Friday, January 25, 2008

Madeleine Albright is an Idiot

Madeleine Albright has written a new book entitled, Memo to the President Elect: How We Can Restore America’s Reputation and Leadership, providing advice on foreign policy. Getting foreign policy advice from Albright is like getting marriage advice from Ike Turner or health advice from Dr. Kavorkian. There is a long list of foreign policy blunders and missteps by this idiot, Albright.

One of her colossal blunders was the phenomenal miscalculation of Slobodan Milosevic’s response to the US-led bombing campaign in Serbia and Bosnia. Albright was criticized by the Washington Post and the BBC for being the “hawk” in the Clinton Administration who pressed for the US to use military means to oust the Serbian leader, Milosevic. According to these sources, she believed Milosevic would back down after the first wave of air attacks. The BBC claimed, “When Milosevic refused to accept the Rambouillet peace accord, the State Department was reported to have been `baffled’ and was wholly unprepared for the ethnic cleansing which swiftly followed.” (Tom Carver, “Madelaine Albright: Haunted by History” BBC News [9 April 1999]; World: America’s Albright Denies Prosecuting `Personal War,’” BBC News [8 April 1999]).

Don’t get me wrong, the European Union let the violence and genocide go on for far too long in Bosnia. The US should have stepped in much sooner than we did. The point is that she is not the great foreign policy expert she wants us to believe.

When pressed about America’s military intervention in Bosnia, according to the BBC, she told CNN, “But I think that any American who has the privilege to live in this country understands the importance of standing up for values and not allowing ethnic cleansing to reoccur. This is not my war. This is America's fight for our values." “World: America’s Albright Denies Prosecuting `Personal War,’” BBC News (8 April 1999).

Apparently, this consideration for ethnic cleansing did not apply to Rwanda four years earlier. On “Frontline’s” “Ghosts of Rwanda,” she chocked up the total failure of the US to abide by its legal obligation to follow the UN’s Charter against genocide as the result of confusion and ignorance while she was ambassador to the UN. For example, she stated, “But I think that what had happened was that basically there was very little information about Rwanda brought to the Security Council. We were dealing with a lot of other issues. I think that what's important to realize is the context of everything. There had been killings in Somalia, Bosnia; just constant attention to a lot of other issues, unfortunately. We did know obviously that there were struggles both in Rwanda and Burundi.” Apparently, neither the UN Security Council nor the National Security Council had paid its cable bill because the genocide in Rwanda was on CNN. Her response to the obvious question about the US’s manifest failure to stop the Rwandan genocide is even more idiotic. The interviewer asked, “The phrase `Never again’ -- did it mean anything? Did it apply in 1994?” Albright’s tortured response was, “The thing is that there were so many kinds of legalistic -- and I found irritating -- discussions about whether this was genocide or not. But those were not ones that-- There's no way to describe exactly that the role of the U.N. ambassador is not the same as-- While you are a Cabinet member and a member of the principals committee, it's not quite the same as being secretary of state or national security adviser. So I think they are very hard roles.
“I think `Never again’ definitely applies, but at the time-- I have to make so clear to you that, at the time, people just did not have the sense that this was happening in the proportions that it was. By the time that it happened, you couldn't do anything about it. That's why my lesson has been that you can't kind of ignore ethnic cleansing, because it develops some momentum that you have to stop as early as you can.” In other words, “Yes, but …” What a profound idiot.

More information about Albright’s idiocies, including what may be her greatest achievement in the idiot arena when she let slip though her hands an entire dossier on bin Laden and his associates in the Sudan, is found at:

What is particularly galling about this idiot is her phenomenal level of hypocrisy. In an interview by Thomas Omestad, “Cleaning Up a Foreign Policy Mess,” US News & World Report (14 January 2008), 18, she criticizes the Bush administration for its unilateralism in foreign policy. This would be a fair criticism except for the fact that in 1994, Albright, speaking of Iraq, declared to the UN, “We recognize this area as vital to US national interests and we will behave, with others, multilaterally when we can and unilaterally when we must.” (Quoted in Stephen Zunes, “Foreign Policy by Catharsis: The Failure of U.S. Policy Toward Iraq,” in Arab Studies Quarterly [Fall 2001] and Steven Greenhouse, “U.S. Says Iraq Appears to Resume Pullback From Kuwait Border” The New York Times [17 October 1994]).

If this appalling idiocy and hypocrisy were not enough, now, add to the mix a staggering level of hubris. On the 8 January 2008 episode of “Today,” Ann Curry asked, apologetically, “Given, with all due respect to, to all the years you served as Secretary of State, first woman in that role. Given that, al Qaeda is accused of causing the attacks of the embassy bombings in Africa, of the USS Cole and, and, and the United States is being criticized under the Clinton administration for not responding, perhaps, enough then. Does that, what, what is your response to this idea that perhaps this may question whether you should be giving this advice?” Albright’s entire answer was: “Well I, I think, I was the lead witness on 9/11 commission. I went over our record. I think we worked very hard to make people pay attention to terrorism and what people don't know is that before 9/11 it was even hard to get people's attention on it. I think that I'm in a very good position to give advice. I worked on the Hill. I worked for, for President Carter and for President Clinton. And I, this is my subject, and I've spent a lot of time. This book is out of my personal experiences and so I hope that, in fact, my advice will be taken. And this is to anybody that is going to win the presidency.”

To put this idiocy another way: I am the smartest person, ever, on issues of foreign policy. You idiot Americans wouldn’t listen to my phenomenal intellectual insights about terrorists. I’m smart. I worked in the White House. I know things because I spent a lot of time doing things. You should listen to me. The next president, if she’s smart, will give me a job.

What an idiot.

Friday, January 18, 2008

The Politics of Idiocy

Two incidents in the past week make me think that politics in this
country has really fallen into the hands of the idiots. I know this
isn't earth shaking, but these two incidents are truly egregiously

First, John Edwards thinks we are all idiots. He claims he will make
health care affordable to all of us. Just ask the people of North
Carolina how affordable his actions have made health care there. John
Edwards made a fortune suing doctors and hospitals claiming they were
responsible for cerebral palsy because of mistakes they had made during
normal, vaginal deliveries. However, according to a number of sources,
including the National Review (in 2004) and the Wall Street Journal
(2004), this simply isn't true. Edwards built his legal and political
career on junk science and the idiocy of juries. His actions, according
to The National Review, raised medical malpractice insurance in North
Carolina by over 400 per cent. It's a safe bet that his actions were
copied by other trial lawyers (we used to call them ambulance chasers in
the old days) resulting in similar increases nationwide. More and more
women are being forced to undergo the surgical procedure of a Cesarean
section because doctors and insurance companies fear doing normal,
vaginal deliveries. Secondly, do you think the doctors and insurance
companies simply eat the increases from the law suits? Obviously, they
pass this along to us. So, John Edwards may have done more than any
other individual to single-handily raise medical costs in this country.
Now, he wants us to believe that he will help hold down our medical
costs -- he must think we're as idiotic as the jurors he hoodwinked in
North Carolina.

Secondly, Hillary Clinton's speech linking the visionary dream of Martin
Luther King, Jr., to the practicality of politics with Lyndon B. Johnson
enacting civil rights legislation was brilliant (much as I hate to admit
that Clinton made such a terrific speech). Then, Barack Obama and his
supporters (and Clinton's opponents) jumped on her for "insensitive"
or even "racist" remarks. Even the London Times is calling this a
"gaffe." What the hell?! She said the truth. MLK had a great vision.
But it took a president, LBJ, to make that dream come true. Obviously,
Clinton was trying to make the point that she, as president, would be in
a position to enact visionary legislation. Her meaning is obvious to
the meanest of intelligences. Nobody with a moderately functioning
brain could believe that Clinton is a racist. Those who accused her and
her speech of being racist are idiots. Either they believe what they
are saying (which makes them idiots) or they are simply manipulating us
(which makes us idiots for believing what is not reasonable).
In both cases, it's time for Americans to stop reacting to politics
emotionally and start using reason. This country has too many problems
to keep electing idiots. Vote for candidates who make reasoned,
rational arguments. Of course, if I believe this will actually happen,
then I'm the biggest idiot of all.

Sunday, January 13, 2008

Twenty-Five Per Cent of All Meetings are Useless

I know what you’re thinking: “What an idiot. Everybody knows that all meetings are useless.” And actually, if you’re not an administrator of a business or institution, you’re probably right. We all know the truism: Meetings – the best way to avoid actually doing work. If, on the other hand, you are an administrator, this fact is lost on you. After all, your entire reason for existence is holding meetings. You naturally assume the rest of the world holds the same love for this decidedly unsatisfying semi-masturbatory event. Having been forced, as the token non-administrator, to attend a number of these meetings, I can state with all confidence that twenty-five per cent of all meetings are useless. During these meetings, the main goal of the ueber-administrator is to manipulate his toadies. They dance and cavort around fawning and seeking his pleasure. They prove that the only difference between an ass-kisser and a brown-noser is depth perception – what a bunch of idiots. In addition to ingratiating themselves with the alpha administrator, they spend the rest of the time stabbing people in the back who aren’t there. Finally, there were always two or three snarky remarks about my colleagues (who were doing the actual work) being overpaid and under worked. Since I was at a meeting instead of doing my job, I guess I was, in fact, one of the idiots being overpaid and under worked. Unfortunately, seventy-four per cent of all meetings are worse than useless. That’s because the second reason for an administrator to exist is to push paperwork. Besides meetings, nothing gives an administrator more spiritual, sexual, or emotional pleasure than pushing paper from one side of his desk to another. Nirvana is inventing new paperwork to fill their meaningless existence. A particularly involved series of cascading meaningless paperwork can keep an administrator climaxing for days. However, because, as they all know, the institution only exists because of them, and because they do all the real work, they feel worn out after developing all this new paperwork. They can’t be expected to do all that hard work themselves. Therefore, they hold meetings to introduce that new paperwork – and at that those meetings the idiots decide to pass it on to the rest of us. Yes, they pass on their work to those of us who are doing the real work. Paperwork isn’t hard to do, but it’s time consuming. And, unless you’re a complete idiot, it’s a colossal waste of time. So, in the end, we get paid to do our job and their jobs. And they get paid to do, well, nothing; at least, nothing productive. What about the remaining one per cent of meetings? I figure that about one percent of meetings are budget meetings where the ueber-administrator, from his Olympian heights, decides to give me a raise. That would be a good meeting. Of course, I could just be an idiot and all meetings are really worse than useless.

Sunday, January 6, 2008

I Hate Ohio

Okay, that might be a little too strong. But, I hate driving through Ohio. Just to put the following in perspective, I drove cab for a year, and, currently, I commute 60 miles, one way, to work every day. Therefore, I think I know something aboud proper driving. For Christmas, I had to drive through Ohio from Cincinnati to Pennsylvania via Cleveland. Most of the time, the whole state is under construction. This time, however, the state was relatively free from long, one-lane bottlenecks. But, with that much highway work going on, you'd think they would have enough lanes on the interstates, but, apparently, Ohio's senators are idiots who can't get their state enough highway dollars. I particularly like how there will be six lanes in the middle of farmland, but this necks down to four lanes when you get close to Cincinnati or Columbus (until you're about five miles away). What kind of idiot designed this system? The biggest pain in my ass this trip was not the one lane of interstate, but the idiot drivers. Apparently, nobody driving though Ohio uses their cruise control. And, passing somebody is considered questioning their manhood (this applies equally to women). People in Ohio like to drive in the fast lane, even when they're driving below the speed limit. It took me a while to figure out that I had to do a great deal of passing on the right. However, as soon as you start to pass somebody, the idiot rabbits up to 90, cuts in front of you, and then slows down to 55. What, exactly, is the thought process here? Nobody but nobody maintains a consistent speed -- so much for saving gas and also allowing the other drivers know what you're going to do, idiots. To add insult to injury, on one of the few stretches of three, northbound lanes, I had to drive under the speed limit for an hour because a smartass cop was driving slowly and no idiot would just pass him (I couldn't make my way to the front, or I would have passed his idiotic ass) -- what a bunch of idiots. Think about it -- an hour of traffic backed up behind this jerk. Finally, I made the mistake of having a "Keep Christ in Christmas" magnet on the back of my car. Apparently, I was just begging to be routinely cut off by every idiot on the road. I try to be a good guy, but I really don't do the whole meak thing very well. I'm afraid I said some rather unChristian things to my fellow travelers who were doing their level best to kill me.

Speaking of which, don't get me started on the two idiots from Michigan (one on the way up and one one the way back) who tried to run my family and me off the road.