Ok, this is an odd post here at American Nihilist, because, well, it's not in celebration of a nihilist. Yes, I know. Shocking. But hey, by allowing non-nihilists to bask in the glow of nihilist admiration, it helps reinforce how sucky we are and make us want to work harder in order to make the world suck as much as we do. Right?
Well here's our Media Hero of the Day, via TPM:
And here's the money quote:
Let's tell the truth. Let's talk about what information we get with
waterboarding, and then we can debate it. It's effective, but is it worth
it? Maybe it would have been better for a couple of other cities to burn,
uhm, instead of waterboarding. And we can have that debate. If you'd
like Washington DC and Los Angeles to be obliterated by a nuclear attack, I
certainly respect your opinion and I think we should just talk about it.
Wow, it's about fucking time. I don't know about you, but I, speaking as a devout nihilist, have wanted to have this debate for quite some time. But it just didn't seem appropriate. Nobody seemed to want to talk about it. And even Joe's co-host seemed quite uncomfortable with the idea and tried to dimiss it as "ridiculous." But Joe's call for an open debate on Waterboarding v. Nuclear Annihilation is quite refreshing, even if he seems to be on the wrong side of the issue.
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not against waterboarding at all. In fact, my main qualm with it came once I discovered that it only simulates drowning. I mean, what's the point of that? Hell, even rollercoasters can kill you. That's all part of the thrill. And of course, my other big issue with it was that it always seemed to be used against the wrong people. But now that Obama is in the Whitehouse and it's cool to love America again, I'm all for it. Particularly if we can do away with the perception that it ain't going to kill you. I'm not saying I want it to be 100% fatal or anything, but would it hurt to make it 5% fatal or at least 1%? I don't think so.
But...that really can't compare with the nuclear annihilation of LA or DC. Not according to my nihilist moral code, anyway. I mean, even with a 100% fatal version of waterboarding, we'd still have to waterboard an awful lot of people to make this even out. And sure, waterboarding is more personal, as you get to do it yourself and hear each and every cry for mercy. But...nuclear annihilation. Even the phrase sounds more nihilist. And then there's the nuclear fallout. Don't even get me started on nuclear fallout. The thought of millions of people knowing that they were the unlucky ones just sends shivers of joy up my spine.
And so I think we all need to send Joe Scarborough a big nihilist thanks for daring to broach this previously untouchable subject. The time for an honest debate on this has finally come and I'm fully prepared for it. I've got a cool Powerpoint presentation ready and everything, including previously unreleased photos from Hiroshima, as well as some artist renderings of what a nuclearized DC might look like (Hint: Fewer buildings.) And I even came up with a cost-benefit analysis of how much in taxpayer money it would take to waterboard everyone in DC and LA, as opposed to just nuking them all. You'd be surprised at what I found.
And so I'm really looking forward to getting that invite from Joe to come on his show to debate him on this. And who knows, maybe I can even win him over to our side. He seems like a reasonable enough guy. And while he definitely gives off the vibe of a man who'd like to have waterboarded nerds in high school, I'm fairly confident that he'd find my Powerpoint slideshow to be pretty persuasive. It's that good. I'll be sure to let you guys know when he's having me on. I can see the mushroom clouds forming already...