Sunday, 18 December 2011

Little John Meets the Blob

If, as suggested, a financial transaction tax were levied in bips (hundredths of a percentage point) and generated tens of billions of monetary units in annual revenue, imagine how many bombs a 1% surcharge could build.

Last time I checked out the story, the archer from Sherwood Forest wasn't begging for pence. Though he did have his royal loyalties.


Pop Quiz
Who was Samuel T. Cohen?
Hint: not a studio head.

And, anyway, if the Jews control Hollywood, why is the time-stamp at the end of the credits in Roman numerals?


Donkey or a Jellyfish?
Of course we recycle our myths in fairy-tale'd horror flicks. But are we really ready to take up kings? As long as they are our kings and not their kings, how bad could they be?

If you call a politician spineless and then vote for him, what does that make you?

You might say that you have to vote for them, even if they do lack backbone, because the alternative is unthinkable; in which case you'd probably understand the perspective that the pols themselves have no choice but to lack backbone.

JFK had back problems. FDR's malady is legendary.

2012 or bust! Down with Prince John! Long live King Richard! Who the fuck is King Richard? He had a lionheart. Frank Baum's lion was a chicken. If Richard I was a chicken, he had an iron claw for women and Jews. And Muslims.
O, but is was the times!


Pop Poetry
All of our fictions feign roots in reality,
Every true story, a figment of fantasy.

I guess that everything that happens within any given time is understandable or laudable, depending on whether your aim is to chop down the cherry tree or harvest its fruit.

Those who forget history won't know how to repeat it.


Advance Fantasy Football Scores/Humor/Crime
Who can forget Rudy, the heroic kicker with down-syndrome who made the field goal that won Notre Dame their first-ever national title?

So what if Flubber was involved.

Turns out the ex-Penn State defensive coach might have been demonstrating survival techniques. Like, just theoretically, mind you: How to live through being raped by a father figure.


Occupy a Wheelchair!
The Office of the German President is largely ceremonial, though it is tasked with the function of undersigning laws. Kind of like the Office of the US President. Except the POTUS has greater freedom to break the law, being Chief Executive, an' all.

The difference between a ceremonial head of state and an officially-ritualistic one is akin to the way two children might alternatively approach a revolving door: One walks through to the other side and eventually back out again; the other whirls about with a "Wheee!" to the cheers of his proud parents, and the dismay of others who cannot understand how adults allow their children to lord over them.

Once finally through the door, however, both kids enjoy advisory board posts, still largely ceremonial, but with large ritualistic remuneration.

So, surprise, sur-motherfucking-prise: The revolving door German Fed Pres got a huge loan from a buddy. Come on. Are we not all buds? Can't he go around just one more time?

What is so hard to understand about the unavoidable verity that a person in a position of authority is a walking conflict of interest, up to & including the time he cannot walk anymore? Just ask any baby-BOOM era "Jap" about the legacy of legendary father figures.


Answer to the quiz
"Why should I feel funny? The two hemispheres are fundamentally at odds."
Fox Harris as J. Frank Parnell
(based on the father of the neutron bomb)


Spacial, unplaned bonus
UPDATE to my last entry, I refer you to a couple of prominent pro-troopers.

The first is [way more than*] a coupla weeks old and from Ms. MS Embassy for the DLC herself, Rae Chill Maaa Dow, who actually concluded her segment with:

"This is a beautiful speech from [Bo Rama] today, with patriotic, moving, even poetic language about the rule of law and the Constitution, and one of the most radical proposals for defying the Constitution that we have ever heard made to the American people."

I admit being a tad surprised and commend her for the criticism, in spite of its eerily fawning duplicity. Still, with her bemusement centered on His Royal Eloquence' espousal of two fundamentally opposing convictions in concert (as in, in the same speech), I hafta ask: Where were you for His Ramaness' conscientiousness-cleaving Nobel demogoguery? Where the frick have you been for every other speech he has ever given?

Of course, I am aware that she's all but helming the MS News Brand Counterweight, which will no doubt go down in American media maritime history. I still wonder if her conscience creeps up on her now and then. Like, are Liberals able to smell the stink of their pan-culturalist furor blowing back in through their window to the world long enough to be cognizant that the only difference between this law and that one is that "it hits home"?

Is the stench of First On Xenophobia & her phony players really so overwhelming that one cannot get a whiff of the very real and undeniable fact that the US failed to get immunity for its serial-dismembering men & women in uniform, so they're redeploying to the neighbor's house, leaving privately operated serial-rapists behind to take care of business, and call it - if not the stench of Donkey Poo - at least anything other than having brought a war to an end?

Sincere apologies to her fans if I am missing something here. But I have seen enough of her praise of the killing machine that it is hard to stomach listening to what she might have to say on any particular issue. And her criticism of the president's hypocrisy is pretty lightweight when - instead of using the word hypocrisy or an equivalent - she refuses to forgo marveling at his beautiful and patriotic poetry. That's fuckin' creepy. Creepier than the prospect of "indefinite detention" itself. Creepier than the creepiness that I have been pointing out about His Royal Creepiness since before he ascended to the throne.

For the sake of currency, pro-trooper number two is a former funnyman turned USO entertainer to the killing machine and present Senator from Minnesota, who weighs in after the Senate voted this past week 86 to 13 in favor of the bill in question (he voted for it before he voted against it):
"The bill that passed on Thursday included several problematic provisions, the worst of which could allow the military to detain Americans indefinitely, without charge or trial, even if they're captured in the U.S."
Given their pro-troop nature, I say they're both Jellyfish come convention time.

Ah Fee'll We're'd



* i.e. the president's stance on this issue predates this bill