I Am Just Tired Some Times

I honestly do not know why I engage in these comment wars at various neo-liberal blogs. Just now I have been enraged concerning the treatment of Jane Hamsher and David House. Not so much their treatment per se, but rather the simple out of control use of power by the military and by the government in denying a visitor to David Manning and thereby continuing and intensifying his torture by his jailers.

Interestingly, the guy who "runs" or at least started Balloon Juice is, himself enraged. Angry Black Lady, a poster and the majority of the commentators on his site, want to blame Hamsher and House. (There are also a not insignificant minority of commentators who have already convicted Manning, but that is for another post[or not].)

The problem seems to be that Jane came out opposing Obama Care and called out Obama on his lies concerning his promises. Now she can do no right.

Another problem is that these people have so invested themselves in Obama and the democratic party that they cannot even begin to seriously criticize them.

For the record she and House were stopped because, according to the marines, her license plates were out of date and she did not have proof of insurance. Given the fact that apparently she drives House to visit Manning regularly, and they have accepted her proof of insurance before that is a bogus claim by the marines. If her plates were indeed out of date, they would only have been by a couple of days and it should not have entailed holding House past the visiting time. Further, there is no one arguing that the cops didn't tell them that their orders were coming from on high.

Yet, even raising these points multiple times simply doesn't matter it is just that Jane Hamsher is so......you know. Kind of icky and not in the in crowd. There were a few who did start eventually insist that they just attack Jane because she is so not cool, and that she isn't you know, you know? Well one thing I do know is that she is braver than any of the commentators, myself included. It is clear at this point that the government is determined to destroy anyone who is connected with Manning and WikiLeaks and will violate all sorts of treaties, laws, and rights to do so. Yet, for so many of the people writing about it, the important thing seems to be that Jane Hamsher is a bitch and is self aggrandizing (interestingly enough the second complaint was made and probably still is made about Jesse Jackson).

Oh yeah, mandatory Greenwald link, who the commentators and posters at Balloon Juice make fun of because he uses too many words.

Drugs

Heard in the Court House today:

Client: I should get a better deal. I wouldn't do things if it wasn't for this drug problem. Nobody knows that I've got this drug problem, if they did they'd be more sympathetic to my problems.

Me: Every god damn body in this Court House knows you have a drug problem. Derelicts using the public restrooms know you have a drug problem. It is just that nobody cares.

Client: Your fired.

Inside Baseball

So like I got into a big argument with a couple of bloggers about the Assange rape charges. In fact it (the argument and response not the case itself) is a kind off strange example of incest (I think, at least that is the best metaphor I can think of) I was in an argument in the comments on one blog and then find that the next day the blogger has another essay on Assange. He links to another blog and I turn out to be linked on the second blog to an argument I made on the first blog (which linked to the second blog which then linked back to the first blog, or actually my comment on the first one). Interesting, to say the least.

Well, I was accused of being a "fanboi" and a fanatic, not I think the same thing although I'm not sure (that's on the second blog, on the first one I was accused of being a not very bright 14 year old). My crime, (which I may be mistaken about, although I don't think so) is to doubt the story of the women accusers and to raise the spector of assumption of innocence as far as the accused is concerned.

The second blog makes the point that if I am arguing for a presumption of innocence for Assange, then I should also grant the accusers the same presumption. That is therefore, I have to completely forgo an opinion in the matter. Perhaps, but I don't think so. Although perhaps I shouldn't phrase my argument in terms of "presumption of innocence."

I do think that I can make certain assumptions about things, by viewing how the world works and just what is going on here. Like Officer Leaphorn I don't believe in coincidences. Assange and WikiLeaks have been the recipients of incredible attacks by the powers that run this world, I do not have to go into them, but they are extraordinary and beyond anything I have ever seen.

I suppose I should admit that I hope he isn't guilty, although I would think that would be obvious, but perhaps not. At any rate up to this point we have the allegations and the blanket denials and that is about all. No I really think it is. We have police reports, but those are usually simply raw data which can't be relied on. It is possible that I may find my mind changed as the evidence comes out, but for the time being I'll go with my experiences in this world and the knowledge that my government is capable of anything, and that there are people who for whatever reason will be willing to do this government's dirty work. And I will not treat them as equals in terms of whose story I should believe at this point, and it isn't the story of the accusers.

UPDATE: I think that an argument being made is that "rape is different." And therefore a person who files a complaint of being raped should not be held to the same standard as others who claim to be victims of a crime. Internal inconsistencies in a person's statements and actions are some of the things we use to help us determine whether or not to believe what people say. Therefore, if one throws a party for a guy she said raped her several days prior to the party, or if she scrubs her twitter and blog accounts of favorable comments made about the rapist after the alleged rape then this should not, apparently be taken as an indication that she may not be telling the whole truth about the crime itself. At least not as far as these alleged victims are concerned.

The point I'm making is that the defenders of these women are not requiring the same kind of consistency they would require of any other alleged victim is concerned. It is a kind of infantilization of these women and a variation of the "children don't lie" meme that was around on child abuse cases some time ago. It works quite well for the reactionaries who run our government here, as they can use the natural sympathies of liberals to do their work for them.

Barack Obama's New Year's Resolutions

This came from a super secret unnamed White House source because he (or she) just wants to look like they are really important to themselves and to the person they leaked the stuff to without getting blamed for it, if he (or she) gets caught and it back fires:

1. Try to really act like I give a shit about anybody who makes less than a million a year.

2. This year really look like I know how the fuck to negotiate at the same time I give everything I claimed to want away before negotiations really start.

3. Keep all secret deals with various industries and corporations secret for at least six months after I make them so I can screw the general populace before any of those fucking bloggers find out.

4. Start another war that I can really call my own.

5. Convince the rubes that I'm trying to save Social Security, while I cut it some more.

6. Shoot a man in Yemen just to watch him die.

7. Squish those Assange and Manning fuckers like bugs.

8. Give even more tax cuts to the most wealthy while I continue to convince the rest of America that it really is for their own good.

9. Get Wall Street and the rest of big business to yell really loud about how they are being destroyed by my socialist policies so the average democrat will really think I'm doing something.

11. Get down on my knees and thank god that "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."