By Beauty Damned

Old Koots (Sentimental)

Sandy wrote a post today that cracked me the hell up. That girl can tell a story like no one else. It got me thinking of old people. How comical they can be. How most of us, if we're lucky, will be really old one day and if we're even luckier than that, we'll be funny and entertaining to be around, even if we don't know it. Not just crotchety and decrepit, but crotchety and decrepit and worth remembering. I think getting really old gives you a license to be kooky. I mean if you're 85, by all means, wear the brightest, craziest outfit you can find. You might as well stand out rather than fade into the crowd.

I never ever did get to go to any of the stores I wanted to that day. They had other plans, like staying in Sears for 3 freakin’ hours. I was put on Pocket-Book Patrol by the Dressing Rooms and I had the pleasure of sitting…sitting….and yes more sitting while they tried on every single color elastic polyester pants came in. Once in a while they’d show me an outfit that they thought I’d look “cute” in. It was hard trying to come up with new ways of saying.."I wouldn’t be caught dead in that outfit".

My grandpa got really funny the older he got, but he didn't have a clue. I guess that's what made him funny. He had his own brand of personal style. My favorite memory of my grandfather is of a time when some friends and I were sitting outside at a coffee shop near my house. My friends had a running thing where they teased me about my grandpa, pointing to any old person passing by and saying "is that your grandpa?" (you know how stupid teenagers are). Of course I would say "no, shut up already" while flipping my vidal sassoon mullet out of my eyes.

But then here came Jimmy, down the street, wearing a dark suit and tie like he wore every day of his life for as long as I knew him, and he wore his hideous "russian" hat on his head that my brother and I always referred to as "the stinky brown hat." The material was like thick carpet. Anyway, he was carrying his "satchel" (that's what grandpa called it - another thing that would make Josh and I break out into hysterics), which was actually a brown leather briefcase. So I sat there with my friends and as he walked by they nudged me once again and said "is that your grandpa?" I felt defensive almost as I looked at how put together and purposeful he was. I said "yes that's my grandpa." At the same time that it is a hilarious moment when I look back at it, it was also meaningful, because I remember it now when I remember him and in that memory I have the most perfect snapshot of him exactly the way he was. A quirky old man carrying around some of his most valued worldly possessions in that satchel. (Namely, his newspaper and his pocketbook).

My grandpa also drove me nuts briefly when I was a teen (or maybe it was vice versa). He came to stay with us when we first moved to Oregon. My dad was studying for the Oregon bar exam, so he wasn't around much and my mom was off working at a law firm in San Francisco because we were poor. My grandpa was the only one there a lot of the time and my brother and I figured he was too old and deaf to know what we were up to. Bad children. He was sleeping on the couch when the police brought me home for being out past town curfew. My brother greeted me and shooed me up the stairs past grandpa so he wouldn't wake up and wonder what the hell was going on. Upstairs my brother was having a virtual fiesta with a bunch of friends over. Grandpa just stayed there fast asleep. But you know, when my parents returned, grandpa Jimmy gave detailed accounts of that night, and all of me and my brother's bad behavior while they were away. No matter how old and absent he seemed, he was sharp as a tack for a long time. Until the last few years when he was more than a little lost.

He also taught me how to play chess and tried in vain to teach me how to read the stock market. And he was always happy to give me a couple dollars, as long as I was willing to try and ask him in spanish as he'd often demand that I do. That old geez' lived to be 93. (And now that he's gone, I miss him).

We should all be so lucky. To live to 93 and be missed.

NO NO NO

This reaches far beyond normal stem cell research and into a realm that resembles too closely that "Island of Dr. Moreau" movie. I do not support this. Not only do I think it is cruel to animals and humans alike, but I also think it pushes ethical bondaries too far and threatens nature on a profound level. What are we to do with all of these cross breeds of humans and animals once curious scientists have learned what they need to learn from them? And at what point do we decide they are more human than animal and they are entitled to the same rights as humans? At what point does the ratio of human outweigh that of animal? The whole idea just makes my hair stand on end.

The Pandora's box that is inherent in this kind of research seems just waiting to be flung open to unleash a wave of valid concerns and unknown consequences. Cloning sheep was one thing, but creating a hybrid of that sheep and a human being strikes me as a true abomination and an assault on natural evolution.

Scientists debate creation of hybrids of animals, humans

By Rick Weiss
The Washington Post

WASHINGTON - In Minnesota, pigs are being born with human blood in their veins. In Nevada, there are sheep whose livers and hearts are largely human. In California, mice peer from their cages with human brain cells firing inside their skulls.

These are not outcasts from "The Island of Dr. Moreau," the 1896 novel by H.G. Wells in which a rogue doctor develops creatures that are part animal and part human. They are real creations of real scientists, stretching the boundaries of stem cell research.

Biologists call these hybrid animals chimeras, after the mythical Greek creature with a lion's head, a goat's body and a serpent's tail. They are the products of experiments in which human stem cells were added to developing animal fetuses.

Chimeras are allowing scientists to watch, for the first time, how nascent human cells and organs mature and interact - not in the cold isolation of laboratory dishes but inside the bodies of living creatures. Some are already revealing deep secrets of human biology and pointing the way toward new medical treatments.

But with no federal guidelines in place, an awkward question hovers above the work: How human must a chimera be before more stringent research rules should kick in?

The National Academy of Sciences, which advises the federal government, has been studying the issue and hopes to make recommendations by February. Yet the range of opinions it has received so far suggests reaching consensus may be difficult.

During one recent meeting, scientists disagreed on such basic issues as whether it would be unethical for a human embryo to begin its development in an animal's womb, and whether a mouse would be better or worse off with a brain made of human neurons.

"This is an area where we really need to come to a reasonable consensus," said James Battey, chairman of the National Institutes of Health's Stem Cell Task Force. "We need to establish some kind of guidelines as to what the scientific community ought to do and ought not to do."

How human?

Chimeras (ki-MER-ahs) - meaning mixtures of two or more individuals in a single body - are not inherently unnatural. Most twins carry at least a few cells from the sibling with whom they shared a womb, and most mothers carry in their blood at least a few cells from each child they have born.

Recipients of organ transplants are also chimeras, as are the many people whose defective heart valves have been replaced with those from pigs or cows. And scientists for years have added human genes to bacteria and even to farm animals - feats of genetic engineering that allow those critters to make human proteins such as insulin for use as medicines.

"Chimeras are not as strange and alien as at first blush they seem," said Henry Greely, a law professor and ethicist at Stanford University who has reviewed proposals to create human-mouse chimeras there.

But chimerism becomes a more sensitive topic when it involves growing entire human organs inside animals. And it becomes especially sensitive when it deals in brain cells, the building blocks of the organ credited with making humans human.

Greely and many other philosophers have been wrestling with the question of why so many people believe it is wrong to breach the species barrier.

Many turn to the Bible's repeated invocation that animals should multiply "after their kind" as evidence that such experiments are wrong. Others, however, have concluded the core problem is not necessarily the creation of chimeras, but rather the way they are likely to be treated.

Imagine, said Robert Streiffer, a professor of philosophy and bioethics at the University of Wisconsin, a human-chimpanzee chimera endowed with speech and an enhanced potential to learn - what some have called a "humanzee."

"There's a knee-jerk reaction that enhancing the moral status of an animal is bad," Streiffer said. "But if you did it, and you gave it the protections it deserves, how could the animal complain?"

Research tools

The potential power of chimeras as research tools became clear about a decade ago in a series of dramatic experiments by Evan Balaban, now at McGill University in Montreal. Balaban took small sections of brain from developing quails and transplanted them into the developing brains of chickens.

The resulting chickens exhibited vocal trills and head bobs unique to quails, proving that the transplanted parts of the brain contained the neural circuitry for quail calls. It also offered astonishing proof that complex behaviors could be transferred across species.

No one has proposed similar experiments between, say, humans and apes. But the discovery of human embryonic stem cells in 1998 allowed researchers to envision related experiments that might reveal a lot about how embryos grow.

The cells, found in 5-day-old human embryos, multiply prolifically and - unlike adult cells - have the potential to turn into any of the body's 200 or so cell types.

Scientists hope to cultivate them in lab dishes and grow replacement tissues for patients. But with those applications years away, the cells are gaining in popularity for basic research.

The most radical experiment, still not conducted, would be to inject human stem cells into an animal embryo and then transfer that chimeric embryo into an animal's womb. Scientists suspect the proliferating human cells would spread throughout the animal embryo as it matured into a fetus and integrate themselves into every organ.

Such "humanized" animals could have countless uses. They would almost certainly provide better ways to test a new drug's efficacy and toxicity, for example, than the ordinary mice typically used today.

But few scientists are eager to do that experiment. The risk, they say, is that some human cells will find their way to the developing testes or ovaries, where they might grow into human sperm and eggs. If two such chimeras - say, mice - were to mate, a human embryo might form, trapped in a mouse.

Not everyone agrees that this would be a terrible result.

"What would be so dreadful?" asked Ann McLaren, a renowned developmental biologist at the University of Cambridge in England. After all, she said, no human embryo could develop successfully in a mouse womb. It would simply die, she told the academy.

True blends

But what about experiments in which scientists add human stem cells not to an animal embryo but to an animal fetus, which has already made its eggs and sperm? Then the only question is how human a creature one dares to make.

In one ongoing set of experiments, Jeffrey Platt at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., has created human-pig chimeras by adding human-blood-forming stem cells to pig fetuses. The resulting pigs have both pig and human blood in their vessels. And it's not just pig blood cells being swept along with human blood cells; some of the cells themselves have merged, creating hybrids.

It is important to have learned human and pig cells can fuse, Platt said, because he and others have been considering transplanting modified pig organs into people and have been wondering if that might pose a risk of pig viruses getting into patient's cells. Now scientists know the risk is real, he said, because the viruses may gain access when the two cells fuse.

In other experiments led by Esmail Zanjani, chairman of animal biotechnology at the University of Nevada at Reno, scientists have been adding human stem cells to sheep fetuses. The team now has sheep whose livers are up to 80 percent human and make all the compounds human livers make.

Zanjani's goal is to make the humanized livers available to people who need transplants. The sheep portions will be rejected by the immune system, he predicted, while the human part will take root.

Minor Overreaction

Poor Table Manners Lead to Stabbings

Associated Press

WORCESTER, Mass. - A man was charged with stabbing two relatives after they allegedly criticized his table manners during Thanksgiving dinner.

Police said the fight broke out Thursday when Gonzalo Ocasio, 49, and his 18-year-old son, Gonzalo Jr., reprimanded Frank Palacious for picking at the turkey with his fingers, instead of slicing off pieces with a knife.

Palacious, 24, described by police only as an uncle, allegedly responded by stabbing them with a carving knife. He is charged with domestic assault and assault with intent to murder, Detective Sgt. Thomas R. Radula said.

Police said Ocasio Jr. suffered stab wounds to the chest, back and right side. A nursing supervisor at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center said Friday she had no information on his condition. His father was treated for a stab wound in his arm.

Special Occasion

I saw the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade for my first time ever on Thursday. My friend Lauren, a lawyer I used to work for a couple years ago and have stayed good friends with ever since, invited me and anyone I wanted to bring to her apartment on Central Park West to get the best possible view of the parade. More amazing to me than the parade though, was her apartment. It's actually her grandmother's apartment and she's had it for a million years. Her grandma is 98 years old. NINETY-EIGHT. My family tends to live into their 90s, but 98 is crazy.

This apartment was crazy. HUGE. In New York, you get used to seeing very small apartments and houses. This place was breathtaking and everything in it was a beautiful antique. Lauren introduced me to her grandma Riva. She was the sweetest lady and totally aware of what was going on, despite the fact that she moved around very little while I was there. Riva spoke clearly and obviously wasn't experiencing dementia of any kind. She knew who I was when Lauren introduced me, apparently I had been mentioned before, and I felt privileged to have the opportunity to meet her, as Lauren has spoken so much about her grandma during the years I've known her. I thanked her for letting us into her home.

There was a beautiful breakfast spread of bagels and pastries and a delicious baked ham. We sipped mimosas and watched the huge floats go by. I brought Kathleen and Charles with me and they had a great time. Kathleen and I marveled at the fact that we have been so lucky with events like this where we were able to get a spectacular view. When we were in New Orleans our friends had a balcony on Burbon street where we celebrated during Mardi Gras. When Kathleen first moved to New York she lived in an apartment on Fifth Avenue where we had a priceless view of the Gay Pride Parade. And now here we were looking out on Central Park from the windows of this fantastic apartment, enjoying a view of the most overhyped parade on earth. The baloons were astoundingly huge and the crowds were gridlocked. My favorite baloons were Clifford, Kermit and the Monopoly Man. Glad I got to see that at least once in my life...

Fatso

Happy Belated Thanksgiving Everyone!

So I have a cousin who lives in Brooklyn. Her name is Andy and I'd never met her before until a few months ago when my aunt and uncle came to visit from Arizona and she came to dinner with us. She called me and invited Rob and I to join her and her husband and another friend for Thanksgiving dinner at her house. She's actually a second cousin, I believe. Her mother is my late grandmother's sister (on my father's side). I always get confused about my family tree. My grandma's side is a mess of Spaniards and Mexicans and there are so many last names that it's hard to figure out how they all fit together, but Andy knows all about it so it was really cool to visit her and have her show me pictures of that side of the family and tell stories and make the connections for me that I've always found it difficult to piece together.

We had a lovely dinner of the usual comforting Thanksgiving kind. Turkey and stuffing and sweet potatoes and cranberry sauce...it's one of my favorite meals to have. I contributed brussel sprouts, which I'd never made before, and I was happy with the way they turned out. I had a yummy recipe that called for bacon and balsamic vinegar, garlic and shallots and all kinds of other savory bits. I threw some fresh parmesan and bread crumbs on top for good measure.

Rob and I had a wonderful time getting to know Andy and her husband Dave and their good friend Trish, not to mention all Andy and Dave's cats who were so sweet. Now I can't wait to invite them over and return the hospitality that they showed us. It felt pretty special for me to realize that I have people here in Brooklyn that I can call family. Andy even pulled out old pictures of my precious grandma Eloise when she was a young lady, which brought up a wave of emotion in me. My brother and I witnessed my grandma Eloise's drowning when we were small children. Obviously, it was never something I easily got over and the memories are still very vivid in my mind. Something about seeing those pictures of Eloise as a young girl just made my heart hurt in a way that took me off guard and I found myself gulping back the urge to weep right there in Andy's dining room. At the same time it felt indescribably good to be there on a special holiday with someone who knew my grandma and was related to her by blood just like me and who had these beautiful photographs to share.

After we were done with sweet potato pie and wine and lots of entertaining conversation, Rob and I were on our way. We went back to his house in the Bronx to spend the rest of the evening with his roommate and a good friend and stay the night.

This morning I got up and started off by eating two pieces of the fabulous cake Rob's roommate Ed had made. After that I heated up a plate of leftovers. Ed's mother had made the turkey, and I have to tell you honestly, no one knows how to cook meat like Puerto Ricans. They have secrets, especially when it comes to seasoning. Ed's mom's turkey was seasoned to perfection and she had somehow managed to get the flavors to permeate the inside of the bird so that even the meat inside was absolutely mouth watering. I have to get her recipe for next year. It was unlike anything I've had before.

After I finished a heaping plate of leftovers, Ed starting frying up empanadas. When he brought me a fresh steaming pie, I couldn't refuse it even though I'd already gone overboard. So I ate the empanada and had a glass of homemade Coquito before collapsing from severe overconsumption and slept for the next 2 hours. When I woke up, I was still so full that I cursed myself for my shameless gluttony.

Funny how I was just telling Rob last night that I lost 5 lbs. since I stopped drinking soda pop and I'm feeling so skinny! HA!!! By the time New Years comes, I'll have gained it back with five more on top. Oh well...it's worth it.

More Hypocrisy

What could be more ironic than U.S. officials telling another country that their voting system is unreliable and corrupted?

I really like this quote from the NY Times article:

Secretary [Powell] also called on Ukraine's government not to use violence against the demonstrators who opposed the result, tens of thousands of whom filled the main square in Kiev today for a third day.

Because here in America, we treat protestors with respect and dignity and do not inflict violence upon them unless they're breaking the law (which they always are, right? Because by protesting, they are defying the government in the first place and should be punished!)

I love it! While the outrage of American citizens who feel our own election system is a sham, go completely ignored, our officials do what they are so good at doing, chastising and demanding reform of other countries. I find it amazing that our government (and Media! You fucks! Stop sleeping) seems to happily ignore whatever is going wrong in our own country, in our own communities, in our own federal and state systems while they are too busy attending to the affairs of others and policing the rest of the world.

Americans have become stepchildren. While our own country is one of the biggest messes of all (ridiculously high murder rates, starving children in our own streets, neglected veterans, millions without healthcare, corrupted voting system and a bazillion other issues that we need to stop ignoring) our government is busy spending billions in Colombia to wage their "war on drugs," when we have bred our own masses of drug dealers and users in the United States. Our government is spending hundreds of billions on a war in Iraq and Afghanistan to "bring liberty and freedom from fascist rule," while in our country we are fighting to maintain our own rights and freedom from fascist rule. Our government is demanding that others hold fair elections, when we can't even hold a remotely fair election in our own country. We condemn others for their savagery and violence, yet we are the greatest purveyors of war, terror and outright savagery, not to mention that even in our own country, we just can't stop fucking killing eachother.

Could we possibly be anymore blind to our own shortcomings while condemning others for theirs?

I saw a pregnant girl on the train begging for money who was obviously high on crack. I saw a veteran on the street holding a sign, silently begging, with the saddest far away look in his eyes as he attempted to put food into his own mouth, but couldn't do so without getting it all over himself. I see people in the subways dozing off from the junk they did earlier, homeless sleeping and defacating in the streets, children whose parents struggle to clothe, feed and educate them, seen drugs take control of the small town of my youth, watched people my age struggle to find a decent job, even after finishing four years or more of college, watched parents agonize about how they are going to provide healthcare for themselves and their children, seen my brother poisoned and victimized by the negligence of a large pesticides corporation, met a man who had been beaten within an inch of his life and left a vegetable by overzealous police, had a friend who blew his own head off with a handgun, have seen photos of American soldiers torturing prisoners and have witnessed and experienced the outrage and disillusionment at our faulty voting system.

Yet our leaders condemn foreign governments for not respecting the will of the people. Our leaders criticize others for not having adequate systems in place. Our leaders condemn others for committing acts of terror and violence. Our leaders frown on others who live in disease and poverty, saying "look! Our healthcare is the envy of the world! And look how great capitalism is!," while children suffer disease and starvation in America. Our leaders boast about how well we treat our veterans while that man sits on the street corner suffering homelessness, hunger and unshakable sorrow. Our leaders talk about ridding the rest of the world of drugs and crime. Our leaders talk of ridding the world of oppression while women and minorities are still heavily discriminated against in America. Our leaders condemn religious fanaticism while they force their own Christian religion through the legislative branches of our government and embrace fanaticism themselves. Our leaders condemn others for proliferating or persuing nuclear capabilities, while we build the biggest and most destructive weapons in the world.

When will we start following the golden rule, start taking care of our own, stop victimizing the rest of the world and cease pretending as if we're somehow better and have some right to reign down judgment and orders upon them?

Sleep Now

I went to a orthopedist today about all my back and neck problems. He was one of these chronically snippy NY doctors. He didn't want to hear anything except the answers to the precise questions he asked. Took some getting used to, but I found myself thinking what a thorough doctor he was about ten minutes in. He says I don't have an operable condition but I obviously have serious muscle and disc problems. That's good news. I guess. He said to keep doing physical therapy and prescribed muscle relaxers (Flexeril). I just took one and I'm so damn relaxed, I can barely keep my eyes open. I've never been much for pill popping. But these things are pretty cool...

My bed is calling me. Yes. It's true. I have to sleep sometime so try not to squabble.

Coke and Oil - America's Vices

When I saw mention of Bush's renewed pledge to "assist" Colombia in their "war on cocaine," I found it unsettling, considering the United States's historical involvement and profiteering in the drug trade.

Bush calls drug war `vital'

By Ron Hutcheson

CARTAGENA, Colombia - President Bush traveled to the heart of the international cocaine trade Monday to pledge America's help in the fight against smugglers and guerrillas that live off the industry.

Stopping in Colombia on his way back from a 21-nation Pacific Rim summit in Chile, Bush said drug trafficking threatened the stability of the entire Western Hemisphere. He promised more U.S. aid to help Colombia fight an alliance of drug traffickers and guerrillas.

''The drug traffickers who practice violence and intimidation in this country send their addictive and deadly products to the United States. Defeating them is vital to the safety of our peoples and to the stability of this hemisphere,'' Bush said during a joint appearance with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe.

The United States has invested more than $3 billion in Colombia's antidrug campaign since 2002, but the funding package, known as Plan Colombia, expires next year. Bush didn't say how much more he would seek from Congress next year. [Continue reading here]

I found the below article to be a pretty adequate reflection of my thoughts. Aside from the history which reveals so much about our interest and motivation in toting a "global war on drugs," I find it hard to believe that George Bush would have such great concern for this matter that he would choose to spend many billions of American tax dollars on it for no other reason than to be a "do gooder." Our government has so long been involved in the drug trade and it has been so lucrative, that it's odd that they would want to eradicate it. Perhaps they'd just like to "redirect" it as has been done in the past.

George W. Bush and President Alvaro Uribe’s close ties to the Medellin Cartel

By Clifton Ross

While Mr. George W. Bush promised more money to the Colombian government to fight presumably "bad narcoterrorists" his administration was sending "good narcoterrorists" to help develop its plans for Haiti.

As USAID states at their website: OTI [Office of Transition Initiatives, of USAID] continues to work closely with the US Embassy and IOM to develop options for a reintegration program for former combatants. Training and management specialists of the Kosovo Protection Corps, a civilian response unit consisting primarily of former Kosovo Liberation Army members, have been brought to Haiti to assess how the Kosovo model might be applied there.

The "Kosovo model" is code that would require an understanding of the KLA to interpret.

After kidnapping President Aristide and bringing into power a narco-government "of transition" by means of drug dealers and murderers it should be no surprise that the Bush administration would want to coordinate this newly imposed narco-government with its drug-dealing buddies in the KLA. See Anthony Fenton’s article.

Up to 80% of the heroin that enters Europe passes through the KLA, the elephant in the living room of narco-terrorism. The heroin the KLA helps smuggle into Europe has its origins in US-controlled Afghanistan ... the nation recently "liberated" from the Taliban, that Islamic grouping that had nearly eliminated opium production.

Now, under the aegis of the US and puppet Hamid Karzai Unocal, opium production is back up to record levels. The Afghan warlords, our "good narcoterrorists" are quite happy, as are, presumably, our "good narcoterrorists" in Kosovo, who skim the cream off the top of the drug money.

It is increasingly clear that what holds up the Bush administration in Washington is not only oil, but drugs ­ and that’s nothing new (see Whiteout:The CIA, Drugs and the Press by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair for an extensive and well-documented history).

During the Contra War, Papa Doc Bush used Colombian cocaine money to pay for arms for the terrorist Contra war in Nicaragua where 30,000 died, and the Vietnam War was financed by heroin from the Golden Triangle. The drugs are brought into the US on CIA planes and distributed in our poor urban communities as a way of keeping the largely African American community and other disenfranchised communities, sedated, neutralized and/or imprisoned.

Now Baby Doc Bush appears to be stemming the flow of cocaine in South America while opening the taps of heroin in the Mideast. That would be a logical conclusion, since the US tends to fund its terrorist wars with drug money and at present the war in Iraq appears to require all the heroin the US can get its hands on for alternative, regional funding sources.

But not everything is as it appears to be. What is being viewed as "stopping the flow" of cocaine is a mere redirection through other channels.

In planning for future assaults on Latin America, we can expect Haiti to once again be a critical transshipment but the US must also get control of "product" and establish relations with the "wholesalers." That is to say, in order for the US to set up "good narcoterrorists" they must first dispense with the "bad narcoterrorists" so the leftist FARC, which taxes cocaine in areas under its control, must first be crushed in order for the "good narcoterrorists" to come into power.

And who might they be?

President Alvaro Uribe, of course.

Uribe’s close ties to the Medellin Cartel will enable the top narcoterrorists of the world (the US government) to finance their wars in Latin America (as they did through the second half of the twentieth century) while also carrying out drug and terror operations in the Middle East.

"Deep throat," the anonymous agent who blew the whistle on Nixon and Watergate, said "follow the money." Perhaps today he might say, "Follow the drug and oil pipelines." Bush’s pledge of aid to oil-rich and drug-plagued Colombia, a nation which is already the largest recipient of US aid in the hemisphere, is another step toward future US intervention in Latin America as it seeks to control the world through oil, drugs and guns.

My Yard is Full of Other Peoples' Trash, And There are A Couple of Assholes Living Across the Street

I had really fucked up dreams last night. Apparently, an ugly exchange I had with someone that I thought was my friend before going to bed, sent me into a subconscious tailspin and I wound up with all kinds of anxiety dreams. They were vivid and scary, as it seems my dreams often are. I rarely have a happy dream. They are most often filled with worry, fear and are sometimes just downright nightmarish. The only thing I'm thankful for is that I usually forget them quickly. Last night was no exception. Except that one part of my last dream stayed stuck in my memory.

In the dream, I was living in a weird neighborhood in some ugly old house. It looked like Medford, Oregon. I had a huge backyard where I threw a big party and a whole bunch of boys came over and trashed the place. Then there was all this garbage in my yard and I didn't feel like cleaning it up because it was a disaster area. I mean crazy shit out there in the yard. Broken bikes and empty kegs and cups and any miscellaneous thing you can think of.

As I stood, surveying the mess that my yard had become, I heard a car pull up across the street. It was Gordon. Yep. Dog Snot lived right across the street from me in my dream. (Is that symbolic or what?) When I saw him I just started laughing hysterically in my dream. It was the most ironic thing I could imagine. I couldn't stop pointing and laughing. He was offended that I was laughing at him and he shouted obscenities at me from across the way. Their house was even worse than mine. An outright dump.

Yeah. So that was my dream. And you know what? It's rare that you have a dream that all makes such perfect sense.

Snap Out of It

I CANNOT BELIEVE that people are still forwarding me the same stupid hoax emails that have been circulating the net since its invention. Someone just sent me that "forward this email to 20 people and Bill Gates will send you money" email. Does anyone actually still believe that? Criminey people. Try snopes.com. It's a wonder how little time it takes to prevent yourself from looking gullible and exasperating your friends via email.

I think this was my favorite response to a hoax email that I've seen. It was posted on Craigslist a long time ago but it still makes me laugh my ass off when I go back and read it.

We all know about these scams by now: You get an email claiming so and so of Lagos or Kenya has died in a horrible accident and if you help the group repatriate the money he had (usually millions) they'll give you a cut of it. Well, I often have free time on my hands and a fake email account so I love to take these guys to task. Below is a complete email transcript between me (this time posing as Dr. John Bigbootie of Yoyodyne industries) and a Nigerian Email Scammer (This time posing as Rev. Edward Franck, the beloved protectorate of rich orphans). Enjoy!

His contact email to me:

FROM FATHER Edward Franck.
ST PETERS CATHOLIC CHURCH
TRECHVILLE AV12 RUE 19
ABIDJAN-COTE D’IVOIRE

I know this letter will come to you as a surprise, when God remembers his people, this is how miracle will come to them.Let me introduce myself to you. I am REV.Edward Franck in St. Peters Cahtolic(sic) church in Abiodjan Cote d’ivoire I heard the death of Dr. And Mrs. Johnson williams from the republic of South Africa. Before his death, Dr. Johnson was an Ambassedor of South Africa in Cote d’ ivoire. They are my church members, they went home for the christmas holidays on the 5th December 2002 and on the 12th December, they had a ghastly motor accident in which the wife died instantly and Dr. Johnson Williams died five days later in the hospital.

After their burial, His three (3) children came to me in Abidjan here, His eldest daughter Grace Williams, disclosed to me what her late father told her before his death, that her father deposited two metallic Trunck Boxes containing $12.5million in a private security and safe deposit company here in Abidjan Cote d’ivoire. According to her, she said that her late father registered these
Boxes as family valuable properties not as money for security reasons...blah, blah, blah...

...I told her that no one can assist them without any comission, then we dioscussed to give you 15% of the total amount of the money for you to assist them in this following ways:

(I love this line, apparently I'm already his sweetheart!)

My dear, these is the ways I want you to help them. To help them get resident permit to stay in your country. To make sure that they continue their education in your country....

Best Regards,
Father Edward Franck
Co ordinator.

How tragic, who could say no to that? Certainly not Dr. John Bigbootie, head of Yoyodyne industries, Devout cahtolic (sic), sworn enemy of poverty, injustice and Dr. Buckaroo Banzai. However, John needs a bigger piece of the pie:

Father Franck,
I am a hard man but a fair one. I did not get to be head of Yoyodyne industries by being a softy. But as a fellow Cahtolic I must do my part to help. I, however will want 40 % of the 12.5 million. That comes to just shy of 5 million. Risky ventures require big payoffs, I'm sure you understand. Contact me with the details.

Sincerely,
John Bigbootee
CEO, Yoyodyne Industries

Certainly now Dr. John was hooked. However, Father Franck couldn't help but renegociate the fake terms with me. Those money grubbing Cahtolic Priests!

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 03:52:13 -0800 edward franck <********@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Dear Friend,
I have received your mail and I have discussed with the family members.They will be willing to release 25% to you for your participation. Please write back immediately with details of your telephone lines so that I can call you.

With Love,
Father Franck

Well, Dr. John didn't get to be head Alien from Planet Lectroid by being a
sucker!, He knows haggling when he sees it, It was also time to let Father
know he was dealing with a big man, the inventor of the Oscillation
Overthruster (with Dr. Emilio Lazardo), only slightly less powerful than
the 'Flux Capacitor':

Father,
as you well know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I'll need 35% to do the deed. Please discuss with the family and then get back to me. I need a return that justifies the risk. You may have reviewed our company online, and if so, you are familiar with our most famous product, the oscillation overthruster. We are currently working on version 2.0, which has been very costly. If I am to use our capital funds to help this family out(it's not illegal because we are a privately held company), I must ensure the safety of our company. So tell me is Franck a German name, or is is Dutch originally?

Sincerely,
John Bigbootee
CEO, Yoyodyne Industries

Father Franck had no choice but to up the offer for such a bigwig Also, it might have to do with the fact that clearly Father Franck was falling in love a little, I think:

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 11:20:57 -0800 edward franck wrote:

Dear Sir,
I have delayed in replying this mail to you because I have to discuss in detail with the family.We understand that you will use most of your time in trying to help ,but I also want you to understand that the family really need this money for their future.

Please in the name of christ,accept 30%.Then Like I demanded in my previous mail.Furnish me immediately with your private telephone line so that we can constantly be in discussion.Most importantly send down your physical address so that we will know you very well.

When I have received these details that I have demanded,I will give to you the contact of the security company and their website.We will also plan our Procedure of action.

With Blessings in the name of Christ.

With Love, (See! See! He loves me!)

Rev. Franck

Father Franck has a short temper and is very demanding. These qualities turn on Dr. John Bigbootie, but also remind him of his arch-nemeses: Dr. Buckaroo Banzai and the Hong Hong Cavaliers. Time to find out just who we're dealing with, in trade, Dr. John will accept his offer:

Dearest Father Franck:
I would be willing to supply the 30 percent if you can provide me with the following answers to assuage my fears. I would have to give you access to our computers here at Yoyodyne, which apart from handling who can and cannot access our money, also contains plans for such things as the new and improved Ocsillation Overthruster, so bear with my questions, even if they seem odd to you:

1. Please tell me the precise date of the tragic accident.
2. Are you now, or have you ever been affiliated with an organization called the Hong-Kong Cavaliers?
3. what are the levels of education for the 4 children? (This will help them attain residency.
4. Have they been baptized in Christ?
5. Do you know of, or have ever met a Dr. B. Banzai of the Banzai institute?
6. Are you a member of or affiliated with World Watch Online, Banzai
Action Team, NASA or the World Space Exploration League (WoSEL)?

Thank you,
Dr. John Bigbootie

Well, father franck was more than happy to answer the questions:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:27:11 -0800 edward franck wrote:

Dear friend in the Lord,
I will answer your questions in the order you asked them:

1) The Precise date of the accident is 12th December 2002
2)I have no affilliation with an Order in Hong Kong
3)The eldest daughter was in the University,while the other two were still in secondary school.
4)They have allbeen baptised in Christ.
5)I have no connection with Dr Banzai.I do not know him.
6)I am not affilliated with any On-line team.

I hope the above answers did justice to your questions.Meanwhile, it is very important that we understand that these children are suffering and need immediate assistance. It is important that you send your physical address and your telephone contacts so that I can call you.

Meanwhile call me on this number immedaitely you receive this mail for a better discussion. My number is:*************.

Remain Blessed,
Father Franck

However, Dr. John was no idiot. Only Buckaroo Banzai would hyphenate the
word 'Online'. Time to call his bluff!:

I'm afraid I don't believe you. Luckily I have agents in the Cote d'Iviore, most notably John Whorfin and John Smallberries. They tell me Dr. Buckaroo Banzai has been seen there recently with the Hong Kong Cavaliers. They claim they were there just to do a benefit show, but I know better, they're snooping on our plant, trying to trace the diamonds we use in the Oscillation Overthruster! Will you stop at nothing Dr. Banzai? I fear this means our transaction has come to an end.

I will stop you and your mad band of swashbucklers someday!

Dr. John Bigbootie

But The reverend was not to be pushed away from such a prize hen as Dr.
Bigbootie. He had one more go, this time, feigning innocence:

Dear Sir Big Bootie,
I am sorry I dont know what you are talking about.We are very honest People here.

Regards
Father Franck

I'm sir Bigbootie! I love it! The FINAL RESPONSE:

So you say. I've been consulted by my colleague John Longjohn and he has told me there is no such place as Cote D'ivoire! Also, apparently, the correct way to spell 'Franck' is 'Frank'! Next you'll claim that English is not your first language, when we know for a fact that everybody in the whole world speaks English! And are you a Reverend or a Father? Your story isn't even Straight! We cahtolics know better. Can you even recite the Five Psalms of Ack-al'baathat Glorg, Overlord of Omicron Perseii 8? If you can't you can hardly claim to be a cahtolic!

Banzai, I know it is you! Give up this farce and face me in one on one combat!

There was no response. To this day, Dr. Buckaroo Banzai remains at large.

Ignoring it doesn't make it go away

Cul posts this article today and gets my blood moving...

Shhh, Don't Say 'Poverty'

By Bob Herbert

Former Senator Phil Gramm, a Republican from Texas who was known for his orneriness, once said, "We're the only nation in the world where all our poor people are fat."

That particular example of compassionate conservatism came to mind as I looked over a report from the Department of Agriculture showing that more than 12 million American families continue to struggle, and not always successfully, to feed themselves.

The 12 million families represent 11.2 percent of all U.S. households. "At some time during the year," the report said, "these households were uncertain of having, or unable to acquire, enough food for all their members because they had insufficient money or other resources."

Of the 12 million families that worried about putting food on the table, 3.9 million had members who actually went hungry at some point last year. "The other two-thirds ... obtained enough food to avoid hunger using a variety of coping strategies," the report said, "such as eating less varied diets, participating in federal food assistance programs, or getting emergency food from community food pantries or emergency kitchens."

These are dismal statistics for a country as well-to-do as the United States. But we don't hear much about them because hunger is associated with poverty, and poverty is not even close to becoming part of our national conversation. Swift boats, yes. Sex scenes on "Monday Night Football," most definitely. The struggle of millions of Americans to feed themselves? Oh no. Let's not go there.

What does that tell you about American values?

Check out his post to read the rest.

Something must change in the fundamental structure of our country in order to conquer hunger and poverty. That thing is to subtract the concept of Greed and eradicate the sentiment of "get for self and no one else." To eliminate the senseless consumerist grip that has been embraced by society. The relentless thirst for competition and dominance. Desire. Self entitlement. Unfortunately, I don't see any of that happening in our lifetime.

Hell is greed. Without a doubt. Almost a worse fate than poverty...

Ethics Not In the Job Description

A good article about Bush's choice for attorney general.

The President's Yes Man

By Alan Berlow

In nominating Alberto Gonzales to be the next attorney general, President Bush has selected a man with a long record of giving him the kind of legal advice he wants. Unfortunately, that advice has not always been of the highest professional or ethical caliber.

Gonzales is perhaps best known for a controversial January 2002 memorandum to the president in which he argued that Geneva Convention proscriptions on torture did not apply to Taliban and al Qaeda prisoners, and that the conventions are, in fact, "obsolete."

This interpretation of international law, which many have linked to the abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison, will no doubt be a focus of confirmation hearings. Senators might also want to quiz Gonzales about a less well-known June 1997 memo involving another treaty, the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Written when Gonzales was counsel to then-Gov. George W. Bush, the memo puts forward the novel view that because the state of Texas was not a signatory to the Vienna Convention, it need not abide by the treaty. Or, put another way, Texas is not bound by Article VI of the Constitution, which states that U.S. treaties are "the supreme Law of the Land."

That memo was written to dismiss State Department concerns about the impending execution of a Mexican national whose rights under the convention had clearly been violated by Texas police. And it is on the subject of executions that Gonzales's most questionable legal writings may be found.

Bush approved 152 executions during his six years as governor. For each of the first 57, he made his judgment based on a three- to seven-page "execution summary" prepared by Gonzales and on an oral briefing that typically lasted no more than 30 minutes that the chief counsel usually presented on the day of the execution. In nearly all these cases, Gonzales was the only person standing between the executioner and a governor who made it abundantly clear he had little or no interest in granting clemency.

Where some might view this as a terrifying and formidable responsibility, Gonzales's "confidential" memos suggest that he saw his role as more of an expediter of his boss's preordained conclusion. Far from presenting an evenhanded or nuanced discussion of the case for and against clemency, Gonzales's execution summaries display a consistent prosecutorial bias. Not once does he attach a clemency petition in which the condemned put forward his or her best case for a reprieve. And Gonzales's summaries repeatedly play down or fail to report the most important issues at hand: claims of ineffective counsel, conflicts of interest, mitigating evidence, evidence never presented to a jury, even evidence of innocence. Not surprisingly, a disinterested observer relying solely on Gonzales's memos would probably do exactly what Bush did: deny clemency in every single case.

Consider the case of Terry Washington. Gonzales's three-page summary misleadingly suggests that there was doubt about the central issue in Washington's plea for life: the fact that he was brain-damaged and mentally retarded. But the state of Texas did not dispute the fact that Washington was retarded. Gonzales doesn't inform Bush that Washington's incompetent attorney never called a mental health expert to testify, never advised the jury that his client was retarded, or that he had an IQ between 58 and 69 and had been beaten with whips, water hoses, extension cords, fan belts and wire hangers as a child. Nine hours after Gonzales's briefing, Washington was executed. The Supreme Court has since found executions of the mentally retarded to be cruel and unusual punishment.

In the case of David Wayne Stoker, there were enough red flags for a May Day parade, yet Gonzales spotted none of them. For starters, a federal appellate judge had concluded that the state's star witness was just as likely the murderer as Stoker. Gonzales's 18-sentence summary also failed to note that a key witness recanted after Stoker's conviction (explaining that he'd been pressured by the prosecution to present perjured testimony) and that the state's star witness received a financial reward for fingering Stoker, had felony drug and weapons charges dropped and therefore had an obvious motive for accusing Stoker. Gonzales also didn't tell Bush that this witness and two police witnesses lied under oath at trial, that the state's expert medical witness pleaded guilty to seven felonies involving falsified evidence and that the state's psychiatric witness, whose testimony was essential to securing a death sentence, never even interviewed Stoker. The psychiatrist had since been expelled from the American Psychiatric Association for repeatedly providing unethical testimony in murder cases.

Senators might want to know how none of this public information made it into Gonzales's report. And they might ask how Gonzales's office could be prescient enough, a full week before Gonzales wrote his summary and briefed the governor, to inform Stoker's attorney that there would be no grant of clemency.

One could, of course, argue that the client calls the shots, and that Gonzales delivered exactly what Bush wanted. But the 57 cases Gonzales summarized were all matters of life or death. They included people such as Stoker, who may have been innocent, and others such as Washington who had something less than a fair trial. Given the stakes, one must ask whether a fair-minded or ethical lawyer would simply do as he'd been told.

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

Roll Me Out

Brunch was awesome. It was a cute little french joint. Very rustic, burning fireplace, wonderful smells. Their brunch special was a great deal. $12 for any entree, unlimited mimosas and coffee. I had the duck confit with poached eggs and hollandaise. It came with roasted potatoes and greens. Delicious. Everyone else's food looked really good. Especially Kimberly's wild mushroom and goat cheese omelet. Yum. If I hadn't been so stuffed from my rich meal, I would have started in on the rest of hers...

Kathleen seemed really to be enjoying her birthday. She received great gifts and cards and plenty of adoring attention. They decided to go to the Bronx Zoo, but since it's a gray New York day, Robert and I felt we would prefer to sit around the house lazily, enjoying the one day that we actually have to spend together, which is very unusual lately since the weekends are his busiest time at work.

So that's the plan. Be lazy and let the food and mimosas settle. Maybe take a nap. It's one of those kinds of days. Perfect for doing nothing.

Birthday Underway

Today is Kathleen's birthday. HAPPY BIRTHDAY KATHLEEN! Actually, I already told her happy birthday when the clock struck twelve last night and she almost never reads my blog, so I'm just letting you all know.

I made reservations for us to have brunch this morning at some restaurant in her neighborhood called Patois and it's for eleven so I don't have time to say much. In fact, I think that was it.

Subliminal

I hadn't seen this until I spotted it here at a fellow PBA site. I too, could not resist. The game is to type just the first letter into your browser and list what the auto-complete function jumps to first. What can I say? Monkey see, monkey do.

So here's mine. The Cannibals Anonymous was the only thing that really surprised me. That is such a fucked up page. Anyway...

A: A Canadian Lefty in the Land of King George
B: bad-candy.com
C: Cannibals Anonymous (mayhem.net)
D: Dictionary.com
E: E Pluribus Unum - Ara Rubyan Dem Blog
F: fark.com
G: google.com
H: haloscan.com
I: ihateclowns.com
J: Jorge B. Perez Arte
K: Klimt, Virgin Guadalupe beaded curtains
L: Launch-My Station
M: madmikey.mu.nu
N: netpolitik.blogspot.com
O: Online Media Law, PLLC
P: PBA Discussion Board
Q: QuickTime Player
R: Radio Station Guide
S: salon.com
T: The Greed Factor - Cheney Halliburton
U: Ulead Photo Explorer 6.0
V: Vintage Goddesswear eBay Store
W: washingtonpost.com
X: None
Y: Yiannis Restaurant Bay Ridge
Z: zefrank.com

I have no idea why that was fun, but it was. So there.

These People Are Supposed to Protect Us?

Hat tip to Mick Arran for this post on the CIA's latest machinations

As I posted in his thread, and I'll say again here: the CIA always has and always will pose one of the greatest imaginable threats to our national security. A greater threat than terrorism, because the CIA practically created it. Throughout its existence, the CIA has been a malevolent organization fraught with corruption, continually mobilized into committing secret acts of terror upon other nations and catering to the ugliest dark side that this country has to offer.

I have never for a moment, thought of them as an organization which is beneficial to our society, integrity as a nation or that is concerned with governmental ethics and responsibility.

It should be abolished.

These latest developments in the ongoing saga of our notoriously poisonous Central Intelligence Agency are just another nail in the coffin as far as I'm concerned. But that doesn't mean it doesn't represent a downgrade in the dependability of that agency to provide us with any amount of intelligence that will truly protect people.

New C.I.A. Chief Tells Workers to Back Administration Policies

By DOUGLAS JEHL

WASHINGTON, Nov. 16 - Porter J. Goss, the new intelligence chief, has told Central Intelligence Agency employees that their job is to "support the administration and its policies in our work,'' a copy of an internal memorandum shows.

"As agency employees we do not identify with, support or champion opposition to the administration or its policies," Mr. Goss said in the memorandum, which was circulated late on Monday. He said in the document that he was seeking "to clarify beyond doubt the rules of the road."

While his words could be construed as urging analysts to conform with administration policies, Mr. Goss also wrote, "We provide the intelligence as we see it - and let the facts alone speak to the policymaker.''

The memorandum suggested an effort by Mr. Goss to spell out his thinking as he embarked on what he made clear would be a major overhaul at the agency, with further changes to come. The changes to date, including the ouster of the agency's clandestine service chief, have left current and former intelligence officials angry and unnerved. Some have been outspoken, including those who said Tuesday that they regarded Mr. Goss's warning as part of an effort to suppress dissent within the organization.

In recent weeks, White House officials have complained that some C.I.A. officials have sought to undermine President Bush and his policies.

At a minimum, Mr. Goss's memorandum appeared to be a swipe against an agency decision under George J. Tenet, his predecessor as director of central intelligence, to permit a senior analyst at the agency, Michael Scheuer, to write a book and grant interviews that were critical of the Bush administration's policies on terrorism.

One former intelligence official said he saw nothing inappropriate in Mr. Goss's warning, noting that the C.I.A. had long tried to distance itself and its employees from policy matters.

"Mike exploited a seam in the rules and inappropriately used it to express his own policy views,'' the official said of Mr. Scheuer. "That did serious damage to the agency, because many people, including some in the White House, thought that he was being urged by the agency to take on the president. I know that was not the case.''

But a second former intelligence official said he was concerned that the memorandum and the changes represented an effort by Mr. Goss to stifle independence.

"If Goss is asking people to color their views and be a team player, that's not what people at C.I.A. signed up for,'' said the former intelligence official. The official and others interviewed in recent days spoke on condition that they not be named, saying they did not want to inflame tensions at the agency.

Some of the contents of Mr. Goss's memorandum were first reported by The Washington Post. A complete copy of the document was obtained on Tuesday by The New York Times.

Tensions between the agency's new leadership team, which took over in late September, and senior career officials are more intense than at any time since the late 1970's. The most significant changes so far have been the resignations on Monday of Stephen R. Kappes, the deputy director of operations, and his deputy, Michael Sulick, but Mr. Goss told agency employees in the memorandum that he planned further changes "in the days and weeks ahead of us'' that would involve "procedures, organization, senior personnel and areas of focus for our action.''

"I am committed to sharing these changes with you as they occur,'' Mr. Goss said in the memorandum. "I do understand it is easy to be distracted by both the nature and the pace of change. I am confident, however, that you will remain deeply committed to our mission.''

Mr. Goss's memorandum included a reminder that C.I.A. employees should "scrupulously honor our secrecy oath'' by allowing the agency's public affairs office and its Congressional relations branch to take the lead in all contacts with the media and with Congress. "We remain a secret organization,'' he said.

Among the moves that Mr. Goss said he was weighing was the selection of a candidate to become the agency's No. 2 official, the deputy director of central intelligence. The name being mentioned most often within the C.I.A. as a candidate, intelligence officials said, is Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden of the Air Force, the director of the National Security Agency, which is responsible for intercepting electronic communications worldwide. The naming of a deputy director would be made by the White House, in a nomination subject to Senate confirmation.

In interviews this week, members of Congress as well as current and former intelligence officials said one reason the overhaul under way had left them unnerved was that Mr. Goss had not made clear what kind of agency he intended to put in place. But Mr. Goss's memorandum did little to spell out that vision, and it did not make clear why the focus of overhaul efforts to date appeared to be on the operations directorate, which carries out spying and other covert missions around the world.

"It's just very hard to divine what's going on over there,'' said Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, who said he and other members of the Senate intelligence committee would be seeking answers at closed sessions this week. "But on issue after issue, there's a real question about whether the country and the Congress are going to get an unvarnished picture of our intelligence situation at a critical time.''

Mr. Goss said in the memorandum that he recognized that intelligence officers were operating in an atmosphere of extraordinary pressures, after a series of reports critical of intelligence agencies' performance in the months leading up to the Sept. 11 attacks and the war in Iraq.

"The I.C. and its people have been relentlessly scrutinized and criticized,'' he said, using an abbreviation for intelligence community. "Intelligence-related issues have become the fodder of partisan food fights and turf-power skirmishes. All the while, the demand for our services and products against a ruthless and unconventional enemy has expanded geometrically and we are expected to deliver - instantly. We have reason to be proud of our achievements and we need to be smarter about how we do our work in this operational climate.''

Badass

I have to do my part to give my wonderful friend Darcie the credit that she deserves for actually doing something to make a real positive difference in the world. She saw something seriously wrong happening in her place of employment. She saw a huge organization making a profit off of the fraud and exploitation of already disadvantaged individuals. She blew the whistle on them. And what followed was a flood of action and concern on the part of the Department of Education and an investigation into federal violations by BCTI. She was the voice that spoke out on behalf of the wellbeing of others. And her voice was heard. It brought tears to my eyes to read the words of one person who commented on her blog that was personally affected by the misdoings of that organization. She is a hero to those who she stood up for. I am so proud and impressed by the results of her persistence and courage. It's not often that one person is successful in making that kind of impact. All hail Darcie!

Doin the Cretin Hop

There were two noteworthy opinions in the Washington Post today. The first pointing out one of the [seemingly unlimited] instances of the Bush administration saying they're going to do one thing and doing another altogether. Almost exclusively at the expense of the disadvantaged.

Children Left Behind

November 19, 2004

DEFICIT SPENDING didn't bother the Bush administration when the issue was tax cuts. Congress had no trouble finding "savings" to supposedly offset new costs when the costs were in a corporate tax bill stuffed with special-interest provisions. But when it comes to health care for poor children, different, stricter rules seem to apply. This week's lame-duck Congress is poised to leave town without taking any action to restore $1 billion in federal funding for children's health care that wasn't used before its Sept. 30 expiration and therefore reverted to the Treasury. Republican lawmakers say they don't oppose renewing the funding but insist that it has to be paid for with cuts elsewhere. The result is that some 200,000 low-income children will be at risk of losing health coverage in the next three years.

The issue involves the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which was launched in 1997 to help states provide coverage to low-income children whose families earn too much to be eligible for Medicaid. With $40 billion in federal matching funds over 10 years, this was the largest expansion of health coverage for children since the adoption of Medicaid in the 1960s; last year alone the program enrolled 5.8 million children. Even as the share of Americans without health insurance is growing, the percentage of children lacking coverage has stayed stable, in large part thanks to Medicaid and SCHIP.

But under SCHIP's complicated use-it-or-lose-it formula, unspent money is going back to the Treasury just as some states are starting to run out of money -- money they need not to expand coverage but to keep serving the children who already have it. Between now and 2007, 18 states (including Maryland) are projected to have insufficient federal funding, which would require them to drop some children or find money elsewhere.

"America's children must have a healthy start in life," President Bush declared in accepting the Republican nomination in September. "In a new term, we will lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of poor children who are eligible but not signed up for the government's health insurance programs. We will not allow a lack of attention, or information, to stand between these children and the health care they need." Stirring rhetoric, but what's the point of providing information and then failing to provide money? It's a dubious sort of fiscal responsibility that only kicks in when poor children's health is at stake.

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

The other article points out the inherent hypocrisy in the GOP's unmitigated maneuver to change the rules in order to protect DeLay and their majority in the House by exempting him from the rule that would require him to step down pending the outcome of an indictment. It is truly heartwarming to see how leniant and quick they are to unshackle their own republican cohorts from the restraints of that which was created for the sole purpose of ostracizing democrats past. So why would it surprise us, now that it's a republican and not a democrat whose ass is on fire, that the rule should be promptly suspended. These fuckers are doin' the cretin hop up in the House baby.

Revolution In Reverse

In solidifying its power, the GOP is loosening its ethics.

By E. J. Dionne Jr.

"And I want to say to you bluntly: You live today with the most corrupt congressional leadership we have seen in the United States in the 20th century. You have to go back to the Gilded Age of the 1870s and 1880s to have anything comparable that we've lived through."

Gosh, those Democrats must be really bitter about this year's elections to say stuff like that. Isn't it time to put aside partisan invective?

But however appropriate that ringing indictment may seem to the moment, it did not issue from any Democrat this week. The words were spoken in February 1992 by a House Republican named Newt Gingrich. Gingrich was then building the momentum that led to the historic Republican takeover of Congress two years later. The GOP modestly called what it was up to a "revolution."

As the old rock song taught us: Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

What's surprising is how shameless House Republicans were on Wednesday in casting aside their 11-year-old rule requiring a member of their leadership to step aside temporarily if he or she comes under indictment.

The repeal might be called the Tom DeLay Protection Act of 2004. DeLay, the House majority leader, is under investigation by Ronnie Earle, the district attorney in Texas's Travis County. Earle, who is a Democrat, is investigating charges that corporate money was used illegally to help Republicans win Texas legislative races in 2002. Republican victories that year paved the way for changes in the state's congressional district lines that helped Republicans win additional U.S. House seats in Texas this year, solidifying their hold on power.

Earle has already obtained indictments against three of DeLay's political associates. The Hammer, as DeLay is known, must be worried.

Recall how Republicans dismissed any and all who charged that the investigations of President Bill Clinton by special prosecutor Ken Starr were politically motivated. Ah, but those were investigations of a shady Democrat by a distinguished Republican. When a Democrat is investigating a Republican, it can only be about politics. Is that clear?

Rep. Henry Bonilla, the Texas Republican who sponsored the resolution to protect DeLay, said it was designed to protect against "crackpot" prosecutors whose indictments might get in the way of the ability of House Republicans to choose their own leaders. Can't let a little thing like an indictment get in the way of the sovereignty of House Republicans, can we?

"Attorneys tell me you can be indicted for just about anything in this country," said Bonilla. Remember the old days during the Clinton impeachment when Republicans went on and on about the importance of "the rule of law"? Oh well.

DeLay's response to the whole thing came, almost word for word, from Clinton's old talking points. "We must stop the politics of personal destruction," Clinton said in December 1998 after the House impeachment vote that DeLay had rammed through. On Wednesday, DeLay said that Democrats "announced years ago that they were going to engage in the politics of personal destruction, and had me as a target." Maybe it's time for Bill and Tom to sit down at that big new library in Little Rock for a friendly drink.

About the only defense Republicans can make for repealing their rule on indicted leaders is that the original motivation for passing it in 1993 was blatantly political. Republicans were trying to make hay over an investigation of Dan Rostenkowski, an Illinois Democrat who was then chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. Rostenkowski was later convicted of mail fraud. If politics was behind the rule in the first place, why not be political now that the rule is inconvenient? Isn't this a case of admirable consistency?

Some Republicans, at least, remember what they stood for 10 years ago. "We took a strong stand in 1994 to make clear the Republican conference would live by a higher standard than our Democratic colleagues," Rep. Chris Shays, a Connecticut Republican, said in a statement. Shays also told reporters: "We won election in '94 because we were going to be different, and what I continue to see is a slow but very consistent erosion in what made us different."

Shays reminds us that when and he and Gingrich were in the opposition, they gave voice to many who worried about the dangers of an entrenched majority that came to assume it had a right to power and could do whatever was necessary to keep it. Gingrich's line about the Gilded Age just may have come 12 years too early. You don't have to be a crackpot to believe that the Gilded Age is now.

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

Posted by Maria at 05:22 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

What a Waste

As we all know, I have a couple of readers who do not know when to quit. I shut down my threads because I am not obligated to put up with their bullshit for any reason and just because I posted an article about methamphetamine abuse doesn't mean it was an open invitation for my cranked up readers to come and pitch a fit.

The saddest thing of all is that, even when it's clear they're not welcome, they're so psychologically ill that they continue to desperately cry out for attention by spamming past entries. I don't know what happened to these people as children, or perhaps it was just all the meth they did while they were in the military, and are apparently still doing, but they have some other issues that I'm not qualified to evaluate, and should probably be addressed in therapy and/or rehab. I think Gordon may have been locked in a closet when he was a child. He goes absolutely batty when you shut him out. He cries because he needs to be heard. He cries. No one ever listened to him because he's never had anything useful to contribute. He uses the internet as an outlet for his antagonistic ways because it makes him feel unstoppable.

But he is just a repulsive little blob who seeks out others to bully and berate to satisfy his manic and borderline sadistic tendencies. Honestly Gordon, you're not well my friend. It scares me when you freak out and fly into one of your crazy crank rages. Seriously, I'm only saying something because I care.

Bad Shit

This piece my dad wrote points out how methamphetamines are being given to American soldiers in Iraq and have long been used to promote aggression and desensitization. He also touches on something that is seriously wrong in this country: pumping children full of drugs to control "diseases" that could be cured by turning off the TV and taking away the pop tarts.

White Man Tweak With Forked Tongue – The Government-Induced Speed Plague

by Charles Carreon

Warrior Tweakers, Good! Citizen Tweakers, Bad!

They’re tweaking again. The military, I mean. It’s not just the throttle jocks, I’m sure, who are popping Dexedrine to stay alert. It’s a war on, man, and if you can’t sacrifice a little sleep to the war effort, then what kind of patriot are you? That’s speed thinking. Compelling, so compelling of course that virtually all of the pilots flying combat missions in Iraq are in an altered state.

An altered state, may I remind you, that in an ordinary citizen is considered illegal in the extreme, a dangerous self-indulgence in a forbidden psychic kick that renders you outré. You’re a meth-head, a dangerous, child neglecting, spouse-abusing, larcenous scab on the body of society, in need of treatment and scorn. As a former prosecutor and criminal defender, I know the depictions are not far-fetched, either. Cranksters can be vile creatures, and meth induces a callousness of character that is definitively anti-social. Delusions of grandeur can feed notions of gangster mystique, and facilitate violence. I once had a client tell me in jail about how he brutally broke the kneecaps on a total stranger after taping him to a chair in his garage, because he had mistaken the poor fellow for some guy who ripped him off. After another tweaker friend came home and informed my client that the fellow was not the ripoff, they put him in the back of a pickup and threw him out in front of the emergency room and sped off. Of course, some meth users merely become weasely thieves, and do not commit mayhem. At all events, it has a corrosive effect on character.

So why do the military rate? Eliminate from your mind first the notion that the drugs are not the same. Dextroamphetamine is what the Air Force hands out to pilots, and they take extras along in the jet to self-administer as desired. Dextro just means the molecule “turns to the right” instead of to the left, but to your brain it’s all the same – left turn, right turn, speed on. To fight fatigue is said to be the reason. But a great side effect is the creation of the callous, anti-social character necessary to drop weapons of mass destruction on fellow humans. It takes a certain distance to do this sort of thing. Speed helps.

It makes me think of the lyrics from “Lucretia,” by the Sisters of Mercy:

“I hear the roar of a thin machine,
Hot metal and methedrine.
Love lost, fire at will,
Dum-dum bullets and shoot to kill,
I hear a dive bomber …
Empire Down …
Empire Down …”

Returning to the question – why do the military get to take speed? Because they need to, we are told. The Iraqis are probably doing speed, too. They’re not stupid. It gives them a little bit of advantage, what with having to stay up all night soldering together bomb-timers, and repairing assault rifles, not to mention keeping a prayer schedule. Speed helps.

Where’s The Money?

The origins of amphetamine are recent. Discovered just before the turn of the century, methamphetamine was synthesized by Smith, Kline & French in 1929. The company filed two trademarks on the trade-name “Benzedrine” in 1936, one as a tablet “medicine for the stimulation of the nervous system,” and another as a decongestant inhaler, citing first use in commerce in 1933. Glaxo, Smith Kline is still the big distributor of Dextroamphetamine for the military, and related stimulants like Adderall, for obnoxious little boys who won't sit still in school. Merck developed a simplified synthesis during the second world war to fuel the Blitzkrieg. I assume we aren’t holding back from giving infantry their share of the crank. After all, the infantryman and mechanized armor guys have the hardest work. So they’re speedin’ legally, driving humvees, tanks, fuckin’ rockin’ and rollin’ for real, and their commanders don’t mind that they’re listening to death metal with titles like “Cook Your Balls and Eat ‘Em,” ‘cause it’s a new crankin’ Army muthafucka.

War Is Hell, But Peace Is Sooooo Boring!

Our little cranksterized killers are going to have a hard time adjusting to civilian life. Death metal they’ll still have, but speed will be dearly bought with social ostracism. And they may begin to reflect on the horrors that they committed when the tunes were crankin’ and their reflexes were cleanly, smoothly distributing ammunition among the Iraqis. It seemed like a video game, but after the smoke and heroics are blown away, there is a terrible wound that the heart does not know how to heal. I knew that wound in some of my uncles who were in the infantry during world war two. They drank a lot.

Of course, the speed experience is not all exhilaration. There’s depletion and exhaustion and paranoia. No amount of speed will move the weariness out of bones that have been worked sore, and the business of dispensing ammunition is terribly wearying. I like to shoot my daughter’s .44 magnum lever-action gun, but it doesn’t have a cushion on the butt, and I’ve never shot a whole box of 50 rounds at a time. My shoulder just gets too sore. I’d hate to have to use that rifle in a war. They’d win just because my shoulder would get sore. Speed might help.

This Shit Works!

I wonder if it’s just possible that the policy makers, munitions makers and pharmaceutical makers might have realized how beneficial it would be for them to encourage the use of a drug that makes people more productive, less sensitive, more able to commit mayhem, less concerned with how they feel about what they are doing. Alfred Nobel created dynamite, some nameless chemist created speed. Who did the more powerful deed? Well, certainly their inventions worked hand in hand to make the world a far more detonated place.

Celebrity Cranksters, Celebrity Killers

Genies have a habit of getting out of the bottle, and the meth genie has been out of the bottle for about seventy-plus years now, fueling an expansion of manic energy that has probably resulted in the unnecessary damming of rivers, cutting down of forests, annihilation of entire tribes, species and ecosystems. And the toxic mentality has spread from the top down. Both Adolf Hitler and John F. Kennedy had “Dr. Feelgoods” who injected them with methamphetamine daily. Dr. Theodor Morell was Hitler’s psychiatric physician and constant companion, just as Dr. Max Jacobson was always present to serve as Kennedy’s pharmaceutical nursemaid. Both doctors supplemented the stimulant regimen with downers to moderate the manic effects of speed. It has been observed that Hitler’s mania for annihilating the Jews developed in intensity during the period of Morell’s influence.

Dirty Deeds, Done Dirt Cheap

Hitler’s allies, the Japanese, were also tweaking freely throughout the second world war, as the Imperial government doled out speed to the military and civilian populace alike, to keep up the “war effort.” The Rape of Nanking, a horrific war crime perpetrated by Japanese soldiers against no fewer than 369,366 Chinese men, women and children during 1937-38, was a murderous orgy that continued for months, during which the Japanese troops raped no less than 80,000 women of all ages. Reliable historical reports indicate that the Japanese killed many millions of Chinese during the second world war, although this Sino-Japanese holocaust has received little attention or commemoration. This type of lethal productivity has the feel of a meth-fueled murder nightmare. The suicide pilots of the Japanese air force were given amphetamines to overcome the desire to survive. The Japanese reversed course on their people after the war, made meth illegal in 1952, and arrested over 50,000 people. The country still has a serious problem with intravenous methamphetamine users, who comprise a large proportion of the 2 million meth users in the land of the Rising Sun.

African Children Turned Into Killing Machines

Many of the approximately 100,000 children under arms in the world are manipulated with amphetamines. For example, in Sierra Leone, Rwanda, Burma, and other war-torn nations, children are taken captive, raped, starved, brutalized, and then injected crudely with amphetamines, cocaine, and other drugs, and directed to commit murderous rampages. A Washington Post article by Douglas Farah, published April 8, 2000, quoted international aid sources as follows: “In Sierra Leone, said social workers and the child combatants, taking drugs-especially amphetamines and cocaine-was a regular part of ‘military training.’ Human Rights Watch found in a 1999 report that ‘child combatants armed with pistols, rifles and machetes actively participated in killings and massacres, [and] severed the arms of other children. . . . Often under the influence of drugs, they were known and feared for their impetuosity, lack of control and brutality.’”

American Children Turned Into Substance Abusers

That’s one way to get folks into drugs young, but we are more subtle in the USA, and we use what is called “treatment.” Under the guise of treating ADD and ADHD, two “diseases” that seem to afflict little boys who eat junk food and watch a lot of TV, our little preschool punk rockers are “treated” by school nurses who dole out speed from a jar. Of course, first they started out using “methylphenidate,” aka Ritalin which supposedly “wasn’t an amphetamine.” This label-switching was ordained by the pharma marketing geniuses who started this project to turn kids into cranksters back in the fifties, because the diet pill craze was winding down, and amphetamines, bennies, white crosses, pink hearts, and black beauties had all got a bit of a bad name at the courthouse and in popular literature. The Rolling Stones helped break the bad news about diet pills in their song, “Mother’s Little Helper,” with its pleading refrain “Doctor please, some more of these!” and its jabbing rejoinder, “Outside the door, she took four more!” But the pharma hacks are always good at finding another use for powerful substances, and now, it turns out that Dextroamphetamine, mixed with meth, in a formulation called “Adderall,” is even better than silly old Ritalin. So what good is it to give speed to kids who are speedy?

Thanks for asking. To answer, I must introduce the vaunted “paradoxical effect” of amphetamines on children under some uncertain age. Marvelously, the pharma hacks explain, speed slows down speedy kids! And you know, with proper medical care and monitoring, maybe it is helpful in extreme cases. But in the USA, what’s good can get force-fed down your throat, whether you need it or not. Think lobotomies for excitable mental patients. The same thing has happened to children. Researcher Nadine Lambert recently presented data at the Consensus Development Conference indicating that prescribed consumption of stimulants during childhood predisposed young adults to cocaine abuse. This sort of obvious connection occurred to me when I heard that one of my nephews, a longtime Ritalin-kid, was doing hard time in the penitentiary because he couldn’t stop using meth. Soon, some criminal defense attorneys are going to wake up and realize that when the state gets you addicted to a controlled substance, that should be a defense to criminal possession.

Houston, We Have A Problem!

Meth has crept into our lives very quietly, and will not leave easily. It may very well explain the extreme bellicosity and hardheadedness of many white American males, who develop a strong loyalty to the drug because of its association with productivity, the work ethic, and a positive, can-do attitude. There is a great false optimism that is brimming over among the nation’s military leaders. We are going to export democracy, uproot tyranny, and kill all the bad guys. With a little crank, it’s all in a day’s work, because speed helps. On speed, we can do more. Somewhere Hitler is smiling.

Something About Kansas

There really is something about Kansas. For some reason, the religious hatespring in that state cannot seem to be contained.

I wrote this entry over a year ago about these people from Kansas who traveled all the way out here to NY to hold signs outside of a Long Island high school that said things like "God Hates Fags," "God Hates Fag Enablers," "God Blew Up The Shuttle" and "Thank God for Sept. 11." The last two really confused the shit out of me since, despite racking my brain, I can't for the life of me figure out what a doomed space shuttle or the attacks of September 11th have to do with homosexuality being a "sin." Leave it to hate mongering "religious" folk to make the connection...

Now I have no idea if those people were from the same church in Kansas that these people are from, but they're all cut from the same cloth, that's for sure. The cloth of hatred and malevolence. So these people from Kansas traveled all the way to Sand Springs, Oklahoma, to protest the fact that this one pastor is allowing an admittedly gay teenager to worship in his church. Didn't these people ever learn that one phrase from the bible about casting the first stone or something...? I'm thinking of putting together a trip to Kansas to stand outside of their churchs with signs that say "God Condemns Hatred" or maybe just get a bunch of gay friends together and have a big parade out there. Sounds like they could use a little pride. And not the kind that makes one think they're better than everyone else.

The most gut churning quote from the Washington Post article was this:

Phelps gestured toward the church marquee that scrolled the message "I hate the sin but love the sinner -- God!" [Phelps said] "It's a play on words, the sin and the sinner," he said. "You can't separate the two. There are some people in this world who are made to be destroyed."

At this point, I don't think it would be any stretch to compare these people to those who embraced the "ideas" of Hitler.

If this is religion, I don't know how it has turned into this monster, but it does not resemble anything I learned about Jesus or Siddhartha as a child. It does not resemble anything close to compassion, acceptance or forgiveness. It resembles a desire to exterminate those who you believe carry an affliction; something that goes against god (despite god having supposedly created everything) which, if only it were legal, would warrant the destruction of the person carrying such an affliction, so as not to allow the "disease" to proliferate or influence others. Those who rabidly oppose homosexuality seem to have this irrational fear of it "spreading" and condemn the world in which gays are accepted and treated as equals, for there is nothing more hideous than to make people think that "it's okay to be gay."

Unfortunately, the saddest part of the article was not the notion that these hateful bigots -- who commit the ugliest sin of all, to cloak their hatred and self righteousness in religion -- came all the way from Kansas to publicize their lack of tolerance, (not to mention their absence of manners, coming to a church that is not their own and condemning the choices of those who worship there) the saddest part is that even though many citizens of Sand Springs "stood up" for this teenage boy, it is still clear that they all held out hope that he would "change" and become a heterosexual. They defended him not for who he is inside, but because he's a member of their community and they weren't about to let some assholes from Kansas come and tell them how to handle anything that takes place in their community and in their churches. Which would be nice if it weren't hypocritical, since on any other day in his town this kid is subjected to homophobic taunts and pressure from those around him to abandon any thoughts of being homosexual. I don't know what's worse, having some fuck from Kansas hold a sign in front of your face that says "Fags Are Worthy of Death" or being quietly pressured by your loved ones to suppress your true self and be something that you're not. That in itself has led to more than one suicide...

The whole thing just makes me sad. And the scariest part is that these are the same people who voted for George Bush because of his "good Christian values."

Oh! The Hypocrisy of it all...

This article makes a point that I've many times made to republicans when arguing about "judicial activism." Republicans hate it when what they refer to as "judicial activism," helps liberal causes, but they sho' do love it when it benefits their own. Kinsley also effectively makes the point that we better watch our backs on the abortion issue because that whole "Laci Peterson" law is going to strike out with a vengance.

The Right's Kind of Activism

By Michael Kinsley

What does President Bush mean, if anything, when he says that his kind of judge "knows the difference between personal opinion and the strict interpretation of the law"? Taken literally, this simply means he wants judges who agree with him. Every judge sincerely believes that he or she is interpreting the law properly.

But Bush's complaint must be understood in the context of Republican Party history over the past half-century. Ever since Chief Justice Earl Warren and Brown v. Board of Education (the 1954 school desegregation case), conservatives have complained about "activist" judges who allegedly impose their own liberal dictates on the country with no legal basis. Taking up this rallying cry is one way Republicans won the South. Even southern conservatives don't publicly complain about Brown anymore, of course. But denouncing activist judges is now Republican boilerplate.

Judges make decisions and impose their will all the time. That's their job. When does this generally salutary activity turn into the dread judicial activism? If activism has any specific meaning, it means judges overruling laws and policies put in place by the democratically elected branches of government. It also means federal judges overruling policies enacted by the individual states.

George W. Bush may get to appoint as many as four Supreme Court justices, including the chief. But the complaint about activism has been quaint for decades. All three chief justices since the "activism" fuss began were appointed by Republican presidents. Earl Warren, it's true, was a bitter surprise to Republicans, but Warren Burger and William Rehnquist were not. Liberal judicial activism peaked with Roe v. Wade, the 1973 abortion decision, and has been in retreat for longer than it lasted.

Complaints about judicial activism are a habit left over from powerlessness. They seem especially retro when held up against today's ambitious Republican judicial agenda. With one apparent exception, the major items on it are demands for federal judges to override Congress or states' rights. Republicans cheer, for example, when courts overturn state or federal -- or even private -- affirmative action programs, and they boo when such programs are allowed to continue unmolested. They have great hopes -- largely unrealized, so far -- for the "takings" clause of the Fifth Amendment as a tool for overturning environmental regulations or any other government policies that might reduce the value of someone's property. There is even a move afoot in the Senate to have Democratic filibusters against Bush's judicial nominees ruled unconstitutional. That would be activism squared.

And let's not forget that the Bush administration owes its very existence to the boldest act of judicial activism in a generation: the Supreme Court ruling that settled the 2000 presidential election dispute. Bush v. Gore made imaginative use of the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause to reverse the Florida Supreme Court's interpretation of its own state election laws.

Republicans will protest, sincerely if not always correctly, that these examples are all legitimate interpretations of the Constitution and not just invitations for judges to take a power trip. But that's the point. One person's constitutional interpretation is another person's judicial rampage. Neither party has a magic formula for determining which is which, and neither can resist trying to enact its agenda through judicial fiat when it gets the chance.

The "apparent" exception to the activist nature of the Republican judicial wish list is abortion. Although I am pro-choice, I was taught in law school, and still believe, that Roe v. Wade is a muddle of bad reasoning and an authentic example of judicial overreaching. I also believe it was a political disaster for liberals. Roe is what first politicized religious conservatives while cutting off a political process that was legalizing abortion state by state anyway. Three decades later, that awakened giant controls the government.

But has anybody read the 2004 Republican platform on abortion? It doesn't merely call for reversal of Roe v. Wade. It calls for "legislation to make it clear that the 14th Amendment's protections apply to unborn children," and for judges who believe likewise. If fetuses are "persons" under the 14th Amendment, which guarantees all persons "equal protection of the law," abortion will be illegal whether a state or Congress wants to legalize it or not. More than that: There could be no legal distinction between the rights of fetuses and the rights of human beings after birth. So, just for example, a woman who procured an abortion would have to be prosecuted as if she had hired a gunman to murder her child. The doctor would have to be treated like the gunman. If the state had a death penalty, it would have to apply to both. And the party that now controls all three branches of government says this is already the case. Legislation is only needed to "make it clear," and judges are needed who will enforce it.

But no "activism," please. The Republican Party can't stand that.

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

Cul has a post that I think is relevant to the article above, about Ashcroft's "final condemnation of 'activist judges" before stepping down. How we love to see him step down...

Pussy Power

Now that's what I call WHIPPED!!!

Love-Struck Bull Pacified by Charms of Cow

Nov 12, 2004

BERLIN (Reuters) - A wild bull on the loose in southern Germany was brought under control by the charms of a cow which lured the distressed male back to the barn, police said on Friday.

"When bulls break out there's no telling what might happen," a police spokesman in the town of Hof said. "He was pretty worked up."

Authorities were getting a tranquilizer gun ready when the farmer's niece suggested luring the bull back home with a cow on a leash.

"It worked," the spokesman said. "He calmed right down and trotted behind her back to the barn."

Give it up for Boulder

I just want to know, who was the parent who made a complaint that "the kids want to kill the president!"??? A little alarmist, don't you think? Well, maybe not for Colorado...

High School Talent Show Turns Political

By Judith Crosson

DENVER (Reuters) - A Colorado high school talent show turned into a political hot potato after some parents said a trio of students planned to use a Bob Dylan song to say they wished for the death of President Bush, officials said on Friday.

Calls were made to the school, students were interviewed, local talk radio jumped into the fray and the U.S. Secret Service even sent two agents to interview the principal at Boulder High School.

Even if there was a misunderstanding over whether the students -- some of whom called themselves the "Talibanned" -- meant to wish harm to the president, they learned how offended people can get.

"It was positioned right after the elections and close to Veterans Day. It was more an emotional than a thoughtful response," Principal Ron Cabrera said referring to the public reaction.

He said there was really nothing to worry about. "I showed them the lyrics of the song," Cabrera said, referring to the federal agents who paid him a visit.

The problem started after rumors circulated that a trio of students planned a poetry reading at the talent show using lyrics from the Bob Dylan anti-war song "Masters of War." But some parents got the impression that the students wanted to alter the words to say they wanted to see the president dead while a slide on a curtain displayed Bush's picture.

Usually Secret Service agents, responsible for keeping the president safe, do not visit high schools to check on threats to the president.

"We got numerous complaints from citizens and have to investigate all allegations of threats regardless of who the sitting president is," Lon Garner, Secret Service special agent in charge of the Rocky Mountain region, said.

"We're very sensitive about First Amendment rights," he added.

"It's a tempest in a teapot. "It apparently began with a misunderstanding of a parent who was told about a rehearsal," Denver attorney and local talk show host Craig Silverman said.

Boulder, Colorado, has long been known as a bastion of liberalism and is often referred to by locals as "the Republic of Boulder." Last week, Boulder high School students staged an overnight sleep-in at the school to protest Bush's re-election.

What's wrong with Democrats?

Forgive the sour notes below, but this Pew report (HT: Femeniste) overloaded me with statistics and poll percentages until I went a little batty. I think we all know which group I fall into here...

Nearly all Republicans foresee a successful second term for Bush (93%). Most independents (58%) also take a positive view of Bush's prospects. Democrats are less upbeat: 30% predict a successful second term for the president, while 55% do not.

A narrow majority of Democrats (52%) think the party's leaders should stand up to the Republicans on issues that are important to Democratic supporters; 42% think Democratic leaders should try to work with Republican leaders even if it means disappointing some groups of Democratic supporters.

Liberal Democrats, by two-to-one (62%-31%), want the party's leaders to stand up to the GOP, while conservative and moderate Democrats are divided over the issue. About half of conservative and moderate Democrats (48%) say party leaders should take a stand against Republicans, while about as many (47%) favor a more cooperative approach.

And that, my friends, is what I think is fucked about the democratic party. No backbone. Too much division. So how do democrats expect to counteract what they think will be an "unsuccessful presidency" if we plan to work with our shitty president on his policies? We need a more unified conviction to defeat republicans in their policies. How else can we expect to have a democratic president in office four years from now? If democrats acquiesce to republicans in the annoyingly "amicable" way that has been talked about, and seen painfully clear in Kerry's concession, we will continue to suffer defeat.

It's like my dad said on the phone yesterday, and I suppose it's fairly typical coming from a lawyer, (I paraphrase) "A lawyer I was working with said we should assert that our adversaries in a lawsuit 'failed to produce documents' and I said, 'They destroyed the documents, so you say 'they destroyed documents.' They're going to say they failed to produce documents.'" He was talking about how important it is to act the adversary and not to work with those who you are supposed to be working against.

What the fuck does it mean when John Kerry talks about his opposition to Bush's policies for an entire election cycle and then when it's over, it's as if it's all a game and now John Kerry is going to work with the president in his policies? I suppose I'm probably taking it all too literally, and what is really meant is that rather than working against the president and not getting anything accomplished at all, it is better to work together as a team to reach compromises. I understand that whole settlement approach, but there has to be some serious fight if republicans are going to push the issues that Bush has talked about and democrats should be spending more time fighting his pet policies than working with president Bush to do things the way he's set out.

I see it as a major problem in the first place that we have engaged discussions about gay marriage and women's reproductive rights, when they eat up way too much precious time that should honestly be spent talking about relevant political issues such as the war in Iraq, environment, economy, schools and healthcare. The government should not have a say in moral issues. I'm sorry. People should be permitted to live their lives the way they choose so long as it does not infringe upon the rights of another. What about that do republicans not get? I guess I can sit here all day and wish that "moderate" democrats had a little more fight and fire in them, but you can't force a will to fight into people and it seems we live in a very complacent society, so what can we do to change this? Not everyone's parents taught them to stand up for themselves and not back down in the face of conflict...I guess, to a significant part of the population, it is better to avoid negativity and conflict even if it means sacrificing what's most important. I remember at one point during the past couple months I read one "likely voter" quoted as saying "I don't think we should tell the government or our president what to do. I think we should leave the decision making up to them." I don't think that's a terribly uncommon sentiment. Not only do many people feel that we should not tell the government what to do, but we should also let them tell us what to do!

Joshua's Photography

View from Mt. Ashland (Southern Oregon)

Creative Outpourings

Some of my brother's paintings.

Blue Dragon

Burned Man

Cable Man

The man himself.

To check out more artwork and photographs by my brother Joshua go here.

Home and Family

I miss Oregon today.

And my siblings (Ana and Josh on the right. Me on the left).

And my kooky parents. (And you wonder why I am nuts! This is NOT an old picture.)

'Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!'

Oh come on. Everyone else is doing it. This is by far the most entertaining quiz I've ever taken.

Which Monty Python & the Holy Grail Character are you REALLY?
brought to you by Quizilla

A Literal Interpretation

I know some have seen this before, as I have in the form of a letter to that bigot Dr. Laura Schlesingwhateverthefuck. But here is a new version, addressed to our Dear Leader.

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness, (Lev. 15:19-24) the problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there degrees of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them (Lev. 24:10-16)? Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, as we do with people who sleep with their in-laws (Lev. 20:14)?

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Eternally Yours,

-- A [God Fearing Patriot]

Lightbulb Flicks On

Nice.

On 'Moral Values,' It's Blue in a Landslide

By Frank Rich

FAREWELL to Swift boats and "Shove it!," to Osama's tape and Saddam's missing weapons, to "security moms" and outsourced dads. They've all been sent to history's dustbin faster than Ralph Nader memorabilia was dumped on eBay. In their stead stands a single ambiguous phrase coined by an anonymous exit pollster: "Moral values." By near universal agreement the morning after, these two words tell the entire story of the election: it's the culture, stupid.

"It really is Michael Moore versus Mel Gibson," said Newt Gingrich. To Jon Stewart, Nov. 2 was the red states' revenge on "Will & Grace." William Safire, speaking on "Meet the Press," called the Janet Jackson fracas "the social-political event of the past year." Karl Rove was of the same mind: "I think it's people who are concerned about the coarseness of our culture, about what they see on the television sets, what they see in the movies ..."

And let's not even get started on the two most dreaded words in American comedy, regardless of your party affiliation: Whoopi Goldberg.

There's only one problem with the storyline proclaiming that the country swung to the right on cultural issues in 2004. Like so many other narratives that immediately calcify into our 24/7 media's conventional wisdom, it is fiction. Everything about the election results - and about American culture itself - confirms an inescapable reality: John Kerry's defeat notwithstanding, it's blue America, not red, that is inexorably winning the culture war, and by a landslide. Kerry voters who have been flagellating themselves since Election Day with a vengeance worthy of "The Passion of the Christ" should wake up and smell the Chardonnay.

The blue ascendancy is nearly as strong among Republicans as it is among Democrats. Those whose "moral values" are invested in cultural heroes like the accused loofah fetishist Bill O'Reilly and the self-gratifying drug consumer Rush Limbaugh are surely joking when they turn apoplectic over MTV. William Bennett's name is now as synonymous with Las Vegas as silicone. The Democrats' Ashton Kutcher is trumped by the Republicans' Britney Spears. Excess and vulgarity, as always, enjoy a vast, bipartisan constituency, and in a democracy no political party will ever stamp them out.

If anyone is laughing all the way to the bank this election year, it must be the undisputed king of the red cultural elite, Rupert Murdoch. Fox News is a rising profit center within his News Corporation, and each red-state dollar that it makes can be plowed back into the rest of Fox's very blue entertainment portfolio. The Murdoch cultural stable includes recent books like Jenna Jameson's "How to Make Love Like a Porn Star" and the Vivid Girls' "How to Have a XXX Sex Life," which have both been synergistically, even joyously, promoted on Fox News by willing hosts like Rita Cosby and, needless to say, Mr. O'Reilly. There are "real fun parts and exciting parts," said Ms. Cosby to Ms. Jameson on Fox News's "Big Story Weekend," an encounter broadcast on Saturday at 9 p.m., assuring its maximum exposure to unsupervised kids.

Almost unnoticed in the final weeks of the campaign was the record government indecency fine levied against another prime-time Fox television product, "Married by America." The $1.2 million bill, a mere bagatelle to Murdoch stockholders, was more than twice the punishment inflicted on Viacom for Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction." According to the F.C.C. complaint, one episode in this heterosexual marriage-promoting reality show included scenes in which "partygoers lick whipped cream from strippers' bodies," and two female strippers "playfully spank" a man on all fours in his underwear. "Married by America" is gone now, but Fox remains the go-to network for Paris Hilton ("The Simple Life") and wife-swapping ("Trading Spouses: Meet Your New Mommy").

None of this has prompted an uprising from the red-state Fox News loyalists supposedly so preoccupied with "moral values." They all gladly contribute fungible dollars to Fox culture by boosting their fair-and-balanced channel's rise in the ratings. Some of these red staters may want to make love like porn stars besides. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.) An ABC News poll two weeks before the election found that more Republicans than Democrats enjoy sex "a great deal." The Democrats' new hero, Illinois Senator-elect Barack Obama, was assured victory once his original, ostentatiously pious Republican opponent, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race rather than defend his taste for "avant-garde" sex clubs.

The 22 percent of voters who told pollsters that "moral values" were their top election issue - 79 percent of whom voted for Bush-Cheney - corresponds almost exactly to the number of voters (23 percent) who describe themselves as born-again or evangelical Christians. They are entitled to their culture, too, and their own entertainment industry. And their own show-biz scandals. The Los Angeles Times reported this summer that Paul Crouch, the evangelist who founded the largest Christian network, Trinity Broadcasting Network, vehemently denied a former employee's accusation that the two had had a homosexual encounter - though not before paying the employee a $425,000 settlement. Not so incidentally, Trinity joined Gary Bauer and Fox News as prime movers in "Redeem the Vote," the Christian-rock alternative to MTV's "Rock the Vote."

But the distance between this hard-core red culture and the majority blue culture is perhaps best captured by Tom Coburn, the newly elected Republican senator from Oklahoma, lately famous for discovering "rampant" lesbianism in that state's schools. As a congressman in 1997, Mr. Coburn attacked NBC for encouraging "irresponsible sexual behavior" and taking "network TV to an all-time low with full frontal nudity, violence and profanity being shown in our homes." The broadcast that prompted his outrage on behalf of "parents and decent-minded individuals everywhere" was the network's prime-time showing of Steven Spielberg's "Schindler's List."

It's in the G.O.P.'s interest to pander to this far-right constituency - votes are votes - but you can be certain that a party joined at the hip to much of corporate America, Mr. Murdoch included, will take no action to curtail the blue culture these voters deplore. As Marshall Wittman, an independent-minded former associate of both Ralph Reed and John McCain, wrote before the election, "The only things the religious conservatives get are largely symbolic votes on proposals guaranteed to fail, such as the gay marriage constitutional amendment." That amendment has never had a prayer of rounding up the two-thirds majority needed for passage and still doesn't.

Mr. Wittman echoes Thomas Frank, the author of "What's the Matter With Kansas?," by common consent the year's most prescient political book. "Values," Mr. Frank writes, "always take a backseat to the needs of money once the elections are won." Under this perennial "trick," as he calls it, Republican politicians promise to stop abortion and force the culture industry "to clean up its act" - until the votes are counted. Then they return to their higher priorities, like cutting capital gains and estate taxes. Mr. Murdoch and his fellow cultural barons - from Sumner Redstone, the Bush-endorsing C.E.O. of Viacom, to Richard Parsons, the Republican C.E.O. of Time Warner, to Jeffrey Immelt, the Bush-contributing C.E.O. of G.E. (NBC Universal) - are about to be rewarded not just with more tax breaks but also with deregulatory goodies increasing their power to market salacious entertainment. It's they, not Susan Sarandon and Bruce Springsteen, who actually set the cultural agenda Gary Bauer and company say they despise.

But it's not only the G.O.P.'s fealty to its financial backers that is predictive of how little cultural bang the "values" voters will get for their Bush-Cheney votes. At 78 percent, the nonvalues voters have far more votes than they do, and both parties will cater to that overwhelming majority's blue tastes first and last. Their mandate is clear: The same poll that clocked "moral values" partisans at 22 percent of the electorate found that nearly three times as many Americans approve of some form of legal status for gay couples, whether civil unions (35 percent) or marriage (27 percent). Do the math and you'll find that the poll also shows that for all the G.O.P.'s efforts to court Jews, the total number of Jewish Republican voters in 2004, while up from 2000, was still some 200,000 less than the number of gay Republican voters.

When Robert Novak writes after the election that "the anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, socially conservative agenda is ascendant, and the G.O.P. will not abandon it anytime soon," you have to wonder what drug he is on. The abandonment began at the convention. Sam Brownback, the Kansas senator who champions the religious right, was locked away in an off-camera rally across town from Madison Square Garden. Prime time was bestowed upon the three biggest stars in post-Bush Republican politics: Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Arnold Schwarzenegger. All are supporters of gay rights and opponents of the same-sex marriage constitutional amendment. Only Mr. McCain calls himself pro-life, and he's never made abortion a cause. None of the three support the Bush administration position on stem-cell research. When the No. 1 "moral values" movie star, Mel Gibson, condemned the Schwarzenegger-endorsed California ballot initiative expanding and financing stem-cell research, the governor and voters crushed him like a girlie-man. The measure carried by 59 percent, which is consistent with national polling on the issue.

If the Republican party's next round of leaders are all cool with blue culture, why should Democrats run after the red? Received Washington wisdom has it that the only Democrat who will ever be able to win a national election must be a cross between Gomer Pyle and Billy Sunday - a Scripture-quoting Sun Belt exurbanite whose loyalty to Nascar does not extend to Dale Earnhardt Jr., who was fined last month for saying a four-letter word on television.

According to this argument, the values voters the Democrats must pander to are people like Cary and Tara Leslie, archetypal Ohio evangelical "Bush votes come to life" apotheosized by The Washington Post right after Election Day. The Leslies swear by "moral absolutes," support a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and mostly watch Fox News. Mr. Leslie has also watched his income drop from $55,000 to $35,000 since 2001, forcing himself, his wife and his three young children into the ranks of what he calls the "working poor." Maybe by 2008 some Democrat will figure out how to persuade him that it might be a higher moral value to worry about the future of his own family than some gay family he hasn't even met.

Attack of the Innuendo

Lies

We've been talking in another thread about this issue of some pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for birth control pills based on their belief that it is against their religion and moral values. But what about this? It seems the pro-life nazis have found a back door to enforcing their "morality" on women who don't share their beliefs about a women's right to choose and those who would seek to have abortions or even to take birth control. (I will never understand those people who oppose both birth control AND abortion - it really seems to negate their entire cause.) Apparently, if they can't overturn Roe v. Wade right now, they are going to find other ways to sabotage the proliferation of accurate information about birth control, abortion and women's health issues, even if it means just injecting patently false statements into state health pamphlets.

Women Wrongly Warned Cancer, Abortion Tied

By LAURA MECKLER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Women seeking abortions in Mississippi must first sign a form indicating they've been told abortion can increase their risk of breast cancer. They aren't told that scientific reviews have concluded there is no such risk. Similar information suggesting a cancer link is given to women considering abortion in Texas, Louisiana and Kansas, and legislation to require such notification has been introduced in 14 other states.

Abortion opponents, who are pushing these measures, say they are simply giving women information to consider. But abortion rights supporters see it much differently. "In my experience, this inaccurate information is going to dissuade few women from going ahead and having the abortion," said Dr. Vanessa Cullins, vice president for medical affairs at Planned Parenthood (news - web sites) Federation of America. "What it does do is put a false guilt trip and fear trip on that woman."

More than a year ago, a panel of scientists convened by the National Cancer Institute (news - web sites) reviewed available data and concluded there is no link. A scientific review in the Lancet, a British medical journal, came to the same conclusion, questioning the methodology in a few studies that have suggested a link. Still, information suggesting a link is being given to women to read during mandatory waiting periods before abortions. In some cases, the information is on the states' Web sites.

"We're going to continue to educate the public about this," said Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer (news - web sites), an anti-abortion group. The effort to write the issue into state law began in the mid-1990s, when a few studies suggested women who had abortions or miscarriages might be more likely to develop breast cancer. The warnings are now required in Texas and Mississippi, and health officials in Kansas and Louisiana issue them voluntarily.

Minnesota law requires its health department to include this information on its Web site, but the department backed down after an outcry from the state's medical community. Montana law also mandated the warning, but the state Supreme Court struck it down.

The brochures still in circulation tell women the issue "needs further study." "They can do further research on their own and determine which of those studies they should put most attention on," said Sharon Watson, spokeswoman for the Kansas Department of Health and Environment. "We're just trying to provide all the information it's possible to provide."

Louisiana - which elected a Democratic governor last year, replacing a Republican - is going to change its official literature that mentions the cancer link, said Bob Johannessen, spokesman for the state's Department of Health and Hospitals. He said the department's new director did not know the state pamphlet included such information until contacted this week by The Associated Press. "If there is scientific evidence, and it certainly appears there now is, we would certainly make the necessary changes in that brochure," he said Tuesday.

The brochure, he said, is a reflection of the "very, very strong pro-family, pro-life leaning" of Louisiana. "Nonetheless, it's incumbent on us as the health agency to make sure any information is factually correct," he said. "We don't want to be misleading women who are making this important choice."

The issue continues to be debated in state legislatures, with bills considered this year in Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Vermont, Washington and West Virginia.

On the federal level, several members of Congress complained last year after the NCI Web site included material suggesting a link between breast cancer and abortion or miscarriage. An expert panel that was asked to review the data reported in March 2003 that "well established" evidence shows no link. Among the studies cited by the NCI expert panel was Danish research that used computerized medical records to compare women who had undergone abortions with that country's cancer registry and found no higher cancer rate.

"The virtually complete consensus was that the studies that purported to show a link were methodologically flawed," said Dr. Martin Abeloff, director of the Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins University. Those studies that showed no link, he said, were almost all well done.

Still, anti-abortion activists are unconvinced.

Joel Brind, a biochemist at Baruch College in New York who advises the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, noted that a woman's chances of getting breast cancer go down if she gives birth at a relatively young age. He reasons that those who opt for abortion are giving up a chance of reducing their breast cancer risk.

Therefore, he says, abortion increases the risk of cancer.

He participated in the NCI debate - filing a minority report - and dismisses the panel's findings. "It was basically a political exercise," he said, "a charade if you will."

Interesting logic there. Where has logic and FACT gone, by the way? It seems to be losing any precedence over falsity in our society. Do Americans no longer care about the difference between truth and fiction? Are they capable of distinguishing what constitutes one or the other? It would seem not.

Fukidol

If you haven't seen it, you're missing out on a good laugh. Check out fuckthesouth.com. (Sorry Sandy! The devil made me do it.)

Fuck the South. Fuck 'em. We should have let them go when they wanted to leave. But no, we had to kill half a million people so they'd stay part of our special Union. Fighting for the right to keep slaves - yeah, those are states we want to keep.

And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really?

Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?

No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier. Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real you are you Johnny-come-lately "Oooooh I've been a state for almost a hundred years" dickheads. Fuck off.

Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't paying for your fucking bridges, bitch.

All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. "Let the Spanish keep it, it’s a shithole," we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.

The next dickwad who says, "It’s your money, not the government's money" is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. That’s right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It’s too easy, asshole, they’re blue states. It’s not your money, assholes, it’s fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.

Let’s talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping dickwads? Well? Can you guess? It’s fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marriage universe. Yes, that’s right, the state you love to tie around the neck of anyone to the left of Strom Thurmond has the lowest divorce rate in the fucking nation. Think that’s just some aberration? How about this: 9 of the 10 lowest divorce rates are fucking blue states, asshole, and most are in the Northeast, where our values suck so bad. And where are the highest divorce rates? Care to fucking guess? 10 of the top 10 are fucking red-ass we're-so-fucking-moral states. And while Nevada is the worst, the Bible Belt is doing its fucking part.

But two guys making out is going to fucking ruin marriage for you? Yeah? Seems like you're ruining it pretty well on your own, you little bastards. Oh, but that's ok because you go to church, right? I mean you do, right? Cause we fucking get to hear about it every goddamn year at election time. Yes, we're fascinated by how you get up every Sunday morning and sing, and then you're fucking towers of moral superiority. Yeah, that's a workable formula. Maybe us fucking Northerners don't talk about religion as much as you because we're not so busy sinning, hmmm? Ever think of that, you self-righteous assholes? No, you're too busy erecting giant stone tablets of the Ten Commandments in buildings paid for by the fucking Northeast Liberal Elite. And who has the highest murder rates in the nation? It ain't us up here in the North, assholes.

Well this gravy train is fucking over. Take your liberal-bashing, federal-tax-leaching, confederate-flag-waving, holier-than-thou, hypocritical bullshit and shove it up your ass.

And no, you can't have your fucking convention in New York next time. Fuck off.

To Everyone

This is not a place to come if you are looking to bait people into arguments or call people degrading nicknames. I feel that it has been a reasonably calm and rational day so far. I would like to keep it that way. Thanks.

Before you comment, you should ask yourself "am I here to fight or am I here to read and respectfully express my opinions?" If your answer is "I'm here to fight," please do not proceed with it here.

I would prefer not to ban anyone from this site. I have given everyone ample warning and a million chances. I am letting you know now, no matter who you are, do not think that you can just come here and stink up my comments with obvious attempts to bait another person into a pissing match. THIS IS NOT A BULLETIN BOARD and it is not a DUMPING POST FOR YOUR GRIEVANCES and it is not a boxing ring. If you want to start a pissing match bulletin board, feel free to do it elsewhere.

During the course of normal conversation and debate, contention can arise. Emotions may get stirred, condescending tones may be used. That is perfectly understandable and acceptable. But the off topic shit slinging in my comments has got to stop.

History Repeats Itself

I had been designated as the task-force commander that would run this secret war [in Angola in 1975 and 1976].... and what I figured out was that in this job, I would sit on a sub-committee of the National Security Council, this office that Larry Devlin has told me about where they had access to all the information about Angola, about the whole world, and I would finally understand national security. And I couldn't resist the opportunity to know. I knew the CIA was not a worthwhile organization, I had learned that the hard way. But the question was where did the U.S. government fit into this thing, and I had a chance to see for myself in the next big secret war....

I wanted to know if wise men were making difficult decisions based on truly important, threatening information, threatening to our national security interests. If that had been the case, I still planned to get out of the CIA, but I would know that the system, the invisible government, our national security complex, was in fact justified and worth while. And so I took the job.... Suffice it to say I wouldn't be standing in front of you tonight if I had found these wise men making these tough decisions. What I found, quite frankly, was fat old men sleeping through sub-committee meetings of the NSC in which we were making decisions that were killing people in Africa. - John Stockwell

I did a search on the internet today to see if any of John Stockwell's writings would turn up. Some may remember that John Stockwell was a very high ranking CIA official who went public during the Reagan years with his knowledge of the CIA's covert operations and secret wars (i.e. things you could never and would never want to imagine our government doing). A brilliantly honest and comprehensible speaker and writer, his book "The Praetorian Guard" was my introduction to the innerworkings of our government and the CIA. While I was home schooled in the 8th grade, I became very interested in that subject and many others and I had already become a voracious reader. When I read that book, I was struck by the most amazing feeling. I understood what it meant to have knowledge. To be informed about something that really mattered. In all my years in public school, I had never had such a feeling. I realized that the key to knowledge was not sitting in a classroom and listening to a teacher provide you with the information that they felt was pertinent to your growth or development. Knowledge is reading.

Because of the issues that we are facing in our world today, with the "war on terror," wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, grappling with the responsibility of the press and whether or not they are even provided the information necessary to give us a clear picture of what is going on, whether they would want to provide the American people with that information even if they had it, fighting amongst ourselves about the true intentions of our government, John Stockwell's writings and lectures once again become incredibly relevant.

In order to identify and foresee the problems that we face and the future that we are creating, it is imperative that we look at the past and not forget what has been done. Forgetting our history would be our most fatal mistake.

I remember directly after 9/11, when I was still awash in angst and gut wrenching trauma, my mother brought forth her knowledge and tried to explain to me the reasons that this was happening. My mother is a very smart, highly educated woman. And nothing lights her fire like talking about the CIA and the wrongdoings of our government. Some of my most vivid childhood memories are of my parents raving about the Iran Contra scandal and other various issues of the day. But when she spoke to me after 9/11, I was blinded by rage and emotion. I tuned her out. I didn't listen. Nothing she could say would make me believe at that moment that those attacks were justified by anything that the United States has ever done to anyone else nor that they were orchestrated by a branch of the United States government itself.

But when my emotions cleared, and sound logic returned, and the truth began to emerge before my eyes, I realized, it is very, very important that we look at the role that our government has played in the world for the past fifty years and logically connect the dots. Get rid of indignance, get rid of pride, arrogance, anger, blind patriotism. Examine history, and let that speak its own self evident truth.

A good start is to read. John Stockwell is such an easy read. Because he was there, and he tells his stories and conveys his knowledge from the standpoint of a person who lived it, there is no confusion, no intricacies that are difficult to comprehend. The only thing difficult to comprehend in his writings, is how on earth it is possible that our government could be so fucking evil. The scary thing is, he gave this lecture in 1987 and it is all still relevant today and in the context of our current foreign and domestic policy. And if you don't believe me, get reading.

THE SECRET WARS OF THE CIA:
THE INNER WORKINGS OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL AND THE CIA'S COVERT ACTIONS IN ANGOLA, CENTRAL AMERICA AND VIETNAM
by John Stockwell
a lecture given in October, 1987

Part I

Part II

Listen Up

When the Personal Shouldn't Be Political
By GARY HART
November 8, 2004

Kittredge, Colo. - If America has entered one of its periodic eras of religious revival and if that revival is having the profound impact on politics that is now presumed, to participate in a discussion of "faith" one must qualify oneself.

I was raised in the Church of the Nazarene, an evangelical denomination founded a century ago as an offshoot of American Methodism, which, the church founders believed, had become too liberal. I graduated from Bethany Nazarene College, where I met and married my wife, who was also brought up in the church. I then graduated from the Yale Divinity School as preparation for a life of teaching religion and philosophy.

The Nazarene Church abhorred drinking, smoking, dancing, movies and female adornment, believed in salvation through being "born again" and in sanctification as a second act of grace, and resisted most popular culture as the devil's work. In doctrine and practice, it was much more evangelical than fundamentalist.

A neglected thread of church doctrine was the social gospel of John and Charles Wesley, the great reformers of late 18th-century Methodism. The Wesley brothers preached salvation through grace but also preached the duty of Christians, based solidly on Jesus' teachings, to minister to those less fortunate. My political philosophy springs directly from Jesus' teachings and is the reason I became active in the Democratic Party. Finally, in the qualification-to-speak category, I will seek to pre-empt the ad hominem disqualifiers. I am a sinner. I only ask for the same degree of forgiveness from my many critics that they were willing to grant George W. Bush for his transgressions.

As a candidate for public office, I chose not to place my beliefs in the center of my appeal for support because I am also a Jeffersonian; that is to say, I believe that one's religious beliefs - though they will and should affect one's outlook on public policy and life - are personal and that America is a secular, not a theocratic, republic. Because of this, it should concern us that declarations of "faith" are quickly becoming a condition for seeking public office.

Declarations of "faith" are abstractions that permit both voters and candidates to fill in the blanks with their own religious beliefs. There are two dangers here. One is the merging of church and state. The other is rank hypocrisy. Having claimed moral authority to achieve political victory, religious conservatives should be very careful, in their administration of the public trust, to live up to the standards they have claimed for themselves. They should also be called upon to address the teachings of Jesus and the prophets concerning care for the poor, the barriers that wealth presents to entering heaven, the blessings on the peacemakers, and the belief that no person should be left behind.

If we are to insert "faith" into the public dialogue more directly and assertively, let's not be selective. Let's go all the way. Let's not just define "faith" in terms of the law and judgment; let's define it also in terms of love, caring, forgiveness. Compassionate conservatives can believe social ills should be addressed by charity and the private sector; liberals can believe that the government has a role to play in correcting social injustice. But both can agree that human need, poverty, homelessness, illiteracy and sickness must be addressed. Liberals are not against religion. They are against hypocrisy, exclusion and judgmentalism. They resist the notion that one side or the other possesses "the truth" to the exclusion of others. There is a great difference between Cotton Mather and John Wesley.

There is also the disturbing tendency to insert theocratic principles into the vision of America's role in the world. There is evil in the world. Nowhere in our Constitution or founding documents is there support for the proposition that the United States was given a special dispensation to eliminate it. Surely Saddam Hussein was an evil dictator. But there are quite a few of those still around and no one is advocating eliminating them. Neither Washington, Adams, Madison nor Jefferson saw America as the world's avenging angel. Any notion of going abroad seeking demons to destroy concerned them above all else. Mr. Bush's venture into crusaderism frightened not only Muslims, it also frightened a very large number of Americans with a sense of their own history.

The religions of Abraham all teach a sense of personal and collective humility. It was a note briefly struck very early by Mr. Bush and largely abandoned thereafter. It would be well for those in the second Bush term to ponder that attribute. Whether Bush supporters care or not, people around the world now see America as arrogant, self-righteous and superior. These are not qualities of any traditional faith I am aware of.

If faith now drives our politics, at the very least let's make it a faith of inclusion, genuine compassion, humility, justice and accountability. In the words of the prophet Micah: "He hath shown thee, O man, what is good. What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?" And, instead of "O man," let's insert "O America."

Gary Hart, the former Democratic senator from Colorado, is the author, most recently, of "The Fourth Power: A Grand Strategy for the United States in the 21st Century.''

The World According to America

Stolen from Flatrock.org. I actually consider this the world according to America's megalomaniacal, ethically exempt government.

Watch Your Back

The war on drugs isn't working, and more and more people are locked up for long periods of time for non-violent offenses. Often, mandatory sentencing guidelines and rules like the 3-strikes you're out in CA and Measure 11 in Oregon, make it a serious problem when prisons are overcrowded or underfunded. It would not be unheard of for a violent offender to be released while non-violent offenders are kept behind bars simply due to having more convictions on record, whether or not they are more of a danger to society.

We need to stop locking people up for long periods of time for drug offenses and other victimless or non-violent crimes. We are a police state. We have more people in prison everyday but our government doesn't want to do anything to fix the root problems that lead to crime in the first place. They just want to lock people up and forget about them. Meanwhile, the tax payers pay and no reform ever takes place and eventually, half of our country is imprisoned.

Report: More women, black men in prison The Associated Press Nov. 8, 2004

WASHINGTON - The number of women in state and federal prisons is at an all-time high and growing fast, with the incarceration rate for females increasing at nearly twice that of men, the government reported Sunday.

There were 101,179 women in prisons last year, 3.6 percent more than in 2002, the Justice Department said. That marks the first time the women’s prison population has topped 100,000, and continues a trend of rapid growth.

Overall, men are still far more likely than women to be in jail or prison, and black men are more likely than any other group to be locked up. At the close of 2003, U.S. prisons held 1,368,866 men, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported. The total was 2 percent more than in 2002.

Expressed in terms of the population at large, that means that in 2003, one in every 109 U.S. men was in prison. For women the figure was one in every 1,613.

Number of factors

Longer sentences, especially for drug crimes, and fewer prisoners granted parole or probation are main reasons for the expanding U.S. prison population, said Marc Mauer, assistant director of the Sentencing Project, which advocates alternatives to long prison terms for many kinds of crimes.

The increase began three decades ago, and continues. The new report compared 2003 figures with those from 1995.

The number of women in prison has grown 48 percent since 1995, when the figure was 68,468, the report said. The male prison population has grown 29 percent over that time, from 1,057,406.

Five percent growth rate

Year by year, the number of women incarcerated grew an average of 5 percent, compared to an average annual increase of 3.3 percent for men.
“It coincides exactly with the inception of the war on drugs,” in the 1980s and continuing into the 1990s, Mauer said. “It represents a sort of vicious cycle of women engaged in drug abuse and often connected with financial or psychological dependence with a boyfriend,” or other man involved in drug crime, Mauer said.

The prison figures do not fully reflect the number of people behind bars. About 80,000 women were in local jails last year, along with more than 600,000 men.

The federal prison system held a large share of female prisoners, with a population of 11,635 at the close of 2003. One state — Texas — held even more, with a population of 13,487. California, the nation’s largest prison system, held 10,656 women. North Dakota had fewer women in prison than any other state — 113.

Among other findings in the report:

·More than 44 percent of all sentenced male inmates were black, and many of them were young.

·Among the more than 1.4 million sentenced inmates at the end of 2003, an estimated 403,165 were black men between 20 and 39.

·At the end of 2003, 9.3 percent of black men 25 to 29 were in prison, compared with 2.6 percent of Hispanic men and 1.1 percent of white men in the same age group.

·In 11 states, there were increases in the prison population of at least 5 percent, led by North Dakota with an 11.4 percent rise.

·Also, 11 states had decreases. Connecticut had the biggest drop, at 4.2 percent.

Posted by Maria at 10:41 PM | Comments (19) | TrackBack

Some Sick Shit Dude!

If she truly had these kinds of feelings for an 8 year old boy, this woman is really sick. I've been known to defend Mary Kay Letourneau, but this is fucking ridiculous.

Woman accused of sex with ‘boyfriend,’ 8

Nov. 8, 2004

BRIDGEPORT, Conn. - A woman faces charges of having a sexual relationship with an 8-year-old boy whom investigators said she considers her boyfriend.
Tammy Imre, 29, was arrested Friday and charged with sexual assault and risk of injury to a minor. A judge set bond at $250,000 Monday.

Police began investigating in September after the boy’s mother discovered a letter Imre had written him, in which she tells the boy she doesn’t “want anyone but you.”

She continued: “Now tomorrow it’s supposed to rain, you can come over we can (you know what).”

Police said the boy, the playmate of Imre’s 7-year-old daughter, initially denied doing anything with Imre because he feared getting into trouble. He later admitted having sexual relations with her.

Police said Imre told investigators she plans to marry the boy someday.
If convicted, Imre could serve more than 20 years in prison. A trial date has not been set.

If Ya Didn't Know, Ya Know Now

Well I'm glad some people are more actively talking than I am right now. I don't know where all my energy went, but I know it will be back as soon as I can dig myself out from beneath a mountain of over analyzation which renders me practically incapable of expression.

In the meantime, reading Daily Kos ignites a flame.

Some really good stuff there. Check it out.

Gramps

I feel numb today. I have nothing to say about politics that isn't being said by everyone else in the blogosphere, not to mention the real world. Or at least it feels that way. Nothing in the news sparks a fire in me. It's the same as any other day. War. Suffering. Bickering. Judgmental assholes... I can't even muster indignation.

Today especially, I wish my grandpa was still alive. He was a hard working Arizona state legislator in his day. I have a feeling that if he was still around to see the direction that politics are taking, he would have some very wise and encouraging words for me right now. While I'm wishing, I'd like it if my Grandma Eloise could come back too, to balance grandpa's words of wisdom with her own common sense words of compassion and keeping on.

She's Mad

Emailed from a friend. Published in Salon:

Many of my liberal friends are seriously discussing leaving the country, for Canada or Europe or New Zealand. It is, of course, tempting. How could we not feel a violent disillusionment and disconnect when we discovered this morning that the majority of voters in the country have a worldview we cannot comprehend? That hate and fear and ignorance can run a successful presidential campaign; that people will respond to these things with eager glee?

And if I wasn't tempted before leaving the house, one look at my car with its Kerry/Edwards bumper sticker -- the only car with such a sticker in the lot -- and how overnight it suddenly acquired a political statement consisting of eggs and shaving cream -- the only car in the lot so decorated -- certainly pushed me in that direction. I imagine the decorators (or their parents) voted on "moral values," as so many Bush supporters did.

But I'm not going to leave, and I made a list of reasons why.

Because this is my country.

Because I'm not letting them have New England autumns, New Mexico sunsets, the Grand Canyon, or Revere Beach.

Because Barack Obama, Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, and a few other stalwarts are isolated enough in a capitol gone mad without their supporters pulling up and getting out.

Because over a million people voted for Alan Keyes, and that means even in Illinois we can't relax.

Because Massachusetts elected a far-right religious zealot in a gubernatorial race no one bothered to vote in.

Because I do, honestly, want my kids to be American citizens.

Because two hundred years ago Americans believed in a separation of church and state, and if there's one thing we seem to be good at, it's regression.

Because we have to speak up even if they're not coming for us personally yet. We're educated and energized and relatively financially secure, and there are a lot of people out there who are none of those things and are at least initially going to suffer far more than we are. We have to speak for them if they can't speak for themselves.

Because this is still my country, and being female and pro-choice and pro-gay rights and an environmentalist and a pacifist and a believer in intelligent leaders and an atheist does not make me un-American or unpatriotic (or IMMORAL!) -- and that needs to be screamed from the fucking rooftops.

Because they vandalized my fucking car, and that is their level of discourse.

Because I am not afraid anymore. I am angry.

-- Mary Meiklejohn

Just a Little Glitch

Hmmm. I wonder how many other "glitches" occurred.

Glitch gave Bush extra votes in Ohio

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- An error with an electronic voting system gave President Bush 3,893 extra votes in suburban Columbus, elections officials said.

Rest of article here.

Designer Duds

Don't miss out on the latest fashions at Banana Republican.

Dude, where’s my car bomb? Can’t find a weapon of mass destruction – or a thing to wear? Rest assured that no one will call for your resignation in these duds – Abu Ghraib ’em while they’re hot!

There are known unknowns grey tank top $27
And there are known unknowns grey pants $45
Listen to me, I know what I’m talking about glasses $75

Emergency Information

This is what we get instead of Kerry

I need a laugh. And I know just the thing. Bushisms!

"We need an energy bill that encourages consumption."

"When Iraq is liberated, you will be treated, tried, and persecuted as a war criminal."

"Sometimes, Washington is one of these towns where the person - people who think they've got the sharp elbow is the most effective person."

"I promise you I will listen to what has been said here, even though I wasn't here."

"I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I believe and what I believe - I believe what I believe is right."

"For every fatal shooting, there were roughly three non-fatal shootings. And, folks, this is unacceptable in America. It's just unacceptable. And we're going to do something about it."

"It's very important for folks to understand that when there's more trade, there's more commerce."

"You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test."

"Redefining the role of the United States from enablers to keep the peace to enablers to keep the peace from peacekeepers is going to be an assignment."

"Natural gas is hemispheric. I like to call it hemispheric in nature because it is a product that we can find in our neighborhoods."

Sure glad he's our president.

More Sadness

The real cover of the Daily Mirror in London:

This is not a joke. It's scary to think that even the countries who are our "allies" think this is a nation of idiots.

Christian "Morality" Reigns Supreme

Thanks to Richard for emailing this. It would be funny if it weren't so fucking true.

Devastated

This is so fucked.

If we think we've seen what the Bush administration is all about in the past four years, we haven't seen nothin yet. No incentive left to cater even an iota to the center through left wing of this country. Now begins the launch of Bush's no holds barred agenda. What a feeling of freedom and power must be pulsing through his greedy veins right now. To have the world in the palm of his hand and the doors to the fate of this country flung wide open.

All there is left to do is fight his policies tooth and nail and never back down to the powers that seek to bring down democracy.

John Kerry was a great candidate. He really did the best that anyone could have done. I am genuinely sad that he will not be our next president. He would have made a really fine leader. He has a humbleness and a compassion and an understanding of people and the world that Bush is utterly lacking. I had hoped that the citizens of this country would recognize that and do the right thing. Unfortunately, as we've found out today, Americans are not worthy of the faith that I placed in them.

Here's my favorite photo of John Kerry. When I look at it, it reminds me that the good guys never win.

Off to Vote!

My boss just sent this to me:

Early turnout reports from CNN:

Ohio - African American precincts are performing at 106% what we expected, based on historical numbers. Hispanic precincts are at 144% what we expected. Precincts that went for Gore are turning out 8% higher then those that went Bush in 2000. Democratic base precincts are performing 15% higher than GOP base precincts.

Florida - Dem base precincts are performing 14% better than Bush base precincts. In precincts that went for Gore, they are doing 6% better than those that went for Bush. African American precincts at 109%, Hispanic precincts at 106%.

Pennsylvania - African American precincts at 102% of expectations, Hispanics at 136% of expectations. The Gore precincts are doing 4 percent better than bush precincts.
 
Michigan- Democratic base precincts are 8% better than GOP base states. Gore precincts are 5% better than Bush.

If true, this is insane. I am having a cow. I cannot deal with the excitement.

Getting Closer

I've been watching this election coverage on PBS that I think is superb compared to most of the crap we have all seen so much of. Tonight I watched a timeline of Kerry and Bush's lives with commentary from people who know them. It was nice to see something that was completely unbiased and neither casting a brighter light on negatives nor positives, but simply conveying the known facts of their documented lives and the thoughts and opinions of those who have known them. A real documentary. It really made me feel like I know each candidate and confirmed in my mind that I'm ready to cast an informed, conscientious vote at the polls tomorrow.

There was a time when I agreed along with other democrats in the beginning of this race that John Kerry was just like Bush; that nothing would change. It would just be the same shit, different day, another screwy politician, but that anything would be better than George Bush. I think we've all grown a lot since then.

I know I've said it here before in recent days, but I'm going to say it again for the sake of the impending political quagmire election: I believe that an America under the leadership of John Kerry would be different and far better than the one that exists under the rule of George Bush. I believe that he is the best candidate. I am proud of the democratic party for nominating him as our contender and I have faith in Americans that the majority will go out tomorrow and vote for the best candidate.

Throughout his life and his career, John F. Kerry has proven that he can be a leader. That he is capable of effectively analyzing complexities, that he is brave and heroic, that he is fiscally responsible, that he is environmentally and humanely responsible and compassionate, and that he is strong enough to protect and guide this country. I feel a belief in him that I never imagined I could feel at the beginning of this process. I know it sounds corny, but it really is true.

We all hear a lot of negative shit. And we haven't heard the last, that's without a doubt, but I look forward to an end to the suspense and anticipation of the election itself. I have a feeling there may never be an end to the bickering and punditry that has been the everpresent mark of the last year, or more accurately, since the beginning of George W. Bush's presidency. But regardless of the outcome, it will ultimately be a relief in itself to move beyond the virtual bardo of not knowing who our president will be for the next four years.

That Dubya does not live up to the esteem of the highest office in this country. It's time for him to step down. I look forward to the end of his loathsome administration and the beginning of far superior leadership for America.

A Full Spectrum

This post has been removed for the sake of my personal relationships, which, though in the heat of a righteous moment seem okay to broadcast, are ultimately not appropriate or necessary to display to all who read this blog.

Thank you.