Stump Lane
in the dirt since history began

Untitled Poem

we packed our bags
before our welcome expired
but the long goodbyes
were overdrawn

Untitled 7″ Haiku Remix:

we had packed our bags
before our welcome expired
“bye” was overdrawn

Disembowelment or disrobe-ment?

(Or at least the part of yesterday’s post pertaining to the Iran rhetoric.)

Wes Clark: “War is not the answer”

Thanks for stopping by, General!

Your Montag is ready for a woman to be president. In fact, I think we need a woman to be president. We also need an African American president. One way or another, we pretty much need to break free of the whole powerful-backward-white-male-flat-Earthers acting like they own the world thing.

More importantly, I think we need a president who embraces a Good Neighbor approach to foreign policy. One willing to ‘take options off the table’ from time to time in the interest of fostering diplomacy.

So I have a problem with this:

ANNE MILLER: … I went to hear Senator Clinton speak in Concord and was not called on during the meeting, but afterwards approached the Senator and asked her about the comments [quoted below the fold] that she had made at the AIPAC meeting earlier in the week and asked her if she really would leave all options on the table and how could she threaten, in effect, other countries’ children with nuclear genocide. She looked me right in the eye, and she said, “No options are off the table. We cannot abide by a nuclear-armed Iran. It would be an existential threat to the United States.” [Democracy Now!: Sen. Hillary Clinton ... Says No Options Should Be Taken Off The Table on Iran]

For fuck’s sake, can we at least take nuclear fucking genocide off the table?!

And, haven’t we heard this, “No options are off the table,” shtick somewhere before?

By the by, Edwards is talking equally tough on Iran, too. [Quotes below the fold.]

Shouldn’t Democratic Presidential candidates try to differentiate their war mongering rhetoric from that of the Bush crowd?

Obama does a little better. [Again, quotes below the fold.] While keeping “all options on the table” he first advocates a “more aggressive approach to diplomacy.” Clark— who may or may not even be officially in the race —speaks similarly. [By now you know where the quotes will be.] And while Clark leaves a military strike option on the table, he mercifully avoids the phrasing “all options on the table.”

If it were socially acceptable to speak his name in polite company, I’d tell you that Kucinich isn’t convinced that there is any “there” there. And that he’d see an unsanctioned attack on Iran by the current administration as some sort of high crime or misdemeanor. [And, if it were socially acceptable to quote him in public, I'd admit to there being such a quote below the fold.]

It is of significant importance to note, that whatever their stance on Iran, one advantage all of these folks share:

1. They are not George Bush.

Up to now, my presumption has been that the only direction we can possibly go from here, after this president’s term ends, is “up.”

But, given the way the front runners are talking, is there any reason to believe that installing a democratic president would result in anything more than a slight change in foreign policy?

All of the above notwithstanding, I think at E-minus 624 (or so) days, perhaps we shouldn’t be so concerned with presidential candidacies. Maybe spend a little more time cajoling congress into getting a grip back on runaway executive branch power. It has occurred to me to wonder, though, if the new Democratic majority congress will even want to do this. (They could very well be licking their chops at the prospect of wielding such power themselves. Which might be nice to find out sometime before the next elections.)

So today, when conversation inevitably turns to the question of ‘who do you like in 2008?’ It might be worth asking, ‘who do you trust with increasingly unfettered presidential power to declare war; to reject laws, in part or totality, through the use of signing statements; to decide who is to be considered an enemy combatant, spy on them, detain them and torture them indefinitely in an undisclosed location?’

Continue for the candidates’ takes on our Iran options, as promised. (more…)

Beer Sweet Beer

I’m not sure that the United States President simply speaking a truth necessarily constitutes a truth event, but there is, I believe, a certain importance that comes into play when he does it.

This is what OFFAL said — and it’s important to note that the implication was that this situation is undesirable:

…let’s put it this way, money trumps peace, sometimes. In other words, commercial interests are very powerful interests throughout the world.

No, he wasn’t talking about US. But still, that is beautiful. Instead of speaking truth to power, we have power speaking truth. Of course, we also probably have power not listening to or understanding the broader truth of which it speaks.

Here’s hoping anyway, that the act of that simple utterance might lead to reflection; to an earnest truth process; to an honest effort at fidelity to a truth; to ethics.

[Yes, that quote has been taken out of context. So, read on. That way it can't be said that Your Montag didn't provide the context.] (more…)

[Cross posted at I Miss Fafblog, Spot!]

Dangerous Democrat leaders have revealed their war plan. It is a plan so craven that it’s difficult to even believe the words that describe the plan might have been uttered. Right thinking news organizations and political parties are already addressing the issue; but the egregiousness of this treachery is such that none of US can afford to ignore it.

For instance this is what Murtha and Pelosi have in mind:

They call it their ’slow-bleed’ plan. Instead of supporting the troops in Iraq, or simply bringing them home, the Democrats intend to gradually make it harder and harder for them to do their jobs. [Republican National Committee]

Can you believe that in today’s world of the political sound bite, they actually call it their ‘slow-bleed’ plan?!

There is a better plan.

Remember when Dutch Schultz punched Billy Bathgate in the nose to cover up the bloodstain on the hotel room carpet? Remember how Billy Bathgate dropped to his knees, and the blood flowed as if the bottom had dropped out of a bucket?

This is not an example of what you would call a ‘slow-bleed,’ now is it? It is the ideal strategy for US in the Mid East, however.

The effect of a sharp blow across the bridge of the nose of Iran, followed by a quick massive hemorrhage will be threefold:

1. Aspiring rogue, evil, nuclear, terror state, Iran, will be brought to it’s knees and come to understand it’s place in Our World.
2. Our World will quickly forget about the unsightly bloodstain on the carpet that was Iraq.
3. The fledgling Phoenix of Mid East Democracy will rise, clean the dry, cracked blood from its muddy face and sign reconstruction contracts and free trade agreements with all the nation of Our World; answering the collect call of the universal appeal of liberty and accepting the charges.

In the end, Our New Mid East will be a shining example of the Naked Power of Freedom.

We cannot allow unhinged mavens of peacenickery, the Slow-Bleeders, to hijack the process of freedom! VICTORY OR BUST!

Yes, I am a glutton for punishment. You spoke loud and clear the other week when Your Montag dared ask:

…is it even worth carrying on with [the Gang Activity] feature? From my standpoint, other than forcing me to post on Wednesdays, it hasn’t served its purpose. Our underpopulated comments section is just as underpopulated as ever.

Given the amount of discussion that went on in the comments on that post, and the fact that, as I warned, “‘new and improved’ Bazooka comics are for shit,” it may be hard to believe that I’d be back with more.*

“Here is what the interweb meteorologists have to say about the St. Valentine Storm.”

And looking out the window…

“Yep it’s snowing like all get-out.”

(If you were hoping for an actual riff on the actual joke, it’s been done before in this space.)

Indeed, it is storming. The shifting wind gusts are prefect for creating the condition that when snow-blowing one has a choice:

1. Blow the snow back onto the area one has already cleared.
2. Blow the snow up onto the side of one’s house.
3. Blow the snow back into one’s face.

Note: this may be a corollary to the old campfire adage, “The smoke follows the fool.”

If you’ve ever been ‘the fool,’ you’ll know what I’m talking about.

Here’s a few of today’s Maine headlines:
Supreme court grapples with Dirigo Health
Indian inmates claim right to practice religion is denied
Price tag grows for Hollywood Slots project

*This will be the last awkwardly forced Gang Activity installment. I do still have a few of the old B.J. comics laying around, but will only drag them out when they are well-suited enough to the days events to make it a worthwhile endeavor.

What, is that short for Maximum? Like ‘Maximum Cat’?

*Second instance of kittens on Stump Lane.