The Guns of Auguste

BBC:

Alternatively, our correspondent adds, a high-casualty attack on US forces in neighbouring Iraq could also trigger a bombing campaign if it were traced directly back to Tehran.

But really - what are the odds of that happening?

Against our traditions we are now entering upon an unjust and trivial war, a war against a helpless people, and for a base object — robbery. At first our citizens spoke out against this thing, by an impulse natural to their training. Today they have turned, and their voice is the other way. What caused the change? Merely a politician’s trick — a high-sounding phrase, a blood-stirring phrase which turned their uncritical heads: Our Country, right or wrong! An empty phrase, a silly phrase. It was shouted by every newspaper, it was thundered from the pulpit, the Superintendent of Public Instruction placarded it in every schoolhouse in the land, the War Department inscribed it upon the flag. And every man who failed to shout it or who was silent, was proclaimed a traitor — none but those others were patriots. To be a patriot, one had to say, and keep on saying, “Our Country, right or wrong,” and urge on the little war. Have you not perceived that that phrase is an insult to the nation?

For in a republic, who is “the Country”? Is it the Government which is for the moment in the saddle? Why, the Government is merely a servant — merely a temporary servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a patriot and who isn’t. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them. Who, then, is “the country?” Is it the newspaper? Is it the pulpit? Is it the school-superintendent? Why, these are mere parts of the country, not the whole of it; they have not command, they have only their little share in the command. They are but one in the thousand; it is in the thousand that command is lodged; they must determine what is right and what is wrong; they must decide who is a patriot and who isn’t…

In a monarchy, the king and his family are the country; in a republic it is the common voice of the people. Each of you, for himself, by himself and on his own responsibility, must speak. And it is a solemn and weighty responsibility, and not lightly to be flung aside at the bullying of pulpit, press, government, or the empty catch-phrases of politicians. Each must for himself alone decide what is right and what is wrong, and which course is patriotic and which isn’t. You cannot shirk this and be a man. To decide it against your convictions is to be an unqualified and inexcusable traitor, both to yourself and to your country, let men label you as they may. If you alone of all the nation shall decide one way, and that way be the right way according to your convictions of the right, you have done your duty by yourself and by your country — hold up your head! You have nothing to be ashamed of.

Only when a republic’s life is in danger should a man uphold his government when it is in the wrong. There is no other time.

This Republic’s life is not in peril. The nation has sold its honor for a phrase. It has swung itself loose from its safe anchorage and is drifting, its helm is in pirate hands.

— Mark Twain

At TAPPED:

Bill Donohue is a fucking loon; just because he runs something called the Catholic League (last I heard, it had no official relationship with the Vatican), doesn’t mean that every single Catholic in the country listens to what he has to say.

In fact - going back to my last comment - another tactic would have been for the Edwards campaign to say, “look, sometimes we all say things we wish we could have phrased differently. Take, for example, the comments Bill Donohue made about homosexuals…”

You can fill in the rest - pull a jujitsu move and use Donohue’s force against him.

Perhpas we should be grateful, though: better to weed out Edwards early on, rather than nominate him and only find out in the general election that he’ll pull a Kerry when he gets swiftboated.

I’m starting to think that my vote will go to the candidate most likely to tell the right to shove it when they pull their swiftboating bullshit. And given that she’s already been through that particular wringer, I’d say that means I could be voting for Hillary.

Well said.

No, Hynes

Patrick Hynes, of Ankle Biting Pundits, is also a consultant for John McCain’s PAC. Now, in terms of conflict of interest, a blogger working for a political candidate is (as ruled on in the landmark case Rightwing Assholes v. Kos) Not A Big Deal. It was, however, to Patrick Hynes (from Wonkette):

“On Tuesday the former Director of Internet Organizing for Dean for President, Zephyr Teachout, revealed that the selfsame Markos Moulitsas Zúniga (who goes by the handle “Kos”) had been a paid shill for the Dean campaign, accepting fees for promoting the campaign of the angry little ex-Governor of Vermont on his blog. Oh yeah, Zúniga also gave “advice” to the campaign…. This mini-scandal is, probably, the blog equivalent of Rathergate or the Williams scandal.”

Kos, you’ll remember, had a disclaimer up. Hynes, later, did not.

(Parenthetically, this part of the Wonkette post also caught my eye, but I won’t comment further:

Sadly, since ABP’s pre-June 2006 archives were scrubbed in a site relaunch, we can’t find what else John McCain’s blogosphere mole had to say about ethics, disclosure and payola. Too bad.

)

But this was all covered last summer. Remember? Remember the shitstorm it churned up when it was revealed that Hynes was a total hypocrite and corrupt to boot? Neither do I. Especially interesting considering that Hynes seems to regard “conflict of interest” as nothing more than a random combination of three english words.

Radley Balko, a policy analyst at Cato who blogs at The Agitator, questioned Hynes’ integrity in working for AARP soon after leaving Cato, where he said Hynes’ job “was to be the PR point guy for Cato’s Social Security Choice campaign.”

Balko complained that AARP is “probably the one group that did the most to derail President Bush’s plans for private [retirement] accounts.” “Perhaps one of the righty blogs defending Hynes’ integrity can explain his representation of … the group that wants to expand Medicare, kill private accounts and enact all sorts of other monstrous, big-government federal entitlements,” Balko added.

Reached by telephone, Hynes said such criticism is irrelevant because he is “not even doing any policy work for AARP.” He reiterated his previous description of the consulting work: “They have a blog, they want to make it a better blog, and I’m helping them do it.”

But here’s the thing: I’m not even writing this post to point out Hynes’ ethical lapses. No, I’m here to highlight Hynes’ extremist stances on social issues.

Hynes wrote a book called “In Defense of the Religious Right”, which, among other things, compared today’s Christian moralizers to - I’m not kidding - abolitionists. Daniel McCarthy, writing in Reason:

“[T]he GOP is, perhaps, God’s Own Party,” not only because religious voters today prefer Republicans but because the party originally arose from the Second Great Awakening and the abolitionist movement. Abolition itself, he writes, “was the result of Christians imposing their moral values on their fellow Americans.”

You could probably get more facile and incomplete than that statement, but you’d have to be working really, really hard. By that standard - and with an actual understanding of history - slavery was the result of Christians imposing their moral values on their fellow Americans. Moreover, comparing the abolitionist movement to the war against contraception or gay marriage seems grossly offensive.

But even allowing for his ethical lapses, and the occasional offensive statement, McCain especially screwed up in not vetting his blogger’s points of view. Hynes is a fringe character, the wingiest of wingnuts. From Reason:

In support of his contention that “secular leftists are determined to remake American culture and society in their own warped image, to tear down traditional pillars of America’s moral strength,” Hynes cites a litany of court cases, legislative acts, and instances of civil disobedience: Griswold v. Connecticut (which effectively legalized contraception nationwide), the Stonewall riots (which launched the modern gay rights movement), 1960s New York and California laws legalizing abortion (the California law was signed by Gov. Reagan), and more.

If McCain was looking for a blogger to move him out of sync with the American people, he looked in the right place. The majority of Americans support civil unions, if not outright marriage. 62% oppose overturning Roe v. Wade. And given that 96% of Catholics use birth control, treating Griswold v. Connecticut as a Commie pinko plot from hell is not likely to play in Peoria.

McCain would be wise to fire Patrick Hynes now, before America wakes up to the kind of extremist he has working for him. It’s not usually considered good strategy to embrace the minority position on every issue. It’s a sure path to what I like to call “not getting elected.”

——

Contact information for the McCain PAC can be found - Okay, listen. Obviously, I’m not seriously arguing that Hynes ought to be fired, unless his ethical violations are a serious problem. But my argument against Hynes’ politics ought to have about as much influence over McCain as Pepsi has over Coke. (Or Coolah Energy - seriously, that shit is awesome.)

Bloggers know their audience, and I’m betting Hynes doesn’t spend a lot of time wooing McCain’s moderate voters by threatening to take their condoms away, just like I know Amanda’s not going to be saying “fuck” in a press release. “Scuttle-the-blogger’s-career” is not a winner for the Republicans.

…can be found here.

Update: Glenn Greenwald has more on Hynes and others and, being Greenwald, does it better.

How I feel about Civil War, basically:

Steve McNiven, Dexter Vines, and especially Morry Hollowell, however, do not.

I like the plot for its “shake-shit-up” factor, but the actual scripting lacks oomph. Big time.

But that art? Fantastic.

_____________:

Webroot Software, one of the plethora of security companies that helps protect Windows users from attacks, said that buyers should be aware of the potential holes in Vista. “We want to make sure that users understand the system’s limitations,” said Gerhard Eschelbeck, a spokesman for Webroot, “and caution them that Microsoft’s anti-virus programs may not fully protect them.”

Ian testing, the company sid, the new Windows Defender program failed to block 84% of viruses - including 15 of the most common pieces of malicious code.

For the rest of the week, I’ll be posting at Rox Populi. I’d try to write both places, but let’s face it, my output isn’t exactly high to begin with. I shall return, and triumphantly!

It didn’t.

Catching up on work and will try to write something tonight.

Make sure, before you watch this, to have an icepick handy with which to stab out your eyes.

There’s a special place in hell reserved for everyone even related to anyone who did any work on this travesty.

Update: Updated with a clearer and creepier version of the commercial.

It is my contention, based on conclusivedotal anecdata, that William Carlos Williams’ “This is Just to Say” is officially the most-parodied poem in history. If you don’t know the poem, you suck, and here it is:

This is Just to Say

I have eaten
the plums
that were in
the icebox

and which
you were probably
saving
for breakfast

Forgive me
they were delicious
so sweet
and so cold

After the jump, I’ve decided to collect some of the better specimens of spoof/satire/tribute for posterity.

(more…)