I ask again, why are moderate Republicans MIA on environmental issues?
Take a look at this story. The Bush administration is proposing rule changes to weaken the environment again, to this time...
"allow cellphone towers and low-flying tour planes and would liberalize rules that prohibited mining, according to Bill Wade, former superintendent at Shenandoah National Park in Virginia"
Republican Sewardship
Moderate Republicans if you do not want your children to go to a National Park and see mines, cell towers, and noisy low-flying aircraft then you must become an American first and a Republican second and oppose your President.
Do you think your hero and outdoorsman Ronald Reagan would pander to business the way George W. Bush does? Are you content with this "new order" of unimpeded robber baron rule?
Where are you?
Hello.
Anybody there?
Can you hear me now?
Monday, August 29, 2005
Saturday, August 27, 2005
Friday, August 26, 2005
Our friend Jon
Jon Stewart is a lot of fun and never any more fun than when someone hands him a hanging breaking ball over the plate. Pat Robertson's comments about assassinating the President of Venezuela was more like planting a ball on a tee in front of the Red Sox's Manny Ramirez.
Stewart knocks cover off Robertson
Enjoy!
Stewart knocks cover off Robertson
Enjoy!
Better primaries
I have heard the point raised many times that Democrats ought to use the True Majority Rule voting system during their primary campaigns so that the candidate with the broadest appeal is the winner of the nomination.
That sounds, every time, like a great idea to me.
It is also, according to Scientific American, the fairest voting system of them all.
Democrats might also use the primary process to implement electronic voting done right (see example here). Why not train legions of Americans that electronic voting can be done quickly, easily, and devoid of corruption? Why not use the most accurate, and therefore most democratic, method to choose the party front-runner?
Why not free voters from wrangling about harming candidate A (Kerry) by voting for candidate B (Nader), or harming candidate A (H.W. Bush) by voting for candidate B (Ross Perot)?
In other words, why not lead on the issue by showing faith in the idea that will produce the strongest candidates?
That sounds, every time, like a great idea to me.
It is also, according to Scientific American, the fairest voting system of them all.
Democrats might also use the primary process to implement electronic voting done right (see example here). Why not train legions of Americans that electronic voting can be done quickly, easily, and devoid of corruption? Why not use the most accurate, and therefore most democratic, method to choose the party front-runner?
Why not free voters from wrangling about harming candidate A (Kerry) by voting for candidate B (Nader), or harming candidate A (H.W. Bush) by voting for candidate B (Ross Perot)?
In other words, why not lead on the issue by showing faith in the idea that will produce the strongest candidates?
Seems indefensible
AIDS is deadly.
HIV can not get through latex or polyurethane condoms.
The Catholic Church is forbidding followers to wear condoms.
This seems like an indefensible moral position leading to needless human suffering.
HIV can not get through latex or polyurethane condoms.
The Catholic Church is forbidding followers to wear condoms.
This seems like an indefensible moral position leading to needless human suffering.
Thursday, August 25, 2005
I say again
And he is too cowardly to face us too, except in sanitized forums where every question is pre-approved.
Commander bawk-bawk-bawk chicken
Commander bawk-bawk-bawk chicken
Here's the PLAN
John Edwards, David Sirota, and Brian Schweitzer teaming up sounds like a hell of a good idea to me. That they would team up to form an organization whose purpose is to promote progressive politics at the state level sounds like an even better one.
Judging by the hot-headed comments from Republicans I'd say they think it threatens their rule.
Take a bow
Judging by the hot-headed comments from Republicans I'd say they think it threatens their rule.
Take a bow
Halliburton is America Hurtin'
Could it be that while America is fighting in a Face And Rear Saving Endeavor (or was that Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism) that more of our patriotic pals at Halliburton are picking our pockets?
Yep.
Glenn Allen Powell has pleaded guilty in U.S. District court in Rock Island, Illinois to taking 20% of a subcontract.
Frequent Fraud
Whatever happened to people's sense of duty?
Is money that good?
Yep.
Glenn Allen Powell has pleaded guilty in U.S. District court in Rock Island, Illinois to taking 20% of a subcontract.
Frequent Fraud
Whatever happened to people's sense of duty?
Is money that good?
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
What I like about Cindy
Cindy Sheehan touched a nerve.
Not with George Bush, mind you, but with many decent Americans she did.
One day, amidst a lull in the apocalypse cheerleading the dust cleared just a little bit and people saw a Gold Star mother asking "Why?".
Only the most loathsome character, someone like Rush Limbaugh or Anne Coulter would demean someone in Cindy's shoes. But decent people know to respect a great sacrifice like Cindy's and to listen to what she has to say. After all, one can hardly Support the Troops and insult their mothers can they?
What this mother had to say is that her son is dead because the President lied to him. Her son is dead because he had enough faith in America to defend it with his life, and yet that trust was misled.
And she wants to look President Bush in the eye and ask him why he told those lies which cost her so much.
And he is too cowardly to face her.
And so she waits and draws attention to that fact.
And the nation waits wondering much the same thing as Cindy.
And he is too cowardly to face us too, except in sanitized forums where every question is pre-approved.
But Cindy is undeterred and that determination is what I like about her. That, and the fact that she says things like this:
If you decide that you want to stand up and speak out, then you should mark your calendars for this event on Saturday, September 24th:
Just say No
I'd consider it a job well done if all the Bush horses and all the Bush men could not put the Iraq lie back together again. So, if you need just a little push to get down off the fence, then perhaps this article by Ray McGovern will provide the Humpty Dumptian nudge necessary.
In closing I'd like to offer thanks to Cindy for awakening the conscience of a nation. The war supporters try so hard to maintain their ill-gotten war that it must seem daunting to stand in their way? To suffer the personal attacks? To be a Gold Star mother and get lectured about your patriotism from those drive-by ignoramuses?
Perhaps your vigil has turned a death into something that will save lives; not Casey's life, but perhaps the life of the child of a new friend (of which I'm guessing you now have many). Thank you for trying. It is honorable work.
Not with George Bush, mind you, but with many decent Americans she did.
One day, amidst a lull in the apocalypse cheerleading the dust cleared just a little bit and people saw a Gold Star mother asking "Why?".
Only the most loathsome character, someone like Rush Limbaugh or Anne Coulter would demean someone in Cindy's shoes. But decent people know to respect a great sacrifice like Cindy's and to listen to what she has to say. After all, one can hardly Support the Troops and insult their mothers can they?
What this mother had to say is that her son is dead because the President lied to him. Her son is dead because he had enough faith in America to defend it with his life, and yet that trust was misled.
And she wants to look President Bush in the eye and ask him why he told those lies which cost her so much.
And he is too cowardly to face her.
And so she waits and draws attention to that fact.
And the nation waits wondering much the same thing as Cindy.
And he is too cowardly to face us too, except in sanitized forums where every question is pre-approved.
But Cindy is undeterred and that determination is what I like about her. That, and the fact that she says things like this:
How in the world is anybody still sitting on that fence?'
"If you fall on the side that is pro-George and pro-war, you get your ass over to Iraq, and take the place of somebody who wants to come home. And if you fall on the side that is against this war and against George Bush, stand up and speak out."
Cindy Sheehan
If you decide that you want to stand up and speak out, then you should mark your calendars for this event on Saturday, September 24th:
Just say No
I'd consider it a job well done if all the Bush horses and all the Bush men could not put the Iraq lie back together again. So, if you need just a little push to get down off the fence, then perhaps this article by Ray McGovern will provide the Humpty Dumptian nudge necessary.
In closing I'd like to offer thanks to Cindy for awakening the conscience of a nation. The war supporters try so hard to maintain their ill-gotten war that it must seem daunting to stand in their way? To suffer the personal attacks? To be a Gold Star mother and get lectured about your patriotism from those drive-by ignoramuses?
Perhaps your vigil has turned a death into something that will save lives; not Casey's life, but perhaps the life of the child of a new friend (of which I'm guessing you now have many). Thank you for trying. It is honorable work.
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Assassinate thine enemy?
Question:
How can a Christian leader promote assassination on-air and yet maintain his credentials as a Christian?
Choices:
A. When the people that follow him are gullible and uncritical.
B. When his followers have so little understanding of their faith that the words and works of Jesus are essentially meaningless to them.
C. When the compulsion to obey the pulpit overwhelms the helps that come from reason.
D. Those who covet violence are often willing to maintain their ignorance through self-deception and religious rhetoric.
E. All of the above.
Who would Jesus assassinate
Times are strange in America.
People seem to have forgotten that announcing you are Christian is a deed without a work.
How can a Christian leader promote assassination on-air and yet maintain his credentials as a Christian?
Choices:
A. When the people that follow him are gullible and uncritical.
B. When his followers have so little understanding of their faith that the words and works of Jesus are essentially meaningless to them.
C. When the compulsion to obey the pulpit overwhelms the helps that come from reason.
D. Those who covet violence are often willing to maintain their ignorance through self-deception and religious rhetoric.
E. All of the above.
Who would Jesus assassinate
Times are strange in America.
People seem to have forgotten that announcing you are Christian is a deed without a work.
Monday, August 22, 2005
Bush clearing
I think that President Bush likes clearing brush because (unlike Iraq) it is a problem whose solution he understands and can manage. He knows that if he keeps going back and forth, back and forth from the brush to the brush pile that the pile will get bigger and the brush will get thinned. If he then burns the pile it will be reduced to ashes and confront him no more.
I think maybe that is the type of problem the President is well suited for. I don't think he understands Iraq and why Iraqis have been able to confront him after Baghdad was burned. I don't think he understands that going back and forth, back and forth from hardened base to conflagration is not thinning the insurgents, but rather increasing their numbers.
I think that he doesn't know what to do. He shocked and awed them Iraqis according to plan but there were no candies. There were no flowers. His stature did not become Churchillian, but more like Jethro Bodine (although an unkind one).
So now he seems to put on the best show he can, all pomp and leers, all tirades and arm waving, all hat and no cattle. As America's problems escalate he bikes, and fishes, and naps, and clears brush because those are activities he can handle. Let us hope he remembers to chew his pretzels.
I think maybe that is the type of problem the President is well suited for. I don't think he understands Iraq and why Iraqis have been able to confront him after Baghdad was burned. I don't think he understands that going back and forth, back and forth from hardened base to conflagration is not thinning the insurgents, but rather increasing their numbers.
I think that he doesn't know what to do. He shocked and awed them Iraqis according to plan but there were no candies. There were no flowers. His stature did not become Churchillian, but more like Jethro Bodine (although an unkind one).
So now he seems to put on the best show he can, all pomp and leers, all tirades and arm waving, all hat and no cattle. As America's problems escalate he bikes, and fishes, and naps, and clears brush because those are activities he can handle. Let us hope he remembers to chew his pretzels.
Friday, August 19, 2005
Frustration level at maximum.
I'm feeling a bit wound up this morning and so I think I'll pass along some great advice from Kevin Drum to Democrats.
See for yourself
Americans know the Iraq war is ill-gotten and unlikely to produce a shining beacon of democracy in gains. More likely it will produce an Iranian client-state if we're lucky, and a terrorist breeding ground ala Afghanistan if we are unlucky.
Climbing aboard a ship of fools is not a wise thing to do, yet the top Democrats sit on deck and complain about the tea service, without realizing that Republicans are making off quietly with the life boats.
Isn't it obvious?
Republicans are trying to cut-and-run without the appearance of cutting and running and Democrats are letting them.
It is time for the democratic leadership to wake up and get an exit strategy from the Bush administration now!
Here is a handy quote to use as ammo:
Nobody will think you're tough for quibbling about structural changes and what-not. Demand a plan for victory. Get Republicans to define the parameters for victory. Don't waste a breath on pull-out dates. Get pull-out conditions.
If you don't lead at a time when it counts, when does it count if you lead?
See for yourself
Americans know the Iraq war is ill-gotten and unlikely to produce a shining beacon of democracy in gains. More likely it will produce an Iranian client-state if we're lucky, and a terrorist breeding ground ala Afghanistan if we are unlucky.
Climbing aboard a ship of fools is not a wise thing to do, yet the top Democrats sit on deck and complain about the tea service, without realizing that Republicans are making off quietly with the life boats.
Isn't it obvious?
Republicans are trying to cut-and-run without the appearance of cutting and running and Democrats are letting them.
It is time for the democratic leadership to wake up and get an exit strategy from the Bush administration now!
Here is a handy quote to use as ammo:
The only definition of Victory is Exit Strategy
George W. Bush 1999
Nobody will think you're tough for quibbling about structural changes and what-not. Demand a plan for victory. Get Republicans to define the parameters for victory. Don't waste a breath on pull-out dates. Get pull-out conditions.
If you don't lead at a time when it counts, when does it count if you lead?
Word play
I don't know if you've noticed a secret military unit called Able Danger in the news recently.
Apart from the fact that this means the US military is spying on American citizens, I became interested in the name chosen for the unit.
Able Danger?
Who thinks these names up?
It sounds like an anagram to me, but an anagram for what?
Here are some possibilities:
Banal Greed
Arab Legend
Bad General
Reagan Bled
Here are a bunch more anagrams
I guess that's nowhere near as good as realizing that the water Evian, spelled backwards, is naive, or that Evil spelled backwards is Live.
Apart from the fact that this means the US military is spying on American citizens, I became interested in the name chosen for the unit.
Able Danger?
Who thinks these names up?
It sounds like an anagram to me, but an anagram for what?
Here are some possibilities:
Banal Greed
Arab Legend
Bad General
Reagan Bled
Here are a bunch more anagrams
I guess that's nowhere near as good as realizing that the water Evian, spelled backwards, is naive, or that Evil spelled backwards is Live.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
Cargo of a dove
Israel is vacating the Gaza settlements this week and it can expect little in return for this move, and particularly from the Palestinian Authority.
My opinions are conflicted on many points, for instance:
I am almost always against using troops on citizens, but a few citizens cannot be allowed to obstruct a democratic decision with violence.
I find Sharon's aggression part of the problem, particularly his quick rejection of Jimmy Carter's attempts to broker an agreement recently (I say Israel owes Jimmy more respect for the Camp David accord).
I find Israel's repeated spying on the US indefensible, particularly when we have sacrificed lives repeatedly on her behalf. It is, in short, no way to treat a friend and can only serve to weaken our alliance.
I find our moral position compromised by our own Westward expansion through nations of Native Americans and that little episode we had with slavery.
That said, though, Israel has decided it wants peace and is willing to sacrifice to get it. Perhaps the world community can recognize this as a step and applaud it and encourage one from Palestine, since Peace doesn't come through strength of arms but the approach of justice for all parties.
Will Palestine reciprocate or will it be violence and victimhood as usual?
On a related note, here is an article that I read which I enjoyed. It doesn't paint things in terms of right and wrong or black and white, but rather in terms of progress towards peace. You do what you can, the author seems to say, you do what you can:
Gush Katif
My opinions are conflicted on many points, for instance:
I am almost always against using troops on citizens, but a few citizens cannot be allowed to obstruct a democratic decision with violence.
I find Sharon's aggression part of the problem, particularly his quick rejection of Jimmy Carter's attempts to broker an agreement recently (I say Israel owes Jimmy more respect for the Camp David accord).
I find Israel's repeated spying on the US indefensible, particularly when we have sacrificed lives repeatedly on her behalf. It is, in short, no way to treat a friend and can only serve to weaken our alliance.
I find our moral position compromised by our own Westward expansion through nations of Native Americans and that little episode we had with slavery.
That said, though, Israel has decided it wants peace and is willing to sacrifice to get it. Perhaps the world community can recognize this as a step and applaud it and encourage one from Palestine, since Peace doesn't come through strength of arms but the approach of justice for all parties.
Will Palestine reciprocate or will it be violence and victimhood as usual?
On a related note, here is an article that I read which I enjoyed. It doesn't paint things in terms of right and wrong or black and white, but rather in terms of progress towards peace. You do what you can, the author seems to say, you do what you can:
Gush Katif
A healing balm
There may be a balm in Gilead to heal a sick, sick soul, but I know from experience that there is also an easily accessible balm at Comedy Central known as the Daily Show.
You may be aware that Iraq did NOT prepare it's constitution by August 15th as President Bush expected. To journalists this is a trifle that should be buried on page 15 between somebody's grandmother's tuna casserole recipe and an appeal for a lost cat.
To one that works in comedy, though, it is a chance to heal with laughter:
Thanks Jon
Enjoy!
You may be aware that Iraq did NOT prepare it's constitution by August 15th as President Bush expected. To journalists this is a trifle that should be buried on page 15 between somebody's grandmother's tuna casserole recipe and an appeal for a lost cat.
To one that works in comedy, though, it is a chance to heal with laughter:
Thanks Jon
Enjoy!
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
Desecration
A Bush supporter drove a truck through a line of grave markers with the names of dead American soldiers inscribed on them.
I don't know if I have to say any more than that.
Details Here...
I don't know if I have to say any more than that.
Details Here...
Heaven Help Us !!!
To President Bush global warming is a myth, intelligent design is a science, and the Patriot Act is vital in the defense of freedom.
To President Bush Iraq attacked us on 911, Osama bin Laden is unimportant, and you respond to hard work with long vacations.
To President Bush "Victory is exit strategy" and we have no exit strategy for Iraq.
To President Bush our Mission is Accomplished and Donald Rumsfeld is a success.
To President Bush Iraq is evil and Saudi Arabia is an ally that needs to be coddled.
I'm getting really sick of President Bush.
Rant Inspiration
To President Bush Iraq attacked us on 911, Osama bin Laden is unimportant, and you respond to hard work with long vacations.
To President Bush "Victory is exit strategy" and we have no exit strategy for Iraq.
To President Bush our Mission is Accomplished and Donald Rumsfeld is a success.
To President Bush Iraq is evil and Saudi Arabia is an ally that needs to be coddled.
I'm getting really sick of President Bush.
Rant Inspiration
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
Republicans MIA
One of the most perplexing things to me about the last five years of uncontested Republican control of the US government is this: why are Republicans MIA on environmental issues?
Republicans have traditionally defended our national park systems, protected hunting and fishing lands, and put partisanship aside to pass clean air and water laws.
What the hell has happened during the Bush reign?
Mercury laws have been weakened.
Energy bills have been passed encouraging coal use (the heat-source of cavemen).
Clean air laws have been weakened.
Our national parks are under assault with budget cuts, drilling plans, and privatization schemes.
Why aren't Republicans up-in-arms about fish too contaminated to eat?
Why aren't Republicans up-in-arms about oil drilling plans in Alaska?
Why aren't Republicans up-in-arms about global warming?
Why aren't Republicans up-in-arms about asthma levels among children in our cities?
Why aren't Republicans working with Democrats to defend the clean air and water acts?
Why aren't Republicans encouraging renewable energy generation?
Why, in other words, are environmentally concerned Republicans rolling over for Bush on environmental issues?
The only Republican I see consistently upholding their principles on the environment is John McCain.
I don't understand what has happened.
Protecting our parks for future generations is a virtue is it not?
Aren't Republican Christians concerned about proper stewardship of God's creation?
What is it that I am missing?
Republicans have traditionally defended our national park systems, protected hunting and fishing lands, and put partisanship aside to pass clean air and water laws.
What the hell has happened during the Bush reign?
Mercury laws have been weakened.
Energy bills have been passed encouraging coal use (the heat-source of cavemen).
Clean air laws have been weakened.
Our national parks are under assault with budget cuts, drilling plans, and privatization schemes.
Why aren't Republicans up-in-arms about fish too contaminated to eat?
Why aren't Republicans up-in-arms about oil drilling plans in Alaska?
Why aren't Republicans up-in-arms about global warming?
Why aren't Republicans up-in-arms about asthma levels among children in our cities?
Why aren't Republicans working with Democrats to defend the clean air and water acts?
Why aren't Republicans encouraging renewable energy generation?
Why, in other words, are environmentally concerned Republicans rolling over for Bush on environmental issues?
The only Republican I see consistently upholding their principles on the environment is John McCain.
I don't understand what has happened.
Protecting our parks for future generations is a virtue is it not?
Aren't Republican Christians concerned about proper stewardship of God's creation?
What is it that I am missing?
E.L. Doctorow on G.W. Bush
My writings about the mess Republicans have made for us in Iraq amount to a rather crude body of work, especially when compared to this statement by author E.L. Doctorow:
The Unfeeling President
Good writing can be stunning.
I am stunned.
The Unfeeling President
Good writing can be stunning.
I am stunned.
Monday, August 15, 2005
Shameful
What does the schedule of a man too busy to spend any time talking with Cindy Sheehan, (the mom who lost a son in Iraq and wants to ask President Bush "Why?), look like?
In addition to the two-hour bike ride, Bush's Saturday schedule included an evening Little League Baseball playoff game, a lunch meeting with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, a nap, some fishing and some reading.
Source
Friday, August 12, 2005
Halliburton and Iran
Halliburton sold nuclear technology to Iran.
I don't think I need to say any more than that.
Story here
I don't think I need to say any more than that.
Story here
Many more dead than reported?
This website contends that:
They have started a simple process to figure out the truth. They published the list of official Iraq casualties (here) and have asked family members to check the list for their fallen loved ones. If your family member died in the Iraq war and is not on the list you should contact the author of the study.
As of July 26th the author verified 52 more names of dead GIs which never made the official Pentagon list.
Even a skeptic like myself has a hard time believing the Whitehouse would be so monstrous to those that deserve honor and dignity for their service.
Hopefully it isn't true.
U.S. Military Personnel who died in German hospitals or en route to German hospitals have very rarely been counted. They total about 6,210 as of 1 January, 2005. The ongoing, underreporting of the dead in Iraq, is not accurate. The DoD is deliberately reducing the figures. A review of many foreign news sites show that actual deaths are far higher than the newly reduced ones. Iraqi civilian casualties are never reported but International Red Cross, Red Crescent and UN figures indicate that as of 1 January 2005, the numbers are just under 100,000.
They have started a simple process to figure out the truth. They published the list of official Iraq casualties (here) and have asked family members to check the list for their fallen loved ones. If your family member died in the Iraq war and is not on the list you should contact the author of the study.
As of July 26th the author verified 52 more names of dead GIs which never made the official Pentagon list.
Even a skeptic like myself has a hard time believing the Whitehouse would be so monstrous to those that deserve honor and dignity for their service.
Hopefully it isn't true.
Thursday, August 11, 2005
What rhymes with hypocrite?
I feel that Art's highest achievement is to make Truth captivating. Who could look away, for instance, from Nick Ut's famous "Napalm Girl" photograph without being changed forever? In that tradition perhaps, Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones have used their musical talents to take a roundhouse swipe at US neo-cons and I cannot wait to hear their new songs.
All too often these days censors are willing to remove songs of protest from the airwaves and from store shelves, but it will be hard for radio stations to ignore anything that the Stones do without incurring lots of listener blowback. That, I think, is what makes this album most significant.
A Bigger Bang
All too often these days censors are willing to remove songs of protest from the airwaves and from store shelves, but it will be hard for radio stations to ignore anything that the Stones do without incurring lots of listener blowback. That, I think, is what makes this album most significant.
A Bigger Bang
Wednesday, August 10, 2005
Texas oil cheats
The Economist has a story about Benon Sevan, the UN oil-for-food diplomat caught accepting bribes. It is a disheartening story, but quite unfair to cast him as the only culprit.
Corruption at the heart of the United Nations
You see, the company offering Mr. Sevan bribes to get at Saddam Hussein's oil was an American company, AMEP Oil, and it is run by a gaggle of Texas oil men. Take a look at their board of directors here:
Texas turds
At a time when Saddam Hussein was under an embargo an American company was bribing officials to get at Iraq's oil. And this, after we fought a war with Iraq!
Benon Sevan is a disgrace and a fraud and he should be ejected by the UN at once. However, people should save some indignation for the Texas oilmen of AMEP Oil for placing their interests ahead of America's security. Well, that and the fact that bribing officials is illegal in it's own right.
What are the chances that Texas oilmen weren't "negotiating" with the UN without a little "support" from the Bush administration?
Corruption at the heart of the United Nations
You see, the company offering Mr. Sevan bribes to get at Saddam Hussein's oil was an American company, AMEP Oil, and it is run by a gaggle of Texas oil men. Take a look at their board of directors here:
Texas turds
At a time when Saddam Hussein was under an embargo an American company was bribing officials to get at Iraq's oil. And this, after we fought a war with Iraq!
Benon Sevan is a disgrace and a fraud and he should be ejected by the UN at once. However, people should save some indignation for the Texas oilmen of AMEP Oil for placing their interests ahead of America's security. Well, that and the fact that bribing officials is illegal in it's own right.
What are the chances that Texas oilmen weren't "negotiating" with the UN without a little "support" from the Bush administration?
Tuesday, August 09, 2005
Grieving mom frightens Bush
Mr. tough-talk, Mr. compassion, Mr. brush-clearing macho man continues to hide like a frightened child from Cindy Sheehan (a mother who lost a son to the Iraq war).
I say that if a parent of one of our fallen soldiers wants to meet the President (particularly while he is loafing on a 5-week vacation) then the President ought to meet them. You show respect to such people no matter how much brush requires clearing.
Is the President afraid to face the truth of his ideology and the cost of his lies?
Mr. President, There's Someone Waiting, and Waiting, to See You
I say that if a parent of one of our fallen soldiers wants to meet the President (particularly while he is loafing on a 5-week vacation) then the President ought to meet them. You show respect to such people no matter how much brush requires clearing.
Is the President afraid to face the truth of his ideology and the cost of his lies?
Mr. President, There's Someone Waiting, and Waiting, to See You
Support our troops at 13 mpg
As I was leaving the grocery store I saw a curious sight. There was one of those gargantuan SUVs with one of those ubiquitous "Support Our Troops" flag/ribbon magnets on it. I thought to myself, that right there is a failure of Republican leadership to communicate with the American people that it is time to curb our appetite for fossil fuel.
People don't realize that the more gas we use the more money we put in Saudi Arabia's pockets, and that 17 of the 19 911 hijackers were Saudi!
People don't realize that the Islamo-fascists that attacked us adhere to a fundamentalist version of Islam (Wahabi) that is bred, fed, and spread from Saudi Arabia!
For God sakes if you want to support the troops pedal a damn bicycle!
Then I got all riled up considering that Bush is gung-ho to go to Mars to see if there is life, when he should be more interested in seeing if he can save life on earth by combating global warming. Just imagine if we took that Mars-project money and used it to propagate wind-mills.
It all goes together in one vision. Put up windmills, solar, tidal power, and any other technologically advanced non-polluting, local power sources and you fight terrorism AND global warming.
Ride the bus to work and you fight terrorism.
Ride the subway and you fight terrorism.
Drive a Prius and you fight terrorism.
Drive a huge, gas-guzzling SUV in the city and you put money in our enemies hands.
It seems obvious, but perhaps more obvious is that Condi Rice had an oil tanker named after her and President Bush was in the Texas oil business himself.
People don't realize that the more gas we use the more money we put in Saudi Arabia's pockets, and that 17 of the 19 911 hijackers were Saudi!
People don't realize that the Islamo-fascists that attacked us adhere to a fundamentalist version of Islam (Wahabi) that is bred, fed, and spread from Saudi Arabia!
For God sakes if you want to support the troops pedal a damn bicycle!
Then I got all riled up considering that Bush is gung-ho to go to Mars to see if there is life, when he should be more interested in seeing if he can save life on earth by combating global warming. Just imagine if we took that Mars-project money and used it to propagate wind-mills.
It all goes together in one vision. Put up windmills, solar, tidal power, and any other technologically advanced non-polluting, local power sources and you fight terrorism AND global warming.
Ride the bus to work and you fight terrorism.
Ride the subway and you fight terrorism.
Drive a Prius and you fight terrorism.
Drive a huge, gas-guzzling SUV in the city and you put money in our enemies hands.
It seems obvious, but perhaps more obvious is that Condi Rice had an oil tanker named after her and President Bush was in the Texas oil business himself.
Monday, August 08, 2005
Clicking my heels
Somewhere over the rainbow
Skies are blue
And the dreams that you dare to dream
Really do come true
- Harold Arlen -
Has Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald handed out Grand Jury indictments to President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former AG John Ashcroft, reporter Judith Miller, and Senior Cheney advisor Mary Matalin?
Has Karl Rove become the icing on the cake with an indictment for Perjury?
Is it time for bluebirds to sing?
Friday, August 05, 2005
The Watchmaker's Ancestors
Since when does the President of the United States dictate to schools how and what to teach?
If you ask me it is a rather Castro-esque thing to do.
If you ask me America's children have fallen far enough behind the Chinese in math and science without letting a man that can't pronounce "nuclear" set educational policy for tens of millions of children.
Furthermore, the "intelligent design" or "watchmaker" theory is plagiarized straight from the Bible (see Wisdom of Solomon) and masquerades as science among only the hopelessly uncritical. This religious teaching does not belong in a fact-based discipline like a science course, except to demonstrate the shortcomings of an ideologically driven approach to learning.
If people want religion taught in the schools why should it be at the expense of science?
If people want their children to be that dumb, why don't they just stick to inbreeding and/or home-schooling?
Bibleology?
If you ask me it is a rather Castro-esque thing to do.
If you ask me America's children have fallen far enough behind the Chinese in math and science without letting a man that can't pronounce "nuclear" set educational policy for tens of millions of children.
Furthermore, the "intelligent design" or "watchmaker" theory is plagiarized straight from the Bible (see Wisdom of Solomon) and masquerades as science among only the hopelessly uncritical. This religious teaching does not belong in a fact-based discipline like a science course, except to demonstrate the shortcomings of an ideologically driven approach to learning.
If people want religion taught in the schools why should it be at the expense of science?
If people want their children to be that dumb, why don't they just stick to inbreeding and/or home-schooling?
Bibleology?
Thursday, August 04, 2005
Pining for Bill
I find myself missing former President Bill Clinton under whose leadership:
We had a 30 year low on unemployment
We had a 32 year low in welfare roles
We had a 27 year low in the crime rate
We had three years of surpluses in the budget for the first time in 70 years
We had the biggest increase in aid to university students in 50 years.
We had 22 million jobs created
We had 7 million families move out of poverty.
We had a drop in the number of abortions.
That's what happens when you shed ideas that don't work and embrace those that do.
We had a 30 year low on unemployment
We had a 32 year low in welfare roles
We had a 27 year low in the crime rate
We had three years of surpluses in the budget for the first time in 70 years
We had the biggest increase in aid to university students in 50 years.
We had 22 million jobs created
We had 7 million families move out of poverty.
We had a drop in the number of abortions.
That's what happens when you shed ideas that don't work and embrace those that do.
The religious left
Reading this article about the religious left fighting back this morning made me think about how easily Americans are divided.
Are you left or right?
Are you red or blue?
Are you gay or straight?
Are you religious or secular?
Do you support or oppose the Iraq war wholeheartedly?
Are you an environmentalist or a defender of ecocide?
Are you for or against guns?
Are you for or against abortion?
Are you for or against unions?
Are you for or against corporations?
Are you with or against France?
And so on...
The trouble with this politics of divide-and-conquer is that people start looking at every issue in black and white terms, and that is moronic.
For instance you can be an environmentalist, as I consider myself, without being against logging. I am for logging because I would rather people use bio-degradable, renewable, all-natural building products and an outdoor career strikes me as enjoyable (at least on some levels). I am, however, against indiscriminate harvesting techniques which plunder the landscape murderously. I am against spraying thousands of acres of forest land with herbicides which poisons the landscape and the wildlife. I am for wind-power wherever it can be installed, and the quicker the better.
I am both for and against guns, which some people call wishy-washy, but I consider practical. I am a gun owner and I hunt, however I see the folly of allowing guns in the hands of children, the insane, violent criminals, or urban settings (here I am speaking only of use, not ownership).
I am secular, but like most secular people (I think) I haven't convincingly disproved the notion of God to myself (i.e. "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"). I have only rejected the more popular religious views of God's benevolence. I guess you could say I look at organized religion like a community of the superstitious, but I feel no need to persecute them any more than people that are afraid of black cats crossing their paths. However, I do live an ethical life and try to treat others as I myself wish to be treated, not because I expect a Heaven exists, but because I believe that to love and to be loved is the only way to be happy.
When it comes to abortion I prefer to keep such a deeply personal decision out of the hands of government. In instances of rape, or when the well-being of the mother is in question I believe it is morally correct to allow for abortions. I view nothing so sadly as an unloved child (since I argue they turn out like neo-cons). Also, when a child will be born with a debilitating deformity (i.e. a hole in the brain or incurable painful conditions) then I also believe it is morally correct to allow for abortions. I believe the morning-after pill ought to be readily available, particularly to the young as they learn to cope with the most powerful of emotions. I argue that this does not "cheapen life" as many anti-abortionists charge, but rather allows prospective parents to choose to raise a family when they are prepared to act selflessly on behalf of their children, or in other words to cherish them. I also believe that most people are good people and do not treat the procedure of having an abortion lightly and that assertions to the contrary are propaganda.
When it comes to France, perhaps I am a clear-cut supporter. They are a free and open society that loves good food and good fun, they're cantankerous and argumentative and fantastic bakers. They sent us the statue of liberty. Their citizens resisted the Nazi's with more success than their army. They have a love/hate relationship with the British. And finally, when it comes to Iraq they did what a true-blue friend should, they told us we were wrong.
When it comes to unions I am mostly for them. My grandfather was an early union-man in the textile industry. When I asked him about it he said the mill wanted him to work seven days a week, with no overtime pay, when he was already working six days a week. Sunday, it should be pointed out, was an important day of worship to him and also the only day my grandfather had to spend with his family (8 children!). So, in response to corporate abuse (in my opinion) people joined and formed unions as a matter of self-defense (there is strength in numbers). My dad was also in a union, but he was a member as America's steel-industry went into decline (eventually he had to find a new career). In his case unions had already established the 40-hour workweek and a living wage, but had then started to fight for things uncompetitive like complicated seniority systems, over-zealous job protection (i.e. there was to be no picking-up-of-slack or cross-training). I also believe that in Poland unions turned a nation into a democracy, and that if we encouraged Iraqis organize into unions we'd be promoting deep democratic roots there.
I haven't touched on everything, but you see what I mean don't you? When presented with an either-or yes-no with-or-against choice you must reject the question.
Are you left or right?
Are you red or blue?
Are you gay or straight?
Are you religious or secular?
Do you support or oppose the Iraq war wholeheartedly?
Are you an environmentalist or a defender of ecocide?
Are you for or against guns?
Are you for or against abortion?
Are you for or against unions?
Are you for or against corporations?
Are you with or against France?
And so on...
The trouble with this politics of divide-and-conquer is that people start looking at every issue in black and white terms, and that is moronic.
For instance you can be an environmentalist, as I consider myself, without being against logging. I am for logging because I would rather people use bio-degradable, renewable, all-natural building products and an outdoor career strikes me as enjoyable (at least on some levels). I am, however, against indiscriminate harvesting techniques which plunder the landscape murderously. I am against spraying thousands of acres of forest land with herbicides which poisons the landscape and the wildlife. I am for wind-power wherever it can be installed, and the quicker the better.
I am both for and against guns, which some people call wishy-washy, but I consider practical. I am a gun owner and I hunt, however I see the folly of allowing guns in the hands of children, the insane, violent criminals, or urban settings (here I am speaking only of use, not ownership).
I am secular, but like most secular people (I think) I haven't convincingly disproved the notion of God to myself (i.e. "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"). I have only rejected the more popular religious views of God's benevolence. I guess you could say I look at organized religion like a community of the superstitious, but I feel no need to persecute them any more than people that are afraid of black cats crossing their paths. However, I do live an ethical life and try to treat others as I myself wish to be treated, not because I expect a Heaven exists, but because I believe that to love and to be loved is the only way to be happy.
When it comes to abortion I prefer to keep such a deeply personal decision out of the hands of government. In instances of rape, or when the well-being of the mother is in question I believe it is morally correct to allow for abortions. I view nothing so sadly as an unloved child (since I argue they turn out like neo-cons). Also, when a child will be born with a debilitating deformity (i.e. a hole in the brain or incurable painful conditions) then I also believe it is morally correct to allow for abortions. I believe the morning-after pill ought to be readily available, particularly to the young as they learn to cope with the most powerful of emotions. I argue that this does not "cheapen life" as many anti-abortionists charge, but rather allows prospective parents to choose to raise a family when they are prepared to act selflessly on behalf of their children, or in other words to cherish them. I also believe that most people are good people and do not treat the procedure of having an abortion lightly and that assertions to the contrary are propaganda.
When it comes to France, perhaps I am a clear-cut supporter. They are a free and open society that loves good food and good fun, they're cantankerous and argumentative and fantastic bakers. They sent us the statue of liberty. Their citizens resisted the Nazi's with more success than their army. They have a love/hate relationship with the British. And finally, when it comes to Iraq they did what a true-blue friend should, they told us we were wrong.
When it comes to unions I am mostly for them. My grandfather was an early union-man in the textile industry. When I asked him about it he said the mill wanted him to work seven days a week, with no overtime pay, when he was already working six days a week. Sunday, it should be pointed out, was an important day of worship to him and also the only day my grandfather had to spend with his family (8 children!). So, in response to corporate abuse (in my opinion) people joined and formed unions as a matter of self-defense (there is strength in numbers). My dad was also in a union, but he was a member as America's steel-industry went into decline (eventually he had to find a new career). In his case unions had already established the 40-hour workweek and a living wage, but had then started to fight for things uncompetitive like complicated seniority systems, over-zealous job protection (i.e. there was to be no picking-up-of-slack or cross-training). I also believe that in Poland unions turned a nation into a democracy, and that if we encouraged Iraqis organize into unions we'd be promoting deep democratic roots there.
I haven't touched on everything, but you see what I mean don't you? When presented with an either-or yes-no with-or-against choice you must reject the question.
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
14 US Marines killed in Western Iraq
14 US marines and a civilian interpreter were killed in Iraq today, bringing the death toll past 1800.
We will be welcomed as liberators.
Mission Accomplished!
We will be spoon fed by celebrators.
Democracy Accomplished!
Ooops.
We will be welcomed as liberators.
Mission Accomplished!
We will be spoon fed by celebrators.
Democracy Accomplished!
Ooops.
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
Bush end-runs democracy
When I first heard that President Bush appointed John Bolton during a Congressional recess, then had the audacity to insinuate Mr. Bolton's nomination was being held up by partisanship I screamed "George W. Bush isn't fit to reside in a democracy, let alone lead one, since he is afraid to face the people when they call him on his hair-brained ideas!"
Then I paused for reflection.
What I realized when I did so was that the President has a whole lot more opposition from within the Republican party than I realized. Truthfully, partisanship can't hold up anything if he can manage to at least get the support of his own party. Republicans control the House, Senate, Judiciary, and the Presidency and there are no effective brakes on Republican power except in circumstances when there isn't partisainship.
The truth is John Bolton is as bad an appointment for UN ambassador imaginable and lots of Republicans know it and refuse to truck this kind of foolishness. John Bolton is an angry shoe-pounder-type that by most accounts is abusive as a manager and a devottee of self-promotion. Not only that, but he is a seasoned UN hater and seems to have lied about WMDs to please his boss (affectionately known as *ss-kissing, brown-nosing, or ring-kissing). His immoral conduct seems to have been greatly appreciated by said boss.
After reflection then, I became happy and hopeful for my country again. Sure, for a while we'll have an ogre at the UN that is brash, brown-nosed, and likely widely disrespected at a time we could use a few allies, but nothing underscores the President's pigheaded and marginal status like this appointment. It also illustrates his lying abilities quite clearly to the rest of the world. Remember that trip he made to Europe recently when he told everyone he was ready to work with the world community? One can now classify such sentiments as another pack of lies.
So, my anger turned to cheerfulness. The President, it seems, is a lame duck clinging to stubborness and stupidity like a life-raft. Let us hope the current carries him swiftly into the history books where he is likely to be remembered as an abject failure as a leader on international and domestic issues, kinda like Harding.
Bolton details
Then I paused for reflection.
What I realized when I did so was that the President has a whole lot more opposition from within the Republican party than I realized. Truthfully, partisanship can't hold up anything if he can manage to at least get the support of his own party. Republicans control the House, Senate, Judiciary, and the Presidency and there are no effective brakes on Republican power except in circumstances when there isn't partisainship.
The truth is John Bolton is as bad an appointment for UN ambassador imaginable and lots of Republicans know it and refuse to truck this kind of foolishness. John Bolton is an angry shoe-pounder-type that by most accounts is abusive as a manager and a devottee of self-promotion. Not only that, but he is a seasoned UN hater and seems to have lied about WMDs to please his boss (affectionately known as *ss-kissing, brown-nosing, or ring-kissing). His immoral conduct seems to have been greatly appreciated by said boss.
After reflection then, I became happy and hopeful for my country again. Sure, for a while we'll have an ogre at the UN that is brash, brown-nosed, and likely widely disrespected at a time we could use a few allies, but nothing underscores the President's pigheaded and marginal status like this appointment. It also illustrates his lying abilities quite clearly to the rest of the world. Remember that trip he made to Europe recently when he told everyone he was ready to work with the world community? One can now classify such sentiments as another pack of lies.
So, my anger turned to cheerfulness. The President, it seems, is a lame duck clinging to stubborness and stupidity like a life-raft. Let us hope the current carries him swiftly into the history books where he is likely to be remembered as an abject failure as a leader on international and domestic issues, kinda like Harding.
Bolton details
Friday, July 29, 2005
The worms crawl in...
It is all too easy to ignore the implication of the following two sentences as we hustle and bustle about our daily routines:
1. All human beings must die.
2. I am a human being.
No matter how good you eat or what diet you follow you will die.
No matter how much you exercise you will die.
No matter how much you attend church you will die.
No matter how carefully you monitor your blood pressure you will die.
No matter how dutifully you shun danger you will die.
No matter how much money you save you will die.
No matter how much insurance you have you will die.
So will everyone that you know.
So will everyone that they know.
And all of their collective pets too.
Death is inescapable and it is an uncomfortable fact that we hide from in many different ways. We dismiss it "it is nothing". We deny it "there is an afterlife". We use intellectual diversion in the form of paradox to address it without addressing it. We have complicated estate planning and burial rituals, but we don't spend time pondering what it really means to die.
What does my death mean to me? Should I expect the time-period after my death to be just like the time period before my birth? What is the experience of nothing like?
1,788 US soldiers have a concrete answer to this most philosophical of questions thanks to the war in Iraq, which came courtesy of Republican leadership.
You hear these numbers bandied about and you lose track of the fact that death for even one person is a momentous thing. It's a pity that so many young lives are being ended for such an unjust cause as the ill-gotten war in Iraq.
Imagine facing this greatest of all questions, "to be or not to be" at such a young age.
1. All human beings must die.
2. I am a human being.
No matter how good you eat or what diet you follow you will die.
No matter how much you exercise you will die.
No matter how much you attend church you will die.
No matter how carefully you monitor your blood pressure you will die.
No matter how dutifully you shun danger you will die.
No matter how much money you save you will die.
No matter how much insurance you have you will die.
So will everyone that you know.
So will everyone that they know.
And all of their collective pets too.
Death is inescapable and it is an uncomfortable fact that we hide from in many different ways. We dismiss it "it is nothing". We deny it "there is an afterlife". We use intellectual diversion in the form of paradox to address it without addressing it. We have complicated estate planning and burial rituals, but we don't spend time pondering what it really means to die.
What does my death mean to me? Should I expect the time-period after my death to be just like the time period before my birth? What is the experience of nothing like?
1,788 US soldiers have a concrete answer to this most philosophical of questions thanks to the war in Iraq, which came courtesy of Republican leadership.
You hear these numbers bandied about and you lose track of the fact that death for even one person is a momentous thing. It's a pity that so many young lives are being ended for such an unjust cause as the ill-gotten war in Iraq.
Imagine facing this greatest of all questions, "to be or not to be" at such a young age.
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Republicans were once uniters
Josh Marshall in this excellent post suggests that, battling those responsible for the recent atrocity in London is made more difficult by our presence in Iraq. This paragraph illustrates the tone:
I would like to add to the discussion that it is time for we Americans to unite against our common enemies, both with each other and with the world community. Recognizing that Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and Poland share the same threat ought to mean that we can all work together to fight religious fundamentalism wherever it takes hold (whether at home or abroad).
For five years now President Bush has been dividing Americans and uniting our enemies and this latest tragedy in London ought to be enough to make him call a truce and work with Harry Reid and John Kerry to make America stronger. As Abraham Lincoln once said, A house divided against itself cannot stand.
But with respect to the folks who want to lasso this into a pillar of support for a disastrous policy in Iraq, frankly, we already knew terrorism was real. Most people are sick to death of our bumbling in Iraq because it's distracted us from actually defending ourselves.
I would like to add to the discussion that it is time for we Americans to unite against our common enemies, both with each other and with the world community. Recognizing that Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and Poland share the same threat ought to mean that we can all work together to fight religious fundamentalism wherever it takes hold (whether at home or abroad).
For five years now President Bush has been dividing Americans and uniting our enemies and this latest tragedy in London ought to be enough to make him call a truce and work with Harry Reid and John Kerry to make America stronger. As Abraham Lincoln once said, A house divided against itself cannot stand.
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Spurning allies
I've always been puzzled by the Republican failure to reach out to liberals in the aftermath of 911. This is because liberals hate everything about the Jihadis and would make a natural ally against them.
Consider:
Liberals fight for freedom of speech through the courts, through street protests, and through exercising their rights. Islamic Jihadis aren't interested in free speech for anyone but themselves.
Liberals fight for gender equality. Islamic Jihadis want women to cover, cower, and conform.
Liberals fight for religious tolerance, yet Islamic Jihadis promote a totalitarian faith that murders non-subscribers.
Liberals believe in expansive personal freedom, and that these freedoms are America's strength. Islamic Jihadis are opposed to the very principle of a self-guided life that pursues happiness.
Consider again:
When Al Quaeda attacked London and New York it attacked two very liberal cities. They didn't attack, for instance, a southern city widely known for it's racism and cultural conservatism.
Reconsider that:
If Al Quaeda "can't stand freedom" and attacked New York and London it must be because they associate freedom with liberal politics.
I simply cannot understand why Republicans have spent so much of their time attacking liberals recently. They are dividing their allies at home as effectively as their allies abroad.
Consider:
Liberals fight for freedom of speech through the courts, through street protests, and through exercising their rights. Islamic Jihadis aren't interested in free speech for anyone but themselves.
Liberals fight for gender equality. Islamic Jihadis want women to cover, cower, and conform.
Liberals fight for religious tolerance, yet Islamic Jihadis promote a totalitarian faith that murders non-subscribers.
Liberals believe in expansive personal freedom, and that these freedoms are America's strength. Islamic Jihadis are opposed to the very principle of a self-guided life that pursues happiness.
Consider again:
When Al Quaeda attacked London and New York it attacked two very liberal cities. They didn't attack, for instance, a southern city widely known for it's racism and cultural conservatism.
Reconsider that:
If Al Quaeda "can't stand freedom" and attacked New York and London it must be because they associate freedom with liberal politics.
I simply cannot understand why Republicans have spent so much of their time attacking liberals recently. They are dividing their allies at home as effectively as their allies abroad.
Tuesday, July 26, 2005
Wild speculation on the leak
One of the things that confuses me about the Valerie Plame affair is why Judith Miller of the New York Times went to jail and Matt Cooper of Time didn't.
Matt Cooper says that his source released him from his pledge of confidentiality, which I believe. What I wonder is why didn't Judith's source release her from confidentiality.
Here are a few different explanations (all wildly speculative):
1. Judith's source is not the same as Matt's source, and hers is not someone that can be outed (like Vice President Cheney or Condi Rice) without great embarrassment.
2. Judith and her source discussed something more damning to the Bush administration than Matt's source (like everyone was lying about WMD).
3. "No person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court".
4. Matt Cooper was scared and lying.
5. Matt Cooper's source seems to be Karl Rove. It could be that he has maintained enough principle not to send someone else to jail on his own behalf.
Isn't this fun?
Matt Cooper says that his source released him from his pledge of confidentiality, which I believe. What I wonder is why didn't Judith's source release her from confidentiality.
Here are a few different explanations (all wildly speculative):
1. Judith's source is not the same as Matt's source, and hers is not someone that can be outed (like Vice President Cheney or Condi Rice) without great embarrassment.
2. Judith and her source discussed something more damning to the Bush administration than Matt's source (like everyone was lying about WMD).
3. "No person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court".
4. Matt Cooper was scared and lying.
5. Matt Cooper's source seems to be Karl Rove. It could be that he has maintained enough principle not to send someone else to jail on his own behalf.
Isn't this fun?
Charles Evers, Republican.
Here is a fascinating perspective. Charles Evers is a black man from Mississippi that is in the Republican party. I don't know what to make of a man that loved Clinton but voted Republican anyway because he supported his party. It seems to me like that attitude puts America second.
But he is a very interesting person and his views deserve attention.
President Bush Doesn't Speak For Me
But he is a very interesting person and his views deserve attention.
President Bush Doesn't Speak For Me
Monday, July 25, 2005
Ooops
Point:
Counterpoint:
Ongoing terror in Iraq
"We will, in fact, be welcomed as liberators"
- Vice President Dick Cheney -
Counterpoint:
Ongoing terror in Iraq
Friday, July 22, 2005
New Clear Threat
Here is a report which might change your opinion of the effectiveness of the Bush administration when it comes to stemming the tide of WMD, that is if you hold the opinion that he is tough and competent:
Nook You Lar
Nook You Lar
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Not again
The BBC is reporting that three small blasts went off in London, although there seems to be confusion about the severity of this recent attack:
Tube cleared after small blasts
It's enough to make you think the US should focus some attention on al Quaeda, rather than stirring up more trouble in Iraq.
Tube cleared after small blasts
It's enough to make you think the US should focus some attention on al Quaeda, rather than stirring up more trouble in Iraq.
Spooky
We all know what Republican spinsters think about the Valerie Plame leak (i.e. gutter politics trump national security). What we need to focus on, though, is what CIA people think of it.
Here is a letter written by 11 of them, and we should all thank Josh Marshall for providing this on his blog:
Leak is spooky
Luckily for American security, polls indicate Republicans are willing to buck the party line on this one. I have culled a few points for your perusal below, but I suggest you read the entire memo and let it sink in.
Here, too, is a recent article written by Ray McGovern of Intelligence Professionals for Sanity:
Rove or America?
Does it look to you like the folks at the CIA are as complacent about the Rove/Libby leak as all the President's men?
CIA agents literally die for our freedom and it disgusts me that anybody would defend the actions of Rove or Scooter Libby after what they have done. You do not share this type of information with anyone unauthorized to receive it EVER, and particularly not the press!
Here is a letter written by 11 of them, and we should all thank Josh Marshall for providing this on his blog:
Leak is spooky
Luckily for American security, polls indicate Republicans are willing to buck the party line on this one. I have culled a few points for your perusal below, but I suggest you read the entire memo and let it sink in.
"we believe that the partisan attacks against Valerie Plame are sending a deeply discouraging message to the men and women who have agreed to work undercover for their nation'’s security."
We believe it is appropriate for the President to move proactively to dismiss from office or administratively punish any official who participated in any way in revealing Valerie Plame's status. Such an act by the President would send an unambiguous message that leaks of this nature will not be tolerated and would be consistent with his duties as the Commander-in-Chief.
Here, too, is a recent article written by Ray McGovern of Intelligence Professionals for Sanity:
Rove or America?
Does it look to you like the folks at the CIA are as complacent about the Rove/Libby leak as all the President's men?
CIA agents literally die for our freedom and it disgusts me that anybody would defend the actions of Rove or Scooter Libby after what they have done. You do not share this type of information with anyone unauthorized to receive it EVER, and particularly not the press!
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
All the same to you?
In October 2001 who said,
Answer here
In October of 2003, who said,
Answer here
Who now says they will
Is it all the same to you, or does it sound like the walk don't match the talk?
In related news, here is a poll which shows that only 25% of the respondents felt that the Bush administration was cooperating with the investigation into the Valerie Plame leak.
You don't get those kinds of numbers without some solid bipartisan mistrust.
"it is unacceptable behavior to leak classified information when we have troops at risk."?
Answer here
In October of 2003, who said,
"If anyone in this administration was responsible for the leaking of classified information, they would no longer work in this administration."?
Answer here
Who now says they will
"fire any aid that committed a crime (in the disclosure of a CIA agent's identity)"?
Answer here
Is it all the same to you, or does it sound like the walk don't match the talk?
In related news, here is a poll which shows that only 25% of the respondents felt that the Bush administration was cooperating with the investigation into the Valerie Plame leak.
You don't get those kinds of numbers without some solid bipartisan mistrust.
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
All work and no pay
I rarely shop at Walmart because I don't like the way they treat their employees. I consider my choice an opting-out of the process that is destroying the American dream for future generations.
Costco, though, has a different story. If you have one near you, shopping there will support this kind of business climate:
the Anti-Wal-Mart
Read those wall street analyst pieces of advice carefully. They sound closed-minded and ideologically driven to me. That is, when faced with facts contrary to their opinions their thinking ought to change, but they instead seem intent on sinking a rising ship.
No wonder hard-working people have such a hard time finding work that pays a living wage!
Good for Mr. Sinegal for rebuffing their efforts. I suppose he can feel vindicated with stock options that are worth $150 million dollars and managing a company whose sales went from zero to $3 billion in less than six years.
If you don't have one near you, then you can always shop on-line here: Costco
What kind of society do you want to live in, dog eat dog or neighbor helping neighbor?
The choices you make matter.
Costco, though, has a different story. If you have one near you, shopping there will support this kind of business climate:
the Anti-Wal-Mart
Read those wall street analyst pieces of advice carefully. They sound closed-minded and ideologically driven to me. That is, when faced with facts contrary to their opinions their thinking ought to change, but they instead seem intent on sinking a rising ship.
No wonder hard-working people have such a hard time finding work that pays a living wage!
Good for Mr. Sinegal for rebuffing their efforts. I suppose he can feel vindicated with stock options that are worth $150 million dollars and managing a company whose sales went from zero to $3 billion in less than six years.
If you don't have one near you, then you can always shop on-line here: Costco
What kind of society do you want to live in, dog eat dog or neighbor helping neighbor?
The choices you make matter.
Monday, July 18, 2005
Beating about the Bush
One thing I like about Noam Chomsky is his use of language, which is hardly surprising since he is by trade an MIT linguist. Be that as it may, when he verbally assaults someone it is with direct blows to the face.
Take this article, for instance, called It's imperialism, stupid
However, in American journalistic circles they'd rather give voice to people like Mike Savage, Joe Scarborough, Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, and their troupe.
Perhaps that is where blogs should come in? Perhaps blogs should amplify the voice of the qualified expert instead of the ignoble Savage?
That's my view anyway. Enjoy.
Take this article, for instance, called It's imperialism, stupid
However, in American journalistic circles they'd rather give voice to people like Mike Savage, Joe Scarborough, Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, and their troupe.
Perhaps that is where blogs should come in? Perhaps blogs should amplify the voice of the qualified expert instead of the ignoble Savage?
That's my view anyway. Enjoy.
Friday, July 15, 2005
Anchors away!
I believe that fighting for justice ought to be the cause célèbre of democrats (whether social justice, Constitutional justice, individual justice, or fairness issues). As such it is absolutely essential that democrats attack Karl Rove and George W. Bush on the Valerie Plame leak. Not to do so is to become what voters consider bad democrats, that is, "one that doesn't stand for anything". What voters mean when they say that is a democrat that doesn't fight for justice.
Howard Dean is not that type of democrat. When he sees corruption (perhaps even treason in this case) he does the right thing and calls the Bush administration to task. Now, if he can use the language of justice (fairplay, common security, moral behavior, and so on) then he'd be cooking with gas:
Howard Dean agrees with George Bush (H.W. that is)
In Karl Rove's case I guarantee that many prominent Republicans will not defend him. When you burn as many bridges as Mr. Rove did, you find yourself stranded.
Load for bear, or perhaps even elephant Mr. Reid, and press, press, press this issue until the Bush administration has to talk about it.
And you, Mr. John Kerry, your very presence serves to remind people what a loathsome character Karl Rove is. Remind voters how he was not below maligning your service to America, or John McCain's either, then link that with his outing of a CIA agent. It's all well and good to target a politician, even one that was a prisoner of war and a hero by most peoples standards, but it is another thing entirely to expose a covert officers identity during wartime. That is politics taken too far. That is extremism.
It should be pointed out that this line of attack is perfect before the expected nomination of a radical judge.
The American people can understand this leak business and can see the depravity of the situation. What they need to see now is Democrats doing something about it.
In the words of James Carville, "If your opponent is drowning throw him an anchor".
Howard Dean is not that type of democrat. When he sees corruption (perhaps even treason in this case) he does the right thing and calls the Bush administration to task. Now, if he can use the language of justice (fairplay, common security, moral behavior, and so on) then he'd be cooking with gas:
Howard Dean agrees with George Bush (H.W. that is)
In Karl Rove's case I guarantee that many prominent Republicans will not defend him. When you burn as many bridges as Mr. Rove did, you find yourself stranded.
Load for bear, or perhaps even elephant Mr. Reid, and press, press, press this issue until the Bush administration has to talk about it.
And you, Mr. John Kerry, your very presence serves to remind people what a loathsome character Karl Rove is. Remind voters how he was not below maligning your service to America, or John McCain's either, then link that with his outing of a CIA agent. It's all well and good to target a politician, even one that was a prisoner of war and a hero by most peoples standards, but it is another thing entirely to expose a covert officers identity during wartime. That is politics taken too far. That is extremism.
It should be pointed out that this line of attack is perfect before the expected nomination of a radical judge.
The American people can understand this leak business and can see the depravity of the situation. What they need to see now is Democrats doing something about it.
In the words of James Carville, "If your opponent is drowning throw him an anchor".
Thursday, July 14, 2005
Britain's brave Brits
Here is an article by John Simpson (a BBC world affairs editor) which illustrates the British approach to dealing with terrorist attacks. It requires extraordinary commitment to New Hampshire's motto "Live free or die":
London bombs need calm response
By contrast, American conservatives seem to believe that to defeat terrorism we need warfare, and one global in scope at that. I'm not sure upon what data they have drawn this conclusion, but it seems awful dear to them. That's too bad, because on Clinton's watch police action caught those responsible for bombing the world trade center without any privacy-invading Patriot act.
ADDENDUM: Here is a site which shows what British are made of.
London bombs need calm response
By contrast, American conservatives seem to believe that to defeat terrorism we need warfare, and one global in scope at that. I'm not sure upon what data they have drawn this conclusion, but it seems awful dear to them. That's too bad, because on Clinton's watch police action caught those responsible for bombing the world trade center without any privacy-invading Patriot act.
ADDENDUM: Here is a site which shows what British are made of.
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
What kind of man is Joseph Wilson?
While the tempest storms around Karl Rove, a man that smeared both John Kerry's and John McCain's service records, and a man that started a false whispering campaign about Anne Richards being a lesbian, it is important to realize that this is the type of person President Bush surrounds himself with.
The type of person that President Bush or his staff has punished is someone like Joseph Wilson.
What type of person is Joseph Wilson?
While ambassador of the US in Iraq in 1990 he was protecting Americans in the embassy there. Saddam Hussein told him that he needed to "register" the guests or face execution. Here is a description of his response in his own words
Excerpted from "The Politics of Truth: Inside the Lies that Led to War and Betrayed My Wife's CIA Identity," by Joseph Wilson.
Which type of person would you rather have bending the President's ear, Rove or Wilson?
Which person is more loyal to America, one that would die to protect Americans, or one that would endager an American CIA operative?
The type of person that President Bush or his staff has punished is someone like Joseph Wilson.
What type of person is Joseph Wilson?
While ambassador of the US in Iraq in 1990 he was protecting Americans in the embassy there. Saddam Hussein told him that he needed to "register" the guests or face execution. Here is a description of his response in his own words
One of these briefings took place on September 20, 1990. The Iraqis had circulated a diplomatic note to all embassies directing them to register citizens in their care with the appropriate authorities. Capital punishment was threatened for those who failed to comply, the implication being that even diplomatic personnel could be subject to this decree. However, registration could be accomplished only by personal appearance at the appropriate office, and our experience had been that Americans appearing were taken hostage. It was clearly a way for the Iraqis to replenish their stock of hostages. The choice, theoretically, was either to turn over Americans or to defy the note and risk execution.
I thought this was a tailor-made opportunity to confront the authorities over their increasingly draconian measures. I decided to give copies of the note to the press attending the briefing that morning, and then, to underscore the threat of execution, I asked the Marine security guard to fashion a hangman’s noose for me to wear. I wanted to make the point that faced with the choice of sacrificing Americans under my protection or suffering capital punishment, my response to Saddam was if he wants to execute me for keeping Americans from being taken hostage, I will bring my own f---ing rope, as I told the reporters that morning.
Excerpted from "The Politics of Truth: Inside the Lies that Led to War and Betrayed My Wife's CIA Identity," by Joseph Wilson.
Which type of person would you rather have bending the President's ear, Rove or Wilson?
Which person is more loyal to America, one that would die to protect Americans, or one that would endager an American CIA operative?
Any cattle with that hat Mr. President?
Scott McClellan, speaking for the Whitehouse on October 6, 2003 said, "If anyone in this administration was responsible for the leaking of classified information, they would no longer work in this administration."
You can watch President Bush and Scott McClellan both talk tough here: tah-dah
Will there be some tough action to back up the tough talking, or will the President lie to the American people again on matters of national security?
If you want to add your name to a call to fire Karl Rove then all you have to do is click this link Fire Rove.
You can watch President Bush and Scott McClellan both talk tough here: tah-dah
Will there be some tough action to back up the tough talking, or will the President lie to the American people again on matters of national security?
If you want to add your name to a call to fire Karl Rove then all you have to do is click this link Fire Rove.
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Plame-leaker on ropes?
George HW Bush once called the type of person that exposed an under-cover CIA agent "the lowest form of traitor". His strong conviction led him to lobby for the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. Now, it appears that Karl Rove is involved in leaking the identity of Valerie Plame:
Traitor Rove?
While the press wonders if Karl Rove will have to "step down", he could be in for a lot more hot water than that (if George HW Bush has his way?), since the leak was made during a time of war.
See the Intelligence Identities Protection Act
This is serious stuff and I'm more than normally glad my name isn't Karl Rove this morning.
Also one wonders why a person like Rove even had knowledge of CIA affairs to begin with. Isn't the person that told Rove about this guilty of dispensing classified information about the identity of an undercover agent?
And finally, if Rove is guilty and charged it couldn't happen to a more deserving character. I don't expect too many people to go out on a limb for him.
ADDENDUM:
I think the media is beginning to tire of being played for patsies by the Bush administration and this story coalesces their ire directed Rove's way. My favorite quote is this one:
Curiously the article ends far off course and winds up with a GOP slam of Hillary Clinton, so there is something for everyone here. I suppose Howard Kurtz considers it fair-and-balanced to repeat Hillary-bashing because Karl Rove was caught with his pants down. I don't. I consider it an attempt to equate treason with joking that the president acts like Alfred E. Newman, or to paint Democrats concern that there is a traitor in the White House as somehow partisan.
But hey, why quibble when the press is starting to do an adult job of it's job, which is to question authority for the people.
ADDENDUM 2
My favorite quote regarding Mr. Rove has already been usurped by the Bull Moose blogger (Marshall Whitman). It is this:
Traitor Rove?
While the press wonders if Karl Rove will have to "step down", he could be in for a lot more hot water than that (if George HW Bush has his way?), since the leak was made during a time of war.
See the Intelligence Identities Protection Act
This is serious stuff and I'm more than normally glad my name isn't Karl Rove this morning.
Also one wonders why a person like Rove even had knowledge of CIA affairs to begin with. Isn't the person that told Rove about this guilty of dispensing classified information about the identity of an undercover agent?
And finally, if Rove is guilty and charged it couldn't happen to a more deserving character. I don't expect too many people to go out on a limb for him.
ADDENDUM:
I think the media is beginning to tire of being played for patsies by the Bush administration and this story coalesces their ire directed Rove's way. My favorite quote is this one:
Under the best case scenario, if Rove's conversations about Joseph Wilson's wife were not technically illegal, we still have the president's top political aide covering up a White House lie by smearing an opponent, going after his wife, and in the process 'accidentally' exposing an undercover CIA agent. For the White House, that's the best case scenario.
Full article
Curiously the article ends far off course and winds up with a GOP slam of Hillary Clinton, so there is something for everyone here. I suppose Howard Kurtz considers it fair-and-balanced to repeat Hillary-bashing because Karl Rove was caught with his pants down. I don't. I consider it an attempt to equate treason with joking that the president acts like Alfred E. Newman, or to paint Democrats concern that there is a traitor in the White House as somehow partisan.
But hey, why quibble when the press is starting to do an adult job of it's job, which is to question authority for the people.
ADDENDUM 2
My favorite quote regarding Mr. Rove has already been usurped by the Bull Moose blogger (Marshall Whitman). It is this:
Short of a criminal indictment, Rove will remain in place. For Bush to get rid of Rove would be like Charlie McCarthy firing Edgar Bergen.
Monday, July 11, 2005
In worse shape
Time magazine has a new article called:
Why Iraq Has Made Us Less Safe
I think that when enough of our troops die that Americans will begin to realize they've been bamboozled by Bush into giving up their children for an ill-gotten war that made them less safe, but until then it is a perverse wait.
On one side of the scale there is the steady, bald-faced lying campaign waged by the Bush administration that is ever-more defensive. Also there are the constant distractions provided by T.V. like shark attacks, hurricanes, celebrity exploits, and "reality" programs.
On the other side of the scale there are dead Iraqi and American GI bodies piling up. Also the number of global terrorist attacks are increasing. Our debt, mostly funded by communist China, is piling up.
Sooner or later miss Justice's scale is going to tip against the Bush administration and all that is required is to wait, but like I said it is a perverse wait.
Why Iraq Has Made Us Less Safe
I think that when enough of our troops die that Americans will begin to realize they've been bamboozled by Bush into giving up their children for an ill-gotten war that made them less safe, but until then it is a perverse wait.
On one side of the scale there is the steady, bald-faced lying campaign waged by the Bush administration that is ever-more defensive. Also there are the constant distractions provided by T.V. like shark attacks, hurricanes, celebrity exploits, and "reality" programs.
On the other side of the scale there are dead Iraqi and American GI bodies piling up. Also the number of global terrorist attacks are increasing. Our debt, mostly funded by communist China, is piling up.
Sooner or later miss Justice's scale is going to tip against the Bush administration and all that is required is to wait, but like I said it is a perverse wait.
Saturday, July 09, 2005
Here's an idea
I am not really ready to write about the London bombings yet. An event like that needs to seep into my mind before I can send anything out.
However, while watching the Harry Potter euphoria bubble inflate it struck me that J.K. Rowling ought to release The Half Blood Prince in London this week.
They've had a bad week in London and this could be just the thing (a fairytale!) to help them through a rough time.
It would be a small gesture, really, but wouldn't it be a nice treat for the children of the Union Jack?
However, while watching the Harry Potter euphoria bubble inflate it struck me that J.K. Rowling ought to release The Half Blood Prince in London this week.
They've had a bad week in London and this could be just the thing (a fairytale!) to help them through a rough time.
It would be a small gesture, really, but wouldn't it be a nice treat for the children of the Union Jack?
Friday, July 08, 2005
Iraq and Iran team up
Iraq and Iran have signed a military agreement:
Details here...
Is this according to plan, or is it an end result of poor judgement?
I guess the latter.
Details here...
Is this according to plan, or is it an end result of poor judgement?
I guess the latter.
Egyptian diplomat murdered
One June 22nd US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice said she hoped "Arab nations would send ambassadors to Baghdad and generally upgrade their diplomatic missions to show support for the Shiite-dominated government."
Source
On July 7th, 2005 the Egyptian foregin ministry confirmed that Egypt's top envoy to Iraq has been executed:
Story
I wonder if Ihab el-Sherif's presence in Iraq had anything to do with Ms. Rice's request?
Source
On July 7th, 2005 the Egyptian foregin ministry confirmed that Egypt's top envoy to Iraq has been executed:
Story
I wonder if Ihab el-Sherif's presence in Iraq had anything to do with Ms. Rice's request?
Thursday, July 07, 2005
Bombs explode in London
Bombs are most likely the cause for explosions that damaged at least one of London's iconic double-decker buses and an Underground subway:
Breaking news...
London police caution that it is too early to tell what/who is responsible for the blasts.
ADDENDUM
DEBKAfile reports that Al Quaeda is responsible for the explosions:
Story here...
Breaking news...
London police caution that it is too early to tell what/who is responsible for the blasts.
ADDENDUM
DEBKAfile reports that Al Quaeda is responsible for the explosions:
Story here...
Paul flippin' Harvey
I grew up hearing the voice of Paul Harvey on the radio. He'd make observations kind of the way Andy Rooney does on 60 minutes and was sandwiched between radio auctions and ballroom music. His signature line is, "and now, the rest of the story..."
Well, recently Mr. Harvey surprised listeners by sounding more like Anne Coulter and calling for more American brutality in our foreign policy.
Here's what he said
I find it troubling whenever anyone apes for more violence, more nukes, and more biological warfare, or else equates petulance with good foreign policy. This Cain-inspired, fear-motivated, apocalypse cheerleading is extraordinarily harmful to humanity.
Must we perish together as fools?
Well, recently Mr. Harvey surprised listeners by sounding more like Anne Coulter and calling for more American brutality in our foreign policy.
Here's what he said
I find it troubling whenever anyone apes for more violence, more nukes, and more biological warfare, or else equates petulance with good foreign policy. This Cain-inspired, fear-motivated, apocalypse cheerleading is extraordinarily harmful to humanity.
Must we perish together as fools?
Wednesday, July 06, 2005
Tuesday, July 05, 2005
Live 8
After posting about the association between Democrats and Justice I came across this quote from Bono at the Live 8 concert in London. While Bono is not to my knowledge a Democrat his language exemplifies what a Democrat should sound like:
Wouldn't you rather hear this simple, hopeful, inspiring language from Democrats?
"So this is our moment. This is our time. This is our chance to stand up for what's right. We're not looking for charity, we're looking for justice. We cannot fix every problem, but the ones we can, we must."
- Bono -
Wouldn't you rather hear this simple, hopeful, inspiring language from Democrats?
Democrats in a word
A popular Conservative view holds that liberal politics is the result of the guilt of privilege. Thinking about this for a while allowed me to see that there is a sliver of truth in that notion, but that it really misses the mark. Furthermore, the mark is important because it allows Democrats to see who they are and why they are here.
The guilt, you see, stems from a longing for justice, and in the case of privileged Democrats the longing is for economic justice. There is nothing to be ashamed of there, unless you consider the teachings of Jesus Christ unethical.
Then, the big picture started to hit me:
Black people support Democrats because they are interested in social justice.
Unions seek economic justice ala the rich Democrats but from the vantage point of the bottom of the barrel.
Trial Lawyers are looking for criminal justice.
What Democrats stand for, then, is breathed in a word: Justice.
So, get out there and start talking about social justice, and criminal justice, and economic justice, and level playing fields, and equal protection under the law, since that is speaking from the heart of a Democrat.
The guilt, you see, stems from a longing for justice, and in the case of privileged Democrats the longing is for economic justice. There is nothing to be ashamed of there, unless you consider the teachings of Jesus Christ unethical.
Then, the big picture started to hit me:
Black people support Democrats because they are interested in social justice.
Unions seek economic justice ala the rich Democrats but from the vantage point of the bottom of the barrel.
Trial Lawyers are looking for criminal justice.
What Democrats stand for, then, is breathed in a word: Justice.
So, get out there and start talking about social justice, and criminal justice, and economic justice, and level playing fields, and equal protection under the law, since that is speaking from the heart of a Democrat.
Saturday, July 02, 2005
Stay the mistakes?
Are we winning Iraqi hearts and minds when we execute the 21-year-old cousin of Iraq's ambassador to the UN?
Smile on your brother
Smile on your brother
Friday, July 01, 2005
Is a traitor about to be exposed?
How ironic would it be if a law promoted by George HW Bush, namely the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, was used to prosecute a member of Jr's administration for exposing Valerie Plame as a covert intelligence agent?
That possibility may be closer to reality as TIME Inc. has decided to release confidential sources in the case:
Norman Pearlstine says...
Of course TIME wouldn't be in this position if Jr. had the ethics to demand the name of the leaker from his cabinet, but the President likes to take toughness only so far as talk.
That possibility may be closer to reality as TIME Inc. has decided to release confidential sources in the case:
Norman Pearlstine says...
Of course TIME wouldn't be in this position if Jr. had the ethics to demand the name of the leaker from his cabinet, but the President likes to take toughness only so far as talk.
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Stay the course?
The President likes to use the phrase "Stay the Course" as if it were an unassailable reason to continue a policy of failure in Iraq. It seems to me that there are times when you want to stay the course and times when you wish to change the course.
For instance, you might want to change the course if you are following a man that has leapt off a tall building. You might want to change your course if you are steaming towards the precipice of a waterfall. You might want to change your course if you inadvertently find yourself in an angry bull's pasture.
I want to argue that you "Stay the Course" when there is a high probability that doing so will achieve the goals which shaped the course, without incurring losses unacceptable for your gains.
The goals which we are striving for are hard to pin down, but today appear to be the creation of a peaceful, free, and democratic Iraq. The original goals which set us on our course were: smoking out Osama Bin Laden, removing fleets of unmanned Ariel vehicles, removing tons of Sarin gas, Mustard gas, and Anthrax, removing mobile biological weapons labs, removing a nuclear arsenal, and of course removing Saddam Hussein himself from power.
The losses we are incurring as we go are killed and wounded American soldiers, killed and wounded Iraqi civilians, billions of dollars expended, and international pariah status for ourselves.
The task of making Iraq safe for democracy is not so clear-cut and is somewhat subjective. However, I want to argue that Iraqi perception of our presence is critically important to our likely success.
And...
Based upon news reports and interviews with Iraqis it seems that their access to water, gas, and electricity is unpredictable and measurably worse than it was under Saddam Hussein. Many cannot find jobs. In many places the sewers aren't working. Many Iraqis argue that while Saddam was a brute and they are happy to be rid of him, that so far they experience more unpredictable danger in their daily lives under our occupation. That is, they considered Saddam to be a predictable danger and our presence there an unpredictable danger. At best I would say they are ambivalent about us, patient and hopeful but not happy with their current lot in life.
Unless we want to spend all our time trying to put out forest-fires of anti-occupation activity then we need to generate conditions succulent for democracy to flourish, namely Iraqi cooperation. In fact, I argue that if the Iraqi people fight against our goals then democracy is unobtainable by its' very definition (government of the people, for the people, by the people). And that means, as Donald Rumsfailed succinctly said, we want to win Iraqi hearts and minds.
Well...
Are we winning Iraqi hearts and minds when Abu Ghraib is still open for business?
Are we winning Iraqi hearts and minds when we shoot at an unarmed, wounded prisoner in a mosque?
Are we winning Iraqi hearts and minds when we use interrogation techniques offensive to their religion?
Are we winning Iraqi hearts and minds when we build permanent bases on Iraqi soil?
Are we winning Iraqi hearts and minds when we smash ancient cities like Fallujah?
I argue that nothing is more important to our goal than to change the course which led to the events listed above. If the current culture is allowed to continue then we will not succeed because the people of Iraq will abandon us, and once that happens we will have to choose between governing like Saddam (with fear) or going.
For instance, you might want to change the course if you are following a man that has leapt off a tall building. You might want to change your course if you are steaming towards the precipice of a waterfall. You might want to change your course if you inadvertently find yourself in an angry bull's pasture.
I want to argue that you "Stay the Course" when there is a high probability that doing so will achieve the goals which shaped the course, without incurring losses unacceptable for your gains.
The goals which we are striving for are hard to pin down, but today appear to be the creation of a peaceful, free, and democratic Iraq. The original goals which set us on our course were: smoking out Osama Bin Laden, removing fleets of unmanned Ariel vehicles, removing tons of Sarin gas, Mustard gas, and Anthrax, removing mobile biological weapons labs, removing a nuclear arsenal, and of course removing Saddam Hussein himself from power.
The losses we are incurring as we go are killed and wounded American soldiers, killed and wounded Iraqi civilians, billions of dollars expended, and international pariah status for ourselves.
The task of making Iraq safe for democracy is not so clear-cut and is somewhat subjective. However, I want to argue that Iraqi perception of our presence is critically important to our likely success.
And...
Based upon news reports and interviews with Iraqis it seems that their access to water, gas, and electricity is unpredictable and measurably worse than it was under Saddam Hussein. Many cannot find jobs. In many places the sewers aren't working. Many Iraqis argue that while Saddam was a brute and they are happy to be rid of him, that so far they experience more unpredictable danger in their daily lives under our occupation. That is, they considered Saddam to be a predictable danger and our presence there an unpredictable danger. At best I would say they are ambivalent about us, patient and hopeful but not happy with their current lot in life.
Unless we want to spend all our time trying to put out forest-fires of anti-occupation activity then we need to generate conditions succulent for democracy to flourish, namely Iraqi cooperation. In fact, I argue that if the Iraqi people fight against our goals then democracy is unobtainable by its' very definition (government of the people, for the people, by the people). And that means, as Donald Rumsfailed succinctly said, we want to win Iraqi hearts and minds.
Well...
Are we winning Iraqi hearts and minds when Abu Ghraib is still open for business?
Are we winning Iraqi hearts and minds when we shoot at an unarmed, wounded prisoner in a mosque?
Are we winning Iraqi hearts and minds when we use interrogation techniques offensive to their religion?
Are we winning Iraqi hearts and minds when we build permanent bases on Iraqi soil?
Are we winning Iraqi hearts and minds when we smash ancient cities like Fallujah?
I argue that nothing is more important to our goal than to change the course which led to the events listed above. If the current culture is allowed to continue then we will not succeed because the people of Iraq will abandon us, and once that happens we will have to choose between governing like Saddam (with fear) or going.
Wednesday, June 29, 2005
Fast forgotten
President Bush's speech was predictable and unenlightening and I expect it to fade from view very quickly.
He's still out to bamboozle the American people by linking 911 and his ill-gotten war in Iraq. He's still trying to divide Americans, rather than uniting them. He's still leaving his incompetent defense secretary in place. And he's still engaging in happy-talk and empty-bravado.
But...
Once your credibility is gone you cannot lie with success. While the president tried to again use our troops as props in his pageant, they refused to play along and clapped exactly once and even then had to be coerced into it.
Here's what I've learned. When you have war whose purpose is to ward off an actual threat (from a fleet of unmanned, aerial, WMD-laden vehicles, say) there is no need to lie to the American people. They will sacrifice and they will fight like hell to defend America. But, when you lie to Americans and their children start to die and the threat evaporates they lose respect for you.
A President is essentially a confidence peddler and nothing is more undignified in a President than pomp devoid of trust, and that is where we are now. Our President is a used-car salesman peddling a lemon and we aren't interested.
This is a palpable feeling which now envelopes President Bush. If he weren't so arrogant I might be capable of compassion for him, but instead I find myself uninterested in him or his likely B.S. In other words I am waiting for the next administration and it's as if he doesn't exist anymore.
Here is the full text of the President's speech. There's nothing new in it and I don't trust the messenger, but a good way to leverage the internets is to provide the whole context and not simply an interpretation.
Lonely and pathetic
He's still out to bamboozle the American people by linking 911 and his ill-gotten war in Iraq. He's still trying to divide Americans, rather than uniting them. He's still leaving his incompetent defense secretary in place. And he's still engaging in happy-talk and empty-bravado.
But...
Once your credibility is gone you cannot lie with success. While the president tried to again use our troops as props in his pageant, they refused to play along and clapped exactly once and even then had to be coerced into it.
Here's what I've learned. When you have war whose purpose is to ward off an actual threat (from a fleet of unmanned, aerial, WMD-laden vehicles, say) there is no need to lie to the American people. They will sacrifice and they will fight like hell to defend America. But, when you lie to Americans and their children start to die and the threat evaporates they lose respect for you.
A President is essentially a confidence peddler and nothing is more undignified in a President than pomp devoid of trust, and that is where we are now. Our President is a used-car salesman peddling a lemon and we aren't interested.
This is a palpable feeling which now envelopes President Bush. If he weren't so arrogant I might be capable of compassion for him, but instead I find myself uninterested in him or his likely B.S. In other words I am waiting for the next administration and it's as if he doesn't exist anymore.
Here is the full text of the President's speech. There's nothing new in it and I don't trust the messenger, but a good way to leverage the internets is to provide the whole context and not simply an interpretation.
Lonely and pathetic
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
Meanwhile back at the ranch
On May 25th, 2004 President Bush used all of the bravado at his command and promised to tear down Abu Ghraib. For those with short memories here is a refresher link:
We will demolish the Abu Ghraib prison
About a year later, on June 28th 2005 that bravado is not only unfulfilled, we have been adding people to Abu Ghraib in excess of its capacity:
Past the normal capacity for both Abu Ghraib and Camp Bucca
Our President is all hat and no cattle.
We will demolish the Abu Ghraib prison
About a year later, on June 28th 2005 that bravado is not only unfulfilled, we have been adding people to Abu Ghraib in excess of its capacity:
Past the normal capacity for both Abu Ghraib and Camp Bucca
Our President is all hat and no cattle.
Thursday, June 23, 2005
What to do about Iraq
Some conservatives have the perplexing position that being correct about the war in Iraq makes Democrats weak on national defense. First, we were dismissed as unpatriotic, or perhaps not properly "supportive" of a President who prematurely declared our mission there accomplished (which frankly still seems absurd).
Then, once we were exposed as correct by the facts on the ground, conservatives adopted the new charge that the mess was somehow our fault, by reason of improper support of a President who mismanaged nearly every aspect of the war.
My conservative friends, isn't it time you started to listen to the helps that come from reason? The solution to the war in Iraq can be paraphrased like so, "Change the friggin' course!"
The unabridged version of the solution was articulated by Senator Joseph Biden, who strikes Marshall Whitman as rather like Truman:
Intelligent Foreign Policy
I just couldn't resist a post on this subject. It's too important a speech to ignore.
Then, once we were exposed as correct by the facts on the ground, conservatives adopted the new charge that the mess was somehow our fault, by reason of improper support of a President who mismanaged nearly every aspect of the war.
My conservative friends, isn't it time you started to listen to the helps that come from reason? The solution to the war in Iraq can be paraphrased like so, "Change the friggin' course!"
The unabridged version of the solution was articulated by Senator Joseph Biden, who strikes Marshall Whitman as rather like Truman:
Intelligent Foreign Policy
I just couldn't resist a post on this subject. It's too important a speech to ignore.
Saturday, June 18, 2005
Thursday, April 21, 2005
No mas
I think I'm going to be hanging up my blogging spurs. I got started on a whim, simply intending to find out what the heck a blog was, and became hooked.
I had found that my pent-up political anger was spilling into my conversations with friends and family and blogging gave me an outlet for my rants. I consider it to have been quite healthy for my psyche as well as beneficial for my social life to unburden myself of missiles like the Abu Gharaib scandal, the swift boat veterans for dishonoring the service of war heroes, Patriot Acts I and II, the plundered treasury, the trade imbalances, the cost and toll of the Iraq war, the arrogance of Rumsfeld, the uncritical press, Blair's brown-nosing, and the growing culture of fascism in America.
I have tried to talk about the world around me from my own perspective in the service of telling my truth steadily and broadly. On occasion I wrote odd short poems hyperlinked to the stories that inspired them, which I expect is a medium unique to the internet.
Mostly I liked to use my blog like an index for stories that I found interesting or important and attached to these stories an expression of their meaning to me. Perhaps I should now provide a bushel of links to sites I have enjoyed:
All hat no cattle
Truth Out
Joshua Micah Marshall
Debkafile
BBC
Asia Times Online
Bull Moose Blog
Daily Kos
David Hackworth
Common Dreams
Michael Moore
Dennis Kucinich
Juan Cole
Noam Chomsky
Slate Cartoon Index
The Onion
Thanks for the company and I hope it was time well spent.
Adieu.
I had found that my pent-up political anger was spilling into my conversations with friends and family and blogging gave me an outlet for my rants. I consider it to have been quite healthy for my psyche as well as beneficial for my social life to unburden myself of missiles like the Abu Gharaib scandal, the swift boat veterans for dishonoring the service of war heroes, Patriot Acts I and II, the plundered treasury, the trade imbalances, the cost and toll of the Iraq war, the arrogance of Rumsfeld, the uncritical press, Blair's brown-nosing, and the growing culture of fascism in America.
I have tried to talk about the world around me from my own perspective in the service of telling my truth steadily and broadly. On occasion I wrote odd short poems hyperlinked to the stories that inspired them, which I expect is a medium unique to the internet.
Mostly I liked to use my blog like an index for stories that I found interesting or important and attached to these stories an expression of their meaning to me. Perhaps I should now provide a bushel of links to sites I have enjoyed:
All hat no cattle
Truth Out
Joshua Micah Marshall
Debkafile
BBC
Asia Times Online
Bull Moose Blog
Daily Kos
David Hackworth
Common Dreams
Michael Moore
Dennis Kucinich
Juan Cole
Noam Chomsky
Slate Cartoon Index
The Onion
Thanks for the company and I hope it was time well spent.
Adieu.
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Spring's new product
Here is a terrific article on the difficulty of selling WWIV.
Step right up
It seems to me that war is always an easy sell because it appeals to the basest nature of us all, so I can't say I agree with the main premise of the article. Sex sells for a reason and that reason is powerful enough to make a preacher put his bible down (as Muddy Waters would sing).
Yet war seems to trump sex as a marketing tool, because even an unjust war poorly planned has many Americans proud enough to adorn their vehicles with patriotic magnets and flags, and spirited enough to shout along with Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, Mike Savage, Rush Limbaugh, and their ilk.
So, call me skeptical, but the article makes for good reading just the same.
Step right up
It seems to me that war is always an easy sell because it appeals to the basest nature of us all, so I can't say I agree with the main premise of the article. Sex sells for a reason and that reason is powerful enough to make a preacher put his bible down (as Muddy Waters would sing).
Yet war seems to trump sex as a marketing tool, because even an unjust war poorly planned has many Americans proud enough to adorn their vehicles with patriotic magnets and flags, and spirited enough to shout along with Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, Mike Savage, Rush Limbaugh, and their ilk.
So, call me skeptical, but the article makes for good reading just the same.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Gloria Olivae
The world has a new pope going by the nomme du pontiff of Benedict XVI.
Urbi at Orbi
Will he be the second-to-the-last pope?
Prophecy of St Malachy
Urbi at Orbi
Will he be the second-to-the-last pope?
Prophecy of St Malachy
Dreams deferred
Here is a story:
Turmoil in Iraq
And a companion quote to reflect upon:
"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or in the holy name of liberty and democracy?"
- Mohandas Gandhi -
Turmoil in Iraq
And a companion quote to reflect upon:
"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or in the holy name of liberty and democracy?"
- Mohandas Gandhi -
Monday, April 18, 2005
Happy Patriots Day
Ray McGovern has been writing a lot lately and I find that both troubling and hopeful at the same time. It is troubling because the last time he wrote prolifically was before the Iraq war. It is hopeful because he seems as committed as ever to honest CIA analysis.
In this article you can get his take on what is and isn't broken in our intelligence services.
Exposing Incompetent Incumbents
In this article you can get his take on what is and isn't broken in our intelligence services.
Exposing Incompetent Incumbents
NY Times on DeLay
If you're going to stone someone they say it takes good aim and a lot of rocks.
On Sunday April 17th the New York Times wrote an Editorial that calls Mr. Delay to task for his numerous ethical lapses.
Within are words such as "alarming" and "abuse" and "disastrous" and "neglect".
Power for Power's Sake
These are uncharacteristically strong words from our paper of record. Let us all hope they resonate with the moral champions that elected President Bush and the company he keeps.
On Sunday April 17th the New York Times wrote an Editorial that calls Mr. Delay to task for his numerous ethical lapses.
Within are words such as "alarming" and "abuse" and "disastrous" and "neglect".
Power for Power's Sake
These are uncharacteristically strong words from our paper of record. Let us all hope they resonate with the moral champions that elected President Bush and the company he keeps.
Sunday, April 17, 2005
Bud wiser
Our survival is not independent of the survival of our food supply. Because of this I admit to being conservative when it comes to introducing GM-based products to market. In fact I would rather pay more for organic produce than trust to market forces as a mother.
I feel that folks bringing GM products to market have been playing fast and loose with human survival. After all, natural selection is a process that has been field tested for millions of years and there may be unapparent reasons for a plant's traits.
I would also say that the early fruits of the GM fields are products like tomatoes that ship well and cannot compete with their packaging for flavor. In other instances, the natural cycle of life is replaced with industrial gardening techniques that poison the land and erode the soil.
A new practice, bio-pharming (I ignore the 'P'), incorporates pharmaceuticals into plants. While this could help reduce medicinal manufacturing costs, there is a chance that such openly-pollinated plant pills will cross pollinate with wild neighboring plants. Imagine if a trip to the super-market for a loaf of bread could introduce one to a game of medicinal roulette. Perhaps the lucky will ingest Viagra. Perhaps the unlucky will ingest estrogen.
Should we treat these risks lightly?
Will limits be placed on the types of drugs manufactured in this way (i.e. should the side-effects be a determining factor)?
Could the new plants introduce dangerous food allergies into previously safe foods?
Is it safe to take medicine in amounts impossible to control (what's the dosage in a slice of toast or a bowl of cereal)?
And finally should producers like Budweiser, who are the nations largest buyer of rice, worry about the risk of infecting their beer with pharmaceutical cocktails?
Apparently that is a thought that has occurred to them and Anheuser-Busch is believed to be the first major company to threaten a boycott over the issue:
Beer Giant Says it Won't Buy Rice from States That Grow GM Crops
I would like to say in closing that while I feel there is great promise in GM foods, greater still is the responsibility inherent in their production. Consequently I don't feel comfortable supporting GM foods until the danger of cross-pollination is removed, and until there are laws isolating the GM food production chain, and until there are governmental oversight panels similar to the FDA dedicated to protecting us from honest mistakes and dishonest suppliers.
I also say, "Good for you Anheuser-Busch for erring on the side of my health."
I feel that folks bringing GM products to market have been playing fast and loose with human survival. After all, natural selection is a process that has been field tested for millions of years and there may be unapparent reasons for a plant's traits.
I would also say that the early fruits of the GM fields are products like tomatoes that ship well and cannot compete with their packaging for flavor. In other instances, the natural cycle of life is replaced with industrial gardening techniques that poison the land and erode the soil.
A new practice, bio-pharming (I ignore the 'P'), incorporates pharmaceuticals into plants. While this could help reduce medicinal manufacturing costs, there is a chance that such openly-pollinated plant pills will cross pollinate with wild neighboring plants. Imagine if a trip to the super-market for a loaf of bread could introduce one to a game of medicinal roulette. Perhaps the lucky will ingest Viagra. Perhaps the unlucky will ingest estrogen.
Should we treat these risks lightly?
Will limits be placed on the types of drugs manufactured in this way (i.e. should the side-effects be a determining factor)?
Could the new plants introduce dangerous food allergies into previously safe foods?
Is it safe to take medicine in amounts impossible to control (what's the dosage in a slice of toast or a bowl of cereal)?
And finally should producers like Budweiser, who are the nations largest buyer of rice, worry about the risk of infecting their beer with pharmaceutical cocktails?
Apparently that is a thought that has occurred to them and Anheuser-Busch is believed to be the first major company to threaten a boycott over the issue:
Beer Giant Says it Won't Buy Rice from States That Grow GM Crops
I would like to say in closing that while I feel there is great promise in GM foods, greater still is the responsibility inherent in their production. Consequently I don't feel comfortable supporting GM foods until the danger of cross-pollination is removed, and until there are laws isolating the GM food production chain, and until there are governmental oversight panels similar to the FDA dedicated to protecting us from honest mistakes and dishonest suppliers.
I also say, "Good for you Anheuser-Busch for erring on the side of my health."
Friday, April 15, 2005
April 15th
Our national spending priorities add endurance to Martin Luther King's charge that we are a world of guided missiles and misguided men.
This website makes it easy to take a look at where the US Congress spends the tax dollars it raises, and how it affects your state.
Where Do Your Taxes Go?
What lesson is there in the fact that we spend 49 cents of every tax dollar on the military, while spending 9 cents of every tax dollar on nutrition, housing and education combined?
A stream of consciousness begins...
Minds dull when bombs shine and hope shines when bombs dull.
A shrine shrinks on bombs hope and a child's blood spends like bullets.
Peace and love bore men to apples, but warriors dream of gardens.
Make love and war and have a bang.
Funerals are like morning-after pills for war (sounds deep but seems to imply nothing).
It takes a child to raze a village but a hero for a parade.
Don't blame me I voted for the other war enthusiast.
God asked me to tell you to jump off a bridge.
A stream of consciousness sputters and ends, far off course...
This website makes it easy to take a look at where the US Congress spends the tax dollars it raises, and how it affects your state.
Where Do Your Taxes Go?
What lesson is there in the fact that we spend 49 cents of every tax dollar on the military, while spending 9 cents of every tax dollar on nutrition, housing and education combined?
A stream of consciousness begins...
Minds dull when bombs shine and hope shines when bombs dull.
A shrine shrinks on bombs hope and a child's blood spends like bullets.
Peace and love bore men to apples, but warriors dream of gardens.
Make love and war and have a bang.
Funerals are like morning-after pills for war (sounds deep but seems to imply nothing).
It takes a child to raze a village but a hero for a parade.
Don't blame me I voted for the other war enthusiast.
God asked me to tell you to jump off a bridge.
A stream of consciousness sputters and ends, far off course...
Thursday, April 14, 2005
Department of Peace
Congressman Dennis Kucinich would like to create a cabinet-level Department of Peace as a counter-balance to the Department of Defense.
After watching my first episode of Nanny 911 I think that creating a culture of peace is a good idea for America. We war too easily and love too timidly and it shows in our families, in our churches, in our communities, and in our foreign policy.
Why don't we set a place at the table for one that calls on us to hope and to love and to be compassionate?
Viva D.O.P.
After watching my first episode of Nanny 911 I think that creating a culture of peace is a good idea for America. We war too easily and love too timidly and it shows in our families, in our churches, in our communities, and in our foreign policy.
Why don't we set a place at the table for one that calls on us to hope and to love and to be compassionate?
Viva D.O.P.
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
For Hermes or McClellan
I am reading Orpheus with his Lute - Stories of the World's Spring Time by W.M.L. Hutchinson at the moment. It is very enjoyable to read "the oldest fairy tales in the world" and I find them remarkably well told, but I'm a bit concerned that I hold the Bush administration in too low a regard, for when I read these words of Prometheus I thought it would be cheerfully fitting to hear Helen Thomas directing them at the Whitehouse press secretary:
How many people read one of the greatest works of literature only to fill the inkwell of their poison pen?
Perhaps I should hold my breath and count to ten?
This seems like a good time to quote Michael McCourt by way of President Clinton, although I am convinced peals of laughter would overtake such wise counsel if Helen Thomas engaged Prometheus' words.
"Harboring anger is like taking poison and waiting for the other guy to die."
- Michael McCourt -
"Insolent hireling! Well dost thou ape the pompous bluster of thine upstart lord, as is ever the wont of thy kind. Go, tell the new-made tyrant that I set him at defiance; no outrage shall wring from my lips the word that would save him."
How many people read one of the greatest works of literature only to fill the inkwell of their poison pen?
Perhaps I should hold my breath and count to ten?
This seems like a good time to quote Michael McCourt by way of President Clinton, although I am convinced peals of laughter would overtake such wise counsel if Helen Thomas engaged Prometheus' words.
"Harboring anger is like taking poison and waiting for the other guy to die."
- Michael McCourt -
Headlights get in your eyes
Here is an excerpt from an interview conducted with President George W. Bush while he was in Rome for the Pope's funeral.
Q: Just to follow up on that, Mr. President, a couple questions about the Pope. One, I noticed at one point you had your glasses on and you were following along -- I'm not sure if you were looking at the homily at that point or maybe, did you have one of those guides that --
THE PRESIDENT: I did. It's hard to follow -- my Spanish is not very good -- (laughter) -- nevertheless, it is decent enough to pick up sounds that then can help me follow the Italian.
Q: Had you ever been to a Latin mass before; I imagine you've been to an English mass?
THE PRESIDENT: No, never been to a Latin mass.
Source: Whitehouse Website
Q: Just to follow up on that, Mr. President, a couple questions about the Pope. One, I noticed at one point you had your glasses on and you were following along -- I'm not sure if you were looking at the homily at that point or maybe, did you have one of those guides that --
THE PRESIDENT: I did. It's hard to follow -- my Spanish is not very good -- (laughter) -- nevertheless, it is decent enough to pick up sounds that then can help me follow the Italian.
Q: Had you ever been to a Latin mass before; I imagine you've been to an English mass?
THE PRESIDENT: No, never been to a Latin mass.
Source: Whitehouse Website
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
Daniel Ellsberg on the Bush Administration
Here is an interesting interview with Daniel Ellsberg on the Bush administration. A couple of the things he said leapt out at me:
1. Everything done by Nixon to keep him from exposing the "Pentagon Papers" is now perfectly legal under the Patriot Act.
2. Daniel said that he would like to see President Bush directly asked 'Do you, Mr. President, believe that a Palestinian state in the West Bank would postpone the return of the Messiah?'
He thinks the President would "find it hard to say that he doesn't believe that, because he's supposed to witness for what he believes in his religious faith and he'd lose a lot of support if he denied that."
Ye doth protest too little
I don't know about you, but I sure would like to see a reporter ask President Bush Daniel's question live. As an American I feel more entitled to his response than to Michael Jackson's extra-musical activities, the contents of the Presidential Ipod, or Jenna Bush's dance routines.
1. Everything done by Nixon to keep him from exposing the "Pentagon Papers" is now perfectly legal under the Patriot Act.
2. Daniel said that he would like to see President Bush directly asked 'Do you, Mr. President, believe that a Palestinian state in the West Bank would postpone the return of the Messiah?'
He thinks the President would "find it hard to say that he doesn't believe that, because he's supposed to witness for what he believes in his religious faith and he'd lose a lot of support if he denied that."
Ye doth protest too little
I don't know about you, but I sure would like to see a reporter ask President Bush Daniel's question live. As an American I feel more entitled to his response than to Michael Jackson's extra-musical activities, the contents of the Presidential Ipod, or Jenna Bush's dance routines.
The Moose rolls
Marshall Whitman is on a roll lately at Bull Moose blog. He is a disaffected conservative whose acid wit burns down Republican rhetoric to the ground. He has seen his party cast off the ideals of Newt's revolution for lure of a dollar bill and the thrill of power.
He says that the true religious calling of Bush-like Republicans is to comfort the comfortable and afflict the afflicted. Here is a rollicking story about a new "holy day" on the Republican calendar:
April 13th
He says that the true religious calling of Bush-like Republicans is to comfort the comfortable and afflict the afflicted. Here is a rollicking story about a new "holy day" on the Republican calendar:
April 13th
Monday, April 11, 2005
Bigger government, debt, and IRS
What kind of pride do Conservatives have now-a-days that their candidate, unencumbered by Senate/House Democrats would:
1. Increase the size of Federal government bureaucracy
2. Increase government's powers to snoop in your life
3. Increase the size of the IRS.
4. Increase deficit spending.
1. Increase the size of Federal government bureaucracy
2. Increase government's powers to snoop in your life
3. Increase the size of the IRS.
4. Increase deficit spending.
Friday, April 08, 2005
A tree falls
I have highlighted many voices protesting the war in Iraq, and have tried to include Republican voices above all because I want to challenge the assumption that to oppose an unjust war makes one a "looney liberal".
Here I would like to draw your attention to the words of Representative Ron Paul, a Republican from the Lone Star state (Texas). When asked if Iraqis are better off with Saddam gone he makes the case (to paraphrase) that the answer is "Well, no, particularly not Iraqi Christians". He also asks a much more important question, I think, which is this "Are we better off with a foreign policy that promotes regime change while justifying war with false information?"
I think Ron Paul feels government ought to be accountable to the people and especially when spending their money or embroiling the nation in war. In any case he is like another proverbial tree falling unheard in the Republican wood:
Chop! Chop! Chop!
Here I would like to draw your attention to the words of Representative Ron Paul, a Republican from the Lone Star state (Texas). When asked if Iraqis are better off with Saddam gone he makes the case (to paraphrase) that the answer is "Well, no, particularly not Iraqi Christians". He also asks a much more important question, I think, which is this "Are we better off with a foreign policy that promotes regime change while justifying war with false information?"
I think Ron Paul feels government ought to be accountable to the people and especially when spending their money or embroiling the nation in war. In any case he is like another proverbial tree falling unheard in the Republican wood:
Chop! Chop! Chop!
Reversing enlightenment
Perhaps it is time that scientists start showing up in churches demanding that evolution be fairly taught on Sundays, or that other flood stories be discussed for their archeological significance. Perhaps scientists should band together and denounce Jesus as "a theory with holes in it". Perhaps scientists should "infect" religious schools with objective truth and peer reviews.
Bible science
Or, perhaps religion should be taught in religious settings and those that prefer biblical biology ought to seek out vestments rather than lab coats.
I thought we ascended from the dark ages.
Bible science
Or, perhaps religion should be taught in religious settings and those that prefer biblical biology ought to seek out vestments rather than lab coats.
I thought we ascended from the dark ages.
Thursday, April 07, 2005
Pay no attention to the war
If happy talk made for happy wars we'd all find delight in Baghdad on a daily basis. However, in spite of heaps, mounds, and monuments of happy-talk the war in Iraq continues to worsen:
Iraq general kidnapped in Baghdad
The popular commitment to willful ignorance in the face of disheartening news is quite impressive. I wonder how long it can last.
Iraq general kidnapped in Baghdad
The popular commitment to willful ignorance in the face of disheartening news is quite impressive. I wonder how long it can last.
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
A look at Falluja
I have a friend that likes to say, "You always get the government you deserve." His meaning, I take it, is that a government will only answer to the people when it has to, and that when the people don't demand justice a government won't offer it.
I think a lot about that statement when I hear the stories coming out of Iraq, and specifically out of places like Falluja. What kind of government will repay our collective indifference to the heavy-handed operations taking place in Iraqi cities such as Falluja?
To hell and back
At least half of the casualties of war are usually children. Do you ever think of them as collateral damage instead?
The Pope, upon whose vestments Republicans now cling like barnacles, condemned the invasion of Iraq as unjust. Do you ever think of our efforts there as "defending freedom" instead?
Most of the fighters in Iraq are actually Iraqis trying to repel a foreign army (us). Do you think of them as "insurgents" instead?
What kind of government do you deserve?
I think a lot about that statement when I hear the stories coming out of Iraq, and specifically out of places like Falluja. What kind of government will repay our collective indifference to the heavy-handed operations taking place in Iraqi cities such as Falluja?
To hell and back
At least half of the casualties of war are usually children. Do you ever think of them as collateral damage instead?
The Pope, upon whose vestments Republicans now cling like barnacles, condemned the invasion of Iraq as unjust. Do you ever think of our efforts there as "defending freedom" instead?
Most of the fighters in Iraq are actually Iraqis trying to repel a foreign army (us). Do you think of them as "insurgents" instead?
What kind of government do you deserve?
June 2005
Before the Iraq invasion several voices rang out loud, and with hindsight, true. Two such voices were those of Scott Ritter and Ray McGovern.
They are now both warning that Iran is going to be struck by either the US or Israel, or by a joint attack, with Scott Ritter setting the moment to June of 2005.
Scott Ritter on Iran
Ray McGovern on Iran
Some people look forward to birdsong and gardens.
Others, it seems, upset our peaceful summer dreams.
They are now both warning that Iran is going to be struck by either the US or Israel, or by a joint attack, with Scott Ritter setting the moment to June of 2005.
Scott Ritter on Iran
Ray McGovern on Iran
Some people look forward to birdsong and gardens.
Others, it seems, upset our peaceful summer dreams.
Tuesday, April 05, 2005
Neutering Social Security
Since 1937 conservatives have been predicting the early demise of Social Security. It galls them, apparently, that a government program should work, or that Americans should be engaged in the welfare of their neighbor, or perhaps they view grandma as a burden to society.
Whatever their reason, though, they are stubborn I'll give them that. Stubborn and cold.
In 1983 the Cato Institute developed a five-point plan to kill Social Security and it went like so:
1. Maintain constant criticism of Social Security to influence the media and to undermine public confidence in the soundness of the program;
2. Build a network of influential supporters of private accounts, including Wall Street brokers who would profit from them;
3. Divide and conquer the opposition by assuring retirees and those nearing retirement that their benefits would be fully paid;
4. Enact laws creating 401(k)s and other private accounts so people learn to accept them; and
5. Have a privatization plan waiting in the wings when a president came along who was willing to claim that Social Security's trust fund faces a shortfall.
Sound familiar?
This entertaining article talks about the legacy of conservatives with regard to "saving" Social Security:
Neutering Social Security
Whatever their reason, though, they are stubborn I'll give them that. Stubborn and cold.
In 1983 the Cato Institute developed a five-point plan to kill Social Security and it went like so:
1. Maintain constant criticism of Social Security to influence the media and to undermine public confidence in the soundness of the program;
2. Build a network of influential supporters of private accounts, including Wall Street brokers who would profit from them;
3. Divide and conquer the opposition by assuring retirees and those nearing retirement that their benefits would be fully paid;
4. Enact laws creating 401(k)s and other private accounts so people learn to accept them; and
5. Have a privatization plan waiting in the wings when a president came along who was willing to claim that Social Security's trust fund faces a shortfall.
Sound familiar?
This entertaining article talks about the legacy of conservatives with regard to "saving" Social Security:
Neutering Social Security
Monday, April 04, 2005
National Sales Tax
Is a national sales tax a good idea?
Not if you want to buy a car, or a house, or a computer.
Not if you are elderly and would be doubly-taxed by a lifetime of income taxes, then a retirement of goods taxes.
Kevin Drum, in this article, counts many more ways in which a national sales tax would be a bane to everyone but the wealthy:
George Will is in love
Not if you want to buy a car, or a house, or a computer.
Not if you are elderly and would be doubly-taxed by a lifetime of income taxes, then a retirement of goods taxes.
Kevin Drum, in this article, counts many more ways in which a national sales tax would be a bane to everyone but the wealthy:
George Will is in love
Saturday, April 02, 2005
Mugabe
The middle-east gets lots of attention for their styles of governance, dubbed as "evil" in some circles, yet it is hard to fathom how any place could be more cruelly managed than Zimbabwe. Here are two analysises of Robert Mugabe and the effects of his "rule":
Climate of the vote
Early vote results
As scornful as the Bush administration is of the press, it has not bombed American press outlets on American soil.
As hostile as the Bush administration is to the poor, it has not generated 70% unemployment.
As cruel as the Bush administration is to POWs, it has not tortured democrats (though they have been forcibly evicted from his "town hall meetings").
As singularly contemptuous of compromise as the Bush administration is, Ted Kennedy remains alive and well.
This is perhaps evidence that we could do worse than President Bush, while at the same time a reminder of why we should care about the consolidation of Presidential power.
Climate of the vote
Early vote results
As scornful as the Bush administration is of the press, it has not bombed American press outlets on American soil.
As hostile as the Bush administration is to the poor, it has not generated 70% unemployment.
As cruel as the Bush administration is to POWs, it has not tortured democrats (though they have been forcibly evicted from his "town hall meetings").
As singularly contemptuous of compromise as the Bush administration is, Ted Kennedy remains alive and well.
This is perhaps evidence that we could do worse than President Bush, while at the same time a reminder of why we should care about the consolidation of Presidential power.
Friday, April 01, 2005
Water on Mars!
Scientists have announced the discovery of water on Mars. As I look up at the sky tonight and cast my gaze towards the red planet it will be with a renewed sense of awe for the achievements of man:
Story here
Story here
The Pope's failing health
All men must die and the best case scenario is to delay that inescapable fate a little bit. The worst case scenario, in my opinion, is to prolong the end in a state of suffering. As the Pope's health seems to be failing I find myself wondering, "What if he slips into a coma without flat-lining his EKG graph, and the consensus medical opinion is that he has no chance of growing younger?".
I also wonder, "What if technology can maintain his state of ill-health indefinitely, keeping him alive as some sort of living mummy?".
Should he be maintained with electrified heartbeats, feeding tubes, and breathing apparatus? If so, would he still be the Pope, since that job is held "for life"?
People close to the pope describe his state as "suffering" and also say he has "great difficulty breathing". Does this mean that Jesse Jackson and Jeb Bush ought to alight to Rome with their placards and showmanship and demand he be kept alive, and also personally attack any Cardinal that says different?
Keep Pope alive!
Obviously I think that the Schiavo case in the soap-opera state of Florida was old-fashioned political grand-standing, but I could be proven wrong by a principled commitment to life expressed Popeward. After all, the Pontiff himself could be allowed to "cross over to the other side peacefully" when there is yet a chance to maintain the bloodflow in his tissue and the motion in his lungs.
I also wonder, "What if technology can maintain his state of ill-health indefinitely, keeping him alive as some sort of living mummy?".
Should he be maintained with electrified heartbeats, feeding tubes, and breathing apparatus? If so, would he still be the Pope, since that job is held "for life"?
People close to the pope describe his state as "suffering" and also say he has "great difficulty breathing". Does this mean that Jesse Jackson and Jeb Bush ought to alight to Rome with their placards and showmanship and demand he be kept alive, and also personally attack any Cardinal that says different?
Keep Pope alive!
Obviously I think that the Schiavo case in the soap-opera state of Florida was old-fashioned political grand-standing, but I could be proven wrong by a principled commitment to life expressed Popeward. After all, the Pontiff himself could be allowed to "cross over to the other side peacefully" when there is yet a chance to maintain the bloodflow in his tissue and the motion in his lungs.
Darfur Day
I have grown fond of the Bull Moose blog, which I describe as a blog with good centrist commentary and a lean to the right on social issues. While I sometimes disagree with the blog's perspective I am magnanimous enough to appreciate a variety of viewpoints, especially when delivered without moral certitude.
In this post Mr. Moose (Marshall Whitman) challenges bloggers to assert their relevance and end the genocide in Darfur, or at least draw attention to the ongoing slaughter there:
Bull Moose
Genocide is defined as "the systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group".
Why do you suppose that Americans are significantly more engaged in the Schiavo case than in the slaughter of Darfur?
On a related note, I am told the movie Hotel Rwanda properly focuses the vigor of the spirit on the dirty business in Darfur.
In this post Mr. Moose (Marshall Whitman) challenges bloggers to assert their relevance and end the genocide in Darfur, or at least draw attention to the ongoing slaughter there:
Bull Moose
Genocide is defined as "the systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group".
Why do you suppose that Americans are significantly more engaged in the Schiavo case than in the slaughter of Darfur?
On a related note, I am told the movie Hotel Rwanda properly focuses the vigor of the spirit on the dirty business in Darfur.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)