If Tom DeLay were your dog, you'd've put that fucker down a long, long time ago. When your old dog gets so lousy with disease, stinking of open sores, shaking when it walks, crazed with dementia, snapping at children, strangers, even you sometimes, shitting in its bed more than it shits outside, then you really have no choice but to load that dog into the family car and take the long ride to the vet. Sure, sure, it's understandable that you and the family would wanna cling to your dog as long as possible, no matter how disgusting and vile and flea-ridden it's become, no matter how much it befouls the carpets, and it's because you remember your dog in its prime, so loving, giving, obeying its masters, gladly licking its own ass.
[...]
Yeah, if Tom DeLay were a dog, it'd be easy. You'd say, "Here, Tom, here, Tom," and hug him and promise him treats to get in the car, and it'd be so sweet, because Tom DeLay would lick you, thinking you were taking him to meet with more cash-stuffed corporate lobbyists. Instead, of course, you'd take Tom DeLay to the kind, gentle veterinarian and the caring nurses, and surely you'd shed a tear as Tom DeLay was put to sleep, going to that big K Street in the sky where there's endless Lockheed-sponsored fire hydrants to piss on. You'd be sad, but at the same time, there's the sweet relief in knowing that Tom DeLay will no longer make you have to send the rugs out to be cleaned every week.
[...]
But, alas, alas, Tom DeLay is not a dog. He is the Republican Majority Leader in the House of Representatives, very nearly a human being. And, like the last roach after the apocalypse, he will cling to his political life, assisted by those who cower in his shadow, until he has polluted the entire house with his stench.
What are the factors in play when we see more "westernized" images of women wearing the hijab. This style of dress not only calls up stereotypes as to who is underneath, it also stimulates an urge to make them more like us. In those instances where they actually do look more like us, however, to what extent is this a factor of Islamic liberalization, western glamorization, commercial exploitation or just plain voyeurism?
This image comes from the MSNBC "Pictures of the Week" gallery from the period of February 24- March 3. They titled it: Eye to eye. Here's the caption:
Supporters of terror suspect Babar Ahmad, who is facing extradition to the United States, protest outside a court in London on March 2. Britain began extradition hearing for Ahmad, who is wanted in the United States for allegedly running terrorist Web sites, but Muslim groups said he should be tried at home.
So, should we start with the positive space, or the negative?
I assume there are standard ways the western eye (or guy) tends to glamorize these cloaked women -- starting with the "eye window" as some kind of teaser. What really tilts this photo to the west, however, is the fact these eyes and lashes are so made up. You can almost hear the sigh of assurance that these women are more educated and middle class.
Or, you could start with one blue pair of eyes and one brown pair. Because the blue associates more with white culture while the brown associates more to, well... brown, one could say the image sets up an East-West dichotomy.
If you subscribe to the East-West argument, you could also say that the blue or west-leaning eyes are "good," while the brown represent those followers of Islam we have to look out for. The picture also reinforces this interpretation through facial gesture. The "good" blue eyes, for example, bear a decidedly more benign expression. The other figure, however, has a look that could almost be read as scheming.
You can also get a conspiratorial sense from how the figures interact. It looks like they are literally "putting their heads together." The impression is that the one on the right is discretely whispering something, while the one on the left is playing it low key.
If you think I am overplaying the association to threat, it's easy to say that I've been set up by the caption. But then, this caption is guilty of a lot of things. By linking the photo to a court proceeding, it implies the picture is newsworthy. So, are these women protesters? Or, more libelously, are they supporters of the suspect, or even "supporters of terror?" Before answering that, however, perhaps one needs to consider the virtue of associating such a suggestive photo (politically, and otherwise) to a provocative news event few readers have ever heard of. (If you ask me, I'd say it puts us back in the neighborhood of exploitation and voyeurism again.)
At my very first look at this pricture I saw something totally different at first. What I saw was one face being formed by the two faces. Not the faces of woman but of one face looking straight at the viewer. I don't know what this says about the meaning of this image but to me it conveys the idea that these women can or could be as hostile towards the west as anyone else involved with terror. The positive—negative effect in "Islamic Eyes" that I see now is the classic "vase or face" optical illusion.
MSNBC wouldn't be doing any kind of Subliminal Seduction propaganda would they?
In a few weeks, Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), the chairman of the House International Relations Committee who as Judiciary Committee chief wielded the gavel during President Clinton's impeachment, will announce that he will not seek another term.
The public position of Hyde, 80, an icon of the conservative movement, is that he will make up his mind for sure in April. But I am told he has decided to retire and is unlikely to reverse course.
Be clear on this: Hyde intends to serve out his term and has a robust schedule that provides a remarkable window to U.S. relations with other nations.
[...]
Hyde gained national notice in 1976, when the staunch abortion foe championed a provision banning federal funding for most abortions, a piece of legislation that became known as the "Hyde Amendment'' that was attached to appropriation bills in the succeeding decades.
[...]
As steadfast a conservative as Hyde is, he does not march lockstep with the movement. In 1994, when Newt Gingrich's so-called Republican Revolution swept the House, Hyde opposed the term-limit plank that was part of the GOP's "Contract with America'' on the grounds that it denied voters the right to choose.
Hyde, when he was Judiciary chairman, also bucked the conservative tide when he backed legislation to require mandatory trigger locks on all guns, background checks for buyers of explosives and closing other gun sales loopholes.
[...]
HYDE A synonym for 'hypocrite' derived from the name of the U.S. House of Representive's Judiciary Committee Chairman during the late 1990s, Henry Hyde, famous for his moral pronouncements and advocacy of 'family values', but who was involved in at least one adulterous relationship that he blamed on 'youthful indescretion' when it was later revealed. This was despite the fact Hyde was in his 40s during the relationship - which destroyed the adultress' marriage.
In the 2004 election Christine Cegelis received more than 44% of the vote, the most a challenger has received against Hyde since he first ran for Congress. Out of the 18 challenger races, on both sides of the aisle in Illinois, I received the second highest percentage of votes only behind Melissa Bean--I also raised the third highest amount of money. Most importantly, I became the adopted race of many grassroots organizations like the Democracy for America (DFA), and of course I was named to the Dean Dozen. In Illinois, this is an honor I shared with only one other candidate: Barack Obama.
Christine needs to develop a clear position on social security refom and a specific proposal that will extend the actuarial predictions. After that, she is free to beat on any diversion of social security funds to private accounts.
The Kerry-Bush number was 46-54 in the District meaning as an open seat, the advantage goes to a Republican, but it'll be a race.
If Tom DeLay were your dog, you'd've put that fucker down a long, long time ago. When your old dog gets 
This image comes from the MSNBC "Pictures of the Week" gallery from the period of February 24- March 3. They titled it: Eye to eye. Here's the caption: 
