Welcome our new dictator.

I think the first people to be prosecuted under this bill should be its authors for attempting to destroy our way of government and life from within. How long has this infiltration been going on?

The Bush administration has systematically destroyed every law ever made to protect American citizens from their own government, and yet I'm still amazed at the temerity of this. Will the next step be not simply not doing things labeled as "terrorist acts", but actual requirements to prove your allegience?

To quote Attorney General Alberto Gonzales: "When courts issue decisions that overturn long-standing traditions or policies without proper support in text or precedent, they cannot - and should not - be shielded from criticism". Ironically, Gonzales doesn't apply this same reasoning to the Executive branch of our government. Apparently the courts should be criticised for overturning long-standing traditions and policies but that anyone who criticises the Executive branch should be imprisoned and tortured until they confess, and then possibly put to death.

You might convince yourself that "well, the wording might allow them to do that, but they never would", but then you'd be a fucking idiot. Bush has already stated publicly that he does whatever the law allows. He further clarified that he meant this in terms of the fullest extent of the law. If the law allows him to kidnap and torture U.S. citizens, he will.

Double-plus ungood.

I don't usually discuss politics, but I'm just so fed up with ignorance and the polarization it causes. Today I received an email from actforchange.org, an advocacy group that I subscribe to regarding the upcoming ABC movie "Path to 9/11". Rather than blindly "act for change", I decided to click some of the links in the email and see what the fuss was about.

Apparently this was a mistake.

Not only was the email from Act for Change a complete misrepresentation of their sources, the sources themselves were unsubstantiated (most of the information was without source references). So I'm to understand we should take action based on distortions of other people's distortions and speculation?

Still not having learned my lesson, I continued following links and watched the speculation and arguing about slant in a movie none of these people have actually seen.

That's right. Everyone on both sides is up in arms and they haven't seen the damn movie. Much of the accusations of slant come from rumors that the Clintons pressured Disney and ABC (who are either liberal or conservative depending on whom you ask and in what context you are asking) to make some changes.

I'm supposed to care? How about this instead: I'll care when I or someone else has seen the movie and provided some actual first-hand evidence that the film is slanted in any particular way.

And here you have it: anyone who is arguing about the slant of this film who hasn't actually seen it yet is an utter and absolute buffoon. You heard it here first.

Oh, and Act for Change? You just lost a subscriber. Good work.