Mark this day
June 20, 2005 12:22 AM   Subscribe

Destroyed. No, annihilated
Let the countdown to the fall of the Bush administration begin! I wanted to sum it up. But oh, just read it!
posted by crasspastor (42 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: There are many ways to make a good FPP out of the new Downing Street Memo news, but this is not one of them.

Bad post. I agree with its content and the editorializing. But it's still a bad post.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:25 AM on June 20, 2005

sorry. via corrente.
posted by crasspastor at 12:26 AM on June 20, 2005

The "best of the web" holmes. I haven't FPPed in years it seems like, but I'm sorry man, but this is for everybody to read.

If Matt or anybody would like to change the tone of my post, go ahead. But that is a damned good read from no matter where you stand on things.
posted by crasspastor at 12:29 AM on June 20, 2005

Even if the writer fights back with a fact-based op-ed piece, no one will be convinced to change their minds on either side.

I would have been more interested in a well-researched FPP on the testimony the writer refers to, no disrespect.
posted by Rothko at 12:33 AM on June 20, 2005

Um, I think this is the meat of it:
If the evidence revealed by the Downing Street Minutes is true, if the Niger Document was known or highly suspected to be fake, if the aluminum tubes were known or highly suspect, if the integrity of curveball was known or highly suspect, then the President's submission of his March 18, 2003 letter and/or various reports to the United States Congress might violate federal criminal law, including: the federal anti-conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371, which makes it a felony "to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose..."; and The False Statements Accountability Act of 1996, 18 U.S.C. § 1001, which makes it a felony to issue knowingly and willfully false statements to the United States Congress.
I'm all for the prosecution of this administration, but I don't see much new here. Maybe someone else will have a more effective time wading throught the editorializing and customized spelling. I actually want to know where the smoking gun is. Why should I "mark this day", crasspastor?
posted by squirrel at 12:34 AM on June 20, 2005

You should "mark this day" because I'm telling you to. Umm, well not exactly. It's a flourish of a very well constructed essay/rant/memoir of currency. Why do you need me to tell you why you should "mark this day".

It's just a title dude.
posted by crasspastor at 12:38 AM on June 20, 2005

I don't mean to be snarky or inconsiderate of your feelings about making this post. I can see why you posted it. But it's a link to a single blog entry. And, well, yeah, such a thing could very well be an example of "best of the web". But surely you'll agree with me that our ability to collectively evaluate "best of the web" and agree upon the evaluation is far, far more limited with regard to a political rant than it is with, say, a link to someone's photography site. That doesn't make the latter more important than the former. Anyway, this is MeTa material and I apologize for bringing it here. I do think it's still acceptable and useful to say a simple "bad post" even though we have both the flags and metatalk.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:39 AM on June 20, 2005

I think this blog post is far more substantial than most. And you're right, it is acceptable to say "bad post".

My bad.

Anyways, it still is the best of the web even though it has the telltale markups of blogger html. If what this guy had to say was in a flash animation would it have been more agreeable?

Probably so.
posted by crasspastor at 12:46 AM on June 20, 2005

Why do you need me to tell you why you should "mark this day".

It's just a title dude.

Gramataically, it's called an imperative. It's telling me to do something, for reasons that the speaker can't articulate, and the listener(s) can't (be bothered to) figure out.

Again, I'm funny behind the spirit of the post, but where's the news, where's the part the marks something original, or that hasn't been said before? I'm just asking for some context, so that I can absorb whatever has made you so happy about this blog entry. I want to be happy, too!
posted by squirrel at 12:47 AM on June 20, 2005

Well actually squirrel, your condescension is remarkable for someone not all that happy -- since I am, as you imply. Actually, it was just a post.

I take it all back.

It's also, Gramatically no Garmataically. FIY.
posted by crasspastor at 12:54 AM on June 20, 2005

And it's not just the horrible things that GWB and his administration has done, but the things they have unfortunately required other people to do against their better judgement.

Case in point. I have released the pictures I have of Iraqi teens being "framed" as insurgents by U.S. soldiers. It's a situation horribly reminiscent of Vietnam's worst days, with civilians being killed and counted as VC. It's a dead body, so give it a weapon... Voila. Another insurgent killed.

If anyone wants to make it into a FPP, I would appreciate it. You can email me for more information, if necessary.
posted by insomnia_lj at 12:56 AM on June 20, 2005

Seconding squirrel's question, which I didn't see as condescending at all. At least, not in comparison with crasspasstor's reply.

If you can't explain why this is so awesome that it fills you with 'I wanted to sum it up. But oh, just read it!' energy, then how are we supposed to feel it?
posted by Jairus at 12:56 AM on June 20, 2005

Well, you read it if you want to. I printed this on no paper before I posted to MeFi.
posted by crasspastor at 12:58 AM on June 20, 2005

I did read it. And then I read this thread. And then I seconded a question.
posted by Jairus at 12:59 AM on June 20, 2005


I take it all back!

heehee. This is actually kinda funny. ; )

If the post need be pulled, then fine.
posted by crasspastor at 1:02 AM on June 20, 2005

You remind me of a girlfriend I once had who would always take questions asked of her, and instead of answering them, turn them into things she did wrong.
posted by Jairus at 1:05 AM on June 20, 2005

I for one welcome our new (but old) diligently-replying-to-each-and-every-comment-in-the-thread Overlord...
posted by benzo8 at 1:12 AM on June 20, 2005

I don't quite get it. Not the content of the post exactly, but the format of the post. Where do the updates begin / end and where does the actual post begin / end.

It's all just a big blur of words and updates.

And "IT HAS HAPPENED" in bolds. Sounds important. What has finally happened that hasn't previously happened? Help this dumb Aussie.
posted by uncanny hengeman at 1:14 AM on June 20, 2005

It's also, Gramatically no Garmataically. FIY.

actually, it's "grammatically".
posted by Silky Slim at 1:15 AM on June 20, 2005

Actually, it's garmatciallilly.
posted by Bugbread at 1:19 AM on June 20, 2005

I'll do all the funny stuff.
posted by uncanny hengeman at 1:20 AM on June 20, 2005

Add me to the boat of What's so special? Like, instead of telling me to read the article or getting all defensive, it'd be appreciative if you gave a one or two paragraph reasoning behind what strikes you so much about the article.
posted by Mach3avelli at 1:48 AM on June 20, 2005

I'd like to see what he's responding to. Am I missing it?
posted by sellout at 1:52 AM on June 20, 2005

is this a new thing in mefi? making terrible posts on purpose just to get more comments?
it's not a contest, people.
posted by Silky Slim at 1:53 AM on June 20, 2005

I don't want to get into the argument about whether this is a crap post or not, and the post itself is too dense to really wade through, just want to say it's sad, yet expected, that a critic of present and past administration policy has to defend their bona fides as true Americans. I see this attack all the time on-line and it's getting old.

We went through this crap 100 years ago in another episode of abuse of executive power:

[Senator] Schurz expanded on this theme in a speech delivered at the Anti-Imperialistic Conference, Chicago, Illinois, October 17, 1899: “I confidently trust that the American people will prove themselves … too wise not to detect the false pride or the dangerous ambitions or the selfish schemes which so often hide themselves under that deceptive cry of mock patriotism: ‘Our country, right or wrong!’ They will not fail to recognize that our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: ‘Our country—when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.’”

Indeed, the Bushites and the media factors that man their defenses: Rush, FOXNEWS, conservatard blogs like lgf, redstate, powerline, etc etc are still operating by impugning the patriotism of critics, and accusing those who marshal arguments against the war (its justifications, legality, and prosecution of the occupation) of irresponsible opportunism.

The Bushites did feel Nov 2 was their "accountability moment", and that they now have sufficient mandate, with their majority (51% of 59.6%) tally, for another 4 years' worth of clear sailing wrt their manifest mismanagement of this country.

I wonder what's going through the Bush true-believer's head right now. Is it ignorance or active stupidity that is making them hold onto their faith in the man and his policy-making capabilities?

Do they really believe the following:

1) Gutting the federal budget with massive tax cuts to the top 1% of earners
2) Redirecting our military to removing Saddam before the job in Afghanistan was halfway completed
3) Appointing whack-job conservatives to the bench
4) Mistreating prisoners in Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, and elsewhere
5) Shitting on our allies and the UN
6) Interfering in the Schiavo case and denigrating the established mechanisms of law

were necessary and prudent acts?

Do they not know that when Bush leaves office in 2009 our nation will be carrying a $10.3 TRILLION national debt, and be facing $525 BILLION in annual interest payments (that's $300/taxpayer/mo in interest on the debt alone!).

From whence do Bush supporters draw support for the man, and his admin? Is it a casual from-the-hip 'choosing the winning team' dynamic; is it the religious pandering ("God Bless America!"); is it the radical vision of shrinking the spending power of the federal government by bankrupting us; how much stems from the Dems actually discrediting themselves in the minds of single-issue voters (eg. "guns, god, gays").

I just don't get it. PP, dhoyt, tddl, help me out here. Do you actually support this continued farce, or is it just a partisan act, tapdancing to save the credibility of your party until a better replacement comes along?
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 2:10 AM on June 20, 2005

Add me to the boat of What's so special? Like, instead of telling me to read the article or getting all defensive, it'd be appreciative if you gave a one or two paragraph reasoning behind what strikes you so much about the article.

Yeah, I took a stab at it with the block quote above, but, again, I don't think there's much there there. I considered MetaTalking it, especially considering what a spaz crasspastor became, but in the end it's just one of a handful of poorly thought-out FPPs we get here every day. Big whoop. I was just hoping that I was overlooking something wonderful. Turns out all I overlooked was my own spell-check. Zing.
posted by squirrel at 2:14 AM on June 20, 2005

"Mark this day". The Downing Street Minutes (or the Kos blog post) is the grain of sand that starts the anti-Bush avalanche...

I applaud your enthusiasm, crasspaster, but I don't share your optimism.
posted by tgyg at 2:15 AM on June 20, 2005

insomnia_lj: holy fuck.
posted by mr.marx at 2:47 AM on June 20, 2005

Ok folks, I would like to say that I am grateful for having this article/blog posted so that I could find it and read it. The wording of the FPP might leave a little to be desired, but after reading the article/blog I have to say that DarkSyde comes across as one of the most intelligent American's I have encountered.

Now that's not to say that there aren't many more American's that are far more intelligent then he, simply that as a Brit I have not had that many intelligent Americans represented to me fullstop. His piece on Super Nova, creationism, and the Fate of the Universe was particularly enlightening about a celestial event that I had little previous knowledge.

So again, not to say that there aren't many, many more intelligent Americans who can express their politics in what appears to be an eloquent and well thought out way - it's just that I don't regularly come across them. Again, this may be my fault and I'll crawl back under my limey rock... Just don't lambaste the guy because you don't find worth in the post, because I did.
posted by Meccabilly at 2:50 AM on June 20, 2005

I had seen the post at Kos before this went up. My favorite part:
(I almost laughed beer out of my nose when my fundy GOP neighbor told me in seriousness "I can't believe how full of shit FOX News is on this Schiavo thing").
posted by JHarris at 3:50 AM on June 20, 2005

hmmm, in checking my numbers, I discovered that the CBO calculates the debt/gdp ratio (that warm and fuzzy ~40% figure that admin apologists use to minimize the fact that the national debt has risen TWO TRILLION DOLLARS SO FAR under Bush) by excluding the debt owned by SS and other government trust funds. Adding those debts back in, and the national debt zooms up to 65% of GDP, putting the US in Japan and Italy debt poster-child territory (I'm not sure how consistent this is with other G-7 accounting methods, but we are running SS surpluses for a reason, and if we don't intend on defaulting on that debt it's as real as any other debt and should be included in that calculation).
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 3:57 AM on June 20, 2005

Paying no attention whatsoever to the content or merits of this post, what does § mean?
posted by NinjaPirate at 4:05 AM on June 20, 2005

I will say this: I was shocked to see the DSM front and center of my local Bush-lovin' newspaper over the weekend. That's quite a coup here in Nebraska. Particularly since it doesn't have anything to do with football.
posted by RavinDave at 4:08 AM on June 20, 2005

*visions of perp-walks dance in head*

[whappa whappa whappa]
posted by quonsar at 4:21 AM on June 20, 2005

Here I thought some giant smoking gun had been found, and instead I am presented with a blogger putting the verbal smackdown on a fool.

I'd say this was completely worthless (since it's all been said before right here on the blue!) except that insomnia finally released those pics he's been talking about. That is some new, soul-hardening shit right there.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:29 AM on June 20, 2005

I just heard Porter Goss saying we know where OBL is, but we can't just go in and get him — because we have to respect the sovereignty of other nations.

I honestly don't see how they can keep up such self-parodying rhetoric and hold a corrupt regime together. Even stauch Faux viewer hafta be scratchin' there heads at that boner.
posted by RavinDave at 4:39 AM on June 20, 2005

(Without having gone to the trouble of actually finding the § in the article), § is a kind of footnote indicator that can be used instead of numbers. I think its generally for the third footnote on a page.
posted by leapingsheep at 4:54 AM on June 20, 2005

Hit by friendly fire (US News &World Report)-- ..."Things aren't getting better; they're getting worse. The White House is completely disconnected from reality," Hagel tells U.S. News. "It's like they're just making it up as they go along. The reality is that we're losing in Iraq." ...
posted by amberglow at 5:00 AM on June 20, 2005

NinjaPirate: § means "section" (or "paragraph"). It refers to a section of law.
posted by Doohickie at 5:14 AM on June 20, 2005

I'm not American, but I do -- no, sorry, I used to follow American politics pretty closely. They're just lame and depressing now. Anyway, despite this, that just looked like a big screed to me. And I don't know where the update ends and the .. thing, whatever it is, begins.

I'll mark this day, I guess (what is it, the 20th? I'll call it crasspastor day), but I have no idea what the hell you're linking to. Bush did some illegal lying? Gasp! The Downing Street memo has been around for a while now, and I don't see any Democrats in Congress suddenly hefting their freshly sprouted balls or anything. It all seems like business as usual.
posted by blacklite at 5:36 AM on June 20, 2005

Thank you very much, Doohickie.
posted by NinjaPirate at 5:53 AM on June 20, 2005

Nice of you to take a big dump on the front page this morning!
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 5:54 AM on June 20, 2005

« Older Gas station debit card OVERcharge   |   Thus Spake Mathematica... Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments