A Confederacy of Dunces...

and a majority of tools. Anyone read the paper lately?

CIA reports conditions in Iraq to be worse than the Bush Administration publically admits to.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld skirted every direct question by the 2,000-strong audience of marines today, some of which who will die based on his poor war planning. Bush's war planning - now there's a damned oxymoron if I read one.

An intelligence bill that a Republican president (who originally opposed the idea) needed to persuade a Republican-led Congress to sign today. Sweeping changes to be made in how intelligence is gathered, processed, and shared. Probably all in the hands of Tom DeLay.

More "coalition" nations pulling their soldiers out of Iraq. I guess things are wrapping up nicely. See above.

Iraq's elections will be held beginning January 30, 2005, states the Bush Administration, though the same administration has publically praised the independence the Iraqi interim government has exerted over the last five months.

Another election passed where "tax-and-spend liberal" Democrats were lambasted by the GOP, only to see Bush's tax-cut-and-spend policy drive the U.S. further into debt, this time by a projected two trillion dollars. Where's Grover Norquist now? Last time I checked, the Democrats were the party that spent recklessly and expanded the powers of the federal government. You know that the GOP wonks are absolute geniuses when they can convince the majority of voters that they are exactly what they claim the enemy to be.

A brilliant article in last week's New Yorker magazine exposed the fake "values based" election results last month. The article points out that a small poll of approximately one thousand people (not even claiming to represent the electorate) was given a list of seven options that "most determined" which presidential candidate they voted for. When looking at the list, six of the seven options received roughly the same percentage of votes, just under twenty per cent a piece. "Values" earned twenty-two percent, only one percent higher than the second-place earner and still only the top reason out of twenty percent of the pollees, and yet the entire country has been brainwashed into thinking that John Kerry was rejected because his values were out of touch with average voters. It appears that the average voter's value system has yet to be determined on a nation-wide level, but based on some of the state elections, that's definitely something to brag about. Eleven states denied tax-paying citizens a fundamental civil right; a southern state elected a former white supremist; Oklahoma elected a representative that admitted to performing unconsented operations on unsuspecting people out of a personal desire; this state denied its citizens the fundamental right to health care. I could go on but I don't feel like vomiting until I've already drunk myself into a stupor.

Re-watching the finale Vote For Change concert that my friend Chris "Lefty" Brown made me, I still love Bruce's tirade in the middle of "Mary's Place" against the "swing" voter: "The man misleads the nation into war, he loses his job. It ain't rocket science." Apparently, with the spread of creation-based "science" spreading like wildfire, science is something that the average Californian and probably American, is afraid of. This issue is another rant I'll leave for a time when I have time to really freak out. Creationism taught in the public schools as science? Which version of creation? The Chumash version, where fish and humans are related based on the people who fell off the rainbow crossing from the Channel Islands to the mainland? The Roman version, where Remus and Romulus were raised by wolves (I know that's not a creation story, but close enough)? Or the most commonly-accepted Christian version, where life starts (everything fully formed without change) and the universe is created in six days. Has anyone noted that NOWHERE in the Bible did any scribe write that GOD spoke or inspired that story to anyone ("Moses" or whomever wrote the Pentatuch down)? The story just has to believed, though no one is sure of the source, the amount of time that passed from the creation of the universe to the time the story was written down, or whether or not the story closely resembles that of any other creation story of a neighboring tribe or people. Creation "science", "intelligent design" or whatever you want to call it: there's one problem, and that is its presupposing foundation is that God exists, He created the universe, and that He wants to have a personal relationship with you if you're white, Protestant, Republican, and hetersexual. Thank God (no irony there) that I don't teach science. I just get to deal with those that say everything about the United States was founded on the teachings of Christ. I don't remember Jesus commanding his disciples to ethnically cleanse North America of its indiginous population, start wars of conquest in His name, or any other idea like creating a nation based not on religious devotion to Him but the general principle (of the eighteenth-century mindset) that all men were created equal. Oh, crap, here's more proof of creation "science."