Loosen the Beltway

The World of Personal Development

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:52:00 -0400

If you had mentioned the world of self-help, personal development or new age concepts to me two or three years ago, I would have laughed in your face. Today, I daily check out StevePavlina.com and BrianKim.net, the web sites of two personal development gurus.

There is a reason why “The Secret” has been so successful. People (including myself) are screaming for hope. We’re looking for reason in our lives. We’re looking for happiness and fulfillment. Not just in our personal lives but also in our professional careers. People no longer stick with one job for 40 years and then retire with a gold watch and a retirement dinner. Technology and globalization has rapidly transformed all areas of business: from call centers in India to marketing personnel shifting companies every few years. The world is moving exponentially faster and there are no signs of it slowing down.

People are looking for answers and unfortunately our leaders do not have them. The current Bush administration just reveals one disaster after another, from failing to prevent 9/11 to Iraq to Katrina to countless breaches of constitutional protections. George W. Bush’s approval ratings are in the low thirties-high twenties. Vice President Dick Cheney is at 9%. Clearly, they are ineffective.

So, we see books like “The Secret” and “The Law of Attraction” as bestsellers. The war in Iraq has become a 21st-century Vietnam. Everyday costs are increasing at a faster rate. College tuition has skyrocketed to where many private 4-year institutions cost $50,000 a year.

I personally believe that this hypercompetitive capitalist environment will eventually subside. It’s too much. We’re already seeing this in young people; climbing the corporate ladder isn’t worth wasting your youth with 80-hour workweeks. People are beginning to search for meaning in life.

So my answer for today is a lesson best taught by Joseph Campbell: follow your bliss. The rest will come.

Technology Is Less Convenient

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 12:12:00 -0400

Every time I hear about another technological innovation, I’m informed about how the new device will make my life easier, will make choices simpler, and the convenience it brings will change my life. Cell phones now double as cameras, walkie-talkies, PDAs, alarm clocks, whatever. The trains on my rush-hour commute are filled with people thumbing through their BlackBerries (derogatorily nicknamed “CrackBerries” by some). This “technological convenience” will now make you smarter, faster, better, more efficient. It will also allow you to have a life too. Or so that’s what’s promised.

Ask yourself this: are you now more convenienced? Is your life simpler or more complex because of technology?

The first decade of the 21st century is now over half over. The latter half of the previous decade promised all sorts of conveniences that technology would bring. People could telecommute. People would be able to leave work early. In other words, technology would bring “less work” and “more fun.”

Instead, it seems all this technology has had the opposite effect. The 9-to-5-workweek is an extinct dinosaur, replaced with late-night sessions checking the BlackBerry. The “virtual office” has now crept into recreational time. Proponents of this “virtual office” culture argue you can work anywhere at any time, even on the beach. Anyone who has done this knows that instead of having a great day in the office, you have a crappy day on the beach.

My point is that diluting the boundaries between work time and recreational time doesn’t conveniently allow you to define your own boundaries, it forces you to work…all the time! If you can check work email at home, sooner or later you will be expected to do so. If you can be reached by phone from anywhere on the planet, you’ll be forced to work. The lack of an inability to work thus forces you to choose when to work…and when you choose not to work, your colleagues will be wondering why you’re not working, especially if they want to work all the time.

No wonder why so many Americans are unhappy. The U.S. is the wealthiest country in the world, and yet billions are spent on self-help books and therapy.

I have yet to own a cell phone. I imagine I will eventually cave in but for now I’m fine not having a 24-hour connection resting next to my hip. God forbid I should be forced to get a BlackBerry.

Even Everything They've Said Has Turned Out To Be Wrong, Neoconservatives Are Still Clueless

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Fri, 2 Feb 2007 14:27:00 -0500

It baffles me to see that, despite the utter chaos that has developed in Iraq, neoconservatives are still incorrigibly retarded in analyzing the situation.

Take Charles Krauthammer's lamentation, for example. Having acknowledged that sectarian strife exists on a full-scale level, Krauthammer lays the blame solely on the Iraqis, ignoring that L. Paul Bremer threw out over 50,000 low- and middle-level Baathist party bureaucrats and dissolved the Iraqi army, which left hundreds of thousands armed and unemployed. That pissed off a lot of people.

When you take jobs away from people and fill that vacuum with foreigners (i.e. private contractors), those now unemployed are going to be angry, hungry, and desperate, resulting in bad outcomes, especially if they are armed. Desperate people resort to hope, a concept that religion thrives on, and thus they lean toward their community leaders. People just like Moqtada al-Sadr. Al-Sadr has blamed the American occupation but has also sought vengeance against the Sunni minority. Conversely, the Sunni minority feels villified, ignored, and seeks to attack Shiites.

Yes, these feelings have been fueled for hundreds of years (much like Catholics and Protestants had violently brutalized each other throughout history), but the catalyst was that the new American occupation fired thousands of Iraqi government officials, disbanded the Iraqi army, and never fully filled the vacuum. The jobs that were replaced were filled by either the US military or private contractors. Iraqis had little say in the early stages of reconstruction.

Sorry, Mr. Krauthammer. You were wrong then and you are wrong now.

Iraq Will Further Deteriorate

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Fri, 2 Feb 2007 10:19:00 -0500

The National Intelligence Estimate reports that unless significant progress is to be made within the next 12 to 18 months, the security situation in Iraq will continue to deteriorate and the US will continue to lose control. The intelligence report also added that a quick withdrawal from the region would have "dangerous consequences."

It's clear that the occupation is not going well. Only members of the far left want an immediate withdrawal and members of the far right are too obstinate to recognize their own failures. Members from both parties recognize that a bump of 21,500 troops isn't enough to regain stability in multi-ethnic, war-torn Iraq.

It is truly unbelievable how the US got into this mess in the first place. Regardless of anyone's opinions on the invasion, the 2003 Iraq war was handled brilliantly; the subsequent peace staggeringly incompetent. In a way, the Republican handling of the Iraqi invasion is analogous to how they view their own domestic policy: do your own thing, keep government out of it, and all will be well.

Well, all is not well in Iraq. Unemployment is rampant, partly due to Bremer dissolving the Iraqi army and his de-Baathification policy. The low US troop numbers were calculated to take the Iraqi army into account but had been dissolved in the early stages of the war; all of those soldiers were thrown out of paying jobs. Private contractors from all over the globe are now doing the work the Iraqis could have done. Employing Iraqis to reconstruct their own country would have alleviated their grievances. Instead, we have Blackwater and Halliburton rebuilding Iraq for the Bush administration.

For the US, the situation is bad all around. Does the US continue to fight a losing war, where creating some semblance of stability is nothing more than a hopeful wish, or do they pull out, condemning the region into more chaos, abandoning hopes for a unified Iraq, and losing face with its allies and especially its enemies?

But I am ranting on topics that have been covered a myriad of times before. The point is that the Iraqi situation would not have been this dire had we had any semblance of competence in the Bush administration. The notion of laissez-faire economic policies only work when there is a stable infrastructure in place to enforce fair-play.

In other words, you can't play football without a written rulebook and reliable referees.

How To Deal With Iran

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Thu, 1 Feb 2007 10:21:00 -0500

It's pretty apparent that the Iranian government is plotting with Iraqi shi'ites in killing American soldiers. The question is how the Bush administration should move forward in handling with what is now a proxy war with Iran. Bush has already said an invasion on Iranian soil is out of the question but will he remain true to his statements? After all, Nixon said he wouldn't escalate the war into Cambodia.

I have a feeling we're going to have some intriguing covert operations over the Iranian border in the next few months (if they haven't started already).

Joe Biden's Words

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:14:00 -0500

ABC News has picked up the story of Joe Biden's faux pas over Senator Barack Obama that the bloggers have been putzing with for the past couple of days:

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man."

It seems that members from both the left and the right are in a hue and cry over this. Rush Limbaugh pounces on the libs:

"'He is a clean African-American'?...Does he mean that he knows that Jesse Jackson is not clean? Does he mean that he knows that Reverend Sharpton is not clean? … See, folks, this is the problem for the libs. Once they get off script they expose their idiocy, they expose their prejudice."

Jesse Jackson cries foul:

"They are loaded words," Rev. Jesse Jackson told ABC News. "And that's why he should interpret what he meant by those loaded words. It was an attempt I thought to diminish Barack's attributes and dismissive of our previous campaigns that made Barack's candidacy possible."

Why don't we take a look at exactly what has been said? Biden called Obama "articulate." Now how is that offensive? Maybe articulate isn't a strong enough word--perhaps Biden should have used "eloquent." Regardless, that's what I believe because to point out otherwise does not make much sense. The Kennedys were once labeled "articulate." Tony Blair has been called "articulate." Google "Bill Clinton" and "articulate" and you will find a myriad of references labeling the former president as such. Does that mean that those who stem from Mr. Clinton's working-class roots stem are inarticulate? Hardly anyone would make that argument. I think the same parallellism here.

No, the argument rests with the idea that the term "articulate" is a dirty word. Historically the term "articulate" had been used to describe educated blacks who fit in the white man's mold. This is 2007, however, and the term "articulate" has never fallen out of favor in the common lexicon. I can call my fellow friend "articulate" and he/she would take it as a compliment. So then why can't it be acceptable to call an African-American "articulate?" Because it jives at the stereotype that African Americans are not articulate? Most African Americans have had to deal with lots of negative stereotypes. If I call a black man smart, does that mean I'm saying he's smart [for a black man]? I don't think it comes down to that.

The "clean" reference can be attributed to Obama's inexperience in politics. He hasn't gotten his hands dirty yet. I seriously doubt that Biden meant to refer to his showering habits.

Biden has never been known for grace or eloquence, but in my humble opinion I think the newsmedia have blown his statement well out of proportion.

Review of The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 11:46:00 -0500

If you had any doubt that Barack Obama would run for president in 2008, read his latest work, The Audacity of Hope. His optimism for a better future pours out of every page. He successfully paints himself as a regular hardworking joe with a family man, just one of millions of Americans who strive for a better future. In other words, it’s a pedestal for which Senator Obama will launch his candidacy.

I don’t normally read books authored by superstar politicians. They are usually ghostwritten and in my eyes do not add much value to the person. For instance, George W. Bush is the author of A Charge to Keep. Does anyone actually believe he wrote this? Similarly, Hillary Clinton’s bestseller It Takes a Village to Raise a Child was also ghostwritten. In my opinion, if you can’t write a book you shouldn’t stamp your name to one.

Barack Obama, however, did not have a ghostwriter and penned the words that appear in The Audacity of Hope. His clear, concise style and the tender moments from his family life he shares bring a sense of credulity to his character. In one segment, he describes a moment where his daughter explains to him that children do not shake hands; that’s what adults do. Pages later he describes whether Ted Kennedy or John McCain had to go out to pick up ant traps after work. These moments reflect on both Senator Obama’s newbie experience as one of the upper echelons of American society and whether he will remain true to the reasons why he got involved in the first place.

In fact, the entire theme of the book is based on the disconnect between the American voter and the leadership in Washington. Private jets allow legislators to fly comfortably at least twice a week but they shelter their powerful patrons from the struggles and hardships of their constituents. Throughout his congressional campaign, Illinois voters kept telling him to never change and remain true to your humble background, a struggle that Senator Obama himself admits to as being difficult.

Mr. Obama was not born into elitism, though his impressive record challenges his humble claims. Earned a master’s degree from Columbia and a law degree from Harvard, was elected president of the Law Review by his peers, Mrs. Obama’s past is anything but average joe. He is a go-getter and would not be where he was today without his insatiable drive. The senator also claims that much from his life hasn’t changed since winning office; he still goes to the same barbershop and hangs out with the same friends. With his hat thrown into the presidential fray, I doubt life will continue as normal. The question is whether a “President Obama” will hang true to his beliefs.

I think he will. Why? It’s the color of his skin. A white man can grow up in poverty, become rich, and easily lose sight of his humble beginnings. The founders of America left Europe for upward mobility; hard work and success dictated your social status, not hereditary titles. Contemporary America, however, has replaced assumed titles with a crude substitute: race. A self-made white millionaire in America can always suppress his lower-class roots; a wealthy black man will wake up every day, look in the mirror, and see his face as one of the millions of other black men who struggle just to survive in this country. He will look around the halls of success and see white males: rich, usually old, and whose first-hand accounts are oblivious to the middle-, working- and lower-classes. Obama attests to this when he enters the Senate chamber and is the only black man present.

Though at times he can seem preachy and seeming to represent all sides to all people, Barack Obama succeeds in writing a candid piece on his views of the American philosophy and social landscape. The Audacity of Hope gets 3½ out of 5 stars.

Bush the Decision-Maker

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:18:00 -0500

He may be the decision-maker on Iraq, but it's too bad he's made all the wrong choices.

Oh Yeah!

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Wed, 8 Nov 2006 09:18:00 -0500

Good times, good times..

Dissenting GOP Senators Surrender on Torture

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 12:21:00 -0400

THE “COMPROMISE”—as the mainstream media is calling it—seems to be less of an agreement between Senators McCain (R-.AZ), Warner (R.-VA), and Graham (R.-SC) and more of a victory for the Bush administration. Though the TORTURE BILL will not redefine the Geneva Conventions clause on torture, it won’t contest President Bush from defining his own interpretation on what the Geneva Convention means by torture. In other words, the torture will go on.

Barring secret evidence from tribunals, however, was a minor victory for the GOP senators. But the remaining results of the so-called compromise seem to indicate a complete capitulation from McCain, Warner and Graham. Originally, they wanted to ban evidence gained from coercion. According to this bill, evidence from coercion can be used upon judicial approval.

What is even more startling is that the TORTURE BILL allows for this:

It allows the president to declare any foreigner, anywhere, an “illegal enemy combatant” using a dangerously broad definition, and detain him without any trial. It not only fails to deal with the fact that many of the Guantánamo detainees are not terrorists and will never be charged, but it also chokes off any judicial review.—New York Times

Sounds like the Alien and Sedition Acts during John Adams’ day, doesn’t it?

Hugo Chavez Is the New Oprah

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 09:59:00 -0400

Apparently, Hugo Chavez can sell books. Hegemony or Survival, Noam Chomsky’s latest work condemning U.S. foreign policy and claiming America has imperialist ambitions, hit #1 on Amazon today because of his rant at the UN.

I’m not a big fan of Chomsky but I must admit I haven’t read much of his work other than what I’ve perused at my local Barnes & Noble. What I did read was mostly polemic, unequivocally condemning, and outlandishly partisan.

The books I like to read are those that are driven by facts and supplemented with opinion; instead, works from Chomsky, Coulter, Limbaugh, and Franken are driven by opinion supplemented by facts.

But maybe I’ll drink the KoolAid and pick it up at the library. But probably not.

Don't Watch "Path to 9/11" -- See "Inside 9/11" Instead

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:05:00 -0400

DESPITE ALL THE HOOPLA surrounding the controversial “Path to 9/11” ABC special, I have no interest in seeing the much-maligned docudrama. Instead I watched the National Geographic Channel’s Inside 9/11, an update to the Emmy-award-winning documentary that timelines in pinpointing detail the events of September 11.

The film aired last night in two parts: “War on America” at 7pm and “Zero Hour” at 8pm. I caught the “Zero Hour” as it repeated after primetime at 11pm and was taken aback on its accuracy and the personal stories interviewees told.

The National Geographic Channel doesn’t seem to list a repeating of the episodes on its website but you should check out Inside911.com. In fact, you should check out most of NGC’s network programming—in my humble opinion, they have some great shows and they seem to be what the Discovery Channel and TLC used to be 5 to 6 years ago.

9/11: Five Years Later

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:56:00 -0400

IT’S BEEN five years. I can hardly believe it. Like so many others during that day, the memories are still vivid. I can remember the book I was reading on my way to work – Big Trouble by Dave Barry (which incidentally involved a nuclear bomb on a plane). I remember seeing the smoke billow out from one of the towers on my morning hike to the office. I remember that, despite being a little more than a mile away from lower Manhattan, we were all watching CNN to find out more info. I remember hiking up the West Side Highway and only hearing the sirens from ambulances, police cruisers and fire trucks. I remember feeling completely powerless and fearing all this could be a grander scheme for an even more disastrous attack, ala nuclear bomb in Times Square. I remember wanting to go home.

I was lucky I didn’t lose anyone on September 11, 2001. None of my family or friends worked at the World Trade Center. But I do remember commuting on the bus and right before entering the Lincoln Tunnel I would occassionally gaze upon the those dual skyscrapers and reflect on the symbolism with which they represented: human ingenuity, democratic values, and the limitless height the American spirit can soar.

I don’t have much more to say than what most other people have already said. Although I will mention this: because of its demise, the World Trade Center more strongly represents the values of Western democracy and American liberty – and how in the blink of an eye those values can quickly disappear.

Review of Fiasco: The American Military Adventure In Iraq

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:59:00 -0400

YOU see the daily reports on the cable news channels. You read the headlines in newspapers and online. You feel the anger exerted by impassioned bloggers. The evidence is clear: Iraq is in a state of failure and its society is on the brink of civil war. In Fiasco, Thomas Ricks explains how this quagmire came to be.

Regardless of your opinions regarding the war, Ricks’ research is thorough. Quotes from high-level military officials, including generals and colonels, are included. The results are profound: the emergence of the current insurgency could have been prevented had the military followed counterinsurgency tactics that have been in place for decades.

However, after the fall of Saddam’s Hussein’s Baathist government the Bush administration did not anticipate a popular insurgency and so many of these tactics were unknown to the leadership. Ricks cites two critical decisions made by L. Paul Bremer, the Coalition Provisional Authority administrator in Iraq. First, Bremer conducted an aggressive de-Baathification policy that alienated the middle- and lower-level Baath Party members and didn’t allow any amnesty policy. Having no option to participate in the new Iraq, these middle managers of the Baathist regime had no other choice but to join the insurgency. Second, Bremer dissolved the Iraqi army. Already short of the boots-on-the-ground that were necessary to occupy Iraq, the U.S. military could have used the Iraqi army to secure the country and restrain the insurgency. Instead, Bremer embittered hundreds of thousands of Iraqi soldiers by placing them out of work.

These early mistakes were critical because it led to more mistakes that fueled the insurgency. For example, since the military did not have enough boots on the ground, U.S. soldiers adopted a security strategy based on speed, which involved convoys rushing to secure an area and then abandoning it. The speed with which the convoys rushed to the area frightened the indigenous population, causing damage to life and property, and effectively giving Iraqis reasons to want the U.S. out of their country. Soldiers also rounded up anyone who was even remotely considered to be part of the insurgency and, because they didn’t have the soldiers to detain and interrogate prisoners, simply shipped them out to Abu Ghraib, the notorious detention center that was already filled to capacity. Studies indicate that at least 80% of Iraqis who were detained by these raids were innocent of any insurgent activity.

Overall, Fiasco is a fascinating and critical account of the U.S. military occupation of Iraq. Whatever the future of Iraq may be, this will become the definitive volume of the events that unfolded and gave rise to the insurgency in the post-Saddam Iraq.

Bush's Poll Numbers Still In the Toilet

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:01:00 -0400

NOT EVEN THWARTING A TERROR PLOT (oh wait, he didn't, the Brits did) could raise Bush's approval numbers above 36%.

Terror Plot Foiled in London

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Thu, 10 Aug 2006 11:08:00 -0400

WELL NOW WE know that Al Qaeda is still mucking around.

LTB gracefully and humbly gives kudos to the British for catching these 21 lowlifes. And kudos to the civil service workers in the U.S. for aiding them. According to Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff, the plans for this multi-plane, multi-day attack were in its final stages.

For those who are travelling today:

In Britain, NO carry-on luggage is allowed.
In the U.S., carry-on luggage is still permitted. but NO liquids are to be brought on board, with the exception of some medications and baby formula.

In case you forgot, the post-9/11 world is still underway.

Liberman Loses!

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Wed, 9 Aug 2006 09:37:00 -0400

LAST NIGHT Democratic Senatorial candidate Ned Lamont defeated incumbent Senator Joseph Liberman in Connecticut's Democratic primary. Liberman vows that he will continue his campaign as an independent, potentially dividing Democratic voters and aiding the Republican challenger.

Frankly, this isn't all too shocking because Joe Liberman has been outside the Democratic mainstream for a long time now. Pundits keep mentioning that the Senator has fallen far since he was a vice presidential candidate in 2000 but they seem to forget why Al Gore picked him as his running mate. Soured by Clintoinfidelity problems, Gore picked Liberman because he was the staunchest Democrat to criticize Clinton, not because he was well-liked or popular within the party.

Fidel Cedes Power...For Now

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Tue, 1 Aug 2006 10:44:00 -0400

FIDEL CASTRO ceded sovereignty of Cuba over to his brother Raul yesterday. We're still waiting the outcome of his health.

Could this be the start of revolution in one of the last remaining communist states? Cuban-American communities in Miami and New York were celebrating [nytimes.com - registration req'd] Fidel's relinquishment of power, though if the notorious Cuban revolutionary fully recovers their joy will be short lived.

Looks Like an Israel-Lebanon Ground War Is Imminent

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Fri, 21 Jul 2006 10:51:00 -0400

ALL I CAN SAY IS that I'm glad to not be in Beirut.

Baby No Likey

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 10:52:00 -0400

YEAH KID, we know. We know.

And the World's Happiest Country is...

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 10:06:00 -0400

VANUATU!

The think tank New Economics Foundation located in London conducted the study and measured factors such as life expectancy, environmental factors , and life satisfaction.

Rounding out the top five were 2) Colombia, 3) Costa Rica, 4) Dominica, and 5) Panama.

The top Western countries were Italy (66) , Germany (81), and Japan (95).

So where does the United States stand?

#150.

Not really surprising, is it?

Plamegate Continues...

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Thu, 13 Jul 2006 17:13:00 -0400

LOOKS LIKE PLAMEGATE STILL lives on in the minds of...well, Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson. They are suing Vice President Cheney, Karl Rove and Scooter Libby.

Frankly, I'm done with Plamegate and I couldn't care less. It doeoesn't matter to me whether she gets a ton of money or nothing because Cheney and Rove will still have their posts.

Bush Secretly Visits Iraq...Again

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:43:00 -0400

UNBEKNOWNST to the Iraqi prime minister, PRESIDENT BUSH travels to Baghdad under the cover of secrecy. This is the second time Bush has visited Iraq, the first trip happening on Thanksgiving in 2003.

I'm not sure as to whether Prime Minister al-Maliki feels flattered or insulted by Bush's appearance. If I were trying to build a perception of autonomy from the occupying Americans, this secret trip undermines this, especially if I were not aware of Bush's visit until 5 minutes before I met with him. Then again, I could be flattered by the presence of the person who caused the fall of Saddam and subsequent chaotic governmental environment in Iraq.

Bush will spend all of 5 hours in Iraq, where he will meet with the prime minister and his cabinet officers. He will probably visit some American troops too. It is rather clear that he will not step one foot outside of the Disney World Arab cocoon that is the Green Zone.

Why Do People Tolerate Ann Coulter?

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Wed, 7 Jun 2006 12:52:00 -0400

SERIOUSLY. As of this posting, Ann Coulter's Godless is #3 on Amazon. Take, for example, this horrendously tasteless quote in her book, as repeated by Matt Lauer on yesterday's Today Show:

"These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by griefparrazies. I have never seen people enjoying their husband’s death so much."

Of course, crazed maniacal statements are nothing new from Ms. Coulter:

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."
[link]

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity."
[link]

"Liberals hate America, they hate flag-wavers, they hate abortion opponents, they hate all religions except Islam, post 9/11. Even Islamic terrorists don't hate America like liberals do. They don't have the energy. If they had that much energy, they'd have indoor plumbing by now."
[link]

"To The People Of Islam: Just think: If we'd invaded your countries, killed your leaders and converted you to Christianity YOU'D ALL BE OPENING CHRISTMAS PRESENTS RIGHT ABOUT NOW! Merry Christmas."
[link]

And does anyone remember that columnist-to-be Ann Coulter was fired from USA Today just before her first entry was published? Now that was hilarious.

Do people absorb Ann Coulter because watching her spew garbage is akin to viewing a train wreck in slow mo? Or does reading Coulter's rantings give the uneducated masses a pseudo-intellectual experience? Do they fail to comprehend the writings of more liberal and more academic intellectuals so they turn to the rantings and ravings of an Ann Coulter, or a Michael Savage? Hell, those two make Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly look like William Buckley.

As for me, I'm looking forward to the next quote. Can anyone guess what it will be? I imagine Ms. Coulter will claim that liberals love to abort their 8 1/2 month old fetuses because they desire the taste of pre-birth flesh while simultaneously sexually molesting them.

Why Ms. Coulter, don't you too?

European Nations Complicit in Secret CIA Abductions

noreply@blogger.com (Brian) — Wed, 7 Jun 2006 10:04:00 -0400

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS reports that, according to a 67-page report by the Council of Europe, as many as 14 European nations have been complicit in allowing the CIA to unlawfully transfer individuals across nation-state borders, a violation of international human rights law.

Poland and Romania were drop-off points for many secret CIA flights, according to the report. Polish Prime Minister Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz denied the allegations. Romeo Raicu, the head of a Romanian parliamentary committee overseeing foreign intelligence servies, also indicated there was no evidence to the claims.

A parallel report by the European Parliament concluded there have been over 1,000 secret CIA flights in Europe since September 11, 2001.