Jon Stewart & John Kerry

Jon's response to the whole Crossfire thing was pretty funny. Let me share my favorite bit.

I told them I thought their show was hurting America. And they came back at me pretty good. They said that I wasn't being funny (Actually Carlson whined that one). And I said to them: I know that, but tomorrow I'll go back to being funny and your show will still blow.

I have to say I'm not even going to try and see both sides on this one. At all. I can't stand Tucker Carlson and was full of abundant glee to see and hear him being called a dick on national television - not to mention the little thing about his bow ties. So I'll be juvenile and just wallow in the happy. Life is short and a bitch - let me have my joy.

=#=

Saw Going Up River. I have to thank ww1614 for the link.

It just made my admiration for Kerry grow even more. Call me shallow, but I'm more than a little taken by the man. How can anybody go over this man's record and say he is soft? Perhaps his policies are too liberal for some people's tastes (not liberal enough for others, but such is life) - but call him soft and indecisive? I guess some people are more comfortable with the John Wayne-ish decision making style (shoot first, think later) and may confuse thinking things through with indecisiveness. Just a guess, since I've reached the point where I can't understand how anybody can be blind to this man's intelligence and integrity. Again, maybe he's not a guy who is for you - but to attack him on his war record and decision making skills? No, I can't get it. Couldn't before, can't at all now.

>Kerry's Testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 22, 1971<

Each day to facilitate the process by which the United States washes her hands of Vietnam someone has to give up his life so that the United States doesn't have to admit something that the entire world already knows, so that we can't say that we have made a mistake. Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, "the first President to lose a war."

We are asking Americans to think about that because how do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? But we are trying to do that, and we are doing it with thousands of rationalizations...

Note: It scares me how this fits with what is going on today - 33 years later.

Good Morning to You!

I should be doing something else, but I couldn't resist sharing this from the thedailyshow. It's a short New York Times article on (who else?) Jon and his Crossfire appearance.

I'm sorry if it bores you guys, but I want to be able to look back on my LJ and remember this little event. Fondly. Happily. Squealing with glee. I do write my LJ with the purpose of chronicling my (ohh so exciting) life. And, of course, sharing some of it with all of you (fortunate, blessed ones). So...

If it doesn't bore you and you do agree that the US media needs a wake up call: >click< It will take you to canedeparie's post - she was kind enough to paste the article (it's short) for the ones who aren't registered at the NY Times site.

Whether the issue is Swift boat ads or Bill O'Reilly's sexual harassment suit, shows like "Crossfire" or "Hardball" provide gladiator-style infotainment as journalists clownishly seek to amuse or rile viewers, not inform them.

Enjoy and good morning!

Edit: .mov file of some really cool editing (if you aren't a Bush supporter) - >click< And I'm adding a disclaimer - I have no clue who edited this and I'm only sharing it as something funny. It's a joke. Sorta.

Edit II: I have a rec to make - a great post, please read it >here<.

Colour me creeped out and yes, this is long

The Lonestar Iconoclast has learnt a thing or two about the new America. It has lost money in subscriptions and ads (some of the people pulled their ads in fear of retaliation and boycotts to their business) for endorsing Kerry as opposed to Bush. It made the news around the country (and world) because it's Bush's hometown and the headline is hard to resist.

I can understand disagreeing with the editorial and with the reasons they listed for not endorsing Bush. Bullying is something that I always had a problem with, though. That's just me. Other people will tell you it's not bullying - it's freedom of speech. Even if said freedom of speech is used to threaten bodily harm and to voice the tyrannical concept that journalists have no right to express their opinions if they aren't the party line's and should be hanged. I kid you not. Hanged.

It's a loguish post, but read the highlighted parts if you are in a hurry and you'll have an idea.

>Aftermath Of Last Week’s Editorial Endorsement<

We have been told by several avid Bush supporters that the days when newspapers publish editorials without personal repercussions are over.

As publishers, we have printed editorials for decades, and have endorsed candidates, both Republican and Democrat. When Bush was endorsed four years ago, the Gore supporters did not respond with threats, nor did Democrats when we endorsed Reagan twice. Republicans did not threaten us personally or our business when we endorsed Carter and Clinton for their first terms.

( Cut for the rest of the article: Aftermath Of Last Week’s Editorial Endorsement )

I do understand that you can't run a country (specially one as powerful and such a big target as the USA) as if it were all living as a big happy global family. There are things that are the way they are - Brazil will always get screwed in trade agreements; the US will always pose as the beacon of democracy, but be ready to forcefully interfere in the government of foreign sovereign nations when its interests seem threaten because, hey it can - such is this crap of a world. But, dude, try using some restraint or just know what the hell is really going on before acting! It would really help everybody out. A lot.

Or don't and just admit you are willing to be as bad as the other guy.

That you are willing to forget the >Geneva Convention< when convenient, but cry bloody murder if anybody else does when it comes to your own soldiers.

That it's okay to hide the numbers of >civilian casualties< in a war that's supposedly over.

The casualties are still mounting and the US press doesn't show you pictures that haven't been sanitized - it wouldn't be good for ratings to see images like >these<, would it?

How can anybody come out and say that yes, they do honestly believe that this was a justifiable war and that yes, getting Saddam was worth all these deaths and all this destruction?!

If you want to take a look at the letters yourself >click<

I sometimes think I should just shut up. I'm not American, I'm not that smart and I tend to be more emotional than rational when it comes to things like people dying for nothing.

XPOSTED

Pigs fly!

Red Sox!

Jerry reminded today is Mickey's birthday! Mickey Mantle, the greatest ball player evah! Yankee, true. Maybe it's some kind of message... but man I can't help but hope the Red Sox wins! Just think of the great story! I mean - it's been over 80 years!

Having said that...
Happy Birthday Mickey!