Skip to main content

i am better than dick cheney

through some unfortunate set of circumstances, i ended up watching fox news sunday last week, where i got to see former vice president dick cheney talking about his new memoir. as far as i can tell, the sole purpose of this book is so that he can prove how aptly named he is. first of all, the man himself has made a big deal of just how bitchy some of it is, promising that "heads will explode" [his own, one hopes -ed.] over the revelations, which really seem to amount to a sort of juvenile mocking of the people in the bush administration who aren't almost universally reviled [yet]. second, the man seems to have had no purpose in writing a book other than wanting to keep up with those from the administration who already had written books because, you know, you'd never want to be the one who takes the opportunity to shut the hell up.

seriously, who would you rather?
as a[n unsuccessful] writer, it bothers me that people like this have automatic access to big publishers and budgets. it bothers me a lot more because this is a guy who should be facing charges, not being given a pulpit. the excerpts i've read from the book tell me that it is... a book, with words arranged into sentences with punctuation more or less correctly placed. i'm sure it will sell many more copies than i'll ever sell of anything and that it took him about as much time to write it as this self-serving blog post is taking me.

there are enough other things i want to read that i doubt i'll ever get around to reading through the dick-cronomicon, but i'm pretty sure it ends with him being fantastically wealthy and laughing at torture victims from a safe distance.

if you too would like to read something other than dick cheney, please feel free to check out the unfolding serial "a definable moment in time", which is updated tuesdays and saturdays. since blogger updated its interface, the formatting of pages has become much easier, which means that the page now has at least 40% less suck. at some point, i'll get around to re-formatting the whole thing, but for now, all the new installments are easy to read.

you can also check out other things i've written in past issues of paraphilia magazine. i have short stories in issues 8, 10 and 11.

or you could order yourself a copy of "interference" a collection of short stories published in 2009.

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …

don't speak

you might think that it sounds dramatic, but linguistic genocide is something that happens. people in power will go to great lengths to eradicate certain languages, not just for the sheer joy of making the world a lesser place, but as a way of beating down the culture that's associated with it. language has a unique reciprocal bond with culture, and every group that has attempted to break down another has recognised that forbidding a cultural group from communicating in their own language is an extremely effective way to tear apart their culture.

there are lots [and lots and lots and lots] of examples of this sort of thing, some successful, some not, but far too many to cover in one blog post. however, i thought it was worth looking at some languages that have been the subjects of active repression, and what the political consequences of that have been.

devastation :: the native north american languages :: it should come as no surprise that the largest genocide in history [by a ma…