Sooner Be Blue

Mostly politics, a few current events, a squirt of seltzer down yer pants .. a little blog for my rambles and rants.

2007/12/31

Dave Barry reviews 2007

@ 07:18 AM (6 months, 10 days ago)

 

(Dave is the master of the humorous year-end review... Happy New Year readers, all 2,000 of you!)

"From iPhones to Anna Nicole to O.J., 2007 ends with humor

It was a year that strode boldly into the stall of human events and took a wide stance astride the porcelain bowl of history.

It was year in which roughly 17,000 leading presidential contenders, plus of course Dennis Kucinich, held roughly 63,000 debates, during which they spewed out roughly 153 trillion words; and yet the only truly memorable phrase emitted in any political context was ``Don't tase me, Bro!''

It was a year filled with bizarre, insane, destructive behavior, an alarming amount of which involved astronauts.

In short, 2007 was a year of deep gloom, pierced occasionally by rays of even deeper gloom. Oh, sure, there were a few bright spots:

• Several courageous members of the U.S. Congress -- it could be as many as a dozen -- decided, incredibly, not to run for president.

• O.J. Simpson discovered that, although you might be able to avoid jail time for committing a double homicide, the justice system draws the line at attempted theft of sports memorabilia.

• Toward the end of the year, entire days went by when it was possible to not think about Paris Hilton.

• Apple released the iPhone, which, as we understand it, enables users to fly, cure cancer, read minds and travel through time.

• The plucky, lovable New York Yankees once again found a way, against all odds, to bring joy to the literally billions of people who do not root for them.

• Dick Cheney did not shoot anybody, as far as we know.

But other than that, 2007 was a disaster. American consumers came to fear products manufactured in China, which covers pretty much everything in the typical American home except the dirt. Global warming continued to worsen, despite the efforts of leading climate experts such as Madonna and Leonardo DiCaprio, who emerged briefly from their private jets to give the rest of us helpful tips on reducing our carbon footprints. [...]

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking_news/story/359770.html

PS–don’t stop here, it gets better as he covers month to month.

 

2007/12/30

Ron Paul says Fox News is scared of him

@ 06:58 AM (6 months, 11 days ago)
 
Fox News has dropped Ron Paul from the Pre NH Primary Debate.
 
So, if Fox News is not bankrolling a candidate, it really doesn't matter how popular said candidate is among the people?
 
What's funny to me is that a couple weeks ago Fox accused Democratic candidates of being afraid to appear on Fox News Sunday... yet Fox is now too chicken to have a Republican with a totally different view than all the other warhawk white guys. Look who’s a scaredy cat now. Pretty hilarious.
 
From boston.com: "PLAISTOW, N.H. -- Ron Paul said the decision to exclude him from a debate on Fox News Sunday the weekend before the New Hampshire Primary is proof that the network "is scared" of him.
 
"They are scared of me and don't want my message to get out, but it will," Paul said in an interview at a diner here. "They are propagandists for this war and I challenge them on the notion that they are conservative." [..]"
 
http://tinyurl.com/2jqpyk
 
Hey, all the other GOP candidates want him gone too. He cleans their clocks.
 
Ron Paul throwing a monkey wrench into Fox's Iraq war agenda sure hasn't stopped him from raising oodles of cash. Record breaking cash raising.
 
The Iowa Independent thinks Paul will come in third in Iowa. Whatever will Fox do then?
 
I would never vote for Paul because he’s anti-choice and anti-evolution...and he talks crazy about public schools, Social Security and Medicare.
 
His financial policy smells funny...he brags that in ten terms he never voted for a tax, EVER. Geez, can you imagine how bad off this country would be if there were NEVER any taxes, ever?
 
And he spoke on The White Citizens Council's radio station. I mean, David Duke supports him....
 
His popularity just shows that we are so tired of the status quo that we're ready to see any kook take on the system.
 

2007/12/29

Vermont rocks!

@ 07:15 AM (6 months, 12 days ago)

More than just maple syrup...they're True Patriots.
 
In the tiny Vermont burg of Brattleboro, community activists are seriously trying to pass a piece of local legislation that would arrest Cheney and Bush for war crimes...if they came to town.
 
In any case, it’s not likely to happen. As the article notes, Bush has never visited Vermont since taking office. And before he took office he never stepped foot outside the US...except to party in Mexico.
 
Anyway, I don't think towns have jurisdiction over war crimes.
 
Yeah, but still…wouldn’t it be fun?
 
Just imagine...if Bush/Cheney did go there just to see what would happen. Imagine Barney Fife and Sheriff Andy trying to arrest the POTUS....why, black helicopters would swoop down long before Barney ever found his bullet.
 
From yahoo.com: "President Bush may soon have a new reason to avoid left-leaning Vermont: In one town, activists want him subject to arrest for war crimes. A group in Brattleboro is petitioning to put an item on a town meeting agenda in March that would make Bush and Vice President Cheney subject to arrest and indictment if they visit the southeastern Vermont community.[..]"
 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071228/ap_on_re_us/banning_bush_1
 
Imagine if San Diego did it. No more military photo-ops!
 
Maybe we should all try this. Hell, who am I kidding? I am a Blue Lady who lives in Redneck-homa...where they still sport their Bush 04 bumper stickers proudly.
 
I understand those Vermonters and their frustration... what they're so het up about:
 
Our president pursued a war against a country that didn't attack us...a war that has claimed many precious American lives and untold innocent Iraqi lives.
 
Usurped over 1 trillion in tax dollars, and still requesting tens of billions more to fight this stalemate war.
 
Sold our soul to China.
 
Sent our economy into a terrible tailspin. The dollar is sinking in value...so much so that the Euro and Pound are worth more, and the Canadian dollar caught up with the US dollar for the first time since 1976... erasing 30 years of progress.
 
Bankrupted the next couple of generations with corrupt crony capitalist spending ...on work which never got done.
 
Broke our military in fiasco after mismanaged fiasco...and disrespected them when they came home wounded.
 
Cut the writ of habeas corpus off at the knees.
 
Turned the Dept of Justice into an arm of his political party.
 
Weakened our alliances and emboldened our enemies, and generally destroyed our standing in the world.
 
Created far more terrorists than he has stopped...even armed al Qaeda and various militias.
 
Allowed the emergence of a corporate privatized army to run roughshod all over Iraq without accountability.
 
There is more ...so much more.... he's the Britney Spears of presidents....
 
We could storm the White House with pitchforks and torches--but Blackwater probably wouldn't hesitate to fire into a crowd of enraged citizens.
 

2007/12/28

There goes Pakistan.

Tags:
@ 08:08 AM (6 months, 13 days ago)

The first female prime minister of a Muslim country, Benazir Bhutto, has been assassinated. Not only has an amazing woman lost her life, but the Pakistani women and children have lost an inspiring and empowering role model. She was an intelligent, articulate, outspoken, compassionate woman who was killed not only for her political beliefs, but also because she was a woman who defied the submissive role that Islamic fundamentalists impose upon women -- a very sad day for all women, worldwide.
 
But the only surprise here really, is that Benazir Bhutto lived this long.
 
I had hoped differently....
 
They show TV clips of her saying that she wouldn't be killed because she was a woman. But she probably said that before the assassination attempt in October.
 
The main suspects in the assassination are the foreign and Pakistani Islamist militants who had repeatedly threatened to kill her...they saw her as a Westernized heretic and an American stooge.
 
All one week before our primaries too. Could be good for Rudy and Hillary's campaign... they'll claim we have to be tough and we have to stay in Iraq.
 
From the Los Angeles Times, December 28, 2007: "WASHINGTON -- For months, the Bush administration's hopes for stability in Pakistan rested on the rising influence of Benazir Bhutto. Her death Thursday shattered those hopes and threatened to paralyze U.S. priorities there: fighting terrorism, ensuring the safety of the country's nuclear weapons and preventing regional chaos.[..]"
 
http://tinyurl.com/2ow69k
 
The entire Middle East is now more prone to violence since Bush opened Pandora's Box by invading the Oil Fields.
 
The problem is we interfere TOO MUCH in the rest of the world ...if Bush had just stayed in Afghanistan to clean it up, then Pakistan would not be so unstable now.
 
I just hope we know where all Pakistan's nukes are ...just in case civil war breaks out ...
 
Some are saying that it was the US who made a deal with Musharraf to bring Bhutto back into the country to give an appearance of democracy. And that Musharraf only halfway went along...hence the lack of security for Bhutto, policemen leaving their posts yesterday, etc.
 
Was the hand of Musharraf really behind this assassination? Or was it the hand behind the hand--the anti-democratic pro-dictatorship Musharraf supporters and sympathizers?
 
Maybe Musharraf didn't play a role in the conspiracy at all...maybe even worse, he was completely powerless to stop it or even know about it.
 
So what does Bush do now...ask Musharraf to take off his uniform again? Demand to know where the nukes are? I mean we should get *something* for our $1 billion a year.
 
Bet Bush was pissed when Musharraf first refused to take his call after Bhutto was killed.
 
And how much longer before Musharraf leaves the scene in a body bag?
 
Bush probably can't do a single thing about Pakistan.
 
Did overthrowing a secular dictator in Iraq, who kept radical Islam in check, do a damn thing to control radical Islam around the world?
 

2007/12/27

Just when you think they can't be any more evil...

@ 07:43 AM (6 months, 14 days ago)

 

But, hey, they’re pro life and pro family....

"U.S. Ruling Backs Benefit Cut at 65 in Retiree Plans"

Boy, it's a good thing people over 65 rarely get sick. This policy is gonna work out great...for someone........some Mega-business someone...

So much for loyalty, it isn't like these rules start for the new hires. Nope, they apply to the people who have already paid their dues, need it the most, matter the least and have no way of changing their circumstances.

But will our Democratic leaders grow a spine and stand up for the retirees...buy some air time to wave red flags about this issue?

Will our brave Presidential Candidates of either party use their national TV airtime to stand up for retirees?

Don't hold your breath.

From nytimes.com, December 27: WASHINGTON--The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said Wednesday that employers could reduce or eliminate health benefits for retirees when they turn 65 and become eligible for Medicare.

The policy, set forth in a new regulation, allows employers to establish two classes of retirees, with more comprehensive benefits for those under 65 and more limited benefits — or none at all — for those older.

More than 10 million retirees rely on employer-sponsored health plans as a primary source of coverage or as a supplement to Medicare, and Naomi C. Earp, the commission’s chairwoman, said, "This rule will help employers continue to voluntarily provide and maintain these critically important health benefits."[..]"

http://tinyurl.com/2mv53u

This rule will definitely NOT HELP employers 'continue to provide...critically important health benefits'... this rule will HELP employers DROP more than 10 million elderly former employees from their benefit rolls.

Which brings me to socialized medicine.

Single payer, single payer, single payer, single payer.

I don't understand all the BS about socialized medicine. Obviously we already have it...so let's make it better. Maybe we should just call it "Medicare-For-All."

People don't know what "single-payer" means. They say it sounds like if you get sick you have to pay for everything yourself without help. No no no.

Single-payer means that ONE fund, handled by a non-profit government agency (accountable to the public) would make payment for all medical services. Period. Just like Medicare does.

The 1500 private health insurance companies that now do this work--each raking in oodles of profits for its stockholders, and each having its own expensive bureaucracy--would no longer be involved as the middle men.

Medicare is an example of a single-payer plan...and everyone knows and loves Medicare...elders pay a portion of their Social Security check to Medicare, I know one who pays $96 a month.

Medicare is one of our most successful government-run programs. And that's how government is *supposed* to work...to help our citizens, not for greedy corporations to make a profit off of us.

So--Medicare for all.

It's insurance that is evil.

 

2007/12/26

The Grinch stole Holiday Sales

@ 08:00 AM (6 months, 15 days ago)

Yep, the 2007 holiday shopping season seems to be the slowest in five years, as US consumers face a housing slump, a credit crunch and higher prices for food and fuel.
 
Let's just hope you've been holding on to your spending money until the after Christmas sales....
 
From the New York Times, December 26, 2007:
"....Spending between Thanksgiving and Christmas rose just 3.6 percent over last year, the weakest performance in at least four years, according to MasterCard Advisors, a division of the credit card company. By comparison, sales grew 6.6 percent in 2006, and 8 percent in 2005.[..]"
 
http://tinyurl.com/2ha6yp
 
I'm no financial whiz but spending that's up 3 percent in a period when inflation is running 4 percent isn't actually up.
 
"Retailers see only slight holiday increase"
From Associated Press: NEW YORK — Early holiday sales reports are weak, with Target Corp., the nation's No.2 retailer, warning that its sales may have fallen in December.[..]"
 
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/chronicle/5403500.html
 
It's worth noting that MasterCard’s spending data is based on purchases made by more than 300 million MasterCard users, and it covers not just store purchases, internet buys and gift cards--it also includes gasoline and meals at restaurants, both have seen big price increases this year.
 
Slow downs in retail will continue to hurt the housing market...manufacturers are hurting, wholesalers are hurting and retailers are hurting because of a 3rd consecutive year of slow sales.
 
How I wish Bush could see that deficits DO matter. Massive trade deficits DO matter. Paying governments who don't have our best interests in mind to borrow money from them is... well, just plain stupid. Bush has run up our government credit card tab 40 percent.
 
Problem is, Bush never had to be responsible for himself or his actions. First Poppy, now we the US taxpayers, are left to settle his accounts.
 
Meanwhile, China builds its military on our dime.
 
Where will we be when George Bush finishes destroying our standard of living and the value of our life savings?
 
Meanwhile we continue to borrow from China to finance war...a war NOT in the budget.
 
Talk to a blue collar worker - the American economy sucks and is rigged to benefit those who already have wealth. That's all you need to know.
 
The good news is that many retailers, from the high-end to the low, will start slashing prices this morning.... 60 to 70 percent. Open up any newspaper, and you will see.
 
The bad news? Americans are still falling behind on their credit card payments. Credit card delinquencies and defaults have soared to double-digit percentages.
 
Except me...I pay my ONE credit card off in total every month...those suckers have never gotten ONE penny of interest from me in over 25 years. My family taught me well--don't live beyond your means.
 
If only GWBush's folks had taught him not to live on a borrowed dime...
 

2007/12/23

I'm an atheist who loves Christmas!

@ 08:49 AM (6 months, 18 days ago)

Yes, yes I know...atheists usually shout out "Happy Winter Solstice!"...and try to start up fake holidays like "Festivus, a holiday for the rest of us"...only there is no tree, just an aluminum pole.
 
No no...I love the trees! I want to remember every one of those trees from my childhood. Especially the ones we cut down ourselves ...or decorated with strung popcorn and cranberries, and construction paper chains made by the little 'uns. I want to remember the bubble lights and us kids trying to throw foil icicles to reach the very top, where the homemade star rested.
 
I love that almost every shop has Christmas music, that the streets are decorated with a Christmas theme, and you can't turn on a radio without hearing "Little Drummer Boy" (one of my favorites)...those Christmas carols bring back many fond memories...we sang them in the school play.
 
I don't know about the rest of the country, but last year in my town a grade school held a Christmas play that celebrated Christmas, Hanukkah and Kwanzaa. Little kids sang songs and told the story of each one.
 
I love all those tearjerker stories about people helping needy families and making Santa possible for homeless kids. I love the joyful giving spirit that seems to run through all our hearts...the Angel Tree at the bank where you take the name of a needy child and buy the gift that he/she has asked Santa for...the people who give up Christmas with their families to serve the free turkey dinner Golden Coral has for the homeless every year.
 
Yes siree, I will be having a holly, jolly atheistic Christmas, one that will include presents under a Christmas tree and a big family party. I see no glaring contradiction in doing so.
 
Just because I don't believe in the supernatural doesn't mean that all the trappings of Christmas are to be disposed of....you don't have to believe the original nativity story to think that the tradition has value.
 
It's very obvious that everything we value in Christmas--giving gifts, celebrating the holiday with our families, enjoying all the sentimental kitsch that comes along with it--all of that has been embraced by the secular world.
 
I read the other day that 85 percent of the people in Sweden are atheists but almost everybody celebrates Christmas.
 
It has long since ceased to be a religious festival. I participate for family reasons, my complaints are strictly limited to the commercialism -- the obscene spending bonanza that nowadays seems to highjack not just December, but November and much of October, too.
 
So, Fox's Mr. Bill O'Reilly and conservative Christians who feel that the holiday has been hijacked are right! So much so that even atheists are now comfortable getting into the spirit.
 
Christmas is a fine example of how social rituals evolve. Hmm...I wonder, what form the celebration will take in the millennia to come?
 
To those who think you have to be a devout Christian to celebrate Christmas--I say bah, humbug.
 
I don't need religion to justify the warm feeling in my heart that I get around this time of year. All I need is to be human.
 
I wholeheartedly wish everyone a Merry Christmas!
 

2007/12/22

More War! It's what's for Christmas!

@ 08:54 AM (6 months, 19 days ago)
 
Bush pushes through yet another debacle for the American economy, but the rightie-tighties pile on the Democratic Congress for caving in to it.
 
For what the Bush government has squandered on this war, every US driver could have had free gasoline for life.
 
"(AP) Congress approved $70 billion Wednesday for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, a bitter finish for majority Democrats who tried to force a change in President Bush's war policy.
 
.....Democrats were eager to avoid being seen as not supporting troops who are in harm's way - and avoid weeks of bashing by Bush for failing to provide that money.
 
"This is a blank check," complained Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass. "The new money in this bill represents one cave-in too many. It is an endorsement of George Bush's policy of endless war." [..]"
 
 
Don't get me started on the Democrats.......
 
And isn't it soooo nice that all those lovely hard earned taxpayer dollars are going to defend several tribes of people who can only agree on ONE thing--that America is to blame for all their problems and nothing will get any better until we leave.
 
From Washington Post: "Iraqis of all sectarian and ethnic groups believe that the U.S. military invasion is the primary root of the violent differences among them, and see the departure of "occupying forces" as the key to national reconciliation, according to focus groups conducted for the U.S. military last month."
 
 
Which should come as no surprise at all. Ever since people started asking, Iraqis have consistently told pollsters that they view the US led occupying forces as part of the PROBLEM, not part of the SOLUTION, and want them to LEAVE.
 
Hell, a good many of them even want Saddam back.
 
The difference this time is that the message is coming from the US military's focus groups -- face-to-face contact rather than anonymous polling. Which means the Iraqis had to have the courage to tell American soldiers that they think the US military is making things worse.
 
The US has enabled Iraq to have both a civil war and ethnic cleansing. We continue to arm and train all three sides of the civil war.
 
The ethnic demon which has haunted Kurd, Shi'ite or Sunni Arab for eons will continue to do so.
 
Don't hold your breath until a population who thinks of itself according to different ethno-religious lines learns to live in a state confederation.
 
No matter how many more billions of dollars we throw at it.
 

2007/12/21

God bless atheism

Tags:
@ 06:20 AM (6 months, 21 days ago)

A view of the US campaign from Pat Condell, a cousin across the pond who isn't afraid to discuss the superstitious beliefs of political candidates who are "pimping for Jesus."

Read the rest of this entry ... (39 words left)

2007/12/20

Military lawyers say "Sit down sir!"

@ 06:26 AM (6 months, 22 days ago)

"White House drops veto bid on promotions"
 
Looks like the Cheney/Bush plan to take control over the promotions of military lawyers in order to get control of the JAG corps has been shelved ...for now. No doubt they will try something else.
 
See, if all JAG promotions were approved by politically appointed lawyers, it could ruin the career of any JAG lawyer who has the temerity to disagree with the White House. Like--"You buck us on torture, you don't get promoted."
 
Hmm...me thinks the Bushies believe the feces is going to hit the fan sooner, rather than later, over those torture tapes.
 
From Boston Globe: "WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is dropping a plan to take control over the promotions of military lawyers, following an outpouring of alarm over the independence of uniformed attorneys who have repeatedly objected to the White House's policies toward prisoners in the war on terrorism.
 
Under the proposal, first reported by the Globe on Saturday, politically appointed lawyers in the Pentagon would have gained the power to veto the appointment or promotion of any member of the Judge Advocate General's Corps, the military's 4,000-member uniformed legal officers group.
 
Retired JAGs loudly objected to the proposal, which they characterized as an attempt to politicize the corps of military lawyers by allowing the administration to block the advancement of officers considered likely to speak up if they thought the White House had issued an illegal order to the military.[..]"
 
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/12/19/military_lawyers_stay_unbridled/
 
The JAG Corps is the military’s legal branch. It was created to uphold the law within the military...NOT to serve at the pleasure of the president.
 
Gah! Is there anything this White House hasn't tried to corrupt and politicize? The Justice Dept./Attorneys General stink was bad enough...but now JAG?
 
'Quality control' my Aunt Fannie. It's an attempt to politicize JAG because there have been too many military lawyers raising objections to certain policies toward prisoners in the war on terrorism. They were among the first to challenge Bush's Guantanamo and torture policies. The Geneva Conventions are very important to the military.
 
That veto power would have ended JAG's role as a checks-and-balance on presidential power... politically appointed lawyers could block the promotion of certain JAGs who they believe would speak up if a White House policy is illegal.
 
It's a sad day for our country when we've reached the point where it's actually a relief to see the military stand up to the president and say, loudly and clearly, "No!"
 
But, with all the political meddling that goes on...I'm just glad the military still has the cajones to stand up to him.
 

2007/12/19

Attn: Rocket Scientists...

@ 07:38 AM (6 months, 22 days ago)

...Stalin said, "I don't care who you vote for as long as I count the votes."
 
"Colo. Bans Most Electronic Voting Machines"
 
And junk 'em they should. No electronic voting machine will ever be hacker-proof, no electronic election will ever be reliable.
 
Yes, the paper voting system can also be monkeyed with...you can always stuff ballot boxes and have dead people vote. BUT, it takes an army of people to pull it off, and armies talk...and the armies have to be here in this country.
 
With electronic systems, one person with a virus can rig the entire election from anywhere on the planet.
 
I'll take the paper ballots please.
 
"(AP) Colorado's top election official decertified electronic voting machines used in many of the state's largest counties Monday, calling into question equipment used in past elections in a move he said could have national implications.
 
...The news comes days after Ohio's Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner urged Cuyahoga County to switch to the optical scan system - ballots filled out by hand and read by computer - in time for the state's March 4 presidential primary."
 
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/18/politics/main3627490.shtml
 
Yay Colorado! Also California and Florida for working to clean things up! Our swing-state buddy Ohio has just issued a report slamming its three providers of electronic voting equipment -- including the renamed Diebold -- and recommending that the 50 counties which use them scrap the machines in favor of a paper-trail-leaving optical scanning method.
 
Colorado's Sec. of State Jennifer Brunner, detailed the many ways that hackers could infiltrate the systems...things like easily picking locks and using magnets to manipulate vote counts. Even adding "malignant software" into boards of election servers!
 
Thank goodness my Oklahoma still uses the paper ballot, scanned by a machine.
 
Every state's voting infrastructure needs to be overhauled and in tip top shape by next year's presidential elections. No matter which side wins, we don't want another dimpled ballot/hanging chad fiasco like we had in 2000.
 
For a couple of weeks we looked like a banana republic. As the Supremes pondered, I wondered if tanks would start rumbling through the streets. I thought Gore did the right thing ...to have dragged it out would only damage our country more. Another reason I like Gore.
 
Next thing you know, we spent $3 billion nationally to purchase the touch-screen machines to replace the old punch-card voting system that had failed us.
 
Too bad we didn't listen to all the experts who warned us that hackers, software bugs and poorly trained poll workers could intentionally, or accidentally, erase or alter voting data on those silly machines.
 
We all should demand paper ballots. Any fool could see that electronic voting machines are error-prone and easily hacked. We need to use only machines that create a paper record.
 
Allen Raymond's book--"How to Rig an Election: Confessions of a Republican Operative"--is coming out next month. He describes how he ran an illegal election-day scheme to jam the phone lines of New Hampshire Democrats during the state's tight 2002 Senate election...and says these dirty tricks went even higher in the Republican party.
 
Ever wonder why it was only the Republicans who fought every mandate to have a paper-trail....oops, I think I already know.
 
Actually, Republicans...if you're so sure about your victory why don't you just quit fighting the paper ballot and PROVE once and for all that those whiny Democrats are just sore losers. Not doing this speaks volumes.
 

2007/12/18

"Don't Tase me, ho!"

@ 07:48 AM (6 months, 23 days ago)

Taser-packin' mamas! Buy your cutie one for Christmas, and hope to high heaven she didn't have her heart set on diamonds instead.
 
They look a little like the kind of deodorant thingies you can buy in any store.
 
But they’re not!
 
If you stuck one of these babies into your armpit you’d get a REALLY nasty shock!
 
From newsweek.com: "Every Saturday afternoon in Scottsdale, Ariz., women gather at Dana Shafman's house to watch demonstrations of her sleek new wares, which come in such enticing colors as "metallic pink" and "electric blue." It's like a Tupperware party … only not.
 
Shafman is peddling Tasers. Hers look a lot different from those bulky blasters carried by cops: they resemble something you'd shave your legs with, and at five and a half inches in length, they're small enough to slip into a purse. But don't be fooled. These babies deliver the same 50,000 volts of muscle-paralyzing electroshock therapy.
 
Looking for the perfect Christmas gift for that special someone who wants to pack heat but doesn't want to mess with bullets? At $299 to $349, the C2 Personal Protection System may be the ticket.
 
...Although there are other electroshock weapons, most are "stun guns" that require physical contact with a target. That differs from a Taser, which fires an electrified cable that attaches to the target, delivering the shock; the C2 can shoot 15 feet,... [..]"
 
http://www.newsweek.com/id/78151
 
Except Tupperware never delivered 50,000 volts or was connected to any deaths.
 
Lor, what will happen? Cops already abuse Tasers, think about one in every woman's purse...one that can shoot 50,000 volts 15 feet. Men, if you even look at a woman "funny"...
 
Yes, we have a right to defend ourselves, but will we become Taser happy? With so much violence toward women, (one in four college girls report sexual assault) I have mixed feelings.
 
On the one hand, it's another option women can have to protect themselves...on the other, anyone who thinks a Taser can't be deadly should bone up on their current events.
 
Let's see...it's late at night and I'm asleep in my bedroom alone...I hear someone kicking down my front door. I have precious seconds to react. The intruder is running down the hallway ...would I rather have a gun or a Taser?
 
What if it's only my neighbor trying to save me from my burning house? Don't laugh, I read about such a shooting.
 
Is a Taser better then a gun? A gun can certainly stop someone trying to hurt a person from a longer distance, but a Taser is less deadly (most of the time).
 
Would I rather have a Taser or pepper spray?
 
Neither would be a match if the bad guy had a gun…
 
What if there's more than one attacker? Do I have to have to reload after every shot?
 
Taser, gun or hairspray and a lighter-- all that matters is whether you can stop the bad guy. Everyone has the right to defend themselves against unwanted aggression. Man or woman.
 
Will we become a Taser-packin' society instead of a gun-totin' society? Are Tasers the wave of the future and guns will end up in museums?
 
I guess in the end, I'd rather use a relatively harmless Taser than a bullet.
 
But you guys better watch out for jilted women and angry ex-wives...they might be packing.
 
Hmmm...maybe I'll invent Taser underwear...or a Taser bra...for when jerks grab a woman...
 

2007/12/17

The Brits are getting out. End of story.

@ 07:54 AM (6 months, 24 days ago)

"UK hands control of Basra to Iraq forces" See how easy it is George?...you just hand the keys over and go home.
 
This is why there will always be an England...they know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em. I am worried about the United States, however....
 
But, it's not that the Bush administration isn't bright enough to realize they've been whupped. Bush's plan for withdrawal has nothing to do with Iraq, it has everything to do with him holding on long enough to hand this mess over to the next president as he withdraws his sorry arse out of the White House.
 
He thinks it will look better on his legacy report card. Boy do I have news for him.
 
Anyway, thank you Britain, you have been a remarkable ally and friend...and I suspect you'll be happy when a sane person occupies the White House again.
 
"Dec 16, 2007, BASRA, Iraq (Reuters) - Britain handed over security in Basra province to Iraqi forces on Sunday, effectively marking the end of nearly five years of British control of southern Iraq.
 
Thousands of Iraqi police and troops paraded along the embankment of the country's second-biggest city in the largest show of Iraqi military force since the days of Saddam Hussein.
 
...Control of Basra will be the biggest test yet of Iraq's ability to keep the peace without troops from the United States or its main ally.
 
With Iraq's second-largest city, only major port and nearly all its oil exports, Basra is far more populous, wealthier and more strategically located than any of the other eight of Iraq's 18 provinces previously placed under formal Iraqi control.[..]"
 
http://tinyurl.com/2qzeuj
 
We cross our fingers that what we have left behind doesn't turn out to be just as tragic as the chaos that we helped create. But, believe me, it's going to happen whether we leave in five days or five years. They have to sort it out themselves.
 
Just like in Afghanistan, local militias have played a mighty part in bringing peace to certain areas...they can also destroy peace whenever they see fit.
 
And why does Basra get to run its own affairs while the rest of Iraq doesn't? After all, Basra holds 80 percent of the country's oil reserves, and the key to Iraq's economy.
 
A BBC poll shows that Basra is glad to see the Brits go. 85% thought the British occupation had had a negative impact on Basra...83% wanted British troops to leave Iraq...63% wanted them to leave the Middle East...and 72% thought security would improve in Basra after the Brits are gone.
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7144437.stm
 
The one the Brits handed over control to, Maj. Gen. Jalil Khalaf (has survived 20 assassination attempts since he became police chief six months ago), is outspoken in his assessment of the situation--“most of Basra’s ports, especially Um Qasr, are under the control of militia gangs....they left me militia, they left me gangsters, and they left me all the troubles in the world.”
 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2228690,00.html
 
What is so sad is that the women in Basra can still be murdered--beheaded!--for being ‘unislamic’. More than 40 have been killed and their bodies dumped in the streets in the past five months...for wearing makeup or appearing in public without a headscarf.
 
And now we have armed the militias with weapons supposed to bring peace. Too bad they're the Iraqi militias and jihadist tribes, not the government we wasted so much blood and treasure to install, but you can't have everything.
 
Especially democracy.

2007/12/16

So much for the Religion of Peace....

@ 06:18 AM (6 months, 26 days ago)

Creationist stabs, kills evolutionist. I guess arguing that you don't believe in mythology is a provocation to murder.
 
Religious fanatics are the most dangerous people in the world folks, no matter their religion.
 
"Scottish backpacker stabbed to death after creationism row"
 
From news.independent.co.uk: "A bizarre row about evolution versus creationism led to an English backpacker fatally stabbing a Scottish backpacker during a fruit-picking trip to earn money for their travels.
 
Alexander York, 33, from Essex, was sentenced to a maximum of five years in jail yesterday for the manslaughter of Rudi Boa, 28, a biomedical student from Inverness.
 
The incident happened in January last year at a caravan park in southern New South Wales, where York had become friendly with Mr Boa and his girlfriend, Gillian Brown. The Scottish couple had just arrived in Australia, and headed to Tumut, a picturesque town at the foothills of the Snowy Mountains, to pick fruit.[..]"
 
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/australasia/article3253070.ece
 
This is the stunning part:
 
"Mr York is eligible for release in January 2009."
 
A Christian nut-job kills someone in cold blood because they don't believe the way he does and he'll hardly do any jail time?
 
Is a life worth that little? He deliberately, intentionally stabbed someone to death ...how can it be only manslaughter?
 
Because the judge seems to think that York is basically a good little Christian.
 
Now if it had been the other way around, and the guy who believes in science and reality had killed the Christian ... well, creationists would be jumping all over it saying it “shows” how evolutionists are crazy and evil.
 
Justice Adams said, "The offender is a person of good character and the offense is a complete aberration."
 
So killing someone during an argument doesn't make you a bad person. The moral of the story is if you kill somebody in Australia it helps to be a religious nut.
 
My friend said it says more about drunk people than about religious people.
 
But I don't know....doesn't booze lower one's inhibitions, revealing the true self? In Vino Veritas?
 

2007/12/15

Thoughts on journalism and the media

@ 09:17 AM (6 months, 26 days ago)

Keith Olbermann was on PBS last night, Bill Moyers Journal. Very thought provoking. He was asked if his anti-right screeching was any different than Limbaugh's anti-left screeching. Here's a link in case you missed it:
 
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/12142007/watch.html
 
Also, an important vote is coming up next week in the Federal Communications Commission -- whether to let Big Media corporations swallow up even more of our local media.
 
Hundreds of thousands of concerned citizens think this is unacceptable and are speaking out. One of the main reasons for the pathetic state of journalism today is because media titans like Rupert Murdoch keep buying up and controlling more media.
 
To drive home the point, Free Press launched a 3-minute "Junk Media" video to sound the alarm and rally opposition to the December 18th vote; it has an important message and a catchy tune:
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilNLeXefmNw
 
Who is this FCC guy...this Kevin J. Martin!? How can one man who was never elected have so much power over public airwaves!? Yes, the airwaves belong to we the people! How can Martin totally ignore the opinions of the vast majority of Americans AND the Congress?:
 
LA Times: "Facing growing criticism of his agenda and tactics, a defiant Kevin J. Martin, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, refused senators' requests Thursday to delay a vote next week on his plan to loosen restrictions on owning a newspaper and broadcast station in the same city.
 
Martin endured three hours of aggressive questioning from the Senate Commerce Committee, with members accusing him of rushing to help big media companies at the public's expense.[..]"
 
http://tinyurl.com/2m9u68
 
How long will it be before we find out how Martin got into Murdoch's back pocket?
 
It's certainly not news that all those mega corporations controlling mainstream media have only one purpose--MONEY.
 
As long as they can rake in all those lovely advertising dollars they don't care about the content. That's why info-tainment has swallowed hard news. And we the Amuse Me! people just sit back and wait for the next titaliting scandal.
 
Topics like Iraq veteran suicides, billions of missing war dollars and war equipment and White House corruption...well, all that reality just isn't as sexy as Britney's crotch shots.
 
I watch PBS for the truth. I don't want to see stories about drunken celebrities, missing wives and senseless shootings 24/7...a little bit is okay for levity, but not 24/7.
 
Not to mention the incessant Viagra commercials...
 
I guess it's too much to ask for in depth coverage of what's going on in our government -- ignorance and incompetence, arrogance...corporation manipulation of public policy...
 
Bill Moyer's Journal, Jim Lehrer's News Hour and other programs on PBS are the last pillars of unbiased TV reporting. Too bad the general public is too addicted to/ hopped up on cable news sugar to realize it.
 
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead
 

2007/12/14

The Dream Is Dead

@ 05:31 AM (6 months, 28 days ago)

Here's MoDo, reminding us all who Douglas Feith is, what he did to this country, and how he has absolutely no remorse.
 
By MAUREEN DOWD, New York Times columnist, 12/12/07:
The man crowned by Tommy Franks as “the dumbest [expletive] guy on the planet” just made the dumbest [expletive] speech on the planet.
 
Doug Feith, the former Rummy gofer who drove the neocon plan to get us into Iraq, and then dawdled without a plan as Iraq crashed into chaos, was the headliner at a reunion meeting of the wooly-headed hawks Monday night at the American Enterprise Institute.
 
The room was packed as the former No. 3 at the Pentagon, previewing his upcoming book, “War and Decision,” conceded that the case could be made that “mistakes were made.” His former boss, Paul Wolfowitz, and the former Pentagon adviser Richard Perle sat supportively in the front row.
 
But he wasn’t self-flagellating. He was simply trying to put an egghead gloss on his Humpty Dumpty mishegoss.
 
“At the end of the day, here we are, and as of now there’s a reasonable chance that the country is going to remain united,” he said. Not quite the original boast of democracy cascading through the Middle East.
 
Feith also inanely noted that his personal view was that his de-Baathification policy — which created a huge, angry pool of unemployed men that fueled the insurgency — “was not basically a big error. It’s been criticized very severely. I think there actually was a lot of good thought that went into the de-Baathification policy.” It just spiralled out of hand, he said. Mistakes were made.
 
He thinks everything would have been fine if America had not lingered so long in Iraq. If only Paul Bremer and the generals had just turned Iraq over to the slippery con man Feith wanted to put in charge, Ahmad Chalabi.
 
Asked about getting tough with Iran and Syria, Feith offered this incandescent insight: “As we all know, the president said he’s The Decider. That actually is quite a profound point. The president is The Decider and the main thing he decides about is risk.”
 
He noted that in battles through American history, “the military fights better over time.” This from a guy who sent our military into Iraq without the right armor, the right force numbers or the right counterinsurgency training.
 
“A strategic alliance of the ousted Baathists and foreign jihadists was something that our intelligence community did not anticipate,” he said, continuing to spread the blame.
 
But the intelligence community didn’t miss it. The neocons tried to scrub out that sort of analysis, knowing it would make the war harder to sell.
 
Classified reports prepared for President Bush in January 2003 by the National Intelligence Council warned that rogue elements of Saddam’s government could hook up with existing terrorist groups to wage guerrilla warfare.
 
In “Fiasco,” Tom Ricks wrote that Feith’s Pentagon office was dubbed the “black hole” of policy by generals watching him drop the ball.
 
“People working for Feith complained that he would spend hours tweaking their memos, carefully mulling minor points of grammar,” Ricks wrote. “A Joint Staff officer recalled angrily that at one point troops sat on a runway for hours, waiting to leave the United States on a mission, while he quibbled about commas in the deployment order.”
 
Jay Garner, America’s first viceroy in Iraq, deemed him “incredibly dangerous” and said his “electrons aren’t connected.”
 
Feith’s disdain for diplomacy and his credo that weakness invites aggression were shaped, Ricks reported, by personal history: “Like Wolfowitz, Feith came from a family devastated by the Holocaust. His father lost both parents, three brothers, and four sisters to the Nazis.”
 
Feith told Jeffrey Goldberg in The New Yorker that “My family got wiped out by Hitler, and ... all this stuff about working things out — well, talking to Hitler to resolve the problem didn’t make any sense to me. The kind of people who put bumper stickers on their car that declare that ‘War is not the answer,’ are they making a serious comment? What’s the answer to Pearl Harbor? What’s the answer to the Holocaust?”
 
What’s the answer to bin Laden? According to Feith, it was an attack on an unrelated dictator. He oversaw the Policy Counterterrorism Evaluation Group, whose mission was to amp up links between Saddam and Al Qaeda.
 
It defies reason, but there are still some who think the chuckleheads who orchestrated the Iraq misadventure have wisdom to impart.
 
The Pentagon neocons dumped Condi Rice out of the loop. Yet, according to Newsweek’s Mike Isikoff, Condi has now offered Wolfie a job. It wasn’t enough that he trashed Iraq and the World Bank. (He’s still larking around town with Shaha, the sweetheart he gave the sweetheart deal to.)
 
Condi wants Wolfie to advise her on nuclear proliferation and W.M.D. as part of a State Department panel that has access to highly classified intelligence.
 
Once you’ve helped distort W.M.D. intelligence to trick the country into war, shouldn’t you be banned for life from ever having another top-level government post concerning W.M.D.?
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/12/opinion/12dowd.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

2007/12/13

A Christmas War with a twist

@ 06:49 AM (6 months, 28 days ago)

"Muslim helps Jews attacked on NY subway"
 
Here's a story about a subway beating motivated by crude, unvarnished anti-Semitism, which could've been motivated by backwards rightwing varnished politicians. The same pols who are so deeply shocked when they see religious and racial hatred without the nice suit of clothes on.
 
And a lone Muslim guy who did the right thing.
 
The attackers apparently yelled "Merry Christmas" at the group of Jews, who responded with a resounding "Happy Chanukah"...then they jumped them.
 
"NEW YORK, New York, Dec. 12, 2007 (NBC) -- New York police have arrested 10 people following a vicious subway attack that began with a Christmas greeting.
 
Witnesses say the group of young men and women wished everyone on board a "merry Christmas".
 
When four Jewish subway riders responded by adding their own "Happy Hanukkah" they were pelted with anti-Semitic remarks before being beaten, police and prosecutors said.
 
...Faced with a knife, Adler said he started looking around for help but only one person came to their aid: Hassan Askari, a Muslim student from Bangladesh who is now nursing wounds of his own.[..]"
 
http://www.ksn.com/news/also/12425926.html
 
I saw on TV that one of the thugs arrested will soon to be spending 6 months in jail after pleading guilty to beating the crap out of four black guys in Brooklyn two years ago.
 
The media is having a field day with the Muslim-Jew-thug trifecta, and I love that. We need a kind heart to balance the cruel hearts right now, between Hanukkah and Christmas. It's nice to know that most of the time people can be counted on to do the right thing and just be good people without first thinking about tribalism.
 
But, <sigh> “This is a Christian nation!” is spouted by some of our lawmakers too, not just subway thugs...though subway thugs surely gather courage from crap like this:
 
I saw Rep. Steve King (R-IA) on Fox News decrying an “assault on Christmas" ...frothing about people who want to “eradicate Christ from Christmas" ...spouting on about his resolution to "honor Christmas" and declare that the US is a "Christian nation"...
 
"Rep. Steve King Upset ...
FOX News - The foundation of this nation and this culture is Christian. ... I think there's an assault on Christianity in America," King said in a release Wednesday. [..]"
 
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316574,00.html
 
Anyone can see what this War on Christmas shit is really about....
 
How long will it be until more exclusive resolutions AND laws about religion are passed?
 
Do the rabid religious right, and anti-Semitism go hand in hand? They try hard to hide it, but back at the local bar they open up and talk about the “ACL-Jew.”
 
My theory is that the hatred and the violence kicked up a notch with conservative talk radio.
 
And, if you support anti-terrorism laws, you have to recognize that hate crimes are just a sub-species of terrorism...
 

2007/12/12

Baby come back.. I'll be good to you

@ 08:02 AM (6 months, 29 days ago)

Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace tells Politico that "the Democrats are damn fools [for] not coming on Fox News." Wallace thinks that once the party has a nominee "they probably will come on, because they know that we get a lot of voters they are going to need if they are going to win the election."
 
"Just imagine if the Republicans, under pressure from right-to-life groups, refused to appear on CNN or MSNBC," Wallace said. "I think there would be holy unshirted hell. I think there would be such talk about these people being captives of the extreme right wing and why are they afraid to answer questions."
 
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7296.html
 
Just what is “holy unshirted hell” anyway?
 
Does it have anything to do with Jeff Gannon (former Bush White House reporter whose naked pictures have appeared on a number of gay escort sites)?
 
Does the Democrat snub have anything to do with slander, disinformation, and intimidation? Or Fox’s reputation for overtalking and not letting a Democrat make a point?
 
Could it have something to do with hackery like this recent story headline on Fox News -- "Democrats Legislating Defeat in Iraq"?
 
Fox uses the same tactics that righties used forty years ago about Vietnam--claiming that anyone who argued for withdrawing or cutting off war funding is a traitor.
 
Certainly Democrats would show up if they knew there’d be a civil discussion.
 
Fox News may bray that they're "fair and balanced"... but how about Wallace's rudeness to Bill Clinton that time? Gee, that may be a good reason for Dems to hold something against Fox.
 
A journalist’s job should never be to destroy the person they invited to interview, which is what Fox’s people seem to do when they invite someone from the “other side.” It’s simply not gracious. Good journalism should provoke discomfort, but leave open the chance to explain.
 
The Fox snub may be one of the few smart things Democrats have done lately. When Hillary appeared that Sunday and laughed at some of the questions...well, we still hear that laugh popping up on Fox's other political commentary shows ...nothing else, just the laugh. Yes, anyone could record and play that cackle, but Fox is the only one who does.
 
At least CNN presents the right-wing side--Glenn Beck. Name one equivalent left-wing show on Fox.
 
It would be fitting for the Democrats to simply ignore Fox and leave them as the only outlet without sources.
 
And last time I checked, Democrats seem to be doing just fine without the help of Fox News. By the way, how’s that Republican campaign fundraising going?
 
There was a recent poll/current event quiz showing that Fox's audience is the worst informed... the best informed audience was that of The Daily Show, NPR next.
 
Really...watching Fox News is like watching a puppet show where everyone's lips move except Brit Hume's.....
 

2007/12/11

Time for a guitar fix

Tags:
@ 07:02 AM (7 months, 23 hours ago)

Here's Guitar God Jeff Beck at the second Crossroads Guitar Festival in Chicago. He still has that magic--pure, arcing melody, shivery growls, and watch him finger-picking the strings while manipulating his vibrato bar with the same hand.
 
He played for an hour, brought the house down. But I chose this video to show his very talented female bassist, Tal Wilkenfeld. I thought she was his daughter, but no. She has her own website if you're interested.
 
I thank Beck for giving a woman the chance to strut her stuff... because Rock has always been a man's world and women struggle to compete. Today's production and record bosses are predominantly male, and you'd be hard pressed to find a woman among the instrumentalists and session musicians.
 
Yes, times are getting better, but women with guitars are still seen as a novelty...a gimmick, something not entirely serious. Women are supposed to be only groupies and adoring fans, not serious musicians.
 
So thanks Jeff, for giving Tal a chance. From the crowd's reaction to her, she can do the rest.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJGCOq89a2o&feature=related
 

2007/12/10

Mitt’s No J.F.K.

@ 06:34 AM (7 months, 1 day ago)

Time for a little MoDo...

By MAUREEN DOWD - NYTimes - December 9, 2007

When I was a kid, we used to drive on the Beltway past the big Mormon temple outside Washington. The spires rose up like a white Oz, and some wag had spray-painted the message on a bridge beneath: "Surrender Dorothy!"

It did seem like an alien world, an impression that was enhanced when we took a tour of the temple and saw all the women wearing white outfits and light pink lipstick.

Of course, it was no more scary than scowling nuns with long rulers preaching about the virgin birth, the Holy Ghost and the hideous fates that would befall girls who wore too much makeup or French-kissed.

You’d think Catholics, who watched with trepidation as J.F.K. battled prejudice, would be sympathetic to Mitt Romney.

But even for those of us in religions that were once considered cults by other religions — my mom and another Catholic girlfriend actually had Southern Protestants ask them to lift up their hair so they could see the mark of the devil or the horns — Mormonism is opaque.

Now in addition to asking candidates about boxers or briefs, we have reporters asking Mitt Romney if he wears The Garment, the sacred one-piece, knee-length underwear with Mormon markings and strict disposal rules.

"I’ll just say those sorts of things I’ll keep private," he told The Atlantic.

....."J.F.K.’s speech was to reassure Americans that he wasn’t a religious fanatic," Mr. Krakauer agreed. "Mitt’s was to tell evangelical Christians, ‘I’m a religious fanatic just like you.’"

The backdrop, he said, is "the wickedly fierce competition between Mormons and Southern evangelicals to convert people."

The world is globalizing, nuclear weapons are proliferating, the Middle East is seething, but Republicans are still arguing the Scopes trial. [...]

http://tinyurl.com/297gb8

 

2007/12/9

FDA wheels coming off, American lives at risk

Tags:
@ 08:01 AM (7 months, 2 days ago)

Hmmm...and all the better for the Bushies to keep the FDA from interfering with drug company profits...
 
It's shameful that our children have toys with leaded paint, our pets die from poisoned food, there is poison in our water, our fruits and vegetables can kill us, and the imports coming into this country are not being examined prior to entry.
 
A new 60-page report from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's science board was released last week--"FDA Science and Mission at Risk." It states that increasing demands and a lack of resources are putting the safety of the public at risk.
 
It says that basic food system inspection and enforcement is severely eroded, and it can't respond to outbreaks in a timely manner...and doesn't have adequate means to prevent future problems.
 
It says there is a low inspection rate...that they can't sufficiently monitor either products manufactured domestically or imported products. During the past 35 years, we have decreased FDA funding and forced a 78 percent reduction in food inspections.
 
And get this--"FDA estimates that, at most, it inspects food manufacturers once every 10 years, and cosmetic manufacturers even less frequently. The Agency conducts no inspections of retail food establishments or of food-producing farms."
 
Here's the fda.gov site:
 
http://tinyurl.com/yvnk28
 
The problems in the FDA have been caused by the Republican Congress' cutting funds and Bush's policies easing regulation.
 
Before the Bushies try to privatize the FDA, we need to tear it down and rebuild it as an Independent Health Agency. Maybe it's time to turn the FDA back into what it was supposed to be in the first place--an agency that protects us from dangerous food and drugs, not a champion for private industry.
 
Today it is just a revolving door between agency and cartels.
 
We started getting into this big mess back in the Reagan years when he decided to get government out of our lives...including important agencies like the FDA, whose job it is to protect us from bad food and drugs. How crazy was that?
 
You just have to remember arch-conservative Grover Norquist's infamous quote about reducing government to the point it could be drowned in a bathtub.
 
See, conservatives think industry can be trusted to police themselves, and furthermore, should be left alone by government, because they will do the right thing to protect we the people.
 
Excuse me while I fall over laughing!
 
Like insurance companies will never shirk on claims payments? Credit industry will never raise rates on those who pay on time? Tainted toys? Poisoned pet food? Meat recalls? Deadly spinach? Drugs rushed to market lacking adequate safety testing?
 
All these examples of corporations NOT policing themselves just prove how dangerous it is to trust that they will protect us from harm on their own.
 

2007/12/8

Traitorous scum.

@ 08:02 AM (7 months, 3 days ago)

This LA Times article has a national poll showing how Bush and his handling of the Iraq war is losing the support of families with ties to the military. A majority say the invasion was not worth it, and 58 percent of these families want the troops home within a year or sooner.
 
This is how disastrous Bush and his policies have been for the military. Given enough time, he will probably piss off and alienate every single member of the US military and every single member of their families.
 
And Cheney might ask--"Why do the families of the troops hate the troops so much? And besides, big deal, the majority of oil company executives and their families still support the war."
 
And Limbaugh might add--"Who cares what those limp-wristed left-wing fake soldier families think!"
 
From the Los Angeles Times: December 7, 2007 WASHINGTON -- Families with ties to the military, long a reliable source of support for wartime presidents, disapprove of President Bush and his handling of the war in Iraq, with a majority concluding the invasion was not worth it, a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has found.
 
The views of the military community, which includes active-duty service members, veterans and their family members, mirror those of the overall adult population, a sign that the strong military endorsement that the administration often pointed to has dwindled in the war's fifth year.
 
Nearly six out of every 10 military families disapprove of Bush's job performance and the way he has run the war, rating him only slightly better than the general population does.
 
And among those families with soldiers, sailors and Marines who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan, 60% say that the war in Iraq was not worth the cost, the same result as all adults surveyed.[..]"
 
http://tinyurl.com/22q8pm
 
And lest you wonder if they would get a different result if they'd poll the actual military members who are serving... and not just their moms or lesbian liberal aunties or whoever...
 
www.militarycity.com
 
www.stripes.com
 
As a member of one of those families I can tell you that I'm firmly in that 58% who believe our family members should be brought home now.
 
Don't be surprised if someone in a military audience boos Bush one day.
 
He has used and abused their blood, courage, sacrifice and honor.
 
And who would Bush and Cheney speak in front of then?
 
They seem to only give speeches in front of audiences that can essentially be ordered to cheer.
 
Wonder how many key speeches they'll be asked to give at the Republican National Convention? Republican candidates never even mention their names. Well, McCain said "Bush" one time in the last debate.
 
I read somewhere that Bush is convinced he will need private (Blackwater?) security after his term because so many in this country and the world dislike him so.
 
America -- what a frightful mess we've gotten you in, this administration and Congress have unraveled so much that was once so good.
 
All for greed and power for so few...
 
No terrorist could have gutted this nation so badly.
 

2007/12/7

Want to fall in love with a coyote?

Tags:
@ 05:40 AM (7 months, 5 days ago)
 
For animal lovers only: "The Daily Coyote"
 
"Charlie came into my life when he was just ten days old, orphaned after both his parents were killed. He lives with me and a tomcat in a one-room log cabin in Wyoming."
 
The photography alone is worth a visit. Start at the very bottom to see Charlie as a tiny pup.
 
http://dailycoyote.blogspot.com/
 
Yes, she's going to have her heart broken one way or the other, but I'm glad she's sharing the adventure.
 

2007/12/6

The Pentagon blocks Iran war?

@ 08:08 AM (7 months, 5 days ago)

Do we have a palace revolt here? How close is our republic to a coup de etat?
 
I'm joking, but sad to say, I might welcome it.
 
So... not only were Pentagon factions instrumental in forming the NIE conclusions, they also made sure the results were made public.
 
And how intense that message must have been to make the White House expose its own deceit and incompetence.
 
This Time article gives me hope. Some may think the Pentagon is full of rip-roarin' go-to-war guys...but it actually seems to have more sense and temperance than the White House.
 
See, the military has to actually fight these wars...not sit back and reap profits from them.
 
"Why the Pentagon Is Happy about the NIE"
 
From time.com: "The latest National Intelligence Estimate on Iran was the final factor in a military equation that now appears to guarantee that there will be no war with Iran during the Bush Administration.
 
It meshes with the views of the operational types at the Pentagon, who have steadfastly resisted the march to war led by some Administration hawks. The anti-war group was composed of Defense Secretary Robert Gates; Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs; and Admiral William Fallon, who oversees the U.S. forces that would have had to wage that war.
 
In recent months, all have pushed back privately and publicly, on the wisdom of going to war with Tehran. Indeed, the Pentagon's intelligence units were instrumental in forming the NIE's conclusions.
 
The U.S. military contributes nine of the 16 intelligence agencies whose views are cobbled together in NIEs.......Some critics have suggested that the military simply found a public way to quiet the drumbeat for war coming from Vice President Dick Cheney and his shrinking band of allies in the Administration.[..]"
 
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1691241,00.html
 
Just call it "checks and balances." How fortunate we are that the professional soldiers in the Pentagon and the professional spies in the CIA have a clear enough grasp of reality to stop a disastrous attack on Iran.
 
What kind of Democracy do we have when our march to war in Iran is blocked by a cabal of intelligence agencies and the Joint Chiefs in the Pentagon?
 
What kind of Democracy should have to depend on "Duty, Honor, Country" military types, or spooks in the intelligence community, to put country first?
 
One I'm proud of at the moment.
 

2007/12/5

Biden says Bush Had to Know

@ 08:17 AM (7 months, 6 days ago)

So far Biden is the only one who actually came right out and said Bush can't be trusted. I'm waiting for someone to contradict him....
 
<crickets chirping>
 
Kind of sad when your own party thinks you're a liar.
 
Yesterday Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden said he can't believe President Bush hasn't known for months about a recent intelligence report that downplays the nuclear threat from Iran. "I refuse to believe that," he said. "If that's true, he has the most incompetent staff in modern American history, and he's one of the most incompetent presidents in modern American history."
 
From CNN: ..."On Tuesday the president acknowledged he had given a speech warning that Iran's nuclear development risked "World War III" about two months after his intelligence chief told him a reassessment of Tehran's nuclear ambitions was under way.
 
Bush told reporters during a White House news conference that he was not told the details of the new assessment until last week and he said the new report, which found that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons work in 2003, will not change U.S. policy toward Iran.[..]"
 
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/04/bush.iran/index.html
 
When told that there were "new developments"...our glorious leader didn't even ask what they were.
 
Or he's lying again. Which is worse -- Bush thinking it looks better for him to be completely ignorant of the NIE on the country he's been talking about WWIII with, or for him to know about it but go ahead and try to scare us about WWIII anyway?
 
The Bush spin on this yesterday was absolutely surreal...he simply went into the "They could resume the nucular weapons program" mode ... unbelievable.
 
Now I want to see PROOF that Iran actually had a nuclear weapons program in the first place.
 
I didn't hear his initial speech, just some of the questions. Dang, that was painful. And did I hear him correctly...did he say the reason 'many' are concerned about Iran getting a nucular weapon is because 'companies doing business there' are worried about their 'market share'? I swear I heard that.
 
At some point the White House press corp looked like they just quit taking notes...maybe waiting for someone to come out and interpret the gibberish for them.
 
Heh..my rightie friends are all frothed up, saying it's amazing that we believed Saddam's WMD intel was wrong, wrong, wrong; but we're so ready to believe this latest Iran intel. That we can't have it both ways!
 
Maybe it's because the Bushies had 2 years and a blank check to get the intel just right before he invaded. Maybe because this NIE wasn't cherry-picked to death by neo-cons looking for just the right answer/reason for war.
 
If the CIA had been allowed to just review the intel on Iraq and make a non-partisan analysis dealing with only the facts---we might not be stuck there now.
 
Some say maybe our intel agencies sabotaged Bush and his Iran war plans because they think he's capital I-Insane.
 
Look, I certainly don't think that Iran is harmless, we need to keep a vigilant eye on what they do. I think average Iranians on the street are friendly to Americans and don't approve of Ahmadinejad and his fundamentalist theocratic regime. After all, he believes that a 2,000 y/o 12th Imam is going to climb out of a well and lead them all to glory. He also wishes he could wipe Israel off the face of the map...
 
So, there just has to be a happy medium between Cheney's rush to bomb them and us linking arms and singing Kum-Bay-Yah with Ahmadinejad.
 

2007/12/4

So much for Iran's 'nucular ambitions'

@ 06:53 AM (7 months, 7 days ago)

Well, seems ALL SIXTEEN of our government's spy agencies report that Iran stopped trying to build nuclear weapons about four years ago....
 
Hmm...wasn't that not long after we invaded Iraq? Wouldn't it be ironic that Republicans can now point to something positive that, at least *circumstantially*, came out of the Iraq war?
 
The bad news is that they just lost their boogyman.
 
I knew something was in the air when we went a whole week without Bill Kristol and the "Weekly Standard" calling for an attack because Iran posed a clear and imminent danger to us.
 
From nytimes.com: WASHINGTON, Dec. 3 — A new assessment by American intelligence agencies concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that the program remains frozen, contradicting judgment two years ago that Tehran was working relentlessly toward building a nuclear bomb.
 
....The assessment, a National Intelligence Estimate that represents the consensus view of all 16 American spy agencies, states that Tehran is likely keeping its options open with respect to building a weapon, but that intelligence agencies “do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.”[..]
 
http://tinyurl.com/24brva
 
Hmm...so Iran was just sabre-rattling ...just like Saddam did about his WMD's. I guess when you're a little dog you have to bark more fiercely so the big dog down the block doesn't try to take your bone.
 
Another hmm...maybe all of our sabre-rattling and threats and bullying were designed to get Iran to RESTART its program.......
 
Wonder how long the Bushies continued to ratchet up the rhetoric on Iran after they knew these NIE findings, after the intelligence agencies concluded there was likely no ‘there’ there?
 
The RNC was heard to exclaim: "Well hell, how are we going to sell this war then? You know we have no hope of winning an election without scaring everybody about war!"
 
Thank goodness that crazy Cheney wasn't able to get his way! He and Bush used the WMD scare as a justification for invading Iraq--suffering tens of thousands of casualties, bankrupting our treasury and destroying the value of the dollar....etc. etc. etc.
 
Hey, if we don't face a threat of immediate annihilation, when will we stop bankrupting ourselves?
 
Yep, these new findings will put a little hitch in the Bushies' giddy-up-and-go war plans. Preznit is going to speak to us today, someone will surely ask him about it. However will he spin it?  He could declare victory and say it was his "tough stance" that brought this about...OR...he could use these latest findings to further his agenda of isolating Iran from the rest of the world with even tougher sanctions, etc.
 
And here the Iranian Preznit Whoosit has been saying all along that Iran wasn't pursuing a nuke... while our Preznit has been saying they were.
 
Pretty funny when their religious wacko Preznit is more truthful than our religious wacko Preznit.
 
You know, a few days after the 9/11 disaster, Iran had one of the largest marches in support of the American people and against terrorism...I saw it on TV with my own eyes, people lighting candles for us in a huge Tehran square. But George W. Bush in his infinite wisdom quickly turned their support into distrust and hate, along with most of the rest of the world.
 
Well, we the people do not have access to intelligence reports...or a network of spies compiling data that we can analyze. But we DO have access to enough open information and our own common sense...and a majority of us were saying all along, over and over again, that this Bush administration was lying to us. And we were right.
 
Like Bush once said so eloquently--"Fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me...you can't get fooled again."
 

2007/12/3

Road to Addiction Can Start in Iraq

Tags:
@ 07:24 AM (7 months, 8 days ago)

ABC News is out with a very important report that the military is overmedicating soldiers in a rush to get them back in the field.
 
ABC claims that this dependence on drugs sometimes leads soldiers to rely on other drugs, including illegal ones, leading to a rising addiction rate.
 
From abcnews.com: "Instead of providing proper counseling and care for Iraq war veterans suffering from physical and psychological pain, too often the U.S. military is trying to medicate the problem away, according to drug counselors and therapists.
 
Andrew Pogany, who works with service members nationwide as an investigator with the veterans advocacy group Veterans for America, said overmedicating veterans is a common problem.
 
"Pretty much every person in my caseload is medicated, heavily medicated," said Pogany. "There's potential for them to become addicted."
 
According to Pogany, a reliance on prescription drugs often leads veterans to reach for other coping mechanisms -- illegal drugs such as marijuana, cocaine and crystal meth. [..]"
 
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=3936723&page=1
 
Everybody wins! Those embarrassing pesky vets are medicated up the wazoo and out of sight... and Big Pharma wins Big Bucks in government contracts.
 
This isn’t just about vets... but about active duty soldiers in the battle arena! We’ve got a bunch of over-deployed, over-stressed kids with guns roaming around Iraq who are also over-medicated with narcotics and psychoactive drugs. What could go wrong!
 
What will happen when they are back home roaming our streets? We need to get them all the help they need NOW.
 
One thing that's scary -- the military traditionally under-provides for psych services for veterans... and there are still negative consequences for anyone who dares admit psychiatric problems. Soldiers don't cry in their sleep!
 
Not all vets turn to illicit drugs to help them cope...I've know some to drink to ease the pain.
 
Our military needs to admit that battlefield experience can lead to trauma, as in PTSD. When a soldier has his leg blown off, we know the “cause” of his pain; but his buddy who witnessed it, and maybe saw his best friend blown to bits, has a certain kind of pain too.
 
I know of one who can't sleep very well and has terrible nightmares. Wakes up in sweats and shouting, which is very disturbing to his wife. Before Iraq he was a very easy going person, but now, 4 years after coming home, he's irritable all the time...and has suicidal thoughts. He has such an intense anxiety in open spaces that when he's out in public he can't function, so he stays in his house all the time. He put in a disability claim 3 years ago and is still waiting...while his family suffers financially.
 
The Vietnam vets can tell you a sad story. Back then they called it "battle fatigue"... I personally knew one who took a shotgun to end his pain.
 
It's shameful that it took until 1980 for the Army, DOD and politicians to admit that the new diagnosis of PTSD was a REAL medical problem. But, nothing seems to be any better now.
 
The VA created the National Center for PTSD and spent millions of dollars on research... but in reality the military still treats soldiers with PTSD symptoms the same now as they did in the 60's and 70's.
 
How well do you know your facts about US veterans returning from Iraq or Afghanistan? Take the War Comes Home "Did You Know?" quiz and find out:
 
http://warcomeshome.org/node/47/quiz/start
 

2007/12/2

Karl Rove lied? I am shocked! Shocked!

@ 07:03 AM (7 months, 9 days ago)

I see that my favorite nemesis, Karl Rove, is still telling whoppers. A few days ago he let go with a big one -- telling a national TV audience that it was Congress, not the Bush White House, that was hell-bent on a resolution to go to war.
 
From the Washington Post: "Former White House aide Karl Rove said yesterday it was Congress, not President Bush, who wanted to rush a vote on the looming war in Iraq in the fall of 2002, a version of events disputed by leading congressional Democrats and even some former Rove colleagues.
 
Rove said that the administration did not want lawmakers to vote on a resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq that soon because it would "make things move too fast," before Bush could line up international allies, and politicize the issue ahead of midterm elections. But Democrats and some Republicans involved with the issue at the time said yesterday that Bush wanted a quick vote.[..]"
 
http://tinyurl.com/yomj5e
 
Rove's former colleague WH Chief of Staff Andy Card said not only is Rove wrong, but added, "Sometimes his mouth gets ahead of his brain."
 
Former WH Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said, “It was definitely the Bush administration that set it in motion and determined the timing, not the Congress,” he said. “I think Karl in this instance just has his facts wrong."
 
And former Bush counselor Dan Bartlett added, "This is the first time I've ever heard Karl say that."
 
When confronted with these statements, Rove did just what we'd expect him to do -- he repeated the lie as if reality had no meaning. Because that was one of the things he did best in the WH--repeat a lie so often that people eventually believe it.
 
Notice how WaPo pussy-foots around...it gets my goat when supposedly reputable news organizations are too chicken to challenge political lies. The "assertion" is NOT "in dispute" -- it's a flat-out lie. And Rove is NOT trying to "shape" history -- he's falsifying it, making it up.
 
Want proof? Here's what Bush said at a press conference with reporters on September 19, 2002:
 
"QUESTION: Mr. President, are you going to send Congress your proposed resolution today? And are you asking for a blank check, sir?
 
THE PRESIDENT: I am sending suggested language for a resolution. I want -- I've asked for Congress' support to enable the administration to keep the peace. And we look forward to a good, constructive debate in Congress. I appreciate the fact that the leadership recognizes we've got to move before the elections. I appreciate the strong support we're getting from both Republicans and Democrats, and look forward to working with them."
 
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020919-1.html
 
It's plain to see that Bush himself sent the war resolution to Congress and called for action before the elections.
 
Yep -- what Rove said is false, wrong, a lie. No doubt about it.
 
Brace yourself, this could be just the first wave of them trying to 'clean up' Bush's legacy.
 
No wonder George W. and Rove are twinseys ...looks like neither one of them will EVER admit they were wrong about ANYTHING.
 
But, the American people know. Just look at the polls--70 percent of the people in this country sure don’t see Bush as credible. Wonder why that is?
 
Could it have anything to do with six years of relentless lying by this White House... led by Karl Rove?
 
This morning on FOX News Sunday the chairman of the DCCC is going to discuss all this with Rove. He'll try make Rove prove himself ...hopefully Rove will just bray louder and look like a jackass. It might be worth watching.
 

2007/12/1

Whew! I thought some wingnut had snapped

@ 08:01 AM (7 months, 10 days ago)

"ROCHESTER, N.H. -- A hostage situation at the Rochester headquarters of the Hillary Clinton campaign ended with a man's arrest Friday evening.
 
Leeland Eisenberg, of Somersworth, N.H., was immediately arrested after exiting the office and told to kneel and then lie on the ground before police placed handcuffs on him. Moments earlier, a young man believed to be the third and final hostage was released.
 
Police said Eisenberg took hostages at the office on 28 North Main St. Friday afternoon. Foster's Daily Democrat reported that Eisenberg is well known to police in Rochester.[..]"
 
http://www.wmur.com/news/14737868/detail.html
 
Boy, this guy will NEVER get off the NO-FLY list now....
 
I know he was only a nutter with road flares and duct tape... but this is upsetting on different levels, not just for those staffers but the precedent it could set for our political process.
 
Let's hope that this won't initiate any copy-cat tricks by other nutcases. That would really affect the openness of all campaigns...of everyone. I wouldn't wish this on a Republican, Libertarian, Green ... ANYone.
 
CNN reported that this guy was upset over the trouble he has been having getting mental health treatment.
 
WMUR reported that he has a history of mental illness. He supposedly told his son to "watch the news" today.
 
Law enforcement is to be commended for the way they handled this... waiting it out. This guy needs help, and hopefully they'll get him off the streets.
 
Hillary is not my candidate, but I liked her cool and compassionate response---he's someone desperately in need of help, who sought it in absolutely the wrong way.
 
It was also appropriate that Hillary went to Portsmouth, NH to meet with the police and the families of those volunteers. I think she behaved like a president should behave at a time like this.
 
A plus side of this hostage-taking episode is bringing attention to the piss-poor mental health care in this country. I read that 1 in 4 Americans has a family member with a mental illness.
 
If people like this could only get help BEFORE they decide to get on the news in a manic episode, BEFORE they progress to the batshit crazy stage....
 
CNN deserves praise for their coverage of the situation...they absolutely did the right thing by not publicly reporting that the hostage-taker had called the CNN newsroom until AFTER the situation was over.
 
On MSNBC a criminal profile guy said the hostage taker was a Libertarian ...Fox News reported the same thing.
 
I'm wondering what's so important about the guy being a Libertarian. I have slight Libertarian leanings (especially on the social side), but that doesn't mean I'm inclined to make bomb threats.
 
I'm sorry to hear his political leanings were revealed at all... but I guess it was inevitable considering the hostage situation took place at a political office. It was going to be asked and speculated about anyway.
 
Interesting that he chose Clinton's office. Edwards was just a few doors down and has a better health care plan.