You may only read this site if you've purchased Our Kampf from Amazon or Powell's or me
• • •
"Mike and Jon, Jon and Mike—I've known them both for years, and, clearly, one of them is very funny. As for the other: truly one of the great hangers-on of our time."—Steve Bodow, head writer, The Daily Show

"Who can really judge what's funny? If humor is a subjective medium, then can there be something that is really and truly hilarious? Me. This book."—Daniel Handler, author, Adverbs, and personal representative of Lemony Snicket

"The good news: I thought Our Kampf was consistently hilarious. The bad news: I’m the guy who wrote Monkeybone."—Sam Hamm, screenwriter, Batman, Batman Returns, and Homecoming

August 17, 2008

Someone Should Write A Book About This Called Savage Mules

Sure, America's intelligence agencies concluded last year December that Iran no longer has a nuclear weapons program. But what do they know? Surely the Democratic Party is far more informed about the situation than them, which is why the Democrats refer to Iran's "nuclear weapons program" in their just-finalized 2008 platform:

Prevent Iran from Acquiring Nuclear Weapons

The world must prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. That starts with tougher sanctions and aggressive, principled, and direct high-level diplomacy, without preconditions. We will pursue this strengthened diplomacy alongside our European allies, and with no illusions about the Iranian regime. We will present Iran with a clear choice: if you abandon your nuclear weapons program, support for terror, and threats to Israel, you will receive meaningful incentives; so long as you refuse, the United States and the international community will further ratchet up the pressure, with stronger unilateral sanctions; stronger multilateral sanctions inside and outside the U.N. Security Council, and sustained action to isolate the Iranian regime. The Iranian people and the international community must know that it is Iran, not the United States, choosing isolation over cooperation. By going the extra diplomatic mile, while keeping all options on the table, we make it more likely the rest of the world will stand with us to increase pressure on Iran, if diplomacy is failing.

Note also that the Democrats are going to be "keeping all options on the table." I've always wondered whether this phrase includes the possibility of America and Israel giving up all their nuclear weapons. I mean, that's an option—surely if all options on the table, that means our complete nuclear disarmament is there on the table with all the rest of them.

IMAGINARY NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAMS WE CAN BELIEVE IN: According to Steve Clemons, the Democratic platform was mostly written by Obama's Senate office policy director Karen Kornbluh.

(Thanks to Don Bacon for pointing this out. Now go ahead and buy Savage Mules.)

—Jonathan Schwarz

Posted at August 17, 2008 02:18 PM

I'm shocked — shocked — that the Democratic candidate is behaving like a Republican.

Wake me when the 'election' is over.

Posted by: Mike at August 17, 2008 02:26 PM

Maybe if we were to steal this "table" that everyone is always going on about, they'd have nowhere to put all their options, and having to stand there empty-handed would make them realize that hey, we're all just people with hopes and fears and dreams, and they'd just laugh and wonder what it was they were ready to fight over earlier!

Posted by: Hopey Change at August 17, 2008 02:30 PM

Iran's nuclear weapons program is a degenerate case—like a "circle" with a radius of zero. It's precisely analogous to Tuvalu's nuclear weapons programs. Does make it pretty tough to abandon, though.

Posted by: John Caruso at August 17, 2008 07:01 PM

Have you ever lived
Down in that getto
Have you ever felt
That cold wind blow
If you don't know what I mean
Won't you stand up and scream
Cause there's things going on
That you don't know
Too many lives they spent cross the ocean
Too much money the spent upon the moon
Till the make it right
I hope they never sleep at night
They better make some changes
And do it soon
They gonna ruin us here with greed
Lord have mercy
They gonna ruin us all
By and by
I'm tellin' all you beware
I just don't think that they care
I think they just sit up there
And get high
Have you ever been
Down in that getto
Have you ever felt
That cold wind blow
If you don't know what I mean
Won't you stand up and scream
Cause there things going on
That you don't know ---Lynyrd Skynyrd

Posted by: Mike Meyer at August 18, 2008 01:10 AM

Why am I not surprised?
I was shocked in 2004 when Sen Obama was running for Senate as an anti-war candidate and even before he was elected, he had changed his postion. He was ready to attack Iran with SURGICAL ( that sounds so precise, like they told us about smart bombs in 1991 gulf war!!)strikes!! Of course, HE needs all the options on the table ( real or imaginary ).,0,5979825.story

Posted by: Rupa Shah at August 18, 2008 08:54 AM

Mike Meyer: Thanks for your 'Lynyrd Skynyrd' post. Much appreciated.

I do not understand this obssesion with or love affair with wars if it is a cure all. I found this prayer by Mark Twain soon after September 11, 2008. Wonder if any of the elected officials or other warmongers has read it!!!!

Posted by: Rupa Shah at August 18, 2008 10:23 AM

Sorry about the error. It should read 'love affair with wars as if it is a cure all.

Posted by: Rupa Shah at August 18, 2008 10:27 AM

Whether you agree with the Democratic platform or not, this posting is disingenuous. The December NIE (the conclusions of which, it should be noted, some disagree with) said that Iran had a FROZEN nuclear weapons program- not that they had no program at all. I.e., their frozen program could be reactivated at a future time. The Democratic platform, in asking Iran to "abandon their nuclear weapons program", could be asking them to completely cancel, rather than just freeze, their program. (What actions would convince Western powers which object that the frozen program has been dismantled, given Iran's past concealment of nuclear activities, I'm not sure of.)

And, some are concerned about Iran's program to enrich uranium, which continues, and although they claim it's for peaceful purposes, some are concerned since they'll have enough uranium in several years to be quickly able to create an atomic bomb if they were to unfreze their weapons program then. I haven't read the Democratic platform and whether it says anything about Iran's enrichment program alone I couldn't say.

Posted by: yrral at August 18, 2008 01:42 PM

Given that both Republicans and Democrats have this policy outlook, it would be incredibly irresponsible if they weren't enriching for weaponizing purposes.

I think that they are, but then so what if they are?

Posted by: Labiche at August 19, 2008 05:38 AM