« August 2007 | Main | October 2007 »

September 30, 2007

What is it Going to Take?

Because I spent a year in Zimbabwe when it was a rising star in Africa, it has been intensely painful for me to see the country's descent into Hell. Cathy Buckle's latest post about living in Zimbabwe is particularly chilling. As she describes the depths of despair and the lack of any uprising among the people I couldn't help but wonder if Americans would be any less compliant and helpless. Considering the toleration we have demonstrated for destruction of our Constitution and our international reputation, I have my doubts.

This week as Monks and then ordinary people in Burma took to the streets in their thousands calling out 'Democracy, Democracy' in the face of the police and soldiers, we can't help but wonder why something similar does not happen here. The chant could be shorter and even simpler than in Burma and it could just be: 'Food, food,' but without leadership it seems as elusive as ever.

It seems so impossible that people could be in such dire straits and still not rise up. And yet there it is for everyone to see. A whole nation believing itself to be helpless. That is, to me, a phenomenon more terrifying than any threat I can imagine. To be helpless is to be without hope.

Posted by Becky at 04:34 PM |

September 27, 2007

Will Bothwell Wake Up Christian America?

William Hughes today tells of an upcoming exposé on the Rev. Billy Graham by Cecil Bothwell, an award-winning investigative reporter. The book, which is due out Nov. 15, is entitled, “The Prince of War: Billy Graham's Crusade for a Wholly Christian Empire.”

Bothwell's unflattering portrait of Rev. Graham shows him as a wily warmonger and a lackey for the Establishment. He describes Rev. Graham as a public figure who: "Undermined the Founders' skeptical Deism and sought to rebrand the U.S. as a Christian nation, [and] its armies [as] the rightful instruments of [a] Christian crusade and empire."

Hughes says the book paints a very unflattering portrait of the man – as someone who is motivated by fame, rather than by a true calling to serve the Prince of Peace – and will reveal Rev. Graham’s warmongering, including:

- Urging Nixon to bomb North Vietnam ("There are tens of thousands of North Vietnamese defectors to bomb and invade the North. Why should all the fighting be in the South?...Especially let them bomb the dikes which could over night destroy the economy of North Vietnam.")

- Inviting Nixon to address his crusade shortly after the Kent State University student killings by the National Guard. ("All Americans may not agree with the decision a president makes--but he is our president...")

- Railing against anti-war protesters in 1969 (they were "radicals and those seeking to overthrow the American way of life").

- Calling Martin Luther King, Jr.’s criticisms of the Vietnam War "an affront to the thousands of loyal Negro troops who are in Vietnam," but refusing to join Dr. King in the Civil Rights march in Selma, Alabama, and avoiding Dr. King’s funeral.

- Joining Pres. George H.W. Bush at the White House to watch the Jan. 16, 1991 bombing campaign on Iraq on CNN.

- Staying mute about the Abu Ghraib scandal.

Hughes concludes:

I'm convinced that unless the Christian community in this country, Protestant and Catholic alike, opens its eyes to what Rev. Graham and his Establishment-serving ilk have been doing "in Christ's name," this nation is headed for a fall that will make the collapse of Rome look like a Sunday picnic.

If you ask me, it’s already too late. I believe that within the next few months, the proverbial birth pangs, in one form or another, will begin in earnest. And I fear Americans of all faiths and belief systems are simply not responding quickly enough to quell them.

Posted by Becky at 12:51 PM |

Presidential Programming Error

Sometimes you have to wonder whether President Bush isn’t a real person, but rather is a programmed robot with some severe speech glitches.

Now I can understand someone making mistakes in pronunciation, even someone in a high position with a lot of intelligence, so the fact that we have just learned that difficult-to-pronounce names are spelled out phonetically on the President’s teleprompter doesn’t bother me (I do wish someone would phonetically spell out “nuke-lee-ar”). But how in the world does the leader of the free world, in giving a speech to a group of school children, manage to say this?

"As yesterday's positive report card shows, childrens (sic) do learn when standards are high and results are measured."

It’s worse than talking about the “Internets.” Gawd.

Posted by Becky at 11:31 AM |

The Noose is Tightening

Today brings us more disturbing examples of abuse of authority. In this video you see a City Councilman get thrown to the ground and beaten with a fist by a cop after he had the temerity to unleash a stream of profanities at a Council meeting for being cut short in his testimony. Not only do we hear a bystander shout approvingly, “Get him. Get him for my dad,” but we are then treated to what you would swear is a B-movie script. The Councilman accuses the cop of abuse, to which the offending cop, after having beaten the Councilman on the back of the head several times, replies, “Who hit you Jack? Did you trip and fall?” And you just know that without the video tape, the subsequent felony charges against the Councilman of battering the cop would not have been dropped. Nods to NW Republican for bringing this to our attention.

Next, we have the unfolding saga of Blackwater and its “corporate culture” of aggression and excessive violence creating all sorts of trouble for us in Iraq. In fact, its security personnel are shooting up Iraqis at more than twice the rate of other American security contractors. Apparently, this is fine with the Bush Administration.

The UK Economist takes an interesting look at the creeping danger that modern technology and the War on Terror pose to civil liberties, something which is as applicable in America as it is in the UK. The noose is tightening on all of us. Hart Williams also writes about this today.

How fitting that just as we are failing to prevent the unfair treatment being given to the Jena 6 following threats of lynching, the lynchers are coming for us all.

Posted by Becky at 11:04 AM |

September 25, 2007

Parallel Universes

Apparently, there actually are parallel universes of infinite number where every possible scenario is played out and every time a choice is made "the universe splits." And apparently, nothing actually exists until it is noticed by a human being. Unless I'm misreading. So apparently, we each create our own reality by choosing what to notice and even what the outcome of various scenarios will be - such as whether or not we will be killed in an automobile accident. I guess it's sort of like being in a video game where all the possible outcomes are pre-programmed in, but you, the player, choose where you will go and make up your own story, but the other outcomes are still there.

I don't know about this, not being at all versed in quantum mechanics, but I'd be interested in others' take on it. It just sounds like the Matrix or maybe even a bit of predestination to me. But if it's true, then why don't we all choose peace and justice and equality and a wholesome environment, and then at least in this universe we can all be happy.

Posted by Becky at 10:06 AM |

Civil Rights Under Attack From All Quarters

What has happened to this country? Nobody acts while security personnel taser a kid for persistently asking John Kerry a tough question. In fact, nobody seems to care that tasers are frequently being used on people they should not be used on, and the horror stories just keep coming in. Outrageous cases include the tasering of children, the disabled, and the elderly. Innocent political activists are being surveiled and intimidated into submission by government agents. We are turning into a place where human beings don’t matter.

And it seems we’re not content to let the federal government or even our local governments have a monopoly on the abuse of civil rights. More and more we’re hearing about people doing it to each other. The horrifying saga of the Jena 6, who are facing a maximum 100 years in prison (compared to the maximum 10 years being faced by two white guys who beat a black man with a hammer simply for being black), is just one example. We have people actually arguing that homosexuality is not a civil right because, they believe, homosexuals haven't suffered as much as black Americans. And student newspaper staff, who dared to use the very same language upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Cohen v. California as a “lyric[al]” expression protected by the First Amendment, are rewarded by their college with a 10% pay cut for speaking out against the abuse of civil rights on their campus.

It’s like the Patriot Act mentality has opened a Pandora’s Box of tolerance for - and participation in - abusive behavior. What has happened to this country?

Posted by Becky at 09:50 AM |

September 23, 2007

Independents and some Conservatives turn on GOP

WASHINGTON - Michael Brooks is exactly the kind of voter the Republican Party can ill afford to lose. But in a foreboding omen for 2008, it may have already done just that.

In a trend that I've seen coming for several years now the MSM is finally talking about Independents having turned away from the GOP.

National exit polls show that after leaning toward Republicans by 48 percent to 45 percent as recently as the 2002 elections, independents began shifting toward Democrats.

Yeah, that's what I've noticed. Since 2003/2004 my fellow Indies have turned away from GOP stances on many issues, but mostly on national security issues revolving largely around Dubya's Folly (aka Iraq War).

"This is a serious problem" for Republicans, says GOP pollster Neil Newhouse. "We didn't get where we are among independents overnight. The data does suggest that it's going to take us some time to earn those votes back."

Yeah... good luck with that, Newhouse. You know what they say, "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." When you lose the White House and more seats in Congress in November '08, I suggest you go give Karl Rove a big wet one and thank him for that "service to his country" that Dubya talked about.

Two key stats that stand out in the Ipsos polling data on two separate polls earlier this month, here and here (.pdf warning).

1. In straight Party affiliation (or lack thereof) Independents outnumber Republicans 25% to 23% of the population, with Dems topping both at 33%. Meaning that in addition to having the loyalty of a full 10% more of the population, Democrats also enjoy the favor of Independents. In terms of party loyalists and leaners the Democrats enjoy a 48% to 36% advantage over the GOP.

2. The Ideology stats are highly interesting in relation to the party affiliation stats. Total Liberal is at 22% while Total Conservative is at 39%. Which means that at least some conservatives don't even lean towards the GOP in a head-to-head match up between Dems/GOP. I'm not sure what exactly to make of that but I do find it fascinating.

Posted by Kevin at 09:50 AM |

September 21, 2007

Vandalism of Jesus Bust is Simple Ignorance

Christians across the country are taking it as an affront to their religion that a 160-year-old marble bust of Jesus was knocked from its perch by vandals at the main branch of the Boston Public Library, while a nearby matching marble bust of Lucifer was not disturbed. The funny part is that nobody seems to be asking the key question here: why would beautiful matching marble busts of Jesus and Lucifer both adorn the grand staircase of the Boston Public Library? And the failure to ask that question prevents the discovery of something very interesting. That is that those who commission such works and operate above the every-day mundane world don't see Lucifer – or Jesus – in the same way as most Americans do. In fact, they view the two figures as personifications of astro-theological concepts or forces, both for good.

It is amazing to me that the rich symbolic history of modern religion is so unknown to most Americans. Why it isn't taught in school is beyond me, but I suppose if it was, then true believers would have a conniption fit.

The official story is thus:

The head of Lucifer has long locks of curly hair to portray the archangel shortly after he fell from grace, before evil and sin sullied his good looks.

Sounds like a nice explanation of why Lucifer is so beautiful, doesn't it? Still, something isn't right. And here's an important clue: both busts rest atop a coiled snake. What can this mean? Well, first some background.

Whether Lucifer is evil or good depends on who you ask. Luciferians claim that Christians have distorted who Lucifer actually was based on a mistranslation of Isaiah 12:14, the only passage in the Bible in which Lucifer appears. They say the passage referring to how far Lucifer (literally written as "son of the morningstar") has fallen really is referring to the "arrogant Babylonian King Tiglath-Pileser III." When translated into Greek, the term "phosphorus" or shining one was used, and when it was subsequently translated into Latin, the word became Lucifer. This may well be true because Lucifer (or Lightbearer) was a Roman god who did not exist when Isaiah was written.

In Roman mythology he is the herald of Aurora, the dawn. Lucifer is the personification of the Morningsstar, the planet Venus. In Greek mythology Lucifer was called Phosphorus, the shining one, herald to the rosy-fingered Eos, sister of Selene and Helios, the Moon and the Sun. The Dawn, which lies between darkness and light, is a fitting symbol of initiation. Lucifer, the herald of dawn, becomes the initiator himself.

This is the origin of the concept that Lucifer and Jesus were brothers. As you can see here, in astrological-theological belief, Jesus is actually a personification of the Sun, while Lucifer is the personification of Venus. The parallels between the Bible and astrology are quite striking if you spend some time to look into them.

The snake symbolism in the sculptures, however, is an important clue to the real reasons these two sculptures probably were commissioned. The serpent symbolizes the kundalini, or divine power. It is also connected with wisdom and duality. In the Biblical account, a winged serpent tempts Eve with the knowledge of good and evil, or duality. This fits in with the myth of the plumed serpent, Quetzalcoatl, which is also associated with the planet Venus, bringing us back to Lucifer.

Throughout pop culture, we often see ancient symbolism even though we don't recognize it. Yet taking a closer look can result in discovery of deeper meanings for those who enjoy such pursuits. For instance, who would have thought that looking into the symbolic meaning of snakes, Jesus, and Lucifer would lead to an explanation for our symbol for drugs?

[S]erpents can also be seen as analogous to the kundalini energy generated at the base of the spine by Shamans and Yogis that goes up through the spinal column and chakras and activates the third eye or pineal gland sometimes in conjuction with entheogenic plants. In this symbol system the rod of the caduceus is the spine, the coiled serpents represent the energy moving through the chakras, the disc is the pineal gland and the wings are the brain. Here we see the genesis of the caduceus becoming our modern symbol for drugs…

In this symbolic system through astrotheolgy we also need to know that Jesus becomes synonymous with sun and light while he is also the mushroom (which is in its turn drugs and the caduceus) itself.

What? Jesus as the mushroom? More on that here. And if you're interested in still more, then check out this site.

The point is that by jumping to offense over the apparent attack on our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, whilst the Devil incarnate, Satan, a.k.a. Lucifer is left untouched, people are entirely missing the fact that those two sculptures were never intended to represent those well-known Christian figures. That is simply a child's cover for what some revere as symbols of deeper mysteries and deeper truths. They would likely view the act of vandalism in the same way most would view an ignorant school-yard prank – as nothing more than meaningless idiocy, and certainly nothing to take as a massive insult.

Posted by Becky at 12:44 PM |

September 19, 2007

Put on Your Tin Foil Hat

This strikes me as somewhat interesting. A spokesman of Iran said today that those who support the “Zionist regime” will receive a “final response” for that support on the World Qods Day, which falls on October 12 this year. Qods Day is the last Friday of Ramadan and is set aside as a day to voice protest against Zionists.

Put on your tin foil had for a minute and consider the following facts. The USS Cole was attacked on October 12, 2000 and a major terrorist attack in Bali was also conducted on October 12, in 2002.

Even more spooky, October 12 this year is precisely 2,222 days after 9/11 (which occurred during a terrorism training drill). Other terrorist attacks have occurred on similarly numerically interesting days. For instance, the 7/7/05 London attack (which occurred during a terrorism training drill) occurred 444 days after the thwarted Sears Tower attack, which was scheduled for April 19, 2004 (the 9th anniversary of the Oklahoma City federal building truck bombing and the 11th anniversary of the Waco fire). The Sears Tower attack, had it occurred, would have been 911 hours after the Madrid train bomb attack on 3/11/04. And that attack occurred 911 days after 9/11/01.

Oh, and Operation Top Off, a terrorism training drill, will be occurring in Oregon at that time.

You may now remove your tin foil hat.

Posted by Becky at 02:49 PM |

September 18, 2007

Student Arrest Shows We've Lost Our Freedom

I think we're toast.

I have just watched this disturbing video and this follow-up video of a student at the University of Florida getting arrested and tasered after running overtime on his question and then asking John Kerry whether he was a member of Skull and Bones. Yes, he resisted arrest, but it was because he knew very well he should not have been arrested. The police overreacted to someone who was being verbally provocative but who posed no threat to anyone. Now he is being charged with a felony for supposedly inciting a riot. Problem is the only riot was by the police. None of the students joined in. And in my opinion, that is a problem. There was a time when they would have, and I think they should have.

See, it's not the arrest and tasering that make me say we're toast. I've seen many occasions first hand where the police exceeded their authority, lied, manipulated, and behaved unethically so I have come to expect it of them. The problem is we're letting them get away with it. Too few are challenging the infringement on our civil rights.

Watch the video again and this time look at the audience reaction. The audience sits by passively, as if they don't recognize or care that Big Brother is stomping all over the civil rights of one of their own. They are like dumb sheep. Are they stunned? Amused? Confused? Beaten down? It is difficult to tell. Imagine the scene if the students had en masse stood up and protested, or even swarmed over the police officers and forced them to stand down. Why wouldn't they do that? Well, of course, because the police are armed and someone might have been hurt or even killed, and certainly there would have been property damage and arrests. And because we've come to believe in this country that life is more important than liberty. Besides, we're supposed to respect the nice policeman because he is our friend. Ahem.

Somewhere along the way we have developed into a culture characterized by learned helplessness. You can even hear it in John Kerry's almost helpless tone. A quietness. A call for calm in the face of gross injustice. Let's not get upset. Let's not stand up for what is right. Let the nice policemen do their jobs and the rest of us will go on as if it never happened. Everybody just stay cool. It will be OK. I must admit, his failure to exercise any sort of authority in the situation surprised me.

This August 2005 story from PBS touches on the problem we're facing with today's youth. It isn't that young people today are not angry, because they are angry. It's that they don't know what they can do about it. They've somehow internalized the notion that they can't really do anything about it. So they just feel angry and hopeless.

We desperately need the youthful passions of today's young people to save our Constitution. We need a few good riots. We need to have the heavy hand of the civil rights-defying police put down. We need angry people surrounding the White House and flooding the halls of Congress. We need the masses to rise up, not just to be angry.

Does that notion bother you? Are you afraid we would be sending our young people into danger to advise them this way? Do memories of the Kent State University riots prevent us from doing what is right? We're so quick to send our young people off to die in wars abroad for causes we don't understand. Why do we teach them not to take risks here at home to fight for causes we do understand? Why do we continue to ignore the man behind the curtain?

Oops, I guess I'd better be careful or I could get arrested for inciting a riot.

Posted by Becky at 10:25 AM |

September 17, 2007

Death of Liberal Press and Liberal Academia

Paul Craig Roberts, a conservative and former Reagan Administration official, writes an interesting column today the death of liberal media and liberal academia. The loss of these independant voices, he says, marks the death of freedom in America.

Posted by Becky at 02:00 PM |

Oh, Yeah, He's "Very Much a Family Man"

Sorry, but I still think creeps like this deserve the death penalty.

Posted by Becky at 01:49 PM |

September 14, 2007

In Defense of Larry George

Back when I was involved in Oregon politics I saw some crooked dealings, but I also had the pleasure of working with some individuals who were steadfastly not crooked. In other words, though a few bad guys dominated my own experience, some good guys kept me from losing hope for a lot of years. Larry George was definitely one of the good guys. So imagine my surprise and dismay when I saw a post on Blue Oregon entitled, "Senator Larry George's Self-Payout." My dismay grew as I read about his "shady campaign finance decisions" and "questionable ethics." It peaked when I clicked through to the Land Use Watch website, where Sen. George's actions were called "self-dealing," "suspicious," and possibly illegal. I knew right away that unless Larry George had undergone a radical personality change in the last six years – not likely – somebody at Blue Oregon and somebody else at Land Use Watch was making a major fool of themselves.

The latest C&E filings are being poured over by anti-Measure 37 activists, and here's the supposed scandal. They have discovered that on numerous occasions, large expenditures of money have been paid by PACs controlled or partly controlled by Larry George to a company called George Advertising. And here's the incredibly surprising thing you would never in a million years guess:

“George Advertising” shares the same address as Senator Larry George. In fact, George Advertising is controlled by Senator Larry George: he is the President, Secretary, and Registered Agent.

Oh, the humanity.

People donate money to Senator Larry George. Senator Larry George then apparently decides to use George Advertising, and presumably he decides how much is paid out to his own advertising firm. Oh, and it’s not just his Senate campaign, but it’s also committees for which he is a director, including Oregonians in Action PAC, Oregon Sportsmens Association PAC (the statement of organization notes “Candidates controlling this committee: Lawrence George”), and maybe Oregon Family Farm Association (my transactions for using the site ran out).

This is just the tip of the ice berg because, in fact, this has been going on for years, and in broad daylight, too!

But here's the thing: it's not scandalous at all. The fact that it is being seen as scandalous is a result of the writers not having done any research, had any experience, or interviewed Larry George for this story, combined with their deeply held belief that all prominent Republicans must be corrupt and irresistibly drawn to money.

Larry George, like many other people, has his own consulting business. Lots of our elected Senators and Representatives do. And he makes some profit from it, as many others do. Not as much as others do, however, because in fact the whole reason he has a consulting firm is so he can provide affordable advertising placement to the causes he believes in – causes that are typically short on cash. So where one consultant might make half a million on a campaign, he might make a tenth of that. And on the campaigns he controls, when he hires himself to place advertising he doesn't make any profit at all. He does the work at cost. His firm is simply able to get better rates, so hiring himself saves the campaigns money.

I've seen the sort of activity that the writers involved in this non-scandal seem to believe is going on here. This is entirely different. In cases where illegal and scandalous behavior is occurring, efforts are undertaken to hide connections to key individuals. If that was occurring here, we wouldn't be talking about an ad agency called "George Advertising." You wouldn't easily be able to trace the organization to Larry George. Moreover, if something secretive was going on, you wouldn't have seen Sen. George introduce a bill last session requiring himself and all other legislators who have consulting firms to disclose their client lists – and when it failed, you wouldn't have seen Sen. George go ahead and fully disclose his entire client list on his ethics form anyway, even though it wasn't required. But he did. He did it because he knows that the problem with people making money representing paid interests is that if people don't know they have a conflict of interest, then they don't have to be accountable to the voters. Hence the whole business of declaring conflicts of interest. And Sen. George thought that if legislators were paid to consult for certain special interests, it would be a good idea if people knew about it so those legislators could be held accountable for decisions they might make that would benefit those special interests.

Every penny Larry George and his agency have received from a political campaign has been publicly reported. How it has been spent has been publicly reported. All of it is an open book and it has been for years. This scandal is simply an uneducated, conspiracy-minded overreaction to something that is completely above-board and honorably motivated, but which the parties simply do not understand.

I personally worked with Larry George on several political campaigns in the late 1990s and into 2001. I never once saw him do anything unethical or illegal. He is honest and dedicated to his cause. I've heard a lot of people on the left say they would like to see straight-shooting conservatives taking on straight-shooting liberals in honest debates. Well, here you have a straight-shooting conservative. Now is your chance to prove you mean it.

Let's focus on debating the issues surrounding Measure 49 and leave the personalities out of it. For once, let's look at this as a debate between fellow Oregonians who ultimately want the same thing – a bright future for Oregon – and simply have different ideas about how to get there. Let's start listening to each other instead of tearing each other down. Let's have some diplomacy here and end the war.

Posted by Becky at 05:07 PM |

An Irresistable Message of Love ... Well, Maybe Not

Remember Bill Keller, the televangelist who said a vote for Mitt Romney was a vote for Satan? Well, now he's back in the news in all his diplomatic glory, having just published a video message for Osama bin Laden in which he warns him to repent of his sins and convert to Christianity. It's such a warm and lovely message that I'm sure it will work and we'll be rid of terrorism forever.

Some highlights:

- He compares bin Laden to a "hunted goat," says he is "pure, unbridled evil," and describes Mohammad as a "false prophet" who also was "nothing more than a murdering pedophile who led men's souls to eternal damnation with the false religion he created."

- He describes Islam as "a 1,400-year-old lie that was born out of the voice of Satan – literally" and calls bin Laden a "coward" and a "tool of Satan."

No doubt Keller will succeed where diplomats and politicians have failed because, of course, he combines strength and straight talk with a message of salvation and the power of Jesus. Even those Muslims who rioted in the streets over Mohammed-mocking cartoons couldn't possibly resist.

Posted by Becky at 09:29 AM |

September 13, 2007

Is This the Best You've Got?

Whatever happened to that Pulitzer Prize winning rag, the Willamette Week? I love dirt on politicians as much as the next guy, but the paper’s “exposé" on Jeff Merkley this week is, well, weak. I mean, omigod, the man wouldn’t pay for water so his tenant could water the lawn, and the lawn died. Horrors!

Tell me, when was the last time your landlord paid your water bill? Or reimbursed you for improvements that he or she wasn’t contractually obligated to cover?

The article is so pathetic a smear attempt that it isn't even funny.

Posted by Becky at 11:01 AM |

Okay, You Can Stop the Ride Now

The nuclear news and people’s response to it these days is straight out of the Twilight Zone. It’s like our nation is on a wild roller coaster ride without a seat belt and nobody has noticed. Perhaps I wouldn’t be so nervous if it wasn’t for last week’s "accidental" transport of nuclear weapons across the country (please go read the link if you don’t understand how terrifying this incident really is or why it is so terrifying). Why is something so insanely serious not on everyone’s lips? Particularly in a state like Oregon, where not so long ago we voted to shut down the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant?

And now today we learn that a stockpile of plutonium and other nuclear weapons materials that have been stored at Los Alamos National Laboratory “ hasn't been fully accounted for in 13 years or more.” In other words, nuclear weapons materials could have gone missing from the lab and we would never know it. In a nation where five or six (depending on which news story you read) nuclear bombs, each with more than ten times the explosive force of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, could “accidentally” be flown across the country despite numerous safety procedures designed to prevent such an occurrence, do we really believe uninventoried nuclear bomb making material is secure?

Can we please stop the ride so I can get off? I feel like I’m going to throw up.

Posted by Becky at 10:10 AM |

September 12, 2007

Excuse Me? Hope?

The New York Times had a science article today that was so ridiculous that it just blew me away. According to the article, astronomers have discovered a planet that seems to have survived its host sun's demise and, they say, that means there is hope for the survival of Earth when our Sun dies about five billion years from now. All life on Earth will be snuffed out when it expands into a red giant, of course, but somehow "there is some hope."

I ask you, who gives a rip if some part of the ball of rock we're living on manages to continue to float around in space after our sun expands and swallows it up, then burns out leaving it a lifeless ball of icy rock? How is that cause for "hope"? Why would it matter if there was no one left for it to matter to?

Posted by Becky at 09:06 PM |

September 11, 2007

Those Liberal Journalists Made Me Do It!

Senator Larry Craig is now blaming journalists for his having plead guilty after he was caught in a sex sting in the men's room of the Minneapolis airport. He says that because reporters had been hounding him for months about his sexuality, he was under extreme stress that apparently clouded his judgment -- their "witch hunt" made him do it.

There's only one problem. Craig already stated in his motion to withdraw his plea that he plead guilty because he believed the officer's statement to him that doing so would make the whole thing go away.

Officer Karsnia told me several times during the interview that I could plead guilty to an undisclosed crime, pay a fine, and be "done" with the situation. I believed him and, based in part on his representation, I decided to plead guilty.

If you watch for it, you'll find that cornered liars always want to say it's someone else's fault. If they're lucky, they can keep their story straight. If not, well ...

Posted by Becky at 02:20 PM |

September 10, 2007

I Had Planned to Post Today ...

...but something else has taken up all my allotted writing time today.

The exchange actually does fit in quite interestingly with this new study about the difference between the way liberals think and the way conservatives think. Perhaps what happened to me is I was raised a conservative, but I have a liberal mind. Something I'll be pondering for awhile.

Posted by Becky at 12:49 PM |

September 09, 2007

I'm leavin' on a jet plane...

FYI - I'm headed to Canada for a few days to attend a technical school for my day job. I'm leaving tonight and won't be back until Thursday. My internet access may be spotty due to time constraints and I probably won't be able to do more than stop by occasionally to see how things are going and to stir the pot. I'll post if I can, but don't count on it.

Posted by Kevin at 07:21 AM |

Fat gene discovery - global boon or bane?

Listening to NPR's regular Science Friday show a couple days ago I was intrigued by the last segment. It was about a newly published study on Adipose - AKA the "fat gene".

Apparently this gene essentially controls how efficiently the body converts and stores fats from the food we eat. The less efficiently we store fats the less excess weight we gain. Which appears to largely explain why two people can take in the same amount of calories from the same kinds of foods and one will struggle with excess weight while the other will remain skinny or even struggle to put on weight.

But what does this discovery portend for humanity? The health benefit implications are significant - diabetes could potentially be eradicated or very nearly so and I should think that heart disease would be impacted as well. Healthier, more fit workers would probably be capable of increased production and perhaps marriage statistics could even improve. And just imagine how much simpler and more efficient military Boot Camp will be when the recruits are already reasonably fit. But what about the flip side of the coin?

As the population of planet Earth continues to climb and global weather conditions appear to be becoming more erratic, with droughts and other phenomenon affecting crop production, starvation and malnutrition continue to be a significant global problem.

I foresee a day in the not so distant future when gene therapy becomes a routine part of the childhood immunization process in Western countries. People will be able to consume more foods without suffering negative health consequences from it. But will that be a good thing or will it consign 3rd world populations to even worse conditions?

Of course this doesn't have to be our future. Medical science could track down how to control appetite and combine that with gene therapy to allow us to eat less rather than more.

Am I my brother's keeper? Or do we continue with the modern variant on Manifest Destiny and grab everything that we can get on the premise that God wants us to do so, consigning the parable of the Good Samaritan to the no longer relevant dustbin of history?

Posted by Kevin at 06:41 AM |

September 08, 2007

Merkley blog

Team Merkley have their new campaign blog up: Campaign Trail. Go check it out.

Posted by Kevin at 08:33 AM |

September 07, 2007

Now that Explains Everything

After reading about Osama bin Laden's latest video, I finally understand why Grover Norquist is so interested in Islam, is married to a Muslim, and lobbies for Islamic causes. It is because "there are no taxes in Islam."

Posted by Becky at 01:35 PM |

Justice Department Opposes Net Neutrality

In case you harbored any doubts as to who owns the Justice Department, yesterday it stepped outside its Mission statement and took the stance that market forces should be allowed to work in the realm of the Internet. ISPs, it said, should be allowed to charge a fee for priority Web traffic - something being pushed by companies such as AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast. For some reason, the Justice Department feels its opinions matter as to the workings of the economy, and it is expressing concern that “Net neutrality” laws could interfere with the development of the Internet, preventing ISPs from upgrading or expanding their networks. Worse, it says, such legislation could place the “entire burden of implementing costly network expansions and improvements onto consumers.”

Sounds so Norquistian – help the corporations make more money, but make it sound like you’re looking out for the financial well-being of the little guy. Funny that opposing “Net neutrality” legislation happens to be one of Grover Norquist’s pet projects. Funny that Norquist has been paid good money before to lobby the Justice Department on several other antitrust matters, including Microsoft and Oracle. And funny how the Justice Department has at the same time repeatedly failed to investigate or prosecute Norquist’s ongoing money laundering activities. Something stinks here - but then, whenever Norquist is involved, that is par for the course.

Posted by Becky at 11:37 AM |

Legal Loophole May Save Sen. Craig

Looks like a legal loophole might save Sen. Larry Craig’s ass. No pun intended. Apparently, he did not realize that Article 1: Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that no member of Congress can be arrested while traveling to or from official session. And wouldn’t you know it, on June 11, the day Craig was arrested, he cast a vote on a high-profile cloture motion on the Senate floor at 5:55 p.m.

By way of review, Craig never bothered to tell anyone about his arrest until the story broke 77 days later (eclipsing news coverage of the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales a day earlier – interesting timing considering he had to have known about Craig’s arrest). Craig waited until June 22, 11 days later, to show back up at the Minneapolis airport to complain about his treatment by the police after the arrest. Two months later, on 8/8, he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor, which he now claims was a mistake made without advice of an attorney.

Craig has served in elective office for 33 years, first as a state legislator, then as a congressman, and now as a Senator. His seat is one of 22 Republican-held Senate seats up for election next year, compared with 11 Democrat-held seats. (33 regular Senate seats are being contested in all, if you don’t count the Senate election in Wyoming, which is a special election for a senator to complete the remainder of another’s term.)

The youngest of Craig’s adopted children, 33-year-old Jay Craig, is acting as the family spokesman, and he says that after speaking with their father, "Our conclusion was there was no wrongdoing there." But neither that nor the technicality offered by the Constitution may ultimately carry much weight with the people back home. The latest SurveyUSA News Poll (#12555) shows 55% of Idahoans want him out of the Senate.

And brace yourself for more outings - a blogger who outed Craig before the bathroom incident ever occurred, has a list of 33 congressmen who are closeted homosexuals, and only three of them have been exposed so far.

Posted by Becky at 10:49 AM |

Iran fined, but what about US?

An American judge has fined Iran $2.6 billion for it's support of Hezbollah which carried out the 1983 bombing of Marine barracks in Lebanon.

That seems fair.

What about US? Specifically the Iran/Contra scheme? Huge numbers of tortures and murders (i.e., Terrorism) were carried out by the Contras and our government, via the Reagan Administration, directly funded and supported them as much as Iran funded and supported Hezbollah. Indeed, Bush 43 has brought many veterans of the Iran/Contra scheme into his administration... most notably John Negroponte, Bush's National Intelligence Director. Negroponte of course was Reagan's pointman with the Contras.

If a Nicaraguan judge fined the United States government a couple billion dollars on the same exact grounds on which Iran has been fined, would Bush treat it the same as they are guaranteed to treat this ruling against Iran?

Posted by Kevin at 10:32 AM |

September 06, 2007

Born-Again Militarists “Kicking Ass” in Iraq

Yesterday, as President Bush arrived in Australia, he proudly announced that “We’re kicking ass” in Iraq. That’s a bit of a different tone from his message to a group of veterans a couple weeks ago, in which he finally embraced the similarities between Iraq and Viet Nam and described the American military as the “greatest force for human liberation the world has ever known.” And speaking of that speech to the vets, Tom Engelhardt offers a fascinating analysis of the fundamentalist Christian influence on the Bush Administration and the war and all that ass-kicking. He is particularly concerned at the emphasis placed on militarization, as opposed to everything that has traditionally defined America.

Past American presidents might perhaps have spoken of the "greatest force for human liberation" as being "the American way of life" or "the American dream", or American democracy, or the thinking of the Founding Fathers. But it took a genuine transformation in, and the full-scale militarization of, that way of life, for such a formulation to become presidentially conceivable, no less to pass unnoticed, even by fierce critics, in a speech practically every word of which was combed for meaning.

Now, read the speech again and you'll see that the line in question wasn't simply passing blather for an audience of vets, but a thematic summary of the thrust of the whole address, of, in fact, the very vision the Bush administration and supporting neo-conservatives carried into office. Much has been said about the Christian fundamentalist nature of the administration, but if that had truly been the essence of these last years, the president would have identified Jesus Christ as that "greatest force".

Not that a distinction need be made, but this administration's primary fundamentalism has been that of born-again militarists, of believers in the efficacy of force as embodied in the most awe-inspiring, high-tech military on the planet. This was the idol at which its top officials worshipped when it came to foreign policy. They were in awe of the idea that they had at their command the best equipped, most powerful military the world had ever seen, armed to the teeth with techno-toys; already garrisoning much of the globe (and about to garrison more of it); already on the receiving end of vast inflows of taxpayer dollars (and about to receive staggeringly more of the same); already embedded in a sprawling network of corporate interests (and about to be significantly privatized into the hands of even more such corporations); already having divided most of the globe into military "commands" that were essentially viceroy-ships (and about to finish the job by creating a command for the "homeland," NORTHCOM, and for the previously forgotten, suddenly energy-hot continent of Africa, AFRICOM.

In the wake of September 11, 2001, these fundamentalist believers in the power of One to twist all other arms on the planet managed to add a second Defense Department - the Department of Homeland Security (with its own "industrial complex") - to the American agenda; they passed ever more draconian laws curtailing American rights in the name of "homeland security"; they went remarkably far in turning what was already an imperial presidency into something like a Caesarian commander-in-chief presidency; they presided over a far more politicized Defense Department (whose commanders today speak out, while in uniform, on what once would have been civilian political matters); they initiated far more sweeping means of government surveillance at home.

And they opened offshore prisons, giving their covert intelligence operatives the possibility of disappearing just about any human being they cared to target and their interrogators permission to use the most sophisticated kinds of torture. In short, they presided over a striking increase in the state's coercive powers, as embodied in a single, theoretically unrestrained commander-in-chief presidency and the first imperial vice-presidency in American history. (Of course, from the Reagan "revolution" on, the American conservative movement that first took power over a quarter of a century ago never meant to throttle the state, only the capacity of the state to deliver any services except "security" to its citizenry.)

How distant now is the American moment when a peacetime US Army could still exist as a minimalist force (as between the two world wars or even, to some extent and briefly, after the demobilization of World War II). Similarly, it is no longer possible for American politicians of either party to imagine any region of the globe as not part of our national security sphere or not an object of our attentions, not to say our duty, if push comes to shove (or far earlier), to intervene or make war. As a name, Bush's "war on terror" was no more meant as blather than that "greatest force for liberation the world has ever seen".

Engelhardt offers much more and you really ought to go read it.

Posted by Becky at 09:59 AM |

The Self-Delusion Continues

I wrote yesterday about the process of self-delusion that led Sen. Larry Craig down his chosen path, as well as the phenomenon of self-deluded loyal supporters of such disgraced politicians. I have had an up-close and personal view of a very similar situation. Today brings more of this same phenomenon to my attention, first with the news that Craig’s supporters are calling for a boycott of the Minneapolis-Saint Paul Airport for “ambushing” the senator and somehow thereby weakening private property rights, and then with the latest Ted Piccolo editorial claiming that those calling for the impeachment or criminal prosecution of President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Alberto Gonzales, and Karl Rove are all “moonbats” because the men “are all innocent.”

Piccolo argues that the complaints against these prominent Republicans are entirely partisan in nature, and were they Democrats, no one would be calling for their heads.

In a nation where innocent until proven guilty has been pretty much a corner stone right it seems that that protection does not protect Republicans.

Because, after all in the liberal mindset (and the MSM) just being a Republican is a crime. If you dare to hold a different POLICY viewpoint you are guilty of being a bigot, an enemy of the environment, killing children in other countries, bribery, blackmail or any other clandestine crime. Again because if you can't PROVE the crimes of elected Republicans that just PROVES that they are guilty.

Of course never mind that a top Hillary Rodham-Clinton (and Democrat) fundraiser Norman Hsu is on the run AGAIN from the law. Or that there were Chinese Communists dropping money off at the Clinton White House in brown paper bags. All of that does not count and should be forgotten.

Yet... Yet according to the moonbats it is supposed to be commonly accepted that virtually everyone in the Bush administration is guilty of some crime. Even though with several investigations (and one REAL BIG ONE) and hopes of Karl Rove being marched out in handcuffs still they are, like most Americans, INNOCENT. And the MSM buys it hook line and sinker.

First, the fact that Democrats seem to have forgotten the Johnny Chung scandal and appear nearly ready to nominate Hillary Clinton as their candidate really should be an embarrassment. So is the silence regarding Mr. Hsu. Clearly, the left is as guilty of self-delusion as the right.

That said, many people who are not “moonbats” have written comprehensively on the crimes of Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, and Rove, and it is clear they are anything but “innocent.” Just as “guilty” requires a court verdict, so does “innocent.” I personally have observed criminal behavior that was investigated and not prosecuted. That did not make the party involved “innocent,” no matter what he and his supporters want to believe.

You can read about Bush’s crimes here, here, and here; Cheney’s crimes here; Gonzales’ crimes here and here; and Karl Rove’s crimes here and his shady past here.

And about that liberal bias in the MSM? Read about that here. Unless, of course, you’re a self-deluded right-winger who is ever-so-willing to overlook the crimes of one of your own.

Posted by Becky at 09:19 AM |

September 05, 2007

Indecisiveness Born of Self-Delusion and Partisanship

I’ve never seen anyone in public life so completely conflicted and undecided in my life as Sen. Larry Craig. First, he claims he is straight after being caught trying to pick up an undercover cop for gay bathroom sex. Then he foregoes legal counsel and pleads guilty, but later says he wasn’t guilty and hires a lawyer to try to undo his plea. Next, when the story goes public, he resigns, and now he is having second thoughts about that, too, saying through his spokesman that resignation is “not such a foregone conclusion anymore.”

Best case scenario for Sen. Craig is he really is innocent and has simply displayed a horrendous lack of sound judgment ever since, in which case he needs to be out of the Senate. Worst case scenario, and more likely, is that he is sexually conflicted, that he risked his reputation as a U.S. Senator to have “nasty, bad, naughty boy” sex with a stranger in a public restroom, thereby embarrassing his entire state and country, that he has lived a lie his entire adult life to the point where he compulsively lies with ease now, that he is so addicted to the power of his office that he is blind to the disgrace he has brought to this country and cannot let it go, and on top of it all, he has a horrendous lack of sound judgment.

Nevertheless, he is a Republican with a good conservative voting record. If any legal decision gives him the slightest bit of wiggle room, he will claim to have been exonerated and the Republican voters will forget all about the facts of his case, chalking it all up to a dirty Democratic scheme to take down a good Republican. And he may well even fool himself into believing it. Such things happen all the time.

A man who lies easily to others often lies to himself, pushing his knowledge of his own bad deeds back down in the dark corners where it can be ignored by his conscious mind. When someone acknowledges to himself that he is a dirty, crooked liar, others can smell it. But when he actually consciously overlooks his own wrongdoing, like someone learning to ignore an ache or pain to get through his daily life, and he convinces himself on that day-to-day operating plane that he actually is a good person, the stench becomes so masked it is hard for others to readily discern, making them easier to victimize.

So I feel for his wife and his children, who really have no palatable choice but to believe and love him, at the same time that I am disgusted with his partisan supporters, whose own naiveté is such that they allow this sort of horrendous “leadership” to continue to undermine what is good for the country.

Posted by Becky at 09:56 AM |

This and that

I'm an avid bumper-sticker reader and this morning I saw a real gem.

Of course it hurts, you're getting screwed by an elephant.

Ouch!!

Anyway... FYI I'm experiencing computer difficulties. My power supply died yesterday and I'm hunting down a source of a replacement. Hopefully that will be today. But until then I'll only have occasional access via my work computer, which I'm on right now.

Posted by Kevin at 07:42 AM |

September 04, 2007

How Dirty Boys Get Clean

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has an interesting new post up on its blog this morning. It seems that in response to CREW's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from the Office of Administration for 5 million missing White House emails, the White House has decided it would rather keep its communications private from its employers and stakeholders (us) and has simply changed the rules on the fly. The dirty boys at the Department of Justice had claimed the office was exempt, but the White House's own Web site said it wasn't. Unfortunately, the Washington Post reported the discrepancy, creating a bit of a mess. What to do? Scrub the White House Web site to axe the listing of the Office of Administration, of course. Problem solved!

Posted by Becky at 11:26 AM |

Accountability: Fire Smith or Impeach Gonzales?

Two Democratic candidates vie for the right to unseat Republican chameleon Gordon Smith.

Two fundamentally different solutions to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales lying to Congress and possibly subverting the course of justice.

Attorney, former Justice Department lawyer and current consultant (lobbyist?) for public sector clients Steve Novick's apparent idea of Constitutional accountability for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales lying to Congress was apparently for Oregonians to vote Senator Gordon Smith out of office.

Public Policy pro, former Defense Department & Congressional analyst and current Oregon legislator Jeff Merkley called for Gonzales' Impeachment.

Which approach makes the most sense to you? Why?

Posted by Kevin at 07:43 AM |