"This shocking revelation ought to send a chill down the spine of every American." - Senator Russell Feingold, December 17, 2005
A little flashback to three years ago. "Only" three years ago, when there was still plenty of time for impeachment. (Thanks, Nancy, how can we ever repay you?)
The New York Times was letting it slip out. It turns out they were still in the Bush Administration's pocket. Yes, even then, three years after their sycophantic WMD propaganda scare, the ever so "liberal" New York Times was still suckling at the teat of the Beast by withholding the story for an entire year. How patriotic of our corporate Ministry of Truth.
This time it was about the Bush Cartel's secret warrantless spying on Americans.
We crazy lefties, and other Bill of Rights enthusiasts, were scorned and ridiculed for screaming about these crimes for years.
Remember this story? Outrages and lies highlighted.
***
Bush Secretly Lifted Some Limits on Spying in U.S. After 9/11, Officials Say
By JAMES RISENand ERIC LICHTBLAU
WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.
Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.
The previously undisclosed decision to permit some eavesdropping inside the country without court approval represents a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices, particularly for the National Security Agency, whose mission is to spy on communications abroad. As a result, some officials familiar with the continuing operation have questioned whether the surveillance has stretched, if not crossed, constitutional limits on legal searches.
"This is really a sea change," said a former senior official who specializes in national security law. "It's almost a mainstay of this country that the N.S.A. only does foreign searches."
Nearly a dozen current and former officials, who were granted anonymity because of the classified nature of the program, discussed it with reporters for The New York Times because of their concerns about the operation's legality and oversight.
According to those officials and others, reservations about aspects of the program have also been expressed by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who is the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and a judge presiding over a secret court that oversees intelligence matters. Some of the questions about the agency's new powers led the administration to temporarily suspend the operation last year and impose more restrictions, the officials said.
The Bush administration views the operation as necessary so that the agency can move quickly to monitor communications that may disclose threats to this country, the officials said. Defenders of the program say it has been a critical tool in helping disrupt terrorist plots and prevent attacks inside the United States.
Administration officials are confident that existing safeguards are sufficient to protect the privacy and civil liberties of Americans, the officials say. In some cases, they said, the Justice Department eventually seeks warrants if it wants to expand the eavesdropping to include communications confined within the United States. The officials said the administration had briefed Congressional leaders about the program and notified the judge in charge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the secret Washington court that deals with national security issues.
The White House asked The New York Times not to publish this article, arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny. After meeting with senior administration officials to hear their concerns, the newspaper delayed publication for a year to conduct additional reporting. Some information that administration officials argued could be useful to terrorists has been omitted.
While many details about the program remain secret, officials familiar with it said the N.S.A. eavesdropped without warrants on up to 500 people in the United States at any given time. The list changes as some names are added and others dropped, so the number monitored in this country may have reached into the thousands over the past three years, several officials said. Overseas, about 5,000 to 7,000 people suspected of terrorist ties are monitored at one time, according to those officials.
Several officials said the eavesdropping program had helped uncover a plot by Iyman Faris, an Ohio trucker and naturalized citizen who pleaded guilty in 2003 to supporting Al Qaeda by planning to bring down the Brooklyn Bridge with blowtorches. Continued...
***
And three years ago we were blessed with this beautiful voice of sanity. I really, really miss this woman.
***
They Wouldn't Lie to Us, Would They?
by Molly Ivins December 17, 2005
AUSTIN, Texas - As one on the liberal side of the chorus of moaners about the decline of civility in politics, I feel a certain responsibility when earnest, spaniel-eyed conservatives like David Brooks peer at us hopefully and say, "Well, yes, there was certainly a lot of misinformation about WMD before the war in Iraq, but ... you don't think they, he, actually lied do you?"
Draw I deep the breath of patience. I factor in the long and awful history of politics and truth, add the immutable nature of pols — fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly — and compare Tonkin Gulf, Watergate and Iran-Contra with the piddly Curveball and Niger uranium. I prepare to respond like a reasonable person — "Of course not actually lie, per se, in the strict sense" — and then I listen to another speech about Iraq by either the president or the vice president and find myself screaming, "Dammit, when will they quit lying?"
Civility is fine. On the other hand, sanity has its claims, as well.
I have been listening with great attention to the series of speeches President Bush has lately given on his newly revealed "Plan for Victory." Of course I was pleased to learn we have a plan for a victory, which consists, it turns out, of announcing: "We cannot and will not leave Iraq until victory is achieved. ... We will settle for nothing less than complete victory."
Unfortunately, the White House claims it produced this once supposedly secret plan in 2003, when it is actually a public-relations paper written less than six months ago, which is pretty much the way things go credibility-wise these days. It has long been clear that this administration thinks it can spin reality to a blue-bellied fare-thee-well, but isn't it a tad late for this?
Of course, it's an awkward time to be a doom-and-gloomer, too. Who wants to remind everyone this isn't working just when all those brave Iraqis just risked their lives to vote again?
Democracy is a grand thing. Unfortunately, a vote has never yet created an operative military brigade.
Bush claimed in his Naval Academy speech that 80 Iraqi army and police battalions are fighting alongside American units, while another 40 are taking the lead in fighting. But last summer, military leaders told Congress that three of the 115 Iraqi battalions are capable of fighting without U.S. help, and in October Gen. George Casey, the American commander in Iraq, lowered that to one.
Of course all Texans are raised on the "Never retreat, never surrender" model, but it does ring just a little hollow when the administration's own plans for a draw-down of troops are dominating the news.
So as not to completely abandon my colleagues still yearning for civility, I point out that Bush and even Cheney are making progress. For one thing, they now acknowledge reconstruction is not going entirely smoothly, a refreshing degree of candor.
Also, Bush now acknowledges we are fighting more than just terrorists. In fact, most of the people we're fighting are themselves Iraqis who don't like us being there. The fact that their government has asked us to leave is still politely passed over. This has already cost us $277 billion, with at least another $100 billion to come.
It does seem a little silly, though, to call for "complete victory" without acknowledging that the war itself is not going well. The number of attacks on American and Iraqi troops per day grows steadily worse. Rep. Jack Murtha, who is very close to the military, says insurgent incidents over the past year have increased from 150 per week to over 700 per week.
Bush's claims on reconstruction are likewise mind-boggling. It's not "fits and starts" — there are rampant overcharges, corruption, lack of oversight — it is a zoo. At least $8 billion the United States provided Iraq's Coalition Provisional Authority is unaccounted for, and Halliburton alone has already been accused of $1.4 billion in unreasonable and unsupported charges.
One night in mid-September, George W. stood in New Orleans' Jackson Square, with the floodlit facade of St. Louis Cathedral in the background. He promised help for housing, education and job training: "The work that has begun in the Gulf Coast region will be one of the largest reconstruction efforts the world has ever seen. ... And tonight I also offer this pledge of the American people: Throughout the area hit by the hurricane, we will do what it takes, we will stay as long as it takes to help citizens rebuild their communities and their lives."
Hey, you know, another mission accomplished.
***
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Wars, Winners and Losers
Back in the 90’s a friend and I used to contemplate the War on Drugs. In order to keep our jobs, we would need to submit to random drug testing. We noted how the War on Drugs was always a good excuse by the right wingers to frighten the public into accepting new laws that were designed to undermine their privacy, civil liberties and Constitutional rights.
Any resistance by a liberal or moderate person to the new police state tactics was always met with the old “soft on crime” accusation. Anyone else see a familiar pattern here?
I would point out that the War on Drugs would be a dress rehearsal for the coming War on Terror. A lot of people listening to our conversations would quickly dismiss us as the paranoid lunatic fringe for thinking such foolishness.
This was not to be the last time that I really wished I was wrong.
As history teaches those of us who pay attention, we can see how both the War on Terror and the War on Drugs operate by similar methods with similar results.
Both are over-reaching militarized operations against problems best addressed by other strategies and tactics.
The War on Drugs is militarized law enforcement used as a tool to address what is best described a medical and public health issue. Drug users are generally non-violent citizens. The War on Drugs exacerbates the damage of drugs and destruction of life.
The War on Terror is an over militarized reaction to what can be best dealt with as a law enforcement problem. Terrorists are criminals. The War on Terror exacerbates the death and destruction from terrorists.
But, since we do not have publicly financed elections, Congress and the Executive Branch owe their souls to the big money boys of the corporate military/industrial complex. They wield the metaphorical hammer. And they see every problem as a nail to be fixed by their only tool.
The public’s perception of these problems is formed by the corporate media. The media love to sensationalize crime and terror. They also love their cozy access to political power and corporate advertisers. Truth and fairness always take a back seat to these interests.
This is why the War on Drugs and the War on Terror are, by nature, endless. So why do we fight endless wars we know we cannot win?
Because someone does win. And it’s not the public. We pour our tax dollars into the black holes of secret police and military budgets. And for all the financial cost and loss of civil liberties, we are promised safety and law and order that we will never see.
The winners in the War on Terror are the war profiteers like Halliburton, KBR, and Blackwater. Armament industries and weapon and ammo manufacturers are doing quite well. Other winners are the terrorists themselves. Bin Laden and al-Qaeda gained more recruits and funds after Bush’s invasions than they ever could have before.
The winners in the War on Drugs are the pharmaceutical, tobacco and liquor corporations. You know, the partnership for a drug-free America crowd. The drug testing, surveillance, and corporate prison industries are also quite happy profiting from the misery of others.
Billions of dollars of Drug War loot are being sucked up by corrupt cops and violent drug dealers. They love the War on Drugs.
The losers are the same in both wars. The taxpayers are duped by politicians and the corporate media. We are throwing more and more money at a problem that will never be fixed by the institutions that profit from the status quo.
And the real victims of the two wars are those innocents caught in the crossfire by the opposing sides. All the cruel and senseless bloodshed could be eliminated by ending the cruel and senseless policies.
The story is getting old, but hope is out there.
Americans are beginning to wake up to the Drug War con. So far, thirteen states have voted to allow medicinal marijuana use. This is good news. It shows that we the people still have some power over the political and corporate interests.
The established power brokers will always resist progress, so the people must always continue to press their struggle for justice and fairness.
American democracy depends on the activism and participation of the common folk of this country. This is why the Reich Wingers are always working to suppress the voters in any way they can.
They will probably renew their efforts more than ever because they are already at war with the Obama Administration. We can look forward to increased dirty tactics from the racists, war mongers, Bible thumpers, mercenaries, and corporatists from the far Right.
If the Clinton era was the breeding ground of the Fox/Limbaugh reactionary right wing media, we can expect a similar outpouring of artificially whipped up rage from the same actors to disrupt and derail any initiatives from Democrats.
We need to push for the enlightenment of the public by illuminating the realities of the failed right wing policies. Our counter-propaganda efforts need to be as unrelenting as their false propaganda has been through the years.
The renewed propaganda surge is already here. I once again received one of those conservative viral e-mails. I’ll show you the message and my response.
***
I HAVE TO PASS A URINE TEST FOR MY JOB... SO I AGREE 100%. Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test with which I have no problem.
What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test. Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their BUTT, doing drugs, while I work. ... . Can you imagine how much money the state and country would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check? Pass this along if you agree or simply delete if you don't. Hope you all will pass it along, though. ... Something has to change in this country -- and soon.
------
Urine tests are unjust because the war on drugs is a wrongheaded failure. It is stupid to impose hardship on anyone for victimless crimes. Rush Limbaugh and Cindy McCain didn’t have to lose their privileged positions and income for their drug addiction. Why should the poor and working class be held to harsher standards?
Too many good employees lose jobs, not because of impaired work performance, but because of politically incorrect recreation on the weekend. Punishment solves nothing. If there is a real problem, treatment is the cheaper, more humane solution. All those anti- tax fiscal conservatives should understand the drug war is a huge waste of our tax dollars compared to a sane policy of treatment and rehab.
Substance abuse will never be solved as a Big Government law enforcement problem. It is a health issue and needs to be addressed as such.
Americans are brainwashed to be eager to give up rights to their privacy. The idiots who say “tap my phone, I’ve done nothing wrong” have just given totalitarians the right to dictate everything else over their lame asses.
Who are more dangerous to human life; dry-drunk, lying war mongers, or peaceful hippies minding their own business?
Right Wing Authoritarian personalities will never understand. They are so much better than everyone else, you know. They love seeing brown folks and other “inferior” people suffer. The drug war is their perfect tool to impose their intolerance on others.
There are many sane reasons to de-criminalize cannabis, or other drugs for that matter. If cannabis was used for textile, fuel, medicinal, and other applications, it could be taxed and actually help our economy recover.But, corporate/police state interests are against it. It is the profiteering by narrow interests that keep it illegal. The same kind of narrow interests are tearing our economy apart. You'd think someone would learn. But since the US corporate government is NEVER wrong...
***
We Americans still have the choice. We can take a reality-based look at the issues of drug use and terrorism. We can respond with a reasoned approach, free of the influence of those who would profit from ill-considered policies. We can choose health, life, progress and a better economy.
Or we can give the bloody terrorists, murderous drug cartels, and the cold-blooded nexus of corporate government all the money and power they could ever desire. We can choose to continue down the paths into failure, bankruptcy and the certainty of more loss of life. All we need to do is keep waging our wars on drugs and terror, and stay the course.
Let’s hope the new administration takes a sane look at the policies that do not work and have never worked. Saving our economy and our Bill of Rights is the kind of change we can all believe in.
Any resistance by a liberal or moderate person to the new police state tactics was always met with the old “soft on crime” accusation. Anyone else see a familiar pattern here?
I would point out that the War on Drugs would be a dress rehearsal for the coming War on Terror. A lot of people listening to our conversations would quickly dismiss us as the paranoid lunatic fringe for thinking such foolishness.
This was not to be the last time that I really wished I was wrong.
As history teaches those of us who pay attention, we can see how both the War on Terror and the War on Drugs operate by similar methods with similar results.
Both are over-reaching militarized operations against problems best addressed by other strategies and tactics.
The War on Drugs is militarized law enforcement used as a tool to address what is best described a medical and public health issue. Drug users are generally non-violent citizens. The War on Drugs exacerbates the damage of drugs and destruction of life.
The War on Terror is an over militarized reaction to what can be best dealt with as a law enforcement problem. Terrorists are criminals. The War on Terror exacerbates the death and destruction from terrorists.
But, since we do not have publicly financed elections, Congress and the Executive Branch owe their souls to the big money boys of the corporate military/industrial complex. They wield the metaphorical hammer. And they see every problem as a nail to be fixed by their only tool.
The public’s perception of these problems is formed by the corporate media. The media love to sensationalize crime and terror. They also love their cozy access to political power and corporate advertisers. Truth and fairness always take a back seat to these interests.
This is why the War on Drugs and the War on Terror are, by nature, endless. So why do we fight endless wars we know we cannot win?
Because someone does win. And it’s not the public. We pour our tax dollars into the black holes of secret police and military budgets. And for all the financial cost and loss of civil liberties, we are promised safety and law and order that we will never see.
The winners in the War on Terror are the war profiteers like Halliburton, KBR, and Blackwater. Armament industries and weapon and ammo manufacturers are doing quite well. Other winners are the terrorists themselves. Bin Laden and al-Qaeda gained more recruits and funds after Bush’s invasions than they ever could have before.
The winners in the War on Drugs are the pharmaceutical, tobacco and liquor corporations. You know, the partnership for a drug-free America crowd. The drug testing, surveillance, and corporate prison industries are also quite happy profiting from the misery of others.
Billions of dollars of Drug War loot are being sucked up by corrupt cops and violent drug dealers. They love the War on Drugs.
The losers are the same in both wars. The taxpayers are duped by politicians and the corporate media. We are throwing more and more money at a problem that will never be fixed by the institutions that profit from the status quo.
And the real victims of the two wars are those innocents caught in the crossfire by the opposing sides. All the cruel and senseless bloodshed could be eliminated by ending the cruel and senseless policies.
The story is getting old, but hope is out there.
Americans are beginning to wake up to the Drug War con. So far, thirteen states have voted to allow medicinal marijuana use. This is good news. It shows that we the people still have some power over the political and corporate interests.
The established power brokers will always resist progress, so the people must always continue to press their struggle for justice and fairness.
American democracy depends on the activism and participation of the common folk of this country. This is why the Reich Wingers are always working to suppress the voters in any way they can.
They will probably renew their efforts more than ever because they are already at war with the Obama Administration. We can look forward to increased dirty tactics from the racists, war mongers, Bible thumpers, mercenaries, and corporatists from the far Right.
If the Clinton era was the breeding ground of the Fox/Limbaugh reactionary right wing media, we can expect a similar outpouring of artificially whipped up rage from the same actors to disrupt and derail any initiatives from Democrats.
We need to push for the enlightenment of the public by illuminating the realities of the failed right wing policies. Our counter-propaganda efforts need to be as unrelenting as their false propaganda has been through the years.
The renewed propaganda surge is already here. I once again received one of those conservative viral e-mails. I’ll show you the message and my response.
***
I HAVE TO PASS A URINE TEST FOR MY JOB... SO I AGREE 100%. Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test with which I have no problem.
What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test. Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their BUTT, doing drugs, while I work. ... . Can you imagine how much money the state and country would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check? Pass this along if you agree or simply delete if you don't. Hope you all will pass it along, though. ... Something has to change in this country -- and soon.
------
Urine tests are unjust because the war on drugs is a wrongheaded failure. It is stupid to impose hardship on anyone for victimless crimes. Rush Limbaugh and Cindy McCain didn’t have to lose their privileged positions and income for their drug addiction. Why should the poor and working class be held to harsher standards?
Too many good employees lose jobs, not because of impaired work performance, but because of politically incorrect recreation on the weekend. Punishment solves nothing. If there is a real problem, treatment is the cheaper, more humane solution. All those anti- tax fiscal conservatives should understand the drug war is a huge waste of our tax dollars compared to a sane policy of treatment and rehab.
Substance abuse will never be solved as a Big Government law enforcement problem. It is a health issue and needs to be addressed as such.
Americans are brainwashed to be eager to give up rights to their privacy. The idiots who say “tap my phone, I’ve done nothing wrong” have just given totalitarians the right to dictate everything else over their lame asses.
Who are more dangerous to human life; dry-drunk, lying war mongers, or peaceful hippies minding their own business?
Right Wing Authoritarian personalities will never understand. They are so much better than everyone else, you know. They love seeing brown folks and other “inferior” people suffer. The drug war is their perfect tool to impose their intolerance on others.
There are many sane reasons to de-criminalize cannabis, or other drugs for that matter. If cannabis was used for textile, fuel, medicinal, and other applications, it could be taxed and actually help our economy recover.But, corporate/police state interests are against it. It is the profiteering by narrow interests that keep it illegal. The same kind of narrow interests are tearing our economy apart. You'd think someone would learn. But since the US corporate government is NEVER wrong...
***
We Americans still have the choice. We can take a reality-based look at the issues of drug use and terrorism. We can respond with a reasoned approach, free of the influence of those who would profit from ill-considered policies. We can choose health, life, progress and a better economy.
Or we can give the bloody terrorists, murderous drug cartels, and the cold-blooded nexus of corporate government all the money and power they could ever desire. We can choose to continue down the paths into failure, bankruptcy and the certainty of more loss of life. All we need to do is keep waging our wars on drugs and terror, and stay the course.
Let’s hope the new administration takes a sane look at the policies that do not work and have never worked. Saving our economy and our Bill of Rights is the kind of change we can all believe in.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Thanksgiving 2008
It’s that miserable time of the year. Right wingers are miserable because Obama will be president. Lefties are miserable over Bush being, for 54 more days, president of our once magnificent country. Never has so much utter failure and sheer disaster been dumped on an incoming president. The excitement of the election has subsided into a relatively moderate mix of anticipation and anxiety.
Thanksgiving is upon us with its own familiar and familial mix of anticipation and anxiety.
Corporate America is desperately hoping there’s enough consumer cash left in our pockets to give them a profitable shopping season. I wouldn’t want to be them right now.
The collapse of the unregulated greed-fueled economy has shifted everyone’s expectations for the coming year. Hopes for a happy and prosperous new year are deflating into a nervous desire for simple survival. We all have a sick stirring of dread in our collective gut about the remaining effects yet to be felt from the ruinous Bush Administration policies of pillage, plunder and scorched earth.
And so now in this setting Americans are expected to celebrate Thanksgiving. The only thankful soul I’ve seen so far, other than the Decider eagerly planning to “refill the old coffers” with his retirement speaking engagements, is the turkey pardoned by Sarah Palin. Yet, why do I think his pardon will not be honored?
Somehow I still have to feel a sense of thankfulness.
For one thing, I’m damn thankful I was not one of those early pilgrim settlers. They went though almost as much hell as they inflicted upon the native tribes. No, I wouldn’t care to trade places with them.
I’m also very thankful I’m not a “liberated” Iraqi. Those poor souls have suffered more than their share.
I guess that makes me thankful to be a citizen of the collapsing empire that has finally come to realize the consequences of unleashed corporatism and its over-extended projection of power.
If you’re the kind of person who can’t stand to be bored, you can be very thankful. We will not be bored witnessing the events of the coming years. I’ve come to understand how much I would be happy to simply be bored. I guess that’s some small insight I could be thankful about.
I am truly thankful for all the great bloggers out there for me to read. I am also thankful for the discerning and kind readers who may enjoy these little rants. We can be thankful we’re all in this together and are able to share our individual perspectives. It is good to know there are many others out there like us.
So let us be thankful for the simple things. We have home and hearth, family and friends, and food and drink.
Let’s enjoy our brief bubble of hope before the next administration takes the helm. At least we can be thankful that after January, we won’t be as disappointed, angry, and frustrated as we’ve been for the past eight years.
And finally, we can be thankful for not having to worry about having too much money anymore.
Thanksgiving is upon us with its own familiar and familial mix of anticipation and anxiety.
Corporate America is desperately hoping there’s enough consumer cash left in our pockets to give them a profitable shopping season. I wouldn’t want to be them right now.
The collapse of the unregulated greed-fueled economy has shifted everyone’s expectations for the coming year. Hopes for a happy and prosperous new year are deflating into a nervous desire for simple survival. We all have a sick stirring of dread in our collective gut about the remaining effects yet to be felt from the ruinous Bush Administration policies of pillage, plunder and scorched earth.
And so now in this setting Americans are expected to celebrate Thanksgiving. The only thankful soul I’ve seen so far, other than the Decider eagerly planning to “refill the old coffers” with his retirement speaking engagements, is the turkey pardoned by Sarah Palin. Yet, why do I think his pardon will not be honored?
Somehow I still have to feel a sense of thankfulness.
For one thing, I’m damn thankful I was not one of those early pilgrim settlers. They went though almost as much hell as they inflicted upon the native tribes. No, I wouldn’t care to trade places with them.
I’m also very thankful I’m not a “liberated” Iraqi. Those poor souls have suffered more than their share.
I guess that makes me thankful to be a citizen of the collapsing empire that has finally come to realize the consequences of unleashed corporatism and its over-extended projection of power.
If you’re the kind of person who can’t stand to be bored, you can be very thankful. We will not be bored witnessing the events of the coming years. I’ve come to understand how much I would be happy to simply be bored. I guess that’s some small insight I could be thankful about.
I am truly thankful for all the great bloggers out there for me to read. I am also thankful for the discerning and kind readers who may enjoy these little rants. We can be thankful we’re all in this together and are able to share our individual perspectives. It is good to know there are many others out there like us.
So let us be thankful for the simple things. We have home and hearth, family and friends, and food and drink.
Let’s enjoy our brief bubble of hope before the next administration takes the helm. At least we can be thankful that after January, we won’t be as disappointed, angry, and frustrated as we’ve been for the past eight years.
And finally, we can be thankful for not having to worry about having too much money anymore.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Our New Conservative Friend
I saw an interesting survey while watching the Sunday pundits this morning. The USA Today/Gallup poll was gauging the public’s reaction to Barack Obama getting elected president last Tuesday. The poll found that 67% of the American people felt proud that Obama was elected. And 67% felt optimistic as well. Gee, maybe God DID bless America.
But, wait. You realists are probably wondering about the rest of the public.
It reported 30% said they are pessimistic. And 27% even said they were afraid. I think I can relate to someone being pessimistic. Been there, done that.
More troubling though, is how would all those poor souls become afraid? It’s not as if there were prominent Republican types accusing Obama of being some kind of secret, madras-schooled, Muslim radical. There couldn’t have been good, church-goin’, uninformed pageant divas out there saying he was pallin’ around with terrorists or nasty stuff like that, right? It has nothing to do with the fact that on the Thursday after the election, Rush Limbaugh used the words “Obama” and “fear” together about six times in the five minutes I heard him.
I don’t know. I give up. I don’t have a clue why good authoritarian Americans would be afraid.
I DO know that, according to our favorite conservative with a conscience, John Dean, 25% of our population are Right Wing Authoritarians. His book “Conservatives without Conscience” explains how Right Wing Authoritarian personalities are devoted to their leaders, no matter where they lead them. The RWA personalities remain loyal followers, regardless of facts or conditions that would suggest to everyone else that new leadership is required. RWA folks do not believe that all people are equal, and they would even think totalitarian rule would be a good idea. One other interesting point about RWA personalities is they all consider themselves conservatives.
Not all people who consider themselves conservative are RWA, but half of them are. And they are very vocal and active, which is why it is up to moderates and liberals to be constantly vigilant, and not allow them power over the rest of us.
It’s strangely amusing to think of these loud, militaristic bullies and tough guys being fearful. But, since they are told by their leadership to be afraid, then that’s just what they’ll be. They march lockstep all the way, whether to glory, or to trembling, sputtering confusion. How odd.
The Bush Administration is the greatest ascension of Right Wing Authoritarians in American government. We’ve had them around for many years, but this is their pinnacle. We see RWA personalities from Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Gonzales, down to Libby, DeLay, Abramoff, and Blackwater CEO Erik Prince. And yes, we can’t forget John McCain and Sarah Palin.
We learn from John Dean and Bob Altemeyer, Dean’s source on authoritarian personality research, RWA personalities are revealed by their own answers to questionnaires and surveys. They share a number of characteristics. The Right Wing Authoritarian leaders are social dominators and are typically men. They oppose equality, desire power, cheat to win, and take advantage of “suckers”. They are pitiless, vengeful, manipulative, dishonest, mean-spirited, militant, and nationalistic. Their Right Wing Authoritarian followers are men and women, submissive to authority, aggressive on behalf of authority, conventional, highly religious, mean-spirited, intolerant, narrow-minded, hypocritical, moralistic, dogmatic, and highly self-righteous.
I would add that they seem to share the psychological mechanism of projection. They accuse others of the wrongful or undesirable behavior they themselves act out. There are numerous examples, but one of my favorites is Sarah Palin accusing Obama of being a socialistic “re-distributer of wealth”, while forgetting she bragged about taking oil companies’ tax dollars and re-distributing them through checks mailed out to Alaskans.
This all brings me to share a “special comment” with you. I was going to respond in the comment thread, but I feel this individual is entitled to some of the attention he craves.
I’d like to thank our conservative reader for his thoughtful comment.
You insignificant coackroach! How can you speak of stealing an election when you just won! This anger and irreverant stupid thinking is what keeps you detestable liberals in the hole of dispair. How is it possible that only Republicans steal elections? No, no fraud or misappropriations by the Dems, right? Obama was clean as a whistle regardless of his Chicago politicking and all the shady associations. You better understand the facts as they are my little "roach". Do your homework before you speak. Look at he election maps. The majority of the country is red! You may not like it, but conservatives can actually vote across party lines at times and when they really have indifference for their chosen candidate they stay home. Remember this my little pest: 57,000,000,000 that is the number that voted against the O man. It is a very fine line indeed! You Libs own nothing. The Hill in nervous and for good reason. I see red in 2010!
I’ll try not to let the flattery of his opening sentence go to my head. As a humble gentleman of mature years, I understand my insignificance in the big picture. By reminding him of a cockroach, I wonder if I am being complimented as a tenacious survivor of a great human cataclysm; perhaps something on the scale of the Bush Regime’s wanton destruction of human lives and the Earth’s environment.
But enough about me. Let’s return to our conservative reader’s own words and give them their due consideration. He was kind enough to enlighten us with his clear thinking and his probing sense of history and current events.
Let’s assume this is a question. “How can you speak of stealing an election when you just won!”
We’ve had eight years to practice.
“This anger and irreverant stupid thinking is what keeps you detestable liberals in the hole of dispair.”
Funny, for some reason I don’t feel angry right now. How about all the rest of you liberals out there? Do you think he read those irreverent words at the top of the blog? So Mark Twain WAS a detestable liberal, after all. If only Obama COULD bring some kind of hope to the liberals’ hole of despair. My, how our bleeding hearts suffer so pitifully.
How is it possible that only Republicans steal elections? No, no fraud or misappropriations by the Dems, right?
Good questions. How on Earth can this be possible? Republicans would never steal an election. They couldn’t purge voter registration rolls of thousands of eligible voters in Florida before the 2000 election, right? They wouldn’t crush the will of the majority of American voters by stopping the ballot re-count, would they?
Wasn’t it back in 2003 when Wally O’Dell, the CEO of Diebold, said he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year”? It’s not like there was complete Republican control over those electronic voting machines, right? There couldn’t have been any tampering with those easily hacked and altered voting machines. Ohio Republican Secretary of State Ken Blackwell had no conflict of interest running the election, did he? He knew they didn’t need no stinking paper trail.
SO WHAT if one of the machines counted more votes for Bush than the actual number of voters?
“Obama was clean as a whistle regardless of his Chicago politicking and all the shady associations.”
If you say so.
“You better understand the facts as they are my little "roach". Do your homework before you speak. Look at he election maps. The majority of the country is red!”
Wow! Look at all the red on that map! You got me there, pal. If all those red acres of land had only voted for McCain, things would be different.
“You may not like it, but conservatives can actually vote across party lines at times and when they really have indifference for their chosen candidate they stay home.”
And this is why I dearly love thoughtful intelligent conservatives.
“Remember this my little pest: 57,000,000,000 that is the number that voted against the O man. It is a very fine line indeed!”
Fifty-seven billion, eh? It’s like you have one of those Diebold chips in your head, adding all those extra votes for the Republicans.
“My little pest.” How endearing! I’m beginning to like you, too. I am so happy you stopped by. Really.
“You Libs own nothing. The Hill in nervous and for good reason. I see red in 2010!”
Yeah, we libs own nothing. We’re just a bunch of socialists who share everything, air, water, public lands, parks, even our culture, arts, education, knowledge, experience, ability to think for ourselves, all that stuff you might think is worthless.
And I wouldn’t be surprised if you’re seeing red right now.
But, wait. You realists are probably wondering about the rest of the public.
It reported 30% said they are pessimistic. And 27% even said they were afraid. I think I can relate to someone being pessimistic. Been there, done that.
More troubling though, is how would all those poor souls become afraid? It’s not as if there were prominent Republican types accusing Obama of being some kind of secret, madras-schooled, Muslim radical. There couldn’t have been good, church-goin’, uninformed pageant divas out there saying he was pallin’ around with terrorists or nasty stuff like that, right? It has nothing to do with the fact that on the Thursday after the election, Rush Limbaugh used the words “Obama” and “fear” together about six times in the five minutes I heard him.
I don’t know. I give up. I don’t have a clue why good authoritarian Americans would be afraid.
I DO know that, according to our favorite conservative with a conscience, John Dean, 25% of our population are Right Wing Authoritarians. His book “Conservatives without Conscience” explains how Right Wing Authoritarian personalities are devoted to their leaders, no matter where they lead them. The RWA personalities remain loyal followers, regardless of facts or conditions that would suggest to everyone else that new leadership is required. RWA folks do not believe that all people are equal, and they would even think totalitarian rule would be a good idea. One other interesting point about RWA personalities is they all consider themselves conservatives.
Not all people who consider themselves conservative are RWA, but half of them are. And they are very vocal and active, which is why it is up to moderates and liberals to be constantly vigilant, and not allow them power over the rest of us.
It’s strangely amusing to think of these loud, militaristic bullies and tough guys being fearful. But, since they are told by their leadership to be afraid, then that’s just what they’ll be. They march lockstep all the way, whether to glory, or to trembling, sputtering confusion. How odd.
The Bush Administration is the greatest ascension of Right Wing Authoritarians in American government. We’ve had them around for many years, but this is their pinnacle. We see RWA personalities from Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Gonzales, down to Libby, DeLay, Abramoff, and Blackwater CEO Erik Prince. And yes, we can’t forget John McCain and Sarah Palin.
We learn from John Dean and Bob Altemeyer, Dean’s source on authoritarian personality research, RWA personalities are revealed by their own answers to questionnaires and surveys. They share a number of characteristics. The Right Wing Authoritarian leaders are social dominators and are typically men. They oppose equality, desire power, cheat to win, and take advantage of “suckers”. They are pitiless, vengeful, manipulative, dishonest, mean-spirited, militant, and nationalistic. Their Right Wing Authoritarian followers are men and women, submissive to authority, aggressive on behalf of authority, conventional, highly religious, mean-spirited, intolerant, narrow-minded, hypocritical, moralistic, dogmatic, and highly self-righteous.
I would add that they seem to share the psychological mechanism of projection. They accuse others of the wrongful or undesirable behavior they themselves act out. There are numerous examples, but one of my favorites is Sarah Palin accusing Obama of being a socialistic “re-distributer of wealth”, while forgetting she bragged about taking oil companies’ tax dollars and re-distributing them through checks mailed out to Alaskans.
This all brings me to share a “special comment” with you. I was going to respond in the comment thread, but I feel this individual is entitled to some of the attention he craves.
I’d like to thank our conservative reader for his thoughtful comment.
You insignificant coackroach! How can you speak of stealing an election when you just won! This anger and irreverant stupid thinking is what keeps you detestable liberals in the hole of dispair. How is it possible that only Republicans steal elections? No, no fraud or misappropriations by the Dems, right? Obama was clean as a whistle regardless of his Chicago politicking and all the shady associations. You better understand the facts as they are my little "roach". Do your homework before you speak. Look at he election maps. The majority of the country is red! You may not like it, but conservatives can actually vote across party lines at times and when they really have indifference for their chosen candidate they stay home. Remember this my little pest: 57,000,000,000 that is the number that voted against the O man. It is a very fine line indeed! You Libs own nothing. The Hill in nervous and for good reason. I see red in 2010!
I’ll try not to let the flattery of his opening sentence go to my head. As a humble gentleman of mature years, I understand my insignificance in the big picture. By reminding him of a cockroach, I wonder if I am being complimented as a tenacious survivor of a great human cataclysm; perhaps something on the scale of the Bush Regime’s wanton destruction of human lives and the Earth’s environment.
But enough about me. Let’s return to our conservative reader’s own words and give them their due consideration. He was kind enough to enlighten us with his clear thinking and his probing sense of history and current events.
Let’s assume this is a question. “How can you speak of stealing an election when you just won!”
We’ve had eight years to practice.
“This anger and irreverant stupid thinking is what keeps you detestable liberals in the hole of dispair.”
Funny, for some reason I don’t feel angry right now. How about all the rest of you liberals out there? Do you think he read those irreverent words at the top of the blog? So Mark Twain WAS a detestable liberal, after all. If only Obama COULD bring some kind of hope to the liberals’ hole of despair. My, how our bleeding hearts suffer so pitifully.
How is it possible that only Republicans steal elections? No, no fraud or misappropriations by the Dems, right?
Good questions. How on Earth can this be possible? Republicans would never steal an election. They couldn’t purge voter registration rolls of thousands of eligible voters in Florida before the 2000 election, right? They wouldn’t crush the will of the majority of American voters by stopping the ballot re-count, would they?
Wasn’t it back in 2003 when Wally O’Dell, the CEO of Diebold, said he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year”? It’s not like there was complete Republican control over those electronic voting machines, right? There couldn’t have been any tampering with those easily hacked and altered voting machines. Ohio Republican Secretary of State Ken Blackwell had no conflict of interest running the election, did he? He knew they didn’t need no stinking paper trail.
SO WHAT if one of the machines counted more votes for Bush than the actual number of voters?
“Obama was clean as a whistle regardless of his Chicago politicking and all the shady associations.”
If you say so.
“You better understand the facts as they are my little "roach". Do your homework before you speak. Look at he election maps. The majority of the country is red!”
Wow! Look at all the red on that map! You got me there, pal. If all those red acres of land had only voted for McCain, things would be different.
“You may not like it, but conservatives can actually vote across party lines at times and when they really have indifference for their chosen candidate they stay home.”
And this is why I dearly love thoughtful intelligent conservatives.
“Remember this my little pest: 57,000,000,000 that is the number that voted against the O man. It is a very fine line indeed!”
Fifty-seven billion, eh? It’s like you have one of those Diebold chips in your head, adding all those extra votes for the Republicans.
“My little pest.” How endearing! I’m beginning to like you, too. I am so happy you stopped by. Really.
“You Libs own nothing. The Hill in nervous and for good reason. I see red in 2010!”
Yeah, we libs own nothing. We’re just a bunch of socialists who share everything, air, water, public lands, parks, even our culture, arts, education, knowledge, experience, ability to think for ourselves, all that stuff you might think is worthless.
And I wouldn’t be surprised if you’re seeing red right now.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Morning In America
Time to wake up! It’s morning in America! Wipe those bleary teary eyes and look at what we’re up against.
Oh, I know what you’re thinking, “Hey, what do you mean ‘what we’re up against’? Didn’t the Democrats just win the presidency, senate and house?”
That’s right, but just because democrats are in majorities does NOT mean they are in charge. They have corporate string pullers working to get them to dance to their tune, and media jackals are nipping at their knees already.
Just today on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, we heard Tom Brokaw squawking on about the US being a “center-right country” and blathering about all the red acreage on the political map. As if the LAND is what’s center-right so we better be too.
I’m sick of the media spouting this crap right after we elect an African-American Democrat for president. What the hell does that say? Does Brokaw think that means we still want the Republicans to dictate the agenda? How is this election an affirmation of this center-right crap?
Give me a break. This is the corporatist propaganda that irks me down to the last fiber of my being. You just KNOW the media and the Republican echo chamber will be harping on about how Obama better not try anything that could be labeled progressive or worse yet, liberal.
It’s going to be up to us to make a lot of noise to break through the media swill. We have got to hold the Democrats’ feet to the fire. We must keep the pressure on them constantly to let them know who put them there and why we did it. They don’t give a bat’s fart about what we want unless we hound them at least as much the fundies and neocons hounded the Republicans into their freedom crushing agenda.
So up and at ‘em! To the barricades if need be. We are still at war for our freedom. The Bush Fascism machine remains standing and won’t come down by the initiative of self centered corporate democrats. Get on the phones and call them. Write them. Send letters, emails, cards, or telegrams. We need to rattle their cages and kick some ass if anything is to be done around here. You and I both know it.
Just because the neocons have been defeated does not mean they are out of business. They will be slithering from underneath their rocks sooner than Obama can take the oath of office. They are enemies to peace, freedom and our very survival. We must not simply defeat them. We must ELIMINATE THEM from our government. They are engineering their next takeover even as we celebrate the election.
So, hooray for Obama! Enjoy the celebrations.
Now let’s get real. We have a lot of work to do.
Oh, I know what you’re thinking, “Hey, what do you mean ‘what we’re up against’? Didn’t the Democrats just win the presidency, senate and house?”
That’s right, but just because democrats are in majorities does NOT mean they are in charge. They have corporate string pullers working to get them to dance to their tune, and media jackals are nipping at their knees already.
Just today on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, we heard Tom Brokaw squawking on about the US being a “center-right country” and blathering about all the red acreage on the political map. As if the LAND is what’s center-right so we better be too.
I’m sick of the media spouting this crap right after we elect an African-American Democrat for president. What the hell does that say? Does Brokaw think that means we still want the Republicans to dictate the agenda? How is this election an affirmation of this center-right crap?
Give me a break. This is the corporatist propaganda that irks me down to the last fiber of my being. You just KNOW the media and the Republican echo chamber will be harping on about how Obama better not try anything that could be labeled progressive or worse yet, liberal.
It’s going to be up to us to make a lot of noise to break through the media swill. We have got to hold the Democrats’ feet to the fire. We must keep the pressure on them constantly to let them know who put them there and why we did it. They don’t give a bat’s fart about what we want unless we hound them at least as much the fundies and neocons hounded the Republicans into their freedom crushing agenda.
So up and at ‘em! To the barricades if need be. We are still at war for our freedom. The Bush Fascism machine remains standing and won’t come down by the initiative of self centered corporate democrats. Get on the phones and call them. Write them. Send letters, emails, cards, or telegrams. We need to rattle their cages and kick some ass if anything is to be done around here. You and I both know it.
Just because the neocons have been defeated does not mean they are out of business. They will be slithering from underneath their rocks sooner than Obama can take the oath of office. They are enemies to peace, freedom and our very survival. We must not simply defeat them. We must ELIMINATE THEM from our government. They are engineering their next takeover even as we celebrate the election.
So, hooray for Obama! Enjoy the celebrations.
Now let’s get real. We have a lot of work to do.
Monday, November 3, 2008
My Endorsement
I was watching the Colbert Report the other night and was delighted to hear Stephen endorse Barack Obama for president. Yes, what a shock! Then he went on to explain his reason. He wants to get a good job running a combine on a new collective farm if Obama wins. Of course, Stephen said he would VOTE for McCain, while endorsing Obama.
Ever since his courageous presentation in front of Bush and the sycophantic press corps, Stephen has been one of my favorite real American heroes. I feel I must follow his example and endorse a candidate for president.
Since endorsements for president mean very little, whether it’s from a Hollywood star or Dick Cheney, it shouldn’t matter that my endorsement comes at such a late date in the election season.
First the bad news; I cannot endorse someone who voted for Bush’s FISA law. It was a horrible act of pandering to the corporate telecom industry, and an un-American assault on the Fourth Amendment of our Bill of Rights.
Therefore I will not endorse Barack Obama.
I hereby endorse Brian Moore for president.
Who is Brian Moore? Thanks to his appearance on the Colbert Report last week, many of us now know he is the Socialist Party candidate for president.
And in the style and manner of my hero, I will endorse Mr. Moore, but I must vote for Obama. After all, the first priority in reversing the USA’s descent into fascism is to remove the Republican Party from the White House. And the most practical way to do that is to vote for Obama.
Should the forces of darkness prevail and the Republicans steal the election again, many of us have justifiably considered moving to Canada. If the Republicans steal the presidency again, then any trace of democracy here in the US is dead and there is little reason to linger in a totalitarian empire in decay.
Oddly, it turns out, there are conservatives considering their options if Obama wins.
I know a bright young Republican couple who say they are moving to Canada if Obama wins.
None of that socialism crap for them, by Jiminy. They won't stand for it!
Ever since his courageous presentation in front of Bush and the sycophantic press corps, Stephen has been one of my favorite real American heroes. I feel I must follow his example and endorse a candidate for president.
Since endorsements for president mean very little, whether it’s from a Hollywood star or Dick Cheney, it shouldn’t matter that my endorsement comes at such a late date in the election season.
First the bad news; I cannot endorse someone who voted for Bush’s FISA law. It was a horrible act of pandering to the corporate telecom industry, and an un-American assault on the Fourth Amendment of our Bill of Rights.
Therefore I will not endorse Barack Obama.
I hereby endorse Brian Moore for president.
Who is Brian Moore? Thanks to his appearance on the Colbert Report last week, many of us now know he is the Socialist Party candidate for president.
And in the style and manner of my hero, I will endorse Mr. Moore, but I must vote for Obama. After all, the first priority in reversing the USA’s descent into fascism is to remove the Republican Party from the White House. And the most practical way to do that is to vote for Obama.
Should the forces of darkness prevail and the Republicans steal the election again, many of us have justifiably considered moving to Canada. If the Republicans steal the presidency again, then any trace of democracy here in the US is dead and there is little reason to linger in a totalitarian empire in decay.
Oddly, it turns out, there are conservatives considering their options if Obama wins.
I know a bright young Republican couple who say they are moving to Canada if Obama wins.
None of that socialism crap for them, by Jiminy. They won't stand for it!
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Rhymes With Witch
It looks like Michigan has its own red spots. There's not really much to add to this little gem. I'll bet she thinks she's one of those REAL Americans.
***
November 1, 2008
Grosse Pointe Farms woman denies Halloween candy to Obama supporters’ kids.
ASSOCIATED PRESS
A Grosse Pointe Farms woman has doled out political tricks by refusing Halloween treats to children whose parents support Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
Shirley Nagel passed out candy Friday — but only to those who shared her support for Republican presidential candidate John McCain and running mate Sarah Palin.
Fox 2 News says a sign posted outside Nagel's house, about 12 miles west of Detroit, served notice to all trick-or-treaters. It read: "No handouts for Obama supporters, liars, tricksters or kids of supporters."
Nagel tells WJBK-TV that "Obama's scary." When asked about children who'd been turned away empty-handed and crying, she said: "Oh well. Everybody has a choice."
Fax and phone messages were left today at numbers listed in Nagel's name.
***
November 1, 2008
Grosse Pointe Farms woman denies Halloween candy to Obama supporters’ kids.
ASSOCIATED PRESS
A Grosse Pointe Farms woman has doled out political tricks by refusing Halloween treats to children whose parents support Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
Shirley Nagel passed out candy Friday — but only to those who shared her support for Republican presidential candidate John McCain and running mate Sarah Palin.
Fox 2 News says a sign posted outside Nagel's house, about 12 miles west of Detroit, served notice to all trick-or-treaters. It read: "No handouts for Obama supporters, liars, tricksters or kids of supporters."
Nagel tells WJBK-TV that "Obama's scary." When asked about children who'd been turned away empty-handed and crying, she said: "Oh well. Everybody has a choice."
Fax and phone messages were left today at numbers listed in Nagel's name.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
