Mandate, My Ass

Good God, What In Hell Are You Waiting For?

2007-07-04T06:55:00.000-04:00

231 years ago today, a bunch of people who really had not wanted to do so found that the only way they had to get the lives they wanted was to declare themselves independent from their mother country.

They wanted to live in freedom.

There are many debates as to whether or not the United States of America is the "best" country in the history of our civilization. Often overlooked is the reason the matter is debated at all, the reason many people believe that in the first place: The notion that the people can rule themselves. No kings, princes, strongmen, warlords... no hereditary ruling class.

We The People.

Unfortunately, several years ago this entire notion was thrown into chaos by a group which believed rather differently. And they have screwed up our nation almost incalculably in six short years.

Day before yesterday was, perhaps, I can hope, the last straw.

And, last night, Keith Olbermann let them have it.

Our country is not the best because of some mythical entitlement.

Our country is the best when we remember that we are all in this together.

Happy Independence Day, America. It's time to be free once more.

Farewell, Steve Gilliard

2007-06-03T12:01:00.000-04:00

Damn it.

No clever whatevers today.

Steve Gilliard, one of the finest and angriest and most passionate voices in Left Blogostan, has passed away at the age of 41. He'd been sick for several months, and took a bad turn some weeks ago, and never got better.

Condolences to his family, friends, and colleagues. He was a hell of a voice, and we'll miss him.

Damn it.

"You're Going To Shoot Me?" "Yep, 'Fraid So, Ol' Chap! Sorry!"

2007-04-18T07:59:00.000-04:00

Wonkette, writing for the Time Magazine blog, picks up on John Derbyshire, over at The Corner at National Review Online:

Spirit of Self-Defense [John Derbyshire]

As NRO's designated chickenhawk, let me be the one to ask: Where was the spirit of self-defense here? Setting aside the ludicrous campus ban on licensed conceals, why didn't anyone rush the guy? It's not like this was Rambo, hosing the place down with automatic weapons. He had two handguns for goodness' sake—one of them reportedly a .22.

At the very least, count the shots and jump him reloading or changing hands. Better yet, just jump him. Handguns aren't very accurate, even at close range. I shoot mine all the time at the range, and I still can't hit squat. I doubt this guy was any better than I am. And even if hit, a .22 needs to find something important to do real damage—your chances aren't bad.

Yes, yes, I know it's easy to say these things: but didn't the heroes of Flight 93 teach us anything? As the cliche goes—and like most cliches. It's true—none of us knows what he'd do in a dire situation like that. I hope, however, that if I thought I was going to die anyway, I'd at least take a run at the guy.

Okay, Fucknutz. Never mind how bloody-ass macho you need to make yourself out to be, at the expense of thirty-two dead kids. Never mind calling a ban on concealed weapons on a fuckin' college campus "ludicrous".

If handguns aren't very accurate at close range, and you can't hit squat and you doubt this guy was any better than you, why isn't the body count goddamn zero?

Why didn't anyone rush the guy? Have you actually been in a classroom? They aren't exactly designed for Hong Kong combat moves.

"... [T]wo handguns for goodness' sake—one of them reportedly a .22. At the very least, count the shots...." COUNT THE SHOTS?!? Someone comes bursting into a room firing guns, and you expect people to know what weapon is being fired at them, with what modifications, and keep track of the ammo? This isn't fuckin' Gunsmoke, you cretin.

I'm not precisely sure what's on Derbyshire's alleged mind, or what idea he hopes to advance by this -- that he himself is a Manly Man? that handguns really aren't that dangerous unless the victim is a coward? that gun control laws are pointless and we should all just be vigilant, or vigilantes? that doing badly at a firing range makes you an expert on self-defense against gunmen? that A = Blue, or kumquats divided by chef's knives = dessert?

I am quite sure of one thing, though.

John Derbyshire is a pompous, preening bag of shit.

I'd Rather Die Today And Go To Heaven Than Live To Be A Hundred And Go To Hell

2007-04-17T13:39:00.000-04:00

It is a coincidence that a friend reminded me of this video not a half hour ago.

Fred fucking useless waste of biomass Phelps is planning to have one of his little anti-gay protests at the funerals of the victims at the Virginia Tech shootings.

I know, I know. Why give him attention? He's head of a church consisting basically of himself and his extended family. He's a nasty, profoundly stupid bigot. Why pay attention?

Because he gets media attention.

Because he gets media credibility.

Because he protests funerals.

He can't let people grieve because of his own hate. Of stuff that has nothing whatsoever to do with him. For the most asinine reasons. And his weak and pathetic god needs his help to... what, exactly? Make people miserable? Make them fear Him? By sending an old man to berate them and interrupt their grief with non sequiturs based on his own prejudice?

I don't wish violence on people. I really don't. I mean, I don't wish violence on Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld and the rest of BushCo.

Fred Phelps gets me real goddamn close.

I Can Tell You One Thing: If We Were At War, I'd Want Him On My Side

2007-04-13T12:21:00.000-04:00

By way of John Kovalic, Game = Life, and GameGrene we learn about Ziggurat Con, a one-day gaming convention to be held June 9... at Camp Adder/Tallil Airbase in Iraq.

This is a tremendously cool thing, and I've contacted them about sending over some CDs. Anybody else want to kick in stuff? Contact david.amberson (at) iraq.centcom.mil

Donations can also be sent to SPC Amberson directly at the following address:

SPC David Amberson
A Co 86th Sig Bn
APO, AE 09331

(Crossposted from the Digital Acoustic LJ.)

Sticks And Stones Can Break Your Bones But Words Cause Permanent Damage

2007-04-12T19:15:00.000-04:00

So Don Imus has been fired.

Can't say I blame CBS. It was an ugly controversy to start with, and it's gotten uglier by the day. And I don't feel particularly sorry for him, except in the way you feel sorry for a befuddled old man who doesn't understand why anybody would have a problem with him saying the kind of thing he's been saying his whole life. I definitely don't feel sorry for him financially -- besides already being rich as hell, I'd be willing to bet he'll be on satellite radio or Internet subscription or some other syndication before too long.

I don't believe he said what he said out of meanness, or even disrespect, except, again, that unconscious disrespect entrenched in the mind of an old man who's always said those sorts of things. It never occurred to him that he might be being offensive. And, if he was, hey. He was a shock jock. It was kinda his job to be offensive.

Up to a point.

And that is the valuable thing to take from this whole brouhaha: We now have something, however tenuous, of a baseline.

See, Imus' remarks were indeed vile and offensive... but he's nowhere near as bad as the Big Guns: Limbaugh, Hannity, Hewitt. Glenn Beck and Michael Wiener/Savage. Coulter. Malkin. People who have agendas, and who spew the most hateful invective, the most noxious lies, the most egregious character assassinations, on a regular basis. People who think that "free speech" is like every other It's Okay If You're A Republican thing -- they can say whatever shit they want, fact-free, insulting, threatening, whatever, but if Democrats do it then they're shrill and angry.

It's far too much to hope that their past barbarisms will come back to haunt them... but it is just barely possible that people will notice their ongoing attempts a little more closely. Because it's not like any of them are going to stop being bigoted, lying, spittle-flecked buffoons.

Zippedy Doo Dah, Zippedy Ay, My Oh My, What A Wonderful Day

2007-01-23T09:43:00.000-05:00

This is the kind of thing that would normally send me into a rage. Not today.

See, the surest evidence that we do not have a free press is that they don't act like it in any way. This morning's primary exhibit: an opinion piece in the Washington Post by that well-known nonpartisan sage, Liz "Fifth Deferment" Cheney.

I won't bother quoting any of it here because it is, literally, a rehash of many of the same arguments used to keep the US in Vietnam about forty years ago. It is NeoCon Worldview 101. It is complete and utter bullshit. And it is intended to, among other things, slander anyone (and especially Hillary Clinton and Chuck Hagel) who doesn't think this is just the gosh-darnedest best ol' war.

However.

There is one glorious, blazing bright spot. One that redeems the whole thing, and actually makes it one of the nicer pick-me-ups a day could have.

The comments on the piece.

Over two dozen pages, at the time of this post, pretty much unanimously slamming Liz Cheney, her family, her bosses, her words, her take on Iraq, her take on history, her rank cowardice. Hundreds and hundreds of Americans who are offended and angry at the WaPo for even publishing her. Who note that the WaPo identifies her as "former principal deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs", leaving out that "daughter of the Vice President of the United States" part. Who correct her many misstatements and lies. Who ask why the hell she hasn't signed up if it's so important. Who rage at her and revile her and snarl at her and laugh at her.

Bush, Cheney, and their poisonous, murderous crime family have lost everybody, except for the True Believers. And they're running out of those, too.

Smiles, Everyone, Smiles

2007-01-19T10:39:00.000-05:00

I have mentioned (well, okay, screamed) on numerous occasions that The Mainstream Press Is The Enemy. The Corporate Media are part of the problem, because they shape the conversation for so much of the country. They do not do their job, which is to report the news. Foremost among their chosen duties is to report on political figures, in particular the President of the United States, in such a way that We, The People, may know what's going on, or at least have a clue to the proper direction of what's going on.

They're not supposed to buddy up to the guy.

They certainly didn't during the Clinton administration.

But Boy Howdy, they loves them some Dubya:

[Comedian Rich] Little said organizers of the event made it clear they don't want a repeat of last year's controversial appearance by Stephen Colbert, whose searing satire of President Bush and the White House press corps fell flat and apparently touched too many nerves.

"They got a lot of letters," Little said Tuesday. "I won't even mention the word 'Iraq.'"

Little, who hasn't been to the White House since he was a favorite of the Reagan administration, said he'll stick with his usual schtick -- the impersonations of the past six presidents.

"They don't want anyone knocking the president. He's really over the coals right now, and he's worried about his legacy," added Little, a longtime Las Vegas resident.

Awww. Don't you feel sorry for the man who lied our country into war, trashed the economy, destroyed our reputation around the world, tortures people in secret prisons, shreds our civil rights, ignores laws and the Constitution, and is about to escalate a war the country wants him to get out of?

Gee. I don't. And the loathsome Press Corps is more worried about his feelings than his actions, or our country, or their chosen responsibility.

I guess they've chosen another responsibility. Which makes it imperative that we never let up on calling them the cohorts, the enablers... what's that term from criminal law...? Accomplices, yeah, that's it. As in, just as fucking guilty. Just as culpable in all those deaths, all that suffering.

You lied, you covered up the lies, you changed the conversation, you worried about missing white women, you debated celebrity break-ups and pregnancies, you did everything you possibly could to change the subject whenever somebody tried to call BushCo on their unspeakable actions... and now you're worried about hurting his feelings.

I hope Cronkite slaps your faces, one at a time. No. I hope he hires The Rock or Bill Goldberg or at least Patrick Warburton to slap your faces, one at a time.

And I really hope that, when Dubya and Cheney and Condi and Rummy and all of your other good pals get sent to the Hague, they've got your names on the indictments as well.

Update: Wait, it gets better. Now the WHCA says they didn't give Little any guidelines. Which doesn't explain how Little knew they'd got a lot of letters....

"Where Am I?" "On The Disney Channel -- At Least There, I Know You Won't Catch Anything"

2007-01-15T06:29:00.000-05:00

Okay, this is ludicrous:

In a ruling sure to make philandering spouses squirm, Michigan's second-highest court says that anyone involved in an extramarital fling can be prosecuted for first-degree criminal sexual conduct, a felony punishable by up to life in prison.
"We cannot help but question whether the Legislature actually intended the result we reach here today," Judge William Murphy wrote in November for a unanimous Court of Appeals panel, "but we are curtailed by the language of the statute from reaching any other conclusion."
"Technically," he added, "any time a person engages in sexual penetration in an adulterous relationship, he or she is guilty of CSC I," the most serious sexual assault charge in Michigan's criminal code.
[...]
The judges said they recognized their ruling could have sweeping consequences, "considering the voluminous number of felonious acts that can be found in the penal code." Among the many crimes Michigan still recognizes as felonies, they noted pointedly, is adultery -- although the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan notes that no one has been convicted of that offense since 1971.

The problem here, of course, is not the newer ruling, but the older law. Adultery is a bad thing -- but it's not the business of the state or the legal system to get involved in it. And certainly not to theoretically throw people in prison for life for it.

Read the whole article -- there's way more to this than I could do justice to, but the short form is: Everyone knows it's silly, but it's enough of a tweak of the Legislature by the Court that it might affect things for awhile. Ideally, it will at least get that stupid adultery law off the books.

I'm BA-A-ACK

2007-01-11T17:32:00.000-05:00

Most of what I've been doing politically lately has been on the LiveJournal. I'm gonna try to focus all that stuff over here again. And this is just a lovely one:

Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) made headlines last month after complaining about Congress’ new schedule that requires members to work five days a week:

“Keeping us up here eats away at families,” said Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.), who typically flies home on Thursdays and returns to Washington on Tuesdays. “Marriages suffer. The Democrats could care less about families — that’s what this says.”

Last night, Kingston offered some advice for Americans living in poverty: work longer hours. During House debate over the minimum wage, Kingston said raising the minimum wage would do nothing for poor Americans. Instead, if people marry and work longer hours, “they would be out of poverty,” he said. “It’s an economic fact.”
Kingston is wrong. The annual salary for full-time workers earning the federal minimum wage “still leaves a family of three about $6,000 short of the poverty threshold.”

Full transcript:

KINGSTON: If the Democrat Party truly wanted to take on poverty, they would have to say what is the relationship between marriage and the poverty level and between hours worked and the poverty level, because the truth of the matter is, if people end poverty, many of them would marry and work 40 hours a week, they would be out of poverty. … It’s not something I have the knowledge of or the information of, but it’s an economic fact that I hope we could have committee hearings on and discuss this. If we want to attack poverty, that’s where we need to go. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Spoken like someone who has never had to, y'know, work for a living.

See, this is a beautiful example of the fake "moralism" in this country: Poor people are poor because it's their own fault. They're lazy.

I truly believe it might never have occurred to Rep. Kingston that, for instance, a person might not be able to get 40 hours because the business cannot sustain it. Or because an employer might not want to, or be able to, pay for health care for that employee (usually based on an hours-per-week threshhold), or for a number of employees. (Wal*Mart, anyone?) Or because the employee can't pay for child care, or at least not full-time child care. Or because of public transportation schedules. Or any of a slew of other reasons.

And what does marriage have to do with it? Married people only make more money if both of them have jobs. If one of them stays home to raise children, that's a whole income missing from the equation -- you slackers!

John Tierney and David Brooks had some columns in the New York Times to this same effect last year. The gist was that you had to work your ass off to get anywhere in this country, unless of course you were a pundit for the New York Times. They seemed especially determined to convince people that women had to get a job, keep house, and have babies, foregoing any education or career until their forties if necessary. No, I'm not kidding.

In the spirit of Bill Maher, I propose a New Rule: Nobody can make asinine comments on how easy it is for people to just buckle down and overwork themselves out of poverty, let alone asinine laws about it, until they have lived for at least a calendar quarter by working at McDonald's. Pay your rent, your phone bill, your car payment and gas, clothes for the kids, oh yeah, food, heat and water if they're not part of the rent, electricity, cable TV if you have it, and any emergency that might pop up. And, in particular, anyone who's bitched about his own five-day work week has no business suggesting a longer one for anybody.

Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Blogger Culpa

2007-01-04T11:50:00.000-05:00

I apologize profoundly to anyone who's subscribed to the RSS feed and just got blasted. I switched over to the New And Improved Blogger this morning, and it reposted damn near everything. This is a "known issue" that they apparently aren't going to fix, because, hey, it'll only happen to you once. Gaaaaaaaah.

And, I'm sorry I haven't posted here much. I've done most of my politicking on my LiveJournal lately, and the past few weeks I've been too busy working on music to even do that. I'll get rolling again soon. After all, today we finally have a new Congress. I hope.

Okay, Go To Plan B

2006-11-15T15:27:00.000-05:00

Sorry I haven't posted for awhile. I've been active on my LiveJournal, and busy with music, and just really couldn't justify repeating the stuff over here. I'll try to do more.

Here's a good thing: an online source for Plan B contraceptive. Reasonably priced, long shelf life.

Take Your Stinking Paws Off Me, You Damned Dirty APE

2006-10-08T22:19:00.000-04:00

A reminder: A*P*E stands for American Puritan Ethic, from Allan Sherman's The Rape of the A*P*E.

From Majikthise:

Last month, feminist blogger Biting Beaver wrote about a nightmarish experience she'd had with a broken condom and a callous medical system that refused to give her emergency contraception over the counter or by prescription.

Instead of getting medical care during the critical 72-hour window of opportunity, BB was stalled, humiliated, scorned, quizzed, and deceived. A nurse tried to tell her that EC was "the abortion pill" other healthcare providers grilled her about her sexual history and her marital status. Her pharmacy wouldn't sell it to her OTC, her doctor wouldn't call in a prescription, and the local emergency rooms wouldn't give her a 'scrip because she wasn't raped or married.

Pat yourself on the back, culture of life, Biting Beaver is pregnant and she's getting death threats.

I am trying not to lose it over here.

But I am more pissed than I've been in awhile.

A lot of what I want to say is said by Amanda at Pandagon, way more nicely than I am capable of right now. In a desperate attempt to be constructive rather than incensed, I will point out that the lady is accepting PayPal for the abortion she has to get (in rural Ohio, oy). Address is bitingbeaver at yahoo dot com.

Gaaaaaaaah.

Honor Doesn't Count For Shit When You're Looking At A Dead Little Boy

2006-10-02T12:49:00.000-04:00

From Making Light:

You are not required to obey an unlawful order.

You are required to disobey an unlawful order.

You swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

The Constitution states (Article VI):
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Here is article 3, the common article, to the Geneva Conventions, a duly ratified treaty made under the authority of the United States:
Article 3

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.

The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.
Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions is straightforward and clear. Under Article VI of the Constitution, it forms part of the supreme law of the land.

You personally will be held responsible for all of your actions, in all countries, at all times and places, for the rest of your life. “I was only following orders” is not a defense.

What all this is leading to:

If you are ordered to violate Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, it is your duty to disobey that order. No “clarification,” whether passed by Congress or signed by the president, relieves you of that duty.

If you are ordered to violate Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, this is what to do:
Request that your superior put the order in writing.
If your superior puts the order in writing, inform your superior that you intend to disobey that order.
Request trial by courtmartial.
You will almost certainly face disciplinary action, harassment of various kinds, loss of pay, loss of liberty, discomfort and indignity. America relies on you and your courage to face those challenges.

We, the people, need you to support and defend the Constitution. I am certain that your honor and patriotism are equal to the task.

This post may be quoted in full. A linkback [to Making Light] would be appreciated.

Nicked from LiveJournal user "siliconshaman".

That's The First Rule Of Politics, Isn't It? The Man Who Orders The Execution Never Drops The Blade

2006-09-16T10:16:00.000-04:00

If you have to ask....

Pope Benedict "is very upset" that Muslims took offense by his invoking a 14th-century speech calling the works of Mohammed "evil and inhuman".

The Only President We've Got finds comments against torture "unacceptable" and wants "clarity" regarding the Geneva Conventions' ban against "outrages against human dignity".

What does that mean, "outrages upon human dignity"? That's a statement that is wide open to interpretation.

You evil, sanctimonious motherfuckers.

With all of the works of Catholicism to pull from, Emperor Popetine grabs one insulting a billion people and then sends out a spokesflunky to tell everyone how the Pontiff is "very upset that some parts of his speech could have sounded offensive to the sensibility of the Muslim faithful and were interpreted in a way that does not correspond at all to his intentions". In what other way, I'm curious, were those remarks supposed to be interpreted?

Chimpy McShithead wants to find the "acceptable" legal limits to his torture program.

Answer to both question: There is none.

And this pushing of the limits, this utter willingness to tear down the boundaries of civilization we've spent thousands of years putting up so we don't spend all our time trying to slaughter each other in righteous rage, is something which the "leaders" of the world do with increasing frequency.

News flash to Pope Bennie: The world communicates instantly these days. If you say something stupid, everybody knows really fast. And, given the religious tensions in the world since, oh, say, the 14th century, going back literally hundreds of years to demonize one-sixth of the earth's population may not be the brightest move. Following up by saying how upset you are about it is just a smack in the face. Having an underling deliver that message is worse than cowardice.

This is what comes from playing My God's Bigger Than Your God. Earlier this week I saw a comment at Eschaton I agree with strongly, the gist of which is Religious tension is a fight over who's got the better imaginary friend.

And, hey, Chimpy: I suspect that you're having such a difficult time with that provision of Geneva because, well, you have no human dignity. None. You were a spoiled silver-spoon brat who made it on your family name and connections, a binge drinker twenty years past your frat days, an inept CEO who ran an oil company and a baseball team into the ground (but managed to make tidy profits for yourself), a clumsy and mean governor who messed up your educational system and economy and enjoyed putting people to death, and now you've been sharing that magic touch with the whole country for six years, with predictable results.

It doesn't surprise me that you don't understand the idea of "outrages upon human dignity". I am slightly surprised that Darth Cheney and Karl let you say it out loud.

Torture is wrong on every level. It's the wrong thing to do morally and ethically. It doesn't work -- tortured people will tell you what you want to hear, rather than, y'know, the truth. Torture endangers our troops -- if we torture the bad guys, they'll be more inclined to torture our guys, because, hey, what have they got to lose?

And you can't find the "clarity" in that.

Impeachment is too good for you, Dubya. I won't be happy until you take up permanent residence in the Hague.

Not Only Are You A Cheat, You're A Gutless Cheat As Well

2006-07-28T19:44:00.000-04:00

Typical:

Republican leaders are willing to allow the first minimum wage increase in a decade but only if it's coupled with a cut in future inheritance taxes on multimillion-dollar estates, congressional aides said Friday.
A package GOP leaders planned to bring to a vote Friday or Saturday in the House also would renew several popular tax breaks, including a research and development credit for businesses, and deductions for college tuition and state sales taxes, said a spokesman for House Majority Leader John Boehner.
The wage would increase from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour, phased in over the next three years, said Kevin Madden, the aide to Boehner, an Ohio Republican.
The maneuver is aimed at defusing the wage hike as a campaign issue for Democrats while using its popularity to spur enactment of the Republican Party's long-sought goal of permanently cutting taxes on millionaires' estates.
[...]
Democrats immediately expressed outrage, saying low-income workers deserved a straight vote on increasing the minimum wage uncoupled to other measures.
"It's political blackmail to say the only way that minimum wage workers can get a raise is to give a tax giveaway to the wealthiest Americans," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts. "Members of Congress raised their own pay -- no strings attached. Surely, common decency suggests that minimum wage workers deserve the same respect."
"It's outrageous the Republican Congress can't simply help poor people without doing something for their wealthy contributors," said Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio.
[...]
The move comes after almost 50 rank-and-file Republican lawmakers pressed House leaders -- who strongly oppose the wage hike and have thus far prevented a vote -- to schedule the measure for debate. Democrats have been hammering away on the wage hike issue and have public opinion behind them
"We weren't going to be denied," said Rep. Steve LaTourette, R-Ohio, a leader in the effort. "How can you defend $5.15 an hour in today's economy?"
It was a decade ago, during the hotly contested campaign year of 1996, that Congress voted to increase the minimum wage. A person working 40 hours per week at minimum wage makes $10,700, which is below the poverty line for workers with families.
In advancing the tax plan, GOP leaders excluded a measure popular with small businesses that would make it easier for small businesses and the self-employed to band together and buy health insurance plans for employees at a lower cost.
That idea was blasted as a "poison pill" by Democrats and labor unions. The small business health insurance bill exempts new "association health plans" from state regulations requiring insurers to cover treatments such as mental health and maternity care. And opponents fear they would offer inferior prescription drug benefits.
Democrats have made increasing the wage a pillar of their campaign platform and are pushing to raise the wage to $7.25 per hour over two years. In June, the Republican-controlled Senate refused to raise the minimum wage, rejecting a proposal from Democrats.

See, this is yet another example of why we need universal health care, so we can get that off the table for everybody, rich and poor. It's also a prime example of how going for the bottom line, for their business constituents who don't want to lose any profit in any way, has made the Republican lawmakers in this country corrupt and stupid. Most of all, it's an example of how the governing process has gone to hell in a handbasket.

What we're talking about here is the dignity to be able to have a chance to eat and pay rent. The Repubs are holding it hostage to get their fucking estate tax passed, so that, even if those in the Old Boy Network can't take it with them, they can pass it down to the next generation of robber barons.

The very idea of a straight up-and-down vote on only the minimum wage hike is anathema to the Repubs. They have to wheel and deal, they have to Further Their Agenda. Their agenda is supposed to be taking care of the priorities of this country -- not the coffers of a few multimillionaires.

And they think this will provide them political cover.

The Dems have to bludgeon them with this. A few of the quotes above are a good start, but they have to hammer them on this endlessly. When the Repubs say, "Hey, we offered you a vote on the Minimum Wage", the Dems have to respond, "Only if we gave away tens of billions more to the very rich. You keep giving stuff to the very rich. There are other people in this country than the very rich. And they're trying to eat."

Once again: Bottom-line profit as the only measurement of success is about as wrong as it gets.

Rams Plagued By Fumbles As Earthquakes Rock Los Angeles -- Film At Eleven

2006-07-28T09:03:00.000-04:00

I really despise the Corporate Media -- not merely because I feel they are directly complicit in and dedicated to keeping evil men in power, but because the shit they do tell us is, largely, shit.

Yahoo News has this "story" from Business Week about how Cartier watches are made. Besides my having trouble giving a third of a shit about how an $80,000 watch is made -- hmmm, lemme see: Wrist chronograph, or rent, food, and expenses for four years? Tough call -- the main Yahoo page has the headline, "Cartier timepieces crafted with artistry, detail".

That isn't news; it's a spam subject line. I know. I get about a hundred Rolex offers a day.

Listening to WWJ-AM in Detroit yesterday (which has similar ads-disguised-as-news all the time, mostly from the auto industry talking about sales promotions), there were constant breathless announcements of a "developing story": Former Detroit City Council leader Maryann Mahaffey died. Now, she was a great lady, who did a lot for Detroit -- but, if her death is a "developing story", I want some fuckin' zombie action, y'know? Illegal experimentation, reanimation, something. I want an origin.

On the same channel, the CBS news update noted the new video by the #2 al-Qaida leader, the one with al-Zawahiri saying they would not stand idly by "while these [Israeli] shells burn our brothers" (a statement made over two weeks after those shells started burning their brothers, where ya been, guys, but never mind). And then they got the following sound bite from "a terrorism expert": "This message may lead to a major attack on a Western target in the future...."

Ooooh, pithy insight.

The capper for the day was Nice Polite Republicans with a story on a national election poll, the results of which came down to: Either the national elections will be decided by national issues, or by local get-out-the-vote efforts on the ground, and there was no way to tell until the election.

The fuck? Somebody got paid for an insight my stuffed bear could provide more detail about?

I know they think we're stupid. I know they talk to us like we're stupid. But I'm getting damn sick and tired of them saying things which are so blatantly stupid that you wonder how the Action Eyewitness News Team can dress themselves in the morning.

We're Sitting On Top Of The Story Of The Century Here

2006-07-14T13:45:00.000-04:00

I'm quite sure that the Powers That Be at CNN and CNN.com wonder why they're held in such contempt by progressive audiences. I mean, gosh-a-roonies, their slogan is "The Most Trusted Name In News!" Way better than "Fair And Balanced".

Well, today gives a perfect example. See, there's this little throwdown going on between Israel and Lebanon, and the issues are confusing to many, and one would think that asking the viewers and web readers a provocative question would get them to think about those issues, maybe just a little. That's, after all, kinda the point of polling.

So what's the poll at CNN.com right now?

"Should a picture of a dying Princess Diana have been published?"

WHO GIVES A SHIT!?

No disrespect or nothin', but the woman died nine years ago. And the pictures -- ooooh! An unconscious woman being fitted with an oxygen mask -- are provocative only because of some people's natural tendencies towards celebrity voyeurism.

The Middle East is bombing the shit out of itself. I think that has a little priority. But asking sush asinine poll questions raises them to a level of respectability they don't deserve, and diminishes actual news by making it no more important than your breathless opinion about a nine-year-old photograph.

In other words, CNN, you keep up shit like this, and you will cease to matter.

Tell Your Friend Not To Get Cute Down There -- The Marines At Gitmo Are Fanatical

2006-07-11T10:53:00.000-04:00

Rule of law? Who'd a thunk:

The Pentagon has decided in a major policy shift that all detainees held in US military custody around the world are entitled to protections under the Geneva Conventions, according to two people familiar with the move.
The [Financial Times] has learned that Gordon England, deputy defence secretary, sent a memo to senior defence officials and military officers last Friday, telling them that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions – which prohibits inhumane treatment of prisoners and requires certain basic legal rights at trial – would apply to all detainees held in US military custody.
This reverses the policy outlined by President George W. Bush in 2002 when he decided members of al-Qaeda and the Taliban did not qualify for Geneva protections because the war on terrorism had ushered in a “new paradigm…[that] requires new thinking in the law of war”.
The policy U-turn comes on the heels of the Supreme Court ruling last month that the military commissions Mr Bush created to try prisoners at Guantanamo Bay contravened both US law and the Geneva Conventions.

In spite of everything this horrific administration has done to our Constitution, this country, and the world, there are still good people out there. People who know that violating civil rights and torturing people is, y'know, wrong. And, dammit, we're going to win.

"Drop Dead." "That's Not Funny."

2006-07-05T10:41:00.000-04:00

Enron founder Ken Lay died this morning. Condolences to his friends and family.

No, I'm not a fan of what Mr. Lay did. Not in any way. But, on several other liberal/progressive blogs, I'm already seeing lots of Good Riddance. Snark, wishes that he rot in hell, jokes. Bluntly, all the stuff the right side of the blogosphere accuses us of.

You won't see that here.

A man died.

And it's a sad end to an incredibly awful situation.

I really don't have more to say about it than that.

Brokeback Got Us Good, Don't It?

2006-06-05T16:32:00.000-04:00

Dear Leader and his Echo Chamber are confronting the direst threat to America today: they want a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. (Never mind that it can't pass and it won't help.)

Naturally, those in favor of, erm, espousing this cause are in favor of protecting the institution of marriage. That's what they keep saying, anyway.

Well, those wacky funsters at AmericaBlog decided to call them on it. Literally.

Take your time, meander down the page, enjoy the comments. Not in any way at all work safe.

Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!

2006-05-25T12:27:00.000-04:00

Finally, some justice. Jeffrey Skilling and Ken Lay have both been found guilty. Skilling on most of the charges, Lay on all. They each face up to thirty years in prison.

Perhaps We Are Asking The Wrong Questions

2006-05-17T12:05:00.000-04:00

I'm gonna put my foot in it here.

Just saw the trailer for Oliver Stone's World Trade Center. It's billed as "a true story of courage and survival". Fine. Looks very good, actually.

But it got me thinking. And I've seen thoughts similar to this expressed in the blogosphere lately, but I just have the need to put mine here.

The real tragedy of 9/11 is how easily it allowed small, selfish men to make cowards of us.

This film celebrates the courage of the NYPD and FDNY. And we, as a nation, will watch it and beat our collective chest and say Yeah, thass right. That's America.

Except it isn't any more.

Those twenty guys on those planes scared the hell out of us, by showing how vulnerable we are to desperate and clever men. And then our own government has spent the following five years keeping us scared, to distract us from the evil they've done to the country.

Our Constitution is being savaged; our military is stretched to the breaking point; our treasury is being emptied; our rights are being eroded; our population is being segregated and downgraded and categorized.

And we're still quite, quite vulnerable to desperate and clever men.

I ask, in all seriousness: Do you really feel safer than you did Sept. 12, 2001? Do you feel we, as a nation, are doing all right? Is this, the path we're on now, what America is all about?

Discuss.

You Are The Lucky Ones. You Are Going To Serve God And Country. I Pronounce You Handmaids.

2006-05-16T19:58:00.000-04:00

Even the WaPo is labelling this story "Forever Pregnant":

New federal guidelines ask all females capable of conceiving a baby to treat themselves -- and to be treated by the health care system -- as pre-pregnant, regardless of whether they plan to get pregnant anytime soon.
Among other things, this means all women between first menstrual period and menopause should take folic acid supplements, refrain from smoking, maintain a healthy weight and keep chronic conditions such as asthma and diabetes under control.

Gilead, here we come.

My God, I Haven't Been Fucked Like That Since Grade School

2006-05-07T16:41:00.000-04:00

Kevin Drum points out today's least surprising headline: Many Youths Disregard Their Virginity Pledges, Harvard Study Says

Virginity pledges, in which young people vow to abstain from sex until marriage, have little staying power among those who take them, a Harvard study has found.

More than half of the adolescents who make the signed public promises give up on their pledges within a year, according to the study released last week.

The findings have raised the ire of Concerned Women for America, a prominent conservative organization that advocates adolescent sexual abstinence.

"The Harvard report is wrong," said Janice Crouse, a fellow at a Concerned Women for America think tank.

"This study is in direct contradiction with trends we have been seeing in recent years," Crouse said. "Those who make virginity pledges have shown greater resolve to save sex for marriage."

Ms. Crouse... sweetie, buhbie, dahlink.

Never mind that many of the kids who've taken that pledge don't count oral or anal sex.

Just... do you really think that the ones who've broken the chastity vow are going to tell you?

I swear to Cthulhu, these people are dumber than urinal cakes.

I've Flown This Route Before -- It Was On The Wings Of A Demon

2006-05-07T15:07:00.000-04:00

Our psychic president:

President George W. Bush said on Sunday he gained a glimpse into German Chancellor Angela Merkel's soul when they met in Washington last week.

Bush told ARD television that Merkel had described her youth in communist East Germany at a White House dinner on Wednesday.

"She spoke of her childhood, of her father who was a pastor, of the (communist youth group) young pioneers, of her school life. And I have to say I got a glimpse into her soul, into how she feels," he said.

Reuters translated his comments from a German transcript of the ARD interview, due to be broadcast on Sunday evening. ARD could not immediately provide original English quotes.

Bush called Merkel "authentic, open and direct."

His comments echo ones he made about Russian President Vladimir Putin five years ago. "I was able to get a sense of his soul, a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country," Bush said then.

His relations with Putin have since soured as Washington has grown increasingly critical of the Russian leader's record on democracy, human rights and press freedom.

Hey. Why not? After all, it works for John Edward.

Oh, wait. He's a charlatan.

Maybe it's just mutual recognition of another sociopath.

"And Who's My Best Buddy In The Whole Wide World?" "Rooby Roo!"

2006-05-06T20:13:00.000-04:00

Porter Goss said Saturday that his surprise resignation as CIA director is "just one of those mysteries," offering no other explanation for his sudden departure after almost two years on the job.

The fuck?

Look! A Four-Legged Aeroplane!

2006-05-05T18:40:00.000-04:00

Almost five hours ago, Porter Goss, the head of the C.I.A., resigned suddenly. (Very possibly because of a sex scandal, tied to former-Congressman-now-incarcerated-felon Randy "Duke" Cunningham.)

What's the big story on CNN.com? Rep. Patrick Kennedy, who crashed into a traffic barrier while apparently under the influence of some pills, is going into rehab.

He was stoned, he was wrong, and he needs help... but, ah, CNN? The frickin' head of the frickin' C.I.A.. Just resigned. Suddenly. Under a cloud. No replacement named yet, so it's not part of the big "shake-up".

We don't have a C.I.A. director. And there are going to be hearings for the new one, which I promise you will be an amazing mess.

But you have to focus on the traffic infraction and the drug use of the scion of a storied political family.

THE FUCKIN' HEAD OF THE GODDAMN C.I.A.

Priorities.

Update: Well, after 7:00 EDT they finally made Goss' resignation the lead story at CNN.com, mentioning that there might've been problems with John Negroponte (oh, that's a surprise). Still took 'em frickin' long enough.

No, No, No -- Rage REALLY Taking Over

2006-05-03T09:19:00.000-04:00

The blogosphere is abuzz this morning with the word that Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), the #2 man in the House, thought Stephen Colbert was in "bad taste" at the White House Correspondent Dinner this past weekend.

Several people have pointed out Dubya's own particularly odious attempt at humor in March 2004.

But I haven't noticed too many pointing out something which I'd like to rub in Rep. Hoyer's fucking face:

Lying us into war, destroying our economy, fouling our environment, trashing our reputation, torturing people, spying on our own citizens, slashing taxes for the rich at the expense of the poor, breaking laws hither and yon, violating civil rights, disenfranchising voters, and abandoning the fucking Gulf Coast to a hurricane are perhaps in slightly worse taste than a comic actor calling our spineless, bullying, illiterate moron of a president an asshat to his face.

Just a thought. You shithead.

The World Isn't Run By Weapons Anymore, Or Energy, Or Money. It's Run By Little Ones And Zeroes, Little Bits Of Data. It's All Just Electrons

2006-05-02T12:09:00.000-04:00

(Alternate subject line: "Soon, where Toon Town once stood will be a string of gas stations, inexpensive motels, restaurants that serve rapidly prepared food. Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful.")

Net neutrality means, basically, keeping the Internet as it is now. As opposed to the big telcos, who are trying to ramrod through legislation that will allow them to create a second tier of privileged content, or block content at their discretion. As the NY Times puts it today:

One of the Internet's great strengths is that a single blogger or a small political group can inexpensively create a Web page that is just as accessible to the world as Microsoft's home page. But this democratic Internet would be in danger if the companies that deliver Internet service changed the rules so that Web sites that pay them money would be easily accessible, while little-guy sites would be harder to access, and slower to navigate. Providers could also block access to sites they do not like.

That would be a financial windfall for Internet service providers, but a disaster for users, who could find their Web browsing influenced by whichever sites paid their service provider the most money. There is a growing movement of Internet users who are pushing for legislation to make this kind of discrimination impossible. It has attracted supporters ranging from MoveOn.org to the Gun Owners of America. Grass-roots political groups like these are rightly concerned that their online speech could be curtailed if Internet service providers were allowed to pick and choose among Web sites.

Find out more and sign the petition.

The Power And The Glory Of Me

2006-05-01T09:32:00.000-04:00

Sorry I haven't been posting more here; I've been doing a lot of it on my LiveJournal, mostly because it's been quick stuff here and there rather than involved posts. Time to get more active again, if only because some things have to be mentioned in as many places as possible.

Like this:

Loyalty Day, 2006
A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America

Our Nation is blessed and bound together by a creed of freedom and equality that is entrusted to all Americans. Preserving the ideals of our founding requires the service and sacrifice of every generation, and on Loyalty Day, we celebrate the gift of liberty and remember our own obligation to this great Nation.
The dedication and selflessness of America's soldiers and their families inspire us all. Some of our Nation's finest men and women have given their lives in freedom's cause. By their sacrifices they have given us a legacy of liberty and brought honor to the uniform, our flag, and our country. The American people are grateful to the brave men and women of our military for their service and we will always stand behind them. I encourage all Americans to learn more about opportunities to thank and support our troops, from sending a care package to writing a message, by visiting www.americasupportsyou.mil.
Loyalty Day is also a time for us to reflect on our responsibilities to our country as we work to show the world the meaning and promise of liberty. The right to vote is one of our most cherished rights and voting is one of our most fundamental duties. By making a commitment to be good citizens, flying the American flag, or taking the time to learn about our Nation's history, we show our gratitude for the blessings of freedom.
The greatest strength of America is in the heart and soul of its people, and every time a volunteer reaches out to a neighbor in need, our Nation grows stronger and more hopeful. Thousands of Americans are serving a higher calling by mentoring, coaching, serving in Senior Corps, and by participating in many other programs that enrich lives and help build a better tomorrow. The light of freedom shines brightly because of compassionate people who care about others. Their dedication to a cause greater than self gives all Americans confidence in the future of our Nation.
The Congress, by Public Law 85-529, as amended, has designated May 1 of each year as "Loyalty Day." I ask all Americans to join me in this day of celebration and in reaffirming our allegiance to our Nation.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim May 1, 2006, as Loyalty Day. I call upon all the people of the United States to join in support of this national observance, and to display the flag of the United States on Loyalty Day.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-eighth day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand six, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirtieth.
GEORGE W. BUSH

Where do we start?

Okay, first things, first, shithead. We've got Flag Day and the Fourth of July and Veterans Day and Memorial Day and however many other damn days we've got. And pretty much everyone who's loyal to the US (which group, believe it or not, Chimpy, does include me -- rather more loyal than you and your cronies, I daresay) is loyal all the time. It's not a weekend thing.

You want to reinforce the word "loyalty". That's a big word for you, and not merely because it's three syllables. Loyalty to you and to your family is the overarching trait defining your presidency. Those loyal to you are rewarded; those disloyal, or who you perceive to be disloyal, are punished.

You really have it in your sad little head that being loyal to America means being loyal to you, don't you?

You shmuck, all you are is a civil servant, and a fairly incompetent one at that. Not only is it not all about you, it never was.

I'm serving my loyalty to the troops you so callously use by supporting efforts to bring them home. I demonstrate my loyalty to the United States of America by upholding its spirit and working to get your bumbling, lawbreaking ass out of office and, ideally, into a war crimes tribunal.

Loyalty Day. Feh.

"Who Did You Bribe For Your Visa? Renault, Or Yourself?" "Myself. I Find Myself Much More Reasonable."

2006-04-06T14:46:00.000-04:00

Yet another example of how fuckin' dumb Congress is:

Senate Republicans and Democrats closed in on a last-minute compromise Thursday on legislation opening the way to legal status and eventual citizenship for many of the 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally.

[...]

While final details were not available, in general, the compromise would require illegal immigrants who have been in the United States between two years and five years to return to their home country briefly, then re-enter as temporary workers. They could then begin a process of seeking citizenship.

Illegal immigrants here longer than five years would not be required to return home; those in the country less than two years would be required to leave without assurances of returning, and take their place in line with others seeking entry papers.

Hey, great idea! All we have to do is ask them how long they've been here.

Wait.

Okay. We can verify it with their documen-

Hold it.

Okay. Okay. Their employment rec-

...

...

...

So, who exactly thought this one through...?

I Didn't Say I Was Gonna Make You Black, I Said I Was Gonna Get You On The Train

2006-03-30T14:13:00.000-05:00

A little hip-hop for Lieberman:

Joementum
Words & Music Copyright 2006 by Tom Smith

Well, I'm the only Senator from Connecticut
Got his nose firmly planted up Dubya's butt
I hate violent video games much more
Than the real thing in the Iraqi war.

I say I'm Democrat, but I'm so far right
That my constituents call me Republican Lite
That makes my blood boil, gets me uptight,
But I don't let it bug me 'cause I'm rich and white.

And I'm not gonna let 'em get away with it
(Not gonna let 'em get away with it)
I'm not gonna let 'em, I got the Joementum
I'm not gonna let 'em get away with it
(Not gonna let 'em get away with it)
I'm not gonna let 'em, I got the Joementum

I was Al Gore's VP candidate,
No one's sure what he thought I brought to the plate,
He was trying to make amends with the far right trash,
So he claimed to be friends with the gentried cash.

Got a big ol' mansion, with a servant staff,
Do I support immigration? Don't make me laugh,
Make the aliens run through hoops and worse,
Become citizens after we exploit 'em first.

Got a whole lot of friends in the military,
Got a whole lot invested in industry,
I support our troops in Iraq, you see,
'Cause my views are better than reality.

And I'm not gonna let 'em get away with it
(Not gonna let 'em get away with it)
I'm not gonna let 'em, I got the Joementum
I'm not gonna let 'em get away with it
(Not gonna let 'em get away with it)
I'm not gonna let 'em, I got the Joementum

So I'm Biden my time for 2008,
When I'm gonna be a presidential candidate.
It's gonna be great, and I just can't wait
Prove I'm the front-runner and ignore the hate

Of the people who voted for me thinkin' I
was a more-or-less liberal kinda guy,
Thought I'd vote against religion infringing rights,
Thought I'd vote against tax cuts for rich whites.

Thought I'd vote against ripping up the Bill of Rights,
Thought I'd actually come to fight their fights.
And now they've got the gall to call me "Republican Lite"
-- I'm "Republican HEAVY", and that's all right!

And I'm not gonna let 'em get away with it
(Not gonna let 'em get away with it)
I'm not gonna let 'em, I got the Joementum
I'm not gonna let 'em get away with it
(Not gonna let 'em get away with it)
I'm not gonna let 'em, I got the Joementum....

"You Knew Jesus?" "Knew Him? Shit. Nigga Owes Me Twenty Bucks."

2006-03-29T15:06:00.000-05:00

Petty Larseny's The Ten Commandments of Covering Religion is required reading.

There's Got To Be One Set Of Fair Laws For Everyone, Including You

2006-03-22T17:16:00.000-05:00

I got this from my friend Mark, who got it from the LiveJournal of "supergee", who got it from the LJ of "anne_jumps".

Remember South Dakota State Senator Bill Napoli? Well, he's made a new friend -- not:

When Governor Mike Rounds signed HB 1215 into law it effectively banned all abortions in the state with the exception that it did allow saving the mother’s life. There were, however, no exceptions for victims of rape or incest. His actions, and the comments of State Senators like Bill Napoli of Rapid City, SD, set of a maelstrom of protests within the state.

Napoli suggested that if it was a case of “simple rape,” there should be no thoughts of ending a pregnancy. Letters by the hundreds appeared in local newspapers, mostly written by women, challenging Napoli’s description of rape as “simple.” He has yet to explain satisfactorily what he meant by “simple rape.”

The President of the Oglala Sioux Tribe on the Pine Ridge Reservation, Cecilia Fire Thunder, was incensed. A former nurse and healthcare giver she was very angry that a state body made up mostly of white males, would make such a stupid law against women.

“To me, it is now a question of sovereignty,” she said to me last week. “I will personally establish a Planned Parenthood clinic on my own land which is within the boundaries of the Pine Ridge Reservation where the State of South Dakota has absolutely no jurisdiction.”

Strong words from a very strong lady. I hope Ms. Fire Thunder challenges Gov. Rounds and the state legislators on this law that is an affront to all independent women.

(article by Tim Giago of The Native American Times.)

Another LJ person, kathrynt, called the Office of the President and spoke with Ms. Fire Thunder herself. And got contact and donation info:

If you want to mail donations to the reservation, you may do so at:

Oglala Sioux Tribe
ATTN: President Fire Thunder
P. O. Box 2070
Pine Ridge, SD 57770

Enclose a letter voicing your support and explaining the purpose of the donation. Bear in mind, the Pine Ridge Res is not exactly dripping with disposeable income, so do consider donating funds directly to the tribe as well as specifically for this effort.

For email contact, you can contact the president at:

firethunder_president@yahoo.com
cc:vbush@oglala.org

That is Ms. Fire Thunder's personal email address; I have received permission to post it here. For the sake of record keeping, do cc: the listed address on all correspondence; that's her official secretary.

There Are Children Here Somewhere -- I Can Smell Them

2006-03-13T18:15:00.000-05:00

Once again, an aging white man calls dibs on women's wombs:

U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, who often takes a conservative line on social issues, is facing a liberal Democratic primary challenge from wealthy Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont. But that hasn't stopped Lieberman from supporting the approach of the Catholic hospitals when it comes to contraceptives for rape victims.

Lieberman said he believes hospitals that refuse to give contraceptives to rape victims for "principled reasons" shouldn't be forced to do so. "In Connecticut, it shouldn't take more than a short ride to get to another hospital," he said.

How fucking sick do you have to be, first off, to tell a woman who was just raped that she isn't as important as her rapist's potential unborn child?

How stupid and insensitive do you have to be, secondly, to say that, if she doesn't want to carry the rapist's potential unborn child, she should go down the street to the next hospital?

And how deeply in denial do you have to be, thirdly, to say these things and call yourself a Democrat? An American? A human being?

Joe must go.

New Song: "Censure Him Gone"

2006-03-13T18:07:00.000-05:00

I might actually try to record this over the next day or so.

CENSURE HIM GONE
(to the tune of "Since You've Been Gone" by Weird Al Yankovic)

Censure him gone
Well, people told me my hat was made of tinfoil
Censure him gone
It turned out Dubya lied us into a war for oil
Oh well, I'm feelin' like he took a chainsaw
To the US Con-sti-tu-ti-on,
You know, I want to give this butthead a brain,
Censure him gone

(Censure him gone)
I couldn't feel any worse if he spied
On our citizens illegally
(Censure him gone)
Till I remembered our kids who have died
For Iraqi democracy

Censure him gone
Well, it feels like someone else is indicted every day
Censure him gone
And this scandal you've got with Jack Abramoff just won't go away
Ever since that day you were sworn in
I've been so miserable, old son --
You know, it almost makes me wish
Ralph Nader had won.

I Have Come Here To Chew Bubblegum And Kick Ass -- And I'm All Out Of Bubblegum

2006-03-12T15:24:00.000-05:00

Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) said this morning that he will introduce a resolution to censure the President for breaking the law with his warrantless eavesdropping program. Crooks & Liars has the video, Raw Story has the transcript, Glenn Greenwald has the analysis.

So, let's assume that at least some Senators are going to vote against this. What should be We The People's next step in that case? And, by all means, my Republican friends, c'mon down. In fact, I've got a bonus question just for you, and I ask it in all seriousness, and ask the progressive/liberal/Dems 'round here to let them have their say: Why shouldn't the Senate censure President Bush?

Crossposted to the Digital Acoustic LiveJournal.

Unfortunately For You, The Line You Crossed Was Real

2006-02-14T15:40:00.000-05:00

At last, a little rationality:

The state board that oversees pharmacies voted Tuesday to require Wal-Mart to stock emergency contraception pills at its Massachusetts pharmacies, a spokeswoman at the Department of Public Health said.

The unanimous decision by the Massachusetts Board of Pharmacy comes two weeks after three women sued Wal-Mart in state court for failing to carry the so called "morning after" pill in its Wal-Mart and Sam's Club stores in the state.

The women argue state policy requires pharmacies to provide all "commonly prescribed medicines."

Again and again and again: This is not the decision of the religious. This is not the decision of the husband/boyfriend/whatever. This is not the decision of the corporation. It damn sure isn't the decision of the pharmacist. It is the decision of the woman, made with the advice of her doctor. End of story. It may take these one-at-a-time battles, but the war for privacy and women's health must be fought and won.

You, You Sonofabitch, You! You're Supposed To STAND For Somethin'! You're Supposed To Protect People!

2006-02-14T11:53:00.000-05:00

Nice to know legal scholarship ended in 1787:

People who believe the Constitution would break if it didn't change with society are "idiots," U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says.

In a speech Monday sponsored by the conservative Federalist Society, Scalia defended his long-held belief in sticking to the plain text of the Constitution "as it was originally written and intended."

"Scalia does have a philosophy, it's called originalism," he said. "That's what prevents him from doing the things he would like to do," he told more than 100 politicians and lawyers from this U.S. island territory.

According to his judicial philosophy, he said, there can be no room for personal, political or religious beliefs.

Scalia criticized those who believe in what he called the "living Constitution."

"That's the argument of flexibility and it goes something like this: The Constitution is over 200 years old and societies change. It has to change with society, like a living organism, or it will become brittle and break."

"But you would have to be an idiot to believe that," Scalia said. "The Constitution is not a living organism, it is a legal document. It says something and doesn't say other things."

Proponents of the living constitution want matters to be decided "not by the people, but by the justices of the Supreme Court."

"They are not looking for legal flexibility, they are looking for rigidity, whether it's the right to abortion or the right to homosexual activity, they want that right to be embedded from coast to coast and to be unchangeable," he said.

Y'know, there was a time I could've sworn that, no matter what my opinion of his decisions, I at least agreed with the premise that Justice Scalia was a smart man. There goes that.

First: He's got the third-person thing going, as if he was a pro wrestler or Bob Dole.

Second: As someone in the Yahoo News Message Boards pointed out, the Constitution may be a legal document, but it's an amendable legal document. You may remember some of those Amendments -- freeing the slaves, giving women the right to vote, and such. Unless, of course, Justice Scalia would like to back to those times, in which case he should probably warn Justice Snerd. Strictly out of fairness, of course.

Third: Let's look at that "flexibility/rigidity" argument. What he's basically saying is that, under the guise of wanting to adapt the laws of the land for the times we live in, the "living Constitution" supporters actually want the Supreme Court, not the people, to have certain laws set in stone so that they cannot be changed. And this is a bad thing.

There's something to that, y'know. For instance, in a post-9/11 world, it just makes more sense for the vice-president to have the right to shoot someone in the face. In a less satirical vein, who needs popular voting to determine the presidency? Oh, wait, that was done by the Supreme Court, wasn't it, Antonin? And you voted in the majority on that case.

Hmmm.

Try this, Justice Scalia: One of the things the Constitution is supposed to prevent is "the tyranny of the majority". That's the idea that popular support for something shouldn't be allowed to oppress those who don't subscribe to it. And, in particular, it's meant to apply to things like the issues you invoke -- abortions, gay marriage -- issues where reasonable people disagree as to whether or not what's being discussed is evil.

You may remember the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." So that, for instance, people who don't believe in a particular god don't have to endure that god's faith being promoted ahead of other faiths, or no faith, in public schools.

Now try another one -- Amendment Nine: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

That means that, if the Constitution doesn't specifically grant a particular right, and it doesn't specifically outlaw that right, it's probably okay.

It may have occurred to you, Justice Scalia -- or perhaps it hasn't -- that virtually all of the most hotly contested rights cases these days are, effectively, issues of personal morality, where one group of people is trying to -- let's see, how did you put it above? "They are not looking for legal flexibility, they are looking for rigidity, whether it's the right to abortion or the right to homosexual activity, they want that right to be embedded from coast to coast and to be unchangeable."

Only you're siding with the ones who want the particular rigidity to be outlawing the right to abortion and the right to homosexual activity.

How then, are you different from your political opponents? As far as I can tell, in only two ways.

One, you want an outcome that limits people's rights. Hell of a thing, Mister Of The People By The People For The People.

Two, you say publicly that "there can be no room for personal, political or religious beliefs". But your judgements, indeed your entire political philosophy, shows otherwise.

Which makes you a stinking hypocrite.

Creatures Of Night, Brought To Light

2006-02-13T16:36:00.000-05:00

A little literary activism today.

Even if you don't think you know the works of Peter S. Beagle, you absolutely know of two. He wrote the screenplay for Ralph Bakshi's animated The Lord of the Rings, Part 1. And if you don't think that has some heft behind it, that was the movie that got Peter Jackson to read the frickin' books in the first place, and the rest is cinematic history.

Mr. Beagle was paid five thousand dollars for his script. That's all. No royalties, no nothin'.

You also might've seen a little classic known as The Last Unicorn. Adapted by Mr. Beagle from his book, voice cast from hell, beautiful Rankin-Bass animation, fan-frickin'-tastic piece of work. It's sold hundreds of thousands of copies on DVD.

For which Mr. Beagle has not been paid at all. No royalties, no nothin'.

Now, it's true that he's a soft-spoken, gentlemanly Good Guy. And it's also true that there are those who would happily stomp on Good Guys if it affords them profit.

That's where we come in.

For more information, and ways that you can help, visit Conlan Press. And thanks.

"What About All That Talk About Screwing Up Future Events, The Space-Time Continuum?" "Well, I Figured -- What The Hell."

2006-02-03T14:09:00.000-05:00

The fuck:

A federal judge on Friday set former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's trial date in the
CIA leak case for January 2007, two months after the midterm congressional elections.

The trial for Libby, who faces perjury and obstruction of justice charges, will begin with jury selection Jan. 8, said U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton. The judge said he had hoped to start the trial in September but one of Libby's lawyers had a scheduling conflict that made that impractical.

Because, goodness knows, doing it before the elections might be "impractical" for an administration and political party trying not to look like the criminals they are.

All The Halls Within Must Be Filled With His Foul Reek

2006-01-27T14:31:00.000-05:00

Now this just stinks:

The investigation of Jack Abramoff, the disgraced Republican lobbyist, took a surprising new turn on Thursday when the Justice Department said the chief prosecutor in the inquiry would step down next week because he had been nominated to a federal judgeship by President Bush.
The prosecutor, Noel L. Hillman, is chief of the department's public integrity division, and the move ends his involvement in an inquiry that has reached into the administration as well as the top ranks of the Republican leadership on Capitol Hill.

The administration said that the appointment was routine and that it would not affect the investigation, but Democrats swiftly questioned the timing of the move and called for a special prosecutor.

The announcement came as Mr. Bush faced a barrage of questions about why he would not make public "grip-and-grin" photographs of him with Mr. Abramoff. The photographs apparently show Mr. Bush and Mr. Abramoff smiling at White House Hanukkah parties and Republican fund-raising receptions.

I'm sorry. That's just too fucking convenient for words. Is Patrick Fitzgerald gonna be offered a judgeship soon?

If You Can't Fix It, You Gotta Stand It

2006-01-25T09:43:00.000-05:00

Excuse me if I giggle:

Canada's newly elected Conservative government has promised to revisit same-sex marriage less than a year after the country became just the third in the world to legalize such unions.
But it won't happen soon, and the effort may be hindered by the Conservative Party's narrow victory Monday, which will force compromise among the major parties.
And reopening the issue seems to contradict the sentiments of most Canadians. Prior to the election, a nationwide poll found that 66 percent felt the issue was settled. The number who said same-sex marriage would determine how they voted was "almost infinitesimal," said pollster Donna Dasko, senior vice president of the Environics Research Group.
A Conservative Party representative said same-sex marriage is not among the party's top five priorities, which are child care, health care, crime, government accountability and lowering taxes.
"We're putting things like same-sex marriage on the back burner to these five," said Melissa Cable, press officer for the party.
[...]
"If the resolution is passed, the government will introduce legislation to restore the traditional definition of marriage while respecting existing same-sex marriages," according to the Conservative platform.
It is unclear how that could happen. Courts across Canada consistently have ruled that denying same-sex couples the right to marry violates the nation's constitution, and any bill would face an immediate court challenge. And the country's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, similar to the U.S. Bill of Rights, prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation.
To make any new action immune from the courts, constitutional experts say Harper would have to invoke Canada's wildly unpopular "notwithstanding clause."
That clause allows Parliament to pass a law notwithstanding the charter that would otherwise prohibit it. Even when such a law does pass, Parliament must revisit the issue in five years.
Harper said during the campaign that he would not have to use that clause because the country's Supreme Court would rule in his favor. But many disagree.

Sigh. Even Canada has fanatics, who just freak at the thought of -- ewww! -- guys making out.

So freaked are they that they would use a "wildly unpopular" clause of the law to overturn legislation which has great popular support and yet protect existing violations to the new law.

My ass. This is what is known as "pandering".

Why is it that gays threaten them so? Because, as far as I know, gays who want to get married aren't trying to destroy the institution of marriage -- they're trying to opt in. In the US, there are are many legal and societal benefits to marriage, and gays want to take advantage of those benefits with their chosen life partners.

So why bother with, effectively, a time window for gay marriage, where those who got in under the wire are good to go, and everyone else is an unclean vile heathen faggot perv, or whatever Canadians would call them? Either it's legal or it's not. And, uh, Canadian Conservatives? Where you are, it is. And people want it to be.

You have a lot of actual, real, country-leading legislation on your plate, and you only won by one seat. Don't get cocky.

Did You Hear That, Eh? That's What I'm On About!

2006-01-24T19:03:00.000-05:00

Remember the previous post, when I said that the Corporate Media are part of the problem, part of the power structure, part of the enemy?

Here we go again

Alito Confirmation Supporters Look Strong

Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito won a Senate Judiciary Committee vote along strict party lines Tuesday as well as commitments from a majority of senators, assuring his confirmation and a likely tilt of the court to the right.

All of the 55 Republicans — except Sens. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee; Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island; Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine; and Ted Stevens of Alaska — have publicly committed to vote for Alito through their representatives, interviews with The Associated Press or news releases.

That gives Alito 50 votes, and Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson (news, bio, voting record) of Nebraska's support makes a majority.

Twenty Democrats are publicly opposing President Bush's pick to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, while the other 23 and independent Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont are still publicly undecided or refuse to say how they will vote on Alito's nomination.

The only way Democrats can stop the conservative judge now is through a filibuster, a manuever they show little interest in.

They've only got 50 votes out of 100.

They can't even get all the Repubs to vote for the guy.

The Dems are starting to circle the wagons.

But the headline is, "Alito Confirmation Supporters Look Strong".

In actuality, this is becoming a knife fight. But your Corporate Media, your So-Called "Liberal" Media, your untrustable source for lies and misinformation and especially propaganda, is trying to make it look like a foregone conclusion.

It ain't.

A Lot Of Alliteration From Anxious Anchors Placed In Powerful Posts

2006-01-23T19:46:00.000-05:00

Yet another example of the biggest problem in our country today:

Summary: Numerous media outlets repeated without challenge White House senior adviser Karl Rove's defense of President Bush's warrantless domestic surveillance program, in which Rove falsely claimed that "some important Democrats clearly disagree" with the proposition that "if Al Qaeda is calling somebody in America, it is in our national security interest to know who they're calling and why." In fact, no leading Democrat has said that it is not in our interest to monitor Al Qaeda's communications.

It's a good and necessary read, and I recommend you follow the link, but in a lot of ways it's just Example #8,473,916 of the biggest problem in our country today: Our media are part of the power structure.

I get as cranked off as anyone when ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox, the New York Times, the Washington Post, etc., etc., etc., etc., leave out or distort inconvenient facts or even straight-up lie, let alone when they start rattling off Republican talking points as if they aren't made up of candy floss and dustbunnies. But I think I now have a solution. It's a radical one, I admit, but give it a chance.

Make it a Democratic talking point that the Corporate Media cannot be trusted because they're In On It.

Tell people, "News agencies around the world report facts, figures, cause and effect. They tell you the truth. But, regarding [insert appropriate story here], CNN [for example] flat-out lied. Why did they lie? Because they are part of the power structure. It is in the interests of the owners of CNN to further the radical agenda put forth by the Bush administration and the Republican party. The majority of Americans believes differently. But they are trying to frame the argument so that it appears that their positions have support when they doesn't, quash debate by presenting speculation, innuendo, and flat untruths as accepted truth, and gloss over inconvenient arguments against their positions, based on -- what a concept! -- actual facts, that have, time and again, proven to be correct.

"The Corporate Media lie to you, to protect themselves and the President's radical agenda.

"We call on members of the media to present the truth whenever and wherever possible. Facts, figures, sources, data easily checked over the internet. This is your country at stake here. They are trying to lull all of us into accepting un-American ideas; they are presenting these ideas as necessary to preserve our way of life. They care nothing for our way of life; they care only for their own profit.

"Cronkite and Murrow would be ashamed."

Now, I realize that this is a little nutso. But, really, what are the media outlets going to do? Not have the Dems on? They already barely have them on as it is, and half the time it's Joe "DINO" Lieberman or Joe "Grrr Snarl Roll Over Beg" Biden.

No matter what Democrats say or do, Republicans will have free rein to demonize them -- and, if they don't bother, the media (especially Fox and CNN, but basically anyone besides Keith Olbermann) will be happy to do it themselves. They're protecting their corporate gravy train, or their laughable sources.

They cannot be trusted.

Any Democratic strategy which does not count the major media outlets as part of the enemy camp is doomed to failure. So we might as well start attacking now. Who knows -- some of them might rediscover shame, and start telling the truth once in a while.

"I'm WHAT!?" "You're Pregnant!"

2006-01-22T10:32:00.000-05:00

Today marks the 33rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

Couldn't tell it from the punditry.

William Saletan has the kind of well-meaning article that makes me want to smack the writer in his bone head. The core of his argument is that the abortion rights movement is going about everything the wrong way:

The lesson of those decades is that you can't eliminate the moral question by ignoring it. To eliminate it, you have to agree on it: Abortion is bad, and the ideal number of abortions is zero. But by conceding that, you don't end the debate, you narrow it. Once you agree that the goal is fewer abortions, the only thing left to debate is how to get there. As a politician might put it: "My opponent and I are both pro-life. We want to avoid as many abortions as we can. The difference is, I trust women to work with me toward that objective, and he doesn't."
Isn't that better than anything you heard from John Kerry?

Excuse me while I impart a hearty Fuck You on behalf of all my female friends.

Besides the nauseating and gratuitous slap at Kerry (who is not one of my faves, but that's just a cheap shot), once again we have a pundit telling Dems what they're doing wrong with no factual basis. And the starting point is the notion that (gasp!) abortion is bad.

Says who? You? You've never had to have one, Bill.

Absolutely, abortion is bad -- if your view of women is that they're pretty much baby mills. If you really think Every Sperm Is Sacred. If you can't wrap your mind around mitigating circumstances in a changing world. If you can't keep your damn hands off other people's lives.

There are lots of good reasons to have an abortion. If you've been raped or sexually abused, for starters. If you can't safely bear a child because of some other medical condition. If you find out early on that the child would have catastrophic birth defects. If you are in an economic or professional position that will not allow you to raise the child. If your birth control method fails. If you know you can't handle the responsibility of raising another life-form for eighteen years.

(The moral folk pooh-pooh at this point, usually along the lines of, "Well, you had sex, you're responsible for the results." The idea of terminating an unwanted pregnancy -- sorry, killing a beautiful loving blessed child -- as a responsible act is completely beyond them.)

I don't know if Mr. Saletan has bothered to notice, but the same religious psychos who don't like abortion also don't like birth control. In fact, they don't like sex. And they don't want anyone else to like it, either.

They can't even be honest about it.

Again, this isn't about saving babies. It's about controlling women, legislating God, and sanctifying birth (never mind pre- or post-natal care).

People are going to have sex. We are at least medically in a situation where we can prevent many of the physical problems of sex, and, as much as the religious types may hate to hear it worded this way, one of the problems of sex is an unwanted pregnancy.

A fetus at the outset is not a baby. And treating it as if it is, with rights equal to or greater than the mother, is ludicrous.

The problem to adress, as usual in this age of screwed-up Puritanism, is a combination of the definition of abortion as a necessarily bad thing, the inability to admit that people have sex for reasons other than procreation, and the need some people have to impose themselves into other people's private lives.

Oh, You Think You're Bad, Huh? You're A Fucking Choir Boy Compared To Me! A CHOIR BOY!

2005-12-26T12:58:00.000-05:00

This is about one of those little things that catches the eye and the mind.

See, to this day, the Right Wing refers to the corporate-owned media as "the liberal media". They created the term, so that they could simultaneously use and discredit the media whenever necessary. They can bludgeon people with a message reported as news, and do it so loudly and frequently that inconvenient facts to the contrary get lost or unreported; they can deride those inconvenient facts to the contrary as things made up by the liberal media to attack Good And Noble Men Just Trying To Do What's Right For America.

And they can slip an idea into the public arena until it hardens like concrete.

Modern reporting has very much become a he-said-she-said situation, all in the name of an elusive, and really illusive, goal called "balance". The idea is very simple: There are two sides to every situation, and each should be given equal weight to come to a fair conclusion.

This second part is, of course, bullshit.

There are infinite examples of one side being categorically right and the other being completely wrong. If someone tells you that all zebras are stripped green and silver, she's either lying or a real partisan for House Slytherin. If a geometry teacher tells you pi is three, he's unqualified for his job. If someone breaks into your house and steals your stereo, their love of music, or even their desire to sell the stereo for food money, doesn't enter into it.

So, what are we to make of this interesting AP phrasing:

Officials in Arnold Schwarzenegger's hometown quietly removed his name from a soccer stadium overnight, complying with the California governor's demand in a bitter dispute over his death penalty stance.

By early Monday, the large metal letters spelling out the action star-turned-politician's name were gone from the 15,300-seat stadium in the southern city of Graz.

Schwarzenegger had written to the mayor of Graz a week ago asking that his name be removed after local activists called for the stadium to be renamed because of Schwarzenegger's refusal to block the Dec. 13 execution of Stanley Tookie Williams.

Capital punishment is illegal in Schwarzenegger's native Austria, where many people consider it barbaric. Opposition had run especially high in Graz, whose official slogan is "City of Human Rights."

The governor, turning the tables on his critics [my emphasis], ordered his name removed and returned a ring of honor that Graz officials gave him in 1999.

[...]

Last week, Graz Mayor Siegfried Nagl wrote to Schwarzenegger urging him to reconsider his decision to cut ties to the city and to keep the ring. Nagl said he reassured Schwarzenegger that he remains admired by most local residents.

Nagl said he was worried that severing ties to Schwarzenegger, one of Austria's most famous sons, potentially could cost the city millions in tourist revenue.

But a movement to scrap Schwarzenegger's name from the stadium had gained momentum in recent weeks, and a majority of the city council in Graz was said to support the idea — even before Schwarzenegger's demand.

The ring arrived at Graz's city hall late last week, and officials were considering displaying it at a local museum, Nagl told the weekly newspaper Die Woche.

Many Europeans have scorned the United States' use of capital punishment in general, and Schwarzenegger's refusal to grant clemency in particular. They are now waiting to see how Schwarzenegger deals with the scheduled Jan. 17 execution of a 75-year-old inmate.

See, it doesn't appear to me that Ahnult has turned the tables on his critics.

On the mayor of Graz, yes. The mayor wants that all-important tourism aspect. But Arnie's critics, the local activists, wanted him to do exactly what he's done: sever ties, and good riddance.

The local officials want Schwarzennegger's association because it brings them money. The people don't want it because it brings them shame. The Associated Press, and possibly Arnold, may indeed believe that Arnold has "turned the tables on their critics" when, in fact, he has been publicly embarassed.

The problem is, that's not the way the story is being told or sold. It's made out to be a he-said-she-said. Or a you-can't-fire-me-I-quit. And it's really not.

"Chicolini here may talk like an idiot, and look like an idiot, but don't let that fool you: he really is an idiot."

2005-12-21T10:10:00.000-05:00

Ready for bald-faced desperation? A number of Republican pundits are defending Bush's domestic spying because Carter and Clinton did it.

Coulda sworn they hated both those guys.

Oh, and -- as usual, they're wrong. Think Progress has the smackdown. Daily Kos has more.

Impeach. Impeach. Impeach. Impeach.

--

Cross-posted to the Digital Acoustic LiveJournal.

I Am The Law!

2005-12-18T01:12:00.000-05:00

I was gonna go off on a huge, long, unspeakable rant regarding Dubya's domestic spying. But there's no chance I'd be as viciously eloquent as The Rude Pundit.

"You Can Go To Hell!" "We Can't -- Not Alone."

2005-11-09T17:52:00.000-05:00

What is it with these assholes and torture?

A new Pentagon policy governing the interrogation of prisoners allows for exceptions if authorized in writing by top Defense Department officials.

The new directive, signed by Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England last week, formalizes many rules created since U.S. troops' abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad was revealed in April 2004.
Elisa Massimino, Washington director for Human Rights First, a group that has lobbied for stricter limits on interrogations after Abu Ghraib, says the exceptions could lead to abuses: "This is what got us into problems in the first place."
Massimino described the exceptions as similar to one that Vice President Cheney has advocated for CIA personnel interrogating prisoners in the war on terrorism.

Look, it's really, really simple, mm-kay? Torture is wrong. Torture is illegal, both by our laws and international treaties we have signed. Torture doesn't work. Torture is not popular with our own people. Torture endangers our troops.

So why are these fuckers, Cheney and England and who knows who else, so hot to get a loophole in there? Well, obviously, because they really like torture.

I say we all kick in ten bucks and get them lifetime memberships in whatever online BDSM multimedia services they might like, give 'em memberships in chat rooms, maybe download some hentai. Let 'em go back to their undisclosed locations and wank till they're out of office.

Better than actual harm inflicted on actual people.

"I'm Here To Tell You Your Brothers Were Killed In Combat. They're Dead." "Which One, Sir?" "All Of Them."

2005-10-26T10:51:00.000-04:00

Vigils tonight across the country in memory of the 2,000 American servicepeople who've been killed in Iraq. Find out more here, here, here, or here.

Note: There have been some on the Right, including that insane scarecrow Michelle Malkin, who are actually trying to characterize these vigils as celebrations. Like so many other things that are lied about constantly by the Right Wing Noise Machine, it apparently has to be said out loud, again and again: We on the Left mourn our dead and honor the sacrifice our soldiers have made. Our problem is not with the soldiers, but with the monstrous, cowardly, imperial-minded psychopaths who sent them to a war we should never have started.

Don't You Have The Whole World To Save?

2005-10-25T02:28:00.000-04:00

An era has passed, in the person of a brave woman. Rosa Parks, one of the foremost icons of the civil rights movement, has passed away at the age of 92. Farewell and good rest to you, gentle lady. May the simple, eloquent blow you struck for freedom never be forgotten.

Well, Why Don't They Call It "The Big Chill"? Or "The Nippy Era"? I'm Just Sayin', How Do We Know It's An "Ice Age"?

2005-10-23T10:30:00.000-04:00

It's dropped below 40° every night for the past few days around my neck of the woods, and gas prices, while dropping noticably, are still much, much higher than they were only a year ago. So it's time, indeed past time, to start thinking about ways to lower the fuel bill. Because God knows our Dear Leaders don't give a shit.

There are many, many good sites out there, but let's focus on a few of the best and best-known. First, the government's Energy Hog program, which is cute in a Nickelodeon-wannabe sorta way, and which is intended particularly to make kids more aware of things like leaving doors open and the lights on.

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's Home Energy Saver site is more useful, because it doesn't work with generalities -- it helps you audit your home for energy use (and waste).

GreenerCars.com has loads of info about environmentally friendly driving and the cleanest (and dirtiest) vehicles.

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy is policy oriented, but also has an excellent online consumer guide to home energy savings.

Same with the Alliance to Save Energy, which broadens the scope to worldwide.

Prompted by an editorial in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.

Okay, So If I'm Just Normally Mentally Defective But Not Criminal....

2005-10-04T15:40:00.000-04:00

Here's an interesting one that's gotten almost no play (interestingly enough, Google News doesn't list nearly as many major news sources as plain ol' Google):

The F.B.I. is now investigating after an explosion near Oklahoma Memorial Stadium Saturday night during the Kansas State, O.U. football game.

One person was killed in the blast and police there are calling it a suicide. Now we know more about that person.

The F.B.I. has identified him as 21-year-old Joel Henry Hinrichs, III. He was a junior at Oklahoma University majoring in engineering. He was also a member of the Triangle Fraternity. Phone books list him as being from Colorado Springs, CO.

Authorities say that the stadium is searched before each game and nothing was found during that search, and no threats had been made. They also say at no time were any fans in the stadium in any danger. The explosion happened outside a Microbiology building on campus, which is on the west side of the stadium.

What's interesting to me (and my friend Leslie, who told me about this) is that this guy... was a suicide bomber.

An American suicide bomber, unless you think there are at least three Middle Eastern fellows named Joel Henry Hinrichs.

Except for freakin' ESPN, however, the news reports don't call him a "suicide bomber". They make much of how he was depressed.

Guys? Corporate media?

I don't give a fuck why someone's bombing public areas.

I mean, I do, because that's the first and best way to stop them, motive motive motive and all that. But the emphasis in coverage has been how depressed this guy was. Not that he thought that the best way out was to potentially take a bunch of people with him.

Someone who is so angry or troubled or sick at heart that they are willing to kill themselves with explosives in a public place? That's a suicide bomber. That's not name-calling or hair-splitting. That's the definition.

Are you trying to avoid panicking a jittery populace? Are you worried about "providing aid and comfort to terrorists" or somesuch nonsense? Because I think your responsibility is crystal damn clear:

You should be pointing out, loudly and frequently, that it's so easy to get explosives in this country, and so easy to get them into public areas, that a 21-year-old kid who was ready to die got them within 100 yards of a stadium full of people.

Even if you use the excuse that he didn't really want to hurt anyone else -- and if that's the case, why didn't he pick any of the many other possible methods of killing one's self that don't involve danger to bystanders? -- what you should be doing, Corporate Media, is highlighting that someone who really wanted to do some damage apparently wouldn't have all that much trouble. And that maybe somebody should do something about that.

As they said on MST3K, "You'd think, after an eternity of this, they'd be better at it."

There Goes The Meanest Man That Ever Took A Breath Of Life

2005-09-28T16:38:00.000-04:00

One of the "moral leaders" of the Republican party, former Secretary of Education and current talk show host William Bennett, has a novel idea to reduce the crime rate:

CALLER: I noticed the national media, you know, they talk a lot about the loss of revenue, or the inability of the government to fund Social Security, and I was curious, and I've read articles in recent months here, that the abortions that have happened since Roe v. Wade, the lost revenue from the people who have been aborted in the last 30-something years, could fund Social Security as we know it today. And the media just doesn't -- never touches this at all.

BENNETT: Assuming they're all productive citizens?

CALLER: Assuming that they are. Even if only a portion of them were, it would be an enormous amount of revenue.

BENNETT: Maybe, maybe, but we don't know what the costs would be, too. I think as -- abortion disproportionately occur among single women? No.

CALLER: I don't know the exact statistics, but quite a bit are, yeah.

BENNETT: All right, well, I mean, I just don't know. I would not argue for the pro-life position based on this, because you don't know. I mean, it cuts both -- you know, one of the arguments in this book Freakonomics that they make is that the declining crime rate, you know, they deal with this hypothesis, that one of the reasons crime is down is that abortion is up. Well --

CALLER: Well, I don't think that statistic is accurate.

BENNETT: Well, I don't think it is either, I don't think it is either, because first of all, there is just too much that you don't know. But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky.

That's right, it'd be "impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible"... but you thought about it, and you think it would accomplish the goal you thought about it in regards to, and then you said it in out loud, knowing that at least some of your audience would nod and go, "Makes sense".

Why does anyone listen to or support these foul creatures?

(Cross-posted to the Digital Acoustic LiveJournal.)

"Why Am I Not Reading It?" "... Because... I Haven't Given It To You Yet?"

2005-09-25T12:18:00.000-04:00

Recently, the NY Times did something incredibly stupid: They put some of their content, including all of their columnists, behind a pay-wall. The reason this is stupid was pointed out on a blog -- I wish I could remember where I saw it -- the gist of which is, it's through their editorial section that any newspaper, and especially the Times, can influence the public dialogue. By preventing internet readers from reading the columns of Krugman, Brooks, Herbert, Tierney, Dowd, and Friedman unless they pony up fifty bucks a year, they remove them from a large part of the international conversation, effectively constraining them only to those who can physically get a copy of the Times.

Unless, of course, you're willing to wait a few days, when the columns are syndicated to sources which don't charge. Which is the idea behind Never Pay Retail.

It Is Only Out Of Sheer Morbid Curiosity That I Am Allowing This Freak Show To Continue

2005-09-15T08:20:00.000-04:00

And, so, the highest court in the land is reduced to a game show:

Frustrated by two days of sparring with John Roberts, Democrats are down to their final chances to coax answers from the chief justice nominee on abortion, privacy and other hot-button issues before he heads to likely Senate confirmation.

Six Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats — Roberts' biggest critics so far — will try one last time on Thursday to elicit his views on a host of legal subjects before ending confirmation hearings on the man President Bush wants to replace the late William H. Rehnquist.
But Democrats expressed little hope of cracking what New York Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer called Roberts' "cone of silence."

"This process is getting a little more absurd the further we move," Schumer groused.

Roberts has successfully sidestepped and parried questions on how he would rule on controversial cases, and committee Republicans were so confident in the 50-year-old judge's ability to emerge unscathed Thursday they've waived any time they could use to help him recover from any potential slip-ups.

This is not a prize, you Republican gamesplayers, you scumsucking powermongers. This isn't a Kewpie doll. This is our goddamn legal system. And it's a fucking job interview.

Candidates for such positions are asked questions because We The People need to know the answers. We need to have an idea of what someone who may direct the Supreme Court for the next generation may think about the most pressing legal issues of the day. We need to know if he's interested in upholding the law or advancing an agenda, and we need to know his philosophical basis for doing so.

If you were interviewing a candidate for a job who "sidestepped and parried" your questions, would you hire him? If you were a candidate playing these games, would you honestly think the interviewer would admire your evasive witticisms -- and then make you CEO?

And the headline on the story makes me just as crazy: "Democrats Get One Last Shot At Roberts". As if it's the last reel of an adventure movie. As if it's a WWE storyline.

As if it's a foregone conclusion that Roberts will be confirmed.

There are a lot of questions about this man's record and legal thinking, questions which both he and the White House refuse to answer. Some records have been released, but nowhere near enough, and not the ones asked for. Under those circumstances, John Roberts doesn't deserve to be a judge in any court of law, let alone leading the highest one.

My Careereth Ith Over - I Am Making A Horseth Asseth Of Myselfeth

2005-09-09T08:10:00.000-04:00

Really, Colin? Glad to hear it:

The former secretary of state, Colin L. Powell, says in a television interview to be broadcast Friday that his 2003 speech to the United Nations, in which he gave a detailed description of Iraqi weapons programs that turned out not to exist, was "painful" for him personally and would be a permanent "blot" on his record.

I'd think it's slightly more painful for all the people who've fucking died because of it.

Maybe I Could Turn This Thing To My Advantage

2005-09-04T09:12:00.000-04:00

One of the biggest disasters to face our nation, ever, and BushCo is still playing politics and trying to avoid blame. The most recent talking point is that it's the locals' fault, both for not declaring an emergency until Sunday and for not requesting help, and even if they did ask for help not specifying what was needed.

This, of course, would be bullshit.

Here is the official declaration by Louisiana Governor Kathleen Babnieaux Blanco of a state of emergency starting on Friday, Aug. 26, until Sunday, Sept. 25.

Here is a four-page letter, dated Aug. 28, laying out in ridiculous detail the assistance Louisiana wanted.

Thanks to The Democratic Daily for this one.

Open The Door! In The Name Of King Arthur, Open The Door!

2005-09-02T11:59:00.000-04:00

MoveOn.org has set up a clearinghouse site for temporary housing. Hurricane Housing is both for people trying to find a place to stay and people who have a place to offer.

In a similar vein, SF writers Larry Dixon and Mercedes Lackey have set up GryphonKing.com, a relief effort site for their friends in SF/Fantasy and gaming fandom.

Did You See Him? He's Probably Still Scratching His Head

2005-08-29T05:52:00.000-04:00

Steven R. Weisman has an analysis of the Constitutional situation in Iraq in today's NY Times. It's not that it's necessarily a bad analysis or anything. But it's got one sentence which shows, more than anything, the disconnect, not only between the Bush administration and reality, but the media's perceptions and reality.

It was not long ago that the administration was loath to be seen as interfering in internal Iraqi politics.

I'd say invading a country under false pretenses, trashing its infrastructure and then handing over the rebuilding contracts to American companies under a no-bid process rather than letting locals have a chance, building fourteen permanent military bases, forcing clans which have warred for decades to try and make nice without addressing any of their grievances, and ramming a hand-picked government down their throats all count as interfering. But, then, I'm not a professional news analyst.

I Think We've Hit A Critical Desalinization Point

2005-08-28T19:36:00.000-04:00

If you are in Louisiana, GET THE FUCK OUT NOW.

Here's information about blood donations, and another blood donation site if the Red Cross does not serve your area, and Red Cross updates (and cash donation options).

If you are still in the greater New Orleans area, and you have the option, PLEASE LEAVE NOW.

I'm Erect. Why Aren't You Erect?

2005-08-28T04:53:00.000-04:00

A victory for the forces of lechery and turpitude:

A new state law banning seminude lap dances at Missouri strip clubs was declared unconstitutional by a judge Friday, two days before it was to go into effect.

Cole County Circuit Judge Richard Callahan said provisions of the law violate First Amendment protections and state constitutional limits on amending a bill beyond its original purpose.

"The state may not limit persons of majority age from engaging in lawful expressive conduct protected by the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution without a substantial and direct connection to adverse secondary effects, a showing that has not been made," Callahan said in the declaratory judgment.

Under the law, signed in July by Gov. Matt Blunt, seminude lap dances would have been banned and dancers would have had to stay at least 10 feet from each other. Customers would have faced misdemeanor charges for tucking money into a dancers' G-strings, and the minimum age for dancers and customers would have risen from 19 to 21.

[...]

The attorney general's office said it was reviewing the judge's decision and didn't yet know what actions it might take.

Hey, I've got an action you might take. How about not fucking worrying about people's sex lives?

The big difference between the very religious -- no, scratch that, the very moralistic -- and those who aren't is that those of us who aren't don't spend every waking hour worried about what the hell other consenting adults are doing and how it offends their weak, oversensitive Gawd.

This spills over into everything having to do with sex, sexuality, and childbirth: women's rights, the abortion debate, contraception, stem-cell research, explicit scenes in video games, the flash of a breast on national TV, "dirty words". And, bluntly, all this noise, all this time, all this money, all this anguish and angst and recrimination and in many cases hatred spent on such topics gets in the way of doing actual, y'know, good.

Let me spell it out more concretely. Because their God wants all children born, moral people would force women to bear every child conceived. It doesn't matter if the child has potentially life-threatening birth defects, if the mother can't afford it, if it would disrupt her career, if she is carrying the child of her rapist... all that matters is the actual birth. After that, the moral people couldn't give a shit what happens to the kid.

Because their God tells them that every embryo is a full human life, moral people would block embryonic stem-cell research with the potential to help millions of people with all manner of medical problems. And we're talking about embryos that would otherwise be thrown away. Nope, nope, nope -- Baby Jesus weeps for them all.

Because their God tells them that anything mentioning sex in any way besides as something sinful, moral people believe all forms of contraception, aside from abstinence, are bad. Unfortunately, humanity has a pretty intense sex drive hotwired in. This means that people, especially young people who don't know better, have sex without knowledge or protection. This means more children are born, more diseases are sexually transmitted, more young lives are derailed by the bearing and raising of children they are not emotionally, intellectually, or financially ready for.

In this particular case, because God tells them that sex and sexuality are wrong, moral people would outlaw lap dancing. I'm sure they'd say it's directly connected with prostitution; perhaps it even is.

Big Yip. That's another discussion for another day, but, briefly, I haven't got much of a problem with prostitution, either, at least not conceptually. The reality of it, i.e., pimps, STDs, and the emotional harm it can inflict on families, are pretty awful; but the concept of someone being paid to provide a service, in this case physical pleasure, is practically the backbone of our economy these days.

How much is the state of Missouri spending on pursuit of this, that they aren't spending on crime prevention?

If there is a God with a massive Hell waiting for all sinners after they die, and He's really all that concerned about lap dances, then let Him take care of it.

Our Rules Supercede Those Of The Outside World

2005-08-21T03:05:00.000-04:00

Example #43,819,591,706 that the Corporate Media is not your friend:

A patriotic camp with a "God Bless Our President!" banner sprung up downtown Saturday, countering the anti-war demonstration started by a fallen soldier's mother two weeks ago near President Bush's ranch.
The camp is named "Fort Qualls," in memory of Marine Lance Cpl. Louis Wayne Qualls, 20, who died in Iraq last fall.
"If I have to sacrifice my whole family for the sake of our country and world, other countries that want freedom, I'll do that," said the soldier's father, Gary Qualls, a friend of the local business owner who started the pro-Bush camp. He said his 16-year-old son now wants to enlist, and he supports that decision.

Qualls' frustration with the anti-war demonstrators erupted last week when he removed a cross bearing his son's name that was among hundreds the group had put up along the road to Bush's ranch.

Qualls called the protesters' views disrespectful to soldiers, and said he had to yank out two more crosses after protesters kept replacing them.

Now, I am sorry for this man's loss. On a factual level, I don't agree with him. On a personal level, I think he's a fathead. I have no idea how questioning why our kids have died for a war we were lied into, or putting up a cross to commemorate a dead soldier, is disrespectful. But, honestly, Mr. Qualls has every right to hold his own pro-Bush protest. I don't agree with him, but that doesn't matter; so far, this is still America. And that, actually, is not what I wanted to post about.

I'm posting about the complicity of the Corporate Media in the Administration's propaganda campaign.

In the very first sentence of the story, with the first three words, Cindy Sheehan and those who protest with her are painted as unpatriotic.

There's really no way to avoid that implication. If those supporting the President are in "a patriotic camp", then Sheehan's Camp Casey is unpatriotic. 1+1=2, y'know?

The Right has been savagely smearing Cindy Sheehan for the past week. Coulter, Horowitz, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, all the big guns. They have been slandering this woman for wanting the President to give her a straight answer as to the cause her son died for. Because we still don't know, and we don't know how long we're going to be there, although the Army is planning for at least four more years.

The members of the Corporate Media do not care about America. They don't care about anything except being the toadies of those holding onto power. Like the sidekicks of bullies, they will take their small, petty, cheap shots wherever they can, and claim them as victories before their targets even look around to see what exactly hit them.

It is now unpatriotic for a mother to question why her son had to die. Think about that.

(The original story has changed. The first link in this post has been updated to access the original through Google Cache.)

When It Comes To Consoling... I'm About As Expert As A Palsy Patient Performing Brain Surgery With A Pipe Wrench

2005-08-15T05:03:00.000-04:00

Every few weeks or so, I wonder if I've let my loathing of the Bush administration become too personal. I try to tell myself that maybe, just maybe, it is possible to hate the policies and not hate the people who implement them, and the monkey king who leads them.

Y'know, I think I've gotten past that.

There's no question anymore: I truly, personally hate George W. Bush. The loathing is necessary. It's as natural as breathing.

Why not, when, in the middle of a fawning, worshipful puff piece in the Dayton Daily News, Chimpy says something like this:

Bush finds time to exercise about six times a week. It's built into the schedule for a president who believes he is at his best when he takes time to work out.

Saturday's ride came as anti-war protesters, rallying behind Cindy Sheehan, a California mom whose son Casey died in Iraq, gathered on a road near the Bush ranch. Bush has steadfastly refused Sheehan's request to meet with her.

"Whether it be here or in Washington or anywhere else, there's somebody who has got something to say to the president, that's part of the job," Bush said of bike-riding while a grieving mom was pleading to talk with him. "And I think it's important for me to be thoughtful and sensitive to those who have got something to say. But I think it's also important for me to go on with my life, to keep a balanced life."

Isn't that special? He thinks it's important to go on with his life. Pity Casey Sheehan can't. And Cindy's sure having trouble with the concept right now.

A uniter, not a divider. A "compassionate conservative", whatever the hell that is. A moral man who invokes Jesus as his favorite philosopher. What a load. What a crock. George W. Bush is a man who sends other people's kids to their deaths, and then he moves on with his life.

What's not to loathe?

I'd Better Not Stand Too Close To You -- People Might Think I'm Part Of The Band! I'm Joking, Of Course

2005-08-10T09:40:00.000-04:00

How does the Pentagon want to mark the fourth anniversary of the September 11 attacks? How 'bout a rock concert:

Q: What is the America Supports You Freedom Walk?
R: The America Supports You Freedom Walk is an event on September 11 that allows citizens the opportunity to remember the victims of September 11, honor our veterans past and present, and celebrate our freedom.

Q: When is the ASY Freedom Walk being held?
R: The Freedom Walk is being held on September 11, 2005, beginning at 10 a.m. at the Pentagon South parking lot.

Q: What is the ASY Freedom Walk route?
R: The America Supports You Freedom Walk begins near the Pentagon crash site, crossing Arlington National Cemetery, passing several National memorials, and concluding adjacent to the National Mall and Reflecting Pool with an America Supports You concert by country superstar singer and songwriter Clint Black....
[...]

Q: Why is DoD organizing this event?
R: Since September 11, 2001, the Pentagon has provided citizens with opportunities to commemorate September 11 in meaningful ways. The America Supports You Freedom Walk is the fourth September 11 commemorative activity sponsored by the DoD. The goal for the 5th anniversary in 2006 is for each state to host a Freedom Walk in order to provide an opportunity for as many citizens as possible to reflect on the importance of freedom.

Thank God. Without this important event, I'm sure we all would've completely forgotten 9/11. 'Cause, y'know, the media wouldn't have mentioned it or anything. And I'm sure Dubya would've maintained his usual dignified silence.

And how good of the Pentagon to "provide... citizens with opportunities to commemorate September 11 in meaningful ways". See? If we had remembered 9/11, we'd'a been stumped as to how to remember 9/11.

And I'm especially sure Dubya's tanking ratings and the abject failure of pretty much everything in Iraq have nothing to do with the timing of this exploitative bullsh- er, spontaneous celebration of American freedom.

Still, I feel for Dubya. He needs a distraction of some sort. Oh, not for him -- for America away from him. Hmmm. Lemme think.

Dammit, aren't there any white women in the news?

What A Jolly Nice Name! Well, Never Mind, Cheerio! Thank You Very Much! Thank You Very Much! Thank You Very Much! ... AWFUL People.

2005-06-28T18:50:00.000-04:00

Bush: Bloodshed in Iraq is "Worth It"

In an evening address at an Army base that has 9,300 troops in Iraq, Bush was acknowledging the toll of the 27-month-old war. At the same time, he aimed to persuade skeptical Americans that his strategy for victory needed only time — not any changes — to be successful.

"Like most Americans, I see the images of violence and bloodshed. Every picture is horrifying and the suffering is real," Bush said, according to excerpts released ahead of time by the White House. "It is worth it."

[...]

He was rejecting calls to set a timetable for withdrawing 135,000 American troops. Instead, he argued for maintaining the present two-pronged strategy: equipping Iraqi security forces to take over the anti-insurgency fight and helping Iraqi political leaders in the transition to a permanent democratic government.

[...]

Bush's repeated acknowledgment of death and difficulty came less than a month after Vice President Dick Cheney proclaimed the Iraq insurgency "in the last throes." Still, the president's overriding message was one of optimism.

"The American people do not falter under threat, and we will not allow our future to be determined by car bombers and assassins," he said.

Democrats and other critics said the country needed more specifics than Bush has been giving.

"We just don't have a clue what the criteria for success is," said Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., a Vietnam combat veteran. "People are still willing to give the president time if he would just level with them."

Outside the base, opponents of the war planned protests.

The liberal group MoveOn.org also unveiled television advertisements that call the Iraq war "a quagmire." "We got in the wrong way. Let's get out the right way," say the ads running in several contested congressional districts.

Bush reserved a few hours before the speech for a private session to console the loved ones of fallen soldiers. Though he often holds these meetings when visiting military bases, the White House's decision to schedule time with 33 grieving families on the same day as the major address underscored the president's plan to offer a more somber assessment than usual of a war that has killed over 1,740 U.S. military personnel and 12,000 Iraqi civilians.

After a certain point, the outrage meter just starts spinning.

How very fucking nice of you to meet with a few of the families of the kids you've pointlessly sent to their deaths. How lovely that "it is worth it".

SAYS WHO!?

It's not your blood being shed, you unspeakable bastard. It's our kids'. It's our victims'.

You're going to lie to the country again tonight, you monkey. You're going to equate Iraq and 9/11 -- it's in the speech. You're gonna say Stay the course, and The terrorists hate freedom, and all the same old shit. And people die every goddamn day for no reason except you wanted to go down in history. Which you will, but not for the reasons you think.

Y'know what would be worth it, George? To have our soldiers, our budget, and our national honor back. But I don't think that's gonna happen until we impeach your sorry ass and hand you over to the Hague.

Until then, though, don't you fucking dare say that your illegal war for oil and treasure and vengeance is worth the lives of anyone, let alone these people.

Any one of them was a better human being than you.

And I Would've Gotten Away With It Too If It Weren't For You Sons Of A Bi...

2005-06-28T14:40:00.000-04:00

Wesley Clark wants you to sign his petition asking Senator John Warner to investigate the Bush Administration's role in the torture at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib.

Mister Bilbo Baggins... Enough... Is Enough

2005-06-28T13:06:00.000-04:00

Absolute must-read editorial from a former Republican.

Thanks to JAC in comments at Eschaton.

It's Not Who I Am Underneath, But What I Do, That Defines Me

2005-06-26T17:35:00.000-04:00

Okay, so, I went off the other day. Big time. Offended several friends. Got some people who told me privately I went too far. One or two said so publicly. So, first things first.

I retract nothing.

Not one goddamn word.

If anything, I didn't go far enough.

That's what this post is about.

But not how you think.

See, what I said was the truth. If you support, defend, or explain away the works of evil men, you are yourself evil.

But I do realize that there are a whole lot of people out there who not only believe that George W. Bush is not evil, but that his political opponents are. And, therefore, they believe that, at the very least, they themselves are not evil.

I'll accept that. Up to a point. There are, however, a few things to consider.

What do you really think of as good and evil?

I'm talkin' the real deal here. Was Bill Clinton evil because he lied about an extramarital affair? Was Ken Starr evil because he spent $70 million investigating that affair and other accusations against the Clintons? Were Newt Gingrich and Henry Hyde evil for going after Clinton for his extramarital affair? How about when it turned out they'd both had affairs as well? Was Michael Schiavo evil because he wanted to let his wife die? Were her parents evil because they wanted her to live? Were George W. Bush, Jeb Bush, Bill Frist, and Randall Terry evil for getting involved?

Is Michael Jackson evil?

Is Hillary Clinton evil?

Is Jerry Falwell evil?

Is Michael Moore evil?

Is same-sex marriage evil?

Is pre-marital heterosexual sex evil?

Is sex education involving anything besides abstinence evil?

Is going to war evil?

Is lying about the reasons to go to war evil?

We could go on like this for awhile. But my point is not that You Are Evil, or There Is Evil, or There Is Moral Relativism, or anything like that -- my point is that there are two kinds of people in the world.

There are people who, when confronted with something that might be evil, take a moment, or a lifetime, and think about it.

And there are people who don't.

We are all both kinds of people at different times. What separates us are our personal templates for good and evil.

Here are two examples:

When I was younger, I shoplifted some books from a local drug store. Several books, one at a time, over a summer. I didn't have much cash, and I wanted the books, and I was petrified of what it would do to my mom if I was caught. But I wasn't caught, and it became easier after awhile. And then it became less easy, because the fear knotted up in my gut -- and the wild part was how it mutated: It ceased being fear that I would get caught, and became fear that I was becoming a thief by nature. And so I stopped doing it, and later sent an anonymous money order to the store to pay for the books I'd stolen.

During that same period, I was frequently hired as a babysitter for the families along our street. One family across the street had two kids, ages 4 and 2, I think, adorable. Loved 'em. Well, one day, my mom and the parents of that family asked to talk with me. Seems the little girl had indicated that I might've touched her in a bad way. I was absolutely stunned, horrified, and I think my instant, fervent denial and the look on my face must've been what convinced 'em more than anything. (Turned out there was another person in the mix, who looked somewhat similar to me, and apparently the very young girl had gotten us confused.)

In the first case, did I perform an act of evil? Yes, I did. I stole, knowingly and deliberately, and for awhile I justified it by my relative lack of spending money and I prided myself on my Artful Dodging. The act was wrong, I was wrong, and if I'd been caught I would've deserved whatever punishment I received. When I stopped, I made amends -- anonymously, because I wasn't brave enough to face the heat, but I did do it, and I stopped stealing. I was evil, but I was able to see it, and to change.

In the second case, I was suddenly smacked in the face with an accusation that left me sick and shaking. Devastated by the possibility that these nice neighbors, these people who I liked and whose kids I loved, that my mom, could possibly believe that of me, even for a moment. I knew evil, and it wasn't me.

Now, let's get back to the present day.

There are four overarching political philosophies in the United States: liberalism, libertarianism, conservatism, and neoconservatism. There are many volumes describing each of them, and to distill them to a single phrase seems almost insulting -- but you can do it reasonably, I think:

Liberalism believes that people need protection, government should do a lot of it, and that taxes are necessary to pay for it.
Conservatism believes that people can take care of their own interests, government should do very little, and that taxes are stealing money from people who've earned it.
Libertarianism believes that people need some protection, government should do little besides the essentials, and that taxes are stealing money from people who've earned it.
Neo-conservatism believes that...

And here we get to the kicker. What do neo-conservatives believe? It's a little muddy. But they currently control the US government.

Remember when George W. Bush came into office? He said two things which have stuck with me. (Well, okay, he said several things which have stuck with me, such as, he hoped to reduce our dependence on foreign oil by working with Mexico, and Al Gore was treating Social Security like some kinda federal program).

He said he was a uniter, not a divider.

He said that the US was not in the business of nation-building.

Now, please, seriously -- those of you who support the Bush administration: What has happened in our country and in the world since then?

Did you sign on for endless war in Iraq? Because that's what we seem to have. We also have it in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, Iran and North Korea are getting into the nuclear weapon business.

Is it okay to torture human beings? Which human beings, under what circumstances?

Should Americans be above international law, simply because they're Americans? If so, why is that fair?

How do you feel about religious morality being legislated? In clinics, hospitals, science classes, pharmacies?

How about tax cuts? Are you getting enough? Too little? Too much?

How's your job security doing?

Do you feel threatened by gays getting married? If so, why?

Are you liberal, conservative, libertarian, or something else? And what do you think of those not in your category, and why do you think that?

For a long time now, our country has had its squabbles, its dividers, its political street fights. Thing is, up to a certain point, there was never any question that, even though both sides vehemently disagreed, we were in fact all on the same team, that being America.

That assumption is now called into question on a daily basis.

After a lot of thought on some of these matters, and no thought needed at all for others, here's some of what I believe.

I believe it was wrong to invade Iraq -- militarily, politically, legally, economically. The bad guys weren't in Iraq, they were in Afghanistan, and we put the brakes on our attacks there to go after Saddam Hussein and his oil.

I believe many of our leaders have become way more interested in money and power and privilege than in serving the country, and more than a few of them have crossed the line into criminality to do so.

I believe that many of those leaders believe that, by virtue of their being rich to begin with, they are entitled to more money and power and privilege than the rest of us, and they will stop at nothing to take as much as they can.

I believe that many of them were once good men, whose greed and narrow view of politics has blinded them to what they are doing. I even believe that many of them still think they are doing good, although with a drastically different set of goals and expectations in mind.

I believe that those goals and expectations are based on an absolute best-case scenario that simply does not play out in the real world, and they don't see that, or want to see that, no matter how many times and how much evidence to the contrary is put in front of them.

I believe that there are those who, in pursuit of money and power and privilege, use people's faith to steer them into directions, thoughts, and actions which the people could figure out for themselves are wrong, if only they were given the opportunity -- but that opportunity never comes, because the drumbeat of the stereotypes, of baby killer and faggot and flag burner and welfare mother and so many others, drowns out rational thought.

I believe that many of those leaders could, under some circumstances, see what they are doing to the rest of us, and possibly change their minds. I also believe that some of them will not want to.

And I believe that the American people -- all the American people -- are much more capable of taking charge of their own moral compasses than the above-mentioned leaders want to allow.

If you were offended by my rant the other day, well, I'm not sorry. I mean, I'm sorry your feelings were hurt, but, dammit, it was intended to be a shot to the chops. Tough love, if you like, because I love my conservative and Republican friends. It just happens that I think they're defending the wrong people, and the wrong policies. And I think that we have to get back to a point where we're all on the same track -- where we're all Americans again. Our country is in a dark time, one in which the very nature of America is being questioned.

It shouldn't have to be. America is the best example in the history of civilization that people can rule themselves, and that freedom makes a country stronger, and that everyone's lives can be better without stifling the ability of people to get rich.

But something has gone awry. No matter which side you are on politically, there is a sizable percentage of the population that thinks you are wrong, and in fact fatally, evilly wrong, because of your support of one policy or another, one set of policies or another, one philosophy or another.

All I ask is that you think about it. All I ask is that you ask yourself why.

Why do you support the people and policies you support? Are you in complete agreement with them? Are you making moral or ethical trade-offs? Are you okay with that? Be as brutally honest as you can be -- it's you questioning yourself, and no one else needs to know.

But you've got to live with it.

I started this off with a quote from Batman Begins. I'd like to end it with another one, said both by Thomas Wayne (Bruce's father) and by Alfred:

Why do we fall, sir? So that we might better learn to pick ourselves up.

Now Those Magic Slippers Will Take You Home In Two Seconds

2005-06-26T06:55:00.000-04:00

Last throes, huh? Then why this (as originally reported in the Times of London)?

After weeks of delicate negotiation involving a former Iraqi minister and senior tribal leaders, a small group of insurgent commanders apparently came face to face with four American officials seeking to establish a dialogue with the men they regard as their enemies.

The talks on June 3 were followed by a second encounter 10 days later, according to an Iraqi who said that he had attended both meetings. Details provided to The Sunday Times by two Iraqi sources whose groups were involved indicate that further talks are planned in the hope of negotiating an eventual breakthrough that might reduce the violence in Iraq.

Despite months of American military assaults on supposed insurgent bases, General John Abizaid, the regional US commander, admitted to Congress last week that opposition strength was “about the same” as six months ago and that “there’s a lot of work to be done against the insurgency”.

That work now includes secret negotiations with rebel leaders, according to the Iraqi sources.

Washington seems to be gingerly probing for ways of defusing home-grown Iraqi opposition and of isolating the foreign Islamic militants who have flooded into Iraq to wage holy war against America under the command of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

The talks appear to represent the first serious effort by Americans and Iraqi insurgents to find common ground since violence intensified in the spring. Earlier informal contacts were reported but produced no perceptible progress.

So much for not negotiating with terrorists.

On one level, this is merely the newest example that everything they do is wrong, and everything they say is a lie. This isn't me being anti-administration; this is demonstrable, documented fact.

This particular situation, however, is cause for a small amount of hope -- not because I believe it will be successful; I don't trust The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Str- er, the Bush administration as far as I can spit while inhaling -- but because this sounds as if they realize that the American people want us the hell out of Iraq, and they're trying to find a way to do it... obviously a way that will make the US look as good as possible, but still.

And anything that gets our troops home and safe as quickly as possible, and gets us out of the horrific mess that Bush built, is potentially A Very Good Thing.

I'm Not Going To Subsidize Cowardice

2005-06-26T05:42:00.000-04:00

A new blog you might find interesting, written by liberal traitors who wanted arrest warrants and therapy for the 9/11 terrorists: Taking the Fight to Karl --American Service Men and Women Mad at Karl Rove.

Four Legs Good, Two Legs Bad

2005-06-24T09:46:00.000-04:00

The White House stands behind Karl Rove's remarks.

Therefore, everybody who disagrees with the President is officially an un-American traitor. Liberals wanted to help the terrorists who destroyed the World Trade Center, they want to help the Iraqi insurgency, and they want US troops to die. That is what Rove said; that is what they are telling us is the case.

These people have no shame. They will stoop to any depth. Their only purpose is to win and consolidate power.

Any bets on suspension of the 2006 elections? Martial law? Liberal internment camps by 2007? Repeal of the 22nd Amendment? Nothing's impossible with these evil fucks.

We Three Kings Be Stealin' The Gold

2005-06-24T09:36:00.000-04:00

A most glorious and foul example of Bobo's World:

A Grosse Pointe Woods church treasurer and mother who pleaded no contest to looting at least $700,000 from her congregation's coffers asked for forgiveness -- and probation -- on Thursday.

She didn't get it.

Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy Kenny threw out the sentencing guidelines, which would have seen Janis Ferworn, 45, serve no more than nine months in prison, and hammered her with a five- to 10-year prison sentence.

Ferworn, the former treasurer of Christ the King Lutheran Church in Grosse Pointe Woods, maintained her composure as sheriff's deputies escorted her away immediately.

"Mrs. Ferworn would have done far less damage if she had taken a bulldozer and knocked down the walls of the church," Kenny said. "The reality is that from 1997 through January of 2005, Mrs. Ferworn was a thief of epic proportions."

Ferworn's lawyer, Gary Wilson, noted Thursday that she has five children, including two adopted children ages 9 and 11 and another child younger than 18. The other two are adults.

"But for the two" adopted "children, I couldn't ask for probation," Wilson said. He asked Kenny "to err on the side of grace and consider my client's children."

Unmoved, the judge said Ferworn signed adoption papers with one hand and fraudulent checks with the other.

[...]

"I am horrified at what I did to my church," Ferworn said. "I pray that Christ the King will someday forgive me for these repugnant crimes."

[...]

The theft wiped out a pension for the church's emeritus pastor and hurt a church reconstruction effort and day care funding, prosecutors said. Meanwhile, they claim she lived in a $500,000 home with an in-ground pool and vacationed at a time-share in Hilton Head, S.C.

"I'd love to live in a $500,000 house," Wayne County Assistant Prosecutor Robert Donaldson said. "I've been doing this a long time, and I can't remember a more egregious violation of trust."

[...]

Ferworn swore that she kept the embezzling from her husband, who has not been charged.

Kenny found it hard to believe Roger Ferworn didn't know.

"How could anyone live under the same roof and have $700,000 of tax-free income and not have clue No. 1 that something strange was going on?" the judge said.

The pastor, Randy Boelter, said the embezzlement might turn out to exceed $1.3 million.

"The cost in time and additional resources to ensure our mere survival has been staggering," he said. "While it took Janis Ferworn seven years to systematically drain our finances, it will take us twice as long to rebuild our ministry and restore what existed."

What gets me is the "I am horrified at what I did to my church". No, you weren't, you sorry hypocritical nothing. You were sorry you got caught. If you were sorry for what you did, you wouldn't have done it to the tune of nearly three-quarters of a million dollars and then bought a big fuckin' house with it.

Where do these people come from!?

This Is Some Rescue -- When You Came In Here, Didn't You Have A Plan For Getting Out?

2005-06-24T08:25:00.000-04:00

Robert Parry has an excellent column, inspired by Dubya's incredible statement earlier this week, “I think about Iraq every day. Every single day, because I understand we have troops in harm’s way."

Two things, perhaps more directly than Mr. Parry's points.

George, the troops are in harm's way because you put them there.

And, given that you put them there, that you have spent hundreds of billions of dollars and almost two thousand American lives and God only knows how many Iraqi lives and all of our international reputation to put them there and there's no end in sight, no exit strategy, no plan, you had fucking well better be thinking of Iraq every waking moment.

Thanks to Billy B, in comments at Eschaton, for pointing this out.

Don't Be Here? But Where Am I To Go?

2005-06-23T13:05:00.000-04:00

Once again, profit uber alles:

A divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses against their will for private development in a decision anxiously awaited in communities where economic growth often is at war with individual property rights.

The 5-4 ruling — assailed by dissenting Justice Sanday Day O'Connor as handing "disproportionate influence and power" to the well-heeled in America — was a defeat for some Connecticut residents whose homes are slated for destruction to make room for an office complex. They had argued that cities have no right to take their land except for projects with a clear public use, such as roads or schools, or to revitalize blighted areas.

As a result, cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue.

[...]

O'Connor, who has often been a key swing vote at the court, issued a stinging dissent, arguing that cities should not have unlimited authority to uproot families, even if they are provided compensation, simply to accommodate wealthy developers.
"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random," she wrote. "The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."

Connecticut residents involved in the lawsuit expressed dismay and pledged to keep fighting.

"It's a little shocking to believe you can lose your home in this country," said resident Bill Von Winkle, who said he would refuse to leave his home, even if bulldozers showed up. "I won't be going anywhere. Not my house. This is definitely not the last word."

Scott Bullock, an attorney for the Institute for Justice representing the families, added: "A narrow majority of the court simply got the law wrong today and our Constitution and country will suffer as a result."

At issue was the scope of the Fifth Amendment, which allows governments to take private property through eminent domain if the land is for "public use."

Not much to add, really, except... y'know what gets me most about this? This ruling was handed down by the supposedly "liberal" justices. The dissenters were O'Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas.

See? I can agree with them, if I feel they're right about something.

I'm Mad As Hell, And I'm Not Going To Take This Anymore

2005-06-23T11:45:00.000-04:00

A notice, please, to all my Republican friends. And, as well, to my fair-minded liberal friends, those who hope to compromise with Republicans.

The Republican Party is fuckin' evil. Their masters? Evil. Your president? Evil.

You have a problem with that? Feel like defending them? Well, guess what? You, too, are fuckin' evil.

Let me explain.

It's not merely that the president lied us into a war. Nor merely that they help their friends profit from it. Nor even that they, among many other things, authorized torture, defied international law, overextended our military, destroyed our budget, undermined the Democratic process, savaged our Constitution, screwed up our environment, encouraged a particularly narrow and twisted variant of Christianity as "mainstream values", want to propagandize the public airwaves, and can't be bothered to tell the truth about the fucking weather.

Let's hear what the President's chief advisor, Karl Rove, has to say:

"Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers," Mr. Rove, the senior political adviser to President Bush, said at a fund-raiser in Midtown for the Conservative Party of New York State.

Citing calls by progressive groups to respond carefully to the attacks, Mr. Rove said to the applause of several hundred audience members, "I don't know about you, but moderation and restraint is not what I felt when I watched the twin towers crumble to the ground, a side of the Pentagon destroyed, and almost 3,000 of our fellow citizens perish in flames and rubble."

Told of Mr. Rove's remarks, Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, replied: "In New York, where everyone unified after 9/11, the last thing we need is somebody who seeks to divide us for political purposes."

Mr. Rove also said American armed forces overseas were in more jeopardy as a result of remarks last week by Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, who compared American mistreatment of detainees to the acts of "Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime - Pol Pot or others."

"Has there ever been a more revealing moment this year?" Mr. Rove asked. "Let me just put this in fairly simple terms: Al Jazeera now broadcasts the words of Senator Durbin to the Mideast, certainly putting our troops in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals."

FUCK YOU, Rove.

Let me put it in more elaborate terms, but FUCK YOU. You want a revealing moment? This, more than anything, reveals you as a partisan scumball who cares for nothing except winning.

You know what you're supposed to be doing, shithead? Advising the President on how best to serve the American people. To take care of the nation's business.

I'm still royally pissed off about Durbin's apology. Because Durbin was right. The tactics being used in Guantanamo Bay are the tactics of fascist regimes. And, if not authorized by our leaders, they are certainly enabled, and aren't we supposed to be the fucking Good Guys?

After 9/11, the world came together. Not merely Republicans, not even just Americans. The entire damn world said, "This is wrong, and those who instigated it will pay." The only ones who didn't were [a] the ones who instigated it and [b] Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.

No, what liberals did was also say, "Y'know, these motherfuckers think they have valid reasons for doing this. So, while we're stomping a mudhole in the specific guys who planned and financed the 9/11 attacks, let's try to find out what their grievances are, so that maybe they won't, y'know, keep doing shit like this."

Which, I guess, sounds like coddling, rather than Detective 101: Motive, motive, motive.

No, Rove, you unspeakable monster, you soulless prick, the "motives of liberals" in opposing you are numerous and specific.

You have used 9/11 as an excuse to attack a country, Iraq, which had nothing to do with the attacks.
You have beggared the country's coffers, both to fight your war and to give financial rewards to your friends, cronies, and political backers.
You have got our military stuck in that country, with no way to get out apart from simply cutting and running (which most of us liberals are not in favor of, because, unlike our President, we believe in cleaning up our messes).
You have lied continually about your actions, your tactics, your strategies (or lack thereof), your ways, your means, everything related to that war.
You have twisted the words of those who question or challenge you, accusing them at best of lying and at worst of treason.
You have shamed our country. Once considered the shining light of the world, now we are, by our own definition, a rogue nation.

And you have the fucking unmitigated gall to impugn the motives of the people who tried to stop you from dragging our country through the mud!?

I have a vision of your future, Karl. A very straightforward one. When this whole horrid mess collapses, you are gonna be Defendent #3 at the Hague, right after Bush and Cheney.

And any of you Republicans out there who support this man, who support this President, who support or condone or explain away these policies, who call Democrats traitors for daring to question Dear Leader... you had better deal with a simple fact.

You are fuckin' evil.

When I'm Through, Scuzzbucket, They're Gonna Scape You Off The Walls With A Squeegee

2005-06-16T15:33:00.000-04:00

The inestimable William Rivers Pitt is live-blogging Rep. John Conyers [D.-MI]'s hearing on the Downing Street Memo. Amazing stuff.

What Are You Talking About, "Variety"? Hostages? You Want To Fuck Some Other Women Now? Is That What You're Talking About, Mickey?

2005-06-14T11:45:00.000-04:00

Okay, the circus is over.

No, it's not.

The pundits now ponder Michael Jackson's future.

The old bit about critics being like eunuchs in a harem -- they can observe, critique, possibly even facilitate, but they can't do it themselves -- seems especially apt with such fatuities as this:

"We don't want to see a Judy Garland," UK-based [DJ and music historian Paul] Gambaccini told the BBC, referring to the Hollywood actress who struggled with addiction to prescription drugs and alcohol in her later years. "We could see a Judy Garland."

Heaven forfend we see a Judy Garland.

Out in the real fucking world, we've got war, earthquakes, pestilence, nuclear tensions, cronyism, Microsoft-sanctioned censorship, a failed drug war, and the occasional startling ineptitude. Now that Jacko's off the hook, could the media be bothered to pay a little attention to that stuff, hmmm?

Didn't think so.

In The History Of This Camp, That Was The Most Infamous, The Most Disgusting, The Most Revolting Display Of Hooliganism We Have Ever Had

2005-06-09T18:00:00.000-04:00

By way of Oliver Willis, I found out about ArchPundit's lovely smackdown of the hilariously-named Pharmacists for Life. Short form: They're referring to Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich as "Slobodan" Blagojevich, intending to equate his upholding state law and allowing women to get legal, prescribed contraceptives with this guy's psychotic genocide. Now that's a moral thing to do.

For more background, I refer you to this superb article from Prevention Magazine a couple of years back. But here's the gist, from my view:

Contraceptives are legal.

Pharmacists are not doctors. They are pill-counters and retail clerks. (And, yes, I know that they actually do undergo extensive training. I have a couple of pharmacist friends. Don't split hairs.) They in no way inform the doctor-patient relationship.

If you're a pharmacist with a problem dispensing legally prescribed drugs, get the fuck out of the pharmacy business.

And get your goddamned God away from my friends' reproductive organs.

Go, Greased Lightning, You're Burnin' Up The Quarter Mile

2005-06-07T10:40:00.000-04:00

Oh, this is just spiff:

General Motors Corp. plans to eliminate 25,000 jobs in the United States by 2008 and to close plants as part of a strategy to revive its struggling North American operations.

Speaking to shareholders at GM's 96th annual shareholder meeting in Delaware Tuesday morning, Chairman and Chief Executive Rick Wagoner said the capacity and job cuts will generate annual savings of roughly $2.5 billion.

Wagoner revealed the cutbacks as he laid out a four-step strategy to revive GM's North American business, the biggest and most troubling part of the world's largest automaker.

Wagoner focused on priorities for clarifying the role of each of GM's eight brands, intensifying efforts to reduce cost and improve quality and continuing to search for ways to reduce skyrocketing health care costs.

He noted that the company's current $1,500 per worker health-care expense puts GM at a "significant disadvantage versus foreign-based competitors," and said GM has conducted "intense discussions" with the unions about how to reduce health-care costs.
[...]
In the cost-reduction area, Wagoner said it was vital for the company to improve efficiency at its manufacturing plants. He said that plant closings and idlings in recent months have reduced assembly capacity in North America from 6 million in 2002 to 5 million by the end of this year.

Several things.

First, perhaps GM should figure out what kinds of cars people want to buy, at what prices, and retool their operation to produce those cars, rather than freak and put tens of thousands of people out of work.

Second, this is yet another example of why we really need to start thinking about universal health care. Just because GM lays off those 25,000 does not mean they will not get sick -- it just means that their illnesses must be paid for by other means, and probably a good hunk of that will be in emergency room visits eaten by the hospital, or by Medicare or Medicaid, or some other method that will likely cost more than GM's $1,500.

Third, the GM jobs are nowhere near the only ones affected. Parts manufacturers, car dealerships, insurance and financing corporations... all the industries based on the auto industry.

Fourth, thanks to the joys of an illegal war, stupid subsidies, no-bid contracts, immense tax cuts for the rich, removal of bankruptcy protections, and more pork in the budget than there is in Meridian, Texas, we are rapidly getting to a point where, even if we wanted to, we can't pay for it. Whatever it is we want to pay for, we simply can't pay for it.

In the endless quest for profit uber alles, our economy is being transformed from one based on manufacturing to one based on service. The bottom line, the most bang for the buck, has become the be-all and end-all. That bit about it being "... vital... to improve efficiency at its manufacturing plants" means "making a smaller work force do the same amount as a larger work force".

This is where following only the money takes you. If you keep producing fewer products, and your customer base is financially unable to buy them from you, how do you expect to keep in business?

Unfortunately, there is no easy solution. It's all tangled up in the Great Circle of Bushonomics. The tax cuts are too high, the deficits are too high, the price of private health care is too high, and I suspect we're past the point of negotiating these things individually. It's gonna take a crisis.

But that may give the people the Occam's Razor necessary to slice through the Georgian Knot.

You Have Meddled With The Primal Forces Of Nature, Mr. Beale, And I Won't Have It

2005-06-03T15:20:00.000-04:00

The big news story this week has been the revelation, in Vanity Fair Magazine, that W. Mark Felt was "Deep Throat", the anonymous informant who helped Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein blow the lid off the Nixon administration.

To me, the funniest -- and vilest -- part of the whole exercise has been the taking to task of Felt. And not just by anybody, either.

By Ben Stein, former Nixon speechwriter.

Peggy Noonan, High Priestess of the First Church of Reagan.

Pat Buchanan, another Nixon speechwriter.

Chuck Colson, psychopath for Jesus.

G. Gordon Liddy, convicted Watergate burglar.

All kindsa folks. You can keep up on it at Deep Throat: Uncovered. But there are two important things to keep in mind -- two important things this barrage of talking heads is trying to do.

First, most of these specific talking heads were in the Nixon administration, and a few of them were involved in the burglary and underlying political plot. They are trying to vilify Felt to scour their own tarnished reputations. They are trying to rewrite history.

Second, they are trying to prevent a Deep Throat of the Bush administration to come forward. They want people to be so afraid of having their characters assassinated and their lives and careers destroyed (not that that's ever happened before) that they'll never come forth with the dirt on the Bushes.

First rule of Republican politics: Win at any cost. The law, the Constitution, people's lives do not matter. All that matters is winning, and if possible making the other guy hurt as much as possible.

So Liddy, who did prison time for his monkey business, not only badmouths the guy who put him away, but how he put him away, the thief lecturing the informant about honor. Noonan calls Colson, one of the most pathetic and hypocritical men in modern American politics, one of the true heroes of Watergate. Pat Buchanan says that millions of deaths in Vietnam and Cambodia were the fault of Felt, for bringing Nixon down when, gosh darn it, all he was trying to do was to save the world.

Everybody says how wonderful Nixon was.

Keep this in mind, and tell everyone you speak to about this to remember it:

In the name of Richard Nixon, these people tried to subvert the Constitution. They committed crimes. Some of them went to prison. Why should anyone listen to them at all, and what does anyone think they're going to say about the man who helped catch them?

"Family" Means No One Gets Left Behind, Or Forgotten

2005-05-30T16:42:00.000-04:00

You say you "support our troops"?

Perrspectives has a fantastic list of links to sites and services that let you do exactly that. Not cutesy ideas; not signs, slogans, bumper stickers, magnetic ribbons, or all that. Real ways to help the troops and their families.

Thanks to Tena at First Draft for pointing this one out.

Calling It Your Job Don't Make It Right, Boss

2005-05-30T09:46:00.000-04:00

Yet another story you might not have heard about over the all-important Jacko trial:

Seven of 10 classroom teachers in a tiny school district resigned after a colleague was fired for helping an 11-year-old girl who was left alone in a playground to pick up rocks as punishment.

The fourth-grader in the East Lynne School District in Cass County was assigned the task last September for refusing to do her schoolwork, but she was unsupervised except for a security camera. The playground was near a road but inside a fence.

The fired teacher, Christa Price, went to the principal — who is also the district superintendent — and asked him to reconsider the punishment, but he wouldn’t. So on her free period, Price helped the girl pick up rocks. Other teachers watched the girl the next day.

At contract time in March, Superintendent Dan Doerhoff recommended firing Price, a popular teacher who had had good performance evaluations, for insubordination. Seven other teachers then chose not to return their contracts.

“If a teacher who advocates on behalf of safety of a student is not fit to be a teacher at East Lynne or anywhere in Missouri according to this administration, then none of us are fit to teach at East Lynne,” the teachers who resigned said Tuesday in a statement.

Okay, first thing: Picking up rocks? I got one for ya, bright boy, O District Superintendent -- why not have her do her schoolwork? Or are you just trying to inculcate that prison mentality a little early?

On multiple days?

How exactly is it, Mr. Doerhoff, that you're qualified to have anything with education, or, for that matter, children? What were the rocks for, asshat? Got a corner of the lawn that needs landscaping, or something?

The only thing this particular punishment would do, as far as I can tell, is to increase the girl's bitterness and resentment and physical danger. Unsupervised? Near the road? Oh, nothing ever happens to kids left alone like that.

And so, a teacher who finds this unfair helps the girl and shows her that not all the adults are stupid, petty, petulant, and arbitrary. And that teacher gets fired by the dipshit that started the whole thing.

And now you've lost 70% of your educators.

Thank you for single-handedly screwing up your entire school district. When are you up for re-election, again...?

Seems To Me, Cap'n, This Mission Is A Serious Misallocation Of Valuable Military Resources

2005-05-30T09:00:00.000-04:00

I have actually seen and heard the phrase "Happy Memorial Day".

What have we become as a people, that for many today is a day off from work, a day to barbecue, a day to buy things on sale, and nothing more?

For those who have forgotten: This is what today is about.

And this.

And this.

And this.

And, though our government really doesn't want you to think about them, this, this, this, this, and this. (Not for the squeamish... but some people really need to take a good, long look.)

(Crossposted to Digital Acoustic LiveJournal.)

I'll Do Anything For A Woman With A Knife

2005-05-26T08:01:00.000-04:00

Sorry for not having anything for several days -- I'm getting ready for a big gig at MarCon in Columbus, and it's been consuming all my time and energy. But I would be remiss if I did not recommend this remarkable post by Athenae at First Draft. Just go read it all.

KEEP SINGING!

2005-05-14T11:35:00.000-04:00

A little G&S parodying for your morning, off this thread at Eschaton:

I am the very model of a right-wing intellectual,
My arguments are pedantic, ill-advised, and ineffectual,
I set up straw men, knock them down, declare myself too smart by half,
And contradict myself at least in every other paragraph;

I take a condescending tone, as if to teach a stubborn child,
I really want to soothe the rabble, keep them docile, keep them mild,
I play at being common man, though strictly of the ruling class,
And can't unravel why I'm called a who-d'you-think-you're-fooling ass.

I dare not ask a question of Dear Leader and his underlings,
They've promised that at some point I'll receive some minor Mordor rings,
So, to the hem of power I cling, and let things go to Heck I will,
In short, the very model of a right-wing intellectual!

---

Chimpy.
Oh, better far to be a jerk
And complain my job is such hard work,
Than talk of problems that we've shared,
And act as if I really cared.
Away to the mundane world go you,
Where having three jobs is better than two;
But I’ll do better than Dad, the wimp,
And live and die a Pirate Chimp.

For I am a Pirate Chimp!
A lying, cheating, bone-stupid imp,
That's me, the Pirate Chimp!

I am a Pirate Chimp!
Chorus.
You are!
Hurrah for our Pirate Chimp!
Chimpy.
A cheerleader, not a commie symp,
That's me, the Pirate Chimp.
Chorus.
He is!
Hurrah for our Pirate Chimp!
Chimpy & Chorus.
Hurrah for the/our Pirate Chimp!

Chimpy.
When I give a speech, my handlers quake,
Ready to correct the least mistake.
I break a few more laws, it’s true,
Than a legal monarch ought to do;
But the problem with democracy
Is it impedes aristocracy,
My circle must stay well-to-do,
How else can we keep from being like you?

For I am a Pirate Chimp!
And for food and health care I won't scrimp,
That's me, the Pirate Chimp!

I am a Pirate Chimp!
Chorus.
You are!
Hurrah for the Pirate Chimp!
Chimpy.
Now bend over and take it till I'm limp,
'Cause I'm the Pirate Chimp.
Chorus.
He is!
Hurrah for our Pirate Chimp!
Chimpy & Chorus.
Hurrah for the/our Pirate Chimp!

Intelligence Officer! Stupidity Officer Is More Like It -- Pentagon Wants To Open A Stupidity Division, They Know Who They Can Get To Lead It

2005-05-12T08:45:00.000-04:00

Mah-mah-mah-myyy Sirota found a beaut:

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are [a] few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
- President Dwight D. Eisenhower, 11/8/54

Given that President Bush, a Texas oil millionaire, is trying to abolish social security as we know it, starve unemployment programs, weaken labor laws, and gut rural/farm programs, I predict that Pat Robertson and Zell Miller will publicly denounce Ike as a gay-kissing Hollywood welfare queen.

(Yes, I freely just copied and pasted this one. No credit to me; all credit to David Sirota -- I just wanted more people to see it, is all.)

Just Get Up Off The Ground, That's All I Ask -- Get Up There With That Lady That's Up On Top Of This Capital Dome, The Lady That Stands For Liberty

2005-05-11T12:00:00.000-04:00

The Princeton Fristibusters are trying to make noise and increase awareness of Bill Frist's efforts to gut Senate rules and destroy the filibuster. They're just hitting Washington, DC today, but there are similar efforts at colleges all across America. If you happen to see 'em, give 'em a little love, say hi, something. They're fighting for your democracy, too.

Thanks to genoasail at Atrios.

You're Only Supposed To Blow The Bloody Doors Off

2005-05-10T22:23:00.000-04:00

This is what happens when you jam your foot in your mouth and gargle:

A Baptist preacher accused of running out nine congregants who disagreed with his Republican politics resigned Tuesday, two days after calling the issue "a great misunderstanding."

[...]

"I don't believe he preached politics," church member Rhonda Trantham said. "I don't believe anyone should tell a preacher not to preach what's in the Bible."

But some congregants of the 100-member church in western North Carolina have said Chandler endorsed President Bush from the pulpit during last year's presidential campaign and said that anyone who planned to vote for Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry needed to "repent or resign."

The church members said he continued to preach about politics after Bush won re-election, culminating with a church gathering last week in which the nine members said they were voted out.

At Sunday's service, the 33-year-old Chandler said the flap over the church members' dismissal was "a great misunderstanding" and he tried to welcome them back.

"No one has ever been voted from the membership of this church due to an individual's support or lack of support for a political party or candidate," he said in a statement.

As reported here a few days ago, this guy specifically kicked nine people out of his church for supporting John Kerry and voting Democratic. So he's a liar, as well as a big-mouthed weakling who folds quickly.

The fact that his church was officially reported to the IRS Monday for violating the no-electioneering laws for churches might've also had something to do with it.

In any case, I'm sure we haven't seen the last of Mr. Chandler. He'll be on O'Reilly and Hannity; he'll be a cause celebre for those who believe that Christians are oppressed in this country; heck, maybe he'll be former Judge Roy Moore's running mate in 2008.

And he'll still be wrong on every level.

"Ives... Ives... Oh, Yes. Archibald Ives. Scot. The Photograph Doesn't Do Justice." "I'd Like To See One Of You Under Similar Circumstances."

2005-05-10T10:20:00.000-04:00

The ever delightful Congressman F. James Sensenbrenner, R-WI, has snuck a piece of legislation that's odious even for him onto an Iraq War appropriations bill: The Real ID Act, which would standardize driver's licenses across the country, electronically encode lots of personal information into lots and lots of "common machine-readable technology" data bases, and barring illegal immigrants from getting a driver's license. So, even more government intrusion into your personal information, easy access for identity thieves, and a whole bunch of untrained, unmonitored, likely uninsured drivers. Good plan, fuckwit.

Naturally, as this was stuck onto a different bill which had no debate, it's already passed the US House. So read up on it and contact your Senator.

(Cross-posted to Digital Acoustic Livejournal.)

Do You Ever Think About Things That You DO Think About?

2005-05-09T20:21:00.000-04:00

Scopes 2: Electric Boogaloo has already got one of the great quotes of the year:

The scientists' boycott was led by the American Association for the Advancement of Science and Kansas Citizens for Science, which believe the hearings are rigged against the teaching of evolution.

Scientists said they don't see the need to cram their arguments into a few days of testimony, like out-of-state witnesses who were called by advocates of the "intelligent design" theory.

But the boycott has frustrated board members who viewed their hearings as an educational forum.

"I am profoundly disappointed that they've chosen to present their case in the shadows," board member Connie Morris said. "I would have enjoyed hearing what they have to say in a professional, ethical manner."

(Emphasis mine.)

Lessee -- that would be the scientific peer community, you superstitious ditz. Studies, data, analysis, everything checked and double-checked and then checked again, before it's finally written and published... and then checked and double-checked and then checked again by scientists around the world, making sure that the results are duplicatable. Everything they've ever said on the subject has been in the full light of day, professionally and ethically available for review and, if necessary, refutation.

As opposed to the much easier to describe, but slightly more difficult to verify, "Let there be light".

And I Thought, "What The Hell, Let's Try It Once With A Woman And See What Those Straight Guys Are Raving About"

2005-05-09T19:06:00.000-04:00

Hey, gay-bashers! Suck on -- erm, read this:

Gay men's brains respond differently from those of heterosexual males when exposed to a sexual stimulus, researchers have found. The homosexual men's brains responded more like those of women when the men sniffed a chemical from the male hormone testosterone.
"It is one more piece of evidence ... that is showing that sexual orientation is not all learned," said Sandra Witelson, an expert on brain anatomy and sexual orientation at the Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada.

Witelson, who was not part of the research team, said the findings clearly show a biological involvement in sexual orientation.

Which is what we've been trying to tell all these people who insist that gays can be "reprogrammed". Look, if you happen to be one of those folks, here's a lot of useful, honest information about sexual orientation, mm-kay? Read it and get back to us, and quit abusing your children.

You're A Team -- Like Bert And Ernie! Superman And Clark Kent!

2005-05-09T18:51:00.000-04:00

Arianna Huffington has got a new super-blog going. The line-up is spectacular, including Senator Jon Corzine, Larry David, John Cusack and Walter Cronkite. Joe Bob sez check it out.

Well, My Nuts Are Halfway Up My Ass, But, Other Than That, I'm Perfect

2005-05-06T07:50:00.000-04:00

You may have gleaned that I have a little problem with religion as practiced in America. It's almost comforting to know the feeling is mutual.

As reported first at Democratic Underground and expanded upon at The Daily Kos, but most importantly as broadcast over local TV news, the East Waynesville Baptist Church in North Carolina has kicked out all of its Democratic members.

The minister spearheaded an effort to communicate nine members over abortion rights and homosexuality. Pastor Chan Chandler (sorry, not sure of spelling) believes that if you supported John Kerry or the Democratic Party, you are against the church... but he says his actions are not politically motivated. Forty other church members have left in protest.

The Kos page has some interesting strategies and ideas, foremost being challenging the church's tax-exempt status. But, as far as I'm concerned, the big message from this is:

The war for the soul of America is on.

These people, these superstitious, frightened folks who can't imagine living in a world where God didn't wave his Almighty hand and make stuff, who value the act of birth more than they value the health of the mother or the post-birth life of the child, who think that same-sex marriage is a greater threat than rising deficits or being in an illegal war, want to turn America into the Republic of Gilead -- a theocracy in which the law of God is more important than the laws of men.

Which is, y'know, one of the reasons that the law of God was not even mentioned in the Constitution.

The religious flakes want to cast different-thinking people out of society, folks.

The war for the soul of America is on.

Has This New Land Turned Thee Into A Heathen?

2005-05-03T08:05:00.000-04:00

Bad law, bad law, what you gonna do, what you gonna do when they're tracking you:

Spurred by the killing of a 9-year-old girl, Gov. Jeb Bush on Monday signed a law imposing tougher penalties on child molesters and requiring many of those released from prison to wear satellite tracking devices for the rest of their lives.

[...]

The Jessica Lunsford Act was quickly drafted after Jessica's death was discovered in March and was pushed through by lawmakers outraged that the man accused of killing her was a registered sex offender. It passed both the Senate and House unanimously.

It establishes a mandatory sentence of 25 years to life behind bars for people convicted of certain sex crimes against children 11 and younger, with lifetime tracking by global positioning satellite after they are freed.

[...]

The 25-year minimum would not apply to anyone convicted of molesting older children. Those offenders would have to be monitored electronically only during their probation, not for life.

Some offenders already on the street could be ordered back to jail or be placed under GPS monitoring if they violated their probation.

Lots of other states have minimum mandatory sentences for sex crimes against children. A number of states already require some form of lifetime supervision of sex offenders, including GPS tracking, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

However, Florida's new law may be the first requirement of lifetime GPS monitoring for an entire group of people who commit a certain crime, the NCSL said.

Florida's new law could also open the door to the death penalty for more killers, because it allows a defendant's status as a sexual predator to be considered as an aggravating factor during sentencing for a murder.

First, the yes-Saddam-was-bad part of the argument. Sexual abuse in any form is bad. Sexual abuse of children is particularly awful. This case was tragic.

But this law is wrong. Dangerously, stupidly wrong.

First -- it sets differing legal values to different ages of children. For an eleven-year-old, we'll hound you for the rest of your life, but for a thirteen-year-old, just for twenty-five years. You don't think this will be challenged, noisily?

Second -- and, again, I am no fan of any sex offender, expecially one whose target is children -- when people are convicted of a crime in this country, they have to pay a "debt to society". But, as we've seen for several years, with child molesters having to register where they live and some of them wearing GPSs for finite periods of time, they keep paying and paying. Now they want to create a class of former criminal that they still know the whereabouts of 24/7. What the hell chance is there of someone rebuilding their life under these circumstances? How can, and why should, they even try to fit into a society that will not let them atone for their past misdeeds?

(This is not so much a note of sympathy for child molesters -- although I believe they suffer a form of mental illness and need some damn help -- as it is pointing out that, when you corner a predator, it does tend to strike back. Hounding these people and calling them "SEX CRIMINAL" with every breath will tend to reinforce that, y'know?)

Third -- this lifetime GPS tracking. If they can do it for one crime, one circumstance, one anything, they can and will do it for others. And if you say, "Well, I'm not a criminal, they won't do any such thing to me", I will point out that some people in this country want to disqualify others from public office on the basis of their faith or race. How long before such disqualification slid down into crime, given the right amount of elbow grease, lung power, and collective bigotry?

We as a people have a tendency to deal with symptoms rather than solving the core problems. Any time we do go after the core problems, we make things better for decades at a time, e.g., labor laws, Social Security, etc. This is another instance of treating the symptom but ignoring the disease, and we're too good a country to keep doing that, dammit. It might actually be fairer to just declare all child molestation crimes punishable by life in prison without parole -- because all this is is a big, permanent, electronic scarlet letter.

Look! A Four-Legged Aeropolane!

2005-05-02T19:50:00.000-04:00

As my colleagues Athenae and Tena are so fond of saying, HIT 'EM WITH THE CHAIR:

Unfortunately, the mainstream media in the United States was too busy with wall-to-wall coverage of a "runaway bride" to cover a bombshell report out of the British newspapers. The London Times reports that the British government and the United States government had secretly agreed to attack Iraq in 2002, before authorization was sought for such an attack in Congress, and had discussed creating pretextual justifications for doing so.

The Times reports, based on a newly discovered document, that in 2002 British Prime Minister Tony Blair chaired a meeting in which he expressed his support for "regime change" through the use of force in Iraq and was warned by the nation's top lawyer that such an action would be illegal. Blair also discussed the need for America to "create" conditions to justify the war.

The document itself is revealing as it indicates that "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." This is the British government proclaiming foreknowledge of the manipulation of intelligence many of us have alleged for some time.

It also quotes the British Foreign Secretary as stating about the case for war: "the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force."
This should not be allowed to fall down the memory hole during wall-to-wall coverage of the Michael Jackson trial and a runaway bride....

Following that is a letter, written to the President, basically calling him on his bullshit and demanding an investigation. If you haven't already followed that link above, do it now and go read it.

This is the kind of thing that every Democrat in Congress should be trumpeting about every day. You guys can each take a favorite atrocity if you'd like -- it's not like you'll run out.

Meanwhile, go visit Mr. Conyers and show some love.

Relax, Baby -- This Is Better Than Sex

2005-05-01T21:40:00.000-04:00

Of course.

Dear Governor Bush:

I am writing you concerning the pregnant 13 year old Florida girl known as "LG" who is currently in the custody of DCF.

I'm sure you are familiar with the details of this case, so I will press the most urgent point of the entire matter.

Governor Bush, under no circumstances should LG's baby be killed by abortion. I am begging you to not allow a repeat of the Terry Schindler fiasco, which results in the death of another innocent person.

Please Mr. Governor, use every means at your disposal to ensure that this innocent unborn child is brought to full-term, and delivered alive. Pro-abortion zealots at the ACLU and pro-abortion judges must not be allowed to snuff out the life of this unique human being.

Moreover, it is clear that LG is a deeply troubled young woman. God knows that she is probably the victim of multiple sexual crimes against her. If she is not already there, she is certainly on track for a long list of self-abusive and self-destructive behaviors which could (God forbid) bring her life to a tragic and premature end.

If she is permitted or pressured into having this abortion, it will be one more mountain of guilt that she will have to carry on her young back. This will be a horrifying, defining moment for her, which will bring no long term relief or solutions to her turbulent life, and will only compound her grief and the emotional crises she will face in the future.

For whatever reasons that Providence has permitted, the eyes of the nation continue to focus on life and death issues in Florida, and hence on you as our Governor. I pray that you will be a stalwart champion for life and justice, unflinching in the face of criticism, a man equal to the battles the lie before you.

Please fight for this baby's life, and do not surrender this unborn child to the hands of his would-be slayers under any circumstances.

God's peace and long life to you,

Randall Terry

cc: Governor Bush's press secretary; Legal Counsel for Governor's office

I'm not even sure where to start.

Yes, I am. Randall Terry is a religious terrorist. He is one of the slimiest, most sanctimonious hypocrites imaginable. He butted into the Schiavo circus; he has incited other religious terrorists to murder health care providers.

And now he wants to force this thirteen-year-old girl to bear a child she herself knows she is not able to care for, a birth far more medically risky than an abortion.

This is why we have abortion laws in this country. This is why we have privacy laws.

It is no business whatsoever of Randall Terry or any-damn-body else except her whether or not she chooses to have an abortion. It is not his call whether a lump of cells with the potential to grow into a human has more rights than an actual human.

And, of course, his smarmy propaganda cap was on with this little missive. The reference to Terri Schindler, as if she hadn't gone by the name Schiavo. Already calling LG's fetus male.

Equating the Schiavo circus to this situation at all.

See, on the one hand, we had a woman who had expressed wishes not to be kept alive in a vegetative state, who hadn't written those wishes down. She suffered a terrible illness which literally destroyed her brain. Her husband fought for fifteen years to simply let her go so he could respect her wishes and remember her as she was. Her parents didn't want to give up their baby. A whole lot of court action and a whole lot of ugliness later, that family is shattered, and who is on their side now? Is Randall Terry or Jeb Bush or Dubya or Tom Delay or Bill Frist calling up the Schindlers and inviting them over to drown their sorrows and commisserate?

On the other hand, we have a young woman -- a girl, yet biologically capable of having a child -- who's been put in foster care because of her home situation. We don't know exactly what it was, but, hey. They took her out of it and made her a ward of the state. And she ended up pregnant, almost certainly as a result of statutory rape (it could be a Romeo & Juliet thing, but I'm not holding my breath). And she was counselled, and -- because she was so young, because she couldn't get a job, because it was physically dangerous to bear a child at her age, because as a minor the state would take the baby from her anyway -- she decided that the best thing to do would be to have an abortion. It is her legal right to do so. But now a man who doesn't know her, who will not care one whit for her or her baby after its birth, a man who puts his God's "law" well before the laws of man, state and society -- a man whose only goal is his sociopathic power agenda against women and their wombs -- is writing to the governor of Florida... and everybody is perfectly aware that the governor might listen to him.

Randall Terry has no goddamn business butting into anyone else's life. Period. He refers to the ACLU as "zealots" because they attempt to enforce and protect the Bill of Rights. The zealot is Randall Terry himself.

And, once again, I have to ask: Is their God so weak that He must employ thugs such as this to enforce His will? Or is His will being perverted to the vile purposes of Randall Terry and his type? Or, horror of horrors, Mr. Terry, what if in fact there is no God, and you just like having power over women in the most intimate and personal matters possible?

Thanks to OrangeClouds115 for his diary on this at The Daily Kos.

(Edited slightly for clarity.)

But, George, Do You Think The Children Will Be Safe Without Nana?

2005-04-28T12:05:00.000-04:00

How cruel do you have to be to do this to a child?

As a 13-year-old Palm Beach County girl prepared this week to end a pregnancy she says she does not want, the Florida Department of Children and Families went to court to stop her from having the abortion.

The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the state's position Wednesday, saying DCF is overstepping its authority and violating the girl's constitutional rights.

The girl, identified only as L.G., lives in a shelter for abused and neglected teens and found out two weeks ago during a doctor's appointment that she is pregnant. Soon after, she told her DCF caseworker in Palm Beach County that she wanted an abortion.

The caseworker scheduled an appointment for the girl to have an abortion Tuesday and planned to drive her to the office, according to an appeal filed by the ACLU. On the same day, lawyers for DCF filed an emergency motion to stop L.G. from terminating her pregnancy.

In a hearing that day before Juvenile Court Judge Ronald Alvarez, the state argued that Florida law gives DCF authority to prevent L.G. from having an abortion. The state said the girl was not able to make an informed decision because of her age and immaturity, according to the appeal filed Wednesday by the ACLU.

[...]

The Supreme Court has established that nobody has the right to determine L.G.'s best interests but L.G. herself, the ACLU argues.

L.G., who is 13 weeks pregnant, does not believe she can care for herself or a child, said Bob Bertisch, the director of Palm Beach County's Legal Aid Society.

The girl has received counseling from a women's health clinic, talked about her decision with responsible adults and knows the medical risks of abortion, the ACLU and Legal Aid Society wrote in the appeal.

The ACLU asked the courts to act quickly. As she moves into the third month of her pregnancy, the abortion will become more risky, they said.

L.G.'s case continues a debate that started in 2003, in the case of J.D.S., a severely retarded women who was raped in a state group home. Gov. Bush intervened in that case, asking that the state be allowed to appoint a guardian to speak for the best interests of the fetus. The courts rejected his efforts as unconstitutional.

J.D.S. ultimately carried the baby to term, and a family adopted "Baby Grace."

Bush's critics argued that the state should have been more worried about how J.D.S. was raped in the first place, and they pointed out that she herself did not have a guardian until the pregnancy.

ACLU attorney James K. Green echoed those criticisms in the case of L.G. Until she became pregnant, the 13-year-old also had no guardian to represent her interests in court.

The state, Green said, should be more concerned with how L.G. was able to get pregnant in state care.

However it happened, Simon said, "forcing a 13-year-old to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term... is just plain cruel. This is what you get when ideology dictates child welfare decisions."

How is Florida wrong? Let me count the ways:

A 13-year-old girl in foster care got pregnant.

A legal medical procedure is being blocked because someone else is morally offended. Sound familiar?

A young woman who wants an abortion, and who has been counselled about it and understands what she is doing, finds the people who are supposed to be caring for her instead trying to force her to have a baby because of her "age and immaturity".

A young woman who recognizes that she cannot care for a child is being told she must have one.

And these assholes believe they're moral why?