Akkam’s Razor

• The GOP ticket’s appalling contempt for science and learning. - By Christopher Hitchens - Slate Magazine - This is what the Republican Party has done to us this year: It has placed within reach of the Oval Office a woman who is a religious fanatic and a proud, boastful ignoramus. Those who despise science and learning are not anti-elitist. They are morally and intellectually slothful people who are secretly envious of the educated and the cultured. And those who prate of spiritual warfare and demons are not just “people of faith” but theocratic bullies. On Nov. 4, anyone who cares for the Constitution has a clear duty to repudiate this wickedness and stupidity.

…and if they did, they’d probably agree with it.

Many of us are making a big deal out of Sarah Palin’s inability to articulate the paramount legacy of this White House - The Bush Doctrine [wiki]. Here is a partial transcript and video of her interview with Charlie Gibson of ABCNEWS (more at HuffPo):

GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine? PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?

GIBSON: The Bush — well, what do you — what do you interpret it to be?

PALIN: His world view.

GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war.

PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership, and that’s the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.

GIBSON: The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?

PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.

I’d like to make an effort to formally define the Bush Doctrine, to provide context for its existence, to examine its success, and to look at future challenges.

Regardless as to your political leanings, the Bush Doctrine exists for one reason and one reason only - to reinforce the Unitary Executive Theory, weakening what, to this point, had been the sole responsibility of Congress over the Executive Branch - the ability to declare war. Similarly, it seeks to remove any external, non-domestic restrictions by foreign bodies over US actions, including international agreements and treaties. In short, the US, as the sole remaining superpower (after the fall of the Soviet Union) would have the justification for acting unilaterally against any threat. This is further quantified by allowing the ability to wage preemptive war against perceived threats both in the near- and long-terms. In short, it means never having to say you are sorry.

Popularity: 9% [?]

• Groundswell (Incorporating Charlene Li’s Blog):
  Who do people trust?
  (tags: statistics trust psychology WOM stats review economics)
• The Takeaway - Guest blogger Vincent Williams: And blacks will vote for…
  I mean, it’s not like black voters are just taken for granted, right? Yep, any second now the media is going to deal with all of these issues. Or maybe I’m too out of touch and aloof to understand why they probably won’t.
  (tags: race black voter hillaryclinton africanamerican barackobama)
• twistori
  This is beautiful.
  (tags: twitter visualization mashup social design art aggregator)

• Google Calendar Syncs with Microsoft Outlook, from Google
  (tags: Google Calendar mobile organization gtd work ajax)
• Transformers in Philadelphia?
  This would be quite awesome, although it better not include a transforming Liberty Bell.
  (tags: movies popculture transformers philadelphia)
• NYTimes: AIPAC Traitor Trial Begins Soon
  The trial threatens to expose the routine acts of treason and leaks of U.S. intelligence committed in the name of “supporting Israel.
  (tags: interesting conspiracy neocons israel)
• 10 Adobe Air Apps Worth A Look
  (tags: adobe air apps)

Michael Barone said the following as posted in an article on Real Clear Politics:

• AlterNet: War on Iraq: Top Military Recruitment Lies
  (tags: military politics lies activism war list)
• Art of Writing - Writing Tips
  Ten timeless writing tips from the masters.
  (tags: writing tips tutorial inspiration useful design Art)
• 20 Icon & Graphics Generators
  (tags: icons graphics mashable generator design list ideas)
• Cheney Aide advocates provocation of Iran, endangering troops. | Salon
  The option that Wurmser allegedly discussed was nudging Israel to launch a low-yield cruise missile strike against the Natanz nuclear reactor in Iran, thus “hopefully” prompting a military reaction by Tehran against U.S. forces in Iraq and the Gulf.

• Filmmaker’s Tool Kit: Creating a Movie with Web 2.0
  (tags: web2.0 video movies filmmaking software tools film)
• What are the best 100 Web 2.0 sites and services? We don’t know. But you do.
  These are the results: the top 100 Web apps, 10 in each of 10 categories, determined by Webware readers and the fans of the sites that made the final cut.
  (tags: web2.0 awards tools webware web software list)
• Survey Results::Digg Survey
  A survey with not-surprising results regarding the opinions of diggers of several subject, including politics, operating systems, game systems, net neutrality, Israel, and religion.
  (tags: survey socialnetworking digg surveymonkey)

As if there's any doubt he wont.

He's not going to support anyone in the primaries, that's for damn sure.  No, he won't bravely support whomever the anointed successor to Junior is, no matter how bad they are (IMHO, Giuliani is the "likely" candidate, with Romney being the "better" candidate).

I don't think Joe cares about anything other than Joe, and Joe's ambitions, for whatever reasoning, seem to be the continuation of this was (in Iraq) and the greater war on America and the Institution of the Police State.  That may seem like hyperbole, but a Civil Rights liberal such as Joe was changed, possibly during the Seven Day War and the ongoing strife in Israel and the greater Middle East, and that change was validated (as correct) with 9/11.

What's even more certain, given his lust for war-without-end, is that he won't be supporting any candidate who seeks to undo what Bush and the Neocons have wrought. 

Popularity: 20% [?]