South America sucks.

Gee, I wonder why.

My theory is because the Mexican government and the drug cartels are one and the same organization. Maybe not technically, but they're all on the same payroll. Small wonder they want to cooperate with the U.S. in name only.

"The Mexican president said forces from both sides of the border should share information to try to stem the flow of illegal drugs and tackle the gangs who supply them."

Yes, so when the U.S. sends you some info, you pass it along to your cartel bosses so they can then watch their butts.

People worry about the Middle East...it's retarded when you look at the big picture. South America is pretty much the same sort of place, minus the Muslim crazies. It's got oil, crime, the works. The difference is that drugs from the region have done more damage to this country than any terrorist ever dreamed.

Do we do anything about South America? Nope. We treat it like our dirty little brother that we don't like to talk about. Like a Canada that never quite made it. Too late now, we're stuck in that retarded desert, we don't have the resources to deal with the festering sore directly to the south.

Dumb.

I'm really a Chinese hacker.

It's probably China's fault.

Meaning the Chinese government. We'd all like to think it's Chinese teenagers having fun, but c'mon...Why do I have the nagging suspicion the Chinese government put them up to it, or at the very least contacts them afterward.

I have no proof, of course, but then again I don't need it.

Money: The root of all unhappiness.

The wrong way to think?

"Money is always necessary for your life."

True, to a point, but I think it's quite apparent where this thought process leads.

Why is Cheney still talking?

He's still alive?

You'd think this guy would climb back into his tomb for another 1,000 years, but no, he's still saying stuff.

Some highlights:

"'President Obama campaigned against it all across the country, and now he is making some choices that, in my mind, will, in fact, raise the risk to the American people of another attack,' Cheney said"

Someone should tell him he's not in charge anymore, he doesn't have to scream terrorist every five seconds to distract people from his administrations rape of the economy/environment/constitution.

"'Stuff happens, and an administration has to be able to respond to that and we did,' Cheney told CNN's State of the Union."

Right, like sending troops to a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 and sitting around for a week while New Orleans was wiped off the map. That's about as responsive as a mentally challenged lump of coal.

Criticizing The Bush administration is like kicking a dead dog, but I hope people continue to do it. None of this "Oh, it's over now, lets move on." People need to held accountable. We didn't have the hair to impeach these losers after they lied to us about the war and left New Orleans to rot, we can at least make damn sure their names are what they deserve to be; mud.

Bush museum.

In case we needed further proof he's a loser.

The economy is going belly-up and he wants a $300 million museum dedicated to himself. I guess the only way history will vindicate him is if he's the one writing it.

Hell, why don't we just find the biggest pile of rubble we can attribute to him and slap a dedication on it? It'd be cheaper, I think.

How about $300 million to poor people?

Recession benifits.

Good.

These belt tightening stories are getting funnier. Maybe no this one, per se, but I've read a few about millionaires having to buy silver houses instead of gold as though we're all supposed to care.

I don't think it's to illicit pity from us poor types. The media knows damn well we like to watch rich people suffer; entertainment news has long thrived on this principal.

To the point:

"The recession is radically changing behavior among many different types of people, from the Wall Street bankers who are now waltzing into Wal-Mart for the first time to buy their groceries to teens who are now thumbing through the piles of status jeans at secondhand shops to save money. And experts say that such behavior could linger long after the economy recovers."

Let it linger, I say. The "old American lifestyle" wasn't sustainable at all. Constant growth? Credit-based society? People seriously believed this crap worked. I'm no economist, but even before this economic mess I was a little skeptical of the nation's business model. I assumed I was the dumb one and there was something I didn't get about the system that made it work just fine.

The funniest part is that my own lifestyle hasn't changed. I was always pretty cheap. A few weeks ago on the news some loser was saying something like "People are going to have to rent apartments instead of buying houses, drive cheaper cars, and maybe go to a state college."

Beat you to it, losers. My car is cheap, my apartment is cheap, and so was my education (Although I would have liked it cheaper...).

Republican Leadership.

It's like watching pigs trying to hump a stump.

Yes, stem cell research is a "distraction." Is Alzheimer's Disease a distraction, asshole? You're entire party is a distraction at this point. Watching these losers say the first stupid thing that comes to their mind in an effort to be seen as the party's leader is rather amusing, I'll admit.

What was the name of that ass that didn't think volcano study was important? Jindal?

Octo-Mom, Octopussy.

I'm watching Dr. Phil.

I think I know why they don't have freak shows anymore. They do, but they're not as popular as they once were.

Competition drove them out. If you want to see someone that makes you feel good about being yourself, just turn on the TV and you'll see some loser who's more hopeless than you ever thought of being.

This is why people don't read anymore. People read all the time when books were the be all and the end all of the media, but now it can be divided up between radio, TV, and the Internet. I'd like to read something intelligent on the effects of mass media.

Back to Dr. Phil. He's interviewing America's latest freak, the Octo-Mom. The woman had eight babies, on top of the six she was already feeding with food stamps.

People hate this woman. She's the poster child for people who are putting a drain on the system.

I'm an idiot. I fell into the trap everyone else fell into. Okay, so the woman has popped out 16 kids who are going to have to fed and clothed by the state, sure. It's going to cost money. A lot of money.

I don't know how much money, exactly, but lets say for the sake of argument her children cost taxpayers somewhere between $5 million and $10 million from the time they are born until they're 18.

There's no way in Hell the cost of these children will ever approach the amount of money Bernie Madoff stole ($50 billion, that's billion with a B) or the deficit our leaders have racked up (Trillions, with a T).

And SHE'S the one people are pissed at? She's the freak?

The problem with country is that we get outraged over minor losers of no consequence, but all we do when a Grade A King Rat comes along is shake our heads, shrug out shoulders, say "Ho hum" and accept it. Ad bending over to that list, and it's done.

Actually, after listening to that idiot woman prattle her story, I can see why there's outrage.

Operation: Rushbo.

Forget what I said yesterday.

Maybe they do know how to fight dirty. Still know, I should say. I've been reading "Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72" by Hunter S. Thompson, and God damn, they all fight dirty. Hopefully not as dirty as they used to, but after Blagojevich, I suspect it's much the same (Spell checker thinks I wanted to spell archipelago when I wrote Blagojevich).

"'The Administration is enabling me,' he wrote in an email to POLITICO. 'They are expanding my profile, expanding my audience and expanding my influence. An ever larger number of people are now being exposed to the antidote to Obamaism: conservatism, as articulated by me. An ever larger number of people are now exposed to substantive warnings, analysis and criticism of Obama's policies and intentions, a ‘story’ I own because the [mainstream media] is largely the Obama Press Office.'"

The sad part is that a large chunk of that is correct.

Yes, they are enabling him. To who's gain, we'll have to see. Obviously, he benefits which is entirely of no consequence. If I were a Democratic strategist, making one twisted Republican ideologue rich at the expense of the others losing power would be a fine trade indeed.

As for him being the antidote to Obamism, I'd like to wait and see if Obamism is even a disease before I set out to cure it. But of course, when you're batting for the Red Team, you have to go against everything the Blue Team says (It's actually quite sickening what partisanship does to America, but that's another post).

As for the media being the Obama Press Office, he's bang on correct.

"Some princes are born in palaces. Some are born in mangers. But a few are born in the imagination, out of scraps of history and hope."

The lead to Gibbs's article, at least the tone, isn't that unique. And while I don't really expect anything but a liberal bias from TIME, to me that article was the pinacle of Obamism. Not even sworn in, and already we're likening him to Jesus Christ.

I didn't know Obama smoked until after the election, but I knew McCain couldn't recall the amount of houses he owns. I also stopped hearing about McCain when he trotted out that thing he found in Alaska. The media knew she made him look stupid, and she was all anyone ever heard about. She was more like Bush than McCain. Girl Bush if you will.

It's things like the Gibbs article that make us deserve Fox News. I hate Fox "News" for the record, but like the plagues in Egypt, we asked for it.

I could go on for a long time about what bias is. For the record, it's not when one party looks to be clearly in the wrong. Beleive it or not, sometimes certain people are right, and others are not, but we need to criticise the government, whoever it happens to be. The last time we didn't, we got the Iraq war as a reward for our complacency.

Republican or Democrat, we need to make the president sorry he ever ran for office by asking him questions that make him lose half a pound in sweat and six months off his lifespan.

Rush says stupid things.

It must be rough having to deal with the team idiot.

Why Steele feels the need to back-pedal for saying what's essentially true is beyond me. Oh wait, it isn't. He must have forgotten that the base he and his party pander to are ignorant hicks and he has to be nice to them.

I'm not going to make fun of Republicans here because I think this situation really illustrates what's wrong with Democrats. Rush Limbaugh has said he wants Obama, the president, to fail.

For the record, the president is the leader of America. Generally speaking, what's bad for him is by extension, bad for America.

Had a liberal said the same of Bush during his presidency, he would have been branded a traitor and forced to apologize. Now that some Republican lunatic has said the same, why isn't he being pounced on?

Some might say Democrats are above such simple-minded political games, but I say it's because they're wimps. They don't know how to fight dirty, plain and simple, and it's why we can't seem to elect two Democrat's in a row.

Ew, looks like I've become bogged into the Republican/Democrat mind trap. That's the kind of mindset that leads to Limbaugh statements. These people don't see politics as a process which governs the lives of people, they see it as some stupid game, like checkers.

Hell, maybe it is a stupid checkers game.