tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-68430051082043557052024-02-20T21:58:23.035-05:00Vulgarian GoulashIf you are tired of the same ol' same ol' when it comes to political analysis, philosophical pondering, current events, etc. etc., then Vulgarian Goulash is for you: Radical intelligentsia at its best. Discover the reality behind the fictions offered by corporate news and/or our leaders.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-67464697884312843272012-01-31T12:57:00.001-05:002012-01-31T13:18:35.423-05:00The Declaration of Independents<span xmlns=""></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><strong>W</strong></span>e hold these truths to be self-evident: There are no such things as facts, only points-of-view. All political parties lie. All politicians are untrustworthy. Global warming may be a hoax.*<sup>1 </sup>Entitlements must be curtailed.*<sup>2</sup> Taxes are too high because of the spendthrift Democrats in Washington.*<sup> 3</sup> Obama just may be a socialist.*<sup>4</sup> Obama hasn't improved the economic mess.*<sup>5</sup> Obama has indebted the United States of America more than any other US President.*<sup>6</sup> Newt Gingrich may be scary with a serious case of megalomania, ethics and fidelity issues, but he's a fighter. Mitt Romney, though unemployed, receives $57,000 a DAY from the returns on his vast wealth thus proving his worth as a businessman. Ron Paul sounds about right*<sup>7</sup> though everyone says he's crazy. Rick Santorum is running for pope.<br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><strong>W</strong></span>hereas for the above stated reasons, we cannot make up our minds as to whom to vote for, despite the overwhelming evidence that the GW Bush Administration's funding of two wars off the books (thereby boosting the GDP numbers even as it kept such costs out of the federal budget) and its deregulation efforts on behalf of the financial sector seems to have caused the dire economic conditions to have befallen the United States, and seeing as we Independents now constitute the swing block vote for the next election, we declare ourselves more pure than the political parties and their adherents because—based upon the self-truths mentioned —there can be no objective reality upon which we can judge the worthiness and truthfulness of the candidates' claims, we therefore now proclaim our indecision is in keeping with our nation's fine conservative heritage.<br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><strong>T</strong></span>herefore, we, the Independent voters of America here-by swear that we won't be swayed by anything other than our intuition, our "gut" if you will. Seeing as we're not willing to parse the data/facts, crunch the numbers, investigate the claims of malfeasance and outright criminality of the Republicans, or of Obama's alleged socialistic doxology, nor are we willing to slog our way through the ample information on the internet (like those numbers from the Congressional Budget Office, the US Treasury, the Office of Management and Budget clearly indicating that Republican Administrations over the past thirty years have drastically increased the national debt) preferring to simply listen to both sides—Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Republican Presidential candidates etc and our local TV news channels –and, unable to separate fact from fiction, await some sign as to whom to vote for.<br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><strong>F</strong></span>urthermore, seeing as we can't, because of its progressive nature, believe the media,*<sup>8 </sup>nor can we believe our leaders because one side says this and the other side says that or because when we want simple answers we get too many facts which, like flies, spoil the soup.<br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;"><strong>B</strong></span>e it so resolved that we, the Independent voters of America, will decide at the last possible moment whether the Republicans or Democrats will control the Senate and Congress and whether or not a Republican will replace the possible foreign born Muslim Socialist President Obama this election so that America might once again be piloted by those that guided our Ship of State onto the shoals of diminished dreams and impoverishment.<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
*<strong>1 </strong>Independents know this to be true because Republicans have said so repeatedly, even though the science clearly indicates that climate change is upon us and closing in on an irreversible "tipping point" from which Earth cannot recover.<br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
*<strong>2 </strong>Independents know this to be true because Republicans have said so repeatedly, though many Independents do not think of Social Security, Medicare, Disability, etc as entitlements like the Republican Presidential candidates do.<br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong>*3</strong> Independents know this to be true because Republicans have said so repeatedly, even though the Obama Administration has lowered taxes.<br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong>*4</strong> Independents know this to be true because Republicans have said so repeatedly presumably due to the fact that Obama calls on taxing the top percent just 3.25 percent more than they're currently being taxed and this constitutes "redistribution of wealth" leaving aside the fact that trillions of dollars have been transferred from the middle class to the top one percent over the past thirty years via corporate and high-income tax rates being slashed.<br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong>*5</strong> Independents know this to be true because Republicans have said so repeatedly, even though there's been economic growth for 15 straight months, private sector jobs have been added to the economy for 21 straight months and unemployment has been reduced by 15 percent; not to mention the financial crisis that blew up the economy happened precisely because Republicans legislated (even as they still hope to pass more) deregulation and opted for a <em>laissez faire</em> policy as regards the financial markets allowing for a casino style approach using taxpayers' money as collateral.<br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong>*6</strong> Independents know this to be true because Republicans have said so repeatedly even though the documented facts/numbers prove that the GW Bush Administration took possession of a $5-plus TRILLION surplus upon taking office and left a $10 TRILLION debt load upon leaving office; Obama's share of the national debt? Still under $2 TRILLION primarily for the stimulus package and rescuing the auto industry thereby preserving millions of jobs.<br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong>*7</strong> Independents know this to be true because Republicans have said so repeatedly (if not <em>en masse</em>) especially his desire to rid the United States of the Federal Reserve, the non-governmental institution charged with keeping a rein on inflation; coupled with returning to the Gold Standard even though doing so would instantly cause inflation as there is but a limited, finite reserve of gold (it's called supply and demand) even as a return to the gold standard would force much of the world into default vis-à-vis debt load repayment as they have little reserves of gold (not to mention Ron Paul's promise to lower taxes to "as close to zero as possible" leaving thinking people to wonder: "What about funding for Education? Interstate highways? Airports? Mass transit? Infrastructure like dams and other flood control functions, electrification, overseeing the national endowments like parks, monuments, etc? What about the cost of defense? Law and order?" Left to wonder because Ron Paul is silent on all of that unless you understand his plan is to downsize government until it withers and dies).<br />
<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
*<strong>8 </strong>Independents know this to be true because Republicans have said repeatedly that the media is leftist and all about "gotcha" sensationalism passing for journalism, even though this usually spews from the likes of Palin, Bachmann, Limbaugh, Coulter, etc after they've been shown to be what they are (mindless cheerleaders for the Neoliberal few vs many paradigm).</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-61626190542551729142011-12-20T16:24:00.006-05:002012-03-07T10:37:13.907-05:00Occupy Movement As Battlefront?<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;"></span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;"></span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">First it was the Arab Spring in Tunisia, then Egypt, Libya, Syria. Then middle class humanists here at home joined the fray. What a freakin' turnaround, huh?</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">Maybe.</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">If nothing else the Occupy Wall Street movement (better known as the "99%" movement) has occupied the consciousness of America, indeed, the world, as similar movements spring up organically from the economic frustrations of people all across the face of our planet (think Great Britain, Greece and Italy). The current savage Capitalist course is, at best, more than a bit out of kilter for the overwhelming majority of people. And, the whole world knows it. Well, the masses do. The top one percent? Not so much. Here in America, they know not at all.</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">Proof of cluelessness is apparent as our federal Republican legislators are refusing to sign off on extended tax relief (payroll tax reductions for FICA—which pays out for Social Security and Medicare, Unemployment tax, etc) for 160 million working Americans (numbering much of Bachmann's fabled 47 percent that don't pay any taxes) so that 300,000 of America's top one percent won't have to have their Federal income tax raised 3.25 percent; these are people with total wealth averaging $8,200,000; people whose share of total income more than doubled to 23.5 percent from 1979 - 2007; people that have seen their income nearly quadruple (rising 275 percent). In comparison, from 1979 – 2007, household incomes for the three-fifths in the middle rose only 37 percent and only 18 percent for the poorest fifth. That's an annual average rise in income of 1.2758 percent for 60 percent of American workers while the bottom fifth only averaged 0.6206 percent increase.</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">Current level of income inequality is at Great Depression era proportion (c 1929). This trend has been a long time in the making. From our Founding Fathers' not-very-representative Democracy to our current plutocracy there has been a steady progression. During Reagan's Administration the onslaught against the American middle class began in earnest and has continued without interruption through both Republican and Democratic Administrations. In fact, a case could be made that the presidency of Bill Clinton did more to undermine the middle class than did Reagan and the two Bushes put together. Clinton did, after all, triangulate his way rightward far enough to give us NAFTA which has resulted in lost jobs and pay cuts at home. He gave us Welfare reform that left women with children without day care but with a demand they work for their meager stipends thereby guaranteeing a culture of poverty well into the future. It was on Clinton's watch that Glass-Steagall was killed thereby allowing banks to make staggering gambles guaranteed with our money. It was on his watch that the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000</i> passed thereby making it illegal to regulate hedge funds and derivatives markets. These latter sad examples of Liberal capitulation are directly culpable for the financial collapse (2007) that we are still struggling through today.</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">As I wrote in a previous blog, "multi-billionaires are </span><a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38556042/ns/us_news-giving/"><span style="color: #6600cc; font-family: trebuchet ms;">pledging</span></a><span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;"><span style="color: #330033;"> </span>to 'give back' half their fortunes. In America, 400 of just such wealthy are being asked to pledge $600 Billion via donation to charity of choice. Which means they're worth over $1.2 Trillion; or, to put it in perspective, worth more than the combined </span><a href="http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/Macroeconomics/Data/HistoricalRealGDPValues.xls"><span style="color: #6600cc; font-family: trebuchet ms;">GDPs</span></a><span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;"> of Mexico and the Caribbean (22 nations); or equal to that of Brazil; or all of South East Asia; or that of all of Africa (52 nations); or worth just a few hundred Billion less than the entire Middle East consisting of the GDPs for Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bahrain, Israel, Jordon, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Syria, United Arab emirates, West Bank and Yemen United, COMBINED (notice these include the "oil rich" Arab states). GDP </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product"><span style="color: #6600cc; font-family: trebuchet ms;">defined</span></a><span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;"><span style="color: #6600cc;"> </span>as the value of all products and services created/performed in a nation during one year; this includes all income earned."</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">So, these few, just a handful really, people richer than the entire continent of Africa begrudging a 3.25 percent increase in their Federal Income taxes, are the people that demand <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">you</i></b> give up your pension, your health care, your quality of life, your collective bargaining rights, and for many of you your very livelihoods or, at the very least, your just-getting-by middle class paychecks need reducing. Yeah, those people. The ones that have long since declared class war on the rest of us. The <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Knights of the One Percent</i>, those proxies carrying on this class war, are the politicians on both sides of the aisle that have been bought and paid for. Current Media exists to serve the status quo, not challenge it. And law enforcement/homeland security exists to secure the property of that upper class. You—as a regular person –have become the enemy. Do not confuse the Corporate "personhood" with your own. The former has much more rights because "s/he, Inc." can afford them. You, on the other hand, a regular flesh and blood person, have the right to demonstrate against not having rights. Well, to a point, that is. As we've seen, local authorities (elected officials, mind you) conspired via teleconferencing to coordinate the nationwide crackdown on the Occupy Movement under the usual rubric of public safety. That's why protesters had to be safely beaten with clubs, pepper sprayed and forcibly arrested.</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">We've heard from the Left a unified chant that this movement has changed the national conversation. Really?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If one watches the mainstream news, reads the mainstream press, learns of the world via hearing about it from uninformed friends and neighbors, one would necessarily have to conclude that no one is much talking about the 99%ers. Sure, left stalwarts such as Democracy Now, NPR, MSNBC, covered the protests replete with cropped shots to give the impression of huge crowds. But, as for radically changing the dialog?</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">What dialog? It's more like a monolog delivered from above. Which brings me to the central question for the Occupy Movement: Who do you think you're talkin' to? The elites have complete cognition of what they're doing. They have no problem with their obscene wealth. They think of themselves as Ayn Randian producers (of jobs) without giving a single moment of thought to the laborers that make them their fortunes. Thus, it has always been so. Here in America, after the Great Depression left millions of people utterly destitute, FDR implemented the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">New Deal</i>. It was a mea culpa to the People having suffered so much and for so long because of the profligate ways of a tiny class of the wealthy elite. The New Deal produced for the People, Social Security, Federally insured bank accounts, retirement provisions, 30 year mortgages, safe housing standards, and the Wagner Act, which promoted labor unions, etc. Seeing as Finance/Business/Industry had not taken care of their workers, government had no choice but to do so.</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">Now, after trillions have accrued to their accounts, while the masses' incomes haven't even kept pace with inflation (thereby actually denoting a loss of income over the 29 years studied) the wealthy elites demand any/all cuts come from the People in order to rectify the huge debt we've accrued under distinctly Republican Administrations with a profligacy unmatched in human history and a rapaciousness that these very elites applauded. Yep, for <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Knights of the One Percent</i> the ONLY solution to that massive debt load is to cut the People to the bone. If you're not one of them, that's your fault. A central tenet of elite belief as rendered by Republican Presidential candidate, Herman Cain, "Don't blame Wall Street. Don't blame the big banks. If you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself."</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">So, if you aren't speaking to the jaded upper tenth of one percent, how about the remaining fraction of that top one percent? You know, CEOs, financial executives, Wall Streeters? Well, they're the ones that leveraged their concocted, high-risk derivatives, Credit Default Swaps and Collateralized Debt Obligations on the backs of unscrupulously issued subprime mortgages and made billions in the process. They knew what they were doing. Betting on high-risk, high-yield payoffs without any concern whatsoever for the hundreds of millions of people that would be ruined if the betting didn't pan out because they knew the de-/unregulated process had become so entangled internationally and domestically that essentially whatever their betting losses might add up being, the Government would back them up with the People's money. Classic privatized profits and socialized costs. You know, "too big to fail," so you, the People, take the fall.</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">Ah, then, it must be to the government with whom you rhetorically speak. The Obama Administration in particular. Yes? Well, that Administration has capitulated on every issue thus far and just gave up on taxing the top one percent (it remains to be seen if Obama will also cave in on the Keystone XL Pipeline provision Republicans snuck into the House bill for the expansion of the payroll tax relief and extended unemployment benefits, a provision that seeks to allow the exploitation of one of the dirtiest oils on Earth, tar sands oil, thereby contributing even more CO<sup>2</sup> to the atmosphere which exacerbates global warming and subsequent climate change).</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">News Flash: no government from here on out will ever listen to such talk of "income inequality" and "fairness" or any other sort of socialistic conceptualization. The big reason for such a pessimistic outlook is due to that legally binding agreement, called the Financial Services Agreement, forced down the throats of the top 152 nations in the world in 1997 (Oh, yes, another bit of Clintonian fuckery that cannot be undone without dire consequences for the exiting parties). The FSA disallows any nation from regulating the high-risk, high-reward markets and, in effect, forced the world's banking institutions and governments to purchase the toxic concoctions that Wall Street created so that, by 2007, the entire financial world was so interconnected or, to use a Jon Stewartism, Clusterfuckered, that now we're all in the same boat. We, the Peoples of the world, are being told the ONLY solution for a decade of indiscriminate and costly war-fighting along with decades of out-of-control financial sorcery, is for the people to give up their retirements, their pensions, their guarantee of safety at the workplace, their health care benefits; with Medicare and Medicaid being decimated, wages lowered, collective bargaining eliminated and unionism destroyed.</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">Of course, that is utter BULLSHIT! And, that is why the Occupy Movement will continue on into the future. More and more people will enjoin the demonstrations as they lose work and then, their homes. More civil disobedience will occur. But, those very few that need to hear what this protest is all about, aren't listening, haven't been listening and, will never listen. For, in actuality, the ONLY true solution is a replacement for Capitalism as worldwide paradigm. America's elite top class of one percent, worth more than the entire continent of Africa, would have to share the wealth as we, the People have shared the burden. As history has shown, however, wealth must be wrested from the holders of same. Caution: look at what happened in Detroit when Occupiers took over an empty car dealership; the local SWAT Team was summoned with weapons drawn. The explanation for such over-the-top militant response? Without the Occupiers even knowing it, they had been officially transformed from protesters to anarchists. In fact, that is what our buildup of Police State/Homeland Security apparatus has been premised upon; to secure that wealth accumulated in the hands of an elite few from hordes of homeless unemployed, the economically ravished, the People. Reagan's vile lie of "trickle down" has finally been utterly exposed. His legacy (as well as that of the Tea Party Republicans' and spineless Democrats') will stain the streets blood red.</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">While I salute the Occupy Movement, I wonder at the naiveté of today's youth and the desperation of the older participants that allows them to believe two months of protest will alter the course we've been hurtling along since the New Deal; having quickened its pace since Reagan. It will take nothing less than a revolution to actually make a reality of one world, one people, operating together for one another, to best use the remaining finite planetary resources we have towards building a future that will allow for the evolution of humankind.</span></div>
<br />
<div align="justify" class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-indent: 0in;">
<span style="font-family: trebuchet ms;">Already the Occupy Movement is experiencing human nature. Ego is surfacing and the immature inability to compromise will once again prove the adage, Democracy is messy. But, if these protesters actually want things to change, for America to be about the People, all the people and not just the very few at the top, then they had better be ready to battle, not just demonstrate, for generations to come.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-36627289799985198392011-12-09T11:56:00.004-05:002011-12-09T12:07:39.500-05:00A Palestinian State Of Mind<div align="justify"><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">Just a bulletin to inform readers that my music is now available for listening on Facebook in conjunction with CD Baby. You do not have to join Facebook in order to listen to my music. All released material is available. You can listen to the Artist List (default list) or click on any album cover and you'll get immediate access to all songs contained on that album. The songs are full-play versions.</span><br /></div><br /><div align="justify"><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">I especially want people to listen to and share the link for my song, "A Palestinian State Of Mind," which is a celebration of Palestinians' United Nations request for statehood.</span><br /></div><br /><div align="justify"><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">Coming soon, my reflections on the Occupy Wall Street movement.</span><br /></div><br /><div align="justify"><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">But, for now, click on my link and enjoy some "ProgTronic" sounds, <em>a la</em> </span><a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/Steven-Lance-Music/205349856201604?sk=app_155326481208883"><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms;">Steven Lance Music</span></a></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-86206519591010642812011-09-15T13:26:00.002-04:002011-09-15T13:30:41.023-04:00Lest We Forget Israel's Origin<span xmlns=""><br /><p align="justify">With the Palestinian bid for statehood about to come up at the United Nations, lest we forget that Israel did the same. The state of Israel was unilaterally proclaimed by Zionist Jews in Palestine on 14 May 1948. A year later, a request for statehood by would-be Israel was presented to the UN General Assembly. On 11 May 1949, that request received the necessary 2/3 majority for approval. However, that General Assembly vote never received UN Security Council ratification.<br /></p><br /><p align="justify">Palestine is about to be born in the exact same fashion. Of course, the nascent nation of Palestine won't be allowed the same privilege of simple existential pronouncement. This new Palestine won't be allowed lapses in legal procedure due to semantic legerdemain. And, Palestine won't enjoy the immediate lavishing upon it of billions of dollars in aid from the United States. Nor the unending supply of the finest military weapons and weapons of occupation provided by that same angel, the US. Nor will any resolution harmful to even Palestine's mere image be tolerated quickly being quashed by US Security Council veto. Nor will Palestine be able to conduct daily terror operations-- replete with wholesale mayhem to and murder of civilians --without any consequences arising because America won't allow it. Nor will Palestine be able to refuse to define its borders—accepting the 1967 lines of demarcation for the nonce — even as it daily devours more and more of Greater Palestine, again without consequence or reprisal. Nor will Palestine be able to provoke Israelis until they respond with violence and hatred and then let loose punishing air attacks and ground assaults that decimate entire towns, cities, villages and claims 100s of times more deaths to innocent victims than were lost to the provoked response. This new nation of Palestine won't be allowed to speak of peace while conducting war; constantly given the "benefit of the doubt" that it means what it mouths even as its actions demonstrate a violently different reality.<br /></p><br /><p align="justify">No, this brand new nation of Palestine won't ever enjoy what Israel has. But what a Palestinian state will enjoy is access to the international legal institutions, like the World Court, in order to air its legal grievances against Israeli occupation and usurpation of Palestinians' homeland. And, once justice is rendered, Palestine will enjoy freedom from a brutal occupation, the end to daily humiliation, to apartheid. Palestine will generate a new hope and good will among its people. They will join together in national recognition, of a dream come true. Pride will flow through the veins of every Palestinian drawing breath on this planet.<br /></p><br /><p align="justify">Blessings to Mahmoud Abbas and nearly ten million Palestinians, for their audacity to hope after 60 years of a brutal occupation, for still believing that by speaking truth to power it will listen and respond in spiritually elevated human fashion, with justice for all.</p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-86556545751708538552011-05-23T06:53:00.004-04:002011-05-23T07:05:57.023-04:00The Time Has Come Today<span xmlns=""> <br /><p align="justify">Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the US Congress this week. President Obama gave a major speech regarding the Middle East and also addressed AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee). Netanyahu rejected Obama's suggestion to abide by UN Resolution 242. Congressional leadership and the President should have clearly conveyed that the time has come for Israeli intransigence against peaceful resolution to the Palestinian crisis be ended once and for all. Sadly, they did not.<br /><br />Why? Because we have been indoctrinated with a singular History of the Jews In Palestine; that Palestine is the Jews' rightful home. We have learned by rote and repetition, that Israel, as the region's sole democracy, is beset by 22 hostile Arab states with cultures of death to infidels. We do not protest, even in these harsh economic times, when $3 Billion of our tax dollars (not counting back-channel and black ops expenditures which some estimate as high as an additional $6 Billion) per year, are funneled to Israel, that money used to build illegal settlements in the West Bank and to repress Palestinians daily. We completely understand the clear difference of Hamas "terrorism" (firing small, ineffective rockets into Israel accounting for 16 deaths from 2001 to 2008) and the "defensive" Israeli assaults on civilian populations; for example, <em>Operation Cast Lead</em> which, in just three weeks, resulted in 1400 Palestinian people killed, most of them women and children, or <em>Operation </em><em>Peace for Galilee</em> which resulted in the destruction of Beirut and 18,000 civilian deaths in just the first days of the 1982 Lebanon invasion. We never think to question Israel's use of state-of-the-art weaponry/tools of repression (courtesy of the US) to commit daily acts of murder, humiliation and illegal occupation of the Palestinian people. Nor do we wonder at the pre-emptive invasions of sovereign nations that Israel carries out at will and whim.<br /><br />We all believe that Israel is acting in self-defense. That notion is fiction. In fact, Israel is guilty of crimes against humanity. A crime of gigantic proportions perpetrated upon some ten million human beings.<br /><strong><br />Historical truth:</strong> Jews claim that Israel/Palestine is their rightful home. Yet, the Semitic peoples whom were to become the Jews, originally came to Palestine as invaders. The only time in 4000 years of history that the Jews actually ruled in the region was under King David and son Solomon, again under the Maccabbees and currently under the Israeli government; a span of time constituting less than 4 percent of the region's history. There is no evidence that Jews ever comprised a majority in Palestine.<br /><br />Palestinian Arabs' roots go back thousands of years, generation upon generation operating under tribal laws despite whatever absent authority claimed to have control there. These Palestinians have lived upon the land of Palestine, as nomads, as tillers of its soil, all having harvested its bounty for most of Palestine's existence.<br /><br />And then came Zionism. Theodor Herzl's plan to have Jews from all over the world return to Zion and build a state. The first wave of illegal Jewish immigration (First Aliyah, 1882 - 1903) found a Palestine with less than 25,000 Jews living there, mostly in Jerusalem; constituting less than 5 percent of the population. The second wave of illegal immigration (Second Aliyah, 1904 – 1914) brought the number of Jews in Palestine to 85,000 or just 10.6 percent of the population.<br /><br />We often hear how the Mandatory for Palestine, Great Britain, "promised" Eastern European Jews by way of the 1917 Balfour Declaration, the whole of Palestine as the home of Jews. That view is clearly refuted by the Churchill White Paper of 1922 which maintained that the Balfour Declaration did not mean "the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole." Nor did it mean that Palestine, "as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be found <em>in Palestine</em>." It should also be understood that the Balfour Declaration stated, "<em>it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.</em>"<br /><br />The Mandate document (Council of the League of Nations, 24 July 1922) outlined the responsibilities of the Mandatory. Great Britain was to guarantee that Zionist immigration would be allowed only "under suitable conditions" (Article 6) and that the Arab majority's civil and religious rights would be protected (Article 2). Further, Article 17 of the British Mandate document prohibited armed defense groups ― like the Zionist underground group Ha-Shomer started in 1907 which burgeoned into Haganah in 1920 which split into Irgun, LEHI, and the Stern Gang ― unless such groups operated under the "supervision of the Mandatory." Despite this proscription these groups operated on their own perpetrating terrorist acts until Israel was proclaimed a State in 1948.<br /><br />The illegal immigration of Eastern European Jews continued unabated until, at the close of the Third Aliyah (1919 – 1923), Jews comprised 18.7 percent of the population in Palestine.<br /><br />Numerous pronouncements from Zionist leaders (Herzl, Jabotinsky, Ben-Gurion, etc) made clear that Zionists wanted all of Palestine (<em>Eretz Yisrael</em>). More and more land was confiscated from Arab Palestinians until in 1936 an Arab revolt erupted. Outlawed Jewish terrorist organizations indiscriminately murdered thousands of Arab Palestinians. As the British cracked down on the illegal immigration and fought the Jewish terrorists, the various illegal armed groups targeted the British military. A protracted round of murderous terrorism convinced the Brits to turn the Mandate over to the United Nations. In 1947, a special committee was convened (UNSCOP) to study the situation. Its recommendation was to divide Palestine into two separate states. At this juncture, Zionists comprised 33 percent of the population yet were offered 55 percent of Biblical Palestine. Of course, the Arab Palestinians refused the offer, much as any humans would if their home had been thieved and then offered only the attic and basement in which to live.<br /><br />Then, in 1948, Israel self-declared statehood and conducted the Nakba (Catastrophe) which was the forceful expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians from their homes. All that was left behind was confiscated by the nascent nation of Israel; "80 percent of the entire land area of Israel is land abandoned by the Arab Refugees. Nearly a quarter of all the standing buildings in Israel had been occupied by those Arabs. Ten thousand shops, stores and other firms inside new Israel had been Arab. Half of all the citrus fruit holdings in the new State had belonged to the Arabs now made refugees. By 1954, more than one-third of the entire Jewish population of Israel was living on 'absentee property' ― most of it now 'absorbed' into the Israeli economy, and unilaterally sequestered by Israeli legislation against a 'global' compensation offer." [<em>The Other Exodus</em>; Erskine Childers; <em>The Spectator Limited</em>; 12 May 1961]. Those refugees are still refugees. In fact, one third of the world's refugees are Palestinian.<br /><br />Israel started the 1956 Suez war and confiscated the entire Sinai. Israel proceeded to start the "Six Days War" (1967) and grabbed more land, Gaza and the West Bank (Judea and Samaria). The UN passed a Resolution (242) demanding Israel return the occupied territories. Israel has refused ever since.<br /><strong><br />Today: </strong>Israel is in daily violation of article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which forbids population transfer into territory occupied in war. Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, such population transfer is also a war crime. The illegality of the settlements was reaffirmed by the International Court of Justice in July 2004. Israel's "Wall of Separation" was determined to be illegal by the International Court. Israel continues to build that wall and continues to send religious zealots into the territories to make "facts on the ground" nullify any two-state agreement.<br /><br />Israel points its finger at Iran as to nuclear proliferation although Israel has engaged in its own illegal (non-signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty) nuclear weapons program with missile delivery capability of warheads and has done so without joining the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency; Iran has). The United States supports this criminality and, in fact, champions sanctions against Iran for merely enriching uranium for its peaceful nuclear energy program but says nothing about Israel's 200 plus weapons of mass destruction.<br /><br />The current situation in Israel is one of apartheid, of brutal repression of an entire people. Days ago, 12 Palestinians commemorating the Nakba were shot and killed by Israeli Occupation Forces, another two dozen wounded. Imagine the worldwide outcry and rush to action if Jews commemorating the Holocaust were indiscriminately murdered.<br /><br />Amidst democratic aspirations of the "Arab Spring" and 63 years of ruthless Israeli tactics to deny the Palestinians their own rightful home, the President of the United States should have stood up to Israel and issued an ultimatum: Justice for the Palestinian people (a two-state solution along the lines of the 2003 Arab Peace Initiative and UN Resolution 242: A Palestinian state based upon pre-1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital) <strong>or</strong> Israel loses its "special relationship" with the US, including the end of weapons transfers and billions in foreign aid. President Obama chose not to so. That act of choice makes America complicit in Israel's continuing crimes against humanity; a complicity for which Americans shall surely pay. </p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-5332576078697796872011-03-27T08:02:00.003-04:002011-03-27T08:08:09.441-04:00Sheeple<span xmlns=""> <br /><p align="justify">Sheeple: People being herded along, believing in the preposterous and bleating it <em>ad infinitum</em> thereby indoctrinating others in an ever-expanding sphere of ignorant influence. </p><br /><p align="justify">Republican/Tea Party shepherds have launched an assault on unionism. Americans are being told that unionized workers are the cause of states' indebtedness. We're being told that public sector retirement costs are too much to bear; that health plans for public workers are costing too much. Americans are being told that there is an imbalance between private sector unions (only 6.9% of the workforce) and public sector union workers (9%) that needs to be remedied by eliminating all unionization. Americans are being sold a fiction. Again and again, Republicans/Tea Partiers are not telling the truth in order to scare enough people into acting against their own best interests. </p><br /><p align="justify">First, let's identify just who these "public sector" employees are: firemen, police officers, teachers, emergency response personnel, government nurses, highway workers, snow plow drivers, etc etc. Also known as the middle class, or simpler yet, the American working class of which 90 plus percent are nonunionized. </p><br /><p align="justify">Despite the fact that benefits (like retirement, health insurance etc) are in lieu of higher salary (deferred compensation) such benefits are being portrayed as unmerited "bonuses" which workers do not deserve. Americans have forgotten that Ronald Reagan, in his final years as President, urged raising teachers' salaries to entice the best and brightest into the profession. At that time, teachers in New York with nearly 15 years experience were making what the proposed salary for <em>starting</em> teachers were to be paid. It has been the states' and federal government's responsibility to make good on setting aside the necessary funds to abide by the contracts entered into. But, rather than raise taxes, they cut taxes. Rather than lockbox the retirement funds (Social Security at the federal level) they spent it on give-aways to businesses in order to create jobs. However, as two separate NYS Comptroller studies illustrated, less than 20 percent of the jobs promised by companies given those tax breaks actually ever appeared. Nationwide we have unemployment levels unseen since the Great Depression. </p><br /><p align="justify">Republican/Tea Party spokespersons claim that public sector union workers (including benefits) make 42 percent more than comparable private sector union workers. Not true, but that's what the American public is being saturated with (paid for by Karl Rove's "<a href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/03/both-sides-assail-new-anti-union-ad-from-rove-linked-group.php">Crossroads GPS</a>" and the arch conservative "Club for Growth"). The only studies that went into enough detail to be able to truly compare apples to apples, demonstrated that public sector union members were 70 percent college graduates while private sector union workers were only 25 percent college graduates. Therefore, based upon education attainments, the public sector is <em>underpaid</em>, making <em>less than</em> the private sector. </p><br /><p align="justify">Yet, what are we hearing from the American media? Propaganda paid for by the monied likes of the Koch brothers (tied for 18<sup>th</sup> richest people in the WORLD) and Republicans Dick "Grass Roots" Armey and Karl "Sleaze Job" Rove. What we're hearing is that the public sector is bleeding the country dry. It's a direct assault on workers, in general, and unionism in particular. Republicans/Tea Partiers understand that unions have always stood on the side of labor, against unfair wages and unsafe conditions in the workplace. Republicans/Tea Partiers understand that many union members died confronting the unfair working conditions in America; men and women murdered to save the paymaster money. But, most importantly, Republicans/Tea Partiers understand that unionists usually vote Democrat seeing as Republicans do not value labor. </p><br /><p align="justify">It's a no-brainer then. Using the financial crisis created by a greedy, criminal Wall Street, newly elected Republicans/Tea Partiers are attempting to punish Democratic supporters; creating conditions that will make it more difficult for them to vote (e.g., not allowing same day registration/vote, requiring specific photo IDs, etc). These Republican/Tea Party "mavericks" are hell-bent on crushing unions for the monied elite they serve. With 65 percent of the fantastic gains made this past decade going to the top one percent, need you wonder who the elite are? They're the ones holding back trillions of dollars from investing to create jobs in order to break the American worker down to serfdom levels where they will be woefully undercompensated, but at least working and, therefore surviving, even as their safety while doing so is diminished. </p><br /><p align="justify">Governor Scott Walker (Wisconsin) came into office and immediately delivered a $118 million tax cut to businesses. One week later he claimed the state had a "fiscal crisis" with a deficit of $132 million. He demanded concessions from public sector workers. The unions agreed to give-backs that balanced the budget. But, Walker wasn't satisfied. He demanded an end to collective bargaining (exempting those unionized workers that voted in large blocks for him: Police and Firemen). Democratic state Senators left Wisconsin in order to create a situation such that a vote could not go forward as there wasn't a quorum. The Republicans then defied an advance notification statute, finagled the law regarding quorum saying that because they removed all "fiscal items" from the bill (a budget relief bill, mind you) they could vote without a quorum and did so. Governor Walker has signed the bill into law even as it has been legally challenged and is currently under judicial stay. </p><br /><p align="justify">In Michigan, the newly elected Republican/Tea Party Governor Rick Snyder created a bill that passed into law giving him complete authority to appoint a person that can eliminate any elected public official of whom he does not approve. Elected officials. Replaced at the whim of a single person. Democracy? Constitutional? Moral? </p><br /><p align="justify">And it doesn't stop there. Twenty states have already introduced bills that, if voted into law, will prohibit or severely restrict collective bargaining. Even worse, there's a bill being introduced on Capitol Hill by Republicans/Tea Partiers that will allow states to declare bankruptcy in order to nullify their existing contracts with public sector workers. That means retirement, health insurance, etc will not be honored. People doing their jobs well for thirty-five years are now being told, "Yes, we underpaid you throughout your career. Yes, we promised we'd make it up to you with health care and retirement. But, we failed to do what needed to be done— paying as we went —and instead relied on the fantasy sold by Republicans that we could reduce revenues by cutting taxes for the wealthy and corporations then borrow our way to prosperity, at which time we'd pay up." Of course, that never happened as 'Trickle down' has been a dismal failure for 90 percent of the population and most certainly emptied governmental coffers! </p><br /><p align="justify">Currently, several polls have been conducted regarding Governor Walker's assault on collective bargaining. One poll has it at 66 percent against, the other has 70 percent against. Americans intimately understand the concerns of the working class. However, if you listen to the media one would think that Americans are all for crushing the unions, that "America's" message is not that all workers should be pulled up to a living wage, but rather, that all workers should be pulled down to non-sustenance wages without benefits. </p><br /><p align="justify">What remains to be seen is if we, the People, resist or remain sheeple being prodded to slaughter.</p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-17371055263106950672011-03-04T11:19:00.003-05:002011-03-04T11:30:45.243-05:00Fuzzy Logic<span xmlns=""> <p align="justify">If we are to believe Congressional Republicans, their three largest concerns are the same as held by the "public" as supposedly expressed via the overwhelming victory by Republicans and Tea Party candidates. These concerns are: 1) The Debt. 2) Unemployment. 3) Shrinking Government.<br /></p><p align="justify">Being that the Republican Party is the "fiscally responsible" party, it logically follows that the American voters went that way in order to alleviate their main concerns.<br /><br />Or so conventional "wisdom" has maintained since November. However, as so often happens with the American electorate, they've been bamboozled into believing the opposite of what is true.<br /><br />Take the GOP-as-fiscally-responsible-party cliché. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms">Bogus!</a> In the period between 1978 – 2009 the Republican Administrations have outspent by a third and added debt at a rate nine times that of the Democrat Administrations. Yet, America believes, without a doubt, that the GOP is the fiscally responsible party.</p><p align="justify">Conservative icon Ronald Reagan was a cheerleader for "Supplyside Economics" (characterized by his own Vice President as "voodoo economics") which maintained that cutting taxes on the wealthy and spending taxpayer money on givebacks to big business would manifest itself manyfold times in the pockets of middle class Americans by way of "trickle down." There would be jobs a-plenty and it would forever be "Morning in America." </p><p align="justify">Middle class Americans have been paying the price ever since for such fuzzy logic. Their incomes (adjusted for inflation) have not grown for thirty years, jobs have vanished at an alarming rate and consequently unemployment has grown to just under 10 percent (20 percent if you count those discouraged from looking for jobs that aren't there).<br /><br />As demonstrated by the "official" Republican response to the latest Presidential State of the Union address, Paul Ryan (R-WI) put forth the "new" Republican program: Repeal the Health Care Reform Act. Raise taxes on those making between $20,000 and $200,000 while cutting by half the taxes of those making more than $200,000. Raise the retirement age to 70 years old and cut Social Security benefits. Deregulate for increased growth. Cut the Corporate tax rate.<br /><br />New? Let's examine the proposals more closely:</p><ul><li><div align="justify">Are we to believe Ryan doesn't know that <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/g/government_accountability_office/index.html?inline=nyt-org">2/3 of our corporations</a> don't pay any income taxes? As clearly <a href="http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_welfare/real_tax_rates_plummet.php">shown</a>, the typical scenario is something like this: During a three year period (2001-2003) just 275 of the Fortune 500 corporations earned $1.1 Trillion (which should have resulted in $370 Billion coming into the US Government coffers) but only reported $557 Billion to the IRS. "Instead of a 35 percent tax rate, the companies as a group paid a three-year effective tax rate of only 18.4 percent." To make matters worse, these companies garnered "$175.2 Billion in tax breaks over the three years." Therefore, our Corporate neighbors stiffed the American People $345 Billion. That's a trillion every 3 years for 30 years. Pretty much our current debt load.<br /><br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Deregulation? Deregulation greased the skids for the worst financial disaster since the Great Depression even as it made conditions ripe for the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill debacle.<br /><br /></div></li><li><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify" align="justify">The Republican/Tea Partiers demand cutting Social Security, already too meager to live on, rather than requiring all income over $106,800 be taxed at the same rate workers' income is withheld, which would fully fund Social Security. </div></li></ul><ul><li><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify" align="justify">By raising the retirement age, Americans will be required to work until 70 years old. Along with Tea Party calls for diminishment of the Minimum Wage, Americans should be ready to work for poverty wages all their life until death.</div></li></ul><ul><li><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify" align="justify">Cutting taxes for the wealthy has been an ongoing crusade by Republicans since Reagan. The premise is that such tax reduction stimulates the economy and produces jobs. Americans should be wondering: When will those jobs finally materialize? After all, it's been thirty years and there still aren't employment opportunities for all that want a decent job with benefits and a living wage. Of course, the b part of this strategy is to raise taxes on the middle class. </div></li></ul><ul><li><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify" align="justify">Repealing the Healthcare Reform Act. Even though the Congressional Budget Office crunched the numbers and said repeal would add an additional $230 Billion to the debt, Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner (R-OH), dismisses such a figure as "just their opinion." Understand that the CBO has been the official nonpartisan number cruncher of record since its inception in 1974, with both parties adhering to the facts as provided by the CBO. Now the Repubs and Tea Partiers simply dismiss any such limitations of reality and factual information by claiming it's mere opinion. And just what does <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/17/opinion/17krugman.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss">Paul Krugman</a>, Nobel Prize winner in economics have to say about this? "We are, I believe, witnessing something new in American politics. Last year, looking at claims that we can cut taxes, avoid cuts to any popular program and still balance the budget, I observed that Republicans seemed to have lost interest in the war on terror and shifted focus to the war on arithmetic. But now the G.O.P. has moved on to an even bigger project: the war on logic." Krugman goes on to dismantle the GOP arguments as so many "three-card monte tricks" and "childish logical fallacies." He further maintains the Repubs' obsession with repeal is due to one single factor – coverage for the uninsured. Why? "…the modern G.O.P. has been taken over by an ideology in which the suffering of the unfortunate isn't a proper concern of government, and alleviating that suffering at taxpayer expense is immoral, never mind how little it costs."</div></li></ul><p align="justify">So, there you have it. The "new" Republican/Tea Party coalition plans on doing what the old-guard has been doing since 1980: Increase the debt. Increase taxes on middle class. Decrease taxes on the wealthy and corporations. Dismantle government "entitlement" programs for the People while enhancing the "entitlement" programs for corporate America/Big Business at taxpayer expense. </p><p align="justify">As for the claim that the wealthiest few percent pay the lion's share of income taxes, since our system of taxation is based upon value (income/net wealth) of course those holding the lion's share of income and net wealth will pay larger portions of the revenue total. But, as we've seen, trillions of dollars that should have been coming into governmental coffers have never arrived even as the tax rates have been steadily reduced for corporations and the wealthiest few percent. Corporations paid 25 percent of federal outlays in the 1950s, now they contribute but 7 percent of the revenue collected. </p><p align="justify">And, further, as jobs are concerned, how is it that Americans do not see the stark disconnect between Republican rhetoric and the reality of a capitalist society? Capitalists are afforded all sorts of tax breaks to create jobs yet whenever there's an unemployment problem, the People scream at government? Why? It is the private sector's responsibility to create the jobs necessary for prosperity. That is why it receives all those tax breaks. </p><p align="justify">Grover Norquist, Republican activist and former speech writer for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, clearly articulated the plan for shrinking government: Republicans "…simply want to reduce it to the size where (we) can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub." </p><p align="justify">Save government by killing it? Fuzzy logic.<br /></p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-74671620715224221252011-02-13T07:03:00.008-05:002011-02-14T13:51:32.015-05:00Our Uncivil Discourse<span xmlns=""> <p align="justify">Desiring civility in political discourse isn't merely about manners. Such civility is required if we are to have a functioning democracy where ideas are debated upon their merits and not from which side of the aisle the ideas arise. Sadly, the political discourse has become more and more uncivil during the last several decades and especially the past two years.<br /></p><p align="justify">How many of you remember Ronald Reagan, arch Conservative, sustained his Presidency on divisive rhetoric? He constantly harassed Democrats as being Liberal and he created a storyline that laid all blame for America's problems at the feet of "liberals." From the tearing apart of the family, to the lack of backbone in supporting armed interventions, to the restrictive regulations placed upon businesses, to taxation being too high.<br /></p><p align="justify">Such rhetoric was drummed into America's subconscious by the status quo biased mainstream media. However, the "reality" created by Reagan's fictions were anything but real: The breakdown of family (by every measureable standard) was largely the result of financial hardship due to joblessness or inadequate pay and federal diminishment of safety net outlays. Reagan used a contrived "exceptional exemplar" of the welfare queen driving around in a Cadillac to create a push to end the "welfare state" as America was being described by the rightwing media even as corporate CEOs were making obscene salaries and bonuses, even as corporate America continued to whittle away at the tax code to such an extent that a majority began to pay zero taxes (currently two-thirds of American corporations pay no income taxes.)<br /></p><p align="justify">"Liberal" was a charge levied against those opposed to Reagan's Contra war against the Nicaraguan Sandinistas, a popular movement fighting an oppressive, murderous regime (Somoza); this "war," a pure terrorist endeavor initiated and funded by the Reagan Administration in defiance of United States law.<br /></p><p align="justify">Reagan's manipulation of the word "Liberal" created a hostile atmosphere/context which extended to the financial and business sectors as well by removing from debate all those whom protested deregulation and wholesale giveaways to the monied class. Reagan single-handedly sought to break American unions. He lowered federal income tax rates which directly led to large local increases in school taxes.<br /></p><p align="justify">Reagan won two terms with such patently absurd rhetorical onslaught.<br /></p><p align="justify">Bush, Sr., Reagan's Vice-President, when he ran for the Presidency kept hammering Mike Dukakis with "card carrying ACLU member" to great effect. Yes, the American Civil Liberties Union, a bastion of defense against governmental abuse and assuring our civil liberties posited by the US Constitution's Bill of Rights, was portrayed as un-American. Bush won.<br /></p><p align="justify">Bush's son, George Jr., also twice won his Presidential bids using his father's methodology of railing against "the Left" and conflating that segment's misgivings about America's direction as being "haters of America."<br /><br />But, all of that pales in comparison to the past two years since a black man— Obama —moved into the White House. The Tea Party devotees conducted scurrilous media campaigns. Their use of terms like "evil," "Marxist," "Socialist," "Communist," coupled with their rally signage depicting racist commentary and imagery unsuited for political discourse not to mention their open display of firearms at many of the Tea Party events, was anything but helpful in forwarding the debate of principles and future policy direction of our nation. What it did was fan embers of hatred and create "enemies" of their fellow Americans.</p><p align="justify">As began with Ronald Reagan, patron saint of Conservatives, the right seeks to continually deride ideas not their own, denigrating science and facts along the way, via labeling any/all who disagree with their "vision" of America with a single pejorative in order to turn a dumbed down American populace away from consideration of the reality facing them.<br /><br />After all, if you're a "Marxist/Socialist/Communist/ Liberal/Democrat", etc, then there's no need to listen to you; you have no place at the table. Of course, the Republicans using such disreputable tactics know exactly what they're doing, creating a fictive narrative to get what they want.<br /><br />And, just what is it that Republicans want? They want government of, by and for the people to die and be replaced with only enough government for channeling what little middle class wealth remains to the coffers of the top few percent. Republicans want to destroy the middle class so that a vast new pool of cheap labor can be exploited. Republicans want only enough government to safeguard their interests at home and abroad.<br /></p><p align="justify">Remember Sharron Angle (Arizona) speaking about lowering the minimum wage in order to spur job creation? In nearly the same breath she spoke to eliminating social security and of the sense of "entitlement" unemployed citizens have. Tea Party sweetheart Angle thinks American citizens should work at less than $8.00 an hour <em>and</em> save for their own retirement. Of course, such earnings amount to a poverty wage even if both adult members of a household can find such work. There is no disposable income to save. Angle was also the woman who kept repeating her "Second Amendment remedies" solution to anything other than total victory for the Tea Party electoral candidates.<br /></p><p align="justify">Sarah Palin used "cross hair" imagery (as used in gun sights) to "target" opponents and when questioned about the appropriateness of such imagery stated to her supporters that now isn't the time to back down but to "reload" and "take back our country."<br /></p><p align="justify">Republican leaders of both houses issued repeated and dire warnings against the "move to Socialism" under Obama creating an atmosphere of fear and loathing which resulted in Republicans refusing to participate in governance— no compromising with enemies, remember —and instead agitated via outlandish claims in hopes of winning midterm elections.<br /></p><p align="justify">It all worked. And, then, in Arizona, there was a tragedy of monumental proportion; a sitting Congresswoman, a Democrat, was shot by a deranged gunman as were 19 others, six of them dying.<br /></p><p align="justify">We immediately hear the Tea Party and Republican rightwing saying it's not their fault, that you cannot draw exact parallels to the deranged gunman and the deranged violence-engendered statements issued by the Tea Partiers and Republicans.<br /></p><p align="justify">Republican leaders should have denounced such dangerous rhetoric but chose to use it to their advantage. Now that the piper needs to be paid, they cop out by crying crocodile tears and refusing to take personal responsibility. Palin immediately blames the "lame stream media" for a "blood libel" against her; she, not even stateswoman enough to understand using such a weighted term is totally inappropriate. Sharron Angle refuses to answer the pertinent question: "Does such a shooting conform to her Second Amendment remedies solution?" Tea Partiers, in general, now claim at every opportunity that they didn't hate, they just voted—regardless of party—for those whom would make good decisions for America.<br /></p><p align="justify">So, that's why they voted to reinstate the party that has been decimating the American middle class for thirty years? Running up the national debt to the detriment of future generations? The party that has bankrupted America and murdered the American Dream?<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans, especially the Tea Party variety, must stop with the lies, the distortions, the baseless charges and begin to discuss the problems this country faces with a commitment to rectifying the damage their Free Market ideology and deregulation efforts have wrought.</p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-8363730005415101372011-01-06T14:34:00.002-05:002011-01-06T14:38:09.150-05:00Oh, 'bama<span xmlns=""><p align="justify">After the "shellacking" this past election, Republicans regained the majority in the House of Representatives. Republicans, remember, since 1980 have continuously undermined the American middle class until it is now in its death throes. Earnings for the middle class have been stagnant for thirty years while the top few percent of Americans have reaped huge dividends. As a <a href="http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html">percent of wealth</a>, (generally defined as what a person/family owns minus all debt) the top one percent holds 34.6 percent of all wealth while the bottom 80 percent (wage and salary earners) share just 15 percent of America's wealth. In terms of financial wealth, (defined as "net worth minus net equity in owner-occupied housing" ) the top 1 percent holds 42.7 percent of all wealth in America while the bottom 80 percent share 8.7 percent. Yet, it was largely the middle class (albeit the older, whiter, racist, ignorant, fervently religious variety) that ran roughshod over common sense and put the Repubs back in power after that party has single-handedly transferred trillions of dollars from the middle class to the top one percent; the same party that refused to regulate the financial industry which has resulted in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.<br /></p><p align="justify">It would seem to be a no-brainer that Democrats needed to fight the good fight against an obvious Plutocratic takeover of America. But, the Obama Administration sought to reach "compromise" via bipartisanship. The Obama method of negotiation was to give in to the demands of the Plutocrats BEFORE sitting at the negotiation table. With every sellout, the Republican media spin machine spewed more and more mis- and dis- information, lies, deliberate distortion and outright fabrications intended to paint the middle-of-the-road Obama Administration as being radical Socialists/Marxists. Absurd. But, effective. Because a majority of Americans are truly vapid, uneducated, ignorant and blinded by false sense of patriotism, they bought the fiction of Republican spin-meisters and voted the criminals back into office.<br /></p><p align="justify">Now, just how much bipartisan cooperation did Obama obtain with that strategy? None…For those of you whom will object by way of the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" bipartisan legislation repeal, the courts had already made the issue moot; either repeal it or the courts will do it for them. As for bipartisan support for the Bush Tax Cut extension, it only came when Obama agreed to increase the national debt by another trillion dollars going to the top 2 percent so that 2 million unemployed would continue to get their meager checks. Health care? No bipartisan support for a watered down bill that, while helping to ameliorate some of the problems, in no way alters the fundamental problem of a profit-bloated insurance-driven industry. In fact, it isn't exactly news that the 111<sup>th</sup> Congress was basically rendered null-and-void for the better part of two years by the No-ist Republicans that closed their ears to appeals of doing the business of the American People and simply folded their arms in defiance; using the time to create a new reality that all the faults of government and economic decline were the fault of Democrats, in general, Obama, in particular.<br /></p><p align="justify">As the election proved, such a strategy worked to perfection.<br /></p><p align="justify">In response, Obama is shaking up his staff. It seems apparent that he'll offer the job of Chief of Staff to <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-03/obama-said-to-consider-william-daley-for-top-white-house-post.html">William Daley</a>, a JPMorgan Chase & Co. executive and former U.S. Commerce secretary, in order to "repair relations with the business community after coming under fire from industry groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The nation's biggest business lobbying group opposed Obama's health-care and financial-regulatory overhauls and committed $75 million to political ads in the midterm congressional elections, mainly directed against Democrats." Get that? Obama now believes he needs to play nice with the scoundrels that gambled outrageously and lost causing a worldwide near-depression and then took a multi-trillion dollar bailout from the American people even as they were busy laying off tens of thousands of workers and still haven't begun to create the atmosphere for increased lending in order to grow jobs that have been promised since Reagan but never seem to appear. This is the same William Daley that wrote a December 2009 op-ed piece in the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/23/AR2009122302439.html">Washington Post</a> in which he suggested that Democrats, "plot a more moderate, centrist course or risk electoral disaster not just in the upcoming midterms but in many elections to come."<br /></p><p align="justify">One would think such an electoral beating would bring clarity to the mind of Obama and his advisors. Sadly, Obama has stated that the new reality of a Republican majority in Congress requires MORE compromise, MORE movement to the "center" in order to regain strength.<br /></p><p align="justify">All the above must be considered in context of the incoming class of Republicans being Tea Party devotees; people so far right that only five years ago they were seen as lunatics; a fringe element so outside the mainstream that they were laughable; a strain of stupid that started with Ronald Reagan and has grown ever since until now becoming middle-of-the-road centrist.<br /></p><p align="justify">Thus, our brave agent of change, with the audacity of hope to strengthen him, with a majority of Americans behind him and with a majority in both houses of Congress, squandered that opportunity. Obama now plans to sell completely out to the fractious factions of brutal Plutocrats and Rightwing-nuts. Having given away so much for the benefit of so few, having decided to give-in rather than fight, embracing one-way compromise as the operative strategy for future, there is no hope to be had. Incoming Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), who will chair the <em>House Oversight and Government Reform Committee</em>, plans on conducting hundreds of "<a href="http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/Hundreds-of-Investigations-of-Obama-Administration-on-the-Horizon-5710">investigations</a>" into everything from the "radicalization of Muslims in America," to "climategate," to "corruption in the Obama Administration" (which he termed the "most corrupt President in modern times" even though there isn't any evidence to remotely suggest any corruption whatsoever), to the "Obamacare" Healthcare Reform Bill passed into law and which Issa wants to see repealed, to the "black panthers" voter intimidation allegations (prompted by a video of two black men hanging outside of a voting place even as voters entered and left without any interfacing at all), to revisiting the alleged ACORN improprieties, as well as Obama's response to the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill (notice Issa isn't about to investigate BP, Halliburton or Transocean). Darrell Issa is the Congressman who sent a <a href="http://www.democracynow.org/2011/1/4/headlines/rep_issa_to_big_business_what_regulations_should_gop_fight">letter</a> out to 150 businesses and business groups asking what regulations they would like to see overturned in order to prompt job creation. In fact, Rep. Issa plans on holding seven new hearings a week for the next two years (a mammoth fishing expedition funded by US taxpayers for the sole purpose of creating a storm-cloud of controversy in hopes of sweeping Obama out of office in 2012).<br /></p><p align="justify">Yeah, Barack…sounds like you'll have a lot of luck with that new strategy of utter capitulation. Really appears that the Repubs are up for compromise. I guess you have forgotten that when you came into office and there were <em>bona fide</em> war crimes to investigate (with nearly 2 million dead Iraqis as a result of Bush's initiation of a war that was predicated on pure backroom PNAC bullshit, not to mention the tortures or massive private contractor fraud, etc etc) you stated the country needed to move forward so you conducted ZERO investigations.<br /></p><p align="justify">See how you're to be repaid? Not with bipartisanship, but rather, with witch hunts and the devastation of your Presidency. In two years, the American people will surely understand you let the Republicans rule when in the minority even as they rule when in the majority. Which should lead the electorate to wonder: Why bother vote for Democrats?<br /></p><p align="justify">There was so much promise with your election. Now? Thanks for nothin'…<br /></p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-41102334063778707892010-10-29T12:20:00.003-04:002010-10-30T09:25:11.759-04:00Vote To Save America<span xmlns=""> <p align="justify">November 2<sup>nd</sup> is perhaps the single most important voting day we have experienced over the past thirty years. All polls seem to suggest that the Tea Party crowd along with rightwing Republicans are poised to take back the majority in the US Congress and perhaps even the Senate. If this happens, the American middle class is doomed. There will be a steady diminution of decent paying jobs, health coverage, retirement benefits. What are the American public thinking? After thirty years of running this country for the benefit of the top few percent, we are mired in unemployment, debt, two wars of convenience being waged, education on the decline. We are seeing the results of the Chicago School of economics (Milton Friedman) theft of trillions of dollars taken from the middle class and transferred to the top few percent always with the promise of more and better paying jobs that never appeared.<br /></p><p align="justify">We are at a place in history where Republican-backed tax breaks are offered to corporations to better facilitate the off-shoring of manufacturing jobs and the American people want to reinstitute a Republican majority even as they claim to be upset over the joblessness. [This constitutes hundreds of billions of tax payers' dollars.]<br /></p><p align="justify">We are at a place in history where Republican-backed efforts to fight two contrived wars by borrowing the necessary funding and hiring subcontractors to do the bulk of work historically done by military personnel has cost $3 Trillion dollars yet Americans are poised to re-elect a Republican majority. [The reason for these wars had nothing whatsoever to do with WMDs or Saddam or installing a democracy; the real reasons, as have become obvious, reduces to oil as regards Iraq and rare earth mineral resources as regards Afghanistan]<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans have decimated the welfare system for the People even as they have increased same for corporations; now some 10 times what is spent on the safety net for the People, and the electorate seems determined to put Republicans back into the majority.<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans are against the minimum wage-- working at minimum wage keeps one in poverty; eliminating the minimum wage is the slippery slope that slides the entire scale of remuneration downward for EVERYONE --and worker/voters want more Republicans in office.<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans put front and center their complaints that the Obama Administration's "Economic Stimulus Bill" has been a complete failure even as Reuters just reports that the Stimulus Bill "…boosted real GDP in the (3<sup>rd</sup>) quarter by between 1.7 percent and 4.5 percent, adding at least $200 billion in economic activity…It raised employment by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million jobs during the second quarter of this year, CBO estimated. Measured another way, CBO said the stimulus increased the number of full-time equivalent jobs by up to 4.8 million, as part-time workers shifted to full-time work or employers offered more overtime work." This on top of the 8 million jobs saved; more than all the jobs created during the two Bush terms. Yet, Americans are ready to put Republicans back in the majority.<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans are against "pork" (a.k.a. earmarks) costing—in total, for each and every Congressperson and Senator combined --$50 billion (funds which are used back home in members' states for worthy causes; except the occasional boondoggle like Alaska's "Bridge To Nowhere") even as Republicans are in favor of extending tax cuts to the richest two percent at a cost of $782 billion, yet, the voting public seem determined to put Republicans back into a majority position to wreak more havoc.<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans are against "Obama's health care" which, at the very least, guarantees you won't lose your coverage when you need it most, and people are ready to vote in Republicans pledging to repeal "Obamacare." [Never mind that the President would OBVIOUSLY veto any attempt to do so, therefore the Repubs run on a plank that cannot become reality. Further, never mind that while initially costing money, ultimately the enacted health care reform will save trillions of dollars.]<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans want to eliminate Social Security, that necessary financial assistance which was promised for generations (and paid for by the People/workers via payroll taxes), yet these primary beneficiaries seem ready to vote in Republicans. [Rather than agitate for the wealthy paying the same percentage on all earned income as do working people, which would render Social Security solvent. Baby boomers getting the double whammy having had to pony up for the current retirees-- because Congress spent the dough --then having to pony up even more for their own security even as they are now being told not to expect anything out of it.]<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans charge Obama with being socialist when it has been Republicans socializing (viz., forcing the American tax payers to pay) the cost of the financial meltdowns (let's not forget the S&L crisis under the first Bush reign) while profits and bonuses continue to accrue to that same financial sector, yet Americans want Republicans back in the majority.<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans decry the cost of retirement benefits as a hindrance to new unfettered growth thereby reneging on the promises of<em> benefits later for less salary today</em> which has been in place since coming out of the great depression, and the American public rally behind Republicans. [And, just how do Americans think they'll make it after their productive work years (20 – 50 years old) end?]<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans' big election year motto is "Had Enough?" suggesting all the problems have been caused by the Obama Administration over the past 2 years when in actuality they were caused by the elitist agenda of the Republican party over the past thirty years. Americans seem to be answering "Yes" to that question, which can only mean they've actually had enough of Republicanism, yet they are poised to re-elect Republicans/TeaBaggers to constitute a majority ruling class to enact legislation on behalf of the plutocracy for which they labor.<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans/TeaBaggers want to "take our country back" when everyone in the world knows that to succeed in the future, nations need to progress, not go back. [And, from what or whom do the Repubs/TeaParty bunch want to "Take our country back?" The answer, a Socialist Obama Administration and a country that elects black folk to positions of power thereby demonstrating that Americans have absolutely no clue what they are talking about as Obama is in no way Socialist. Ahh, but he is black! Racism and ignorance the motivating factor in this year's election.]<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans/TeaBaggers want to revoke abortion rights even in the case of incest, rape or risking the health of the mother. Never mind the intrusion of big government into a woman's body by way of having the final say over her reproductive activities. Yet, polls show American women leaning towards voting Republican/TeaBagger.<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans/TeaBaggers want to be able to stuff the Supreme Court with more conservative activist judges (the Citizens' United ruling a case study in judicial activism via overturning decades of case law precedents to reach their deluded conclusion that corporations are "people" and therefore deserve First Amendment rights without restriction thereby allowing for unlimited funding of election campaigns even by foreign sources which can only corrupt the very core of democracy here at home; no longer the People but corporations deciding who shall govern and on whose behalf they shall govern) and the US citizenry seem poised to vote Republican.<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans are anti-immigrant supposedly because "those people" cost US tax payers money and jobs when all data demonstrates that illegal immigrants actually contribute more to the system than they receive and that the jobs they take pay so badly no Americans are willing to do them. [Of course, the solution is simple but Republicans refuse to opt in: Exact heavy fines from any businesses that hire illegal immigrants. Do that and the "immigrant problem" goes away; no work, no lure to relocate.]<br /></p><p align="justify">Republicans/TeaBaggers push for term limits, which is an obvious subterfuge for having a never-ending merry-go-round of people ignorant of due process and incapable of running government [Google Christine O'Donnell], so that government is no longer able to function. Republicans/TeaBaggers remember, hate government. And the American people want to vote the Republicans/TeaBaggers into office.<br /></p><p align="justify">This is madness. Never has America been so ignorant of what has been transpiring. Never has America been so brainwashed by imbecilic babble [Google Sarah Palin] that passes for profundity and/or "The change we need." Whatever your views, if you care about the America we were all taught to believe in-- where one and all are guaranteed freedom, liberty, justice, equal treatment under the law, where we can be assured that our government operates in righteous manner --then listen up: YOU'D BETTER VOTE DEMOCRAT ALL ACROSS THE BALLOT OR YOU SHALL REAP WHAT YE HAVE SOWN!<br /></p><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align="justify"><span style="font-family:Biondi;font-size:12;"><span style="font-size:130%;">Spread this rant far and wide</span></span></p><p><br /></p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-33346232511051595692010-10-06T06:43:00.006-04:002010-10-09T06:01:34.476-04:00The Final Solution<span xmlns=""> <p align="justify">Worldwide, Jews shiver at any mention of the phrase Final Solution. They intimately understand what it means for a government to exterminate a people based upon ignorant stereotyping and hatred. That is why Israelis are so good at it. They have been usurping Palestinian land for over a hundred and twenty years; in earnest after Nazism flourished. In order to "justify" such thievery a fiction was developed summed up in the now famous phrase, "A land with no people for a people with no land." Also nurtured during that time has been a brooding hatred of Arabs for fighting back against the theft of their homeland. Now, the push is on to take it all; to rid Palestine of Palestinians. Israelis see Arab Palestinians as mere placeholders on a land bequeathed to "God's Chosen." Extreme fundamentalists are settling Judea and Samaria. These are some of the most radicalized religionists in the world, operating on the imprimatur of a Jewish theocracy. These "<a href="http://warincontext.org/2009/11/24/the-real-demographic-threat-facing-the-jewish-state/">devout</a>" Jews have no doubts that the land is theirs. Never mind that many, if not most, of these Jews are recent transplants from Brooklyn and other parts of America. When questioned as to how they could possibly feel Palestine is theirs, when they had never lived there a day in their lives, they reply that the Arabs were simply taking care of the Jewish land and now it is time for them to move on and let the rightful owners take over. The rightful owners being American and European Jews; not the Palestinians who have lived uninterrupted on those lands for thousands of years.<br /></p><p align="justify">What most Americans do not understand is that the "inherent right" to Palestine claimed by Jews is not based upon reality but a fiction of Zionist creation. You see, Palestine/Canaan was not the Jews' region of origin. Jews invaded Palestine. They then wrote the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torah">Pentateuch</a> (first five books of the Old Testament; Torah) after returning from their Babylonian Captivity. Thus was the Old Testament compiled and personalized by once-exiled Judeans who no doubt maintained a great sense of resentment at having been so unceremoniously expulsed and dispersed and, therefore possessed not only the modus operandi (scholarship/political awareness) and the opportunity (time and wherewithal), but also a motive to ensure the Old Testament contained Yahweh's proclamation that Palestine belonged to the Israelites.<br /></p></span><p align="justify">In short, the claim that Jews have a "special" relationship with Palestine is by way of Jews writing a book that states a god of their own conjuring gives the land of Palestine (that Jews invaded but never wholly conquered and never populated a majority) to Jews. Convenient isn't it? That Jews only controlled Palestine under David and Solomon for a period of 125 years out of the 6010 years since creation (dated 4000 BCE according to Old Testament) means Jews premise their claim on partially controlling a region for less than 4 percent of its existence while Palestinians have lived there for 100 percent of the time.<br /></p><p align="justify">To review: It is upon this above mentioned substrate of God's "promise" and a minute percentage of so-called sovereignty (so-called because even during the reign of David, the Kingdom of Israel was a contentious, multi-faceted, sectarian conglomeration of tribes that had banded together primarily to defeat the Philistines) that present-day Zionists build their <a href="http://www.imemc.org/article/59012">arguments of justification</a>.<br /></p><p align="justify">Just days ago, as the whole world was watching with hope for a true peace process to get underway, Israelis lifted the settlement moratorium. Notice, in the preceding blog, the reference to the Bedouin village that had all its buildings destroyed by the Israeli military claiming said buildings were "illegal." That the Arab inhabitants of Palestine lived uninterrupted on the land for thousands of years means nothing. Israelis, yet again, attempted to claim the high moral ground by claiming they were not being prejudicial against Arabs<em>, per se</em>, but rather, upholding the rule of law that states a governing entity has authority to demand residential development proceed via permit. What Israel doesn't do, however, is issue building permits to Arabs that want to build residential housing. Once again, convenient, yes? This semantic game-playing is reminiscent of the Gaza Flotilla Massacre incident when Israeli military executed nine peaceniks while in International waters and then claimed these unarmed peace lovers were brutal thugs against which Israeli troops had to <a href="http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ocha_opt_special_focus_2010_08_19_english.pdf">defend themselves</a>.<br /></p><p align="justify">Even though the entire world knows for a fact that Israelis have thieved Palestine, even though the United Nations has time and again denounced Israeli confiscation and occupation of Palestine to be illegal under International Law, Israel claims the moral high-ground. As they currently are even though the lifting of the settlement "freeze" has put a hold on peace talks and could very likely force the Palestinian contingent to break off talks until the settlements stop. This action by Israel is just another in a long, long line of such actions meant to destroy any chance for peace, for a two-state solution. Here's an IDF Official's view of such peaceful solution, "We must define our position and lay down basic principles for a settlement. Our demands should be moderate and balanced, and appear to be reasonable. But in fact they must involve such conditions as to ensure that the enemy rejects them. Then we should maneuver and allow him to define his own position, and reject a settlement on the basis of a compromise solution. We should then publish his demands as embodying unreasonable extremism." [General Yehoshafat Harkabi, chief of military intelligence, as quoted in Ma'ariv, 2 November 1973.]<br /></p><p align="justify">Thirty years later, as detailed in Jimmy Carter's book, "Palestine Peace Not Apartheid" [Appendix 7] Israelis were hailed as peacemakers because they "accepted" the International Quartet's [Russia, United Nations, European Union, United States] Roadmap for Peace of 2003. In reality, however, the Israelis issued a 14-point "caveat" that effectively placed intolerable preconditions on the process. For instance, with the very first "caveat" the Palestinians would be required to end ALL acts of violence and/or provocation, dismantle ALL groups opposed to Israeli occupation, disarm ALL Palestinians, even as Israel would be exempt from the same condition: "…the Roadmap will not state that Israel must cease violence and incitement against the Palestinians." The second "caveat" states, "Full performance will be a condition for progress between phases and for progress within phrases." Meaning, ANY violation by Palestinians would render the agreement null and void. However, should Israelis continue to confiscate Palestinian lands and further provoke via expanding or creating new settlements, should settlers continue to harass, beat, <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/youtube-clip-shows-idf-soldier-belly-dancing-beside-bound-palestinian-woman-1.317177">humiliate</a> and/or murder Palestinian men, women and children, the peace process would remain on track. The Israelis then went on to demand that Palestinians elect leaders that were acceptable to Israel, that whatever land may constitute Palestine would be discussed at some indeterminate future date (as would the all-important water rights issue). Further, the Israelis demanded that once a Palestinian state was established, Israel would control all points of entrance and exit by persons and/or cargo, would station IDF troops along both the Jordanian and Israeli borders, would not allow an armed Palestine and would control "its airspace and electromagnetic spectrum." Also, the final settlement could not include reparations (for the tens of billions of dollars worth of land and buildings confiscated by Israel since 1948) nor would Israel allow for the "right of return" by nearly a million Palestinians expulsed from their homes during 1948 Nakba.<br /></p><p align="justify">But, surely Israelis are appalled at members of their Knesset currently offering up resolutions to expel all Arab citizens from Israel proper (pre-1967 borders). Nope. For the <a href="http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article4702.shtml">majority</a> of Israelis are in favor of "getting rid of" Arabs. Thus, with Israel's lifting of the settlement freeze, once again it demonstrates there is no intention of peaceful resolution, complying with UN Resolutions 242 and 338 in any of their parts, treating Arabs with anything but <a href="http://www.middleeastmonitor.org.uk/resources/briefing-papers/1230-israels-discrimination-against-its-arab-citizens">animosity</a> and asymmetric brutality. Though Arab Palestinians have the right under International Law to fight for their occupied homeland, even Palestinians peacefully protesting the occupation are now determined to be too "provocative" and therefore requiring more violence and brutality at the hands of the IDF. And, of course, there is repeated the ever present untruth that Israel cannot find a "peace partner."<br /></p><p align="justify">The peace talks are on hold because Israel has resumed building more housing units in the occupied territories, yet Israel chastises the Palestinians for having "wasted" nine months of the ten month freeze. As it stands, unless Israel agrees to remove the settlers (leaving the settlements as reparations) from the occupied territories of West Bank and Gaza, agrees to a fair agreement of water rights (which exist primarily in the Palestinian West Bank), agrees to dismantling the wall deemed illegal by the World Court, cedes the entire West Bank and Gaza vis-à-vis pre-1967 borders, there will be no solution. Israelis understand that to allow for a one state solution will be to end their dream of a theocratic Jewish nation. Which begs the question: How can a Jewish theocracy be democratic UNLESS there are no Arab Palestinians within its borders?<br /></p><p align="justify">That the Obama Administration could only manage to utter its "disappointment" over Israel's latest example of intransigence, is a condemnation of its sense of fairness even as it is an affirmation of its shared criminality. The United States allows Zionism to continue its crime against millions of human beings. Any attempt by America to otherwise excise itself from the crime is futile. Granted, the Israeli government is fully behind efforts to propagandize the world with its <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/09/israel-foreign-ministry-media">fictive narrative</a> and most Americans have bought the lie lock, stock and barrel. True, the AIPAC lobby along with all major media have nurtured the perception of Israel as the victim; <a href="http://www.truthout.org/1114097">always the victim</a> and never the brutalizers. True, Americans don't hear about how MOSSAD [Israeli equivalent to the CIA] is <a href="http://mycatbirdseat.com/2010/09/gordon-duff-taxpayers-funding-israeli-database-of-american-citizens/">spying</a> on citizens here in the United States. True, not many citizens even know that our US Central Command commander, General David Patraeus, made a <a href="http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/03/petraeus-vs-netanyahu.html">case</a> in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee for Israel ending the Palestinian conflict via two-state solution as "Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR (Area Of Responsibility) and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support. The conflict also gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas."<br /></p><p align="justify">President Obama needs to put Israel's feet to the fire and demand that the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative">2002 Arab Peace Initiative</a> be accepted in all its parts by Israel or the United States will stop all aid/funding/weapons transfers to Israel (as it's American funding that goes to building settlements). It is time Americans see Zionist Israel for what it is and has always been: a liar, a thief, a murderer, a <a href="http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm">psychopath</a> that cares nothing of the lives of "goyim" only of Jews.<br /><br />Rest assured, there will be no Final Solution until justice is served and Palestinians get their due: To live with human rights in their own homeland. If that does not happen, however, there will be a final reckoning.<br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-8801834320018261992010-08-12T11:22:00.007-04:002010-08-19T08:03:53.169-04:00R 'n' R<span xmlns=""> <p align="justify">Rock 'n' Roll? No, that garbage gets kicked to the curb some other day. Talkin' about, Rest 'n' Relaxation. 'Tis the season, after all, isn't it?<br /></p><p align="justify">Here in the United States' Northeast we've been mired 'midst the "dog days" of summer since the final week of June. Disgustingly hot, humid days and sleepless, clammy-skinned nights. Work and/or familial frustrations easily kindled into explosive outbursts. Traffic always at a stand-still while finger-waves of extreme pavement heat ripple like sheets of distortion in the air. Ozone buildup makes it difficult to breathe deeply. Time drags at the job, flies by at home. Weekends seem like only the briefest respite and nowhere near two full days long. Americans (those with jobs, that is) are having to work longer and produce more than ever for <a href="http://www.alternet.org/economy/147469/we're_in_a_recession_because_the_rich_are_raking_in_an_absurd_portion_of_the_wealth/">diminishing real-time wages</a>. Personal indebtedness is soaring. Job security is a thing of the past. Retirement now seems to coincide with death. The financial crisis is still claiming victims among the innocent while the "<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-10656699">criminals</a>" deposit more and more money into their bulging accounts. Congressional Republicans continue to play the "No-ist" role of handcuffing any/all <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/15/AR2010071500464.html?hpid=topnews">meaningful legislation</a> while perpetrating the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/opinion/01stockman.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&ref=homepage&src=me">lie</a> that such intransigence is in the Peoples' interest, meant to keep the Federal debt from escalating. We watch calamitous oil spills fouling our waters, our lands for over a hundred days and then, once the problem well has been capped, we hear that 200 million gallons of the toxic stuff plus millions more of applied dispersants are almost all gone with the remaining quarter of it not to be a bother. We hear of new techniques (<em>hydraulic fracturing</em> developed by Halliburton) for natural gas extraction that can foul entire aquifers; drinking water for millions; state watchdog agencies saying it's no problem await industry marching orders as to what regulatory regime will be put into place. [Insert laugh here_____.] We read of more of our food being contaminated with shit (literally) and other undesirable additives. Killer heat waves. Gas prices rise. Oil prices begin to climb in time for winter. And, that's just on the hemispherical home front. </p><p align="justify">Abroad, America continues to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan; in the first instance, because a cabal of delusional Cold Warriors (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Perle, Abrams, Wolfowitz – PNAC mainstays) executed a particularly odious assault vis-à-vis American Exceptionalism in the guise of "keeping America safe from terrorists;" and, in the second instance, well, there seems to be only one <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html">reason</a> even though the same pronouncements about "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here" are uttered. Israel is poised to <a href="http://www.consortiumnews.com/2010/080310c.html">launch an attack</a> on Iran, which, if that happens, expect oil/fuel to escalate in price by at least 50 percent upon first Israeli bombing sorties, and more if Iran mounts a serious response. Palestinians are still being tortured, murdered, humiliated daily by Israelis; some of <a href="http://australiansforpalestine.com/27496">these Palestinians</a>, residents of Israel proper for generations, thousands of years longer than any Israelis. Both of the foregoing events aided and abetted by the American government, with the continuing "approval" of a majority of Americans; such callousness the driving force behind extremist Jihadists. The American government still turns a blind eye to the continuing evidence of widespread long-term impacts of <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3798581.stm">Agent Orange exposure in Vietnam</a>, refusing to send that government money to deal with that tragic <a href="http://www.vn-agentorange.org/news/2010-07-23-arsenault-vietnams-forgotten-war-victims.html">legacy</a>. Rain forests are being clear-cut at alarming rate. Entire species being exterminated daily. Huge, devastating storms and deadly floods wreaking havoc.<br /></p><p align="justify">But, the above thoughts—if ever existing at all in the minds of Americans —are now lost to thoughts about getting some Rest 'n' Relaxation. After all, this is the time to get away, to take a vacation, to linger a week or two on an ocean beach or mountain lake shore, slugging back Margaritas and/or Lime Coronas, maybe do some swimming, fishing, seeing the sights, buying fetish consumerist products of non-utilitarian nature before heading out to local eateries to partake in sumptuous meals. In general, the idea is to become immersed in mindless ennui to achieve body/mind revitalization.<br /></p><p align="justify">Wait a minute. "Mindless ennui?" Isn't that a typical American's day-to-day state of mind? Or, rather, their state of perpetual mindlessness? You know, vacant of knowledge yet full of opinions. Filled with <a href="http://people-press.org/report/300/a-portrait-of-generation-next">dreams of becoming rich</a>, or being a "star," yet having no talent and no idea of how those conditions may be attained. So sure that a Socialist plot is afoot that evidence is not required. Not to worry. Americans are special; held in highest esteem, by ourselves at least. And, that is all that matters. We are, all of us, <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/02/27/study_finds_students_narcissistic/">destined to be exceptional</a>. After all, we are Americans.<br /></p><p align="justify">Please excuse this writer. [Off to vomit.] [Now cleaning and freshening up.] Thanks, that's better.<br /></p><p align="justify">The good news is that multi-billionaires are <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38556042/ns/us_news-giving/">pledging</a> to "give back" half their fortunes. In America, 400 of just such wealthy are being asked to pledge $600 Billion via donation to charity of choice. Which means they're worth over $1.2 Trillion; or, to put it in perspective, worth more than the combined <a href="http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/Macroeconomics/Data/HistoricalRealGDPValues.xls">GDPs</a> of Mexico and the Caribbean (22 nations); or equal to that of Brazil; or all of South East Asia; or that of all of Africa (52 nations); or just a few hundred Billion less than the entire Middle East consisting of the GDPs for Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bahrain, Israel, Jordon, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Syria, United Arab emirates, West Bank and Yemen United, COMBINED (notice these include the "oil rich" Arab states). GDP <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product">defined</a> as the value of all products and services created/performed in a nation during one year; this includes all income earned.<br /></p><p align="justify">Who among you would like to wager that such an act of "kindness" among the wealthiest of wealthy will go a long way towards helping Americans to be dissuaded from any inspection of Capitalism as worthwhile worldwide economic system. God forefend we should question a system that has produced such wealth for so few at the expense of so many. That would be "class war" talk and totally indicative of a Socialist or Communist talking-point that it would then have to be immediately swept clean from the discussion table with the table itself disinfected. Although, with mid-term elections upon us, you'll be hearing the Republicans chanting this "class war" charge very soon and often as they direct their verbal attacks at the "Socialist" Obama Administration, in particular and Democrats, in general. You see, the only time "class war" can be brought up for discussion is when Republican representatives of the moneyed class do so in order to rage against the envious have-nots; against those whom deserve their poverty and hopelessness and complete lack of opportunity; admonishing the system-rejects for not pulling themselves up by their bootstraps (if only these poor people HAD boots upon which to tug). The above mentioned "give back" by the way, will certainly qualify for tax deductions on the billions earned this year thereby helping to replenish the coffers.<br /></p><p align="justify">The intention of this writer is not to disparage Americans' work ethic nor put forth the proposition that a "break" from drudgery isn't required to recharge the batteries. But, in the context of the dismal lives so many human beings are experiencing primarily because of the Capitalist few-and-many paradigm, will any Americans be concerned enough to educate themselves to what's really transpiring around them? Perhaps pondering how much of the developed world allows for more than a full month PAID vacation/holiday time while Americans are lucky to get an unpaid week or two. Or, maybe reading in-depth analysis of financial news in order to suss out how the Wall Street pigs still feed at the trough of wealth-producing American labor? Will they be educating themselves to lifestyle changes that MUST be embraced if humanity is to survive? Will they be educating themselves to the realities of everyday life as opposed to fiction and celebrity scandals? Will they be educating themselves to the complexities of international issues like Palestinian sovereignty in an attempt to actually know what they're talking about when supporting, say, a criminal Israel?<br /></p><p align="justify">The answer is, "No." Given this time, Americans will feed their faces, spend their money on nothing of import and lay about in a comatose state of smug satisfaction. While Americans so often excuse themselves from getting involved because of the time constraints they face (e.g., work, commuting, familial obligations), will they now, during their down-time vacations, educate themselves in order to contribute to our democracy via intelligent analysis of issues of import based upon facts and not just their "gut" feelings? Again, the answer is surely, "No!"<br /></p><p align="justify">So, as Americans laid upon pristine ocean beach sands, in another sandy location, the Negev desert, 45 homes were razed by American made bulldozers. The Bedouin town of al-Araqib was leveled, destroyed by 1500 Israeli border guards, riot squad personnel, armed police and busloads of High Schoolers getting additional credit for removing the furniture and personal belongings of the villagers while mocking and taunting those hapless victims of Israeli policy of spreading misery to Arabs; in this instance on the pretext of making way for a national Jewish forest preserve. That these lands have been tended and lived upon for thousands of years, that these same people are actual citizens of Israel, means nothing. They are Arabs. And, therefore, in the eyes of Israelis they are less than animals and deserving of nothing but brutality. Yet, a major talking point on America's resort beaches, in the restaurants, on radio talk shows, television news, was the anger at the decision to allow a Muslim mosque to be built two blocks from Ground Zero.<br /></p><p align="justify">As vacationers imbibe spirits and engage other like-minded folk in conversation, how many will actually know what they're talking about? My guess is precious few. How many will still maintain that the current financial meltdown was caused by sub-prime mortgages? How many will still blame Muslim terrorist acts on Islam? How many will side with Republicans on absolutely no addition to the Federal Debt, thereby agreeing that $34 billion for extended Unemployment Benefits shouldn't be spent, that $26 billion for keeping police, fire fighters, sanitation workers, teachers on the job shouldn't be spent; that the Health Care Bill passed into law should be repealed; that all "ear-marks" should be eliminated; that Financial Reform shouldn't have been passed; that an environmental reform bill including cap-and-trade provisions shouldn't be even brought up for discussion; that the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent should be extended since not doing so would hinder economic recovery; that American should agree with the near-unanimous Congressional resolution to support Israel vis-à-vis its actions against the Gaza Flotilla; that "special interests" such as unionism should go the way of the Dodo bird? That government is the problem not the solution?<br /></p><p align="justify">All the above are current Republican talking points. They are all wrong, misconstructions of reality. Charlatan-esque in that Republicans agitate on behalf of the top couple of percent while convincing the American people that such actions are in the interests of common folk. Outrageous. Republicans actually lie in the faces of their constituencies and those people buy it lock, stock and barrel. Why? Because the "masses" aren't sophisticated (read: educated) enough to know better. Most believe that their Republican representatives wouldn't lie to them. Oh, the President would (because he's black and/or Socialist). But, not the likes of Boehner, McConnell, Kyl, nor pundits Gingrich, Palin, Beck, O'Reilly.<br /></p><p align="justify">However, the FACTS are these: </p><ul><li><div align="justify">The current financial crisis is totally the responsibility of irresponsible financial instruments (credit default swaps) that were, in many ,if not most, cases piggy-backed on subprime mortgages. It wasn't the subprime mortgage holders that were at fault. It wasn't Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae. It was Wall Street and the Bush Administration's insistence that the financial industry would be self-regulating; it was the Clinton Administration's repeal of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act">Glass-Steagall Act</a>; it was Clinton's successful push for the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000">Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000</a> that essentially made it illegal to regulate the very financial products that caused the financial crisis. </div></li><li><div align="justify">The <a href="http://archive.chronogram.com/issue/2004/12/news/terrorist.php">Muslim extremists</a> perpetrating the 9/11 atrocity did so because of <a href="http://www.vulgariangoulasharticles.blogspot.com/">Israel's continued illegal occupation of Palestine</a>; because of America's support of Israeli brutality and illegality, because of Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982; because of American collusion in propping up brutal regimes in order to secure cheap oil. </div></li><li><div align="justify">Republicans have repeatedly voted against allowing the extension of unemployment benefits and against allowing monies to aid state/city workers so they can stay on the job and provide public service; the claim of not doing so due to the fact of adding to the debt is a lie as both these expenditures would be paid for by closing loopholes that allowed huge corporations to off-shore jobs and have the government pay them for doing so and by raising taxes on the top 2 percent. </div></li><li><div align="justify">"Earmarks" or "pork" is money that comes back to the People, for neighborhoods. It costs $55 Billion. The Republicans assail this expenditure while chanting in unison that the $672 Billion dollar Bush tax cut for the top 2 percent is no problem; that it will stimulate the economy. However, every Republican Administration since Reagan has increased the national debt. Clinton raised taxes on the top two percent and the best economic period of growth in history ensued; creating 22 million jobs; reducing the debt until a half Trillion dollar surplus was projected. These facts fly in the face of Republican rhetoric. </div></li><li><div align="justify">The Congressional resolution in support of Israel in defiance of international law gave a perfect picture of how Israel gets away with atrocity after atrocity; taking a boat by force in international waters, murdering nine people aboard, tampering with evidence (confiscated video) in order to create a video of edited information (creating a fiction of victimization of Israeli troops); refusing to allow independent investigation; all with approval of the American government. </div></li><li><div align="justify">Unionism is the American workers' only hope of gaining a living wage and safe working conditions; the rightwing-nuts continuing to bash unions to improve corporate America's bottom-line; apparently a ratio of <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/28/news/economy/ceo_pay_workers/index.htm">364 to one</a> as to CEO earnings compared to average worker isn't enough.<br /></div></li></ul><p align="justify">So, every time you hear someone talking, why not question them about their views? Why not ask them to substantiate even one fact upon which their "gut feelings" are premised? Just because one's stance on some issue seems right in one's heart/gut, doesn't make it so. Core beliefs and knowledge seem so strong only because they are familiar, unchanging, repeated from parent to child again and again. Such familiarity, however doesn't make them correct. So, next time you hear someone spewing their opinion, jump in. I know, that uncomfortable feeling in the pit of your stomach is the stress of confrontation. Instead of letting that put you off, consider that discomfort compared with the daily brutality of Palestinians (3 million human beings) or the victims of American savage capitalism on billions of humans, and then question those that spew lies, or misinformation, or prejudice. Because, people, if you do not, as we're seeing with the TeaParty folk, such opinions catch on like wildfire and spread becoming a majority opinion that those in power use to further the status quo. To allow this to continue without challenge, makes one accessory to murder and mayhem; guilty, in a word.<br /></p><p align="justify">Silence is complicity. Speak up. Challenge the status quo. Challenge the mindless spewers of ignorance or there will be no innocents come the next terrorist attack here in America.</p><p align="justify">Maybe R 'n' R should be less about Rest 'n' Relaxation and more about RESPONSIBILITIES that go hand-in-hand with Rights.</p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-13811976278023469772010-06-30T11:38:00.006-04:002010-07-13T11:44:39.379-04:00The Law<span xmlns=""> <p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 52pt" align="justify"><strong><em>Hunhh…Good God! What's it good for?<br />Absolutely nuthin'…Say it again, y'all…<br /></p></em></strong><p align="justify">[With apologies to Edwin Starr vis-à-vis his 70s anthem: "War"]<br /></p><p align="justify">Lately, <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> seems lacking. Certainly Justice has gone askance. Though, truth be told, Justice has been a long, long time deviating along that unfortuitous route. Now, <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> (whether you're talking local codes, or statewide legislation, or federal policy, or international standards of legal conduct) not only doesn't live up to the false notion of America's Founding Fathers' great moral courage to champion such "Justice for all" philosophy, but <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> is being shown as it truly is, bared of such presentiments which are pure poppycock; as they were even then. We, the People, are not supposed to notice those phrases in the <em>Declaration of Independence</em> ("We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness") and in the <em>Constitution of the United States of America</em> ("We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice…promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves, and our posterity,") that demonstrated cowardice, for in reality, they were lies. At the founding of this great republic, more than half the population were exempted (women and men of color) from liberty, justice, the pursuit of happiness and égalité.<br /></p><p align="justify">The majority. Denied rights guaranteed to the minority elites. America's initial premise, bogus, hypocritical on its face. But, woe unto ye who says so.<br /></p><p align="justify">In fact, as even a skeptical reading of "<em>An</em> <em>Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States of America</em>" by Professor Charles Beard will convey, America's Founding Fathers is a virtual Who's Who of well-heeled capitalist land owners (thieved from indigenous populations) conspiring to preserve, nay improve, the value of their money/assets. That and nothing more. All their hype about democracy of, by and for the People, was to bolster support for the enactment of such institutional inequality. The single biggest factor in the Founding Fathers' plan was to create a central bank in order to assure their loans/investments would be repaid either in gold or gold-backed currency. You see, when the various states began to issue their own paper currency, the big lenders would get reimbursed with currency that only had currency in the state of issuance. Inconvenience big money? Exact a tax on big money? But, of course, a revolution was required.<br /></p><p align="justify">From such roots does present-day America blossom. TeaBaggers and "No-ists" and demagogues, Oh, my! The same <a href="http://worldnewsvine.com/2010/06/minority-leader-mcconnell-refuses-to-agree-to-unemployment-extension-hypocrites/">hypocrisy</a> is in evidence [McConnell turning down unemployment extension bill because it would add $30B to the debt even though George W. Bush Republican Administration ran up a 2 Trillion debt load with McConnell's help and silence on the matter]. The <a href="http://www.scrippsnews.com/content/de-la-isla-arizona-immigration-law-about-electoral-politics">same lies</a> [Arizona's race-based anti-immigration law of which Governor Brewer and Senatorial hopeful <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20008167-503544.html">Sharron Angle</a> claim Mexicans will not be targeted and will be treated as equals even though anyone with brown skin will be seen as suspect]. The same deaf-dumb-blind being led by self-serving, finger-pointing <a href="http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view.bg?&articleid=1264464&format=&page=1&listingType=politics">charlatans</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_North">criminals</a> [Sarah Palin and Oliver North speaking at a Tea Party event in Norfolk, VA].<br /></p><p align="justify">The inebriating agents used are also the same as back when: Appeals to blind patriotism, to xenophobia, to ancient prejudices, to American exceptionalism and, last but certainly not least, to God Almighty. Unless you glorify Uncle Sodomy's anal rape of Latin America (from the Monroe Doctrine onward), or Truman's "courage" (dropping atomic bombs on civilians), or the Republican mantra of "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs" which translates into "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine">Exploit, Baby, Exploit</a>" you are looked at as a traitor. To want to regulate in order to preserve the bounty of America from being utterly destroyed so that future generations may luxuriate in that natural bounty, to desire regulating safeguards against the few getting more and more while the many pay for it again and again, is somehow seen as being "liberal" which translates, <em>prima facie</em>, to being wrong and un-American.<br /></p><p align="justify">But isn't <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> supposed to be a positive force in society? Without <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> won't we shortly devolve back into a way of life where the strong devour the weak? Won't we become a nation where a few with power/money can exact servitude from the many in order to further fatten their already plentiful larders. Are we there yet?<br /></p><p align="justify">Actually, been there, done that. Round robin. Back to the Future. Here we go again. The same pulling of wool over the eyes of the masses; agitating with outlandish claims of peril and doom so that those whom are exploited will relish their exploitation even as they lash out at those whom attempt to end such exploitative practices as non-living minimum wage level, not enough jobs to go around, no single-payer health care, no guaranteed pensions, no guaranteed acceptable minimum standard for housing, fighting "terrorists" over there so we won't have to fight them here.<br /></p><p align="justify">The TeaBaggers have been <a href="http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1436">shown</a> to be largely white, Christian, bigoted, racist, right-wing, intolerant, uninformed, illogical and lousy spellers. These people are the fodder that feeds the mindlessness surrounding us. There is little, if any, thought process involved in arriving at their positions. The Republican rightwing has so ensconced itself into the Republican party's mainstream (or, perhaps more aptly described, to borrow Sarah's reference, "lamestream") that their minority status and fringe viewpoints are dictating the parameters of debate among the party's so-called centrists. In other words, the Republican party has moved so far rightward, that their center has been yanked to the proximity of Pluto.<br /></p><p align="justify">Karl Marx (in 1848) had something relevant to say about today's TeaBaggers, those disenfranchised, disgruntled, simple masses, "...all of these fight against the bourgeoisie*, to save from extinction their existence as fractions of the middle class. They are therefore not revolutionary, but conservative. Nay more, they are reactionary, for they try to roll back the wheel of history…" And what of this "'dangerous class', the social scum, that passively rotting mass…?" Marx says "its conditions of life, prepare it far more for the part of a bribed tool of reactionary intrigue." Counter-revolutionists, in a word. The Republicans lost power and this insanity called Tea Partiers, the Palin worshipping, the "No-ist" strategy on Capitol Hill, Senatorial hopefuls espousing "second amendment remedies" is the result; an effort to disrupt and dislodge the victorious Democrats. Notice, such a reactionary counter-offensive speaks nothing of doing right by Americans and/or America. Rather, it speaks to the greed for mo' money and mo' power for the few. Back to our roots, if you will.<br /></p><p align="justify">At local levels, too often <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> gets applied according to who appears before a permitting board. Long time local gets the benefit of a streamlined (read: inappropriately truncated) process; the newcomer unknown to the politically appointed board members (whom generally are of a pro-growth bent for the jobs-jobs-jobs), gets the full-monty as to stringency of review (as this newcomer is a potential competitor vis-à-vis one or other old time interest). To hell with SEQR (State Environmental Quality Review) even though <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> demands it. Many local Planning Boards and Zoning Boards of Appeal simply do not know what they are doing as per requirements of <strong><em>the Law</em></strong>. They simply wing it and hope for the best. So, if you're wondering how the hell that pig farm (owned and operated by a local yokel) was ever allowed next to a tourist-oriented restaurant (owned and operated by a new family of city transplants) thereby putting the latter business out of business, now you know why.<br /></p><p align="justify">At both the local and national levels, <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> is warped by promises of jobs that never appear, of promises (rather than proofs) that there will be no negative impacts, of corners cut, process fudged in favor of the business applicant. So, while the business entity gains tax breaks galore and saves on initial start-up costs and never delivers anywhere near the number of jobs promised and has the process skewed such that safeguards against potential negative impacts are not demanded, therefore delivering a nice return to stockholders/investors (the ownership class), once the project goes into production and there's a problem (noise, dust, unhealthful fumes, oil spill of billions of gallons, leaking carcinogenic chemicals, etc) suddenly "the process" stops working and the impacted/harmed person is left to defend a prohibitively expensive legal process that, because of the great cost of pursuing same, always favors the perpetrator that lied and the regulating board that didn't do the job <strong><em>the Law </em></strong>requires it to do. Ironic, is it not, that the Supreme Court has ruled corporations answering ONLY to their shareholders, with vast sums of money to safeguard their interests, are considered persons. In the eyes of the Law, BP and any of the many victims of BP's callous cost-cutting measures, are equal. Well, except when it comes to paying the victims their due. Then the Law favors BP with its army of attorneys and privileged information restrictions due to the fact that BP is a private corporation and doesn't have to release such internal data. A protracted legal process can last decades victims getting paid only a meager sum. Or, as is more likely the scenario, a corporation goes into bankruptcy to avoid paying on those damage claims only to come out the other side with a new name, logo and no liability. In order to avoid such an outcome President Obama appealed directly to BP. Obama's subsequent "shake down" of BP as characterized by the "No-ists" is nothing of the sort. "The <a href="http://www.pephost.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&amp;page=NewsArticle&amp;id=9647">'escrow account'</a> in 2010 is not $20 billion dollars. BP will put in $3 billion dollars in the third quarter of 2010 (ending September 30) and another $2 billion in the fourth quarter (ending December 31). Thereafter, it will have to make installments of $1.25 billion each quarter for the next three years. This means that the necessary money will not be available to pay the tens of billions in losses that are real and immediate. It also means that people and businesses will have to get in line. The real number for the escrow account in 2010 is $5 billion—six months from now at the earliest. To put this in perspective, BP has been bringing in between $26 billion and $36 billion annually in profits on revenue of $250 billion, and pays out more than $10 billion in dividends yearly. According to a report in Forbes, BP could absorb $35 billion in spill costs before it would have a 'material impact' on its operations. But instead, it will be allowed a paltry $5 billion a year, in an installment plan over four years. Another measure of perspective can be had by comparison of this $5 billion per year voluntary set-aside to the accumulated potential fines and penalties under the Clean Water Act. BP can be fined $4,300 per barrel of oil spilled as a consequence of gross negligence. With the recent acknowledgment that the spill volume is 60,000 barrels per day, that is a potential penalty of over $250 million per day. Put another way, every 60 days accumulates a potential $15 billion fine under the Act. The voluntary arrangement to set aside $5 billion per year is meager in comparison."<br /></p><p align="justify">In fact, the recent <a href="http://www.laed.uscourts.gov/GENERAL/Notices/10-1663_doc67.pdf">judicial decision</a> to disallow the federal government's six-month moratorium on all new and as yet off-line deep water oil facilities is another example of <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> not working. Judge Martin L.C. Feldman (himself heavily invested in oil production) nitpicked the fact that while the Obama Administration via Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar, made a good case for problems at 1000-plus feet (as DEMONSTRATED DAILY by BP Deepwater Horizon catastrophe) the actual request for the moratorium used a greater than 500 feet figure. Judge Feldman said there was no reason whatsoever for this figure to be used; even as he mentioned the precise reason that figure was used: The Shallow Water Energy Security Coalition—itself an industry funded group –uses that figure because <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> (in this case the law of physics that determines a "standard" which) demands that over 500 feet depth, floating rig systems be used; precisely the systems that require further study. Convoluted? Absolutely. Justice served? Absolutely not. So, as provided by <strong><em>the Law</em></strong>, the Administration appealed. Also as provided by <strong><em>the Law</em></strong>, guess who heard the appeal? That's right, Justice Feldman. Now, this case is headed to the Supreme Court unless the Obama Administration decides to implement <em>Section 12c</em> of the <em>Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act </em>and declares a national emergency in order to stop all facilities from continued operation: "<span style="font-family:Times New Roman;">12</span>(c) All leases issued under this Act, and leases, the maintenance and operation of which are authorized under this Act, shall contain or be construed to contain a provision whereby authority is vested in the Secretary, upon a recommendation of the Secretary of Defense, during a state of war or national emergency declared by the Congress or the President of the United States after the effective date of this Act, to suspend operations under any lease; and all such leases shall contain or be construed to contain provisions for the payment of just compensation to the lessee whose operations are thus suspended." Notice how, should the President need to declare such a state of emergency, the United States taxpayers must <strong>pay BP</strong> for its daily losses. Outrageous, huh? But, that's <strong><em>the Law</em></strong>.<br /></p><p align="justify">And then there's a most egregious breach of <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> to consider. Israel's interception of a Gaza-bound humanitarian aid ship in international waters, Israel's use of special forces to sniper/murder at least four unarmed civilians on that ship before any Israeli dropped aboard, its confiscation of all recorded media from the civilians, its disabling of the ships propellers, its towing of the boat into an Israeli port, its subsequent charging the civilians (hijacked against their will) with illegal entry into Israel, its subsequent editing of the recorded media to reconstruct (fabricate) the scenario so that the armed Israeli commandos became the victims; a video created that played worldwide as truth. By the end of the brutal assault, nine civilians were dead; the rest held and questioned by Israeli authorities. Now, ask yourself this: "Had ANY OTHER NATION IN THE WORLD done the same, having murdered an American in cold blood after illegally boarding a ship in international waters, would America be as silent as it has been?" In fact, ask yourself, "If another theocratic regime, say, IRAN!!! had done the same thing, would the Obama Administration be quiet as a church mouse? Would America be so willing to look the other way and do NOTHING after such a regime—this one replete with illegal nuclear program with 200-400 actual nuclear warheads and missile capability to launch them –murdered the innocent?! Would America allow the perpetrator of such indecent acts to investigate itself as to find cause/blame? Well, even though the United Nations has called for an international panel to investigate the incident, Israel refuses and America supports them in their intransigence. Utterly despicable! Unconscionable! Sick!<br /></p><p align="justify">Of course, as their ancestors have for thousands of years, Israeli Jews claim victimhood. Israel maintains it has <strong><em>the Law</em></strong> on their side. How so? The Israeli position is that under international law they have the right to detain any ship attempting to violate a blockade in order to assure there are no weapons aboard. Of course, what never seems to come out in various pro-Israeli media is the <a href="http://opiniojuris.org/2010/06/02/why-is-israels-blockade-of-gaza-legal/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+opiniojurisfeed+(Opinio+Juris)">FACT</a> that international law allows for such actions ONLY if the combatants are nations at war. Obviously, Gaza isn't a nation; a point Israel has reinforced time and again since Zionism began over a hundred and twenty years ago. So Israel then claims that because it's fighting Hamas, the International Armed Conflict (IAC) provisions of <em>San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea</em> and the 1909 <em>Declaration Concerning the Laws of Navel War </em>(London Declaration) apply. But that brings Israel full circle, back to having to accept Gaza as being occupied which would immediately render their land blockade of same illegal via the <a href="http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/6756482d86146898c125641e004aa3c5">Fourth Geneva Convention</a>. So, no matter how Israel tries to justify their brutal illegal hijacking and murdering of civilians, they are guilty by virtue of <strong><em>the Law</em></strong>. Some consolation to the dead. This type of perverted mental gymnastics to allow continued occupation and usurpation of Palestine has been used without censure from Israel's biggest supporter, America, for more than a century with Palestinians being humiliated, tortured, disenfranchised from their homelands and murdered, on a daily basis, for generations.<br /></p><p align="justify">Which gives rise to another feature of <strong><em>the Law</em></strong>, any law. Laws are written by elite entities that attempt to have the words written mean what they want them to mean to serve their own purposes. Too many times laws are written in language that is unclear at best and confusing/contradictory at worst. While legal experts engage in a battle of wits, real battles with human loss are waged on and on with great consequence; no, not for the scholars, jurists, attorneys, etc. But, for the people in whose name these laws have been written.<br /></p><p align="justify"><br /><strong><em>The Law</em></strong>…<strong>What's it good for? Hunh…Absolutely nuthin'…</strong><br /></p><p align="justify">*According to Marx in the Communist Manifesto: "The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder the motley feudal ties that bound man to his "natural superiors", and has left remaining no other nexus between man and man than naked self-interest, than callous "cash payment". It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervor, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotistical calculation. It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up that single, unconscionable freedom – Free Trade. In one word, for exploitation, veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation."</p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-75358508607103547692010-05-07T10:39:00.006-04:002010-07-24T09:20:56.516-04:00Delusionistas<p align="justify">Just random, unrelated events transpiring? Completely lacking any coherence? No contextual similarities? Consider, if you will: <strong>1)</strong> A 2000-5000 square mile oil slick snaking its way to shore, sure as shit to devastate the economies of several states, decimate the commercial shellfish industry, detrimentally impact eco-systems all along the coasts of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida, delivering an environmental nightmare to the American people. <strong>2)</strong> United States Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton, completely oblivious to the irony, standing at the podium at the UN Nuclear Proliferation Treaty conference admonishing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for his country's persistence in establishing a uranium enrichment program for peaceful use application. <strong>3)</strong> A racist immigration bill being signed into law by the Republican Governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer. <strong>4)</strong> Snowmaggedon? Snowpocolypse? A lot of winter snow in Washington, DC proving Climate Change isn't real; just the liberals' new religion replete with a priestly class and its own Pope, Al Gore. <strong>5)</strong> Local Planning Boards bowing to monied corporate interests at the expense of the township they are charged with defending. <strong>6)</strong> President Obama still auctioning off bits and pieces of his YesWeCan to bring about bi-partisanship with the No-ists as regards Financial Industry reform. <strong>7)</strong> Supporting our troops in their occupation of Iraq after a war of convenience had been launched by the PNAC, oops, the George W. Bush Administration (a.k.a. Cheney & Rumsfeld, LLC). <strong>8)</strong> Eighty-five percent of all human beings (Ninety-two percent of Americans) believe in G(g)od(s).<br /></p><p align="justify">Lucky 7 plus a bonus point. Limited for the reader's benefit as item upon item could be heaped on and on and…<br /></p><p align="justify">1) The <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_14989681">Draft Environmental Impact Statement</a> submitted by BP during its <em>Deepwater Horizon</em> permitting process states again and again that it is virtually impossible for a major oil spill/leak to occur. However, should there ever develop a leak or spill, the cutting edge technology available would allow BP to quickly and efficiently apply remediation measures so there would be zero damage to people, wildlife and environment. <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/world/bp-site-was-spared-environment-tests-as-spill-unlikely-20100505-uaom.html">In fact</a>, "The US Interior Department exempted BP's calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental impact analysis last year after three reviews of the area concluded that a massive oil spill was unlikely. The decision by the department's minerals management service to give BP's lease at Deepwater Horizon a 'categorical exclusion' from the National Environmental Policy Act on April 6, 2009 - and BP's lobbying efforts just 11 days before the explosion to expand those exemptions - show that neither federal regulators nor the company allowed for an accident of the scale of the one unfolding in the Gulf." Also, initially there was no doubt much emphasis on the jobs such a venture would provide. That's J-O-B-S…Jobs-JObs-JOBS!!! Now, what affect do you suppose such spiels as those above had on the local yokel members of the board/commission that would render the final decision to either go ahead and "Drill, Baby, Drill" or, turn the application down. Delusionistas, they signed off on the <em>Deepwater Horizon</em> project presumably for the jobs even though such ventures rarely produce the number of jobs proposed; this "white lie" a routine methodology used by entrepreneurs in order to acquire the necessary operating permit. As for the economic benefits of having an oil drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, numbers thrown about make such a proposal a "no-brainer" as in, that much money coming into the community? Hell, it's a no-brainer. Though, if the logic of that position escapes you, welcome to the club. Just how did that extra worker money get spent at the local café or restaurant or movie theater when they were stranded out to sea on the oil drilling platform-city? How many in the "community" have prospered? The majority? No way. Per usual, a few businesses have been making better profits by supplying the platform-city with needed provisions. Hell, Americans didn't even get the benefit of that oil as it was sold on international market like all other oil. And, of course, the local-yokel Delusionista contingent voted to allow the operating permits because, well, hell…there's absolutely no danger of a spill or leak. BP said so. Oh, yeah? Here's the payback. And, just how many pay for this breach? Compared, that is, to those profiteers? Ah, if you said, respectively, the Many and the Few, you grasp reality.<br /></p><p align="justify">2) The recent <a href="http://english.sina.com/world/p/2010/0503/317748.html">Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Conference</a> convened at the UN saw American, French and British diplomatic representatives and other functionaries walk out on Iranian President Ahmadinejad's speech. Apparently being reminded of America's use of nuclear weapons on civilian populations (the only nation in the world to do so) was not polite. Bringing up the point that the Obama Administration just threatened Iran with the use of nuclear arms (referring to a "U.S. Nuclear Posture Review provision retaining an option to use U.S. atomic arms against countries not in compliance with the nonproliferation pact, a charge Washington lays against Iran.") was <em>gauche</em>. Having the President of a nation clearly and articulately put forth the rationale for its peaceful use nuclear program is too jarringly contradictory to the propaganda America and its European allies have been incessantly spewing. But, perhaps most disturbing of all was Ahmadinejad's acquiescence to a "nuclear-free Middle East." What were the Americans, French and British, to do? They had to get up and leave in a visual snub of the Iranian leader. They walked out to add dramatic flair to their fictional storyline. After all the rhetoric/propaganda these nations have been manufacturing about stopping nuclear proliferation, having that become their <em>raison d'état</em>, how could they actually turn down such an offer to stop nuclear proliferation? The answer came in the form of Secretary of State Clinton when she pointed her finger across the entire UN crowd stating that not a single nation in attendance has violated the NPT parameters like Iran has. Of course, while all 189 signatories to the NPT attended the conference, absent were India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel. These nations haven't signed on. These nations all have nuclear programs with Israel having missile delivery capability and <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/un-security-council-permanent-members-back-nuclear-free-mideast-1.288467">200 or more nuclear warheads</a> to place on those missiles. Israel, during the first Iraq war actually had nuclear tipped missiles ready to launch. A nuclear free Middle East? Fear of nuclear proliferation the motivating factor for America, France and Great Britain? Then, why isn't Hilary Clinton pointing that finger at Israel? Why isn't Obama threatening Israel? Delusionistas, they would have you believe in their delusions rather than reality. Even with unified agreement among the NPT Conference attendees on a "Nuclear-free Middle East" you can be assured that Israel will never comply, will never sign onto the NPT regimen, nor will the United States or European nations pressure it to do so<br /></p><p align="justify">3) In Arizona, Republican Governor Jan Brewer (in yet another ploy in a long line of such ploys used by Repubs to lay ancient problems on the fresh door stoop of the Obama Administration) signed into law an illegal immigration bill that allows for police to round up, question and ask for papers of anyone suspicious; suspicious, of course, undefined. When a <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJrcVvfv26Q">reporter asked the Governor</a> what an illegal alien looks like, she shrugged her shoulders and said she didn't know. Seeing as the bulk of illegal immigrants in Arizona are Mexican then typically brown people will be considered "suspicious" by the authorities. Get caught without your papers proving you're here legally, and you can go to jail and be fined even if it turns out you're an American born citizen who just happened to forget their wallet or purse. Not to worry. Republican Brain Trust Sarah Palin insists the law won't encourage "racial profiling" because the law states no racial profiling will be allowed. [Dingbat, comes to mind…"Awwwww, AhhChee…"] In an even more bizarre turn of events, Governor Brewer wrote an op-ed piece for <a href="http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=brewer/100505">ESPN</a> using sport metaphors to explain the law. One of her more intriguing statements is this one: "'Reasonable suspicion' is a well-understood concept that has been thoroughly vetted through numerous federal court cases. Many have asked: What is reasonable suspicion? Is it race, skin color or national origin? No! Racial profiling is prohibited in the new law. Examples of reasonable suspicion include: a person running away when approached by law enforcement officers, or a car failing to stop when the police turn on their lights and siren." Oh? Then why does she also go on to state: "…under SB 1070 there must first be reasonable suspicion that you are breaking some OTHER non-immigration law before an officer can ask a person about their legal status. <strong>Only then, after law enforcement officers have a "reasonable suspicion" that another law has been broken, can they inquire about immigration status -- </strong><strong>but ONLY if that individual's behavior provides "reasonable suspicion" that the person is here illegally</strong>." You know, behaviors like wearing a cowboy hat and a Mickey Mouse shirt with soccer shorts and work boots…Oh, yeah, and carrying around that brown skin, too. Republican Delusionistas would have us believe being Mexican-American in Arizona won't be a problem at all.<br /></p><p align="justify">4) During the worst February snow storm Washington, DC ever saw, <a href="http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_021010/content/01125106.guest.html">Rush Limbaugh</a> offered his "dittoheads" this particularly poignant, well-thought out, non-fact-based nor cited reasoning: "Now, normally the rain would be going further north and the global warming models all predict that the cold weather would be going north and it's the exact opposite. All of this is much southerly, much more southerly than it ought to be. These two storms are merging here and they're El Nino storms, Mother Nature can't do anything about that, and it's just another nail in the coffin of the whole global warming thing, and each time, you know, every day like this, where is Algore? Where is the media asking Algore what's going on with this? I mean the IPCC has been destroyed credibility-wise. It doesn't mean that the leftist goons are giving up by any stretch, but nobody's had any curiosity to go out and try to find Algore and ask him to explain this or at least comment on it. I find that fascinating." How did the "Great One" substantiate this? "…this comes from our official climatologist, Dr. Roy Spencer, University of Alabama Huntsville, UAH." So much the Delusionista, Rush Limbaugh needs to bend the reality more than a bit to get to where he wants to get to. Like claiming his source is a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatology">climatologist</a> when actually the man is a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteorology">meteorologist</a>. <a href="http://texasvox.org/2010/04/07/climatology-vs-meteorology">No difference you say?</a> Then you must be of the mindset that there isn't much difference between a butcher and brain surgeon (nor between ribs and sweetbread sausage). Known for his brilliant analysis, Rush goes on: "I think we all need to have a good laugh here at the expense of the environmentalist wacko communists in New York, Washington, Baltimore, and Philadelphia, and every other snow-packed town or city whose houses are equipped with Ed Begley Jr. recommended solar panels. You got people relying on solar panels and windmills and all of these other green energy technologies. Imagine how frustrated these people are who say they're going to save the planet and they can't even save themselves. Their own technology could not get them to the grocery store during a situation like this. Their own technology would not enable them to feed themselves. They have to rely on snowplows powered by gas-guzzling combustion engines in order to get out of their driveways to drive or bike or go to a global warming protest in the middle of a blizzard." Not a fleeting thought about how the reality could be combustible engine-free, but isn't, not because of the environmentalist-wacko-communists but rather, a Delusionista culture awash in America's <em>status quo</em>, in Empire-ism and hoggishness that cares nothing of anything beyond its ever expanding waistlines; so, to sacrifice? A nonstarter. To educate oneself in order to make rational decisions about the shared reality we habituate with 6 Billion other humans? A pipedream.<br /></p><p align="justify">5) Picture, if you will, a small rural township, with a once-upon-a-time thriving manufacturing sector now worn, shuttered, rotting; the town, slowly succumbing to collapse. Enter WalMart with a plan to open a supercenter on the site of a decaying mall. Townspeople rejoice. Any who attend the meetings held by the Town Board and Planning Board on the issue of Walmart opening a store vocalize their total support. Obvious to the politicos people want it because of the following points: Jobs! jobs!! jobs!!! and cheaper prices. The tax money such a venture will bring into the community is a sweet anticipation. What's not to love about Walmart opening a store which will revitalize the township? So, the Town Board lets the process slip through to the Planning Board which does the following: It holds a public hearing to hear the "people" express their feelings about the proposal; almost unanimous support for allowing the special use permit. It votes (requiring a supermajority; majority plus one) to by-pass county recommendations to do a full SEQRA [State Environmental Quality Review Act] review. In rendering its decision, the Delusionista-occupied Planning Board cites the overwhelming support from the public, it mentions that SEQRA isn't meant to be used again and again and since the site has been a shopping mall for decades, no further expensive studies are necessary to determine impacts, it mentions the positive addition of jobs, it grants the approval. However, consider the fact that there is nothing at all in the laws of New York State that allows for decisions being based upon public support. In fact, case law exists that has resulted in overthrowing Planning Board decisions primarily predicated upon public support. While "the people" are to be given the opportunity to speak at a public hearing, whether a clear majority want approval or do not, cannot be a determining factor for a Planning Board's decision. The Planning Board's refusal to do a SEQRA is completely wrong! The mall site was constructed prior to SEQRA law and has actually never had a full SEQRA review. Stormwater runoff concerns alone should have triggered a SEQRA review of the proposed Walmart project, but did not. The Planning Board should have been aware of two NYS Comptroller reports dating back a decade that found less than 20 percent of jobs promised are actually delivered and the <a href="http://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/may06/051606.htm">current report</a> finds less than one-third of the jobs promised are delivered; this in the context of lucrative State, county and local PILOT programs designed to lessen start-up costs; call them taxpayer subsidies to private investors. Lucky for town residents that a local group banded together with help from a Walmart competitor and <a href="http://www.shawangunkjournal.com/2010/04/29/news/1004290.html">sued the town Planning Board</a> for not having done its job. While losing in the first round (typically the case) the appeal should render quite a different outcome. At the very least, the court will probably send word to the Planning Board that a comprehensive SEQRA review is required; which should have been the case from the beginning and which will no doubt have to include an economic impact study that can only include a ton of data regarding Walmart's devastating impacts on surrounding smaller businesses because of its siphoning of the limited disposable income available which a Walmart requires to stay in business; the fact that for every job created by Walmart three others are lost in the hosting community/area; that the supposed tax money bonanza coming to the community, not to happen as that money goes to the county via PILOT programs (Development Authority Payment In Lieu Of Taxes enticements that reduce local taxes—property, school, town and sales – for at least a decade); that the pay is minimum wage, without benefits; that Walmart turnover in jobs offered is somewhere around 300 percent (which is testament to a less than ideal workplace environment); that Walmart has been shown via court cases to be discriminatory towards women and seniors; etc etc etc. Needless to say, once the town's Planning Board conducts such a thorough SEQRA review (in order to protect the community from negative impacts), giving an okay will be quite impossible as it will be abundantly clear that such a venture is NOT in the best interests of the community as the negative impacts far outweigh the positives.<br /></p><p align="justify">6) Congressional approval of a <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/credit_crisis/financial_regulatory_reform/index.html">Financial Reform Bill</a> had no traction for a bi-partisan vote so mostly Democrats voted to curb the excesses of Wall Street while Republicans continued their strategy of just saying "NO" to every provision. In a beautiful example of hypocrisy Republican Minority Leader <a href="http://blog.buzzflash.com/honors/317">John Boehner</a> (R-OH) and the epitome of a Delusionista, refers to the proposed Senate Financial Reform Bill as "President Obama's TARP Forever Act" attempting to force-feed Americans Frank Luntz's semantic manipulations that change reality to fiction within a few words; here attempting to link Obama and America's disfavor with the massive near-trillion dollar federal Wall Street giveaway known as TARP even though said program was a George W. Bush Administration transfer of wealth from taxpayers to top one-percenters. And then there's Senator Mitch McConnell griping about the Obama Administration coming to the table with only half the job done (meaning an unfinished bill). Of course, this is the same McConnell that griped about not being a part of the preparation work for the Health Care reform bill as he and all other Republicans refused to participate over 14 months in the bill's construction. So, now, when the Obama Administration seeks to include the Republicans at the beginning of a bill's construction, McConnell protests that the bill isn't finished. Like Goldmember's "blintz and a bong" offer, there's no pleasing the "No-ists" on Capitol Hill.<br /></p><p align="justify">7) Operation Iraqi Freedom. A war that need not have been fought; a war of convenience; a war to establish Middle Eastern hegemony; a war to secure forward bases for foreign interventions by US troops; a war that was never so much a war as an occupation; an occupation that wasn't about democracy nor deposing an evil tyrant nor WMD but rather a war conjured up by demented Reagan-era planners/convicts (Iran-Contra Scandal) with a penchant for dramatic anti-Communist murder sprees: <a href="http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/">1,366,350</a> Iraqi civilians so far converted from living beings to so much collateral damage. Delusionistas believing whole-heartedly in American exceptionalism, better than all the rest, therefore, whatever we think and/or perpetrate is God Blessed. So, support our shock troop occupiers? No, thank you.<br /></p><p align="justify">8) Which brings us to the fact that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God">Eighty-five percent of all human beings</a> believe in G(g)od(s); <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/23/ST2008062300818.html">ninety-two percent of Americans</a>. May 6<sup>th</sup> was <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Day_of_Prayer">National Prayer Day</a> a day where Delusionistas prostrate themselves and pray for a better world; one caution though, "Usually Satan will try to suggest to you that your prayers were not heard. He will encourage you to look to the problems again and get your eyes off God. He will try to get you to talk as if you are not sure if your prayer is answered. If he succeeds in getting you to express doubt it is likely that your mouth confession will cancel the effect of your prayer. Therefore guard your mind and heart, resist the temptation to talk negatively about the situations with others, especially with those with whom you are praying. Take firm control of your thought life. Think on positive things (Philippians 4:6-9). By praising God and confessing the relevant truths of the Word, cast down every thought that is contrary to your prayer. These thoughts many times are nothing but the <a href="http://nationaldayofprayer.org/">suggestions of the devil</a>, who is working to negate our faith." Ergo the most deluded of Delusionistas. God-ites relying on "faith" for their strength, on metaphors for proof of God's existence and whatever we do, do NOT talk about the negative behaviors inundating us; ignore them so that our "mouth confessions" will not be heard. (G(g)od(s) must be hard of hearing anything but positivity. This is how we do not take responsibility for being the only intelligent species in the universe (that we know of), how we murder and maim in the name of our Lord(s) and rationalize away our disgusting prejudices with ritual and prayer that reassures we are closer to G(g)od(s) than the nonbelievers. One can only wonder at the shared outpouring of outrage that will accompany the latest <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/04/15/wisconsin.court.prayer/index.html">court ruling</a> re National Prayer Day.<br /></p><p align="justify">In every example above, Delusionistas have taken the easy way out: Staying on the rutted path of Status Quo out of laziness and fear, stupidity and hatred, greed and misanthropy. But, look at the Delusionistas when they are at their most deluded. You'll see a heavenly glow, a beaming quality that shouts: "I'm number one. I sitteth at the right hand of G(g)od(s)." If that doesn't put a chill up and down your spine, you're one of them.<br /></p><p align="justify">Unfortunately, Delusionistas are not a delusion but a reality that is everywhere on this planet. The question is: Do we close our eyes and join them? Or, do we fight for the humanity imprisoned by their delusions?</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-42316020792177250132010-04-09T10:27:00.005-04:002010-04-23T09:08:57.425-04:00Any Which Way<span xmlns=""> <p align="justify">Senator John McCain (R-Az), amidst a tough re-election campaign, states he has never put himself across as being a maverick even as his <em>auto</em>biography, "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/081296974X/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_2?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0375505423&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0ZF9N7SYK2NEZ9KA2XG3"><em>Worth the Fighting For</em></a>" carries this subtitle, "<em>The Education of An American <span style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline">Maverick</span>, And the Heroes Who Inspired Him</em>." Senator Blanche Lincoln (D) from Arkansas, amidst a tough re-election campaign, puts out two commercials, one stating she stood against Obama's Health Care reform bill by voting "no" even as she states in her other commercial that she supported the bill by voting "yes" (when she voted to procedurally allow the bill to move forward so that she could ultimately vote against it). President Obama (D)-- a professor of Constitutional law and professing to be all about the rule of law, even as he points his finger in accusation against religious fanatics (meaning, Islamists though not Israelis) aiding and abetting violence in pursuit of their aims --issues a <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7089899.ece"><em>fatwa</em></a> (extrajudicial death sentence) on American-born Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki (for <em>allegedly </em>having egged on the "Christmas Day Bomber"). And then there's <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/90883-coburn-threatens-to-block-all-spending-bills-in-senate">Senator Tom Coburn</a> (R-Okla) a proponent of George W. Bush's unfunded tax cuts (that transferred hundreds of billions of dollars from the working middle class to the top one percent) objecting to a $9 Billion emergency spending bill to extend unemployment benefits to more than 200,000 Americans even as he stated, " The easiest thing in the world is to pass this bill unpaid for, but consider the millions of Americans whose financial futures would be damaged, versus <strong><em>the relatively small amount of people</em></strong> who will be affected by this delay. Now you tell me which vote takes the most courage." [This writer's emphasis]<br /></p><p align="justify">And, of course, we have the hysteria of Obama Socialism being fanned by the usual suspect demagogues (Beck – Coulter – Goldberg – Hannitty – Ingraham – O'Reilly) to such raging proportion that the <em>ignorami</em> have taken to brick-throwin' and death threatenin' and packin' weapons so enflamed have they become. Secession from the United States of America has gained traction in such dimly lit circles; where shadows are everything, being cast as they are by a reality which is only a reflection of the terror felt by those less than fortunate feudalists mobbing on behalf of a system that exploits them; serfs to the Republican lords of "free market" ideology.<br /></p><p align="justify">Dumbfucks, in a word.<br /></p><p align="justify">So here we are in the year 2010 with the American political scene one of profound polarity, with hypocrisy at unprecedented levels and with the American people fervently yelping anti-Communism rhetoric reminiscent of the worst McCarthy era <em>jihadists</em>. According to this less than scintillating sector of American citizenry, Team Obama are—at the same instant, mind you –socialist/communist/progressive/fascists whose only goal is to impose their tyranny of the left, to grow government, to feed big brother, to…<em>Wha' da?! Hey?!</em> Government has grown bloated under thirty years of <em>Republican</em> governance even as it has been largely privatized (ergo decisions made by what's good for shareholders rather than what the People require). Big Brother-- what with warrantless wire-tapping, email intercept programs, the tossing of <em>habeas corpus, </em>the indiscriminate use of "enemy combatant" to lock away anyone for any reason or no reason at all --has been never as well nourished as during the last thirty years of <em>Republican </em>governance. And yet, across America, Tea Partiers are apoplectic over a "tyranny of the left" so ominous and all-powerful that the "No-ists" (a.k.a. <em>Republicans</em>) can thwart every Democratic move by merely threatening to filibuster and/or by using any/all delaying tactics/procedures no matter how thin the validity in order to obstruct progress. But, this escapes the "moral majority."<br /></p><p align="justify">Really, really dumb, dumbfucks.<br /></p><p align="justify">This is a summation of Karl Marx's central premise re Communism: "The state of society in which there is no private property, no socially significant division of labour or exclusive ownership of tools and means of production, and no use of money as a substitute for the social control of production, and in which production is directly for use. This stage will be achieved as a result of the internal collapse of capitalism when the proletariat comes to expropriate the expropriators and places into social ownership the means of production, distribution, and exchange. Marx envisages capitalist habits and the use of money not being abolished overnight after such a revolution. Politically, the revolution will be accompanied by a temporary repressive dictatorship of the proletariat, which will then be the vast majority of mankind, preventing the old ruling class and its agents from regaining power. Economically, the first stage of communism, often called socialism by Marx's followers, will be based on the continuation of a money economy and of democratized labour discipline according to the principle, <em>'From each according to his capacity, to each according to his contribution.'</em> When such socialized production has caused the springs of wealth to flow more freely, when labour has become highly educated and versatile, and when the vestiges of bourgeois habits and self-seeking have been eliminated, money will cease to play a significant role and the principle of society will become, <em>'From each according to his capacity, to each according to his need'</em>." <span style="font-size:9;"><span style="font-size:78%;">[<em>The Portable Karl Marx</em>, edited by Eugene Kamenka; Penguin, 1983; pg 564-565]<br /></span></p></span><p align="justify">To review the three pillars of Marxian Communism: The People (workers/proletariats) own the means of production. The People (workers/proletariats) own the nation/real property assets. The People (workers/proletariats) rule of, by and for the People, not for profit.<br /></p><p align="justify">With America going absolutely bonkers having been fed large portions of hate and divisiveness, with fears fanned so hot that irrationality stokes the conversation, the anti-Communist outpouring has been blistering; lots of heat with absolutely no light being generated. The self-serving leading the deaf, dumb and blind. For, think about it. The means of production has been lost, shifted overseas; now China out manufactures America. Millions of jobs have likewise been off-shored; the legion of non-working now the highest since the Great Depression. American production workers are becoming an endangered species. Trillions of dollars of value/wealth has been lost by the People (middle class) as the housing bubble burst, as tax breaks for the top percentage of earners siphoned trillions more from the People (middle class) and even more money transferred as real wages for the People (proletariat/workers) has fallen over the past three decades. As for money ruling, have Americans forgotten the S and L crisis of the 80s and the $313 billion (in today's dollars) bail out; that it came on George Bush, Sr.'s watch; that it involved son Neil Bush; that crisis theft serving as bookend to W's deregulatory debacle that currently plays out? Does the current financial crisis ring a bell? Trillions of taxpayer dollars given over to gamblers who went hog wild and went belly up— these hogs, the major American banks, those same institutions that successfully lobbied for a cut-throat bankruptcy law that would force middle-class Americans defaulting on credit card debt to pay up even if it meant losing their homes and all their possessions; the argument used most, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard">moral hazard</a>. Yet, even as the moral hazard argument was used on American citizen debtors and the rest of the world during the Asian financial crisis of 1997, there wasn't much talk of moral hazard when it came to bailing out America's financial elites. According to <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Freefall-America-Markets-Sinking-Economy/dp/0393075966/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1270823108&sr=1-1">Joseph Stiglitz</a>, Nobel winning economist, "During the East Asian crisis, just a decade ago, American and the IMF demanded that the affected countries reduce their government's deficits by cutting back expenditures – even if, as in Thailand, this resulted in a resurgence of the AIDS epidemic, or even if, as in Indonesia, this meant curtailing food subsidies for the starving…America and the IMF forced countries to raise interest rates, in some cases (such as Indonesia) to more than 50 percent. They lectured Indonesia about being tough on its banks and demanded that the government not bail them out. What a terrible precedent this would set, they said, and what a terrible intervention into the smooth-running mechanisms of the free market. The contrast between the handling of the East Asian crisis and the American crisis is stark and has not gone unnoticed. To pull America out of the hole, the country engaged in massive increases in spending and massive deficits, even as interest rates were brought down to zero. Banks were bailed out left and right. Some of the same officials in Washington who dealt with the East Asian crisis are managing the response to the American implosion." [p222] The ol' <em>Do as I say, not as I do</em> routine. Don't these multi-trillion dollar bail outs and double standards suggest who is, and will forever be, calling the tune here in America? Could it truly be possible Americans have forgotten the above mentioned realities? Yes, they have. Thus the new strategy for simply making reality whatever you want it to be for the nonce, not to be hindered by pesky real reality, history, actuality. Lying and then lying about lying has become the operative strategy in America. Any which way. What difference does it make? Real? True? Fiction? Lie? All the same to the lame of mind Tea Partiers and Republicans and even some Democrats, too. It works. Americans are not equipped to deal with facts. In fact, most don't know how to distinguish a fact from a fiction; a condition that is exacerbated via amnesia of anything beyond <em>ME in the MOMENT</em>.<br /></p><p align="justify">Just look at the People (workers/proletariats) manning the barricades spewing venomous, misspelled epithets and threatening the "Progressives" with violence (in words and deeds) because this Democrat Administration is supposedly forcing Communism down America's collective throat. Never mind that at no time since its inception has Marxian Communism been less likely to flourish in America. Yet, "Leaders" like House Minority Leader, John Boehner* (R-OH ) screams "HELL NO!" refusing to go anywhere near that Marxian "dystopia" called Communism. And that's not because it'll undermine American morality; that's already been accomplished by Republican leadership over three decades. Why Boehner squeals like a pig against Communism is because Communism is all about operating on behalf of the masses, not amassing on behalf of the few at the expense of the masses. He, along with his Republican cohorts, have pledged to refuse to go along with ANY legislation proposed by the majority party Democrats in an effort to strait-jacket the legislative process hoping the American dumbizens will only remember come November that gov'mint ain't workin', so it must be the Democrats' fault 'cause they's the majority. As long as the Republicans can continue their terrible-two <em>tantrumatrics</em> and fuck up the workings of democracy, the better chances they have for getting rewarded with the reins of a legislative majority this coming election.<br /></p><p align="justify">Ironic? No, tragic. A clarion call to all Americans to smarten up or face the consequences of their stupidity.<br /></p><p align="justify">* Let's finally call the Congressman out on the pronunciation of his name, shall we: <em>Doe</em> rhymes with dough as does foe, hoe, Joe, Moe, Poe, roe, toe and woe. Therefore, <em>Boe</em>hner rhymes with boner. The guy even plays games with his own name, for cryin' out loud! A real stiff prick, that one.</p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-61883975982571014412010-02-15T10:27:00.002-05:002010-02-15T10:31:52.943-05:00Non Sequitur<span xmlns=""><p align="justify">From Latin [it does not follow] "The fallacy of irrelevant conclusion; an inference that does not follow from the premises." <span style="font-size:78%;"><em>Funk & Wagnalls, </em>Standard Dictionary, International Edition<br /></p></span><p align="justify">Remember that definition. It's with us now more than ever. It will be for the foreseeable future. You see, Right Wing-Nuts have cornered the market on <em>non sequitur</em> and they're spewing it non-stop across the blogosphere, internet and every media market in America in an effort to demagogue their way out of a horrific reality caused by Republican rule over the last thirty years (YEAH-YEAH-YEAH…Including Republocrat William Jefferson Clinton*). The American empire has run its course. Only violence will secure (for the ever-dwindling "many") a continued lifestyle to which a proportion of Americans have become accustomed. "Many" defined as the swallowed hump that is the middle-class bulge in the belly of the beast; now being slowly digested; soon to be passed as one gigantic fecal deposit. <em>Precisely</em> the excrementitious result any <em>real </em>Capitalist system <em>must</em> ultimately produce.<br /></p><p align="justify">America has operated for the benefit of its monied elites since inception. To believe otherwise is to have been propagandized by their fictions called History. That tale tells nothing of rich white men legalizing their two-fold self-serving agenda: Acquisition of more money and more power. Rather, that story is of good men of conscience, yearning to be free from the shackles of Royal decrees and burdensome oppression. Compassionate men, our <em>Founding Fathers</em>. Those saints to <em>homo vulgaris</em> blessing them with a democracy <em>of, by and for the People</em>.<br /></p><p align="justify">Like I said, pure propaganda (and, I coulda used bullshit there for clarity). If you believe America is pure and God Blessed, a true democracy and really standing for the rights of the People, etc, etc,…then you're also likely to believe the following:<br /></p><ul><li><div align="justify">The recent deluge of Fox-based noise quoting Cheney and Limbaugh and Beck as well as pretty much every pundit/talking head on FOX "news" channels, going on and on about how the Obama Administration is going light on "terrorists" by encouraging the civil trial in New York City of <em>Khalid Sheikh Mohammed</em> rather than using the military tribunal process. Typical charges have been leveled at Team Obama: <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/32250.html">Soft on terrorism</a>. Naïve. Selling out our nation's security. Communist/Socialist. Muslim-lover. Blackman in whiteface and big red lips. Bone through nose. Goat-fucker. ** Any who believe the preceding is also likely to believe the George W. Bush presidency's claim that torture of "terrorists" was justified and legal. The tortured reasoning has been because these "vermin" aren't regular army—affiliated with no nation-state –the Geneva Conventions do not apply. But, the contradiction is this: If these "terrorists" weren't regular army in order to wiggle out from under the Geneva Conventions, why are these same voices now calling for military tribunals? Ahh, the problems with pesky reality always butting in and ruining such perfect illogic.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">The "Liberal" media is being typically unfair by going after Sarah Palin because she was caught reading off <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7020549.ece">notes written on her hand</a> when interviewing during the <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/tea-party-sips-bitter-brew/story-e6frg6z6-1225829335523">National Tea Party</a> convention. While discussed at length by the usual suspects (Fuck News, folk) and even counterpointed by MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow, the essential contradiction wasn't stressed: Sarah Palin, just after she sarcastically referred to Obama ["This is about the people. And it's a lot bigger than any charismatic guy with a teleprompter."] not merely needed to read her own palm (where she had scribbled some talking points…"Energy" "Tax" "Budget cuts" with "Budget" crossed out, and "Lift American spirits." DUH!) which demonstrates a shocking, nay, appalling lack of "on her feet intelligence," an obvious inability to parse the here-and-now which is a trait that any President should have. Palin's palm reading was done surreptitiously! Like a school kid cheating on a test. She could have simply written the points down on a index card. But, no. She sought to put forth a false "perception" that was meant to make her seem Presidential, able to speak intelligently off the cuff. By doing what she did, she LIED to her own constituency and to the American people. Yet, the Tea Baggers fall all over themselves defending her. Now, before moving on, think about the points Palin did scribble down. What nitwit wouldn't know those talking points; couldn't recite them even in their perpetual stupidity-induced haze?! But, if you think about it, maybe she's on to something. If ever elected President, the American people would no doubt hope she keeps a note about which button to finger for the nuclear end game scribbled between her mavericky mams, just in case. Wouldn't want her to be quick-dialing for pizza and, "Oops…My baaaad."<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Another belief no doubt held by America's <em>ignorami</em> is that the <a href="http://jonathanturley.org/2010/01/21/supreme-court-rules-5-4-against-campaign-limitations-in-the-hillary-the-movie-case/">recent US Supreme Court ruling</a> giving corporations unlimited influence in American political elections is a good, wholesome, what-the-founding-Fathers-wanted kind of decision. All we've heard from the Right Wing-Nuts is that finally America's highest jurisprudential body has gotten it right when defining corporations: They're people! With all the rights of any American citizen. The FACT that corporations are increasingly foreign-based (to avoid paying their fair share of taxes) as well as foreign-owned seems to have had no bearing on the "Supreme's" deliberations. One wonders what leaps in logic will be induced upon, oh say, CITGO's (owned and operated by Venezuela, hence Hugo Chavez) massive funding of the next Democrat candidate. You can be sure there will be a huge, frothing-mouthed out-cry from these same Right Wing-Nuts about the undemocratic nature of this same Supreme Court decision. Again, while this issue has been bounced around on nearly every political talk show available, none have focused on the contradiction inherent in this decision; viz., allowing for unlimited (via corporate-scale funding of) "free speech" rights of corporations that deny same to their employees (also sanctioned by the US Supreme Court). Meaning, now in America, free speech is guaranteed to Corporations that deny free speech to the American citizens they employ. There have been numerous stories about employees fired for their Facebook musings on their own page done on their own time. Or those stories about corporate employees speaking out for unionization getting fired, etc. etc.<br /></div></li></ul><p align="justify">You know, there used to be a time, not that long ago, when being labeled (or worse, when proved to be) a hypocrite was a fate worse than death for a politician. Now, for the Right Wing-Nuts, it's a medal of distinction; showing an "intellectual" spryness, an uncanny ability to dance around facts until nonsense makes sense. Just like there used to be a time when a word's definition meant something; when using words was for communicating, for articulating ideas ever more clearly. Now we have Sarah Palin (and Beck and Limbaugh and Coulter and Ingraham and Hannitty and Dobbs and O'Reilly) using words strung together that, when analyzed, mean absolutely nothing. But, you see, this type of word usage isn't about articulating anything at all. It's about vague "button pushing" words used to tap into the anger born of unintelligence, bias, hatred, ill-conceived patriotism and a religious-based righteousness that supersedes all but the authority of their God. These words aren't meant to enlighten but to obscure reality from the fictions being perpetrated. Hey, here's a couple words for you that you would be well advised to study and know by heart: demagoguery and demagogue. If you believe the points above, you have already been subsumed by demagoguery as distributed by the demagogues just mentioned.<br /></p><p align="justify">In fact, at least half of the American public has a collective knowledge base that is 180 degrees from (and exactly opposite to) reality; that's right, all turned around from what is true. Whatever you believe to be "facts" are very likely to be wrong. Your belief in US History? Wrong! Your belief in an America of, by and for the People? Wrong! Terrorism is a war to be won? Wrong (terrorism is a state of mind)! American elites are honest about fighting terrorism? Wrong (The United States is the most egregious terrorist nation in the world; why else do you think Hugo Chavez gave President Obama a copy of the quintessential Latin American history book, "<em>Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent</em>" by Eduardo Galeano? and why else is the Muslim world so angry? Because they actually <em>hate us for our freedom</em>??? WTF! Analyze that phrase and see that it is a meaningless utterance of words that pushes buttons thereby instilling hatred of a people that have had their resources used and their way of life abused by the dual-headed monster <em>AmerIsrael</em>)!<br /></p><p align="justify">Let's call America's Right Wing-Nuts something more appropriate: The 180s. Any time you hear an asinine, demagogic screed from the likes of the <em>ignorami</em>, be they local yokels or media darlings, label them what they are: A 180. A person bereft of reality relying on the punditry of demagogues without conscience; people that will believe anything.<br /></p><p align="justify">Anything, that is, except the truth!<br /></p><p align="justify"><br />* Always the required disclaimer re Clinton when none whatsoever should be necessary. He was a Republican moderate and/or a compassionate conservative costumed in Democrat's rhetorical flourishes. Two "proofs," if you will: NAFTA and <em>Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000</em> which opened the legal floodgates to water the financial sector's abuse of the system which sprouted in the Financial Crisis of 2009 -11. 'Nuff said?<br /></p><p align="justify">** I shit you not. Google "Obama sex with goat" and you'll get back a half-million entries. <a href="http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/race-issues/64408-nigger-caught-having-sex-goat.html">This one</a> and worse where the picture has been poorly photo-shopped with Obama's face superimposed on the Nigerian miscreant and reproduced all over the internet. Notice: These last three examples are NOT about security issues but nonetheless relevant, as in, WTF???!!!</p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-61913555225354447592010-01-27T11:24:00.005-05:002010-01-28T05:54:44.621-05:00AARRRGH!<span xmlns=""> <p align="justify">As a boy I loved pirates. They were a colorful bunch. Bold. Independent. Adventurous. Unconventional. Besides, my mom encouraged my love of pirates because she'd found a way to get me into shorts for the summer: She cut them saw-toothed at the legs and told me that's how the pirates wore them. I read countless books about pirates starting with, of course, <em>Treasure Island</em> by Robert Louis Stevenson with its fantastic depiction of Long John Silver and his crew. Then it was onto Black Beard (Edward Teach), Captain Kidd, Redbeard, Captain Henry Morgan, Captain Charles Vane, Anne Bonney, Jean Laffite, Black Bart (Bartholomew Roberts), and on and on. Avast, me hardies…'Twas wonderful reading. And what rapture, after all those intervening years, to view the <em>Pirates of the Caribbean</em> movies. Swashbuckling excitement almost as good as my youthful imagination.<br /></p><p align="justify">Much of the allure for me was the pirates' fight against the status quo, against the stodgy establishment, against the provincialism of power and its "lawful" abuses (always within the law because the law was written by the powerful few to use against the many). Pirates operated under their own flags. They had their own code, one that seemed most fair in that work was divvied up much as the loot procured; each man getting his rightful share. Certainly not like the monarchies ruling Europe and Asia where blood entitlement trumped common fairness. </p><p align="justify">Alas, today we read of Somali Pirates that seemingly have not an iota of the romanticism of the pirates of yore. They are petty little bandits. This writer became incensed just months ago when those rag-tag criminals took yet another foreign ship's crew hostage finally forcing nations to intercede by providing military protection for safe passage. It wasn't so much that such protection was required because of the pirates, but rather, that such protection was being paid for by taxpayer money to protect private interest profits. That has been the extent of this writer's Somali Pirate knowledge.<br /></p><p align="justify">Then comes along the article, "<em>Toxic Waste Behind Somali Pirates</em>" in the book "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Censored-2010-Top-Stories-2008-09/dp/158322890X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264608254&sr=1-1">Censored 2010</a>" edited by Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff citing articles in <a href="http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2008/10/2008109174223218644.html">Al Jazeera</a>, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/you-are-being-lied-to-abo_b_155147.html">Huffington Post</a> and <a href="http://wardheernews.com/Articles_09/Jan/Waldo/08_The_two_piracies_in_Somalia.html">WardheerNews</a>. Like Alice tumbling down the rabbit hole, everything is curiouser and curiouser! Seems the "pirates" call themselves the "Volunteer Coast Guard of Somalia" and are on a righteous mission to protect their waters from abject abuse from international interests. When the Somali government collapsed in 1991, predators moved in. "According to the High Seas Task Force (HSTF), there were over 800 IUU (Illegal-Unreported-Unregulated) fishing vessels in Somali waters at one time in 2005, taking advantage of Somalia's inability to police and control its own waters and fishing grounds. The IUUs poach an estimated $450 million in seafood from Somali waters annually. In so doing, they steal an invaluable protein source from some of the world's poorest people and ruin the livelihoods of legitimate fishermen."<br /></p><p align="justify">Reason enough, wouldn't you say? But wait. It gets much worse. While reports have been circulating about illegal dumping of toxic waste since early 1990s, little has been done to investigate such reports. According to <em>Scientific American</em> (February 2010; pg 15) "In 1994 Italian television journalist Ilaria Alpi and cameraman Miran Hrovatin were shot dead near Mogadishu, after they picked up the hazardous waste trail in Somalia." What sort of toxic waste, you might wonder? "There is uranium radioactive waste. There is lead, and heavy metals like cadmium and mercury. There is also industrial waste, and there are hospital wastes, chemical wastes." The tsunami of 2004 brought barrels and barrels of toxic waste onto Somalia's shores, proving what the locals had been claiming for over a decade. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) report "blamed fumes from these unidentified objects (unmarked barrels) for internal hemorrhages and deaths of local people."<br /></p><p align="justify">The local Somali fishermen sought to stop such dumping and thieving and wage a "tax" on the offenders. Pirate leader Sugule Ali states their motive is "to stop illegal fishing and dumping in our waters. We don't consider ourselves sea bandits. We consider sea bandits those who illegally fish, and dump waste, and carry weapons in our seas." Independent Somalia news site <em>WardheerNews</em> "conducted the best research we have on what ordinary Somalis are thinking. It found that 70 percent 'strongly support the piracy as a form of national defense of the country's territorial waters'."<br /></p><p align="justify">How does the world respond? The UN Security Council passes resolutions against such self-defense. NATO and the EU issue orders to crush such "piracy" even as many of the member states are home to financial interests guilty of poaching and dumping. And, lest we forget President Obama's <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/world/obama-gives-order-for-snipers-to-shoot-pirates-to-free-captain-20090413-a45t.html">personal order </a>issued on Easter Sunday evening, 2009, for Navy Seal snipers to murder three members of the "Volunteer Coast Guard of Somalia" upon their "hijacking" of the freighter, Maersk Alabama.</p><p align="justify">Taxpayers pay for private gain. Common folk seek to defend their country against heinous violations. The powerful ignore abuses and work to eliminate the weak. The world's major media spin their doublespeak so that good and decent becomes filthy dementia and a world of pigified sheep feed at the trough of deception pausing only long enough to shout, "Hang the bastards."<br /></p><p align="justify">Who among you still believe George Orwell's "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Orwell/1984"><em>nineteen eighty-four</em></a>" remains a work of fiction that exemplifies failed prediction? Those responding "I do" shall be made to "<em>walk the plank</em>." </p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-58418446468388285592009-11-23T10:35:00.002-05:002009-11-23T10:47:12.747-05:00Framers Wanted<span xmlns=""><p align="justify"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">During our last visit, I suggested you and as many of your family, friends and like-minded acquaintances as you can muster, should seek out and confront the virulence that is Republicanism/Conservatism. I suggested an "in your face" style unwilling to meek out with typical Liberal "let's agree to disagree" posturing. What better time to do this than the upcoming holidays when families and friends and new acquaintances congregate. I'm sure every one of you have at least one relative who always manages to shut you up with his/her narrow-minded views. Time to change all that!<br /></p></span><p align="justify"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">In other words, <em>Time to kick out da mofo jams, People!</em><br /></span><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;"><br />What follows is a very condensed, excerpted speech given by Cognitive Scientist/Semantic Linguist George Lakoff, Berkley professor. You should make his book, "<a href="http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Political-Mind/George-Lakoff/e/9780143115687/?pwb=1&pv=y">The Political Mind</a>" an absolute must-read. He and his colleagues have done extensive research into the role of metaphor on brain function and how concepts like "patriotic" can mean such diverse things to different people. Example: Patriotic to some, means having a responsibility to expose governmental malfeasance while, to another, patriotic means never questioning your government (unless, I guess, it's Democrat and/or presided over by a black man, in which case such questioning <strong>is</strong> patriotic.)<br /><br /></span><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">Boiled down, the theory holds that metaphors are energized by certain frames of reference. Once energized, the brain is reluctant to rewire. Every time thereafter a frame is triggered (e.g. see: stem cell, tax relief and war on terror, examples below) the brain reinforces the attachment to the metaphor used as trigger. To argue against such irrationality with facts is to go completely unheard.<br /><br /></span><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">Republicans/Conservatives use a <em>bible of word usage</em> created by wordsmith <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Frank_Luntz">Frank Luntz</a> that primarily engages the worst of Orwellian semantic manipulation to create whatever reality is most propitious to further the elite agenda of <em>mo' money, mo' money, mo' money</em> (and power, too). Witness a sampling of such lingual duplicity:<br /></p></span><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman;">A frame is a conceptual structure, a way in which we think. Some of it has to do with language. Every word carries with it a conceptual structure and images to go with it. A simple example from the press: Tom Delay arguing against the bill to allow stem cell research. Notice the word before—<em>embryonic </em>stem cell research. What is the image of an embryo? Like a little baby. So who told the conservatives always to use the word? Frank Luntz, in the manual. Now <em>The New York Times </em>uses it, NPR uses it. Embryonic stem cell research. It has that image. What Delay said is that we are dismembering the embryos—tearing them apart. Actual stem cell research, if you check out the science, is done on what is called a blastocyst. It is 3 to 5 days old, a hollow sphere containing only stem cells, no blood cells, nerve cells, eye cells—nothing else, just undifferentiated stem cells in a hollow sphere. There's no dismemberment. That suggests there is something with limbs that you can tear off. You will not hear that on TV. They're not going to ask biologists to go on TV and say exactly what a blastocyst is. You're not going to see pictures of it. Instead you're going to hear about embryonic stem cell research and dismembering.<br /></p></span><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman;">Framing carries with it an image. My favorite example is "tax relief." The first day Bush was in office he started talking about tax relief, and every day, tax relief, tax relief—it's repeated. And the word "relief" has a little frame. It says that taxes are an affliction; somebody's harmed by it. Then there's a hero who takes away this affliction, and anybody who tries to stop him is a bad guy. You add tax to that and you get taxation as an affliction and if anybody's against tax relief, they're bad guys. That's what tax relief says every time you hear the word, over and over. And what happens in your brain? One of the things we study in cognitive science—the synapses change. Every time that frame is activated, the synapses get stronger and stronger, until it becomes a permanent part of many people's brains.<br /></p></span><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman;">Another example: something like 70% of the people who voted for Bush believed that Saddam Hussein was in cahoots with the big 9/11 guy. Why? Frank Luntz put out a memo before the election saying, "Do not talk about the Iraq war. Don't mention the word Iraq. Say 'War on Terror'." Every time you see coverage of the war on Fox News, it says "War on Terror," until the two phrases form the same category. We think about them in the same frame. And vast numbers of Americans are assuming that what we're doing in Iraq is responding to 9/11. What do we learn from this? When your brain changes, when a frame enters your brain, it becomes a new common sense. And the facts hitting your common sense will be ignored. The facts will be trumped by the frames, explained away, not heard—once your brain changes. Now progressives believe in arguing with the facts. Why? It's important to understand this. The progressive movement had its start in the sixteen hundreds with the Enlightenment. The idea was that every single one of us, according to rationalist theory, has universal reason. No matter how rich or poor you are, you think the same way. And if you have universal reason, you don't have to listen to the king or the church. You can govern yourselves. An important idea for all progressives throughout history. Moreover, governments should be rational, and it's irrational to be against your material self-interest. Therefore, governments should govern to maximize the material self-interest of everybody. And facts matter. They are important for the realities of the world, and you should pay attention to science, look at the facts, look at prior reasons for the consequences. Governments should act in that way to help everybody. That is the birth of the liberal tradition. The pieces that are important. We can govern ourselves. We can think for ourselves. Material interests matter. We should work for the material interests of everybody. Facts matter; science matters. But there was a problem with the Enlightenment. It was a false theory of mind. It did not take framing into account. It did not notice that we think in terms of conceptual frames and we think metaphorically.<br /><br /></p><div align="justify"></span><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">As is already clear, Republican/Conservatives have understood this phenomena and used it to propagandize the public into believing what's good for monied elites is good for the <em>hoi polloi</em>. The following focus on the "family" metaphor is extremely important in today's political discourse/understanding of issues:<br /></div></span><p align="justify"></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman;">There's also something called deep framing, having to do with the whole structure of the system of concepts we have. Concepts don't just come one by one, one word at a time. They fit together as a whole. And how they do is not obvious…If people have a number of views and they fit together, you can predict that there has to be something holding them together—some generalization. So I took it as a cognitive science problem. I made a list of what people were saying. I noticed that liberals and conservatives had different moral views and different language for morality. I made long lists of expressions. I would go out and interview liberals, and they would consistently tell me that conservatives were irrational. How is it possible for anybody to be "pro life" and for the death penalty? Then I talked to a few conservatives, and they said, "You liberals are immoral. You're irrational<em>. </em>How can you possibly not want to put a murderer to death and sanction abortion?" They saw it as an utter contradiction. And going down the list of issues, each side would see the other as irrational. When you see this as a cognitive scientist, you know what that means. Here are two different worldviews, and people are reasoning <em>inside </em>the worldviews, not in terms of universal logic or universal reason. This is not a matter of standard logic. It's a matter of reasoning a hermetically sealed worldview, which gives different inferences, these two worldviews.<br /></p></span><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman;">I wondered why conservatives were talking about family values. What did they mean by that term? Out popped two notions: the nurturant parent family [Liberal/Democrat] and the strict father family [Conservative/Republican].<br /></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><br />You need a strict father in this model, because there's evil in this world, and he has to protect you from evil. You need a strict father because of the competition in this world. There are going to be winners, and there will always be losers, always. If you want to be a winner, you need a strict father. It's important to the family. And—children are born <em>bad </em>and need a strict father to teach them right from wrong. There's an absolute right and an absolute wrong, and there's only one way to teach them. As <a href="http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/James_Dobson">James Dobson</a> says: <em>painful punishment. </em>Punishment painful enough so they will have an incentive to discipline themselves, to take physical discipline and make it internal. He says that's the only way you create moral beings. And a lot of other right-wing child rearing books, in effect, said the same thing— children are born bad, they have to be disciplined. And discipline has a secondary effect: If they're disciplined and they pursue their self-interest, they can become prosperous, in this land of opportunity. And pursuing their self-interest, as Dobson points out, is good. It is part of free market capitalism. As Adam Smith said, If everybody pursues their own profit, the profit of all will be maximized, as a law of nature, by the invisible hand. Dobson writes that: this is what our country is about—the free market. Now what if you don't become prosperous? You obviously weren't disciplined enough. Or somebody was interfering with the free market. And there's a name for this in conservative thought. Anybody interfering is like government regulation. The idea of a free market is that you have to have an incentive (profit) and if you take away the incentive, you take away the reason to be disciplined enough to pursue the free market. Taking away the profit is called <em>taxation. </em>The good people, the moral people are those who are disciplined enough to pursue their self-interest and become wealthy.<br /></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><br />Taxation is the punishment—taking away the just rewards. So it follows that if you are not disciplined enough to pursue your self-interests and become prosperous, then you're not disciplined enough to be moral, and you deserve your poverty. That's the logic. So what does this say politically about social programs? They are all immoral—every one of them. Immoral in 2 ways: they give people things they haven't earned and therefore take away the incentive to be disciplined enough to pursue their self-interest. And because they take away discipline, they make people immoral, unable to do right. Immoral in two ways. From the strict father point of view, all social programs can be eliminated, on moral grounds. That is what this administration has in mind. That's what our Congress and all of those think tanks have in mind, and that's what they write about. It's immoral. </span></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman;">From the notion of nurturance, every progressive value immediately follows. If you care about your children, then you identify and empathize with them and you want them to be protected. Fiercely. Who from? Crime, drugs, pollution, unscrupulous companies. All the things you need to protect children from. What does that mean in politics? First, it's the progressive idea of protective security: environmental protection, consumer protection, worker protection, all part of what we call total security. Second, if you care about your kids, you want them to be treated fairly and equally. Very important—fairness and equality are important values. If you care about your kids, you want them to be fulfilled in life, and they can't be fulfilled unless they're free—so freedom is a value. They can't be free if there's no opportunity, and there's no opportunity if there isn't general prosperity. So opportunity and prosperity become values. But you live in a community—what kind? The strict father model where a community leader tells you what to do? Or a nurturing community where you care about one another, do community service, are responsible to one another. And to serve the community, you have to cooperate. To cooperate you need trust. To trust you need honesty and openness. Those are progressive values. They all come from nurturance. It makes sense: from the larger social groups, states and nations, to the smaller—community and family<br /></p></span><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><br /></p><p align="justify"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">The way forward then, is to understand the battle (ergo my repeated harping on America's <em>Stupid Factor</em>). The battle isn't about facts, or rather, facts aren't what convinces the masses. "Common sense" and "morality" wins the day. The object is to first question the morality of the Conservative/Republican position by using metaphor (analogy) that is a common sense-type "story" that people can digest. Once swallowed, the frame is created and every subsequent use of the metaphor reinforces the frame.<br /></p></span><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman;">The Democratic Party is stuck in the following way: it uses polls differently from Republicans. Republicans frame an issue their way, so people have to agree with it in terms of their framing, i.e., "Do you think the middle class should get more tax relief?" –yes or no? And a lot of people will say yes, and they release the poll and announce, "Americans are in favor of tax relief." That's the way to advance an agenda. Democrats will take the same poll, with Republican framing, and they'll say, "Gee, maybe we should be in favor of cutting taxes, too. Maybe we should move to where they are." But the point is not to go where they are, but to <em>change </em>them. So why are they missing the boat here? Remember rationalism? It's irrational to be against your own self-interest. So if voters think rationally, what we should do is ask them what their interest are, take the top six and run on that program. And they lose. Because voters are really voting their <em>identity. </em>They're going for someone who shares their values, whom they can trust, not necessarily in their self-interest. Thomas Frank, author of <em>What's the Matter with Kansas </em>points out over and over again that people are voting against their self-interest. And they are. They're voting on their identity and their morality, and that's why Democrats are losing. They've got the wrong theory of the electorate. </span><br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman;">Frank Luntz, their language man, put out a section on the environment. In it he discussed global warming, and this was leaked on the internet. In it, Luntz said, "The other side is winning, because they've got science on their side. But…we can turn it around. We can win through language. We can use words like 'healthy', 'clean', 'safe', when we talk about coal plants, nuclear power." You've heard the president (G.W. Bush) at his press conferences: "We need a nuclear power plant that is healthy, clean and safe." They name their environmental initiatives after those words—like "The Clear Skies Act," that increases pollution; "The Healthy Forest Act" that allows clear-cutting. Notice that they could not call it "The Dirty Skies Act." They could not call it "No Tree Left Behind." But we can. And should. They're using Orwellian language here, and they only do this when they're weak, when they do not have public approval. They know they're in the minority, and have to use substitute language to cover up their weakness. They have to use "The Death Tax" to make it look like it applies to everybody instead of just millionaires. They have to use "Partial Birth Abortion," giving a horrible image for an operation that doesn't exist. They have to use "Compassionate Conservative." And if they really were compassionate, they wouldn't need the adjective. When they use language to manipulate the people, they know they do not have public support. And in those cases we need to go right after them and say what you really believe from your own moral position. Powerfully, strongly. There is nothing stronger than nurturing, nothing more protective than a fierce nurturing parent. You have moral outrage and you should express it strongly, straightforwardly.<br /></p></span><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"><br /></p><p align="justify"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">By way of example, say Uncle Fucker, fat from years of overconsumption, having done alright for himself in his business (via paying his workers minimum wage without benefits) starts off his typical anti-Democrat spewing as the giblet gravy drips off his double chins, "God damned Obama! Socialist! No doubt about it…" Family history has been for everyone to sit silent even as various members roll their eyes in hackneyed disgust (although carefully so as not to draw attention and, thus, Uncle's ire). Oh, there have been outbursts in the past from the younger members, being optimistic and great believers in fairness. But these disagreements have quickly escalated with Mother saying "Enough!" and displaying the evil eye so as to defuse the situation by quieting the effrontery. Even though Mother and Father may actually believe Uncle Fucker to be a pompous ass and totally self-serving, custom dictates that maintaining a sense of holiday decorum is more important. This blog is to move you to question that assumption. It is NOT better to remain quiet. It is NOT better to allow Uncle Fucker's frame of reference rule the dinner table discourse.<br /></p></span><p align="justify"><br /></p><p align="justify"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">So, how does one go about challenging Uncle Fucker's frame? How about something like this: "Uncle, are you saying you approve of the massive trillion dollar Financial bailout? Giving all that taxpayer money to an elite few?" [CAUTION: First you better make sure someone knows how to apply the Heimlich Maneuver 'cause sure as shit Unc is gonna sputter and choke on it a bit.] He'll no doubt feel a trap and stutter something like, "Uh, hmmm…Th-There was no choice! Had to be done!"<br /></p></span><p align="justify"><br /></p><p align="justify"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">You respond, "Well then, Uncle…That was and is a purely socialistic methodology applied. It socialized the cost of failure while doing absolutely nothing about the continued privatization of profits. It took the People's money and gave it to those who made obscene profits before they then gambled and lost. And, by the way, Uncle...that socialist give-away was perpetrated by a Conservative/Republican Administration."<br /></p></span><p align="justify"><br /></p><p align="justify"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">As Conservatives/Republicans are wont to do, Uncle Fucker will no doubt jump directly [Do not pass GO but he'll still take the $200] into the Health Care controversy so as to spew his "facts" that are fabrications developed by the Insurance Industry and peddled as concern for the insured. First thing out of his mouth will be "Obama Health Care Bill." INTERRUPT him by stating there is no such thing and if Uncle Fucker thinks there is let him name it NOW! HR 3200, the bill that has cleared the hurdles in the House of Representatives and made its way to the Senate floor is the bill in question and Team Obama didn't write a single word of it!<br /></p></span><p align="justify"><br /></p><p align="justify"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">Uncle will sputter, he'll huff and puff, and no doubt he'll jump right back into his litany of falsities, like, the "<em>death panels</em>" that'll decide if Grandma should live or die, or the "<em>40 percent cut to heart and cancer specialists</em>" which will decimate the field thereby putting Americans at greater risk of dying, or how you'll not be able to choose a doctor, etc etc.<br /></p></span><p align="justify"><br /></p><p align="justify"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">You'll have to issue the "WHOA-WHOA-WHOA" to break the train of lies and distortions spewing forth. Hit Uncle Fucker with the facts (contained in prior blog re debunking health care lies/fabrications, the Conservatives for Patient Rights— CPR —fallacy, the Kaiser health news rebuttal to the 40 percent cut mythology, the tort reform benefit exaggeration, etc.) I mean, by the time you ratta-tat-tat that shit, ol' Uncle Fucker is gonna be chokin' on his bird!! And when Mama gives you the arch-browed, head wagging "ENOUGH!" you should calmly reply, "No, mother…It's about time people know the truth and not remain stupid to the reality of what's going on. It's the moral thing to do!" Remember to stress the Conservative/Republican misuse of information and not facts, their lying and not facts, their chicanery used, not the facts, <em>per se</em>. And, if all else fails, at least tell Uncle Fucker to go fuck himself for being such an immoral bastard!<br /></p></span><p align="justify"><br /></p><p align="justify"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">Then, enjoy your pumpkin pie! You'll have earned it. Also, you might want to give thanks for having such a fine meal; remembering how many in the world are suffering to provide this meal to us, we, the empire's beneficiaries (as these scraps from the Capitalists' tables is a meal fit for kings and queens of the third world; the masses would be thankful for just a whiff of same.)<br /></p></span><p align="justify"><br /></p><p align="justify"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;">Whatever you do, keep on confronting the idiocy rampant in America where ever and whenever you come across it. </span></p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-4693689167603619272009-11-16T13:07:00.008-05:002009-11-17T10:22:32.801-05:00Equal and Opposite<span xmlns=""><p align="justify">The physics-based Newtonian Third Law of Motion states: "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." For our intent and purpose, the action in question started during the waning months of the George W. Bush Administration; that constant reiteration by the American "Left" that only twenty-some percent of Americans identified themselves as Republican. The equal and opposite reaction has finally rebounded via recent <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/123854/Conservatives-Maintain-Edge-Top-Ideological-Group.aspx">Gallop Poll</a> data that is sure to be used again and again during the run-up to 2010 elections. The numbers are bleak. 40 percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36 percent as moderate and only 20 percent as liberal. Stated another way, 76 percent of Americans occupy the middle of the road to right shoulder (viz., in the fuckin' ditch) of same when it comes to political views. When one considers that only <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2002-06-05-education-census.htm">24.4 percent</a> of Americans earn a college Bachelor's degree or higher advanced degree, one should begin to see a disturbing correlation: "Tea Party" performances and GOP-issued defamations and fabrications regarding every issue of concern in America are premised upon the fundamental reality of a serious intelligence gap among our citizenry.<br /></p><p align="justify">Remember when the Kennedy Administration first conjured the "missile gap" which prodded American taxpayers along a $6 Trillion trajectory to fund nuclear overkill capability, a bloated military industrial complex, a hawkish anti-Communism that has devastated Cuba, Central America, South America, Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe and Africa, not to mention rendering any mention, let alone discussion, of Capitalism's less desirable consequences passé at best or traitorous at worst (e.g. Adam Smith's "invisible hand" stroking the cock of commerce to produce lugubrious payoff of benefit to all parties-- as in <em>when da Massa o' da Manor is happy, so his slaves</em>. Of course, such post-WWII use of unfounded fear-based claims were for the sole purpose of propagandizing Americans to believe, without question, that Capitalism/Democracy is God's tool and must be rescued from the horror of Totalitarian Communism.<br /></p><p align="justify">What a crock o' shit!<br /></p><p align="justify">So, how are American politicians now dealing with such a dangerous gap? By exploiting it, of course! The difference between Republicans and Democrats is this: Democrats know the People are intellectually challenged and seek to educate them with facts. Republicans know the People are fuckin' stupid as a brick and use that fact to further their personal grab of power and profits via fear-mongering. Not that Dems are saints. They are not. However, THEY are the ones we hear talking about helping the People while Republicans are scaring the People into believing preposterous stories that, should they become true (which they won't), would hurt the People and most likely destroy America. Democrats are steeped in tradition of supporting unions and workers rights while Republicans are steeped in corporate extortion of labor. Democrats have a history of promoting Constitutional rights to all Americans while Republicans have worked to bring Constitutional rights to corporations to the detriment of Americans. Democrats have a history of spreading the wealth while Republicans seek to concentrate wealth and then use such absurdities as "Trickle Down Theory" to pabulumize the populace (as in <em>GooGoo, GaaGaa…Eat IT! It's good for you.</em>)<br /></p><p align="justify">I apologize to regular readers for harping on America's <em>Stupid Factor</em> in my blogs. But, Jesus H. Christ…Unless we continually hector the public with the fact that Americans are stupid and either oblivious to, or completely and unequivocally uncaring of, the fact that they are woefully uninformed, we are doomed to total collapse of America – as an awe-inspiring experimental concept and real-world haven for the truly oppressed –as stupidity threatens to win out over intelligence especially when we're talking about ultimate evolution of the Human species. I should clarify, one does not require a higher academic degree to be considered "smart." But, having gone through the process of higher education, hopefully (if educators have done even a minimally good job of educating), one will have learned, first, to think is a good thing, and to think well, is even better; being "smart" more about how to go about thinking in a logical manner than whatever may be thought. Too much of the American debate is now premised upon fear, loathing, ill-repressed racism, paranoia, xenophobic stereotyping, demagoguery and fabricated "facts." Even so-called leaders do not attempt to approach each issue with a good thought process, as evidenced by House and Senate Republicans who steadfastly issue forth outrageous claims based upon mis- and/or dis-information conjured to inject a sense of righteousness into their positions. Of course, the case could be (and regularly is) made that such a lack of logic and honesty does, in fact, represent the American People.<br /></p><p align="justify">However, Republicans must be held accountable for their treachery. Opinion is being formed largely based upon nightmarish scenarios concocted by a self-serving, Conservative elite. Such inappropriate fear-mongering is having dire impacts on opinions here and abroad. Witness just a few:<br /></p><ul><li><div align="justify">After governments of the world <em>finally</em> accede to the reality of man-made global warming confirmation, the Gallop Poll shows Americans' belief that global warming is "exaggerated" in the news <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/116590/Increased-Number-Think-Global-Warming-Exaggerated.aspx">rose from 35% in March 2008 to 41% in March 2009</a>.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">At the APEC (Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation) summit held in Indonesia this past weekend, it's <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/world/asia/15prexy.html">reported</a> that, "The agreement on Sunday codifies what negotiators had already accepted as all but inevitable: that representatives of the 192 nations in the talks would not resolve the outstanding issues (Global Warming Limits) in time. The gulf between rich and poor countries, and even among the wealthiest nations, was just too wide."<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Perceptions that there is too much government regulation of business and industry" jumped <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/123101/Americans-Likely-Say-Government-Doing-Too-Much.aspx">from 38% in September 2008 to 45% in September 2009</a> this in the context of the stupendous financial meltdown caused by lack of oversight from which the world is still reeling. </div></li><li><div align="justify"></span>The percentage of Americans saying they would like to see labor unions have less influence in the country <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/122744/Labor-Unions-Sharp-Slide-Public-Support.aspx">rose from 32% in August 2008 to a record-high 42% in August 2009 </a>again, in the context of off-shoring of jobs by the millions and the massive givebacks on benefits, hours, and job security by American labor. </div></li><li><div align="justify">The desire for government to "promote traditional values" as opposed to "not favor any particular set of values" <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/123326/Renewed-Desire-Gov-Promote-Traditional-Values.aspx">rose from 48% in 2008 to 53% in 2009</a> with Republicans agreeing at a 67 percent rate, Independents at 54 percent and Democrats at 42 percent.<span style="color:#252626;"><br /></div></li></ul></span><p align="justify">We must mention the fact that a Republican Administration unilaterally decided (via the PNAC) that <a href="http://ericfrancis.com/issues/0305/WhyWar.html">pre-emptive wars in Iraq</a><a href="http://ericfrancis.com/issues/0305/WhyWar.html"> </a>and Afghanistan were necessary. As a result, even when Democratic Administrations want out of such lunacy, there isn't any easy way to do so. Now the Republicans get their wars fought even when they're not in power. Funny how that works, huh? Frame the "debate" in such a way as to disallow any change to the frame. In this case, any attempt to end the wars begets charges that Dems are gutless and don't understand geo-politics so they "cut-and-run" or Repubs charge the Dems with "not supporting our troops" or "cowardice" on and on. And, why is this the operative dynamic? Because the American voters are too ignorant to understand how they are being used and abused by unconscionable Republicans.<br /></p><p align="justify">A rather graphic display of cowardly, non-thinking posturing by the US Congress (Republicans and Democrats alike) is evidenced by House Resolution 867 condemning the Goldstone Report as being "irredeemably biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy," passed by a vote of 344 to 36 with 22 abstentions; this, after the Obama Administration stated that the Goldstone Report was seriously flawed. World-renowned jurist Goldstone actually wrote the Obama Administration inquiring as to what flaws they were specifically referring only to get no response. The Goldstone Report conducted at the behest of the United Nations documented Israeli atrocities, human rights violations and war crimes during last December's Gaza invasion. The report also documents Hamas violations. I guess we can at least take comfort in that the US Congress is finally on record that charges of Hamas' acts of terror are merely the result of irredeemable bias.<br /></p><p align="justify">Of course, the worst displays of all the above is the Health Care "debate" as engaged by Republicans. So many claims made by Republicans are taken from a single email by some ass-wipe with a grudge against Democrats. Story is that a North Carolina state representative sent out the <a href="http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/twenty-six-lies-about-hr-3200/">fallacy-laden</a> email points as a fund raising tool only to have it go viral in the blogosphere, appearing on thousands and thousands of blogs. Soon thereafter, Republican Congressmen and Senators began routinely interjecting the plethora of false accusations into their propaganda. Republicans have charged that the 40 percent reductions in Medicare payments to heart and cancer specialists as contained in HR 3200 (passed House health bill) would decimate the profession and likely lead to many more American deaths. The actual figure is a <a href="http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Report.aspx?reportdate=11-2-2009">10 percent reduction</a> over four years! The non-ending cry for "Tort Reform" championed by House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio and Utah Senator Orrin Hatch, each claiming that such reform would result in a $100 billion savings, has been proved to be bullshit by the <a href="http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/malpractice-savings-reconsidered/">Congressional Budget Office</a> as being only one-tenth of that figure. And then we have the cynically named, <a href="http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/cpr-administers-bad-facts-again/">Conservatives for Patients' Rights</a>, a group thoroughly operating at the behest of the Insurance Industry and likely personal investments to the distinct disadvantage of the American public. CPR routinely fudges the data in order to obscure the reality of America's troubled Health Care system thereby working for a few industries' interests while working against millions of American citizens.<br /></p><p align="justify">America does not operate in leadership position based on the moral high-ground. We operate in lowest-common denominator position based on fear and stupidity of a poorly educated populace. To add to this mix, the overbearing emphasis on "self-esteem" in our schools produces a population that is stupid as stones but think they're geniuses. Should anyone dispute that claim, name-calling ensues in such loud saturation that any kind of intellectual pursuit of truth is drowned out or bludgeoned into silence. With the ever present "looking out for #1" syndrome fully developed, Americans will believe anything as long as the <em>tellers of tall tales</em> keep insisting they are looking out for #1; facts be damned.<br /></p><p align="justify">We radicals/progressives need to drag the current strain of Republicanism into the bathroom, drown it in the tub, drive a stake through its heartless heart, shoot it with a silver bullet and burn the fuckin' corpse to ashes. To allow this virulence to live is to allow it to spread throughout humankind which will surely spell disaster. Stop with the niceties of discourse. Call these motherfuckers what they are in blatant terms. Stop selling out for bipartisanship. Start taking these liars and self-serving fuckers to task. And perhaps the best place to start is at home. Confront your parents, grandparents, relatives, neighbors. Stop placating them with the "let's agree to disagree" wimp-out. In their face! Don't relent. Make them absolutely aware that their beliefs are bullshit, based on garbage, worthy of no respect whatsoever. Fuck that right to one's opinion crap as a end point. There can be no end points. Continue to challenge such ludicrous opinion where ever you find it and do not relent.<br /></p><p align="justify">The entire world and all its peoples depend on it!<span style="color:#252626;"><br /></p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-77041644521044744652009-10-09T08:25:00.008-04:002009-11-02T09:59:28.394-05:00The Goldstone Report<span xmlns=""><p align="justify">So, here it is. The United Nations' commissioned investigative report regarding the savage Israeli invasion of Gaza back in December 2008. Called the "<a href="http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-48_ADVANCE1.pdf">Goldstone Report</a>" it is a thorough look at what any reasonable person knew to be war crimes and/or crimes against humanity. Immediately the Israeli propaganda machine went to work denouncing the report as a scurrilous bit of biased drivel concocted by a hopelessly biased self-hating Jew. Apparently, the fourteen hundred dead Palestinians, half of which were non-combatant women and children, are mere figments of imagination conjured by Israeli-hating Arabs; their phosphorus-burned bodies just more anti-Semitic accusations by democracy-hating Arabs; the billions of dollars of destroyed infrastructure just more irrational babble from the freedom-hating Arabs. Israel's defense is clear: label all victims bloodthirsty Islamofascists and be done with it.<br /></p><p align="justify">The much more important issue to Israel is Iran. As a result, Iran is the central character in much of the news today. Iran is reviled because they are nuclear renegades; liars and cheaters for building a civilian nuclear facility without first getting permission from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); holocaust deniers on a mission to "wipe Israel off the map" as has been repeated again and again; just plain crazy Arabs.<br /></p><p align="justify">Americans, secure in their propagandized world view would nod in agreement. Did you catch it? Iranians as Arabs? Even though Iranians are Persian, they've been cast in the same mold as al Qaeda/Taliban extremists so often that they are now—if not officially then, for all intents and purposes –Islamofascists hell-bent on destroying the West. Poor little Israel is simply trying to warn the world of this impending peril.<br /></p><p align="justify">With the Goldstone Report out, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/24/us/politics/24prexy.text.html?pagewanted=1">President Obama spoke at the UN</a>. Read his words carefully (especially the parts w/bold italics added):<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"Today, let me put forward four pillars that I believe are fundamental to the future that we want for our children: non-proliferation and disarmament; the promotion of peace and security; the preservation of our planet; and a global economy that advances opportunity for all people.<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"First, we must stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and seek the goal of a world without them.<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"This institution was founded at the dawn of the atomic age, in part because man's capacity to kill had to be contained. For decades, we averted disaster, even under the shadow of a superpower stand-off. But today, the threat of proliferation is growing in scope and complexity. If we fail to act, we will invite nuclear arms races in every region, and the prospect of wars and acts of terror on a scale that we can hardly imagine.<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"A fragile consensus stands in the way of this frightening outcome, and that is the basic bargain that shapes the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It says that all nations have the right to peaceful nuclear energy; that nations with nuclear weapons have a responsibility to move toward disarmament; and those without them have the responsibility to forsake them. The next 12 months could be pivotal in determining whether this compact will be strengthened or will slowly dissolve.<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"America intends to keep our end of the bargain. We will pursue a new agreement with Russia to substantially reduce our strategic warheads and launchers. We will move forward with ratification of the Test Ban Treaty, and work with others to bring the treaty into force so that nuclear testing is permanently prohibited. We will complete a Nuclear Posture Review that opens the door to deeper cuts and reduces the role of nuclear weapons. And we will call upon countries to begin negotiations in January on a treaty to end the production of fissile material for weapons.<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"I will also host a summit next April that reaffirms each nation's responsibility to secure nuclear material on its territory, and to help those who can't -- because <strong><em>we must never allow a single nuclear device to fall into the hands of a violent extremist</em></strong>. And we will work to strengthen the institutions and initiatives that <strong><em>combat nuclear smuggling and theft</em></strong>.<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"All of this must support efforts to strengthen the NPT. <strong><em>Those nations that refuse to live up to their obligations must face consequences.</em></strong> Let me be clear, this is not about singling out individual nations -- it is about standing up for the rights of all nations that do live up to their responsibilities. Because <strong><em>a world in which IAEA inspections are avoided and the United Nation's demands are ignored will leave all people less safe, and all nations less secure.</em></strong><br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"<strong><em>In their actions to date, the governments of North Korea and Iran threaten to take us down this dangerous slope.</em></strong> We respect their rights as members of the community of nations. I've said before and I will repeat, I am committed to diplomacy that opens a path to greater prosperity and more secure peace for both nations if they live up to their obligations.<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"<strong><em>But if the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards; if they put the pursuit of nuclear weapons ahead of regional stability and the security and opportunity of their own people; if they are oblivious to the dangers of escalating nuclear arms races in both East Asia and the Middle East -- then they must be held accountable.</em></strong> The world must stand together to demonstrate that international law is not an empty promise, and that treaties will be enforced. We must insist that the future does not belong to fear.<br /><br />"That brings me to the second pillar for our future: the pursuit of peace.<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"The United Nations was born of the belief that the people of the world can live their lives, raise their families, and resolve their differences peacefully. And yet we know that in too many parts of the world, this ideal remains an abstraction -- a distant dream. We can either accept that outcome as inevitable, and tolerate constant and crippling conflict, or we can recognize that the yearning for peace is universal, and reassert our resolve to end conflicts around the world.<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"That effort <strong><em>must begin with an unshakeable determination that the murder of innocent men, women and children will never be tolerated.</em></strong> On this, no one can be -- there can be no dispute. The violent extremists who promote conflict by distorting faith have discredited and isolated themselves. They offer nothing but hatred and destruction. In confronting them, America will forge lasting partnerships to target terrorists, share intelligence, and coordinate law enforcement and protect our people. We will permit no safe haven for al Qaeda to launch attacks from Afghanistan or any other nation. We will stand by our friends on the front lines, as we and many nations will do in pledging support for the Pakistani people tomorrow. And we will pursue positive engagement that builds bridges among faiths, and new partnerships for opportunity.<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"Our efforts to promote peace, however, cannot be limited to defeating violent extremists. For the most powerful weapon in our arsenal is the hope of human beings -- the belief that the future belongs to those who would build and not destroy; the confidence that conflicts can end and a new day can begin.<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"This Assembly's Charter commits each of us -- and I quote – 'to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women.' Among those rights is the freedom to speak your mind and worship as you please; the promise of equality of the races, and the opportunity for women and girls to pursue their own potential; the ability of citizens to have a say in how you are governed, and to have confidence in the administration of justice. For just <strong><em>as no nation should be forced to accept the tyranny of another nation, no individual should be forced to accept the tyranny of their own people.</em></strong>" (Applause.)<br /></p><p align="justify">In so many words Obama portrayed Iran and North Korea as rogue nations escalating the proliferation of nuclear weapons. After all, even as delegates attended the UN meeting, Iran tested military rockets; rockets that a compliant media unanimously maintained could deliver nukes to Israel and Europe. Only problem is that military experts agree, Iran is still far from having even a single nuclear warhead, those particular rockets in no way are warhead capable, are rather erratic, not to mention it's every sovereign nation's right to protect itself and testing rocketry is a routine worldwide practice. But, the further reality that this writer is alluding to is obvious. Let's look at the above highlighted phrases in the single context of Israel's nuclear warhead production as non-signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and non-member of the IAEA. Israel has, by best educated estimates, over 200 nuclear warheads ready to detonate. Israel has rockets already developed and tested to deliver those nuclear payloads which are certainly able to reach Iran and every Arab nation. Israel, during the first Iraq war (1990 Gulf War) had nuclear tipped missiles ready to launch (<em>The Samson Option</em>; Seymour M. Hersh; Random House, 1991; pg 318) before being "persuaded" by the US to stand down.<br /></p><p align="justify">In summary, the fear mongering regarding North Korea and Iran is a <em>projection</em>, a <em>possible</em> future scenario. Israel on the other hand is and <em>has been</em> the single most violent extremist in the Middle East. Israel <em>has</em> thieved nuclear material (<a href="http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/specialreports/buriedlegacy/s_87948.html">NUMEC</a>), <em>illegally </em><em>secured </em><a href="http://www.1913intel.com/2009/09/30/israels-nuclear-program-plus-video/">heavy water</a> for nuclear warhead production, <em>has refused</em> to live up to their obligations, <em>avoided</em> IAEA inspections, has <em>repeatedly ignored</em> UN demands/resolutions, <em>has repeatedly ignored</em> international standards, <em>has</em> put the pursuit of nuclear weapons ahead of regional stability and security and, as documented by the Goldstone Report, Israel <em>has </em>murdered innocent men, women and children.<br /></p><p align="justify">So, what comes of it? The United States of America has pressured the Palestinians to bend to the will of Israelis (<em>to accept the tyranny of another nation and the tyranny of their own people</em>) even as the following was <a href="http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/10/2009103125440407949.html">reported</a>, "…<em>The Washington Times</em> quoted three unnamed sources as saying Obama had confirmed to Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel's prime minister, that he would maintain the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy…In an interview last week with Israel's Channel 2 media company, Netanyahu spoke of his confidence that Obama's recent remarks on a world free of nuclear weapons would not apply to Israel. 'It was utterly clear from the context of the speech that he was speaking about North Korea and Iran,' the Israeli leader said."<br /></p></span><p align="justify">How pathetic. How sick. How Obama thinks he'll get anywhere with such disingenuousness, such hypocrisy, such unfair duality is really <em>mysterious</em>. That last word carefully chosen because to expound upon the real reasons would only lead to charges of anti-Semitism, of Jew-hating, of failing to accept Israel's right to exist; a line of argument used far, far too long by an illegitimate state hell-bent on genocide of the Palestinian people.<br /></p><p align="justify">The world is watching, President Obama. You've talked the talk on a global stage. Now it's time to walk the walk.<br /></p><p align="justify">The whole world is waiting, Mr. President, waiting for Israel to be finally brought kicking and screaming into the world of nations as an <strong>equal</strong> member. If that offends <em>God's Chosen People</em>, fuck 'em! Or they will be the death of us all!<br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-89237282373479677152009-08-27T08:42:00.004-04:002009-10-12T06:15:03.928-04:00Bits 'n' Pieces<span xmlns=""><p align="justify">So many things have been happening I thought I'd bring readers up to date as well as tie up some loose ends and also answer some questions/comments that have arisen in regards to some of what I've written in previous blogs.<br /></p><p align="justify">First, this writer's been heavily involved in creating music for the past 18 months. I finally have some worthy music to share with the world and y'all can get a taste of Steven Lance's music by visiting my <a href="http://myspace.com/stevenlancemusic">MySpace</a> page. I was just featured on WVKR's [91.3 FM] "Secret Music" show hosted by Scott Raymond. Scott interviewed me and played my music for a whole hour this past Sunday (23 August 2009). My CDs will be available <a href="http://www.cdbaby.com/">here</a> after September 7, 2009; just type Steven Lance into the search box. The first CD that will be available is titled, "<em>4 Never and Ever</em>." By mid-September, I'll be releasing my second CD titled, "<em>Green Hole</em>." By November I hope to have two remastered CDs of older work available titled, "<em>Outward Bound</em>" and "<em>No Boundaries</em>." So, to say I've been busy is a gross understatement! I had to arrange for sales and credit card access, do the cover artwork, finalize song order for each CD, etc. etc. etc.<br /></p><p align="justify">Thrown into the mix I had a construction gig and computer work to attend to. So, the last eight weeks have passed in a swirl. But some things did manage to stand out and maintain a grab-hold of my consciousness: Like the "grassroots" anti-health care reform crowd showing up at Town Halls across America all riled up and denouncing with red faces and spittle foaming from their mouths the socialist "ObamaHealthCareBill" (no such thing in existence). Especially that woman crying and carrying on, lamenting in sob-choked voice: "Where's my America?! I want my America back." She haunts like acid-sour puke stuck in the throat after a 48/7 weekend liquor binge.<br /></p><p align="justify">And, to which America might she have been referring? Let this writer take at crack at that: The America that allowed troglodytic white people to lynch "niggers" without fear of prosecution? Where dumbfuck redneck hillbillies were/are held up as the epitome of what patriots are all about? Where drunk, stupid, loaded gun rack in the truck, never read a book and proud of it, flag-wrapped with hand o'er heart proclaiming, "My country right or wrong," serve as badges of honor? You mean, That America, Lady?<br /></p><p align="justify">That these spectacles were orchestrated by demagogic <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/07/opinion/07krugman.html">insurance lobbyists</a> hoping to whip up the "idiot mob" yet again to feverish proportions, there can be no mistake. Disagree? Do you actually believe these folks arrived at local Town Halls sputtering and chest-puffing and heaving and pushing and disrupting for the sake of disruption because of policy issues? The policy as detailed in some 1100 pages contained in the three bills floating around the halls of Congress? Guaranteed none had even read the documents in question. Those that claim to have read those bills are likely quoting "facts" from propaganda pamphlets put out by the Insurance lobbyists that spin the actual facts until they're dizzy then claim said facts are actually derived from those bills. Kinda like how a mosquito is derived from a 747 (yeah, as in scraped off the windshield). Not close. No cigar? Oh, no. The cigar was gotten anyway as now the "public option" seems destined to the dust bin of history. And, of course, that is what the motive was all along; not better, more affordable health care for the people and making sure that all Americans are insured. Any public option will be direct competition for insurance companies and people will flock to the cheaper alternative thereby decimating insurance profit margins. After all, grassroots sounds so democratic as opposed to the reality of, " well-heeled interest groups are helping to organize the town hall mobs. Key organizers include two Astroturf (fake grass-roots) organizations: FreedomWorks, run by the former House majority leader Dick Armey, and a new organization called Conservatives for Patients' Rights. The latter group, by the way, is run by Rick Scott, the former head of Columbia/HCA, a for-profit hospital chain. Mr. Scott was forced out of that job amid a fraud investigation; the company eventually pleaded guilty to charges of overbilling state and federal health plans, paying $1.7 billion — yes, that's "billion" — in fines. You can't make this stuff up."<br /></p><p align="justify">I've attended hundreds of Town Hall meetings and never saw such antics until just last election when the party having lost power (for the first time in fifty years) went on a binge of lying, fabricating myth whole-cloth as regarded the zoning code the new administration was doing. Hundreds of people showed up spewing smoke from their ears. They disrupted and shouted down those in disagreement. One after another these irate residents spewed venom against the "these people" [their code words for the gay, radical, socialists that had won a majority the prior election; a.k.a., Democrats]. As these obviously ill-informed, mentally challenged individuals poured out their anger, nothing would appease them. They were positive the "zoning code" was going to limit how many children they would be allowed to have. I shit you not! Where did they get such profoundly skewed misinformation? Anonymous "newsletters" made available around town; the fact that the perpetrators wouldn't even put their names on them should have been enough warning that the contents were suspect. But, nooooooooo…speaker after speaker repeated the alleged atrocities contained in those anonymous shit-rags. And I'm talking about people that sit on major governmental boards; Zoning Board of Appeals and Planning Board members actually fanning the flames of discontent by spewing rhetoric fit for octagon cage fights denouncing what the code contained even though the code contained no such things!<br /></p><p align="justify">Of course the DemParty leadership thought the charges leveled by the "idiot mob" were so preposterous and absurd that no sensible person(s) could actually believe them. Wrong. The election saw Dems lose by the biggest margin in the history of this town that was founded some 300 years ago!!! Smell the whiff of similarity? Obama team is behind the curve big-time. They let this get too out of hand. Even a number of Dems in the Senate (with 60, count 'em, 60 votes!!! Oops…Ted's dead. Make that 59,) have pulled back support for the "public option" because they're up for re-election and such a Town Hall turn-out has scared the be-jesus out of them; countless references to the Republican takeover in 1994 as response to Hillary's healthcare proposals. Imagine…those in the clear majority in both houses, having just won the Presidency, after decades of Republican outrages that have us enmeshed in two wars, brought us to the brink of financial collapse, indebted us to historical degree, grown government to unprecedented size, shredded the US Constitution vis-à-vis torture and civil rights, now become "fraidy cats" because of a bunch of nitwits spewing their ignorance and bad manners? The Republicans who are completely out of the power loop simply fold their arms across their chests, repeat "NO" for every proposal while serving up none of their own and now, organize ersatz "grassroots" movements, foment incivility by scaring dumb folk with lies, half-truths, innuendo, outright fabrications, and this stops progress? This same cowardice applied to charging Cheney and others for breaking the law as regards torturing prisoners and shredding the Constitution; let us look forward rather than the past?!?<br /></p><p align="justify">WTF?!?!?<br /></p><p align="justify">Where is Rahm Emanuel? You remember him, Chief of Staff? Renowned far and wide for being a real hard-ass, burn-and-slash type politician, completely unafraid to crack heads for policy advancement? Why hasn't President Obama sent this assassin to visit the wavering jelly-spined Dems and threaten them with ball-crushing clarity of political retribution should they not fall in line and fall in line fast, right NOW? Very simply, FUCK the REPUBLICAN obstructionists! In fact, team Obama should ramp up the ante with bills that ONLY allow for public option; a complete take-over by government, then ask how the Repubs like those choices and when they get the same arm-folded terrible-two-year old antic of "NO" pass one of those "socialist" bills into law! I think the Dems would be hugely surprised to see Americans actually applauding such action. It is completely surreal the way Republicans are controlling this process.<br /></p><p align="justify">What is brewing is another backlash by "real Americans," you know, those that believe Sarah Palin is Einsteinishly intelligent. They'll flock to the polls and bring us back Republican rule in that the clear majority in both houses will be lost. Which should serve as a elemental lesson to be finally learned: Educate the People or democracy becomes a moronic miasma of mindlessness; ergo spokespersons Rush Limbaugh and Jonah Goldberg stirring the shit (which serves as intellectual debate for the Conservative Right)!<br /></p><p align="justify">Okay, on to some explanation and clarification. First, it has come to my attention that people may be wondering (in regard to my <em>True Hero</em> blog below), if Fidel Castro was such a social democrat, why were Cuban presidential elections suspended? This writer thought the background info was clear enough as to suggest a logical substrate for such a move, namely, with crucial facilities being bombed, with the country being attacked by counter revolutionary forces aided and abetted by the US, with an entire governmental rework required, with people hungry and suffering, can anyone actually believe elections should have been the primary focus? Think of the enormous amount of work that had to be accomplished, essentially building a new nation. The first priority of the Castro government had to be stability in order to be successful in bringing a better life to <em>el gente</em>, the people. Okay, so why after all these years are there still no elections? Economic blockade by the biggest market in the world makes for continued hardship. Repeated assassination attempts by the CIA coupled with continuing (to this day) attempts to undermine the revolution being made by exiles based in Miami as well as a massive campaign of agitprop for counter revolution being delivered daily by radio and, of course, television, not to mention leaflets dropped from planes urging Cuban citizens to resist the revolution, forces Castro to continue the suspension of presidential elections. Until such time when the United States normalizes relations with the Cuban government, ending its demand for elections as precondition, Cuba must make stability of leadership priority <em>numero uno</em>. And, for those now shaking their heads in disbelief at the hypocrisy, consider this: Revolution is a proven in Cuba. Castro did it with the aid of <em>el gente</em>. If <em>el gente</em> were as bad off and desirous of regime change as the exiles and US Administration try to make us believe they are, Castro would be long gone!<br /></p><p align="justify">Finally, I've been taken to task for repeatedly dropping the <a href="http://www.psychsound.com/2009/06/you_cant_say_the_fword_at_the_1.html">F-bomb </a>in my blogs. Now, to demonstrate precisely the mental process involved: What did you just hear referenced in your mind? The word "Fuck" correct? Not, F-bomb. And if I'd used F*** the mind would likewise hear Fuck. Besides, fuck is an exquisitely agile word with many meanings beyond the act of sexual intercourse (which, by the way, as proved by context, is precisely the usage I never refer to in my blogs). My response to this call for less "colorful" language is, Fuck NO! If people object to a word (regardless of the word) to such an extent that they cast judgment on the piece—deciding not to read it –then those people are simply using the word usage as an excuse to not read and think about what they do not want to think about. It isn't the word, Fuck, at all but rather, the animosity to their Point Of View (POV) which rankles them especially because they cannot counter the arguments made. By their objection they can escape claiming moral superiority. Fuck 'em…They're the problem, not the solution.<br /></p><p align="justify">So, dear readers, until next time. In the interim, please check out the music of Steven Lance…<br /></p><p align="justify">Fuck you very much. </p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-30313194762890469902009-06-25T17:21:00.006-04:002009-06-26T11:06:48.814-04:00Red, White and P-U: Eau de Empire<span xmlns=""><p align="justify">What that stank odor be? Foul stench of Liberty, Freedom, Democracy, rotting from unprincipled use, abuse; dead at the hands of "patriots" (a.k.a. Conservatives sans conscience). Just living fictions, spouting same, "Of, by and for the People!" Be real. Be sane. "Those whom own the country shall reign," sayeth Founding Father John Jay and his class, governing peasants like the farm-yarders they are. Hee Haw. Oink Oink. Cock-A-Doodle-Doo. Work. Eat. Procreate. No life at all, having lived to grow the wealth of elites, before dying for sake of sick tortures in our name, high-handed hypocrisies slapping the faces of every human being on Earth with "Do as we tells ya, not as we does, what we pleases. And to hell with y' all…" attitude of Empire-bred arrogance.<br /></p><p align="justify">Happy fuckin' Fourth of July! Three hundred years of world abuse, pillaging its treasures, anal-raping Mother Nature until she screams from her searing bowels, "NO MORE!"<br /></p><p align="justify">As if eight years of Reagan wasn't enough, we got the two-terms of Cheney/Bush with a doctrine of anything goes. Speaking of which, at top of the list, the Bill of Rights. As if Terrorism/terrorists could ever be worse than the murderous motives of Dick Cheney who believes, <em>a priori</em>, since he's doing God's work whatever pops into his demented mind can only be the Word of the Lord to do what needs be done in His name (God's, not Dick's). Shocking testicles in God's name. Water boarding in God's name. Sexual perversions in God's name. Destroying hundreds of thousands of Iraqis in God's name. None of the foregoing creating any contradiction whatsoever in the Conservative mind.<br /></p><p align="justify">So, when the newest U.S.-minted Satan [replete with false reports of his <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/weekinreview/11bronner.html">vow to exterminate Israel</a>] Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wins re-election, <em>Buttafuocco</em>…it must be rigged. And, who should know better than we of the hanging chads and popular vote loser, huh?<br /></p><p align="justify">Therefore, we are graced with one Conservative after another posturing for the cameras, <a href="http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/18231">drooling their idiocy</a>, "[Obama's] been timid and passive…" "We could be more forceful…" "I would like to see the President be stronger…" All of that in context of the Iranian Presidential election and claims of voting fraud which brought out a hundred thousand into the streets — or times that by x amount, being unable to determine the multiplicative limitations of tweets to real time protestors — representing fifteen-one-hundredths of one percent of <a href="https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/ir.html">65,875,224</a> Iranian citizens. Compared to America that would be the equivalent of approximately 450,000 people demanding change — DOH!! — <em>"And by the time we got to Woodstock, we were half-a-million strong…"</em> [<em>CSNY</em>] How many of you fuckin' Republicans were/are/will ever be ready to back up the <strong>70s One World Generation</strong> with those changes we demanded? Like ending America's violent public means to profitable private ends philosophy? [*<em>plink*</em> the sound of pin dropping] Riiiiiiiiight…Your types fought and some still fight against such economic equality not to mention racial equality, employment equality, gender equality, drug use equality. Well, equality in general, actually, because y'all think you're <em>special</em>. One of God's angels. Which completes the circle jerk. Splatt…Or, was that Rush Limbaugh's intelligential offering? No? How about Jonah Goldberg? Ahhhhhh…<br /></p><p align="justify">And, just what would Republicans have President Obama do, exactly? For it is soooooo easy to demand action without actually articulating what action should be taken [besides such rhetoric being the "moral" groundwork for Israel's inevitable, illegal pre-emptive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities]; such is the "game plan" from the idea-bereft Far Right Huddlers; those over there, in their caves, dragging wives around by the hair when not "walking the Appalachian Trail" (viz., fucking some Argentinean non-wife friend after having vociferously called for Bill Clinton's impeachment over the Lewinsky affair), or sniffing after "jail bait" interns, or "snooping for sausage" in public restrooms, that is.<br /></p><p align="justify">You might think such truths exposed to Conservative Republicans would give them moment for pause, to contemplate the great contradictions inherent in their <em>Weltanschauung</em> thereby mending their grotesquely distorted view that all of Universe is centered on them.<br /></p><p align="justify">Well, you'd be dead wrong, Bro. According to John W. Dean, [in "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Conservatives-Without-Conscience-John-Dean/dp/B001G8WNEG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1245955837&sr=1-1"><em>Conservatives Without Conscience</em></a>"] Republicans like Cheney, Bush!!, Rove, Gingrich, Delay, Scooter Libby, Richard Perle, Elliot Abrams and the rest of those Right Wing Authoritarian roaches, display the following traits "…dominating, opposed to equality, desirous of personal power, amoral, intimidating, and bullying; some are hedonistic, most are vengeful, pitiless, exploitive, manipulative, dishonest, cheaters, prejudiced, mean-spirited, militant, nationalistic, and two-faced." Dean, citing social psychologist and researcher Bob Altemeyer of the University of Manitoba, goes on to characterize Authoritarian Conservatives as being incapable of seeing their own faults: "Right-wing authoritarians, as we have seen, are motivated by their fear of a dangerous world, whereas social dominators have an ever-present desire to dominate. The factor that makes right-wingers faster than most people to attack others, and that seems to keep them living in an 'attack mode,' is their remarkable self-righteousness. They are so sure they are not only right, but holy and pure, that they are bursting with indignation and a desire to smite down their enemies…"<br /></p><p align="justify">The best and brightest Big Business — our God — has to offer, seeing as these same species of leeches swim seamlessly between private and public ponds leaving their slimy residue on both as they suck the lifeblood from each even as they preach the Good Word. Let me hasten to add here: When I'm talking about the elites I'm talking about the top fraction of one-percenters, those whom know nothing at all of want, disease, hopelessness. There are plenty of people making "good money" that are compassionate and actively involved in change, in actual on the ground work to help common folk, those still educating themselves to American brutal over-reach and so, work to get an Obama elected (just to serve as an example).<br /></p><p align="justify">I'm talking about those with royal sense of entitlement, should they want they should have. After all, being royalty has its benefits. All is as wanted. If not. Make it so. For them. Because they want it. And they call us "The Me Generation." Once again, riiiiiiiiiiiiiight…<br /></p><p align="justify">So, happy birthday, America. You with your smiling Black Socialist President smiting flies without conscience…You, no doubt, now laughing having caught the reference; Obama killing that fly during an interview and getting a tongue-in-cheek rebuke from P.E.T.A.? But, seriously, how many of you feel that Iranian leaders calling for brutality against their people, actually killing them because they had become unwanted nuisance [and, so…BUT OF COURSE…they must be exterminated] without so much as a hint of remorse were/are morally bankrupt? Killing humans as if insects. How many of you had that feeling? Certainly the impression as conveyed by the Conservative Republicans spewing their agitprop was of just such a calloused response by the Iranian leadership. Human life of no more significance than a fly. Which leads to a profound depth to P.E.T.A.'s central meaning, does it not, that of holding all creatures in reverence and against which we should do no harm.<br /></p><p align="justify">But, we're Americans. We kill flies and mock P.E.T.A. and say "Fuck our contradictions!" for that is how we treat the rest of the world: "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out." Oh, I know, "Not me!" you indignantly cry. But, when was the last time you resisted the <em>go along to get along</em> zeitgeist so prevalent now? When did you last buck the system? Stand up to the "man?" Sacrifice? Agitate for progressive change? Or, when was the last time you went without a meal or two to feel the hunger untold millions suffer every day of their existence with the full, attendant understanding that many if not most of the hungry are made so by America's Capitalistocracy? Hmmm?<br /></p><p align="justify">This writer didn't see anyone busting through barricades when Conservative Right-wing Authoritarians stole an election, maybe two, right here in 'merica during the last decade. This writer didn't see the Limbaughs and Grahams and Cheneys facing off against riot squads when students were clubbed in Chicago or shot at Kent State, nor when Black Panther leader Fred Hampton was murdered by FBI agents, nor when Nixon illegally bombed Cambodia, or during the Iran-Contra atrocity perpetrated by/…<br /></p><p align="justify">Oh, that's right. Conservative Republicans weren't manning the barricades then or now on behalf of the People because they were/continue to be, the murderers and thieves, the charlatans and two-faced politicians, the dominators and their legion, authoritarian followers that did/will do the dirty work or did/will do nothing to stop it. Like good sheep.<br /></p><p align="justify">Happy Bahhhh….day, America.<br /></p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-56605960337031211202009-06-02T14:33:00.009-04:002009-06-07T06:49:17.062-04:00True Hero<span xmlns=""><p align="justify">America craves heroes. Super hero comic books have been popular for decades. TV shows are predicated upon heroes in order to provide Americans their weekly fix. Inevitably such heroes are comprised of "good, caring" people that cannot stand the abuse and unfairness so prevalent in their society so they strive to "save the day" like Mighty Mouse of old. They defy all odds by going up against an evil bully in a fight of "David and Goliath" proportions and come out the winner which translates as the Peoples' victory. So, when such a real flesh-and-blood person engages in heroic battle and comes out victorious, Americans should embrace him/her and hail them as a hero. Correct?<br /></p><p align="justify">Nope.<br /></p><p align="justify">You see, real heroes are a messy business. Real heroes walk among us. People we routinely put down as arrogant (mistaking confidence), or as complainers (never mind the US Constitutional guarantee of the right to petition the government for redress of grievances), or troublemakers (those unhip, discomforting agitators unwelcome in our universe). Most Americans, interfacing with truly ethical, empathic beings on a mission of altruism in the furtherance of Human evolution, are forced to change in order to accommodate such heroes. For, unlike the comic books, TV and movies, heroes in the real world aren't milk-bread fictions conjured by American propagandists. They're people that become the nub of our rub against them. They're different from us. They do more than bitch and moan. They actually do something about the problems faced. They come from all stripes, not just the white, Christian, middle-class men of our fictional dreams, men born of democracy and American Exceptionalism fighting un-American evil doers (most ironically) bent on criminal activities almost wholly premised upon theft of wealth from rich folk (THINK: Socialists. Or, worse. Communists. Or, even worse than the worst: Democrats!) No, these heroes of reality are fighters for the People. They want to do their part to advance the species one more forward step. They believe in Human Beings; as Creator and Savior even as these are but fictive fixatives, survival boosters for the down-hearted. But, that means walkin' the walk.<br /></p><p align="justify">We need no comic book heroes. There actually is such a fighter for the People. Altruistic. Egalitarian. Visionary. A true, real life and still living hero. Living not 100 miles away. In a country that had been under American domination since 1898 when the United States of America essentially, unilaterally annexed Cuba for its own purposes: To exploit cheap labor in order to secure sugar at a criminally low price. US troops were hastened into Cuba in order to put down the natives' fight for Independence from Spain. In the aftermath, the <a href="http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/platt.htm">Platt Amendment</a> was passed by Congress which essentially, unilaterally decided what Cuba could and could not do. During the next six decades, the Cuban people were exploited and their lands taken by monied American elite interests; "<a href="http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/cuban-rebels/NI-FidelsRevolution.pdf">By the 1920s, U.S. companies owned two-thirds of Cuba's farmland and most of its mines. The sugar industry was booming</a>." These American owners of sugarcane plantations and sugar mills became the dominant force in Cuba. Once America's Prohibition took effect (1919 – 1933) "organized crime moved in, taking over the casinos, booze, drug running and prostitution." While IMF figures assert<em> per capita</em> Cuban income was quite high prior to the revolution they do not account for the <em>distribution</em> of income which was decidedly skewed to a few holding a lot and the many hardly any income at all. You see, the Cuban elites were— as are all elites, solely concerned with their own needs, desires, wealth and accumulated assets —totally unconcerned about the impoverished, exploited masses. Until, that is, those masses had the audacity to demand a stop to their exploitation.<br /></p><p align="justify">In 1933, the United States assisted army sergeant Fulgencio Batista in a take-over of government via coup (displacing dictator Geraldo Muchado y Morales). Ruling by way of puppet Presidents at Batista's beck and call, the brutal sergeant maintained dictatorial power until winning the Presidency himself. He served his term and left office only to return in yet another coup in 1952.<br /></p><p align="justify">Tired of governmental corruption, the brutality of the dictatorial Batista, the ruinous economic conditions, the continued exploitation of the Cuban people, on July 26, 1953 Fidel Castro initiated his revolution when he, his brother Raúl and about 90 rebel fighters attempted to take the Moncada army post (Cuba's second largest at the time). The attempt was a failure. Eight rebels were killed and 53 captured and executed. Fidel and the rest of his men managed to escape only to later surrender and be sentenced to 15 years. <a href="http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/cable/cable-12-19-57.htm">Pressed by the American government</a> to show some leniency in the face of a building popular dissatisfaction, Fidel Castro and his brother Raúl were released from prison in a general amnesty for political prisoners. Not long thereafter, Fidel traveled to Mexico and met Ché Guevara.<br /></p><p align="justify">On 2 December 1956 the Castro brothers and 82 men traveled from Mexico on a dilapidated yacht called <em>The Granma</em> and were soon set upon by Batista's army. Only the Castro brothers, Guevara, Camilo Cienfuegos and eight other rebels were able to escape to the Sierra Maestra mountains where they began to build the rebel forces that would eventually liberate Cuba from the brutal American sponsored Batista dictatorship. Over the next two years, Fidel Castro created a revolutionary movement that caught the imagination of 75 – 80 percent of the Cuban people. The small bands of <em>guerillos </em>began to build victories upon victories, not merely holding off an army of approximately 10,000 but beating the military regularly. And then came the battle of Santa Clara which sent Batista packing on January 1, 1959.<br /></p><p align="justify">Such courage of their convictions. Such sacrifice. Such dangerous undertaking. All in the name of the People (<em>el gente</em>), of a better tomorrow where one and all are provided for so that the nation would be strengthened by its people's successes.<br /></p><p align="justify">Even as Fidel Castro rode victorious into Havana [8 January 1959] on the wings of his wildly popular revolution the Eisenhower Administration started thinking of ways to destroy it. Working fist-in-gauntlet with the soon to be expropriated companies, the US Government began a massive propaganda campaign meant to portray Fidel Castro as Communist and thus a threat to American national security. On another front, CIA orchestrated propaganda made Fidel's supposed "betrayal" to the Revolution its leitmotif. Castro even responded to it by stating, "As prime minister I have been faithful to the revolution. Cuba is going through a profound and genuine revolution and that is the main reason for the misunderstanding which is due to many interests which will never be in agreement with a genuine and just social revolution." [<em>Politics & Social Structure In Latin America</em>; James Petras; Monthly Review Press, 1970; p 115]. Quoted two years prior in a <em>New York Times</em> article that portrayed him to be pro-democracy and strongly committed to liberty and social justice, Fidel Castro proclaimed, "Above all we are fighting for a democratic Cuba and an end to the dictatorship." When queried about his 26 July Movement's stances against colonialism and imperialism and how that would impact US-Cuba relations, Fidel said, "You can be sure we have no animosity towards the United States and the American people." Further, early in 1959 "in an address before the Venezuelan Congress, Castro criticized the Organization of American States (OAS) and called for the formation of a democratic bloc to function within it, to expel dictatorial governments. In April 1959, in a speech in New York's Central Park, Castro suggested a Marshall Plan for all of Latin America, 'in order to avoid the danger of communism'." [ibid; p113]<br /></p><p align="justify">True to his promises to the people, Fidel Castro immediately set about putting an agrarian reform program into law, giving land to <em>el gente</em>, to 22,500 families. The land was expropriated from the large sugar plantations. By the end of 1959, 2.2 million acres worth approximately $300 million were confiscated to fulfill the agrarian reform program. Castro offered to repay the US companies full value for their holdings, but could only do so via 20 year bonds "bearing <a href="http://www.crestmontresearch.com/content/irates.htm">4.5 percent interest </a>with prices to be based on assessed value as reflected in tax rolls." [<em>Latin America in the Era of the Cuban Revolution</em>; Thomas C. Wright; Greenwood Publishing Group; p27] The US response came swiftly. "The State Department sent a note to the Cuban government reminding Cuba that 'this right [to expropriate] is coupled with the corresponding obligation for prompt, adequate, and effective compensation'." [Petras; p111] In other words, after years of subjugation and exploitation and theft of public funds by prior governmental officials amounting to several billion dollars, US companies could not/would not wait for payback and the US government took up their cause; <em>mustn't harm the stockholders</em> seems to be the American Government's response to every financial setback in the private sector regardless of fault or model of risk undertaken (this continues even and especially today).<br /></p><p align="justify">As with all true revolutions, before the heat of victory turns into the warmth of accomplishment, counter-revolutionaries attempt to regain what they've lost. As these counter-revolutionaries attempted to usurp Fidel Castro's power/popularity, a half-million workers poured into the streets of Havana protesting the attempted power grab thereby securing the revolution and establishing Castro as the <em>Caudillo</em>, or supreme leader. The counter-revolutionaries joined the elite upper classes in leaving Cuba. It is estimated that in the first 15 years of the revolution, nearly 600,000 Cubans (mostly upper class and upper middle class) or perhaps one-tenth of the population, left the island; many immediately began to plan a military retaking of Cuba and were aided and abetted by the United States Government. "Castro created the Ministry for the Recovery of Stolen Property (<em>Ministerio de Recuperación de Bienes Malversados</em>) with sweeping powers to seize the assets of Batista and his collaborators, 'counter revolutionaries,' and, after 1960, of all exiles." [Wright; p28]<br /></p><p align="justify">"U.S. policy-makers mounted a multiple offensive against the Cuban Revolution, violating Cuban sea and air space, cutting the sugar quota (July 6, 1960), holding Congressional hearings in which former Batista officials were given the national spotlight, etc." [ibid; p 114] President Eisenhower responded by stating America would not "permit" the establishment of a Communist regime in the Western Hemisphere; a reiteration of the Monroe Doctrine. In that effort, the US "moved to extend its embargo against the Cuban Revolution by pressuring client states throughout the hemisphere and the rest of the world. The U.S. Senate approved an amendment to the mutual security appropriations bill which would cut off foreign aid to any nation supplying military or economic assistance to Cuba." [ibid; 114] Cuban exiles based in the United States conducted repeated raids on Cuba's sugar fields. "By early 1960, almost 13 percent of Cuba's cane fields had been bombed." [ibid; p114]<br /></p><p align="justify">"On January 3, 1961, the U.S. government broke relations with Cuba…Newly elected President John F. Kennedy (who during his election campaign had called for stepped-up U.S. assistance to the armed exile groups) reaffirmed the Monroe Doctrine and gave no indication of wanting to negotiate U.S.-Cuban differences…Cuba offered to negotiate its differences with the United States and accepted Argentina as a mediator. The Kennedy Administration refused mediation. In his State of the Union message Kennedy set forth in the blunt language of the true believers in private enterprise the intransigent hostility which was to characterize U.S. policy toward Cuba: 'Questions of economic and trade policy can always be negotiated. But Communist domination in the hemisphere can never be negotiated'." [ibid; p116-117]. CIA-financed forces stepped up their terroristic destruction by burning the Hershey sugar mill ($5 million damage) and El Encanto department store ($7 - $8 million damage) even as B-26 bombers out of Miami attacked Cuban air bases. And, then, the ill-fated <em>Bay of Pigs</em> invasion [April 17 - 19, 1961] in which 1,500 Cuban terrorist exiles were ferried to the island on two U. S. Navy destroyers. The terrorist invaders were promised the <em>quid pro quo</em> of having their assets returned to them for overthrowing Castro. Just like Rumsfeld telling Americans that Iraqis would welcome us with open arms, the U.S. CIA anticipated popular support. Funny how reality always slaps self-serving fictions in their faces! In beautiful irony, the terrorist exile army was defeated by the People's militias.<br /></p><p align="justify">Of course, the lesson to be learned would have been: Cuba is an independent nation operating on behalf of its people and it is both, rabidly so. Not Communist. But a struggling Social democracy.<br /></p><p align="justify">But, Cuba became a "bad example" by initiating other reforms like education and health care so that every Cuban would have a chance to succeed and, by doing so, help the Revolution succeed. As other Latin American nations became aware of the Cuban success story, they too wanted independence and social democracy. Thus, the <em>Alliance For Progress</em> initiated by the Kennedy Administration that promised all things good for the people but served up instead, 17 more dictatorships that conducted themselves in typical brutal fashion in order to deny Latin America its independence and its people social democracy. Not enough to cut a nascent nation completely out of the dominant global economic/financial paradigm, not enough to send terrorists against it, not enough to construct a totally fictitious scenario of Communistic threat just off our shores, not enough to attempt repeated assassination against Cuba's beloved <em>Caudillo</em>.<br /></p><p align="justify">To consider that Cuba and its Revolution is still in existence, still attempting to bring a better way to its people, having been completely cut off (blockade) from normal trade with the world's largest economies, that the Cuban people enjoy a high rate of literacy and are entitled to free health care, that millions of <em>el gente</em> still believe in the Revolutionary ideals espoused by Fidel Castro, a true hero, is a testament to the purity of Castro's vision as stated March 13, 1968:<br /></p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify">"But, of course, with its standard of living arising from a developed economy whose income is incomparably higher than that of any underdeveloped country, imperialism can offer material incentives of many types, and, in the face of this, what are we to do? What is the duty of the Revolution if not to strengthen its determination, to exalt all types of moral values among the people? Feelings of internationalist solidarity, justice, equality, love of country, love for the people, for the struggle; the satisfaction of having a giant task, a historic task, to carry out, and accomplishing it, facing up to it, overcoming obstacles. That is the kind of people we have to create…We will continue along our road; we will build our Revolution, and we will do so fundamentally through our own efforts. Great is the task that faces us! A people that is not willing to make the effort has no right even to utter the word 'independence,' no right even to utter the word 'sovereignty!' Let us struggle bravely, among other reasons, to minimize our dependence on everything from abroad. Let us fight as hard as possible, because we have known the bitterness of having to depend to a considerable extent on what we can get from abroad and have seen how this can be turned into a weapon, how at the very least, there is a temptation to use it against our country. Let us fight for the greatest independence possible, whatever the price! Of course, that offended the "principles" of the microfaction (exiles/the few); that was a crime: dignity was a crime, honor was a crime, the Revolution was a crime!"</p><p style="MARGIN-LEFT: 36pt" align="justify"></p></span><br /><p></p><p align="justify">Let us hope that President Obama will not continue to see the Cuban Revolution as a crime but, rather, a heroic undertaking worthy of praise! End the Cuban embargo now and normalize relations, Mr. President!</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-49068586142389009082009-05-11T12:59:00.007-04:002009-05-18T06:36:21.683-04:00Melting Steele<span xmlns=""><p align="justify">Just over 100 days into the Obama Administration and America's right-wing Republican/Conservative legion is being fed a massive dose of propaganda. The line goes like this: "Americans have learned what the Democrats' promise of 'change' really means -- an assault on capitalism, free enterprise and fiscal responsibility," not to mention "individual liberties sacrificed at the altar of collectivism." That great heaving hulk of ignorance and arrogance that passes as "the silent majority" is being fed huge portions of historical revisionism and washing it down with a heady brew of distilled delusion.<br /></p><p align="justify">Stupid America, at about 50 percent of the population– most affiliated with Republicans/Conservatives reeking of religiosity –are being told to vote Republican next election because the $787 billion stimulus package contained "pork" and allowed bonuses for AIG officers via loophole. That the stimulus package was made necessary due to nearly thirty years of Republican fiscal mismanagement, of <a href="http://www.stwr.org/global-financial-crisis/sold-out-how-wall-street-and-washington-caused-financial-meltdown.html">unchecked greed and avarice of the financial class</a>, of Republicans getting all they wanted and more since Reagan, matters not at all. Nor does the fact that the so-called "pork" accounts for less than a percent of total. Nor does the fact that the faulty "loophole" was made possible by the malfeasance of the Bush Administration by way of one of the greatest transference of wealth mechanisms (from the many to the few) ever devised viz., TARP.<br /></p><p align="justify">Nope. Obama and his ilk are at fault. Ilk? Yes… that other half of the country receptive of "Obama Democrats' dangerous liberal agenda" hell-bent on "fleecing (Americans') freedom and values." According to the propagandists, the Democrats are responsible for the huge debt, the budget deficit and a "destructive tax, spend and borrow agenda." [All above quotations from Michael Steele, RNC chairman, in a letter requesting contributions to help win back both houses come next election cycle.]<br /></p><p align="justify">The fact that "supply side" economics (lowering income tax and capital gains tax rates for the wealthy as well as reducing regulation even as federal deficit spending increases thereby spurring supply side investment) has been a Republican/Conservative mainstay for thirty years seems irrelevant. The fact that both size of government and spending has increased exponentially under Republican Administrations apparently is irrelevant. The fact that debt has soared under Republican rule isn't relevant.<br /></p><p align="justify">As one <a href="http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODMzOTlmZWM0ZWU1MjA5NWE4ZTBhY2NmMGFmNDQ4ZTA=">Republican/Conservative pundit opines</a>, "I would love it if the GOP dedicated itself to cutting government by two-thirds, leaving only a minimal social safety net, a big honking military and a few other bells and whistles for promoting the general welfare. My ideal ticket in 2008 would have been Cheney-Gramm. That's right, Dick Cheney and Phil Gramm: two old white guys who would crush our enemies and liberate our economy while shouting, 'You kids get off my lawn!' at the filthy hippies who would inevitably accumulate outside the White House like so much bathroom fungus."<br /></p><p align="justify">That was Jonah Goldberg, a member of the <em>Conservative Ignorami</em> that passes itself off as the right-wing's intellectual brain trust. Just 100 days into Obama's Administration and the above is what you get from those who have been in power and fucking up royally for three decades.<br /></p><p align="justify">The putative, reigning king of the Republican party, Rush Limbaugh, claims what is needed isn't the current GOP "listening tour" (<a href="http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/05/02/gop_group_launches_listening_tour_to_rebrand_image_1241311793/">The National Council for A New America</a>) but rather a teaching tour where Americans will be taught to recite the above distortions and outright lies as profound truths. Can't happen? Think again, dear hearts, for it happened in the small town I live in; GOP fabrications of such ludicrous proportion that the Dems refused to believe anyone could believe such outrageous claims so did nothing to counter the distortions and were promptly voted out in a sweep of historical proportions; that, after nearly two decades of building the case of GOP atrocities against town residents that ultimately resulted in a Democrat majority for the first time in fifty years. The moral of the story? Don't underestimate the GOP's willingness to lie and the stupidity of the "average" American.<br /></p><p align="justify">No, this writer didn't forget that Clinton, a Dem, presided for two terms. But, as written in this space prior, Clinton did more to undermine middleclass Americans than any Republican would've been able to accomplish; well, any Republican other than Ronald Reagan, that colossus of mental acuity that prompted his supporters to chant, "Let Reagan be Reagan" until the addle pated headcheese spoke off the cuff and it became glaringly clear that his faculties (never honed anywhere near sharp) were atrociously atrophied from lack of use. Hence, why he is Sarah Palin's patron saint; she soooooooooo gets him! As does the "working class," Joe-the-Plumber's crowd, their greatest complaints centering on paying too much taxes (transfer of wealth) for bloated government that hinders job development; jobs they so desperately need. Hmm…One of Reagan's first acts was to fire all air traffic controllers for striking thereby crushing a union to serve as warning to all other union members (Reaganism: Fuck the working class). One of Reagan's other acts was to pledge and carry through on Federal tax reductions which directly led to the increased need for localities to substantially raise school taxes (Reaganism: Thieve from the poor give to the rich). Granted, the <em>Gipper</em> did make Americans feel good about themselves. Well, at least those scrubbed clean, crew-cutted, flag-waving patriots felt better after enduring a decade-and-a-half of having their self-centered shortcomings and provincial views (anti-feminist, anti-black, anti-gay, anti-third world) taken to task by "filthy hippies" who had taken to heart all the bullshit the American public was spewing and, upon attempting to implement those grand sentiments via application in the real world, found the "Greatest Generation" were frauds; their parents liars for talking the talk but then wanting to break the legs of those whom would walk the walk. Don't forget one of the biggest marketing coups in American history was the transformation of the 70s one-world generation to the "me" generation; that generation, fixated as it was on global considerations as a restraint against American adventurism abroad, classified as narcissistic miscreants unworthy of all but scorn from the "silent majority."<br /></p><p align="justify">Another point well worth noting: Nothing in American politics is actually about Republican v Democrat ideals. It's about the few aiding the fewer at the expense of the many; Capitalism the coin of the realm. Both sides of the aisle are to blame for the failed conditions of education, housing, employment, taxation, health care, etc etc as applied to the "average" American. Yet, "average" Americans continue to rally behind their favorite ideological façade as if either side truly were working on the average Americans' behalf.<br /></p><p align="justify">Doltism is alive and well here in the United States of America, for sure. Warning: Don't ever, ever underestimate the power of stupid people to band together and thwart the best intelligence a species has to offer.<br /><br />It's happening right now.</p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6843005108204355705.post-86520116199785054842009-04-21T12:26:00.002-04:002009-04-21T12:30:14.911-04:00Ashes to Ashes<span xmlns=""><p align="justify">Four small bags of ashes contained in two canisters, the remains of my father. Notice I did not write, <em>total </em>remains. The reason being, my Dad touched so many lives that every remembrance in the minds of those he impacted will keep him alive for a good long measure. I'm sure his name will be mentioned often and heads will bow come this fall, this football season (my dad's other three seasons being "round ball" "round ball" and "round ball" or basketball, baseball, golf). Moments of silence may ensue. The measure of a man is how well he is remembered. And he will most definitely be remembered well.<br /></p><p align="justify">But, the stark reality of small bags of dust being thrust (per his request) about the 50 yard line, where he "lived" the life he loved, was at once surreal/lucid. Such a man reduced to this? But even as that thought occurred so did the inner-vision arise before my mind-eye almost able to see my father on the sidelines. For there was no place he'd rather be than in the thick of battle, employing all his wits and knowledge of the game he loved, calling offensive plays and defensive schemes (yeah, he did it all in those days) pacing up and down, chewing out the referees (Oh, woe unto the poor shtupp who blew a call) and always, always teaching life lessons to his "men" as the game progressed. And, believe me, having heard more than my fair share of emotional speeches, there was no better half-time motivator than my father. His team would roar out of the locker room nearly busting the doors off their hinges.<br /></p><p align="justify">The above remarks refer to my lucid thoughts. As for the surreal? That any of the above means anything at all. Such rituals beget nothing, save for peace of mind if one believes hard enough. Of course, to us, to human beings, such loss is traumatic. We go through our grief period before numbing out to a new reality, one with a gaping hole in our heart; never again able to feel full. Or, rather full enough. Psychoanalysts might say of such a relationship that boundaries have been breached, torn asunder even, given such connectedness; maybe even going so far as to suggest such "love" isn't healthy to the individual.<br /></p><p align="justify">Be that as it may, if you're lucky enough to have had or now be in a relationship with a person you love and respect, one who has experienced life's ups and downs alongside of you for a good number of years and you can still honestly say this person is your best friend, consider yourself blessed and forewarned: Love them now. Love them with all your heart. And, live your life together well. Because at the end of it, even a "long life" ends too soon. When you lose a loved one you lose something that cannot be replaced. Your life becomes changed; more empty. Fantasies of everything working out become less believable. In fact, you will need to work harder than ever to maintain the will to go on as so much of you has been irretrievably lost. Regardless of what "shrinks" might think, losing a father, mother, child, wife, leaves a void that will never heal over; a sinkhole of lost love that sucks the energy from your soul.<br /></p><p align="justify">HINT: Not a bad rationale for creating G/god(s) to help alleviate the misery, to fill that hole in your heart with versions of an afterlife where there will be jubilant reunions and everything will be wonderful again.<br /></p><p align="justify">HINT: Knock! Knock! No one home… Not gonna happen!<br /></p><p align="justify">Or so go the endless existentialist thoughts. This writer is hardly the first to anguish over such considerations and won't be the last. Well, not until the last human breathes his/her last breath on this dying planet. Although, for each of us, the essence of who we are, breathes its final breath upon death. The body follows all too quickly (as this writer can attest to having worked his way through college as a grave digger). What is left behind is sorrow, loss, and that's if you're lucky. If you're unlucky, add in remorse, guilt, shame or the ol' woulda-coulda-shoulda trifecta.<br /></p><p align="justify">So, if you love your mother and/or father, if they were a big part of your life, if what they have given you extends well beyond the obligatory material support of food on the table and a roof over your head, be thankful and give her or him a call and maybe say "thanks" for all they did and for the values instilled in you that make you who you are. We like to think "things" will stay the way they've "always" been. Not so. The tomorrow of change is right around the next corner. Go ahead, phone home.<br /></p><p align="justify">But, whatever you do or don't do, remember we come into this world the way we exit: Alone. Regardless of how many people may be bedside for the death watch, once the curtain drops, the individual spirit leaves the body. And whether your custom requires the body to rot in the ground or cremation ashes to be sprinkled about, one fact is for certain: No one leaves here alive. A single lifetime isn't ever enough.<br /></p><p align="justify">So, live and love well. This too-short life is the only one we have.<br /></p><p align="justify">As for my father, today, and every day from here on, he is nowhere and everywhere. </p><p align="justify"> </p></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com