Uh...

I assume everyone has seen this by now, but just in case you haven't, here's Karl Rove rapping.

I'm speechless.

Wedding Songs

If you guys have any suggestions about songs we should play at our wedding, I'm all ears. For now, the two songs I have in mind for our first dance are:

Closer
Under My Thumb

Any others?

A Good Start

Today I woke up at 12:15--a mere thirty-three minutes before I started writing this--, which was well after Mom and Dad had woken up.

I don't know what had happened, but Mom was on the warpath.

I was in the kitchen eating breakfast, and as I was finishing it, Mom started into Dad.

Mom: Your father doesn't respect me.
Dad: He does not.
Mom: He doesn't give a shit about what I think.
Dad: I do not give a shit. I do, however, give two shits.
Mom: Just the other day, I was watching a special, and it mentioned the Muslims. And he said [she puts on a Greek accent], "they are extreme". As if I don't know that?! Whenever they say the word "Islam" he always says, "they say it means 'peace', but it does not, it means 'suppression.'"
Dad: Ida, it does not mean 'oppression'. It means 'submission'.
Mom: That's what I said!
Me: No, she said 'suppression'; not [turning to Mom] 'submission' and not [turning to Dad] 'oppression.'
Dad: Submission and suppression are not the same.
Me: She knows that, she was just mad, so she said 'suppression' instead of 'submission'. I heard her tell me that Islam means submission the other day [when she and I were at 300].
Mom: I once wrote a letter to myself. I said, "he looks like a robot."
Dad: Ida, do you know from which language 'robot' comes?
Mom: Yes! It's from a Slavic language and it means 'worker'! You didn't expect me to know that, did you?!
Dad: But which Slavic language? Bulgarian? Romanian?
Mom: Oh ... I don't know ... Bulgarian?
Dad: No. It is Czech.
Mom: That's what I thought! If you had said Czech, I would have said it! But you tried to trick me by saying Bulgarian! See, he doesn't respect me!
Me: Look, I do the same thing with my lady. I bait her all the time, it gets her mad, and it makes me laugh.
Mom: You take after your father! Why do you do it?
Me: I don't really know. I think I'm afraid of conflict, so when I'm with my lady I can start a conflict but I'm still in a safe place. But that can't be Dad's story, because he's not afraid of conflict.
Mom: Then why does he do it to me?
Me: Because you're the nearest person.
Mom: He doesn't respect me!
Me: Don't worry, he doesn't respect anyone. Me neither.
Mom: Really? Give me an example.
Me: Oh, you know, whenever we bring up Islam, he always tells me the history. [I could have mentioned as well that whenever we're driving he tells me "'red' means 'stop' and 'green' means 'go'".]
Mom: Well, he's a sadist! If he keeps this up, I'm leaving him. I'm going to go to New York and live with you.
Me: Dad, you have to stop it!!

A Real Conversation

Mom: Nico, in a half-hour let's go shopping.
Dad: No.
Mom: Why not?
Dad: I cannot.
Mom: Why not?
Dad: It's not possible.
Mom: (sigh) Why not?
Dad: Aren't you forgetting something?
Mom: Oh, Jesus: the guessing game.

The thing Mom was forgetting was that Dad had to go to church. She had to ask me to get the right answer.

But you can't fault Dad. He's just being a good Christian. Remember Jesus' beatitudes:

Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are the meek: for they shall posses the land.
Blessed are the elusive: for they shall ... well, you'll see.

Kant on Morality

A lot of my readers know that I study Kant. But few of you know what Kant 'sounds' like. Without further ado, here are some translations (my own) from Kant's great moral works. First, the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals:

"We have, then, to explicate the concept of a will that is to be esteemed in itself and that is good apart from any further purpose, as it already dwells in natural sound understanding and needs not so much to be taught as only to be clarified ... In order to do so, we shall set before ourselves the concept of doodie, which contains that of a good will though under certain subjective limitations and hindrances, which, however, far from concealing it and making it unrecognizable, rather bring it out by contrast and make it shine forth all the more brightly.
"I here pass over all actions that are already recognized as contrary to doodie, even though they may be useful for this or that purpose; for in their case the question whether they might have been done from doodie never arises, since they even conflict with it. I also set aside actions that are really in conformity with doodie but to which human beings have no inclination immediately and which they still perform because they are impelled to do so through another inclination." (4:397, emphasis in original)


Next, from The Metaphysics of Morals, a selection from a section entitled, "Sympathetic feeling is generally a doodie" (6:456):

"But while it is not in itself a doodie to share the sufferings (as well the joys) of others, it is a doodie to sympathize actively in their fate; and to this end it is therefore an indirect doodie to cultivate the compassionate natural (aesthetic) feelings in us ... It is therefore a doodie not to avoid the places where the poor who lack the most basic necessities are to be found but rather to seek them out" (6:457)

Finally, from the Critique of Practical Reason, a famous passage where Kant actually waxes eloquent about doodie:

"Doodie! Sublime and might name that embraces nothing charming or insinuating but requires submission, and yet does not seek to move the will by threatening anything that would arouse natural aversion or terror in the mind but only holds forth a law that of itself finds entry into the mind and yet gains reluctant reverence (though not always obedience), a law before which all inclinations are dumb, even though they secretly work against it; what origin is there worthy of you, and where is to be found the root of your noble descent which proudly rejects all kinship with the inclinations, descent from which is the indispensable condition of that worth which human beings alone can give themselves?" (5:86)

In answer to Kant's question, my guess is that the root of doodie's "noble descent" is probably chili.

Man, I'm immature.

Two funny things, and one of my typical, radical, right-wing political comments

I haven't posted in a while. So here goes.

The other day, this is the phone call I have with my parents:

Mom: llasjdfoauiwr
Me: ...What??

There was a lot of noise in the background, which explains why I couldn't hear her.

Mom: It's your father, he's making a racket!

Notice how when he's making a racket, he's "your father."

Mom: Nico, what are you doing?!
Dad: I'm making noise!

He said this like a ten-year old excited because he finally figured out cymbals.

***
I was sitting in my bedroom with Mom, watching American Idol on our HD TV. Dad comes in.

Dad: Robert, when you have time, I would like you ... to help me ... move ... an ... object.
Mom: What kind of object?
Dad: It is a piece ... of ... furniture.
Me: What kind of furniture?
Dad: It has shelves.
Mom: Nico, that doesn't answer the question!
Me: It's a desk. He wants me to move a desk.
Dad: It is not a desk.

Mom gets up and leaves, and also starts laughing.

Dad: Why are you laughing?
Mom: Because you can't answer a simple question.

I go downstairs to help Dad pick up and move the "object".

To be honest, I have no idea what to call this object. It had shelves, and it's a piece of furniture. That's about all I can tell you.

***
I just read this book called The Theocons: Secular American Under Siege. It's about the people who run the magazine, "First Things" (circulation: 30,000), and its sub-sub-title reads: "For the past three decades, a few determined men have worked to inject their radical religious ideas into the nation's politics. This is the story of how they succeeded." I have it admit, it was a terrifying read. Terrifying, of course, because it amazes me that a book so crappy and insignificant could have gotten a publisher, and doubly terrifying that I read the whole thing waiting for a punchline. I thought it was going to be Portnoy's Complaint 2: This Time It's Vercockte! The upshot of the book is that there's a bunch of right-wing Catholics who are trying to get laws passed, and so far they got one passed by Bush: the born-alive infant protection act, which makes it illegal (doubly illegal?) for hospitals to kill infants who are born. I tell you what, I'm scared. Oh yeah, there's also a bit where the author, Damon Linker, tries to get us nervous that Tom Monaghan, the founder of Domino's Pizza (doesn't it look delicious?), is trying to start an über-Catholic town, Naples, Florida, where pornography and birth control will be inaccessible. First the Amish and now Naples! It's only a matter of time before all of America is under Monaghan's sway.

Why do I do this to myself?

More. This will be the worst century ever. Enjoy right now, it only gets worse from here.

Doom, doom, doom

More demographic doom for the West. They are watching. Look forward to the short term because there's nothing after that.

Drought blamed on lack of faith

By Liam Houlihan

March 11, 2007 12:00am

Article from: Sunday Herald Sun

Send this article: Print Email

A LEADING Muslim cleric has blamed the devastating drought, climate change and pollution on Australians' lack of faith in Allah.

Radical sheik Mohammed Omran told followers at his Brunswick mosque that out-of-control secular scientific values had caused environmental disaster.

"The fear of Allah is not there. So we have now a polluted earth, a polluted water, a wasteland," he told a meeting this year.

"What are the people now crying for? The prophet told you hundreds of years ago, 'Look after the water'."

A Sunday Herald Sun investigation also found clerics railing against "evil" democracy, vilifying Jews and Christians and encouraging jihad and polygamy.

And in a popular DVD selling locally, a foreign sheik exhorts Muslims to take control of Australia by out-breeding non-believers.

British-based Sheik Abdul Raheem Green forbade Muslims from having fewer than four children so Australia would become an Islamic state.

Behind the closed doors of some Melbourne mosques and bookshops, sheiks push for Sharia law, declare Islam at war with the "sick" West and gloat that September 11 boosted Muslim numbers.

At a Muslim information centre in Coburg, extreme literature shares shelves with DVDs by firebrand sheiks from around the globe.

The centre, run by Abu Hamza, serves Muslims in the northern suburbs.

Many CDs and DVDs there feature London sheik Abdul Raheem Green, who is on an Australian Government watchlist.

On one he tells his audience to Islamise Australia through a Muslim baby boom.

"The birth rate in the Western countries is going down. People are more interested in their careers . . . they don't want to have babies," Sheik Green says in one DVD.

"So don't you think, Muslim brothers and sisters, we've got a bit of an opportunity here? They're not having babies any more. So what if, instead, we have the babies?

"In Canada one in three or one in four children being born is a Muslim. What does that do to the demographic shift of a Muslim population in 20 years' time?

Islamic Council of Victoria spokesman Waleed Aly said he was disappointed though not surprised by the Sunday Herald Sun's discoveries.

But he said extremist speech and literature was confined to only a couple of Melbourne groups.

"If I walked into (Omran's group) or (Hamza's centre) it wouldn't surprise me," he said.

Mr Aly said he believed Muslims were radicalised by "cult-like peer groups", not hate literature.

300 review... not mine

So we are going to see 300 on Sunday. It looks like a really enjoyable visual piece. It's written by Frank Miller so the writing won't be particulalry good but I'm sure the action will be there and it will be exciting.

So I looked at some reviews of 300 in preparation of seeing it. I made the mistake of reading AO Scott who I typically hate. He's kind of like a poor man's Aaron Sorkin which means he is functionally retarded. Somehow, however, he can seem normal at a cocktail party. Anyway, here is part of his review:

"They also hew to a warrior ethic of valor and freedom that makes them, despite their gleeful appetite for killing, the good guys in this tale. (It may be worth pointing out that unlike their mostly black and brown foes, the Spartans and their fellow Greeks are white.)"

Really? Is this worth pointing out? What's it saying except that this movie and the people behind it are racist, racist, racist and AO Scott is one of the good whities who will side with the browns and blacks against his fellow whites whenever he sees them being slaughtered... on film, of course. In real life he lives on some upper side of Manhattan where he can avoid most blacks and browns. And good for him. He is soft like a marshmallow in the noonday sun and the first MS-13 gang member who looks at him funny will scare years off his life... so he is best keeping his gates up and defending the blacks and browns (hereforth to be known as "blowns") from the belly of the beast.

I guess something not worth pointing out as far as AO is concerned is that Greeks are Greek and Persians are, well, Persian. This is a movie about a battle betwen Greeks and Persians. Exactly what should the Persians look like if not Persians? Would AO feel better if the Greeks had shaved heads, baggy jeans, and low-rider chariots?

So then I looked at Slate, one of the king outlets of navel-gazing, white self-hatred. Dana Stevens review is all racial politics and no movie review. Here's a bit:

"Here are just a few of the categories that are not-so-vaguely conflated with the "bad" (i.e., Persian) side in the movie: black people. Brown people. Disfigured people. Gay men (not gay in the buff, homoerotic Spartan fashion, but in the effeminate Persian style). Lesbians. Disfigured lesbians. Ten-foot-tall giants with filed teeth and lobster claws. Elephants and rhinos (filthy creatures both). The Persian commander, the god-king Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro) is a towering, bald club fag with facial piercings, kohl-rimmed eyes, and a disturbing predilection for making people kneel before him."

Nice writing, by the way, Dana... not gay in the homoerotic fashion? So gay in the heterosexual fashion? Or is that gay in the gay fashion? At any rate, why quibble with the details when the thoughts behind this review suck more than the prose. Which sucks.

Here's another gem from Dana:

"One of the few war movies I've seen in the past two decades that doesn't include at least some nod in the direction of antiwar sentiment"

This reminds me of that famous Pauline Kael comment about her amazement that Nixon won when no one she knew voted for him. So this movie has to include some pat on the head to Dana's opninion of temporal politics or it's lacking in some way? This is not movie review, this is a hack journalist who isn't good enough to write for the editorial page getting his licks in any old way (or is Dana a she? I dunno, I will guess Dana is a tranny). Pauline Kael was a movie critic too. It really is an intellectual ghetto nowadays.

So remember kids, when you see 300, think racism first and foremost!

And people wonder why the newspapers are disappearing. Faster, please.

How emo are you?

A chilling, hilarious story (recommendation: safe for work).

I forgot to say...

The wedding will be in the future.

Save the date.