Voting in Seattle

Seattle, WA is a pretty awesome city and state to live in. I used to hate election season. Other places I've lived, it seemed like everyone always felt outnumbered and attacked no matter what their political position, and each election cycle was several months of hell. Moving to a progressive State (and turning off the TV in favor of the internet) has done wonders for my blood pressure and peace of mind. As it would happen, this election day I was terribly ill. I had contracted strep throat a few days before, followed quickly by an insane viral complication that felt like some Bond villain was keeping their prize school of man-eating piranha in my mouth. Three trips to the urgent care center down the street just prior to the election had me on a four different medicines and I was instructed to avoid all contact with other humans for two weeks. Luckily, we vote by mail here in Washington state. Instead of standing in some stupid line contracting and spreading god knows what, I was able to vote from my sofa. I could take my time, web-search every candidate and initiative via the iPad, and not worry that my illness (or impatience / forgetfulness / ignorance) was causing me to make some foolish decision. Plus, thanks to our lovely open primary and run-off system, I'd already done my research on these candidates two months ago, so for 80% of the races I could just check my notes from back then. It made for a really laid-back voting experience, no pressure or confusion, and with me being so damn sick I really appreciated that. As to how I voted: mostly Democrat, plus Greens where-ever possible. No big surprise there. We did have some pretty weighty issues on the local ballot initiatives this year, and I think that's definitely the most important part of voting this time around. If you'll indulge me whilst I ride this high horse up onto the soapbox... I'm a bleeding heart liberal and I look like a hippy, but those who truly know me will acknowledge I'm kind of a square. I have maybe 10 alcoholic drinks in an entire year. I have never ever done a recreational drug. Despite that notable degree of stick-in-the-mud-itude, I voted this year to legalize pot, and am really glad it passed. From my outsiders perspective, pot certainly seems no more harmful than booze. I've been threatened and even attacked by drunks before, but never by stoners. You just can't put enough weight on that, even if there are other reasons to be pro-legalization. Washington has no income tax, and I expect the extra money from regulated pot sales are probably going to really help keep our various liberal programs and infrastructure projects well-funded. Raking in the dough, instead of spending it to lock up generally harmless stoners. Legalized pot will hopefully take the wind out of the sails of the cartels, in much the same way that ending prohibition deflated the US mafia. Not that cartel influence is felt that much up here in the Pacific NorthWest, but it is a legitimate concern on the national level. Pot's status as a "gateway drug" is because most people think it's no big deal, and yet you have to break the law to do it, which pretty much trains people to think it's no big deal to break the law. Legalization seems to me like a huge win for sanity, all around. I also got to vote in favor of marriage equality, and am thrilled it passed as well. I'm about to celebrate the 10-year anniversary of my marriage to the most amazing woman I have ever met. Prior to meeting her, I experienced a miserable failed marriage and divorce. Gay people getting married is certainly no more threatening to the institution of marriage than stupid people who don't understand commitment getting married is. Don't take that out of context, there. I'm not saying gay people are stupid, I'm saying as long as idiots such as myself (particularly at the time of my first marriage) are allowed to get married, anyone ought to be allowed. Happiness, peace of mind, legal protection, soul-stripping emotionally vulnerability -- there's nothing about marriage that shouldn't be just as available for any two loving adults to partake in regardless of their genders or orientation. I'm dumbfounded by just how alarmed some of my fellow heterosexuals get over the notion that two guys somewhere might have a ceremony and sign a financial / legal document. If you think some stranger's marriage (or bedroom practices) is a threat to your way of life, you have a outrageously flawed sense of perspective.

AWPC: Weight Loss

V: You want to know a good way to lose weight?

Me: Stop eating and start fucking.

V: That's pretty good.

Me: What have you got?

V: Nothing as good as that.

Moving Further Down the Spectrum of Conspiracy

The New York Times ran an interesting article yesterday by Kurt Eichenwald, wherein he revealed that the Bush administration had a lot more advance warning about 9/11 than what they'd acknowledged to the 9/11 Commission or the public.

The direct warnings to Mr. Bush about the possibility of a Qaeda attack began in the spring of 2001. By May 1, the Central Intelligence Agency told the White House of a report that “a group presently in the United States” was planning a terrorist operation. Weeks later, on June 22, the daily brief reported that Qaeda strikes could be “imminent,”
 ...
And the C.I.A. repeated the warnings in the briefs that followed. Operatives connected to Bin Laden, one reported on June 29, expected the planned near-term attacks to have “dramatic consequences,” including major casualties. On July 1, the brief stated that the operation had been delayed, but “will occur soon.” Some of the briefs again reminded Mr. Bush that the attack timing was flexible, and that, despite any perceived delay, the planned assault was on track. 

That level of awareness (especially when combined with the administrations efforts to downplay and hide it after the fact) is pretty damning.  Somebody should have been impeached.

There's a wide spectrum of possibilities as to what really happened, and what level of complicity various high-level individuals might have had. Here's one possible way to dissect it:

1. Incompetence and denial amongst a few key people at the top. 
2. Innocent of all but incompetence at the time, but actively covering it up and hamstringing the official investigation after the fact to save political face.
3. Willful risk-taking of a few key people at the top, hoping for the "New Pearl Harbor" that would allow their dream policies to move forward, and incompetently underestimating just how successful or potent the terrorist attack would be. Thinking they were risking a few dozen deaths, not thousands. Motivation to cover-up after the fact is guilt instead of just worrying you'll look like a fool.
4. Actively allowing it to happen for political gains. Willfully standing down crucial portions of our defenses, knowing full well how deadly the attack was going to be, and deciding that the scope and scale were just going to be that much more effective. The cover-up no doubt started before the attacks in this scenario.
5. Actually orchestrating or funding this murderous nightmare. 

The recent revelations via the NYT lays to rest Scenario #1. What I took away from that article was that it was at least Scenario #2, and Scenarios #3 or #4 seem much less extreme than they did just a few days ago (though I was inclined to believe at least Scenario #3 myself already, as it seems to be something a political insider could easily get themselves mired in).  And to be clear, I'm not arguing for or against #5. I don't think this piece of evidence speaks to motive or level of complicity beyond a certain point. They should have seen it coming. Afterwards, they had something to hide, and hide they did. The details beyond that are still debatable.

Even if you insist that it was the more innocent fuck-up-then-cover-up scenario 2 and nothing more, these revelations show just how extreme the incompetence at the top must have been. Not just "we failed to put the pieces together" but a more dramatic "a team of experts actually did put the pieces together and spelled it out for us repeatedly, yet we chose not to do a damn thing." 

9/11 Truther

I am still a nut.

I still don't buy the official story.

I still have a lot of questions.

As time passes, not buying into the official line really puts you on the fringe. People are more likely to believe that I actually did see a UFO than to entertain the idea that 9/11 was anything other than the official story as told by the 9/11 Commission.

I also don't believe the government's official version of the events at the Gulf of Tonkin which lead to the US dramatically escalating involvement in Vietnam. (Vindicated)

I don't believe the JFK lone gunman theory or the magic bullet. (Vindicated to everyone but Americans)

I don't believe Iraq was hiding nuclear or chemical weapons capabilities. (Vindicated)

Happy Patriot Day!

Fuck the DEA

Former DEA heads urge Holder to speak out against pot ballots | Reuters:

"To continue to remain silent conveys to the American public and the global community a tacit acceptance of these dangerous initiatives," said a copy of the letter obtained by Reuters.

Dear fascist bully boys,

Fuck you, you fucking fucks!

Sincerely,

Democratic Process

Grumble grumble dangerous initiatives my ass.

Добро пожаловать!

I was digging through viewer data for the blogs.

Apparently Repeated Expletives is a hit in Russia. This blog gets more than twice as much viewership from Russia than we do the next highest traffic zone, the USA.

So to our Russian brothers and sisters, привет. I don't know what we've got here that you find interesting but we'll try to keep it up.

Free Pussy Riot!

Once Was Lost But Now Is Found

It's a boson: Higgs quest bears new particle | Reuters: Scientists at Europe's CERN research centre have found a new subatomic particle, a basic building block of the universe, which appears to be the boson imagined and named half a century ago by theoretical physicist Peter Higgs.

Yay!

This makes me really fucking happy. Now I wish I had purchased some fireworks.