in case yr interested in that whole iraq's a mess but not really unless you don't think being in a mess is a mess thing...
iraq on the record
of course, caveats are in order; this list was compiled at the behest of rep. henry waxman and is hosted by the official house website. damn that liberal media...i mean, government...
so it took two days, but i finally recieved a response from slurp:
him pt. ii (finally)
You make some interesting points, and I think that we just have to agree to
disagree. Considering that we have only one class left, and that it will be a
festive atmosphere, I suggest that we put this in the eternal parking lot.
Go Pistons,
kwag/p (name edited)
[line] end of *engaged* dialogue [stop]
considering our discourse took place beyond the boundaries of anything too u of em related, i have no idea why it must be put to pasture. perhaps his retorts are soggy/mushy; perhaps i'm a douche and there's been good reason to be patronized. or perhaps he's a douche slurper. i think it's the douche factor. the eternal parking lot? there's a context to that comment, but still...
anyhow, i should have asked about the standard pew reference conservative wankers tend to cite while wasting the excrement of countless trees. the majority of reporters identify themselves as left-leaning, which *might* buttress the assertion of liberal bias if people even one-quarter of one-half pretended to account for the hierarchy of censorship present in media outlets.
selah...it's not like he answered any of my other questions. and it's not like i was going to say anything else but forgot what that was. eh? no? sometime? the wather's nice? what's "wather?"
him pt. ii (finally)
You make some interesting points, and I think that we just have to agree to
disagree. Considering that we have only one class left, and that it will be a
festive atmosphere, I suggest that we put this in the eternal parking lot.
Go Pistons,
kwag/p (name edited)
[line] end of *engaged* dialogue [stop]
considering our discourse took place beyond the boundaries of anything too u of em related, i have no idea why it must be put to pasture. perhaps his retorts are soggy/mushy; perhaps i'm a douche and there's been good reason to be patronized. or perhaps he's a douche slurper. i think it's the douche factor. the eternal parking lot? there's a context to that comment, but still...
anyhow, i should have asked about the standard pew reference conservative wankers tend to cite while wasting the excrement of countless trees. the majority of reporters identify themselves as left-leaning, which *might* buttress the assertion of liberal bias if people even one-quarter of one-half pretended to account for the hierarchy of censorship present in media outlets.
selah...it's not like he answered any of my other questions. and it's not like i was going to say anything else but forgot what that was. eh? no? sometime? the wather's nice? what's "wather?"
i think we were talking about teacher activism and mobilization last night in seminar. since everyone in mac knows everything, a kind man full of slurpage raised the issue of media as a way to draw attention to whatever our cause may be: "i'm sure there's some young beat writer out there looking to break the big story and make a name for himself."
me: and there's an established editor waiting to tell him how to fuck himself.
so this led to an aside between the two of us about media spotlight, to which he invaribly invoked liberal bias:
- eh. what do you mean?
- ownership, etc. look at who owns the media.
- oh...you must watch fox news, eh.
- i watch them all. cnn...now they're liberal.
- ok then...how exactly does the media.....hello?
ok, so now i've discovered the new this pisses me off more than anything. ain't no i was a guest student at princeton during summer term nine years ago so i'm going to wear princeton shirts and sweatshirts every day to try passing myself off as alumni/slurp magnet/wanker going to walk away from me mid-sentence. i emailed him.
he emailed back.
i emailed again. not too incendiary, but interesting to me nonetheless.
me pt. i:
so i'm still interested in this liberal bias you speak of. i thought we were
talking about it, but you turned and walked away. i'm curious if this is b/c
you have no way to substantiate this claim or if you didn't realize i was done
speaking even though i continued to, well, speak.
i wonder b/c i've heard people speak of a liberal bias, and i've heard people
speak of a conservative bias. i've never actually heard anyone say how to
actually *determine* how whether or not these biases exist. i have my own
theories of what constitutes a bias, but they prolly don't fit with your
models.
him pt. i,
The reason for the conclusion of the conversation was that my group was next to
speak, and I also honestly thought that you were done. With regard to my
position on how liberal I believe the media slants in this country I have the
following support:
1. When one looks at the majority of public/cable television/radio news I cannot
fathom that anyone would seriously believe that NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, NPR, etc.
are incredibly left-leaning. All one has to do is watch how these networks
report stories to see that they are definitely trying to spin the news to fit
their liberal agenda. One can also look at who owns these news outlets (minus
NPR, which is completely publicly funded), and you can see that the owners of
these stations are all overwhelmingly liberal in their political beliefs. Now,
we have a Republican President and Congress, and the news media's job is to
check any potential abuses that our government may be involved in. This current
political climate is not where I draw my conclusions, rather, it was during the
tumultuous years of the Clinton Presidency that the media's true colors shined.
We had a president who was incredibly derelict in his duty as
Commander-in-Chief, and who lied to the nation repeatedly, and he got a free
pass from most news outlets.
2. Yes, I do watch Fox News, because it is the only television news outlet where
I feel that I can get any semblance of a conservative point of view on the
issues. In fact, my favorite part of Fox news is when the Fox All Stars convene
around 6:30 p.m. to talk about the big news of the day. The cast is usually
Fred Barnes (a conservative, who I have enjoyed since I saw him on the
McLaughlin Group as a youngster), Morton Kondracke (sp?) {a liberal, who has a
show with Fred on Fox called the beltway boys}, Brit Hume (a conservative and
one of the best interviewers on TV) and usually a liberal from NPR (Maura
Liaason, Cece Connally, etc.). This is the most civil and balanced conversation
about politics on TV, and, while, in general, Fox News is slanted to the right,
this is a responsible and respectable approach to journalism.
3. In the print media it is incredibly hard to find a conservative voice (The
Weekly Standard, Wall Street Journal and Washington Times). I read the New York
Times frequently, and I am constantly disappointed at how liberal their
coverage is. Whenever there is disparaging news for the Democrats it is always
buried in the paper, or, if the editors deign to actually put it on the front
page, it is right on the fold, so it is hard to read.
You are a very intelligent young man, and I respect your opinion, but as an
astute follower of political news I cannot accept anything other than that the
media is largely a haven for liberals.
If I did offend you, I do apologize, and I was focused on preparing my
presentation, so I may very well have been rude last night.
me pt. ii
a few things...
1. gotcha on the *ready to present* sctickt. completely understandable.
2. you may want to censor your tone. calling me a "respectable young man"
leaves me to think you're simply patronizing me. from the length of yr
response, i assume that's not the case.
media...
3. what exactly is a "liberal agenda"? for that matter, what's a conservative
agenda? i hear this all the time, but i have no clue what this means. i've
come to think, perhaps simplisticly, that "media bias" is euphemism for "i
don't agree with what yr saying."
4. how does ownership affect agenda? does a single person own abc, nbc, and
cbs? murdoch owns fox, and turner owns cnn, so i can see you making that
argument re: those two, but the rest are corporate. why exactly would
corporations set out an agenda against the very system that's allowed them to
evolve into the conglomerates they are? wouldn't they look to uphold the
status quo, which is more conservative than liberal in nature. (of course, i
consider liberal as socially progressive and conservative as maintenance of the
system that's allowed for those in power to achieve that power...you could also
call it the haves vs. the have nots.)
5. is ownership necessarily important in determing bias in a consumer driven
media? the networks/newspapers rely on advertising revenue, no? that would
leave them pandering to two seperate audiences: companies looking to advertise
and the audience necessary to lure those companies to their particular forums.
if i'm an editor at the nytimes, i'm not going to publish much that's going to
piss of my advertisors. (and disclaimer: i'm aware that abc, nbc, and cbs
often take a hit for their news broadcasting.)
6. does your liberal vs. conservative split equate with dems vs. republicans?
this bold heading indicates an end to our email exchange
notes on ownership:
- abc is owned by disney entertainment
- nbc is owned by general electric
- cbs is owned by viacom
- fox is owned by newscorp.
- cnn is owned by time-warner
me: and there's an established editor waiting to tell him how to fuck himself.
so this led to an aside between the two of us about media spotlight, to which he invaribly invoked liberal bias:
- eh. what do you mean?
- ownership, etc. look at who owns the media.
- oh...you must watch fox news, eh.
- i watch them all. cnn...now they're liberal.
- ok then...how exactly does the media.....hello?
ok, so now i've discovered the new this pisses me off more than anything. ain't no i was a guest student at princeton during summer term nine years ago so i'm going to wear princeton shirts and sweatshirts every day to try passing myself off as alumni/slurp magnet/wanker going to walk away from me mid-sentence. i emailed him.
he emailed back.
i emailed again. not too incendiary, but interesting to me nonetheless.
me pt. i:
so i'm still interested in this liberal bias you speak of. i thought we were
talking about it, but you turned and walked away. i'm curious if this is b/c
you have no way to substantiate this claim or if you didn't realize i was done
speaking even though i continued to, well, speak.
i wonder b/c i've heard people speak of a liberal bias, and i've heard people
speak of a conservative bias. i've never actually heard anyone say how to
actually *determine* how whether or not these biases exist. i have my own
theories of what constitutes a bias, but they prolly don't fit with your
models.
him pt. i,
The reason for the conclusion of the conversation was that my group was next to
speak, and I also honestly thought that you were done. With regard to my
position on how liberal I believe the media slants in this country I have the
following support:
1. When one looks at the majority of public/cable television/radio news I cannot
fathom that anyone would seriously believe that NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, NPR, etc.
are incredibly left-leaning. All one has to do is watch how these networks
report stories to see that they are definitely trying to spin the news to fit
their liberal agenda. One can also look at who owns these news outlets (minus
NPR, which is completely publicly funded), and you can see that the owners of
these stations are all overwhelmingly liberal in their political beliefs. Now,
we have a Republican President and Congress, and the news media's job is to
check any potential abuses that our government may be involved in. This current
political climate is not where I draw my conclusions, rather, it was during the
tumultuous years of the Clinton Presidency that the media's true colors shined.
We had a president who was incredibly derelict in his duty as
Commander-in-Chief, and who lied to the nation repeatedly, and he got a free
pass from most news outlets.
2. Yes, I do watch Fox News, because it is the only television news outlet where
I feel that I can get any semblance of a conservative point of view on the
issues. In fact, my favorite part of Fox news is when the Fox All Stars convene
around 6:30 p.m. to talk about the big news of the day. The cast is usually
Fred Barnes (a conservative, who I have enjoyed since I saw him on the
McLaughlin Group as a youngster), Morton Kondracke (sp?) {a liberal, who has a
show with Fred on Fox called the beltway boys}, Brit Hume (a conservative and
one of the best interviewers on TV) and usually a liberal from NPR (Maura
Liaason, Cece Connally, etc.). This is the most civil and balanced conversation
about politics on TV, and, while, in general, Fox News is slanted to the right,
this is a responsible and respectable approach to journalism.
3. In the print media it is incredibly hard to find a conservative voice (The
Weekly Standard, Wall Street Journal and Washington Times). I read the New York
Times frequently, and I am constantly disappointed at how liberal their
coverage is. Whenever there is disparaging news for the Democrats it is always
buried in the paper, or, if the editors deign to actually put it on the front
page, it is right on the fold, so it is hard to read.
You are a very intelligent young man, and I respect your opinion, but as an
astute follower of political news I cannot accept anything other than that the
media is largely a haven for liberals.
If I did offend you, I do apologize, and I was focused on preparing my
presentation, so I may very well have been rude last night.
me pt. ii
a few things...
1. gotcha on the *ready to present* sctickt. completely understandable.
2. you may want to censor your tone. calling me a "respectable young man"
leaves me to think you're simply patronizing me. from the length of yr
response, i assume that's not the case.
media...
3. what exactly is a "liberal agenda"? for that matter, what's a conservative
agenda? i hear this all the time, but i have no clue what this means. i've
come to think, perhaps simplisticly, that "media bias" is euphemism for "i
don't agree with what yr saying."
4. how does ownership affect agenda? does a single person own abc, nbc, and
cbs? murdoch owns fox, and turner owns cnn, so i can see you making that
argument re: those two, but the rest are corporate. why exactly would
corporations set out an agenda against the very system that's allowed them to
evolve into the conglomerates they are? wouldn't they look to uphold the
status quo, which is more conservative than liberal in nature. (of course, i
consider liberal as socially progressive and conservative as maintenance of the
system that's allowed for those in power to achieve that power...you could also
call it the haves vs. the have nots.)
5. is ownership necessarily important in determing bias in a consumer driven
media? the networks/newspapers rely on advertising revenue, no? that would
leave them pandering to two seperate audiences: companies looking to advertise
and the audience necessary to lure those companies to their particular forums.
if i'm an editor at the nytimes, i'm not going to publish much that's going to
piss of my advertisors. (and disclaimer: i'm aware that abc, nbc, and cbs
often take a hit for their news broadcasting.)
6. does your liberal vs. conservative split equate with dems vs. republicans?
this bold heading indicates an end to our email exchange
notes on ownership:
- abc is owned by disney entertainment
- nbc is owned by general electric
- cbs is owned by viacom
- fox is owned by newscorp.
- cnn is owned by time-warner
look closely at the ball and you'll see tj's mark of approval:
donkeys bray, and it sounds a lot like fook ja.
donkeys bray, and it sounds a lot like fook ja.
just updating b/c i have nothing to update. i did see a hippy this week talking about how she loves the people of the human race right before she spit on a picture of awol for acting, well, human. i, too, spat, but only b/c i took a draw of spoiled melk. ewwwww...
actually, i spat b/c i heard awol had fallen off his bike this weekend. slippery pavement and an aggressive potus generally equate with an owie. or perhaps, no rain at all. fooken liars. looks like i'll be reading john kerry is a douche bag but i'm voting for him anyway with a bit more frequency...
anything else? i think cory ran out of playstations to auction off on ebay and got hisself a
job/be/job.
and since my m.o. re: paucity of update assumes the shape of photos, i present memories of cheryl and dc:
oh, kris: you can click the mr. kristine's b/f link now.
actually, i spat b/c i heard awol had fallen off his bike this weekend. slippery pavement and an aggressive potus generally equate with an owie. or perhaps, no rain at all. fooken liars. looks like i'll be reading john kerry is a douche bag but i'm voting for him anyway with a bit more frequency...
anything else? i think cory ran out of playstations to auction off on ebay and got hisself a
job/be/job.
and since my m.o. re: paucity of update assumes the shape of photos, i present memories of cheryl and dc:
oh, kris: you can click the mr. kristine's b/f link now.
damm, i thought i was getting my first prank call from a student today:
-is marco there?
shit, here we go... soar-ree?
-is marco there?
please don't say polo......who?
-marco.
it's coming...no.
-oh, sorry. bye.
wait, you sound hott--
[click]
-is marco there?
shit, here we go... soar-ree?
-is marco there?
please don't say polo......who?
-marco.
it's coming...no.
-oh, sorry. bye.
wait, you sound hott--
[click]
i think today is look at the stoopid fooken sign i stuck on the back of my car day. first, before i can wipe the 6.30 am out of my eyes, some hillbilly wanker who's strayed too far south from militia hq goes whipping by me in [gasp] a big ass pickup truck. painted in big white letters on his tailgate is:
THE US CONSTITUTION SAYS JESUS CHRIST IS GOD.
insanely curious, i busted out my copy of the consititution (yes, i have a pocket size) and read from cover to cover. nope, the founding fathers neglected to make that assertion. maybe he meant the declaration of independence? not there either. the federalist papers? nope. the old articles of confederation? various state constitutions? the universal declaration of human rights? no, very no, and absolutely no. i've exhausted a good deal of possibilities; perhaps his militia leader has "us constitution" sketched on his birth certificate?
second, as i'm drawning near to my domicile i catch sight of the old monte carlo wannabe z-28. plymouth's an educated community, and this guy obviously owns a computer to prove so. rather than use paint, he taped a mini-poster to the back of his car:
john kerry's a vietnam vet
...blah blah blah...(i didn't have my glasses on)
he came back a trader
i'm voting for bush!
excusfookenme? yr voting for bush b/c kerry came back from vietnam a trader? what kind of trader? the fur trade, and yr a member of peta? the oil trade, and yr an advocate of renewable energy? the drug trade, and yr trying to clean up the streets? can you really blame the guy for trying to make a living after vietnam? to not do so would be un-american, and that would be simply traitorous.
i suppose bush is heavily reliant on the moron vote. too bad for the rest of us there are more of them than me.
edit: speaking of signs whilst driving, freeway blogger is worth a click.
THE US CONSTITUTION SAYS JESUS CHRIST IS GOD.
insanely curious, i busted out my copy of the consititution (yes, i have a pocket size) and read from cover to cover. nope, the founding fathers neglected to make that assertion. maybe he meant the declaration of independence? not there either. the federalist papers? nope. the old articles of confederation? various state constitutions? the universal declaration of human rights? no, very no, and absolutely no. i've exhausted a good deal of possibilities; perhaps his militia leader has "us constitution" sketched on his birth certificate?
second, as i'm drawning near to my domicile i catch sight of the old monte carlo wannabe z-28. plymouth's an educated community, and this guy obviously owns a computer to prove so. rather than use paint, he taped a mini-poster to the back of his car:
john kerry's a vietnam vet
...blah blah blah...(i didn't have my glasses on)
he came back a trader
i'm voting for bush!
excusfookenme? yr voting for bush b/c kerry came back from vietnam a trader? what kind of trader? the fur trade, and yr a member of peta? the oil trade, and yr an advocate of renewable energy? the drug trade, and yr trying to clean up the streets? can you really blame the guy for trying to make a living after vietnam? to not do so would be un-american, and that would be simply traitorous.
i suppose bush is heavily reliant on the moron vote. too bad for the rest of us there are more of them than me.
edit: speaking of signs whilst driving, freeway blogger is worth a click.
i realized earlier today that death prolly isn't such a terrible option in the larger scheme of things. i don't mean this in suicidal tone, only that our general conceptions of death are rather contemporary (contemporary meaning only our present understanding of the issue informs our ideas). the problem with death anxiety is that we think in a binary, either-or context; death is simply the absense of life. since all we really understand is life, how exactly can we go about making generalizations about death? maybe it's a fooken hoot. perhaps we can do all the drugs, motorcycle tricks, and sexual laisons we'd like to without fear of consequence; it's fair for me to assert that the fear of death is the capital venture that invests in the rest of our fears. all i'm really saying here is that death is much more incomprehensible then we'd like to admit b/c it's too far beyond the realms of conception. fear of the unknown leads us to hasty conclusions.
this whole berg thing is still playing ping pong with my head, and no one's keeping correct score. the blurred circumstances surrounding the end of his life have me more confused than i was as i initially watched his decapitation. there are some crazy, though plausible, theories out there from both sides of the political spectrum trying to append an explanation to the build up of events; the theories originating from the left leave me more scared than those from the right. just saying, esp. in light of conservative doctrine that promulgates minimalist governmental intrusion. hypocricy much??? <---- oui, i own a ten meter springboard that aids in my leap to conclusions.
an epiphany visited me tonight as i pondered why i'm so shite at the small talk. it occurs to me i'm too busy thinking about more important matters than the surface area (read: most of the people i meet are measured in square units, not cubic) of the conversation i'm so desperately trying to eject from. why subject myself to the standard roll of hometown, major, line of work, who's yr friend bs when i can think of more pressing issues to donate my attention to? like my own lack of self worth. and how modern politics are affected by my lack of self worth. or why i think i'm too busy thinking about supercilious minutae that is neither profound nor timeworthy. nevertheless, i'm too busy to talk to you right now.
if i had no intention to use the following pun -----> i have a gut feeling my doctor didn't do so well stitching up my hernia.
this whole berg thing is still playing ping pong with my head, and no one's keeping correct score. the blurred circumstances surrounding the end of his life have me more confused than i was as i initially watched his decapitation. there are some crazy, though plausible, theories out there from both sides of the political spectrum trying to append an explanation to the build up of events; the theories originating from the left leave me more scared than those from the right. just saying, esp. in light of conservative doctrine that promulgates minimalist governmental intrusion. hypocricy much??? <---- oui, i own a ten meter springboard that aids in my leap to conclusions.
an epiphany visited me tonight as i pondered why i'm so shite at the small talk. it occurs to me i'm too busy thinking about more important matters than the surface area (read: most of the people i meet are measured in square units, not cubic) of the conversation i'm so desperately trying to eject from. why subject myself to the standard roll of hometown, major, line of work, who's yr friend bs when i can think of more pressing issues to donate my attention to? like my own lack of self worth. and how modern politics are affected by my lack of self worth. or why i think i'm too busy thinking about supercilious minutae that is neither profound nor timeworthy. nevertheless, i'm too busy to talk to you right now.
if i had no intention to use the following pun -----> i have a gut feeling my doctor didn't do so well stitching up my hernia.
it's been a string of bright days in a foggy window. i see weird things as i drive to school, but they disappear once i step out of my auto and see the world for what it really is; namely, strident ennui that i try so hard to capture and name so i can tell my children how much i've enjoyed life so far. this fog i mention, however, comes from my own efforts. i work so hard so my vision can be blurred by the stuff i don't care to regard as important.
anyhow, i convinced myself today that i should view the berg video, somehow neglecting to consider the emetic nature of what i was about to see. i've spent the remainder of the day trying not to puke. in fact, i had originally made "berg video" a hot link, but the queasiness returns everytime i see the image of his orange jumpsuit highlighted against the backdrop of hooded cowards, so i de-linked. i then begin to hear again the sounds captured by the low quality sound equipment, the robotic drone of "allah akkubar" that mixes with berg's formless scream in a way that resembles rape more than the intended statement. it feels so despondant to consider the pornographic nature of the video, how berg's life ended so maliciously and unceremoniously, despite the extremists' effort to the contrary, in a place that prolly resembles the basement in silence of the lambs. i don't know; this isn't helping...
anyhow, i convinced myself today that i should view the berg video, somehow neglecting to consider the emetic nature of what i was about to see. i've spent the remainder of the day trying not to puke. in fact, i had originally made "berg video" a hot link, but the queasiness returns everytime i see the image of his orange jumpsuit highlighted against the backdrop of hooded cowards, so i de-linked. i then begin to hear again the sounds captured by the low quality sound equipment, the robotic drone of "allah akkubar" that mixes with berg's formless scream in a way that resembles rape more than the intended statement. it feels so despondant to consider the pornographic nature of the video, how berg's life ended so maliciously and unceremoniously, despite the extremists' effort to the contrary, in a place that prolly resembles the basement in silence of the lambs. i don't know; this isn't helping...
today was a collage of nap, broken fights, and bad guitar playing. i pretended i was going to grade papers, but then i saw grass that grows like smoke. and no, not that smoke. the kind of smoke that causes light to dance in the way computers were created to emulate. it's only once in an often that free smells dance as vividly as i saw tonight in the town commons. not that plymouth isn't anything but common...
i do say that fat-pants deserves a round of applause for doing the grad school thing while working 110+ hours per week. and no, i don't believe that baby emma is eight already. it makes me feel we're closer to death than we once were to life, although i'm looking it in the face as soon as i turn around.
we've all been kidnapped by our families, environments, the weather, the temperment of our sun, the soft breezes that tickle the leaves we chew on, and even the religious fervor of countless wankers who may or may not be related to me. i've popped off what good comes from fighting one time too many when i realized some of us are kidnapped by disease. as for me, my ears have been kidnapped by modest mouse.
