
Feliz Navidad,
Feliz Navidad,
Feliz Navidad,
Prospero año y Felicidad
The perfect Christmas gift (am I still allowed to say that if I'm not a card carrying rightie?) would be an indictment of Mr. Rove, and serious impeachment proceedings against King George II.
effect)? His point was that the public, through a mob mentality, was getting whipped up into an emotional lather over a non-issue, a non-existent threat, distracting the legislature from more relevant an meaningful work. The issues change, but the intent and effect are always the same: divide the people over emotional ideological issues. Get them so worked up, so polarized that constructive discourse can never take place on that issue, and turn attention away from the real issues we face so politicians are not forced to deal with them and are not held accountable. Ed Schultz's Guns, God and Gays theory.
psychology is always the same: Identify a clear enemy (more difficult in this case, we can't directly blame Osama or Saddam, so progressives as a group will have to do. We know they are all sodomizing atheists), clearly & simply identify how they are actively attacking you (anti-America, pro-Saddam, weak on national defense or crime, anti-religion), use incendiary language to describe it ("war on ___", "anti-war", "anti-family values"), and shout down any nuanced, balanced discussion on said topic. The battle lines have to be very clear; you are either 150% with us, or you are 150% against us. This cultural/sociological trend disturbs me on several levels.
together and celebrating our similarities, our differences, our strengths, and trying to help with our weaknesses. Instead we are now attempting to do with the holiday season what we let the Fox folks do with other occasions: turn it into an opportunity for destructive, divisive polarization, groundless paranoia and conspiracy theories, and bitter name calling.
And the Jesse Jacksons and Sean Penns of the country have moved on to new spotlight opportunities, new Teri Schaivos and new New Orleans.
since the Supremes effectively cleared the way for states to resume the killing in 1972; some by days, a few by hours befor the scheduled execution (1,000 have been killed since the landmark ruling allowing the states to decide). Most of these corrections have been possible through the technological breakthrough of DNA comparative testing, a crime tool not even envisioned in the early 20th century, though others have been through other means. This is precisely the kind of mistake that led Republican Governor George Ryan of Illinois to place a moratorium on the death penalty in his state on January 31st, 2000.
murder committed in 1984. Trouble is that there was only one eye witness who would implicate Ruben only after 3 police interrogations over a 5 month period. There was no physical evidence linking Ruben to the crime, no murder weapon found; The only thing that killed him was a possibly coerced witness, nothing else between execution, Texas style, and him. This witness has since recanted, leaving no evidence to support a conviction, much less execution. But it is too late. The strongest reaction of the DA? Bring perjury charges against the witness! Listen to more on NPR.

You have to feel for him, you really do.
degree. He took real responsibility, real accountability. He admitted unequivocally that he broke the law and tried to impede an investigation. No excuses, caveats, disclaimers, evasion, spin or defense. No assertions that "it's not a real crime", accusations of prosecutorial persecution or adventurism, no claims of partisan agenda from him or his defenders as we hear from Messrs. DeLay & Libby and their crowd. No claims that "I didn't know what was going on, it was my subordinates" like we hear from the likes of Ken Lay, Dennis Kozlowski and Bernie Evers. Sure, they had the Duke-Stir dead-to-rights, he wasn't going to slip out of that noose too easily. But he didn't have to put himself through the pain and humility of his public apology and admission, with no ambiguity, no gray area. Lighter sentence because of it? Highly unlikely. This guy knows there's a good chance he'll die in prison. He's a cad of the worst sort for sure, but in the end he showed a shred of character. Not a bunch, but more than the larger bunch in D.C.
An unfortunate, dead-on summation of our middle east adventure. And the sad thing is it was so predictable.
I have been baffled by the comments and eMail I've received from the last post (and since revised update at the end) related to the CBS story about rebuilding New Orleans. My modest little blog doesn't deserve such attention, and perhaps my poor communication skills have contributed to the misunderstandings. I would ask this of people with opinions: read, digest, only then respond. Consider the following:Update:
A few days after Katrina devastated the Gulf coast some rightie lawmaker showed the usual rightie sensitivity & judgment and questioned why we should rebuild New Orleans at all. Its a reasonable question, it was just a terrible time for a leader to publicly vocalize it while tens of thousands of people were still stranded. But as the reconstruction dollars begin pouring in the time has probably come to take a long look at the issue, and CBS' 60 Minutes took the first major shot at it last Sunday. In a very poignant and sobering segment Scott Pelley (god he's terrible! Why the hell didn't they let him fade away when they deep-sixed the mid-week faux 60 Minutes?) talks to several officials and experts about the pros and cons of rebuilding this gem of a city. The pros are mostly nostalgic and emotional, the cons chilling. Professor Tim Kusky of St Louis University, an earth sciences and flood control authority, said that in 80-90 years coastal erosion will leave the Big Easy as a bowl in the Gulf, completely surrounded by sea water and a 50 foot levee system. As it is today they estimate that about one third of the city's residents don't plan to return permanently. And its a stark and painful question the ones who plan to return need to face as well (and to a lesser extent those of us who know and love this wonderful place so).
doubloons, parrots, and walking the plank. What rarely comes to mind is modern day piracy, alive and well on today's high seas. Among the most active areas for pirates today are the seas off Southeast Asia. The pirates will chase shipping vessels with small, swift craft, board undetected, seize control of the ship through violent means (often killing the small crew and throwing their bodies overboard), then proceed to a cooperative port or rendezvous with an assisting vessel to offload any valuable cargo. Then this ill gotten booty eventually is sold off for pure profit on both legitimate and illegitimate markets. Roughly 70% of the earth is covered with water, most of that having no practical law other than the agenda of the one with the most firepower (I personally abhor guns, but if I ever sailed a vessel into international waters I would definitely carry one). We almost never see these incidents reported in the mainstream media.
So it was interesting to see this incident so widely reported when it occurred a few weeks ago in the Atlantic off the coast of Somalia. What made it news I suppose was the fact that a passenger ship was the target and that they successfully escaped the attackers, as well as the use of this sonic weapon.


"I take responsibility." There are few phrases in the English language which purport to mean so much but which actually, without redress, mean zilch. I know I rarely pick on lefties these days, but former senator and vice presidential candidate John Edwards is begging for it with his Washington Post op-ed today titled "The Right Way in Iraq". As support for the invasion and occupation of Iraq (a sovereign nation which posed absolutely no threat to us) continues to plummet in this country, lefties who voted for the war are scrambling for the exits, feigning shocked outrage at the way they were "duped" into voting for war. Some claim they were simply led to believe that they were presenting a united front, giving Mr. Hussein incentive to cooperate fully with UNMOVIC, believing we'd never actually invade. Others, like Senator Edwards, are claiming that they were presented with invented and trumped-up evidence that Iraq was a clear and present threat to the US and its allies.
and symbolic gesture. Senator Edwards could do this by either sparing us his platitudes and fading quietly into private life or by coming clean with the real reason he voted to go to war: he had future political ambitions and wanted to dodge the rightie bullet that lefties are soft on national defense. For this he has blood on his hands.
Got seven large burning a hole in your pocket? Why not consider a relaxing vacation on the beaches of North Korea (do you think they have clothing optional beaches there??), or shopping in Pyongyang? These 5 Americans recently made that choice, having the trip of a lifetime. What a bizarre and scary place, stuck in time for 50+ years. If I was given a choice to travel to the international space station or to go to North Korea, it would take a lot of headscratching to decide, and I think I'd end up in Pyongyang. Its funny, as the dubyas try to repackage their Iraqi adventure as humanitarian, I can't help but think the most repressed people in the world live in North Korea.
One might think that the brassiest thing he could have said today was that those who are criticizing his administration are trying to rewrite history (this from a guy who brags about his aversion to reading non-fiction). This administration was the one that changed the story twice as to the reason for invasion prior to said invasion, then once more after invasion when WMDs were as difficult to find as righties at a Chelsea block party.
blew that opportunity.
Stephen Colbert's guest on his new show last night was a woman named Catherine Crier, a former judge turned TV personality and bestselling author. I had never heard of her before. As they started discussing her background --Texas judge, Court TV, CNN, FOX "News"-- a wave of distaste and distrust washed over me; this month's token righty for a progressive show. When she started talking about her latest thesis --how we'd better wake up and see how the religious wackos want to pack the courts with true activists-- I sat up and started listening, then did some research on her past writings. She's smart, and really nails it clearly and completely; she understands where we're headed. No far-gone lefty, we'd all be wise to heed her warnings.
recycled every few years is how Madonna is "constantly reinventing herself". I would submit she's just super-talented. Love her or hate her (I fall somewhere in the middle), Madge has demonstrated an uncanny ability to draw headlines, fans, and dollars almost at will over her near 25 year professional career. Sure, she's had her challenges but those memories quickly fade with each new success. She has that rare ability to fuse creative talent with a keen instinct for the current cultural climate, and is very focused & disciplined with the execution. She is also very intelligent, with good street smarts.
We have kids dying in Iraq for no reason, a runaway national fiscal deficit, a huge federal ideological divide, and an increasing retro approach to the environment, foreign policy, and social compassion, yet congress prioritizes.......baseball????????
compromising pics he must have of some key CBS execs to stay on the air), but this performance admission ticket issue absolutely pisses me off! Recent quote on Ticketmaster for a local performance:
I'm amused today with all the leftie pols and pundits high-fiven' and back slappin' each other over their perceived victory with regard to the Harriet Miers withdrawal from consideration as a supreme court associate justice today. Folks, IMHO this was the best shot you were going to get! She has all the earmarks of a potential moderate (read: Bob Dole, non-neoright) conservative who would grow and learn with the job; in other words, one who would eventually learn to keep an open and practical judicial mind. Plus, she seemed smart.... The next nominee is very likely to be a red doozie, watch for it.
I blame the U.S. for a lot of the escalating turmoil in the Middle East, but they by no means have a corner on the market. What the hell was this yahoo from Iran thinking when he chose to wade into this snakepit? Preemptive action, perhaps??
CBS's venerated 60 Minutes did a piece last Sunday on the bizarre story of Charles Robert Jenkins, the former US Army sergeant who deserted to North Korea from his patrol near the DMZ in 1965. We've heard a bit about the ordeal over the last 6 months or so as he and his Japanese wife and their children finally made it out of North Korea after nearly 40 years, eventually to Japan, then to a US Army jail to serve time for desertion. You can see some of the video or read the entire transcript of the piece here.
That common target of liberal accusations, that supposed bastion of the left, The New York Times, today endorsed Michael Bloomberg, a decidedly Republican candidate, for re-election as mayor of our nation's largest (and arguably most prestigious) city. They did it for practical reasons: he's a fiscal conservative who believes government has to empower, not fetter the private infrastructure to be part of the solution (like the Republicans of 30 years ago), but also knows that compassion and practical solutions to issues like homelessness, poor schools, and crime are the real basis for a better future for all citizens. Unlike the group running the affairs of the nation, who believe that one must ignore the "background noise" (W's phrase for the realities of what is actually happening in life) and instead stick to supporting some mythical ideology, good governance means hard work, a true recognition and understanding of reality, and workable, effective solutions which involve a broad slice of constituents. Kudos to the "liberal" New York Times for endorsing an effective leader regardless of party. We'll see pigs fly before we see The Washington Times or Fox "news" support a true Democrat for office.
Got to see Mr. Bill O'Reilly hawking his book on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart this week. I love the fact that Jon will host alternate points of view, but having BO on was a puzzle to me. Bill is successful from a TV trashy tabloid point of view, but is hardly a serious pundit. We already know that Bill is not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed, but what the hell was an intellectual like Stewart thinking? Maybe a Carribean shower joke or two?

While we are still unable to get complete and accurate information regarding the situation in Iraq the news media have gotten much braver in the last few months, shedding their apparent aversion to angering the powers in the Beltway. But information regarding the center of the real "war on terror", Afghanistan, has remained virtually nonexistent.| Courtesy of Seattle Police Dept. |