Archives for September 2006

Well, to no one’s surprise at all, things are heating up, and the frenzy is only going to escalate right up and all the way to that most glorious of days. That’s the day when, at long last, you finally get to reconcile all of your worries and all of your fears; all of your hopes and all of your dreams into certain and clear solutions; the day when you step forward, and in that one act of exalted and sublime human mastery and achievement, you assert — you exercise — your God-given right — that sacred right — to have your 1 in 300 millionth say in your own affairs and the affairs of others.

And you shall not be denied; oh, no! This is important business, you see.

There is, of course, little to no rational basis for voting. There just isn’t. But go ahead, persist in your delusion. It would be nothing new. I mean, if Jesus is Coming Again, I suppose anything’s possible, and so 1 part per 300 million might really seem meaningful.

But regular readers know that the utter futility of voting is not my real objection to it. And after all, if voting truly is futile, then why would I really object to myself or anyone else participating in it?

Voting is a profoundly immoral act for most people at most times (with a single exception). Let’s be honest. When you go into that booth, you’re voting to proscribe certain things, right? You want and are attempting to have some value to accrue to you; you want some value of someone else — that you consider a vice — denied them; you want to utilize tax money “better,” and you say or think “utilize” because it doesn’t seem like what you really mean: “keep stealing, because I’ve got some ideas about what you can do with it, including doing things that I’d like, but don’t necessarily want to pay for.” Let’s keep being honest. You’re a thief. But voting makes it seem and feel to you like you’re not. It even masquerades as a Big Lie — a duty — in a way that it doesn’t even occur to you that you’re a thief, and that you’re a willing participant in mayhem, death, and destruction.

The question that arises is: why don’t you just seek out the values you want on your own, or in partnership with those who hold like values? Why can’t you let be those who have values you consider vice and steer yourself and your kids clear of them?

Isn’t the answer obvious? Politicians. They’re going to do all your dirty work for you, you see. Just leave it to them. Give them the power. Give them a “mandate,” and by God they’ll use it. Will a little mayhem, death, and destruction ensure their reelection? Sure it will, because you don’t want to get your hands dirty, and after all, you want someone who’s going to be tough on [insert your favorite hobgoblin]. Gotta have people who are tough-on.

Being honest, aren’t you disgusting, and shouldn’t you be ashamed of yourself?

Alas, voting is an immoral act unless every vote you cast is cast only and exclusively within the context and purpose of defending your life and property from agression by the state and others. Everything else is just a big costume party to conceal what it’s all about, which is theft. Pure and simple. And you need politicians to do it for you, and why? Because you need someone who’s willing to do what “needs to be done” when the “will of the people” is challenged by the audacity of a mere individual.

When you vote, what you’re really voting for is to steal a bit of someone else’s life and property, to be used for your benefit. When you vote, who you’re really voting for is people who will kill, if necessary, to ensure it.

Defiance can never be tolerated. That’s the way you want it, and that’s really what you vote for and sanction each time you step in that booth. Most fundamentally, you are voting for death to anyone who will not ultimately submit to your judgment of value.

Elian Gonzalez

You have oh so far to go before you are an actual human being in the ideal sense.

A question:

"Why should we continue to put pressure on politicians to do something
that would come as second nature to any decent person? What does it say
about our leaders if we have to beg them to oppose torture?"

Uh, because politicians aren’t decent people?

(Brad)

Seems like a plan to me, although you ought to understand the risk you may be taking. Harbor no illusions — especially if you’re a male — and even moreso if you’re Black or Hispanic. Remember, you’re dealing with the sorts of people who seek out employment where they get to bark orders and push regular people around while carrying a gun. I dunno; perhaps it gives them bulges in their pants, or moisture in their panties.

Nonetheless, if they take a dislike to you, they might suddenly "believe" that they saw a gun, or even a bomb, y’know, for even bigger bulges and gushing moisture.

I think a better, safer policy is to patiently wait until you encounter a TSA-goon in a non-airport situation, where they’re not armed, and then look at them as though you just stepped in a fresh, steaming pile of dogshit.

(Wendy)

Every one of them.

Don’t be an idiot. These fuckers want control over every aspect of your life. They are every bit as bad as the democrats, who wish every person dependent upon them for their very lives, cradle to grave.

I hate them all. I hate them with boundless passion. If you support any of them, in any way, just fucking stay clear of me. I mean it.

I cease never to be amazed at the tone and scope of things like this. The whole underlying implication is that this sort of thing is surprising, shocking, rare, isolated, unexpected.

It’s nothing of the sort, and if you think it is, it’s only because you believe The Big Lie.

The Big Lie, of course, is that people who hold political office possess some degree of nobility, virtue, moral authority. No, they are people who desire to control and regulate your life. And they steal your own money to do it. They believe with all their hearts that they know best what limits ought to be placed on what you are permitted to value; what limits ought to be placed on the sorts of values you are permitted to trade; what limits ought to be placed on whom you might trade with: what race, gender, nationality, or geographic situation; and in what quantity, times, places, and what minimum time must have passed since the day or your birth, or that of your partner in trade. And they wrap it all up with enforcement at gunpoint.

In short, though it’s dressed up a lot prettier than others at other times have bothered with, it really amounts to total and complete domination of your life, ultimately. Should you resist, uncompromisingly, no matter how minuscule the issue, the penalty is death.

Just strip away all the bullshit, and for once, see these people (all of them) for what they truly are. And if you can honestly say that you have no desire — indeed posses a moral aversion — to trying to control other people’s lives and values, then know that you are not like them. You’re so not like them. You’re virtually a different species altogether.

That’s why what you read in that article, or any other scandal or wrong isn’t the least bit surprising. It’s more surprising that there isn’t more of it. Morality begins with the recognition that each man is free to pursue his own values to the extent he grants every other man that same right. Virtue begins with pursing them in our uniquely human way. Proscribing or denying values by force, upon anyone, for any reason, is to be devoid of both morality and virtue. So the apparent fact that a U.S. Congressman wants to seduce a 16-year-old boy, manipulating him into who-knows-what, is a direct implication of the whole political process.

They make their living by diminishing and destroying the lives of many, piece by piece and bit by bit, but under a veil of legitimacy. Stop being fooled. They are criminals in the truest sense of the word, so it should be no surprise when one of them actually gets caught out of the costume so cleverly designed to keep you from seeing them for who they truly are.

Update: There’s this story, and this, which leaves little doubt that Congressman Foley is:

"They’re sick people; they need mental health counseling," Foley said.

That’s him justifying enacting the very laws that just might land his sorry ass in jail. Hoist by his own petard. Lovely. Wonderful. As Radley Balko puts it, "a delicious bit of irony."

Never fall for the costume. They’re all wearing them, you know.

Easily my best laugh of the day, so far.

Update: On a serious note, regarding the article cited, it makes me jump for joy. I just love justice. If this kind of moronic "regulation" (Sarbanes-Oxley) were to make America a second-rate international financial center, it would only be right and fitting; even moreso: it was rushed in during a republican, "pro-business" administration. It is to laugh, a second time. If the Republicans get what they deserve, they should not win another election for a long, long time, and I really care not what happens resulting from the commies (democrats) who’ll be filling the slots. I just don’t. Not anymore. Let it sink, as far as I’m concerned.

Well, Kim, I can’t argue with you, here. It’s a fine list, both yours and the late Colonel’s. Fine lists. I might add a thing or two and take a thing or two off, but the underlying theme is very clear.

If you stop and think about it, there’s one hellava lot more chance of changing the world for the better with this sort of thing than with political activism of any sort.

John Venlet takes time out to remind people that you can’t have your cake and eat it too. For what good it’ll do.

Yet, Yet, and Yet another. Courtesy of public enemy number one.

And amen.