It is a time of freedom and fear, of Gaia and of borders, of many paths and the widening of a universal toll road, emptying country and swelling cities, of the public bought into privacy and the privacy of the public sold into invisible data banks and knowing algorithms. It is the time of the warrior's peace and the miser's charity, when the planting of a seed is an act of conscientious objection.
These are the times when maps fade and direction is lost. Forwards is backwards now, so we glance sideways at the strange lands through which we are all passing, knowing for certain only that our destination has disappeared. We are unready to meet these times, but we proceed nonetheless, adapting as we wander, reshaping the Earth with every tread.
Behind us we have left the old times, the standard times, the high times. Welcome to the irregular times.
Why Matthew Cook Will Not Have to Eat His Hat
Saturday, October 09, 2004
Over one year ago, one of our writers, Matthew Cook, decided to lead the effort in the creation of a gigantic list of reasons that Americans should vote to boot Bush on Election Day 2004. Matthew promised that if the people at Irregular Times could not assemble 2,004 reasons to boot Bush by Election Day this year, he would eat his hat - literally.
It looks like Matthew Cook will not have to eat his hat, for, as of this morning, Irregular Times has indeed completed its historic list of 2,004 reasons to boot Bush. This list is in the process of going to the printers as a book that's available as a definitive resource for anti-Bush activists. The book is expected to be available by the beginning of next week, and should be an especially good gift for any undecided voters who are still hiding out in the shadows at this late date.
We congratulate Matthew Cook on the hat not eaten.
The Republicans don't have anything close to this list, of course. History is already against Bush in this election - now we just have to hope that Americans are too smart to repeat that history.
Warning from the Surgeon General
WARNING: The Surgeon General has determined that asking George W. Bush a question in a debate may result in him jumping down your throat, causing severe backlash. Symptoms include Mr. Bush blinking, shifting his jaw, yelling, badgering, interrupting, hectoring, headbobbing and charging the questioner. Medical experts advise voting Bush out of office, and into a more relaxing environment, in November 2004.
Republican Radicals Dominate: Four Examples
Americans are starting to take note: Under George W. Bush, the Republican Party has become more and more extreme. Here are four examples that illustrate the trend:
- The Bush Administration does some pretty disgusting stuff, but nothing was more disgusting than Bush's new rule for factory farms that allows corporate farmers to take huge mountains of untreated animal shit and dump them wherever they want to, even if the shit leaks into streams or rivers that feed into human water supplies. You think that's water you're drinking? No, that's a load of bull shit.
- Republican Congressman Jim DeMint has declared that he favors banning gays from working as school teachers. Oh, but that's not all! Mr. DeMint also says that single mothers out to be forbidden from working as school teachers too. This guy represents the new Republican Party - the party of George W. Bush.
- Kansas Republican congressional candidate Kris Kobach is running a campaign based on the support of a right-wing organization that seeks to implement Nazi-style eugenics programs right here in the United States. Kobach also takes funds from an extremist pro-gun activist who has given speeches to representatives of the Aryan Nation. George W. Bush has refused to rebuke or in any other way distance himself from Kris Kobach. Instead, the Bush Administration is pushing for Kobach's victory.
- Republican commentator Ann Coulter has told Fox News viewers that they should stop trying to talk to liberals and attack them with baseball bats instead.
What's At Stake: Think Justice Antonin Scalia
Friday, October 08, 2004
We're nearing the finish line in our marathon effort to list 2,004 separate reasons to boot Bush on Election Day. As of this moment, we have assembled 1,968 reasons - giving us just 36 to go. If tonight's debate is anything like the last meeting between Bush and Kerry, we expect that the list will be all wrapped up by morning.
Reason #1,968 to Boot Bush
In 2004, the Supreme Court had to force the Bush Administration to allow prisoners held and tortured at the American base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to merely petition the United States judicial system to consider whether their imprisonment is justified according to American law. As a result, the Bush Administration was forced to release several prisoners when it became clear that there was no real evidence that they were guilty of any crimes.
Despicably, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote an opinion insisting that the Bush Administration has the right to withhold the reach of American laws from its prisoners if it wants to. If just two more justices had voted with Justice Scalia, then there would be no one to stop the Bush Administration from imprisoning and torturing anyone it wanted, without any judicial supervision. With just two more votes, the totalitarian vision of Justice Scalia and George W. Bush would have won out. In the next four years, it is expected that two Supreme Court Justices at a minimum will resign and will have their vacancies filled. If George W. Bush wins re-election, he'll have the chance to put two more extremist judges like Justice Scalia on the Supreme Court bench - and America will change forever.
Bush: War was necessary to end "gaming"!
Thursday, October 07, 2004
So here's the latest in Bush's long string of revised versions of why America just plain had to go to war:
Bush says that if we didn't preemptively invade and occupy Iraq, the government of Iraq would have kept on "gaming" the system of economic sanctions that had effectively disarmed Iraq.
Well, this changes everything. I mean, gosh, if Bush hadn't had the strength to stop Iraq from "gaming", then pretty soon, the entire Middle East would have been playing games, and then Europe! Why, rumor has it that Saddam Hussein played a game of checkers with an Al Quaida agent!
A war to confront a gathering storm of games - what a noble quest!
Yes, that certainly justifies the deaths of a thousand Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis.
We all know that evildoers love to play Monopoly. It's time for a game to end all games!
Armchair Warriors: Put Up Or Shut Up
It comes down to this: Hundreds of thousands of armchair warriors are pushing America's soldiers to go over to Iraq and fight in a war is based upon a lie.
They sit in their easy chairs and sputter about supporting our troops, but why aren't they among the troops?
They put ribbon magnets reading "Freedom isn't Free" on their cars, but why aren't they willing to pay the price?
On television, wishy washy conservatives like Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity push other people to go fight, and call anyone who opposes the war a coward. However, even though they are of able body, they won't go and fight in the war themselves. They're making too much money producing pro-war propaganda, and sipping cappucinos in their dressing rooms.
When it comes down to the real test of courage, these armchair warriors fail miserably, and give nothing but excuses. They demand that soldiers die in their war, but refuse to go themselves. They ask others to die so that they can sit on the couch and eat potato chips.
It's time for Americans to be consistent. If you say you support the war, then go to war. Do it today, if you really mean business. Sign up with the military. If the military won't take you, buy a one-way plane ticket to Baghdad, buy a rifle there and start your own pro-occupation American militia. The insurgents don't let little things like medical deferments get in their way.
If you're not willing to make the sacrifice yourself, then please stop asking other Americans to do the dirty work for you. If the war isn't important enough for you yourself to fight and die in, then you ought to oppose the war with every ounce of effort contained in your body.
Put up or shut up goes for opponents of the war too. You cannot just oppose it passively by not signing up with the military. If you oppose the war, then you need to be active in doing so. You need to sacrifice as much as you can so that the reckless sacrifice of human lives over in Iraq comes to an end.
Americans stand at a crossroads. They must either join the fight or work to end the fight. Which road will you take?
How Soon Will George W. Bush Ask DeLay to Step Down?
Tom DeLay, the leader of the Republicans in the House of Representatives, was found this week to be guilty of two serious charges. First, he was found to have attempted to bribe another member of Congress in order to change that representative's vote. Second, DeLay was found guilty of using the power of the Department of Homeland Security to intervene in a dispute with the Democratic Party in Texas, attempting to get law enforcement agents to illegally detain elected Democratic officials.
Tom DeLay has been caught in the worst kinds of corruption, and yet, so far, George W. Bush has remained silent. The truth is that Tom DeLay has risen to lead the Republicans in the House of Representatives in large part because he is an old Texas ally of George W. Bush. So, Bush shares in the responsibility for DeLay's corruption - unless Bush chooses to renounce that responsibility.
Bush could clear himself of all connection to Tom DeLay's corruption, if he would just call upon Tom DeLay to step down from his position as leader of the House Republicans. With Bush's position as national leader of the Republican Party, such a request could not be withstood.
Bush has, to this point, refused to call upon Tom DeLay to take responsibility for his misdeeds. Bush has refused to call for Tom DeLay's resignation, either as Majority Leader, or as a member of the House of Representatives.
How long will it take for Bush to ask Tom DeLay to resign? Well, we don't know, but we're interested in your opinion. That's why we've started a new poll on our discussion boards. Get on over to the Irregular Forum, take the poll, and join the discussion about what George W. Bush ought to do, and what he's probably going to do about the problem of Tom DeLay.
Dick Cheney Lied About His Senate Record
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
During last night's Vice Presidential Debate, Dick Cheney tried to puff up his apparent responsibility by asserting that "in my capacity as Vice President, I am the President of the Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session."
Well, now, it turns out that Cheney was fibbing about this, too. A search of the Congressional Record by the intrepid folks at Daily Kos turned up that of all the Tuesdays the Congress was in session during the years from 2001-2004, Cheney was in the Senate as presiding officer just twice.
Why does Cheney lie about this kind of stuff when he knows he'll be found out? Is it habitual? Does he need a therapist's help?
Maybe we should help Mr. Cheney get some much needed rest, for the sake of his mental health.
Edwards and Cheney meet - AGAIN
During the Vice Presidential debate last night, Dick Cheney had the gall to claim that John Edwards was so absent from Washington, DC that the night of the Vice Presidential debate was the first time he had ever met Edwards.
Of course, it turns out that Cheney was lying. There are at least two meetings on film: Cheney and Edwards sat down together for breakfast in February 2001, and came together to welcome Elizabeth Dole to the Senate in 2003. Mind you, these are only the meetings that are on film.
If Cheney's going to lie about something like this, when can you trust him to tell the truth?
We shouldn't be surprised that Dick Cheney is willing to stoop to this kind of bald-faced lie. After all, this is the same guy who voted against helping Meals on Wheels assistance for elderly Americas, against Head Start preschool education for kids, against a holiday to celebrate the work of Martin Luther King Jr., and against a congressional resolution urging South Africa's apartheid regime to release Nelson Mandela from prison.
Reason 1,904 to Boot Bush
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
We're in the final stretch of our marathon effort to compile 2,004 reasons to boot Bush by Election Day. With less than one month to go, we reached reason 1,904 to go - that's just 100 left.
Reason 1,904 to Boot Bush:
Do it for the Mom of Casey Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq and wants to know why.
She says, "His Sergeant said 'Sheehan, you don"t have to go,' cause my son was a mechanic. He was a Humvee mechanic. And Casey said, 'Where my chief goes, I go.' And he knew what had to be done. He died in his best friend"s arms in Iraq.
I imagined it would hurt if one of my kids was killed, but I never thought it would hurt this bad – especially someone so honest and brave as Casey, my son.
When you haven"t been honest with us, when you and your advisors rushed us into this war, how do you think we felt when we heard the Senate report that said there was no link between Iraq and 9-11?"
Someone Tell Bush It's Not All About Him
When George W. Bush was asked whether the war in Iraq was worth the cost in lives, Bush's response centered around meeting the wife of a soldier who had been killed in action, and finding out that "it's hard work to try to love her as best as I can." He put it more generally that "the hardest part of the job is to know that I committed the troops in harm's way and then do the best I can to provide comfort for the loved ones who lost a son or a daughter or a husband or wife."
Where's the pain, the tragedy, the struggle in Bush's story? It's with the hard, hard work Bush occasionally puts in consoling relatives of people who have been killed.
Will someone tell this self-centered buffoon that it's not all about him?
(Source: Transcript of Bush-Kerry Debate, September 30 2004)
Mr. Rumsfeld - Which Truth is the Truth?
That old hawk, Donald Rumsfeld, has a habit of snorting and snuffing at his press conferences, in feigned exasperation, and asking why people can't just understand the truth that's staring them right in the face. I mean, geez, c'mon!
So, Mr. Rumsfeld, geez, c'mon! Is there a link between Iraq and Al Quaida or isn't there?
For years, Donald Rumsfeld has suggested that Iraq and Al Quaida were in cohoots. Then, yesterday, when pressed by reporters, Rumsfeld admitted that he had never been given much reason to believe such a thing. "I have never seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two," he said.
Today, Rumsfeld withdrew his comments. Rumsfeld now says that the first truth that he told was the truth, and that the second truth that he told was not true, and that what he's saying now about the second truth not being the truth is the truth.
We're just asking for one more clarification: If Donald Rumsfeld was not telling the truth when he said that he had never seen any good evidence of a link between Iraq and Al Quaida, then why did he say it?
C'mon and give us the answer, Mr. Rumsfeld. I'm sure we're just being really dense for not seeing the plain and obvious truth that's staring us right in the face.
The kind of Democrat we can do without
Monday, October 04, 2004
Another sign that Southern Democrats are in an existential crisis:
Harold Ford Jr., who represents Memphis, Tennessee in the United States House of Representatives, used to like to portray himself as a supporter of civil rights for all Americans, regardless of sexuality, has suddenly changed his mind.
Caving in to pressure from fundamentalist religious leaders in Memphis, Harold Ford Jr. voted for an amendment to the United States Constitution that would have criminalized same-sex marriage. In doing so, Harold Ford Jr. betrayed the Democratic Party itself, helping to give George W. Bush an election issue against John Kerry.
We shouldn't be surprised, however. In the past, Harold Ford Jr. has consistently shown himself to be the kind of very conservative Democrat who is willing to sell out to Republican causes whenever it suits his political ambitions. Ford supported Bush's invasion of Iraq. Ford supported Bush's faith-based initiative madness. Ford tried to derail the election of progressive Nancy Pelosi as minority leader of the House of Representatives.
Time and time again, Harold Ford Jr. has urged Democrats to collaborate with George W. Bush, for the sake of preserving political power. We think that Congressman Ford has got it backwards. We believe that political power comes from standing up for what's right.
The word is that Harold Ford Jr. plans on running for the U.S. Senate soon, and is even considering a campaign to become President of the United States. If he does so, we sincerely hope that he considers doing so as a Republican. Harold Ford Jr. is the kind of turncoat Democrat that we can do without.
For our readers from Memphis and West Tennessee, we're providing a link to the web site of Jim Maynard, a true progressive who is challenging Harold Ford Jr. as a write-in candidate. We also have created a bumper sticker, button, magnet, t-shirt and poster in order to promote Jim Maynard's campaign.
We applaud Maynard's courage in challenging a morally corrupt, yet extrememly powerful politician like Harold Ford Jr. We know that it's an uphill battle for you, Jim, but we're hopeful that your struggle, even if it does not result in electoral victory, will give a profound shock to the increasingly conservative Democrats of Memphis, Tennessee.
Bush says that Kerry's plan proves that Kerry has no plan
George W. Bush is clearly struggling to come up with some kind of statement that will erase the memory of his own scowls and blinking stammers from the minds of voters. Bush's latest attempt: To claim that John Kerry has no plan for the war in Iraq.
"He has no plan," Bush told a crowd of his supporters today. Then Bush went on to criticize one part of Kerry's plan for dealing with Iraq, asking for help from the international community, saying that, "I can imagine him walking in to the leaders of the world saying, 'We need your help."
Then, Bush complained about another part of Kerry's plan, making the strange claim that, "A summit won't solve the problem."
So then, here's a quick summary of Bush's perception of John Kerry's plan for Iraq:
1. John Kerry doesn't have a plan for dealing with Iraq.
2. Part of John Kerry's plan for dealing with Iraq is to work with other world leaders to bring more support into Iraq, but that's a bad idea.
3. Another part of John Kerry's plan for dealing with Iraq is to hold a summit with world and regional leader, but that's a bad idea too.
4. The Bush plan of not asking for help, while allies pull their troops out and leave the Americans holding the bag in Iraq, is a much better than John Kerry's plan for dealing with Iraq.
5. John Kerry doesn't have a plan for dealing with Iraq.
The really important question is this: If George W. Bush wins the election, does anyone in his administration have a plan for re-introducing him to reality?
Bush: Losing Hearts and Minds Across the Globe
Of course, Americans should vote as they see fit. But it is instructive to note how citizens of other nations around the world would vote if they had the choice. Of thirty-three nations surveyed recently, in only one nation did a majority of citizens say they wished for Bush to be re-elected, and in only two other nations were there more citizens who said they wanted Bush to be re-elected than citizens who said they wanted Kerry to be elected. In thirty countries, more citizens wanted Kerry to be elected president, and the margin of Kerry's favor was, on average, a staggering 26%.
Now, it could be the the previous result came from only surveying treacherous nations of evildoers. So let's look at the United States' traditional allies. Even among the United States' traditional allies (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and the United Kingdom), citizens from nation to nation uniformly supported Kerry by margins of 20% to 67%. We can succumb to xenophobia and dismiss this wave of judgment as coming from useless outsiders, or we can listen to what they're trying to tell us.
Let's try to be most favorable to Bush and move from those nations whose old alliances with America Bush has undermined to a consideration of Bush's "New Europe," the small Eastern European nations with whom Bush has tried to forge new alliances. Surveys were taken in three such nations: Poland, Sweden and the Czech Republic. In only one, Poland, was Bush preferred over Kerry -- and only by a 5% margin. In the other two nations, Kerry was preferred by margins of 24% (in the Czech Republic) and 48% (in Sweden). Bush has globally lost the hearts and minds of even the few nations he's reached out towards.
(Source: Program on International Policy Attitudes September 8, 2004)
Conservative Newspaper Tries to Diminish Iraqi Deaths
This morning, we learn of yet another devastating bomb going off in Iraq - the country that George W. Bush says is doing just great under our occupation.
The problem is, just how many Iraqis were killed by the bomb?
Most newspapers are reporting that 21 people were killed, with more than 100 wounded.
Not the Washington Times, the ultra-conservative newspaper run by cult leader Reverend Moon. The Washington Times is pulling for George W. Bush, so they're downplaying the deaths, saying that just 8 people were killed and only 30 were wounded.
So, what are the people at the Washington Times thinking? Are we supposed to believe that it's okay for just 8 Iraqis to die instead of 21?
We deserve the full truth, not some pro-war watered down version of it from conservative news hacks.
Fox News Caught in Metrosexual Lie
Mother Davis checks her own nails as she tells the following true story:
Conservatives have been giving CBS a hard time for accepting fake documents describing George W. Bush's poor service with the National Guard. CBS deserves some criticism, of course, but what conservatives hate to mention is that their own favorite news network, Fox News, tells outright lies all the time.
In just the latest example, Fox News was caught making up a story about presidential candidate John Kerry. In the hours after Kerry's triumph over George W. Bush in the first debate of the season, the Fox News political team was pretty angry, so their chief political correspondent, Carl Cameron, wrote a story criticizing Kerry.
Cameron's story was about how John Kerry had declared himself a "metrosexual" and fawned over his own manicure. The only problem with the story is that it was completely false, having come from nowhere but Cameron's own mind. In short, Fox News made it all up, and then told its viewers that it was very true.
Making up "news" stories is bad enough, but what's particularly despicable is the form that Fox News's deception took. Because the Fox News political team could not find any substance upon which to criticize John Kerry, they chose to appeal to one of Americans' worst prejudices: Anti-gay bigotry.
Our own writer, J. Clifford Cook, describes the Fox News fake article as "an underhanded suggestion that John Kerry is gay. You see, Fox News reporters know that their audience is not culturally informed enough to realize that metrosexuals are for the most part very heterosexual. That, and the references to John Kerry's supposed manicure, were supposed to make Kerry look like the Republican's worst nightmare: A powerful poof."
Checking her own nails, and there's not a damn thing wrong with that,
George W. Bush calls soldiers disposable "assets"
Sunday, October 03, 2004
In his first debate with Senator John Kerry, George W. Bush insisted that his wars have been justified and well-planned, and promised to do more of what he's done in Iraq and Afghanistan. Bush justified his sacrifice of over over one thousand American lives by saying, that the government must follow his approach to war, and "use every asset at our disposal". For referring to soldiers as assets that he is free to dispose of as he sees fit, George W. Bush ought to be impeached, and sentenced to one month of house arrest in the homes of the families of the soldiers who have died as assets at his disposal.
Republican Mobs Threaten to Hang Michael Moore
Are you still an undecided voter, desperately looking for some good reason to vote for one presidential candidate instead of the other?
Well, then - how about Republican mobs threatening to lynch activists who dare to challenge George W. Bush's version of the truth? Such mobs are starting to form all across America, in a last-ditch desperate attempt to win the presidential election through physical intimidation. One incident occurred at an event held by progressive activist Michael Moore in Syracuse, New York. An angry mob of 30 Republicans arrived on the scene, carrying a display that threatened to take Michael Moore, put a noose around his neck and hang him in revenge for Moore's documentary Fahrenheit 9-11, which describes the Bush Administration's disastrous record of foreign policy blunders.
You don't find mobs of Democrats threatening to kill Bush. No, Democrats only ask their fellow citizens to vote John Kerry. The difference between Bush's supporters and John Kerry's supporters comes down to this: Republican mob violence vs. Democratic nonviolent activism. The choice between the two parties has never been more clear.
My favorite reason to vote for Bush
Someone on our message boards recently asked people to name what their favorite reason to vote for George W. Bush is. Well, here's mine:
Bush and the Republicans favor an amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America that would make it illegal to burn or otherwise "desecrate" the America flag.
You see, for those of you who don't live in the United States, our American society is currently nearly falling apart because of marauding gangs of people roaming the streets burning and otherwise defiling American flags. Most Americans can't even leave their homes because of the crisis, and have taken to eating their own shag carpeting out of desperation.
No one feels safe! Please won't someone save my baby boy from these flag burnings! We need a hero to save us from those villainous Democrats who refuse to allow George W. Bush to save us!
Return to the Irregular Times Main Page
Read our Blog Archives