Oh Yeah...You Mean THAT "Secret, Underground Nuclear Fuel Facility"

President Obama, Prime Minister Gordon Brown, and President Sarkozy are dropping a bombshell (pun intended!) at the G20 summit today...well not really that surprising considering Iran's track record. From the NY Times:

President Obama and the leaders of Britain and France will accuse Iran Friday of building a secret underground plant to manufacture nuclear fuel, saying it has hidden the covert operation from international weapons inspectors for years, according to senior administration officials.

The revelation, which the three leaders will make before the opening of the Group of 20 economic summit here, appears bound to add urgency to the diplomatic confrontation with Iran over its suspected ambitions to build a nuclear weapons capability. Mr. Obama, along with Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Britain and President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, will demand that the country allow the International Atomic Energy Agency to conduct an immediate inspection of the facility, which is said to be 100 miles southwest of Tehran.

That's certainly one way to approach diplomacy, and a much more effective one that inviting Iranian officials over for hot dogs.

Taliban Advance on Islamabad, Nuclear Facilities

Oh Fuck

Did you think that Pakistan's government negotiating a deal with the Taliban to allow for Sharia law in exchange for "peace" in the Swat Valley was a good idea? Me neither. Despite the government telling the international media that all is well, Al-Jazeera English has footage of Buner being occupied by the Taliban (southeast of Swat and about 100km from Islamabad, map is here):

More troubling news from The Long War Journal is that the Taliban are continuing their march onward to Islamabad and areas which have nuclear facilities:

The Taliban advance on Mansehra and Haripur takes place at the same time they are moving on the districts of Swabi, Mardan, and Malakand. The takeover of these five districts would essentially cement the Taliban's control of the province.

The Taliban takeover of Haripur would put the Taliban on the doorstep of Islamabad and would also put two major nuclear facilities at risk.

Haripur borders the Margala Hills, a region in the Islamabad Capital Territory. Haripur also borders the Punjab districts of Attock and Rawalpindi.

Attock hosts two major nuclear facilities in Pakistan: the Wah Cantonment Ordnance Complex and the Kamra (Minhas) Airbase. The Wah Cantonment Ordnance Complex host three sites where nuclear weapons and components are stored and assembled and aircraft and missiles are modified for use in nuclear attacks. The nearby Kamra Airbase is thought to host attack aircraft capable of delivering nuclear weapons.

Pakistan's military has been dispatched after some justifiable hand-wringing by SECSTATE Hillary Clinton. But, seeing how Pakistan's military advances against the Taliban have a history of being a dog-and-pony show to get more aid from us, it might be time to start shitting your pants.

CNN Uses Graphic of Heavy-Caliber Machine Gun To Discuss "Assault Weapons Ban"

Cache Find in Mexico That an Assault Weapons Ban Would Have Little Effect On

Obama's trip to Mexico has ignited debate about how to curb drug cartel violence. Along with tanks and nuclear warheads, the above pictured weaponry is not legally allowed to be possessed by your average U.S. citizen. However, it was the featured graphic on an article discussing the pros and cons of Obama reinstituting the Assault Weapons Ban to halt trafficking South of the Border. It goes to show how we're failing to address the root problems of the violence in Mexico. From CNN:

Obama still supports reinstating the ban, as he did during the presidential campaign, but there are no plans to reintroduce it anytime soon, according to an administration official. Obama thinks more can be done to stop the illegal flow of weapons to Mexico within existing laws, the official said, noting that the president has taken steps to deploy more law enforcement to curb the illegal flows of drugs, weapons and cash in both directions across the border.

The Mexican drug cartels are often utilizing heavy weaponry that is only available to the military, and only about 17% of weapons seized in Mexico are being traced back to the states, but President Calderon of Mexico has been on a media blitz on American TV trying to drum up support for an Assault Weapons Ban in America. Certainly, we should take measures to assist Mexico in their war against the cartel thugs, but seeing how an AWB would have an effect on the violence is unclear. Mostly because the cartels could get and have gotten their weapons elsewhere and bringing weapons from the U.S. to Mexico is already illegal. Why not just enforce that law? The fact that the media continues to saturate this debate with little knowledge of already existing restrictions on firearms makes things more frustrating.

Also, another piece of disinformation is the DEA saying that the higher the bodycount in Mexico, the more successful the Drug War is being conducted. From NY Daily News:

The body count shows that Calderon's crackdown is "shrinking" the drug trade, and doesn't mean Mexico is becoming a failed state, another official said.

"It's not the harbinger of imminent failure, it's the signpost of success," said DEA intelligence chief Tony Placido.

Weird. If the purpose of the drug war is to protect people from self-destructive behavior, why is rampant cartel violence from people using corruption and murder to get an edge on the black-market beneficial to society? Obama doesn't strike me as a total numbskull on foreign policy, perhaps he'll finally realize that it's best to throw in the towel on the utopian promise of a drug-free America.

Shocker: Iranian Thugocracy Ain't Chomping on Obama's Carrot

Besides throwing the Special Olympics under the short bus yesterday, Obama made a pretty bold soft power move by issuing a video addressing the Iranian people and its leadership on the occasion of Nowruz (Persian New Year). Not a terrible idea, since not exercising all diplomatic options prior to conflict would be madness. However, it unsurprisingly was met with disdain by Iran's leadership. FOX News has a little blurb about Iran saying "neigh", and using the power of teh google news aggregator, I was able to dig up this FARS News Agency (one of Iran's propaganda mills) article:

The new US administration needed a "fundamental change in attitude", he said. But Iran would "not show its back" to Obama if the US put its words into practice.

"By fundamentally changing its behavior, America can offer us a friendly hand. So far what we have received have been unfriendly fists. Unlimited sanctions which still continue and have been renewed by the United States are wrong and need to be reviewed," he said...
...But Iranian memories go back much further, to the 1953 CIA-backed coup that overthrew the nationalist prime minister Mossadegh, and decades of American support for the shah. As Obama pointed out, with presidential understatement, it would not be easy to overcome "the old divisions".

Javanfekr also singled out US backing for Israel, Iran's arch-enemy and currently the only nuclear power in the Middle East.

You're pretty standard Iranian fanfare about our support of Israel and past involvement with the Shah. Of course, nothing from Iran about their aggression of the last 3 decades from kidnapped diplomats to flying drones above neighboring countries to undermine regional security. However, it seems like the video was a clever way to reach out to the Iranian people ahead of their elections, and the vid is getting some serious attention on the Middle Eastern satellite stations.

The Persians are smart enough to have good taste in music, so perhaps they'll realize that all the ridiculous conspiracy theories about the West attempting to assassinate Ahmadinejad with airport X-rays is simply state-issued propaganda to distract the citizenry. Also, observational evidence suggests that Iranians don't have some deep-seated hatred towards America and in fact have some affinity for Western culture. Fundamentalist theocracies will inevitably collapse during an information age, since control of media by the state becomes less and less feasible. Perhaps the President was just trying to hasten the process.

Politics Ain't What It Used To Be: The Baffling Partisan Rhetoric of the Bailout Era

The Fact That I Share the Same Sentiment as Code Pink is Further Complicating Matters

Goddamn. Remember a couple years ago when all everyone talked about was Iraq? The left would say something about the surge was going to flop and Cheney was a dick, and the right would retort with cries of "defeatism" and that they didn't support the troops. Man, political discourse was so much easier in those days.

As the cool heads at The Moderate Voice have already noted, the TARP bailout in response to the economic crisis back in September 2008 and it's political fallout (this week, it's AIG bonuses in the spotlight) have woven the most convoluted mess of punditry we've been privy too in a long time. Talking points are altered on a daily basis, people largely responsible for the mess are trying to save their own asses by whipping up populist rhetoric, and the President is trying to "take the proverbial heat" just to squash this wretched debate.

So here's a bit of half-assed pundit deconstruction on where we are at as of 19 March 2009 (likely to change tomorrow...if not later this evening):

President Obama: While acknowledging that these bailouts were necessary, he's trying to pull the old Clintonesque "I Feel Your Pain" bit by acknowledging popular sentiment that the AIG bonuses were appalling for fear that he has an angry populist uprising amongst Americans. I'm sure he hopes this whole outrage gets swept under the rug quickly and the media will revert back to talking about the status of his White House blackberry.

Congress/Senate: Scrambling around like buffoons (both sides of the aisle) and getting all preachy about how awful these AIG bonuses are to save their careers on the public teat. The irony seems to be lost on them that they were the body that dumped all the taxpayer dollars into these floundering companies with very little accountability, and that many of these same congressmen/senators were at least partially responsible for this whole economic fiasco in the first damn place.

Fox News: They seem to be trying to blame the goons in Washington D.C. for this mess as seen by Shep Smith's angry rant yesterday and BillO going nuclear on incompetent legislator Barney Frank (D-MA) a few months back. Personalities like Neil Cavuto try to explain why the government dishing out billions of free money might have negative long-term ramifications, but breaking stories about AIG execs going to tanning salons strike the anger chord with more Americans and get more ratings.

CNN/MSNBC: Also lots of stories about suits flying off to corporate junkets in the Bahamas, and CNN was responsible in catching Senator Dodd in an embarrassing (criminal?) lie about who authored the amendment to allow for the AIG bonuses. The cable news outlets have been relentlessly pummeling anyone in Wall Street or DC who might be responsible for this economic mess to whip up ratings, and we appreciate it! My .02 is that the big cable news networks have done a good job documenting this saga for your average person sans MBA.

Dead Tree Media: Providing a lot of cover for the Obama administration and Wall Street by not looking deeper into the shady ties between Wall Street and Washington. For instance, why are hobbyist bloggers the ones sounding the bell about AIG campaign contributions? I suppose the only exception would be the Wall Street Journal, which has tried to investigate, albeit at a more educated (ergo boring) level than the cable news stations. However, the print media still thinks publishing illegible Kathleen Parker Op-Eds about boorish Americans who take an interest in politics is key in reviving this rapidly vanishing industry.

Conservative heavies: This is where it gets all weird. Just a few days ago, William Kristol said going populist would be a great political strategy for the GOP. With billions of taxpayer dollars going down the tubes, I'd say that's a good idea and where's my pitchfork. But, today Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, and even the exalted Glenn Beck (oh noes! he's my fave!) are now opposed to the outrage against AIG. I suspect this has to do with following the partisan axiom of "always being for what the other side is against", and they are now crying a river about AIG suits receiving "death threats" because the of congressional Dem reaction. Odd.

Reason/Free-Market/Paultard types: I've generally believed that a collapse of portions of the bloated financial sector was necessary for long-term economic survival. Especially, since the zombiefication of all these banks in a quasi-socialist/nationalization type system will just delay an economic reckoning that is way overdue. Reason has been against the bailouts before they were against it, so at least someone out there is staying consistent and knows something about economics. However the "Go Galt" phenomenon I've seen with some of these people is incredibly creepy and I'd rather get touched in the bathing suit area by a mustached PE teacher than have to try and live out Ayn Rand's tyrannical vision of life.

Netroots: Also, another weird bunch. After spending 2008 and early 2009 deifying The Obama, they are now going after...Obama's Treausury cabinet?!? Glenn Greenwald is on a rampage saying that Summers and Geithner are responsible for the executive bonuses at AIG and same with FireDogLake. This seems like a big push to exonerate skeezy Dodd after he was caught lying, but at the expense of the one and only Obama?!? What is this world coming to? Dogs and cats, man.

AIG CEO Liddy: Took a dollar-a-year salary to save this monstrosity back in September 2008, which is respectable. But, he wrote a piece in the Washington Post promising the company was going to payback the taxpayers, which isn't look too good considering they just took billions more. However, he seems to be under the misconception that public service employees shouldn't be getting millions in bonuses. After all, with 80% government ownership in AIG, it should essentially have the perks of any government bureaucracy replete with lack of basic office supplies and crummy GS-whatever salaries. I think the man may be a bit "out of touch".

Anyhoo, I can't keep up with all the moving parts in this deep debate involving our financial future or lack thereof, so I'm dropping all feeds off my reader...except for Wonkette, which follows the model of "making fun of everybody all the time". Seems enjoyable enough to sit in your underwear and read. With all the rhetoric flying around that follows no traditional ideological conventions, it's almost like blogging in the twilight zone.
Maybe the next person to come out and talk about why we need more TARP funds will be... I dunno Art Bell or something.

Obama's Energy Secretary All About Fission

Here's a bit of good news for a soon to be unemployed Navy nuke guy like myself and a country that is in desperate need of an electrical infrastructure makeover. Obama's incoming energy secretary is a nuclear nerd. From Politico:

The Nobel Prize-winning physicist told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee during his confirmation hearing that he’d help streamline nuclear loan guarantees that would help the industry construct several new plants to produce low-emission energy and would push the Energy Department to examine options for recycling nuclear waste.

“I’m supportive of the fact that the nuclear industry should have to be part of energy mix in this century,” Chu said. “And recycling [nuclear waste] in the long term can be part of the solution.”

While counting on government subsidies is hardly a valid business model, if cap and trade were imposed or a gas tax, that some prominent conservatives are supporting, nuke power would be much more economically viable. Obama has hinted that he supports splittin' atoms before, but has waffled on what to do with nuke waste. I suggest dumping it at Al Gore's house..."for the children", or if his house unavailable going with the Yucca Mountain option. Either way it's good to see the administration at least paying lip service to new power plant / grid construction. However, expect most of the opposition to come from NIMBY types that expect all the benefits of living in modern civilization without any of the "eyesores".

Pakistan President's Gets Punk'd By Prank Call, Almost Starts a War with India

Not Fucking Funny

In a striking similarity to the Onion article where JFK gets let in on the Cuban Missile Crisis hoax, Pakistan scrambling its air force during the Mumbai attacks was the result of a prank call. From Fox News:

A man pretending to be India's foreign minister called Pakistan's president and talked in a "threatening" manner during the Mumbai terror attacks, prompting Pakistan to put its air force on high alert, a security official and a news report said Saturday.

Dawn newspaper said authorities were investigating the circumstances of the hoax, which occurred as tensions spiked between the nuclear-armed neighbors during the attacks.

The potential for nuclear conflict between Pakistan and India has reached dangerous new levels due to Mumbai, and the fact that some joker could push central Asia towards the Urdu version of Road Warrior is very troubling. That or Pakistan's Administration is playing games with the media to deflect attention from their involvement with the attacks, as India has suggested.

The real question is how does some random schmoe have the phone number directly to Pakistan's President? If anyone knows it, please call Mr. Zadari and tell him to properly secure the NATO convoy route through Peshawar. It is becoming extremely problematic as seen by 96 trucks bound for Afghanistan being set ablaze by militants.

Note: It's in bad taste to relate international tensions to that ass clown Ashton Kutcher, but in tough times all you can do is laugh uncomfortably at how fucked up everything is.

Indian Police Blame Laskhar-e-Taiba, Pak-Indian Tensions Getting Ugly

What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

As the smoke clears from the abominable atrocities committed in Mumbai, speculation of how nations respond and whodunnit abound throughout the international media. Jules Crittenden has a pretty good round-up of what's being said, and, unsurprisingly, India's leadership is enraged. It's no secret that nuclear-armed Pakistan and India are not the greatest of friends, and reportedly the thugs responsible came from a terrorist group in Pakistan. From the Daily Mail:

One police officer said: ‘That, thankfully, never happened because we managed to stop them.’ Police insist that Kasab confessed to being a member of the Pakistani terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba, which has denied involvement in the carnage, and claimed he and the others were trained in the Muslim country.

Long War Journal has a pretty good synopsis of the Lashkar-e-Taiba:

Indian and US intelligence officials believe the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba was behind the attacks. The capture of Kasab, along with signals intelligence, and a satellite phone and GPS recovered by police indicate the group was behind the attack.

The Indian Mujahideen -- a front group for the Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Harkat ul Jihad al Islami, and the Students Islamic Movement of India -- claimed responsibility for the attack. The Indian Mujahideen has been behind several mass-casualty terror attacks in India over the past two years.

Lashkar-e-Taiba has an extensive network in southern and Southeast Asia. A senior US military intelligence official described the group as "al Qaeda junior," as it has vast resources, an extensive network, and is able to carry out complex attacks throughout its area of operations. "If by some stroke of luck al Qaeda collapsed, LeT (Lashkar-e-Taiba) could step in and essentially take its place."

The relationship between al Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Taiba is complex, the official noted. "While Lashkar-e-Taiba is definitely subordinate to al Qaeda in many ways, it runs its own network and has its own command structure. The groups often train in each others' camps, and fight side by side in Afghanistan."

If this terrorist attack in Mumbai was backed by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence, like the suicide bombing on the Indian Embassy in Kabul, the hostility between the nations will only get worse. There's also reports that Pakistani troops are being pulled from the northwestern tribal areas to be garrisoned along the Indian border. Pakistan's new democratic government deserves international support, but they have to be held accountable for allowing terrorism to fester inside their borders. A tough tightrope to walk for a nation like the U.S. A successful Indian entrepreneur writes in the WSJ that this is Obama's first international challenge. The stakes are incredibly high and the consequences for failed policy are enormous. I hope our next president doesn't let us down, because solutions to Pakistan's terrorist problem are not easy to come by.

From the mind of Barack Obama "I picked the wrong week to quit smoking!"

World's Troublemakers Weigh in on Obama

Iraqpundit writes that many of our allies are pleased with the selection of Obama as President. This is good news, as America's standing in the world needs some serious repair in light of recent worldwide opinion polls. But what about the quasi-dictator hooligans who continue to oppress their suffering people? Iran says Obama must stop the "war mongering", Chavez hopes he can meet the president select on "equal and respectful terms", and Al-Qaeda thugs in the online forums said "Today America elected Obama because al-Qaeda wanted it, after God desired it! In 2004 America elected Bush because al-Qaeda had wanted it, after God desired it!". Ho-hum. This is normal and silly chatter from the usual rabble, but another questionable regime appears to have taken action. The apparatchiks at Pravda wrote a glowing review of Obama in yesterday's edition:

Those of us in the international community who predicted eight long years ago what would happen if Bush were elected must do two things. First, never forget the damage done by George W. Bush and his minions of evil and make sure that, like the generations after Hitler, history does not pardon these criminals as well-meaning politicians who were the victims of tough times. Secondly, we must give Barack Obama a blank page to write on, and hand him the pen with a sincere and open smile.

Welcome back, people of the United States, welcome back into the fold of the international community, where you will find friends and not foes, where you will find we all prefer to smile and not to cry and that when we do cry, our tears taste of salt just like yours do, whether we are pink, blue, white, yellow or black.

Sounds like kind words from our sometimes friends across the pond. Unfortunately, President Medvedev decided to deploy the nuclear-capable Iskander missiles today in an attempt to spook the incoming Obama administration. The President then prattled on about the U.S. being the architect behind the global financial crisis. The Telegraph reports that some Russian media delved into the ridiculous:

Several tabloids incorrectly reported that the main message of Mr Obama's final campaign speech was a call on young African Americans not to let their underpants show above the waistline of the jeans.

Jeez. It's like these guys want to go back to the good old days of the cold war, replete with shoe-banging and thermo-nuclear annihilation. Despite a resurgence in classic movies like Matthew Broderick's War Games, our country doesn't need this headache while we are already engaged in a difficult fight against Islamic extremism.

Joe Biden originally gave us six months before Obama would face a serious crisis. President elect Obama didn't even get 24 hours before Russia started puffing it's chest Soda Popinski-style. Please have a plan, Mr. Obama.

Russian President Trying to Act Tough

Nuke Power Gets the Nod From the Snooty New York Times

The New York Times writes about viability of more nuclear power plants in America and seems to be supportive of the whole no CO2 emission thing. But, a detailed discussion at Reason suggests new nuclear power plants are too damn expensive to be economically sustained without either massive government subsidies or a huge carbon tax/cap-and-trade policy in place. And that takes into account fossil fuels being priced through the roof.

Whatever our country decides to do for energy, I just hope the policy wonks come up with a strategy soon. Because, I just got my separation letter from the Navy and I need to get a job like a normal person eventually. Trying to live off Paypal donations from internet people probably isn't going to tide me over for long.

LT Nixon tries to make a living off bloggin'

Top 10 Horror Flicks for Halloween To Scare the Bejeezus Out of Your Kids

(pic from Weird Asia News)

No, no not that kind of scary, I'm talking about some no-shit, freaky-ass movies that will creep out the whole family. It's Halloween, and everyone deserves a good scare or two, especially because Americans are wound up so tight with this damn election. It's time to lighten up! So here's my 10 bestest horror recommendations for Halloween (in no particular order), if you don't like 'em then provide some of your own in the comments.

#1 Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974): This film is loosely based on the life and times of Ed Gein, but Tobe Hopper chose to turn his bizarre and macabre characteristics into a whole damn family. The result is one of the most disturbing things you'll ever see: chainsaw-wielding brother, deranged hitchhiker, cannibalistic BBQ joint run by the dad, and even a visit from crusty old pervert Grandpa.

#2 Sleepaway Camp (1983): One of the ultimate summer camp schlock flicks that involves kids getting schwacked in mysterious ways. While a bit cheesy, the movie's hilarious dialogue is worth the watch alone (check out the pederast cook). Be sure to stick around for the ending too, which rivals the Rosebud ending in its greatness.

#3 Nightmare on Elm Street 3 Dream Warriors (1986): It's Freddy Kruger in an insane asylum for teenagers. What the hell else are you going to do on Halloween, go to the opera? One of the best of the series, and the part where the Dungeons and Dragons nerd buys the farm is worth the purchase alone.

#4 Hills Have Eyes (2006): A perfect movie for the election year when blue state stereotypes about "country folk" abound. A family gets stuck in the desert when deranged mutants from a nearby nuclear waste pit of an abandoned town begin terrorizing them. Every urban person's fear as they drive out on a camping trip in their Saab.

#5 Dawn of the Dead (1978):Not much else to say about Dawn of the Dead except that it'sa damn near perfect movie. The opening sequence in the Philly slum is one of the best sequences on what would happen if society collapsed, and the mall setting is allegorical for how we are all a bunch of low-life zombies looking for brains. Great commentary, and great horror flick.

#6 Evil Dead II (1987): There probably hasn't been a protagonist more tortured than Ash in cinematic history. From being strangled by his own severed hand, to being possessed by a demonic spirit, and finally getting sent back to the dark ages, Ash keeps the humor alive in this ridiculously violent romp.

#7 Prince of Darkness (1987): Some people think The Exorcist is the gold standard for movies about Satan, but those people have simply overlooked John Carpenter's The Prince of Darkness. Not only does it play on the good vs. evil religious theme, but it also has schizoid Alice Cooper stabbing some dude with a bicycle. Awesome!

#8 House of 1000 Corpses (2003): Rob Zombie's first attempt at directing is a true freak-out, as he encompasses some of the best tried and true methods of horror into one big film. A psychotic family in the country, idiotic urban folks blundering into a death trap, well-placed references to serial killer Albert Fish, etc. As a bonus it actually revolves around Halloween.

#9 The Shining (1980): While this Stanley Kubrick flick doesn't have the rampant violence that some of the other movies on this list do, the twin girls are scary enough to make even the most battle-hardened movie buff shit his or her pants. The descent into madness at a a remote location and Kubrick's style of shooting this makes the psychological aspect of the film totally mind-blowing.

#10 Dead Alive (1992): Before Peter Jackson became a nerd sensation with the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, he had this ridiculously violent movie set in New Zealand. The movie involves a party that devolves quickly into a zombie fest, which is followed by the infamous lawnmower scene. A cult classic!

Madman Joe has a "Bring it On" Moment

Joe Biden is really amping up the "Democrats can be Tough Guys Too" rhetoric that was a big part of The Obama's acceptance speech. From Fox News at a rally in Tacoma

“Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America.” he told a fundraising crowd in the Pacific Northwest on Sunday. “Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

“He’s gonna have to make some really tough - I don’t know what the decision’s gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it’s gonna happen.”

What the shit? It sounds like Biden is hoping for some catastrophic tragedy so that he can prove a point about The Obama not being a wimp. Well, I hope the "international crisis" is the long-awaited Attack of the 50-foot woman in one of our fair cities. First off, she's a babe, and second, it would be much more preferable to be killed by Snu-Snu rather than getting incinerated by a nuclear explosion from whatever jihad group is pissed off that week.

Not A Terrible Way to Go

Thoughts on the Debate; All Hail Obama and His Glorious Empire!

Well I thought it was pretty evenly matched, but too bad for McCain he needed a miracle to alleviate his epic drop in the polls. Even Karl Rove was calling this election for Obama before this debate started, and I didn't see McCain take out any magical fairydust out of his knickers to pull this one off. Time to get a grip on reality and understand that Obama is probably going to be running the country in a few months...and planning accordingly. Here's some dumb thoughts:

Where's The Money Lebowski!: Neither Obama nor McCain could answer the question about future obligations for entitlement programs without diverting the topic to immediate plans for tax relief. That probably has to do with them needing to win the election in the short-term, and the long-term ramifications of entitlement programs are just too damn depressing to think about for the average voter. I don't plan on living past 40, so I should be good to go, but the rest of you should probably bury a bunch of money in your backyard before aging boomers can get their mitts on it for yoga classes in their twilight years. There was a time when young people respected the elderly, but that was before the Ponzi schemes known as Medicare and Social Security became part of the collective conscious.

So, Healthcare is a Right Now: I'm a big fan of worldwide natural rights, such as institutions not being able to force people to think a certain way, not being coerced to see shitty chick flicks, and not being able to deprive others of those rights. But referring to healthcare as a "right" is a bit disturbing, because it requires the compulsive services of doctors, nurses, people developing medical technology, etc. Does that mean that I can willfully deprive those hardworking folks of their liberty just so I can get the ass implant I always wanted? Hmm. Obama is implying that we should mandate socialized healthcare the same way we have the right to free speech. I would sure like to know how we are going to pay for that shit. In fairness, McCain is the guy who wants the federal government to buy up foreclosed homes, so that money troff in Washington must run pretty damn deep.

Obama Fires a Zinger at AIG: The plutocrats at AIG have already stolen $61B of the $85B in taxpayer dollars that our unprincipled wangs in Washington handed over. A week after AIG got a piece of this "bailout", a bunch of the upper management went to some resort in CA for $400K. Obama said the CEO should be shitcanned, which struck a chord with me. But then I remembered that both Obama and McCain approved "The Bomb", and I just got pissed off two seconds later.

Energy: Seems like Obama and McCain both supported Nuke power, and McCain even mentioned that he spent some time on carriers run by nuclear power...cool! Of course he didn't mention that one nuclear operator in the Navy costs about $250,000 to train, and new nuclear plants cost multiple billion dollars. They might be profitable if oil prices continue to go through the roof, or a cap and trade system is implemented, but it's going to be a lot of dough, and considering we're going to be burning trash and dead squirrels in a barrel for the next four years due to the economy tanking, I'm just not sure Americans will be onboard with such massive projects for energy independence. As for my Navy nuclear training, you should feel honored that you, the taxpayers, spent a quarter of a million dollars on me and all you got is this lousy blog.

(for ABWF, on Obama talking about government research and computers: the first "general purpose electronic" computer was ENIAC which was developed by the Army during WWII for firing artillery. But, technically, the Abacus is probably a computer that was been around forever, but was invented by Al Gore.)

Afg/Pakistan: I never thought the Democrat would be the guy wanting to go Dr. Strangelove on the nuclear-armed Pakistan, while the Republican took a more nuanced approach. Seems a little hardcore, and I'm wondering if the State Dept. in Pakistan is going to have to do some damage control tomorrow. But, Obama recovered well and cited that supporting dictator Musharaf was probably a lousy idea on the Bush administration's part. Afg/Pakistan is really complicated, and it's tough to discuss in a townhall forum when the people running for Commander-in-Chief are fielding questions from the rubes in palookaville, ansewering ridiculous questions about their favorite flavor of ice cream or whatever the fuck that last question was.

Iraq: Didn't seem to come up much. I guess when stability broke out, it no longer became such a hot-button issue that it was at the beginning of this presidential campaign eons ago. I'd say that speaks loudly of what our troops did there. McCain's support for the successful surge strategy is definitely a big plus in my book, but it's in the past. Obama went further back into the past and cited McCain supporting the initial authorization for the use of military force, which still pisses off Americans.

Veterans Issues: IAVA came out with a very comprehensive grading system for DC politicians today (Obama got a B, and McCain got a D) based on how they voted on issues like the Webb GI Bill. TSO disagrees with Paul Rieckhoff's analysis in a very-detailed post, but I still consider Paul a very trustworthy dude who has done a lot for our generation of vets. But I urge IAVA to give both Obama and McCain a big fat F, because they FAILed to even mention veterans issues. A panel of vets at the NY Times were not very impressed with this lack of discussion. But we're a small voting bloc and we need to realize that there is going to be a serious lack of tax revenue to pay for vets benefits. Hang on, because it's going to be a wild ride.

Thanks to everyone who hung out at the chat room on This Ain't Hell. Politics is a vile, nasty business, but sooner or later, it is going to fuck you in the ass. We're just trying to stay educated on the subject. What are your thoughts on the debate?

Freaky Christian Zionists Invade My Mailbox

Luckily, their literature makes for a good coaster

So I usually never get anything good in my old-school mail, except the occasional coupon from Deja Vu on a 2-for-1 lap dance, but I was totally ecstatic to get this creepy propaganda on the coming end of the world today. It seems to be from one of these eschatology groups (see Blumenthal's Rapture Ready for a good explanation). Basically, they advocate starting a nuclear war between Iran and Israel to bring about the end times and the second coming of Jesus. Transcribed:

Worldwide upheaval will lead to the rise of the "Beast", which is the world dictator and a council of ten leaders (with three removed). They will have power on a global scale. He will, for a time, bring order to chaos. He will appear to resolve world problems. He will make a 7 year peace treaty with Israel, but after 3.5 years he will break that peace and invade Israel.

I don't even know what the hell these people are talking about, but it's either an anti-Obama 527 or a prelude to Maiden's new album. It keeps going (and then some):

Israel will suffer greatly at the hands of its enemies but at the end of this 7 year tribulation period, God will sovereignly interven: the armies of the world will ultimate go to war against the Lord himself. But the Lord, who is called Faithful and True, will bring swift judgement against the Antichrist, the one world government, and the armies of the world. He will utterly consume them all.

It's not sounding like a very good time to make long-term property investments, but fortunately for us, Jesus eventually shows up:

Jesus Christ Himself, the Prince of Peace, will rule over the nations, and He will restore the earth to its original beauty and balance.

I'm not really anti-religion or even against people putting this craziness in my mailbox, but when some of our leaders seem to advocate foreign policy based on beliefs like this, I understand why there is separation of Church and State.

The website the literature invites you to visit is BibleGateway.com, which is advertised by this little fat kid talking about how it's fun to rock out to Bible verses. The website hardly seems malign or political, and I'm just not understanding how the Bible can be taken to advocate such an extremist foreign policy.

Do You Know About the Dangers of A Nuclear Detonation?

Oh Noes! My Porn Was in There

Did you know that a nuclear detonation by a ballistic missile could cause widespread death and destruction?!? Get the fuck out, I know. Despite duck n' cover drills being taught throughout America during the cold war, the cuban missile crisis, and a legendary performance by Steve Gutenberg in The Day After, the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation seems to think people in Washington DC don't appreciate the devastation that a nuclear explosion could cause. That's why they want to create "EMP Recognition Day" on March 23rd for congress members, where politicians would have to live out a Flintstones episode because everything electronic would be simulated as decimated by an Electromagnetic Pulse.

Not sure what the point of this foolishness is, but they seem to want to drum up support for more investment in missile defense. Not surprising as they get a bunch of their funding from defense contractors. Pretty lame.

(h/t Armchair Generalist)

Is Obama Serious about Nuclear Power?

Anti-Nuclear Hysteria May Still Have an Effect on Public Policy

As a full disclosure, myself and OleGreyDog may need employment in the near future, and that box of cookies we sent with our resumes to Lehman Brothers may have been a futile action seeing how they've gone tits up. Since we are already confirmed nuke power nerds, putting shameless self-interest into our election decision is desirable to secure future subsidies for our drinking habits.

McCain and Obama had a bit of a testy exchange on nuclear power at yesterday's debate. Transcipt:

MCCAIN: No one from Arizona is against solar. And Senator Obama says he's for nuclear, but he's against reprocessing and he's against storing. So...

OBAMA: That's just not true, John. John, I'm sorry, but that's not true.

MCCAIN: ... it's hard to get there from here. And off-shore drilling is also something that is very important and it is a bridge.

And we know that, if we drill off-shore and exploit a lot of these reserves, it will help, at temporarily, relieve our energy requirements. And it will have, I think, an important effect on the price of a barrel of oil.

OBAMA: I just have to respond very quickly, just to correct -- just to correct the record.

MCCAIN: So I want to say that, with the Nunn-Lugar thing...

LEHRER: Excuse me, Senator.

OBAMA: John?

MCCAIN: ... I supported Nunn-Lugar back in the early 1990s when a lot of my colleagues didn't. That was the key legislation at the time and put us on the road to eliminating this issue of nuclear waste and the nuclear fuel that has to be taken care of.

OBAMA: I -- I just have to correct the record here. I have never said that I object to nuclear waste. What I've said is that we have to store it safely.

Obama seems to be taking a middle ground approach on nuclear power, and his energy page has a bunch of pictures of trees and wind turbines, but nothing on splittin' atoms. However, I was able to dig up this video where he discusses some nuclear issues at a campaign rally:

Obama talks about keeping his kids safe, and that nuclear plants need to prove that they are safe (yawn). Pretty dishonest comment seeing how the worst nuclear accident in American history (Three Mile Island) didn't result in anyone getting injured. Meanwhile, every time an oil refinery blows up and leaves a pile of stiffs in its wake, it barely makes a dent on any politician's radar. Obama also mentions that he is against the Yucca mountain depository, which would provide a permanent storage solution for high-level waste. His criticism of the high-cost of nuclear power is justified, but with the cap and trade program he advocates, it could become more economically viable. So, Senator, hopefully you'll come around to support nuke power, and if you don't, remember that there's no bigger a nuisance in the modern age than an unemployed blogger.

Great News: Mysterious Iranian Boat Loses Toxic Cargo to Somali Pirates

Uh-oh. The Long War Journal has an in-depth report on the Iran Deyanat, which was hijacked by Somali pirates late last month. The ship was supposedly carrying 40K Tons of iron ore from China to Rotterdam, but something seems a little fishy about this payload. From LWJ:

The MV Iran Deyanat was brought to Eyl, a sleepy fishing village in northeastern Somalia, and was secured by a larger gang of pirates - 50 onboard and 50 onshore. Within days, pirates who had boarded the ship developed strange health complications, skin burns and loss of hair. Independent sources tell The Long War Journal that a number of pirates have also died. "Yes, some of them have died. I do not know exactly how many but the information that I am getting is that some of them have died," Andrew Mwangura, Director of the East African Seafarers' Assistance Program, said Friday when reached by phone in Mombasa.

News about the illness and the toxic cargo quickly reached Garowe, seat of the government for the autonomous region of Puntland. Angered over the wave of piracy and suspicious about the Iranian ship, authorities dispatched a delegation led by Minister of Minerals and Oil Hassan Allore Osman to investigate the situation on September 4. Osman also confirmed to The Long War Journal that during the six days he negotiated with the pirates members of the syndicate had become sick and died. "That ship is unusual," he said. "It is not carrying a normal shipment."

The symptoms cited amongst the pirates are consistent with radiation sickness, which causes reddening of the skin, nausea, hair falling out, and looking like an extra from The Day After. It takes over a 100 rads at once to get sick, and unless your standing on top of a critical reactor, getting nuked Strangelove-style, or near High Level Radioactive Waste, it just ain't gonna happen. Even the dreaded yellowcake (processed Uranium ore) probably can't cause these kind of symptoms as seen in Table 4 of this CDC PDF. So, if it's radioactive waste making the "Curious George" pirates puke themselves, it has to be some kind of spent fuel.

Since the last two big internet rumors have turned out to be accurate (see Palin Hacker story and Obama Astroturfing campaign), time to speculate on a new one. Iran is carting around toxic radioactive waste to create a mutant, mop-wielding, Somali Army to wage war against the West! It'll be like The Toxic Avenger, but in Farsi and with less boob shots.

Actually, it might be Iran trying to get rid of their nuclear waste from trying to start up the Bushehr reactor and its enrichment program. So by trying to dodge the pesky IAEA's questions, Iran accidentally shipped a bunch of material for a dirty bomb to the place on earth most resmbling Road Warrior (i.e. Somalia). Way to go, Ahmadinejad.

Or...it could be some kind of chemical weapon coming from China. The Chinese have been accused of providing weaponry to Iran merchants before. No wonder Iranian shipping just got slapped with sanctions.

Keepin' it Klassy in Kitsap Kounty

From the Kitsap Sun: Port Orchard Woman Arrested, Despite Claiming to be a "Nuclear Scientist"

A 23-year-old Port Orchard woman who claimed she was a nuclear scientist — and then shouted insults and obscenities at a Kitsap County sheriff's deputy — was arrested Sunday morning for assaulting the deputy.

And again from the Kitsap Sun: Stolen Bremerton Chihuahua Turns Up at Vet's After Ingesting Meth

The employee told an officer a Chihuahua had been brought into the clinic Thursday by a 40-year-old Silverdale man. The veterinarian believed the dog had ingested methamphetamine based on its strange behavior. They also believed the Silverdale man might have been high on methamphetamine, according to reports.

Sometimes, no commentary is necessary.

A Journey into the Heart of Darkness: The 2008 Dem PlatformD

It Smelled Like Slow Death in There

Following up on the amateur analysis of the GOP platform, the Dem platform is out(pdf) and worth taking a gander at. I admit to once having a strong dislike of the Democrats when I first became interested in politics during the Clinton days, which was probably the result of listening to a lot of Waco-era talk radio growing up. But, the times have definitely changed, and old partisan lines have been redefined. Here's the rating systems of the platform (out of 4 Sinbads for good, out of 4 Mr. Van Driessens for heinous)

Sinbads (out of 4): The hilarious comedian and star of the epic TV show, A Different World, and the underated 1995 classic, Houseguest, embodies the best traits of liberalism. He understands that institutionalized forms of intolerance are best defeated at a grass roots level by relentless mocking and parodying of the hypocrisy in the cultural elite. While advocating for change, Sinbad still holds a profound affection for this country by serving in the Air Force (despite going AWOL a few times) and doing USO tours into a conflict zone to boost morale among forward deployed Americans (even though he didn't come under sniper fire the way Hillary remembered).

Mr Van. Driessen (out of 4): The wussy teacher of Beavis and Butthead embodies the worst of liberalism. A cult-like fanaticism exists within his mind towards emphasizing people's feelings and being one with mother nature like some sort of hippy ant colony. Mr. Van D can only sense injustice within the own confines of his silly little world, as shown with his distrust of authority figures in law enforcement and irrational fear of human progress. Naively singing songs about Lesbian seagulls, while madmen overseas plot to massacre both nature-lover and corporate fat-cats alike. Mr. Van Driessen represents the dregs of modern liberalism and is not a good choice for a candidate in a time of uncertainty.

The Issues:

• Economy: Entitlement programs, ahoy! The platform wants to give Joe and Jane schmoe energy rebates to accommodate rising gas prices, health coverage for Americans similar to the plans congressmen get, stronger social security, stronger medicare/medicaid, and much, much more. There's probably some shit in their about free puppy dogs and lollipops to voters in bellwether states, but it's hard not to space out when reading this beast of a PDF. They also want to pump in a whopping $50 Billion to local and state coffers that will certainly save incompetent government programs from the chopping block in these tough times. All this money doesn't grow on trees, and these pie-in-the-sky promises are exacerbating the problem of government misspending that has gone on in both the major political parties, which makes the dollar more worthless, making shit more expensive, and making me have to haul a wheelbarrow full of cash to the liquor store to buy a pack of smokes for fuck's sakes.

Rating: 3 Van Driessens

• Energy: The Dems are pushing hard for the cap and trade system, which would cut greenhouse gases and prevent Denver from becoming beach front property in the future due to global warming. And who doesn't like the idea of more jobs being created to develop infrastructure and the like. But even the platform's ambitious zeal for "green-collar" jobs can't make totally wacky promises, and they seek only 25% of America's energy from renewables by 2025. Scrounging around the platform for nuclear power, one only finds something about how awful it would be in using the barren, uninhabitable expanse of Yucca mountain as a place to store nuclear waste. Seems a bit unrealistic and lofty a proposal to put all our eggs in one solar-powered basket, and we'll most likely continue giving Chavez petrobucks until we can come to our senses on a reasonable energy policy. The platform also mentions harnessing American ingenuity to free America from the "the tyranny of oil". Hmm. I'm confused about the context here, because if it wasn't for crude oil and its distilled products, we'd probably be bitching about needing the local consulate to mend the yoke for our oxens because all the able-bodied men died of the bubonic plague or something of a medieval nature. I think the Dems are looking for solutions that aren't totally anti-growth, but they need to keep lookin' harder. If any of you know the silver bullet to our energy woes (which can't be destroyed or created tanks to the crummy law of thermodynamics), you've got my vote!
  

Rating: 1 Van Driessen

• Military/Diplomacy: Lots of good ideas to expand the State Dept (by way of the Peace Corps), Americorps, and the military, Scrapping the archaic Don't Ask Don't Tell policy is a way to allow more Americans to serve their country. Also, expanding diplomatic options as service-based rather than career-based would have more people working for Uncle Sam as opposed to the indirect method we have now, where many civilians serve as contractors. The Dems focus a lot on the conflict in Afghanistan/Pakistan, and I hate everything they tried to fly during the surge, but the reality is that the future administration will require a reduction of military forces in Iraq, and more focus in A-stan/Pakistan. This has been the position of the Democrats for a long time, even when it was completely irresponsible, but it would be a good thing for Iraq and America if withdrawal was done based on the conditions now. As for Iran, they say they will have diplomatic negotiations without preconditions to prevent Iran from developing nuke weapons. Not a bad idea, since saber-rattling has got us jack and shit the last 28 years. The only beef I have is with China, because the Dems talk about economic trade with the emerging giant as a way to foster a more legitimate regime, but the Dems platform on trade was alarmingly protectionist to placate the union cronies that have their dicks in punch bowl. Seems like they want to have their cake and eat it too. I have no reason to question that Dems care for vets, as Sen. Webb, a Dem, was the ones who passed the GI Bill and was awarded the Military Coalition Award.
  

Rating: 3 Sinbads

• Values: The Dems acknowledge the 2nd amendment, but want to instate the assault weapons ban. Bye-bye zombie protection kit! They also support money going to churches, despite the infringement on the first amendment. More pandering to the evangelical base, when they clearly will have trouble getting these votes because they are pro-choice. And if you are irresponsible enough to knock someone up or get knocked up without the means of raising a small kid, your babies will be shipped off to Pre-K on the government's dime. Lucky you. The platform also gives would-be fathers advice: "We need more fathers to realize that responsibility does not end at conception. We need them to understand that what makes a man is not the ability to have a child–it’s the courage to raise one." I find this very offensive that a political party would feel the need to explain something so obvious to the unwashed masses. Maybe in 2012 they'll tell people how to tie their shoes. However, the platform gets some props for strongly supporting tribal sovereignty, which is a matter not often discussed.
  

Rating: 2 Van Driessens

This platform isn't bad on national security (never thought I would say that for the lefties), but promises an awful lot of goodies from Uncle Sugar to woo voters come election time. The foreign investors must be ecstatic at the amount of cash our country is willing to borrow. The Dems have the fiscal spending responsibility of a 15 year-old at a Gucci shop in Beverly Hills with Daddy's plastic. Unfortunately, we're all gonna have to pick up the tab eventually. You say Hope and Change, and I say Game Over, Man! See you all at the burn barrel under the bridge.

What are your thoughts on the platform?