This Is What I Think

Traditional Marriage Perverts the Tradition of Marriage

2008-11-03T17:12:00.001-08:00

A brilliant playwright (and close personal friend of mine) recently sent this editorial out regarding Prop 8. I thought I'd share.

Traditional Marriage Perverts the Tradition of Marriage
by Jeff Goode (Californian)

About a decade ago, as a young playwright, I was hired to write a script for the Renaissance Festival of Kansas City. It was a period piece about knights and jousts and intrigues of the court, building up to a lavish royal wedding between a prince and a princess, restoring peace to the troubled land.

This was one of my first professional writing assignments, so I was really excited about doing all the research and making sure that everything was historically accurate, especially the royal wedding which needed to follow all the traditions exactly.

Over a summer of research, I learned a lot of surprising facts about the history of marriage and weddings, but by far the most shocking discovery of all was that the tradition of marriage-as-we-know-it simply did not exist in those days. Almost everything we have come to associate with marriage and weddings -- the white dress, the holy vows, the fancy cake and the birdseed -- dates back a mere 50 or 100 years at the most. In many cases less.

And the handful of traditions that do go back farther than that are, frankly, horrifying. The tossing of the garter, for example, evolved from a 14th Century tradition of ripping the clothing off of the bride's body as she left the ceremony in order to "loosen her up" for the wedding night. Wedding guests fought over the choicest bits of undergarment, with the garter being the greatest prize.

Savvy brides got in the habit of carrying extra garters in their bodice to throw to the male guests in hopes of escaping the ceremony with some shred of modesty intact!

It turns out that marriage, in days of old, was a barbaric custom which was little more than a crude exchange of livestock at its most civilized, and a little less than ritualized abduction at its worst. That's why you'll find no reference to white weddings in the Bible, or the union of one man and one woman. Because up until fairly recently, there was nothing religious about it.

You will of course find plenty of biblical bigamy, practiced by even the most godly of heroes-- Noah, Abraham, David, Solomon -- because that's what marriage was in those days. Even in more enlightened New Testament times, the only wedding worth mentioning (the one at Cana) is notable only for the miraculous amount of wine consumed.

In the 21st Century, we've heard a lot about the sanctity of marriage, as if that were something that has been around forever, but in reality the phrase was invented in 2004. Google it for yourself and see if you can find a single reference to the "sanctity of marriage" before the Massachusetts Supreme Court legalized same-sex unions in that state. The proverbial Sanctity of Marriage sprang into being because opponents of gay marriage needed a logical reason to overturn an established legal precedent. And the only thing that trumps the Constitution is God himself.

Unfortunately, God is still pretty new to the whole marriage game (or he might have made an honest woman out of the Virgin Mary, am I right? Try the veal!)

The truth is that marriage has always been more a secular tradition rather than a religious one. Up until the early Renaissance, in fact, couples were traditionally married on the church's front doorstep, because wedding ceremonies were considered too vulgar to be performed inside the building: After all, there was implied sex in the vows and shameless public displays of affection. No clergyman in his right mind would have allowed such an unholy abomination on the premises.

But as times changed, ideas and attitudes about marriage also changed. So when people became religious, matrimony became holy. When people became nudists, clothing became optional. And so on throughout history.

And the wonderful thing about the institution of marriage -- the reason it has remained strong and relevant through thousands of years of ever-changing times -- is its unique ability to change with those times.

Marriage is, and always has been, a constantly evolving tradition that never fails to incorporate the latest shifts in culture and climate, changing social habits, fashions and even fads. (Because, seriously, that chicken dance is not in the Bible.)

Thus, in the 1800s when the sole purpose of marriage was procreation and housekeeping, marriage between an older man and a hard-working tween girl was considered perfectly normal. Today we call it pedophilia.

For thousands of years marriage was essentially a business transaction between the parents of the bride and groom. But in the last century or so, we've finally seen the triumph of this new-fangled notion that marriage should be about a loving relationship between two consenting adults.

Followers of the Mormon faith can tell you that the traditions of their forefathers included a devout belief that polygamy was appropriate and sanctified. But modern Mormons generally don't support that vision of happiness for their daughters.

And during the Civil Rights era, when opponents of interracial marriage tried to pass laws making such couples illegal, we came to realize that they, too, were wrong in trying to redefine marriage to prevent those newfound relationships.

Always marriage has triumphed by becoming a timely celebration of our society, rather than a backlash against it. It's strange, then, to see "tradition" used as a weapon against change, when change is the source of all its greatest traditions.

Just ask the white dress: In 1840, Queen Victoria of England married Prince Albert wearing a beautiful white lace dress -- in defiance of tradition -- in order to promote the sale of English lace! The image was so powerful that practically overnight the white wedding gown became de rigueur for the well-heeled bride. And then it became de rigueur for every bride.

By the dawn of the 20th Century, the white dress had also inexplicably come to symbolize chastity. (Even though blue was traditionally the color of virginity --"something borrowed, something blue...")

And the new equation of white with virginity eventually achieved such a rigid orthodoxy that older readers may remember a time when wedding guests who happened to know that the bride was not perfectly pure would have felt a moral obligation to demand that she change into something off-white before walking down the aisle.

Fortunately, as cultural norms eased during the Sexual Revolution, a sort of "don't ask, don't tell" policy took hold where all brides were required to wear white regardless of their virtue and the less said about it the better.

In recent years, as a generation of divorcees have remarried and a generation of young people have entered wedlock with some degree of "experience", the pretense of a connection between literal virginity and the bridal gown has become entirely obsolete. A colorful journey for a custom which has always seemed iron clad, even as it was evolving over time.

And not all traditions have to do with changing sexual standards. The long-time custom of pelting the newlyweds with birdseed did not exist before the 1970s when animal-lovers realized that songbirds were bloating on dried rice that they found on the ground after the former custom.

Economic times have caused families to rethink the age-old convention of the bride's father paying for the entire ceremony -- a last vestige of the days of dowries when a young man had to be bribed to take a free-loading daughter off her parents' hands -- that well-established custom has gradually given way to a more humane approach to sharing the financial burden.

Even religious traditions of marriage have experienced constant metamorphosis over the years. As more interfaith couples have wed, we have seen the emergence of multi-disciplinary ceremonies where couples have chosen not to follow the out-dated tradition of rejecting one or both of their faiths as a prerequisite of holy matrimony.

One of the most beautiful weddings I ever attended was between a young Jewish fellow and his Catholic fiancé, whose mother was born in France. The ceremony was performed by both a rabbi and a priest with intertwining vows in English, Latin, Hebrew and French. A perfect expression of the union of their two families, yet one which would have been unthinkable just a generation before.

But, again, marriage has such a long history of changing with the ever-changing times, that the last thing we should expect from it is to stop growing and changing. We know today that marriage is not a rote ritual handed down by God to Adam & Eve and preserved verbatim for thousands of years. It is, rather, an expression of how each community, each culture, and each faith, chooses to celebrate the joining of loved ones who have decided to make a life together.

Christians do not expect Jesus to be central to a Buddhist wedding, nor do Jews refuse to acknowledge Lutheran unions because they didn't include a reading from the Torah. Marriage is what we each make of it. And that's the way it always should be.

Perhaps the greatest irony of the traditional marriage argument is that it seeks to preserve a singular tradition that has, in fact, never existed at any point in history.

Because, honestly, which traditional definition of marriage do we want our Constitution to protect?

...The one from Book of Genesis when family values meant multiple wives and concubines?
...Or the marriages of the Middle Ages when women were traded like cattle and weddings were too bawdy for church?
...Since this is America, should we preserve marriage as it existed in 1776 when arranged marriages were still commonplace?
...Or the traditions of 1850 when California became a state and marriage was customarily between one man and one woman-or-girl of age 11 and up?
...Or are we really seeking to protect a more modern vision of traditional marriage, say from the 1950s when it was illegal for whites to wed blacks or Hispanics?
...Or the traditional marriage of the late 1960s when couples were routinely excommunicated for marrying outside their faith?

No, the truth of the matter is, that we're trying to preserve traditional marriage the way it "was and always has been" during a very narrow period in the late 70s / early 80s - just before most of us found out that gays even existed: Between one man and one woman of legal age and willing consent. Regardless of race or religion (within reason). Plus the chicken dance and the birdseed. Those are okay.

But there's something profoundly disturbing about amending the Constitution to define anything about the 1970s as "the way God intended it."

She makes him feel so young....

2008-10-29T07:40:00.000-07:00

See more funny videos at Funny or Die

Go Get'em, Joe the Senator!

2008-10-26T10:15:00.001-07:00

At long last....sanity.

2008-10-19T11:09:00.001-07:00

Charlie Gibson as Batman and Sarah Palin as...

2008-10-13T01:23:00.000-07:00

Protect Elections, Prosecute Rove

2008-10-08T17:19:00.000-07:00

From: Velvet Revolution:

RoveCyberGate.com

Tell Congress to investigate Karl Rove’s cyber strategy to illegally manipulate elections. Click here to send an email to your Congress Members demanding immediate public hearings on whistleblower allegations that Rove architected and directed illegal attacks on Democratic candidates through the improper use of corporate funds channeled through fake Web-based front organizations, the improper political use of the Justice Department to prosecute opposition candidates, and the use of Internet based IT networks to alter election results.

UPDATE 9/18/08: Ohio Attorneys File Papers To Take Deposition Of Bush IT Expert Michael Connell And Others-Includes Spoonamore Affidavit

Yesterday, Ohio attorney Cliff Arnebeck asked the federal court in Columbus to allow him to place Bush IT guru Michael Connell under oath to ask him about his 20 year work for the Bush family, including his work for Jeb Bush in Florida 2000 and for Ken Blackwell in Ohio 2004. “The public has a need and right to know, before the next presidential election, that the top Republican IT expert shares a concern about the vulnerability of electronic voting systems to fraudulent manipulation, and that this is not just “conspiracy theory,” Arnebeck wrote. Arnebeck also advised the court that he would seeking depositions from others, including Karl Rove. See Court filing.

Attached to the filing are two affidavits, one from cyber security expert Stephen Spoonamore and the other from analyst Richard Hayes Phillips. The Spoonamore affidavit asserts that the election computer setup used by Ken Blackwell in 2004 provided the means and opportunity for the manipulation of the election results. “ The vote tabulation and reporting system, as modified at the direction of Mr. Blackwell, allowed the introduction of a single computer in the middle of the pathway. This computer located at a company principally managing IT Systems for GOP campaign and political operations (Computer C) received all information from each county computer (Computer A) BEFORE it was sent onward to Computer B. This centralized collection of all incoming statewide tabulations would make it extremely easy for a single operator, or a preprogrammed single "force balancing computer" to change the results in any way desired by the team controlling Computer C. In this case GOP partisan operatives. Again, if this out of state system had ANY digital access to the Secretary of State’s system it would be cause for immediate investigation by any of my banking clients.” See Spoonamore Affidavit.

The Hayes affidavit asserts that after reviewing hundreds of thousands of documents, ballots and other election records, “it is my conclusion that there is so much evidence of ballot alteration, ballot substitution, ballot box stuffing, ballot destruction, vote switching, tabulator rigging, and old fashioned voter suppression, that the results of the 2004 presidential election, would have been reversed” had there been a real investigation. See Hayes Affidavit. He insists that the time is now to take depositions from those implicated in the theft of that election.

UPDATE: 9/30/08: Stay Lifted, Depositions Ordered, Connell Subpoenaed, Connell Stonewalls

Many new turns in this case the past few days. On September 22, the federal court lifted the stay in this case and ordered depositions to begin, starting with Bush IT Expert Michael Connell. (See Order in PDF) A few days later, Connell was subpoenaed and ordered to produce documents. He hired three high powered GOP-connected attorneys and filed a Motion to Quash (See Motion in PDF) and an affidavit stating that his information is confidential.(See Affidavit in PDF) His attorneys have refused to make him available for deposition and have indicated that they will not let him testify unless forced to by the court. Attorney Arnebeck intends to secure a court order to enforce the subpoena.

UPDATE: 10/1/08: VR Calls for Special Prosecutor to Investigate Connell and Rove

In light of Mike Connell’s stonewalling of the subpoena in this case, Velvet Revolution today called for Attorney General Mukasey to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the conduct, actions and knowledge of Michael Connell and his confidential work for Karl Rove and George Bush vis a vis election manipulations and destruction of data. VR also called on Congress to hold hearings and place Mr. Connell under oath to testify about election rigging, destruction of White House emails, and spying on Congress. See PDF news release.

UPDATE: 10/3/08: VR Offers 100K Reward In RoveCyberGate Case

Today, VR offered a $100,000 reward for information from whistleblowers who have knowledge of election related criminal activity by Michael Connell, Randy Cole, Karl Rove and others. You can see the full ad here. The information must result in a conviction.

UPDATE: 10/7/08: Velvet Revolution Calls On John McCain To Fire Michael Connell For Covering Up For Karl Rove In Federal Election Manipulation Lawsuit

Velvet Revolution today issued a press release calling for Republican candidate John McCain to fire computer expert Michael Connell from his campaign for covering up alleged election manipulations of Karl Rove and others. Mr. Connell, the GOP’s top computer expert, was subpoenaed based on a September 19th court order to testify under oath in an Ohio federal lawsuit looking into serious allegations that Mr. Rove has directed a strategy to illegally manipulate elections through the use of computer technology. Rather than cooperate in the investigation, Mr. Connell hired attorneys close to the Bush/Cheney Administration and refused to appear for the deposition arguing client (GOP) confidentiality. Those attorneys have said that they will do everything possible to keep Mr. Connell from testifying before the November general election. See press release pdf.

(Please take a bold step to deliver the new era of accountability that George W. Bush promised us when he was running for President in the 2000 elections. Prosecute the criminals who seek to undermine the very foundation of our Democracy...fair and honest elections. If you don't, the terrorists win...with the help of our own government. If we're fighting the epic struggle of our time to protect our freedoms and the institutions that make this nation great, that fight has to mean prosecuting ANYONE who would seek to defraud the voting public and illegally manipulate elections...especially those who would do so from inside the White House.

There is a whole lot more at the Velvet Revolution.com Go to their website. NOW!)

"My Friends" was the wrong phrase to pick to drink to...

2008-10-07T18:45:00.001-07:00

Somebody call an ambulance...I can't feel my teeth and my vision is going red.

Town Hall was a stupid debate format. Should have done boxing instead.

Warning for College Student Voters

2008-10-06T18:26:00.000-07:00

(Speaking of silencing the opposition, VET)

Last week, Virginia’s Montgomery County, home to Virginia Tech, issued a press release regarding proper protocol for college students registering to vote. In interviews with Inside Higher Ed Tuesday, it was described by turns as “unsubstantiated,” “chilling,” and (more generously) as not “incredibly encouraging or friendly.”

It reads, in part: “The Code of Virginia states that a student must declare a legal residence in order to register. A legal residence can be either a student’s permanent address from home or their current college residence. By making Montgomery County your permanent residence, you have declared your independence from your parents and can no longer be claimed as a dependent on their income tax filings — check with your tax professional. If you have a scholarship attached to your former residence, you could lose this funding. And, if you change your registration to Montgomery County, Virginia Code requires you to change your driver’s license and car registration to your present address within 30 days.”

The county registrar of elections said Tuesday that the memo was intended to counteract the absence of cautionary information given to students signed up through the ubiquitous get-out-the-vote registration drives. Generally speaking, however, those interviewed for this article said the warnings are, at worst, farfetched and misleading, or, at best, overstated and not typically supported in reality.

And, in a year in which historic youth voter turnout is anticipated, and the Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has been propelled by college students’ support, this case in the battleground state of Virginia is “not an isolated incident,” said Sujatha Jahagirdar, program director for the Student Public Interest Research Group’s nonpartisan New Voters Project.

“For a county registrar to issue what really are in our experience unsubstantiated warnings for a particular demographic is alarming,” said Jahagirdar. “It’s upsetting that this is coming up in Virginia. But it’s even more upsetting that the ability of young people to vote is questioned in many other states too.”

She added: “In 25 years of registering young voters around the country, none of the staff has ever heard of a single incident where a student has lost their tax status or their scholarship because of where they’ve registered to vote.”

Meanwhile, Obama’s campaign, which has been registering voters on Virginia Tech’s campus, has called the information propagated by the county “erroneous.” The campaign’s Virginia spokesman, Kevin Griffis, cited an exemption in the U.S. tax code allowing dependents to live away from home while attending school.

And he said that while students should check with their individual health insurers, in the campaign’s calls to 10 top health insurance companies, none indicated that registering to vote at a college address would be grounds for dismissing students from coverage, “and in fact some of them laughed at us.” (In an interview with Inside Higher Ed, Lynne High, a spokeswoman for the mammoth United Healthcare, echoed that students covered on their parents’ health insurance plans aren’t affected if they register to vote in another state.)

“We should be trying to engage as many people as possible in the political process, and have them take part in the civic life of their communities. In the case of students at Virginia Tech, their community is Blacksburg. That’s where they live; that’s where they call home. They should be able to vote there,” Griffis said. (The campaign of the Republican presidential nominee, John McCain, did not return a call to its Virginia state office Tuesday.)

On Information
Montgomery County followed up its first dispatch with a somewhat more neutrally worded news release two days later, on August 27. This one raised similar issues but in the form of questions, which students were prompted to consider in deciding whether to register to vote where their family lives or where their college is.

Among them: “Are you claimed as a dependent on your parents’ income tax return? If you are, then their address is probably your legal residence.... Do you have a scholarship that would be affected if you changed your legal residence?.. Would your health, automobile or other insurance coverage be affected by a change in your legal residence? If you are covered under your parents’ insurance policy, your protection could be affected by a change in your legal residence.”

The language in the county’s second release was taken from the Virginia State Board of Elections’ Web site, which in itself is discouraging, said Jon Greenbaum, director of the Voting Rights Project at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, in Washington. “If you were to look at this as a student, the suggestion that the State Board of Elections is giving you is, ‘You probably should not register to vote here. Don’t register to vote here.’ We think that’s the wrong message to be sending.”

In an interview, E. Randall Wertz, the general registrar of elections for Montgomery County, cited the State Board of Election’s guidance on college student registration as what he relied upon. He explained that, in sending the memo, he was attempting to combat either the misinformation, or lack of information, that college students have to consider when signing up through voter registration drives.

“What’s happening is they’re going out across campus over here and just getting people to sign the registration forms left and right and not telling them issues to consider, or telling them the incorrect information,” said Wertz. “Before they make the decision to register with us, they need to check with the accountant who does the taxes. They need to check if they’re on their parents’ health insurance. By being at a separate permanent address, does that affect their insurance?”

“I was just trying to inform them of things to consider, and then once they’ve made an informed decision and decide to come with us, we welcome them,” Wertz said.

“We don’t want to suppress them from voting and we certainly want them to vote. It’s just, what’s best for them is what they need to consider. Unfortunately, the campaigns, they’re not concerned with what’s best for the student. They’re generally concerned with just getting people signed up.”

From Tuesday through Friday of last week, voter registration drives at Virginia Tech brought more than 2,000 new registrations to the county, Wertz said. He also estimated that about 25 students have called to ask if the county could cancel the processing of their registration.

— Elizabeth Redden

The original story and user comments can be viewed online at http://insidehighered.com/news/2008/09/03/voting.

"And I'm a maverick, also."

2008-10-03T02:53:00.000-07:00

Republican John McCain calls Obama someone who is riding solely on his celebrity without real understanding of substantive issues.

And he gives us Palin?

"Hoosiers for the Hot Chick" is their response?

She never answered questions, couldn't stay on topic, a requirement for a real debate, and instead kept shifting to her memorized talking points. Then after the debate the first thing she does is get the crowd to chant "USA, USA, USA"???

Who is she running against? China?

This is the most important election in the history of the world, there is that much at stake here, and they act like its a soccer match.

She gave a shout out during the debate, fer crap's sake.

She has no idea what diplomacy is, how can she be passionate about it?

She's a mainstreeter?

Isn't anyone else sick to death of a "folksy" White House? Please, Jesus God, give me a White House filled with people who know what they're doing! Please, grant me a winning presidential ticket that understands the Constitution they are going to swear to defend. Is wanting that so wrong?

And they lie. They just stare straight into the camera and lie to all of us.

These people, and the people who march in lockstep behind them, scare the bejeebus out of me.

At least she supports the full legal rights of same sex couples. Though, look for that position to change...sorry, "be clarified" within 48 hours.

And she admitted that the Bush administration has made a lot of blunders...but never look back, unless you're looking back to Reagan. Does the Reagan estate get a royalty everytime she plagiarizes the former President?

Do we really want a President and Vice President who want government to get out of the way when our entire economy is on the brink of disaster due to massive deregulations that took away the safeguards put in place to prevent a second Great Depression? How does constantly repeating that government needs to "get out of the way" jive with the massive oversight that she and John McCain are supposedly in favor of?

What the hell is she talking about?

Joe Biden is right. Facts matter.

Why wouldn't she answer the question about John's plan to tax our health benefits as income?

Is the answer to the economic crisis really to blame Joe Six-Pack, as she lovingly calls the electorate?

"Come on, Joe Six-pack Hockysoccer Mainstreeter, doggone it, get some backbone and stop letting Wall Street take advantage of you, will ya? You big lug, you need to stop hitting the payday loaners and trying to live beyond your means, there. Just say, thanks, but no thanks, to them predatory lenders and the rest of those people who are just gonna lie to ya, you know, sayin' things with a pretty sparkle in their eyes and a big old smile on their faces tellin' ya that they care about making your life better when all they really want is for you to help them get what they want, doncha know?"

People like Sarah Palin and John McCain, you big lug.

I don't know, maybe she has a point. If people are actually stupid enough to vote the Palin - McCain ticket into office, they deserve what they get. Unfortunately, the other half of this polarized nation is going to have to suffer for their folly right along with them.

Her victory is not your victory. Not by a longshot.

Sarah Palin Bags Her Some Liberty

2008-10-02T14:04:00.000-07:00

Can't wait to witness the carnage tonight.

Nobody has made me weep so much for this country as this woman and her bid for the second highest office in the nation.

All McCain's Horses and all McCain's Men
Couldn't put America together again...

Republican John McCain is a lying liar (or too old to remember anything he said or thought yesterday)

2008-09-28T15:19:00.001-07:00

Hi, Liar!

2008-09-25T05:48:00.000-07:00

RFK Jr and Pap: "Is Your Vote Safe?"

2008-09-25T05:34:00.000-07:00

http://airamerica.com/ringoffire/blog/2008/sep/22/rfk-jr-and-pap-your-vote-safe

RFK Jr and Pap: "Is Your Vote Safe?"
By Ring of Fire

Bobby: "There are about 30 scams the republicans are deliberately
using, particularly in the swing states to get democratic voters off
the rolls. These scams originate in the so-called Help America Vote
Act which was passed after the Florida debacle in the year 2000. It
was originally suggested by democrats and republicans but it was
passed by a republican congress with a republican senate and a
republican president. And instead of reforming what happened in
Florida it basically institutionalized all the problems that happened
in Florida. And institutionalized a series of impediments that make
it very difficult for democrats to register, for democrats to vote
and then for democrats to have their vote counted.

"One of these requirements under HAVA is called "the perfect match"
and what that does is little known but it is devastating. A quarter
of the voters in Colorado have just been removed from the rolls
because of this--just this one scam. And what it does is they use a
computer system to compare your registration application to all other
government records of you in the state. So they'll look at your
social security records, your motor vehicle records and any time
you've had any interaction with the government and if there is any
information on your voter registration that is different than the
information on another government record that they find they remove
you from the voting rolls.

"For example, if I registered as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and yet my
motor vehicle license said Robert Frances Kennedy Jr. I'd be removed
from the rolls. If your initial is different, if you leave an initial
out, if you leave a "Jr." out, if you leave a hyphen out in your
name. And what they've done is a study in New York that said 80% of
the errors are errors that were done by state clerks who are taking
down this information. And particularly immigrant communities that
people tend to vote democratic, people have names…spell Muhammad with
an "o" instead of a "u" (crosstalk)

Pap: "Are the democrats suing to stop this?"

Bobby: "No, the democrats are doing nothing to stop it. In New
Jersey, which is a swing state, 300,000 voters in New Jersey were
just sent letters saying that they are now ineligible to vote. New
jersey is nice enough to actually notify them--most states will not
even notify them. And New Jersey intends to send out 870,000 letters
so that is three quarters of a million people off the voting rolls in
a state that could decide this vote by 50,000 votes. And these are
democrats that are being pushed off the rolls.

Bobby: "Let me tell you about one other of these scams people should
know about. If you're a newly registered voter--and of course the
democrats have done these gigantic registration drives--12 million
people on registration--if you're a new voter you MUST include your
license or some other state I.D. when you come to vote. What that
means is that if you're a college kid (and college kids now--they're
sending in absentee ballots--they're not going to the voting place,
they do everything online or they do everything remotely--they don't
dream of going to the precinct house voting on election day and
waiting in a long line) so if they send in the absentee ballot and
they don't include a color copy of their license their vote is going
to be thrown into a trash can. And none of these people know this
because you have had to read the law in order to know it. So there is
no notification for when you fill out your registration form, so all
of those 12 million people that the democrats have registered: those
ballots are going to be just thrown out.

Pap: "And if democrats won't talk about this how the hell's anybody
gonna know about it? I'm involved with this kind of thing every day--
I didn't know that until you just told me. The media is not talking
about it. How in the hell is somebody gonna find this out? It's just
incredible.

Bobby: "Hopefully--Obama is getting 66 million dollars a month--
hopefully somebody in the democratic organization is going to pay
some attention to this before election day.

The End Is Near....

2008-09-05T05:58:00.000-07:00

I watched the DVR of the convention. The whole night had the feel of a Nuremberg rally. Right down to the Storm Troopers dragging out those Peace Sign showing, pink shirt wearing women against the war. (Code Pink)
But ain't that little Bush Jungen precious?

I am not really being hyperbolic here. The woman was/is a member of the Alaska Independence Party which advocated secession because the US Government was too intrusive and violated the Constitution.

Never mind that both the persons on the Democratic ticket are ACTUAL CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLARS who might actually restore some elements of the Constitution this administration and the Republican Party have used for toilet paper for eight years.

From what I hear, McCain wanted to pick Lieberman, but Rove wouldn’t let him and insisted on Romney, so McCain went with her to show he is his own man. Then, even in his own acceptance speech, he spent a huge amount of time talking about her. She seemed to be the one in charge, the gun toting church lady.

I think that what will happen for the Mother of All October Surprises is that McCain will get another “health issue” and have to withdraw from the ticket, moving her to the number one spot and she will tap Romney.

Then there will be so much media buzz close enough to the election to provide cover for another theft of the election via fraud at the polls.

Again, what I hate most is that I now live in an America where a notion like that is even something that would occur to me, let alone seem plausible.

The crazy thing is this supposedly being a reflection of McCain's superior judgement that comes from experience. What it does reflect is a truly dangerous leadership style that will be based on gut reaction and attempts to salvage a sense of self worth on McCain's part as he continues to be pressed into service by the Rove Machine.

What I'm trying to say is...We're doomed.

Palin Watch:

The Onion Jokes on the Square

2008-09-03T11:31:00.001-07:00

Bush Tours America To Survey Damage Caused By His Disastrous Presidency

How John McCain Could Easily Get My Vote (and win the election)

2008-06-26T15:15:00.000-07:00

Put on an eyepatch, appear everywhere he goes with a whiskey bottle, and scream into the camera, "Barak's terrorist detector is craaaap. Will someone shut off that gods damned MUSIC????"

That's the only frakkin' thing that will work. And he's cylon enough to know it. Is he man enough to do it?

Congratulations, Barack...but I don't think it's going to happen.

2008-06-03T17:02:00.001-07:00

Here's my prediction...it is one I've made several times over the last four years.

Bush isn't going to leave office.

I'm terrified that there is going to be a major terror attack of such significance that martial law will be declared, elections suspended, the Constitution suspended, Congress dismissed.

The legal groundwork for that has already been laid:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

Or we will invade Iran, and then see the above.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/04/washington/04diplo.html?ref=world

Call me paranoid if you like, but that's what I really think is likely to happen. Is he acting like he's running out of time in office?

I think that if Hillary had gotten the nomination, like Rush Limbaugh and the other right wing spin machines were working so hard to make happen, then my prediction would not happen...it would just be a quiet continuation of the old regime under a new name....but Obama surprised everyone.

To be more accurate, the American People surprised everyone and voted for this man in such overwhelming numbers that he actually is going to be our nominee. Nobody, especially Hillary, understood just how fed up the majority of Americans are with this Administration, and the people who helped them do what they've done to us and the world. People like Hillary Clinton, whose votes on the war, the telecom companies, and so on simply couldn't be forgotten.

And now, all bets are off. With Obama stumping on the radical notion of advocating a foreign policy that involves actual negotiation and real diplomacy...the neo-con hand will be forced.

Don't get me wrong...a Bush dictatorship isn't what I'm hoping for. I'd love for the candidate that I actually support to win the election, take office without incident, and change the catastrophic course that this nation has been on since the Rhenquist Five handed over our nation to this evil, wretched man and his evil, wretched, greedy supporters.

But what about the last eight years inspires hope?

Scotty Confirms Archie Was Right All Along

2008-06-01T07:13:00.000-07:00

Long time readers...and there actually are a few...will know that from the beginning I've said that it was Bush himself who leaked the Valarie Plame stuff.

I've said all along that he is vindictive enough, vengeful enough, and has enough arrogance to not care about the laws designed to restrict and limit what a President can do while in office.

Now, in his book, Scott McClellan states that the President himself was involved in selectively declassifying intelligence...including intelligence used to discredit Joe Wilson.

I repeat the cry for justice.

I repeat the call for impeachment.

This President hates this country, hates the Constitution, hates our laws, hates our traditions, hates our system of government.

How can even 20% of this country still love him for it?

Forward this URL to the White House, since George won't go to the funerals...

2008-05-16T09:34:00.001-07:00

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2008-03-13-iraq-casualties_N.htm

Maybe he could look at it on his Blackberry in the golf cart, going from hole to hole.

Call Your Representative RIGHT NOW!!!

2008-05-07T11:52:00.000-07:00

NO MORE BLOOD AND TREASURE FOR IRAQ!!!!

On Thursday, Speaker Nancy Pelosi will force the House to approve $163 billion more of our tax dollars for the occupation of Iraq - nearly $100 billion for 2008 plus nearly $70 billion more for 2009.

We are outraged. This Democratic Congress was elected to end the occupation, not fund it forever.

On Monday, a new Democrats.com poll found an overwhelming 68% of Americans want to bring our troops safely home within 6 months - a significant increase from 54% last September. Support among Democrats increased 14% to 85%, while support among Independents increased 20% to 78%. Why is the Democratic Congress defying the will of the overwhelming majority of Democrats and Independents?

Each day's news underscores how disastrous the occupation is. April was the deadliest month for U.S. soldiers since last September. One in five Iraq and Afghanistan veterans - roughly 300,000 - report symptoms of PTSD or major depression. The V.A. covered up the fact that 12,000 veterans attempt suicide each year while under V.A. treatment. As Cindy Sheehan asked, "for what noble cause" are our sons and daughters suffering and dying?

To make matters worse, Bush continues to use our occupation of Iraq as a reason to wage a covert war against Iran that could quickly turn to a wider and even more disastrous war. We know the Iraq War "marketing" was timed for the 2002 election - if John McCain is behind in the polls, will Bush "bomb bomb Iran" as an "October Surprise" to keep Republicans in power?

On top of it all, as our economy tanks, we simply cannot afford to waste $163 billion more of our tax dollars for Iraq on top of the $562 billion we've already wasted and the $3 trillion overall cost, included tripling the price of gasoline.

It's urgent for everyone to call our Representatives today with a simple message: Not One More Penny for Iraq.

This battle is not impossible. On January 16, 42 progressive Democrats voted against the last $70 billion blank check. Most Republicans oppose Pelosi's bill because it includes some domestic spending, so a large bloc of progressive Democrats can defeat it.

Call the switchboard at 202-224-3121 or find your Representative's name and direct dial by entering your address on the right side here. Please report the results of your call here:
http://www.democrats.com/iraq-sellout-alert-call-congress-today

Operation Chaos

2008-05-07T10:40:00.000-07:00

El Rushbo has been working his pimpled draft evading butt off to help keep Hilary in the race.

I've heard him say time and again, "Better Hillary Clinton in the White House than John McCain."

Though, it should be said, that was before McCain got the nomination.

Rush and many other members of the "We're not elitists, but that doesn't mean we're not better than you are" conservative punditry have actually been raising money for Hillary's campaign. Not necessarily because (despite the earlier quote) they want her to win, but because they want to divide the Democratic Party (it is, in fact, the Democratic, not Democrat, Party) and have Hillary and Barack tear each other apart before the general election to give their boy a better shot.

They even use the phrase "Keep her in it so we can win it!"

And I know that their tactics are working, because I know several Ditto Head true believers who hate Hillary with all the "red" blood in their veins who registered as Democrats to vote for her in their primaries. Why shouldn't they? McCain has the nomination so why not participate in tipping the primary in their favor.

It looks like Indiana, a state that is never going to go for the Democratic candidate in the general election anyway, had as much as 7% of the vote for Hillary come from Republicans just to keep her in the race a little longer.

You can read Rush bragging about his attempt to influence the election on his website: Operation Chaos.

Here are my questions about all this.

First, was there some backdoor deal in 2004 where Hillary was told that if she didn't run for President then, and keep George from getting a second term, they'd field such a crappy slate of candidates in 2008 that she'd be a cinch to get elected...and then Obama in Iowa surprised everyone and ruined all the carefully laid back door plans?

Pardon my tendency toward conspiracy...as we're told so often, we're living in a Post-September 11th World now, where pretty much all bets are off and anything can happen. Even something as plausible as democracy being a sham and governance of the nation being run through the shady deals of families that want to create dynasties.

Here's another question I have.

Why on Earth would the Democratic party choose to have as its nominee for the Presidency the same candidate that Rush Limbaugh is working so hard to keep in the race instead of the candidate that Rush Limbaugh is actually afraid of getting the nomination?

Here's another one.

With Hillary trying so hard to "have the votes of Michigan and Florida count", even though she agreed to abide by the rules of her party and not let them count if those states broke the rules for setting the dates for their primaries...I really have to wonder why nobody is asking this question...How can we expect Hillary to abide by the Constitution and the laws of our nation if she cannot even abide by the rules set by her own political party?

Do we want another president who will say anything, do anything, regardless of the consquencs for the people she supposedly represents in order to be the winner?

Do we really want another president, regardless of race or gender, who doesn't give a crap about rules, laws, or anything but their own self interest?

I don't know about you, but I've had about enough of that to last me a lifetime from the president we already have.

Jesus, Hillary...stop. Just stop, already.

There's a lot more on the table than your place in history.

For further stomach turning reading, visit:

Carrot for President!

2008-05-07T10:36:00.001-07:00

Take the Bush-McCain Challenge. It is a fun on-line quiz that really helps put into perspective the differences between Bush and John McCain. Or, rather, the lack thereof.

Yes, "thereof" is one of those words elitists use.

If thinking I'm better than anyone who would vote for Bush or McCain makes me an elitist, then fine. I guess I'm pretty proud to be one. I wish the Non-Elitists were as ashamed of themselves as they should be.

Yes We Can

2008-05-06T04:08:00.001-07:00

And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

2008-05-01T07:20:00.000-07:00

Jesus plus nothing:
Undercover among America's secret theocrats, by Jeffrey Sharlet for HARPER'S, March 2003

Hey! That Black Guy Ain't Wearing A Flag On His Lapel! He must be a Freedom Hater!!!

2008-04-18T06:29:00.000-07:00

Why worry about the war, the economy, health care, the value of the dollar, the price of oil, jobs, the erosion of liberty, the presumption that privacy doesn't exist, the unofficial repeal of the 4th Amendment, the vastly expanded powers of the president, the corruption and lack of respect for the rule of law, inability to hold our leaders accountable for any action, the fact that the president has admitted to war crimes, adoption of torture as national policy, or any of the other multitude of issues that make this particular election indisputably the single most important election in the history of our nation...when we can focus on someone's pastor and whether or not they choose to wear a lapel pin?

Cause We're AMERICANS and we can CHOOSE to be as STUPID as we WANT TO BE!!!!

Fer craps sake. Hows come nobody is asking whether the next president will move to restore balance to government, and whether or not they will continue to use the enormously enlarged imperial powers that this president has presumed?

Huh?

Hows come nobody is asking Hillary or Obama if they will agressively move to overturn the executive orders of George W. Bush and take a pledge to limit their signing statements and abide by the legistlation sent to them by Congress and abide by the letter of the legislation they sign into law? I think that would be a tremendously valuable question to ask in a debate. Especially when the two candidates are BOTH SENATORS and should have some RESPECT FOR THE ROLE OF CONGRESS.

That would be another good question, "SENTATORS, as members of Congress, do you feel that CONGRESS is a QUAINT AND OUTDATED part of our GOVERNMENT?"

I really care a lot more about a restoration of American/Jeffersonian democracy than whether or not Obama should wear a lapel pin. Or what his pastor says.

Why hasn't anyone asked McCain to repudiate and distance himself from Falwell and Robertsons comments about the ACLU being the reason September 11th happened? Why doesn't the press ask McCain how he feels about that comment? Or how he feels about Right Wing radio hosts like Glenn Beck saying that we "will never defeat terrorism until we have defeated Liberalism in America"?

And why doesn't the press, who are supposed to be the ones who hold those with power accountable, ask important questions? These "debates" after all, are paid for with our money, whether tax dollars or contributions.

Nothing is going to change, until you demand the change you want. The Neo-cons demanded the change they wanted, and they got it. Why aren't we demanding what we want when what we want is what is actually written in our Constitution, and actually central to the teachings of the Christianity they claim to have cornered the market on. We want freedom, we don't want tyranny. We want our rights protected, we want a balance of powers with checks and balances, and we want to be a nation of laws and not of men. We want all men to be equal before the law, and we want the consequences of breaking the law to be equally severe for all criminals, regardless of wealth, power, or station. We want the poor to be treated well, we want the least among us to be protected, we want the hungry to be fed, we want the naked to be clothed, we want the sick to be healed. We want social and economic justice, not protection and expansion of wealth, the destruction of the middle class, and the creation of an underclass that will do the work for nothing, expect nothing, and see joining the military as the best option for getting basic needs met.

We want our military to be used responsibly, we want our soldiers to be trusted, we want every vote to be counted, we want fair and certifiable elections with verifiable results, we want to trust our government again and we want people who choose to run for elected office that actually believe that government is good for something and not the enemy as Ronald Reagon tagged it. We want never again to have people who think that government is what is wrong with this nation to take control of the government.

We want a government that is repsonsive to the needs and wants of the people and who do not trade that respect for disdain for public opinion polls.

We want "Support Our Troops" to mean more than sticking a yellow ribbon on your trunk and to actually include proper supplies, adequate pay, proper training, realistic tours of duty, an end to stop lossing, recruiting that doesn't include waiving medical and legal barriers to service to avoid instituting a draft, and adequate health care after returning home.

We want a lot of things, and the top of the list shouldn't be a politically charged fashion accessory.

Get a grip, people!

Don't decide there isn't anything you can do, or that there is so little difference between the candidates that the kinds of issues that ABC focused on in the debate are actually important.

You can take some action. And you damned well should, if you give a damn about this country and the direction it is taking. 80% of Americans think we're on the wrong track. Do you really think that asking about a lapel pin is going to get us going in the right direction? Don't let the Neo-cons define our party for us.

Please pass this on:

Hi,
If you missed the Democratic presidential debate on ABC Wednesday night, Editor & Publisher called it "perhaps the most embarrassing performance by the media in a major presidential debate in years."

Moderators George Stephanopoulos and Charlie Gibson spent the first 50 minutes obsessed with distractions that only political insiders care about--gaffes, polling numbers, the stale Rev. Wright story, and the old-news Bosnia story. And, channeling Karl Rove, they directed a video question to Barack Obama asking if he loves the American flag or not.

Seriously!

I just signed a petition to ABC and other media that says: "Debate moderators abuse the public trust every time they ask trivial questions about gaffes and 'gotchas' that only political insiders care about. Enough with the distractions--ABC and other networks must focus on issues that affect people's daily lives."

Want to sign it too? We need a bunch of signers for ABC to take this concern seriously.

Click here to sign:

http://pol.moveon.org/enoughdistractions/?r_by=12457-5705002-OP8OPr&rc=mailto

Thanks!

Sigmund Freud Explains the Reptilian Brain

2008-04-11T05:48:00.000-07:00

What $1.2 Trillion Can Buy

2008-04-03T07:26:00.000-07:00

Read it and weep.

It's funny because its true.

2008-03-03T10:50:00.001-08:00

Diebold Accidentally Leaks Results Of 2008 Election Early

How come they won't let you declare bankruptcy when they are trying to bankrupt the country?

2007-12-17T20:18:00.000-08:00

Take 8 minutes and watch this report. Better yet, take 8 minutes to watch it and then another 60 seconds to forward it to everyone you know.

Virginians--Call James Webb today!

2007-12-17T10:52:00.000-08:00

There's a fight brewing on the Senate floor today. President Bush wants Congress to give immunity to the phone companies that helped the administration spy on innocent Americans.

This fight strikes at the heart of accountability in our democracy. No president should be able to work with corporations to break the law and then use Congress to cover up the crimes. Holding the phone companies accountable may be the only way that the American people find out the extent of the Bush administration's illegal actions.1

Progressive Senators Chris Dodd and Russ Feingold are pledging to block any legislation that includes "telecom immunity." 2 And presidential candidates Joe Biden and Barack Obama have said they'll support a filibuster.3

It is critical that other senators support Senators Dodd and Feingold . Can you call Sen. Webb today and tell him to join progressives in the Senate in blocking any bill that includes immunity for lawbreaking phone companies? Tell him voters want accountability and oversight—not immunity.

Here's where to call:

Senator James Webb
Phone: 202-224-4024

Then, please report your call by clicking here:

http://pol.moveon.org/call?tg=FSVA_2&cp_id=665&id=11811-3418799-j76b9N&t=2

An investigation into the illegal wiretapping could expose how far Bush and the telecoms went in breaking the law. President Bush keeps insisting that his illegal spying program was narrow and only targeted at suspected terrorists. But AT&T whistleblower Mark Klein—who has firsthand knowledge of the program—says the program was a massive invasion of Americans' privacy and AT&T is covering up the truth:

"They want to portray it like the president does, that it's a handful of international phone calls. That's the sound-bite, and that's not true. It affects millions of people domestically." 4

That's why the Bush Administration and the telecom companies are desperately seeking immunity to conceal their crimes. AT&T has even hired a consulting company headed by John Ashcroft, Bush's former Attorney General, to lobby for immunity.5

We need the Senate to stand up to their pressure and hold them accountable, not aid their cover-up.

Can you call Sen. Webb today and tell him to join progressives in the Senate in blocking any bill that includes immunity for lawbreaking phone companies?

Thanks for all you do.

–Nita, Tanya, Laura, Jennifer and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team
Monday, December 17th, 2007

Sources:

1. "Congress Stand Firm: America Deserves A Legal Decision on Warrantless Wiretapping," Electronic Frontier Foundation, October 10, 2007
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005480.php#005480

2. Statement from Senator Chris Dodd on a filibuster, October 20, 2007
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3088&id=11811-3418799-j76b9N&t=3

"Intelligence bill may hinge on immunity for telecoms," USA Today, November 27, 2007
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3270&id=11811-3418799-j76b9N&t=4

3. "Obama Camp Says It: He'll Support Filibuster Of Any Bill Containing Telecom Immunity," TPM Election Central, October 24, 2007
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3102&id=11811-3418799-j76b9N&t=5

Live Chat with Senator Joe Biden, Washington Post, October 19, 2007
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3089&id=11811-3418799-j76b9N&t=6

4. "AT&T Whistleblower: Telecom Immunity Is A Cover-Up," Talking Points Memo, November 7, 2007
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004662.php

5. "Key Senators Raise Doubts on Eavesdropping Immunity," New York Times, November 1, 2007
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3269&id=11811-3418799-j76b9N&t=7

Support our member-driven organization: MoveOn.org Political Action is entirely funded by our 3.2 million members. We have no corporate contributors, no foundation grants, no money from unions. Our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. If you'd like to support our work, you can give now at:

http://political.moveon.org/donate/email.html?id=11811-3418799-j76b9N&t=8

PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Help Wexler Hold Them Accountable!

2007-12-16T13:49:00.000-08:00

http://www.wexlerwantshearings.com/

Click, sign up, and get everyone else you know who wants to hold this administration accountable to do the same.

Stop the American Disenlightenment.
Stop the American Theocracy Movement.
Stop the descent into madness this administration represents.

Its your government...start making them act like it.

Reckless Decisions...Look Who's Talking...

2007-12-07T12:03:00.000-08:00

Bush, in his speech about the mortgage crisis...a crisis created by encouraging predatory lending and re-writing the bankruptcy laws in favor of credit card companies, by the way...made the following statement:

"We should not bail out lenders, real estate speculators or those who made the reckless decision to buy a home they knew they could never afford."

Why are only the home buyers who were victims of the lenders and real estate speculators given an adjective like "reckless"?

I'd say fine to not bailing out "predatory" lenders or reckless real estate speculators who have watched too many episodes of "Flip That House".

But if we're going to go after reckless people who bought more than they knew they could afford...I'd really like to go after the people who planned this war.

Sorry, these wars.

I have an idea for a whole new reality show..."Flip This War."

Oh, it's already on TV 24 hours a day...on CNN.

The White Plane

2007-12-02T21:05:00.001-08:00

Holy Crap.

The New Democracy!

2007-10-05T11:34:00.000-07:00

I think the people of this country owe the Japanese Government one hell of an apology.

Let me explain why. If you’ve been watching the news, you know that more memos have come out indicating that we approved the use of torture at the highest levels.

But, the official line is that the US doesn’t torture people.

That’s George’s line and he’s sticking to it.

Do you know what waterboarding is?

First you strap a person to an inclined board with his feet up and his head down. You strap them good and tight so that they can’t move at all and then you cover their face…you can use different things, cloth, soiled underwear, plastic wrap—it doesn’t matter, so long as you cover the nose and mouth. Then, while one person shouts questions, or insults, or perhaps patriotic poetry, the other uses a large watering can to repeatedly pour liquid onto the person’s face.

Now, whether water actually does or does not get into the person’s airways doesn’t matter. The point is not to actually drown the person, but to simulate drowning in such a way that the person’s body thinks they are drowning—and the gag reflex kicks in, so they start to choke. Sloppy interrogations can cause extreme pain, lung damage, brain damage, broken bones, long term psychological damage and possibly even death.

Do you know what Dick Cheney called it? “A dunk in the water.” He said it was pretty silly to keep our CIA officers from “dunking terrorists in the water” in order to save American lives. Did you know that the average CIA officer who subjected themselves to the same “dunking” lasts an average of 14 seconds before screaming to be let loose?

Is the average CIA officer a bigger sissy than a 4th grader in the wading pool or could waterboarding actually be torture?

Do you know what the Bush administrations’ definition of torture is? If your organs don’t fail and you don’t die, you aren’t being tortured.

Pretty straight forward. Waterboarding isn’t torture. That’s kind of weird, because at the end of WWII, Japanese soldiers who waterboarded American troops were convicted of war crimes and some of them were even executed.

Here’s the thing…I know that there is something called Godwin’s Law.

It says that no matter how accurate the comparison, the first person to use a Nazi analogy loses the argument. OK, I don’t want to lose any arguments here…so let’s stop using Nazi Analogies. Let’s start using Imperial Japanese analogies---

George, either you, Dick Cheney, and Alberto Gonzales are all war criminals who deserve to be executed or those Japanese soldiers didn’t do a damn thing wrong. I think I know where you stand on that, so I think you need to pardon those poor, misunderstood Japanese soldiers for dunking our troops during WW2 and all patriotic Americans should apologize to the Japanese Government for the injustice we perpetrated on their honorable soldiers.

Totalitarianism—it’s the new Democracy!

Impeach.

2007-09-25T14:05:00.001-07:00

What else is there to say?

Goodbye, Tom. Thanks for doing what you did.

2007-07-31T17:31:00.000-07:00

Late-night talk show pioneer Tom Snyder dies of leukemia.

I loved watching Tom when I was a kid. I loved watching Tom even more than I loved watching Dan Akroyd parody him on SNL. Nobody smoked more than Tom, except maybe Edward R. Murrow.

And so, in memorial, here is an archival video of two of my heroes:

More Bush Caught on Tape

2007-07-31T04:35:00.000-07:00

Presidents say the dumbest things....

2007-07-30T08:50:00.000-07:00

OK, I am right now watching our own President Gomer meeting Prime Minister Brown, live at Camp David, and he is blathering on about the Tyrany of Poverty, Tyrany of Lack of Education, bloodthirsty ideologies we need to nip in the bud...

And he actually said (I paraphrase here, but look up the actual quote later) that we and the Brits are fighting against a bloodthirsty bunch of folks who want to drive us out of certain parts of the world where they want to impose their ideology.

Uh....You mean the Muslims who want to drive us out of THEIR part of the world so that they can have the opportunity to EXPRESS their OWN ideology THEMSELVES as opposed to submitting to the unrequested "liberation" which has resulted in an ongoing and appearantely endless occupation designed to impose OUR ideology on them at the cost of their oil resources? An occupation, I might add, which has been at a very high cost in blood and treasure to all parties involved.

Holy crap.

And before you point that stupid finger, this is not BLAME AMERICA FIRST, nor is it unreasoning hatred of George Bush. It is not hatred to realize he is an idiot with less than a thimbleful of understanding of the enormous consequences of his actions.

Did he just say, "The challenge for Gordon and me is to write a chapter, the first chapter in this struggle." We are FOUR YEARS into a war you yourself expect to last DECADES and you're only now starting to think about the FIRST CHAPTER???? And then he went into a riff of jokes about the reporter's age who asked the question.

"People who kill innocent men women and children to achieve political ends are evil." That's a quote. Does that mean he understands his own evil or that he considers that all of the people he has killed in this "ideological struggle" to be guilty?

George, you keep telling us how serious this war is, so show us how serious it is by taking it seriously and stop cracking jokes with the press corps.

We don't care that you and Tony Blair used the same toothpaste but Gordon Brown uses a different one. Nobody is laughing at your jokes but you. A very large percentage are crying.

Whenever George Bush laughs, the world laughs a little less.

Here's a nice video montage of some of the more statesman-like comments uttered by our President. Laugh or cry at it. Which you do shows a lot about who you are and how seriously you take his impact on our country.

Happy 4th of July, Scooter!

2007-07-03T10:22:00.000-07:00

When I was growing up we used to celebrate the 4th as the birthday of our democracy. The day we declared independance from a king who ruled his people unfairly and who was above the rule of law.

The day we declared ourselves a nation of laws and not of men.

And this 4th of July, distracted by the pretty bursts of firecrackers, how many will notice or even care that Scooter Libby had his sentence commuted and that Bush is considering a full pardon for him?

Don't forget, that this is the President who campaigned on bringing dignity and honor back to the White House. Who professed to love the law and who swore not only to defend the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic but to actually follow the rules laid out in that sacred document.

Don't forget that this president was asked by the Pope to confer life imprisonment on a converted Christian murderer who had repented her sin, and felt remorse for her crime...but the then Governor of Texas felt the law was the law and he had a sworn duty to uphold it...the just sentence of death had to be carried out.

I ask you, if Paris Hilton had to go back to jail, why shouldn't Scooter Libby? Scooter Libby, whose crime was to obstruct the investigation into the crime of outing an active CIA covert operative engaged in gathering intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction during a time of war. A man who has never exhibited the slightest remorse for this crime, nor repented of his efforts to subvert the very democratic processes his President has sworn to uphold.

They are all criminals.
They are all thugs.
They are contemptuous of everything real American Democracy is supposed to represent.

They need to be removed from office.
They need to be held accountable for their crimes.
They need to be punished.

If they are not, there is no longer an America to defend.

Can you Freaking Believe This?

The next Ditto Head who mentions Mark Rich to me is going to get a mouth full of fist, and consider that public notice.

Olberman said it better than I.

"...So Long As I'm The Dictator"

2007-06-09T07:58:00.000-07:00

We all remember being a little uneasy when George W. made that famous statement, the one where he says that democracy is hard, that it would be a lot easier if this were a dictatorship...so long as he was the dictator.

I don't know if you've noticed, but big steps are still being taken in that direction. He has amassed the greatest number of imperial powers the office of President has ever had. He's placed himself above the law and openly considers Congress irrelevant as is evidened by his signing statements.

On May 4th, he went a giant leap forward by signing a new executive order, put up on the White House website on May 9th. The National Continuity Policy: homeland security-national security presidential directive-- a special kind of executive order that can be kept secret -- meaning you might not even know that it has happened when it does. Maybe it already has.

Ever since Bush and his fellows began exploiting 9-11 to justify sweeping attacks on the freedoms and democracy they claim to be protecting from the Terrorists who hate our freedom so much, I've been warning that the Neo-Cons and Theocrats have been working to ensure that what we used to think of as America goes away forever. They seem to be pulling it off quite nicely.

I've also been saying for years that George Bush is going to be President a lot longer than FDR. I pray every night that I'm wrong, and that one day soon we will have someone in office who actually understands the Constitution they have sworn to defend.

The Rhenquist Five did more and longer lasting damage to this nation than Islamic Terrorists are capable of doing. The Bushies are fond of pointing out that there has been no attack on America since 9-11. They forget the attacks they themselves have mounted.

Further reading:

Bush To Be Dictator In A Catastrophic Emergency by Lee Rogers, Global Research
White House revises post-disaster protocol y Charlie Savage, Boston Globe
Is Martial Law Around the Corner? by Matthew Rothschild, The Progressive.
New presidential directive gives Bush dictatorial power by Larry Chin, Online Journal
National Security Presidential Directive 51, by The Issue Wonk
Bush Makes Power Grab, includes Tribal Governments, Native Unity Blog
Bush Confers Dictatorial Powers on Himself in the Event of a “National Emergency”, by Kenneth J. Theisen, World Can't Wait

Video Vets on Youtube

2007-04-20T10:58:00.000-07:00

A very good friend of mine recently took part in the YouTube experiment called Video Vets.

VideoVets: Susan Sykes Berry

God bless you, Sue. And my prayers are with you, and every other mother, son, daugher, father, and family member who has a loved one out there in uniform serving their country even though their government has failed them so badly for so long.

Sue's video is one of many produced and directed by karinmoveon. Please take a little time to watch some of these videos...this war needs some human faces. The administration has done everything in its power to keep this war from feeling real to the American public...part of the "fight them over there" strategy.

You can find out a lot more about the Video Vets project by going to the Video Vets page at Moveon.org.

From their website:

"The administration tries to call anyone who criticizes their policy in Iraq 'anti-troop,' but the interviews below show that 'supporting the troops' does NOT mean supporting an endless war. The voices of these veterans and military families are missing from the debate in Washington. Together we can make sure they become a vital part of the national dialogue around ending the war.

You watch the videos and tell us what you think. Then, Academy Award winning director Oliver Stone will turn it into a TV ad-spreading this message even further. (Note: The views expressed in these interviews do not necessarily reflect the views of VoteVets or MoveOn.org Political Action, they are the views of interview subjects only.)"

They Put Torture Boy on CSPAN 3????

2007-04-19T06:04:00.000-07:00

I am rug biting mad today, boy! What is arguably the most important testimony of the entire Bush administration so far, is broadcast live on CSPAN 3 today. I got 30 minutes of the opening on tape before they pre-empted it to give us live coverage of the House debate on Iraq War Spending, saying you can continue to follow this hearing on CSPAN 3.

Who even gets CSPAN 3? It isn't even an option in my region and I'm only 3 hours outside of Washington DC!!!!

Fer freak's sake!

Score another point for that damned Liberal Media Bias that is doing everything it can to bring down the Bush admistration. God, can you even imagine what a wonderful world it would be if there actually were a liberal bias to our media?

Or conservatives who are smart enough to realize that news agencies beholding to and dependent on advertising paid for by corporations who are agressively conservative can't possibly be liberal in their bias?

Or a public that admires people who question authority rather than believe their leaders because their leaders are infallible simply because they are leaders?

Where do we live, anyway? It certainly doesn't feel like the world's greatest representative democracy which depends on an informed public willing to take responsibility for governing themselves.

Bastards.

Here, be subversive--get informed: Google News Right Now!

Virginia Tech Shooting

2007-04-18T11:48:00.000-07:00

The VT campus is only a 40 minute drive south from me on Insterstate 81. The past few days have been filled with anguish, empathy, sympathy, and deep sorrow. First and foremost, my thoughts and prayers go out to everyone affected by this senseless act.

The media, however, have been horrible. We'd like you to go home, please, instead of rushing to shove a microphone into the faces of any group of two or more people you find dealing with their shock and grief.

If, however, you would like to do your actual job, rather than that of being vampires, perhaps you could pose a few questions beyond "How do you feel?"

I think it is pretty clear how most of us feel.

Perhaps you could ask if this shooter was using extended magazines rather than stock magazines...the difference being that extended mags would allow more than double the shots fed into the semi-automatic pistols before a new clip needed to be inserted. The standard mag holds 10 shots, extended mags can hold up to 33. Extended mags would still be illegal if George Bush had not broken his campaign promise and allowed the assault weapons ban to expire.

Perhaps you could ask why it is more worrisome to so many that this shooter wrote a frightening play than that he was able to so easily buy such deadly weapons legally.

Perhaps you could ask why so many Virginians would rather limit the constitutional right to freedom of speech than the constitutional right to bear arms.

Perhaps you could ask why so many of the people saying his odd behavior and mental illness should have gotten him removed from the campus are the same people fanatically opposed to background checks before the purchase of a firearm.

This is a tragedy of nearly incomprehensible proportions...but it is one for which we as a society must accept a portion of the responsibility.

It is not exploiting the tragedy to feel moved to prevent future tragedies by advocating for sensible, rational, gun control legislation. So, please don't make that idiotic accusation.

We have to accept that the possibility of this shooting is part of the price paid for being able to walk in and buy a gun so easily. I don't happen to think its worth the price paid.

If you have nothing to hide, why are you hiding everything?

2007-04-12T08:06:00.000-07:00

What is it going to take for the American People to rise up and overthrow this obviously criminal regime that has taken over our government? Nobody is allowed privacy in this country except the President and his corrupt administration.

As if you needed any further evidence that it has been the intention of this administration to break the law at every turn, how do you feel about the news that the White House has actively sought to circumvent the Presidential Records Act?

Compared to this, Libby's obstruction of justice is like comparing a kid shoplifting some bubblegum in a candy store to Ken Lay's activities at Enron.

It is increasingly clear that the intention of the Republican Party is to create its own shadow government, answerable to no one (except perhaps the corporations which fund it). The RNC claims it provided a seperate and email system and laptops to the White House to help it avoid violations of the Hatch Act, a law that prevents using official White House systems for partisan political communnications...but since everything this White House does is solely for partisan political purposes, is it any wonder that people like Rove, Cheney, and the rest of the inner circle rely primarily on the RNC computers and systems which are designed to erase emails after 30 days?

Obviously, an administration whose primary concern is secrecy, is going to find the RNC solution to questionably legal communcations very desireable.

America, enough is enough. These people are criminals. Our governemnt is being run by a new kind of organized crime. For the love of God and country, do something about it!

Impeach! Impeach! Impeach!

How can you be proud of ignoring the crimes of a President who has brought you multiple wars, loss of international prestige, and crippling debt when you couldn't ignore consensual extramarital sexual relations by a President who brought you the greatest period of peace and prosperity this nation has ever known?

And please, stop trying to frame my anger and dismay as irrational hatred of George W. Bush. I am not blinded by hate. I see very clearly the harm done by this administration and hate the damage being done to my country. Devotion to this administration is evidence of blindness and irrationality.

And to support this President, his policies, his crimes, and his secrecy is to share in the guilt. But don't worry, you've got Imus and Anna Nicole's baby to distract you from any self-examination.

Read more (and weep):

White House Admits Misuse of Republican Party-Sponsored E-Mail Accounts
Countless White House E-Mails Deleted, By Dan Froomkin, Special to washingtonpost.com, Thursday, April 12, 2007
The Next Bush Scandal?, By Dan Froomkin, Special to washingtonpost.com, Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Leahy: Bush Aides Lying About E-Mails
Academia opposes Bush
Official E-mail: The public record, SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD
The New Watergate
The E-mail Trail
And so on....

Isn't the Commander-in-Chief a War Czar?

2007-04-11T06:21:00.000-07:00

In the most telling proof to date that the President is an incompetent boob who'd rather be on vaction than do the job he was placed in office to do...The administraion is attempting to create a new position...that of War Czar.

Just the proposal to create this position means a couple of things:

1) We will never, ever, not be at war from this point forward.

2) This "War President" loves the war powers afforded him by declaring his wars of choice, but does not want any of the responsibility the granting of those powers imply.

I, personally don't know which is more frightening...that they want to create this position or that they can't find anyone to take the job. The first three generals they asked have turned it down. Would this position essentially be Deputy Commander in Chief? Or is the President outsourcing his own responsibilities?

Or is this a glimmer of hope that the people at the highest levels are finally coming to grips with the fact that they don't know what the hell they're doing?

If that is the case...please, for the love of God and country, resign and let the competent people start running this country. Give them the titles that goe with the jobs you are asking them to do for you.

Maybe nobody with two brain cells to rub together wants to be the War Czar, but I'd like to hope that someone competent to do the job still wants to be the President. We could do a lot worse than having Dub and Dick resign and let Pelosi try to fix this mess. Actually, unless they resign, or are impeached for the impeachable offenses they publicly admit to having committed, we will continue to do a lot worse.

Torture Boy Demands To Be Fired

2007-03-15T05:59:00.000-07:00

What a difference two months of real Congressional oversight makes.

I hope you've all been paying attention to the Gonzales flap, and how now even Republicans are recommending his dismissal. Alberto Gonzales has been the poster child for our President's plan to turn the Judiciary into the poltical (and probably in some cases, literal) version of a death squad. You're either with the President or you're as good as dead. Ask Joe Wilson, ask Valarie Plame, ask the entire covert operation set up specifically to monitor Iranian nuclear development that disappeared because it didn't provide information that the administration wanted.

But one thing you have to admire about the guy who called the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions "quaint" and who instituted torture as a bedrock national policy...he does not look like he will budge off the "I serve at the pleasure of the President" line. To me, I have to believe that he is smart enough to have known all along that what pleased the President was illegal and immoral. I admire the fact that he isn't going to just quit in order to make it all go away. He did what the President wanted him to do, and he'll be damned if he doesn't make the President fire him for it.

And that would be just the sort of thing even Fox News would have to take notice of.

Henry Waxman, I Love You!

2007-03-14T06:31:00.000-07:00

The pennies and shoes are going to be dropping like crazy any day now.

Look for resignations by score. The end is near.

Or so I hope, and that hope comes in the form of Henry Waxman, who is (thanks to the Democrats taking Congress) the Chair of the House Oversight and Reform Committee. It is not a story you will find in that Mainstream Media with the well known Liberal Bias, but do a little looking and you'll get the skinny on the most important thing happening in Washington right now.

Waxman to Rice: Answer 11 ignored letters on Iraq claims

He's demanding that Condi respond to 11 outstanding requests for information regarding the Iraq threat since 2003, including her "role in the President's false assertion that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger."

You can read the actual letter here.

My favorite part is:

"Since 2003,I have been asking why President Bush and other top Administration officials used fabricated intelligence about lraq's efforts to obtain uranium from Niger to justify launching the Iraq war. I first wrote to the President about this matter on March 17 ,2003, two days before the start of the Iraq war. In my letter, I asked why the President had included the bogus Niger claim in his January 28,2003, State of the Union address, the most heavily vetted speech a president makes. I wrote:

In the last ten days ... it has become incontrovertibly clear that a key piece of evidence you and other Administration officials have cited regarding Iraq's efforts to obtain nuclear weapons is a hoax. What's more, the Central Intelligence Agency questioned the veracity of the evidence at the same time you and other Administration officials were citing it in public statements. This is a breach of the highest order, and the American people are entitled to know how it happened."

That was TWO DAYS before we started the war. TWO DAYS!!!

Don't let them tell you that Congress had the same information the President did, and that "Everybody believed there were WMDs in Iraq." Not to put too fine a point on it, that claim is Bovine Fecal Matter. He lied. The war is illegal. His whole administration are guilty of the most heinous crimes you can commit against not only our own nation, the nations of the world, but humanity itself. They must go, and they must go now.

After reading the story from RAW (linked above), check out some other sources, including Waxman's own Committee website.

Then send Congressman Waxman a thank you letter for being brave enough, and enough of a patriot to stand up and fight for what this country is really supposed to be about--True Freedom, True Democracy, and...TRUTH ITSELF.

Haliburton HQ moving to Dubai.

2007-03-11T19:44:00.002-07:00

Halliburton Moving C.E.O. From Houston to Dubai

Wow. Reading something like this sure makes me wish I were able to look at the negotiations for no-bid contracts and those secret energy policy meetings conducted before the war.

And could it be...might it be...possible that Dubai is attractive to the CEO of Haliburton for the same reason it is for Michael Jackson? The lack of an extradition treaty?

Ehhhhh, could be.

Libby Takes Fall...It took long enough.

2007-03-06T16:02:00.000-08:00

I'm sorry folks, I've been so busy and so convinced we're going to invade Iran that it has been hard to muster the strength to type a post. Perhaps if we are still only engaged in two wars come the end of May, and not the three or more I expect we'll be in, I'll be able to start posting again.

A few things of note...how far my jaw dropped when Neal Boortz used the Walter Reed story as a way to bash the utopian ideal of socialized medicine....that was a biggie.

How we announced we're working on a new Nuke while telling everyone else they can't have any.

How a few weeks ago Russia made vieled threats that they thought Bush might have gone too far and something might have to be done.

How Iran is actually helping the Shia that we are backing in the civil war there against the Sunnis, who are being supplied by Saudi Arabia, but we're going to invade Iran and not Saudi Arabia.

How the deal brokered with North Korea is essentially the same one Clinton brokered, but which Bush abrogated because he felt (like he did with Iraq) that North Korea was violating the agreement by enriching Uranium, which they weren't it turns out, but wouldn't have been against the agreement anyway because the agreement was specifically about Plutonium enrichment, and by the way...the bomb they did develop and detonate? Yup, it was Plutonium, which they hadn't been developing, as per the agreement, until Bush broke the agreement.

How our foreign policy is to say we are open to discussion so long as the other party we might want to have discussions with will do whatever we want to be the result of the discussions before we start discussing anything and blame the other party for being opposed to the discussion we have invited them to have when they, quite logically, tell us to go stuff it.

How the conservatives scream about the idiocy of global warming being based on carbon emissions from fossil fuel consumption but if they would simply advocate conservation of fossil fuel use in order to break what the President himself calls an oil addiction and cut off the money stream to the very people conservatives tell us are doing nothing night and day but plotting to kill every American...we'd satisfy the Green wish for a reduction in the carbon footprint. Why can't we reduce our consumption of fossil fuels for a patriotic reason or is it really their desire taht we empower our enemies and destroy the planet rather than give one single liberal something they are working to achieve? I know, they don't care about ideology, except to justify and enable profit, which is the only motivation at play in the conservative mind, but the obvious idiocy is still galling.

And lastly...my friends...you should have heard Rush Limbaugh grinding through his mental gears to spin the Libby verdict today. I can't do it justice in my weakened, nearly comatose state, so please go right now to Huffingtonpost.com and read today's post about it.

Precious.

But still...there are more pennies to drop. The time will come, and I believe soon, that Bush and his lawbreaking will be revealed. The empire will fall. Unless he can drop those nuclear bombs on the imaginary nuclear factory in Iran. Then all bets are off.

Anybody got a copy of Endgame?

"You Cried for Night. It Fell. Now Cry in Darkness..."

Or something like that.

Be careful what you celebrate.

2006-12-29T19:09:00.000-08:00

That is all I have to say about the Saddam execution.

"Gerald Ford...He's Making Us Proud Again"

2006-12-27T10:02:00.000-08:00

Gerald Ford passed away last night. I was genuinely sad. Gerald Ford is one of the most interesting presidents we've had, and (with the probable exception of George W. Bush) he is the only one who was never elected to the office of President or even Vice President. He was appointed by Nixon to take the place of Spiro Agnew who resigned in disgrace, and then took Nixon's place when he resigned in disgrace a short time later.

He was the longest living president, and the last member of the Warren Commission to die. He, as I recall, is one of two presidents who have filed a UFO sighting report.

He was a genuine, unassuming man who I did respect and admire as a human being.

You might not know this, but yours truly grew up in a Republican household. My father was a poor Republican to the day he died, His father hated the Kennedys and told me over and over again that a vote for a Democrat was a vote for a War.

My mother was from a family of wealthy Republicans, who'd gotten that way honestly through hard work and rising above their Dust Bowl poverty. My maternal grandmother was a major player in local Republican party politics.

I remember as a kid having a "Nixon, Now More Than Ever" bumper sticker pinned to the back of my coat and I stayed up all night watching the election returns that brought Nixon his re-election landslide with Grandpa drinking his scotch amd Grandma smoking her Kent 100's, also drinking a scotch. I was elated over Nixon's win, because I knew elation won approval from my grandparents. I remember watching the Watergate hearings with less elation, but a growing sense that something really important was happening. That something was really wrong. If John Lennnon thought it was important enough to go and watch the hearings, then something was really going on, I thought.

I remember Nixon's resignation. I remember Chevy Chase's hilarious Gerald Ford impersonations on Saturday Night Live. I remember Ford getting the Republican nomination. I remember making fun of Jimmy Carter right along with the rest of my family.

And here is how we get to the picture.

That, believe it or not, is a picture of my bedroom in Junior High. My grandmother had given me this gigantic Ford poster and you can see the Ford bumper sticker on my headboard. Honest to God, the campaign slogan on the poster was "Ford, He's Making Us Proud Again." His bumper sticker was a simple red with the words "President Ford" on it--as though we needed to be reminded he was the President.

I never joined the Teen-age Republicans, but I remember walking in the rain, at my Grandmother's request, carrying Ford posters like a sandwich board and handing out leaflets trying to get him elected.

But, most of all, I remember Gerald Ford giving Richard Nixon a full Presidential Pardon. Nixon, who didn't feel he needed pardoning because, as he famously declared, "When the President does it, it isn't illegal." I remember trying to convince my friend Joe to run as vice-president on my ticket for the leadership of the Methodist Youth Fellowship. I remember joking that if I did anything wrong he could pardon me. That was the first time I remember making a joke about Republicans instead of Democrats.

For me, that the pardoning of Nixon was the moment when I began to stop being a Republican just because I was born into a Republican family. When I began to question what I believed and what I was told. And when I began to realize that there was something terribly wrong with my country if it could produce the Watergate Era and have it wiped away by a man who'd never been elected to office simply with the stroke of a pen and saying "Our long national nightmare is over."

I've been hearing all day today pundits saying that Ford was proven right in his decision to promote national healing rather than continuing to investigate and prosecute Nixon. That he really had, in fact, made us proud again.

I'm of a different opinion. Perhaps if he had not pardoned Nixon we might have actually had the era of accountability we've been promised by every Presidential candidate since. Perhaps we wouldn't have had the Iran Contra fiasco. Perhaps we wouldn't have propped up dictators in our national interest, like Saddam Hussein. Perhaps we wouldn't have traded arms for hostages. Perhaps we would now have a culture that understands that wrongful acts bring certain consequences. Perhaps we would have people who do not abuse power because they know with certainty that to abuse power is to lose power.

Instead, we have what we have. A nation with the most corrupt and incompetent administration in American history. An administration made up of many members of the Nixon and Ford administrations. A celebration of the lack of responsibility and the erosion of our most basic freedoms and rights. Mired in an illegal and never ending war. The most sweeping expansion of presidential powers in history.

No matter how good a man I think Gerald Ford was, I blame him personally for the events which led us to George W. Bush and the current Republican Party. Nixon's get out of jail free card cost us plenty as a nation, to our shame.

Happy Christmas...War is Over...(if you want it, and Jesus does, so why don't you?)

2006-12-24T10:58:00.000-08:00

Tonight is Christmas Eve. I just got a phone call from my mother who told me her pastor had quoted my previous Christmas editorial about the sinister side of using the seasonal greeting to identify those who aren't "like minded" Christian Conservatives.

It warmed my heart. Earlier, while listening to Air America, they were playing the John Lennon song Happy Xmas, War is Over and I got very nostalgic for the ghosts of Christmas past. This was a Christmas song I listened to over and over again every year when I was in high school. And I was still in high school when John Lennon was shot just 17 days before Christmas. They played that song an awful lot that year.

How many times have you heard it this year? Or last year? Or since 2003? I honestly don't think I can remember hearing it once besides last night on Air America.

Dig it out of your record collections, call into radio stations and request it. This Christmas song by one of the greatest peace activists to come out of popular culture is more important this year than ever...especially since this is the year, at midnight on December 31st, that all of the FBI documents on John Lennon will be declassified.

And the message of that song is as true now as it was in Viet Nam...the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, the War on Terror, the War on Christmas, the War on Liberalism, the War on everything that isn't strongly in favor of George Bush being a war president won't be over if we don't want it, and if we don't say we want it as loudly as we can.

There is often an argument between Christians which holiday is more important, Easter or Christmas. Easter couldn't have happened without the birth of Christ, but the birth of Christ has no meaning without Easter.

I had a look at my editorial from last Easter, and am reprinting it here...updated for the holiday. Think of it as my Christmas card to you.

HAPPY CHRISTMAS from the HEART OF ARCHIE

If I were to meet Judge Roy Moore, who said his Christianity had moved him to donate a graven stone image of the Ten Commandments to the foyer of the Alabama Courthouse in which he was the sitting Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court...I'd ask him why he didn't instead donate a stone memorial to the commandment Jesus gave, just before he was taken by the Romans?

Jesus told his disciples, "I have a new commandment for you...that you should love one another."

Wouldn't that be a world changing thing to have inscribed above every courthouse in the nation? Or, for that matter, above the front doors of every school, church, and town hall in the land? Emblazened on every drinking fountain, every fountain pen, every bumpersticker, on every lapel pin, every coin, every dollar bill, and every prison gate in America?

"I command you to love one another" --signed, Jesus.

God gave Moses Ten Commandments. Jesus gave us one.

And so, I'm trying to fulfill that commandment.

At least through Christmas.

George Bush, I love you. John Ashcroft, I love you. Judge Roy Moore, I love you. Donald Rumsfeld, I love you. Dick Cheney, I love you. Zacharias Moussaui, I love you. Mohammad Atta, I love you. Osama bin Laden, I love you. Saddam Hussein, I love you.

And I love each of you, too.

Merry Christmas, and God bless us--everyone.

Does Virgil Goode Represent the America that Represents FREEDOM?

2006-12-21T12:17:00.000-08:00

I live in Virignia, home of the Evangelical Theocratic Elite power players. Just up the road from me is Liberty University.

One of our recently re-elected theocrats, Virgil Goode, says he got a flood of emails from constituents complaining that newly elected Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison would use the Koran, not the Bible, when being sworn into Congress next month. Ellison is a Muslim, so their thinking his taking an oath on the Bible would be more appropriate than a book the new congressman actually regards as holy only speaks to the state of mental accumen among Goode's loyal voting base here in the Old Dominion.

In response to the complaints, Goode sent out a letter. He appears to have accidentally sent it to some people who were not, as they say down here, "like minded." One such person was John Cruickshank, of Charlottesville. He turned the letter over the the C-Ville Weekly who promptly published it. I reproduce it here:

Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515-4605

December 7, 2006

Mr. John Cruickshank
7—— S—————————— Dr.
Earlysville, VA 22936

Dear Mr. Cruickshank:

Thank you for your recent communication. When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran. We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country. I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.

The Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Koran. My response was clear, “As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office.” Thank you again for your email and thoughts.

Sincerely yours,
Virgil H. Goode, Jr.
70 East Court Street
Suite 215
Rocky Mount, Virginia 24151

When questioned about the letter, Goode replied "I wrote the letter. I think it speaks for itself."

Indeed it does, sir. Indeed it does. And what it says is repugnant, hateful, and so contrary to the spirit, mission, and purpose of this nation that I can't believe you have not been pulled from your office and treated to good old conservative tar and feathers, and a trip out of Washington tied to a rail.

This is why the founding fathers put into the Constitution the Establishment Clause, and I ask you, sir, how it is that you can take an oath to defend the Constitution so seriously that you demand that oath be taken upon your holiest book, and yet refuse to apply those constitutional principles evenly, and fairly to all those whom you represent and who are protected by them?

Radical Religious Extremism and hate mongering disguised as partiotism are the tools of the enemy we are supposedly fighting against. I am ashamed of you, Virgil Goode, you are an embarrassment and a danger to all that this country stands for. If you cannot do the job to which you were elected, if you cannot fulfil your oath to protect and preserve the Constitution and the principles it was designed to ensure, you should resign and never more seek public office.

Here's a movie Virgil Goode mised in Social Studies class:
Don't Be A Sucker! Watch it and remember what America is supposed to be, and remind yourself that none of what is happening now is new...except that now it is successful.

Sources:

Happy Prove You're Not Muslim, Jewish, or Liberal Day!

2006-12-20T10:46:00.000-08:00

And the war rages on...not the war in Iraq, not the War on Terror, but the War on Christmas. This week, here in Roanoke, we were treated to Bill O'Reilly staging another insurgent attack on those who would occupy his holiday.

"The far left has become completely unhinged over losing the Christmas controversy. And the most hysterical item we've come across comes from the Roanoke Virginia Times. Editorial page editor Dan Radmacher, a far left ideologue, whining, saying fewer people are saying 'Happy Holidays'. Dan doesn't like that and then levels personal attacks against me and others for believing it is wrong to prevent people - to prevent people - from saying 'Merry Christmas'. Radmacher's column was disgraceful, and upon researching this loon, we found he uses personal attacks all the time. So we called his publisher, Wendy Zomparelli, but she's hiding under her desk."

Here's the thing. One of the most effective tools employed by the Nazi party in the years during which it rose to and maintained its power, was the "Hitler Greeting." If I walked up to you and greeted you with "Heil, Hitler!" and you replied with, "Hello, good morning" I knew immediately that we were ideological opposites, because in my world view as a Nazi party member, anyone who was not also a party member would be an ideological opposite.

We're not at the point yet where conservatives greet each other with "Freedom!" or some other slogan which sets them apart from the dangerous others they are seeking to rid themselves of, but if you consider the flag lapel pin a replacement for the armband and the W sticker on Republican rear windows a replacement for the swastika...along with the feeling that as a liberal you are not entitled to fly the flag or even consider yourself a patriot...you get a little feeling for life in the Weimar Republic.

In fact, as I've said for years now, the rhetoric of the conservative pundits and the Nazi propaganda machine are frighteningly similar. Try this experiment. Spend one day listening to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Neal Boortz, Michael Reagan, Michael Savage, Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly. Then take any speech from a Nazi party official or read Mein Kampf but do the following:

Replace "JEW" with "Muslim"
Replace "COMMUNIST" with "Liberal"
Replace "FATHERLAND" with "Homeland"
Replace "GERMANY" with "America"

If you do, I'm sure you'll be astonished by how familiar it all sounds. Seriously. Try it. I beg you.

Christmas, however, presents a unique opportunity for these Radical Neo-Cons to test something very like that "Hitler Greeting". All of conservative radio at this time of year is aflame with encouragement to proudly proclaim your Christianity by greeting everyone--regardless of their own faith or persuasion-- with Merry Christmas in order to antagonize all those out to prevent Christians from celebrating their holiest holiday. They also call upon the "faithful" to boycott shops that don't say "Merry Christmas" on their signs and avoid shops where you are greeted with "Happy Holidays" instead of an overt proclamation of Christian faith.

It isn't technically the same as saying don't patronize the shops of liberals, Jews or Muslims but a difference that makes no difference is no difference. It isn't about defending Christmas, it is about making life difficult for everyone who isn't exactly like you. Is that a message Jesus would want to be associated with?

I am, in fact, a Christian, and I believe that the spirit of the holiday encourages me to spread love and unity, and to respond with kindness and love of all men, as per the final commandment Jesus gave his followers before his exectution. I don't believe that I am called to identify and persecute those who are not of the same faith or political persuasion. I don't want my expression of Christmas wishes for a happy holiday season, of goodwill, and desire for peace to be a means of division, seperation, and hurtfulness. I don't think Jesus would either.

I know that Jesus said not to think he came to bring peace on Earth but to bring a sword. But he also said by our fruit shall we be known, and he knows if you are using His name to spread hate or to spread love. He knows if you seek his grace to allow you to forgive or if you are abusing his grace to justify angry retribution. And as a Christian I deeply resent the efforts of our President to use the season of giving to justify calling on Americans to do more shopping. Today in his press conference he stood there in the guise of a Christian and called upon the nation not to love one another or do more giving, but to do more shopping. I resent that the season of giving has become the season of last minute economic recovery.

What I wish for Christmas is that Christians will live as Jesus lived, that they will turn the other cheek, forgive, and prove their faith by demonstration in works. And that in so doing, that their eyes will be opened to the hypocrisy of those with political power who build their kingdoms on earth by misleading the hearts of men. But most of all, I wish and pray that the War On Christmas is not a successful war against all that is not Radical Fundamentalist Christian Ideology.

Sources:

Bush Says He Won't Be Rushed....

2006-12-13T15:08:00.000-08:00

"I'm not going to be rushed into making a difficult decision, a necessary decision to say to our troops: 'We're going to give you the tools necessary to succeed and a strategy to succeed,"' Bush said.

Wow. Never mind that what he said makes no sense what so ever, and don't worry about how telling it is that he frames it as a decision but only offers himself one choice...let's just assume he means what we hope he means...that he's going to give this some serious thought before taking action. Wow, I say again.

Wouldn't it have been wonderful if his thoughful consideration, determination not to rush to action, and fear of dire consquences had manifested a little earlier...like 3 years ago, maybe?

How can anyone still support this man who is feeding your sons and daughters, along with billions of your tax dollars each month into a war that has no end? If you were in a car and the driver just kept saying, "We're not stopping till we get there." Would you honestly want to stay in the car if he never told you where "there" is? Would you think he was just swell if he never paid to fill the tank but kept using your swift pass at every Exxon station along the way? How about if on this magical mystery tour he shot or ran over so many people that an average of 180 people a day were killed and over hundreds of thousands injured?

Do you really think the Iraqis are better off than they were when Saddam was in power? They had lights, food, government, police, water...it doesn't matter, you say? Saddam was a mass murderer who killed his own people, right? Did Saddam Hussein manage to kill 2.5% of his nation's population in three years time? 655,000 Iraqis - or 2.5 percent of the population - have been killed in this conflict, according to the November 2006 Johns Hopkins study. Did Saddam Hussein manage to kill 655,000 people in the entire 20 years he was in power?

And people like Sean Hannity still have the gall to ask why the liberal media refuses to report all the good things that are happening in Iraq.

Well, America, the truth is, we are in that car. We are not going to get out of that car and people aren't going to stop dying from George Bush's metaphoric road rage unless we stop paying for the gas, stop giving him bullets, and take back the wheel.

At some point, even a passenger who grumbles about a driver on a killing spree but takes no action to stop the carnage becomes at the very least an accomplice guilty of vehicular manslaughter.

So, what is it, America? Are you an accomplice or a hostage?

"Bad boy, bad boy, what you gonna do? What you gonna do when they come for you?"

SOURCES:

Let Characters Smoke, Even If Real People Can't

2006-12-04T12:25:00.000-08:00

I know, there is a lot of stuff I should be griping about, but I just haven't had time lately. I got sent this from my identical cousin, who is a playwright and he's all up in arms about it, so I'm posting it here to keep from having to talk to him about it.

An Important message from Theatre Communications Group:

Dear Colleagues,

TCG has been approached to support a legal case on behalf of our member theatre, Denver-based Curious Theatre Company.

This is a First Amendment/Freedom of Expression issue relating to the newly passed Colorado Clean Indoor Air Act which does not allow for the artistic portrayal of smoking. The original suit was denied, and Curious Theatre has appealed this decision. TCG plans to submit an Amicus Brief in support of Curious Theatre Company’s appeal, and has found a First Amendment lawyer who has agreed to take this on pro bono. Bruce Johnson, a member of our National Council for the American Theatre and a trustee of Seattle Repertory Theatre, will write the brief.

Other states with smoking bans, including New York and California, allow exceptions for theatrical purposes. Curious Theatre is seeking to protect the artistic intent of playwrights and theatre companies that include the portrayal of smoking as an integral part of the script.

WE NEED YOUR HELP! We need to provide the Court with a broader context, background and evidence of the use of smoking on the stage as one means of freedom of artistic expression. The issue will be covered in a future edition of American Theatre magazine. Please take a few moments and fill out the survey which we have prepared. The deadline is Friday, December 8, 2006.

This email is being sent to managing directors, artistic directors, dramaturges, literary managers and education directors at all of our member theatres – thank you, in advance, for your assistance!

Feel free to pass on the survey link: http://www.zoomerang.com/survey.zgi?p=WEB225WYT52DBC

Sincerely,

Laurie Baskin
Director of Government & Education Programs
Theatre Communications Group
520 Eighth Avenue, 24 Floor
New York, NY 10018
(212) 609-5900 x228
(212) 609-5901 fax
www.tcg.org

Botched Joke Revisited

2006-11-12T05:50:00.000-08:00

Ok...I've got one more thing to say about the whole Botched Joke Kerry said our troops are retarded BS.

I saw a bumpersticker yesterday on a truck with an Allen bumpersticker and an NRA sticker on the window...I suspect a Republican...and another sticker in the window that said:

Holy Crap.

I have never seen a more prideful anti-intellectual statement or a clearer inference that not only do the kids who aren't smart go into the military, but they become MARINES.

Why is it that Kerry gets villified and this idiot thinks he's a genius by making this bumper sticker statement that says essentially the same thing?

Oh, yeah...perhaps the answer is inherent in the question.

The Sun Also Rises....

2006-11-09T17:41:00.000-08:00

Well, Allen finally conceded and so I feel comfortable posting.

Congratulations, America, you have taken the first bold step to reclaiming our democracy.

Democrats, I give us all 24 more hours to gloat, and then we have to get down to the hard work of leading by example.

I don't think we should be entirely fixated on Iraq, however. Remember, the majority of votors were concerned about corruption. The real mandate is for investigations, and I for one don't want us to get out of Iraq until we have some hard facts about why we are there in the first place.

I don't want Democrats shouting for impeachment, I want Democrats shouting for oversight and long overdue investigations, which I am confident will turn up so much awful truth that even Republicans will want this guy impeached. So that's what I think the plan should be. Get the truth, get the facts, let the truth and the facts speak for themselves, and let those who were duped go after the duper.

After all, for the last three years Bush has openly admitted to impeachable offenses as a point of pride. The nation has spoken, they want the accountability he promised he'd bring to the White House in 2000.

Did anyone out there tape that press conference where Rumsfeld's resignation was announced? I didn't get it taped, but watched it. Wish I had it, especially the part where Bush admitted to the Press that he knowingly lied to them about Rumsfeld staying through the remainder of his presidency.

He lies. He likes to lie. And he keeps asking us to trust him. But now, after November 7th, we don't have to trust him, any more than the founding fathers thought we should trust any leader...which is why they so carefully crafted seperation of powers and a system of checks and balances. And a free press. Let's not forget the free press.

Today...for the first time in many years...Archie Levine has a song in his heart and hope on his mind.

Happy Days Are Here Again.

The Botched Joke

2006-11-01T02:52:00.000-08:00

Maybe you've heard it. If you haven't, you haven't been paying any attention. John Kerry, tired, made a comment that the Republicans--from the President on down--are jumping on to try to save their political asses in an election they could never manage to win without Diebold or taking on the issues that matter to better than 70% of the American public.

Here is what he said: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq." -- Sen. John Kerry

First of all, even if it is a botched joke, it works on two different levels and is funny because its true.

First level: Reflection of the President. He is perhaps our nation's most powerful and important C student in history....and due to his inability to try to be smart, he and the rest of the nation are stuck in Iraq. His idiotic insistance on fighting a conventional war and ignoring even the most fundamental lessons taught by the war he managed to avoid fighting in (Viet Nam for those of you who are also not making an effort to be smart) instead of fighting a counter-insurgency means that we are doing more damage than we are good there.

A "C" is what happens when you skip class. Iraq is what happens when you skip going to Viet Nam.

We are stuck in Iraq and the Republicans, in spite of 11th hour changes in language about troop withdrawls, benchmarks, and tough talk to the Iraqi leaders...the Republicans want us to stay there indefinitely. Hence the permanent bases we won't admit we've built or intend to occupy.

Stuck. Stuck. Stuck...because of stupidity and arrogance by our leaders and the people who vote for them.

Level two: The military, because the Republicans are terrified that they will have to admit that sooner or later their imperialistic desires in the Middle East and militaristic foriegn policy will force us to have a reinstatement of the draft, are lowering their recruitment standards to dangerous levels. This means that as the war drags on beyond Rumsfeld's infamous "6 days, 6 weeks, I doubt 6 months" comment and we see our pre-war military stretched dangerously thin and doing 4 and 5 tours in Iraq with recuriters so desperate for new bodies in uniform they'll take nearly anyone willing to go, even if they have to lie and use high pressure, false statements and Conduct Unbecoming to meet quota.

When we've lost 103 soldiers in the month of October alone...well, it doesn't take a smart, hard studying, educated mind to realize that with demand for soldiers going higher, the benefits getting lower, the risks increasing along with the hatred and resentment of the people in the region for our presence there...that the people who sign up are mostly going to be those who have fewer options available.

If you're smart enough to know that we are fighting an illegal war, invading a nation which did not pose a threat and had not attacked us, and see that our civilian leaders don't have any idea what they are doing...Or, if you are wealthy enough not to need to join the military to earn a living, why would you?

OK, some people might still join out of principle and love of country. But damned few.

And if that isn't true...tell me why there aren't more children of politicians serving in uniform in the Middle East right now? Jim Webb has a son who is a Marine lance corporal headed to Ramadi. Where are George Allen's children? George Bush's?

If it isn't true, why is it that so many people who have never worn a uniform or served in combat shouting so angrily about those who have (like John Kerry, Max Cleland, John Murtha, and Jim Webb) that dare to speak out against the war? How is it that the people of this country think draft dodging cowards who avoided service have any right to criticize decorated combat veterans as being anything but supportive of our men and women in combat?

Why is that?

George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George Allen, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and the rest of you chickenhawks who are so eager to keep sending other people's children to die for your failed policy and inability to admit a mistake.

For crying out loud, the only uniform Californian George Allen ever put on was a confederate general's uniform while an extra in Gods and Generals.

The botched joke is this administration. And they're just barely smart enough to know it, which is why the rest of us are so afraid of what they'll do next to hide their shame.

As a PS, Jim Webb is too much of a gentleman to do it, but I'm not any kind of a gentleman.

While Allen is scrambling to win votes away from Webb by calling him a woman hater and a cut & run coward who writes dirty books...Jim Webb never once responded by showing this picture in any of his ads. But somebody has to. Click on the link for the "war record" of General George.

What a Bear does in the Woods is Die

2006-10-20T15:44:00.000-07:00

Last night I was listening to Michael Savage...and apart from being struck by the fact that even he wants to see Donald Rumsfeld fired (for different reasons than most of the rest of America, granted), I was struck by his reading of a news story I knew nothing about.

It was something having to do with the King of Spain shooting a drunken Russian bear. I told my identical cousin, Todd Ristau about it. I said that Michael Savage was likening the news story to Dostoevsky. Todd, being better educated than I, said it all sounded like Gogol to him and that Dostoevsky was probably the only Russian writer Savage knew, and was probably pulling even that out of his butt just because the names sounded Russian.

It could be. I don't know. All I know is that my cousin wrote this Gogol parody based on that news story. He sent it to me, and said it was hilarious. Hilarious I don't know about, but he's a college professor in theatre, so maybe he knows these things. At any rate, it is too heartbreaking to write about American news, so I offer his writing about Russian news to you today instead.

WHAT A BEAR DOES IN THE WOODS IS DIE
By Todd Ristau, based on actual events

(Lights up on a line of people standing on the stage. From left to right, they are MITROFAN the BEAR, VLADIMIR PUTIN, JUAN CARLOS, STAROTSIN, and PALACE SPOKESMAN . None are aware of each other, and all speak directly to the audience. The Russian men wear furry hats, Juan Carlos wears a Burger King crown and holds a shotgun.)

MITROFAN: I am a bear. I was a bear. I am a bear no longer. I was born of the soil of Mother Russia. I lived in humility and meekness until my old age. I was born in a state of captivity, and as a captive I lived my entire life, in a holiday resort. My tired and captive eyes staring out through the bars of my cage at the line of distant trees which mark the forest which should have been my home. Had I ever spent any time there as a cub, perhaps I would have yearned to live there, but knowing only the life of a slave bear, I was content to live among my captors and exist by what kindness they found in themselves to show me. These important personages at whose whim I was allowed to live…at whose whim I did not realize I would one day die. Even in Russia, the bear finds no honor in his homeland.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I am Vladimir Putin. I am the President of the great nation of Russia. I am a friend to King Juan Carlos of Spain, whom I invited into my country.

JUAN CARLOS: I am Juan Carlos, King of Spain. I have never been to Russia in my life.

STAROTSIN: I am Starotsin, Deputy Chief of Hunting for the region of Volgda. Sometimes, when important people want to go hunting, sometimes a call comes in from the higher ups. Get us a wolf, they might say. Vicious, but not dangerous. Lean, but not fast. Old, but not crippled. Someone important needs to shoot a wolf today.

PALACE SPOKESMAN: I am the spokesman for the palace of the King, Juan Carlos of Spain. Whatever else you might hear, from me, you will hear nothing but the truth.

MITROFAN: Perhaps it is only my own mad imaginings, but I’d always expected to be buried alive. Of course, even though I am a bear, I knew that one day I must be buried, but I could never conceive of my own demise. I did not even imagine I would be dead when under all that dirt, but forever lying in my own grave and chewing on my own flesh for nourishment, waiting in vain for a resurrection which could never occur, because I could not die.

PALACE SPOKESMAN: Reports that King Juan Carlos of Spain shot a drunken bear to death during a hunting trip in Russia are ridiculous.

MITROFAN: Am I a metaphor? That is for others to decide. All I know is that I was a bear, and am no longer. Thanks to King Juan Carlos of Spain.

JUAN CARLOS: I was not even in Russia at the time. It is ridiculous. They tell you a lie when they say I have shot this bear. The bear has shot itself. What are you laughing at? You are laughing at yourselves!

MITROFAN: A bitter punch line to a badly written bitter joke, a joke at which I alone can laugh, and the laugh I laugh is a bitter laugh. Thanks to King Juan Carlos of Spain.

PALACE SPOKESMAN: We have no comment to make because this story is totally ridiculous and the source is sensationalist. You may quote me on that, but you are not allowed to use my name, due to palace rules. The palace of King Juan Carlos of Spain neither confirms nor denies that the King, Juan Carlos of Spain, was hunting.

JUAN CARLOS: I was not hunting.

PALACE SPOKESMAN: We can neither confirm nor deny that the King, Juan Carlos of Spain was hunting in Russia.

JUAN CARLOS: I have never been to Russia.

PALACE SPOKESMAN: We can neither confirm nor deny that the King, Juan Carlos of Spain, shot a bear.

JUAN CARLOS: I have never shot a bear.

PALACE SPOKESMAN: We can neither confirm nor deny that the bear, alleged to have been shot by the King, Juan Carlos of Spain, was drunk at the time of the alleged shooting.

JUAN CARLOS: I do not drink.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: The King of Spain, Juan Carlos, was visiting Mother Russia for the purpose of hunting. It was a private visit. By my personal invitation.

PALACE SPOKESMAN: The King, Juan Carlos of Spain, was hunting in the Volgda region near Moscow.

MITROFAN: And even now, in the fresh new gloom of death, I see that yes, gentlemen, it was gloomy in that world, and gloomy in the next as well. Goodness, how sad is our Russia!

STAROTSIN: When a king, who is a very important person, is invited by the President of the nation, also a very important person, to go on a bear hunting trip and expects to shoot a bear—

MITROFAN: Symbol of the nation in which Juan Carlos, King of Spain, is a guest…

STAROTSIN: All I know is, when someone important expects to shoot a bear, that is what had better happen.

JUAN CARLOS: This story is a ridiculous fraud.

STAROTSIN: So, I think to myself, where can I find a bear? And I remember old Mitrofan, who is soon to be dying in any event, so why not let the old bear’s death mean a little something? It would certainly mean something to the President, and if it meant something to him, it might, in the end, mean a little something to me, too. I hated to do it though, with wolves, you don’t mind so much, but a bear…a bear who never hurt anyone in his whole life…He was really a good natured and joyful bear.

PUTIN: Juan Carlos, King of Spain was a guest, a guest at the personal invitation of the President of Russia.

JUAN CARLOS: I was never even there, I tell you.

MITROFAN: They came to my cage, these men who had been my care takers, responsible for my health, happiness, and very life itself. They fed me bowls of honey.

STAROTSIN: We mixed the honey with vodka, got him drunk.

MITROFAN: There are bears who exist in this world not like entities, but like the speckles or spots on something, and now, that is I. Thanks to King Juan Carlos of Spain.

STAROTSIN: and when we heard the King and the President tromping through the woods, we pushed the old bear out of his cage and shoved him into the woods, in the general direction of the noise the King and the President were making.

MITROFAN: I thought they were bringing me more honey and vodka.

STAROTSIN: Naturally, a heavy, drunken animal is an easy target.

PUTIN: Juan Carlos, King of Spain, took Mitrofan out with one magnificent shot.

JUAN CARLOS: I have never killed any bear. Drunk or sober.

STAROTSIN: He denies it, but you cannot turn black into white.

MITROFAN: Denial of murder cannot restore life to the dead. Perhaps…the gift of that bullet, coming after so delicious a meal, was a divine blessing that freed me from my madness and my mortality in a single explosion of pain, blood, and gunpowder, a fleeting moment providing emphatic punctuation to a run-on sentence which meandered too long without finding its subject.

PUTIN: I think that Juan Carlos had a wonderful time, and enjoyed his trip to Russia very much.

JUAN CARLOS: I have never been to Russia.

STAROTSIN: I didn’t want to do it, but I organized the whole thing. My bosses told me to. When someone important tells you to do something, of course, you must do it. Whether you like what you do or not, that isn’t the important thing. The important thing is knowing what you have to do and doing it. Life is really just as simple as that.

PALACE SPOKESMAN: An official commission has been created to investigate this thing that has not happened, and as yet, they have not reached any conclusions on the fiction being widely circulated in the world press. It will take time to study the issue and to reach conclusions, but we are not going to set a timetable on presenting whatever findings we may find. It is as simple as that.

PUTIN: I was not actually present on the hunt. I don’t know what happened. It is as simple as that.

KING JUAN CARLOS: Why would anyone want to kill a bear, especially a tame, drunken bear who never hurt anyone? It is ridiculous. And it isn’t true. It is as simple as that.

MTIROFAN: The truth is that now I am dead, and even dead, not released from the pain of having lived. I walk this netherworld without even hope of honey, vodka, or bullet to free me. It is as simple as that.

(lights down, end.)

Happy Anniversary, Nuremburg Trials.

2006-09-29T07:06:00.000-07:00

How ironic that on the 60th anniversary of the Nuremburg War Crimes Tribunal, the Senate should pass their torture bill with provisions that attempt to protect interrogators working for the CIA and the Department of Defense from any repercussions for using illegal methods or to find ways to keep the 1996 War Crimes Act from applying to post-Sept. 11 actions.

By a 65-34 vote, the Senate approved legislation establishing military tribunals and empowering Bush to set guidelines for aggressively interrogating suspects without violating international prohibitions on prisoner abuse.

Even more ironic, last night I was watching a production of the play And Then They Came For Me. I was very impressed with the talk after the show, that included the presence of Holocaust survivor Eva Schloss--who is one of the characters in the play. One of the things she spoke about was never feeling that these things were dealt with in the past, they exist now, all around us. She spoke about Darfur, and the turmoil in the Middle East.

Frequently you hear the Republicans shout about the hysterical desperation of the Democrats who attempt to liken their efforts at governing and President Bush to the events that led to the Holocaust and Adolf Hitler.

You must have your blind eye buried in the sand like an ostritch if you can not see the relevant comparisons. Secret camps, secret arrests, secret police, domestic spying, encouraging the public to inform on each other, torture, limitations on dissent, erosions of freedom, increased nationalism tied to a single political party, linking domestic opposition to a nebulous enemy which does not have a state, and a leader who is the sole arbiter of what is and is not legal.

Just as with Hitler's exploitation of the Reichstag fire, we in America have been whipped into a frenzy with the September 11th attacks. We are constantly encouraged in our fear, and that fear is expertly manipulated to justify any measure, any act, to the point where it is now un-American not to support un-American actions we would never tolerate in our leaders otherwise. Where Hitler exploited the national fear of communists and Jews, we are warned by Republicans and talk radio pundits of the efforts of liberals and Muslims who seek to destroy this country from within.

That fear is used to eliminate opposition to the President, close our borders, push for national photo ID cards, support for secret prisons, placing interrogators above repercussion for illegal methods of interrogation, and to make advocacy for the rule of law and proper criminal procedures be perceived as weak and giving aid to the "enemy."

The defendants at Nuremburg said in their defense that they had changed the laws and acted according to the new laws.

They claimed that what they did was legal. Technically, it was.

We, and the rest of the world rejected that defense. In 1946, everyone knew exactly what torture was. No one was confused about what outrages against human dignity meant. The world stood up and took action to prevent any nation from perpetrating, even by technically legal national policy, outrages against human dignity for any reason, including guarding against presumed threats against national security.

We are constantly told by this administration that nothing is more dangerous to the nation than not "staying the course."

Staying the course means increasing instability in the Middle East, decreasing the respect and admiration of the rest of the world, further undermining the rule of law, 800 to 900 attacks a week against our forces in Iraq, increasing the number and desire of jihadists who are plotting against us, decreasing the safety of our people at home and abroad, deepening our national debt, further eroding the very freedoms we claim to be defending, and continuing to weaken our ability to respond to future threats. Staying the course means continuing to accept the increasing power of an imperial presidency and the erosion of the relevance of the other two branches of government designed to provide the necessary checks and balances for a successful democracy. Staying the course means less certainty about the election process and verified results. Staying the course means greater influence of corporations and diminishing influence of what is called the "mythical little guy" by this administration. Staying the course means continued deception, misrepresentation, secrecy, and lies rather than the oversight Congress is mandated by the constitution to provide. Staying the course means continued reliance on "body language" and "instinct" by this President in making decisions rather than thoughtful examination of factual evidence and honest consideration of opposing viewpoints prior to taking action.

I believe that nothing is more dangerous to this nation than not taking a new direction. Even Osama bin Laden said that his fundamental plan was "...Continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy." Just like Reagan wanted to spend the Soviet Union into Oblivion. You'd think that when bin Laden is taking a page from the Reagan playbook that Republicans might be able to recognize it. But...This is not an administration founded on either perception or congitive ability.

I don't hate America, I miss it.

I don't hate George Bush, I hate what he has done to destroy the country I once was so proud to call my homeland.

Please, for the love of both God and country, think deeply about what you vote for this November. Vote for wisdom, debate, honesty, open government, freedom from corruption. Vote for democracy. Vote for checks and balances. Vote for a return to the governmental system designed by our forefathers. Vote for sanity. Vote for oversight. Vote for accountability. Vote for a return to consequences and a departure from impunity.

You can't have that in a one party system. Vote for the Democratic candidate in your election. Only by doing that will we get the responsibility and accountability that George Bush promised in the 2000 campaign.

My old Methodist minister used to say that Laws without Punishment are just good advice. Why would you vote for the party that is going to allow George Bush to claim he isn't doing anything illegal, but just in case he is going to push for legislation to make anything he might have done that was considered illegal, retroactively legal?

Why would you support a party who believes it is OK to go even further in their defense than those in the dock at Nuremburg? At least they bothered to change the laws they wanted to break BEFORE they broke them.

It is time to ask yourself, what kind of government do you deserve, America? Because that is the government you are going to get.

Tell Me A Fairy Tale, Uncle Rushbo!

2006-08-18T14:24:00.000-07:00

(News Theme Music and lights up on a man in a suit seated at a desk, music out. To be performed as an angry rant in the style of Lewis Black or Andy Rooney after being kept in a cage for a week fed only Mexican food and tequila.)

Hey! I'm Archie Levine! And THIS is what I think!!!

(shift to a serene and cherubic demeanor) I think I'd like to hear a fairy tale. Uncle Rushbo, can you tell me the one about the nasty old liberal media and how they control the whole wide world, and because they hate George W. Bush so much they will stop at nothing to destroy him with lies and non-stop coverage of any teensy weensy little bad thing he might do, and how if they can't find anything that's true they just make up terrible bad evil lies about him because they just hate him so darn much they can't even see straight?

(shifting back to his normal, adorable rage) Look, you fricking pain pill addicted, viagra smuggling, pimple on your butt so you don't have to go to Viet Nam, disinfotainment spewing, hate mongering proof that Freud was wrong about cigars....I double dog dare you to compare the mainstream media coverage of two stories which, miraculously, broke at the same time:

1) The President of the United States was ruled by a judge to have exceeded his authority in spying on the American People, acted contrary to the Constitution he has sworn to defend, and may very well be guilty of a criminal act which merits jail time.

2) A nut job in Thailand claims to have killed Jon Benet Ramsey and is arrested by Thai officials who release information regarding his confession which they later retract.

Instead of detailed, objective analysis of the ruling....Hell, instead of slavering over the ruling like a pack of half-starved baying hounds eager to get at a frightened rabbit with a broken leg...we get nearly non-stop coverage of this murder and sexual assault of a little white girl that happened in 1997! It is the number one story on Google News! And if we aren't hearing about this dubious confession, we're being prodded into an ever increasing fear of combining any two liquids or gels in the wake of the foiled British terrorist plot!

Terror terror terror....its all you want to feed us. Aren't we supposed to be freeing the world from governments that try to control their own people through fear?

Here's the thing...if there actually were a liberal media bias, would the media be owned and controlled by the very same corporate interests who are the biggest contributors to conservative causes and candidates?

If there were a liberal media bias, wouldn't it be asking why the Bush administration urged the Blair administration to make arrests in London earlier than Scotland Yard wanted, seriously compromising the potential of convictions? And why those arrests coincidentally diverted media attention from Ned Lamont's victory over Joe Lieberman?

Wouldn't Wolf Blizter ask why the Republican Party refuses to endorse their own party's candidate in Connecticut?

Wouldn't a liberal media ask the President why it is that if the terrorists hate our freedom he is actively seeking to limit and erode those freedoms?

Wouldn't a liberal media ask why the US and Britain are the only countries who are banning liquids from air planes and taking such extreme measures as warning women not to wear gel bras on flights?

If the definition of terrorist is someone who uses fear to obtain their political goals which could not be otherwise obtained through legitimate means...doesn't that mean that the President is a terrorist?

I don't know about you...but the possibility that the female passenger next to me might have exploding boobs doesn't scare me. What scares me is that the most dangerous boobs in the world are the leaders of our country.

I think that come November we should all get together to lift and separate them from office, don't you?

And if we don't have a liberal media to help us do it, well that's just too damned bad. Nobody said it was going to be easy. Not much worth doing is.

Cobra II

2006-08-15T15:09:00.000-07:00

I've been really overwhelmed with outside projects this summer, and haven't been able to keep up with my usual perpetual ranting...not that there hasn't been plenty to rant about.

I have been reading some good books, though, and wanted to give them some plugs.

I strongly recommend reading Cobra II: The Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq by Michael R. Gordon and General Bernard E. Trainor.

It is a real page turner and I wish that everyone in Congress would get it and read it.

I place it among the recommended reading links below.

I'm also reading the Neal Boortz book on the Fair Tax.

I know, you're wondering how a guy who gets so angrified over Neal Boortz could stand to read his book. Well, first of all, I checked it out of the library so I wouldn't be giving him any money. Second, I have been hearing him hawk this thing and the Fair Tax plan for a really long time...and I have to say, I have yet to find a reason to be opposed to it...so I thought that reading his book might help me make a more informed decision about it.

I have decided that neither Neal nor the good congressman John Linder are authors that will give John Grisham anything to worry about. The book is not long on substance and pretty heavy with the liberal bashing, but I still haven't found a reason to be opposed to the Fair Tax and it seems like a pretty good idea.

If there are reasons, can you, my loyal readers, fill me in?

Otherwise, maybe we should actually help support the plan.

Joe Lieberman....So Long, it wasn't good to know ya.

2006-08-09T05:19:00.000-07:00

Here's what I don't get. Why in the world people think it takes a radicalized left wing extremist not to want to vote in a primary for the Democrat that is endorsed by Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Neal Boortz, Tom DeLay, the Republican Party at large and President Bush in particular?

Most REPUBLICANS wouldn't want a picture of Bush kissing them, why would any one with a rational mind not think something like that would hurt a Democrat?

What is wrong with the majority of Democrats actually voting for the candidate which most accurately represents their own interests and opinions? Isn't that the freedom democracy is supposed to bring?

Harry Truman (an actual Democrat) once said, "If you run a Republican against a Republican, a Republican is going to win every time."

Joe--and all you talk show ditto heads--the Democrats are tired of running Republicans, and we at least want candidates who accurately represent us. Nothing less is acceptable.

And by the way, in what universe is the 56% of the population who want this war in Iraq to end a fringe group of lunatics?

In a real democracy that sort of majority would have some actual power to take some action...the people are starting to get hip to the lies, George. You can only scream terrorism and pull back the curtain so many times. We're not going to ignore you any more. So fire up the shredders and draft those executive orders, because the investigations are coming.

We call for an end to your push for a one party nation. That party is soon to be over.

What if they really were criminal masterminds?

2006-07-12T06:57:00.000-07:00

I was talking with a friend recently about conspiracy theories. He came up with a nutty one based on birthdays that tied George W, Burt Ward, and Sly Stallone.

This conversation would have been better with the benefit of some mind altering substance, but given our ages, our minds have been altered enough.

He wove Burgess Meridith in there as having worked with both Sly and Burt, but hadn't connected the dots to George...so I did it for him by telling him that Dick Cheney is often referred to as The Pengin on The Daily Show.

This led to my altered mind going into overdrive. I give you the results for your comment:

Penguin = Cheney
Joker = George Bush (this gives W too much credit, but he is insane and makes a lot of bad jokes.)
Harley Quinn = Laura Bush
Catwoman = Rice
Riddler = Rumsfeld
Bookworm = Wolfowitz
Two Face = Powell
R'as al Ghul = Rove
Black Mask = Gonzalez
Mister Freeze = Michael Chertoff
Scarecrow = John Ashcroft
Cain = Tom DeLay
Solomon Grundy = Ronald Reagan
Ventriloquist = Scooter Libby
Poison Ivy = Ann Coulter
Bane = Rush Limbaugh (Venom = Oxy Contin or Viagra, depending on what he needs relieved)
The Cluemaster = Robert Novak
Killer Croc = Sean Hannity (granted, croc in his case doesn't stand for crocodile but crock of something significantly less palatable.)
The Mad Hatter = Michael Savage

But really, does this work? John Kerry = Batman, John Edwards = Robin ?

Kerry is more like Alfred and Al Gore more like Batman. Lieberman is no Robin, however, but maybe Lieberman is more like that corrupt cop on the Gotham police force, Detective Bullock. Paul Wellstone as Commissioner Gordon. Nancy Pelosi is Batgirl.
Hillary, of course, is Wonderwoman.
Bill Clinton = Superman (Man of Teflon instead of Steel).
Howard Dean as Green Arrow.

I could go on, I suppose, but I'd only reveal the true extent of my desire to avoid living my own life.

A Letter from Uncle--Where is Ken Starr when you need him?

2006-07-07T06:17:00.000-07:00

So much to write about recently--But, alas, I've been very busy with work and have not had the opportunity to rant about the injustice and corruption. Verily, my cup runneth over.

Instead, I offer you a guest editorial, as it were. An email I got today from my Uncle...who is a real inspiration for me.

Nephew,

Much to my surprise, I have to realize that Kenneth Starr's place in history needs to be re-examined. Perhaps it is more accurate to say that the fact he is not in our hearts and minds these days must be examined, which is to say we, the American public, must a look a bit at ourselves. In part this call for examination is simply due to a growing realization of importance of his investigations. Through his efforts we came to learn that semantics, such as "What is, is" word games, plays so large a place in our polite social and political fictions. We learned, as well, that some of us will gladly force all of us to expend endless time, trouble and money to attack gnats, while most of us, whether from cynicisim or optimism, are not
fazed by documents sought for years suddenly appearing on a White House breakfast table without explanation. Starr made us understand that given enough time, every fact in any one's life that is not desired to be bruited about, can be made public, except, of course, those facts most important, such as motivation and causes and whether the person so subjected to scrutiny is, ever so slighty, insane and therefore fit for public office.

However, in a short half-generation, we find ourselves bereft of all this. Can you imagine the exquisite public debates today, if Starr were to force the present incumbent president to explain "What I believe belief may be" in terms of weapons of mass destruction? Do any of us believe it would be less salutory today to discover whether there was a conspiracy afoot to have us attack a country without cause, in the name of anger against an admitted enemy on an entirely different matter? Would it not be more important than ever today to have someone of Starr's zeal and aptitude for detail pore over the public pronouncements and secret announcements of this administration, to find where things were omitted, violations of public trust committed and plain old- fashioned fibs uttered, than it ever was in the past to find out if then private citizens made bad investments worse?

To some degree, our present failure to call back Starr to higher and greater tasks is simply our desire to avoid unpleasantness. This may be stated in high-falutin' terms. "Starr," one might say, "was before dedicated to finding "high crimes and misdeamanors," in a kind of Paul Drake role to the House of Representatives as Perry Mason. However, that formula is upon a moment's reflection recognizably threadbare. If failing to tell the truth (if the contorted questions and answers in question could be so construed) under oath rose to the standard of a high crime and misdeamanor, surely attacking another country without provocation, upon trumped up charges, rises to that same standard. Indeed, I had thought that invading countries
without cause and upon trumped up charges, as when the Nazi regieme invaded Poland after dressing up corpses so as to make it look as though Poland had attacked a few German soldiers, was a crime against humanity, a crime under international law and all the rest. I may be wrong, but I would imagine that the homes of the some 2,500 American dead, the homes of all those wounded, the homes of all those worried that their loved one may die there, would, if polled at length, support some examination of how their loss or pending loss came to be.

There is, however, one way we must change before we are worthy of Kenneth Starr in these times and can call him forth again. Apparently we enjoy self-examination only when it is combined with sexual titillation. I have no quarrel with sex bieng one of the main driving forces of our lives. However, I suspect we had better give a little attention to the drive, previously thought to be even more important, of self-preservation. Absent our champion of Kenneth Starr again taking to the field, our sloth puts us all in danger.

Your loving Uncle

And there you have it. Now, get your bottle of vodka and crawl back into bed. The worst is yet to come.

It's All In The Timing....

2006-06-23T14:36:00.000-07:00

This is what I think....

I think everybody in America ought to get a backhoe, dig a giant hole, back their Hummer into it, cover it with dirt and call that a bomb shelter, because we're going to need some shelter from the coming storm.

All week we were treated to the Republicans clarifying for us dummies, you know, the Americans who want to see a timetable for getting out of Iraq and who don't support the war....what do they call us? Oh, yeah, THE MAJORITY!

The Republicans clarified for us how getting out of Iraq would be cutting and running, and would be a slap in the face to all those heroic sons and daughters who have already died there trying to force freedom down the throats of an ungrateful nation.

They told us again and again how the War on Terror can't be run as a criminal investigation, but can only be won militarily.

And, as expected, the will of the President prevailed over the will of the People, and Congress approved resolutions supporting the war and defeated resolutions calling for redeployment. It didn't even matter that the Iraqi government itself has asked for a timetable for US withdrawl.

And then...yesterday...seven people in Miami were arrested for plotting to blow up the Sears Tower.

Well, OK, then. There is a terrorist threat, and based on what we learned from the Republicans this week, there is only one course of action we can take.

We have to pre-emptively invade America.

These were American citizens, living in America, so it is clear that the US is harboring terrorists bent on attacking America. After September 11th, a domestic terrorist INSIDE the US used ANTHRAX, a known WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION on our own people. The first anthrax death was in...FLORIDA. Now, there is no proof that these American terrorists were linked to that attack, or that they possess further stockpiles of anthrax...but they haven't proved they don't, and until they do, the danger is clear. Nor has this group of American Christians, who are--by their own admission--bent on creating a second 9-11, proven to anyone's satisfaction that they aren't attempting to aquire nuclear weapons. And even if Al Qaida had nothing to do with them, the FBI agent posing as Al Qaida got them to be very interested in Al Qaida support, so if Al Qaida were interested in helping homegrown terrorists, we know homegrown terrorists would accept that help.

My God, are you blind to the risks here? Is your love of logic and the law worth the deaths of millions of Americans? And here, I mean the innocent Americans, not the Americans who want to kill Americans, because obviously Americans who want to kill Americans should be killed by Americans before they can kill any Americans.

Its simple.

Let me put it to you this way. If the Republicans are right, and they have to be, because otherwise God wouldn't let them bein power, we will never stop these evil doers with any method short of full scale military invasion. That's how we won in Afghanistan, and that's how we're winning in Iraq. The path is clear. We now have to invade ourselves....or at the very least, we have to invade Florida.

It doesn't matter that law enforcement uncovered the plot and thwarted it by arresting them. So what? Don't let these criminals try to sidetrack you from the mission at hand. Military action is the only effective tool against terror and it has to be used before smoking gun turns out to be a mushroom cloud.

HAVEN'T YOU BEEN LISTENING????

And just like soldiers in Iraq can't always distinguish between civilians and insurgents, how are we supposed to know for certain which Floridians are the good guys and which are smiling at us because they're picturing how we'd look with radiation poisoning after their dirty bomb goes off in our living room? Better safe than certain, that's our national post 9-11 motto.

Because you can't be 100% cetain. And you're putting the entire nation at risk if you even try.

Floridians, you are either with us or you are with these god-loving, bible carrying, militant Christian extremists bent on destroying their own country. We have to fight them in Florida so we don't have to fight them in Illinois. How much clearer could it be?

And if we fight, we have to fight to win. All the way. Total victory. No retreat, no surrender, no way.

Nobody is pulling out of Florida until the job is done, so Jeb Bush, start stocking your spider hole....because....Freedom is on the march!

The Pentagon Wants To Be Your My Space Buddy

2006-06-16T07:11:00.000-07:00

I know that you should never put anything on the internet you don't want on the 6:00 news...but that's usually a rule of thumb designed to keep you from making an ass of yourself and never being able to live down the embarrassment of sending out a "reply all" when you meant it to go to a trusted friend who already knows you're an ass.

Or blogging when you are drunk.

Now, just when you thought it couldn't get worse than the NSA wiretaps on your phone, you have to worry about having even more of your tax dollars used against you and your attempts to make virtual friends.

According to a recent article in New Scientist Technology, the Pentagon is gathering, storing, and analyzing data from social networking sites in order to create a more detailed impression of...everyone. Follow the link and read the whole story.

Check it out, and be afraid. And if you helped vote in this era of agressive avoidance of oversight and reduction in privacy in the name of preserving freedom....I hope they get you first.

Take action--call and write Congress today

2006-06-06T10:19:00.000-07:00

Here's what I wrote:

Dear Senator,

Please oppose efforts to revise the constitution to reflect the religious intolerance of ultra conservatives who advocate an erosion of the separation of church and state, and the advancement of an American theocracy in order to legistlate their own narrow view of morality.

This is something we have gone to war in other nations to prevent, please take action now to prevent it at home.

You can not, with any credibility, claim to be freedom loving and spreading it around the world while at the same time actively seeking to limit freedoms at home.

Help instead to promote monogomy among gays and lesbians by advocating gay marriage, which would be a tremendous postive step in helping to reduce the spread of AIDS.

Here's an easy way to do it: www.congress.org

Fear and Self-Loathing in Washington?

2006-06-06T05:21:00.000-07:00

From Wayne Madsen Report:

June 4, 2006
More on George W. Bush's "Sanctity of Marriage" gay marriage constitutional ban.
George W. Bush's marital problems have just taken another turn for the worse. Apparently, Mr. Bush has not only engaged in an extra-marital affair with a member of the opposite sex who is also a senior member of his Cabinet, but also a member of the same sex. WMR received the following release this morning from Leola McConnell, Democratic candidate for Governor of Nevada (who has been endorsed by WMR). McConnell is a one-time professional dominatrix.

"President Bush's speech to the nation Monday. If he doesn't say he's a gay American or at the least a bisexual one then he shouldn't be making one at all. And the notion that it would be in regards to writing bigotry into our nation's Constitution is reprehensible. Too bad it isn't me doing the rebuttal because in 1984, I watched him perform (with the enthusiasm of homosexual male who had done this many times before) a homosexual act on another man, namely Victor Ashe. Victor Ashe is the current Ambassador to the nation of Poland who should also come out like former Governor McGreevey of New Jersey and admit to being a gay American. Other homo-erotic acts were also performed by then private citizen George Bush because I performed one of them on him personally.

I am the woman this website (bushssecretlifein84.tripod.com) speaks of that has been posted on the net nearly two years now. None of this would be the business of anyone but President Bush's little ruse to save his failed presidency by using DOMA [Defense of Marriage Act] to divide Americans one from the other has to be exposed as the act of a desperate closeted homosexual man. The only crime in being GLBT is in the hiding. The President needs to come clean with the American people about his own past sexual behavior before he tries to besmirch the humanity of people in search of sincerely committing to the same bonds of matrimony he's afforded. He violated his own vows of monogamy having a homosexual affair with a long time family friend of whom his wife had no knowledge. His hypocrisy seems to know no bounds.

I had planned to run for governor of Nevada without going into any of this but his planned nationally televised address to the nation makes it necessary for me to address his attempt at division in as public a way as he picked to try this Bushification of reality regarding same sex marriages.

Sincerely,
Leola McConnell
Liberal Democratic candidate for Governor of Nevada"

Bush Leading Republican War on Monogomy!

2006-06-05T14:24:00.000-07:00

(Even though he, personally, doesn't give a sh*t, according to Newsweek.)

Why is it, really, that Republicans are so hot to keep gays from committed, long term relationships which exclude multiple partners? Why do they really want to perpetuate the myth of homosexual promiscuity?

Remember, the White House's favorite reporter was a gay male prostitute who got inside access even more often than Jack Abramoff.

Don't we have a few more important things to address at this particular moment in history than a constitutional amendment on gay marriage and flag burning?

Where Is Ken Starr When You Need Him?

2006-06-02T13:22:00.000-07:00

Now, picture them naked.

Ick.

I remember very well her verbal slip back in 2004 when she referred to the President as "my husb--" but caught herself almost in time. She's never been married, so a slip like that isn't easy to explain away.

I also remember how in Woodward's book there were those Crawford get togethers where Condi would sing spirituals for him. I wondered then if she tucked him in and read to him at night. More ick.

Nothing is confirmed, of course, but with this administration the old line of "Don't believe anything until it is officially denied" rings truer than ever.

And the more "vehemently" they deny it, the more true it likely is.

I know there are more serious things to worry about than Presidential Sexploits...like Haditha and that this is the first administration I know of which fairly routinely requires ethics training for its employees and now the combat troops...and not as part of the plan to fulfil W's campaign promise to bring honor back to the White House in the very first minute of the first hour of the first day of a Bush Administration. Or Robert Kennedy's new report on the voter fraud in Ohio. Or what passes for diplomacy with Iran.

Rumor inside the beltway now has it that Laura Bush has moved out of the White House and into the Mayflower Hotel because she's had enough of the ongoing affair between her husband and the Secretary of State. (From Wayne Madsen's website)

So...inquiring minds want to know. (Actually it was the tabloid The Globe which ran the cover story about the Bush Breakup, not the National Enquirer, in the interest of credit where it is or isn't due.)

America has spoken--the only scandal that can capture and hold our attention is a sex scandal.

So, do we have one? Or will we have to be content with the now run of the mill torture, war crimes, vote fraud, and congressional corruption scandals you've been giving us?

See also:
Condoleezza Rice, a Sally Hemmings for the 21st Century, by Liza Sabater, April 21, 2004

Freedom of Speech vs. Responsibility for Consequences

2006-05-26T08:30:00.000-07:00

You know, one of this nation's most precious freedoms is our freedom of speech. Everyone has the right to say whatever they want, to anyone they want. Even George W. Bush.

When he said to the insurgents in Iraq, "Bring it on," or when he told the world that Osama bin Laden was "wanted dead or alive," those were clear messages he now says were misinterpreted. He regrets saying them. He admits making a mistake.

I agree with him. He's far too late and too many lives have been lost as a result of his freedom to say those words....but I agree that it was a mistake to utter them.

I also agree that he had the right to say them.

I know. You're asking, "Archie, how can both those things can be true? How can you say someone has the right to say something but is wrong to have said it?"

I'm glad you asked. Let me try to explain.

Too often in this country we mistake personal freedom for being the limit to our social responsiblity. I would never argue for limits to our freedom of speech, but I will always stand up for using that freedom responsibly. You know, sort of like how some people say that you should be free to have a gun so long as you use it responsibly. It's not a perfect metaphor, but maybe it helps you see my point.

This is not an argument for censorship--telling someone not to say what they honestly want to say is wrong. Trying to get someone to understand why they might not want to say what they are thinking at any given moment is not wrong.

We all take risks in our daily lives. Getting up in the morning is a risk. Taking risks can be a virtue. What matters is knowing what we are risking before we decide to take those risks.

Sometimes, when we don't consider those consequences, our personal risks hurt people's feelings, end friendships, even injure people. Sometimes, as with George Bush's hasty words, the consequences are even more dire. George risked our safety and the lives of our men and women in uniform when he spoke those words.

How many innocent lives were lost because of George Bush's irresponsible rhetoric will never be known, but that lives were lost as a result is impossible to deny. And because he is a leader, millions of Americans followed his example--embracing a similar rhetoric that remains equally dangerous and irresponsible.

Words can be tools or they can be weapons. Whether you are the President of the United States or just another member of a community...My hope is that more people will use their words with responsibility, forethought, and an understanding of the consequences of the risks they take by using them.

I'd like to ask every American to use our words to help build something good in the world instead of using them to inspire us to hurt each other.

Transcript of Bush-Blair News Conference, NPR, May 26, 2006

US Rep. William Jefferson should resign

2006-05-24T12:17:00.000-07:00

For the record, if any of you gleeful conservatives out there are asking where the wacko liberal fringe and the Democrats are on the issue of corruption when it comes to their own party....Let me be among the ones who want him to resign, attempt to clear his name (if he can) and stop allowing himself to be a distraction to the corruption scandals rocking the current administration.

If the Dems are going to attempt to claim the high ground, we have to hold ourselves to a higher standard and come down even harder on our own when they fall short of the public trust than we would those in the opposition whose culture of corruption has become the order of the day.

From where I stand, proving innocence is going to be pretty difficult if they have him on tape and recovered the exact same money paid to him as a bribe.

US Rep. William Jefferson, I beg of you to do what is right and step down.

This is a disgrace, and cries out for justice.

For my part, it is perfectly understandable that Speaker Dennis Hastert is outraged at the FBI search, because it sets a precedent many Republicans are going to be very nervous about if the search for corruption is even handed.

Let's hope for the nation's sake that it is.

And while we're at it, vote for oversight this November. Vote for seperation of powers. Vote to make Congress relevant again. Vot for Democracy and not an Imperial President.

Vote Democrat for America.

I am laughing like a Frenchman!

2006-05-19T08:11:00.000-07:00

Sorry for the lack of posting of late, it has been both a busy time, and a depressing one. I weep for the American nation.

But this morning, as CNN reported about the Senate proposal to make English the official language of America...well, I had to chuckle.

How many of these xenophobic, racist, bigoted butt wipes who want to make English the criteria by which the arms of America open to citizens and non-citizens alike could actually pass a proficiency test themselves? I teach for a living. I know their children have some real problems speaking and writing the only language they claim to know--or think they need to know.

And, of course, the real humor comes from the intense anti-French sentiment most of these people have....and yet it doesn't stop them from trying to create the same kind of English as Official Language they so often criticize the French for doing in their nation.

Here's a question for you "Freedom Lovers" who think I'm an "America Hater"--Doesn't freedom of speech include the language you use to speak?

Here's another question, is anyone interested in national security and border closing sitting in lawn chairs with a beer and a now-legal to own AK-47 along the Canadian border? Or is it just a national security concern if people are coming in from Mexico?

If memory serves, the lion's share of terrorists have come from that direction. And most of them flew. We'd need a pretty high fence if you want to stop the terrorists from getting into the country.

These people are idiots. But they are in charge. Because you let them. I don't care about Diebold. I know they stole the election, but that was only possible because people didn't turn out in overwhelming numbers and nobody lodged a legitimate protest about the election results and the conduct of elections in this country.

So, the buck stops with you.

Good Friday's No Shame Theatre Piece

2006-04-14T18:03:00.000-07:00

Friday Nights I'm always at No Shame Theatre...Tonight is Good Friday and it is no exception. Here's the piece I'm doing--

Easter Greetings from the Heart of Archie
(Lights up on Archie at his desk. He is eerily calm and serene.)

Hey, I'm Archie Levine...and THIS is what I think....I think you're probably wondering where my anger is.

Why aren't my veins popping out of my head?

Why aren't I yelling and screaming?

God knows I've got plenty I could be yelling and screaming about.

There are more retired generals calling for Rumsfeld to resign than there are Americans who think Bush is doing a great job.

(Rising anger through this section)

There's Tom DeLay's resignation, there's the Homeland Security official caught in an online underage sex sting, and there's the Scooter Libby revelation that Bush was the leaker he said he'd fire for leaking the information that led to the outing of a covert CIA operative in a time of war.

There's Bush telling us that for our protection and to help America understand why he was saying what he said in his speeches about the war, he declassified the tiny part of the National Intelligence Estimate which addressed his claims of WMD in Iraq, but didn't declassify the overwhelming majority of the same classified document which contradicted that very claim...

There's fact that even Rush Limbaugh is saying you can't execute Moussaui for not telling us something because we have a 5th amendment right not to incriminate ourselves.

There's the insane perversion of logic in the argument that Moussaui deserves to be put to death because his not telling everything he knew to the FBI was the cause of the deaths of 3,000 innocent people on September 11th....even though Bush not telling us everything he knew caused us to launch a pre-emptive war which killed at least 33,000 innocent people!

There's the Council on Family Relations who are bankrolling lawsuits by students around the country who want to use the courts to force universities with anti-discrimination codes of conduct to repeal those codes so that Christians can have the freedom to express their religion by telling fags that God hates them and will make them burn in Hell.

There is John McCain speaking at the Liberty University where Jerry Falwell is putting everything he can into the creation of a biblically based Law School so that there will be wave after wave of Dominionist End Time Theologians with the legal credentials to sweep secularists from the benches in our courts and liberals from the seats of power in our government.

(At the peak of apoplexy)

There are revelations after revelations about the lies, greed, corruption, and incompetence of our current government that are staggering in the extreme and so dangerous I can't get to sleep at night without taking a bottle of vodka to bed with me!

(Calming to serentity again)

So, why am I so calm?

Because it is Holy Week. Because instead of thinking about what the Theocratic Elite are telling me Jesus says to hate, and destroy, and punish...instead of watching Pat Robertson and Falwell and the Council of Conservative Christians try to figure out how to get God to start the End Times ahead of schedule....I had a little look at what Jesus had to say about his life, and his message...and his death...which we commemorate this day.

If I were to meet Judge Roy Moore, who said his Christianity had moved him to donate a graven stone image of the Ten Commandments to the foyer of the Alabama Courthouse in which he was the sitting Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court...I'd ask him why he didn't instead donate a stone memorial to the commandment Jesus gave, just before he was taken by the Romans?

Jesus told his disciples, "I have a new commandment for you...that you should love one another."

Wouldn't that be a world changing thing to have inscribed above every courthouse in the nation? Or, for that matter, above the front doors of every school, church, and town hall in the land? Emblazened on every drinking fountain, every fountain pen, every bumpersticker, on every lapel pin, every coin, every dollar bill, and every prison gate in America?

"I command you to love one another" --signed, Jesus.

God gave Moses Ten Commandments. Jesus gave us one.

And so, I'm trying to fulfill that commandment.

At least through Easter.

George Bush, I love you. John Ashcroft, I love you. Judge Roy Moore, I love you. Donald Rumsfeld, I love you. Dick Cheney, I love you. Zacharias Moussaui, I love you. Mohammad Atta, I love you. Osama bin Laden, I love you. Saddam Hussein, I love you.

And I love each of you, too.

Who Would Jesus Love?

(You can read more of Archie's thoughts on religious issues at his other blog, Stop Hurting Jesus.)

They lied to you. More proof. How much do you need?

2006-04-12T00:16:00.000-07:00

Lacking Biolabs, Trailers Carried Case for War: Administration Pushed Notion of Banned Iraqi Weapons Despite Evidence to Contrary, By Joby Warrick, Washington Post Staff Writer,
Wednesday, April 12, 2006

On May 29, 2003, 50 days after the fall of Baghdad, President Bush proclaimed a fresh victory for his administration in Iraq: Two small trailers captured by U.S. and Kurdish troops had turned out to be long-sought mobile "biological laboratories." He declared, "We have found the weapons of mass destruction."

The claim, repeated by top administration officials for months afterward, was hailed at the time as a vindication of the decision to go to war. But even as Bush spoke, U.S. intelligence officials possessed powerful evidence that it was not true.

A secret fact-finding mission to Iraq -- not made public until now -- had already concluded that the trailers had nothing to do with biological weapons. Leaders of the Pentagon-sponsored mission transmitted their unanimous findings to Washington in a field report on May 27, 2003, two days before the president's statement.

They knew their claim was bogus and they put it on the shelf because they knew the only way to get you to do what they wanted was to keep the truth from you and then tell you whatever it took to convince you of the lie they wanted to believe.
(follow the above link for the full story)

With a track record like this, do you really think he's telling the truth when he says plans and preparations for an invasion of Iran are just wild speculation?

This administration takes the joke out of the old saying, "Don't believe anything until it is officially denied."

Please read these and be proud of your president:

Bush Wrong 36 Ways, by Edward Jayne
Ex-Bush aide denies calls on phone jamming, By KATHARINE WEBSTER, ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
Is George W. Bush the worst president in 100 years? He has always been a polarizing figure, but now his constant battles at home and abroad are taking on historic proportions
US Election Commissioner (EAC) Martinez Resigns
Gallup: Most Americans Critical of President in CIA Leak Case
The Bush Administration's Final Surprise?
Adventures in Testifying
A President's Promise
Bush leads Muzzle award winners

Deserving of Death for Lying?

2006-04-11T06:27:00.000-07:00

I'll admit up front that I am opposed to the death penalty.

This comes from my Christian Values. Christ submitted to his own execution not because he believed strongly in the death penalty as a deterrent to crime, but because he knew that regardless of what men on this Earth call justice there is a higher judge to which we will be held accountable. Jesus was not only innocent of the crime he was executed for, but innocent of any crime. That, coupled with his stopping what was, by Jewish law, a legal execution leads me to think the only stance on the death penalty a Christian can take is to oppose the death penalty. Death cuts a person off artificially from the chance for redemption and forgiveness.

Perhaps this is why so many Christians are proponents of the death penalty. They, like Hamlet delaying his murder of Claudius, want to deny those they hate the chance of redemption and to more quickly get them into hell. I'm not sure how they can continue to call themselves Christians if this is how they feel, but Jesus was well aware of the problem of hypocrisy even among his most ardent followers. That is why he constantly warned against it.

In the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, we are seeking the death penalty not for what he actually did do, but for what he says he wanted to do and for what he failed to prevent by lying to the FBI. Why is it that many of the people rabidly hungering for this execution are often the same people claiming that hate crime legislation is wrong because you can't try someone for what they are thinking?

If we execute Moussaoui on the grounds that if he had not lied to the FBI the deaths of thousands of innocent people could have been avoided, then it certainly begs the question as to what the consequences should be for Bush, since the lies told to the American people by our president mislead us into a war which has killed tens of thousands. Telling us the truth could have avoided this war.

And yet, even today, knowing all that has been revealed, Bush continues to express pride rather than remorse over the loss of life he has willingly caused.

This war happened because we were told false information, and were not told important information which contradicted the false information that we were given.

Because the President lied to us about the threat posed by Hussein, because the President has actually admitted selectively declassifying only that information which supported his case and not the preponderance of information collected by intelligence services which contradicted his conclusions about WMD and the threat posed by Iraq...tens of thousands of people are dead. That is a fact.

Should we hold this lunatic terrorist rejected by Al Qaida to a higher standard of punishment for not fully disclosing their knowledge of a possible threat than we do our own president? If we don't, then what does that say about us as a people?

Bush either lied to us or is dangerously incompetent. Which do you prefer? Neither is worthy of continuing to hold the office of the President of the United States.

We are going to put Moussaoui to death because he wanted to kill Americans and we have decided he lied to us about his knowledge of the impending 9-11 attacks.

We invaded another nation on the grounds that our leader claimed its leader wanted to kill Americans and we claimed their leader was lying about his inability to attack us.

Our President wanted to tart a war that he knew would kill thousands of innocent Iraqis and lied about his intention to do so. He lied about the justifications for doing so. He is using the same rhetoric again about Iran.

Of the three, our President is the only one who actually did what he wanted to do.

If we are going to embrace the doctrine of pre-emption we should not be surprised when any other nation also embraces that same doctrine.

If we are going to embrace a hunger for vengeance, we must accept that those whom we harm will also seek vengeance with the same justification.

It is time to accept that the only "total victory" which will make us safe is the complete and utter removal of all who oppose or question Bush from the face of the earth. The President has said time and again, you are with us or you are against us.

Nothing could be more dangerous for the world than a Domoninionist and a proponent of End Times theology with more power than any other human has ever had before.

George Bush cares about only one thing...that he has looked Evil in the face and said "Bring it on." No price is too high for him to ask us to pay in his effort to destroy evil.

How willing are you to allow him to spend of the blessings God has given you--your lives, your hopes, your families, your treasure--and how willing are you to allow him to define for you what is and is not evil?

I am not asking for Bush's execution. I am crying out for justice for all people. You can not condemn one man to death and exalt another man as heroic for the same action...telling lies which lead to the deaths of thousands.

Deny Moussaoui the martyrdom he craves and knows he did not earn.

Hold Bush accountable for his deceptions and abuses of power.

Be more careful about what you choose to believe.

Be just.

Be fair.

Be Americans who uphold the ideals of our republic.

Be vigilent in defense of our nation and its democratic principles. Much more than your individual security is at stake.

Bomb Iran, bomb bomb Iran...

2006-04-10T07:12:00.000-07:00

Well, they've said it. Regime change in Iran is the option they are looking for. Today they are denying it, so you know it's got to be true.

Why don't people in this country get nervous when Bush says, as he did recently, that "future presidents" will have to deal with Iraq and the pull out of troops? FUTURE, as in NOT HIM, and PRESIDENTS, plural. Iraq is going to be, by the president's own admission, a war which will go on for four, if not eight, if not 12, if not 16, if not 20 or more years into the FUTURE.

Is this what he told us and what Congress approved?

No.

Given the monumental degree of misrepresentation and the complete failure of the Iraq War, how can they even think about a similar invasion of Iran?

Would they even be able to consider putting the master plan of the Project for a New American Century into action if they didn't know for certain they were going to hold all three branches of government in this nation for that entire century?

In a democracy, how can you be sure of that?

You can't.

One thing Bush has proven about the PNAC and the Neo-Cons...they barely even need a human being to be a candidate.

Nothing they are doing or have done indicates that their actions are tempered by any thought of gaining the approval of the electorate. In the last "election" even Republicans like Bob Barr were telling other Republicans not to vote for Bush. They weren't saying vote for Democrats...so how did he win by 11 and a half million more votes than he did in 2000? Where did those votes come from?

Why is it that the same machines we are saying aren't reliable enough to justify a Chavez victory are more than reliable enough to validate a Bush win?

Before we do anything else. Before we talk about impeachment or immigration, or education, or taxation, or going to war. Before anything else, we need to demand election reform. Not just campaign finance reform, but real election reform.

We need elections with paper ballots and verifible results. We need standardized voting machines made by people who are banned by law from making contributions or statements of support for any candidate.

And we need to stop believing that an administration so clearly opposed to the fundamental principles of democracy is honestly trying to spread democracy around the world at gunpoint.

Nothing we do as a nation matters at all unless we continue to uphold and defend the basic democratic principles which made this nation great and a beacon the world over against tyrany and despotism.

We are a nation of laws, not of men. We are a nation that strives toward ideals, not a nation which sacrifices those ideals in the name of greater power and security.

Give me Liberty or Give me DEATH.

One man, one vote.

Of the People, By the People, and for THE PEOPLE.

FREEDOM.

PRIVACY.

TRUST.

HONOR.

LIBERTY.

JUSTICE.

EQUALITY.

Where did these words go? When did they stop meaning what our founding fathers thought they meant?

They created this system of government, our great CONSTITUTION, as a bulwark against abuses of power.

They knew that power and liberty are naturally incompatible and so they created a system of checks and balances so that as the nation gained power, that power would never so erode liberty and freedom that all their work and pursuit of the ideal would be undone.

The federalists are not patriots.

The dominionists are not following the example of Christ.

Diebold is not furthering democracy.

Do something about it, America. For the love of God and Country, please do something about it. NOW.

I AM THE LAW

2006-04-07T08:20:00.000-07:00

George Bush was against the leak before he was for it.

I can't understand two things...how there can be a liberal media bias when we're focused on The Davinci Code and Cynthia McKinney during a week where Bush is revealed as the source of the NIE leak, Tom DeLay resigns, the US courts are going to give the gift of martyrdom to Moussaoui, and a high ranking official in the Department of Homeland Security is arrested for seducing a 14 year old girl over the internet with naked pictures of himself wearing his DHS security badge.

And I can't understand why even 37% of America is so deep in denial that they continue to support George Bush.

Holy Crap, America.

Get your head out of your ass and ask yourself a couple of hard questions once in a while, instead of pretending the only thing keeping your boy down are liberal traitors in the White House Press Corps.

The official motto of this White House is "I won't comment on an ongoing investigation."

So much for restoring dignity to the White House. They have no credibility because they don't think they need any more credibility than their own say-so. You call that Democracy?

That dog don't hunt. That's like a prostitute preaching celibacy. Harry Taylor had it right, Bush should be ashamed. And scratching the W off the back of your SUV isn't going to be enough to remove your shame when you finally wake up and smell the catastrophe your support of this amoral idiot made possible.

Told You It Was Bush!

2006-04-06T11:15:00.000-07:00

I said all along, Bush is the White House source for the leaked information that led to outing CIA covert operative Valerie Plame. He leaked classified information, outed an operative engaged in WMD investigations all to silence critics. I think, as this line of investigation continues, we're going to find he was much more actively involved than it sounds like now...And now it sounds pretty bad.

He has a history of vengeful reprisals on critics and lacks any understanding of the rule of law which might prevent him from abuses of power. The kind of thing that usually gets a person labeled a mad man.

What is it going to take for you people to turn on this guy who is destroying our nation more effectively than Osama bin Laden could ever dream of doing?

I also pointed out how carefully he put it in his statement, that he would fire anyone on his staff who was involved in the leak. Bush is not on his own staff. He thinks he's clever. I think he's a liar.

What do you think?

And what are you going to do about it?

Throw Her Ass In Jail

2006-04-05T07:06:00.000-07:00

I think that Rep. Cynthia McKinney is a disgrace to her gender, race, and political party. I think she should set an example by accepting responsibility for her actions. I think she should be arrested and get her day in court. I think she should plead guilty. When convicted, I think she should do the same kind of time any other person would--be they white, black, Muslim, Catholic, man, woman, or any other category you can think of dividing people up into.

Maybe some community service time in an orange jumpsuit would remind her of what the hell she is supposed to be doing in Congress.

How can the Democratic Party attempt to hold Republicans responsible for their actions when someone like McKinney refuses to be responsible for hers?

Regrettably, she is one of ours. Regrettably she helps the other side to diminish our credibility and to distract the country from their own failings of leadership.

SHE HIT A COP.

She hit a cop who was doing his job of protecting her and every other member of Congress during a time of war. A time of war in which Congress itself has been attacked by terrorists. (Even if the Anthrax Mailer probably was a domestic terrorist and we have completely forgotten about trying to capture and arrest him, her, or them.)

I don't care what motives you ascribe to the cop after you hit him, the fact is you committed a crime by hitting him and it is up to the courts to determine the justification. The cop did not yell, "Hey, Ghetto Slut, you ain't allowed in Congress!"

By all accounts (except hers, I guess) the cop was civil, polite, and tried three times to get her attention. Maybe members of Congress ought to be a little more attentive to the police, or at least be attentive to them when they are going through security check points.

Or, here's an idea, if you know people are having a hard time recognizing you--wear your security badge and make an effort to get them to recognize you by reaching out to meet them yourself. How many names and faces of capital police, who risk their lives to protect yours, have you bothered to learn?

Here's another idea. If you can't go on television to talk to Wolf Blitzer without two lawyers sitting next to you....DON'T GO ON TELEVISION.

Hitting a cop and then claiming the criminal act was justified by a motivation you ascribe to the cop that has not been proven is, in principle, exactly the same as what we are doing in Iraq and criticizing the President for!

Given McKinney's leap of logic in this case, I would say she suffers from a degree of prejudice. Perhaps the origin of which is even justified. She has been treated badly in the past, even by Clinton administration staffers, but a justified origin for prejudice does not justify individual actions taken by the person as a result of that prejudice. The responsible thing to do is to recognize that you have reasons to be sensitive to slights and take actions which reduce, not inflame, prejudice in others.

And you don't sidestep the fact that you committed a crime by attempting to reframe the debate about your crime to one of broader and more incendiary issues like race and gender bias.

How dare you, Rep. McKinney, distract this nation from the important and serious issues your constituents sent you to Congress to address in order to pursue an agenda of personal aggrandizement and racial division? Is this really how you want to get name and face recognition?

You hit a cop. That was a greater wrong than the alleged slight to your dignity you are claiming motivated your illegal action. Like it or not, not knowing who you are is not a crime.

I bet you a million dollars that Senator Ted Kennedy has a more recognizable face than you. He comes from one of the most famous families in the world. Did Senator Ted Kennedy throw a punch at airline security when they told him he was on a no fly list?

HE WAS STOPPED AT THE AIRPORT FIVE TIMES! It took him THREE WEEKS to clear his name and fly again.

If it were me, and I were him, I would have wanted to throw a punch, or at least make the accusation that putting him on the no fly list out of Washington had to be politically motivated. But he didn't do either of those things. He had the grace and class that we expect from our national leaders.

Grow up and lead, Congresswoman, because that is what we expect our leaders to do.

The Ongoing "Accomplished" Mission in Iraq

2006-03-19T06:30:00.000-08:00

Marking the third anniversary of the War in Iraq, I watched the CNN documentary on the war yesterday while cleaning my house. The night before I'd watched my identical cousin do his thing at No Shame Theatre. I wanted to reprint his script here.

I think its brilliant, but then I also think brilliance runs in the family.

I'm THIS (3) many!
by Todd Wm. Ristau (and some of the words Bush gave us on the last three March 19ths)

(Lights at full. Todd sits at a table with a three layer cake covered in white and red frosting. He has three candels and a box of kitchen matches. If possible a giant video screen above would show George Bush speaking, and freeze frame when Todd speaks. If not, Todd will speak Bush's lines and attempt to make it clear those are words he is repeating, not speaking for himself.)

BUSH: We come to Iraq with respect for its citizens, for their great civilization and for the religious faiths they practice. We have no ambition in Iraq, except to remove a threat and restore control of that country to its own people.

(Todd picks up a candle, places it in the cake.)

BUSH: Now that conflict has come, the only way to limit its duration is to apply decisive force. And I assure you, this will not be a campaign of half measures, and we will accept no outcome but victory.

(Todd strikes the match. The image of Bush shifts to the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln.)

TODD: Mission accomplished.

(Todd lights the candle. Lights down to 2/3rds brightness.)

TODD: Today, you are this many.

(pause)

BUSH: The war on terror is not a figure of speech. It is an inescapable calling of our generation. The terrorists are offended not merely by our policies -- they are offended by our existence as free nations. No concession will appease their hatred. No accommodation will satisfy their endless demands.

(pause)

TODD: In addition to US Military war dead, there are now 6,331 civilian casualties....more than twice the number killed on September 11th.

(Todd picks up another candle, places it in the cake.)

TODD: Today, you are this many.

(Pause as Todd lights the candle. Lights down to 1/3rd.)

BUSH: We launched Operation Iraqi Freedom in order to disarm a brutal regime, free its people, and defend the world from a grave danger. We knew of Saddam Hussein's record of aggression and support for terror. We knew of his long history of pursuing, even using, weapons of mass destruction, and we know that September the 11th requires our country to think differently...We must, and we will, confront threats to America before they fully materialize.

(pause, the image of the president from the last speech fades slowly away)

TODD: In addition to the US Military casualties, the war has cost 11,312 civilian casualties. Nearly four times the number killed on September 11th.

(Todd picks up another candle, places it in the cake.)

TODD: Today, you are this many.

(Pause, as Todd lights the third candle, lights out so that he is lit only by the candles.)

2,300 US Military Dead, 700 short of the number killed on September 11th.

Somewhere between 30,000 and 100,000 civilians have been deprived of life....at least ten, perhaps thirty three times the number killed on September 11th.

When do the original 3,000 no longer justify the blood we are spilling? (pause) The day will come when not a single member of an American high school graduating class will have lived in a pre-September 11th world.

What do you want that world to look like? And are you willing to see it only by the light of the candles you are adding to this cake?

How long before you realize the light from these fires makes you blind?

(Todd blows out the candles in a single breath. End of piece)

Sources:

For extensive reading on 9-11, please visit this site:
Cooperative Research 9-11 Timeline

That last one is very interesting....I was particularly frustrated by the following passage from that site, which is indicative of how this whole mess landed in our lap in the first place and the leadership from which the entire world has been made to suffer. But, you get what you pay for, even if you don't get to make the decisions on how your tax dollars are spent.

1984-1994: US Supports Militant Textbooks for Afghanistan
The US, through USAID and the University of Nebraska, spends millions of dollars developing and printing textbooks for Afghan schoolchildren. The textbooks are filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings, part of covert attempts to spur resistance to the Soviet occupation. For instance, children are taught to count with illustrations showing tanks, missiles, and land mines. Lacking any alternative, millions of these textbooks are used long after 1994; the Taliban are still using them in 2001. In 2002, the US will start producing less violent versions of the same books, which President Bush says will have “respect for human dignity, instead of indoctrinating students with fanaticism and bigotry.”

(He will fail to mention who created those earlier books)

[Canadian Broadcasting Corp., 5/6/02; Washington Post, 3/23/02]

Bush is a moron, and he thinks you're the stupid one.

2006-03-17T15:42:00.000-08:00

"The Terrorists Are Turning To A Weapon Of Fear Because They Know They Cannot Defeat Us Militarily."

He actually said that on March 13th.

Dumb ass, terrorists employ weapons of fear by definition.

They have no military.

If, after three years of leading the Global War on Terror, you still have so little grasp of the basic concepts involved...Jesus Christ! Why is this guy still in office? Why does anyone take him serously?

Should we just surrender now?

Somebody give him a blow job so we can impeach him already.

Don't just take my word for it, check it out on the idiot-in-chief's website:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/

An Elephant Never Forgets

2006-03-16T14:22:00.001-08:00

One thing that drives me nuts about the Radical Right Wing is their insistance that they are the only ones who get to define what "Christian" is. That and their rampant hypocrisy.

You know what hypocrisy is? It is that thing that really ticked the Jesus off....The original Jesus, not the one on your dashboard or bumper sticker. Not Republican Jesus.

The Theocratic Elite talk a big game about following the example of Christ, but forgiveness isn't a very big part of their philosophy (never mind that stuff about charity and non-violence).

A pretty good example is what just happened to poor Hanoi Jane in Georgia.

The Georgia Senate on Thursday nearly unanimously defeated a resolution that would have honored the actress' charity work in the state.

Criticizing the government and trying to end a war...advocating peace...that will forever trump any acts of charity which come after. Not that criticizing the goverment or trying to end a war because you are an ardent peace activist seem that bad when we live in a country in which the ability to criticize the government is supposed to be a defining virtue and peace is a Christian ideal...but these Republicans...not so big on the logic front...only the vengeance front.

They like the revenge a lot.

Or take Missouri. They are trying to pass a resolution naming Christianity the official religion of the majority of Missourians.

When you have a lock on all three branches of government, why not go whole hog? Trying to get Judge Roy Moore's special statue of the 2nd draft of the Ten Commandments seems like small potatoes.

The thing is, they have a much more radical agenda than the gays they pretend to be afraid of. They actually want a theocracy. They are making bold strides and are getting away with it because they've got you afraid to question their motives.

Criticize the government, and you are are an enemy of the state.
Criticize Christianity and you are persecuting Christians and an enemy of God.

Two great things that get greater together. That's the plan.

I say we call them on it and make these people wrapped in the flag act like Americans.

I say we make these Christians act in a Christ-like way and stop using their religion to justify hatred.

That's what I say.

What do you say?

(Remember....the elephants are listening and just waiting to trample you...no longer how long they have to wait, they are not going to forget. Martyrdom is easier to venerate than contemplate, though, ain't it?)

Tell Congress to vote for Censure

2006-03-15T14:55:00.000-08:00

President Bush swore an oath to defend the Constitution, not circumvent it.

President Bush has broken the law and done everything he could to place himself above the law.

President Bush has taken bold steps to destroy the separation of powers and render Congress as irrelevant as he has said the United Nations has become.

Stop the President, send a clear message to Congress that we are a nation of law, that no one is above the law, and that when the President does something that is a crime, it is still illegal.

Please, for the love of our Constitution, and the sake of our nation, tell Congress to vote for the censure the President.

Take back your country.

On Monday, Senator Russ Feingold introduced a resolution to censure President Bush for breaking the law by illegally wiretapping American citizens.

When the president misleads the public and the Congress and willfully and repeatedly breaks the law, there need to be some consequences --that's how the law works for everybody else.

Censuring the president is a reasonable first step in condemning the president's actions. Now it's up to us to show broad public support for Senator Feingold's resolution.

Can you sign this petition asking Congress to join the call for censure?

http://political.moveon.org/censure/

Tell Me When Its Over

2006-02-24T16:07:00.000-08:00

Another installment of reader's theatre from my identical cousin:

Tell Me When It's Over
by Todd Wm. Ristau

(Two men sit at a table, perhaps in a bar. One is a FATHER, the other his SON. They have several empty beer bottles in front of them, and are in the process of adding two more.)

FATHER: Well, it couldn't have been easy.

SON: Nope.

FATHER: Your mother, she was awful proud of you.

SON: I'm sorry about that.

FATHER: Well, we were both worried too. Braggin' on you kept her from crying, I think.

SON: I wasn't doing much front line duty. There were plenty of people needed more worrying about than I did.

FATHER: I don't think there's anybody anyplace that isn't in need of some worrying anymore.

SON: S'pose you're right. It's pretty fucked up.

FATHER: (laughing, as men do) Don't talk like that in front of your mother.

SON: I won't.

FATHER: No...you probably won't. You haven't said more than six words to her since you got back.

SON: Sometimes...sometimes it seems like the more things back here try to act like they were before I left, the less I feel like I really am back.

FATHER: Probably doesn't seem real yet.

SON: Dad...that's just it. That's exactly it. Nothing seems real. I don't remember when it did.

FATHER: Well, that just takes time. You know, after you're here a while, and after you get a job...

SON: What the fuck kind of job am I going to get?

FATHER: Hey--watch your mouth. You're not in fatigues now, you're in blue jeans and you're in my bar where all my friends are watching me sitting down for some beers with my son.

SON: Well, that seems mighty familiar....you worried about what other people think of me, instead of worried what I think about anything.

FATHER: Look, you have a responsibility. People want to support you, they don't want to see you come home bitching about every goddam thing, sad sacking around, and complaining about your service.

SON: Fuck you, Pop.

FATHER: I think you've had enough.

SON: I've had enough, but I've just begun to drink tonight. What I've had enough of is you and all these other sons of bitches with W's and yellow ribbons on their SUVs being all proud as hell of what I'm doing for them...doing so they A) don't have to do it themselves, and B) Don't have to watch me do it for them because I'm doing it way the fuck over there.

FATHER: That's right. That's god damn right. Fighting them there is better than fighting them here. I don't know what the hell is wrong with you.

SON: I don't know what the hell is wrong with me either.

FATHER: (softening, fatherly) Well, just find out and then fix it.

SON: Wow. You know what I'd have given if even one person above the rank of Colonel had that thought occur to them? The only thing they know how to do is train everyone to stare at something broke and call it already fixed. The more broke it is the more fixed they call it. (laughing and taking a deep drink of beer) And I guess that makes me damned near perfect.

FATHER: (giving up and getting angry) You're right, with an attitude like that nobody is going to hire you for anything. I don't know if I'd hire you. I'm not even sure I want to finish this goddam beer with you.

SON: Nobody's going to hire me because I re-upped and I'm going back for another tour.

FATHER: No you're not. You're just saying that to be hurtful.

SON: I guess you'd know all about saying stuff just to be hurtful.

FATHER: I thought you were going to get a job here in town, your mother is talking to some people--

SON: Is Mom gonna get me a job where I can kill some towel heads for her? Is she gonna get me a job where I can kick the shit out of an 11 year old muslim kid until he tells me anything he thinks I want to hear just to get me to stop? Show me the want ad where they need someone good with dogs, jumper cables, and menstrual blood. You've seen the pictures. That's what I know how to do. That's what I'm an expert at.

FATHER: Those pictures are lies.

SON: If that makes you feel better, then believe that.

FATHER: If any of that happened...it was bad apples and they got pulled out of the barrel. You'd never do anything like that.

SON: You're not listening to me. I'd never do anything like that, you're right, so if I did do everything exactly like that...then who the fuck was I? Who the fuck am I? I'm AWOL but I show up for duty every goddam time. How can that be? How can broke be fixed? How can you be glad this imposter came home and has the fucking balls to sleep in your son's bedroom?

FATHER: (long pause) If you hate what you're doing so much, why would you go back and do more of it? It doesn't make any sense.

SON: (pointing the empty bottle at his head) Because they fixed me, Pop. When you can walk into a cell with a bucket of soapy water to wipe away where somebody wrote on the wall...in their own blood...that they killed themselves to keep you from hurting them any more...Me, Pop...When you can drive a man to kill himself and then can wash away his last words and only think how hard it's going to be to clean up...You don't come home after something like that...you can't come home because you're not really there to come home anymore...no more than the son of a bitch whose blood is filling up your sponge.

FATHER: (angry) So, what are you saying? It's all pointless? All those lives just wasted?

SON: (not looking at his FATHER, not looking at anything at all) I don't know. I'm not supposed to know. Neither are you. We find out when we're done.

(Slow fade to black as SON continues to drink. FATHER watches him in uncomprehending silence.)

First performed at Roanoke No Shame on February 17th by the author and Drew Duncan

Let me get this straight...this is what he wants his first veto to be?

2006-02-23T12:54:00.000-08:00

Ok...So we all know that the DP World deal with a company owned by the United Arab Emirates (A country with far more demonstrable links to September 11th than Iraq) is going to be in charge of 6 vital American ports is a "hot button" topic.

We know that Rush Limbaugh is in favor of it and that Sean Hannity is suspicious of it (Bill Frist is against it, so poor Sean's head is grinding and smoking over deciding what he's supposed to think and or say about it).

We know that many Republicans are outraged over it, but Jimmy Carter says it is probably no big deal. Sign of the apocolypse?

We know that Dittoheads are glad to see Democrats acting like racists because Dems are against giving control of the ports to an Arab firm. Now they get to slam Democrats for being Johnny Come Latelys to the security issue and for being hypocrits about profiling. (That logic makes sense to them, though it doesn't make sense to me...but then the very definition of DittoHead is to agree with Rush without having to actually make or understand the argument being made.)

We know that these folks in congress (from both parties) who are against it are talking about sending up a bill to oppose it, and that the President has said he'd veto any legislation designed to stop this deal.

But did you know that the President didn't even find out about this deal until AFTER it was already a done deal? That's right. He saw it on the TV news. I guess we should be glad that he is actually watching the news, that's in the plus column, but I would think something like this might be something the White House would be interested in taking a peek at before it gets passed.

Did you know that passage of this deal was not even legal, because by law any sale such as this to a foreign power which might affect national security is supposed to get a vigorous 45 day investigation and Congressional Review?

Now, here's the thing, folks.

1) I don't know if this is a safe or a good deal. Neither does Congress. Because they weren't given a chance to find out, because this administration doesn't care what you, I, or Congress thinks. It does what it wants to do and deals with the fall out later.

2) The President didn't even know about the deal until after it was over, and he is taking his strongest public stance, waving the veto pen, to protect it. This tells me that either someone else is telling our President what to think, do and say or the President doesn't care that he doesn't know enough about the issue to take a stand on it.

3) This administration are a bunch of scoff laws and they are doing their best to turn the DittoHead nation into unquestioning scoff laws too. This deal was NOT legal. It shouldn't be at the point where Bush is threatening to veto a law which would prevent it, it should be at the point where Bush is explaining why, again, his administration doesn't feel it has to follow any laws it does not like.

And here, we get to the real heart of the matter. With one party in control of all the branches of government there is no chance of impeachment, no consequences for wrong action, and no hope of oversight in a government any school kid is supposed to understand was created with the novel notion of checks and balances to power. Why does this administration keep doing stuff like this? Because it knows it can.

Think about it...breaking the law and misrepresenting the truth are textbook examples of impeachable offenses...but impeachment can't happen unless the House decides to take that action...and this House is beholden.

I know that by bringing up impeachment I will be immediately discounted by many as a Bush Hater. I am not a Bush Hater. I am an America Lover and I'd like to have a President who cared about things like obeying the law.

Is that too damned much to ask?

Cheney Victim OK, No Charges...No Story?

2006-02-17T13:00:00.001-08:00

Well, The Man That Dick Shot is released from the hospital.

The Newmerican People just want to move on and get back to paying attention to the things that really matter to them.

Because you'd have to be an idiot to think that the Newmerican People give a damn that their Vice President shot a man and avoided any of the usual examinations...like a blood alcohol test or immediate questioning by law enforcement.

And you'd really have to be out of your mind if the Newmerican People gave one single damn about the recent report that shows in a world wide opinion poll the only country less popular than ours is Iran.

If anybody does care about something as trivial as our highest elected officials being so far above the law that they can shoot people and then tell you it isn't a newsworthy event or that Iran is only slightly less popular than we are, you can tell them the same thing Dead Eye Dick told Senator Pat Leahy on the Senate floor.

Pretty much it is the Newmerican national motto.

"Go (you can't print it but Dick can say it) yourself."

The Shot Heard Round The World...except at the White House

2006-02-15T07:48:00.000-08:00

Listen, the real issue is less that the Vice President accidentally shot a man...accidents do happen, and millions of people get accidentally shot all the time...the real issue is that I can raise the following questions at all. All relevant questions should have been answered, and answered convincingly, by the Vice President or an official White House spokesperson immediately after the event.

Why did it take so long to inform the President of the accident?

Is there something wrong with the communications system, during a time of war, which allows information to be quickly and accurately transmitted between the VP and the President?

Why was local law enforcement turned away by the Secret Service?

Why did a private citizen, the ranch owner, give the first public statement instead of the White House or Vice-President's office?

Was the eye witness coached during the 22 hours it took to give her eye witness account?

Why was the Vice President hunting without the proper credintials, and therefore was hunting illegally?

Regardless of any criminal charges, who was at fault in the shooting? Can it be reasonably claimed that Harry Whittington was responsible for the situation which resulted in his being shot by the Vice President?

Is Harry Whittington already dead?

Call me conspiratorial if you must, but that last question seems very relevant to me. If the wounds were as superficial as originally described, with Whittington all but laughing off the "peppering", why has he been in intensive care for three days? How did a "peppering" of shot result in a pellet getting through his chest and into his heart? How close was he to Cheney?

22 hours would be plenty of time for the US Government to arrange for someone the Vice President killed, even by accident, to a hospital where some time after the fact complications due to age rather than directly resulting from the shooting would give a cause of death less politically damaging than manslaughter. Let me be clear, I am not making that accusation. I am angrily pointing out that secrecy creates doubt, which is more damaging to a democracy than a shotgun blast to the face and chest.

Consider the contempt it must take for this administration to choose deception and secrecy by default while claiming to spread a doctrine of democratic freedom which inherently demands an informed electorate.

Why risk, given the age of the victim and the seriousness of any gunshot wound, why risk hiding anything at all when it will only give rise to suspicion? Unless the truth is even worse than anything the unimformed public might possibly suspect?

It makes no sense, until you accept that they don't care.

They would care if they had any reason to care...and the evidence is that they don't care what we think, suspect, or even ask.

You stopped caring, so they don't have to.

Come on, people. Blame George and Dick if you want, but I don't care where Truman said the buck stops...we've got the government we deserve, and unless we start caring, the people we put in power never will.

I bet some of you out there are saying, just like Luke Skywalker said to Princess Leia, "I care."

Well, prove it.

Don't stop following the shooting story, but don't follow it so closely you don't pay any attention to the fact that Scooter Libby just testified that he was authorized by "superiors" to leak the Plame information, and that Plame was a covert agent owing to the fact that she had travelled as a covert agent to Iran to work on WMD issues during the required 5 year period before the leak was made.

Cheney has done worse than shooting a 78 year old man who got between him and a quail raised in captivity for the sole purpose of being shot by rich "hunters" on the weekends.

HOLD HIM ACCOUNTABLE.

This administration may be a joke, but it is no laughing matter.

Dick Cheney Shot His Friend and Donor....

2006-02-13T05:44:00.000-08:00

How do you think he'd treat an enemy and a critic?

Seriously, you can't make this stuff up. Dick Cheney shot his friend, Harry Whittington, in a hunting accident.

"The covey flushed and the vice president picked out a bird and was following it and shot. And by god, Harry was in the line of fire and got peppered pretty good." -Katharine Armstrong, ranch owner

I'm glad Dick Cheney's friend is OK, but for crying out loud...Could you ask for a better metaphor when it comes to not getting between Dick Cheney and anything he wants...or wants to kill?

And for all you Bushco apologists out there who are talking about liberals taking cheap shots on this or anything else...Stop for a second and honestly ask yourselves what you'd do if John Kerry or Al Gore accidentally shot somebody on a hunting trip.

While you're at it, ask yourself (and again, honestly if that is possible) what you'd do if anything done by this administration had been done, exactly the same way, by the Clinton administration...either the last one or the next one.

And...though it is nearly impossible to imagine (but not for the reasons Republicans think)...ask yourself how worked up you'd get over Bush getting a blow job from a consenting partner he wasn't married to.

Would that be as easy to laugh off as Dick Cheney shooting someone?

Or would you get all worked up about how terrible it was that the President's indiscretions were revealed by a scheming Democrat for political reasons after illegally recording, in secret, a private conversation with the President's willing partner...someone they knew considered them a friend and a confidant?

You people make Newmerika suck.

And I'm here to tell you, that sucking sure as hell ain't willing or consensual on my part.

Living In Newmerika

2006-02-03T08:46:00.000-08:00

As of Tuesday, with the confirmation of Alito and the State of the Union Address, I have decided that we no longer live in America. A bloodless coup has been accomplished and we now live in the state of Newmerika.

I'm heartbroken, of course, because I actually loved being an American. I loved the freedoms, rights, moral authority and rich history of progression towards justice along with the devotion to peace that was part of the fabric of the nation where I used to live.

Where I live now is a strange place...I could try to describe the differences between Newmerika and America, but if you aren't aware of the differences already, I have to presume that you are incapable of discerning the difference or were a Newmerikan long before you and your kind seized control of my former homeland.

I'd like to believe that America will rise again, will throw off these occupiers and repudiate their doctrines which run so contrary to America's philosophy and creed...But the Newmerikans have been careful in their planning. They have waited patiently for 30 years and I must confess to little hope of success.

I am afraid that I believe that no revolution or insurgency will remove them from power, and even if it did, that would only be a temporary reclamation...At the first opportunity they would spring back to life in a form even more difficult to eradicate a second time.

If history teaches anything, it is that the only hope for the end of Newmerika is to let Newmerika consume and destroy itself by allowing its insane and immoral objectives to be realized. Resist, but know that resistance is ultimately futile.

Newmerika must be allowed, as difficult as it will be to live through that process, to self-destruct. The repudiation must be complete, the revelations of corruption unquestionable, and the wrongness of this state must be obvious to all...Including those who have helped perpetrate that wrong. Because Newmerikans will never yield to reason, it is not reasonable to attempt to reason with them. American virtues are pearls, and these should not be cast before swine. They must be worn, so that those who reconginze their worth will be drawn to them...but nothing is as dangerous as an overextended metaphor.

At this point you either get it or you don't...or rather, won't.

This is not what any of you want to hear, I know, but we lost and they won. We had our chance to change the course, to preserve America, and we failed. It is no use to assign blame. The only thing of value we can do now is to be accurate chroniclers, and ensure that all the wrong and mistakes are known, recorded, and preserved to educate future generations....so that after the inevitable fall, no one will ever again make the choices which have lead to the path our nation now travels.

But, I do not mean to be an assassin to hope. So long as America lives in your heart, it has not passed away utterly. No matter how long we Americans must live in Newmerika, we must continue to live as an American. Resistance may be futile, but assimilation is far from inevitable and certainly not advisable. Survival means nothing if you must sacrifice your most basic defining principals in order to continue that survival.

Live in Newmerika, Live as an American.

Be just, be fair, be honest, be kind, be moral, defend instead of attack, give rather than take, tolerate rather than punish. Lead by brave example rather than follow in craven fear of punishment.

Don't accept that what the Newmerikans tell you is true.

Research. Question. Verify. Record. Distribute. Repeat.

Hardest of all...Forgive.

But no forgiveness is possible without repentance, no repentance without confession, contrition, and a sincere desire to be forgiven.

We are right, and we are good...And we must have faith that rightness and goodness shall not perish utterly from this Earth.

For Example:

Are the Republicans really Nazis?

2006-01-29T17:18:00.000-08:00

I was recently having an on-line debate with a friend over whether or not I should be as concerned as I am over this Alito thing.

I mentioned my now familiar thread on similarities between the Bush exploitation of 9-11 and Hitler's exploitation of the Reichstag fire to move rapidly from democracy to an authoritarian state. My friend dismissed my argument as hyperbolic and told me that I had attained the perfection of Godwin's Law (that the first person to make a comparison to the Nazis in order to win an argument automatically loses it) -- and since I'd made it in my opening salvo, I'd pre-empted my own argument before any actual arguing began, thus the "perfection" of the law.

You will hear conservatives frequently cite this, along with a huffing rebuke of whomever has used the comparison--Senator Byrd, for example--as being hysterical and trying to exploit the Nazis for their own nefarious political agenda. Never mind that people like Rush Limbaugh have been comparing Democrats and feminists to Nazis for years without the slightest pang of concience over it.

Unfortunately, Godwin's law provides an excellent cloak of protection to anyone who is actually advancing an ideology similar to the Nazis. They've been told that they can just stop listening as soon as they hear that buzz word, and that they can automatically "win" an argument they have not actually engaged in.

For me, anyone who agrees about history teaching lessons that ought not to be forgotten and who doesn't want the abuses of the past to return would do themselves a favor to examine the Wiemar period and how power was consolidated from a democratic republic into the hands of an increasingly powerful central authority.

While it's true that facile references to the Nazis always fly a little too glibly from the lips of liberals, it is also true that many facets of Dubyisti tactics since 9/11 are substantively reminiscent of the Nazi dismantling of Weimar democracy.

Case in point: I feel the Reichstag Fire Decree -- issued on the German equivalent of 9/12 -- genuinely parallels the programmatic intrusions the Bush Administration has dishonestly used 9/11 to impose or attempt to impose on the US Constitution:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Order of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State

On the basis of Article 48 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the German Reich, the following is ordered in defense against Communist state-endangering acts of violence:

§ 1. Articles 114, 115, 117, 118, 123, 124 and 153 of the Constitution of the German Empire are suspended until further notice. It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [i.e., habeas corpus], freedom of opinion, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications, and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.
[...]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Does this mean that I think Bush, Cheney, et al actually are Nazis? No.

Does it mean I think they have certain important and dangerous qualities in common with the Nazis? Yes.

I strongly recommend that anyone who's interested in looking more closely at those similarities read Defying Hitler: A Memoir, by Sebastian Haffner.

Haffner, a prominent German historian and journalist during the latter half of the Twentieth Century, wrote the memoir in 1939, after fleeing Germany for England; but it wasn't published until the unfinished manuscript was discovered by Haffner's son after his death. His story of a largely apolitical young attorney watching as his country is led in small steps from democracy to fascism in the months following 9/11, and the familiarity of Haffner's descriptions to observations being made about our current situation is chilling.

Further Reading:

On the Courts of the Third Reich: Servants or Opponents of National Socialism?
Enabling Act and the Reichstag Fire Decree in Nazi Germany
Senator Byrd, Major Media Spread Coverage of Bush-Nazi Nexus, by Harvey Wasserman and Bob Fitrakis for Common Dreams.

Thanks to my good friend JT for his input on this. Together, we've often comprised a whole brain.

"If the President does it, it's not illegal."

2006-01-27T04:49:00.000-08:00

That's what Nixon said and we tore him a new one. Even Republicans wouldn't stand for a President who so clearly flouted the law, disregarded the Constitution he was sworn to protect. America rejected an imperial presidency then.

Why now? If you wouldn't take it from Nixon, why are you willing to take it from a president who'd have to stand on his mother's shoulders just to kiss Nixon's butt?

What happened to America? What happened to the Republican Party? It used to stand for more than big business, but the preferential treatment we've given businesses since the Reagan years have finally made the multi-nationals so huge that they own everything...and if I hear one more time about the liberal media bias when most of the "mainstream media" is owned by multi-nationals or defense contractors, I'm going to bust a gasket.

When George Bush gets applauded for a largely incoherent press conference where he actually admits that he was advised that the newly named "terrorist surveillance program" was illegal but he decided he could disregard that law (not "circumvent", that's a bad word) because it was 28 years old and wouldn't let him do what he wanted to do...America, we got ourselves a problem. The Constitution is a lot older than 1978, does that mean it too is as irrelevant as the United Nations? When George W. says he's got the Constitution behind him, he means he's wiping his butt with it.

If we blamed the Germans for allowing the Nazi's to take power, we've got no one to blame but ourselves if we allow Alito and the Neo Cons to create a presidency with powers that the founding fathers specifically set out to protect us from.

And these bastards are going to finally give the so-called "America Haters" an America we won't be able to help but hate.

Today, there is still ample reason to love this country...after Tuesday? I'm not so sure.

Defend your country, defend your constitution, defend the America you love...because she has never been in greater danger.

Please contact key senators who can provide critical support to the filibuster effort! We need to act now if we are going to save the seperation of powers, along with the checks and balances which made the United States of America unique among nations. Be a modern patriot, and save your country.

http://www.SaveTheCourt.org/AlitoFilibuster

Sign the Filibuster Petition:
http://www.johnkerry.com/action/filibuster/

If you can't even bother to sign an on-line petition to protect your rights and freedoms, you deserve what you get.

I mean that.

Alito's Defenders Speak With Forked Tongue

2006-01-24T08:46:00.000-08:00

Ok, this is a short post...because I have to go run and bind my head in an Ace Bandage before it explodes...All I want to do is ask the "good" senators on the Judiciary Committee (like Sen. Graham, for example) how they can point a finger at Democrats and accuse them of playing "party politics" with this nomination, with destroying the fabric of civility, with dragging the nomination process to new lows by using it to prepare for the NEXT election....and in the SAME speech also admonish the Democrats for being surprised by Alito's nomination when the President had promised in his presidential campaign to nominate judges exactly like Alito to the Supreme Court.

Huh?

The Democrats are politicizing the process and playing election politics over Alito but a conservative, right leaning, Executive powers supporting nomination like Alito was a CAMPAIGN PROMISE?

What are you people smoking?

Have you forgotten how back in October it was CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS who kept Harriet Myers from even HAVING HEARINGS because you felt that she did not represent a fulfilment of your PRESIDENT'S PROMISE? And you have the unmitigated gall to accuse DEMOCRATS of playing politics with this process?

The PRESIDENT ran on CHANGING THE COURT. If you want to admonish someone for playing politics with the nomination process, start there.

You want judges who won't be activists and yet you owe your golden child in office to the activism of conservative Justices who decided the outcome of the 2000 election. You don't want activist judges but you will do whatever you can get get someone on the Supreme Court who will limit freedoms, disregard precedent, and invest unprecedented power in the Executive Branch.

And Arlen Spector...you are a coward. I watched you throughout this process, and I've seen your grave concerns about this nomination. I know in your heart that you understand that you are chairing a process which will fundamentally and forever change what America is, and what it can ever be. This is your legacy, Senator. You, more than any other person in this country are responsible for this sea change.

It was the Supreme Court, and the Rhenquist Five who began this process, and you have codified it. It is no good to, like Pilate, wash your hands and send it to the Senate to vote on it. You could have stopped it here, and you did not.

Sen. Feinstein stated today that the world, and our nation, is different than it was when Justice Ginsberg was confirmed. She was roundly criticized for saying that. How many times have Republicans claimed that September 11th changed everything, and that nothing in the pre-September 11th world continued to apply?

While not invoking the Republican's favorite justification for extreme changes to the very fabric of our nation, September 11th, that is a very real truth here. September 11th and the unending War on Terror will be a very large part of cases which will appear on the Supreme Court's docket.

The President says that the terrorists hate us because of our freedoms, our rights, and our way of life. How can the Republicans claim to defend those rights and freedoms, that way of life, while working far more effectively than the terrorists to remove them?

They can't...unless they lie...and that's the truth.

I Love America Because.....

2006-01-20T17:26:00.000-08:00

Well, it looks like January is Drama Month here at This is What I Think. I've been swamped with the start of the semester and trying to figure out how to deal with all the students I have who are recording my lectures and turning over their notes for money paid by conservative alumni groups. Wouldn't it have been nice if that story had broken while Alito was being questioned about Concerned Alumni of Princeton? I mentioned to my identical cousin my concerns about where America seems to be headed and how the people who scream the loudest about how much they love America seem to be doing everything in their power to make America unrecognizable. I also talked at length about how even Hitler was elected and everything the Nazis did in Germany was done strictly according to law...and when what they wanted to do was illegal, they just changed the laws.

Well, he wrote a little play for his No Shame Theatre thing. He stopped short of the Hitler reference....but the rest is pretty good. He'd probably say so himself, but I'm saying it for him.

I Love America Because....
By Todd Wm. Ristau

(Lights up on two men sitting at a table. One is a LIBERAL, the other is a CONSERVATIVE.)

LIBERAL: I love America because we are a democracy.

CONSERVATIVE: Me too.

LIBERAL: (turning to CONSERVATIVE) Then how come you are so supportive of an administration which actively sought to keep us from having a balloting system where votes could be counted, verified, and that ensures the principle of one man one vote is protected. Instead your president's party engaged in massive voter fraud, intimidation, gerrymandering, and took large campaign contributions from the Diebold company--which makes voting machines without paper trails, are not 100% safe from tampering, and whose CEO promised that he would deliver the state of Ohio to the President.

CONSERVATIVE: I love America because of our Freedoms and Liberty.

LIBERAL: Me too. (LIBERAL smiles, then looks nervous, and turns to CONSERVATIVE) Which freedoms do you mean?

CONSERVATIVE: Are you stupid? (counting on his fingers as he recites the following) Freedom of worship...

LIBERAL: Then how come you are constantly trying to impose a specific brand of conservative Christian ideology on the 15% of Americans who are not Christian and the 85% who are?

CONSERVATIVE: (ignoring him) Freedom of association...

LIBERAL: Then how come you are supportive of infiltrating groups which are critical of your president and actively seek to limit the ability of homosexuals to marry or publically express their sexuality?

CONSERVATIVE: Freedom of speech...

LIBERAL: Then how come your president only speaks before military or hand picked supportive crowds and dissenters are relegated to "Free Speech Zones"? And how come conservative alumni groups are paying conservative students to spy on and report their instructors at Universities if the teachers speak out against their government or the President in their classrooms? Or pressuring corporations with boycots if they advertise in gay magazines or express an idea that you don't agree with? Or applaud conservative corporations who fire employees for having bumper stickers which express ideas or candidates they oppose? Or that guy who got banned from a mall for wearing an anti-war t-shirt that he bought at that mall?

CONSERVATIVE: Freedom of the press....

LIBERAL: Then how come you're always screaming about the bias of mainstream media, happy about pressuring media through corporate advertising not to run stories critical of the administration or the war, and don't seem to care that your president gave more White House access to a gay male prostitute than he does to legitimate journalists? And why do you like that he actively threatens to cut off access to journalists who ask probing, difficult questions which might embarrass the President? Or that any difficult line of questioning immediately gets cut short by calling it a threat to national security and then accuse the press of giving comfort and aid to the enemy when their investigations uncover wrong doing or deception by this President and his administration?

CONSERVATIVE: Freedom from an oppressive authoritarian state....

LIBERAL: Then how come you are supportive of a president who is actively taking measures to create a legal precedent for the head of state being above the law, and who can spy on every aspect of your private life and communication including web searches, faxes, and telephone calls? Or who, as a result of presumed "War Powers" in a war which by definition has no identifiable measure of when it will be concluded, is able to arrest and detain any American citizen without charge or notification of their families for as long as they choose? Or that this President is surrounding himself with those who agree that he has the authority and the responsibility to order that detainees be tortured, if not by us then by sub-contractors in nations where torture is legal?

CONSERVATIVE: Freedom from the abuses that come from monarchies or dictatorships....I love how our Founding Fathers created a system of checks and balances to the power of government....That we have a two party system.....

LIBERAL: Then how come you are working to lable any opposition as treasonous, and to give the executive office powers over the other branches of government which the Constitution specifically prohibits?

CONSERVATIVE: I love America because we believe in equality, that any American regardless of race, creed, or economic background can rise to become the President, and that we are a nation devoted to representing the interests of the little guy against the powerful. I love that we are a nation who have a clear, fair, and impartial system of justice and dedicated to the principles of Law.

LIBERAL: (stunned into silence and staring at CONSERVATIVE for a moment in slack jawed disbelief) Come on...What do you really love about America?

CONSERVATIVE: I love that we're strong enough to kick any other nation's ass if they don't do what we want.

LIBERAL: (pause while this is digested) At least you're being honest. That's refreshing.

CONSERVATIVE: Thank you. (pause) Do you believe in Jesus?

LIBERAL: (pause, suspicious) Yes.

CONSERVATIVE: What do you love most about Jesus?

LIBERAL: I love his devotion to the spirit of the law, rather than the letter of the law. I love his doctrine of forgiveness instead of retribution, his advocting for generosity instead of greed, and his gospel of love instead of hate. (pause) What do you love most about Jesus?

CONSERVATIVE: (excited) That I'm forgiven because he loves me, and come Judgement Day, he's gonna kick the ass of everyone who doesn't love Him back and then toss every single motherhumper that ever lived, who isn't just exactly like me, into a lake of fire where they can snap, crackle and pop for all eternity while I sit back and cool my heels in Heaven singing Hallelujah.

LIBERAL: Oh.

(LIBERAL looks very sad and becomes quiet)

CONSERVATIVE: What? (agitated pause) What?

LIBERAL: So, basically, you like an America and a Church that make you feel superior to everybody else and will punish people who aren't like you.

CONSERVATIVE: See, that's exactly what I hate about you Liberals...you're all anti-America and anti-Christian. (stands in a rage) Stop persecuting me, asshole. We're taking names and kicking ass. You're gonna be sorry, just wait and see.

(CONSERVATIVE gets up and storms off the stage)

LIBERAL: I'm already as sorry as I can get........I hope.

(Lights slowly fade)

Fighting Evil Can Be Complicated

2006-01-15T08:08:00.002-08:00

This is another little play that my identical cousin, Todd, sent me. I post it here for your enjoyment. I've changed the names -- with permission--so that even the least sensitive reader can understand the metaphor

You Failed Your Saving Throw
by Todd Wm. Ristau

(Lights up on GEORGE, PAUL, and DICK seated at a long table. On the table are dice and some lead miniature figures. At the head of the table sits DUNGEON MASTER, behind a Dungeon Master's screen.)

GEORGE: What does it look like?

DUNGEON MASTER: It is a gold amulet.

GEORGE: There's no design on it or anything?

DUNGEON MASTER: Nope.

PAUL: No design. That could be significant.

GEORGE: Like how?

PAUL: Or, it could mean nothing.

(GEORGE stands there indecisively for a long beat.)

DICK: Shouldn't there be some kind of timer between moves, like in Scrabble?

DUNGEON MASTER: It's not really a turn based game like that.

PAUL: Does Scrabble have a timer? I think that's Yahtzee.

DICK: DO SOMETHING!

GEORGE: OK, OK....I touch it.

DUNGEON MASTER: The amulet immediately transforms into the Holy Symbol of your diety.

PAUL: Ah, that is significant.

GEORGE: Ok. Shit. What do I do?

PAUL: Well, ordinarily I wouldn't trust something that makes itself look more attractive to me when I touch it.

DICK: What would happen if I touch it?

GEORGE: It's MY holy symbol, nobody touches it but ME.

DICK: I want to do something.

DUNGEON MASTER: You just helped wipe out a whole cave full of goblins.

DICK: I want to do something now.

GEORGE: Why would goblins have a holy symbol of my god?

PAUL: Maybe they ate the priest who wore it here.

DUNGEON MASTER: What are you doing?

GEORGE: I'm putting it on.

DUNGEON MASTER: Ok, it starts choking you.

GEORGE: What???

PAUL: We probably should have identified it first.

GEORGE: You can do that???

PAUL: Sure. I'm a magic-user.

DUNGEON MASTER: (rolls dice) You take another 4 points of choking damage.

GEORGE: Shit!!! Get it off me!

DUNGEON MASTER: Technically you can't say that, you're choking.

(GEORGE mimes choking and with red face and sputters indicates he wants something cut off his neck.)

PAUL: I look through my spell book for an appropriate action.

DICK: I take out my serrated dirk and start to saw off his head.

(GEORGE backs away and, still miming his being choked by an invisible amulet, glares angrily at DICK.)

DICK: What? I want to do something.

DUNGEON MASTER: (rolls dice) You take another 4 points of choking damage.

GEORGE: Gmbdt ibt duff fuhhhck offfdddt mmmmeeeee!

PAUL: I'm going to identify it now.

GEORGE: Gmbdt ibt duff fuhhhck offfdddt mmmmeeeee!

DUNGEON MASTER: The gnome identifies the the obect choking the priest as an Amulet of Holy Might currently attuned to the diety Tyr, God of Justice in the Forgotten Realms.

GEORGE: (no longer choking) Then why the fuck is it choking me?

DUNGEON MASTER: You can't ask that, you're choking. (rolls dice) Another 2 points, by the way.

GEORGE: I'm asking you, not my character.

PAUL: You must have had an alignment shift or something.

GEORGE: I'm evil now?

DICK: I WANT TO DO SOMETHING!

PAUL: Loot the bodies of the goblins.

DICK: I did that already.

GEORGE: Why am I evil?

DUNGEON MASTER: Why do you think you're evil?

GEORGE: This isn't therapy, its a god damned game.

PAUL: Maybe you're evil because you use profanity. God's don't like that.

GEORGE: I'm using profanity because there's no way in hell my goddam character turned evil. I was good this morning, Mighty Tyr granted me my prayers, didn't he?

PAUL: That's right, your priest spells were instrumental in allowing us to surprise the goblins and wipe them out.

DICK: I try to rob the priest while he's chocking.

DUNGEON MASTER: OK, but you'll have to take a penalty, because he's thrashing while he chokes.

DICK: I'll just wait, how close is he to dead?

GEORGE: (making the time out sign) Pause! How am I evil?

DUNGEON MASTER: (with great patience) You're evil because you used your power to sneak up on this goblin tribe and wipe them out without provocation or allowing them the chance to defend themselves.

PAUL: Did my fireballs at the goblin children change my alignment?

DUNGEON MASTER: You were already evil...Which was also a strike against the priest, because his Lawful Good diety didn't like his associating with evil characters.

GEORGE: I don't fucking believe this.

DUNGEON MASTER: Oh, that reminds me, your prayers won't be answered until you atone...

PAUL: He could pray to an evil god.

DICK: Who can I pray to for something to do????

DUNGEON MASTER: (rolls the dice) 3 more points of choking damage.

GEORGE: No! Goblins are evil creatures. They are inherently evil, they live in evil little caves and they do evil little things and the Forgotten Realms is better off whenever an evil creature gets destroyed so that it can no longer do any evil!

DUNGEON MASTER: So, you agree the world is going to be better off when you choke to death?

PAUL: That's right, the amulet agrees with you, so it is eliminating evil by destroying you.

GEORGE: If the amulet agrees with me, then it shouldn't be punishing me.

PAUL: Wow. Good point.

DUNGEON MASTER: It doesn't matter if the amulet agrees with you, it matters if your God agrees with you.

GEORGE: I killed these goblins in the name of my god!

DUNGEON MASTER: But Tyr didn't like that.

GEORGE: Says who?

DUNGEON MASTER: Says me.

GEORGE: You aren't the god of me.

DUNGEON MASTER: (rolls dice) 4 more points of choking damage.

GEORGE: No!!!

DUNGEON MASTER: You have two choices. You can atone or convert to an evil religion.

PAUL: If he doesn't die.

GEORGE: This sucks. I thought I was doing the right thing. That should count for something. Why should I give the goblins a chance? They're EVIL for freak's sake. They wouldn't have given me a chance, they'd have snuck up on us and slit our throats if they could.

DUNGEON MASTER: Right, because they are evil. That would be an evil thing to do.

PAUL: Technically...Yes. Smart, but probably evil.

GEORGE: Isn't it good to protect the party, the villages, the other good creatures of the world by eliminating the threat of evil whereever you find it?

DUNGEON MASTER: Is it worth becoming evil yourself in the process?

PAUL: Who Watches the Watchmen...

DUNGEON MASTER: Exactly.

DICK: (brightly) Do we still have the prisoner?

DUNGEON MASTER: The one who told you where the goblin cave was?

DICK: (sarcastic) Do we have more than one prisoner?

DUNGEON MASTER: No.

DICK: Then, that one.

DUNGEON MASTER: You still have the prisoner.

DICK: I start to torture it.

GEORGE: Why are you torturing it?

DICK: Because I'm BORED!

GEORGE: (shocked) But...that's evil!

DICK: (mocking him) Why is it evil to torture an evil creature? It'd torture me if the situation were reversed.

PAUL: Uh-huh. And then it would eat you.

DICK: Besides, I'm already evil anyway. I should do some evil stuff, or I'll turn good.

GEORGE: (sputtering) You're evil too? Everybody I was with was evil but me?

PAUL: (cheerfully) But now we have achieved balance and party unity, because you're evil too!

DUNGEON MASTER: (rolling dice) No, now he's dead.

(Everyone looks at DUNGEON MASTER, lights fade to black.)

Something to hum while you wait for my next post

2006-01-12T16:35:00.000-08:00

First week of classes, overwhelmed.

Have XM radio and listening to C-Span instead of Rush. Makes my blood pressure lower but I haven't been driven to a rage inspired rant.

In the mean time, please click on this link and memorize the song.

It is very happy making:

http://www.weebls-stuff.com/toons/magical+trevor/

Holy Hypocrite, Batman!

2005-12-08T07:37:00.000-08:00

Merry Christmas + Happy New Year = Happy Holidays.

It doesn't take Christ out of anything, so shut up, already, you radical theocratic elites!

But you won't. Not while there is a chance to panic foolish Christians into thinking they are persecuted so that they will turn out in record numbers to defeat the Devil and the Democratic Party without a thought in the world about what they are actually supporting in doing so.

Jerry Falwell and his "Friend or Foe" Christmas campaign is out there advocating a boycott of anyone and anything that doesn't put "Christmas" into their holiday. Christmas sales, not Holiday sales. Christmas tree, not Holiday tree. Christmas suicides not Holiday suicides.

Then George Bush sends out the official White House Christmas Card and it says "Holiday Greetings" and not "Christmas Greetings." It also included an Old Testement verse.

A lot of conservative Christians were infuriated, and threw their "Holiday" card in the trash.

And Jerry Falwell, who organized the boycott? He said this: "There's a verse from Scripture in it. I don't mind that at all, as long as we don't try to pretend we're not a nation under God."

Uh, so you're saying that if WalMart or Target put up a verse of OLD TESTEMENT scripture, you wouldn't think they were part of a vast liberal conspiracy to outlaw Christmas?

How about:

"When a ruler hath sinned, and done somewhat through ignorance against any of the commandments of the LORD his God concerning things which should not be done, and is guilty; Or if his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge; he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a male without blemish: And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the goat, and kill it in the place where they kill the burnt offering before the LORD: it is a sin offering. And the priest shall take of the blood of the sin offering with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out his blood at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering. And he shall burn all his fat upon the altar, as the fat of the sacrifice of peace offerings: and the priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him." --Leviticus 4:22-26.

Let's all send George a goat this Christmas.

I really like this one, I think the "Jersey Girls" and other 9-11 widows ought to send to the White House and any critics of their stand against the administration's policies:

"Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child. If thou afflict them in any wise, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry; And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless." Exodus 22:22-24

Here's a thought. How about at CHRISTMAS TIME, we put CHRIST back in CHRISTIAN?

Maybe we could pull out the NEW TESTEMENT and look at some of the things Jesus Would Do. You know, like the bumper sticker on the back of your Lexus says.

Maybe you could consider how Jesus was executed for a crime he didn't commit and how he actually stopped a legal execution, and then join the fight to end the death penalty.

Maybe you could consider how Jesus said to avoid wealth and to pay your taxes, and advocated helping the poor, feeding the hungry, healing the sick, and doing good works. Just because good works alone don't get you into Heaven, it doesn't mean don't do them. So, maybe, you could stop helping rich people and corporations avoid taxation, and start working on social justice and poverty issues.

Maybe you could consider how Jesus said to love your enemy and to turn the other cheek and how he asked his disciples not to take up arms in his defense...and then maybe you could start working for peace instead of ardently supporting the Iraq war, along with the detention and torture of people in secret prisons.

Maybe you could consider how Jesus instructed us to ask God to forgive us as we forgive others...and adopt a tendency toward forgiveness rather than vengeance.

Maybe you could consider how Jesus revered his Father in Heaven, and remember that while God could have put a fence around the Tree of Knowledge, he didn't. He gave us the opportunity to choose to obey him. Then maybe you might stop working so fervently to legislate morality and instead, like God, support giving people the freedom to choose not to sin. God is pro-choice and anti-abortion...why can't you understand that Democrats can be too?

Maybe you could consider how Jesus asked us to ask God to deliver us from evil and then stop putting your faith in George Bush's ability to deliver us from evil.

These are just my Christmas musings. I guess I agree with Jerry Falwell that Christ ought to play a bigger role in Christmas...I just don't think Jerry is as well aquainted with Jesus as he thinks he is...or that using religion to shape a political agenda is what Jesus would do...because there is one thing Jesus definitely was not...and that's a politician.

Thank you, Jesus.

Special extra bonus! More Old Testement stocking stuffers--perfect for your Christmas observance and guaranteed to placate the Reverend Falwell:

God Loves Slavery: "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing." Exodus 21:2
God Loves The Death Penalty, and demands you be put the death for: killing men; killing men with guile; cursing either of your parents; stealing people to sell them; any mischief resulting in death (but if your ox kills someone, you can kill the ox rather than be killed yourself...unless your ox likes pushing people, you have been warned of this, it gets loose and kills a man or a woman, then you must be killed); being a witch; sleeping with animals; worshipping any other god; afflicting widows or their children (he really hates this); or giving your seed to Molech (one of the gods that God mentions but doesn't want you to worship or mention); committing adultery; sleeping with your mother or seeing your father naked; sleeping with your daughter-in-law; having gay sex; sleeping with your wife and her mother at the same time (all three of you must be purified by fire in this case); fornication with animals; being a wizard or having a familiar spirit; being the daughter of a priest who pretends to be a whore (fire, again); committing blasphemy using God's name. Exodus 21:12-29, Exodus 22:18-20, Exodus 22:22-24, and Leviticus 20,21,24
God wants your first born sons, booze, and fruit: "Thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me." Exodus 22:29
God hates: blemished bullocks improperly killed and burned on the sacrifical altar; people who eat fat and drink blood; people who aren't stoolies, people who touch dirty dead things; people who touch unclean living people; people who sin and who don't bring sin offerings of lambs, goats, doves, pigeons, rams or bullocks to be sacrificed on the altar; people who eat fat, ox, sheep or goat; people who eat things that die of natural causes; people who eat camels, rabbits, and pigs (oh my!) ; people who eat shrimp, scallops, lobster, or any other aquatic life without fins and scales; people who eat eagles, ossifrages, osprays, vultures, kites, ravens, owls, night hawks, cuckows, other kinds of hawks, little owls, cormorants, great owls, swans, pelicans, gier eagles, storks, herons, lapwings, and bats (No kidding. He thought he had to tell us not to eat bats), any fowls that creep upon all fours; people who don't wash their clothes after they touch any dead thing that they can't eat; dead weasles, mice, tortoises, ferrets, chameleons, lizards, snails, and moles; uncircumcised men; dirty laundry if it has the seed of copulation or menstrual blood on it (or belongs to someone who has touched an unclean dead thing); lepers; people who don't obey Him; people who see their relatives naked (including halves, steps, and in-laws); people who see other people and their relatives naked together even if they are not your own relatives; people who look at nakes women who are menstruating; people who burn their seed of copulation (this is considered a sacrifice to Molech); people who say bad things about deaf people or trip blind people; people who cross breed cattle or make clothes of different fibers; people with tattoos; people who have cosmetic surgery, shave their heads or trim their beards; people who turn their daughters into prostitutes; men who marry whores; men who don't marry within their own people; men who don't marry virgins; peopel who kill an animal and its young on the same day; usery; liars; people who don't return other people's asses when they get loose; people who accept gifts; oppress strangers; farmers who don't rest their fields every 7th year; blood mixed with leavened bread; mixing meat and dairy products; people who don't bust up images of other gods --Leviticus 1, 3:17, 5, 7:23-24, 11,12,13,15,18,19,21,22, and 25; Exodus 23

Special Thanks to God Hates Shrimp

A Pagan Symbol by Any Other Name...

2005-12-02T07:35:00.000-08:00

I'm a Christian. I don't apologize for that, and I won't try to prove it to anyone either. Jesus knows, and that's all that matters. And he loves me, this I know, for the Bible Tells Me So.

The Bible tells me lots of other things, too. Like Hallmark kind of misses the mark when it puts out that Peace On Earth line of Christmas cards. But really, how many cards are they going to sell if they put in the actual Jesus quote:

"Think not that I am come to bring peace on Earth. I came not to bring peace, but a sword."

Probably not too damned many.

And how come if the Bible is supposed to be literal truth, Jesus was always speaking in metaphors and parables? Find me one depiction of Jesus with a literal sword strapped to his side. Maybe hanging on the wall of a ranch in Crawford....but I digress.

What I'm really ticked off about today is the controversy in Roanoke, Virginia over what to call the decorated evergreen tree they are putting up downtown. Is it going to be a Christmas Tree or a Holiday Tree?

Now, that might not be up there with the religious argument over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or whether or not Jesus owned his own clothes...but it sure as Hell was important enough to push aside the City Council debate over the Stadium for a few days.

And it isn't even a home grown controversy. It is raging in nearly every town in the country thanks to Jerry Falwell, who is trying to save Christmas from those minions of the devil, the evil God and America hating liberals. It is part of something he is calling the "Friend or Foe" campaign.

Oh, yeah, that sounds like Christmas to me. Because nothing says "Christian" like exploiting your savior for political purposes and ginning up fear of persecution to rally your base before an election year.

But before all you Christian Soldiers go marching off to War, let me fill you in on a few facts your enflamed passions might not have considered.

The Christmas Tree in downtown Roanoke has been called a Holiday Tree for at least the past five years...that's as far back as anyone can remember.

Most people will refer to it as a Christmas Tree anyway, and this controversy is not the most important thing on the ACLU's to do list. Christianity is not in danger of being outlawed. There is no more truth to this spurious claim than there was in the claim that if elected Kerry would ban the Bible...a claim distributed throughout West Virginia by the Republicans.

The Christmas Tree itself has pagan roots, and was even banned by the Catholic Church for a while. In 1659 Massachussetts passed a law that could send you to jail for putting one up, or celebrating Christmas in any other way than by going to church.

Jesus wasn't born on December 25th, the Bible says the birth was at the time of the lambing. That's in the Spring. The Catholic Church chose December 25th to make it easier to convert pagans because they already celebrated that date as the pagan holiday of Saturnalia--exchanging gifts, hanging up green stuff in their snow covered houses, and trying to cheer themselves up from Seasonal Affective Disorder.

And lastly, perhaps most importantly...this tree put up by the City of Roanoke is designed not to bring souls to heaven but downtown to shop. Call it a Commerce Tree and at least be truthful about it!

Do you really think Jesus wants his name on anything to do with shopping? Does God really want his name on our money? You know, that thing for which the love of is the root of all evil?

Does Jesus want us to spend a precious moment of our God given lives debating this in our homes, schools, town halls, church basements, and call in radio shows?

Read Second Timothy: "Have nothing to do with stupid, senseless controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to every one, an apt teacher, forbearing, correcting his opponents with gentleness."

So there you have it...I'm going to say this as gently as I can...Please stop fighting about stupid things and start living like Christ came here to convince you to live. With kindness, generosity, humility, and forgiveness.

That's what I want for Christmas...don't you?

Sources: