Tuesday, October 28, 2008

One Of The Finest Speeches Ever Made

And it was written for a movie character, dammit! I was watching it again last night (a few more times and I'll be able to quote the script in its entirety), and when Andy Shephard got in front of that crowd in the press room and started to talk, I just got all goose-pimply and shivery up and down my spine. That is how I want a political leader to sound!

A very pertinent excerpt:

"America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours.

"You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then, you can stand up and sing about the "land of the free".

"I've known Bob Rumson for years, and I've been operating under the assumption that the reason Bob devotes so much time and energy to shouting at the rain was that he simply didn't get it. Well, I was wrong. Bob's problem isn't that he doesn't get it. Bob's problem is that he can't sell it!

"We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it."

Now, here's the trick: Go back and read it again, and wherever you see the name, "Bob Rumson," you just insert the name of your local anti-equality, anti-individual, anti-woman, anti-man, anti-autonomy, anti-CHOICE rabble rouser who wants to legislate your giving up your independence "for the good of all" he believes in.

And keep in mind that he doesn't care what you believe in. He is interested only in how he can turn your beliefs to his own advantage, all the while sneering at you and your beliefs. He will exploit what he perceives as the weakness in your belief that you have the right to live your own life the way you chooses, worship or not as you choose, and exercise your freedom the way you chooses. He will then turn it around to accuse you of hindering him in his pursuit of his freedom to shut down your freedom.

Because he truly is not interested in solving any problems. He just wants you to be afraid of shadows so he can come along with his flashlight and "show you the way." That is his road to becoming powerful. One of the "elite," at which he only pretends to sneer, when all the while he desperately wants to be one.

What he's hoping you won't notice (and people who are afraid notice very little outside their immediate fear) is that the beam of his little flashlight only shows what he's aiming at in that particular moment. It does not show the surroundings that are still in the shadows. It shows you the dog's teeth, but it does not show you the big leather collar, the steel-link leash, and the heavy post to which the dog is chained.

And it doesn't show you what the fear-monger is hiding behind his back -- a goad that he is using to prod the helpless animal into snarling and snapping his teeth, and a bolt cutter, which he will use to cut through the chains of the dog and loose him on you himself, if you don't submit to giving up your freedoms through his threats alone.

Beware the fear-monger. You need not fear what he says; you need to fear what he does not. Look beyond the beam of his flashlight and into the shadows for yourself.

"President Barack Obama" has an interesting ring to it.

NO to California Proposition 8.

And thank you, Aaron Sorkin, for some of the finest words ever written.

Sunday, October 26, 2008

Who Said That?

Every person must act according to what he thinks is right, regardless of the source of those values. Asking people to give up on what they think is true is asking them to live in an Orwellian world where they have to act like black is white and white is black, even is they don't believe it.

You are never gonna believe it.

Go ahead. Guess.

I'll tell yaz later, but you better strap in and hang on before I do that, or the decompression will probably cause injuries.

UPDATE:

Well, here it is. Sixth paragraph in that comment on this thread. Quite an interesting little tussle goin' on in the comments. I'm finding it fascinating how the one who keeps trying to tell others how they have to live according to her values doesn't want any value input into her own life from anyone else.

Saturday, October 25, 2008

A Gold Medal Is Just A Phone Call Away

I'd be a lot more inclined to support the Olympics if they included sports like this.

And no, unless you work as a talent scout for Hefner or Flynt, it's not work safe.

(H/T to my ukelele-playing buddy, Howlin' Hobbit)

Friday, October 24, 2008

What Really Bugs Me About Palin

is that she talks, almost exclusively, in subordinate clauses and non-sequiturs. She also incorporates multiple tenses.

It's like trying to listen to someone sing several different songs at the same time in three different keys.

Give it a listen. I will totally understand if you can't listen to the whole thing because your ears start to bleed when you do that. But listen to the start of it, anyway, and see if you don't hear her mangling the English language in gulps and phrases.

And the purentee gall of it all is that she expects to be under-fucking-stood! And elected on that basis!

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Marinara Sauce

From scratch. Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

Also from garlic, tomatoes, onions, garlic, celery, herbs, garlic, spices, mushrooms.

Did I mention garlic?

Three days, it takes.

Dinner at eight on Saturday.

UPDATE: (Friday noonish) Driving me crazy, it is. It's amazing, though -- it really is possible to take a bushel and a peck of fresh tomatoes and condense them all into two or three gallons of yummable, nommable flava!

UPPERDATE: (Saturday afternoon) When it's thick enough (without your having used a thickening agent) that a spoon will stand up in the kettle without leaning over, it's almost ready. One last dose of herbs, one or two last heads of garlic (yes, heads, not cloves), a couple more hours for the flavors to marry, and then one final ingredient -- a square of unsweetened baker's chocolate.

UPPESTDATE: (Saturday evening) Al dente pasta, crusty bread, twizzling fork, bib, Firefly on the DVD player. Ready? This won't take long...

...did it?

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

In The Words of John Diefenbaker...

"I am a Canadian,
free to speak without fear,
free to worship in my own way,
free to stand for what I think right,
free to oppose what I believe wrong,
or free to choose those who shall govern my country.
This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind."

From the Canadian Bill of Rights,
July 1, 1960.

Ain't it funny what people think they can alter to suit their own agendas? The above wording is the original, untouched, unedited version of what Dief said some forty-eight (omigod! *gasp*) years ago.

Now, you may or may not know that Dief was a Tory. That was back in the days when "Tory" meant something. We don't really have any more Tories. We have Reformatories, instead. And they're busy trying to rewrite history (which, naturally enough, would serve to alter the future) to suit their own agenda.

So...in anticipation of a big Reformatory win (oopsie!) in this year's popularity contest, one of these Reformatories posts:

"I am a Canadian,
a free Canadian,
free to speak without fear,
free to worship God in my own way,
free to stand for what I think right,
free to oppose what I believe wrong,
free to choose those who shall govern my country.
This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and for all mankind."

See the difference? Emphasis on "a free Canadian" and insertion of the word, "God" does much to change the flavor. There is not only the hint of a suggestion that some Canadians are not (or maybe should not) be free, but also the less-than-subtle naming of a particular diety, the naming of which is a threat to those who do not "worship" that particular diety.

Then along comes another Reformatory, who gets a litle more specific with the agenda. She follows right along without questioning the altered wording, but emphasizing certain phrases and adding a more specific threat at the end of her interpretation:

"I am a Canadian,
a free Canadian,
free to speak without fear,
free to worship God in my own way,
free to stand for what I think right,
free to oppose what I believe wrong,
free to choose those who shall govern my country.
This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and for all mankind.

"Note to beligerent Muslims and other professional victim groups..."

Huh. One would almost think she's afraid of Muslims, wouldn't one? I certainly think so! I wonder if Dief was thinking of how fearsome Muslims are (or any other religious or cultural group, for that matter) when he deliberately did not name any specific diety? Maybe he actually meant what it looks like he said:

"This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind."

All mankind. ALL mankind. Yes, Piglet, even the Muslims.

And then along comes yet another Reformatory, who sticks her chin up in the air and adds this little diatribe:

"I will not submit to any power that opposes my conscience when it comes to saying and doing what I think is right and necessary. Any power that tries to stop me is a tyranny, and I will not suffer to be oppressed."

She doesn't see any problem in thinking that those who think different from her should be oppressed by her and others like her, though. She follows that line of faux logic by calling for the elimination of the Human Rights Commission. By all means, let's have no more human rights, or safeguards thereof. After all, the Human Rights Commission does not recognize a fetus as a citizen. It can't. By law, a fetus cannot be a citizen because a fetus is not a person.

What she deliberately ignores (and actually refutes in that above phrase) is that no one is opposing her right to her own conscience. No one is trying to oppress her. Indeed, the shoe is on the other little trotter when it comes to oppression. She wishes to force everyone else to abide by her "conscience."

So let me do a little judicious editting of my own:

"I am a Canadian,
free to speak without fear,
free to worship in my own way whatever diety I choose -- or not -- as I see fit,
free to stand for what I think right for myself,
free to oppose what I believe wrong for myself,
free to oppose the imposition of another's values over my own,
or free to choose those who shall govern my country.
This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind."

ALL mankind.

Biodh Se!