Archive for December, 2010
Time to Fish or Cut Bait
Last week I was watching a discussion on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” which really resonated with me. The concept was not particularly novel or profound but it merits recording here on the blog. The discussion revolved around our protracted involvement in Afghanistan and the conclusion drawn is one I think makes sense.
First, however, I wanted to briefly refresh my memory about our major wars of the second half of the 20th century. It’s actually kind of depressing to read about it. From a casual glance, one gets the impression that we Americans love to fight and love nothing more than fighting against the spread of an ideology with which we don’t agree. Whether or not that ideology is any real threat to us is another matter entirely. In 1941 we very appropriately declare war on Japan for bombing Pearl Harbor. It is the last time in the 20th century that we actually declare war on a country that hurt us. The next big conflict in 1950 is the Korean War which basically is the result of the US and USSR sharing the spoils of WWII (Korea, a Japanese territory) but then falling out with each other based on ideology (communism). Communist China is our primary foe, with the USSR supplying support. The end of the three-year conflict has us no better off than we were before with a communist North Korea and a non-communist South Korea. China is no threat to the United States at this point, nor have they attacked us, but we jump on the United Nations bandwagon and get involved.
At about the same time, things start brewing in North and South Vietnam with the 50′s ending with our sending “military advisers” to the region. We all know how that turned out. Again, a region that posed no real threat to America other than embracing an ideology we opposed, gets a heap of American youngsters dropped in their lap, many never to return home. The great irony is that the big bugaboo of communism essentially dies of its own flaws in the 1980′s without a single shot being fired. The dreaded Soviet Union dissolves and communist China embraces, in a limited fashion, capitalism. What strikes me about both of these conflicts is our military involvement in regions that did not hurt us, and with no formal declaration of war.
Fast forward to the 21st century. We are attacked on September 11, 2001 by 19 men some of whom trained years earlier in Afghanistan, none of whom were actually from Afghanistan but rather were from Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon. Our response is to attack the country where most al Qaeda training occurred, Afghanistan. While we are at it, we attack Iraq which had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 and in fact, we dilute our focus in Afghanistan and increase our military activity in Iraq. We declare war on neither country. As our effort in Iraq finally draws down, we up the ante in Afghanistan, which by this time has next to no al Qaeda. We expand our mission in Afghanistan to include nation building.
So here we sit today with a commitment to withdraw some troops from Afghanistan in 2011 (ten years after the 9/11 attacks) and most but probably not all troops by 2014. The war is a quagmire. The government we are propping up is disloyal to the United States and basically a sham. Most Americans, honestly have lost interest.
So here is the proposal inspired the “Morning Joe” discussion. Let’s fight us a real good old-fashioned war! It’s a two-step plan that would most definitely make the world stand up and take notice, not to mention knock our fellow Americans out of their complacency.
Step 1: Re-institute the draft.
Step 2: Formally declare war on Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Saudi Arabia.
It’s basically the Bush Doctrine on steroids. If you knowingly harbor terrorists in your country or you finance them (e.g. Saudi Arabia), we will formally declare war on you and we will come over to your neck of the woods and bomb the living crap out of you until we are sure that you are taking terrorism seriously. The formal declaration is important. It is symbolic. It says that we are not engaged in some fuzzy-defined venture and we are NOT nation building. Any country harboring terrorists bent on America’s destruction is our enemy, end of story, and will pay the price.
This plan needs people to make it work. A volunteer army won’t do. So the draft must come back. And that is a good thing. Right now, we are waging an undeclared war with a small minority of folks, many of whom bear this burden because their civilian options are limited. Yes of course there are many patriots who would be there under any circumstances, but there are also loads of economically lower-middle class to low-class folks fighting this fight while the rich stay safe and cozy. That needs to change. We need forced buy in.
The great consequence of the draft is that anti-war folks finally wake up again. Folks who think a “war on terror” is a pipe dream equivalent to the “war on drugs” suddenly have good cause to hit the streets and protest because their best friend just got sent over to Yemen or their son or daughter just got shipped to Pakistan.
When I look at the last 50 years I see us doing a lot of fighting. Much of it prompted by no real threat to our safety. When the real threat comes, we fight these pseudo-wars with an all volunteer army that takes more than a decade to get the job done. We also tolerate incompetent governments insufficiently committed to stopping the terrorists within their own borders.
2011 is the year we should either pull out all the stops and make everybody take notice, or go home and stop doing a half-assed job that will go on forever.
Respectfully,
Rutherford
Peace and War
Two years ago I posted a video and lyrics from a beautiful holiday song and it has become somewhat of an RL tradition. Today I am just posting the lyrics to the song, based on a Longfellow poem. Even though the song mentions God, I believe regardless of religious persuasion the listener can find a message that resonates. Unfortunately, we live in a time of peace and war. In the spirit of the day, I will deal with war some other time. Today, we talk about peace.
No matter how bad things seem to be, there is always tomorrow and always the opportunity for good to defeat evil. No matter what damage is done, evil cannot destroy hope for a better tomorrow.
I Heard The Bells on Christmas Day
I heard the bells on Christmas day
Their old familiar carols play
And mild and sweet their songs repeat
Of peace on earth good will to menAnd the bells are ringing
Like a choir they’re singing
In my heart I hear them
Peace on earth, good will to menAnd in despair I bowed my head
There is no peace on earth I said
For hate is strong and mocks the song
Of peace on earth, good will to menBut the bells are ringing
Like a choir singing
Does anybody hear them?
Peace on earth, good will to menThen rang the bells more loud and deep
God is not dead, nor doth He sleep
The wrong shall fail, the right prevail
With peace on earth, good will to menThen ringing singing on its way
The world revolved from night to day
A voice, a chime, a chant sublime
Of peace on earth, good will to menAnd the bells they’re ringing
Like a choir they’re singing
And with our hearts we’ll hear them
Peace on earth, good will to menDo you hear the bells they’re ringing?
The life the angels singing
Open up your heart and hear them
Peace on earth, good will to menPeace on earth, Peace on earth
Peace on earth, Good will to men
Respectfully,
Rutherford
When Comedy Delivers the Real News
Within the past two weeks I’ve been flabbergasted by how pathetic our anointed sources of news have become and how pop culture and comedy shows have had to pick up the slack. You would think that you could turn to Time Magazine for incisive reporting and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart for a good laugh. But this my friends is bizarro world.
Time Covers Palin and Becomes Tiger Beat Magazine
Two weeks ago Sarah Palin appeared on the cover of Time. No problem there. Palin is everywhere lately, Twitter, Facebook, Fox, TLC, bookstores, Dancing with the Stars, you name it, you’ll find Sarah or some reminder of her staring at you. So it makes sense for Time to cover her. What didn’t make sense was that the author Jay Newton-Small seemed to be taking notes from Rich Lowry of The National Review. Puff piece does not do the article justice. The coverage of Palin was so light and fluffy, the words practically floated off the page. We learned, for example about Team Palin, lead by the First Dude, Todd. In a sidebar accompanying the article Newton-Small talks about Palin’s official photographer and writes that Sarah hates to have her picture taken. Are you friggin’ kidding me? This is the number one attention whore in the political universe and I am supposed to believe she hates to get her picture taken?
This is the best Newton-Small can muster in giving any critical assessment of Palin:
There is something unmistakably improvised about the way Palin operates. Eleventh-hour decisions mean that her team has had its share of missed flights, misspelled candidates’ names, appearances canceled at the last minute, endorsements in races attributed to the wrong state, to say nothing of made-up words like “refudiated.” Her endorsements often took recipients by surprise, and when she did campaign for a candidate, it was often so late that the local reporters didn’t even know she was in the state.
via Does Sarah Palin Want to Be President, or Just Famous? – TIME.
Improvised? How about disorganized, Ms. Newton-Small? So the most incisive criticism of Palin that Time could produce was that she is Lucy to Todd’s Ricky Ricardo. Pathetic. Especially in light of the more exhaustive article written in pop culture magazine Vanity Fair:
Warm and effusive in public, indifferent or angry in private: this is the pattern of Palin’s behavior toward the people who make her life possible. A onetime gubernatorial aide to Palin says, “The people who have worked for her—they’re broken, used, stepped on, down in the dust.” On the 2008 campaign trail, one close aide recalls, it was practically impossible to persuade Palin to take a moment to thank the kitchen workers at fund-raising dinners. During the campaign, Palin lashed out at the slightest provocation, sometimes screaming at staff members and throwing objects. Witnessing such behavior, one aide asked Todd Palin if it was typical of his wife. He answered, “You just got to let her go through it… Half the stuff that comes out of her mouth she doesn’t even mean.” When a campaign aide gingerly asked Todd whether Sarah should consider taking psychiatric medication to control her moods, Todd responded that she “just needed to run and work out more.” Her anger kept boiling over, however, and eventually the fits of rage came every day. Then, just as suddenly, her temper would be gone. Palin would apologize and promise to be nicer. Within hours, she would be screaming again. At the end of one long day, when Palin was mid-tirade, a campaign aide remembers thinking, “You were an angel all night. Now you’re a devil. Where did this come from?”
via Sarah Palin: The Sound and the Fury | Politics | Vanity Fair.
That was the “nice” excerpt from the article. Reports are that Palin was furious about the Vanity Fair piece. Could that have influenced Ms. Newton-Small? Was Time afraid they wouldn’t get access if they went too tough? One thing is for sure. Sarah Palin can no longer moan and groan about the “lame stream media” because in this Time cover story, the MSM treated her like a pop star.
I Thought This Was Supposed to be Funny
In his final broadcast of 2010, Jon Stewart jumped the shark on Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show”. He decided quite deliberately to stop being funny. His topic was the Zadroga bill, legislation designed to fund medical care for gravely ill 9/11 first responders who have suffered with debilitating ailments for the past nine years since they spent time in the Ground Zero hell hole in New York City in September of 2001. After a scathing review of the media’s poor coverage of the bill and the GOP’s inaction on it, Stewart devoted a full second segment to interviewing four first responders.
It’s hard to watch this video and not be enraged at the Republicans who have made this a political football. Other than a bit of comedic sarcasm, Stewart does a straight interview with these guys, one of whom is from the NYPD and another from the FDNY. There’s no difference between these guys and our soldiers abroad. These guys risked life and limb to come to the aid of ordinary citizens under attack. The thanks they get is a Republican party that wants to play games. To his credit, Jon Stewart gives them a forum to voice their frustration.
This is what we have come to in the main stream media. For tough critiques of issues we now need to read Vanity Fair and watch Jon Stewart on Comedy Central while our trusted sources of news dick around.
Well I’m not alone in noting Jon Stewart’s coverage of the Zadroga bill. There is a journalist with Time who wrote an article, “Did Jon Stewart Turn the Tide on the 911 First Responders Bill?” Even though she makes a snarky comment about Stewart himself, she acknowledges he might have influenced better recent coverage of the issue. The author’s name: Jay Newton-Small.
Yeah Jay, as long as we have journalists like you writing fanzine articles, we need folks like Jon Stewart to do your real work for you.
WWIII Will Be Fought with Data
The year is 1983 and a boy named David finds his way into a top-secret military server and potentially kicks off a world war. It turns out that David is only a character played by actor Matthew Broderick in a film called “War Games”. Fast forward to 2010 and a nuclear facility in Iran inexplicably becomes compromised. It turns out the facility has been attacked by a computer virus. This is not fiction. No actors here. What’s more, the source of the attack is not 100% clear. It might have been Israel. It might have been China.
What is 100% clear is that computer viruses have graduated from criminal password/financial/personal data grabbing enterprises to large-scale industrial sabotage. The mainstream media covered the so-called Stuxnet virus as the story du jour for about a week and then the childish games of our Washington politicians bumped it from the front pages. The media doesn’t get it. The Stuxnet incident ushers in a new age of government sponsored computer disruption. It’s no longer some long-haired geek in the basement playing games. The potential for damage is tremendous. From exploiting vulnerabilities in Wall Street servers to infiltrating computer systems in nuclear launch facilities, a war fought entirely with software is now conceivable.
In tandem with this threat is the threat of information leaks. Bradley Manning would have been just another unknown member of the armed forces had he not leaked thousands of confidential military and diplomatic memos that found their way to Julian Assange, Editor-in-Chief of WikiLeaks a whistle-blower web site. The leaked documents have compromised our security and our diplomatic credibility. This story has had a bit more staying power in the mainstream media but probably for the wrong reasons. We’ve got liberals like Michael Moore donating to the defense fund of Assange, who is pending sexual assault charges. We’ve got others calling Assange a hero. We’ve got MSNBC and the Huffington Post reporting on near torture conditions for Bradley Manning who is under military arrest (and supposedly long-term solitary confinement). What gets lost in translation is the fact that this information, which in a computerized world is simply another form of data, can cause great damage to international relations and indeed lead to conflict.
And if you don’t think that information based data can be used as a threat, just look at what Assange told the media prior to his arrest in London. He said that if anything happened to him, an encryption key would be distributed to a vast network of trusted associates who had received encrypted versions of the leaked memos. They would decrypt the damaging information and distribute it. He might have been bluffing but his threat still summoned the specter of a distributed army of data-soldiers ready to attack at a moment’s notice.
In 2001, George W. Bush received a memo indicating Osama bin Laden determined to attack America. Many including me, made much of this briefing, accusing Bush of negligence. If we get out of the politics of it, one has to admit the briefing provided virtually no actionable information. Still it highlighted Bush’s and Clinton’s inability to track down this threat before it was too late. My fear is that as we enter the second decade of the 21st century, we are now faced with new threats that are not getting sufficient attention.
As we worry about signing the new START treaty which is basically grounded in the conventional warfare threat of the Cold War, what are we doing on the front of this new war? Albert Einstein is quoted as saying “I do not know how the Third World War will be fought, but I can tell you what they will use in the Fourth—rocks!” I don’t think it is a stretch to say that the Third World War will be fought with data.
Respectfully,
Rutherford
The 3am Phone Call Went to … Bill Clinton
During the 2008 Democratic primary race, Hillary Clinton famously asked who we wanted answering that phone at 3 in the morning when some crisis was in progress.
Saturday Night Live took it a step further and suggested that should Barack Obama get elected, he would be making a 3am phone call to “Senator Clinton” (who knew she’d wind up Secretary of State?) to bail him out of a jam.
I’m sure if Aaron Sorkin had the chance, he would have further twisted the scenario into some sort of “West Wing” TV movie sequel. Here the scene is that Bobby Jones, the first black President has just struck a deal with the opposition party that has everyone popping blood vessels. Bobby’s own party hates him. The opposition realizes how much they gave away and they hate him … heck they hate him anyway. So during a press briefing, Bobby shows up with former President Josiah Bartlett, played by Martin Sheen. Bartlett brings order to chaos and a trembling nation is put at ease. This kind of preposterous plot twist of a sitting President bringing a former President into the press room and then leaving him there to take questions could only happen in a sensationalized fictional story. Right?
Wrong. I’m sad to say, wrong. This Friday, President Barack Obama walked into the White House press briefing room with former President Bill Clinton by his side. After some brief banter, Obama announced he could no longer keep the First Lady waiting (at a staff holiday gathering) and he left the room. Clinton followed him out the door …. eh, no. Clinton stayed behind and talked to the press. Junior left Big Daddy to take care of things.
Watching Obama stand there while Clinton pontificated was embarrassing enough. Seeing him leave the press in Clinton’s hands just made matters ten times worse. If one had awakened from a nine year coma just after Obama left the room, one would have thought it was just another presser with President Clinton. Imagine the surprise of the just-out-of-coma patient when you tell him, no actually it’s been nine years, Clinton is no longer President but the current President feels so ill equipped to handle the current political backlash that he has called in Clinton as reinforcement. It’s enough to send a man back into a coma.
Sorry my friends but it’s time to play the race card. Don’t say I didn’t warn you. What doubly burns me up about this is the racial message this sends to those with messed up antennae. Here is a black man being bailed out by the competent white man. The black apprentice, not really ready for the job, watching with admiration as his white superior takes over. I know Obama believes he and the country are beyond race but that is pure bull crap. The optics of this racially were deadly. The optics of this outside of race were equally deadly. Who is leading the frigging country?
This has been a horrible week for Barack Obama. He struck what was probably the best deal he could strike with the Republicans. Then, allowing his ego to take over, he lashed out at his own party and then likened the opposition party to hostage-takers. He has lost control of the narrative. He is just another participant in the political circus.
Back in 2008 I had a good laugh at the SNL skit. Although I was a staunch Obama supporter, I had to acknowledge the ad was clever, capturing both Obama’s rock star image and Hillary’s over confident self assessment. I would never have believed that if we fast forwarded two years that Obama would indeed be calling in help from a Clinton in such an obvious and embarrassing way.
This time, it wasn’t Hillary. It was Bubba.
Respectfully,
Rutherford
We Must Imagine
It was 30 years ago today that I was eating breakfast at the Greenhouse Cafe in Cambridge, Massachusetts when I learned of John Lennon’s murder on the cafe radio. At the time I was neither a huge Lennon nor Beatles fan. I liked the song “Imagine” but I liked it simply as a song not as any philosophical statement. The older I got, the more the lyrics resonated with me. So it was with some dismay that I received a virtual holiday lump of coal in my e-mail in-basket last night from my blogging friend Blackiswhite Imperial Consigliere. On his blog, Taxes, Stupidity and Death, he took issue with two things: the folks who blindly idolize John Lennon and the lyrics of Lennon’s most famous solo work. I can get behind some impatience with folks who idolize anyone. BiW, as I call him for short, made sense to me there. It was when he took issue with the song “Imagine” that I had some problems.
On my drive home tonight, the local talk show host, David Boze, was talking about John Lennon’s death, and the horrible annual spectacle in which the aging hippies and the perpetually naive lionize the dead musician.
He was dissecting “Imagine” and pointing out that it describes a world that cannot be because it goes against human nature, and pointed out that not everyone wants to give up their possessions and personal liberties, and that if they tried to make the more reluctant among us give those things up, they would indeed have something to fight and die for. — BiW
BiW was back in the mode of so many conservatives who scoffed at Barack Obama’s Hope and Change rhetoric of the 2008 campaign. To believe the world could be a better place made you “perpetually naive”. The song is flawed because it describes a world that cannot be because it goes against human nature. But isn’t that what aspiration is all about? Aren’t we here to resist the baser parts of our nature? Aren’t we here to change the world for the better? Aren’t we here to share in the world’s riches?
Ah yes … sharing. As I engaged with the blog’s author in the comments section, I discovered that the root of his objection to “Imagine” was his assumption that it advocated communism. It is interesting to me that whenever we suggest to the wealthy or to the establishment that we should share, the suggestion gets labeled with the most scary political labels at their disposal. No where in Lennon’s lyrics does he mention communism. In fact, if one wants to get a different perspective on “Imagine”, one should look at the lyrics of an earlier work by Lennon while he was with the Beatles:
You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it’s evolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don’t you know that you can count me out
Don’t you know it’s gonna be all rightYou say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We’d all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We’re doing what we can
But when you want money
for people with minds that hate
All I can tell is brother you have to wait
Don’t you know it’s gonna be all rightYou say you’ll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it’s the institution
Well, you know
You better free you mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don’t you know it’s gonna be all right
The highlighting above was added by me. Clearly, Lennon was interested in world unity without violence or government forced compliance. “Imagine” is a song of hope and aspiration to an idealized society where greed, and chauvinism do not rule the day. How anything sinister could be surmised from it is beyond me.
Imagine there’s no Heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for todayImagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peaceImagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the worldYou may say that I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will live as one
The progress of the human race will come to a screeching halt when we can no longer imagine.
Respectfully,
Rutherford
Compromise or Capitulation: Where in the World is Barack Obama?
The punditocracy seems split over the deal Barack Obama struck yesterday regarding the Bush Tax Cuts. On the one hand, he sold his liberal base down the river. On the other hand he acknowledged that elections matter and showed good faith negotiation with the GOP. Heck, just on one network alone you could get whiplash watching the pundit ball bounce back and forth from Ed Schulz blowing a gasket to Lawrence O’Donnell thinking this is business as usual, to Joe Scarborough putting on his “political analyst” hat and screaming foul. Joe’s position was particularly perplexing in that as a conservative he favors lower taxes but felt Obama made a very bad move politically.
For me, it is just more evidence, in a growing dossier, that Obama has no core. He is first and foremost a politician and his favorite political strategy is reconciliation. Progressives are upset that he didn’t even attempt to put on a good fight to keep the rich from maintaining their tax cut. But where is the surprise here? Apart from fiery rhetoric, when has Obama fought for anything in the past 22 months? Health care? Nope, sorry no fight there. Yes it was a bit of a struggle to get what little we got, but oh we got so little. A real mess of legislation, most of which doesn’t even see the light of day until 2014.
Obama’s unwillingness to put the GOP up against the wall and dare them to screw over the working man in favor of the rich fits a pattern that is trying the patience of the far left. Rendition, Gitmo, and secret wire taps remain. Afghanistan war has been escalated (ok he said he would do that on the campaign but still). The fact that we have not seen what Obama is willing to fight for calls into question whether he truly has any ideology at all. It also brings back bad campaign memories of accusations of relationships of convenience with Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright.
To borrow Joe Scarborough’s boxing analogy from today’s “Morning Joe”, Obama hit the mat before the end of the first round. Now that doesn’t erase the fact that his political opponents are rank hypocrites who last night agreed to add 800 billion dollars to the federal deficit. We should also take some small comfort that our paychecks will see a bit of a bump in January due to a 2% decrease in FICA tax. But still, it is a bit disheartening to see Hope and Change reduced to “Can’t we all just get along?”
Your New Banker: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
If increasing the deficit weren’t bad enough, I got a jolt to the system while watching MSNBC’s “Countdown” last night (skip to the 10 minute mark in this video). Sitting in for Keith Olbermann, Sam Seder reported a mind blowing fact that I doubt many Americans know. We talk a lot about how much of our debt China owns. But it turns out we spread our debt around pretty nicely. We owe Great Britain, Saudi Arabia and …. get this …. Iran. To make matters worse, how much we owe Iran is basically a state secret. In fact, when we first borrowed money from the Saudis during the Carter administration, the deal was contingent on secrecy.
So my question to the GOP is do you have any shame at all? Are you so willing to keep spending money we don’t have that you will do business under the table with a country that wants to do us harm? I was already fed up with the Republican’s hypocrisy regarding borrowed money but now that I better understand the source of the money, I am totally disgusted and you should be too.
Respectfully,
Rutherford
How to Implement the Repeal of DADT
Even if “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” gets repealed, there is now discussion about how we implement the change in policy. This absolutely boggles my mind. What do we expect? The day after the law is repealed, normal troop formations will be replaced by gay pride parades? Soldiers will immediately doff their uniforms and put on thongs? Taps will be replaced by “It’s Raining Men”?
What the hell is wrong with our military leaders? Here’s my simple implementation plan:
1. Only the “Don’t Tell” part of the law gets killed. The “Don’t Ask” part stays in place because it’s none of your damn business!
2. Gay soldiers are to abide by the same rules as straight soldiers. You don’t sexually harass your fellow troops. You’re there to defend your country, not to hook up.
3. Everybody carry on as you did before because guess what? It didn’t matter worth a rat’s ass before and it doesn’t matter now. Just do your duty. And Bob, if you wanna write a letter home to your boyfriend Ted and you wanna tell your bunk mate about it, be my guest. If your bunk mate doesn’t like it, he can say “thanks for sharing, I’m not interested in your love life.” Done deal.
As I said in the previous article, we won’t see the end of DADT for some time now. Despite the findings of the Pentagon study, which determined this was no biggie, Republicans will drag their feet on it and Obama will push it to the bottom of the to-do stack. But once the law does get repealed (and I do believe it eventually will), the “implementation plan” will be, as my daughter’s Kindergarten teacher used to say, easy-peasy:
GET OVER IT AND GET ON WITH IT!
Respectfully,
Rutherford
Can I Have Spam With That?
In the world of internet marketing, search engine optimization (SEO) is a big deal. It’s the way we get search engines like Google to list our sites near the top of search results. One of the results of this SEO craze is SPAM, comments posted to a blog with one and only one purpose, to plant a backlink to a particular web site. The idea is that the more sites that link to your site, the better your SEO standing.
I’ve noticed an uptick in SPAM lately and while most of it is simply a list of links, some of it is quite amusing. So what better way to end 2010 than on a totally absurd note. When the world makes no sense, let’s look to SPAM to find some meaning. The following gems are actual unedited morsels for your entertainment.
Self confessional SPAM — don’t SPAM while drunk.
Submitted on 2010/11/25 at 10:38 pm
I’m admiring the webmaster, nice job on the design. Looks like your site can handle heavy traffic.
I’m only a little bit drunk, I’m sorry. Please don’t judge.
I’m not happy about my life, what can I do to be happy?
I’m a little bit eccentric, and sometimes my comments get removed. I just want to add some spark.
I.R.S.: We’ve got what it takes to take what you’ve got!
I’m sure lots of writing gets done at this dude’s site:
Submitted on 2010/11/30 at 7:30 pm
Great writeup. Do you accept fan articles from other writers ? Contact me. Cheers. mydirtyhobby livecams
Pride in technology:
Submitted on 2010/11/30 at 6:01 pm
Sick! Just got a brand-new Pearl and I can now read your weblog on my phone’s browser, it didn’t operate on my previous 1.
I exploded this SPAMMER’s intellect so successfully that his comment made my mind implode. Can you translate this one?
Submitted on 2010/12/03 at 9:48 am
First of all, allow my family recognize a person’s command during this matter. Even though this is certainly brand new , nevertheless soon after registering your site, this intellect has exploded extensively. Allow all of us to take hold of one’s rss to help keep in touch with at all probable messages Sincere understand but will pass it on to help admirers and my private are living members
Don’t quote Hemingway while drunk:
Submitted on 2010/12/05 at 4:02 am
Ernest Hemingway~ Theres nothing noble in becoming superior for your fellow males. Accurate the aristocracy is becoming superior to your former self.
The actual quote is: “There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.”
SPAM with minimal time wasted:
Submitted on 2010/12/06 at 4:39 pm
Hello. And Bye.
Is this SPAMMER describing the typical liberal?
Submitted on 2010/12/06 at 4:37 am
People who are more prone to high levels of empathy-based guilt may be likely to suffer from anxiety and depression; however, they are also more likely to cooperate and behave altruistically
SPAM clearly from a good judge of writing (I write soooo good):
Submitted on 2010/12/07 at 7:16 pm
Something I have seen in all your blog posts and I wanted to compliment you on is how good your writing and spelling are. How did you learn to write so good? It looks like you have a degree in writing from a College.
Finally, an honest assessment — heck he sounds like most of the conservatives who comment here. Mmmmm maybe this wasn’t SPAM at all?
Submitted on 2010/12/27 at 4:43 am
How is it that just anybody can write a weblog and get as popular as this? Its not like youve said something extremely impressive –more like youve painted a pretty picture about an issue that you know nothing about! I dont want to sound mean, right here. But do you truly think that you can get away with adding some pretty pictures and not genuinely say something?
Happy New Year to all friends and loyal readers!
Respectfully,
Rutherford
WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance
December 31, 2010 at 1:42 am Rutherford 374 comments