h/t to Friendly Atheist.
* Double-click to embiggen.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Dick (Chicken) Cheney goes off on Obama
You may have seen the video by now, but Dickie the Chickie Cheney, on MSNBC, said that Obama should stop "dithering" on Afghanistan, and that Obama was "afraid" to send more troops to that benighted country.
Our soldiers in Afghanistan are having a rough time, saith the Chickie, and Obama needs to get on the stick.
This from a guy who made sure he would never have to fight in any war. You remember those five (5!) college deferments which he pursued so's he wouldn't have to go to Vietnam.
For eight years he and Georgi totally screwed up not only our country but Iraq and Afghanistan. While they were fighting an unnecessary war in Iraq (where Osama wasn't) they ignored Afghanistan (where Osama was). And as Joan Walsh points out in an excellent article in Salon, Chickie Cheney "spent much of his vice presidency hiding in a secret bunker.."
Walsh quotes a retired general, Paul Eaton:
"The record is clear: Dick Cheney and the Bush administration were incompetent war fighters. They ignored Afghanistan for 7 years with a crude approach to counter-insurgency warfare best illustrated by: 1. Deny it. 2. Ignore it. 3. Bomb it. While our intelligence agencies called the region the greatest threat to America, the Bush White House under-resourced our military efforts, shifted attention to Iraq, and failed to bring to justice the masterminds of September 11."
What bugs the hell out of me is why any legitimate news source (that excludes FAUX News) would give Chickie Cheney the time of day; what he has to say is irrelevant and often stupid. He's a failed charlatan that will be pilloried in the history books! Enough already!
You can read Ms. Walsh's entire article here.
Our soldiers in Afghanistan are having a rough time, saith the Chickie, and Obama needs to get on the stick.
This from a guy who made sure he would never have to fight in any war. You remember those five (5!) college deferments which he pursued so's he wouldn't have to go to Vietnam.
For eight years he and Georgi totally screwed up not only our country but Iraq and Afghanistan. While they were fighting an unnecessary war in Iraq (where Osama wasn't) they ignored Afghanistan (where Osama was). And as Joan Walsh points out in an excellent article in Salon, Chickie Cheney "spent much of his vice presidency hiding in a secret bunker.."
Walsh quotes a retired general, Paul Eaton:
"The record is clear: Dick Cheney and the Bush administration were incompetent war fighters. They ignored Afghanistan for 7 years with a crude approach to counter-insurgency warfare best illustrated by: 1. Deny it. 2. Ignore it. 3. Bomb it. While our intelligence agencies called the region the greatest threat to America, the Bush White House under-resourced our military efforts, shifted attention to Iraq, and failed to bring to justice the masterminds of September 11."
What bugs the hell out of me is why any legitimate news source (that excludes FAUX News) would give Chickie Cheney the time of day; what he has to say is irrelevant and often stupid. He's a failed charlatan that will be pilloried in the history books! Enough already!
You can read Ms. Walsh's entire article here.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Friday, October 23, 2009
Rachel Maddow: The White House fight with Fox News
Everyone knows, or should know, that Fox News is FAUX News. It is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a legitimate news organization. It is, as a White House spokesperson said, "opinion masquerading as news."
FAUX News is, as also was said, the communication arm of the Republican Party.
This is undeniable. To put it crassly and bluntly, O'Reilly, Beck, Hannity and all the rest are assholes crapping on the American people and in the process badly messing up the country!
FAUX News is, as also was said, the communication arm of the Republican Party.
This is undeniable. To put it crassly and bluntly, O'Reilly, Beck, Hannity and all the rest are assholes crapping on the American people and in the process badly messing up the country!
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Keith Olbermann: Lindsey Graham - Worst Person in the World
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
There's an interesting article on the man who believes we have a god-given right to screw up the world, Lindsey Graham, here.
Senator George LeMieux just another Repugnican
[Photo of LeMieux & Crist from here]Well, we knew that, didn't we?
Florida's "new" senator, George LeMieux, appointed by Charlie Crist to fill the seat vacated by Mel Martinez, who cut out early, turns out to be just another Repugnican thug.
Seems that before he got the nod from Charlie, he "was advising a secretive pro-oil drilling coalition that is pushing a bill through the state Legislature to open up the Florida Coast to drilling."
That, according to the St. Petersburg Times.
But, wait, maybe he's not guilty of anything. "...LeMieux, who could have to vote on drilling legislation, refuses to say what he did [for this secretive group], and the leader of the industry group says he cannot remember."
Heh. Heh. Typical con artist corporate lying SOBs!
Not only so, but the U.S. Senate is considering legalize to allow drilling off of Florida's pristine shores. In previous years, the Floridians in the Senate have opposed such a measure, but, guess what, LeMieux likes the idea!
The outfit LeMieux worked for is called Florida Energy Associates and is comprised of a bunch of nameless smaller oil companies. They are eagerly awaiting the opportunity to bid on possible new leases that might come about from new state legislation.
So, what's LeMieux been up to? And what does Charlie know about it?
Just another day in La-La Land.
Which religion should you follow
Thanks to Dan Florien at Unreasonable Faith, who found this at Hot Taco.
* Double-click on the flow chart to embiggen!
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Right wingy Repugnicans ARE Big Brother!
[Photo from here]I find it amusing and sad that the right wingy Repugnicans in Congress, who blither on and on about "big government," "Socialism," and "Communism," are so eager to become our Big Brother.
They want to control a woman's right to abortion; they want the Bible taught in public schools; they want their version of the Ten Commands posted in courthouses; they want abstinence only sex-education taught to our children; they want to restrict the use of contraceptive measures; they want to tell our servicemen and women what they can read and what they can't read; they want to make our military an agency of fundamentalist christianity; etc., etc. They don't want the common folks to have government health care (even though they enjoy an elite version of just that!). They do favor allowing employees of companies employed by the government to get away with rape. They do favor allowing christianist organizations to discriminate against homosexuals. They are against regulating corporations and controlling the chicanery and larceny of these corporations. Many of them don't believe in climate change or any science. And so forth.
The Census is a-coming next year. There are 10 questions on the census. Now, however, a couple of Repugnican dimwits have proposed adding an 11th question to be asked of every person who answers the census taker's door knock. These two christianist crispy flakes want to the census taker to ask, "Are you an American citizen?"
The crispy flakes are Robert Bennett (R-Utah - do you think he might be a Mormon?) and none other than the Jesus-loving, hooker-hiring David Vitter (R-Louisiana). [And why hasn't Vitter resigned by now? I guess Repugnicans figure god's forgiven them their sins - as have their wives - so it's just Democrats caught with their pants down that should resign. Everyone knows god doesn't much like Democrats!]
Ah, but what are these Repugs worried about?
Losing seats in Congress! Gotta get the illegals out, slap 'em in a camp, send 'em home, whatever, but first let's find out who they are, eliminate them from population count, and that will ensure we can retain our seats in Congress. Vitter's very worried about this. He claims that if we don't sift out the illegals, then "Many states will lose congressional representation, which such states would not have otherwise lost ... "
You might note that the super wingnut dingy, Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma) is a co-sponsor of the amendment and he's afeared his state's gonna lose representation.
Now, whatever the merits of the amendment (of which I can think of none), one has to be concerned whenever the likes of Bennett, Vitter and Coburn get together and concoct an amendment such as this. Nasties, all of them. They don't give a rat's ass about fairness, or the general health of our country! They vote against everything! All they care about is Repugnican power; saving Repugnican seats in Congress!
I've got a better idea. These are the clowns always blathering about "family values," so based on the lives of Vitter, Engsign, Gingrich and that moron from South Carolina, Mark Sanford, let's add a question to the census that reflects their "family values" --
Let's add this question, with the disclaimer it would be asked only of Repugnican politicians:
"Have you ever been sexually involved with someone not your wife or husband or have you ever paid for sexual services by a prostitute or gigolo or anyone else?"
And because these folks like to play Big Brother and poke their nose into the bedrooms of our citizens, we'll turn around and use that against them by placing their responses in a national database which would be made available only on-line. Wouldn't that be great during an election season when they all, in unison begin yammering about how much they love Jesus?
I want to be the one to knock on Vitter's door.
Grayson v. Broun on the Constitution
Alan Grayson is like a bright, beaming star in the darkness of rightwingnuttery in Congress and he completely eclipses nogoodniks like Broun! This is fantastic!
Commentary derived from Crooks and Liars:
You might expect a man who graduated from Harvard Law School with honors, and was later a law clerk in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (1984-85) under Robert Bork, Ruth Ginsburg, and Antonin Scalia to know his stuff concerning the Constitution. And with that kind of background you might also reasonably assume such a man would not suffer fools gladly when presented with an alternate view of reality on U.S. Constitutional matters. Grayson uses the words of William Rehnquist and James Madison to destroy a rather hapless Paul Broun.
This is Rep. Alan Grayson and Rep. Paul Broun discussing a bill to deny funds to one specific named organization in a Science and Technology markup. Such a bill is known as 'a bill of attainder'.
h/t Ministry of Truth for the transcript
Chairman: "Mr. Grayson is recognized."
Grayson: "Thank you. I'd like to ask the gentleman from Georgia a few questions, and I'll yeild to him for the purpose of having answers to these questions. Um, Does the gentleman from Georgia know what a bill of Attainder is?"
Broun (R-GA) "A bill of, the answer's yes, in fact it's been very explicitly described by the court's."
Grayson: "What is it?"
Looooooooooooooong pause while Broun looks through notes for an answer
Broun: "The courts have applied a two pronged test. Number one, whether specific individuals or entities are affected by the staute, Number two, when the legislation affects a Quote "Punishment" End quote, on those individuals, it serves no legitamate regulatory purpose. "
Grayson: "What, um, does the Constitution says about Bills of Attainder?"
Broun: "Oh, I suggest that this is not a Bill of Attainder. It's, um, certainly does focus on a specific entity, but it does not inflict punishment by any means. In fact. . . "
Grayson: "Will the gentleman from Georgia explain what the Constitution says about Bills of Attainder?"
Outside Voice/another Republican: "Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield for a second? The gentleman from Florida?"
Grayson: "No. I'd like an answer to my question."
Outside Voice/another Republican: "Well, frankly, I can't wait to see the discussion when it comes to . . . . "
Grayson: "I did NOT yeild, and I'd like an answer fron the gentleman from Georgia to my question, I. . ."
Chairman: "Li, Li, Listen, let's get back to all the time, is Mister, the gentleman from Florida, who will yeild to the gentleman from Georgia, will . . ."
Grayson: "Right. What does the Constitution say about Bills of Attainder? It's a simple question."
Broun: "The Constitution says "Congress shall pass no Bills of Attainder" but this is not one . . . "
Grayson: "Alright, now, would you agree with me that it is UnConstitutional to single out one or more persons without the benefit of trial?"
Broun: "Uh, no sir, there is a two pronged test, this is not a Bill of Attainder, it is . . . "
Grayson: "Alright, well, when I, when I said, I'll reclaim my time. I just quoted William Rehnquist writing the book "The Supreme Court", he wrote that book and said "You can not single out on or more persons without the benefit of a trial." Will the gentleman agree that Bills of Attainder are contrary to every principle of sound legislation?"
Broun: "The two main criteria which courts would like to look, in order to determine whether legislation is a Bill of Attainder, one is whether a specific individual/entity is affected by extension, number two, whether the legislation affects a punishmeny to the individuals . . . "
Grayson: "Will the gentleman please tell me whether you agree or not that Bills of Attainder are contrary to every principle of sound legislation?"
Broun: "Bills of Attainder are UnConstitutional."
Grayson: "AND contrary to every principle of sound legislation, is that correct?"
Broun: "That's correct."
Grayson: "Alright. And you know who said that?"
Broun: "Tell me."
Grayson: "James Madison in the Federalist papers."
"Now, do you, does the gentleman agree that the Bill of Attainder clause was intended not as a narrow or technical provision, but rather as an implementation of the seperation of powers, and a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function, or more simply, trial by legislation. Wil the gentleman agree with me on that."
Outside Republican: "Will the Gentleman yield?"
Grayson: "No."
Laughter throughout the committee room , then silence. . .
Outside Representative: "Um, the, the, will the gentleman restate the question?"
Grayson: "The question is, will the gentleman from Georgia agree with me that the Bill of Attainder clause was intended not as a narrow or technical provision, but rather as an implementation of the seperation of powers, and a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function, or more simply, trial by legislation. Wil the gentleman agree to that?"
Broun: "No, sir, I will not, and I ask counsel to help us with this, I think all this is determination of the court and I'd like to appeal to Mr. Sensenberner (wingnut who's name I refuse to spell correctly)
Grayson: "Well, I'm sorry, but it's my time, not yours or Mr. Sensenberner's, so I will reclaim my time, and I will point out that what you just you would NOT agree to is from a Supreme Court case called the United States V Brown, something I would expect you might know about, given your name."
Outside voice: "Will the gentleman yield?"
Grayson: "No."
One voice laughs
Grayson: "Uh, listen, we, we are trampling on people's Constitutional rights. And I think it's unfortunate that the mania that exists on the other side of the aisle regarding this one organization, and we know why that mania exists, it's because they've registered an awful lot of Democrats, continues to distort and waste the time of this committee and many other committees here in Congress. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! I yield my remaining 5 seconds"
Commentary derived from Crooks and Liars:
You might expect a man who graduated from Harvard Law School with honors, and was later a law clerk in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (1984-85) under Robert Bork, Ruth Ginsburg, and Antonin Scalia to know his stuff concerning the Constitution. And with that kind of background you might also reasonably assume such a man would not suffer fools gladly when presented with an alternate view of reality on U.S. Constitutional matters. Grayson uses the words of William Rehnquist and James Madison to destroy a rather hapless Paul Broun.
This is Rep. Alan Grayson and Rep. Paul Broun discussing a bill to deny funds to one specific named organization in a Science and Technology markup. Such a bill is known as 'a bill of attainder'.
h/t Ministry of Truth for the transcript
Chairman: "Mr. Grayson is recognized."
Grayson: "Thank you. I'd like to ask the gentleman from Georgia a few questions, and I'll yeild to him for the purpose of having answers to these questions. Um, Does the gentleman from Georgia know what a bill of Attainder is?"
Broun (R-GA) "A bill of, the answer's yes, in fact it's been very explicitly described by the court's."
Grayson: "What is it?"
Looooooooooooooong pause while Broun looks through notes for an answer
Broun: "The courts have applied a two pronged test. Number one, whether specific individuals or entities are affected by the staute, Number two, when the legislation affects a Quote "Punishment" End quote, on those individuals, it serves no legitamate regulatory purpose. "
Grayson: "What, um, does the Constitution says about Bills of Attainder?"
Broun: "Oh, I suggest that this is not a Bill of Attainder. It's, um, certainly does focus on a specific entity, but it does not inflict punishment by any means. In fact. . . "
Grayson: "Will the gentleman from Georgia explain what the Constitution says about Bills of Attainder?"
Outside Voice/another Republican: "Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield for a second? The gentleman from Florida?"
Grayson: "No. I'd like an answer to my question."
Outside Voice/another Republican: "Well, frankly, I can't wait to see the discussion when it comes to . . . . "
Grayson: "I did NOT yeild, and I'd like an answer fron the gentleman from Georgia to my question, I. . ."
Chairman: "Li, Li, Listen, let's get back to all the time, is Mister, the gentleman from Florida, who will yeild to the gentleman from Georgia, will . . ."
Grayson: "Right. What does the Constitution say about Bills of Attainder? It's a simple question."
Broun: "The Constitution says "Congress shall pass no Bills of Attainder" but this is not one . . . "
Grayson: "Alright, now, would you agree with me that it is UnConstitutional to single out one or more persons without the benefit of trial?"
Broun: "Uh, no sir, there is a two pronged test, this is not a Bill of Attainder, it is . . . "
Grayson: "Alright, well, when I, when I said, I'll reclaim my time. I just quoted William Rehnquist writing the book "The Supreme Court", he wrote that book and said "You can not single out on or more persons without the benefit of a trial." Will the gentleman agree that Bills of Attainder are contrary to every principle of sound legislation?"
Broun: "The two main criteria which courts would like to look, in order to determine whether legislation is a Bill of Attainder, one is whether a specific individual/entity is affected by extension, number two, whether the legislation affects a punishmeny to the individuals . . . "
Grayson: "Will the gentleman please tell me whether you agree or not that Bills of Attainder are contrary to every principle of sound legislation?"
Broun: "Bills of Attainder are UnConstitutional."
Grayson: "AND contrary to every principle of sound legislation, is that correct?"
Broun: "That's correct."
Grayson: "Alright. And you know who said that?"
Broun: "Tell me."
Grayson: "James Madison in the Federalist papers."
"Now, do you, does the gentleman agree that the Bill of Attainder clause was intended not as a narrow or technical provision, but rather as an implementation of the seperation of powers, and a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function, or more simply, trial by legislation. Wil the gentleman agree with me on that."
Outside Republican: "Will the Gentleman yield?"
Grayson: "No."
Laughter throughout the committee room , then silence. . .
Outside Representative: "Um, the, the, will the gentleman restate the question?"
Grayson: "The question is, will the gentleman from Georgia agree with me that the Bill of Attainder clause was intended not as a narrow or technical provision, but rather as an implementation of the seperation of powers, and a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function, or more simply, trial by legislation. Wil the gentleman agree to that?"
Broun: "No, sir, I will not, and I ask counsel to help us with this, I think all this is determination of the court and I'd like to appeal to Mr. Sensenberner (wingnut who's name I refuse to spell correctly)
Grayson: "Well, I'm sorry, but it's my time, not yours or Mr. Sensenberner's, so I will reclaim my time, and I will point out that what you just you would NOT agree to is from a Supreme Court case called the United States V Brown, something I would expect you might know about, given your name."
Outside voice: "Will the gentleman yield?"
Grayson: "No."
One voice laughs
Grayson: "Uh, listen, we, we are trampling on people's Constitutional rights. And I think it's unfortunate that the mania that exists on the other side of the aisle regarding this one organization, and we know why that mania exists, it's because they've registered an awful lot of Democrats, continues to distort and waste the time of this committee and many other committees here in Congress. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! I yield my remaining 5 seconds"
Keith Olbermann - Tourist attraction identifies witches
While this is a tongue-in-cheek (I hope!), it's a pretty good example of Repugnican christianist wingnut science.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Keith Olbermann - Worst Person - Lou Dobbs
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Jury allows Bible to determine man's fate
That a travesty such as this can happen in the United States in the year, 2009, is unbelievable. It is also a testimony to the growth of a type of fundamentalist christianism that has infected so many of our people and our systems; an infection that is a real and present threat to our constitutional democracy.
It happened in Texas (which, for some reason, is not all that surprising). At the trial of one Khristian Oliver, who does not appear to be a nice man at all. In 1999, Oliver instigated a burglary of a home during which he shot the homeowner in the face and then proceeded to beat the homeowner with the latter's rifle.
At the trial, as the story goes, the jury met to determine whether or not Oliver deserved the death penalty for his crime. It appears the jury decided the way to do that was to check to see what the Bible has to say.
Yup. Evidently four Bibles were present at this jury session, all with certain passages highlighted. According to an article by Tom Leonard at the Telegraph Company, a juror reportedly read aloud sections of the Bible, one of which included this passage: "'And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.'"
Defense lawyers screamed bloody murder (pardon the pun) and appealed. The trial judge rejected their appeal, and the judge was upheld by a Texas appeals court.
More appeals. Then last year, according to Leonard, "a federal appeals court ruled ... that while the Bible should not have been allowed into the deliberation room at Oliver's trial, there was no clear evidence to indicate they had influenced the juror's decision."
The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear the case.
So, Oliver is set to die on November 5.
Now, whether you are for or against capital punishment, it is specious to argue as did the federal appeals court that, because there was no evidence the jurors were swayed by the Bible readings, the jurors were not swayed by the Bible readings. Just the fact that at least one Bible passage was read aloud which clearly implicated Oliver as a murderer according to Holy Writ and therefore, deserved to die, should have caused the sentence to be tossed.
Against the federal appeals court ruling, it appears that the judges forgot one important point: This country is not ruled by the Bible but by the Constitution! The Bible does not belong in a jury room and the sentence should have been invalidated for that reason alone! Furthermore, while there may not be "evidence" the jurors were swayed by the reading of a Bible passage, neither is there evidence they were not swayed by the biblical message.
Common sense, it seems, got thrown out in this case.
Leonard notes that "Kate Allen, Amnesty International's UK director, said Oliver's trial was a 'travesty.'"
Yes, it was. We, as Americans, are better than this. Especially those of us who don't try to make the scribblings of ancient and ignorant tribesmen ruled by a bloodthirsty god the law of the land!
It happened in Texas (which, for some reason, is not all that surprising). At the trial of one Khristian Oliver, who does not appear to be a nice man at all. In 1999, Oliver instigated a burglary of a home during which he shot the homeowner in the face and then proceeded to beat the homeowner with the latter's rifle.
At the trial, as the story goes, the jury met to determine whether or not Oliver deserved the death penalty for his crime. It appears the jury decided the way to do that was to check to see what the Bible has to say.
Yup. Evidently four Bibles were present at this jury session, all with certain passages highlighted. According to an article by Tom Leonard at the Telegraph Company, a juror reportedly read aloud sections of the Bible, one of which included this passage: "'And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.'"
Defense lawyers screamed bloody murder (pardon the pun) and appealed. The trial judge rejected their appeal, and the judge was upheld by a Texas appeals court.
More appeals. Then last year, according to Leonard, "a federal appeals court ruled ... that while the Bible should not have been allowed into the deliberation room at Oliver's trial, there was no clear evidence to indicate they had influenced the juror's decision."
The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear the case.
So, Oliver is set to die on November 5.
Now, whether you are for or against capital punishment, it is specious to argue as did the federal appeals court that, because there was no evidence the jurors were swayed by the Bible readings, the jurors were not swayed by the Bible readings. Just the fact that at least one Bible passage was read aloud which clearly implicated Oliver as a murderer according to Holy Writ and therefore, deserved to die, should have caused the sentence to be tossed.
Against the federal appeals court ruling, it appears that the judges forgot one important point: This country is not ruled by the Bible but by the Constitution! The Bible does not belong in a jury room and the sentence should have been invalidated for that reason alone! Furthermore, while there may not be "evidence" the jurors were swayed by the reading of a Bible passage, neither is there evidence they were not swayed by the biblical message.
Common sense, it seems, got thrown out in this case.
Leonard notes that "Kate Allen, Amnesty International's UK director, said Oliver's trial was a 'travesty.'"
Yes, it was. We, as Americans, are better than this. Especially those of us who don't try to make the scribblings of ancient and ignorant tribesmen ruled by a bloodthirsty god the law of the land!
The Iraq Embassy - A Bush/Cheney boondoggle!
[Image from here]On several occasions, we've expressed our opinion about the monstrous, idiotic U.S. Embassy in Iraq. It cost $736 million. It's a blight on the landscape. It's an insult to the people of Iraq. It is, as I recall, the largest and most useless U.S. embassy in the world.
The construction of this embassy was stupid. It was the work of the Bush/Cheney administration and has all defects characteristic of the work of that administration.
This from McClatchy:
The embassy building has "multiple significant construction deficiencies" according to a report by the State Department's inspector general. McClatchy says the report "cites flaws in numerous systems throughout the embassy complex and says that the contractor, First Kuwait General Trading & Contracting Co., failed to properly design, construct and commission the largest U.S. Embassy overseas."
The report also says the contractor should return $130 million to the U.S. government.
There are problems "with the embassy's water treatment plant, power systems, walls and concrete walkways, and fire protection systems." There are "'plumbing deficiencies' at more than 200 locations."
The blame is being laid at the feet of a retired Army Major General, Charles Williams, who "set up a separate, secretive unit, answerable only to him, to oversee the Baghdad project." [Hmmm, wonder what the airhead, Glenn Beck, has to say about this?]
Williams failed on just about every count to take the proper precautions in terms of overseeing the construction of the embassy.
How could this happen? That's not the question. The question is "How could it not happen under the regime of Bush/Cheney?"
Here's an example: "During a dinner in Kuwait City on Jan. 11, 2008, attended by then-President George W. Bush and Kuwait's emir, a diplomat from the emirate gave the U.S?. delegation a package that included a DVD and testimonial with praise for First Kuwait."
So, while everything the Bush/Cheney gang touched in the Middle East was going up in flames, he's eating dinner with his co-conspirators. And at the same time, the U.S. economy is going down the tubes, also with the full blessing of Bush/Cheney.
Fifty years from now, universities in this country will be offering a four-year course on the havoc wreaked upon the world by Georgi Bush and Dickie Cheney, and that still won't cover it all!
Read the entire McClatchy article here.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
The Republican Pary Today - A commentary
Many pundits and commentators have noted the slide of the Repugnican Party into the slime of gutter politics and religious wingnuttery. Part and parcel of that slide into the slime has been the unremitting and vicious attacks on President Barack Obama; attacks which I personally believe in many cases are rooted in a inherent nativist racism derived from uncontrolled inbreeding among the ignorant and stoopids.And the situation is getting worse. Just watch that treasonous asshole, Glenn Beck, for a few minutes (if you can keep from tossing your cookies!).
Richard Stitt has an excellent commentary at BuzzFlash, detailing how the Republican Party, hijacked by the Religious Right in the 1990s, is now comprised of "militant, enraged losers made up mostly angry white (usually older) males who have nothing positive to offer our country. Their Svengali, Rush Limbaugh, whose potent gift of toxic rhetoric percolates to his followers like a queen ant emitting pheromones to the obedient drone colony."
Stitt puts it in a nutshell when he writes, "Right-wing extremists, birthers, teabaggers, gun-toting racists, and xenophobes are still carrying out the orders issued by screech radio bombast Rush Limbaugh and other extremist groups such as the Minutemen, Tea Bag Patriots, FreedomWorks, and other corporate-funded splinter groups determined to undermine, subvert and sabotage our president, our democracy and our country to keep us from making forward progress."
Stitt has much more to say, all of it worthwhile, and you can read it here.
http://blog.buzzflash.com/contributors/2096
One reason you're getting screwed by your insurance company
The New York Times ran a story the other day noting that, because of the McCarran-Ferguson Act, initiated in 1945, insurance companies enjoy a "limited exemption to national antitrust laws" in that the act allows states to regulate insurers within their boundaries.Senator Harry Reid told the Senate Judiciary Committee that this act is the legal loophole which has allowed insurance companies to jack up their prices to unreasonable levels. According to The NYT, Reid and "other critics ... say the law allows insurers to monopolize markets and fix prices in ways that are usually illegal."
But you knew that.
Reid also said that this exemption was "anticompetitive and damaging to the American economy. Health insurance premiums have continued to rise at a rapid rate, forcing businesses to cut back on health insurance coverage and forcing many families to choose between health insurance and basic necessities."
You think?
There's hope on the horizon, however, because Sen. Pat Leahy, a Democrat (naturally) has brought forth a bill known as the Health Insurance Industry Antitrust Enforcement Act that would bring this exemption to an end!
Even better, other Democrats like Charles Schumer (NY) are trying to get this exemption repeal in health care reform legislation being put together by Congress.
The health insurance industry is fighting back, and, as you would expect, citing a phony report they put together with the help of PricewaterhouseCoopers, claiming that such a repeal would force higher insurance premiums. It's the same old song and dance.
It is obvious to everyone but Repugnicans that the health insurance industry report was a smoke-screen to derail any attempt to roll back their exemption to fix prices and monopolize markets.
The devil, you say!
The HAPPY Act or Republicans like dogs better than humans
The HAPPY Act (aka the Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years Act) was brought before Congress by a dipshit Repugnican Congressman from Michigan, named (and you might want to write this down if you live in Michigan so you can be sure to vote against him the next time he runs) Thaddeus McCotter.
Mr. McCotter, a Repugnican, has to be opposed to health care reform for humans in this country, but he doth love little animals and their owners. He loves them so much that he's proposed this dippy HAPPY Act which would give pet owners the right to deduct $3,500 per year in pet care expenses.
Yup! $3,500 per year. In a time of a growing deficit, a time when every one who cares about anything is trying to find funds to allow us to enact legislation of benefit to real people, this moron wants to further reduce the amount of money coming in to the government. I guess Bush's tax cuts for the rich just didn't do enough damage for him.
Now I love animals, too. I have a dog. I've had pets all my life. And while I do consider it the responsibility of government to provide health care for all, I've never considered it the responsibility of the government to subsidize everyone's pet health care costs!
We must remember, though, that McCotter is a Repugnican. Which is evidence by itself that he is lacking in common sense and intelligence.
Watch and listen to this moron.
h/t to WalletPop Blog
Mr. McCotter, a Repugnican, has to be opposed to health care reform for humans in this country, but he doth love little animals and their owners. He loves them so much that he's proposed this dippy HAPPY Act which would give pet owners the right to deduct $3,500 per year in pet care expenses.
Yup! $3,500 per year. In a time of a growing deficit, a time when every one who cares about anything is trying to find funds to allow us to enact legislation of benefit to real people, this moron wants to further reduce the amount of money coming in to the government. I guess Bush's tax cuts for the rich just didn't do enough damage for him.
Now I love animals, too. I have a dog. I've had pets all my life. And while I do consider it the responsibility of government to provide health care for all, I've never considered it the responsibility of the government to subsidize everyone's pet health care costs!
We must remember, though, that McCotter is a Repugnican. Which is evidence by itself that he is lacking in common sense and intelligence.
Watch and listen to this moron.
h/t to WalletPop Blog
Keith Olbermann: Glenn Beck, Worst Person in the World!
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
The Rachel Maddow Show: Grayson's Anatomy
Also by Heather at Crooks and Liars:
Rachel Maddow talks to Rep. Alan Grayson about the trouble the Republicans have been having finding someone to run against him.
Maddow: So you now have somebody moving from another district—well two people—two candidates possibly moving from another district to run against you.
Grayson: Oh, they decided they’re in and three others—but you know we polled, we’ve already polled and we found out that people with fake names have better name recognition than people already in the race against me.
Maddow: You ran—you made up names…
Grayson: We made up names, right, we put them in a poll and the fake names did better than the current opponents.
Grayson on bipartisanship.
Maddow: On health reform let me ask you right now how you feel about the two sides right now. We talked about it at the top of the show. Sen. Jon Kyl, Republican, this weekend saying he doesn’t believe that death rates are higher for people who don’t have health insurance. The chair of the Republican Party says we just don’t need health reform. How do you see the two sides right now.
Grayson: I think that the Democrats have been fooled now for months by this fantasy of bipartisanship. Bipartisanship is a concept that’s become a weapon of mass distraction to keep us from actually doing what we need to do—to give people in this country universal health care—to give them affordable health care—and to give them comprehensive health care.
Because a lot of people find they get all the health care they need as long as they don’t need any. And that has to end. That’s not what American is entitled to and that’s not the kind of America most people want to see. But instead we get bogged down in these nuisances. I don’t remember hearing a lot about bipartisanship when we were talking about tax breaks for the rich.
Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz Respond to Liz Cheney
From Heather at Crooks and Liars:
Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz both responded to Liz Cheney and Bill Kristol's new group Keep America Safe's ad, which accused them of being afraid to debate her. Rachel was polite as always and said Ms. Cheney is welcome on her show any time. Ed Schultz had some of his guests weigh in as well and was not so kind to Cheney. He questioned why she was qualified to work at the State Department in the first place and I think Bill Press' response was the most appropriate.
Press: You know what I think Ed? This was another balloon hoax. This whole thing is a total hoax, this Keep America Safe thing. It is. It's a total media creation. You're right about Liz Cheney. What about Bill Kristol? This is the guy that brought the country Dan Quayle and Sarah Palin—Bill Kristol—the one that wanted Bill Clinton to invade Iraq in 1997—what credentials—and I'm sorry Earnest, but the credentials of the people who represent the organization do say a lot about the organization. You’ve got Liz Cheney and Bill Kristol—neither of them know squat about security. And we’re supposed to believe them?
Monday, October 19, 2009
Pat Robertson says other religions worship demonic powers
From Rightwing Watch.Supposedly, some poor soul, after watching Pat Robertson on TeeVee, wrote in to ask the wrong reverend a question:
"Why [do] evangelical Christians tell non-Christians that Jesus [God] is the only way to Heaven? Those who are Hindu, Buddhist, Islamic, etc. already know and have a relationship with God. Why is this? It seems disrespectful."
Hmm. Does this sound like a typical viewer of the 700 Club? Or, does this sound like Robertson asking himself a question so he can give an answer that's been burning in the seat of his pants? I think if this was a legitimate question, the writer would have thrown the Jews in with the other religious groups. But Robertson wouldn't want to say the Jews worship "demonic powers."
Here's what Robertson said:
"No. They don't have a relationship. There is the god of the Bible, who is Jehovah. When you see L-O-R-D in caps, that is the name. It's not Allah, it's not Brahma, it's not Shiva, it's not Vishnu, it's not Buddha. It is Jehovah God. They don't have a relationship with him. He is the God of all Gods. These others are mostly demonic powers. Sure they're demons. There are many demons in the world."
"Jehovah"? Nobody who knows anything about the Bible uses that word anymore as it is the result of a mistranslation made hundreds of years ago. Yahweh is the usual term for the Hebrew letters.
Evidently these other "gods" (Allah, Brahma, Shiva, Vishnu, Buddha) are all demons! They're real powers, though, in Robertson's view. They're just bad, bad gods; bad, bad demonic powers.
Why anyone would listen to anything this moron has to say is beyond understanding!
Amazing grace douchebags
[Image from here]If you read the previous post, this post will make sense.
From Fanhouse:
A church somewhere (probably in New England) that calls itself, ironically, Amazing Grace Baptist Church, has weighed in on the marital status of Tom Brady, the quarterback for the New England Patriots.
He is, according to the Baptist douchebags, going to burn forever in hell:
"Tom Brady has an unwed child, but it's okay because he wins Super Bowls. Tom Brady is teaching us to have sex outside of marriage, to commit fornication, don't marry and do the right thing, don't take responsibility for your actions, have a good time no matter who you hurt in this world, go from sex partner to sex partner, and it's okay because of who I am. How many of dad's (sic) cheer on Tom in the Super Bowl while your kids are watching?"
Now, not only is Tom Brady living a sin-filled life but he's teaching all the little kiddos out there to do the same. Yessiree, all those little kids watching NFL football on Sunday afternoon are thinking, "Hey, I wanna be like Tom Brady and have a kid with a gorgeous female creature to whom I'm not married."
Christianist crap. Dontcha just wish the Rapture would come and take them all away! Baptist bozos. This is what the previous post's cartoon is talking about - douchebags.
Why is that these fundy christianists who, by the way, have a higher divorce rate in this country than any other religious group, are so fascinated by sex or the lack of it?
If there's one very good reason not to become a fundy, christianist douchebag it's to avoid having to spend eternity in heaven with them! That would not be heaven, that would be hell!
You can read more here.
Eat, drink and be merry, for everyone goes to Sheol
[Image of skull and bones from here]From the writer of Ecclesiastes:
" ... the same fate is in store for all: for the righeous, and for the wicked; for the good and pure, and for the impure; for him who sacrifices, and for him who does not; for him who is pleasing, and for him who is displeasing; and for him who swears, and for him who shuns oaths. That is the sad thing about all that goes on under the sun: that the same fate is in store for all ...
" ...
"Go, eat your bread in gladness, and drink your wine in joy, for your action was long ago approved by God. Let your clothes always be freshly washed, and your head never lack ointment. Enjoy happiness with a woman you love all the fleeting days of life that have been granted to you under the sun -- all your fleeting days. For that alone is what you can get out of life and out of the means you acquire under the sun. Whatever it is in your power to do, do with all your might. For there is no action, no reasoning, no learning, no wisdom in Sheol, where you are going."
Ecclesiastes 9:2-10
Note: Sheol - There are few references to an afterlife in the Hebrew Bible. One is created of dust, lives out his days and returns to dust. The word, Sheol, however, is used by several writers, notably by Ecclesiastes. Sheol is an "underworld," a place where the dead descend to sleep "with their fathers." The bible does not speak of a resurrection or life after death until one reaches the later eschatological (Daniel) and apocalyptic/wisdom literature.
The RAPTURE is Coming Soon!
I should say the Rapture is coming soon, I think. The problem is that the folks who are trumpeting the return of Jeebus on Wednesday said awhile back that the RAPTURE would come on September 21.
Sadly, so far as I know it didn't happen.
So now they are claiming it will occur on October 21!
That doesn't give us a lot of time to get our respective houses in order, give our hearts to Jesus and find a place to wait before we're swooped up into the air to go to heaven, which is somewhere out there in the cosmos ... nobody really know where it is ...
If you don't believe me, just go to this website where you shall learn the TRUTH. And you'll know it's the truth because they use large print and lots of fluorescent colors and there are a ton of pictures and most importantly, they reference a lot of Bible verses!
Me, I'm going to go have a beer and relax. If the RAPTURE happens I hope that the good Lord will take all the christianist creeps out of here. That would make life a lot more pleasant!
h/t to Pharyngula.
Sadly, so far as I know it didn't happen.
So now they are claiming it will occur on October 21!
That doesn't give us a lot of time to get our respective houses in order, give our hearts to Jesus and find a place to wait before we're swooped up into the air to go to heaven, which is somewhere out there in the cosmos ... nobody really know where it is ...
If you don't believe me, just go to this website where you shall learn the TRUTH. And you'll know it's the truth because they use large print and lots of fluorescent colors and there are a ton of pictures and most importantly, they reference a lot of Bible verses!
Me, I'm going to go have a beer and relax. If the RAPTURE happens I hope that the good Lord will take all the christianist creeps out of here. That would make life a lot more pleasant!
h/t to Pharyngula.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
A $5 million dollar bridge to a religious nowhere
[Photo of Andy Stanley from here]
North Point Community Church is located in Alpharetta, Georgia. It is huge by most any measure, serving much like a large shopping mall, offering a variety of religious/spiritual/piety opportunities for everyone.
North Point is a typical fundamentalist christianist operation which means several things. It teaches that:
In order to be "saved" and spend eternity with the deity, you must accept Jesus as your personal savior. That's because you're a filthy sinner with no hope and have no way to become acceptable to the one they call God. To become acceptable to this god, you have to believe that the Jesus of the New Testament was killed on a cross to save you from your sins, because God demanded (indeed "needed") a blood sacrifice by a sinless human and Jesus was the only "sinless" option available in the first century. This is where things become complicated because they also believe that Jesus is God. So God, in the form of Jesus, had himself killed because he needed a blood sacrifice (all ancient gods required blood sacrifices, you'll recall) and that satisfied his lust for blood so he could forgive the sins of all who believed that he did this.
Why it took God so long to have Jesus hung a cross is one of the great unknowns. It makes no sense that he wait for millions of years to set this wonderful bloody, sacrificial atonement in motion! All those people gone before are burning in hell!
There are other problems, too. Especially with the so-called "sinlessness" of Jesus. Remember how he got mad and sent demons into innocent pigs who then went flying off a cliff to their deaths? Why hurt the pigs? And remember how he refused to help the guy whose daughter was dying and let him go through all the terror of that death before he showed up to show off and raise the daughter from the dead? And remember when he cursed the fig tree because it hadn't borne fruit even though it wasn't the season for figs? And you must recall how he said that those standing in his presence would see the Son of Man come in all his glory before they died? That didn't happen. Was he lying? Confused?
Well, the folks at North Point insist that if you confess your sins and believe in this sacrificial atonement theory, then you've got it made and you will be recreated after death in physical form and will spend all of eternity with Jesus/God/Holy Spirit who are in fact, one "person," while everyone in the world who does not so believe will burn in fiery torment forever and ever. Amen.
North Point theology also includes the notion that the Bible is inerrant in all respects and is God's holy word to the human race. Of course, the Bible is incredibly confusing and difficult to understand and has all those passages where God murders thousands of people so it has to be interpreted and the leaders at North Point know how to do that, so it's best if you believe what they say about the Bible and try to follow the teachings of the Bible as they lay them out for you. If you fail to accept the Bible as inerrant in all respects and find that you can't follow these teachings your so-called "faith" in Jesus becomes suspect and it is likely that the Devil has entered your soul and caused to backslide or you're just a miserable sinner with no hope.
As I said, North Point is a massive operation. It has 22,000 members. The church building seats 4,800 people. You can imagine the amount of money they rake in every Sunday. You can also imagine the amount of money it takes to keep such an operation operative.
The co-founder and senior cleric of North Point is 50-year old, Charles Andy Stanley. Stanley's dad is Charles F. Stanley, pastor of First Baptist in Atlanta.
Andy, as he is generally called, did his seminary training at Dallas Theological Seminary which is a notorious fundy wingnut school in Dallas, Texas. If you wish to know more about the "theology" spewed out at Dallas Theological Seminary, click here. Andy falls pretty much right in line with the typical fundamentalist delusions.
But, it appears he is a good administrator and organizer. According to Wikipedia, North Point now has four campuses, and in 2007 Andy was voted as the 20th most influential Christian in America, and North Point in 2006 was voted the 3rd most influential church in America.
To gain further perspective on the size of the reach of this mega-church, click here.
But Andy and North Point have a problem. Too damn many people! There is so much congestion on Sunday morning that it seems some folks just give up and go home; or worse, go to the local Lutheran church!
According to an article in Christian Post, Andy is quoted thusly: "I have friends who say it's just too much like going to a Braves game." Yeah, but at a Braves game there's beer and hot dogs!
Here's the situation. The church can seat 4,800. But the infrastructure can't handle the traffic. Although there are 3,000 parking spaces and two exits/entrances, Andy told his congregants, "Once we go past 3,500 people at one time, it gets exponentially ridiculous in the parking lot."
The situation has been getting worse. In fact, nine years ago, North Point began working on putting together another way to get in and out of the church facility. Their efforts have finally paid off and they have now received the necessary permissions from the powers-that-be which means they can begin building a $5 million bridge "from its campus to a major highway" in order to mitigate the Sunday morning traffic jams.
Christian Post says, "The bridge will stretch across flood plains and wetlands and connect the campus to Old Milton Parkway via Brookside Parkway. It will be constructed as a three-lane concrete bridge with a walkway." Construction is expected to be completed in 2010.
Now, I really don't care what people believe or which god they worship so long as they don't try to force me to acquiesce to their nonsense. But it is very difficult to equate this kind of religion with a legendary 1st century Jewish rabbi who was, as described, very poor, without a place to lay his head, who spent most of his time wandering about in the company of people who were considered the nogoodniks of his time, and who had the irritating habit of telling people that they could experience the kingdom of God within them if they would keep all of the Jewish law, and do what so many other ancient teachers taught - live so as not to bring harm to others.
Five million buckaroos is a lot of money - even today, even for a mega-church. Especially to build a bridge to a religious nowhere; to a place where fundamentalist wingnuttery is proclaimed, where science is ignored, where the rankest biblicism is pounded into the heads of the ignorant so they can go into the world to preach this same christianist nonsense and strive to turn our nation into a replica of their own wingnuttery.
It is out of mega-churches like this that so much of the opposition to evolution, gay rights, health-care reform, the Constitutional separation of church and state, global warming, abortion, etc., derives.
This is a bridge that creates troubled waters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)