When is a first strike not a first strike?
When it's Anticipatory Retaliation.

August 11, 2004

Burnt. Out.

Bravo Romeo Delta

Sorry for the weak, sporadic, and otherwise generally non-existent posting as of late. I am burnt out. Burnt. The. F*ck. Out.

That said, and recognizing that nobody (including me) wants to hear my whining, I did note this comment from a thread on Roger el Simon's site about the shocking, shocking! I tell you, shocking revelation that the media is so desperately full of crap, they can't sneeze without spraying shit everywhere.

At any rate, the comment was as follows:

Kerry either was in Cambodia at the time in question, or he was close enough for government work, a point that he makes in his battlefield journal.

Which, of course, is asinine.

I am either down the pants of a very attractive young lady sitting some thirty feet away, or "close enough for government work". Right?

Except not.

For those of you with mathy or logicky backgrounds, we note that if you have a set "A", you can also define a set "not A." If one says that something is in "not A" then, pretty much axiomatically, it is not part of set "A". Done. That's it kids.

This is the reason that, despite my close proximity to an attractive co-worker, that I am not getting maced, pepper-sprayed, sued, beaten, or various other calamities. That's because, kids, we recognize the difference that being in something is not the same as being "close enough for government work."

Eons ago, I noted that Kerry would be one of the worst possible Democratic candidates - Senators are simply unelectable in an age of massive archiving and lightning fast records retrieval. Surprise, surprise, Kerry's being hoisted by his own petard and people are shocked.

What gives? Seriously? I mean the simple fact that Senatorial and Congressional candidates are a liability is no shock to anyone. And this goes for McCain, too.

I have a huge amount of respect for Alan Simpson, a former long-time Senator from Wyoming. Some years ago, he was asked about a run for President, to which he replied with something to the effect that he had too many dents in his armor to make a good candidate. Smart man, there.

Any other bit of jackassery to the contrary is pure wishful thinking. You simply cannot subject 20 or so years of someone's professional life (on record, in DC) to this level of scrutiny and not find that they are a duplicitous jackass. Or at least dig up enough stuff that requires extensive and involved explanations. The Democratic Party chose Kerry. And surprise, they have to deal with his record.

I wouldn't normally be this ticked, but for Chrissakes, if Kerry got the nomination on "electability" (and no, I'm not going to find the ample primary poling data showing this as being the biggest single factor in Kerry's nomination), then what were people thinking? If you want to elect someone "electable" then elects someone who is actually "electable".

But not, deep in the throes of Bush Derangement Syndrome, the Democratic Party chose this particularly dubious specimen. Even without the notion of the Democratic Party playing for the center of the electorate by choosing, of all things, an extraordinarily left-wing east-coast liberal democrat, they chose a bloody Senator.

And if Bush wins, I fear I'm going to have to listen to another four years of whining, pissing, bitching, and moaning because the powers-that-be in the Democratic Party didn't have the sense that God gave a goose.


Launched by Bravo Romeo Delta at August 11, 2004 07:20 PM
mypetjawa v. 2.0 (beta) Retaliates with: I'm John Kerry, Bitch!

Retaliatiory Launches

Wow. Speaking as a guy who's also Burnt. The. F*ck. Out. (in my case, tired of the lunacy inherent in attempts at fruitful discourse), I have to say, for a guy who's burnt out, you don't seem too crispy to make a good comment, not at all.

Posted by: Patton at August 12, 2004 04:30 AM

I will second what Patton had to say.

Another thought, if I am standing at the border between Canada and the United States and I am two feet on the Canadian side of the border then I am in Canada. I am not virtually in the United States. This is especially important if a) I am doing something that is il/legal in one jurisdiction and not the other, or b) I have the legal right to be in one place or the other. This could be simplisme on my part but then I have never had such an experience seered into my memory.

Posted by: Ghost of a flea at August 12, 2004 06:34 PM

Somehow, every time I look at Kerry I think of Reagan's words during a debate in which he turned to his opponent and said: 'you sir, are no John F. Kennedy'

I believe the DNC looked around to see who had the following criteria in this order:
- HAS LOTS and LOTS of Charm to ensure voters will not scrutinize closely or believe the right.
- HAS LOTS MONEY - at least enough to match Bush.
- Has done military service, but is on record against the war.
- IS A SMOOTH TALKER - who when questioned under oath can say: "well that depends on the meaning of is".

FYI, and so you won't get maced or brought up on charges, many states are clear on how close is close when it comes to creating a sexually harrassing environment.

Posted by: michele at August 17, 2004 06:04 PM

free hit counter