Sharpening our wits on the grindstone of Life

2011-12-24T20:11:00.026-06:00

First, let me thank my family for the present of this computer, without which this post wouldn't have been possible (or at least probable).

Secondly,I'd like to wish my Christian friends a Merry Christmas. I'd also like to wish my other friends a Happy Channukah, Saturnium, and Ramadan.

On to the Faux outrage o' the day. Apparently the President sent out a Christmas Card that did not include a Christmas Tree. Instead it featured his dog reclining in front of the fireplace.

Of course, this proves that our President is a Secret Muslim.

As Sarah Palin puts it, ""It's odd," Palin said, wondering why the president's Christmas card highlights his dog instead of traditions like "family, faith and freedom."

Just for historical perspective, let's explore what past presidents have issued on this austere occasion.

Greeting cards didn't really come into play until the 19th century, but our first president, George Washington, spelled out in his contract of 1787 with a new gardener the amount of time for Christmas celebrations:

"In Consideration of these things being well and truly performed on the part of the sd. Philip Bater [or Bates], the said George Washington doth agree to allow him…four Dollars at Christmas, with which he may be drunk 4 days and 4 nights; two Dollars at Easter to effect the same purpose; two Dollars also at Whitsontide, to be drunk two days…"

Not exactly "family, faith and freedom", eh, Sarah?

Fast forward to our 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, who commissioned this 1863 depiction of Stuntz Toy Shop located at 1207 New York Avenue in Washington, D.C. as his Christmas greeting for that year:

Nary a reference to "family, faith and freedom." Obviously also a Secret Muslim.

Moving into the more modern era, here is Ronald Reagan's card in 1983:

Or George W. Bush's 2005 Christmas card, also featuring the First Dogs, incidently:

In honor of "family, faith, and freedom", I offer this simple Christmas wish. In the words of our current president's Christmas message:

"From our family to yours, may your holidays shine with the light of the season."

The Politics of Fear: 2nd Amendment Edition

2011-02-25T13:03:00.016-06:00

According to Tea Party fave Senator Rand Paul, President Obama just banned a million American rifles. Although I couldn't find anything in recent news regarding this issue, I did find references to it dating back to September 2010, raising my suspicion that there might be some twisting of the facts here (such as "just" meaning "within the past year") to support an ulterior motive. And I was right.

Senator Paul's call to sign a petition (and of course make a donation) is a bit lengthy, so I'll just touch on a few of the twisted, or completely fabricated, "facts".

First of all, it's not a ban. The rifles in question are the M-1 Garand and the M-1 Carbine rifles loaned to South Korea in the 1960s after we pulled out of the Korean War as part of our Military Assistance Program (MAP) due to increased aggression and infiltration by North Korea. The U.S. State Department blocked the sale of the weapons by South Korea last year, as it has for the past five years, because the weapons do not belong to South Korea. They belong to us. By rights, the weapons should be returned to the U.S. Army, and then sent on to the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP) for inspection, grading, and eventual sale to collectors and American shooting clubs.

From the fourth line in Paul's appeal: "In a move unprecedented in American history, the Obama Administration secretly banned the re-importation of nearly one million American made M1 Garand and Carbine rifles." Besides not being "unprecedented" (The Clinton administration blocked sales of M1s and other antiquated military weapons from the Philippines, Turkey, and Pakistan.), the so-called "ban" was not done in secret; Fox News reported on it in September 2010.

Senator Paul refers to President Obama’s "deep seated hatred for gun rights", although reality seems to indicate otherwise. In 2009, President Obama signed two bills that allowed concealed weapons in national parks and permitted passengers with guns on Amtrak trains, and I have yet to see reports of any anti-gun legislation that he has either signed or vowed to sign. Last year the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence graded Obama an "F" on gun control.

HR 2159, which Senator Paul refers to as The Disarming American Citizens Act (as opposed to the actual title of Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act) was a non-starter and never made it out of committee, yet Paul wants you to fear it (and send money).

"In fact, on top of banning American citizens from owning these historic firearms, Obama’s State Department is arranging for the destruction of nearly one million of them -- ironically, at a time of ballooning federal deficits."

First, no one is banned from owning these historic firearms. You can buy an authentic, historical M-1 today at the Civilian Marksmanship Program, which is where the weapons in question would end up if they were imported. Second, there are no indications that the U.S. plans to destroy them, and third, is a time of "ballooning federal deficits" the time to spend our tax dollars to inventory, catalog, grade, and ship these weapons from South Korea just to sit in a warehouse waiting to be sold? Most of the people who are screaming loudest wouldn't be either willing or able to shell out $850 - $1,000 for an historic collectible.

Don't get me wrong. The M-1 is a beautiful weapon. The U.S. Marine Corps Silent Drill Platoon uses them in their precision exhibition drills, as does the U.S. Air Force Academy Cadet Honor Guard. I wouldn't mind owning one myself, although I couldn't justify shelling out up to $1,000 for one (personal responsibility, living within my budget, and all that).

My point is that Senator Paul is creating a tempest in a teapot in order to stir up fear among his base and persuade them to send money to an organization whose purpose is to stir up more fear.

I realize Senator Paul is new at his job, but that's all the more reason he should focus on the job he was elected for - creating jobs and fixing the economy - and lay off the fearmongering, at least until he starts running for re-election.

A Flip-Flopping Politician? Who'da thunk it?

2011-01-08T17:22:00.008-06:00

The latest fabricated outrage has Fox News up in arms over the appropriateness (or lack thereof) of the President of the United States being seen in public wearing rubber footwear.

In response, I have but this to offer:

I guess the difference is, the former president's footwear is accessorized with official presidential socks, so that makes it okay.
I'm just glad Fox didn't call them thongs, because I suspect if I did an image search for "presidential thongs", I probably wouldn't want to to see the results.

The War on the War on Christmas

2010-12-10T22:41:00.004-06:00

It's that time of year again. Time for snow to fall, LED mini-light nets to go up on houses, and neo-conservatives to begin caroling about how the lefties, communists, socialists, gays, and Jews are trying to take the Christ out of Christmas. The first salvos have been fired, naturally by Fox News. Apparently, a school in Florida has outlawed red and green in their Christmas decorations .

Never mind that it's a story based on one parent's opinion, and that Fox didn't solicit the school's input. Because we all know that the school is a madrassa beholden to a politically correct liberal leftist agenda. Needless to say, the story was foundless, and Fox News has since printed a retraction.

Fox News notwithstanding, I can only assume that the hungry have been fed, the sick have been healed, and the homeless have been sheltered, since churches are crusading about how they're greeted at places of business. Take the case of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas, who have posted on the web their annual Naughty and Nice list.

Now, a naughty and nice list is okay, as far as it goes. if a business chooses to be inclusive by trying to appeal to other than Christians-only, then you have a right to not give them your consumer dollars. But when a church bases their naughty/nice list solely on submissions from the internet, it opens the way for abuse.

The FBC in Dallas basically gives businesses a red (naughty) or green (nice) background to comments it receives. What's to stop a dissatisfied customer from adding a business to the naughty list because an associate didn't "look right" to him or her? Or from those Dogless Libruls from lying about whether someone who could have been on the nice list by claiming they, horror of horrors, wished them a Happy Holidays instead of a Merry Christmas?

What I find amusing is that, even though over 75% of Americans associate themselves with the Christian failth, so many followers of that faith see themselves as a victimized minority. My opinion is that if you're strong enough in your faith, you shouldn't have a problem with businesses including non-Christians in their holiday greetings.

Of course, everyone knows that nothing on the internet can be taken at face value, and this is apparent in the statement by the American Family Association, which states that Staples issued a press release saying ""We use the term Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas. We do this because it does not offend any other religions and to remain politically correct." However, a simple Google search shows that Staples sells plenty of goods labeled clearly as Christmas items. Sure, they also sell holiday cards, but their largest customer base is businesses, and businesses tend to send generic holiday cards so as not to offend their non-Christian customers.

It all boils down to this: businesses tend to cater to the general public, not specific consumers. If your feelings are hurt because someone who wants to sell you something wants to sell to others besides you, then you should take your business elsewhere.

It doesn't mean that they are trying to bring down your way of life, or that they are attacking your beliefs, or that they are trying to impede your right to free speech. It just means that they want to appeal to a larger segment of the buying public. Your rights have not been violated, and you have the right to shop elsewhere. Please do so, just don't whine about how "political correctness" is infringing on your right to worship as you wish.

If you really want to put Christ back in Christmas, you need to throw out all the lights, trees, decorations, Santa Claus, Rudolph, and Frosty, and get back to the real "reason for the season". Never mind that the actual "season" would have been in the spring or early summer, rather than during the winter soltice. Just keep in mind that all of the trappings that are associated with Christmas are based upon pagan rituals, and if you really want to get back to the roots of the celebration, abandon all the trappings of the holiday and follow Jesus' teachings on feeding the hungry, healing the sick, etc. rather than how your feelings are being hurt by the marketplace by hawking their wares to anyone other than you.

The pilgrims didn't celebrate Christmas because they considered it a hedonistic holiday. The Founding Fathers didn't celebrate Christmas, other than to perhaps participate in the drunken debaucherie.

It wasn't until 1870 that Christmas was actually recognized as a holiday in the United States. In the 1850s the American media portrayed Christmas as a personal family tradition, and this is the image that I suspect most anti-Happy Holidaysers want to idealize as Christmas. However, in the early 20th century the media changed tactics and commercialized it into what it is today - an opportunity to sell product to the masses that they don't really need and/or can't afford. And that is the Christmas that pastor Jeffress and his ilk are trying to preserve by pressuring businesses to cater to their ideology and no one elses.

As far as political correctness goes, ABC didn't think Charles Shultz's A Charlie Brown Christmas would go over well because it quoted Scripture on the real meaning of Christmas back in 1965, yet that cartoon continues to air every year, including this year. So much for the PC main stream media - today's argument didn't hold water 45 years ago, and it still doesn't make sense today.

So, Happy Christmas, Feliz Navidad, Joyeux Noel, and Mele Kalikimaka to all, and to all a Gute Nacht.

2010-12-05T22:19:00.005-06:00

Geography lesson for the day:

Today is the Day

2008-11-04T07:04:00.004-06:00

I’ve been blogging here since about a year into Bush’s first term. During the run up to the invasion of Iraq, I began to see a dangerous trend in the direction our country was heading, and became increasingly political. I lobbied for change in the 2004 election season, and was appalled that Bush had been elected for a second term, thinking, “How could so many people be so stupid?’

Since then, our country has gone downhill. Our economy is in shambles, we are stuck in a war we had no business being in in the first place, and our constitutional rights have been trampled in the name of “national security”. Basically, we are reaping the consequences of handing our government to crooks, cronies, and power-hungry theocrats.

Today, that changes. The American people have finally woken up and realized that we cannot continue down that path and survive. No more giving preferential treatment to large corporations that send jobs overseas. No more ostracizing anyone who has a dissenting view of what the government should and should not do. No more waiting for opportunities to “trickle down” from those have no intention of, or interest in, sharing those opportunities.

It’s a new day, America. Let’s get it right this time. Our children depend on it.

Schadenfreude

2008-10-24T16:58:00.007-06:00

[shahd-n-froi-duh] – noun: satisfaction or pleasure felt at someone else's misfortune.

Origin: 1890–95; G, equiv. to Schaden = harm + Freude = joy
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

I'm not one given to pleasure at others' misfortune, but I've been waiting for this day for a long, long time. After 8 years of arrogance and showboating from this C student, George W. Bush cast his absentee ballot in the presidential election uncerimoniously from his desk today.

As you may recall, he cast his ballots amidst great fanfare in the last two presidential elections. This time: No bluster, no smirking, just quietly and humbly filling out his absentee ballot at his desk and putting it in the mail.

I will proudly cast my ballot at my local polling station, in constrast to this broken shell of a president, and I will enjoy it immensely. And chances are, I will actually cast my vote for the winning candidate this time.

Outside the campaign

2008-10-20T19:24:00.004-06:00

To get away from the usual rhetoric, I would like to introduce to you the candidates, unadulterated and in their purest forms, from the Alfred E. Smith dinner, in which the honorees are encouraged to comment on themselves, their campaigns, and each other in a most irreverent manner.

Indeed, the occasion has evolved into something of an opportunity for speakers - particularly ones whose mien is typically quite serious - to show, through quips and slightly irreverent humor, that they can poke fun at a political issue, an opponent, or themselves.

Without further ado, I present to you Senator John McCain.

And then, Senator Barack Obama.

S & H on SNL

2008-09-19T05:41:00.001-06:00

For those of you who missed Saturday Night Live last weekend, here’s a very funny faux announcement from “Sarah Palin” and “Hillary Clinton”. Just the thing to break the post-hurricane blues.

And just for giggles, here is Sarah’s baby name generator. What would Sarah have named you if you had been born into the Palin family? Sorry, Track, Trig, Bristol, Willow, and Piper have already been taken.

The question begs to be asked

2008-09-11T05:39:00.005-06:00

Listing a host of issues on which he said McCain has the same position as President Bush, Obama said, "That's not change."

"That's just calling something that's the same thing something different," Obama continued. "You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper and call it change. It's still going to stink, after eight years.

"We've had enough of the same old thing."

Houston Chronicle

The question is, if Obama was referring to Palin as the pig, who was he referring to when he talked about the stinky old fish?

Who is the real elitist?

2008-08-24T18:15:00.000-06:00

Obama was born poor, and used what opportunities he had to obtain a top-level education. He then used that education to help the poor in Chicago before he went into local politics.

McCain was born to wealthy parents. His father and grandfather were admirals in the Navy, so that’s where he went. He graduated near the bottom of his class, but was still made a pilot anyway. He crashed his planes repeatedly, and after one of his crashes was captured by the enemy and made a prisoner of war. I am not discounting his time spent as a POW – anyone who serves his country honorably has my utmost respect – but after he returned from that captivity, he dumped his wife for a younger, richer woman and became very wealthy indeed.

When asked, McCain was unsure how many houses he owned. Obama owns one house with his wife.

Obama was born in, and vacations in, Hawaii. McCain met and had an affair with his current wife in Hawaii.

Obama is marries to his first wife, and has two children. McCain divorced his first wife after she got fat and disabled and married a younger rich heiress to a company that pulls in more than $300 million per year. They have various children from both marriages, the most prominent one, Meghan, who is unemployed and blogs for her father’s cause.

Cindy MCain, John’s current wife, tells us that a private jet is the only way to get around Arizona, John’s home state.

I could go on, but just which of these families seems closer to what average Americans are familiar with, and which family seems more elite?

We're never leaving Iraq

2008-07-01T17:34:00.000-06:00

It appears that the Bush administration wants to keep our troops in Iraq forever. Even the Iraqis want us out, but our side is insisting that we have a permanent presence there, along with immunity for our troops and contractors from any criminal acts they may commit. I'm not saying that our beloved troops would commit any crimes against the Iraqi people, but I wouldn't necessarily rule it out for the private mercenaries we have working there.

"The Americans are making demands that would lead to the colonization of Iraq," said Sami al-Askari, a senior Shiite politician on parliament's foreign relations committee who is close to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. "If we can't reach a fair agreement, many people think we should say, 'Goodbye, U.S. troops. We don't need you here anymore.'"

It's time to get our troops out of combat there, and the Bush administration seems to be hell bent on preventing that from happening in order to justify their endless war against a country that we had no business being in in the first place.

Everyone is more Muslim than Obama

2008-06-27T19:12:00.000-06:00

By now, everyone is aware of the highly publicized, racially charged statements from Barack Obama’s Christian pastor, Jeremy Wright. In spite of that, and defying all logic, one in ten Americans still believe that Obama subscribes to the Muslim faith. Among the “proof” of this Muslim affiliation is the picture of Obama taken during his visit to Africa during his 2006 visit.

What I find interesting is that, while Obama made a typically respectful gesture to a people while visiting their culture, this image has been used as proof of his allegiance to a particular faith other than his own. With all due respect to people of Islamic faith, pictures of him garbed in their ceremonial garments are hardly proof of his allegiance to their beliefs.

I ran across a website that shows how other public figures have likewise shown understanding of other cultures, including Islam, and have adorned themselves with the trappings of those cultures.

Join me for a tour of cultural tourists who have “proved” that they are Muslims by adorning themselves in the garb of the cultures they have visited.

First, let’s look at Meghan McCain, John McCain’s daughter. She has accompanied her father on the campaign trial and is blogging her adventures. Here she is with her Mom in a relaxed moment with pillows, but she's sporting a disturbing kaffiyeh, which is a garment that Rachel Ray caught a steaming pile of criticism for wearing in a Starbucks ad as a terrorist-sponsoring symbol.

Then there is the current president, mixing it up with the current head of Saudi Arabia. Since the majority of the 9/11 conspirators were Saudis, we can be assure that this “patriotic” administration would have nothing to do with them, the fact that Georgie would clown around with this guy with a sword is clearly evidence that we embrace the Muslim way of life.

And then there’s the infamous fist bump with Michelle – obviously a tip of the hat to Hamas in Palestine. Unfortunately, dubya’s daddy did the same thing to a notorious communist, Anna Kournikova.

There are many other examples, but you get the idea. Just because Obama dressed in local garb while visiting a friendly nation does not mean he subscribes to their beliefs.

If you still believe this infers a connection to terrorist organizations, I leave you with this disturbing possibility; your house pet sympathizes with our enemies:

Now you can be afraid…

In Memoriam

2008-05-25T14:34:00.006-06:00

On this Memorial Day, I would like to offer specific condolences and gratitude to the families, friends, and Battalion mates of four Marines who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country on May 2, 2008.

These men were members of Combat Logistics Battalion 1, Combat Logistics Regiiment 1, 1st Marine Logistics Group, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, based out of Camp Pendleton, California.

With my utmost respect and gratitude, I honor the following men:

Lance Corporal Casey L. Casanova, age 22,
McComb, Mississippi

Corporal Miguel A. Guzman, age 21,
Norwalk, California
Lance Corporal James F. Kimple, age 21,
Carroll, Ohio

Sergeant Glen E. Martinez,
age 31,
Boulder, Colorado

Words cannot express how sorry I am that their loved ones have to suffer their loss. I know how painful it can be, and can only hope and pray that they recover from this loss. I also hope and pray that our international issues can be resolved without any further loss of life.

Casey, Miguel, James, and Glen – thank you for your service. I know the men and women in your Battalion honor your memory. As will I, for as long as I live.

Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day.
Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words-
Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester-
Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.
- William Shakespeare (1599)

How Dumb Do They Think We Are?

2008-04-25T13:32:00.000-06:00

Senators McCain and Clinton are proposing a gas tax holiday this summer. On the surface, it sounds like a great idea. Suspend the 18.4 cents per gallon to make the summer travel season a little more palatable to the average Americans who like to vacation during the summer but don’t like the humongous bill when they fill up the tank. Look into the mechanics of these proposals and they make less sense. These proposals are prime examples of the type of pandering to the uninformed that the Bush administration is famous for. In essence, paint a rosy picture of legislation that will not really help the average American. On the contrary, legislation of this type will eventually hurt consumers.

I’m sure that, by taking this position, I will be labeled a “tax and spend” liberal. If so, so be it. Because the money this tax provides does not buy “welfare cadillacs”, or supply emergency healthcare to illegal immigrants. It goes directly into the funds that build and maintain the roads and bridges that Americans rely on to take their vacations and get to work and home each day. By suspending this tax, economists estimate we will lose $6.8 billion in funds designed to repair and improve our highways and bridges.

McCain suggests we transfer money from the General Fund into the Highway Trust Fund to make up the shortfall. Clinton proposes that we levy a windfall tax on the oil companies to make up the difference. Taking money from the General Fund will result in less funding for other programs, and an oil company windfall tax will backfire on consumers. Face it, if we try to slap an extra tax on oil companies for their record profits, they’ll just pass this cost along to consumers. This will have the effect of raising gas prices before the suspension lapses. When the tax returns, the price of gas will go up even more, leaving us worse off than we were before the holiday.

The only presidential candidate that appears to be leveling with us is Barack Obama, who basically says that the gas tax holiday is a bad idea. Economists agree with him, to which Clinton retorts, “I’m not going to put my lot in with economists”. Her response is highly reminiscent of the Bush administration – never mind what the experts say, I know better.

Clinton’s blatant dismissal of expert opinion, along with McCain’s admitted lack of understanding of economic principles, lead me to believe that Obama is the only presidential candidate with our best interest in mind, and stands by his position regardless of any immediate political gain.

I say we pass on this gas tax holiday, and focus instead on legislature that will reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and promote alternate sources of energy. It may be more painful today, but in the long will lead to a stronger America that is less reliant on other countries, some of who may not like us very much.

Wyld Card's Coveted Presidential Endorsement

2008-03-04T21:07:00.029-06:00

And now for the endorsement you've all been waiting for:

Wyld Card officially endorses Barack Obama as the Democratic presidential candidate.

Why Obama? As Kinky Friedman's campaign asked back in 2006, why not?

First of all, Obama can make the clutch shot in the paint.

Hillary, not so much.Also, Obama looks good in a hat.
Hillary does not.
But the deciding issue is as important to this author as it is to many other Americans.

Obama likes him some spicy food.

Hillary, please...

Obama/Clinton: the Silly Debate

2008-02-28T19:16:00.005-06:00

Okay, this is my first foray into imbedding video in this blog. I'm a firm believer in the hit-and-miss html philosophy, so this should be an interesting experiment in the newfangled technology that's beyond this humble blogger's expertise.

Fortunately, the subject matter is lighthearted. Please focus your attention on the two Democratic presidential candidates in a photoshopped debate that has no desired outcome other than which looks sillier with giant clown glasses added for effect.

You've seen them, now decide.

No Civil Liberties Left Behind

2008-02-28T18:55:00.003-06:00

Nancy Pelosi, using her rarely used cojones, finally said “no” to the Bush administration by refusing to allow amnesty to telecom companies for participating in his illegal “spying on America for the good of national security” program. Way to go, Nancy!

Harry Reid, spineless wimp that he is, failed to stand up to Cheney & Company, leaving it up to No Nonsense Nancy to block this piece of fecal matter of legislation that would indemnify Bush’s corporate buddies in any wrongdoing in his relentless war on the rights of American citizens.

This particular American patriot is not against collecting intelligence information, but to grant immunity to anyone who is willing to stomp all over our civil liberties at the request of a renegade administration, particularly corporate entities who contribute generously to the coffers of this administration, is just asking them to stretch the boundaries of ethics in order to gain favor in federal contracts.

Keep in mind that this is the administration that gave no-bid contracts to Halliburton for support services in the Iraq war, and convinced their base that no one else has the resources to provide the services on such a large scale. It also spearheaded the No Child Left Behind program that enriched Bush’s brother Neil and his educational software company under the guise of improving education.

Nancy’s “no” was temporary, however, and merely put off a vote on the permanence of the Protect America Act until August.

Any American that values civil liberty over the ability of the federal government to intrude on individual privacy with no provocation needs to contact his or her congressional representatives and tell them that under no circumstances will we tolerate this intrusion into our private lives.

Do that here. Do it now.

The time has long past when true Americans will idly stand by as their government tramples on their rights in the name of so-called “national security”. It's time to restore our integrity, and reinstate our legacy of "We the people, for the people, and by the people".

Let the games begin!

2008-02-01T19:20:00.000-06:00

The race to the white house is heating up, and the candidates are pulling out all the stops in their attempts to portray themselves as the only candidate that can get you what you want in this knock-down, drag-out slugfest known as the 2008 presidential election.

On the Democratic side, Barack Obama is the media darling, despite his questionable connections with a known Chicago low-life. But hey, what are the chances of being involved in Illinois politics without at least one bottom-feeder tarnishing your image, eh?

Hillary Clinton is his primary opponent, and she is taking advantage of every available option, including Barack’s bad press and her “crying game”, for her personal gain. She’s the consummate politician, just like her hubby, so we don’t know where she really stands at this point.

Yours truly is waiting for their votes on whether or not to include immunity for telecom companies in the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act (FISA) legislation to decide which candidate to support. We all know how Hillary voted to support the war and that Barry took a pass, but now it’s time to put up or shut up, and I want to see how they do.

On the Republican side, John McCain is the media darling, despite the fact that he’s far less conservative than the base. He is way far left on the immigration issue, against torture, and not exactly the fundamentalist’s vision of the next coming of the Messiah. Personally, I respected McCain up until he approved Bush's appointment of Alberto Gonzalez's appointment as Attorney General, even though at the time Gonzalez approved torture as an effective form of information gathering. Since then, the Bush administration has admitted that information achieved through torture is less than accurate.

Mitt Romney is a Mormon, and even though that’s not supposed to matter, you know it does. But he’s a businessman and well versed in the practice of laying off people, so you know he gets a pass from neo-cons who favor outsourcing labor to countries that don’t have the stringent safety and labor laws that we have here.

And then there’s Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul. Huckabee has a following among the born-again crowd, and Chuck Norris, but that’s about it. Ron Paul has a massive following, mostly among the disillusioned who want the government out of your life unless you’re female or gay.

So let the games begin. We’re going to see major mudslinging – first between Hillary and Barry and McCain and Romney, and then between the Republican and Democratic candidates – and then we’ll have the grand standoff in November. We’re in for a major Battle of the Brands.

Regardless, anything result November will be an improvement over what we have right now. Viva la Revolution!

The Battle of Lysistrata

2008-01-23T13:51:00.001-06:00

I’ve been a political junkie as long as I can remember, and one of the first websites I discovered on the internet that fed my political addiction was Wonkette. When I started my blog many moons ago, it was one of the first links in my sidebar. It’s still one of my regular click-through sites when I can find time to just browse.

Wonkette has been through many changes, growing from a one-woman show into an integral part of the Gawker universe. Editors and writers have come and gone, and come back again. But never before has Wonkette experienced a reader/commenter mutiny like they did this week.

The drama began with the rehiring on Ken Layne as the editor-in-chief. Ken was the “West Coast Bureau Chief” when I started reading the site, and then he left, I presume to go freelance. Upon his return, he promptly fired one of the readers’ favorite writer, along with an intern and staff photographer, apparently because they didn’t “fit” with Layne’s vision of the site’s future. The writer, Megan Carpentier, had a huge following, and her loyal minions promptly organized a boycott of the site.

Wonkette commenters, or “Wonketteers”, are an eclectic bunch. There are gays and straights, college students and professors, patriots and expatriates, liberals and conservatives. The one thing they all have in common is the ability to see the ridiculousness of the political mindset in our nation’s capital and beyond.

And now they’re irate. Megan Carpentier is a smart, funny, and knowledgeable writer. She has worked as a lobbyist on Capital Hill, and used her inside knowledge to explain the sausage-and-lawmaking process in a witty and sarcastic, yet understandable, manner. She also was not afraid to offend sensibilities. Apparently, these are the traits that don't fit into the Gawker mold. By canning her, however, Wonkette has driven its more intelligent constituents away from the site.

The Wonketteers are currently congregating at a blogspot site called Homofascist’s Army (homofascist was a fixture commenter on Wonkette, and became the defacto leader of the insurrection). Meanwhile, Wonkette’s page hits have dropped by a third, and its comment boards have dropped in participation by half.

I for one will be visiting HF’s site to get my fix of witty political repartee, and encourage everyone else to do the same. Eventually, the Wonketteers will either migrate back to Wonkette or find a new site. In the meantime, HFA will be the place to be. See you there!

Update: Megan, along with several ex-Wonk commenters have migrated over to The Cynics' Party. It's a little more highbrow, a little less silly, and very entertaining. Check it out!

Don't Go Away Mad, Just Go Away

2008-01-22T19:20:00.000-06:00

So Fred Thompson is out of the race for the White House. Once lauded as the next Ronald Reagan, Fred led a sluggish campaign that tried to snare the neo-conservative wing of the Republican Party - to little effect.

You may recognize the Fredneck from the Law and Order teevee show, but if you’re not from Tennessee, you may not realize that Fred has been bouncing around the political scene for decades. He was involved in the investigation leading to the impeachment of Bill Clinton. After serving in the Senate, he became a Washington lobbyist, and eventually landed back on television.

So anyway, Fred thought he could land in the White House by wearing cowboy boots and campaigning in a red pickup truck, but apparently that’s been done, so he’ll go back to being an obscure actor.

Goodbye and good riddance, Fred. You were good for some laughs during the debates, so we’ll try remember you as a footnote in the 2008 presidential elections.

So who's next?

Happy Chrismahanukwanzica to you!

2007-12-25T21:30:00.000-06:00

Peace on Earth!

Happy Thanksgiving!

2007-11-22T21:08:00.000-06:00

Another Bush pardon recipient showing his appreciation.

Trick or Treat!

2007-10-31T23:59:00.000-06:00

Happy Halloween!

Here, There Be Pirates!

2007-09-19T00:55:00.000-06:00

Talk Like a Pirate Day be upon us, and the unwashed among who be celebratin’ will be garnishing our vernacular with many a colorful expression.

But as we celebrate the lifestyle of the quasi-heroes of yore, it be good to reflect on the qualities we see in ourselves, and those qualities we imagine we could achieve.

So, to kick things off, I extend a hat tip to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, whose patron saint, the jolly fish, holds sway over these here festivities.

As history tells us, piratin’s nothin’ new in these hereabouts. From Jean Laffite to John Singer to Henry Morgan, the Texas gulf coast be rich in pirate history.

And it hasn’t let up much, either. If yer thinkin’ that piratin’s a thing of the past, then I got some news for ye, mate. Here there be pirates, whether ye see them or not.

Take f’rinstance Ken Lay. Here be a pirate t’make ye proud. He set sail with the crew of the Crooked E and pillaged and plundered more than any man since. Aye, he was a piece of work, he was. Rumor has it he faked his own death, and is wallowing in coins to this day, awaiting his partner, the Commodore-in-Chief, to disappear into the South American wilderness, no one the wiser.

But this is all speculation, mind you, of an idle mind too long at sea.

Another great pirate of the day be Karl “Turdblossom” Rove. This scallywag convinced the colonial government that plunderin’ be sound economic policy, resulting in unprecedented bounty reaped by the predominant merchants of the day. Legend has it that his partner in crime, Dick “the Dick” Cheney, helped him negotiate these commercial treaties, and helped settled the Paraguayan wilderness where the brigands would spend their waning years, sipping rum and basking in the glory days of conquest.

Today, piracy be alive, well, and thriving. So why not join us in a celebration of the cultural magnificence that be piracy? This be the day we get to pretend that we have no conscience.

And then, come November 2008, vote against those who don’t pretend. Granted, none of the examples given are elected officials, but they're the power behind the thrones. Let those in the thrones know that there be no place in America for pillaging and plundering, because for everyone who benefits, there be thousands who suffer.

Piratin’ be fun to pretend, but keep this in mind: Pirates hate civil service – unless there’s something in it for them.

In the meantime...

Arrr!

Six Years After

2007-09-11T21:37:00.000-06:00

Today is the sixth anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, so allow me to reflect on just how our lives have changed since that tragic day.

Let’s see, I believe Osama bin Laden was the architect of the attacks, and our president vowed to chase him to the ends of the earth to bring him to justice. How’s that coming along? Not so well, eh?

Instead, we invaded Iraq, which basically had nothing whatsoever to do with the attacks. So how’s that part of the plan going? Well, let see, our president proclaimed “Mission Accomplished” four years ago, yet we’re still there.

May 2003

On Thursday, I visited the USS Abraham Lincoln, now headed home after the longest carrier deployment in recent history. I delivered good news to the men and women who fought in the cause of freedom: their mission is complete and major combat operations in Iraq have ended.

Back in January of this year, when most of the country was pressing the administration to withdraw troops from Iraq, “The Decider” announced he would send even more troops into the meat grinder, calling it a “surge”, as if it were a wave that would wash over the opposition and then recede away from the shores of battle. Nine months later (yesterday) General Petraeus, head soldier over the whole shootin’ match, announced that this “surge” was working, contrary to reports from the Government Accountability Office, a recently declassified portion of the National Intelligence Estimate, and a report to Congress made by Marine Corps General James Jones.

Petraeus claims that violent incidents are down even though, statistically, this summer had been deemed the deadliest summer of the war so far for American soldiers serving in Iraq. He says we shouldn’t draw back from the escalation troop strength until at least next summer (coincidently just before the 2008 elections).

So here we are six years after Al-Qaeda attacked our country, and we’re still fighting Al-Qaeda in a country it wasn’t active in before we invaded. Everyone not associated with the White House believes we’re no safer now than we were on September 10, 2001. There are prominent Americans who blame all Muslims for the attacks and want to bomb their holy lands, and our fearless leaders are planning to invade Iran next even though our military is already stretched to the breaking point.

The Patriot Act has stripped American citizens of many of their civil rights. Torture is an accepted method of intelligence gathering, and citizens can be held indefinitely without charges. And through it all, the Bush administration assures us that all is well and that we’re on the right course of action.

I grieve for those lost on September 11, 2001, and hold them in the utmost regard. However, I cannot support the path we are on now, and neither should anyone who can think without being clouded by emotion from events that happened six years ago. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, did not have the weapons of mass destruction that were promoted as the reason for our invasion, and was not strife with inter-denominational violence as it is now.

It’s time for this war to end. Before any more Americans die. A war that was begun on pretenses can not be allowed to continue on further pretenses. The results of the 2006 election show that the voting public does not support this war. And if the new crop of leaders won’t bring an end to the madness, then we’ll vote them out also.

It’s time, people. Let’s do it right for a change, and make America great again.

Don't Let the Door Hit Ya

2007-08-30T17:00:00.000-06:00

Where the Good Lord Split Ya...

This week we say goodbye to two more rats who are abandoning the U.S.S. Dubya as it slowly sinks toward Davey Jones’ locker. Both of these bozos have been with Bush since his days as governor of Texas, and both have used their arrogance and positions in power to strip the rights and liberties of American citizens. Now that dubya’s chief of staff, Josh Bolton, has announced that anyone who stays with this administration after Labor Day will have to see it through to the end, these may not even be the last two to bail out.

Congress has been trying to get Alberto Gonzales to resign for the past several months. He has stonewalled them during the congressional hearings on the firing of U.S. Attorneys, saying “I don’t recall” more often than he answered any questions. One intrepid attendee at the hearings made quite a splash by counting and displaying the times he uttered the phrase – and this was just on the first day of the hearings.

Gonzales, also known by Bush’s nickname for him, Fredo, is most noted for his support of using torture to extract information from those the administration has deemed possible terrorist sympathizers.

The other partner in crime who’s jumping ship is Karl Rove, orchestrator of all of dubya’s escapades including the run for governor of Texas and two terms as president of these United States. No small feat, that, considering Bush is a complete idiot.

Rove was responsible for the trashing of Vietnam war veteran and former POW John McCain and managed to paint Bush as more of a patriot by avoiding combat in the National Guard. Unfortunately, he also predicted a permanent Republican majority, and we all know how well that worked out.

So let’s give these guys a big buh-bye, and look forward to even more desertions in the coming months.

Happy Independence Day!

2007-07-04T13:11:00.000-06:00

With Liberty and Justice For Some

2007-07-04T12:46:00.000-06:00

On this 231st anniversary of the founding of our nation, the current occupant of the White House demonstrates how much he respects the principles our country was founded upon by thumbing his nose to the American people.

Irve Lewis “Scooter” Libby was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice in the exposure of CIA agent Valerie Plame. Granted, Libby didn’t actually out Plame, but he lied to investigators to protect his boss, Vice President Richard Cheney, and was found guilty by a court of law and sentenced to 30 months in a federal prison, along with a hefty fine.

Speculation was high that the president would pardon Libby before he served any jail time. The president has that right, although typically they wait until the prison term is served, and it’s rarely done by a president for someone in his own administration.

When Libby lost his appeal this last week to remain free while he appealed the sentence, Bush did one better – he commuted his sentence. If the president had actually pardoned Libby, Scooter couldn’t use the 5th Amendment to refuse to testify against his administration. After all, if one is pardoned, one cannot reasonably argue that one’s testimony would be self-incriminatory.

So as a reward for protecting an obviously guilty administration, Libby doesn’t have to go to prison, and only needs to pay a fine, a tab which will undoubtedly be picked up by friends of Dick and George.

So much for liberty and justice for all.

Talking points for those who defend the administration usually lead off with “Clinton pardoned a lot more people than Bush. Besides, he had sex with that… woman”. But that argument doesn’t fly in the face of reason.

Clinton didn’t run his entire platform on integrity and values. Bush rode into office with promises to clean up government. So far we’ve seen how he cleaned up the government. His cronies, regardless of capability, infuse all branches and levels of government. We all witnessed FEMA’s handling of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and the invasion and occupation of Iraq based on lies and cherry-picked intelligence. The administration announces a terror alert any time the administration needs a distraction or when Bush’s approval rating drops. And now, after vowing to bring anyone who was involved in leaking Plame’s identity to justice, its protecting a high-level administrator who was convicted of just that.

Remember this announcement Bush made in September of 2003?

"There's leaks at the executive branch; there's leaks in the legislative branch. There's just too many leaks. And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if that person has violated law, the person will be taken care of."

Now, in an example of the diminished ethics of this administration, we see how the person who has violated law has been “taken care of”.

Liberty and justice for all, indeed.

"My Government"

2007-06-13T20:18:00.000-06:00

Sorry, that's not my quote. I can't claim any responsibility for this government, as none of the people I voted for were elected (I live in a red state, after all). No, this was a quote from our president, when discussing the no-confidence vote that never materialized in Congress.

"And they can try to have their votes of no confidence, but it's not going to determine -- make the determination who serves in my government."

"My government". Kinda goes against the "We the people" thing, but in wartime you gotta grant some additional leeway to the Commander-In-Chief. But this seems a little excessive. He's referring to Alberto Gonzales, the Attorney General who promotes torture and has amnesia about the political firing of various State Attorneys General.

The Decider has proclaimed, despite the lowest approval rating of almost any American president, that he doesn't care what the American people think; he's gonna stick to his guns, no matter how hopeless the cause. Even his own base is turning on him because of immigration issues.

This man (a title dubious at best given his National Guard record) has been irrelevant since 2004. The sooner we realize that, the sooner we can get on with rebuilding this democracy of ours and make this country great again.

Attention Deficit Disorder

2007-06-07T18:37:00.000-06:00

I’ve never written about Paris Hilton before, but this little episode bears mentioning. She was released from county lockup today after only a few days for “medical reasons”. Okay, not officially released, but “reassigned”, but she gets to go home. Same difference in my book.

And what are the “medical reasons”? No one’s talking, but the only medical person to visit her in lockup was her therapist. There are also allusions to “prescription medicine” that couldn’t be appropriately administered by Correction Department personnel. Draw your own conclusions on that one.

The press is talking about her prison memoirs. First of all, she wasn’t in prison, she was in jail, and only for a few days. If this turns into a mini-series, it’s got to be very 24ish.

I just can’t help but thinking if she wasn’t the heir apparent to the Hilton fortune, she would have been a porn actress or a golddigger in search of a rich husband.

Not to be outdone, Nicole Richie is also facing a DUI, and admitted to Letterman that she might go to jail as well. As this is a repeat offense, she faces 90 days to a year in incarceration.

In related celebrity weakness, Lindsay Lohan is on lockdown in rehab, and Richie Sambora checks into rehab today.

It appears that these “reality-based” celebrities have very little grasp on reality.

Update: Paris was carried kicking and sreaming back to jail. There is a just God after all. End of story (hopefully).

Shouldstock site available

2007-06-02T21:19:00.000-06:00

Cindy Sheehan’s “Camp Casey” is up for sale on eBay.

Bidding is scheduled to open Monday or Tuesday, with expected bids upwards of $80,000, for land that would normally sell for a fraction of the cost. Reasons for the over-inflation include: that it is close to Bush’s Crawford pseudo-ranch, and that it is the historic site of Sheehan’s protest movement that was based there.

I think that the land would be excellent for an annual concert event, like Willie’s 4th of July Picnic, or Farm Aid, or something.

If I had an extra 100 grand, I’d get in on the bidding. Then again, if I had an extra 100 grand, I probably wouldn’t be a progressive (i.e. liberal) blogger.

Let’s hope that the person who buys it uses it for some virtuous purpose, like an annual tribute to the freedom from oppression enjoyed by Americans before Bush declared his War on Terra. The way it should be.

Cause I would totally take vacation for Shouldstock 2009.

Words cannot express

2007-05-28T12:41:00.000-06:00

the gratitude we feel toward the brave men and women who have given their lives for the safety of others. Whether they fought and died to defend their country or to stroke the ego of a despot, their ultimate sacrifice is bestowed the highest honor in this household and in this land.

Would that our sons and daughters, and those of our leaders, show the courage and honor that those brave souls have shown for that in which they believed.

May they rest peacefully, knowing they have achieved greatness.

Happy Arbor Day!

2007-04-27T16:58:00.000-06:00

So what's wrong with being a tree hugger?

Sweat the Small Stuff

2007-03-06T22:05:00.000-06:00

Went to the rodeo last night. The musical performance was mediocre at best, so I checked the local paper for a review; you know, see if the critic was spot-on or pandering to some special interest or other.

Lo and behold, there’s a full-blown controversy shouting at me from the entertainment page, and I hadn’t heard a thing about it. Probably because I’m not nine years old or I don’t listen to talk radio. Or both.

The dustup wasn’t about the night I attended, though, which was very enjoyable regardless of the talent of the headliner. It was about the day before, when the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo was overrun with hyperactive preadolescent suburbanites. Throw in some technical difficulties, and there’s an epic event in the making.

For those of you not from Houston, the rodeo is a major annual event. Not only does it give Reliant Stadium a reason for existence in the off-season, it provides scholarships for rural teens, many of whom would not be able to afford college otherwise.

Sunday’s headliner was the Cheetah Girls along with Miley Cyrus as Hannah Montana. Now, as a basic cable subscriber, I know that Hannah Montana has infinitely more brand recognition than the Cheetah Girls and Miley Cyrus combined. Stir into the mix last year’s attendance-record-breaking Hillary Duff concert, last Sunday’s again-record-breaking attendance (what, did they add folding chairs?) and the related record-breaking sellout duration (three minutes). What could possibly go wrong?

I don’t know about you, but at this point I’m picturing hordes of pre-teens rushing the stage to see their role model; material girls obsessed with boys and pink trinkets. Word is, during Hannah Montana’s opening set, the sound crew couldn’t hear Miley over the squealing crowd, so they cranked her up.

Halfway through her set a breaker tripped; the western half of the crowd got the Hannah mini-concert while the eastern half got only its echo. Suddenly, parents are shocked, yes, shocked, that they have to suffer the indignities of paying exorbitant prices for “brokered” tickets, only to have the event treated like any other charity event! It’s an outrage!

Well, the problem was fixed, the Cheetah Girls took the stage without incident, and the day ended happily ever after.

Or did it? Outraged parents took to the phones, and now talk radio is leading the charge for accountability.

Long story short: the percentage of people whining about paying $35 for a cheap t-shirt is about the same percentage as the people whining about not being able to get a $35 t-shirt.

The controversy lies herein: should the HLSR offer refunds? If so, should they petition their vendor (Reliant Stadium) for refund coverage?

My question is this: if someone is financially able and willing to buy “brokered” tickets at $200 apiece to spoil their spawn, what’s the point of getting a $16-$26 refund? Principles?

As for the parking and traffic complaints, one would naturally think that a sold-out concert would cause some congestion in and around the area. Get over it, y’all.

Let’s just hope that the rodeo can weather the storms that this onslaught will bring, and carry on its mission. I gotta get me one of them calves in the calf scramble next year.

We're going to be at war forever

2007-02-17T14:47:00.000-06:00

On Valentine’s Day, the president gave his first news conference since announcing his planned escalation of the war in Iraq. Naturally, there were questions posed about the troop buildup and the rumors of his planned invasion of Iran. As is his wont, he was evasive on the Iran issue. In the wake of conflicting data from the intelligence community as to the culpability of Iranian leadership in weapons supplied to insurgents in Iraq, dubya danced his usual side-step to answer whether or not we will be invading another sovereign nation any time soon: "Does this mean you're trying to have a pretext for war? No. It means I'm trying to protect our troops."

Apparently, protecting our troops includes dispatching another aircraft carrier to the region, even though the insurgents don’t have a navy, and giving the order to execute any Iranians captured inside Iraq.

In addition, the comments of the Joint Chiefs if Staff, who apparently wasn’t briefed on the administration’s talking points, cast some doubt on the culpability of the Iranian government in the conspiracy to provide insurgence with incendiary devices.

"That does not translate that the Iranian government per se, for sure, is directly involved in doing this," Pace said.

Does this remind you of anything? Like maybe 2003 when, in the midst of worldwide support and economic stability, the Bush administration used the same tactic to convince lot of people that Iraq had WMDs and that Saddam Hussein was a threat to world peace, thus embroiling us in war without end, and plunging our national debt into a hole that it will take generations of sacrifice to emerge.

If we make the same mistake of believing these cretins again, we probably deserve the fate that befalls us.

To My Valentine

2007-02-14T06:47:00.000-06:00

I can't fax you my love,
I can't email my heart.
I can't see your face in cyberspace,
I don't know where to start.
I'm light years behind,
from this age they call stone.
I'm just a carbon-based caveman;
just flesh and bone.

If men came from Venus,
and women came from Mars,
then I'd be lunching with my boyfriends,
while you girls talked about cigars.
But that's not how it happened,
evolution took a different turn.
We may be creatures with some unique features,
but we've still got a lot to learn.

Now, we live in this age of computers.
They run everything in the world.
I'm a little behind on this technical climb,
and you are an internet girl.
I've got words but no processor,
I've got feelings but I don't know DOS.
So I just have to go back to basics
to try to get my point across.

I can't fax you my love,
I can't email my heart.
I can't see your face in cyberspace,
I don't know where to start.
I'm light-years behind,
from this age they call stone.
I'm a carbon-based caveman;
just flesh and bone.

Flesh and Bone - Jimmy Buffett

When we become afraid of a cartoon sign, the terrorists have won.

2007-02-09T21:22:00.000-06:00

The city of Boston was shut down last week because of a series of bomb scares.

Apparently, a couple of guys were contracted by the Cartoon Network to place a series of lit signs around town to promote their Adult Swim cartoon, Aqua Teen Hunger Force, and were instructed to place the signs where their target audience, males 18 – 26, would see them. So they placed the signs on bridges and in other visible places, and hilarity ensued.

The first device was found at a subway and bus station underneath Interstate 93, forcing the shutdown of the station and the highway.

Later, police said four calls, all around 1 p.m., reported devices at the Boston University Bridge and the Longfellow Bridge, both of which span the Charles River, at a Boston street corner and at the Tufts-New England Medical Center.

The devices in question look like Lite-Brite sets. They depict a a Mooninite, a character from the cartoon, flying the one-finger salute. But since they also contained wires and a battery, the city of Boston panicked and shut everything down while the bomb squad scrambled.

Never mind that these devices had been in place in Boston and nine other cities for weeks. When Boston officials became aware of the marketing scheme, they vowed to press for punishment to the fullest extent of the law.

Two men were arrested, who didn’t seem to take the situation as seriously as officials would have liked.

Peter Berdovsky, 27, and Sean Stevens, 28, were released on $2,500 cash bond after each pleaded not guilty to placing a hoax device and disorderly conduct for a device found Wednesday at a subway station. They waved and smiled as they greeted people in court.

Outside, they met reporters and television cameras and launched into a nonsensical discussion of hair styles of the 1970s. "What we really want to talk about today — it's kind of important to some people — it's haircuts of the 1970s," Berdovsky said.

While the presence of the silly signs in other cities barely caused a blip on the local public’s radar screen, Boston officials scrambled to save face in the wake of their panicky behavior. They alluded to irresponsible marketing tactics in a post 9/11 world, while even Bostonians called their response “silly and insane”.

Naturally, Cartoon Network’s parent company, Turner Broadcasting, went into damage control mode, apologizing, agreeing to pay their part of $2 million in damages, and even having the head of the Cartoon Network resign.

It’s sad that, in our post-9/11 society, it’s considered unthinkable that someone would display a Lite-Brite sign. Okay, so they had wires, and lights, and batteries. But so does just about every other device advertised shamelessly in our consumer-driven culture. If those had been giant iPods, would there have been the same panic?

Get over it, people. There were just as many dangers in our pre-9/11 world, probably even more. The world has always been a dangerous place, and until 9/11, Americans mistakenly thought they were safe. We can’t let the fear promoted by our current leaders keep us from enjoying our lives, and we can’t give up our freedoms for the false sense of security hyped by these so-called leaders.

When we cower in fear over little things like electronic toys, then the terrorist truly have won.

WWJD: What Would Jeb Do?

2007-01-24T23:23:00.000-06:00

Some Bush administration shill wrote a fantasy piece in the Washington Post postulating what life would be like if Jebediah Bush had won the Florida governorship in 1994. According to S. V. Date, Jeb was the Great White Hope of the Bush clan that would “avenge the Great Usurpation of 1992”, when voters denied George 41 his rightful second term in favor of Bill Clinton. Unfortunately, Jeb lost, while W became governor of Texas, throwing a huge monkey wrench (pun intended) into their nefarious plan.

We all know how it turned out. Dubya went on to the presidency, while Jeb was relegated to making sure Florida was a red state during the presidential elections in 2000 and 2004.

In Mr. Date’s fantasy world, however, Jeb captured Osama bin Laden and won the Iraq war, all in time for his sixth State of the Union address. Date continues the fairy tale in reality, bragging how Jeb helped Florida’s wealthiest citizens, whom he calls “risk takers” and “job creators”, avoid paying their share of taxes, even though during his reign, Florida had its worst job creation statistics since 1971.

In the spirit of this WaPo article, Wonkette takes the fantasy further with an altered State of the Union address:

As a grateful nation tuned in in greater numbers than next month’s Super Bowl, President Jeb, flanked by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Oprah Winfrey, would mention with pride the attendence in that august chamber of Presidents Ford and Reagan, both of whom had cheated death and recovered 100% thanks to Jeb’s forward-thinking health care policies. As a thousand Afghani orphans stood to cheer their hero for replacing their lost limbs with robotic prosthetics, the heroes of 9/11, those superpower-equipped firemen who saved the twin towers from collapsing and flew thousands to safety in Battery Park via their federal government-researched and -supplied rocket packs, would all brush away tears. Tears made of gold, which they harvest and use to repay our national debt.

Meanwhile, back in the real world: in his State of the Union address, dubya asked legislators to give his troop surge idea a chance, proving that he is insane (given the definition of insanity as trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result). The Senate said no.

Bet they wouldn’t have done that to Jeb.

Change is Brewing

2007-01-21T13:55:00.000-06:00

St. Arnold Goes to Austin

As we plunge headlong into the new year, what free time I have is spent pondering what the past year has brought us, what the future holds, the true meaning of existence, and… beer. But not just any beer - craft beers, loving produced by microbreweries.

These thoughts were prompted by a call to action from the Friends of Texas Microbreweries, who are attempting to convince the Texas Legislature that archaic alcohol laws are hurting this particular niche of Texas’ small business community.

Under current law, brewers cannot sell directly to the public. This is fine for the big guys like Bud and Coors whose product is available just about everywhere on the planet, and who have organized their corporate structure to include in-house distribution companies. But it hurts the little guys, who are typically small startups who won’t get premium service from wholesalers and distributors.

The laws that were originally designed to protect the consumer and small businesses from post-prohibition profiteers is now actually hampering small businesses and consumers, and favoring wholesalers, distributors, and megabrewers.

By law, bars and restaurants must buy their liquor from distributors, or wholesale retailers that double as distributors. By ensuring that a middleman is involved, prices are higher, and the distributor decides what he wants to distribute.

In addition, megabrewers have organizational structures that take advantage of this law. For example, Silver Eagle distributes almost exclusively Anheiser-Bush products. If you saw one their trucks on the road, you would assume it was a Budweiser truck, unless you read the logo on the door of the cab. Microbrewers don’t have the capital to skirt the law like this, whereas with the big guns, it’s just another corporate restructuring for the tax lawyers to orchestrate. It should also be noted that the beverage distribution industry has a strong lobbying presence in the state capitol.

So the Friends of Texas Microbrewers, led by my neighborhood microbrewery, St. Arnold, are pounding the Austin pavement and cold-calling our elected leaders to persuade them to change the rules, some of which have been in place since before prohibition in the 30’s, so that the small business portion of this industry is allowed to prosper on their own merits, rather than at the pleasure of the distributors.

This campaign is being joined from all over the political spectrum, from Off the Kuff on the left, to Perry vs. the World on the right, and many points between, which demonstrates that beer truly is the universal language.

On any Saturday, you can visit the St. Arnold Brewery, tour the beer works, and sample its wares. Unfortunately, once you’ve determined which of their twelve specialty beers is your current favorite, you have to go elsewhere to buy it. This is not the case in other states, such as California and Arizona, where microbrewers typically run an associated tavern for socializing and imbibing. Likewise wineries, even in Texas, where once you’ve sampled the wares, you can purchase a bottle to bring home with you.

Out of 19 microbreweries that have emerged in Texas, only five remain. Those that are still around attribute the loss of so many of their peers to the legislative culture they’re forced to work in.

We can no longer ignore the fact that 14 out of 19 microbreweries have failed in Texas in part because current regulations disadvantage microbrewing small businesses," said Saint Arnold founder Brock Wagner. "This common-sense proposal will allow Texas microbrewers to compete with out-of-state microbrewers on a level playing field."

While I’m on a soapbox (or should I say beer keg) about this, there are other portions of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code that could use some tweaking as well. For example, the code only allows beer to be sold in specific sized containers.

A Sunset Commission report cited the impacts of the Texas law that requires that beer be sold in only certain-sized containers. A 12-ounce can is fine; a 345-milliliter can -- common in much of the world -- holds 11.67 ounces, so it is banned by the TABC.

"As a result, [Texas] consumers lack access to a range of products bottled in metric sizes from countries such as Canada, Holland, Belgium, New Zealand and Japan, which can be purchased in almost all other states," the Sunset Commission report said.

So one domestic brewer has to pay $600,000 more to produce a container that conforms to Texas law. And a malt beverage producer estimated additional costs of $200,000 for that, the Sunset report stated.

Why the need for such a law? Because distributors prefer working with standardized containers. Sunset staffers wryly noted that "This does not seem to be a matter of state concern."

It’s time to change these decades-old laws to promote the small business atmosphere that our elected leaders are constantly spouting about. Give our microbrewers a fighting chance, and they will flourish. Or, as I like to say, "if you brew it, they will come".

The Surge in General

2007-01-20T18:29:00.000-06:00

no·blesse o·blige ["naw-bless aw-bleezh"] noun. The moral obligation of those of high birth, powerful social position, etc. French, literally meaning: "Nobility is an obligation."

In his address to the nation last week, the president told us that the way to win in Iraq is to send more troops. For those in the armed forces, this is not good news; those who are currently serving in Iraq have been there way too long already, and there aren’t enough troops not in Iraq to cover the 21,500 additional troops needed to occupy Iraq for the next few years in order for dubya’s plan to succeed.

And I use the term "plan" very loosely, since the strategy proposed is really nothing more than what’s been tried and retried for the past three years - clear, hold, and build. We’ve been pretty good at the "clearing" part, but we’re stuck getting a handle on the holding stage. As soon as we clear an area, we move on to another, and the insurgents just move back in after we’re gone.

According to the report on which Bush is basing his strategy, we’ll need at least 30,000 additional troops, along with extending the tours of those already in Iraq, for at least 18 months in order to clear, hold, and build Baghdad and the western Anbar province. Bush, in his speech, mentioned little about the mission, and neglected to say how long the additional troops would be in Iraq, leading us to believe that they’ll be there indefinitely, regardless of his claim that it would not be an "open-ended" occupation. This is a double-edged sword for Bush, as Sen. John McCain, one of the most vocal supporters of the escalation, says that a short term increase in troops will not have the desired effect - namely, victory.

In addition to the lack of a clearly defined mission, the Bush administration faces a dilemma that could cause his dismal approval ratings to drop even further. According to the AEI Plan for Success in Iraq (on which the "surge" strategy is based), Bush must call for a "national commitment to victory", including a "personal call for young Americans to volunteer to fight in the decisive conflict of this generation". Since dubya rarely makes any personal calls to anyone with income levels that will not benefit his coffers, the report must be talking about enlisting some of these armchair warmongers who have been hyping the war all along. A few prospects come to mind, including Kagan himself, who is of enlistment age, and the next generation in the Bush clan , including his daughters and Jeb’s children - all of enlistment age - yet the entire family is vastly underrepresented in the ranks of the armed forces.

Those who support the war, but feel they can better support the effort by drumming up acceptance stateside, need to re-evaluate their role - we don’t need more people cheering the war on at home, we need them in the trenches. Right wing bloggers, College Republicans, and war supporters of all economic classes need to do more than stick a magnetic ribbon on their car. It’s time to put up or shut up.

This surge, which in reality will be an escalation, is more of a political strategy than a military one. Basically, the Bush administration needs to appear to have resolve. Yeah, yeah, we get it, dub. You can be stubborn, and ignore the counsel of the commanding officers in Iraq, the Iraq Study Group, and Congress, as long as you get in the history books as a war president. Well, guess what? We already have a lot of war presidents in our history books, and almost none of them are remembered with respect or admiration.

The president’s choice of referring to his strategy as a troop surge, rather than an escalation of forces, is important to note.

A CBS poll released Monday found that only 18 percent of Americans support an escalation of forces in Iraq. However, when asked whether they support a "short-term troop increase," the number jumps to 45 percent approval (48 percent disapproval).

Rather than escalating the occupation of Iraq, the Bush administration should be planning for the long term: Increase the effort of training Iraqi troops and police, provide long-term economic benefits for a moderate Iraqi government, and use a diminishing occupation force not to clear and hold, but to train and build. These are basically the recommendations of outgoing military commanders (those who have less to lose by openly disagreeing with the commander-in-chief) and the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan effort led by Bush appointee James Baker.

Now that dubya’s minions no longer have complete control of our government, some Democrats are talking about blocking funding for additional troops. Although Republican
talking points refer to this as lack of support for our soldiers, it should be noted that financial support of our existing troops will not be affected. The money that will be denied will solely be the funding required to send more of America’s finest into the meat grinder that is Iraq.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., charged that what Democrats really want to do is cut off funding for the troops, something Democrats have denied. McConnell threatened to block any legislation expressing disapproval of the buildup plan.

McConnell conceded that GOP lawmakers as well as Democrats are troubled by Bush's new policy, but he said, "Congress is completely incapable of dictating the tactics of the war."

Kettle, meet pot. Congress may be incapable of dictating war tactics, but so is the one who’s calling the shots now. Those who are capable - Generals in the field, and the Iraq study group - are being largely ignored.

As a veteran and the parent of a child currently serving in the military, I say, "enough is enough". Stop sending America’s finest to die for the ego of a "man" who dodged his own obligation to fight in a war that his commander-in-chief deemed necessary for the advance of democracy. When dubya encourages his own children and those of his supporters to enlist and fight in what he deems a necessary war, then I might consider changing my views. But as long as he continues to throw our children at a losing fight, he will do so without my support, and with as much opposition as I can muster.

Support our troops. Bring them home safely so they can protect us from real dangers, not imaginary dangers invented by warmongers to maintain their power and fill the coffers of their cronies.

A dreamer and a fighter

2007-01-15T21:30:00.000-06:00

Houston Chronicle

Last Friday, the Houston Independent School District held the finals for their 11th annual Martin Luther King Jr. Oratory Competition at the Antioch Missionary Baptist Church. In honor of the late Dr. King’s day, I’d like to share with you one young boy’s version of his achieving his dream - not through peaceful protest, but through conflict.

Harvey Pittman II, a 10-year-old boy whose thin frame belied his loud voice, was supposed to be honoring Martin Luther King Jr., the slain civil rights leader known for his nonviolent approach.
Pittman, however, said his own dream was to fight.
"I know, I know," he said Friday, "with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the fight in our neighborhoods, I know you're probably thinking, 'Please, no more fighting.'
"But the fight I'm dreaming about is the fight for a better education, caring parents and honest politicians."
Pittman, a bespectacled fifth-grader, didn't stop there during the 11th annual Martin Luther King Jr. Oratory Competition.
"Parents, are you satisfied with the present condition of the black family?" he asked. "Teachers, are you fighting for your students? Politicians, are you fighting for our rights? Preachers, are you practicing what you preach?"
Pittman's words and delivery - as polished as a politician's - won him first place and a $1,000 savings bond. Ten students from across the Houston Independent School District earned a spot in the contest, which required them to write and give a speech answering the question, "If you could share your dream with Dr. King, what would it be?"

Young Pittman makes a very good point. How can we expect to achieve greatness, if mediocrity among our leaders - in the family, school, church and government - is the acceptable norm?

Here’s hoping he gets his message across enough to make a difference.

2006-12-13T22:07:00.000-06:00

peace on earth

Feliz Navidad
Merry Christmas
Blessed Ramadam
Happy Chanukah
Mele Kalikimaka
Nguzo Saba
Jolly War on Christmas
Festivus for the Rest of Us

A Premonition of the 2008 elections

2006-12-13T20:48:00.000-06:00

Rodriguez celebrates his win

To top off an awesome midterm election, where the electoral public ceremoniously dumped the Republican leadership in favor of the lesser evil, Texas Congressional District 23 was decided in a runoff election yesterday in favor of the Democratic candidate Ciro Rodriguez.
Rodriguez defeated 14-term incumbent Republican Henry Bonilla in the runoff, in which he was designated the underdog right up until the day of the runoff election. Rodriguez was under-funded and out-gunned at every turn, yet still came out ahead and the end of the day, 54 - 46%.

But sweeter still, CD-23 is one of the districts that the Supreme Court ruled that the redistricting coup that Texas Republicans pulled off in 2003 unconstitutionally redrew the district to carve 100,000 Hispanics out in order to garner Republican votes (blast those activist judges!). The irony is that Bonilla already held the office before the redistricting scam. He won easily in 2004 (duh!), but was given his comeuppance yesterday when the voice of the people was allowed to be heard.

Right-wing pundits have posited that this runoff election would not be a spill-over of the purging of the current crop of ethically-challenged politicians - indeed Bonilla has been favored to win since Rodriguez came within a percentage point of him in the general election - but was a premonition of the 2008 elections, when voters regained their senses.

Rodriguez was basically broke at that point, and had a largely volunteer support staff. National Democrats then joined the fray, and even though they spent little more than half of what Bonilla had to spend, they managed to help Rodriguez get out the vote, and the odds were beaten - against an incumbent, no less.

So much for a premonition of the 2008 elections. Not to get off-topic here, but if Bush continues to postpone announcement of a decisive policy in Iraq, this may very well be a premonition of 2008.

So Ciro Rodriguez joins my new roster of heroes, along with Nick Lampson, who had both been redistricted out by the Republicans in 2003, yet have re-entered the halls of Congress through the will of the people.

Of course, the new Democratic leadership rewarded both Rodriguez and Lampson with choice committee appointments. Let’s hope they don’t turn into a pork barbeque for local special interests.

I’m all for new leadership, especially considering the direction in which our current lawmakers have been steering us.

But I won’t tolerate blind ideology, or "business as usual" tactics from the current gaggle of politicos any more than I would have the last batch.

Get it right, guys and gals, or what’s now referred to as the "liberal blogosphere" will suddenly turn conservative.

We’ve got the momentum to begin doing things right. Don’t screw it up.

Technology for the techno-challenged: Part One

2006-11-30T23:20:00.000-06:00

Put Up or Shut Up

2006-11-28T21:20:00.000-06:00

I read an article today that gives new meaning to the term class warfare. While I’ve always asserted that the poor are disproportionately represented in the military, this article points out a disturbing statistic.

In 1956, half the graduating class of Princeton served in the military. Now less than one third of one percent of the Ivy League serves.

All this talk of supporting the troops and fighting the war on terror, and the bulk of those doing the fighting and dying, in a country we have no business in, come from the lower levels of the economic spectrum.

In World War II, a war we believed in, virtually every able-bodied male at least tried to enlist to fight. Nowadays, there’s a lot of patriotic rhetoric, but no one’s willing to enlist. Instead, upper and middle class folks put magnetic ribbons on their SUVs and label anyone who criticizes the war as a “terrorist enabler”.

How many of our high-level CEOs and elected officials have children fighting in Iraq? Very few compared to previous wars. In Vietnam, parents wanted their kids to fight for their country, while the kids could see through the smoke and mirrors to see that war was unjustified. Now, those kids have kids of their own, and the parents aren’t pushing them to enlist, while today’s kids see that we don’t belong in Iraq and aren’t willing to give their lives for an illegal war.

If this war is so just, why aren’t the Bush twins on the front line? If our president feels so strongly about the need to neutralize the threat in Iraq, why isn’t he insisting that his own flesh and blood join the fight? Instead, his offspring are partying it up in South America; some even suggest that they’re paving the way for an administration exile once the American public wises up and decides to call Bush on his policies.

Interestingly, the Bush twins are being asked to leave Argentina, either because they’re a security risk (apparently the Secret Service has abandoned them), or because twinmania is upstaging the arrival of the newly appointed ambassador. Either way, Jenna and Barbara are persona non grata by the American embassy in Argentina.

But I digress. The point is, the wealthy no longer support the war effort through the blood of their loins – only through rhetoric. It’s time for the hypocricy to stop, and for the elite of America to either send their sons and daughters to fight this fight, or support the cause of peace.

Happy Thanksgiving to All!

2006-11-23T21:43:00.000-06:00

What, me turkey?

A wolf in sheep's clothing

2006-11-13T21:31:00.000-06:00

By now, everyone has heard about the Reverend Ted Haggard, who publicly disdains the homosexual lifestyle, and yet privately embraces it, along with the drug use that obviously goes with it. Gay sex and drugs - all that’s missing is Rock & Roll to complete the '70s mantra.

Pastor Ted was the leader of the largest Evangelical church in the nation, and was president of a national association of evangelicals that had some 30 million members. Unfortunately, none of those 30 million would give him the pleasure that a gay masseuse could, and provide the meth that he needed in order to achieve the spiritual high that he craved. The only thing missing is the depraved Rock & Roll that would complete the picture.

Now, thanks to Amanda, we find out that Rock & Roll fits into the picture quite nicely, and in doing so, it explains much about the mindset of the fundamentalist movement, and how it attempts to fit the cult of personality into the culture of promiscuity.

Apparently, there’s a pastor out there that tries to put the Hip into shooting-from-the-hip. He says that it’s the wife’s fault that the man strays from the straight and narrow. If the man succumbs to the gay, it’s the wife’s fault for letting herself go. That explains it all - women who don’t maintain their Tammy Faye Baker persona are causing their pastor husbands to stray from the fold, and play birds and bees with anything that shakes its tail feathers.

It is not uncommon to meet pastors’ wives who really let themselves go; they sometimes feel that because their husband is a pastor, he is therefore trapped into fidelity, which gives them cause for laziness. A wife who lets herself go and is not sexually available to her husband in the ways that the Song of Songs is so frank about is not responsible for her husband’s sin, but she may not be helping him either.

Apparently, this guy, Mark Dricoll, has had numerous floozies flaunt themselves before him, and he’s been forced to shut off all contact with the outside world in order to maintain his piety.

Pastors should have their office at the church and their study at home. There is no reason a pastor should be sitting alone at the church at odd hours (e.g., early morning and late evening) to study when anyone can drop in for any reason and have access to him. Instead, a pastor should come into the office for scheduled meetings and work from home on tasks such as emails, planning, studying, sermon preparation, etc. I spend the vast majority of my time working from home. Some years ago when I did not, I found that lonely people, some of them hurting single moms wanting a strong man to speak into their life, would show up to hang out and catch time with me. It was shortly thereafter that I brought my books home and purchased a laptop and cell phone so that I was not tied to the church office.

So this guy couldn’t handle the temptation of single women wanting his advice, so he shunned their evil attempts to request counsel from their pastor, and took the Godly path of shielding himself from their stalking ways, and sequestered himself from the public.

Isn’t this contrary to what a Pastor is supposed to be? I thought a Pastor devoted his life to providing counsel to those in need of enlightenment.

He goes on to expose more paranoid delusions:

Pastors need to carefully protect their cell phone number. If that private number gets out, too many of the wrong people have access to the pastor. Not only should the cell phone number of a pastor be given out to only a few people, he should also consider eliminating his voicemail and simply have calls forwarded to his assistant. In this way people will not become too informal with the pastor and if the pastor knows someone is trouble (e.g., a flirtatious woman), he can see that on his caller ID and simply refuse to answer the call or have to deal with a voicemail.

And so, Pastor Driscoll provides a primer on how supposed men of God can provide sustenance to their flock - avoid them at all cost, shun their attempts at communication, and have your underlings deal with their concerns. Sounds like a plan to me. Never mind that they need your guidance, or that they joined your religion with the hope that someone would care about their plight. As long as your church grows, and you continue to reap donations, it doesn’t matter that the congregation is still suffering. After all, suffering works for your fundraising efforts.

And how, again, does this mesh with the teachings of Jesus?

The Dawning of a New Day

2006-11-12T14:09:00.000-06:00

Well, it only took two years, but the world has finally shifted back on its axis to achieve its proper balance. The sun seems to be shining a little brighter this week. Maybe it’s the absence of the dark cloud that’s been hanging over our country for so long.

With the democratic retaking of the House and Senate, no longer is all power in the hands of one political party. Sure, Republicans still control the executive and judicial branches of the U.S. government, but the legislative branch is safely in the hands of Democrats. The days of one-party rule are over; at least for the time being.

Now let’s see what the Dems can do with it. They had the majority for several decades up until 1994, when Republicans wrestled it away from them with a platform that promised to clean up corruption and instill values into our legislation. Twelve short years later, it’s apparent that they were incapable of keeping their promise; they proved to become just as corrupt, if not more so, than their predecessors, and in a far shorter time. This seems to lend credence to the adage that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Soon-to-be Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi promises to work with Republicans, including the president, to achieve great things. She had better, otherwise those who bailed on the Republican Party will go right back where they came from in 2008. It’s important to remember that those who shifted loyalties did not really vote for Democrats, they voted against Republicans. Although it reinforces my belief that voters are fickle, it also shows that the lemmings are capable of not voting a straight-party ticket. I’ll wager, though, that there were a lot of down-ballot races that didn’t get as many votes, as I also am confident that the majority of voters do not research candidates, but instead rely on name recognition, attack ads, and sound bites for their political education.

In any event, the Democrats have two years to prove themselves. Not an easy task, considering how little has been accomplished in the past six. They’ve been slapped down by the Republican majority, and had to fight back using filibusters and other legislative maneuvers. Now that non-Republicans have the majority, we can only hope that they won’t slap down the Repubs so much that the same tactics get utilized.

I’m not gonna gloat, or flame the losers. Instead, I’m going to ask the newly elected legislators to get it together, and start moving this country forward. We’ve been going backward for too long now. Get together, figure out a way to win this war quickly to get our servicemen and servicewomen home safely. Use diplomacy, rather than stubborn arrogance, to solve the problems we’re having with Iran, Syria and North Korea. Get the economy back in the hands of the middle class, and help the poor become part of that middle class. Oh, and deflate that windbag in the White House a little more so he can’t do more damage in the two years he has left.

Is that too much to ask

October Suprise, number one

2006-10-03T19:53:00.000-06:00

So there's this old dude, like, and he likes to email young guys with suggestive things, like, and he's totally creepy, ya know?

Ya already heard the story? Okay, cool. So this guy totally resigns, okay? And then they totally launch an investigation, right? Only it turns out that the old guy digs young guys, right? Razzing the old dude aside, how cool is that?

btw - no way this old dude gets into my inner cricle. But still, these guys scare me. Here I am, willing to give up my summer to "serve my country", but not in that way.

Okay, there's plenty of internships available if my credentials are good enough. But my credentials draw the line at dropping my drawers for some overweight, undersexed perv.

Draw your own conclusions. There, I've said it without any preconceived puns. Okay, now throw your puns in:

1) Why don't Congressmen use bookmarks? They don't have to, they just bend over the pages...

Politics as usual

2006-09-29T22:56:00.000-06:00

With elections little more than a month away, politicians are pulling out all the stops to make it look like they’ve done something this term. In the process, they’re going to strip away many of the freedoms that this country was founded on.

Last night, Congress approved legislation that would effectively deny any semblance of fairness or justice to anyone that authorities deem an "enemy combatant". Once suspects are in custody, they can be detained without charges and tortured until those authorities either prosecute them or release them. Although the bill clarifies acceptable "interrogation" techniques, it doesn’t define enemy combatants; kinda leaving it up to our ever-so-trustworthy government to decide.

The Senate's 65 to 34 vote marked a victory for Bush and fellow Republicans a month before the Nov. 7 elections as their party tries to make anti-terrorism a signature campaign issue. Underscoring that strategy, House Republicans pushed through a bill Thursday night authorizing Bush's warrantless wiretapping program, adding it to their list of accomplishments even though it has no chance of Senate passage before this weekend's scheduled adjournment. It passed the House 232-191.

So in addition to taking away detainee rights, they are also attempting to legitimize the Bush administration’s illegal wiretapping activities that it attempted to keep secret (national security, and all that) and then tried to marginalize. Although there isn’t time for the Senate to pass anything before they adjourn to campaign for re-election, it gives them fodder for their "tough on terror" campaign speeches.

Also in the campaign rhetoric department, Houston’s own less-than-favorite congressional wannabe, Shelley Sekula-Gibbs (minus a few more hyphens that she conveniently leaves out), stepped into it with both Gucci pumps when she used the tragic death of a Houston Police officer to stump for the CD-22 spot vacated by the soon-to-be-convicted Tom DeLay. As you may recall, Shilly is a write-in for the race after the Texas GOP’s shenanigans were denied, leaving the district without a Republican on the ballot.

Anyway, Shel used her allotted time in Houston’s City Council meeting on Wednesday to grandstand and call for a review of what she calls the city’s "sanctuary" policy, in which police don’t ask to see the green card of every Hispanic-appearing person they encounter. Before she threw her hat into the congressional ring, she opposed a review of the policy, but now that she’s trying to woo Sugar Land Republicans (i.e. white, well-to-do suburbanites) she’s changed her tune. And she chose the day of the funeral of slain HPD Officer Rodney Johnson to step up on her soapbox for some pre-election sound bites.

Needless to say, most of the City Council walked out during her speech.

Where I’m going with all this, is that it’s time to stop listening to these clowns, whose only interest is to become elected. To paraphrase an old axiom, anyone who has the desire to become an elected official is inherently unsuited for it. Some leaders are born to greatness, others have it thrust upon them. When the mediocre try to thrust themselves into power, or keep power, it usually involves self-inflation. And that’s exactly what we’re currently experiencing.

Gas prices conveniently went down dramatically just before the election. I still feel the pain from the pumps, but I’m sure there are plenty of sheep out there who think all will be rosy from here on out, and they’re not mad at their Republican leadership anymore.

Also conveniently, the foreign intelligence community recently foiled a plan to blow up some planes using liquid explosives, and the sheep rallied behind the GOP, even though it was proven that the plan was impossible. There's that pesky physics again; yet another liberal conspriracy to prove Republicans wrong.

My challenge to you is this: challenge everything. If the Democrats say they're going to solve the immigration problem, ask them how. If the Republicans claim they're the best choice to protect the country, ask them what they're going to do differently - because obviously they're not doing too good of a job of it now.

Last election, I naively voted for those I thought were the most qualified for each job. I did research, and voted for some Republicans, and some Democrats, based on their qualifications. I now see that that was a mistake. Now I see that I have to vote for a party that shares my overall views, because everyone in that party is going to tow the party line, and vote for legislation that promotes their views.

After careful consideration, it seems that the Democratic Party is my party of choice. Until I'm convinced otherwise, Democrats are going to get my vote, and I'm going to do everything in my power to convice others to do the same. Call me a "librul" if you will, but the party that promotes corporate greed has nothing on the party that is trying to look out for the little folks on the "values" issue.

All I'm saying is to evaluate where you want to be as a human being, and vote your concience. I'm sure that when you get past all of the "my country, right or wrong" rhetoric and can see that it's your patriotic duty to question your government's intentions, you'll feel the same way that I do.

Come November 7, please vote. And vote your heart. Not what you're told to vote.

Awright, Willie!

2006-09-18T20:20:00.000-06:00

My heroes: Willie and the boys

Willie's bus went through a commercial checkpoint on a highway in Louisiana and the inspector smelled marijuana. The bus was searched and a pound and a half of marijuana was found, along with three ounces of mushrooms.

Normally, this is enough to nail someone with distribution (e.g. major prison time), but since five people fessed up to owning it (including Willie), it turns out to be a misdemeanor for each of them.

Wingnuts aside, it's logical to think that all of the groceries were being shared, so it's not like anyone's lying (which can't be said of our current administration). So when asked whose it was, they all raised their hands.

Whether or not they all could claim legal right to the stash, it was still a way-cool thing to do. If they blamed it on one person, that person would have been incarcerated in the Great State of Louisiana for a long, long time. Instead, they thought of their friends and took one for the team.

That's the kind of loyalty we look for in our friends. That's why we can't trust the current administration to act in our best interest. Everything they've done has demonstrated to us (the common people) that their primary loyalty is to their benefactors - big business lobbyists.

Anyway, I digress. Yes, laws were broken, and the perpetrators will pay the piper. But in standing up their buds, Willie's crew demonstrated the mindset of the modern American progressive: consider other's needs, and then your own comfort.

Okay, I lost about 40% of you there (according to the latest polls), but still; circumventing the law while standing up for your moral values, and still rendering unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's (look it up) is a pretty clever trick in my book.

My cowboy hat's off to you, Willie, and your crew, for demonstrating what selfishness is not about.

Finally, Texans have a true choice

2006-08-07T20:12:00.000-06:00

Scalia rejects plea to get DeLay off ballot

Don'cha just love it? Texas Repubicans, who have had their way for the past decade because of their hold on the "morality" base, are now struggling to keep their power base. Why? Because their morality stance is finally being questioned on the moral and ethical means they use to maintain this base.

A last-ditch effort to have Tom DeLay's name struck from the ballot - because he withdrew amidst pressure about his ethical behavior - in order to throw another name on the Republican ballot for the mindless straight-party voters to cast their votes in the upcoming mid-term elections, has been denied by the U.S. Supreme Court, which recognizes it as an attempt to cirrcumvent Constitutional law in an effort to garner the straight-party vote.

I've always stressed that voters should look at the candidates' history and background before they vote. This stance bit me in the nether regions when, in the last election, it was apparent that straight-party voters won the day, even though the voters knew nothing about the candidates they voted for. People of limited intellegence voted their party, and when questioned about them, knew virtually nothing about who they voted for what they stood for.

Fool me once, it's my fault.

But you're not going to fool me twice. Ignorance may be bliss, but it's hurting our country. The Texas GOP wants a new name on the ballot under the Republican listing; but if they get it there, mindless lemmings will vote for that person just because he's a Republican - even though primary voters did not choose that candidate.

What happened is this: primary voters chose Tom DeLay as their candidate of choice for the upcoming election. DeLay, seeing a firestorm coming about his ethical behavior, chose to resign from Congress in order to avoid the scrutiny involved in his upcoming criminal trials. The Texas Republican party wants to replace him on the ballot in order to avoid the bad press and to place someone on the ballot so that mindless straight-party voters will have someone to vote for without thinking about it, and so that they don't have to think about how the person they voted for last time ended up the target of a criminal investigation.

The Texas Democratic party objected, and so far the courts (including Justices put in place by both Bushes) have agreed. Now the Texas GOP is appealing to the Supreme Court for a favorable ruling. We'll see how this plays out, but it appears that the premise is sound - just because DeLay resigned and is claiming to have moved out of state (what does this say to the people he claimed to call his own while he was in office), he still owns property in Texas, it's possible he may still reside there on election day, and is therefore still eligible to run for office.

The defense of the ruling is that the courts are denying Texans a choice on election day. This is not even close to the truth. First of all, Texans have plenty of choices on election day. There are at least two candidates running in the 22nd Congressional District on the ballot. Second, the courts didn't deny Republicans the choice, DeLay did by resigning from Congress. He won the primary, then withdrew. By doing so, he removed himself from the ballot, not the courts, and if they want someone to replace him, they should ask the voters who should replace him. Instead, they want to replace him with their candidate, and the voters have no voice in who they replace him with.

So now Texas voters have a true choice, if they're up to the challenge. I know, it's require some thinking, and some research. But if we truly want someone who will represent us in Congress, it's worth the effort to find out what our candidates stand for, and cast our vote based on how those candidates will stand up for the things we think are important.

You finally have a true choice, Texans. Use it wisely.

I never looked at music the same way again

2006-08-03T22:07:00.000-06:00

25 years ago this week, a revolutionary new concept was introduced to the TV watching public - music television. No longer were we teenagers limited to just albums, cassette tapes, and FM radio. Now we could see our favorite bands perform, and if we were lucky, they would have some rock babes in their videos.

Sure, recorded visual music performances were around long before MTV came along. My first taste was the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan Show. But somehow the canned performances on MTV were different than the canned performances on network television. It wasn’t so obvious that they were lip-syncing, and there were plenty of flashing lights and images to keep our adolescent minds entertained.

Not only that, but no longer did we have to wait until our favorite bands came to town to actually "see" them. Sure, it was recorded, but compared to just listening, it was a quantum leap forward in music appreciation. The younger generation probably won’t be able to grasp this, with music videos commonplace today ("like, what’s the big deal?"), but back then it was a breakthrough concept.

The first actual music video I ever saw was Meat Loaf’s "Paradise by the Dashboard Light". It was shown every weekend right before the midnight screening of The Rocky Horror Picture Show at a theatre downtown. We saw it dozens of time and never got tired of it. In fact, it was a huge disappointment if we showed up late and missed the Meat Loaf video; although it never stopped us from staying for Rocky Horror anyway.

Then MTV came along, and you could get music videos right in your house (assuming you had cable, which less than half of us did). Bands that we had listened to for years took on a whole new dimension. Bands like ZZ Topp, Peter Gabriel, and the Rolling Stones embraced the concept with open arms and open legs.

Which brings us to the downside of MTV: by attracting fans with eye candy, it was no longer necessary to produce good music. The bands mentioned above were prolific with their videos, but the music produced was far from their best work. Pop buried rock & roll, and buff posers dominated airtime. Attractive crooners without talent became stars, and ugly rockers had to have a gimmick to get noticed; both of which contributed to the decline of the music’s quality.

Music video production became standard operations for bands as they rolled out new music; when they came out with a new album, the singles were made into videos. At first, the practice was used to sell more albums, like radio airplay. Eventually, though, the video became the medium of choice, and videos were made for the sake of making videos. Some bands used humor or drama to tell a story, but most just tried to push the envelope, using shock value and sex for the sole purpose of selling more videos.

Eventually, it wasn’t about the music anymore; it was about the culture. Within a few years, MTV dictated urban youth culture, and fans marched lockstep with the image presented by the artists. From the Pat Benatar look in the 80’s to Shakira wannabes in the aughts, every post-adolescent hipster wants to look like she just stepped out of the video studio. Pimpin’ rides and dissin’ playas became the new national pastime for the under-20 set. The east-coast/west-coast feud was played out all across the country, and what used to be called a waist ended up being worn around the thighs.

Nowadays, MTV doesn’t even play music anymore. I guess attention spans got even shorter, and now a three minute video is to long to spend without some kind of jolt to the adrenaline. Reality shows, talk shows - basically anything to keep the viewer from changing the channel - have replaced the novel concept of showing visual recordings of music performances.

One good thing has come from MTV, though. Once it was demonstrated that visual performances is marketable, a lot of good concert footage has been dug out of archives, dusted off, and put on a DVD. So even though I don’t watch MTV anymore, I’m building up a respectable collection of classic concerts, and I can watch them anytime I want.

And like the original MTV tag line said, I’ll never look at music the same way again.

What's up? Everything but the economy.

2006-07-29T17:55:00.000-06:00

Economy dives: Inflation heats up in 2nd quarter

Can someone please explain to me how our current administration is helping our country? Not only are we currently at, or on the verge of, war with a good portion of the rest of the world, our economy is in the dumpster along with our values.

In its usual effort to win votes, the Bush administration pushes tax cuts. Everyone wants to hear that they're getting money, never mind that its a few measly bucks. Meanwhile, the lion's share of benefits go to those who are already wealthy. Reminiscent of Reagan's "trickle-down" effect, this administration's policies are supposed to help the economy grow, so that jobs can be created and everyone lives happily ever after.

So what happened? Second quarter data was released yesterday, revealing that growth is down (meaning those jobs aren't being created) and inflation is up. In effect, we've got less money coming in while having to spend more on the things we buy.

"The economy has significantly throttled back but inflation pressures are developing more fully," observed Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com

By "throttled back", he means that people aren't producing as many goods or buying as many houses - two factors that indicate the income levels of average Americans are stagnant.

The second-quarter's performance — which reflected the bite of high energy prices and rising interest rates on people and businesses as well as a cooling in the once red-hot housing market — was weaker than the 3 percent pace analysts were forecasting.
The 2.5 percent pace was the slowest since a 1.8 percent growth rate in final quarter of 2005, when the economy was suffering fallout from the devastating Gulf Coast hurricanes.

At the same time, the cost of goods and services are rising.

An inflation gauge closely watched by the Federal Reserve showed that core prices — excluding food and energy — jumped at a 2.9 percent annual rate in the second quarter — far outside the Fed's comfort zone. That was up from a 2.1 percent growth rate in the first quarter and marked the highest inflation reading since the third quarter of 1994, when core inflation rose at a 3.2 percent pace.

And this excludes the cost of energy. So in addition to paying more for just about everything else, we also have to pay more for gas, heating fuel, and transportation costs for the things we buy. To top it off, the inflation data used was taken before our most recent record surge in oil prices, when oil surpassed the $77 per barrel mark.

So due to the actions (and inactions) of the Bush administration, Americans have less income (relative to the economy), and are spending more for the things they need and want. At the same time, oil companies are showing recond profits. I fail to understand how this administration is helping America, unless the goal is to turn us into a corporate state.

So far, this administration has started an unnecessary war, pissed off most of our trading partners, and sent our economy into a downward spiral, while enriching their friends and largest contributors. Do all you people out there who voted for these clowns realize you made a mistake yet? If not, I hope you realize it soon, before we sink any deeper.

Finally, a moral boundary the Bush administration is not wiling to cross

2006-07-29T09:00:00.000-06:00

Last week we celebrated the 35th anniversary of Neil Armstrong’s historic "one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." Since then, the science of mankind has moved forward by leaps and bounds. Now, if the powers that be have their way, science may come to a screeching halt.

Just as Congress finally passed some meaningful legislation - expanding funding for stem cell research - good ol’ dubya steps in and throws down his first-ever veto. Although he quietly vetoed the bill in private, he publicly announced it in a carefully arranged press conference surrounded by frozen embryo babies. Is it just me, or did it look like one of the babies flipped him off during the announcement?

As Cragg Hines points out,

For the second time in as many years at a White House stem cell event, Bush was shown against a background of parents with children who were born from "adopted" embryos. Never has the White House bothered to point out that, according to Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., majority Senate manager of the stem cell bill, these children are the tiny exception to a quantum rule.
The children are precious and to be loved. But, as I noted in the earlier column, although there are currently an estimated 400,000 cryogenically preserved embryos, few will ever be "adopted." Since 1997, only 128 deliveries or ongoing pregnancies had resulted up to May 31, according to Specter.

And in a column published before dubya’s veto, Hines elaborates:

And speaking of morality, what's moral about forbidding research with embryonic stem cells that otherwise will be destroyed? Opponents of wider research contend stored embryos can be "adopted" by otherwise childless couples. That sounds almost heroic, as there are an estimated 400,000 embryos that have been cryogenically preserved. But Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., majority manager of the Senate measure, said that even with federal funding to encourage "adoption," it's an almost unknown phenomenon.
Using figures from the Snow Flake Organization, a federal grantee, and the National Embryo Donation Center, Specter said that as of May 31 there have been since 1997 only 128 deliveries or ongoing pregnancies from such embryos.
"Which makes it conclusive that these 400,000 embryos will either be used for scientific research or thrown away," Specter said, as donor couples stop paying storage fees or otherwise authorize destruction of their remaining frozen embryos.

So where are the 400,000 self-righteous couples stepping forward to adopt these snowflake embryos? Most likely, they’re pounding their chests in church, crowing about the sanctity of life while vowing to end the welfare state. Step up to the adoption board, folks, and start walking the walk. Let’s see that self-righteousness in action, rather than just the usual rhetoric.

Specter correctly characterized the clash as "the conflict ... between ideology and science," which has arisen repeatedly over the centuries. And by ideology he essentially means religion.
Specter ticked off some famous and not-so-famous cases, including Columbus' trouble with Spanish bureaucrats and Galileo's trouble with the Roman Catholic church.
Perhaps most apt was Specter's reference to Michael Servertus, whose research was stymied when Pope Boniface VII issued a papal bull in the 13th century effectively outlawing cadaver dissection.
"This stopped the practice for over 300 years and greatly slowed the accumulation of education regarding human anatomy," Specter said.
Or for equal aptness, try the attempt in the 18th century by the Anglican divine Edward Massey to stifle work on vaccinations because "diseases are sent by Providence for the punishment of sin."

Sound familiar? We have some fundamentalists today who seem to feel the same way. Natural disasters are proclaimed to be the will of God, punishing us for tolerating homosexuals, promoting promiscuity, and voting for Democrats. Likewise, vital medical research should be hobbled so that it doesn’t interfere with God’s punishment of diabetics, old people, and celebrities that fall off horses.

The House moved quickly to sustain the president's veto of legislation that would have allowed the federal government to underwrite research on embryos discarded at fertility clinics. The House vote, 235-193 in favor of federal funding, fell 50 votes shy of the two-thirds needed to override a veto.
During House debate, Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston, a supporter of stem-cell research, said the president had "thumbed his nose at the millions of Americans who suffer from incurable diseases."

Congress didn’t have enough votes to overturn his veto, so research that can save many lives and improve the quality of life for millions of stricken Americans will be put on the back burner so that our holier-than-thou president can appease the few supporters he has left: fundamentalist zealots. And speaking of pandering to the zealots, three of the Republican presidential hopefuls backed bush’s veto: Sens. Sam Brownback of Kansas, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and George Allen of Virginia. Only the GOP hopefuls who stand a chance of being nominated without riding on dubya’s coattails, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee and Sen. John McCain of Arizona, chided the panderer-in-chief for his obviously political maneuver. Of course, by doing this they were doing some maneuvering of their own - away from his dismal approval (or, more accurately, "disapproval") ratings.

Bush’s reason for the veto, like the man himself, is simple:

"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush said in announcing his veto. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect."

There are two vital insights into the Bush administration’s mindset in this announcement. One is that it’s okay to support the taking of innocent human life to "spread democracy", but not to save other innocent human lives. The second is that the Bush administration has finally found a moral boundary that it’s not willing to cross.

By vetoing funding for this research, he apparently made good on a promise he made in 2001 (back when some people still believed what he said). Better late than never, right? Not really. Now, most Americans think we should expand stem cell research. The only ones that don’t are his base, which is constantly shrinking as he stumbles through domestic disasters and international blunders.

Ironically, Bush’s strategy seems to have backfired. The void in funding created by dubya’s veto is being filled by state funds, as evidenced by Ahnuld’s $150 million loan to California’s voter-approved stem cell research institute.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Thursday ordered a loan of up to $150 million to the state's voter-approved stem cell research institute, catapulting California into the lead as the nation's top public funder of the divisive research.
------
Institute President Zach Hall said that once grant proposals are received, dollars could flow to research by early next year. Ironically, Hall noted, Bush's first-ever veto - based on his opposition to the destruction of embryos in some forms of embryonic stem cell research - served California well. "I think with one stroke, the president energized [the institute's] program," he said.

And California is not the only state to bump up funding for stem cell research in the wake of Bush’s folly.

Connecticut, Maryland, Illinois and New Jersey have approved some state funding for the work. And on Thursday, the governor of Illinois announced that he was diverting $5 million from the state budget for stem cell research - also in response to the Bush veto.

So by vowing to oppose federal funding of this research, he’s managed to quadruple state funding.

With these kinds of results, I can only hope he’ll back some of the GOP incumbents in the upcoming mid-term elections. We could use a change in leadership.

Party (convention) Time in the Lone Star State

2006-06-06T12:58:00.000-06:00

It's official: the Texas Republican Party hates everything. They held their semi-annual convention in San Antonio last weekend and voted on a platform that spells out everything they're against. Well, not everything, but the things that will get them points among the religious right wing base that keeps them in office - at least temporarily.

Among the things they're officially against include:

amnesty for illegal immigrants
people who hire illegal immigrants
children of illegal immigrants
marriage (other than the straight kind)
the morrning after pill
abortion

I still don't get their reasoning. They're against abortion, but also against the class of people least likely to have or need one - gays. They want to build a wall along our borders, but want to kick out the people we're going to need to build it. And now, for the first time ever, they want to take away being born into citizenship in this country.

For a play-by-play of the Republican Convention, check out the Texas Safety Forum, which liveblogged it. Vince Leibowitz from Capitol Annex also did a pretty good synopsis of his view from the left bleachers.

The Texas Democratic Party Convention is being held this weekend in Fort Worth. Hopefully, their platform will demonstrate that they're for something, like Texans, rather than against everything.

Lot's of people will be liveblogging the Dems' Convention from the floor of the convention center (I know of at least eight). Check out the Texas Bloggers Caucus for links to these sites, as well as schedules and convention news.

Hopefully next week, we voters will have a clear picture of which party actually represents the people of Texas, rather than a small, powerful group whose only interest is in self-preservation.

In Memorium

2006-05-29T00:59:00.000-06:00

The Card family wishes to express its deepest appreciation to those who have risked and given their lives to protect our freedom. Servicepersons in blue, green and white have helped protect our democracy for 230 years, and those serving today are making the same sacrifices that their ancestors made when they won our freedom from oppression at the birth of this country.

Whether or not we agree with the justification for going to war in Iraq, those who are serving and dying there are doing it for the noblest of reasons.

No words can express our gratitude for what these soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are doing for their country.

God bless you all, and we pray for your safe return.

update: Burnt Orange Report has published a list of the 234 native Texans who have died in Iraq and Afghanistan. Please take time today to reflect on the sacrifices they've made for us, and pray for comfort for their families and friends.

¿hable inglés?

2006-05-29T00:43:00.000-06:00

The immigration bill that passed the Senate and now goes to House has general support from both Democrats and Republicans at all levels of government, although no one seems to support all aspects of the bill. Some are not happy with the guest worker program, and some are not happy with the criminalization of hardworking people who are just looking for a better life for themselves and their families. The portion that raises my ire is the part that makes English the official language of the United States.

I have no problem with calling English our common language. In reality, English is the language of success in this country. What I take issue with is the language in the bill which states that the government has no obligation to make any information available in any language other than English.

Businesses realize that to succeed, you need to make your services easily accessible to everyone. Most product owners manuals provide instructions in multiple languages, and they’re still incomprehendable. To make our information available only in English smacks of isolationism - not just from other nations, but from some classes of our own people as well.

Education in this country is in poor condition, with record numbers of dropouts and students who are performing well below standards. Yet our lawmakers see the need to limit services to those that lack English reading skills, rather than doing something to improve the reading skills of all classes of Americans.

Many immigrants, once they learn English, become top performers in school. Instead of allowing these students to accellerate their learning, this legislation will hamstring them by denying them bilingual opportunities as they learn our language.

This legislation will limit access to public services, including emergency service and voting procedures, to only those with adequate reading skills. If you thought hanging chads were a controversy, wait until only those who can read well will have their votes counted. It’s a form of class warfare, promoting the haves over the have-nots.

Not everyone has a babel fish, or the good fortune of being born into an English speaking family. This legislation, if passed as currently written, means that services now available to all citizens need only be provided to those who can read English. What better way to limit the voices of Americans than to put limits on how they can communicate?

NSF, UC-Berkeley rotten to the corps

2006-05-27T11:26:00.000-06:00

This week, the National Science Foundation, spearheaded by UC-Berkeley, issued a report on why the levees failed in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. They were none too kind to the Army Corps of Engineers, Congress, and local and national agencies responsible for levee construction and maintenance. According to the report, not only have these agencies been lax in the past, their current efforts leave much to be desired as well.

The findings undermine assurances by the Bush administration and the Army Corps of Engineers that the federal levee repair program due to be completed in June will provide a higher level of protection to New Orleans, which sustained 1,293 deaths and property losses of more than $100 billon from Katrina.
The team's 600-page report disputed most of the corps' preliminary findings about what caused levee breaches, saying the corps' investigators had made critical errors in their analysis.
The corps "is conducting the most important engineering analysis in its history" in determining why storm walls and levees around New Orleans failed last August, Seed said.
"And they got it wrong. When the entire world is watching and a city has been destroyed, you want to get it right."

According to the report, the damage done by the hurricane wouldn't have been near as severe had preventive measures been taken based on predictions by, it seems like, just about everybody.

The report alleges that Katrina wouldn't have breached the region's hurricane protection system had it been properly financed, designed, built and maintained. It said all breaches and levee failures could have been avoided had the federal government been willing to pay for better designs that didn't require building "too close to the edge of safety."

Unfortunately, attempts to protect New Orleans from a major hurricane were shot down by the pork barrel politics in Congress. Apparently, South Louisiana didn't have a Tom DeLay to protect their interests. They do have William Jefferson, but apparently he was too busy lining his own pockets.

Granted, the Army Corps of Engineers did what they could with the resources available, yet they defended their actions with the usual beurocratic sleight-of-hand common in American politics:

Maj. Gen. Don Riley, director of the corps' civil works operation, said Monday that his staffers must finish reviewing details of the new report released Sunday before they can respond with specificity.
But Riley said his own review of the report's executive summary, coupled with remarks he heard Seed make in a lecture about a month ago, gives him a pretty good picture of the team's focus.
"I'm confident that all the recommendations he makes that are in the corps' control are already under way," he said. "We've taken action on everything in our purview."
The changes, which he said are being incorporated into repairs of the storm-damaged system, include more robust wall designs, increased safety factors, new scour protection behind floodwalls and armoring of critical levee sections.
Riley said the experts would have to sit down together and look at each other's work.
Riley said IPET has asked several times to see the Berkeley team's work, but it was not handed over until this weekend, when the report was also given to the media and posted on a Web site.
"We've asked them many times to share their analytical information, but they never did," Riley said "It may have helped us."

Until we can move away from finger-pointing and excuses, disasters like this will not be avoided, they will be blamed on others. Where's this "uniter" we elected 2004? Oh yeah, I forgot. He has problems of his own these days.

Meanwhile, NOAA predicts above average Atlantic hurricane activity this season, which begins June 1. They predict 13 - 16 named storms, 8 - 10 hurricanes, and 4 - 6 of them major (category 3 or greater). Compared to last year, when we had 28 named storms, and 15 hurricanes (7 of them major), this year sounds kind of light. But taking into account that NOAA predicted fewer storm last year than this year, I'm not chowing down on my hurricane supplies yet. This year's predictions are less than last year's because Atlantic water is not as warm now as it was this time last year, and there shouldn't be any El Nino or La Nina effects coming over from the Pacific.

So batten down the hatches, folks, and keep your hands and arms inside the ride at all times. Hurricane season's coming! Though it may be a little tough to work up a good fear from Hurricanes named Chris, Debby, Gordon, or Sandy. But then I always thought Hurricane Katrina sounded like a Soviet roller derby queen. Shows what I know...

Making the rounds

2006-05-17T12:16:00.000-06:00

I've been guest blogging for a couple of compadres recently, so if you want to see my latest posts, hop on over to MindSpeak for this post on progressive bloggers' effect on politics.

Then head to the People's Republic of Seabrook for this one on wind turbine farms in South Texas, and this one on The DaVinci Code.

I also posted this at TPRS on Mother's Day, and caught some flack from the mother of my children for not posting it on my own site. So for her sake, please give blood at your neighborhood blood center and name your mom as a recipient. It'll get me off the hook, and your mom will thank you for it. And I was mistaken; they weren't open on Mother's Day. Instead, I'll be donating at the newly resurrected KIOL's blood drive this month. Maybe I'll even rap with Outlaw Dave, who's broadcasting live from several locations (but not all at the same time).

Also, I've added some newcomers to my blogroll. Please welcome Texas Kos, an offspring of the Daily Kos, to the Texas blogosphere. Also, MindSpeak is a brainchild of Fyreplace that takes its place in the progressive political spectrum, and the new Common Sense site makes its debut.

Check out these sites and learn what you can do to help make Texas, America, and the world, a better place to live in.

And feel free to let us know what you think. That's what interactive politics is all about.

Zealots Gone Wild: the video

2006-05-11T14:20:00.000-06:00

This horse has probably been beaten to death several times over by now, but as a parent of a soldier, I have to comment. I could hear the anger in my son's voice when he brought it to my attention, and after watching the video clip, I could see why. Shirley Phelps Roper, who claims to be a Christian, rationalizes all the evils that are plaguing us, including the deaths of American soldiers at war and AIDS, as the justifiable wrath of God.

I've got news for her. The evils that are plaguing us are products of the ignorance of man. Anyone who can hate in the name of God just adds fuel to the fire; Roper and her ilk are perfect examples of what happens when religion goes overboard.

Man's ignorance has always played a part in his spirituality. Early in mankind's history, he has looked up at the stars and seen them as evidence of a greater being. Anything that could not be explained by man's limited knowledge was attributed to the mysterious workings of some almighty deity or another.

Nowadays, Roper's church displays that ignorance openly and arrogantly. Religion has always produced nutcases, and the present day is no exception. This church's beliefs shocked people a few weeks ago when Roper was interviewed on Hannity & Colmes. It didn't suprise me a bit. Jesus tried to teach the masses about love, tolerance, and understanding. Instead, the most persuasive of His "followers" have distorted his message to gain power and money.

Roper's father, Fred Phelps, runs the Westborough Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas, and encourages his congregation to protest at the funerals of soldiers who were killed in action. Apparently, he and his followers believe that the wage of sin is literal death, and that the deaths in Iraq are the result of God's wrath because of - get this - America's promotion of homosexuality.

Where have these people been for the past six years? The last thing this country is promoting is any kind of alternative lifestyle. The powers-that-be are gnashing their teeth because everyone in the country doesn't believe in the same "value system" as them, and most Americans don't want to change their lifestyles to conform to the right-wing version of what an American should look and act like.

And now these religious right-wing "social conservatives" have created a monster. A monster so deluded that it considers it its christian duty to demonstrate at funerals, carrying banners that say "Thank God for dead soldiers", while the families of those soldiers mourn.

If God's wrath is responsible for these soldiers' deaths, it's aimed at the Bush administration for sending them to die unnecessarily. If He's pissed at anything, it'd be at the way Roper, Phelps, and their ilk are twisting their followers into the mindless zombies they are, and using His name to promote hatred.

If I remember correctly, Jesus preached love, peace and tolerance. Kinda the opposite of what these clowns are promoting. Or for that matter, any of the religious right-wing groups that are trying to shape our country into a homogenous, mindless congregation.

I just hope this episode serves as a wakeup call for those who feel justified in tormenting, or even discriminating against, someone who is different than them. If not, more of these groups will surface, and not all of them will be satisfied with peaceful protest. They'll take God's wrath into their own hands, and people will die. Normally, we call these groups terrorists.

Are you ready for christian terrorists?

Save the Internets

2006-04-28T13:09:00.000-06:00

The opposition is taking their usual stand: there's no issue, let's just ignore it. They claim that net neutrality will hamper research and development and leave consumers with fewer choices. Sound familiar? That's what they said before the Ma Bell monopoly was broken up decades ago. Do we have fewer phone service choices now, with stale technology? I think not, as new services and equipment are introduced faster than we can break or lose our cell phones, unlike the Ma Bell days when a brick-like rotary phone rusted before a new one was needed.

For the uninitiated, net neutrality would guarantee surfers acess to all internet content, not just the content that your internet service provider (ISP) wants you to see. Alyssa Milano puts it very succinctly:

Wal-Mart refuses to fill certain prescriptions because they are ethically against them. Why couldn’t the corporations limit our access to information they are against? They could, especially if large Internet providers like AT&T are successful in their current behind-the-scenes campaign to get Congress to gut Network Neutrality—the Internet’s First Amendment and the key to Internet freedom. Network Neutrality is the idea that all information online is treated equally, so Internet companies have to make the smallest blog just as accessible as the largest corporate website.

Network neutrality was addressed in the Markey Ammendment, which was up for vote in the House this week as part of telecommunications legislation. Unfortunately, the ammendment was defeated by a 34 - 22 vote, primarily along party lines. As expected, Republicans backed the big telcos, but the big news is that the Subcommittee on Commerce and Energy defeated Markey's last attempt 23 - 8, showing a marked shift in attitudes. Those who changed their vote this time credited the explosion of public interest in the issue.

More info on net neutrality can be found at savetheinternet.com. It explains how ISPs will be able to give preferred connections and access speeds to sponsors according to how much the sponsor pays them. As a result, those companies willing to pay more to ISPs will have a bigger presence on web surfers' PCs, virtually shutting out small business, non-profit, and amateur content providers like me.

Television, newspapers, sattelite, and cable TV are already controlled by large corporations, and show you want they want you to see. At present, the internet is unimpeded in it's content. Sure, not all of this content is good, but at least we still have a choice what we want to access. This will be gone if big business is allowed to control the internet.

AT&T, Comcast, Verizon and Time Warner are spending millions lobbying congress not to sponsor net neutrality.

They want to tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of their data. They want to discriminate in favor of their own search engines, Internet phone services, and streaming video — while slowing down or blocking their competitors.
These companies have a new vision for the Internet. Instead of an even playing field, they want to reserve express lanes for their own content and services — or those from big corporations that can afford the steep tolls — and leave the rest of us on a winding dirt road.

On the other side are bloggers, consumer advocates, internet pioneers, and those who'll benefit from a gate-free internet like Yahoo, Google, and EBay. They've seen borderline abuses and want to prevent the slide toward corporate midsets such as these:

In 2004, North Carolina ISP Madison River blocked their DSL customers from using any rival Web-based phone service.
In 2005, Canada's telephone giant Telus blocked customers from visiting a Web site sympathetic to the Telecommunications Workers Union during a labor dispute.
Shaw, a big Canadian cable TV company, is charging an extra $10 a month to subscribers in order to "enhance" competing Internet telephone services.
In April, Time Warner's AOL blocked all emails that mentioned www.dearaol.com — an advocacy campaign opposing the company's pay-to-send e-mail scheme.

Although the Markey Ammendment was defeated, the fight for net neutrality is far from over, as the Communications Opportunity Enhancement Act moves to the full house for a vote. This act (referred to as COPE) favors ISPs and would affectively kill Net Neutrality in the House. However, if passed it must reconcile against Senate legislation before it can be signed into law.

Though Senate Commerce Committee chairman Ted Stevens (R-AK) has said he supports the idea of Net Neutrality in principle, he has stopped short of endorsing putting the principle into codified law.However, Senators Olympia Snowe (R-MI), Byron Dorgan (D-ND), and Ron Wyden (D-OR) have all introduced legislation in the Senate that would ban network providers from degrading content or creating "toll lanes" where content providers can ensure better access to their sites in exchange for paying more money.

There is still time to make your voice heard. If you value unlimited access to the internet, join with Save the Internet in letting our elected officials know we don't want the internet controlled by the telecommunications industry.

Although COPE will encompass many changes to how telecoms, cable companies, and municipalities deliver Internet services to customers, the blitz of opposition to a "tiered Internet" has brought mainstream public attention to an issue Matt Stoller says the telecoms wanted kept quiet.
"The telcos have spent hundreds of millions of dollars and many years lobbying for their position. We launched four days ago, and have closed a lot of ground," he said. "Over the next few months, as the public wakes up, we’ll close the rest of it."

Vote for a change

2006-04-28T10:49:00.000-06:00

Chet Edwards, who's running as the incumbent in District 17, and Nick Lampson, who's running as a challenger against Tom DeLay's replacement in District 22, are in line to receive some campaign funds from Barbara Boxer's PAC for a Change.

There are many critical races that will be decided this November -- races that will determine whether Democrats will regain control of Congress. So today I'm inviting you to decide which two Democratic House candidates -- one incumbent and one challenger -- we should support next.

The decision will be based on online voting, so if you want to see these guys get a little more in their campaign funds, go here and vote for them. Every little bit helps, and your vote will count. I thank you, and your country will thank you.

Ejamucashun reform, Texas style

2006-04-25T08:15:00.000-06:00

In the wake of the Carole Keeton Strayhorn's estimate of an $8.2 billion surplus in the state budget, the fighting 79th (yet another sequel) approved $2.4 billion for school property tax relief in a stopgap measure designed to put a bandaid on our ailing school system. Of course, this does nothing toward providing adequate pay for teachers, enough books to go around, or habitable classrooms, but it provides lawmakers with good sound bites in an election year.

"We can go home and tell the people that we have reduced the property taxes, that the schools will stay open in June," said Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa.

"We're here to lower property taxes," [Rep. Patrick] Rose said. "The quicker we do that, the sooner we can work on education reforms."

They also tentatively approved business tax expansion by an 11 vote margin (wanna guess who was for and against?), shrinking loopholes so only the shrewdest of businesspersons will be able to avoid it. Unless you're a doctor - er, I mean "health care provider" - 'cuz then you're exempt.

Perry butt-kisser Beverly Woolley (R-Houston) managed to slide in a provision that the good news of property tax reduction will be announced to voters - er, I mean taxpayers - by Perry's Secretary of State, whose office has nothing to do with taxes. It should be announced by the Comptroller, but that happens to be Perry's opponent in the upcoming gubernatorial election, Carole Keeton Strayhorn. Woolley claims it's for transparency. She's right, 'cause it's very transparent to me. Perry wants voters to get the good news from him, at taxpayer expense, right before the November election.

Some questioned the propriety of allowing the letter to come from the office that handles elections rather than tax issues.
The office that normally handles taxes is held by Perry's November opponent in the governor's race, Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn.
The letter would likely go out to voters just before November election day, this year only.

Still on the agenda for this special session is a cigarette tax increase that started out strong, but has been filtered so much that the American Lung Association and the American Cancer Society have withdrawn their support of it. There's also a shrewd plot to capture sales tax from auto sales by taxing blue book value on cars sold, rather than the sale price.

Funny, but I don't see anything that says the Lege is fixing the school system. Wasn't that what the special session is supposed to be all about? Oh, I forgot - this is an election year. We can't fix the school system without raising taxes, and no one is going to risk re-election by even mentioning it. Especially with all those grass-roots republigoons hanging around the capitol holding the sign on the "L" on their foreheads to show solidarity.

For more information on these issues, check out Capital Annex for an analysis of House Bills 1 through 5, and a comprehensive history of school finance in Texas.

Also, Eye on Williamson County has a primer for yesterday's House debate.

The real state of the union

2006-04-23T18:12:00.000-06:00

Boo Hu

Bush jerks off yet another world leader

Looking for the real state of the union? WaPo had the abbreviated verson on Friday (via Easter Lemming Liberal News). Updates on Hu's blues, Rove's woes, the Plame game - it's all there.

More smoke and mirrors on April Fool's Day

2006-04-01T23:25:00.000-06:00

This morning, POTUS used his weekly radio address to attempt to convince America that his tax plan is needed to grow the economy. I don't know about you, but the measley $300 I got didn't help my economy much - it barely made a dent in my gas tank, now that I'm paying twice what I used to fill up my car. I'd say that was a poor trade. The rich get the gold mine, the rest of us get the shaft.

"The evidence is overwhelming: The opponents of tax cuts were wrong," he said. "Tax relief has helped to create jobs and opportunities for American families, and it's helped our economy grow."

So where's the evidence? This is another example of the Bush administration's strategy. Repeat it often enough, and it becomes the truth. Not only is there no evidence, there's not even any indication that any economic sector is improving, other than for oil companies and wartime contractors. The only people putting more money in their pockets are CEOs of large corporations and the lobbyists who funnel their contributions to right-wing politicians.

Bush is down in the polls, which find most Americans objecting to the war in Iraq, and has said he recognizes that midterm election politics is making Republicans in Congress nervous. He used the popular GOP call for tax relief to appeal to Americans' pocketbooks with the April 15 filing deadline approaching.
"As tax day approaches later this month, many American families are now finishing their tax returns," Bush said. "And as you do, an important debate is taking place in Washington that will affect the amount you will pay in the years ahead."

That's funny, I just finished my tax return, and it still seems I'm paying more in taxes even though the deduction and exemption levels have gone up. It's got to be smoke and mirrors, because the only time I ever see anything related to tax relief is when the Treasury sends me my pittance to make it look like I'm getting some money back.

Someone is making a killing off of this tax relief scam, but it isn't the average taxpayer. Otherwise, why would dubya keep harping on the necessity of tax relief in order to score points. It can't be the poor schmucks who believed him when he got the "morality" vote in 2004. Most of them can't afford accountants and have to do their own tax returns, so surely they can see that the wool is being pulled over their eyes.

These tax cuts for the wealthy are being underwritten by our children and grandchildren. The bills have to be paid eventually, and the national deficit is at an all time high. Today's families are already paying the price for dubya's war with the lives of their husbands, wives, sons and daughters. We will continue to pay the price for this war in generations to come for the monetary debts incurred by this fiasco.

It's time we said, "No more!" We've had enough of this administration giving our money away to their friends while the rest of us scrimp to make ends meet; and our youth, the future of our country, go off to fight and die in a war that was started by a man who just wanted his place in history as a wartime president.

In his response to the presidential broadcast, retired Army general Wesley Clark pretty much ingored the tax cut issue, treating it as a mistaken priority.

He argued that the nation "is in danger from the administration's mistaken policies and priorities."
Clark offered a litany of missteps, from the failure to get bin Laden to the more than 2,300 U.S. military deaths in Iraq and the thousands wounded. Domestically, he cited several challenges, including rising gasoline prices, illegal immigration and the impact of global warming.

In addition to dissing the tax cut issue, he reiterated that the govenment has a duty to provide security to its citizens - something the Bush administration has failed to do by ignoring Osama bin Laden and starting a war that did more for terrorist recruitment than Al Qaeda could have done in a decade.

"This administration has taken us on a path to nowhere - replete with hyped intelligence, macho slogans and an incredible failure to see the obvious," Clark said in the broadcast.
The administration "has shown tragic incompetence in everything from nation building in Iraq to disaster relief in Louisiana," he said. "Let's face it: We're not going to win the war on terror unless we start making more friends and fewer enemies in the world, and we're not going to be able to protect the American people without a new strategy."
Clark joined House and Senate Democrats on Wednesday in calling for a strategy that would provide U.S. agents with the resources to pursue bin Laden, redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq, better equipment for the military and improved screening of containers and inbound cargo.

So there you have it. On April Fool's Day, the president attempts to fool us again, while his opposition tells it like it is. Who will you trust? Or better yet, who will you vote for in the next election?

Runoff Rundown

2006-03-31T19:25:00.000-06:00

First of all, it should be noted that Texas Democratic Party Chairman Charles Soechting, in an unusual move, throws his endorsement behind Barbara Radnofsky for the Senate seat nomination against Gene Kelly (not the Hollywood guy). According to Soechting (and many others), Kelly is not a viable candidate, and is only on the ballot because of name recognition. The sentiment was also echoed by gubernatiorial hopeful Chris Bell. This solidifies the argument that everyone who is serious about electing a leader, and not just a name, needs to get behind Barbara Radnofsky and do whatever they can to insure that she runs against Kay Bailey Hutchison in the general election.

Also in runoff action is the race between Borris Miles, lifetime resident of HD 146, former law enforcement officer, and self-made businessman who not only renovates and provides professional office space for other bootstrap businessmen in his district, but also serves on several boards for civic improvement and sickle cell research, against Al Edwards, whose crowning achievement was legislation to curtail provocative performances by adolescent cheerleaders.

So the choice in this race is between a guy who has worked to improve the quality of life for residents of his district, and a guy who monitors teenage girls for tittilating gyrations. Personal preferences aside, who would you want representing your district?

By the way, the award for best Al Edwards post goes to PinkDome, for U-G-L-Y, You ain't got no alibi...You Ugly! Not because the post told us things we didn't already know, but because it has such a cool title.

In other primary news, Henry Boehm Jr. of Brenham won the democratic nomination for Texas Senate District 18. Unfortunately, Dr. Boehm withdrew from the race a month before the election, leaving Republican incumbent Glenn Hegar without a challenger. Another Senate seat lost to ignorance and apathy.

So let's make informed decisions, y'all, and not just vote for familiar names on the ballot. Learn about your candidates and what they stand for, and help bring in government leaders who believe in the same things we do.

The alternative is too u-g-l-y to contemplate.

BBQ Saturday with Morrison and Van Os

2006-03-23T00:36:00.000-06:00

If I had to describe David Van Os in one word, I would probably have to say "momentum". The dude never stops. Now he's coming to Houston to one of my favorite venues, and he's bringing some heavy hitters with him.

Van Os, best known for his Filibuster for Independence at the Texas State Capitol, is running for Texas Attorney General, and is well into a marathon speaking tour through Texas.

Mark your calendars. This Saturday, March 25th, he'll be at Drexler's BBQ.

That's right, Clyde "The Glide" Drexler's Mom's and Pop's place at 2300 Pierce, a downtown landmark.

With him will be Master of Ceremonies Richard Morrison, who is running against Tom DeLay for District 22 in this year's election.

Music will be provided by David Rovics, who's show has been described as "the musical version of Democracy Now", and a musical political comedy called "Brother, Can You Spare a Dime".

Advance tickets are cheaper, but you can pay at the door.

See the flyer here.

See you there!

Correction: PDiddie rightly pointed out that Nick Lampson is running against DeLay in the upcoming election. He won't be at the BBQ, because hopefully he'll be out there convincing the lemmings in District 22 not to reelect an ethically-challenged, power-hungry Charlatan. The non-lemmings in District 22 don't need convincing.

Richard Morrison ran against DeLay in the 2002 race. I guess I'm still living in the past, 'cause the present is so surreal. Doh! I was saving that for therapy! Now I'll have to think of something else...

Voter Alert: Gene Kelly died (ten years ago)

2006-03-22T21:36:00.000-06:00

The name you'll see on the ballot for the Democratic Senate runoff election on April 11 does not belong to the beloved singer and dancer you visualize when you hear the name. The Gene Kelly you'll see on the ballot belongs to an 80 year-old former lawyer named Eugine Kelly who has run unsuccessfully for state office 10 times in the last 14 years. He has no credentials, runs no campaigns, participates in no debates, and gives very few interviews. He simply relies on name recognition - that of the Hollywood icon - to get him on the ballot in the general election.

Then he loses miserably, as he did in the 2002 Senate election against Kay Bailey Hutchison and three time previously, causing a loss to Texas Democrats that is felt all the way down the ballot. Those who might have voted the straight-party ticket (as is the wont of the typical Republican voter) break the pattern at the top of the ballot when they see his name, and don't carry through to vote for worthy Democratic candidates for other offices within their state and county.

So what can a voter do who's tired of the corruption and apathy that's rampant in the current crop of elected representatives? He or she can start by learning about Kelly's runoff opponent, Barbara Radnofsky, and going out and voting for her on April 11.

Unlike Kelly, Radnofsky is not afraid to tell you where she stands on the issues. And where she stands looks pretty good. She has strong positions on education, immigration, veterans rights, health care and the war in Iraq. Kelly, on the other hand, has expressed opinions on very few of these issues; though we do know, via ontheissues.org, that he supports organized prayer in schools, the death penalty, the "Star Wars" missile defense system, the war on drugs, and subsidizing a church-controlled welfare system.

Barbara Radnofsky is smart (she entered U of H at age 16), she's a partner at Vinson & Elkins (Houston's premier law partnership), and a mother of three with a strong history in health-care legal circles. She has spoken out against the Republican incumbent, Kay Bailey Hutchison, with valid arguments as to why Hutchison is ambivalent to the plight of middle class Texans and beholden to special interests.

Barbara Radnofsky has also been endorsed by the Dallas Morning News, . the Fort Worth Star Telegram, and the Houston Chronicle as the best candidate to oppose Hutchison in the 2006 Senatorial race.

This is the kind of candidate we need in the upcoming elections. If you really want to cast off the yoke of the ethically-challenged Republicans in our state leadership, this is your best opportunity. By knocking Kelly out of the runoff election, you'll help pave the way for someone with some brass cojones to run for the U.S. Senate and make headway in our quest for honest and forthright leadership in Texas.

Visit her website at www.radnofsky.com and learn about her. If you like what you see, vote for her. If you really like what you see, send her some money, because the run against Hutchison, the Republican incumbent, will not be cheap, and without big money from special interests behind her, she'll need all the financial help she can get.

Game on!

2006-03-19T12:14:00.001-06:00

There's a new game in town, and it's a hoot. Although it pokes fun, it's a serious statement on the state of our union.

It's a Monopoly-like game called " Patriot Act: The Home Version".

Instead of losing cash for landing on certain squares, they lose civil liberties. And the "Mr. Monopoly" character at the center of the board is replaced by a scowling former Attorney General John Ashcroft.

The object of the game is to be the last player with any civil liberties left. The "Go" space has been replaced with "Bring It On", in reference to Bush's challenge to the insurgence early in the Iraq war.

Players roll the dice to determine how many civil liberties they start out with, accumulating them from a variety of categories: U.S. citizens get 5; non-citizens 1. Whites and Asians get 5; Arabs 1. Ultra right-wingers get 6; Democrats 3 or 4.
Instead of landing on, say Oriental Avenue, players land on a color-coded spaces corresponding to the national terror alert. A player who lands on a red space loses one civil liberty, as does anyone else within five spaces. A player who lands on an orange space gets to designate another player to lose one civil liberty.
"Chance" cards are now "Homeland Security Cards," with orders such as, "FBI wants you for questioning; Lose one turn;" and "You provide the local authorities with speculative information on your next door neighbor; Collect one civil liberty from each player."

The game's creator, Michael Kabbash, is a graphic artist and civil rights activist. He obviously has a sense of humor, but also a message to get across.

"I've had people complain to me that when they play, nobody wins. They say `We're all in Guantanamo and nobody has any civil liberties left,'" he said. "I'm like `Yeah, that's the point.'"

The game board and cards can be downloaded for printing at http://www.graphix4change.com/portfolio_PA_game.html

Kabbash says his next project will probably have something to do with the National Security Agency's domestic eavesdropping program. He is reasonably certain "there's a file on me somewhere."
Asked if the FBI keeps a file on Kabbash, a bureau spokesman refused to comment.

Game on!

It was 20 years ago today...

2006-03-19T12:14:00.000-06:00

Okay, it wasn't 20 years ago - it just seems like it. It was three years ago today that Bush launched the war in Iraq. It began as a "shock and awe" campaign, literally blowing up large portions of the Iraqi landscape, then progressed to ground troop pushing toward Bagdad, and then the symbolic toppling of Saddam Hussein's statue. It received favorable press, and prompted the Bush administration to predict a rapid cessation of hostilities. A year later, dubya announced "mission accomplished" and declared that major fighting was at an end.

A few months after that, though, the insurgents arose, and havoc ensued. Military leaders initially estimated that 700,000 troops would be needed to "liberate" Iraq. They were scoffed at, particularly when we took Bagdad with only 150,000. Now, three years after the start of this debacle, there are still 150,000 American troops in Iraq and the end is not in sight.

Sure, Cheney and Rummsfelt insist that we're winning, but the numbers tell a different story. Over 2300 American soldiers dead, thousands more injured - and that doesn't count the cost in Iraqi lives. The insurgents seem to get a second wind about every three months, and daily attacks cause untold death and destruction. In the same newscasts where we hear American generals tell us about Iraqi traffic cops wearing shirts and ties instead of body armor, another segment tells us of new attacks and more body counts.

Protests are occuring all over the world this week. Countries who supported us in the "alliance" are watching their citizens march in the streets, calling Bush a terrorist. Worldwide, we're seen as a bully, whose leader lied to get his war and is causing American and Iraqi deaths just so he can be remembered as a wartime president.

He'll be remembered as a wartime president all right, but not in a favorable way. His approval rating is again at an all time low, with more that half of the country seeing him as incompetent. In 2004, he called 51% of the votes in the election a "mandate". Now that 51% of people have disavowed him, that should constitute a "mandate" that he be removed.

Hey, I'm just using his logic. Or doesn't the logic work both ways?

Our soldiers are fighting and dying for a bogus cause. If dubya wanted to spread democracy around the world, he could have chosen to dethrone any number of despots other that Hussein. He chose Iraq because 1) they have oil, 2) they tried to kill his daddy, and 3) he wanted to deflect criticism from his dealings in the Arab world that should have been brought to light when one of the Bin Ladens, former business associates of his, planned and executed terrorist acts on American soil.

Now, almost four years later, Osama bin Laden is still at large, and we are three years into an endless battle with a country that had nothing to do with the attacks of September 11, 2001.

63% of the people who were mesmerized by Bush's rhetoric are now waking up to the fact that we were lied to - Saddam was not behind 9.11, and had no weapons of mass destruction - and now we're mired in a war that we can't win, and can't withdraw from.

Maybe when the other 37% wake up, we'll have enough collective intelligence to find a solution for this mess. Because now, it doesn't seem there is one. The administration's solution is to blow more smoke up our skirts, which isn't going to end the war anytime soon, and will most likely extend it. There has to be a better solution than trying to salvage the political career of someone who never should have been given power in the first place.

2006-03-17T17:50:00.000-06:00

From the folks at WyldCard.org!

Stop in an amuse yourself

with toasts, limericks, jokes, and more at

Wyld Card's St. Pat's page

He is a uniter after all...

2006-02-21T20:10:00.000-06:00

But it's a pyrrhic victory when he's united everyone against him.

The issue, of course, is the sale of the contract for the operation of six of America's ports to an Arab Emirate company. The sale apparently passed CFIUS's criteria, and therefore obtained the Bush Administration Seal of Approval.

But that wasn't enough for some folks. Apparently, the Treasury Department's version of "See-if-us" didn't satisfy the national security concerns of Congress and the Senate in regards to protection of our nation's borders.

Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader called Tuesday for the Bush administration to stop a deal permitting a United Arab Emirates company to take over six major U.S. seaports

Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the House asks for a moratorium on the Dubai port deal.

At risk is the operation of maritime ports in: New York, Newark, Philadelphia, Miami, New Orleans, and Baltimore.

The issue has landed our administration firmly in the category that we've always suggested - that of self-preservation.

Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff strongly defended the decision, which, given his decisive abilities during Katrina, should be roundly disavowed.

In contrast, Rep. Pete King (R), Homeland Security Chairman, is strongly against this transaction.

Interestingly enough, support for the president's position came from unexpected quarters - former Presindent Jimmy Carter (not likekly to gain dubya points with his base), and Senator John McCain, who, although he has been critical of the administration's actions, remains true to the principles.

CFIUS' economic based rulings have disapproved only one of the 1500 foreign investement cases brought before it. Yet dubya has full confidence in their ruling. Kinda like when he told Brownie he was doing a great job on Katrina, then canned him.

The current ruling affects the sale of the operating contract at six U.S. ports. They're currently operated by a privately held British company, and the contract is pending sale to a Middle Eastern company, which is owned by the Emir of Dubai.

When the Bush administration takes the high road, you know you can't trust them, because their actions have always belied their words.

Is it possible that Bush is generating this kind of publiciy to draw attention away from the Cheney fiasco? Or maybe to divert our doubts about the sincerity of his statements about converting America to alternate sources of energy?

Nah, there's something afoot here, and it probably can be traced to campaign contributions or some polaroids in the Emir's posession.

Proponents of the deal are claiming that the details have been public since November. It reminds me of when Arthur Dent claimed ignorance of plans to demolish his house, and the bureaucrat informed him that it was prominently displayed. No matter that it was displayed in the basement of the planning department, in the bottom of a locked locked file cabinet, tucked into an unused lavatory with a sign on the door that said "Beware of the Leopard".

Bush threatened to veto any legislation that would attempt to block the transaction. White House Counsel Dan Bartlett explained that dubya only did this because he was asked by a reporter if he would do so. Just because he said he would doesn't mean he really would, especially since his handlers didn't have a chance to cull the reporter out of the crowd prior to asking his question, which is kinda difficult to do aboard Air Force One.

It all boils down to whether we want state-sponsored companies in charge of our ports. Sure, it's a limited number of ports (suspiciously in Democrat dominated areas), and the controlling comapanies are not responsible for security (although the contract includes security responsibilities).

I'm getting a little nervous here. Is the government of Dubai sympathetic to our cause (protection from terrorist attacks)? Or are they interested in their own agenda (economic relations with the U.S.)?

Does fear play a part in this drama? Yes! Absolutely!

The question is - are there less benign areas of our economy in which Dubai can play a part that would allow them a profit? - Yes. Energy comes to mind.

And it would provoke a much lower level of anxiety than that which the Bush administration is trying to involve them in.

Live Green, go ...cabbage?

2006-02-17T22:21:00.000-06:00

cabbage: the new alternate fuel source?

Hey, it gives me gas. Why couldn't it be an alternate fuel source?

With all the hype about corn being the leading source for alternate fuel, i.e. E85 ethanol, there's not a big push to develop alternative fuels other than the ones already being developed by the big 3. With cabbage being naturally self-multiplying, there should be some research in this area. But convincing GM to shift its research, and its production schedules, is most likely a wasted effort.

So when you see the commercials for live green, go yellow, keep in mind that what you're seeing is a mindset that is not likely to change for expedience, and a marketing campaign that will not bend for environmental improvement. It's only there to sell cars and trucks.

Cheney - just asking for it

2006-02-17T21:25:00.000-06:00

Okay, I'll kick him one more time while he's down, and then leave it alone (if I can).

Feaux News is calling for an end to the media circus surrounding the coverage of Dick Cheney shooting his friend in the face. I'm sorry, but it's just so easy to plug away at the guy who's led us down one dark path after another, and then tops it off by shooting his friend in the face. But I'll try - after today. Think of this as Fat Tuesday, before Lent makes me repent.

In comments on the trial of Scooter Libby, Cheney says he has the power to declassify information. Not so, as far as I can tell. This must be in the same secret part of the Constitution, not available to the general public, that Bush claims allows him the power to violate civil liberties and spy on Americans.

Cheney's former chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, told a grand jury he was "authorized by his superiors" to disclose classified information from an intelligence estimate on Iraq to reporters, the special prosecutor investigating the 2003 leak of a CIA agent's identity told Libby's attorneys. The prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, did not identify who those "superiors" are.
In an interview Wednesday with Fox News, Cheney said the case was "nothing I can talk about." But he said he had the authority to declassify material under an executive order that "focuses first and foremost on the president, but also includes the vice president."

If someone can show me where this executive order is, I'll retract my statement publicly. I have a feeling, though, that this will go into sound-bite history, and we won't hear about it again.

As for Cheney shooting his friend in the face, Common Sense has an interesting wrap-up - in absence of our daily Daily Show episode - that succinctly covers the pertinent points rather admirably.

Along these lines is The Agonist, pointing us toward a site where Cheney could have taken a quail hunting course that could have helped him avoid shooting his friend in the face.

I took this course, and passed it. Okay, on the second try. That Harry Whittington is a wily character.

On a final note, Sploid ponders whether shooting his friend in the face is why Cheney chose not to reveal the accident right away. Apparently, there were two female members of the hunting party who were not the wives of the male members of the hunting party. I'll wait for you to catch up.

Not that these were nubile babes or anything, but they were hustled off the scene before any statements were made to law enforcement or the media. Draw your own conclusions.

As a close to my final post on the fact that Dick Cheney shot his friend in the face, it should be said that this story is far from over. There are questions as to what actualy happened that weekend, and to what are the implications of our attitiudes towards gun control related to hunting (such as, making sure that your field of fire is not inhabited by your hunting companions).

And most importantly, that your hunting fiasco is not haunted by evidence of extra-marital affairs. 'cause as we've learned, it's worse to have extra-marital affairs than to screw the entire country.

Fair, Balanced and Filtered

2006-02-17T20:25:00.000-06:00

Fox refuses to air DeLay Ad

Here's an interesting twist. Fox News in Houston is refusing to air an ad produced by Tom DeLay's folks that attacks democratic suppporter George Soros for spending millions in the attempt to defeat Bush in 2004, and to help produce the ads attacking Tom DeLay that were refused by the media last month.

Was this an attempt to appear "fair and balanced"? Regardless, it personifies the power that the media have over the information we receive. If they had agreed to air both ads - one for, and one against DeLay - then it would truly be fair and balanced. Instead, it proves that the information we receive from the media is filtered in order to just inform us of what they want us to hear.

Cheney update

2006-02-14T21:00:00.000-06:00

Man shot by Cheney has minor heart attack

Dick Cheney received a warning from the Texas Fish and Game Department - apparently he didn't have the proper "lawyer" stamp on his hunting licence. I'm sorry, the "upland game birds" stamp. It's so hard to determine between the two.

Oh yeah, and Whittington had a heart attack, apparently because he has shotgun pellets lodged in his heart put there when Cheney shot him.

If he wasn't the vice president, Cheney would be up on charges right now. The cause of the accident was attributed to a "judgement factor". This says a lot about Cheney and his leadership abilities.

But it's not over yet. Only time will tell whether Cheney will have to answer for his stupidity. I mean, anyone who shoots their hunting partner, aside from being the brunt of their friends' jokes, has to answer to the law eventually.

And Cheney is definitely being the brunt of their friends' jokes, as well as everyone else in the country. Everyone from the president to the press corps is wearing orange and making the most of the comic side of this.

But the issue is real - gun control could have prevented this - and nothing the administration can do will change that. There are no indications that either Cheney or Whittington had taken any hunter safety classes, yet were allowed to weild potentially lethal weapons.

Cheney exemplifies the NRA advocate. Yet now he stands as an example of why firearms should be regulated. If someone like this can brandish a weapon in such an irresponsible manner, what's to keep Joe Sixpack from using this example to justify his irresponsible hunting accidents which kill people on a regular basis.

Guns don't kill people. Irresponsible people with guns do.

And irresponsible people with guns are out there. Just waiting for you to get in the way.

Happy Valentine's Day!

2006-02-14T00:19:00.000-06:00

I can't fax you my love,

I can't email my heart.

I can't see your face in cyberspace,

I don't know where to start.

I'm light years behind,

from this age they call stone.

I'm just a carbon-based caveman;

just flesh and bone.

If men came from Venus,

and women came from Mars,

then I'd be lunching with my boyfriends,

while you girls talked about cigars.

But that's not how it happened,

evolution took a different turn.

We may be creatures with some unique features,

but we've still got a lot to learn.

Now, we live in this age of computers.

They run everything in the world.

I'm a little behind on this technical climb,

and you are an internet girl.

I've got words but no processor,

I've got feelings but I don't know DOS.

So I just have to go back to basics

to try to get my point across.

I can't fax you my love,

I can't email my heart.

I can't see your face in cyberspace,

I don't know where to start.

I'm light-years behind,

from this age they call stone.

I'm a carbon-based caveman;

just flesh and bone.

Flesh and Bone - Jimmy Buffett

Assault and Peppered

2006-02-14T00:05:00.000-06:00

I know that this news item has been done to death (correction: I'm told the issue is now in stable condition, but still in ICU), but I can't resist getting my potshots in. Dick Cheney, aside from helping send thousands of American soldiers to their deaths in Iraq, normally only shoots himself in the foot.

Now it's also well-known that he also shoots small, farm-raised birds and his friends that accompany him. After emerging from his vehicle, and accompanied by his secret service entourage, he was tracking a coven of quail with his weapon and let loose just as his friend came into the path of the shotgun blast.

Apparently, his 78 year old victim and friend, Austin attorney Harry Whittington, was retrieving some previously shot quail and didn't bother to announce his return to the hunting group.

Although Cheney didn't report the shooting, once it hit the press he blamed Whittington for getting in the line of fire. Whittington should have announced himself. "Hey Dick! I'm not a bird in an orange vest. It's me, remember! I was just here".

Cheney also blamed the incident on the sun being in his eyes. I always thought that was one of the primary rules in gun safety - If you can't see, don't pull the trigger. But what do I know? I'm not a member of the NRA.

Whittington is a well-seasoned fundraiser for the Republican party. Well, maybe not well-seasoned enough, since Cheney felt the need to pepper him - with birdshot.

Cheney stands behind his decision to shoot at what he thought were quail, because all intelligence at the time pointed toward quail being in his line of fire. And in response to questions about reporting the incident, White House spokeslemming Scott McClellan informs us that by talking about it now, we're letting the quail know that we're hunting them. This is paramount to giving aid and comfort to the enemy. And if we continue, the quail win.

Whittingham, in the meantime, is currently undergoing tweezer therapy, although there will still be many pellets imbedded in his face, neck and torso, and still won't comment. I guess that's a small price to pay to maintain party loyalty. And boy, does he have some favors coming.

When asked why there was no official announcement of the event from the White House, McClellan waivered:

The White House did not inform the national media of the accident, but the vice president’s office confirmed the story after journalists called to ask about the report on the Caller-Times Web site nearly 24 hours after the shooting.
On Monday, McClellan faced a combative press corps asking why the delay in disclosure took place and asking why it was announced by a private citizen rather than the White House or Cheney's office.
"That's one way to provide information to the public," McClellan said.
"I think you can always look back at these issues and look at how to do a better job," he added.

Sounds like their response to many issues, including Katrina. I guess when you have a boss like Bush, the bar gets set pretty low.

Whittington, who had raised a lot of money for the Republican Party in Texas, was rewarded for his efforts by then-Governor Bush with a seat on the Texas Funeral Service Commission.

So what have we learned from this little episode?

Guns don't kill people; Dick Cheney does (or could, if given the proper ammunition).
It's a good thing they didn't trust him with anything deadlier that training-wheel bird-shot.
What our government response will be to "avian flew".
If your face is full of pellets, it's better to shut up than lose your coveted political appointment.
If friends of the administration get blasted for getting in the way of their leaders' blind pursuits, what chance does the average American have?

Again, the administration claims ignorance

2006-02-10T18:58:00.001-06:00

In another classic case of the White House not knowing what's going on, they belatedly put the gag on Michael Brown, who began testifying today before the congressional committee investigating the government's response to Hurricane Katrina.

At the beginning of the session, the committee chairperson made it very clear that she had contacted the White House to see if executive privilege applied to Brown, which would mean he wouldn't be allowed to discuss any communication between himself and the oval office.

The white house declined, and Brown began detailing the sad chain of non-events that led to the worst aftermath of the worst natural disaster in our nation's history.

A couple of hours later, White House spokeswhore Scott McClellan was angrily waving a copy of the New York Times on the doorstep, ranting about misrepresentation. True to their style, the administration claimed ignorance of the hearing.

Next thing you know, Brown's not allowed to talk about any communications he had with the president regarding the disaster.

It's no suprise, but it's becoming apparent that the only government agency that did what it was supposed to do during and after Katrina was the National Weather Service.

Unfortunately, no one took them seriously. Two days after landfall, dubya was still on vacation at his ranch, da veep was fly-fishing in Wyoming, The chief of staff was in Maine, and Chertoff boarded a plane to Atlanta to attend a conference on avian flu.

The state was unprepared, the city was undecided, and everyone was understaffed and undersupplied.

Of course, it didn't help that the National Guard troops that normally would have been available to help, were off fighting dubya's war instead of being there like they were supposed to, just for such an emergency as this.

Its obvious that our federal government is not equipped to handle natural disasters. They can bluster all they want about terrorism, but when it comes down to it, they don't know how to deal with Mother Nature and her tantrums.

Should FEMA be a part of Homeland Security? It's obvious that they're not getting the attention they deserve, based on the money going to anti-terrorist activities vs. protection from natural disasters.

Let's hope that the hearings being held will shed some light on where our priorities lie, and not just on where the blame lies in this national disaster.

Speaking of scary...

2006-02-10T18:58:00.000-06:00

As usual, most of the excitement at the Super Bowl this year didn't take place on the field. And although we didn't have any "wardrobe malfunctions", it was still an interesting day.

Also as usual, we overdid it on the snackage. This is the time of year when we tend to overindulge culinarily without actually eating anything substantial. Chips, wings, shrimp, nuggets - basically anything that can be dunked into a sauce or dip.

This is also the one time of year we actually watch commercials. Not that the game wasn't almost exciting. Sure, Seattle was in it for the first time ever. And Pittsburgh, well they were good in the 70s. But it was really about the halftime show and the commercials.

Speaking of the halftime show, it's a good thing they got away from the sexual content of previous years, eh? Yeah, Mick kinda mumbled through the racier lyrics of Rough Justice. And unless you had any imagination at all, you wouldn't see the symbolism of the giant tongue-shaped stage, or understand what the Rolling Stones were singing about in Start Me Up and (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction. Subtlety aside, it was just good, clean family entertainment. And Mick didn't show any nipple.

There was a "wardrobe malfunction" reference in one of the commercials, though. Apparently, a sale was going to fail, so it was decided to send in the Go-Daddy girl. Her halter strap breaks, and an old guy (the buyer, we presume) reaches for his athsma inhaler. Clever, but was it effective? First, we didn't get to see what he saw, and second, what does Go-Daddy sell, anyway?

Among the other ads were big production numbers, such as a Full Throttle tanker truck being followed by a testosterone parade, Burger King burger diving - a Busby-Berkely number featuring trapeze veggies and a bun babe, and Budweiser football on the Range featuring all manner of barnyard animals and a streaking shaved lamb.

There were cute ads, such as Hummer3 being the love child of a Godzilla knock-off and Robotman, and a hamster mascot hanging with Ronald McDonald (was that Michael J. Fox in the hamster suit?).

There were almost-funny ads, including two from Ameriquest, whose theme was "don't judge too quickly". In one, an intern zaps an insect with defibrilator paddles, then says "that killed him" just as the patient's family walks into the hospital room. In another, a woman tries to get past the sleeping passenger next to her on a plane. The lights come on while she's straddling him with her skirt hiked up.

Also almost funny was HEBs ad featuring David Carr carrying in groceries by the armload. According to his wife, he doesn't like sacks.

There were some decidedly un-funny ads, which I won't even acknowledge by mentioning them here. And I'm a little disappointed by Overstock.com, whose icon - the Big O - wasn't used as a double entendre even once that I could tell. They should take barely-subtle lessons from the Stones if they want to get my attention.

Oddly enough, the only actually funny commercials were both done by Pepsi. Diet Pepsi came in second with a series of commercials where it gets an agent. In the first, it stars in a music video (kinda lame), but then it co-stars with Jackie Chan in an action flick. The agent insists it doesn't do stunts, so Diet Coke stands in and gets crushed. It would almost make we want to drink Diet Pepsi if it tasted any good.

The funniest commercial was for Sierra Mist, where a guy gets stopped at airport security. The agent (Kathy Griffin?) passes the metal detector over the soda bottle, making noises. The guy calls her on this, she tells her partner they have a troublemaker, and her partner snaps on his latex glove. The guy says "I'm good" and moves on.

And now, it seems, scientists are using brainscan images recorded while people watched these ads to see which ones produced favorable responses. Not surprisingly, the Sierra Mist ad topped the list, along with one from Disney, which I must have missed.

Every year at Super Bowl time, an unofficial, often more engaging, contest takes place between the 30-second commercials that air before, during and after the game.
Companies like Pepsi, Anheuser-Busch, Disney and Careerbuilder.com pay megabucks for the chance to go down in the history of public opinion as the funniest, most dramatic or most shocking advertiser during the country's most-watched program. Eliciting emotion in a commercial can be considered a factor for positive remembrance--and with data on brain response, the competition could reach new heights.
The researchers at UCLA and FKF Applied Research used fMRI, or functional magnetic resonance imaging, to measure the activity of brain regions associated with key emotions in viewers. "NFL Dreamers" elicited strong responses in the orbito-frontal cortex and the ventral striatum, two brain regions associated with the processing of rewards, they said. Bud Light's "Employee Incentive Plan," in contrast, induced anxiety. FedEx's "Caveman" failed to trigger much activity at all.
However, most of the ads--including FedEx's--had one response in common: repelling viewers.
"Almost all the ads induced their greatest activity in the amygdala, a center of the brain most associated with detecting threats or danger," Joshua Freedman, a UCLA clinical assistant professor of psychiatry and co-founder of FKF Applied Research, said in a statement.

And The Agonist brings up a very good point:

That's scary that technology can measure the effectiveness of advertisements! Means governments will use it next for the best propaganda money can buy. Perhaps they already are?

American Pie 3: Cheney puts his staff in it

2006-02-10T06:41:00.002-06:00

Cheney OK'd leak in CIA case

"No comment" is a good response to hear from our current administration. It means they haven't had time to think of a good lie, or semi-truth, yet.

And that's the response from Dick Cheney's and Scooter Libby's lawyers and White House spokeslemming Scott McClellan on the report that Cheney gave approval for Libby to leak Valerie Plame's identity, who was an active CIA agent at the time, in order to punish her husband, Joseph Wilson, for pointing out that we had no justification for starting the war in Iraq.

When Bush stated in 2003 that he would seek out and punish anyone who leaked national security information, he was just telling the people what they wanted to hear. He didn't really mean it. Kinda like when he said he'd reduce our dependence on foreign oil. He was just generalizing.

"It was an example"

At least that's what his Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said the day after dubyas State of the disUnion address last week.

Such is the case in the Valerie Plame case. Bush vowed to bring to justice anyone who was involved in outing the CIA agent, which is a treasonable offense. When Scooter Libby was indicted, he changed it to punishing anyone who broke the law.

Judging from this administration's more-than-loose interpretation of the law regarding the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), it's got to be pretty hard to break the law when you can bend it into an unrecognizable form.

Now that his number two man, Dick Cheney, is implicated, the law will become a shadow of its former self - vaguely reconizable as a law, yet totally unrelated to its intent, which was supposed to prevent jeapordizing national security by revealing our covert agents, and therefore placing agents and entire operations at risk.

How's that for jeapordizing up the war on terra, just to cover their backsides?

Why was there no surveillance on these activities? Obviously it posed a risk to our national security. Is it because there were no parties that were officially tied to Al Qaeda operatives? What about Bush? Didn't he have personal friends in the Bin Laden family? Surely the web of surveillance covered this relationship. And if not, why not?

To the unitiated, this may seem curious. But to anyone who understands the policy of self-preservation, its obvious how the commander-in-chief can limit the scope of the investigation to exclude any embarrassing illuminations. Kinda like how members of the Bin Laden family were allowed to leave the country, without being questioned, immediately following 9/11, that horrendous event that our illustrious leader is so prone to exploit whenever he needs to inflame fear in order to divert attention from his illegal and immoral activities.

So now we wait to see where the administration goes from here. Do they try to portray the traitorous activities of the VP as patriotic actions (anyone who's against the war is against America), or as justifiable actions against the enemy (dissent = aid and comfort to the enemy)?

It'll be interesting to see how they twist this one to say that it was anything but illegal and traitorous. But they've done it before.

And that's what's scary.

FISA. It's NOT everywhere you want it to be...

2006-02-10T06:41:00.001-06:00

Groundhog Day occurred. What a bunch of crock. Begun in Germany as a folk tale/superstition, and scheduled on February 2nd because it was halfway through the winter. It epitomizes how man's lack of understanding leads to his attempted explanation of the world around him.

Which leads to our current executive branch of government.

We had a State of the Union address, which means that our fearless leader, Gee Dubya, felt the need to explain to the 'murcan people how that when he broke the law, it was for our own good.

He began by thanking the Congress for inviting him to speak, when we all know he called the meeting. We also know, from that dastardly mainstream media, that Cindy Sheehan, notorious mother-of-a-soldier, was in the audience, but was arrested because she might have been a nuisance, and was held until the state of the disunion was over, then released.

It was also curious that the most thunderous applause ocurred among the Democrats when dubya's speech mentioned that Congress failed to pass his Social Security "reform" efforts.

On the other side of the chamber, however, the lemmings were standing and sitting so often that it reminded me of a Catholic Mass. Drinking games aside, dubya's references to 9/11 and "nucular" weaapons were making me so nauseous that I couln't stand it anymore, and had to turn the TV off - something the bedwetters and self-rightous don't seem to have figured out how to do yet.

One thing that’s obvious is that dubya was counting on his State of the disUnion address to bolster his polling numbers. The question is why. He’s already a lame-duck, and only into his sixth year. He’s already isolated his base by embracing immigration labor and waffling on other conservative values.

And he’s proven that he can’t be trusted to tell the truth. Cases-in-point include his relationships with Jack Abramoff and Big Oil. Aside from the fact that he’s had numerous personal meetings with Abramoff, he also claims to plan on reducing American dependence on foreign oil by 2025, when his actual plan is nothing near his claimed goal.

Dubya, in another attempt to divert popular opinion, referred to the successful identification of a plot to plane-bomb L.A. No details are available to determine whether these are the same intelligence sources that let us predict 9/11, but were ignored by the administration, or are a result of illegal surveillance.

One thing I haven’t figured out yet. The main argument for spying on the American people - I’m sorry, "terrorist surveillance" - is that if you don’t have anything to hide, what’s your problem with it. Well, if the administration has nothing to hide, why did they try to hide it?

Al "Gonzo" Gonzalez called it a "hypothetical question" back in 2005. Bush denied it in 2004. Now it’s not only his Constitutionally protected right (someone show me where this is in the Constitution, please), but his duty as commander-in-chief (even though Congress explicitly denied this in the original temporary passage of the Patriot Act).

Gonzo even cited cases where Washington, Lincoln, Eisenhower and other presidents used surveillance in time of war. He neglected to mention the fact that this was before it was illegal to do so.

Well, that's this administration's spin for ya. Repeat something often enough, and it will become truth. Soon we'll be throwing our phone and internet records at this "smaller government" party, begging them to intrude more in our daily lives. 'Cuz it'll make us safer.

And we know how they'll use that information. If we dissent, they will destroy us. Like they did Joseph Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame. But that's another story.

Is haiati plural for hiatus?

2006-02-10T06:41:00.000-06:00

Yeah, I've been away for awhile. I've got a lot going on in my life right now, and haven't had any time for extracurricular activities, much less helping others understand what's really going on in their world. Selfish, you say? Maybe. But I've got to set priorities, and at the moment I've got some things to set right in my world before I can help others set things right in theirs.

At the moment, though, it seems that I have an opportunity to send a shout-out, so I'll take advantage of it.

To those of you who've stood by me, my appreciation and gratitude. You know who you are.

To those who've stuck with me without knowing my troubles, my admiration. You may not know who you are, but if you're reading this, you're probably one of them.

Thanks for bearing with me, y'all, and checking in even when there was nothing new. I'll try to make it up to you.

Happy Birthday to Me!

2006-01-20T18:26:00.001-06:00

It just struck me. I'm a year old. Funny, I feel a lot older.

It was a year ago this month that this blog came into being. Not counting the gestation period, of course, as I know there are those out there who believe that life begins at conception. In which case I'm a lot older, as the disillusionment with our elected "leaders" has been gestating, or should I say 'festering', much longer than that.

And although I'm still learning to crawl, I'm suprised that there are people out there who are interested in what I have to say. I started this blog with the intention of educating and informing people of the mistakes we've made recently, mainly in the 2004 election. But as I've learned and become more "politerate", it's grown to include local politics, the environment, and injustices in general.

It's been a wyld and crazy year. I've learned much, and been called much, since I started.

I've learned not to drink and blog - it's much better to wait until I'm hungover. The post may not be as fresh, but it's much more coherent.

I've learned about grammar and syntax, although I still have a lot to learn about being snarky and prolific like the masters at Pinkdome and Wonkette.

My second-ever post (the first being a brief introduction) was linked by The People's Republic of Seabrook with the following excerpt:

Patriotically Correct vs. Not Patriotically Correct
PC: Believing President Bush's promises.
Not PC: Expecting him to keep his promises.
PC: Believing Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11.
Not PC: Pointing out that the only thing that Iraq and Al Qaida have in common is the letter "Q". (and later pointed out, the letter I).
PC: Believing that Haliburton is the only company that could handle support for the Iraq war because "it's a big job".
Not PC: Pointing out that Dick Cheney made the decision, and he used to run the company.
PC: Voting straight ticket Republican on moral grounds.
Not PC: Questioning the morality of Republican leaders who lie, cheat and bully their peers to pass legislation that benefits themselves and their friends.

And I was off and running...

And of course, with Jack's detractors clued into my presence, the negative comments began to roll in.

Also in January, Richard Cranium at the All Spin Zone linked to a piece I did on the proper way to burn a flag, which drew criticism from both the right and the left.

That's right, I'm an equal opportunity offender.

In February, I set up a site meter, and was counting twenty-plus hits per day. Not a lot compared to the mega-bloggers, but knowing that more than a hundred people were looking at my blog every week motivated me to keep writing.

Since then, based on comments posted, I've been looked at by some big hitters including Pissed Off Patricia at BlondeSense, and Rising Hegemon. No idea how they found me, but I'm honored to be noticed by the hotshots of the progressive blogosphere.

Now, thanks to the previously mentioned bloggers and my new friends in the Texas Progressive Alliance, I'm kept in the loop on political goings-on and social happenings, and hopefully will use these newfound resources to help keep you, the internet surfer, informed as to the state of our union.

So as the new year progresses, I leave you with the tag-line used by annatopia -

Fudd's First Law of Opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.

And this quote from the late Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, borrowed from Eye on Williamson County -

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter"

For the best representation money can buy...

2006-01-20T18:26:00.000-06:00

All Aboard the Gravy Train

In the wake of the Abramoff bribery and corruption scandal, Republican legislators are scrambling to buiild up the facade of ethics in government. Thank goodness some of our GOP leaders are brave enough to buck the tide of appearances, and continue to show their true colors.

I'm talking, of course, about Congressman Joe Barton, who kicks of his gravy train, er, Texas Train Ride where, for the paltry sum of $2,000 ($5,000 if you're a PAC), you can spend several hours with "Cotton Bowl Joe" (okay, the Cotton Bowl isn't really part of the BCS, but it sounds much better than "Orange Bowl Joe", doesn't it?), get an after-hours tour of the Alamo, and spend an evening of drinking and gambling. Yessir, good ol' Republican values!

The invitation promises that "During the ride, we'll have lots of time to talk".

How's that for blatantly snubbing the ethics reform movement?

And in the spirit of the GOP's secrecy mindset, he's not reporting who'll be aboard the train. Wouldn't want any big PACs that are linked to Abramoff having any public association with this endeavor, would we?

In response, annatopia is asking for financial support of his 6th District opponent, David Harris. Compared to up to $700,000 Joe stands to make from this fundraiser, every dollar Dave gets will help combat the advertising blitz Barton is sure to mount in his attempt to retain his seat in Congress.

the "ayes" of Texas are upon you

2006-01-16T20:45:00.002-06:00

While Governor Rick Perry is basking in his 65 percent delusion, in which football coaches retain their jobs while librarians lose theirs, there are others who think they can do a better job as governor.

Never mind that Perry's two special sessions failed to produce an education bill or anything else that resembled meaningful legislation, he's still portraying himself as a man of the people.

So who dares to pit themselves against Governor Goodhair?

There's Bob Gammage, who thinks that his reputation of opposing corruption will help him beat MoFo at the polls.

Then there's Carole "One Tough Grandma" Strayhorne, and Kinky "Why the Hell Not" Friedman.

Add to the mix Chris "Redistrict This" Bell and you've got an interesting race.

In any event, the governor's race in Texas is the one to watch.

Regardless of who wins it (other than Perry), it can only be an improvement over the current administration, whose only goal seems to be lining the pockets of those who've contributed to the current governor's campaign.

If Strayhorne wins, the education system wins.

If Kinky wins, we've proved that politics are a farce.

If Bell wins, there's a good chance that we'll have medical insurance for everyone.

And if Gammage wins, then it seems that everyone in Texas wins overall.

I'd say that's 4 - 1 odds that Texas can be improved in the next election.

Make sure you make your voice heard and vote next election day.

It's really up to you.

Ethics? Puh-lease! This is politics!

2006-01-16T20:45:00.001-06:00

Okay, we know about Tom DeLay leading the bid to close the Native American casinos in Texas while under the influence of Jack Abramoff. And we can deal with Roy Blunt transferring donations between funds to benefit his son's campaign in Missouri from DeLay's deep pockets in Texas.

But our concern is this. Who will lead the GOP when they're all in jail?

And why didn't this send a message to former Attorney General John Ashcroft, who's just now coming into his own as a lobbyist?

Bush in 2006!

2006-01-16T20:45:00.000-06:00

It seems that with the hype about Vince Young abounding, Reggie Bush has been lost in the shuffle. Maybe cooler heads will prevail in the coming months before the draft, but for now it seems as if popular opinion will steer the Texans towards drafting Young. Big mistake.

Sure, Young made a spectacular showing in the Rose Bowl. But Bush has proven himself all season and appears to be ready for the NFL, while Young - although a talented runner and respectable passer - still could stand to gain by honing himself further in college.

At issue is the number one draft pick. We can pick Reggie Bush, Vince Young, or trade for lower draft picks. My take is that Young would be the worst possible choice we could make in this situation.

Why, you ask? Well, I'll tell you.

First because, although Vince Young is an exceptional ground player, he still has a way to go as a passer. Sure, he holds his own in college, but against NFL defenses, he will probably not pan out as a superstar. Another year in the NCAA will probably fix this, but for now, he'd be average.

Second, he'd most likely play backup to David Carr, who in my opinion, is highly underrated as a QB. Put Young behind the same line as Carr, and you'd likely see the same result. Even if he bumped Carr out of the number one QB slot it wouldn't make much difference in league standings for the team, and Carr would declare free agency next year (as is his right), leaving us just as shallow in the QB position as we are now.

On the other hand, Reggie Bush would make a nice addition to our offensive backfield. Domanic Davis can only do so much, and Bush would provide another weapon for defenses to have to guard against. After all, there's only one quarterback and multiple offensive backs, meaning Davis and Bush could be on the same offense and easily obfusticate the defense with multiple attacks.

Or, we can trade down for players to fill the holes we're sadly lacking in. Lord knows there are plenty of offensive and defensive positions that we need talent in to get us out of hole we're in. There are lots of players in the draft that can fill these holes, and a 13th or 14th pick can do this for us.

With all taken into account, I believe we should go with Reggie Bush. He would add an offensive weapon without replacing anything critical, and will greatly improve the team's chances of winning more games next year.

I'm tired of the Texans being the brunt of NFL jokes. I watch their games, and I want to see them win.

Let's let the owners know that we want a winning team, not just a team full of superstars that have name recognition, and can compete with other teams rather than with each other.

Draft Reggie Bush. As much as I hate to admit it, I'm voting for a Bush for the first time in my life. And, unlike others who have voted likewise, I don't plan to regret it.

The knuckleheads are running rampant

2006-01-11T10:06:00.000-06:00

Regardless of whether you believe in evolution or not, it's evident that de-evolution is alive and well in the 21st Century.

The concept peaked my interest when I caught a news bite about a man in New Mexico who tried to kill a mouse he'd caught by throwing it on a pile of burning leaves. Needless to say, the flaming mouse ran back into the peabrain's house, and burned it down along with all of its contents.

What a maroon. Fire safety aside, what would posess a person to burn anything alive, regardless of its position in the food chain. In this case, it appears that the rodent's last great act of defiance proved who was the smarter of the two.

So I looked a little deeper, and it seems the knuckleheads are running rampant.

Consider the dimwit in North Dakota who stole a some earings from a college fundraising auction, then tried to have them appraised at the jewelry store that donated them to the auction. And, you guessed it, the name of the jewelry store was on the earing box, so it's not like a coincidence that he accidently took them to the wrong store.

Or the guy in Germany who sold a stolen camera on eBay to its original owner.

Or the nitwit in Nebraska who tried to rob a bank with "FINDME" as the vanity plates on his getaway car.

If you believe that intelligent design should take the place of evolution, whoever put these witless wonders together was either having a bad day, has a sense of humor, or is intent on thinning out the herd.

Or some of us could just be de-evolving.

The war is being fought by the wrong people

2006-01-03T19:06:00.001-06:00

I joined the military thinking it would give me a better chance at life. A chance that included educational reimbursement, even though I found out later that they didn't provide the benefits I thought they would.

Now my own son has joined the military to get the benefits to improve his life in the way that I couldn't.

He's chosen to lay his life on the line to get these benefits. During wartime.

It's the curse of the middle class. College is a dream. Sure, Community College classes count towards a degree, but until you have serious money for a University, most of your time spent seems like spitting in the wind.

And so my son enlisted in the military. At least his training will take up to a year, meaning he won't be deployed for at least a year.

But this is no comfort for those whose sons and daughters have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in the past few months.

Its sickening to know that the middle and lower classes are the primary sources of human fodder deployed in war zones in order to protect oil interests around the world, while the priveleged classes are safely ensconced at home doing "war related" activities, including political activism and fundraising for the Republican Party.

It reminds me of our president, safely in the Texas National Guard, skipping classses and partying in the States, while his contemporaries were dying in Vietnam.

But it's all about earning your degree. Dubya managed to score a degree with his connections. My son will have to earn a degree by possibly fighting and dying for his country in an illegal war for a chance to earn his degree when he gets home by applying himself 110%.

Dubya's degree was superficial, and got him opportunities mainly on his name recognition. My son will need to apply for jobs relying mainly on his academic achievements.

My son will succeed because he's an intellegent, resourceful individual, who's ethics and values will be appreciated by some forward thinking company, or in his own business.

Dubya will retire gracefully because he's fostered lobbyist loyalty and has fostered many friendships in his presidency.

It still boils down to the fact that lower and middle class citizens are the ones who serve in the military, and the onus of who dies for our country should fall on our leadership. And, using the title of leadership loosely, I lay it on the White House, the Congress and the Senate.

As a parent, a citizen and a voter, I know the value of my son's life, knowledge and well being.

Don't muck it up. Because I know the score. And I will hold you personally responsible for his safety.

Signs that the new year may be better

2006-01-03T19:06:00.000-06:00

Primary Season Promises Fireworks
The Candidates

I know, I'm an eternal optimist, but hey - exciting things are happening already. Yeah, some of them have been in the works for awhile, but they're now beginning to come into fruition.

The best reason to celebrate is that Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty to federal conspiracy, mail fraud and tax evasion charges today. Yes, it was expected, but now it's official. He'll plea and hopefully sing like a bird, bringing down everyone from GOP Representative Bob Ney of Ohio, through his buddy, the former House majority leader, Tom DeLay of Sugar Land, up to and including top officials in the White House. Dubya's already denied ever meeting the guy, but you know there's dirt to be dug up. There's plenty of dirt under Abramoff's fingernails from all through the political spectrum, so this isn't a partisan thing. Crooked is crooked no matter which side of the fence you're on, and I hope we get them all. Or at least enough of them to send the remainder into hiding.

Another reason to celebrate is that Bill White will serve another term as Houston's Mayor. Almost from day one, he cut through the red tape to work on our traffic and environmental problems, and proved adept at listening to advisors who actually knew what they were talking about. Sure, he made some mistakes, but unlike typical politicians, admitted and then corrected them. Too bad we can't find more public servants that would do the same.

Speaking of public servants, Nick Lampson has thrown his hat into the ring for the 22nd Congressional District race. As you may recall, he got squeezed out of a neighboring district when Texas Republican leadership, headed by Tom DeLay, rearranged the Districts, which left Nick with predominantly Republican constituents. Needless to say, he lost his next election.

Now he's moved to Sugar Land and is taking on DeLay, and it seems as if he's got a good shot at unseating the Hammer for the first time in DeLay's more than 20 years in office. Throw into the mix that DeLay is fighting money-laundering and conspiracy charges, and that he faces three other Repubicans in the primary, and it should make for some interesting theatre. People are already suspicious of Republican ethics (an oxymoron if I ever heard one), and once the mud starts flying, it can only make them seem dirtier.

In other good news, District 7's Jon Lindsay is retiring. Although his district is heavily red-state, there are four candidates vying for his seat, among them professional loudmouth Dan Patrick, which should again insure plenty of mudstorms and more disillusionment being washed away among the constituents in northwest Houston.

The race for governor just got less interesting, with Carole Keeton Strahorn, aka One Tough Grandma, announcing that she'll run as an independent. Strayhorn has been one of the most vocal critics of incumbent Rick "Adios Mofo" Perry. With her running as a Republican, it promised excellent theatre and a good chance of widening the chasm between the GOP and it's lemmings. Now, as an independent, she'll have to convince the reddest of states that it really is time for a change in ideology. Not an easy task, with most of the electorate blindly swallowing the bull shoveled at them without question.

Ironically, Strayhorn was originally a Democrat, then switched tracks to the GOP twenty years ago. Now she's defected again and become an independent, along with satirist Kinky Friedman. The Libertarian party boasts one candidate, and the Democrats and GOP four each.

On the downside, District 18 - largely suburban and heavily Republican - is being vacated by Democratic Senator Ken Armbrister, leaving the district open and contested by four Republicans and one Democrat. If the Republicans take this district, it would give them 20 of the 31 seats - one short of the two-thirds majority required to advance legislation.

All in all it promises to be an interesting election season. If there wasn't so much at stake, it might even be entertaining. This season will be a big step towards putting someone decent, or even intelligent, in the White House in 2008. Let's not make the same mistakes we've been making - actually believing what the candidates say - and do a little research on their actions before we decide to vote for them. I know I will, and will do my best to spread the word. Because, as an uninformed electorate, we become victims not only to sound bites, but to the actions of the politicians that benefit not us, but those that hire lobbyists to get favorable legislation.

Happy New Year, Y'all!

2005: a year to remember

2006-01-01T21:27:00.001-06:00

Nothstar at the People's Republic of Seabrook has posted his comprehensive 2005 Dumb@$$ of the Year Awards, and again he has outdone himself. And once again he proves that the barrel has no bottom.

Many thanks to my good friend Jack, who introduced me to the world of blogging and linked to me back in February of this year for the first time. I am forever in his debt for helping me get my opinions out to the masses. Along with him, I have attempted to bring to the world's attention the atrocities committed by our so-called public servants. He has drawn most of the wrath for this - mainly because he has more readers and a higher profile.

In retrospective, he was a mentor. Thank you, Jack.

Anyway, he apparently had some time on his hands, and has collected the year's biggest dumb@$$es into one place for your browsing pleasure. So, without further ado, I give you:

THE 2005 DUMB@$$ OF THE YEAR AWARDS

Amateur Night at the Apollo

2006-01-01T21:27:00.000-06:00

I haven't seen so many drunk people since, well, last New Year's Eve. It amazes me that people still think it takes alcohol to have a good time. The bands started at nine, and by then most of the inhabitants of the hobbit hole we call a club were well into their cups.

A rare treat, a good harmonicka player, started off the evening, although he was a bit of a Blues Brothers wannabe. Reminiscent of Elwood Blues in his style of dancing and singing, he was still a killer harpist, and had the crowd hopping with his antics and guest guitarist, Mark May of Agitators fame.

Mark took the stage next with his Agitators, and along with playing his originals, got the crowd fired up with a Santana double play - Oye Como Va and that other instrumental that I can't think of the name, but always make me crank up the stereo whenever it comes on the radio.

The night ended with Uncle Mojo bringin' it home. Although I doubt most of the crowd would bring it home safely, and I hope most of them took advantage of the hotel discount available.

The point is, New Year's Eve is supposed to be a celebration of the year past, and hopefully looking forward to the coming year. But it seems that New Year's Eve is the time to drown your sorrows for all of the bad times that the year brought, and to numb you to the injustices to come. That shouldn't be. If we all try to improve our situation in the year to come, then alcohol should not only not be necessary, it shouldn't be involved at all.

Let's all make a resolution to improve humanity's lot in the new year - not only our own, but that of our fellow man.

And not to drink so much. At least until next New Year's Eve.

Guns don't kill people, drunk teenagers with guns do...

2005-12-28T00:44:00.000-06:00

Teen dies after being shot at party

Another senseless death from a firearm. No one meant any harm. No one was attempting to hurt or kill another human being. Just a situation out of control, and a handgun happened to be there, and now a teenager is dead.

A teenager. Someone whose life was just beginning to bloom. Possibly a future leader - someone who could have done some good. Sure, he was at a teenage party where drinking was involved. But I'm sure there were plenty of similar situations in our current president's adolescence (and well into his adult years as well).

The difference here is that a firearm was involved. The news reports say that the kids found the gun. If that's the case, it was there because someone felt it was necessary to have a gun handy. For protection. In rural southeast Texas where, apparently, roving bands of hoodlums prowl for innocent victims to rob, pillage, rape and loot.

This was most likely a case of a firm believer in the second ammendment, where someone felt unsafe and used his god-given right to brandish a weapon against ne'er-do-wells and protect his property against godless minorities who have infiltrated his sanctuary from modern society. He just happened to leave it laying around where kids could find it.

Let's face it - teenage drinking parties have been around for decades. But the ones I remember may have included a few fistfights and some dissing of the less-than-popular, but they never included handguns. Even the the rural ones. Now it seems that the paranoid feel that guns are a necessary part of life, both urban and rural, and the stakes have been raised.

Now those who have been dissed have access to a more equitable equalizer than just the typical ambushing of their antagonists. This is the root of the school massacres that have plagued us in the past few decades. No longer do they need to face their antagonists with untrained fists. Now they can even the playing field with artillery, thanks to the right-to-bear-arms wingnuts who insist that it's everyone's right to as much firepower as they can afford.

The sportsmen say that they need automatic weapons for hunting, but if you need twenty rounds per second to kill a deer, I say you need to find another hobby. Homeowners say you need an automatic handgun for security, but if that's the case, you need to move to a different neighborhood.

This particular death would not have happened had not the firearm been available.

Someone may have ended up with a black eye, instead of his life being snuffed out.

Happy Chrismahannukwanzaakuh to all!

2005-12-24T23:40:00.000-06:00

Same old song and dance

2005-12-08T10:39:00.000-06:00

Bush on Iraq offensive, cites 'tangible progress'

Bush is in the middle of his traveling roadshow to bolster support for his war in Iraq because his administration is heartened by an increase in his approval rating in the NYT/CBS News poll. Woo Hoo! Finally more that a third of the country thinks he's fit for the job he was re-elected to last year.

He's up to 40% now, so what does he do with his newfound "political capital"? He goes on the road and spouts the same old rhetoric he's been spewing since he declared "mission accomplished" in 2003. But now his cheerleading is tempered with some acknowledgement of his cluelessness.

"Reconstruction has not always gone as well as we had hoped, primarily because of the security challenges on the ground," Bush said.

Meaning basically that his administration had no plans beyond the "Shock and Awe" stage of the invasion. Apparently they didn't anticipate any opposition once they pounded Bagdad into rubble.

He left some bits out, though. Conspicuously absent was any mention of the resumption of oil production that his administration claimed would fund reconstruction. Current production is at about 1.8 million barrels a day, far short of the 2.4 - 3.0 million barrels a day predicted by VP Dick Cheney in 2003, which would have generated $20 Billion annually to help pay for reconstruction.

Instead, we get to foot the bill. You break it, you bought it, right? Only we don't get to keep it. Once it's fixed, we give it back to what will most likely be a theocracy, and within a decade Iraq will be right back where they started before we stepped in, just with new players.

Not only that, but the bill will be padded.

Democrats in Congress criticized the administration's oversight of the rebuilding effort, noting Wednesday that nearly two-thirds of the $20.9 billion earmarked for reconstruction was unspent or directed to other programs.
Uncalculated billions have been lost to waste and fraud, Democrats said.
"America's troops and taxpayers have paid an enormous price for the Bush administration's continued missteps and mistakes in Iraq, and we cannot continue to blindly pay it," Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said.

Bush also changed his wording slightly, no longer calling the opposition "insurgents" or "rebels". His staff doesn't want to give them any semblance of humanity. So now he calls them exclusively "terrorists" or - this one kills me - "Saddamists". Despite all evidence to the contrary, his administration is still trying to tie Saddam Hussein to Al-Qaeda. Hussein is gone, Al-Qaeda is supporting the insurgency and supplying funding and car bomb fodder, yet I didn't hear them mentioned in his speeches. No, they're Saddamists, as if they were there supporting him before our invasion and occupation of Iraq.

"Victory will be achieved when the terrorists and Saddamists can no longer threaten Iraq's democracy, when the Iraqi security forces can provide for the safety of their own citizens, and when Iraq is not a safe haven for terrorists to plot new attacks against our nation," Bush said.

And so we're back to the same old song and dance. If we don't continue this war, Iraq will once again be a safe haven for terrorists to plot new attacks against our nation. Never mind that the last attack was done by Saudis and plotted not in Iraq, but Afghanistan and even within our own country by friends and former business associates of our fearless leader.

The lyrics have changes slightly, but the song remains the same. Never mind the facts. Believe what I say or you won't be safe. And we all know what happended the last time he said that.

And the winner is...

2005-12-02T08:50:00.001-06:00

Pinkdome.com

Left leaning bloggers have chosen the Texan of the Year, and it's... a Republican.

Now, before you go thinking that the tide that's turning against the right wing theocracy is turning again, keep in mind that the Texan of the Year is not an endorsement, it's a collectively objective opinion as to who has been most influencial on politics in Texas, regardless of party or the direction that their influence has taken.

Other Republicans were nominated, such as Tom DeLay and G.W. Bush, but I'm happy that if a Republican won it, it was Rep. Carter Casteel. Although she's in the wrong party, and from an 80% Republican district, she had the cojones to stand up to the lemmings and fight for reform in public schools rather than cave to the voucher faction.

Any social economist (except those in the employ of the right wing spin machine) will tell you that the education of ALL citizens is vital to a healthy society. However, those in favor of class distinction - with elite and servant classes widely seperated in the social spectrum - insist that their children be subsidized in their private schools. Rep. Casteel adamantly opposes this, and for that she should be commended.

She also voted against preventing gays from becoming foster parents, despite being from a conservative district. Now that's cojones.

Congratulation to Rep. Casteel, and thanks to the folks at Pinkdome for putting this election together. I'll be adding them to my blogroll for your future education and enjoyment.

Others who were instrumental in this election include:

Back in the saddle again...

2005-12-02T08:50:00.000-06:00

I guess I can leave you guys alone for a minute without things getting mucked up. I took off for my periodic escape from civlization to ommune with nature - cooking Thanksgiving dinner in a makeshift oven in the ground and generally abandoning electronic entertainment and communication - fully expecting apocolyptic conditions upon my return.

But lo and behold, Tom DeLay is still under investigation. Bush's approval rating is still dropping, and he devoted a state of the disunion address to defending his war in Iraq without really saying anything new. And the Texans still can't win football games.

Although I am sorry I missed the election for Texan of the Year. But I think my fellow bloggers have handled it admirably in my absence, and they really didn't agree with my nomination anyway. But every election needs a Pat Paulsen for comic relief, right? And I still think Kinky Friedman would make a better governor than any of the other frontrunners out there.

Anyway, I'm back now, and ne'er-do-wells are again not safe to run amok with our liberties without scathing criticism from yours truly. I don't know if it'll make a difference, but it's kinda like singing a bar of "Alice's Restaraunt" in front of the draft board. If enough people do it, it'll become a movement. And if you want to end war and stuff, you gotta sing loud. With feeling.