TERI'S TIRADES

Here's the thing about Joe Paterno and Mike McQueary

2011-11-10T16:05:00.002-06:00

You see a grown man raping a child, you stop him, beat the dog crap out of him, and call the police. There's no - I told someone who told someone, and no one did anything about the pedophile with access to dozens of extremely vulnerable children. WTF?

That part of the entire BULLSHIT conspiracy doesn't ring true at all to me. It's hard for me to swallow that Paterno and McQueary just "told" someone and didn't think they had the duty to do anything else about it. I'm a 5'2" girl, and I would have beaten the dog crap out of someone if I saw them doing that, and hounded them to the ends of the Earth until children were safe from them and they were locked up. Who wouldn't do that? What kind of sub-human just looks the other way? It's baffling that anyone thinks we would buy that crap.

Hate Groups Torture Families of Dead Children and Soldiers with the Supreme Court's Blessing, While "Occupy" Protesters Gassed and Arrested

2011-10-26T09:48:00.008-05:00

Police Fire Tear Gas at Occupy Protesters in Oakland

I actually don't think the President has the authority to tell all states, counties, cities, and private parties in the country that they have to let people protest in spite of whatever their local laws are. Further, I don't think it would be a good idea to make this a Democrat vs. Republican thing, and I don't think that would be helpful to the protesters either. I actually think we can get republicans on our side. A lot of them already are given the approval ratings of the Occupy protesters. Not all republicans are totally brainwashed by Faux Spews, and the point of all of this is the 99% who are ALL being dramatically affected by and angry as hell at Wall Street.

One thing I am certain of, is Pres. Obama is weighing all these considerations carefully.

However, if some officials and police around the country continue to behave as if they are on the verge of turning into Mubarak or Gaddafi, at some point, something very, very bad is going to happen, and then, a chain of events none of us has ever even considered might be set into motion, for better or worse.

|

Marine Vet Injured Last Night As Riot Police Attack Occupy Oakland

Last night, Occupy Oakland was attacked by riot police for the second night, with the department using heavy-handed tactics to disburse protesters. Video has emerged of Scott Olsen, a Marine veteran affiliated with Veterans for Peace, being carried away after being injured by non-lethal weapons.

It's very hard to understand how this is happening to peaceful, legitimate protesters in my country, including military veterans who put their lives on the line for the rights they are trying to exercise, when those God Hates Fags/Westboro Bapt. Church monsters can legally protest at soldiers' and childrens' funerals.

Gaddafi Dead

2011-10-21T08:21:00.005-05:00

They showed video of Gaddafi on ABC news today. I was streaming the president's statement regarding his death, and before the president came to the podium, ABC showed the video. It's only a minute or so, taken with a cell phone I'd guess. It's not graphic violence, but it's hard to watch. Gaddafi is in a huge crowd, being pulled and shoved and knocked around. He is haggard and bloodied, and he is clearly terrified, mortally terrified, and for good reason.

What I found jarring about it wasn't any blood or gore, but the intense fear and rage so visible and palpable in that short clip. You know you are watching someone who is about to be violently killed, someone who surely knows it. This is no movie - it is real, and thank God we don't see that very often, nor do we want to.

I found it extremely hard to take, deserved or not. Surely other leaders in the world who are oppressing their people and trying to stamp out human dignity and cries for freedom should take heed.

Really? The Tea Party is Reinventing Reality Saying Their Movement Was Peaceful? Evidence to the contrary.

2011-10-14T12:24:00.007-05:00

WTF!?! I'm SO sick of hearing the Tea Party act as if they were so innocent, like scampering, impish cherubs wagging their finger at big government with flowers and peace signs floating behind them. Fox Spews and Tea Party sheep keep pointing to the arrests in the Occupy movement, arrests related to WHERE they are protesting and not violence or threats, as some sort of condemnation of them as violent criminals.

Give me a freaking break! The Tea Party was/is infested with RACIST, VIOLENT, CRAZY, BRAIN-WASHED, LYING, GUN-TOTING, EXTREMIST FREAKS, including militia and supremacy groups that the Dept. of Homeland Security issued a freaking threat warning about!

And as for the Occupy protesters message being incoherent, the message is so simple, so elegant in its coherence that anyone can understand it: Occupy WALL STREET! They are protesting WALL STREET's power and influence. I'm so sick of the politics of "I know you are, but what am I." It's Faux Spews' signature strategy, and it's a CHILDREN'S TAUNT for God's sake!

There were reports and concern about Tea Party violence and criminality, so Fox says I know you are but what am I about the Occupy protesters. There was no coherence in the Tea Party message, so Fox says I know you are but what am I about the Occupy protesters. It's the SAME crap they always do, and some small minority of people actually buy it. Frankly, it's MADDENING to see my fellow citizens so easily manipulated by a strategy that a 10 year should see through.

However, they are NOT going to re-event reality, as they are so fond of doing on Faux Spews. I have links in this blogs to several articles you may find interesting related to Tea Party violence and threats, which of course were buried under miles of craptastic made up nonsense in the search engines:

Time Magazine - "Behavior: A Chilling Wave of Racism"

Washington Post: "Lawmakers concerned as health-care overhaul foes resort to violence"

Media Matters: "Conservatives warn of social-fasc- commun-Nazi-McCarthy-Marxism | Media Matters for America"

Washington Post: "Ezra Klein - We have something to fear from fear-mongering itself"

CBS News: "Could Tea Party Rhetoric Lead to Another Oklahoma City?"

The Examiner: "Homeland Security issues report warning of right wing extremists one week before Tea Party events"

CBS Miami: "Radio Talk Show Host Arrested At GOP Town Hall Meeting"

CBS News: "Tea Party Getting Violent? 10 House Dems Report Threats, Vandalism - Crimesider"

Christian Science Monitor: "Violence at Tea Party rally: bare-knuckle politics in the streets"

Politico: "Democrats fear for their families - Jake Sherman"

CBS News: Poll: "Is Tea Party Inciting Violence or is the Media Making it Up?"

Tea Party Funding Koch Brothers Emerge From Anonymity - Peter Fenn (usnews.com)

No One Listened to Gabrielle Giffords

Listening to Gabby Giffords in that interview before she was shot, and she has EARNED the right to be heard, really gives me chills. Seriously, WTF is Fox Spews talking about? The Tea Party was not some paragon of peaceful protest virtue - QUITE THE OPPOSITE! Now, I don't want to freaking hear anymore about what violent criminals the Occupy protesters are for being arrested for peaceful civil disobedience! ENOUGH!

Columbus Day - Take a Chill Pill People!

2011-10-10T17:37:00.003-05:00

Columbus didn’t mass murder Native Americans. Jeez. He’s celebrated for sailing here and finding this place. I think people are WILDLY exaggerating with their fake-outrage BS, as usual.

I believe this Holiday started as mostly an Italian American thing. Heck, my people have St. Patrick's Day and everyone seems to join in. I don't know squat about St. Patrick, and neither do most people. But, I hear the Easter Bunny smokes crack! :D

It's an interesting discussion, and I suppose it makes people think, but I don't see this kind of insult to an Italian American hero as productive.

I think Columbus' achievements are noteworthy enough. I'm pretty sure there are no perfect people in history, and it really doesn't make sense to vilify all historical figures and erase their achievements from human history. Seems like this is a constant drumbeat whenever we celebrate any historical figure. JFK was a hormonger, right? *rollseyes*

Now Queen Elizabeth was a genocidal maniac, and that's a fact. She exterminated over a million Catholics, but we glorify her in lovely movies with Kate Blanchett. I find them historically insulting, but most people think she was some kind of hero to the female gender. I suppose there's some merit to that.

Have y'all seen the movie, The New World about Pocahontas and John Smith? That is a lot more historically accurate version of what happened. She was a very tragic figure, and he was a veritable scoundrel, but Disney isn't going to be destroying that cartoon anytime soon, lol.

Again, an interesting discussion, but not some major outrage IMO.

I think people are relying on a certain "version" of history with all this labeling Columbus some kind of sadistic slave owning monster guilty of genocide. There's always a "version" of history, isn't there? Most people of “stature” kept slaves and had what we consider barbaric ideas about humanity. I don't condone it, but it's a reality you can't just dismiss, and given the centuries that have passed, I really don't think it's reasonable to take all that as gospel.

I have read so many versions of Thomas Jefferson's life in various biographies that it seems he was several different people. And George Wills' version of Jefferson is particularly vicious. I'm not saying we should just ignore history and not try to learn more - far from it, but I am saying we really do have to take a lot of this with a grain of salt and an ounce of humility. We are sitting on our high perch judging celebrated historical figures based on an abridged, slanted, probably far from accurate or complete version of them, whose lives and times we cannot possible comprehend. If we take this day each year to learn more about history, then it's well worth celebrating IMO.

Corporate Spending and the Employment Rate

2011-10-09T11:09:00.001-05:00

I saw this graph on Fareed Zakaria's GPS. The correlation between corporate spending and the employment rate is undeniable. Yet, corporations are holding onto trillions that they are not spending. The employment crisis CANNOT be solved without corporate spending. The question is how do we get them to spend?

http://blogs.worldbank.org/prospects/category/tags/us-capital-spending

Is America Getting Soft?

2011-10-09T11:08:00.000-05:00

IT'S BAILEY'S BUILDING & LOAN VERSUS GREEDY OLD MR. POTTER ALL OVER AGAIN!

2011-10-07T15:21:00.009-05:00

It's George Bailey and The Building and Loan versus Mr. Potter run amuck! We all know how this is supposed to work, and yet we are allowing our country to be turned into Pottersville!

The basic deal is that we give them our money to safeguard, and in return we either get interest (savings) or pay a small fee (checking), and the biggest benefit for them is they get to lend that money out to others for a fair fee called "interest."

This isn't that hard to figure out. They can say it's too complicated for us to understand and make it appear that way, but it's not. It's really not. We ALL know what they did, no matter how they "bundle it" or what kind of ribbon they tie around it, and it's obviously, clearly CRIMINAL, or it should be. What the hell is wrong with going after these thieving maggot banksters that nearly brought the world to it's knees? THAT is why we have regulations. We have got to get back to limiting the banks to size, region, and the types of business they can do. It is absolute global suicide to allow them to keep doing this. We were supposed to have learned this in the 20s. Our generation better figure out before "our way of life," and that of most of the rest of the people on this planet, is destroyed.

There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with regulating for the sake of honestly and fair-play. Civilized societies have always know this. It baffles me how the propaganda machine can make people think otherwise.

Let's start out with some cold, hard facts:

Politifact rated MOSTLY TRUE, the statement by Michael Moore: ""Not a single banker, a CEO from Wall Street, anyone from corporate America — nobody, (there was) not one arrest of any of these people who brought down the economy in 2008."

Politifact also rated this statement by Rep. Bernie Sanders: "Today, you have six financial institutions, the largest six, that have assets that are the equivalent of 60 percent of the GDP of the United States of America."

That's reckless to say the least! It's all right there in our history. Around the time the movie, It's a Wonderful Life was made, The Glass-Steagall Act was enacted in response to the banks bringing this country to it's knees in The Great Depression. In 1999, much of those measures were undone . . . and here we are again.

And no, the free market doesn't correct itself. Obviously. Even Alan Greenspan has learned that lesson:

"...a humbled Mr. Greenspan admitted that he had put too much faith in the self-correcting power of free markets and had failed to anticipate the self-destructive power of wanton mortgage lending."

“Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity, myself included, are in a state of shocked disbelief,” he told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform."

So, what is confusing about the target of the Occupy WALL STREET protests? I mean, it's right there in the name. I keep seeing headlines comparing .... or denying comparison between the Tea Party and the Occupy/99% protesters. Let me put it like this, who has all our freaking money and caused the global economic meltdown? I'd say the Occupy protesters are after the correct people - the ones they can't vote out of office and who are really in control and have caused so much misery and chaos around the world. They caused a global recession, which IMO, was just them stealing all the money they could run away with from ALL OF US!

That's the funny thing. Even the Tea Party hates these thieving criminal banksters who have broken the global economy, robbed all of our 401ks, and made our homes worth so much less. So, why are Faux Spews and all the big mouth republicans talking heads so determined to discredit the Occupy protesters? They're NOT trying to be a political party. In fact, the one thing that is obvious is they are specifically targeting the big banks who have gotten away with grand global larceny! All of the 99% should agree that's wrong!

Even the term, "Bankster" originated in the 1920s and 1930s:

"It was coined [by]... Ferdinand Pecora,... chief counsel to the US Senate Committee on Banking set up in the early 30s to probe the origins of the Crash of 1929..."

Yet, this is the language Fox and right wing pundits are using to describe the Occupy protesters. Ask yourself why - then wonder for a moment who OWNS them and is paying them:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Parks and Demonstration

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show Full Episodes

Political Humor & Satire Blog

The Daily Show on Facebook

I'm not sure what this Occupy / 99% thing will grow into. Maybe it will just fizzle out and be ignored, but so far, I find it compelling, and I see a lot of people and groups with some influence throwing in with their Occupy idea, and to me that idea is really simple and really clear. The banks and Wall Street are out of control and sucking us dry, and we've HAD ENOUGH.

In the end, there's only one way we are going to change anything . . .

Beware . . .

2011-10-03T14:35:00.000-05:00

Facebook changes - Just Annoying, or Sinister?

2011-09-21T11:12:00.008-05:00

What, and for whom, is the benefit of this censorship? How is FB deciding what and whose feed I should view benefiting me?

Zuckerberg never does anything without a reason, and I'm trying to figure out what that reason is. However, this smacks of censorship to me. When Facebook starts deciding what is and isn't "important" to me, how long till that turns into censorship? Does FB decide what political views I'm allowed to view? Am I the only one who finds this VERY disturbing?

I WILL CENSOR MY OWN FEED thank you very much! I don't need anyone to tell me what and how to think or decide what I should and shouldn't know or be exposed to. I was perfectly capable of taking care of all that myself with the tools at hand, till FB stepped in to decide all these things for me and took away my tools.

So, excuse me if I find this suspect.

This is just the kind of thing they would expect us sheep to accept, without resistance, without considering the consequences . . . that's how we got to be such cattle going along with whatever anyone tells us we should, like wars, unfair collection of taxes, etc. In my not so humble opinion, it stared with the media - feeding us the spin not the facts and calling it for-profit infotainment, but what it really is, is propaganda, with a very clear agenda.

And really, someone explain to me how this benefits us and how this benefits FB???? I totally do not see it. Do any of you WANT FB to censor posts and feed and decide what THEY think should be "important" to you? If so, they could have made that an option I suppose, like only looking at our games feed used to be an option (and I can't now, which I do find annoyhing, if not sinister, lol).

Seriously, what IS the benefit of this? I really want to know.

And here's a thought, we could actually complain and see if we can make them change it back. It’s not like they haven’t done it many times before:

"Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced the change of policy late last night, stating as follows:

"Going forward, we’ve decided to take a new approach towards developing our terms. We concluded that returning to our previous terms was the right thing for now. . . . Our terms aren’t just a document that protect our rights; it’s the governing document for how the service is used by everyone across the world. Given its importance, we need to make sure the terms reflect the principles and values of the people using the service."

"Our next version will be a substantial revision from where we are now. . . . Facebook users will have a lot of input in crafting these terms. . . .we’ve changed the terms back to what existed before the February 4th change, which was what most people asked us for and was the recommendation of the outside experts we consulted."

http://www.siliconvalleyiplicensinglaw.com/blog/facebook-reverses-decision-and-announces-temporary-return-to-prior-terms-and-conditions/

If you don't see how this could impact your life, imagine if FB doesn't deem your posts about the wars "important" and eliminates them from the feeds of your friends . . . THAT is the point. I may think the picture of my friend's new puppy, or a one line zinger, just as important as anything FB deems important. I want to know why FB thinks it should decide to censor my feed, and what the point of doing that IS?

FB has become a very valuable tool around the world for people to communicate and share information, along with breaching cultural gaps and well, just being a part of revolutions and movements to gain freedom. It may not technically belong to us, but when they start screwing around with it in such a way that has such dramatic potential, I find it important, and I'm going to raise hell about it.

You've all heard me rant on the crass, interactive political reality show with a hidden agenda our "free press" is peddling and how that is distorting and destroying our political discourse, if not our ability to be self-governed, and yeah, that's a small part of the foundation for my concerns here. If the Koch brothers and their buddies gave Zuckerberg $10 billion dollars, would he use Facebook to control people and spread only the propaganda they want? IDK, but this censoring of feed, certainly has that potential, and I am very alarmed.

The Media and the Hurricane Drama that Never Was

2011-08-29T12:03:00.006-05:00

I woke up Sunday morning and turned on CNN, and thought "what the heck are they reporting about? After watching about 15 min., I was baffled? OH NO! There's water almost up to the reporters' ankles in some places in NYC! The Humanity! Are they really that desperate for ratings? What am I missing? Well I guess they sent all those reporters out there, and they had to do something.

At 45 seconds into this video, you can see the funniest damn thing. This CNN reporter, Rob Mariciano, is acting like he's being blown around so much he has to brace against a wall . . . all while people in front of him are leisurely milling around. It's an Oscar worthy performance, lol.

This is the kind of thing that makes people stay in their homes the next time there's a storm and causes the kind of massive casualties and stranded people that we saw during Katrina. They always go so over the top in predicting what these storms might do, that people become jaded about it. Of course government officials certainly should warn people to prepare for the worst and not gamble with their lives when a hurricane is approaching; however, it seems to me in the name of covering their rear ends, a lot of government officials went way overboard in their rhetoric.

I can't tell you how many hurricanes hit when I was growing up, that just really weren't that big of a deal. Just seems to me this wall to wall, way over the top national coverage of something that really were merely local stories, causes more harm than good.

Don't get me wrong, I'm so thrilled the storm doesn't appear to have done much damage and has weakened so much, but complacency will become a problem next time I fear, and in a city like NYC, they can't afford to be complacent.

When people were so nasty about the people in New Orleans after Katrina, I kept trying to explain this dynamic. People just can't afford to pick up and leave every time there's a hurricane, particularly when 90% of the time, they aren't that bad. After a while, people start to tune all the over dramatization out. I know they can't really accurately predict how bad these storms will be and they have to prepare for the worst, but this is why so many people stayed. It wasn't until maybe 12 hours before Katrina hit, that it was clear it was going to be very bad, and by then it really is too late to get out. The roads are hopelessly clogged.

The kind of absurdly exaggerated reporting I saw on CNN feeds that dynamic.

And now, the media either doesn’t get it, or is distorting the the public's complaints. A lot of the worst of the hype, was after it was clear the storm had weakened and damage would be minimal. It’s not the public’s problem CNN sent reporters all over the area, and there was nothing substantial to report. They don’t have to invent things just to have something to do.

Anyone Remember This Guy? Were You Listening?

2011-08-12T14:36:00.005-05:00

Here are some quotes from the guy you voted for, long before you voted, and not some obscure quotes ... MAJOR policy positions. Frankly, I keep wondering if a lot of our society is deaf and dumb. The crass, fact-bending, interactive political reality show the media is peddling seems to be having some kind of strange effect on how things travel from the ears to the brain:

“But the point is we're going to have to capture some revenue in order to stabilize the Social Security system. You can't get something for nothing. And if we care about Social Security, which I do, and if we are firm in our commitment to make sure that it's going to be there for the next generation, and not just for our generation, then we have an obligation to figure out how to stabilize the system. And I think we should be honest in presenting our ideas in terms of how we're going to do that and not just say that we're going to form a commission and try to solve the problem some other way.” Barack Obama 4/16/08 - Obama/Clinton Debate

There's a difference between REFORMING Social Security and Medicare to make them solvent, and destroying them. A big difference.

“As president, as president, I will tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology, and find ways to safely harness nuclear power. I'll help our auto companies re-tool, so that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built right here in America.” Barack Obama 8/28/08, Democratic Nomination Acceptance Speech

"When John McCain said we could just muddle through in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources and more troops to finish the fight against the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11, and made clear that we must take out Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants if we have them in our sights." Barack Obama 8/28/08, Democratic Nomination Acceptance Speech

“As commander-in-chief, I will never hesitate to defend this nation, but I will only send our troops into harm's way with a clear mission and a sacred commitment to give them the equipment they need in battle and the care and benefits they deserve when they come home. I will end this war in Iraq responsibly and finish the fight against Al Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan. I will rebuild our military to meet future conflicts, but I will also renew the tough, direct diplomacy that can prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and curb Russian aggression.” Barack Obama 8/28/08, Democratic Nomination Acceptance Speech

“Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions, who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short, for they have forgotten what this country has already done, what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose and necessity to courage.” Barack Obama 01/20/09 Inaugural Address

Well, that made me cry again. It's been a long time since I've heard it. I am still a believer. I knew it wouldn't happen magically or easily or all at once, and I knew it was going to take US fighting together to make the changes we wanted. One man cannot change a nation, but its people can, if we continue to fight and work and not give up when everything doesn't go our way.

The problem with "progressives" is they WEREN'T PAYING ATTENTION during the election. They were so proud of themselves for getting the black guy elected, they forgot to pay attention to what the guy's agenda was.

Most of them actually don't have ANY idea what his position on the wars were, unbelievably:

I really can't bitch when someone I voted for is doing so much of what he promised:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/

Yes, Pres. Obama did run on making big changes, but WE have to be part of that, not just disgruntled spectators, and even we on the left cannot do it alone. Some people seem to be confused about how divided government works. Pres. Obama does not and cannot control Congress, WE DO, when we decide who to elect.

Pres. Obama did run as someone who would reach across the aisle, NOT on rabid partisanship.

“I don't think the Democrats have a monopoly on good ideas. I think that there are a lot of thoughtful Republicans out there.” Barack Obama 4/16/08 - Obama/Clinton Debate

“The problem is, we've been locked in a divided politics for so long that we've stopped listening to each other. And I think that this president, in particular, has fed those divisions. That's something that we've tried to end in this campaign. And I think we're being successful.” Barack Obama 4/16/08 - Obama/Clinton Debate

“I was making was a bet on the American people, that they were tired of a politics that was about tearing each other down, but wanted a politics that was about lifting the country up, that they didn't want spin and P.R. out of their elected officials. They wanted an honest conversation.” Barack Obama 4/16/08 - Obama/Clinton Debate

Again, this is who you voted for. Do I agree with him on everything, no, but I knew that going in, and I don't agree with anyone on everything. This is a big diverse country, and you are never going to find anyone, who is electable, who agrees with you on everything, but you vote for the one who most represents your ideology. It's called democracy.

WE the people!

2011-08-10T10:45:00.005-05:00

"The government" ... I really wish people would stop bitching about "the government." WE the people, sent these clowns up there to represent us, and frankly, I'm tired of getting what WE deserve. I pay attention, stay informed and engaged, and the sound bite, propagandists are taking us all for a ride.

A lot of us have forgotten what serious discussions and political discourse are. It's too easy to get sucked into the crass, dumbed-down, contrived, interactive political reality show the media is peddling - it's like a narcotic to some people, and it makes them very easy to manipulate. Of course, it was designed that way.

Ideology is NOT knowledge.

We very clearly need election reform, campaign finance reform, and the return of The Fairness Doctrine. I believe ONLY registered voters should be able to contribute to campaigns and that the amounts should be limited. The money going into elections these days is disgusting. That's not fair, open, and honest elections, and it's not allowing The People, a real opportunity to weigh the candidates and issues in a thoughtful way. So, yes, you are right that big corporate money has a hand in that, but it IS up to us to change that. No one else is going to do it for us.

There is no short cut to being informed and doing your civic duty . . . that is if we want to remain self governed. I would hate to see our generation be so soft, spoiled, and indifferent that we are the ones who destroy this great experiment in human freedom and dignity.

I can remember hammering on the right for years for getting their "news" from a source they KNEW was biased and had a clear agenda. Now my side is doing it too, and lapping it up like mother's milk? I find this polarization terrifying. We are the UNITED States. All of our greatest achievements we have achieved together, and all of our best moments in history have happened when we were UNITED in common purpose.

All of our most shameful moments occurred when we were bitterly divided.

Seriously, do people actually ever READ anymore? Research? Learn? Is it all just little sound bites they can regurgitate at will from their favorite agenda-driven pundits?

Back during WWII, FDR would conduct his radio fire side chats and explain in detail what was happening. He even went so far as to ask the American people to go out and buy maps, so that he could explain exactly how and where the war was being conducted. Map sales went through the roof.

These days, you can pull it all up on the internet, anything you want to know, from CREDIBLE sources - you can learn whatever you want to know, in detail and check fact check politicians and propagandists on your own, but people are too freaking lazy, and they'd rather cheer their red team/blue team heroes, like a some sick, contrived rasslin match.

IMO, with Reagan came this whole misdirection in morality / religion / spending / economics / polarization / nationalism /Amercian exceptionalism / cronism / etc. This same bunch ran Bush II's campaign of misdirection, and now they have gotten very good at it. They just make sh*t up, based on what they want people to think, and people buy it without question based on their "team" affiliation. It's got nothing to do with facts or reality. It's just pure propaganda and manipulation, appealing to people's lowest instincts. They tell us we are innately morally superior, if we think what they tell us too, and thus encourage people to be ignorant.

That's no way to run a country of people who are self-governed and want to remain so.

2011-08-06T09:58:00.001-05:00

Can I smack Bill Maher please? Just one time, really hard!

2011-08-06T09:23:00.002-05:00

This was a great piece, and actually as funny as I've seen him in ages - nice to see he can serve some purpose, wrong and misguided as he is.

I used to be such a huge Maher fan, but he's just not as informed as he should be. It's all about what he THINKS, instead of what he KNOWS, and frankly, I can't take it. Watching his show just puts me in a rage, from screaming at the tv.

And the worst part is the stupidity! IT'S COUNTER PRODUCTIVE! He and Walsh, and the rest of them, SHOULD be saying "we need to focus, work hard, and get MORE Dems elected to congress, take back the House, and get a REAL majority in the Senate." Then we won't have to keep making these horrible compromises, but instead . . . they just keep whining and crying in their milk, and behaving as though they really don't have clue how divided government works. Instead of inspiring people to get off the couch and VOTE, they inspire them to stay home, and THAT is how we lost the GD House in the first place!

And the SOB Maher had the NERVE to say we would have been better off under Hillary Clinton. REALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He was one of the F'ers out that mindlessly hammering her day, after day after day, with maniacal stars in his eyes for Obama! He, and the rest of the left wing media handed us Obama on a silver plate, apparently without listening to a word Obama was saying, and NOW they want to invoke Hillary Clinton?!? I'd like to smack him so hard.

""While I can appreciate the financial logic of drowning television viewers in a flood of opinions designed to confirm their own biases, the trend is not good for the republic...This is to journalism what Bernie Madoff was to investment: He told his customers what they wanted to hear, and by the time they learned the truth, their money was gone." Ted Koppell

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/12/AR2010111202857.html

Where did we go wrong?

2011-07-27T14:14:00.002-05:00

I think the problem with our finances is graft, greed, lack of regulation and oversight. And even more importantly, we as a nation, we as individuals, we as a business community and business model, and we as a government have bought into the notion that we should just take what we want and worry about the price later.

There is ALWAYS a price, and I think it is our generation's calling to right our economic ship and restore the ideologies of fair play and making a reasonable profit for providing a valuable service. The path we are on is NOT sustainable, but it's a terrible thing to use as a political football and a worse to use an economic nuclear bomb. We need knowledgeable, REASONABLE, competent people to work toward fixing this mess in a measured thoughtful way. Otherwise, we're all screwed.

Social Security is NOT an "entitlement"

2011-07-24T19:58:00.011-05:00

And the Democrats are NOT asking for "tax increases!" They are asking for TAX REFORMS, in addition to allowing the Bush tax cuts to EXPIRE as they were DESIGNED TO DO.

These kinds of terms really PISS ME OFF. I pay 7.5% of my income into Social Security, and my employer matches that as part of my compensation. Of course I am counting employer contributions as part of my compensation. You don't think employers are? 15% of my income is NOT an entitlement. Why do we keep letting them get away with mislabeling things for political purposes.

If Social Security is an "entitlement," then insurance is an entitlement also. Social Security is designed just like insurance. We all pay our premiums, knowing that we may not collect back all that we paid, but someone else might instead. However, we pay the premiums in case, we are the ones who need the million dollar cancer care.

And like insurance, it should be sustainable, but for the government's borrowing from it, and circumstances like the baby boomers - or in the case of insurance, several hurricanes in a row. The baby boomers, who are a huge group, are all claiming their benefits at once. Then there's the fact that people due to medical advances, are living longer. We need reforms to Social Security and Medicare to fix these issues. I think we can all agree on that, but that doesn't make it an entitlement, not by a long shot.

It's not entitlement if I don't collect more than I pay in, or my father died before he collected a dime, and I collect some of his - for example. A lot of people die before they collect a dime of that money. Yes, there are people who are born with terrible disabilities that don't pay in and do collect, and perhaps you could say they are receiving an "entitlement," but the system was designed to stop the old and infirm from suffering horrible poverty and/or starvation. I'm PROUD OF THAT. Theoretically we all have a "policy" with Social Security . . . any of us could have that child who is born disabled or could become disabled and SS is insurance we ALL pay into in the event it happens to us.

We are the UNITED States, and we have done many marvelous things UNITED TOGETHER to promote the general welfare, and UNITED we pay for these things. This is just one of them, clean water, immunization from disease, roads, bridges, etc., etc., etc., are among some of the other things we do together that benefit us as a society. Those things are NOT entitlements, so long as we responsibly pay for them. In the last 20 years, we haven't been doing that, because political gamesmanship has been turning us against our own best interests and the idea this UNITED States represents in the first place.

Is that socialism? Again, we are the UNITED States . . . our Constitution is all about the things we will do TOGETHER. Lol, I guess that made us socialists from the get go. We have a balance of both "socialism" and capitalism, and we are constantly debating and revising the terms of that balance, but there have always been elements of "socialism" in our society. Always.

Further, the private sector has been doing a number on my 401k all my life. They rob us blind, and we hand them more money so they won't blow up the entire economic world. Even pension plans are raided. No, Social Security isn't perfect, but it's about the most historically solid retirement plan we have. We need to fix it, NOT destroy it. I don't want to live in a world without it. I can't imagine the suffering we would all see and many of us would endure.

Finally, maybe we should take a look at why the government is broke . . . wars we charged on our China credit card, pork projects, waste, graft . . . Pres. Clinton figured out how to stop running at a deficit. We, as a nation, have bought into the whole, charge all the crap we can't afford, live above our means, and worry about how to pay for it later. WE, the people, individually and as a government, have to learn how to live within our means. THIS is our generation's challenge. We can start making REAL changes, which means PAYING OUR DAMN BILLS, including increases in revenues AND spending cuts, in a responsible honest way. All this BS from these Ftards we have elected is just more of the self-delusions that got us into this mess.

I'll tell you what an "entitlement" is - it's oil companies, that are making record profits and paying little or no taxes, getting subsidies. Now THAT is an entitlement.

Libertarians and "anti-government" types are always bitching about the government while enjoying all that it provides. I'm not willing to throw the old and infirm out on the street to die, just so YOU don't have to pay your share. I'm not willing to live in some primitive society with an uneducated, diseased, heart-breakingly poor class of people, just so YOU don't have to pay your share. I'm not willing to do without clean water, food inspections, unregulated corporations running wilder than they already are in defrauding us all and taking advantage of workers, just so YOU don't have to pay your fair share.

What frustrates me is that they never have any SPECIFIC argument laying out why their ideas are better, why they will actually make our society BETTER, just general cliches about "big government" and the "nanny this" and "nursemaid that" and "I don't want to pay blah, blah, blah." That's not an argument. Explain to me how having a grotesquely poor class of people, including children and the elderly, whether they should take care of themselves or not, is better for everyone? Then explain to me where my privatized Social Security money would be right now if Bush had had his way - because my 401k keeps getting raided by the banksters every few years, and I freaking hate it. I'd put all my retirement money in Social Security, and collect an adjusted benefit if that were possible and I knew the system was sound and not going to be robbed before I could collect it. Maybe I'd die before I got a dime of it and someone else would benefit, but at least it would be put to good use.

Since our nation's conception, we have constantly been arguing about the limits of the things we will do together and revising those endeavors based on what does and doesn't make sense, but we are a representative democracy, and the majority decides. If some folks don't like that, they have to convince us on EACH individual issue that their way makes more sense. If they can't, then I'm sorry, they lose.

Freedom isn't free, and rights come with responsibility in a civilized society.

Our Laws Need to Catch Up with Technology SOON!

2011-06-10T13:24:00.005-05:00

*Yawn*

No. 1 - I don't give a rat's ass about that fool Palin, who the media is constantly promoting in her attention whore career; and

No. 2 - At what point doesn't the media find this an invasion of privacy? Can we see all their personal emails please?

Now, if it's job related, I'm all for publishing them. If they are private, whether they are on her government account or not, then they are PRIVATE. A lot of us occassionally, or even frequently, send private emails through our work account, and vice versa. Only work-related emails are fair game IMO.

I don't think ANYONE'S private communications should be published without their permission. Tampering with U.S. mail is a crime, and it should be a crime to hack and tamper with people's private electronic mail as well.

If I don't respect her privacy, then I don't get any respect or protection for my own. We used to know things like that in this country.

If my office released my private emails that I happened to send using that account (and I rarely do that), I'd be freaking furious. I mean, did she get payment confirmations for her gas bill? Is that fair game? Communications with her kids' teachers? Where does it end?

Of course, I don't have any great expectation of privacy at work, but I would hope my employers aren't total, sleazy scum bags who are monitoring my every move for their own sick gratification, and I certainly would find it horrifying if they published my private emails for the entire world to see.

Again, I get that Palin brings a lot of this on herself, but if we have no regard for her privacy, why should anyone respect ours? We are a country who endured the KKK parading down the streets of small town America in the name of free speech. I would think we could show some respect for another's privacy, even when we don't particularly like her.

I'm just saying, I really cannot stand her, and all the ridculous media attention distracting us from actual meaningful issues, but all this really does go WAY too far. The media is always hungry for more Palin drama, and they are sinking pretty damn low now IMO.

Who knows, maybe a miracle could happen and she could actually have a positive effect in the world by suing the hell out of every media outlet that publishes her emails and bring about laws that protect ALL of our private communications. Stranger things have happened.

Israel and the Palestinians - More Fiction than Fact for Too Many Americans

2011-05-22T17:13:00.006-05:00

Here are some fun facts:

"U.N. has passed more resolutions condemning Israel than it has all other nations combined."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_Israel

The article below was published FIVE YEARS AGO, and this siege is STILL going on:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/27/AR2006082700768.html

This TOO continues:

"Journalists have been barred from the battle zone in Gaza, but they are given full access to sites in Israel hit by Hamas rockets."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/world/middleeast/07media.html

‎"...a 2002 poll conducted by PIPA, 72% of both Palestinians and Israelis supported at that time a peace settlement based on the 1967 borders."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-state_solution

People have some knee-jerk reaction, sound-bite propaganda knowledge on this topic, like it's apple pie and baseball to be pro-Israel. I'm pro-human dignity, and this crap cannot continue. I'm proud of Pres. Obama for talking even a little tough on this subject, particularly with his re-election bid looming.

I cannot understand the proposition that Israel should be able to do the things they are doing to the Palestinian people, with absolutely NO accountability for all these years. Why are they so much more important than the other human beings concerned? If we punished an entire population because of what a few criminals do, then we would be right? How is this in keeping with ANY of our principles? God gave them that blood-soaked piece of dirt, and therefore, they can do whatever they like to protect and expand it? Rubbish.

This subject gets me riled up. I don't like this crap being blindly supported in my name.

Israel TOO has to learn to live in peace with its neighbors, and taking land that IS NOT THEIRS and treating the people of Gaza almost as badly as Jews were treated in the Warsaw ghetto during WWII, is NOT living up to the reasons they were given this land, and how this land was procured is another topic I could rail about.

The people of Gaza elect Hamas officials because they can provide vital services. Since Israel is holding the chains, perhaps THEY should provide these services and look like the good guys for a change.

Yes, I realize there is old and pervasive hatred and bigotry at the heart of this on BOTH sides, but Israel is doing nothing to counter that IMO. Netanyahu and so many on the far right, are taking a position that is contrary to even the people of Israel's position on these REAL and vital points of negotiation. No one here has clean hands, and the sooner we all acknowledge that, the sooner something can be done to stop this horrible cycle.

What Israel has done is ILLEGAL. No country in human history has been given land by the U.N. in this way, land that was "negotiated," and I use that word in the loosest possible way, away from another group. The position on the 1945 borders is not only this president's position, but Bush's, Clinton's, Carter's, and Reagan's,

1981: Fahd, Reagan, and Fez Plans
In 1981, Saudi Crown Prince Fahd proposed a peace plan entailing an Israeli withdrawal from all territory gained in the 1967 War, removal of Israeli settlements, and a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza. The Arab League adopted the plan at a 1982 summit in Fez, Morocco. The so-called Fez Initiative drew tacit support from the United States and Europe, but Israel rejected it, citing insufficient security guarantees. Israel also rejected U.S. President Ronald Reagan's proposal for Palestinian autonomy in association with Jordan, as did the Palestine Liberation Organization under Yasir Arafat.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/CGME_transcript.html

And I don't just say it is illegal, IT IS:

The UN Security Council "is composed of five permanent members — China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States." There are no Arab nations on the Council - yet the Security Council has issued

http://www.un.org/sc/members.asp

Yet, "from 1967 to 1989 the UN Security Council passed 131 resolutions directly addressing the Arab–Israeli conflict."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_Israel

In ALL cases where these resolutions called for any kind of sanctions against Israel, the U.S. was the sole veto of those resolutions, including Pres. Obama.

"[The U.S.] has become by far the most frequent user of the veto, mainly on resolutions criticizing Israel; since 2002 the Negroponte doctrine has been applied for the use of a veto on resolutions relating to the ongoing Israel-Palestinian conflict. This has been a constant cause of friction between the General Assembly and the Security Council. On the 18th of February 2011, the Obama Administration Vetoed resolutions condemning Israeli settlements."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_veto_power#United_States

"Nearly half a million Jews live in more than 100 settlements built since Israel's 1967 occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. They are held to be illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this."

"While stating that it opposed new settlements, the Obama administration argued that taking the issue to the UN would only complicate efforts to resume stalled negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians on a two-state peace deal."

"Unfortunately, this draft resolution risks hardening the positions of both sides," said the US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice."

"The resolution, sponsored by at least 130 countries, declared Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories were illegal and a "major obstacle to the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12512732

"White House won’t show bin Laden photo, do you agree?"

2011-05-04T17:19:00.003-05:00

The Geneva Convention:

"Mr Rumsfeld said: 'We know that the Geneva Conventions make it illegal for prisoners of war to be shown, pictured, and humiliated. This is something the US does not do.'"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/chilling-images-breach-geneva-convention-592195.html

Lol, then Rumsfeld flip-flopped:

"These two individuals are particularly vicious individuals," Rumsfeld told reporters at the Pentagon, according to a Washington Post report. "They are now dead. We know that. They have been carefully identified. The Iraqi people have been waiting for confirmation of that, and they, in my view, deserved having confirmation of that."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/05/03/135957715/is-it-legal-for-the-u-s-to-release-pictures-of-bin-ladens-body?ps=cprs

I do not believe the Geneva Convention is "quaint," but it is outdated, and doesn't anticipate everyone walking the planet having a cell phone camera.

On what I think, I really don't care one way or the other. The people who will never believe it (herald the birth of the "Deathers" - ain't it ironic? :D), won't be convinced by any photos or other evidence. They could have been there and watched it happen and they wouldn't believe it. They just don't want to. I mean, there are still some nut jobs out there who don't think we ever landed on the Moon, lol.

I don't need convincing or another fake ass stupid controversy. I understand the dilemma they face, but frankly, I just don't care all that much. I'd like for us not to do it as matter of decency we should show anyone, but whatever. I don't always get things my way.

It's kind of irrelevant to me, but I'm sure they're turn it into a "news" sensation, lol.

Finally, Reuters, I expect better of you. I expect REAL news. Not some gory photos from Pakistan you paid some scum bag to give you or dumb, inane, shameless pandering like this topic right here.

Let's get back to REAL news on this topic. This photo BS isn't every news agency's shimmering opportunity for dumb, inane, shameless pandering and self promotion.

Giant Tirade on bin Laden and the Afghan War

2011-05-03T16:44:00.014-05:00

Okay, so my head has been exploding for the last two days over all this contrived, falsified, made up, RETARDULOUS melodrama we seem to be thriving on lately as a nation. For God's sake people, take off the nappies and act like you have some sense!

1. To all those who say we can now pull out of Afghanistan

I think it's just sad that people are so intellectually challenged and factually retarded they don't get that Afghanistan is not all about bin Laden. Anyone remember the difference between the Afghan and Iraq wars? Here is a hint, the man most of you voted for on the left, he knew the difference. Pres. Obama is doing EXACTLY what he said he would in Afghanistan when he campaigned, and we voted for him:

In fact, it's another of Pres. Obama's promises KEPT:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/may/02/Obama-kill-bin-laden-campaign-promise-kept/

When the result of all this withdrawal talk, is a blood bath for those who helped us, worked with us, and dared to believe in us, I really don't understand how y'all think you are on the humane side of things.

Yes, it's a real mess. We have an uneducated, incredibly oppressed population, forced to grow little but illegal drugs, and addicted to opium to some degree, even the children, because of the hunger pain, rampant corruption, and on and on and on. I don't know how we're supposed to make anything reasonable out of that. I suspect it will go back to what it was before when we leave.

However, Bush, invaded that country, then just abandoned it. Obama is TRYING to get something positive out of it for everyone, and I think we can all agree getting bin Laden was a pretty big plus. However, yo do realize that Pres. Obama wants to start drawing down our troops by the end of the year. I don't think he has any unrealistic expectations. I just don't want to leave a blood bath in our wake AGAIN. I'm trusting that smarter minds than mine are trying to figure out just how to do that, and I'm willing to give them the time to try.

That's the problem with overthrowing a government - something has to take it's place, and WE have a responsibility to these people. Like it or not.

2. On bin Laden's burial at sea:

Can I just say, that I don't give a RAT'S ASS! He incinerated and pulverized THOUSANDS of our citizens into a fine dust, and we at least made an effort to put him to rest with some dignity. He CERTAINLY wouldn't have done the same for any of us "infidels."

3. On Sarah Palin, Donald Trump, Glenn Beck, Anne Coulter, Rush Lambaugh, and the rest of the idiots:

You know, the attention seekers are out there, doing their usual, “I’m so controversial - Look at me! Look at me!” bit with regard to this subject. They are just starting to crawl out of their muck and go at it. THEY NEED TO BE IGNORED! Controversy, in and of itself, is NOT NEWS, nor does it automatically have merit. I REFUSE to give these blood sucking leaches a moment of my time or attention just for being outrageous clowns. The people murdered by this man DESERVE more dignity than this!

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-palin-bin-laden-remarks-20110503,0,4220829.story

4. Finally, as for all those complaining that people aren't reacting the way they think they should to bin Laden's deaath:

Can I just say WTH!?! Let me see if I get this straight, if some people are "happy" the mass murdering monster is dead, what exactly are the other people? SAD?!? Give me a petty, knit-picking F'ing break. This is just STTTTTTUUUUUPPPPPIIIIDDDDDD Bogus, manufactured, idiotic fake controversy for the stupid Ftards. BITE ME PLEASE!!!!!

I realize people react to these things differently. I'm just really getting sick of all the judgment. We all get to have our very own feelings, and it seems to me all this judgment is well ... ridiculous, contrived nonsense. People are allowed to feel what they feel, ALL OF US, not just the sanctimonious ones.

No one is "celebrating" the killing of a bunch of INNOCENT PEOPLE! Surely you know the difference between those killed on 9/11 and bin Laden. I'm not even "celebrating" or jubilant at all, but I can certainly see why some people are. It's been 10 years of those gloating videos and threats, and add to that the bombings in England, Spain, etc. Yes, I'm very glad that mass murderer has been stopped. If he had to die evading capture, so be it. HIS choice.

Everyone has complicated feelings about this they are expressing. I'm all for that, really. That's why I say again, we should all be allowed to feel what we feel in this instance. My feelings are pretty complicated as well: I'm proud of our troops, happy for the families, sad that a woman bin Laden used as a shield was killed (she probably never had a choice in ANY of it), angry at the politicizing of this so quickly and the usual contrived, sensationalized controversy, and honestly, mostly just numb in general when I think of all the other implications. I'm still processing. There are a lot of aspects to this. But one thing I don't feel is the slightest bit of reverence toward this man's death or humanity - I doubt he had any, and I just couldn't dredge that up, even if I wanted to.

5. On the fake MLK quote, everyone is insanely still defending:

People do this with founding fathers' quotes a lot, and it's a pet peeve of mine. The one real quote was from the "I have a dream" speech for Pete's sake. Manipulating people by using SOME of MLK's words is pretty despicable in my book. And boy oh boy, people sure don't like it when you tell them they don't get to call everyone's, but their own, reaction "vengeance," or point out they are spreading around a bogus MLK quote. Yup, they get darn right bent right out of shape, for people who are so humble and reverent.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/Horizons/2011/0503/How-Osama-bin-Laden-s-death-sparked-a-fake-Martin-Luther-King-quote

I closing, I don't know why this is pissing me off so much. I guess because it is just more utterly silly, emotional polarization games, and it's the far left hammering on Obama AGAIN! For God's sake, they're going to ruin us with their purity, preciousness, and lack of any grasp of reality or facts! This becoming one goofy, pathetic country. Yeah, we're going to fail alright, but not because of who is wrong or who is right. Because we have the national intellect and emotional focus of a bunch of 13 year old girls. And that's kind of an insult to 13 year old girls - I do apologize for that.

Bin Laden's Dead, But the War's NOT Over Yet

2011-05-02T10:01:00.005-05:00

In case you forgot, or just didn't realize since you couldn't see past the glare of Obama's shiny, changy face, he IS doing what he said he would when you voted for him!

Whether you agreed with invading Afghanistan or not, WE DID, and a majority of Americans strongly supported. For ONCE we need to act like we have some damn sense, and live up to our promises. But, hey, that's what Pres. Obama promised to do, and a majority of us VOTED FOR HIM. The rest is all sour grapes.

Dumb sh*ts all chanting let's get out of Afghanistan. Like it or not, we DID invade Afghanistan, and we have responsibility to a country when we invade it and overthrow their government. I'm SO F'ING SICK of people and their simple minds, with their passionate sound-bite slogans. This isn't a sound bite.

Why would we do the same stupid crap we always do - get people to help us, believe in our promises, and risk their lives, and then leave and look the other way while they are slaughtered. Good plan, even if it's not very original. We did this to THESE people before actually, You know, we stuck our nose into their business, and then left, and that how we got Bin Laden and the Taliban in the first place! Turns out that country would have been a hell of a lot better under Russian rule!

It would be another thing, if we had not invaded, overthrown their government, driving the Taliban and Al Qaeda into Pakistan, nearly bringing their government to it's knees. If we leave, Afghanistan will be a killing field. Anyone who helped us, thought they might actually have a future, or even benefited from our being there WILL be slaughtered.

There are smart, educated, dedicated people, Afghan people, who are working for their country's better interests over there, and I will not bear the shame of their murders happening in my name.

Finally, I find it extremely annoying when someone tries to heap their political objectives on the backs of our troops. They have enough weight to carry around. Carry your own.

"Bin Laden Is Dead, U.S. Official Says" NYT

2011-05-01T22:05:00.000-05:00

Right now, I'm just thinking that one of the most prolific mass murderers in history is dead and of all those people he killed ... the fear and the horror of that day. I'm glad he's dead! Politics be damned right now. A lot of family members and fatherless and motherless children are feeling something I can't imagine. My heart is with them.

The Terrible Burden of Ridiculously, Unrealistically High Expectations

2011-04-11T11:23:00.012-05:00

It is often said, that Pres. Bush benefited from low expectations. Well, Pres. Obama is clearly suffering from ridiculously, unrealistically high expectations.

Look it's HARD to do big things on the national level. It was designed that way. If not, imagine the damage Bush could have done. Obama and the Dems ARE getting things done, in spite of their own side letting them down:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/

WHO exactly didn't show up to vote and lost us the House? If every Dem who voted for Obama, had been informed enough to know he was living up to more of his promises than I would have thought possible, and had gone to the polls, we would have a hell of a lot better chance of getting the things done we all want. Nothing is instant or simple in our democracy. You have to hack away at it, bit by bit, and you make gains, but Dems have never been a bunch of lock step morons. I've always been proud of that, proud of our "big tent," that yes, includes Blue Dogs and Independents. If you want thinking people on your side, you have to understand that this is a big, diverse country and everyone's not going to agree with you all the time. This country was founded on compromise. Without the compromises of both Jefferson AND Hamilton, this nation wouldn't have lasted a decade. Too far in either direction would have been fatally flawed. We have to keep the faith and keep on hacking away. That's just how it works, and I wouldn't have it any other way. All or nothing is fine, unless you are the ones with nothing.

It's a vast and diverse country, and we ALL get a say, whether we exercise that right or not. Obama ran as a centrist, someone who would "reach across the aisle." There are no perfect choices, but if we don't choose, we end up with a Reagan, a Bush, or a McCain, and I'll take an Obama, a Clinton, or even a Carter, if those are the choices. I just don't think a Michael Moore (who I also disagree with sometimes) can get elected in this climate. It is what is, what it is. And frankly, the sad reality is, I think if Pres. Obama wins a second term, he'll take on some of the things that are most important to me in a big way, like election reform, campaign finance reform, more education reform and tax reform, etc., etc., etc. If he did those things now, we'd have a republican in 2012, and I shudder at the thought of who is planning to run on the right.

During the election, Obama hung the moon and stars, and no one was listening to his actual policy statements? It was all a big, stupid race for most popular. Look, I was a Hillary supporter, but I'm not so self-destructive I wouldn't turn my back on Obama just for spite and vengeance. I mean, you could just support Palin, Romney, etc. That's who all this rhetoric is actually helping, the far right. I'm not saying don't complain about Pres. Obama. I'm saying DO IT IN A PRODUCTIVE AND SPECIFIC WAY! Bitching to the entire world about your terrible disappointment, trying to keep them from voting, is essentially a vote for the other side - it's like Fox News hordes of the Left, and is NOT productive. Go work for a candidate you think can beat Pres. Obama who will do a better job or bombard his office with emails and phone calls. I don't get how "progressives" constant bitching and staying away from the polls because they can't get everything there way all the time is productive. I know we are an instant gratification society, but he can't do everything instantly. He's going to need our help to do it. Jeez. Whatever. This is what's wrong with the left. All the "new voters" and "enthusiasm" was dandy, but I figured it would turn out like this. We are the party who has great intentions but sorry follow through. It takes more than emotion to get things done. It takes time and real commitment.

What I really can't take is the general, non-specific, fact starved character assassinations off all these MSNBCbaggers. A lot of this is just counter to what Obama actually promised - like bitching about the war in Afghanistan. He is actually doing exactly what he said he would:

Or take healthcare reform. People on the left were screaming about "the public option." Jeez, who promised them that? Kusinich? Cause you know, he didn't win. What we got wasn't my idea by a long shot, but it was a lot. Some of it was VERY important to millions of people. It has potential, that is if we don't screw it up.

I just can't really bitch when someone I voted for is doing as much of what he said he would, as Obama is. I'm hopeful he'll get to the other stuff, but ya know, there have been some pretty amazing challenges, not the least of which is losing the House. This is the toughest, most complex, and important job on the planet. I was raised on this stuff. Raging political debates were mothers milk in my family growing up, and I'm pretty used to the ups and downs, but frankly, I've never seen such an ugly, divisive, polarized climate in my life, nor have I ever the fringe on both sides dominate the discussion so thoroughly. I think it has a lot to do with the for-profit, corporate owned crass, sensationalized, dumbed-down political reality shows their selling on the "news networks, but it will get A LOT worse, if we fracture on the left. The GOP has an increasingly radical and frightening agenda. We'd do well to remember that. Pres. Obama may not have turned out to be everyone’s prince charming, here to magically kiss away their troubles and save the day, but he IS doing a lot of what he promised, and he IS a hell of a lot better than anyone I’ve seen on the right in a very, very long time.

I got hammered as a Hillary supporter by people saying she was too "polarizing" while Obama was a centrist. Oh, NOW those same stupid, self-destructive people want someone polarizing. Yeah, Dennis Kusinich would do the bidding of the far left - he'd shut down the government, refuse to compromise, and just freaking destroy everything in the middle of the worst global economic crisis since The Great Depression, two wars, and all the rest of the horrors we've been dealing with. He'd be a fighter all right. It's really easy to be a lone wolf who won't budge on principles when you are in the Congress. A president has GOT to be different! He's got to get things done, and run the entire country, not just the one in the delusions of the far left. I used to marvel at how Bill Clinton would work with Congress, getting them to do what he wanted, and think it was their idea, lol.

Seems like the supposed "liberal" media hates liberals as much as Fox, doesn't it? Now I have "progressives" calling me an "O-bot." LMAOROTF! It's the latest fad to be a "progressive" who hates Democrats - these are the same people who were gaga for Obama a couple of years ago. All the "new voters" and "enthusiasm" Obama brought was just great, but I figured it would turn out like this. They're not serious about politics, very naive, and very easily manipulated. Isn't it interesting how MSNBC and HuffPo were the most viciously anti-Hillary in the media - they pretty much gave us Obama a nominee, and now they're nearly as anti-Obama as Fox, and they call it "holding him accountable." I call it being owned by giant corporations with their own agenda.

Obama is not some mystical God sent to save the world. He's a GD politician, and he has to work within the confines of the government we actually have, not the one you wish we had, and thank God for that! I can't imagine that government.

I actually didn't like him at all, as a Hillary supporter, had no idea what all the fuss and worship was about. Until McCain picked Palin and went all Karl Rove on us, that is. Then, I was absolutely certain he was the guy for me, lol. Since I never caught that glazed-eyed Obamamania, I never had all these unrealistic, bizarro, MSBNCbagger expectations, with no basis in reality or chance of happening.

This ain't my first rodeo. I've been a political junkie all my life, and Obama has won me over with his ACTIONS, not his glorious changy persona. But some folks just love to bitch, love the crass, contrived, sensationalized, interactive political reality show the "news" networks and other parts of the media are putting on for ya. Just be careful, or we'll all get voted off the island, and there's no script for that episode.

In the end, I think Dems will rally around the President. I've never seen us as divided as we were after the 2008 Dem. primary, but then Palin showed up and McCain went all Karl Rove on us, and Dems were a solid, unbeatable force. The people throwing their hat in the ring so far on the right, make Bush look like a humanitarian genius. The stakes are too high to play Russian roulette with our future.

Former WikiLeaks Colleagues Forming New Web Site, OpenLeaks

2011-02-08T08:43:00.003-06:00

(from The New York Times)

By RAVI SOMAIYA
Published: February 6, 2011

LONDON — As the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange fights extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sexual wrongdoing, a dozen of his former colleagues are creating an alternative Web site for leaks to be governed by what they characterize as a revised vision of radical transparency.

The new organization, OpenLeaks, will begin work in earnest this summer, said Herbert Snorrason, an Icelandic programmer who is involved. It aims, he said, to avoid the “influence of a single figurehead” by refusing to handle documents itself. Instead, it will act as a neutral conduit to connect leakers with media and human rights organizations. OpenLeaks emerges from the ashes of a struggle between Mr. Assange and many of his closest associates last September. About a dozen members of WikiLeaks left that month, accusing Mr. Assange of imperious behavior and of jeopardizing the project by conflating the allegations of sexual wrongdoing, which he denies, with the site’s work. The defectors, Mr. Snorrason said, decided to start their own project.

“It’s no secret that we had disagreements with how WikiLeaks was being managed,” he said, “and a large part of what we hope to accomplish with OpenLeaks is to avoid those problems.”

Mr. Assange has often said that he sees it as his mission, in part, to raise awareness of the material WikiLeaks releases by increasing its public profile. It is a strategy that has kept the documents he has released — including hundreds of thousands of classified United States government documents — on the front pages of newspapers around the world, including The New York Times. But it has also meant that Mr. Assange, a mercurial and charismatic figure with strong political views and a penchant for the unorthodox and newsworthy, has often become the story himself.

Though those behind OpenLeaks are at pains not to criticize Mr. Assange, and have repeatedly made it clear that they do not see themselves as his competitors, their aims address many of the barbs leveled at him, the man who has defined a new era of online mass leaks.

It is partly run by Daniel Domscheit-Berg, a precise programmer from Berlin who was once Mr. Assange’s deputy. Since he left WikiLeaks in September, he has been working on a book which he promises will reveal “the evolution, finances and inner tensions” inside WikiLeaks.

At a recent gathering of the Chaos Computer Club, a hacker community in Berlin, Mr. Domscheit-Berg said OpenLeaks would be neutral and would not rely on secrecy as WikiLeaks does. Those who seek transparency, he said, should “stand in the sunlight ourselves and enjoy that we are creating a more transparent society, not create a transparent society while sneaking around in the shadows.”
The new site must not, he added, “contain any politics and personal preferences or personal dislikes about whatever you’re going to publish or what you must not publish.”

OpenLeaks is not the only site inspired by the success of WikiLeaks. Dozens of smaller leaking sites — some focused on specific topics, like the environment, or particular regions — have sprung up in recent months with the aim of encouraging whistleblowers.

It is, perhaps, the realization of a vision Mr. Assange outlined on his blog in 2006, the year he founded WikiLeaks. He imagined a world where “mass leaking” left unjust governments “exquisitely vulnerable to those who seek to replace them with more open forms of governance.”

But the emergence of OpenLeaks may have taken a toll on its predecessor.

In private, Mr. Assange has told reporters that the spate of defections shut down the complex computer systems WikiLeaks uses to process new information and make it hard for governments and corporations to trace its source. At a January news conference in London, he said that trouble with the site’s “internal mechanisms” had rendered it no longer open “for public business.” He said the site would continue to accept material in other forms, like computer disks.

Beset by legal difficulties, working on a book for which he has signed a deal he says is worth as much as $1.7 million and managing his newfound celebrity, Mr. Assange has had less time to focus on repairing the systems, friends have said.

But his struggles, lending him the status of a martyr figure, may paradoxically provide him a better platform from which to leak damaging information, said Evgeny Morozov, a researcher on the political effects of the Internet and author “The Net Delusion,” a book that is skeptical of the power of the Web to change governments for the better.

“The reason WikiLeaks has been able to function operationally,” he said, “is that they have managed to monopolize public attention. If anything happens to them, it is a big story.”

The challenge for OpenLeaks, and others who hope to imitate it, Mr. Morozov said, is to make the Internet infrastructure for leaking secrets more robust. “If anything,” he said, the recent blows to WikiLeaks have “revealed how easy it is to silence a publisher in the Internet age, and how little pressure you need to put on an intermediary to slow it down.”

Late last year several companies, like Amazon, PayPal, MasterCard and the Swiss bank Swiss Post decided to stop providing financial and computer services to WikiLeaks in the wake of its controversial releases.

While traditional publishers in many countries have well-established legal protections against governments who wish to stifle information, he said, sites like WikiLeaks and OpenLeaks operate in uncharted territory.

Speaking of such challenges in a recorded speech played to a large rally in his adopted hometown, Melbourne, Australia, last week, Mr. Assange compared the struggles of WikiLeaks to those of African-Americans who fought for equal rights in the 1950s, of protesters who sought an end to the Vietnam War in the 1960s, to the feminist movement and to environmental campaigners today. “For the Internet generation,” he said, “this is our challenge, and this is our time.”

Mr. Domscheit-Berg, in his speech to the Berlin hackers, studiously avoided such soaring rhetoric about OpenLeaks. But, he said, “I think it’s going to be a more effective process, a more efficient process.”

A version of this article appeared in print on February 7, 2011, on page A10 of the New York edition.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/07/world/07openleaks.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

See Also, THIS piece on NPR:

"The New York Times and the Guardian both have books out this week which detail the back story behind the WikiLeaks revelations. Alan Rusbridger, editor of the Guardian, talks to Renee Montagne about WikiLeaks' Julian Assange."

*Click next on Media player till you get to "Books Describes Working With WikiLeaks' Assange"

http://www.npr.org/2011/02/08/133583959/Guardian-Editor-Describes-Working-With-WikiLeaks-Assange

Here's What a REAL Whistle Blower Looks Like

2011-02-01T14:02:00.004-06:00

In case y'all aren't unfamiliar with what a real whistle blower is, I'd like to remind you about Sgt. Joseph Darby, who exposed the abuses at Abu Ghraib. He wasn't detained or punished by the Army - quite the contrary, he was protected when his identity as a whistle blower was made public by the media.

Darby didn't have to go to some hacker to get results. He went to Army CID, which lead to prosecutions and prison for those involved.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/07/60minutes/main2238188.shtml?tag=contentMain%3BcontentBody

Now there were those outside the military who deserved to be prosecuted as well, but in spite of this matter being made extremely public and all the evidence and names of those involved, that still hasn't happened.

Also, this embed code doesn't work, but this interview with Bill Keller, executive editor of The New York Times, about the decisions the newspaper faced in negotiating with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and the U.S. government over publishing classified government information, is very informative.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/media/jan-june11/wikileaks_01-28.html

Here

2011-02-01T14:02:00.001-06:00

The U.S. Role in Egypt's Revolution?

2011-01-31T09:59:00.002-06:00

This situation is VERY complex, and for once it's not ABOUT US. I really wish people would stop thinking that our president is supposed to tell everyone in the world what to do and how to do it. I think the Admin. is striking exactly the right tone.

See THIS interview with Sec. Hillary Clinton from yesterday's Face the Nation. CBS is technology-challenged and I can't embed this video, but it is very much worth clicking on to watch.

Additionally, I completely agree with THIS New York Times column By ROSS DOUTHAT (what a great name btw):

We intervene in Afghanistan and then depart, and watch the Taliban take over. We intervene in Afghanistan and stay, and end up trapped there, with no end in sight.

Sooner or later, the theories always fail. The world is too complicated for them, and too tragic. History has its upward arcs, but most crises require weighing unknowns against unknowns, and choosing between competing evils.

The only comfort, as we watch Egyptians struggle for their country’s future, is that some choices aren’t America’s to make.

One minute people want us to stay out of everyone else's business and accuse us of emperialsm, and the next they expect us to police the world. We're not the world's freaking mommy. We can't be blamed for every situation in every country, like some Peter Pan 30 year old living in the parent's basement, blaming them for his inability to take control of his OWN life.

We have to deal with the people who are in power all over the world, usually to everyone's benefit. In many situations we refuse, N. Korea, Iran, etc., because their human rights record is beyond atrocious, but if we shut out every single country with bad leadership, what do you think would happen to the people in those countries, with no trade, no one pressuring their government to do better? We have had bad leaders too, but at least we boot them out.

Do I agree with all of our government's policies, currently and historically, HELL NO! But I have one voice and one vote, and I do what I can. We are not some monolithic, group think, bunch of clones of each other in this country or any other. Further, each Administration, has a different view and agenda. I think Pres. Obama's speech in Cairo was honest and earnest. I listened to it again yesterday as a matter of fact am posting it here. And I have more respect for Sec. Clinton than I can even articulate.

Once upon a time, our country was a colony being bled dry and subjugated by Great Britain. We stood up and we fought back and we took our freedom, as unlikely and improbable as that was. We had a plan, and we secured help to do it. That was a very different world, but I don't think the U.S. can never, or ever could have handed the Egyptian people their freedom. I think they have to take it for themselves, and that is why I am so proud as a free person, to see them fighting for it. I believe the American people and our leadership are with them, but there is nothing we can do now, beyond what we are doing, to help them. If you know of something more, I'd love to hear it.

I should mention, I am half-Irish, so my ancestors were being starved to death and murdered by the same empire during the American Revolution. I take no credit for it, only take pride in the spirit of those who fought for the country where I was born. Ireland in many ways did the same to gain their freedom, but it took a hell of a lot longer. It is correct to include the U.S. as being partial sponsors of the oppressors in the middle east, but at this moment, that doesn't seem to be a factor IMO. This revolution, these uprisings, are NOT ABOUT US. It's about, by, and for the Egyptian people. What really could we do anyway? Invade, throw out Mubarak? See Iraq for the results of that! And if we denounce him now, I believe he will fight that much harder and come down on the protesters very brutally, and then we will have NO influence! He may do that anyway, and if he does, I will evaluate our government's response accordingly.

One thing is very clear - WE HAVE TO GET OFF THE OIL! Pres. Obama is fighting tooth and nail for alternative energy and conservation, so that we won't be forced to deal with this kind of thing. It's costing us way too much. All these wars, all this corruption over oil. It's NOT worth it. Even that idiot Bush finally had to admit we are addicted to oil, and it's a dangerous addiction for us. If the flow of oil stops, it will cause global death and destruction. It's almost beyond comprehension that we have gotten ourselves into this mess, and have had to make the ethical and moral compromises we have because of it.

THIS is a documentary I saw some time ago on CNN that details what would happen if the flow of oil stopped. It is not a pretty picture, for ANYONE:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/23/cp.03.htmll

Abortion Doctor's "House of Horrors"

2011-01-24T16:10:00.005-06:00

I'm hearing people, who must be a little off in the head, use this guy, who is obviously a CRIMINAL and a MONSTER, and his actions as some sort of anti-abortion example. WTF?!? All those dead bodies all over, and the babies feet in jars?!? Jesus! Let's not confuse the issue! That’s like saying if a bus driver goes on a killing spree, it’s buses that are the problem. Absurd logic.

Everything isn't about some stupid partisan divide.

But since you brought it up, I think if people on the right REALLY cared about aborted babies, they would DO SOMETHING to make it obsolete, like support REAL, sensible sex education and use of birth control.

We teach kids more about taking care of body odor than their bodies' MOST important function, and we provide them with tools to prevent it too, but not creating life. It's freaking stupid, backward, pig-headed, controlling, hate-based, self-righteous, pointless, mindless CRAAAAAAP!

I have this irresistible urge to get a clip board and go to abortion clinics, taking down names and addresses of protestors. "Yes, Mrs. Morally Superior Pretend Do-Gooder, DHS will send several of their foster children to your home tomorrow for you to take to raise, since you care so much about what happens to them. Have a good day, and thank you for loving God's children so much." Those "protests" would end instantly. Standing around with a freaking sign isn't DOING anything about the suffering of children, just making a bunch of idiots feel self-righteous. If they really cared, they'd be handing out condoms instead of advocating abstinence only, or rather ignorance only, rubbish.

I LOATHE abortion and feel VERY, VERY strongly about this. Making it illegal, wouldn't stop abortions. They've been around for centuries in every culture. The great thing is, we have the solution FINALLY, in many convenient, health conscious forms for any lifestyle, but like primitive apes many of us are frightened by progress.

As if it's ever going to be made illegal anyway. That's a joke. It's an issue-voter bonanza for the right, and they'll never do anything to jeopardize that, which is proved out by the fact that under Pres. George W. Bush, Republicans had control of all 3 branches of government and did NOTHING to make it illegal. Not to mention it's settled law and will never be overturned. The obvious, glaring solution is prevention, but somehow the propaganda machine on the right has senselessly demonized that too.

Therefore, BABIES KEEP DYING, and unwanted children continue to be born to suffer abuse and neglect, and it absolutely infuriates me!

You cannot and should not legislate morality - people who claim to care about liberty should be the first to agree with that. So, the answer is obviously prevention. How can you be against both? It doesn't make any sense! Abortion is a barbaric, unnecessary, risky procedure that SHOULD be obsolete in a civilized society. Am I wrong?

And that's what I have to say about that, which I insist has nothing really to do with this EVIL monster.

President Obama's Full Speech at Tucson Memorial

2011-01-13T09:15:00.000-06:00

A Part of the American Soul Was Murdered Today

2011-01-08T13:43:00.005-06:00

Although we do not know the motivation of the person who gunned down Congresswoman Giffords today, the gut reaction for most of us, is that it was motivated by politics, Arizona being one of the states where politics has gotten extremely ugly and contentious. I worry that instead of learning and changing our tone, as a result of this tragedy, the rhetoric will only become more hateful and bitter.

As a life long political junkie, I have always relished political debate and believed ours is one of the finest democracies mankind has ever devised. Lately though, I have felt discouraged and disgusted with all engineered polarization, misinformation, hate-mongering, and fear-mongering that has become our daily bread of political discourse, served up to us by people who are motivated by greed, self-interest, and lust for power and attention. It's not healthy nor productive, rather it is designed to manipulate and enthrall, rather than inform.

The shooting of Cong. Giffords has, in fact, wounded us all, on both sides. She was elected by the people, for the people, and we the people are all responsible when we nurture and spread the kind of outrageous hatred and divisive bias that is poisoning our ability to be self-governed.

I've said this many times, but today, I feel so much sadness when I reiterate: We are the UNITED States! Everything great we have ever achieved, we have achieved because we were UNITED, and every shameful moment in our history has occurred because we were divided by hate and fear. So, when we all reflect on this day's events, it is my deepest hope that instead of becoming more divided and hateful toward the other side of the aisle, we will find it in ourselves to push away those feelings, denounce those who foster them, and make every effort to work together, UNITED, with mutual respect, toward the common good. We can and must heal, if we are to survive and thrive as a nation. It seems to me, from what I know of Gabrielle Giffords, that she would want the same.

Favre - So, He Appears to be a Pretty Average Horn Dog

2011-01-04T15:00:00.007-06:00

Ex-Jets massage therapists sue Favre

Well, IDK what to say. Yes, he's obviously a horn dog, of a rather slimy variety. That's not to say he did anything wrong. I find it interesting that in 20 years nothing like this ever came up, only when he played in NY for a year. We shall see...

It amazes me how much people, and particularly the has-beens in the sports media, hate Favre, yet think all with Vick should be forgiven and forgotten. You can tell by how terribly upset they are that the NFL is considering making Mike Vick MVP right? I remember when Vick was convicted people told me, "if he can win games, a team will hire him," and I said, "No freaking way! The fans will never stand for it!" Well, I was soooo wrong. No, athletes, for the most part, are not role models. They have parties with boats full of hookers, carry guns around, get shot down by nefarious people they associate with, give alcohol to minors in bars then have sex with them (allegedly or isn't that much admitted?), and some of them, like Broadway Joe, are single and charming enough to pull off the skeeve thing, and actually have it enhance their reputations.

Just seems to be that Favre's a sleeze who hits on women. I never saw anything in those voicemails or texts with Sterger than indicated he was abusing or sexually harassing her, and apparently neither did the NFL, nor did they find anything untoward in his interaction with these women now suing him. I mean, if every guy, even in the NFL, who hit on women all the time had their reputations and achievements sacked and ruined, there wouldn't be anyone left in all of sports.

Keep in mind, that I also defended Tiger Woods. He, also, didn't do anything illegal in any way. His relationships with these women was clearly mutual, and no one has ever alleged otherwise, yet . . . his career, his mental focus, his family, his wife's and children's piece of mind, has all been torn to shreds for the sake of the media's lust of sensational stories and the public's lust for stupid, mindless, pointless gossip.

These are damn athletes for Pete's sake, not a sitting Popes. Their fame comes from their athletic abilities, and frankly, people who see them as moral or a sexual role models, need their heads examined.

Further, the Jets have stated that the suit has NO merit:

"Unfortunately, the plaintiffs never reported the allegations to the Jets, either during or after the conclusion of their work," the team said in a statement Tuesday. "The case against the Jets is completely without merit, and we look forward to defending the matter in court, where we are confident that the Jets will prevail."

I also found it interesting that the women never even personally got a text from Favre - are they saying they were harassed 2nd hand?

"While the women don't say they received any messages directly from Favre, the quarterback referred to Scavo in a message proposing a meeting with her and a third, unidentified massage therapist, the lawsuit says."

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=12537834

Finally, it’s worth reading the NFL’s ACTUAL statement regarding fining Favre, rather than the speculative, fictionalized account in the media:

The NFL office conducted an investigation to determine whether Brett Favre's interaction with New York Jets game-day employee Jenn Sterger in 2008 violated the NFL Personal Conduct Policy.

In reviewing the matter, the sole focus was on whether there was a violation of league policies regarding conduct in the workplace. NFL policies do not extend to private conduct or make judgments about the appropriateness of personal relationships, except where that conduct or those relationships raise issues under the law or league policies.

The investigation included an analysis of publicly available reports; a series of interviews with knowledgeable individuals, including Sterger and Favre; a review of communications between the two furnished to our office; and independent forensic analysis of electronically stored material. The investigation was limited in several respects because the conduct occurred in 2008 but was not brought to our attention until this fall. As a result, certain records and individuals were unavailable to the NFL.

The investigation also reviewed a second media report about allegations involving other women who worked at the Jets' facility in 2008. Misconduct by Favre regarding that claim was unable to be substantiated because individuals with potentially relevant information declined to be interviewed or otherwise cooperate with the investigation. In addition, our investigation took longer than might ordinarily have been the case due to difficulties in arranging to speak with certain key individuals, the time required to retrieve and review stored electronic records, and Commissioner Roger Goodell's decision to meet personally with both Favre and Sterger before making a decision.

On the basis of the evidence currently available to him, Commissioner Goodell could not conclude that Favre violated league policies relating to workplace conduct. The forensic analysis could not establish that Favre sent the objectionable photographs to Sterger. The review found no evidence to contradict the statements of both Favre and Sterger that they never met in person, nor was there anything to suggest that Sterger engaged in any inappropriate conduct.

However, Commissioner Goodell also determined that Favre was not candid in several respects during the investigation, resulting in a longer review and additional negative public attention for Favre, Sterger, and the NFL. The commissioner notified Favre that he has been fined $50,000 for his failure to cooperate with the investigation in a forthcoming manner. Commissioner Goodell stated to Favre that if he had found a violation of the league's workplace conduct policies, he would have imposed a substantially higher level of discipline.

In a memo to clubs today, Commissioner Goodell reminded them of the serious nature of this matter and stated that NFL policies make no excuses for improper or potentially unlawful conduct in the workplace.

'Every member of every club's staff should be able to work in an environment free of harassment or hostility, and one in which every employee is valued, respected, and given a full opportunity to contribute to the goals of the club and the NFL,' Commissioner Goodell said. 'Our new training program on workplace conduct will help all of us to promote the right kind of environment for all employees and I intend to dedicate the fine I have imposed on Favre to help fund that training program.'"

It's disappointing. I'm getting pretty sick of defending Farve, particularly when it involves this skeevy, nauseating crap, but I never thought he was a moral compass, just the most exciting quarterback I've ever seen play, who loves the game and brought so many amazing legendary moments and accomplishments to the game of football.

I got a Kindle3 for Christmas!

2010-12-28T09:34:00.004-06:00

I just LOVE IT! I'm halfway through with The Girl with Dragon Tattoo, and I'm really enjoying reading it on my Kindle. Here's an interesting article about Kindle's surprising ("Third-Generation Kindle Now the Bestselling Product of All Time on Amazon Worldwide") success :

Amazon didn't freak out and rush a Kindle with a color LCD screen when Apple's iPad came out. (It may be working on one internally, but it didn't rush anything to market.) That's because there's no reason for Amazon to compete with Apple's iPad on features, especially when it has such a huge price advantage.

Instead, Amazon kept its product focused on what matters to readers. Things like size and weight, portability, e-ink screen quality, the ability to read in the sun, and battery life. It made improvements, like better support for grayscale, and faster page-turning, but it kept things simple.

...

Amazon's devotion to the Kindle as an e-book platform, and not just as a hardware device, is a huge reason for its success.

Amazon offers Kindle reading apps for the Kindle (obviously), the iPhone and iPad, Android, BlackBerry, Windows Phone 7, and the Mac and PC. We wouldn't be surprised if Amazon would make a Kindle app for the Barnes & Noble Nook, if it were ever technically possible.

Even the iPad owners that we surveyed said they are more likely to buy Kindle e-books than Apple iBooks.

How Amazon Saved The Kindle

Merry Christmas!

2010-12-22T16:12:00.001-06:00

Can you say HYPOCRITE?

2010-12-21T10:53:00.004-06:00

WikiLeaks' Julian Assange turns on the Guardian after paper leaks info on his alleged sexual assault

Old friends are quickly becoming Julian Assange's new enemies. The founder of the controversial whistleblower website WikiLeaks slammed itish newspaper The Guardian for "selectively" publishing intimate details about his alleged sexual assaults against two women.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/12/21/2010-12-21_wikileaks_julian_assange_turns_on_the_guardian_after_paper_leaks_info_on_his_all.html?r=news

I actually think this guy's a little crazy. Not only do his positions make no sense, morally or ethically - I mean the guy published Palin's personal emails, and he seems to think that he and his organization are the only ones entitled to privacy, secrecy, and security, not to mention that his cohorts try to bring down anyone who won't support him, yet he's so paranoid about people out to get him, even The Guardian for Pete's sake, but also, just the way he talks in these interviews, about women, about "crushing bastards," his whole demeanor, personality, and background, are very, very strange and suspicious.

I got a giggle when I read the part in this article about his "appeal to women." Lol, what women? He's about the most unattractive, pasty little geek I've ever seen. Just looking at his pictures makes my skin crawl at the thought. EEEWWWW!

I mean, his supporters have exposed the identities of alleged rape victims and viciously attacked them and spread a pretty ugly hate campaign worldwide, but HE is entitled to his privacy and security? Really? You know he'd publish any documents he got his hands on about someone else in his position.

I'm telling you, like his past hacking life, this is just another money making scheme, and it's working like a charm. BEFORE he even released the first batch of U.S. stolen documents, Wikileaks had collected over a million dollars in "donations." Imagine how much money that is now, AND his accountants have yet to provide the required documentation on how the money for his "non-profit" is being spent - they've been promising to for months:

Fulda told Der Spiegel that the foundation has received about $1.2 million for WikiLeaks since it began accepting donations on the organization’s behalf in October 2009 via PayPal and direct bank transfers. WikiLeaks has now spent more than 370,000 euro ($495,000) of this money, Fulda said.

This is about 13 times the amount ($38,000) that Fulda reported had been spent for total WikiLeaks expenditures as of July."
...

Most of the money came in before WikiLeaks began publishing the classified material believed to have come from Manning. Fulda told Der Spiegel that donations have been steady since the release of documents attributed to Manning.

“Every new publication by WikiLeaks has unleashed a wave of support, and donations were never as strong as now,” he said. “More than 80,000 euros ($107,000) was contributed in one week via PayPal alone."

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/wikileaks-spending/

Most of all, I find those out there attacking Assange's accusers baffling, in their attempts to try this case in the public square without a shred of actual evidence or testimony, just a bunch of irrelevant gossip and hearsay, and WHY do you suppose that is? THAT is actually the only real point. If he is innocent, great - he'll be charged by the U.S. of several crimes for which he will certainly be pursued, and then they can make excuses for him that might have some merit to their way of thinking. As it is, how about we actually not automatically ASSUME sexual assault allegations are false, when we like the guy for some reason, and see what the EVIDENCE says. I'm so sick of this blaming the victim attitude when it comes to sexual abuse. It's the 21st freaking century, and sometimes I think very little has changed - in this world one in four women will be sexually assaulted during her lifetime and rape is still a weapon of war in many countries. It's attitudes, JUST LIKE what we are seeing in this instance that perpetuate those horrors.

In fact, all this making offensive, ill-considered, and ignorance-based excuses for him now, under these circumstances, is simply turning more people away from the guy, not that he isn't doing a pretty good job of that himself, every time he opens his mouth. So, do carry on.

To Compromise or Battle to the Death - That is the Question

2010-12-08T15:30:00.006-06:00

Yes, Pres. Obama has forged a compromise on his promise - a 2 year compromise, since "progressives" in large numbers didn't get out and VOTE and lost us the House, not to mention a recession and unemployment benefits for those in need being held hostage. I thought we on the left were about the greater good, not some lock step, "scorched Earth," battle to the death.

I just keep wondering, how do these people who CLAIM to be on our side think we would have faired with McCain/Palin? Did they think Obama was their soul mate or something? The guy ran as a moderate who can compromise and reach across the isle. REMEMBER?!? What guy do you people think you voted for anyway? I swear, while MSNBC was beating the crap out of Hillary and promoting Obama like he was the 2nd coming, they sure as Hell weren't LISTENING TO HIM!

Here's the thing, if you're going to follow and engage in politics, you have to be a grown up. Not everyone thinks like the far left, or the far right, thank God. Most of us are somewhere in the middle, and compromises have to be made. For 2 years of extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich, Obama got A LOT of important things - particularly important if you are one of the people whose about to lose unemployment benefits. If it were up to me, I'd say let all the tax cuts expire, but I have to think of someone besides myself sometimes. That's what people in a democracy do.

So, while I may not like the tax cuts being extended AT ALL for the rich, I do understand, under the circumstances - that being the fact that we're about to lose a majority in the House, which ironically was the most far left seat of power in DC BEFORE "Progressives" stayed home on election day and lost that majority. You know, all these things are connected right?

I mean, I hate being such a snot, but this sh*t pisses me off! I'm sick of the people who shot us in the foot, bitching about the pain of the wound.

I wonder . . . who benefits from all this irrational, immovable bitching . . . I know THE media does - just like Fox does, people love to be enraged with contrived controversy and false self-righeousness, along with the republicans. This MSNBC-induced malaise is what cost us the House, and will hand the White House back to the GOP in the end. Gee, whose side are they on again?

BTW, polls show support of the deal, so who freaking cares what the fruit cakes on the far left "think" anyway:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145109/Americans-Support-Major-Elements-Tax-Compromise.aspx

There are some aspects to this that could be beneficial actually. Look at what the GOP has done - they added to the deficit not only by extending the tax cuts but also by extending unemployment, none of which is paid for. How is this going to square with the Tea Party in 2012? I'm thinking it will be doable to get these tax cuts for the rich knocked out right around that time, a HUGE election year. Frankly, it simply wasn't going to get done after the last election, and that's a fact that no amount of wishful thinking are MSNBC magic fake-rage dust can change.

But whatever, enjoy your rancor and all that jazz, but explain one thing to me about your outrage. It's about the GOP getting its way on a this small extension isn't it? That's really the crux of it isn't it? It's not about who benefits, who doesn't, who suffers, who doesn't - it's about fighting a huge battle over a small, in the grand scheme of things, concession.

Yeah, I'm glad Obama's our president, not some crack pot who would cripple our government and hurt people just to be righteous.

I don't like this compromise EITHER, but I see it's necessity and wisdom

Is Gridlock a Government?

2010-12-07T13:51:00.005-06:00

I'm "liberal" by any standard, and I used to consider myself a "progressive," by the old Katrina Vanden Heuvel standards, a term she popularized starting about 10 years ago. Now "progressive" means consumers of the fake political reality shows that MSNBC, DailyKos, HuffPo, and others are marketing. The one in which they set unreasonable expections for things no one ever promised. Today's "Progressives" run around complaining about the "public option" like someone they voted for actually promised it to them, lol. And please don't show me that grainy cell phone footage of Obama discussing the public option, like all y'all were in that room and missed EVERY debate and EVERY speech he gave during the campaign. Today's "progressives" are the people who lost us Ted Kennedy's seat and control of The House, because THEY DIDN'T SHOW UP TO VOTE! They're going to lose us a lot more seats too, if all the nonsense doesn't hit a wall.

A FB friend told me today, "progressives" are just like liberals, but they want to "get stuff done," lol. Well, in order to "get stuff done," YOU HAVE TO BE WILLING TO DOOOOOO SOMETHING, NOT JUST STAND YOUR USELESS GROUND, and you have to have some vague notion of what "stuff" and "done" actually mean:

CQ: Obama's Winning Streak On Hill Unprecedented
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122436116

The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

The man isn’t just doing what he said he would do, he’s doing it to an historic degree!

So, while we have a lot in common, we may see things differently. I'm actually in favor of not cutting off our noses to spite our faces and recognizing a damn good thing when we've got it. I'm all for continuing to push our president and Congress toward the kind of reform we all want, but I am NOT for childishlly, unrealistically burning down the entire thing if we can't force everyone to see things our way. And THAT is the difference between today's liberals and progressives, and the difference between the Kennedys and today's progressives. Do a little research on the kinds of deals Teddie made during his many years in the Senate. He just may not be your ideal poster boy after all.

Further, the left wing media JUST as bad as the right, with their deceptive BS, and there don’t appear to be much of any neutral, actual journalists around anymore. The left wing base are a bunch of ignorant jug heads watching Keith Olbermanure and Arrianna Huff n' Puff, who bitched about Obama for not doing things, he never ran on doing in the first damn place. THEY ARE NOT ON OUR SIDE! They are on their corporate masters' side, JUST like Faux Spews. All this misinformation and lack of information has people living in some kind of alternate reality, one where they cannot be self-governed.

For example, Obama never ran on single payer. NEITHER did Hillary. I don't understand why people on the left expected something from him that he never even endorsed as a candidate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neyut6lpa3Y

Obama SAID he would increase troops in Afghanistan, AND SO DID Clinton:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HO2uA2t9e-I

This is the SH*T that drives me nuts! Where were Keith Olbermanure and Arrianna Huff n' Puff during the election? They were promoting Pres. Obama like he was the 2nd coming, but were they not listening TO WHAT HE WAS SAYING!?! I can't really bitch when someone I voted for does what he promised to do, ya know?

If we don’t demand a LOT better of our “free press,” we’re not going to be informed enough to self-govern a lemonade stand.

This is OUR country, ALL of us! We are the self-governed, and if we don't start cooperating and working together UNITED, and informing ourselves, and I don't mean the propaganda and political reality shows on 24 hour spews, we WILL certainly lose it.

This country was built on cooperation and compromise and doesn't function well in its absence. We wouldn't have survived a decade without the contributions of Hamilton (my hero) AND Jefferson, together. Somewhere in the middle usually works out to be the best place for us.

Look at it this way, If not for Obama, Pres. McCain would have been extended the tax cuts for the rich, and no one else, and there'd be no unemployment benefits.

Seriously, moving on to the next battle . . .

Would someone please STOP this WikiLeaks SOB?!

2010-11-24T16:05:00.008-06:00

This is just RIDICULOUS! How many documents did that little traitor have access too? What ELSE is out there, the codes to our nukes? For God's sake, I just shudder at the thought! How can anyone who cares about this country AT ALL keep defending this BS and calling it "whistle blowing"?!? It's ESPIONAGE, plain and simple. The documents were obtained through ESPIONAGE, and he is complicit in publishing them! It makes me so furious I can hardly see straight!

US warns of likely harm from WikiLeaks release

"‎The revelations they contain are likely to range from the mundane, in the case of routine reporting on meetings between U.S. and foreign government officials, to the explosive, in the case of candid assessments of foreign officials or the exposure of pressure tactics used by U.S. diplomats."

"One concern, for example, is that the documents may reveal the kinds of pressure the Obama administration has put on various countries to accept the transfer of Guantanamo Bay detainees who have been cleared for release but are unwelcome in their home countries.

State Department officials said privately there was concern, too, that details about certain sensitive programs could be exposed. These might include details about surveillance at U.S. diplomatic compounds abroad."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jUZomhwHKrBR-R3tw_E-cFunmZgQ?docId=e36bae4685ba416e80c2fde3e9ec78ff

Yeah, we should just leave all our national security documents open to whoever wants them, including documents that detail how our troops operate. They put their lives on the line for this country, which makes them disposable right?

It's F'ing ridiculous. I don't just call it espionage - IT IS.

"The act of securing information of a military or political nature that a competing nation holds secret. It can involve the analysis of diplomatic reports, publications, statistics, and broadcasts, as well as spying, a clandestine activity carried out by an individual or individuals working under secret identity to gather classified information on behalf of another entity or nation. In the United States, the organization that heads most activities dedicated to espionage is the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/espionage

In what possible way is this whistle blowing? You didn't know there were two wars going on? You think I like these wars? Hell no, but that doesn't change the fact that they ARE, IN FACT, wars, and those who are fighting them shouldn't be put in danger so the anti-war left can delude themselves into thinking there are any big revelations in those documents and that sniveling little traitor is doing some public service. There are none, and he is not! Any criminal acts or acts of abuse detailed in those documents, were no doubt already being prosecuted by the military, in a way that doesn't reveal classified information. You didn't read about that in those field reports did you? You just ASSUME the military doesn't care. Well, that would be wrong. The military may not be perfect, but it was the top brass from the military and even the FBI who were fighting the Bush Admin.'s torture policy the hardest!

FBI Weren't the Only Ones Objecting to Torture in 2002 -- So Did the Army, Marines & Air Force

But it's not like the FBI was alone in expressing those concerns. On October 1, the commander in charge of detainee interrogation at Guantanamo Bay wrote a memo requesting authority to use "aggressive interrogations techniques" that were similar to those outlined in the Bybee memo. It reached the desk of Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Joint Staff solicited opinions before making a decision. Here's what came back to them in November 2002.

Air Force: Had "serious concerns regarding the legality of many of the proposed techniques...Some of these techniques could be construed as 'torture' as that crime is defined by 18 U.S.C 2340." Further, they were concerned that "implementation of these techniques could preclude the ability to prosecute the individuals interrogated," because "Level III techniques will almost certainly result in any statements obtained being declared as coerced and involuntary, and therefore inadmissible....Additionally, the techniques described may be subject to challenge as failing to meet the requirements outlined in military order to treat detainees humanely and to provide them with adequate food, water, shelter and medical treatment." They called for an in-depth legal review.

Criminal Investigative Task Force (CITM): Chief Legal Advisor to the CITF at Gitmo, Maj Sam W. McCahon, writes "Both the utility and the legality of applying certain techniques identified in the memorandum listed above are, in my opinion, questionable. Any policy decision to use the Tier III techniques, or any techniques inconsistent with the analysis herein, will be contrary to my recommendation. The aggressive techniques should not occur at GTMO where both CITF and the intelligence community are conducting interviews and interrogations." He calls for further review and concludes by saying "I cannot advocate any action, interrogation or otherwise, that is predicated upon the principal that all is well if the ends justify the means and others are not aware of how we conduct our business."

Army: The Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans writes: "As set forth in the enclosed memoranda, the Army interposes significant legal, policy and practical concerns regarding most of the Category II and all of the Category III techniques proposed." They recommend "a comprehensive legal review of this proposal in its entirety by the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice."

Navy: recommends that "more detailed interagency legal and political review be conducted on proposed techniques."

Marine Corp: expressed strong reservations, since "several of the Category II and III techniques arguably violate federal law, and would expose our service members to possible prosecution." Called for further review.

Legal adviser to the Joint Chiefs, Jane Dalton, commenced the review that was requested by the military services. But before it was concluded, Myers put a stop to it -- at the request of Jim Haynes, the Department of Defense General Counsel, who was told by Rumsfeld that things were "taking too long." Over the objections of the Army, the Navy, the Marines, the Air Force and the Criminal Investigation Task Force, Haynes recommended that the "aggressive technique" be approved without further investigation. He testified that Wolfowitz, Feith and Myers concurred.

On December 2, 2002 Rumsfeld approved Haynes' recommendation with the famous comment "I stand for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to 4 hours?"

One of the conclusions of the Senate Armed Services Committee report is that Myers screwed up:

"Conclusion 11: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers's decision to cut short the legal and policy review of the October 11,2002 GTMO request initiated by his Legal Counsel, then-Captain Jane Dalton, undermined the military's review process. Subsequent conclusions reached by Chairman Myers and Captain Dalton regarding the legality of interrogation techniques in the request followed a grossly deficient review and were at odds with conclusions previously reached by the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Criminal Investigative Task Force."

They also conclude that "Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's authorization of aggressive interrogation techniques for use at Guantanamo Bay was a direct cause of detainee abuse there. Secretary Rumsfeld's December 2,2002 approval of Mr. Haynes's recommendation that most of the techniques contained in GTMO's October 11, 2002 request be authorized, influenced and contributed to the use of abusive techniques, including military working dogs, forced nudity, and stress positions, in Afghanistan and Iraq."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/fbi-werent-the-only-ones_b_190708.html

In 2002, Military Agency Warned Against 'Torture'

"The unintended consequence of a U.S. policy that provides for the torture of prisoners is that it could be used by our adversaries as justification for the torture of captured U.S. personnel,"...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/24/AR2009042403171.html

That wikileaks F'er doesn't give a rat's ass about who lives and who dies, he just wants to appear righteous.

And we had NO idea that the U.S. had a policy of not intervening on Iraqi on Iraqi violence . . . REALLY? There was video on the internet of the Iraqis savagely EXECUTING SADDAM, not to mention literally beheading one of this henchmen when they were executing him. We needed more proof to hold someone in the government (and that WAS a government, NOT a military policy - they FOLLOW ORDERS - they DO NOT make policy) accountable? Wow, cause I thought if "we the people" were going to object to this, we had PLENTY of the most literal and shocking proof YEARS ago of what was going on.

"Lynching the Dictator"
"On Saturday morning, the United States helped to officiate at a human sacrifice."
Jan. 2, 2007

"How could it have come to this? Did U.S. officials know that the designated "executioners" would be the unwashed goons of Muqtada Sadr's "Mahdi Army"—the same sort of thugs who killed Abdul Majid al-Khoei in Najaf just after the liberation and who indulge in extra-judicial murder of Iraqis every night and day? Did our envoys and representatives ask for any sort of assurances before turning over a prisoner who was being held under the Geneva Conventions? According to the New York Times, there do seem to have been a few insipid misgivings about the timing and the haste, but these appear to have been dissolved soon enough and replaced by a fatalistic passivity that amounts, in theory and practice, to acquiescence in a crude Shiite coup d'état."

http://www.slate.com/id/2156776/

I want the government held accountable too! ACCOUNT AWAY! We already know that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld committed war crimes, Bush is ADMITTING he authorized torture, a war crime, and then there's the fact that they lied us into war, BUT NO ONE IS DOING SQUAT! You think a bunch of field reports that give the enemy - that would be the people shooting at and blowing up our soldiers - information about who has helped us, what our operating procedures and movement patterns are, are going to make the government accountable? I'd sure like to know how.

IF this was about whistle blowing, then they would have redacted the portions that would cause people harm or only published those that would have truly exposed abuse. THEY DID NOT.

"We want to be a neutral conduit," OpenLeaks founder Daniel Domscheit-Berg tells Forbes. "That's what's most politically sustainable as well." He left WikiLeaks when Mr. Assange insisted on releasing 400,000 classified documents about the war in Iraq without bothering to redact names of informants whose lives WikiLeaks put in danger. He also criticized Mr. Assange for focusing his attention on the U.S.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703518604576014142631806416.html

This is worse than what the anti-war activists did to the Viet Nam vets in some ways. They're being betrayed right there on the battle field.

UPDATE: So, if anyone tries to charge him for this apparent crime, he just says he's releasing more documents he got through espionage, and he's being framed. Uh huh. Let's arrest the F'er for espionage and let Sweden try him for rape if there's anything left of him.

WikiLeaks says next leak 7 times larger than Iraq logs

"WikiLeaks' announcement comes just days after Sweden issued an international arrest warrant for the website's head, Australian Julian Assange, wanted for questioning related to rape and sexual molestation accusations."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101122/ts_alt_afp/usiraqmilitaryinternetwikileaks

Arrest Warrant for WikiLeaks Founder Assange Is Upheld by Swedish Court

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-24/arrest-warrant-for-wikileaks-founder-assange-is-upheld-by-swedish-court.html

UPDATE:

WikiLeaks has raised at least $1 million in general donations, according to statements Assange made after April when his site published a classified Army video taken in Iraq. This was before his organization released three massive caches of... documents.

...

Wau Holland Foundation — the Berlin-based non-profit that handles most of the money donated to WikiLeaks — will finally be detailing how WikiLeaks has spent funds from the more than $1 million it has raised in the last year. The report has been expected since August.

“At year end [Wau Holland] will give a breakdown of how they have reimbursed our costs and the staff salaries of people who are getting paid,” Hrafnsson said. It’s the first indication that some WikiLeaks staffers have been receiving salary payments for their work.

The report, if complete, should also detail what money WikiLeaks has paid out to date for the defense fund of Army Pfc. Bradley Manning, who confessed in online chats to a former hacker that he downloaded classified documents from Army networks — including 260,000 U.S. State Department cables — and passed them to WikiLeaks. Manning is currently being held at the U.S. Marine Corps brig at Quantico, Virginia.

WikiLeaks has actively sought donations for Manning’s defense.

...

WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange has recently declined to publicly comment on any payment for Manning’s defense, despite soliciting donations for the cause. Assange said at a press conference in Geneva in November that his group had been advised not to talk about it anymore.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/12/wikileaks-salaries/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wired%2Findex+%28Wired%3A+Index+3+%28Top+Stories+2%29%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

I wonder if he'll pay for the defense of all these hackers out there trying to bring down anyone who doesn't want to assist him.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian

So, let me get this straight, Wikileaks is anti-secrecy, except for their own, and for full disclosure, except for their own, and all about freedom, except when someone disagrees with them. Uh huh, there's a moral and logical hole in this argument you could drive a fleet of trucks through.

First, let's be clear Assange is NOT a jouralist, he's a hacker who has found a way to profit from it, as most hackers do.

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/08/operation-payback-targets-mastercard-and-paypal-sites-to-avenge-wikileaks/

This is a very interesting and informative discussion of the legal implications of what Wikileaks and Assange face:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/july-dec10/wikileaks2_12-07.html

2010-11-24T16:04:00.001-06:00

This is a pretty fun and funny quiz.

My Liberal Identity

You are a Working Class Warrior, also known as a blue-collar Democrat. You believe that the little guy is getting screwed by conservative greed-mongers and corporate criminals, and you’re not going to take it anymore.

Take the quiz at
About.com Political Humor

SEX, LIES, AND VIDEO TAPE - THE NEW MAINSTREAM MEDIA

2010-11-04T09:17:00.004-05:00

And whose fault is all this? The American people didn’t know that not only was TARP done by the Bush Admin., but it was Obama who put the criteria in place to insure that we have gotten ALL of our money back, WITH interest. They didn’t know that 1/3 of The Stimulus was tax cuts, that in fact 95% of Americans got a tax cut under Pres. Obama. In fact, the American people appear to be painfully, dangerously ignorant, all while claiming some phoney, contrived outrage the media TOLD them to feel. The media decides what to cover and how to cover it, such as spending hundreds of hours on bogus “death panels” and all the rest of the crazy BS political reality show of self-promotion and manipulation, instead of telling people what was in the health care reform bill, credit card reform bill, student loan reform, financial reform, etc., etc., etc.

Sadly, people aren't informed by watching our politicians on CSPAN. They are informed by the media, and the media decided those accomplishments weren't sexy enough without contrived conflict and misleading nonsense. THAT is why the Dems lost! Take some freaking responsibility - the media is a disgrace to the idea of a “free press!” The media spent the last year drumming into our heads that the Dems were going to lose - was that reporting, or an agenda? CLEARLY, it was an agenda.

The left wing media is JUST as bad as the right, with their deceptive BS, and there don’t appear to be much of any neutral, actual journalists around anymore. The left wing base are a bunch of ignorant jug heads watching Keith Olbermanure and Arrianna Huff n' Puff, who bitched about Obama for not doing things, he never ran on doing in the first damn place. THEY ARE NOT ON OUR SIDE! They are on their corporate masters' side, JUST like Faux Spews. All this misinformation and lack of information has people living in some kind of alternate reality, one where they cannot be self-governed.

For example, Obama never ran on single payer. NEITHER did Hillary. I don't understand why people on the left expected something from him that he never even endorsed as a candidate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neyut6lpa3Y

Obama SAID he would increase troops in Afghanistan, AND SO DID Clinton:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HO2uA2t9e-I

The man isn’t just doing what he said he would do, he’s doing it to an historic degree!

CQ: Obama's Winning Streak On Hill Unprecedented
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122436116

The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

This is the SH*T that drives me nuts! Where were Keith Olbermanure and Arrianna Huff n' Puff during the election? They were promoting Pres. Obama like he was the 2nd coming, but were they not listening TO WHAT HE WAS SAYING!?! I can't really bitch when someone I voted for does what he promised to do, ya know?

If we don’t demand a LOT better of our “free press,” we’re not going to be informed enough to self-govern a lemonade stand.

I mean, what was that about anyway? The tea party movement got control of the House. That's great. They handed control back to the same damn people who spent us into oblivion, charging a giant tax cut, a prescription drug benefit, and two wars, all of which we could not afford, on their big fat China credit card. The same people who started a war for no reason, bailed out the banks, etc., etc., etc., for which the Tea party claimed to be mad at them too. Honestly, what was the point of that whole, "I'm mad as hell and I'm going to jump up and down and yell crazy nonsense and call people Nazis and socialists" exercise? The tea party played right into the GOP's and Rove's hands like children. You couldn't make this stuff up.

We need and must demand The Fairness Doctrine back for one thing, and Campaign Finance Reform that allows campaign contributions from ONLY registered voters. I mean, we don't let corporations VOTE, and if they want to speak - fine, but they have to come out of the shadows and show themselves so everyone knows they are, who is paying for ads, politicians, and the propaganda on TV and radio stations they OWN. Freedom and free speech are for everyone, but they are NOT free.

If you can control the flow of information, you can control society. Ask Kim Jung Il, the "dear leader" how that works.

We are the UNITED States, Not the Dividied States!

2010-10-01T11:06:00.008-05:00

I really wish people would get freaking sense of proportion and maturity. The thing that really annoys me to no end are these people who weren't LISTENING when Candidate Obama outlined his policies during the election. Now they want to complain? Really? After they went around all ga ga in some kind of manic sycophant stupor? What the heck did they think the election was about? Finding the next American Idol? CRAP!

Look, I was a Hillary supporter, but I can pull my head out of my ass and acknowledge Pres. Obama is doing a good damn job!

CQ: Obama's Winning Streak On Hill Unprecedented
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122436116

The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

He's following through, and particularly considering the crippling mess that was left in his lap, he's gotten more positive things done than any president in my lifetime in only 2 years. No, I didn't really think he was magical and ready to satisfy all my instant gratification needs. There's nothing easy or instant in Washington. It was designed that way.

He stopped torture, is closing GTMO, pulling us out of Iraq responsibly, restored our credibility in the world, stopped a major depression, has come up with a REAL strategy in Afghanistan, instead of just letting the situation languish, as it did under Bush, he's appointed TWO women to the Sup. Ct., has made radical, critical reforms to health care, and most importantly, he got the Stimulus passed, our generation's "new deal" IMO, and yes, I read it line by line with and was absolutely thrilled to the tips of my toes. It will set the stage for a change in how we use energy, educate our children, and brings innovation to the forefront again in this country, at a time when we are falling so far behind the rest of the world, that these things are absolutely critical. And when he had some free time, he won a freaking Nobel Peace Prize!

I say thank you Pres. Obama. Keep up the good work, and don't wear yourself out man. We've got a long road ahead of us, and people need to buckle up. It's going to be a bumpy ride, but one that will take us somewhere besides down an elevator shaft.

I'm impressed as Hell! Damn! Do I agree with him on everything? No, but I knew that going in, and I'll take him over McCain/Palin EVERY DAY I honestly don't understand all the goofy-ass whining and scare tactics ... well yes I do, people are easily led around by the nose, and the powers that be, who are paying for Fox Spews and the Tea Party, know they can manipulate citizens to act against their better interests if they are just polarizing enough. It's mindless red team / blue team rubbish at it's worst. People tune into Fox or MSNBC, and hand over their brains, no questions asked. Infotainment in place of self-government. It will be our downfall.

News is made up of facts - not opinion, which is the twisting of facts for the consumption of the masses, in order to manipulate them. Look, I'm beating up on the extreme left as much as the extreme right most of the time, but the problem is there doesn't seem to be any moderate left or right anymore. It's like some kind of sacrilege not to walk in lock step with the party line. WTF? I don't agree with anyone all the time, much less extremists. The fact is, it's the moderates who decide elections. The middle is large, and we have our heads on straight.

I frankly, have a lot of respect for and see merit in true conservative principles - I just haven't seen a republican actually act on those principles during my lifetime. There have been no republicans who are REAL fiscal conservatives, or protect states rights or individual liberties, or ANYTHING they claim to be about. Stating a bunch of principles for the lazy, ignorant masses to latch onto, and ACTUALLY following them are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. I mean, don't people who vote Republican read, think, live in the same reality as the rest of us?

We've had enough stupid, inept, and just plain corrupt. Thanks so much. The Dems are cleaning up the giant mess the Republicans made AGAIN, while everyone on the right seems to be having some kind of idiotic food fight, instead of pitching in a helping. All while waving the flag, lol, which is the most literal and recognizable symbol OF our government and UNITED efforts.

Take health care reform, why shouldn't we pool our money together and get the most for our money, like most civilized nations do, instead of allowing corporations to feed off of death and suffering like maggots? This never made ANY sense to me. We are the UNITED States, and we are a great nation BECAUSE of the things we have done UNITED in common purpose, to "promote the general welfare." All of our shining moments have come when we were UNITED, and our most shameful ones have come when we were divided over race, religion, equality, and fear-mongering. It baffles me how people are being brain-washed to think that it is not "patriotic" for us to be UNITED in common purpose - THAT'S THE DEFINITION OF PATRIOTISM for Pete's sake! It defies logic, all intellect, and just reality.

I sometimes think the GOP figured out why Jim and Tammy Faye Baker were so successful. It's easy to con stupid people out of their money, when you make it about faith and dogma and NOT performance or goals.

And BTW, the Boston Tea Party was NOT a protest against taxation itself or government - it was a protest against taxation without representation and in favor of self-government, lol. Y'all can't even figure out what your symbols mean, or learn from history, much less run a lemonade stand. No, Faux Spews, Limpbrain, and Beckerhead, amazing oracles of conning stupid people out of their rights and better interests, AREN'T on your side. And here's your proof - where were the Tea Partiers when Bush was spending us into oblivion, and charging two wars and a giant tax cut on his China credit card? Fox News INVENTED, then PROMOTED, "the Tea Party" to defeat the Democrats, and that's just the truth.

This is OUR country, ALL of us! We are the self-governed, and if we don't start cooperating and working together UNITED, and informing ourselves, and I don't mean the propaganda and political reality shows on 24 hour spews, we WILL certainly lose it.

This country was built on cooperation and compromise and doesn't function well in its absence. We wouldn't have survived a decade without the contributions of Hamilton (my hero) AND Jefferson, together. Somewhere in the middle usually works out to be the best place for us.

Christine O'Donnell, the Craziest of the Crazy Tea Baggers!

2010-09-16T17:03:00.020-05:00

LMAO! I think republican men would vote for a life size Barbie with cotton stuffing in her head to run the country, and that would be saner than voting for Christine O'Donnell! Cripes!

O'Donnell goes on CSPAN and slams welfare, advocates censorship, single sex education, says "you CAN legislate morality," and seems to be saying women shouldn't be admitted into the military - SHE IS A SCARY NUT!

Here's O'Donnell on CSPAN saying AIDS gets too much money . . . while she equates it to other diseases, which are NOT communicable. There's a lot of blaming the victim on this too. What a great Christian! I mean, this one is just about as ignorant as a person gets.

There's also her telling Bill O'Reilly on Fox News: "They are - they are doing that here in the United States. American scientific companies are cross-breeding humans and animals and coming up with mice with fully functioning human brains."

WTF?!? And then there's her warning of orgy rooms in college dorms, saying masturbation is a form of adultery, that she doesn't believe in evolution, and strangest of all that people from Castle's campaign were hiding in her bushes and Joe Biden tapped her phones, and we haven't even seen all the Politically Incorrect with Bill Maher crazy ass crap she's said.

I'd laugh if it weren't all so freaking disturbing!

And about that lying thing - how about the lies she told about her education, which sure are compelling considering how "un"articulate" she is, lol, her financial issues, including the alleged misuse of campaign funds to pay her personal bills while not paying her staff, and on and on and on. I've seen political careers go down the drain over plagiarism in college, and candidate Obama deep fried in the media over things his preacher said - not him. Yet, she is somehow exempt from taking responsibility for her own words and actions? PARTICULARLY WHEN SHE'S CLEARLY BORDERLINE INSANE!

By the way, with regard to O'Donnell's statements on Welfare, I just posted an article today about the poverty rate in Texas exploding. In fact, Red states receive far more in welfare and other entitlements than Blue states, and yet . . . the right doesn't seem to believe in entitlements. Who is legislating morality again? And who is just blowing smoke up our tail feathers?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/04/the_red_state_ripoff.html

How is that the "Tea Party" is supposed to be about individual liberty, but this psycho wants to "legislate morality," and she's the "party's" darling? REALLY?

NOW, check out these Today Show fictional campaign ads for O'Donnell. They were blatantly promoting her the last THREE mornings:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/39208900#39208900

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp/39228839#39228839

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/#39208921

(Sorry, I can't quite figure out how to embed these).

I thought I was beyond being shocked by this kind of thing, but this just floors me. Three mornings in a row The Today Show has PROMOTED O'Donnell, twisting the facts and selling her in a way that I just really find shocking!

The Today Show is so obvious, so blatant in their support for this nut, who could change the majority of the Senate if she somehow were to win, that I am actually stunned by it. They're not even trying to hide it! Every morning she's getting the kind of campaign ads she couldn't possibly afford or put together so effectively herself, on a show that gets a staggering number of viewers!

They practically defended her, didn't quote any of the crazy things she's said, made excuses for her, and in fact, they edited the masturbation thing down to "lust in your heart is adultery," and then they're letting Sen. DeMint, one of the few Republicans supporting her, defend her some more.

I've also seen similar articles on CBS and WaPo, practically promoting this nut. Why? Could it be that the giant corporations who own the media will benefit from a GOP majority in the Senate? Yes, there's a reason the GOP said she is unelectable, and the MSM isn't going to hide that from the public.

By the way, with regard to O'Connell's statements on Welfare, I just read an article today about the poverty rate in Texas exploding. In fact, Red states receive far more in welfare and other entitlements than Blue states, and yet . . . the right doesn't seem to believe in entitlements. Who is legislating morality again? And who is just blowing smoke up our tail feathers?

Okay . . . I'm exhausted now from linking to all these crazy things, and I have a feeling I could do this all night long. This should be enough though right, for ANY SANE PERSON!?!

But if you need any more convincing, here's a radio interview that will make your brain hurt.

UPDATE: I have a feeling there are going to be a lot of updates on this piece, lol. So, Christine O'Donnell "dabbled in witchcraft." Can you imagine if Pres. Obama had "dabbled in witchcraft?" The Tea Baggers would tear him to pieces. They already think he's the anti-Christ, lol.

LMAO! Bob Sheffert on Face the Nation is totally threw O'Donnell under the bus for canceling at the last minute. He even showed the "witchcraft" clip, and even his republican strategist guests, said she is simply unelectable. She also canceled her appearance on Fox News Sunday.

It's pretty funny though, watching Karl Rove flip and flop around, from saying she was an unelectable liar, to he supports her, to now saying she has explain the "witchcraft" thing.

Further, Rove is challenging Palin to campaign for O'Donnell, personally. Rove is a shrewd operator, and he knows Palin intends to do a Ralph Nadar in 2012, taking votes away from the GOP nominee, and I think he's trying to bury Palin now.

Palin's Sound and Fury - Signifying More Nothing

2010-09-03T11:54:00.003-05:00

You know, the new substitute for news and political discourse is now partisan opinion and polarization (often based upon false premises), and I think it is VERY dangerous. The best things we have ever done as a nation, we did UNITED, and our most shameful history almost always saw us divided over race, religion, and ethnicity - some want to turn political philosophy into an ethnic-type of label (as in we're either "real" Americans who blindly follow what some political party supports in lock step, or we're communists, fascists, Nazis, racists, etc., etc., etc., praying on all of our worst fears and character traits.

Sometimes I think we are incapable as a species of learning from our mistakes. None of this is actually new in human history. I was watching The Last Emperor last weekend, and there it was again. It's almost formulaic in it's simplicity. Be very wary of those who play the "us and them" card, is all I'm saying - it's a very dangerous game.

I'm not crazy about the far left either. If you know me, you know that. I used to think "Independents" were just people too wimpy to pick a side and stand up for something. Now, I am on the verge of becoming one, lol. I happen to favor liberal philosophies, but I've always admired ACTUAL conservative principles (haven't seen them given much more than lip service or acted upon much in my lifetime though), and I think things usually run best when we have a balance of both. Without the contributions of Hamilton AND Jefferson, this nation never would have survived.

Facts are facts, and I think in recent years facts are getting completely lost in the noise machine, and the issues that really matter are being decided without us, the self-governed, while we bicker and quibble and call each other names. Palin is the epitome of all that's wrong with American politics IMO. I generally do my level best to ignore her outrageous attention-seeking behavior and not reward her efforts. But lately, the pointless noise is drowning out everything that matters again, and blinding us to the vital issues and challenges we face. It all just baffles and very disappointing.

Boston and the Irish, on the Anniversary of the Ursuline Convent Riots

2010-08-30T09:12:00.002-05:00

August 12, 2010

On August 11 and 12, 1834, a riot fueled by anti-Catholic fervor resulted in the burning of an Ursuline Convent in Charlestown, Massachusetts, in what is now Somerville. In this excerpt from A City So Grand: The Rise of an American Metropolis, Boston 1850-1900, Stephen Puleo examines the height of Irish immigration to the city in the years following the riot, and the deeply anti-Catholic and anti-Irish discrimination the new arrivals faced.

The Know-Nothing Party flag.
When Charles Dickens visited Boston in 1842, he might have had the Irish in mind when he told guests at a dinner in his honor: "Virtue shows quite as well in rags and patches as she does in fine linen . . . she goes barefoot as well as shod . . . she dwells rather oftener in alleys and by-ways than she does in courts and palaces." He urged Bostonians to "lay [your] hands upon some of these rejected ones whom the world has too long forgotten" and to understand that "these creatures have the same elements and capacities of goodness as yourselves."

But Dickens's message went unheeded during the height of Irish immigration to Boston.

Thousands of Boston Irish, who had witnessed such devastation in their own country—who saw it transformed from a nation of bucolic splendor to a blight-infested isle of death—arrived in their adopted city to find not succor but prejudice, not welcome but suspicion and contempt. Boston's closed Yankee society, its deep anti-Catholicism, its intellectualism—all of these were completely foreign to, and conspired against, the bedraggled Irish who stepped weakly off the coffin ships and sought refuge among her narrow streets. Beginning in earnest with the ransacking and torching destruction of the Ursuline Convent in Charlestown in 1834, the Athens of America, one of the most progressive and educated locales in the New World (or the Old World, for that matter), rejected the Irish with an unprecedented, unrelenting, white-hot vitriol that rocked the newcomers and left them dispirited and disillusioned.

But not broken.

Boston's Irish had survived the destruction wrought by the famine, they had survived the deadly Atlantic passage, and they would survive—and eventually thrive—in Boston by virtue of their resilience, faith, family bonds, and perseverance that kept them alive during the darkest of times. They battled poverty, illness, ridicule, humiliation, hatred, and religious and ethnic discrimination in Boston. When seeking jobs, the men read the "Positively No Irish Need Apply" signs at warehouses, workshops, hotels, factory gates, fishing boats, and restaurants; women saw the same restriction in the classified ads seeking domestic help to care for children. A typical example: "WANTED—A good, reliable woman to take the care of a boy two years old, in a small family in Brookline. Good wages and permanent situation given. No washing or ironing will be required, but good recommendations as to character and capacity demanded. Positively no Irish need apply."

Still, desperation begets determination and the Irish took any work they could find: cleaning stables, unloading ships, digging trenches, laying foundations; eventually traveling to Lynn to work in the shoe factories, to Lowell and Lawrence to operate looms in the textile mills and build the dams that powered the factories, or to the western part of the state to man the farms. Some went to New York to dig canals and Pennsylvania to mine coal, but the vast majority remained in Boston and Massachusetts and built the roads and laid the track for the network of railroads that the city celebrated at the 1851 Railroad Jubilee. It was dangerous and exhausting work; many Irish were killed in accidents, crushed by falling embankments that had not been properly braced, buried under cave-ins, or maimed or killed by powder blasts. Historian Carl Wittke recounted the popular saying that there was "an Irishman buried under every tie" along railroad lines. Later, it was mainly the Irish who laid the ties and track that formed Boston's horse-railroad system.

And between 1846 and 1848, it was nearly three thousand Irish laborers who dug the trenches and built the fifteen-mile-long aqueduct that brought Boston its first municipal supply of fresh water, from Long Pond (later renamed Lake Cochituate) in Natick and Framingham. The aqueduct ran to a hilltop reservoir in neighboring Brookline, which held up to 100 million gallons of water, enough to supply the city for two weeks if lake service were ever interrupted. From there, the reservoir fed two smaller reservoirs, and then more than sixty miles of cast-iron pipes that workers, mostly Irish, had laid beneath every inhabited street, according to environmental historian Michael Rawson. Boston became one of the first cities with a municipal freshwater supply—there would be no more need to exclusively draw water from wells or collect rainwater in tanks or cans—and Irish laborers provided the sinew to make it possible. When nearly three hundred thousand people from across the state gathered for a Boston parade in October 1848 to celebrate the achievement, thousands of Irish were in attendance. When a demonstration was held on Boston Common and a column of water "burst forth from the fountain to a height of some seventy-five feet," thousands of Irishmen were among those cheering. The municipal water project had provided the first, steady, long-term income to Irish immigrants who arrived after 1845.

Irish women persevered outside of the home, too, in the mills and the garment industry, and, despite the entrenched bigotry of the larger community, eventually as domestics for wealthy families on Beacon Hill, cooking, maintaining homes, and yes, caring for children.

Slowly, steadily, the Irish made economic progress in Boston. Barney McGinniskin's appointment in 1851 was symbolic of those strides, but progress was not entirely linear; there were setbacks. When the anti-immigrant, anti-Catholic Know-Nothing Party took control of the Massachusetts state government in 1854, McGinniskin was fired, and Boston was again without an Irish police officer. But he had paved the way. The continued upward mobility of the Irish, coupled with their bravery on behalf of the Union during the Civil War—more than 10,000 Boston Irish were part of the 144,000 Irish who fought for the North—did finally change things in Boston. By 1871, there were forty-five Irish police officers; by the end of that decade, there were one hundred.

In other ways, too, the Irish were changing Boston. In September of 1867, just two years after the Civil War came to an end, a crowd estimated at between twenty thousand and twenty-five thousand gathered at a building site in Boston's South End to watch Bishop John Joseph Williams lay the cornerstone for a massive new cathedral at the corner of Washington and Malden streets. Williams went first to the place where the church's main altar would be, "sprinkling the ground with holy water and praying over the spot," historian James O'Toole wrote. "It took imagination to see the huge building that would rise on the spot, but Williams had that vision and asked others to see it too." John Francis Maguire wrote in 1868: "The vastness of its dimensions typifies the progress of Catholicity in Massachusetts." It was remarkable that such a structure could rise in Boston, "the stronghold of the Puritan . . . Boston, whose leading citizens, had they met a Catholic in the street, they would have crossed to the other side, such was their horror of, or such their aversion to, one of that detested creed."

When it opened eight years later, the massive Cathedral of the Holy Cross, with its great tower rising three hundred feet, was a testament to the changing religious face of Boston—the rise of Catholicism that had occurred primarily because of the influx and influence of the Irish.

For the remainder of the nineteenth century, the Irish reshaped Boston. By 1880, more than seventy thousand Irish lived in the city, accounting for a full 20 percent of Boston's population. In 1882 Patrick Collins was the first Irish-born person elected to Congress from Boston; and the first Irish-born mayor of Boston, Hugh O'Brien, took the oath of office on January 5, 1885 (Collins would succeed him as mayor in 1902, winning election by the largest majority in the city's history). What Barney McGinniskin had begun in 1851 finally paid dividends for the Irish thirty years afterward.

By the mid-1880s, a clear argument could be made that Boston's conversion was irreversible, if not complete: it was becoming both an Irish and a Catholic city.

Listen for my interview on NPR's All Things Considered on August 28, 2010

2010-08-27T22:07:00.005-05:00

I was interviewed by National Public Radio reporter Brent Baughman for NPR program All Things Considered regarding virtual goods. I write a monthly Op Ed for the Yoville fan group, Yo Junkies. Two of my Yo Junkies Op Eds on virtual goods and virtual reality are reproduced below.

The program will air on August 28, 2010, about 35 min. into the program. You can locate your local NPR station and schedule HERE. After the program has aired, I will post the link here on my blog.

UPDATE: Well, that was somewhat disappointing, as I feared. It was just snippets of what I talked about, and didn't include anything about Yoville. I was the one saying that the game forces you to interact with other people and talking about my Egyptian friend, who of course, I could never have talked to within the game of Farmville.

They seemed primarily to focus on Farmville, as that's the most popular game. Yoville, is so much more innovative than Farmville, and it is what I talked about for the most part. Farmville has won several tech awards and gotten more press though. Farmville was actually the first game I played online, but once I discovered Yoville, Farmville seemed primitive by comparison. You can't even trade your items or virtually interact with other people in Farmville. It was pretty cool though I guess.

Op Eds for Yo Junkies (Yoville Fan Group)

2010-08-27T13:38:00.005-05:00

Below are the two pieces that he was interested in, as well as my personal gaming experience:

Published May 2010
PLAYERS' BILL OF RIGHTS

Now that Zynga has signed a 5 year contract with Facebook, I am wondering whether players will be given any kind of guarantees that Zynga will not just disappear all of the virtual items we have purchased, at its whim. Legally, they could do that. Just shut down Yoville, taking all of our "virtual goods" with it. Virtual goods, also referred to as "digital item[s] can be defined as 'an image created by a service provider and tracked through a database that can be transformed and exchanged among users. Its value is decided through rarity, utility, and resulting demand.'"

http://virtual-economy.org/blog/virtual_goods_and_regulatory_i

The purchase of "virtual goods," for actual cash money, is a relatively new form of commercial transaction, which the Federal Trade Commission has not explicitly addressed. In many ways, Zynga has lead the way in these games and this type of commerce, and I would like to suggest that Zynga should lead the way in developing guidelines to protect its players. Many of us spend much more money than we would ever spend on any type of gaming, other than perhaps gambling; however, the only return we have for our money is our virtual items.

CNN ran an article in May regarding players of Second Life who have a class-action lawsuit against the game's owners, Linden Lab:

Now, in a sign that virtual issues increasingly are bleeding into the real world, some "residents" of Second Life are taking virtual property rights to real-world court, citing California consumer protection laws to make their case ... claiming the games owners mislead them into believing they owned their virtual lands.
....

Andrea Matwyshyn, an assistant professor of legal and business ethics at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, said real courts have been slow to take up issues associated with these complicated worlds.

"The law is a slow-moving elephant, and technology is a graceful gazelle," she said. "And it's a mismatch."

Matwyshyn said virtual property should be thought of like a "service" instead of something that's actually owned. But because the issue is so new, the new lawsuit likely will be settled out of court, she said.

That happened with a similar case in 2006, she said.

Grimmelmann, the law professor, said the virtual land does have real value. It makes people feel happy and at home, the same way looking out at a front yard from a real-world porch would, he said.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/05/10/virtual.property.second.life/?hpt=Sbin

There has been much discussion in the tech world regarding this lawsuit:

The question with Second Life has always been – given that data can be deleted at any time what is the nature of the risk that you run by investing in it. And from a legal point of view – what entitlement do IP rights give you to digital artifacts. As far as I’m aware settled opinion on this latter point has been – none.

http://terranova.blogs.com/terra_nova/2010/04/bragging-again.html

If I were to design a "Players' Bill of Rights" for Yoville, I would of course want some sort of assurance that:

1. Zynga will protect my purchases, my virtual property, from theft, fraud, and technical error. We can trade our items, even naively, being scammed or conned, but we cannot protect the software and hardware where are property is stored. Should there be errors or hacking, I would expect Zynga to have backed up the data for our accounts and be able to restore them;

2. Should Zynga decide to upgrade the game, to a degree that our virtual items are not useable in the new format, I would expect Zynga to either convert my items to something comparable in the new game, or provide us with some form of compensation, in the form of coin and yocash with which to replace my items; and

3. Should Zynga decide to shut down the game completely, I would expect Zynga to at least provide us all with some sort of website or computer compatable gaming disc where we can still access our homes and goods. Though we may not have the community, interaction, nor any flow of new items, we would have our virtual things and homes, and perhaps the ability to edit and move the items as we always have. This seems more than fair, in light of the amount of cash money many of us have spent on our virtual homes, clothes, furnishings, etc.

My feeling is that Zynga will continue to prosper and grow for some time, as will our beloved virtual Yoville world. I have had the same free hotmail account for 15 years, and I have never lost a thing. In my opinion, and by all indications, the virtual world is here to stay, but as a consumer, we are owed some assurances and guarantees, just like any other consumer. Such assurances will make us feel more secure and give Zynga a whole new status as a reliable and trustworthy company that takes it's responsibilities to its customers seriously, and that, in turn, will draw even more players to Zynga games.

* I contacted Zynga for this piece, but have yet to receive any responsive reply.

---------------------------------------------------------------

CAN YOVILLE REPLACE "REAL" LIFE?

When Lisa and I were discussing subjects for this first op-ed, one topics she had considered was, "Has Yoville replaced real life?" I’m very intrigued by this question, and I’m sure many of you have given this some thought as well. If you’ve been playing Yoville for very long, you have probably encountered a lot of people for whom this really does seem to be true. I often wonder, is this a bad thing? For a lot of people, I’d say the answer is, No.

There are people addicted to Yoville, like all of us, who have health issues that keep them isolated and homebound, and Yoville keeps them in
contact with other people, entertains them, and best of all, in Yoville, all avatars truly are created equal. We’re all the same physically - same height, weight, age, and our physical abilities and fashion expression are only limited by the amount of time (and for some money), they are willing to invest in the game. I can see how liberating this would be for someone with physical or emotional limitations, and how much it could enrich their lives.

Yoville is many things to many people. To me, it is like Barbie dolls, HGTV, and a really fun chat room all in one. I’ve made so many interesting new friends from all over the world in Yoville, crossed cultural borders, exchanged ideas and information, and changed perspectives, including my own. I’ve spent nearly as many hours dressing my avatar as I did dressing up my Barbie dolls and paper dolls growing up. It’s easy to become so absorbed in the game, your role and your virtual stuff, that it really does feel like a "reality" of sorts. Those are MY clothes, MY houses, and MY furniture, and yet . . . these are all just pieces of code in a virtual, digital world. Yet knowing that, doesn’t make me adore any of those things less. Frankly, sometimes that worries me a little, lol.

When I think about Yoville as a virtual reality, I often think of the movie "Wall-E" and all those generations of blob-like humans on that galactic cruise ship, being ferried around in their hover chairs, never looking beyond a computer screen placed inches from their noses or venturing anywhere on their own steam, on their own two legs. The world they saw on their screen, was the life they were actually living. When one of them loses her computer connection, and apparently for the first time in her life, looks up, she says, "I didn't know we had a pool." She's been sitting in front of that pool, probably on a daily basis, all of her life. I wonder . . . was that Yoville she was looking at on her screen?

The military and others have been experimenting with using virtual reality video games to treat PTSD and manage pain in wounded veterans, cancer patients, and a variety of others:

"In small studies over the last 10 years, kids and adults who engaged in a virtual reality gaming environment during medical procedures such as having blood drawn or undergoing chemotherapy consistently reported less pain, discomfort, and fear."

"In one preliminary study, immersive VR distraction reduced patients’ pain ratings during severe burn wound care by 30 percent to 50 percent. Compared with patients who took pain medications alone, patients receiving VR during physical therapy reported bigger reductions in the amount of time spent thinking about pain and pain intensity."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/12/health/webmd/main6476752.shtml

"The Defense Department's Centers of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury have begun a pilot program that uses multi-sensory virtual reality to treat Soldiers with post-traumatic stress disorder. The program enables doctors to choose a scenario, customized around a Soldier's personal experience."

http://www.army.mil/-news/2010/05/04/38464-dod-using-virtual-reality-for-ptsd-treatment/

It’s a little startling to think that virtual reality is so powerful that in the mind, it can replace actual reality, even the physical and mental pain.

Our computers are integrated into our lives more and more. It’s how we work, bank, pay our bills, shop, get our news, and connect with other people. There are virtual colleges, conferences, romances, parties, etc. I've even read of a funeral that was broadcast on the web so that mourners who were unable to physically attend, could still be present . Frankly, I'm not so sure that Yoville isn't a sneak peak into the future lives of many humans, and it has the potential to be a rich and vibrant mental life, but I wonder, going back to the movie "Wall-E," whether it will be a rich physical life. So, today I propose we all get up out of our computer chairs for a while, and do a few laps around the block, unless you’ve got one of those new I-Pads, then you can take your walk and play Yoville at the same time!

It's ABOUT Freedom

2010-08-17T12:57:00.007-05:00

I hear people talking about Muslims not having the same freedoms of religion and property rights as the rest of us, and I wonder WHAT they are thinking? Ya know, a large segment of African Americans are Muslims, and many of them have family trees that go back further in this country than most of us. Yet, THEY are not "REAL" Americans entitled to the same Constitutional rights and protections as everyone else?

I hear people talk about Muslims being violent and hateful, and I wonder if they ever heard of the millions and millions slaughtered by Christians during The Crusades, or The Spanish Inquisition, or The Salem Witch Trials. It's more than accurate to say that Christians have killed more people in the name of religion than any other group.

State sanctioned religion is DANGEROUS. The Founders knew it, and we as a people certainly used to know it. We have stood between those who would commit genocide in the name of religion over and over, in our finest hours. How can this discussion even be happening in my country? Are they teaching history and civics in school AT ALL anymore? Who are these people who would throw away all that we value as a Nation?

They make me ashamed they are my countrymen. They make me cringe when the rest of the world, who has seen us stand up for freedom, liberty, equality, and human dignity for centuries, hears their hateful screeching and sees them spitting in the faces of all those who died to protect those principles?

They talk about The Constitution and liberty, but don't understand that people can build what they want on their own private property and are free practice their religion. We endured the KKK parading down the street in this country, all in the name of freedom. Here in Alabama, we still endure the sight of a giant rebel flag on the side of a major highway in the name of that freedom.

Is a strip club near that spot, that after 9 yrs. is still no more than a hole in the ground, okay? How about the mosque that's 4 blocks away that's been there for 40 years, BEFORE the WTC was even built?

This is just one of those idiotic divisive talking points meant to give the racists and haters something to latch on to, and the media is doing such a good job of promoting it. Fact is, doesn't make two sh*ts whether the hate-mongers like it or not. They have RIGHTS and FREEDOMS guaranteed by that Constitution thingy those on the extreme right like to waive around so much, but don't know a thing about.

And BTW, the Boston Tea Party was NOT a protest against taxation itself or government - it was a protest against taxation without representation and in favor of self-government, and the flag they like to plaster all over themselves, that IS the most literal and recognizable symbol of our government and our UNITED efforts that there is. Until they figure out what their symbols mean, or learn from history, they really should shut up.

The idea that we wouldn't want a mosque on the sight of a sacred Burlington Coat Factory is just ridiculous. They seem to have no idea how many people and businesses are located within two blocks of ground zero. Besides, don't these same people usually have a lot of nasty things to say about all those "New York liberals" anyway - what a bunch of crap.

What IS sacred are our principles and our freedoms, and if we lose those because of what those terrorists did on 9/11, then they have truly won. I really wish you sniveling little scardy-cat Nancy boys would find something to do that's more productive than crying about mosques and immigrants. I hear the military needs some help. Probably do you all some good and toughen you up. ;-)

Reusable 'horse race journalism' fails the public

2010-08-12T10:56:00.003-05:00

As usual, I couldn't agree more with media critic and NYU journalism Professor, Jay Rosen. He is currently in Australia for a journalism conference, and the following is the transcript from an interview he gave:

Reusable 'horse race journalism' fails the public

Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Broadcast: 12/08/2010
Reporter: Leigh Sales

Transcript
LEIGH SALES, PRESENTER: If you were following an election campaign 20 years ago you would have had the newspaper to read in the morning, the radio to listen to during the day and if you wanted to actually see what the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader had been up to, you'd have to wait for the 6 o'clock evening news.

These days, if you're not watching Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott live, you can certainly see pictures as soon afterwards as you like.

And forget waiting for the next day's paper for analysis, most keen observers are straight onto Twitter and media websites for instant news and views.

One man who follows the changing media landscape very closely is Jay Rosen, a press critic, writer and Professor of Journalism at New York University.

He's currently in Australia and indeed is with me in our Sydney studio. Welcome.

JAY ROSEN, PROFESSOR OF JOURNALISM, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY: Thank you.

LEIGH SALES: You've only landed in the country 24 hours ago. You've landed in the midst of an election, in case you hadn't noticed.

JAY ROSEN: I noticed.

LEIGH SALES: You wrote of the 2008 US election that it was "horse race journalism" that works for journalists but doesn't work for the public, it fails for the public.

Explain to us what is "horse race journalism" and is it something that's peculiar to the US or do you see it in evidence here too?

JAY ROSEN: Horse race journalism is a reusable model for how to do campaign coverage in which you focus on who's going to win rather than what the country needs to settle by electing a prime minister.

And it's easy to do because you can kind of reuse it sort of like a Christmas tree every year and it requires almost no knowledge either.

And it kind of imagines the campaign as a sporting event, right? And everything that happens in the campaign can potentially affect the outcome.

And so you can look at it as 'How is it going to affect the horse race?' And every day you can ask, 'Who is ahead and what is their strategy?'

And I think this perspective appeals to political reporters because it kind of puts them on the inside, looking at the campaign the way the operatives do.

By the way, I'm told that you actually have a program here on Sunday morning called the Insiders.

LEIGH SALES: We do.

JAY ROSEN: Is that true?

LEIGH SALES: We do.

JAY ROSEN: And the "insiders" are the journalists.

LEIGH SALES: That is right.

JAY ROSEN: That's remarkable.

LEIGH SALES: Mm. The nature of - Basically what you've just described there is basically the day to day reporting of modern campaigns. What would be an alternative model then for reporting like we just saw on the news, the cut and thrust of what the leaders are up to all day?

JAY ROSEN: Mm hmm. Well, an alternative model might start with 'What do the people of Australia want this campaign to be about? What are the issues they want to see the candidates discussing?'

And then to ask each day, 'Well how did we do on advancing the discussion of the citizens' agenda today?'

Was it ignored? Was it addressed? Was it demagogued? Was it slighted?

And if the journalists helped citizens get their agenda addressed during the campaign they would be performing something that's actually very important - a role that's very important for them to do.

But instead, if they want to simply become the chroniclers of the inside game and tell us from the point of view of the professional strategists who's doing better, well they're going to in a way join the political class and that's the attraction of the horse race.

LEIGH SALES: But do you not need both? Because, of course, you do need the stories that give context and explain what's going on and is this true or not true, how does this all fit? But then how do you ignore - say for example today when we have a former opposition leader showing up at a particular event, you can't very well just ignore that?

JAY ROSEN: No, you can't. But what you could do is say 'Well politics is also theatre, politics is also entertainment', so in that segment of our coverage, we'll cover Latham - is that his name?

LEIGH SALES: Latham.

JAY ROSEN: Latham - because clearly this is the entertainment portion of the campaign.

LEIGH SALES: Presumably it's getting harder and harder to do contextual reporting because of the nature of news, the constant deadlines, the need to be sending back stuff online. So this type of reporting you're talking about is perhaps the only thing that is doable under some of these constraints?

JAY ROSEN: Maybe, but even then you can send those who are interested in knowing more to the Web, to find out more.

You can try and engage people in things that maybe don't strike them immediately as interesting, but underneath that are.

And if you start with 'What do the people of Australia want their candidates to be discussing?', that's real also. And you can sort of press that and try to bring those things into the campaign.

That would give journalists an agenda that's not an ideological thing, but is a very important role for them - much more important frankly than telling us who's ahead today.

LEIGH SALES: You mentioned reporting on things that might seem boring superficially but are actually interesting when you dig a little bit deeper, and you've written about an example of some reporting in the United States to do with the financial crisis. Talk us through that a little.

JAY ROSEN: This American Life, which is one of our best radio programs, produced a one-hour documentary in 2008 called The Giant Pool of Money which explained the financial crisis and its roots in the mortgage market to people who, like me, didn't understand the story and thought it was kind of crazy.

And they did it not by asking professors of finance to explain what went wrong in the market, but instead by going to people at every level of the system who were involved in this crazy system and asking them 'What the heck did you think you were doing and why?' And getting them to explain their own actions in retrospect.

And they started out - that is the producers of the program - in the same position as members of the audience, baffled by this complicated thing that had crashed and caused huge, horrific consequences in their world. And they didn't understand it any better than the audience did.

So they were representing the ignorance of the audience and the drama of the documentary as they move from a position of ignorance to mastery of the subject by investigating it and starting where citizens start.

LEIGH SALES: So as a listener to that did you feel at the end like you understood the origins of what was going on?

JAY ROSEN: That was the extraordinary thing. Before that time I had heard about the subprime mortgage crisis and I knew it was kind of serious and headlines warned me that this was big, but I didn't really understand a thing about it.

And after I listened to this documentary I knew what had happened and I kind of knew why it had happened. And I also knew why it was important and I knew how the events of mortgage brokers in Kansas were related to global finance, because they started with this giant pool of money that investors have around the world and they search for opportunities to invest it to get a higher return.

So that's where they began. So it connected the local to the global and explained this story so that now I became a kind of customer for the news and for the remaining chapters of the story which were still unfolding - like how do we prevent it?

LEIGH SALES: The incremental stories then after that held your interest.

JAY ROSEN: Yes, whereas that before that the incremental stories not only didn't hold my interest but in a way turned me off to the news.

LEIGH SALES: There's a whole lot of stories like that around, that there never seems to be a beginning or an end. Say for example the Middle East crisis...

JAY ROSEN: Indeed.

LEIGH SALES: ..where it's a very difficult story to dip in and out of.

JAY ROSEN: Yes, but if we can't rely on our professional journalists to make the important interesting, whose job is it?

LEIGH SALES: Where are most consumers getting their news from these days?

JAY ROSEN: Lots of places. They certainly do get it from the traditional networks and newspapers. They also get it from each other and they get it from amateurs as well as pros. And increasingly because people are connected online all day long, they kind of get it from being awake.

Like in a small town you get your news by walking around, right? Today people get their news by just being online.

LEIGH SALES: How significant is it getting news and links passed onto you from friends or people that you trust who have a presence, say, on something like Twitter? How important is that becoming and how are mainstream news organisations dealing with that?

JAY ROSEN: In the days of big media, the audience was connected up to the ABC or to the Sydney Morning Herald but not connected across to one another. And what's so different about the Internet is it's both.

It still can connect you up - you can go right to the election campaign or in the US you can go right to WhiteHouse.gov and access the White House directly.

But the Internet is extremely effective at connecting friend to friend, daughter to father, peer to peer, and as a result people get news as much horizontally by recommendations as they do from big media.

So for example, when Barack Obama gave his famous speech on race in 2008 - which was a key moment in the campaign - it was on CNN during the day, but more people actually accessed it through the web afterwards through recommendations "You have to watch this speech", than who actually saw it at the time.

So what this means is the audience is also a distribution system and when people get recommendations from their friends it means something quite different than when the television set is telling them what to do.

LEIGH SALES: It's a bit more personalised because presumably your friends know the sorts of things that you would be interested in so it's a little bit more targeted.

JAY ROSEN: Yes.

LEIGH SALES: Are media organisations thinking in those sorts of ways as well, that they know that I click on certain types of stories in the New York Times, for example? At some stage is the New York Times going to become I guess a bit like Amazon where I click on and Amazon says "Hey, if you like the Sopranos you'll love the Wire!"

Is the New York Times going to start doing that? "If you like this story on Barack Obama, you'll also love this one on Hilary Clinton!"

JAY ROSEN: Yes, the web allows news producers to know much more about the people who are using the news and they can therefore incorporate that into what they suggest to you. But there's a danger there because we don't always know what we're interested in until we're presented with it.

So they need to do both. They need to understand their users very well and use the data coming from the Web to do that and they also need to exercise their independent judgment about what's important. But how do you know what's important to me unless you know something about me? So that's where the two work together.

LEIGH SALES: And are the big media companies moving quickly into that sort of area? Is it something they're paying a lot of attention to?

JAY ROSEN: Well, it's both. It's the upstart companies tend to be quicker, born on the Web companies faster to use this kind of data, but the traditional news companies are learning that they have to do that as well.

They're a little bit more hesitant to leap in, because they understand that part of what they have to sell is their own judgment. And they sometimes look at all this information coming from the web about what people are doing and clicking on and searching for and they look at it and they say "Will that erode our judgment?"

What I think they need to do is just sort of swallow that and find a more fertile combination of the two.

LEIGH SALES: What about the argument that if news becomes, I guess, more personalised or specifically tailored for people that we end up living in echo chambers and only hear views that reinforce our own?

JAY ROSEN: The people who worry about echo chambers, they're all listening to each other.

LEIGH SALES: (Laughs)

JAY ROSEN: Get it?

LEIGH SALES: They're in their own echo chamber. I see.

JAY ROSEN: I think there's something to that, but the idea that 'before we all had the same news and therefore lived in the same world' was in a way an artifact of a limited media universe and there was a lot of illusion in that.

Now that people have many more choices about what to listen to and who to pay attention to, we just simply have to create a common culture through more difficult and more challenging means.

We have to actually persuade people to pay attention to the issues that unite them as opposed to sort of forcing them to do so through a limited media universe. And that's a lot harder but I think it's probably more meaningful if you can get people to engage on the things that really unite them, which include problems.

LEIGH SALES: You once said - with credit to Clay Shirky - that there's no such thing as information overload, there's only filter failure. What does that mean?

JAY ROSEN: It means that because there are so many more sources and there is so much more stuff online coming at us, we sometimes think we're going to be overwhelmed and who can make sense of it, and we kind of look at it - some people do - as chaos.

But we should actually just calm down a little bit and realise that in an era of information abundance, which is what we're living in, we can manage it if we have good filters - meaning ways of filtering the flood, of finding the good stuff, of knowing what's worth paying attention to. And if we can improve our filters, we can cope with even a huge increase in supply.

So that's what that statement means. It's 'Let's improve the way we filter the information so that we know what to pay attention to'. And if we can put a lot of energy into that we can cope with this.

LEIGH SALES: And so how do you filter information like that? And how do you, I guess, retain control of the filtering as opposed to having what's coming to you filtered by someone - I guess, the gatekeeper?

JAY ROSEN: Part of it is you use friends, family, people you know, people you trust.

Part of it, I think, is trusted journalists should be good filters and they can do that well if they understand something about the people they are filtering for. It can also come down to the news system knowing something about you and what your interests are.

I would love to be able to tell the news system 'Don't send me any soap opera news or don't send me any celebrity news, because I'm not interested in that'.

It would be good to be able to turn off things we get too much of, right? And there's no reason in the future why we shouldn't be able to do that.

LEIGH SALES: But every now and then a soap opera story comes in that just really hooks my interest.

JAY ROSEN: Yeah. That's true.

LEIGH SALES: I get scared I might miss out on something that's actually oddly engaging?

JAY ROSEN: Right. Well that's why I think we need a mix of ways to pay attention to the world. If you rely simply on one, you probably will miss something.

LEIGH SALES: Jay Rosen, thank you very much for coming in tonight. It was very interesting to talk to you.

JAY ROSEN: My pleasure.

I mean really, WTF?

2010-07-24T09:19:00.005-05:00

They run around waiving the flag, the most literal and recognizeable symbol OF our government and UNITED efforts, while they scream and complain about those very things
Frankly, they don't know what they want, what they hate, or what the F they're talking about:

"Disproportionate ratios between red and blue states: Federal Taxes Paid vs. Federal Spending Received"

Those statistics are pretty stunning and shows that blatant hypocrisy we're all getting so used to from the right:

"If we assume that Senators represent their constituents, and that Democratic Senators are generally more likely to support federal spending than Republican Senators, it appears that the states that receive the least federal spending per tax dollar contributed are the states that are most likely to support federal spending. And the states that are least likely to support federal spending are those which, on average, receive the most federal spending dollars per tax dollar paid."

Yet, these same people don't actually support the cutting of any spending that most benefits them. What the hell spending do they want to cut? Not defense spending, that's for sure.

I mean, really? WTF?

Trying to Set a Tea Bagger Straight

2010-07-14T16:47:00.004-05:00

Just had to share this response to some tea bagger who pretends to know stuff, lol. Lots of good links in here too.

Lol, what is "radical" Dan? And what in the world is your measuring stick? Reagan nearly broke the country. GW Bush nearly broke the world. GH Bush and Ford were ineffective. Nixon was crook and abused power to a criminal degree . . . shall I go on?

How can you loons on the right just make sh*t up, and think we're all buying the snake oil you're selling? It defies reality, and frankly, this right wing narrative that the Dems will lose big in November, is also a bunch of rubbish. There's NO reason anyone should elect the same irresponsible, self-serving, money-grubbing idiots who got us here, but what's more baffling is why there are so many utterly delusional, brain-washed red team (rah, rah) Faux Spews dorks who continue to repeat their corporate agenda driven propaganda.

"Why the economy fares much better under Democrats"
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2008/1021/p09s01-coop.html

"Despite 'market friendly' Republican policies, stocks rise more and volatility dips under Democrats"

http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/21/markets/election_demsvreps/

"Democratic Superiority, by the Numbers"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20059-2005Apr1.html

In FACT, the Republicans are historically the ones who run up debt and deficits:

http://www.lafn.org/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget

They are also the ones who get involved in scandals related to their job performance, not their sexual performance - you decide the meaning of that, but I sometimes wonder if one isn't the result of the other (joking - a little). Republicans are the ones lying us into wars (Bush), trading arms for hostages (Reagan), abusing power (Nixon, Reagan, and Bush), etc., etc., etc., and they are the ones who grow "big government" and expand executive power.

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0720/republicans-dominate-watchdogs-list-crooked-candidates/

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2519

http://norris.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/06/big-government-republicans

http://www.pegc.us/archive/Unitary%20Executive/unitary_exec_2nd_half_cent.pdf

In my lifetime, there have been no republicans who are REAL fiscal conservatives, or protect states rights or individual liberties, or ANYTHING they claim to be about. Stating a bunch of principles for the lazy, ignorant masses to latch onto, and ACTUALLY following them are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. I mean, don't y'all read, think, live in the same reality as the rest of us? The right seems to be charming y'all by selling ignorance as a virtue (Palin). WTF?

We've had enough stupid, inept, and just plain corrupt. Thanks so much. The Dems are cleaning up the giant mess the Republicans made AGAIN, and y'all seem to be having some kind of idiotic food fight, instead of pitching in a helping. All while waving the flag, lol, which is the most literal and recognizable symbol OF our government and UNITED efforts.

I sometimes think the GOP figured out why Jim and Tammy Faye Baker were so successful. It's easy to con stupid people out of their money, when you make it about faith and dogma and NOT performance or goals.

And BTW, the Boston Tea Party was NOT a protest against taxation itself or government - it was a protest against taxation without representation and in favor of self-government, lol. Y'all can't even figure out what your symbols mean, or learn from history, much less run a lemonade stand. No, Faux Spews, Limpbrain, and Beckerhead, amazing oracles of being wrong that they are, saying something, and it actually happening . . . not likely.

Myths and Facts about the Oil Spill and Clean Up

2010-07-02T12:23:00.004-05:00

First of all, FACTS MATTER. I've been researching the BP oil Spill in the Gulf since the day it happened, and here is what I have learned.

Every 4 days, the same amount of oil that was "spilled" in the Exxon Valdez, spews into the Gulf, and that's just the latest estimates. Further, the Valdez was a finite amount of oil from a tanker, and yet . . . 21 years later, only 14% of it has been cleaned up

What we are dealing with now, is so much worse. It's like an ant trying to move a mountain. We see the oil coming ashore, and we are horrified and cannot understand why someone didn't stop it. How - is the key here. HOW? We mere humans have unleashed something upon ourselves that we are simply not able to stop. It's like trying to stop a volcano.

I hope and pray with every fiber of my being that these relief wells work. If not, we are just doomed. This is the 2nd largest oil deposit on the planet, capable of producing 500,000 barrel ls a day for a decade. It's beyond comprehension and our pitiful efforts to make a dent in that.

Everyone who can help is helping. They have been cleaning up since the moment they realized oil was spewing into the Gulf. They've been burning, using dispersants, skimming, putting out booms. People are working tirelessly, thousands of them, without sleep, exposed to this toxic stew, doing everything humanly possible.

Further, "On Tuesday the State Department announced that new offers of aid would be accepted from 12 foreign countries and international organizations, but spokesman P.J. Crowley noted that booms donated by Mexico, Norway and Brazil had been in use since May 11,and that 24 foreign vessels from nine foreign countries already have been helping with the cleanup"

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/06/30/1709204/gops-false-talking-point-jones.html#ixzz0sNSJBTho

I honestly don't know what some local mayor, governor, or even Pres. Obama can do that the brain trust, of every human being who may be have any idea what to do, cannot.

The Afghan War - The Media's Latest Balloon Boy Sensation

2010-06-30T17:07:00.001-05:00

Nice to see a little soap opera drama will get the media on this story, always running around wildly looking for the "next big thing." It would be nice if the media gave a crap about this war for the last 9 years, and not just when they think it will make them a buck. I'm not sure who the biggest war profiteers are . . . military contractors or the "free press."

As for the recently birthed anti-war left - really people? Y'all had next to nothing to say about this till the money-grubbing media decides it's a story worth exploiting. This war has been going on for NINE YEARS! Pres. Obama is doing EXACTLY what he said he would do during the campaign, when Olbermann, Huffington, Matthews, and the rest of the big mouths also didn't have a word to say about this:

All your impulse caring and momentary interest doesn't change the fact that some of us have loved ones serving, who need your support rather than your fickle concern.

I wish we had a time machine and could go back and reconsider a lot of things we've done, including helping the Afghans fight off the Russians and then leaving them at the mercy of the Taliban - seems to me they'd be better off now under the Russians. And perhaps we didn't have to invade at all and could have cleaned out the nests of terrorists with drones, etc. However, till someone invents that time machine, we have to deal with the situation as it ACTUALLY EXISTS.

We invaded their country, overthrew their government, and asked them to help us. That makes it our responsibility by any definition of the word "responsibility." We don't have a responsibility to create a little carbon copy of the U.S. there, and that probably cannot be done anyway. But we cannot walk away without at least making a real effort not to leave another river of blood and suffering behind. WE drove the Taliban and Al Qaeda into Pakistan, a nuclear power whose government is now very fragile, and now that they have FINALLY started working with us to get rid of them, and that includes a lot of Afghans who will be slaughtered like cattle for helping us if we leave, people here are finally paying attention and have some big, fat, ill-considered opinions? REALLY?

There's a reason these people hate us alright, and it has a lot to do with our meddling in their affairs and then walking away when it suits our agenda, regardless of the consequences to them. We just can't keep doing this!

You know, history is an important teacher, and we did this EXACT SAME THING to these people before, when we helped them get rid of the Russians and the left them at the mercy of the Taliban - many experts believe, we in fact were the catalyst that created the Taliban in the first place.

Again, I don't know whether there was a better way to handle this, that didn't require an all out invasion. Doesn't really matter. That point is moot. We are where we are, and we can't wish all that away. I realize a lot of people don't want to think about all that or deal with the mess we have made, and walking away sounds fine to them, but I personally cannot stomach it.

The good news is we appear to be winning hearts and minds and gaining some trust:

In one key shift, the latest poll by ABC News, the BBC and ARD German TV finds that sharply more Afghans now see the Taliban as the main source of their country's strife, while many fewer blame the United States or its allies.

http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/afghanistan-abc-news-national-survey-poll-show-support/story?id=9511961

Let's give it a little more time and see if we can turn things around. No one hates war more than I do, or worries about our troops more, believe me. I have some skin in this game.

Reliable Sources - Another one Bites the Dust

2010-06-25T09:36:00.002-05:00

Please listen to this clip from Reliable Sources last Sunday, wherein they talk about the media's coverage of Pres. Obama speech. There's more than one moment in this talking-head discussion, wherein these "reporters" show their contempt for our intelligence. One of them even says of Howard's concern that the media isn't covering the "more serious" debate on how far the government should go on regulating corporations, "that is a very interesting discussion to you and me, and I think it's a very boring discussion for the public." In other words, they know what's important, and they'll tell us what we should think is important.

The Embed function is disabled on this clip on youtube, but you can view it HERE.

After this episode, I finally took this show off my TiVo to do list. This was the last straw. Kurtz is doing a terrible job of being a media critic, and has taken up the role of media apologist.

The General's Bad Behavior

2010-06-23T09:59:00.006-05:00

This entire situation reminds me of the movie "Almost Famous" (based on the experiences of real life Rolling Stone Reporter Cameron Crowe), wherein the rock band knows the Rolling Stone reporter is "the enemy," but they get too close to him, open themselves up, and in the end, he writes everything they said in their false sense of security and confidence. I guess that's a reporter's job, getting people to feel comfortable with them so they can print gossip.

I was born on military base. My father served his entire adult life, and his service inspired myself and all 4 of my brothers to serve. Gen. McChrystal was out of line in the extreme, and the furor over his remarks demonstrates why military members are bound to stay away from political opining. Imagine if the right and the tea baggers, latch onto this man, and he, in turn, is so gratified, in the midst of all this criticism he's being hit with, that he becomes their champion . . . this is how military coops begin.

I do sympathize with Gen. McChrystal, but his remarks, and those attributed to him, are not only extremely improper, but non-specific, non-constructive, juvenile gossip and sniping. I have gone back and forth on whether Pres. Obama should remove him from his assignment. On the one hand, he may be the best possible person for this very difficult job, and the General has served with incredible distinction and honor. On the other hand, allowing the General to get away with this kind of insubordination and grossly inappropriate behavior AGAIN, does not set a good precedent, nor a good example for the rest of the military. In the end, this is Pres. Obama's decision, and given that he is a man who doesn't seem to have such a giant ego that he can't admit when he is wrong, change his mind, and apologize himself, I think he will make the decision based upon what he believes is best for the country.

However, Gen. McChrystal may have apologized, but whether he stays or goes, he needs to speak to the troops and affirm for them them in no uncertain terms, why this type of behavior is inappropriate and unacceptable. A man of lesser rank would be punished for this. I have no doubt about it.

This is a very sad day for the military in my opinion, and for that, the General has yet to make amends. There's no one who should be proud of this piece in Rolling Stone. It's a set up, and this reporter should be ashamed of himself.

UPDATE: Well, that's that. McChrystal out, and Petraeus in.

The Gulf Oil Disaster and the Oceans Currents . . . The Story You are NOT being told

2010-06-22T11:55:00.006-05:00

I was watching the mayor of Orange Beach, Alabama bitch about the federal oil clean up response the other day, saying that he was taking care of his own beach, and he would make sure no oil came ashore . . . the next morning, oil came ashore on Orange Beach, and that stupid mayor didn't even have those useless, pathetic booms up. Guess who he was then blaming . . . just guess - I'm sure you can guess.

All this raging from local residents and politicians and the media, about the oil "clean up" effort . . . they STILL don't get it? Really?

It is futile. The irrational idea that keeping the oil from coming "onshore" matters even a little. Even IF you could do it, with ALL THAT OIL OUT THERE - a spill the size of the Exxon Valdez occurs every 4 days, and that's just the latest in a long line of ever multiplying estimates, what good is it to have a little clean sand, when the entire freaking entire Gulf is dead and polluted beyond anything we have ever imaged? By the same token, it doesn't matter how many turtles or pelicans you pluck from the Gulf and release somewhere else, the vast majority of them will simply go right back there. It's in their DNA.

I am not a person who gives up. I will generally fight to the bitter end, and then some, long after I have already lost, but even I have to accept that perhaps it is beyond all help at this point. The Gulf and it's coasts are too far gone, but can we possibly save ourselves?

Further, in my opinion, we and the media need to stop screaming at BP to hurry up and stop the oil from spewing into the Gulf. What we really need is for BP to be very, very careful, take its time, and DO THIS RIGHT, because if they screw up the relief wells, we may just kill the entire planet. We are talking about the 2nd largest oil deposit ON THE PLANET, capable of producting 500,000 barrels of oil a day for at least a decade. Mere humans, and most other species, could not survive that. We will be extremely fortunate if we survive the amount of oil that has already spewed into the Gulf.

This is the story the media is not telling, the government is not briefing us on, because it would cause world wide panic. Our Oceans' intricate system of currents are vital to the survival of our species. They moderate the atmosphere's temperatures in ways that are essential to our continued survival. We simply have no idea how all this oil will effect these currents, even a slight shift in temperature can dramatically affect these currents, and the the oil WILL get into these currents, and it WILL travel far and wide.

Fifteen years ago, 29,000 rubber bath toys were lost from a cargo ship, those toys have washed up on beaches from one end of the Earth to the other, and are still on the move.

These currents are vital to maintaining surface temperatures that allow human beings to survive:

Many scientists now believe it was, in fact, changes in our Oceans, not an asteroid or other theories, that caused the mass extinction that wiped out the dinosaurs 250 million years ago.

What have we pitiful humans unleashed upon the planet?

MORE on how our oceans work.

Tony Hayward's Total Lack of Sincerity

2010-06-21T11:12:00.006-05:00

When BP's Tony Hayward's testimony before Congress was int erupted by a protester last week, he just sat there, didn't even have the good grace to turn around and face her:

What should he have done? He should have stoop up, asked the Committee's indulgence of this woman, and then looked her in the eyes and begged her forgiveness.

In further proof that he just doesn't GET IT, he took a day off this weekend to attend yacht races ... really? Ya know, Hayward doesn't deserve to enjoy watching boats gracefully negotiate clean, cl earn, unfowled waters EVER AGAIN! EVER! This is why he is reviled by so many Americans. He is so mystifying insincere, in his words and actions. Even while he's mouthing the words that he's "deeply sorry," there's nothing convincing about it, no feeling, no evidence of the deep shame he should rightfully feel for allowing this to happen to our planet.

The only time he seemed sincere, in this entire mess, is when he talked about wanting "his life back."

VIDEO: “Oil Confirmed to Be Leaking from Cracks in Sea Floor”

2010-06-17T11:38:00.000-05:00

From Political Carnival

VIDEO: “Oil Confirmed to Be Leaking from Cracks in Sea Floor”
Thursday, June 17, 2010 at 9:02 AM by GottaLaff 0 Comments and 0 Reactions

In the interest of clarification, the blog title is that of the original post.
I received the link to this video last night just as I was getting off line, so it is the first one I am posting this morning. The headline is one of the most disturbing ones I’ve read in some time. A worst-case scenario may, indeed, become a reality:

On the video, we see oil leaking from the oil floor. What does this mean? It means that the oil pipe in the ocean has burst and now the oil is leaking from the seafloor. Simply put, there’s probably no realistic way we can stop this.
There are simply no words left…

Here are a few details:

This video was recorded from the Viking Poseidon — ROV 1 on June 13th, 2010 at 2:58 AM EST.

Location of the sea floor crack leaking:
N:10431633.05
E: 1202852.27

My calculations indicate:

The ROV is 19.11 feet north and 55.75 feet west of the leak point.
The ROV is 58.93 feet away from the leak point.

Well, that's it . . . the end of life as we know it. I can't stop crying.

Our Irresponsible, Useless "Free Press"

2010-06-16T10:53:00.008-05:00

Can I just vent about our "free press" for a minute?

They had a new graphic on GMA with this morning! "America's Frustration Index"?!? WHAT THE &*#K! REALLY!?! Then, ALMOST A SOLID HALF AN HOUR NOW OF OPINIONS ON THE SPEECH, with the most partisian hacks you've ever seen.

Can't they STFU with what they freaking think and these polarization games for five minutes and put some information on TV? The press is so incredibly irresponsible, abusing their power to a degree that is unprecedented, outside of N. Korea and China anyway.

Does the media not have any facts? Can they not get any? Why not? Ain't it their job!?! Woodward and Bernstein figured out Watergate for Pete's sake, and these chumps can't freaking stop talking about whether Obama is angry enough for five freaking minutes?

I saw a special on The Discovery Channel the other night, "Disaster in the Gulf: A Race Against Time" about the explosion, the operation to stop the oil gushing into the Gulf, the clean up efforts, EVERYTHING. They were inside the crisis center, filming the team, interviewing them, showing graphics every step of the way explaining it all in detail.

CNN gained access to the BP crisis center Tuesday and had exclusive footage inside, but Weinberger says the Discovery footage is different.

"We're inside closed-door meetings seeing the full implementation, so we're a fly on the wall," he says.

Read more HERE.

If The Discovery Channel can get this kind of access, the press sure as hell can.
There are more facts about this situation in this one hour on The Discovery Channel, more real experts, than I've seen in all the non-stop coverage on CNN put together. This is how far afield citizens have to go to find out some facts and information!

I'll give you some examples of facts they could find out right now: what about redirecting the Mississippi River, as I've read is being proposed by some of Pres. Obama's experts? What does that entail? How long will it take? What are the possible repercussions and benefits? What about the methane that's also gushing into the Gulf? I mean, CRAP! I just don't care what they think, and saying they can't get facts is no excuse for them filing air time with this RUBBISH 24/7!

And if they're not getting access, well then they know who to see:

"ALLEN: I put out a written directive and I can provide it for the record that says the media will have uninhibited access anywhere we're doing operations, except for two things, if it's a security or safety problem. That is my policy. I'm the national incident commander.

TAPPER: Well, I can tell you firsthand people are not -- people are not following that.

ALLEN: You take (ph) the information and you tell me where it's at, and we'll get the word to them."

http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/week-transcript-allen-kerry-cornyn/story?id=10838756&page=4

I've had just about enough of this lame ass crap. This is a national crisis, and the press is handling it just like they did when Bush took us to war in Iraq. They're playing stupid partisan games and leaving us totally on our own.

I understand The FTC is looking into our "free press" to see if there are corporate interests that are controlling and distorting their "reporting," and the press is pushing back hard, saying it is dangerous for the government to get involved in the media. REALLY? Who the hell do they think protects their Constitutional mandate? And they don't find it dangerous for a handful of corporations, to own the vast majority of our media? How are we supposed to be self-governed when we have this cheep, tacky, reality show taking the place of reporting and journalism. HERE is the FTC summary of the ideas and input they have gotten so far.

Our money-grubbing, agenda driven "free press" is polarizing us and destroying our ability to be informed and, effectively, self-governed. We haven't been this polarized since the civil war, and in my opinion, the media has taken advantage of this and feeds off of it.

Our "mainstream" media has some delusion that what they think is news. They find the most partisan hacks they can on either "side", and line them up against each other to argue, most of the time with very little fact involved. That's what is now considered news? And their opining and speculating s usually totally wrong. But you know, if they say it enough, they just might be able to make it true.

Our press has an incredible amount of power and a sacred trust, which they are violating it in ways that are just flat scary.

“Our Republic and its press will rise or fall together." Joseph Pulitzer

Behold our dark, magnificent horror

2010-06-04T14:22:00.005-05:00

By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist

Friday, June 4, 2010

There is, you have to admit, a sort of savage grace, a tragic and terrible beauty, to the BP oil spill.

Like any good apocalyptic vision of self-wrought hell, the greatest environmental disaster in U.S. history has its inherent poetry. You see that creeping ooze of black, that ungodly wall of unstoppable darkness as it slowly, inexorably invades the relatively healthy, pristine waters adjacent, and you can't help but appreciate the brutal majesty, the fantastic, reeking horror of this new manifestation of black death we have brought upon ourselves, as it spreads like a fast cancer into the liquid womb of Mother Nature herself.

Really, it's not just the incredible photographs of the spill that are, in turns, heartbreaking, stunning, otherworldly and downright Satanic in their abject revulsion. It's not just the statistics that tell us how many millions of gallons might ultimately be spilled, or the stunned scientists who can only hypothesize how this unprecedented catastrophe might affect the fragile food chain and distress the ocean's ecosystems at the very root level.

It's not even the endless, heartrending tales of livelihoods lost, industries destroyed, coastlines ravaged or wildlife killed. The fact is, any one of these aspects alone is enough to poison your soul for as long as you wish to wallow in that murky state of fatalism and doom. It is nothing but bleak.

I think the most disturbingly satisfying thrill of this entire event -- and it is, in a way, a perverse thrill -- comes from understanding, at a very core level, our shared responsibility, our co-creation of the foul demon currently unleashed.

What a thing we have created. What an extraordinary horror our rapacious need for cheap, endless energy hath unleashed; it's a monster of a scale and proportion we can barely even fathom.

Because if you're honest, no matter where you stand, no matter your politics, religion, income or mode of transport, you see this beast of creeping death and you understand: That is us. The spill may be many things, but more than anything else it is a giant, horrifying mirror.

Do you wish to try and deflect it? Lay responsibility elsewhere? Really? We can't quite blame an "act of God," as we would for some sort of hurricane or tsunami inflicted upon meager humankind by an angry deity, punishing us all for being too war-like, violent or perhaps naïve enough to want to enjoy the sunshine for five goddamn minutes before He decided He'd better kill some people lest we forget who's in charge.

We cannot blame evil terrorists, some cluster of swarthy foreigners who hate our shopping malls and secretly envy our Porsche Cayenne's. Nor can we blame the spill on some sort of nefarious conspiracy, a secret act wrought by devious agents in black helicopters designed to destabilize the U.N. and induce universal mind control -- unless, of course, you're getting a little desperate and don't get outside much, in which case, you absolutely can.

Finally (and a bit shockingly), I'm not hearing Pat Robertson or any of his cretinous cult of apocalypticans blame the gays, or voodoo, or anal sex, or reality TV for what's happening in the Gulf. Oil is, after all, completely non-denominational. It mocks all religions equally -- except, of course, the only one that really matters: capitalism.

This is how you know this is one of the more universally damning disasters of our time: No one really seems to know how to process it, much less react. The GOP is backtracking like terrified hyenas from Sarah "Queen of Duh" Palin's "drill baby, drill" mantra/ass tattoo, as suddenly the incessant Republican wail for more oil exploration, more drilling, more tax cuts for oil conglomerates don't just reek of the usual inbred cronyism; they reek of death and destruction the likes of which the country has never seen.

On the other hand, hardcore lefties are going mad with desire that the disaster will lead to the immediate imprisonment of every BP employee worldwide, as if BP is somehow any different than any other oil titan raping the planet right now (hi, Alberta's oilsands). Hardcore lefties would also appreciate it if Obama would use the disaster as a surefire excuse to instantly change the entire course of energy history by immediately shutting down all 48,000 oil wells in the Gulf and hand every American a bicycle and a solar panel. See? All better.

Sure. As if oil wasn't woven like oxygen into every single aspect of American life, as if fully 30 percent of domestic transportation fuel didn't come from the gulf, as if shutting down a fraction of those wells wouldn't re-devastate the economy, as if petroleum and coal weren't powering the very energy plants that deliver the electricity that charges the iPhones that allows everyone to Tweet their angry complaints through all the various energy-sucking server farms the size of a small country.

Truly, BP is behaving no better or worse than any other corporate spawn of Satan would in a similar situation. What's more, if you don't think every oil company on earth is right now kneeling before Beelzebub in gratitude that it wasn't one of their own wells that exploded, you haven't been paying attention.

That said, after all is said and done, it's gloomily nice to think our darkest disaster in a generation could somehow ultimately improve our attitudes, change our behavior, lighten our violent treatment of the planet. As someone recently noted, the BP spill isn't Obama's Katrina, it's actually Big Oil's Chernobyl. Meaning: a disaster so appalling and devastating it might very well alter the industry and change the course of our energy policy forever.

Is it possible? Or, more accurately, are we even capable of such a shift? Is there any silver lining to be found in that black and greasy gloom? This is, perhaps, the most imperative question of all: If we can produce a demon of such extraordinary scale and devastation, can we not also somehow create its exact opposite? Let us pray.

The GOP Wants to Put a Bureaucrat Between You and Millions of Gallons of Oil

2010-05-26T17:15:00.002-05:00

Why is it every time ANYthing happens, and the right finds some BS retardulous reason to blame Pres. Obama, and of course the press latches on, because they crap fake controversy after breakfast every day - the left, just mindlessly goes along with it?

That's ALL there is on the "news" channels anymore! Just political pundits opining and wildly speculating us all into brain damage. I have to limit myself to watching PBS Newshour just to stay sane and hear some serious, calm JOURNALISTS giving me the who, what, when, where, why and how.

I love politics. I'm a certifiable, life-long political junkie. But what's been going on since the ratings bonanza of the Democratic primary isn't politics. It's some kind of fake political reality show. And every now and then, it drives me over the edge, and I have to get away from it all before my head explodes. All interesting and rational discussion and fact-finding is nearly totally suspended in favor of making vague, paranoid, nonsensical judgments about conspiracies and blame. It's like most of the country puts on their tin foil hats and transforms into 9/11 truthers from time to time. Is there an antidote for this brain scrambling disease? It is all just pointless blathering rubbish.

It drove me so crazy during the health care reform debate, I just had to tune out to all of it. Anything was too much for the right, and for the left nothing was good enough, went far enough, could ever satisfy them, regardless of whether anything even remotely like what they demanded could even be passed. I, on the other hand, was thrilled to have SOMETHING to build on, SOMETHING to provide a lot of relief to A LOT of people, and what basically turned out to be what Obama AND Hillary AND Edwards all supported during the primary and general election. I mean, they seem to want magic and their fantasies fulfilled by Pres. Obama. I never thought he was magic. So, I'm generally pretty pleased when he more than meets my expectations.

And the right wingers, they hate "big-government take-overs" and don't think the federal government is capable of doing anything right, but they want Pres. Obama to take over the spill. Uh huh. The left . . . I guess they just really believe Obama can walk on water and oil slicks, beam his heavenly aura down to the Ocean floor, and lay hands on the leak to stop it. I don't know why anyone thinks the federal government has deep oil spill experts laying around the White House doing nothing all day.

I mean, I was born in Biloxi and grew up in Ocean Springs. This is my hometown at risk AGAIN too. I am crushed and heart-broken too, and I was a Hillary supporter as well, but there has to be some rational, thoughtful, FACT-BASED reasoning going on right now. The last thing we need is more screaming political nonsense.

I feel sick to my stomach watching all this petty political BS going on, when so much catostrophic suffering and loss is happening. I can hardly bear the pain of knowing the beautiful, clear waters where my dad took me fishing and the pristine islands and beaches where I went camping and spent so much of my life are going to be hopelessly spoiled for, perhaps, decades, just a mythical dream some of us had once, but as satisfying as raging and blaming is, it has to be directed at the right people.

This BS is getting so out of control. Jesus, I can hardly stand it anymore. Just blah, blah, blah, blame, blame, blame. People are so caught up in politicizing this, that we are paralized! There are things we can DO and LEARN and CHANGE, make things better, instead of worse FOR ONCE!

HOW MUCH OIL IS BEING SPEWED INTO THE GULF?

2010-05-17T10:20:00.004-05:00

Give Me Poison, Or Give Me Death!

2010-05-05T11:18:00.004-05:00

Fox pushes the religion button to trigger hate, and the freedom/patriot button to curtail freedom, and fear button, for just everything on their agenda. This propaganda really just seems so obvious and absurdly contradictory to me, that I'm shocked all these tea bagging idiots are being roped into and organized by Fox to "protest" corporations and rich people being fairly taxed and made to follow rules and regulations, particularly in light of the HORRIFIC damage they have just done to our global economy and environment. I mean, how f'ing stupid do you have to be not to see what's right in front of your face, lol?

Now they're complaining about the government regulating the very dangerous salt levels that are in processed food, lol. Yes, give me poison, or give me death. LMAO! When does this get to a point when even the stupidest sheep among us can see that they are being conned?

The Colbert Report

Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c

FDA Salt Regulation - Lori Roman & Michael Jacobson

www.colbertnation.com

Colbert Report Full Episodes

Political Humor

Fox News

This is the kind of "food" Fox "News" wants to protect from being regulated by the goverment:

Now, you don't suppose Health Insurers Investing in Fast Food, has anything to do with Fox "New" helping two big corporate industries by conning and manipulating people?

UPDATE: Lol, so now Sarah Palin is attacking the idea that there should be a minimum nutricial value in school lunches.

Sarah Palin brings cookies, hits 'nanny state'

This woman is so freaking stupid. Yes, yes, we want our kids to be fat, stupid, and riddled with disease from schools serving them crap with no nutritional value whatsoever.

Likewise, Gov. Perry on Jon Stewart the other night talking about the government trying to tell us how much salt we should eat.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Rick Perry Pt. 1

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show Full Episodes

Political Humor

Rally to Restore Sanity

Lol, NO they're trying to make sure processed food doesn't contain near toxic levels of salt. You can bath in salt if you want at your house. I liked John's comeback, which was something like, the government also shouldn't tell us how much lead is in paint?

The Politics of Willful Stupidity

2010-05-03T10:29:00.007-05:00

So, Palin is running around promoting off shore drilling, incredibly, while Fox News is telling their idiot cult that the spill is Pres. Obama's fault. Wow. Indecent stupidity really knows no bounds. I actually don't think it does them ANY good to spew this crap, since Independents are running from their party like it's a plague that makes you stupid, and apparently it does. More votes for the sane, reasonable people!

What really infuriates me is these tards on the right indecently spouting off utter nonsense with the intellectual content a toddler could provide, while we are watching, perhaps the most epic disaster to ever befall our country. There's almost an element of cruelty to it.

Me, I spent my weekend glued to the TV, watching this unfold, and weeping. I was born and raised in the Biloxi area. So, I guess I'll tell my grandchildren about the mythical place I grew up, the waters my Daddy took me to fish on, the beauty and teaming life of an area that will for decades be a dead zone.

I don't understand how could anyone let this happen? How could they be so careless? There is no amount of money that could be worth it or can now repair it!

I just keep wondering if people understand what is about to happen. A black, putrid plague is descending on one of our Coasts. It will destroy EVERYTHING in it's wake, animal life, sea life, plant life, all rare and beautiful, as well as a source of food and income for many, many people. And the beaches, covered in never ending blackness and stench. It will drive all the people away.

And at the rate it is gushing, unabated, it will be a miracle if it doesn't go up river, the many rivers that connect to the Gulf and perhaps even into the Atlantic. This will be like a nuclear bomb hitting our continent, leaving a giant dead zone that will take decades to recover. This is not a worst case scenario. This is what we are facing.

In the face of that, these ridiculous idiots really aren't worthy my time or attention. In fact, the worst thing we could do to them, is ignore them. That's my plan!

Hate Speech on Facebook

2010-04-23T10:56:00.001-05:00

Below is the title, content, and pretty much all there is to a group on Facebook:

DEAR LORD, THIS YEAR YOU TOOK MY FAVORITE ACTOR, PATRICK SWAYZIE. YOU TOOK MY FAVORITE ACTRESS, FARAH FAWCETT. YOU TOOK MY FAVORITE SINGER, MICHAEL JACKSON. I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW, MY FAVORITE PRESIDENT IS BARACK OBAMA. AMEN

The comments section of this "group" is filled with some of the most vicious, unChristian, hate-filled garbage you may ever have the misfortune to be exposed to. But here's the thing, in the name of free speech, we’ve put up with the KKK parading down the streets of small town America, and a lot of other vile crap. All, so Jon Stewart, the SouthPark guys, Bill Maher, Edward R. Murrow, and so many others, could say the things they do. Bill Maher lost his job over his free speech, when the Bush Admin. didn’t like what he had to say. I don’t want to follow that example, do you?

I abhor people who are so cowardly and so dishonest they have to try to hide their vile, sick, hate speech by using religion or in the guise of a joke, but frankly, I’d die to protect their right to do it. Because I value my right to free speech that much. So, they might call it a joke, one that’s not funny in any way unless you have something evil in place of your soul and humanity, and if they pretend to be Christian, well, I’d say they have some learning and some explaining to do to someone up there.This is exactly the kind of thing that turns most Americans against these tea bagging, hate-filled, irrational, ignorant Fers, who, btw are showing an awful lot of disrespect for Swayze, Fawcett, and Jackson - not sure what they ever did to these idiots.

They do themselves more harm than banning this crap could ever do. Let them continue to lie in their own putrid, black hatred. I will strive to rise above, and frankly, that is the example Pres. Obama has been setting for us all since this all began. I think it's a good one. :)

However, I'd also like to follow Jon Stewarts example, and say to these motard freaks, GO FUCK YOURSELVES!

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

South Park Death Threats

http://www.thedailyshow.com/

Daily Show Full Episodes

Political Humor

Tea Party

Tea Party - Is it really about debt and taxes?

2010-04-17T12:54:00.002-05:00

Actually, the Dems are not the big spenders Dan. That's another one of those crazy, partisan myths.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget

"Why the economy fares much better under Democrats"
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2008/1021/p09s01-coop.html

"Despite 'market friendly' Republican policies, stocks rise more and volatility dips under Democrats"
http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/21/markets/election_demsvreps/

"Democratic Superiority, by the Numbers"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20059-2005Apr1.html

In FACT, the Republicans are historically the ones who run up debt and deficits:

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/06/08/Obamas-National-Debt-Dwarfs-Bushs-and-Reagans

http://www.lafn.org/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html

Lol, we all seem to remember things exactly the way we want to, along partisan lines. It's just short of amusing. In my lifetime, there have been no republicans who are REAL fiscal conservatives, or protect states rights or individual liberties, or ANYTHING they claim to be about. Stating a bunch of principles for the lazy, ignorant masses to latch onto, and ACTUALLY following them are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

I'm just really sick of the manufactured rage and manufactured concern and manufactured issues. YOU may have been concerned since the 70s, but the Tea Party didn't rear it's head until just after Pres. Obama was sworn in, before he even had a chance to spend anything, and when we were in financial free fall, with a scattered message (and I'll leave out the uglier parts), which seemed to to most of us to generally be about wanting lower taxes and smaller government.

Well, a lot of us have an obvious question. Were all these people in a coma for the 8 yrs that Bush grew government beyond anything this nation's ever seen (and this is a conservative source):

http://reason.com/archives/2009/01/26/bush-was-a-big-government-disa

and ran our federal deficit into the stratosphere?

They didn't even seem to know that it was Bush who was responsible for "the bank bailouts."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_2008

or that Obama made sure they were paid back, WITH INTEREST:

http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/30/news/economy/tarp_program/index.htm

Now the Tea Party wasn't protesting then, in 2008, within the shadow a presidential election just two months away . . . why not? That WAS the time to protest if they stand for what they claim, when the government was bailing out the banks right? No, the first Tea Party protest was in February 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_protests

They didn't even wait for Pres. Obama to DO anything before they attacked him, and that is why people are suspicious of their true motivations. Mix all those other facts, about ignored debt, and enough though conditions are improving, they're angrier than ever, and I hate to mention it, but the continuing and abundant racist overtones and threats of violence and intimidation, ridiculously exaggerated fear-mongering, inflammatory language, and last, but certainly not least, the fact that most of them don't even know 95% of us received a tax cut under Pres. Obama.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-6201911-503544.html

Frankly, it's amazing they're surprised when they are so often met with scorn, exasperation, and sarcastic contempt. I mean, I don't understand the convenient timing of this awakening. Oh wait, yes I do:

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/Peter-Fenn/2011/02/02/tea-party-funding-koch-brothers-emerge-from-anonymity

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer

It's manipulation, pure and simple. Pres. Bill Clinton once said, when we get people to think, we win. Well, the GOP and their corporate owners, have discovered when you get people to FEEL, whether it's fear, hatred, false patriotism, or some false sense of religious or racial superiority, they win. IMHO, that is what ALL this drummed up outrage is about, and the proof is in how they are going about it. For example, collective bargaining for public has NOTHING to do with deficits. And the really sickeningly obvious thing about that ploy is all the people standing up and defending the giant executive bank bonuses, by talking about how they had contracts. Uh huh, well so do teachers, police, and fire fighters, theirs are just very, very meager, and much of their benefits are paid for straight from their own salaries - that's the bargain they struck and the contract that should also be honored.

The Problem With "Tea-Partiers"

2010-04-17T12:43:00.005-05:00

Let me see if I can outline the problems with the self-appointed "Tea Partiers." There are a number of them, including on the most fundamental level - there's no coherence to their complaints, which is demonstrated by the obvious fact that too many don't even understand what their symbols, The Boston Tea Party and The UNITED States flag, actually mean. The Boston Tea Party was a protest against taxation without representation. Because of the courage of those who fought The Revolutionary War and the founding fathers, WE ARE REPRESENTED WITH OUR VOTE! That is what they were fighting for at The Boston Tea Party, not against taxation itself. They teach this in basic high school civics - you remember right? And if you are fighting taxation itself, then you're throwing in with this long time group of people who don't believe in paying taxes at all a/k/a Libertarians, and their views are extreme and immature at their core, to say the least. They enjoy the benefits of taxation and government, while saying it shouldn't exist, that the "free market" can do everything. I think we've seen how well that works with the recent banking free-for-all.

If your symbol is the flag, and you are anti-federal government and/or anti-taxation, then you are ridiculously wearing the most literal symbol there is OF our federal government. You know, one for each of our UNITED states . . . you remember that right? It's so absurd, it's laughable. Thus, we laugh. Our government is US, we UNITE in common purpose "to promote the general welfare" (that's in that Constitution thingy you may have heard of) - it's right there in the name, UNITED STATES! Our government has made us one of the richest, most powerful and successful nations in the history of the planet. We have UNITED through government to build interstate highways, transcontinental railroads, eradicate disease through vaccinations, educate our people so that we were a nation fit to compete, bring clean water to everyone, safe products and services, trade, and on and on and on. We the people, have UNITED together to do important things, things that are vital to our survival and prosperity - it is the very essence of what we are as a country and what our flag symbolizes. Our government, and our common bond as Americans, IS what the UNITED States of American literally IS, not so much dirt and trees, and I, for one, am very proud of my country. We are a generous, innovative, resilient people who have done great things. Our common bond is the reason we were able to overthrow the British, when it seems an impossible endeavor, and we have succeeded beyond anyone's wildest expectation because of that bond. So if you hate my federal government, you hate my country, while waiving it's symbol. How does this make ANY sense? If you dislike how the government is functioning, then do something more about it that make vague, unintelligible, disorganized, irrational, and angry complaints. Run for office!

And then there's the fact of when this new Tea "Party" formed and began protesting - it was just days after Pres. Obama took office, with a scattered message (and I'll leave out the uglier parts), which seemed to most of us to generally be about wanting lower taxes and smaller government. Well, a lot of us have an obvious question. Were all these people in a coma for the 8 yrs that Bush grew government beyond anything this nation's ever seen and ran our federal deficit into the stratosphere? They didn't even seem to know that it was Bush who was responsible for "the bank bailouts." Now the Tea Party wasn't protesting then, in 2008, within the shadow a presidential election just two months away . . . why not? That WAS the time to protest if they stand for what they claim. No, the first Tea Party protest was in February 2009. They didn't even wait for Pres. Obama to DO anything before they attacked him, and that is why people are suspicious of their true motivations. Mix in continuing and abundant racist overtones and threats of violence and intimidation, ridiculously exaggerated fear-mongering, inflammatory language, and last, but certainly not least, the fact that most of them don't even know 95% of us received a tax cut under Pres. Obama. Frankly, it's amazing they're surprised when they are so often met with scorn, exasperation, and sarcastic contempt.

I can appreciate citizens with real grievances with federal policy and actions, IF they fully understand the issues they are "protesting" against, but it seems to me they are not effectively nor reasonably demonstrating that, given how the "Tea Party" has evolved and conducted itself, in all it's many scattered, random parts, which include some groups most thoughtful people wouldn't want to be associated with.

Jon Stewart Pounds CNN Again!

2010-04-02T21:48:00.003-05:00

The sad thing is, CNN is the only "news" network that's even worth trying to save.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

CNN Hires Erick Erickson

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show Full Episodes

Political Humor

Health Care Reform

Very interesting suggestions from Jay Rosen on how CNN might save itself and fascinating debate in the comments section, which, of course, I participated in. What CNN Should Do With Itself in Prime-Time

CNN report suggests Antichrist-fearing militia group hosted Tea Party

2010-03-29T12:29:00.004-05:00

"During a report about the arrests, CNN's Susan Candiotti displayed a web page from MichiganMilitia.com advertising a "Tea Party." The website promotes an "Open Carry Family Picnic & Tea Party" to be held on April 10, 2010."

A militia group worried about the Antichrist was the subject of multiple reports over the weekend.

"A Christian militia group was a target of at least one of a series of weekend raids the FBI conducted in Indiana, Michigan and Ohio, a Michigan militia leader says," the Associated Press reports.

The FBI said Sunday that it had conducted raids in the three states, resulting in at least three arrests. Federal warrants were sealed, but a federal law enforcement official speaking on condition of anonymity said some of those arrested face gun charges and officials are pursuing other suspects. Some of the suspects were expected in court Monday.

It wasn't clear what prompted the raids, but Michael Lackomar, a spokesman for the Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia, said one of his team leaders got a frantic phone call Saturday evening from members of Hutaree, a Christian militia group. They said their property in southeast Michigan was being raided by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Lackomar said.

"They said they were under attack by the ATF and wanted a place to hide," he said. "My team leader said, 'No thanks."'

"Jesus wanted us to be ready to defend ourselves using the sword and stay alive using equipment," Hutaree.com reads. "The only thing on earth to save the testimony and those who follow it, are the members of the testimony, til the return of Christ in the clouds. We, the Hutaree, are prepared to defend all those who belong to Christ and save those who aren't. We will still spread the word, and fight to keep it, up to the time of the great coming."

Another AP report notes, "Two law enforcement officials told The Associated Press that members of the group had planned multiple attacks on police officers or other law enforcement personnel as way to express their hatred for the government. Charges against members of the militia group are expected to be unsealed later Monday when some of the suspects appear in court."

"Nine members of a militia group arrested in Michigan, Indiana, Illinois and Ohio were planning to 'levy war' against the United States and 'oppose by force' the nation's government, according to an indictment released this morning in U.S. District Court in Detroit," the Detroit News reports.
The indictment says they were planning to kill a member of law enforcement, possibly after a traffic stop, to "prompt a response by law enforcement."

The goal: To "intimidate and demoralize law enforcement, diminishing their ranks and rendering them ineffective," according to the indictment.

The group then intended to use the incident to spark a "war" against law enforcement, using bombs, ambushes and prepared fighting positions.

During a report about the arrests, CNN's Susan Candiotti displayed a web page from MichiganMilitia.com advertising a "Tea Party." The website promotes an "Open Carry Family Picnic & Tea Party" to be held on April 10, 2010

For its part, MichiganMilitia.com denies they have been "raided" by the FBI.

Neither MICHIGANMILITIA.COM nor the SMVM have been "raided" by the FBI. We do nothing illegal.

Some sources indicate that the sealed warrants will be released on Monday...This site has NOT been compromised by anyone, nor have we been raided at all. Please disregard any such false information that you might encounter on any comment boards.

Read more at: http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0329/hutaree-militia-video/

“Smash Windows!”: Tea Party Leader Is On Government Disability

2010-03-26T12:26:00.001-05:00

Posted in Liberaland by tlw3 • March 26, 2010, 12:56 PMET • 1 Comment » by tlw3

Here comes the hypocrisy card again: Michael Vanderboegh, the Tea Party leader and former militiaman who is calling for an armed march on Washington for April 19, and who urged people to break Democrat party office windows, is on government disability!

Vanderboegh said he once worked as a warehouse manager but now lives on government disability checks. He said he receives $1,300 a month because of his congestive heart failure, diabetes and hypertension. He has private health insurance through his wife, who works for a company that sells forklift products.

Born in Michigan and raised in Ohio, Vanderboegh said he was not always a libertarian. He once was active in the Young Socialist Alliance and the Progressive Labor Party. “In my youth, I was a communist,” he said. But in the mid-1970s, Vanderboegh read Friedrich von Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom,” among other books, and had an epiphany.

“From that point on, I could never take Marxism-Leninism seriously again,” Vanderboegh said.

Really? You think your taxes are paying other people's way? Really?

2010-03-18T12:01:00.005-05:00

Your taxes, they pay for the roads we all drive on, which brings the crops to market, the food to the stores, the cars to the lots, which take us all to work - they have allowed us to expand, prosper, and trade, like the railroads. It was our government, ALL OF US united in common purpose, that made the initial investment in railroads. All of our tax dollars, do something FOR ALL OF US. You're not giving me a darn thing out of charity. You are simply paying your own way for the benefits we all receive. Like the EPA, who makes sure our water is drinkable, and a thousand other agencies, that keep the wheels of this great country moving. Imagine what these services would cost you individually, should you have to pay for them like your cell phone bill. And the best thing about getting them a la carte, is not only do we pool our money together, thus reducing the cost to each of us, but from time to time WE THE PEOPLE elect Representatives to manage and regulate these services - IT'S CALLED GOVERNMENT! This is who we are, the UNITED States. It's what we do for the greater good, and though we have accomplished great things united in common purpose, many governments have done much, much more. We are always debating the limits, the guidelines, and exactly what should and shouldn't be included in our joint efforts, and often come to different conclusions that many of other industrialized nations. However, regarding healthcare, we had an election about this, remember? A majority of us elected Pres. Obama to do just what he is doing, and a majority, arguably elected Bush, and if he did what they wanted, well, it's a damn fine thing they're not in the majority ANYMORE

We the people, have UNITED together to do important things, things that are vital to our survival and prosperity - it is the very essence of what we are as a country, IT IS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and I'm very proud of that.

As for Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, we all pay into that too. Yes, there are A FEW who are so disabled, many born that way, whom we each contribute to in some tiny, minuscule way, because we spread it out over so many of us, the amount you individually pay, even if you're Warren Buffet, is too small to quantify.

The vast majority of us pay into the system, through taxes, and we receive a very great deal for that payment. I like having clean water, a country free from polio and other diseases, which we have TOGETHER eradicated, bridges, fire and police departments, civil and criminal justice systems, roads, safety standards for workers and products, men on the moon, national security, armed forces, agencies to go in and help out countrymen when natural disaster strikes, meat inspectors, etc., etc., etc.

So, I really feel bad for you, if you honestly think that YOU get nothing for your tax dollars, and it's just your giving to charity, because you clearly haven't taken a fair and objective look around you, and there's an air of self-importance, distorted proportion, and utter selfishness that I find truly alarming in that idea.

The most important thing about this heath care bill, IMO, is it will stop insurance companies from feeding off of death and disease like maggots. They will be forced to compete in an exchange of qualified insurers, forced to insure everyone, and forced to do something to earn all that money we are paying them, forced to return any money over a certain percentage not paid out to providers, and best of all, we will have a larger pool and can spread the risk out.

As it stands, it's just a casino. I am betting, much more money than I can afford, that I will get sick or injured. The insurance company is betting that I won't. The problem is, even if I do get sick or injured, they find a way to hedge on the bet and not pay. That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of. I've been saying for over a decade that future generations would look at our insurance and banking systems, as they have been for so long, and think we were all brain damaged. Well, thank goodness we and this administration are doing something about it, before it all blows up in our faces. It's been unbridled, unhindered thievery going on, and I can't imagine why anyone would support that.

Do the Anti-Goverment Tea Baggers Not Get that the Flag IS the Symbol of our Governement, Our Union?

2010-03-16T13:14:00.003-05:00

Are they REALLY this stupid?

The government is US. We UNITE in common purpose to promote the general welfare - it's right there in the name, UNITED STATES! Our government has made us one of the richest and most successful nations in the history of the planet. We have united through government to build transcontinental railroads, eradicate disease through vaccinations, educate our people so that we were a nation fit to compete, bring clean water, safe products, trade, and on and on and on.

Our government is the finest one the planet has ever known, and when they wrap themselves in the flag, like the flag hags on The Right so often do, our government IS what they are wrapping themselves in. How can they not know that? Jesus!

UPDATE: Had to add these logos for commenter "Citizen Tom," who seems to be confused and/or delusional.

Is Media Bias and Punditry "News" or "Brainwashing"?

2010-03-15T17:33:00.003-05:00

This was inspired by some Facebook discussions, so it is unedited for my blog. I'll dress it up all pretty later, but the points are all there. :)

I'm "liberal" by any standard, and I used to consider myself a "progressive," by the old Katrina Vanden Heuvel standards, a term she popularized starting about 10 years ago. Now "progressive" means consumers of the fake political reality show that MSNBC, DailyKos, HuffPo, and others are marketing. The one in which they set unreasonable expections for things no one ever promised. Today's "Progressives" run around complaining about the "public option" like someone they voted for actually promised it to them, lol. And please don't show me that grainy cell phone footage of Obama discussing the public option, like all y'all were in that room and missed EVERY debate and EVERY speech he gave during the campaign. Today's "progressives" are the people who lost us Ted Kennedy's seat, because THEY DIDN'T SHOW UP TO VOTE! They're going to lose us a lot more seats too, if all the nonsense doesn't hit a wall.

[A FB friend told me today, "progressives" are just like liberals, but they want to "get stuff done," lol.] Well, in order to "get stuff done," you have to have some vague notion of what "stuff" and "done" actually mean:

CQ: Obama's Winning Streak On Hill Unprecedented
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122436116

The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

So, while we have a lot in common, we may see things differently. I'm actually in favor of not cutting off our noses to spite our faces and recognizing a damn good thing when we've got it. I'm all for continuing to push our president and Congress toward the kind of reform we all want, but I am NOT for childishlly, unrealistically burning down the entire thing if we can't force everyone to see things our way. And THAT is the difference between today's liberals and progressives, and the difference between the Kennedys and today's progressives. Do a little research on the kinds of deals Teddie made during his many years in the Senate. He just may not be your ideal poster boy after all.

When Bush was in office, venting our frustrations and having pundits on the left to hammer on him was some small satisfaction. Now, I worry about the self-governed, when too many of us are just getting the facts that suit our supposed agenda. I can't see how this "progressive" brain-washing fest is any different than the Faux Spews watchers and the ditto heads . . .

I scout for my own news from sources I trust, and I listen mostly to NPR and PBS, where calm serious people give me the who, what, when, where, why, and how, and DON'T spend all their time telling me what to think. I can figure that out all by myself. All these people, get all passionate about these "issues," but when you ask them the details, they don't know. They haven't independently researched it. They don't even realize that are facts that are being left out of the view their getting, because they aren't convenient for the pundit's agenda?

So . . . that's where I stand on the mounting number of pundits and the diminishing number of actual objective journalists. I think it's dangerous.

I've been a political junkie long enough to know that if you are constantly ingesting opinions that you KNOW are slanted and biased, you are NOT getting all the facts or anywhere near it. That's just common sense.

Look, I like Jon Stewart and Bill Maher and SNL. However, all of them tend to poke fun at and point out the hypocrisy on BOTH sides of the isle. I'm not saying you shouldn't listen to this army of pundits, with "information" tailored to your political predisposition. I'm saying, please don't think your informing yourself when you do - quite the opposite. I don't believe any of us has the wisdom or the 6th sense, or whatever, to fend off the kind of agenda driven, blue team, or red team, mind contamination that kind of thing can cause, long term.

We need to govern our country based on facts, logic, and promoting the general welfare. Not one side or another's talk show hosts self-promoting spewage.

"The power to mold the future of the Republic will be in the hands of the journalists of future generations." Joseph Pulitzer

So the Saints McCray Got Fined for Two of the Illegal Hits to Favre, What Did it Teach Them?

2010-02-01T10:19:00.001-06:00

. . . NOTHING, that's what. Fines and penalties are supposed to be a deterant, but in this case, they mean less than nothing. The Saints are bragging about trying to hurt Manning in the Superbowl:

"And if Manning gets hurt in the process? 'If it happens,' Williams added, "you hope he doesn't get back up and play again."

Read more: To New Orleans Saints, roughness is necessary with Peyton Manning

Why don't we just let them have a gun to shoot quarterbacks with?

UPDATE: Good for the Saints! I'm proud of them! They beat the Colts FAIR AND SQUARE AND WITH HONOR! :)

The Saints Going to the Big Show . . . a Reward for Dirty, Illegal Play

2010-01-26T10:00:00.012-06:00

Just in case you are confused by the photo above, it shows without a doubt that the play which caused Favre's ankle injury during the NFC Championship game was illegal under the Brady Rule.

And this is not McCray's first time brutaly hitting an utterly defenseless quarterback. Take a look at this hit on Kurt Warner:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzos9cbIcJo

I realize it's all sour grapes and that the Saints did a fantastic job of stripping the ball, which lead to all those "fumbles." And while the Vikings blew them away in every other respect, the turnovers are what cost them the game. No doubt about it.

My point here is, in large part, that the Saints INTENTIONALLY went out there TRYING to hurt Favre, and they got away with A LOT of dirty crap in trying to do that. Frankly, I get upset when players keep on fighting after the whistle is blown, etc. This is an actual GAME, a sporting competition, not an episode of Ultimate Fighting. NO quarterback should ever be subjected to the kind of beating Favre took and the kind of shoddy officiating that allowed it. Too much of it was dirty as hell. It, frankly, made my stomach turn. In all these years, I've never seen Brett Favre helped off the field of play, EVER. And the Saints and all their fans better be real glad that he's as tough as nails and kept getting back up and limping back onto that field. If they had actually severely injured this legend, with these repeated, illegal personal fouls, there wouldn't be a lot of sympathy for them.

So yeah, teams get robbed all the time in this game, I understand that. Refs are merely human. Nevertheless, I'm calling FOUL!

It's blatantly obivous that the Saints were out to severely injure Favre:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsASxsXXpno

Then, there's the touchdown that wasn't actually a touchdown.

And before you start, there is certainly no guarantee that the Saints would have scored on the next play if that non-touchdown hadn't been called - they couldn't convert for sh*t in the red zone - they're the WORST in the league. The difference in that game was less than a fraction of a hair, and the Saints would do well to understand that when they come face to face with Peyton Manning. Are they going to beat him to a bloody pulp too? Is that how the game is played now? Just a f'ing low-skill free-for-all?

Yes, I wanted the Favre story to have the ultimate happy ending, him winning one last Super Bowl. I'm sure no one is shocked by that revelation, lol. But I guess that's not going to happen, since I suspect he will retire, after the brutality and disappointment of his last game, and if that is what football is evolving into, a pure blood sport, then I'm glad he's retiring. Personally, I'm not interested in that either.

Wild Card Weekend? Karma's an unforgiving witch!

2010-01-11T10:31:00.002-06:00

There was a lot of karma coming home to roost this playoff weekend. Bye, bye Tom Brady, bye, bye - I guess the Pats need to cheat to win. See ya Mike Vick and the Eagles - karma's an unforgiving witch, aint it? And GO HOME GB Packers! You're doomed to another 30 years of laying in the ditch, since you crapped all over the man who finally pulled you out that ditch.

I get NO pleasure from seeing the pain on the faces of so many players I've loved for years, and there was a lot of pain. Driver looked like someone had ripped out his heart.

Rodgers is, and always was, a long shot, so far as ever really "replacing" Favre and taking them anywhere. I'm frankly, shocked he's not hurt by now, as much time as he spends on the turf and as often as he was hurt when he was Favre's back up.

I'll give them a little credit, even Rogers, but the guy has GOT to stop taking so many sacks! DEAR GOD! He just can't get rid of the ball! I've never seen anything like it, and how appropriate for the game to end on a sack, turned fumble, by Rodgers.

If you add up all the sacks, fumbles and interceptions Rodgers made, you'll see EXACTLY why they lost that game, that and penalties. What a cluster F! Of course, the sports media insists on treating Rodgers like the handicapped kid who still gets a trophy. Any other young QB who has F'ed like Rodgers would be reemed by the sports media 5 times a day.

In the end, what matters is CHAMPIONSHIPS and glory! And I will tell you something, they had A LOT better shot with Favre the last two years, and he had A LOT better shot with the Packers, but Ted Thompson, Mark Murphy, and Mike McCarthy threw that all away, based on some personality conflict, or WTF ever kind of short-sighted, despicable BS that motivated them to do this stupid, stupid crap! And THIS is the price. Funny, the Cardinals aren't looking for their next QB, their future. They're going to hang on to Warner with everything they have and beg him to play if they have to.

So don't tell me this is business or they were trying to work towards the future. There is no future in the NFL, there's here and now and WINNING!

ALL THOSE NEW VOTERS, WITH ALL THEIR "ENTHUSIASM" - YEAH THAT WAS A GREAT IDEA

2010-01-07T09:09:00.007-06:00

When you see the left wing applauding Dodd's departure (and Dodd may not be a saint, but he's a damn GOOD man, and he knows how to turn the levers of government, not an easy task), it's pretty easy to see where this is headed. Not many Democratic senators are going to be willing to fall on their swords like Dodd did, which means big losses for us, and just f'ing doom for our country.

I'm so upset about Dodd, I'd like to smack someone, but I guess I'll just wipe a few tears and move on.

So, it looks like we're on our way to handing the GOP another majority in Congress. Thanks so much extreme left, brain-washed by MSNBC, HuffPo, DailyKos, etc., for unrealistically, immaturely, throwing out "the good," in pursuant of the impossibly "perfect," and in reality handing us the "worst possible," AGAIN. Good job. Enjoy your pure principles while the republicans repeal health care reform and anything else that could ACTUALLY help people. Thanks, thanks a bunch.

All these people, SO unhappy with Obama and the Dems, who frankly, didn't pay ANY attention during the election, or they just don't have the vaguest clue how goverment works, are not only cutting off their noses to spite THEIR faces, they're going to lop off all our noses.

It's nice to have new blood and new enthusiasm in the party, ain't it? Particularly, when that new blood self-destructs out of their own ignorance and blows us all up. Were they paying ANY attention AT ALL during the election to what Obama was proposing in terms of health care reform? Cause we're getting MORE than he even proposed, but no we can't be satisfied with people actually delivering what they promised - we're democrats, masters of self-defeat.

Obama DID NOT promote the public option during the election, and I've posted this video and the dozens just like it a 100 times. How can people not know this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-f2_p-fd2D4

And even if there are some differences, did you think there wouldn't be? Really? Did you think one of the most difficult reforms in our country's history would be so simply and perfectly achieved? Besides, IF we keep "the trigger," in the final bill, THERE IS YOUR PUBLIC OPTION REALIZED!

And before you people start, yes Obama did MENTION the public option at least once. I've seen that grainy video too, that looks like cell phone video, from some union event or something, and it was more of a philosophical discussion if you ask me. He DID not promise it in his platform or anywhere else that was significant, NEITHER did Hillary Clinton. And from the moment she started talking about allowing us access to "the same insurance Congress has," I recognized that as code for - this is the way to universal, government run health care. We've already discovered (again recently as well), that you can't ram the kind of universal care we all want through the front door, but rather, you have to sneak it in the back.

I'll be signing up for that non-profit Congressional coverage the second it's available, IF the GOP doesn't take over Congress and repeal it by then, and before you say, that is not government run, I KNOW, just like Medicaid and Medicare are ADMINISTERED here in Alabama by BCBS, but BCBS doesn't set the rules, or profit from that administration other than a flat rate they are paid. This is very common in other states as well, and it is the only thing insurance companies are good for IMO.

I've studied both bills as they came out of the houses of Congress, and I suspect the final bill will mirror the Senate bill, but they will hide some more good stuff in there first that they can count on the blue dogs, etc. to vote for in order to hold that shaky 60 votes. It may not be the kind of outright, blow-the-doors-off reform we would all like, ideally, but it IS a damn great start, the first step, and something that the American people will end up liking very much and wanting refined and expanded. THAT is the critical point.

Also, I'm just really amazed that the Dems in the Senate get NO credit for working like mad men and woman all the way up to Christmas Eve, trying to force this baby to be born. Nothing, nada, not a shred of credit for the valiant fight they put up. Well, actually, that's not true. MOST democrats get it, understand what they were up against and what they did, but there are enough of the MSNBC heads to F up the entire thing.

So, in closing, if you think Pres. Obama's not keeping his promises, here's a fact check on that:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/browse/

Frankly, I'm astonished at how many of those promises he's kept or are on the way to being kept, in less than a year, but then I'm not some political novice who believes in magic or super heros.

But hey, that's the problem with being a true "big tent" party of "thinkers" who don't walk in lock step off the edge of a cliff. We have some moderates, some extremists, and some who border on being conservative, but they side with us because they can't stand the neo-cons, "social" conservatives, and the just plain dumbed-down, brain-washed Faux Spews hoards.

If we want to get thinking, rational people on our side, then we have to make compromises and expect that they're not all ideologically "pure." Please don't tell me the left is now going to start spouting off about "purity" tests and contracts?

We can accomplish a heck of a lot by bonding together with those who aren't as far left as the extreme left, but we will crumble if we try to force everyone into that mold. I, for one, want no part of the extreme left zombies who just rant and rave, regurgitating their MSNBC, HuffPo, and DailyKos programming, without any REAL knowledge or comprehension.

Our government was designed and born of compromise. We are the "United" States - it's right there in the name, and without the contributions AND compromises of men like Hamilton AND Jefferson, our government would never have survived the first year.

The Obameter: Tracking Obama's Campaign Promises

2010-01-06T14:15:00.003-06:00

This is a fantastic website, that allows you to see whether or not Pres. Obama has kept 500 of his key campaign promises. Wow, I'm even more impressed with Pres. Obama than I already was. Does the man ever sleep at all?

Extreme "Anti-war" Left Painting Military as Monsters . . . History Repeates Itself in More Ways Than One

2010-01-04T11:20:00.004-06:00

Are the extreme left now going to start hating on and demonizing members of the military, since they're absurd, immoral anti-war BS that they didn't even VOTE FOR when voting for president, didn't come true? Gosh, didn't they persecute Vietnam Vets in EXACTLY the same way? F'ers. Some things just never change. They couldn't care less what happens to Afghans or Pakistanis after we pull out, given the gigantic mess we've made. They don't give a rat's ass about children, addicted to opium, to stave off hunger pangs, since the Afghan population has been utterly enslaved into growing 90% of the world's heroin by the Taliban and Al Quaeda, through starvation, brutality, and ignorance. There is only a 10% literacy rate in Afghanistan, girls and women are horribly, barbarically persecuted, but they don't care about Afghans in any real sense, even though they put out garbage like this:

http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/?q=node/440

It's absolute BULLSHIT to paint all military members as mass murdering, soulless monsters. I can tell you some things about the people my brothers helped in Bosnia and Somalia or what my father suffered in WWII, including taking bullets, to save the world from mass murdering monsters like Hitler.

For all the "support the troops" sentiments, there are some, mostly on the left, who think anyone who joins the military is transformed into a brain-washed, bloodthirsty murderer. I've been fighting that stereo-type for a long time.

Blame the government and those who run it when our military is misused, NOT the idea of, nor the members of the military. In fact, I believe in mandatory service - people might feel a lot differently about war and aggression and how our military is used if it were THEIR necks and THEIR children's necks on the line.

I don't believe we should have gone into Iraq, but I would have re-enlisted and stood shoulder to shoulder with my brothers and sisters in the military there if I could have, in a heart beat. I'm not sure I can articulate where I'm coming from. I believe in military service. It is who I am. I only served 2 yrs in the U.S.A.F, but I'm about as proud of having done that as anything else I've ever done.

There were a lot of reasons people joined the military after 9/11, fear, nationalism, revenge . . . I don't know. I don't actually think it matters. The fact is there were a lot of people ALREADY in the military on 9/11, and I might well have been one of them if it had occurred when I was in the service, which is what happened with my brother (who just made 20 yrs. this month), and I would have followed orders and gone where I was sent, and I support those who are following orders in every way I possibly can. This how our military MUST operate; otherwise, they become a threat to us all.

The military doesn't decide which wars to fight, our government does, and WE are our government. It is OUR responsibility and our fault when our military is sent into fight immoral, unnecessary wars . . . EVERY SINGLE TIME.

Don’t let terrorists scare the liberty out of you!

2009-12-30T11:03:00.008-06:00

First, I have to say, as for someone’s dad or relative reporting them to an embassy as becoming "radicalized," and that resulting in ANYONE not being able to travel - well, that’s just absurd to the nth degree. I’m sure my exhusband would like to make my life my difficult by saying something like that. People, seriously, get a freaking grip! The media is covering this as if the “underwear bomber” should have been locked up or denied the freedom to travel because someone, who may or may not have ulterior motives or proof of ANY kind, told American authorities he might be dangerous. Really? Is that where we are in our irrational fears? I believe American authorities acted properly by opening an investigation, etc.

Further, I think calling these people “terrorists” is totally inaccurate. What they are is cult members. A bunch of men, who abuse women and children, flout the law and societal norms for their own gratification based on some twisted version of religion, and they are willing to use violence and even mass suicide and murder to do it. These are a bunch of brain-washed MEN who want to have total authority and control over as many women as possible, and they do it in the name of religion. In this country, we’ve long since stop legitimizing these scum bags by calling them religious extremists. No, they’re cults - violent, manipulative CULTS. Now, in the American Revolution, our founders might have been accurately labeled as "terrorists" or freedom fights, but not Al Quaeda and their ilk. They are obviously cults. Take the Taliban, or Saudi Arabia in general - people are kept poor and ignorant. What little "education" they do receive is religious propaganda designed to make them more mailable. People who are recruited as "terrorists" are often weak-minded, socially isolated, lonely, unhappy people, and they are recruited often using religion and even from religious locations. They are told they should fight based mostly on twisted religous view and that they will be rewarded for dying as religious "martyrs," and the main premise of what is wrong and evil with the West often has to do with educating girls, freedom for women, and just freedom and free thinking in general. Now, to me, that sounds like a freaking cult! No doubt, our government has been screwing around in that part of the world for FAR too long and doing some pretty despicable things, and there is some blame there on our heads, but that doesn't make my comparison any less reasonable.

Finally, I can’t remember how many movies and tv shows I saw growing up wherein the central plot involved “terrorists” taking over a plane. The movie poster above is from 1996, and I even remember the movie Airplane! having some pretty hilarious terrorists in it. This is a fact of life, always has been. No matter how many of our rights and privacies we give up, people who are determined, WILL find a way to get on a plane with some sort of weapon. This isn’t new. What is new is the kind of damage and mass murder terrorists were able to exact on 9/11. Our focus should be on making sure they cannot take over planes and ram them into buildings, etc. Keeping them off the planes entirely, probably isn't even possible, and it isn’t worth the what it would cost us all in terms our our liberty and privacy.