"BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton collapsed Monday during a speech on Social Security, moments after complaining about a stomach virus.
"She fainted after not feeling well, got medical attention and is proceeding with her planned schedule," according to a statement released by her office in Washington.
Colleen DiPirro, president of the Amherst Chamber of Commerce, told WBEN-AM radio that Clinton told the crowd she was feeling weak and had had a stomach virus. Clinton started to speak then collapsed, DiPirro told the radio station.
Clinton, 57, was smiling when she walked out of the private club where she had collapsed, the club's general manager said.
"I saw her walk out the door by herself, she smiled and said 'thank you'," said Saturn Club general manager Vincent Tracy.
Later Monday, she arrived at a Catholic college where she was to speak about health care. Several hundred people were waiting to hear that address. There were also dozens of anti-abortion protesters waiting at the college.
In September, Clinton's 58-year-old husband underwent quadruple bypass surgery.
During an earlier editorial board meeting Monday at The Buffalo News, Clinton complained about suffering from a flu-like bug that affected several of her staff members during a weekend retreat in Westchester County, where she lives."
Glad She's OK.
Heard at Blogtalkradio.com/whiskeyrebellion every Tuesday Night at 8:00 PM Eastern, Call In At (646) 915-8862 Intellectual Honesty is a Greater Virtue Than Party Loyalty
Monday, January 31, 2005
Hillary Clinton collapses during speech in New York
"BREAKING NEWS
The Associated Press
Updated: 1:13 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2005
BUFFALO, N.Y. - Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton collapsed Monday during a speech in Buffalo and was taken to a local hospital.
Colleen DiPirro, president of the Amherst Chamber of Commerce, told WBEN radio station that the senator apparently wasn't feeling well and collapsed in the middle of her speech at the Saturn Club.
There were no immediate details on whether she was remained conscious."
I'm no fan of this woman but I do not wish her harm either. May God be with her.
The Associated Press
Updated: 1:13 p.m. ET Jan. 31, 2005
BUFFALO, N.Y. - Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton collapsed Monday during a speech in Buffalo and was taken to a local hospital.
Colleen DiPirro, president of the Amherst Chamber of Commerce, told WBEN radio station that the senator apparently wasn't feeling well and collapsed in the middle of her speech at the Saturn Club.
There were no immediate details on whether she was remained conscious."
I'm no fan of this woman but I do not wish her harm either. May God be with her.
Kerry: Iraq Election No Big Deal
From Newsmax.com: "A bitter-sounding Sen. John Kerry dismissed the historic Iraqi election on Sunday, warning Americans not to "overhype" the watershed event.
"No one in the United States should try to overhype this election," Kerry told NBC's "Meet the Press."
The failed presidential candidate questioned the historic referendum's legitimacy, saying, "It's hard to say that something is legitimate when a whole portion of the country can't vote and doesn't vote."
Kerry also pooh-poohed reports of a surprisingly high 72 percent turnout by Iraqi voters, insisting instead that the election has "gone as expected."
Asked if he thought Iraq was now less of a terrorist threat, Kerry at first said: "No, it's more. And, in fact, I believe the world is less safe today than it was two and a half years ago."
But he changed his answer moments later, after "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert pressed him on the bizarre claim.
"I'm glad Saddam Hussein is gone, and I've said that a hundred times," he insisted."
Sour grapes Senator? For shame on you.
Sunday, January 30, 2005
Israel to Transfer West Bank Security
I've said it many times, the only impediment to peace between Palestine and Israel is Arafat. Now granted, his death did not bring instant Xanadu to Palestine but I think slow progress is being made. Israel, true to their word, has said that they would give up territory if the PLO would just clamp down on the terrorists. Here is another story off the wire that may just be another brick in the wall of Middle Eastern peace.
"TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) - Israel will transfer security control over several West Bank towns to the Palestinians in coming days, Israel's defense minister said Sunday, hours after meeting with a top Palestinian negotiator to work out the details of Israel's troop redeployment.
A senior Palestinian security official said control of the first four towns - Ramallah, Tulkarem, Qalqiliya and Jericho - would be handed over Wednesday, the latest sign of rapid change on the ground after more than four years of fighting.
Israel informed Palestinian officials it was ready to withdraw from all West Bank towns "within a very short period of time" and return to positions it held before the outbreak of fighting in September 2000, said Hassan Abu Libdeh, a senior Palestinian official.
Such a pullback is part of the long-stalled, U.S.-backed "road map" peace plan, which both sides now say they are ready to implement."
I'm pretty bullish on this thing. Nobody thought we'd see the end of Communism but I remember it as clear as day. I was in Junior High when the Berlin Wall came down and the Soviet Union collapsed into Russia and "former Soviet Republics". Change in the world is slow and arduous. It's painful and mistakes will be made. But it does happen. I think in a lot of ways the 21st century will be defined by it's role in cleaning the damage from the 20th century. You all remember that one right? That's the one where we had two world wars and the threat of nuclear war.
Obviously there is still a long way to go and at any moment we could slouch towards war with China or Iran but one never knows. Unlike Ted Kennedy I'm optomistic and I think the US can succeed in the Middle East. Unlike Ted Kennedy and his ilk in the Democrat Party, I actually want the US, Iraq and Democracy at large to succeed
"TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) - Israel will transfer security control over several West Bank towns to the Palestinians in coming days, Israel's defense minister said Sunday, hours after meeting with a top Palestinian negotiator to work out the details of Israel's troop redeployment.
A senior Palestinian security official said control of the first four towns - Ramallah, Tulkarem, Qalqiliya and Jericho - would be handed over Wednesday, the latest sign of rapid change on the ground after more than four years of fighting.
Israel informed Palestinian officials it was ready to withdraw from all West Bank towns "within a very short period of time" and return to positions it held before the outbreak of fighting in September 2000, said Hassan Abu Libdeh, a senior Palestinian official.
Such a pullback is part of the long-stalled, U.S.-backed "road map" peace plan, which both sides now say they are ready to implement."
I'm pretty bullish on this thing. Nobody thought we'd see the end of Communism but I remember it as clear as day. I was in Junior High when the Berlin Wall came down and the Soviet Union collapsed into Russia and "former Soviet Republics". Change in the world is slow and arduous. It's painful and mistakes will be made. But it does happen. I think in a lot of ways the 21st century will be defined by it's role in cleaning the damage from the 20th century. You all remember that one right? That's the one where we had two world wars and the threat of nuclear war.
Obviously there is still a long way to go and at any moment we could slouch towards war with China or Iran but one never knows. Unlike Ted Kennedy I'm optomistic and I think the US can succeed in the Middle East. Unlike Ted Kennedy and his ilk in the Democrat Party, I actually want the US, Iraq and Democracy at large to succeed
U.S. Is Close to Eliminating AIDS in Infants, Officials Say
If this is even close to being true, it's the best news on the subject I've heard in a long time.
"AIDS among infants, which only a decade ago took the lives of hundreds of babies a year and left doctors in despair, may be on the verge of being eliminated in the United States, public health officials say.
In 1990, as many as 2,000 babies were born infected with H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS; now, that number has been reduced to a bit more than 200 a year, according to health officials. In New York City, the center of the epidemic, there were 321 newborns infected with H.I.V. in 1990, the year the virus peaked among newborns in the city. In 2003, five babies were born with the virus.
Across the country, mother-to-child transmission of H.I.V. has dropped so sharply that public health officials now talk about wiping it out.
"This is a dramatic and wonderful success story," said Dr. Vicki Peters, the head of pediatric surveillance for the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. This winter, Dr. Peters presented a report in Bangkok for World AIDS Day documenting the improvement in New York.
The success in fighting mother-to-child transmission, a sweeping victory for public health officials, was made possible largely because of better drugs, but aggressive public education and testing, as well as cooperation at the federal and local levels, also played a significant role.
The advent of AZT, a drug used to attack H.I.V. in the blood and central nervous system, was critical. But equally important was simply getting mothers to know their H.I.V. status before they gave birth, a problem complicated by privacy and political and social issues."
"AIDS among infants, which only a decade ago took the lives of hundreds of babies a year and left doctors in despair, may be on the verge of being eliminated in the United States, public health officials say.
In 1990, as many as 2,000 babies were born infected with H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS; now, that number has been reduced to a bit more than 200 a year, according to health officials. In New York City, the center of the epidemic, there were 321 newborns infected with H.I.V. in 1990, the year the virus peaked among newborns in the city. In 2003, five babies were born with the virus.
Across the country, mother-to-child transmission of H.I.V. has dropped so sharply that public health officials now talk about wiping it out.
"This is a dramatic and wonderful success story," said Dr. Vicki Peters, the head of pediatric surveillance for the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. This winter, Dr. Peters presented a report in Bangkok for World AIDS Day documenting the improvement in New York.
The success in fighting mother-to-child transmission, a sweeping victory for public health officials, was made possible largely because of better drugs, but aggressive public education and testing, as well as cooperation at the federal and local levels, also played a significant role.
The advent of AZT, a drug used to attack H.I.V. in the blood and central nervous system, was critical. But equally important was simply getting mothers to know their H.I.V. status before they gave birth, a problem complicated by privacy and political and social issues."
Saturday, January 29, 2005
Two Killed at U.S. Embassy on Eve of Vote
God be with the families of the fallen.
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Iraq stood on the verge of its first free election in a half-century Saturday, its borders and bridges locked down, its hopes on the line. The government urged Iraqis to vote despite their fears of violence, even as insurgents rocketed the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, killing two Americans.
Mortar fire boomed across Baghdad as the world awaited a vote that will echo from militant Islamic Web sites in the Mideast to the halls of the White House. A suicide bomber killed eight people in a Kurdish city near the Iranian border and insurgents blasted polling stations in eight cities.
Iraqi officials have predicted that up to eight million of 14 million voters will turn out for Sunday's election to choose a National Assembly and governing councils in the 18 provinces. Voters in the Kurdish-run north also will select a regional parliament.
But turnout is uncertain, especially in the Sunni Arab areas of central, northern and western Iraq where the insurgency is most deadly. About 300,000 Iraqi and American troops are on the streets and on standby to protect voters.
U.S. tanks and armored vehicles blocked roads and bridges to prevent insurgent movements. Iraqi National Guardsmen, wearing black ski masks to hide their faces, roamed through the capital in SUVs and pickup trucks, machine guns mounted. Police and Iraqi soldiers set up checkpoints and randomly searched cars.
As thousands of ballots arrived at 5,200 polling stations, government spokesman Thaer al-Naqeeb warned Iraqis to expect "sabotage operations" carried out by "the enemies of Iraq."
But he encouraged Iraqis "to overcome their fear" and turn out at polling station. "It is important. It will preserve the integrity of Iraq," he said. "If you vote ... the terrorists will be defeated."
President Ghazi al-Yawer, a Sunni Arab running for a National Assembly seat, expressed hope that turnout will be high." But he acknowledged many Iraqis would probably stay away "because of the security situation."
Despite the lockdown - and a nighttime curfew - guerrillas hit the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone with a rocket Saturday evening, killing a Defense Department civilian and a Navy sailor and wounding four other Americans, according to State Department spokesman Noel Clay in Washington. Another American soldier was killed by a roadside bomb in Baghdad. More than 40 American troops have been killed in the past three days.
The election is a major test of President Bush's goal of promoting democracy in the Middle East. If successful, it also could hasten the day when the United States brings home its 150,000 soldiers.
"Tomorrow's election will add to the momentum of democracy," Bush said in his weekly radio address from the White House. "The terrorists and those who benefited from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein know that free elections will expose the emptiness of their vision."
But a low Sunni turnout could undermine the new government and worsen the tensions among the country's ethnic, religious and cultural groups.
Shiite Muslims, estimated at 60 percent of Iraq's 26 million people, are expected to turn out in large numbers, encouraged by clerics who hope their community will gain power after generations of oppression by the Sunni minority.
A ticket endorsed by the country's leading Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, is expected to fare best among the 111 candidate lists. However, no faction is expected to win an outright majority, meaning possibly weeks of political deal-making before a new prime minister is chosen.
Sunni extremists, fearing victory by the Shiites, have called for a boycott, claiming no vote held under U.S. military occupation is legitimate. A Western election adviser, speaking on condition of anonymity, estimated Sunni turnout could run anywhere from 15 percent to 50 percent.
Throughout the Sunni heartland, there was little enthusiasm for the election.
"We will not vote because our houses have been destroyed," said Alaa Hussein of the Sunni city of Fallujah, which fell to a U.S. assault against insurgents in November. "We don't have electricity or water. The Iraqi National Guard fire at us 24 hours a day. So who will we vote for?"
By contrast, enthusiasm among Shiites was high.
"There's joy everywhere," said Mohammed Hussein, who lives in the Shiite holy city of Najaf.
In Saturday's attacks, a suicide bomber detonated an explosives belt in front of a police station in the largely Kurdish town of Khanaqin, about 70 miles northeast of Baghdad.
In the insurgent bastion of Ramadi west of the capital, five Iraqis with hands tied behind their backs were found slain on a city street. One was decapitated, and militants accused them of working for Americans.
Fighting raged Saturday night in the ethnically mixed northern city of Kirkuk between police and insurgents. The clashes occurred in a predominantly Sunni Arab neighborhood and lasted for about an hour, according to police Brig. Gen. Torhan Abdul-Rahman Youssef.
As part of security measures, Iraqi authorities sealed the borders, blocked traffic from bridges, closed Baghdad's airport and extended a night curfew. Travel was restricted to discourage car bombings.
Most streets in Baghdad were deserted and shops closed. Concrete blast barriers blocked major roads.
All that gave this city of six million the appearance of a war zone, reminiscent of the last days of Saddam's regime.
"We have one life and one God," said Mohammed Omar, 35, repeating an Arabic expression underlining the futility of trying to cheat death. "Our hearts have died. We no longer fear anything. If death is written, then there's nothing that we can do."
Amar Samir, a Christian resident of Baghdad, said it was impossible to believe that things could get worse.
"We get electricity for half an hour and then it disappears for six or longer," Samir said. "These are very strange elections. They will not change a thing.
"Or maybe they will," he added. "But not right away."
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Iraq stood on the verge of its first free election in a half-century Saturday, its borders and bridges locked down, its hopes on the line. The government urged Iraqis to vote despite their fears of violence, even as insurgents rocketed the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, killing two Americans.
Mortar fire boomed across Baghdad as the world awaited a vote that will echo from militant Islamic Web sites in the Mideast to the halls of the White House. A suicide bomber killed eight people in a Kurdish city near the Iranian border and insurgents blasted polling stations in eight cities.
Iraqi officials have predicted that up to eight million of 14 million voters will turn out for Sunday's election to choose a National Assembly and governing councils in the 18 provinces. Voters in the Kurdish-run north also will select a regional parliament.
But turnout is uncertain, especially in the Sunni Arab areas of central, northern and western Iraq where the insurgency is most deadly. About 300,000 Iraqi and American troops are on the streets and on standby to protect voters.
U.S. tanks and armored vehicles blocked roads and bridges to prevent insurgent movements. Iraqi National Guardsmen, wearing black ski masks to hide their faces, roamed through the capital in SUVs and pickup trucks, machine guns mounted. Police and Iraqi soldiers set up checkpoints and randomly searched cars.
As thousands of ballots arrived at 5,200 polling stations, government spokesman Thaer al-Naqeeb warned Iraqis to expect "sabotage operations" carried out by "the enemies of Iraq."
But he encouraged Iraqis "to overcome their fear" and turn out at polling station. "It is important. It will preserve the integrity of Iraq," he said. "If you vote ... the terrorists will be defeated."
President Ghazi al-Yawer, a Sunni Arab running for a National Assembly seat, expressed hope that turnout will be high." But he acknowledged many Iraqis would probably stay away "because of the security situation."
Despite the lockdown - and a nighttime curfew - guerrillas hit the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone with a rocket Saturday evening, killing a Defense Department civilian and a Navy sailor and wounding four other Americans, according to State Department spokesman Noel Clay in Washington. Another American soldier was killed by a roadside bomb in Baghdad. More than 40 American troops have been killed in the past three days.
The election is a major test of President Bush's goal of promoting democracy in the Middle East. If successful, it also could hasten the day when the United States brings home its 150,000 soldiers.
"Tomorrow's election will add to the momentum of democracy," Bush said in his weekly radio address from the White House. "The terrorists and those who benefited from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein know that free elections will expose the emptiness of their vision."
But a low Sunni turnout could undermine the new government and worsen the tensions among the country's ethnic, religious and cultural groups.
Shiite Muslims, estimated at 60 percent of Iraq's 26 million people, are expected to turn out in large numbers, encouraged by clerics who hope their community will gain power after generations of oppression by the Sunni minority.
A ticket endorsed by the country's leading Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, is expected to fare best among the 111 candidate lists. However, no faction is expected to win an outright majority, meaning possibly weeks of political deal-making before a new prime minister is chosen.
Sunni extremists, fearing victory by the Shiites, have called for a boycott, claiming no vote held under U.S. military occupation is legitimate. A Western election adviser, speaking on condition of anonymity, estimated Sunni turnout could run anywhere from 15 percent to 50 percent.
Throughout the Sunni heartland, there was little enthusiasm for the election.
"We will not vote because our houses have been destroyed," said Alaa Hussein of the Sunni city of Fallujah, which fell to a U.S. assault against insurgents in November. "We don't have electricity or water. The Iraqi National Guard fire at us 24 hours a day. So who will we vote for?"
By contrast, enthusiasm among Shiites was high.
"There's joy everywhere," said Mohammed Hussein, who lives in the Shiite holy city of Najaf.
In Saturday's attacks, a suicide bomber detonated an explosives belt in front of a police station in the largely Kurdish town of Khanaqin, about 70 miles northeast of Baghdad.
In the insurgent bastion of Ramadi west of the capital, five Iraqis with hands tied behind their backs were found slain on a city street. One was decapitated, and militants accused them of working for Americans.
Fighting raged Saturday night in the ethnically mixed northern city of Kirkuk between police and insurgents. The clashes occurred in a predominantly Sunni Arab neighborhood and lasted for about an hour, according to police Brig. Gen. Torhan Abdul-Rahman Youssef.
As part of security measures, Iraqi authorities sealed the borders, blocked traffic from bridges, closed Baghdad's airport and extended a night curfew. Travel was restricted to discourage car bombings.
Most streets in Baghdad were deserted and shops closed. Concrete blast barriers blocked major roads.
All that gave this city of six million the appearance of a war zone, reminiscent of the last days of Saddam's regime.
"We have one life and one God," said Mohammed Omar, 35, repeating an Arabic expression underlining the futility of trying to cheat death. "Our hearts have died. We no longer fear anything. If death is written, then there's nothing that we can do."
Amar Samir, a Christian resident of Baghdad, said it was impossible to believe that things could get worse.
"We get electricity for half an hour and then it disappears for six or longer," Samir said. "These are very strange elections. They will not change a thing.
"Or maybe they will," he added. "But not right away."
Sen. Biden, Iran Minister Clash Over Nukes
When Democrat Senators start beating the war drum and acting tough with the Islamists, you know we're in for some serious business, I reckon.
This from from AP not too long ago:
"DAVOS, Switzerland (AP) - Sen. Joseph Biden and Iran's foreign minister clashed Friday over Tehran's nuclear ambitions, with Biden hinting at the possibility of armed conflict unless fears of an Iranian weapons program were put to rest."
Later on the story relates a much cooler and collected Senator Biden with his usual sense of frank diplomacy.
"You have to grow up and my administration has to grow up, with all due respect, and find out if there is any common ground," he said." We are on the course of unintended consequences."
Biden reminds me of my dad.
On a slightly more serious note, Iran and all of its complexities is a favorite topic here on PC. As democracy takes hold in Iraq and something slightly resembling an armistice takes hold in Palestine/Israel the focus of the world struggle will move to Iran, Syria and Lebanon. As PC moves on I will continue to cover Iran as much as can from my humble abode in South Miami.
This from from AP not too long ago:
"DAVOS, Switzerland (AP) - Sen. Joseph Biden and Iran's foreign minister clashed Friday over Tehran's nuclear ambitions, with Biden hinting at the possibility of armed conflict unless fears of an Iranian weapons program were put to rest."
Later on the story relates a much cooler and collected Senator Biden with his usual sense of frank diplomacy.
"You have to grow up and my administration has to grow up, with all due respect, and find out if there is any common ground," he said." We are on the course of unintended consequences."
Biden reminds me of my dad.
On a slightly more serious note, Iran and all of its complexities is a favorite topic here on PC. As democracy takes hold in Iraq and something slightly resembling an armistice takes hold in Palestine/Israel the focus of the world struggle will move to Iran, Syria and Lebanon. As PC moves on I will continue to cover Iran as much as can from my humble abode in South Miami.
Friday, January 28, 2005
Dumb and Dumber, Fox Style
This has been a long time coming. For months now I’ve complained to my politically minded friends that I thought Fox News’ debate show “Hannity and Colmes” was to political debate what MTV was to new and interesting music. I hadn’t written about it until now because frankly, the show is so bad that I didn’t think it deserved the time or the effort. However, if I’m going spend my nights yelling at the television like one might do during a sporting event, then I at least owe my neighbors an explanation.
First some history; there once was a time before the Iraq war when I felt that a full-scale invasion was not wisest course of action. I was of the opinion that Hussein should be removed from the seat of power but a more subtle means should be employed. To friends and peers I suggest a coup or even assassination. My politics at the time were very green as I was pro-environment in the sense that I believed business were obliged to use the least dirty methods of production. I was and am to this day pro-drug legalization so long as it is regulated by the medical industry as it was over a hundred years ago. I was also vehemently anti-censorship and an ardent student of former punk rocker and green political activist, Jello Biafra. I was not by any means a pacifist but I did hold a certain amount of skepticism towards any political entity that was eager to declare war without certain, harsh, provocations. And then any trend toward liberalism I had within me came to a screeching halt the day I met Alan Colmes.
In the documentary, “Outfoxed,” which is a slam against the Fox News organization crafted by Moveon.org, it suggests that Fox purposely hires “weasely” looking liberals so as to associate weakness and distrustfulness with liberalism. I really don’t believe the folks at Fox have put that much thought into their productions but if it’s true then Colmes certainly fits the bill. But it wasn’t his looks or his presentation that had me in disgust back then. It was and still is to this day his intellectually juvenile arguments. I have seldom seen him make a cogent point that was worth listening to. On most broadcasts he can be heard making these absurd leaps in logic that usually do the progressive argument more harm than good. After a few episodes of this nonsense, I said to myself, “If to be liberal is to be associated with the likes of Alan Colmes then maybe I should rethink my political stance.”
It wasn’t all that simple but that man certainly didn’t help matters. There are days when pontificating about Alan Colmes I dream that he was actually a heroin addict that Rupert Murdoch found in the street and cleaned up for television. At least then I could forgive him for some of the mind numbingly childish things that he’s uttered night after painful night.
For many months after I fled the Green party believing them to be pacifists to point of our own countrywide destruction, I spent many an afternoon drive listening to the Sean Hannity show on NY’s WABC radio. He compliments Alan Colmes very nicely, for he too is an imbecile.
Sean Hannity reminds me of my old clients back in drug and alcohol treatment. Their commonality rests in both parties inability to hold an adult conversation where both sides wait for the other to actually finish speaking. They both also share a rather inflated ego that suggest that they are only interested in what they have to say aren’t even listening to the other party or parties. I can forgive this inability to effectively communicate among recovering drug addicts because do to their notorious lack of social skills but Hannity is supposed to be an educated person. I say supposed to be because after watching his show, reading one of his books (which would have made a better pamphlet) and listening to him on the radio, I believe the jury is still out on his intellectual prowess.
So if you are inclined to watch the political version of Dumb and Dumber or as I like to call it, Politics WWE style, here is what you are in for; an hour of two morons, one less logically inclined than the other, yelling over their guests and reducing any newsworthy debate to that of schoolyard name calling. Hannity’s role appears to be that of pundit bully as he shouts over his opponent, never letting them get a word in edgewise and repeatedly asking them asinine questions that have no worldly or intellectual relevance accept to those who don’t read and possibly still think the world is flat. Hannity is preaching to the masses that defend creationism and intelligent design as if to consider anything else would spell doom for all 2000 plus years of Christianity far and wide. In short, he dumbs down the rhetoric for the dullards that have read his books and though, “Hmm, makes sense.”
And then there’s Colmes. Colmes is like the fat, ugly girlfriend hot chicks pound around the mall with to accentuate their own looks. No matter what nonsense Hannity is spewing, Colmes will be right there to distract you with even greater nonsense, loyal sidekick that he is. He validates every idiotic argument Hannity makes (and I use the term argument oh so loosely) by not even offering the closest proximity to a counter argument. Essentially if Hannity is asking the often-befuddled guest, what is two plus two, Colmes will chime in with, “shoes, the answer is shoes!”
So why do I watch if it is so God-awful? I watch for the guests mostly. For a good long time they frequently booked both Ann Coulter and Charlie Rangel on nearly a weekly basis. Now I must admit, I am a sucker for guilty pleasures. I like my metal heavy, my peanut butter covered in chocolate and political pundits caaaaaaarazy! Five minutes of Ann Coulter or Charlie Rangel is worth sitting through an hour of absolute tripe. In addition, I often work nights and by the time I get home all I want to do is take my pants off, pour myself a nice cold glass of green tea and watch cartoons; so I put on “Hannity and Colmes”.
And for the record, as bad as this show is, it’s still better than the drivel that follows it called, “On the Record w/ Greta Van Susteren.” Even I, a loyal Fox viewer, cannot sit through an entire hour of that woman and her equally annoying analysis.
First some history; there once was a time before the Iraq war when I felt that a full-scale invasion was not wisest course of action. I was of the opinion that Hussein should be removed from the seat of power but a more subtle means should be employed. To friends and peers I suggest a coup or even assassination. My politics at the time were very green as I was pro-environment in the sense that I believed business were obliged to use the least dirty methods of production. I was and am to this day pro-drug legalization so long as it is regulated by the medical industry as it was over a hundred years ago. I was also vehemently anti-censorship and an ardent student of former punk rocker and green political activist, Jello Biafra. I was not by any means a pacifist but I did hold a certain amount of skepticism towards any political entity that was eager to declare war without certain, harsh, provocations. And then any trend toward liberalism I had within me came to a screeching halt the day I met Alan Colmes.
In the documentary, “Outfoxed,” which is a slam against the Fox News organization crafted by Moveon.org, it suggests that Fox purposely hires “weasely” looking liberals so as to associate weakness and distrustfulness with liberalism. I really don’t believe the folks at Fox have put that much thought into their productions but if it’s true then Colmes certainly fits the bill. But it wasn’t his looks or his presentation that had me in disgust back then. It was and still is to this day his intellectually juvenile arguments. I have seldom seen him make a cogent point that was worth listening to. On most broadcasts he can be heard making these absurd leaps in logic that usually do the progressive argument more harm than good. After a few episodes of this nonsense, I said to myself, “If to be liberal is to be associated with the likes of Alan Colmes then maybe I should rethink my political stance.”
It wasn’t all that simple but that man certainly didn’t help matters. There are days when pontificating about Alan Colmes I dream that he was actually a heroin addict that Rupert Murdoch found in the street and cleaned up for television. At least then I could forgive him for some of the mind numbingly childish things that he’s uttered night after painful night.
For many months after I fled the Green party believing them to be pacifists to point of our own countrywide destruction, I spent many an afternoon drive listening to the Sean Hannity show on NY’s WABC radio. He compliments Alan Colmes very nicely, for he too is an imbecile.
Sean Hannity reminds me of my old clients back in drug and alcohol treatment. Their commonality rests in both parties inability to hold an adult conversation where both sides wait for the other to actually finish speaking. They both also share a rather inflated ego that suggest that they are only interested in what they have to say aren’t even listening to the other party or parties. I can forgive this inability to effectively communicate among recovering drug addicts because do to their notorious lack of social skills but Hannity is supposed to be an educated person. I say supposed to be because after watching his show, reading one of his books (which would have made a better pamphlet) and listening to him on the radio, I believe the jury is still out on his intellectual prowess.
So if you are inclined to watch the political version of Dumb and Dumber or as I like to call it, Politics WWE style, here is what you are in for; an hour of two morons, one less logically inclined than the other, yelling over their guests and reducing any newsworthy debate to that of schoolyard name calling. Hannity’s role appears to be that of pundit bully as he shouts over his opponent, never letting them get a word in edgewise and repeatedly asking them asinine questions that have no worldly or intellectual relevance accept to those who don’t read and possibly still think the world is flat. Hannity is preaching to the masses that defend creationism and intelligent design as if to consider anything else would spell doom for all 2000 plus years of Christianity far and wide. In short, he dumbs down the rhetoric for the dullards that have read his books and though, “Hmm, makes sense.”
And then there’s Colmes. Colmes is like the fat, ugly girlfriend hot chicks pound around the mall with to accentuate their own looks. No matter what nonsense Hannity is spewing, Colmes will be right there to distract you with even greater nonsense, loyal sidekick that he is. He validates every idiotic argument Hannity makes (and I use the term argument oh so loosely) by not even offering the closest proximity to a counter argument. Essentially if Hannity is asking the often-befuddled guest, what is two plus two, Colmes will chime in with, “shoes, the answer is shoes!”
So why do I watch if it is so God-awful? I watch for the guests mostly. For a good long time they frequently booked both Ann Coulter and Charlie Rangel on nearly a weekly basis. Now I must admit, I am a sucker for guilty pleasures. I like my metal heavy, my peanut butter covered in chocolate and political pundits caaaaaaarazy! Five minutes of Ann Coulter or Charlie Rangel is worth sitting through an hour of absolute tripe. In addition, I often work nights and by the time I get home all I want to do is take my pants off, pour myself a nice cold glass of green tea and watch cartoons; so I put on “Hannity and Colmes”.
And for the record, as bad as this show is, it’s still better than the drivel that follows it called, “On the Record w/ Greta Van Susteren.” Even I, a loyal Fox viewer, cannot sit through an entire hour of that woman and her equally annoying analysis.
Thursday, January 27, 2005
PC Talk Back 1/27/05
An old friend of mine asked me in an e-mail to defend some of my beliefs that I had outlined in an earlier e-mail exchange. Here is the fruits of that labor. I'm reprinting here because I think it truly covers what PC is all about and where I stand in the political spectrum...and I've been sick all day so this is all I had the energy to write ; )
Dear (Reader)
First, I'm flattered you'd compare me to Molly Ivins but I'm not that far to the left. Let us remember, despite the myriad amount of issues I have with the Bush Administration, I still voted for him because I thought Kerry would be so much worse.
Ann Coulter? I love Ann Coulter but I also love black metal and chocolate covered peanut butter, none of which are good for you. If you want to read some reasonable conservative thinking, check out charles Krauthammer or Bill Kristol. Somewhere in the archives of my site and the 411 site there is a review of Ann Coulters last book in which I compare her contributions to political discourse to the contributions of Hall and Nash to WCW circa 1996. Needless to say, as much as I'm willing to read her columns for the laughs they bring me, it is impossible for me to take her seriously. Then there's Sean Hannity ::::shudder::::::he's even worse.
I'm glad you liked the Dimebag Darrell piece. I put a lot of hard work into that. However, I think you are associating racism and elitism with conservatism which is why you keep assuming I'd come from a collectivist philosophy. Let me attempt to clarify a few things.
My politics are mostly green, as I believe I stated in the first e-mail. The ugly truth of the matter is that neither party represents green values. Democrats have two goals, to expand the role of government, if not the size of government, which is collectivism (or communism as you keep saying) and to solidify their own power base. Democrats espouse a liberal philosophical agenda for their own protection. You cannot judge them or take something away from them if in the social sphere of your civilization, anything goes. Frankly, there is no reasonable defense for social relativism or liberalism. In the end it is a philosophy that only hurts the weakest amongst us. Iran is a collectivist society and any reading their literature would show you that it's citizens chafe against the Ayatollah rigid vision of how a society should behave.
Now conservatives on the other hand are Laissez Faire social darwinists. Their core belief is that capitalism should go unchecked and that the only governing force in a society should be the marketplace. I have no tolerance for this shortsighted philosophy either because in practice what Conservatives seem to believe is that where the marketplace creates poverty and dooms an entire portion of ones society, those with money will build walls thick and high enough to protect them from the rabble. With the advent of the internet, that is not only untrue but impossible. However, that doesn't stop the hardcore conservatives from continuing to preach from that gospel.
So then what's left eh? What stops me from voting green as I did in 2000 and has pushed me squarely into the GOP's arms in 2004 is national security. I firmly believe that a strong, slightly insane defense policy is the only weapon that keeps our enemies at bay. Make no mistake about it, if we were to adopt a pacifist stance like France or Japan our enemies would be on shores faster than you could say oops. Do not be lulled into believing we are safe because we seem to making nice with Russia and China. The fact of the matter is that their powers that be are looking for chinks in are armor and if we are not careful, we will in fact expose ourselves. So, despite some of economic interests not being met, I'm stuck with Conservatism because they seem to be the only folks who truly understand the dangers that are out there.
And don't hand me that it's our fault because we've created worldwide poverty which breeds terrorism etc. The matter is far more complicated than that. I offer you the Blood Bankers by James S, Henry. Before you go about laying the woes of the world at our doorstep, I would suggest you read that book. It by no absolves us guilt, but it does lay out the blame everywhere it belongs.
On gay marriage. My issue with gay marriage has less to do with how it affects children in a myopic and specific way but how it affects society at large. Raising gay marriage or any alternative lifestyle to the level of what has been western society's norm for untold years seeks to rip apart our social framework. In short, it's the slippery slope, which I know liberals laugh at when conservatives bring this up but hear me out. Society's that function reasonably well do with an overall social philosophy that may not work for everyone but sets a standard that none the less, everyone must follow. In America, it's Judeo-Christian philosophy. Be mindful here that I am not talking about religion in the organized sense but rather I am referring to a guiding philosophy that separates acceptable behavior from unacceptable behavior. When you start expanding the definition of social norms, such as marriage, which has a specific purpose mind you, you open your society to chaos. You cannot condemn one man for his nuttiness but then accept another man for his when you have to basic structure for defining nuttiness in the first place. I'm sure there are wonderful gay parents and gay couples who want nothing more than to live their life in peace and to each man or woman, I have no issue with that. But in the broader scope of maintaining ones civilization, you must consider the larger impact of widening the definitions of social norms. I ask you this, if it's all relative and it's all good, what social norms should guide us, Western European Liberalism, Saudi Arabian Wahhabism or American Judeo-Christian philosophy? One might say that you live and let live but as you can see from reading the news, the Wahhabists believe their social norms are righteous and seek to put them on us. The Western Europeans think they are advanced and evolved and wish desperately that we'd catch up. Societal maintenance is not as simple as Live and let live and you must consider the many levels of the argument before deciding which belief works for you.
On Israel, it is a fact that Saddam Hussein was financially supporting a myriad of terrorist organizations that were employing suicide bombers against that country. It is on the record that one of Hussein's objectives was to eliminate Israel from the planet by any means necessary. Hussein had already been reprimanded once for having rockets that could reach Israel in the face of UN resolutions specifically saying any rockets had to be less than that distance. Please understand that if we had not pursued the course against Iraq that we have, the sanctions must assuredly would have come down and given enough time, Hussein would have gone to war against Israel either directly or by proxy. My issue is not that we went in to Iraq, my issue is that we seemed to have done it thinking it would be bloodless. I suggest you to The Secret History of the Iraq War by Yossef Bodansky for further clarification.
As a matter of fairness, I too listen to Air America. I actually really like Randy Rhodes but I absolutely cannot stand Franken. Besides, he's on against Rush I have my loyalties
: )
I think this just about covers everything from your last e-mail. Being that it is 1:00am I hope it was coherent. I hope to chat with you again.
Mark
Dear (Reader)
First, I'm flattered you'd compare me to Molly Ivins but I'm not that far to the left. Let us remember, despite the myriad amount of issues I have with the Bush Administration, I still voted for him because I thought Kerry would be so much worse.
Ann Coulter? I love Ann Coulter but I also love black metal and chocolate covered peanut butter, none of which are good for you. If you want to read some reasonable conservative thinking, check out charles Krauthammer or Bill Kristol. Somewhere in the archives of my site and the 411 site there is a review of Ann Coulters last book in which I compare her contributions to political discourse to the contributions of Hall and Nash to WCW circa 1996. Needless to say, as much as I'm willing to read her columns for the laughs they bring me, it is impossible for me to take her seriously. Then there's Sean Hannity ::::shudder::::::he's even worse.
I'm glad you liked the Dimebag Darrell piece. I put a lot of hard work into that. However, I think you are associating racism and elitism with conservatism which is why you keep assuming I'd come from a collectivist philosophy. Let me attempt to clarify a few things.
My politics are mostly green, as I believe I stated in the first e-mail. The ugly truth of the matter is that neither party represents green values. Democrats have two goals, to expand the role of government, if not the size of government, which is collectivism (or communism as you keep saying) and to solidify their own power base. Democrats espouse a liberal philosophical agenda for their own protection. You cannot judge them or take something away from them if in the social sphere of your civilization, anything goes. Frankly, there is no reasonable defense for social relativism or liberalism. In the end it is a philosophy that only hurts the weakest amongst us. Iran is a collectivist society and any reading their literature would show you that it's citizens chafe against the Ayatollah rigid vision of how a society should behave.
Now conservatives on the other hand are Laissez Faire social darwinists. Their core belief is that capitalism should go unchecked and that the only governing force in a society should be the marketplace. I have no tolerance for this shortsighted philosophy either because in practice what Conservatives seem to believe is that where the marketplace creates poverty and dooms an entire portion of ones society, those with money will build walls thick and high enough to protect them from the rabble. With the advent of the internet, that is not only untrue but impossible. However, that doesn't stop the hardcore conservatives from continuing to preach from that gospel.
So then what's left eh? What stops me from voting green as I did in 2000 and has pushed me squarely into the GOP's arms in 2004 is national security. I firmly believe that a strong, slightly insane defense policy is the only weapon that keeps our enemies at bay. Make no mistake about it, if we were to adopt a pacifist stance like France or Japan our enemies would be on shores faster than you could say oops. Do not be lulled into believing we are safe because we seem to making nice with Russia and China. The fact of the matter is that their powers that be are looking for chinks in are armor and if we are not careful, we will in fact expose ourselves. So, despite some of economic interests not being met, I'm stuck with Conservatism because they seem to be the only folks who truly understand the dangers that are out there.
And don't hand me that it's our fault because we've created worldwide poverty which breeds terrorism etc. The matter is far more complicated than that. I offer you the Blood Bankers by James S, Henry. Before you go about laying the woes of the world at our doorstep, I would suggest you read that book. It by no absolves us guilt, but it does lay out the blame everywhere it belongs.
On gay marriage. My issue with gay marriage has less to do with how it affects children in a myopic and specific way but how it affects society at large. Raising gay marriage or any alternative lifestyle to the level of what has been western society's norm for untold years seeks to rip apart our social framework. In short, it's the slippery slope, which I know liberals laugh at when conservatives bring this up but hear me out. Society's that function reasonably well do with an overall social philosophy that may not work for everyone but sets a standard that none the less, everyone must follow. In America, it's Judeo-Christian philosophy. Be mindful here that I am not talking about religion in the organized sense but rather I am referring to a guiding philosophy that separates acceptable behavior from unacceptable behavior. When you start expanding the definition of social norms, such as marriage, which has a specific purpose mind you, you open your society to chaos. You cannot condemn one man for his nuttiness but then accept another man for his when you have to basic structure for defining nuttiness in the first place. I'm sure there are wonderful gay parents and gay couples who want nothing more than to live their life in peace and to each man or woman, I have no issue with that. But in the broader scope of maintaining ones civilization, you must consider the larger impact of widening the definitions of social norms. I ask you this, if it's all relative and it's all good, what social norms should guide us, Western European Liberalism, Saudi Arabian Wahhabism or American Judeo-Christian philosophy? One might say that you live and let live but as you can see from reading the news, the Wahhabists believe their social norms are righteous and seek to put them on us. The Western Europeans think they are advanced and evolved and wish desperately that we'd catch up. Societal maintenance is not as simple as Live and let live and you must consider the many levels of the argument before deciding which belief works for you.
On Israel, it is a fact that Saddam Hussein was financially supporting a myriad of terrorist organizations that were employing suicide bombers against that country. It is on the record that one of Hussein's objectives was to eliminate Israel from the planet by any means necessary. Hussein had already been reprimanded once for having rockets that could reach Israel in the face of UN resolutions specifically saying any rockets had to be less than that distance. Please understand that if we had not pursued the course against Iraq that we have, the sanctions must assuredly would have come down and given enough time, Hussein would have gone to war against Israel either directly or by proxy. My issue is not that we went in to Iraq, my issue is that we seemed to have done it thinking it would be bloodless. I suggest you to The Secret History of the Iraq War by Yossef Bodansky for further clarification.
As a matter of fairness, I too listen to Air America. I actually really like Randy Rhodes but I absolutely cannot stand Franken. Besides, he's on against Rush I have my loyalties
: )
I think this just about covers everything from your last e-mail. Being that it is 1:00am I hope it was coherent. I hope to chat with you again.
Mark
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
Get on With It!
I didn't get my computer back on-line until Friday of last week. I thought I had missed my chance to write about Dr. Rice's confirmation as Secretary of State because surely she would be confirmed in short order. Leave it to the blowhards in the Senate to waste taxpayer dollars by grandstanding and blocking the confirmation process. Senators Boxer, Byrd and Kerry should be ashamed of themselves. They are in the Senate to do the work of the people, not to use the Senate as platform for raising ones political stock like John Edwards and Senator Hillary Clinton have done. This wouldn't bother me as much if wasn't being reported that her confirmation was indeed assured and that Boxer and Kerry are most likely going to vote for her. But they are and that makes this delayed confirmation process an exercise in hubris and political maneuvering.
So what does all this accomplish? They've used this confirmation process as an opportunity to wallop the president's plan (or lack thereof) in Iraq. Here's the problem, we aren't leaving Iraq anytime soon so reminding the news watching public what a bad idea this was doesn't bring us any closer to leaving Iraq. In addition, the election is over, done, finite, end of line. He cannot run again so I'm not sure how much attacking President Bush on Iraq accomplishes. What are we the voters supposed to do, take our vote back? I understand that this is politics as usual and that both sides are guilty of it but that doesn't mean I have to approve of it. And what's worse is that we the taxpayers are paying for the likes of Senator Boxer and Senator Byrd to stand and cry out loud over something they (or at least Boxer) have no real intention of stopping.
This is why I think Senators should be limited to only two terms. I'm a firm believer in term limits and the current group of unabashed egomaniacs definitely needs to be reined in. Senator Boxer and especially Senator Byrd should have been booted out of the Senate many years ago. You would think that an entire body of Americans born into privilege would exhibit a bit more class.
So what does all this accomplish? They've used this confirmation process as an opportunity to wallop the president's plan (or lack thereof) in Iraq. Here's the problem, we aren't leaving Iraq anytime soon so reminding the news watching public what a bad idea this was doesn't bring us any closer to leaving Iraq. In addition, the election is over, done, finite, end of line. He cannot run again so I'm not sure how much attacking President Bush on Iraq accomplishes. What are we the voters supposed to do, take our vote back? I understand that this is politics as usual and that both sides are guilty of it but that doesn't mean I have to approve of it. And what's worse is that we the taxpayers are paying for the likes of Senator Boxer and Senator Byrd to stand and cry out loud over something they (or at least Boxer) have no real intention of stopping.
This is why I think Senators should be limited to only two terms. I'm a firm believer in term limits and the current group of unabashed egomaniacs definitely needs to be reined in. Senator Boxer and especially Senator Byrd should have been booted out of the Senate many years ago. You would think that an entire body of Americans born into privilege would exhibit a bit more class.
Monday, January 24, 2005
Baby Needs a New Democracy
Hey, maybe civil war isn't the only future for Iraq after all.
"BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Leaders of the mostly Shiite Muslim ticket said Monday they have no intention of establishing an Iranian-style Islamic state in Iraq if they sweep next weekend's national elections.
They also vowed not to be dragged into a civil war by retaliating against Sunni extremist attacks on the Shiite community."
Since before Iraq War everyone from the Middle East experts to my very own dad claimed that once the US moved out of post election Iraq, the Shiite's and the Sunni's would immediately enter into a civil war. It wasn't an unreasonable proclamation given the volatile history of the region but it did lack in any kind of faith that people other than Europeans could handle democratization. Actually, it kind of struck me as condescending.
When I look at Iraq I do not see Iran. I see a country that despite its Shiite majority has some understanding for the need to separate Mosque from State. If Saddam can be thanked for anything it would be for secularizing the Iraqi people. If you watch the documentary, "Voices of Iraq" what you don't see is veiled women and cloaked men calling for "death to America!" You see men, women and children whom are no different than Americans or Europeans having a country conversation. Sure, some would like nothing better than to have an Iranian-style Islamic state but then, Jerry Falwell would like nothing more than to be anointed High Priest of Jesusland. Every country has its nuts after all.
It would appear that most Iraqi's, both Shiite and Sunni are simply tired of war in general. It's the same kind of tired that plagued Western Europe after two world wars. Let's look at the short history of Iraq; a protracted and devastating war against Iran that decimated both countries armies and population; another war in Kuwait that resulted in worldwide response that further eroded the country; more than a decade of sanctions and finally the US/Coalition of the Willing invasion and subsequent occupation. Call me crazy but I think they're done with war for the time being.
Every country has members of its population that will not listen to reason and will always go to violence. It's not like the US doesn't have organized crime or gang members. One also has to remember that many of the "insurgents" aren't Iraqi's at all but rather jihadists or mercenaries sponsored by Iran from a whole host of Middle Eastern countries.
We've rolled the dice in Iraq and call me naive but I think in the long run we may have picked a winner. The above article would certainly seem to indicate so.
"BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Leaders of the mostly Shiite Muslim ticket said Monday they have no intention of establishing an Iranian-style Islamic state in Iraq if they sweep next weekend's national elections.
They also vowed not to be dragged into a civil war by retaliating against Sunni extremist attacks on the Shiite community."
Since before Iraq War everyone from the Middle East experts to my very own dad claimed that once the US moved out of post election Iraq, the Shiite's and the Sunni's would immediately enter into a civil war. It wasn't an unreasonable proclamation given the volatile history of the region but it did lack in any kind of faith that people other than Europeans could handle democratization. Actually, it kind of struck me as condescending.
When I look at Iraq I do not see Iran. I see a country that despite its Shiite majority has some understanding for the need to separate Mosque from State. If Saddam can be thanked for anything it would be for secularizing the Iraqi people. If you watch the documentary, "Voices of Iraq" what you don't see is veiled women and cloaked men calling for "death to America!" You see men, women and children whom are no different than Americans or Europeans having a country conversation. Sure, some would like nothing better than to have an Iranian-style Islamic state but then, Jerry Falwell would like nothing more than to be anointed High Priest of Jesusland. Every country has its nuts after all.
It would appear that most Iraqi's, both Shiite and Sunni are simply tired of war in general. It's the same kind of tired that plagued Western Europe after two world wars. Let's look at the short history of Iraq; a protracted and devastating war against Iran that decimated both countries armies and population; another war in Kuwait that resulted in worldwide response that further eroded the country; more than a decade of sanctions and finally the US/Coalition of the Willing invasion and subsequent occupation. Call me crazy but I think they're done with war for the time being.
Every country has members of its population that will not listen to reason and will always go to violence. It's not like the US doesn't have organized crime or gang members. One also has to remember that many of the "insurgents" aren't Iraqi's at all but rather jihadists or mercenaries sponsored by Iran from a whole host of Middle Eastern countries.
We've rolled the dice in Iraq and call me naive but I think in the long run we may have picked a winner. The above article would certainly seem to indicate so.
Sunday, January 23, 2005
No More Adventures!
“No more adventures, I’m not going that way,” announced C-3PO as he split from his long time companion, R2-D2 in Star Wars: A New Hope. While C-3PO may have been the comic relief and resident coward of the ensemble cast that made up the Rebellion we all know and love, in this particular incident, he may have been quite wise. After everything he and his partner had been through, all C-3PO wanted to do was take the more direct and less dangerous path to salvation. There’s something to be said for the path of least of resistance.
Do you hear them? They were beating in the background of President George W. Bush’s inaugural address. Do you hear them? They beat a little louder every day. They are the war drums and this administration plays them like a child with a new Playstation 3. They are the war drums and this administration can’t seem to formulate any other strategy over their infernal racket.
They say war is diplomacy by another means. I myself have often referred to battlefields such as Baghdad as “chessboards”. The problem with this philosophy is it takes the humanity out of an event that has unalterable consequences on an entire host of people. These people whose lives will be torn asunder will suffer in a war that they didn’t plan and they didn’t want. The simple fact of the matter is that most Iranians do not want war with the United States or Israel. The Iranian populace is no different than you or I. The men love their families just as our men do. The women struggle for equality and validation just as our women do. Their children haven’t the foggiest clue what it’s all about just the same as our children. And that’s what makes the chessboard philosophy so painfully accurate. Our soldiers and their soldiers are nothing more than pawns in an internationally diplomatic game between the GOP in Washington and the Mullah’s in Tehran. Both of which we’d all, Americans and Iranians alike wish would, “take a flying leap,” as my mother would say.
We no longer live in a world where we can safely demonize one another. Despite what TV may show you, not every Iranian is an Al-Qaida operative chomping at the bit to destroy the “Great Satan”. Pick up a copy of “Reading Lolita in Tehran” or “Nine Parts of Desire” and you will see a very different Arab/Muslim/Persian world than the one we are shown on my beloved cable news programs. They are not the enemy. They are not monsters. They are not evil.
This is essentially what’s been part of the problem in Iraq. We’ve miserably lost the propaganda war. Try as they might, you cannot win a war without killing people. You cannot kill people unless you’ve demonized them and you can’t demonize people in the age of information. Only people who choose to be led like so much sheep will fall for cheap tricks of demonization and they are not going to win the war for us. Simply put, what barely worked for the war in Iraq and has proven itself to be short, will fall far shorter in Iran. While I understand and am for nuclear deterrence in the Middle East, I feel it’s a deadly game of chicken we are playing with Tehran. It may all just be saber rattling and inevitably Tehran could back down in the face of both American and European Union pressure. But what if they don’t? When does an adventure evolve into sound deterrence? When will Iranians cease to be human beings in the eyes of the voting American public?
In an article on Taipeitimes.com entitled, “UK wouldn't join US in `Iran adventure'”, the article states, “For all the stern words from Washington about possible military action against Iran if it fails to rein in its nuclear ambitions, the US would almost certainly have to mount such a campaign without the backing of Britain, its staunchest ally in Iraq, according to experts.”
You can bet money that the only country that would join us in an “adventure” would be the Israeli’s. They have the most to lose if Iran goes nuclear and surely they would lose whatever leverage they now have in the Middle East. And as a reminder, without that leverage, there would be no Israel. There would be no Israeli’s. There would be in fact a second holocaust. Let’s not forget that one of the objectives of the Mullah’s, the Wahhabist’s and the terrorists is to, “push Israel into the sea.” As much as I enjoy waxing humanitarian about the Iranian people, we cannot forget that millions of Israeli lives rest upon the shoulders of Washington and their “desire” to bring “democracy” to the Middle East.
For those keeping score, I do not want to see any more adventures. I do not want to see us at war with Iran nor do I want Iran (directly or by proxy) to escalate its war with Israel. The European Union has set itself up as the counterweight du jour against the United States. Russia is seeking to keep itself relevant in Central Asia and the Middle East. If we as a world truly share C-3PO’s sentiment of no more adventures than the time has come for both the EU and Russia to step forward and prevent Tehran from obtaining nuclear arms. If they cannot pass this test, if they cannot contribute at least that much, then even without the UK, there will be yet another adventure.
God save us all.
Do you hear them? They were beating in the background of President George W. Bush’s inaugural address. Do you hear them? They beat a little louder every day. They are the war drums and this administration plays them like a child with a new Playstation 3. They are the war drums and this administration can’t seem to formulate any other strategy over their infernal racket.
They say war is diplomacy by another means. I myself have often referred to battlefields such as Baghdad as “chessboards”. The problem with this philosophy is it takes the humanity out of an event that has unalterable consequences on an entire host of people. These people whose lives will be torn asunder will suffer in a war that they didn’t plan and they didn’t want. The simple fact of the matter is that most Iranians do not want war with the United States or Israel. The Iranian populace is no different than you or I. The men love their families just as our men do. The women struggle for equality and validation just as our women do. Their children haven’t the foggiest clue what it’s all about just the same as our children. And that’s what makes the chessboard philosophy so painfully accurate. Our soldiers and their soldiers are nothing more than pawns in an internationally diplomatic game between the GOP in Washington and the Mullah’s in Tehran. Both of which we’d all, Americans and Iranians alike wish would, “take a flying leap,” as my mother would say.
We no longer live in a world where we can safely demonize one another. Despite what TV may show you, not every Iranian is an Al-Qaida operative chomping at the bit to destroy the “Great Satan”. Pick up a copy of “Reading Lolita in Tehran” or “Nine Parts of Desire” and you will see a very different Arab/Muslim/Persian world than the one we are shown on my beloved cable news programs. They are not the enemy. They are not monsters. They are not evil.
This is essentially what’s been part of the problem in Iraq. We’ve miserably lost the propaganda war. Try as they might, you cannot win a war without killing people. You cannot kill people unless you’ve demonized them and you can’t demonize people in the age of information. Only people who choose to be led like so much sheep will fall for cheap tricks of demonization and they are not going to win the war for us. Simply put, what barely worked for the war in Iraq and has proven itself to be short, will fall far shorter in Iran. While I understand and am for nuclear deterrence in the Middle East, I feel it’s a deadly game of chicken we are playing with Tehran. It may all just be saber rattling and inevitably Tehran could back down in the face of both American and European Union pressure. But what if they don’t? When does an adventure evolve into sound deterrence? When will Iranians cease to be human beings in the eyes of the voting American public?
In an article on Taipeitimes.com entitled, “UK wouldn't join US in `Iran adventure'”, the article states, “For all the stern words from Washington about possible military action against Iran if it fails to rein in its nuclear ambitions, the US would almost certainly have to mount such a campaign without the backing of Britain, its staunchest ally in Iraq, according to experts.”
You can bet money that the only country that would join us in an “adventure” would be the Israeli’s. They have the most to lose if Iran goes nuclear and surely they would lose whatever leverage they now have in the Middle East. And as a reminder, without that leverage, there would be no Israel. There would be no Israeli’s. There would be in fact a second holocaust. Let’s not forget that one of the objectives of the Mullah’s, the Wahhabist’s and the terrorists is to, “push Israel into the sea.” As much as I enjoy waxing humanitarian about the Iranian people, we cannot forget that millions of Israeli lives rest upon the shoulders of Washington and their “desire” to bring “democracy” to the Middle East.
For those keeping score, I do not want to see any more adventures. I do not want to see us at war with Iran nor do I want Iran (directly or by proxy) to escalate its war with Israel. The European Union has set itself up as the counterweight du jour against the United States. Russia is seeking to keep itself relevant in Central Asia and the Middle East. If we as a world truly share C-3PO’s sentiment of no more adventures than the time has come for both the EU and Russia to step forward and prevent Tehran from obtaining nuclear arms. If they cannot pass this test, if they cannot contribute at least that much, then even without the UK, there will be yet another adventure.
God save us all.
Saturday, January 22, 2005
Former Judge Charged with Indecent Exposure
If you listen to many of the conservative radio programs such as Michael Savage, Mark Levin or Laura Ingrahm one of the topics they cover regularly is our seemingly out of control Judiciary branch. They mostly center on how the judges seem to be writing law from the bench rather than interpreting law as they should be. Many books of late have also covered this very subject. However, I haven't heard any of them talk about perversion from the bench:
"OKLAHOMA CITY (Reuters) - A former state judge, who allegedly used a sex toy called a penis pump in court, was charged with three felony counts of indecent exposure by Oklahoma authorities on Thursday.
Former Judge Donald Thompson, 58, pleaded not guilty in the Creek County District Court in the northeastern Oklahoma town of Sapulpa. If convicted, Thompson could face up to 10 years in prison for each count.
At the courthouse on Thursday, Thompson was taken to a backroom where he provided a DNA sample to authorities.
Last year, a court reporter who worked for Thompson was fired after she said she saw the judge masturbate and use the penis pump during hearings. Other witnesses claimed they saw Thompson use the pump in court.
Thompson stepped down in August after the allegations came to light and the state attorney general acted to remove him from the bench.
Officials searched Thompson's courtroom and chambers, and performed tests on carpet, a chair, a trash can and the judge's robe.
A preliminary hearing has been scheduled for March 22."
So here's the question; is this an example of a bigger problem on the bench, that is to say an elite group of people suffering from hubris and unaccountability or is it just a random occurence of bizarre behavior of a person in power? I guess we'll see as time goes on.
On a personal note, I've finally moved and gotten set up here in Miami. Having said that, I'll be back to updating the site daily again.
"OKLAHOMA CITY (Reuters) - A former state judge, who allegedly used a sex toy called a penis pump in court, was charged with three felony counts of indecent exposure by Oklahoma authorities on Thursday.
Former Judge Donald Thompson, 58, pleaded not guilty in the Creek County District Court in the northeastern Oklahoma town of Sapulpa. If convicted, Thompson could face up to 10 years in prison for each count.
At the courthouse on Thursday, Thompson was taken to a backroom where he provided a DNA sample to authorities.
Last year, a court reporter who worked for Thompson was fired after she said she saw the judge masturbate and use the penis pump during hearings. Other witnesses claimed they saw Thompson use the pump in court.
Thompson stepped down in August after the allegations came to light and the state attorney general acted to remove him from the bench.
Officials searched Thompson's courtroom and chambers, and performed tests on carpet, a chair, a trash can and the judge's robe.
A preliminary hearing has been scheduled for March 22."
So here's the question; is this an example of a bigger problem on the bench, that is to say an elite group of people suffering from hubris and unaccountability or is it just a random occurence of bizarre behavior of a person in power? I guess we'll see as time goes on.
On a personal note, I've finally moved and gotten set up here in Miami. Having said that, I'll be back to updating the site daily again.
Friday, January 14, 2005
Sex Bomb
"THE Pentagon considered developing a host of non-lethal chemical weapons that would disrupt discipline and morale among enemy troops, newly declassified documents reveal.
Most bizarre among the plans was one for the development of an "aphrodisiac" chemical weapon that would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other. Provoking widespread homosexual behaviour among troops would cause a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow to morale, the proposal says."
I can't even find the words. I'm not sure what's worse, the fact that we have an on-going chemical weapons program or that in this CW program we are developing the "Homo-Bomb". This is like some 60's free love nightmare come to life. Marvel comics couldn't come up with something this good. The WWE maybe, but not Marvel. I'm just wondering what the Mullah's in Iran or Osama bin Laden will think when they learn what we've been up to. They already think we're the most decadent and unclean culture this side of hell. The fact that we were considering development of a "sex-bomb" can only be bad, bad PR for us in the Muslim world. Not like it takes much. As scary has this story is, I can't help but laugh when I think of the images this conjures up.
Have you ever seen the N. Korean's do that weird hopping march? Now imagine they're marching and then BOOM! Gay N. Korean soldier orgy...mmm someone tell Paris Hilton, that's hot!
Remember the good old days when war actually meant trying to kill lots of people instead of finding odd ways to avoid killing people? The truly scary part about this is while we dick around with "sex-bombs", the Chinese may have a neutron bomb. "Neutron bombs kill people without destroying buildings. Unlike conventional nuclear weapons, the explosion and heat from a detonated neutron bomb is confined to a relatively small area.
But the detonation also releases a massive wave of radiation capable of penetrating armour or several metres of earth."
So in what may turn out to be the inevitable war between China and America, it'll be the Neutron bomb VS the Sex bomb.
OK, so that's not necessarily the case but it does go to the heart of the matter, which is the competing ideologies that drive both governments. Just as in Iraq, we go out of our way to avoid killing people only to face an enemy with no such compulsions. We cannot win with one arm tied behind our backs. Not against an enemy that has shown itself to be merciless to its own people.
Most bizarre among the plans was one for the development of an "aphrodisiac" chemical weapon that would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other. Provoking widespread homosexual behaviour among troops would cause a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow to morale, the proposal says."
I can't even find the words. I'm not sure what's worse, the fact that we have an on-going chemical weapons program or that in this CW program we are developing the "Homo-Bomb". This is like some 60's free love nightmare come to life. Marvel comics couldn't come up with something this good. The WWE maybe, but not Marvel. I'm just wondering what the Mullah's in Iran or Osama bin Laden will think when they learn what we've been up to. They already think we're the most decadent and unclean culture this side of hell. The fact that we were considering development of a "sex-bomb" can only be bad, bad PR for us in the Muslim world. Not like it takes much. As scary has this story is, I can't help but laugh when I think of the images this conjures up.
Have you ever seen the N. Korean's do that weird hopping march? Now imagine they're marching and then BOOM! Gay N. Korean soldier orgy...mmm someone tell Paris Hilton, that's hot!
Remember the good old days when war actually meant trying to kill lots of people instead of finding odd ways to avoid killing people? The truly scary part about this is while we dick around with "sex-bombs", the Chinese may have a neutron bomb. "Neutron bombs kill people without destroying buildings. Unlike conventional nuclear weapons, the explosion and heat from a detonated neutron bomb is confined to a relatively small area.
But the detonation also releases a massive wave of radiation capable of penetrating armour or several metres of earth."
So in what may turn out to be the inevitable war between China and America, it'll be the Neutron bomb VS the Sex bomb.
OK, so that's not necessarily the case but it does go to the heart of the matter, which is the competing ideologies that drive both governments. Just as in Iraq, we go out of our way to avoid killing people only to face an enemy with no such compulsions. We cannot win with one arm tied behind our backs. Not against an enemy that has shown itself to be merciless to its own people.
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
Fought on Principle, and Lost
Well it's finally over. GW's electoral victory has been certified and the lawsuit in Ohio has been dropped. The Air America crowd really thought they had something with this suit and that maybe this time, the Florida 2000 loss would be avenged. Such is life perhaps. One can only hope that with each election and post-election scrutiny we'll come closer to legitamate results than in elections past. Bev and the Blackboxvote.com crowd got further this time than in 2000. Maybe in 2008 they'll actually be abe to prevent voter fraud in the first place. This from NewsMax.com:
Ohio Court Dismisses Election Challenges
The Ohio Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a challenge from voters to the presidential election in light of last week's certification of the electoral vote and the upcoming inauguration.
A lawyer for the plaintiffs, a group of 37 voters, had moved Tuesday to drop the lawsuit, saying it is now moot. The high court agreed without comment to dismiss it.
Citing fraud, the suit had asked the court to examine several problems with voting procedures in the hopes of overturning President Bush's victory in the state.
The election turned on Ohio's 20 electoral college votes, and not until preliminary results were available early Nov. 3 did Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry concede.
Attorney Cliff Arnebeck, who represented the voters, wanted the court to examine several Election Day problems such as long lines, a shortage of voting machines in predominantly minority neighborhoods and problems with computer equipment.
Arnebeck said Tuesday the voters couldn't expect to win the suit given the congressional certification of the electoral votes last week and the inauguration next week.
The voters' challenge to the re-election of state Chief Justice Thomas Moyer was also dismissed at their request. © 2005 The Associated Press
Ohio Court Dismisses Election Challenges
The Ohio Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a challenge from voters to the presidential election in light of last week's certification of the electoral vote and the upcoming inauguration.
A lawyer for the plaintiffs, a group of 37 voters, had moved Tuesday to drop the lawsuit, saying it is now moot. The high court agreed without comment to dismiss it.
Citing fraud, the suit had asked the court to examine several problems with voting procedures in the hopes of overturning President Bush's victory in the state.
The election turned on Ohio's 20 electoral college votes, and not until preliminary results were available early Nov. 3 did Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry concede.
Attorney Cliff Arnebeck, who represented the voters, wanted the court to examine several Election Day problems such as long lines, a shortage of voting machines in predominantly minority neighborhoods and problems with computer equipment.
Arnebeck said Tuesday the voters couldn't expect to win the suit given the congressional certification of the electoral votes last week and the inauguration next week.
The voters' challenge to the re-election of state Chief Justice Thomas Moyer was also dismissed at their request. © 2005 The Associated Press
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
Devil’s Grip, the Iron Fist
When the GOP and Karl Rove decided to run George W. Bush for president, they did so with specific goals in mind. The first and most obvious one was their desire to remove Saddam Hussein and his sons from power in Iraq. September 11th, 2001 was one of the worst days in American history but for gold traders and the Bush Administration, it was a blessing in a fiery, disastrous disguise. If you’ve read “The Price of Loyalty” by Ron Suskind (the Paul O’Neil book), you would know that the Bushites had planned a military “adventure” in Iraq from the start. The problem was they didn’t have sufficient cover. It has been reported that Saddam Hussein gave aid, comfort and money to terrorist organizations such as Ansar al-Islam, Hamas, the Palestinian Liberation Front and the Mujahedin-e-Khalq, but there has been a suspicious lack of strong connections between Hussein and al Qaeda. That didn’t stop the administration from asserting there were rock solid connections between said parties and thus they got to have their much-ballyhooed war. It would appear that Cheney and company’s whole plan consisted of removing the Hussein family from power and the rest would sort it self out…as if Iraq was going through political puberty. Their strategy for winning the post-war resembled the business plans for underpants gnomes:
Phase 1: Collect underpants.
Phase 3: Profit.
Failing to understand Arab reality wasn’t the Bush administrations only goal however. Item 2 on the agenda was to pass a tax cut. “To pay for his tax program, Bush raided Social Security Trust Funds and made off with $500 billion, eroding our protections for the elderly. Then he borrowed another $500 billion from foreigners, putting our future in their hands. For every $100 you got back in tax cuts, $40 was borrowed from foreigners, $20 was borrowed from Americans, and $40 was taken from Social Security.” (Credit bushtax.com)
For those keeping score, this would be why in season 2 of the GW reality show; they are taking on Social Security reform. The reason why President Bush and the gang are so high on private Social Security accounts is they figure if you invest half your funds and then come up bust, it’ll provide cover for the federal government not having the money to properly fund Social Security in the first place. I’ll bet a Basic Income Guarantee is looking pretty good now isn’t it?
The third item on the to-do list was to pass an energy policy that would be a boon for the oil and oil related industries that have been propping up the GOP for oh so many years. According to the Sierra Club, the Energy Policy Act of 2003:
• Threatens our coasts and other public lands by allowing new fossil fuel exploration all along the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) and more public lands. This will destroy some of our nation's most unique wilderness areas and critical fish and wildlife habitats.
• Puts consumers at risk from electricity markets. Power companies will be allowed to set up multiple subsidiaries and blur their financial reports, leading to market manipulation similar to that seen during the California energy crisis.
• Funnels billions of dollars to polluting industries. This bill gives away 10.7 billion dollars in tax breaks to polluters and 30 billion dollars in subsidies to the nuclear industry.
• Ignores the property rights of farmers and ranchers and provides incentives for destructive coal-bed methane drilling that threatens thousands of acres of sensitive lands in the West and its scarce water resources.
• Opens Native American lands for mining and drilling by preventing the nation's hallmark environmental law, the Environmental Protection Act, from applying to Native American lands.
• Allows automakers to sell more gas guzzlers by failing to raise fuel economy standards.
• Fails to increase our use of clean, renewable energy by excluding a Renewable Energy Standard (RES) that would ensure that more of our electricity comes from clean, renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power.
This monstrosity passed in November of 2003. Thank your Republicans kids!
One can only assume that a second Bush term would inevitably lead to the White House unleashing Cheney like the river on Saruman’s tower (if you understood that reference, you too are a Lord of the Rings nerd). However, according to the Associated Press by way of MyWay.com, Cheney may actually be limiting his role as Emperor Palpatine to GW’s Darth Vader.
“WASHINGTON (AP) - Like the man behind the curtain working the levers in the "Wizard of Oz," Dick Cheney has been called the real power in President Bush's administration, perhaps the strongest vice president in U.S. history.
But as Bush enters his second term, Cheney's role is in flux. His chief task in Bush's first administration - mentoring a novice president with little foreign policy or legislative experience - has been accomplished. He remains dogged by heart disease and an FBI probe of a subsidiary of Halliburton, the company he once ran.
Indeed, some wonder whether Cheney, with no ambition to succeed his boss in the White House, will serve out his second term. And while he has redefined a job that traditionally involved attending ceremonial and campaign events or undertaking thankless policy assignments, there is speculation Cheney's influence is waning…”
With no international axes to grind, economies to flummox, environments to irrevocably corrupt or Dalmatians to skin for a nice coat, just what does Dick Cheney have to offer? Not much besides stereotypical villain fare this side of Osama Bin Laden, and that’s the truth. At this point I’m hoping the Republican’s in Congress realize they can still win elections without propping up the Bush Kingdom and restore the iota of sanity in government they are capable of restoring.
On the other hand, maybe the plan is to let President Bush wreck the country so badly that they can sell what’s left to Rupert Murdoch. Stranger things have happened.
Phase 1: Collect underpants.
Phase 3: Profit.
Failing to understand Arab reality wasn’t the Bush administrations only goal however. Item 2 on the agenda was to pass a tax cut. “To pay for his tax program, Bush raided Social Security Trust Funds and made off with $500 billion, eroding our protections for the elderly. Then he borrowed another $500 billion from foreigners, putting our future in their hands. For every $100 you got back in tax cuts, $40 was borrowed from foreigners, $20 was borrowed from Americans, and $40 was taken from Social Security.” (Credit bushtax.com)
For those keeping score, this would be why in season 2 of the GW reality show; they are taking on Social Security reform. The reason why President Bush and the gang are so high on private Social Security accounts is they figure if you invest half your funds and then come up bust, it’ll provide cover for the federal government not having the money to properly fund Social Security in the first place. I’ll bet a Basic Income Guarantee is looking pretty good now isn’t it?
The third item on the to-do list was to pass an energy policy that would be a boon for the oil and oil related industries that have been propping up the GOP for oh so many years. According to the Sierra Club, the Energy Policy Act of 2003:
• Threatens our coasts and other public lands by allowing new fossil fuel exploration all along the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) and more public lands. This will destroy some of our nation's most unique wilderness areas and critical fish and wildlife habitats.
• Puts consumers at risk from electricity markets. Power companies will be allowed to set up multiple subsidiaries and blur their financial reports, leading to market manipulation similar to that seen during the California energy crisis.
• Funnels billions of dollars to polluting industries. This bill gives away 10.7 billion dollars in tax breaks to polluters and 30 billion dollars in subsidies to the nuclear industry.
• Ignores the property rights of farmers and ranchers and provides incentives for destructive coal-bed methane drilling that threatens thousands of acres of sensitive lands in the West and its scarce water resources.
• Opens Native American lands for mining and drilling by preventing the nation's hallmark environmental law, the Environmental Protection Act, from applying to Native American lands.
• Allows automakers to sell more gas guzzlers by failing to raise fuel economy standards.
• Fails to increase our use of clean, renewable energy by excluding a Renewable Energy Standard (RES) that would ensure that more of our electricity comes from clean, renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power.
This monstrosity passed in November of 2003. Thank your Republicans kids!
One can only assume that a second Bush term would inevitably lead to the White House unleashing Cheney like the river on Saruman’s tower (if you understood that reference, you too are a Lord of the Rings nerd). However, according to the Associated Press by way of MyWay.com, Cheney may actually be limiting his role as Emperor Palpatine to GW’s Darth Vader.
“WASHINGTON (AP) - Like the man behind the curtain working the levers in the "Wizard of Oz," Dick Cheney has been called the real power in President Bush's administration, perhaps the strongest vice president in U.S. history.
But as Bush enters his second term, Cheney's role is in flux. His chief task in Bush's first administration - mentoring a novice president with little foreign policy or legislative experience - has been accomplished. He remains dogged by heart disease and an FBI probe of a subsidiary of Halliburton, the company he once ran.
Indeed, some wonder whether Cheney, with no ambition to succeed his boss in the White House, will serve out his second term. And while he has redefined a job that traditionally involved attending ceremonial and campaign events or undertaking thankless policy assignments, there is speculation Cheney's influence is waning…”
With no international axes to grind, economies to flummox, environments to irrevocably corrupt or Dalmatians to skin for a nice coat, just what does Dick Cheney have to offer? Not much besides stereotypical villain fare this side of Osama Bin Laden, and that’s the truth. At this point I’m hoping the Republican’s in Congress realize they can still win elections without propping up the Bush Kingdom and restore the iota of sanity in government they are capable of restoring.
On the other hand, maybe the plan is to let President Bush wreck the country so badly that they can sell what’s left to Rupert Murdoch. Stranger things have happened.
Monday, January 10, 2005
Abbas wins election in landslide
He's not perfect but he'll do. Anyone that was willing to quit because Arafat was an impediment to peace is OK in my book. Hopefully, the founder of HAMAS will be able to reconcile enough of the problems between the Palestinians and Israelis that some measure of stability can be established. A man can dream can't he?
RAMALLAH, West Bank - Mahmoud Abbas was elected Palestinian Authority president by a landslide, results showed Monday, giving the pragmatist a mandate to resume peace talks with Israel — but also leaving him with the tough task of reining in powerful armed groups.
Israeli leaders welcomed Abbas’ victory, but said they will watch closely how hard he tries to subdue militants. Abbas could easily lose his political capital over a major bombing or shooting attack, and while most militant groups signaled they are willing to give him a chance, not all have signed on to a truce with Israel.
Still, Abbas’ victory held out the promise of a new era after four decades of chaotic and corruption-riddled rule by Yasser Arafat, who died Nov. 11. Abbas, who has spoken out against violence and has the support of the international community, promises to reform the government and the unwieldy security services.
Many Palestinians had high expectations of Abbas, widely known as Abu Mazen. “Today is the beginning of a new future,” said Sami Radwan, 55, a restaurant owner in Gaza City. “Abu Mazen is the right choice. He is the one who can bring us peace, good business and security.”
“The election is our weapon to change our life,” added Souad Radwan, a 46-year-old teacher from the Gaza refugee camp of Jebaliya, whose house was demolished in an Israeli raid. “We are
RAMALLAH, West Bank - Mahmoud Abbas was elected Palestinian Authority president by a landslide, results showed Monday, giving the pragmatist a mandate to resume peace talks with Israel — but also leaving him with the tough task of reining in powerful armed groups.
Israeli leaders welcomed Abbas’ victory, but said they will watch closely how hard he tries to subdue militants. Abbas could easily lose his political capital over a major bombing or shooting attack, and while most militant groups signaled they are willing to give him a chance, not all have signed on to a truce with Israel.
Still, Abbas’ victory held out the promise of a new era after four decades of chaotic and corruption-riddled rule by Yasser Arafat, who died Nov. 11. Abbas, who has spoken out against violence and has the support of the international community, promises to reform the government and the unwieldy security services.
Many Palestinians had high expectations of Abbas, widely known as Abu Mazen. “Today is the beginning of a new future,” said Sami Radwan, 55, a restaurant owner in Gaza City. “Abu Mazen is the right choice. He is the one who can bring us peace, good business and security.”
“The election is our weapon to change our life,” added Souad Radwan, a 46-year-old teacher from the Gaza refugee camp of Jebaliya, whose house was demolished in an Israeli raid. “We are
Saddam Teamed Up with OBL's Wahhabists
Politics and religion in the Middle East is a tangled web indeed. This from Newsmax.com:
Starting in the mid-1990s, Saddam Hussein forged alliances with Muslim radicals from Saudi Arabia who practiced the same brand of militant Islam as Osama bin Laden, Saudi dissidents in London revealed last week.
In a development that experts call astonishing, the Sunni dictator made common cause with radical Wahhabists in a bid to keep Iraq's Shiite majority at bay.
"Saddam invited Muslim scholars and preachers to Iraq for his own survival," Saad Fagih, a London-based dissident, told the Associated Press. "He convinced them that Shiites are the danger."
Wahhabism began trickling into Iraq nearly a decade ago, with radical Muslims coming from Saudi Arabia as well as other Arab countries. A Wahhabi mosque was even built in the Shiite holy city of Karbala at a time when Shiites were banned from worshipping their religion freely, the AP said.
In Oct. 2001, two Iraqi defectors told U.S. intelligence that they taught radical Islamists at the terrorist training camp Salman Pak to hijack U.S. aircraft in groups of four and five using small knives.
The hijack trainees, who were recruited from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Morocco and other Mideast nations, were avid students, the defectors told the London Observer - except that they stopped five times a day to pray to Allah.
U.S. intelligence agencies eventually rejected the notion of a link between Salman Pak and the 9/11 attacks, based in part on the presumption that secularist Saddam would have never conspired with religious fundamentalists.
Officials at the CIA and State Department concluded that while hijack training did take place at Salman Pak, it was actually to instruct Iraqi counterterrorism units in anti-hijacking tactics.
Starting in the mid-1990s, Saddam Hussein forged alliances with Muslim radicals from Saudi Arabia who practiced the same brand of militant Islam as Osama bin Laden, Saudi dissidents in London revealed last week.
In a development that experts call astonishing, the Sunni dictator made common cause with radical Wahhabists in a bid to keep Iraq's Shiite majority at bay.
"Saddam invited Muslim scholars and preachers to Iraq for his own survival," Saad Fagih, a London-based dissident, told the Associated Press. "He convinced them that Shiites are the danger."
Wahhabism began trickling into Iraq nearly a decade ago, with radical Muslims coming from Saudi Arabia as well as other Arab countries. A Wahhabi mosque was even built in the Shiite holy city of Karbala at a time when Shiites were banned from worshipping their religion freely, the AP said.
In Oct. 2001, two Iraqi defectors told U.S. intelligence that they taught radical Islamists at the terrorist training camp Salman Pak to hijack U.S. aircraft in groups of four and five using small knives.
The hijack trainees, who were recruited from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Morocco and other Mideast nations, were avid students, the defectors told the London Observer - except that they stopped five times a day to pray to Allah.
U.S. intelligence agencies eventually rejected the notion of a link between Salman Pak and the 9/11 attacks, based in part on the presumption that secularist Saddam would have never conspired with religious fundamentalists.
Officials at the CIA and State Department concluded that while hijack training did take place at Salman Pak, it was actually to instruct Iraqi counterterrorism units in anti-hijacking tactics.
Sunday, January 09, 2005
Brutus Eyes White House
A headline on MYWAY.com reads, "Newt Gingrich Open to Presidential Run". I have mixed emotions about this. First, according to Joe Scarborough in his book, "Rome Wasn't Burnt in a Day", Gingrich stabbed the Class of '94 (GOP House members newly elected in a startling sweep of Congress) in the back. In their Contract with America, they had vowed to cut government waste and bring some sense of personal responsibility to Washington D.C. Sometime after the government shutdown I believe, Gingrich betrayed his fellow conservatives and started making deals with insider devils. I don't remember all of the details but apparently Scarborough and company were not happy with Gingrich by the time his third term was coming to an end. If I remember correctly, Gingrich's tenure as Speaker of the House turned scummy toward the end. This is probably not the guy we want leading the free world.
On the other hand, with Karl Rove knighting GW's next successor and HILLARY staking her claim in the oval office, maybe Gingrich isn't such a bad choice afterall. It's not that I think his policies are wonderful, it's that he may be the lesser of two evils. I don't want to see either the Bush nor the Clinton dynasty hijack the White House. However, both teams are going to be hard for any politician to beat (loot at Kerry, who's no slouch to the game) and it may just take another slimy insider to do the trick. It's too soon to say really. I'll hit the books and retackle this subject again depending on how serious this Gingrich thing pans out.
On the other hand, with Karl Rove knighting GW's next successor and HILLARY staking her claim in the oval office, maybe Gingrich isn't such a bad choice afterall. It's not that I think his policies are wonderful, it's that he may be the lesser of two evils. I don't want to see either the Bush nor the Clinton dynasty hijack the White House. However, both teams are going to be hard for any politician to beat (loot at Kerry, who's no slouch to the game) and it may just take another slimy insider to do the trick. It's too soon to say really. I'll hit the books and retackle this subject again depending on how serious this Gingrich thing pans out.
Saturday, January 08, 2005
City to Pay Lap Dance Parlor Owner $19,500
Like I always say, working girls just need to be left in peace. I may be a conservative but in all my years of social work, I've always sympathized with lady's of the night. Now I don't like to see sex shops in places where kids can see them but I'm for having them exist in a red light district or something like that. So I'm glad this story worked out the way it did:
KEY WEST, Fla. (Reuters) - An exotic dancer will get nearly $20,000 from city officials who moved to shut down her lap dance parlor in this historically easygoing Florida town known for its drag clubs and clothing-optional bars.
Key West has agreed to pay Christy Sweet $19,500 to cover legal fees and lost revenue for her business, Personal Dances, her attorney Richard Wilson said on Thursday.
The city had granted Sweet an adult entertainment license in 2002 but revoked it in January 2004, according to federal court documents.
Then four months later, city officials voted to drastically restrict adult businesses in the town of about 26,000, home to adult-themed festivities such as the annual Halloween-pegged Fantasy Fest.
Sweet filed a lawsuit in federal court. A judge sided with her and signed the settlement last month.
Key West city attorney Bob Tischenkel said the city agreed to settle because "she was going to win."
KEY WEST, Fla. (Reuters) - An exotic dancer will get nearly $20,000 from city officials who moved to shut down her lap dance parlor in this historically easygoing Florida town known for its drag clubs and clothing-optional bars.
Key West has agreed to pay Christy Sweet $19,500 to cover legal fees and lost revenue for her business, Personal Dances, her attorney Richard Wilson said on Thursday.
The city had granted Sweet an adult entertainment license in 2002 but revoked it in January 2004, according to federal court documents.
Then four months later, city officials voted to drastically restrict adult businesses in the town of about 26,000, home to adult-themed festivities such as the annual Halloween-pegged Fantasy Fest.
Sweet filed a lawsuit in federal court. A judge sided with her and signed the settlement last month.
Key West city attorney Bob Tischenkel said the city agreed to settle because "she was going to win."
Friday, January 07, 2005
The Bush Twins Are Nuts
I used to like Kid Rock. I'm not crazy about the guys music anymore but I still enjoy some of his songs on the occasion when they are played on the radio or in the background at a bar. When "Devil Without a Cause" came out I bought it based mostly on the video for "I am the Bullgod". Then I heard the opening track which was "Bawitaba" and instantly fell in love with the record. At that time and even to this day I tend to favor any combination of rap and rock. However, Kid Rock is not for the faint of heart nor is it appropriate music for the inauguration of our president. I was pretty shocked when I read this over at Newsmax.com:
"A scheduled appearance by vulgar rock-rapper Kid Rock at a Bush inauguration concert hosted by Bush daughters Jenna and Barbara has shocked conservative supporters."
Wait, there's more:
"Kid rock was chosen to appear because he was a supporter of President Bush's re-election campaign."
Under that premise would Kim Jong Il have been invited to John Kerry's inauguration if he had won the election?
I would love to know what went on in the heads of the Bush Twins when they booked they guy who, "got the sex rhymes". It's bad enough the GOP never honors the promises made to Christian America, but this is spitting in their eye on top of it. I said this during the convention in reference to the Bush Twins; let's not ruin what we have by talking.
I have another piece of advice for them, stay out of the public eye until you are in your 30's. Actually, if the Dems really had some chutzpa, they'd hire the Bush Twins to sabotage their families future political endeavors. They already seem to be doing so on their own as it is.
"A scheduled appearance by vulgar rock-rapper Kid Rock at a Bush inauguration concert hosted by Bush daughters Jenna and Barbara has shocked conservative supporters."
Wait, there's more:
"Kid rock was chosen to appear because he was a supporter of President Bush's re-election campaign."
Under that premise would Kim Jong Il have been invited to John Kerry's inauguration if he had won the election?
I would love to know what went on in the heads of the Bush Twins when they booked they guy who, "got the sex rhymes". It's bad enough the GOP never honors the promises made to Christian America, but this is spitting in their eye on top of it. I said this during the convention in reference to the Bush Twins; let's not ruin what we have by talking.
I have another piece of advice for them, stay out of the public eye until you are in your 30's. Actually, if the Dems really had some chutzpa, they'd hire the Bush Twins to sabotage their families future political endeavors. They already seem to be doing so on their own as it is.
Thursday, January 06, 2005
WorldCom former outside directors to pay 54 mln usd to settle suit - report
I don't know if this means much but I hope this is a sign that corporate crooks in the future will have to give back the money they've stolen.
NEW YORK (AFX) - Ten former outside directors for the former WorldCom Inc have agreed in principle to pay 54 mln usd, including 18 mln out of their own pockets, to settle their portion of a class-action lawsuit brought by bondholders and shareholders in the wake of the firm's accounting scandal, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter.
The remaining 36 mln usd will be paid by the directors' liability insurers, the sources were quoted as saying.
Under the accord, the 18 mln usd to be paid by the former directors represents about 20 pct of their combined personal net worth, excluding their primary residences, retirement accounts and certain joint marital assets, it said.
Some of the former directors will pay more than others, though the amounts that will be apportioned to each have not yet been determined, the report said.
A formal agreement is expected to be signed and presented for approval to a federal district judge in New York as early as Thursday, the newspaper said.
WorldCom emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last year and has changed its name to MCI Inc (NASDAQ: MCIP - news) .
The move comes less than two weeks before jury selection is due to get underway in the trial of Bernard Ebbers, WorldCom's former chief executive.
Ebbers is charged with securities fraud, conspiracy and causing the company to make false filings with securities regulators.
NEW YORK (AFX) - Ten former outside directors for the former WorldCom Inc have agreed in principle to pay 54 mln usd, including 18 mln out of their own pockets, to settle their portion of a class-action lawsuit brought by bondholders and shareholders in the wake of the firm's accounting scandal, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter.
The remaining 36 mln usd will be paid by the directors' liability insurers, the sources were quoted as saying.
Under the accord, the 18 mln usd to be paid by the former directors represents about 20 pct of their combined personal net worth, excluding their primary residences, retirement accounts and certain joint marital assets, it said.
Some of the former directors will pay more than others, though the amounts that will be apportioned to each have not yet been determined, the report said.
A formal agreement is expected to be signed and presented for approval to a federal district judge in New York as early as Thursday, the newspaper said.
WorldCom emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last year and has changed its name to MCI Inc (NASDAQ: MCIP - news) .
The move comes less than two weeks before jury selection is due to get underway in the trial of Bernard Ebbers, WorldCom's former chief executive.
Ebbers is charged with securities fraud, conspiracy and causing the company to make false filings with securities regulators.
Wednesday, January 05, 2005
Judge Orders Addict to Stop Having Children
In all my years as a social worker, I joked that this would happen someday. I can't believe I was actually was right. This from Newsmax.com:
ROCHESTER, N.Y. – A Family Court judge who last year stirred debate about parental responsibilities ordered a second drug-addicted woman to have no more children until she proves she can look after the seven she already has.
The 31-year-old mother, identified in court papers only as Judgette W., lost custody of her children, ranging in age from eight months to 12 years, in child-neglect hearings dating back to 2000. Six are in foster care at state expense, and one lives with an aunt.
The youngest child and two others tested positive for cocaine at birth, and all seven ``were removed from her care and custody because she could not and did not take care of them,'' Judge Marilyn O'Connor said in a Dec. 22 decision made public Tuesday.
``Because every child born deserves a mother and a father, or at the very least a mother or a father, this court is once again taking this unusual step of ordering this biological mother to conceive no more children until she reclaims her children from foster care or other caretakers,'' O'Connor wrote.
In a similar ruling last March, O'Connor ordered a drug-addicted, homeless mother of four to refrain from bearing children until she won back care of her children. The decision, the first of its kind in New York, is being appealed.
Deadbeat Dads Bad, Deadbeat Moms OK
Wisconsin and Ohio have upheld similar rulings involving ``deadbeat dads'' who failed to pay child support. But in other states, judges have turned back attempts to interfere with a person's right to procreate.
O'Connor said she was not forcing contraception or sterilization on the mother, who had children with seven different men, nor requiring her to get an abortion should she become pregnant. But she warned that the woman could be jailed for contempt if she has another child.
New York Civil Liberties Union maintained that the opinion could not be enforced because it ``tramples on a fundamental right, the right to procreate.''
``There is no question the circumstances of this case are deeply troubling,'' said the group's executive director, Donna Lieberman. ``But ordering a woman under threat of jail not to have any more babies ... puts the court squarely in the bedroom. And that's no place for the government.''
ROCHESTER, N.Y. – A Family Court judge who last year stirred debate about parental responsibilities ordered a second drug-addicted woman to have no more children until she proves she can look after the seven she already has.
The 31-year-old mother, identified in court papers only as Judgette W., lost custody of her children, ranging in age from eight months to 12 years, in child-neglect hearings dating back to 2000. Six are in foster care at state expense, and one lives with an aunt.
The youngest child and two others tested positive for cocaine at birth, and all seven ``were removed from her care and custody because she could not and did not take care of them,'' Judge Marilyn O'Connor said in a Dec. 22 decision made public Tuesday.
``Because every child born deserves a mother and a father, or at the very least a mother or a father, this court is once again taking this unusual step of ordering this biological mother to conceive no more children until she reclaims her children from foster care or other caretakers,'' O'Connor wrote.
In a similar ruling last March, O'Connor ordered a drug-addicted, homeless mother of four to refrain from bearing children until she won back care of her children. The decision, the first of its kind in New York, is being appealed.
Deadbeat Dads Bad, Deadbeat Moms OK
Wisconsin and Ohio have upheld similar rulings involving ``deadbeat dads'' who failed to pay child support. But in other states, judges have turned back attempts to interfere with a person's right to procreate.
O'Connor said she was not forcing contraception or sterilization on the mother, who had children with seven different men, nor requiring her to get an abortion should she become pregnant. But she warned that the woman could be jailed for contempt if she has another child.
New York Civil Liberties Union maintained that the opinion could not be enforced because it ``tramples on a fundamental right, the right to procreate.''
``There is no question the circumstances of this case are deeply troubling,'' said the group's executive director, Donna Lieberman. ``But ordering a woman under threat of jail not to have any more babies ... puts the court squarely in the bedroom. And that's no place for the government.''
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi reportedly arrested in Iraq
If it's true, it's the best news I've heard since the election. This from ITAR-TASS:
DUBAI, January 4 (Itar-Tass) - Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi, whom the US occupation authorities declared to be the "target number one" in Iraq, has been arrested in the city of Baakuba, the Emirate newspaper al-Bayane reported on Tuesday referring to Kurdish sources. Al-Zarqawi, leader of the terrorist group Al-Tawhid Wa'al-Jihad, was recently appointed the director of the Al-Qaeda organisation in Iraq.
The newspaper's correspondent in Baghdad points out that a report on the seizure of the terrorist, on whom the US put a bounty of 10 million dollars, was also reported by Iraqi Kurdistan radio, which at one time had been the first to announce the arrest of Saddam Hussein.
There have been no official reports about the arrest of the terrorist. Al-Zarqawi, 38, a Jordanian, whose real name is Ahmad al-Khalayleh, aims to turn Iraq into a "new Afghanistan". According to Arab press data, Al-Tawhid Wa'al-Jihad group has divided Iraq into several emirates. The group's independent subdivisions at a strength of 50 to 500 militants operate in the cities of Al-Falluja, Al-Qaim, Diala, and Samarra.
The personnel of the group is on the whole 1,500-strong and includes Iraqis and citizens of Arab and Islamic countries. There are demolition experts and missilemen among them.
The group has depots of weapons and explosives in various parts of the country. It intends to frustrate the upcoming parliamentary elections that are scheduled for the end of this month. Al-Tawhid Wa'al-Jihad threatens to do away with Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi and members of the interim government.
More on this as it develops.
DUBAI, January 4 (Itar-Tass) - Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi, whom the US occupation authorities declared to be the "target number one" in Iraq, has been arrested in the city of Baakuba, the Emirate newspaper al-Bayane reported on Tuesday referring to Kurdish sources. Al-Zarqawi, leader of the terrorist group Al-Tawhid Wa'al-Jihad, was recently appointed the director of the Al-Qaeda organisation in Iraq.
The newspaper's correspondent in Baghdad points out that a report on the seizure of the terrorist, on whom the US put a bounty of 10 million dollars, was also reported by Iraqi Kurdistan radio, which at one time had been the first to announce the arrest of Saddam Hussein.
There have been no official reports about the arrest of the terrorist. Al-Zarqawi, 38, a Jordanian, whose real name is Ahmad al-Khalayleh, aims to turn Iraq into a "new Afghanistan". According to Arab press data, Al-Tawhid Wa'al-Jihad group has divided Iraq into several emirates. The group's independent subdivisions at a strength of 50 to 500 militants operate in the cities of Al-Falluja, Al-Qaim, Diala, and Samarra.
The personnel of the group is on the whole 1,500-strong and includes Iraqis and citizens of Arab and Islamic countries. There are demolition experts and missilemen among them.
The group has depots of weapons and explosives in various parts of the country. It intends to frustrate the upcoming parliamentary elections that are scheduled for the end of this month. Al-Tawhid Wa'al-Jihad threatens to do away with Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi and members of the interim government.
More on this as it develops.
Monday, January 03, 2005
The Line of Kings
It’s only January 3rd, 2005 and the next presidential election is already looking rather bleak. For starters, outside of an act of God, nothing will prevent Hillary Clinton from winning the Democrat nomination for President in 2008. She’ll face stiff enough competition from the likes of John Edwards, Evan Bayh and John Kerry but in the end, the Clinton machine, which owns the DNC, will secure her a resounding victory. She’s already made illegal immigration a campaign issue, which she isn’t believable on but believability isn’t something that seems to matter in the eyes of most American voters. Also, Hillary is known as somewhat hawkish on foreign policy issues and recorded a vote for the Iraq war. The former Black Panther associate isn’t believable here either but that’s OK. As we all learned from this past election, the 60’s and the 70’s were a million years ago and nothing liberals did back then is relevant today. After all, Hillary’s all grown up now. Surely she’s put away her dreams of bringing down American hegemony from her activist days (←insert sarcasm here).
However, the field of Republicans vying for the highest office in the land isn’t too promising either. Actually, it’s not so much a playing field as it is a minefield. Senator John McCain, while he’s my personal favorite besides Dr. Condoleezza Rice, is already making stupid mistakes in what I’m sure he thinks is his rightful place as Republican frontrunner for 2008. His major issue so far is steroids in sports. Hillary is taking illegal immigration and boarder security on and this guy is making a federal case against steroids. That’s noble and all but it doesn’t exactly scream top priority for a Commander-in-Chief. If that’s indicative of the kind of tactics he’s going to employ for a serious run at the presidential nomination, then he’s probably wasting his time. Not that this really matters much as, according to Newsmax.com, my political nightmare appears to be slowly coming true:
“Washington Times reporter and Bush biographer Bill Sammon flatly predicted on "Fox News Sunday":
"Jeb Bush is being groomed to be the successor to his brother. The first sign of this is him being sent by President Bush to South Asia with Colin Powell to head up relief efforts."
Sammon noted that in any potential presidential contest, the Florida governor would handily carry his own state, along with its critical Electoral College votes.”
For those keeping score, Jeb Bush recently stated in reference to a run at the presidency, “No! Why am I not believable on this subject? This is driving me nuts.” With all due respect to Gov. Bush, he’s not believable on this because he’s a senior member of the Bush family and somewhere between the 50’s and today (if not much earlier) that family became American royalty with high elected office as their collective birthright.
Another reason why he’s not believable on this subject is Karl Rove. If you’ve read “Bush’s Brain” or at least my review of it, there’s a bit that deals with life after George W. Bush’s term in the oval office. The book states that Rove’s objective is to continue to wield policy influence by getting agreeable, malleable, political contenders into powerful elected offices. Rove has managed Prince George into not only a governorship but also two terms as Commander-in-Chief and leader of the free world. Mind you, this same fellow, whom I voted for, couldn’t find oil on his own, in Texas, home of the oil barons, when he had his own oil company. It would be a slight understatement to say that Rove is a man of considerable marketing talent and seems to have his hand on the emotional strings of the American voting populace. Rove may be the first political consultant with his own office inside the White House and that’s too much power for an unelected official in my book. The only problem is, if he can get GW into the Oval Office, just think about what he can accomplish with his brother, the one most whom most Americans don’t think is a boob. If the GOP is already grooming Jeb Bush for his turn at the steering wheel of democracy then you can be assured Rove is right there in the shadows ticking of a list of dirty tricks to employ against Hillary in 2008.
So this is what it’s come to; we voters now have to choose between two lines of royalty. One drawn in blood from the victims of the Dixie Mafia and one drawn in oil from Texas and Saudi Arabia. That’s not a choice, that’s an oligarchy. I’m sickened to think that my vote counts the same as somebody who will undoubtedly fall for whatever marketing strategy both kingdoms decide to employ. Whether it’s the folks who will vote for Hillary because she’s a woman or because they really like her husband, I now have to stand in line and watch them try to hand over our country to a socialist with a decidedly anti-American track record. Then of course there will be the gung-ho, rah-rah anti-terror strategy of the GOP. “Vote for Jeb, his brother protected us from terrorists,” they’ll say. Rove I’m sure will also take Gov. Bush’s history of dealing with crisis’ such as the 4 successive hurricanes and now this tsunami and will fashion that into a message that because he can effectively manage relief efforts, he can keep Americans safe. Throw that in with the usual “no-fags” campaign and you got yourself a winner, I reckon.
Royalty and nepotism in America subverts democracy and in my opinion makes us no better than Putin’s Russia. I’ve already held my nose and anointed one prince king because the alternative was so awful, I won’t do it again. Unfortunately I’m only one voter. The lesson in all of this is that the American public needs to start tuning into what going on in their country. They cannot afford to be provincial lambs allowing themselves the fallacy of thinking their elected shepherd’s will keep them safe. This shouldn’t be all that radical for us. We dumped one king over 200 years ago and now we need to revisit that spirit of 1976.
Whether it’s Hillary or Bush III, we’re doomed if remain blissfully ignorant.
However, the field of Republicans vying for the highest office in the land isn’t too promising either. Actually, it’s not so much a playing field as it is a minefield. Senator John McCain, while he’s my personal favorite besides Dr. Condoleezza Rice, is already making stupid mistakes in what I’m sure he thinks is his rightful place as Republican frontrunner for 2008. His major issue so far is steroids in sports. Hillary is taking illegal immigration and boarder security on and this guy is making a federal case against steroids. That’s noble and all but it doesn’t exactly scream top priority for a Commander-in-Chief. If that’s indicative of the kind of tactics he’s going to employ for a serious run at the presidential nomination, then he’s probably wasting his time. Not that this really matters much as, according to Newsmax.com, my political nightmare appears to be slowly coming true:
“Washington Times reporter and Bush biographer Bill Sammon flatly predicted on "Fox News Sunday":
"Jeb Bush is being groomed to be the successor to his brother. The first sign of this is him being sent by President Bush to South Asia with Colin Powell to head up relief efforts."
Sammon noted that in any potential presidential contest, the Florida governor would handily carry his own state, along with its critical Electoral College votes.”
For those keeping score, Jeb Bush recently stated in reference to a run at the presidency, “No! Why am I not believable on this subject? This is driving me nuts.” With all due respect to Gov. Bush, he’s not believable on this because he’s a senior member of the Bush family and somewhere between the 50’s and today (if not much earlier) that family became American royalty with high elected office as their collective birthright.
Another reason why he’s not believable on this subject is Karl Rove. If you’ve read “Bush’s Brain” or at least my review of it, there’s a bit that deals with life after George W. Bush’s term in the oval office. The book states that Rove’s objective is to continue to wield policy influence by getting agreeable, malleable, political contenders into powerful elected offices. Rove has managed Prince George into not only a governorship but also two terms as Commander-in-Chief and leader of the free world. Mind you, this same fellow, whom I voted for, couldn’t find oil on his own, in Texas, home of the oil barons, when he had his own oil company. It would be a slight understatement to say that Rove is a man of considerable marketing talent and seems to have his hand on the emotional strings of the American voting populace. Rove may be the first political consultant with his own office inside the White House and that’s too much power for an unelected official in my book. The only problem is, if he can get GW into the Oval Office, just think about what he can accomplish with his brother, the one most whom most Americans don’t think is a boob. If the GOP is already grooming Jeb Bush for his turn at the steering wheel of democracy then you can be assured Rove is right there in the shadows ticking of a list of dirty tricks to employ against Hillary in 2008.
So this is what it’s come to; we voters now have to choose between two lines of royalty. One drawn in blood from the victims of the Dixie Mafia and one drawn in oil from Texas and Saudi Arabia. That’s not a choice, that’s an oligarchy. I’m sickened to think that my vote counts the same as somebody who will undoubtedly fall for whatever marketing strategy both kingdoms decide to employ. Whether it’s the folks who will vote for Hillary because she’s a woman or because they really like her husband, I now have to stand in line and watch them try to hand over our country to a socialist with a decidedly anti-American track record. Then of course there will be the gung-ho, rah-rah anti-terror strategy of the GOP. “Vote for Jeb, his brother protected us from terrorists,” they’ll say. Rove I’m sure will also take Gov. Bush’s history of dealing with crisis’ such as the 4 successive hurricanes and now this tsunami and will fashion that into a message that because he can effectively manage relief efforts, he can keep Americans safe. Throw that in with the usual “no-fags” campaign and you got yourself a winner, I reckon.
Royalty and nepotism in America subverts democracy and in my opinion makes us no better than Putin’s Russia. I’ve already held my nose and anointed one prince king because the alternative was so awful, I won’t do it again. Unfortunately I’m only one voter. The lesson in all of this is that the American public needs to start tuning into what going on in their country. They cannot afford to be provincial lambs allowing themselves the fallacy of thinking their elected shepherd’s will keep them safe. This shouldn’t be all that radical for us. We dumped one king over 200 years ago and now we need to revisit that spirit of 1976.
Whether it’s Hillary or Bush III, we’re doomed if remain blissfully ignorant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)