The Federalist Papers

2010...Republicans modify "Axis of Evil" list

2010-01-17T12:55:00.000-08:00

Just because Republicans were overwhelmingly and passionately voted out of office by reality-based voters in November of 2008 does not mean that the Hate Train gets a rest. On the contrary. The Hate Train has added several more cars to its haul and thousands more lost, mindless souls. Fox News incessantly provides the coal as Republicans continue to scour America for more Sarah Palins and Joe the Plumbers: people who could not care any less for facts or truth and who must cling to at least one good conspiracy theory about Obama or they will be forever labeled as, "dang libral".

New elections called for new things to hate. No reason necessary. In fact, having a reason actually gets in the way as it requires some sort of brain power and critical thinking: both of which are abhorred by the Republican base.

I will try to include the entire 2010 Republican Axis of Evil List. It is quite the challenge as the list grows sporadically and unpredictably; on any given occasion it could add 3 items in one day and other times go a month with the same, tired hate targets. Personalities like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity certainly have been busy little bees in order to keep this list freshly-stocked and always cloaked in "Christian values".

Here's what I've come up with:

1. Marxism, or any derivative of the word. Karl Marx, the Marx brothers, Richard Marx, or any older man with a long beard that has some shades of grey in it. This is a term that gets thrown around a lot. It was on the 2008 and 2009 list as well. There are to my knowledge 2 Republicans in the world who understand Marxism and its complex nature. Both of those individuals are in a witness-protection program and their whereabouts are secret. Dick Cheney knows where they are and you can bet they're being tortured right now.

Be careful here: if you ask one of your Republican neighbors or a Tea Bagger to discuss Marxism, you better be ready for some violence. When you stump a Republican or Tea Bagger, their response is usually to intimidate you by yelling or threatening violence. That right there has more to do with Marxism than any other issue in the debate. Funny how that works.

2. Chicago. Anyone or anything from Chicago. Yes, even the Cubs. Damn, even the Cubs. Those Lovable Losers are now part of the Chicago Political Machine that Obama founded in 19...err...whatever. Upon being elected president, little did Obama know that he put Chicago on the Axis of Evil. Apparently between being born in Kenya and coming out of his mother's womb in Honolulu, the infant found time to start the corrupt Chicago political scene. Was this kid destined for great things or what??

When Chicago lost in its bid to land the 2016 Summer Olympics, Republicans cheered with the same fervor as when we brought Apollo 13 safely back to Earth. Amazing that in this economy that many fellow Americans would cheer for same number of fellow Americans to stay unemployed. Patriotism to the maximum.

3. Leftist Agenda. Hell, I don't even know what this means. But it's on the list and it doesn't matter how it got there. Ask any Republican what this is and they just may kick you right in the choda for even asking them that. Especially if you ask them that while they are away from the TV or Hannity radio program. They are like cornered dobermans: scared, confused and angry.

4. Socialism. Again the Repubicans struggle with all of the -isms except racism, sexism and warism. Along with socialism comes socialized medicine. To Republicans this means that if we pass a comprehensive health insurance bill that will cover uninsured Americans, instead of providing health insurance coverage to those who have none, we would simply change our country's name to France, begin speaking French and ship all of our medical devices from every single medical facility to Iceland. Then all of the doctors would grow beards like Karl Marx and send you to death camps in Stalingrad. What's so funny? Sarah Palin said it's true.

5. Global Warming/Al Gore. "We're still havin' them change of seasons so how can we be havin' global warmins'?" The most uneducated voting base on the planet has now ventured into the world of science. God help us.

By global warming being on the Axis of Evil the Republicans are now determined to pollute the planet even further and thereby destroying it. Then they will all sit back and laugh and point fingers saying, "Hahahaha....told ya there was no such thing...dadgum kool-aid drinkers!"

6. Taxes. Apparently giving the middle-class tax breaks and lifting them on the wealthy have really angered some middle-class blue collar Republicans. Who would have ever thought that the middle-class would literally die to protect the wealthy? Germany 1936...cough...cough.

Karl Marx would certainly be upset but what did he know, friggin' Marxist/Socialist?

This was the glue that brought all of the Tea Baggers together. The same ones who said, "Tell government to keep their hands of my Medicare!" Nothing like showing off your intellect in a room lacking intellect.

7. Czars. Bush had them in his administration but when Bush would pronounce the word "Czar" it had a southern twang to it and therefore it reaked of America. (almost like, "Las' night I went to duh drive in and I czar a Clint Eastwood movie.") Obama has them and somehow we are reminded of the Gulag and the hammer and sickle...and Ivan Drago, of course..."I vill crush you."

Glenn Beck has made it his life's purpose to rid the Obama administration of anyone who has a last name whose letters can be rearranged to spell "Commie", "Russian", "Red", "Sickle", "Drago" (from Rocky IV), "Gorbachev", "Putin" or "Vodka".

8. Hawaii. Paradise to some but absolute Hell to Republicans. This is the "apparent" birthplace of Barack Hussein Obama. Birth certificate...check. Article in paper....check. Official birth records...check. Placenta?.....HA ! Where is it MR. PRESIDENT??? Kenya??

Many Republicans are now boycotting Hawaii for fear of brushing up against the birth certificate. They would rather catch cholera in the Amazon than have to look at that piece of paper.

9. Haiti. This one was just added as Obama promised to help Haiti in the wake of one of the world's greatest tragedies in the last 120 years. If Obama promises to help you, you are immediately and firmly placed on the Axis of Evil (poor people, gay people, minorities have all been on the Axis of Evil at some point in time). Because, as Pat Robertson would argue, natural disasters are brought on by people and their choices. Mother Nature? Meteological phenomena? Those weren't around when Jesus was drivin' his Expedition...were they?

Fox News ran an Op-Ed piece where the author questioned whether America should help Haiti or not and tied it criticism of Obama. Nothing like selective compassion by people who claim to follow the most UNSELECTIVELY compassionate person in the history of the world.

10. Teleprompters. Who would have thought this great invention would meet such a terrible fate? Bush used them. Clinton used them. Mostly Bush read from text on paper but still needed assistance. So has nearly every president and every high school speech class student for the last 200 years.

But...for some, Obama has a skin color problem. Republicans have no choice but to tie that to intelligence ("I have many black friends who are very articulate"). Obama needs the teleprompter whereas Bush just had it laying around and decided to use it.

11. Jimmy Carter. Yep. Old Peanuts has found himself on the Axis of Evil for probably the last 5-6 years. When Republicans have whipping post fever, old JC is the only cure. I don't see Jimmy getting off of the list even post-mortem.

12. Education. This one is HUGE ! If there's one thing Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber have in common it's the lack of education. And that my friends, gets Republicans more turned on than Donald Rumsfeld attending the International Convention of Torturous Devices. Being educated means you care about facts, data and truth. Who needs that crap when you have a gun, a Cabela's hat and a goatee?

Speaking in sound bites, leaving the -ing off of -ing words (such as "hatin' librals"), claiming to not know how Washington works, refusing to read books with facts, exhibiting a stunning display of ignorant hypocrisy, not believing in dinosaurs or the Roman Empire...are all very attractive to the Republican base. Dare I say.,..erotic?

When Sarah Palin was asked by Glenn Beck which of our country's Founding Fathers were her favorite, Sarah calmly and confidently replied: "Oh...I don't know...all of them!" You nailed it, sister. You dropped that gem and a thousand Republicans watching just lit a cigarette and gave a deep sigh, moaning..."Now THAT was good!"

Do your best to derail the train, truth seekers and remember, we don't shoot our wounded.

"Hello Officer Timson, how are ya? Going bowling this evening?"

2009-07-25T18:17:00.000-07:00

Men in authority will always think that criticism of their policies is dangerous. They will always equate their policies with patriotism, and find criticism subversive.

---Henry Steele Commager

There are two things all police officers hate: 1) having to chase anyone, and 2) having their authority questioned by a black person.

The length and energy exerted by the police when chasing a suspect is directly proportionate to the severity of the beat down the suspect will suffer upon being apprehended. Everyone knows this. Just do a google search of police chases and thousands of examples are sure to come up where you will see an overweight, out-of-breath officer with a mustache beat the living hell out of an unconcious suspect who was thrown from his car at the end of the chase. What is rarely seen on a google search are the instances when a police officer has his authority (almost always a male officer) questioned by a black person. In these instances, the black man (almost always involves a black male) is described by any of the following adjectives: angry, combative, violent, belligerent, unruly, threatening, out of control, suspicious, insulting, disrespectful, dishonest, arrogant, condascending, and everyone's favorite excuse for police brutality, resisting arrest.

As Richard Pryor once said during one of his performances, "White people always say, 'what is this thing about police brutality, those black people are just resisting arrest', that's cuz the cops live in your neighborhood...and you know him as Officer Timson."

In the case of Henry Louis Gates, Jr. we have what is commonly known as, "The Irreverent Negro Who Forgot How Lucky He Is". Harvard University Professor Gates was returning home after a long trip to China. While attempting to enter his own home through the back door, a home which he has paid for with real money, he was forced to literally "break-in" because his front door tends to stick in the summer humidity. A neighbor spotted him doing this and most likely came to the logical conclusion that Professor Gates had reverted back to his old negro habits of home invasion and grand theft auto. The neighbor called the police quickly because in these instances black people tend to multiply rapidly.

When the police arrived with the information "multiple black males attempting to break into a home" the mindset is pretty clear. They are now searching for ANY black male and when they spot him he will be questioned more rigorously than if they were searching for a white male. Because, you see, when a black male is reported to be involved in a crime, the police search for ANY black male. When it involves a white male the description tends to be as precise as an E-Harmony.com single's profile and therefore, the need to stop every white male tends to be an unnecessary hassle for the common hard-working taxpayer.

During the arrest, as if there were going to be any other conclusion to this story but an arrest, the police discovered that Gates, despite being very black, did in fact own the home he was standing in. Despite several attempts to disprove that ridiculous achievement the police were set to leave Professor Gates' residence feeling rather dejected and disappointed. Gates added quite a bit of salt to their deeply wounded ego by voicing his frustration about how common this type of reaction is by the police. The evidence was overwhelmingly in his favor. There is not enough space on the internet to list all the cases of racial profiling, police brutality and false imprisonments of black people. So let's move past that, quickly.

What appears to have been the straw that broke the Man's back was that Gates continued his verbal frustration outside on his front porch, saying, "I'll talk to ya mama outside". At that point, there were several people gathered outside to observe the exchange. The police report reads, "These actions on the behalf of Gates served no legitimate purpose and caused citizens passing by this location to stop and take notice while appearing surprised and alarmed." I'm sure there were more than "several" people who were surprised and alarmed to find a black man in THAT kind of house and that he was a Harvard University professor. The officer was apparently concerned for the safety and serenity of the neighborhood and thereby justifying the arrest of Professor Gates with the charge of being "loud and tumultuous in a public place". Watch this video clip of a white male stopped by a state trooper. Notice the officer's tempered reaction to a white person being "loud and tumultuous."

Black people are often referred to as being "loud and tumultuous". It appears to be a necessary characteristic. Because history clearly indicates that if similar individuals tend to be unnecessarily arrested, unnecessarily beaten and sometimes tend to unnecessarily disappear then one can conclude that being loud and tumultuous may be a lifesaver.

Gates was not arrested entirely because of his blackness. I'm sure there have been black men questioned somewhere in America during the last 24 hours and were not arrested as a result. The REAL reason Professor Gates was arrested was simple. It's the same reason white conservative men dislike Supreme Court Nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor: when minorities question authority they are ungrateful and unpatriotic. (When white people do it we call it "rebellion" or "revolution" because there must be a reason for it) Ungrateful because they appear to not know how lucky they are to have the opportunity to vote, to own property and to rule over or teach white people. In short, minorities fail to realize how lucky they are to have basic human rights. Unpatriotic because "only in America can a black man become professor or a Puerto Rican woman can become Supreme Court Justice. See how generous America is ?

Those who support the actions of the Cambridge Police cry out, "But this black man...why did he have to say anything to the police? Couldn't he just have kept his mouth shut and not be so...black?"

I suppose those same people, mainly right-wing conservatives, were saying 220 years ago to their fellow liberal, "Why did you have to talk back to that British soldier? Couldn't you just let him question you, steal your dignity and punch you a couple of times? Why are you so sensitive and feel the need to be so loud and tumultuous?"

Questioning authority is a founding principle of this country. It is a keystone for any free society. Loud and tumultuous are synonymous with freedom. Until everyone is free no one is.

"We pray for those who are sick in both body and spirit..." --Padre Pio

2009-07-16T14:30:00.000-07:00

Occasionally I venture out into a world that is so terribly sick and twisted that it makes me fear for the human race. That world is Hannity.com. In the forum section you will find the most hateful, ignorant and arrogant people who, in my opinion, consume too many of the Earth's valuable resources. I was flirting with the Devil this morning when I hit paydirt on my first try with this post below by "Young_Republican":

Young_Republican3618
Man On The Street

Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2

To all of you anti-war freaks

First of all isnt war what brought our country together. And think about it. As Albert Einstein said, "As long as there is man, there shall be war." The Iraq war was needed.You have to remember that terrorists attacked NY. Now i dont want to here all this theroys that th war was for oil or anything like that. Back in 1941 The Jappenese attacked the US and we went to war. If these terrorists were in lets say india. We would be fighting in india. But they came from Iraq so were in Iraq (now out, or in military bases) People dieing in any war is bad. But look at this. Only 7000 deaths of US troops. In what a.... 8 years. 7 years... In 1 day in our countrys past war. Over 10,000 americans died. D-Day, Iwo Jima, Gettysburgh, Market Garden. Our troops fight for us, to keep us safe. And Some people call all there hard work pointless. Wow just wow.

Yes, you just read that and no, I didn't make it up. I wouldn't know where to begin when trying to address this. This post, however illogical, nonsensical and completely devoid of rational thought, is a fairly common representation of the majority of current right-wing thought in America. The person who vomited this organic ignorance is an authentic and original product of Fox News. I've blogged about this before. By all appearances it would seem that I am obsessed with this type of individual. It's like visiting a haunted hotel where I continually go there to catch a glimpse of the legendary ghost.

This person was born out of the Fox News Crusade to demonize educated people. Educated people tend to be truth-seekers. Fox News wants truth-seekers like Sean Hannity wants to march in the San Francisco Gay Parade. But there may be more to this than Fox News simply trying to turn education into a disease.

Questioning the war in Iraq has always been prohibited on Hannity.com. Should you question ANYTHING about the war in Iraq it will almost certainly get you banned by one of Hannity's disciples (moderators). This is a place where the surreal is real and the real is surreal, where facts are "biased" and where members gather around a bonfire of absolutely fantastic lies, warming their hands, singing songs and drinking the same hot cocoa kool-aid while chanting, "Freedom ain't free".

I was a member on the Hannity.com forums until I was banned in 2007. During that brief sojourn of living on the darkside I discovered this demographic which I had completely underestimated in size and in depth of ignorance. I would have thought by now, given that nearly all Republican officials agree that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and that Iraq DID NOT have weapons of mass destruction, that this movement would have lost some of its momentum. Sadly, I was wrong.

As I've written before, these individuals are so full of fear and shame that if they were to be enlightened it would be an emotionally crippling experience. Fox News has given their ego what it needs to stay alive and healthy: an identity. If this type of individual were to detach from their ego and that relative identity that it holds in its tight grasp, their ego would suffer a horrible death.

I can only conclude that this type of individual lives entirely on ego which is fueled by this identity that it must hate everything that Fox News propagandizes as evil. This individual has relinquished all logic and deferred all decision-making properties to its ego. And by doing so in such a collective manner in such a large community, their ego has a much higher probability of survival because it is constantly validated by others who are just as spiritually sick. In short, should one of these sheep stray from the flock it risks losing not only the identity for the ego but those fellow sheep who keep the identity strong. If such a person were to lose this community and the identity that feeds the ego, the ego then becomes vulnerable. The ego then becomes susceptible to actual reality in the present moment.

A moment in which we know that Iraq was and is not our enemy, a moment in which homosexuals are above all human beings and a moment in which a Puerto Rican woman CAN use the expression "wise latina" AND be taken seriously.

Updated Fox News Enemy List: education, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barack Obama, Barack Obama's birth certificate, Iran, North Korea, Mexico, polar bears, moose, proper English, Europe (Vatican City not included), Karl Marx, Cesar Chavez, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans (thanks Sonia!), humanities, art, children under the age of 18, minority children over the age of 6, health insurance for people who make less money than they do, Canadian health care system, Australian health care system, Islam, Muslim, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Turkey (kind of), Yemen, Somalia, anything French, Earth, truth, facts, investigations, resigning from a job after a scandal, practicing Christian values, China, Russia, Putin, Stalin, Trotsky, Borat, Bruno, Jane Fonda, Phil Donahue, Patrick Duffy (not sure about this one, I'll double-check) Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Brittney Spears, Jamie Lynn Spears, equal rights, empowered minorities, "wise" minority people, the word "minority", journalism, secret documents that reveal secret programs no one knew about, the Constitution, the law, the word "tax" and any derivative of, Jimmy Carter, Chelsea Clinton, Obama's children, Michelle Obama, whatever clothing Michelle Obama has on right this very second, anything "organic"...

Please feel free to add to this list.

"4 yes votes and 1 'hell yeah' "...The Story of a Governor's Cabinet

2009-07-04T13:51:00.000-07:00

Sarah Palin's press conference. Seriously? Was that not the most awkward 30 minutes of television you've ever watched? Forget O.J. and the white bronco. Forget Mark Sanford. This was the moment when even Larry the Cable Guy was scratching his head with hot barbeque tongs saying, "What in THEE hell did that woman jis say?"

There are times as a parent when you must teach your children a lesson. Friday July 3rd around noon Sarah Palin did your work for you. She taught all children that education is very important.

The most disturbing piece was this nugget:

"In fact, this decision comes after much consideration, and finally polling the most important people in my life - my children (where the count was unanimous... well, in response to asking:)

'Want me to make a positive difference and fight for ALL our children's future from OUTSIDE the Governor's office?' It was four "yes's" and one "hell yeah!" The "hell yeah" sealed it - and someday I'll talk about the details of that..."

So, just so I understand it, Palin "the average hockey mom" made the decision to resign as governor by polling the following think tank:

Todd Palin --- husband, commercial fisherman and snowmobile afficionado

Track Palin -- 20 yr old son, amateur hockey player

Bristol Palin ---18 yr old daughter, mother of infant born out of abstinence

Willow Palin --- 14 yr old daughter, unknown as no one has heard her speak

Piper Palin -- 8 yr old daughter, primary babysitter of Trig

Trig Palin --18 month old son who has Down's Syndrome

I'm not making this up. So...time for hypothetical scenario: Sarah Palin is President of the United States (I know but just play along anyway...) North Korea is set to test fire yet another missile and this time intelligence indicates that it could reach Hawaii. North Korea states if the missile is intercepted it will view it as a declaration of war. President Palin gets the 3am phone call. She's briefed on the situation and calmly hangs up the phone.

She then proceeds to wake up her advisors, cabinet members in whom she has unshakeable trust.

"TODD !!! TRACK !!!! BRISTOL !!!! WILLOW !!! PIPER!!! TRIG !!!! GET YER ARSES DOWN HERE WILL YA? WE GOT ONE OF THEM THERE SITUATIONS GOIN' ON !!!

AND IT AIN'T NO FULL COURT PRESS, YOU BETCHA!!!

Remember when Alaska was cool, abstract and rugged... before Sarah Palin painted it qwerky?

2009-07-03T16:22:00.000-07:00

Alaska. I've never been there and I'll bet you haven't been there either. Still wanna go?

I don't. Send me a postcard if you go. Wait a second..., no, send me a photo of the Wasilla Town Hall so that I can make it into an epitaph for my vision of what I thought Alaska was.

It died the day the world discovered Sarah Palin.

Alaska used to be too cool for me to even talk about. If someone asked if I'd been there, I would have answered, "no...haven't had the chance to head up there...YET ! But as soon as I can, boy, I might even stay a couple years." What a lie! I was so terrified of Alaska I couldn't even watch Northern Exposure for more than 15 minutes at a time. I felt as though Alaska knew who was watching HER...as if it were the most rugged, exotic, land where only tough, artsy, nature guys could survive (like Emile Hirsch in "Into the Wild"). How in the hell was I going to make it in Alaska if I could not bring my Aveda shampoo and conditioner and my American Crew Pomade? Do grocery stores in Alaska even have Pellegrino?

Sarah Palin has turned Alaska into the equivalent of a Japanese game show: no one understands it, the host winks and laughs and everyone is embarrassed for the people in it. She took a land that was so mysterious and powerful that even the most intellectually elite were frozen in awe of its natural beauty upon arrival, to now a land where all intellectuals are terrified at its governor's ignorance, lack of intelligence and purposeful avoidance of reality. Alaska the Land has been overshadowed by a nasal voice that simply answers every question with a "you betcha" and a very obscure fishing metaphor. Palin took Alaska and melted it into a Flint, Michigan, a Decatur, Illinois, places where we EXPECT to find close-minded people who still have the Steve Perry/Bob Seger hairdo and think that Spain is a region in Mexico.

There's a reason why no one can name any other governor of Alaska prior to Palin: because they never talked! They didn't have to. Hello !!!??? Being governor of Alaska is all that needs to be said. Alaska the Land always spoke louder than its governor. That's how it's supposed to be.

My only solace now is "Ice Road Truckers". But even that is getting close to the cheesy press appearances Sarah Palin delivers every week free of charge. There's a girl trucker on that show (the only girl trucker) and she used to play basketball in high school in Alaska. Sound familiar?

How fitting was it today, the day that Sarah the Baracuda QUITS as governor, that the ducks on the pond and the owl in the tree behind her were louder than her voice, that the grass she was stepping on was a bit greener and the mountains looked taller... as if to say, "Behold...Alaska the Land has awoken again". To use a Palin metaphor, she "forfeited the game". A quitter in every sense of the word.

No more shooting polar bears from helicopters, no more footage of turkeys getting their throats slit and thrown into a defeathering machine, no more trendy square-rimmed spectacles and certainly no more "Alaska is just a microcosm of America". Because it's not. We in the lower 48 know it's not. That's why we thought Alaska was cool. That's why we wanted to visit Alaska the Land.

The Party of Family Values keeps on "thinking"...and keeps on sinking !

2009-07-03T15:24:00.000-07:00

Oh, yeah. Promise Keepers. The Fellowship. Good ole Christian Right family values. The party of judgment and contempt, of exclusion and prejudice, the party that believes poverty, hunger, being black and homosexuality are all choices, shows once again why claiming to be morally superior is not only anti-Christian but is unrealistic and utterly prophetic. Every single time.

First of all, let's be clear. The Republican party must have been on their feet cheering like Notre Dame cheered for Rudy when John Ensign and Mark Sanford came out with their admissions of sexual, carnal, adulterous, naked, flesh-touching affairs.

At least these two cheaters had partners of the opposite sex (unlike Larry Craig, Mark Foley and Ted Haggard). So in a way the party offered their "conservative compassion" for at least not going all "log cabin-ish". Although I must say that Sanford's situation is a bit riskier as he chose an Argentine woman.

Fox News watchers have difficulty finding Argentina on the globe much less determining if it is on the Axis of Evil or if Argentina is "with us or against us." Too much culture and/or geographic distance can automatically get a country placed on Fox News' Enemy List and Argentina has both, i.e. tango, soccer, Vespas, chimichurri and empenadas.

Ensign and Sanford were both very prominent Republicans arguably in the top 5 of leaders of their leaderless party (if you don't count Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich---another extramarital conservative). Both Ensign and Sanford belonged to a religious cult...errr...group known as "The Fellowship". Now this does not include Frodo or Gandolf but it does include a lot of white male Republicans. Here is the mission statement of The Fellowship:

To develop and maintain an informal association of people banded together, to go out as "ambassadors of reconciliation," modeling the principles of Jesus, based on loving God and loving others. To work with the leaders of other nations, and as their hearts are touched, the poor, the oppressed, the widows and the youth of their country will be impacted in a positive manner. It is said that youth groups will be developed under the thoughts of Jesus, including loving others as you want to be loved.

The mission statement seems harmless enough. Where did these two go wrong?

It shows once again how the body does not follow the mind, how one cannot think himself into right action. It is only by right action that right thinking can become automatic. A few years before Jesus pimped those sweet leather sandals in Palestine, Aristotle had several ideas that he expressed openly.

Here's one that underscores my point, taken from the Nicomachean Ethics:

II. The Good Character.

A. People have a natural capacity for good character, but it is developed through practice. The capacity does not come first--it's developed only through practice.

1. The vicious circle of which is preeminent--acts or dispositions--is broken by Aristotle's distinction between acts which create good dispositions and acts which flow from the good disposition once it has been created.
2. Arete is a disposition developed out of a capacity by the proper exercise of that capacity.
3. Habits are developed through acting; a person's character is the structure of habits and is formed by what we do.

Aha! This could explain why so many look to be saved without rowing the boat. God can calm the waters but He can't move the oars.

So, I wonder if Ensign and Sanford, as they lay atop their respective lovers in the moonlight like the scene in Top Gun with Tom Cruise and Kelly McGillis, even quite possibly listening to "Take my breath away" by pop legend Berlin, if both men were still trying to think themselves into right action.

The Quiet After The Storm...

2008-11-05T19:04:00.000-08:00

What a gift from God it was to experience the evening of November 4, 2008 in America. My mind is still trying to wrap itself around the magnitude of what just happened. I will be able to tell this story a thousand times over and I am certain that it will never get old.

Ineffability is defined as: To say that something is "ineffable" means that it cannot or should not, for overwhelming reasons, be expressed in spoken words (as with the concept of true love). It is generally used to describe a feeling, concept or aspect of existence that is too great to be adequately described in words, or that inherently (due to its nature) cannot be conveyed in dualistic symbolic human language, but can only be known internally by individuals.
In Zen it is often said that (by analogy) the finger can point to the moon but is not the moon; likewise words and actions can point towards what is ineffable but cannot make another know it.

When I think of what happened yesterday, all I can do is cry. I thank God for giving me life and for allowing me to experience this moment in its fullness.

To anyone who has been made to feel an outsider, made to feel less than a full citizen, has been disrespected or accused of being guilty until proven innocent, who was told they could never succeed...today is YOUR day! Own it like it's always been yours. This is what the "other side of the mountain top" feels like. The possibilities are endless and every dream is a question of "when", and never "if".

But lest we forget those who've gone before us....

Gabriel Posser
Nat Turner
Harriet Tubman
Frederick Douglas
Marcus Garvey
The Scottsboro Nine
Medgar Evers
Emmitt Till
Ronald Madison (mentally handicapped man killed by N.O Police during Hurricane Katrina)
Bernie Mac
Jackie Robinson
Rosa Parks
Charles Steele
Denise McNair, Cynthia Wesley, Carole Robertson, and Addie Mae Collins
The Great Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.

And countless, and I do mean countless others...

With gratitude and humility...keep your torch lit

"Hey, I'm not racist...I'll have you know I have one black friend and he's very articulate..."

2008-10-19T09:01:00.000-07:00

I published this post on July 4, 2009. I had started to write this post back in October of 2008. The hateful racist backlash had already begun as the writing was on the wall that Obama would win the presidency. I shelved this post mainly because the topic of racism is so broad and so far-reaching that I truly did not know how to begin to write about it much less find a conclusion. As far as we've come since the Civil Rights Movement is as far as we still need to go to truly say that, "All men are created equal." Perhaps having a black man as the most powerful man in the free world will unearth the last remaining seeds of racism and thereby begin a new field in which true love and tolerance will flourish.

The excitement that has been swirling since Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court has been nothing short of a compelling anthropological study of white conservative America. Both Limbaugh and Gingrich, cross-cultural icons and open-minded drug and sex addicts respectively, labeled Sotomayor as a racist. Reverse racist to be exact. For those of you who are not racist and/or are not familiar with the term "reverse racist", allow me to enlighten you.

The term is usually heard on Fox News or on Hannity /Limbaugh radio shows. It is a pathetic attempt at self-pity by white men when any minority person exhibits any form of empowerment or shows pride in their ethnic background; or when a minority person accomplishes greatness or earns a position of power and refuses to honor the "white privilege", such person is viewed as ungrateful and is accused of being a "reverse racist". How blatant the double-standard is in America: when a white male achieves the office of Senator, President or Supreme Court Justice, he has done so through hard work, dedication and intellect. When a minority person accomplishes the exact same positions, that person has "obviously benefited from living in America and should be thankful he/she even had the opportunity." Note to minority person: this is why you're held to a different standard. Mark Sanford and John Ensign will still have careers after their respective scandals. Minorities don't.

The central issue that seems to generate the most discussion is Sotomayor's comment from 2001 during a speech at Berkeley (terrorist factory) where she said, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

So, is she saying that someone who has lived in a wider, broader and deeper spectrum of America, a latina woman who has been in the depths of poverty (usually reserved for minorities and typically where you find the most crime) and had not only been on welfare but eventually got to rub shoulders with white men at Princeton, would not have a better background to base decisions on than an affluent, white male who has never been within 10 miles of a (insert state) Department of Economic Security Office, who grew up in an all-white country club, who had never been in a car that wasn't made that same year (unless it was a vintage Mercedes) or who always thought the house in the Hamptons was "roughing it"?

Where could Sotomayor have gotten the juevos to say this? As Lindsey Graham so naively and racially put it, "And if I had said something like that--or someone with my background and profile--we wouldn't be talking about this nomination going forward." Ummm...yeah we would. Because white men have done that for centuries. They just never had to say it out loud. Our country was founded by white men, the laws were written by white men, white men were the only persons allowed to vote for the first 140 years of our country's existence, white men are 97% more likely to hail a cab in New York City.

So, yes, a Latina woman with an experience similar to Sotomayor's does come to a better decision than a white male who lacks that broad background of America's cultural landscape. We white males live in a fairly confined, narrow scope in America. When is the last time any of you took a stroll down the worst neighborhood in your city at night? Didn't keep the collar popped on the Polo, did ya? How about that liquor store on the corner in the ghetto...? Ever stop and ask for directions? No? Why not?

How many Fox News broadcasters are black? (Juan Williams doesn't count...Sheppard Smith is blacker than he is.) How many are Latino? Okay, Geraldo, but he's part-time.

But the right will respond that Michael Steele is the head of the Republican National Committee and I think I did see 3 or 4 persons of color at the Republican National Convention and they weren't just security guards...they were actually delegates. It appears as though they are making progress.

Sounds like they need a community organizer.

UPDATE: 7/14/09

The chairman of the Republican Party, house negro Michael Steele, just dropped this gem of a quote, watch the video in the link below:

Michael Steele decides he can "woo blacks to the GOP with fried chicken and potato salad"

Just when you think it couldn't get worse...the Republicans come through with a grand slam!

The NeoConned assault on Lady Justice: The frightening trend of proving false negatives

2008-10-19T08:49:00.000-07:00

America. Land of the free, home of the brave. America. Home to the world's best example of equal justice. For centuries we have operated under the warm blanket of "innocent until proven guilty". Prosecutors are required to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury of 12 fellow citizens who have been selected at random.

Have there been times when the guilty have gone free? Yes. Have there been times when the innocent were found guilty? Yes. The system is not perfect. It does walk in some faithful harmony with our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Our Founding Fathers believed in humanity for all citizens of the world. This is why you will not find an indirect or direct reference to "U.S. citizens" in the Bill of Rights. For it is a document which outlines what the government can and cannot do against any people of any nation on earth (yes, even members of al-Qaeda!)

The American justice system is currently broken. It used to be that one was presumed innocent until proven guilty. In eight short years the Neoconned have abducted and assaulted our Lady of Justice. The result: if you are not a registered Republican, neoconservative and/or Fox News watcher, you are now presumed guilty until you are proven innocent. Yes, this has happened. Let's take a look back starting on September 12, 2001.

It is considered common knowledge at this point that the Iraq War was essentially planned prior to Bush's inauguration. 9/11 was simply a catalyst to be able to invade Iraq on ridiculously thin intelligence and the brilliant strategy of fear-mongering. When the U.S. were forced to comply to some set of rules laid out by the UN, they requested that Iraq provide intelligence and documentation on its weapons of mass destruction program. When Iraq complied and submitted a 19,000 page document, we conveniently erased the parts that stated that they did not have a WMD program and then asked Iraq again to come clean...or cleaner? Iraq clearly did not have WMD. However, when you send 150,000 troops to the Gulf to "negotiate diplomatically" it becomes increasingly difficult to continue to search (and be patient) for the truth.

Iraq continued to deny that they possessed WMD (most likely due to the fact that they did not have any). We still refused to accept that claim. This is perhaps the first instance of forcing someone, in this case an entire country, to prove a false negative; that is to say, that Iraq was clearly presumed guilty and ultimately was unable to prove its innocence.

As we are discovering on almost a daily basis, the U.S. knew that Iraq did not have WMD. In fact, as early as February of 2001 both Colin Powell and Condi Rice stood before the American public and claimed beyond doubt that Iraq had ceased to produce WMD and that they currently DID NOT possess any operational WMD.

There have been thousands of cases, obviously on a smaller scale, where this fascist system of justice has been present. Wiretapping, torture, denying prisoners habeas corpus are all elements of this upended American ideal. Persons who have spoken out against the war are on the government No Fly List. Protesters have been arrested for no reason other than exercising their constitutional rights. This perversion of real justice is a small but significant step in the direction of transforming a democratic state into a fascist state.

But recently this evil ideology has permeated the presidential race. Because the Republican party is unable to run on any type of solution-based platform, they are now forced to run on personal attacks, rumors and fear-mongering. The Republicans have hugged tightly to the various associations that Barack Obama has had prior to his candidacy. William Ayers, Sal Olinsky, Reverend Wright, the Chicago Cubs and ACORN (okay, not the Cubs but hey, Fox News spares no one in their attempt to start rumors) are the top four words you will hear on Fox News. Forget Osama bin Laden...no, seriously, I mean, I know we're not looking for him and we've already forgotten about him but forget about him again.

You would think these individuals have been responsible for events such as but not limited to: 9/11, the economy, the No Billionaire Left Behind Education Program, the housing crisis, Jamie Lynn Spears getting pregnant, blocking off-shore drilling, gas prices, Larry Craig's bathroom sex sting operation and for giving reporters tricky questions to ask Sarah Palin; questions like, "What newspapers do you read on a daily basis?"

Because Obama has met these individuals on few occasions or has had some type of brief relationship with them, he is presumed guilty and now must prove his innocence.

Here's the predicament. He has explained the connections on numerous occasions. The facts show that he is telling the truth. But since he is being forced to prove a false negative, he is unable exonerate himself.

It is similar to someone accusing you of being in a certain place on a certain day. They didn't see you there but they report the incident as if it were factual. You are then forced to prove something that is false. You are forced to prove you were not there but perhaps you can't because you were home alone during the evening in question. Amazing, isn't it? Our whole system of justice turned upside down. Imagine how court cases would play out. Would anyone be innocent ever again??

What exacerbates this particular situation is when this is played out in the public court of opinion and when the situation involves the future of our country. We are faced with going backwards or moving forward out of the most miserable eight years of our country's existence. We are forced with moving closer to a fascist state of government where the Constitution will continue to be sodomized and civil liberties be stripped away or returning to our fundamental principles that are clearly outlined in the Constitution.

Democracy is an interactive exercise. Let's put the blindfold back on Lady Justice.

"Constitution first, Country second"

The New Right-Wing Guide to Profanity

2008-10-18T19:56:00.000-07:00

Under the Bush Regime the right-wing lemming movement has not only hijacked country music, the Constitution, the right to cheer for the military and the goatee, but it appears as though they have begun an aggressive assault on the English vocabulary.

It is understood that here in Amirca (Bush pronunciation) we have a certain slang in our representation of the English language. From Texas to Arkansas and from Missouri to southeastern Georgia, you will find an infinite number of different accents coupled with regional expressions that violate nearly every grammatical rule. But they are undoubtedly OUR expressions.

We thought they would have been satisfied with this. Apparently they're not.

The right-wing and its Hall of Justice, Fox News, have cornered several meaningful words and have deemed them blasphemous. The very existence of these words is threatened! (Not sure which color the terror level meter would be...probably a burnt orange or scarlet red).

The following 10 words have been kidnapped by the right wing. The problem: they have no idea of their meaning but they use them in emergency situations like an eject button in a fighter plane right before impact.

If you see a right-wing lemming using these words, usually in the midst of a Sean Hannity talking point, call your local English teacher or librarian and report them immediately.

1.) Socialist

Actual meaning: Of or pertaining to a political and economic theory or system of social organization based on collective or state ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange. Like capitalism, it takes many and diverse forms.

Right-Wing meaning: "Means that you wanna give away all my stuff to somebody else and I have to pay more money for stuff I ain't got no more. All them librals is socialists. Like in Europe and stuff."

I will now use the word socialist in a sentence: Being unable to express individual thoughts and be recognized for them is indicative of a socialist intellectualism.

2.) Marxist

Actual meaning: Of or pertaining to the political and economic philosophy of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in which the concept of class struggle plays a central role in understanding society's allegedly inevitable development from bourgeois oppression under capitalism to a socialist and ultimately classless society.

Right-Wing meaning: "It's that one guy with the long beard who wanted to everyone to get the same haircut and then share their meals together. What a crazy kook! This here is one of Obama's buddies. They drank that funky tea together in Chicago while they was talkin' 'bout bein' radical and stuff."

I will now use the word marxist in a sentence: Marxist natural process is clearly represented during the eight long years under the Bush Regime; the working class has experienced new depths of poverty while the wealthy have experienced incredible growth in their net worth.

3.) Communist

Actual meaning: Of or pertaining to a system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.

Right-Wing meaning: "Soviet Union, vodka and Ivan Drago from Rocky IV. Far as I'm concerned, anybody who don't think Amirca is #1 in everything is a communist."

I will now use the word communist in a sentence: The federal financial rescue package passed by Congress is almost communist: we all share in the debt and risk but only Wall Street gets the rewards.

4.) Radical

Actual meaning: Departing markedly from the usual or customary; extreme: radical opinions on education. Favoring or effecting fundamental or revolutionary changes in current practices, conditions, or institutions: radical political views.

Right-Wing meaning: "Freak! Why you wanna go changin' everything around? Damn it! You librals bein' for peace and equality...y'all just a bunch of radical radicals and stuff."

I will now use the word radical in a sentence: To be for torture, wiretapping and eliminating habeas corpus is a radical shift from the fundamental principles of our Constitution.

5.) Liberal

Actual meaning: Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.

Right-Wing meaning: "Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly told me that librals is just another word for traitor. You librals wantin' all that peace, freedom and equality. Well guess what...freedom ain't free and these colors don't run. I got yer tolerance for other people's ideas right here...!"

I will now use the word liberal in a sentence: Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and John Hancock were all signatories of the Declaration of Independence and were all very liberal men.

6.) Global

Actual meaning: Of, relating to, or involving the entire earth; worldwide: global war; global monetary policies.

Right-Wing meaning: "Who cares about the rest of the global peoples? Only thing that matters is the Global War of Terror that Amirca is bringin' to other parts of globe. Hey, if you don't come to democracy then democracy is comin' to you! Yee-haw! We gotta figure out a way to get the globe to cooperate with us. We're Amirca, damn it!"

I will now use the word global in a sentence: In an effort to speed up global warming, Governor Sarah Palin pushes for more drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Natural Refuge and continues to push for the extinction of polar bears in order to achieve it.

7.) European

Actual meaning: A person, object or attribute of the continent of Europe, the European Union, or a descendent of a European ethnic group or of a European person.

Right-Wing meaning: "People who talk funny, don't take showers or shave, eat weird food and listen to classical music. Fox News calls 'em elitists!"

I will now use the word European in a sentence: My experience has been that an average European citizen has more geographical knowledge of the United States than do most Americans.

8.) Fair

Actual meaning: Having or exhibiting a disposition that is free of favoritism or bias; impartial: a fair mediator. Just to all parties; equitable: a compromise that is fair to both factions. Being in accordance with relative merit or significance: She wanted to receive her fair share of the proceeds. Consistent with rules, logic, or ethics: a fair tactic.

Right-Wing meaning: "Fox News is fair and balanced. Who' da thunk it that Obama was a Muslim AND he had a crazy Christian pastor at the same time?"

I will now use the word fair in a sentence: When a political party rigs voting machines and threatens potential voters of the rival candidate, one can say that an election of this sort would not be fair.

9.) Community Organizer

Actual meaning: Community organizers create social movements by building a base of concerned people, mobilizing these community members to act, and developing leadership from and relationships among the people involved.

Right-Wing meaning: "Community organizers are a bunch of radicals trying to help other people, kinda like a socialist, and these organizers try to get them off poverty and stuff, teach 'em how to get a skill or something. Not quite sure...I heard Sarah Palin make a joke about it at the convention and everyone get a kick out of it! I guess it's just a bunch of people who ain't got nuthin' better to do than to help other people."

I will now use the term community organizer in a sentence: Jesus Christ was a liberal community organizer.

10.) Feminist

Actual meaning: Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes; the radical notion that females are human beings and are equal to men.

Right-Wing meaning: "Kinda like when a female wants to become special; you know, like when you're in the finals of a competition, then you're a finalist. Same thing here: a female becomes a feminist. All it takes is nice pair o' legs, a uterus and the occasional wink at me here in the audience."

I will now use the word feminist in a sentence: To say that Sarah Palin is a feminist would be to say that Dick Cheney is a philanthropist.

To everyone: take back these words and their meaning, take back your democracy from those who threaten it and continue to be truth-seekers.

The "maverick" who got lost...

2008-07-27T12:50:00.000-07:00

Arizona Senator John McCain calls himself a "maverick". I'm not entirely certain why he chooses that label, perhaps because he represents the state of Arizona and therefore he can be viewed as some type of mascot for the state which is famous for old western movies. Tombstone, Prescott and Jerome are all cities in Arizona that conjure up images of an old man on a horse, trudging through the desert while building fires and eating beans out of a can. Yes sir, the old west. Kill or be killed.

I became curious about the meaning of the word "maverick".
A very wise professor from graduate school always suggested to begin with the word itself. Often times there is a whole other world of meaning within the letters of a word that can reveal its true nature and unlock the truth surrounding it. So, I searched for the definition of "maverick" on google.com and this is what came up:

An unbranded range animal, especially a calf that has become separated from its mother, traditionally considered the property of the first person who brands it.
One that refuses to abide by the dictates of or resists adherence to a group; a dissenter

My best educated guess is that most uneducated and uninformed (and misinformed) people view John McCain as a "maverick" in the # 2 part of the definition; someone who doesn't follow the group just to follow but rather blazes his/her own trail and by default can be considered a leader (provided that others follow).

I could dissect that theory faster than my friend Claudio can dissect a veal shank and I could now jump into the 61 positions and counting in which John McCain has been anything BUT someone who goes his own way, or has his own personal convictions despite how others may view him. From the Iraq withdrawal timetable to Bush's tax cuts to off-shore drilling, John McCain changes his mind as quickly as a pregnant woman does when deciding what to have for lunch. Asking Senator McCain to stick to his position is like asking Dick Cheney to reveal his e-mail inbox. Simply put, it would be asking that the impossible become possible.

But let us examine the # 1 part of the definition within the scope of John McCain and the party to which he claims affiliation: Republican.

It is rarely argued that on September 11, 2001, the world changed forever. One of the major changes was within the Republican party of the United States of America. Prior to September 11, 2001, the Republican party was (in)famous for opposing gay marriage, opposing rights of women to have control over their own human bodies, labeling poverty and homosexuality as "choices", believing that Jesus Christ was both Republican and American, pro- big business/corporatism, pro-tobacco industry and pro-big oil, over-taxation of middle-class, etc. Basically, the Reagan agenda was their coat of arms. (trickle-down means pissed-on)

But it appears as though the Republican party encountered a fracture, a type of rupture in its structure, where certain individuals developed an entirely different agenda that was much more devastating on a global basis and the new agenda reeked of nationalistic and fascist ideologies.

This movement, the NeoConservative, or more affectionately called, "NeoConned", looked to gain complete control of the military, judicial, legislative and executive components (not to mention, state's rights) of our nation's government by instituting a propagandistic strategy not seen since that of Hitler's regime in Germany 1936.

From 2001 - 2007 I would have not classified John McCain as one of the NeoConned. In this sense, he could very well have been labeled a "maverick" for not joining in the NeoCon passion of torture, illegal war and the sodomy of the Constitution.

But 2007 is when the so-called "maverick" became a calf (naive and willing to do anything for love) that had become separated from its mother (his party's traditional ideologies), and thereby considered the property of the first person who brands it (the NeoCons branded him with this image, "$$"). John McCain decided to run for president in 2008, perhaps to erase that awful image of him hugging George Bush in that 2000 photo when he could not resist snuggling his nose in Bush's neck.

John McCain was a calf that had decided to stray from his traditional Reagan Republican herd. He stumbled upon the NeoConned who quickly put their brand on him and are now showing him off at the local 4-H fairs nationwide. He says what they want him to say: torture is fine sometimes, especially if you watch "24" and how Kiefer Sutherland handles those "ticking time bomb" scenarios, off-shore drilling makes perfect sense, tax cuts for the richest 3% of America are a good idea while the middle and lower classes are taking it in the poopenschaft and at a time when gas has hit the same price as a meal for two at Burger King, 100 years in Iraq is a fantastic idea and bombing Iran and starting ANOTHER ILLEGAL PREEMPTIVE WAR makes sense when we have no proof or evidence that the Iranians have violated any law whatsoever.

In conclusion, perhaps the title of "maverick" is wildly suitable for McCain. He has, in fact, strayed from his proverbial mother. But he accomplished that way back in 1973 when he returned from Vietnam after 5 1/2 grueling years as a P.O.W. He discovered his once attractive, swim wear model and first wife Carol had been in a terrible car accident 3 years prior to his return. The accident left her disfigured and not so "bikini-liscious".

The man of values and principles left his disfigured and debilitated wife Carol and began an affair with the Bud Light Girl, Cindy, who is his current wife. In fact, "maverick" applied for a marriage license to marry Cindy before he finalized his divorce to Carol. Holy Maverick, you say...here's the undisputed link.

At this point, both Ronald and Nancy Reagan lost a great deal of respect for John McCain and went as far as to provide financially for Carol for many years to follow. When Nancy Reagan was asked to endorse John "The Maverick" McCain, she was quoted, "Well, obviously, this is the nominee of the party." I would say that is an endorsement dripping with enthusiasm.

John, you are no maverick. The only thing you have in common is that you share three of the same letters of the alphabet. You are simply a calf who got lost and are now being raised by angry, violent wolves. You are doomed either way.

If you fail in your mission, they will eat you. If you succeed in your mission, they will eat your mother.

Rome was neither built nor conquered in one day...

2008-04-26T12:20:00.000-07:00

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.

---Martin Luther King Jr.

It's been a while since my last post. So much has happened over such a short amount of time. It's becoming increasingly evident that the right has truly kidnapped America and what she stands for. To speak out about America and to exhibit any trace of disappointment over the actions of our government is now classified as "hate speech"; that is, if you're black and living in America....

A great country rarely falls from foreign threats but rather from within. As Sinclair Lewis once wrote, "When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross."
Here are some reflections on recent events.

1. Reverend Jeremiah Wright = With the right-wing lemmings being so appalled at his sermons, which take place daily in thousands of churches from coast to coast, it would then be only logical to say that these same people are then VERY PROUD of the following "accomplishments" of that same government Reverend Wright criticized: torture, illegal war, declining benefits for veterans, ill-equipped soldiers, genocide of Native-Americans, genocide of African-Americans, enslavement of Africans, lynching of African-Americans, sexism, racism, discrimination, religious intolerance, attempted destruction of labor unions, Japanese internment camps, fire hoses and German shepherds on African-American citizens in Alabama, segregation, agent-provocateurs who incite riots during peaceful protests, the use of military aircraft to transport heroin from southeast Asia into the United States...and the list can go on until the next Microsoft program comes out.

Now, I'm one of the few, perhaps, who believe that there is a stark difference between my government and my country. America is synonymous with freedom and equality. America is the Constitution, not the government. When the president of this country takes his/her oath, it is not to "protect the American people" but rather "...solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
What the right-wing jackasses are playing on the radio is actually helping Reverend Wright. As they continue to play only sound bites and snippets of his entire sermon, Reverend Wright continually refers to "the Government" and not to "America". But you won't hear that unless you look for the entire sermon on the internet somewhere. When a black man criticizes America he's considered a hateful ingrate and a traitor; when a white man does it they call it anger peppered with wisdom and conservatism.

2. Hillary = The person inside her body is a right-wing nut job dressed in a business suit and armed with the most annoying laugh in the history of mankind. From wanting to annihilate Iran and wipe it off the map to employing fear tactics to claiming that since Obama had a pacifier until the age of 2 she is better suited to be president on Day One, this woman has made Karl Rove look like Mr. Rogers. Her arithmetic is so much of a twisting fantasy that you would need at least 3 hits of acid and 1 bag of shrooms to partially grasp the hint of possibility that she may win the nomination. The damage that she has done is immeasurable and was totally unnecessary. She has distracted Obama enough to let McCain go untouched for at least 8 weeks now. Surprisingly though, despite the negativity and adolescent attacks by Hillary, McCain has a mere 3 point lead over either Democrat. I can't wait to see Obama destroy McCain in a debate. Maybe "my friend" will get so fired up that the red face will beautifully contrast the white hair...the fist will start pumping and that mechanical arm will go all crazy and start flapping and then...aaahhh...one can only hope.
Hillary's cult followers have now promised to vote for McCain over Obama should Obama get the nomination. Brilliant. Maybe that was the plan all along.
Her tactic is cunning. Attack mercilessly and childishly and when Barrack fires back then play the victim. This country still gets fired up when a black man speaks in a harsh tone to or about a white woman.

3. Rush Limbaugh= Definition: overweight, insecure megalomaniac drug-addict who encourages his lemming listeners to switch parties and vote for Hillary in the primary and then go to Denver and riot when Obama does not get the nomination.
There is no one on the radio who is more overtly racist, sexist and elitist than Rush Limbaugh. To so many who have removed the frontal lobe region of their brain, Rush (and Sean Hannity) is their source of reason. The right-wing lemmings have made Rush their cult leader. I mean, you'd have to call him that if he's encouraging people to go to Denver to riot in August and they are willing to get arrested to do it.
This is so tragic and this is part of the problem in America today; we rely on the media to interpret information that is so incredibly easy to comprehend. 9/11 took our breath away and the right-wing gave us an oxygen mask that pumped us full of fear gas. Some were able to wiggle out of the mask; others still have not and are now addicted and can't live without it.

4. Iran = If you want war bad enough, I'm sure it will happen. The Bush Crime Family has been itching to lob some missiles into Iran. McCain can't wait to bomb it and Hillary wants to obliterate it. Don't be surprised if you wake up one morning in the next 30 days and see Breaking News where Iran "provoked a U.S. carrier" --most likely we parked a battleship on one of their beaches in Akhtar and then say, "They threatened us"---or "the U.S. intercepted communication". More war, more money, more death, more oil, more troops, more torture, more rape, more murder, more military contracts for Carlyle Group, Haliburton and Boeing, more coffins, more grief, $4 a gallon gas....and less safe than ever. And don't forget: we're supposed to be looking for Bin Laden.

I never thought I'd be living in America and writing these types of thoughts I just put forth.
9/11 didn't unite us; it divided us and the Bush Crime Family made sure of it. When will people stand up and say they've had enough? At the sake of expanding an empire we are on the verge of losing the republic...

Stuff right-wingers like...

2008-03-08T16:03:00.000-08:00

I recently stumbled across another blog entitled stuff white people like. The blog is genius and I laughed so hard my stomach hurt for the rest of the day. I check it frequently as, despite its clever humor, it delivers poignant observations about the Caucasian race in America.

With that in mind I wanted to do an entry on stuff right-wingers like.

This is going to be the most fun-filled post I've done since the inception of the blog.

Disclaimer: This list could grow or diminish in size. The list is not intended to capture all of the objects of pleasure of the right-wing lemmings but merely underscore the principal commonalities. Their condition, or dis-ease if you will, can only be cured by an icon who is a respected military authority, a champion driver on the NASCAR circuit or in the country music industry who would be willing to reveal the truth to them: that they have been duped and that the Bush Crime Family screwed them, too.

Let the fun begin...

Patriotic country music

This is perhaps the most common. Any song that speaks of America kickin' ass, that the "Red, white and blue are comin' fer you too" or of 9/11 (usually in the form of a ballad) is pretty mainstay for the average right-winger. They may have a compilation of this type of music on CD or multiple CD's. At any rate these CD's are readily available and easily accessible in their vehicles. You may have heard some of these songs as they tend to roll their windows down in their vehicle and play the music at a high volume when cruising. The music can evoke a wide array of emotions, from rage to sadness to grief. Bottom line: necessary for nutrition for the blindly patriotic.

Patriotic (allegedly) t-shirts

For the average right-winger the choice in apparel is paramount. Having the right t-shirt can make or break their night out. There are many choices. T-shirts with the following slogans/designs are generally considered chic: "These colors don't run", "Let the eagle soar", "Freedom ain't free", "Bin Laden we're comin' for your ass" (usually with Uncle Sam as the protagonist), "Unleash the military - Give war a chance", "I Love Waterboarding", "I love torturing terrorists", "Peace through superior firepower". These t-shirts come in many colors, too. It's important for the average right-winger to wear these classics by tucking them into their Wrangler BLUE jeans with either broken-in cowboy boots or a pair of tennis shoes (NOT running shoes...remember, "these colors don't run").

Trucks

Big. Loud. Ford. Dodge. These four words mean a lot to the average right-winger. They basically stand for, "I'm gonna kick yer ass whether you want me to or not". The choice in trucks says a lot about the average right-winger. They know that it takes $182.75 to fill up the gas tank but that is not a statement of their wealth but rather of their arrogance and disdain for anything environmental (how could you be an avid fan of war AND be an avid fan of the environment at the same time?)
The younger lemmings tend to choose a flashy, 25-foot high truck with flashy rims and an outrageous bumper sticker like, "I'd rather be in a CIA secret prison waterboarding a terrorist". The older, more sophisticated right-winger tends to have a Ford F150 extended cab with responsible tires and rims, no more than 2.5 feet from floorboard to the ground and a "W 04" sticker or a "Bush/Cheney 04" sticker. They may (and this is probable) have a front decorative license plate that is of the American flag or of a bald eagle or they may have an American flag windsock out of their back driver side window. Whether it is the young buck right-winger or the homophobic older type, they both keep their trucks 5 levels above operating-room cleanliness. Trucks are to right-wingers as Volvos are to liberals: a mutual sign of fraternal order.

American flag lapel pins

Who would have thought that those American flag lapel pins you can buy at Chevron, Circle K or 7-11 would become so incredibly popular and be considered so sacred and patriotic? Well, believe it. These little suckers can go anywhere, not only your lapel. You can put them on hats, scarves, vests, ties, backpacks and they go great on any apparel from Cabela's or Bass Pro Shops.

If you do not own one of these, and the average right-winger owns more than one, you are immediately classified as a terrorist and hateful towards America and anything American.
You can also be accused of communist tendencies and, although you may know nothing about the Muslim religion, a Muslim extremist who owns many sandals and plenty of curry at home.

The flag lapel pin is akin to Popeye's spinach. If you find yourself in a precarious situation and in need of displaying deep, meaningful patriotism, then bust it out and slap it on so everyone can see how sincere you truly are.

Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity

To the average right-winger these two propagandistic deities are in the realm of demagogues. If O'Reilly and/or Hannity were to advocate violence towards any Democrat we would find ourselves in a type of Armageddon previously only seen in movies. Both Hannity and O'Reilly have hypnotic power over the average right-winger. These men supply the weak, empty talking points to millions of right-wingers daily.
If you hear terms like "SP" or "selective moral outrage" then you know you have encountered one of these lemmings. Just know that any type of truth, data or factual evidence is virtually useless against these individuals. Their perspective is dependent on false accusations, fear-mongering, judgment, hate and ignorance. There is absolutely no room for truth in this world.
The average right-winger makes desperate daily attempts to convince others that their talking points were not gathered from Hannity or O'Reilly. They are usually confronted on this when debating with progressives but when they are in the company of other average right-wingers, both parties pretend not to know that the other is actually regurgitating verbatim what Hannity and O'Reilly said the day before.

More war (battleground TBD)

The only thing better than the Iraq war would be more war. The target country is rather unimportant. What is important for the average right-winger is that when there appears to be a lull in violence that the Bush Crime Family find another country, and quickly, that is not a threat and bomb it back to primitive times. The reason for more war could and will change according to facts and truth that are uncovered. Example: supposedly we went into Iraq because, according to intelligence, they had weapons of mass destruction and they were going to use them against us in the near future ("can't let the smoking gun be in the form of a mushroom cloud"). When it was discovered (proven) that Iraq DID NOT have WMD the mission changed to "removing a brutal dictator". When Saddam was executed, then it became, "spreading democracy".
Intelligence reports have concluded that Iran does not have a WMD program. You know what that means? Iran is next on the list.
There is an adolescent excitement that exists here, similar to Christmas Eve, and it most likely is very related to my previous blog entry and the average right-winger's obsession and love of the military.

NASCAR

I am convinced that there is not one NASCAR fan who is, or ever was, against any war---past, present or future. To watch identical cars go around in a circle and wait for them to crash can say a lot about someone's view of the world in general. The ultimate weekend for an average right-winger: going to a NASCAR race with your friends where all of the attendees have trucks, patriotic t-shirts, tight Wranglers, patriotic country music, lots of Busch beer and when overly-intoxicated, closet homosexual tendencies.
Being an average right-winger and being a NASCAR fan are nearly syllogistic in nature. Ultimate orgasmic moment: having your driver win the NASCAR race and do the victory lap with a gigantic American flag.

"Truthiness" and general disdain for facts and truth

Stephen Colbert coined the term truthiness a while back. Here's the definition according to wikipedia:
"a satirical term to describe things that a person claims to know intuitively or "from the gut" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts."
This phenomenon has permeated nearly every aspect of the average right-winger's world. Real truth, to them, is simply abhorrent. When presented with evidence and facts, such as the fact that Iraq had no WMD or that the "surge" is really the U.S. government offering huge payments to al-Sadr's army to temporarily cease violence, the average right-winger will become enraged and offer his/her brand of "truthiness": "That's bullshit! Everyone knows that Saddam had WMD and that he smuggled them into Syria before the invasion, my neighbor's kid is in the Marines and he has satellite images of it. No one can see them yet because they're classified, but they will come out someday. And the surge is working because we've got more soldiers there then we ever had and we're killing more of them!!!" Facts: we have less soldiers there now then we did pre-surge, we are paying Muqtada al-Sadr large sums of money to remain idle and to this moment in time there have been no WMD found in Iraq. Those are facts. But the average right-winger cannot tolerate facts and therefore relies on what his/her truth is, which is "truthiness".
In all seriousness I believe this boils down to a psychological defense mechanism that prevents someone from having a nervous breakdown. If the average right-winger were to face the truth and facts regarding Iraq, let's say, the truth would be literally crippling: both psychologically as well as emotionally.
"Truthiness" can also be applied to the above topic of pretending to be or pretending to have been in the military. As Joseph Goebbels once said, "If you tell a big enough lie enough times people will come to believe it."

Submissive wives

No surprise here. The average right-winger male needs his wife to be submissive and thoughtless, but yet the ultimate caregiver for the children. As he engages in deep political, philosophical debates such as "What type of bomb would you drop on Baghdad, bunkerbuster or clusterbomb?" and "Do you think Al-Qaeda was kinda responsible for Hurricane Katrina, too?" the submissive wife is close by, listening attentively so that she may relay these illogical and nonsensical points to her girlfriends and to various radio talk-shows (Hannity or O'Reilly) when the husband is away at work during the day. Perhaps the submissive wife achieves the highest form of unconditional love: when she would be willing and competent enough to disable the part of her brain that allows her the ability to reason so that it will instead simply and automatically validate and affirm the husband with robot-like frequency.
During one of the philosophical discourses on the Iraq war and while in the presence of the husband the submissive wife is not allowed to change the subject, interrupt the husband or to offer too radical of an opinion. The expectation is simply that a head-nod or a "mmmmhuh" will be more than sufficient. Typically the submissive wife will don the same gear (only one size smaller) as the average right-winger husband: patriotic t-shirt, tennis shoes, tight Wranglers (stonewashed). Other necessary components include Wrigley's Xtra gum, Marlboro lights, heavy makeup, teased hair, perfume from 1993, manicured nails with American flag emblem on each fingernail, drinking beer from bottle sans glass.

Television show "24"

The television show "24" allows the average right-winger to engage in their fantasy at least once a week: the country is under attack and there is ticking-time bomb scenario and only Jack Bauer can torture the suspect enough to save America. This is what is feeding the average right-winger's view of the Global War of Terror. This is what validates their "shoot first, ask questions much later" mentality. To them al-Qaeda is in the process of procuring dozens of canoes in order to row to America, land somewhere in Maryland and begin their take over of America. I would argue that the average right-winger viewer actually HOPES to be involved in a "24" episode in real-life. The temptation to torture is too great to resist.
Since 9/11, torture has become almost a form of entertainment much like gladiator battles were to ancient Rome. There is a sense that the average right-winger could not care any less whether a suspected terrorist is innocent or not; the simple fact that they are of darker skin and speak Arabic is justification for a Spanish Inquisition-style torture. Our forefathers would shake their heads in disgust, shame and disbelief.
Bottom line: the average right-winger believes that "24" is reality. Which would beg the question: how in the heck did America stay safe while Kiefer Sutherland was doing time for his DUI arrest?

Believing al-Qaeda was always in Iraq

Although tens of thousands of pages of intelligence have been submitted, along with dozens of military intelligence analysts going on record to state it, the average right-winger believes, rather KNOWS, that al-Qaeda have been in Iraq for decades. How do they know this?
Because al-Zarqawi, the red-headed stepchild of al-Qaeda, got medical treatment from a hospital in Iraq one month before the Iraq invasion. Match point, I guess. This falls under that umbrella of "truthiness". The same people who told us that there were WMD in Iraq and that they knew where they were planted this gem of information into the right-wing world. It shot around like a super ball on crack and now every average right-winger holds on to that tidbit like a 5 year old girl hugs her teddy bear. Problem: Saddam would have killed Zarqawi had he known he was anywhere in Iraq. Saddam thought al-Qaeda to be much too radical and that they attracted too much attention. The ONLY agreement Saddam had with any organization was this: "if you come across any stray nuclear weapons, I'll buy them from you at any price and if you come into Iraq I'll cut your f#$%^& head off!"
Al-Qaeda is in Iraq because we took out Saddam. End of story.

Believing Saddam was involved in 9/11 (select few, usually in rural areas)

16% of average right-wingers still believe that Saddam was behind 9/11. This demographic usually falls into the rural areas of America in communities no larger than 2,000 inhabitants. There may be one or two people who have a computer in these towns but they refuse to tell the other 1,900 + people that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.

Believing that violating the Constitution is a fantastic way to fight terrorism

Perhaps the most frightening pleasure of the average right-winger. They are perfectly content with illegal wiretaps, the elimination of habeas corpus, torture, racial profiling, illegal detentions, denial of rights and the multiple executive orders that give Bush control of each state's National Guard and the power to accuse any American of being an "enemy combatant".

You will usually hear the average right-winger say, "Well, if you ain't got nuttin' to hide, whadda ya worried about?" Little do they know this is how Nazi Germany began its ascent to a totalitarian state. The average right-winger, as I've mentioned several times before, normally lacks an education for whatever circumstance. That is no judgment on them. They cannot see the dangerous correlation between "they hate us for our freedom" and the fact that the Bush Crime Family has taken away more of our freedoms than al-Qaeda could have ever done in a thousand years. One person losing their rights is everyone losing their rights.
Bush once said, "The Constitution is just a god-damned piece of paper". That statement could very well have transcended the population that believes he is more intelligent than they are.
When you have bludgeoned a population with the club of patriotism you can accomplish almost anything.

As Benjamin Franklin once said, "If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both."

How the Right kidnapped the military --- GOP + USM = CQB

2008-02-25T06:48:00.000-08:00

It has become increasingly clear to me that the average conservative supporter of the Global War of Terror knows more about the military, the Iraq war, the missing WMD's, insurgent snipers, Humvees (the ill-equipped ones and the better-equipped ones) than, well, everyone else on the planet. Even those who were virtually disinterested in military affairs have become "synthetic soldiers" in post-9/11 America. Now, I'm not talking about the enlisted soldier, I'm referring to the "next-door neighbor" type who has become enamored with everything military.

You may encounter these individuals in the blogosphere but you may run into them in real life as well. This demographic is the one that found "Shock and Awe" to be orgasmic, the one that would thoroughly enjoy invading another country and showing anyone that "these colors don't run." They use a wide array of acronyms that display their superior knowledge in a field that is apparently useful only in a foxhole or seated in an armored tank.

Here are some general example that you and I could comprehend fairly easily:

SCOTUS = Supreme Court of the United States
POTUS = President of the United States
CiC = Commander in Chief
DoD = Department of Defense
CO = Commanding Officer
HVT = High-value target (probably used for Bin Laden when we were looking for him)

Apparently there are several "initialisms" that to lovers of the military and bombs are really amusing. Such as these:

BOHICA = bend over here it comes again
AWR = Allah's Waiting Room (when insurgents are in a building and an air-strike has been called in)
INI= Intoxication and intercourse (other than throwing puppies over cliffs these are other activities performed when not on duty)
USMC = Uncle Sam's Misguided Children

The list can go on for pages. The bottom line is that this vernacular has ceased to remain within the confines of the military and has spilled over into the general population that is supportive of war. Not only did the Bush Crime Family divide the country in such a way that pitted American vs. American, it also created a sub-culture that is absolutely fascinated and mesmerized by guns, tanks, bullets, bombs, death and destruction. I envision many of them watching movies like Red Dawn and Top Gun on a weekly basis. And to think this all started with 19 geeky terrorists who got lucky one day...

This love for all things military has created alter egos in many of this brethren. I've witnessed countless in the blogosphere who either claim to have fought in Iraq or Afghanistan and in reality have not (but so desperately want to fit in using some of the above acronyms) or claim to have a relative or friend that is in the military and that relative or friend was part of the team that found Saddam or was part of the team that "found the WMD but can't talk about it for 5-6 years...so yes, Iraq had WMD".

These terms and expressions are commonplace for the average right-winger. They use these expressions in forums or in an e-mail or in simple conversation. When the other party is not familiar with the expression, this is the opportunity they've been waiting for. They are all too excited to explain to Mr. or Mrs. Ignorant Civilian what these acronyms stand for or what the expression really means, its origin and how they are intrinsically tied to the expression.

Yes, the right has hijacked the military much like the Bush Crime Family has hijacked our Constitution. This is not a surprise. We've seen it in the past with countries like Germany in the 1930's and Italy in the late 1920's, early 1930's. A steroidal sense of nationalism combined with a dangerous lack of education produces this type of citizen. They are usually the easiest to convince and buy into nearly every form of propaganda.

Those that oppose war as the first option, like myself, will continue to honor the military and the service the men and women so courageously offer.

I still firmly believe, and hopefully will always believe, that the concept of a military is to defend our country rather than to create an empire.

"I wish I knew how to quit you..."

2008-02-19T06:11:00.000-08:00

There's something about this photograph that gives me the chills.
It could be the placement of McCain's left hand or the senator's head buried in Bush's neck as a possible effort to smell the strong, sinister scent of that neocon cologne known as "Deception No. 9".

In any case, it's odd that you would find that kind of affection coming from a man who was swift-boated by Bush (Rove) in the 2000 election. McCain appeared to be on course to get the nomination and then ...((((ROAR)))) ...the Neocon lion awoke from his slumber and decimated his prey with a single, fierce blow. There were war plans to execute and nice guy McCain simply lacked the heart (morals, ethics, brains, conscience, soul) to do it. So now that nearly 8 LONG, damaging, divisive, deceptive, murderous, hateful years have passed, the "nice guy" is back and is closing in on a real opportunity to live in the White (Guy's) House for 4 or more years.

But not so fast, Sheriff! The neocons ain't havin' none of that "no torture, think first" kinda attitude 'round here.

McCain has been "waterboarded" by his own Republican (apologies to the man from Dixon, IL) party. I use "Republican" simply as an adjective to describe that political party which is not Democrat. Everyone knows that the Republican party has been hijacked by the neocons (Project for New American Century---William Kristol and the other fascist hobbits) and Jack Bauer is the only one who can save us (if only Kiefer Sutherland didn't get that last DUI and have to do jail time, we'd have been out of this mess a lot sooner). McCain was tortured as a POW in Vietnam. That is why he is against torture now (that will soon change).

The torture his own party has put him through is in the very early stages. His rhetoric has gotten significantly more aggressive; he's mentioned about being in Iraq for 100 + years, going to war with Iran, promising that there "will be more wars" (neocons had to smoke a cigarette after hearing that declaration) and basically underscoring that Bush's policies that have worked so incredibly well will remain in place to ensure the continued destruction of American principles.

McCain has become the "mascot/little brother/kid who will do anything to make friends/water boy" for the neocons. McCain knows he can't get elected without them and he's 71 and not likely to make another run (unless he is going to campaign between the hours of 4am and 4:30pm). At this point, everything is on the table for negotiation: more wars, increased torture, more revoking of civil liberties, ...did I mention more wars?

So what is McCain prepared to do? Well, get ready for the ultimate sell-out. Those who have followed the "Straight Talk Express" (funny name...I mean, what's the opposite? Gay Talk Express?) for many years have become accustomed to the senator's open-mindedness and thoughtful approach to politics. He's known for reaching across the aisle frequently and he's often gone against party lines in hard line issues like immigration.

But that will change now. Pay close attention and you will see McCain ratchet up the war threats, the fear-mongering and he may even let slip out which country will be the 2009 recipient of American democracy (Bombs Away!).

At least in 2000 the neocons got a gift from Texas in the form of a doltish, aphonic idiot who had the "audacity of arrogance" after running numerous businesses in the ground and setting the record for most executions under a governor (experience needed to become president...this is where Obama is lacking).

But in 2008 you will get the chance to watch the metamorphosis of a man who will trade his moral compass and his character for an agenda that is against America, her principles, her forefathers and her Constitution. An agenda that is potentially so catastrophically damaging to this country that many U.S. citizens are making preliminary plans to leave our country until the smart people start running things again.

I'm tired of being afraid and I want my Constitution back.

What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy? ---Mahatma Gandhi, "Non-Violence in Peace and War"

Do we even care about truth?

2008-01-24T20:09:00.000-08:00

As I inexplicably watch the post-Republican debate discussion on MSNBC as if it were a cheesy '80's movie, I think back to a line I heard today on talk radio. A noted talk radio hostess asked, when discussing the Iraq war, "Do we even care about truth?" The question has circled my mind all day. I began to think about the people I know: friends, family, colleagues. I wondered if they think about this stuff as much as I do or if, when confronted with news of more lies by the White House administration, do they even get curious?
Do they feel anything at all?

What is accepted as fact today is that we illegally invaded and currently occupy the former sovereign nation of Iraq, that this country did not have weapons of mass destruction nor was involved in 9/11, that Iraq did not pose an imminent threat to the United States, and that Iraq was not a sponsor of al-Qaeda. How is it then that few, if any, even give this a second thought?

I often wonder if the age of technology has disengaged the part of the brain that is responsible for the concern for truth. I have often been involved in conversations with friends or family members regarding the Iraq war. I have listed FACTS in bullet-point fashion, with numbers, statistics and data. They simply nod, agree that it's troubling but then shrug it off with a, "Well...whadda ya gonna do? You wanna get a coffee?"(as they send another text message...)

I don't ever remember my parents being terribly concerned with these type of issues, either. My formative years were during the mid '80's when Reagan was president. If you lived in a nice, safe neighborhood with lots of other white people, as I did, life was grand.

I do remember my grandfather though, who when in front of the television would briefly catch something of breaking news or bits of the State of the Union speech, he would listen and watch attentively and then mumble something under his breath. I recall seeing his face many times either with a look of disgust and a shake of his head or with a look of hope followed by a inconspicuous smile.

This period in our history is one in which I would have enthusiastically discussed these matters with my late grandfather. Would he care to know what I have learned regarding this debacle in Iraq? Would he be interested to know how many people have profitted financially from this war? Would he be outraged to see that ExxonMobil has reported the all-time greatest profit recorded by any company since the beginning of time? That President Bush only last week asked Saudi Arabia to increase oil production because, "our citizens are having a bit of a hard time..."? Did my grandfather understand what "war" really entails? Would he be against this war?

When I refer to truth, I am referring to it in the most natural sense: what is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value of existence. Often Republicans like to debate intuition, speculation or "truthiness"(things that a person claims to know intuitively or "from the gut" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts).

George Piro, the FBI agent who was responsible for interrogating Saddam Hussein, will appear on "60 Minutes". Piro learned during his many conversations with Saddam that the Iraqi dictator did not think the U.S. would seriously attack or invade Iraq. Saddam admitted to Piro that he DID NOT HAVE ANY WMD but refused to admit that to the world because he was fearful that Iran would seize an opportunity to invade Iraq. Wow...talk about not having a way out! The U.S. was going to invade Iraq whether they had WMD or not and Iran would attack if the U.S. didn't. And with us being the world's only superpower, the best we could come up with was to invade, bomb and occupy a country based on "truthiness".

So, my question to anyone reading this is, "Do you care about truth?"

If Iowa is a snapshot of America...

2008-01-05T15:35:00.000-08:00

Then we may be able to draw these conclusions....

1) Hillary is under the impression that most people like her when in reality they don't. The cackle, the arrogance, her dogmatic manner in engaging the issues which underscores her feelings of superiority, the fact that she voted for the war --- I believe many people view her as "Bush-Lite" (1/3 less stupid with the same great lack of humility). She was not expecting third place in Iowa. But guess what? I didn't expect a "B" in history my junior year in college.
Advice: Don't fake regional accents, do a self-inventory and see what's not working, change it and work harder. Get a new hair style and add color to it.
Prediction: She will run again in 2012.

2) Barrack Obama is hands-down the front runner for the Democrats. When he speaks he motivates people. No other candidate, on either side, has that flair. His oratorical skills are hypnotic.
To win as an African-American candidate in Iowa is like getting Dick Cheney to smile: nearly impossible. Are there even any African-Americans in Iowa? If he takes New Hampshire, say good-night to Hillary. John Edwards may be Obama's Secretary of State choice, especially with his deep knowledge of African politics. Early prediction: Obama will take Jim Webb as his VP running mate. If that happens, Republicans have as much chance at winning the White House as George Bush does at learning the electric slide.
Advice: Get Spike Lee, Prince and Cornel West to endorse you. You will need the black vote and need it to be present at the polls.

3) John Edwards is trying too hard. His ideas are progressive and attractive. When he goes into long-winded explanations I feel as though he believes we have difficulty understanding the English language. I get it Johnny. The health care issue is killing you. We know that you will fight for health care for all Americans. I'm thrilled, really. Talk more about getting Bin Laden and getting out of Iraq.
Advice: Just be yourself, get that lid messed up once in a while, throw some dirt on those Haggar slacks and eat some ribs, damn it! And get your haircut at an African-American barber shop.
Prediction: When he retires from the race, he will get emotional.

4) Rudy Giuliani is as empty as a beer can at a Friday night fish fry at the Elk's Club in Milwaukee. If the election were based on the person physically closest to the first of the 9/11 attacks, Rudy would win. Thank God that's not the case. He is a one-trick pony. Even the FDNY is not backing him. That says something, especially when you claim you were hunting for survivors next to the brave men and women who actually were there doing it.
Rudy has a deranged foreign policy adviser in Norman Podhoretz, who is not helping the Rudy Train. Norman has been busy praying for war with Iran since the NIE came out which stated that Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program 5 years ago. (see my other post about this)
Advice: Quit bringing up 9/11 like you're some kind of superhero and just join the Mafia, it's one of the few organizations that could care less how many girlfriends and/or ex-wives you have.

5) Fred Thompson makes me sleepy. In order to be my president, you need more than a cowboy hat and a faint southern accent. I think Fred thought he would show up and dust the other guys off without having to stay up past 6PM. Not quite. Mike "Forrest Gump" Huckabee just handed you your lunch and Mitt Romney will cut it up into smaller bites so you can eat it.
Advice: Lose the cowboy hat, admit that you backed abortion rights as a lobbyist and explain why and get more publicity with old school Republicans like Jim Baker and Nic Brady.
Prediction: Fred will be back to daily 1PM naps by Valentine's Day. Good thing, too, because his wife is going to want more than a box of chocolates. And if Rudy is still creeping around....hey, he could get her free NYPD protection, you know!

5) Huckabee. The mere sound of his name makes me laugh. I picture him and Tom Sawyer eating worms and chasing each other around in straw hats with no shoes or socks. This guy doesn't believe in evolution and thinks that homosexuality is an aberration and unnatural. Hmmm...what do you say about that Mark Foley, Ted Haggard and Larry Craig? How about 3,000 years of human history? Last I checked, gays have the right to vote. We'll see how "unnatural" their ballots are in November.
Advice: Rely on other research material besides the Bible and quit with the subliminal hints in the ads (the HUGE cross in the background). The Roman Catholic Church in Vatican City for centuries had male sex slaves so just validate that homosexuality is not a choice and you might have a chance with the MTV vote.
Prediction: Huckabee is the fall guy, kind of like that really cool African-American guy in a mystery-suspense movie who the white screenwriter kills off first. The RNC is pimping him as the front runner to eventually supplant him with a candidate who is less evangelical but equally in line with those values (possibly McCain). Karl Rove, you are genius!

7) McCain is still the only true Republican. This is the only Republican that if elected would not make me want to move out of the country. I still think he is a very legitimate contender. He may not be the most dynamic speaker or have the best hair cut but he is still moving forward with his "diplomacy first, no torture" platform. That is attractive to the undecideds and to the moderates. If there is anyone who can speak on the subject of war, it's McCain. He is from Arizona so his illegal immigration platform ought to be considered more logical and reliable than that of any other candidates.
Advice: Get Sylvester Stallone to endorse you and get some of your war comrades to speak on your behalf. Show some dialog with Hispanic leaders to reinforce your commitment on immigration reform. And don't say that we'll be in Iraq for 100 years, that will get you unseated as senator in Arizona.

8) Mitt Romney is a great candidate. He supports Bush too much but no one is perfect. He is certainly the best-dressed and best-looking candidate. He was elected governor in a very liberal state. But he's Mormon and if I'm not mistaken, Fox News has unilaterally put Mormons on Bush's Axis of Evil list. If we had to put Iraqi generals on a deck of playing cards so that Fox News viewers could understand the war, you can bet that NO ONE on that side understands the modern day LDS religion. That being said, it's only a matter of time before Mitt throws in the towel. Too bad that we judge candidates before they speak.
Advice: Too late to go Catholic but give it a shot. Just claim you had some vision in a dream and God spoke to you. Worked for Bush in justifying his invasion of Iraq. Get a Boston accent, too. Another guy did that and won an election.
Prediction: It will be sad when he retires from the race. America is not prejudice, right?

Voter turnout for Iowa Caucus:
Democrats - 220,000
Republicans - 115,000

That is not good for the elephants.

If I had a crystal ball...

July of 2008: Clinton and Obama are battling for the Democrat nomination and McCain and Giuliani are duking it out for the Republicans

After the conventions: Obama vs. McCain

Next President: Not Ron Paul

The Project for the New American Century: Sociopaths working hard to ensure the destruction of American principles

2007-12-30T21:02:00.000-08:00

I watched yet another frightening documentary on the pre-emptive, unnecessary and illegal war that is Operation Enduring Freedom. This is a fairly appropriate title for this war since it is this administration that our freedoms have had to endure. In this cold, factual documentary, Uncovered: The War in Iraq, director Robert Greenwald has the usual cast of experts who explain how Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle and the other axis of evil got away with, well, murder. As this tragedy continues to play out-- and I even hesitate to call it a tragedy because tragedies usually begin well and end sadly-- this constitutional siege began badly and continues to worsen. In this documentary there is a mention of The Project for the New American Century, or as neocons so affectionately call it by its acronym, PNAC (click here for website - caution: material not suitable for truth-seekers!).

William Kristol heads this group of deranged, nerdy wannabe imperialists. If you do not know who William Kristol is, that is perfectly normal. You and 359 million other Americans have at least that in common. Mr. Kristol is also the editor of The Weekly Standard, a very conservative, let's be honest, NEOconservative publication. If I could write The Weekly Standard's motto, it would read: "So what if we made up the intelligence report on Iraq's WMD program in order to go to war? We can't let silly things like truth or facts get in the way of global responsibility!"

Here is PNAC's mission statement, or better yet, a brief glimpse into the minds of individuals who played WAY too much Dungeons and Dragons in their adolescent years:

The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle.

The Project for the New American Century intends, through issue briefs, research papers, advocacy journalism, conferences, and seminars, to explain what American world leadership entails. It will also strive to rally support for a vigorous and principled policy of American international involvement and to stimulate useful public debate on foreign and defense policy and America's role in the world. - William Kristol, Chairman

Now, lets play critic for moment and have fun with words! In the first part, Kristol decides to use the combination of "fundamental propositions". This can be interpreted in a variety of ways but here is my "proposition". "Fundamental", meaning, "necessary or essential, basic" is used with a word (proposition) that truly lacks any identity with being true or false. It translates to "essential suggestion". My experience has been that suggestions are merely "suggestive", never necessary. If you and your friends are hungry and are discussing where to eat, if you do not "suggest" a location, will all of you die of starvation? I doubt it.

Next William goes on to say that "American leadership is good both for America and for the world...". This is a bit ambitious, wouldn't you agree? I would "suggest" that the current White House administration has been anything BUT good for America, at least most of America (two beneficiaries: those who have stock in Haliburton and Osama Bin Laden). Ask around about gas prices, the Iraq situation, the surrendered hunt for Bin Laden, health care, the cutting of pay for soldiers or the No Billionaire Left Behind School Program. Ask some middle-class people in Livonia, MI who can't get work because their jobs are in China and... gas being what it is, can't make THAT kind of commute...Livonia is also where The Decider decided to autograph an American Flag for some lucky person. Imagine that...someone autographing the American Flag with a Sharpie, as if it were a concert t-shirt or a Major League Baseball...awwww shucks...humility is not his best quality.

As far as American leadership being good for the world, I'm not so sure Wild Bill. Iraq is certainly not as bucolic as Mr. Kristol's McLean, VA. La fuga del cervello, the flight of the intellect, continues to destroy Iraq from within and our decision to fire 450,000 Iraqi soldiers was not the beginning of a winning streak. Iraq is about as safe as you and I next to Dick Cheney on a hunting trip.

Next, Kristol maintains that, "...such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principles." Yippeeee....! "Such leadership"....where did he define what it was? He didn't. So what he has not defined still requires something. Sweet genius!
So let's bring our armed forces to enforce ___ and then let's put spread some "diplomatic energy" around___ (as if it were magic dust that may or may not work---hopefully it won't, that way we can have more shock and awe!) and then we can commit to "moral principles".
Ever "committed" to going fishing with one of your drinking buddies at 6AM on a Saturday morning while you are both sauced on Friday at midnight? And neither of you show up, but when you see each other later that day, you don't mention it because you both knew it was a long shot that you would have succeeded to begin with? I have committed to so many things without ever feeling a muscle move or blinking an eye. If there are 4 frogs on a log and one commits to jump off, how many are left?
4 -- that one frog only committed to jumping.

The second paragraph is less confusing but more disturbing. Kristol scribbles, "The Project for the New American Century intends [...] to explain what American world leadership entails."

Whatch you talkin' bout Willis??? Huh??? Did it already happen?? Where were we?
That statement contains no hypothetical words or conditional expressions! (teeth chattering)
I can see William and his fellow non-truth seekers all sitting around playing "Risk" in their Darth Vader/Hans Solo pajamas, pretending to be Napoleon.

The second half of the last statement is rather a bit of an oxymoron. If the objective of this sinister group is that America rules the world, then how or why could that insane, illogical, nonsensical goal "...stimulate useful public debate on foreign and defense policy and America's role in the world."

Wouldn't the debate sound something like this.

Participant X: I feel that American world leadership would curtail the natural order of things, that it would stifle the freedoms and liberties of other nations and their right to govern themselves as they see fit...since they are already a sovereign nation, it would be against our founding fathers' wishes that this democracy partake in such a tyrannical act.

William Kristol: America kicks ass and will continue to do so whether you want us to or not. Come to democracy or it will come to you! Next question please!

Aside from my attempts at humor, I chose to bring this serious issue to the attention of as many people as possible. Why? Because there are individuals who want to do great harm to this country and what it stands for. And not just Bush and Cheney. There is a very powerful neoconservative movement out there that has its eyes set on an Empire. They do not take days off and we cannot afford to either.

Where the leaders in the Democrat Party have failed us, and miserably, we must pick up the banner and continue to carry it for those who founded this country, for those who have fought for it and for those who will follow behind us. We do not want, nor can we allow ourselves, to be the generation that failed in its duty, that in the face of evil from both internal threats as well as external ones, we maintained with dignity our principles of truth and justice and we protected the Constitution with the fierceness of a lioness protecting her young. Even when the tendency was to constrict or eliminate freedoms and liberties, we realized that by doing so would suffocate any hope of victory against those who want to take them away.

The neocons, regarding the War on (of) Terror, often spew the tired rhetoric of "you're either with us or you're against us." My response is parallel to a quote by the great Mark Twain, "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it". I love America, the American Flag and the Statue of Liberty. I love the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and our forefathers who wrote them with our self-preservation in mind.

To PNAC and Bush I say,
"WE DON'T SUPPORT YOU
BECAUSE YOU DON'T DESERVE IT."

Putin is "Time" magazine Person of the Year---neocons get robbed !!

2007-12-20T15:04:00.000-08:00

So an American didn't win "Time" magazine Person of the Year? Wait a second...but I thought we ARE the world...the rest of the countries are sub-human, terrorist, primitive, culturally-backward and overall inferior?
That's not the case? Huh??

But we have Kenny Chesney, NASCAR and Wrangler Jeans! I demand a recount! (wait a minute, we all know how recounts turn out - see Florida 2000 Election)

The neocons are screaming in disbelief about Time's choice. The average far right-winger has donned the lemming suit once again and is following the right-wing pundits' proposed selection of General David Petraeus--the man who singlehandedly saved Iraq from the "last throes of the insurgency" (in real terms, the general who saved the White House from further embarassment). Not sure exactly how much of a role General Petraeus is playing in the decline in violence in Iraq. Are we to discount the efforts by those brave men and women dodging bullets? And wasn't it the White House and Fox News who were touting the increase in solidarity among common Iraqi citizens against their own fellow disenfranchised national religious insurgent neighbors...errr...Al-Qaeda?

Forget Petraeus and Putin. Both men certainly had enormous influence on world affairs. But have we so quickly forgotten about the man who brought us to this point in history, who masterminded the fear and propaganda campaign after 9/11? The architect of the "Iraq has WMD/Iraq is behind 9/11"...The man who succeeded in dividing the country in such a way that hasn't been seen since the Civil War? The genius that came up with, "you're either with us or against us"...still no idea?

Karl "Joseph Goebbels" Rove!!!
click on name to see Karl decked out in full fascist gear

That's right ladies and gentlemen, this is the man responsible, primarily, for the following events: this blog, the divisiveness in our country, the unilateral and dangerously arrogant foreign policy of "The Decider", the constant fear of the unknown, the relinquished and surrendered efforts to capture bin Laden, the unnecessary bodily searches at your nearest airport, the illegal wiretapping program, the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity, allowing right-wing religious zealots to hijack the Republican Party, the pre-arranged firing of 8 U.S. Attorneys who wouldn't agree to shredding the Constitution, the planting of lunatics among peaceful protests to highlight civil unrest, the spying on normal, ordinary citizens, the elimination of habeas corpus, Guatanamo-ville, Operation Rendition, the idea of putting Saddam and 51 other Iraqi government officials on a deck of playing cards so that the Hannity and O'Reilly lemmings could understand and play "Shock and Awe" together, the fun and colorful "Terror Alert" seen on Fox News Channel until they realized that even the neocons were getting annoyed with it, the advent of Anthrax (not the muscial group), Bush winning the 2000 Presidential Election, and quite possibly, the curse of Steve Bartman (guy who interfered and caught the infamous foul ball in Cubs playoff game in 2003---okay, a bit of an exaggeration there...thought I could sneak one under the radar).

Quite a resume'. And this is a mere snapshot. This guy would make Hitler say, "Wow...now that IS friggin' evil !!!"

So, Time, I am disappointed, too. I really thought you would have given this a bit more thought. Karl Rove has supposedly retired this year and rode his black horse back to Mordor (click here to view Karl's front lawn).

Perhaps we will someday honor this wicked man-- who in an effort to "protect America and spread democracy" did everything to the contrary.

When men pray to God, they pray that 2 + 2 will not make 4...

2007-12-05T20:19:00.001-08:00

Bush and his neo-conservative war hopes...errr... plans for Iran have been foiled by the National Intelligence Estimate!
16 different agencies produced the report and have concluded that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Damn those wily liberals with all of their facts, truth and data!

Score one for democracy and the Constitution, not to mention mankind and peace.

Many neocons profess it to be God's will that the United States invade other countries to wage war and to the surprise of many, establish lucrative military contracts for Haliburton, Blackwater, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, etc. Who would have thought that God was a merciless, inhumane capitalist?!

With firm conviction in their socio-pathological minds, neo-conservatives claim to be such ardent followers of peaceful religions. So frequently they stereotype ALL Muslims to be replicas of Osama Bin-Laden. I guess that means ALL Christians and/or Jews are peaceful, non-violent, brother-loving, and selfless like....for example Rudy Giuliani's Foreign Policy Adviser, Norman Podhoretz, of Jewish faith. Norman wrote a very loving, peaceful op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal.

Here is the last paragraph of that "peaceful" article, exact quote:

"Not so George W. Bush, a man who knows evil when he sees it and who has demonstrated an unfailingly courageous willingness to endure vilification and contumely in setting his face against it. It now remains to be seen whether this president, battered more mercilessly and with less justification than any other in living memory, and weakened politically by the enemies of his policy in the Middle East in general and Iraq in particular, will find it possible to take the only action that can stop Iran from following through on its evil intentions both toward us and toward Israel. As an American and as a Jew, I pray with all my heart that he will."

Huh??? Did you just pray for what I thought you just prayed for???

I mean, I've heard of praying for Notre Dame to beat Michigan, for the Cubs to beat the Cardinals...but praying for war...death, destruction, violence, grief and homelessness?

Sorry Norman, that "religion" I want no part of ! (same goes for radical Islamists)

Voting for Rudolph Giuliani for president is like voting for Bush...only with a New York accent, slightly larger vocabulary and instead of saying "nuclear" every 12 seconds, Rudy says "On September 11th, 2001..."

I leave you with this: "an eye for an eye leaves the world blind" - Gandhi

Peace to all this holiday season...even to you Ahmadinejad...I'll love you until you can love yourself!

Just checking in...

2007-12-02T10:56:00.000-08:00

It has been over 2 months since my last post. My wife suggested in early October that I take a break. I was getting a bit too emotional trying to exorcise the lemmings who continue to buy into the trinity: Rush, Sean Hannity and Fox News. It was an exercise in futility as these individuals continue to march forward with an ideology that appears to be more fascist in nature with each day that passes.

I really had to let go of the idea that I was, or currently am, capable of changing the mindset of misguided individuals. I must have faith that our Creator will eventually allow good to triumph over evil, and that, yes, the "truth will set us free."

A recent documentary was released on DVD. The piece is entitled, "No end in sight" (www.noendinsightmovie.com) I recommend it to anyone who has not closely followed the Iraq quagmire...errr...conflict since the mission was declared "accomplished" back in May of 2003. The individuals interviewed in the documentary were those asked to head the reconstruction of post-conflict Iraq. Their stories will leave you in disbelief and perhaps even infuriate you. To see the lives of these young men and women who are maimed and severely damaged emotionally, having fought and given their lives for the empty rhetoric of "Global war on terror" and "spreading democracy", is the ultimate shame for this highly corrupt and pre-fascist White House administration. In ten years or less this documentary will be shown as part of the curriculum in social studies/history classes nationwide. You can contain the truth for a period of time but you can never make it disappear forever. (If Dick Cheney can't do it, no one can)

I recently purchased the latest book by Naomi Wolf, "The End of America: A Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot, A Citizen's Call to Action". Wolf does a superb job of highlighting the frightening similitudes between fascist regimes like those of Hitler and Mussolini and those of the current Bush Administration. The thread that ties the book together is the fact that the regimes of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy did not fully blossom overnight, but rather, in a long, systematic process that devoured civil liberties piecemeal. Wolf delivers her thesis in a chilling intellectual manner, subverting emotion to remain factually and historically accurate. If you don't believe you can be arrested at random and be labeled an "enemy combatant" by George Walker Bush and be sentenced to a military prison for years without a trial and subjected to torture, then you are guilty of one of three things: 1) you have not read the list of executive orders delivered by Bush over the last 16 months or noticed that OUR political leaders passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (click here for information), or 2) you do not know the full story of Jose' Padilla or 3) you watch Fox News and believe that Bush, if he had the power to do that, is justified in doing so (Yeeeee-haw...Freedom ain't free you A-rab lovin' librals!).
Either way the information is out there. It's free, but it won't come to you without your seeking it out.

If you think you are patriotic, if you love the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, if you believe that Ben Franklin, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson were men of principle and foresight, if you long for the days when this country was respected, then both the documentary and book are for you.

There has never been a democracy like ours in the history of mankind. Enjoy it while you can.

"When Johnny comes marching home again..."---For whom or what does the soldier fight?

2007-10-02T21:43:00.000-07:00

One of the many drums that the Bush administration has continued to beat is that of the "brave young men and women who are fighting for our freedom and democracy." It has been used as a very sharp, sentimental weapon: when Congress was slow on approving funds for the war, when morale and support for the war in general begins to weaken and when there is a tide of an angry and tired public which questions the overall legitimacy of this war, the war machine spits out a couple of televised meetings with the families of fallen soldiers or shows video of Bush's latest visit to a military base. As I mentioned in an earlier post, support for this war means everything to the Bush administration. They will stop at nothing to create it and/or find more of it. If there's no support, John and Jane Citizen may see this war for what it truly is and may take some serious action to get us the hell out of there (losing votes is devastating).

In August Rep. Lindsey Graham-R attempted to debate the Iraq question with Democrat Senator Jim Webb on Meet the Press. One of Rep. Graham's talking points was a very tired one, and a very misunderstood one: that more and more soldiers are reenlisting to go back to Iraq and fight after redeployment or injury. Now, Sen. Webb, a Vietnam veteran himself, could have slammed him on that remark. I was surprised he didn't. But then again, what I'm about to discuss in this blog entry rarely attracts any debate. It would be not only unpopular but the subject alone requires an enormous amount of concentration and comprehension, which in the age of excitement can be annoying.

One of my faults (so they told me) in graduate school was my occasional overly-simplified explanation of highly intellectual material. I write to be understood, not to play hide-and-seek with the reader. My dream would be to teach a course on the Divine Comedy strictly in the lexicon of the pop culture.
Alright "hip" reader, you're in luck. Today's blog concerns the field of semiotics, which is the study of signs and symbols and their meaning as they relate to communication. I will address this by presenting two psychoanalytic concepts by Jacques Lacan and demonstrate how they can be used to understand why and for what the modern soldier fights.

In 1963 Jacques Lacan gave his famous 11th Seminar entitled, "The Four Fundamental Concepts of Pyschoanalysis." (L'Ecrits) For the first time Lacan proposed a break in the theory of Saussure regarding the concepts of the "signifier" and the "signified".

Let me break this down. Let's use something we all know fairly well, language. A signifier could be the word "cat", not in the sense of feline or what it means to be a cat or to meow, or even what it smells like or feels like, but simply the word, cat. The word cat on paper is simply that, a word. It doesn't have meaning until we give it one. When we give it meaning in our minds is when it becomes the signified. The signified could obviously change and be very different depending on the individual. I say the word cat and some of you think of Garfield, some of you think of a pet you had years ago and some of you think of allergies. Bottom line: there is a book full of signifiers, it's called a dictionary. What you think of when you read a particular word is a signified.

We could also say this: the signifier is the external reality and the signified is the internal reality, right? I mean, cat is generally accepted in our society as a four-legged feline that can be a domestic animal/pet. It purrs, meows and scratches. That is the signifier and in this case seems to be a generally accepted external reality.

The signified could mean various things to different individuals. Those meanings tend to be internalized and therefore exist only in our mind, a kind of internal reality. This does not mean that those internal realities are false and/or imaginary. On the contrary, they could all be true and authentic. The unique quality is that the signified usually differs among individuals because of experience and personal identification. After all, being scratched by a cat is very real to us.

Okay Federalist, where in the hell are you going with all this?

For the soldier, the war in Iraq has two distinct and very different realities: an external reality, what the German philosophers called Umwelt and an internal reality, called an Innenwelt.

The external reality, as we have established as the signifier, translates to the soldier as what the Bush administration has coined "The Global War on Terror". This signifier is one that is common to all soldiers and to the American public (Fox News flings this term around every 1.6 seconds). The soldiers have enlisted in the Armed Services. They were called up to go and wage war in Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of this coined phrase "The Global War on Terror". They cannot discriminate or use discretion in deciding where or when to wage war. They are forced to go.

I argue that these soldiers are not fighting for nationalistic ideals of spreading democracy, they do not subscribe to the tired rhetoric of "they hate us for our freedoms", heck, they may not even believe in those silly bumper sticks that say "Freedom ain't free". The idea that these soldiers are being injured in combat and wishing to return to the front to fight for such lofty and intangible ideologies like that of spreading democracy is not only the stuff of fairy tales but it is a disgrace to those who have given the ultimate sacrifice! Shame on those who continue to say that this war is just and necessary and that those fallen soldiers gave their lives so you can be free!

What the soldier can and does relate to is their signified, whatever that may be. It usually starts out with a pregnant wife or girlfriend back in the States, one or two young children, it could be a farm with hundreds of animals, it could be the desire to seek a college degree with money earned from enlisting...the list could go on ad infinitum.

In combat the signified for which the soldier fights expands and cements itself in the form of a fraternal bond. Their focus then becomes common protection and survival with the man who is beside them in the foxhole taking mortar rounds. They begin to feel an incredible sense of duty and brotherhood with those who are closest in proximity. When they are injured or maimed and cannot return to combat, my senses tell me that these brave but unfortunate soldiers are not crying out for returning to spread democracy or to eliminate the al-Qaeda network. They are crying out for that signified that represents the essence of their being and their purpose. Their families, their fellow soldiers, their lieutenants, their pick-up trucks and a cold 6-pack of beer back home.

Bottom line: the soldiers fight for these things because they are tangible and they mean something to them. These and only these type of ideals, those that are personal to the soldier and are ones he can identify with, are the signifieds for which that soldier fights, so that those who planned this horrible war and who continue to profit from it, can achieve, perhaps, their own personal signifieds.

(photo is of Jacques Lacan, French pyschoanalyst, psychiatrist and doctor, 1901-1981)

The line at the bathroom stall is long...here's a solution!

2007-09-30T19:48:00.000-07:00

So, yeah, I've been a little absent from submitting new posts for my blog. Since my last post so many things have taken place that it almost makes me want to procrastinate further.

A while back, a story broke which reported that Idaho Senator Larry Craig (a man with two first names...suspicious already) had been arrested on June 11 in a sting operation designed to curtail homosexual sex acts in a public bathroom in the Minneapolis Hubert Humphrey Airport. The charge was a misdemeanor to which Craig immediately pleaded guilty in hopes that the whole episode would vanish as quickly as Dick Cheney's e-mails. Well, it didn't. Just because a tree falls in the forest...and...you get the picture.

Now, as always the case when "straight" married men get busted for homosexual sex, Craig's first response was that of giving his track record of 60 plus years of continuous heterosexuality, the physical presence of a wife and children (proof of at least two heterosexual sexual acts, possibly three) and for the mere fact that he is a Republican, and therefore, straight. After all, homosexuality is a choice (remember when you, reader, chose your sexuality...it was a Wednesday, wasn't it?) and a sinful one at that. A Christian Republican would never willingly commit sodomy (Ted Haggard, Mark Foley...cough cough).

The Republican party finally hung Craig out to dry and made him walk the plank. Namely because at the center of the controversy was a homosexual act and also because Idaho has a Republican governor, who would undoubtedly replace Craig with another Republican senator, therefore keeping the seat. The GOP probably thought that Craig had caught some contagious viral disease, gaykemia, and wanted nothing to do with that.

Democrats have been claiming hypocrisy and Republicans have been citing Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.

So...where's Frodo and who has the ring?

Hypocrisy. Google tells me that it's the " The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness." Saying one thing and doing another. Republicans such as Craig have run on the platform of ferocious opposition to gays and to gay rights. This would then beg the question: are they opposing gay rights because they don't like gay people and what they represent (i.e. parades, better dance club music, great taste in fashion and home decorating) or is it because they are opposed to homosexuality? I suppose you could be gay AND be asexual. But you could also be married with children and be homosexual...come to think of it, you can be just about anything nowadays. Therefore, Craig and his posse must be against the parades and all its gayness, right? Because it would appear that they are not so much against the gay sex part (at least Craig isn't).

The hypocrisy hangs over this situation like Rudy Giuliani's new hairpiece, even better. You see, the Republicans came out swinging in 1994 with slogan "We are the party of family values." While that may have been true for former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, who, let's face it, will never be voluntarily involved in any sex scandal...ever, it has certainly proven to be an unreachable ideal for many other prominent Republicans who have professed, and continue to profess, to be morally superior.

Ted Haggard. No explanation needed. C'mon, look at the guy. There's nothing about him that screams straight other than his teeth. Here's a preacher who spoke directly with the White House nearly once a week and fought against gay rights. Proof that the harder you fight the urge for something, the more you go overboard with it when you get it. Remember that uptight dude from the movie "Chocolat"? When he finally got his hands on some chocolate, he got it all over...his...I'll stop there.

Mark Foley. A former congressman from Florida who advocated stiffer (sorry) punishment for pedophiles in his home state of Florida. Meanwhile, he's texting 15 year old male pages (young lads that do summer work at the Capitol to gain experience...hmmm...maybe this is where it starts) telling them that he's got an erection and asking when he can "help slip their shorts off." Someone call Chris Hansen from Dateline NBC, we gotta live one.

Brian J. Doyle. Former number 5 in charge in Department of Homeland Security was busted for soliciting an officer posing as a 14 yr old girl in a child internet sex sting. He even told the officer who he was, that he worked for Homeland Security and he even gave out his government issued cell number. He even sent hard-core pornographic movie clips to the undercover officer. Feel safe yet? (link to story)

Senator David Vitter. Current Senator from Louisiana who was on a Washington madam's call list (really expensive hookers with no diseases). Vitter was virtually congratulated by his colleagues for this heroic heterosexual act. Vitter claimed that he had a deep conversation with "his God" and that "his God" forgave him, so everything is cool now. Seems like many Republicans have conversations with God, none of which are ever recorded or witnessed by anyone, and they seem to be the only conduits to Heaven. Never mind that prostitution is still illegal (God is all powerful but He has had difficulty overturning that law in Washington D.C.) and that Vitter is married. No worries. The GOP had to keep Vitter, because Louisiana has a Democrat for a governor and the people of Louisiana are not exactly doing cartwheels for the current White House administration.

This list goes on ad nauseum. John McCain's Florida campaign adviser was busted in a park bathroom for soliciting gay sex. Another Homeland Security person was busted in a child internet sex sting last week.

Bottom line, as far as hypocrisy goes, is that the Democrats don't run on the platform of being morally superior because THEY KNOW THEY'RE NOT. They don't run on the platform of judging others, of what's acceptable social behavior and what's not, of who is good and who is bad, of speaking for a God from whom they could not be further away. There was a candidate years ago, that ran on a platform of not wanting to judge or condemn others, of not wanting to call others names and insults, who believed that everyone was equal and should have the same opportunities as others. What was his name...??? Oh yeah, Jesus of Nazareth. Crazy socialist liberal.

Bill Clinton was impeached because he lied to a grand jury. He said he DIDN'T DO SOMETHING THAT HE ACTUALLY DID. That's called lying. That's against the law when you're in court. He did not, however, say during any of his campaigns that he was a "man of family values" and that he was going to restore "good faith, morals and values to the White House." Fortunately for Bill, cheating on your wife by having sex with an intern in the Oval Office, while a very poor decision, is not against the law. I don't think you're going to see Bill Clinton do any type of marriage counseling or hold any fidelity workshops in this lifetime. Again, poor decision but no hypocrisy.

The sad part for Republicans is that for millions of men in this country, homosexuality seems to be working out quite nicely. I rarely hear any complaints from any of my gay friends about their choice. If I ask, "How's it going Brad?", rarely do I hear, "It's going okay, things could be better if I weren't so freakin' gay." They generally seem happy, joyous and free with their lifestyle. They love themselves and love others unconditionally. A lesson few have learned.

The tragic part for the Republicans is that the GOP drove a good man and great public servant like Larry Craig into a dirty, filthy public bathroom to engage in what it deems sinful, despicable and unmentionable. His chance of contracting HIV or any other STD, or passing one on, increases exponentially every time the stall door closes. Who knows how many men he has been in contact with and how many they have subsequently been with? He is confined to a bathroom stall because outside of this urine and fecal receptacle area lies a whole world so incredibly judgmental and so full of hate and misunderstanding, that instead of being a punchline at a Washington party and the recipient of a thousand condescending stares, he chooses to have the most intimate sexual act in a place you can't get out of fast enough. You neo-con Republicans fail to realize that this is not a choice. You act as if one day Craig woke up, poured a cup of soy milk and said to himself, "I think today is a good day to start having anonymous gay sex in public bathrooms across the country."

Stop treating homosexuality like it's contagious. Don't worry: if you don't have it by now you're not going to get it. You're safe. Quit touching feet in Minneapolis, open the stall and let the others out of the bathroom so they can be safe, too.

Barack Obama looking to gain votes from "A little shock and awe never hurt nobody" crowd...why the attitude?

2007-08-06T15:10:00.000-07:00

("Pakistan...you betta recognize!")

For those of you who missed it, last week Barack Obama provided additional comments that the right-wing pundits devilishly enjoyed spinning and sensationalizing. Obama's comments were the following:

"Let me make this clear...There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaida leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."

How cool would it be to hear that quote come from the mouth of James Earl Jones....SWEET!

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but there was this good ol' boy from Crawford, Texas, who came on the television shortly after 9/11 and said that Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda were the guilty ones. He SWORE that he would hunt them down, wherever, whenever, however. He gave that, "you're with us or against us" line. He said that anyone who harbors terrorists is as guilty as the terrorists themselves. Heck, G-Dub even said HE would invade Pakistan, with or without their permission. What? He did? When? Click here.

So why is everyone all uptight about Obama saying the same thing? I mean, Obama can't do anything. He's NOT president. Our president CAN and IS arrogant and ignorant enough TO in fact, light up another country, with or without congress and the United Nations. He's got the direct line to God. (By the way, is that line being tapped in the warrant-less, unconstitutional wiretapping program?)

So... why is everyone SOOO concerned, given that the President, back when he was at 80% approval rating...(remember that time? ...seems like two generations ago) SWORE that the perpetrators of this horrific, terrifying, tragic act of murder would be brought to justice? Is Obama not seeing that promise through when discussing what he would do if he were president? Did everyone suddenly forget why we are in this awful mess to begin with? I don't remember hearing anything about "Iraq" in the month that followed 9/11. But I do remember seeing this tall, shy fellow with a beard, speaking from a cave (and you know he got that camouflage jacket from a military second-hand store)

The right constantly beats the drum of "you scaredy-cat liberals are for cut and run!" Obama seems to be for kicking the door down and hunting for terrorists. Something the current administration has failed to perform. You see, we're in Iraq. See this map in case you forgot how far that is from Afghanistan. Well, it's far. Imagine taking a flight from New York to Los Angeles, but the plane stops in Denver and the pilot says, "Oops, my bad."
Despite Bush pleading and supplicating that you believe that the terrorists we're fighting in Iraq are those of 9/11, they're not the ones who dun it! We're fighting the pissed off Iraqis and killing them, and staying out of the way when they want to kill each other (primary job of a liberator, right?).

So, to make sure we understand the rules... When we want to stick our chest out and say "we'll fight 'em anywhere", invading a country like Pakistan, an ally with nuclear weapons, is perfectly legitimate. Right? "Yee-haw, it's fer the Global War on Terror boys...Amirca's colors don't run!" Wave a couple flags in the backdrop and play some country music in the background. Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh will convince you that Bush's plan is brilliant. As soon as they procure a copy of the talking points from Tony Snow and Rupert Murdoch, the light then turns green and they begin their rhetoric. 30 minutes into it, you start believing that Musharaf is actually an old drinking buddy of Bin Laden, that they both slept with Rosie O'Donnell and then you can't wait another minute for the Hellfire missiles to start raining down on the mountains of Pakistan. As the saying goes, "If you don't come to democracy, democracy will come to you."

On the other hand, you have a presidential candidate with EXACTLY the same amount of White House experience that Bush had at the time of his first campaign (zero), saying what he would do if he were president and fighting terrorism. He's doing two things: 1) he is dispelling the "cut and run" accusations from the right that are as tired as Ann Coulter's jokes and 2) he's is attempting to gain respect and ultimately votes from those who are just right of center. Those who are perhaps NOT NRA members but are very patriotic, who don't mind a couple of missile explosions now and then, just to keep the world honest.

THIS base ladies and gentlemen, is the key voter base that is worth its weight in oil...errr...gold. These people get out and vote EVERY time. They are thinkers: doctors, lawyers, accountants, business owners, teachers, nurses, and they are not driven entirely on emotion. They could respect someone like Obama; tough on terrorism, proponent of an education bill that would actually complete its intended purpose, someone who is willing to talk out disagreements instead of sending 175,000 to troops to "offer diplomacy" and lastly, someone who is not afraid to show his religion and/or spirituality.

Being left of center, I have to admit that the right-wing tends to get its voters to polls with much higher frequency. Sadly. My little skateboarders and goth monsters are not pulling their weight in terms of civic duty. No one has shown them that they can be who they want to be AND go to the voting booth one day a year.

Obama and his team understand the importance of this demographic. But instead of threatening them or offering them bribes (cough George Allen cough-sneeze) for their votes, Obama is offering a return to those days following 9/11: when so many of us wanted to catch those parties responsible for the largest terrorist attack ever on American soil. Or, as our president so eloquently called them, "the folks who did this."

Sean Hannity: The intellectual pride of neoconservative thought...why debate when you can hate?

2007-08-03T13:11:00.000-07:00

("You peace-loving liberals just don't get it, do you?")

This post is dedicated to the thoughtful, compassionate and moral side of the Iraq debate. Remember the party that once said they would return "morals and values to Washington"(Mark Foley, Tom Delay, Dennis Hastert, David Vitter, Scooter Libby, Ted Haggard...ZZZZzzzzz)

As I stated in my very first blog entry, the right encounters enormous difficulty when attempting to debate the Iraq question. When confronted with annoying issues like facts and data, the right typically resorts to ad hominem attacks, suggestions of violence and vulgar insults that make me warm and fuzzy with nostalgia for my days in middle-school.

Compassion knows no boundaries. Sean Hannity is an expert hate-monger. His daily talk show consists of twisting the truth in such a manner that some of his listeners would believe that Al-Qaeda actually created Hurricane Katrina. His followers now congregate in the venues of the Freedom Concert Series, which is terribly ironic when you realize that "freedom" is exactly what Bush is taking away from American citizens in the way of recent executive orders. The trickle-down effect of his rhetoric has manifested itself in so many of the common right-wing citizens that, despite factual evidence and widely-accepted truths, his followers generally cling to the following items:

1) There is no such thing as Global Warming. These two words were invented by Al Gore. He is a democrat. He is evil and wants America to be taken over by Islamic extremists. There was no Global Warming when Jesus was driving his Ford Expedition around. There ain't none now either!

2) The Global War on Terror is completely justified. If you're not with us, then you're against us. We are fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here. If we weren't in Iraq right now, the terrorists would be arriving by the thousands daily. We would be attacked right here on our own soil! You liberal loonies don't get it! And Jesus told Bush to invade Iraq anyway. How can you be wrong when JC has your back?
(Despite the declaration of war on a mere concept, for instance, I could make a Global War on Daylight, the right believes this war is necessary for the fight for survival for the planet. It's like Terminator 2: Judgment Day and we can't let the machines win.)

3) We are also under attack by Mexicans who are poor, hungry and have 2 changes of clothing. They are all violent heathens and speak that damn Spanish. This is going to be problematic because we can't tell them apart from the Al-Qaeda terrorists, who are due to land on our shores in a matter of days (if a democrat is elected president!)

4) All Democrats are for the Islamic extremists. They actually want them to win. The Democrats want everyone to convert to Islam, hand over ALL of their possessions to the new socialist regime and make everyone take a humanities course in college to become more civil.

These are only a few of the strong talking points that are originating from the right-wing pundits. Sean Hannity, encyclopedic arrogance, once had his lunch handed to him by the mayor of Salt Lake City in a debate over the Iraq conflict. While Mayor Rocky was serving up unemotional, intellectual facts, Sean resulted in name-calling, various insults and an emotional plea to the crowd as he started out with footage from a recent funeral of a fallen soldier. You would have made Lincoln kick his dog with that performance Sean.

Here are the youtube.com links to parts of that debate. Click Here.

NO CONTEST!

Individuals like Hannity (Coulter, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Melanie Morgan) do absolutely nothing for healthy debate in this country, especially on an issue so critically important as Iraq. Instead of searching for information to dissect the situation, Hannity and others simply gather audio clips of Democrats speaking, taking only bits of the clip in order to bash, ridicule, judge and hate. Brilliant. Melanie Morgan did this piece on Nancy Pelosi while on Hannity and Colmes. Click Here.

Sean Hannity even has his own website. No, it's not www.spreadhate.com. But here's a link to the forum on his website, full of loving, compassionate comments by his SS soldiers.

Click here to read some of the posts left by Hannity followers...wow!

Perhaps I'm giving these individuals more credit than they deserve. I tend to forget that they are, after all, entertainers. They are capitalizing on this situation just as some of the government officials are doing, as I mentioned in my previous post.

Despite the hate that some have for my views and possibly your views as well, I continue to focus instead on love and tolerance. Maybe the terrorists don't hate us for our freedom, but rather because most of us choose to love instead of hate. Piss off a neo-con and fight the right-wing pundit's agenda, do something kind for someone today, and don't tell anyone you did it!

War is business....and business is booming!

2007-08-02T21:29:00.000-07:00

By now most Americans understand that our initial reasons for invading Iraq were completely false. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. I mean, come on. Don't you think if there had been Bush would have jumped at that photo op? A picture of him sitting on top of a can of yellow cake or on top of a missile, with that Crawford grin and the big thumbs up? There was no meeting between Mohammed Atta and a senior Iraqi intelligence official in Prague in April 2001. The supposedly "high-quality aluminum tubes" would certainly have made Lt. Columbo say, "Ummm...sorry to bother again, it's all a bit confusing, but just one more question..."

Bush finally admitted in 2006, "my bad, Iraq didn't have any weapons of mass destruction. Okay, let's eat." But he quickly added that he and the rest of the world believed that Iraq was better off without a brutal dictator like Saddam...so, that is now the reason why we invaded. No, wait a second. He was a state sponsor of terror. Hold up...I got it! Saddam was illegally downloading music on his iPod. Gotta keep up people. The reasons change every six months.

The problem with maintaining a national defense is that at some point weapons became stale. Yes, they have a shelf life. And when the shelf life nears you can either a) destroy them or b) destroy them AND some humans. The United States opted for "b". Shock and awe cleaned out the inventory and allowed for the manufacturing of new military toys. And you can only imagine that if you had played your cards right, that is to say that if you had been prescient and predicted the Iraq conflict, then you could have invested beforehand in companies like Boeing, Haliburton, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon and made a frightening amount of money. Buying low and then cashing in later when stock is high is a sweet deal. Ask Martha and those over at Enron.

These companies, among others, produce the military gadgets that cost huge amounts of money.
I mean, do you know what an Apache Helicopter goes for these days? And what if you could make lots of them for the conflict in Iraq and sell some to Israel, Netherlands and Greece?
Well, take 18 million dollars a pop and multiply that by roughly 500. For starters. Point being that there are some individuals that are making serious coin off of this war business. Who are these lucky bastards and how did they know ahead of time to put their chips on that horse?

Some call them government officials. I call them the Axis of Evil.

See for yourself. Perpetual War Portfolio

Now, the names of the members of congress in the last column made their cash on political contributions from these companies, contributions that range from $2,000 to nearly $36,000. Don't get me wrong, I find those contributions to be pretty slimy. But that is pretty common for members of congress. And individually they don't have a direct effect on foreign policy like those of the Axis of Evil.

But let's take a look at those individuals in the third column from the left.

Lynne Cheney (wife of Darth Vader) served as the Director of the Board of Lockheed Martin, the largest national defense contractor until January 2001. Are you freaking kidding me? Yeah, okay, let's see if I can get my arms around this. While dining over pot roast, Lynne, speaking on behalf of the old chums at Lockheed, and the VP can discuss how to prolong this conflict in order to manufacture thousands more Hellfire Missiles. Conflict of interest? Nah.

Richard Armitage, leaker of Valerie Plame (Wilson) the CIA agent. When Joe Wilson returned from Niger and said, "Geez guys, I know you want to see a link between Iraq and Niger in the purchase of uranium...I simply can't find the link. I don't think there is one." Armitage said to Scooter (I love saying that name, sounds like someone off of Dukes of Hazzard) Libby, "Tell the NY Times that his wife is a covert CIA agent. That'll teach him." Armitage was a major architect for the invasion of Iraq.

Paul Wolfowitz, recently asked to resign from president of World Bank. Previously he was Donnie Rumsfeld's Deputy Secretary of Defense. I wouldn't ask this guy to manage the money from the ashtray in my car. This guy jets off to a neighborhood in suburban Detroit and polls 100 super-wealthy Iraqis, asking if they feel that Iraq would be better off without Saddam AND if they think there would be any difficult in unifying the country in reconstruction efforts. They all responded with a resounding "NO" and so, the complex post-war Iraq plans were a done deal. How'd that little insurgency turn out for ya Paulie?

Then there's Stephen "the war is going great" Hadley. Deputy National Security Adviser. He is the one who said that Iraq is NOT in a civil war. Definition of a civil war: A war between factions or regions of the same country. I know what you're thinking, lawyers say the craziest things.

Lastly, it's the evil warlock Karl Rove, Bush's right-hand villain. The man who lives in the shadows, the one who jumps with joy when Bush rattles off 3-4 long, compound sentences without making a mistake. Karl is a shareholder in Boeing and is probably going to cash that in when he rides back to Sleepy Hollow in January of 2009.

What is tragic about this episode is that, despite the dead bodies coming home for the neocon money machine, the president is still able to find humor in the loss of young lives.
(See this clip)

I believe the word for it is "sociopath". But don't forget: "we're fighting them there so we don't have to fight 'em here."
Sounds to me like we should be fighting THEM here so we don't have to fight anyone THERE.

(Perpetual War Portfolio link provided by Dack Ragus 2002-2003.)

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. -- Joseph Goebbels

2007-08-01T16:54:00.000-07:00

Okay, so you have to be wondering by now, how is it that George Bush can continue to make the claim that the Al-Qaeda we are fighting in Iraq is the Al-Qaeda that executed the terrorist attack on 9/11? It is simply not true. Al-Qaeda did not exist in Iraq prior to our invasion. Moreover, the Al-Qaeda that is in Iraq now, due entirely to our removal of Saddam Hussein and lack of a plan to secure the peace, is a collection of sectarian groups who have attempted to align themselves with Al-Qaeda in hopes of gaining control of Iraq, naturally through violent means. But hey, last time I checked, 17% of the population still thinks Saddam was behind 9/11...

The title of this blog is a quote by one of the greatest propagandistic minds of all-time. Joseph Goebbels was propaganda chief for Hitler and the Nazi Regime. His success stemmed from his ability to mobilize the press, radio and the visual arts to create a national fervor for a large military conflict. The overall success for Germany's war plans depended almost entirely on the nation as a whole to offer itself either in the form of labor or as a soldier in the military (or as a fertile woman to make lots of little Nazis). Intellectual and scholastic achievements, if they were not for furthering Nazi propaganda, were simply stifled.

I find some striking similarities between the Nazi regime of Germany in the late 1930's and the current Bush Administration. It's important to always be precise when using these examples. Not everyone in Germany was a Nazi and certainly not everyone in America supports Bush.

Dr. Laurence Britt supports this theory in this video clip

So why does Bush still make the claim of a connection between

Iraq

and 9/11?

If you consider the consequences of discontinuing the effort to connect Iraq to 9/11, Bush must continue to make that false connection. His base is one that has completely bought into the fear and terrorism package that the White House and Fox News have pushed from the onset. He is playing the flute and he still has many mice that are following the tune.

If this base, which is fiercely loyal, were willing and open to look at the factual evidence then perhaps the support would dissipate very quickly. But to possess the willingness is problematic when you are fearful that you may have been misled. The fear is reinforced by the image of the young boy or girl stomping their feet, hands over their ears, screaming, “I CAN’T HEAR YOU, I’M NOT LISTENING! BLAH, BLAH, BLAH!”

In my opinion you have a rather socio-psychological phenomenon that is conducive to prolonging this awfully destructive policy. First, you have a group of people that arguably suffer from an enormous sense of pride and an unquestionable patriotism, both of which are dangerously foolish, and who would be psychologically damaged if they were to admit that they had been misled. These are ultra-conservative individuals who typically do not possess a global awareness, nor are they are terribly respectful or knowledgeable about the cultures of other nations. They cling to the American flag because it prevents them from slipping into the margins of society, a sort of rallying point where they can gain emotional support and comfort from others who share the same narrow-minded perspective, that the world is a competition and America must win “it”---whatever “it” is. (that sort of "you're either with us or against us" mentality). These individuals are serenaded by the country music ballads singing of fallen soldiers, the fight for freedom, how the eagle must soar and how America has bought the international rights to the colors red, white and blue (same colors as the French flag).

I believe that they continue to buy into these lies because it is an internal, psychological defense mechanism that prevents and protects them from being humiliated. My truth is, however, that the progressive side has taught me that we don't shoot the wounded. Perhaps the conservative base is projecting their character defects on to others, that is to say, that those supporters of Bush who would admit that they have been lied to would somehow be judged and condemned by those who have seen truth for several years. (The age-old, "damn it, you guys were right the whole time and now you’re going to rub our noses in it").

Secondly, you have an administration that is creating its own constitution as it goes along. Karl Rove, as evil as he is, is terribly shrewd and cunning, and understands the dynamics of the political landscape in a post 9-11 America. Both he and Cheney are the brains of this organization; Bush simply throws in the "good ole boy" persona with his rolled-up sleeves and southern accent. The loss of habeas corpus, illegal wiretapping, questionable firings and information leaks now come frequently and always without consequence (all in the name of patriotism).

What does this translate to? It translates to a low-level Fascist-type of regime which has subverted everything for which we stand. To sacrifice liberties and freedom to fight an enemy that has never declared war on us, but rather committed an awful crime, is terribly ironic when it is continually presented in the context that these enemies "want to prevent individuals from enjoying democracy and liberty". This concept was used by Joseph Goebbels in the Nazi regime, in order to keep the population on board with the objectives of the administration.

To list the mistakes we have made in the execution of this illegal war would take too much time. We are all aware of many mistakes made, from L. Paul Bremer firing the entire Iraqi army to lack of armor and weaponry to our own troops to the ignorance and refusal of advice provided by experts on Iraq and the Middle East. Those are facts and they cannot be manipulated by someone's "gut" feeling.

There is no connection between Iraq and 9-11. We were going into Iraq as Bush was stealing Florida in the 2000 election. 9-11 was a convenient agent to force entry into this illegal war. Even had Saddam come out, hands up in the air with his supposed weapons of mass destruction, there was no turning back. In Iraq, we never found the weapons of mass destruction. Instead, the mission changed objectives over night, and we removed a brutal dictator and called it “mission accomplished”. But, as experts warned numerous times in standard and Crawford-Texan English, in its place we created an incubator for growing future terrorists, alienated our allies and incited fear in nearly every corner of the globe.

I continue to support any who is in combat in this conflict and their respective families and friends, that they stay safe and return home as soon as possible.

Why am I here?

2007-08-01T15:21:00.000-07:00

I turned 36 this morning at 7:58AM. I figured it is time to align myself with my contemporaries and begin to publish some of my thoughts.
I've been interested in doing this for some time now. My lovely wife (fortheloveofperfume.blogspot.com) has encouraged me for months now to funnel my political thoughts and ideas in places other than her ears. Nevertheless, as with most men it takes a lot of time for reasonable suggestions to sink in. I do believe though that some of my perspectives have rubbed off on her :)

I'm not exactly sure how or when I became so passionate about the current political situation here in the U.S. Prior to 9/11 I suppose I was like many of you; just trying to find my way and find my place in the world. I wouldn't say that I was terribly selfish or self-absorbed but I had a child-like faith that men and women in government generally had our best interests in mind, and more often than not, steered clear of deceit and corruption. I thought that if I worked hard and remained persistent that I could realize my dreams like anyone else. I wouldn't say that belief was or is naive whatsoever. After all, I grew up in the Midwest, played Wiffle Ball every day in the summer, followed the baseball box scores, collected sports cards and rode my Big Wheel around town like I owned the place.

Growing up I was presented the same sloppy version of U.S. history that every other white kid my age got: England was mean so we fought back and won, our forefathers all agreed on the constitution, we kindly asked our good friends, the "Indians", if they would let us have some more land, we helped out Europe,...errrr...won WWI and WWII and the Soviet Union wanted to blow up the planet as many times as possible. Generally speaking, white Americans kicked a lot of ass and never had to say they were sorry. Does it get better than that?

A higher education (those wily liberals!) is a wonderful thing, as it allows one to study things like The Federalist Papers, the systematic genocide of the Native American people, the Scottsboro Nine, Emmett Till and Medgar Evers, the atrocities of the conflict in Vietnam, Operation Northwoods and the U.S. support for the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in the 80's and 90's. I felt pretty foolish when asked what I knew about these things. History is, in fact, told by the winners...at least in Smalltown, USA.

I guess for my generation (30-40?) you could say that we classify our lives into two distinct categories: pre-9/11 and now. I was living in Tallahassee, Florida when 9/11 happened. I was a Master's degree student/teaching assistant at Florida State University. I reacted like many that day: shock, terror, sadness, doubt, fear, anger, and worry. For a while in the "now" period, I would say from September 12, 2001 until about May of 2003, I was a regular consumer of the Bush Administration's kool-aid. I have to admit: during those 20 months I was a bit apprehensive about even being in an elevator with anyone who appeared to be of Middle Eastern descent. I wouldn't classify it as a resentment, most likely due to the fact that I worked in a very culturally diverse environment, but I can't deny that I had prejudice thoughts constantly swimming in my head.

Looking back on that I can see how the media, mainly Fox News, and the Bush rhetoric nearly converted me to this narrow-minded and intellectually surrendering type of thinking. "You're either with us or you're with the terrorists" quit working for me.

Not until I arrived in Madison, Wisconsin in the summer of 2003 to begin doctoral work did I begin to feel some sense of freedom from this oppressive and suffocating neo-conservative propaganda. (Thank you Melody and Eugenia!) I tell people that I was face-to-face with the dark side, and somehow was fortunate enough to turn and head in the direction of truth and reason. I know that I have always been a truth-seeker. Since my adolescent years I have always sought to gather information that would lead me to the truth. Moreover, my years in graduate school afforded me serious intellectual and scholastic growth. An education of this sort, mostly in the area of humanities, furnished me with the tools and knowledge that I believe are fundamental in forming a logical and syllogistic argument. I discovered early on that in order to present a solid paper it was necessary to place intellect over emotion.

And I guess that is why I am here, sort of. I find that the current political situation has become so incredibly emotional that it is hard to sit down and have a discussion with someone about, for instance, the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

My goal is to launch some of my thoughts and ideas about the current political landscape and to solicit feedback and dialog, all in a non-threatening way and without the ad hominem attacks. I simply cannot be unique in my thoughts.

Does anyone question our government? Did you stop questioning after 9/11 because you feel in doing so you are a traitor? Do you ever feel that terrorists must not like us for reasons OTHER than, "they hate us for our freedom"? Did anyone else feel that even if Saddam had had weapons of mass destruction and had surrendered them to the Bush regime that we were going to invade Iraq anyway? Do you ever wonder why we aren't looking for Osama Bin Laden?

There must be many others out there who are as bewildered as I am, scratching their heads and asking, "how did we get here and why hasn't anyone gotten upset about it?"

(photo is of James Madison 1751-1809, the fourth U.S. president and co-author of "The Federalist Papers")