Technology is indistinguishable from Magic
Ramblings of a cheap hack

A blog about News and Politics.
About mattloch


Member Since:
March 14, 2006
Last Signed In:
October 10, 2008
Profile Views:
7748
Blog Views:
5158
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
Let's talk about Sarah Palin, from somebody who knows her
This town hates tall, skinny, boys!
"Seven Questions for Liberals"
Having problems getting your children to do chores?
News from the Executive Branch ~7/20/07
Bush admits Administration broke the law...
Father's day, and lessons he taught me
An alternate history of Europe
State of the Union blog thread
"We don't talk to evil."
Archives
November 06
December 06
January 07
February 07
March 07
April 07
May 07
June 07
July 07
August 07
September 07
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
October 08
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL

Share!


Enough talk about Ms. Palin's daughter- leave the families alone. Even the Mafia had enough sense to let the families be. This is a letter about Sarah Palin, and the way she ran Wasilla, Alaska. This was originally posted on another site; written by somebody who lives in Wasilla, and watched Sarah carefully during her term as mayor. The things she says should serve as warning to those who claim Ms. Palin is somehow "experienced" in executive office because of what she did in Wasilla. While many of the things Palin did (or is accused of doing) might qualify her to operate under the current Administration, I don't think America can handle another 4-8 years of this kind of favoritism or abuse of power. This letter reveals a side of Palin that I have only seen glimpses of in the mainstream media so far. Many of the factual claims made against her can be verified by previous reporting, and supports many of the unverified (or unverifiable) claims.


Dear friends,

So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the
last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .

Basically, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have only 2 things in
common: their gender and their good looks. :)

You have my permission to forward this to your friends/email contacts
with my name and email address attached, but please do not post it on
any websites, as there are too many kooks out there . . .

Thanks,
Anne


ABOUT SARAH PALIN

I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992.
Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a
first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her
father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a
first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more
City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the
residents of the city.

She is enormously popular; in every way she’s like the most popular
girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and
won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because
she is a "babe".

It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She
kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents
for seven months.

She is "pro-life". She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby.
There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.

She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.

She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just "puts things out
there" and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit.

Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a
champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin’s kind of job is highly
sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his
work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or
so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their
major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything
like that of native Alaskans.

Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.

She's smart.

Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000
(at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about
670,000 residents.

During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running
this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been
pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had
gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had
given rise to a recall campaign.

Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a “fiscal conservative”. During her 6
years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over
33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the
City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation
(1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a
regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she
promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they
benefited residents.

The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration
weren’t enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed
money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it
with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage
the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said
she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a
new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a
multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece
of property that the City didn’t even have clear title to, that was
still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers
involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the
community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it
would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that
could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.

While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office
redecorated more than once.

These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.

As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus
in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will
make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she
proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state.

In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she
recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while
she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's
surplus, borrow for needs.

She’s not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas
or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren’t generated by
her or her staff. Ideas weren’t evaluated on their merits, but on the
basis of who proposed them.

While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected
City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from
the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents
rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's
attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew
her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the
Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.

Sarah complained about the “old boy’s club” when she first ran for
Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of "old boys". Palin
fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as
Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people,
creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally
grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power
to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the
case of pressuring the State’s top cop (see below).

As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla’s Police Chief because he “intimidated”
her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top
cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure
and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that
an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't
fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation
for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen
contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she
later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to
replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded
for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew
her support.

She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in
help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town
introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council
became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She
abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn’t
like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.

Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything
publicly about her.

When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got
the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one
of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no
background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great
job which paid $122,400/yr, she was complaining in the press about the
high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the
structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this
Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party)
engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some
undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all
her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and
garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a
gutsy fighter against the “old boys’ club” when she dramatically quit,
exposing this man’s ethics violations (for which he was fined).

As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from
Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel
politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the “bridge to
nowhere” after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.

As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget
guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing
projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative
action restored most of these projects--which had been vetoed simply
because she was not aware of their importance--but with the unobservant
she had gained a reputation as “anti-pork”.

She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party
leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated
them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a
fiscal conservative.

Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah.
They call her “Sarah Barracuda” because of her unbridled ambition and
predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly
stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made
point guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah's
mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and
experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.

As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package
of legislation known as “AGIA” that forced the oil companies to march
to the beat of her drum.

Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to
global warming. She campaigned “as a private citizen” against a state
initiaitive that would have either a) protected salmon streams from
pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the
state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State’s
lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior’s decision to list polar
bears as threatened species.

McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a
heartbeat away from being President.

There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more
knowledgeable and experienced than she.

However, there’s a lot of people who have underestimated her and are
regretting it.


CLAIM VS FACT
•“Hockey mom”: true for a few years
•“PTA mom”: true years ago when her first-born was in elementary
school, not since
•“NRA supporter”: absolutely true
•social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill
that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships
(said she did this because it was unconsitutional).
•pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to
promote it.
•“Pro-life”: mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down’s syndrome baby
BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life
legislation
•“Experienced”: Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has
residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska.
No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on
supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city
administrator to run town of about 5,000.
•political maverick: not at all
•gutsy: absolutely!
•open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at
explaining actions.
•has a developed philosophy of public policy: no
•”a Greenie”: no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores
and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.
•fiscal conservative: not by my definition!
•pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city
without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built
streets to early 20th century standards.
•pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on
residents
•pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city
government in Wasilla’s history.
•pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union
doesn’t make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim
that she is pro-labor/pro-union.

WHY AM I WRITING THIS?

First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed
voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting
programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne Kilkenny +
Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local
government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.

Secondly, I've always operated in the belief that "Bad things happen
when good people stay silent". Few people know as much as I do because
few have gone to as many City Council meetings.

Third, I am just a housewife. I don't have a job she can bump me out
of. I don't belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no
fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will
cost me somehow in the future: that’s life.

Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100
or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah's
attempt at censorship.

Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to
say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.

CAVEATS
I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in
spending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor)
from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of
Wasilla, and I can't recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust
for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible
for a private person to get any info out of City Hall--they are
swamped. So I can't verify my numbers.

You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the
population of Wasilla, ranging from my "about 5,000", up to 9,000. The
day Palin’s selection was announced a city official told me that the
current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was
5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to
2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90’s.

Posted in the Politics interest group.
Topics:
posted by mattloch on Tuesday, September 2, 2008 at 07:29 PM
Permalink - Comments [97] - Leave a Comment - Report a Violation
Viewed 214 times
I just spent a frustrating afternoon at that bastion of consumerism, The Mall. My son needed some new pants (because he keeps growing, the little weed), so we went in search of some. First stop was JC Pennys. One pair of 9 Slims in the entire store, and one pair of 10 Slim school pants with adjustable waistbands. Thinking about buying larger pants, and just getting a few belts to hold them on? Hope you like black braided leather, because that's the only style they have in his size. A quick once-through of their "big and tall" section (the largest of any store in town) for myself, and out we go with his two pants. Forget going to Macy's (who hates boys with such a passion their "boys" section is no larger than a bathroom) or Sears (more Husky sized clothing than normal size, so forget being skinny), or The Children's Place (where boys are banished to two small corners of the entire store), the only place left would be Old Navy. Good luck there, because they've moved from the Rule of 2/3rds (2/3rds of the store for female clothing, 1/3 for men) to 3/4ths (where women now control 3/4ths of the entire store). You can't even buy larger than fitting pants there, because they don't have any belts for boys.

I've had to stop shopping at the Mall for myself as well, because of the aforementioned lack of Tall clothing.



In general, this town hates children and smart people. Proof? There is no longer a toy store or a book store in the mall. What other mall in America has no book store, and no toy store? Can the Valley Plaza staff answer that one for me?
Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by mattloch on Sunday, December 30, 2007 at 03:34 PM
Permalink - Comments [34] - Leave a Comment - Report a Violation
Viewed 228 times
This is an interesting Op-Ed column by someone who's point of view is decidedly more "conservative" than myself. It touches on several different subjects, all of which have been talked about in various blogs over the past few weeks (and years).

I'd like to toss it out there for people to read, answer, and discuss. I'm interested in all points of view, so defending the author's questions is encouraged.

A FEW QUESTIONS FOR LIBERALS

Edward L. Daley
CMP | OpEd Columnist

1) The modern American “peace movement” is responsible for the deaths of far more people than the U.S.-involved wars its members have protested over the past half century. Why then are so many Americans still convinced that going to war is the worst thing our country can do?

2) Over the course of its existence, our planet has been much colder and much warmer than it is today, having endured periodic ice ages and various cataclysmic natural events. That being the case, why would anyone choose to believe that human beings are responsible for the earth’s most recent, and relatively mild, climatic shift?

3) The Bush doctrine of preemptive warfare would – in all likelihood – have saved tens of millions of lives had it been implemented against Nazi Germany prior to Hitler’s invasion of Poland in 1939. So why do human rights activists today insist that stopping Islamofascists from acquiring nuclear weapons isn’t worth the cost in human life?

4) Monetary transactions between private citizens are what fuel our economy. The government taxes private citizens, thereby removing money from the economy. Since economic growth is dependent upon increased monetary transactions within the private sector, why do Democrat lawmakers routinely propose raising taxes, especially on those citizens who invest the most money in our economy?

5) The word viable – as it applies to human beings – means capable of life or normal growth and development. An unborn human being during every stage of gestation is clearly alive and capable of normal development, unless he or she is genetically predisposed to abnormal growth or is hindered in some way from developing naturally by an external force. That being the case, why do some people argue that unborn human beings are non-viable during the earliest stages of their development, and therefore, appropriate candidates for abortion?

6) The Geneva Conventions’ protocols relative to the treatment of prisoners of war, were created for the purpose of holding the signatories of the various treaties which make up those Conventions to a certain moral standard of behavior during times of war. Any entity, be it a nation, group, or individual, that does not adhere to the standards set forth therein, is not subject to the Conventions’ protections under international law. How then can one justify affording such protections to terrorists, who ignore all of the aforementioned behavioral standards?

Oh, and one last thing…

7) If George W. Bush is as stupid as so many liberals claim, how did he manage to steal an election, mastermind 9/11, cover up his administration’s involvement in that event after the fact, con practically every Congressional Democrat into going to war with Iraq just so he could further enrich his cronies in the oil industry, single-handedly destroy every American’s civil rights via the Patriot Act, and then steal a second election on top of all that? And if he’s really an evil genius, which he’d surely have to be to get away with even half of those things, why aren’t his primary political adversaries in prison on trumped-up criminal charges right now… or dead?

Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by mattloch on Thursday, August 9, 2007 at 10:16 AM
Permalink - Comments [17] - Leave a Comment - Report a Violation
Viewed 100 times
Would your child(ren) rather play video games than do chores? Getting them to do 15 minutes of chores is somehow an excessive amount of effort to ask of them, but they'll invest hours per day into a game that seems to have no discernable goal, short of draining your bank account and turning them into zombies (filled with useless information and statistics)?

Do I have the thing for you!

Chore Wars!

Yes, now your child or children can earn valuable "Experience Points" for doing even the most mundane of daily chores!

Instead of telling them that chores "build character" (like our parents did), let them play a "game" in which they "build a character", similar to Dungeons & Dragons or World of Warcraft. (If you don't understand either of these references, then most likely you don't have kids that are still living at home.)

"Chore Wars lets you claim experience points for household chores. By getting a few people in your house or workplace to sign up, you can assign experience point rewards to individual chores, and see how quickly each of you levels up."

In other words, your kids get to "play" the game by doing real world chores.

"Characters gain a level for every 200XP they earn. When a character levels up, their strength, dexterity and other statistics are adjusted to reflect the chores that the character has performed - if you've gotten most of your XP from high-constitution vacuuming and gardening, then your character will muscle up and develop a higher constitution value; if you've not done any intellectually-challenging chores, your intelligence will go down, and so on."

You can choose to reward your children by determining "prizes" for each level. Perhaps it is pizza for dinner. Perhaps it is a new video game. Perhaps it is a trip to the miniture golf course. You get to design the "game" for your family.

To quote the source by which I first learned about this:
"After seeing Chore Wars mentioned yesterday, the opportunities for manipulating people seemed... rich. ... When my charge is old enough to manipulate in this way, my crib is going to f@*king sparkle."

Give it a look. (Its free!) Try it out. If at least one person's life is made easier by this, I will consider it a success.
Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by mattloch on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 at 12:26 AM
Permalink - Comments [8] - Leave a Comment - Report a Violation
Viewed 86 times
Before some of these stories completely threadjack other blogs/discussion threads, I'll attempt to post some of the stories coming out from and about the Executive Branch over the past 24-48 hours.

1) The President signed an Executive Order stating that under emergency powers he can sieze a person's properties if they're suspected of aiding and abetting terrorists (so long 4th and 5th Amendments!).

2) Cheney will be President for a Day while The Decider gets a colonoscopy. (Jokes about finding Bush's head, Cheney's hand, or WMDs can, of course, be made.)

3) Someone in the Administration has leaked to the Washington Post that the President believes he has the ability to force US Attorneys to not investigate Executive Branch acts, and to defy Congressional contempt citations. So we no longer have three co-equal branches of government. No more "justice for all". Not yours.

4) Senator Clinton was admonished by someone from the Pentagon (who used to work for Cheney) for asking about withdrawal plans from Iraq. She was told that such questions "aid enemy propaganda". Guess we're back the to "if you're not with us, you're against us" and "unpatriotic" tactics we saw years back. Guess they're getting desperate, and looking for scapegoats. (There was a Special Comment by Olbermann last night.)

More stories can and will be added to this list as they come in (and I see them).

A suggestion (not a requirement): put the number of the story that you're responding to before your response, so that we can keep the discussion about the various stories separate.

For the trolls: THIS IS NOT A "BASH BUSH" THREAD! This blog is intended on serious discussions of the legal, political, philosophical, and literal repercussions caused by the actions of the Executive Branch.
Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by mattloch on Friday, July 20, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Permalink - Comments [20] - Leave a Comment - Report a Violation
Viewed 91 times
...but it happened more than 24 hours ago, so the statute of limitations currently used against the Administration has expired.

From the AP (as posted on MSNBC):

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Thursday acknowledged publicly for the first time that someone in his administration likely leaked the name of a CIA operative, although he also said he hopes the controversy over his decision to spare prison for a former White House aide has "run its course."

<<snip>>

Bush would not directly address answer a question about whether he is disappointed in the White House officials who leaked Plame's name.

"I'm aware of the fact that perhaps somebody in the administration did disclose the name of that person," Bush said. "I've often thought about what would have happened if that person had come forth and said, 'I did it.' Would we have had this endless hours of investigation and a lot of money being spent on this matter? But, so, it's been a tough issue for a lot of people in the White House. It's run its course and now we're going to move on."


That's right, folks. Nothing to see here. Move along. (These are not the droids you're looking for.) Oh, by the way, al-Queda 9/11 Saddam Hussein.

Glad to see he's almost finished "restoring honor and dignity" to the White House.

Mission Accomplished.

Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by mattloch on Thursday, July 12, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Permalink - Comments [11] - Leave a Comment - Report a Violation
Viewed 45 times
I've been thinking about fatherly advice today, both received and given. And as appropriate as it would have been to post this blog topic last week, well, men are not known for remembering things like birthdays and anniversaries before the actual date. (And sometimes not until long afterwards.) But I wanted to post this blog (and thread topic) today because quite often we don't remember things like advice (both good and bad) until long after we needed to.

So today, after spending the day with your father, remembering your father, or being a father, please post fatherly advice you've received (and even that which you've given) here. Funny or sad, deep or shallow, all is welcome.

Thanks dad, for everything.
Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by mattloch on Sunday, June 17, 2007 at 10:56 PM
Permalink - Comments [5] - Leave a Comment - Report a Violation
Viewed 56 times
I know this isn't the typical topic that I post on or about, but I thought I should share this with everyone here. 

I was reading through the LA Times yesterday, and came across an article about an art exhibit that they reviewed. The exhibit simply blew me away. Here's the summary from the gallery:

"Ecuadorian artist Eduardo Villacis posits an alternative history following the landing of Columbus on the shores of the Americas. Instead of a European conquest of Aztec culture, Villacis envisions Columbus taken prisoner, his navigational tools examined and used to embark on an adventure to subdue and colonize a new world which will be renamed “Amexica.” This installation is a mock historical museum, complete with artworks, artifacts, and historical fragments of a vanquished people who once called their land “U-rop.” With this ambitious project, Villacis reflects on racism and the manipulation of religious beliefs as ideologies of conquest and as tools of deceit."

The artwork blew me away, both in its imagery (the Aztecs had some wicked evil looking writing) and its imagination. "Alternate histories" are a rich vein of fiction writing these days, and one which I enjoy when done well. Here are some of the pieces of art:

 Aztec cannonballs
The invasion fleet
The construction of pyramids over the razed city of Rome


From the Times article: " "Smoking Mirror" originated as a graphic novel, mimicking the museum exhibit form, with fake historical documents, war weapons and illustrations supposedly by artists of the time, for Villacis' thesis project at Cal State Fullerton, where he was a Fulbright scholar. It was first shown at the Laguna Art Museum in 2001. Villacis is still trying to finish the graphic novel and hopes to publish it in the United States.

To dramatize Columbus' arrest by Aztec authorities on charges of illegal immigration and traveling without proper identification, Villacis' "museum" includes a detention document from that supposed incident, written in a pseudo-Aztec script.

In pastel and pencil illustrations, Villacis shows pyramids being constructed over the ruins of the Vatican (circa 1505), the Pope on trial for heresy in an Aztec court (1507) and a shining new Aztec city dwarfing what remains of Paris (1522).

Physical "artifacts" also move the Amexican story forward: a priest's vestments in a glass case, pistols and cannonballs decorated with fantastical motifs that Aztec craftsmen supposedly made after studying the weapons brought by Columbus and his crew. (Villacis designed the weapons himself and asked a sculptor collaborator to realize them in clay.)

The Aztecs' attempts to understand the European culture they are destroying are as comically uninformed as were those of the conquistadors in Latin America. Because the examples — Shakespeare, Michelangelo, Christ on the cross — are intimately familiar to western viewers, the ridiculousness of the conquerors' interpretations is all the more apparent.

One caption speculates that the European natives worshipped a god named Henry, due to the inscription "INRI" above the crucified Jesus. Another notes that the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel must have depicted an orgiastic bacchanal: "The two masculine hands about to touch each other thus would be part of a larger homosexual scene."

So, what do you think?
Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by mattloch on Friday, February 2, 2007 at 10:22 AM
Permalink - Comments [8] - Leave a Comment - Report a Violation
Viewed 331 times
Since it appears nobody else has posted this yet, I'll open this blog up to comments from everybody. Share your impressions of the speech, or the Democratic response, or whatever you can think of related to the SOTU.
Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by mattloch on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 08:02 PM
Permalink - Comments [57] - Leave a Comment - Report a Violation
Viewed 672 times
According to this news piece, Iran offered to end support of terrorism, and make it's nuclear program more transparent. In 2003. The US response was "we don't talk to evil." Thanks Cheney. If we don't talk to evil, why are people still talking to him?

Washington 'snubbed Iran offer'

Iran offered the US a package of concessions in 2003, but it was rejected, a senior former US official has told the BBC's Newsnight programme.

Tehran proposed ending support for Lebanese and Palestinian militant groups and helping to stabilise Iraq following the US-led invasion.

Offers, including making its nuclear programme more transparent, were conditional on the US ending hostility.

But Vice-President Dick Cheney's office rejected the plan, the official said.

The offers came in a letter, seen by Newsnight, which was unsigned but which the US state department apparently believed to have been approved by the highest authorities.

In return for its concessions, Tehran asked Washington to end its hostility, to end sanctions, and to disband the Iranian rebel group the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq and repatriate its members.

 Former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had allowed the rebel group to base itself in Iraq, putting it under US power after the invasion.

One of the then Secretary of State Colin Powell's top aides told the BBC the state department was keen on the plan - but was over-ruled.

"We thought it was a very propitious moment to do that," Lawrence Wilkerson told Newsnight.

"But as soon as it got to the White House, and as soon as it got to the Vice-President's office, the old mantra of 'We don't talk to evil'... reasserted itself."

Observers say the Iranian offer as outlined nearly four years ago corresponds pretty closely to what Washington is demanding from Tehran now.

Since that time, Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah inflicted significant military losses on the major US ally in the region, Israel, in the 2006 conflict and is now claiming increased political power in Lebanon.

Palestinian militant group Hamas won power in parliamentary elections a year ago, opening a new chapter of conflict in Gaza and the West Bank.

The UN Security Council has imposed sanctions on Iran following its refusal to suspend its uranium enrichment programme.

Iran denies US accusations that its nuclear programme is designed to produce weapons.

Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by mattloch on Thursday, January 18, 2007 at 08:44 AM
Permalink - Comments [10] - Leave a Comment - Report a Violation
Viewed 271 times
1 2