Preserve, Protect and Defend

Most of this is quite moving. The rest isn't.

2010-03-24T21:47:00.001-04:00

A Balm in Gilead

2010-03-22T21:08:00.009-04:00

I have a proposition for the ultra-conservatives in this country and for the rest of us. Now, I’m not including all born-again or fundamentalist Christians in this proposal—only those who don’t like the way this country was originally set up and would like to change the direction it’s going. Anyone who wishes to would be welcome to participate and no one would be forced to.
Here it is:

I propose that the US cede a certain territory—say, from the Rio Grande on the south and along the western Texas and Oklahoma borders north to the Oklahoma and Arkansas borders and east to the Mississippi River—as a sovereign territory to be handed over to those who don’t want to live under the US Constitution anymore. For convenience’ sake, I’ll call the new nation ‘Gilead’. The area is not cast in stone—it is simply one possible region to consider.
The territory thus created would have abundant farmland, a coast and an already developed infrastructure including a number of urban areas ranging from large cities to small towns and the connecting highway network within it. It would also include the oil reserves of Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and off the coasts of Texas and Louisiana.

Now, before those remaining behind get all up-in-arms—allow me to remind you: the infrastructure was paid for by everyone’s tax dollars. Gilead’s citizens paid taxes while they were US citizens and are entitled to the benefits they would have received from them had they remained in the US.
Think about it on an individual level: if you and your family were to move from California to Boston, you would be inheriting the communication systems, roads and water lines set up there before you arrived. The same would be occurring here—just on a larger scale.
The two governments involved could, should they choose to, agree to a repayment agreement for the infrastructure inherited by Gilead.

Homeowners who live inside Gilead’s boundary who wish to move out could list their homes on the internet. Those who live outside Gilead and wish to move in could do the same. We would then do a 1:1 swap between homes of comparably assessed value. The homeowners would carry their mortgages with them and pay them off on their new properties—or work out appropriate agreements with their respective lending institutions. Those who are renting would simply move to the area of their choice.

A jobs exchange could also be set up online and people could apply for jobs which would be abandoned by those leaving the area they wish to migrate to.

The area to be included is already populated by a number of people who would want to live in Gilead—so there would be less inconvenience to the general population than would occur if either the east or west coast were the region to be ceded.
Even so, this mass migration would take a while—so why don’t we give ourselves about 15 years to complete the move? This would avoid a massive upheaval of the population all at once and give Gilead’s government time to get set up before the Date of Government Transference.

Considerably less than one generation after implementation of the plan, those people who believe the Constitution was a mistake could move to Gilead and create their own country. Gilead would have no ties to the United States beyond a common boundary and any ambassadorial and trade functions the two governments wish to pursue—just as we have now with Mexico and Canada.

* Inside Gilead, if they wish their legislation to consist of the laws set forth in Leviticus, they could set that up.
* If the primary government or that of any city or state wants to put the 10 Commandments or a Nativity Scene on a public building’s lawn or in the lobby, they could do so.
* If the people want to ban any religion other than Christianity, they could do that, too.
* They could close all businesses on Sundays if they wish.
* They could mandate state-sponsored prayer in the schools. They could ban evolution and teach only creationism.. They could include Bible Study in their curricula, as well.
* They could give government funds to faith-based charities and allow discriminatory hiring.
* Given today’s technology, if they wanted to keep unwanted radio and television broadcasts from crossing their borders as well as limiting internet access, I imagine they could do so.
* They could limit marriage to a union between one man and one woman.
* They could ban abortion and contraception and practice abstinence-only and the rhythm method.
* They could allow hospitals to refuse medical care to any woman hemorrhaging from a miscarriage.
* They could ban stem cell research and outlaw the use of any cures found through such research.
* They could prohibit assisted suicide and direct hospitals to practice all heroic measures to maintain life for as long as possible.

Well, you can see the advantages, I’m sure.

Once an adult moved to Gilead, he or she would no longer be a citizen of the US and would not have the Right of Return. If, on the off chance, someone wanted to come back, they would get in line like any other immigrant and go through the full process. [I would recommend an exception be made for people who were below some agreed-on age—say 21—when the move occurred so that people who were minors on the Date of Transfer can make their own decisions when they reach adulthood. Most of them, though, would likely choose to remain where they grew up.]
Travel between the two countries on business or vacation or to visit friends and relatives would be fully permitted, of course, with the same restrictions currently practiced between the US, Canada and Mexico.

In exchange, the United States’ Constitution would be left intact. Those of us remaining in this country would be let alone to live our lives as we wish to do.

This seems to me to be a win-win situation for everyone involved. The needs and wants of all current United States citizens could be met with minimum upheaval and turmoil.

And, whatever you may be thinking—no, this is not tongue-in-cheek. I’ve been thinking about a way out of the situation this country finds itself in and, though many details would have to be worked out, this general plan seems to me to be a fair and equitable solution.
xxxxx
For what it's worth, I originally published this post back in 2004. Since that time it has become even more urgent that some solution to our situation be found. More and more, I believe, our circumstances are becoming untenable. We must search for a viable alternative to our current problems. I think this proposition may be our best chance.

From Ben Sargent of The Washington Post

2010-01-28T10:01:00.005-05:00

Well, THIS hits the nail on the head!

British health care explained

2009-08-30T15:01:00.002-04:00

How does it stack up next to ours? You decide.

2009-08-04T00:29:00.005-04:00

Well, as I threatened in the comments on the previous post, I have revived Scattershot Thoughts. And, as luck would have it, my very first post on my return over there was political. Go figure.

Scattershot won't be completely political. It will, though, be generally laced with liberalisms — I know I won't be able to help myself in that department.

Maybe, by broadening my outlook, I'll be able to ease myself gently back into posting here. We'll see. Anyhow, I hope to see you over there.

So Long

2009-08-02T02:35:00.002-04:00

I’m feeling defeated today. I just can’t seem to gear up for another post. I think PP&D is history.

I kept my sanity and my spirits up all during the Bush years by believing that, when actual leadership returned to this country, people would rejoice. They would recognize the fact that crimes had been committed and welcome the return of a lawful administration. They would be happy to be accepted back among the civilized nations our country had alienated for eight years.

Obviously, I was mistaken.

I’ve been cruising the newspapers and a forum I visit and I can’t believe what I’m reading.
People write, “Why do liberals hate so much?” and in the same post, “Blue Cross Blue Shield is good enough for me. Why should my taxes pay for health care for all those illegals and those commie-pinko liberals anyway?”
And call Obama “Obammie the Commie—the teleprompter junkie.” Just as if every president since its invention hasn’t used the teleprompter.

When I hear Pat Buchannan trash Affirmative Action and declare that the US was built by White men who are being discriminated against after all their hard work, I want to sit down and cry. The US was built by White men? Really? Didn’t Pat work in the White House? Who built it? Slaves. Most of the monuments and public buildings in DC were, in fact, built by slave labor. Guess what color they were?
The railroads in this country were built almost exclusively by Chinese immigrants who were treated like slaves, themselves.

And whose schools are crumbling? The inner city schools which are attended by, primarily, Black and Hispanic students. I used to visit those schools every day when I worked with poor children. How does anyone come out of that environment with hope? How does anyone live in the projects and attend a school that is falling down and ‘learn’ from a teacher who uses improper grammar and mispronounces ‘Scheherazade’ and not feel like a second-class citizen who deserves nothing?

Then, when I hear of a Harvard professor being arrested in his own home because he is Black, I throw in the towel. There is no hope for my species.

And Pat says White men are being discriminated against.

It’s hard to keep trying to be a voice of reason in the face of ignorance, hate and bigotry.

Furthermore, I just keep hearing about massive partisanship. Partisanship. Partisanship.
The Republicans say, “Slow down,” when they mean, “Let’s drag our feet and hope the health care bill succumbs to our lies.” “Let’s fight against rebuilding the economy.” “Let’s let the Birthers run riot and refuse to admit Obama’s an American.” “Let’s let the country spiral out of control in the hopes of reclaiming all three houses over the course of the next four years. After all, THAT’S what’s important—not the well being of the country!”

AND—last night I saw a documentary on Bill Moyers' Journal about the good that can be done by religious leaders who work for positive change. And I cried because “religion” in my country seems to just want to grab power. It seems interested only in exclusion, separation and destruction. Not love.

I’ll keep posting at All That Is, I know that. It’s a happier blog—and it doesn’t require me to read newspapers in order to keep it going. That’s a huge plus, right now.

I know that emotions don’t last forever—they just feel as if they will. But this feels pretty overwhelming, right now. If things change maybe I’ll be back.

Or, maybe not.

EMILY'S LIST

2009-07-23T09:47:00.003-04:00

Who is EMILY? The folks at Emily's List are asked that question all the time.

EMILY is not a famous feminist, elected official, or the nickname of it's founder. EMILY is an acronym for "Early Money Is Like Yeast" (it helps raise the dough).
The people who founded Emily's List knew that early money made women credible candidates and gave them the best shot at winning. That is still the organization's goal: to help elect pro-choice Democratic women.

But, a few of years ago, a candidate delivered a speech about what EMILY meant to her — and to women all across the country.
That candidate was Jennifer Granholm, who is now the governor of the state of Michigan and one of the rising stars in American politics. This is what she had to say:

Here is the transcript from a few excerpts of then-Michigan Attorney General Jennifer Granholm's speech at the EMILY's List Majority Council Conference in June 2002.

"EMILY is every woman who has ever sat at a business meeting while someone else took credit for her good work.

EMILY is every young professional who's been told to wait her turn and every seasoned one who's been told she still has to pay her dues.

EMILY is every working mom who's managed to balance a checkbook, who's managed a clean house, a corporate budget and a 12-year-old's basketball tournament in one day.

EMILY is every stay-at-home mom who has ever been asked, 'No, I mean, what do you do? What do you really do?'

She is every woman who's ever had to defend her right to be pro-choice. She's every woman who's ever had to explain her choice not to have a child.

She's every woman who has ever demanded a raise because she's been doing the same work as the man in the next cubicle for the same number of years, and she's still not getting the same pay. She's every woman who has ever wondered why the company won't cover her contraceptives, but will cover that same guy's Viagra.

EMILY is every working mom who has ever fought for quality day care or family leave time. She is every woman who has given up a single day of vacation to care for a sick child or a sick parent.

EMILY is every girl in every classroom whose hand was still in the air after the boys got their questions answered.

She's every athlete who's ever been told, she 'throws like a girl.'
She's every candidate who's ever been asked how she can run for office and have a family at the same time.
She is every African American woman who has had to work three times as hard to be considered as good as her white male colleague.
She is every Jewish woman who has ever been called a princess.
She is every Hispanic woman who has been asked how long her family has been in this country.

She is every woman who has been called too soft or too strong or too aggressive or too nice or too ambitious to get the job done.
She is every woman who has ever been measured against a glossy picture in a magazine.

EMILY is the seamstress who has sewn the graduation gowns for years but has never worn one. EMILY is every woman who helped set up this room today and who will clean up after we leave … and that same woman who only wants her daughters to dream big dreams, because EMILY knows that young girls cannot be what they cannot see.

She is you. She may be your next governor … she may be your next vice-president ... she may be your next president.

And EMILY doesn't get mad — she gets elected!"
xxx
Emily's List is a dynamic, important organization.
Their primary function has been the same since it's founding in 1985. In 24 years they have been instrumental in electing Democratic Pro-Choice women to offices at every level in the country except the Executive Branch and it won't be long till they reach that goal, as well.

And it's time, now, to begin our donations to this worthy cause to be sure we hang onto both houses in 2010. Please go here to check it out.

Dobbs Says There Are "Still Questions". Oh, Really?

2009-07-23T06:29:00.001-04:00

Jon Stewart is the most trusted news caster in America today [according to a NY Times Poll].
Heck, even Kansas and Missouri, 2 Republican bastions, voted for him--how trusted is THAT?
And Jon put out this piece on the "birther movement. Take a look.

An Insider Speaks Out

2009-07-17T08:29:00.000-04:00

Wendell Potter, a former high-ranking PR executive for Cigna wrote an expose of the health care industry. The following is an excerpt. The entire article can be found here.
And here is a related article that exposes numerous practices engaged in by the 'health care' industry.
xxx
I'm the former insurance industry insider now speaking out about how big for-profit insurers have hijacked our health care system and turned it into a giant ATM for Wall Street investors, and how the industry is using its massive wealth and influence to determine what is (and is not) included in the health care reform legislation members of Congress are now writing.

[I]n recent years I had grown increasingly uncomfortable serving as one of the industry's top PR executives. In addition to my responsibilities at CIGNA . . . I was in a unique position to see not only how Wall Street analysts and investors influence decisions insurance company executives make but also how the industry has carried out behind-the-scenes PR and lobbying campaigns to kill or weaken any health care reform efforts that threatened insurers' profitability.

I also have seen how the industry's practices . . . have contributed to the tragedy of nearly 50 million people being uninsured as well as to the growing number of Americans who . . . are underinsured. An estimated 25 million of us now fall into that category.

What I saw happening over the past few years was a steady movement away from the concept of insurance and toward "individual responsibility," a term used a lot by insurers and their ideological allies. This is playing out as a continuous shifting of the financial burden of health care costs away from insurers and employers and onto the backs of individuals.

As an industry spokesman, I was expected to put a positive spin on this trend that the industry created and euphemistically refers to as "consumerism" and to promote so-called "consumer-driven" health plans. I ultimately reached the point of feeling like a huckster.

I thought I could live with being a well-paid huckster and hang in there a few more years until I could retire. I probably would have if I hadn't made a completely spur-of-the-moment decision a couple of years ago that changed the direction of my life. While visiting my folks in northeast Tennessee where I grew up, I read in the local paper about a health "expedition" being held that weekend a few miles up U.S. 23 in Wise, Va. Doctors, nurses and other medical professionals were volunteering their time to provide free medical care to people who lived in the area. What intrigued me most was that Remote Area Medical, a non-profit group whose original mission was to provide free care to people in remote villages in South America, was organizing the expedition. I decided to check it out.

That 50-mile stretch of U.S. 23, which twists through the mountains where thousands of men have made their living working in the coalmines, turned out to be my "road to Damascus."

Nothing could have prepared me for what I saw when I reached the Wise County Fairgrounds, where the expedition was being held. Hundreds of people had camped out all night in the parking lot to be assured of seeing a doctor or dentist when the gates opened. By the time I got there, long lines of people stretched from every animal stall and tent where the volunteers were treating patients.

That scene was so visually and emotionally stunning it was all I could do to hold back tears. How could it be that citizens of the richest nation in the world were being treated this way?

A couple of weeks later I was boarding a corporate jet to fly from Philadelphia to a meeting in Connecticut. When the flight attendant served my lunch on gold-rimmed china and gave me a gold-plated knife and fork to eat it with, I realized for the first time that someone's insurance premiums were paying for me to travel in such luxury. I also realized that one of the reasons those people in Wise County had to wait in long lines to be treated in animal stalls was because our Wall Street-driven health care system has created one of the most inequitable health care systems on the planet.

Although I quit my job last year, I did not make a final decision to speak out as a former insider until recently when it became clear to me that the insurance industry and its allies (often including drug and medical device makers, business groups and even the American Medical Association) were succeeding in shaping the current debate on health care reform.

I heard members of Congress reciting talking points like the ones I used to write to scare people away from real reform. I'll have more to say about that over the coming weeks and months, but, for now, remember this: whenever you hear a politician or pundit use the term "government-run health care" and warn that the creation of a public health insurance option that would compete with private insurers (or heaven forbid, a single-payer system like the one Canada has) will "lead us down the path to socialism," know that the original source of the sound bite most likely was some flack like I used to be.

Bottom line: I ultimately decided the stakes are too high for me to just sit on the sidelines and let the special interests win again. So I have joined forces with thousands of other Americans who are trying to persuade our lawmakers to listen to us for a change, not just to the insurance and drug company executives who are spending millions to shape reform to benefit them and the Wall Street hedge fund managers they are beholden to.

Take it from me, a former insider, who knows what really motivates those folks. You need to know where the hard-earned money you pay in health insurance premiums -- if you lucky enough to have coverage at all -- really goes.

I decided to speak out knowing that some people will not like what I have to say and will do all they can to discredit me.

I'm writing this because, knowing how things work, I'm fully expecting insurers' PR firms to quietly feed friends of the industry . . . with anything they can think of to discredit me and what I say. This will go on behind the scenes because the insurers will want to preserve the image they are working so hard to cultivate -- as a group of kind and caring folks who think only of you and your health and are working hard as real partners to Congress and the White House to find "a uniquely American solution" to what ails our system.

I expect this because I have worked closely with the industry's PR firms over many years whenever the insurers were being threatened with bad publicity, litigation or legislation that might hinder profits.

One of the reasons I chose to become affiliated with the Center for Media and Democracy is because of the important work the organization does to expose often devious, dishonest and unethical PR practices that further the self interests of big corporations and special interest groups at the expense of the American people and the democratic principles this country was founded on.

After a long career in PR, I am looking forward to providing an insider's perspective as a senior fellow at CMD, and I am very grateful for the opportunity to speak out for the rights and dignity of ordinary people. The people of Wise County and every county deserve much better than to be left behind to suffer or die ahead of their time due to Wall Street's efforts to keep our government from ensuring that all Americans have real access to first-class health care.

Well, So Much for the Stimulus

2009-07-08T08:14:00.008-04:00

Heard on The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer:
Hartford Connecticut is poor. Two years ago, it’s kids scored among the lowest in the nation on performance tests. Connecticut also has some of the richest communities in the country. As a result, the state has the widest performance gap of all the states among its students.

One district in Hartford did a massive overhaul of its schools. With no new money, it redesigned its systems to include 4 separate ‘academies’ within each school. The campus that was profiled had the Freshman Academy, the Law Academy, the Green Academy and the Nursing Academy. Except for the Freshman Academy which serves as an introduction to high school, each provides the basic high school curriculum as well as focusing on its own core area of study. For the first time in a long, long time, 2008/2009’s test scores began moving upward.

The kids who were interviewed by the NewsHour reporter sang the praises of their school saying that, for the first time, they believe they have a shot at attending college.
When the stimulus came along, the 4 principals of the school were elated. They intended to hire a school nurse, a counselor, a health teacher, a math teacher as well as raising salaries across the school in order to entice better teachers to come to their system.

I believe any reasonable person can agree—an increase in college attendance and graduation would, more than almost any other development, serve to bring Connecticut [or any other state] out of its economic doldrums and jump-start the economy. It’s too bad the governor of Connecticut cannot be counted among the reasonable people of the world.

True to form, Jodi Rell cut all programs the stimulus would affect by the exact amount of the expected infusion from the Federal Government. What do you want to bet she refunded $300.00 to each of her constituents?
Goodbye, new money—hello, status quo. And so long, prospects of bringing in new teachers, raising salaries, adding support staff. In other words, so much for creating new jobs. Gee, thanks, Governor Rell.

I guess she’s looking out for her and her neighbor’s kids. After all—we can’t have just any riff-raff in those poor towns going to good schools and getting into college. What if the rich children can't get into those good schools because their poorer counterparts make better grades than they do? And, what will those rich kids do for jobs in such an Alice-In- Wonderland world?

Of course, another possibility is that this Republican Governor has joined forces with Rush Limbaugh and simply wants the stimulus to fail. To hell with the country, to hell with her own kids' future if we can see to it that Obama falls flat on his face and we can elect Sarah Palin in 2012.

2009-07-03T14:17:00.011-04:00

Today I received a petition from the Care2 Petition Site asking me to sign a petition thanking President Obama for reversing the previous administration’s policies regarding the U.N. and joining the Human Rights Council within that body.

While this is good news in the matter of our standing among the nations of the world, it is another slap in the face to the 1.5% of the population in this country who are still waiting to have their basic rights acknowledged.

So, I have an idea:
Right now the Obama administration is, most likely, congratulating itself for taking this stand and supporting the U.N.’s Human Rights Council. They are absolutely correct that the only way to make a difference in this extraordinarily important matter is by taking a seat inside the council and working to make changes from the inside. Scolding from the outside has less than no effect.

However, this is a terrific time to remind Obama that a disastrous human rights injustice is happening right here every day.
When people’s careers are being ruined by our government’s misguided policy of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell as a matter of course; when our Department of Justice puts out a statement comparing gay marriage to incest and the marriage of children, how can our country possibly act as an arbiter of justice in the U.N? The short answer is it cannot.

So, I appended a personal message to the petition and sent a personal email to the White House to that effect. I attach it below. Please copy and paste it or edit it as you please or write your own and send it along to them.

Now, while they’re focused on worldwide human rights issues, is the time to remind them that they need to get their own house in order before trying to tell other countries how to conduct their affairs, right?

Here’s my letter— please use it as a jumping off point for your own.
And, won’t you pass this ms along to your email friends, too? Thanx.
xxx
I add my personal gratitude for your reversal of the former administration’s policies regarding the U.N. in general and the Human Rights Council in particular.

Now, will you please also address the human rights issue here at home that is still languishing, waiting for your attention?

Please tell the Pentagon to stop enforcing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell until Congress gets around to addressing this miscarriage of justice.
And please speak out against the insult to all LGBT’s put forth by your Justice Department last month.

Human rights are essential for dignity and freedom from fear. The people of the LGBT community still labor under fear for their own safety in this "land of the free". Maintaining their status as second class citizens and publishing misinformation about them do nothing to lift that fear-- in fact such measures increase it.

Thank you for turning your attention to this profoundly important matter.

Food Instead of Tea

2009-07-02T20:46:00.000-04:00

Please note the button on the sidebar linking to the Million Can March.

Food pantries are struggling now as the increase in demand meets the decrease in donations.
So, in answer to the Teabagging Parties scheduled for July 4, Les Enrages.org has launched a drive for 1 million cans of food to be donated to food pantries around the world.

And there's more! [That came out like one of those late-night commercials -- sorrreeee.]
RevPhat has emailed Rachel Maddow asking her to mention the Million Can March on her show. And she's asking the rest of us to do the same. Rachel's e-ddress is: Rachel@msnbc.com

So, let's all get on the stick, raid our pantries and write to Rachel and get this thing rolling! After all, 1,000,000 cans of food [or boxes of cereal or mac and cheese or mashed potato buds] aren't going to march into those food pantries all by themselves, right?

Palin Revisited

2009-06-30T22:29:00.019-04:00

The August Issue of Vanity Fair featured an article by Todd S. Purdum:

It Came From Wasilla

Here are some excerpts:

Palin is at once the sexiest and the riskiest brand in the Republican Party. Her appeal to people in the party (and in the country) who share her convictions and resentments is profound. The fascination is viral, and global.

Whatever her political future, the emergence of Sarah Palin raises questions that will not soon go away. What does it say about the nature of modern American politics that a public official who often seems proud of what she does not know is not only accepted but applauded? What does her prominence say about the importance of having (or lacking) a record of achievement in public life? Why did so many skilled veterans of the Republican Party—long regarded as the more adroit team in presidential politics—keep loyally working for her election even after they privately realized she was casual about the truth and totally unfit for the vice-presidency? Perhaps most painful, how could John McCain, one of the cagiest survivors in contemporary politics—with a fine appreciation of life’s injustices and absurdities, a love for the sweep of history, and an overdeveloped sense of his own integrity and honor—ever have picked a person whose utter shortage of qualification for her proposed job all but disqualified him for his?

[Personal insert: There is one answer that will cover the last two questions, at least: Neither McCain nor the Republican Party at large wanted to win the election. Palin was not in on the joke. Just my personal take on the disaster that was the last Republican presidential campaign.]

In the aftermath of the November election, the conventional wisdom among Palin’s supporters in the Republican establishment was that she should go home, keep her head down, show that she could govern effectively, and quietly educate herself about foreign and domestic policy with the help of a cadre of experienced advisers. She has done none of this.

Palin is a cipher by choice. When she chooses to reveal herself, what she reveals is not always the same thing as the truth. Her singular refusal to have in-depth conversations with the national media . . . has compounded the challenge of understanding who she really is. There has been Hollywood talk that Palin could star in a reality-TV show about running Alaska, but nothing has come of it yet.

[**Personal note: Oh, please, oh please do, Sarah! What an efficient method for destroying your next campaign! Please! Please! Please!]

Little Shop of Horrors

The caricature of Sarah Palin that emerged in the presidential campaign, for good and ill, is now ineradicable. The swift journey from her knockout convention speech to Tina Fey’s dead-eyed incarnation of her as Dan Quayle with an updo played out in real time, no less for the bewildered McCain campaign than for the public at large. It is an ironclad axiom of politics that if a campaign looks troubled from the outside the inside reality is far worse, and the McCain-Palin fiasco was no exception.

By the time Election Day rolled around, the staff had been serially pummeled by unflattering press reports about the gaps in Palin’s knowledge, her stubborn resistance to direction, and the post-selection spending spree in which she ran up bills of $150,000 on clothes for herself and her family at high-end stores. The top McCain aides who had tried hard to work with Palin . . . were barely on speaking terms with her, and news organizations were reporting that anonymous McCain aides saw Palin as a “diva” and a “whack job.”

[I]n a recent series of conversations, a range of people from the McCain-Palin campaign, including members of the high command, agreed to elaborate on how a match they thought so right ended up going so wrong.

After she was picked, the campaign belatedly sent a dozen lawyers and researchers, led by a veteran Bush aide, Taylor Griffin, to Alaska, in a desperate race against the national reporters descending on the state. At one point, trying out a debating point that she believed showed she could empathize with uninsured Americans, Palin told McCain aides that she and Todd in the early years of their marriage had been unable to afford health insurance of any kind, and had gone without it until he got his union card and went to work for British Petroleum . . . . Checking with Todd Palin himself revealed that, no, they had had catastrophic coverage all along. She insisted that catastrophic insurance didn’t really count and need not be revealed. This sort of slipperiness—about both what the truth was and whether the truth even mattered—persisted on questions great and small.

In regards to the debate with Biden:

Palin worked hard, and the results were adequate. Palin’s winking “Can I call you Joe?” performance against Biden was nothing like a disaster. In fact, it seems to have emboldened her enough that the next day she openly voiced disagreement with the McCain team’s decision to pull out of active competition in Michigan. When orders or advice from McCain headquarters began to conflict with her own impulses, aides told me, she simply did what she wanted to do.

xxx

Immediately, Jim Geraghty of the National Review Online came out swinging.

He wrote an article entitled, Reading and Mocking the Palin Profile So You Don’t Have To.

He led off with, “To go through the 9,800 word profile/excoriation of Sarah Palin by Todd Purdum in Vanity Fair and Fisk it line by line would take an enormous amount of time and space, and probably more time than you’re willing to devote to reading it. So for now, the low-lights:”

Isn’t it beautiful? In one fell swoop he dismissed his readers’ need to check the source and helped them feel virtuous for choosing to remain ignorant of what the article actually said. That’s quite a skill. “There, there, dears. Don’t you worry your pretty little heads about what’s in that nasty old article. Uncle Jim will tell you everything you need to know.”

He then goes on to argue against the hyperbole [of which there is plenty, I admit] and the opinions [ditto]. However, he mentions very few of the facts outlined in the article, and pretty much refuses to dispute them. I would imagine that is because could not disagree with the factual statements as they were all true. Indeed, he simply glossed over most of them. Best not to put them before his readers’ eyes, after all. They might get to know some of the more unsavory bits about their princess. Probably not a good idea.

His article reminds me of the Lawyer’s First Rule: When the law is against you, argue the facts. When the facts are against you, argue the law. When both are against you, call the other lawyer names. Does this remind you of any campaign of recent history? Geraghty continues this great tradition. In his case, he sneered at Purdum while ignoring the truths in the article.

His fancy footwork was amazing. Again—he displayed a great deal of skill. The fact that he used it to lull his readers into complacent bobble-headed acceptance of an altogether unprepared person who may well be seeking the presidency is pretty frightening, to my way of thinking.

[As I was rereading the last paragraph, what popped into my mind’s eye was Richard Gere’s/Billy Flynn’s tap-dance during the trial of Roxie Hart in CHICAGO. That little link scared the bejeebers out of me. We’re not talking about a fictional character who killed her lover in a passionate frenzy here, but about a woman who very likely has her eye on the Oval Office.]

Geraghty adroitly used opinions put forth by Purdum about Palin as chances to take digs at Obama and even Bill Clinton. I counted two against Obama and one against Clinton. Uh, this is a response to an article about Palin, remember? He did, however, quote a fairly funny joke made by Obama during a speech. I guess that’s supposed to make it all OK.

He claimed that Purdum intimated that Palin won the debate against Byden. I watched that debate. I’ll bet you did, too. Tell me, who do you think won?

Geraghty wrote, “She has been living in the eye of a hurricane since last August, and has become one of the few figures subject to the scrutiny of both the political media and the celebrity-industrial complex manifested in People and Us Weekly. Almost overnight, she’s gained millions of devoted fans and furious enemies. That has to be a horrific environment to make tough decisions in.”

To my mind, this statement makes Palin out to be some sort of innocent bystander—not the person who has orchestrated the media frenzy from the beginning of her campaign until the present—notwithstanding the attempts by her handlers to get her off the stage where she just keeps damaging herself in the public eye.

Geraghty did make one cogent and truthful point: “Palin may run for president in 2012, which could very well be a mistake. Her current public reputation and support is probably just enough to win the GOP nomination and then generate similar electoral college results as 2008. As a GOP strategist put it to me a few months ago, ‘The perception of Sarah Palin will change when the reality of Sarah Palin changes.’” Ummm, do you actually expect THAT to happen? Me neither.

Another skill Geraghty displayed was changing the subject so dexterously that I almost missed it.

Note Purdum’s statement in the original article:

“Also with Coale’s help, Palin formed the grandiosely named Alaska Fund Trust, to defray a reported half million dollars in legal expenses arising from a slew of formal ethics complaints against her in her home state—prompting yet another formal complaint, that the fund itself constitutes an ethical breach.”

And Geraghty’s response:

“The fact that Palin is now 15 for 15 in having those “formal ethics complaints” dismissed as groundless would seem to be somewhat relevant.

Purdum wrote about the Alaska Fund Trust and the reason it was created—to offset Palin’s legal costs. He did not suggest that the ethics complaints had merit. He DID say that the Fund itself turned out to have been questioned as to its own ethics.

However, Geraghty ignored the point about the Fund and focused on the merit of the complaints. Nifty knitting? Yes. Answering the point brought up in the original article? No.

Finally, he went on to say, “I find my toddler son exhausting; I can only imagine a life running a state while caring for a son with Down syndrome and a son in Iraq and a daughter who is a new mother in the sharp glare of the public spotlight and a grandson and another daughter suddenly appearing in David Letterman’s routine. This may not be the right time for another go-round in a multi-year process in which vast swaths of the political world will aim to see her torn down to nothing.”

Once again: “Poor widdle Sarah. She’s such a victim. Feel sowwy foa her.”

And he ended his piece with that most vapid of statements: “But it’s her call, and time will tell.”

Oh, really? The rest of us hadn’t figured that part out. Thanks for explaining it to us mindless ijits.

A Novel Idea: Health Care for the Masses

2009-06-26T12:45:00.007-04:00

Health Care Faces the 'R' Word -- by Michael Kinsley

Even though more and more Americans have no health insurance at all, Americans consider health care to be a right. Not just that: We consider the best possible health care to be a right. Few would find it acceptable for a poor person to die of a medically curable disease for lack of money. Even fewer would find it acceptable that they themselves should die because the system won't spend the money to cure them. This is all in theory, of course. In practice, people die all the time because some effective treatment is too expensive. But whenever an issue gets drawn into the political system and becomes explicit, it becomes harder. That is what health-care reform will do to the question of rationing.

The Obama administration believes that health care can be made cheaper without any reduction in quality. It has evidence to back this up. According to the famous Dartmouth studies, health care costs two or three times as much per person in some places in America as it does in others, with no measurable difference in results. Atul Gawande's deservedly admired recent essay in the New Yorker makes a similar point. So in theory it's easy: Just figure out how the cheap places do it and apply this knowledge to bring down the cost in the pricier places.
~~~
The administration is investing great hopes (and $1.1 billion of stimulus money) in "comparative effectiveness research." Because we don't collect and compare in any systematic way the vast piles of data we have about individual patients and their treatment, we know astonishingly little about which treatments work and which are a waste of money. The administration is touting the figure of 30 percent of all health-care costs as spending that may accomplish nothing.

I suspect that what a billion-plus dollars' worth of research will find is that perhaps 30 percent of what we spend on health care is almost entirely worthless, or just barely better than a much cheaper alternative. Or it might be better and no one knows for sure.

Click here for the complete text.
xxx
Being one of those who has no health insurance ['the great unwashed' as I call us uninsureds], I'll be glad when this thang is settled--though it'll be too late to benefit me. Next year, I become eligible for Medicare.
Still, it's about time the rest of the population can see a physician without breaking the bank, don't you think?

And We Should Care Why?

2009-06-21T09:39:00.005-04:00

I picked this up on All Voices:
US census to count gay and lesbian married couples
By: jonnalagadda3
Washington: The Census Bureau of the USA will recognize married couple of the same sex in the 2010 census.
Same sex couples could not get married in US during the last census. Last y[e]ar, two states approved same sex marriages, and now it became imperative they be taken for head count for statistical purposes. This count will also help arriving at a data of homosexuals, gays and lesbians who are legally married. This would also help the state plan their welfare. President Barack Obama has recently signed a memorandum giving the same rights and facilities to those employees who are married to same sex, on par with other government employees [sic]. Steve Jost, a spokesman of the Census Bureau sa[i]d same sex couples ought to report themselves for the count. He said after the 2010 census, the country will have good data on which to discuss the same sex phenomena emerging in the country.
xxx
Well, the government is counting married gays. So what? It's still perceiving them as second class citizens.
They can't serve in the military unless they lie about who they are.
Obama's Justice Department just compared their marriages to incest and the marrying of children.

Maybe the census will count each of them as 3/5 of a person?

Les Enrag�s.org: Million Can March: Yes We Can!

2009-06-19T20:35:00.001-04:00

O-betray

2009-06-17T09:08:00.028-04:00

O.K. So last year, Obama said he supported gays. In fact, he said he DID NOT support Don’t Ask Don’t Tell [DADT] and would get rid of it if he got to be POTUS. As a result of that and other statements, a lot of gays supported him. And worked for his campaign. And voted for him.

What a difference a year makes. Here we are, almost 5 months into his presidency and DADT is still very much the law of the land. Still enforced. Two hundred fifty three people have, since Obama took office, had their military careers destroyed—just like they did under Bush and Clinton before him.
These people want to serve their country. And he kicks them in the teeth.

Change We Can Believe In. Uh huh.

Then, last Friday the Justice Department took out the trash [a concept you’re familiar with if you religiously watched (as I did) the TV drama, The West Wing.]
In case you didn’t, here’s the idea: on Fridays, the government releases information it doesn’t want people to notice.
The weekend is coming up and fewer people read newspapers on Saturday and Sunday. So, if you want to put out a story —so you won’t be accused of hiding stuff— but you want it to be used only to line the bottom of the birdcage and nothing else, you sit on it till Friday and release it along with a whole slew of other stuff —all at once.

Only, this time, people noticed.
Oops.

Here’s what was supposed to leak out under the radar —only it didn’t:
A statement was released by the Justice Department supporting the Defense of Marriage Act [DOMA].
~~~
Here are excerpts from the Act:
Powers reserved to the states:
No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.
Definition of 'marriage' and 'spouse':
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.
~~~
Last Friday’s brief was authored by a Bush holdover. A Mormon. And it shows. It equated gay marriage with a marriage between uncle and niece. It equated gay marriage with marrying off children.

Do you see why they wanted to release this piece of garbage on Friday? It could just have easily have come from the Bush administration. Except Bush would have been proud of it and released it on Tuesday morning with a flourish of trumpets.
They were right in one way —the correct thing to do with it was to line the bottom of the bird cage.

Last Friday evening Rachel and others speculated that Obama didn’t know this filth had been released. Even that he doesn’t agree with it.
I’m sorry, but I’m of the mind that he is, after all, the president. And I’m with Harry Truman—if he didn’t know it was coming out, he should have known. It’s his buck.
It looks from here as if, when it comes to gays, Obama is an empty suit.
xxx
So, fast forward to today:
All of a sudden, Obama makes the announcement that he is giving ‘many of’ the same rights to gay federal employees and their partners that ‘opposite’ married people have enjoyed forever and ever.

This is another of those little items Obama had promised—but not delivered. Now, he’s using it to sop up the egg that’s dripping off his chin.
Oh, and by the way, what does ‘many of’ mean?

Nice try, Barry. But you're offering too little too late.
For one thing, this tidbit had come out so precipitously and so recently that Rachel and her staff and the guest she discussed it with didn’t yet know what form it had taken. Was it a resolution or a memorandum? I hadn’t known the two types of statements existed—let alone the implications involved.
Here’s what it boils down to: A resolution becomes standard operating procedure —it remains in effect unless and until a later president repeals it— and that requires legal action.
A memorandum remains in effect for as long as Obama is president. Once he’s out of office it immediately dies.

Maybe I’m being really, really cynical here—but that seems to be pretty nifty if you’re trying to bribe a certain constituency to vote for you come 2012.
I don’t know how many federal employees are LGBT but, it’s a fair number, I imagine. Since 1.5% of the general population is LGBT and since there are a lot of federal employees—it’s a good guess that the same percentage of federal employees are LGBT. Add to that number their spouses—who certainly aren’t all, themselves, fed employees—well, let’s call it 2.5% of the number of feds. Not enough to swing the election, of course, but still—a welcome voting block come 2012.
So, suppose you’re one of the people who suddenly had your basic rights acknowledged. And suppose those rights will expire in January unless the guy who [however expediently] signed the measure that recognized them gets reelected. Well? Who are you going to vote for? Yeah. Me too.

But laying all that aside —Mr. Obama, your administration just delivered a deadly insult to a group of people that worked for you, got the vote out for you, voted for you and whom you have ignored since November:
First you invited Rick Warren to offer an invocation at your inauguration. When the understandable hoopla ensued, you hurriedly invited Gene Robinson, too. Shame on you.
During your campaign you promised to repeal DADT.
Even supposing it would take some time to do that, you could, with a stroke of your pen, tell the Pentagon to stop enforcing it. You could stop the practice of ruining people’s careers. It would take ten minutes.
You haven’t bothered. Shame on you.
Also, during your campaign, you promised to address gay marriage. And THIS is what you did. You ignored it. Then you insulted 1.5% of the population. Then you backtracked by giving the ones among them who work for you “many of” the rights enjoyed by the straight married people in your employ.
Gee, thanks, Mr. President.
And shame on you.

Here are some related articles:
The Village Voice, The CBS Blog, The New York Times, and an article whose headline:'Dept. of Justice defends DOMA, Obama wants it overturned', all by itself, gave me whiplash— The Catholic News Agency.

By the way, that last article lead off with this statement:
'Although the Department of Justice filed a brief defending the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) last week, the Obama administration has made it clear that promoting same-sex “marriage” will be an important focus of its political agenda.'

Errrrrrmmm—when?
Oh, and that hoity-toity, holier-than-thou Catholic newspaper can remove those condescending quotes around the word "marriage", too.

Our Surrender

2009-06-09T20:30:00.021-04:00

The Bush Hangover: Guantanamo Undercuts Our Protests of North Korea -- by Mitchell Bard
George W. Bush has been out of office for more than four months now, but I fear that the damage done during the Bush years has inflicted serious injury to the American psyche and reputation, and it will take years, if not decades, to recover.

I woke up this morning to the chilling news that two American journalists had been sentenced to 12 years of hard labor by a North Korean court for the "crimes" of illegally entering the country and committing "hostile acts."
^^^
[T]he international community has to stand against the heinous actions of the North Korean government. Clearly, the United States should be at the head of such international action.

But today, I also read about Lakhdar Boumediene, and the truly disturbing story of what happened to him after the 9/11 attacks. An Algerian man living with his wife and two children in Sarajevo, Bosnia, he was working for the Red Crescent in October 2001 when he was arrested and charged with conspiring to blow up the American and British embassies in the city. An investigation revealed no evidence of his involvement in any plot, so a Bosnian judge ordered him released, but the Bush administration intervened, and in January 2002 he was shackled and flown to Guantanamo Bay.
^^^
In the end, Boumediene was held for 7 1/2 years in Guantanamo, during which time, he says, he was tortured. He says he was kept up for 16 days straight, beaten, "stretched" (pulled up from under his arms while his feet were shackled to a chair) and forced to run while chained to guards, and if he could not keep up, he was dragged until he was bloody and bruised. After he began a hunger strike, he had food tubes put up his nose and, he claims, soldiers would purposely poke IV needles into the wrong parts of his arm, just to induce pain. But the one thing that was not done to him? Nobody asked if he was involved in a plot to blow up the U.S. and British embassies in Sarajevo. Rather, all he was repeatedly asked was about his connections to al-Qaeda and Osama bin-Laden (he insists he had no connection at all to the terrorist group).

But there was one thing in the article that not only amazed me but brilliantly illuminated why the U.S. should never torture, and why it is so important that we repudiate what happened during the Bush years and chart a clear and unequivocal new path forward, one that reflects the country's traditional values. Boumediene said:
"I thought America, the big country, they have CIA, FBI. Maybe one week, two weeks, they know I am innocent. I can go back to my home."

In other words, Boumediene had faith that a country like the United States could not possibly keep an innocent man prisoner with no way to contest his guilt. His view of America is one that many in the world shared before the Bush years . . . .
That is supposed to be the difference between a country like North Korea and a country like the United States.
Click here for the complete article.
xxx
This says it all. The US willingly surrendered what high ground we had had before.

Of course, even before Bush, our 'high ground' had been tenuous at best:
A country founded on genocide and slavery.
Jim Crow and, even now, capital punishment and imprisonment that allows strikingly different statistics depending on race.
The sham of The War On Drugs.
The only western country which does not offer reasonable health care to its citizens [unless they happen to hold high government office].
That has 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' as a very real law and denies marriage to 1.5% of its population.
Whose education is falling apart.
That tolerates children going to bed hungry every night.
That accepts the fact that some of its people still kill in the name of God.
Whose people are urged to take their guns to church——
All this doesn't leave us a lot of room to talk, does it?

Still, before Bush was appointed president, we had slightly more room than we do now.
And Cheney just goes on telling us how right he and his cronies were all that time—spouting the lie that 'torture saved lives' just as if that were the question [which it is not].

But, today, the real issue comes home. Two of our citizens are being illegally and immorally held by another country and we are powerless to even raise our voice in protest—all because we have done the same thing—and right recently.

In Doctor Tiller's Name

2009-05-31T22:16:00.004-04:00

Hey folks-- I was reading the Article at Huffington Post about the assassination of Dr. Tiller and someone made the suggestion of making a donation to Planned Parenthood in his name.

It sounded like a great idea, to me, so I went to the site and donated. It didn't offer a way to donate in the name of a particular person but I figure they'll probably get lots of donations today -- and they'll know why.

So, I just wanted to pass on the idea to everyone here. And please pass it on to your blogs and email address books, won't you? Thanks.

Global Warming Rethunk

2009-05-29T23:52:00.020-04:00

I just had an ‘Aha! Moment.’
For the last decade or more I’ve believed every word the scientists said about Global Warming. After all, the politicians immediately came out swinging, smearing the scientists and declaring their findings ‘pseudo-science.’
I mean, who would YOU have believed?

I just watched a documentary I’d seen before—but, this time, I noticed something that had escaped me the first time around.

I had known for many years about the Little Ice Age that began around the year 1000. It ushered in such innovations as chimneys, multi-roomed dwellings with staircases [the gentry lived upstairs where it was warmer] tapestry-hung beds, buttons on clothing, rotation of crops, an increase in animal husbandry as a result of the mass failure of cereal crops while animal feed crops were better able to survive the cold, etc. etc. etc.
The Black Death arrived about three hundred years later and preyed on a population already weakened by the change in climate.
The European mindset became paranoid. Surely, the Almighty was calling on the populace to clean up its act. The Church and governments turned on Jews and women and the witch hunts and purges of the Jews brought about thousands of violent deaths.

Across the Atlantic Ocean, the Vikings’ great experiment had been underway for several generations.
When they arrived, Greenland was a lush and green place—not the glacier-covered mass we’re all familiar with today. For the first century or so of the European settlement, the newcomers derived 80% of their sustenance from the land [goats, sheep and cereal crops] and 20% from the sea. After the Little Ice Age began, that ratio gradually reversed itself and the Vikings, who had never learned the technique of winter-fishing used to tide the Innuit over during hard times, died out.

This is the history of the early Little Ice Age. The earth actually began that cycle with a considerably warmer climate than we see today.
xxx
The part I hadn’t put together before was the length of the cycle we’re talking about, here.
The Little Ice Age didn’t last for two or three hundred years, as I’d always assumed. Its effects, in fact, were being felt when the Pilgrims arrived in the New World in 1620. They were still going on when George Washington crossed the Delaware River in 1776. All that ice in the painting wasn’t included for effect. It was really there as diaries of the time attest.
In 1816, when Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein, ice imagery abounded in the novel, reflecting conditions outside as she wrote. In short, the Little Ice Age came to an abrupt end in 1850—probably fueled, at least in part, by industrialization.

The fact remains, though, that the earth has not, by any means, warmed to the level it was when the cycle began in approximately the year 1000—when Greenland was actually green and England harvested grapes every summer as a matter of course.
xxx
But, here’s why this whole argument [the ‘natural warming’ the politicians postulate] is irrelevant:
No matter the cause, we are faced with a major crisis or even series of crises as a result of the warming we’re undergoing at the moment.
After all, with Greenland locked up in ice for almost a thousand years, with the arctic and the antarctic massively larger than they were 1000 years ago, we’ve been building on coasts that have been dry for considerably less than that amount of time.
Whole cities have grown up on land that was covered by ocean before the Little Ice Age began [I live in one of them]. Therefore, it would behoove us to keep the Little Ice Age that we’re currently living in stable—or face violent social upheavals as the climate returns to the level that may be the actual ‘norm’ [assuming there is such a thing] and our coastal cities drown.
I guess my point is—if conditions that existed prior to the year 1000 were the norm—and we are currently living in a waning Little Ice Age which may, now, be drawing to a close—whether or not we are responsible in whole or in part for the warming—we may be fighting a losing battle as we attempt to stabilize the climate, no matter what we do.
If we’re lucky, we are the sole cause of the warming and we can slow or stop it if we clean up our acts [given our political situation, a pretty big IF.]
But, if we’re not lucky and the earth just wants to warm up, my guess is she’s gonna do it.
In a battle between us and Mother Nature—guess who’s going to win? And those of us who live along the coasts had better invest in swim fins.

Oh, Yeah—We're In Danger of Forgetting What It Is!

2009-05-22T17:38:00.019-04:00

Congressman Broun [R-Georgia] wants to make the year 2010 the Year of the Bible. This although Ronald Reagan did exactly the same thing back in 1983. If I had known about it then, I would have been every bit as against it as I am now.

Broun uses lies to justify his stance. He claims that our founding fathers were in favor of his plan. This although the very First Amendment to the Constitution explicitly states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. . . .”
Either he doesn’t care that anyone with the ability to read immediately recognizes his lie—or he is deluded.
Let me ask you this: Do you consider yourself a good Muslim/Jew/Buddhist/Christian/Wiccan/Hindu/Atheist/Agnostic? If so, when was the last time you lied in order to espouse your belief? That's what I thought.

Broun goes further, even, than that. He breaks the oath he took upon assuming office. You know, the one to Preserve, Protect and Defend that pesky piece of paper, the Constitution of the United States.

Hello, Congressman Broun, not all Americans hold the Bible as their holy book. There are those who follow the Tipitaka. There are those who study the Torah and the Talmud. There are those who read the Qur’an. There are those who read the Aranyakas and upanishats. I study ‘The Seth Material’ and ‘The Michael Teachings’. Where is the Congressional Resolution for those books?

By singling out any one book, you foster discrimination against all others. This is exactly what our founding fathers warned us against and tried to protect us from. They had studied European history. They knew what a state-fostered religion would lead to. Things like witch burnings, purges, crusades, murder in the name of God.

This is not something we want to return to—even if Broun would like to take us there.
xxx
Update—May 31, 2009
By the way, this was a rather timely post, wasn't it?

Today, we witnessed exactly that. Murder in the name of God.
Do you see, Congressman Broun, what comes of promoting one religion/viewpoint at the expense of all others?

Of course, you'll denounce the murderer. It's the politically correct thing to do and you'll do it. And it will never cross your mind that you had anything to do with his actions.
Wake up.

2009-05-21T12:57:00.013-04:00

Gingrich: Pelosi Not Good Enough Liar to be Speaker -- by Andy Borowitz
Offers Congresswoman Lying Lessons

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich lashed out today at the current Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, calling the congresswoman unfit to be Speaker of the House "because she's not a good enough liar."
Mr. Gingrich, in an appearance on ABC's "Good Morning America," said that the ability to lie seamlessly is the most important qualification for the job of Speaker, adding, "I've been in the job and I should know."
The former Speaker issued the following ultimatum to Rep. Pelosi: "She needs to get better at lying, or step down."
Mr. Gingrich offered a brutal, blow-by-blow criticism of the House Speaker's lying technique, which he said consists of "pauses, ums and uhs, stuttering - all the hallmarks of an amateur."
In contrast, he said, "When I was in her chair my lying was as smooth as a baby's bottom."
He added that if Rep. Pelosi is serious about remaining in her position, he would be "more than willing" to give her lying lessons.
"Being a good liar requires practice," Mr. Gingrich said. "Fortunately for me, I had years of practice lying to my many wives."
xxx
Newt missed a bit, though.  He forgot to mention hypocrisy.
Maybe he has conveniently forgotten the fact that he did exactly what Pelosi is doing now—to the FBI—while he was Speaker.  Or the fact that, while he was calling for the impeachment of Clinton, he was having an affair with one of his aides.
xxx
You can subscribe and get your very own, free, Borowitz Report delivered daily to your emailbox here.

Oba-blowing-it

2009-05-16T06:46:00.017-04:00

Believe it or not, back in 1969, Nixon did something right.
He didn't just launch the fiasco of the ‘War on Drugs,’ he started a treatment-in-lieu-of-prison option for those who were caught using drugs [though not those who sold them]. And he gave the treatment programs wide latitude to develop their own approaches to the ‘problem’.
The fact that he probably added the treatment option because, for the first time, lots of middle-class kids were running into the drug culture doesn’t change the fact that the funding of the treatment option did a lot of good. How much good depended, of course, on the effectiveness of the respective programs.

In 1972, I voluntarily entered one such program called Renaissance West [Rennis]. It was a ‘year-long’ program [people could graduate successfully anywhere from 6 to 18 months after entering—as assessed by the individual, the staff and the ‘family members’ within the program]. And the focus was not on drug use.
Instead, it concentrated on the fact that the lives of clients involved in the live-in, commune-like program were out of control and they had engaged in a form of self-medication in order to make their lives tolerable.
In-depth therapy was practiced and, in fact, the entire program, from house cleaning to meals to the development of personal support systems to the group therapy sessions themselves were used to address the issue of building more effective lives for ourselves.

A learning center was included and clients who wished to do so could pursue any courses of study they chose. I picked classes on astrology, creative writing and psychology. A student from the University of Missouri at Kansas City taught several pupils in the writing course and a professor taught the psychology class in which I was the only student.
After I graduated from Rennis, I wanted to go back to college. I had flunked out twice before and when I applied, UMKC refused me entry. I solicited letters of recommendation from the directors of the program and that psychology professor who had been teaching me for the last several months. In fact, I wrote the letters and they signed them. Based on those letters, I was accepted on probation.
I was the first graduate from Rennis to enter college and I felt the full weight resting on my shoulders. If I didn’t succeed it would reflect badly on the program and on the people who had helped me get in. I HAD to do well.
xxx
During the course of our history, if a White president did a bad job, he was judged as an individual. The next person we elected was also a White Male—because that’s just what we did.
But, things are different now. For the first time, we have departed from our standard operating procedure. We have elected a type of person who is ‘different’ from our norm. [No, he’s not really different, but he is perceived as different—and that’s what matters.]
Odds are, we wouldn’t have done this if Bush/Cheney had been even remotely competent. They weren’t and, as a result, the people of this country, collectively, made history.

And Obama is in exactly the same position I was in in 1973 when I walked into my first class at UMKC. If I did well, I opened the door for other clients of Renaissance West. If I did poorly, I slammed that door in their faces. It was that simple.

Obama is what? 48 years old? I was only 25 and I recognized the fact people who I might never meet but who might attempt to follow me from Rennis to college could be adversely affected by my actions.
Doesn’t Obama realize the plain reality that, if he keeps flip-flopping, reneging on his promises, alienating the people who elected him, screwing up generally, he will close the door of the Oval Office to any person who follows him who is not a White Male?
xxx
Update:
OK. Maybe it's not so bad.
I know I'm flip-flopping myself—in fact, I'm starting to experience whiplash.

Today I saw a clip of Obama's press release during which he said he will fight the publishing of the torture photos. I hadn't, before, heard the argument that releasing them might hamper future investigations of the torture and the people who instigated it as well as those who carried it out.

OK, then. That's an argument I can understand and believe in. If they might drive the whistle blowers back into the closet—keep the pics close to your vest. So long as the reason for withholding them isn't to keep the torture as secret as it still can be kept, I'm OK with that.

I just wish he had thought this argument through before he made the initial announcement that he would release them. If he keeps doing these switch-backs he'll do neither the nation nor himself any good.

2009-05-14T01:29:00.008-04:00

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm—
Tonight I received an email from the **ahem** “Change.gov” website asking for my thoughts regarding health care.

I had just finished writing the post below and was sitting here contemplating setting my hair on fire.
And, I had a thought [a dangerous undertaking, I know, but I’m used to working without a net]:
So, I went to the url included in my email, found the contact button and gave them a piece of my mind about the refusal to release the torture photos. I told them that, while health care is an important issue, it pales in comparison to transparent government—especially in light of what Obama promised while on the campaign trail. And I used the “if they’re not likely to listen to reason, give em shame” tactic. I compared his administration to Bush/Cheney.

So—I’m asking anyone who reads this: Please go to this website and yell at them about the torture photos. And urge others to, as well. If O & Co. get enough of these change-the-subject messages, they just might sit up and take notice. It’s worth a shot, anyway.
xxxxx
Rethinking—
It is just slightly possible that this is more of the same scenario I postulated on 4/21:
Back then, Obama stepped on the Justice Department's toes. And roused a protest from Holder.

Today, he stepped on the toes of the 2nd court of appeals that, in fact, just came out with the exact opposite opinion of what Obama was saying today.

So maybe, just maybe, this is all a political game. Maybe, if he steps on enough toes and gooses enough departments and branches of government, someone somewhere will grab the ball and run with it and Obama can look like the helpless bystander.

I know. I'm reaching again.
But, he gave me hope last year and I'm loath to let go of it—at least, not yet.

Turley Said It Best

2009-05-14T00:15:00.017-04:00

Today, Obama repealed his own policy.
No more transparency—even if it has to do with crimes committed by the previous administration.
Obama has flip-flopped on releasing the pictures of torture. You know, the pictures he promised to make public on May 28? Those pictures.

There is speculation that Obama’s administration fears the pictures will be associated with it instead of the people who actually authorized the torture. WTF? Do they truly think that?
I can tell them right now—just in case they’re wondering: The people who already hate them. The ones who call him a socialist. The ones who are still demanding to see his birth certificate. The ones who hope he [and thereby, the country] fails. Those people will say, “See? We knew Obama tortured! We knew everybody does it!” But, no one else will.

On the other hand, those of us who used to think he was on the right track, those of us who believed him when he talked about transparency, those of us who are not among the 12% of the population who identify as Republicans, are deeply, deeply disappointed. And we’re heading toward rage.

So, here we go yet further down the slippery slope:
He asked Rick Warren, a gay-bashing-bigot, to pray at his inauguration.
He has maintained Bush’s policies in regard to “Faith Based Initiatives”—even down to allowing discriminatory hiring and proselytizing before dishing out the soup and handing over the cot.
He hasn’t repealed Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, as he had promised. Gays continue to have their military careers ruined.
And he talks out of both sides of his neck when it comes to torture.

Tonight, on Rachel Maddow, Jonathon Turley, a law professor at George Washington University said, “It’s perfectly Orwellian.”
And, “What the president said today is diametrically against the Federal law.”
And, “If he succeeds, instead of having a transparent government, he would create this opaque government where you could virtually see nothing. The government could say, ‘This is going to be embarrassing. So, whatever is embarrassing to us injures national security.’”
And, “It’s just more evidence that this administration is becoming the greatest bait-and-switch in history. He is morphing into his predecessor.”

Rachel asked if these hundreds of new pictures suggest that there was an overall pattern that obviously reaches much higher than the ‘few rogue operators’ as both administrations have labeled them—and if that is the case, the whole thing will have to be investigated. And THAT is what Obama does not want to do. Turley agreed that that is exactly how this whole charade is beginning to appear.

The ACLU said it for me: When these photos come to light, “the outrage will focus not only on the Bush administration but on the Obama administration’s complicity in covering them up.”

Remember how much worse Watergate became after the cover-up started? Apparently, Obama doesn’t remember that little history lesson. And we all know what they say about those who forget history.
xxx
There is one [as Rachel would say] “teeny, tiny, tinee, teeeeeneee” little sliver of hope here.

Turley came up with virtually the same idea that I wrote about on April 21: that Obama is secretly hoping that he will be forced to release the photos—but that, for political reasons, he can’t just do it.

That COULD be the case, of course, but the more he plays these political games, the worse he looks to us hicks out in the sticks. To my mind, he’s choosing to mollify the wrong people.
Really, Obama, Cheney and Rush can't be any nastier to you than they're already being. Remember who put you where you are. Quit appeasing the criminals and start paying attention to the rest of us—or risk losing your head three-and-a-half years from now.

2009-05-10T18:35:00.007-04:00

Absolute Denial

From the Washington Post--by Carlson

xxx
This morning on The McLaughlin Group, a poll by AP was presented:
31% of those polled identified themselves as 'conservative'. I don't remember the exact percentage of that 31% — but it was substantial — refused to identify themselves as Republican.

Eleanor reported another poll by The Washington Post in which 21% self-identified as conservative. There was no breakdown by party identification reported.

So, McLaughlin asked, reasonably enough, if the elephant is becoming extinct.
No one admitted to believing this to be the case. I agree. The same question was being asked about the Democrats just 4 years ago. [The Democrats, however, did not provide the hilarious entertainment that the Republicans are now dispensing. As a matter of fact, the Dems were, so I understand, wracking their brains trying to figure out how to appeal to more people—not fewer.]

During the ensuing discussion, Pat Buchanan accused the Democrats of gloating. Outside of blogsville, I don't believe that's true. Certainly, within the MSM, all parties are pointing to steep declines by both parties in the past and predicting a comeback.
And, let's face it, we bloggers are, for the most part, amateurs. We're not obliged to hide our snickers behind our hands. And it's a good thing—or I would bust a gut!

But here's the kicker:
Pat also declared, in a no-nonsense fashion, the Republican Talking Point, "This nation is a Right-Leaning nation!"

Amazingly, no one refuted his statement. Are the other people on the panel afraid of him as so many fear Rush?
xxx
My question to Pat is this:
How can the numbers 31% [AP] and 21% [WaPo] be construed as a majority? Those are the people who declare themselves as "Conservative"— although many of them run, screaming, away from the label "Republican."

Either Pat is lying [while the figures are right up there on the screen in front of us] or he doesn't understand how percentages work.

So, which is it, Pat? Are you a liar or an imbecile?

2009-05-03T01:09:00.009-04:00

WHAT Were They Thinking?

I heard this tidbit on Wait! Wait! Don’t Tell Me! this morning and, if I didn’t know the producers of the show are absolutely scrupulous about getting their facts straight, I wouldn’t have believed it.

This week it came to the attention of the Obama administration that FEMA had put out a coloring book for small children. Entitled, “A Scary Thing Happened," it was included as a pdf file on the children's page on the FEMA website.

When they discovered the coloring books the new admin ordered the book pulled from the site. They declared the subject matter inappropriate for children. Duh.

The subject of the coloring book?
Can you guess?
I’ll give you a hint:
On one of the pages, the children were invited to color a picture that featured 2 airplanes flying into the side of a tall building.

Yep. This coloring book, designed for four to eight-year-olds, depicted the details of the happenings on September 11, 2001.

The book was published in 2003—about the time that things were starting to get back to normal in most communities across the country. Well, our government couldn’t have THAT!
I suppose it was decided that one way to keep the fear in the consciousness of the public was by attacking our children. After all, if the children are having nightmares, their parents will be reminded to be afraid—be very afraid. And let the government do whatever it wants to do in the name of keeping us safe.
Here's one of the pictures the children were invited to color:

2009-05-01T16:20:00.007-04:00

WTF???
As I’ve moaned about before, I’m appalled that Obama wants to “move on” from torture.

I watched McSame last Sunday—on Face the Nation, I think—saying, “We shouldn’t do it again. We won’t do it again.”
Then he accused Democrats of playing politics with torture.

I saw Newt on some other show saying, “I think this is something we shouldn’t do,” while saying he doesn’t know if waterboarding is torture or not.

I’ve listened to Pelosi when she said: “I didn’t know about the waterboarding.”

And, Monday night, Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, who is on the Select Committee on Intelligence, kept telling Rachel, “As soon as I found out what happened. . . ,” “We don’t yet have all the facts. . . ,” and, “The memos were offensive.”
+++
Other than Pelosi [how could she not have known? _I_ knew!] the Democrats are being somewhat more skilled in their dancing around the issue.

But, the fact remains, they’re dancing. In some ways they remind me of the “danse macabre” of the middle ages. And the denials throughout Europe [and here] after World War II.

Keep dancing, politicos. I’ll keep taking notes and keeping score. And, come November, 2012, I’ll remember. So will lots and lots of other people. You remember that.

2009-04-29T23:33:00.008-04:00

The Honest Scrap Award
I just received the Honest Scrap award from Libhom whom I consider a fellow scrapper. Thanx, Libhom **blush**.

Here’s the description of the award:
"This award is bestowed upon a fellow blogger whose blog content or design is, in the giver’s opinion, brilliant." [thus the blush]

"Scrap means left over, fragments, discarded material. Many times truth and honesty are discarded material, considered fragments and left over. People like us need to tell it like it is, and let the scraps fall where they will."

“Many times truth and honesty are discarded material.” Ain’t THAT the truth?
xxx
See the Rules below— Here, I’ll just follow them:
1] Oh, gee, what can I say? I sure like to think my blog pushes honesty. So, yeah, I’m really, really proud to have received this thang.

2] Did this already. Thanx again, Libhom.

3] Uhhhhh—SEVEN? That’s a lot of blogs! In no particular order, here are the blogs I've passed the award to.

a] Ramona’s Voices— Ramona describes herself as the eternal optimist. Certainly a skill to cultivate in these times. Even so, she’s not shy when it comes to taking on the ghastly economic situation we’re in, the Second Amendment, Rush Limbaugh, and on and on.

b] An Average American Patriot. Jim and I have known each other for a long time. We converse about weekly.
Jim pulls no punches when it comes to holding our government accountable. And it doesn’t matter who’s steering the ship. He’s every bit as p-o’d about the lack of prosecutions as he is about the torture. Take a look.

c] A Little Reality— KnightErrant describes his blog as “A search for reality (or at least a little fun) in politics and life.” He may be surprised at this nod as I’ve been lurking on his blog for a while but haven’t checked in with any comments lately.
Honesty is KnightErrant’s middle name. KnightHonestErrant. Kinda has a nice ring to it, doesn’t it?

d] Pissed On Politics by Polishifter lays it all out on the table. He comes across strongly and he comes across angry. He takes on everything from the Republicans’ Small Tent Strategy to Swine Flu to Terrorism to Torture. Coming away from his blog you’ll have no doubts as to where Poli stands on the issues.

e] Another I’ve lurked on [and will have to come out of the shadows in order to tell Ed that I’ve awarded him] is Left in Missouri.
He talks of “being blue in a sea of red.” Having lived in Missouri and now, living in Florida, I very well understand how he feels.
Much of what he reports on is the state legislature. A nice change from the majority of us who concentrate on the federal level. Missourians, take note.

For my final two, I’m going to depart from the norm—at least for my list:

f] Polaris, a blog written by a couple of channels of a post-earth entity called Polaris and who know another entity I study called Michael. Matthew and I communicate on Polaris and on my blog, All that Is.

g] And finally, Morning Martini. Pissed off Patricia who posts Mondays through Thursdays [ Fred the Cat, posts on Fridays] tackles everything from her disgust with the Bush administration and torture to her ongoing saga regarding the newest member of her family—a little yorkshire terrier.
She also takes us on tours of Florida’s beaches to watch the hatching of the sea turtles and their race for the sea. An eclectic and thoroughly enjoyable blog.

That’s seven! **whew!**

OK, now I’m supposed to tell you ten honest things about myself. This could be as hard as awarding 7 blogs:

1] I was born in the first 10 minutes of the baby boom. Well, not quite. Maybe the 2nd 10 minutes. Anyhow, I’m 61 and a half years old.

2] As a result of [1], I’m really, really tired of the Blame the Boomers movement that’s been going on for at least the last 40 years.

3] My first computer was virtually free. I paid only for the hard-drive.
When I asked my friend who built that computer what size hd to buy she told me, “Get a half-gig—that’s all you’ll ever need.” **giggle!**
Since then I’ve become the original puter potato.
Oh, and a few weeks ago when Molly died, I bought a new hd—ahem—160 gigs. Not to mention the 3 external hd’s. So much for the half gig.

4] Rachel Maddow is my very, very favorite talk show host.

5] There’s a beast sleeping in my computer room right now. His name is Jake. Someone dumped him in my retirement community about 6 months ago and he worked his wiles on me. I was just a helpless bystander. So now a litter box is a major part of my life.

6] I LOVE Stephen Colbert and I don’t care WHAT the conservatives say—yes, he’s doing satire.

7] I’m such a hermit that I fire up my truck once per month to go to my free-health clinic. And, once or twice per month, I take my golf cart to the grocery store and to PetSmart about a block away. Other than that, I’m a stay-at-home.

8] Because of [7] I’m not too worried [for myself] about swine flu.

9] A friend introduced me to an awesome free online game here. I played it 7 times while I waited for a 2nd game—a prequel, here. And, I’m not a huge computer game person.

10] I’m a 5th level old Sagittarius born in the year of the boar. No, NOT BOOR! BOAR—as in pig. OK, don't start.

Rules and Regulations
These are the rules and the instructions for the 'chosen ones’:

1.You must brag about the award. Check.

2.You must include the name of the blogger who bestowed the award on you and link back to the blogger. Check.

3.You must choose a minimum of seven (7) blogs that you find brilliant in content or design. Or you may improvise by including bloggers who have no idea who you are because you don’t have seven friends. Surprise someone! Check.

4.Show their names and links and leave a comment informing them that they were prized with Honest Weblog. Or think of it this way--show the seven random victims' names and links and leave a harassing comment informing them that they were prized with Honest Weblog Award. Check.
Well, there's no prize, but they can keep the nifty icon.

5.List at least ten (10) honest things about yourself. Then pass it on with the instructions! Check.

OK-- all done!

2009-04-27T01:00:00.002-04:00

• Faith breeds certainty

A drinker may engage in risky behaviour when his awareness of danger is limited by the effects of alcohol. Now comes a study which shows that drinkers are not alone. Religious believers have been found to have less anxiety than nonbelievers about making errors or facing the unknown. (The reason for this “calming effect” was not examined, though presumably it comes from the reassuring feeling of having a Powerful Friend.)
xxx
Well, this certainly explains a lot about the previous president, doesn't it? Especially when the effects of both alcohol and religion are taken into account—not to mention cocaine. I assume there is a cumulative effect?
[Follow the title link to read the full article.]

Our Wiley President

2009-04-21T00:51:00.024-04:00

Rachel made my day, tonight.
She led off her show with an update about the torture and Obama’s statements that he would not prosecute the CIA operatives who “were just following orders.” Does that ring a bell? Remember Nuremberg?
But I digress.
Rachel actually brought us some good news.
Obama may SAY he doesn’t intend to go after the CIA agents. Rahm Emmanuel may go on This Week With George Stephanopoulos and say the White House has no plans to pursue the people who wrote the memos or the people who told the lawyers to find them some legal loopholes so they could play schoolyard bully with people who were tied up and tied down and couldn’t fight back.
Obama and Emmanuel can say whatever they want to say and they can say it till they turn blue. It makes no nevermind. It’s not their decision to make.

**sssshhhhhhhhh!** Don’t tell Obama, but it’s the Department of Justice that determines what laws were broken and who to prosecute and who not to prosecute.
xxx
So, do you want my take on all of this? Well, want it or not, you’re gonna get it. =)
1] Obama, unlike his predecessor, is a very smart man.
2] I’ll bet money he knows all about the separation of powers within our government. I betcha he knows full well he doesn’t get to decide what crimes were committed and what will be done about them.
3] I’ll also bet he knows politics well enough to know that nothing will get the supervisor of any department running up a full head of steam faster than somebody else daring to tread on his turf.
4] AND I’ll bet that this is one hell of a sticky wicket for Obama.
He was just about 11 years old when the news was All Watergate All The Time—so he probably didn’t pay a lot of attention while it was going on. But, I’m sure it was dissected in every civics and American history class he took in high school and college.
And he certainly knows that every Democratic President has had hell to pay ever since. Nixon/Watergate was the reason why Ken Starr spent 6 years and $40 million investigating Bill Clinton and finally had to settle for impeaching him for sleeping around. But he HAD to prove the old Republican talking point that, “Everybody does it.”

So, try this on for size:
Obama wants to prosecute. But he can’t SAY he wants to prosecute or he will bring down all kinds of hell on his head and the heads of every Democratic president who follows him for at least the next 40 years.

In fact, if he makes a point of saying he DOESN’T want to prosecute, he might get the Republicans to back off the constant attempts to find dirt in the backgrounds of every Democrat they come in contact with. [fwiw, Clinton wasn’t the first. They tried with Carter. They hounded Tom Eagleton off Mondale’s ticket. And, during his presidential campaign, they hunted for something, anything, on Gore. Not to mention the 'birth certificate' insanity that still haunts Obama himself—although he's smart enough to just ignore it.] It’s enough to convince any viable candidates that they can find lots better stuff to do with their time.

So, Obama, being the smart guy he is, just might have found a way out of the waters that were rising above his head:
By taking prosecution off the table, he steps on the Justice Department’s toes. And Eric Holder rises to the bait saying that HE hasn’t taken prosecution off the table by any means, thankyouverymuch.
Obama is forced to back down and apologize to Holder and his department. [He hasn’t done it yet, but—given the stink Holder is making—I’ll bet he does soon.]
Now, he’s on record as being against the prosecutions. He, and all the Dem presidents of the next half century, are off the hook.
And the prosecutions are more likely to move forward than they were before Obama stepped on Holder’s toes.
xxx
OK, yes, I’m reaching just a bit, here.
I WANT this nefarious scenario to be true. I want an excuse to vote for Obama four years from now.
Still, given the convoluted state of Washington, it COULD be true, couldn’t it?

2009-04-17T08:46:00.012-04:00

Now We Know
It’s official. We now know what the torturers did in our name. I, for one, can’t live with what I know. I just can’t.

I’m not sure where to go from here with this post. What can I say?

People were deprived of sleep.

People were slapped.

People had their heads banged into walls.

People were manacled in body-cramping positions for hours on end.

People had their faces “walled”. I’m not sure what “walling” is—but I can guess.

People were locked in boxes filled with insects.

People were deprived of food. Physicians were on tap to advise the torturers about how few calories people could be given for extended periods before they starved to death.

People were kept in very cold conditions. If they covered themselves with their prayer rugs, the rugs were taken away. The justification? They were being ‘uncooperative’.

Waterboarding was justified by saying that we didn’t mean to harm people. We proved it by having a doctor in attendance while it was going on. Scratch that. We had medical personnel available.
What does ‘medical personnel’ mean?
What does ‘available’ mean?
And why does that matter?

If you watched Rachel last night you were treated to a demonstration of just what waterboarding is.
I wanted to turn away. I forced myself to watch. After all, this was done in my name. It was done to ‘make me safe.’

I don't feel safe.
xxx
And, yesterday, Obama said, "We must move forward."

What he is really saying is this:
We must not prosecute the people who did this in our names.
We must set a precedent so that any future president or CIA director can, without fear, disappear anyone s/he wishes to take off the street. Any president can lock people up indefinitely without access to counsel. Any president can dispense with Habeas Corpus whenever it becomes inconvenient to uphold. Any future president can order the torture of human beings without fear of prosecution.
Any president [including this one] can choose not to 'preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States' if it is inconvenient to do so.
Any president can simply refuse to honor his oath of office as it benefits him personally or politically.

So, I ask you: Do you feel safe?

2009-04-17T08:44:00.002-04:00

Today, I sent an email to President Obama. I hope enough of these are sent so as to catch the attention of his staff and they get brought to his attention.

Since a groundswell of small donations got him into office—I hope a groundswell of angry voices will wake him up to the disastrous mistake he is making.
xxx
The defense, 'I was just following orders' didn't work in Nuremberg. Why should it be allowed here?
And, what about holding accountable the people who gave the orders? And the people who drafted the memos giving the people who authorized torture the justification for their orders?

If the President refuses to take action against torture-- thereby giving precedent to the presidents who follow him --I will find it necessary to donate as much money as I can to any Democrat who challenges him in his next primary. I will campaign for him or her, as well.

If Mr. Obama secures the nomination, I will be compelled to vote for a Republican president for the first time in my life.
After all, if Mr. Obama does not appoint a special prosecutor and throw his full weight behind this matter---- what is the difference?

2009-04-16T19:46:00.006-04:00

Here Comes the Sun
Hey, folks—
Please check out the solar power widget on my sidebar.

It will take you to a site that will allow you to determine whether solar power will work for you.

Ferinstance—I live in Florida, so it's a no-brainer. Of course solar will work for me.
But, at the website, I was able to find out what government incentives are available [with Federal and State funding, my price for standard solar panels drops from $35,000 to $13,000].

The calculator also projects the inflation of energy costs in the future and tells you, assuming you take out a loan to pay for the system, when your system will begin turning a profit either by simply saving you energy or through a sell-back system.

And, check this out!
A new solar film is due out soon. The company producing it is called Konarka Energy. The film weighs considerably less than solar panels and can be installed on virtually any roof. It's far cheaper than silicon panels, too.

Put all those facts together and—well—it's another no-brainer.
I don't think Florida has a sell-back program yet—but, when it does, I'll be ready!

I'll keep you posted when the film becomes available and I start shopping around for it.

Blog Against Theocracy Swarm

2009-04-10T00:27:00.004-04:00

In medieval times, during the Renaissance, and right on up to the present, the Church and science have clashed repeatedly. Here are some of the highlights of their squabbles:

Science: the earth revolves around the sun.
Church: the universe revolves around the earth.

Science: the earth is billions of years old. Cities with written records have existed for about 5000 years.
Church: the earth is approximately 5000 years old.

Science: there is such a thing as a vacuum—and it can be demonstrated.
Church: a vacuum is, by definition, a place where nothing exists. So God and His angels couldn’t exist there—so there is no such thing.

Science: there are tiny particles we can't see.
Church: the only things smaller than the unaided eye can see are cherubim.

Science: electricity exists.
Church: no it doesn't.

Science: lightning is electricity and we can protect ourselves from it by use of a lightning rod.
Church: it is heretical to protect ourselves from God's wrath.

Science: life moves from the simple to the complex and has been developing for billions of years.
Church: the earth and everything on it was created in 6 days and nothing has changed since then.

Science: complex organisms have existed for millions upon millions of years. Dinosaurs ruled the earth 65 million years ago.
Church: if dinosaurs existed, they coexisted with humans and missed the boat when the great flood came. God made it LOOK as if they existed long before humans.
[It’s easier, I guess, to believe that God would lie to us than to believe in evolution.]
xxx
During the Medieval and Renaissance times, the Church enforced its views by torturing and killing those who dissented—so science was arrested for hundreds of years.

There is evidence that many of the women who were burned as witches were acting as midwives and physicks. The Church viewed aiding childbirth as heretical because God decreed that women were to suffer for Eve's sin.
Likewise, to heal people of disease was to interfere with God's plan [punishment of the sick person for some evil s/he had committed.]
There were exceptions, of course. The clergy and the wealthy were allowed to seek medical care -- but even the accepted doctors [males] were limited in what they were allowed to do. Dissecting human bodies was heretical—so medicine remained a matter of superstition and dogma for centuries when that needn't have been the case.
*_*_*
Today, new battles are being waged:
The abortion battle still rages. Many people [who are, for all their rhetoric, still the minority] are not content simply to make the personal choice not to seek an abortion for themselves. They want to deny that choice to others.
The related issue of contraception simmers. "No you can't" is the watchword when it comes to choosing whether or not to bring a child into the world.
The people who wish to deny the rest of us our own choices bang the Bible to hammer home their points.

And they would halt medicine today by stopping stem cell research. They prefer to throw away thousands of blastocysts daily rather than use them to lessen human suffering. They propagandize that the blastocysts would be created simply to be destroyed when the facts put the lie to their claim.
That doesn't stop them, however, they just keep pushing the lie in order to confuse the people who either don't know how to look up the information for themselves—or don't care to.

There are people who would still attempt to stop others from recognizing evolution. No matter how much evidence supports it, people who follow certain dogmas refuse to recognize it for themselves and seek to keep the rest of us from accepting it for ourselves.
The US may have elected another president with a very different viewpoint, but the belief that evolution is heresy continues among great numbers of people. And they still want to censor it—to force those of us who agree with the theory to denounce it.
We have only to glance at the Middle Ages to find a parallel.

Another we've all heard of is the one about global warming. The information that was being disseminated [and censored] by the recent stand-in for the Church, the Bush administration, was that global warming didn’t exist or, if it did, we had nothing to do with it.
Evidence, however, shows that Greenland’s ice sheets, the Arctic and the Antarctic are shrinking every day. Science has come to the realization that we are approaching a tipping point beyond which we will no longer be able to stop the warming trend we have set in motion.
There are at least two scenarios as to what will happen next. One is that the earth will continue to warm until all life on earth is threatened—including us. Another is that the earth could move into a human-made Ice Age and all life on earth would be threatened—including us.
Both predict an increase in the numbers of and ferocity of storms and droughts around the planet. [Please note Katrina and the massive increase of the number and the fury of tornadoes—and the fact that the Saharan Desert has been growing for the last two decades, at least. And Florida, where one used to be able to set one's clock by the summer rainstorms is in its sixth year of water rationing due to drought.]

I [among many others whose blogs I read] noted for eight years that Bush’s short-sighted policies would probably not trigger the end of the US right away. They could, however, help set off the end of the world as we know it—and begin the backward march of civilization.

It seems some of those predictions are coming true. With the world's finances in such disarray, how can we afford to give science the money it needs to continue the research that might halt global warming? Or bring us cures from the stem cells Obama has, once more, allowed scientists to study? Or search for asteroids that may be on a collision course with Earth?

The Christian proselytizers have shut one door after another that could have moved us forward.
As we are discovering—perhaps too late—humans are not too skilled at standing still. We seem to be able to progress or regress—but not remain static.
And what do many of the obstructionists trot out to back up their assertions that global warming doesn't exist, that we should ignore possible cures, that we should abandon science? The Bible, of course.

Meanwhile, how many of these same people accept medical help when giving birth? How many vaccinate their children? How many of them go to doctors, hospitals, take medication? These are all things that, at one time, the Church viewed as heresy.
Those who would use the Bible to restrict progress are hypocrites of the highest order.

Because our forefathers had studied history and knew what came of combining Church and State, they foresaw the situation we are in now. They did their best to protect us from it. But, today, as the Constitution is losing its strength, the Church is encroaching further and further into government.
As with the matter of global warming, we may be too late to stop the slide.

oops

2009-04-09T14:06:00.003-04:00

Hey, everyone.
Just want to let you know that my computer crashed and burned two nights ago.
After spending 14 hours on it yesterday [and replacing more components than I can count] I'm back among the living in blogsville -- though I'm still on life support. **beep beep beep**

Luckily, my post for the blog-swarm was already completed, so it will be up tomorrow.
After that, though, I'm likely to be out of circulation for a while till I get all my data imported into my virtually new computer.

The cloud does have a silver lining-- although I spent WAY too much money, I can't believe how fast this baby is!

Anyhow, I'll see you soon -- as soon as I get my head above the level of my desk.

2009-04-07T17:51:00.001-04:00

Warren still has a huge following outside of his mega-church. The policies he supports still increase the spread of HIV in Africa.
He still hates the Constitution, especially the part about the separation of church and state. And he still advocates a State that includes only fundamentalist Christians who want to prohibit all religions except their own, want to install nativity scenes on all courthouse lawns and want to outlaw 12% of the population -- no matter what their religion may be.
xxx
BTW-- congratulations Vermont Congress! I never knew how lovely the word, "Override" sounded.
Oh, and WAY TO GO, IOWA!
And, DC recognizes all marriages, no matter whose they may be, in ALL states. Seems like a beautiful place to honeymoon, huh?

Spain Has Named Names

2009-04-04T00:21:00.007-04:00

Spain is indicting 6 men from the Bush administration for war crimes. Like torture, for instance.
[Kind of a reverse Spanish Inquisition, if you will. YOU torture—WE put you on trial. Cool!]

Here are the Inquisition Six:
Former Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales
Cheney’s former Chief of Staff, David Addington
Former Undersecretary of Defense, Douglas Feith
Pentagon General Counsel, William Haynes
Justice Dept lawyer, John Yu
Justice Dept official and current Federal Judge (and ain’t that a kick in the head?), Jay Bybee
xxx
Meanwhile, back in this country, Dawn Johnsen has been nominated for the post of the head of the Office of Legal Counsel.
This is the same Dawn Johnsen who wrote a piece for Slate in which she asked, “Where is the outrage? . . . . We must regain our ability to feel outrage whenever our government acts lawlessly.”
[I guess she hadn’t read my blog or all the blogs I follow every day— to which the only adjective I can apply is —outrage.]

Still, even if she should get out more and maybe increase her reading, she’s apparently an ok kind of person. She sees her job as reversing all the policies followed by the former Office of Legal Counsel.

So, guess who is working like hell to block her confirmation to her new post?

OK. No guess necessary. You know who’s blocking her. I just hope the Rethugs are as effective in her case as they were in blocking the stimulus package.

SIC EM, DAWN!
xxx
Also, meanwhile, it looks like Obama would like the BushCo legal problems to just go away. He’s not appointing a Special Prosecutor to begin the investigation into the previous administration’s lawbreaking.
Even though a lawyer [whose name I forget, sorry] wrote an op-ed recently announcing the profoundly UNsurprising conclusion that Bush’s presidency met all the qualifications of a dictatorship.
Duh.
Another guy who doesn’t get out into blogsville much, I guess. How many times have I—and have you—come to that conclusion? Huh? How many?

Well, since our president doesn’t have the gonads to go after the former administration for its crimes, I’m glad Baltasar Garzón, at least, is doing something.

Of course, the chances of anything coming of the— whatever the Spanish word for ‘indictments’ is —are virtually nil so long as the people involved don’t go out of the country.
And, as we all know, Bush went to Canada last month. But, so far, he’s not on the list— so maybe that doesn’t count.

btw—there has, I think, been a hint that not all names have been named yet and more indictments will be forthcoming. Gee, I hope so.
xxx
You can find more on this at yglesias.

2009-03-31T18:10:00.009-04:00

Update: BillO’s Ads
OK, folks, as promised, here are the advertisers on Bill O’Reilly’s show. There are a lot of em.

KIA
Tums
Progressive Insurance
Ambien CR
Utah’s Tourism Board [no surprise there]
Florida’s Tourism Board [a bit more surprising—tho not much]
Gillette
Courtyard Hotels
Spiriva
Direct TV
Phillips Colon Health

For Tampa Bay Florida residents only:
Brighthouse [BH may have other markets—but I don’t think it’s nationwide]
Bay News 9
Beltzruth law office
If you want to know the local companies in your area that advertise on BillO, I'm afraid you'll have to watch the show [or record it and scan for local advertisers] yourself. fwiw, those ads were aired during the 3rd ad break.

And, here’s the one that shocked and saddened me:
Downy fabric softener—made by Procter & Gamble.
I’m sad because my dad worked for this company all his life and, as a result, I’ve used their products all of mine.

I’m shocked because:
P&G’s headquarters is in Cincinnati, Ohio. Some years ago, early in the time when the issue of gay marriage was beginning to get press, that city was poised to make discrimination against gays legal—over and above the fact that marriage is denied them.
P&G stepped up to the plate. They issued a press release stating that, while they took no stand on gay marriage, they were adamantly against legalizing discrimination against any group.
They told Cincinnati in no uncertain terms that they would move their headquarters to another state should Cincinnati or Ohio move forward with the plan.
Cincinnati backed down.
I emailed the company when I heard about that and thanked them for standing up for equality for all.

Given P&G’s action in that situation, I can only think that they are unaware of the actions of Bill O’Reilly. You can bet I’ll enlighten them!

UPS vs. BillO the Clown

2009-03-29T23:36:00.011-04:00

I just had a thought:
Had you heard about Bill O'Reilley of Fox News stalking a reporter of another news organization who wrote a piece in which she disagreed with him? Actually, he didn’t even have the guts to do it himself. He sent a couple of goons to do it for him.
The reporter had written that she believed he should not speak at a fund raiser for an organization that supports women who have been raped. She wrote her opinion based on the fact that O’Reilley had, on national television, reviled several women who had been raped-- saying they had asked for it.
He went on to describe the clothing of a woman who was raped and killed. He berated her for walking on a public street at night.
So, after the reporter described his behavior and stated her disagreement with his actions, he sent two men to stalk her to the hotel she was going to for a vacation. They followed her from her home and accosted her in the hotel's parking lot shouting at her that she was harming rape victims.
xxx
After this story broke, UPS pulled its advertising from Bill O'Reilley's show.
Yesterday, I went to the UPS site and sent them an email thanking them for refusing to advertise on his program.

I'd like to ask you if you'd be willing to do the same.
We need to let companies that do the right thing know that people are paying attention to what they do. They probably get plenty of complaints — and very few kudos.

What makes me sick though, is that other companies will continue advertizing on his program just as if none of this had happened. So, now, I'm thinking seriously of breaking down and watching that **vomit** program to see what companies are still advertising there. Then I’ll confront them. I plan to tell them I will boycott their products and urge others to do the same.

I think that should be our next step. Will you join me?
Monday night I’ll watch the program and post the names of the companies here.
Will you send emails to them and pass on this request to others? We need as many people as possible to do this to ensure that they'll listen.
Together, we can make a difference.

2009-03-23T15:56:00.000-04:00

We must protect our government from religion—and vice versa. Our forefathers knew it. Somehow, our current leaders seem to have lost sight of that basic fact:
President Obama failed to deliver on his campaign promises.
When creating his Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, Obama did not adequately prevent discrimination on the basis of religion by those organizations that receive government grants.
Although he had originally proposed a new take on the Faith-Based Initiative, one that would not maintain the constitutional and civil rights obstacles of the Bush Administration, the executive order President Obama signed last week leaves the ENTIRE architecture of the Bush Faith-Based Initiative intact—every executive order, every rule, every regulation.
And thanks to a hard line anti-civil rights push from the Department of Justice toward the end of the Bush Administration, almost every social service tax dollar distributed by the government can be used for discriminatory hiring.
In this time of unparalleled need, this is even more unacceptable than ever.
xxx
So, once again, it's up to us.
The Blog Against Theocracy Blog Swarm is on again. Scheduled for Easter weekend [April 10 - 12], it will address the urgent need for the continuing struggle to keep church and state away from each other.
So, please go here to learn how to participate and get ideas for your post. And link your post to the swarm.
Oh, and one other thing. You can go here and tell Obama's administration directly that you are watching what they do and that you perceive this issue as urgent.

Reality

2009-03-22T12:45:00.010-04:00

The other night I was channel surfing and came across a program called 30 Days. It was a real eye-opener.
It’s a reality program—only, this is the real thing. In this episode, a young couple [Alexia and Morgan] moved to Cincinnati, Ohio and tried to live on the minimum wage.
They left their credit cards behind. They found an ant-infested apartment upstairs from an apartment that had, until a few days earlier, been a crack-house. And they were glad to get it because their landlord allowed them to pay the deposit over time.
A few days into their adventure, they found a free store. They got their first furniture [they had been sleeping on the floor and eating while sitting on the floor or standing at the sink.] Suddenly, they had a kitchen table with two chairs, a mattress with sheets and a blanket, a couch, two end-tables and two lamps. They felt as if they’d died and gone to heaven.

A few days later Morgan sprained his wrist at his landscaping job. He tried to ignore it—since he didn’t have health insurance. The following day, though, he decided that he couldn’t risk losing the use of his hand. After all, he was working two manual jobs.
So, he went to the free clinic. They were accepting only 20 patients that night and he was 38th in line. With no other options, he went to the emergency room. Just to walk in the door cost him $551.00. I don’t remember what the doctor’s fee was. His ace bandage cost $40.00. And he was told to stay home from work the next day. Two jobs—16 hours—about $118.00 in lost wages.

If they hadn’t had bad luck, Morgan and Alexia would have had no luck at all. Alexia came down with a urinary tract infection a few days later. Walking into the emergency room cost $448.00. The trip to the drug store cost them $.85 [they had only one bus pass]. Her prescription cost $24.00. And another $.85 to get home.

As you can see, they were behind the eight ball—and they were one week into their experiment.

Not having children of their own, and wanting to experience what people with kids go through, they borrowed a niece and nephew for a weekend. Before they arrived, Morgan went to the library to research free recreation to take them to. He found things like: ‘Call your bank and ask for a tour. If you’re wearing a ski mask, take it off before arriving at the bank.’ ‘Call a bakery and ask for a tour.’ ‘Call a manufacturing plant and ask for a tour.’
In other words, there are no free activities available in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Buying blankets and sheets at the Salvation Army before the children arrived and taking them to a movie during their visit cost about $80.00.
If Morgan and Alexia had had children of their own, daycare would have cost about $833.00 for the month [10,000.00 per year]. One job at minimum wage brings home about $15,000.00. Would it have been worth going to work outside the home in order to pay 2/3 of their wages to daycare? No wonder so many couples work different shifts from each other — in order to care for their children at home — and rarely get to see each other.
xxx
Here’s something I hadn’t known.
The minimum wage was last raised in 1997. Since then Edward Kennedy has introduced bills EVERY YEAR to raise it again. None have passed. Meanwhile, Congress has voted itself a “cost of living” raise every year.

Yes, the cost of living has gone up. Who do you suppose is having a harder time keeping up with it—Congress or people who are living on the minimum wage?
xxx
Alexia and Morgan survived for the month. Their relationship was strained—but they made it through. They don’t know if they would have remained together if they hadn’t been doing this as only a 30 day experiment.

In fact, couples who make less than $25,000.00 per year experience twice as many divorces as couples who make above $50,000.00.
xxx
Interestingly, as I was hunting for pictures to include here, I found numerous photos of homeless men, men holding signs asking for help, men in unemployment lines and food bank lines. Women and children were notable only by their absence.
This is one way we continue to ignore the issue. If we pretend women and children are not affected by poverty, it’s easier on our consciences.

We interrupt this blog for a commercial

2009-03-19T08:14:00.003-04:00

[I wrote this on November 6th, slated it for November 8th and promptly forgot all about it. I was just cleaning up some stuff and stumbled across it.]
xxx
On Election Day [well, technically, the following morning] I got to bed at 8:00. That afternoon, when I woke up, my back was in excruciating pain. [Maybe a result of hunching over the TV, biting my thumbs? Just a wild guess.]

Several months earlier I had ordered a Teeter Hangup. The model I bought wasn’t the one they profile on all their ads. It had seemed kind of scary to hang totally upside down. So, I bought one that allows me to hang from my hips.
Anyhow, rather than take a pain pill the day after Election Day, I went in and hung my back out for about 3 minutes. And the pain was gone!
So, if you have back pain and don’t want to destroy your liver with medications, you can do a whale of a lot worse than investing in a Hangup. jfwiw.
[ok, Teeter, I assume the check is in the mail???]

2009-03-14T17:14:00.005-04:00

Just in case you don't know Rachel, get acquainted with her here-- and watch her on MSNBC. I doubt you'll be disappointed.

The Drivel-Heads Just Keep Talking

2009-03-12T18:12:00.012-04:00

I'm so sick of all the talking-heads that spout only drivel, second-guessers, back-seat-drivers, know-nothings and do-nothings that I could vomit.

At the same time that they're telling Obama that he's not doing enough: that he should have solved the economic crisis by now— you know, the one that took at least all the years since Reagan took office to create —they're telling him that he's doing too much. Somehow, they've managed to convince themselves he can do both simultaneously.
And they accuse us of calling him Superman.

What they're actually saying is that they don't want to save the environment and create sustainable energy sources. They don't want the rest of us to have affordable health care. They don't want to care for our veterans. They don't want to allow the children of us peons to receive an education. And they absolutely refuse to see how all these matters are related to each other and the economy.

What they do want is a return to the early twentieth century when the workers had to live in company housing, shop at the company store and there were no workplace safeguards.
Or, better still, they'd like to return to Medieval Times.

And now a bunch of DINO's are switching over to the Rethuglican side and yelling, "Whoa! Put the brakes on! Don't spend any money! Do what Hoover did!"
The truth is, without exception, they hate FDR and they see us headed toward a new New Deal— one that's something like the old one they've been trying to dismantle for the last 70 years.

The Rethugs may be irrelevant and to have run out of ideas. But I can say one thing for them: at least they stood together— even if it was for all the wrong things.
Keeping Democrats together is a lost cause— it's herding cats.

Bush's Bigotry

2009-03-10T04:08:00.003-04:00

I just learned of this atrocity. Had any of you heard about it?

The American Atheists wrote a letter to every member of US Congress, asking for the body to pass a resolution condemning the discrimination against Atheists by any elected or appointed official of government. The offered resolution read:

"No person in public life may be free to impugn the patriotism of any minority group because of that group's opinion in respect to religion. President George Bush is herewith censured for his public expression of August 27, 1987, at which time he stated: "I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

A Letter to the Traitors

2009-03-09T00:14:00.006-04:00

Frank Schaeffer is the author of CRAZY FOR GOD-How I Grew Up As One Of The Elect, Helped Found The Religious Right, And Lived To Take All (Or Almost All) Of It Back.
He wrote an open letter to the Republicans. Of course the fact that he published it in The Huffington Post assures that they won't read it. Still, we can.
xxx
Dear Republican Leaders:
The Republican Party has become the party dedicated to sabotaging the American future....

You ... are the arsonists who burned down our national home. You combined the failed ideologies of the Religious Right, so-called free market deregulation and the Neoconservative love of war to light a fire that has consumed America. Now you have the nerve to criticize the "architect" America just hired -- President Obama -- to rebuild from the ashes. You do nothing constructive, just try to hinder the one person willing and able to fix the mess you created.

2009-03-08T14:22:00.008-04:00

The good news is that Karl Rove was notable only by his absence on This Week with George Stephanopoulos this morning.
Now, I'm holding my breath. Did they actually hear us? Or will he be back?
Meanwhile, I went ahead and informed ABC that I noticed and appreciated their decision to remove him from the panel. I do think it's a good idea to tell them when they do something right as well as when they stick their collective heads up their asses.

And, I had been waiting to see if the other shoe dropped before writing to the show's sponsors. The producers saved me some work—and, for that, I'm always grateful. :)

This Is News?

2009-03-05T20:56:00.009-05:00

OK, it’s official.
After the release of those memoranda that suspended the Bill of Rights, Scott Horton has declared Bush’s presidency a ‘dictatorship.’

Hello?
How many bloggers have been declaring this obvious —you know— FACT for about 7 to 8 years, now?

The current concern is this: no president willingly gives up power. We now have a precedent—a president who had the power to do what the memos said he could do. So, even after the CYA memos that rescinded the original ones and went out days before the end of the Bush presidency, another president could, conceivably, do it again.

And THIS is why we must have hearings and/or trials: to hold all those people —the ones who crafted the memos, knew of the existence of the memos and, to some extent at least, acted upon them— accountable.

Why Did It Take Me So Long?

2009-03-04T06:05:00.000-05:00

I'm hearing a Rethuglican talking head diss Obama and it just hit me:
The Republican party is an oxymoron -- emphasis on the last 5 letters of that word.
These people believe the best government is no government.
So, why are these people in Congress? Aren't they doing a disservice to the people by simply being in Washington? In fact, from here, it looks like they're hypocrites before they even open their mouths.

Heard on MSNBC:

2009-03-03T16:55:00.006-05:00

"Joe the Plumber" is talking about a run for Congress.

wtf?!?!?!?!?

Considering the ways I've seen some people vote, he could-- ya know --win. And then where would we be?

It's official. This country has gone straight through the looking glass.
xxx
And, another bit:
Steele went running to Rush to do his mea-culpa.
So, for all his denials, WHO is it who really runs the Republican Party?

**deep sigh** Maybe the country will be all right after all. Rush will keep them out of the White House and should help them decrease their numbers in the other two houses, as well.

We may just be saved by the skin of our teeth, here.

Giving Rove a Forum???

2009-03-01T13:06:00.013-05:00

This morning on This Week with George Stephanopoulos, I was appalled to see Karl Rove sitting there, being listened to with what looked like respect by George and the other members of his round table.
I immediately went to abc.com and, after considerable hunting around, figured out how to email them my outrage. I informed them that I will boycott their network hereafter and urge everyone I know to do so, as well.

If you agree that a man who refuses to testify before Congress has lost his right to pontificate on his views to those of us who do things like-- you know --obey the law, I'm asking you to register your feelings with ABC. And, if you're interested, please join my boycott of all things ABC.
OK, I know that may be a bit much for some folks. In that case, may I suggest Boycott Lite:
If you want to watch something on ABC, how about recording the program and watching it later--and zipping through all commercials?
Another possibility [and one I plan to follow up on] is to contact all of This Week's sponsors and tell them I will boycott them as long as they sponsor Stephanopoulos' program. Since most of them are, most likely, headed up by Republicans, I don't expect anything to happen unless a major boycott occurs. I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.
Still, I can't just sit here and watch this travesty happen.

Here's the url for the email site where you can voice your views on this matter.
I'm not positive the link will work-- you may have to register with their site in order to use it.

2009-02-26T23:24:00.007-05:00

What Was He Thinking?
More to the point—does he think? Does he have a brain?
Senator Schultheis of the Colorado General Assembly stated publicly that he opposes the AIDS testing of pregnant women. Even having a private thought like this, imnsho, disqualifies him from holding office.

When he received the inevitable and well deserved flak for making such a statement, he defended it. He said that he hoped the child born to a woman with AIDS would contract the disease—thereby causing its mother to feel guilty.
To his mind, the child’s suffering and premature death takes second chair to making a statement about the woman’s “promiscuity”.
Of course, it is not a given that the mother had engaged in promiscuous sexual behavior. Furthermore, if she had, by Schultheis’ lights, acted in such a fashion, that does not mean that any objective observer might agree with his view.
And if she had, even in an objective light, acted irresponsibly? According to Schultheis, we should condemn her child to this deadly disease.

Oh, and by the way—Senator Schultheis is on the Health and Human Services Committee of Colorado. I'm not kidding—I couldn't make this stuff up.

For what it’s worth, I sent an email to Senator Schultheis calling him out as the misogynist and child-hater he is and urging him to step down from office. I think we should stuff his inbox!
In case you’re interested in joining the fray, here is his email address:
senatorschultheis@gmail.com

2009-02-26T11:11:00.008-05:00

Some Things Never Change
I’m watching a documentary about train wrecks during the 1800’s. It stated that two different sources of the time, The Railroad Gazette and the National Census, reported on railroad accidents. In 1875, the Gazette stated that there were 1,201 wrecks while the National Census reported 8,216. So, depending on which source you read, you were told that there were either 3 or 21 wrecks per day.

Companies and their employees were reluctant to adopt innovations like the air-brake and the telegraph. Brakemen didn’t like the air-brakes because, if they were implemented, they would lose their jobs. Companies didn’t like them because they cost money to install on the trains.
Often, the companies either didn’t buy telegraph equipment or the employees failed to use it to warn other stations of blocked tracks or scheduling problems.

Bridges were allowed to deteriorate until they collapsed. After one huge disaster, two men who were blamed for it but were not prosecuted committed suicide.

It took a number of lawsuits and criminal indictments before even minor changes began to be made piecemeal within the systems.
Eventually, the federal government stepped in, creating the standardized time system we use today and eliminating hundreds of local time zones. This measure prevented hundreds of wrecks per year.
A number of measures passed by federal, state and city governments required the railroads to either use the technology available to them or face being shut down.

Probably because the story is so old, the program was not hesitant to point out that profits and expansion were more important to the railroad companies than the loss of life and the terrible injuries that were inflicted by negligence and the refusal to impliment the technology that was available at the time.

Let’s see—failure to regulate, allowing the system to police itself, profits trumping pain, suffering and life itself—
Does any of this sound familiar?

Charlie Flubbed It

2009-02-24T01:22:00.002-05:00

I watch Charlie Rose’s interview show regularly and for the first time ever, I’m disappointed in him.

Tonight, he interviewed John Mack, the CEO of Morgan Stanley. Before the interview commenced, he told the audience that he and Mack grew up together—lived in the same neighborhood, went to the same school. During the conversation, they mentioned the fact that Charlie introduced John to his wife.

The interview seemed, to me, to be an exercise during which Charlie lobbed softballs over the plate. He didn’t seem to be interested in holding his friend accountable for his part in the crisis.
And John spewed a good bit of self-congratulation. He denied having taken bonuses “in 2007 and 2008” claiming that, though Morgan Stanley showed profits during those years, it was not profitable enough to merit a bonus. However, he mentioned only those two years—which suggests to me that he has taken bonuses in other years—and we all know how obscene those can be. And Charlie didn’t ask him about other years. That’s what I mean when I say that he played softball with his friend. In fact, generally, Charlie didn’t confront Mack about the crisis at all. He simply allowed him to dictate the direction and tenor of the conversation.

Now, maybe Charlie had to invite a friend in order to air any program of this type. Maybe Mack was the only CEO Charlie could get to sit down in front of a camera. Even so, though, I think he spent more time placating his friend than he did illuminating his audience. While this may be human nature and, therefore, understandable—I rather wish he had, instead, asked a scientist to discuss the environment or an author to plug his latest novel.

Sean Hannity Froths at the Mouth

2009-02-21T20:33:00.007-05:00

From the Huffington Post:
Sean Hannity's Ridiculous War Against Socialism -- Bob Cesca

Sean Hannity ought to heroically command his viewers in these states to not accept those jobs. They're socialist jobs, after all.

While he's at it, Hannity might as well refuse delivery on the president's new socialized home rescue plan as well. I wonder how many McCain-Palin voters who ripped into Barack Obama for "redistributing the wealth" will actually participate in the program.

Funny what happens to ridiculous Neo-McCarthyite sloganeering when the shit really hits the fan.
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
I hear lots of folks suggesting that the representatives and governors turn down the money. It all sounds so satisfying -- let their states go down the crapper, right?

Of course, it wouldn't work out that way.
First of all, no way will the lawmakers not take the money.
And, second, our states aren't independent of each other. If Michigan goes down-- so does California --since both are so dependent on cars. If North Carolina goes down-- what will Florida do? Lots of N. Carolinians love to go to Disney World and Epcot Center. If Kansas goes down-- what will Colorado do? Many, many Kansans vacation in the Rockies, seeing as how it's less than one day's travel.

So, I guess we can be grateful that our lawmakers are such hypocrites, after all.
---
I cringe to think what would happen to Florida if Jeb Bush was still our governor. He just might try to set himself up for a presidential bid by betraying us. Fortunately, Crist has already gone on record. He wants the money-- no matter what Martinez says.

2009-02-20T22:02:00.006-05:00

From the Huffington Post:
How the New York Post Monkey Cartoon Should've Looked-- by Lee Camp

Another Week, Another Ulcer

2009-02-15T17:07:00.001-05:00

I was watching This Week with George Stephanopolous and feeling sick. Again.

Congressman Peter King [R-NY], Congressman Lindsay Graham [R-NC], Congresswoman Maxine Waters [D-CA] and Senator Charles Schumer [D-NY] were on the panel.

King and Graham belly-ached about the [fact? I don't know] that they were frozen out of writing the economic bill. When Congresswoman Waters pointed out that the three senators who stepped up to vote for the bill proposed amendments that were, across the board, accepted, they just kept on beating the same drum. They ignored the concept that, if you say NO, you don't get to change things.
They dissed the Democrats, saying that they gloated, "We won, we get to write the bill."
But, how quickly they forget what was happening for the first 6 years under Bush. The Republicans wrote new Congressional rules that froze out the minority party.
Apparently, they believed they would never again be in the minority. And didn’t they SCREAM when the Democrats enforced those same rules for the first hundred days after they gained the majority!
imo, Democrats were just too nice. They should have kept those rules for a lot longer than one hundred days.

When asked, King denied that he voted against the bill in order to present a united front. However, when it was brought up that he was in favor of the infrastructure and tax cut parts of the bill [the largest parts], he protested that he was against the tax cuts for the arts [a miniscule part] thereby admitting that the reason he voted against it was in order to present a united front. Period.

I’m so sick of the Rethuglicans I could vomit.

2009-02-15T06:23:00.000-05:00

It's not often that I agree with Kathleen Parker. But, this time I believe she got it right:
xxx
Phelps Takes a Hit by Kathleen Parker
The Washington Post
It's hell being a celebrity, especially if you're young and find yourself at a party, where marijuana and cameras should never mix.

And it's not exactly heaven being sheriff of a county with escalating drug crimes and pressure to treat all offenders equally.

Thus it is that Olympian swimmer Michael Phelps and Sheriff Leon Lott of South Carolina's Richland County are being forced to treat seriously a crime that shouldn't be one.
Click here for the complete text.

The Frantic Voices

2009-02-13T18:09:00.005-05:00

From the Huffington Post:
President Obama Is Driving Republicans Insane -- by Bob Cesca

By . . . merely presenting a contrast of character, President Obama is making the Republican A-listers appear small, petty and absolutely befuddled.

[I]f the Republicans are at all interested in continued survival, someone they respect should probably smack their hands and scold: Drop that filthy Limbaugh quote! You don't know where it's been!

But if this is their "voice" and they're satisfied with it, I for one welcome the new Republican "voice" and wish them a hearty and very sincere: Good luck with that.
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
Bob makes very good points. Still, I get a little nervous.
In my mind's eye, I see a little girl all dressed in white-- and the neighborhood bullies are throwing mud at her. No matter how much Scotchguard her mom laundered into her dress, won't some of the mud eventually stick? The little girl didn't get her dress dirty. But, she'll be muddy, just the same.

Starr, Once Again, Tries to Destroy America

2009-02-11T13:29:00.004-05:00

Kenneth Starr [remember him? He's the guy who sniped at Clinton's heels for 6 years looking for something, anything, to hang on him] has filed a brief with the Supreme Court seeking to divorce all the Gay couples in California who married before Proposition 8 passed.

If you disagree with this idea, please go here, view a very moving video and sign a petition asking that these marriages be upheld and that Prop 8 be overturned.
If our Constitution means anything, it should mean that all people are equal.
It's hard to believe that people can try to destroy marriages in the name of "morality".

http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/s/divorce

Once Again, the Party is Deemed More Important Than the Nation

2009-02-09T14:40:00.006-05:00

From the Washington Post:
GOP Sees Positives In Negative Stand
by Alec MacGillis and Perry Bacon, Jr.

Three months after their Election Day drubbing, Republican leaders see glimmers of rebirth . . . .
After giving the package zero votes in the House, and with their counterparts in the Senate likely to provide in a crucial procedural vote today only the handful of votes needed to avoid a filibuster, Republicans are relishing the opportunity to make a big statement. Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.) suggested last week that the party is learning from the disruptive tactics of the Taliban, and the GOP these days does have the bravado of an insurgent band that has pulled together after a big defeat to carry off a quick, if not particularly damaging, raid on the powers that be.
Click here for the complete text.
^^^

Oh, that’s rich. They’re taking a page from the Taliban's playbook, now!

And, ‘Rep. Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), said “[Our] core principle that suffered the most in recent years was fiscal conservatism and economic liberty. That was the tallest pole in our tent, and we took an ax to it, but now we're building it back."’

So, they can dump fiscal conservatism overboard when a failing president leads them into a disastrous war based on lies. But when it comes to saving our country from the catastrophic economic policies that have been in force since Reagan, suddenly they find their “principles” again?

This is no more and no less than pitting their party’s interests against those of the nation. Again. And we’re not supposed to notice?

I don’t think so.

2009-02-08T05:56:00.001-05:00

From the Washington Post:
Capitalist Punishment by Harold Meyerson
We demand that welfare recipients do an honest day's work for their checks.

[W]hat's the moral distinction between welfare recipients and the wizards of Wall Street, other than that the welfare recipients aren't the ones responsible for tanking the global economy?

Is this any way to treat our best and our brightest? The guys who shuttered our industrial base, indebted us to Communist China, hooked us on plastic and subprime mortgages, bought our politicians, eluded our regulations, wiped out our retirement plans -- and then turned to us for help when their house of debt collapsed? Damn straight it is. Bring on the pillories.

Click here for the complete text.

2009-02-05T18:05:00.006-05:00

From the Huffington Post:
Daschle's Premature Dash by Dylan Loewe

The only thing more implausible than believing that a multi-millionaire with national ambitions would willfully try to defraud the IRS of $140,000 is believing that a man like that actually does his own taxes. Of course, he signs his name to them and is, as such, legally responsible for their content. But morally reprehensible? It was an error on his taxes, most likely committed by his CPA.

Tom Daschle . . . was to spearhead an effort to bring real, lasting health care reform to a country desperately seeking it. He has unique relationships with the Senators he once led, an unmatched knowledge of legislative strategy and procedure, and was an eye-witness to what went wrong when reform was attempted in 1994. He is exceptionally qualified.
Click here for the complete text.
^^^
Maybe the 2nd paragraph above was the point all along. I'm certain there are parties who do not want health care reform. And, bank on it, many of those parties have certain Congress people's ears.

On a kind of related note: People are gnashing their teeth over the fact that Daschle knew about this oversight and did nothing for several months.
Here's a fairly comparable situation: Several months ago, I was mailed a check I was supposed to cash or deposit. Now, a check for $3.43 doesn't call a lot of attention to itself and I put it aside and forgot about it. I went to the bank several times over the several months it sat on my desk and never remembered to take it with me.
Last week, the bank that issued it needed to settle its books and sent me a letter asking what had become of the check. Today, I finally cashed it.
To my mind, for Tom Daschle, $146,000.00 is probably about the equivalent of $3.43 for me. I knew the check was there-- but kept on putting off doing anything about it. I'll bet the same was true for him.

Acourse, I wonder what I'd be thinking if this post had been about Cheney or Rove. Hmmmmm.

2009-02-02T07:39:00.002-05:00

From Truthout:
The Anti-Stimulus Crowd Blows a Gasket -- Dean Baker

The anti-stimulus crowd is getting desperate. The possibility that a young charismatic new president will push through an ambitious package that begins to set the economy right is truly terrifying to this crew. After all, if the economy begins to turn around and has largely recovered in three or four years, the Republican leadership can look forward to spending most of their careers in the political wilderness.

President Obama will cakewalk to re-election, and even his designated successor will be able to benefit from the glow of his success.

This explains the need that many Republicans feel to block the stimulus package. This desperation led them to fabricate a report from the Congressional Budget Office . . . .
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
Don't these people read? Even when the handwriting is on the wall?
Everyone I'm reading these days says that the House Republicans are going to fall down the slippery slope of their own making by working against the country's interests yet again. They've been caught out but they just keep blundering on.

The definition of neurosis applies here: Just keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome, Rethuglicans. And, come November of 2010, you'll get to pack up your desks and go home.

What Part of "He Failed" Don't GOPPERs Understand?

2009-01-31T19:11:00.004-05:00

From the Huffington Post:
Republicans in the House are Behaving like the Collapse of Bush's Policies Never Happened -- Mitchell Bard

Say you belonged to a charitable organization, and you and your friends were appointed to the steering committee for a big fundraiser, so you chose to have a combination bake sale and casino night. And let's say that you scheduled it on the same night as the town's homecoming football game, so nearly nobody showed up, and the peanut butter cookies in the bake sale gave the few guests that did visit salmonella. Oh, and let's say that in setting up the casino equipment, you accidentally cut off the electricity for the entire block. When the time rolled around the next year for the annual fundraiser, would you stand up and advocate a salmonella bake sale held on the same night as the big game? Of course not. You'd sit down, shut up, and wait for someone else to come up with a new idea. Even if you thought a bake sale/casino night could work under the right circumstances, you would probably be able to figure out that having overseen a colossal failure, the timing might not be right for you to pitch the same idea again.

Unless, apparently, you are a Republican member of the House.
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
It looks to me like the Rethugs have taken a page from Rush's book: they want Obama to fail.

They want the country to go to hell in a handbasket so they can have the satisfaction of saying, "I told you so." And, maybe, claw their way back to power in 2 or 4 years.

What they don't seem to be taking into account, though, is the fact that this stimulus package [which passed despite their best efforts] just might succeed. If that happens their constituents will remember that the very first thing they did after Obama was elected was to act in a way that elevates Marie Antoinette to sainthood.

Once again, the Rethuglicans are getting it wrong.

The Losers' Gallery

2009-01-27T05:01:00.000-05:00

"Gallery Devoted to Presidential Losers Grows by One"
When I first saw this title, I thought the gallery [located in Norton, Kansas] would be filled with pictures of such people as Grover Cleveland, Andrew Johnson and, of course, G.W. Bush. It isn't though--the pictures are of people who ran for president and lost. So, McSame is hanging among people like Thomas Jefferson and Al Gore. To my mind, it's too good a fate for him--considering the fact that he would have continued Bush's policies. But, of course, there could be much worse outcomes.
Click here for the complete text.

Leggoland

2009-01-25T05:23:00.000-05:00

The inauguration-- all in leggos.

2009-01-21T17:35:00.002-05:00

Chris Matthews of Hardball Put His Foot In It

Rush Limbaugh goes on the air and says he wants Obama to fail. And Chris reports it. Now, you know that’s exactly what Rush wants. As long as he can grab headlines he figures he’s on top.

I’m of a like mind with the Prime Minister of Germany when a Holocaust Denier was convicted of a hate crime. He disagreed with the court’s decision saying, ‘The appropriate thing to do with a fool is to ignore him.’

From the White House's Website

2009-01-21T05:47:00.004-05:00

Talk about hitting the ground running!

The website lays out proposed legislation to address civil rights for all minorities including all ethnic groups, GLBT's, and women.
Issues such as ending employment discrimination, addressing hate crimes, equal pay for equal work, repealing the 'don't ask don't tell' rules, drug discrimination [prosecuting crack possession differently from possession of powder cocaine], sending non-violent drug-crime perps to treatment rather than prison, dealing with the rise in AIDS infection among women, etc. etc. etc. are all slated to get early billing according to the website.
Click here to get a look at the White House's agenda.

It's a brand new, bright Obama day!

2009-01-21T03:39:00.007-05:00

Well, I spent the day glued to the TV and it was such a lovely change to hear an articulate man talk about the issues we're facing as if he actually understood them. No false bravado and, "Bring it on!" No mispronounced words. No pride in being uneducated.

I felt myself breathing deeper than I had in years. And, in fact, I hadn't known how much tension I'd been holding in till I let go of it.

One lovely note: someone said Obama will be hitting the ground running tomorrow and gave an outline of the meetings he has scheduled. And I was reminded of the day after the inauguration 8 years ago when Bush lit out for a month's vacation in Texas. At the time, I asked anyone who would listen why he worked so hard to steal the election if he didn't want the job.

On another note:
This is the first time I've ever watched an inauguration. So, can someone please tell me-- are the male reporters ALWAYS so preoccupied with what the women reporters are wearing? I don't know how many times I heard some man ask a professional woman about the label of the clothing she had on. Most of the women dodged the question or tried to make a joke of it but he just kept on inserting his foot in his mouth [Biden has nothing on this guy].

Finally, a man who was being interviewed made a joke about who had designed his tie and guy who had been quizzing one woman after another shut the hell up. When will men stop seeing professional women as being fit only to discuss fashion design on television?

I hope someone will soon do for women what Obama did for non-white men today.

2009-01-20T08:38:00.001-05:00

Happy Obama Day!
Finally! Finally! The long nightmare is over.
No guarantees, but we can certainly hope President Obama will be up to the numerous tasks before him. We need to be patient and give him the time he needs to pull us out of the quagmire. If anyone can do it, I think he can.

But, today, is celebration time!

Sagan and Druyan Search for Answers

2009-01-19T05:16:00.000-05:00

The issue had been decided years ago. The court had chosen the middle ground. You'd think the fight was over. Instead, there are mass rallies, bombings and intimidation, murders of workers at abortion clinics, arrests, intense lobbying, legislative drama, Congressional hearings, Supreme Court decisions, major political parties almost defining themselves on the issue, and clerics threatening politicians with perdition. Partisans fling accusations of hypocrisy and murder. The intent of the Constitution and the will of God are equally invoked. Doubtful arguments are trotted out as certitudes. . . . Politicians check the latest polls to discover the dictates of their consciences. Amid all the shouting, it is hard for the adversaries to hear one another. Opinions are polarized. Minds are closed.

Is it wrong to abort a pregnancy? Always? Sometimes? Never? How do we decide?
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
A thoughtful examination of facts articulately conveyed. And, like the Supreme Court in Roe vs. Wade, they support the middle ground.

2009-01-16T23:27:00.003-05:00

Norman Lear is taking this video along with a copy of the Declaration of Independence to the Inauguration and will present it to Obama. If you visit the site here you can hear the song, sign the Declaration, remix the song, write your own lyrics or create a plan for what you want to do to help get this country back on track.

If you want the embed code you can get it at
http://www.bornagainamerican.org/spread.html

Getting Serious

2009-01-16T06:56:00.003-05:00

Remember the Republic Doors and Windows Company?
The one that went bankrupt and tossed out its employees while reneging on their vacation pay, health benefits and severance pay?
Well, the employees locked themselves into the plant and refused to leave. For six days they staged a sit-in demanding the benefits they were owed under federal law. And they won their benefits!
Fast forward.
Another company, Serious Materials has offered to buy the company and rehire the former employees. The company makes energy efficient building materials. So, they're going to turn the employees from blue-collar workers to green-collar workers. They will be unionized.

The decision rests with the bankruptcy judge. Serious Materials and the union are requesting a quick decision so they can get the employees back to work and hold onto their old customer base.

YAY SERIOUS! YAY WORKERS WHO DIDN'T BUCKLE!
Finally, some good economic news.

2009-01-14T21:03:00.004-05:00

Heard on Rachel Maddow:
Susan Crawford, the convening authority for the U.S. military commissions and a life-long Republican, said that Mohammed al-Qahtani was tortured. Al-Qahtani was hospitalized twice. On at least one occasion, his heart rate dropped to 35 beats per minute.
Judge Crawford further stated that this situation has "tainted everything going forward."

So now, IF this man is guilty, well, it's just too bad. He cannot be prosecuted.

Even a lawyer whose job it was to prosecute one of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay has stated that the evidence against many if not all of them is so disorganized that fair prosecutions may be impossible. He is now calling for the release of the man he was scheduled to prosecute.

Of course, we've been hearing for years that many, many of these prisoners were not guilty and our government knew it.

Sen. Jim Webb [Va-DINO] came out as an apologist for the White House saying things like, "We need to look forward" and quoted McCain [of all people] on the matter. He also used the same words the White House spin-doctor-- excuse me --press secretary did, "These techniques were not used as a matter of policy."

Then he dropped off-thread and started talking about Pakistan instead.
^^^
So, a Republican judge called the White House out on the matter of torture.
And a Democratic [?] senator gave them a pass.

What Pat Buchanan Said

2009-01-14T20:21:00.005-05:00

I had a hard time believing my ears.

Pat Buchanan saying that Obama was "smart" for going to George Will's home last night for dinner with Will, Charles Krauthammer, William Kristol and David Brooks, Paul Gigot and Peggy Noonan--some of his harshest critics over the last couple of years.

Pat Buchanan calling Obama a "class act" on Hardball when noting his invitation to McCain to join him and Michelle for dinner the night before his inauguration.

I can't believe it. Buchanan and me. Agreeing on something. And you know how that makes me crazy.

2009-01-12T17:10:00.011-05:00

Surprise! Not All Texans Love Him
From The Dallas Observer News:
George W. Bush, Texas' Prodigal Son, Returns --
by Jim Schutze
George W. Bush is returning here to live, and that means people in our community are going to have to live with him. So my question remains.
How?

Say I'm in the plumbing aisle at Home Depot. . . I look up sideways. Damn it! It's George W. Bush.
"Oh, Hi, Mr. Presi...uh...former Mr....the ex...you... you... can you just tell me what the hell you were thinking...?"

I'm at a loss even trying to find a parallel. Herbert Hoover, the 31st president, retired to California in 1932. So how did people greet Hoover? "Interesting to meet you, sir. Thanks for the economic depression."

With Bush, helping ruin the global economy was only the last thing he did. "Hey, sir, before you leave the plumbing aisle, do you mind my asking about the thing where you attacked the wrong country?

Maybe shoe-hurling will be common here too. What is that strange, muffled sound in the distance? Thunder? A marching band? Oh, no, it's former President Bush coming our way, and the ominous sound we hear is the rolling tympani of shoes bouncing off his motorcade.

I just don't think Dallas gets it yet. This is the worst president in the history of the United States. He started a war for no good reason. He couldn't handle a flood.

And who else will come with him? Cheney lived here before. What if Cheney starts showing up in Dallas again? Oh...my...goodness. The difference between Bush and Cheney is that people give Bush a tiny break for being a hapless character in an Oliver Stone movie. But Cheney is real.
Click here for the complete text.

The Smaller Than Life President

2009-01-06T21:41:00.006-05:00

From The New York Times:
A President Forgotten but Not Gone -- by Frank Rich [excerpted]
"You start to pity him until you remember how vast the wreckage is. It stretches from the Middle East to Wall Street to Main Street and even into the heavens, which have been a safe haven for toxins under his passive stewardship. The discrepancy between the grandeur of the failure and the stature of the man is a puzzlement. We are still trying to compute it. . . .

"Almost poignantly, he keeps trying to hawk his goods in these final days, like a salesman who hasn't been told by the home office that his product has been discontinued. Though no one is listening, he has given more exit interviews than either Clinton or Reagan did.

"[An] elaborate example of legacy spin can be downloaded from the White House Web site: a booklet recounting “highlights” of the administration’s “accomplishments and results.” With big type, much white space, children’s-book-like trivia boxes titled “Did You Know?” and lots of color photos of the Bushes posing with blacks and troops . . . .

"This document is the literary correlative to 'Mission Accomplished.' Bush kept America safe (provided his presidency began Sept. 12, 2001). He gave America record economic growth (provided his presidency ended December 2007). He vanquished all the leading Qaeda terrorists (if you don't count the leaders bin Laden and al-Zawahri). He gave Afghanistan a thriving 'market economy' (if you count its skyrocketing opium trade) and a 'democratically elected president' (presiding over one of the world's most corrupt governments). He supported elections in Pakistan (after propping up Pervez Musharraf past the point of no return). He 'led the world in providing food aid and natural disaster relief' (if you leave out Brownie and Katrina).

"The man who emerges [from all those exit interviews] is a narcissist with no self-awareness whatsoever. It's that arrogance that allowed him to tune out even the most calamitous of realities, freeing him to compound them without missing a step. The president who famously couldn't name a single mistake of his presidency at a press conference in 2004 still can't.

"He can, however, blame everyone else."

2009-01-01T06:51:00.011-05:00

May you all have a wonderful year with all good things flowing your way. Now that we have a President with a brain and the will to help us out of the mess the last 8 years have brought-- mebbe there's a chance this New Year's Wish will come to pass. Peace.

2009-01-01T06:20:00.004-05:00

This article from WebEcoist presents twenty nine disturbing ads illustrating what we as a species are doing to the environment that sustains us--but for how much longer? Please take a look and pass these on to your email list. We need to get the word out and these ads capture the imagination in ways that are difficult to ignore.

2009-01-01T06:08:00.004-05:00

I've just discovered some books that sound intriguing. So, I'm going to start listing and excerpting them. Since, for the most part, these won't be political in nature, the best venue for them is, I think, Scattershot Thoughts. So, if you're in the market for some good reading matter, hop over there and check them out. I'll flag book-review entries so they'll be easy to spot as you scroll through the blog.

2009-01-01T05:51:00.009-05:00

This article in the Huffington Post seems to put the final nail in Norm Coleman's coffin. And about time.
Of course, the Rethugs aren't going to go down without another ridiculous fight. **sigh**
National Republican Senatorial Committee Chair John Cornyn released a state me nt on Tuesday indicating that some GOP senators would resist seating Franken before the courts have their say, even if the Democratic challenger is declared the winner of the recount. "I expect the Senate would have a problem seating a candidate who has not duly won an election," Cornyn claimed.

Gee, I wish we'd thought of that argument before letting Bush into the White House.

The Slave Next Door

2008-12-29T07:50:00.006-05:00

I found this over on Mock Paper Scissors in an entry dated 12/28. Thanks Betsy--I guess.
---
Shyima was 10 when a wealthy Egyptian couple brought her from a poor village in northern Egypt to work in their California home. She awoke before dawn and often worked past midnight to iron their clothes, mop the marble floors and dust the family's crystal. She earned $45 a month working up to 20 hours a day. She had no breaks during the day and no days off.
xxx
The trafficking of children for domestic labor in the U.S. is an extension of an illegal but common practice in Africa. . . . Some girls work for free on the understanding that they will at least be better fed in the home of their employer.

Around one-third of the estimated 10,000 forced laborers in the United States are servants trapped behind the curtains of suburban homes . . . .
xxx
The family brought [Shyima] back to their spacious five-bedroom, two-story home [in Irvine, California], decorated in the style of a Tuscan villa with a fountain of two angels spouting water through a conch. She was told to sleep in the garage.

It had no windows and was neither heated nor air-conditioned. Soon after she arrived, the garage's only light bulb went out. The Ibrahims didn't replace it. From then on, Shyima lived in the dark.

While doing the family's laundry, she slipped her own clothes into the load. Madame slapped her. "She told me my clothes were dirtier than theirs. That I wasn't allowed to clean mine there," she said.

She washed her clothes [hand-me-down t-shirts] in a bucket and hung them on a line next to the trash bins.

It never occurred to her to run away.
"I thought this was normal," she said.
xxx
Tens of thousands of children in Africa, some as young as 3, are recruited every year to work as domestic servants. They are on call 24 hours a day and are often beaten if they make a mistake. Children are in demand because they earn less than adults and are less likely to complain. In just one city— Casablanca — a 2001 survey by the Moroccan government found more than 15,000 girls under 15 working as maids.

"In most homes, these girls are not allowed to use so much as the same spoon as the rest of the family," said Hany Helal, the Cairo-based director of the Egyptian Organization for

If you could fly the garage where Shyima slept 7,000 miles to the sandy alleyway where her Egyptian family now lives, it would pass for the best home in the neighborhood.
The garage's walls are made of concrete instead of hand-patted bricks. Its roof doesn't leak. Its door shuts all the way.
xxx
On April 3, 2002, an anonymous caller phoned the California Department of Social Services.
A few days later, Nasser Ibrahim opened the door to a detective from the Irvine Police Department. Asked if any children lived there beside his own, he first said no, then yes — "a distant relative." He said he had "not yet" enrolled her in school.

The police put Shyima in a squad car. They noted her hands were red and caked with dead, hard-looking skin.

The couple pleaded guilty to all charges, including forced labor and slavery. They were ordered to pay $76,000, the amount Shyima would have earned at the minimum wage. The sentence: Three years in federal prison for Ibrahim, 22 months for his wife, and then deportation for both.

"I don't think that there is any other term you could use than modern-day slavery," said Bob Schoch, the special agent in charge for Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Los Angeles, in describing Shyima's situation.
xxx
EPILOGUE: On a recent afternoon in Cairo, Madame Amal walked into the lobby of her apartment complex wearing designer sunglasses and a chic scarf. After nearly two years in a U.S. prison cell, she's living once more in the spacious apartment where Shyima first worked as her maid. The apartment is adorned in the style of a Louis XIV palace, with ornately carved settees, gold-leaf vases and life-sized portraits of her and her husband. Before the door closed behind her, a little girl slipped in carrying grocery bags. She wore a shabby T-shirt. Her small feet slapped the floor in loose flip-flops. Her eyes were trained on the ground. She looked to be around 9 years old.

Click here for the rest of the story along with a video of Shyima.

Peace to You

2008-12-25T06:40:00.002-05:00

I'm not much into the traditional Christmas stuff-- to my mind, this says Christmas so much more than choirs of angels.

Have a wonderful solstice celebration--whatever you may call it.

Where's a Coffin When You Need One?

2008-12-24T06:32:00.000-05:00

From the Huffington Post:
Laissez-Faire Capitalism Should Be as Dead as Soviet Communism -- Arianna Huffington

"It's time to drive the final nail into the coffin of laissez-faire capitalism by treating it like the discredited ideology it inarguably is.

"But most Republicans are still refusing to see what's right in front of them. Especially Bush, our CEO president, who lays the blame not on the failures of the marketplace but on past administrations and corporate greed. "Wall Street got drunk," he says. Maybe so, but who made the last 8 years Happy Hour, and kept serving up the drinks?"
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
Btw-- another article in the same edition states that the current unemployment rate is the highest in 26 years. And who was in charge 26 years ago? Reagan and a Republican Congress. Just sayin.

2008-12-23T00:33:00.004-05:00

From the Washington Post
Finding the Proper Epitaph -- by Dan Froomkin

A fairly exhaustive outline of the devastation Bush is leaving behind-- and his attempt to redirect our attention at the 11th hour. Just as if there were something to redirect our attention to. It's pretty hard, though, to create propaganda when we've been here all along watching him as he dismantled the country brick by brick.
^^^
Robert Scheer of the San Francisco Chronical writes, "The shoe-throwing Iraqi journalist is now a venerated celebrity throughout the Mideast. . . , and his words to the president - as he threw his second shoe, 'This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq,' a reminder that we have used much deadlier force than a shoe in the shock-and-awe invasion once celebrated in the American media as a means of building respect for democracy."

One particular phrase from Bush's interview with ABC News's Martha Raddatz, right after the shoe-throwing incident, seems to be taking on some resonance. Bush said al Qaeda chose to make a stand in Iraq, Raddatz pointed out that al Qaeda hadn't even been in Iraq until the U.S. invaded -- and Bush replied: "Yeah, that's right. So what?"
^^^
And from the transcript of Time Magazine's interview with Obama:
Q. "When voters look at your Administration two years from now, in the off-year election, how will they know whether you're succeeding?"

Obama: "I think there are a couple of benchmarks we've set for ourselves during the course of this campaign. On [domestic] policy, have we helped this economy recover from what is the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression? Have we instituted financial regulations and rules of the road that assure this kind of crisis doesn't occur again? Have we created jobs that pay well and allow families to support themselves?
Have we made significant progress on reducing the cost of health care and expanding coverage? Have we begun what will probably be a decade-long project to shift America to a new energy economy?
Have we begun what may be an even longer project of revitalizing our public-school systems so we can compete in the 21st century?

"On foreign policy, have we closed down Guantánamo . . . , put a clear end to torture and restored a balance between the demands of our security and our Constitution?
Have I drawn down U.S. troops out of Iraq, and have we strengthened our approach in Afghanistan -- not just militarily but also diplomatically and in terms of development?
And have we been able to reinvigorate international institutions to deal with transnational threats, like climate change, that we can't solve on our own?

"And outside of specific policy measures, two years from now, I want the American people to be able to say, 'Government's not perfect; there are some things Obama does that get on my nerves. But you know what? I feel like the government's working for me. I feel like it's accountable. I feel like it's transparent. I feel that this is a President and an Administration that admits when it makes mistakes and adapts itself to new information, that believes in making decisions based on facts and on science as opposed to what is politically expedient.'"

Click here for the complete text.
^^^
Oh, and by the way: Bush has apparently helped Iraq's economy. The cobbler who made the famous shoes has had to hire more staff in order to keep up with the orders for them.
Way to go, Bush! Go speak in more countries -- maybe you can bring the world economy back from the brink you and the other Reaganites have driven us to.

Kill the UAW--Kill the Middle Class: It's All in a Day's Work for the Rethugs

2008-12-21T00:45:00.002-05:00

From the Washington Post:
Destroying What the UAW Built -- by Harold Meyerson

In 1949, a pamphlet was published that argued that the American auto industry should pursue a different direction. Titled "A Small Car Named Desire," [it suggested that] a substantial share of American consumers would welcome smaller cars that cost less and burned fuel more efficiently.
The pamphlet's author was the research department of the United Auto Workers.

[U]nder the leadership of Walter Reuther, the UAW was the most farsighted institution -- not just the most farsighted union -- in America.

In the immediate aftermath of Pearl Harbor, Reuther, then head of the union's General Motors division, came up with a detailed plan for converting auto plants to defense factories more quickly than the industry's leaders did.

[B]y the early 1950s, the UAW had . . . set a pattern for the rest of American industry and created the broadly shared prosperity enjoyed by the nation in the 30 years after World War II.

[T]he UAW also used its resources to incubate every up-and-coming liberal movement in America: the great 1963 March on Washington, César Chávez's farm workers union, the early '60s student movement, the National Organization for Women, and helped fund the first Earth Day.

And for decades, the UAW was among the foremost advocates of national health care -- a policy that, had it been enacted, would have saved the Big Three tens of billions of dollars in health insurance expenses, but which the Big Three themselves were, until recently, too ideologically hidebound to support.

The UAW not only built the American middle class but helped engender every movement at the center of American liberalism today -- which is one reason that conservatives have always hated it so.

Over the past several weeks, it has become clear that the Republican right wants to see the demise of the UAW so much that it would prefer to plunge the nation into a depression rather than craft a bridge loan that doesn't single out the auto industry's unionized workers for punishment.

Click here for the complete text.

Coal's Response to Rachel

2008-12-18T07:26:00.003-05:00

On 12/12, Rachel Maddow was blamed by the “Clean” Coal Industry because its blog didn’t receive as many hits as it wanted after she had featured it on her program earlier that week.
Furthermore, it threatened her. When she said that it was offensive that the “Clean” Coal ad had used the hymn Silent Night to sell a product that pollutes and to spread lies about it, a related blog-site said that it could, in turn, publicize things put forth by Rachel that offended the developers of this ad.

Rachel’s response: "Oh! Is that a promise? My work here is done!"
Go, Rachel! =D

My Old Mayor Weighs In

2008-12-18T06:57:00.001-05:00

Emanuel Cleaver II used to be the Mayor of my old home town, Kansas City, Mo. And, he was a good one, too. He was reelected several times before setting out for DC where he has been the representative of my old district for a number of elections, now.

He wrote an op-ed for the WaPo recently and I felt compelled to post it here. Sounds like pretty good advice to me: 'keep a lid on sky-high expectations'.

2008-12-12T20:20:00.002-05:00

Where Was He?
After his appearance on David Letterman last night, the talking heads are asking, 'Where was this John McCain during the campaign?' He was funny. He seemed aware. All traces of senility were gone.

Hello!!! He's no longer saddled with a bid for the presidency that he had no intention of winning. Apparently, losing an election is almost as hard as winning. See my post for November 1: A Losing Strategy.

Profiteering and Ideology Trump the Country

2008-12-12T06:20:00.004-05:00

From the Huffington Post:
Republicans Kill Any Help for Detroit -- Steve Parker

Late Thursday night, Republicans in the Senate derailed a bill, passed the day before by the House, to loan $15 billion to the Detroit Three. The Senate vote was 52 to 35, with 10 Republicans joining 40 Democrats and two Independents in favor.

Sen. Bob Corker, R-TN, after the talks collapsed late Thursday said, "We are three words away," from a deal.

Those words? Most likely, "United Auto Workers."
xxx
I'm seeing names and states of those who voted against the bill. Isn't it interesting how many of those guys have Japanese- and German-based factories in their states?
Unfortunately, they don't seem to understand that, the parts suppliers may be caught up in the ripple effects-- leaving those factories out in the cold when it comes to being able to attach those special touches to their cars. You know, things like tires, windshield wipers, seats, radios and carpets. Little things like that.
Business savvy guys these senators aren't.
Anyway, here's the link for the rest of the article.
And here's a link to another, related article by Stanley Bing [Thanks, Senate! For Nothing]
Psssssssst! Let's all go to the websites of those senators and flood their email inboxes with our own brand of hate and threats to recall em in 2 or 4 years.

A Chance to Talk Back? Who Woulda Thunk?

2008-12-05T16:23:00.013-05:00

A couple of days after the election I read about change.gov where we could post emails to the transition team which, at the time, consisted of Obama and Biden. So, I went there and told them what my priorities for the early stages of the new administration are. Things like: restore the Constitution [including habeas corpus, f'rinstance] and repudiating torture, bringing home our troops, upgrading education [especially at the elementary and middle school levels], and addressing health care issues, etc. etc. etc. [Click on American Moment, then on Share Your Vision or Share Your Story].
Truth be told, I posted the email with faint hope. After all, even before Bush came along, I didn't expect my government to actually listen to me except when I was physically inside the voting booth [and, yes, I do understand that even that is more influence than most people on the planet ever get a chance to have.]

So, imagine my surprise, today, when Dan Froomkin of the Washington Post alerted us to the fact that the transition team seems to be reading the emails and responding to them! That's right! They're paying attention to us!
Now, they've begun actually posing questions and asking us to tell them what we think. They're asking us to give them suggestions! And, after reading a bunch, they even post a video response to what they've read! They're talking about ideas they're getting from us that they're going to take under advisement and look into implementing!

The latest question is: "Please tell us your story about how the economy is affecting you and what you would like to see us do about it."

Oh. My. God.
Have I died and gone to heaven and not noticed till now? Or what?

2008-12-03T23:31:00.002-05:00

Cool Video--

See more Jack Black videos at Funny or Die

and check out scattershot thoughts for another hilarious video. =D

I'm ba-ack! :)

2008-12-02T18:58:00.002-05:00

Honey, I'm ho-ome!
Exhausted. And, yes, it snowed while I was up there. Well, it was Thanksgiving -- what did I expect?
And the car broke down 100 miles outside KC, on the way home. :(
But, we made it!
Going to check now and see if you [and Jake] left me any soup.
Then, I'm gonna sleep for a day or so.
C U soon.

c u later

2008-11-23T23:43:00.005-05:00

hey, folks--
I'll be out of pocket for about a week.
Some friends offered to drive, so I'm off to Kansas City for Thanksgiving. I think I must be out of my mind but I'm gonna do it anyway: heading north just at the time when the first snows begin to fly in that area isn't my brightest idea. Given that it's Missouri, that could well mean freezing rain covered by snow. :(
Still, it's a chance to visit friends I left behind-- so, too good a chance to pass up.

So, will see you all when I get back. Meanwhile, there's hot-and-sour-soup in the fridge along with some Mongolian Beef with Noodles. And lemonade. And, some steeping tea in the cabinet. Help yourselves -- just, please, don't spill on the rug, ok?

Branded!

2008-11-23T01:06:00.025-05:00

I just garnered yet another label: ‘Fiscal Conservative’. Who’da thunk?

Allow me to digress for a moment. First of all, I consider myself to be pretty moderate. I perceive the policies and other stuff I agree with to be in line with plain, old common sense.
Things like:
Educating everyone equally—assuming we want an egalitarian nation that allows people to 1] live lives that aren’t filled with quiet [or not-so-quiet] desperation and 2] actually contribute to the greater good.
And, what's more, I'm willing to pay for this quality education for all. I believe it will more than pay for itself in the long run. To that end, I've never voted against a tax that would help the schools and our teachers.

Allowing other people to live their own lives without a lot of interference from me [or the government or anyone else, for that matter.] That includes GLBT’s, people [including women and the sick and the elderly] who want control of their own bodies, people who disagree with you and/or me and/or even the most “socially conservative” among us.
If people don’t scratch up my karma, I promise not to run over their dogma.

Including immigrants in our population IN our population. Not placing them on the fringes and threatening to deport them if they step out of line by asking to have their humanity acknowledged.

Living a personal life that is, by and large, pretty frugal. Don’t get me wrong—I live pretty comfortably, too. I don’t deny myself anything I actually need. I don’t even deny myself most of those things I want. But I’m not a huge consumer of high-end goods. I don’t shop as a panacea for boredom, buying anything that catches my momentary interest to bring home and add to a growing pile of stuff I’ll never use.

And, on a related issue, protecting the environment—even if the humans living in the same region as an endangered species or wetland or natural wonder or forest or coastline are inconvenienced. We are, after all, PART of the environment —not its Lord and Master— an acknowledgment we ignore at our own peril.
I think that that truism is becoming more and more stark as time goes on.

Apparently, though, from what I’ve been reading, these views put me to the far-left-of-left—almost a Commie-Pinko-Librul.
xxx
But, this morning, I heard a piece on the radio that coupled the word “moral” with the little passion play we all witnessed this week of multimillionaires carrying their tin cups to Washington D.C. in their private jets.
The idea that this was an immoral act seemed to be a novel one to the talking heads on that [NPR] radio show. I wonder what those deep-thinkers get paid. If they’da asked me, I coulda told em that that was a profoundly immoral act.
Just as what AIG and the other banking institutions have been doing with the $300 billion they've received is immoral.

And, at last, Congress earned my seal of approval when it spanked the hands of the Big 3 and sent them to bed without supper. At least Congress learned from its latest mistakes.

[fwiw, I do believe we should bail out the Big 3—but on terms and with well-thought-out conditions. Multi-million dollar salaries, bonuses and private jets not included.]
If that makes me a Fiscal Conservative, I guess it’s a label I can live with.

My point here is this:
FINALLY our pundits and politicians are waking up to the fact that morality doesn’t consist of going to church, keeping your pants zipped when appropriate, wrapping yourself in the Flag and brandishing the Cross at election-time and trying to force everyone out there to agree with your own narrow views. There are broader, more inclusive views that are moral—and it’s time Congress realized it.
xxx
And, one more thought on the matter:
If I read, just one more time, that these tolerant viewpoints are held exclusively by the young, I'm going to vomit or scream or both.
I'm almost 61 years old, for God's sake! And I'm sick to death of being labeled Conservative and/or a Bible Thumper on that criterion alone!
I've held these views ever since I learned to think for myself—which was a while ago— like, ummm, high school, for what it's worth.

A Fresh Idea for the Conservatives

2008-11-22T06:06:00.001-05:00

Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria writes:
As conservatives survey the damage they have done to the Republican Party, they have fixed upon one comforting notion. John McCain lost the election, according to many of them, because he supported the surge in Iraq.
^^^
The fact is that had the surge failed, McCain would have lost. It succeeded, and he lost. The logical conclusion is that the surge was irrelevant to McCain's fate -- that there were broader reasons for the resounding Republican loss.
^^^
The Republican Party's social program is out of tune with an increasingly young, diverse and tolerant electorate.
As the conservative writer David Frum points out, "College-educated Americans have come to believe that their money is safe with the Democrats -- but that their values are under threat from Republicans." [emphasis added]
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
Just as, once upon a time, men wanted to keep women uneducated in order to be able to rule unhindered, so, now, Republicans would like to keep the masses uneducated for the same reason.

Sorry-- it's too late --that ship has sailed thanks to FDR's GI Bill and other Progressive policies. They're just going to have to suck it up and get used to the idea that, along the way, the electorate learned how to think. So they're going to have to come up with other ideas to get what they want from the rest of us.
They could do worse than to simply start telling us the truth.

2008-11-20T01:04:00.002-05:00

Gawd, She's Good!
Michelle Bachman has now gone on TV to deny saying what she said on national TV two weeks ago.
In fact, she is now calling the fact that she accused the Democrats in Congress of being unamerican an "urban legend."

Excuse me, but I was watching Rachel Maddow when Maddow incredulously ask her to clarify her statement and Bachmann repeated what she had just said a second time.

And now, suddenly, she is claiming that the quote is an urban legend.
^^^
This takes a certain talent. Say something on national television, then go back on TV and deny that you said it. Amazing.
**wandering away from the keyboard shaking head in disbelief**

Drawing the Fangs

2008-11-19T06:25:00.001-05:00

Obama Is Killing the GOP With Kindness -- Jacob Heilbrunn
Where Bush sought to polarize, Obama is taking the opposite approach. He wants to embrace the opposition. . . .
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
I'm going to inject a little religion here---sorrrrreeee---but, not being a government or religious institution, I'm not required to divorce religion and politics.
If I remember my New Testament correctly, in the verse following the passage where the Christ Soul tells us to turn the other cheek, he goes on to say, 'You will heap coals of fire upon his head.'

I've always read that to mean: 'Be good to those who are mean to you not in order to turn into a doormat but for a very pragmatic reason: he'll feel guilty and stop doing what he's been doing.'
Seems like pretty sound reasoning, to me.