Comments on: Saturday Funnies

By: sofistic

sofistic — Sat, 08 Jul 2006 21:30:30 +0000

For those of you in a wierd food mood, take a look at “Steve don’t eat it!”

http://www.thesneeze.com/mt-ar.....eat_it.php

By: Morris Sheppard

Morris Sheppard — Sat, 08 Jul 2006 19:54:27 +0000

I’m stealing this from a comment at DKos by a poster callled EZWriter, but I thought it was so funny it was worth the larceny. Someone later informed me they thought it was a recycled blonde joke, but it’s so much funnier about GW.

Bush calls in his NASA head and says he’s decided to send a man to the SUN! The NASA guy and his aides were a bit worried. They said, “Mr. President, it is pretty hot on the sun.”

Bush said, “That is OK. We will go at night, when it’s cooler.”

By: skippy

skippy — Sat, 08 Jul 2006 19:34:29 +0000

dover,

i’m actually not a fan of kaufman’s, i think he only works w/the right director (spike jonez, the guy who did “spotless mind”) and i think he has big problems writing third acts (who doesn’t?).

linklater did an admirable job, i think. it seemed to me that the plot was always just out of reach of being comprehensible…like one of those magic eye puzzles you look at, and think you know what you’re seeing, but not quite sure.

it wasn’t the best dick i’ve ever had, but it was some good dick. and you can’t ever turn down good dick.

By: Dover Bitch

Dover Bitch — Sat, 08 Jul 2006 19:29:43 +0000

That’s great, Skippy.

I’m looking forward to “Scanner Darkly” because it was one of my favorite books (Dick’s “Valis” is his greatest, though).

I’m a little apprehensive because the screenplay I thought they were going to use was written by Charlie Kaufman (”Being John Malkovich,” “Human Nature,” “Eternal Sunshine,” “Adaptation”) but somehow Linklater got the film made. Could still be great, but I think Kaufman would have been sensational.

By: Anon

Anon — Sat, 08 Jul 2006 19:27:42 +0000

In an op-ed, “The high court’s Hamdan power grab”, in the LA Times of 7/7/06, Professor John “torture boy” Yoo vaingloriously compared the Bush Administration’s war crimes against detainees in the Global War on Terror (GWOT) to Lincoln’s emancipation of the slaves: “A PRESIDENT responds to an unprecedented war with unprecedented measures that test the limits of his constitutional authority. He suffers setbacks from hostile Supreme Court justices, a critical media and a divided Congress, all of which challenge his war powers. … this describes President Bush after the Supreme Court last week rejected military commissions for trying terrorists. But it just as easily fits Abraham Lincoln when he issued the Emancipation Proclamation freeing the slaves …”

In Hamdan, the Supreme Court held that: “[The] requirements [of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions] are general, crafted to accommodate a wide variety of legal systems, but they are requirements nonetheless. The commission convened to try Hamdan does not meet those requirements.” And, per War Crimes Act of 1996: “[any US national who] commits a war crime [e.g., violates Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions] … shall be fined … or imprisoned …, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.” And, death has resulted to more than one victim of the Bush Administration’s violations of Common Article 3.

It is time to ask what our values are. Does America condone war crimes? Do true Americans consider Bush’s war crimes morally and legally on par with Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation?