Boycott robots

Political consultants seem to think that having a robot call me on the phone to play an untrained, robotic-sounding voice reading a one-sided, uninteresting, and poorly written conversation is a good way to influence my opinion on their behalf.

It is almost as if the angels of comedy are trying to find out how low our democracy can go. They must consider us an audience with an incredible affinity for the absurd. After all, they broke through the "Vote [yes/no] on [some number]" threshold some years back and now have added robot conversations to their joke arsenal.

Anybody influenced by this kind of time-wasting, inhuman experience ought not to have the right to vote. Anybody practicing this kind of grassroots avoidance probably doesn't have much chance of gaining political capital by the practice.

I wonder if marketers even demand to know what percentage of their message is heard before hangup. I expect not or somebody would have these things stop calling me because my hello-to-hangup is blazingly fast.

There is a way, though, to one-up those comedy angels and it is this. Let your answering machine talk to the robot, perhaps even updating your message for the political season.

May I suggest, "Hello. If you are a robot please leave a message. I'm so lonely for robot conversation and I do love talking politics."

At least then you will have the last laugh.

Earth blood

The popular refrain "No Blood for Oil" recently got me thinking...

Many Earth stories say that the Earth itself is alive, not in the sense that things live on it, but in the sense that it has actual consciousness. Gaia, some call it, or Terra others, and I am sure there are many more names for it. Some people extend that belief and feel that what we call wind is instead breath, what we call coral reefs are instead a type of brain, and what we call a tsunami is instead a type of birth (water is being broken).

Anyway, recently I had the thought that if the Earth was indeed alive then maybe oil is blood, which would further mean that extracting too much of it would prove fatal, and that protest signs might be modified to read, "No blood for blood!"

Along those lines I also wonder:

Does global warming correspond to a fever?

Can a volcano be quieted with a very large Zantac tablet?

What are human beings in this context, children or parasites?

Does the earth have any songs?

What does a sub-terrainean nuclear explosion feel like?

Does the earth have any planet friends?

If the earth can be alive, then what about the galaxy or a molecule or a single cell?

Are pandemics like AIDS, black plague, avian flu and so on biological defenses which keep life in balance?

You don't have to believe in an idea to explore it with intellectual curiosity and I hope you found the exercise pleasant.

I'll leave you with this thought. Where would the naughty bits be?

Rock bottom

Here is what rock bottom looks like for an elected President. This excerpt came from an article by the Washington Post:

On almost every key measure of presidential character and performance, the survey found that Bush has never been less popular with the American people. Currently 39 percent approve of the job he is doing as president, while 60 percent disapprove of his performance in office -- the highest level of disapproval ever recorded for Bush in Post-ABC polls.

[...]

Overall, the survey underscores how several pillars of Bush's presidency have begun to crumble under the combined weight of events and White House mistakes. Bush's approval ratings have been in decline for months, but on issues of personal trust, honesty and values, Bush has suffered some of his most notable declines. Moreover, Bush has always retained majority support on his handling of the U.S. campaign against terrorism -- until now, when 51 percent have registered disapproval.

Full Details

I still believe that Pomp without dignity is the calling-card of the pathetic. I think it is time the president resign so that America can get back on track.

Who wins if he stays on the job besides Bush dead-enders and anti-intellectuals who think the biggest threat to America in the face of 911 is gay people and evolution?

It is also time, I think, for Democrats to look ahead and define themselves as reformers. Bush may now be dismissed with a wave of the hand and a polite sympathetic look and furthermore he will not be running again. Bush-bashing, in other words, is hardly useful and could start to be interpreted as piling on the helpless.

Like a tree, standing in the water

Perhaps there is no more fitting song to mark the legacy of Rosa Parks than Pops Staples version of "I shall not be moved", which has the chorus:

I shall not.
I shall not be moved.
I shall not.
I shall not be moved.
I'm like a tree,
standing in the water,
And I shall not be moved.

Rev. Al Sharpton might not be able to move voters on his own behalf, but he moved me when he called on us all to make a Rosa Resolution during his eulogy:

James Crowe Junior, Esquire

Al Sharpton could have been speaking coyly about President Bush's avoidance of Cindy Sheehan when he said:


Its easy to remember activists after they're gone.
Its [another thing] to be called on to be active and work and walk with them while they're still here.



I admire Rosa for knowing what to do to change the world for the better and having the fortitude to do it.

I don't know what to do to change the world I see and don't like, and I know fundamental things are wrong. I can see that the people in charge are not going to make a difference and it is such a despairing conclusion.

How can I make a difference the way Rosa Parks did? How can I get my own life to have that kind of impact? How did Rosa know what to do on December 1st, 1955?

Al ended his eulogy for Rosa by saying, "I intend to stand up wherever I see injustice, and if I can't stand up then I'll speak out, and if I can't speak out then I will get a chair like Rosa Parks and just sit in the way".

Am I in anybody's way?

What should my Rosa Resolution be?

I wish I knew. I feel I am being called but it comes without direction and I don't know my response.

Rosa knew and that's what made her a part of history. Her response was so simple yet so powerful that Presidents stood in her wake.

Hard-hitting Harry

If you accept my belief that what Democrats need to stand for in a word is Justice, then you can only applaud Harry Reid for calling on Republicans to investigate the actions of the Bush administration for the good of their nation.

While network viewsmen scramble to portray his recent showdown in the Senate as partisan it is decidedly not. If Republican corruption has made Truth and Justice partisan issues, then I have rarely been prouder to call myself a Democrat.

Here is the statement Harry issued before taking the Senate into a closed session. Rather than provide a link to the statement I feel it is worth reproducing here. As a reward to your effort, I have provided Jon Stewart's take on the battle at the end.


"This past weekend, we witnessed the indictment of I. Lewis Libby, the Vice President's Chief of Staff and a senior Advisor to President Bush. Libby is the first sitting White House staffer to be indicted in 135 years.

"This indictment raises very serious charges. It asserts this Administration engaged in actions that both harmed our national security and are morally repugnant.

"The decision to place U.S. soldiers in harm's way is the most significant responsibility the Constitution invests in the Congress.

"The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really about: how the Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions.

"As a result of its improper conduct, a cloud now hangs over this Administration. This cloud is further darkened by the Administration's mistakes in prisoner abuse scandal, Hurricane Katrina, and the cronyism and corruption in numerous agencies.

"And, unfortunately, it must be said that a cloud also hangs over this Republican-controlled Congress for its unwillingness to hold this Republican Administration accountable for its misdeeds on all of these issues.

"Let's take a look back at how we got here with respect to Iraq Mr. President. The record will show that within hours of the terrorist attacks on 9/11, senior officials in this Administration recognized these attacks could be used as a pretext to invade Iraq.

"The record will also show that in the months and years after 9/11, the Administration engaged in a pattern of manipulation of the facts and retribution against anyone who got in its way as it made the case for attacking Iraq.

"There are numerous examples of how the Administration misstated and manipulated the facts as it made the case for war. Administration statements on Saddam's alleged nuclear weapons capabilities and ties with Al Qaeda represent the best examples of how it consistently and repeatedly manipulated the facts.

"The American people were warned time and again by the President, the Vice President, and the current Secretary of State about Saddam's nuclear weapons capabilities. The Vice President said Iraq "has reconstituted its nuclear weapons." Playing upon the fears of Americans after September 11, these officials and others raised the specter that, left unchecked, Saddam could soon attack America with nuclear weapons.

"Obviously we know now their nuclear claims were wholly inaccurate. But more troubling is the fact that a lot of intelligence experts were telling the Administration then that its claims about Saddam's nuclear capabilities were false.

"The situation was very similar with respect to Saddam's links to Al Qaeda. The Vice President told the American people, "We know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know he has a longstanding relationship with various terrorist groups including the Al Qaeda organization."

"The Administration's assertions on this score have been totally discredited. But again, the Administration went ahead with these assertions in spite of the fact that the government's top experts did not agree with these claims.

"What has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress to the Administration's manipulation of intelligence that led to this protracted war in Iraq? Basically nothing. Did the Republican-controlled Congress carry out its constitutional obligations to conduct oversight? No. Did it support our troops and their families by providing them the answers to many important questions? No. Did it even attempt to force this Administration to answer the most basic questions about its behavior? No.

"Unfortunately the unwillingness of the Republican-controlled Congress to exercise its oversight responsibilities is not limited to just Iraq. We see it with respect to the prisoner abuse scandal. We see it with respect to Katrina. And we see it with respect to the cronyism and corruption that permeates this Administration.

"Time and time again, this Republican-controlled Congress has consistently chosen to put its political interests ahead of our national security. They have repeatedly chosen to protect the Republican Administration rather than get to the bottom of what happened and why.

"There is also another disturbing pattern here, namely about how the Administration responded to those who challenged its assertions. Time and again this Administration has actively sought to attack and undercut those who dared to raise questions about its preferred course.

"For example, when General Shinseki indicated several hundred thousand troops would be needed in Iraq, his military career came to an end. When then OMB Director Larry Lindsay suggested the cost of this war would approach $200 billion, his career in the Administration came to an end. When U.N. Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix challenged conclusions about Saddam's WMD capabilities, the Administration pulled out his inspectors. When Nobel Prize winner and IAEA head Mohammed el-Baridei raised questions about the Administration's claims of Saddam's nuclear capabilities, the Administration attempted to remove him from his post. When Joe Wilson stated that there was no attempt by Saddam to acquire uranium from Niger, the Administration launched a vicious and coordinated campaign to demean and discredit him, going so far as to expose the fact that his wife worked as a CIA agent.

"Given this Administration's pattern of squashing those who challenge its misstatements, what has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress? Again, absolutely nothing. And with their inactions, they provide political cover for this Administration at the same time they keep the truth from our troops who continue to make large sacrifices in Iraq.

"This behavior is unacceptable. The toll in Iraq is as staggering as it is solemn. More than 2,000 Americans have lost their lives. Over 90 Americans have paid the ultimate sacrifice this month alone - the fourth deadliest month since the war began. More than 15,000 have been wounded. More than 150,000 remain in harm's way. Enormous sacrifices have been and continue to be made.

"The troops and the American people have a right to expect answers and accountability worthy of that sacrifice. For example, 40 Senate Democrats wrote a substantive and detailed letter to the President asking four basic questions about the Administration's Iraq policy and received a four sentence answer in response. These Senators and the American people deserve better.

"They also deserve a searching and comprehensive investigation about how the Bush Administration brought this country to war. Key questions that need to be answered include:

How did the Bush Administration assemble its case for war against Iraq?
Who did Bush Administration officials listen to and who did they ignore?
How did senior Administration officials manipulate or manufacture intelligence presented to the Congress and the American people?
What was the role of the White House Iraq Group or WHIG, a group of senior White House officials tasked with marketing the war and taking down its critics?
How did the Administration coordinate its efforts to attack individuals who dared to challenge the Administration's assertions?
Why has the Administration failed to provide Congress with the documents that will shed light on their misconduct and misstatements?

"Unfortunately the Senate committee that should be taking the lead in providing these answers is not. Despite the fact that the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee publicly committed to examine many of these questions more than 1 and ½ years ago, he has chosen not to keep this commitment. Despite the fact that he restated that commitment earlier this year on national television, he has still done nothing.

"At this point, we can only conclude he will continue to put politics ahead of our national security. If he does anything at this point, I suspect he will play political games by producing an analysis that fails to answer any of these important questions. Instead, if history is any guide, this analysis will attempt to disperse and deflect blame away from the Administration.

"We demand that the Intelligence Committee and other committees in this body with jurisdiction over these matters carry out a full and complete investigation immediately as called for by Democrats in the committee's annual intelligence authorization report. Our troops and the American people have sacrificed too much. It is time this Republican-controlled Congress put the interests of the American people ahead of their own political interests."

Your reward

Senator Patrick Leahy

Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont was one of the few elected Democrats smart enough to oppose the Iraq war from the beginning. On Tuesday, October 25th he delivered a blistering critique of the Iraq occupation and it's cheerleaders:

Bring them home

Why don't more Democrats speak out against this obvious catastrophe, this ill-gotten FUBAR effort?

There is more to leadership than posturing. One expects, at minimum, good hindsight.

A question for top Democrats

Clinton was a master at answering the question:

What difference does it make if I win?

Today's Democrat party-leaders seem adept instead at its' avoidance. Consider for instance the issues ranging from Iraq, to clean energy, to biotechnology, to foreign policy.

Where's the burning bush?

Deadly October

The President spends most of his time either turning corners or regrouping while the violence in Iraq continues apace oblivious to his rhetoric. In fact it looks like October has been the second-most violent month in Iraq (since January) this year.


Bombs and chaos


I think the recent election was officially "turning a corner", and that after the Libby indictment the President was said to be "regrouping", so perhaps we are turning another corner now in Iraq?

I'm dizzy.

Libby's loose lips

It is too easy to get caught up in the showmanship of a good trial, when perhaps the reason for a trial is more important.

60 minutes took a look at the damage done by the leaking of Valerie Plame's name. The line that sticks with me was spoken by a former spy,

"We're not being undermined by the North Koreans, we're not being undermined by the Russians. We're being undermined by officials in our own government, and I find that galling"

60 Minutes on Plame

Would you, if you worked for the C.I.A., take a N.O.C. assignment knowing that Rove or Libby "had your back"?

Mirror, mirror on the wall

Here is what it means to be a Bush-backing Republican:

1. You condone deficit spending.
2. You condone pre-emptive war that engages US troops in nation-building.
3. You tolerate a majority leader that was thrice warned of ethical violations, then stand behind him when he dismantles the ethics committee and is finally indicted.
4. You condone the exposure of CIA agents for short-term political advantage.
5. You condone a Roe-v.-Wade litmus test for Supreme Court nominations.
6. You condone a culture of cronyism at the highest levels of government, including positions involving national security.
7. You condone an isolationistic world-view with nominations like John Bolton's.
8. You condone the denigration of military service for short-term political advantage. Exhibits here include John McCain, John Kerry, Max Cleland, and those cute little purple-heart bandaids at the RNC convention (I challenge you to wear them at Walter Reed).
9. You advance the ambitions of a National Security advisor that failed to act in the face of a PDB that warned "Bin Laden determined to strike inside U.S".
10. You support marginalizing the voices of Colin Powell, Brent Scowcroft, Norman Schwartzkopf, Paul O'Neil, Richard Clarke, John McCain, and Democrats universally.
11. You support the alientation of our traditional allies in the face of global intelligence warfare.
12. You condone obstructing investigations into 911, Tom DeLay's ethical abuses, the Downing Street memo, electoral abuses in Florida, electoral abuses in Ohio, Harriet Miers record, and John Roberts record.
13. You condone dividing America along partisan lines at every turn, even in the face of 911, and in the face of Katrina.
14. You condone falsifying intelligence data to conform to political whim.
15. You condone proven ineffective techniques like abstinence in the face of an AIDS epidemic.
16. You condone massive borrowing from Communist China.
17. You fail to act against North Korean nuclear weapons, Iranian nuclear weapons, and Pakistani nuclear weapons while spending tens of billions to save us from Iraq's unmanned fleet of aerial vehicles and gigantic stockpiles of WMD.
18. You support deploying the numerical equivalent of Manhattan's police force to smoke out Osama bin Laden.
19. You condone torture to the point of sending Dick Cheney to lobby the Senate on it's behalf.
20. You condone "extraordinary rendition" (outsourcing torture).
21. You condone handing grandma's rent-money to wallstreet investors.
22. You condone lying to Congress about the costs of a prescription drug bill.

I'd say that Snow White isn't the only one your ugly reflection has to worry about.

Is it serious?

If President Bush is serious when he says that prosecutor Fitzgerald's investigation is serious, then perhaps he ought to speak with Libby and ask him to testify again, but this time truthfully.

Afterall if this is a serious matter and the President is concerned he must want to get to the bottom of it? Doesn't that further imply that the President ought to try to use Presidential persuasion on Libby to get the truth out?

Instead he went to Camp David didn't he?

This is fun

What would history look like if Fox News had been there through the ages?

Negros attack police

I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

Prowhat now?

I have been hearing the word "Progressive" a lot on the left and nobody really ever explains it. I wonder sometimes if I am progressive, liberal, both, neither or what.

I have some sort of vague sense of what some of the different distinctions are, but must confess no real book-smarts on the subject.

In an effort to educate myself I turned to the Progressive Caucus website. There they had a PDF file explaining their values. Based on them I guess I'd say I am a progressive. They remind me of Democrats.

Miers Withdraws Supreme Court Nomination

Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination to be a Supreme Court justice today:

Story here...

I would have thought the President would have stayed the course with Harriet, consequences be damned, but apparently he was too weak to stand up to the lunatics in the Republican Party that want an ulema council to decide US law.

Fitzgerald fingers Lynndie England!

In a move that is sure to stun the nation federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald announced no indictments for Karl Rove or "Scooter" Libby would be handed down. Instead he appears to have uncovered a coup led by Ms. Lynndie England designed to "disrupt American government."

Paul O'Reilly over at Fox News was heard to exclaim, "Yes! Yes!", shortly before he busted a valve in his brain and collapsed with a crooked grin cemented on his face. He is recovering at a nearby Shriners Hospital where it was thought grown men dressed as clowns would lend a certain dignity to his condition.


Full details here...



In your dreams Republicans!

Damocrats taking it on the chin

Rather than translate the largest foreign policy disaster in decades into gains, top Democrats continue to go along with the Iraq war and congratulate themselves for their poor judgment.

NPR, in this hard-hitting piece, approached Democrats and tried to get them to define their positions on the Iraq war. Hillary Clinton, after hearing herself in this piece, ought to consider buying new golf clubs. I don't believe that voters will look here in 2008 for leadership.

Courting Disaster

John Kerry is a little more forceful in his objections to the war today, now belatedly saying he wouldn't vote for the Iraq war if he knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. Answering the obvious question with the obvious answer during the campaign would have been better, but it's a start.

John Kerry's position

How many corners must some men turn before they can see the spin?

The answer my friend is blowin' in the wind.
The answer is blowin' in the wind.

Marking 2000

Want to mark the passing of the 2000th US soldier by attending a candlelight vigil?

I have been to MoveOn-hosted vigils before and they have always been sincere and respectful. People stand with candles and flags to remind others of our soldiers' sacrifices.

Thanking the Troops

I should add that you ought to plan on being harassed by those misguided Republicans who think everything is partisan. However, each time I have attended a vigil there have been Republicans among us, and they are usually more upset than anyone at the disrespect. There have also been veterans ashamed at their neighbors conduct.

I suggest ignoring them and maintaining a respectful vigil.

Ideology's problem

Philosophers like Kant believed that one should always tell the truth and argued for doing so even when it might jeopardize someone's life. A practitioner of Kant's view betrayed Anne Frank to the Nazis. This person is perhaps considered "good" in Kant's eyes, but generally thought of as scum by more prudent users of Truth.

I feel that the worst politicians of all, and perhaps the worst human beings of all, are those so sure of their ideology that they are oblivious to the suffering caused by their actions.

That is why President Bush is such a terrible President. He has convinced himself that his Iraq polices are a smashing success and no amount of contrary evidence will shake his opinion, will alter his actions, or will change his course. The upshot is that people die without just cause while he congratulates himself for his vision thing.

Here are the consequences of the President's ideologies in Iraq:

Troy Tuschel

U.S. soldiers clean their boots

I think there is something defective about Love and it is this. Love requires familiarity. You love your own children, but not the child starving in the forgotten world (the third world) with equal affection. You love your wife, but not equally the woman suffering from abuse in an open secret.

It is a tragic flaw because Justice would either exist on earth, or be fought for mightily, if people were capable of loving outside their own insular bubbles.

If people could love the detainees at Guantanamo then there would be outrage that even medical doctors join in the torture with the fly Lords. If people could love their own US soldiers, then there would be outrage that US women soldiers are expected to degrade themselves sexually for the purposes of advancing phsychological torture.

More abuse details

If People could Love more expansively and more expensively, and Hate more exclusively and more elusively what a World it'd be.

But instead we have this defective kind of Love, this bubble-Love, this little-Love, this black-sheep cousin of Hatred to rule a mad, mad World.

Sometimes I feel like a carrion bird for loving in a world that loves to hate.

Caw!
Caw!

U.S. military death toll reaches 2,000

Another macabre milestone has been reached in the Iraq war. The United States has just lost it's 2000th soldier to the noble cause of saving the President and US Congress from admitting their mistakes.


2,000 dead

Will we go to 3000?

We will if Democrats don't forcefully lend their voices to the calls for withdrawal.

How about it Hillary?
How about it Obama?
John Kerry?

Anyone?

Will you lead when it matters?

One act play

I like to compare our Iraq policy to a man beating a hornets nest with a stick. In this one-act play a wise pundit discovers a stung man beating an angry hornet's nest with a stick...

Wise Pundit: "You've already been stung and cutting and running now would be a dishonor to your suffering."

Stick Wielder: "Don't worry, I'll stay the course! Whack! Ouch! Whack! Ouch!"

Wise Pundit: "Perhaps what you need are more sticks."

Stick Wielder: "Thanks! They're not working. Ouch! Whack! Ouch!"

Wise Pundit: "You've already been stung and cutting and running now would be a dishonor to your further suffering..."

Stick Wielder: "Don't worry, I'll stay the course! Whack! Ouch! Whack! Ouch! Hang on. Let me try a new stick..."


At least two Conservatives seem to be making their own comparison, but to Vietnam rather than stubborn hornet-nest whackers.


One. Ron Paul, Republican from Texas

Two. Mr. Scowcroft

I prefer my comparison because it illustrates the futility of staying the course, as well as the absurdity of the venture to begin with. I do tip my hat to Mr. Scowcroft and Mr. Paul, though, since Vietnam did disprove the "domino theory" Bologna, which is now being bandied about in fresh dogma-doo-doo (i.e. The entire middle east will fall to terrorist forces if we minimize our losses and get out).

Is our VP a sick man?

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I think that Dick Cheney suffers from dementia. My theory seems supported by this statement from a friend of his:

"The real anomaly in the Administration is Cheney. I consider Cheney a good friend. I've known him for thirty years. But Dick Cheney I don't know anymore."

- Brent Scowcroft -

Full details here

Maybe the reason we never see Dick Cheney in public is because he is being kept somewhere safe so that he doesn't wander down Pennsylvania avenue muttering to himself about a mining shaft gap?

If my suspicion is true it would mean that the man everyone in the Bush administration relies upon for gravitas is without his wits. That would sure explain a lot.

All smiles

I spent the past week in a cabin in the woods in rural America. I was far from the tethers of the Internet or even of answering machines. I didn't watch any television. I didn't read any newspapers.

When I returned home I decided to catch up on what I'd missed.

My favorite bit of missed news was of course Tom DeLay's arrest and smiling mug shot.

It's nice that he's smiling.
I'm smiling too.
We're both smiling.

Another welcome story was that the nomination of Harriet Miers seems scuttled:

Harriet like New Coke

And there are many furtive-looking photos of Karl Rove and Lewis Libby to enjoy.

Furthermore the Jack Abramoff case seems about ready to make many more Republicans decidedly uncomfortable.

It looks like decent Americans have awoken as I was away and said, "Holy crap! This guy Bush isn't just an idiot, he's corrupt too!"

Can I get a blast o harmonica?

How many times must a man look up
Before he can see the sky?
Yes, 'n' how many ears must one man have
Before he can hear people cry?
Yes, 'n' how many deaths will it take till he knows
That too many people have died?
The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind,
The answer is blowin' in the wind.

- Bob Dylan -

The winds of change may be upon us.

Fear

There is so much to fear:

Disease.
War.
Environmental collapse.
Death.
Persecution.
Humiliation.
Torture.
Obesity.
Ozone.
UV rays.
Food borne illness.
Willful ignorance.


That I hate to add to the list but I am compelled to by expectations.

Moe's Musings will be on vacation until October 23rd.

Try not to panic.

Constitutional?

"No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

- Article VI, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution -


"Harriet Miers' religious beliefs figured into her nomination to the Supreme Court"...

"People are interested to know why I picked Harriet Miers. Part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion"...

- President Bush, Wednesday October 12th -

God and STD on your side

Someone sat down and analyzed whether or not religion is beneficial to society in objectively-measurable terms. The results are hardly surprising to humanists, and will probably be met with strong denial by the pious, but if you believe in facts you may care to know that...

Within the United States "the strongly theistic, anti-evolution South and Midwest" have "markedly worse homicide, mortality, STD, youth pregnancy, marital and related problems than the Northeast where ... secularization, and acceptance of evolution approach European norms."

Much more here...

Surprised?

Another macabre milestone

More journalists have been killed in Iraq in 2.5 years than in Vietnam in 20 years.

This is just one more example of something going awfully wrong with the plan which we are encouraged to embrace by the Whitehouse.

Mourning bells are ringing

Now Kurt

Kurt Vonnegut, one of my favorite authors, was on the PBS show Now recently. He's old now, 83, but has a lot to say and managed to smile through most of it.

Here is an excerpt:

KURT VONNEGUT: I have one more thing I wanted to read. It has something different.

DAVID BRANCACCIO: Something in the other pocket, too?

KURT VONNEGUT: Yes.

DAVID BRANCACCIO: Alright.

KURT VONNEGUT: You know, Christianity is very big now in particular-- and our president, of course, is a Christian. These are words I never hear.

Blessed are the poor in spirit. For theirs is kingdom of heaven.

This isn't original.

Blessed are they that mourn. For they shall be comforted.

Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the Earth.

Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness for they shall be filled.

Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy.

Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God.

Blessed are the peacemakers. For they shall be called the children of God.

Not exactly a Republican platform.

DAVID BRANCACCIO: These, of course, are called the Beatitudes.

KURT VONNEGUT: Yes.

DAVID BRANCACCIO: From the Holy Bible.

KURT VONNEGUT: Yeah.

And here is a link to the transcript of the segment:

Kurt Vonnegut

This was the first time I saw David Brancaccio in action and I have to say I thought he did a good job. It can't be easy to talk casually with a man like Kurt and he pulled it off well.

Click picture if you think Jesus is wrong 

Bush's weak response to torture

In June of 2003 President Bush declared, "The United States is committed to the worldwide elimination of torture and we are leading this fight by example."

That statement has been exposed as another big fat lie by his recent pledge to veto legislation banning the torture of anyone in US custody:

Details here

The President's position is cowardly.

When you notice dog-shit clinging to your shoe do you leave it to fester and stink, or do you scrape it off to be rid of it?

I call on all Democrats to denounce this stain on America's honor with open contempt and ridicule. I call on America's allies and friends to join the choir and sing on this issue. I call on the press to run the newly released torture photos and remind Americans of the moral argument against the President's stance.

How do we win hearts and minds to our side when the world sees our hand in the indifference to torture cookie jar?

What does it matter if the Homeland is saved if America is lost? Does soil define a country?

I again applaud John McCain's leadership on this issue and hope you'll read his idea of an adequate response to torture. I also applaud the many legislators that joined Senator McCain and voted to pass the amendment.

Let's get this dastardly practice stopped. Here is a petition to sign that will help get America rolling in the right direction again.

A man that cries "Torture is unAmerican!" should not feel alone on our watch. Otherwise, well, he'd be wrong and what could be worse?

Of geese and ganders

If I were to proclaim in a headline, "US behind poison-gas attacks on Iraqis" because the US provided Saddam Hussein with the WMDs he needed to gas his own people, I'd wager readers would be outraged at me on the grounds that guns don't kill people.

Well, the BBC has a headline which says:

Iran 'behind attacks on British'

Delving into the article it seems the Iranian Republican Guard has made weapons available to some people inside Iraq and those weapons were further used against British troops.

Should I be outraged at Iran or the BBC?

If I should be outraged by Iran's actions then mustn't I be outraged at America's coddling of Saddam when they found him convenient?

If I should be outraged by the BBC then I guess that lets Iran off the hook.

Principled outrage is such a difficult thing to maintain.

Bush crony in charge of pandemic response

The President doesn't care about our national security as much as his rich incompetent friend advancement program (rifap). He proves that on a daily basis with appointments like Michael Brown at FEMA and his new laughably underqualified appointment for the Supreme Court.

The only qualification that the President wants to see in his appointments is loyalty to his fancy. So he has, like a tin-pot communist dictator, surrounded himself with yes-men. Ignorance favors simplicity.

However, some tasks are not simple.

For instance, the responsibility for a competent pandemic response rests with the Assistant Secretary for Public Health Emergency Preparedness (ASPHEP). Stewart Simonson, appointed in 2003 by Mr. Bush, has a familiar bio, that of a well-rewarded Unqualified Crony.

The President is now busy pretending to prepare a plan for dealing with avian flu. He is a simple man with only two ideas in his head. Cut taxes or use the military on it. In this case he seems to favor both ideas simultaneously. Perhaps he had an epiphany?

A man with a mind like that could use a few competent people around him. Unfortunately for us all, nothing threatens the barricaded ego of the incompetent like capability.

Perhaps that is why so many Americans didn't vote for John Kerry?

Senate Approves Detainee Treatment Rules

It is not often I praise Republicans but today I will praise the efforts of Senator John McCain for attaching an amendment to a military spending bill that would:

Prohibit the use of "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" against anyone in U.S. government custody, regardless of where they are held

Full story

The vote itself on the bill was also impressive, 90-9.

Predictably a few Bush dead-enders (like Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama) called the legislation unnecessary because "We do not have ... systematic abuse of prisoners going on by our United States military"

The logical response to such a statement is to say that if a thing is unnecessary then there is no good reason to oppose it, particularly when doing so would curtail resources from our troops.

It is high time to end the reputation-eroding, troop endangering, alliance-deteriorating, practice of prisoner (or detainee) abuse. Few things have brought as much disgrace to America as stooping to the type of moral cowardice that leads to torturing a charge.

Our troops do not escape harm when they engage in such misdeeds. The message from the top needs to be that Freedom is something to aspire to, not empty rhetoric.

Interview with Barbara Ehrenreich

Barbara Ehrenreich has a new book called Bait and Switch: The (Futile) Pursuit of the American Dream.

BuzzFlash interviewed her
here and you can read all about it.

I thought it was an interesting interview and it sounds like it will be another good book from Barbara. In a way she is doing what Charles Dickens did by peeking under Society's covers, but with journalism rather than fiction.

Maybe our compassionate President should read her books so he has an idea what life is like when the road ahead isn't paved with gold bars?

Stopping torture

Ray McGovern writes about the use of torture in the Iraq war and our complicitous silence in the face of it.

Ouch.

Reichbishops 'r' us

Are we really like Good German citizens under Hitler that heard about dark deeds in dark places and kept silent?

Are we like those white church-folk throwing stones and curses at Martin Luther King's marches?

Are Democrats a loyal opposition party present only to support the myth of an alternative?

What should one do?

Shall we fight them with facts?

There are mountains of facts, truckloads of facts, books, and sacks and pen-fulls of facts. Facts that show lies. Facts that show more. Facts that make men of reason abhor what they've done!

No, torture is no match for facts.

Shall we fight them with Religion?

There are billions of Bibles with trillions of pages that scream against cruel-ness in all forms and stages. The robed ones they tell us be kind to each other, treat every man just like a dear brother. But pendulum and rack and turn of the screw were all to God's service before the Spanish were through. Burning hot pokers and salt on a wound were God's love expressed from Him down to you.

No, torture is not slowed by Religion.

The U.N. then, is that where we'll turn?

They make the sound of crickets chirping, of butterfly wings, and caterpillar footsteps on moss as men are borne to their doom. They prance like peacocks and fuss like hens as demented men defile in the gloom.

No, the UN is a social club that is only useful when there is consent among members.

Maybe all these things together?

Is that what Good Germans thought?

1,942 dead, 14,641 wounded, and counting...

Andy Rooney of 60 minutes and Jon Stewart of the Daily Show hammer the Bush administration over Iraq here:

Take that


As far as I can tell we are now in Iraq to keep the President and the Congress that backed him from being embarrassed by their poor judgement.

That ain't worth dying for if you ask me.

Supreme Crony

Why would anyone in their right mind nominate a person with no judicial experience whatsoever to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States of America?

Harriet Miers

This looks just like cronyism to me.

Apparently it looks like cronyism to many on the right too.

Harry Reid seems to favor the nomination, which would normally incline me to agree, but I instead think her lack of experience makes a mockery of the Supreme Court and the careers of those more qualified for the job.

Tom DeLay's Blues

Poor Tom Delay is being indicted by a new grand jury:

DeLay faces money laundering charges

I expect there will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth over these charges, except among Tom DeLay's many detractors (including myself).

Tisk Tisk Tisk

It just doesn't stop.

The GAO has called the Bush administrations use of taxpayer-funded propoganda illegal:

Can you do the time?

One question nobody seems to be asking in the big-tent media is this, "Who else is on the whitehouse payroll besides Mr. Williams?"

Isn't it to laugh to recall that Mr. Bush was to restore accountability to Washington?

If that were true he'd show himself the door and give the Presidential posterior a good stout kick.

Bushmouth

Sometimes you just have to watch ol' George talk and laugh...

And sometimes, you have to package it up in a nice bit of satire and laugh even harder:

Where wings take dream

U.S. troops launch 'Operation Iron Fist'

US Troops have just launched operation "Iron Fist" inside Iraq.

Uhm.

Who's leading the charge the Fuehrer Brigade?

Nazi rhetoric

Who names these things?

Abort all black babies and cut crime, says William Bennett

I know that modern Republicans are big-government, nation-building, defecit-growing, crony-promoting criminals.

But...

I didn't know they were also dumb-ass racists too:

Strange moral values

Is Mr. Bennett in a close race for KKK leader in his home state?

WTF?

Breaking News: Judith Miller to testify

Is Plamegate getting closer to resolution?

Judith Miller was last night released from prison after reaching an agreement to testify with special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.

I find this statement interesting:

"In recent days, several important things have changed that convinced Judy that she was released from her obligation"

Also interesting is the fact that her source appears to be connected to the office of Vice President Cheney.

Details here...

The Last Passion of the Democratic Party

Here is a well-written plea to Democrats to remember their purpose:

Justice for all

I'm seeing a lot of this type of thing as the majority who don't support the war in Iraq have nowhere to turn, as Democratic leaders try to nitpick the nuances of an ill-gotten, poorly planned, catastrophic failure dead ahead of us.

This is perhaps because many Democrats neglected their duty and handed the Bush administration a blank check to wage war. Perhaps they feel it is now better to abandon American soldiers than to change their minds before voters?

For shame.

We should get out of Iraq because it is the right thing to do. It was wrong to go in and it is more wrong to stay in. Our presence there is getting our soldiers killed for no oil.

Have D.C. Democrats noticed that every three months the President himself warns us to expect more violence inside Iraq? How much violence does that now add up to?

Are we supposed to stay in Iraq to flatter your opinion of yourselves?

Frist may be next

The Security and Exchange Commission has upgraded it's inquiry of Bill Frist to "formal" status:


Details here...


Prediction:

The President will say that Bill Frist is doing a heck of a job.

DeLay indicted in campaign finance probe

Yet another Republican makes a defiant exit due to corruption, this time under indictment, this time one Tom Delay (and stay tuned for Bill Frist and Karl Rove).

Hammer time

Mr. Delay ought to be thankful that the Ronnie Earle scandal reached him before the Jack Abramoff scandal did and do us all a favor and go quietly.

We, the American people, are the ones that deserve to be outraged, not him! He abuses his position and we're supposed to allow him to publicly trash the conclusion of a grand jury?

Good riddance to bad rubbish!

The march on Washington

The march on Washington on September 24th was huge but hard to see on T.V.

Here is some video footage from the march in Quicktime format. Other formats are available on the TruthOut website.

My favorite chant was,
"Arrest George Bush!"

Why aren't the major news outlets embedded in the peace movement?

ADDENDUM: Kudos to the Washington Post for their coverage, including this photo exhibit.

A day in the life of a Swedish schoolchild

The reason we pay taxes is to live in a civilized society. As we chop our taxes down society itself falls for it.

Often, I think, money reduces things to such an abstraction that everything becomes a number. As Lilly Tomlin put it, "Accountants know the cost of everything and the value of nothing."

Let's step back.

Imagine you went to sleep normally. You turned out the lights, laid down and fell asleep. When the alarm went off you woke up and zombie-like searched out the coffee machine. You sat down with your coffee and as you looked at the paper you spat coffee all over the table.

There on the front page of the Swedish Washington Post was an article about guests staying at an ice-hotel, made entirely of snow and ice, enjoying vodka.

You were, it seems, in Sweden.

You pinch yourself, but feel it and assume you are awake.

Your children come down to breakfast. Confused you pack them lunches (unnecessary as you'll see) then send them off to school, dressed in typical American fashion (just like those folks on MTV).

Here is what your child's day would be like when they arrived:

A day in the life of a Swedish schoolchild

The difference between what we have here, McDonalds encroaching in the schools, insufficient resources, and factory-based education, and what they have there, small class sizes, individualized curriculums, free lunches, and safe and clean environments, is a life-based tax-distribution (PDF) and enough taxes to fund the programs which benefit all citizens (the common good).

What are corporate taxes in Sweden like?

Here are the details (PDF).

When you talk only of taxes you talk only of money. When you talk only of money you talk only of numbers. When you talk only of numbers one has no more meaning than two or three or four except that one is easier to afford.

This has driven us to where we are, discussing schools as if they were budget items instead of budget items as if they were schools. We discuss healthcare as a number and therefore as if it were a burden on society rather than a life-affirming, citizen pleasing, benefit to society. It goes on-and-on in this manner up and down the budgets.

My shocking conclusion is that even the rich can benefit from a well-educated, well-cared-for society. It is perhaps more pleasant to believe that hard work or good morals or good breeding makes one better, more entitled, or worthy of extravagance though.

Numbers insulate us from suffering, they protect us from despair, and they keep our dreams in little boxes.

Bush or LBJ?

Which Texas President said this:

"America is committed to the defense of [insert country name] until an honorable peace can be negotiated. Despite the obstacles to victory we shall stay the course."


Find out here

Eating less at Gitmo

When I think about the new hunger strike at Guantanamo Bay I can't help but wonder, darkly...

Wouldn't it be convenient for the Bush administration if everyone there died, since Guantanamo Bay is illegal under international law, US law, and contrary to kindness.

One must admit that this would be a perfect solution to such wondering. The detainees get to be heroic, the US gets to be absolved of responsibility, US courts don't have their rulings openly ignored anymore, and the solution is final.

But...I suppose we should just let them starve and go about our business of watching the next Survivor champion crowned. I wonder if there will be any sexual tension in this years season.

Phil Donahue for President

Phil Donahue takes on Bill O'Reilly on the Iraq war in this video:

Phil vs Bill

It surprised me how much respect Bill showed Phil, and also how good Phil was at pressing his case. I take it that Phil is really upset with the Iraq war and its' cheerleaders.

Ugh

This is the man people thought would be a better President than John Kerry?

Speaka da English much?

Song of protest

If you have iTunes you can download this song for free. It is Bright Eyes performing "When the President Talks to God".

I like it and maybe you will too.

At least the price is right.

When the President Talks to God

This weekend there will be large protests in Washington D.C. on the 24th. If you're going you can load this tune up on your mp3 player and impress your friends.

McWhat?

Often liberals define themselves negatively, by which I mean they trumpet what they are not, not what they are.

If you don't believe me go to any health food store frequented by your local liberals and take a look at the shelves where you'll see:


Chips with no salt.
Bread with no gluten.
Coffee with no caffeine.
Soap with no scent, or no phosphates.

With politics it is much the same. Liberals are anti-Bush, anti-monopoly, anti-war, and anti-discrimination.

I confess I am guilty of falling into the same trap.

This is too bad because a lot of ideas on the left are very good for America. It is time, I think, to transform the way we talk. It is time to talk about what we are rather than what we are not.

One thing many on the left are for is energy independence, particularly sustainable non-polluting energy sources. This makes sense for our foreign policy, or environmental policy, our economic policy, and our security (no vulnerable dependencies).

With wind-mills, for instance, we all breathe cleaner air and forgo nuclear meltdown dangers and furthermore have enough wind to harness to supply all of America's power. Yet this progressive, forward-looking vision gets discussed as anti-nuclear, anti-coal, and anti-oil talking-points, which are nowhere near as unifying or constructive.

To that end here is a great idea my wife had.

She is a fan of old-time country music and heard that Willie Nelson was starting a bio-diesel company. She asked me what biodiesel was and I explained it was diesel fuel made from vegetable fats and how we could make our own using a kit sold by Home Power (I'm a subscriber).

She thought about that for a few moments and said, "Wow! McDonald's is sitting on a gold-mine. Why don't they take all that grease, team up with Willie, and add bio-diesel filling stations at their locations? You could buy McFuel with your McNuggets!"

In that moment I knew once again I made the right choice when I married.

Can you imagine the immense good this would do to McDonald's reputation among environmentalists?

Why not have our cars filled up as we wait in the drive-thru lane anyway? Now that's what I call convenient!

I'm lovin' it!

From hell's heart...

In a way I feel bad for Laura Bush, whose popularity suffers collateral damage by way of marriage. Unlike her husband she is interested in books, and in literature, and in American culture. Unlike her husband, who disdains opinion polls (and no wonder), she seems saddened by the snubs of people whom she obviously admires.

But, I guess she has made her bed and must now lie in it. She must accept that it is not easy to make friends when your husband is casting shadows of tyranny and religious chauvinism on American soil:

A poet says no

Poets are haunted by war.
It wakes them up at night.
They forget the children-damage least of all.
Their eyes are wells of poetry.

Good night, and good luck

George Clooney is one of my favorite actors.

He has a new movie called "Good Night, and Good Luck" slated for release on October 7th that I am looking forward to.

Here is the trailer:

Edward R. Murrow

I believe that McCarthyism is just around the corner because Americans are so scared they will soon seek the safety of persecution through herd-hysteria. Perhaps this movie will remind Americans that more was lost than gained when the greasy-haired high inquisitor was allowed to run amok in our land.

I hope the American press is ready for this new McCarthyism, but when I look into the vacant stare of what passes for a news anchor today I have my doubts. Can the sensation salesmen and the disembodied divas protect our liberties when we really need them the way Edward R. Murrow did?

"Give me liberty or give me death", said John Henry at St. John's church in March of 1775. What will Americans say 230 years later?

Pauline Robinson Bush

The way the Bush family reacted when Pauline Robinson Bush died on October 11, 1953 is something that might help to explain the President's personal disconnect from humanity in the wake of Katrina.

It turns out that the young George W. Bush was kept in the dark about his little sister's leukemia, was told to stop playing with her, not present when Robin died, nor taken to the funeral. The day after the funeral George H.W. Bush and Barbara Bush reportedly spent time golfing in Rye.

I forget that sometimes.

No wonder he had no empathy for the victims of Katrina.

About Robin Bush


Recalling this musters up symptoms of compassion for the President in my bunkered heart.

But...

My sympathy for the President doesn't usually last long. No longer, in fact, than it takes me to recall that stem cell research is an avenue of hope for those suffering with leukemia today.

The president's position on stem cell research is well known.

What is going on?

Here is another story which highlights the fact that something isn't right in the Katrina relief effort:

You're on your own


I am no longer prepared to excuse the US government's awful response to the disaster as mere incompetence, because too much planning went into the failure.

For instance:

FEMA sends aid away, leaves it idling uselessly in Maryland.

British food aid to be incinerated

Chertoff delays Katrina response

FEMA won't accept Amtrak's help in evacuations

FEMA turns away experienced firefighters

FEMA turns back Wal-Mart supply trucks

FEMA prevents Coast Guard from delivering diesel fuel

FEMA won't let Red Cross deliver food

FEMA bars morticians from entering New Orleans

FEMA blocks 500-boat citizen flotilla from delivering aid

FEMA fails to utilize Navy ship with 600-bed hospital on board

FEMA to Chicago: Send just one truck

FEMA turns away generators

FEMA urges First Responders Not To Respond

FEMA shows "lack of urgency and lack of respect" handling dead bodies

Visit the Daily KOS for updates to this list: here, or you can also check here.

Consider that these were not things FEMA failed to do, or to consider, but did consider and did do. They were actions in other words and not a lack thereof. They were actions that would not make sense to an idiot. Why then, should they make sense to Michael Chertoff and Michael Brown?

I think it is time for the American press to do some digging. There's a story here that I think they are missing. Something about the poor response seems deliberate.

Worth seeing

I say again that I personally don't feel President Bush is racist. I think he's incompetent and feels that poor people are untouchable (whatever their color).

However, here is a video by K-Otix that I think is worth seeing...

(Be forewarned that it may have a few naughty words in it):

Gold Digger


Thanks to the folks at One Good Move for posting the link.

9/11 And The Sport of God

Know what a Patriot Pastor is?

Heard of the book, "Is Religion Killing Us?"?

Does a literal interpretation of the Bible inevitably lead to the conclusion that God is "sadistic, brutal, vengeful, callow, cruel and savage"?

Who did Pat Robertson blame 9/11 on?

What is a Christocrat?

What is the "Ohio Restoration Project"?

What is America 21?

What is a Christian Realist?

Read on and find out in this article by Bill Moyers on the radical right.

Why context matters

Context is the difference between parroting and Truth telling.

Few examples are as clear-cut as this segment by the Daily Show. Most network news outlets would not take the time to set Tom's words into perspective the way Jon Stewart does here:

Hypocrite

Without context one almost sympathizes with Mr. Coburn's aching heart and passionate call to less partisanship. Contrasted against his own hate-speech, though, one sees a hypocrite exposed rather than a genuine appeal to civility.

Average family health policy nears $11,000

As the average health insurance plan tops $10,000 dollars I wonder if a single-payer insurance program like they have in Canada isn't a better system after-all.

Why?

1. A lot of fear would be lifted from many American's lives, particularly the fear of not being able to care for a sick child. People that are afraid make bad decisions for themselves, their families, and their communities.

2. Our economy would get a boost if we put $10,000 dollars in every family's pocket. Furthermore, that money will be well spent.

3. American companies would be more competitive. For instance, Ford Motor Company claims $1,000 of the cost of every car is due to health insurance costs.

4. A lot more small businesses would be added to our economy, since a chief obstacle now is the burden of health insurance premiums.

5. A new study by researchers at Harvard Medical School and Public Citizen estimates that national health insurance could save at least $286 billion annually on paperwork, enough to cover all of the uninsured and to provide full prescription drug coverage for everyone in the United States. That is called a win-win scenario.

6. A high percentage of America's personal bankruptcies are fueled by health-care costs. A single-payer system would eliminate this strain on our financial system.

7. The last time I checked Canadian economic growth met or surpassed U.S. performance in seven of the past ten years.

8. There is a strong moral case to be made for caring for the sick.

9. Government should provide for the common good and any one of us can become sick or disabled. This, therefore, seems like a duty of a good government.

Hiding the Truth

Once again Republicans are putting party before country, even when it comes to matters of national defense:

Disloyalty to America


If it is true, as the Bible says, that "the Truth will set you free", then what does that make us in this moment?

Maybe memere was right

My grandmother believed that there was no need to worry about going to hell because we were already there. Her worry was staying in hell, that is to say being reincarnated here on Earth. Her idea of heaven seemed to be somewhere else.

I can't say I blame her. As a young girl she had to wait in bread lines during the great depression. She worked in a mill, but found love and married. After becoming pregnant her husband was drafted into WWII and sent overseas for four years.

Yet, my grandfather survived and life became somewhat normal until the Korean war, to be followed by the Vietnam war where three of her sons served.

So, she had a lot to worry about during her lifetime and I didn't blame her for feeling the way she did about Earth being hell. But, I didn't believe her until last night, when we learned that Karl Rove, a political assassin, is going to be in charge of the Katrina rebuilding effort.

Maybe memere was right?

Instead of being fired for exposing a CIA agent in time of war, or held in jail as a traitor (if intent were established), Karl Rove is going to be the face of compassion in the Bush administration! The man that defeated John McCain by insinuating he had an illegitimate black child is going to repair the President's image with the predominantly black Katrina refugees!

I'm sorry Jesus. I must have been terribly wicked to deserve this punishment, but I hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me.

Mercy!

ADDENDUM: Here is a great post by Josh Marshall on this subject.

It's easy being green.

Here is an angry article which says Mike Brown was the result of Bush's type of affirmative action, that is preferential treatment for rich white men.

Old-boy network

That's a really good point that I hadn't thought of and perhaps a new way for Democrats to talk about race. Discrimination isn't just about black or brown people being held down, but also about those that are held up without merit.

However, I claim that class issues are more discriminatory than race issues today and think John Edwads really nails the issue with his "Two America's" theme.

Green, I feel, is the only color that power cares about, and Kermit the Frog was wrong. It's easy being green...

When you're green you have healthcare.

When you're green your children go to good schools.

When you're green your neighborhoods are safe.

When you're green your neighborhoods are quiet.

When you're green you can afford healthy food.

When you're green no predatory lenders call.

When you're green you can defend yourself like Michael Jackson or Ken Lay, or ensure any jail time is comfortable like it was for Martha Stewart.

Yes, when you're green, life is good.

When you're not green you are stranded on rooftops after a flood waiting for help that is slow to arrive.

When you're not green you lose your home because you want the hospital to save your daughter's life and have no other way to turn green.

When you're not green they find out you are innocent after they kill you on death row.

When you're not green the food on the grocery store shelves is rotten before you bring it home.

The reason that affirmative action is focused on economic opportunity is because the racism you experience is in inverse proportion to your green. When you're green, in other words, nobody cares if you're black. They also don't care if you're a moron.

12 Explosions in Iraq Kill at Least 152

It seems that billions of dollars of expense and years of patience has not allowed the US to secure Baghdad, let alone Iraq. So why is everybody in the Bush administration so confident of their course?

The captain of the Titanic, I am sure, was confident of his course. That didn't make him correct did it?

Bombs in Baghdad

It should not escape your attention that Al Qaida in Iraq took responsibility for the bombing. As was predicted before the war began Iraq is becoming a breeding ground for terrorists, just like Afghanistan turned out to be for Russia.

People foresaw that icebergs were in northern waters too. Those that paid no heed and confidently stayed the course seem to have learned the hard way that they were mistaken.


ADDENDUM: Today there are fresh bombings.

Preying on Katrina

This article points out that the same corporations getting no-bid contracts to redestruct Iraq are now circling the Katrina devestation and licking their lips. They look with hunger to the President in hopes of a publicly-financed nest egg.

It's a small world afterall

One man's loss

Click photo for clarification by George Lakoff 

Pat Robertson is nutty

It seems that every time Pat Robertson opens his mouth these days it is to sputter hate-speech, paranoid delusions, or outright crazy-talk.

For example, he is currently blaming Hurricane Katrina on Ellen Degeneres, when we sane people know that God is really punishing Pat Robertson for recently calling for Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez to be assassinated.

Paranoid Pat


Could Pat be trying to deflect attention from the log in his own eye?

To put it kindly

The soft bigotry of low expectations in action:

Praise for George

Refugees or Evacuees

I have never liked the politically "correct" movement, particularly it's penchant for controlling language (thought?).

Lately I have heard the thought police trying to enforce the notion that people should say evacuee, not refugee, when speaking of Katrina's displaced.

I am somewhat perplexed, since a refugee is essentially one that seeks refuge, and not to my knowledge a term of derision:

Full definition here

Perhaps some people can't stand the notion that we in America can have our own refugees and so their response is to sanitize the language, thereby comforting themselves with righteous indignation and a linguistic wall of obscurity.

I do know that I am going to continue to say refugee here because I believe it is a phrase that garners sympathy, and sympathy is the mother of giving. I also feel that the hardest-hit victims of Katrina were not evacuee's (that is to say people that were evacuated) and that was indeed a large part of their problem.

I smell a rat

The center for disease control has, since 1969, compiled abortion statistics. They have been unpolitical about it, which means they were one of the few sources of trustworthy objective analysis out there.

As you may know the abortion rate is tied closely to the poverty rate. This historic trend was reinforced during the Clinton years where 7 million families moved out of poverty and the abortion rate went down, down, down.

See for yourself


Given that historical trend I had to wonder, since George W. Bush has produced an economy with 4 straight years of families moving into poverty what was happening to the abortion rates.

CDC abortion statistics seem to have stopped being published in 2001.

My inquiries to the CDC on the subject have not been answered.

I suspect that Republicans have a dirty little secret that they want to hide from their base of religious supporters, namely that supporting Republican economics requires supporting an increase in the abortion rate.

I could be wrong, but I find it highly unlikely that Karl Rove would keep a decline in the abortion rate a secret from da base.

I smell a rat.

Here's an idea

I have an idea.

People now are talking about independent commissions to get to the bottom of the Katrina disaster.

I say a commission is a big fat whitewash independent or not, but at least an independent one has the potential to be less obvious.

Why not appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the mess?

Those guys seem pretty thorough and we might actually learn something.

Of course, there must be a pretext of a crime I suppose....

Is there such a thing as criminal negligence?

That's A Dodge

I've just been watching a press briefing that you should see:

David vs Goliath


It clearly emphasizes the disconnect between the Bush administration and the American people right now. It looks to me like Scotty McClellan here is flustered, angry, (watch his color change), and confused. It's as if he doesn't realize that when there are thousands of AMERICAN dead bodies in the streets of one of our greatest cities it's time to produce answers. It's time for some accountability.

How I hope the era of a stagnant press politely allowing themselves to be marinated in B.S. is over. How I hope that next time this happens the next questioner takes up where the last one left off until an actual, factual, answer to a direct question is given. How I hope the objective Truth will stop being treated like a ball in a shell-game, elusive, blurred, and concealed.

Don't let them lull you back to sleep boys!

You're making me proud.

Thanks.

Race and Katrina

Here is a video that many of you may have missed, or seen in edited format. Rapper Kayne West speaks from the heart at a Red Cross fundraiser while sharing the stage with Mike Myers.

I disagree with Kayne and think the slow response to Katrina was not driven by racism but instead by really ineffective ideology in conjunction with nepotism. However, I am white and I am sure that I can't see racism through Kayne's eyes.

Maybe you agree with Kayne?

In any case I respect someone testifying from their heart (as opposed to a teleprompter). I have to admit the second time Kayne spoke I laughed like hell. I might not agree with his position, but I am really weary of B.S. and find candor refreshing.

Maybe it will become a trend?

The third world

Today I find myself wondering about that term the third world. I have heard it a lot lately in the aftermath of Katrina. People are saying that Biloxi, Mississippi and New Orleans, Louisiana look like the third world.

It is a rather curious turn of phrase.

What do we mean when we say it?

The history of the phrase, which you can get in full here is: "This expression originated in the mid-1900s, at first denoting those countries in Asia and Africa that were not aligned with either the Communist bloc nations or the non-Communist Western nations."

But I wouldn't say that it was used that way anymore.

I think that when we say it we think of, literally, another planet.

On this other planet there is a lot of suffering human beings, but what makes it special is that we don't care. It is somehow normal on this third world for people to starve, or be exploited as indentured servants, as long as they keep making our cheap sneakers.

I think that is a more modern, honest, and sober definition of the phrase third world don't you?

I suppose it could also be argued that the phrase third world is also a planet of predominantly dark-skinned people, which seems to be the case for those left behind in Katrina's wake.

What do they mean on the newscasts when they compare New Orleans, then to the third world? Are they trying to harden our hearts, or garner sympathy, as in these poor devils have it so bad they look like they are on the wrong planet.

I understand, now, those people who say One World as if it weren't an astute observation of the obvious. Their wish is to live on the planet where it is not OK to suffer, where someone will come to their aid, where the compassion is.

I think maybe I'll stop using the phrase. Maybe forgotten world would be better?

Pressure drop

I usually restrain myself from these kinds of things.

Today I don't feel like it.


Take another vacation
You lazy blockhead!
Take another vacation
while we tally our dead.

Go ride your bike with Lance Armstrong!
Go strum guitar and sing Nero's song.

Go back to your ranch.
Go back to your brush.
Go dine on pretzels.
Be a born-again lush.

What you gonna do
when they come with Voodoo?
Where can you hide
from eyes that have died?

America, I know,
can survive quite a blow.
America, I hope,
can survive such a dope.

FEMA Chief Waited Until After Storm Hit

President Bush doesn't really need another reason to fire the twin disasters Michael Brown and Michael Chertoff, but one has just been made public all the same.

It seems Mr. Brown waited until hours after Katrina struck before making a request to his boss to dispatch 1000 Homeland Security employees to the region, and gave them two days to arrive, and they were to serve in PR roles.

It also seems that Mr. Chertoff, Mr. Brown's boss, wasn't competent enough to send the people on his own, nor in a useful capacity.

President Bush tolerates failure in the performance of Donald Rumsfeld even as American GIs die and die and die, so I fully expect him to stand behind these twin pillars of fault as well while Americans die and die and die.

Accountability is about as far from the province of Mr. Bush as satisfaction with his performance is to Katrina's survivors.

You just can't make this stuff up

I fully expect the "leak" in this case to have been orchestrated by Mr. "loose-lips" Rove, but I don't care if the story is true. There is enough information to act already.

How much failure in such a critical role is too much?

How many people get to die for lack of competence before the President restores credibility?

What to do

I suppose I shouldn't simply berate the Bush administration for its faulty relief effort without offering a few suggestions. So, here goes.

First and foremost, I think, President Bush needs to steal a quiet moment and reflect upon what it means to lose everything. By everything I don't just mean possessions, I mean also family members, neighborhoods, places of employment, transportation systems, access to food and water, access to television and telephones, control over your own safety or that of your family's. I mean living in an environment that is unclean, unsafe, and laden with despair. I say this because I feel the President is out-of-touch with his compassion (perhaps it got lost to politics), and I feel that he needs it now so that he can rise up and be a beacon of hope, or at least stop saying incredibly stupid cold-hearted things.

Secondly, I'd say, reassign those twin disasters Michael Chertoff and Michael Brown. They have done enough damage and I'm sick of their excuse making. Marshall Whitman suggests a competent replacement would be Rudi Giuliani and I agree with him. I say this can't happen soon enough.

Thirdly, the world community is extending offers of help. Accept them with thanks. In fact accept any and all help. Refusing help at a time like this is as daft as it gets. This might even help you with your foreign policy as it will restore some old friendships the way nothing but tragedy can.

Fourthly, here is a guiding principal. If an idea decreases human suffering approve it immediately, if it increases it abandon it. So, if truckloads of water appear at a time when water is desperately needed you can approve of the idea immediately. If Canada wants to help with the rescue effort you can approve the idea immediately. If a FEMA middle-manager wants to obstruct relief efforts to show-off his authority you can fire him immediately (which upholds both principals).

Lastly, take your economic ideology and shove it. Be guided simply by what works. What works will be anything that fulfills the needs of those in trouble. If they need housing open a closed military base, bring in cruise ships, direct people to MoveOn. If they need food put New Orleans immense hospitality industry to work. If they feel abandoned give them hope. This is no time for high ideals but a time for lowly human compassion. In other words, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Harry Reid has a host of suggestions too. You can read them here.

President Bush people are desperate for help and to let them die expecting it is about as noble as leaving the fallen on the battlefield. You were in the Guard, you know what that means don't you?

Be the uniter we're overdue.
Bring on your compassion.

A forgiving nation awaits your redemption.

A little rhyme

Told the truth?
You're demoted!
Told a lie?
You're promoted!

Accountability rules and sincerity prevails?
Sincerity tales and nobody's fools!

Go back to your holes.
Go back to your pits.
Go lurk in the dark.
Stop giving me fits.

On second thought

When I'd first heard that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) stopped three truckloads of water sent to New Orleans by Wal-Mart I was fit to be tied.

Details here...

"How could people be so stupid as to render vocabulary merciless to describe it?", I raged.

"How could anybody be so incompetent as to send away the needs of great despair?", I stormed.

"What kind of an idiot does it take to be so monstrously ineffective?", I howled.

But on second thought a deeper disgust dawned.

For years the President has been a promoter of privatization, and of smaller government (in words alone, not deeds). Here, unbidden, was an opportunity to score from third base on a solid single. A PR paradise ready for the plucking!

Wal-Mart, the best company in the world at getting goods to people efficiently, generously (it must be said) decided to respond to the Katrina disaster by sending desperately needed water. They were, in effect, a sterling example of a corporation taking the lead and filling holes left by receeding government services. "See?", the President could have said, "it is possible to privatize and to down-size government without pain!"

Instead, stupidly, Wal-Mart's generosity was turned away.

It seems this President can't even recognize a good idea when it pulls up in three trucks and honks its horn!

Bad plans produce bad results

Here is a timeline put together by Kevin Drum that clearly shows the polices of George W. Bush as contrasted against their shabby end-results for Katrina disaster victims:


The Washington Monthly


I think the most important point made is that a response to this type of disaster is nearly identical to, say, a terrorist attack on a major city; and there was a weeks warning with Katrina, and there have been years of preparation (at great expense) since 911. In other words the Bush administration excuse-making about structural re-adjustments that are terrorism related just don't add up (as Bugs Bunny liked to say).

One point I would like to add in light of the recent warning by Herr Chertoff of the H.S.S. (Homeland Security Services) to expect an "ugly scene" in the aftermath of Katrina is, "Yes, of course you idiots! Why do you think we've been impatient with your accursed foot-dragging?"

Am I wrong?

I Wrote Bush's War Words -- in 1965

Thanks to the Prissy Patriot for pointing out this article on her blog. It is an opinion piece written by Daniel Ellsberg in the L.A. Times.

Daniel compares President Bush's recent speech to those he advised in 1965 to keep us in Vietnam:

Learn some history

The question now seems to be, "How long will we stay the course? Will it be until 58,000 American GIs die to uphold the honor of a pack of liars?"

I, for one, hope not. It seems that Daniel makes two.

Another way to help

Hurricane Katrina has left a lot of people temporarily homeless. It is also a tragedy that is hard to face without help from neighbors.

So, MoveOn has put together a site which allows Americans with room to spare to put up survivors in need of somewhere to stay.

This allows one to reach out and make life better for at least one family in need.

It is also a place that those in need can turn for shelter.

In other words, it is neighbor helping neighbor, and what Americans have always been good at.

Details here

A Disaster for President Bush?

FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, was heartily trimmed by the Bush administration and many argue that the Federal response to hurricane Katrina was hampered by this decision.

Here is an article published in Sept. 2004 which complains:

Bush administration policy changes and budget cuts, they say, are sapping FEMA's longterm ability to cushion the blow of hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, tornados, wildfires and other natural disasters.


Full details

If news like that got out it could be bad for the President's reputation.

Lord knows that ridiculous speech he gave yesterday isn't going to help.

Then there's this news. It is so bizarre and smacks of such incompetence that one has to wonder if the President is playing with 52 cards in his deck.

Krugman on Greenspan

Like Paul Krugman I cannot forgive Alan Greenspan for selling the Bush tax cuts while warning America about paying down the deficit too fast.

While I admit that the economic stewardship of President Bush has indeed been a competent solution to worries about a freedom from debt, and I further admit that the Presidential tax-cuts have been so effective that there is absolutely no danger at all now that the deficit will be paid down too fast, I argue that the debt will become an anchor around opportunity's neck, dragging students out of schools, services out of communities, and healthcare away from Americans.

My understanding is that the role of the central bank (aka "The Fed") is to maintain the debt levels as high as possible, but not so high that interest payments to the investors (such as the Rockefeller's and the Communist Chinese) cannot be made.

In light of this understanding, Mr. Greenspan's warnings and actions have made perfect sense, although he may have bit off more debt than America can eschew with his backing of Republican economics.

In light of this understanding, it also makes perfect sense why the mouthpieces for the mega-rich (aka Republicans) were railing against Greenspan when the debt was going down under Democrats, but are largely silent now that it has been brought to record-setting levels.

So, given my understanding, you may perhaps forgive me if I view Alan Greenspan as a traitor to America's young, a deliverer of debt, and a selfish human being.

Unlike me, Mr. Krugman maintains civility and here is what he has to say on Mr. Greenspan's career:

Greenspan and the Bubble