« Shift Happens | Main | Slow Saturday »
David Swanson Sums It Up
Last night Richard and I had another one of those long conversations about the State of Things, one in which we found ourselves once more easily distracted by the momentary needs of children and house, overwhelmed by the sheer number of activities we are asked to support, and challenged by the need to make more money than the world seems interested in rewarding us with.
Does that feel familiar to anyone else here?
So we watched a movie. (A Thousand Clowns, one of the great subversive flicks of the 1960s. We lamented the passing of a world with much simpler problems, but it was good to laugh).
This morning I woke up with the same questions as yesterday, however. The questions add up to something that is covered by the main question:
WTF are we doing here?
I swear, some days I have no idea where we are going or how we are going to accomplish anything, especially when I get requests to hep with events on Sept. 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 15, 26, 29.... none of which are coordinated by the same group.
David Swanson must be feeling the same way, because he sent along today's thread header, bless the man:
Chris Dugan, former military recruiter, countering
photo: K Bradley
By David Swanson
There is something else we can try. If you've given up on staging marches and rallies, or if - like me - you haven't but you want to try something else as well, and if you've given up on lobbying Congress as pointless, or if - like me - you haven't but you want to try something else as well, and if educating your fellow citizens as to exactly how completely corrupt the whole system is seems like an incomplete answer, and if staging a general strike or taking over the capital only seems like a good idea if you can get millions of others to join you, there is another approach that can be taken right away by a single person, a small group, or a crowd.
You can counter recruit, counter the corporate war profiteers, and counter the media. Talking to high school and college students and career counselors about the reality of the military, done at the smallest or largest scale, helps to deny the military the troops it needs to occupy foreign lands and kill. Of course, the military pushes back, raising the top age for recruits (now at 42), promising bigger bonuses (now at $50,000), and lowering various qualifications. Ultimately, the military can push back by instituting a draft. But that could also lead to much greater resistance. Corporations profiting from the pretended "reconstruction" of Iraq, from the control of Iraq's oil, and from the use of weapons and mercenaries, can be protested and influenced. Bechtel chose to stop bidding on contracts in Iraq rather than endure further protest. And the media can be resisted through the creation and promotion of independent media, through criticism and protest, and through campaigns targeting advertisers.
A guide to engaging in these tactics and training others to do so is found in a new book called Army of None: Strategies to Counter Military Recruitment, End War, and Build a Better World, by Aimee Allison and David Solnit. They present this approach, as everyone on the left always presents their approach, as the only one of any use. I disagree. I think the various approaches work together. I think the marching and lobbying help move the public to the point where more people will resist recruitment. I think countering recruitment helps recruit peace activists of all sorts. And I think that we have to model democratic behavior as part of defining a vision for the future, if nothing else. We have to publicly demand the behavior we want from our elected officials if only to deny them the argument that we never asked. And we have to envision a world in which one day citizens are able to influence politicians directly.
Most of "Army of None" is devoted to counter recruitment, and the book makes an ideal guide for anyone interested in that project. Among other things, it provides the basic facts about the usual lies recruiters tell. For one thing, most recruits won't actually get $50,000 or anything close to it. In fact, nothing a recruiter promises a recruit means anything at all, because every military contract includes these lines:
"Laws and regulations that govern military personnel may change without notice to me. Such changes may affect my status, pay allowances, benefits, and responsibilities as a member of the Armed Forces REGARDLESS of the provisions of this enlistment / re-enlistment document."
In other words, the rest of the contract means nothing, and only those two sentences and a signature actually matter. The rest, like much of what comes out of recruiters' mouths, is lies. The New York Times reported that one in five U.S. Army recruiters was under investigation in 2004 for offenses ranging from "threats and coercion to false promises that applicants would not be sent to Iraq."
In addition to educating potential recruits and assisting them in finding more positive career options, citizens can actively counter recruitment by protesting or impeding recruiting operations. One of the more creative ways to do this is for that dwindling portion of the population that is not qualified for recruitment to attempt to enlist. Raging Grannies and other groups of women have tied up recruiting stations and attracted attention by attempting to sign up, refusing to leave, and risking arrest. What are the raging grandfathers waiting for?
Although "Army of None" does not suggest it, I would recommend another tactic as well. Get to know the recruiters and offer to help them with their job. Take a stack of brochures and blank contracts from them. And whenever you encounter a pro-war demonstrator, offer to help them sign up. "Hey Hey What about you? You look under 42!" is a chant that has been known to silence the most obnoxious voices. The point is not, of course, to actually recruit anyone, but to expose the hypocrisy of war proponents and call attention to the question of exactly who is being recruited.
If you want to get involved in countering recruitment and in supporting members of the military who refuse to serve in illegal wars of aggression, go to http://www.couragetoresist.org
To get involved in this movement face-to-face, check out the following upcoming events:
August 15-19 in St. Louis
Book Release and Project Kick-Off for "Army of None"
August 30 in Oakland, Calif., 6:30 - 9:30 p.m.
Club Oasis, 135 12th Street
Week of action in Washington, D.C.
September 15: March and massive die-in
September 16: truth in recruiting training and congressional lobbying training
September 17 National Truth in Recruiting Day
September 18 Congressional Challenge Day
http://grassrootsamerica4us.org
There is actually a major peace event planned for Washington, D.C., for just about every day in September. This has caused a lot of people great distress, judging from the Emails I get asking me to combine all the events into one day (as if I had some way to do that!), but I think the variety of the ongoing events may be advantageous. We'll try to keep track of them all here.
*****
So DCPers, how are you feeling today about taking some action? And what will it be?
Karen,
I think I am going to do the free copies of the US Constitution thing. My kids can help me pass them out.
I have to see how many I can print out before I go broke, but I was wondering if I can put on the bottom, the DCP addy...?
Provided by, or sponsored by or whatever, just the US Constitution and DCP addy and nothing else.
I mean, really, what else does any American need?
I tend to believe most people, 99.6%, who never actually read the US Constitution never did so because they never had cause to have a copy provided to them. It is not a document that winds up in your hand by accident.
If it is true, and only .04 % of our citizens have actually read the damn thing, I think it is obvious where we should focus most of our personal attention.
Not the whole Constitution, the preamble and Bill Of Rights.
Otherwise I go broke very fast and they lose attention.
Christy,
That's a good one, but do stick around to explain some of the harder parts:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
The common defence part often seems to stick in people's minds, while promoting the general welfare and securing the blessings of liberty seem confusing to folks. So often, the "I've got mine, screw you and yours" mentality trumps the basic sense of sharing that the Founding Fathers aspired to.
After kindergarten and Mr. Rogers, it's all downhill in the direction of profiteering selfishness and empire building, too often.
But yes, please put the DCP blog addy anywhere you can. We are all in this together, and the perspective sharing helps.
Also, for those of you who don't know this, this blog and the thread headers also run on the front page of the Backbone Campaign page:
http://backbonecampaign.org/
scroll to the bottom
I will explain it if they want to stick around to ask about it, but at this point it is just about getting as many copies in as many hands as possible.
Even if they do not read it they will take it home, lay it down with car keys and another family member will wind up with it.
None will dare throw it away.
We need to get everybody, and I mean 99.6%, to argue about it, regardless of how they interpret it on its' face.
It is a very simplistic document, that some will not understand is given, but I tend to believe it is hard to misinterpret the good stuff.
The Founding Fathers deliberately made it hard to misinterpret their words and intent.
US Constitution; Impeachment
This was placed there not just to remove the President, but any officer or appointee of the President, against the will of the President.
Impeachment is the stick in the legislative branches tool chest.
Madison inserted the vague language of high crimes and misdemeanors...basically if the senate agrees the president is fit to be removed, and votes to convict, it is justification in itself.
Interestingly enough, Madison argued that the wanton removal of officers by the president was grounds for impeachment.
It is time to bring that tool out again, and use it.
This was the basis for Impeachment to be brought against President Clinton;
The House approved two of the Articles alleging that the President had provided perjurious, false and misleading testimony to the grand jury regarding the Paula Jones case and his relationship with Monica Lewinsky and that he had obstructed justice through an effort to delay, impede, cover up and conceal the existence of evidence related to the Jones case.
Nobody died in the invasion of Monica Lewinsky..no constitutional rights were trampled upon during the battle for Paula Jones...yet President clinton was Subjected to Impeachment hearings.
Using the same fabric of cause for Impeaching President Clinton, not only is President Bush overwhelmingly passing the bar for proceedings to begin, many officers and those that gave testimony including Colin Powell subject to investigations of their role as well.
Tens of thousands Died because of false and misleading testimony, and now the White house is obstructing justice through delay cover up and impede investigations of the crimes committed.
The only differnece is we have Cowards in office today, otherwise the President would have been impeached long ago.
"Interestingly enough, Madison argued that the wanton removal of officers by the president was grounds for impeachment. "
That makes sense though. The Attorney Scandal we are currently involved in shows that that 'wanton removal' is more probably covering up other high crimes.
Madison was certainly thinking such an act of purging would be an effort to thwart investigations, or scrutiny of the presidents actions.
It always amazes me how they understood us so well, and we were not even We yet.
Incredible.
Not a single coward among them.
Karen
Well my friend Paula is coming through DC Sept. 15 and wants to help with whatever is going on. She asked me to keep my ears open when at YearlyKos and I didn't hear much at all about things in DC. Just went to her gallery opening here last night and she will have one in NYC and then take a bus to DC, then Amtrak back to Seattle. She has never been involved in an action or anything in DC and really wants to help. Any specifics, please forward on to me & I'll get it to her.
Thanks!
Christy
The Constitution thing (handing out copies) sounds great!
I didn't know the candidates had been grilled on gay marriage.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/08/10/at_forum_six_democrats_grilled_on_gay_marriage/
Only Gravel and Kucinich support it. The rest will back civil unions. I like the Backbone Campaign position: Civil Unions for All. (Marriage could then be a "frill" added by whatever church, mosque, synagogue, temple etc. wanted to add, but legally, gender would be irrelevant for "civil unions"). I don't think any Republicans support Civil Unions, let alone gay marriage.
This title focusses on "Dems Oppose Gay Marriage"
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0807/5320.html
so you have to read it to know they support civil unions.
The press is lagging behind the people, as civil union is no longer controversial in this country. I think both gay marriage and defense of marriage positions are kind of uninteresting. Civil unions for all!
(Marriage could then be a "frill" added by whatever church, mosque, synagogue, temple etc. wanted to add, but legally, gender would be irrelevant for civil unions)"
I agree with civil unions but I would be careful to try to render marriage a 'frill'.
For whatever same sex unions should be sanctioned by definition they can not propogate the species.
No, it is not a swipe at gays raising children, but biologically some things are sacred and you will always need a male/female relationship to go fourth and multiply.
I do not even like marriage, but it scares me to think it would be rendered a 'frill'.
I thought I would repost this:
CENSURING BUSH BY SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPS.:
(symbolic but it is better than nothing at all - perhaps laying the groundwork for impeachment)
Feingold Introduces Resolutions Censuring Bush, Others
By Frederic J. Frommer
The Associated Press
Monday 06 August 2007
Washington - Sen. Russ Feingold has introduced resolutions that would censure President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales for what Feingold calls the Bush administration's misleading the nation into war, and undermining the rule of law.
In the House, Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-N.Y., introduced companion resolutions.
"Congress cannot stay silent when the American people are demanding that this administration be held accountable for its blatant misconduct regarding Iraq and its attack on the rule of law," Feingold, D-Wis., said in a statement Monday.
"From misleading this country into invading Iraq to establishing a warrantless domestic spy program, this White House has continuously misled and deceived the American people while disregarding the rule of law that guides our democracy," Hinchey said in a statement Monday,
Feingold announced last month that he would introduce the two resolutions.
One would censure Bush and Cheney for what it calls misleading the country about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's regime, and inadequate planning for military action in Iraq, among other things.
The other would censure Bush and Gonzales for the warrantless surveillance program against suspected terrorists, and what the resolution calls misleading Congress about the firings of U.S. attorneys, among other things.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/080707K.shtml
Do you want to make phone calls?
If yes, I would go after the Philly Daily News for printing this awful column:
(The person in charge of editorials in Sandy Shea phone 215-854-5886 - I have alreadly called her and left a message)
Stu Bykofsky | To save America, we need another 9/11
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/columnists/stu_bykofsky/20070809_Stu_Bykofsky___To_save_America__we_need_another_9_11.html
Posted by: Christy at August 9, 2007 09:04 PM
Yall should all make it a point to stop and call this bastard out right freaking now.
E-mail stubyko@phillynews.com or call 215-854-5977.
Not even our own congressmen can show a functioning knowledge of the United States Constitution.
DISGUSTING.
“We have not only a Hindu prayer being offered in the Senate, we have a Muslim member of the House of Representatives now, Keith Ellison from Minnesota. Those are changes — and they are not what was envisioned by the Founding Fathers,” asserts Sali.
Artivle 4
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
Sorry, my bad.
That is Article 6.
Good You Tube video on Bush's press conference yesterday:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvIYLiboRSg
Censure Resolutions update:
House Resolution #625 - 19 Co-sponsors (mishandling/wrong-doing in Iraq)
House Resolution # 626 - 19 Co-sponsers (rule of law, attorney firings, A.G. Alberto Gonzales)
Stocks trim losses after the Fed adds another $16 billion to the banking system, but remain weak for second straight session on worries about tightening credit, subprime fallout.
August 10 2007: 11:23 AM EDT
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Stocks slumped Friday, falling for a second session in a row, as accelerating worries about the tightening of credit and the subprime mortgage fallout dragged on investor sentiment.
However, stocks cut losses after the Federal Reserve injected an additional $16 billion into the banking system, following the morning's addition of $19 billion.
more...
http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/10/markets/markets_1030/index.htm?postversion=2007081011
Sure, just pump another arbitrary $16 billion in there, but we still can't keep our bridges safe, our people educated, or our citizens healthy...
Is this a great country, or what?
Posted by: chinatool at August 10, 2007 09:05 AM
That info came out of the Moyers interview with John Nichols and Bruce Fein.
Check your local PBS station for time, but the show will be re-run tonight.
Posted by: not my president at August 10, 2007 09:51 AM
Actually, that's what the marriage contract is all about. To get married, a couple has to get a license from their county. Marriage is a civil and legal contract for two people to live together (and ensures paternity as long as a woman remains monogamous).
All the rest is hyperbole.
Posted by: Ralpheh at August 10, 2007 10:16 AM
Censure is only symbolic... but it's all the Senate has to work with since impeachment proceedings must start in the House.
But it still makes Dems look weak. There's no method of punishing the criminal actions being censured, and no one can be removed from office for being censured.
It's the equivalent of slapping fingers.
Although "Army of None" does not suggest it, I would recommend another tactic as well. Get to know the recruiters and offer to help them with their job. Take a stack of brochures and blank contracts from them. And whenever you encounter a pro-war demonstrator, offer to help them sign up. "Hey Hey What about you? You look under 42!" is a chant that has been known to silence the most obnoxious voices. The point is not, of course, to actually recruit anyone, but to expose the hypocrisy of war proponents and call attention to the question of exactly who is being recruited.
I love it, Can't you just see their faces. Now if we could just arrange for them to be handed out to Georgie and Dick and their gang, it would be worth it, just to get their response.
Posted by: Ralpheh at August 10, 2007 10:16 AM
Censure is only symbolic... but it's all the Senate has to work with since impeachment proceedings must start in the House
@@@@@
I disagree on this point. I think that it means the Democrats are united in their disgust and dislike of the Bush administration. And they will state so on the record. Furthermore, two of the arguments against impeachment are:
1) the Dems will never get 2/3rds in the Senate to convict
2) impeachment will take up too much time that the Congress should use on other things
Censure is much quicker and easier (and perhaps more Repubs would join in support of)
BTW:
I am ready to give up on impeachment. There is no ground swell; Pelosi says no; the Dem candidates for president do not mention it; the media avoids talking about it; Dems in the House of Reps are not supposed to call Bush a "liar" etc...etc ...
NPR reports on Katrina survivors 2 years after leaving New Orleans; crime, drug use, suicide is common
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12592168
July 19, 2006
Drugs and Crime Plague FEMA Trailer Park Residents
Oct. 17, 2006
Creating Community in FEMA Trailer Parks
Jan. 24, 2006
Katrina Overwhelms Mental Health System
Feb. 27, 2006
Families Struggle to Rebuild Sense of Home
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12592168
Along with the thread header, this just in:
Need help with a down payment? Ask the Army
Under aggressive plan, recruits could get ‘buffet’ of incentives
Updated: 11:05 p.m. ET Aug 9, 2007
WASHINGTON - Need a down payment for your home? Seed money to start a business? The Army wants to help — if you’re willing to join up.
Despite spending nearly $1 billion last year on recruiting bonuses and ads, Army leaders say an even bolder approach is needed to fill wartime ranks.
Under a new proposal, men and women who enlist could pick from a “buffet” of incentives, including up to $45,000 tax-free that they accrue during their career to help buy a home or build a business. Other options would include money for college and to pay off student loans.
An Associated Press review of the increasingly aggressive recruiting offerings found the Army is not only dangling more sign-up rewards — it’s loosening rules on age and weight limits, education and drug and criminal records.
It’s all part of an Army effort to fill its ranks even as the percentage of young people who say they plan to join the military has hit a historic low — 16 percent by the Pentagon’s own surveying — in the fifth year of the Iraq war.
More here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20205033/
Unfortunately for the young people who fall for this....
they are lying.
NPR reports on Katrina survivors 2 years after leaving New Orleans; crime, drug use, suicide is common
Posted by: Ralpheh at August 10, 2007 05:01 PM
To sad, To sad, I had always wished to travel to NewOrleans, my Nephew was there for 4 months just before Katrina.
So sad that I will never see it in all its Granduer, or as Christy described it in one of her posts.
By the way, anyone hear anything from Indy these days.
Quarter of America's Oil Flows Through Sinking Louisiana Land http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/080907EC.shtml
Nicholas Varchaver reports for Fortune Magazine on a new energy crisis that is occurring as southern Louisiana, the conduit for more than a quarter of America's oil, sinks into the sea.
rossiann,
Monkey hears from Indy occasionally, as does oncall and they will occasionally post updates.
My friend Marietta just got back from NOLA and she said the French Quarter looks fine, but the sections to the north and west are just devastated. Or so she thought until she visited a friend along the Mississippi Gulf Coast.
THAT was devastation--and it's still bad.
Civil unions for all!
Posted by: not my president at August 10, 2007 09:51 AM
Thank you!
re: NOLA
I've never been there, but I would like to go soon. In fact, I just got a flyer from NOLA tourist bureau asking me to visit the French Quarter, three nights for the price of two.
My father never said nice things about NOLA - he said it was a decadent place where you could walk into a neighborhood bar and watch sex acts. Katrina was God's justice for the city, he says. But that makes me want to go that much more.
After all, he sided with Rummy on Chicago being a barren wasteland - and I found otherwise.
Christy
Civil Unions For All, I retiterate. Gay couples can surely adopt - anyone who says straight couples are better parents has alot of answering to do for cases of child neglect and abuse. It is always an individual situation. & this country has more single parent families than two-parent families. An egg and sperm are currently required to produce a gamete, but a man and woman are not required to produce a healthy, functioning human being, and neither is marriage.
CIVIL UNIONS FOR ALL. I advocate for the rest to be abolished as a requirement. For ceremonial reasons, individuals could again go to their mosque, synagogue, church, temple etc. but it would not be required. Said CIVIL UNIONS would not even ask gender. Two names would be written and it would cover sharing of property, custody and especially wills and who is consulted in time of serious accident, coma etc.
Love is love and I would gladly give up my marriage if there were CIVIL UNIONS FOR ALL. Currently, non heterosexual love is treated as second class and it is as unfair as racism. There should be no laws restricting individuals from freely choosing in love.
Once society discovered birth control and was able to limit family size, once we were no longer agricultural in modern societies - prior tradition was rendered obsolete and we have not caught up. If we are going to follow archaic practices, then we shouldn't be driving, using electricity and telephones, iPods, etc. We should be like the Amish or the Taleban who at least are at least in some ways consistent (I am not putting them on the same level but they neither is modern).
"My sons are all adults and they've made decisions about their careers and they've chosen not to serve in the military and active duty and I respect their decision in that regard. One of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping me get elected because they think I'd be a great president."
-- Mitt Romney
from MITT ROMNEY'S LITTLE CHICKEN HAWKS
http://apenwarmedinhell.blogspot.com/2007/08/my-sons-are-all-adults-and-theyve-m
ade.html
Thanks Karen. Great ideas - plenty to do and think about - thanks David.
The army of none tactic is just BRILLIANT. Can you think of any way to get the news out to those who are wanting to buy a house and those considering going signing up for the money? It needs to be put out there. That one I would dearly love to get involved in. Giving the registration form to the abusers! Yes!!! You still don't get the top-paid abusers. But still, it could cause some red faces in places.
Posted by: not my president at August 10, 2007 11:03 PM
Not only that, but people who don't fit our rigid definitions of gender (including me - and even the Mann), also have a right to be hitched into a civil union too.
If Emperor W has his way, I have no way of ever getting married, or ever having sex even.
Posted by: not my president at August 10, 2007 09:49 AM
And speaking of transgender rights, did anyone bring up the issue of how the REAL ID Act will screw over transgenders, and what the presidential hopefuls want to do about it, if at all?
Ally
Gender is relative - chromosomal, chemical, psychological.
Everything is so backward I can't believe it sometimes. It's all so discriminatory. People who think in black/white terms should not be using insulin, cancer treatments or in vitro fertilization. Funny the double standards they hold for what they think is "natural."
By the way, tomorrow at noon is the election integrity summit - Elizabeth and Marjorie G will meet - at THK's favorite restaurant - I just made reservations!!
BUSH'S WAR ADVISOR: MAKES SENSE TO CONSIDER A DRAFT »
Associated Press | August 10, 2007 07:39 PM
"I think it makes sense to certainly consider it," Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute said in an interview with National Public Radio's "All Things Considered."
"And I can tell you, this has always been an option on the table. But ultimately, this is a policy matter between meeting the demands for the nation's security by one means or another," Lute added in his first interview since he was confirmed by the Senate in June.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070810/bush-war-adviser/
THAT was devastation--and it's still bad.
Posted by: karen at August 10, 2007 09:18 PM
Thanks Karen, will you wish Dick a Happy Birthday for me from Down Under.
And Monkey or Oncall, if you hear from Indy will you wish him the best for me.
This comes from the Christian Century Foundation:
Civil unions for all
CIVIL UNIONS FOR ALL: One way to finesse the gay marriage debate would be for the state to get out of the business of defining marriage--leave that to churches, mosques and synagogues--and give civil unions to everyone, straight and gay. This is not that radically different from what we do now, according to Alisa Solomon, because the license comes from one institution and, in most cases, the blessing from another. Solomon points out that her rabbi won't perform interfaith marriages, which is his religious prerogative, but that is not the law of the land. Alluding to the movement for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages, she quotes Rabbi Arthur Waskow: "God forbid--and I do mean God forbid!--that as a country we dig ourselves into a pit where Orthodox Jews and Southern Baptists are affirmed by the Constitution while Reform Jews and Episcopalians are ghettoized" (Village Voice, March 3-9).
My father never said nice things about NOLA - he said it was a decadent place where you could walk into a neighborhood bar and watch sex acts. Katrina was God's justice for the city, he says. But that makes me want to go that much more.
After all, he sided with Rummy on Chicago being a barren wasteland - and I found otherwise.
Posted by: Ally McRepuke at August 10, 2007 10:27 PM
Hell that would make me want to go more also,he sounds like haggart and the fundamentalist hypocrits, my nephew loved it.
And if as karen says the French Quarter is okay, I probably will, but do you ever think it will be the same after what it has been through. Isn't Indy and his Brothers Restaurant in the French Quarter?
The Republican candidates don't recognize civil unions and refused to appear at the debate where the Democrats appeared. Giuliani opposes civil unions. Not sure where the others stand.
All the candidates except Gravel and Kucinich oppose gay marriage. I support civil unions for all. If gays can't get married, I think marriage ought to be abolished as a civil statute. Civil unions for all, no gender allowed as a question. Irrelevant. Then as an add-on- go to the church, synagogue, mosque, temple etc. of your choice but it is not legal - it is philosophical.
No special privileges for heterosexuals. If I am repeating myself it is because I am formulating hypothetical law. Civil law should not = religious law. If we are living in a theocracy, we should not be. We need to live it as we WANT it, not as it is dictated.
Freedom!!! Not as defined by W, but true freedom. It is so liberating that in 5 hours I will be 55 years old and officially a crone!!
Rossian, Ally, anyone else interested -
I went to the American Speech and Hearing Association convention in New Orleans, Louisiana. It was held in the same convention center where those poor people were kept in horrible squalor after Hurricane Katrina. It's haunting. There is an escalator that goes right up to a Mall where it's possible to buy dozens of flavors of alcoholic slurpee drinks!! White Russian is the best!! We would buy the drinks, take the escalator down, and sit in our boring meetings.
I missed most of the meetings because I wanted to see New Orleans!
I went to New Orleans for the second time about a week after 9/11/01. This time it was also for the American Speech and Hearing Convention. This time we allowed an extra week just for visiting plantations (which aren't anything like I imagined - they are haunted!), swamps/bayous with marshmallow-eating alligators, cemeteries above-ground like in France!, vampire bars, Chinese restaurants with drag queens, voodoo parlors, gay-owned shotgun house, and a street that we were not supposed to cross or we would be shot (which is racist).
Very special, swampy, humid, magical, undesribable place!! I understand that Bourbon Street and the rest of the French quarter is "restored," but I understand also that the Mexican component of the population has increased (as they are involved in the building and rebuilding) and the black component has decreased (as they didn't all come back). I loved the magic but found the place kind of racist, in that we were told not to go on certain streets as it would be dangerous. That I am not used to, as I am used to being able to go anywhere I want any time day or night. I didn't like that part and wished I was invisible so I could forget about that part.
Go ahead and go there! What happened there was terrible and inexcusable but we need to keep it all alive! It really feels different from the rest of America and everyone says that!! I can't wait to get back there again.
I am wondering why Ally's dad would want to go to bars with sex acts! LOL
The most racist people I ever met were on a cruise to Alaska. They were from a place north of New Orleans and warned us not to go there and said why, which I am not going to repeat because it was horrible heinous and racist. They had no idea what they were talking about and cheated themselves out of wonderful experiences because of their sick mentality.
I am so sick of homophobic, racist, sex-negative mentality I could scream. If you wonder if I am drinking wine, I am, and it is good. Notice I don't make as many typos when I am drinking wine. It is good Bordeaux.
I would not go so far as the transhumanists but I find their postulates intellectually stimulating and somewhat refreshing!
Either we go with technology or we don't! It seems strange to embrace it in some sectors but not others, yet that is what we do.
Why is it ok to upgrade our computers and software to the max but relegate humans to 15th century tradition only?
They call this a church? Unfrikingbelievable
Megachurch Cancels Funeral For Gay Navy Vet
Associated Press | ANGELA K. BROWN | August 10, 2007 10:19 PM
Relatives of a gay Navy veteran who died say they are upset that a megachurch canceled his memorial service 24 hours before it was to start. Officials at the nondenominational High Point Church knew that Cecil Howard Sinclair was gay when they offered to host his service, said his sister, Kathleen Wright.
But after his obituary listed his life partner as one of his survivors, she said, it was called off.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070810/gay-funeral/
Iran/Iraq - being pitted against each other
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/listen-up-bush-tells-maliki-iran-is-a-danger-to-the-middle-east/2007/08/10/1186530618698.html
Dangerous Lame Ducks
I am wondering why Ally's dad would want to go to bars with sex acts! LOL
Posted by: not my president at August 11, 2007 01:30 AM
I don't think he did nmp, he thinks God struck New Orleans down because those bars with sex acts are there.
That is why Ally would go hhahahahah
Dangerous Lame Ducks
Posted by: not my president at August 11, 2007 02:00 AM
IN A warning to the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, President George Bush said Iran was a danger to the Middle East, and that if Mr Maliki did not share that view, Mr Bush would have a "heart to heart" talk with him.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall, listening to Maliki telling Georgie what to do with himself.
New York on alert for 'dirty bomb'
NEW York police have increased security throughout Manhattan and at bridges and tunnels in response to what they say is an "unverified radiological threat" that a dirty bomb may go off in the city on Friday night.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22226848-2,00.html
nmp - congratulations on soon realising official cronydom - in a few days!! I didn't realise that it happens at 55. I've been there for almost 3 years!
nmp - sorry - I meant a few hours. Happy Birthday!
HAPPY BIRTHDAY DiAnne!!
The most racist people I ever met were on a cruise to Alaska. They were from a place north of New Orleans and warned us not to go there and said why, which I am not going to repeat because it was horrible heinous and racist. They had no idea what they were talking about and cheated themselves out of wonderful experiences because of their sick mentality.
@@@@@@@@@
The Trailer park in the N.P.R. piece is working class/lower class white folks, after looking at the photographs. I had assumed, wrongly, it was might be black folks after listening to it on the radio.
The sad fact is that these people cannot afford to move into rental housing - rental housing prices have almost doubled in Mississippi since Katrina.
I wish these could get into bigger trailers - i.e. mobile homes. The small trailers they have now ARE FOR CAMPING. The guy in the story with the wheel chair says his wheel chair won't fit into the trailer (VIOLATION OF THE ADA???)
Ralpheh
The racist people were well-to-do elderly white people. The guy hated the cruise ship because he couldn't ride his lawn tractor.
" They were from a place north of New Orleans and warned us not to go there and said why, which I am not going to repeat because it was horrible heinous and racist. "
Welcome to the south.
Every damn day it is like that here. Can you imagine if those people were your father, or aunt, or even your brother...?
Just this morning I got to hear an earful about a white girl who is apparently a 'wigger'.
Oh, what a way to wake up.
BTW, did they tell you how bad 'black people smell', because they 'don't use soap'...?
I tell you, you just ain't lived until you confront that one.
Repeatedly.
new thread, take your time, it's a slooooowwww Saturday.........................................
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/08/11/daily-show-hard-hitting-cavuto-interview-reveals-bush-as-clarifier-in-chief/
Daily Show: Hard-Hitting Cavuto Interview Reveals Bush As “Clarifier-in-Chief”
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/08/10/daily-show-on-missing-iraqi-weapons-coincidence-or-profound-incompetence/
Daily Show on Missing Iraqi Weapons: Coincidence? Or Profound Incompetence?
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/08/10/david-brooks-lets-us-in-on-a-little-secret-everyone-hates-bush/
David Brooks lets us in on a little secret: Everyone hates Bush
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/10/3097/
John Nichols: AT&T Censors Criticism of Bush
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/09/3071/
John Nichols: Bush More “Disastrous” Than Nixon
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/07/3046/
John Nichols: Kucinich Helps the AFL-CIO Prove a Point
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/07/3047/
Wesley K. Clark & Kal Raustiala: Why Terrorists Aren’t Soldiers
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/07/3037/
Burt Cohen: America Needs To Impeach
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/10/3098/
Helen Thomas: Yet Again, The Democrats Roll Over
The Republican candidates don't recognize civil unions and refused to appear at the debate where the Democrats appeared. Giuliani opposes civil unions. Not sure where the others stand.
All the candidates except Gravel and Kucinich oppose gay marriage. I support civil unions for all. If gays can't get married, I think marriage ought to be abolished as a civil statute. Civil unions for all, no gender allowed as a question. Irrelevant. Then as an add-on- go to the church, synagogue, mosque, temple etc. of your choice but it is not legal - it is philosophical.
No special privileges for heterosexuals. If I am repeating myself it is because I am formulating hypothetical law. Civil law should not = religious law. If we are living in a theocracy, we should not be. We need to live it as we WANT it, not as it is dictated.
Freedom!!! Not as defined by W, but true freedom. It is so liberating that in 5 hours I will be 55 years old and officially a crone!!
Posted by: not my president at August 11, 2007 01:23 AM
NMP, et al,
Here is a link to a transcript of Larry King interviewing Laura and George Bush on August 15, 2004.
PLEASE NOTE that neither of them had any problem with Americans having freedom of religion (or not), or freedom of lifestyle, and the seperation of church and state.
There are also comments in this transcript made by Laura and George W. Bush about their positions on legal civil unions, and their position of freedom of religion and them appreciating America being able to give freedom of religion (or not) to everyone, along with the freedom to be themselves, which is contrary to what you have been saying. I am not a troll, but I happened to remember watching this interview in 2004, and posting at that time on the Kerry Blog or the DCP blog that President Bush said he has no problem with civil unions but wants to leave the decisions up to the states themselves. He has a problem with the civil union being called a "marriage", which has been throughout history a term used legally for hetrosexual unions that were most often performed in a religious atmosphere, thus equating the term "marriage" in alot of people's minds as being a religious institution.
I remember at that time I also posted that if what gays really want is to legalize their union, they could if their state voted to make civil unions legal unions. Who cares if they call it marriage? If they then go to a religious ceremony and call each other married does that make them any more or less legally bound to one another? Marriage is a term. A word.
In reality, if civil unions are made legal in more states, and the partners are entitled to the same privileges as hetrosexual partners, what difference does it make if they call it the word "marriage"? Especially if it offends many religious people who equate the word "marriage" with a religious ceremony and commitment.
There is no mountain here, not even a molehill.
******
"KING: Does it come to the office? Does the faith come to the office? By that I mean...
G. BUSH: You can't separate your faith from your life. I make decisions on what I think is best for the country but my faith is important to me and a lot of times my faith comes up because I thank people for their prayers and I mean people from all religions. But, no, I think the church ought to be separate from the state, the state separate from the church but I don't see how you can separate your faith as a person and my faith is an integral part of my life.
L. BUSH: I think he's right. I mean, you know, whatever anyone's faith is is a part of their lives. But the great thing about our country is we have the right to worship if we want to, however we want to or not to worship. And, you know, as we look around the world right now that's one of our most important freedoms and they're -- you know, I know George knows that. I mean, I think that's the whole point of the separation of church and state but it's also our right.
KING: But you don't see this as a Christianity against the world.
G. BUSH: No, of course not. I see it as people who love freedom against those who prevent others from being free and I say that it a lot when asked about religion that the greatest thing about America is you can practice your faith, or have no faith at all and you're equally an American. And if you choose to -- if you believe in the Almighty, you can -- you're equally an American. If you're a Jew, Christian or Muslim or Hindi or whatever. It is one of the great traits and traditions of our country, where people can worship the way you see fit. And that is not the case in parts of the world.
KING: Where?
G. BUSH: Take Afghanistan: Not only could you not worship freely, but if you didn't worship according to the Taliban, you were whipped publicly. For example, if you were a woman, if you weren't in lockstep with these dictators and tyrants, that you would be brutalized. And America stands in stark contrast to that. We're the opposite end of that spectrum.
KING: The gay issue.
G. BUSH: Yeah.
KING: There are many gays in your party.
G. BUSH: Sure.
KING: Many gays in the Democratic Party. Many gays in America. You want a constitutional amendment to protect heterosexual marriage?
G. BUSH: Yes, I do.
KING: Why? Why do you need an amendment?
G. BUSH: Well, because I'm worried that the laws on the books that basically define marriage as between a man -- not basically, do define marriage between a man and a woman will be ruled unconstitutional, and then judges will make the decision as to the definition of marriage. And I think it's too important an issue for judges to make that decision. And I think that one way to guarantee that traditional marriage is defined as between a man and a woman is through the constitutional process...
KING: What about the union of gays? G. BUSH: Well, that's up to states, you know. If states choose to do that, in other words, if they want to provide legal protections for gays, that's great. That's fine. But I do not want to change the definition of marriage. I don't think our country should, from the traditional definition of marriage that's between a man or a woman.
The other thing about the constitutional process, it will get states involved. In other words, the people ought to be involved in this decision. And so that's why I took the stand I took.
KING: You do think...
(CROSSTALK)
G. BUSH: Well, listen, I...
KING: You don't amend easily.
G. BUSH: Yeah.
L. BUSH: That's right. It's a debate. I mean...
G. BUSH: Absolutely. But it's an important debate, Larry, and it's a debate that the people need to be involved with, and not courts. And that's what you're beginning to see. There was a decision here in California, it was a court decision. In other words, it's -- and it ruled that marriages in San Francisco were illegal according to California law. But the point is that this ought to be decided by people, and I just happen to believe and know that if you believe that traditional marriage ought to be the law of the land, that the way to guarantee that is through the constitutional process.
And I want to say something about this debate. It is a debate that must be conducted with the greatest respect for people. And that my judgment, I think our society is great because people are able to live their lifestyles, you know, as they choose or as they're oriented.
KING: Gay people would honestly say they want the benefits of a marriage.
G. BUSH: Well, you can do that through the legal process. You know, people have said to me, well, if you're gay, you can't inherit because -- and you don't get the exemption from income tax. Well, my answer there is get rid of the inheritance tax forever, the death tax, which I'm trying to do. And there are ways to make sure gays have got rights. And you can do so in the law."
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0408/15/lkl.00.html
or tiny URL: http://tinyurl.com/2mryg2
THE JOYRIDE THAT WAS THE AMERICAN EMPIRE
A review of Financial Armageddon: Protecting Your Future From Four Impending Catastrophes, By Michael J. Panzner
Carolyn Baker
A few days ago a friend called me just after hearing Michael Panzner on the Thom Hartmann show on Air America. My friend wanted me to read Panzer's book, Financial Armageddon and see what I thought. Apparently, Panzer's radio interview remarks were filled with passion and a sense of urgency, and upon reading the book, I experienced the same intensity in the author's writing which pleasantly surprised me. Here was a financial guru with 25 years' experience in the stock, bond, and currency markets and a faculty member of the New York Institute of Finance, who unlike Ben Bernanke and the silver-lining pundits of the financial pages, was not telling us that everything is going to be fine or that things will "bounce back in 2010"...
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m35255&hd=&size=1&l=e