Brian William's interview of an Iraq war widow: Brian, really your dewy eyed basset hound look when interviewing the wife of a soldier killed in Iraq is simply media staged. If the news conglomerates can make a buck especially off a women's tears and sadness they'll do the story. What on this earth would someone who has lost a loved one in Iraq say about Iraq? Would she/he say that they died for nothing? How many times do we the public have to hear those meaningless explanations that freedom is not free? I get that BUT Iraq had NOTHING I repeat NOTHING to do with our freedom. The invasion and occupation of Iraq was based on lies, misplaced revenge, the attainment of power, corporate money, delusional neocon politics and pure hubris. The Iraqis never attacked us or our freedom. Osama bin Laden did. Where is he? Why wasn't there an all out effort by the hugest, strongest military on planet earth used to get the REAL perpetrator? Iraq got in the way of Afghanistan where the real culprits lie. I might add the preponderance of the 9/11 attackers came from Saudi Arabia. Why didn't we attack them?
Guess what? Reality speaks. Iraq was an epic mistake and all nearly 3600 and counting have indeed died for not a thing except to put this country and the world in an even greater danger. If there was no Al Quaeda in Iraq before the war there certainly is now. I feel great empathy for that woman but if one wants to, in fact, do the right thing by all our soldiers and to show true empathy get them out of that dastardly hell called Iraq immediately. Our soldiers were commanded to invade a country which did nothing to us. They are in that country to kill because that is the military's purpose. It is NOT nation building.
My freedom feels to me to be more at risk now than directly after 9/11 when the world was with us. We now stand alone and are considered by many to be a rogue nation. What happened between 9/11 and now? George Bush took us to an unnecessary war and our soldiers went voluntarily. Our 3000 lost on 9/11 have NOT been avenged. Bin Laden is still alive crawling around a mountain somewhere with kidney dialysis machine in tow on the Pakistan border and the strongest nation on earth has done nothing about it. According to George Bush in one of his speeches he does not care!
When Bin Laden is captured or killed I could say THAT was a rational response. With all due respect to that woman who lost her husband in Iraq, so called freedom was not the rationale for going there in the first place. It was to allegedly find WMD and for other vacuous reasons. When we found no WMD all of a sudden it was about some trumped up platitude called Iraqi freedom. Attacking a nation that did not attack us is CERTAINLY not free it is damn expensive!
This is a running commentary on contemporary social, political and religious issues. From the Introduction of James Comey's book "A Higher Loyalty -- Truth, Lies and Leadership" "Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary" Reinhold Niebuhr
Friday, June 22, 2007
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Thoughts on War: I saw one picture of graphic violence with respect to the latest insane Iraq mosque bombings. How can anyone steal the beauty of those mosques? They were simply gorgeous edifices constructed by the mind of man. The destruction of them is so sad and the annihilation of people even sadder. The carnage is unimaginable. It simply staggers me. I think with all the glory, all the parades and all the hoopla about war this is what war really is. It's not glory and it's not flag waiving. It is bodies ripped apart so one can barely identify that the corpse was once a human being. The man on a stretcher in an Iraqi "emergency room," the remnants of whose body I saw, was somebody's son, somebody's brother, husband or friend. The love of him has been drowned in a river of blood. His identity covered soon by the dust. Most of us who live here are lucky. We are not used to this kind of violence except if you were so unlucky to have been at Ground Zero on 9/11 or in the Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building on April 19, 1995. Generally speaking, we do not know the carnage that exists in Iraq except for the few who were so unlucky to be sent to that God forsaken place and are among our dead or wounded.
Then, of course, I think of Hiroshima or Nagasaki as recently I had the misfortune of seeing the graphic pictures of that too. It is unimaginable. Every day I think of the Holocaust and the ovens, the torture and death. I search for meaning where there is none. How can we do this to one another? Why? It is such a waste of humanity. Somewhere among the dead of recent wars perhaps lies a scientist, an artist, a playwright, a mathematician or a biologist who cures disease. Why do we waste life with such ease? What religion tells human beings to do this to one another? It is beyond my understanding. I simply do not know. I have been told history is written by the victors and that I believe is so. Really, though, in the end we are ALL the losers. War today, I believe, has no winners. I shake my head in disbelief and wonder if I will ever live to see the senseless violence end.
Then, of course, I think of Hiroshima or Nagasaki as recently I had the misfortune of seeing the graphic pictures of that too. It is unimaginable. Every day I think of the Holocaust and the ovens, the torture and death. I search for meaning where there is none. How can we do this to one another? Why? It is such a waste of humanity. Somewhere among the dead of recent wars perhaps lies a scientist, an artist, a playwright, a mathematician or a biologist who cures disease. Why do we waste life with such ease? What religion tells human beings to do this to one another? It is beyond my understanding. I simply do not know. I have been told history is written by the victors and that I believe is so. Really, though, in the end we are ALL the losers. War today, I believe, has no winners. I shake my head in disbelief and wonder if I will ever live to see the senseless violence end.
Homosexuality -- a Biological Imperative and Biblical Fallacy: In my opinion, there is no question that homosexuality, generally speaking, is biologically determined in-utero probably due to a combination of hormonal and other genetic factors. It is impossible to think that most would choose a life which is fraught with difficulty if there were not an overwhelmingly compelling nature-driven dictate orchestrating man's sexual symphony.
As man's knowledge increases I hope there will be a time when the issue of gay marriage will be moot. I trust some day the Biblical edicts which some interpret to frown upon and exact brutal punishments for homosexuality will be understood in the same context as the Biblically fallacious ideas that once believed the earth was the center of the universe. Through science and observation we absolutely know the earth is just a small part of huge universe and that it lives because it revolves around the sun. We can, therefore reject much of which is undeniably scientifically and fundamentally untrue about the Bible. Likewise, I hope, someday science will verify the fact that biology itself determines sexuality. When this happens it would be nice if the murderous behavior of all those religious fanatics who base their cruelty against homosexuals on Biblical veracity would finally see the error of their ways.
As man's knowledge increases I hope there will be a time when the issue of gay marriage will be moot. I trust some day the Biblical edicts which some interpret to frown upon and exact brutal punishments for homosexuality will be understood in the same context as the Biblically fallacious ideas that once believed the earth was the center of the universe. Through science and observation we absolutely know the earth is just a small part of huge universe and that it lives because it revolves around the sun. We can, therefore reject much of which is undeniably scientifically and fundamentally untrue about the Bible. Likewise, I hope, someday science will verify the fact that biology itself determines sexuality. When this happens it would be nice if the murderous behavior of all those religious fanatics who base their cruelty against homosexuals on Biblical veracity would finally see the error of their ways.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Our Prescient Founders: Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force of the people.... No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.
— James Madison
— James Madison
Iraq the Continuing Debacle: The Bush administration has committed a foreign policy blunder of epic proportions. It has brought our country to an abyss. It is staggering how any one administration could have done so much damage to our country which was once the envy of the world. Our, country, the beacon of liberty's light where so many came to enjoy its endless possibilities seems to be on the precipice of a disaster from which we may never recover. Our enemies are now salivating at our weakness and unlike WWII we have very few allies in Europe and elsewhere we can count on for true support. The Bush administration, its cronies and political hacks have forfeited the credibility we once enjoyed.
Iraq has been an unmitigated failure promulgated by lies to the Congress and to the American people. This adventure has dismembered our military, spent our treasure and has mired us in foreign entanglements about which our prescient Founding Fathers warned. This administration has opened up a hornets nest and, in the process, squandered our best opportunity to dismantle Al Qaeda when the world was with us. How could they have done this to our nation? They have fractured the Middle East by opening up a war which could set the entire region on fire. The president has compromised our own civil liberties by dismembering our rights one by one.
President George Bush ignored the warnings before 9/11 which appeared on his desk. The Bush administration, with Cheney at the helm and Rove in the background, have committed endless illegalities and have taken this nation possibly to the brink of destruction. I really do hope prayer works because I am saying one for our nation. This is a grave and extraordinarily serious time, perhaps, even worse than the rise of the European tyrannies of the 20th century. I hope our president sleeps well. I can assure you I am not.
Iraq has been an unmitigated failure promulgated by lies to the Congress and to the American people. This adventure has dismembered our military, spent our treasure and has mired us in foreign entanglements about which our prescient Founding Fathers warned. This administration has opened up a hornets nest and, in the process, squandered our best opportunity to dismantle Al Qaeda when the world was with us. How could they have done this to our nation? They have fractured the Middle East by opening up a war which could set the entire region on fire. The president has compromised our own civil liberties by dismembering our rights one by one.
President George Bush ignored the warnings before 9/11 which appeared on his desk. The Bush administration, with Cheney at the helm and Rove in the background, have committed endless illegalities and have taken this nation possibly to the brink of destruction. I really do hope prayer works because I am saying one for our nation. This is a grave and extraordinarily serious time, perhaps, even worse than the rise of the European tyrannies of the 20th century. I hope our president sleeps well. I can assure you I am not.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Movies-- "Gidget": I LOVE watching films of the 1950's which say so much. Well, they say so much about the 1950's. What a ridiculous bunch of substantively nothing some of these films were. The plots are so thin as are the women. I think when one looks at these films ... really looks at them ... one can see why there had to be a feminist movement. All the cliches apply. The women surely do not seem to have a brain in their head.
In this film Gidget's friends simply do not know what on earth will happen to poor Gidget if she doesn't have a successful summer which means getting a steady boyfriend. She cannot even return to school if that doesn't happen. Gidget, well, she just ruminates and hand wrings wondering why oh why she just does not have the right stuff. Maybe there is something "wrong" with her that she simply does not care about men. She's such a cutsey tomboy. Uh oh..Nope, not to worry, gay is not an issue. Gay is an impossibility in that era and not even eluded to even though one of her friends seems ever so lesbian to me. Worry not though, her friend who helps her dress for the loowow and listens while Gidget worries about men but says nothing, is pinned, to a guy of course. Gidget's mother reassuringly stands by and tells her everything is AOK and she will know that man when she meets him. Whew, I was SO worried.
We know, all's well that ends well and Gidget does finally get a man (Moon Doggy)in the hunky form of James Daren and, of course, remains virginal to boot. She realizes there is nothing "wrong" with her at all. She simply did not meet the "right" one. Thank God. She's saved OR thank God she saved IT! How could this ever-so bleached blond with an 18 inch waist, those platinum looks and pancake makeup whiter than white skin not meet anyone? One could never mistake her for a black woman that's for sure. Of course, in the 50's there were no blacks right? Did anyone of that era really have Gidget's hair and skin that color? If one cared to notice Gidget's eyebrows were brown! No one notices as blond, whiter than white skin, and an 18 inch waist, especially for women, are what America in the 50's wanted everyone to be.
What was her character all about? If one expects her to discuss War and Peace, Dickens, Steinbeck or even Louisa May Alcott forget it. How about she discusses James Baldwin, Alan Ginsberg or Lenny Bruce? No way. Will she talk about Jim Crow laws in the south, the Brown v. Board of Eduction Supreme Court decision or American foreign policy post WWII? I don't think so. Gidget is about worrying though. It is worrying about learning how to surf, attending loowows in the right clothes, hunky guys and Gidget's lack of attraction to men err lack of attraction to the RIGHT man. After all, this is serious stuff.
Perhaps, the film is about innocence. Innocence, though, without some reality is simply trash. That is what the Gidget films are. They are pure and simply ridiculous trash. Sandra Dee had talent however as evidenced by movies such as "Imitation of Life" and "A Summer Place." It's too bad her talent was wasted on the Gidget genre of film. Obviously, those films made money and THAT was what the Gidget films were all about. They made money because America wanted women to be like Sandra Dee. If you weren't like that then too bad--life is tough.
Oh well, I will admit watching those films is like taking a drink. It's utter escape into a life of pure fantasy and into the innocent life of a 1950's that really never was all that innocent. No, Gidget is surely not reality. For a moment, though, when I watch it, I can pretend, indeed, it is.
In this film Gidget's friends simply do not know what on earth will happen to poor Gidget if she doesn't have a successful summer which means getting a steady boyfriend. She cannot even return to school if that doesn't happen. Gidget, well, she just ruminates and hand wrings wondering why oh why she just does not have the right stuff. Maybe there is something "wrong" with her that she simply does not care about men. She's such a cutsey tomboy. Uh oh..Nope, not to worry, gay is not an issue. Gay is an impossibility in that era and not even eluded to even though one of her friends seems ever so lesbian to me. Worry not though, her friend who helps her dress for the loowow and listens while Gidget worries about men but says nothing, is pinned, to a guy of course. Gidget's mother reassuringly stands by and tells her everything is AOK and she will know that man when she meets him. Whew, I was SO worried.
We know, all's well that ends well and Gidget does finally get a man (Moon Doggy)in the hunky form of James Daren and, of course, remains virginal to boot. She realizes there is nothing "wrong" with her at all. She simply did not meet the "right" one. Thank God. She's saved OR thank God she saved IT! How could this ever-so bleached blond with an 18 inch waist, those platinum looks and pancake makeup whiter than white skin not meet anyone? One could never mistake her for a black woman that's for sure. Of course, in the 50's there were no blacks right? Did anyone of that era really have Gidget's hair and skin that color? If one cared to notice Gidget's eyebrows were brown! No one notices as blond, whiter than white skin, and an 18 inch waist, especially for women, are what America in the 50's wanted everyone to be.
What was her character all about? If one expects her to discuss War and Peace, Dickens, Steinbeck or even Louisa May Alcott forget it. How about she discusses James Baldwin, Alan Ginsberg or Lenny Bruce? No way. Will she talk about Jim Crow laws in the south, the Brown v. Board of Eduction Supreme Court decision or American foreign policy post WWII? I don't think so. Gidget is about worrying though. It is worrying about learning how to surf, attending loowows in the right clothes, hunky guys and Gidget's lack of attraction to men err lack of attraction to the RIGHT man. After all, this is serious stuff.
Perhaps, the film is about innocence. Innocence, though, without some reality is simply trash. That is what the Gidget films are. They are pure and simply ridiculous trash. Sandra Dee had talent however as evidenced by movies such as "Imitation of Life" and "A Summer Place." It's too bad her talent was wasted on the Gidget genre of film. Obviously, those films made money and THAT was what the Gidget films were all about. They made money because America wanted women to be like Sandra Dee. If you weren't like that then too bad--life is tough.
Oh well, I will admit watching those films is like taking a drink. It's utter escape into a life of pure fantasy and into the innocent life of a 1950's that really never was all that innocent. No, Gidget is surely not reality. For a moment, though, when I watch it, I can pretend, indeed, it is.
Monday, June 04, 2007
The Terror of TB: Everyone connected with Mr. Speaker's extreme drug resistant TB is at fault. In my opinion, the very first time Mr. Speaker was aware, initially in January after a rib injury, that he had a case of extreme drug resistant TB, a prohibitive no travel possibly quarantine order should IMMEDIATELY have been issued by our government. It should NEVER have been suggested he not travel but it should have been DEMANDED AND LEGALLY ORDERED he not travel. Where was our much touted Homeland Security? After all biological risk is said to be on their agenda. Being a lawyer, he certainly should have known he should not assume the legal (not to mention moral) risk of travel harboring a contagious disease. I don't care if he was marrying the Queen of England. He should not have traveled legally and he should not have traveled morally. Who the hell does the moral thing these days? It's every man for himself. He fits right in to our right wing leadership which does not REALLY care a wit about society as a whole but loves non-governmental intervention especially in cases of public need (but not in cases of unnecessarily bombing the hell out of other countries which did not attack us.)
This shows one, I believe, that the individual cannot be trusted to do the right thing because many care only for themselves. It is the law of self preservation. The initial medical establishment who treated Mr. Speaker is at fault and the CDC is at fault when both became informed that the TB was drug resistant. Mr. Speaker himself is culpable for not having a shred of decency to consider the other guy. Of course the border inspector in Canada who knew and thought Speaker looked "well" and let him back into the US should, without question, be fired.
Speaker failed and, most especially, our system failed. Welcome to the Age of Katrina and the Bush administration's DEemphasis of governmental responsibility. God help us. I say get this accursed administration out of our nation's highest offices fast and elect a human being with intelligence as the chief executive who will hire people of expertise to control the critical arenas of public protection. Elect a chief executive who does not simply spout platitudes about morality but one who REALLY does something to ensure the nation survives.
This president has appointed moronic cronies to the most sensitive positions caring for the public welfare. Whether it's the security of this country compromised by disease, disaster, or terrorism we need INTELLIGENT leadership in offices which have dictates over public safety. We need ACTION and not rote cranked out speeches that tout feigned action. Most especially we need this administration to be held accountable.
This TB episode, in my view, is a reflection of a higher reality just as the Katrina response was. Our country's leadership at every juncture is an utter and abominable failure. It is the WORST in history and it is humiliating that the world sees a complete nincompoop and his cronies control the nation's highest echelons of power catapulting this nation over a cliff.
Natalie Rosen
www.natalierosen.blogspot.com
This shows one, I believe, that the individual cannot be trusted to do the right thing because many care only for themselves. It is the law of self preservation. The initial medical establishment who treated Mr. Speaker is at fault and the CDC is at fault when both became informed that the TB was drug resistant. Mr. Speaker himself is culpable for not having a shred of decency to consider the other guy. Of course the border inspector in Canada who knew and thought Speaker looked "well" and let him back into the US should, without question, be fired.
Speaker failed and, most especially, our system failed. Welcome to the Age of Katrina and the Bush administration's DEemphasis of governmental responsibility. God help us. I say get this accursed administration out of our nation's highest offices fast and elect a human being with intelligence as the chief executive who will hire people of expertise to control the critical arenas of public protection. Elect a chief executive who does not simply spout platitudes about morality but one who REALLY does something to ensure the nation survives.
This president has appointed moronic cronies to the most sensitive positions caring for the public welfare. Whether it's the security of this country compromised by disease, disaster, or terrorism we need INTELLIGENT leadership in offices which have dictates over public safety. We need ACTION and not rote cranked out speeches that tout feigned action. Most especially we need this administration to be held accountable.
This TB episode, in my view, is a reflection of a higher reality just as the Katrina response was. Our country's leadership at every juncture is an utter and abominable failure. It is the WORST in history and it is humiliating that the world sees a complete nincompoop and his cronies control the nation's highest echelons of power catapulting this nation over a cliff.
Natalie Rosen
www.natalierosen.blogspot.com
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
"Why We Fight": I recommend highly a great documentary film in rental called "Why We Fight" made by Eugene Jarecki. This is an ever-so-precise explanation of US foreign mis-policy post WWII. The centrifugal part of the documentary centers around Dwight Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the Nation Jan, 17, 1961 where he presciently talks about, at that time, the fledgling military industrial complex which now has become the ubiquitous military industrial complex. The very entertaining film, of course, applies to contemporary events most especially Iraq and it evolves as such. A word Eisenhower wanted to put in his address but took out was "Congressional" so he wanted to say the "military industrial *CONGRESSIONAL* complex" but opted for a more politically prudent phrase of military industrial complex. Nonetheless he was unbelievably prescient for his time, considering his life long occupation and the fact he was Republican.
The documentary did include some comments by an aged Gore Vidal albeit very briefly. I wish I saw more experts like Vidal, Howard Zinn or the provocative Noam Chomsky giving commentary on more pop cultural formats such as Hardball, Paula Zahn, Larry King or Keith Olbermann. We need some truth tellers. I have all but given up. It is a hard thing when one approaches 60 (I'm only 58!) to start realizing we are not forever. I cannot envision a world without my favorite academics and personalities. Hell, I cannot envision a world without me. It is even harder for me to realize the limits of what we will see. At 20 something my hope was endless. Now, I really do not have much. It's sad to think that way but I do. No matter how vociferous those against violence as a method of foreign policy are it never seems to really matter. Now, this behemoth is bigger than any of us. A caveat symbolizing that is today the news is Cindy Sheehan is hanging up her protest sign. She said it has cost her her health, her money and that her son Casey died for nothing. That is symbolic to me of it all.
This documentary is on DVD and has excellent commentary especially the running commentary of the filmmaker and an expert.
The documentary did include some comments by an aged Gore Vidal albeit very briefly. I wish I saw more experts like Vidal, Howard Zinn or the provocative Noam Chomsky giving commentary on more pop cultural formats such as Hardball, Paula Zahn, Larry King or Keith Olbermann. We need some truth tellers. I have all but given up. It is a hard thing when one approaches 60 (I'm only 58!) to start realizing we are not forever. I cannot envision a world without my favorite academics and personalities. Hell, I cannot envision a world without me. It is even harder for me to realize the limits of what we will see. At 20 something my hope was endless. Now, I really do not have much. It's sad to think that way but I do. No matter how vociferous those against violence as a method of foreign policy are it never seems to really matter. Now, this behemoth is bigger than any of us. A caveat symbolizing that is today the news is Cindy Sheehan is hanging up her protest sign. She said it has cost her her health, her money and that her son Casey died for nothing. That is symbolic to me of it all.
This documentary is on DVD and has excellent commentary especially the running commentary of the filmmaker and an expert.
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Memorial Day Memories: Two white haired quite elderly gentlemen wearing veterans' caps were sitting at a local supermarket with collection cans and handing out red poppies when they received a donation. I remembered vets doing that so many years ago when I was a child. These gentlemen were so sweet as they thanked and blessed me when I dropped a minuscule four quarters in their collector. I thought it a poor recompense for what they had endured. I thanked them for what they and others have given to the country and then I cried.
I was crying not only for the vets' sacrifice but also because the War in Iraq is a horrific mess and lost. I was crying for the waste of young life and because we are now considered by many to be the pariah of the world instead of its savior. When I was a child the vets with the poppies were usually WWII vets. I thought what a far cry Iraq II is from World War II. The two wars are light years apart not only in decades but are light years apart in the rationale for going to war. Iraq II has been one of the most divisive and, in my opinion, worst foreign policy blunder in US history. It has been based on catastrophic lies, incompetent mismanagement, inability to understand regional history and an absence of prescient planning. We attacked a nation which did not attack us. This war may have ultimately the most dire far reaching consequences for the US and, indeed, the world as nearly any we have waged. The argument now should be not whether we leave Iraq but how fast we should leave.
The mistake of Vietnam, I thought, was bad enough but the Iraq II venture really takes the blunder prize. In the brilliant film "Judgment at Nuremberg" one of the Germans, a former Nazi judge played by Burt Lancaster, accused of war crimes, finally admits to his complicity in the horrific Nazi atrocities. He ashamedly and ever-so-passionately asks the question "Where were we? Were we deaf, dumb, blind?"
I might ask the same thing of the people who not only conducted this war but the ones who were complicit in giving the permission slip. In the final analysis, someone put this president in office and someone voted yes giving him financial carte blanche to conduct a war under false pretenses which not many questioned. Perhaps, William Shakespeare said it best in Act I Scene II of Julius Caesar: "The fault dear Brutus is not in our stars but in ourselves."
I was crying not only for the vets' sacrifice but also because the War in Iraq is a horrific mess and lost. I was crying for the waste of young life and because we are now considered by many to be the pariah of the world instead of its savior. When I was a child the vets with the poppies were usually WWII vets. I thought what a far cry Iraq II is from World War II. The two wars are light years apart not only in decades but are light years apart in the rationale for going to war. Iraq II has been one of the most divisive and, in my opinion, worst foreign policy blunder in US history. It has been based on catastrophic lies, incompetent mismanagement, inability to understand regional history and an absence of prescient planning. We attacked a nation which did not attack us. This war may have ultimately the most dire far reaching consequences for the US and, indeed, the world as nearly any we have waged. The argument now should be not whether we leave Iraq but how fast we should leave.
The mistake of Vietnam, I thought, was bad enough but the Iraq II venture really takes the blunder prize. In the brilliant film "Judgment at Nuremberg" one of the Germans, a former Nazi judge played by Burt Lancaster, accused of war crimes, finally admits to his complicity in the horrific Nazi atrocities. He ashamedly and ever-so-passionately asks the question "Where were we? Were we deaf, dumb, blind?"
I might ask the same thing of the people who not only conducted this war but the ones who were complicit in giving the permission slip. In the final analysis, someone put this president in office and someone voted yes giving him financial carte blanche to conduct a war under false pretenses which not many questioned. Perhaps, William Shakespeare said it best in Act I Scene II of Julius Caesar: "The fault dear Brutus is not in our stars but in ourselves."
Friday, May 25, 2007
Three Questions: MSNBC is asking three questions on their web page. I have pasted in all three and answered all three one by one individually.
First Question: What issue facing our country today is most important to you or has the greatest impact on you, your family and neighbors?
The greatest importance to our country, I believe, is its security. However, to ensure our security and to make sure the country has funding for things that matter I believe we MUST change the direction of our foreign policy. Perpetual war does NOT bring perpetual peace. It brings the threat of more war and ultimately the possible extinction of humankind as we know it. The War in Iraq, which I initially supported, became, I believe a colossal error. It showed me that the US MUST reexamine how we conduct ourselves internationally. When Ron Paul, Republican candidate, for president said it matters what America has done in the past and our historical behavior often dictates present aggressions against us he was exactly correct. Why Rudolph Giuliani never heard an analysis like that I do not understand. Real security and the real safety of our military troops and personnel comes first with an extrication from wars we cannot win through military intervention. Each war for the US after WWII has been problematic. It is a different era. We must step up security which requires funding and we must wage peace. Money going to the Iraq war -- in many cases horrendously wasted -- needs to be spent at here home. We need to develop ties internationally over decades which will HELP the people of the Middle East not bomb them into submission. Bombing does not stop terrorism it creates it. Perhaps, that money we save by NOT going to war could be redirected and spent on ameliorating the planet threat of global warming, improving healthcare, education and ultimately ensuring the welfare and the security of our people.
Second: How does it affect you, your friends or loved ones? Tell us your story, and please be specific:
I am disabled. I am constantly worried specifically about healthcare. This country, the richest on the planet, in my opinion, should have enough resources to make sure someone like I do not spend the rest of my life worrying whether I will have the money to pay for the medications I take now or may need in the future. Aging strikes everyone. Most everyone will have to face the ravages of it at some point in their life. As medicine becomes more advanced life is extended. As life is extended more medical interventions will be necessary. Healthcare is expensive and not affordable to many. Wars sap billions and ultimately trillions of dollars which could be redirected and used to help people who cannot help themselves. Those are moral values too and, in my opinion, those are the ones that count above all the others. If we cannot breath the air, if we cannot afford healthcare, if we cannot pay for medication, if children cannot get the education that is available we all, as a nation, suffer. As much as I love the value of American individualism I also believe man is a social being and needs the group to ensure his survival. Our nation must attend to the needs of its individuals when those individuals cannot do that alone.
Third: What do you think should be done to "fix" this problem?
We cannot anymore utterly waste billions conducting unnecessary, purposeless, unsupervised and careless military interventions. While there is no doubt we must spend on maximum military preparedness, we must be prudent, too, and ever-so-cautious when we use it. It must be used only as a last resort. We most especially need to elect the most intelligent, articulate and communicative leaders who possess an understanding of history and who possess the diplomatic skills to know when to use force and when not to. Huge amounts of money, which has throughout recent decades, been wasted on ineffective wars, must be spent on the betterment of mankind and not on its destruction. Only then can we as a nation begin to recapture and show to the world, as we have in the past, the true genius of our system of government and the humanity of our people.
First Question: What issue facing our country today is most important to you or has the greatest impact on you, your family and neighbors?
The greatest importance to our country, I believe, is its security. However, to ensure our security and to make sure the country has funding for things that matter I believe we MUST change the direction of our foreign policy. Perpetual war does NOT bring perpetual peace. It brings the threat of more war and ultimately the possible extinction of humankind as we know it. The War in Iraq, which I initially supported, became, I believe a colossal error. It showed me that the US MUST reexamine how we conduct ourselves internationally. When Ron Paul, Republican candidate, for president said it matters what America has done in the past and our historical behavior often dictates present aggressions against us he was exactly correct. Why Rudolph Giuliani never heard an analysis like that I do not understand. Real security and the real safety of our military troops and personnel comes first with an extrication from wars we cannot win through military intervention. Each war for the US after WWII has been problematic. It is a different era. We must step up security which requires funding and we must wage peace. Money going to the Iraq war -- in many cases horrendously wasted -- needs to be spent at here home. We need to develop ties internationally over decades which will HELP the people of the Middle East not bomb them into submission. Bombing does not stop terrorism it creates it. Perhaps, that money we save by NOT going to war could be redirected and spent on ameliorating the planet threat of global warming, improving healthcare, education and ultimately ensuring the welfare and the security of our people.
Second: How does it affect you, your friends or loved ones? Tell us your story, and please be specific:
I am disabled. I am constantly worried specifically about healthcare. This country, the richest on the planet, in my opinion, should have enough resources to make sure someone like I do not spend the rest of my life worrying whether I will have the money to pay for the medications I take now or may need in the future. Aging strikes everyone. Most everyone will have to face the ravages of it at some point in their life. As medicine becomes more advanced life is extended. As life is extended more medical interventions will be necessary. Healthcare is expensive and not affordable to many. Wars sap billions and ultimately trillions of dollars which could be redirected and used to help people who cannot help themselves. Those are moral values too and, in my opinion, those are the ones that count above all the others. If we cannot breath the air, if we cannot afford healthcare, if we cannot pay for medication, if children cannot get the education that is available we all, as a nation, suffer. As much as I love the value of American individualism I also believe man is a social being and needs the group to ensure his survival. Our nation must attend to the needs of its individuals when those individuals cannot do that alone.
Third: What do you think should be done to "fix" this problem?
We cannot anymore utterly waste billions conducting unnecessary, purposeless, unsupervised and careless military interventions. While there is no doubt we must spend on maximum military preparedness, we must be prudent, too, and ever-so-cautious when we use it. It must be used only as a last resort. We most especially need to elect the most intelligent, articulate and communicative leaders who possess an understanding of history and who possess the diplomatic skills to know when to use force and when not to. Huge amounts of money, which has throughout recent decades, been wasted on ineffective wars, must be spent on the betterment of mankind and not on its destruction. Only then can we as a nation begin to recapture and show to the world, as we have in the past, the true genius of our system of government and the humanity of our people.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Farewell to Falwell: The Biblical story of Exodus tells us not to be joyful when another person dies even if that person is one's enemy. As the legend tells us when the Jews saw the Red Sea swallow up their enslavers God told them not to be joyful because after all those dying were His creation too. Try as I might not to be happy that Jerry Falwell is gone I fall short. I think the evil that man did by suppressing the rights of blacks, women, homosexuals, indicting them for 9/11, his suppression of AIDS research in the Reagan years resulting in the deaths of thousands, his views against stem cell research which create so much suffering as well as his contribution to the emergence of a money-oriented Evangelical movement and corrupt Republican machine is far more important to iterate.
Some people laud him by saying he was genuine and he was what he appeared to be. To me what he appeared to be was hateful, stupid and cruel. I cannot understand why are we spending so much time talking about him? I suppose the reality of how many he influenced commands that we do. Jerry Falwell created discord. He was a fanatic. He did not attempt to erase the nation's divisions but contributed toward them. I certainly will not mourn his passing but rather hope, probably to no avail, that no one of his ilk emerges in that movement to take his place.
Some people laud him by saying he was genuine and he was what he appeared to be. To me what he appeared to be was hateful, stupid and cruel. I cannot understand why are we spending so much time talking about him? I suppose the reality of how many he influenced commands that we do. Jerry Falwell created discord. He was a fanatic. He did not attempt to erase the nation's divisions but contributed toward them. I certainly will not mourn his passing but rather hope, probably to no avail, that no one of his ilk emerges in that movement to take his place.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Frontline -- The Religious right and the keys to the White House: I detest Pat Robertson and his ilk so much that I think I may not be able to watch Bill Moyers this Friday night as he examines the influence of the religious right in the White House and beyond. I felt the same way about watching its segment on Mormonism. I watched part of it in increments.
The threat of the subrogation of the state to religion -- any religion -- is, to me, like returning to the Dark and Middle Ages. Mankind has fought long and hard to plow its way from the torturous path of kingly and papal tyranny through to the Magna Carta, on to the Renaissance, to the Reformation, Age of Reason and Age of Enlightenment only to have all those centuries hard-fought-for rights, cultural and scientific advancement rendered worthless by the institution of a George Bush presidency. Bush, a cerebrally inept and incurious man with many psychological debilitations, has with much help, attempted to return humanity to its most repressive and intellectually bankrupt past. I can barely watch it happen. Pat Robertson's flock literally taking up residence in the White House is a sort of blasphemy to me except not of the religious kind but of an intellectual variety. It is almost more than I can endure.
Of course, to close ones eyes to its occurrence is to remove oneself from perhaps having some influence to prevent the backward motion of history. When three of nearly a dozen Republican candidates actually raise their hands to indicate they do not believe in evolution reflects the catastrophic danger these people present. Perhaps the law of historical gravity will prevail and present culture will not fall on the sword of the ignorance of drunken religious bliss. Perhaps, we will be saved this time by an intellectual messiah of reason rather than be sacrificed at the alter of stupidity.
The threat of the subrogation of the state to religion -- any religion -- is, to me, like returning to the Dark and Middle Ages. Mankind has fought long and hard to plow its way from the torturous path of kingly and papal tyranny through to the Magna Carta, on to the Renaissance, to the Reformation, Age of Reason and Age of Enlightenment only to have all those centuries hard-fought-for rights, cultural and scientific advancement rendered worthless by the institution of a George Bush presidency. Bush, a cerebrally inept and incurious man with many psychological debilitations, has with much help, attempted to return humanity to its most repressive and intellectually bankrupt past. I can barely watch it happen. Pat Robertson's flock literally taking up residence in the White House is a sort of blasphemy to me except not of the religious kind but of an intellectual variety. It is almost more than I can endure.
Of course, to close ones eyes to its occurrence is to remove oneself from perhaps having some influence to prevent the backward motion of history. When three of nearly a dozen Republican candidates actually raise their hands to indicate they do not believe in evolution reflects the catastrophic danger these people present. Perhaps the law of historical gravity will prevail and present culture will not fall on the sword of the ignorance of drunken religious bliss. Perhaps, we will be saved this time by an intellectual messiah of reason rather than be sacrificed at the alter of stupidity.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
Waging Effective War and Waging Effective Peace: Jeff Jacoby in his May 9, 2007 editorial in The Globe entitled "Israel's Deadly Stupor" says Israel should maintain a constant state of war readiness and not lose its fervor because its enemies will not lose theirs. It is, I think, impossible for a state to maintain that kind of fervor for constant, perpetual and never-ending war. I am sure he will say Israel's enemies and our enemies, too, will always be in the attack mode. One part of me knows that he is right and that radical Islamic fanaticism will never give up, never not love war, and will always attempt to kill us. My other part says war is not an answer. It is too costly in blood, treasure and carries with it the potential for nuclear annihilation. War alienates rather than befriends.
What can we do? If war is the only answer then for certain it must be waged better than Olmert and most certainly better than Bush waged it. Both men have wasted life and both produced the opposite of what they set out to do. We need sagacious leadership that finds its way out of this constant state of fear and war. War has done nothing but bankrupt states and made them hated. We, in addition to being war ready, need to create an arena where religious fanaticism and anti-US propaganda does not proliferate. War plays into our enemies hands. Building bridges, finding water supplies, establishing medical facilities, building schools and the like builds friendships which eschew Islamic anti-US radicalism and propaganda. We need to wage peace but if we must turn to war we must do so through effective surgical strikes only when absolutely necessary and certainly only when effectively planned!
What can we do? If war is the only answer then for certain it must be waged better than Olmert and most certainly better than Bush waged it. Both men have wasted life and both produced the opposite of what they set out to do. We need sagacious leadership that finds its way out of this constant state of fear and war. War has done nothing but bankrupt states and made them hated. We, in addition to being war ready, need to create an arena where religious fanaticism and anti-US propaganda does not proliferate. War plays into our enemies hands. Building bridges, finding water supplies, establishing medical facilities, building schools and the like builds friendships which eschew Islamic anti-US radicalism and propaganda. We need to wage peace but if we must turn to war we must do so through effective surgical strikes only when absolutely necessary and certainly only when effectively planned!
Saturday, May 05, 2007
Letter and question to the Department of Defense: I heard a panel on CSpan discussing the American political landscape. One questioner at the end asked a very important and poignant question perhaps the most grave question of the entire discussion. He asked what the answer is to the eventual thought by some, that WWIII in the Middle East was unavoidable. One commentator said that truly this is the question that absolutely no one in the military or in our government or even outside of our government has any idea how to avoid or what to do.
I recently caught part of a segment done by Ted Koppel which centered on the role for our military OTHER than the role of warrior. That is instead of waging war, we are waging peace. His reporting centered on some rather remote villages in Africa and elsewhere where the US has made incredible humanitarian inroads by providing medical, schools, water development and other humanitarian assistance to poor people in various parts of the globe. This has given the US such a positive image in those places which it assists and even foils the attempts of terrorists to gain a foothold. It seems to me part of the problem in Middle East countries and elsewhere is the people's feeling that somehow they were left out of the success equation of the western world and used by the west for primarily the economic reason of oil. That probably I suspect has some truth. Obviously, other religious and historical issues are involved but do not you think that what I have just described is one crucially pivotal way we can avoid a doomsday scenario? There must be an answer. I believe 9/11 was avoidable and surprised even the perpetrators as to how devastating it was but, of course, hindsight is 20/20. I believe another, God forbid a million times, event could be avoided IF we can get people around the Globe not to hate us but to appreciate us. That is how we were viewed after WWII. Something after that, I think, went askew. We must get that back again and I think that humanitarian and other assistance while OF COURSE maintaining our own security is one simple rather inexpensive effective answer to the most complex and poignant question of our age.
I recently caught part of a segment done by Ted Koppel which centered on the role for our military OTHER than the role of warrior. That is instead of waging war, we are waging peace. His reporting centered on some rather remote villages in Africa and elsewhere where the US has made incredible humanitarian inroads by providing medical, schools, water development and other humanitarian assistance to poor people in various parts of the globe. This has given the US such a positive image in those places which it assists and even foils the attempts of terrorists to gain a foothold. It seems to me part of the problem in Middle East countries and elsewhere is the people's feeling that somehow they were left out of the success equation of the western world and used by the west for primarily the economic reason of oil. That probably I suspect has some truth. Obviously, other religious and historical issues are involved but do not you think that what I have just described is one crucially pivotal way we can avoid a doomsday scenario? There must be an answer. I believe 9/11 was avoidable and surprised even the perpetrators as to how devastating it was but, of course, hindsight is 20/20. I believe another, God forbid a million times, event could be avoided IF we can get people around the Globe not to hate us but to appreciate us. That is how we were viewed after WWII. Something after that, I think, went askew. We must get that back again and I think that humanitarian and other assistance while OF COURSE maintaining our own security is one simple rather inexpensive effective answer to the most complex and poignant question of our age.
The DC mad Madam? I don't think so. Watch 20/20 tonight: It's not the sex stupid, it's the HYPOCRISY of course! These holier than thou Republican utter hypocrites are beyond belief. How anyone could even THINK of voting for them is beyond me. They are corruption not to mention stupid ad nauseum (30% of the Republican candidates did NOT I repeat NOT believe in evolution.) Why didn't Chris Matthews ask them if they tried giving previously effective but now useless antibiotics to cure a strep throat and just why they thought that happened? Did someone ask how many believed in gravity, a round earth with the sun as its center or maybe the tooth fairy? I bet they all believe in the tooth fairy but round earth not so much. 100% think full term human beings women should die at the hands of a quack dark alley abortionist rather that terminate their own pregnancy within their own body. There must be one Republican of intellect somewhere? Where?
Republicans want abstinence for all except them. What utter garbage. Read my lips: NO ONE but NO ONE can have an easy time denying sexuality. Just ask a few thousand priests if abstinence worked for them. God, if there is one, must shake his head in utter disgust. Of course, Democrats commit their own sexual indiscretions but at least that party does not base its very foundation on sexual morality wanting to deny women control of their own body, creating the virginity police or hoping that homosexuals would just die, be sent to prison or become their kind of Christian.
The Republican party needs to think very seriously about just what morality is. How about morality being about feeding the poor and, clothing the naked and not giving no bid contracts to Halliburton? How about clean government not dedicated to running rough shod over the little guy and not giving tax breaks to billionaires? Oh yes, and how about not bombing the living hell out of countries which did not attack us? Maybe that would gain us some friends and actually prevent another 9/11. Did ja ever think of that? Somebody, I forget who .. probably me, said "a little kindness in public and foreign policy goes a long way." I hope all these Republicans who have committed sexual hypocrisy not to mention the scads of other scandals they have perpetrated within the most corrupt administration in US history, get their due. Maybe then I will REALLY believe there is a God!
Republicans want abstinence for all except them. What utter garbage. Read my lips: NO ONE but NO ONE can have an easy time denying sexuality. Just ask a few thousand priests if abstinence worked for them. God, if there is one, must shake his head in utter disgust. Of course, Democrats commit their own sexual indiscretions but at least that party does not base its very foundation on sexual morality wanting to deny women control of their own body, creating the virginity police or hoping that homosexuals would just die, be sent to prison or become their kind of Christian.
The Republican party needs to think very seriously about just what morality is. How about morality being about feeding the poor and, clothing the naked and not giving no bid contracts to Halliburton? How about clean government not dedicated to running rough shod over the little guy and not giving tax breaks to billionaires? Oh yes, and how about not bombing the living hell out of countries which did not attack us? Maybe that would gain us some friends and actually prevent another 9/11. Did ja ever think of that? Somebody, I forget who .. probably me, said "a little kindness in public and foreign policy goes a long way." I hope all these Republicans who have committed sexual hypocrisy not to mention the scads of other scandals they have perpetrated within the most corrupt administration in US history, get their due. Maybe then I will REALLY believe there is a God!
Friday, May 04, 2007
Indict Rove: How much is it going to take to place Karl Rove under indictment? He is, I believe, guilty of so much wrongdoing I have lost count. He was involved in the outing of the CIA agent, the firing of the US attorneys, he conducted political business from the White House on the people's time flouting the Hatch Act. 3 million emails between him and others concerning the firing of the USA eight have been oh so conveniently lost. It is staggering.
Yet he walks free with a Cheshire smirk on his face probably laughing every night about how he gets away with everything, frustrating the attempts of those who want honest government. The accusations and suspicions are alleged every day and nothing is done. The Democrats investigate and subpoena but they are ignored by this administration. It has, I think, become a waiting game until the most corrupt, politically and morally bankrupt administration in US history is finally out of the public domain. If all the egregious things that have been done by Republicans, including a laundry list of Republican congressional scandals, were committed by a Democratic administration you KNOW there would have been hell to pay. The Republicans impeached Clinton for SO much less.
Rove is symbolic of just how low and how immoral government can go. I need my faith in government restored. I want an indictment, trial and ultimate conviction of Karl Rove and the impeachment and conviction of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Richard Cheney and George W. Bush for the highest of unconstitutional crimes including most emphatically high treason by taking this country to war under false pretenses, murdering 3300 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, destroying a country, ignoring the Geneva Conventions through torturing, suspending habeas corpus, conducting warrantless wiretaps, outing a CIA agent and depleting this country of huge amounts of its treasure. It's time to hold those accountable for the perpetration of the most heinous crimes in US history so that future presidents and administrations will know there is a limit to their power!
Yet he walks free with a Cheshire smirk on his face probably laughing every night about how he gets away with everything, frustrating the attempts of those who want honest government. The accusations and suspicions are alleged every day and nothing is done. The Democrats investigate and subpoena but they are ignored by this administration. It has, I think, become a waiting game until the most corrupt, politically and morally bankrupt administration in US history is finally out of the public domain. If all the egregious things that have been done by Republicans, including a laundry list of Republican congressional scandals, were committed by a Democratic administration you KNOW there would have been hell to pay. The Republicans impeached Clinton for SO much less.
Rove is symbolic of just how low and how immoral government can go. I need my faith in government restored. I want an indictment, trial and ultimate conviction of Karl Rove and the impeachment and conviction of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Richard Cheney and George W. Bush for the highest of unconstitutional crimes including most emphatically high treason by taking this country to war under false pretenses, murdering 3300 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, destroying a country, ignoring the Geneva Conventions through torturing, suspending habeas corpus, conducting warrantless wiretaps, outing a CIA agent and depleting this country of huge amounts of its treasure. It's time to hold those accountable for the perpetration of the most heinous crimes in US history so that future presidents and administrations will know there is a limit to their power!
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Wolfowitz's World: I do not understand why justice almost never prevails. How do the rich and the powerful get away with so much carnage and unethical behavior so often and in plain sight? How are they allowed with ease to run rough shod over the weak and vulnerable? Reports now are that World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz did not consult the ethics panel of the World Bank according to the panel's former chairman, Mr. Melkert, before Mr. Wolfowitz set up his girlfriend with a sweet money package and job deal even though Mr. Wolfowitz said he did consult it. Could it be that Mr. Wolfowitz is lying? Is that possible? I jest, of course. The question: is anything else possible from a man who was one of the premier architects of the biggest military catastrophe, fraud, waste of life and treasure in the history of this country. That war we now know was based on lies ... often his lies and Neocon fantasy.
Mr. Wolfowitz -- supported by the Bush administration -- is telling the World Bank that he consulted its ethics panel. Mr. Melkert former chairman of the World Bank's ethics panel says differently. Waxing chicheish, in view of Mr. Wolfowitz's past behavior, I wouldn't trust Paul Wolfowitz as far as I could throw him. I'd put my money on Mr. Melkert's ability to tell the truth.
Paul Wolfowitz yet again has committed immoral behavior. He did it vis-a-vie Iraq. Why shouldn't he do it with respect to his unethical behavior at the World Bank? Character counts. Clearly he and his ilk have little. For once, could real morality, truth and justice prevail? Paul Wolfolwitz should be fired and the World Bank should never exonerate him!
Mr. Wolfowitz -- supported by the Bush administration -- is telling the World Bank that he consulted its ethics panel. Mr. Melkert former chairman of the World Bank's ethics panel says differently. Waxing chicheish, in view of Mr. Wolfowitz's past behavior, I wouldn't trust Paul Wolfowitz as far as I could throw him. I'd put my money on Mr. Melkert's ability to tell the truth.
Paul Wolfowitz yet again has committed immoral behavior. He did it vis-a-vie Iraq. Why shouldn't he do it with respect to his unethical behavior at the World Bank? Character counts. Clearly he and his ilk have little. For once, could real morality, truth and justice prevail? Paul Wolfolwitz should be fired and the World Bank should never exonerate him!
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
"The Children of Men" -- a review: The more I thought about "Children of Men" the more I loved it. The DVD discussion by the director and others certainly helped to get a clearer understanding of the director's intent. It is a supremely Orwellian film, bleak and violent, which had much to say about the nature of man and culture. It is a film that begs for discussion. The somewhat simple story of the film cannot be divorced from the complexity of its landscape. Each would be nothing without the other and special attention should be paid to the movie's setting.
The movie takes place in the not-too-distant future making technological chaos a part of its surroundings. It centers on the world's inability to generate children, its lack of ability to understand why and the consequences this has for the disintegration of population, culture, history and life itself. The bleak surroundings of decay are omnipresent. It is testament, I think, to what happens when constant war and anarchy prevail. Society deconstructs. In society's vain attempt to perpetuate and sustain itself through repressive force it does neither. Stability is always elusive. One social and political philosophy is like another and the only thing left for the state to do is to perpetuate its media driven lies in some withering attempt to maintain order through tyranny. No one has the answer even though some think they do. The less powerful, of course, succumb to the Darwinian forces of nature. It is dinosaurian. If one force doesn't kill there is always another right around the corner which will. There is no rhyme or reason to it all. Humanity is prostrate before forces no one can control and man is at the mercy of other men and fate itself.
This movie poses many interrogatives. What happens to human society when biological or socially catastrophic events interfere with the natural orderly progression of life? How do humans adapt and survive or can they adapt at all? What happens when chaos reigns and people are in a constant state of war and anarchy? If social conflict is perpetual are human beings inclined toward constructing a totalitarian state? Who suffers and why? Is utopia a possibility ... ever? Is there hope?
This film, I thought, was phenomenally relevant to the world in which we find ourselves. Perhaps, it is a film for all seasons as well. It could apply to Nazi Germany to Bosnia, to Lebanon, Darfur and most certainly to Iraq or, indeed, to any place which is prey to biological and other catastrophic events which give rise to chaos. The author perceptively places this film in Britain. I think this says it could apply to western culture as well IF we do not stop those forces which are brewing a perfect storm of biological catastrophe and social fracture. The very survival of life as we know it on our planet is at stake.
This film, although it is quite starkly bleak, does offer some hope through the only woman in the world who is pregnant. Amid this primordial social ooze and against all odds she attempts, with the help of one man, to save her infant’s life. One must be patient and wait to see if there is an ultimate ray of light at the end of the tunnel. I recommend this film highly to those who want entertainment through serious thought provoking art.
The movie takes place in the not-too-distant future making technological chaos a part of its surroundings. It centers on the world's inability to generate children, its lack of ability to understand why and the consequences this has for the disintegration of population, culture, history and life itself. The bleak surroundings of decay are omnipresent. It is testament, I think, to what happens when constant war and anarchy prevail. Society deconstructs. In society's vain attempt to perpetuate and sustain itself through repressive force it does neither. Stability is always elusive. One social and political philosophy is like another and the only thing left for the state to do is to perpetuate its media driven lies in some withering attempt to maintain order through tyranny. No one has the answer even though some think they do. The less powerful, of course, succumb to the Darwinian forces of nature. It is dinosaurian. If one force doesn't kill there is always another right around the corner which will. There is no rhyme or reason to it all. Humanity is prostrate before forces no one can control and man is at the mercy of other men and fate itself.
This movie poses many interrogatives. What happens to human society when biological or socially catastrophic events interfere with the natural orderly progression of life? How do humans adapt and survive or can they adapt at all? What happens when chaos reigns and people are in a constant state of war and anarchy? If social conflict is perpetual are human beings inclined toward constructing a totalitarian state? Who suffers and why? Is utopia a possibility ... ever? Is there hope?
This film, I thought, was phenomenally relevant to the world in which we find ourselves. Perhaps, it is a film for all seasons as well. It could apply to Nazi Germany to Bosnia, to Lebanon, Darfur and most certainly to Iraq or, indeed, to any place which is prey to biological and other catastrophic events which give rise to chaos. The author perceptively places this film in Britain. I think this says it could apply to western culture as well IF we do not stop those forces which are brewing a perfect storm of biological catastrophe and social fracture. The very survival of life as we know it on our planet is at stake.
This film, although it is quite starkly bleak, does offer some hope through the only woman in the world who is pregnant. Amid this primordial social ooze and against all odds she attempts, with the help of one man, to save her infant’s life. One must be patient and wait to see if there is an ultimate ray of light at the end of the tunnel. I recommend this film highly to those who want entertainment through serious thought provoking art.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Fearing Fundamentalism--Frontline and the Mormons: I love Frontline and I love PBS. I must admit, however, I am undecided as to whether I want to watch its series on the Mormons. I am ardently for the separation of church and state and am an avowed skeptic of all religious and other belief systems. I find it MOST disturbing that our culture has entered a partnership with fanatical religious beliefs during the last fifty years but most especially during the last seven years. It dismays and frightens me. Mormonism and Fundamentalism walk hand in hand.
Watching this program on Mormons is not, for me, easy to do because of the political impact Mormonism has enjoyed and because it is one of the fastest growing fundamentalist-like movements in the world. Nearly 78% of Mormons in this country voted for George W. Bush, are avowed Republicans, are extraordinarily anti-homosexual and, of course, are misogynistic. In the not-too-distant past they considered blacks "children of Cain" nor could blacks or women be elders. Someone who is not Mormon could not step into a Mormon sanctuary. Someone who does not have children is not, in Mormon eyes, fulfilling his duty. In my opinion, they have held far too much sway on our political process as has all of Christian fundamentalism. It is ironic that Mormonism which suffered discrimination during its formative years in the United States has become in its recent history the most ardent advocate of the suppression of human rights, supporter of the Republican party and its casus belli.
Further, I cannot, in general, fathom the mythological belief systems people hold. It is staggering to me. The tenets of the Mormon faith are breathtakingly ridiculous. I reject all that they believe as I reject any other fundamentalist hocus pocus mythological belief. I no more could believe in Moroni the so called Mormon prophet or Christ walking on this continent as I could a messiah being born of a virgin, rising after death, walking on water or the infallibility of popes who in history often have acted so immorally. Nor could I believe in Moses parting the Red Sea or seeing burning bushes or Hebrews being spared in the killing of the first born or whether there WAS a killing of the first born or if there even were Jews enslaved by Egyptians. Other belief hierarchies raking in tons of money such Scientology are inane. The hypocrisies of Islam are legion. Parts of Hinduism want to imprison a man for planting a completely benign kiss on a woman. Many people fall hook, line and sinker for these inanities and give their hierarchies tons of money making their leaders very very rich promulgating those beliefs and in doing so gain immense power and influence.
How human beings who possess such a wonderful capacity for reason and ability for rational science could eschew that reason and the laws of physics by accepting religious phantasmagoric myths as truth, is beyond my capacity to understand. Humankind has fought long and hard to advance to the Age of the Renaissance and on to the Age of Reason. Centuries of progress could be squandered in an instant.
I believe fundamentalist religions including Mormonism is the greatest threat to mankind along side nuclear war. Fundamentalist religious beliefs, in fact, may be responsible for the very use of nuclear weaponry itself which would destroy civilization as we know it. Beliefs are about money and about power. They are about power over me.
The fact that Mormonism has donated so much money to Republican politics, supports George W. Bush and those like him, wants to deny rights to women, blacks and homosexuals, considers those who do not have children not fulfilling the law and has been for years in general against progressive politics is an anathema to me. It is their new found power I fear. If I watch Frontline's The Mormons it will, indeed, be a hard thing for me to do.
Watching this program on Mormons is not, for me, easy to do because of the political impact Mormonism has enjoyed and because it is one of the fastest growing fundamentalist-like movements in the world. Nearly 78% of Mormons in this country voted for George W. Bush, are avowed Republicans, are extraordinarily anti-homosexual and, of course, are misogynistic. In the not-too-distant past they considered blacks "children of Cain" nor could blacks or women be elders. Someone who is not Mormon could not step into a Mormon sanctuary. Someone who does not have children is not, in Mormon eyes, fulfilling his duty. In my opinion, they have held far too much sway on our political process as has all of Christian fundamentalism. It is ironic that Mormonism which suffered discrimination during its formative years in the United States has become in its recent history the most ardent advocate of the suppression of human rights, supporter of the Republican party and its casus belli.
Further, I cannot, in general, fathom the mythological belief systems people hold. It is staggering to me. The tenets of the Mormon faith are breathtakingly ridiculous. I reject all that they believe as I reject any other fundamentalist hocus pocus mythological belief. I no more could believe in Moroni the so called Mormon prophet or Christ walking on this continent as I could a messiah being born of a virgin, rising after death, walking on water or the infallibility of popes who in history often have acted so immorally. Nor could I believe in Moses parting the Red Sea or seeing burning bushes or Hebrews being spared in the killing of the first born or whether there WAS a killing of the first born or if there even were Jews enslaved by Egyptians. Other belief hierarchies raking in tons of money such Scientology are inane. The hypocrisies of Islam are legion. Parts of Hinduism want to imprison a man for planting a completely benign kiss on a woman. Many people fall hook, line and sinker for these inanities and give their hierarchies tons of money making their leaders very very rich promulgating those beliefs and in doing so gain immense power and influence.
How human beings who possess such a wonderful capacity for reason and ability for rational science could eschew that reason and the laws of physics by accepting religious phantasmagoric myths as truth, is beyond my capacity to understand. Humankind has fought long and hard to advance to the Age of the Renaissance and on to the Age of Reason. Centuries of progress could be squandered in an instant.
I believe fundamentalist religions including Mormonism is the greatest threat to mankind along side nuclear war. Fundamentalist religious beliefs, in fact, may be responsible for the very use of nuclear weaponry itself which would destroy civilization as we know it. Beliefs are about money and about power. They are about power over me.
The fact that Mormonism has donated so much money to Republican politics, supports George W. Bush and those like him, wants to deny rights to women, blacks and homosexuals, considers those who do not have children not fulfilling the law and has been for years in general against progressive politics is an anathema to me. It is their new found power I fear. If I watch Frontline's The Mormons it will, indeed, be a hard thing for me to do.
Friday, April 27, 2007
The Democratic Debate: I loved the Democratic debate. I loved every single one of the candidates. I don't care WHO wins the Democratic nomination. Absolutely any Democrat would be better than the insipid destructive fool and poor excuse we have now for a president and better than any other Republican candidate. Republicans mean more of the same old disastrous policies both foreign and domestic. They are not the party of the middle classes. They are the party of billionaires.
When will the American public wake up to what really is moral and what is not? No one's life is affected by the so called social issues except the ones who do not want to be shackled by government or religion or both. If you don't want to have homosexual sex or an abortion then don't. If you want to pray then do. Who cares. Just do not force your beliefs on anyone who does not want a subscription. We desperately need a New Day.
The Democrats were, I thought, effective last evening. They were not combative, they were civilized, unified and SMART. Finally can this country elect someone SMART? Is that too much to ask? I loved all the Democratic debaters including Mike Gravel whom I thought had the ability to, with emotion, say what we many of us feel and then some. Good for him.
I am voluntarily praying morning, noon and night that Democrats sweep in 2008 so that we can undue the horror that has fractured us over the last seven years and so that we can have a communicative intellect occupy the most powerful office on earth. The Democratic debate was great fun. I say bring em on!!
When will the American public wake up to what really is moral and what is not? No one's life is affected by the so called social issues except the ones who do not want to be shackled by government or religion or both. If you don't want to have homosexual sex or an abortion then don't. If you want to pray then do. Who cares. Just do not force your beliefs on anyone who does not want a subscription. We desperately need a New Day.
The Democrats were, I thought, effective last evening. They were not combative, they were civilized, unified and SMART. Finally can this country elect someone SMART? Is that too much to ask? I loved all the Democratic debaters including Mike Gravel whom I thought had the ability to, with emotion, say what we many of us feel and then some. Good for him.
I am voluntarily praying morning, noon and night that Democrats sweep in 2008 so that we can undue the horror that has fractured us over the last seven years and so that we can have a communicative intellect occupy the most powerful office on earth. The Democratic debate was great fun. I say bring em on!!
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
David Halberstam a national treasure: I was so saddened to hear about the death of the eminent journalist and author David Halberstam. I feel we as a nation are diminished when people like he leave us especially before their time. A PBS documentary on Americana will not be the same without David Halberstam's voice.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
A History of Swagger: This country has a history of swagger. So much of our history is about the waging of war and the glorification of violence. From the Revolutionary War, to the Civil War, to Andrew Jackson's devastation of the Indian, to the Alamo, to the Wild West, to Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders, to LBJ's Vietnam, to Ronald Reagan's Star Wars, to the swagger of all swaggerers George W. Bush and his devastating slaughter in Iraq, his dead or alive mentality and his "bring em on" spewing -- no wonder there is violence in our land. Violence has been and is everywhere. It is in every city and every town, on every TV program and in much of film and there is always shock radio. Our country is saturated in blood, guns, violence, vitriol and vulgarity. No wonder there is violence in our land. We say we loath it but we, in fact and in part, love it.
We love our warriors, we love men who are macho, we love our bombs and we love our guns because all make us feel so powerful. We are not powerful though. We are perhaps, at our core weak, and the world senses it. We have succumbed at times to the lesser angels of our nature and we have shown the world how might does not often make right but makes misery and makes enemies. It makes Columbines, it makes VA Techs, it makes Wacos, it makes Oklahoma City bombings, it makes Ruby Ridges, it makes Vietnams and it makes Iraq.
We live in a country that cares more about its guns than it does about its people's healthcare. We need a change in leadership and a change in direction and we need it fast so that our constitutional government and the better angels of our nature do not succumb to the onslaught!
We love our warriors, we love men who are macho, we love our bombs and we love our guns because all make us feel so powerful. We are not powerful though. We are perhaps, at our core weak, and the world senses it. We have succumbed at times to the lesser angels of our nature and we have shown the world how might does not often make right but makes misery and makes enemies. It makes Columbines, it makes VA Techs, it makes Wacos, it makes Oklahoma City bombings, it makes Ruby Ridges, it makes Vietnams and it makes Iraq.
We live in a country that cares more about its guns than it does about its people's healthcare. We need a change in leadership and a change in direction and we need it fast so that our constitutional government and the better angels of our nature do not succumb to the onslaught!
The Media and the Message: The coverage of the VA Tech shooting by the media has been wonderful. It has provided up to the minute knowledge of the events. The emphasis on the tragedy has been appropriate. However, the 24/7 coverage of it by MSNBC, CNN and other networks, I believe, becomes over done WHEN they are announcing the same news over and over and over again since there is no new news which has not already been reported. I suspect that the media saturation does contribute to our violent culture especially among youth which makes a copy cat scenario more possible. Overdone news coverage could provide rationale to many pathological personalities in this culture to gain entry into the macabre hall of fame no matter how dubious that distinction is.
I know we cannot go back to the days of the Huntley Brinkley Report but just a little less repetition by the news media might be exactly what the public really wants. The coverage of the Imus situation and the VA Tech utter tragedy is non-stop and while it is very very important, much of the media neglects other news out of, for example, Iraq which is a continual never-ending slaughter. Hugely important things are happening there which threaten the lives of our very young and very best. Further, more and more is emerging with respect to our Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his impending testimony before Congress about his involvement in the firing of the US Attorneys. Some behaviors within the oval office itself possibly rise to the level of impeachable offenses. These stories could have a major impact on the very foundation of our republic.
Much as VA Tech will, I think, always have a place in our hearts there is other news as well which should not be neglected and it is vital that the public now be informed in equal fashion about it!
I know we cannot go back to the days of the Huntley Brinkley Report but just a little less repetition by the news media might be exactly what the public really wants. The coverage of the Imus situation and the VA Tech utter tragedy is non-stop and while it is very very important, much of the media neglects other news out of, for example, Iraq which is a continual never-ending slaughter. Hugely important things are happening there which threaten the lives of our very young and very best. Further, more and more is emerging with respect to our Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his impending testimony before Congress about his involvement in the firing of the US Attorneys. Some behaviors within the oval office itself possibly rise to the level of impeachable offenses. These stories could have a major impact on the very foundation of our republic.
Much as VA Tech will, I think, always have a place in our hearts there is other news as well which should not be neglected and it is vital that the public now be informed in equal fashion about it!
Monday, April 16, 2007
Vatican Veracity: My heart is heavy at this time of year. Although I was born before the Shoah it has always, since I was a child, formed my politics and my character. It was, I believe, perhaps, even THE defining moment in history of the Jewish people.
I was dismayed at the Vatican's dispute with Israel with respect to attending the Holocaust memorial because they did not like the swirling questions surrounding Pius XII's response or lack of it to the Holocaust. I wrote the email below to the Vatican:
It is dismaying that a dispute has arisen between the Vatican and Israel because the Vatican did not like the swirling questions many Jews and others have surrounding Pius XII's response or lack of it to the Holocaust. As a Jew whose politics has been shaped by the tragic events of WWII, I am supremely suspect of the Vatican's position with respect to the sanctity of Pius XII. I am suspect because any time institutions of power refuse to release ALL their information regarding a specific subject it emphatically gives the appearance that they have something to hide. It raises my suspicion.
If those secret documents could exonerate the wartime Pope then one would think the Vatican would rush to release them to settle the controversy surrounding Pius's involvement in the events of the Holocaust. Conversely, if there are embarrassing documents that indicate the Vatican through Pius XII was complicit in the horror, well, indeed, the unequivocal hypocrisy and the utter unconscionable attempt to make Pius XII a saint would be more dastardly than words can describe.
Until we know exactly what ALL the documents in the Vatican say about Pius XII and the Church of that era, until NONE is hidden from view and until the Vatican is honest, then the Jewish people and the world will never really know what Pius XII did or did not do; we will always have a question as to Pius XII's complicit acquiescence and indeed his contribution to the events of the Holocaust.
Pius was a rabid anti-Communist which leads me to think that the rise of fascist states in Europe such as Nazi Germany and Italy was possibly not that abhorrent to Pius XII. Fascists, of course, have been notoriously anti-Communist. I suspect, although I do not know this for a fact, that Pius XII thought perhaps the right wing dictatorships emerging were not so bad. Maybe he thought they were better than Communist states and if it meant sacrificing Jews he may have concluded so be it. The historical credo of the Church indicting the Jews for the killing of Christ could have given rationale in his mind that the Jews somehow deserved to suffer their fate. Maybe he thought, too, that Germany and Italy were anti-Communist states so he did not want to offend them by coming out vociferously against Nazi policies vis a vie the "Jewish question." I do not possess a great deal of evidence to affirm my suspicions since the Vatican refuses to release the pertinent documents but I tentatively conclude, because of the few statements I have read by Pius XII, that he did not do enough if anything to challenge what was to be the Jewish fate.
One would think a policy which resulted in the extermination of 2/3rds of the Jews of Europe would invite resounding criticism and outrage by a Pope. It appears it did not. The intense secrecy of the Vatican today makes my suspicion seem correct because the Vatican remains an institution which hides many of the documents relating the events of its history. Until the Vatican opens those documents up for close inspection and scrutiny for all the world to see or worse if it shreds them, I will always think Pius XII was part of the horrendous acts of that era and part of the attempted genocide of the Jews! To make him a saint in view of that would be more insulting and despicable than my words have the ability to convey. Perhaps, you can prove my suspicions wrong through release of the pertinent evidence.
I was dismayed at the Vatican's dispute with Israel with respect to attending the Holocaust memorial because they did not like the swirling questions surrounding Pius XII's response or lack of it to the Holocaust. I wrote the email below to the Vatican:
It is dismaying that a dispute has arisen between the Vatican and Israel because the Vatican did not like the swirling questions many Jews and others have surrounding Pius XII's response or lack of it to the Holocaust. As a Jew whose politics has been shaped by the tragic events of WWII, I am supremely suspect of the Vatican's position with respect to the sanctity of Pius XII. I am suspect because any time institutions of power refuse to release ALL their information regarding a specific subject it emphatically gives the appearance that they have something to hide. It raises my suspicion.
If those secret documents could exonerate the wartime Pope then one would think the Vatican would rush to release them to settle the controversy surrounding Pius's involvement in the events of the Holocaust. Conversely, if there are embarrassing documents that indicate the Vatican through Pius XII was complicit in the horror, well, indeed, the unequivocal hypocrisy and the utter unconscionable attempt to make Pius XII a saint would be more dastardly than words can describe.
Until we know exactly what ALL the documents in the Vatican say about Pius XII and the Church of that era, until NONE is hidden from view and until the Vatican is honest, then the Jewish people and the world will never really know what Pius XII did or did not do; we will always have a question as to Pius XII's complicit acquiescence and indeed his contribution to the events of the Holocaust.
Pius was a rabid anti-Communist which leads me to think that the rise of fascist states in Europe such as Nazi Germany and Italy was possibly not that abhorrent to Pius XII. Fascists, of course, have been notoriously anti-Communist. I suspect, although I do not know this for a fact, that Pius XII thought perhaps the right wing dictatorships emerging were not so bad. Maybe he thought they were better than Communist states and if it meant sacrificing Jews he may have concluded so be it. The historical credo of the Church indicting the Jews for the killing of Christ could have given rationale in his mind that the Jews somehow deserved to suffer their fate. Maybe he thought, too, that Germany and Italy were anti-Communist states so he did not want to offend them by coming out vociferously against Nazi policies vis a vie the "Jewish question." I do not possess a great deal of evidence to affirm my suspicions since the Vatican refuses to release the pertinent documents but I tentatively conclude, because of the few statements I have read by Pius XII, that he did not do enough if anything to challenge what was to be the Jewish fate.
One would think a policy which resulted in the extermination of 2/3rds of the Jews of Europe would invite resounding criticism and outrage by a Pope. It appears it did not. The intense secrecy of the Vatican today makes my suspicion seem correct because the Vatican remains an institution which hides many of the documents relating the events of its history. Until the Vatican opens those documents up for close inspection and scrutiny for all the world to see or worse if it shreds them, I will always think Pius XII was part of the horrendous acts of that era and part of the attempted genocide of the Jews! To make him a saint in view of that would be more insulting and despicable than my words have the ability to convey. Perhaps, you can prove my suspicions wrong through release of the pertinent evidence.
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Moral Bankruptcy at the Bank: There is no question in this world that there is one form of justice for the poor, one for the very rich and yet another for the very rich who happens to be president of the World Bank. The stain that is on Paul Wolfowitz is indelible and spreads throughout the world up to and including the World Bank. He has been the driving force from the formulation of the volcanic blunder of Iraq policy to the ever so unethical behavior as president of this prestigious institution.
He is involved in smarmy immoral conduct this time through his efforts to hire and significantly advance within the World Bank the monitory interests of a woman with whom he is sexually involved. This is yet another example of the fact that if one is rich and powerful one can get away with nearly anything. The World Bank which is supposedly involved in advancing the plight of the poor around the globe should be ashamed of the situation within which it finds itself because of the bad behavior of its president. The hypocrisy is glaring. This institution cannot pretend to be one thing, dictating to the underdeveloped world what they need to do to amend their corrupt practices and then allow the president of this Bank to be caught literally with his pants down involved in his own corrupt immoral behavior which taints the Bank.
The situation regarding the hiring of Paul Wolfowitz's girlfriend at a salary beyond the reach of most people, immeasurably affects the World Bank's efforts to improve the condition of the underdeveloped world because of this conditional deceptiveness. This is an ethical lapse of great magnitude and Paul Wolfowitz should get his just reward and be immediately fired!! Perhaps then can we say there is SOME justice in this sad conflagrant world!
He is involved in smarmy immoral conduct this time through his efforts to hire and significantly advance within the World Bank the monitory interests of a woman with whom he is sexually involved. This is yet another example of the fact that if one is rich and powerful one can get away with nearly anything. The World Bank which is supposedly involved in advancing the plight of the poor around the globe should be ashamed of the situation within which it finds itself because of the bad behavior of its president. The hypocrisy is glaring. This institution cannot pretend to be one thing, dictating to the underdeveloped world what they need to do to amend their corrupt practices and then allow the president of this Bank to be caught literally with his pants down involved in his own corrupt immoral behavior which taints the Bank.
The situation regarding the hiring of Paul Wolfowitz's girlfriend at a salary beyond the reach of most people, immeasurably affects the World Bank's efforts to improve the condition of the underdeveloped world because of this conditional deceptiveness. This is an ethical lapse of great magnitude and Paul Wolfowitz should get his just reward and be immediately fired!! Perhaps then can we say there is SOME justice in this sad conflagrant world!
Thursday, April 12, 2007
This was written in response to an article by John Perazzo at the web site Frontpagemag.com (link below) which talked about the racial hypocracy of Al Sharpton and other black leaders. Al Sharpton according to Mr. Perazzo has had a particularly egregious history including but not limited to his involvement in Tawana Brawley case in New York City as well as the case of an inadvertent killing of a black child by a Hassidic Jew.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27826
Mr. Perazzo your article on Rev. Sharpton was riveting. Much of it I knew. If you will pardon the pun nothing is simply black or white. I try to be a fair person but it is ever so hard to know which side the angels will reside. The events you relate are indeed horrifically shameful. Being Jewish those events make my blood boil. Still, in this instance at this time, Imus did utter a simply awful comment. Should he be pilloried like he has been? I do not know. Part of me does feel bad for him to some degree. Sharpton perhaps would do well to review some New Testament which talks about turning another cheek or casting the first stone. Sometimes though, although I am not a believer, I think in Biblical fashion the more appropriate edict says one does reap what one sows.
The history of this country with respect to the African American all 500 years of it has been abominable. The black southern experience is an embarrassment. Why did our Founders, whom I think were more than brilliant, not foresee that someday, if the country survived, slavery would come back to haunt their descendants? How they missed that sagacity I do not understand except that slavery was big business. We have been paying for its occurrence ever since.
When one's people have been rendered powerless for hundreds of years one gets angry. Imus is part and parcel of that anger as was the O.J. Simpson verdict and perhaps also were the events that you have mentioned in your article. This is not an excuse it is merely an observation. It is simply too bad that our country from the very beginning did not see the hypocrisy of slavery. The fact that we had a civil war about it and shed blood over it was only the beginning. Alas I fear we have sown the wind and reaped the whirlwind
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27826
Mr. Perazzo your article on Rev. Sharpton was riveting. Much of it I knew. If you will pardon the pun nothing is simply black or white. I try to be a fair person but it is ever so hard to know which side the angels will reside. The events you relate are indeed horrifically shameful. Being Jewish those events make my blood boil. Still, in this instance at this time, Imus did utter a simply awful comment. Should he be pilloried like he has been? I do not know. Part of me does feel bad for him to some degree. Sharpton perhaps would do well to review some New Testament which talks about turning another cheek or casting the first stone. Sometimes though, although I am not a believer, I think in Biblical fashion the more appropriate edict says one does reap what one sows.
The history of this country with respect to the African American all 500 years of it has been abominable. The black southern experience is an embarrassment. Why did our Founders, whom I think were more than brilliant, not foresee that someday, if the country survived, slavery would come back to haunt their descendants? How they missed that sagacity I do not understand except that slavery was big business. We have been paying for its occurrence ever since.
When one's people have been rendered powerless for hundreds of years one gets angry. Imus is part and parcel of that anger as was the O.J. Simpson verdict and perhaps also were the events that you have mentioned in your article. This is not an excuse it is merely an observation. It is simply too bad that our country from the very beginning did not see the hypocrisy of slavery. The fact that we had a civil war about it and shed blood over it was only the beginning. Alas I fear we have sown the wind and reaped the whirlwind
Bad Black Rap: The media has been saturating the airwaves regarding the issue of finding a remedy for what I now call the Imus phenomenon. Some say the big purveyors of black racist comments are black rap music and ghetto slang itself which gives a permission slip to everyone saying it is okay to use that type of language. To some degree, perhaps, this is correct but I believe, too, it is the black person's right to say about his own group what he wants. I believe when a black person uses derogatory characterizations it is often a way for him to render powerless the hateful speech that whites have used to subjugate, demean and sometimes crush him. If the black man uses those words it weakens those words and I think it says to the culture those words, horrible as they are, have no power over him anymore. I believe, though, when a white person uses those words the old threat that whites posed historically to blacks reemerges. I believe the so- called conservative shock jocks often use the very hateful, mean, vituperative, and profane words they claim to oppose. There is a mean-spiritedness and a cruelty which exists in much of the media perhaps reflecting a large part of the country. I think everyone everywhere needs to reexamine their hearts. Perhaps, the Imus volcanic eruption will lead to a kinder gentler nation. I am not sure that it will but at least I can hope that it does.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
A cancer on the body politic: I believe Imus is part and parcel of some typical "conservative" shock jocks in America. There is nothing warm and fuzzy about these radio/TV personalities. As a matter of fact they are the very essence of those traits they claim conservatism is against. They clamor and decry the vulgarization of America but they are the ones who most often generate callous, uncaring, hate filled rhetoric. Why do they do this? Because audiences listen and listeners turn into money. None of us is immune to it.
There is and perhaps always has been a cancer on the body politic of this country and it is the fact that the country has often not lived up to its ideals and many refuse still to admit this fact. An American conservative movement comprised of a so called "moral majority" has developed in the last fifty years. It has been designed to reject and deflect much of the academic criticism of this country with respect to most especially race and foreign policy. I suggest Imus's racist spewing has much to do with this phenomenon.
The modern conservative movement was a movement begun to counteract the late 60's cultural revolt. If the New Left called into question what historian Howard Zinn calls American exceptionalism the American Right rejected that criticism and became angry. From Vietnam to Iraq; from Mississippi to Boston this "moral majority" has refused to see the real immoralities of this country and created a reactionary movement in opposition to those who would illuminate our hypocrisies. Race is a part of it. It continues to be one sore on our body politic that festers; the cancer that will never go away. Imus is merely a reflection of an age old malady. Race concerning blacks in America has deep historical roots. Whites often cannot admit it and worse many do not care about it. We must care about it. The Imus volcanic eruption should teach us we must be very careful what we say and to whom we say it. We must confront our inequities as a nation or like cancer our malady will ultimately consume and kill us.
There is and perhaps always has been a cancer on the body politic of this country and it is the fact that the country has often not lived up to its ideals and many refuse still to admit this fact. An American conservative movement comprised of a so called "moral majority" has developed in the last fifty years. It has been designed to reject and deflect much of the academic criticism of this country with respect to most especially race and foreign policy. I suggest Imus's racist spewing has much to do with this phenomenon.
The modern conservative movement was a movement begun to counteract the late 60's cultural revolt. If the New Left called into question what historian Howard Zinn calls American exceptionalism the American Right rejected that criticism and became angry. From Vietnam to Iraq; from Mississippi to Boston this "moral majority" has refused to see the real immoralities of this country and created a reactionary movement in opposition to those who would illuminate our hypocrisies. Race is a part of it. It continues to be one sore on our body politic that festers; the cancer that will never go away. Imus is merely a reflection of an age old malady. Race concerning blacks in America has deep historical roots. Whites often cannot admit it and worse many do not care about it. We must care about it. The Imus volcanic eruption should teach us we must be very careful what we say and to whom we say it. We must confront our inequities as a nation or like cancer our malady will ultimately consume and kill us.
Remembering the Holocaust: Someone recently said to me in 100 years no one will even remember the Holocaust existed. I suspect, although certainly its occurrence has application to all people and for nearly every social relationship known to man, it will be primarily the Jew who remembers it if even they do. In a PBS documentary about the Holocaust, an expert was asked by the commentator if the Holocaust had any meaning or purpose whatsoever. He simply answered "no". Anger about that nearly approaches for me the anger I have of the event itself. To think that no one will care or that no one will remember that six million lives (great scholars and scientists included) are gone and that there REALLY is no good reason why or no lesson to be learned from the Shoah makes my blood boil.
I have seen the cartoon clip remembering the event which was attached to an email I received during Yom Hashoah last year and it seems this year world events have waxed worse. The Middle East, thanks to putrid US and western foreign policy for over a century and certainly presently, is now ablaze everywhere with more carnage, I suspect, to come. Israeli policy too has had its immense blunders and miscalculations. The Arabs are empowered. This is not good for the US and it is not good for the Jew especially an Israeli one.
I surely do not know what the answer is or why the Jewish people have been born to suffer for over 5000 years. Perhaps there is really no higher purpose to explain the tortured history of the Jews. The Holocaust though will always remain sacred in my heart and, perhaps, if there is indeed a God it will always remain sacred to Him too.
Lets hope for a better year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See what's free at AOL.com.
I have seen the cartoon clip remembering the event which was attached to an email I received during Yom Hashoah last year and it seems this year world events have waxed worse. The Middle East, thanks to putrid US and western foreign policy for over a century and certainly presently, is now ablaze everywhere with more carnage, I suspect, to come. Israeli policy too has had its immense blunders and miscalculations. The Arabs are empowered. This is not good for the US and it is not good for the Jew especially an Israeli one.
I surely do not know what the answer is or why the Jewish people have been born to suffer for over 5000 years. Perhaps there is really no higher purpose to explain the tortured history of the Jews. The Holocaust though will always remain sacred in my heart and, perhaps, if there is indeed a God it will always remain sacred to Him too.
Lets hope for a better year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See what's free at AOL.com.
Sunday, April 08, 2007
I sent this to the Globe in response to their editorial in the Sunday Globe about embryonic stem cell research. The Globe's article asked the question are 200 cells or blastocysts in a petrie dish really a human being and George Bush's opinion that blastocysts in a petrie dish are human beings.
I cannot speak of George Bush's moral compass without raising my blood pressure to Olympian heights. George Bush vetoes an embryonic stem cell bill which would have used 100 to 200 cells growing in a petrie dish in fertilization clinics to help, perhaps, ultimately millions of full term human beings discard or reduce their disabilities. If the embryonic cells, which George Bush calls human beings, are not used to impregnate they will ultimately be thrown out. Not only will those cells be rendered useless but those real life human beings whom those cells may have helped will suffer and even die as well.
While allegedly caring so much about human life George Bush has dropped bunker buster bombs on innocent men, women and children. He has lied to take our country to war against another country which did nothing to us. He ultimately killed and maimed thousands of innocent human beings which he has termed collateral damage. The killing goes on. The enormity of Bush's hypocrisy is staggering. Bush is sinking in the quicksand of a immoral quagmire and pulling the rest of us down with him. Morality is truly relative. If human life means so much to George Bush he should end this truly immoral and unjustified war in Iraq, sign a stem cell research bill and begin to save real lives rather than kill them.
I cannot speak of George Bush's moral compass without raising my blood pressure to Olympian heights. George Bush vetoes an embryonic stem cell bill which would have used 100 to 200 cells growing in a petrie dish in fertilization clinics to help, perhaps, ultimately millions of full term human beings discard or reduce their disabilities. If the embryonic cells, which George Bush calls human beings, are not used to impregnate they will ultimately be thrown out. Not only will those cells be rendered useless but those real life human beings whom those cells may have helped will suffer and even die as well.
While allegedly caring so much about human life George Bush has dropped bunker buster bombs on innocent men, women and children. He has lied to take our country to war against another country which did nothing to us. He ultimately killed and maimed thousands of innocent human beings which he has termed collateral damage. The killing goes on. The enormity of Bush's hypocrisy is staggering. Bush is sinking in the quicksand of a immoral quagmire and pulling the rest of us down with him. Morality is truly relative. If human life means so much to George Bush he should end this truly immoral and unjustified war in Iraq, sign a stem cell research bill and begin to save real lives rather than kill them.
Saturday, April 07, 2007
A Response to Rush: Rush Limbaugh thinks it is wrong that the 9/11 victims received millions and our troops receive a pittance. He thinks it's wrong that our Congress gets a raise and our troops get little. I agree ... in part:
Yes, I will admit this one time that blowhard Limbaugh is somewhat (although not completely) correct. It is ridiculous the compensation or lack of it our troops get. I am glad, however, that the 9/11 victims received their money because our federal and state governments were beyond negligent for the happenings of 9/11. Bush was warned "terrorists to strike buildings in US using aircraft" and he did nothing. All George Bush could say when he received that warning was "okay now you've covered your ass." Then he proceeded to go on vacation, clear brush in Texas and travel to Florida to read "My Pet Goat" to kids in an elementary school. Seven minutes passed before he understood the nation was under attack.
I believe both those killed in 9/11 are due their millions AND those killed and wounded in combat should receive the same just compensation. There is no doubt about that one. But guess what? Our president cut spending which included the benefits to survivors and families of those in the military. Now he will veto the military funding bill because Democrats have the unmitigated temerity to attach a deadline for withdrawal so the killing will stop. Imagine the nerve of them to want the troops home at a date certain. The treatment of our military or lack of treatment by this administration has been and is egregious. It has contributed to many severe injuries and many deaths.
The fault of Iraq (and I believe even of 9/11 too) lies at Bush's feet. He was horrendously negligent and purposefully criminal. Iraq is HIS war. He owns it lock, stock and barrel. Our dead should be (but are not) on his conscience if he even has a reptilian remnant of one. This war is criminal. He and his entire administration are criminals. He lied this nation into a war from which we will never in generations be able to extricate except by Congressional mandate IF they have the cajones to do so. He and his administration have perpetrated unconstitutional acts through the abandonment of habeas corpus, the use of illegal wiretaps, spying, the exposure of a CIA agent and for many other reasons. He should be tried for war crimes because he lied us into a war which has killed thousands and he has sanctioned the use of torture. He should be impeached for treasonous high crimes and misdemeanors as the Constitution instructs because those crimes so befit the founders intent.
The gas bag Limbaugh is right in part though. There is something rotten in Denmark when Congress gives itself a raise and our military is given peanuts and not enough body armor. Rush Limbaugh is not one to talk however. He has supported and does support the Bush fiasco that is Iraq. At this point after the man behind the curtain has been exposed and knowing the lies perpetrated to send our troops to Iraq, anyone who does support this war now is, in my opinion, complicit in it. All Bush knows how to do is drop bombs and watch while Rome burns. How Christian!
Yes, I will admit this one time that blowhard Limbaugh is somewhat (although not completely) correct. It is ridiculous the compensation or lack of it our troops get. I am glad, however, that the 9/11 victims received their money because our federal and state governments were beyond negligent for the happenings of 9/11. Bush was warned "terrorists to strike buildings in US using aircraft" and he did nothing. All George Bush could say when he received that warning was "okay now you've covered your ass." Then he proceeded to go on vacation, clear brush in Texas and travel to Florida to read "My Pet Goat" to kids in an elementary school. Seven minutes passed before he understood the nation was under attack.
I believe both those killed in 9/11 are due their millions AND those killed and wounded in combat should receive the same just compensation. There is no doubt about that one. But guess what? Our president cut spending which included the benefits to survivors and families of those in the military. Now he will veto the military funding bill because Democrats have the unmitigated temerity to attach a deadline for withdrawal so the killing will stop. Imagine the nerve of them to want the troops home at a date certain. The treatment of our military or lack of treatment by this administration has been and is egregious. It has contributed to many severe injuries and many deaths.
The fault of Iraq (and I believe even of 9/11 too) lies at Bush's feet. He was horrendously negligent and purposefully criminal. Iraq is HIS war. He owns it lock, stock and barrel. Our dead should be (but are not) on his conscience if he even has a reptilian remnant of one. This war is criminal. He and his entire administration are criminals. He lied this nation into a war from which we will never in generations be able to extricate except by Congressional mandate IF they have the cajones to do so. He and his administration have perpetrated unconstitutional acts through the abandonment of habeas corpus, the use of illegal wiretaps, spying, the exposure of a CIA agent and for many other reasons. He should be tried for war crimes because he lied us into a war which has killed thousands and he has sanctioned the use of torture. He should be impeached for treasonous high crimes and misdemeanors as the Constitution instructs because those crimes so befit the founders intent.
The gas bag Limbaugh is right in part though. There is something rotten in Denmark when Congress gives itself a raise and our military is given peanuts and not enough body armor. Rush Limbaugh is not one to talk however. He has supported and does support the Bush fiasco that is Iraq. At this point after the man behind the curtain has been exposed and knowing the lies perpetrated to send our troops to Iraq, anyone who does support this war now is, in my opinion, complicit in it. All Bush knows how to do is drop bombs and watch while Rome burns. How Christian!
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Render to Science what is Science: I wrote this to the Wall Street Journal which has a great section I just found which carries editorials created by the general public. I couldn't resist my favorite subject -- the historicity of religion and religion's impact on jet propelling the future scientific advancement of humankind into historical reverse. CNN carried an article by Dr. Collins who worked on the Human Genome Project but still tries to square science, the science of DNA and evolution with his belief in God which he amazingly sees as science too.
Dr. Franics Collins stated believer in God/Jesus and medical doctor working on the Human Genome Project certainly is a poor excuse for a scientist. It is NOT, I repeat NOT incumbent upon the atheist to prove the non-existence of god. It is incumbent upon the BELIEVER to prove the existence of god. One cannot prove a negative. There is, of course NO truth of the existence of God that has emerged. Even Collins says it requires a leap of faith but believes it as fact anyway which is on par with the facts of evolution and DNA. That is NOT I repeat NOT science. That is religion and belief NOT fact. Science is FACT and science is neutral with respect to the existence of God until such time as it can unequivocally be proven that a God exists.
As for the existence of Jesus which he says is true, there is NO, I repeat NO proof whatsoever as to the historicity of the existence of Jesus as there is NO proof whatsoever that much of the Old Testament is true or that the tenets of any other religion on the face of the earth are true. If Dr. Collins wants to believe in the man/God Jesus, the parting of the Red Sea or the tooth fairy FINE but do not pass this off as fact. Religion is NOT fact. It is a collection of stories based on other stories from other belief systems including ancient pagan beliefs.
We modern-day humans lose sight of the fact that Biblical stories have a cultural and historical context. They did not simply come out of nowhere. It would better serve mankind if Dr. Collins would admit to THAT truth and leave science to true scientists and religion to those who study the etiology of mythological beliefs.
Dr. Franics Collins stated believer in God/Jesus and medical doctor working on the Human Genome Project certainly is a poor excuse for a scientist. It is NOT, I repeat NOT incumbent upon the atheist to prove the non-existence of god. It is incumbent upon the BELIEVER to prove the existence of god. One cannot prove a negative. There is, of course NO truth of the existence of God that has emerged. Even Collins says it requires a leap of faith but believes it as fact anyway which is on par with the facts of evolution and DNA. That is NOT I repeat NOT science. That is religion and belief NOT fact. Science is FACT and science is neutral with respect to the existence of God until such time as it can unequivocally be proven that a God exists.
As for the existence of Jesus which he says is true, there is NO, I repeat NO proof whatsoever as to the historicity of the existence of Jesus as there is NO proof whatsoever that much of the Old Testament is true or that the tenets of any other religion on the face of the earth are true. If Dr. Collins wants to believe in the man/God Jesus, the parting of the Red Sea or the tooth fairy FINE but do not pass this off as fact. Religion is NOT fact. It is a collection of stories based on other stories from other belief systems including ancient pagan beliefs.
We modern-day humans lose sight of the fact that Biblical stories have a cultural and historical context. They did not simply come out of nowhere. It would better serve mankind if Dr. Collins would admit to THAT truth and leave science to true scientists and religion to those who study the etiology of mythological beliefs.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
James Carroll's article "Passover and the Passion" was brilliant and completely accurate. What most Christians do not realize when they are indoctrinated by their faith is that Christianity, indeed, had an early church history. Christians need to microscopically study it and understand most importantly the context of the tenets of their faith. There is a history behind the Christian story. Christianity was a competing faith among Jews. Never, I believe, in the wildest dreams of those who wrote the Gospels decades after Jesus' death, did they think that those passages would be used century after century by the Church and other Christians to exact their pound of flesh against the Jews for the death of Jesus.
Ultimately, the Holocaust and the killing of the six million had as its necessary historical precondition the proclamation of the perfidious Jew within the Gospel text itself. In my opinion, no matter how much the Church has tried to erase that stain and its villainous consequences for the Jewish people it cannot because it is there in black and white. What is not there in black and white is its historical underpinnings. People are often ignorant of the historical veracity of all Biblical text. Christians in particular often understand nothing of Christianity's roots first and foremost within Judaism. Many I suspect have feared that understanding the historical context of Christianity or any faith will undermine its credibility. Therefore, Christian authorities who have taught young children for millennia about that faith conveniently ignored and omitted the importance of its historical beginning. To say the least, the consequences of that omission have been profound.
Ultimately, the Holocaust and the killing of the six million had as its necessary historical precondition the proclamation of the perfidious Jew within the Gospel text itself. In my opinion, no matter how much the Church has tried to erase that stain and its villainous consequences for the Jewish people it cannot because it is there in black and white. What is not there in black and white is its historical underpinnings. People are often ignorant of the historical veracity of all Biblical text. Christians in particular often understand nothing of Christianity's roots first and foremost within Judaism. Many I suspect have feared that understanding the historical context of Christianity or any faith will undermine its credibility. Therefore, Christian authorities who have taught young children for millennia about that faith conveniently ignored and omitted the importance of its historical beginning. To say the least, the consequences of that omission have been profound.
Friday, March 30, 2007
The Machiavellian Mastermind: Who on earth can keep track of the corruption which has absolutely saturated our government? Our tax dollars are being used for partisan political purposes. I don't like it in Republican administrations nor do I like it in Democratic administrations. It doesn't matter who perpetrates it. It is still, ultimately, our money that is used and stolen.
Present day Republicans, though, have taken corruption in government to Olympian heights beyond the stratosphere. Who can keep track of all of the scandals? Karl Rove has probably been behind most if not all of the schemes and illegal actions from election fraud, outing of CIA agent Valerie Pflame, firing of the USA eight to many fund raising Hatch Act illegalities. In my opinion, Karl Rove knew about and sanctioned a plethora of nefarious Congressional and other illicit activities.
Yet, one of the highest perpetrators of this activity goes free, hiding behind executive privilege. If Congress investigates under oath no other Machiavellian mastermind in this horrendously corrupt administration, I pray every day that justice prevails and Rove through Congressional oversight is investigated by Congress and ultimately tried in a court of law for his egregious behaviors. I doubt he will be tried and perhaps he will not even be investigated. The Republicans have, through Bush's reign, in fascist-like fashion, usurped every governmental institution including the Supreme Court which will ultimately determine the outcome of the looming Constitutional crisis as it rules on the use of executive privilege.
I hope the august body of our Supreme Court leaves politics aside and places the rule of law first. I hope it finds that executive privilege does not apply to the particular Congressional investigations of Karl Rove and that it requires Rove's testimony before Congress in transcript and under oath. It is only in this way that the American public will be able to see the truth of what he and others have done. It is only in this way that the people can see if he should be tried in a court of law for the crimes he has allegedly committed against us. Perhaps, in this way, one day this great nation I thought I knew can return to the more honest decent nation I believe it once was.
Present day Republicans, though, have taken corruption in government to Olympian heights beyond the stratosphere. Who can keep track of all of the scandals? Karl Rove has probably been behind most if not all of the schemes and illegal actions from election fraud, outing of CIA agent Valerie Pflame, firing of the USA eight to many fund raising Hatch Act illegalities. In my opinion, Karl Rove knew about and sanctioned a plethora of nefarious Congressional and other illicit activities.
Yet, one of the highest perpetrators of this activity goes free, hiding behind executive privilege. If Congress investigates under oath no other Machiavellian mastermind in this horrendously corrupt administration, I pray every day that justice prevails and Rove through Congressional oversight is investigated by Congress and ultimately tried in a court of law for his egregious behaviors. I doubt he will be tried and perhaps he will not even be investigated. The Republicans have, through Bush's reign, in fascist-like fashion, usurped every governmental institution including the Supreme Court which will ultimately determine the outcome of the looming Constitutional crisis as it rules on the use of executive privilege.
I hope the august body of our Supreme Court leaves politics aside and places the rule of law first. I hope it finds that executive privilege does not apply to the particular Congressional investigations of Karl Rove and that it requires Rove's testimony before Congress in transcript and under oath. It is only in this way that the American public will be able to see the truth of what he and others have done. It is only in this way that the people can see if he should be tried in a court of law for the crimes he has allegedly committed against us. Perhaps, in this way, one day this great nation I thought I knew can return to the more honest decent nation I believe it once was.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Jeff Jacoby 3/29/07 editorial: Awww, Jeff what a saccharinely (is there such a word?) sugary -- okay incredibly sweet editorial "Messages to my son" was. How could anyone criticize your sentiments that you want your ten year old son to be kind, and do good?
I couldn't help but wonder though how a person would want that for his son and be philosophically conservative at the same time. Conservative thought, it seems to me, is more of the sink or swim, live or die, rise or fall on your own but don't expect government to help you when you are down variety. I thought it stood for government is not the solution it is the problem. I thought conservatives now want the poor or the sick to rely more on the good will of others or their church (or synagogue) for any help they need. If they can't get it there then do not true conservatives think those are the breaks because life is harsh? These conservatives are often not too kindly especially when it comes to the bigger picture.
You say to your son "Whenever we are startled or inconvenienced by the siren of an ambulance, I offer a prayer that the EMT's will arrive in time to help whoever is in danger." Well, that person on the other end of the siren better have more than a prayer. He better have good health insurance coverage because his fate certainly rises or falls on that. What more of a dirty concept to conservatives than national health care. The outcomes of having cancer, which is an equal opportunity employer, favors the rich who have insurance over those middle class or poor who do not.
Conservatives always SOUND so sweet but in reality crush the poor, do not lend a helping hand and in reality care more about the buck than the person. The conservative response to Katrina is example par excellence of that fact.
Conservatives often are perfectly willing to send other kids into battle to get killed or maimed in useless unnecessary wars based on lies while their own kids are going off to Yale. So when you are telling your son that above all else be decent, kind and honest, explain to him how you square the group you philosophically advocate for with those qualities you urge him to be.
I couldn't help but wonder though how a person would want that for his son and be philosophically conservative at the same time. Conservative thought, it seems to me, is more of the sink or swim, live or die, rise or fall on your own but don't expect government to help you when you are down variety. I thought it stood for government is not the solution it is the problem. I thought conservatives now want the poor or the sick to rely more on the good will of others or their church (or synagogue) for any help they need. If they can't get it there then do not true conservatives think those are the breaks because life is harsh? These conservatives are often not too kindly especially when it comes to the bigger picture.
You say to your son "Whenever we are startled or inconvenienced by the siren of an ambulance, I offer a prayer that the EMT's will arrive in time to help whoever is in danger." Well, that person on the other end of the siren better have more than a prayer. He better have good health insurance coverage because his fate certainly rises or falls on that. What more of a dirty concept to conservatives than national health care. The outcomes of having cancer, which is an equal opportunity employer, favors the rich who have insurance over those middle class or poor who do not.
Conservatives always SOUND so sweet but in reality crush the poor, do not lend a helping hand and in reality care more about the buck than the person. The conservative response to Katrina is example par excellence of that fact.
Conservatives often are perfectly willing to send other kids into battle to get killed or maimed in useless unnecessary wars based on lies while their own kids are going off to Yale. So when you are telling your son that above all else be decent, kind and honest, explain to him how you square the group you philosophically advocate for with those qualities you urge him to be.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
The problem of the Patriot Act: I respectfully disagree with FBI director Robert Mueller who said it's not the Patriot Act that is the problem it is the implementation of the Patriot Act that is the problem.
When one gives government broad sweeping extra constitutional powers one can be sure someone somewhere in the government will abuse that power. For anyone in this country who has been a law abiding citizen who may disagree strongly with a government position to have to worry that someone may be looking in his mail, snooping into ones email, phone conversations or worry about other egregious infringements by government upon their rights we have become like those countries we have fought so hard against. This is a travesty. Worse than a travesty it takes up unnecessary time in our fight in the war against terror.
We need to be very prudent as to whom we investigate and limit our efforts to those people who indeed are nearly a certain risk. Wasting time, effort, manpower and money collecting humongous caches of information on those who clearly are benign entities is ridiculous and does more to make God forbid a terrorist act more likely because it drains the resources we need to use to fight the real threats.
Government becomes the problem when the powers the people bestow upon government are egregiously abridged. The Patriot Act, although I once benignly supported it, seems to have become the problem as those who enforce it can and will, if given the opportunity, most certainly abuse it.
When one gives government broad sweeping extra constitutional powers one can be sure someone somewhere in the government will abuse that power. For anyone in this country who has been a law abiding citizen who may disagree strongly with a government position to have to worry that someone may be looking in his mail, snooping into ones email, phone conversations or worry about other egregious infringements by government upon their rights we have become like those countries we have fought so hard against. This is a travesty. Worse than a travesty it takes up unnecessary time in our fight in the war against terror.
We need to be very prudent as to whom we investigate and limit our efforts to those people who indeed are nearly a certain risk. Wasting time, effort, manpower and money collecting humongous caches of information on those who clearly are benign entities is ridiculous and does more to make God forbid a terrorist act more likely because it drains the resources we need to use to fight the real threats.
Government becomes the problem when the powers the people bestow upon government are egregiously abridged. The Patriot Act, although I once benignly supported it, seems to have become the problem as those who enforce it can and will, if given the opportunity, most certainly abuse it.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Rovian Revenge: I used to think that Karl Rove was particularly brilliant. That's what everybody seemed to be saying. I viewed the DVD "Bush's Brain" and thought Rove was the sinister genius that everyone suggested he was. How else could George W. Bush, with his intellectual mediocrity and deficit, prevail not only once but twice without the puppet master pulling the strings?
Now I have changed my mind. Rove is, I have concluded, not that bright. In fact there is either a stupidity or smugness which leads to great stupidity that is the reason behind the error of the firing of the USA eight. This time I think Karl Rove has made a doozy. There was no reason on earth for Rove to orchestrate the firing of Republican US Attorneys especially, since there were only eight of them. Doing that changed nothing. Rove did not realize that removing USAs because they were not prosecuting Democrats with enough fervor or Republicans with enough restraint, was ethically problematic if not, indeed, criminal. That was, in fact, stupid.
His most egregious mistake -- a mistake which I think reflects the nature of extreme wing politics -- was that he never gave a damn about the FEELINGS of those eight Republican US attorneys. The colossal mistake was that he never thought that saying people were fired due to incompetence would hurt someone's feelings ESPECIALLY if that rationale was a false one against these eight USA's.
Perhaps Mr. Rove has never been on the other end of a cruel boss or on the other end of something that was said or done to an underling by a superior which was clearly wrong and not fair. It hurts. Not only does it hurt but it infuriates. Not only does it infuriate it makes a person somehow and in some way want to get even. Most times one cannot and one has to simply endure the shame and move on. In this case though, the shame, bad as it was personally that the rationale for firing them was said to be because of "poor performance," that lie was revealed publicly. THAT is what stung and that is what Mr. Rove was too stupid to realize! Now, because it is public, some completely justified revenge is possible and has, in part, already occurred. Rove's callousness and uncaring part of his twisted psyche came back and bit him in the posterior. For once in this sad administration I surely do hope justice ultimately prevails and Rove ends up behind the bars he so richly deserves!
Now I have changed my mind. Rove is, I have concluded, not that bright. In fact there is either a stupidity or smugness which leads to great stupidity that is the reason behind the error of the firing of the USA eight. This time I think Karl Rove has made a doozy. There was no reason on earth for Rove to orchestrate the firing of Republican US Attorneys especially, since there were only eight of them. Doing that changed nothing. Rove did not realize that removing USAs because they were not prosecuting Democrats with enough fervor or Republicans with enough restraint, was ethically problematic if not, indeed, criminal. That was, in fact, stupid.
His most egregious mistake -- a mistake which I think reflects the nature of extreme wing politics -- was that he never gave a damn about the FEELINGS of those eight Republican US attorneys. The colossal mistake was that he never thought that saying people were fired due to incompetence would hurt someone's feelings ESPECIALLY if that rationale was a false one against these eight USA's.
Perhaps Mr. Rove has never been on the other end of a cruel boss or on the other end of something that was said or done to an underling by a superior which was clearly wrong and not fair. It hurts. Not only does it hurt but it infuriates. Not only does it infuriate it makes a person somehow and in some way want to get even. Most times one cannot and one has to simply endure the shame and move on. In this case though, the shame, bad as it was personally that the rationale for firing them was said to be because of "poor performance," that lie was revealed publicly. THAT is what stung and that is what Mr. Rove was too stupid to realize! Now, because it is public, some completely justified revenge is possible and has, in part, already occurred. Rove's callousness and uncaring part of his twisted psyche came back and bit him in the posterior. For once in this sad administration I surely do hope justice ultimately prevails and Rove ends up behind the bars he so richly deserves!
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Bush's Pathology: Response to Paul Slansky's article in HuffingtonPost.com. What a fabulous article "Deep Goat" is. Mr. Slansky is right on the money -- pardon the pun of an apt description for the Bush mafia. Ever since I read the story about Bush getting joy from torturing a frog, I realized there was something so dark and so fetid about him which chilled me thinking that THIS was our president. Underneath it all, underneath all the darkness must live a little boy who feels cerebrally not quite good enough and certainly not quite strong enough, scared and frightened that he is not quite up to the task of doing much of anything let alone assume the highest office in the world. It is sad, really, when one thinks about it. It would be one thing if he suffered his inadequacies alone but to drag us and the rest of the world down with him sometimes seems more than any country should bear although many put him where he is today. Like other tyrants, he did not attain power by himself. It would have certainly been better if George W. Bush suffered in silence and alone rather than inflict his psychopathology on the rest of us. His severely disturbed nature and that of others who helped him along the way has cost us thousands in lives and billions in treasure!
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
A response to Tom Hayden in the Huffington Post: Tom Hayden, with all due respect, the anti-Vietnam movement of the 1960's of which I was a part obviously did not do much. Yes, the US finally finally got out of Vietnam and a dictatorship was eliminated but really the Vietcong did not usher in a paradise. It's only recently that economic reforms have been initiated and the standard of living has risen.
The radical disruption of the 1968 convention was a huge mistake. The Democratic party was really the only friend we had despite Johnson's continuing of the war. I believe Humphrey would have ended it. Moreover, just like Nader did to elect George Bush, the radical movement, as I see it, ensured a never ending succession of right wing politicos. Our politics in hindsight drove the so called "moral majority" to the Republican extreme leaving Democrats with the taint of unpatriotic. It is unfortunate. When one thinks of the damage that has been inflicted by the Republican presidencies of Nixon, Reagan, and most especially the most extreme of right wing extremists George W. Bush we have reaped the opposite of what, I believe, we intended to sow. We did not have the majority of the American public's tactical support.
I hope it is not too late and that someday I experience the joys of Rooseveltesque leadership that brings creativity, academic excellence and humanitarian ideals to the presidency. I believe the radicalism of the 60's brought on to itself the worst of all possible worlds George W. Bush for not one term but two!
The radical disruption of the 1968 convention was a huge mistake. The Democratic party was really the only friend we had despite Johnson's continuing of the war. I believe Humphrey would have ended it. Moreover, just like Nader did to elect George Bush, the radical movement, as I see it, ensured a never ending succession of right wing politicos. Our politics in hindsight drove the so called "moral majority" to the Republican extreme leaving Democrats with the taint of unpatriotic. It is unfortunate. When one thinks of the damage that has been inflicted by the Republican presidencies of Nixon, Reagan, and most especially the most extreme of right wing extremists George W. Bush we have reaped the opposite of what, I believe, we intended to sow. We did not have the majority of the American public's tactical support.
I hope it is not too late and that someday I experience the joys of Rooseveltesque leadership that brings creativity, academic excellence and humanitarian ideals to the presidency. I believe the radicalism of the 60's brought on to itself the worst of all possible worlds George W. Bush for not one term but two!
Anniversary Regrets: How well I remember shock and awe. It was the only time in my life in which I was aware of politics that I look back on myself with disgust. I am truly ashamed. Because the Iraq war was within close proximity of 9/11 I was intoxicated with rage at an Arab world that could perpetrate such a disgusting heinous act on the country I loved killing so many innocents. Not only was I enraged I believed what this administration said. I fell for their line because I thought they were telling the truth about all they uttered indicting Iraq as a monumental danger. I believed what they said because I was a civilian removed from the centers of power and those who know what I thought were the secrets of the world. I thought Bush and his minions knew things that I did not know and that he would not lead this nation into folly squandering lives and billions gambling the security of the world. I argued, often vociferously, in support much to the great consternation of many of my friends.
I ultimately turned adamantly against this war for so many different reasons seeing this president's utter lack of understanding of the historical context of Iraq and Middle East foreign policy. My friends still do not let me forget what my view was at that time. Unlike the president though, I have no problem apologizing. I apologize for my country's utter lack of understanding of historical context and its present leadership's incredible capacity and without conscience deliberately lie in order to perpetrate this utterly inhuman war to advance a delusional neocon agenda. George Bush and those with him have sowed the wind and reaped the whirlwind of this absolutely reckless foreign policy blunder. I guess some would say we get what we deserve as someone had to support Mr. Bush and his cronies. Thankfully, I can say without shame, in both elections I did not.
I ultimately turned adamantly against this war for so many different reasons seeing this president's utter lack of understanding of the historical context of Iraq and Middle East foreign policy. My friends still do not let me forget what my view was at that time. Unlike the president though, I have no problem apologizing. I apologize for my country's utter lack of understanding of historical context and its present leadership's incredible capacity and without conscience deliberately lie in order to perpetrate this utterly inhuman war to advance a delusional neocon agenda. George Bush and those with him have sowed the wind and reaped the whirlwind of this absolutely reckless foreign policy blunder. I guess some would say we get what we deserve as someone had to support Mr. Bush and his cronies. Thankfully, I can say without shame, in both elections I did not.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
I sent this to Tomm Hartmann on Air America who was discussing the Second Amendment.
Second Thoughts on the Second Amendment: Tom Hartmann of Air America was discussing the etiology of the Second Amendment. He often, to support his opinion, delivers a historical rant about what the Founding Fathers thought in relation to current affairs some 300 years later. Sometimes, I think that his historical analyses as it involves contemporary events are ridiculous. He attempts to make a case for present day policies by historically reviewing the revolutionary war and post revolutionary war period. That can be futile. What "the founders had in mind," especially with respect to the Second Amendment, can often not, it seems to me, be determined and if it can be determined by various writings of our founders, to attempt to apply it to contemporary times is inane. The Second Amendment, of course states: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
What the Second Amendment meant to those who came out of the Enlightenment is different, I think, from what the Second Amendment means today. Our revolutionary fathers were about curtailing the power of the king. The king's standing army was a threat against people who had no guns. I think that is one general fair assessment of why they included the Second Amendment. They wanted the people to have the right to have guns to prevent a tyranny from oppressing any person in each state or that each state should have the right to defend itself from an invasion. The people in each individual state would be able to have guns just in case the government got out of hand or if another country invaded. The founders, I think, wanted the people on par with the government as well as each state to be able to defend itself individually and collectively.
American culture and society today certainly has evolved. The ownership of guns now has nothing really to do with the possibility of overthrowing the government. If one bought a gun with the intent of attacking the government especially now with respect to the Patriot Act they would be doing something treasonous and illegal. No one could overthrow this government with a gun or if a country invades it now is the federal government's responsibility to defend the people.
Guns presently are used not for defense against the government or foreign invaders but defense against individual criminals, sport or for collectors. The question is in this culture, forgetting the etiology of the Second Amendment which is, I believe, meaningless, do we need ad infinitum access with little oversight over the sales of guns even machine guns? The founders NEVER imagined our culture as it has metamorphosed today. Is the Second Amendment as the founders have written it even applicable to our current historical and social milieu? THAT is the question, I believe, one should debate. The etiology of our Second Amendment as it existed in the revolutionary period is nearly irrelevant to the question of gun control as it exists in contemporary times.
Second Thoughts on the Second Amendment: Tom Hartmann of Air America was discussing the etiology of the Second Amendment. He often, to support his opinion, delivers a historical rant about what the Founding Fathers thought in relation to current affairs some 300 years later. Sometimes, I think that his historical analyses as it involves contemporary events are ridiculous. He attempts to make a case for present day policies by historically reviewing the revolutionary war and post revolutionary war period. That can be futile. What "the founders had in mind," especially with respect to the Second Amendment, can often not, it seems to me, be determined and if it can be determined by various writings of our founders, to attempt to apply it to contemporary times is inane. The Second Amendment, of course states: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
What the Second Amendment meant to those who came out of the Enlightenment is different, I think, from what the Second Amendment means today. Our revolutionary fathers were about curtailing the power of the king. The king's standing army was a threat against people who had no guns. I think that is one general fair assessment of why they included the Second Amendment. They wanted the people to have the right to have guns to prevent a tyranny from oppressing any person in each state or that each state should have the right to defend itself from an invasion. The people in each individual state would be able to have guns just in case the government got out of hand or if another country invaded. The founders, I think, wanted the people on par with the government as well as each state to be able to defend itself individually and collectively.
American culture and society today certainly has evolved. The ownership of guns now has nothing really to do with the possibility of overthrowing the government. If one bought a gun with the intent of attacking the government especially now with respect to the Patriot Act they would be doing something treasonous and illegal. No one could overthrow this government with a gun or if a country invades it now is the federal government's responsibility to defend the people.
Guns presently are used not for defense against the government or foreign invaders but defense against individual criminals, sport or for collectors. The question is in this culture, forgetting the etiology of the Second Amendment which is, I believe, meaningless, do we need ad infinitum access with little oversight over the sales of guns even machine guns? The founders NEVER imagined our culture as it has metamorphosed today. Is the Second Amendment as the founders have written it even applicable to our current historical and social milieu? THAT is the question, I believe, one should debate. The etiology of our Second Amendment as it existed in the revolutionary period is nearly irrelevant to the question of gun control as it exists in contemporary times.
Friday, March 16, 2007
Rosie O'Donnell: I support Rosie. She is the only reason I watch The View and she is one of only a few who appropriately criticize this administration for the egregious corrupt and criminal acts which have cost lives. Although, I think Rosie O'Donnell perhaps could have phrased her opinion regarding the torture of terrorist suspects in general and KSM in particular better, I do not think that she needs to be held to Supreme Court nominee accountability. Professional news broadcasters themselves are certainly not held to those standards. She does not need to support her point of view with flawless evidence. My goodness, our president doesn't even do that. If he can articulate an intelligent sentence I breathe a sigh of relief.
Rosie is NOT a news broadcaster or an academician. She is another personality on TV with her own opinion protected by, of course, our First Amendment. I certainly hope she was NOT defending that poor excuse for humanity KSM but she has every right to debate the legality of this administration's use of torture to extract evidence which is what I thought she was debating. Personally, I have very mixed emotions about the use of torture. One part of me thinks if it can save our lives who cares about those immoral bastards who would perpetrate a 9/11. On the other hand if it extracts phony confessions or imprisons without trial an innocent person, it could do more harm to us than good.
Whether on The View, Oprah, or Larry King, this question is not only Rosie's right or any other American's right to debate, it is our obligation to debate it as citizens of a great democratic country.
Rosie is NOT a news broadcaster or an academician. She is another personality on TV with her own opinion protected by, of course, our First Amendment. I certainly hope she was NOT defending that poor excuse for humanity KSM but she has every right to debate the legality of this administration's use of torture to extract evidence which is what I thought she was debating. Personally, I have very mixed emotions about the use of torture. One part of me thinks if it can save our lives who cares about those immoral bastards who would perpetrate a 9/11. On the other hand if it extracts phony confessions or imprisons without trial an innocent person, it could do more harm to us than good.
Whether on The View, Oprah, or Larry King, this question is not only Rosie's right or any other American's right to debate, it is our obligation to debate it as citizens of a great democratic country.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
I am responding to Colleen Roller's March 15, 2007 letter to the editor recording her disdain for The Globe's printing of the picture of two men kissing. Homosexuals have been a part of our species probably for as long as our species has been on the planet and homosexuals will continue to exist for all time. It is a genetic variation within our species. Therefore, I say get used to it. I would rather see two men kissing then shooting, maiming, and killing each other. I suggest Ms. Roller should indeed subscribe to The Boston Globe. It is the best and most professional newspaper to quote her phrase "for those of us living out here."
Monday, March 12, 2007
Dismayed about Deval: I voted for Deval Patrick but I have been very dismayed about Gov. Patrick's performance. I have written before and said I did not like the Cadillac, the drapes, the week long celebration, The Commonwealth paying for his wife's secretary and I ESPECIALLY hated the phone call to and for cronies with whom Gov. Patrick previously worked. Governor Patrick has been in his job only 2 months and he's taking a leave for his wife's depression? I do not understand that. I am sympathetic to depression and the havoc it can play in a family's life.
My father had a wife with severe emotional problems -- and I mean severe -- one daughter who died two weeks after birth, and his next daughter had polio. Ultimately my mother ended up a quadriplegic from a misdiagnosed benign spinal tumor and then a stroke, spent 20 years in a wheelchair, lots of time in home care and then in hospitals. My father took sole care of her for 7 years before she had surgery. He worked very hard, incurred huge medical expenses and took care of my mother, the house upkeep, cooking and even me in high school and he didn't take ONE not ONE day off from work. He went in every day without fail. If I, after two months of work, said I had to take care of my spouse because of depression how long would I have lasted at that job? About a minute and a half. I am always suspicious of a new hire when all of a sudden an excuse for an absence is given.
I wonder who is Gov. Patrick kidding? I am thinking Gov. Patrick cannot take the heat of the kitchen and that the job is not what he thought it would be. I am thinking he is in over his head and can't get out. In fairness I liked his handling of the illegals although it's dropped from the news and they are still in absentia. Gov. Patrick, I think, is simply not strong enough and cannot take the onslaught. What did he think that job would be like?
I hope I am wrong because I love having a liberal in a position of great power especially too now that a Supreme Court vacancy, because of Judge Sossman's death, has occurred but he must show that he can assume those responsibilities he signed on for irrespective of familial problems.
What did he think that job was all about? It should not be about accumulating as many perks as one can, it should not be about talking to companies to get them a favorable monetary result and, in my opinion, it really should not be about taking time off for his wife's depression as much as I am sympathetic to her and the family's plight. The Commonwealth has a lot of plights and we elected, and I voted for, Gov. Patrick to take care of them!
My father had a wife with severe emotional problems -- and I mean severe -- one daughter who died two weeks after birth, and his next daughter had polio. Ultimately my mother ended up a quadriplegic from a misdiagnosed benign spinal tumor and then a stroke, spent 20 years in a wheelchair, lots of time in home care and then in hospitals. My father took sole care of her for 7 years before she had surgery. He worked very hard, incurred huge medical expenses and took care of my mother, the house upkeep, cooking and even me in high school and he didn't take ONE not ONE day off from work. He went in every day without fail. If I, after two months of work, said I had to take care of my spouse because of depression how long would I have lasted at that job? About a minute and a half. I am always suspicious of a new hire when all of a sudden an excuse for an absence is given.
I wonder who is Gov. Patrick kidding? I am thinking Gov. Patrick cannot take the heat of the kitchen and that the job is not what he thought it would be. I am thinking he is in over his head and can't get out. In fairness I liked his handling of the illegals although it's dropped from the news and they are still in absentia. Gov. Patrick, I think, is simply not strong enough and cannot take the onslaught. What did he think that job would be like?
I hope I am wrong because I love having a liberal in a position of great power especially too now that a Supreme Court vacancy, because of Judge Sossman's death, has occurred but he must show that he can assume those responsibilities he signed on for irrespective of familial problems.
What did he think that job was all about? It should not be about accumulating as many perks as one can, it should not be about talking to companies to get them a favorable monetary result and, in my opinion, it really should not be about taking time off for his wife's depression as much as I am sympathetic to her and the family's plight. The Commonwealth has a lot of plights and we elected, and I voted for, Gov. Patrick to take care of them!
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Letter to Patrick Fitzgerald: Patrick Fitzgerald, you have restored my faith in the system. The system works. I have become so cynical because of many events and things committed by this administration especially with respect to its policy in Iraq which initially I supported. I have been so dismayed at the huge number of illegalities committed whether by the former Congress or by the Executive branch. I was about to give up on expecting any semblance of justice.
You have provided me with hope and have conducted a simply SUPERB prosecution of Mr. Libby and I commend you enthusiastically and thank you for your efforts on behalf of the people. The people once again have prevailed. I continue to hope this will be the first in a long line of holding these egregious betrayers of the public trust to task for the horrific sins they have committed.
You are an admirable and honorable man. I thank you for your Herculean efforts and thank you for the restorative powers of faith in our system you have precipitated!
You have provided me with hope and have conducted a simply SUPERB prosecution of Mr. Libby and I commend you enthusiastically and thank you for your efforts on behalf of the people. The people once again have prevailed. I continue to hope this will be the first in a long line of holding these egregious betrayers of the public trust to task for the horrific sins they have committed.
You are an admirable and honorable man. I thank you for your Herculean efforts and thank you for the restorative powers of faith in our system you have precipitated!
Pausing to think about Patrick: First it was the week long multi-million dollar inaugural, then it was the Cadillac top of the line limo, then it was the refurbishing of furniture,then it was state payment to Patrick's wife, then it was the powerless response on behalf of the homosexual community who supported Gov. Patrick, now the worst has happened. Perhaps Gov. Patrick is turning into a Republican! Did Governor Patrick place a phone call to former secretary Rubin now of Citicorp on behalf of a company ACC which owns Ameriquest whose board Gov Patrick was on to intercede NOT on behalf of the Commonwealth but on behalf of Ameriquest who is seeking capital from Citigorp? Gov. Patrick interceded on behalf of a company with another company to funnel cash to a company he was connected with? It has vague reminders of Republicans and Halliburton, et al. raping the taxpayer. This time it was corporation to corporation with nothing gained by the Commonwealth but it is still the same quid pro quo and somebody's pockets ultimately get lined. I was incredulous after reading the Globe story. I am getting sorrier and sorrier every day I read something pathetic Gov. Patrick has done which does NOT include the welfare of the ordinary citizen! Isn't Gov. Patrick savvy enough to know his every movement, his every phone call, his every action is scrutinized. Perhaps, next time he will think very carefully before he acts while he is an elected official of the Commonwealth. Perhaps, next time I will think more carefully about my vote!
Libby the Liar Part 2: It is great that the jury is being so scrupulous about examining every count in the Libby case. If that guy gets off though then I give up. If that is the case then our judicial system is intrinsically and impossibly flawed. This is an OJ Simpsonesque case and if the verdict does not hit -- no smash -- a juror in the face and that treasonous criminal gets off it will be yet another travesty of justice. Frankly, if I were on the jury it would have taken me about 3 minutes and 20 seconds to arrive at a guilty verdict. It is now 10 days. It's hard to believe it would take that long to convict him. Time will tell if yet another fiasco ensues and Bush, et al get away, as they continuously have, with perjury, treason and crimes against humanity.
Monday, March 05, 2007
Letter to Brian William Blog re: trip to Iraq: Brian, I wish you the best and am sure that both the technological and US military expertise that NBC has access to offers you some comfort as you undertake your dangerous journey to bring us your report. I personally, although a supporter of the war initially, have been completely astounded as to the political hack job that has been Iraq. Our so called Commander in Chief has been anything but. He has sacrificed our precious young blood, our treasure, our position in the world, regional Middle East security for a NeoCon fantasy cajoling the public into believing that WMD's would be found. Hussein is dead, now what? I would venture a guess that our Commander has not read ONE book about Iraq. What has he done to us? I shake my head in disbelief. I ask that you bring us the uncensored facts about just what is occurring as we yet again, I believe, proceed into folly. This era is not WWII. This country can no longer bomb itself into security. We bomb ourselves into more insecurity. This is a new kind of war if indeed it is a war. It is a world-wide defensive action that requires a diplomatic savvy, understanding of the region as well as a technological and computer expertise. This Commander in Chief has not the vaguest idea about any of that. We need a new day and new leadership if we can ever hope to end this nightmarish quagmire. I hope and pray you and our country remain safe.
Saturday, March 03, 2007
Disastrous Disasters -- Responsibility of the federal Government: It's de ja vu all over again. The President exiting his helicopter, greeted by his political allies fawning over him and thanking him for what exactly? This is a prayerful country blah blah blah blah. All that we hear is platitudes. Guess what? Prayer is not going to rebuild a poor person's house even though they THINK it will. If God is so benevolent and kind, perhaps he could have redirected that tornado especially around a school. Maybe he just could have redirected that bus in Georgia so that the driver NOT go down the wrong lane. Or maybe the south is having so many disasters because it voted for George Bush and is regressive and inhumane on every social issue in this country! If God is all powerful then ... Why does no one ask THOSE questions? I say to our president YOU show me the money.
It's all well and good for the president to ask the citizens of this country to contribute yet again to another disaster. We have been called upon to contribute ad infinitum and we have answered the call. I can't help but feel, though, here we are the richest country on the face of the earth wasting billions in Iraq, billions lost and billions expended and more going to be expended. All that money! How many disasters could this Federal government have contributed to IF we had all that money back? Katrina, tornados, floods and so many other natural disasters our country has suffered during the Bush years could have been paid for entirely. Moreover, global warming, the probable cause of so much catastrophic weather could be reversed. I resent the American people being asked yet again to contribute. We DO contribute through our tax dollars. Too bad those tax dollars are not used to HELP our own people but are used to perpetrate one of the most destructive and costly wars in our country's history!!
It's all well and good for the president to ask the citizens of this country to contribute yet again to another disaster. We have been called upon to contribute ad infinitum and we have answered the call. I can't help but feel, though, here we are the richest country on the face of the earth wasting billions in Iraq, billions lost and billions expended and more going to be expended. All that money! How many disasters could this Federal government have contributed to IF we had all that money back? Katrina, tornados, floods and so many other natural disasters our country has suffered during the Bush years could have been paid for entirely. Moreover, global warming, the probable cause of so much catastrophic weather could be reversed. I resent the American people being asked yet again to contribute. We DO contribute through our tax dollars. Too bad those tax dollars are not used to HELP our own people but are used to perpetrate one of the most destructive and costly wars in our country's history!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Democratic Presidential Convention--On to November
I watched the Democratic convention last evening until my body's demand for sleep overtook me around midnight. Having followed thin...
-
Academics say Justice Antonin Scalia was an “originalist.” What does it mean to be a Constitutional originalist? It means that one revert...
-
I wrote this last week and for the most part sat on it because I did not want my writing to imply anything against Israel. As stated agai...
-
Breach of Tort : This is NOT the change I bought into. Each day I grow angrier and angrier at the president for making this DISASTROUS deci...