Dave v. Rodan

This Means War: Class Warfare According to the Numbers

2011-10-01T17:19:00.007-05:00

We are occupying Wall Street, they are calling for austerity measures and an end to social welfare programs. It would be a mistake to think that we are not in the midst of direct class warfare. The numbers tell the tale:
1) One-fifth of Union activists are fired when trying to organize their workplace.
2) 75% of companies hire professional Union busters to coerce organizing employees.
3) The gap between the rich and the poor is the biggest it has ever been in the United States
4) The richest 1% of Americans had 18% of all wealth in the age of the robber barons, circa 1915. The richest 1% of Americans have 24% of all wealth today.
5) 15% of Americans “run short on food,” what the government calls having “low food security”
6) 1 in 7 Americans is on food stamps.
7) The Wealthy have launched a successful campaign to take away funding from OSHA, the Federal Agency in charge of maintaining workplace safety.
8) 2/3 of military recruits come from households where the income is below the national median
9) All of the Army's top 20 recruiting counties have lower-than-national median incomes
10) All GOP presidential candidates want to abolish the Department of Education or “or seriously diminish its function.” Abolishing the Department of Education has aorically be part of the GOP platform.
11) 16.7% of Americans do not have health insurance, a record high.
12) 15% of Americans live in poverty.
13) 22% of American children live in poverty.
14) Through 2010 and 2011, corporate profits have been at record highs.
15) For the first time in US history, the percentage of national income devoted to wages and salaries fell below 50%- Corporation(and their stockholders) now make more than their workers
16) The Median wage worker pays 8% more of their income in taxes than the top 1%
17) Corporations pay 12% of their profits to taxes.
18) The US has the highest child poverty rate in the industrial world.

September 11, 2001: What It Means 10 Years Later.

2011-09-07T17:30:00.010-05:00

We are on the eve of the 10th anniversary of September 11, 2001. The nation is poised to memorialize the attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and United Flight 91, but there is no clarity in how we plan to mark the occasion. On September 11, 2001, the nation was joined in shock, fear, anger and empathy. Ten years later, those events have not stayed in focus as a clear, shared experience with a single meaning. How, as a nation, is it appropriate to memorialize these attacks, and the events that have followed in these past 10 years?

I see three parts to this question: what September 11, 2001 means to Americans as an experience, what have we done since September 11, 2001 as a result of those events, and what do we want to do to memorialize September 11, 20011?

September 11th does not- cannot-mean - the same thing to all Americans. To some three thousand families, it means the loss of a loved one. For a city, it means remembering a time of real personal fear. For many more, a time of heroism and courage. For the nation as a whole it means a feeling of vulnerability- a feeling which has lessened for most but not all. For some Americans it meant a fear, mistrust and anger that did not subside. So for some, the day is about memories of those who perished, and the first responders who ran towards collapsing buildings while others ran away. For others, a significant portion of Americans, September 11th means something more sinister, the beginning of a new world tainted by terror- external and internal.

Since September 11, 2001, we have commenced an endless war. A war against an an amorphous, faceless, stateless enemy, and as much as anything else, an idea: terror. Afghanistan is America’s longest war. While we have "drawn down” combat operations in Iraq, there is still a significant troop presence. Foreign policy discussions often hinge on which Middle Eastern nations is the next potential contender as a host state to our next military adventure. Drone bombings continue in Pakistan, and have left thousands dead. Americans have willingly relinquished myriad civil rights, allowing for the inception and renewal of The Patriot Act, allowing and even advocating torture, extraordinary rendition, “black sites” all over the world, the use of Guantanamo Bay and secret military tribunals, and severely increased domestic surveillance.

At the same time, our troops are captive in endless tours of duty. When they return as veterans, they are cast aside, receiving insufficient care and benefits. So too are the first responders from September 11, 2001, cast aside. Their persistent medical and psychological problems are ignored and uncared for, their repayment for their service are empty honorifics.

We have demonized a religion. We have fought a sloppy war, both on the battlefield and in the public mind, against Islam. Where before there was no understanding, now there is misunderstanding. We have, out of carelessness, cast ourselves as enemies of a diverse, complex and multifarious religion, and abandoned our national identity as civil libertarians.

When we look at what we have done since September 11, 2001, we see we are no better. We are worse.

How will we honor the 10th anniversary of September 11, 2001? Will we talk collectively about where we were? Will we watch cable news run handheld footage of rolling plumes of dust carpeting lower Manhattan and ceaseless replays of the impact of the planes? Will we celebrate our victories over cloudy enemies we have only half conceived? I believe we will. But we also have an imperative to examine who we are after these attacks, and take serious stock of where we want to be. We do not want to be worse in 10 years, we want to be better.

An Email Forward: Pass It On

2011-09-05T13:52:00.002-05:00

Even If you don't like the NSA..You will love them for these tips. Read this and make a copy for your files in case you need to refer to it someday. Maybe we should all take some of his advice! A National Security Agent sent the following out to the employees in his department:

1. Do not sign leave the antennas on your car, cell phone or radio extended when not it use.

2. If you get new license plates, DO NOT accept plates that begin with the number 7. Trust me, especially if the plate ends in the LETTER D.

3. If you are in a hospital or airport and here a PAGE FOR “DOCTOR LIU” leave immediately!!! THERE IS NO DOCTOR LIU!!

4. Place the contents of your wallet on a photocopy machine.
Do both sides of each license, credit card, etc. You will know what you had in your wallet and all of the account numbers and phone numbers to call and cancel. Keep the photocopy in a safe place. Make sure it is encased in metal.

5. Have you seen that car before? YES.

6. If a police officer comes to your door, here's what is perhaps most important of all: (I never even thought to do this): BURN your toothbrush, comb and nail clippers in the sink.

We pass along jokes on the Internet; we pass along just about everything.

If you are willing to pass this information along, it could really
help someone that you care about.

Labor Day: Justice is Never Given

2011-09-04T14:25:00.003-05:00

Labor Day finds us unprepared. Our country is in the midst of a debate as to whether or not it has a place for organized labor. Despite soaring corporate profits and sagging wages, working Americans have not made up their minds. When contemplating the fate of organized labor, the American mind is clouded by misstatements, fear, and resentments, and organized labor is cowed by decades of defeats and internal struggles. And so on Labor Day, 2011, those who wish to disenfranchise the American worker speak with one clear, full throated voice, and must argue only against muted static. Today, then, we must remember the origin of Labor Day, and recall that respect for working people is not given, but must be demanded.
Labor Day’s roots lay in the rail yards, which, in the 1890s, were America’s beating heart. No highways had been laid, and industry, commerce and agricultural needs were all fed by rail. The robber barons who made the steel and ran the rails owned that heart. One such man was George Pullman, owner of the Pullman Company, which built and staffed railcars. Pullman, like his cohort, offered no dignity to those who labored to finance his success.
Pullman’s abuses went deep. In the 1880s, Pullman built a company town outside of Chicago for his workers, Pullman, Illinois. There, workers labored and lived under their employer’s total control. Pullman owned the houses, the schools, the churches, the shops and the libraries. Wages and expenses simply looped in and out of his hands, and, as one employee said, “We are born in a Pullman house, fed from the Pullman shops, taught in the Pullman school, catechized in the Pullman Church, and when we die we shall go to the Pullman Hell." Pullman left no part of his workers’ lives out of his control, from lifestyle to name. Pullman banned alcohol from his town. All the porters who Pullman hired to staff his cars were African-American, and Pullman dictated that they all answer to “George,” his name, when working (of course, harkening back to America’s then recent abolition of slavery, where slaves were forced to adopt a master’s name).
In 1893, like today, the economy took a drastic hit. Pullman slashed wages, but left prices for rents and goods untouched in his company town, and still demanded employees work standard 16 hour days. Workers organized, and demanded audience with Pullman, which he refused. The organized workers shut down Pullman, and in June of 1894, nearly every railway worker refused to handle Pullman cars, in sympathy with their fellow workers. The country ground to a halt, and the strikers swelled with power. Industry mobilized: corporate functionaries were deputized by the Federal government, and the military and US Marshalls were sent to break the strike, attacking the strikers and sending 13 strikers to the morgue and 57 workers to the hospital.
Outrage was so severe, and voice of labor was so united that the government sought to assuage the labor by Codifying a day of national of honor for American organized labor and its achievements; “legislation was rushed unanimously through both houses of Congress, and the bill arrived on President Cleveland's desk just six days after his troops had broken the Pullman strike.” The rails were the first to organize industry-wide, and they still enjoy unique protections in safety, labor regulations, and union density. In later years, actions by the Porters, still then named “George,” developed into not just victories for labor but civil rights, growing power, leadership and consciousness that blossomed in the 1960s, when civil rights made unparalleled strides.

This year, on Labor Day, the future for American organized labor is unclear. As we celebrate, we must remember that this day was earned through great collective action. The Pullman Porters serve as but one reminder that American labor has had to—and must continue to—fight for every victory. As the leader of the later Porters’ Strike, A. Philip Randolph said, “Justice is never given; it is exacted and the struggle must be continuous for freedom is never a final fact, but a continuing evolving process to higher and higher levels of human, social, economic, political and religious relationship.” Labor Day is no gift; get out there and fight!

I'm Just Saying

2010-11-11T07:59:00.004-06:00

Nissan Alternatives to "The Leaf"

2010-11-07T16:26:00.006-06:00

Nissan is releasing its first electric car, the Nissan Leaf. There couldn't really be a less marketable or macho name for a car. Or Could there? Presented below are the top 10 alternatives to the Nissan Leaf:

10) The Nissan Mathlete
9) The Nissan Poem
8) The Nissan Patchouli
7) The Nissan Erudition
6) The Nissan Stamen
5) The Nissan Debutante
4) The Nissan Snuggle
3) The Nissan Mediator
2) The Nissan Allergen
1) The Nissan Gay (registered trademarked by budding homophobe Ron Howard)

Why the Midterms Don't Mean Anything At All

2010-11-07T09:57:00.002-06:00

The Republican gains in the November 2, 2010 mid-terms don’t mean anything for seven reasons:
1) The party in power gets walloped in every midterm; these numbers are actually not historic.
2) Incumbents in general get walloped when the economy is in dire straits, which again, is not a great political indicator.
3) The house was disproportionately flush with democrats who rode Obama’s coattails in 2008, this was a foreseeable self-correction.
4) The Republicans failed to capture the senate, which many Republicans predicted. Hell, they couldn’t even beat Harry Reid, who is less appealing than a flesh eating virus. The senate has, historically, greater stability than the Senate; the Republican’s failure to win it shows not only a moving bar measuring success, but a show of proof that larger, less “particularized” voting blocks are not engaging in a referendum on Obama.
5) The Blue Dog democrats were obliterated, and two-third of the tea-party candidates lost their races. This means the election was not a clear move right, or to the center. What does it mean, if not a move right or center? See numbers 1 and 2.
6) The Republicans don’t have a plan. Really, they don’t. “The Pledge to America” is cutting taxes and repealing health care. Democrats have cut taxes for middle-America already, in the Stimulus and in general. That means the only tax cuts left are for those making $250,000 or more. And repealing the healthcare bill would take a sizeable majority in both the house and the senate, which the Republicans do not have. In fact, Republicans can’t do anything they want because they don’t have both houses.
7) The Republicans had a “take their ball and go home” attitude before the midterms, using the Senate’s filibuster to stop every piece of legislation they could. Having the house doesn’t even mean they can stop more legislation. From a practical standpoint it really doesn’t change anything.

So, there you have it. The win is a historically predictable midterm election in a flagging economy, and the Republicans lack the power to do anything. And since Republicans stopped all they could with the filibuster, the gains in the house aren’t a game changer. It just means that the next two years are a wash. Two more years of watching Obama continue to reach out to Republicans and get scorned for it will help all the Democrats along with Obama in 2012.

Why Glenn Beck's Populism Means He Must Attack SEIU

2010-11-06T15:36:00.003-05:00

Glenn Beck attacks the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) a lot. He attacks SEIU nearly daily on his radio and cable news shows. SEIU represents a special place in Glen Beck’s web of progressive conspirators who wish ill on America. Why? Who is SEIU and why are they an important enemy for Glenn Beck and his world view?

SEIU Represents Working People, Mostly Working Women of Color
SEIU is one of the largest labor unions in the country, representing nearly two million workers in the health care, child care, janitorial and private security fields, as well as in the public sector. SEIU, focused on the ever growing service industry, is the fastest growing union in the country. The membership is largely comprised of women and people of color.

Glenn Becks Audience is Rich, White Men
Glenn Beck holds himself out to be a populist who represents the disenfranchised American. Glenn Beck’s audience is rich, white, college educated and childless males (95% white, 60% male, 72% college educated, 60% with a household income above $60,000, and 37% with an a household income above $100,000, 75% childless). How do you make rich white men the most disenfranchised group in the country? How do you argue that defending the interest of the empowered minority is true populism? By explaining away the group that defends the disenfranchised.

Beck Claims SEIU is Not Like Normal Unions; SEIU Has a Hidden Agenda
Beck explains, “[SEIU] represents 2.2 million people. There are 3 million who watch this show.” When a guest attacked the Steel Workers and Auto Unions, Beck pushed back, stating that he is "against unions, but not all unions." Beck is careful to differentiate between the largely white and abandoned industrial/factory unions and the new, service oriented SEIU. Beck warns that SEIU is unlike other unions, a part of a shadowy cabal of progressive institutions that threaten the safety and fabric of American life. On October 25, 2010 Beck called out SEIU, alleging that “every day we are unmasking villains.”

Glenn Beck Claims SEIU Does Not Represent the People, But a Shadow Conspiracy
In the attack on liberal groups that Beck dubbed “Crime, Inc.,” which led California highway shooter Byron Williams to seek to murder liberal activists, Beck named SEIU an important pillar in the liberal plot to destroy America. On September 13, 2010 Beck cautioned, “[t]here are those people that really want this to collapse, and they are planning on violence. They're planning on it -- we've already shown you. We've already seen it with SEIU.” Beck, claiming that SEIU is “awakening a sleeping giant,” threatening a “revolution,” states “you will have to shoot me in the forehead before I acquiesce and be silent."
In this week’s midterms, Beck warned that “SEIU [is] rigging voting machines.” On September 1, 2010 Beck threatened that “SEIU is going to come and deliver a beatdown to you if you are at a tea party,” and he has stated that "even the Boy Scouts aren't safe from SEIU's thuggery."
Beck recently attacked SEIU, again, by name, on September 21, 2010, warning “values of Union bosses… don’t match up with your values, and I am talking to Union members. … It is about a global idea of moving wealth around out of your pocket into the pocket of workers in third world nations.” Beck warns against “SEIU’s message,” calling it “Communist, Marxist, propaganda” and pleading that “we don't want to become a socialist nation.” Just because he attacks the leaders does not mean, however, that Beck is not also attacking the members of SEIU.

Glenn Beck Claims SEIU Members Are Thugs and Terrorists
Beck attacks the members of SEIU themselves. On November 8, 2009, Beck tweeted of SEIU, “It nvr has been members that bother me. Leadership & Thugs that R poisons NOT average members.” A few months later Beck called SEIU members “"burnout, loser hippies," and compared the members to al Qaeda suicide bombers, contending that “you'll notice that people in al Qaeda, the leaders never blow themselves up. They just get the youth to do it…. Well here you have SEIU and SDS in bed in California, or I mean in Arizona. Here you have these grand leaders ... that, you know, they did their tour of duty. Now it's the young. And they'll reap all of the benefits."

Without Delegitimizing SEIU, Glenn Beck is No Populist
In his invocation of terrorism and “thuggery,” and in his claim that SEIU, unlike “other” Unions who are less “radical,” Beck is tapping into a covert racism to draw distinctions between his wealthy white viewers and the “thugs” whose shadow plan is to redistribute their wealth. In so doing, Beck seeks to validate his audiences’ feelings of victimization and to delegitimize SEIU and its members’ status as underdogs. This reversal of roles is necessary to Beck’s populism. If SEIU is not a shadow conspiracy to violently redistribute wealth, Beck’s claims that the wealthy need to be protected from the working poor sounds outrageous.

Open Letter to Hammer, Editor of the Horse BC

2010-06-24T13:30:00.002-05:00

Hammer:
I am writing in response to your recent article, “One Tin Soldier.” You raised four topics in your article, Arizona’s law, the rise of Islam in America, giving awards for avoiding collateral damage in Afghanistan and our government’s attacks on our freedoms. Your article got me thinking, so I put pen to paper to write a response to the ideas you raised.

Arizona’s Law
First, it seems strange to talk about how proud we, as bikers are, of our outlaw heritage, and then to support an increase of police powers to stop, card and detain anybody in the State of Arizona. Second, it seems plain weird for our community, as patriotic as we are, to embrace a law that is unconstitutional both because of the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee of search and seizure rights, as well as preempting federal law. In the recent past you have alluded to your background in legal studies; I am sure I am not telling you anything you don’t already realize.
Third, so what if people support the law? What have we, as a community, ever cared about public opinion on anything? 59% support a law that takes away our constitutional right to not get hassled by the cops? They may not understand it, or it proves our long held belief that mainstream society values its freedoms less than we do. I know I don’t want to give cops more rights to stop, search and detain me than they have now, and I am surprised you do.

Finally, the law is racist. One third of Arizona’s population is Hispanic; 70% of the Hispanic population was born in the United States, and of course, not all of the 30% foreign born Hispanics are undocumented immigrants. Roughly 10% of Arizona’s workforce is undocumented. Despite the fact that the 12 page law prohibits “racial profiling” five times, racial profiling is implicit in the enforcement of the law. There has never been an assertion of how a police officer- in the border state where nearly every undocumented immigrant is Mexican- is to tell an undocumented immigrant from an Arizona resident other than their looking Mexican. We are a straight shooting group, so lets’ be honest: the law targets Mexicans for looking Mexicans, and we shouldn’t support that sort of bullshit.

The Islamization of America
You say that we are facing “the Islamization of America.” According to the Pew 9who you cite in defense of the Arizona law) only 0.8% of Americans are Muslim. The Muslim population growth rate is 0.9%. Pentecostals, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Adventists are bigger groups in America who are growing faster and there are 3 times as many atheists and they are growing 24 times faster. So the concern about that Muslim neighborhoods are “mushrooming” in America is not legitimate.
You also say that “Islam has declared war on the U.S.” This would surprise Muslims. There are Muslims in the U.S. and in every country we are allied with, as well as a number of Muslim countries who are supporting us in our war against terror. Do not forget that Al-Qaeda has launched more attacks against Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia than the U.S., and count Iran as an enemy as hated as the U.S.
Islam is not at war with America, but some Muslims are. And just like all Hispanics are not illegal immigrants, all Muslims are not terrorists. And like the Arizona law, to say that “we will live to regret” allowing legal Muslim immigrants into the U.S., as you suggest, is racist.

Collateral Damage
You also say in your article that soldiers should not get awards for preventing civilian causalities in combat. You say this is the same as giving a bike builder a trophy not to build a bike. Really? Soldiers’ main purpose is killing civilians? They would be surprised to hear that. Most would say that their job is to kill enemy soldiers, and that killing civilians is collateral damage, like when a bike builder hits his thumb with a hammer. You said you were in Vietnam, so I have to assume that you were simply using this as an excuse to attack the politics behind the award, rather than thinking killing civilians is a reasonable goal in war. We have the best fighting force in the world here in the U.S. Our soldiers are the best trained the most disciplined and the most honorable soldiers in the world. Our fighting men and women are stuck in the middle of nowhere fighting for their lives against an enemy that blends in with the population – just like in Vietnam- and being able to kill the enemy while sparing- while protecting- the population a part of what makes them so damned great at what they do. Why on earth would you oppose giving them a medal for it?

Recent Restrictions in Freedom by the Government
Finally, in your tirade against our current government you say “the only laws the government wants to enforced are those against its citizens” and that they want to “clamp down on our freedoms.”
Here is a list of the current administration’s accomplishments, you tell me which one limits the freedoms of citizens: a stimulus package that, according to the CBO, saved or added between 800,000 to 2.4 million jobs, expanded SCHIP to cover 4 million more lower-income children, passed a bill to expanding the rights of workers to sue for wage discrimination claims, passed regulations on the credit card industry to protect consumers, passed a law to regulate the private student loan industry, passed Health Care Reform making health care available to 30 million uninsured Americans, allowed guns in federal parks, ended the media blackout on war casualties, covers the expenses of families of fallen soldiers to come to Dover AFB, bailed out GM upon GM’s request (who has nearly paid the government back), stopped torture as defined by the Geneva Convention, to which the USA is a signatory), began providing increased body armor to the troops, reengaged the US in nuclear test ban and environmental protection treaties, got Iran to give up its weaponized Uranium to US allies, passed the Cap in Trade bill which forces industry to pay for excess pollution, passed a bill ending previous policy of offering tax benefits to corporations who outsource American jobs, improved pay, benefits and housing for military personnel, increased spending to improve Walter Reed Army Hospital, improved benefits for veterans, increased government loans to small business, ended no-bid military contracts. Oh, and he signed a bill into law giving tax credits for motorcycle purchases.
Of course the previous administration tapped domestic phones, abandoned habeas corpus, put surveillance in places of worship and held Americans indefinitely without trial, all found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. This makes your “disturbing trend” accusations sound hollow.
I like your magazine, and can’t tell you not to talk about politics in it. Hell, I don’t ever want to tell somebody that they shouldn’t say what’s on their mind. Freedom of speech, you know, another value we all share. Anyway, you should definitely keep speaking your mind, and for the same reason I am glad you did, I felt I had to respond.
Thanks for reading. Keep the shiny side up.

In Solidarity,

Dave Cann

In Defense of Helen Thomas

2010-06-10T11:36:00.002-05:00

Helen Thomas said, when asked, that Jews should go home to Europe and America and leave Israel to the Palestinians. Her ideas have been subjected to criticism, but surprisingly, have not found any defenders. Is it that nobody agrees or is it that our dialogue on Israel is too narrow to allow such criticism? I assert that we need this criticism, both as a country that values a vibrant national dialogue and as a country that, by general consensus, supports Israel.
Helen Thomas had a responsibility to articulate this position. Columnists, academics and professional thinkers hold a special position in society. There role is to be critical analysts, take on sacred cows and advance debate for the general welfare. Thomas had a responsibility to give her beliefs voice in her work; she has not. By failing to champion her beliefs in the past she has left her positions and the public discourse underserved both by failing to craft a well reasoned defense for her ideas and by presenting them so clumsily when she chose to propose them extemporaneously.
Further, those that agree with her have a responsibility to defend her statement. It is inconceivable that no public thinkers agree that Jews should leave the Middle East. Why are they silencing themselves? When the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, published cartoons of Muhammad, lovers of free speech defended the paper. Where are they today? I think I know the answer to this, and it is twofold: those who agree are in engaged in self-censorship, and the critics of those who would suggest Jews should leave the Middle East have done themselves a disservice. The criticism, while arguable, is a valid one. Whether we support Israel or its critics in this argument, we must nourish the debate.
I support the Jews presence in the Middle East, and existence of Israel; however, I do not believe the decision to colonize (there were very few Jews in Palestine before 1870- there were very few people in Palestine- but those that were there were almost all gentiles) was a good decision. Uganda would have been a better choice, as suggested in 1903. I know that once the Holocaust began, Jews found no quarter, but really most places would have provided a more welcoming home. I like to joke that I believe in a Jewish State, and that State is Florida; claims of ancient historical and religious privilege on both sides strike me as absurd. And let us not be mistaken: the Israeli’s are colonists.
I have heard the criticism that Jews should leave Israel and “go home” is akin to statements that Latino and African-American’s should “go home.” I do not believe this to be an apt analogy; it would be more congruous to say “American’s should get out of the Native American’s home and go back to Europe.” The argument shares the same inaccuracies but it also shares the same broad outlines of truth: both groups colonized and disposed the native peoples of their country. Like Israel, the US was carved out through a combination of war, both just and unjust engagements, and the movement of native peoples at times voluntary, at times involuntary.
The defender’s of Israel can make the case that the State should exist, but to deny it’s spotty history- a history shared by all colonial powers- means they must always share the stage with the looming presence of that denial, and will always lack the seriousness of argument that comes with obfuscation and half-told history. If supporters of Israel demand an honest appraisal of its colonial history, an end to the settlements and the system of apartheid forced on the Palestinians, they can give full throated support unclouded by injustices. Now, they cannot.
Finally, I do not believe that all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic, or that all critics of Israel are called anti-Semitic. By allowing this deafening silence for supporters of Thomas’s statements, however, we are fostering the idea that the national dialogue is too toxic to allow Israeli criticism. If we value free speech, if we want to criticize Israel fairly or even to defend Israel fairly we must foster an open and full debate of its history and its actions.

Ridley Scott’s Robin Hood: A Spoiler Sandwich

2010-05-15T09:50:00.003-05:00

Do you know the difference between Robin Hood and Sarah Palin? If you answered no, you just might be Ridley Scott. Scott’s reimagining of Robin Hood borrows so little from the original legend that most buzz of the movie is based upon its departure from the script, but its real novelty lies in its political underpinnings. The story is a new one: it begins in roughly 2003.

Robin Hood is an archer in Richard the Lionheart’s army, returning from a middle eastern crusade that has bankrupted the kingdom both financially and morally. When Richard the Lionheart falls in battle, the crown falls to his younger brother, John, who is an effete (and mysteriously swarthy) upstart, who is literally in bed with the French (the niece of the King of France, a “betrayal” of the Kingdom). John announces a plan to increase taxes on a population we are shown to be taxed into starvation. Oh, the taxes. Medieval trickle-down economics anyone?

Maid Marion, a war widow, tends to the family estate. She works the fields and frets over trying to care for her peasants despite voracious tax collectors stripping the estates wealth. King John does not heed the he warnings of the court that his new taxes will be bleeding a stone”- harming not just the wealth of the estate holders but those poor peasants who depend on their largesse. Remember: the “Tea” in Tea Party stands for “taxed enough already.” Tax the rich, and the poor starve. Without the capitalist’s beneficence, we are all at a loss. Who is John Galt, indeed?!

When the government comes to collect wealth from a noble, he laments he has nothing left to give, they have taken it already: they commence to sack his castle, burn his land and murder the peasants. The evil tax collector, when trying to rape (literally) Maid Marion, espouses Obama’s alleged philosophy of wealth redistribution: “No one person should have 4,000 Acres.”

Robin Hood Galvanizes the overtaxed nobles to support the King in a war against the French on the condition that the King agree to halt taxation without representation. He also throws in some strangely specific demands for rights, like due process, and, why not, several mentions of liberty and a demand for a written constitution. Only when the Government refuses these rights does Robin Hood accept his patriotic duty to take up arms against his over-taxing oppressors.
This Robin Hood does not rob from the rich and give to the poor. He takes up arms against the government for overtaxing the rich, and therefore, starving the poor. There is a quote, “you cannot help the poor by destroying the rich,” recently and falsely attributed to Abraham Lincoln. Why not Robin Hood, eh?

Embedded.

2010-04-25T12:08:00.003-05:00

Print ads, commercials and billboards are fair game. We have agreed on the rules of engagement: this space is a marketplace, caveat emptor. But what happens when advertisers decide that there is too much content and not enough space for ads? What happens when they convince content providers? How much is it worth to an advertiser to hawk their product when you are not in that guarded space, aware you are being solicited and contextualizing the message with a critical thinking? Then, my friend, you have embedded advertising, or product placement.

In just the past few years Apple has appeared in 103 top grossing films, Budweiser in 73, Chevrolet in 73, Sony in 64. Subway sandwiches have paid to be part of Happy Gilmore, Austin Powers: Goldmember, Barbershop 2, Blades of Glory, Get Smart, Hitch, Jackass: The Movie, Meet the Spartans, Talladega Nights, the TV show Chuck (“We're doing this as an ongoing way of making sure we get to the audience”), Will and Grace, and appeared prominently in the reality show The Biggest Loser.

Director Michael Bay, who delivers a litter of low quality summer blockbusters every season, is a record breaker when it comes to cramming shameless and over the top (sometimes plot driving) product placement into his movies. Says Bay, “"There are products in everything in everyday life. Do people think there shouldn't be brand names or something? Everything is branded. I hate commercials when they take logos off of stuff. It's not real life."

A website called “Brand Channel” tracks product placement, or “product cameos” in media. According to Brand Channel, the newly released film Valentine’s Day had 56 clearly identifiable brands pitched in the movie, Kick-Ass has had at least 42. Even Star Trek, the recent reboot of the sci-fi classic included a much touted in movie ad for Nokia phones.

And the walls are more permeable than you think…

For two-weeks in 2008, KVVU, Fox News 5 in Las Vegas, had its morning news anchors deliver the news behind two tall, frosty glasses of McDonald’s iced coffee. The coffee was not real, nor was the ice, which did not melt, or the condensation, which sparkled perfectly for the two weeks the coffee appeared on the newscast. The newscasters did not drink or acknowledge the coffees, whose logos faced the camera for the length of the broadcast. The news station was paid to place the product on camera, as what is referred to as an embedded product and it is more prevalent than you might think.

And it works; according to a Nielson Media Research study, product placement boosts “brand awareness” by roughly 20%. Without being aware that we are subject to advertising, it is successfully effecting us.

What We Talk About When We Talk About Incitement

2010-03-29T16:44:00.005-05:00

This weekend a Christian militia group called Hutaree was raided by the FBI in three states, planning to attack police and start a revolution; they “are Christian ‘soldiers’ who are arming themselves and training in anticipation of the coming of the Anti-Christ.”
I propose that the Republicans, fanning the flames of religious paranoia amongst a significant portion of the population, are at least partially to blame for outbursts such as this.

• The Bible is “America’s favorite Book” according to a recent poll.
• According to a Rassmussen poll, 54% of Americans believe the Bible is literally the word of god; the number is 74% for weekly church goers; 85% for Evangelical Christians. According to a Gallup poll, 78% believe the Bible is true.
• 79% of Evangelicals believe torture can be justified, more than any other group in America, according to a Pew research poll.
• 24% of weekly church goes believe in evolution, almost 50% lower than the national average, according to a recent Gallup poll.
• According to a poll by TIME, 59% of Americans believe the events in Revelation are going to come true.
• According to a recent Harris poll, 24% of Republicans think Obama is or may be the Antichrist, that he is an anti-American (41%) socialist (67%) Muslim (57%) who wants a one world government (51%) is imitating Hitler (38%), and wants the terrorists to win (22%).
• House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) says , Obama’s health plan is “Armageddon.”
• Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) says, “I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue… we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us, having a revolution every now and then is a good thing, and the people — we the people — are going to have to fight back hard if we’re not going to lose our country.”
• Congressman Phil Gingrey (R-GA) says, protesters against the government “should” bring firearms to protests and town hall meetings.
• Congressman Gregg Harper (R-MS) says, “We hunt liberal, tree-hugging Democrats, although it does seem like a waste of good ammunition.”
• Florida Republican Congressional Candidate Robert Lowry made a media event of firing live ammunition at targets emblazoned with the name of his democratic opponent.
• RNC funded Newsmax recently ran a column stating, ” "A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama's radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible."
• Jim Inhofe (R-OK) suggests, "We're almost reaching a revolution in this country."

In summary, speaking to a base that a) believes Revelations is literally true, b) is afraid that the end times is around the corner, c)believes the Obama is the Antichrist, the GOP is invoking Armageddon and steeping it's message of dissent in violence. In this context, we should not be surprised that THIS WEEK, a group of Fundamentalists are waging war on the government, believing to do so is to do battle with the Antichrist. And that, my friends, was incited by the GOP.

An Open Letter to Representative Edolphus Towns on Health Care

2010-01-24T11:42:00.001-06:00

January 24, 2010

Representative Edolphus Towns
2232 Rayburn House Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5936
Fax: (202) 225-1018

Re: Healthcare Legislation

Dear Representative Towns:

I am a constituent and a supporter of yours in the 10th Congressional District of New York. I am writing to urge you to support and encourage your fellow progressives to support the Senate version of the Health Care reform legislation. I am a proud progressive and I am often pained to see our shared aspirations compromised; I do not believe that this legislation constitutes such a concession. This legislation is a necessary first step, whose components enjoy tremendous support in your district and throughout the country. This legislation is an opportunity we cannot afford to miss for two reasons: we will not be granted an opportunity to achieve this gain again, and a failure now will be so a severe loss to the national democrats that we will lose power, costing us more in our efforts for progress than any defeat.

Ted Kennedy was reported to have stated that his greatest regret was letting healthcare under Nixon slip away. Every subsequent attempt has resulted in less progressive proposals. Every subsequent attempt has failed. It does not serve our cause to cash in this legislation for less progressive legislation in the future or allow our string of failures to continue one day longer. Looking to the history of health care reform, a failure now will haunt us with less progressive iterations in the next effort.

I further believe that the political cost of failure would cost us the democratic majority in 2010 and the presidency in 2012. Our desire for stronger subsidies and a public option can be realized in reconciliation. Even if they could not be won in reconciliation and were lost, would our resentment over not achieving more aggressive legislation in one arena be worth abandoning our seat of power and the opportunity to revisit the issue? Would it be worth an act of political self-sabotage and abandoning the opportunity to act on all other issues? I urge you and the liberal objectors in the House to act in the interest of the nation and our self-preservation and pass this significant and worthwhile legislation.

Thank you for your attention, I hope that my thoughts have been of some value and will help express the robust support this legislation enjoys in your district.

Very truly yours,

David Cann

AVENGE ME!

2009-10-18T10:11:00.003-05:00

By Guest Columnist Can of Campbell’s Soup

Since 1962, I have suffered in silence. Andy Warhol brazenly and unapologetically appropriated my image, and used it to vault himself into a career of success as the darling of the pop art scene. Many were the late night in which I and newspaper cartoon panels would drink and rail at the likes of Warhol and Roy Lichtenstein, whose cute little observations made them money and fame on our likenesses.
Today, however, we may finally have justice. Not for ourselves, grant you, but for all the other images who have been subject to “creative interpretation” to create “art.” Shepard Fairey, has finally admitted that his Obama campaign poster, “Hope,’’ was based off a photograph cribbed from the Associated Press. Thank god the Associated Press sued him, too, or else artists would think that just looking at an image and changing it to suit their artistic perception would be sufficient to get away with “making art and reflecting their personal vision of what they observe.” Bullfeathers.

The Bible called me yesterday when the story broke to say it was still rankled at Milton’s “take on it” in Paradise Lost. Mona Lisa’s face sent me an email, and Beowulf and Gawain and the Green Knight have always been angry to have been subjected to the oral tradition without being sourced as an original work whose history and development have been corrupted by the input and influence of artists over the years.

And don’t even get me started on these kids today and their “hip hop” and their “sampling.”

Darell Issa: I Almost Certainly Have Never Shot Nobody

2009-10-04T20:14:00.005-05:00

Congressman Darrell Issa (R—CA), introduced the September 17, 2009 motion to kill funding to ACORN. It is not without irony that it is Darrell Issa leading the charge against ACORN: Issa has defended and rewarded Blackwater in strange and inappropriate ways, has shown personal contempt for the law, racking up half-a-dozen criminal charges as a petty thug, and made bold and embarrassing partisan attacks that have compromised his integrity.

Issa and Blackwater
Issa has a hysterical and inappropriate relationship with Blackwater. Howard Krongard, a State Department official, was forced to resign for blocking congressional probes into investigations of contract fraud and arms smuggling by Blackwater. Just a few days before Krongard’s forced resignation, Issa sent him the a laudatory letter thanking him for his sterling performance: "Thank you for your service. And I’ll end by saying that the first week of December the president’s having a Christmas party. I have an extra guest ticket. After today, I know that you’ve earned it. I would be happy to have you use my guest ticket and then you’ll get your picture with the president and you’ll get to meet him as well you should."

Issa not only singled out a Blackwater apparatchik forced out of government service his improper service to Blackwater. In a congressional hearing investigating Blackwater for killing Iraqi civilians, Issa defended the company. Not only did he attempt to shield Blackwater from the allegations of wrongdoing, Issa accused the families the Blackwaters’ Iraqi murder victims of lying to congress.

Issa and Wild Unsupported Grandstanding at the Expense of Congressional Decorum

Issa demonstrated showed his poor character by angrily denouncing efforts to provide Federal Funding to for care for 9-11 first responders made sick, saying they were not victims of terror, but rather "It simply was an aircraft, residue of the aircraft and residue of the materials used to build this building." Issa also accused Joe Wilson and Valarie Plame of perjury before congress. Also,

Issa has a Rich History of Petty Criminal Chagres, Which Is Just Hillarious
Issa has full criminal history, including three charges of auto theft and two gun charges. Says Issa when questioned on a few of his gun charges, "I remember plenty of the details, but I don't think 30-year-old misdemeanors are fair play here" My favorite quote of Issas, which he actually made in his own defense (as in to imply that he would look better rather than worse for having made the statement), is the following: “Shots were never fired. ... I don't recall having a gun. I really don't. I don't think I ever pulled a gun on anyone in my life."

What is Issa’s Beef with ACORN?
With no sense of irony whatsoever, Issa stated the “scandal surrounding the criminal activities of ACORN have called into question their role in all aspects of government."
Also, you may recall something from high school civics prohibiting bills of attainder, wherein in is unconstitutional for the government to pass legislation punishing a person or group without the benefit of due process. It is all covered in Article I of the Constitution of the United States. Does this make the proposed law unconstitutional? Yes.

Guns, Guns, Guns (Part III)

2009-09-21T22:59:00.002-05:00

The Policy Change We Need
The question is whether or not we need a change. I retreat to the above statement that there are a myriad of hobbies and pastimes whose dangers we tolerate, and in some cases, celebrate. I am a motorcyclist, a hobby whose danger and high rate of fatalities is no secret and certainly a part of the appeal. Why should guns be any different? If we decide that guns are worth the danger, after all, we are a nation of independent and free thinking individualists, than no reform may be called for.
For three reasons, I believe guns are different than other dangerous hobbies. First, guns are not just a hobby, but a fetish. Guns, a symbol of our independence and potency, put a premium on aggression and defensive paranoia in a way that I, personally, find troublesome. Second, hobbies like motorcycling, skydiving and scuba primarily endanger the hobbyist. Gun ownership primarily endangers those around the hobbyist. This requires a different criterion to evaluate appropriate regulation. Finally, guns are not primarily a hobby, but first and foremost a weapon. Because of this, they should be subject to regulation as such. In the same way that gun ownership is important to maintaining or self-image as independent, they proclaim that defense and protection are to be vested in the hands of everyday Americans. Luckily, this is not a reflection of reality: police and government serve to protect the rule of law. Based solely on the numbers presented above, gun ownership makes us less safe rather than safer, so it seems the more civilized response is to leave the policing to the police, and stop expecting the right to shoot each other and ourselves.
So, if we deem that we are not willing to accept gun violence (a position I advocate, but am not qualified to decide alone), what reform is appropriate?
Gun rights advocates state that the gun laws which have been in place in recent years (many of which are no longer in effect) are not effective in reducing crime and gun violence. A Department of Justice study focusing on the Assault Weapon Ban found that the reductions in crime would be modest. The Center for Disease Control released a report on evaluating the effectiveness of firearms laws as a strategy for preventing violence; the results were insufficient “to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.”
The half-measures provided in waiting periods, ineffective registration and licensing requirements, ammo bans, school zone bans, felon prohibitions and waiting periods hamstrung by gun show loopholes are not effective. If we decide that guns are a problem, which I propose they are, the regulations proposed are insufficient. Considering that the minority of American’s who defend the rights of gun ownership have shown such zeal to mischaracterize efforts to regulate gun control, nothing is lost by skipping the half-measures and seeking more extreme restrictions. If, therefore, people agree that guns are a danger, and that reform is appropriate, the argument must be made for a total ban.
The argument against the ban is that it would not be effective, but would leave guns in the hand of criminals. This argument falls flat: no law is completely effective; we do not propose that murder should be decriminalized because there are murders – that argument is just insane. Secondly, all people that break the law are criminals, why would gun bans be different?
It would take time, as America is just flooded with guns, and we have never had trouble importing contraband. Overtime, there would be fewer guns on the streets. That means, at least, fewer kids accidently shooting themselves with their parents legally owned guns. It would also mean fewer legal guns being stolen and being used in violent crime. Would a ban mean an end to all firearm violence? No, it would not. Law enforcement is difficult and ongoing; the war against crime is never won because people will stop breaking the law. The ban would serve to provide that when laws are broken, it is more difficult to do so with a firearm. If, and only if, you feel that gun violence is not worth the benefits it serves as a recreational activity, I believe you are obliged to support a ban on all firearms.

Guns, Guns, Guns (Part II)

2009-09-21T22:42:00.004-05:00

Evaluating Gun Laws
In deciding what sensible gun laws should be, we have to examine the costs of unrestricted gun ownership and the benefits of access to guns.
The Costs: Firearm Related Deaths
The costs are violence: accidental shootings and intentional homicides. The most recent statistics available for gun violence are 2005, wherein 30,694 people were killed by firearms: 12,352 by murdered; 17,002 by suicide; 789 in accidents; 330 shot by the police, and 221, where the “intent was unknown.” There were only 18% fewer firearm related fatalities than the 37,313 automobiles related fatalities of 2008. There were 71,417 non-fatal shootings in 2005.

The Benefits: Recreation and Self-Defense
The argument for guns for recreation could be made in the sheer popularity of guns in the United States. More than one in three homes contains at least one gun. There are more privately owned guns in America than there are Americans over the age of 18 (there are 230,173,211 Americans over the age of 18 and more 283,000,000.)
According to the NRA, “the number of privately owned guns in the U.S. is at an all-time high, and rises by about 4.5 million per year.” According to the ATF, nearly 4 million new firearms are produced in the alone US every year.
According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 12.5 million Americans are hunters. There are nearly four million members of the NRA. There is no doubt that guns are a popular form of recreation. There 2 million members of PETA, 650,000 members in The American Youth Soccer Organization, 500,000 members of the ACLU, 500,000 in NOW, 300,000 in the American Motorcycle Association , 250,000 members of the American Medical association. The NRA, as a hobby and political organization, is by far the biggest of all of these.
Self Defense is much harder to prove. There is a poverty of evidence to support the assertion that gun ownership actually provides any security. While there are 789 accidental annual deaths by shooting, there are only 154 justifiable homicides with guns per year. It seems that based upon the amount of deaths, even accidental deaths, the shootings in self defense are dwarfed. It appears that the costs outweigh the benefits if measured only in terms of lives saved. The defense provided by gun ownership seems to largely be an idea, rather than a fact.

Gun Culture and the Road to Change
A change in gun law would be more than a mere policy reform; it would be a referendum on a major underpinning of American culture. American individualism is represented in the gun. From a revolutionary force of armed gentleman farmers taking on and defeating the world’s greatest empire, to hard scrabbled frontiersmen who carved America from an untamed wilderness, America’s defense and fortune is won by the gun. The American spirit requires no support more than the trusty sidearm – that it may hunt to survive and defend from attack.
Further, since the conservative voice that defends gun rights so often paints the left both eager to encroach on civil liberties (a conceit shown hollow in recent years) and to weak and effeminate to protect America from danger, the left is in a difficult possession in trying to advocate for gun control. How do you advocate for gun control, either modest or extreme, when your efforts will be painted as emasculating America? Obama, who has proposed no serious changes to the gun laws in the future, and who supports only very modest changes in theory, has been successfully characterized as a gun control zealot. This characterization produced a swell of fear and to a nationwide a run on guns and ammo.
The truth, however, is that Americans want reform for our current gun laws. In polls dating back to 1993, the public opinion has found it more important to control gun ownership than to protect gun owner’s rights. In that time, despite all changes over time, public opinion has always favored gun control over the rights of gun ownership. Despite the consistency of the trend, however, gun control – while still more important to the public than gun owners rights—is less popular than ever. This change, however, is not a reflection of a genuine organic response to shifting political realities; the change is panic induced by a coordinated and calculated lie disseminated by the right.
During the presidential campaign, McCain threatened that Obama had unspoken plans to attack gun rights, and that we should not be swayed by Obama’s assurances that he supports gun rights: “the rights of law-abiding gun owners will be at risk.” At the same time, according to FactCheck.org, “The NRA is circulating printed material and running TV ads making unsubstantiated claims that Obama plans to ban use of firearms for home defense, ban possession and manufacture of handguns, close 90 percent of gun shops and ban hunting ammunition.” The NRA states, “You can’t trust Obama with your guns” he shall be “the most anti-gun president in American history.” The conservative and misleading news coverage persisted, seeking to sow seeds of uncertainty; the warning continued to be that while Obama claims to support the second Amendment, we should not believe him.

From this we may take that we live in a gun culture, where firearms serve a special place in our notion of who we are as individualists. Americans support gun reform, but are cautious to give up an important pastime and recreation so important to our identity. Further, the waters of debate have been muddied by lies and misstatement, making any policy change in the immediate future problematic.

Guns, Guns, Guns (Part I)

2009-09-21T19:00:00.003-05:00

The Second Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms
The goal of this post is to examine the intended scope of the second Amendment, and to analyze the arguments put forth by those who call for or argue against restrictions on gun rights. This post also seeks to examine what policies best suit us going forward, and whether or not those goals are reconcilable with the second Amendment ‘s right to bear arms.
As a caveat before I begin, I will state that I personally see merits to both sides of the argument, and do not have an axe to grind here. Hopefully, as readers, you will agree that my presentation of both sides is fair and critical, and it is my hope that by the end of this analysis, you will either agree or respect the logic behind my conclusions. Without further ado:
The Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights provides:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The question most often posed is whether this right pertains to individuals, granting them the right to possess weapons for personal use and protection, or whether this right is a collective right providing State’s the right to maintain organized standing armies for defense and rule of law, such as State run units of the National Guard. A second question is that if this right pertains to individuals, what limitations, may be imposed on this right? One has to admit, that in a single sentence, to call for a “regulated” right that “shall not be infringed” there appears to be some contradiction and ambiguity.

The Amendment Itself: Individual Right or State’s Right
According to the National Rifle Association (the NRA), the second Amendment serves two purposes: the right to arm yourself to protect against government oppression, and the right to maintain “citizen militias” for state and Federal protection without an official government sponsored standing army. The argument here is that the right is an individual right.
This argument makes some sense, since there are by in large, two sorts of rights provided in the Bill of Rights: positive rights and negative rights. Positive rights are rights which require a right to be given, or oblige some action on the part of the state; negative rights are rights which prohibit the state from acting to infringe a right. Most of the rights in the Bill of Rights are negative rights, rights which prohibit the state from infringing on a personal freedom possessed by an individual.
The first Amendment provides freedom of speech, religion and assembly free from government intervention. The third Amendment provides the freedom from having US troops commandeer your home. The fourth Amendment provides the freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. The eighth Amendment provides the right against excessive bail or cruel and unusual punishment, and the perhaps most compellingly, the ninth Amendment reserves in the people all rights not enumerated.
The other rights, however, are positive rights: rights which are grants of duty of the state to individuals. The Fifth Amendment provides the right to due process, committing the state to provide a full and fair trial to all individuals before depriving them of life, liberty or property without a fair trial. The sixth Amendment provides that the state owes a duty to all criminal defendants to provide a speedy and public trial by a jury, the right to confront their accuser and the right to be represented by legal counsel. The seventh Amendment creates in the state the duty t provides defendants in civil cases with a trial by jury.
By examining the breakdown of these rights, a compelling argument begins to take shape that the lion’s share of the rights in the bill of rights are positive rights provided to individuals. The wrinkle, however, appears when we examine the tenth Amendment, which provides: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. This Amendment creates a new category of right, unlike those provided above. The Amendment creates an acknowledgement of state’s rights (herein linked to the people’s rights, the rights of individuals) to be protected against the rights of the Federal government. This notion, that the rights of states (to be associated with the rights of individuals) are to be preserved in the same spirit as individual rights, and are contemplated and reserved in the same document, creates a real ambiguity as to the intention of the second Amendment. Absent the tenth Amendment, the argument that the second Amendment is clearly an individual right is a strong one, but with it questions arise. Luckily, sufficient history exists to address the question.

The History
Amusingly, the history that produced the ambiguity is based upon nearly identical arguments to those going on today. The Anti-Federalists, those who wished to see the centralized Federal authority be weaker than individual state’s rights, largely argued that the second Amendment right was to be a state’s right, to protect against the tyranny of the Federal government. In fact, the Second Continental Congress, while debating different versions of the second Amendment, a provision stating that the right existed “for common defense of a free state,” but was instead replaced with “necessary to the security of a free State.” Importantly, the national army of the time was a loose confederation of state militias, and the state’s rights version holds up better historically.
In fact, this argument persevered through much of the early legal history (such as the cases of US v. Cruikshank, Presser v. Illinois, Miller v. Texas, Robertson v. Baldwin), and seems to be the predominate philosophy up until relatively recently. Even more strange is that today’s conservatives, whose position would be ideologically consistent with the state’s rights perspective, fight against the position that state law should shape gun rights, and argue for an individual and Federally protected Federal right. This became most clear in the recent District of Columbia v. Heller case, where the Supreme Court (supported by conservatives and the gun rights lobby) found that the individual right protected by the Federal Constitution prevents states from drafting laws which would infringe on an individual’s second Amendment rights.
I do not argue that the individual rights argument is without merit: the Bill of Rights was purposefully modified to allow for ambiguity where it originally stated clearly that the right was reserved for states rather than individuals. I further believe that while the legal history prior to the recent case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the legal precedent favored an argument for state’s rights. Still, the law is a fluid and living thing, and the terms of the debate today have shifted to grant that the second Amendment now protects an individual right, rather than a state’s right. What, then, does a rational national policy look like considering that the current treatment of the right, although a historically disfavored interpretation, is an individual right?

Why the Resignation of Van Jones Matters

2009-09-06T13:20:00.005-05:00

Van Jones, a man who I admire for dedicating his life to the advancement of the America’s less privileged, has been cowed into resigning from a post as “Special Advisor on Green Jobs” to the Obama Administration by criticism from the right wing. The criticism of Van Jones has been unapologetically political in nature, based solely on his personal past as a liberal activist. Jones, most importantly, is a casualty of politics.

I will provide a biographical sketch of Jones, and address the myriad of hollow criticisms and misstatements and lies (I am loath to accuse pundits of lying, but willing to do so when applicable) that surround him. But first, I feel it is necessary to provide the context to explain how Jones came to be targeted and why.

THE ATTACK ON JONES
On July 28, 2009, Fox News personality Glenn Beck appeared on the Fox morning talkshow, Fox & Friends, and said Obama has "a deep-seeded hatred for white people." Beck continued, "I'm not saying he doesn't like white people, I'm saying he has a problem. This guy is, I believe, a racist." Fox News disclaimed the statement later that day, issuing a public statement immediately.

An African-American advocacy group, ColorofChange.org, most recognized for their advocacy work done on behalf of the Jena 6, took Beck to task. Incensed by Beck’s statement, and challenging it as reckless race baiting, or what Tavis Smiley would call “racial arson,” ColorofChange.org called for calling on Beck's advertisers to stop sponsoring his show. Fifty-Seven Companies responded to the call and dropped Beck.

Beck responded. He did not apologize for calling Obama a racist. He did not attempt to explain, justify or defend his statement. Instead, he focused his response to personal attacks on Van Jones, co-founder of ColorofChange.org, and Special Advisor on green jobs to the Obama Administration. Beck took a step away from the criticism of his own comments and the resulting outcry and focused the whole of his attention on ad hominem attacks on Jones. According to an article in the Los Angeles Times:

During his 2 p.m. PDT show, Beck did not address the boycott spearheaded by Color of Change to protest the talk show host’s remark last month that he believes President Obama is “a racist.”
Instead, he spent a large share of his program suggesting that Jones, who co- founded Color of Change in 2005, is a radical. Jones now serves as a special advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

WHO VAN JONES IS AND WHAT HE WAS ATTACKED FOR
Jones began a career of community organizing (an effort the right has been unreserved in its disdain for, despite their shallow conceits towards populism) as a Yale law student. Focusing primarily on police brutality, Jones was involved with protests in the LA Riots that followed the Rodney King verdict. Beck and right wing critics have stated that Jones served time in prison for inciting street violence and fueling race riots. In actuality, Jones participated in peaceful protests of police brutality, was arrested with a group of peaceful protesters, was released and apologized to by the LA Police, and received a settlement from a civil suit for wrongful arrest.

Jones was also a member of Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM), a communist group that grew out of a San Francisco Organization called Roots Against War (RAW), founded to protest the first Gulf War. The group focused on racial, social and gender equality, and galvanized mass protests against police brutality. Jones has specifically been attacked for his affiliation with STORM because of its avowed Communist orientation, being likened to Nazis because of his “STORMtrooopers.” Jones has never apologized for his affiliation with a group who chartered itself on racial, social and gender equality, and I think his critics should be embarrassed to expect it.

Jones went on to found the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, focused on promoting social justice in the Oakland area, with programs like the Books Not Bars Campaign to reform California’s youth prison system, the self explanatory Green-Collar Jobs Campaign, the Heal the Streets program, a 10-month fellowship course to develop leadership in 15-18 year olds, and Soul of the City Campaign to make Oakland greener, more spiritually and socially conscious, and a watch dog program to advocate against police brutality.

Jones has likewise been a supporter of Mumia Abu Jamal, a Black Panther whose death sentence has been subject to speculation, as to the appropriateness of the death penalty, the fairness of his trial, and even his guilt. Jones has been widely attacked for his support of Jamal.

He has also been admonished for the statement that 9/11 should engender “sadness and anger at the deaths of innocent working class people” but also anger at the US government for the “worldwide aggression had engendered such hate across the globe that working class people were not safe at home. We honored those who had lost their lives in the attack -- and those who would surely lose their lives in subsequent U.S. attacks overseas.” He added that he was fearful that “Anti-Arab hostility is already reaching a fever pitch as pundits and common people alike rush to judgment that an Arab group is responsible for this tragedy," and that he feared “that an atmosphere is being created that will result in official and street violence against Arab men, women and children."

For the above statements, Mike Pence, Republican Congressmen from Indiana called for Jones’ resignation. Pence identifies as "a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order." Pence helped establish “Operation Offset” wherein he demanded tax cuts and abortion bans to counteract liberal efforts to provide aid to survivors of Hurricane Katrina.

Jones then founded ColorofChange.org in the wake of Katrina as an organization specifically aimed at advocating for people of color being underserved by the system. ColorofChange.org is probably best known for its advocacy work done on behalf of the Jena 6, six black high school students in Louisiana who were subjected to threats of lynching, and then trumped up legal charges.

In 2007, Jones founded a non-for profit, Green-For-All, specifically seeking to use green-collar jobs as a solution to American poverty. His works have earned him the following awards and accolades:

• 1997-1999 - Rockefeller Foundation "Next Generation Leadership" Fellowship
• 1998 - Reebok International Human Rights Award
• 2000 - International Ashoka Fellowship
• 2008 - Time Magazine Environmental Hero
• 2008 - Elle Magazine Green Award
• 2008 - One of the George Lucas Foundation's "Daring Dozen"
• 2008 - Hunt Prime Mover Award
• 2008 - Campaign for America's Future "Paul Wellstone Award"
• 2008 - Global Green USA "Community Environmental Leadership" Award
• 2008 - San Francisco Foundation Community Leadership Award
• 2008 - Puffin/Nation prize for "Creative Citizenship"
• 2008 - World Economic Forum "Young Global Leader"
• 2009 - Hubert H. Humphrey Civil Rights Award
• 2009 - Eco-Entrepreneur Award; Howard University
• 2009 - Individual Thought Leadership, Energy & Environment Awards; Aspen Ins Institute

WHY THIS MATTERS
Van Jones is a leader for social justice, a prominent and respected voice for the disenfranchised and a passionate advocate for the greening of America. His association with an organization that called a right-wing pundit to task for race baiting led him to be targeted politically. Fox News has proclaimed his resignation as “a victory.”

It should be unacceptable to Americans of either party to allow a leader who offers so much to be driven from the halls of power for political reasons. Let us not forget that even if we take his commitment to social justice as political extremism, the accusation cuts both ways. If we can have a GOP candidate for Vice President who speaks on behalf of political organizations who advocate violent secession from the Union, or GOP Governors who call for secession, surely there is room for a Special Advisor who refuses to apologize for his association with Communists. This sort of political gamesmanship is unacceptable. We cannot afford to lose advocates for the poor and the greening of America to these sorts of shoddy, shallow and cheap political attacks; there just aren’t enough people committed to social justice to spare.

The Post Wherein I Present the Whole WSJ Article by Whole Foods CEO, John Mackey, Infused With Appropriate Counter Argument and Profanity

2009-09-05T20:34:00.003-05:00

John Mackey, CEO and co-founder of famous union busting powerhouse Whole Foods recently wrote an editorial for the Wall Street Journal wherein he decried the Obama Administration’s efforts to revamp healthcare and stated that health care is not a human right. I am providing his editorial in its entirety, interjecting my opinions and observations in italics.

The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare Eight things we can do to improve health care without adding to the deficit.
Obama has not provided a Health Care Plan, but rather provided Congress with suggestions for “Guiding Principles” in drafting one – to refer to any of the several health care proposals as “ObamaCare” is a misstatement that is perfidious or ignorant. One of those Guiding Principles, a stated requirement for any plan he enacts, is that the Plan be “deficit neutral.” That means the title alone is based on a false premise.

By John Mackey

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out
of other people's money." —Margaret Thatcher
Margaret Thatcher privatized a dozen national industries during her time as Prime Minister, and revamped the British Health Care system extensively in the 1980s, and yet, left it as a “socialist” program. Probably not the most compelling person to quote at the opening of this article. She is currently receiving socialist treatment for a broken arm and advanced dementia.

With a projected $1.8 trillion deficit for 2009, several trillions more in deficits projected over the next decade, and with both Medicare and Social Security entitlement spending about to ratchet up several notches over the next 15 years as Baby Boomers become eligible for both, we are rapidly running out of other people's money. These deficits are simply not sustainable. They are either going to result in unprecedented new taxes and inflation, or they will bankrupt us.
While we clearly need health-care reform, the last thing our country needs is a massive new health-care entitlement that will create hundreds of billions of dollars of new unfunded deficits (The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that the Plan is Deficit Neutral, Asshole!) and move us much closer to a government takeover of our health-care system (This argument is literally taken, in several places to the word, from “GOP Health Care Talking Points” from gop.gov). Instead, we should be trying to achieve reforms by moving in the opposite direction—toward less government control and more individual empowerment. (Is he making the argument that people without healthcare would be less empowered with government financing for their healthcare? What an asshole!)Here are eight reforms that would greatly lower the cost of health care for everyone:

• Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs). The combination of high-deductible health insurance and HSAs is one solution that could solve many of our health-care problems. (He is saying that the problem is that people are getting too much insurance for too little, and that we need to pass on some more costs to the insured. That is, perhaps, the dumbest thing he suggests in this whole shit sandwich he calls an editorial.) For example, Whole Foods Market pays 100% of the premiums for all our team members who work 30 hours or more per week (about 89% of all team members) for our high-deductible health-insurance plan. We also provide up to $1,800 per year in additional health-care dollars through deposits into employees' Personal Wellness Accounts to spend as they choose on their own health and wellness.
Money not spent in one year rolls over to the next and grows over time. Our team members therefore spend their own health-care dollars until the annual deductible is covered (about $2,500) and the insurance plan kicks in. The average Whole Foods “Team Member makes $25,451 per- year. Depending on the number of the people in the family, this average wage places these employees near, at or below the Federal Poverty level. Luckily Whole Foods only asks their employees to spend 10% of their pre-tax annual income on medical care before they kick in one-cent. Otherwise they would look bad.
This creates incentives to spend the first $2,500 more carefully (John Mackey may be the first person in our national healthcare debate to suggest that it is actually the wasteful spending of the insured causing the crisis. If you were looking for a good place to decide to hate this ass-hat, I humbly propose that now would be a good point). Our plan's costs are much lower than typical health insurance, while providing a very high degree of worker satisfaction.

• Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair.

• Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable. The reason this is a bad idea is because than you have certain states, and I am looking at you, Delaware, who are willing to relax the legal requirements for the industry so that all the companies relocate. Then, in the race to the bottom, the only type of health insurance Americans can get is that provided in the state with the least regulations providing the least possible benefits. This is why credit card companies are all in Delaware, and legally allowed to eat your first born.

• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover (because why should health insurance be required by law to cover health conditions- that’s bullshit, right? Whose with me?) These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars (what with making insurance companies pay for hospital care and all). What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying (damn those special interest groups, like theAmerican Cancer Society and American Heart Association.)

• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care. I mean do you really want to be able to sue if you or a loved one is harmed through medical negligence or malpractice? Think of the poor insurance companies who need to be protected from those greedy families who lost loved ones to medical malfeasance. Won’t someone please, just once, think of the insurance companies?

• Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost. How many people know the total cost of their last doctor's visit and how that total breaks down? (Is he suggesting that people either a) do not know that medical treatment is expensive, or b) would not seek medical treatment if they knew how much it cost their insurance company? What fucking planet is this asshole from?) What other goods or services do we buy without knowing how much they will cost us?

• Enact Medicare reform. We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare is heading towards bankruptcy (based on highly disputed partisan projections, unless you account for programs such as the recent White House proposal to create an independent council to set Medicare fees, estimated to save billions in the short term) and enact reforms that create greater patient empowerment (what about having the government pay your healthcare bills to private providers leaves Americans underpowered, exactly?), choice (or without choice) and responsibility (yeah, John Mackey, fuck those irresponsible Medicare patients.)

• Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren't covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
If only there were some way to, as a community, decide to contribute a voluntary portion of our earnings to provide medical care to those who need it. We need to think of some way to choose representatives from the public to craft these plans, and then some group to “govern” these donations and distribute them. Of course these donations to take care of other people should be subject, somehow, to accountability by the people making the donations through some sort of “vote.” John Mackey may really be onto something here. God, what a fucking asshole.

Many promoters of health-care reform believe that people have an intrinsic ethical right to health care—to equal access to doctors, medicines and hospitals. While all of us empathize with those who are sick, how can we say that all people have more of an intrinsic right to health care than they have to food or shelter? ( Or, perhaps, everybody has a human right to all three, asshole.)

Health care is a service that we all need, but just like food (provided by the USDA Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which provides food through the Federal Food stamps program to 34 million Americans a month) and shelter (provided by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, which provides Federally subsidized housing for 1.2 million American households)it is best provided through voluntary and mutually beneficial market exchanges (god, what an asshole). A careful reading of both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution will not reveal any intrinsic right to health care, food or shelter. (Ok, this is probably the most offensive bit here. First, it isn’t true: you could easily make an argument that the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness includes an implicit promise of healthcare. Second, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act actually makes it illegal to deny medical treatment to somebody who needs it, making the right to healthcare, at least in the most immediate sense, a right in America, protected by law. Third, there are lots of rights we have that are not included in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, like the right not to be a fucking slave. Fourth, is this bag of dicks actually trying to argue that there is no human right to healthcare? It sounds an awful lot like that this bag of dicks is trying to argue that there is no human right to healthcare.)That's because there isn't any. This "right" has never existed in America. (Dude, did he just refer to the right to healthcare in sarcastic quotes? How can a millionaire CEO be so brazen as to snidely refer to the “rights” of the sick poor to healthcare in a nationally syndicated editorial and not be afraid to walk down the street without being spat on by every person that recognizes him? HOW?)

Even in countries like Canada and the U.K., there is no intrinsic right to health care (This is, interestingly enough, a lie. The right to healthcare s actually provided in both Canada and the UK, as provided in the 1984 Canada Health Act, Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and in the UK’s national Health Service Constitution.) Rather, citizens in these countries are told by government bureaucrats what health-care treatments they are eligible to receive and when they can receive them (it is worth adding that being told what treatments you have a right to merely defines the scope of the right, rather than negating it.) All countries with socialized medicine (metaphorically) ration health care by forcing their citizens to wait in lines (metaphorically) to receive scarce (not actually) treatments.

Although Canada has a population smaller than California, 830,000 Canadians are currently waiting to be admitted to a hospital or to get treatment, according to a report last month in Investor's Business Daily. (For what treatment? How long does this last? Is the wait to see a doctor actually longer than it is in the US? Is it longer than, say California?) In England, the waiting list is 1.8 million (Ok, this doesn’t even make sense. The waiting line is 1.8 million? What the fuck does that even mean?)

At Whole Foods we allow our team members to vote on what benefits they most want the company to fund. Our Canadian and British employees express their benefit preferences very clearly—they want supplemental health-care dollars that they can control and spend themselves without permission from their governments. Why would they want such additional health-care benefit dollars if they already have an "intrinsic right to health care"? The answer is clear—no such right truly exists in either Canada or the U.K.—or in any other country.
Ok, I was wrong before, this is more fucking infuriating. Assuming what he is saying is true, and he is not a font of credibility, so what. If the government provides enough healthcare to meet the standard required as an essential human right, there is no reason to think that people wouldn’t want more. And that doesn’t negate it, or discount the sufficiency of the services to meet the minimum human right. That is like saying because criminal defendants with public defenders would like more legal services, than there is no right to habeas corpus. Total fucking bullshit. And again with the statement that there isn’t a human right to healthcare, which is, in the case of the three countries mentioned, technically incorrect, and in a broader sense, morally abhorrent.

Rather than increase government spending and control, we need to address the root causes of poor health. This begins with the realization that every American adult is responsible for his or her own health. Again, we really need to bring all these cancer patients to task for their lack of responsibility. And don’t get me started on those fucking goldbrickers with MS.

Unfortunately many of our health-care problems are self-inflicted: two-thirds of Americans are now overweight and one-third are obese. Most of the diseases that kill us and account for about 70% of all health-care spending—heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes and obesity—are mostly (?!) preventable through proper diet, exercise, not smoking, minimal alcohol consumption and other healthy lifestyle choices.

Recent scientific and medical evidence shows that a diet consisting of foods that are plant-based, nutrient dense and low-fat will help prevent and often reverse most degenerative diseases that kill us and are expensive to treat. We should be able to live largely disease-free lives until we are well into our 90s and even past 100 years of age. Despite being a audacious, stomach churning piece of self-promotion, this is also wrong.

Health-care reform is very important. Whatever reforms are enacted it is essential that they be financially responsible, and that we have the freedom to choose doctors and the health-care services that best suit our own unique set of lifestyle choices. We are all responsible for our own lives and our own health. We should take that responsibility very seriously and use our freedom to make wise lifestyle choices that will protect our health. Doing so will enrich our lives and will help create a vibrant and sustainable American society. So, if you are sick and poor, or just either of the two, you now know you have nobody but yourself to blame.

Mr. Mackey is co-founder and CEO of Whole Foods Market Inc. Perhaps you should not shop there.

FOX News: A Potential Political Bias?

2009-04-20T20:19:00.003-05:00

FOX News has been wailing and moaning that the Tea Party protests, and FOX News itself, have been subject to unfair treatment in the mainstream media. The criticism, however, fails on two levels. Fist, FOX has claimed that by providing unflattering coverage, members of the media-at-large are violating the First Amendment Rights of the protesters. Second, a cursory reflection on the treatment FOX News gave those who protested the Iraq war betrays a shallow, politically based hypocrisy that deserves derision. I am pleased to provide at least a small part of that richly deserved derision. Allow me to begin.

Point One: Unfavorable Treatment by the Media Constitutes a Violation of the First Amendment
FOX News claims that the “main stream media” coverage was controlled by a “far-left vision,” and was “hateful,” “condescending,” “vulgar,” “obscene” and most importantly “don’t understand the First Amendment.”
Here is the problem: the First Amendment protects your right to say any damn thing, so that it can be introduced into the marketplace of ideas and wilt our flourish based upon their merit. The First Amendment provides the Tea Party folk to voice their ideas. The function and dynamic of the First Amendment requires that the right end when the idea is voiced. Other voices in the media, such as CNN, MSNBC and NPR must be free to respond those ideas and pooh-pooh them as necessary. That is the idea of evaluating the merit of ideas: people need the freedom to claim that Obama is a Nazi (really) and the rest of us must be allowed to laugh at them until our faces cramp up and we are afraid we are going to pass out, but sober ourselves because you don’t want to be unconscious near these maniacs. But we laugh later and are happy that we allowed them to speak because their hilarious and delusional fears make our social fabric more rich and nuanced, and provide necessary levity when debating serious issues. Plus, without them, David Icke would look crazy.

Point Two: FOX News is Hypocritical
You would expect that based on the outrage that FOX News displayed on the treatment the Tea Party’s received from the “left-leaning media,” you might expect that the conservative-leaning FOX would have provided wholly even-handed coverage of the anti-war protests leading up to and following the commencement of the Iraq war. If that is the case, I would also like to interest you in some real estate.
In one 2007 segment on FOX Sean Hannity program, they characterized the anti-war protesters as the “radical element” of “ hard left wingers, led by ‘Hanoi Jane’” spit on Veterans, send hate-mail to Walter Reed Army Medical Center, and “vulgar people.” The segment wrapped with saying of “Code Pink, which is antiwar group” that “these are not Americans as far as I'm concerned." It goes on.
Fox Reported on anti-war protesters by providing a full complement of pro-war protesters and suggesting that “if the anti-war protesters succeed in altering U.S. policy, it would put more troops in harm's way.” Similar coverage establishes that “even as a majority of Americans say they want U.S. troops to stay in Iraq and finish the job,” anti-war protesters still subject Bush to criticism; this despite the fact that “almost half of voters think” that “if American troops left now,” it “would symbolize a victory for Iraqi insurgents and terrorists.” FOX also had the audacity to suggest that Cindy Sheehan, mother of a soldier slain in Iraq lacked “a legitimate reason for requesting another meeting with President Bush,” but rather was “just trying to get publicity for anti-war demonstrators.”

In 2005, Sean Hannity blamed “the anti-war left” for protesting the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, citing specific instances of such protests; Hannity, however, failed to mention that the “the anti-war left” protesters at the funerals were Fred Phelps and his cadre of loons from the Westboro Baptist Church. Typical of the “anti-war left,” Phelps believes “that God is killing soldiers to punish America for condoning homosexuality.” Says Phelps, "This is the hypocritical, fag-infested, fag-run United States of America and we're supposed to respect that fag rag flag?" Hannity astutely identified these sentiments as the type of typical liberal pabulum that passes for protests against the war, and rightly took them to task for bringing their left-wing agenda to the funerals of the fallen. Such fair and balanced characterizations set the standard for honoring and providing honest coverage of protesters of all political stripes.
And they aren’t alone: The Washington Post drew fire for granting equal coverage to anti-war and pro-war protests in 2007; however, unlike FOX, The Washington Post magnanimously covered the disparity and corrected the misrepresentation stating that anti-war protesters far outnumbered their pro-war counterparts.
So it appears, and I am proud to claim that I am the first to say this, but FOX News may be hypocritical. Pulitzer, please!

GOP: Obama To Blame for North Dakota’s Weather Crisis

2009-03-28T10:41:00.000-05:00

As flood damage worsens in North Dakota, and Fargo residents begin mass evacuations, the tide of political accountability is rising in Washington. Republicans on the Hill have been pressing President Barack Obama to accept responsibility for the growing crisis in North Dakota’s precipitation crisis. House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) seized on the opportunity to criticize the president Tuesday for over-reaching in his first 50 days on the job, stating asserting that “the President’s number one task is to protect the American people” and that Obama’s “Do-it-all-all-at-once” approach showed a lack of focus that was leaving American people at risk.
Following the GOP's weekly conference, Cantor, the second-ranking House Republican told reporters that President Obama should be focusing on the "weather crisis," as opposed to holding four-hour meetings on healthcare, and “dithering” about on aimless “pork-laden spending bills” as the president has been. The efforts may be laudable, Cantor said, but the White House should be devoting all resources to fixing the crisis and not to "tax and spend schemes."
“At the end of the day, we are in a serious emergency. Meteorologists are saying that there's a chance of ‘significant’ snowfall along Interstate 94, including in Dickinson and Bismarck” Cantor said. "My goodness, we do have an emergency, and we oughta say, look, priority No. 1 is to protect the people from this sort of crisis."
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs acknowledges that while the North Dakota River is threatening to worsen flooding in Fargo, the State Capital, the State Government, National Guard and Red Cross are prepared to meet whatever needs the State Residents may have, and evacuations have already begun. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) claims that the efforts so far are “typical of the Administrations reactive as opposed to proactive approach” to the crisis.
“The fact of the matter is every time [Treasury Secretary Tim] Geithner opens his mouth, precipitation falls. The weather is clearly reacting to the Obama Administration’s plans, and the response is not good” Boehner said.
Karl Rove, FOX News Political Commentator, says the problem is deeper than that. “The fact of the matter is that Obama has had over six months since he became the presumptive Democratic candidate for President to start to formulate plan for dealing with exactly this sort of problem. He could have captured the national dialogue over the Summer, but the reality is that he is unprepared to deal with this. In fact, we should have serious discussions as to whether or not this Administration bears responsibility for Katrina.”
Gibbs responded to the criticism by requesting that the Republicans utilize the talent for sandbagging they have demonstrated in obstructing plans to remedy the Economic crisis and pitch in around Fargo. “Fuck you, Robert” Cantor responded

The Anagram Game: Michael Steele

2009-03-13T19:57:00.003-05:00

Cease ill theme (Actually good advice).
Shame, lie, elect. (How Republican is THAT).
Emcee is lethal (rock that hip-hop theme).
These camel lie (The “faulty intelligence” that done the Republicans wrong).
Hi. See Cellmate. (Gangsta’ rap is hip-hop, too).

Earmarks: The End of The World

2009-03-12T00:22:00.004-05:00

Obama just signed an “Omnibus Bill” granting $410 billion to the Federal Government to keep it going for the rest of the fiscal year; not unusual, it is the annual federal equivalent of spending the last few days of the week on a credit card before your paycheck comes for failure to budget properly. But that is ok, we do it every year. And this year, it is to cover Bush’s budget, and really cannot properly be attributed to a failing of Obama. It is sort of like if you were required to pay the security deposit of the previous tenant who trashed the place. Actually, most of the Obama presidency is like that.
Anyway, that isn’t stopping the Republicans from assuming the role of the party of mulish gatekeepers of our purse strings after 8 years of spending money like Mike Tyson. That reference is funnier if you know that Mike Tyson Spent $300 million on jewels, cars, tigers (plural) and a bejeweled watch emblazoned with pornography, before filing for bankruptcy. To be fair, Bill Frist has got only one tiger out of the Bush administration, but he had a snow leopard beforehand.
What sort of fiscal discipline did the Republicans show? Well, the Bush Omnibus Bill in 2008 was for $555 billion. That is more than one-third as large as the current $410 billion Omnibus Bill. Under Bush the 2008 Omnibus Bill had over 11,000 earmarks, and his 2005 Omnibus Budget Bill had over 13,000 earmarks. According to John McCain’s histrionic hissy-fit accused “Obama’s” Omnibus Bill (remember, it is Bush’s, and Obama didn’t touch this mess caulking the leaks in Bush’s budget) of having a mere 9,000 earmarks. Earmarks, all 7,991 of them (McCain was mistaken with his 9,000 estimate), comprise $7.7 billion, or $5.5 billion according to the G.O.P. House Appropriations Committee, of the Omnibus Bill. That is 1.87% of the bill, or more accurately 1.34%. That is less than 2% of the total bill. Are you kidding me?
And the Republicans are blowing their fucking tops over this 1.87% of the bill that goes to earmarks. They are going fucking ballistic over this 1.87%. McCain demanded Obama veto the whole Omnibus Bill – which would have bankrupt the federal government starting at midnight, March 12, 2009. They would literally not be able to honor pay checks, product orders, anything – they would be broke. And that was worthwhile over 1.87% of the budget. It wouldn’t be worth allowing the government to fold even if earmarks were totally fucking worthless, if it meant 1.87% of the cash was made flushed in handfuls down public toilets at Union Station. It would still be a criminally bad idea to purposefully derail the government to stop that level of waste. And that is assuming that earmarks are 100% total garbage and pure waste. But why are earmarks even bad?
Fox News is lambasting Obama Secretaries Lahood and Solis for their addition of earmarks to the Omnibus bill, added when they were in congress, both of which asked for money for local police. Wait, you may say, I support local police. Could it be, you may ask, if things such as local police funding are being demonized, that perhaps “earmarks” or “pork-barrel spending” may not be all bad? You, my hypothetical reader, are astute. And good looking. Really, your hair looks good these days. And you raise a good point: maybe earmarks are necessarily the great gaping herpes sore on the proud, pouting lips of America.
An earmark is nothing more than a provision delivering federal funds to a specific local program, often but not always in the congressional district of the congressperson inserting the earmark into the Bill. The programs that receive funding through earmarks are things like schools, police, parks programs, hospitals and research programs. Does that sound bad? If you don’t support schools, cops, hospitals, parks or science then you are almost certainly a Republican. And if that is the worst thing you can imagine, then earmarks are as bad as it gets. And if a small percentage of funding for cops and hospitals and schools is worth shutting down the American government (then the terrorists have won?) then McCain was right and Obama should have vetoed the Bill. And even then, the Omnibus Bill is covering the tab on Bush’s last year, and it is still smaller than last year, and so is the amount going to loathsome earmarks. I defy you to twist that story into a condemnation of Barak Obama: it will not sound credible.

Soylent Green: It’s People!®

2009-03-11T12:44:00.001-05:00

Financial times are tight, and people have a fair amount of anxiety about it. My “modest proposal” is that we have more anxiety about it than we know. Nobody pays more attention to the zeitgeists of our collective fears and desires than the good folks in advertising, and their subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) allusions to cannibalism in recent ads have me thinking they have tapped into a vein of anxiety about the financial crisis that our conscious collective minds might not even be aware of. We will discard the M&M commercials in which M&Ms eat M&Ms because it seems to be more a matter of poor continuity.
Now, I present to you no less than FOUR separate commercials from the past few weeks featuring cannibalism:

1. Boost Mobil, “Unwonged”

In a recent commercial for Boost Mobile, available here, we see two pigs eating ham. The gist of the commercial is that a service provide with no hidden fees is blah, blah, blah shocking. Reminiscent of a recent Trojan Condom ad, in which pigs solicit women and are denied for refusing to don condoms (tagline: Trojan: Evolve), the pig angle seems to be a solidly developing advertising trope. It is also worth noting that Fox and CBS refused to carry the Trojan commercial because it promoted condom use for pregnancy prevention rather than disease prevention, and thus “may be considered controversial for religious and moral reasons.”
Still, the Boost Mobile ad featuring extremely self-aware acts of cannibalism is brought to you by Jeff Deist, horror movie special effects whiz, who is currently working on the forthcoming movie, Let’s Eat Lolly, about- wait for it - cannibalism. Clearly this is on people’s minds.

2. MasterCard, “Icons” (Alternately, “Mascots”)

Airing during the Superbowl and coming in at almost a month old, the MasterCard “Icons” commercial features a family style dinner with advertising “Icons:” Count Chocula, Mr. Peanut, the Jolly Green Giant, the Gorton's fisherman, Charlie the Starkist tuna, Chef Boyardee, the Pillsbury doughboy, the Vlasic pickles stork, the Morton Salt girl and Mr. Clean doing the dishes. It ends with saying “dinner with the family or something, blah, blah, blah: Priceless.” BUT, as they are passing around food, Tony the Tuna is eating and sharing Tuna casserole!
Again, in the ads invocation of togetherness, and perhaps more importantly, stability, the Ad still contains a reference to cannibalism: A tuna eating tuna.

3. Hulu, “Evil Plot”

This ad also first aired almost a month ago during the Superbowl. Hulu, a recently founded internet service has been advertising it’s Flash format streaming TV shows with ads featuring self-identified “TV Stars” Alec Baldwin, and then Eliza Dushku claiming that they are aliens who want to eat our brains. The premise of the ad is that by providing more TV our brains will soften and be better to eat, hence the “evil plot” that is the product.
It is easily arguable that aliens eating people is not cannibalism, however, as self-identified “TV Stars” we know and recognize them as humans and despite references to the contrary, our processing of the commercial and the pitch made by the recognizable stars is one of “people” we know and are already familiar with. And they are promising to eat us.

4. McDonalds, “Filet-O-Fish”

In this final and most recent ad, a wall-mounted “Billy Bass” type fish (think: The Sopranos) sings to a man that he wants his fielt-o-fish sandwich to a synthpop beat. Says Fish to man eating fish sandwich “Gimme back that filet-o-fish, Gimme that fish.” The ad has two possible reads, as I see it.
The first possible implication could be that the fish wants to reclaim the filet, hence “gimme back that filet-o-fish.” But that read is more of a PETA treatment of fish sandwiches, and the guy eating the sandwich seems to bobbing his head as if being serenaded by the fish. Finally, when the sandwich chomping gourmand shows his appreciation of the fish’s little ditty, he seems to be staying a friend with an electric drill who was prepared to remove the fish from its mount (or some other more sinister action to silence the prostrate fish’s brackish cries). Finally, the ad ends with the fish looking towards the camera and belching a contended “Ah!” This detail seals the deal for me, making the case for the second possible implication of the commercial.
The second possible, and more likely, implication could be that the fish wants to eat the fish sandwich. And based on his satisfied eructation I assert that he DID eat another fish. Again, cannibalism.

I believe that these ads reflect a subconscious anxiety about the economic crisis and a deep fear of the level of desperation we feel setting in, and our need to laugh at it; if you don’t agree I invite you to eat me.

Republican Congress Earns a Penalty Flag

2009-02-07T22:53:00.004-06:00

The Republican congress’s refusal to participate in the crafting of the stimulus bill is ridiculous. The fact that Republican senators, lead by John McCain, have proposed a “rival” stimulus plan – a plan that consists solely of tax cuts – is offensive. The plan is a proposed $445 Billion in tax cuts: that is it. The Republican stimulus plan is brought to us by McCain and his former economics advisor, Lindsay Graham. Actually, it is McCain, John Thune (whose defeat of Tom Daschle was based, in part, on voter suppression targeted at Native Americans), Richard Burr (who is devoted to voting against or stalling every Obama appointee), and Lindsey Graham (who famously advised then Presidential Candidate McCain that this was a “mental recession” and called America “a nation of whiners.”
Jim Demint, a Republican senator from South Carolina, who has joined David “Purveyor of Brothels” Vitter to be one of the lead obstructionist ass-trumpets in this whole debate, actually proposed an amendment to the stimulus bill to replace all the stimulation spending with tax cuts. The DeMint amendment was voted down 36-61.
This is a big deal for a few reasons, all of which make the Republicans look terrible. I mean, really obstructionist and malicious.
First, we already voted on this. We held a big national election on whether or not we wanted a progressive plan, heavy on investment in infrastructure, or more tax cuts. McCain and his tax cuts lost.
Second, Bush gave us a $1.2 trillion deficit. The cost of the Iraq war is in estimated to be about $3 trillion. The Bush tax cuts cost $1 trillion just between 2001 and 2005. So we can rule out the Republican’s serious desire to go lean on spending to balance the budget.
Third, the house republicans all voted against the stimulus bill. All of them. Actually, Ginny Brown-Waite, a Florida Republican, missed the vote but due to a family emergency, but intended to join her cohort in voting against the “pork-ridden bailout that produces few jobs, sends billions of your money to corrupt organizations like ACORN.” 177 Republicans, all except Brown-Waite, voted to veto the stimulus. The Republicans simply tried to take their ball and go home. They didn’t even go through the trouble that their counterparts in the senate went through to try to propose an alternative, however ideologically rigid and untenable. They just refused to participate.
Finally, only five Republicans in all of congress – Arlen Specter, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Mark Begich and George Voinovich were even willing to negotiate, and only the first three seem willing to seriously consider voting for a stimulus package that includes more spending than tax cuts.
This whole phenomenon of refusing to participate in good faith legislative action is appalling. The Republicans have had 8 years to run free with their experiment on America, dosing us with deregulation and tax cuts and we see where that got us. And then we voted, and decided on a different approach, which specifically included the promise of this stimulus package. By refusing to participate and trying to hijack the process is patent bad faith.

The War on Christmas, by Guest Posters Reginald and Edith Paft

2008-11-23T22:09:00.003-06:00

Well, as usual, Halloween is come and gone, Thanksgiving is just around the bend and the holiday season is under way, and that means the war on Christmas. Why is it that we can’t just enjoy Christmas in peace, the way we always have, by broadcasting our personal beliefs to the whole country through every aspect of the media and government? Christmas is a time for family, faith and a private celebration of the beliefs and values that mean most to us on a deeply personal level. When a corporation like Best Buy or Target wishes us “happy holidays” or “season’s greetings” it erodes the crass commercial affirmation that is most fundamental to our enjoyment of the holiday.
It is the same reason we refuse to acknowledge other people’s birthdays, because they devalue ours. That is why we can count on Bill O’Reilly and the American Family Association to help us fight this battle.
The American Family Association, who has the bravery to take on such scourges to the American way as the National Endowment to the Arts, Muslims being sworn into Congress, and the no-prayer agenda that was to blame for the Virginia Tech shooting. We found them when they began their boycott the Girl Scouts for refusing to ban lesbians! They have been fighting the broadening of America’s acknowledgment that other holidays are being celebrated on or near the time of Christmas. Just as sure as this country was founded as explicitly Christian with no intended separation of church and state, nothing makes a sacred holiday more hallowed than having it celebrated to the exclusion of all other holidays in civic spaces and mass marketing campaigns. Amen.

Honor Killings: Mulsim Women Fight for Social Justice

2008-11-18T16:41:00.004-06:00

Sophie Anwar, a BBC journalist has founded a charity aimed at raising resources for women affected by honor killings. The UN contends that as many as 5,000 women a year are killed in honor killings: when a family kills a woman for behavior that diminishes her perception as sexually chaste, the killing is an attempt to preserve family honor. Honor killing is most severe in Muslim nations, and has been the subject of human rights reports in Turkey and Palestine, but the UN makes the important observation that “Islamic leaders have condemned the practice and say it has no religious basis.” What is interesting is the steps being taken to prevent it include a united front of disparate movements banding together for broadly defined progress.

A UNESCO Report posits that there are three separate feminist movements in Islam: Islamic feminists who couch rights to equality in Islamic teachings, Muslim feminists who are Muslin but argue from secular or human rights perspectives, and Islamists who argue that an Islamic government which maintains equality in public spheres but allow for traditional gender roles in the home.

All fronts working together have been successful. There are many secular movements including men and women of all faiths working together for global human rights to promote women’s rights in all contexts- including the prevention of honor killings. There is a new generation of Muslims in the Western world who choose to embrace tradition as a source of pride and dignity while looking to their religion for support for equality and personal rights; of course this modern conception of tradition does not include honor killings. The groups embracing tradition, in fact, casts the reactionary strain of Islam that condones honor killings as ill-conceived and unsupported. And in Morocco, the Mudawwana Civil Code has developed a brand of shari’ah, Muslim Law, which has significant levels of gender-equity, which do not permit honor killings.

The united front for women’s rights—for human rights—is essential to creating true progress. Social justice is a goal, but it is also a process. Even countries which boast parity in pay and legal rights (a category of nations amongst which the United States may not count itself), issues of class, race, gender and globalization are still so tinged with gender bias that the progress is necessary. It is also worth noting that legal rights compliment but do not ameliorate social biases, and that progress will always be a goal to be strived for.

The united front is necessary because each group has its own hurdles, challenges and insights into our mutual progress and shared development. And in that spirit, the

Anagrams for Henry Paulson

2008-11-17T14:15:00.002-06:00

Penal Horny Us
Sanely, Uh, Porn
Real Phony "Nus"
Ha! Leprosy Nun.
Has Pure Nylon
Nearly, Oh Puns.

Anagramns For Sarah Palin

2008-11-17T11:18:00.003-06:00

Piranha Las
Plan: Sharia
A Sharp Nail
A Plain Rash
His Anal Rap
Ah, Liar Naps

10 Biggest Post Election Revelations About Sarah Palin

2008-11-11T22:41:00.004-06:00

10) Leaning out of helicopter, strafed Bosnian runway in 1996
9) Campaign clothing budget part of coordinated secret plan to stimulate American economy
8) Surprised that all that effort courting pitbull vote didn’t pan out
7) Got snookered by Biden’s ruse, “you vote for me, I’ll vote for you” trick
6) Actually believes Canada and Russia are in Alaska.
5) Actually pals around with terrorists
4) Split up A-Rod’s marriage
3) Actually violated Alaska State Law and Ethics Rules
2) More questions than answers: never seen in the same place as Charles Busch?
1) Wholly unqualified to serve in higher office

Proposition 8.5: Rock Badgers, Motherfucker. I Don’t Eat Them.

2008-11-09T14:03:00.004-06:00

California just recently passed a ballot initiative to restrict State law’s recognition of marriage to one man and one woman, or as the ballot title states, "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." The people of California have spoken clearly, saying that they are threatened –terrified – by seeing others exercise their rights and enjoy their freedoms. But what other freedoms are people engaging in that threaten to erode the quality of the American character? Drinking had the Temperance movement; same-sex marriage has the Prop. 8 folks and voting minorities are kept in check by Republicans. But what about people who decide to abstain from eating meat: who is restricting their freedoms to keep their seemingly personal decision from bringing the rest of society from “slouching towards Gomorrah?” Adapting James Dobson’s arguments from Marriage Under Fire, as offered on nogaymarriage.com, I offer you
TEN REASONS TO PASS PROPOSITION 8.5: Meals To Be Defined As Between a Man, a Starch, A Vegetable and a Meat (or Fish):

1) Child Welfare
Children do not have the freedom to decide what they eat. They are wholly at the whim of their parent’s dietary inclinations. If parents decide to impose their wild-eyed extremist views on food on their children, those helpless, precious angels will be undernourished, porous boned rickets ridden children to frail too protect themselves from the savage world.

2) Pica is Next
Just as the Proposition 8 folks draw the natural parallels between gay marriage to polygamy, pedophilia, bestiality necrophilia and other sorts of deviant sexuality, so too is vegetarianism a slippery slope to extreme and terrifying dietary practices. If we allow vegetarianism we have to ask: what sort of crazy dietary practices could be next? Eating dirt, rocks, nails, bleach? You can’t eat bleach, it isn’t even a solid!

3) Law Will Fail
Dobson and his ilk propose that the gay agenda is to undermine marriage in society and see the institution so weakened that divorces will be freely obtained without the involvement of the courts, and will be freely available as we slip into a lawless bacchanalian state. Right on! The same is true of the tree-hugging carrot lovers! Their agenda to attack what is American—Meat and potatoes values—is really just a first step to seeing law and order and all that binds our society torn asunder. Like the gummy tendon you find to your horror as you spoon through canned beef stew, law is the flexible and unappetizing ligament that holds our society together. Let the carrot loves begin to hack away at our most precious institutions and you will have an unrecognizable chaotic blend of all that is worst in the world, like Spam.

4) Vegetarianism Will Be Taught in Our Schools
School is the place that children go to learn the world and right and wrong. Without differentiating between these moral distinctions, like gay and straight or vegetarian or normal, children will not know how to identify alienate and attack those that are different from them. To make things worse, they may serve vegetarian alternatives in the cafeteria. Honestly, that is just gay.

5) Vegetarians Can Adopt
Clearly vegetarians are weak. Their effeminate nature and underdeveloped muscles are natures way of weeding them out of the gene pool (do not mistake this argument for advocating evolution and natural selection). Their low sperm count and inability to nourish a fetus is further evidence that their lifestyle is an aberration before god and an illustration of His will that they ought not to reproduce. That is why they should not be able to adopt. Just because children are rotting away without homes doesn’t mean we should hand them over to the perverse hands of veggie-chompers.

6) Foster Parents Will be Forced to Teach Vegetarianism
As stated above, children are better off on the street in rabid packs or staying in abusive homes than in loving accepting foster homes being taught by some seitan worshippers.

7) Government will be Bankrupt
If we have to raise taxes to support the increased medical emergencies to protect frail and unhealthy broccoli munchers. Worse, police forces will be required to swell to protect limp-wristed tofu-slurpers. The cost of protecting these self-elected weak-sisters of proud Americans will surge government spending and bankrupt us in an already soft economy.

8) Vegetarianism will Spread
If we barrel chested, steel jawed Americans can’t keep vegetarianism at bay, what hope do the lesser peoples of the world have. Let us lead by example and deny this softening of our spirit.

9) This is a Threat to Jesus
Quoting here from nogaymarriage.com: “Perhaps most important, the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ will be severely curtailed.” And it is as true of vegetarianism is a threat to god’s word just as surely as gays are. Diet is a staple of religious principles. Kashrut law prohibits eating pork, shell fish, rock badgers – yes, rock badgers and mixing dairy and meat. Muslims steer clear of the pork, too. Catholics used to avoid meat on Fridays, and Jesus has a whole spiel with teaching people to fish. Meat and fishing is the chosen metaphor for Jesus and man’s independence. What sort of assault on his earthly kingdom are we engaging in by allowing people to turn their back on his laws and metaphors. Not that religion should be thought of as a metaphor. Put down that rock badger!

10) The Culture War is the Balance
If we lose to the carrot-humper the shock to the Christian conscience will send us spiraling into a godless abandon. Stop humping that golden statue of god and stop roasting rock badgers, you godless sons-of-bitches!

UN Porn Names

2007-04-11T19:19:00.000-05:00

UN Related Porn Actor Names:
Coffee Anon
Franca Lingua
Sasha Licktenstein
John “Strap-On” Bolt-On
Alejandro Wolff (actual name)
Anthony Eden (actual name)
Ban-Ki Moon (actual name)

UN-Related Porn Titles:
Orifice of the Secretary General
Signing Instrument
Charter Bodies
Binding Resolutions
Treaty Enforcement: Soft Law turned hard
Buttroast Buttroast, Golly!
The Genital Assembly

…You know, the general assembly has the commission for the status of women under it but sometimes they let the commission be on top.

Baby Food Ad Ideas

2007-04-11T18:34:00.000-05:00

Goebbel’s brand baby food. Just plain, old fashioned baby food. Never packaged it with a coat-hanger, never will.

Say no to flipper babies. Make it Goebbel’s brand baby food.

With metal shards, or without? When you decide, decide Goebbel’s.

Because you don’t want your baby to grow up gay, make it Goebbel’s.

Because when you buy Goebel’s brand baby food, none of the proceeds go to Osama Bin Laden. Make it Goebbel’s.

Fiberglass? Make it Goebbel’s.

You could buy baby food that was made in a tire factory, or you could buy Goebbel’s.

Baby food made of real mashed peas and carrots, not real babies. Make it Goebbel’s.

Because we don’t believe in “aging to perfection,” make it Goebbel’s.

We aren’t saying other brands cause SIDS, were just pointing out the correlation. Never associated with Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. Make it Goebbel’s.

We don’t hire Gypsies. Make it Goebbel’s.

You didn’t hear it from us, but we think other brands carry a virulent strain of the Avian Flu. Make it Goebbel’s.

How much gristle is too much gristle? You don’t need to worry, if you make it Goebbel’s. Never made it with gristle, never will.

Because we never fucked your sister, make it Goebbel’s.

Dave Will Be Rich and Famous

2006-08-13T12:38:00.000-05:00

Here is an idea that is too good to pass up, because it will allow me to raise enough money and public support to run for office and create changes that will make rich white people move to Canada: M.C. Nuggets. Allow me to explain.
What I do is: release a rap album under the moniker “M.C. Nuggets.” My logo will be a gold emblem of a large “M” accompanied by a smaller “c,” or a golden “Mc.” The Name of the album will be “M.C. Nuggets will cause you to develop at a post issue. (Hint: say “at a post issue" quickly). Than I will be sued by McDonalds. I will prevail in court, because it is too tenuous to be real copyright infringement, however, the media exposure will allow me to cash in on the hullabaloo, whether my rapping is any good or not (hint: not). Than I will have money and fame, allowing me to run and win and implement public policy. Not bad, eh

The DaVinci Code: Separating Fact From Fiction

2006-05-22T17:58:00.000-05:00

Jesus Christ…
Is our Lord and Savior.

Books…
Should not be believed, unless they are about Jesus. Except this one. This one should not be believed. A rare exception to the no book except for Jesus rule.

The Holy Grail…
Is real. But it isn’t person. Worshiping people is crazy. I think the bible says something about worshipping things. Graven images, something about that. Yeah, things, that’s the ticket.

Is The DaVinci Code…
Is evil. The bible should not be interpreted, written or talked about. Don’t even think about it. Stop it. Now.

The church is…
Not invested in convincing people not to challenge ideas. Because they have the Bible!

The Bible is…The word of God, just the way it is. The King James Bible, as it was written, in English, by Jesus. Or the disciples. But in English, without alteration. The one you have is exactly the way it was written. It should not be changed, and never has been.

2006 Budget Analysis

2006-05-16T22:17:00.000-05:00

The Senate just approved a $70 billion package of tax cuts aimed to lower rates for investors and also save billions for families with above-average incomes.
It includes:
-A Two-year extension of the reduced 15 percent tax rate for capital gains and dividends, currently set to expire at the end of 2008.

Veterans programs and services cut $15 billion
+
Cut $3.2 Billion from education
+
The stateside system of elementary and secondary schools for military family members slated to be closed, will save $788 million
+
$2.4 billion for a reduced health benefits buyout for servicemen and women
+
Department of Education cuts of $500 Million, including Head Start cut $177 Million, the elimination of the low-interest Perkins Loan, and the elimination of 48 programs
+
The Women, Infants and Children Nutrition Program Cut $122 Million
+
National Institutes of Health spending cut $25 billion
+
$500 Million in spending cuts for the EPA
+$468 Million in Cuts for the Department of Energy
+
$2 Billion in Discretionary Spending Cuts for the Department of Agriculture, mostly research and watershed protection, farm subsidies and conservation
+
$500 Million in CDC Cuts, going to prevention and protection from bio-terrorism
+
$45 Billion in Medicaid Cuts
+
$3.7 Billion in Cuts for the Department of Housing, mostly going to low-income Americans, the disabled, housing assistance programs for those with AIDS, and for Native Americans
+
$100 Million in Cuts for the Department of the interior, 2/3 of which will come from National Parks, and the rest from the Bureau of Indian Affairs
+
The Department of Justice Will receive $1.1 Billion, including a 95% cut in the extremely successful Community policing program, a 5% cut for the Office of Violence Against Women, and a hefty yet-to-be-quantified cut for extra police
+
Department of Labor Cut $12 Billion Million, including the elimination of the Migrant and Seasonal Farm-worker job-training program, and the Responsible Reintegration for Young Offenders program, and OSHA Company safety training
+
$790 Million in Cuts for the Department of Transportation

= $113.168 Billion in Cuts, more than enough to cover that Tax cut for the Wealthy.
Thanks, Veterans and Native Americans. Way to take it on the chin for America. Now I can buy that second yacht.

The Star Mangled Banner

2006-04-30T18:30:00.000-05:00

By Ronald Theodore Hayden Wigmore Gobblewood III

I’ve just about had it with the jack booted P.C. thugs trampling into our homes, censoring our speech our thoughts, and unilaterally condemning our racist figurines. They’re decorative, darn it, and a hilarious send-up reminiscent of our proud antebellum history! But just when I thought I couldn’t get any angrier, they come out with a version of the star spangled banner in Spanish! Well, let me tell you something, muchachos: we like to have our country praised in English! People have always had the common courtesy to learn English, all the way back to the Indians and the slaves. You don’t hear people speaking Cherokee or Yoruba, do you! Of course not. High five for cultural hegemony! You like that Squanto? Bring it on!
If the coalition of the willing taught us anything, it is that we have friends all over the world, and can pick and choose how and when people pay fealty to the greatest country in the world. There has to be some way to assure true loyalty in English. I might propose a loyalty oath of some sort, some sort of pledging of allegiance, but I can’t imagine any way that we could require an pledge to god in a country with separation of church and state, patriot that I am.
When one reads the Statue of Liberty, the inscription reads, "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she/ with silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,/ Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,/ The wretched refuse of your teeming shore, /Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,/ I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" See! Keep your ancient lands! We don’t want you. We already feed our homeless to the statue and her insatiable appetite for woe and suffering. Your swarthy immigrants might give old lady liberty indigestion. So, next time you decide you would like to appreciate and pay homage to our great nation, learn a new language first. This great country of ours was not built on the blend of people from different places and cultural experiences. We can all agree on the religious fanaticism, witch burning and international cotton and tobacco cartels this country was founded on. And if you can’t support our values in the language we watch our sitcoms on (on five of the seven major networks) you aren’t welcome.

Palestine v. Israel

2006-04-27T01:31:00.000-05:00

Israel just elected Ehud Olmert, Ariel Sharon’s pupil, who ran on moderation and a “painful” withdrawal of Israeli settlements in Palestine. Just previous, Palestinians elected a Hamas majority government, who refuse the Israeli plans for separation, whose hard-line Prime Minster, Ismail Haniyeh, said the plans will “definitely not be accepted.”
In his acceptance speech, Olmert said, “We are prepared to compromise, give up parts of our beloved land of Israel, remove, painfully, Jews who live there, to allow you the conditions to achieve your hopes and to live in a state in peace and quiet.”
The Hamas government, who named a known and wanted terrorist wanted in connection with bombings killing Israeli citizens as the head of national security, refuses to condemn terrorist attacks against Israel. The numbers, collected jointly by Palestinian and Israeli journalists reveal a great disparity in acceptance and eagerness to resolve the dispute:

Palestinians:
37% of Palestinians support Hamas’s recognition of Israel.
52% of Palestinians support attacks against Israeli Civilians.
81.4% of Palestinians support integrating armed groups that level terrorist attacks againstIsrael
into Hamas Security forces.
45% of Palestinians believe reconciliation will never be possible.

Israelis:
68% of Israelis support an autonomous state of Palestine, despite continued attacks and a
government that does not recognize Israel’s right to exist.
56% of Israelis support a complete pullout of both the West Bank and Gaza.
59% of Israelis support a pullout, to some extent.
58% of Israelis believe one of Hamas’s goals is the annihilation of the state of Israel.
[Hamas states the annihilation of the state of Israel is a goal]
27% of Israelis believe reconciliation will never be possible.

Bush Running On Fumes

2006-04-23T17:48:00.000-05:00

President Bush celebrated Earth day with a bike ride and a speech commending the development of hydrogen fuel cell technology for cars and a promise of ending dependency on oil. Of course, all the promises in the world don’t cost a thing, when the funding goes directly to GM, and research scientists don’t see a viable product coming for at least 15 to 20 years. Further still, the energy required to extract hydrogen from water is significant enough that it doesn’t answer the pollution and fossil fuel problem. Of course, “fuel cell technology” is a buzz-word, just like “pro-family:” it doesn’t cost you anything to say, and is such an abstract concept that concrete commitment is neither required not expected. It just sounds good to say. So, in the words of the immortal Oz, let’s take a look at what is going on “behind the curtain” of the administration’s energy policy.
First, I feel obliged to begin with the fact that fresh out of the stable in their first term, the administration invited a greedy cabal of lobbyists and corporate interests to draft the nation’s energy policy. The “energy task force” composed of corporate interests were allowed to write, word-for-word, our national energy policy. Four years ago a Federal judge forced the administration, who fought the legal action for roughly a year, to disgorge their meeting reports. What they got was a heavily censored 13,500-page transcript, replete with redactions that still served as a heavy indictment. The sale of public interest was so great it would make the bureaucrats who dismantled and sold of the Soviet Union blush: here it is.
Second, in concerns of industry wide price gouging, the Department of Energy has a much publicized website that people can use to turn in retailers they suspect of falsely raising prices. Way to stick it to the middle-class retailer! That suspect small business owner makes a great scapegoat, while the oil company’s make gut-busting record profits. Friend of small business my ass! “Record Profits.” Exxon exceed previous profits 75%! A record high. Chevron profits rose 20%, their new record, too. Esso did the same. Record profits for Royal Dutch Shell and British Petroleum, too. But hey, if you think that small business owner on the corner is scamming you, don’t read the paper, turn him in to the authorities.
Finally, Bush tried to silence NASA scientists for exposing global warming as a real threat. What a dick!

Immigration Debate Comes To Boil On Beltway

2006-04-15T11:09:00.000-05:00

Hot on the heels of the rejection of a watered down immigration bill, the GOP and other concerned Americans have not given up on solving our nations greatest problem. There are already some 12 million illegal immigrants in the US, and the number is growing by up to 700,000 a year.
The rejected legislation would have criminalized being an undocumented immigrant, and would have created a 700-mile fence along the boarder, but was weakened by Democratic concessions allowing illegals who have been working since 2004 to apply for citizenship. Senator Bill First has proposed a bill, the Securing America’s Borders Act, which would deny citizenship to all illegal immigrants living in the US currently living in the US, unless they were pursuing a math or science degree, and would hire 2,000 new border agents. Senator John McCain’s Secure America and Orderly Immigration (SAOI) Act of 2005 would create a system of fines and penalties for illegals who want to apply for citizenship. Hardly sufficient when aliens are taking our jobs.
Alfonso Ruiz, of the Cato institute, does not see a problem. “When I came to this country three-weeks ago, I had no education and opportunities. I had been a migrant farmer, but was stricken with deep poverty and no chance to improve the financial prospects for myself and my family while in Mexico. Now I work at the most revered conservative think tank in the United States.” Professor Donald Whitmore, whose job Ruiz took, was unavailable for comment.
Former Senator Tom Carper did weigh in on the issue, however. “I had served my constituents well for five-terms in congress, twice as governor, and had been in the Senate for 5-years. One day I show up to work and some Mexican is doing my job, apparently for less. This is a problem that affects us all.” Carper is now making ends meet as a collecting grocery carts at a Delaware Safeway.
All of Washington’s highest-ranking positions, from congressional seats to the powerful jobs as power-brokers and lobbyists have recently gone to illegal immigrants, while former officials find themselves working low paying jobs in the food service and as day-laborers. The drastic shift has evoked strong sentiments across the beltway.
“It is the American Dream: to come to the US, apply yourself, and succeed. American’s must not forget that they themselves are delineated from immigrants who came to this country in search of that dream. It is incumbant upon Americans to preserve and nurture that which distinguishes this great country and makes it a beacon of hope and possibilities,” said Raymon Ferrera, recent immigrant and lobbyist for the pharmacutical industry. “Blow it out your ass,” said landscaper and former lobbyist, Richard Stewart.

Dear Pope,

2006-04-08T22:35:00.000-05:00

My Dear Pontifex Romanus, after almost 2000 years, I think it is time we broke up. It isn’t that we haven’t had good times, but I think maybe we should see other people. I’m not alone in this, and my father was a lot of help. He says you don’t let me speak for myself enough, and are always putting words in my mouth. I used to argue with him, but after many years I am starting to think he has always been right. He usually is. You order for me in restaurants, and are so jealous refuse to let me talk to other people. “You want to know what Jesus thinks, well, ask me.” Well, Pope, those days are over. I would like to travel, meet interesting people, and live a life of my own. It is almost like you prefer seeing me as a victim. Well, I’m tired of being the martyr for this relationship. From now on, Jesus speaks for Jesus. Look out world, Jesus is coming back.

Sincerely,
Jesus

Nathan the Goat: The Sanctity of Marriage

2006-03-18T01:00:00.000-06:00

I am a goat, and I am happily married. I live in Texas, and like the saying says… I wasn’t born in the Lone Star State, but I got here as fast as I could.
Now, many people don’t know, but Rick Santorum does: bestiality is legal (or not expressly illegal) in 20 states, including Texas. Up until recently, sodomy was illegal in 15 states, same-sex only sodomy was illegal in 4 states. So when I made love to my human wife, I could look in her eyes and bleat out passionately knowing we were sharing something special. Something that the United States, and the Great State of Texas had decided could be shared in a special kind of union recognized by the state. Certainly too special for two gays to share. But since Lawrence v. Texas, homos can have sex legally, and now they’re getting married all over the damned place.
Marriage used to be sacred, special, reserved for special situations. Maybe I want to marry a millionaire on Fox. Maybe I want to order a bride, sight-unseen, from the Ukraine or the Philipines. Maybe I want to get ripped on Thunderbird and get hitched to a stranger at a drivethrough in Vegas. Maybe I want to be married by a captian of a boat. These are the outer-limits of the respectability of marriage as a legal institution, and it is my right to explore them. And it does me and my rights a dis-service to let a bunch of ass-bandits the privlige to degrade the sanctity of the institution. It makes me sick. Now, if you don’t mind, I am going to have legal, heterosexual goat-sex with my wife. God bless America, and don’t mess with Texas.

US President George W Bush has again defended his decision to see through walls, “keep an eye” on Americans, in the wake of the 2001 terror attacks.

2006-03-16T19:21:00.000-06:00

Speaking at a press conference, Mr Bush also repeated that he would continue to fly around America, using his x-ray vision to monitor American goings-on.
He also urged Congress to support his use of super-hot heat-vision, a top US anti-terror power, calling it an essential tool to protect Americans.
"We cannot afford to be without heat-vision for a single moment," he said.
It was not in the best interests of the country for people to "play politics" with homeland security, he said, while answering reporters' questions.
Bush will also be seeking endorsement of his super strength, invulnerability to conventional weaponry, and ability to reverse the earth’s orbit, backing up the passage of time.
'Helping the enemy'
Mr Bush also said he expected a "full investigation" into who leaked information about his new found powers.
"My personal opinion is it was a shameful act for someone to disclose this very important weapon against terror in a time of war," he said.
The fact that we're discussing this at all is helping the enemy," he added.
The New York Times reported last Friday that Mr Bush had signed a secret presidential order following the 11 September 2001 attacks, allowing the use of the new presidential powers.
Bush reminded reporters that presidential powers had been legally enhanced by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and the 2001 Joint Resolution for the Authorization of military force. He then shot fire-bolts from his fists into a screaming throng of journalists.

Hungry for the Wolf

2006-03-16T19:12:00.000-06:00

Gray Wolves have recovered from near extinction in the Great Lakes Area. To celebrate, the Bush administration is proposing removing protections on the population of 3,800 wolves. Hopefully we will be able to shoot these beautiful wild animals, since they are so abundant.

F.C.C.ing Madness

2006-03-16T00:55:00.000-06:00

The Federal Communications Commission is suing over 100 TV stations that aired the CBS program “Without a Trace” in December of 2004 for “suggesting” that teenage characters participated in an orgy. The program defends itself claiming it is a cautionary tale of unsupervised youth run amock. The F.C.C., fining the stations that aired the program a record $3.6 million are defending a new standard brought into effect with the new F.C.C. chairman, Kevin Martin, who is intent on proving that Der Commissar Powell was too much of a pussy to really stick it to broadcast TV. Powell set the previous record for F.C.C. violation fines, slapping CBS with a $550,000 fine for letting Janet Jackson embarrass herself in the worlds most innocuous display of a pasty-covered breast in human history. This fine is SEVEN times bigger, and nary a nipple in sight. Powell issued a record setting (at the time) $7.9 million in fines that year. The single fine means Martin is half-way there.
Martin is a politico-hack who served as deputy general counsel to the Bush-Cheney Campaign, is reaping his reward for political fealty, and I just plain don’t like him.
One of his first acts was to create a mandate that “shit” be added to a list of words that are off-limits in almost any context. This is attributed to be a response to the utterance of the word by Nicole Richie at the Billboard Music Awards in 2003. Not only is it terrifying that people like Janet Jackson and Nicole Richie are influencing national policy directly, it kind of sucks that restrictions on expression are getting tighter as time goes by.
Is it a really big deal that we can’t say “shit” on TV anymore? Not really. Something tells me artists can find a way to express themselves without the prohibition of a B-grade swear word being too big of an obstacle. Something else tells me artists aren’t expressing anything on broadcast TV, so it doesn’t make a shit-load of a difference. But penalization of CBS (and since when did that network become the “bad boys” of broadcasting, anyway?) for the orgy-bit is a big deal. Why? Because an off-screen orgy isn’t an obscene word or image… it is an idea. It is a dramatic fiction. The idea that any idea presented in a dramatic context can be seen as obscene when expressed in plain-spoken narrative is FUCKING TERRIFYING.
Example: Phaedra falls in love with her son-in-law, is re-buffed, claims he raped her and kills herself from guilt when her husband kills him. DIRTY!
Example: In the Orestia Agamemnon kills one of his daughters, Iphigenia, so his wife, Clymenestra kills him while he is taking a bath. While the haughty Clymenestra is ruling with her lover and usurper of the throne, Aegisthus, her remaining children Electra and Orestes plot to murder them. Which they do. NASTY!
Example: Oediopus kills his dad, boffs his mom, and cuts out his eyes. ICKY! Medea kills her kids. Lycoan fed his own brother in a stew to Zues. Titus Andronicas fed his enemies their children after they raped and maimed his daughter. And guess what… all this shit happens off stage. And it’s art. It’s fucking art, because even if they are unpleasant they ARE JUST IDEAS! They are powerful because they are ideas, but they are certainly not purient and obscene because they are just ideas. Romeo and Juliet would be porn if you could only think of young teens bumping uglies. But a healthy adult is able to understand that themes and events in narrative context aren’t pornography and can take in a ripe drama without drooling too much and getting the pages of literature stuck together. You don’t say anything about the art by obsessing on the gritty details, just yourself. Was the satue of Lady Justice purient just because John Ashcroft couldn’t get over a bare breast, or did it just reveal that he was so obsessed with TITS that he couldn’t a) be near a fucking COLD METAL depiction of the female form without getting in a lather, and b) was overwhelmed by the presence of a nipple and was bling to the irony of hiding a statue of justice behind a sheet. Irony is lost on these shitheads.
NOW… this doesn’t mean Without a Trace is great literature. It could be a cheap and sleazy piece of trash. I don’t know, I haven’t seen it and I don’t care. But an idea isn’t obscene, unless it is the notion that the government should be fining TV stations for TALKING about things they think are dirty. THAT is obscene.

I Knew He Was Trouble

2006-03-15T19:08:00.000-06:00

VW Part I

2006-03-15T18:31:00.000-06:00

There are a few of these commercials, you’ve probably seen them. They star Peter Stormare, which is kind of novel in and of itself. He played the “Marlboro Man” character in “Fargo,” and the nihilist porn-star in “The Big Lebowski.” He is a strange, lionized Teutonic fella’ who is something of a favorite character actor of mine. He sort of exudes the sort of charming creepiness that made pairing him up with Steve Buscemi a natural move. Anyway, the commercials: Peter Stormare plays a patronizing German engineer with a disdainful leggy-blonde assistant who destroys young people’s cars. Why on earth would I give a rat’s ass about a commercial? Well, mostly, I don’t. But here is an interesting perspective on it…

The commercial is for a Volkswagon. Volkswagon is german for “People’s Car.” The company was the brain-child of Adolf Hitler. In 1933 Hitler met with the German auto-engineer Ferdinand Porsche to discuss creating an economical car for the people of Germany. He was big on taking care of the German people, you know. Hitler helped design and supervise the making of the car. Hitler changed the name of Porsche’s V38 to the KdF Wagon, “Kraft durch Freude" meaning “Strength through Joy.” This offended the ever-living-shit out of Porsche, who was not a member of the Nazi Party, who issued government stamps for the public to purchase the car. So, that is the history of VW. Now, I’m not a big fan of visiting the sins of the father on the son, and imagine that all of the people who head up VW were never Nazis. I could be wrong, but who knows. If an auto-company that had ties to the Nazis was off limits, nobody would buy Fords. Ford’s CEO won a Nazi German Eagle First Class for building troop-transporters in Berlin. Actually, Ford was sued to disgorge profits made by Nazi Slave labor during WWII. Elsa Iwanowa v. Ford, 67 F.Supp.2d 424 (D.N.J. 1999). (The Case was dismissed because the statute of limitations had run). Henry Ford, Sr. himself was responsible for the mass publishing of The Elders of Zion, and started a newspaper called the Dearborn Independent, based on a series of articles about “the problem” raised by “the International Jew.” Hitler had a portrait of Ford in his office.

VW Part II

2006-03-15T18:26:00.000-06:00

But enough about Ford, that is another rant…
Actually, Ford had the good sense to shut-the-fuck-up about their sordid past and try to keep it quiet. VW doesn’t seem to be that smart. So here are the commercials…

German Engineer and Disdainful Blonde standing in front of tricked out car with various “hip-hop” styled young men.
German Engineer and Disdainful Blonde: Vee are going to ‘un-pimp’ zee auto.
DESTROY CAR IN “FUNNY” WAY
German Engineer and Disdainful Blonde: Vas up! V-Dub representing Duetschland!

And after they “ethnically” cleanse the hip-hop-ified car which has been pimped out, they brag about un-pimping the car and give a shout out to the company’s German heritage. Is this way too fucked up to believe? Am I alone in being bugged-out by this?
See the commercials if you like: http://youtube.com/watch?v=cv157ZIInUk

Certifiable

2006-01-16T20:44:00.000-06:00

A staph infection (pronounced “staff”) is an infection caused by staphylococcus aureus bacteria. Staph bacteria is really quite common, and most people have it living on their skin much of the time. Cuts and abrasions can lead to the infections, and the bacteria is the leading cause of food poisoning. Staph can also lead to pneumonia, bone infections, blood infections, infections inside the heart and toxic shock syndrome. Different antibiotics are used to treat different strains of staph. Hospitals have to be vigilant because the majority of patients are in high-risk categories with lowered immune systems. Because of their weakened state the otherwise benign bacteria can cause exacerbated damage. 90% of hospital personnel are alleged to harbor the bacteria at any given time. It is called colonization: an organism that is present in or on a host organism but is not causing infection or illness. The host than becomes a carrier, and can infect patients in high risk states. Staph infections from hospital stay are the most dangerous because they are more resistant to antibiotics. Regular penicillin may not work, and hospital stay with intravenous antibiotics may not work. According to the FDA, about 70% of bacteria that are in hospitals are resistant to at least one antibiotic. Thousands of people die from staph infections contracted in hospitals die every year in the US.
But people are going into hospitals with resistance to antibiotics already. We get it in our food. Our chicken and turkey are steeped with fluoroquinolone drugs to protect them from e.coli from being in close proximity with their own leavings. They eat their leavings when they are crammed together. It is cheaper to inject the animals with antibiotics than it is to provide the animals with larger pens. fluoroquinolone is also used on humans as an antibiotic. As we eat poultry suffused with fluoroquinolone, we build up a resistance to it. So when we come into contact with like bacteria (say Campylobacter bacteria-- which poultry are often colonized with, and act as carriers for) we are resistant to the antibiotics that treat it.
This isn’t just poultry? It is milk, beef, all sorts of produce. Is there any way to avoid produce that is infused with antibiotics? Sure. Certified organic food don’t use antibiotics. Why aren’t all farms organic? It is price prohibitive. The National Organic Program, chartered in 2001 by the USDA, creates regulations that determine what is legally certifiable as “organic.” Hiring a private agency to certify your farm as organic is very expensive; the USDA doesn’t certify farms, but confers the duty to private agents (only 13 states are in the Organic certification game, the other 37 only have private agents).
The agencies will not tell you what you have to do to meet the standards as a part of application and review, but have separate departments available for hire to consult, educate and troubleshoot with applicants. Costs for the first year certification run the gambit from $90 to $150,000 dollars. One consistency in costs is that small farms are charged a percentage of their annual sales that is SIX TIMESmore than commercial “super farms.” This is a particularly nasty parting shot, because the reward for switching to organic farming comes from the significantly higher asking price for the produce, which needs to be collected up-front for the small farmer to recoup the loss from conversion and prevent insolvency in the first year. The cost of transforming the farming operation from non-organic to organic alone (not including certification costs) is often to high for small family farms.
And that being said, the majority of large commercial super farms are still not operating as organic, despite the smaller proportionate costs and increased opportunities in revenue. The bottom line: it is cheaper to keep farming dangerous than to either broaden the market place by allowing small, family farms the opportunity to survive or force the commercial super farms to convert to healthier standards. Of course if the standard were raised, the commercial super farms that are already organic would stop being able to charge premiums for their produce (that is why they aren’t working towards a universal organic standard). The solution: on October 27th, the congress slapped a rider on the 2006 Agricultural Appropriations bill to lower the standards for organic certification. Isn’t that a great punch line? Not to make the certification or conversion process more affordable. Not to mandate changes to make Americans healthier. No… lower the standards! HA! I love these guys. Oh, here are the congressmen that pushed the rider through… 8 Republicans (big surprise, huh?)
Sen Robert Bennett (R-UT)
Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS)
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA)
Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT)
Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID)
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS)

There is Hope, After All

2006-01-16T13:49:00.000-06:00

Anagrams for Samuel Alito

2006-01-15T18:55:00.000-06:00

Malaise Lout

It a lame soul

Oil: Meal ta’ US

Isolate, Maul

Meat ails Lou

Lou ate Islam
Me is all auto

O, all time USA

Sit a male Lou

Lout is a meal

A soil amulet

I tamale soul

Alias: Me Lout

Adult Movies with the name "Bjorn" in Them

2006-01-15T18:32:00.000-06:00

Toot Your Own Bjorn
The Bjorn Identity
Bjorning Wood
Bjorn on the Cob
Bjorn on the 4th of July
Bjornography
Oh, Me So Bjorny

Guest Poster Series: Nathan

2005-10-23T20:10:00.000-05:00

Nathan: Free Speech and YOU

When the founding fathers of this great nation put pen to paper it wasn't for security from aboraod. With the decleration of independance the small upstart nation went to war with the British Empire... I challenge you to show me the security in that. Why did they do it? Freedom. This country is about freedom.

Now I know I'm not surprising anybody to bring up the same old polls we've been hearing about ever since September 11th, but the majority of American's are willing to sacrifice the right to free speech to be monitored a little more closely by their government. They call that security. It makes them sleep easier. Well, I may just be a goat, but I am a prize winning showgoat, and I've traveled enough to see how other goats live. Let me tell you something, buster: if we give up our freedoms there is nothing left to protect. Maybe you sleep easier with the governments watchful eye trained on you, but I don't. And let me tell you what: the sacrifice of freedoms is a slippery slope! We've already given up certain freedoms by relinquishing the press to business interests. What do I mean?

Let me ask you a question. Let's pretend for a minute that I weren't a goat, and that I decided to run for President. Let's also pretend I wasn't rich. How would I get my message out? Most of western Europe would allow me equal exposure on state subsidized platforms; in the U.S. I;d be lucky to get on AM radio. Free speech? Free if you can afford it! So remember what matters. Don't give your freedoms without asking what you are supposed to be getting in return. Hold onto those rights, and hold tight.

The Gift

2005-10-20T03:35:00.000-05:00

An entire generation, at least mine, and hopefully those that follow, have grown up thinking of safe sex as the only sex. It is common sense, but it is more than that… it is fear. Unlike any generation before us, sex can be deadly. Of course, diseases that are treatable with antibiotics could be deadly when untreated, but HIV and AIDS have changed the level of danger in sex. Because sex is inherently infused with shame and fear, and the psyche is enthralled and repulsed, the most negative aspects of sexuality can easily be fetishized. That is why, by all rationales, it should come as no surprise that unprotected sex, as a recent taboo, could be fetishized. Perhaps it is my generational bias, but I was surprised.
The Gift won the jury award for Best Documentary at NewFest 2003: The New York Lesbian and Gay Film Festival. It is a documentary about “bug chasers,” HIV negative men who fetishize high-risk unprotected sex, seeking “the gift“ of HIV. The thrill and nihilism shown in the film are pretty shocking. Even in the sub-community portrayed in the film there is a wide spectrum of cross-motivations: resignation to the hazards of the lifestyle, hope in medication, a desire to relate to the community, nihilism and crass and ignorant romanticization. The film contrasts the “bug chasers” (a self-applied moniker emblemized by bio-hazard tattoos) with a horrified and indignant group of older men who were have were infected by chance, and have been living with HIV and AIDS. The gay community at large, as portrayed in the film, understands the desire to enjoy sex without the anxiety and buzz-kill of worrying about protection, but dismiss the idea of giving up on protection as dangerous and careless. The film goes a step beyond, interviewing repentant bug chasers who are filled with anger and regret at their choice to court death and become infected.
A quick look online shows the reality of the problem. Bare-backing is a real thing, and “Bare-backing” parties are all over, and very, very common. There are online listings for parties and anonymous encounters. For sex parties and hook-ups, bare-backing is a proclivity and an option when cruising. Casual sex without protection, however, is a problem for everybody, whether gay or straight, whether “illicit” or not. Thirty-one states have made it a criminal offense to knowingly be infected with HIV and have unprotected sex without disclosing your status. According to a University of California study, the ratio of those ever failing to disclose HIV infection prior to sex to casual vs. steady partners was 11:1 for gay/bisexual men, 3:1 for heterosexual men and 1:1 for women. While 36.7% of gay and bi-sexual men have sex without disclosure, the rates are as high as 13.1% of heterosexual men and 9.5% among heterosexual women. The politics and social significance of protection may differ from community to community, but the danger is real for everybody, and the welfare of one community is the interest of all others.
While “The Gift” focuses on the gay community, the themes of fear, resignation, and resentment of the fear that has become a normal part of sex are universal themes. I don’t say this as an attempt to marginalize the legitimacy or validity of the epidemic in the gay community, or the fact that the phenomenon of “bug chasing” is a unique and singular sub-culture; the themes it addresses, however, are very real for everybody of our generation who was raised in the world of safe sex. It is an important story for everybody in understanding our relationship with protection, our attitudes about what it means for intimacy, and assessing how we internalize risk as a result of our sexuality.

GRAND THEFT AUTO: VATICAN CITY

2005-10-18T15:21:00.000-05:00

Guest Poster Series: Robert Walter Hillsborough

2005-10-12T00:36:00.000-05:00

Guest Poster: Robert Walter Hillsborough

Why I'm a Republican

I hear a lot of trash about why Republicans are bad. Well let me tell you something, Mr. and Mrs. ACLU: you can talk a good game, but I don't think you have spent the time thinking it through. Sure, any political party has issues on their platform you don't agree with, that don't mean you throw the baby out with the bathwater. How many of you democrats supported Clinton hushing up them gays in the military? How about kickin' all them lazy baby-machines off the dole? I thought so. Sure, Republicans might stand for some things I don't like, but that don't mean I ain't a Republican.
Let me give you an example: I'm a member of the Klu-Klux-Klan. I know, I know, all you bleeding-hearts are thinkin' that any card-carying Klansman has got to be racist. Well let me tell you something, Mr. Know-it-all pinko, you're as wrong as a wrestling is fake! I believe in white pride, not racism. Hell, it's a big tent.
Same thing with the NRA. Of course every American deserves to have protection. It's a dangerous world. I live in a decent town, but them urban types wind up even all the way out here. Do I want a gun? of course I do. Do I think we ought to have them "cop killers" the rappers are always going on about? Heck no. They're the ones protecting us. So you see, Mr. Ivy-League-Liberal, not all conservatives think the same.
So maybe Bush is all about stealing oil and fattening up companies. That just ain't my idea of Republican ideals. But sure enough, he brought Jesus back in the White House. He gave the Sadaam "Insane" the ole' heave-ho. I can't scoff at that. So instead of thinking all Republicans are the same, next time you see a Republican think of what I said: white pride, protecting ourselves from urban types, and Jesus in the White House. Then you'll understand what I'm saying. To keeping America free for Americans!
-Robert Walter Hillsborough

Guest Poster: Roger William Mayflower

2005-10-11T15:49:00.000-05:00

Roger William Mayflower Speaks For America

America is over 200 years old. Years built on pride, sacrifice and family values. We fought the British, the Indians, the Mexicans and the Krauts to make this country what it is. It is a sad day when one of our own... some fickle pickle from the beltway... tries to sink our boat by drilling away holes at the hollow.
This Dave v. Rodan fellow seems to see humor in being a gadfly... well, Alger Hiss was a such a bug and we swatted him. I've had about enough of this brat's snideisms and I am prepared to blow his horsefeathers the way of the door. Let me tell you why this website, its "bloggeristas" and all those like it are bad for America.
America is like a pride winning clydsedale. She's a strong, handsome mare with fine pedigree and a job to do. Sure there are other phillies out there with pretty manes and manicured hooves who may make a prettier show horse but, damn it, America does the work. She carries the the heavy yolk of leadership while the goats of Europe and Asia look up to her with their milky goat eyes dreaming of their day in the fields. The last thing she needs is a flies like you buzzing around her twtching tail, picking away at her. Sure, those that ride on her shoulders might not be the finest the great American farm has to offer. Philanderers like Harding, cripples like Roosevelt, and now this little lord Fontlery from Ascot Acres, W. Bush, but this fine horse will keep working the fields no matter who is behind the reigns. So I say so what it Bush snorted cocaine of the chest of a Chipendale's showboy in some backroom in Fort Worth. So what if Karl Rove likes to have little girls dressed like nurses dress him in diapers and take his temprature. Who cares if Rumsfeld stabs a few lousy hobos. So did Coolidge... I ought to know, I worked the rails back then. Forgive me saying so, but this fine horse that is America, her rich musty loins and lithe bristle haired legs, strong and lustful loin and luscoius prideful neck... I forgot what I was saying. I love horses, you know. Anyway, some gadfly Jew shouldn't be poking away at her. An American should be spending his time with horses, appreciating what America has to offer. Like freedom, liberty, and horse farms. Not complaining about every political mistep of some politicians. These boys are just doing what they think is best for the country. Let's all just forget about this nitpicking and squabling and get back on the horse.
-Roger William Mayflower

The Right to Bare Ass

2005-10-05T01:53:00.000-05:00

I was flipping channels last night and settled on MSNBC for a moment. I find watching cable news is usually as entertaining and informative as savaging myself in the groin with a claw hammer, but today would be different. It seems they are considering passing a law in Seattle barring strippers from contact during their performances... in essence, a legal statute prohibiting "lap dances." I didn't know this. Did you? Caveat emptier... I am no strip club expert. To me, strip clubs are like... Well, cable news: they don't really hurt anybody (injuries to dignity not withstanding) but it isn't for me. Anyway, Tucker Carlson goes on to say that we have a constitutional right to lap dances. Now, another aside... I have a blog, so obviously I have no problem with purple prose, being bombastic, or hyperbole in general. But come on? A constitutional right to lap dances? Than I thought... I'm just a first year law student. Am I wrong? Is there some permutation in "the penumbras of the law" that guarantees the right to a lap dance? I'll keep you posted. Until that time, I invite you to join me in dismissing all televised news as utter and total hog-feed.

Men Named Ralph

2005-10-03T22:36:00.000-05:00

Really. Ralph. All of them.

What was Tom DeLay indicted for?

2005-10-01T18:10:00.000-05:00

.

In 2002 elections the Republicans won their elections in a landslide. The dealmakers and campaign big-wigs went on to brag about how they won thanks to corporate donations. Corporate donations are illegal in Texas political campaigns. Investigations started almost immediately, focusing on DeLay’s PAC TRMPAC (Texans for a Republican Majority). DeLay created this PAC; he designed it top-to-bottom to match the design of his Americans for a Republican Majority Pac. He barely bothered to change the name.
It turns out DeLay had an associate, Warren Robold, raise a bunch of corporate money in DC. The corporate money got funneled to TRMPAc were it was spent on fundraisers, phone banking and consultants. One check in particular, a check for $100,000, made its way from Austin to the Republican National Convention. In essence, the party was being used to launder dirty money. $190,000 in corporate donations went from the Austin PAC to the RNC, and came back in $190,000 in campaign funds for seven Republican candidates in Texas. None of this is in dispute.
DeLay is not alone on the chopping block. Two associates, Jim Ellis and John Colyandro, are right there next to him. Ok… so we know that he is being charged with violating state campaign finance law. He claims the money is legit; his defense is based upon the notion that money is to fluid to track: the money they gave isn’t necessarily the money they got back, even if they’re the same amount. It is pretty run of the mill fund-raising scamming. This is and of itself is not all that unusual, except the for the fact that, unlike all that many places, it is explicitly and particularly illegal in Texas. But they had even sleazier, dare I say, at cost of sounding hyperbolic, evil.
District lines are drawn every ten years, based on fluctuations in demographics and populations in the census (which is taken every ten years). The Texas district lines had just been set upon the release of the 2001 census. Roughly a year later, the Republicans decided to re-adjust them. Is this unusual? It is the first time it has happened in over 100 years without a court order. According to Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican, the lines should stand until the release of the next census. The Republicans did involved computer mapping, and figured out in a procedure called “cracking and packing” how to break up strong Democratic strongholds, and pack them into new districts that would favor Republicans. As should come as no surprise, I am sure, the bulk of the disenfranchisement was at the expense of African-Americans and Latinos. The affect was turning a 17-15 district breakdown favoring Democrats into a 22-10 breakdown favoring Republicans.
Conspiracy theory? No. This is a conspiracy theory. This is a fact. Republicans don’t deny that they carved up the districts like a Christmas turkey for political gain. They would have no other explanation, and they aren’t the type took let a successful act of mischief go unclaimed.
So, now you know. Go tell your friends that DeLay is up for two-years in Texas prison. Lucky for him Bush isn’t Governor, what with ol’ W’s penchant for puttin’ prisoners in the chair, and all. Lucky boy, Tom. Lucky boy.

TODAY'S HEADLINES

2005-09-29T01:25:00.000-05:00

Mice Enjoy Fruits of Health Science
Laugh at Helpless Humans Still Plagued With Disease

Hurricane Rita
Weather Continues to Affect Country

Cocaine Allegations Lose Kate Moss Modeling Contracts
Fashion Industry Loathe To Send Unhealthy Message to Women

Conflict in Israel
Also Sand, Historic Monuments

Tornado Able To Locate Texas on a Map
Outshines President, Former Governor

Kettle Under Fire as “Too Black”
Calls Pot “Uncle Tom”

Lobby For Intelligent Design Gives Up
Sure That God Who is So Amazing And Capable Can Speak For Self

Things that came as a surprise to the Bush administration

2005-09-19T22:32:00.000-05:00

The Bush administration dodged blame for the federal government’s lack of preparedness in the New Orleans disaster by saying that nobody could predict that the levees would break. In that same spirit we bring you other things that came as a surprise to the Bush administration:

-Despite thick accent, facial hair, Saddam not Bin Laden
-Ewoks not baby wookies
-Earth round, heliocentric
-Heliocentric not a 70s prog-rock bad
-After throwing all that support behind him, Schwarzenegger not cyborg. Can’t even travel in time.
-African-Americans actually allowed to vote by law
-White House China room in DC, full of plates or some shit
-Cheney can shotgun a 24-pack, break chair over head, sing Brown-Eyed Girl in perfect Pitch
-They actually take attendance in National Guard
-Science has firm proof of atmosphere, high probability of “ozone”
-The Very Hungry Caterpillar eats too much, gets tummy-ache, learns a valuable lesson
-Thirst for human blood nightly… unquenchable

A Reason To Wake Up In the Morning

2005-09-15T00:44:00.000-05:00

Things I Don't Believe In

2005-09-15T00:34:00.000-05:00

Angels
The 5-Second Rule
Strict Legal Constructionism
Those little gift books they have in the check out lines of bookstores
School Vouchers
Stoplights
Everybody Loves Raymond (I don’t… do you?)
Creationism
That pink is the new black
Restraining orders, um, oh wait… ignore that one
NASCAR Dads
Any-god-damn-thing Rumsfeld says
Allergies. Come on, nobody is buying it, you pussies.
That crap they were peddling at my “intervention”
The “Whoever smelt it dealt it” doctrine
Any kind of ornamental underpants
“Hearts and Minds” Campaigns
What Happens in Cancun Stays in Cancun
Adverse Possession
Any product made by Axe
Holocaust denial. Come on, who do these fuck-nuggets think they're kidding.
Wall Calendars
Mustaches
A god that would allow Reality TV

Ms. America Ends World Hunger

2005-09-15T00:07:00.000-05:00

“Thank You,” Say World's Hungry

Just two-months into her term, Linda White has already achieved her most ambitious goal. When the part-time actress and hand model from Little Water, Arkansas accepted the title, few imagined the precocious 27-year old beauty queen would enjoy such immediate accomplishment. “The first 100-days really set the tone for the term,” said Dr. Allen Tyson, a professor at University of Pennsylvania and leading scholar in Ms. America -related studies. “When White successfully ended teenage smoking with a whirlwind tour of high-schools she really set the bar for herself. When this little lady looked America in the eye and vowed to uphold all of the values the crown and the title stand for she wasn’t kidding around.” Americans know that the conduct of our beauty contest winners is no laughing matter and are still stinging from the embarrassment from when Ms. Teen Fitness USA brought on an eight-month suspension of trade with a social gaffe during a welcome reception held by the First Lady of the Fiji islands. “I almost lost my faith in the system.” said Gerald Aberdine, a roofer from St. Louis, Missouri.
But what was lost has been restored. “This position is about more than social appearances and goodwill ambassadoring,” said White. “It is about the people of the world that I represent as Ms. America, too.” For those who doubted, this surely ends the debate as to whether or not women’s essential character is best judged based upon their appearance in swimwear, their poise, and their ability perform brief singing and dancing vignettes.

The Doctor Weighs In

2005-09-13T00:17:00.000-05:00

Dr. Maya Angelou is featured in a new public service announcement encouraging parents to utilize the infamous “v-chip” now included as a standard feature in all cable set-up boxes. The campaign of PSAs has been allotted $250 million worth of airtime over the next 12-months and will be aired both in English and Spanish. The campaign’s tag line is “Take Control. It’s Easy.” The v-chip is a device that recognizes TV ratings assigned to programs and blocks them based on assigned personalized criteria. The v-chip, demonized by some, championed by others seems like a decent middle ground. It offers parents an opportunity to control what comes into their homes without censoring what is available to the public in general.
Maya Angelou has famously been a victim of censorship. She enjoys the strange company of Dante, Shakespeare, Steinbeck, and J.K. Rowling Her famous and celebrated work, “I Know Why the Cage Bird Sings,” has been subject to censorship because of it’s description of the rape suffered by the author as a child. I don’t know where to begin with that. Can I ask if we want our literature to address important issues of the human experience? Or, perhaps it is important that we acknowledge as a society that there is something unsavory and inappropriate about a victim of sexual-assault giving voice to her experience. The last thing we want is rape victims going on and on about how they’ve “suffered,” are you with me? Wait a second, what the fuck are they talking about? The problems with censoring the autobiography of a civil rights activist whose rape is discussed on important personal and allegorical levels is just total bullshit. The censors have the choice of either being racists and misogynists or just plain ignorant on this one. Lucky them, that’s a hell of choice. Anyway, as an advocate of civil rights and a victim of, amongst other significant historical injustice, censorship I can understand why Maya Angelou would want to speak out for people talking personal responsibility for the shows they let their kids watch, instead of having us slide further down the slippery slope of censorship. But a part of me wonders…
Aren’t PSAs usually a public service punishment for celebrity criminals? Willy Nelson did them when he got arrested for pot, I think. It might have been the tax-evasion thing, but I’m pretty sure it was the weed. Robert Downey Jr. comes to mind, too. Kobe Bryant did his for PR, since he never got convicted and it wasn’t a court order. I’m pretty sure Chevy Chase’s were from his arrests. Oh, here’s a good one:
"Drugs make you make bad fashion choices." - Courtney Love, from her anti-drug PSA.

So, if anything, what did Maya Angelou do to get arrested?
-Cable theft…hahahaha
-Beat the shit out of Ted Nugent at the MTV Music Awards
-Mistaken for George Michael in public park men’s room
-Drunken and abusive heckling at the Penn-Faulkner Literary Award ceremony
-Panda smuggling
… But I heard the famous author was arrested for dangling a participle in public.

Katrina in History: What Does it Mean

2005-09-11T01:46:00.000-05:00

New Orleans is still under water. Fires burn all over the city. Smoke still pores from the chemical depot, smoldering after days by the river’s edge. The Industrial Canal’s burnt shell poured its poison into the stagnant water pooling in the city center into a toxic sewer. The national guard has landed; they are armed for war and have been ready for battle. Lt. General Steven Blum brags that many of the National Guard arriving in Louisiana are arriving from conflicts overseas and are “highly proficient in the use of lethal force” and will deal with the unruly populace “in a quick and efficient manner.” New Orleans police told a CNN reporter, Chris Lawrence, that those who walk the streets of New Orleans are “taking their lives in their hands.” According to Police reporting to ABC on Friday, the Superdome (where refugees were housed) had been the site of several riots. A New Orleans SWAT team had locked themselves apart from the violence, hiding in a hotel. For a long while buses refused to come to the hospitals and refugee centers because they were being targeted by snipers.
Road blocks ring the city. Military Police in bullet-proof vests man the check-points keeping refugees from spilling out of the city. When they try to flee they are turned back. Speaking to reporters: “ If any of these pedestrians jump in front of you, there’s a good chance they’re trying to steal your vehicle,” one police officer wearing a bulletproof vest said near dusk. “Run ‘em over and keep going.”
What does this mean?
How is it that a “first world” country was brought to such a state so quickly? There are several parts to this answer. Most of the components have been covered before: this is one of the worst natural disasters to hit the country.; New Orleans, while aware of the threat and costs, was unprepared; Federal help was slow and ineffective. But why was the impact of this level three hurricane so profound? This is not the “worst” hurricane to hit the area. A stronger hurricane hit last year and just missed New Orleans. The effect was amplified by unfortunate city-structure and levees that were overwhelmed. What are you going to do to change the layout of one of America’s oldest cities? Not much. But the levees… people have been predicting this for at least six years. Why was nothing done? The easy answer is that it wasn’t a priority. Pardon my glib rejoinder to a grave situation, but what constitutes “security” of the homeland more than securing us against the elements? How basic is that? I boldly posit: very. Nice assertion, huh. Sign me up for McNeil/Lehr, I’ve blown the cover off this one. Ok, so it was dismissed as a pressing issue. That’s fine. We have done the same to all our “discretionary” programs like education, health care and environmental protections. Telling people in hurricane alley to go-fuck-themselves is hardly new form for the anti-people presidency. Why was Federal response slow? I’d be happy to attribute that to simple bungling. Again, an administration that views constituents as a nuisance isn’t really going to be ready to spring into action to defend them. In my mind the question that hasn’t been asked and is ultimately the truly significant part of the story is why (other that the levees and the slow Federal response) a hurricane was able to rip a city apart.
(Oh, an important note: I know places other than New Orleans were harmed by this disaster and they are no less important. These observations could be applied to many but not all of them to a lesser extent).
The case as I see it is this: the measure of a natural disaster is not its force but the strength of the infrastructure. Example: The 1995 Chicago Heatwave. I’m a Chicago native, so I was there at the time. It was hot, but I was fine. Over 400 people died, however. Who were they? I’ll give you a hint: “Deputy Chief Paramedic Robert Scates, a 25 year veteran, and one of the city's first black paramedics, has reportedly submitted a request to be demoted to his career service rank and relinquish supervision of all paramedics on Chicago's Southside.”
50% of deaths before the age of 75 are affected by restricted access to health care. This is the US, where all residents are guaranteed emergency medical care. How about ambulatory care? Preventative medicine? Medication? Diagnostic services? The estimated cost of medical care for each family in the US is $14,000 per year. The income of a poverty-level family of three is $15,260. That is almost 92% of that poor family’s income. “There is an increased risk of about 30% for fair or poor health for individuals living in states with greater inequalities in income.”

But it depends what you’re talking about. Diabetes, heart disease, HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis everything, TB, polio… yeah, fucking POLIO…these are way bigger problems in poor communities. The vaccination rate for poor children fluctuates, but it is about 15% lower than the aggregate of those above the poverty rate. Frankly, I think those numbers are low. That’s health care. Too start. It’s worse than I’m going to get into in this article, trust me. But this is a hint… a tiny taste of the fact that the infrastructure that we take for granted doesn’t apply to those at the bottom of the economic spectrum.
How about policing? How about schools? How about fast, efficient and convenient public transportation? How about vigorous advocacy in the government. Shit, how about being allowed to vote? Does anybody else remember that they keep black people from voting in this country?
So… what does the New Orleans lapse into chaos mean? It means that we live in a country where the director of FEMA can claim not to have known that hurricane refugees were packed in the Superdome after days of coverage; from the 28th when the story broke to the 31st when Brown allegedly learned about it during a televised news interview. This means that ignored populations are particularly vulnerable to disasters and have less capacity to cope and recover. It means we have a duty to re-build where the hurricane struck and the duty to begin to build where poverty and inequality

Get to Know Mike Brown

2005-09-11T00:42:00.000-05:00

A Lawyer
… Who went to a law school that was finally accredited 22-years after Brown had graduated

Boasted a 21-year Law Career
…If you believe his resume. Six-years if you believe, well, everybody else.

Spent the Bulk of His Career Practicing in Colorado
…except there is no record of his practice in public documents. Except on an add on findlaw.com… where he says he worked for the International Arabian Horse Association. Legal department. Which he wasn’t.

Was President of the International Arabian Horse Association
…but he wasn’t. He was the commissioner of judges and stewards. A little less prestigious. Oh, and he wasn’t fired. He resigned when the membership of the organization began leveling a battery of lawsuits against him. But first he solicited a $50,000 donation from a member he was supposed to regulate. Than he was asked to resign. Mr. Dignity.

How was he qualified for to be the director of FEMA?
… The obvious answer is poorly. The sad answer… I am not making this up, his former college roommate, than director of FEMA, Joseph Allbaugh, asked the than unemployed Brown (having been fired by the) to be general counsel for the agency. Big promotion for somebody who hasn’t practiced law in 15-years. Nice job, boys. Nice job.

Shhoting from the hip

2005-09-05T00:40:00.000-05:00

The following us a transcript of New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin’s interview with local radio station WWL-AM correspondent Garland Robinette's. Robinette asked the mayor about his conversation with President Bush. Thanks to CNN.com for the transcript in its entirety:
NAGIN: I told him we had an incredible crisis here and that his flying over in Air Force One does not do it justice. And that I have been all around this city, and I am very frustrated because we are not able to marshal resources and we're outmanned in just about every respect.
You know the reason why the looters got out of control? Because we had most of our resources saving people, thousands of people that were stuck in attics, man, old ladies. ... You pull off the doggone ventilator vent and you look down there and they're standing in there in water up to their freaking necks.
And they don't have a clue what's going on down here. They flew down here one time two days after the doggone event was over with TV cameras, AP reporters, all kind of goddamn -- excuse my French everybody in America, but I am pissed.
WWL: Did you say to the president of the United States, "I need the military in here"?
NAGIN: I said, "I need everything. Now, I will tell you this -- and I give the president some credit on this -- he sent one John Wayne dude down here that can get some stuff done, and his name is [Lt.] Gen. [Russel] Honore. And he came off the doggone chopper, and he started cussing and people started moving. And he's getting some stuff done. They ought to give that guy -- if they don't want to give it to me, give him full authority to get the job done, and we can save some people.
WWL: What do you need right now to get control of this situation?
NAGIN: I need reinforcements, I need troops, man. I need 500 buses, man. We ain't talking about -- you know, one of the briefings we had, they were talking about getting public school bus drivers to come down here and bus people out here. I'm like, "You got to be kidding me. This is a national disaster. Get every doggone Greyhound bus line in the country and get their asses moving to New Orleans." That's -- they're thinking small, man. And this is a major, major, major deal. And I can't emphasize it enough, man. This is crazy. I've got 15,000 to 20,000 people over at the convention center. It's bursting at the seams. The poor people in Plaquemines Parish. ... We don't have anything, and we're sharing with our brothers in Plaquemines Parish. It's awful down here, man.
WWL: Do you believe that the president is seeing this, holding a news conference on it but can't do anything until [Louisiana Gov.] Kathleen Blanco requested him to do it? And do you know whether or not she has made that request?
NAGIN: I have no idea what they're doing. But I will tell you this: You know, God is looking down on all this, and if they are not doing everything in their power to save people, they are going to pay the price. Because every day that we delay, people are dying and they're dying by the hundreds, I'm willing to bet you. We're getting reports and calls that are breaking my heart, from people saying, "I've been in my attic. I can't take it anymore. The water is up to my neck. I don't think I can hold out." And that's happening as we speak. You know what really upsets me, Garland? We told everybody the importance of the 17th Street Canal issue. We said, "Please, please take care of this. We don't care what you do. Figure it out."
WWL: Who'd you say that to?
NAGIN: Everybody: the governor, Homeland Security, FEMA. You name it, we said it.
And they allowed that pumping station next to Pumping Station 6 to go under water. Our sewage and water board people ... stayed there and endangered their lives. And what happened when that pumping station went down, the water started flowing again in the city, and it starting getting to levels that probably killed more people. In addition to that, we had water flowing through the pipes in the city. That's a power station over there.
So there's no water flowing anywhere on the east bank of Orleans Parish. So our critical water supply was destroyed because of lack of action.
WWL: Why couldn't they drop the 3,000-pound sandbags or the containers that they were talking about earlier? Was it an engineering feat that just couldn't be done?
NAGIN: They said it was some pulleys that they had to manufacture. But, you know, in a state of emergency, man, you are creative, you figure out ways to get stuff done. Then they told me that they went overnight, and they built 17 concrete structures and they had the pulleys on them and they were going to drop them. I flew over that thing yesterday, and it's in the same shape that it was after the storm hit. There is nothing happening. And they're feeding the public a line of bull and they're spinning, and people are dying down here.
WWL: If some of the public called and they're right, that there's a law that the president, that the federal government can't do anything without local or state requests, would you request martial law?
NAGIN: I've already called for martial law in the city of New Orleans. We did that a few days ago.
WWL: Did the governor do that, too?
NAGIN: I don't know. I don't think so. But we called for martial law when we realized that the looting was getting out of control. And we redirected all of our police officers back to patrolling the streets. They were dead-tired from saving people, but they worked all night because we thought this thing was going to blow wide open last night. And so we redirected all of our resources, and we hold it under check. I'm not sure if we can do that another night with the current resources. And I am telling you right now: They're showing all these reports of people looting and doing all that weird stuff, and they are doing that, but people are desperate and they're trying to find food and water, the majority of them. Now you got some knuckleheads out there, and they are taking advantage of this lawless -- this situation where, you know, we can't really control it, and they're doing some awful, awful things. But that's a small majority of the people. Most people are looking to try and survive. And one of the things people -- nobody's talked about this. Drugs flowed in and out of New Orleans and the surrounding metropolitan area so freely it was scary to me, and that's why we were having the escalation in murders. People don't want to talk about this, but I'm going to talk about it. You have drug addicts that are now walking around this city looking for a fix, and that's the reason why they were breaking in hospitals and drugstores. They're looking for something to take the edge off of their jones, if you will. And right now, they don't have anything to take the edge off. And they've probably found guns. So what you're seeing is drug-starving crazy addicts, drug addicts, that are wrecking havoc. And we don't have the manpower to adequately deal with it. We can only target certain sections of the city and form a perimeter around them and hope to God that we're not overrun.
WWL: Well, you and I must be in the minority. Because apparently there's a section of our citizenry out there that thinks because of a law that says the federal government can't come in unless requested by the proper people, that everything that's going on to this point has been done as good as it can possibly be.
NAGIN: Really?
WWL: I know you don't feel that way.
NAGIN: Well, did the tsunami victims request? Did it go through a formal process to request? You know, did the Iraqi people request that we go in there? Did they ask us to go in there? What is more important? And I'll tell you, man, I'm probably going get in a whole bunch of trouble. I'm probably going to get in so much trouble it ain't even funny. You probably won't even want to deal with me after this interview is over.
WWL: You and I will be in the funny place together.
NAGIN: But we authorized $8 billion to go to Iraq lickety-quick. After 9/11, we gave the president unprecedented powers lickety-quick to take care of New York and other places.
Now, you mean to tell me that a place where most of your oil is coming through, a place that is so unique when you mention New Orleans anywhere around the world, everybody's eyes light up -- you mean to tell me that a place where you probably have thousands of people that have died and thousands more that are dying every day, that we can't figure out a way to authorize the resources that we need? Come on, man. You know, I'm not one of those drug addicts. I am thinking very clearly. And I don't know whose problem it is. I don't know whether it's the governor's problem. I don't know whether it's the president's problem, but somebody needs to get their ass on a plane and sit down, the two of them, and figure this out right now.
WWL: What can we do here?
NAGIN: Keep talking about it.
WWL: We'll do that. What else can we do?
NAGIN: Organize people to write letters and make calls to their congressmen, to the president, to the governor. Flood their doggone offices with requests to do something. This is ridiculous. I don't want to see anybody do anymore goddamn press conferences. Put a moratorium on press conferences. Don't do another press conference until the resources are in this city. And then come down to this city and stand with us when there are military trucks and troops that we can't even count. Don't tell me 40,000 people are coming here. They're not here. It's too doggone late. Now get off your asses and do something, and let's fix the biggest goddamn crisis in the history of this country.
WWL: I'll say it right now, you're the only politician that's called and called for arms like this. And if -- whatever it takes, the governor, president -- whatever law precedent it takes, whatever it takes, I bet that the people listening to you are on your side.
NAGIN: Well, I hope so, Garland. I am just -- I'm at the point now where it don't matter. People are dying. They don't have homes. They don't have jobs. The city of New Orleans will never be the same in this time.
WWL: We're both pretty speechless here.
NAGIN: Yeah, I don't know what to say. I got to go.
WWL: OK. Keep in touch. Keep in touch.

Write a letter:

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi

Did you know...

2005-08-21T02:31:00.000-05:00

That Marx said we should abolish marriage because woman are communal property (really!).

That Satan resents Jesus getting the Renaissance when all he gets is heavy metal.

That Paris, the beauty pagent judge, was known as the Greek George Hamilton.

The Denmark tourism board sued Shakespear, claiming that their "skulls laying all-over-the-place" days had long since past.

Rodeo clowns wouldn't tease the cows like that if they new how it felt.

That the wealthiest 1% of America own 65% of the pet-tigers.

Zombies only eat brains because other organs are loaded with carbs.

I like humping monkeys. Monkeys that hump, that is.

A bad motto for Planned Parenthood is "In with choice, out with fetus."

The Visigoths attacked the Romans preemptively. Nice work, boys.

For a "People's Revolution" the Dress Code is Surprisingly Formal

2005-08-21T02:29:00.000-05:00

The Resemblence is Obvious

2005-08-21T02:17:00.000-05:00

OK, I’m no marine biologist, and I’m not a physician or shrink so I can’t say what effect months cooped up on a boat can have on a persons brain/mind/psyche. I am, however, a relatively reasonable guy. That’s why I have concluded that ancient sailors were retards. Above I have provided a picture of a manatee. Look at him. Isn’t he cute? Big ol’ snout, cute little whiskers, their adorable little fuzzy puppy tummies. Wait a second, how the fuck did anybody ever confuse these giant sea-mammals that look more like a combination of a pug and a silk-worm for a half-woman half-fish? Must be all that sea-water they drank. Of course, they were also afraid of sailing of the corners of the earth. Nice job, boys.

As far as I can tell, the closest we get to mermaids is the horrible and almost always fatal birth-defect called sirenomelia (in which the baby’s legs are fused together, and usually a myriad of other internal dysfunctions). Only two people (both currently living-- one in America and one in Peru) have survived.
Of course, there are still people who are too clever to be fooled, and know mermaids exist. One fellow actually enumerates several scientific principles supporting the “aquatic ape” theory, going so far as to state that existence of mermaids is not possible but probable. The author goes on to describe mermaid personalities. They are smart, playful and carefree, for the record.
Even recently, photos were circulating on the web claiming that a mermaid corpse was found washed ashore after the Tsunami. BE WARNED: The picture is pretty gross. It is not necessarily worth looking at unless your sense of humor is strongly morbid, and your stomach is just plain strong. There is another one in Japan, allegedly 1,400 years old, and revered by many to be real. Again, this picture is also kind of nasty. The most famous example of a “hoax” mermaid body was P.T. Barnum’s Feejee mermaid, which later turned out to be a monkey sutured to a monk fish. That is the last link with an icky picture, scouts honor. Except for these fake mummies of mermaids, which are without a doubt, the nastiest fucking things I have ever seen. That was the gross part, now for the flakey part.
Lady Abigail is a Wican who gives voice to witches struggling to come to terms with a world that won’t have an interfaith dialogue with them. Her writing is heartfelt, earnest and terribly sad. Her writing about mermaids being real, however, is fucking hilarious. “For magickal work, calling on the energies of Mer-Magick, Monday is considered the day corresponding within this power. To a degree this is equal with the corresponding day employed with Moon Magick. Any day under the Full Moon stage of the moon is amazingly enhanced and excellent for calling the powers utilized within Mer-Magick.I have found that working with the tides can be like a secret key for the working of Mer-Magick. Your magick, whatever it may be, is excellently enhanced by means of the natural rhythm of the tides.” Come on, Wicans, we’re trying to give you some credit for being in tune with nature or whatever the fuck. Don’t make it so hard for us.
There are also, apparently, people who are into the mermaid thing, if you gather my nuanced and suggestive meaning. One website has a collection of wistful sensual musings on the mer-folk. It is endlessly fucking weird. The “sirenphile” community is none to small, replete with erotic art and literature. Then there is this otherwise pleasant seeming lady, Cecilia Tan, who has written mermaid erotica for an entire anthology of water-related/mermaid sex-stories.
To hear her tell it (and she seems pretty bright, and references some pretty decent authors as influences in the provided article) she seems to be trying to highlight the positivity of sexuality by letting people re-orient their prudish selves in fantasy and contrasting the good with the strange. A clever perspective, if you don’t mind having fish-people in your porn. You do? I hoped you might.

A Word On Rolling, And How I Do It

2005-08-21T00:54:00.000-05:00

I am bling-bling. I am that which it is hit by and that by which it is tapped. West Coast and East Coast unite in me, the central peninsula that weighs down heavily the middle of the continental hip-hop atlas. I am neither check, nor debit, nor credit. I am cash money: the only form in which money is the bomb. Neither the wooly mammoth, Wayne Gretzky, nor the hexagonal crystals water forms at its transition point have a greater experience of ice than me. I am frosted -frosted I say-- with those fabulous rocks. Yet ironically it is not my diamonds but me who is a girls best friend. Perhaps it is because I spit game with the rapidity of a tech-9. You surely will recognize, not because of my infamous good looks, tell-tale charm or characteristically soothing and smoky basso profondo voice, but because of my many skills, which are legend. Ah yes, recognize indeed.

Reflections on God

2005-08-16T19:59:00.000-05:00

I saw a family of televangalists on late-night cable last night. I am afraid that my family lacks the religiosity and air time they had; but what we lack in syndication we more than make up for in quite, metaphysical introspection. Damn those sanctimonious humanist Jews, and their accepting but analytical ways, they will co-exist with us all! I do channel the Holy Spirit on occasion; but he manifests himself as a desire to read Slate on line, and drink coffee. I did work as a research assistant to a professor who studied the afro-Caribbean Diaspora, and almost got a chance to study with him in Cuba, staying with Santeros. That would have been pretty cool; I’ve been told I am a son of Ogun, the warrior metals-smith. That would be a little easier to believe if I had known how to change a tire before I was 20.

My father actually embraced Zen Buddhism in a big way before I was born, so I was raised in the multi-disciplinary setting of studying Hebrew while at the same time relinquishing my attachment to its worldly trappings, thus forgetting it by the end of the lesson. Take that, Mahayana Buddhists! The Buddhist part of me knows that life is suffering, but the Jewish part can’t stop going on about it. Anyway, not real religious, but that is where I get my discipline, and intellectual detachment (now there’s a mixed blessing on the dating scene). That is more or less where I fall on religion; a well informed and good natured agnostic.

“The chief problem about death, incidentally, is the fear that there may be no afterlife -- a depressing thought, particularly for those who have bothered to shave. Also, there is the fear that there is an afterlife but no one will know where it's being held.”
-Woody Allen

Also, I kind of take the pants pocket approach to religion. I was talking to a well meaning but incredulous fundamentalist once who simply didn’t understand how I could not accept that Jesus Christ was my lord and savior. I responded by asking her what I had in my pocket. She said she didn’t know. I told her to guess and she said keys. Good, I said, what kind? Car keys? Maybe. What kind of car? Chevy. Ok, what year and model. You see, I said, the more specific you get when you are trying to guess what I’ve got in my pocket the less likely you are to be right. Keys, maybe. 1963 Chevelle, probably not. All the Christian philosophy (or Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, etc.) is pretty close. Let’s call the golden rule fundamentals the key, pardon the pun. Jesus Christ, Gautama Buddha, Allah, are all specific enough they’re probably wrong. Your safer calling them a key. Plus, if god is infinite it’s a safe bet we can’t put our senses on the whole thing, and metaphors are the best way to express the inexpressible.
it turns out it’s not keys at all, but an ear shattering... [continued below]

2005-08-16T19:54:00.000-05:00

-ZAP-

That is more or less my whole god thing. I figured since it seems so important to folks these days it would be worth getting out there, kind of like my vestigial tail. Better to know now than later.

On The Creative Process

2005-08-11T01:27:00.000-05:00

Ok, so you sit down at a typewriter — or more likely a computer — and you can write anything. The world you create is bound only by your imagination. You can create gods, erect and lay flat civilizations. You can unravel the lives of men from the cradle to the grave, writing fantastical experiences and private thoughts. You can revisit any moment in history and invent a distant future. You can challenge the laws of the universe or even verse itself — defying the narrative medium and being constrained by nothing! When one picks up the pen, they are like a god: they can create and destroy worlds, reason and law with the slightest whim. That is why the Jason Ward, David Garrett, TJ Schneider and Josh Lieb have shaken my faith in the depths of human expression. They wrote Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo. They said, “Hey, that Rob Schneider sure did a great job with Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo, didn’t he? Still, I can’t shake the feeling that more than anything else in the realm of creative possibility, that story has more to tell. Let’s get on it and help him, as a group of four professional writers, spend the next six-years writing another installment to this saga. It is a story that must be told, a story before all others.” Nice job, guys. Nice job.

These Come Up When You Google My Name

2005-08-10T14:07:00.000-05:00

Staying On Message

2005-08-08T16:14:00.000-05:00

"Some people seem confused about the motivations and intentions of terrorists and about our coalition's defense of the still young democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq. They seem to cling to the discredited theory that the recent attacks in London and elsewhere, for example, are really in retaliation for the war in Iraq or for the so-called occupation of Afghanistan," he added. "That is nonsense."
-Donald Rumsfeld

Al-Zawahiri threatened more destruction in London and said in a videotape earlier Thursday that the United States would suffer tens of thousands of military dead if it does not withdraw from Iraq.
-CNN

Ayman al-Zawahri warned that there would be further violence unless the US and its allies withdrew from Iraq.
-BBC

"They're terrorists, they're killers and they will kill innocent people trying to get us to withdraw from the world so they can impose their dark vision on the world. That's what they're trying to do, and the comments today by Mr. Zawahiri absolutely reinforce what I have just told you. We will stay the course; we will complete the job in Iraq."
-George W. Bush

Pirate Personals

2005-08-04T15:40:00.000-05:00

Single-eyed single-man sails seven seas of love for romance, friendship, booty

John Bolton on the UN

2005-08-04T12:51:00.000-05:00

"There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is only the international community, which can only be led by the only remaining superpower, which is the United States…. The [UN] Secritariat Building in New York has 38 stories. If it lost ten stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference."

Bush Terrorizes White House Tour Group

2005-08-04T11:35:00.000-05:00

WASHINGTON- Early this afternoon group of visitors touring the White House were accosted by President George W. Bush. Having just entered the Vermilion Room, sometimes called the Gold Room enjoying English Regency and French Empire silverwork when Bush stormed the tour. “I was just telling them about the green silk draperies are of early 19th-century design, and how the carpet is a Turkish Hereke from about 1860, chosen for its pale green background and gold silk highlights. That’s when it hit me,” said Adelaide Lloyd, a retired Lincoln, Nebraska school teacher and volunteer White House tour-guide. “It was horrible,” says tourist Greta Stanton, of Green Bay Wisconsin, “he was running in circles around the room pounding his chest, shrieking like a car alarm and hurling it [his own waste] at us.” Most tourists in the group of twenty-four were knocked over and while none suffered serious injuries several were admitted to Washington area hospitals for observation.
“It is not unusual to use threatening gestures, stares or vocalizations to intimidate or scare off intruders,” says Dr. Mark Willits, a Washington, D.C. Primatologist. “These agonistic displays are used to frighten away and prevent conflicts. Baboons flash their eye-lids and grimace widely. Marmots display their genitals from behind. I can’t speak to the circumstances but it sounds like he [the President] felt threatened by an intruder.”
“The President, swollen with the pride of a successful appointment, and flush with sense of dominance was simply asserting himself and trying to communicate his control of the situation,” said White House spokesperson Scott McLellan. “The passersby should have heard what we call ‘belch vocalizations’ coming from the president, signaling contentment and joy from having just assertion of his primacy over the males in the senate turn to ‘hoot-series’ of low-pitched barks and howls signaling stress and threat. Frankly, given the cues he displayed before the attack, the president can hardly be blamed.”

Bush Appoints Bolton, Bypassing Senate

2005-08-04T10:56:00.000-05:00

WASHINGTON -- President Bush installed embattled nominee Michael Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations on Monday, bypassing the Senate after a testy five-month standoff with Democrats who argued that the soulful crooner was unfit for the job.
"This post is too important to leave vacant any longer, especially during a war and a vital debate about U.N. reform," Bush said at a White House ceremony with Bolton and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
Bolton went directly from the White House to the State Department where he was sworn in. Within five hours of his appointment, he arrived at the U.S. Mission in New York to begin work.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan pointedly noted that Bolton was one of many U.N. ambassadors. "I think it is all right for one ambassador to come and sing," Annan said, "but an ambassador always has to remember that there are 190 others ambassadors out there and it's hard to make a name for yourself. This isn't VH1, baby, this is the UN. This is Big Time."
Bush's appointment was the climax to a high-stakes test of wills with Democrats. Republicans failed twice to break a Democratic-led filibuster against Bolton's confirmation.
The president, after feuding for months with Democrats over judicial nominations, decided to defy his opponents and get his way with his U.N. candidate.
The shaggy-haired Bolton has been a sharp critic of the United Nations, a man who rarely muffled his voice for the sake of diplomatic niceties. His critics portrayed him as an uncompromising and hotheaded romantic who shut out or retaliated against any voices of caution or dissent. Bush said he was "the right man" to prod the U.N. to adopt difficult reforms.
Bush put Bolton on the job by means of a recess appointment, an avenue available when Congress is in recess. Under the Constitution, Bolton's appointment will last until a newly elected Congress takes office in January 2007.
The president has made 106 recess appointments, many of them judges. Bolton is the highest-level such appointment of Bush's administration and the first U.S. ambassador to the U.N. named by a recess appointment.
Addressing concerns that Bolton's hand had been weakened by the process, Bush said the diplomat had "my complete confidence. ... He will speak for me on critical issues facing the international community."
Republican Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio, who had stunned the White House by opposing Bolton, said he was disappointed by Bush's decision.
"I am truly concerned that a recess appointment will only add to Michael Bolton's baggage and his lack of credibility with the United Nations," Voinovich said.

Turn Offs

2005-08-03T23:13:00.000-05:00

Dan Brown
“Americana”
Golf
Chocoholism
Celebrity News
Spectator Sports
Girls Gone Wild
Popular Hip-Hop
Disney
Anti-Intellectualism
Hippy Aesthetic
Music Radio
Talk Radio
Materialism
Men’s Magazines
Women’s Magazines
Jimmy Kimmel and Craig Kilbourne
Reality TV
Freud-Bashing
Astrology
Bumper Stickers
Garfield
Summer Blockbusters
Children Being Tried As Adults
Long Nails
GOP Assholes Who Wear Boots with Suits
Smart and witty Jewish bloggers, curse those handsome devils

Oh, And Speaking of Condescension...

2005-08-03T23:02:00.000-05:00

And I hate how Bush has the "take home message" of all every speech of his projected behind him. We aren't as slow as you, asshole, we can understand the thrust of your soundbyte without you literally spelling it out for us. Ahh, I hate this guy!

OK, OK, Enough Already With The Fucking Boots

2005-08-03T17:48:00.000-05:00

Ok, we get it. You’re down in the trenches with the troops. Jesus! Do you always have to wear footwear to match the occasion? Do you wear little pink satin ballet shoes to see the Bolshoi? It’s like Bush and the flight-suit. You guys love to play fucking dress up, don’t you.

A Wholly Fastidious Point-by-Point Explination of How Karl Rove Broke the Law

2005-08-02T18:10:00.000-05:00

In 1969 a CIA officer, Philip Agee, resigned amongst allegations of alcoholism, financial mismanagement and committing adultery several diplomats' wives. Six years later, despite the efforts of the CIA, Agee released a book which was highly critical of the agency, Inside the Company: CIA Diary. The book revealed some pretty sordid Agency secrets and resulted in the CIA’s expulsion from West Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, France and the UK. After being imprisoned for three-years Agee (with the help of Cuba and the Soviet Union) began publishing a newsletter called The Covert Action Information Bulletin, whose purpose was, according to Agee, to mount “a worldwide campaign to destabilize the CIA through exposure of its operations and personnel." The newsletter actually contained a section called “Naming Names.”
In response to Agee’s work, and his co-editor Lewis Wolf (who allegedly published over 2,000 covert CIA operatives names, addresses, telephone numbers and liscence plates) the Senate passed “The Intellegence Identities Protection Act.”

The criminal provisions of the Act are contained in 50 U.S.C. § 421:

“Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under Title 18 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”

So Karl Rove told Time Magazine's Mathew Cooper that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent. According to a July 18th, 2005 Washington Post Article, “White House senior adviser Karl Rove, after telling Time reporter Matthew Cooper in 2003 that the wife of an administration critic worked for the CIA, closed the conversation by noting "I've already said too much," Cooper said Sunday in recounting his testimony before a federal grand jury.” This was as the Joseph Wilson thing was first flaring up, and of all the excuses the Republican's are flinging around, they aren't claiming that Rove was being too ambiguous. That establishes that Karl Rove “identified a CIA agent” to somebody who was not authorized to know. Pretty open and shut, I would say. The Bush administration and it’s defenders argue that is not the case. The defense says a) Rove heard she was a CIA agent from a reporter and didn’t know it was secret, b) Rove was trying to discredit a lie told by her husband, and was justified in this, and c) Rove didn’t say she was a covert agent.

We can start with B: Rove was trying to discredit a lie told by her husband, and was justified in this; it doesn’t matter why Rove chose to break the law. Ok, now we’ll go after C, Rove didn’t say she was a covert agent. First of all you don’t need to say a covert agent is covert to blow their cover, saying their an agent is enough. It’s like saying, “I didn’t tell the drug dealers he was an undercover cop; I just said that he was a cop.” Nice job, asshole. Saying she was CIA at all “outed” her. Another good example is the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (or HIPAA); a doctor doesn’t have to say, “I’m not supposed to tell you this, but…” All they have to do is say it, and they’re in violation of the law. So, Rove didn’t have to say she was a covert agent. Plus, he may not have said she was covert, but intimated it by saying “I said too much.” And come on, “I’ve already said too much” is practically the same as “I’m not supposed to tell you this.”

As for A: Rove heard she was a CIA agent from a reporter and didn’t know it was secret, Scooter Libby, the vice-presidential chief of staff used a similar excuse. “Libby has testified that he learned about Plame from NBC correspondent Tim Russert, according to a source who spoke with The Washington Post some months ago. Russert said in a statement last year that he told the prosecutor that "he did not know Ms. Plame's name or that she was a CIA operative" and that he did not provide such information to Libby in July 2003.”

The answer to the question of whether or not Rove knew of Plame’s secret status may lay in a Top Secret State Department memo. Seven-days before Plames identity was leaked in Novak’s column, a document regarding Wilson and his wife, literally marked “Top Secret” was taken aboard Air Force One by then Secretary of State, Colin Powell. Bush and his top aides were also on that plane trip. That would place Rove on the scene. Let’s take a closer look at that the information in that document. According to The Washington Post, “A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked ‘(S)’ for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials…. The CIA classifies as "secret" the names of officers whose identities are covert, according to former senior agency officials.”

So they were they trying to keep it a secret. In order to break the law in full it has to be something the CIA wants kept secret, right. Well, the “secret” on the paragraph in a document itself labeled “top secret” kind of clears that up. We know Rove and Libby were lying about being told her status by reporters, and we know the State Department didn’t even know she was in the CIA until days before the leak. This wasn’t information that was in the air like a cool summer breeze. If you (read: Karl Rove) know and disseminate top secret information, lie about your source, and a likely source stating the secrecy of the leaked material surfaces, you probably leaked information you knew was secret. And you’re an asshole.

Novak is Still An Asshole, Too-

As the wagon's were circling around Rove, Novak put out a defensive little piece claiming he hadn't done anything wrong. The column he put out included the following statement: "To protect my own integrity and credibility, I would like to stress three points. First, I did not receive a planned leak. Second, the CIA never warned me that the disclosure of Wilson's wife working at the agency would endanger her or anybody else. Third, it was not much of a secret."

Well, I'll answer the first part, first. No plot. That must be why Rove was so relaxed and causual about his not being named. "High-level sources apparently laid down conditions. Time's Matt Cooper, for example, sent his editors an e-mail stating that White House adviser Rove's leak was provided only "on double super secret background . . . don't source this to rove or even WH [White House]." Also, Patrick Fitzgerald, appointed Special Prosecutor for this case, takes for granted that the leaks were based on a poltically motivated smear campaign, and is building up from there. Even further, if it wasn't just a smear campaign, what was it. Rove claims he was calling to prevent Novak from printing a factual error. Wilson said he was sent by the CIA to investigate the urnaium allegations in NIger, and Rove wanted to correct him, saying Wilson was actually sent by his wife.
First, it is important to realize that the CIA was already on the outs with the administration about the whole uranium thing to begin with. According to the Washington Post, "then-deputy national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley spoke with Tenet during the week about clearing up CIA responsibility for the 16 words [in the President's State of the UNion Address], even though both knew the agency did not think Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger, according to a person familiar with the conversation. Tenet was interviewed by prosecutors, but it is not clear whether he appeared before the grand jury, a former CIA official said." They were double checking to disprove something the administration wanted to have proven. So, bad mounthing the CIA was a bonu.
Secondly, know we know, Valerie Plame was not a bureau chief, and thus could not have dispatched her husband. She could, however, recommend him. We know that becaus, you know, her job classification was leaked.
Ok, so Novak claims he wasn't warned. Here is a great little quote from the Washington Post: "Harlow, the former CIA spokesman, said in an interview yesterday that he testified last year before a grand jury about conversations he had with Novak at least three days before the column was published. He said he warned Novak, in the strongest terms he was permitted to use without revealing classified information, that Wilson's wife had not authorized the mission and that if he did write about it, her name should not be revealed.Harlow said that after Novak's call, he checked Plame's status and confirmed that she was an undercover operative. He said he called Novak back to repeat that the story Novak had related to him was wrong and that Plame's name should not be used. But he did not tell Novak directly that she was undercover because that was classified."
As for all the secret status stuff, Novak claims she wasn’t even covert. According to CIA Agent (and Republican) Larry C. Johnson, “Valerie Plame was an undercover operations officer until outed in the press by Robert Novak… If caught in that status she would have been executed… [and] until Robert Novak betrayed her she was still undercover and the company that was her front was still a secret to the world. ” Yow!

The Prettiest Victim

2005-08-01T01:17:00.000-05:00

Jacques Derrida, the post-structuralist philosopher and literary critic passed away recently; about a year ago. His life experiences punctuate his philosophical contributions in a way that is rarely explored. A French Jew born in Algeria, he was kicked out of public high school by the anti-Semitic collaborationist Vichy government during WWII. After the war he arrived in France, and taught soldiers children’s French rather than serve in the French suppresionist army during the Algerian War of Independence. His experience, like so many of French of his generation –Jews in particular– was one of inherent contradictions. Liberty, Equality and Brotherhood? Léon Blum, France’s first socialist (and Jewish) Prime Minister was elected in 1936. The popular front, a Marxist/Socialist party of conscience brought the progressive forces of France together, and empire, nationalism and racism coursed through the politic as a steady, aching undercurrent. How could a Frenchmen, born in Algeria no less, not develop the theory of deconstructionism? It was an idea whose time had come.
Deconstructionism is a system of critical analysis that looks at a philosophy or text and teases from it two separate but interwoven voices with contradictory messages. Without placing a hierarchy or binary opposition between the two ideas, deconstructionisim looks at what the contradiction in philosophy says about the larger text or idea. The idea is summed up in what Derrida termed “Différance;” a French pun, with the dual meanings of defer and differ, referring to semeiotics: the word cannot summon all that it is intended to and therefore must defer to other words to signify what is absent within itself. By looking at what is contradictory or even absent in a text or idea we can learn as much about that text or idea as what is present if not more so. This brings us to the point at interest: victimhood of women in the news.
A casual observation: there is a heightened sense of awareness of the imperilment of women and girls in the news. While the Laci Peterson story was as much about the rights of the unborn, a missing bride on Christmas Eve, and a defendant who resembles Ben Affleck in a funhouse mirror kind of way, it was mostly about women… pregnant defenseless women… as victims. The Aruba disappearance is the same thing. Elizabeth Smart, the teenager from Utah who was kidnapped, more of the same. That is why the “Runaway Bride” story took off so fast when Jennifer Wilbanks disappeared, and continued to be news when reporters seethed at being made to look foolish for their ghoulish appetite for another Peterson story, and crucified her for teasing them with a juicy story only to return in fine condition (her strange inability to blink notwithstanding).
There are more stories like this, as I’m sure you remember, but at risk of sounding callous (which I hope I do not), I try to stay away from this sort of sensationalist news as much as possible. News junky that I am I ingest an awful lot of flotsam with my real news; such is the price of trying to stay informed, but my point remains the same: this is exploitive quasi-news based on a lurid objectification of the woman (most often girl) as victim. That is not to say that there aren’t lots of important stories to be told about women being victimized –we live in an imperfect world were that is all too real and prevalent a problem– what it is meant to say is that the real stories with meaning are passed over for more sensationalistic ones. These stories –the sensationalistic ones– are sort of pornographic. It sounds a little hyperbolic but it isn’t and here’s why: they objectify not just women but the mistreatment of women by turning their suffering into objects of lurid entertainment. That is a sort of pornography, and not a pretty kind. So how could stories about women in peril be different?
Am I advocating a different sort of coverage for a different kind of tragedy? You may be thinking, “By god, Dave, I’ll kidnap a woman this very day.” Um, no. Stay with me here. First of all, these stories give a prejudicial picture of American crime. There isn’t that much random violent crime. Most crime against women, violent or sexual, is committed by a friend or relative: date rape, marital rape, molestation, domestic abuse. When was the last time you saw a story about date rape? What is the ratio of date rape stories to valley-girl disappearances? 1 to 150, maybe. Are there that many more abductions? Are there more serial killers than date rapists? No, of course not. The picture is skewed for our perverse entertainment, not our edification. But to highlight common problems of common women as victims would be an inversion of the woman as victim paradigm: women are victimized by deviants who operate on a value system other than our own, and their victimization is not our problem because its not our fault, but that isn’t to say we can’t get a kick out of the coverage. To cover date rape or domestic abuse makes it our problem at large; we are the ones doing this, not them. This is the Différance in the media’s coverage of women as victims: we decry it with a nudge and a wink. What we say and how we say it show that while we are shocked and appalled we’re also intrigued; and because we don’t cover more common and meaningful problems of sex crimes we show that we don’t feel responsible for creating an environment in which mass victimization is made possible, and even condoned. A news program couldn’t air a Laci Peterson story and a date rape story in the same broadcast without the latter inadvertently drawing attention to the perversity of the former.
I have a simple proposal: stop watching TV news. TV news is the main venue for these sorts of stories. Cable news has to fill 24 hours of feed and rather than relegate themselves to broadcasting “hard news” they have 24-hour news alerts on “slasher” crime. Pick your print media and internet sources carefully. Listen to National Public Radio. Don’t reward the vultures with your time or attention, and do yourself the favor of getting your informational sustenance away from the television troth. There’s room here at The Nation, and it’s quite refreshing.

A Seventeen Quiz: Are You On Fire

2005-07-31T14:17:00.000-05:00

Blistering! Are his eyes aflame with passion? Does his heart burn for you? Are you his next flame? This sweltering quiz answers all you’re burning to have answered.

1) Your boyfriend invites you over to his place to dinner to meat his parents. They serve up a big bloody steak, even though you’re a vegetarian. Do you:
a) Demand your boyfriend fix you a veggie-friendly option: you’re his princess,
darn it-he should know better.
b) Eat all the non-offending side dishes, but let your boyfriend know how he missed the ball after the get together.
c) Eat what you’re served. You’re a guest after all.
d) Spread the flames that are shooting from your body onto the table-clothes and drapes, setting the dining room aflame.

2) The class hottie asks you to go to spring formal, but you know he has a girlfriend. Do you:
a) Go! Why would you miss a chance like this?
b) Ask the girlfriend for permission, then go.
c) Confront Señor Foxy about his plan to two-time.
d) Belch fire like the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory.

3) Everybody at school is talking about how you went all the way with the captain of the basketball team. Your cool capital is through the roof, but the truth is you never did it. Do you feel:
a) Like a superstar! They wouldn’t say it if it couldn’t be true.
b) Terrible. You’re good name has been dragged through the mud.
c) Unsure. You want to be popular, but not for this.
d) The pain of 10,000 smoldering suns.

For every time you answered a), give yourself 1 point, every b) is worth 2 points, every c) is worth 3 points and every d is worth 4 points.

If you got 4 or less: Brrr. Ice queen. You give frosty the snowman the chills.

If you got a 9 or less: You are probably not on fire.

If you got a 10 or more: Look out world, she’s on fire!

Live Streaming Video… Bush Gets Fristed Hardcore

2005-07-31T05:04:00.000-05:00

This Friday Senate Majority Leader and heart-and lung-transplant surgeon Bill Frist (R-TN) showed a stunning reversal by announcing his support of Stem Cell Research funding. This is big news for a few reasons:

1) It is emblematic of the rift in the Republican Party between old-fashioned hardliners and the Christian Right
2) It demonstrates the extent to which Frist and the GOP were burned by the Schiavo case
3) It is a direct response to Frist’s alienation by the GOP when he was unable to stop the compromise forced in
the Federal Judicial Nominations
4) It is a meaningful compromise in the Stem Cell Debate

A compromise? Frist? Bill “nuclear option” Frist? “Get out of here,” you may be saying. NO, it’s true. There are seven –seven– different pieces of stem cell legislation. The bill Frist is supporting is H.R. 3144, a bill based on a White House Sponsored Bioethics report from this year that champions harvesting stem cell lines without destroying embryos. So says H.R. 1344 “Stem cells may be derived from various sources, including adult tissue, umbilical cord blood, and living human embryos. The use of cells from embryos has drawn great interest in the scientific community but also raises very serious ethical concerns for many Americans, because as practiced today it requires the destruction of human embryos to obtain their cells... [thus the Bill includes] Prohibitions Regarding Harm to Human Embryos.”
Plus, the act only allows work on lines cultured before August 9, 2001.

What’s more, the bills sponsor, Roscoe G. Bartlett (R-MD) has received a rating of 0 from Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League every year he has been in congress and gets full endorsements from the National Right to Life Committee and the Republican National Coalition for Life PAC. His position papers say that he does not support a woman’s right to choose and thinks abortion should only be allowed in cases of rape, incest and when a woman’s life is endangered. This helps shed some light on the bill’s nature as a piece of compromise.

So why the compromise? The piece of legislation that is farthest along, HR 810/ S471, allows stem cells to be harvested from embryos willingly donated to fertility clinics. Bush has promised to veto the bill should it come to pass: his first veto in either of his terms. So even though Bush is grumbling and huffing about the compromise, Frist is kind of bailing him out of a tough position. That doesn’t mean that they aren’t still at odds on this one politically, or that the party isn’t divided here; it just means there’s more nuance than a cursory glance would imply.

I’m Not a Doctor But I Play One on TV

Frist is an awful doctor. His decision to change his position is not based on medical reasons. His spokesperson, Amy Call said Frist “worked tirelessly for weeks” to secure passage for the less moderate version of the bill before coming to the political decision to help float the compromise.
According to his aides, Frist spent months talking to, amongst others, ethicists and religious figures from across the country.

Does this mean Frist is a loonball fundamentalist like Bush and his ilk? Not necessarily, but it does mean he’s a cheap pseudo-medical whore who will trick out his medical credentials for cheap and easy air of legitimacy.

Example 1:

Frist is using his medical credentials to spearhead legislation to cap medical malpractice awards. The bill was wrested away from him by Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Mike Enzi (R-WY) in an all night bi-partisan negotiating session resulting in a more moderate proposal. “Hold on a second, Dave…” you maybe be thinking. “Wouldn’t a doctor be crazy not to support malpractice caps these days, malpractice insurance being what it is these days?” No, and here’s why: a) malpractice insurance isn’t high because the awards and settlements are too expensive, but because the insurance companies are greedy and b) any self-respecting doctor supports patients rights and wouldn’t want to deprive them of their only recourse in a stultifying and increasingly un-human system. The caps on malpractice awards are all a part of the insurance/HMO gambit to institute “tort reform” limiting individuals’ rights to defend themselves against corporations. The ABA gives Frist a 0% approval rating, as has the American Public Health Association every year but 2004. Frist is in the insurance companies’ pocket; his suggestion to improve the health care crisis is tax breaks so American’s can afford to pay the outrageous premiums asked by insurance companies.
Total douche-bag, right? Obviously, his choices aren’t made out of medical expertise.

2) This Week with George Stephanopoulos December 5, 2004
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a guest on George Stephanopoulos’ show. They are discussing a congressional report ordered by Henry Waxman (D-CA). Waxman orders a lot of special reports; he’s a real watchdog like that. His website boasts “he has conducted investigations into a wide range of topics, including the high costs of prescription drugs, conditions in nursing homes, overcrowded schools, and voting irregularities. He formed a "Special Investigations Division" of the minority staff that has prepared hundreds of investigative reports on local and national topics for Members of Congress.” Gotta’ love that. Anyway, Waxman had just released a report, “The Content of Federally Funded Abstinence-Only Education Programs.”
I highly recommend it; it is both hilarious and heartbreaking. Anyway, the report called attention to misinformation in some of these programs. Here is what happened when George Stephanopoulos unleashed his elfin fury on an unsuspecting Frist:
George Stephanopoulos: One of programs [said] "the actual ability of condoms to prevent the transmission
of HIV/AIDS, even if the product is intact, is not definitively known. Another: "The
popular claim that condoms help prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases
is not supported by the data. A third...suggested that tears and sweat could transmit
HIV and AIDS. Now you're a doctor. Do you believe that tears and sweat can transmit HIV?

Bill Frist: I don't know. I can tell you --

George Stephanopoulos: You don’t know?

Bill Frist: I can tell you things like, like --

George Stephanopoulos: Wait. Let me stop you there. You don't know that, you believe that tears and sweat might
be able to transmit AIDS?

Bill Frist: Yeah, no, I can tell you that HIV is not very transmissible as an element, like compared
to smallpox, compared to the flu, it's not…

George Stephanopoulos: ...Let me just clear this up though, do you or do you not believe that tears and sweat
can transmit HIV?

Bill Frist: It would be very hard...for tears and sweat to -- I mean, you can get virus in tears and sweat.
But in terms of the degree of infecting somebody, it would be very hard.

Ok, I’ll admit, that looks pretty bad. But let’s take a look to see what the ol’ Department of Health and Human Services has to say on this one:
"In the context of HIV disease HIV is spread most commonly by sexual contact with an infected partner. The virus can enter the body through the mucosal lining of the vagina, vulva, penis, rectum, or, rarely, the mouth during sex. The likelihood of transmission is increased by factors that may damage these linings, especially other sexually transmitted diseases that cause ulcers or inflammation. HIV also is spread through contact with infected blood, most often by the sharing of drug needles or syringes contaminated with minute quantities of blood containing the virus. Children can contract HIV from their infected mothers during either pregnancy or birth, or postnatally, through breast-feeding. In developed countries, HIV is now rarely transmitted by transfusion of blood or blood products because of screening measures."

So, do you secrete tears with your vagina, rectum, penis or lactating breast? If you do you have bigger problems than abstinence can help with. And sweat? Well, it just doesn’t enter into it. Unless you’re wiping your sweaty rectum on somebody’s open sores, than, without needing knowing your definition of abstinence, you’re not invited to my pool parties. Bill Frist knows better. Every sixth grader who had health class at a public school in the past ten-years knows better. While Bill Frist demonstrates many of the same characteristics of a twelve-year-old, knowledge about HIV transmission isn’t one of them. He’s a bad politician and a lousy doctor.

3) Things Frist DOES NOT Support According to his Office’s Issue Papers
-Implementing a universal health care program to guarantee coverage to all Americans regardless of income.
-Health care strategies focused on prevention, including health education, and natural medicines and remedies.
- A Patient's Bill of Rights which includes the right to sue when claims are denied.
-Allowing states and local communities to use federal funds for needle-exchange programs to combat the spread of HIV.
- Providing citizens age 55-65 the option of purchasing Medicare health coverage.
- Prohibiting states from passing laws that deny human services (medical care, education) to illegal immigrants or their children.

4) That Whole Terri Schiavo Thing
Schiavo according to Frist: "I question it [the diagnosis that Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state] based on a review of the video footage which I spent an hour or so looking at last night in my office. She certainly seems to respond to visual stimuli."

Schaivo According to the Washington Post: “An autopsy on Terri Schiavo backed her husband’s contention that she was in a persistent vegetative state, finding that she had massive and irreversible brain damage and was blind, the medical examiner’s office said Wednesday.”

Not only is Frist not a neurologist, not only did he not even spend actual time with Schiavo… thus making his unsolicited “medical opinion” suspect to begin with, she was blind. Mr. Bradshaw, Mr. Long, let us consult the tape:

Frist: She certainly seems to respond to visual stimuli.

Autopsy: Blind.

Yup, that looks like a fumble to me.

Get to Know Robert Novak

2005-07-29T14:12:00.000-05:00

Age: 74

Hometown: Joliet, Illinois.

Other Famous Joliet Natives: Lynne Thigpen
AKA “The Chief” on Where in the World is
Carmen Sandiego

Lawrence Jenco
Famous Hostage, Lebanon 1985-1988

Daniel Ruettinger
Notre Dame’s “Rudy”

Robert Novak is a self-dubbed paleoconservative, famous for their rabid nationalism, xenophobia, sentimentality for aristocracy and royalism, and a rich tradition of anti-Semitism. Novak is not anti-Semetic, and though born Jewish, was not indoctrinated into the Catholic church until 1998. He is now a member of Opus Dei, a semi-secretive organization founded in 1928 to "to contribute to [the] evangelising mission of the Church." The founder of Opus Dei, Josemaría Escrivá, fought with Spanish dictator, Francisco Franco, and left many Opus Dei members in high-ranking positions in Franco’s government. But Novak can’t take credit for that, no matter what he tells you. Still, Opus Dei still has some strong Fascist tenats in its ethos. Hard to imagine any religious/fascist/nationalistic leanings in a self-identified paleoconservative.

Oh, and remember how Novak was instrumental in getting the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth on the national screen? How he lauded praise on their book, promoted it and primed the media’s pump, challenging them to check out the story? Of course, there was no insidious reason for Novak to plug the book other than being willing to lie for political reasons, right? He’s dishonest, but what could be more important than lying for a cause? How about lying for a profit?
Novak’s son is a top executive at the small publishing house, Regnery Publishing, which put out the blatently fallacious Swift Boat Veterans for Truth book, Unfit for Command. Novak tried to dodge allegations that he was connected to the publishing house, and its operations, despite the fact they publish his newsletter, and is on the board of directors of the company that is Regnery’s largest stock-holder. In fact, Novak celebrated the books high-sales as a guest of honor wish the publishers.

The Lies:
Reporters, including the arch-conservative editorial page at the Wall Street Journal, have dubbed the perenially dishonest Novak “the Prince of Darkness.” Here are a few reasons why:

1) Crossfire September 29, 2003
Paul Begala: It is a felony for a government official to reveal the name of an undercover CIA operative[Valarie Plame]. And yet, according to our own Bob Novak, that is precisely what the Bush administration has done.

Robert Novak: In July, I was interviewing a senior administration official on Ambassador Wilson's report when he told me the trip was inspired by his wife, a CIA employee working on weapons of mass destruction. Another senior official told me the same thing…. So what is the fuss about, pure Bush-bashing?... Mrs. Wilson was an analyst, not a spy, not a covert operative, and not in charge of undercover operatives.Because there's no great crime involved here, it doesn't seem.

Really? Than why did 6 other Washington post writers, New York Times reporter Judith Miller and Time Magazine’s Matt Cooper pass on the story? Not juicy enough? Illegal, perhaps? In the notorious article Novak writes, “Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction.”
Funny you should refer to her as an operative at all, seeing as that she’s an analyst, right. But, hey, poTAto, poTAAto.
That also explains why special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald was appointed to investigate, oh, I don’t know… A CRIME! You know, the whole House Intelligence Committee investigation into, you know… A CRIME! Their order that the Bush administration provide them with “with factual information in their possession relating to the disclosure of the identity and employment of Ms. Valerie Plame as a covert employee of the CIA." Those dummies in the House Intelligence Committee held all these hearings, and they still think Plame was a covert operative? Duh, just ask Robert Novak. If she was, it would have been, you know… A CRIME… to leak her identity. Actually, the entire Bush administration is under investigation by the Department of Justice because of this.
Nice, huh? But surely, not a crime.

2) The Capital Gang October 30, 2004

Robert Novak: Because the Indians stole the election...

(CROSSTALK)

Tucker Carlson: Senator Daschle...

Al Hunt: The Indians stole the election, Bob? Did you say that?

Mark Shields: Al...

Al Hunt: Did you say that?

Sounds offensive. What on Earth is the context? Surely something so inflamatory would have to be based in fact, otherwise it would just be… racist. The statement is in reference to the 2002 Senate elections in which Democratic incumbant Tim Johnson defeated his Republican challenger John Thune. The transcript above is the third time Novak made the allegation. The second time?

Crossfire January 6, 2004

Robert Novak: In 2002, Thune would have been elected to the state's other Senate seat, but the election was stolen by stuffing ballot boxes on the Indian reservations. Now Tom Daschle may have to pay for that theft.

James Carville: That's pretty...

(APPLAUSE)

James Carville: That's -- that's pretty out there. Has Thune said that the Native Americans are election thieves?

Robert Novak: No, I -- I said it.

James Carville: Well, no. Is that the Republican -- is that the party line here?

Robert Novak: No, it's my line.

James Carville: That Native Americans are election thieves, that they can't be
trusted to vote? You hear that, my friends out in South Carolina? Tim Johnson won that race.

(CROSSTALK)

James Carville: They're Native Americans, Bob.

Robert Novak: I call them Indians.

Holy Shit! What an asshole! But (sputter)… despite being racist and obviously feral… is there any truth to the charges?

Well, according to the Republican Secretary of State who oversaw the election, Chris Nelson, South Dakota’s Republican Governor, Mike Rounds, the State GOP Chairman, Randy Fredrick, and candidate John Thune himself: hell no! Novak pulled it out of his ass. What an Asshole!

3) The Capital Gang February 26, 2004

Robert Novak: The Democratic line that this isn't a problem -- Howard Dean gave a speech at Cornell on Thursday of this week in which he said that 80 percent -- over the years, 80 percent of the Social Security benefits will be lost. There is a problem. So, Howard sometimes tells the truth. He doesn't get the exact line.

Less than a week Later

CNN’s Inside Politics February 28, 2004

Robert Novak: He [Dean] spoke at Cornell University last week, and the only paper that covered this was the Cornell daily student paper. And he said, yes, Social Security has a big problem, over the years it's going to lose about 80 percent of the benefits. That, Judy, is not the Democratic line. The Democratic line is, "There is no problem." So Howard Dean says what he thinks is the truth. Often it is the truth. He's going to be a lot of fun as national chairman.

What Dean Actually Said:
“If Social Security were left alone for 30 years, benefits would be reduced to 80 percent of what it is now.”

Judy Woodroof had to apologize for Novak's lie.

4) The Specter Test November 8, 2004

“Sen. Arlen Specter, the canny old fox of Pennsylvania politics, got carried away last Wednesday in the flush of an easy fifth-term victory and revealed too much of what he really thinks. He clearly imposed a litmus test requiring support of the Roe vs. Wade abortion decision for Supreme Court nominees at a time when Chief Justice William Rehnquist is gravely ill…. To correct Specter's monumental mistake, his staff Thursday put out a news release trying to contradict the senator's undeniable advocacy of a litmus test.”

Oh, but it’s a lie.

5) Chicago Sun Times July 7, 2005

“Adding to the tension is word from court sources that ailing Chief Justice William Rehnquist also will announce his retirement before the week is over.”

Novak said this a lot. In print and on TV. Oh, it was a lie.

6) Crossfire July 28, 2004

Robert Novak: Your ticket is the most liberal member of the Senate, [Senator John] Kerry, and the fourth most liberal, [Senator John] Edwards. Do you check your principles at the door when you're supporting a ticket like that?
According to the New York Times, quantifying thier votes on a politically weighted matrix, Kerry and Edwards are both moderates. So far as empirical evidence based on thier voting records, they are middle of the road democrats. Edwards is a little right of center, according to the numbers. So I gues that would make Novak's statement a lie.
Good Job, Bob. Good Job.

Top 10 Hilarious Things Bush Has Denied

2005-07-29T13:08:00.000-05:00

10) Global Warming
9) Manipulating Pre-War Intelligence
8) Anti-Gay Bigotry
7) Cocaine Use
6) Overtime for Working America (that one kind of stung, actually)
5) Going AWOL
4) Evolution
3) Breast Feeding his Springer Spaniel on Occasion
2) 1989 Jagermeister Fueled Threesome with Nolan Ryan and Rafael Palmeiro
1) Having Legitimately Held Political Beliefs

Does This Newscast Make Me Look Fat?

2005-07-18T23:25:00.000-05:00

Guests on Larry King Live

Jessica Hahn
Dick Clark
Toby Keith (Country Star)
Andy Williams
Naomi Judd (Country Star)
Raquel Welch
Ben Affleck
Dr. Phil
James Van Praagh (psychic)
Don Imus
Angela Lansbury
Tanya Tucker (Country Star)
Kathie Lee Gifford
Lorrie Morgan (Country Star)
Janet Jackson
Marie Osmond (Country Star)
Sharon Osbourne
Macaulay Culkin
Dale Earnhart Jr.
Gene Hackman
Celine Dion
Sylvester Stallone
Sophia Loren
Reba McEntire (Country Star)
Donald Trump
Paul Anka
Sarah Jessica Parker
Ron Howard
American Idol Cast
Vanessa Redgrave
Susan Somers
Shania Twain (Country Star)
Linda Evans
Mary Tyler Moore
Pricilla Presley
Donny Osmond (Country Star)
Jermaine Jackson
Lisa Marie Presley
Tony Bennett
Regis Philbin
Leonardo DiCaprio
Motley Crue
Ellen DeGeneres
Tracey Gold
Kirstie Alley
Ashley Smith (Playboy Bunny)
Joan Rivers
Wayne Newton
Elton John
Tim McGraw (Country Star)
Fear Factor
Extreme Makeovers
Psyhic Detectices (Twice)
The Women of Court TV
The Men of Court TV
The Cast of :Everybody Loves Raymond
The Cast of The Swan
The Cast of The Biggest Loser
The Cast of Will & Grace
The Cast of Dancing With the Stars
Snoop Doggy Dogg (Title of Show: Shattered Dreams)
Stories About The Peterson Case: 81

Guests on The Daily Show

Floyd Abrams
Madeline Albreight
Christiane Amanpour
Carl Bernstein
Joe Biden
Michael Bloomberg
Henry Bonilla
Pat Buchanan
Carol Mosley-Braun
Donna Brazille
Tom Brokaw
Wesley Clark
Richard Clarke
Bill Clinton
Hillary Clinton
Norm Coleman
Katie Couric
Mario Cuomo
Tom Daschle
Howard Dean
Bob Dole
John Edwards
Ari Fleischer
Thomas Frank
Al Franken
Thomas Friedman
Dick Gephardt
Ed Gillespie
Newt Gingrich
Rudy Giuliani
Bernard Goldberg
Al Gore
Gary Hart
Christopher Hitchens
Seymour Hersh
Karen Hughes
Kay Bailey Hutchinson
Michael Isikoff
Peter Jennings
Bob Kerrey
John Kerry
Henry Kissinger
Joe Klein
Ed Koch
Bill Kristol
Paul Krugman
Dennis Kucinich
Steve Levitt
Joe Lieberman
Terry McAuliffe
John McCain
Ken Mehlman
Zell Miller
Michael Moore
Bill Moyers
Ralph Nader
Ben Neslon
Paul O’Neill
Bill O’Reilly
Richard Perle
Gerald Posner
Colin Powell
Marc Racicot
Robert Reich
Bill Richardson
Tom Ridge
Charles Schumer
Al Sharpton
Bishop Desmond Tutu
Sarah Vowell
Jim Wallis
William Weld
Christine Todd Whitman
Joseph Wilson
Tom Wolfe
Bob Woodward
Byron York
Fareed Zakaria
Howard Zinn
John Zogby

News From Yesteryear

2005-07-16T02:40:00.000-05:00

Every once and a while I am surprised by national reaction to a news story. A good example: the Bush went AWOL story. The country began to eat up news stories about Bush’s skipping out on his commitments to Texas Air National Guard a few months before the 2004 election. Was I crazy? Didn’t we hear about this almost four years ago?
“Bush avoided duty oversees by joining the Texas Air National Guard. No documents have been found to show he reported for duty as ordered in Alabama in 1972” and when did John Kerry say, “Those of us who were in the military wonder how it is that someone who is supposedly serving on active duty, having taken that oath, can miss a whole year of service without even explaining where it went?”
November, 2000. John Kerry was quoted along with Nebraska Senator Bob Kerry impugning Bush’s hypocritical hawkish bluster. Where did this story go for four-years? If I knew it, it was obviously out and about in the general media. I may make a conscious effort to stay informed but I am about as far from being a political insider as… as, oh, I don’t know… Al Gore. Ouch! Okay, that one hurt. But still, what gives?

Ok, here’s another good one: the Cheney energy task force. Remember that gem? This was early on in their first term. Cheney set up a task force to craft new energy policy and it turned out the entire task force was big rich energy companies and lobbyists. Big shock, right? The intrigue comes in when Cheney refuses to turn over records from the meetings when ordered to by congress in a General Accounting Office investigation. Can you believe the balls on this guy! “The task force was one of Bush's highest priorities after his inauguration and was launched on his 10th day in office. None of the group's meetings was open to the public, and participants told GAO investigators they "could not recollect whether official rosters or minutes were kept," Sunday 6th, 2002.
Still, these greedy bastards have had their hands caught in the cookie jar before. What did it turn out they were trying to hide. Well, the report tendered by James Baker during these meetings said, “The United States should conduct an immediate policy review of Iraq, including military, energy, economic and political/diplomatic assessments…. Sanctions that are not effective should be phased out and replaced with highly focused and enforced sanctions that target the regime’s ability to maintain and acquire weapons of mass destruction.”

When was this report from? April, 2001.Even more incriminating was the fact that an independent political watchdog group called “Judicial Watch” filed a lawsuit against Cheney to unseal the Energy Task Force meeting notes based on a law which spoke directly to the legal requisite for transparency in these types of situations, the Federal Advisory Committee Act. They sued in 2001. The story broke July, 2003, when Judicial Watch went on PBS to share their findings.
What did they find? Believe it or not, the Task Force had already diced up the Iraqi oil fields and listed out interested parties should these oil fields come up for liquidation.
What does this mean? 10 days into office, the Bush administration had opened up the gates to the most craven and mercenary corporate energy concerns, and were already discussing invading Iraq to seize their oil. I’m not making this shit up, folks. And the thing is, every step of the way the story surprised people, like they’d never heard about it. Hell, when Lay was indicted last July, the press made a big deal about the “revelation: that he had been advising the administration on oil policy. Good work, Albert Q. News-Older-Than-Methusala’s-Balls! Keep it sharp for the boys in copy, and have the presses rolling overtime on that one.

“But Dave”, you must be saying, “this is obviously old news. Why are you busting a blood-vessel over this now?” Good question, voice in my head. Here is why: Karl “Turd Blossom” Rove. Yes, Bush and staff actually call Rove “Turd Blossom.”

His story, the one about him being the one who allegedly outed CIA an undercover agent broke a while ago, right? Am I nuts? Isn’t that what everyone was saying back in 2003? If we finally have hard evidence, and Cooper’s notes nail him, why aren’t DC Jail thugs churning his creamy white ass into prison butter already? Its not like his being the likely candidate is a new revelation. Ahh! The only thing shorter than our memories is the respect the administration gives us for being wise to their antics.

Pandamonium

2005-07-14T22:18:00.000-05:00

Mei Xiang, the eight year-old giant panda at the DC Zoo gave birth last Saturday, July 10th, 2005 to a baby panda cub weighing just a few ounces. Pandas born in captivity have a pretty high mortality rate but this panda has already made it past the first five days and its chances of survival are very high now. It is very cute. You can watch the mother and cub live on the zoo’s panda cam.

Dave and Kansas Have a Chat

2005-07-13T02:05:00.000-05:00

Dave: Hey Kansas, welcome to Dave v. Rodan. You look great. That outfit is really slimming.

Kansas: Thanks for having me, Dave.

Dave: Anytime, Kansas, anytime. Getting down to business it has almost been a six years since your State Board of Education banned evolution from the curriculum.

Kansas: Let’s see here, July, August… you’re right! These summers go by so fast. We restored it to the curriculum two years later!

Dave: So, how did that whole “not teaching science to school kids” thing work out for ya’?

Kansas: Well, Dave, we didn’t out and out ban teaching evolution. A lot of people think that but it just isn’t true. We just “deleted” it from our curriculum. Teachers were free to teach it if they want, just as they were free to teach Creationism as written in Genesis.

Dave: It is reassuring to know that evolution and religious teachings are viewed as equally appropriate subject matters in Kansas’s public schools.

Kansas: Well, actually, recent polls show Kansans are really considering going back to the 1999 ban. Truth be told we prefer students learn Creationism. You know, Dave, evolution can’t be applied to the scientific method… you know, because it can’t be repeated.

Dave: What, the entire biological history of the planet can’t be repeated, you mean?

Kansas: Yes.

Dave: And Creationism…

Kansas: Is written in the Bible, plain as day. I mean, Evolution is just a theory.

Dave: Do you know what a theory is, Kansas?

Kansas: A fact that hasn’t been proven!

Dave: Close. A theory is a hypothesis, or series of hypotheses that have been confirmed through multiple trials, or observable and empirically recordable aspects of our world. A theory, a synonym in the scientific community for “law” or “law of nature” cannot ever be proven, only disproved. Like gravity. Can you prove that gravity always abides by the laws or principles we understand it to be limited by? No, of course not. Only exceptions can be found. Do you have an exception to the theory, or “law” of evolution, Kansas?

Kansas: Why are you picking a fight with me? Louisiana and Arkansas passed bills in 1981 requiring equal time be allotted to evolution and Creationism.

Dave: Well, Louisiana’s law was overturned by the Supreme Court in the 1987 ruling of Edwards v. Aguillard. And honestly, Arkansas… what do you expect.

Kansas: Point well taken. The year we banned evolution, Rep. Tom DeLay directly blamed the teaching of evolution in public schools for the massacre at Columbine High School. According to a November 19th, 2004 Gallup poll 45% of American’s believe god made us as we are 10,000 years ago. Only about 30% believe in evolution; the same percentage that are biblical literalists. Plus, all those fossils that seem to indicate cumulative changes in species over time are just artifices of the devil meant to test our faith. Differential survival based on inherited traits only holds true in defense of hate groups and abstractions regarding free market capitalism. You can’t make us believe in science!

Dave: Nor would I want to. Thanks for stopping by.

Kansas: Give me a call if you see any Witchs need burnin', too.

Dave: Will do.

The Jew Among Us

2005-07-11T22:43:00.000-05:00

A fellow Jew to be proud of: Big Red!

Louis “Red” Klotz
Founder/Player/Owner of the Washington Generals

At 5’7, Klotz is the third shortest man to play in the NBA.
Beat the Harlem Globetrotters once in his early twenties, playing with the South Philadelphia Hebrew Association, and once at 50 with the Washington Generals. He retired as point-guard at 62. His team, the Generals, lasted from 1953 to 1995. They lost over 13,000 games to the Globetrotters. Immediately after disbanding the Generals, he began the New York Nationals. The Nationals have been playing the Globetrotters for 10 years, and have yet to win a game.
Where would the Globetrotters be without him? Clearly Louis "Red" Klotz is a Jew of note. Cheers, Red. Cheers.

Barking up the Wrong Tree

2005-07-11T20:47:00.000-05:00

Q: Why does Snoop Doggy-Dogg have an umbrella?

A: For Drizzle.

Take Off Those Robes and Slip into Something More Comfortable

2005-07-11T20:29:00.000-05:00

Sandra Day O’Connor, a moderate Supreme Court Justice appointed by President Reagan in the 1980s, will be impossible to replace. Why? Because her moderate status—often the deciding vote on a divided court—will not be upheld by whoever her successor is? Well, maybe… but most importantly, only two Supreme Court Justices had ever slept with each other, and she was one of them. The other was… wait for it…not Clarence Thomas… not Ginsburg (even though they went to Panama City that one time and after shot-gunning a few beers… well I digress)… Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist. They dated in law school. O’Connor was third in the class at Stanford, Rehnquist was first. Rehnquist and O’Connor dated briefly before Sandra met her husband, also a student at Stanford Law. In fact, she stepped down to care for her husband, who is ailing with Alzheimer's disease. But what a unique position she played on the court.
So, the real issue is who fill the chasm. The court is so divided, particularly after Gore v. Bush, that it seems unlikely that any of the current Justices with decide to bump uglies. Rehnquist and Brenner used to play poker together but rumor has it that they have been divided by politics. Ginsburg and Scalia are opera buffs, but that is not enough to mend the cleavage rendered by partisan polarization. So what now? There are two options that present themselves:

1) Nominate ex-husbands, wives, girlfriends and boyfriends and court-groupies and road meat that have slept with the Justices before… Can you imagine any congress-person rejecting the equivalent of the Susan Sarandon character in Bull Durham. “May I please the court?” I am sure that Fiengold and Santorum can agree on that.
2) Nominate hotties in potentia, sort of like a Temptation Island sort of thing. Who is most likely to bang a justice? Two? Three justices? The David Bowie/Madonna type could probably bag ‘em from both proverbial sides of the aisle, is you know what I’m sayin’ (knudge-knudge, wink-wink).

Anyway, that’s our mission. My recommendation, worth-while or not, is Bill Clinton. President Taft was a one-term flop, but shined like the North Star in the Supreme Court. Clinton would love to be back in action, and he wouldn’t mind getting back into government, either.