta Force advisors seconded to the Justice Dept. in a principals meeting of April 14. Those two advisors supported the rejected plan that was later implemented "hypothetically" in order to conform to the letter of Posse Comitatus law. I also have published a peer-reviewed article with this finding. It is based on government documents--all open source. The rejected plan supported by Jeff Jamar, Richard Rogers, and the two Delta Force officers resulted in a disaster that did not have to happen. It was an ill-advised tactical approach to a religious community that feared that Satan was attacking them.

Those two Delta Force officers were Peter J. Schoomaker and "Jerry" Boykin, now both top officials in the US Army in charge of military planning for the war on terrorism.

Yes, it's that Jerry Boykin and, even more pointedly, it's that Peter Schoomaker.

Paula: So does video.

Perhaps Donnie was silly enough to swallow something that the oft vexed liberal left swallows like the sweetest honey: Islam is a religion of peace.

I believe that Islam is a religion of peace to almost exactly the same extent that I believe Christianity is a religion of peace. Or, for that matter, Buddhism or Hinduism are religions of peace. Which is to say: it depends entirely on the practitioner.

In regards to ad buys, here's another possibility:

LEADERS WHO HAVE AUTHORIZED WATERBOARDING

STALIN
KIM IL SUNG
POL POT
GEORGE W BUSH

and maybe a separate ad detailing the horrors of Tuol Sleng (?) concluding with: "This is what George W Bush wants for America."

[Plus, I'm going to continue to plump for groups of people travelling the country, offering $50 to anyone who can stand more than 20 seconds of waterboarding. Now there's some political theater in the making.]

Comment statistics for Anarch on the Making Light blog

Total: 117 comments. View all these comments on a single page.