This Is Not Pandering

life lessons from all fours...

2011-06-28T10:01:00.008-07:00

at a time when mother nature is unleashing the end of days upon us, and a day after I am horrified that the public is shocked that, just once, 12 regular people decided they would actually believe that it was better to let 100 guilty go free than send one innocent to death, I am again remembering the simple lessons that the furballs teach each day. so here is an updated list of life lessons given to me by bacchus, hermione, nans, rick and rox...

if you are going to chew on someone, make sure they know you love them first...

sometimes it is more satisfying to just sit and watch the world go by...

life isn't always fair, sometimes there is a screen or a gate in your way...

...but if there is, take every chance you get to go past your comfort zone and experience the world...

with a bit of imagination, the packaging is better than what's inside...

it is not alright to mess with other people's shit...

...but if you really love them, you'll step aside...

everyone needs physical signs of love, even if it is a simple pat on the head...

don't be ashamed of your love for large breasts...

don't be ashamed of your big butt, your big, you're beautiful, own it...

it's ok to like being spanked...

no fence is too high to get past if there is a friend on the other side...

start every morning of your life with a whole lot of love...

...and when you think you've had enough love for that morning...give a little more...

it can make you feel better just to be in the presence of good friends...

no matter how annoying you may find your family and friends to be at times, they deserve your sacrifice...

some people may just be worth risking your life for...

respect your elders...

not everyone will like you, no matter how friendly you are...

there is no shame in joyful crying when a friend returns...

you don't need papers to feel validated...

head scratches feel really, really good...

...so does having your back rubbed...

...and your belly...

whenever you hurt someone, make sure you say you're sorry...

you are only as old as you feel...

...and it is best to feel like a kid again, even if just for a few minutes...

if your best friend is feeling down, nuzzle them...

sometimes, if you beg and plead long enough and loud enough, you'll get dessert...

nothing says love like cleaning someone else's ass when they can't do it themselves...

there is no better way to see the country than by car...

everyone needs a place they can feel safe...even if its just under the coffee table...

every adventure should end with a return home...

turn me back into that wild-haired gale.

prosecuted for the truth...

2011-02-25T10:09:00.006-07:00

just when Obama's department of justice was getting things right by refusing to argue that the unconstitutional DOMA should be upheld, this story comes out...Julian Heicklen, an old man with convictions and obviously an understanding of the law and history of the american judicial system, is being indicted by federal prosecutors for telling the truth. see, Mr. Heicklen hands out pamphlets on the steps of the courthouse and talks to people that ask questions about the power of the jury in our legal system. unlike prosecutors and judges, he does not lie to them. he tells them they have the absolute right to ignore the law and refuse to convict if they feel a conviction would be unjust - even if they believe someone is technically "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." the age-old tried-and-true basis of the anglo-american criminal justice system...jury nullification.

of course prosecutors hate that jury nullification exists...because they love their seemingly unadulterated power to decide who gets charged with what crimes - a power that in this day and age, essentially makes that single person the most powerful individual in your town. they really really do not want jurors to know that they have an ancient duty to nullify a law if they believe it is unjust, that jury nullification is the reason juries came into existence in the first place. and while everyone in the system recognizes that jury nullification exists and is the absolute right of the jury, we tell them otherwise - unconstitutionally. just ask some long-dead names you might recognize...

John Adams recognizing jury nullification -

"It is not only the juror's right, but his duty, in that case, to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court."

and Alexander Hamilton telling us how un-American and stupid (and contemptible) it would be to shun jury nullification, let alone prosecute someone for advising that it exists -

"The jury have a power of deciding an issue upon a general verdict. And, if they have, is it not an absurdity to suppose that the law would oblige them to find a verdict according to the direction of the court, against their own opinion, judgment, and conscience?"

"By withdrawing from the jury the consideration of the essence of the charge, they render their function nugatory and contemptible. Those opinions are repugnant to the more ancient authorities, which had given the jury the power, and with it the right, to be judge of the law and fact, when they were blended by the issue, and which rendered their decisions in criminal cases final and conclusive."

think about it - why do we even have the jury system?

because "fear of unchecked power, so typical of our state and federal governments in other respects, found expression in the criminal law in this insistence upon community participation in determination of guilt or innocence." Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145, 156 (1968). "Those who wrote our constitutions knew from history and experience that it was necessary to protect against unfounded criminal charges brought to eliminate enemies and against judges too responsive to the voice of higher authority." Id. Now, "just as suffrage ensures the people's ultimate control in the legislative and executive branches, jury trial is meant to ensure their control in the judiciary." Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 306 (2004).

Thus, those old white men gave us the jury, they gave us a group from the community that would "guard against the spirit of oppression and tyranny on the part of rules" and act as "the great bulwark of our civil and political liberties. United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 239 (2005). and now, we are prosecuting an old white man for telling members of the community what that actually means, for telling them what history has marked out as the role of the jury, even if the government wishes it were different. in this, he is doing America's work, because "the very reason the Framers put a jury-trial guarantee in the Constitution is that they were unwilling to trust government to mark out the role of the jury." Id., 542 U.S. at 307.

but the government wants to mark out the role of the jury, because once it can do that, nothing short of revolution can stand in its way. for this, those original old white men would be horrified and have taken to revolution, because the history they lived through taught them a simple truth about juries...

"other liberties would remain secure only so long as this palladium remains sacred and inviolate, not only from all open attacks (which none will be so hardy as to make), but also from all secret machinations, which may sap and undermine it."

Jones v. United States, 526 U.S. 227, 246 (1999).

if we continue to lie to juries and turn them into just another arm of the state, if Mr. Heicklen can be prosecuted for spreading the truth about the historical and important role juries play, what is left to stop them from running all over all of us?

midwestern pride and the government turns around a failed business...

2011-02-25T09:08:00.003-07:00

I've been away for a decade now...and maybe that is why I can finally appreciate it in a way that might have been impossible in my younger days...either way, I've been pretty damn proud of certain midwestern segments in the last week. following the events unfolding in Wisconsin, it is difficult not to beam a little at the corn-fed masses occupying the state capital with a simple message to republican brotherhood of insanity - "Step Off My Dick!" I know that in the future, when the republicans are inevitably tossed out of office for treating public service like their own personal ATM and declaring "let them eat cake" they will use the door opened by midwestern democrats and run for the hills anytime any sensible legislation comes up (after all, they showed a severe lack of shame in abusing the filibuster without even having the balls to actually stand up and talk for days on end), but damn it is nice that for once in my lifetime the democrats put their money where their mouth was rather than roll over at the use of "deficit." it was the right thing to do and I hope they enjoy their stay in my home state, knowing that they are welcome as long as it takes.

and it is nice to see good sensible hard-working people stand up for themselves and what is right. because let's face it, if we are being honest with ourselves we have to admit a simple truth, no matter how much we joke about government workers, those jobs suck...and they pay shit for a job none of you want anyways. but they are absolutely necessary for us to have any semblence of the life we have, so we need someone to do them, we need to get some poor saps into those jobs. and how did we do it? we told them "ok, you aren't ever going to get rich because we aren't going to pay you enough for what you do and your importance to our society, and we are going to completely shit on you whenever we get a chance because you are such an easy target...but in return, we promise a few simple things - health care and a retirement." that is basically it. that is all they get. health care and a retirement. only we handed their health care and their retirements to a few big whigs on wall street...who then took whatever they could and are laughing at them from overhead in their corporate jets. so we failed on our end of the bargain, and now we want them to bend over for us? if I were in their shoes I'd be in the capital telling the legislators and governor to go fuck themselves too.

another thing, I was getting pretty damn sick of our collective historical amnesia of how unionism built this country and took it from the dark ages through the most universally prosperous decades the world may ever see. how did unions become a bad thing? got kids? like that they aren't working in a sweat shop sticking their tiny fingers into dangerous machinery? thank a union. like that you actually have weekends off? thank a union. enjoy getting a short break every few hours and some time to eat lunch? thank a union. like the idea of retiring someday without being homeless and hungry? thank a union. like social security? thank a union. employer supported healthcare? thank a union. medicare and medicaid? thank a union. the 40 hour work week? thank a union. vacations and holidays with your family? thank a union. your neighborhood? thank a union. your house? thank a union. your car? thank a union. not living in third world conditions? thank a union. like america? thank a union.

on a somewhat related note (i.e. bullshit conservative mantras proven wrong), GM made a lot of money last year...first time in quite a while. as a result, regular old factory joes and janes will get profit sharing checks worth a month or more of regular pay. republican leadership just asks that you please ignore the fact that this amazing tournaround happened while (gasp) the federal government has a 61% stake in the company. because we all know the federal government can't do anything right, that it is totally incapable of running anything and that high paid CEOs inevitably will do better on their own. except those same high paid CEOs ran GM into the ground. it was a failed company. the private sector blew it. under the guidance of the federal government, GM has returned to a global auto powerhouse. but yea, ignore the man behind the curtain.

just punch the clock...

are you under the impression this isn't your life?

2010-09-24T08:40:00.000-07:00

another election season rolls around, bringing with it another round of hilarity and hijinks...after all, if we didn't laugh at this shit, we'd spend our lives in tearful depression. the republican "pledge" is the newest headliner in braindead lunacy and cowardly politics - retaking the mantle from a democratic party that is apparently scared to draw a line in the sand that would very obviously benefit 90% of the voting public. here in new mexico, a gubernatorial race features a pair of non-personalities...neither of which really seem to have a clue what they are doing, or even what office they are running for. so, as the time approaches for the rally to restore sanity and the march to keep fear alive...here is a brain dump from yours truly...

newt gingrich would have used the "pledge" to wipe his ass. seriously...it took you two fucking years to come up with this? perhaps all that spray tan is finally melting your brain...

"We, the modern Republican Party, which has so shamed those that came before us - well...at least some of the modern party, there's at least 12 of us signing on to this thing right? - hereby pledge (we used "pledge" because it reminds everyone of how patriotic we are) to rattle off the same nonsensical talking points we have been screaming for the last 30 years. please ignore that (1) none of this is possible; (2) none of it actually fits together; and (3) we have thrown in a few obvious pandering points to angry old white ladies."

maybe the republican party needs to watch the biggest loser...because their deficit reduction plan sounds like a back-ass-wards diet plan...

both parties are in an abusive relationship with their leaders. republican cries of "fiscal responsibility" whenever they are out of power are like Ike telling Tina he didn't know what came over him and he'll never do it again. "really baby, I just lost it last time with all that crazy spending on nothing...and the time before that...and the time before that...but this time, I mean it, no more. I'll do better. I promise." democratic leaders have a different style - "where else are you going to go? you know I'm the best you're going to get." and time and again...we all keep coming back...

perhaps it is because I'm not a professional talking head without any real background in anything of meaning...but can someone please explain to me how democratic advisers and leaders decided that not forcing an open republican blockade of extending most tax cuts was a good idea? seriously...if we are all convinced that low taxes are more american than apple pie, why are they not making the republicans block them for all but the wealthy? after all, they are so convinced they are taking back the house and the senate, just ask them why they can't extend the rest later.

don't look now. albuquerque police just shot another person.

I can't be the only one aware that the republican party is all about spending our money towards two objectives: (1) ending life; and (2) ending liberty. spend anything you can get your hands on for guns, weapons, war and prisons. not only have they replaced "pursuit of happiness" with property...but of the the three (life, liberty, property), what kind of fucked up do you have to be to put the latter so far above the former?

bill clinton is giving political advice to obama. makes me wonder if obama is listening - which would mean that headline I saw on weekly world news was right...he really is a manwhore.

but seriously...bill, I know you're smart as shit...but you're also the shitbag that gave us NAFTA when you could have given us health care. you're the piece of shit that pushed financialization of everything and danced while the dow soared, taking next to none of us with it, only to set us up for the inevitable spectacular fallout. and don't even get me started on your love of the death penalty in the federal criminal justice system.

anyone else amused by the fact that while the republicans release their "pledge" calling for even more deregulation we learn that companies hid that the patch was killing healthy girls and diabetes meds killed 50,000? you can't make this shit up...

thanks to decades of "anti-government" rhetoric from shitbags with no sense of decency, many localities are now sending bills for emergency services. someone runs you over and the fire department comes out? that'll be $500 please.

at the same time, such wonderful bastians of right-wing lunacy as colorado springs (home to focus on the family and gay-bashing-male-prostitute-fucking-meth-head preachers) are admitting that the boneheaded politics of government cuts is resulting in police that will not even bother to take reports on most crime.

its even leading to such wonderful practices as making mothers pay for their son's deaths in places like chicago heights, where an officer arrested a mother for driving on a suspended license and sent boyfriend off into the night with the son in the car. only boyfriend was hammered - slammed a tree and killed the kid. now the city wants mom to pay $500 for impounding the car. ain't the free market grand?

and the president of iran gets exactly what he wants...

recently a chicago law professor brilliantly blogged about how tough it is for a family to survive on a mere $250,000 plus in this day and age. todd henderson wanted president obama to know that a return to sane tax rates for the wealthy would crush him. but don't think its because he lives an extravagant lifestyle...as he tells you in his blog, its rough to buy a home in one of the most expensive neighborhoods of chicago, the mortgage is killer. and the $15,000 a year in property taxes on a $1,000,000 home are brutal. ok...but please don't think they aren't frugal, I mean, like most working americans they have two cars, cell phones for the kids, and cable tv - but he assures us they do not have movie channels. and when you live in a really expensive home in a great neighborhood you absolutely must have expensive day care and someone to cut the lawn and clean the house. after all of that - well mr. henderson only has a handful of thousands of dollars a year to piss away on nothing. the horror of only have a few thousand left to spend while living in a giant house, driving a fancy car, having a landscaper and a maid after sending your pre-k kid to expensive private school. and I though I had it tough. kind of puts it all in perspective.

(no, I did not make that up...although I hope to god it is satire. - see for yourself delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/todd-henderson-we-are-the-super-rich.html)

steven colbert was apparently classic before a house committee testifying, in character, about his experience with migrant workers. after a day out there he sure as hell doesn't want to go back out there and was shocked that there aren't more lining up for an exciting career in picking produce. as all of us, he wants americans picking his produce though...and while he's "not a fan of the government doing anything. [he's] got to ask, why isn't the government doing anything?" absolutely classic.

having lost our own mayor daley here in albuquerque recently, I can sympathize with chicago. and tell them good fucking luck. you're about to find out how bad it can get.

back to the democrats spineless weaseling of the tax vote until after the election. not that you apparently give two shits...but you lost another one. after a brief stint as a registered donkey, I'll be heading back to my more comfortable position of "fuck them both" status.

poverty rates (the bullshit lower than real ones) are disgustingly high. although orange-skinned nutjobs will never feel it...this will hurt.

note to bill richardson. while I appreciate that a wild horse sanctuary would extend your name for a bit longer...sometimes we need to prioritize a bit better. way to hand the right-wing nuts a fantastic talking point.

can palin top goldwater and garner that ever-elusive goose egg?

virginia executed its first woman in a century. good job buddy. you did it.

we are relearning a sad reality - you break it, you buy it. wondering if we'll ever get out of afghanistan.

health care reform...if its a good idea in 2014, why not now? I've never understood this about laws. in 5 to 10 years we'll do the right thing. we just can't be bothered to make it happen right away.

and by the way ms. palin - the "hopey changey thing" is going pretty damn well if you take a look at what has been accomplished. but then I'm not an angry old white person...so perhaps I'm the wrong one to ask.

although, while the political world is overrun with shouting nonsense...a few things give me hope. jon stewart and steven colbert. lincoln county residents recognizing that spending a few extra bucks a year to keep your neighbors in business helps everyone. attorney general gary king getting his ass handed to him. the second judicial district attorney's office completely falling apart.

it all serves as a reminder that the snows are coming soon...and all of our blemishes will be covered. ever notice that on the side of a mountain, everyone agrees?

if you've never been I am sorry for you...

2010-03-22T16:41:00.011-07:00

april is almost upon us. and so, as happens every year, the United States Forest Service will see to it that the lifts at Taos Ski Valley come to a halt and the bighorn sheep have the snow covered mountain to themselves once again.

season number eight coming to a close, and I cannot help but get a bit emotional (as I do every year when spring arrives and the snow starts to melt). while there were not as many days on the mountain as there may have been in past years, Ernie and Ullr determined that this was to be a special year for our little corner of the world, and so every single day was blessed with either fresh, soft, dry Taos powder, cloudless blue Taos skies, or a combination of both.

perhaps it is age and the perspective that accompanies another year, perhaps it is the returning understanding of self, perhaps it was simply the fact that this was one of those years we will tell future Taos travelers about with a wink, a smile and a declaration that "you should've been here," but I truly connected with this place again. the nearly constant influx of storms and fresh snow brought out that midwestern kid again, new to the mountains and the magic that Ernie discovered and made sure to leave for the rest of us, sunburned gums and a hoarse voice from the constant smiles and hollars. at the same time, that blanket of white was accompanied with a peace that I have not known in some time.

I rediscovered the simple, timeless joys that have kept any who have strapped two boards to their feet in the winter to slide down a snow-covered mountain coming back again and again; the white blanket enveloping you; the sensation of floating above the mountain; the weightlessness of flight; the pillow soft splash; the deep blue of the northern New Mexico sky; the indescribable beauty of the Rocky Mountains; the comraderie; the uniquely overpowering beating of your heart as you stare down below you at the seemingly endless expanse of a white canvass waiting for the first brush stroke of the day.

And I have not found anywhere better to experience these moments than Taos. For me, this mountain is a church, a safe haven from the world, a release from the everyday, and a return to myself. Ernie's little creation has provided me with more memories, happiness, and humanity than any other location on earth. And for that, Mr. Blake, I am eternally grateful.

Yes, it has been another banner year in Taos, one epic day after another. And so, as it comes to a close and the shots in the boards are filled, the burrs smoothed, and the summer wax put in place, I'll take the time to say thanks - to Ernie for building this magical place - Ullr for providing that one-of-a-kind Taos powder - my parents for introducing a young boy to the mountains - my brothers for allowing that young boy to tag along - ski buddies come and gone for the times etched into memory - countless strangers that understood that anyone found on the mountain is a friend - and all of those that have shown us the childhood delight that sticks and snow can provide for leading the way.

Thanks to each and every one of you for all you have done. Your actions, some short and sweet, some life-long journeys, have given so much to this life. My appreciation can never be overstated. Because of you, I have seen, I have lost myself in the whiteness, and found myself in the process.

Thank you all...this line is for you.

Olson goes to work defending the constitution...

2010-01-12T12:44:00.001-07:00

Text of Ted Olson’s Opening Statement in Prop. 8 Trial – As Prepared

January 11, 2010

OPENING STATEMENT
(as prepared)

This case is about marriage and equality. Plaintiffs are being denied both the right to marry, and the right to equality under the law.

The Supreme Court of the United States has repeatedly described the right to marriage as “one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men;” a “basic civil right;” a component of the constitutional rights to liberty, privacy, association, and intimate choice; an expression of emotional support and public commitment; the exercise of spiritual unity; and a fulfillment of one’s self.

In short, in the words of the highest court in the land, marriage is “the most important relation in life,” and “of fundamental importance for all individuals.”

As the witnesses in this case will elaborate, marriage is central to life in America. It promotes mental, physical and emotional health and the economic strength and stability of those who enter into a marital union. It is the building block of family, neighborhood and community. The California Supreme Court has declared that the right to marry is of “central importance to an individual’s opportunity to live a happy, meaningful, and satisfying life as a full member of society.”

Proposition 8 ended the dream of marriage, the most important relation in life, for the plaintiffs and hundreds of thousands of Californians.

___________________________________

In May of 2008, the California Supreme Court concluded that under this State’s Constitution, the right to marry a person of one’s choice extended to all individuals, regardless of sexual orientation, and was available equally to same-sex and opposite-sex couples.

In November of 2008, the voters of California responded to that decision with Proposition 8, amending the State’s Constitution and, on the basis of sexual orientation and sex, slammed the door to marriage to gay and lesbian citizens.

The plaintiffs are two loving couples, American citizens, entitled to equality and due process under our Constitution. They are in deeply committed, intimate, and longstanding relationships. They want to marry the person they love; to enter into that “most important relation in life”; to share their dreams with their partners; and to confer the many benefits of marriage on their families.

But Proposition 8 singled out gay men and lesbians as a class, swept away their right to marry, pronounced them unequal, and declared their relationships inferior and less-deserving of respect and dignity.

In the words of the California Supreme Court, eliminating the right of individuals to marry a same-sex partner relegated those individuals to “second class” citizenship, and told them, their families and their neighbors that their love and desire for a sanctioned marital partnership was not worthy of recognition.

During this trial, Plaintiffs and leading experts in the fields of history, psychology, economics and political science will prove three fundamental points:

First – Marriage is vitally important in American society.

Second – By denying gay men and lesbians the right to marry, Proposition 8 works a grievous harm on the plaintiffs and other gay men and lesbians throughout California, and adds yet another chapter to the long history of discrimination they have suffered.

Third – Proposition 8 perpetrates this irreparable, immeasurable, discriminatory harm for no good reason.

I - MARRIAGE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT RELATION IN LIFE

Plaintiffs will present evidence from leading experts, representing some of the finest academic institutions in this country and the world, who will reinforce what the highest courts of California and the United States have already repeatedly said about the importance of marriage in society and the significant benefits that marriage confers on couples, their families, and the community. Proponents cannot dispute these basic facts.

While marriage has been a revered and important institution throughout the history of this country and this State, it has also evolved to shed irrational, unwarranted, and discriminatory restrictions and limitations that reflected the biases, prejudices or stereotypes of the past. Marriage laws that disadvantaged women or people of disfavored race or ethnicity have been eliminated. These changes have come from legislatures and the courts. Far from harming the institution of marriage, the elimination of discriminatory restrictions on marriage has strengthened the institution, its vitality, and its importance in American society today.

II - PROPOSITION 8 HARMS GAY AND LESBIAN INDIVIDUALS, THEIR CHILDREN AND THEIR COMMUNITIES

Proposition 8 had a simple, straightforward, and devastating purpose: to withdraw from gay and lesbian people like the Plaintiffs their previously recognized constitutional right to marry. The official title of the ballot measure said it all: “Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry.”

Proponents of Proposition 8 have insisted that the persons they would foreclose from the institution of marriage have suffered no harm because they have been given the opportunity to form something called a “domestic partnership.” That is a cruel fiction.

Plaintiffs will describe the harm that they suffer every day because they are prevented from marrying. And they will describe how demeaning and insulting it can be to be told that they remain free to marry—as long, that is, that they marry someone of the opposite sex instead of the person they love, the companion of their choice.

And the evidence will demonstrate that relegating gay men and lesbians to “domestic partnerships” is to inflict upon them badges of inferiority that forever stigmatize their loving relationships as different, separate, unequal, and less worthy—something akin to a commercial venture, not a loving union. Indeed, the proponents of Proposition 8 acknowledge that domestic partnerships are not the same as traditional marriage. Proponents proudly proclaim that, under Proposition 8, the “unique and highly favorable imprimatur” of marriage is reserved to “opposite-sex unions.”

This government-sponsored societal stigmatization causes grave psychological and physical harms to gay men and lesbians and their families. It increases the likelihood that they will experience discrimination and harassment; it causes immeasurable harm.

Sadly, Proposition 8 is only the most recent chapter in our nation’s long and painful history of discrimination and prejudice against gay and lesbian individuals. They have been classified as degenerates, targeted by police, harassed in the workplace, censored, demonized, fired from government jobs, excluded from our armed forces, arrested for their private sexual conduct, and repeatedly stripped of their fundamental rights by popular vote. Although progress has occurred, the roots of discrimination run deep and its impacts spread wide.

III - PROPOSITION 8 HARMS GAY AND LESBIAN INDIVIDUALS FOR NO GOOD REASON

Proposition 8 singles out gay and lesbian individuals alone for exclusion from the institution of marriage. In California, even convicted murderers and child abusers enjoy the freedom to marry. As the evidence clearly establishes, this discrimination has been placed in California’s Constitution even though its victims are, and always have been, fully contributing members of our society. And it excludes gay men and lesbians from the institution of marriage even though the characteristic for which they are targeted—their sexual orientation—like race, sex, and ethnicity, is a fundamental aspect of their identity that they did not choose for themselves and, as the California Supreme Court has found, is highly resistant to change.

The State of California has offered no justification for its decision to eliminate the fundamental right to marry for a segment of its citizens. And its chief legal officer, the Attorney General, admits that none exists. And the evidence will show that each of the rationalizations for Proposition 8 invented by its Proponents is wholly without merit.

“Procreation” cannot be a justification inasmuch as Proposition 8 permits marriage by persons who are unable or have no intention of producing children. Indeed, the institution of civil marriage in this country has never been tied to the procreative capacity of those seeking to marry.

Proposition 8 has no rational relation to the parenting of children because same-sex couples and opposite sex couples are equally permitted to have and raise children in California. The evidence in this case will demonstrate that gay and lesbian individuals are every bit as capable of being loving, caring and effective parents as heterosexuals. The quality of a parent is not measured by gender but the content of the heart.

And, as for protecting “traditional marriage,” our opponents “don’t know” how permitting gay and lesbian couples to marry would harm the marriages of opposite-sex couples. Needless to say, guesswork and speculation is not an adequate justification for discrimination. In fact, the evidence will demonstrate affirmatively that permitting loving, deeply committed, couples like the plaintiffs to marry has no impact whatsoever upon the marital relationships of others.

When voters in California were urged to enact Proposition 8, they were encouraged to believe that unless Proposition 8 were enacted, anti-gay religious institutions would be closed, gay activists would overwhelm the will of the heterosexual majority, and that children would be taught that it was “acceptable” for gay men and lesbians to marry. Parents were urged to “protect our children” from that presumably pernicious viewpoint.

At the end of the day, whatever the motives of its Proponents, Proposition 8 enacted an utterly irrational regime to govern entitlement to the fundamental right to marry, consisting now of at least four separate and distinct classes of citizens: (1) heterosexuals, including convicted criminals, substance abusers and sex offenders, who are permitted to marry; (2) 18,000 same-sex couples married between June and November of 2008, who are allowed to remain married but may not remarry if they divorce or are widowed; (3) thousands of same-sex couples who were married in certain other states prior to November of 2008, whose marriages are now valid and recognized in California; and, finally (4) all other same-sex couples in California who, like the Plaintiffs, are prohibited from marrying by Proposition 8.

There is no rational justification for this unique pattern of discrimination. Proposition 8, and the irrational pattern of California’s regulation of marriage which it promulgates, advances no legitimate state interest. All it does is label gay and lesbian persons as different, inferior, unequal, and disfavored. And it brands their relationships as not the same, and less-approved than those enjoyed by opposite sex couples. It stigmatizes gays and lesbians, classifies them as outcasts, and causes needless pain, isolation and humiliation.

It is unconstitutional.

amen.

a failing experiment, lieberman exposes his inner douche, and rejecting clinton...

2009-12-14T13:48:00.001-07:00

the health care "debate" (not so much of an actual debate as one side declaring "whatever you say I must oppose to the death"), if nothing else, has given us a glimpse into the state of the american experiment in governance...and that glimpse is exposing to the world that the experiment, two hundred some years in the making with archaic procedures, may be failing before our eyes. a system designed with a plethora of "checks and balances" which two centuries ago seemed like a brilliant means of slowing the pace of hysteria-induced mob-rule and avoiding the complications which arise from a single person exerting themself above all other considerations has now become a disastrous spectacle.

they wanted to call it democratic republicanism - so they gave us a house with popular elections on schedules which would avoid career politicians. only now the only way to get elected to the house is to become a career politician and to spend your entire term campaigning and racking up contributions from the very corporate entities that they once revolted against. they wanted to check mob-rule in the house, and so they gave us the distinguished senate. only now, compliments of an archaic super majority rule which has been grabbed by the republican minority to shut down governance has created a body in which perhaps three individuals dictate policy...each of them from not-so-heavily populated states. and so we have the de facto tyranny of the moronic few (cough cough nelson and lieberman) which overrides the will of the people and any hope of a white house occupant garnering actual power of the process.

we are left with a legislative process that apparently accomplished the founders' goals too well...it not only crawls along, but it has virtually stopped on any significant initiative thanks to an "oppose anything and everything" minority party supported by a funding scheme disinterested in the good of the american nation and its people. for those of us interested in history, and aware that the united states and our "experiment" are but a blip on the radar, it is fascinating to watch as the "greatest government ever devised" utterly fails at accomplishing anything. frightening...but fascinating.

and while I have not been entirely pleased with obama as of yet...I am not, like too many others, throwing it all on his shoulders (presidents always get more credit and more blame than they deserve in any of this shit). the only thing he can do at this point is call them out...and that should be our main disappointment - his failure to do so. instead, he seems to be edging congressional leaders to call their bluff...which I agree with, provided mr. president, you then proceed to beat them over the head with their own bullshit.

which brings me to mr. lieberman...has there ever been a more spoiled-brat-grude-holding-fuckhead as this in the senate? seriously...can anyone understand his position on health care reform? in 2000 he campaigns with al gore about how wonderful allowing folks to buy into medicare would be, particularly those between 55 and 65, who were fast becoming uninsured...earlier this fall he reiterates that avoiding a public option could be accomplished with allowing folks to buy into medicare if they were among those without insurance because they simply couldn't afford it. fast forward 9 years from the former, and only two months from the later - and suddenly he refuses to support anything that might be health care reform...and for what? simply out of spite? this guy's position can only be explained in two ways - there are a lot of insurance companies "housed" in his home state with its extremely corporate friendly laws that are providing lots of cash to his reserves OR he is simply a douchebag that is still pouting for being called out on his bullshit by a democratic party that started to grow a pair. either way...connecticut must be proud to call him their own - particularly the majority of residents that want a public option.

and while all of this happens, we will likely watch as some fuckheaded democrats join with their boneheaded ignorant republican pals to block any hope of returning to meaningful regulation of financial markets. and for that we have bill clinton to thank - a man that was so incredibly smart he was unable to see through the clearest fraud perpetuated upon the world by "economists" - "free market" ideology and financialization that, whenever tested, proved to be an utter disaster and failure. its time to purge the democratic party of these imbeciles and reject clinton's big R republicanism once and for all. I don't give a shit how smart this guy was...on the things that mattered he was an opportunistic idiotic shitbag.

dry clothes...

when your mind's made up...

2009-12-11T17:12:00.000-07:00

seven plus years ago I left chicago on a whim for a relatively unknown corner of the united states...loaded up the bru with all my crap and came to the desert to ski. (yes, that's right, I came to the desert to ski).

a hell of a lot has changed in the years since. a companion was replaced by two furrier and much better friends. some of the most beautiful sites in the world have been visited - maps collected and memories forged, only to then hide them away until both could be replaced. friendships come and gone, some lasting only as long as a beer, some as long as a run or two, some forever. swat snipers on the porch and officers providing advice on cutting would-be burglars. countless miles logged on the highway and in the air. tolerances built and lost. degrees hung, and at times wasted. hands held too long, hands folded too soon. and there are people and times that have gone during those years that I miss dearly...and there are occurances and actions that I would much rather undo.

and in the end, all the horrible mistakes I have made, all the trouble and all the heartache, was worth every second just to get here, back to that place I was seven years ago...the snow falling in taos, fields of white stretching into the forest below...entire friendships to be forged and lost between the base and the top...entire lifetimes to be lived between the snap of the buckle and the cold of the chair.

if you have never felt that soft, white fresh pouring over your shoulders and clouding your vision as you feel branches brush past you down a forty degree pitch, you have yet to live.

its snowing again in taos...I'll be back in april.

you're the one for me, fatty...

2009-11-24T14:12:00.001-07:00

so much is happening in the world...and I can't seem to get worked up about any of it anymore...

seems the GOP is admitting that sarah palin was totally unqualified to be vice president...she dropped out of a scheduled interview with univision last fall because she did not have the slightest clue about "issues regarding hispanics and latin america." that says about all you need to know about the modern manifestation of the GOP - it doesn't know a damn thing about issues important to a substantial chunk of the public...particularly if that chunk happens to have the audacity to be born unwhite...

lou dobbs is hinting at a presidential run. the xenophobic know-nothings are reborn...

and how much fun would a palin-dobbs debate be? "its all the mexicans' fault!" - "what's a mexican? I think I skinned one of them in a folksy manner."

a young man in a car accident spent the next 23 years trapped - unable to move, unable to respond, unable to speak. unfortunately, he was not unable to hear, think or feel. think about that for a moment...23 years of being totally aware of your surroundings but being unable to do a single task that involves any physical action on your part. this will unevitably be latched onto by the frightening save terri crowd...but what kind of life are we condemning people to?

the RNC got busted offering its employees a health plan that covered abortions. thats how much the GOP actually cares about your conservative "culture" issues...

not that the DNC is much better. thanks to bill clinton and his ilk the democratic party prefers finance to manufacturing and the DOW to employment...and no, the current administration is not exempt...

combine the two and you have to wonder if you and I ever really stand a chance...

scientists made protons knock boots finally. as of yet, a black hole has not developed over europe. damn.

good morning america dropped adam lambert from its show. apparently they feel unemployed old people won't like simulated gay sex...

a grand jury in albuquerque recently returned a no bill in a case involving a cop that gunned down a young kid armed with a cell phone. (APD sure does have a knack as of late for killing people that aren't armed). somehow I'm thinking if he hadn't been wearing blue he'd be looking at a life sentence...

not that APD would ever be involved in anything questionable. the only reason they have a policy instructing their officers not to put anything in writing relating to police misconduct is to protect the reporting officer. requiring an oral report to superiors that can then determine all actions were justified is completely legitimate. if you have any doubts, just look at how many internal investigations show that the reporting officer was a fibbing. just ignore this blue curtain...

and no, I am not kidding. APD has an established, well-known policy of not reporting illegal conduct of its own. ain't freedom grand?

a judge in northern new mexico recently placed an entire courtroom in contempt. 32 people were sent to jail, the only ones that avoided handcuffs were those with serious medical conditions. their mistake? caring about a loved one.

finally, both the right and the left are awakening to the fact that they are on the same side when it comes to the perverse criminalization of just about anything and everything. somehow in "freedom loving" america it became acceptable for everything to be punishable by prison time (although the multi-billion dollar private prison industry was very grateful for the boost). while I am a little disgusted that it did not occur to many of these people that the criminal justice system was entirely out of control until it cost them a bit of money, happy to finally have some support from those that claim to be freedom's most staunch defenders...

which is particularly pertinent in new mexico now, where a disabled vet recently got convicted of DWI because he tried to sleep it off and a cop knocked on the window. that's right...here in new mexico we have gotten so insane about fighting DWI without ever looking at the underlying causes of it (because it is always easier to just increasingly criminalize this stuff than to legitimately deal with it) that we pop people for DWI when they do the right thing and don't drive. sleep in your car in the parking lot so you don't risk the lives of everyone on the road? you're going down. message to the public? you might as well try to make it home...because you know someone will call the cops on you if you're sleeping in a parking lot. absolutely brilliant use of law.

and so I leave you again, content in the knowledge the world I know continues to slide into oblivion...

you're the one for me, fatty...

strange priorities, jury nullification, and monied cover-ups...

2009-11-11T11:46:00.000-07:00

I feel as though I have entered bizarro-america as of late...although maybe its just the same old america I've always known, the same place run by the same crazy fucks that have been in charge of things my entire life. say what you will about Richard Nixon, but his "silent majority" strategy has had some serious lasting power. at a time when the economic well-being of the western world remains hanging by a thread, a time when millions and millions of americans are desperate for a job - any job, a time when the most geo-politically dangerous region on the planet continues to slide closer and closer to a frightening chaotic state...american political and economic leaders remain in some fantasy land where bill clinton knew what he was doing and the secret to happiness is stoking cultural anger of all sorts. there is little wonder that so many have abandoned the american political process...when we need solutions and ideas all it gives us is more shit about abortion.

don't get me wrong...I feel very strongly that stringent restrictions on abortion are not only assinine and a not-so-subtle means of maintaining the gender status quo, but they are also counterproductive and do nothing to attack the legitimate issues and concerns relating to unwanted pregnancies and the disintegration of family and community. but in all honesty, when we are faced with tens of millions of people unable to gain access to health care of any sort, hordes of our children living in disgusting poverty, delapitated schools, crumbling infrastructure, and a very real chance that our economic well-being, the very foundation of american society, is entering a time of serious relative decline, how the hell did our leaders allow themselves to be drawn into a fight over abortion? well, that is an unfair question because I am fairly certain precisely how that happened (although I do have side questions...like how the hell the pro-choice people weren't prepared for this), but that does not relieve our political establishment of responsibility.

seriously, this is a time we should be concerning ourselves with serious solutions to problems that have been festering for decades. (and while the abortion amendment in the house's bill would undoubtedly make it extremely difficult for women of unsubstantial means to obtain a needed procedure...without this bill would they be able to anyways? afterall, it isn't like poor women have legitimate access to serious reproductive health care now). and we are in a position to address it now...the political capital was there to seriously rearrange our priorities, to shift public funds to the public good. hell, with the falling dollar we are even in a position to at least try and salvage our manufacturing infrastructure in a last ditch effort to avoid the fate of so many other economic behemoths before us. instead, we continue our death-spiral virtually unabated while our political leaders bicker over who can get married, and who can avoid having kids. me...I'm just hoping we can hold on long enough for my generation to grab a hold of things since we seem much less likely to give two shits who you fuck in the privacy of your own bedroom and how you deal with the consequences.

a jury recently returned a not guilty verdict for two bear sterns managers...and the government and prosecutors and law enforcement talking heads immediately started complaining about how much of a setback this is for our legal system. and while I believe strongly in prosecuting large white collar cases (if for no other reason because those defendants have the funds to cover substantial attorney's fees), I have to strongly disagree that this is in any way a setback in our criminal justice system. in fact, if the case was truly as strong as the prosecutors apparently thought, the acquittal provides me with a renewed faith in the american criminal justice system because, quite simply, it is proof that jury nullification is alive and well. historically, the petit jury was the last stand of the common man against the over-reaching, over-zealous power of the government displayed through the public prosecutor. it provided a means of a last-ditch effort on the part of the community to stand up and saw "we will not stand for this. regardless of what you say about the law, it is wrong, and we will not support your tyranny." and so we have it again, twelve common people refusing to allow the government to turn two men into a scapegoat for an entire system that the same government encouraged and applauded for decades. as one of the jurors told the press - "The entire market crashed, you can’t blame that on two people." to you twelve, I shall toast.

turns out that when you pay a private company billions of dollars to do the work of your military, they lie, cheat and bribe. never saw that coming. whatever happened to the good old days of the old-fashioned coverup by the chain of command and threats against fellow soldiers? that was way cheaper.

I keep me in a vacant lot...

Kai on Carter...

2009-09-18T13:25:00.002-07:00

The following is an article published on TheRoot.com by Kai Wright on September 17, 2009. It examines the words of Jimmy Carter, one of the few prominent white men in America willing to speak about race.

Jimmy Carter, True Son of the South, Hits Nail on Head

By: Kai Wright

Posted: September 17, 2009 at 10:21 AM

The White House’s fear of challenging the tea-bag madness is typical of its cautious politics. The rest of us accept it at our peril.

Jimmy Carter is a son of the South. Not the New South of relocated corporate headquarters and (foreclosed) McMansions, but Jim Crow’s South. So we’ll all have to excuse his refusal to act like he doesn’t hear Glenn Beck’s vicious dog whistle. He knows too well the coded language of political racism because he witnessed its writing.

America abhors history. No wonder, given how many national crimes are lurking back there. But we’ve arrived at a time when a politician’s refusal to consider the past is a perverse testament to prudent leadership. And as a result, a statement as obvious as Carter’s—that the tea-baggers hate President Barack Obama because he's black —can be passed off as controversy in 2009.

It’s self-evident that a movement that calls the president a lying, socialist, Nazi eugenicist with a fake birth certificate is about something more than deficit spending. People don’t brandish automatic weapons and pray for the president’s death because they want to keep their employer-sponsored health plans. But to name the stalking beast is more than we can bear.

Not, thankfully, for Carter. He knows the tea-baggers aren’t new, that their fear of “big government” is but the latest version of states’ rights, which was itself a pseudonym for white supremacy. And he wants us to recall this history: In the months following the 1954 Brown ruling, a Mississippi college football star and plantation manager named Robert Patterson launched a crusade to protect school children from “being taught the Communist theme of all races and mongrelization.” Patterson was angry, and proud of it. “You say this is not the time for hotheads and flag-waving,” he wrote in a public letter quoted in Gene Roberts’ and Hank Klibanoff’s must-read history of civil rights journalism. “We need those hotheads, just as we always have when our liberty has been threatened.”

Patterson channeled his anger into a lasting innovation for the white supremacy movement—give it a respectable face, strip it of explicitly racist rhetoric and use it as an invisible hand to guide mob violence. He created the Citizens' Council, which would spawn a regional network by year’s end. Each council’s membership boasted the area’s finest white leaders in business, government and, yes, media. They directed their public anger less at integration itself than at federal incursions on local rule, but the resulting violence was no less extreme.

At the time, Carter was a Plains, Ga., peanut farmer and board of education member. He recalls in his campaign memoir, Turning Point (Random House, 1993), how the Plains Council pressured him to join. When he refused, the council sent 20 of his best customers to demand compliance. Carter again refused, this time adding, “and besides, there are a few politicians in Atlanta who are taking the dues from all over the state and putting the money in their pockets, just because folks are worried about the race issue.”

Tea-bagging elites like Fox News, Sarah Palin and Joe Wilson are the political descendants of Patterson’s councils. They’re still using coded language to orchestrate rowdy, racist mobs and they’re still pocketing the money the frenzy generates.

In the tea-bagging universe, “big government”—or, really, the social programs both Beck and Rush Limbaugh conspicuously dub “reparations”—is a stand-in villain for integration. Not the literal act of blacks and whites going to school together. Rather, bashing big government swats at the same anxiety Patterson had: a concern over who gets to make the rules. That question has haunted Dixie ever since black slaves outnumbered the South’s white residents. And it still haunts the GOP’s Southern, white base today.

Nor is it new for the movement’s media mavens to cry foul when someone dares break the code. It started, as Roberts and Klibanoff detail, as the national media covered Little Rock’s brutalities, and it intensified throughout the era. Southern newspaper editors, themselves affiliated with Citizens’ Councils, led a concerted effort to bully national outlets into what pioneering Atlanta Constitution editor Ralph McGill called “the cult of objectivity.”

The fruits are seen in the timidity of today’s mainstream news. Demonstrable liars like Joe Wilson and Sarah Palin are given point-counterpoint coverage. A rally dominated by ugliness such as that on display in Washington on Sept. 12 is reported as legitimate political dispute. And Jimmy Carter’s willingness to speak the clear truth is debated as controversy. Decades ago, CBS correspondent Howard K. Smith predicted this outcome as he watched his network reel from complaints about his Freedom Ride coverage. Applying balance to a discussion in which there is none, he warned, was “equivalent to saying that truth is to be found somewhere between right and wrong, equidistant between good and evil.”

The White House’s fear of challenging the tea-bag madness is typical of its cautious politics. But the rest of us accept it at our peril. The absurd, plainly racist ideas that found air at Palin’s campaign rallies have dug in as meaningful parts of our daily public conversation. Carter is the most significant public figure to say that’s not OK. Rather than allow the right to shout him down, many more purported leaders must stand up with him.

do the numbers lie and which country back?

2009-09-18T11:29:00.001-07:00

I have tried very hard to avoid news as of late...partly because the stories carried by the news themselves are a sad commentary on our culture and nation - such as the inordinate amount of press dedicated to kanye west storming the stage of the VMAs, or the fact that these days in america, everything has to be a crime that somebody must pay for (i.e. a coach barely escaping with an acquittal after one of his players collapsed and died during practice) unless its committed by old white men in suits residing at least part of the year in washington - and partly because news from within my world can often serve as a crushing reminder that it is always a long, arduous and extremely difficult right to see that the constitution remains more than a mere inconvenience for some win-at-all-costs prosecutor.

but a few things just cannot be avoided. and one of them is the health care "debate" - not really much of a debate so much as an ideologically trenched shout off. it came up again last night at a small gathering and there was much talk of numbers and statistics. and while I am an advocate of an eventual single-payer system and strongly believe that we must provide access to health care, which is not the legal mandate and role of health insurance companies - a distinction all too often lost - I also am very much wondering how accurate all the numbers thrown around actually are. yes, we spend a hell of a lot more than other countries...but are our results really as bad as those on the left want to portray? and if you can access our health care, are the results really as extraordinary as those on the right want to portray? for instance, if we could factor in the negative impact that our violent culture and resulting higher murder rates, is our life expectancy really that much lower than so many other industrialized countries? and what about our relative lack of a general safety net, leaving more of us stranded in poverty which inevitably brings with it delitorious effects on our health? does our poor urban planning force us to be less active than others? but then, in the end does any of that matter? or am I just guilty of once again avoiding the only question that matters - how can we possibly say that anyone is not entitled to some of the most basic necessities in life; nurishment, clean water, shelter and their health? what does it say about us that for all the high ideals we claim to stand for, we still have a tendency to treat these as commodities to be used for propping up our stock portfolios?

and another unavoidable story is the ongoing discussion of racism and its effects and manifestations in our nation. jimmy carter expressed what a hell of a lot of persons of color feel in this country...that some otherwise completely illogical opposition to the president is a manifestation of the vestages of centuries of racism, perhaps a bit more dormant in recent times than just a few decades ago. and while I am again reminded that for whatever reason, the vast majority of white people simply refuse to address the legitimatacy of such opinions given the deplorable history of race relations in this country, I am also struck by one of the phrases that is repeated over and over and pointed to as proof that racism is the underlying current - "Give me my country back."

and regardless of whether the holder, consciously or subconsciously, desires to express that america is a white man's nation, one must wonder exactly what country it is that the holder wishes to have back. let's be honest (and stereotypical), many of these people never got a fair shake in this country...largely because of their parents occupations or simply being born in the wrong area code. so what is it they want back? is it just the fantasy we all were indoctrinated with as children of this mythical exemplary nation that stood above all others and in which it was actually possible to rise above it all if you just put your head down and worked hard? because in reality...there are very few instances in this nation's history where that was actually true (and ironically, it often occurred during some of the darkest times). is it one where we all share a sense of community and actually take care of each other? and if so, does that not necessarily include a racial element given the extreme tribalism that our "melting pot" has often slipped into? in the end, I am left believing for most it is the mythical america that they believed as a child sitting on the curb waiving their flag and catching shriner candies...an america that as they aged and matured, they never saw. it isn't that they want their country "back" so much as they want the innocence and beauty of their youth returned...they want to believe again. face it, it is a hell of a tough world regardless of whether or not we are the richest nation that ever was. too many of us have not gotten the country we were promised as school children...and yes, we are angry. perhaps the only true difference between us is how we handle that anger...and how it manifests itself.

eyes on the crack in the door...

texas as murderer, prosecutors that don't care about justice...

2009-09-03T13:47:00.002-07:00

a little over 3 years ago I wrote a bit about the story of cameron todd willingham, a man executed, nay, murdered by the state of texas in 2004 because it used lying hacks to convict him of capital murder in the alleged arson which killed his three children. a group known as the innocence project, a wonderful collection of attorneys and students dedicated to exonerating those wrongly on death row (of which, anyone in the business knows, there are plenty), basically completely debunked the case against willingham. the chicago tribune investigated the matter a bit further and concluded that texas very likely killed an innocent man. now, the new yorker has reported on a commission put together by the state of texas to look into such shenanigans which has discovered that, beyond a reasonable doubt, texas killed an innocent man.

for those of you that don't know, willingham was in his early 20s when a fire broke out in his home. he tried in vain to get to his three toddlers but was unable to do so. once outside the home, witnesses initially reported that he was hysterical in his attempts to regain access to the home to get to his children...to the point that he was restrained by authorities. however, the so-called "forensic experts" decided that the fire was clearly an arson that had to have been deliberately set because no natural fire would burn the way it did. suddenly, witness statements started to change and willingham was portrayed as acting oddly for someone who's children were being burned. willingham maintained his innocence (up until the needle delivered the deadly poison) and refused a plea deal that would have spared his life. the jury (stacked with death penalty supporters as I have written before) was out all of one hour.

and now, actual experts that know the science of fire and its characteristics have examined the evidence and conclusively ruled out arson, going so far as to basically call the original "experts" complete hacks that did not understand a thing about fire and the way it behaves. all this while we learn from israel that dna evidence is easier to manufacture than fingerprints. and yet we still cling to putting people to death in a very apparently flawed system, a system of which we can now say, beyond any reasonable doubt, is responsible for the death of innocent persons.

which really is not all that surprising when you have the very opposite of the types of persons that should be prosecuting cases actually doing it. rather than people concerned with the rule of law and doing justice and representing the people (including any allegedly accused of crime), we have some of the least ethical, win-at-all-costs persons with obscene amounts of discretionary power wielding the giant hammer of the state against you and I. take a case of mine for instance...

a man is shot once and dies from the gunshot wound. the police and DA's office know the dead guy had a record a mile long, including such wonderful things as nearly choking his wife to death, breaking into a girlfriend's parents home to beat her severely and crack her jaw in two places, and connections to drug cartels of which he bragged. they hear from co-workers of the shooter and the shooter himself that the dead guy repeatedly threatened the shooter and others around him with death or great bodily harm by pulling knives on a 65 yr old man, showing off his gang tatoos and bragging about his ability to have people disappear and explicitly stating "I will kill you." they know he was extremely intoxicated when he died and that moments earlier he had threatened to kill the shooter again, to the extent that multiple people had to restrain him from attacking the shooter, even after the shooter displayed his weapon and asked to be left alone. every person they interview validates the shooter's story...except one. of course that one person has a serious substance abuse problem, and tells a tale with obvious falsehoods that they know to be false (like placing the shooter in a big white truck...when all involved know the dead guy was in the big white truck). but this one person is facing 40 plus years for beating the shit out of his boyfriend and nearly biting his thumb off while on probation. and this one person gets a deal from the prosecution to six months time served...and his testimony is wildly different than that of any reasonable person otherwise associated with the case. and it directly conflicts with the information investigators received from the plethora of unbiased people also around at the time (in addition to the co-workers of the shooter). the prosecutor calls only the one snitch that got that great deal...ignoring all the people he knows about that show this guy is a lying sack of shit just wanting to get out of jail. and this is your justice system.

I would've changed my fucking lock...

I cant keep up with you, if you slow down for me I can see that you're only telling lies...

2009-08-14T09:34:00.001-07:00

freedom of speech is a wonderful thing. and regardless of how incredibly ignorant, insanely stupid, or just plain unethical and evil you may be, I am big proponent of the fact that you can walk to the corner, drop a milk crate for a stage and declare your philosophy to the world. unfortunately...that means I am forced to put up with whatever you have to say, no matter how incredibly ignorant, insanely stupid or just plain unethical and evil you may be.

on the same token...freedom of the press is a wonderful thing. only "the press" stopped being "the press" long ago (part of me blames kennedy and that televised debate...cue the entrance of marketing into politics). there was a time when a journalist was a journalist and a commentator was a commentator. there was a time when a journalist would have the balls to ask "why are you telling lies?" now, everything is reported under the guise of "fair and balanced" coverage. so once again...no matter how incredibly ignorant, insanely stupid or just plain unethical and evil you may be, I am forced to hear your words spouted back to me by equally incredibly ignorant, insanely stupid or just plain unethical and evil people with a press pass.

take the health care reform "debate" for instance. when your "talking points" rely entirely on misinformation, ignorance, stupidity and outright lies...you should be (1) outright ignored by the press or (2) called out by the press. unfortunately, instead we have republican "leadership" whipping vulnerable segments of the population into a frenzy with idiocy. as a former conservative sympathizer, I am utterly ashamed that I once went out of my way to defend the republican party.

thanks to this ignorant hysteria we have people shouting some of the most ironically asinine comments at elected representatives. things like "keep your government hands off my medicare" - because if you are so thankful and satisfied with your government-run health care program obviously the last thing you want is for the government to get its hands on your government-run health care program.

and one of my favorites - the old "if government-run health care is so great than why don't congress and the president be the first to sign up for it?" please just ignore the fact that the vast majority of public employees, state, federal and local, have health care provided through government plans...including congress and the president.

and then there is all the hoopla about the "horrors" of other univeral health care systems. here is a story of "horror" from france for you. in college I had an acquaintance that sliced his hand to shreds while working on an architecture project. at the time he was studying abroud in versailles. he was taken to a french hospital in a nation with (shudder) government health care. the extremely difficult task of repairing the multitude of severed tendons and such was completed by french doctors. his hand was good as new. no cost. and he wasn't even french. god forbid we would have such a system. you know, one that would help us live longer, happier, healthier and the like.

and it isn't like we are getting any real ideas from the conservative side...which is a shame, because they could contribute to a true, honest and robust debate that might actually assist in forging a program that could work. instead we have the CEO of Whole Foods telling us that the answer is found "high-deductible" plans that encourage self-imposed rationing of health care up to a few thousand (if not more). he espouses how wonderful this is because it keeps the health care costs of Whole Foods down...but doesn't tell you that this is because when you have a high-deductible plan and you are working at a place like Whole Foods, you can't afford the deductible and so you never get health care because you can never afford to pay the portion required of you before the insurance kicks in. I have a professional degree and a white collar job...I have a high-deductible plan...I can't afford to use it because I can't drop a few grand on doctor visits. but then I guess it doesn't qualify as "rationing" if profit hungry fuckjobs are causing it.

but the most offensive is this bullshit about "pulling the plug on granny" and so-called "death panels." referring to a provision inserted by a southern republican senator, the republican "leadership" has now declared that one of the most positive aspects of end-of-life care should be considered the most frightening and is really just a front for the government to slit your mom's throat. every single one of us can point to someone in our lives that has been terminally ill and come to the end of their lives...many of us know that person finished their life in an unfamiliar place and in pain. some of us know that person was determined to leave this place with dignity, and were lucky enough to be in comfortable surroundings, possibly even with loved ones in their own home. some choose to fight with everything medicine can offer, some choose to accept the end and want it to be as comfortable as possible. (ironically those that opt for comfort and ease have been shown to outlive those that remain in the hospital). as the child of aging parents, I am horrified at how the GOP is approaching this subject...horrified but not surprised. to think that anyone would argue against my mother or father being given access to all the information necessary to make the right decision for them is extremely distressing. to think that my parents, and yours, may be forced to die in a hospital bed rather than in comfort and surrounded by their loved ones because the republican party has no agenda other than bringing down a democratic presidency is infuriating.

there was a time I defended the republican party, there was a time I pointed out that at least they were trying to do something. there was a time I believed that we could move past this bullshit politics of whatever you are for I am against and the most important thing is that I bring down whatever you are for. there was a time when I actually believed the better angels of america's nature would overcome the onslaught of un-american, my-profit-above-all-else talking points from persons concerned now with human beings, but only with dollar signs. I am no longer so sure.

I have permanently abandoned the republican party as a refuge for wing-nuts, ignorance and profit over people. but the democratic party should not believe for a second that this means they have my faith. if you blow this opportunity, if you back down for fear of your immediate political future, myself and history will view you with utter contempt.

people are facing "death panels" daily in this country because through no fault of their own they are not lucky enough to be blessed with financial well-being and perfect health. stop this. it is un-american. worse, it is inhuman.

reading between the lines in cambridge: can we honestly discuss the reality of race in america?

2009-07-24T08:59:00.001-07:00

despite having elected a black man to the highest office in the land, lets stop pretending that america has moved past its racial problems. and can we please stop talking about being "post-racial" (which is really just a nice coded way of saying "let's get back to the good old days when us white folk didn't think about race because it is an uncomfortable subject to talk about and deal with")? the arrest of professor gates has presented an opportunity that we are completely blowing...a chance to have an honest discussion about race in america and examine ourselves (and we all know how wonderful self-reflection can be...just ask sen. graham). instead, we have white men crowing how unjust it is for the president to point out the obvious...it is ludicrous to arrest a man that needs a cane for, at best, being an asshole to you.

now, none of us know precisely what happened when officers showed up at gates's home after someone in the neighborhood apparently did not recognize him at his own home. you can't fault the police for checking into a reported break-in in progress. if you have any experience with law enforcement you have a pretty damn good idea of what happened next. and it likely involved an accomplished man that felt accosted in his own home by law enforcement (something that right-wing airbags claim to understand). either the officer responded in kind to an emotionally escalating situation, or the officer responded with that condescending "calm" talk from officers that we have all experienced...the same talk that makes even suburban white males like me want to wind up and clock them. personally, I have no doubt that the officer's name and badge number were demanded, and I have little doubt that he refused to provide them. (after all, officers here in albuquerque have a nice tendency of putting electrical tape over their badge numbers and covering their faces when they head out to violate civil rights).

read between the lines of the statements the officer has made:

"I'm still just amazed that somebody of his level of intelligence could stoop to such a level, and berate me, accuse me of being a racist or racial profiling. and then speaking about my mother, it's just -- it's beyond words."

at best, this was an officer that arrested a man because the officer felt he was personally insulted. (I am sick of hearing the same old "its dangerous to be an officer and the old guy could have used his cane or grabbed a gun" argument...fact is the place was surrounded by cops. and if the officer had actually felt threatened you can be damn certain guns would be drawn). having spent a few years pouring over police reports, interviewing officers, comparing their reports to actual recordings and sitting through their subsequent testimony at trial, it seems pretty clear to me that gates was arrested not for disorderly conduct but for P.O.T.C. ("pissing off the cops"). the last sentence tells it all...gates said something about the officer's mom and the officer just felt that was inappropriate so he abused his power to teach this man to respect authority. at that point it becomes necessary to claim the arrest was for one of those fall back offenses that officers always use - disorderly conduct, disrupting the peace, and obstruction. it is absolutely not an arrestable offense to "berate" an officer, call him racist or speak about his mother. in fact...it is pretty much basic protected first amendment speech.

but perhaps the more interesting thing about what the officer has said is that he was surprised that an intelligent black man would react the way that he did. he claimed he was not expecting the response he initially received, which wasn't exactly welcoming. he also claimed surprise that an "intelligent" black man would react the way gates did. even using the age-old bullshit line of "if you have nothing to hide you would cooperate." (side note - cops love that bullshit argument...they don't want you to remember that the constitution gives you the right to tell them to fuck themselves and not cooperate with their investigation. they also don't want you to know that regardless of if you cooperate or not, they've made a decision who will be arrested and you are going down regardless).

this position from the officer is shocking (well, not surprising) to me. imagine how you would feel if an officer showed up at your own home and demanded proof that you actually lived there. unless you are lying to yourself, you would be insulted and feel as though you were being harrassed. if the officer was genuinely surprised by the response he received than he is rather out of touch with just how much americans respect the privacy of their own homes. nobody likes the government intruding past their front door.

but perhaps the most amazing response from the officer is that he was surprised at how a man "of his intelligence" would feel as though race had something to do with this. (did this actually mean "I expect this from the black kid on the street...but smart blacks should know to respect law enforcement?"). and this is where we can actually have an intelligent conversation about race in america...yet next to zero of us (and by us, I mean the white community) are attempting to do so.

now this officer may very well be a fine gentlemen and an honest cop. but his statement of surprise at gates's reaction means one of two things: (1) he is lying about how the situation went down and even he recognizes it had something to do with race; or (2) as a white man he just doesn't have a clue. although by virtue of the badge I tend to think it is a combination of the two...let's discuss the latter.

first, because I will inevitably hear from people about how this cop is so not racist that he taught a course on profiling and tried to save a famous black athlete, I will address these two points. initially...even racist crackers love the black athlete. thanks to systemic racism, athletics is deemed by white society as an appropriate place for the black male. harvard professorship? not so much. second, courses taught at the police academy aren't exactly rigorous exercises in critical thought. there just isn't the time. not only that, but I personally put together materials for the department of homeland defense's course for training first responders in potential suicide bomb attacks. my role was to examine racial profiling laws throughout the united states and determine which actions the law would and would not allow. with this in mind, I have serious doubts that any serious discussion of race relations actually occurred in an academy class on racial profiling. now, I am not saying that this officer was racist...but that in no way means that the situation did not have something to do with race.

if anything, the officer's past makes it even more evident that whites need to examine race in a way that the vast majority of us never do. the only reason that a white officer would be surprised at such a response from a black man is that the white officer has never honestly dealt with race in america. that does not mean he is a bad man or a racist, it just speaks to the truth of being white in america - race does not occur to most of us because as the dominant race we aren't forced to examine it. when the systemic racism works in your favor, it is easy to ignore it. which then makes it easy to make such intellectually dishonest comments as references to "reverse-racism" and the plight of the white man in america. if we honestly talked about race relations in this country and examined the historical significance of overt and covert racism, no white officer would be surprised at being received with hostility for asking a black man to prove he lived in a nice neighborhood. of course the issue instantly became about race for the black man...he is constantly reminded that he is black. after all, even now (and I am guilty of this as well), he is referred to as a preeminent "black" scholar rather than just a scholar. and of course the white man can't understand why it has to be about race...because he has never had to come to terms with race in america. although, if he truly examined his past and the historical mistreatment of irish immigrants in america, I am sure he could begin to understand how gates must have felt, even if it is impossible for him to fully understand.

regardless, this is something that should be discussed. this should be an opening for the white community to get serious about actually confronting what we love to just ignore (shushing children when they ask about race, averting our gaze, remaining quiet when the topic is broached). race matters in america. people of color are not allowed to forget. and just once, I wish that we would not allow ourselves to ignore it either.

getting serious about health care, police power, and the GOP chooses prison over school...

2009-07-23T09:25:00.000-07:00

this morning I was watching horrific morning television since my music was in the car and I have been socialized to require noise to be comfortable. for whatever reason they had some bozo on as a talking head to discuss the health care "debate" (in quotes since there is far too much intellectual dishonesty going on from both sides discussing the issue). my guess is that said bozo likely has a degree in either communications, journalism or economics...none of which provide him with any historical context of the underlying issues and apparently leave him utterly ignorant to anything but token right wing talking points and accepted universal truths that are neither universal, nor truth. well, this fool basically had only two things he could say (either because he is a fool or a liar). the first was how great american health care is because rich people come to america for treatment. the second was how this issue is "being rushed" to be concluded before august. both of these are highly dubious and misleading claims that I am getting rather sick of hearing.

first off...while some filthy rich people may be coming to america to get top notch treatment, that same treatment is largely unavailable to the majority of americans. to the contrary, many americans are actually touring abroad for medical procedures that they cannot afford here in the united states. what they are really suggesting is that if america has the best of the best for a tiny fraction of the public that could afford to get it wherever it is than that is a top notch system as a whole...regardless of how pathetic it is for the rest of us.

the second claim is one of the conservative's new favorite mantras - "this is so costly and so important we cannot rush this." the obvious implication is that a national health care system has not been considered before this month. nevermind that germany implemented the first nationalized health care system over a century ago. nevermind that there was a serious discussion and attempt at this fifteen years ago in this country. nevermind that president truman proposed a national health care system over sixty years ago. and nevermind that president roosevelt had asked for it to be included in an economic bill of rights before even that. to claim that this is being "rushed" is completely ludicruous, dishonest and just plain fucking stupid. so seriously...can we stop all the damn posturing and bullshit and actually talk about this subject legitimately. I refuse to believe that america is incapable of providing quality health care to its citizens cheaper than it does when the rest of the civilized world already does it. (and don't tell me our private system "subsidizes" the rest of the world...because our government subsidizes a hell of a lot of medical research already...it just doesn't get any of the profits back).

a white cambridge police officer arrested a highly distinguished black harvard professor at his own home. now I can understand that someone in the neighborhood called in when they thought they saw someone breaking into the home (although you have to wonder which neighbor was unaware that one of the most distinguished black scholars in history lived on their block...that fact alone raises interesting questions)...but why in gods name it was necessary to arrest a man after he had shown that he was, in fact, entering his own home is completely beyond me. and the only possible explanation comes down to two prongs...the first - police still really do not like black men. the second - police forces tend to be filled with too many people that think the badge gives them too much power. the kind of guys that get off on having authority and flaunting it whenever they can. and when you combine this with systemic racism it is a dangerous coctail that is destined to lead to absurdities such as arresting a distinguished mind because he didn't hide his eyes and say "yessa" when confronted with idiocy. which also makes me wonder...where are all the screaming right-wing talking heads on this subject? shouldn't they be appalled that the government arrested a man in his own home for nothing more than not taking shit from a cop? isn't that supposed to be the limbaugh crowd's calling card? they should have a new hero...but they'll be picking the cop who refused to apologize as their martyr. as much as I wish we could...I lament that this likely will not lead to a serious discussion about race in this country.

speaking of police fucking with black men because they can...california is finally closing its budget gap to possibly avoid bankruptcy. and since the GOP absolutely refused to raise any taxes to help it happen (good ol' historically false supply side economics) they instead slashed funding for key programs designed to help those that need it most. education was gutted...right when numbers were released that put america 10th in percentage of the population with a post-secondary education. but in the process of gutting programs designed to actually benefit people (particularly the already disadvantaged) the GOP threatened to kill the process again over cuts to the department of corrections. because while it is vital to crush any program that might assist disadvantaged groups...it is also vital to make sure that we keep them out of sight and off the streets as much as possible, particularly if they have a bit more melanin. and while the media is going to ignore this for the most part...in this one dispute the GOP has been perfectly summarized. today's republican party..."if we have to choose between educating you or imprisoning you...we'll go with imprisonment."

we are underused...

the beauty and the boneheaded nature of our system...

2009-07-21T15:16:00.000-07:00

The following is a column by Neal Gabler of the Boston Globe. We dealing with a political party that has no interest in constructive criticism or dialogue and the other without the guts to go it alone. At the same time we are being bombarded with misleading half-truths and outright lies. Mr. Gabler makes me once again wonder how close to the edge we have gotten...or if it is even under our feet anymore.

Hope, caught up in a sea of obstruction

By Neal Gabler | July 21, 2009

HERE’S THE situation: President Obama maneuvered a stimulus package through Congress that, after being reduced to attract additional senators, has proven insufficient to stimulate the economy. Now, given the political calculus, it would be nearly impossible for him to introduce an additional boost. He also proposed a regulatory scheme for Wall Street that was so riddled with compromises and concessions that it was unlikely to prevent another economic meltdown. And he has pushed a national healthcare plan that is almost certain to be eviscerated, and that even in its disemboweled form may not pass Congress.

Obviously, we face daunting problems, but we nevertheless continue to operate with a kind of hopefulness that we will meet the challenges and triumph. Historically, we have reason to feel this way. In the last 70 years , this country faced down the Great Depression, Nazism, and Jim Crow. The system, however balky and tardy it may have been, has always worked.

But today, beneath the optimistic rhetoric, lurks another possibility that no politician and few pundits want to admit: that the system is no longer up to the task and that the factors that once brought relief are no longer operable. There is the real possibility that this time we will not win but rather founder the way Japan has done since its economic catastrophe. There is the possibility that this time it is hopeless.

How has it come to pass that the most powerful (and most self-confident) nation in the world now seems helpless? The short answer is that political action is a function of political will - the public’s more than the politicians’ - and that ours has been steadily sapped. Rahm Emanuel, the president’s chief of staff, has said that crisis creates opportunity, but he is only partly right. Crisis creates pain. It is the pain that creates the opportunity.

The New Deal, that great spasm of political initiative, arose out of a national agony: 25 percent of Americans were unemployed, and with absolutely no safety net to catch them. There is plenty of agony now, but it is not as deep nor as wide, in part because of the programs of the New Deal, including unemployment insurance. President Roosevelt had the advantage of an angry citizenry who wanted him to do anything to rescue them. Obama has the disadvantage of a passive citizenry that, frankly, may never hurt enough to demand what might finally cure what ails them.

Obama is also the victim of a much different and more complex political system than the one FDR faced - a system with far more interests to broker among. The number of lobbyists in Washington, a good indicator of how many interests must be served and how vested those interests are in maintaining the status quo, has more than doubled since 2000. There are now roughly 40,000, 2,000 more since last November alone. In the last year nearly 2,500 began lobbying on the single issue of climate change. By a political Newton’s Law, every action has an equal and opposite reaction, which means that there are thousands of thrusts and parries on any major piece of legislation - a sure prescription for inaction or for tepid action.

Then there is the new media ecology. Yes, Roosevelt had his enemies in the press - almost all of which was arrayed against him. But he did not have a 24/7 cable antagonist dedicated to his presidential demise or hundreds of Internet bomb-throwers as Obama does, and he did not have a press whose baseline was skepticism about any possible government initiative. It is not the right-wing media that inhibit change; it is the mainstream media with their own attachment to the status quo, their own loaded questions about dramatic new policies and their predilection to identify potential missteps rather than to extol potential boldness. On healthcare, for example, the press has yet to ask one simple and critical question: Why can France have vastly superior care at half the cost per person of ours?

But finally, and most importantly, our own political institutions have been steadily and deliberately hogtied or even dismantled so that they cannot effectively do very much. In truth, the system was never very good at meeting crises; it was designed for incrementalism, not daring leaps. Our Founding Fathers, worrying about demagogues and runaway democratic effusions, created a number of institutions and rules, from the aristocratic Senate, which was devised to put the brakes on what they feared might be the careening of the more democratic House, to the entire system of checks and balances. The object was to prevent change, not facilitate it.

What those Fathers could not have anticipated was a political party dedicated to total obstructionism - dedicated to making certain that the government would fiddle while the nation burned. For this we have the Republicans to blame for their actions and the Democrats to blame for their inaction. As comedian Bill Maher recently put it, “The Democrats have moved to the right, and the right has moved into a mental hospital.’’

Americans forget that after four years of Herbert Hoover’s dithering during the Great Depression members of his party almost unanimously opposed FDR’s economic stimulus, and that in the procedural run-up to Social Security, they held ranks against it, too. Twelve of the 19 Republican senators voted to have Social Security scrapped. Old age security, they argued, would spoil Americans.

Flash-forward 30 years, and the party was back to its shenanigans, opposing Medicare. Exactly half the Republicans in the House voted against it while Senate Republicans voted 17-13 to stop it. Only overwhelming Democratic majorities in 1935 and 1965 led to Social Security and Medicare - and this at a time when the GOP had a moderate wing. The conclusion: in times of dire need the system only works when there is a huge one-party majority and a popular, muscular president of the same party to keep the legislators in line.

Things have only gotten worse - much worse - since then. It is not only the 30-year Republican drumbeat that government is the problem, a cliche that has helped drain political will; or the tax cuts that, as Reagan’s budget director David Stockman candidly admitted, were largely enacted to starve government and render it ineffective; or the incompetency of George W. Bush’s appointees that was intended to discredit government. It is the Republican lurch rightward that has purged those few moderates and gamed the filibuster so that any piece of legislation is now held hostage to 40 votes. This generates cries for bipartisanship, neglecting the fact that there is one party adamantly opposed to any change whatsoever.

How obstructionist is the GOP? From 1927 to 1962, cloture - the vote to end a filibuster - was invoked only 11 times! In 2007 alone, with Republicans trying to derail initiatives in the Democratic Congress as disparate as an increased minimum wage, a climate change bill, campaign finance reform, and an energy bill, there were 62 cloture votes. When you consider that conservative Democrats are being hammered by Republicans as well as by lobbying interests who provide them with campaign contributions, you can readily see that not even the Democrats’ 60 votes in the Senate are sufficient to move legislation even if there is a public outcry for action. According to polls, roughly 70 percent of Americans want a public option in healthcare. With that kind of support, the fact that it is even being debated is testament to how decrepit our system has become.

And so we are now a nation with great professions of faith that we will succeed but little real confidence that we will, a nation that focuses more on what can go wrong than on what can go right, a nation that can’t seem to get action. We are a timid nation with small dreams and even smaller plans - a nation that seems to have lost its capacity to do big things. We all know the nation is broken, but we may no longer have the will or the institutions to fix it.

repaying the wrong ones, screwing working america, my minimum wage,and judicial red herrings...

2009-07-17T09:15:00.001-07:00

goldman sachs made a profit such as it has never seen in its century and a half of existence. an obscene amount of money once again for doing basically nothing...credit is still non-existent, money is not going to its most productive uses, and the trend followed by every economic hegemon before us continues - worship of financialization for finance's sake at the expense of actually making anything tangible and retaining a manufacturing base that can be utilized at times like this. (how wonderful would it be to still have a strong manufacturing sector at this time and factories that might actually be opened to make things and put people back to work?) and so what is goldman sachs doing with all this money it is raking in now that the taxpayers came in to prevent collapse of the financial markets? well, it paid about $10 billion back to the government...and it is setting aside even more than that (between $11 and $12 billion) to pay out to obscenely rich people so that the average salary of their employees will near $1 million. and this is why class matters in america as it has in every nation since the dawn of civilization. there has class warfare waged in this nation since its founding...only never up the ladder, always down. and so now, long after americans fought and died for the right to a decent living and enough to eat and a roof over their heads we are heading right back to square one. uber-rich with no concept of good ol' fashioned christian morality or good ol' american equality and community spirit. and they are trying to scare us into accepting it because that is just the price of "prosperity." except that it isn't. we have had true prosperity before, in a way that benefited a hell of a lot more people than the current raping and pillaging of all but the richest. and they have the audacity to scold us about "soaking" the wealthiest of the wealthy, the people that have built walls and iron gates around their communities so they don't have to so much as look at the horror they are promulgating. since the dawn of time they've been soaking us...and the last 30 years it has turned into a tsunami. so excuse me if I don't feel so bad about making them run through a sprinkler so that my neighbor's don't lose their homes, their jobs, their health and their dignity.

which brings me to the latest sell-out of the american working class by the democratic party...the abandonment of the card-check provision in the labor bill being drawn up by the senate. (for those not in the know...this provision would allow unions to be recognized as soon as a majority of workers indicate they want one...making it much more difficult for the walmarts of the world to destroy the working class). even though anyone with the tiniest bit of context understands the historical significance of unionized labor in america and the immense benefits it bestowed upon the nation and the reality that as labor has been squeezed by the "free" market bullshit fuckheads that have no understanding of humanity and believe that we are all greedless rational beings the gap between the haves and the used to haves and the have nots has become enormous - the democrats decided it is more important to have 60 votes than to do what is right. and it is because they are scared of their campaign contributions drying up. they don't give a shit what is good for those of us that need the most help...they only care about what is good for the next election cycle. and while the republican party eats itself alive, I have to wonder if the democratic party is not far behind when the inevitable thunderstorm of severe economic distress comes upon us and the masses of america once again let their displeasure known.

and one of the things they consistently fuck us on is the minimum wage (even though a ridiculous super majority of americans think it should be higher...including card-carrying republicans). well, I've come up with a solution. forget having a minimum wage set at a real dollar amount. let's open it up for Big Business, let it float and fluctuate...with a catch. as a corporation, the lowest paid employee must make at least 1/50th of your CEO. you want to pay your CEO a $1 billion dollar bonus...fine. but then your mail-room clerk is going to get a $20 million christmas vacation. watch in amazement as CEO pay comes back to earth.

I'm am entirely sick of roe v. wade being the issue that they want us to give a shit about when it comes to who sits on the supreme court. I know that it is not nearly as important to me given that I don't have a uterus...but trust me, every day there are far more important issues being decided by the court that have serious effects on all of our every day lives. if we are going to insist on grilling about shit they won't answer...how about their views on how it is that a fictional entity concocted for the sole purpose of making money is considered a human being under the law, even though it never has to suffer the consequences that a human being would have to suffer when it breaks the law (capital punishment, jail time - side note, why the fuck don't we revoke corporate charters for 0 to life when business breaks the law?) how about their views on how spending is speech? how about their views on whether the founders meant it when they called the first states "commonwealths"? how about their views on the right of access to courts?

not that any of the condescending patronizing fuckheads could understand any of the answers. even with my lack of a uterus, I managed to be appalled at the attitude these fuckwads showed towards a woman. why the fuck are "conservatives" concerned with whether or not they are nice to lawyers all of a sudden? I thought us lawyers were evil encarnate. or is it just that this one has a vagina and so it makes her "moody" and "bitchy" where with scalia it makes him decisive, strong and intelligent. (and not that conservatives are the only ones...thank you sen. boxer for pointing out that the black guy before your committee might not have been expressing a view consistent with a NAACP resolution or another black guy from atlanta. its always lovely to see someone express their crackerness in such a pathetic way). despite the insane lack of substance that came out of four fucking days of nothing before the committee...one thing was abundantly clear. that woman that sen. graham "likes...really, he likes her" properly considers you fucking bozos mental midgets and she could run intellectual circles around your asses after a three day scotch binge.

that's when I reach for my revolver...

if you saw the face of god and love...would you change?

2009-07-16T10:41:00.001-07:00

hey mama they got us livin' suicide...

the GOP has been absent from chicago politics for a long, long time. and they are now learning what chicago politics is all about. arizona sen. kyl, republican douchebag, is running his mouth about how they need to cancel the rest of the stimulus spending. so the administration, in good ol' fashioned chicago style, called his bluff. letters were sent to arizona's governor asking if the state would prefer the feds withhold stimulus funds per sen. kyl's wishes. finally...progressive hardball.

hey mama they got us livin' genocide...

why the hell is a fireman testifying at a confirmation hearing for a supreme court justice? is this what the process has come to? forget legal minds and colleagues...lets here from people with vendettas. this should be an opportunity to educate the public about the courts. this should be an opportunity to examine how the system is supposed to work (and in the process getting rid of the bullshit "activist judge" moniker). instead we are parading parties that lost on appeal because the appellate court agreed with the detailed ruling of the lower court. join the fucking line buddy.

you gave cash to the feds, left your school district for dead...

although that line is a hell of a lot shorter than the line developing for people that bush nominated appellate judges are fucking through "activist" tendencies, ignoring the law, their own rulings and the rulings of the supreme court if they think the guy probably did something to deserve it along the way. forty-five minutes worth of findings from the judge that heard all the evidence and lived with the case for 5 years? out the window.

still believin' the system is workin' while half my people are out of work...

the los angelos times does not think it is appropriate to "soak" the rich to pay for a healthy society. yea...having to fork over $50,000 a year if you make more than a million to ensure that people are not unnecessarily dying sounds like such a terrible thing. to put this in perspective...that's like asking the typical starting teacher in new mexico to pay an extra $1,500 bucks a year. and to put that further in perspective...ask yourself what kind of policy they would give you for $1,500 a year.

anonymous notes left in the pockets and coats of judges and juries from frisco to jersey...

and never mind that the tax rates they will enjoy will still be significantly less than it was in the post-war era during the largest, most egalitarian economic expansion in history. guess this is the result of white-washing history and never getting past WWII in the textbooks.

threats and protests, politician's mob debts...

sarah palin offered her view on energy policy in an op-ed in the washington post. it appeared just after she quit her job. she talked about how what they "know" up in alaska...the place she just quit on. as someone that used to at least have a modicum of respect for the republican party that is now utterly embarrassed at the horror show it has become...please keep talking ms. palin. maybe you could have some conversations with sen. kyl and sen. sessions on the record about how scary that black guy with the foreign sounding name is and how unbelievable it is that brown people don't all think alike.

trumped up charges with phoney arrests...

at a time when the supreme court is about to give corporations free reign in political campaigns it is important to note analysis conducted by larry bartels. in his numbers (and granted the studies he had to utilize indicate that his analysis is by no means fool-proof) he discovered that the wishes of low-income persons are literally ignored by republicans and democrats alike. but we just found video of michael jackson's hair on fire...so please continue about your day.

the CIA runnin' like their jones from indiana...

the CIA lies to people...including representatives. it is what they do. get used to it. stop feigning shock over it. end them or accept them. they are our jack nicholson at gitmo. they provide a glimpse in the mirror of how terrible we can be...but we much prefer to just go on about our days and not think about it. so either do something or don't. I am sick of this half-ass gamesmanship.

this ain't no cartoon, no one slips on bananas...

an officer actually filed suit to get an injunction so that he wouldn't have to go to war per his orders claiming that until he sees obama's birth certificate he does not consider obama a "natural born citizen." jesus. fucking. christ.

hell, I shot ronald reagan, I shot JFK, I slept with marilyn and she sung me happy birthday...

california may finally be nearing an end to handing out IOUs. and the governator is reminding everyone why the "tax cut" mantra is entirely boneheaded. at a time when they are needed most by more people than ever...he refuses to sign anything that may institute any tax raises whatsoever in order to close the gap. wish they would hold his balls to the fire and send him something that only taxes the uber-rich more. there is another wave of regular ass people blowback against the wealthy on the horizon...and the GOP is in for a stormy few decades.

politicians got lipstick on the collar, the whole media started to holler, but I don’t give a fuck who they screwin’ in private, I wanna know who they screwin’ in public...

ever notice that the majority of people whining about race are white men? its scary when your centuries-long death grip on everything is beginning to slip isn't it? look at how minority leaders (and by that I mean leaders that are minorities, not leaders of minorities) speak about race and compare it with how white male leaders talk about race. I mean seriously...white men from the south are now concerned about race injecting itself?

you tellin' the youth don't be so violent, then you drop bombs on every single continent...

at a time when "collateral damage" is used to describe civilian deaths I am called on to remember ronald reagan...the man who utterly abhored the idea of taking military action that would endanger civilian lives. the man who left lebonan when he discovered that this was just a bad idea. the "tough" guy that sat out of the conflict of his generation to make movies, who then made it a point to sit down and talk directly with the front man of the "evil empire" of his day.

mandatory minimum sentencin’ ‘cause he got caught with a pocket full of medicine,
do that again another ten up in the pen...

AIG is spending tax dollar money to pay rich people more more money. but again, please ignore this and go back to the video of michael jackson's flaming head. this doesn't concern you.

get so mad I want to bomb an institution...

roger simon brought up an interesting point about diversity on the supreme court...it is full of ivy-leaguers and sotomayor is just another to join the bunch in that regard. but simon's comments raise another question...what in the hell went wrong in this country that we became so hostile to education and intelligence? not that the ivy league is necessarily the bastion of intelligence it would like us to think. but seriously...there was a time when this nation looked up to learned people. now the "champions" that are "just like me" are morons that are proud of their inability to constructively think and mock those that are capable of complex thought processes. fuck me.

oh my god.

GOP slight of hand, thinning the ranks, murder and lies, and paying for our health...

2009-07-14T09:01:00.000-07:00

as the right-wing gasbags heat up to sooth THE right-wing gasbag during the confirmation hearings with ridiculously misinformed, ignorant, or outright knowing lies about "activist" judges (i.e. judges that are not insanely conservative and - preferably - white men) attention is diverted from the true "activist" judges now running the supreme court that are about to overturn a 100 year old law that now serves as the last roadblock to complete and overt corporate takeover of elections. (side note - I am mildly amused to see the democrats rhetoric against qualified candidates coming back to bite them in the ass...just do it the old-fashioned way, the way the GOP has been, pack the fucking courts, make the supreme court 11...and find young lefties to fill the seats). never mind that the feigned horror at policy from the appellate courts (cough cough thurgood marshall cough cough) and judges "making" law (cough cough anglo-american common law jurisprudence cough cough) - unbeknownst to the general public, the supremes have agreed to hear a case concerning corporations activities in federal elections. and they aren't just applying the law to the case before them (i.e. the supposed GOP "ideal" judicial standard)...they are going well past that and are looking at whether limitations on corporate involvement in federal elections is constitutional (an issue not even raised by the parties in the lower courts...activism at its finest). and so, with right-wing nutjobs holding down the fort...we are likely to see over 100 years of law and decades of precedent overturned by "conservative" judges that have no problem with "activism" provided it is in favor of corporations and their profits. you thought Big Business ran the show now? wait until the next round of elections...joe q. public is about to become a footnote.

once again bills are being introduced to repeal "don't ask don't tell" - quite possibly one of the most idiotic policies ever enacted (perhaps if monica had testicles instead of breasts we would have been spared from this foolishness). in the meantime, it does not look like the big brass have been instructed to slow roll the effects of this gay-fearing idiocy. so far in 2009 alone, 100 service members have been dumped because when they go home they go home to the wrong sex. in the past, the purging of those scary gays has cost us more than a few arabic-proficient persons (oops). now, with the military stretched to its limit and recruitment suffering we are throwing people out because they consentually fuck the wrong the genital region. and the nay sayers are still clinging to their "morale" argument...which if you ask me, is a knock on our military. it necessarily implies that they can't do their job if the guy next to them has silk panties on under his fatigues. maybe I'm just confused because I always thought our soldiers were professionals...

turns out the CIA was hiding shit from congress. big surprise. and it turns out that the shit it was hiding from congress violated international and military law. big surprise. and it turns out that dick cheney wanted to keep information from congress, all eight members that are on the "know" list. big surprise. if congress really had any balls they would yank the plug on CIA funding. afterall...congress holds the purse strings and it is their trump card over every other branch. and yes, the CIA could just keep itself running through selling even more arms and drugs. but at least congress would try something more than posturing.

they are going to fuck up health care because they are claiming they can't figure out how to pay for it. what they really mean is that there is no way in hell they want to piss off their campaign contributors - the uber-wealthy and corporations (especially since corporations are about to get free-reign in elections). the highest tax bracket in this country used to be about 90%...and this during the largest and longest sustained and equal economic growth in the history of mankind. and I could be wrong, but the wealthy were still doing pretty well during the post-war period. the corporate tax rate? during that boom the highest bracket was consistently at or above 50%...and corporations were still doing pretty good. so there you go. there is your fucking money. now make it happen.

I dreamed about you for twenty-nine years before I met you...

Blue Cross is only about Green Bills...

2009-06-25T16:15:00.002-07:00

The following is the prepared testimony of Wendell Potter before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation delivered on June 24, 2009. Potter, a former executive in the "health" insurance industry, puts the dirty little secret of health insurance companies under the high beams - health has nothing to do with it, only profits.

Testimony of Wendell Potter, Philadelphia, PA
Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation
June 24, 2009

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to be here this afternoon.

My name is Wendell Potter and for 20 years, I worked as a senior executive at health insurance companies, and I saw how they confuse their customers and dump the sick – all so they can satisfy their Wall Street investors.

I know from personal experience that members of Congress and the public have good reason to question the honesty and trustworthiness of the insurance industry. Insurers make promises they have no intention of keeping, they flout regulations designed to protect consumers, and they make it nearly impossible to understand—or even to obtain—information we need. As you hold hearings and discuss legislative proposals over the coming weeks, I encourage you to look very closely at the role for-profit insurance companies play in making our health care system both the most expensive and one of the most dysfunctional in the world. I hope you get a real sense of what life would be like for most of us if the kind of so-called reform the insurers are lobbying for is enacted.

When I left my job as head of corporate communications for one of the country’s largest insurers, I did not intend to go public as a former insider. However, it recently became abundantly clear to me that the industry’s charm offensive—which is the most visible part of duplicitous and well-financed PR and lobbying campaigns—may well shape reform in a way that benefits Wall Street far more than average Americans.

A few months after I joined the health insurer CIGNA Corp. in 1993, just as the last national health care reform debate was underway, the president of CIGNA’s health care division was one of three industry executives who came here to assure members of Congress that they would help lawmakers pass meaningful reform. While they expressed concerns about some of President Clinton’s proposals, they said they enthusiastically supported several specific goals.

Those goals included covering all Americans; eliminating underwriting practices like pre-existing condition exclusions and cherry-picking; the use of community rating; and the creation of a standard benefit plan. Had the industry followed through on its commitment to those goals, I wouldn’t be here today.

Today we are hearing industry executives saying the same things and making the same assurances. This time, though, the industry is bigger, richer and stronger, and it has a much tighter grip on our health care system than ever before. In the 15 years since insurance companies killed the Clinton plan, the industry has consolidated to the point that it is now dominated by a cartel of large for-profit insurers.

The average family doesn’t understand how Wall Street’s dictates determine whether they will be offered coverage, whether they can keep it, and how much they’ll be charged for it. But, in fact, Wall Street plays a powerful role. The top priority of for-profit companies is to drive up the value of their stock. Stocks fluctuate based on companies’ quarterly reports, which are discussed every three months in conference calls with investors and analysts. On these calls, Wall Street looks investors and analysts look for two key figures: earnings per share and the medical-loss ratio, or medical ―benefit‖ ratio, as the industry now terms it. That is the ratio between what the company actually pays out in claims and what it has left over to cover sales, marketing, underwriting and other administrative expenses and, of course, profits.

To win the favor of powerful analysts, for-profit insurers must prove that they made more money during the previous quarter than a year earlier and that the portion of the premium going to medical costs is falling. Even very profitable companies can see sharp declines in stock prices moments after admitting they’ve failed to trim medical costs. I have seen an insurer’s stock price fall 20 percent or more in a single day after executives disclosed that the company had to spend a slightly higher percentage of premiums on medical claims during the quarter than it did during a previous period. The smoking gun was the company’s first-quarter medical loss ratio, which had increased from 77.9% to 79.4% a year later.

To help meet Wall Street’s relentless profit expectations, insurers routinely dump policyholders who are less profitable or who get sick. Insurers have several ways to cull the sick from their rolls. One is policy rescission. They look carefully to see if a sick policyholder may have omitted a minor illness, a pre-existing condition, when applying for coverage, and then they use that as justification to cancel the policy, even if the enrollee has never missed a premium payment. Asked directly about this practice just last week in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, executives of three of the nation’s largest health insurers refused to end the practice of cancelling policies for sick enrollees. Why? Because dumping a small number of enrollees can have a big effect on the bottom line. Ten percent of the population accounts for two-thirds of all health care spending. (Samuel Zuvekas and Joel Cohen, “Prescription Drugs And The Changing Concentration Of Health Care Expenditures,” Health Affairs, 26 (1) (January/February 2007): 249-257). The Energy and Commerce Committee’s investigation into three insurers found that they canceled the coverage of roughly 20,000 people in a five-year period, allowing the companies to avoid paying $300 million in claims.

They also dump small businesses whose employees’ medical claims exceed what insurance underwriters expected. All it takes is one illness or accident among employees at a small business to prompt an insurance company to hike the next year’s premiums so high that the employer has to cut benefits, shop for another carrier, or stop offering coverage altogether – leaving workers uninsured. The practice is known in the industry as "purging." The purging of less profitable accounts through intentionally unrealistic rate increases helps explain why the number of small businesses offering coverage to their employees has fallen from 61 percent to 38 percent since 1993, according to the National Small Business Association. Once an insurer purges a business, there are often no other viable choices in the health insurance market because of rampant industry consolidation.

An account purge so eye-popping that it caught the attention of reporters occurred in October 2006 when CIGNA notified the Entertainment Industry Group Insurance Trust that many of the Trust’s members in California and New Jersey would have to pay more than some of them earned in a year if they wanted to continue their coverage. The rate increase CIGNA planned to implement, according to USA Today, would have meant that some family-plan premiums would exceed $44,000 a year. CIGNA gave the enrollees less than three months to pay the new premiums or go elsewhere.

Purging through pricing games is not limited to letting go of an isolated number of unprofitable accounts. It is endemic in the industry. For instance, between 1996 and 1999, Aetna initiated a series of company acquisitions and became the nation’s largest health insurer with 21 million members. The company spent more than $20 million that it received in fees and premiums from customers to revamp its computer systems, enabling the company to "identify and dump unprofitable corporate accounts," as The Wall Street Journal reported in 2004. (“Behind Aetna’s Turnaround: Small Steps to Pare Cost of Care,” Wall Street Journal, August 13, 2004). Armed with a stockpile of new information on policyholders, new management and a shift in strategy, in 2000, Aetna sharply raised premiums on less profitable accounts. Within a few years, Aetna lost 8 million covered lives due to strategic and other factors.

While strategically initiating these cost hikes, insurers have professed to be the victims of rising health costs while taking no responsibility for their share of America’s health care affordability crisis. Yet, all the while, health-plan operating margins have increased as sick people are forced to scramble for insurance.

Unless required by state law, insurers often refuse to tell customers how much of their premiums are actually being paid out in claims. A Houston employer could not get that information until the Texas legislature passed a law a few years ago requiring insurers to disclose it. That Houston employer discovered that its insurer was demanding a 22 percent rate increase in 2006 even though it had paid out only 9 percent of the employer’s premium dollars for care the year before.

It’s little wonder that insurers try to hide information like that from its customers. Many people fall victim to these industry tactics, but the Houston employer might have known better – it was the Harris County Medical Society, the county doctors’ association.

A study conducted last year by PricewaterhouseCoopers revealed just how successful the insurers’ expense management and purging actions have been over the last decade in meeting Wall Street’s expectations. The accounting firm found that the collective medical-loss ratios of the seven largest for-profit insurers fell from an average of 85.3 percent in 1998 to 81.6 percent in 2008. That translates into a difference of several billion dollars in favor of insurance company shareholders and executives and at the expense of health care providers and their patients.

There are many ways insurers keep their customers in the dark and purposely mislead them – especially now that insurers have started to aggressively market health plans that charge relatively low premiums for a new brand of policies that often offer only the illusion of comprehensive coverage.

An estimated 25 million Americans are now underinsured for two principle reasons. First, the high deductible plans many of them have been forced to accept – like I was forced to accept at CIGNA – require them to pay more out of their own pockets for medical care, whether they can afford it or not. The trend toward these high-deductible plans alarms many health care experts and state insurance commissioners. As California Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi told the Associated Press in 2005 when he was serving as the state’s insurance commissioner, the movement toward consumer-driven coverage will eventually result in a "death spiral" for managed care plans. This will happen, he said, as consumer-driven plans "cherry-pick" the youngest, healthiest and richest customers while forcing managed care plans to charge more to cover the sickest patients. The result, he predicted, will be more uninsured people.

In selling consumer-driven plans, insurers often try to persuade employers to go "full replacement," which means forcing all of their employees out of their current plans and into a consumer-driven plan. At least two of the biggest insurers have done just that, to the dismay of many employees who would have preferred to stay in their HMOs and PPOs. Those options were abruptly taken away from them.

Secondly, the number of uninsured people has increased as more have fallen victim to deceptive marketing practices and bought what essentially is fake insurance. The industry is insistent on being able to retain so-called "benefit design flexibility" so they can continue to market these kinds of often worthless policies. The big insurers have spent millions acquiring companies that specialize in what they call "limited-benefit" plans. An example of such a plan is marketed by one of the big insurers under the name of Starbridge Select. Not only are the benefits extremely limited but the underwriting criteria established by the insurer essentially guarantee big profits. Pre-existing conditions are not covered during the first six months, and the employer must have an annual employee turnover rate of 70 percent or more, so most of the workers don’t even stay on the payroll long enough to use their benefits. The average age of employees must not be higher than 40, and no more than 65 percent of the workforce can be female. Employers don’t pay any of the premiums—the employees pay for everything. As Consumer Reports noted in May, many people who buy limited-benefit policies, which often provide little or no hospitalization, are misled by marketing materials and think they are buying more comprehensive care. In many cases it is not until they actually try to use the policies that they find out they will get little help from the insurer in paying the bills.

The lack of candor and transparency is not limited to sales and marketing. Notices that insurers are required to send to policyholders—those explanation-of-benefit documents that are supposed to explain how the insurance company calculated its payments to providers and how much is left for the policyholder to pay—are notoriously incomprehensible. Insurers know that policyholders are so baffled by those notices they usually just ignore them or throw them away. And that’s exactly the point. If they were more understandable, more consumers might realize that they are being ripped off.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for beginning this conversation on transparency and for making this such a priority. S. 1050, your legislation to require insurance companies to be more honest and transparent in how they communicate with consumers, is essential. So, too, is S.1278, the Consumers Choice Health Plan, which would create a strong public health insurance option as a benchmark in transparency and quality. Americans need and overwhelmingly support the option of obtaining coverage from a public plan. The industry and its backers are using fear tactics, as they did in 1994, to tar a transparent, publicly-accountable health care option as a "government-run system." But what we have today, Mr. Chairman, is a Wall Street-run system that has proven itself an untrustworthy partner to its customers, to the doctors and hospitals who deliver care, and to the state and federal governments that attempt to regulate it.

Blue Cross has no interest in you unless you are Benjamin Franklin smiling at them from the frontside of a certain denomination of United States Currency.

so you think you can tell heaven from hell?

2009-06-24T16:27:00.000-07:00

another round of exploring the expanses of my wandering mind...

best. republican. affair. story. ever.

seriously...disappearing to argentina for a (supposedly) secret rendevous with some quote "piece of ass"...utterly brilliant. this tops all. this is better than doing a tap dance in the shitter for some twig and berries. this is better than drunkenly throwing stones at the windows of the interns dorms. this is better than $4,000 romps. this is pure gold. wow.

when it comes to whether or not an affair counts, I have pushed the ocean rule. but the hemisphere rule - that is a whole new level of fun.

wondering how much tax-payer dollars were spent on his love trysts in the past. what with him refusing to take federal dollars so his people could starve.

but maybe the best part of it all...sarah palin seriously is going to be the "best" option for the GOP in 2012. at least the democrats held it pretty much together for a few generations before imploding. the republicans seem to do it with every administration they get.

or maybe the best part is that she is in argentina. what? good ol' american girls aren't good enough for you? if you don't like south carolina girls mr. sanford you can just get out!

was watching the news last night. they called the plan for a public insurance option "controversial." how the fuck do they get away with this? something that is favored by 75 percent of the population is "controversial" now? why didn't we have the "controversial" patriot act when it was being "debated"? what's next? "controversial" constitutional democracy?

in flipping through channels over the weekend looking for updates on happenings in iran I came across geraldo on fox news. he had a guy out at the gathering near columbia university to find a young iranian grad student to put on the air - no doubt for a pep talk and "solidarity" and all the rah ree kick em in the knee bullshit. only the kid didn't capitulate. instead he went on a rant about how it is bullshit for the GOP to turn this into an american political football game and the people of iran don't trust us for shit and mccain is a fucking idiot and obama is doing everything right on the matter. they cut him off. but it made me smile.

the boys were scared of sotomayor's relationship with powerful women. so she quit her group. not sure who I am more embarrassed for.

thomas friedman is still a complete fucking idiot.

the insurance industry has an anti-trust exemption along with major league baseball. (that's right...the insurance industry has a license to break the law and jack up prices on you). tickets for bleacher seats at wrigley are somewhere near the federal deficit this year. nobody can afford insurance. coincidence?

and for "free" market advocates...damn are they scared of competition.

then again, who ever thought it was a good fucking idea to leave your health in the hands of an entity that exists for one sole reason - to turn as much profit as possible. seriously, under the american health care system the folks in charge of providing health care are actually legally required to make as much money for stock-holders as possible or they get sued. and how do they make as much money as possible? deny coverage, over charge, kick out anyone that might remotely need health care. yup...that's a jim dandy of a system.

mr. president and democratic senators, I am well aware that you take pride in bipartisan efforts. but when the other side is telling you that there is no way they will agree to anything that resembles what the vast majority of the population wants...fuck them. step up to the plate for us for once goddamnit. we don't need it to get 70 votes...we need it to get 51. if they want to filibuster...let them eat the political fallout.

they are going to crush the protests in iran for the time being. but man did they overplay their hand. going to be an interesting year over there.

the new mexico attorney general indicted an attorney on corruption charges because some old fucks that weren't paying attention thought he was telling them they could misuse government funds in violation of the documents that they signed. not that he actually told them they could...but they thought it was what he meant. lesson to lawyers in new mexico...don't ever do any work for the government.

don't look now but they are going to wait us out in iraq and just keep fucking with us whenever it is time to leave. thanks g.w. can't say enough about how glad I am for that.

the amusing (if you have a fucked up sense of humor like myself) part of all of it. in the end, the neo cons will have succeeded in creating an iran in iraq while the iranian people will create a stable democracy in iran. not that we will remember that in 20 years.

best stimulus plan for the economy I have heard yet (and yes I am biased)...erase student loan debt. an army of educated persons that can finally take advantage of their earning potential rather than shipping it into the coffers of bonehead banks that can't make any decent decisions. hell, for me alone that would be an extra $7,000 a year spent on goods and services. multiply that by a few and we may be back in business.

some guy was pissed at neighborhood kids for playing in his yard. to remove them he played porn...very loudly. call me old fashioned...but I find this particularly hilarious.

who are these people that are satisfied with their insurance that they are genuinely worried that they would have to swap in their $10,000 a year health insurance with a $5,000 deductable and routine denials of coverage?

thanks to gun nuts the ban on such wonderful hunting tools as AK-47s expired. since then there has been a glut of these weapons flooding into the united states. and now they are popping up in arizona as the cartels move northward. yay for the second amendment.

one of our drones killed a group of people at a funeral for others killed by one of our drones. when war becomes a caricature you know you are fucked up.

you can all rest peacefully tonight. the missing white girl was found.

burque I love you, but you're dragging me down...

2009-06-16T09:19:00.000-07:00

on one of the morning shows that all blend together as the same sham journalistic ventures there was an attorney representing that mother accused of killing her pretty little daughter and wrapping her in a carpet (for the life of me I can't remember her name...but that comforts me). she had with her a forensic pathologist (ignore that forensic pathology is uber voodoo science...somehow it passes muster in the courts...I will never understand how). even though it had nothing to do with nothing the "anchor" (or whatever they call themselves on those morning shows) asked the pathologist about a certain kung fu star found hanging in thailand. why is this still news?

not that I don't care deeply if the death of an old actor was accidental, suicide or murder...I just wonder if maybe a string of right-wing nutjob murders, the implosion of the most powerful country in the middle east that isn't hiding a nuclear arsenal, the AMA and the insurance industry ramping up to make sure that we all die of preventable causes in the future and cops stopping paramedics on the way to drop off a patient at the hospital in a "my dick is bigger contest" might warrant more coverage...that's all.

the gay rights community is pretty fucking pissed off at the obama administration...and rightfully so. apparently they recently filed a brief defending the defense of marriage act and making a rather unsightly comparison of homosexual families to bad touch uncles. and while I share the disgust at the administration for doing next to nothing about gay rights (including refusing to quit enforcing don't ask don't tell...one of the all-time dumbest pieces of legislation ever created) I don't quite understand the shock. he was never very friendly to the gay rights movement...and even for the most liberal of heterosexual men, homosexual men still scare the bejesus out of them.

on that note...I have to chuckle at the crazies that are still crying that we cannot get rid of don't ask don't tell (side note - pbs has a new documentary on it coming out this week) because it will hurt moral, cohesion and combat readiness. I don't know about you, but if I'm stuck in a foxhole and bullets are flying around, I don't give a shit if you are scarlett johanssen in a threesome with briana and jrm...chances are I'm not thinking about sticking my dick in you at the moment. and no matter how gay you are and how utterly spectacular my ass is...I am fairly confident that you are more concerned with survival than anal sex.

unless you're canadian of course...that bit from brain candy still cracks me up...

once again we are hearing the false choice from the insurance industries and the hippocratic-oath ignoring AMA...if you want health care you have to pay more, even in a publically funded option. they point to all these polls which show people aren't willing to pay more in premiums or taxes to ensure access to doctors. nevermind that it has been ingrained in our national identity not to prepare for the unexpected (afterall...when disaster struck eight years ago our supreme leader told us to go buy shit we don't need)...the question is purposefully worded to get the response they desire. it isn't a matter of paying more...never has been. folks like me will likely pay more...but that is because I am horribly underinsured - the reason I am horribly underinsured? thanks to my crushing student debt I can't throw $400 bucks a month to an insurance company. so I, like so many others, just hope I don't get sick. of course, I would gladly pay another hundred bucks a month in taxes if it meant I got actual access to health care.

and in the same token...all those people that don't want to pay more because they are already getting raped by their insurance premiums aren't asked whether they would rather keep more of their money, send none of it to the insurance company, but send a portion of what used to go to the insurance company ceo to expanded medicare. chances are...they are all more than willing to pay less overall for the health care.

not that I think we necessarily need a public option. you want to keep your private insurance companies? fine. treat it like car insurance. you have to have it and regulate the fuck out of what they can charge you. bet health care costs plummet.

apparently some senators are concerned that nominee sotomayor is in a woman's group. concerned enough that she had to defend it and declare how men are involved. are you serious? are you fucking serious? members of the united states senate are worried about a girl's club? apparently the irony is lost on them...

guilty pleasure as of late - I'm a celebrity. the reason? patti blagojevich. she comes across as a nice woman, concerned for her family and more than capable outside of it. she could be anyone you know. and she slams the us attorney...rightfully so. it is so refreshing to have someone saying what everyone in the business knows...they lie, cheat and steal to get a conviction. they are not concerned with justice, they are concerned with adding another pelt to their belt. they squeeze the balls of people that are in a shit ton of trouble until they say anything the government wants to hear. they purposely drag up repeated media coverage and hold press conferences and release evidence that may or may not be admissible in a trial to the public not because they are concerned with "the public's right to know" but because they know it taints the jury pool against an accused. you ever want to find the least ethical slimiest attorneys in your city...forget the creepy guy on the billboard, take a trip to your local DA's office.

speaking of blagojevich...turns out that illinois is just dirty. seriously...even if the man did what they claim, it would put him in the bottom half of corrupt politicians in that state.

homeland security (god that sounds so amusingly commie) puts out a report showing concern about right-wing nutjobs. the right-wing talking heads go nuts. homeland security withdraws the report. right-wing nutjobs commit terroristic acts of murder. discuss.

is anyone else sick of not being able to find actual news? say what you will about fox news, but they accomplished what they set out to do. turn all of reporting into bullshit.

letterman makes a joke about impregnating an underage daughter of palin. the former chair of the republican party in south carolina tells people not to be concerned over an escaped guerrilla because it is probably just one of michelle's relatives. thank god for productive political discourse in this country.

jean-pierre bemba will be tried at the hague. not that you would know. afterall, a former leader facing charges of crimes against humanity doesn't involve a 70 yr old actors genitals in a knot.

a roomful of sorrow...a spoonful of joy...

let's get back to what matters...

2009-06-15T11:30:00.000-07:00

with iran on the verge of explosion (or implosion) and american medical association worried more about their paychecks than their patients health I am taking a vacation from important events to focus on really important events...

thus, without further delay. the cubs are tanking and sweet lou is severely disappointing.

The following blog entry was posted by Steve Rosenbloom of the Chicago Tribune on today's date...

Piniella admitted he had no answers, but he still has a job -- for now

No converter box required . . .

Lou Piniella said he was out of answers. The Cubs manager admitted he didn’t know what to do, what to say, nothing. So, the hitting-challenged Cubs managed by a hitting-centric manager fired the hitting coach.

But the hitting-centric manager didn’t fire the hitting coach. No, that act was done by the general manager who failed to supply the team with a respectable offensive backup at third base in case the clean-up hitter got hurt. I guess Aramis Ramirez’s injury was Gerald Perry’s fault.

Mark DeRosa was traded. That’s Gerald Perry’s fault.

Alfonso Soriano is gimpy and unable to hit anywhere in the lineup that requires discipline. He was a free-swinger before the Cubs paid $136 million and he remains a free-swinger, only hobbled, which has made him a worse outfielder than ever, if you can believe that. That’s Gerald Perry’s fault.

Geovany Soto showed up fat and bad. That’s Gerald Perry’s fault.

Kosuke Fukudome looked awful in spring training, started the season great, then began his batting average death spiral, all of it for the second straight year. That’s Gerald Perry’s fault.

Milton Bradley got hurt and angry the way everybody except the Cubs knew he would. That’s Gerald Perry’s fault.

The surprise is that the Cubs didn’t blame Gerald Perry for the parking meter disaster in the city, too.

Yeah, I know, Perry was made a scapegoat. Can’t fire 25 players, so you fire a coach or manager, blah, blah, blah.

Thing is, you wouldn’t have to fire 25 players. Just bench a couple of them. Hold them accountable. That would be the manager’s job. Piniella said Perry’s firing was tough on him because he worked with the guy for six years on two teams, but apparently it wasn’t worth sitting down Soriano, for instance, until he got healthy. Nor was it worth benching Fukudome until he proved in batting practice that he could stop that silly spinning thing that Piniella even commented on -- commented on but didn’t send a message. Nope, Piniella’s players don’t seem to be held accountable. Not enough, anyway.

And whether Piniella knows or cares, he’s coming off as someone who’s just counting days until the Steinbrenner family files adoption papers.

Here’s some utter lack of urgency from the manager in Rick Morrissey’s column today:

"Just relax and let it happen," Piniella said of his players. "It's not the end of the world if you don't. You're still going to get a paycheck. Your dog will still like you."

Yeah, get that paycheck. Not the end of the world if you’re stealing money. Nice message.

But wait. There was more: "Three years from now, nobody's going to give a damn anyway."

How precious. The franchise whose fans deal with the 100-year itch everyday hear the manager say no one will “give a damn’’ in three years. Yeah, 1969, 1984, 2003 -- who in Wrigleyville remembers that? Who gives a damn about those seasons? [colin side note - although I was ten years from birth, I remember 1969's tragedy. my first childhood memory involves mom's spaghetti sauce, bad tv trays, a gatorade soaked glove, fucking steve garvey, and a ground ball between the legs of leon durham leading to a crushing defeat. 2003 I remember for the best few months of my life...brought quickly to a halt by a disastrous 8 run 8th inning. I went home and cried that night - we knew game seven was lost.]

It was obvious from the start that Piniella wasn’t in touch with the concept of Cubaholism. He often commented with surprise on the intensity and fatalism and regular recitation of history. He tried to distance his current team from the franchise’s legendary failures. Fine. But now he looks and sounds as if he’s distancing himself from the urgency to win. There are a lot of people who think he doesn’t care enough.

If Piniella wanted to make it clear that every pitch of the season matters and that nothing less will be acceptable, then he had a chance to make a point by yanking Bradley when he lost focus and lost track of outs and threw that ball into the stands in the eighth inning Friday.

But no. Bradley stayed in the game. Afterward, Piniella made a joke about learning how to count. All I know is that almost a year ago to the day, Philadelphia’s Charlie Manuel benched then-reigning MVP Jimmy Rollins in the middle of a game for not hustling. Manuel made a point.

Piniella apparently just made another tally mark on the wall.

some day we'll go all the way...

it isn't about you john q. victim, real competition in health care, and the prison asylum...

2009-06-11T13:25:00.001-07:00

recently the self-styled "victims' rights movement" has decided that absolute regression is the way to go and have convinced many legislators that it is necessary to add a "victims' bill of rights" to the law books. (ironically, the movement gathered steam right around the time that the republican party decided it was time to scare the crap out of white america that the brown and black boogey man was going to come into their home and rape their daughters and shoot their sons...coincidence?). they have honed what they put out as a stable argument that victims need to have significant roles in the criminal process...and they base it all on devolution of the criminal justice system back hundreds of years. they claim victims always had a significant role in prosecutions, including privately prosecuting crime, and that it is only returning to the way things should be from what they claim to be only a very recent abberation of public prosecutions wherein the victim is relegated to witness status. they want you to believe that until very recently the trend in the anglo-american legal tradition was for greater participation by victims. they lie. their arguments are at best profound misunderstandings of the historical significance and evolution of the criminal justice system and at worst complete intellectual dishonesty. what they don't want you to know is that about 1000 years ago public prosecution (i.e. the sovereign prosecutes based on the theory that crimes are a wrong against the public) for the worst offenses was already strongly established in the anglo tradition while victims' were basically relegated to seeking redress privately in civil courts (apparently they are the only lawyers in america that don't know blackstone). connecticut made it official right around the turn of the 18th century and by the time the american revolution happened public prosecutions were dominant. as soon as the revolution was over the victim (alleged) quickly became nothing more than a witness...afterall, punishment of crime was designed based upon redressing wrongs to society, not the individual. within a few generations, private prosecutions were anomolies.

but the victims rights movement wants us to ignore how the law has evolved. they want to ignore that the bill of rights was concerned more with protecting persons accused of crime than anything else. they want to ignore that they retain the ability to seek redress in civil courts for private wrongs. they want to ignore that a system with a personal interest in the prosecution of another for a crime is a frightening prospect (afterall...how many "terrorists" were turned over because their neighbor was pissed at them?). they want to ignore that the framers got it right and that we have worked over a couple centuries since towards perfecting their system to ensure that the government does not overstep its bounds. and some of their lawyers just want money because they got canned at the district attorneys office after being popped for DWI (cough, cough...barbara romo...cough, cough). but then maybe they have something right...because recently nothing says "american" like historical ignorance and regression. my only request is that if we are going to regress...let's get fucking serious about it. trial by ordeal.

somebody has to help me out on the health care thing because I am having trouble understanding how it is that more competition in the marketplace scares the free-market crowd. ok...that was a fib. I am well aware that what they are scared of is actual competition and they really don't give a shit about "freedom" in the marketplace, they just want freedom to rape, pillage and extort. me...I want an actual choice in health care, and I would prefer that one of those choices be efficient and as inexpensive as possible while providing better customer satisfaction than others. wait...that already exists in the government run health care program of medicare and medicaid? I'll be damned. and why the hell should I not be allowed the choice to opt into such a program that would undoubtedly be more responsive, cheaper and better than the crap I get from blue cross? oh yes, that's right...because as a corporation blue cross is concerned with only one thing...making money. they don't give two shits about healthy populations and preventing and curing illness...they care about making money. if they cared about anything else they would be breaking the law. which is probably why my premium just jumped about 30 percent for my 30th birthday. never mind that I am in better shape now than I ever was during my 20's. but god forbid my choice be limited by someone that does not have a financial interest in denying me care. that would just be awful. (side note - don't be fooled by the AMA coming out against a public plan...they are one of the most conservative groups in the nation and tend to be rightfully villified by AMSA (medical students) - the ones that still have a heart).

a teenage kid in texas just got sentenced to 100 years for kiddie diddling after pleading guilty to five counts. yea yea yea...we all hate kiddie diddlers and they deserve no rights (I have heard it all before and it is all paranoid crap). here's the thing about the kid that just got 100 years...his IQ is 47. no, I did not forget a digit...his IQ is 47. that pretty much means he has the mental capacity of a preschooler. now imagine a preschooler diddling kids...not nearly as horrifically blame-worthy is it. but we have left ourselves with no option because prison has replaced every other program for the mentally disabled. maybe it's just me, but there is something very uncomfortable about giving 100 years to someone that cannot possibly understand their conduct, let alone the system. but hell...as long as we are regressing the criminal system, might as well I guess...

when the sixth veil falls, the desensitizing, corrupting illusion of bullet-train history and its apocalyptic destination will surely dissolve...

the king of carrot flowers...

2009-05-27T16:19:00.000-07:00

I have a distinct inability to focus on anything as of late...so while the markets are up again and some idiots are applauding because they tell us all is swell again I just need to dump my brain...

watching meet the press sunday - the show's opening segment features a token democrat vs. republican rap session. the democrats get dick durbin, a crook that has represented illinois in the senate for over a decade after being in the house for my entire life. the republicans got newt gingrich...a man that was shamed out of the house of representatives a decade ago. could not have provided a more apt analogy for the parties.

it is amazing how much better horrible policies can sound when they are delivered with elegance...

I'm torn on sotomayor...she has potential to be good, but I see her more likely to be a sandra day o'connor or kennedy (possibly a stevens) than a real mover and shaker. I really hoped obama would go balls to the wall with the courts, recognize it was a fight he couldn't lose and take advantage of it...

not to say I don't understand that he does not believe the courts should have to play a major role in progressive politics or that such a role would be proper for them...but the fact is they can, they do, and they will...

but as far as a political strategy. I have to believe they are hoping beyond hope that the elephants are stupid enough to seriously challenge her and hold the nomination up...because nothing says political wilderness like repeatedly telling the largest growing demographic in america to fuck themselves.

a bit more on sotomayor...she's right, appellate courts make policy. that is what they do. get over it. it has been our system for centuries.

even when obama pisses me off it is hard to be pissed. at least he speaks to me like a grown man and not some frightened child hiding in the closet...

speaking of which...hermione, you can come out from under the sink now. the freaky white t-shirt theiving nutjob isn't coming back...

I wish the california supreme court had decided otherwise...but I haven't read the opinion so I can't really say whether or not they got it wrong. but hell...if iowa and maine are there...its coming.

am I the only professional white male that believes it would be utterly impossible to be impartial if one was incapable of seeing the issue through the eyes of both parties standing before them?

rush, dick and newt see no place for the man that could have been the first black president, an unquestionably talented military mind and diplomat, an intelligent and analytical thinker, in their republican party. they are right...which is exactly why everyone in my generation is fleeing the elephant's tent in droves...

the local school district found $16 million it didn't know it had. will this money be used for: (a) compensation for teachers horribly underfunded; (b) hiring new teachers to reduce class sizes; (c) moving classrooms out of "portables" and into actual schools; (d) providing technological equipment to schools desperately in need; (e) athletic facilities?

kim jong il ain't fucking around anymore. immediately after incinerating some ground hogs, he is threatening an attack on south korea if they mess with his ships. and we are no doubt outraged and will stomp our feet and say boo. and when he does it, we'll send every available man and woman to stop him. all fifteen of them.

although I have to wonder if the best way to get him to do what we want is to simply ignore him like you would a petulant child. bring in those brit ladies from nanny 911 for some tough love lessons.

saw an amusing original production of a local theater company...cat gut strung violin. was about a young immigrant finding his way to america only to be conned into joining the armed forces and shipped off to war, where he then desperately tries to cling to his humanity - in an of itself a ludicrious impossibility. I hear the show will be hitting the festival circuit...if it comes, go.

also had the good fortune to end the weekend with horrible depression after viewing the devil came on horseback. the latest reminder that "never again" will again return as a catch phrase in a decade when we look back on the horror we let continue in darfur...

which makes me think that china learned a very valuable lesson from anglo-style capitalism. seriously...the nation acts like some of the biggest corporations in the world, wealth and power without concerns over things like human rights or basic decency. and now the student has become the master.

if it is true that burris got the senate seat for $1,000 bucks I am pissed off that none of my buddies still in Illinois didn't call me up. I would have thrown in twice that for them to be my puppet in washington.

since it seems to be supported by the same politicians that tell me that if I haven't committed a crime I have nothing to worry about with illegal, unethical, unconstitutional and brutal police and prosecutorial tactics (nevermind that I have something to worry about for precisely the reason that I haven't committed a crime...afterall, if I were guilty I'd be on borrowed time anyways) are the same politicians that want guns in our national parks I have to ask - unless you are using them illegally, why would you possibly need a gun in a national park?

new numbers are out...we pay $25,000 a year to house drug offenders in federal prisons...a damn good number of them low level dealers and couriers. legalize the shit and save $25,000 a person. put them to work in a legit billion dollar business with even minimal earnings and they bring in tax revenues like you would not believe (on their own income, on the business itself, and on the inevitable sin tax). could turn into a swing of hundreds of thousands an individual per year. but how sad that the only argument that may work in the end is the bottom line...what does that say about us as a society?

while you read this another aging sick person was busted for the unspeakable act of growing a plant in their house that makes their life bearable and does not hurt anybody.

I've got a pocket full of nothing and I keep on losing it...

thoughts on and old-fashioned long-distance debate...

2009-05-21T11:21:00.001-07:00

dueling speeches. somewhat like a good old-fashioned debate. obama once again showed just how important and powerful it can be to have incredible oratory skills in the white house. cheney once again showed that bigotry and tyranny rely upon fear more than anything to sustain themselves...

nevermind the blatant historical innacuracies that cheney continues to rely upon (sadam's secret love affair with the very groups that wanted him dead and so on and so on)...there is one that pervaded his speech that drove me batty. I think cheney is a smart guy, and would be willing to bet he'd make a great neighbor...and I don't doubt the odd sincerety with which he clings to his idiocy. but at a time like this, when the only ones willing to call bullshit bullshit are "journalists" that couldn't investigate a story or do a legitimate commentary to save their lives (and this holds true for many on both sides of the spectrum), we, as informed citizens need to put everything in context.

cheney played up the fearmonger thing again (as much a tactic of the far left as of the far right) and went into the "our most important job was to protect americans from further attacks and prevent the terrorists from acting again." well, never mind that actually is not, at all, the most important job of an acting executive, his claim that they had done that is just downright false. he said we were all wondering what would come next, when the next big attack would be and they had to do whatever it took to stop it. ironically, he then cited saddam's "ties" to terrorists...apparently missing that because of this horseshit the next "attack" went out better than bin ladin ever could have hoped. eight years later the american economy is devestated, trillions have been pissed away in a far-away land that has killed many an empire, and thousands of americans have been killed with tens of thousands more maimed, physically and emotionally, all while extremists begin to move towards taking over all important pakistan. anyone that was listening when the leaders of al queda were speaking could tell you that this was precisely the next attack. and it worked to a T.

this doesn't mean that I was entirely pleased with obama's address. afterall, he began by citing the same bullshit "my most important role is to protect the american people" line that has been used as an excuse for so many horrific actions done in our name. and I cringed when he said it. because when we disregard the oath that presidents take, which places their most sacred duty not on protecting the american people from attack, but on protecting the constitution and executing the laws of the land, we lead ourselves right into traps that have us debating which un-american actions are appropriate. when we accept that the most important role of a president is to keep us safe, we allow for torture and needless war and death and destruction to become more acceptable...and they begin to be referred to as "misguided tactics" rather than what they truly are - un-american, inhumane, and insane actions that violate the oath of office the president takes.

if there is one thing we should have learned it is that by allowing the debate to become over what is a more effective way to effectuate bullshit, we open the door for fear and emotion to overrule our most basic principles. I had hoped obama would have slammed that door shut...but he just seemed to nudge it closed. a hint of light still peeks through...and that worries me.

its amazing how soon we forget...

2009-05-12T10:42:00.001-07:00

this morning I received a forwarded email that claims to originate from an angry guy in california that apparently has been reading letters to the editor from persons with hispanic surnames which must be infuriating in their tone to a true american. (side note - I find it amusing that the pissed off guy has a french surname traditionally associated with rich assholes in that country...five bucks says this guy applauded "freedom" fries and dumped out any french wine he had a few years back). the email claims to include a copy of a letter to the editor which mr. labonte's historically ignorant wife did not get printed (no doubt because the media is overrun by brown people seeking to keep whitey down). below is a copy of the email...and below that, my response.

The Orange County California Newspaper

This is a very good letter to the editor. This woman made some good points. For some reason, people have difficulty structuring their arguments when arguing against supporting the currently proposed immigration revisions. This lady made the argument pretty simple. Not printed in the Orange County Paper. Newspapers simply won't publish letters to the editor which they either deem politically incorrect (read below) or which does not agree with the philosophy they're pushing on the public. This woman wrote a great letter to the editor that should have been published; but, with your help it will get published via cyberspace.

From: 'David LaBonte'

My wife, Rosemary, wrote a wonderful letter to the editor of the OC Register which, of course, was not printed. So, I decided to 'print' it myself by sending it out on the Internet. Pass it along if you feel so inclined. Written in response to a series of letters to the editor in the Orange County Register:

Dear Editor:
So many letter writers have based their arguments on how this land is made up of immigrants. Ernie Lujan for one, suggests we should tear down the Statue of Liberty because the people now in question aren't being treated the same as those who passed through Ellis Island and other ports of entry.

Maybe we should turn to our history books and point out to people like Mr. Lujan why today's American is not willing to accept this new kind of immigrant any longer. Back in 1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to the United States, people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in New York and be documented. Some would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the ground. They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their new country in good and bad times. They made learning English a primary rule in their new American households and some even changed their names to blend in with their new home.

They had waved good bye to their birth place to give their children a new life and did everything in their power to help their children assimilate into one culture. Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, no welfare, no labor laws to protect them. All they had were the skills and craftsmanship they had brought with them to trade for a future of prosperity.

Most of their children came of age when World War II broke out. My father fought along side men whose parents had come straight over from Germany , Italy , France and Japan . None of these first generation Americans ever gave any thought about what country their parents had come from. They were Americans fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan They were defending the United States of Americas one people.

When we liberated France , no one in those villages was looking for the French American or the German American or the Irish American. The people of France saw only Americans. And we carried one flag that represented one country. Not one of those immigrant sons would have thought about picking up another country's flag and waving it to represent who they were. It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had sacrificed so much to be here. These immigrants truly knew what it meant to be an American. They stirred the melting pot into one red, white and blue bowl.

And here we are in 2009 with a new kind of immigrant who wants the same rights and privileges. Only they want to achieve it by playing with a different set of rules, one that includes the entitlement card and a guarantee of being faithful to their mother country. I'm sorry, that's not what being an American is all about. I believe that the immigrants who landed on Ellis Island in the early 1900's deserve better than that for all the toil, hard work and sacrifice in raising future generations to create a land that has become a beacon for those legally searching for a better life I think they would be appalled that they are being used as an example by those waving foreign country flags.

And for that suggestion about taking down the Statue of Liberty , it happens to mean a lot to the citizens who are voting on the immigration bill. I wouldn't start talking about dismantling the United States just yet.

(signed) Rosemary LaBonte

first off, ms. labonte is incredibly historically inaccurate in her claims of immediate, uncoerced and happy assimilation of previous immigrant groups. hell, most of them still haven't thrown off the cultures of their native lands...why the hell does she think every major city in this country has "little italy," "little germany," "little india," "chinatown" etc. she herself probably goes down to chinatown for grub once a week. if we had all assimilated so wonderfully before this, reservations would never have come to be.

the simple reality is that prior immigrant groups underwent the exact same crap with people screaming how they did not want to assimilate and were refusing to "americanize." someone like myself especially remembers that german farming communities in the midwest were looked upon with suspicion while the press was up in arms about how they had no interest in becoming a part of america but were only seeking to form a beachhead for germany to come take over. their true "allegiance" was questioned for generations, particularly when europe exploded into war. hell, just down the river from where my father's family settled a fellow german was throttled to death by a mob for the incredible offense of being german during the first world war.

we know it is an outright lie that former immigrant groups did not retain their language and culture from their homeland. another side note - if anyone bothered to check, second generation hispanics are a hell of a lot more "americanized" then any other immigrant group before them). very few voluntarily changed their names. they were either given new names because the authorities were too lazy to figure out how to spell or pronounce their true names, or they changed their names to avoid the same kind of bigotry that is now pointed at brown people from latin and south america. the same goes for use of language, an important aspect of cultural heritage. in my family, german did not stop being used in the home until the nation really turned on germans during the world wars. it is especially idiotic to make such a claim when it is so evident that the very basis of "our way of life" - the "rule of law" - was retained from the english homeland. hell, the english language itself is called english, not american.

but the problem is, we ran out of european ethnicities to turn our noses up at. we hated on the italians, the irish, the germans...on down the line. only now we accept them as the fabric of the american quilt. so we needed someone else to turn on - enter the asian peoples. only even they brought good things to this country, and soon they became more accepted. and so we need someone else to turn on, especially when things start to go bad. it happens everytime, earlier immigrant groups attack the newest immigrant group harder than anyone. the last immigrant to get shit on by the american public treats the next worse than the rest of us.

ms. labonte hints at the true nature of her rant (economic times are tough, and she is not getting the same life she felt she was entitled to, so she needs a scapegoat) when she implies she wants to go back to the good old days without "free lunches, labor laws, and welfare" to protect the public. never mind that this is a gross misrepresentation of the history of the american state. perhaps she would like to turn her children over for seven 15 hour shifts a week. maybe she would prefer the indentured servitude of company towns. or maybe she just wants to spend her life locked in a filthy factory working for pennies a day in shifts that start before dawn and end at midnight making garments that she can never afford to buy on machines that will inevitably take one of her fingers within the first two years of sleep-deprived, hunger-induced work. maybe she enjoys hordes of neighbors starving and living in squalor. perhaps, like all those immigrant groups she claims so immediately shrugged off their heritage, she just really hated the post-war years and the growth of the middle class, home ownership, standards of living, education, etc. I'm with her in that regard, because man, those "free lunches, labor laws and welfare" really screwed stuff up after WWII when the largest sustained economic growth in history resulted.

the problem with not understanding history and with pushing historical myths that are so far from the truth is we get mired in this ridiculous exceptionalism that has played a major role in bringing down every single major western power since the roman empire. if one never admits their flaws, personal growth is impossible.

ernie lujan had it right...there was a time when we declared to the world "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me." ms. labonte appears to prefer the statue of liberty read "europe sent us their tired, their poor, their huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of their teeming shore. europe sent those, the homeless, tempest-tost to us. we even took a bunch from asia and brought them over from africa. we're all full up on foreigners now. besides, brown people stick out too easily."

now that I've found you, would you object to never seeing each other again?

sometimes bill maher can make you chuckle...

2009-05-08T14:43:00.000-07:00

Americans, please wash hands before criticizing Obama

By Bill Maher

Friday, May 8th 2009, 4:00 AM

New Rule: Now that we've answered his call to wash our hands, President Obama must continue to tell us how to live. Last week, when America was faced with the pan-global swine flu omega death plague, the President went on TV and told people to wash their hands, and experts tell us this made a big difference, which augurs well for next month's "National Wipe Your Butt Day." Next week, in a fireside chat, he'll tell us not to put a fork in the toaster.

It's sad that the leader of the free world had to call a live press conference to tell his nation of clueless nitwits that employees must wash hands before returning to work. If that's not the "Forrest Gump-ification" of America, I don't know what is. Feeling wet, America? Why not try new, "Coming in from the Rain"?

You may think I'm blowing this out of proportion, but this plea from Obama - you know, the "Audacity of Soap" - was the first specific thing a President has asked the American people to actually do in decades. Unless you count "go shopping." Hopefully it will open the door to other, slightly weightier suggestions from the President.

So please, Mr. President, tell us to turn the lights off when we leave the room. Tell us not to buy crap we don't need and can't afford. Tell us to lay off the Ring Dings and Cheese Nips, and think twice before dating a stranger we meet on craigslist. For God's sake, tell people to read a newspaper. Not just to save the newspaper industry - though Lord knows I'd miss my Daily Jumble - but because having a public that actually knows something is our best defense against ever again electing a President who knows nothing.

There's a name for people who do the right thing for their country, even if it involves sacrifice. And no, it's not "socialists." It's "patriots." We all know the modern definition of a patriot: It's the person who pays the least taxes and listens to the most A.M. radio. But that wasn't what it always meant.

Patriots want their fellow citizens to be able to go to the hospital. They want to make sure no one sells them bread made out of Chinese skulls. They want a country where the deer and the antelope can still play - and not just so Sarah Palin can shoot them from a helicopter. Patriots want to burn less coal and buy less oil. Jimmy Carter put solar panels on the White House roof and Ronald Reagan had them removed. You've heard of "opposite marriage"? This is "opposite patriotism."

Rush Limbaugh celebrated this Earth Day by praising coal-fired power plants and the plastic bag, while Glenn Beck cheered a man on while he cut down trees.

During the campaign, Obama suggested that one simple thing Americans could do to help with fuel-efficiency was check their car's tire pressure. And Republicans freaked, because to them, every suggestion for the common good is a direct attack on their personal liberty, and it's unpatriotic to interfere with anyone's God-given right to be big, dumb and selfish.

When the President suggests things that will help the greater good, that's not a slight against your fragile manhood. I know, you're a rugged individualist. But you're not - you're just a schmuck.

Going back to Reagan, all of our leaders have predictably and reliably told us that government is always the problem, never you my precious, perfect American citizen. You are always perfect just the way you are, like a precious little snowflake. A beautiful, precious, 350-pound, pig-ignorant snowflake.

you say that you've got an open mind...but it's your mouth that's open all the time...

courts are supposed to make it up as they go, misused discretion, and symbolic death...

2009-05-06T08:43:00.001-07:00

william murchinson is now the latest to join the ranks of historically ignorant fools that espouse what they feel should be the virtues of judges in the anglo-american legal tradition. mr. murchinson, not a lawyer or a judge, but rather a columnist with no real background in anything (which, in the world of commentary makes you an expert in everything) boldly declares that "what judging used mainly to be about" is "looking at the law, going with the intent of those who passed it, leaving it to later lawmakers to change or abandon it." which, as a conservative, he of course thinks scalia does. only one slight problem with this...not only does scalia not do this...but no court ever has in our system. courts are not supposed to do that in our system. the very foundation of our legal tradition is judicially created law. that is what common law is. that is the way it has been for centuries...that is the system we inherited (gratefully so) from the british. our courts make it up as they go along. they allow the law to evolve with humanity, they allow fluidity in the law. if it were not for this the protections of the constitution and our highest ideals would become meaningless hollow pledges with no backing (which is, of course, what fools like murchinson actually want...more for me, less for anybody else). I know I've said this many times before...but it still gives me a chuckle that the same fools that wanted to call french fries "freedom" fries because they hate all things french try and try and try to get us to change our legal system to the french model. so mr. murchinson, if you wouldn't mind, at least do some very basic research on the topics you write about. hell, a simple google search would have clued you in to how very embarrassingly wrong you were.

there was another example of the ridiculousness of bowing to and trusting "prosecutorial discretion" in the news recently. and surprisingly enough, the supreme court told prosecutors to go fuck themselves. for once, they acknowledged that crimes are being overcharged, and fantastically so. this time it was charging immigrants that used false social security numbers, albeit with their own names, with identity theft...thereby grabbing one of those handy mandatory minimum sentences. and so, somebody that was guilty of wanting a job and maybe doctoring some papers was being shipped to prison for at least two years. (thank god our tax dollars were being spent on keeping these most dangerous people in prison...god forbid they are spent on something like providing health care, education, infrastructure, employment, etc...it is much more important that our communal funds be spent putting brown folks looking for work behind bars for years). well, the supremes found a loophole (as courts have done for centuries when the "letter of the law" is bullshit mr. murchison) and declared that using random numbers to give yourself a social security number while using your own damn name is not identity theft. (am I the only one that finds it amusing that using your actual, birth-given name was stealing an identity by prosecutors?) so from now on, prosecutors that consistently violate their most sacred duty and oaths by overcharging every single case because they are too fucking scared to actually go to trial and risk their precious "conviction rate" (cough cough every united states attorney cough cough) will actually have to do what they were hired for. of course this could be a problem...because trust me, not too many of these people belong anywhere near a courtroom, especially on the taxpayers dime.

jack kemp died. how wonderfully poetically symbolic that jack kemp died just as arlen spector left the republican party and the all of the crazies that hated kemp because he wasn't purely conservative enough are the only ones left hanging out under the elephant flag. now jack kemp had a lot of ideas that I do not agree with...but he also was the poster child for what republicans should have been. it was people like him that originally attracted many young people, myself included, to aspects of the party. while his ideas may not have gotten to the end result he desired...at least they had a chance and at least he desired the end result and was hell-bent on getting there. after purging the likes of kemp, republicans tried to claim "compassion" (ironically)...but the world has seen through this sad attempt at false window dressing. and now, while they run around trying to figure out how to become useful again and seem to be drawing further and further into their degenerative shell...one can't help but wonder how helpful it would have been to have a republican party modeled after kemp at this time to actually provide legitimate ideas and help to solve problems he tried to draw our attention to thirty years ago. rip jack...you leaving could not have been more apropos.

the death of a party came as no surprise...

after 29 years you'd think I'd be used to the spin...

2009-05-05T12:33:00.000-07:00

maybe its the nyquill and vodka...but the world has my head spinning again...and it is time for a dump...

thomas sowell, another "free"-market-worshipping-milton-friedman-ass-kissing-fool, wrote a column about how horrible it is that obama has indicated he will look to appoint someone with empathy to the highest court. sowell claims this will only take us further and further away from the fabled "rule of law" and towards a court that actually seeks to relieve distress of the downtrodden (I know...shudder the thought). the amusing thing about sowell, and the countless other hacks that are worried about another thurgood marshall showing up on the court...he isn't law trained. he doesn't have a fucking clue what he is talking about. his "expertise" is economics. and amusingly enough, he bought into a theory of economics that has never historically panned out as he believes it always will. so thanks for your insight mr. sowell...but perhaps you should spend your time figuring out why it is that friedman was so drastically wrong.

which also makes me wonder...does sowell and others mocking empathy on the bench realize that a lack of empathy is a sign of pyschopathy?

maine's legislature has approved gay marriage. we've come a long way in my lifetime...when I was first figuring out politics bill clinton was telling me gays were better off in the closet if they were willing to die for my "way of life."

of course there is a bizarre 180 effect...california banning gay marriage while maine and iowa bring it on. huh.

the supremes are looking into whether or not it is unconstitutional to sentence juveniles to life without parole. and before you get pissed and call me "soft on crime"...neither of the cases before the court involve a body. yup...teenagers sent to prison for life without ever killing someone. land of the free indeed.

and while they are sending those kids to prison forever they are sending your money with them. and then they are telling you there is no money to improve your kids' school. but it's worth it...because that scary brown kid from down the street is gone. he was probably a drug dealer anyways.

regardless...I challenge anyone that thinks giving kids life without parole is ok to actually visit a prison and spend some time talking to someone on the line.

I'm told the recession is over. the stock market is being reinflated. and I have to chuckle to myself...because for about 25 years blue collar america has been wondering when the recession is going to end for it.

speaking of chuckling...I get a kick out of Big Business folks telling me that making them pay their fair share of taxes is going to "cripple" the economic recovery in america. because if there is anyone you can count on to make jobs in america...it is the company that has been moving all its operations overseas.

arlen spector swapped sides and then immediately said he would not be a good democrat. but arlen...you've been around for nearly 30 years as a republican...you are the definition of a good democrat. hell, you're practically a clinton.

guess what. the pig flu isn't the end of the world. its the flu. but that doesn't mean we still can't build a wall on the southern border.

tenaha, texas law enforcement officers are in some trouble. they are being sued for highway robbery. seems they took a page out of every other law enforcement agencies book and stopped brown and black people, grabbed their money and "forfeited" it. you'd be amazed at how much law enforcement makes this way.

a bunch of rich fat white guys met in a pizza parlor. see...the republican party is back. they like pizza. they are just like you and me. albeit I can't remember the last time I went to a pizza parlor in a $5,000 suit. not that I wouldn't.

congressional democrats are not giving the administration the money to close gitmo...at least not until there is a "concrete" plan to ship those folks off to some other discreet location. way to go.

ms. california, bless her heart, is not helping her case. granted perez hilton (or whatever the fuck that fool's real name is) is a jackass for slandering her...she doesn't help much by doing naughty photos. mom and dad taught her touching tacos is inappropriate...but apparently they forgot to tell her to keep her ninnies to herself.

is anybody else horrified that we are actually discussing whether or not torture is effective? how did we get past the first question into strategic significance?

a bank in southern california discovered it is cheaper to demolish completed homes in a new development. yup...that's why the free market is so wonderful and I am so glad that we leave important decisions up to the bottom line. tent cities? overpasses becoming overcrowded? who gives a fuck...these perfectly good houses just standing here unoccupied are costing us money...priorities people...

prisons have become our asylums...which has got to be just as cruel, if not more so, as forced commitment. so what the fuck do we do now?

it's cinco de mayo and I have a confession...I hate mexican beer...

I never thought you'd be a junkie cause heroin is so passe...

the absurdity of prosecutorial justice, extensive wiretapping, and iowa opens its doors...

2009-04-28T15:58:00.001-07:00

today the supreme court reminded us again why trust in the ethics of the nations prosecutors is severely misplaced. while they take an oath to seek justice, not vengeance or convictions, but justice, all too often they seem to transform into conviction at all cost drones. in cone v. bell, the supremes chastized tennessee prosecutors for what is becoming a rather common story in the criminal justice world...withholding evidence that doesn't fit with their theory of the case (which comes with the wonderful benefit of preventing the defense from presenting its best case...afterall, nobody wants to screw up their conviction rates when there is an election on the horizon). this time it was a vietnam vet that claimed PTSD and drug addiction led him to do some scary shit. and during trial, the prosecutor mocked these claims, implying that there was no way this guy was at all mentally unstable or had any issues with drug addiction...even put an officer on the stand claiming it was a load of bullshit. right on cue the jury (already hand-picked to only include a small section of the community that is gung-ho for capital punishment thereby knocking out a large portion of society from even having a chance to sit) declined to accept the mitigation of PTSD and drug addiction and voted for death. only there was a problem that Mr. Cone would not discover until years later when a local freedom of information law gave him access to the prosecutor's files...it was full of evidence that corroborated his claims - police reports and BOLO's referring to him as a "drug addict" and "heavy drug user"...witness statements describing him as wild looking, crazy and drunk and high...even statements from the officer the prosecution put on to rebut cone's claims that referred to him as a "heavy drug user." unbelievably, the state had the gonads to tell the supremes they were not required to turn over the evidence clearly favorable to the sole defense offered at trial...prompting justice souter to declare "I believe you have just made a statement to me that is utterly irrational." and that is exactly the problem with prosecutors throughout the country...they are utterly irrational. the only thing that matters to them are convictions...it doesn't matter if its the right guy, it doesn't matter if all of society is better served through other means...all that matters is another notch in the belt.

which leads me to another observation. it has become extremely obvious that during the "damn the constitution, full speed ahead" era of the boy king and his "putting testicles in a vice works" walking dead sidekick wiretaps were not used to hunt for terrorists or keep an eye on anything that had to do with national security. they became the quick and cheap way to investigate anything and everything...and everybody's phone got tapped. somebody says you sell drugs - no problem, we'll just tap your phone and listen for months until you say the magic words. it has begun to seem like there is not a single marijuana case in this state over the last few years that did not involve a wiretap...regardless of what the pesky constitution and supreme court had to say about it. and if officers are turning to it that quickly...I guarantee they are going hoover on your ass too. next stop - political opponents.

iowa opened its doors to gays for marriage this week. and guess what...all hell did not break loose. hellfire did not reign down. iowa did not become a dustbowl. children did not go all catholic priest overnight. all of this despite the best efforts of the fringe folks still clinging to the idea of a hard-line "christian" america...including the very effective petition turned in by one man in iowa city which contained...wait for it...8 signatures. one such fool had the quote of the day...although somehow I guarantee he entirely missed the deeper meaning. chuck hurley of the "family policy center" (one of those "we wanted to call it death to queers but we are far too cowardly for that" groups) turned in a petition asking the clerks to disobey the law and to refuse licenses. he said more people did not come out in person to protest because they had important things like "raising children and going to work" to attend to. it seems he missed the point of his own remark though...in the end, regardless of who you put what into at night within the confines of a consensual relationship, all you really want out of life is to be free to raise your children and go to work. although apparently mr. hurley is not concerned with his children...and his work is preventing others from raising children and working.

step on my old size nines and I'll take you round...

hating miss cali, corporations deserve no role in policy, and when drug reform is accepted...

2009-04-24T08:50:00.001-07:00

perez hilton, that bastion of respectable journalism, has his manties in a bunch because miss california answered his question honestly...only not the answer he wanted to hear. and suddenly all sorts are raising their pitchforks and torches and clamoring for a resignation at best, or an actual tar and feathering at worst. and once again, I am reminded exactly how not to move forward...how not to bring about the types of advances and changes you hope for - get pissed off and spew hatred at poor ignorant fools that just don't get it.

if you actually bothered to listen to her 30 second response to whether or not she supports gay marriage rights you understand that she is not the enemy to be fought with vitriol...that should be reserved for dobson and his ilk (side note - thank the lord dobson is finally focusing on his own damn family...which is a complete fucking disaster from what I hear). this is basically what she said: "I like to think I respect people and whatever is left of the democratic process. but my mommy and daddy also taught me that just because everybody likes dick does not mean that everybody should get dick." there was no hatred in it, there wasn't even any fucking knowledge in it...it was a prime example of plain and simple ignorance. here is person that likely is unaware that they have ever known someone that is gay. here is a person that likely has no idea what the marriage issue actually means to gays. and so here is a person that can likely be won over with some simple understanding and experience. and yet we respond by trashing her at every opportunity...assuring that not only will she become so deadset in her ways and full of resentment that she will forever fight against equal rights for gays, but that many in her position will as well. so mr. hilton, do us all a favor and shut the fuck up. if you aren't going to do any of the heavy lifting anyways, get the fuck out of the way.

somehow, as good capitalist sheep, we accepted that corporations are people (hilarious) and that corporations have a conscience (because we all know made-up entities also contain made-up hearts that feel made-up empathy). and so, at the behest of the right-wing nutjob race, we accepted that they know what it is best and that they deserve a seat at the table in policy arguments. because if its good for business its good for america. except that whats good for business is making as much money as possible at the expense of as many people as possible...so basically, whats good for business is good for business and thats it. if you happen to be the business...fantastic. if you happen to be the other 95% of the populace...then you're apparently just an atm anyways.

and so we allowed them to take over the debate as to intelligent use of energy and issues associated with environmental degredation. and guess what...they lied to protect their profit. imagine that...a corporation being concerned with the bottom line above all else. who would've thunk it. and now we learn that all those "scientists" that the right-wing establishment relied upon to justify to some fool his driving of a behemoth of a vehicle with no legitimate purpose and our spewing of as much crap into the air as we could because doing otherwise would kill the economy (which is humming along just fine thank you) simply don't exist. we learn that while industry scientists are screaming behind the scenes "you are lying to people. you simply cannot refute that human activity is drastically altering the climate and we are fucking ourselves right in the ass" they are running around the halls of congress and the white house participating in policy-making based on the lies their own scientists refuted.

when will we learn? when will we accept what the nation's founders took for granted: that a business is not human. when will we accept what the first teabaggers were trying to tell us: that government is supposed to protect the people from soulless money-hungry made-up phantom entities, not give them the reach-around.

the feds are asking for a five year sentence for a medical marijuana distributor from california. of course it had to go federal because his actions were completely legal under state law. and despite holder's promises not to go after these people, apparently that doesn't include anyone that got caught up in the pyschotic frenzy of the bush justice department. this. is. insanity. but I see a light on the horizon...I see a time when we will accept that the "war" on drugs is a complete fucking waste of our time and money...

unfortunately, I don't see it showing up until bodies are hanging from the expressways in phoenix. it is easy for us to ignore the incredible downside of our obsession with drugs when we can hide it behind bars and south of the border (not to mention when the worst of it is reserved for "those" people). except that nastiness has decided not to stay hidden anymore and its moving into john mccain's backyard. we've made a billionaire out of a cartel boss...and we've turned mexico into a surreal beyond thunderdome experience. and now mad max is coming to the states...where a bunch of crackers love to settle. and finally, when that happens, and we can't hide it anymore, we'll decide that pissing money away so that neighbor joe can be kidnapped for ransom and his headless body appear on the lawn isn't such a good idea afterall...

today was supposed to be not just another day...

its time to examine our own inhumanity...

2009-04-23T09:35:00.001-07:00

everybody is up in arms in one way or another now that the "torture memos" have been released and we know what we already knew all along...that the united states utilized illegal and disgustingly inhumane methods against a perceived enemy. well...no shit. on one hand, the right-wing blowhards have it right (although it is amusing that their moral absolutism disappears whenever they are committing immoral acts) in that we shouldn't be so shocked over this...and often times our outrage becomes somewhat partisan (afterall...we all know democratic presidents have presided over abuses of human rights...but we didn't seem to get too pissed off about it until a nutbag republican bragged about it). and in reality, this really isn't even much different than what the united states has done for pretty much its entire existence in one way or another. hell, it isn't even the first time the united states has openly bragged about frighteningly inhumane and immoral behavior. of course to understand that would require more than the most cursory understanding of your own nation's history...something entirely lacking in the majority of the american populace, and seemingly even moreso in the halls of power.

but I guess at least before we could pretend we were above it...that we weren't involved in the same sort of behavior we so often condemned in our enemies. and in a sense wanting to believe you are above it can be a good thing in the same way that lionizing past leaders can be a good thing...it gives you something to shoot for. but if there is a lesson in this sad chapter of our history (and the book is becoming rather lengthy at this point), it is that our use of this ridiculous exceptionalist mythology stunts the growth of a society over time. when you teach your young and convince yourself that you do no wrong...eventually everything becomes right as long as you are the actor. and so you get textbooks in your schools that omit the horrors of our past, that dedicate two paragraphs to the eradication of this nations first peoples...and even then call it "relocation," "manifest destiny," or "the indian wars" because then we can ignore that our nation, while born of high ideals and beautiful imagery, was built upon crimes against humanity. by focusing only on the good, especially the mythological good, we are condemning ourselves to forever repeating the same storyline...surprised and feigned outrage at yet another example of our failure to live up to the standards we set for others.

which is why I now struggle with the question of prosecution of individuals involved in the decision making process and those carrying out the orders. I worry that it will become just another excuse to push it under the rug and for us, in the future, to simply act as though this episode was a abheration when it wasn't. and we will never learn the full truth as to how and why this happened. and in another generation, we will begin the process anew. would that not simply be adding to the tragedy? are we not better off, for once, trying to learn from this...about our systems and ourselves and how we might actually reach for the ideals we espouse?

blame me...I will wear it...

rambling reflections on those gone...

2009-04-20T16:47:00.001-07:00

this weekend I had a whirlwind trip back to the midwest to attend the memorial service for my grandmother, a farm woman from central illinois while a simple woman, she had a subtle, yet incredible strength. born in 1911 she watched the world move in leaps and bounds, outliving her husband Marvin by 30 years, as well as a child, a sibling, and even grandchildren. through it all she remained full of wit and smiles in a way that I wish I could emulate.

in the time since her death I have been thinking much about the legacy we leave behind when we go...and there may be no greater testiment to the character of a person than the quality of family they give to the world. and by that measure, while I may be biased, I would say my grandmother was a rousing success. married to the son of an unwed german immigrant, she raised a family that has spread into one of the more stable and loving expansive environments I can imagine. and for her role as its matriarch, I am forever grateful.

but that is not all she gave to me. when I was young, she, like many grandmothers, would bake cookies for her grandchildren whenever a visit was due. her specialty was chocolate chip, a long-time staple loved by all american youth but one...myself. I hated chocolate chip cookies...for whatever unnatural reason, I just could not stand a good cookie to be ruined by the presence of melted chocolate. and so my grandmother always made two batches, and we always returned with three tubs of cookies - two full of her signature chocolate chip for my three brothers and one overflowing with her secret gem; oatmeal raisin, just for me. and while I may not have realized it at the time, by that simple act, my grandmother was telling me something that every child deserves to hear and to know in their heart...that I was loved and cherished, not by virtue of my place in a class such as grandchildren, but by virtue of my uniqueness. through oatmeal raisin cookies I learned that I was loved by her for one simple reason...that I was me. I cannot overstate the importance of this and the impact it can have on a life as one matures...and for that, I am also forever grateful to her. and while I failed at appropriately and adequately sharing my appreciation with her, I hope she knows.

not too long ago, she sent a letter to my oldest brother. in talking of his family she slipped into rememberances of her own and how it grew. and while it contained some characteristic musings and tangents expected of any of us that may be so lucky as to near 100 years on this earth, it concluded with a powerful sentiment she did not often express..."I sure do miss Marvin." and for that, I sincerely hope beyond hope that there is a heaven, and that my grandfather waited patiently all these years for her to join him again.

and I hope that this heaven has a place for the animals that are dear to us. on sunday morning one of my brother's received word that his four-legged companion of nearly 15 years had passed in his sleep. petey, a little toy fox terrier, had grown up with my brother, who brought petey home as he began his adult life. to this day, I have not seen a dog that more clearly belonged with one person than petey with my brother. petey was there with him through moves, broken relationships and a burgeoning marriage. petey grew with him as he began a career, found a wife, and started a family. and in the process, petey became a part of our family, treated like the first grandchild and nephew.

I like to think that petey knew it was time for him to move on...that he understood that he had done all he could for my brother, and my brother all he could for petey. I like to think that when larry told him goodnight his look was meant to convey what petey could not write..."tell him I'm sorry for leaving this way, but I loved him as no dog has before loved his companion. tell him I will miss him, and he will miss me, but that it is better this way. that I am tired, and I have done all I can for him. and tell him how grateful I am to have found such a beautiful home during my time here and that I will be waiting for him."

I like to think that as petey closed his eyes to sleep that night he was transported back to that first summer, when they were inseparable and a bond that can only exist between man and dog was formed, and he was truly happy. I like to think that he awoke in the farmhouse with grandma and grace, who promptly introduced him to grandpa before letting him loose in the yard to chase the rabbits and terrorize the mice in the barn, and that he'll be there when my brother comes to pick him up and take him home again...and he'll probably have eaten the pie off the windowsill.

mostly, I just like to think they are all happy...which is why I'll keep hoping, for their sake, that there is a heaven...

right wing teabaggers, prosecutorial "discretion" and prison populations...

2009-04-15T08:41:00.000-07:00

so the right wing, at the behest of our old friend the fox news network, is desperately trying to catch up to the times with some good old fashioned organizing around something, anything. problem is, howard dean figured out that with the new and fast dissemination of information one could utilize all these local networks to come together into a political movement. obama pretty much perfected the model and we got a hybrid of bottom-up and top-down political action that put the first black man into the white house. and now the republicans, desperate to catch up, after failing with the "we've got a woman too" angle and now the "we've got a minority too" angle, they are trying their own community organizing...only without the hybrid...its all top down. and the best part...it involves teabagging. and seriously, nothing is more amusing than the mental image of a bunch of backwards rush limbaugh dittoheads gathering around a circle for some good old fashioned teabagging.

but in all seriousness...what the hell are these people actually protesting? the extra 20 bucks in their paychecks this month? the fact that their savings account still exists? that the right wing spent their future and set them up for a zero balance in their 401k? seriously, what the hell are they yelling about? makes me wonder just how many of them know anything, and I mean anything, about the boston tea party and what was actually going on. I wonder how many of them still repeat the mantra "no taxation without representation" without being able to fathom any more substantial drive behind the revolution, or even the simple act of dumping tea into the sea. if any of them even know which company brought the tea into the harbor...or can understand that the brits had given said company sole access to the tea market. (now, if they are actually protesting corporate dominance of the government, then I'll teabag a few conservatives myself...but somehow I doubt that, especially considering the whole shebang has been promoted incescently by fox).

don't get me wrong, I can't stand piss poor spending of the public wealth either. the fact that our children attend schools in disrepair without enough pencils and paper let alone actual books or quality teachers that aren't overly concerned with teaching to a pointless test that does nothing to improve schooling but costs billions of dollars a year makes me physically ill. the fact that most of my tax dollars are now going to either killing poor brown folks across the world or putting poor brown folks and their white class-mates in cages while the guy down the street is just praying that his heart problems, diabetes and lung issues (compliments of asbestos) don't kill him before medicaire kicks in because we are the only serious western "civilized" nation in the world that won't give him the medicine he needs is disgraceful. but what are these nutjobs complaining about? aren't they most likely to be the same ones that beat their chests and cheerlead us into any war? the same ones that cheer for putting the government back into our bedrooms while complaining that the feds are overstepping their bounds? the same ones that tell immigrants to get the hell out of america and then complain when it costs an extra buck for their produce?

then again...what is my problem? maybe all this nation needs to set it straight is a day of collective teabagging...

was watching good morning america or one of those useless shows this morning (left the radio in the car, so npr was not to be heard) and they were discussing how ridiculous it is to charge high school kids with sex crimes for possessing "child pornography" when they snap nude photos of their boyfriends and girlfriends. they talked to one kid who was 18 and had some nudey photos of his ex who now must register as a sex offender for a long, long time. and apparently vermont has some people that are actually realizing how fucking ludicrous this is and want to close the loophole so that we don't destroy somebody's life for something stupid half of kids are doing before they are even old enough to have a beer. and they had on some crazy lady (the inevitable "we aren't hard enough on crime and we need to protect our children" ranter type) on that claimed that there already were protections in place...protections she called "prosecutorial discretion." well...let me tell you what that actually means...

you see, in theory "prosecutorial discretion" is a wonderful thing because prosecutors are no doubt all perfect beings that are truly interested in justice and what is best for all involved, the community, the alleged victim and the accused. and so, in theory, they choose which crimes are proper to choose, keeping in mind that their job is to do justice...not vengeance. only that ain't how it works in reality. in the real world "prosecutorial discretion" is a bullshit cover for some asshole to find any and all crimes that they might be able to slap on someone, the higher the degree the better. and then try and lock them up as long as possible, because in the end, prosecutors care shit about justice and only care about winning.

that is how, recently in albuquerque, we had a kid on trial for a triple murder when the DA's office admitted it had maybe, at best, a 50/50 shot at a conviction. and then, mid-trial, it turns out the meth-head get-a-favor-from-the-state-if-you-testify witnesses were full of shit. the truck they said he was driving when he supposedly gunned these kids down...wasn't bought until a year later. the trailer park where they supposedly went immediately afterwards to party...hadn't been built yet. and this is what "prosecutorial discretion" gets you...it gets you a murder charge in a case that, if it were a civil matter, would make the headlines as frivulous and lead to calls to hang the trial lawyers from the nearest tree. well, pardon my french, and offense meant to my friends that use it, but fuck prosecutorial discretion and the high horse it rode in on.

new study released indicates that blacks in state prisons for drug offenses dropped dramatically during the last decade. sounds great doesn't it...but I have one question. something tells me it is rather likely that there has been a corresponding uptick in blacks in federal prisons for drug offenses. and if that is the case...thanks bill clinton. I didn't need you to be an asshole on the campaign trail last year to know that you were a complete shitbag posing as one of us. when you see nixon in hell, tell him you did your best.

I'm a creep...

free market throwback, bipartisan phooey, and the healing power of baseball...

2009-04-14T14:08:00.001-07:00

a few centuries ago a virgin nation struggled to combat pirates off the coast of africa. after that virgin nation grew into the most powerful in the world over the span of those centuries, it once again is struggling to combat pirates off the cost of africa. and this is the beauty of our blind adherence to the "free market" and our force-feeding that adherence to others around the world (but of course only after decades and decades of protectionist policies and utterly un-free markets in the first world had provided the opportunity to get a massive and seemingly insurmountable head start)...we inevitably create conditions that present throwbacks to times long since forgotten (at least by americans...when your nation is only a few centuries old you tend not to have a long-term view of history or the future. in that sense we can be a hell of a lot like civilizations wandering around in the dark before the advent of writing...for coming so far we are still pretty damn close to the starting line). before we discovered (for the god knows umteenth time in history) that the "free market" is a recipe for civilizational collapse, we exported it by force. not military force exactly (although that undoubtedly also added some spice to life), but force nonetheless. "open the market completely or you starve" has basically been the mantra of the first world (of course what the developing world did not know at the time was that it was going to starve regardless...but we needed somebody to give us cheaper shit). and so they did...and so their societies deteriorated and their governments became essentially worthless. and all those starving poor people saw huge commercial shipping vessels heading by, taking their resources for nothing and giving them to us at huge profits. and they felt powerless...and so they did what every group in a similar position has done since the dawn of time...they fought dirty. they picked up a few dusty AK's and a rowboat and sent us back 300 years with the return of piracy. boy, ain't the market grand?

I'm already sick of all the wondering about bipartisanship and whether it will arrive and if obama has shirked a campaign promise. surprise surprise, self-identified republicans hate a moderately progressive liberal. once again, we are blinded by our "gotta have it now" mentality and inability to look long term. whether or not obama "ushers" in a new era of bipartisanship or handholding or bongos and kumbayah will not be clear for some time. hell, FDR was considered a complete shitbag by the right when he was slamming the new deal down their throats. of course now many of those programs are considered models of bipartisanship in their support. already we see signs that obama may be taking the same route as republicans despise him and his policies - while the majority of regular ass people seem to think he is doing a pretty damn good job. regardless...at this point, I am re-convinced that we are all fucked anyway...at least we're not completely embarrased by the fool that represents us...

walt whitman once said "I see great things in baseball. It's our game -- the American game. It will take our people out of doors, fill them with oxygen, give them a larger physical stoicism. Tend to relieve us from being a nervous, dyspeptic set. Repair those losses, and be a blessing to us." and while I can personally vouch for the mr. whitman on the physical benefits a day spent in the sun looking down upon the unmistakable lush green of a ball field, baseball plays a much more significant role than preventing gastrointestinal disorders...it can heal, it is the great equalizer. there are few places in which the promises of the declaration of independence are more apparent than on a baseball diamond. all one needs is a stick and ball to be on equal ground. and so, tomorrow, 62 years to the day since jackie robinson helped to change baseball and the united states forever, all of major league baseball will wear the number 42 to remember how difficult it has been, and continues to be, for the united states to remember the promises of its birth. and at a time when our society again strives to crush equality, I wonder how much the world could change if some future hall of famer went home to join another man in bed each night.

Another Step Towards Equality in the Pursuit of Life, Liberty and Happiness...

2009-04-03T14:42:00.000-07:00

Today the Supreme Court of Iowa issued a unanimous decision in Varnum v. Brien (Westlaw cite 2009 WL 874044...also available via the Iowa Judiciary Website at http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/Supreme_Court/Opinions/). In reaching another rung on the ladder of equality, the Iowa Supremes determined that statutes limiting the institution of civil marriage to couples with both a man and a woman violated the most basic of our founding virtues: equal protection before the law:

"If gay and lesbian people must submit to different treatment without an exceedingly persuasive justification, they are deprived of the benefits of the principle of equal protection upon which the rule of law is founded. Iowa Code section 595.2 denies gay and lesbian people the equal protection of the law promised by the Iowa Constitution."

The following are excerpts from the rather lengthy, but compelling opinion (with citations largely omitted):

This lawsuit is a civil rights action by twelve individuals who reside in six communities across Iowa. Like most Iowans, they are responsible, caring, and productive individuals. They maintain important jobs, or are retired, and are contributing, benevolent members of their communities. They include a nurse, business manager, insurance analyst, bank agent, stay-at-home parent, church organist and piano teacher, museum director, federal employee, social worker, teacher, and two retired teachers. Like many Iowans, some have children and others hope to have children. Some are foster parents. Like all Iowans, they prize their liberties and live within the borders of this state with the expectation that their rights will be maintained and protected-a belief embraced by our state motto.

Despite the commonality shared with other Iowans, the twelve plaintiffs are different from most in one way. They are sexually and romantically attracted to members of their own sex. The twelve plaintiffs comprise six same-sex couples who live in committed relationships. Each maintains a hope of getting married one day, an aspiration shared by many throughout Iowa.

Unlike opposite-sex couples in Iowa, same-sex couples are not permitted to marry in Iowa.

...

A statute inconsistent with the Iowa Constitution must be declared void, even though it may be supported by strong and deep-seated traditional beliefs and popular opinion.

...

Our responsibility, however, is to protect constitutional rights of individuals from legislative enactments that have denied those rights, even when the rights have not yet been broadly accepted, were at one time unimagined, or challenge a deeply ingrained practice or law viewed to be impervious to the passage of time. The framers of the Iowa Constitution knew, as did the drafters of the United States Constitution, that times can blind us to certain truths and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress, and as our constitution endures, persons in every generation can invoke its principles in their own search for greater freedom and equality.

...

A classification persists until a new understanding of equal protection is achieved. The point in time when the standard of equal protection finally takes a new form is a product of the conviction of one, or many, individuals that a particular grouping results in inequality and the ability of the judicial system to perform its constitutional role free from the influences that tend to make society's understanding of equal protection resistant to change. As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes poignantly said, It is revolting to have no better reason for a rule of law than that so it was laid down in the time of Henry IV. It is still more revolting if the grounds upon which it was laid down have vanished long since, and the rule simply persists from blind imitation of the past.

...

The same-sex-marriage debate waged in this case is part of a strong national dialogue FN5 centered on a fundamental, deep-seated, traditional institution that has excluded, by state action, a particular class of Iowans. This class of people asks a simple and direct question: How can a state premised on the constitutional principle of equal protection justify exclusion of a class of Iowans from civil marriage?

...

the plaintiffs are similarly situated compared to heterosexual persons. Plaintiffs are in committed and loving relationships, many raising families, just like heterosexual couples. Moreover, official recognition of their status provides an institutional basis for defining their fundamental relational rights and responsibilities, just as it does for heterosexual couples. Society benefits, for example, from providing same-sex couples a stable framework within which to raise their children and the power to make health care and end-of-life decisions for loved ones, just as it does when that framework is provided for opposite-sex couples.

...

Thus, the right of a gay or lesbian person under the marriage statute to enter into a civil marriage only with a person of the opposite sex is no right at all. Under such a law, gay or lesbian individuals cannot simultaneously fulfill their deeply felt need for a committed personal relationship, as influenced by their sexual orientation, and gain the civil status and attendant benefits granted by the statute. Instead, a gay or lesbian person can only gain the same rights under the statute as a heterosexual person by negating the very trait that defines gay and lesbian people as a class-their sexual orientation.

...

The County does not, and could not in good faith, dispute the historical reality that gay and lesbian people as a group have long been the victim of purposeful and invidious discrimination because of their sexual orientation. The long and painful history of discrimination against gay and lesbian persons is epitomized by the criminalization of homosexual conduct in many parts of this country until very recently. See Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 578-79, 123 S.Ct. 2483-84, 156 L.Ed.2d at 520 (invalidating criminalization of homosexual sodomy in 2003). Additionally, only a few years ago persons identified as homosexual were dismissed from military service regardless of past dedication and demonstrated valor. Public employees identified as gay or lesbian have been thought to pose security risks due to a perceived risk of extortion resulting from a threat of public exposure. School-yard bullies have psychologically ground children with apparently gay or lesbian sexual orientation in the cruel mortar and pestle of school-yard prejudice. At the same time, lesbian and gay people continue to be frequent victims of hate crimes. See Criminal Justice Information Servs. Div., FBI, Hate Crime Statistics 2007, http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2007/victims.htm (according to FBI-collected data, the only hate crimes occurring more frequently than sexual-orientation-motivated hate crimes are crimes based on race or religious bias).

...

sexual orientation is broadly recognized in Iowa to be irrelevant to a person's ability to contribute to society.

...

sexual orientation forms a significant part of a person's identity... Sexual orientation influences the formation of personal relationships between all people-heterosexual, gay, or lesbian-to fulfill each person's fundamental needs for love and attachment. Accordingly, because sexual orientation is central to personal identity and may be altered [if at all] only at the expense of significant damage to the individual's sense of self, classifications based on sexual orientation are no less entitled to consideration as a suspect or quasi-suspect class than any other group that has been deemed to exhibit an immutable characteristic. Sexual orientation is not the type of human trait that allows courts to relax their standard of review because the barrier is temporary or susceptible to self-help.

...

Gay persons have been subjected to and stigmatized by a long history of purposeful and invidious discrimination that continues to manifest itself in society. The characteristic that defines the members of this group-attraction to persons of the same sex-bears no logical relationship to their ability to perform in society, either in familial relations or otherwise as productive citizens. Because sexual orientation is such an essential component of personhood, even if there is some possibility that a person's sexual preference can be altered, it would be wholly unacceptable for the state to require anyone to do so. Gay persons also represent a distinct minority of the population. It is true, of course, that gay persons recently have made significant advances in obtaining equal treatment under the law. Nonetheless, we conclude that, as a minority group that continues to suffer the enduring effects of centuries of legally sanctioned discrimination, laws singling them out for disparate treatment are subject to heightened judicial scrutiny to ensure that those laws are not the product of such historical prejudice and stereotyping. [citing the Connecticut Supreme Court]

...

Thus, the question we must answer is whether excluding gay and lesbian people from civil marriage is substantially related to any important governmental objective.

The County has proffered a number of objectives supporting the marriage statute. These objectives include support for the traditional institution of marriage, the optimal procreation and rearing of children, and financial considerations.

...

A specific tradition sought to be maintained cannot be an important governmental objective for equal protection purposes, however, when the tradition is nothing more than the historical classification currently expressed in the statute being challenged. When a certain tradition is used as both the governmental objective and the classification to further that objective, the equal protection analysis is transformed into the circular question of whether the classification accomplishes the governmental objective, which objective is to maintain the classification. In other words, the equal protection clause is converted into a barren form of words' when discrimination is made an end in itself.... It permits a classification to be maintained "for its own sake." Moreover, it can allow discrimination to become acceptable as tradition and helps to explain how discrimination can exist for such a long time. If a simple showing that discrimination is traditional satisfies equal protection, previous successful equal protection challenges of invidious racial and gender classifications would have failed. Consequently, equal protection demands that the classification ( [that is], the exclusion of gay [persons] from civil marriage) must advance a state interest that is separate from the classification itself.

...

The County has simply failed to explain how the traditional institution of civil marriage would suffer if same-sex civil marriage were allowed. There is no legitimate notion that a more inclusive definition of marriage will transform civil marriage into something less than it presently is for heterosexuals. Because the County offers no particular governmental reason underlying the tradition of limiting civil marriage to heterosexual couples, we press forward to consider other plausible reasons for the legislative classification.

...

The research appears to strongly support the conclusion that same-sex couples foster the same wholesome environment as opposite-sex couples and suggests that the traditional notion that children need a mother and a father to be raised into healthy, well-adjusted adults is based more on stereotype than anything else.

...

If the marriage statute were truly focused on optimal parenting, many classifications of people would be excluded, not merely gay and lesbian people.... If the statute was truly about the best interest of children, some benefit to children derived from teh ban on same-sex civil marriages would be observable. Yet, the germane analysis does not show how the best interests of children of gay and lesbian parents, who are denied an environment supported by the benefits of marriage under the statute, are served by the ban. Likewise, the exclusion of gays and lesbians from marriage does not benefit the interests of those children of heterosexual parents, who are able to enjoy the environment supported by marriage with or without the inclusion of same-sex couples.

...

a classification that limits civil marriage to opposite-sex couples is simply not substantially related to the objective of promoting the optimal environment to raise children. This conclusion suggests stereotype and prejudice, or some other unarticulated reason, could be present to explain the real objectives of the statute.

...

Gay and lesbian persons are capable of procreation. Thus, the sole conceivable avenue by which exclusion of gay and lesbian people from civil marriage could promote more procreation is if the unavailability of civil marriage for same-sex partners caused homosexual individuals to become heterosexual in order to procreate within the present traditional institution of civil marriage. The briefs, the record, our research, and common sense do not suggest such an outcome. Even if possibly true, the link between exclusion of gay and lesbian people from marriage and increased procreation is far too tenuous to withstand heightened scrutiny. Specifically, the statute is significantly under-inclusive with respect to the objective of increasing procreation because it does not include a variety of groups that do not procreate for reasons such as age, physical disability, or choice. In other words, the classification is not substantially related to the asserted legislative purpose.

...

The stability of opposite-sex relationships is an important governmental interest, but the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage is not substantially related to that objective.

...

Having examined each proffered governmental objective through the appropriate lens of intermediate scrutiny, we conclude the sexual-orientation-based classification under the marriage statute does not substantially further any of the objectives. While the objectives asserted may be important (and many undoubtedly are important), none are furthered in a substantial way by the exclusion of same-sex couples from civil marriage. Our equal protection clause requires more than has been offered to justify the continued existence of the same-sex marriage ban under the statute.

...

Now that we have addressed and rejected each specific interest advanced by the County to justify the classification drawn under the statute, we consider the reason for the exclusion of gay and lesbian couples from civil marriage left unspoken by the County: religious opposition to same-sex marriage. The County's silence reflects, we believe, its understanding this reason cannot, under our Iowa Constitution, be used to justify a ban on same-sex marriage.

While unexpressed, religious sentiment most likely motivates many, if not most, opponents of same-sex civil marriage and perhaps even shapes the views of those people who may accept gay and lesbian unions but find the notion of same-sex marriage unsettling. Consequently, we address the religious undercurrent propelling the same-sex marriage debate as a means to fully explain our rationale for rejecting the dual-gender requirement of the marriage statute.

It is quite understandable that religiously motivated opposition to same-sex civil marriage shapes the basis for legal opposition to same-sex marriage, even if only indirectly. Religious objections to same-sex marriage are supported by thousands of years of tradition and biblical interpretation. The belief that the sanctity of marriage would be undermined by the inclusion of gay and lesbian couples bears a striking conceptual resemblance to the expressed secular rationale for maintaining the tradition of marriage as a union between dual-gender couples, but better identifies the source of the opposition. Whether expressly or impliedly, much of society rejects same-sex marriage due to sincere, deeply ingrained-even fundamental-religious belief.

Yet, such views are not the only religious views of marriage. As demonstrated by amicus groups, other equally sincere groups and people in Iowa and around the nation have strong religious views that yield the opposite conclusion.

...

Our constitution does not permit any branch of government to resolve these types of religious debates and entrusts to courts the task of ensuring government avoids them.

...

civil marriage must be judged under our constitutional standards of equal protection and not under religious doctrines or the religious views of individuals. This approach does not disrespect or denigrate the religious views of many Iowans who may strongly believe in marriage as a dual-gender union, but considers, as we must, only the constitutional rights of all people, as expressed by the promise of equal protection for all. We are not permitted to do less and would damage our constitution immeasurably by trying to do more.

The only legitimate inquiry we can make is whether [the statute] is constitutional. If it is not, its virtues ... cannot save it; if it is, its faults cannot be invoked to accomplish its destruction. If the provisions of the Constitution be not upheld when they pinch as well as when they comfort, they may as well be abandoned.

...

The sanctity of all religious marriages celebrated in the future will have the same meaning as those celebrated in the past. The only difference is civil marriage will now take on a new meaning that reflects a more complete understanding of equal protection of the law. This result is what our constitution requires.

...

We are firmly convinced the exclusion of gay and lesbian people from the institution of civil marriage does not substantially further any important governmental objective. The legislature has excluded a historically disfavored class of persons from a supremely important civil institution without a constitutionally sufficient justification. There is no material fact, genuinely in dispute, that can affect this determination.

We have a constitutional duty to ensure equal protection of the law. Faithfulness to that duty requires us to hold Iowa's marriage statute, Iowa Code section 595.2, violates the Iowa Constitution. To decide otherwise would be an abdication of our constitutional duty. If gay and lesbian people must submit to different treatment without an exceedingly persuasive justification, they are deprived of the benefits of the principle of equal protection upon which the rule of law is founded. Iowa Code section 595.2 denies gay and lesbian people the equal protection of the law promised by the Iowa Constitution.

Somewhere, Thurgood Marshall is smiling on the Midwest.

NEW MEXICO REPEALS CAPITAL PUNISHMENT!

2009-03-18T17:16:00.001-07:00

As I type this Governor Bill Richardson just concluded signing New Mexico HB 285, which repeals the death penalty in the State of New Mexico. I now proudly reside in only the second state to do away with inhumane and un-American Government sanctioned murder since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated in just a generation ago.

I am speechless.

NEW MEXICO LEGISLATURE VOTES TO REPEAL THE DEATH PENALTY!!!!

2009-03-13T14:43:00.001-07:00

The New Mexico Senate voted this after in favor of HB 285, which had cleared the House earlier this session by a healthy margin. The final vote was 24-18, largely along party lines. Prior to this year, all such bills failed to even get a floor vote in the Senate.

Gov. Richardson issued a statement indicating he continues to visit the issue, but has not stated whether he will sign the bill.

Either way, this is a huge step forward from where we were just a few years ago when we argued Young before the New Mexico Supreme Court. Thanks to everyone at the NM Coalition to Repeal the Death Penalty and the countless attorneys, support staff and citizens which have worked so hard to see this day. And thank you to the following Senators who voted in favor of this bill, your humanity will be remembered: Eric Griego, Tim Eichenberg, Timothy Keller, Sander Rue, Howie Morales, Gerald Ortiz y Pino, Stephen Fishmann, Peter Wirth, John Pinto, Phil Griego, Dede Feldman, Pete Campos, Linda Lopez, David Ulibarri, John Sapien, Michael Sanchez, Bernadette Sanchez, Cynthia Nava, Mary Kay Papen, Carlos Cisneros, Mary Jane Garcia, Lynda Lovejoy, George Munoz, and Cisco McSorley.

Every once in a while this place makes you damn proud.

cash for inmates, don't tell me how to spend your money, and give us real judges...

2009-03-11T11:01:00.001-07:00

ignored in the important questions of whether octo-mom was going to do porn or whether keeping a chimp as a pet is moronic was one of the biggest flashing neon signs trying to tell us that our criminal justice system is broken...pennsylvania judges sending juveniles to jail for a little cash under the table. two judges were shipping kids to jail that had no business being there because the private prison company that ran the place wanted bodies to fill the beds so they could milk the tax payers for more money. kids lives were destroyed so the bottom line could be fatter and the judge's vacation sunnier. we should still be talking about this, not where octomom got the money for a big house. we should be taking note that when you have a for-profit prison industry it creates incredibly perverse and counterproductive incentives - lock 'em up and throw away the key. our priorities got so incredibly fucked up with the bullshit "war on drugs" and "crack down on crime" that we created a multi-billion dollar industry with an interest in rising crime rates. let that sink in. our fucked up system is not interested in protecting the community, rehabilitation, responsibility, etc...it is interested in money. we created a huge money machine with an interest in squashing any talk of responsibly addressing issues of crime and drug use in our communities. and now we would rather talk about some crazy bitch that wanted a giant family for weeks on end. god help us.

speaking of wasting tax payer money...the financial sector is now starting to say they don't want the capital injection afterall. at least not if we get to tell them how to spend our money. (not that they had any problem with telling you that their loan to you had to be spent in a certain way). my favorite, signature bank of new york is going to give back the money because it doesn't like the idea of limiting executive pay. that's right - they don't want the $120 million if they can't spend it on bonuses. and now lots of banks are chiming in that they want to refund the money rather than deal with the strings attached to federal funds (the same rules that we all abide by when getting federal funds). which raises the question...why the fuck did they get the money in the first place? if they can manage without it, why are we pissing our tax dollars away on them? are they really so devoid of humanity that they wanted the money to cover bonuses rather than keep families in their homes? maybe it is time for a bank holiday...

hidden beneath all the huge moves that this administration is taking (and while the Man might not be pleased with them actually doing something, us regular ass folk are quite pleased that someone is willing to take a risk on our behalf once every 80 years or so) is the fact that the president will begin to appoint judges to the federal courts. and with this knowledge I have a simply plea...give us real judges. compromise on whatever else the fuck you want (except maybe the bullshit brain-dead failed tax cuts cure all philosophy of the elephantile class), but absolutely refuse to compromise on the courts. pack the fuck out of them. add judgeships everywhere as much as you can. throw the youngest, most liberal, thurgood marshall mold jurists you can find into those slots. and start with the 10th circuit...because they have lost their damn minds up in denver. and when you are done...on your way out of office, appoint yourself to the supreme court please. god knows we could use a mind like yours on the bench for the next 20 years.

thank god the ghansta's back...

blind adherence to friedman, the dow's measurement, our shock doctrine, and actual crime...

2009-03-05T12:05:00.001-07:00

the other day I was perusing a column, and for the life of me I cannot remember the bonehead that wrote the thing. while it could easily have fallen into another of the countless examples of talking heads that got a finance or econ degree and therefore thought they knew something (although had they ever bothered to take a simple western history class they would have clearly seen everything they were taught as gospel was a repeated historical failure), it jumped out at me as the prime example for the inherent lack of logical analysis from anyone with an MBA. the first section repeated the "I'm the last guy to want to the government to take a role in the economy...so if I say it might need to be done, even briefly, then you should listen." at the same time, it was yet another ode to the free market and the brilliance of friedman. and then...the author described how he felt we got into this mess where the unthinkable might have to be done. except his main target of wrath and blame were regulators that did not do their job of regulating. from that point on I waited for evidence of the simple epiphany that the writer apparently missed...if we got into a big mess because the government did not take an active role and do its part then maybe taking the government completely out of the equation is a bad idea to begin with. but no...never got there. still adhered to the free market mantra of those idiots that think friedman was a genius and not just the latest regurgitator of crap from the dumpster of history. see, there is a simple problem with the "free" market - it is called human beings. we are scum. we will fuck it up.

which brings me to another point. meet the press last week had a panel discussion on the economy and recovery and bla bla bla (side note - david gregory has been a pleasant surprise in one on one interviews...but when it is a panel he is an utter disaster). so gregory asked a question about the president's policies with a false premise - mainly that the people don't believe in them because the DOW continues to fall. ford had a perfect opportunity to score huge points...and hinted at it, but did not go all the way, instead arguing as if the DOW measured what you and I think of things. it doesn't, it never did. the DOW measures what the richest assholes that have been bleeding us dry for centuries think about things. and yes, they are scared because the era of their bullshit stolen wealth may be finally ending (again). when was the last time your investment decisions had any impact on the market? now when was the last time the stock market was outrageously and falsely high yet your income was completely stuck and your bills were rising? it is a crock of shit, this "ownership" society they tried to sell to you. you didn't own shit, they owned you. it was an excuse to take your hard earned money and siphon more and more of it up to them. but the market was high so they told you not to worry...and bill clinton convinced you he wasn't the most effective republican president of your lifetime.

as things collapse the stimulus bill and other actions being taken by the white house seem to be full of things of questionable stimuli. but for the most part, they are all damn good ideas that we should have implemented decades ago (or just not dismantled decades ago). and whether or not they end up stimulating the economy (which, let's face it, is next to impossible when the only thing you "make" anymore is bullshit ideas that failed), I say cram it down our throats. give them a taste of their own medicine...its like klein's shock doctrine for lefties. and if it is either this or forcing me to privatize everything that is public...I'm all for going this way while we burn.

the ICC indicted hassan al-bashir, the first time a sitting head of state has been the subject of an ICC warrant for war crimes. (of course you may not know because your morning news show carried a year old 911 call from octomom or some crazy lady that didn't get her mcnuggets). somewhere, tennyson is smiling...

For I dipt into the Future, far as human eye could see,

Saw the Vision of the world, and all the wonder that would be;

Saw the heavens fill with commerce, argosies of magic sails,

Pilots of the purple twilight, dropping down with costly bales;

Heard the heavens fill with shouting, and there rain'd a ghastly dew

From the nations' airy navies grappling in the central blue;

Far along the world-wide whisper of the south-wind rushing warm,

With the standards of the peoples plunging thro' the thunder-storm;

Till the war-drum throbb'd no longer, and the battle-flags were furl'd

In the Parliament of man, the Federation of the world.

There the common sense of most shall hold a fretful realm in awe,

And the kindly earth shall slumber, lapt in universal law.

don't call me highness, cause it's a long way down...

2009-02-19T10:45:00.000-07:00

good ol' laissez faire capitalism is crumbling...free market economics brought to us by the chicago boys has once again been proven to be a recipe for disaster...economies world-wide are basically in free fall at the moment. and my brain is racing like a pro now...

the national academy of sciences released its report on crime labs. turns out the guy with a badge that took a 5 hour course doesn't really know a damn thing and wings it so that he can add another pelt to his belt. and those of us that live and work in the criminal justice system are wondering how in god's name it took this long for someone to say what we all knew - junk science is sending innocent people to prison. justice be damned...they just want convictions...

take, for instance joshua kezer. the man spent 17 years in prison for murder he always swore he did not commit before being given his freedom. what did the judge have to say? he castigated the prosecutor for withholding evidence at the first trial.

think about that. we get it wrong quite a bit when we give people "all the protections of american citizens." so just how bad are we off when we deprive those protections from people? and shouldn't that make you want to send all those right-wing fuckheads that claim we cannot possibly allow the same process for alleged terrorists as we do for alleged criminals with american citizenship to gitmo themselves?

whenever I hear fucktards like paul celluci (an ambassador to canada, one of the cushiest jobs in the world) say boneheaded things like "canadians in particular are free traders" I want to slap the living hell out of them. what they actually mean to say is that those with obscene amounts of money want an economic system that will continue to bring them disproportionate gains. the guy out of work doesn't give two shits about your free trade...he wants a roof over his head and a peaceful retirement.

people are complaining about the car companies (namely GM) needing money from the feds now because they agreed to a 30 and out retirement plan (30 years in, and you get your full pension for life) because theoretically people are retiring before they hit 50. I'm just wondering - what is the average life expectancy of persons working 30 years in the factory in detriot? are they really living way beyond retirement?

california is going broke. federal courts are ordering they release prisoners being housed in inhumane conditions because they can't afford to lock 'em up and throw away the key. so incredibly close to making the connection, but we still don't get it...

when people start selling pot to cover their regular-ass bills because their full-time job can't cut it anymore you know we are in trouble...

and you can't help but wonder why they go to prison while your bartender gets an extra tip for making your drink strong...

as foreclosures are mounting someone figured out a simple defense...prove it. these assholes repackaged and shipped off these loans so many times that they seem to have lost the documents. makes a little part of you smile...it's ok, fuck them.

ronald reagan is requesting his catch phrase be updated...the new scariest phrase in the english language is "I have an MBA and I am here to help."

everytime the unemployment numbers come out remember this...clinton changed the rules to hide the true numbers. it is actually much higher.

we are all learning that bipartisanship takes two to tango. and the republicans still apparently think it means they should get whatever they want or else they will go pout in the corner. but remember...FDR forcefed a lot of programs down the throats of the elephantile idiocracy. it was not until later that those programs had a go of bipartisan support. so mr. president, let them pout and whine. throw your weight around - at them and your free market boneheaded democrat friends.

I really want to be a member of congress...so I've decided to stop paying my taxes...

after the peanut debacle I was disgusted with the way in which greed and the bottom line has overcome all else. which is the problem with corporations (and why our founders staged a revolt to protest them)...our laws treat them like people, and they aren't people. they have one sole purpose to exist - to make money. of course, in that way they are a lot like people I suppose.

and then I thought - good god, what is going to happen to all those people that work at that factory when the company goes down?

the other day I saw a short story on a little girl that was given a rescue dog because her dad wanted her to have one. dad got shipped to war. yea, we sent your dad to kill and be killed. but here's a dog.

civilian deaths are up in afghanistan...god help us...

just as it is looking like we are stuck in a quagmire afterall - the general is calling it a stalemate. somewhere vladimir putin is chuckling...

speaking of afghanistan, kyrgyzstan is kicking us out. why is this not a bigger story?

is anybody else terrified about the fact that pakistan has nukes?

and what the hell is wrong with mankind that we build such horrifying devices of death and destruction but refuse to make sure kids don't die of hunger?

with all of this, I am sickened that the top news story has been whether whatever the fuck his name is beat up whatever the fuck her name is and missed the grammy's because of it...

you will always remember my name...

stop wasting our money on this insanity...

2009-02-05T13:32:00.000-07:00

If only politicians would finally admit to the reality of the "War on Drugs" we might be able to get somewhere. The following is a column by Jason Whitlock of the Kansas City Star.

Quit crying double-standard over Phelps

By Jason Whitlock - Kansas City Star

There is no bigger fan of racial double-standards than yours truly. But those of you looking for one inside Michael Phelps' bong are misguided, stuck in the 1960s and worship at the Church of Al Sharp-tongue.

Don't send me any more e-mails complaining that if Phelps were black, he'd be dropped by his sponsors, locked in a cell next to O.J. Simpson and banned from all international competition.

If Phelps had dark skin and answered to "Jerome Washington," he'd be headed to Disney World, toting the Super Bowl MVP trophy he stole from James Harrison and Big Ben Roethlisberger.

Yeah, America gives its marketable, talented and wealthy weed-smokers the Santonio Holmes treatment. We forgive and quickly forget. Oh, I know there's a pattern of misbehavior with Michael Phelps. The cops busted him driving under the influence four years ago.

Well,the cops pinched Holmes twice in 2006, busting him for disorderly conduct and domestic violence — the charges were eventually dropped after smooth lawyering — and nabbed him ridin' dirty (three blunts) last October.Mickey Mouse doesn't care, and neither do you.

America's war on drugs is a scam to lock up poor people, a prop to advance political careers and an easy way for corrupt police and politicians to funnel millions of untraceable dollars into their own pockets. And you really want to play the if-so-and-so-was-black game over a dorky white swimmer pulling on a bong? Are you really that simple-minded?

The black president smoked weed. Rush Limbaugh was a junkie. Brett Favre had a fling with prescriptions. In college, I was Saddam Hussein and Crown and Chronic were my weapons of mass destruction.

I'm not going to be a hypocrite and blast this kid for blowing trees. And I'm not going to rip his sponsors for remaining loyal.

Michael Phelps knows how to play the game. He's quick with the contrite, toke(n) apology and he maintains a boy-next-door image.

Someone e-mailed me saying the media would be tougher on an NBA player captured on Kodak with his lips locked on a three-foot bong.

Depends on the player. Shane Battier? We'd forget before tipoff, and we'd forgive without an apology. Now, if it's one of Human Tattoo Billboards or Lil Wayne Wannabes, we'd demand a Senate investigation and expect David Stern to punish him to the full extent of the law.Image is everything whether you're black or white.

I got away with so much (spit) in high school simply because I spoke proper English, dressed appropriately, smiled at teachers, captained the football team and attended class. Everyone loved me, gave me the benefit of the doubt when I made a mistake and looked the other way when I spent the last semester of high school celebrating my full-ride scholarship to Ball State.

It's not that difficult to play the game. You don't have to sell out. If you want to be a rebel and carry yourself like a recent parolee, then accept the consequences and quit whining. There are decisions I've made with my appearance that limit my chances of hooking up with Beyonce. I could cry about it, talk about how unfair life is for a man three to five pounds above his ideal weight, but no one wants to hear it. The truth is it is Beyonce's loss. I'm sorry. I digress.

Rather than bellyaching about a racial double-standard, the Phelps case provides a wonderful platform to call for the legalization of marijuana (and all drugs). Check your 401k. We're broke. Obama's cabinet nominees are cheating on their taxes. We're wasting billions of dollars locking up and providing "free" health care to drug offenders. The government needs to take control of the mega-billion-dollar drug industry and use a portion of the money for rehabilitation facilities
and the rest to help get us out of debt.

If Michael Phelps just can't say no, why would we expect kids with far more depressing circumstances to avoid getting high?

I'm sure many of you are reading this right now after having a legal drink and popping a legal prescription drug and you just don't understand why poor people don't go to the doctor and get a script for Xanax, Lexapro or Prozac.

The beauty is, if things keep going the way they are, these middle-class and wealthy hypocrites will soon be poor and they'll have intimate knowledge of why many poor people self-medicate with marijuana and other drugs.

I'm not an advocate of drugs. In the near 20 years since I graduated from college, I can count on two fingers how many times I've seen marijuana. I'm not even a regular drinker. I'm high on my life. I love it.

Years ago I read a Los Angeles Times story detailing who uses drugs and who gets arrested for buying and selling drugs. The stats were damning, shocking and disturbing along racial and economic lines. My affinity for Crown and Chronic was cured.

At the time, I was black, poor and living in a major city — the can't-miss recipe for an American drug arrest. Now, I'm black, relatively wealthy, an admitted former toker and living in the suburbs — a recipe for being elected president.

Whitlock in 2012: I'll call for an end to the drug war, and Michael Phelps can be my vice president.

dems didn't get the memo, neither side gets it, and voodoo science is sending you to jail...

2009-02-05T09:55:00.000-07:00

the culture of washington was going to change (for what seems like the 10,000th election cycle in a row). progressive minded folks (true progressive, not left-wing nutjobs or democratic party players) were going to slap some sense into the moronic tendencies of our government, decades overdue of a cleaning, entrenched in their counter-productive and severely damaging ways of throwing money at themselves while they pat themselves on the back. don't get me wrong, my entire life I have had to live under the bullshit ideologies and practices of a republican party that long ago was hijacked by Big Business and all that is wrong with capitalism and america. (lest we forget, republicans always had such a leaning though...even lincoln was a lawyer for Big Railroad). and because of this, I too have a desire for payback...it is only natural. but while the democrats in congress apparently believe that 2006 and 2008 is a blank check for payback on their across-the-isle braindead brethren, I can't help but think they just did not get the memo from the american people. we are at a watershed moment, unfortunately it is not the watershed we had hoped for. our economy, which we falsely believed was eternally unstoppable (thanks to an undying proud ignorance of history), is crumbling...crumbling being too soft a word for the dramatic freefall we have entered. a hundred thousand people a week are receiving pink slips. one hundred thousand a week. millions are being kicked out of their homes. we don't build anything anymore. to say we are up shit creek without a paddle would be a gross understatement. basically, we are royally fucked, we the narrowest of windows to save ourselves, and possibly the world, from a decade of hell (well, there is plenty of the world that life won't change much for, except that we will stop helping). and on the other side? a world in which the united states is no longer the undisputed heavy weight champion of the world...just ask the brits, the dutch, the spanish, the romans...its one hell of a beautifully repeating cycle in western history.

and how do the democrats in congress respond? by butchering a stimulus bill to basically just make it the largest pet-project bill ever imagined. we are not talking about $800,000,000,000 (yea, when you write it out it looks like a lot of fucking money) into a massive public works program, education, and assistance to local and state governments. we are talking too much about an excuse for payback, to get all the crap that the republicans kept for themselves the last 15 years. we are talking about spending that might be a good idea...but not now. we are talking about throwing money desperately needed to put people to work to pay the FBI more for its junk science (see below) along with a load of other crap that suddenly has the american people questioning what the fuck these bozos are doing with our money. all while apparently not a single one of them pays their own goddamn taxes. and this is why I hate the democratic party. this is why, after a few months of hope and apparent insanity, I will once again be removing my name from the party's roll. fuck you and the fucking horse we gave you to ride in on.

not that the republicans are any fucking better...maybe just lucky. do not for a second believe that they "saw the light" and recognized much of this bill for what it is - dem masturbation. (don't get me wrong, there are some very good projects and ideas in this...unfortunately, like most good things that come out of washington, it is accompanied by a host of stupid shit). they are not pissed off at indiscriminately throwing money at anything and everything...they are pissed because they don't make the rules anymore. they are pissed because they got used to shutting their across-the-isle-hopelessly-lost brethren and the american people out of the process. and they are pissed because it is no longer their pet projects that are getting hoards of money. this isn't an ideological stand...this is a fucking tantrum.

but what is their response? tax cuts. are they fucking serious? I am so goddamn sick of this "we must cut taxes" refrain (now accepted in large part by the democrats). did none of these people have to take american history? if cutting taxes was the answer, why is it that the economy crumbles every time we get to the end of a period where cutting taxes was the answer? why is it that after 30 years of cutting taxes we are in this mess? why is it that hastened giant tax cuts over the last 8 years resulted in us leaning over the cliff? can't we add a constitutional amendment to require an IQ test and a basic knowledge of history before we let you help run the country?

changing gears to my typical anger at the criminal "justice" system. anyone involved in criminal law knows that there are an unbelievable number of convictions based on voodoo "science" developed by non-scientists and conducted by idiots. yes, forensics, as practiced in america, is a load of fucking crap. they make it up. we know it, they know it (although they will swear they are never wrong and will testify under oath to a slew of shit that they could never possibly know or understand...and they will get convictions, some of which, thank god, are later overturned thanks to real science). crime labs are a joke. they are factories for convictions. they are designed to find what the detectives and prosecutors tell them needs to be found. I'm actually involved in a case where a crime lab wanted to testify that a man was biting on a hamburger when he was shot because a hamburger fell on the ground from his truck when he got out of it a half mile later...I'm not kidding. and another case when a crime lab wanted to testify that a man was shot while climbing a fence because that was the only explanation for the slightly upward angle of the wound under the arm (thank god for a newer forensic pathologist not yet trained in the whatever-the-police-say ways who noted that any such theory would necessarily be one of countless possible scenarios). blood splatters? bullet analysis? gun powder? they don't know what the fuck they are doing...they make it up and make sure it fits the prosecution's theory.

but now we finally have some real scientists to tell the truth. the National Academy of Sciences put together a report mocking "forensics" used to convict - including fingerprints, firearms, bite marks, blood splatter, hair, handwriting, etc. in a no brainer to those of us working within the system, the NYT reports that the NAS report "says such analyses are often handled by poorly trained tecnhicians who then exaggerate the accuracy of their methods in court." of course the law enforcement community and the department of justice did everything they could to derail this effort. because the last thing prosecutors and police want is real scientists looking at their junk science and calling bullshit when they see it. once again, the false advertisement of "halls of justice" is exposed. and it couldn't come soon enough.

mandatory minimum sentencing...cause he got caught with a pocket full of medicine...

perpetually hoodwinked democrats, golden reefer, and more bodies...

2009-02-03T08:56:00.000-07:00

claire mccaskill, senator from the ludicrously named "show-me" state, has introduced a bill to limit wall street fuckwads to a mere $400,000 a year after they've again ran off with billions in bonuses - most of which necessarily came from our tax dollars since they lost insane amounts of money and needed a few hundred billion from you and I to make "ends" meet (and by ends, I mean million dollar office renevations, million dollar junkets, private jets, and enormous bonuses to those driving the bus off the cliff). sure, its all well and good that someone is finally listening to us folks that have been screaming for years that clinton's so-called "booming economy" was a disaster waiting to happen and that skyrocketing executive payment is a sign of the growing wealth chasm, which always appears before a global hegemon takes one on the chin. but sen. mccaskill went on a rant, well-intended I am sure (as most feigned righteous outrage is from politicians these days...they are mad as hell and they aren't going to take it anymore...at least not on camera), that exemplified why, despite the emergence of the president, I cannot stand the democratic party and why we never should trust those fuckwads. here is what she had to say about limiting executive pay - "We should have done it in the first place. But I don't think any of us thought these guys were this stupid. I don't think any of us believed that they would take billions of dollars in bonuses while their institutions were literally days from being wiped out. But they did. And we've learned our lesson." does that sound familiar to anyone? two of the most massively important votes by democrats during my lifetime, both of which they rushed and were bullied into - war in iraq and throwing tax dollars at crumbling financial institutions without any strings. and it is the same fucking excuse - "we didn't think they would actually do it." war in iraq? yea, they voted for it, but they didn't think the president would actually do it without a UN resolution and global support, even if they did give him the authority to run in there any second for any reason. and now...even more classic - "we didn't think the greedy sons of bitches that have run the economy into the ground so they could milk it for every cent possible would take tax dollars without strings attach and spend it on themselves like there were no strings attached." (insert slap of forehead here). tell me senator, how many more fucking expensive and devestating lessons must you and your party learn at the country's expense?

michael phelps is a physical freak, one of the greatest athletes (the way most would define "athlete" - personally, I reserve that mostly for decathaletes, triathletes, and gymnasts) in the world, also happens to like his ganga. the horror. executives and stock owners of private prison corporations everywhere are shuddering to think that society might just figure out that you can smoke pot and be productive, hell, one of the top olympians ever. and if society figures out that marijuana does not inevitably lead to a life of destitution, burglary, domestic violence, unemployment, etc....then maybe society will figure out that sending someone to prison for years because they relax at the end of the day with a joint rather than a glass of scotch is one of the most fucking idiotic and counterproductive ideas ever concocted by our "moral" law makers. legalize it, regulate it, tax the living fuck out of it, use that money to fund schools and social programs. in the process, put a cartel or two out of business.

the UN released its numbers on civilian deaths in afghanistan...2,100 in 2008. and no, I have no idea how many of those were the result of an american bomb dropped by some poor kid from rural tennessee and how many were the result of a resurgent resistance. but does it really matter? is the death of an innocent person any less disturbing if it comes at the hands of someone with darker skin and a different heritage? I often wonder how we, as a society, have come to the point where 2,100 civilian deaths in a year thanks to a war we are participating in is the kind of news that is buried deep within the paper, if reported at all. patrick henry purportedly boldly declared "give me liberty or give me death." in the process of trying to give the former, are we too accepting of producing the latter?

if you have something to say, say it to me now...

when the bottom line kills, unable to see they lost, finding the funds, and the american way...

2009-01-27T10:09:00.001-07:00

privatize everything. the market is more efficient than the government. the scariest phrase in the english language includes government help. throw money at the rich and all boats will rise. whatever is good for business is good for america. unions have outlived their usefulness and are hurting the american worker. repeat, privatize everything. there is your modern republican party in a nutshell. its founders are wishing they were still alive so they could run these fuckwads out of the country. and we are seeing the consequences of thirty plus years of their mantra being accepted and put into practice.

and this week we are given a gruesome reminder that when you privatize everything, the bottom line becomes all that matters. humanity? compassion? community? psshhh, let's focus on the portfolio. the market is necessarily inhuman and inhumane. as bobby kennedy reminded us, our GDP does not measure that which makes us great, only that which makes a few of them very, very wealthy. the market does not give a shit if you are a 93 year old man without anyone left in the world. a man who spent his entire life working to own a home and is only looking to enjoy your last days on this planet before being reunited with your wife. the market only cares that the privatized power company has a bill which has not been paid. the market does not give a shit if you are a 93 year old man alone at home and the temperature outside is subzero. and so, thanks to privatization and the market, the private power company (making huge profits off the publically-financed power grid which yours and my tax dollars constructed for them) ignores social responsibility, compassion, humanity and community. rather than doing what is right, it does only what is most profitable. and it sticks a fun little device on your meter which short circuits it once you have hit a certain usage because it has some unpaid bills...but it doesn't tell you, because that would cost a few cents, and the market would not accept such "unnecessary" spending. and so, in the dead of winter in frigid michigan, when temperatures are constantly below freezing, your power just quits. and you are left to slowly freeze to death inside your home...you are left to a slow, painful death. all for the bottom line. ain't the market grand?

and yet the modern republican party cannot stop with the same old sorry story which destroyed america in the first place. "give us more tax cuts" they scream. "too much money going to the states" they tell us. "the market is more efficient" they robotically proclaim. and all we are left to do is smack our foreheads and wonder if they are fucking serious. tell me, if tax cuts were the answer, if destroying social programs were the answer, if the market was so great, then how the fuck did we end up here? is it that we did not put big enough holes in the social safety net? is it that the chasm between the uber-rich and the rest of us did not get big enough? don't get me wrong, I am all for listening to the intelligent argument from the other side, I am all for bringing true conservatives into the conversation...but at some point, you just have to tell them to shut the fuck up because they obviously don't have a damn clue what they are talking about. as the president told them, you fucking lost. you destroyed this nation. shut the fuck up, move aside and let someone try to salvage what is left.

in the meantime, the states are broke. and as unemployment continues to skyrocket (now over 7 percent officially - many times higher if you count the people we needlessly throw away into our prison system) they will only become even more broke because the brilliant republican fuckasses gutted everything human from the federal government, values guys that forgot the most basic christian value - give help to those less fortunate - and the most basic american value - a chance to live free and pursue happiness for all. and while they complain about giving some help to the states to deal with the mess they have left them...there remains one very quick way to find those funds - prison. the states are spending ten times their education budgets on housing drug addicts in prison. and while bullshit draconian un-american psychosis like the hidden print in the adam walsh act and mandatory minimum sentencing kicks in ever harsher each year, the gap only gets wider. and so your state cuts deals with private prison companies (remember, all must be privatized) and guarantees them thousands of inmates every year over the life of a 20 year contract. and then these fuckjobs have the nerve to tell your kid he isn't getting a grant or a subsidized loan for school. I'm telling you, but stock in private prisons...other than developing new ways to kill human beings, keeping them locked down like animals is the next biggest growth industry in this country. hows that for fucked up priorities?

we have gotten so far away from the most basic ideals that america stood for that we are more concerned with building bombs and bars than with building an educated citizenry. and so people begin to accept horrifying statements from republican leaders in this country questioning why we would ever want to bring an alleged terrorist to the united states where he might...gasp...have the same rights as an american citizen? and here I was under the impression that we were bombing the fuck out of the middle east to bring them the same rights as american citizens. here I thought that freedom and liberty were universal values and we should strive to make sure all persons enjoy them. here I thought we were proud of our system of justice and thought it the best in the world. as if it is hard to get a bullshit conviction in the united states anyways...ever gone through the criminal process? when boehner says shit like that on national television and isn't called on it I suddenly begin to think maybe the nutjob armed militias in the mountains are just ahead of the curve. afterall, when his ilk show up at my front door, all I've got is a set of miracle blades and cross-dressing cat.

on the plus side...it is nearly february in taos. which means it dumped. and it will keep dumping. and for a few hours a couple days a week I will forget that I am part of a broken system. and I will be unable to hold it in and let out yelps of excitement as the the trees disappear from view compliments of the wave of soft, dry snow pouring over my shoulders. and sharing those moments with those special to me, I will remember that all is not lost.

welcome to chicago senators, a real stimulus, and where to find the money...

2009-01-08T10:02:00.001-07:00

the united states senate has for years (hell, decades...centuries even) been a lofty perch for a handful of blowhard white male holdouts desperately clinging to the good ol' boy life and the knowledge that they are blessed and better than anyone that would come out of a true meritocracy. yes, the united states senate is the depository for our home-grown aristocracy. and that is why I am grateful to illinois gov. rod blagojevich for giving them a dose of good old fashioned hard nosed blue collar chicago politics. ever since blago and his hair were led into the dark SUV in handcuffs, the senators have been on their self-imposed pillars talking down to the rest of us (as if the vast majority of them aren't crooks...hell, harry reid, the loudest shitbag of them all on this issue hails from neveda, that bastion of good and ethical politics) and declaring that blago will not get to fulfill his duties and the people of illinois will be without a second voice in the senate because they decide who gets in the club. (on a side note, I am amazed at how little I heard from the talking heads about how frightening it was that the senate was effectively telling the american people its elections and laws ..ing united states senators were null and void anytime those already in the exclusive club decided they did not like a candidate...or even worse, the people lawfully picking that candidate...and this from the purportedly "liberal" party which has been crying about the loss of democracy during the rule of the uber-wealthy. and this my friends, is why the democratic party should burn in hellfire). well, the hair showed washington that it doesn't have shit on chicago. box them in, embarrass them, force your will upon them. its the chicago way. and now the senate is backing down (thanks in part to another chicago strong-arm...the president-elect). take note all of you that worried that obama is not tough enough...the man rose from chicago politics and forced his way onto the national scene and into the white house. fuck with him, and he will end you. welcome to chicago.

there is plenty of talk about economic stimulus over the last few months. (the amusing part of it being that everyone talking about it was ignoring the ground work for a future stimulus and shouting how prosperity was everywhere and the market was high so all was well and would be forever. and now we have nothing to stimulate except other nations that build things. woot.) and I am all for pumping the economy in a last ditch hope that we haven't crossed the rubicon (although I am fully willing to accept that relative economic decline is inevitable, and, in the long term, can actually be beneficial to a former worldwide economic hegemon). but when it is coupled with all this crap about tax cuts (because if there is any kool-aid which washington just cannot put down it is the tax cut crap and the brain dead, now yet again proven false friedmanomics) I become very worried. that supposed "stimulus" of tax cuts the last few times was just one more example of the cute word play of those that don't give a shit about the masses or poverty or the growing chasm between the shrinking number of haves and everybody else. it was a wealth transfer...from those without to those with too much. it was a stealthy attack in the class war that they have fomented against us for centuries. ask yourself...if you get a refund check or a break in your taxes where is that money going to go? not into your savings...because your insurance and your loan rates are too high. it will go right back to the same insanely bloated institutions that already took hundreds of billions of tax payer money and then said "thanks...and no, you cannot know where the money went or what we did with it or why we are still refusing to do the socially responsible - and long-term business savvy - thing and loan any money to anyone worthy." claiming right does not trump doing wrong.

and if we are going to get a real stimulus...an infusion into education, manufacturing, infrastructure development, small business (actual small business, not the current definition, which includes dick cheney) growth...now that the deficit under the party against big spending has skyrocketed...where do we find the money? drugs. little noticed story recently - the feds are planning to "surge" the border in the war on drugs. and we all know how well this particular war has worked...and how effective prohibition was at developing a huge class of gangsters. so we spend billions and billions to ward of drugs. in the process, we effectively divert about as much as a kid digging a hole with his hands on the banks of the mississippi...we aren't stopping shit. and we spend billions putting addicts and those that supply them in prison - where it is actually easier to get drugs than on the street. ensuring that when they get out they cannot find work, leading to depression and right back to drugs. and in the meantime we have turned other nations into living hells, we have turned border towns into death traps where 40 murders in a weekend is no longer news and if the chief of police lasts more than a week he should get his retirement. and yet we look to london, where herione is given to addicts free of charge, putting dealers out of business, crushing crime and avoiding the danger of the impurities (pure opiates don't tend to kill people near as much as the crap to cut them). and how much revenue is made on taxes for cigarettes and alcohol? when was the last time you heard of someone killing a family for a cigar and a shot of whiskey? you could tax the hell out of these things, regulate their manufacture and distribution to keep them as pure and safe as is possible, keep prices low enough to put dealers out of business, and still make a fortune. and don't give me this crap about how we will become a nation of addicts if drugs are legalized. we are a nation of addicts now. it is not hard to get drugs anywhere in this country. if you think it is I envy your sheltered existence.

I'm just breakin' down...

let them play and the left missed the point...

2008-12-31T09:54:00.001-07:00

governor blagojevich decided to do his job and appoint someone for the vacant illinois seat in the united states senate afterall. in doing so he picked someone that most likely was never being seriously considered before all this happened (although we may never actually know) in roland burris. burris seems like a nice enough person and has a historical spot in illinois politics, having broken the racial barrier in a statewide election. and he meets all the constitutional qualifications...and while he may not have anything major to his name, one must remember that hillary clinton didn't have much major to her name, and what has caroline kennedy really done? but everybody swears they don't have a problem with burris himself, that their beef is with the governor only and that anyone the governor picked would necessarily be excluded from the senate. but am I the only one asking why? the man is still governor until the people of illinois have him removed through the legal channels they have instituted...we do still have due process in this country do we not? (however much the boy king and his cronies have tried to dismantle it over the last 8 years). the people of illinois are getting the shaft by not having an equal voice in the senate, as was always intended. they put in place procedures to replace a duly elected senator if they were to exit office prior to the expiration of their term (and contrary to all the blowhards at the sun times, a special election was not it). those procedures have been followed, the man satisfies the constitutional criteria. and yet democrats are declaring they will not allow it to happen...that if he gets through the state, the senate democrats will not let him sit in their exclusive club. which raises the question...why the hell have we allowed the senate to become such a ridiculously exclusive club mostly filled with long-time party shitbags? hell, that's the main reason I'd love to see al franken in the senate...anyone that other senators don't want there is probably exactly what the senate needs. we claim to be a nation of law, of due process and a presumption of innocense. so to senate democrats...prove it.

the left has its collective panty all up in a bunch over obama's choice of rick warren to give the invocation at the inaugeration. (personally, I wonder why he have an invocation at the inaugeration anymore...especially after we've seen the wonderful christian works done by the president that speaks to god). yes, rick warren is a homophobic asshole. and no, I will not be one bit surprised when we learn he was sharing a meth-head male prostitute with that creepy howdy-doody look-a-like whenever he visited colorado springs. but he is a different mold from the right wing "agents of intolerance" for the most part. and it isn't like he was appointed to oversee government efforts to address gay rights. don't get me wrong, I totally understand being upset at this, especially for groups that are seeing major setbacks in their quest for basic dignity. what bothers me is all the talk of "he better not forget the people that got him elected." every time I hear that I cringe - the speaker obviously missed the most basic message of the obama campaign. if he has shown anything, it is that he will not cowtow to the "base" anymore while worrying about the next election. he has a damn job to do, and it is going to require getting everyone to sit down and bring their best ideas forth. have we become so hatefilled all around that we cannot even talk to each other? what exactly do we lose by talking and listening? don't be surprised if warren's stance on gay rights softens. and be assured that attacking someone for incredibly boneheaded ignorance is the most sure-fire way to entrench them in that ignorance.

whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. and when you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you. - F. Nietzsche

american aristocracy, the department of vengence, bringing evildoers to justice...

2008-12-19T10:18:00.000-07:00

I have nothing against caroline kennedy personally. I am certain that she is a pleasant enough person (at least her public persona would lead us to believe). and she probably has just as good a shot as any other stooge to be adequate in the united states senate. that being said, she has no business in the united states senate...especially if she gains a seat by appointment and not by vote. look, I understand as well as anyone that this country has always had a monied aristocracy, and one with very little turnover at that (check out Kevin Phillips Wealth and Democracy if you are a complete nerd and are interested in how the same list of families have held the bulk of american assets for decades, even centuries). and I will be the first to admit that the roosevelts, although from wealthy bloodlines and related, were two presidents that I admire very much (while also recognizing they comitted america to shameful acts). I also happen to be fond of the kennedy clan...although I firmly believe that robert, post-john assasination transformation complete, would have outshone them all. but I am disgusted by the way in which american politics is becoming a family affair. one of my major problems with hillary clinton was her relation to bill. one of my major problems with the boy king is his relation to his father (and also some of those same monied aristocrats that have been running the show for a long, long time). and now there is talk that jeb will take federal office...and caroline is seeking a senate seat. this is exactly how societies get into big problems...it isn't the best and the brightest making decisions, it the most inbred. (side note - if you haven't seen the inbred brothers from the state...look it up). the dream of a meritocracy has vanished...

the united states department of justice does not deserve its name any longer. we all know how the boy king and his gang tranformed the DOJ into a spy organization used to circumvent the law rather than uphold it. what most of us don't know is that during the bush years the DOJ reversed course from what was the trend since the beginning of this nation - more humane prosecutions and a pull away from capital punishment. rather, in comes ashcroft and his cloth-draped statutes and gives the order to get very aggressive on pushing the death penalty in federal cases. at a time when the rest of the civilized world is disgusted with the united states for its state-sanctioned murder, to the point that many nations will not extradite to the united states for certain crimes (except of course those that torture themselves), the DOJ wanted more blood. (another plug - if a play The Exonerated comes to your town...go see it). and so we forget that our criminal justice system contains "justice" (or is supposed to anyhow) and turn it into the criminal vengence system. afterall, there is no other justification for the death penalty than vengence. show me one moral tradition that has been given any value over time that equates vengence with high moral character.

tellingly, col. theoneste bagosora was given life imprisonment from a UN tribunal trying him for genocide and crimes against humanity in rwanda. in the civilized world evildoers are brought to justice, not the other way around. in the civilized world law and order rule over the sword. and so closes another chapter in the latest of "agains" after the "never again" of the jewish holocaust. (interestingly, "never again" did not arise out of the aremenian holocaust). and while we condemn bagosora and his ilk for the unimaginable horror they propogated...we must remember that we share some of the blame. there are parts of the world that still remain in bitter conflict - now with modern weaponry. although this conflict did not necessarily start with western colonization, it was heightened by colonial powers with the old divide and conquer technique. and although much of the horror in rwanda was perpetrated with clubs and knives, much of the worldwide horror is being perpetrated with much more modern weapons. weapons that the western world sells for huge profits and then turns around and questions why people can get along peacefully.

so this time of year, remember that it is not their problem. it is also yours.

you could be that someone...

illinois politics - its on all of us...

2008-12-10T10:11:00.001-07:00

to the "shock" of the country, the leader of my beautiful home state was finally arrested by the feds (who have been looking into his antics for years) when he crossed the line, even for an illinois politician, by auctioning off obama's vacant senate seat. first off, let me assure you that fitzgerald was lying to you when he said he was shocked...the man knows how dirty illinois politics is. perhaps he was shocked at how incredibly stupid the guv is...but not at all by the depravity of his actions. nobody that has spent anytime in illinois could be shocked. we all know that is how the system operates...we all know that in the political corruption department city hall in chicago and the state capital in springfield give the kremlin a run for its money. in the end, there are lot of things that we can learn from the downfall of this former up-and-comer turned most-despised-governor (even before this)...

first off...those of you outside illinois should take a few things to heart about obama. the whole tony rezko business? if that is seriously the only connection to corruption that the man has after years dealing with the daley chicago machine (and yes...chicago is most definitely still machine politics at its "best") and the scum downstate (this will make back-to-back governors in a federal penitentiary) then the man really is serious about changing the culture of politics. I said it before and I'll say it again...if that is all you got, the man must be a saint.

and if it is not the only connection to corruption obama winds up having, then we have learned something somewhat comforting for a left-leaning leader...the man is tough enough to end you. seriously, you have to be incredibly tough to make it through the brutal gauntlet of chicago and springfield politics to begin with. but if you are so tough that you can come out of it and everybody is scared to talk about your dirty laundry...you are a certifiable bad-ass. maybe it is just the decades of the right throwing their weight around speaking...but I would be more than glad to have a hard-nosed, no nonsense, willing to destroy you liberal leaning progressive at the helm.

when I came to new mexico a few years back I quickly learned that I had moved from the most corrupt state in the country to one that was desperately trying to overtake it. and now that politicians here are beginning to learn the wrath of a prosecutor enraged by the stealing of democracy as well, I again noticed how it is all the same good ol' boy network in these schemes. but who is to blame?

we should all take a good hard look in the mirror...because this is not just the shame of a governor, it is not just the shame of springfield or illinois...it is the shame of all of us. we abdicated to the likes of blagojevich and bush...we gave the keys of the kingdom to the likes of nixon and clinton...we told the likes of delay and jefferson we would let them do as they pleased. is it any wonder that our politicians have taken all they can get after decades of the american people not putting a stop to it? instead of shouting them down...we shut up and avoided the polls on election day. instead of taking them on we held pat-ourselves-on-the-back-bitch-fests with our likeminded friends...all talk and no action.

this should be a sign to all of us. get informed, and not just every fourth year. stay informed. get vocal and stay vocal. grab a petition and hit the streets. throw your hat in the ring against the career politicians that inevitably disappoint and create a sham democracy. you want to fix this mess? put non-politicians in office. during the primary, refuse to accept the choice of your local machine. make them earn it. make them listen.

this is one hell of a country when it works. make it work.

children in the justice system, inhumane prisons, gas taxes and other thoughts...

2008-12-08T10:26:00.000-07:00

I've been busy...but that doesn't mean I haven't been thinking...

during my absence there was a rather bone-chilling story about an 8 year old boy that supposedly shot and killed his father and a family friend. and then the tape of the police interrogation (they love to call it an interview...but I don't give a shit what the supreme court says, whenever cops are asking you questions, it is an interrogation). with it, suddenly people began to question whether or not this kid actually did it...or if he was just nudged into admitting it by the circumstances (and even then, it was not a very convincing admission). so the pundits (many of which are simply failed members of the criminal justice community) came out and declared that the questioning was not done properly and likely would be inadmissible. then my favorite comment one morning on good morning america - the outrageous claim that children would never be questioned that way in a child sex case. as one that has dealt with said child sex cases...I officially declare bullshit. I assure you, whatever their intentions, whatever their desires, suggestive questioning of children is the norm. kids may have difficulty deciphering fiction from reality...but they are not idiots. they know what adults expect them to say and will often give them that, especially to make an uncomfortable situation end. so next time you see that tape and you feel even the tiniest tinge of outrage - remember that there are plenty of innocent people sitting in prison because of it...and don't believe for a second that it is as rare as they try to tell you...

speaking of prison, this last trial was a month-long seminar on the horrors of american prisons. anyone who sat through it could not help but come away questioning what in god's name we are doing under the claim of justice. inmate after inmate took the stand to testify and one thing became clear - treat a man like an animal, and he will inevitably act like an animal...tell a man that society deems him worthless, and he will inevitably treat society as if it is worthless. but something else became clear...that with all the horrible things that these men had done in their lives, all the mistakes they had made, they were still human. they still felt pride, fear, sadness, regret, desire...they were uncomfortably just like you and me in many regards. and yet we throw them into a system that is eerily similar to the dog farm which got michael vick demonized...but since the prisoners are four-legged creatures it is somehow ok. one man on the jury broke down after just half a day of testimony because his son had been in prison and he had heard the horror stories, he had seen the broken man his son had become. we've turned the criminal justice system into a factory...making sure that if you weren't a danger to society when you went in, you most certainly are when you come out. and we should all be embarrassed.

tom brokaw (thank god he's leaving...although I am in no way excited about david gregory taking over) wanted to know why obama wouldn't tax the living shit out of gasoline to keep it up at $4/gallon where, as brokaw claimed, "people were ready to pay that" in order to prod them into smaller and more efficient vehicles rather than the monsters brokaw seems to think they are rushing out to buy now that gas has dipped (although if you ask your local dealer, they would kill for a rush on any vehicle at the moment). once again, I must call bullshit. sure, some people were "ready to pay" 4 bucks for a gallon of gas...but they are the same assholes that will keep driving behemoths because they can afford it anyways. the vast majority of people were only "ready" because they had no other choice. and this is the problem with the gas tax - it is vital, it pays for infrastrucure programs that otherwise would not have any funds - but it also is one of the most regressive taxes we have, slamming those that cannot afford it the hardest. ironically, the same bunch that was complaining about "raising anybody's taxes" in an economic environment like we have (i.e. keep the highest tax brackets with artificially low rates) are the same ones that have no problem with taxes on the poor.

it was nice to see some history sneak into obama's discourse with brokaw. he kindly pointed out that the american economy was strongest and grew the most when tax rates evened the playing field the most. of course he also started to hedge on one of his most basic campaign promises with the bush tax cuts...but I'm trying to hold my tongue until he actually does something.

americans, as most humans I suspect, have an uncanny ability to shrug off that which does not happen in our back yard. all this talk about bush "keeping us safe" has to make one shudder. afterall, terrorist attacks have skyrocketed since the boy king destroyed america after 9/11...but as long as it doesn't happen in an american city, we quickly forget it. (of course it helps if americans are killed - see india).

after centuries of europeans artificially constructing borders in other lands, is it really any wonder that there is so much built up hatred and violence in certain parts of the world? afterall...how much death and destruction did it take before europe sort of figured out where to draw the lines?

yes, the american auto industry has been horribly managed and driven into the ground by braindead MBA grads who forgot everything that henry ford showed them about running a business. and yes, those same assholes should be left to their fate. but how is that at all the fault of the assembly line workers? of the dealership employees? of the delivery person? of the retired couple? and so we learn the problem with destroying the safety net and leaving it to companies to provide...when those companies fail, we end up having to prop them up to avoid bread lines anyways.

just like health care...an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of treatment. but who can afford prevention? so please stop using me as a statistic, as an example of those that "choose" not to have adequate health care because they are young and relatively healthy. if I actually had a choice...if it was remotely affordable, I would kill to have health care that let me actually see a doctor when I needed. I would absolutely choose to have the ability to get sick and not become homeless because of it. in a heartbeat. to claim otherwise is simply false. so please stop.

this holiday season many people are opting to forego the usual spending spree and just be happy with time spent near those they hold dear. sometimes it is amazing what it takes to properly set our priorities.

godspeed mr. santo.

it is dumping in taos...you know where to find me...

there is something happening in america...

2008-11-05T15:02:00.002-07:00

I first truly discovered american politics as an 8th grader in 1992 amidst a three-way presidential election. since that time I have watched as time and time again, the promise of america, the promise of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the promise of opportunity and equality, the america that I was taught to love as a small child, became increasingly faint with each passing november. my disenchantment began with the democratic party when it lost its way and no longer practiced what it preached as it became increasingly more the party of reagan-tag-alongs and less and less the party of FDR. likewise, my disenchantment with the republican party grew as it became increasingly more the party of the old confenderacy and less and less the party of lincoln and roosevelt.

for many years I wandered through american politics without a compass, unable to identify with the tragic comedy that my nation's leadership had become. I began to look back through our collective history and wonder what had happened to the hope that once was america. just as I truly discovered the idealistic youth within, it began to be crushed beneath a cynicism wrought by the weight of the knowledge that the america I dreamed of lay over an increasingly distant horizon.

I became angry and insolent. I chastised those that declared themselves america's leaders without every exhibiting the qualities of america. I wondered how it was that election after election, the american progressive spirit was never given a chance to show itself, stifled by those incapable of nurturing it, or worse, unwilling to let it flower. and then came barack obama...

at times over the last two years, the weight of that cynicism has seemed too heavy a burden. but inevitably, it would be cast aside with a renewed hope and deeper belief that our time had come, that the centuries old march towards the more perfect union had again picked up the pace. a short time ago, I fought back tears in the center of a crowd of tens of thousands reaching out from the better angels of our nature. last night, I broke down, the long stifling weight finally lifted. as spontaneous dancing erupted in the streets and complete strangers shared smiles, embraces, and stories of an undying longing and hope for a better tomorrow, I wiped my eyes and realized there is most definitely something happening in america...

for the first time in my life, the american promise is alive and well. for the first time in a very long while, I am not tired.

we are america again.

cynicism relieved; obama draws 45,000 in albuquerque...

2008-10-27T15:46:00.001-07:00

many of you know me for my cynical nature. some of you know that hidden beneath is a romantic idealist that just will not die. unfortunately, throughout my life, that idealist has been trampled again and again by the hard reality that the true america was being dismantled by our leaders. I've wanted so badly to believe in the american myth that I grew up with, that this was a nation where anything was possible and all peoples came together for the common good, where we commit to upholding the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness above all else. four years ago, I sat on the couch and felt that idealism being stoked by a state senator from my home state.

over the last few years, that idealist has battled that cynic, trying desperately to convince him that this time was different, that this was a leader, that this was a movement, this was the movement I had been pining for...give them a true progressive and the american people will come together in an astounding fashion to announce that the american creed is not dead. saturday night...he finally won.

I woke up saturday and made my way over to johnson field where a handful of people had already sat down at the front of the line for an obama visit rumored to be drawing upwards of 20,000.

as the gates opened and we gathered near the stage, I had no idea that a line wrapped around the campus, I had no idea just how many people had been as desperate as I was. we tried in vain to get an idea of the size of the crowd, holding cameras above our heads and bringing back photographs showing a sea of people disappearing into the darkness behind us. turns out, 45,000 arrived because a leader had finally inspired them to be bigger than our differences, to be better than this.

most remarkably, within a five foot radius I was surrounded by children as young as five and men and women as old as my grandparents, by people of every ethnicity and background. a woman next to me had traveled from out of state to be there. her view blocked, I asked if she wanted to swap locations with me so that she would have a better vantage point. she declined, patted me on the shoulder and told me "thanks, but that's ok. I am here for you."

it was a beautiful moment, and I hope she knows the profound effect that simple gesture had on me. at that moment, the cynic within me faded away as I looked upon the little girl on her mother's shoulders in front of me and thought to myself how we were all there for her. and as I realized this was the time I had dreamed of I began to get emotional, and as 45,000 roared si se puede, I actually believed those words.

the destiny of a nation...yes we can.

under seige, gun control, and defining americans...

2008-10-21T15:39:00.002-07:00

the other day I was driving around albuquerque and noticed a billboard doing its best to convince me to join the local police force so that I could be "in step with my community." (side note - you will never see current episodes of COPS in albuquerque because mayor marty decided it made the city look bad and won't let them come back). the thing is, the whole "in step with our community" slogan did not quite fit in with the character on the board, literally ready for combat. reminded me of the night a head popped up in my window and told me to turn off all my lights before setting up shop with a high powered rifle on my porch. I know it is not exactly kosher to ever question law enforcement or the "war on drugs" or getting "tough on crime" and all the other bullshit used an excuse to control joe q. public...but when are we going to seriously examine ourselves and consider whether we truly want to live in a nation where police roll down the street in tanks and position snipers on rooftops. there is something frighteningly unamerican about that picture...but is a reality in every metropolitan area in the country. your local police have at least a wing that are basically para-military. perhaps that is why nobody noticed when the actual military was notified it would be stationed and ready for action in the united states. seriously people...something is very, very wrong here.

and I know many will claim it is necessary because "the bad guys" have arsenals to shoot up the local sheriff with and so they need to counter with ungodly firepower. which begs the question...why do we allow so many guns of such power into our communities? which leads me to a recent dilemna I am having over gun control. I am a firm believer in the constitution of the united states. call me a homer, but I believe it to be the single greatest political advancement of modern history. if you read it, and I mean really read it, and put it in context of the times...it is incredible in its audacity and beautiful in the framework it lays out to push the people towards the ideals embodied in the declaration. and I cannot imagine that when it says no infringing on my right to speak and assemble, it meant anything but none. or when it says no unreasonable searches and seizures it means none. or when it says no mixing of church and state, it means none. which is my problem, I support gun control...but the second amendment says no infringing on my right to arm myself to the teeth, and would it not mean none? now, I've typically read the text to mean you get a gun if you are in a militia, and used that as an excuse to try and tweek the document to modern times. but then I have to admit that there is just as strong an argument that not only am I parsing the text wrong, but even if I am not, it is just as logical that you get a gun in case you ever need to join a militia - you'll have some handy. and if I fall back upon the evolving standards of the document&183;does that not also provide fodder for those that would curtail my write to speech, press and assembly? so what is one to do?

finally, the modern GOP has informed me that I am not a real american. the irony of this is apparently lost on them. afterall, thirty years ago, it was people like me that brought the GOP into power..."middle" class white men. see, I was born in the suburbs...not rural virginia, hence, I am not a "real" american. I do not go out of my way "worshiping" the christian god...not a "real" american. I spend my days defending the bill of rights...not a "real" american. my father was born in a small farm town along the mississippi...one would think he was a "real" american, but then one must remember his family came from "old" europe and german americans were rounded up by mobs in the early days, and especially during WWI. my mother was from red wing...too similar to "un-american" virginia to be classified as "real" america. so here I am, a white male, raised on the bible and home cooking, college educated, professional degree, and deeply in touch with the history of my nation. and I am called "un-american" because I think...

that is a frightening prospect. this is where the party of lincoln has come...the man would cringe if he were alive. he once told americans that millions of their sons were being slaughtered on the battlefield because every drop of blood drawn by the lash was being repaid with one drawn by the sword. his blistering attack on the modern GOP would make colin's appearance on meet the press seem like a slap on the wrist. and he would be right...and it is the reason the GOP is in for a long few decades. they have lost the next generation of politically active americans...enjoy the wilderness asshole.

we were born to fuck each other one way or another...

three cheers for friedman-omics!

2008-10-09T14:08:00.000-07:00

historians everywhere are looking smug as of late. it has never worked we said. the rising stock market is a sign of trouble ahead we said. financialization and "free" market worship always lead to decline we said. they told you it would be unlimited and never-ending prosperity. they told you it was patriotic to buy shit you didn't need and couldn't afford. and now...it is all collapsing. just as we said it would.

mr. friedman, legitimate economics called...they want their nobel prize back.

glam dog mocked joe biden for declaring it was patriotic to pay taxes. where she comes from it apparently is not patriotic to do anything for the common good...or to make any effort to pay for the equipment that the troops (which she proudly proclaims her support for) require to avoid needlessly dying. I understand that the university of idaho school of journalism probably is not a bastion of intellectualism...but you'd think a simple term like patriotism would not be so difficult to understand.

so I'm wondering...if it isn't patriotic to sacrifice a little bit financially for your nation when it so badly needs it then why did previous leaders request that during past wars?

eight years of the same republican president and his free market ideology in the 1980's and it ends in the savings and loan collapse and black monday. eight years of the same republican president and his free market ideology in the 2000's and it ends in an all out market collapse and black october. coincidence?

not that the eight years under the same democratic president were as bill wishes we would see them. anyone with half a brain understood that it was simply setting the stage for utter disaster...guess what. the curtain just raised.

remember when the boy king was telling us all how wonderful it would be if we could put all our retirements into the stock market and rely solely on the market and not social security to pay the bills in our old age? now do you understand why that is such a horrible idea?

speaking of social security...tom brokaw is a fucking moron. I am sick of so-called journalists (please bring back mr. russert) telling us social security is going under. the far right has been saying for 30 years that social security was within days of going under...and yet it is still projected to be full our lifetimes. when did objectivity become synonimous with repeating lies? edward murrow wherefore art thou?

anyone else find it highly amusing that some lady threw obama a softball question about whether health care was a right or a commodity and he needed tom brokaw to save him? although it was even more amusing to have mccain proudly declare that it is a commodity to be traded across state lines. yup...that is exactly what we need...forum shopping by insurance companies.

hurry hurry hurry! we must pass a bailout bill yesterday! the bill passes...the president then comes out and says to be patient because it will take months. things that make you go hmmmm...

the boy king in a wharehouse talking to people that likely won't have a job too much longer was smiling and laughing. seriously...this has been this asshole's m.o. for the last 8 years. has there ever been a president that has ordered so many young men and women to die that has laughed and joked so much? even about the decision and bullshit stories that he used to send them to their deaths? has there ever been a president watch the economy tank and laugh and joke so much? then again...the child has had more vacation time in his years in the white house than most of us will see in our entire careers.

well, I take that back...once we are all laid off and quit looking for work we will have plenty of vacation time.

speaking of all of us getting laid off...how incredibly stupid is mccain's idea of a governmental spending freeze right now? FDR puts the country back to work on public works and infrastructure development. the modern republican party says if you want a job you better sign up for never-ending combat.

which reminds me...all those earmarks the man has been foaming at the mouth over...most of them keep a hell of a lot of people at work. since the "less is more" bullshit theology of the republican party has taken hold, earmarks are the only way we have to maintain the infrastructure.

I'm sick of the great depression analogies. this country is in an entirely different position. we don't manufacture anything anymore. as a nation we make nothing of tangible value. all we have to offer is financial slight of hand. only the world is rejecting financial slight of hand. I guess what I'm trying to say is...you should wish this were the great depression. at least then we would have a way to get out of it.

when the dust clears, if russia and china are stronger than the united states thanks to three decades of deregulation and financialization...who won the cold war?

bottles on the windowsill...

so full of righteous hate...

2008-09-25T08:42:00.001-07:00

so it is now well into the period when the world was supposed to end if we did not hand over $700,000,000,000 to the bush administration to buy a bunch of crap so that banks would not collapse. the market was supposed to be down 200% by now...it really hasn't moved all that much. although a lot more people are out of work (of course that is a trend that has been continuing for some time). and since people were beginning to look around and say "wait a minute, wasn't this supposed to be a must-get-done-yesterday thing?" the boy king comes on television and tells you that the world will end on sunday if we don't give his boys $700,000,000,000 and just sit back and wait for an update sometime down the road.

yet another ploy by a "drown it in the bathtub" crowd. say what you will about those that lead the conservative coup (not conservatives in general, just those at the top with the all the money), but they tend to think forward in ways that the left has been unable to do for some time. see, toss $700,000,000,000 into the shitter and suddenly thing like governmental regulation, education, health care, social security, etc. become unfeasible in the very near future...it just simply can't be paid for (although pissing away hundreds of billions fighting phantoms will always be en vogue). they don't want you to think about it, just do it. it was the same thing that gave us that brilliant "patriot" act (and if mccain is that kind of patriot, in the words of his illustruous running mate, thanks but no thanks). it was the same thing that made my effective tax rate hit the fucking roof while warren buffet now pays a lower percentage then his secretary.

only they didn't foresee something different this time...the american people are sick of being told to be afraid. perhaps the one great thing about american exceptionalism is the "fuck you" attitude that arises when "leaders" tell us to be scared...we are too damn proud to put our tail between our legs and cower behind uncle sam for too long. and now, we're mad as hell and we aren't going to take it anymore.

and we are looking at that price tag, and people are flooding their congresspersons with angry letters, phonecalls and emails. they are questioning why $700,000,000,000 can't shore up an economy by providing jobs through public works programs. they are wondering why it is that they have been told 1/6th of that is too much to pay for health care for their children and themselves, but it isn't too much to protect poor business leaders following what we all knew would be a failed economic philosophy. they are wondering how many schools would be upgraded with a fraction of that money. they are wondering why $700,000,000,000 can be thrown at wall street but not at the ninth ward or galveston. they wonder how it is that bankers get hundreds of billions while programs for those most in need get cut year after year. most of all, they are wondering when joe and jane america will be considered too important to let fail.

and so mccain calls a "timeout" to run back to his office (which he has abandoned for almost 1/2 a year) because the 500 plus members of congress are hopelessly lost without him yelling at them. nevermind that this is an issue he admits he knows nothing about (not that many supposed "experts" have any fucking clue...more historians, less mba's please). nevermind that congress is already close to hammering out a deal (just in time for him to swoop in and take credit for something he had nothing to do with). it is a stupid move politically because the people are pissed off about the bailout...and he wants to save the bailout. just goes to show you how insanely out of touch the right wing has become.

and then there is bill clinton...who has made it very, very clear we should not be talking about who is to blame for this mess. and always talks about "we" when he mentions how this mess came to be. nevermind that bill clinton's embracing the "free market" and financialization guaranteed this day would come. nevermind that clinton signed the bill that repealed much of the safeguards put in place after the last time this happened to ensure it never happened again. nevermind that clinton wanted everyone to believe that because the stock market was high everything was grand.

the stock market is not what makes america great. it is great in spite of wall street, not because of it. "the gross national pruduct does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. it does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. it measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our passion nor our devotion to our country. it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. and it can tell us everything about america...except why we are proud that we are americans."

for instance, don't look now but a gitmo prosecutor quit his job because his higher-ups were demanding he proceed unethically. mccain votes to undue habeaus, this reservist quits because the process is un-american. who is the hero here?

in the end, take comfort in knowing this...racism is a powerful force in america, but at times like these, class solidarity becomes equally powerful. and as society becomes more diverse, and as a younger generation stands up to mom and dad, and as the corporate fat cats desperately try to one last grab at controlling your government, they are finding out they did not act soon enough...the shock is over...the sleeping giant has been awakened. the landslide is on.

talkin' about a revolution...

those of us with historical perspective saw this coming...

2008-09-17T09:42:00.001-07:00

Since I started blogging I've been pointing out that our economy is in a lot of trouble, and that the 90's were not a golden age, but the set up for disaster, hastened by the boneheaded policies of the free market fools. With McCain and his crowd still deeply in denial, many of us that have some historical perspective of over-reliance on financialization and deregulating financial markets are wishing we could not say "told you so."

The following column is written by Erich Rauchway of The American Prospect and was published today.

McCain's Dangerous Do-Nothing Economics
The Great Depression was caused not by a stock crash but by a banking system left to self-destruct by a conservative president who, like John McCain today, insisted that the economy's "fundamentals" were strong.
Eric Rauchway | September 16, 2008 | web only

Responding to the collapse of several major investment banks this week, John McCain reassured us, "I think still -- the fundamentals of our economy are strong." That move comes from an old playbook: On Oct. 25, 1929, Herbert Hoover declared, "The fundamental business of the country, that is the production and distribution of commodities, is on a sound and prosperous basis."

The day before Hoover insisted that the fundamentals were strong was the day that came to be known as Black Thursday, when in heavy trading the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost about 9 percent of its value. And while, in endless stock-footage documentaries showing images of dumbfounded traders over a soundtrack of mournful jazz clarinets, the crash is supposed to begin the Great Depression, it wasn't quite so. The real cause was the collapse of the banking system, which followed the crash in part because Hoover believed strong fundamentals would protect the economy from disaster.

For the likes of Hoover and McCain, asserting the strength of fundamentals is shorthand for saying that business leaders, with maybe a little cheerleading, can sort out the crisis and that Congress should not try to regulate their behavior. It's too soon to know if McCain will be proved right (I doubt it), but Hoover certainly turned out to be wrong.

At the time, Sen. Robert Wagner, a New York Democrat, characterized Hoover's response to the crisis as "the time-worn Republican policy: to do nothing and when the pressure becomes irresistible to do as little as possible." In fairness, Hoover didn't quite "do nothing," but he followed a script that may sound familiar to students of the modern Republican Party.

Hoover worked to get businessmen to respond to the crisis by herding them into conferences and urging them to cooperate. He backed immigration restriction and a cut in the capital-gains tax. He quarreled with the unemployment figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. None of it worked, and yet Hoover insisted on the soundness of fundamentals, blaming the continuing crisis on whiners: "The income of a large part of our people is not reduced by the depression," he said, "but is affected by unnecessary fears and pessimism." He urged his fellow countrymen to count on "the magnificent working of the Federal Reserve system and the inherently sound condition of the banks."

But the banks were not inherently sound; they depended on the unsound foundation of 1920s lending. After the crash, the president said the fundamentals were strong, but American consumers said, in effect, well, we'll see, and their credit-driven buying slowed. Purchases of consumer durables in 1930 were about 20 percent lower than they were in 1929. Less purchasing meant less selling and more layoffs, which meant still less purchasing and soon more defaulting. The banks began to fail. Meanwhile, the "magnificent working of the Federal Reserve" did not stop the bank failures, which increased to sickening levels as Hoover's term ground on and the reality of the Depression became undeniable.

If this sounds unsettlingly familiar, it should: Ill-advised lending and borrowing also contributed to the apparent economic run-up we've seen in recent years, and the collapse of that credit bubble has brought on the present crisis. Whether it will develop into a disaster like that of 1931-1932 depends on whether we follow John McCain's suggestions and Hoover's playbook, or take a different tack.

For even when, under irresistible pressure, Hoover moved to do more, he didn't do enough. In the last year of his dismal presidency, he backed a federal effort to bail out the banks, with some success. But this policy offered no speedy relief to the ordinary voter -- by intention, as Hoover's Treasury Secretary Ogden Mills said, the point was to let "business do for itself what the government cannot hope to do for it." While bailing out business is a defensible strategy on the merits, it's shockingly immoral to offer a federal safety net to the rich while extending bromides about sound fundamentals to the poor.

For Hoover as for McCain, the insistence on "sound fundamentals" means that if necessary, the government will throw a life preserver to business leaders; the rest of us are on our own. Franklin Roosevelt knew how to answer: "The present administration has either forgotten or it does not want to remember the infantry of our economic army. These unhappy times call for ... plans ... that build from the bottom up and not from the top down, that put their faith once more in the forgotten man at the bottom of the pyramid." He echoed his cousin/uncle Theodore, who declared, "We must protect the crushable elements at the base of our present industrial structure." In an economic crisis, these ideas are the true, and sound, American fundamentals.

prepare your hoovervilles.

you cannot escape history...

2008-09-10T10:42:00.001-07:00

for some time now I have commented (mostly within my inner circle) how fascinating it is to watch the decline of a global hegemon first hand. it is a cycle that has been repeating itself since the dawn of history...and unfortunately for us, it is one that tends to speed up each time through. before the industrial revolution a global (and really, being a white american male, by global I mean more of a "western") hegemon could count on a few hundred years of solitude atop the world...but then the dutch rise and fall happened relatively quickly. the british stepped in to the void and eventually beat out the rest for world domination for some time. but britain's fall was, historically speaking, rather remarkably sudden after its rise. it was only about 150 years before the brits were eclipsed by their upstart cousins in america. and now it has been somewhere between 60 and 90 years for the united states and the tell-tale signs of decline are already much further along than we might expect.

over the last decade many smart people have been dismayed over the rise of religion in our politics, specifically a bizarre millenialist christian belief system that seems to actively seek the end-times. but this is by no means a strictly american occurence. millenialism has reared its head and come to frightening prominence in just about every hegemon when its time at the top was coming to a close. most recently, british society (many leaders and so-called "upper class" people) embraced an idea that the end of the world was just around the corner.

typically, this is accompanied by some nasty world events that, to the believer, buttress the belief that we have reached the end (because exceptionalist beliefs within hegemons never fail to omit life after hegemony as a possibility). more often than not it has been a great war, barbarian hordes invading, struggle for the seas, colonies rising up, the war to end all wars, the war against terrorism. and the struggle is always framed as the be-all-end-all fight between that which is good, and that which is evil. and yet the world always continues on...

along with these strange millenialist beliefs comes a degrading of science in favor of religiosity. the best minds are ridiculed at best and harshly repressed at worst. this process of ridding the nation of thinkers and innovaters so that others could catch up has hastened as the spread of ideas and knowledge has arrived. and we are seeing it now happen in virtually the blink of an eye (historically speaking).

economically, manufacturing, the actual creation of tangible goods, is severely neglected. the top dog nation adopts the view which the spanish perfected - let the world be our workshop. ironically, it has almost always been a commitment to manufacturing and openness towards ideas that led to hegemon status in the first place. spanish manufacturing collapsed spectacularly when the crown stamped down on important economic groups. the dutch began what the british and now the americans would later perfect - utter neglect of manufacturing in the worship of financialization of the economy. the windmills that had brought incredible wealth that allowed this tiny country to rule the world economy were left still. rather than pour itself into further industrial developments, the dutch moved to financial markets and became the bankers of the world. unfortunately, that didn't last as the brits did innovate industry...until they moved to the bankers of the world as the american manufacturing giant was awoken with assembly lines and technological advancements once only in science fiction.

the love of financialization pays off at first when the strong manufacturing base provides an influx of cash and allows the hegemon to become the creditor of the world. but it wears off...and as industry advances at an ever quickening rate, so the window closes just as quickly. and it tends to close ever the more speedily when the nation throws itself into a treasury draining military conflict (colonial wars, succession wars, wars of religion, great power struggles, wars against terrorists). suddenly, the world's great creditor is the world's great debtor.

and then, the hegemon is eclipsed and is no longer the biggest baddest boy on the block. it is inevitable, no nation has yet proven to live up to its self-described exceptionalism and avoid the cycle of history. and yet we believed we could break the chain.

there is good news and bad news. the good news is, sometimes the hegemon has been able to soften the fall and remain relevant. the bad news is, that really only happened with the brits (and to a much lesser extent, the dutch)...and there is an awfully good chance that this has a lot to do with the fact that the dutch and the brits were a natural progression, which was a natural progression to americans. unfortunately, there is no anglo nation to take up the reins...and it appears the next global hegemon will not even arise from the west.

I guess what I am saying is this...we are fucked. given the relative quickening of all these process, it is likely going to be a brutal fall as well. and as fascinating as it is to see from the inside...what I wouldn't give to be a few generations older.

questions Gibson most certainly won't ask...

2008-09-09T10:41:00.000-07:00

The following is a column by Dick Polman on Philly.com.

The Sunday chat shows had quite a lineup of heavyweights yesterday. We had Barack Obama on ABC, Joe Biden on NBC, John McCain on CBS, and Sarah Palin – wait a second, Sarah Palin was on…what? Surely she was somewhere on the air, let's see…I must have missed that listing…still looking…On Fox? Nope….CNN? Nope…MSNBC? Nope….I mean, after all, this is somebody who has already been judged by McCain as ready to assume the presidency on a moment's notice, so clearly she must be ready to step into the journalistic firing line and showcase her breadth of knowledge. Right?

Wrong. Palin is still America's mystery guest. The McCain people said a few days ago that she would remain on the sidelines, where presumably the briefers are working overtime to pour talking points into her head, until such time that she feels "comfortable." But since their statement was a virtual admission that she's indeed not ready to hit big-league pitching, the McCain people clearly needed to erase it, pronto. And so they have. They announced yesterday that Palin will take questions later this week during a sitdown with Charlie Gibson of ABC News.

I wouldn't presume to know what Gibson plans to ask her, but, in the interests of a venerable American journalistic tradition known as holding candidates accountable, I'd love to see these questions on the table. They ain't all pretty – the byplay between candidates and journalists is often akin to watching sausage get made – but still:

1. Gov. Palin, news reports indicate that you are undergoing intensive foreign policy tutelage from Senator Joe Lieberman and senior members of the McCain team, including Randy Scheunemann and Stephen Biegun. Lieberman and Scheunemann are known for their ties to the neoconservatives who promoted the invasion of Iraq. Biegun last worked on George W. Bush's National Security Council. Given your lack of foreign policy expertise, how confident can we be – and how confident are you – that you are being briefed by a sufficiently broad range of people? Is the McCain campaign reaching out to include, as briefers, prominent Republicans who disagree with the neoconservatives and the Bush White House? People like Brent Scowcroft and Colin Powell, for example? Are you insisting on a broad range of briefers? If the range of advice that you are getting is narrow, how would you know?

2. You recently stated in a church appearance that the war in Iraq is "a task from God." Imagine that you have been thrust into the presidency, and that you have to decide whether to launch a new military action. If you were to determine, in your prayers, that this new military action also qualified as "a task from God," how much confidence should the American people have that you would carefully consider all earthly counter-arguments – including any warnings by U.S. intelligence that war was the least defensible option?

3. One follow-up on Iraq. In Bob Woodward's new book, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says about Iraq, "There are a lot of things if I could go back and do them differently, I would." Do you agree with Secretary Rice? If so, since you have been vetted by Senator McCain as being ready to assume the presidency, will you share with us three or four specific things that you wish had been done differently in Iraq? For instance, in terms of execution, what would you have done differently with respect to the Sunnis and the Shiites? Can you explain to us the difference between the Sunnis and the Shiites?

4. Following up on the simple question that Campbell Brown of CNN tried to ask last week – she posed this question to a McCain aide, who ruled it out of bounds – can you give us an example of a command that you have given to the Alaska National Guard? Something specific that sheds light on your readiness to be commander-in-chief of the United States? And could you please comment on last week's press reports that the Alaska National Guard, during your tenure as governor, has been plagued by personnel shortages that make its aviation units the most poorly staffed in America? How do you respond to the fact that the Alaska Guard's top officer warned in a memo, earlier this year, that the lack of qualified airmen "has reached a crisis level"? How do these developments square with Senator McCain's claim that your command of the Guard constitutes national security experience?

5. Governor, you are currently the target of an ethics probe in Alaska. It was authorized by a bipartisan decision of the legislature. You are accused in some quarters of abusing your power, that you fired the state police commissioner because he allegedly dragged his feet on dumping one of his troopers, your ex-brother-in-law. The details may be too murky for many voters, but what's most interesting is that at first you promised to cooperate fully with the investigation – only to renege on that promise. Now you're saying that you will only provide testimony if the legislature stops its own probe and transfers jurisdiction to the state Personnel Board – whose three members are appointed by the governor. If you have nothing to hide, why are you trying to game the process? And isn't there a risk that your stance in Alaska might remind some voters of the Bush administration's general refusal to cooperate fully with congressional oversight investigators?

6. Governor, you will soon become a grandmother, congratulations. You have praised your daughter for her decision to have the baby and keep the baby. You emphasize that this was her choice. But there are tens of millions of voters who would like to have a far broader range of choices. How do you intend to persuade Hillary Clinton's voters that all women should be denied the choice of abortion, even in cases of rape or incest? Isn't your position antithetical to what Hillary Clinton has fought for since the ruling of Roe v. Wade?

7. Governor, you keep telling audiences that you told Congress, "Thanks, but no thanks" on the boondoggle Bridge to Nowhere – whereas in reality, of course, you campaigned for that bridge project in 2006 and abandoned it only when it became a national embarrassment. How do you square your current remarks with your previous remarks praising the work of Alaska's Republican delegation in obtaining the federally-earmarked funds? And how do you square Senator McCain's promise to veto all earmarked projects with the fact that Alaska depends heavily on federal earmarks, and that Alaska is currently seeking projects totaling well in excess of $100 million? And how can you present yourself as an anti-earmark "maverick," when your own representative in Washington, John Katz, recently defended earmarks in an op-ed piece, calling them "a legitimate exercise of Congress' constitutional power to amend the budget"?

8. Governor, you and your husband in the past have attended conventions of the Alaska Independence Party. This year, you videotaped a message of greeting for the AIP's 2008 convention, urging members to "keep up the good work." Yet the AIP for decades has endorsed the idea of giving Alaskans the option to secede from the United States. Why have you failed to denounce a group whose message contradicts Senator McCain's slogan "Country First"? And why do you continue to associate with a group whose founder, Joe Vogler, declared that "the fires of hell are glaciers compared to my hate for the American government" and declared that "I've got no use for America or her damned institutions"? Governor, why haven't you renounced this man, the way that Senator Obama has renounced Jeremiah Wright?

9. And forgive me, governor, but I can't resist this one. The entire state of Alaska has 670,000 people. Montgomery County, a suburban county outside Philadelphia, has 775,000 people. The Montgomery County commissioners deal with issues of sprawl and land use and environment versus economic development, just as you do, except they don't run huge budget surpluses every year, like you do – with 86 percent of your tax revenue coming from the oil industry. Therefore, given the fact that the Montgomery commissioners have more constituents than you do, tougher budget tradeoffs than you have, and given the fact that they have roughly the same national security expertise as you do, aren't they just as qualified as you to be vice president of the United States?

they really don't get it...

2008-09-04T10:41:00.000-07:00

last night I watched and waited for sarah palin to wow me...or maybe just to say something of substance. I sat through an amusing speech by rudy, who always forgets that his one big accomplishment was showing up to work on september 11, 2001. (hell, I went to work and stayed the whole day...does that make me a great and courageous leader?) and I noticed that this time pbs made a concerted effort to locate the 5 black people in the audience.

and then she came out...and she started talking.

through the first half of the speech I turned to my friend and noted that this was not a vice presidential speech...it was a first lady speech. through the second half, I became glad I had a penis, because otherwise I imagine I would be even more insulted. absolutely. no. substance. now I'm no fool, I recognize that substance is traditionally missing from republican speeches (and often democratic speeches as well)...but this was painful. this was a woman who was needed to show the country she knew what the hell she was doing...and instead she told us she is a feisty dog with makeup.

the speech writer (no, palin did not write it...which I suppose might speak well for her in the end, because it was dreadful) sure took some liberties...and made some boneheaded mistakes (perhaps because the campaign failed to figure out what they hell they had before last night).

for instance, her touting her cutting on spending in alaska and praise as a "tax cutter." funny thing about alaska...they don't have an income tax. so when she "cuts" taxes she isn't doing shit to help the little guy...because he ain't paying them. cutting spending in alaska? well, not federal spending...which she requested in record levels while mayor (earmarks, and lots of them) and while governor (the bridge to nowhere...after she got the money and it became a punchline she diverted the funds). but here's the problem palin - if the feds had to bail you out to run your state...who's gonna bail you out if you have to run the feds?

she said she started in politics by joining the pta to make her kids' education better...she is governor of a state with abysmal high school graduation rates...

her claim of standing up to special interests, lobbyists and the like in alaksa...well, she hired a lobbyist to go to washington when she was mayor and ask for earmarks. all her desire to drill baby drill...well, she is the special interest - her husband is in the drilling business. the "good ol' boys network"...guess she forgot that she ran a 527 about how great stevens was.

her claim of major ethics reform in alaska - she's under investigation for abusing her office as governor to settle a family dispute.

her claim of putting the governor's jet up on ebay...well, it didn't sell. and they wound up getting almost half a million less than they wanted for it.

her "state budget being under control"...not so much of an accomplishment when you recognize that she relied on huge federal funds and alaska has an obscene amount of revenue come into the government from oil.

her claim to saying "thanks, but no thanks" for the bridge to nowhere...well, she asked for the bridge to nowhere, got the money, and then became a joke and diverted the funds to other projects (helping out the state's budget with federal monies again)...

did anyone notice that she was touting the natural gas pipeline as an answer to difficulties with oil? as soon as detroit makes me a car that runs on natural gas I will thank you.

her claim that american's taxes will go up if obama gets his way...well, only if you already make enough not to notice or if you are already dead. let's be serious...once you are six feet under, do you really give two shits what happens to your money? and for folks so hell-bent on self-reliance and meritocracy...why would we give people money just for coming out of the right vaginal canal?

her touting of mccain's great achievements? how about ensuring that mlk is not celebrated in arizona?

her claim that mccain doesn't "run with the washington herd"...perhaps because he's spent the last eight years trying to catch up after the republican washington herd trampled him in 2000...

I found it amusing that they would use the high price of gas by saying it is too expensive to get to your job at the factory in ohio...apparently the republican party still believes there are factories operating in ohio in which to get to work at...

and I really, really, really want the democrats to call the republicans' bluff on drilling. I want them to say "fine, we'll drill...but to prove it is to help joe and jane america and not line the pockets of big oil, we want to nationalize the oil coming from america so that it goes directly to americans instead of the world market. we want that oil to actually bring down prices here because it is for us only." but they don't have the balls...and that is why I still scowl at them...

three days of a major national political convention and still nothing of substance...and not a word on the economy (other than forgetting that all the factories in ohio are closing). I thought the democratic convention was largely a flop until I saw the republican counterpart. from what I can gather...here is the republican platform...

john mccain was beaten up by communist asians and still gave a thumbs up...

no abortion...

john mccain is our friend.

wow.

welcome to the end of the american far right my friends...and the beginning of a long few decades for the republican party...

conventional wisdom - frostback style...

2008-09-03T08:50:00.001-07:00

so much has happened since we spoke last...and yet so much remains the same...

a friend pointed out a story that has developed into a new man-crush for me...vladimir putin. while our wannabe cowboys are prancing around for the cameras looking tough, the man who made the boy king look like an inept fool (granted, not exactly a difficult task), reminded us what a real "real" man looks like. while hanging out with a film crew and some wildlife experts tracking siberian tigers in the wild, putin came to the rescue when a tiger escaped and charged the film crew. while our "manly" leaders no doubt would have shrunk in horror, putin calmly pulled a tranq gun and put the kitty to sleep. the man may be an evil genius, but seriously, that's just plain hot...

while the republican party was busy pounding their chests and cheering soldiers, the entire night was about john mccain. not what he would do, not what he has done, just john mccain. and I couldn't help but wonder which candidate is supposed to be the narcissistic "celebrity" when the republican platform is apparently "john mccain, he was tortured."

which brings me to another point...why in god's name am I yet to hear one journalist, pundit or otherwise talking head ask the simple and obvious question - does someone that spent 5 years being beaten and tortured, and now has a known history of bizzare blow-ups and crying apologies, really have the mental stability to be president of the united states?

nevermind that not enough is being made of his oldness. seriously, my parents are 70-something...they can't think hard for more than an hour without needing a nap. and he is going to need to go 18 hours a day or more...

I'm still trying to figure out the palin pick...I mean, I get it, she's attractive and much younger (mccain kind of has a history of that) and has a vagina. but if I'm a woman, I am kind of pissed...he seriously couldn't find a woman out there to avoid the all of the "only on the ticket because she has a vagina" talk. legitimate or not, that is the conversation now...and it is a shame...

then again, as mrs. mccain pointed out - alaska is really close to russia. so there you go. I live in albuquerque, which is really close to mexico...so I've got this whole immigration thing nailed.

but seriously, picking a republican leader from alaska would be like obama snaring an old-school daley politician from chicago. you just have to know some shit is going to come out.

I feel really bad for palin's daughter and am disgusted at media for making her the focus of the news this week...

although it raises another interesting question...if you have a special needs infant to raise, and your teenage daughter is 5 months pregnant...and you are the "family values" candidate - wouldn't it make more sense to turn down the nod and take care of more important things?

watching joe lieberman speak I could not help but wonder how a ticket with him on it ever was even close to the white house...seriously, utterly emotionless. sorry joe, but your counterpart (leach at the democratic convention) blew you out of the water...

he just went on...and on...and on. and all he said throughout the (what seemed like) hours he was on stage was basically this "john mccain is my friend."

you know the republican party is in a boatload of trouble when their convention gives the appearance that this is their platform: (1) yay for guys with guns...especially dead ones - and (2) don't kill fetuses. ouch.

watching laura bush speak made me very glad that regardless of what happens, the right-hand woman will be a step up come january.

I'm going to catch some shit for this...but that is my job I suppose. fred thompson tried to tell america that throughout history people have turned to military figures as their great leaders. and I thought to myself...well, that may be somewhat true, but typically they turn to successful military leaders. for the life of me I cannot think of a single big-time leader that got caught for 5 years by the other side in war beforehand.

another thing that thompson bragged about for mccain - was his record number of demerits at the naval academy. yay...another american president proud of being a poor student.

in all seriousness...watching both conventions leads to a few obvious conclusions. there are a lot of fat white people in the republican party. (notice the hispanic guy and the jewish guy that talked called themselves democrats). and the democratic party thinks a lot more of the american people.

ron paul is courting a lot of disenchanted republicans...lawsuits to limit access to the ballot anyone?

not that the democrats won't match those anti-democratic efforts with lawsuits to keep nader off...

as the far right is being pushed back into crazyland...let's just hope it isn't too late...

the bill of rights disintegrates because freedom just gets in the way...

conventional wisdom...

2008-08-28T11:02:00.001-07:00

my head has been filling up as of late and has wandered much...perhaps it is due to the fact that my current reading is absolutely miserable (another excuse for academic analysis that is actually just repeating of failed freidman ideals)...

saw a film by werner herzog, encounters at the end of the world, about antarctica and the folks that are drawn there. most of them were explorers and wanderers...and then there were the penquins. there was a scene in which some penquins crossed paths, one set heading back to the sea, another heading back to the nesting grounds. and one simply stood pat until the others were near the horizon...and then he took off towards the mountains. after about 50 yards the penquin turned and looked back, pausing briefly, perhaps reconsidering a trip to the interior...and then he continued on. and there was a penquin that had gotten nearly 50 miles off course in the same direction - wandering through camp on his way into the interior of the continent. penquin explorers...and for a week now I have been wondering what they were thinking - what was driving them? did they just want to see what was over the mountains? were they looking for some steeps? were they just like those ill-fated human explorers of lore? either way, godspeed my tuxedo-donning friends...

the local school district provided sexual exploitation workshops for their teachers recently. apparently my tax dollars are being spent to fill teachers with such wonderful misguided things as a "fact" that 1 out of every 20 men is a child molester. that's right, according to APS, 5% of men diddle kids. see if you can pick out which one's in your office are the culprits. and something that might help in choosing is another gem from APS - beware of the "creep" factor in guys wearing bad sweaters and turtlenecks. I truly wish I was kidding...

another air raid in afghanistan...looks like 90 civilians killed, 60 of the children. never again always means "until the next armed conflict."

now the afghani government wants an agreement that foreign troops can only stay if they quit kicking in doors of homes and stop air raids. seems pretty reasonable to me...

this morning al roker was tracing his heritage on the today show...in the bahamas he was seeing the names of his ancestors on slave rolls, learning that the roker name was the name of the owner of his ancestors. and he noted that when other people talk of "heritage" they talk of their past as people...while blacks talk of their past as property. I cannot fathom such a reality, and will be forever glad that I don't have to live with it...

which raises the question - if we can spend a few hundred billion to kill arabs, why can't we spend a few bucks to make payments for the faults of our ancestors? and for all of you that claim "I never owned slaves" or even "my family never owned slaves" - I would be willing to bet you would have been at the front of the line demanding german reparations after WWII and the holocaust, paid by an entirely different government and a generation uninvolved in the horror (they were not paid in full until the 1970's)...

I have managed to catch most of the speeches from the democratic convention thus far...and most have been a complete dud. michelle obama's was masterfully given, but was painfully written - an ode to the media pundits would be an appropriate moniker. everything she said that little bit in the back of my head kept saying "they made her say that because..." hillary was good, ironically, I think obama made her a better politician - more connecting. and I have a newfound respect for her as she refused to say god bless america...and I am sick of hearing that at the close of every major american speech. bill was flat...but got on a role towards the end (even if he will never admit that he was a huge part of the problem). biden did his job...which is pretty much all you can ask. john kerry showed us why he was one of the worst picks ever for president...he sounded bitter and reminded that he is one of the least inspirational speakers in history.

still, it will never cease to amaze me how much the "liberal" party has agreed to play on the republican field. every single speech played into rove-ean talking points...there was the token "we can be just as belligerent as you" tough guy talk all the way to the "we are too patriotic!" it is embarrassing to see the democratic party trip all over itself to out-republican republicans.

but if you have been watching coverage by the major networks and their affiliates you probably missed the best speech given thus far - jim leach, a republican, delivered a stirring historical perspective that was likely lost on many in the audience. it is disappointing that his speech did not receive airtime on anything but pbs, because it was one of the few worthy of the day. it was not a "obama is my main man" bullshit that conventions are typically known for...it was much closer to obama's 2004 address. and it was a quick glide through history and the progressive tradition of america...it was a great reminder that we get too caught up in "liberal" vs. "conservative" because the true american ideals have always been progressive, regardless of if they are viewed as liberal or conservative. so if you didn't happen to be watching pbs the first night...read this speech (http://www.clipsandcomment.com/2008/08/25/full-text-former-us-rep-jim-leach-speech-to-democratic-national-convention/).

as much disappointment as I have felt in obama as of late, it is very difficult not to get back on board. I still feel that he could have a profound impact on the future of american politics and that, win or lose, he is one of the few that could return us to that progressive heritage. and I am certain that he will deliver tonight, and I will be eating crow again...

but it is also an emotional moment for anyone with any sense of historical perspective. a black man, born to an african father, is a legitimate contender for the white house and will represent one of the two major parties on the ballot. and perhaps he is tempting fate by delivering the address in an outdoor stadium on the anniversary of king's dream speech...but being a cubs fan, I am deeply rooted in history, and perhaps it has to be this way. regardless of what happens in november and after, regardless of whether obama fulfills the promise that I see in the movement that has gelled behind him...it is a remarkable step, 150 years (and much longer) in the making. so despite my cuss-filled tirades of past...tonight I have a simple message...godspeed...

hate to say I told you so, death for waiting, shameful "politics", and lolo’s gold...

2008-08-20T09:04:00.001-07:00

I hate to say it...but I told you so mr. obama. some jackass democratic strategist no doubt informed you that you must begin to make yourself more "electable" to the "center" in america - and that you had to prove you were a tough belligerent asshole like the other guy (who was so much of a man that he left a woman because she got crippled and pudgy while waiting for him to return from war) - and that you had to cower to the big money. and so you did, and you sold out civil liberties, and you sold out those struggling to get by, and you sold out human dignity, and you sold out the rule of law, and you sold out the founding generation, and you sold out the ideals of america, and in the process you sold out all of those that saw in you the spearpoint of a movement that just might be able to wedge itself into washington and save us from ourselves before it was too late...all in the false promise of "getting elected." you followed the bill clinton model - apparently forgetting, as al gore and john kerry before you, that the only reason clinton won was that perot was kind enough to cripple bush sr. by taking almost 20 percent of the vote. and what do you have to show for it now? you are losing, and the once immenent landslide has turned the other way. you are hard at work turning yourself into the newest posterchild for a simple fact of politics - give the american public the choice between a republican and a democrat that acts like a republican and they will choose the legit republican every...single...time. so once again, on behalf of myself and generations to come...fuck you.

texas is getting ready to execute someone. (I know, I know...big surprise). the guy is being put to death for sitting in a truck while his buddy committed a robbery, shooting the clerk in the face in the process. nevermind that, as is all too often the case, the guy is most likely incompetent to stand trial, let alone be executed (but then a little secret that the right-wing death mongers don't want you to know...nobody, and I mean nobody, avoids a murder conviction even if they are insane. once there is a dead body the writing is on the wall and unless you are unfunctionable insane and eating your own feces...you are going to trial, and in texas, you are getting murdered by the state). nevermind that he got inadequate representation at trial and during the sentencing phase (seriously, look up the ABA standards for capital representation some time...then ask yourself how in god's name someone getting paid a couple thousand bucks could pull that off without going bankrupt). just focus on this...he was sitting in the truck. he didn't have the gun. he didn't shoot the cashier. he didn't actually kill anybody. he sat in the truck. no wonder the boy king finds it so hard to so much as verbally reprimand china for its human rights record...

so the presidential candidates...well the two republican candidates anyway...appeared at a mega-church to be grilled by an evangelical about their thoughts on jesus and when a baby retains human rights (oddly, the question was termed as a baby, thereby insinuating that there has been a birth...but neither candidate thought it a good idea to point out the idiocy of the question and scientific problems with the premise...the dumbing down of america continues). and the media has spent days telling us how it went and how the crowd responded and who "won" the meeting. I have seen exactly one report that expresses concern over the fact that our political process has so eroded that the presidential candidates are essentially being given a religious litmus test. kathleen parker of the chicago tribune brought up an interesting point...it is time we stop asking what would jesus do (nevermind that he would be appalled at the actions of the united states and democratic and republican leadership) and start asking ourself what would the founders do. and she hits the nail on the head...they would cringe in horror at the thought that presidential candidates would give legitimacy to such a sham in such a forum. of course, they might also expect that the american people would understand enough of their history to plainly see how utterly against the american ideals such a "debate" is...are things really this far gone?

on a less depressing note...lolo - while most in america and feeling your pain after you hit the second to last hurdle in a race that was your gold to win, I will not be joining in. for starters...congrats to dawn harper, who stayed humble enough to take advantage of your mistake. a woman from the most depressing town in america, east saint louis, is now golden. and you, lolo, part of me feels that is what you get for wearing gold shoes to the race.

bring on the major leagues...

putin makes america his bitch, mccain’s undermining nature, and our pathetic press...

2008-08-14T10:27:00.001-07:00

all of those jackasses that bought into fukuyama's "end of history" bullshit apparently never bothered to read paul kennedy (who's writings from decades ago proved eerily foretelling). russia, a nation with vast natural resources, a gigantic reserve of human power, and a history of belligerence, power and a chip on its shoulder, was never going to sit back and watch america overrun the world. after a few decades of american leaders thinking they could bend russia to our will, putin has now declared "this time you are MY bitch." if there was any doubt, it was erased after putin listened to the boy king's empty threats and immediately escalated russian activities in georgia. and here's the thing...what the fuck are we going to do about it? as much as mccain might want to beat his chest and prove how manly he is by wanting to start yet another war (more below), america cannot do shit. not only has putin brilliantly exposed the double-speak of american leaders and the neocon crowd, pointing to kosovo as the precedent and the attrocities commited by western supported forces as proof that russia needs to protect the georgians from the georgians, but he has exposed the impotence of america at this stage in world affairs outside of iraq and afghanistan. there isn't a damn thing we can do except talk tough...he knows it, we know it, the world knows it. (I must admit, I do take some perverted joy in putin specifically making the boy king look as idiotic as he is...bush never imagined that one of his "friends" would do such a thing, apparently forgetting that putin was kgb and spent his life stabbing "friends" in the back).

which brings me to mccain...imagine how absolutely fucking mad the right-wing talking heads would have gone if obama had made a speech like mccain did on such a big foreign policy issue at a time when the sitting president was outside of the country (nevermind that mccain butchered the name of the georgian president, whom he claims to be good friends with...I don't know about you, but I'm fairly certain I can at least come close to properly pronouncing my friends' names...I mean hell, at least I get the right number of syllables). isn't that one of the right-wing unwritten rules - never show up a sitting president on foreign affairs when the president is out of the country. the man has lost his fucking mind - although I am not certain that he retained it much after he dropped into the vietnamese jungle (and again, I wonder how getting shot down and tortured qualifies one for higher office rather than raising a red flag as to possible mental issues that have no business in the white house). at a time when we are trying to fight two wars and our economy is on the brink of disaster, do we really need a guy with a still-itchy trigger finger? especially one that has no problem talking down to russia - a nation that has proven throughout history it is not one to fuck with and highly resents american exceptionalism. maybe it is time we match the age floor with an age ceiling for the presidential office...

our press had a field day with a man that is not in public office having an affair while he was not in public office...and claimed it was important political news. to make it all the more humiliating to all americans, even the lefty talking heads on the radio were claiming it was news worthy and that it was something we should take our time discussing. and this is exactly why this country has hit the absolute shits...and yes, I am about to go on my old fuddy duddy rant...somehow our culture went from being one which applauded the self-educated and intelligent man to one that applauds the inane and stupid. is it any wonder that our president brags that he was an unaccomplished student when our political reporting during a presidential race focuses on the cost of haircuts and affairs of people that aren't running and aren't even in any office? is it any wonder that newspaper readership has fallen off the table when the new york times offers us brooks, friedman, novak and other faux-intellectuals? this shit makes me glad I never studied journalism...because if I had, I would hide my head in shame...

third time's a charm, third time you pay the price.

daddy’s pay day is not enough...

2008-08-07T09:05:00.000-07:00

after a few decades of worshiping at the alter of the "free" market, the dollar is dropping steadily, deficits are rising, inflation (real and under the government's bogus calculations) is crushing, manufacturing is all but dead, the financial world is crumbling upon itself, and we have run out of bubbles to keep it all running. thanks freidman-ite sheep...I really did not want to have a legitimate future in my own country anyways...

I mean - I always joked how my secret plan was that my debt in student loans, car loans, bar loans and credit cards would become worthless as the dollar inevitably collapsed with the boneheaded economic policies our leaders have followed throughout my lifetime...I just really hoped I was wrong...

but then if there is one lesson of history, it is that noone ever learns from history...

does anyone seriously still believe that all those nations that are shoring america up against total collapse consider us "too big to fail"? especially china...anyone notice that china, russia and the middle east now have a strategic interest in the united states being weakened - all the more so when their trade with the european union and asia is more profitable anyhow.

and what is one to do about it? I was asked this last night and could only come up with three solutions - suicide, becoming an ex-pat immediately and waiting. and since most of us will still be waiting when we are dead, here's betting that suicide rates start exploding...

hell, murder rates are already on a serious rise...

just as greyhound launches a new marketing campaign with ads declaring there is a reason you never heard of bus rage - a kid is hacked apart, beheaded and eaten on a greyhound. a really fucked up...but pretty apt metaphor for so much...

the government basically destroys a scientist's life by hounding (an extremely overly nice way of putting it) him and trying to pin the anthrax letters on him...and then they have to admit they were totally wrong and pay him a bunch of money. now the government destroys a scientist's life by hounding him and trying to pin the anthrax letters on him - and when he kills himself from the pressure they just say "trust us...it was him." and then they give all kinds of it-could-be-maybe-possibly-nothing-concrete evidence to say "told you so."

is it just me? or has the government become like every stud athlete these days - they say "I never ever ever never ever never!" and we all raise our eyebrows and think riiiggghhht just before the inevitable crying apology comes when they are outed.

which is why I cannot help but laugh that the white house and the cia are acting so appalled that anyone would even suggest that they would concoct a plan to plant evidence in order to bolster the case for war...because any good american knows it is preposterous that an american president would use the cia to lie...

nevermind that saddam was so paranoid that there were 50 of him around iraq to get shot at so the real one would be saved...and I am supposed to believe this guy is letting his top generals send him letters about his cooperation with terrorist networks aimed at the united states?

just out of curiosity - when does actual discussion begin as to which direction we should be taking? I fear we may have to have tom brokaw knocked off first...

seriously, brokaw is the last straw - if I am an american journalist, I am ashamed to admit it...

two years ago the army told a cadet at west point that he should stay on and continue to play football for them because he was good enough to make it to the nfl, and if he did, they would allow him to put up his service time through advancing army recruiting by his position. so, rather than transfering to another college to finish and move on to the nfl, he stayed - perhaps due, in part to the cadet honor code. then, he gets drafted and shoes up in training camp. only the army changed its mind a couple weeks before...they just forgot to tell him. as he prepares for his dream - he is told the army is pulling back on its promise - perhaps it forgot the honor code. they will now insist on his two years of service...the first of which (get this) will be spent coaching football at west point. then he will earn the right to go off and get killed for nothing.

so there you have it...the soldiers are honorable, those giving the orders are lying scumbags. perhaps the guns are pointed in the wrong direction...

not that much will change...countries that are falling from their perch atop the world order (especially as they watch their role of economic top dog disappear) have always fallen back upon hollow belligerence and chest thumping...

so we will continue to send young people off to kill and be killed, we will continue to destroy ourselves and others, and none of it will bring back the good old days, and it will only hasten the fall...

and yesterday we remembered that only one nation has ever stooped so low as to incinerate hundreds of thousands of women and children in an instant, that only one nation has ever had the gall to use the ultimate weapon of mass destruction...ours...

maybe all I need is a shot in the arm...