Ahab Has A Blog.

Been absent pending time and energy for an engine update...

But just now I've been listening to Boyd Rice vs Bob Larson. Look'em up. I ain't making no links these days. For those who don't know, Boyd Rice was/is a musician, pseudo-fascist, and acerbic atheist not above masquerading as a Wotanist or Satanist; above all, he seemed to enjoy pranking people and tweaking them with outrageous statements just for the sake of it.

All this being said, listening to Boyd go toe-to-toe with Bob Larson, the most striking thing is how closely Boyd Rice's actual statements and apparent beliefs - Social Darwinism in particular - correspond to the actual beliefs of the Republican party in general, and the Bush administration in particular.

The obvious sore thumb here is that the religious right, as a social force, are represented by Bob Larson, and the rest of the Republican Party are represented by the exact opinions espoused by Boyd Rice. The sticky point - and the future of America - depends very much on where the religious right falls out on this wedge, this fulcrum. Do they choose to speak up for their alleged values, or do they follow their authoritarian instincts all the way to hell?

The strong dominate the weak, and the clever dominate the strong. The Bush administration in a nutshell. Republican Christians - do you stand with this, or against it? The world may hang in the balance. The Boyd Rice vs Bob Larson tape plays like an internal debate in the soul of the Republican party. And Bob Larson lost.

Teenage fans of crude music have sex sooner, study finds. In other news, girls who dress like sluts put out more.

Wha's with this story? Is this an attempt to shore up the dykes of hypocrisy now that another moral scold (Joe Lieberman) is about to disappear from the public eye? Or did the wingnut welfare grant just run out this week?

Yes, this one is way late, but... it's so underrated I'm going to bite anyway. Hasn't anyone noticed that "necon" is an oxymoron? Like "new antiques"? Like "jumbo shrimp" ( a LOT like jumbo shrimp, IYKWIM )? Like "Jews for Jesus"? (no, no anti-Semitic motive hidden in that one - and being an anti-crypto-Zionist doesn't count).

And yet (well, OK, there is some crrypto-Zionism that negates the use of "yet"), you can google "neocon oxymoron" and find this. Anonymous comments are verboten, but I would have replied this:

I don't want to blow my own horn (okay, maybe I do), but I happen to think I fall into Dr. Westen's "ruthless self-reflection" category. Of course, I bet that everyone puts him/herself into that category--no one's a mindless partisan, right? Right? (Except the other side, course). I'm not concerned with your horn. But the post-1980 Right in the West is almost obsesively non-self-reflective.. Have you been living in a fucking hole? Have you ever heard even the tiniest morsel of self-reflection from Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld et. al? Not a fucking chance.

ymarsakar's childish distinction "60s socialism vs self-sacrifice) - and the post itself - ignores a critical fact.

conservatives stopped doing self-reflection at the start of the cold war. they are afraid it makes them look wimpy. that's why Boosh can't figure out what a colossal failure he is.

Liberalism - that is, all modern government that isn't a failure - has nothing to do with avoiding pain. And conservativism has nothing to do with confronting pain. If it did, you'd see more conservatives engaging in self-reflection and/or signing up to fight the battles they believe in. Instead, the ratio of conservatives saying "I got mine" to those saying "Government pork is bad" has climbed to historically embarrassing levels. Instead, Repulicans have promoted only two real values in recent decasdes (snooping into the bedrooms of others does not count as a moral value, unless you are a Pharisee): winning is everything. Well, ok, that's just one, but I was trying to do them a favor. Liberallism, on the other hand, stems from a critical recognition that good government should have, as part of its core principles, avoiding the creation of misery, and the alleviation of it, when practical.

Pretty simple, ain't it?

You can disagree, but then again you can die in a government-caused famine "for the greater good". That's not a choice; it's an observation.

"We know dogs aren't born mooing." At first, it seems like a stupid question. But once you understand the context, you realize it's a very, very stupid question.

But what about people? Are they "born gay"? An interesting question. Many, if not most, people who report themselves as gay seem to feel that way. I have yet to hear anyone finish a sentence with "and that's when I decided to be gay." Kind of telling, isn't it?

But that doesn't exactly answer the question. I'd like to answer the question with a question: Hasn't anyone in focus on the family ever seen a dog fuck another dog in the ass? Dogs only follow their natures - that was the original premise of asking why dogs don't moo. So it seems fair to note that dogs - and many other animals - show us that gay behavior is part of the repetoire of "natural" behavior.

In conclusion: "We know social conservatives aren't born thinking for themselves. But can they learn?"

Last week, a contractor bought a bathroom vanity at a Massachusetts Home Depot and discovered two 50-pound "bricks" of grass inside. Elsewhere in the state, a plumber purchased a similar product at an unnamed "hardware store" and opened it to find 40 pounds of weed plus 3 kilograms of cocaine. Police and DEA officials have swept a dozen Home Depots in the state and found other loaded vanities. From CNN: In each incident being investigated by Tewksbury Police, all of the merchandise boxes originated from a Texas location and were distributed through one Massachusetts warehouse, Peterson said.

"I'm sure the packages were being shipped to the distribution center and someone was supposed to intercept them," Peterson said. "So that person [who was supposed to intercept the packages] either wasn't on duty that day or the packages were marked wrong."

That's why they call him "dope", right? Seriously, if the guy had some past convictions, then I feel bad for him, but otherwise, what kind of idiot would alert the cops? At least take the weed and alert the cops to the coke, right?