CRIPES!!!! get offa my case, I'm updating already. Check out the front page for the links to all the new shizzle I just threw up here, I got da new shit all ova da place, new photos in wrestling, new t-shirt designs, new links, new logos, new digital imaging, hell you name it, I got it.

As for this section, well, all I have today is one new video that's funny as hell. God bless the media for being so.... fake and stupid, and God bless the two guys that ruin the illusion this "reporter" is trying to create.

Below, well below is a new political rant. You'll either love it or hate it, depending on whether or not you're an imbecile. Check ya later.

-------------------------------------

I'm often accused of being a little bit......harsh, self-righteous, extreme, and insulting when discussing/argueing politics. SOOOOOOO.... I decided to take a tip from the epitome of rational, calm debate, Ann Coulter, and write a little tip for my liberal leaning brethren called.... "How to talk to a Conservative."

It's actually quite simple. When dealing with those members of the self-proclaimed "faith based" world, using "known facts" as they are deemed on Redstate.org and such, will NEVER work. Why? Conservatives live in the "faith based" world, SO facts, studies, polls, evidence, reports, film footage, sworn statements, etc. ALL MEAN NOTHING. So this is how you "win" a political debate with a right-winger.

Ask questions.

Yep, the best way to "win" a debate, is instead of citing "facts" (you know how they hate those darn pesky things), just ask questions, and allow them to figure the things out for themselves. So let's get onto the main event, the questions. Next time your asshole brother in law tries telling you how Bush has done more for the American Economy, or some other Fox talking point, hit 'em up with one of these questions. I want to state that while loaded, I feel that all of these questions are fair. None of the questions are rhetorical. Some are for Republican voters, and some are questions I would LOVE to hear the press ask Bush, Cheney, Rove, Dobson, etc. You're all smart enough to figure out what questions are for who. I also want to state that, despite my parties inability to form a cohesive platform, I would be willing to answer any fair questions myself.

20 Questions for Republicans

1. If you are so against "judicial activism", why does it matter if a judge is liberal or conservative? Shouldn't they be neutral politically? Weren't 7 of the nine justices (pre-Roberts) appointed by Republican Presidents? How is it a "liberal court" then?

2. Wouldn't the repeal of "Roe v Wade" be judicial activism? I mean, isn't it a court repealing a standing decision in America? How about the court picking the Pres in 2000?

3. If you so strongly want a "Strict Constructionist", are you against women being allowed to vote? Howza bout blacks? Should we go back to segregated schools? Weren't those examples of "judicial activism" that differed from what the founding fathers intended, and even lived?

4. If Miers' nomination is being criticized for her not meeting the level of excellence required for the bench, then why not hold the same standard for the presidency?

5. If you get your way, and Roe v. Wade DOES get overturned, what is the penalty for a woman getting an abortion? Fines, Prison, Therapy? How much time/money should she be penalized? How about the doctor? Does he just lose his license, or does he get fined/jail time? How much jail time? I mean, since you feel SO strongly about this, I would assume that you've thought this all out....

6. How do you enforce the law? How will you know who got an abortion? Are you catching them in the act? Kicking in doors? Trusting them to be upfront? Most women would get abortions towards the beginning stages of the pregnancy, so they most likely wouldn't even show, so HOW do you ever catch anybody? And is it a federal crime, or a state/local one?

7. Are you willing to adopt the unwanted children that will be born? Are you willing to pay more in welfare taxes to support the children?

8.Why was Clinton perjuring himself important enough to impeach him, but when Rove and Libby do it (and I may have to repeal this question, depending on the end of this week's investigation outcome, to be fair) just Fitzgerald trying to "Criminalize politics"?

9.If you support the troops SO much, why aren't you more upset at the right's (and here it's largely Rove) demeaning of the service of McCain, Kerry, and Cleland?

10. How, and I want examples here, not freakin bumper sticker slogans, exactly does gay marriage threaten MY marriage?

11. If we knew where the WMD were in Iraq, as Powell showed diagrams of to the UN, where are they?

12. To Powell, were you lied to, or did you lie to the UN? There's no other options, because when you say "We know...." that's not bad intelligence, that means "We KNOW"

13. If Annan should step down as head of the UN because the oil for food scandal happened on his watch, and it looks like he knew about it and did nothing, but there's no CONCRETE proof yet, shouldn't Bush be held to the same standard and step down because of everything that's happened on his watch?

14. Why don't Cheney's stock options in Halliburton bother you?

15. When do we know we won the war on terror?

16. Without using the phrase, "Stay the course", what, exactly, is our current plan in Iraq? How do we know if we win? How do we know if it's time to leave?

17. Doesn't it bother you that Bin Laden is still out there?

18. Do you normally vote for coke heads that "cleaned up" their lives AT 40? 40? Do you think it's good to lower the standards THIS much for our President? What lesson do you think this teaches children?

19. Have you ever personally lied/exagerrated about sex? Have you ever lied/exagerrated about going to war?

20. After 2,000 dead American servicemen, 10,000 injured servicemen, Katrina, Enron, Jeff Gannon, Miers, 100,000 dead Iraqiis, seven minutes of "The Little Goat", record deficits, N.C.L.B., Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, trade deficits, Terri Schiavo, DUI, cocaine use, CPA losing $8 billion, Armstrong Williams, "Curveball" Chalibi, broken borders, Downing Street Memos, Project for a New American Century, and possibly Plame-Gate......... was it worth it?

So there you go. Ask away.

Odds are, all you'll accomplish is pissing someone off, but damn, ain't it fun?

Just two topics to discuss here today. First, let's talk about something I love, the Red Sox!!! Besides the incredible picture to the right, PROVING that the SOX rule all of MLB, check out my Digital Photography section for some shots I took at this weekend's Red Sox/Baltimore game at Camden Yard. Hell of a ballpark, AND the Sox swept the birds, BABY!

The other topic isn't a happy thing, but rather a bad thing. Instead of my saying what I think about Hurricane Katrina, and in particular various responses to it, I decided to just include four videos (courtesy of consumptionjunction.com) showing how different people reacted to it.

The videos do a great job at understanding our little country, it's leaders, it's press, and it's citizens. NO MATTER WHAT, as Americans, and hell, just as good ol' humans, we've gotta start looking out for our poor, elderly, and disabled.

Short update here. First up, to the right is a video of Andy Dick as President Bush's speech writer. Not sure what show it's from, but it's some funny shit. Seriously, WHO the fuck IS writing his stuff, or better yet, why do his handlers suck so bad at reigning in his moronic ad libs?

Now, I've got three images for ya. First, we've got two different nip slips, to add to the recent glut of celeb titties I've been showcasing lately. Right HERE we've got Francine from ECW giving the fans a little something extra while she receives a piledriver from Tommy Dreamer.

And HERE we've got a nip slip of little miss Daisy Duke, aka Jessica Simpson. NICE.

Thnaks to Banged Up for the images.

And HERE we've got another contender for worst tit job EVER!!!! Check out the fucking scars. Hon, either cover them up with make-up, or just plain ol' cover them up. Errrrg!

Finally, the banner below is a link to one of the best sights on the web for info about our current situation in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's a non-profit, non-partisan web site that mostly conatins letters form the troops over there now, both with good and bad things about the wars. It's also very enlightneing about what happens to these brave men and women when they return home to America, and have to readjust to "normal" life. Do yourself a favor, check out the site, hell, donate to them if you can. It's a damned good cause. Support the troops, not a political party.

I know it's been a while since I've added any political commentary here, but I just haven't had time. Between working on design work for T-Shirts, a kid's book, and logos for a construction company, well, I gots to get paid. BUT, I wanna make up for that, so let's play.....

CONNECT THE DOTS

------------------------------------------------------------------

So, instead of my ranting (at least TOO much), I'm just going to put some links, with LIMITED commentary, and well, I think you'll get my point.

Let's start waaaayyy back in the past. This all starts with one man, Leo Strauss . No, not the jeans guy. Leo Strauss was... the father of "Neo-Conservatism", which has some of it's basic teachings here . Also, amongst the teachings, is the theory of "The Noble Lie" , which justifies the misleading of the common people by the leaders of their society, for the good of the common people, to paraphrase the philosophy. Now, here's a partial list of student's of Strauss, or associates of Strauss.

...."Among their alumni are other Pentagon officials, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, the Chair of the National Defense Policy Board, Stephen Cambone, the Under Secretary of Intelligence, Elliot Abrams of the National Security Council and Adam Shulsky already mentioned. "

One last ...interesting connection here states....

"Around 1997, Wolfowitz and Perle who have known Chalabi, a fellow graduate of the University of Chicago, since 1985, through an introduction by their common mentor, Albert Wohlstetter, the former Trotskyite-turned-RAND Corporation Cold Warrior enlisted the help of Gen. Wayne Downing (ret.) and former CIA Director James Woolsey, to promote the overthrow of Saddam Hussein to be replaced by Chalabi! "

-------------------------------------------------------------------

NEXT, let's roll forward to the 1970's. And let's discuss the "B-Team" under the Ford Administration. This subject is heavily covered in the BBC documentary (unavailable in the US) called The Power Of Nightmares . Points of interest......

--"In 1972, President Richard Nixon returned from the Soviet Union with a treaty worked out by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, the beginning of a process Kissinger called "détente." On June 1, 1972, Nixon gave a speech in which he said, "Last Friday, in Moscow, we witnessed the beginning of the end of that era which began in 1945. With this step, we have enhanced the security of both nations. We have begun to reduce the level of fear, by reducing the causes of fear—for our two peoples, and for all peoples in the world." But Nixon left amid scandal and Ford came in, and Ford's Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld) and Chief of Staff (Dick Cheney) believed it was intolerable that Americans might no longer be bound by fear. Without fear, how could Americans be manipulated? "

--"And these two men - 1974 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Ford Chief of Staff Dick Cheney - did this by claiming that the Soviets had secret weapons of mass destruction that the president didn't know about, that the CIA didn't know about, that nobody but them knew about. And, they said, because of those weapons, the US must redirect billions of dollars away from domestic programs and instead give the money to defense contractors for whom these two men would one day work. "The Soviet Union has been busy," Defense Secretary Rumsfeld explained to America in 1976. "They’ve been busy in terms of their level of effort; they’ve been busy in terms of the actual weapons they ’ve been producing; they’ve been busy in terms of expanding production rates; they’ve been busy in terms of expanding their institutional capability to produce additional weapons at additional rates; they’ve been busy in terms of expanding their capability to increasingly improve the sophistication of those weapons. Year after year after year, they’ve been demonstrating that they have steadiness of purpose. They’re purposeful about what they’re doing." "

--"The CIA strongly disagreed, calling Rumsfeld's position a "complete fiction" and pointing out that the Soviet Union was disintegrating from within, could barely afford to feed their own people, and would collapse within a decade or two if simply left alone. "

--"But Rumsfeld and Cheney wanted Americans to believe there was something nefarious going on, something we should be very afraid of. To this end, they convinced President Ford to appoint a commission including their old friend Paul Wolfowitz to prove that the Soviets were up to no good. According to Curtis' BBC documentary, Wolfowitz's group, known as "Team B," came to the conclusion that the Soviets had developed several terrifying new weapons of mass destruction, featuring a nuclear-armed submarine fleet that used a sonar system that didn't depend on sound and was, thus, undetectable with our current technology. " (emphasis mine)

--"" Dr ANNE CAHN, Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 1977-80: They couldn't say that the Soviets had acoustic means of picking up American submarines, because they couldn't find it. So they said, well maybe they have a non-acoustic means of making our submarine fleet vulnerable. But there was no evidence that they had a non-acoustic system. They’re saying, 'we can’t find evidence that they’re doing it the way that everyone thinks they’re doing it, so they must be doing it a different way. We don’t know what that different way is, but they must be doing it.'

"INTERVIEWER (off-camera): Even though there was no evidence.

"CAHN: Even though there was no evidence.

"INTERVIEWER: So they’re saying there, that the fact that the weapon doesn’t exist…

"CAHN: Doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. It just means that we haven’t found it."

The moderator of the BBC documentary then notes: " What Team B accused the CIA of missing was a hidden and sinister reality in the Soviet Union. Not only were there many secret weapons the CIA hadn’t found, but they were wrong about many of those they could observe, such as the Soviet air defenses. The CIA were convinced that these were in a state of collapse, reflecting the growing economic chaos in the Soviet Union. Team B said that this was actually a cunning deception by the Soviet régime. The air-defense system worked perfectly. But the only evidence they produced to prove this was the official Soviet training manual, which proudly asserted that their air-defense system was fully integrated and functioned flawlessly. The CIA accused Team B of moving into a fantasy world."

Nonetheless, as Melvin Goodman, head of the CIA's Office of Soviet Affairs, 1976-87, noted in the BBC documentary,

" Rumsfeld won that very intense, intense political battle that was waged in Washington in 1975 and 1976. Now, as part of that battle, Rumsfeld and others, people such as Paul Wolfowitz, wanted to get into the CIA. And their mission was to create a much more severe view of the Soviet Union, Soviet intentions, Soviet views about fighting and winning a nuclear war." Although Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld's assertions of powerful new Soviet WMDs were unproven - they said the lack of proof proved that undetectable weapons existed - they nonetheless used their charges to push for dramatic escalations in military spending to selected defense contractors, a process that continued through the Reagan administration.

But, trillions of dollars and years later, it was proven that they had been wrong all along, and the CIA had been right. Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Wolfowitz lied to America in the 1970s about Soviet WMDs.

Not only do we now know that the Soviets didn't have any new and impressive WMDs, but we also now know that they were, in fact, decaying from within, ripe for collapse any time, regardless of what the US did - just as the CIA (and anybody who visited Soviet states - as I had - during that time could easily predict). The Soviet economic and political system wasn't working, and their military was disintegrating.

As arms-control expert Cahn noted in the documentary of those 1970s claims by Wolfowitz, Cheney, and Rumsfeld: "I would say that all of it was fantasy. I mean, they looked at radars out in Krasnoyarsk and said, 'This is a laser beam weapon,' when in fact it was nothing of the sort. ... And if you go through most of Team B’s specific allegations about weapons systems, and you just examine them one by one, they were all wrong."

"INTERVIEWER: All of them?

"CAHN: All of them.

"INTERVIEWER: Nothing true?

"CAHN: I don’t believe anything in [Wolfowitz's 1977] Team B was really true." "

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOW, let's move on to The Project For A New American Century, founded in 1997 . What's the PNAC? Well, their own site states...."The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle. "

Their site also claims....."The unavoidable reality is that the exercise of American power is key to maintaining what peace and order there is in the world today. Imagine a world in which the U.S. didn’t exercise this power. Who would handle a nuclear-armed North Korea? Who would prevent the one-party state of China from acting on its pledge to gather democratic Taiwan into its fold? Who would be left to hunt down Islamic terrorists increasingly interested in getting their hands on weapons of mass destruction? Who could have contained, let alone defeated, a tyrant like Hussein, preventing him from becoming the dominant power in the Middle East? Who can prevent the Balkans from slipping back into chaos? Who is going to confront regimes like those of Iran, Syria and Libya as they rush to get their own weapons of mass destruction?"

But WHO is a part of this "think-tank"?

Elliott Abrams / Gary Bauer / William J. Bennett / Jeb Bush / Dick Cheney / Eliot A. Cohen / Midge Decter / Paula Dobriansky / Steve Forbes / Aaron Friedberg / Francis Fukuyama / Frank Gaffney / Fred C. Ikle / Donald Kagan / Zalmay Khalilzad / I. Lewis Libby / Norman Podhoretz / Dan Quayle / Peter W. Rodman / Stephen P. Rosen / Henry S. Rowen / Donald Rumsfeld / Vin Weber / George Weigel / Paul Wolfowitz---(emphasis mine)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, were up to modern day. What's up now? Howza 'bout the Downing Street Memo , which, though not discussed in America, includes statements like....

" But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy"

"Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD."

"The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record."

SO, what does this all mean?

Well, you can see what I'm getting at, just connect the dots. Oh yeah, if you question the authenticity of these linked documents, or their sources, feel free to research them yourselves.