Jasen Comstock

"Obama uses the veneer of intellectualism to promote the dirty politics of Bush. The president spoke..."

Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:38:12 -0500

“Obama uses the veneer of intellectualism to promote the dirty politics of Bush. The president spoke in Oslo, when he accepted the Nobel Prize, of “just war” theory, although the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan do not meet the criteria laid down by Thomas Aquinas or traditional Catholic just-war doctrine. He spoke of battling evil, dividing human reality into binary poles of black and white as Bush did, without examining the evil of pre-emptive war, sustained military occupation and imperialism. He compared al-Qaida to Hitler, ignoring the difference between a protean group of terrorists and a nation-state with the capacity to overwhelm its neighbors with conventional military force. “The instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace,” Obama insisted in Oslo. The U.S., he said, has the right to “act unilaterally if necessary” and to launch wars whose purpose “extends beyond self-defense or the defense of one nation against an aggressor.” Obama’s policies, despite the high-blown rhetoric, are as morally bankrupt as those of his predecessor.”

- Chris Hedges (via azspot)

"Central to the problems we face is our reluctance to see them as anything more than temporary..."

Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:36:40 -0500

“Central to the problems we face is our reluctance to see them as anything more than temporary downturns in the usual up and down cycles of economics and climate. They are not. World production of oil in the past three years has remained steady—85 million barrels per day— while the price has more than doubled in that time, and in early July had reached as high as $145 per barrel. A human slave, on the other hand—of which there are now approximately 27 million in the world, more than at any other time in history—can be purchased for a mere $40. Add another 3 billion people to the planet in 40 years while simultaneously trying to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 80 percent. Find livelihoods, food, fresh water and shelter, as well as education, health care and stable governments for these numbers without causing species extinction, soil degradation, civil wars, nuclear wars and mass migrations. Try running any of the world’s major cities—their subways, waste water plants, transportation, lighting and heating—for even a few days on low density solar and wind power.”

- William Vitek (via azspot)

YES!

Why God? Why?

Mon, 14 Dec 2009 09:47:59 -0500

afghanibanani:

Why does anything school related begin at 8 am? I’ve already taken my Spanish final this morning. I did it in 10 minutes, but whatever.

You know what I love doing at the earliest possible time? Stem changing verbs and present participles. Preferably, in a different language.

I would rather be punching in the alarm code at Starbucks at 4:30 am than trying to be cognizent and “learning” at 8.

OH MY GOD… Super hot Chemistry professor just walked in here. I can’t talk now. Bye.

My Latin Final is today at 5! You are obviously way better at Spanish than I am at Latin… Good luck with the rest of your Finals.

catbus: Here is a political cartoon where two-time Pulitzer...

Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:04:09 -0500

catbus:

Here is a political cartoon where two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Mike Ramirez compares people who disagree with him to the people who bombed the fuck out of Pearl Harbor in 1941.

You are doing it wrong!

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:03:04 -0500

Why are you being praised by National Review and bashed by the ACLU!

A Framework for Impunity

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:02:07 -0500

A Framework for Impunity :

azspot:

We had hoped, and expected, that the Obama administration would share our commitment to most if not all of these ends. The administration promised accountability, and initially it seemed ready to deliver. Immediately after taking office, President Obama disavowed torture and shuttered the CIA’s black sites. Two months later, he agreed to release the Justice Department legal memos that sought to authorize torture.

But notwithstanding those early decisions, the administration has not made good on its promise of accountability. Now the administration is suppressing the evidence rather than disclosing it, and protecting torturers instead of investigating them. It is shielding Bush administration officials from civil liability, criminal investigation, and even public scrutiny.

However, by invoking evil in his peace speech, he has obligated himself to a more decisive course of...

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:56:25 -0500

However, by invoking evil in his peace speech, he has obligated himself to a more decisive course of action and perhaps a new moral seriousness. For there is a deeper neoconservative concern that serves as the foundation upon which the architecture of democracy promotion and hawkishness are built. This is the belief in good and evil, reality’s parting gift to the mugged. Sometimes thought of as a quaint and outdated proposal, the assertion that virtue and wickedness are real is at the heart of neoconservative support for American power in the world. The Taliban — which beheads innocents, chops off voters’ hands, and subjects women to lives of brutal servitude — is evil. So, too, are Iran’s mullahs, who sentence teenagers to hangings for the “crime” of homosexuality. Defeating these parties is its own reward. As evil is now part of Barack Obama’s war lexicon, he must make this point, and he must speak of victory. For once evil is invoked, compromise is off the table. Evil demands defeat.

Abe Greenwald, Going Neocon.

Going Neo-Con

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:50:12 -0500

Going Neo-Con:

During his Nobel Peace Prize–acceptance speech today, Barack Obama said, “For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world.” He cited the historical example of Adolf Hitler and the present-day example of al-Qaeda. This rounds out a year that has seen a succession of real-world object lessons that bear out the claims of the intellectual tendency known as neoconservatism: Iran has rejected a torrent of American obsequiousness and will not be charmed out of pursuing nuclear weapons; its population, meanwhile, is clamoring for a robust American defense of democracy; a far-left American president has determined that a significant surge of American troops is the only way to win a faltering war effort in a far-off Muslim land; that same president has acknowledged that “we’ve achieved hard-earned milestones in Iraq” and is using the basis of those achievements as the model for his new ramp-up strategy.

Bacteria Engineered to Turn Carbon Dioxide Into Liquid Fuel

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:42:06 -0500

Bacteria Engineered to Turn Carbon Dioxide Into Liquid Fuel

goldenrat1o: sparo: Say I had a dog, right? These are the top five names that I would choose from...

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:30:51 -0500

goldenrat1o:

sparo:

Say I had a dog, right? These are the top five names that I would choose from to give my dog.

Steve Dogs

Kim Dog-Il

Barack Odogma

Dick Chewney

Vladimir Poochin

Al Poochino

I vote Kim Dog-Il

Vladimir Poochin

yaldabaoth: Afterwards, everyone in the Young Republicans were...

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:51:00 -0500

yaldabaoth:

Afterwards, everyone in the Young Republicans were able to confirm that they still had their wallets.

dude, is that Gary Coleman?

Things about porn:

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:37:01 -0500

sexartandpolitics:

I would like to see pre-scene negotiation and aftercare.

I would like to see more varied uses of hands.

Fewer genital close ups.

I should probably watch more porn where guys jack themselves off.

I’d like porn to be a source of realistic inspiration and fantastic exploration.

People who watch internet porn have probably seen somebody being raped.

Porn is like any product, know where it comes from and that it’s ethically made.

Broke Straight Boys does a negotiation scene before most of their shenanigans. The fat dude behind the camera is like “Ok Trig, I will pay you $1,000 (HA!), to have sex with Levi here.”

super big lisp “uh, huh huh, no way dude I’m straight, you said there would be chicks here.”

Xtube is mostly guys posting themselves.

The only porn that I thought was ever actually fun and inventive was “Shane’s World” series of videos from the 90’s. It’s straight porn, but was done in a reality tv kinda format which was still pretty new in 97’.

stfuconservatives: andressaleite: thedailywhat: Big Fat...

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:22:52 -0500

stfuconservatives:

andressaleite:

thedailywhat:

Big Fat Whale.

well this is how i’m celebrating christmas so fuck you!

I want that wreath.

I want a Nietzsche sweater

notthatkindagay: Yup. Do you think his staff asks him if they...

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:22:09 -0500

notthatkindagay:

Yup.

Do you think his staff asks him if they can feel his hair to see if it is like normal people hair?

Not watching the House Wall Street Regulation thingy, how is...

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:15:47 -0500

Not watching the House Wall Street Regulation thingy, how is that thing going?

yaldabaoth: via Gawker thanks I needed that.

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:01:46 -0500

yaldabaoth:

via Gawker

thanks I needed that.

who is this pole dance guy and why is he not famous?

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 15:49:34 -0500

http://www.youtube.com/user/Poledancefan#p/u/5/O1W46tFi-94

who is this pole dance guy and why is he not famous?

robot-heart-politics: jasencomstock: I’m in training to be a historian and I have never found...

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:57:51 -0500

robot-heart-politics:

jasencomstock:

I’m in training to be a historian and I have never found Howard Zinn anything but frustrating. I don’t know what Zinn is talking about here, but we don’t pay people based on talent. never have.

I think you’re missing the point? It’s less about why we actually pay people, and more about how people perceive their own payment/benefits. In a world where there is much to feel guilty about in terms of how much money you make (especially if you look around you and see the overwhelming poverty of others), it’s much easier to explain your fortunate position as, “Well, I deserve it because I’m smarter, work harder, etc., and they clearly are lacking in those areas and are poor due to their own laziness/stupidity/etc.,” than to acknowledge that much of your good fortune is little more than luck, not hard work or talent.

Maybe you’ve never encountered this belief before, although I find that unlikely. It’s been the foundational argument of the Republican party for nearly 30 years.

Perhaps what I find frustrating is that I actually don’t think anyone really believes this. It is said, certainly, usually by the poor fooled people who defend the obscene incomes of the wealthy. but the argument is quickly demolished by the observation of a work day. Zinn is debating what everyone knows is a lie on its face, wins, and then we call him genius.

The strange bipartisan consensus on Obama's Nobel speech

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:34:19 -0500

The strange bipartisan consensus on Obama's Nobel speech :

absurdlakefront:

Yesterday’s speech and the odd, extremely bipartisan reaction to it underscored one of the real dangers of the Obama presidency: taking what had been ideas previously discredited as Republican or right-wing dogma and transforming them into bipartisan consensus. It’s not just Republicans but Democrats that are now vested in — and eager to justify — the virtues of war, claims of Grave Danger posed by Islamic radicals and the need to use massive military force to combat them, indefinite detention, military commissions, extreme secrecy, full-scale immunity for government lawbreaking, and so many other doctrines once purportedly despised by Democrats but now defended by them because their leader has embraced them.

That’s exactly the process that led former Bush DOJ official Jack Goldsmith to giddily explain that Obama has actually done more to legitimize Bush/Cheney “counter-terrorism” policies than Bush and Cheney themselves — because he made them bipartisan — and Yale Law Professor Jack Balkin made the same point to The New York Times’ Charlie Savage back in July:

In any case, Jack Balkin, a Yale Law School professor, said Mr. Obama’s ratification of the basic outlines of the surveillance and detention policies he inherited would reverberate for generations. By bestowing bipartisan acceptance on them, Mr. Balkin said, Mr. Obama is consolidating them as entrenched features of government.

“What we are watching,” Mr. Balkin said, “is a liberal, centrist, Democratic version of the construction of these same governing practices.”

Most of the neocons celebrating Obama’s speech yesterday made exactly that point in one way or another: if even this Democratic President, beloved by liberals, announces to the world that we have the unilateral right to wage war and that doing so creates Peace, and does so at a Nobel Peace Prize ceremony, doesn’t that end the argument for good?

Much of the liberal praise for Obama’s speech yesterday focused on how eloquent, sophisticated, nuanced, complex, philosophical, contemplative and intellectual it was. And, looked at a certain way, it was all of those things — like so many Obama speeches are. After eight years of enduring a President who spoke in simplistic Manichean imperatives and bullying decrees, many liberals are understandably joyous over having a President who uses their language and the rhetorical approach that resonates with them.

But that’s the real danger.

My friends shopping list for party tomorrow

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:12:31 -0500

10 bottles of bourbon

7 bottles of coniac

3 gallons whole milk

30 pints of heavy cream

130 eggs