It's Time to Begin the Filiblog!!

This is a great idea. We have seen the wing nuts do this type of thing. Now it is our turn. Contact everybody you know.

Ok, I've contacted my email list.

Got you email tutt you got me here, work to do okay. apart from that one of the most honest and responsible pieces I have read.

http://ftssoldier.blogspot.com/2004/11/holiday-in-falluja_19.html

Here is a media list of the majors and the news organizations:

[Links Updated]

360@cnn.com, 48hours@cbsnews.com, am@cnn.com, Colmes@foxnews.com, comments@foxnews.com, crossfire@cnn.com, dateline@nbc.com, daybreak@cnn.com, earlyshow@cbs.com, evening@cbsnews.com, insidepolitics@cnn.com, live@cnn.com, livefrom@cnn.com, newsnight@cnn.com, nightline@abcnews.com, nightly@nbc.com, rrhodes@airamericaradio.com, today@nbc.com, wam@cnn.com, wolf@cnn.com, wsj.ltrs@wsj.com, netaudr@abc.com, public@nytimes.com, connected@msnbc.com, hardball@msnbc.com, countdown@msnbc.com

Email all of them please. Tell them from your heart what you think about the Republican's abusing what they, themselves, term, "The Nuclear Option" and tell them we want them to report the news and what this will do to our democracy.

It's time to write those letters to the editor. Keep them short and from the heart. Increase your odds of your letter being used by using 150-200 words or less, and really make the connection between what the Republican majority wants to do and WHY it hurts all of us! Post your letters here, so we can see our work in action.

http://newslink.org/

Here are some phone numbers for major media. Please start dialing now to let your voice be heard.

NBC News -- Headquarters
Website: www.msnbc.com/news
Phone: (212) 664-4444
Fax: (201) 583-5453
Address: 30 Rockefeller Plz New York, NY 10112

CBS News -- Headquarters
Website: www.cbsnews.com
Phone: (212) 975-4321
Fax: (212) 975-1893
Address: 524 W 57th St New York, NY 10019

CNN News Group -- Headquarters
Website: www.cnn.com
Phone: (404) 827-1500
Fax: (404) 878-0891
Address: One CNN Center, PO Box 105366 Atlanta, GA 30348-

Fox News Channel -- Headquarters
Website: www.foxnews.com
Phone: (212) 301-3000
Fax: (212) 301-4229
Address: 1211 Ave of the Americas New York, NY 10036

New York Times -- Headquarters
Website: www.nytimes.com
Phone: (212) 556-1234
Fax: (212) 556-3622
Address: 229 W 43rd St New York, NY 10036-3959

Boston Globe -- Headquarters
Website: www.boston.com/globe
Phone: (617) 929-2000

Arizona Daily Star -- Headquarters
Website: www.arizonarepublic.com
Phone: (602) 444-8000
Fax: (602) 444-8933
Address: 200 E Van Buren St Phoenix, AZ 85004-2238
Fax: (617) 929-2098
Address: 135 Morrissey Blvd Boston, MA 02125

Washington Post -- Headquarters
Website: www.washingtonpost.com
Phone: (202) 334-6000
Fax: (202) 334-5269
Address: 1150 15th St NW Washington, DC 20071-0070

Capital Outlook -- Headquarters
Website: www.capitaloutlook.com
Phone: (850) 681-1852
Fax: (850) 681-1093
Address: 602 N Adams St Tallahassee, FL 32301-

Florida Sentinel Bulletin -- Headquarters
Website: www.flsentinel.com
Phone: (813) 248-1921
Fax: (813) 248-4507
Address: 2207 E 21st Ave Tampa, FL 33605-

Miami Herald -- Headquarters
Website: www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald
Phone: (305) 350-2111
Fax: (305) 376-5287
Address: 1 Herald Plz Miami, FL 33132-1693

Miami New Times -- Headquarters
Website: www.miaminewtimes.com
Phone: (305) 576-8000
Fax: (305) 571-7677
Address: 2800 Biscayne Blvd Miami, FL 33137

Dallas Morning News -- Headquarters
Website: www.dallasnews.com
Phone: (214) 977-8222
Fax: (214) 977-8319
Address: 508 Young St Dallas, TX 75202-

Houston Chronicle -- Headquarters
Website: www.houstonchronicle.com
Phone: (713) 220-7171
Fax: (713) 362-6806
Address: 801 Texas Ave Houston, TX 77002

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel -- Headquarters
Website: www.jsonline.com
Phone: (414) 224-2000
Fax: (414) 224-2699
Address: 333 W State St Milwaukee, WI 53203-

Wisconsin State Journal -- Headquarters
Website: www.madison.com/wisconsinstatejournal
Phone: (608) 252-6120
Fax: (608) 252-6119
Address: 1901 Fish Hatchery Rd Madison, WI 53708-8058

Capital Times -- Headquarters
Website: www.madison.com/captimes
Phone: (608) 252-6400
Fax: (608) 252-6445
Address: 1901 Fish Hatchery Rd Madison, WI 53708

Arizona Daily Star -- Headquarters
Website: www.azstarnet.com
Phone: (520) 573-4511
Fax: (520) 573-4141
Address: 4850 S Park Ave Tucson, AZ 85714-

Well, you can be certain I will be participating from my sick bed. It's two-fer. One, I get to feel good and two, I gets to do good.

And thank you for the lovely jelly beans, Easter Bunny.

Ethics of prolonging life differ depending on religious beliefs

By Manya A. Brachear
Tribune staff reporter

March 23, 2005

As the quest to sustain the life of a brain-damaged Florida woman commands the attention of the American public, people of all faiths are pondering if ancient tenets can resolve the moral quandaries posed by modern medicine.

Withchemotherapy, respirators, feeding tubes and other artificial means possibly adding years to a human life, believers across the spectrum are challenged by the questions raised in the Terri Schiavo case.

But for Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and Christian bioethicists, the debate hinges on criteria different from the legal technicalities and Roman Catholic theology argued in her situation.

Jewish scholars generally disregard brain activity as a legitimate sign of life. Christian ethicists point to the biblical principle that humans are made in God's image. Some Hindus make a distinction between death by fasting and death by suicide. In Islamic law, it is cruel to interrupt the process of dying once it has begun.

"A new measure to start the feeding again is unwanted," said Dr. Shahid Athar, chairman of the medical ethics committee of the Islamic Medical Association of North America. "We do not want to prolong life in a vegetative state because we Muslims feel that it's prolonging the misery rather than prolonging the life. The will of God should be taken into account."

Doctors say, short of a miracle, there is little chance that Schiavo, 41, will emerge from the persistent vegetative state in which she has been trapped for the last 15 years. Unable to eat or drink, her sustenance has flowed from a feeding tube. Last week, after a a judge's ruling, the tube was removed.

That plastic pipe is at the heart of the debate among Catholic theologians. Church teaching holds that "extraordinary means" of life support are not morally required for severely disabled patients. Last year, Pope John Paul II declared feeding tubes a form of ordinary care and their removal morally wrong. Schiavo's Catholic parents cling to that position.

Still, a majority of Catholic theologians disagreed. They and other Christian ethicists distinguish between removing a feeding tube and providing the means to end a patient's life, such as injecting drugs to speed up the process.

"It's never OK to do anything that would hasten death," said Aana Marie Vigen, a professor of Christian ethics at Loyola University. "The prevalent view in religious communities--Catholic and Protestant alike--is it's OK ... to disconnect the ventilator or withdraw nutrition as long as there's comfort care, as long as she's not going to be in any pain, as long as there's no hope for recovery."

Many evangelical Christians agree with the Vatican position, arguing the sanctity of humanity should be protected.

"The Bible isn't intended to be a medical textbook on 21st Century medical technology, but I still think it gives us some principles," said Richard Cizik, vice president of government affairs for the National Association of Evangelicals. "Human dignity is indivisible from the unborn to those with disabilities."

But Athar said it is already too late. He believes that doctors should not have removed the feeding tube in the first place. But, he said, Schiavo has begun to die and that process should not be reversed.

"The right decision Islamically and ethically would be not to do any heroic new measures," he said. "To put the tube back would cause pain now."

Many of the same principles guide Jewish ethics in similar situations. Byron Sherwin, a professor of bioethics at Spertus Institute, said the case has been handled inappropriately from the start. According to Jewish law, the decision should rest in the hands of an objective decision-maker appointed by rabbis, not a parent or spouse with a vested interest.

"In American law, it's a concept of rights," he said. "In Jewish law, it's what you are obliged to do... not what are their rights, just what is right."

Copyright © 2005, Chicago Tribune

Ok..before I hit the sack, I'm going to write my letter to Frist, write my op-eds then enter a wonderful dream world where we save our democracy from those who are stealing it.

we don't have the luxury of sitting back and ranting about the nuclear option aftet it happens. if a filblog can save the filibuster, then by all means consider me a filablogger!!!

I am preparing my letter to be faxed to frist and my senators, specter and santorum. i figure i have a 50-50 chance with arlen, and not a snow balls chance in hell with santorum, but that isn't going to stop me!!!

Ailing Pope May Have Feeding Tube Fitted

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4325541

I've worked as a speech pathologist for more than 20 years & this is always an ethical issue - when a person's swallowing ability is compromised, is it ethical to set up an alternate delivery route for nutrition & how likely is it that it will be long-term vs shorter-term with prospects for at least some recovery. It's ironic that the Pope made a statement within the recent past about the feeding tube. He also has Parkinson's disease, which my father had, & which is progressive & he's also quite elderly. This is never easy - any one who doesn't should be an Advance Directive as soon as possible - have it in writing, & loved ones and legal and medical representatives know where it is and what it says.

Buddhist view on prolonging life:

It is far better to care for the lives for all around us rather than spending a fortune in prolonging life or seeking ways to extend it for those who can afford it, at the expense of relieving suffering in more practical ways.  Improving the moral and spiritual quality of life improves its quality for us all rather than the selfish individualism that benefits the elite few who draw most resources.

(not meant to represent all Buddhists, but the branch I am most familiar with)

http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma5/viewdeath.html

This is also a beautiful perspective on life and death from a beautiful religious tradition which seems deal well philosophically with the impermanence of life and the reality of death.

DiAnne,

I am convinced that it is fear that makes people act so bizarrely around dying people.

We tend to fear our own loss of control and that seems unacceptable.

Buddhism teaches that control is an illusion anyway. So might as well relax and take care of what is right in front of you now.

Ok..before I hit the sack, I'm going to write my letter to Frist, write my op-eds then enter a wonderful dream world where we save our democracy from those who are stealing it.

Posted by: sparrow at March 29, 2005 09:37 PM

Wow that sounds great- think ill do the same!

One more fear thing, Karen, I agree. Regardless of whether any DeLay or politically craven mischief sticks with this Schiavo circus, we don't know whether any disabled or fearful of being in jeopardy will see the GOP as their savior in some twisted, undeserved way. Considering our record on disability legislation.

They always try to pare off a few here and there on emotional and fear issues.

This is the text of the letter I faxed to bill Frist.

Dear Senator Frist,

I am writing to you about the majority threat to use the nuclear option in order to stop filibustering on the confirmation of federal judges. I implore you to reconsider using this option, no matter how attractive it looks to you at this point. It is wrong to capitalize on majority status at the expense of the checks and balances that have served this county for so long and so well. You have constituents from both major parties, along with independent voters that you are required to represent, and all of them deserve full consideration.

Using the nuclear option is a mistake. It cries out that you are a willing rubber stamp, rather than a true statesman for your party. If the candidates have not been confirmed before, is it so hard to understand that they are quite possibly not the people for the job? Is it hard to understand that a lifetime appointment conferred on a candidate, who is less than the best person, is a disservice to many people who depend on the courts to be impartial and independent when making their rulings? We deserve the finest jurists.

The country will not thank you for confirming judges who are clearly not impartial. Not only that, if you confirm a judge who is truly questionable by using the nuclear option, you taint that judges legitimacy. You must represent a candidate for the federal bench with the highest of standards, and not take the easy option just because you can. If a judge cannot stand up to the scrutiny of a filibuster once, is it really the best thing to introduce the nuclear option now, thereby admitting that the only way a questionable candidate will pass a confirmation hearing, is to lower the bar?

A nuclear option sounds ominous. It sounds like it is speaking of destruction. It sounds like the majority party considers the minority an enemy to be bombarded with a very dangerous weapon of mass destruction. This type of nuclear weapon in your grasp could cause serious damage in the short run and grave damage in the future. You are considering going down in history as the leader who dropped a WMD on the United States Senate. Please do not let that be your legacy.

Thank you,

Is NCLB Making History of Social Studies?
29 March 2005

There is currently an interesting debate on EdWeek.org about NCLB and the decline in teaching Social Studies in the schools.

Here in CA, the current requirements to graduate high school only call for 3 years of Social Studies. And, good luck trying to get your kid an extra year of Social Studies if they want to take it as an elective, especially in the Los Angeles area. Many high schools within L.A.U.S.D. simply do not offer them. Why? Well, so I have been told two years in a row, now… It’s not in the budget! No classroom space, no teachers, no books…

Experts are seeing an increasing trend to devote more class time and instruction to reading and math, as well as other core subjects deemed crucial by state and federal mandates. As a result, subjects such as social studies and civic education are experiencing a decrease in curriculum resources.

MORE - http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=643

Love this! Passed it on to the Illinois 10th.

Wonderful letter tutterfly. I'm sure your op-eds will be just as great. I'm working on those today.

And I will certainly be calling today too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/29/fashion/29dres.html?ex=1112763600&en=2a2eba80a08588f7&ei=5070

Religous-themed clothing is suddenly trendy - what exploitation

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/29/opinion/29krugman.html?ex=1112763600&en=0c6940dfb10fa812&ei=5070

What's Going On?
By PAUL KRUGMAN

Democratic societies have a hard time dealing with extremists in their midst. The desire to show respect for other people's beliefs all too easily turns into denial: nobody wants to talk about the threat posed by those whose beliefs include contempt for democracy itself.

We can see this failing clearly in other countries. In the Netherlands, for example, a culture of tolerance led the nation to ignore the growing influence of Islamic extremists until they turned murderous.

But it's also true of the United States, where dangerous extremists belong to the majority religion and the majority ethnic group, and wield great political influence.

Before he saw the polls, Tom DeLay declared that "one thing that God has brought to us is Terri Schiavo, to help elevate the visibility of what is going on in America." Now he and his party, shocked by the public's negative reaction to their meddling, want to move on. But we shouldn't let them. The Schiavo case is, indeed, a chance to highlight what's going on in America.

One thing that's going on is a climate of fear for those who try to enforce laws that religious extremists oppose. Randall Terry, a spokesman for Terri Schiavo's parents, hasn't killed anyone, but one of his former close associates in the anti-abortion movement is serving time for murdering a doctor. George Greer, the judge in the Schiavo case, needs armed bodyguards.

Another thing that's going on is the rise of politicians willing to violate the spirit of the law, if not yet the letter, to cater to the religious right.

Everyone knows about the attempt to circumvent the courts through "Terri's law." But there has been little national exposure for a Miami Herald report that Jeb Bush sent state law enforcement agents to seize Terri Schiavo from the hospice - a plan called off when local police said they would enforce the judge's order that she remain there.

And the future seems all too likely to bring more intimidation in the name of God and more political intervention that undermines the rule of law.

The religious right is already having a big impact on education: 31 percent of teachers surveyed by the National Science Teachers Association feel pressured to present creationism-related material in the classroom.

But medical care is the cutting edge of extremism.

Yesterday The Washington Post reported on the growing number of pharmacists who, on religious grounds, refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control or morning-after pills. These pharmacists talk of personal belief; but the effect is to undermine laws that make these drugs available. And let me make a prediction: soon, wherever the religious right is strong, many pharmacists will be pressured into denying women legal drugs.

And it won't stop there. There is a nationwide trend toward "conscience" or "refusal" legislation. Laws in Illinois and Mississippi already allow doctors and other health providers to deny virtually any procedure to any patient. Again, think of how such laws expose doctors to pressure and intimidation.

But the big step by extremists will be an attempt to eliminate the filibuster, so that the courts can be packed with judges less committed to upholding the law than Mr. Greer.

We can't count on restraint from people like Mr. DeLay, who believes that he's on a mission to bring a "biblical worldview" to American politics, and that God brought him a brain-damaged patient to help him with that mission.

What we need - and we aren't seeing - is a firm stand by moderates against religious extremism. Some people ask, with justification, Where are the Democrats? But an even better question is, Where are the doctors fiercely defending their professional integrity? I think the American Medical Association disapproves of politicians who second-guess medical diagnoses based on video images - but the association's statement on the Schiavo case is so timid that it's hard to be sure.

The closest parallel I can think of to current American politics is Israel. There was a time, not that long ago, when moderate Israelis downplayed the rise of religious extremists. But no more: extremists have already killed one prime minister, and everyone realizes that Ariel Sharon is at risk.

America isn't yet a place where liberal politicians, and even conservatives who aren't sufficiently hard-line, fear assassination. But unless moderates take a stand against the growing power of domestic extremists, it can happen here.

I see the Schiavos will have another day in court & they have the support of Laura Bush, who is headed to Afghanistan. I just won't comment.

This is the text of my letter to you know who.

Senator Rick Santorum
Dear Senator,

I am a constituent from Pennsylvania. I am writing to you today with my concerns regarding the safety and preservation of the filibuster. I know that the majority leader has expressed interest in using the nuclear option in order to prevent filibustering during the confirmation of judges for the federal bench. I am asking you to preserve the filibuster.

The nuclear option is just as ominous as it sounds. It is a drastic step that in the long run will not serve the country and its people. The nuclear option is a measure that will allow the majority to rubber stamp judges, rather than truly explore their worthiness for the bench. When considering a candidate for the federal bench, if they were not confirmed on during their last nomination, are you doing them any favor now by admitting that in order to confirm them now, you have to lower the bar? Does that not make them suspect in their worthiness for a lifetime position?

You are up for re-election next year. There are a good many voters who consider themselves Democrats and Independents. You are called on to represent all the citizens of Pennsylvania. You are enjoying a majority in your party, but is it so hard to understand that you cannot serve only the majority in Washington and then claim to care about all of the citizens of your state if you do not act and vote for all of us.

You carry party loyalty to an extreme with disregard for the people who are troubled by your record already. The nuclear option, if you see fit to back it, will be just one more slap to the people who find that you are working always to silence us and marginalize us. It is unwise of you to continue to vote the party line when you will be asking the people of this state to allow you to speak for us in Washington.

I ask you, just because the nuclear option is available to you, is it wise to use it? Is it wise to enjoy your majority status to the point of acting like an avenging mobster, rather than a statesman? Would you shut off debate rather than admitting other voices to speak? Can you not confirm these judges in a time honored fashion, thereby giving them true legitimacy? A judge confirmed using the muscle of the nuclear option would be a judge forced upon us, rather than honestly voted on. Do you fear that your powers of speech could not sway a vote from the minority, and rather than facing a defeat, you would use a nuclear method to achieve your goals?

Nuclear options indicate that you would not hesitate to decimate, destroy. Nuclear options mean that you would use a drastic weapon on a tradition that stands in you way. We all know how much damage a nuclear weapon can do. You hold in your hand the power to cause that destruction. Do you want to be a weapon of mass destruction? It might be very easy to launch a nuclear option, but you need to ask yourself, is it the right thing to do, and how much damage do you want to be responsible for?

Thank you,

Great letter!!!

Same letter to Arlen Specter, with appropriate changes.......

Senator Arlen Specter
Dear Senator,

May I begin this letter with the wish that you are maintaining your strength during your treatment for your illness? Having had cancer myself, I know that treatment is draining, and it is my hope that you are well, and continue to get better. I hope you beat it, as I did.

I am a constituent from Pennsylvania. I am writing to you today with my concerns regarding the safety and preservation of the filibuster. I know that the majority leader has expressed interest in using the nuclear option in order to prevent filibustering during the confirmation of judges for the federal bench. I am asking you to preserve the filibuster.

The nuclear option is just as ominous as it sounds. It is a drastic step that in the long run will not serve the country and its people. The nuclear option is a measure that will allow the majority to rubber stamp judges, rather than truly explore their worthiness for the bench. When considering a candidate for the federal bench, if they were not confirmed on during their last nomination, are you doing them any favor now by admitting that in order to confirm them now, you have to lower the bar? Does that not make them suspect in their worthiness for a lifetime position?

You are known as a moderate in the Republican Party. The nuclear option has nothing to do with moderation, and everything to do with extremism. It is an option that you have a responsibility to denounce. Your position in the Judiciary committee demands that you exercise every bit of the moderation that you profess. How could you do less than to speak out against an option that speaks of destroying a tradition that you have been upholding and respecting for five terms?
Will you stand by and let the filibuster be buried? Or will you speak out to save it, and insist that the healthiness of debate must be preserved?

I ask you, just because the nuclear option is available to you, is it wise to use it? Does a statesman need a nuclear option? Would you shut off debate rather than admitting other voices to speak? Can you not confirm these judges in a time honored fashion, thereby giving them true legitimacy? A judge confirmed using the muscle of the nuclear option would be a judge forced upon us, rather than honestly voted on. Do you fear that your powers of speech could not sway a vote from the minority, and rather than facing a defeat, you would use a nuclear method to achieve your goals?

Nuclear options indicate that you would not hesitate to decimate, destroy. Nuclear options mean that you would use a drastic weapon on a tradition that stands in you way. We all know how much damage a nuclear weapon can do. You hold in your hand the power to cause that destruction. Do you want to be a weapon of mass destruction? It might be very easy to launch a nuclear option, but you need to ask yourself, is it the right thing to do, and how much damage do you want to be responsible for?

Thank you,

People for the American Way has an online petition to save the filibuster, along with a list of 24 senators who could be crucial to the vote. Find out if your senator is on the list and make contact today!!

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=17698

The 24 target senators.......

Sen. Richard Shelby (Alabama)
Sen. Ted Stevens (Alaska)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)
Sen. John McCain (Arizona)
Sen. Richard Lugar (Indiana)
Sen. Charles Grassley (Iowa)
Sen. Pat Roberts (Kansas)
Sen. Jim Bunning (Kentucky)
Sen. Mitch McConnell (KY)
Sen. Olympia Snowe (Maine)
Sen. Susan Collins (Maine)
Sen. Thad Cochran (Miss)
Sen. Chuck Hagel (Nebraska)
Sen. John Sununu (NH)
Sen. Judd Gregg (NH)
Sen. Pete Domenici (NM)
Sen. Mike DeWine (Ohio)
Sen. George Voinovich (Ohio)
Sen. Gordon Smith (Oregon)
Sen. Arlen Specter (Penn)
Sen. Lincoln Chafee (RI)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC)
Sen. Lamar Alexander (TN)
Sen. John Warner (Virginia)

I'm not sure if it's Center for the American Way or People for the American Way, but EITHER WAY, they are beginning an educational campaign today to inform everyone that DEMOCRACY is founded by two or more voices, not by one party pushing their own agenda without fairly representing everyone in the United States.

They get it! Democracy includes all voices, two or more parties, and many religions.

Republicans may love that they have the majority, but as the majority they owe utmost respect to our constitution and our democracy.

Spread democracy here--before you export it to oil-rich nations.

Here is an article by Scott Ritter. Too many good points to give a snippet.

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/21631/?cID=16#c16

This is about the border problem with Mexico and deals with what those who try to cross the border face.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/21632/

Molly Ivans on the Bush energy policy.

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/21622/
[snip]
I'm tired of arguing about whether Bush is so ignorant he doesn't know that he is cutting alternative energy programs and subsidizing oil companies or so fiendishly clever that he knows and doesn't care what he says. In the end, it doesn't make any difference. You get wretched policy either way.

Powell: U.S. was ‘too loud’ pushing Iraq war
Ex-diplomat says mistakes made, but he's glad Saddam is gone

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7334576/

-snip-

“Yes, the insurgency is much bigger than we anticipated. But I’m glad that Saddam is in jail,” he said in the German article.

Powell said he had argued for a diplomatic solution against Cabinet colleagues such as Vice President Dick Cheney, who did not believe that diplomacy would work.

“The situation with Saddam Hussein had to be resolved, either by taming him or by removing him by military means,” he said. “I’m sure that the Vice President’s view from the very beginning was: we’ll never solve this through diplomatic means.”

Why is the White House Scrubbing Its Social Security Privatization Events?

March 30, 2005

The deception and misinformation efforts of the White House are starting to catch up with the president and his band of merry privatizers. Bush is now on day 28 of a 60 day taxpayer-financed Social Security privatization tour, and the results are not pretty. With the president's Social Security job approval numbers in the red zone, the White House is now resorting to comical, politburo-designed "town hall" events to prop up his ill-conceived plans for dismantling the system.

The White House is forcibly removing dissenters from public, taxpayer-funded Social Security events. Three Denver residents report "they were forcibly removed from one of President Bush's town meetings on Social Security because they displayed a bumper sticker on their car condemning the administration's Middle East policies," according to the Washington Post. White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan claimed the person who removed them was a volunteer staffer who was concerned "they might try to disrupt the event." The three individuals "said nothing and did not sport T-shirts or signs criticizing the president or his policies." McClellan added, "There is plenty of opportunity outside of the event to express their views."

The White House is blacklisting Americans who disagree with the president's efforts to privatize Social Security. The Denver purge was not an isolated incident. Before a February event in Fargo, North Dakota "more than 40 residents were placed on a "black list" of people who were not to receive tickets because they had expressed opposition to Bush's policies," according to the LA Times. The White House also blamed this incident on "an over-eager volunteer."

Why is the president going to such lengths to suppress dissent? Because Americans don't buy his plans to privatize Social Security. The White House's modus operandi since the Iraq war has been to spin a thick web of lies and misinformation about intended policies with the hope of steamrolling the opposition before the public catches on. Not this time. Americans have wisely avoided the president's den of deception and have spoken loudly: "Don't privatize Social Security!"
Daily Talking Points is a product of the American Progress Action Fund.

To visit the Talking Points archives, please go here:
http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/pp.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=134667&tr=y&auid=794582

Good morning, Filibloggers,

How are we doing today? Have we expressed our individual opinions fully enough yet?

Have we informed our representatives of our concerns? I see Tutterfly has been busy...

As a resident of the District of Columbia (aka The Last Colony), I need to borrow a couple of Senators from another state, so I will be borrowing from the list provided by PFAW. Please feel free to join me in letting your concerns be heard.

Think about the future here...

And wouldn't the Republican party be deeply concerned about losing the filibuster if and when they are the minority party? I think so...

The Senators need to think about the future as well.

OT. Wolfowitz in Europe today, looking for nomination backing???

Go to translation bottom thread.

http://permanent.nouvelobs.com/economie/20050330.OBS2569.html

This article is on LUTD and showed up in my in box.
By former Sen. Bill Bradley

I hope Dollar Bill (a reflection of his basketball talent) hangs around.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/30/opinion/30bradley.html?

[snip]
A party based on charisma has no long-term impact. Think of our last charismatic leader, Bill Clinton. He was president for eight years. He was the first Democrat to be re-elected since Franklin Roosevelt. He was smart, skilled and possessed great energy. But what happened? At the end of his tenure in the most powerful office in the world, there were fewer Democratic governors, fewer Democratic senators, members of Congress and state legislators and a national party that was deep in debt. The president did well. The party did not. Charisma didn't translate into structure.

I have started to include this as a "signature" on all my emails, including those to my Operation Democracy group.

"The link below will take you to an action site:
http://www.democracycellproject.net/

"If you don't have much time and you want to see what actions are being taken on any given day by any segment of the progressive family, this is the place to go. If it's an action being taken by Dems or progressives and you want to be part of it, you'll find the info here on the blog or in the forums. United We Stand never has so much meaning."

Love this new ad attacking SS privitaization. Message: Ask the kids Congressman, if they are willing to take their parents in when SS collapses from W's reforms.

The True Majority spot is a 60-second "Harry and Louise"-style ad called "The Kids," set to run in Iowa's 1st, 2nd, and 4th congressional districts.

Script for "The Kids":

Female voice: This is terrible Frank. When President Bush and his Wall Street pals privatized Social Security, they never told us we could actually lose our money.

Male voice: Please don't cry, Honey. But that's the stock market for you, it goes up, but now, that we need the money, it's down.

Female voice: How much of our Social Security have we lost in the market?

Male voice: I can't even think about it. I can't believe that this is what privatization did to Social Security — instead of guaranteed benefits, now we've got this mess, Social Insecurity.

Male announcer voice: This could be you when you're getting ready to retire. Only Social Security, and not the stock market, can guarantee you the retirement benefits you've worked for all your life. For decades, millions of retired Americans have received the monthly checks they counted on. By privatizing Social Security, President Bush is gambling with our futures.

Female voice: Frank, what are we going to do?

Male voice: Maybe the kids will take us in.

Announcer voice: Call Congressman Jim Leach . . . and ask him to oppose the scheme to privatize Social Security. This ad has been paid for by TrueMajority ACTION.org, which is solely responsible for its content.

sp correction: has should be had. Thanks.

MONTGOMERY, Alabama (AP) -- Former U.S. Sen. Howell Heflin, a popular Alabama politician who served three terms in Washington, has died, lawmakers announced Tuesday. He was 83.

Heflin's death was announced on the floor of the state Senate, which held a moment of silence.

Heflin, a Democrat, was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1978 and retired after 18 years. He served on the Judiciary and Ethics committees and the panel that investigated the Iran-Contra scandal. He was viewed as the chamber's top authority on ethics, heading the ethics panel for nearly a decade when Democrats were in the majority.

There is no excuse for the filabuster to be killed by the nuclear option while the country sits glued to the television staring down the barrel of a feeding tube.

Paying attention to the convenient cover being overplayed in Florida will catch people feeling mighty foolish as yet another vestige of democracy is murdered.

What happens in Florida is less important than what is happening in Washington D.C. The Senate should be the focus right now. Senator Frist should be the one in the glare of the spotlight.

I cannot stress enough how important it is to save the filabuster. If we end up with judges who are slaves to corporate interests, and enemies of the environment, and we did NOTHING to stop it, then we will be once again lamenting after the fact how bad things are.

You have to take action now, speak up now. No one will care about what is said when it's too late. If you haven't taken five minutes to practice democracy today, isn't it time that you did?

Looks like Howard Kurtz is continuing his GOP propoganda machine.

Doubts Raised On Schiavo Memo
Web Critics Question Authenticity Of 'Talking Points' Aimed at GOP

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 30, 2005; Page C01

Bloggers are swarming around a new target: the Terri Schiavo "talking points."

"Fresh from declaring victory over CBS News and its discredited National Guard memos about President Bush, some of the same bloggers are raising questions about a strategy memo, first reported by ABC News and The Washington Post, that cast the Schiavo right-to-die case as a partisan opportunity for Republicans to stick it to Democrats."

Tut... AWESOME work!

I wonder where all "Save Terri" folks come down on this story???

Soldier calls killing injured Iraqi 'honorable'
U.S. commander testifies to shooting 'to put him out of his misery'

The Associated Press
March 30, 2005

WIESBADEN, Germany - A U.S. Army tank company commander told a military court Wednesday that he shot a gravely wounded, unarmed Iraqi man “to put him out of his misery,” saying the killing was “honorable.”

Taking the stand for the first time, Capt. Rogelio “Roger” Maynulet, 30, described the events that led him to fire twice upon the Iraqi, maintaining that the man was too badly injured to survive.

“He was in a state that I didn’t think was justified — I had to put him out of his misery,” Maynulet said. He argued that the killing “was the right thing to do, it was the honorable thing to do.”

Prosecutors at the court-martial say Maynulet violated military rules of engagement by shooting an Iraqi who was wounded and unarmed.

Read more... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7336185/

And while Kurtz shills for the rethugs, look who is not. Must read if you haven't already.

March 30, 2005
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
In the Name of Politics
By JOHN C. DANFORTH

t. Louis — BY a series of recent initiatives, Republicans have transformed our party into the political arm of conservative Christians. The elements of this transformation have included advocacy of a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, opposition to stem cell research involving both frozen embryos and human cells in petri dishes, and the extraordinary effort to keep Terri Schiavo hooked up to a feeding tube.

Standing alone, each of these initiatives has its advocates, within the Republican Party and beyond. But the distinct elements do not stand alone. Rather they are parts of a larger package, an agenda of positions common to conservative Christians and the dominant wing of the Republican Party.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/30/opinion/30danforth.html?pagewanted=print&position=

A couple of good diaries today at dkos..........

Hot New Report on 'Democrat Voter Intimidation' Just Released!
by lapin
[Subscribe]

Wed Mar 30th, 2005 at 10:53:03 PST

If you're an RNC Team Leader like me, you may have recieved this e-mail recently:

Dear Lapin,
Election after election, Democrats have cried Republican voter intimidation as one of their campaign tactics.

But like so many other Democrat claims, this falsehood is shattered by the truth.

More below the jump...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/30/13533/6929

OOPS-multi-tasking & forgot this one......

ePluribus Media. Would you like to help?
by ePluribus Media
[Subscribe]

Wed Mar 30th, 2005 at 08:53:27 PST

Many hands make light work.
If there is one adage that we at ePluribus Media have taken to heart, it is that one. In fact, the evolution of the Gannon case, the growth of ePluribus Media and the future of Community (Open Source) Journalism itself rests on the foundation of active community involvement. This is true of the investigations, the stories and organizational operation.

The journalism paradigm is changing. We (ePluribus Media) are in the process of building a new kind of Media organization. One that runs on the energy of the community, not owned by corporations and big business. Stories and investigations originating with you, the people. FYI, we are a non-profit, 501(c)4 organization.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/30/115327/562

The Filibuster....Social Security...Terry Schiavo...The Gop is trying to spread its Battles across borders, trying to divide and weaken opposition to this grab for Political Power.
The grab for Power is the common denominator in these three issues.

The Filibuster to allow religious right movement to place their choice of judges in vacant seats without due diligence or proper vetting ;
The reason we have Minority party is to represent the people that do not have a voice in Government. If the minority party is not given a voice, the Nation loses it as well.

Social Security. This Administration is attempting to overhaul the backbone of the Retirement system. The people will have Trillions in debt added, and Wall street will rejoice in its newfound source of management fee's;
What the Bush Administration is doing is not Social, and Certainly isnt Secure.

Terry Schiavo. This Family is being used as a Pawn in a precedent setting legislative move to overturn the Decision of a State Court. This is a tragedy all the way around, and quite disgusting to see Senators and Congressman led by the nose from the Religious Right;
This is not the 17th century, and the republican party are not Puritans. They are Elected officials sworn to uphold and Defend the Constitution of the United States. If they cannot perform to the Oath, they must resign their office.

'Mr. Smith' joins filibuster fray
People for the American Way ad campaign targets uncommitted GOP senators in battle over Bush judicial nominees

By Tom Curry
National affairs writer
MSNBC
Updated: 4:45 p.m. ET March 30, 2005

WASHINGTON - Jimmy Stewart has joined the partisan combat over President Bush’s judicial nominees; Stewart, that is, in the fictional role of Sen. Jefferson Smith, the starry-eyed freshman lawmaker in the 1939 movie, “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.”

The advocacy group People for the American Way, (PFAW) founded by Hollywood producer Norman Lear, launched a television ad campaign Wednesday featuring a scene from the movie in which Sen. Jefferson Smith filibusters on the Senate floor to block a corrupt pork-barrel project.

“Wild horses aren’t going to drag me off this floor until those people have heard everything I’ve got to say,” declares Stewart.

PFAW’s ad campaign is aimed at seven Republican senators in a bid to preserve the Democrats’ ability to filibuster Bush nominees. Altogether PFAW plans to spend $5 million on TV ads and other advocacy on the issue.

The Senate is likely to vote in the next few weeks on a move by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to lower the threshold for ending filibusters from 60 votes to 51.

Using parliamentary procedures, Republicans could make the change by a simple majority vote.

Starting in 2003, Senate Democrats have used filibuster threats to prevent ten of Bush’s appeals court nominees from getting up-or-down Senate confirmation votes.

Under Senate rules, it takes 60 senators to agree to end debate, which means that 41 can prevent a nomination from being brought to a vote.

Lear told reporters the filibuster “has worked for 200 years for both parties.” He added that, “America works best when no one party holds absolute power,” an idea also espoused in the TV ad by Los Angeles firefighter Ted Nonini.

“The United States Senate is fast approaching one of the most dramatic moments in its history, and quite frankly, in the history of the United States,” said PFAW leader Ralph Neas, at a Washington press conference Wednesday at which the ad was unveiled.

Neas played a major role in the defeat of President Reagan's Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork in 1987.

“What I’m afraid of is that the Senate and how it has operated for over 200 years is in great jeopardy, and therefore, our democracy is at risk” Neas said.

He noted that he had served as an aide to Republican senators Ed Brooke of Massachusetts and David Durenberger of Minnesota in the 1970s.

Neas said Frist and “others on the radical right” were intent on lowering the filibuster threshold. “If they do so, it will obliterate 200 years of how the Senate has operated.” The filibuster, Neas said, is necessary “to make sure there are no abuses of power by the majority party.”

Read more... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7337645/

Marc,

Abuses of power by the majority party?!!! Sounds like Bullwinkle--he's been sleeping for the last 30 years!

Watergate
Iran Contra Affair
Bash Clinton-gate
President Bush completely over the edge of decency gate (Iraq gate, Condigate, torturegate, propranda gate, stolen elections and selections gate)
Tom Delay Gate
Terri gate
....

(and the list goes on...)

I've been listening to AAR today.

It saddens me that the neocons have so successfully distracted progressives from the real issues that face us: a mind boggling deficit that can only increase if we continue as we are, a war on foreign soil where we are the invaders, the attempt to stack the courts with extremist anti-tolerance judges, the need for election reform, the need for media reform, and the need for universal health care. And perhaps vital to each of those, the need to take back the Senate in 2006.

We are like bees to honey. Yes, I repeat myself. The Republicans throw out a few already discredited politicians and leaders and have them say a few words about something to get us all riled up, maybe even have them present an unpassable bill in congress. We predictably take the bait.

We need to focus on the real issues.

In my area, anti-neocons are gearing up for the 2006 elections. We are cleaning up our database, making house calls to identify Democrats and volunteers, and working on various projects at the local level to identify what distractions the neocons will be using against us during the next campaign. I hope our spokespeople get back on track soon - we need their help.

This administration are a bunch of crooks - they have stolen our tax money and thrown it away on the sands of Iraq, where the blood of our children continues to spill. They did this in service to their own greed. And yet, instead of hammering them with demands for answers about what is really going on in Iraq, about when the rest of the intelligence report will be released, when our kids will be brought home, etc, we are all running around in a tizzy because a handful of public figures are waxing ridiculous over one family's struggle with a personal healthcare decision. There is no principle at stake here. The law is the law, and like VP Gore said, we are a nation of laws.

In truth, Republicans would never pass legislation that required we as a nation prolong life as long as possible in cases like that of Ms. Schaivo, and by extension, in every case. It would set an impossible precedent. Insurance companies simply would not allow it. Imagine for a minute the costs.

We should let the neocons explain this to their religious extremist base themselves, instead of trying to fight for some nebulous principle. Every once in a while, we need to call their bluff. This was one of those times, and we missed it.

Let Bush repeal what he signed into law in Texas, and instead, "choose life." Let the Republicans take from families the right to allow a loved one to die, and instead, keep each and every damaged human being alive as long as possible, at the expense of our health care providers. Let these neocons deal with the inevitable clash between the profit-driven insurance companies and their intolerant, fanatical base.

These people have been walking up both sides of every issue and getting away with it. And we've been their cover.

Progressives need to stay out of this. JMHO.