Yo

This place has become obsolete, I think. Redirect your bookmarks to www.drewspeak.com.
All the posts from this site are being mirrored and revised up there. It's looking to be a pretty nice endeavor.

Let us practice some "google magick":
drewspeak drewspeak drewspeak

Some Presidents are smart...

"Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose, and you allow him to make war at pleasure.... If today he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, "I see no probability of the British invading us," but he will say to you, "Be silent; I see it, if you don't."

- Abraham Lincoln

How things have changed, eh?

These quotes were yanked from the Wikipedia article on "The Vulcans", Rice's group of foreign policy experts who advised George W. Bush's 2000 Presidential Campaign.

Jesus. If only Dubya was actually a man of his word. How much better would our country be, non?

"If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us. If we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us. And it's -- our nation stands alone right now in the world in terms of power, and that's why we have to be humble. And yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom."[1]

“The vice president and I have a disagreement about the use of troops,” Bush announced. “He believes in nation building. I would be very careful about using troops as nation builders,” he clarified, expressing particular concerns about the Clinton Administration’s recent involvement in Somalia and Haiti, by telling Gore:

“I'm not so sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say this is the way it's got to be. We can help. And maybe it's just our difference in government, the way we view government. I want to empower the people. I want to help people help themselves, not have government tell people what to do. I just don't think it's the role of the United States to walk into a country and say, we do it this way, so should you.”

“I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war,” Bush went on to explain, “I don’t want to try to put our troops in all places at all times. I don’t want to be the world’s policeman.”

Bush Refuses to Set Timetables For...

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/bush_refuses_to_set_timetable_for

This is pretty brilliant.

My Year as Neocon Zombie

On March 27, 2007, I made a curious entry in my journal: "I do not like that Karl Rove," I said. "I would not like him in a grove. I would not like him in a box, I would not like to watch him on Fox. I would not like him here or there. I would not like him anywhere." My choice in targets was not what made this entry remarkable to me - in fact, I would be inclined to believe that quite a few people dislike Karl Rove these days. Two years ago, I was of quite a different mind - I openly declared that "Karl Rove is my homeboy." Today, the most similar thing I can say about the man is that he's a vicious, conniving gangster. While I've never quite liked liberals, I've always had a special hatred for conservatives - I've been a self-righteous libertarian for most of my life. There was a time, however, when I tried something different. For a year, I decided that I wanted to see what it was like to be a neo-conservative Republican.

Let me assure you, this was not an easy task. While my pluralistic philosophy has always told me it was important accept each and every system of beliefs as valid, it always seemed to me that conservatism was a euphemism for backwards-thinking and self-deception. Nevertheless I wanted to get myself beyond those personal prejudices, so I took careful and deliberate steps to infuse myself with this strange reality tunnel. I stopped reading newspapers like the Washington Post or the USA Today (after all, they suffered "liberal bias), and instead exclusively read the Washington Times. I listened to the virulent right-wing radio show "The Savage Nation" for three hours a day, six days a week. I voraciously read and re-read the three books of the show's host, Michael Savage: "The Savage Nation", "The Enemy Within" and "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." I even gave Pat Buchanan a chance. I thought I was being quite open-minded by willingly subjecting myself to that garbage. I didn't realize I was falling into a trap.

It's hard to be a conservative. For example, in order to justify the War in Iraq to myself, I had to willingly suspend my disbelief. My good sense suggested that the war was a terrible idea that should have never been implemented; the news reported atrocity after atrocity occurring in Iraq, but I learned how to ignore things like "doubts" and "evidence". The chorus of the time was to have faith in the President, to have faith in his generals, to have faith in God, to "stay the course" and eventually, miraculously, the war in Iraq would settle and all would be well with the world. After all, it was better to fight the terrorists overseas than to wait for them to attack us on our own soil, right? In hindsight, this isn't really a plausible argument, but it certainly made for a nice mantra. Leave Iraq? No, it's better to fight them over there than over here. Better there than here. Better us than them.

The Washington Times didn't report things the way the Washington Post did. When I read about the Valerie Plame affair, it was through editorials insisting the entire ordeal was a political stunt, a waste of time - the paper suggested that Plame wasn't even a secret agent after all, that her name, photo, and job could be found in a Who's Who of Washington publication. The whole strange story was written off as simply more evidence to prove that the "liberal media" was undermining the war effort. Whenever there was some sort of bombing overseas, headlines would blare "Islamofascists kill 8 on West Bank" or something similar - it eventually became hard to believe that there was anything written in the Qua'ran beyond the calls to jihad. Profiling Arabs at the airports? This was an obviously effective anti-terrorist effort, and it kept the TSA screener's hands out of my own pockets. After all, everyone knew terrorists were ever only Arab males.

What I ultimately learned from this experience is that conservatives actually live in an entirely different world than the one inhabited by ordinary, thinking persons. I've said before that conservatism is another phrase for "backwards thinking", but it wasn't until I practiced that art that I understood how fully it was the case. The modus operandi of the anti-abortion, anti-gay, pro-military, pro-church, hardcore Republican is to start with a preconceived notion, like the thought that "the war in Iraq is a good idea", and to then go and doctor together evidence to support their foregone conclusion. This method ensures that the Right is always, well, right; anything that says otherwise is subversive propaganda. After all, if one listens to Michael Savage, the aim of the left is to undermine traditional morals and national security so that America is an HIV-ridden, drug-infested anarchic state under constant attack from the "Islamofascists".

Eventually, this experimentation began to alienate my friends. I can't really blame them - who really wants to hear the vitriol of a neocon? One of my comrades explained to me that he "stopped listening when a conservative started spouting"; this was apparently a fairly common sentiment. It seemed that there wasn't much respect among the educated for someone who hated gays, supported a disastrous war effort, opposed contraceptives, abortion, wanted children praying in schools, decried atheism, evolution, accused liberals of being traitors - it was a philosophy of negativism, completely incompatible with the active, libertarian lifestyle my peers considered "freedom". Immersed in the dregs of this regressive philosophy, I found myself with fewer and fewer friends. My girlfriend refused to ride in a car with me if I insisted on listening to Michael Savage. So I rode alone. People on the Metro shunned me when I opened the Washington Times. I read the Washington Times anyway. I had ceased to be a libertarian, and I was treading down the road of a lonely fascist.

Eventually, of course, I broke free of this intellectual bondage. There came a point wherein I loudly lauded Israel's capacity to "defend itself" with enough nuclear armaments in underground bunkers to bring about mutually assured destruction for the entire globe. An acquaintance looked at me quizzically and asked if I really believed that was a good thing. Of course I said yes, and I argued the point with enough vitriol to make Pat Robertson proud. I launched into a tirade lambasting the violent Muslims, the plague-ridden homosexuals, the freedom-hating "Demoncrats", anyone and everything to the left and center. By the time I was finished, I saw shocked faces all around. I had gone too far. A sudden, dizzying wave of horror caught me; the things I was advocating were not the things I actually believed in. I was no longer sure what I believed in, but I understood that I had been under the sway of something else for a very long time. Dare I call it a devil? I do not think such a claim would necessarily be amiss. I understand now with complete certainty that these stalwarts of tradition and righteousness which have ruled our country are fraudulent through and through. Beyond that, I understand nothin

Bill of No Rights

the bill of no rights

The following was written by State Representative Mitchell Kaye from Cobb County, GA

We, the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid any more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt-ridden delusional and other liberal, commie, pinko bedwetters.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that a whole lot of people were confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim that they require a Bill of No Rights.

ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone - not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc., but the World is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.

ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in health care.

ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.

ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big-screen color TV or a life of leisure.

ARTICLE VII: You don't have the right to demand that our children risk their lives in foreign wars to soothe your aching conscience. We hate oppressive governments and won't lift a finger to stop you from going to fight if you'd like. However, we do not enjoy parenting the entire world and do not want to spend so much of our time battling each and every little tyrant with a military uniform and a funny hat.

ARTICLE VIII: You don't have the right to a job. All of us sure want all of you to have one, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.

ARTICLE X: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to pursue happiness - which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an overabundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.