I found Sunday's paper this morning, so I thought yesterday was today.
Brenda, warn us to put down our coffee first! Miss What's Up Down South has the world's best collection of excuses turned in by kids in an anonymous school district that needs to stay anonymous as she probably has grandkids going there. At first I thought these excuses might be made up by the kids. I was very good at making up great excuses and signing my mother's name. To this day, our signatures look alike. But back to my point. After reading several, I had this sudden and awful realization that these were written by the parents. Lord, help us. This was my favorite:
"Please excuse Jennifer for missing school yesterday. We forgot to get the
Sunday paper off the porch, and when we found it Monday, we thought it
was Sunday. "
Monday, April 05, 2004
Saturday, April 03, 2004
A French Conundrum
Rick Freedman who writes Worlds on Fire has a post up on the controversial banning of the hijab in French public schools. He has provided for us a balanced discussion of the subject and invites our comments. Read his posting first and take your time to follow some of his links.
I admit to a prejudice against the islamic religion as I see it practiced around the world. Its imans call for death to Jews and homosexuals. Women are treated as chattel, subjected to the will of their fathers, their brothers, their husbands. Does the fact that many cooperate in their denigration as second class matter to me? No. Is slavery wrong if the slaves don't object to it? Yes, I think so. The French think so as well. To their horror, they realized there are ghettos in Paris and Marseilles where muslim women are terrorized by muslim fundamentalists. Being unable to constructively deal with this clash of cultural values, the French decided to declare a symbolic war against this fundamentalist terror, and for their first battle, they banned from public schools the hijab, a scarf popular with many western muslim women. Next to the burqa required in some muslim countries, the hijab seems quite modest. Just to seem fair, they banned yamulkas and religious symbols as jewelry, such as stars of david, even crosses if they're too big, but it was the hijab that they were going for.
The abuse of women in unassimilated muslim cultures does not belong to France alone. There are stories about the mistreatment of muslim women by their fathers, brothers, husbands, and even strangers coming to us from Norway, Germany, the Netherlands, Great Britain, even Australia. Indeed, every country which has opened its doors to immigrant workers has had to deal with the abuse of women in islamic culture. Islamic fundamentalilsm in Europe is like the camel sticking his nose into the tent. Slowly but persistently, it has sought to substitute itself for the laws and values of its host countries.
Should France do anything? You may not like the way your neighbor treats his wife, but unless he starts to beat her, you probably ought to stay out of their business. Even as uncomfortable as it makes you feel.
I empathize with the French for wanting to do something positive for young muslim girls. This law, while well intended, is doomed to fail. For this law to operate successfully, it requires a policeman at the door of each school, and that seems pretty oppressive. This law can only be successful if those at whom it is aimed cooperate. I don't see that happening.
It's a test of will between two determined opponents. France has chosen an unfortunate mechanism for reinforcing the secular nature of its schools.. It will fail and the problem will remain unresolved. The French will continue to struggle with it. Just as we do here.
Rick Freedman who writes Worlds on Fire has a post up on the controversial banning of the hijab in French public schools. He has provided for us a balanced discussion of the subject and invites our comments. Read his posting first and take your time to follow some of his links.
I admit to a prejudice against the islamic religion as I see it practiced around the world. Its imans call for death to Jews and homosexuals. Women are treated as chattel, subjected to the will of their fathers, their brothers, their husbands. Does the fact that many cooperate in their denigration as second class matter to me? No. Is slavery wrong if the slaves don't object to it? Yes, I think so. The French think so as well. To their horror, they realized there are ghettos in Paris and Marseilles where muslim women are terrorized by muslim fundamentalists. Being unable to constructively deal with this clash of cultural values, the French decided to declare a symbolic war against this fundamentalist terror, and for their first battle, they banned from public schools the hijab, a scarf popular with many western muslim women. Next to the burqa required in some muslim countries, the hijab seems quite modest. Just to seem fair, they banned yamulkas and religious symbols as jewelry, such as stars of david, even crosses if they're too big, but it was the hijab that they were going for.
The abuse of women in unassimilated muslim cultures does not belong to France alone. There are stories about the mistreatment of muslim women by their fathers, brothers, husbands, and even strangers coming to us from Norway, Germany, the Netherlands, Great Britain, even Australia. Indeed, every country which has opened its doors to immigrant workers has had to deal with the abuse of women in islamic culture. Islamic fundamentalilsm in Europe is like the camel sticking his nose into the tent. Slowly but persistently, it has sought to substitute itself for the laws and values of its host countries.
Should France do anything? You may not like the way your neighbor treats his wife, but unless he starts to beat her, you probably ought to stay out of their business. Even as uncomfortable as it makes you feel.
I empathize with the French for wanting to do something positive for young muslim girls. This law, while well intended, is doomed to fail. For this law to operate successfully, it requires a policeman at the door of each school, and that seems pretty oppressive. This law can only be successful if those at whom it is aimed cooperate. I don't see that happening.
It's a test of will between two determined opponents. France has chosen an unfortunate mechanism for reinforcing the secular nature of its schools.. It will fail and the problem will remain unresolved. The French will continue to struggle with it. Just as we do here.
Friday, April 02, 2004
Friday Cat Blogging
I haven't been able to express myself these past several days. Nothing is right. No words fit. There is a cloud passing between me and the sun, and its shadow chills me. It times like this, the best thing to say is nothing. Tonight I write. Right now I'm going for a 5-mile power walk with a co-worker through the streets of San Francisco.
I haven't been able to express myself these past several days. Nothing is right. No words fit. There is a cloud passing between me and the sun, and its shadow chills me. It times like this, the best thing to say is nothing. Tonight I write. Right now I'm going for a 5-mile power walk with a co-worker through the streets of San Francisco.
Tuesday, March 30, 2004
Any Bets on Who's the First...
Cartoonist to come out with a drawing of Cheney holding a Dubya doll giving testimony to the 9-11 Committee? Am I the only one the see the ironic humor in this situation? If Iwere a cartoonist, I'd have it drawn and be famous by midnight on the West Coast. Whoever picks up on this, please give me my five minutes in the sun by crediting me for the idea. How do I call Mark Fiore?
Cartoonist to come out with a drawing of Cheney holding a Dubya doll giving testimony to the 9-11 Committee? Am I the only one the see the ironic humor in this situation? If Iwere a cartoonist, I'd have it drawn and be famous by midnight on the West Coast. Whoever picks up on this, please give me my five minutes in the sun by crediting me for the idea. How do I call Mark Fiore?
What She Said
I recently blogged on the pledge of allegiance. Essentially I said it just isn't important to me. In my comments section, an anonymous visitor "YY", took the time to reflect on its effect on her/him as someone from a different culture than my own. So profound was this comment, in my mind, that I wanted to put it on the front page. Here it is:
"As a foreign (Japanese) kid in an American school in the fourth grade when first confronted with the pledge becoming familiar with the pledge was part of learning the new language. The act of reciting an oath to the flag of a country not my own (being just a visitor) did not bother me very much and I understood the politics of it for what it was. What always did bother me was the "under God" phrase.
"Growing up in the latter half of the twentieth century in a secular society, in a non-religious household, my natural inclination was toward, how shall I put it, atheism. I felt a greater deal of discomfort in acknowledging God than in proclaiming allegiance to country not my own.
"Americans typically would not be conscious of the invocation of God that occurs in context of authority as would a visitor from a more secular society. Sudden surprise of finding God reference occurs in typical instances: "In God We Trust" on the currency, in the pledge and in numerous instances of prayer as opening to gatherings. Being non-religious, these reminders do cause some discomfort, as blasphemy would to the religious. YY"
I don't think I could summarize the importance any more succintly than this. Thank you, YY. If you ever come back by this way, linger and get to know us. You are very perceptive and articulate. I'd like to get to know you better.
I recently blogged on the pledge of allegiance. Essentially I said it just isn't important to me. In my comments section, an anonymous visitor "YY", took the time to reflect on its effect on her/him as someone from a different culture than my own. So profound was this comment, in my mind, that I wanted to put it on the front page. Here it is:
"As a foreign (Japanese) kid in an American school in the fourth grade when first confronted with the pledge becoming familiar with the pledge was part of learning the new language. The act of reciting an oath to the flag of a country not my own (being just a visitor) did not bother me very much and I understood the politics of it for what it was. What always did bother me was the "under God" phrase.
"Growing up in the latter half of the twentieth century in a secular society, in a non-religious household, my natural inclination was toward, how shall I put it, atheism. I felt a greater deal of discomfort in acknowledging God than in proclaiming allegiance to country not my own.
"Americans typically would not be conscious of the invocation of God that occurs in context of authority as would a visitor from a more secular society. Sudden surprise of finding God reference occurs in typical instances: "In God We Trust" on the currency, in the pledge and in numerous instances of prayer as opening to gatherings. Being non-religious, these reminders do cause some discomfort, as blasphemy would to the religious. YY"
I don't think I could summarize the importance any more succintly than this. Thank you, YY. If you ever come back by this way, linger and get to know us. You are very perceptive and articulate. I'd like to get to know you better.
Taco Meatloaf
Now that I have your attention... Thanks, Lisa, it works.
This morning I went visiting, stopped by the Fulcrum to see what Charles2 had to say, and was introduced to Lisa who writes Kamakaze Kumquat. She was great. I didn't have a lot of time, but I read everything she had to say today including links, and still wanted more. So I went into her archives from day 1 to see who this woman is. She's my new best friend. I proudly add to to my list of Cousins in the Heartland. Hey, I llike that. I'm going to rename my blogroll that. Go visit and see what I mean.
Now that I have your attention... Thanks, Lisa, it works.
This morning I went visiting, stopped by the Fulcrum to see what Charles2 had to say, and was introduced to Lisa who writes Kamakaze Kumquat. She was great. I didn't have a lot of time, but I read everything she had to say today including links, and still wanted more. So I went into her archives from day 1 to see who this woman is. She's my new best friend. I proudly add to to my list of Cousins in the Heartland. Hey, I llike that. I'm going to rename my blogroll that. Go visit and see what I mean.
Friday, March 26, 2004
What it Says
Amendment 1. Proposed September 25, 1789; ratified December 15, 1791.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ...
If Congress passes a law that says we are a nation "under God" then Congress has taken sides in the discussion as to whether or not there is a God. To require a group of school children to then affirm Congress' decision is forcing a religious concept on those children. It seems pretty clear to me.
If the Supreme Court says, "Dr. Newdow, sit down. You're incredibly silly for being here." I would probably agree with them. I think it's an incredible waste of effort and resources. In fairness though, I say that about a lot of issues with which I disagree. Dr. Newdow doesn't need to get your permission or mine to exercise his constitutional rights. It bothered him and he pursued it at his own expense and expertise all the way to the Supreme Court. That's his right. I still disagree with him on the importance, but then I'm a White, Protestant Christian, traditionally raised, so there is no doubt in my mind that the God being invoked is mine. I can afford to be cavalier about it.
As silly as I think Dr. Newdow is though, I have to say that I think he's absolutely right. I also think he's going to lose. Despite what the Constitution says, it means what five of nine justices says it means.
I predict the Supreme Court will allow under God to remain in the Pledge. Millions of kids will continue pledging their little hearts away, never giving any thought to what they're saying, just as they have for the past 100 years. I would like to propose some additional wording to the pledge. They can be tacked onto the end. Here's my proposed sentence: "And I promise to vote in each and all elections."
It would give it a lot more punch than invoking an indifferent God who really doesn't take sides in national disputes.
Amendment 1. Proposed September 25, 1789; ratified December 15, 1791.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ...
If Congress passes a law that says we are a nation "under God" then Congress has taken sides in the discussion as to whether or not there is a God. To require a group of school children to then affirm Congress' decision is forcing a religious concept on those children. It seems pretty clear to me.
If the Supreme Court says, "Dr. Newdow, sit down. You're incredibly silly for being here." I would probably agree with them. I think it's an incredible waste of effort and resources. In fairness though, I say that about a lot of issues with which I disagree. Dr. Newdow doesn't need to get your permission or mine to exercise his constitutional rights. It bothered him and he pursued it at his own expense and expertise all the way to the Supreme Court. That's his right. I still disagree with him on the importance, but then I'm a White, Protestant Christian, traditionally raised, so there is no doubt in my mind that the God being invoked is mine. I can afford to be cavalier about it.
As silly as I think Dr. Newdow is though, I have to say that I think he's absolutely right. I also think he's going to lose. Despite what the Constitution says, it means what five of nine justices says it means.
I predict the Supreme Court will allow under God to remain in the Pledge. Millions of kids will continue pledging their little hearts away, never giving any thought to what they're saying, just as they have for the past 100 years. I would like to propose some additional wording to the pledge. They can be tacked onto the end. Here's my proposed sentence: "And I promise to vote in each and all elections."
It would give it a lot more punch than invoking an indifferent God who really doesn't take sides in national disputes.
Friday Pet Blogging
Beauregard's an odd cat. Maybe all cats are odd. I don't know, this is my first. I grew up with dogs. We now have 11 years together. The person giving him to me gave me a line of bullshit about how he was from championship Maine Coon stock.
Maine Coons can get big, real big. Beauregard stopped growing at about 12 pounds. I realized Beau was not a Maine Coon at about 3 years of age when I visited a friend with a real Maine Coon like this one here.
I consider myself fortunate with Beauregard. He has a lot of character. He also enjoys people. I've had parties where it was wall to wall people, and Beauregard gets right in the middle. He doesn't like being treated like a stuffed animal. You may stroke him briefly, in an admiring sort of way. He is a cat after all. He doesn't like being picked up though. How would you like it if strangers 100 times your size picked you up and held you closely. He's not rude about getting away from you, just insistent. He doesn't run away from you once he's free either. It's not you he's rejecting. He just doesn't want to be picked up by a giant he's just met. He likes being on the same level as the company, so he sits on the back of the sofa, or the chair, or the stereo, or on top of my computer as I type--if I let him.
He greets me at the door when I get home, and follows me from room to room, talking. He has a rather small voice which sounds more like chirping than meowing. If I go to the garage, he follows me and hangs out while I putter. In the most charming of ways, he is my constant companion.
Beauregard's an odd cat. Maybe all cats are odd. I don't know, this is my first. I grew up with dogs. We now have 11 years together. The person giving him to me gave me a line of bullshit about how he was from championship Maine Coon stock.
Maine Coons can get big, real big. Beauregard stopped growing at about 12 pounds. I realized Beau was not a Maine Coon at about 3 years of age when I visited a friend with a real Maine Coon like this one here.
I consider myself fortunate with Beauregard. He has a lot of character. He also enjoys people. I've had parties where it was wall to wall people, and Beauregard gets right in the middle. He doesn't like being treated like a stuffed animal. You may stroke him briefly, in an admiring sort of way. He is a cat after all. He doesn't like being picked up though. How would you like it if strangers 100 times your size picked you up and held you closely. He's not rude about getting away from you, just insistent. He doesn't run away from you once he's free either. It's not you he's rejecting. He just doesn't want to be picked up by a giant he's just met. He likes being on the same level as the company, so he sits on the back of the sofa, or the chair, or the stereo, or on top of my computer as I type--if I let him.
He greets me at the door when I get home, and follows me from room to room, talking. He has a rather small voice which sounds more like chirping than meowing. If I go to the garage, he follows me and hangs out while I putter. In the most charming of ways, he is my constant companion.
Thursday, March 25, 2004
A Class Act
Norbizness over at Happy Furry Puppy sums up Richard Clark's testimony Wednesday, calling it a class act. I know a lot of words and their meanings, and I can't think of a word that better describes Clark than that. I thought his response to that idiot Jim Thompson was priceless.
"No, I don't think it's inconsistent at all. I think, as I said in your last round of questioning, Governor, that it's really a matter here of emphasis and tone. I mean, what you're suggesting, perhaps, is that as special assistant to the president of the United States when asked to give a press backgrounder I should spend my time in that press backgrounder criticizing him. I think that's somewhat of an unrealistic thing to expect." (Richard Clark in response to a question by Jim Thompson, former governor of Illinois.)
I haven't had much to say about the 9-11 Commission hearings. There are better people out there who are covering it. My expectations of this commission are absolutely zero. First, it was appointed by Bush & Co. The Republicans on it are party hacks and the Demoocrats on it are suspect. It is not the nature of American politicians to accept responsibility for anything, and that blanket indictment covers Democrats as well as Republicans. That made Richard Clark's apology to the families of the victims of 9-11 all the more poignant: "I also welcome the hearings because it is finally a forum where I can apologize to the loved ones of the victims of 9/11. To them who are here in the room, to those who are watching on television, your government failed you, those entrusted with protecting you failed you and I failed you. We tried hard, but that doesn't matter because we failed. And for that failure, I would ask -- once all the facts are out -- for your understanding and for your forgiveness." (Richard Clark in his opening statement on Wednesday.)
Norbizness over at Happy Furry Puppy sums up Richard Clark's testimony Wednesday, calling it a class act. I know a lot of words and their meanings, and I can't think of a word that better describes Clark than that. I thought his response to that idiot Jim Thompson was priceless.
"No, I don't think it's inconsistent at all. I think, as I said in your last round of questioning, Governor, that it's really a matter here of emphasis and tone. I mean, what you're suggesting, perhaps, is that as special assistant to the president of the United States when asked to give a press backgrounder I should spend my time in that press backgrounder criticizing him. I think that's somewhat of an unrealistic thing to expect." (Richard Clark in response to a question by Jim Thompson, former governor of Illinois.)
I haven't had much to say about the 9-11 Commission hearings. There are better people out there who are covering it. My expectations of this commission are absolutely zero. First, it was appointed by Bush & Co. The Republicans on it are party hacks and the Demoocrats on it are suspect. It is not the nature of American politicians to accept responsibility for anything, and that blanket indictment covers Democrats as well as Republicans. That made Richard Clark's apology to the families of the victims of 9-11 all the more poignant: "I also welcome the hearings because it is finally a forum where I can apologize to the loved ones of the victims of 9/11. To them who are here in the room, to those who are watching on television, your government failed you, those entrusted with protecting you failed you and I failed you. We tried hard, but that doesn't matter because we failed. And for that failure, I would ask -- once all the facts are out -- for your understanding and for your forgiveness." (Richard Clark in his opening statement on Wednesday.)
Drink Your Kool-Aid!
Go visit Jesse over at The Gotham City 13, via Michael at Musing's Musings. Kool-Aid. Quenching my thirstitude since I found Jesus. Brilliant, just brilliant. I may have to buy the poster.
Go visit Jesse over at The Gotham City 13, via Michael at Musing's Musings. Kool-Aid. Quenching my thirstitude since I found Jesus. Brilliant, just brilliant. I may have to buy the poster.
Wednesday, March 24, 2004
Ennui
Listlessness and dissatisfaction. God, what a great word. I'm experiencing it right now. Not my first time, so don't worry for me. Too much.
I having a bit of a disconnect from everything right now. I know you all have felt it, feel it, will feel it, etc. etc. ad nauseum. Nothing matters. Nothing matters. Nothing matters. It doesn't matter how much they lie. It doesn't matter how much they get caught in their lies. They know that their side doesn't believe anything anyone says that's negative. Bush can fart between now and November and his mignons will swear he's singing, joining in the chorus, saying up is down, black is white. Bad is good. I want to focus my thoughts elsewhere. We need to stay balanced, too. Everyone, take a deep breath. Thanks for indulging me. I feel better already. Now, on to today's post.
Old Cat Man's rooster died today.
That's Big Daddy. That's what Old Cat Man called him. He probably called himself Sylvester, or something like that. Big Daddy died today. OCM is marking his passing by taking a moment.
If you haven't read Old Cat Man's blog yet, take a minute or two and stop by. OCM lives on a few acres on the side of a mountain somewheres in Colorado. I think he's in his 60s, retired in the sense of not having to go to an office everyday, but he's wide awake and paying attention, all the time, everywhere. He's also irreverently chronicling our times, cleverly using letters, a bit of photoshop, a sharp eye and biting comment. He and I are close in age and sentiment, yet worlds apart in our experience. As I get to know him, I learn everyday how much more we're alike than different. I'm Gay, he's straight. I live in a mad urban environment, he's up on a mountain in Colorado. Still, our lives and our goals have become interconnected. He may be a new friend to me, but damn, it sure seems close.
Big Daddy's death triggered a lot of thought and memory for me. I grew up in the country with chickens that lived in a yard with a rickety old chicken house with a couple of old roosters, one old, one a little younger. I thought it was natural selection until my cousin told me that it's customary to eat the ones that don't lay eggs, leaving an occasional rooster for whatever reason. You wanted a good rooster, though, cause when a hen decided to nest, you didn't want her incubating blanks.
We boys watched those roosters, too. Remember, we're farm kids. We know the score. That old rooster was getting himself some everytime he turned around. I sure liked that idea, once I learned what "getting some" meant. You hear people say if there is such a thing as reincarnation, they want to come back as a cat and just lie around all the time and purr and get fed. Yeah, and probably be castrated. Farm boys want to come back as roosters. Man, the odds may not be good for becoming Big Daddy, but if you made it, the rewards were great!
Old Cat Man, buddy, I'm with you tonight. Rest in peace, Big Daddy. You had your moment in the sun.
Listlessness and dissatisfaction. God, what a great word. I'm experiencing it right now. Not my first time, so don't worry for me. Too much.
I having a bit of a disconnect from everything right now. I know you all have felt it, feel it, will feel it, etc. etc. ad nauseum. Nothing matters. Nothing matters. Nothing matters. It doesn't matter how much they lie. It doesn't matter how much they get caught in their lies. They know that their side doesn't believe anything anyone says that's negative. Bush can fart between now and November and his mignons will swear he's singing, joining in the chorus, saying up is down, black is white. Bad is good. I want to focus my thoughts elsewhere. We need to stay balanced, too. Everyone, take a deep breath. Thanks for indulging me. I feel better already. Now, on to today's post.
Old Cat Man's rooster died today.
That's Big Daddy. That's what Old Cat Man called him. He probably called himself Sylvester, or something like that. Big Daddy died today. OCM is marking his passing by taking a moment.
If you haven't read Old Cat Man's blog yet, take a minute or two and stop by. OCM lives on a few acres on the side of a mountain somewheres in Colorado. I think he's in his 60s, retired in the sense of not having to go to an office everyday, but he's wide awake and paying attention, all the time, everywhere. He's also irreverently chronicling our times, cleverly using letters, a bit of photoshop, a sharp eye and biting comment. He and I are close in age and sentiment, yet worlds apart in our experience. As I get to know him, I learn everyday how much more we're alike than different. I'm Gay, he's straight. I live in a mad urban environment, he's up on a mountain in Colorado. Still, our lives and our goals have become interconnected. He may be a new friend to me, but damn, it sure seems close.
Big Daddy's death triggered a lot of thought and memory for me. I grew up in the country with chickens that lived in a yard with a rickety old chicken house with a couple of old roosters, one old, one a little younger. I thought it was natural selection until my cousin told me that it's customary to eat the ones that don't lay eggs, leaving an occasional rooster for whatever reason. You wanted a good rooster, though, cause when a hen decided to nest, you didn't want her incubating blanks.
We boys watched those roosters, too. Remember, we're farm kids. We know the score. That old rooster was getting himself some everytime he turned around. I sure liked that idea, once I learned what "getting some" meant. You hear people say if there is such a thing as reincarnation, they want to come back as a cat and just lie around all the time and purr and get fed. Yeah, and probably be castrated. Farm boys want to come back as roosters. Man, the odds may not be good for becoming Big Daddy, but if you made it, the rewards were great!
Old Cat Man, buddy, I'm with you tonight. Rest in peace, Big Daddy. You had your moment in the sun.
Tuesday, March 23, 2004
Stupid is as Stupid Does
From the Letters to the Editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, via Michael at Musings Musings via Atrios.
"Too high a price on naughty words?"
"I was wondering why the Republicans believe that hearing a four-letter word on the radio is more damaging than death or catastrophic injury. Consider that the Bush administration wants to increase FCC fines for indecency up to $500,000 per violation per station, yet at the same time, it wants to restrict noneconomic damages in tort cases to $250,000 or $350,000.
"So if a DJ says a four-letter word on the radio, the harm is so appalling that a fine of $500,000 per word, per station is justified. But if someone is paralyzed, killed or otherwise catastrophically injured, the most the family could get for the (noneconomic) loss would be up to $350,000.
"Apparently, Republicans have reworked the children's adage about words never hurting to: 'Sticks and stones may break someone else's bones, but words will hurt me worsely.'"
Dennis Mulvihill.
(Mulvihill practices tort law.)
This is convoluted logic at its fundamentalist Republican finest. Fining stations for obscene words enhances the power of the state. Limiting the ability of the individual to obtain redress for injury, intentional and accidental, limits the individual. Hmmm. Oh, now I get it. I don't like it, but I get it. Saying "fuck" is dangerous. Getting "fucked" by bad doctors, sloppy hospitals, and such is just part of the risk each of us takes for being so fucking plebeian as to put ourselves in harm's way in the first place. What a brave new world Republicans want to create for us.
From the Letters to the Editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, via Michael at Musings Musings via Atrios.
"Too high a price on naughty words?"
"I was wondering why the Republicans believe that hearing a four-letter word on the radio is more damaging than death or catastrophic injury. Consider that the Bush administration wants to increase FCC fines for indecency up to $500,000 per violation per station, yet at the same time, it wants to restrict noneconomic damages in tort cases to $250,000 or $350,000.
"So if a DJ says a four-letter word on the radio, the harm is so appalling that a fine of $500,000 per word, per station is justified. But if someone is paralyzed, killed or otherwise catastrophically injured, the most the family could get for the (noneconomic) loss would be up to $350,000.
"Apparently, Republicans have reworked the children's adage about words never hurting to: 'Sticks and stones may break someone else's bones, but words will hurt me worsely.'"
Dennis Mulvihill.
(Mulvihill practices tort law.)
This is convoluted logic at its fundamentalist Republican finest. Fining stations for obscene words enhances the power of the state. Limiting the ability of the individual to obtain redress for injury, intentional and accidental, limits the individual. Hmmm. Oh, now I get it. I don't like it, but I get it. Saying "fuck" is dangerous. Getting "fucked" by bad doctors, sloppy hospitals, and such is just part of the risk each of us takes for being so fucking plebeian as to put ourselves in harm's way in the first place. What a brave new world Republicans want to create for us.
Sunday, March 21, 2004
One Year Later
And no, I wasn't there. Instead, I sent another $20 to the Kerry campaign. That's what I would have spent on tolls, fares, lunch and probably a drink at my regular pub.
Last year I was a bit hostile towards the demonstrators. I was still in the "they wouldn't be saying those things about Iraq if it weren't true" phase of denial. I have learned a lot this past year. First of all, yes they would say those things if they weren't true. There are no weapons of mass destruction. Intent to develop programs is not the same. That's not what they said. Yes, I'm happy Saddam Hussein has been taken down. My heartfelt best wishes to the Iraqi people as they attempt to put their lives back together. I'm gloomy about their prospects, though. Iraq sort of reminds me of Yugoslavia in that once the glue (Tito, Saddam) is gone, there's nothing holding the rest together. Just replace the Serbs of Yugoslavia with the Sunni of Iraq, and you have the promise of serious grief down the road.
It doesn't take a crystal ball to see moderation taking the most hits. Extremism always wins in these kind of fights. I guess the most important question Americans can start asking is, "Which state do we put our two or three million new Iraqi immigrants that we'll be forced to take on humanitarian grounds to save them from massacre?" I say we send them to Texas. If they take to Texas as well as the Cubans have to Florida, it won't be long at all before they can have several of their own Congressmen and maybe even a Senator.
Bush & Company's efforts against terrorism seems to be about as successful as puring gasoline on a hill of fire ants. It burns a few, disrupts the colony, spreads them around and makes them real mad. It doesn't get rid of the fire ant problem. Bin Laden is still free. Probably his money is still free, too. Those details are always murky. We've certainly learned that just because our government says something it don't make it so. Boy, are the Europeans mad about that. I fail to understand why Republicans in this country aren't mad as hell, too, but they just keep denying that there's anyway but Bush's way. Everybody's wrong in the whole world except them.
It's true that there haven't been any bombings in this country since September 11. Fundamentalism however doesn't target just the United States. In the case of Islamic fundamentalism, it targets anything identified as Western: Australians in Bali, Germans in Egypt, a neighborhood in Morocco, Jews everywhere. Does anyone truly believe they are safer because Saddam Hussein has been captured and his brutal reign in Iraq is over?
It's understandable how we got sucked in by Bush & Company's strategy. It seems to be an American tradition. In Vietnam we faced a near invisible foe. Did we give up fighting just because we didn't know who to fight? Hell no, we tried our best to bomb southeast Asia into the stone age. Problem with that strategy is that they were already in the stone age. Fast forward to Afghanistan, another stone age country with no rich targets. Damn, what's a cowboy general going to do? Choose another country with lots of rich targets ruled by an ugly dictator that no one likes, especially his own neighbors.
I can just hear those guys talking amongst themselves. "Hey, in Crawford, an A-rab is an A-rab. It don't matter if its Bin Laden, just as long as its A-rab butt being kicked." "Right, boss. We get two birds with one stone. You get credit for standing tall in the face of terror. We get a country rich for sacking." Who knew they were talking about sacking the U.S. Treasury and economy? Who knew?
I'm rambling now. Happy Sunday, all. Take some time off today, take a walk, smell a flower, bless a child, visualize a new government we can trust to help us imagine a better world. I'm going there now. Peace.
And no, I wasn't there. Instead, I sent another $20 to the Kerry campaign. That's what I would have spent on tolls, fares, lunch and probably a drink at my regular pub.
Last year I was a bit hostile towards the demonstrators. I was still in the "they wouldn't be saying those things about Iraq if it weren't true" phase of denial. I have learned a lot this past year. First of all, yes they would say those things if they weren't true. There are no weapons of mass destruction. Intent to develop programs is not the same. That's not what they said. Yes, I'm happy Saddam Hussein has been taken down. My heartfelt best wishes to the Iraqi people as they attempt to put their lives back together. I'm gloomy about their prospects, though. Iraq sort of reminds me of Yugoslavia in that once the glue (Tito, Saddam) is gone, there's nothing holding the rest together. Just replace the Serbs of Yugoslavia with the Sunni of Iraq, and you have the promise of serious grief down the road.
It doesn't take a crystal ball to see moderation taking the most hits. Extremism always wins in these kind of fights. I guess the most important question Americans can start asking is, "Which state do we put our two or three million new Iraqi immigrants that we'll be forced to take on humanitarian grounds to save them from massacre?" I say we send them to Texas. If they take to Texas as well as the Cubans have to Florida, it won't be long at all before they can have several of their own Congressmen and maybe even a Senator.
Bush & Company's efforts against terrorism seems to be about as successful as puring gasoline on a hill of fire ants. It burns a few, disrupts the colony, spreads them around and makes them real mad. It doesn't get rid of the fire ant problem. Bin Laden is still free. Probably his money is still free, too. Those details are always murky. We've certainly learned that just because our government says something it don't make it so. Boy, are the Europeans mad about that. I fail to understand why Republicans in this country aren't mad as hell, too, but they just keep denying that there's anyway but Bush's way. Everybody's wrong in the whole world except them.
It's true that there haven't been any bombings in this country since September 11. Fundamentalism however doesn't target just the United States. In the case of Islamic fundamentalism, it targets anything identified as Western: Australians in Bali, Germans in Egypt, a neighborhood in Morocco, Jews everywhere. Does anyone truly believe they are safer because Saddam Hussein has been captured and his brutal reign in Iraq is over?
It's understandable how we got sucked in by Bush & Company's strategy. It seems to be an American tradition. In Vietnam we faced a near invisible foe. Did we give up fighting just because we didn't know who to fight? Hell no, we tried our best to bomb southeast Asia into the stone age. Problem with that strategy is that they were already in the stone age. Fast forward to Afghanistan, another stone age country with no rich targets. Damn, what's a cowboy general going to do? Choose another country with lots of rich targets ruled by an ugly dictator that no one likes, especially his own neighbors.
I can just hear those guys talking amongst themselves. "Hey, in Crawford, an A-rab is an A-rab. It don't matter if its Bin Laden, just as long as its A-rab butt being kicked." "Right, boss. We get two birds with one stone. You get credit for standing tall in the face of terror. We get a country rich for sacking." Who knew they were talking about sacking the U.S. Treasury and economy? Who knew?
I'm rambling now. Happy Sunday, all. Take some time off today, take a walk, smell a flower, bless a child, visualize a new government we can trust to help us imagine a better world. I'm going there now. Peace.
Friday, March 19, 2004
Thursday, March 18, 2004
The Scalia-Cheney Connection
I agree with Scalia. If he didn't recuse himself when he made his friend Vice President, why should he recuse himself now. He's absolutely right. His mind was made up well before he went duck hunting with a man who was Vice President only because of the persuasion of Scalia's influence among his fellow justices, in an airplane owned by an oil company. I might well ponder, who owns whom? Scalia snubs our middle-class expectations of impartiality my attacking the Sierra Club for its audacity of suggesting that his long-term friendship with Cheney would somehow influence how he might hold in a case. Any case. And in doing so, no one asks about the plane owned by the oil company. Maybe Scalia will recuse himself from all future cases where the Sierra Club is a party. That would itself be a plus.
I honestly believe that the duck-hunting trip did not influence Scalia in any way whatsoever. That is not the only reason for recusal, though, and Scalia knows this.
Recusal is also used when the justice wants to demonstrate how important and sacred the law is, by avoiding even the appearance of influence. You want to see this demonstrated, observe the California Supreme Court and how they practice the art of recusal.
If the public loses faith in the courts, our civic agreement is damaged. In this country, we have resorted to civil war only once. To do anything which would make Americans lose confidence in an impartial judiciary is to do serious damage to our tripartite government. Scalia in his cynicism has done us great harm.
Think not? Ask anyone you know if they think the Supreme Court would be impartial should a case similar to Florida occur again in 2004. Watch the ones who say yes. Watch their eyes. Notice the flicker of fear in some of their eyes just before they answer. That flicker of fear is the acknowledgement that the Court is no longer accepted as impartial by half of the country. The fear you see in their eyes is genuine.
I have not voted for a Republican candidate for President in over 30 years. The one issue that has always motivated me: the Supreme Court. I wish I had the option of having other issues in the Presidential race. I don't. It's totally about who appoints federal judges. Kerry at his worst, will do better than Bush at his best. I used to be critical of Bill Clinton for his appointments of Ginsburg and Breyer, but a good friend pointed out to me that both Breyer and Ginsburg are masters at building consensus. That's equivalent to playing no-trump over a bid of spades: stay away from trump and you're commanding the game.
Every night before retiring, I pray for the health of Stevens (84), Renquist (80), and O'Connor (74). Scalia is also up there at 68, but that seems young when compared to Stevens and Renquist. Scalia is evil. He has the kind of ego that would sink the ship just to show his superiority to the rest of the passengers. Intellectually, I think he's incredibly dishonest. He's as faithful to the Constitution as a Church of God minister is at interpreting the Bible.
My point in all of this is let's just make sure the next person who gets to shape the future by his appointments to the Supreme Court is someone whose opinion in this matter is one that we can trust, and it ain't Bush.
I agree with Scalia. If he didn't recuse himself when he made his friend Vice President, why should he recuse himself now. He's absolutely right. His mind was made up well before he went duck hunting with a man who was Vice President only because of the persuasion of Scalia's influence among his fellow justices, in an airplane owned by an oil company. I might well ponder, who owns whom? Scalia snubs our middle-class expectations of impartiality my attacking the Sierra Club for its audacity of suggesting that his long-term friendship with Cheney would somehow influence how he might hold in a case. Any case. And in doing so, no one asks about the plane owned by the oil company. Maybe Scalia will recuse himself from all future cases where the Sierra Club is a party. That would itself be a plus.
I honestly believe that the duck-hunting trip did not influence Scalia in any way whatsoever. That is not the only reason for recusal, though, and Scalia knows this.
Recusal is also used when the justice wants to demonstrate how important and sacred the law is, by avoiding even the appearance of influence. You want to see this demonstrated, observe the California Supreme Court and how they practice the art of recusal.
If the public loses faith in the courts, our civic agreement is damaged. In this country, we have resorted to civil war only once. To do anything which would make Americans lose confidence in an impartial judiciary is to do serious damage to our tripartite government. Scalia in his cynicism has done us great harm.
Think not? Ask anyone you know if they think the Supreme Court would be impartial should a case similar to Florida occur again in 2004. Watch the ones who say yes. Watch their eyes. Notice the flicker of fear in some of their eyes just before they answer. That flicker of fear is the acknowledgement that the Court is no longer accepted as impartial by half of the country. The fear you see in their eyes is genuine.
I have not voted for a Republican candidate for President in over 30 years. The one issue that has always motivated me: the Supreme Court. I wish I had the option of having other issues in the Presidential race. I don't. It's totally about who appoints federal judges. Kerry at his worst, will do better than Bush at his best. I used to be critical of Bill Clinton for his appointments of Ginsburg and Breyer, but a good friend pointed out to me that both Breyer and Ginsburg are masters at building consensus. That's equivalent to playing no-trump over a bid of spades: stay away from trump and you're commanding the game.
Every night before retiring, I pray for the health of Stevens (84), Renquist (80), and O'Connor (74). Scalia is also up there at 68, but that seems young when compared to Stevens and Renquist. Scalia is evil. He has the kind of ego that would sink the ship just to show his superiority to the rest of the passengers. Intellectually, I think he's incredibly dishonest. He's as faithful to the Constitution as a Church of God minister is at interpreting the Bible.
My point in all of this is let's just make sure the next person who gets to shape the future by his appointments to the Supreme Court is someone whose opinion in this matter is one that we can trust, and it ain't Bush.
Wednesday, March 17, 2004
What country are you?
I got this from Diana Moon over at Letter from Gotham. The test is deceptively simple.
For the record, I challenged the first conclusion, and demanded a retest. The questions change, so obviously the results. I didn't like my first answer. This answer is okay.
Hail, Canada.
I got this from Diana Moon over at Letter from Gotham. The test is deceptively simple.
For the record, I challenged the first conclusion, and demanded a retest. The questions change, so obviously the results. I didn't like my first answer. This answer is okay.
You're Canada!
People make fun of you a lot, but they're stupid because you've
got a much better life than they do. In fact, they're probably just jealous.
You believe in crazy things like human rights and health care and not
dying in the streets, and you end up securing these rights for yourself and
others. If it weren't for your weird affection for ice hockey, you'd be
the perfect person.
Take
the Country Quiz at the href="http://bluepyramid.org">Blue Pyramid
Hail, Canada.
Tuesday, March 16, 2004
We are called to bear witness to the truth.
My blog-buddy, Wanda, wants everyone in the world to read an essay by a friend of hers.
My reaction to Amy's essay was to first ask, how can I make everyone I know read it? Can't do that, can I? Okay, let me ask nicely. Please, please go read Amy's essay. She says everything that my heart is screaming and that I try to say with each word I write.
I don't have anything to say right now because unnecessary words are but clutter in our minds. What she said.
My blog-buddy, Wanda, wants everyone in the world to read an essay by a friend of hers.
My reaction to Amy's essay was to first ask, how can I make everyone I know read it? Can't do that, can I? Okay, let me ask nicely. Please, please go read Amy's essay. She says everything that my heart is screaming and that I try to say with each word I write.
I don't have anything to say right now because unnecessary words are but clutter in our minds. What she said.
Monday, March 15, 2004
Getting the Message Across
Going to work this morning, I noticed a guy frantically drawing on the sidewalk in front of the MacArthur BART station in Oakland, California. On my way home this afternoon, I saw up close what he had been doing.
"the dead are ours, the wars are yours"
On another sidewalk, he had done a chronology of the past year on the sidewalk, much like our blog entries have also done. The last panel was this message.
"Here Now, the Future is unwritten. The World is at War. We are both targets and accomplices. What they can do in Spain, we can do here." I do not know who this sidewalk prophet is, but he sure as hell spoke to me today.
What Spain has done, let us do here.
Going to work this morning, I noticed a guy frantically drawing on the sidewalk in front of the MacArthur BART station in Oakland, California. On my way home this afternoon, I saw up close what he had been doing.
"the dead are ours, the wars are yours"
On another sidewalk, he had done a chronology of the past year on the sidewalk, much like our blog entries have also done. The last panel was this message.
"Here Now, the Future is unwritten. The World is at War. We are both targets and accomplices. What they can do in Spain, we can do here." I do not know who this sidewalk prophet is, but he sure as hell spoke to me today.
What Spain has done, let us do here.
Sunday, March 14, 2004
Terror is a symptom of the illness
Lambert, one of the writers of Corrente has an excellent discussion about Bush's failure to make any significant headway against terror because of a fundamental flaw in his understanding of the nature of fundamentalism, the true source of all terror, Muslim, Christian, and plenty of others. He suggests we redefine our efforts by calling it a Campaign Against Fundamentalism. I found it over at The Right Christians. Go read it when you have a few minutes. It's very thought provoking.
Lambert, one of the writers of Corrente has an excellent discussion about Bush's failure to make any significant headway against terror because of a fundamental flaw in his understanding of the nature of fundamentalism, the true source of all terror, Muslim, Christian, and plenty of others. He suggests we redefine our efforts by calling it a Campaign Against Fundamentalism. I found it over at The Right Christians. Go read it when you have a few minutes. It's very thought provoking.
Al Qaeda or ETA
The Talking Dog thinks the bombings in Spain are the work of Al Qaeda: "Yesterday's atrocity in Madrid occurred, of course, precisely 30 months to the day after the events of September 11, 2001; more scary, it was pointed out that the two attacks were... 911 days apart (I do the math at 912-- but that's so freakishly close I'll concede the point). Did ETA do it? Not on those facts. Only the gollum monster created by Saudi corruption and paid for by Saudi petro-dollars could be capable of evil to that degree...." The Dog has plenty more to say about the Bushes and their friends, the Saudis. In the comments under this post, is a letter that someone penned in the style of Mark Twain's Letters from the Earth. It is satire at its best. I hope Bernie and Talking Dog don't mind my quoting it here.
"I can't take it anymore. I'm driving this clown around, and it eats at you. Lately, it just doesn't stop eating me up. I've gotta tell someone to ease the pressure. What better place than this site. First, no one I work for reads it. Second, my boss is very familiar with talking dogs. He used to see them all the time, along with yodeling monkeys and scat-singing rabbits. I've been with this joker a long time. In fact, a talking dog told him to run for President. I was there for the hallucinations. I've been there since the boob stumbled his way out of college."
"The final straw was on Thursday, when I drove him to a memorial service in a public park in Long Island. At first, all he kept asking was what was popular with the "Long Islandonians", or was it "Long Islandians?" Once the Crew set him straight (usually by giving him the Gameboy to play), he wanted to know what the memorial was for. "Hey, who died?" Now you know why he didn't speak there."
"Afterwards, it was off to a local fund-raiser, or "fun-raiser" as he calls them. The scene is usually the same, he wants to limbo dance while two blonds pour Jaegar and cranberry juice shots down his mouth. This explains why only a select few have access to him. They pay so much to get into the inner circle, they're gonna keep their mouths shut so they don't ruin their investment. He picked up $1.6M that night, asking each contributor to 'bark if you love me.'"
"I gotta go, there's only a short amount of time when I'm not watched."
"Posted by Bernie Z at March 13, 2004 09:49 AM"
Brilliant, f*cking brilliant.
The Talking Dog thinks the bombings in Spain are the work of Al Qaeda: "Yesterday's atrocity in Madrid occurred, of course, precisely 30 months to the day after the events of September 11, 2001; more scary, it was pointed out that the two attacks were... 911 days apart (I do the math at 912-- but that's so freakishly close I'll concede the point). Did ETA do it? Not on those facts. Only the gollum monster created by Saudi corruption and paid for by Saudi petro-dollars could be capable of evil to that degree...." The Dog has plenty more to say about the Bushes and their friends, the Saudis. In the comments under this post, is a letter that someone penned in the style of Mark Twain's Letters from the Earth. It is satire at its best. I hope Bernie and Talking Dog don't mind my quoting it here.
"I can't take it anymore. I'm driving this clown around, and it eats at you. Lately, it just doesn't stop eating me up. I've gotta tell someone to ease the pressure. What better place than this site. First, no one I work for reads it. Second, my boss is very familiar with talking dogs. He used to see them all the time, along with yodeling monkeys and scat-singing rabbits. I've been with this joker a long time. In fact, a talking dog told him to run for President. I was there for the hallucinations. I've been there since the boob stumbled his way out of college."
"The final straw was on Thursday, when I drove him to a memorial service in a public park in Long Island. At first, all he kept asking was what was popular with the "Long Islandonians", or was it "Long Islandians?" Once the Crew set him straight (usually by giving him the Gameboy to play), he wanted to know what the memorial was for. "Hey, who died?" Now you know why he didn't speak there."
"Afterwards, it was off to a local fund-raiser, or "fun-raiser" as he calls them. The scene is usually the same, he wants to limbo dance while two blonds pour Jaegar and cranberry juice shots down his mouth. This explains why only a select few have access to him. They pay so much to get into the inner circle, they're gonna keep their mouths shut so they don't ruin their investment. He picked up $1.6M that night, asking each contributor to 'bark if you love me.'"
"I gotta go, there's only a short amount of time when I'm not watched."
"Posted by Bernie Z at March 13, 2004 09:49 AM"
Brilliant, f*cking brilliant.