« No Title Needed... | Main | The Captivity Diaries - How Bad Fashion Saved Me »
The Village People President
Is he President of The United States, or is he auditioning for the 1970's disco band, The Village People? Let's review the costumes.
First up, the President as...
The Cheerleader
The Construction Worker
The Fighter Pilot
The Cowboy
The Fashionista
And The Latest...The Biker
And now ...
The Village People
So what is it--President or member of The Village People? You be the judge.
Dubya's certainly doing his best to come across as a "Macho Man".
It's not fun to say Y.U.S.A?
He's sort of like a dressup paper doll. You can keep switching the outfit but the brains inside it are just nonexistent.
The same is true for his policies. They dress them up in nice cozy words--like compassionate conservatives or blue skies again (or even their stolen phrase about Iraq that they stole for Kerry "adapt to win"--but when you look at the policies themselves, they're empty promises too. (Funny thing is that when Kerry says "Adapt to win" he means it. When they say it, they're just stealing another outfit to prance about the town in.)
Just like the dress up clothes are empty promises and empty words.
Posted by: Cyrano at August 18, 2006 10:44 AM
he may be trying to be a "Macho Man" but he is more of a caricature. I actually find tons of humor in these dress up episodes :) especially when he admits he doesnt ride Motorcycles lol. Since he has given the middle class very little to laugh about, I think of this as his contribution to us since he gives us nothing else.
Posted by: zzRevolution at August 18, 2006 10:58 AM
Amen
Oh and Casey one should go down in the DCP hall of fame as all time funniest Blog Header :) thanks for the laugh.
Would that make the remaining 33% The Village Idiot People?
Posted by: monkey at August 18, 2006 12:10 PM
It takes a village...
He DOES look alot like the Indian chief.
It's not fun to say Y.U.S.A?
Posted by: monkey at August 18, 2006 10:57 AM
=============================
Monkey:
I'm dead now. I won't be able to do anything but think about that song and laugh my head off.
So ends any serious intentions for getting my work done this morning.
Posted by: Fe at August 18, 2006 12:25 PM
Yes, but just think of the excorsize you're getting.
Hooked On Phonies
Posted by: monkey at August 18, 2006 12:38 PM
LOL TGIF
On an aside maybe John Stewarts people will pick up this thread lol.
Bush: Foundation of our economy is strong
President disappointed with France over Lebanon troop support level
Updated: 17 minutes ago
(AP)Camp David, MD - President Bush declared "the foundation of our economy is strong", in a statement following a meeting with his economic advisors at the president's Camp David retreat in Maryland. Though billed as an economic event, the bulk of the questions following the president's remarks pertained to other issues.
Responding to a question about Israel and Hezbollah, the president acknowledged it could take time for the people of Lebanon and the world to view the war between Israel and Hezbollah as a loss for the militant group.
"The first reaction of course of Hezbollah and its supporters is to declare victory. I guess I would have done the same thing if I were them," Bush said. "Sometimes it takes people awhile to come to the sober realization of what forces create stability and what don't. Hezbollah is a force of instability."
more on...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14406920/
"Sometimes it takes people awhile to come to the sober realization of what forces create stability and what don't. Hezbollah is a force of instability."
Perhaps it takes one to know one?
Posted by: monkey at August 18, 2006 01:16 PM
I think what he means is... Actually hats off to anyone who actually knows what this man means. Reading the papers this morning I have to wonder if Bush even knows what he means. He has issued statements that make no sense whatsoever on everything but the Ramsey case or have I missed it maybe his illegale wiretap program helped to catch the person no one is sure actually committed the crime yet.
One more thing the good news is that Bush is still happily using signing statements as he did with the Pension Bill yesterday and from what I read it appears the Supreme Court likes to know if the president has a veiw on these things called laws that the congress passes and hes signed. I am so glad its friday. Bush will be sunning himself at Camp David and hopefully silent for the weekend the man gives me a major pain where a pill can not reach.
NSA surveillance ruling
President Bush said those who agree with a federal judge that his warrantless surveillance program is unconstitutional "simply do not understand the nature of the world in which we live."
"This country of ours is at war," the president said Friday. "And we must give those whose responsibility it is to protect the United States the tools necessary to protect this country in a time of war."
The day before, a federal judge in Michigan struck down the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program, ruling it was an unconstitutional infringement on the right to privacy and free speech. Upon Bush's orders, the Justice Department appealed within hours.
"I strongly disagree with this decision. Strongly disagree," he said of the ruling by U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in a case brought by the American Civil Liberties Union.
Bush suggested he sees the issue as a politically potent one in a year when most of Congress is up for re-election, and GOP control of the Capitol is in danger.
"I made my position clear," he said. "It'll be interesting to see what other policymakers -- how other policymakers react."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14406920/
Watch Colin Powell sing "YMCA" while at an Asian security summit.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/multimedia/v/colinpowellymca.htm
This is for real.
Read about Bohemian Grove, where prominent Republican politicians have dressed up in drag for years.
http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/conspiracy/research/bohemianclub.html
Wish they would just get it out of their system.
Intelligence officials doubt Iran uranium claims, say Cheney receiving suspect briefings
by Larisa Alexandrovna
Published: Friday August 18, 2006
The Bush administration continues to bypass standard intelligence channels and use what some believe to be propaganda tactics to create a compelling case for war with Iran, US foreign experts and former US intelligence officials tell RAW STORY.
One former senior intelligence official is particularly concerned by private briefings that Vice President Dick Cheney is getting from former Office of Special Plans (OSP) Director, Abram Shulsky.
"Vice President Cheney is relying on personal briefings from Shulsky for current intelligence on Iran," said this intelligence official.
Shulsky, a leading Neoconservative and member for the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), headed the shadowy and secretive Department of Defense's OSP in the lead-up to the Iraq war -- helping to locate intelligence that would support the Bush administration's case for war with Iraq.
In an earlier report by Raw Story on an OSP spin-off dubbed the Iranian Directorate (ID), Lt. Col. Barry E. Venable -- a spokesman for the Pentagon -- confirmed that Shulsky was consulting for this new initiative as well.
"Mr. Shulsky continues in his position as Senior Advisor to the USD, focusing on Mid-East regional issues and the [global war on terror]," stated Venable.
Several foreign policy experts, who wish to remain anonymous, have expressed serious concern that much like the OSP, the ID is manipulating, cherry picking, and perhaps even -- as some suspect -- cooking intelligence to lead the U.S. into another conflict, this time with Iran.
"Cheney distrusts the information being disseminated by CIA on Iran," said one former senior intelligence official. "The reports assembled by the Iranian Directorate at the Pentagon differ significantly from the analysis produced by the Intelligence Community. The Pentagon Iranian Directorate relies on thin and unsupported reporting from foreign sources."
In the build-up to the Iraq war, Cheney relied on intelligence almost exclusively from the OSP, which leveled allegations that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. This was later debunked, but no OSP or DOD officials were held accountable for what many believe was a "deliberate effort" to mislead the nation into war.
New Uranium Allegations:
read more...
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Intelligence_officials_doubt_Iran_uranium_claims_0818.html
President Bush said those who agree with a federal judge that his warrantless surveillance program is unconstitutional "simply do not understand the nature of the world in which we live."
Posted by: monkey at August 18, 2006 01:42 PM
(Just catching up after stepping away from the computer & news for a couple of days...)
I just heard that bit on NPR & I thought he sounded particularly pissy, as if he's the only person in the world who "gets it" & the rest of us are the idiots. Guess you can believe anything you want when you're the "decider."
Interesting diary about other comments Macho Man (*) has made recently; the comments are good too.
(* hat tip to Cyrano for nailing this name!)
Bush Says We Just Don't Understand
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/8/18/161032/367
Also found another good diary about the Fear Factor...
Calling bullshit on the Fear mongers
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/8/17/135837/353
Posted by: madame defarge at August 18, 2006 05:47 PM
Time to sing along:
Hey! Hey! Hey, hey, hey!
Macho, macho man
This Prez got to be, a macho man
Macho, macho man
Boy George got to be a macho man!
Macho, macho man
The world's gone to hell, but we got macho man
Head is in the sand
George III got to be a macho man.
Iraq's in the can
Bill Kristol's got to be, a macho man
Iran, yes we can
Irving's dump got to be a macho man!
Macho, macho man
Cheney lacks a heart but he's a macho man
Macho, macho man
Tricky Dick got to be a macho man!
Cowards to a man
Every con tries to be a macho man
Macho, macho man
Every coward wants to be a macho man!
Every coward tries to be a macho man!
Every coward needs to be a macho man!
Posted by: Cyrano at August 18, 2006 06:52 PM
Most excellent. Better than the original.
Of course, I may not appreciate that tune in my head as I try to sleep tonight... ;=)
Posted by: monkey at August 18, 2006 01:42 PM
Great. Destroy American democracy in order to protect it.
Bin Laden is laughing all the way to the bank.
Of course, since the American people elected this a-hole TWICE, they deserve every bit of the suffering W causes them.
Read about Bohemian Grove, where prominent Republican politicians have dressed up in drag for years.
http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/conspiracy/research/bohemianclub.html
Wish they would just get it out of their system.
Posted by: DiAnne at August 18, 2006 03:06 PM
Sounds like "who wants to be the next Mann Coulter" contest to me...
From the New Yorker...a good read
SNAKE EYES
Issue of 2006-08-21
On February 27, 1968, Walter Cronkite, the longtime anchorman of the CBS Evening News and the gruff but kindly voice of what was then called Middle America, signed off his broadcast on an unusual note. Freshly returned from Vietnam, where the Tet offensive had just ended, Cronkite offered what he called “an analysis that must be speculative, personal, subjective.” “We have too often been disappointed by the optimism of the American leaders, both in Vietnam and Washington, to have faith any longer in the silver linings they find in the darkest clouds,” he said. “To say that we are mired in stalemate seems the only realistic yet unsatisfactory conclusion.” Like the famous issue of Life devoted to photographs of a week’s worth of American dead, Cronkite’s polite demurral came to symbolize the long migration of opposition to the war in Vietnam from the fringe—the campus firebrands, the radical clerics, the flowers-in-gun-barrels hippies, the papier-mâché puppeteers—to the wide, upholstered center of American political life.
--snip--
“It is now obvious that we are not midwifing democracy in Iraq,” Thomas L. Friedman wrote, in the August 4th edition of the Times. “We are baby-sitting a civil war.” Friedman may not be another Walter Lippmann (just as any number of Stewarts, Olbermanns, O’Reillys, and Coopers don’t quite add up to a Cronkite), but he is the most influential foreign-affairs columnist in the country, and from the beginning he has been a critical supporter of the war. His defection is a bellwether. “The Administration now has to admit what anyone—including myself—who believed in the importance of getting Iraq right has to admit,” he wrote. “Whether for Bush reasons or Arab reasons, it is not happening, and we can’t throw more good lives after good lives.” In a Washington Post column a day earlier, the relentlessly centrist David S. Broder, citing his colleague Thomas E. Ricks’s new book, “Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq,” admitted that “the hope for victory is gone” and deplored “the answer from Bush,” which he characterized this way: “Carry on. Do not waver. And do not question the logic of prolonging the agony.”
--snip--
Three and a half years ago, on the eve of the invasion of Iraq, commentators across the board agreed that the coming war would be a gamble—“the greatest shake of the dice any President has voluntarily engaged in since Harry Truman dropped the bomb on Japan,” Thomas Friedman called it. The metaphor came up again and again as the war approached. “This is the biggest gamble any President has taken in my lifetime,” a foreign-policy specialist at the Heritage Foundation said. “By accident or design, President Bush has allowed Iraq to become the gamble of a lifetime,” the Washington Post noted. Some viewed the gamble with apprehension. “Whatever this war’s effect on the region, globally it may be an even bigger roll of the dice for the United States than either its proponents or critics have argued,” Charles W. Freeman, Jr., who was the first President Bush’s Ambassador to Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War, wrote. Others were thrilled by the audacity, the swagger, the sheer “High Noon” moral clarity of it all. “This is Texas poker, with the President putting everything on Iraq,” a Republican senator told the columnist Robert Novak, with relish.
It is in the nature of gambling that the gamble may lose. The dice have now been well and truly rolled, and they have come up snake eyes. The war’s sole real gain—the overthrow of the murderous Saddam Hussein regime—is mocked by the chaos and suffering that have overwhelmed millions of Iraqis, whose country is again a republic of fear. The concrete losses are horrific: nearly three thousand American and “coalition” troops killed; thousands more maimed; scores of thousands of Iraqi civilians dead; a third of a trillion dollars burned through. So are the less tangible ones: the unprecedented levels of anti-Americanism throughout the Muslim world and Europe; the self-inflicted loss of America’s moral prestige; the neglect of real nuclear dangers, in Iran and North Korea, while chimeras were chased in Iraq. The neoconservative project of a friendly, democratic Middle East, with Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace, is worse than a charred ruin—it is a flaming inferno.
After the defeat of Joseph Lieberman in last week’s senatorial primary in Connecticut, spokesmen for the Bush Administration and the Republican Party sought to portray the result as an expression of opposition to the struggle against Islamist terrorism. It was not. Virtually all those who voted against Lieberman, and many, probably most, of those who voted for him, oppose the Iraq war, as does a solid majority—sixty per cent, according to a CNN poll released last Wednesday—of the American public. But they oppose it because, among other reasons, they believe that it has harmed, not helped, that larger struggle. At the end of the week, after British authorities foiled what was evidently a large-scale plot to destroy transatlantic airliners and murder thousands of passengers, President Bush called the plot “a stark reminder that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists who will use any means to destroy those of us who love freedom.” But the war in Iraq is wholly irrelevant to the means chosen by the London terrorists, and the means that thwarted them—dogged police work, lawful surveillance, international coöperation—are precisely those which have been gratuitously starved or stymied on account of the material, political, and human resources that have been, and continue to be, wasted in Iraq. Why not change the game to one that relies less on gambling and bluff and more on wisdom, planning, and (in every sense) intelligence?
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/articles/060821ta_talk_hertzberg
Another first, with more than a dash of irony...
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- By granting absolution to a convicted moonshiner, George W. Bush also earned the unique distinction of becoming the first president to pardon a cast member of the 1972 Academy Award-nominated movie "Deliverance."
more on...
http://tinyurl.com/l6zoe
Hu from China is right. Just shut up. Be Quiet. It is much, much better. (with regards to the American neocons)
Heard The Decider on the drive home - telling me I don't understand the nature of the world in which we live.
Earlier I saw a guy with a bumper sticker on the back of his car that said, "I am in charge of my own perception." He had a bunch of Post-It notes on his steering wheel.
I decided I'd rather have him for President. Really.
I just got back from my first day at Camp Wellstone here in Houston. Our first speaker was Eric Peterson one of Wellstone's campaign managers and Craig Veroga who works with Harry Reid as his communications staff. Our first project was to put together a 1 minute radio spot in 5 different groups crafting different messages to target different markets and executing a strategy to market our fictional candidate. They used a publication called Politics the Wellstone Way a great teaching tool I would recommend others get a hold of. While they announced this is their last 3 day camp for this election cycle I would highly recommend it going forward to any of you looking to work in or help manage campaigns.
Just received this & I notice it's from a local weekly. Click on my name.
1. Go to www.family.org and you will see their home page.
2. Once you're at the home page, look for the "Resources" link in the blue bar on the left-hand side, right above the "Search" box, and click it.
3. Under the "Resource Category" menu on the left-hand side, you'll notice categories such as "Homosexuality." Go ahead and click that for shits and giggles.
4. It's time to start shopping! Scroll down a little bit and feel the homophobia flow. How about a nice copy of A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality? Go ahead and click the "Add to Cart" button.
5. Now comes a tough decision: Do you have the book sent to yourself so you can sell it on eBay for cash (my personal favorite) or do you keep it on your mantel as a high-larious conversation piece to point at and laugh when your friends and family come over? Or do you send it to a jerk? I always opt for sending it to myself. Yes, you may end up on the Focus on the Family mailing list (though I've been doing this for some time and have never received anything beyond what I ordered), but reading Focus on the Family's junk mail is a good way to keep tabs on their activities and it will cost them even more money in postage.
Please note: Focus on the Family won't send you more than $100 worth of materials for free in any given shopping trip, so be sure to keep it reasonable and return often.
6. Select "Add New Shipping Address" and click "Proceed to Checkout." Or, hell, continue to shop and pick up a box set of The Chronicles of Narnia on CD.
7. The next screen will ask you to sign up for an account and give your information. Don't worry, they don't ask for your credit-card number. Enter whatever name and address you like, because you won't be paying.
8. Once you've filled out all the required fields (you can also create a fake e-mail account if you're super paranoid), click "Proceed to Checkout" one more time. You'll now find yourself at the "Here Is Your Cart" field. Annoying thing alert: You may have to reenter your info again after this field to actually set up your account. But just keep going until you get to the "How Much Would You Like to Donate?" page.
9. So, how much would you like to donate? Zero dollars, obviously. Don't be fooled by the field in the lower-right-hand corner that shows you the suggested donation amounts. Simply select "Enter other total amount" and enter 0.00 as the amount you would like to pay. (Don't put in a dollar sign or it will ask you for credit-card information!) Proceed to checkout.
10. You'll now be led to a screen that will try to make you feel guilty about the amount you haven't donated. But don't feel bad! Just proceed to checkout again.
11. Jesus! Here you are on the twelfth step and you still don't have your self-hatred materials! And you thought preventing homosexuality was supposed to be easy! Click "Checkout Now" and you're done.
Congratulations!
You have just removed a few dollars from the coffers of a major anti-gay organization. You can further capitalize on your brief investment of time by selling the item/s on eBay. You'd be surprised how much money you can get—a friend of mine makes a few hundred extra dollars every few months on this perfectly legal activity.
Posted by: DiAnne at August 19, 2006 12:43 AM
Thanks DiAnne as always - I will post this to a lesbian board.
Ray McGovern | The Constitution: Checking a Would-Be King
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081806A.shtml
Ray McGovern writes that yesterday Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, "ruled that Bush's eavesdropping program is 'obviously in violation of the Fourth Amendment' as well as the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which expressly forbids eavesdropping on Americans without a court warrant."
Larry C. Johnson | Bush's Weapon of Mass Deception
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081806B.shtml
"It is a week since news broke in London about an alleged plot to blow up nine commercial jetliners, and there are emerging indicators that Bush and Blair exaggerated the truth about the actual readiness of the so-called plot," writes Larry C. Johnson.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060819/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush
Bush blasts court ruling on surveillance
CAMP DAVID, Md. - President Bush on Friday criticized a federal court ruling that said his warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional, declaring that opponents "do not understand the nature of the world in which we live."
"I strongly disagree with that decision, strongly disagree," Bush said, striking his finger on a podium to underscore his point. "That's why I instructed the Justice Department to appeal immediately, and I believe our appeals will be upheld."
{{{Errrrr... No, DimWit. We quite understand the world in which we live; you've rendered our world virtually FUBAR. You and your administration are the ones who are the paranoid criminals...! It's you who would like to do things like spy on Democratic leaders at the same time as you *say* you want to spy on criminals - and criminals, BTW, are often smart enough to communicate by trackless means, so your illegal and unconstitutional wiretapping can't be used for much of anything that will produce any positive results for law enforcement. We remember Watergate and the Iran-Contra hearings, even if you have no memory for reasonably recent history...! Regarding the flight suit that you never earned the right to wear when you went AWOL, Captain Codpiece: Too bad you don't have balls enough to fill it with anything.... How many bags of cotton balls did you have to stuff the thing with to make it look like there's something there?}}}
Ira,
I hope you're taking great notes. We're going to have to pick your brain on this.
re: DiAnne's post: You have just removed a few dollars from the coffers of a major anti-gay organization. You can further capitalize on your brief investment of time by selling the item/s on eBay. You'd be surprised how much money you can get. A friend of mine makes a few hundred extra dollars every few months on this perfectly legal activity.
Yeah, why let a little think like morality stop you in this scam? BTW, just because you don't get caught, does not make it "perfectly legal". This is stealing, and in your heart you know it. Since your anti-Christianity message is making these organizations more money than ever, I suppose you do have to resort to a scam. It is very fitting. BTW, were any of you lefties who claim to be Christians offended by DiAnne's use of Jesus' name in promoting this scam? Didn't think so.
Posted by: thinkmuch63 at August 19, 2006 08:43 AM
No numbnuts, I am far more offended by the killing and dismembering of hundreds of thousands of innocents worldwide in the name of a compassionate christian president who claims that God told him it was ok.
I am WAY more offended by the complete perversion of what I BELIEVED to be a completely beautiful religion based on the teachings of the PRINCE OF PEACE.
And finally, I am wayyyyyy more offended by the likes of you, who offers nothing in the way of constructive, productive dialogue, but spouts hate riddled, divisive musings that somehow make you feel better about supporting a completely and thouroughly detestable ideology.
Peddle your brand of morality somewhere else, or better yet, why dont you and all those like you start by practicing what you preach.
You should be completely ashamed of yourself.
But Jesus still loves you, so what the hell, eh?
This is a very good column and I have snipped only one paragraph from it.
August 19, 2006
Guest Columnist
What Is K Street’s Project?
By THOMAS FRANK
But K Street is not neutral. From all its complex machinations emerges a discernible political project best described by Joseph Goulden in “The Superlawers” back in 1972, when the lobbying business was so many acorns beside today’s forest of towering oaks. The “Washington lawyers,” Goulden wrote, had over the years “directed a counterrevolution unique in world economic history. Their mission was not to destroy the New Deal, and its successor reform acts, but to conquer them, and to leave their structures intact so they could be transformed into instruments for the amassing of monopolistic corporate power.” (Goulden, by the way, is no radical: he is a former director at the very conservative press watchdog Accuracy in Media.)
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/08/19/opinion/19frank.html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print
"GOP Goes to Work for Joe Lieberman"
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081906Z.shtml
"Facing Senator Joseph I. Lieberman's independent candidacy, Republican officials at the state and national level have made the extraordinary decision to abandon their official candidate, and some are actively working to help Mr. Lieberman win in November."
BTW, just because you don't get caught, does not make it "perfectly legal".
Posted by: thinkmuch63 at August 19, 2006 08:43 AM
Holy crap, you just summed up the entire Dubya legacy, while actually doing a pretty good impersonation of him at the same time.
Relax, Lie Down.
Posted by: thinkmuch63 at August 19, 2006 08:43 AM
How funny is it that your posting handle is totally contradictory to your post?
If you really think about it, which those who are filled with rabid hatred are unable to do, the "christian" organization that you are so concerned about has made a conscious decision to give away products. There had to be discussions in their group to either fully charge or ask for donations.
The fact that they/you claim to be "christian" in no way absolves them/you of a hate filled position based on fear and misunderstanding. Using Christianity to defend abhorant policy has been used before, and the world has condemned it.
folks, you can "reframe" the message all you want but I see no one actually addressed my two issues.
1. That this is stealing
2. That it is wrong to use Jesus' name in this fashion.
I am not talking about how the President uses His name; I was discussing how that post used His name.
I am not talking about all the other woes in the world; I was discussing that this scheme is theft.
thinkmuch63
You probably wouldn't much like Hempfest either.
Every year there are a bunch of protesting Evangelicals.
If you don't like The Stranger, don't read it.
If you don't like what you read, don't read it.
I am not talking about all the other woes in the world...
Posted by: thinkmuch63 at August 19, 2006 10:17 AM
Not talking about, not thinking about, not addressing, what's the difference?
Wanna talk theft? Let's talk Halliburton, shall we?
His name has been turned into a brand name and pimped like Coca-Cola, and it turns my stomach.
The woes of the world are on the blood stained hands of your collective blind obedience.
Blessed are the peacemakers.
thinkmuch63
It was stealing for Halliburton to slant-drill from Kuwait into Iraq.
It was stealing (life, property, tax money) to start needless wars over lies.
Posted by: thinkmuch63 at August 19, 2006 10:17 AM
1.Did you even read my post? It is not stealing when the leaders of that group decide to let people make a choice how much one wants to donate. They have made a conscious decision to give their products away if that is a visitor's choice (Isn't it strange *that* choice is acceptable to them and other mattters of choice are not [I am not referring to homosexuality]?).
2. I don't disagee with you on the second point, but I wonder have you gone to other "christian" sites and scolded them for taking Jesus's message and bastardizing (that means corrupting and debasing) it? Have you shown any modicum of courage on this issue? Or have you found it easier and more self satifying to post on a "lefty" site , as you see it, to criticize where obviously no insult was intended?
thinkmuch
Irony
sarcasm: witty language used to convey insults or scorn; "he used sarcasm to upset his opponent"; "irony is wasted on the stupid"; "Satire is a sort of glass, wherein beholders do generally discover everybody's face but their own"--Jonathan Swift
It's helpful when analyzing the world, not to be too literal or too concrete. Thinking can be black & white & absolute. The world is nuanced and relativity hasn't been disproven.
Thinkmuch
Speaking of theft, the Republicans stole elections and plan to do it again.
Speaking of theft, read all about Pat Robertson & the Bank of Scotland
http://www.gregpalast.com/index.php?tag=pat-robertson
The Bank of Scotland has appointed the TV evangelist Dr Pat as chairman of its US retail banking holding company.
US Internal Revenue Service, with the agreement of Robertson’s ministry, the Christian Broadcast Network, stripped it and three other Robertson-controlled groups of their tax-exempt status for the years 1986 and 1987 for engaging in political activity leading up to his failed US presidential bid.
Robertson has recently become involved in UK businesses. In February he was appointed to the board of directors of Laura Ashley. The following month, Bank of Scotland’s British customers protested when it announced the launch of a phone-based US consumer bank holding company with Robertson as 25 per cent owner. He is now chairman of that operation.
Posted by: DiAnne at August 19, 2006 10:37 AM
Good point DiAnne. I wish I had used it.
Just wondering out loud, if I use that point, is it "theft"?
Oncall
Sure. Artistic license, I think.
Artistic licence or license (US), also known as dramatic license/licence, is a colloquial term used to denote the distortion or complete ignorance of fact, or the changing of an established work that an artist may undertake in the name of art — for example, if an artist decided it was more artistically "correct" to portray St. Paul's Cathedral next to the Houses of Parliament in a scene of London, even though in reality they are not close together, or if he decided to depict a dinosaur chasing a Neanderthal (even though the two never coexisted), that would be artistic license. Writers adapting a work for another medium, e.g. a film screenplay from a book, often make significant changes, additions to or omissions from the original plot in the book, (often to the dismay of fans of the original book) on the grounds that these changes were necessary to make a good film.
Oncall
Artistic license - Bush speechwriters use it all the time! Along with Historical revisionism (in the pejorative sense).
Historical revisionism is the attempt to change commonly held ideas about the past. Historical revisionism has both a legitimate academic use, and a pejorative meaning. Within the academic field of history, it is the legitimate reexamination of historical facts, with an eye towards updating histories with newly discovered, more accurate, or less biased information. The implication is that history as it has been traditionally told may not be entirely accurate.The pejorative use refers to illegitimate manipulation of history for political purposes, for example Holocaust denial.
By the way, I forgot to credit these definitions. I guess that's stealing. (They're Wikipedic)
This is from Ben, a Christian and new American..
Byron Dorgan has a book called Take this job and ship it about how the rich buy factories in poor countries and exploit the workers then sell the items here in the US and send their money to banks in the Cayman Islands so they won't have to pay taxes - the scum. And all their policies are supported by their Repub cronies. Well soon nobody in the US will have a job and there won't be anybody to buy all that stuff and all the neighborhoods will crumble. Its like these people are the down fall of the US, just like the Roman empire, destroyed by greed and corruption.
Its like these people are the down fall of the US, just like the Roman empire, destroyed by greed and corruption.
Posted by: DiAnne at August 19, 2006 10:59 AM
I'm working on two books at the moment, the second of which will call for (among other things) a return to what I describe as "classical republican virtue" - a secular notion, without which the Founders and Framers did not believe that this nation would endure.
Molly Ivins
Republican ethics
AUSTIN, Texas -- My, my, gonna be a long four years.
House Republicans have rewritten the ethics rules so Tom DeLay won't have to resign if indicted after all. Let's hear it for moral values. DeLay is one of the leading forces in making "Republican ethics" into an oxymoron.
(snip)
DeLay has already been admonished by the House ethics committee three times on separate violations of ethics rules. Please note, that is the Republican-dominated ethics committee.
(snip)
Showing his usual keen sense of ethics, DeLay has already started a legal defense fund and raised $310,000 since last summer. According to the Austin American-Statesman, half the money has come from Republican House members, who are all dependent on the Republican Steering Committee for their committee assignments and chairmanships.
(snip)
Hey, no worries about corrupting influence there because DeLay already does favors for big contributors to his plain old political action committees, even without additional contributions to his defense fund. Moral values. DeLay is going to give born-again Christians a bad name.
In furtherance of moral values, Congress now has to raise the debt limit by another $800 billion. We actually reached the debt ceiling in early October, but obviously the R's didn't want that vote coming up before the election. Then after they finish spending a staggering amount of money, the R's will return to make Bush's tax cuts permanent.
Now I realize that the Bushies consider it a point of pride to pay not one iota of attention to what the rest of the world thinks about us. But I would like to point out that the rest of the world is holding our paper. And foreign investors have demonstrated elsewhere that they are quite capable of taking alarm over unsound fiscal practices and pulling out completely, leaving bankrupt countries behind.
Speaking of what the rest of the world thinks of us, the matter was nicely summed up by Britain's Daily Mirror with its classic tabloid headline, "How Can 59,054,087 People Be So DUMB?" The Guardian just put a tiny, white-on-black headline: "Oh God."
I realize the "liberal elites" are not allowed to even quote the word "dumb" lest we be accused of "cultural condescension" toward our salt-of-the-earth red-state compatriots. Since I'm a populist happily living in the midst of a quite red state (some of my best friends are named Bubba), I never pay any attention to such horsepoop. But I do resent it when the people running the country think we're so dumb they can rip us off and then tell us to pray.
http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=18112
Matt Carnicelli
Great book idea (return to the values of the Republic) - heard a quote about that on radio yesterday, with respect to the ruling that Bush's wiretapping is unconstitutional.
Republicans also sometimes avoid the use of Democratic party in favor of Democrat party, which is incorrect, as Democratic stands for Democracy and the Republicans know it so they would like to obscure the fact.
Cyrano,
I read Jeffersons' entire letter. I must say that I found his characterization of Judaism to be very disturbing, and totally inconsistent with my understanding of the religion.
thinkmuch63 (if you are still around - which I doubt):
I've been thinking about your post from the other day about your alleged abortion, and how you blamed that on someone who "talked you into it".
The thing about choice, is that you had one. You, like many other right wingers and evangelicals, like to blame all your problems on everyone but yourselves. What ever happened to taking responsibility for your own actions?
If indeed you did choose abortion, it was YOUR choice. No one (like the government) forced you to do it, according to your post. Somewhere deep down, you knew it was what you needed to do, otherwise you would have made the other choice.
Alternatively - without the freedom of choice, you would have been forced to carry the pregnancy, no matter what your circumstances. You are lucky you had a choice. I'm sorry if you've decided it was the wrong one, but that's what personal responsibility is all about.
So you can blame liberals all you want for every problem in the world, but last I heard, your party was in power and had been for a long time. Teen pregnancy is up (that abstinence stuff just doesn't work), thousands of soldiers and civilians have died, we are less safe than we were and the country is vastly divided. You most likely voted for Bush. Are you going to blame that on someone else too?
It's all about admitting you were wrong. It's not easy. But it's OK. You might even feel free if you do it. Give it a try. You're not the only one!
It's about having the courage to believe in free will & the exercise of it!!
Posted by: NonnyO at August 19, 2006 09:56 AM
I read that article first thing this morning. I actually felt sorry for the Republican candidate ( no, I don't know his position on the issues). I plan to look at his web site, if he has one, in order to help me better understand why the Republicans have rejected one of their own.
I hope the Democrats announce, that if Lieberman should win, they will not allow him to caucus with them. They should force him to remain "independent". Heck he might want to form his own party. I can't think of a good name for one. Maybe some of you more clever contributors can think of a name for Lieberman's new party? How about the "Will take money from anybody party" or "Ethics, we don't need your stinking ethics party"?
That's the freedom, liberty & democracy we hear about, unfortunately not the kind we spread in the world under this administration. I think for them, those are code words for proselytizing and hypercapitalism.
Posted by: oncall at August 19, 2006 11:19 AM
That might be - since I was not claiming that he is somehow "correct" in what he thinks, but only that his thinking generally reflects the intellectual preferences and prejudices of his era. The most interesting members of this generation challenged everything, and were not what we would call today politically correct when it came to religion. However, it is fair to say that he is not more critical of Judaism than he is of Christianity.
Posted by: Cyrano at August 19, 2006 11:45 AM
Agreed. I must say how nice it is to see your posts on the blog. And to others who have returned after long absences, I say,welcome back.
BTW does anybody go to the IRC anymore? I have gone there many times and have found it completely empty for hours. Maybe I am "just missing" people?
Oncall
Re IRC - it hardly ever says working for me - probably a mismatch of some sort with my computer.
I want to add the folowing to my above post: Reading Jefferson's letter, he seemed more critical of those who would twist Jesus's message to further their own agenda as opposed to citing Judiasm with significant criticisms as a religion. His opinions were based on the belief that Jews were ..... "a blood thirsty race, as cruel and remorseless as the being whom they represented as the family God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob, and the local God of Israel." Yes, Jefferson is critical of Christianity, but only in the sense that it had been usurped by others. Still, I do agree with your comments about his opinions reflecting the tenor of the times among the leading intellectuals.
August 19, 2006
In Nashville, Sounds of Political Uprising From the Left
By THEO EMERY
“Something political will not get played on country radio unless it’s on the conservative side,” he added. “If you show both sides, it’s not good enough. It’s got to be just on the right.”
Country music, the genre of lonely hearts and highways, lost jobs and blue-collar woes, has become a cultural battleground. Conservatism is widely seen as having the upper hand, a red-state answer to left-leaning Hollywood.
Democrats on Music Row, the country music capital here, have grown frustrated with that reputation. A group of record-company executives, talent managers and artists has released an online compilation of 20 songs, several directly critical of Mr. Bush and the Iraq war.
SNIP
The songs include Mr. Braddock’s “Thou Shalt Not Kill” and “Big Blue Ball of War” by Nanci Griffith. Another longtime songwriter, John Scott Sherrill, contributed “You Let the Fox Run the Henhouse,” and former Vice President Al Gore speaks a few words at the end of “Al Gore,” which was written by Robert Ellis Orrall and includes the line, “President Gore lives on my street.”
SNIP
Mr. Scott recently recorded a new song, “W Cheese,” in a basement studio at Famous Music on Music Row. One verse ends, “They filled our plate with freedom fries, red, black and blue, white lies/And a helping, heaping, hating size of stinkin’ W cheese.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/19/washington/19nashville.html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print
Posted by: DiAnne at August 19, 2006 11:58 AM
DiAnne,
I use Apple as well, and never seem to have a problem. Let me know what you are experiencing, by sending me an e-mail, and maybe I can lend a hand.
I sure would like to hear how the House Republican leadership reacts to this:
August 19, 2006
Chicago Woman’s Stand Stirs Immigration Debate
By GRETCHEN RUETHLING
CHICAGO, Aug. 18 — In a small storefront church in a Puerto Rican neighborhood on the city’s West Side, Elvira Arellano, a fugitive from the government, waits with her 7-year-old son and prays.
Ms. Arellano, 31, an illegal immigrant from Mexico, defied an order to report to the Department of Homeland Security on Tuesday to be deported and is instead seeking sanctuary in her church.
Ms. Arellano is hoping Congress will act on a private relief bill that would allow her and her son, Saul, a United States citizen who has attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, to stay in the country, where she says he can get better medical treatment.
“I’m not a terrorist,” said Ms. Arellano, who came to the United States illegally nine years ago and is facing her second deportation. “I’m only a single mother with a son who’s an American citizen.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/19/us/19immigrant.html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print
Posted by: oncall at August 19, 2006 12:16 PM
Jefferson says quite a number of things that we should be wary of.
For instance, his views on African slaves as being inherently "unequal" are a case in point - and make for very uncomfortable reading today. But Abraham Lincoln as late as the 1840s was apparently advocating the same expatriation scheme that Jefferson supported for emancipation. There are ugly thoughts that share the same space as wonderful thoughts in almost every important thinker that I know of. This is a sad fact of the human condition.
I note that Vatican II made a point of proclaiming that "the Jews" did not kill Christ. Now, the fact that they even had to do that a mere forty plus years ago, attests to a deep seeded antisemitic strain in Western thought, one that has been here since the era that the New Testament was composed. I recently heard Joseph Hough, head of Union Theological Seminary, talk about what he described as antisemitic passages in the Gospel of John. He described how this Gospel was probably written in a time of Christian persecutions.
There's an ugly shadow of ignorance, hatred, prejudice, and intolerance that runs throughout almost all of human history - and in my view, that includes our scriptures. I'll argue that it is the responsibility of spiritual people to engage in the process of sifting among the ugly and luminous, and to separate these as one would separate the wheat from the chafe. I'd further argue that the Founding Generation thought that they were doing just that - even if they were incapable of identifying their own blind spots, and areas of indefensible intellectual and spiritual sloth. That task they left to us.
I went to Connecticut Republican candidate Schleshinger's site. He has absolutely nothing about the Iraqi war on the site. He clearly is a fiscal conservative, and *that* can not be tolerated in this Administration. It is obvious why the party is abandoning one of their own, he is a true Republican.
http://www.schlesinger2006.com/index.html
Posted by: oncall at August 19, 2006 12:26 PM
Along the same lines, Kris Kristofferson is back with a great song & video, sharing his views on war & this regime...
http://kriskristofferson.com/news
Posted by: Cyrano at August 19, 2006 12:44 PM
That last paragraph is precisely how I feel, and why the kind of mindless drivel that thinkmush spews sets me off like nothing else.
I'm done being talked to me about protecting His name and image when it's being used like a club pulverizing a baby seal to death by the party that currently is in command.
Right wing, evangelical extremists and their terrorist devisiveness have driven me, it pains me to say, to the brink of hatred, not a place I want to be, not a place I'm comfortable being, and so what I am NOT about... DAMN that chunk of wood in their eye.
I'm Left No Choice
Oncall
Thanks (about the IRC) - I'll give it a trial run soon & let you know. Typically it has let me comment 2-3 times & then freezes. It worked somewhat with Safari & not at all with Internet Explorer, so might have been a browser problem.
Thanks again!
What follows is my e-mail to the Schlesinger campaign and their reply:
----- Original Message -----
From:
To: mail@schlesinger2006.com
Sent: 8/19/06 1:20 PM
Subject: Now I know why the party has abandoned you
I read the NYTimes article this morning about the Connecticut race. I had also been aware of the Republican's leadership hesitancy to endorse you. I was curious as to why the Republican party felt that they should abandon one of their own. After visiting your site, the answer is obvious: You are a Republican in the mold of Barry Goldwater, a true fiscal conservative and one whom, I believe represents, the majority of Republicans in this country. The Republican powers have decided that in order to sustain George Bush's philosophy as the "chosen one", they need to garner as much support for the Iraqi disaster as they can muster up. They could care less about the economic well being of this country and its citizens as long as their theologic agenda is adhered to.
I want to be completely transparent here. I voted for Kerry, and
I also agree with Lamont's views about the war (I don't like using *that* term as we clearly have not declared war, but in fact have decided to use military force to obtain Bush's and the neocon's objectives). I do believe that the Republicans in control today are harmful for America and the ideals for which it stands.
I hope you are running away from the Republican leadership. That would make your candidacy more legitimate among most citizens. Don't make this an issue about Democrats, " 'Washington and the media have attempted to hijack this election and turn it into a referendum on the future of the national Democratic Party,†Mr. Schlesinger said in
an interview yesterday". Turn it into an issue about what has
happened to the Republican party. Run against your own party as a true conservative. You may consider this political suicide, but I don't see you as having any other choice. Today's Republican leadership does not reflect Republican thinking. It represents a conceited view of American idealism and is harmful for most Americans. Take a stand as a true Republican, you will get more votes and more attention from others. Call Lieberman what he really is, a self absorbed lame duck.
You don't mention your views about Iraq on your site, you should clarify those as well. If they are similar to Lieberman's - you will probably win. If not win, you will certainly turn this into a race and make the country better for it.
Sincerely,
*****************************************************************
Thank you, you do get it. We will consider the strategy.
Schlesinger US Senate
US Names Spy Operations 'Manager' for Cuba, Venezuela
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081906X.shtml
The United States has named a special "manager" for its intelligence operations against Cuba and Venezuela, in effect putting the two Latin American nations on a par with "axis of evil" states confronted on multiple levels by the administration of President George W. Bush.
Major Arms Soar to Twice Pre-9/11 Cost
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081906Y.shtml
The estimated costs for the development of major weapons systems for the US military have doubled since September 11, 2001, with a trillion-dollar price tag for new planes, ships, and missiles that would have little direct role in the fight against insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq.
{{{War is hellishly profitable for the Bu$hCo Criminal Cabal.}}}
The New York Times | Editorial: Ruling for the Law
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081906A.shtml
Ever since President Bush was forced to admit that he was spying on Americans' telephone calls and email without warrants, his lawyers have fought to keep challenges to the program out of the courts. Yesterday, that plan failed.
~~~~~
Judge Anna Diggs Taylor is my new heroine!!!!! Per the last paragraph of this editorial, I can only conclude that the 535 people in Congress should have sought employment in any sector other than public service if they couldn't stop the frat-boy-wannabe-dictator from so blatantly abusing the limited powers granted to a president under our Constitution, and couldn't stop him from committing war crimes in *our* names...!
Since she so obviously knows the limits of power granted to all three bodies of our government under the Constitution, I wonder if she could be talked into running for president.......?
NonnyO
When I was at HempFest I heard (at the Grassroots Dems booth, of course!) that Bush was sending troops quietly to Mexico to secure the oilfields, if it turns ugly with the Obrador/Calderone business. It could just be someone's Pipe Dream, but you never know! We were registering Young Progressive Voters like crazy but had to hurry before the Hendrix Tribute at 4:20, when everyone would become distracted. We will try again tomorrow. I have some very beautiful collector postcards which tell why it's important to Get Out The Vote.
I got a bootleg CoeXisT t-shirt (the C is Muslim, the X is Judaism, the T is Christian, in the design) - by that I mean it's not the expensive version. We had to try to explain the event to the Chinese tourists.
oncall was asking for names for Lieberman's Party, I'd call it Lieberman's party of one. But if he should win and then expected to vote for majority leader Reid how could you then tell him he can't caucus with Democrats? Somehow oncall I just don't see how you could do both?
Also Buzz Flash sending out emails warning today how Bush is promising choice committee assignments for Lieberman if Republicans stay in control of the Senate.
In our conference call several weeks ago we discussed linking dcp to other non profit sites which I understand must be 501 c 3 sites. Since Camp Wellstone is such a site should I look into helping having them as a potential link? Does anyone know where we stand on that project or is that something we don't discuss here?
Posted by: Ira at August 19, 2006 11:01 PM
Ira,
If he wants to vote for Reid, fine, that's his choice. Still given the fact that most of Liebermans's support will be coming from the Republican party apparatus, I think the Dems should treat him as a Republican. No surprise to me that Bushco would suggest that Lieberman would get choice committe assignments. He would be in their back pocket. I just don't trust him. If you recall, there was a vote in the last year or so where Lieberman sided with the Republican majority. I don't remember which vote it was. I wrote him and told him that he crapped in his pants. You were upset with me. However, I don't think Lieberman deserves to be considered a member of the Democratic caucus as he will not even be elected as a Democrat if he should be elected.
Is there a rule that requires a Senator to be allowed to caucus with the party for which he casts his vote for Senate Leader?
Ira,
I don't know the "rules" of the site, but I would contact somebody on the board about your idea.
Here is an interesting site with a lot of entertaining links. The home page is very imaginative with links to other great links. This is a fun site. Go beyond the home page and explore.
http://www.neilyoung.com/lwwtoday/
If people had really listened to Jimmy Carter back in the day, things would have turned out so much better for the world.
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,431793,00.html
Please may his son & a bunch of others take their rightful place in the Senate & House!!!!
Yes, I am back. I see no one again wanted to address directly the stealing thing. Think about this: Where I live people frequently operate unattended produce stands, suggesting prices (btw, no scales, you have to try to guesstimate) for the items and leaving a box for payment. Now, if I came by and took some produce and did not pay for it, is it stealing? Of course it is. Can I get arrested? Of course not, as the owner decided to take this risk and chose not to "sell" the stuff.
If you think this is not stealing, I hope you are not raising children.
Also, I see my posts have not been read in their entirety. I am Jewish, (thought I mentioned that in the anti abortion post) so I think it is hilarious that just because I 1) respected the views of Christianity and respected the sanctity of Christians' views on using Jesus' name and 2) tried to point out that your scam was theft and immoral I was labeled as an Evangelical Christian.
BTW, I have taken full responsibilty for my actions, which, though legal, were immoral. Again, I can make the distinction.
Also, why in the world would you assume that I would think Pat Robertson was anything but INSANE? Just because I don't walk in lockstep with the far left of the Democratic party does not mean I have lost my mind. I have voted Dem. almost my entire life, but in the last several years have done a 180 (Loved Loved Loved Bill Clinton, but Al Gore and John Kerry, Puhleeze!) Still, you attribute all sorts of views and positions to me just because I don't agree with the far left positions you advocate. And people on this site (except Karen, I noticed from looking at past blogs) are rather nasty and unable to have an intellectual discussion without resorting to name calling.
Don't know if it is analogous or not oncall but Jim Jeffords and Bernie Sanders were allowed to caucus with Dems even being declared independents. Jeffords was definitely given his requested Committee assignment I believe for an Education Committee that he felt passionately about, I believe as a reward for supporting Reid as Majority Leader for a short period of time. Rewarding independents is exactly what Bush/Frist are communicating to Lieberman. A vote with the Republican majority, I am sure there were plenty including the bankruptcy bill and blocking the filibuster of Alito. If I sinned oncall and did not see the errors of my way, back then, I aopologize and its been a steep learning curve about Lieberman. My real concern is that we win 5 instead of 6 Senate seats and have to rely on Lieberman to take back control of the Senate. Its hard to imagine the control Lieberman would then have over the party and how much his ego would have to be stroked. Maybe I am a cynic to believe that but if true I would urge him to just go ahead and officially change his party id because a Senate under control of Lieberman is no better than retaining a Republican Senate.
and by the way I don't care if you are Jewish, while we welcome you here thinkmuch, please check your ego at the front door. As a newcomer its chutzpah to come here and blast all of our members here that don't agree with you as 'far lefties' whatever the heck that means, and nasty. I have been on this site since January '05 and I return precisely because we are an open forum, don't censure and allow every opinion here, unless abusive or vulgar, from far left to far right (much like Ed Schultz)without regard to party or affiliation. But don't think you can just show up, have everyone agree with you and then slam them for disagreeing or critizing you. Unlike the conservative sites, this is an open educational forum where we come to learn from one another and learn strategies and techniques for being better citizen activists working to empower our leaders to progressive causes to make this a better country. Sorry you were not aware of that, but nasty, sir that's way over the line. Let me also advise you that within days after Katrina struck exactly a year ago and 30,000 New Orleanians came to our Astrodome, our members personally shipped well over $100,000 worth of relief supplies to the Astrodome recahing into their pockets, their employers', and through local churches and synagogoues.
I believe that one year anniversary is coming up next week and we should really have a tribute to that horrible event and see if someone can possible find our friend Indy( who I often vociferously disagreed with) and find out what his architecture firm has accomplished in the rebuilding phase of N.O.
"1) respected the views of Christianity and respected the sanctity of Christians' views on using Jesus' name"
You're likely to discover that a majority of people on this blog were brought up either Christian or Catholic. Hence, we are in a position to criticize how Jesus is or isn't represented.
Now, with regard to your preference for Clinton over Gore and Kerry, I guess that you simply like winners who will say or do anything to get elected, and who routinely sell out members of their own party to stay viable in the game. As a man, from the perspective of a man, Bill Clinton cannot hold a candle to either Gore or Kerry, as their respective biographies will attest.
Thinkmuch63
Since I posted something someone sent me from The Stranger, I will answer. I don't advocate stealing and what they were talking about in the article (about sending for literature from Focus on the Family) was grift. It was sleazy satire because people COULD do so but I doubt few were. They were making a point, because many readers of that paper are GBLT and bitter about being treated as 2nd class citizens iin this country. One columnist has been with his partner for 12 years and they are parenting. They can not get married but a couple of drunk straight people who have an overnight fling can go to a chapel in Vegas and do so.
I didn't assume you supported Robertson. I used him (and could have used Ken Lay or Tom DElay) as examples of stealing from the public coffers for one purpose & using the money for another, and as examples of bad ethics among those we need to represent us, not screw us over. Those who had Enron stock for retirement were certainly stolen from. Halliburton is another. But that is corporate theft. White collar theft.
I don't advocate petty theft either and when I was a child we could leave our doors open. That's before bad policy increased poverty, and with it came more desperation theft - meth labs and all that goes to support them. We've had two cars stolen and more broken into, our garbage gone through for purposes of identity theft.
I stand by The Stranger. There are some people who are being denounced daily by groups like Focus on the Family, for being who they were born. There was a time when women and minorities couldn't vote in this country, when blacks and whites drank from separate water fountains, when women had choices dictated to them, when only snow white people married each other, and always same gender. We need to keep moving forward, not move back.
As a man, from the perspective of a man, Bill Clinton cannot hold a candle to either Gore or Kerry, as their respective biographies will attest.
Posted by: Cyrano at August 20, 2006 09:01 AM
I think they all have strong points and would be much superior to who we have in office, his father or that one cowboy actor - I'm trying to forget. Just received these this morning.
----A real President (Clinton)
http://s9.photobucket.com/albums/a81/kos102/2006/01%20August/Videos/?action=view¤t=clinton.flv
----A fake President
Pundits Renounce The President
For 10 minutes, the talk show host grilled his guests about whether "George Bush's mental weakness is damaging America's credibility at home and abroad." For 10 minutes, the caption across the bottom of the television screen read, "IS BUSH AN 'IDIOT'?"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/19/AR2006081900568.html?referrer=emailarticle
Posted by: DiAnne at August 20, 2006 09:22 AM
Compared to Dubya, Clinton's a combination of Socrates and Gandhi, rolled into one.
They can not get married but a couple of drunk straight people who have an overnight fling can go to a chapel in Vegas and do so.
Posted by: DiAnne at August 20, 2006 09:18 AM
We have a waiting period for gun ownership in this country, why not for marriage?
I hear so many who are discouraged. But there are always people trying to make a difference.
I had a call last night from Ben Doko. I've talked about him before. He is an Indonesian immigrant who is not a citizen yet so cannot vote. He alone registered enough voters, 10x as many actually, to swing our Gubernatorial election. It was won by 126 votes on the 3rd count and he registered well over 1000 voters.
He called last night to arrange pickup of leftover beautiful glossy pro-voting cards after I get done with Hempfest today. He will then take them to the Evergreen Fair, to continue to attract, convince and register voters. These are cards that were paid for with small donations and an anonymous larger one and to a small democracy cell in a conservative area. They are issue-oriented on one side and definitely not throw-aways. On the other side is information about why and where to vote.
Ben had given away alot of cards and registered 50 some voters. He would actually sit down on the grass with people and talk with them, especially young people. I have seen him in action many times, outside bars, grocery stores and libraries - talking to new citizens, youth. His English is still developing but he can articulate the issues beautifully and answer questions with thought and good analysis.
Ben has a friend Rita. Her husband voted Republican until the last election. Rita has become quite an activist. She has been talking to me about Lillian. I told her I could not advocate for a campaign but would mention Lillian as a citizen. This is Lillian, in the words of Rita.
Lillian has a fascinating story to tell. She was not even interested in politics till she watched Michael Moore's 9-11. That got her going, then she met me because I followed her home and she had on the back window of her van "GW and Cheney are hypocrites and liars". I stopped to talk to her for about two hours and I directed her to the coordinated campaign, in 2004, which led her to get involved in the L.D. and a committee woman to a PCO. She was at the PCO training class in Olympia when she was asked to run for state senator. She was a paralegal, till her husband and her started their vending business out of the trunk of their car, so she could stay home with their children. She maintained the books, placed the orders, and approached the clients.
More from Rita (who can't blog because their home computer corporate firewall)
You may want to go to the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. There is an action suggested to help the troops because congress wants to cut funding to the veterans. Yet, they are willing to give tax breaks to the rich.
Their website is http://www.IAVA.org
I am amazed at how many people use computers only at work or have home computers that are owned by companies they work for so have firewalls (examples: Boeing, US Army in Germany). If I were in that situation (and I hope I wouldn't be), I would buy a personal computer for browsing and get a server that wasn't restricted long before I'd get a car or tv or even eat meals out! We gave Wifi in the cafeteria at work now & I may get a laptop so I can use it.
BTW, I have taken full responsibility for my actions, which, though legal, were immoral.
Posted by: thinkmuch63 at August 20, 2006 08:07 AM
One more thing. You forget to add, in my opinion. Because, you see, the nut running Iran thinks that eradicating the State of Israel is moral. Go ask him, and he'll tell you just that. The crazies blowing themselves up in Israel and Iraq think that they are headed for Paradise. The Nazis believed that sleeping with a member of an inferior race was immoral.
Human beings are often in no position to objectively judge the "morality" of their actions.
Human beings are often in no position to objectively judge the "morality" of their actions.
Posted by: Cyrano at August 20, 2006 09:48 AM
Amen.
Well-stated.
Bottom Line.
I am going to remember this.
DiAnne, thank you for your thoughtful and thought provoking response. I knew you could do it!
I support gay marriage, btw. I also believe with all my heart that most GBLT are born that way, so society should just get over it. However, I do believe cutting and pasting that post was encouraging people to steal from this organization. No matter how crappy you think the organization is, it is still stealing to do that which the article advocates.
A couple of additional illustrations of how notions of morality can be a terrible guide for one's life: in the antebellum period, as tensions escalated between North and South, a new argument for slavery emerged among defenders. This defense postulated that slavery was a positive virtue, a noble institution that kept an inferior race in its place, and not merely the necessary evil that it had been tolerated as during the 18th century.
In Spain in 1492, after the "Reconquista", Jews and Muslims are given the choice of conversion or exile. Many choose conversion, but historians tell us that decades later Catholic authorities begin to worry that these converts are Catholics in name only. They begin to worry that one of these men might even become Pope. Hence, the attitude begins to emerge that having even a single drop of Jewish blood is enough to make a person suspect in the eyes of the Church. Professor Arthur Williamson argues that this moment in European history is where the most virulent strains of antisemitism begin to emerge, the kinds that would lead to the death camps in Nazi-Germany.
Reading over this thread reminds me of days in the past when we would engage in the kind of online discussions that changed hearts and minds and made us all better thinkers and writers. I confess that mt "crazy busy" lifestyle has left little room for this lately.
thinkmuch63 is a provocateur but one willing to engage and discuss further. That is what we need, in the end. It is always far too easy to dismiss someone as a troll. We need to remember that there varieties of trolls as well, and some here even began under the accusation of being a troll. I give tm63 credit for coming back and raising the questions and listening to the answers.
However, I will also add that I think the serious issue behind the discussion about stealing is that of moral relativism. Surely we are aware that it is far worse to lead a country to war with lies than it is to get on a mailing list and use the resources of that organization freely for the purpose of depleting those resources. However, tm63 asks us to think about whether such tactics are what we want our children to do or see us doing.
We have not really had this conversation in great depth here, although I think we could predict who among us would say what (we do know each other's thinking quite well after almost three years!). What is of higher moral consequence to each of us? What are we willing to do in the name of winning? of tricksterism? of scoring one up? of increasing blog traffic?
Just some Sunday morning food for thought.
Meanwhile, here is a link to an audience member of FEAR UP's post to the NY Times theatre website:
http://theater2.nytimes.com/gst/theater/tdetails.html?id=1125016642883
DiAnne, thank you for your thoughtful and thought provoking response. I knew you could do it!
Posted by: thinkmuch63 at August 20, 2006 09:53 AM
The condescending tone continues to irk me beyond comprehension...
I knew you could do it... again.
new thread--Polly is back.
Posted by: thinkmuch63 at August 20, 2006 08:07 AM
I am not sure if you even looked at my response to you yesterday. I laid out, in simple terms, without name calling, my answers to your questions. You did not accept them. Fine with me. I don't accept your premise either. Like DiAnne, and most of the good people who contribute to this site, I don't condone petty theft. But, focus on the family's decision to let people receive merchandise without payment was theirs and nobody elses.
I assumed you were "christian", my mistake as you claim to be Jewish.
I also noticed YOU didn't answer my question. Have you gone to other sites and scolded them for bastardizing Jesus' message, or are you here to help us not offend those who would use Jesus' name for other than truly historical or religious commentary?
Ira,
You point is well taken, but I wonder on which issues Lieberman would actually vote with the Dems and would it really make much of a difference? As the country slowly, and unfortunately way too late begins to distrust the "Republican Agenda" it will be easier for some centrist Republicans with Presidential aspirations to break from the fundamentalist Christian dominated base. Therefore, I am not too sure his vote will be as important as you predict. If it is, then we really are screwed. One man's vote in the Senate should not have so much influence. The Constitution, as you know, provided for the VP to break any ties and therein is the single most valuable vote.
thinkmuch63
When I read The Stranger, I also read the other weeklly from here, The Weekly, & the dailies -Times & PI. One is more GBLT/alternative, the other yuppified, and of the dailies, one more conservative (endorsed Lieberman in 2004), one more liberal. It's pretty full-spectrum.
I'm willing to play if you're willing to demonstrate open-mindedness not just go trolling. This site is for dialogue but it's also a progressive site. It's not like everyone has to agree but it's good to see people back up their points. One reason I came to the site that preceded this one was to check on regional and cultural differences and to broaden my perspective about America beyond where I live (liberal) and where I grew up (conservative), which happens to be urban west vs rural upper midwest.
Karen
Good analysis. I wrote my response about The Stranger in that spirit. I am usually in the Merry Prankster mode but realize that others may not see either the humor or the political intent.
We were talking about web sites that are effective and call people to action today at Camp Wellstone.
This site is hilarious: http://www.arnoldsneighborhood.com/