TexProdigy

The Debates...

I watched the entire debate between Kerry and Bush. Although I am biased towards Kerry, I can be objective enough to make a call. I think Kerry won the debates. When I watched ABC News (my Dad watched CBS and called to tell me the results of their poll) they showed in their results Kerry won the debate with 45%. Bush came in second with 37%. Just 17% of the people ABC polled said it was a tie. My Dad said CBS's results were similar. So, I am not the only one who said Kerry won.

I noticed several things about the visuals of the debates. I blogged about the Drudge Report comment about Kerry looking too orange. To me, on my awesome HDTV, he looked to have a normal shade of skin colour. Bush, on the other hand looked too tan - almost like he fake-baked. It was really obvious in the split screen. The other thing I noticed were Bush's eye rolling. If I was talking to someone and they rolled their eyes at me, I would consider them rude. Bush's eye rolling was rude!

Another thing I noticed was demeanor. Kerry seemed even keeled. He was very Presidential. Bush seemed short-tempered, almost angry. His responses were spoken too rapidly - kind of like when you speed up your speech when you get angry or frustrated.

Now Kerry and his team just needs to control the spin after the debates. They need to be on the news programs. They need to write letters. They need to call in to radio shows. So do Kerry's supporters. In 2000, Bush was not too strong during most of the debates. His spin team had to have worked over time to make him look decent. I doubt they will do it this time.

It Was That Easy?

I just read an article on Yahoo! News that seems to suggest that if you want to get out of your service to the National Guard (or any other military obligation) all you have to do is write a letter saying you do not have enough time to fulfill your obligation that you agreed upon when you signed the contract. I never knew it was that easy!

Now that people know, will they use the same form President Bush used when he said he had "inadequate time to fulfill possible future commitments." Is that a Department of Defence form? Is that an Air Force form? Maybe it is a Texas Air National Guard form.

George W. Bush had a commitment to serve the Air National Guard. He failed to complete the commitment he signed to when he signed that contract. He did it when he did not show up for duty in Alabama. He failed to show up and complete his commitment when he moved to Massachusetts.

Bush and his White House press secretary have repeatedly said they have released all the documents. Yet, every few weeks the White House (not CBS) releases new documents. They, like this administration, lied. I have a sneaky suspicion the White House okayed the CBS documents knowing they were false. This way any past and future documents would be called into question.

Bush failed to fulfill his commitment, yet he involuntarily extends the commitment of Guardsmen, Reservists, and Active Duty personnel by implementing Stop Loss, extending their stays involuntarily, and putting these brave men and women on rapid deployment schedules. These people should copy the form Bush used and just say, "I do not inadequate time to fulfill possible future commitments."

And So It Begins...

Matt Drudge, the not-so-closeted gay writer (or so I'm told) of the Drudge Report (I'm not going to link to it, go find it yourself), has an article about how John Kerry is on "Orange Alert." They were commenting on how orange a he looked in some pictures.

Drudge did the same thing to Gore in 2000. The Right cannot win fairly in a debate so what do they do? They trash how someone looks. First it is going to be on Drudge, then the Right-wing talk shows are going to pick it up (naturally), then Faux News will pick it up, and then CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, etc. Once that happens, people will say, "Gee, didn't Kerry look orange?" They will not say, "Damn, Bush didn't have any come backs."

I'm sure the Kerry camp is watching the press. Kerry will have make-up artists who will make him look awesome. Wouldn't be awesome if, because Bush pissed off his cosmetologist by being so anti-gay, that the cosmetologist applied make-up that would flake off or run after about 30 minutes? As Judy Tenuta would say, "Hey! It could happen."

80-Pound Paper

The Secretary of State for Ohio, J. Kenneth Blackwell, says he will strictly enforce the rule for new voter registrations to be printed on 80-pound paper. This requirement, to me seems so arbitrary. It smacks of Jim Crow Laws used by the Old South to suppress African-American vote from the end of the Civil War to the timeo f the Civil Rights movement. As an African American, J. Kenneth Blackwell should know better.

Besides enforcing a nitpicky regulation, I think J. Kenneth Blackwell is violating the Voting Rights Act Section 1971 which states:

No person acting under color of law shall -

(B)

deny the right of any individual to vote in any election because of an error or omission on any record or paper relating to any application, registration, or other act requisite to voting, if such error or omission is not material in determining whether such individual is qualified under State law to vote in such election;

I have already written to J. Kenneth Blackwell. I suggest you do the same and let him know that his enforcement of the 80-pound paper rule smack of Jim Crow. Ask him if he likes violating Federal voting laws.

His contact information is:

J. Kenneth Blackwell-R
180 E. Broad St., 15th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
614-466-3910
E-Mail: blackwell@sos.state.oh.us

Lowered Expectations

Bush likes to have the image that once he makes up his mind, he does not change it. That could not be further from the truth, as evidenced by the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the September 11th commission, and others flip-flops.

Now, from an article on Yahoo! News, the Bush administration is lowering their expectations on Iraq. Because of their lowered expectations, Iraq will no longer serve as the free-market democratic beacon of the Middle East. When Iraq has a leader seen by many living in Iraq to be a puppet dictator installed by the occupiers, I can see why the expectations were lowered.

Lowering expectations is what happens when you do not have a plan and you believe the tripe told to you by sycophants who work in or with your administration like Richard Perle and Achmed Chalabi. Tax cuts will not be the answer to solving the problems in Iraq. The President needed to have a clear plan for all the phases of the Iraqi conflict, not just the war phase. If Bush cannot plan for that, what other mess is he going to get us into? I think it is time for new leadership in the US.

Pledge Protection Act Letter
Below is a copy of the text I sent to my Senators, Senator John Cornyn and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison:

I am writing to you regarding the Pledge Protection Act of 2004 which states:

`No court created by Act of Congress shall have any jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court shall have no appellate jurisdiction, to hear or decide any question pertaining to the interpretation of, or the validity under the Constitution of, the Pledge of Allegiance, as defined in section 4 of title 4, or its recitation.’

The House of Representatives passed this Act on 23 September 2004. This is, along with the Marriage Protection Act is perhaps one of the least Constitutionally sound laws written. I have excerpted some selections from the Constitution and the First Amendment and provided some history of the US Supreme Court and The Pledge of Allegiance.

US Constitution
Article III, Section 2

The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--[between a state and citizens of another state (changed by the Amendment XI)];--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

For some added history, on 24 February 1803 The US Supreme Court ruled in Marbury v Madison that the Court had the right of judicial review – the power of the court to rule laws passed by Congress unconstituional, when they were a result of a suit.

For some more history, Francis Bellamy wrote the Pledge of Allegiance on 11 October 1892. The original word of the Pledge of Allegiance were “I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” In 1924, the word “Flag” was changed to “the Flag of the United States of America.” The words “under God” were added after a campaign started by the Roman Catholic Knights of Columbus. , Senator Homer Ferguson of Michigan sponsored a bill to amend the pledge to include the words under God, to distinguish the U.S. from the officially atheist Soviet Union, and to remove the appearance of flag and nation worship. The bill passed on 8 June 1954.

The Pledge Protection Act seeks to emasculate the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review established in 1803. It also seeks to force Americans to say “under God” even if doing so would infringe on the freedom of religion granted by the First Amendment. Representative Todd Akin (R-MO), the author of the Pledge Protection Act of 2004, even said the Supreme Court is likely to rule differently if it considers the substance of the case. Basically what Representative Akin is saying is that based on the merits of the case, if brought properly – for example by a parent of a Buddhist child or some other religion that does not recognise God or a higher power – that the words “under God” would be struck out. So, instead of trying to work though the courts and winning or losing the case based on substance and merit, Representative Akin and other seek to alter the right of judicial review and infringe on the free expression of religion. Representative Akin and those like him are acting like children, they cannot win by the rules of the game so they want to change the rules arbitrarily in mid-game. They will take their ball and go home, pouting. The Founding Fathers would be ashamed.

What will be the next step? Why not make a law that would prohibit the Supreme Court from ruling against ruling a law abolishing the Supreme Court? Then write a law abolishing the Supreme Court. That is an extreme example of the absurdity of laws like the Pledge Protection Act and the Marriage Protection Act could lead to.

I urge you, if the Pledge Protection Act comes to a vote in the US Senate, that you vote against it because of the harm laws like this could do to the very foundations of our system of government. History is rife with examples where the powers of the courts and legislatures were stripped away and then handed over to dictators – Hitler, Hussein, Pinochet, etc.

Thank you,

Pledge

What in the world is wrong with Republican Representatives? Do they not read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? After reading an article on Yahoo! News, it is obvious to me that they do not.

Representative Todd Akin (R-Mo), said the Supreme Court is likely to rule differently if it considers the substance of the case and :

...if we allow activist judges to start creating law and say that it is wrong to somehow allow schoolchildren to say 'under God' in the pledge."

So, in his infinite wisdom Representative Akin is doing two things. First, he is erasing the line of the separation of powers between the Legislative and Judicial branches of our government (slightly) by removing the prerogative of the Supreme Court to hear the case. Second, he us erasing the separation of church and state (slightly) by not allowing the Supreme Court to hear this case. By not hearing this case all children in this country, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, etc. will be required to say "under God." For Hindus this may be a problem, because which god would they pray to? Shiva? Kali? Since Buddhists, like me, do not believe in a God, why would they have to say "under God?" I can site other examples, but you get the picture.

Why force the recognition of a divine power on those who do not regognise one? That, to me, is the crux of this issue. Even Representative Akin said he would lose the case based on its merits. I fear that if this passes, people like me will have our religious freedoms infringed. I know, as a Buddhist, I am in the minority, but I would not force others to meditate, go to Temple, etc. It would be wrong. Unfortunately, people like Representative Akin cannot see that.

Charlie Gonzalez

Before I vote, I try to find out what I can about the candidates and issues. I recently went to Roger Scott's website. He is running against Charlie Gonzales for US Representative for District 20.

One of the many reasons Roger Scott will not get my name is because of his stance on issues. They do not mesh with mine. I am simply not voting for a name. For example, Roger Scott says in his "Roger Scott’s Position on Sexual Orientation Protection Under Employment Non-Discrimination Act:"

I believe any and all forms of discrimination are wrong!

I'm glad to hear that. Sounds good so far... Then he continues:

I also believe that sexual orientation is a choice. Therefore, sexual orientation is not something that should be part of this act. This act [ed. - The Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA)]is intended to protect those minority individuals who have such status without a choice. You cannot change the color of your skin or the fact you have a disability. These folks should be protected from discrimination.

Really, Roger Scott? Religion is a choice, yet we protect against religious discrimination. Speaking of choice, does that mean you are heterosexual by choice? Roger Scott, do you even know what the ENDA is?

The purpose of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2001
is to prohibit employers, including government employers, employment
agencies, labor organizations, and joint labor-management
committees, from discriminating in employment or employment opportunities
on the basis of sexual orientation.

Roger Scott, your definition of ENDA, "This act is intended to protect those minority individuals who have such status without a choice." does not even jibe with what the actual ENDA is. Did you even read it? I do not think you did. You you did, you would not have put that on your website.

Why would I want to vote for a potential US Representative who does not even know what proposed laws are for? Roger Scott, I have other problems with your stance on issues. I will probably tackle them in other posts. Suffice it to say, you are not going to get my vote.

Watch Lists

Unlike Michelle Malkin, who looks like a raving psycho when she gets interviewed, I do not think racial profiling or internment camps work to deter crime or terrorism. What happened with Yusuf Islam, formerly known as the singer Cat Stevens, is a good example of this.

Yusuf Islam was detained, questioned, and will be deported because he was on a terrorist watch list. Dennis Murphy, Homeland Security Department spokesman, said:

"He was interviewed and denied admission to the United States on national security grounds."

What a crock! Yusuf Islam is a peace activist who has spoken out against criticized terrorist acts, such as September 11th attack and the school seizure in Beslan, Russia. Granted, he did support the Ayatollah Khomeini's death sentence against Salman Rushdie, author of "The Satanic Verses." He was not right then, but I hope he saw the errors in his ways.

Watch lists, detaining, and deporting people like Yusuf Isalm give a bad name to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). They show how asinine and arbitrary these lists are. Someone at DHS should have made a decision and allowed Yusuf Islam to remain in the country and promote his DVD.

Endorsed by All Two of Them

Oliver Willis writes about President Bush's most recent endorsement from the Abe Lincoln Black Republican Caucus (ALBRC). They are a group of young, urban, Black, gay Republicans. Wow! That has to be a group of what, two people? That some HUGE endorsement!

I can only imagine that the ALBRC is in total denial of the Republican Platform. Anthony Falls, Republican Precinct Chairman -- Dallas and the ALBRC National Spokesperson said:

"We think that the 'Republican Tent' is inclusive and there is room for differences, but one does not pick up their marbles and go home if there are a few points of disagreement."

I guess they are content to go to be treated like second class citizens by their own party. They want must to experience life as it was before the Civil Rights movement. I guess it is okay for the US to deny rights to an entire group of people. Even the Log Cabin Republicans saw the Bush was bad for the LGBT community. Whatever... The ALBRC is an insignificant, ineffective group.

Arbitrary Standards

A short while back, a few in the media were playing up a ripped Bush/Cheney sign on a Kerry/Edwards campaign stop. This sign "belonged" to a little girl, Sophia Parlock. Actually, the sign belonged to her father, Phil Parlock, who has a habit of attending Democratic events and pulling out signs.

I do not remember the same outrage at an AIDS protester getting kicked (allegedly) by Scott Robinson at the Republican Youth Convention. They ripped the sign out of Claire Martin's hand then she was thrown on the floor by the Secret Service. While she was on the floor, she got (allegedly) kicked by Scott Robinson.

The media to me has arbitrary standards it applies. A crying little girl who gets her Bush/Cheney poster ripped up get a prominent picture, but a young woman who gets stomped on by a Young Republican does not? Why? Does the young woman not grab ratings as much?

Phil Parlock and Claire Martin both have every right to protest - even at Democratic and Republican-sponsored events (respectively). It was wrong for their signs to be taken from Sophia and Claire. However, what happened to Claire deserves much more focus. Claire should have never been kicked. It was simply stupid and wrong. I hope Scott Robinson is not an indication of other Young Republicans.

If I were Claire, I would pursue both criminal assault charges and civil charges. I would not only sure Scott Robinson, but I would sue anyone involved in that event I could - organisers, the Secret Service, etc.

Kerry's Top Ten List

John Kerry was on the David Letterman Show last night. Here are John Kerry's "Top 10 Bush Tax Proposals:"

10. No estate tax for families with at least two U.S. presidents.

9. W-2 Form is now Dubya-2 Form.

8. Under the simplified tax code, your refund check goes directly to Halliburton.

7. The reduced earned income tax credit is so unfair, it just makes me want to tear out my lustrous, finely groomed hair.

6. Attorney General (John) Ashcroft gets to write off the entire U.S. Constitution.

5. Texas Rangers can take a business loss for trading Sammy Sosa.

4. Eliminate all income taxes; just ask Teresa (Heinz Kerry) to cover the whole damn thing.

3. Cheney can claim Bush as a dependent.

2. Hundred-dollar penalty if you pronounce it "nuclear" instead of "nucular."

1. George W. Bush gets a deduction for mortgaging our entire future.

Let You Who Have Not Sinned...

Atrios's blog is, in my humble opinion, one of the best blogs on the web. As I was reading it, I came across a posting about something that Jimmy Swaggart said. Jimmy said:

I'm trying to find the correct name for it ... this utter absolute, asinine, idiotic stupidity of men marrying men. ... I've never seen a man in my life I wanted to marry. And I'm gonna be blunt and plain; if one ever looks at me like that, I'm gonna kill him and tell God he died.

You remember Jimmy, don't you? He is the televangelist who preached righteousness and then was caught with a prostitute. He committed adultery. He got on his program and tears were streaming down his face as he said, "I have sinned." Damn skippy you sinned. And now Jimmy Swaggart is talking about sinning again.

Look at what he said: "I'm gonna kill him and tell God he died." Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy. Not only will you have committed adultery, but you will have committed one of the worst sins ever - murder. God will see past your words and into your hateful heart. He will know that, like Cain, you slew someone out of malice. And then they Justice system will get a hold of you. Jimmy Swaggart, you will be convicted of murder and you will go to prison.

If you do kill someone, I hope that you get put in the general population of a maximum security prison. I hope that you cry every night in fear. Fear that you will be beaten. Fear that you will be raped. Fear that you will die a horrible, brutal death. Why? Karma.

Jimmy, I do not believe you will ever enter the Kingdom of Heaven with as much hate as you have in your heart. When you die, you will see the Pearly Gates from a distance as you descend into the one of the pits of hell reserved for people like you. You call yourself a Christian, yet you are not.

Iraq Had No WMDs

Iraq had no WMDs. I am not making that up. This is via an AP story on Yahoo! News. Drafts of a report from the head of the Iraq Survey Group, Charles Duelfer, conclude there were no weapons stockpiles.

That is not to say Saddam Hussein was not thinking about restarting it perhaps at some time in the future. The top U.S. inspector in Iraq wrote:

Iraq was importing banned materials, working on unmanned aerial vehicles in violation of U.N. agreements, and maintaining a dual-use industrial sector that could produce weapons.

Bush said that Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of WMDs and could use them at any moment. That turns out to be a lie. (I am going to call a spade a spade.) Having a car and having the intention of having a car are two totally separate things. I can save up money for a down payment, look into financing options, test drive cars, and so on. Until I actually sign on the dotted line, I do not have a car.

Hans Blix said, prior to being run out of Iraq by the impending invasion by the US, that Iraq had no WMDs. David Kay said Iraq had no WMDs. Now Charles Duelfer says Iraq has no WMDs. Three independent inspectors all saying the same thing. What more could people want?

Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator. However, being a brutal dictator is not necessarily a reason why the US should go to war (basically) alone. The initial reason Bush started the war in Iraq was because he said Saddam Hussein had WMDs. Then, when none were found, even though we occupied the entire country - in the north, the south, the east, and the west - no WMDs were found.

Then Bush changed his reason for the war. He needed a new reason for the war. Bush said Iraq was invaded because they harboured terrorists. The only place terrorists - Ansar AL Islam, in particular - were was in the northern part of Iraq where Saddam Hussein was not allowed. After Iraq fell, jihadis went into Iraq in droves. That is where Americans were.

Bush's next reason for invading Iraq was to bring western-style democracy to that country. Iraq is so over run by insurgents that setting up a viable western-style democracy would be an uphill fight.

We went into Iraq on false pretenses. Bush lied to get us into that country. Now that we are in Iraq, we have no exit strategy. If we pull out, it will leave a power vacuum and the US will lose prestige in the world. If we stay, more Soldiers, Marines, Sailors and Airmen will die. Like Colon Powell said, we broke it, now we have to fix it. Bush broke it, but he cannot fix it.

Witch Trials

I was reading an article on MSNBC and it reminded me so much of the Salem Witch Trials. In the Salem Witch Trials, girls accused adults of being witches. They rolled on the ground, screamed out, and displayed other actions that had many in Salem convinced that the accused really were witches.

Many people were accused, several people were imprisoned, and some were executed for their supposed witchcraft. In Iraq, it seems the new witches are terrorists.

"The Source," an Iraqi used by the US Army because he said he could point out terrorists in a town called Tall Afar had this exchange between the Tall Afar residents, the soldiers, and himself:

"The village. He wants you to arrest all the men in the village," the interpreter told Army Capt. Eric Beaty, commander of Company C, 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment.

"They're all bad?" Beaty asked.

The interpreter consulted The Source. "Yes, all bad," he said.

All bad? How can every man in the village of Tall Afar be a suspected terrorist? And then we come to the crux of why "The Source" wanted all the men in the village of Tall Afar arrested:

The Source declined to give his name. He then asked: "Is the commander going to pay me any money? If you are an informant, they are supposed to give you money."

Like the Salem Witch Trials, this boils down to money. In Salem families wanted to increase the size of their farms. In Iraq, "The Source" wants to increase the size of his pocketbook. If I had been the captain in charge, I would have called "The Source" a money-grubbing liar. I cannot see how every man in the village of Tall Afar could be a terrorist. Now, since they were all rounded up, they will have animosity towards the Americans and even more sympathy for the insurgents. Oh, and saying,

"You have the right to remain silent," one soldier told an uncomprehending detainee in English. "Anything you say will result in a punch in the face."

really wins the hearts and minds of Iraqis. I think that is a brilliant strategy*.

(* - denotes sarcasm)

Matt Lauer: Liar

Matt Lauer interviewed, or rather, gilled Kitty Kelley on September 13th about her book, "The Family: The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty."

Here is part of the exchange...

Kelley: “Matt, you play golf with the former President Bush?”

Lauer: “I have never played golf with him.”

Really Matt? What's this?

Matt, when you do not tell the truth, you are a liar. Maybe you did not play a full 18 rounds, but you did putt. Last time I checked, putting is part of golf. Therefore, you did play golf with former President Bush.

SCLM

The so-called liberal media (SCLM) is having fun with what I have seen referred to as Memogate. Memogate concerns the memos that were released by CBS, 60 Minutes, and Dan Rather in a story about George Bush's service (or lack thereof) in the later 1960's and early 1970's.

I find it interesting how quickly the media glommed on to the idea that the memos were forgeries. They took the word of "experts" from right wing blogs like the Free Republic (Freeper) as fact. Only later did the find experts who would say something similar to what the Freepers said.

Contrast to the agonisingly slow way the media refuted the Swift Boat Whores for Lying (SBWfL) claims. It took the SCLM weeks to finally show that the SBWfL claims had so many holes in their story that they would have instantly sunk if put into the waters of the Mekong delta.

Why is that? Over the past 30 years or so the Republicans have honed their media manipulation to a fine art. Democrats, stung by events of the 1970s - the Johnson screw up of the Vietnam War and the Carter screw up of the Iran hostage crisis - tried to frame their arguments in logic and pad it with facts. Unfortunately for the Democrats, Americans have very short attention spans. If the logic and facts get too deep, most Americans tune out.

What do political parties have to do? Keep the message simple. Ross Perot did a wonderful job in 1992. He bought air time and had simple charts and graphs most people could understand. He boiled complex issues down. Another thing political parties have to do is stay on message. Staying on message is a fine art. If you stay on message too long, the American public grows bored. If you do not stay on message long enough, they message will not sink in. If I were Kerry, I would have done this when the SBWfL first aired their adverts: I would have hired researchers to pore over the lives of the members of the group and where their funding was coming from. Once I found out all the dirt on them, I would air it. Discredit the messenger. It may not be nice, but the Republicans have proven it works. If the American public has a doubt about the messenger, the message (even if 100% true and accurate) will be clouded by doubt and uncertainty.

In the 1992 Presidential election, George H.W. Bush's operatives attempted to use Clinton's alleged affairs against him in the campaign. Bill Clinton's operatives nipped that line of attack in the bud by countering in the way they knew how - by going to air the alleged affair Bush had during his life time. I wish politics was not a dirty game, but it is. It has always been since political parties were started in the US in the late 1790's and early 1800's. I agree that the discourse between the parties should be more civil. However, when your opponent slings mud, some of it tends to stick. If your opponent slings enough mud, eventually you will get dirty. Staying above the fray does not work when Americans want a Jerry Springer-type of campaign.

General Irony

Secretary of State Colon Powell said:

"We understand the need to fight against terrorism ... but in an attempt to go after terrorists I think one has to strike a proper balance to make sure that you don't move in a direction that takes you away from the democratic reforms or the democratic process."

No, Colon Powell was not talking about what happened in the United States after September 11th. He said that statement because Vladimir Putin radically changed the Russian political map. Putin is using the bloody school siege in Beslan to pull power back in the hands of the Kremlin. He wants to do things like enancting a new election law to limit the number of political parties. Putin also wants to appoint regional governors who will answer to him. Until now, governors have been elected by the people of Russia.

Colon Powell's statement drips with irony. When democratic reforms and processes are stripped back here in the US, it is for the safety and security of Americans. When it is done in Russia, it is an attempt to repeal hard-won government reforms since the fall of the Soviet Union. In truth, no difference exists between the two. Vladimir Putin's show of force is just more egregious because he is doing so much so fast.

Agenda

According to Tom Coburn, the greatest threat (subscription or click-though required) to our freedom that we face today is...the gay agenda.

"The gay community has infiltrated the very centers of power in every area across this country, and they wield extreme power ... That agenda is the greatest threat to our freedom that we face today. Why do you think we see the rationalization for abortion and multiple sexual partners? That's a gay agenda."

I had no idea abortion and multiple sexual partners was a gay agenda. I guess the memo from AL-Gayda Headquarters never got to me. I only wish the gay community wielded "extreme power."

I personally would never ask a female who I impregnated to have an abortion. The chances of me getting a women pregnant are low, though. However, I will not restrict the right of any woman who I did not impregnate to make that choice. The woman will have to live with her decision, whether that is to carry the baby to term or to have an abortion.

As far as multiple sexual partners, it takes all kinds. Both gays and straights have the propensity to be sluts (Go slut pride!) As for me, I am a one man guy. Most of my friends, gay and straight, are one person-at-a-time people.

People like Tom Coburn scare me with their stupidity. How can someone so educated be such an idiot? The Salon article has quite a bit on this wingnut. Apparently he illegally tied the tube (sterilised) a 20 year old woman and then charged Medicaid for the sterilisation. He also proposed a bill, in 1997, that would have ended anonymous testing for HIV/AIDS. He would have required reporting the names of those who tested positive to public health authorities. As someone who has friends who are HIV-positive, to force someone to report their status to public health authorities is wrong. We have never done that for any disease - measles, yellow fever, etc. Why do it for HIV?

The list of Tom Coburn's idiocy goes on and on. I sincerely hope he loses to Brad Carson. Hopefully the people of Oklahoma will see that Brad Carson is the better person to will represent Oklahoma.

Letter to John Cornyn

Here is the text of my letter to Senator John Cornyn:

Dear Senator Cornyn,

I am writing to you about the proposed "Flag Protection Amendment." The FPA states, "[t]he Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States."

I see this as an abridgement of my civil right to freedom of speech. A similar measure, "The Flag Protection Act" was struck down by the United States Supreme Court because it violated free speech rights. What makes this proposed amendment any different?

Let me see if I have the train of thought on this amendment correct. We will protect a symbol of freedom and liberty by making illegal to actually exercise freedom and liberty.

I would never burn the United States (or any country's) flag. I did not serve eight years in the Air Force to do that. However, I would never dream of abridging someone's civil right to protest - even if they protested by burning the flag.

I think it is a shame that you , as a co-sponsor to this amendment, and Senator Frist are trying to bring this proposed amendment to the floor of the Senate. I do not believe you are doing it for truly altruistic, patriotic reasons. I believe you want to use this amendment as a wedge issue for the upcoming Presidential election. What rights will your next proposed amendment remove?

Sincerely,

Flag Protection Amendment

I have disagreed with Senator John Cornyn about the Federal Hate Amendment. It took a while, and two e-mails, but he did respond. Now John Cornyn is a co-sponsor of yet another ill thought out amendment (thanks Atrios), a double-speak amendment with the title of "Flag Protection Amendment" or FPA.

Here is what the FPA states:

"[t]he Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States."

Let me see if I have the thought of the FPA right. We will protect a symbol of freedom and liberty by making illegal to actually exercise freedom and liberty. That makes sense to me! I agree with John Cornyn that the flag is more than a piece of cloth. It does represent our country and everything it stands for - liberty, equality, and justice. However, removing someone's right to free speech by protesting against the policies of the and burning the flag in protest is wrong.

John Cornyn and the other Republicans are not going to bring this proposed Amendment to the floor out of the goodness of their hearts and for the protection of the flag. Like the Federal Hate Amendment, they are going to bring this to the floor to use as a wedge issue to force Senators like Senator Kerry, Senator Edwards, and Senator Daschle to vote for it. If any of those three voted against it or were not present, it would be used by the Republicans.

So I say shame on Senator Cornyn for using the FPA as a purely political tool. Shame on Senator Cornyn for trying to remove the free speech rights of Americans. First they will say the flag is illegal to burn. What will they suppress next?

Shooting Squirrels with an AK-47

The Ten-year ban on the sale of assault weapons expired today. I cannot possibly imagine why anyone would need to own assault weapons. I have shot several different types of guns in my life - hand gun, rifles, and assault weapons. I felt I had more control of the hand gun and the rifle than I did when I shot the assault weapon.

Other than maybe shooting targets, I cannot see a legitimate reason to own a assault weapon. You cannot really hunt with them. Can you imagine shooting a squirrel with one? You would not have anything left of the squirrel. The only thing I can foresee happening is a run on assault weapons - the very weapons terrorist and criminals will use to conduct their crimes. They will have more fire power than our police. I remember a back robbery a few years ago in California. The bank robbers had body armour, loads of ammunition, and an bevy of assault weapons. From what I remember, they held the police off for two hours.

I am not against owning guns, but when it is easier to own and shoot a gun than it is to own and drive a car, I think there is a problem. I think gun owners should have all their guns registered and they should be licensed to carry guns. We do it for cars, why can we not do it for guns? If a gun is stolen, it can be returned to the owner. If an owner sold the gun illegally, they can be held liable, especially if that gun was used to commit a crime.

I think the lapse in the assault weapons ban is a bad idea. People like Tom DeLay should be ashamed of themselves for stalling and preventing it from getting voted on. George W. Bush should be ashamed of himself. Instead of being a decisive leader, George W. Bush said he would sign it only if Congress sent it to him. It does not surprise me, though. That is the way he did business in Texas.

Fox Watching the Hen House?

It seems military investigators lost key evidence in a trial regarding the investigation into the death of Nagem Hatab, an Iraqi man who was beaten by Marine prison guards.

Some of the evidence that was lost includes bones taken from the throat and chest. In addition to losing the bones, Hatab's organs, which were removed during autopsy, were left on the tarmac during the Iraqi summer. They , too, were destroyed. But that's not all, folks! A summary of an interrogation the Marines conducted with Hatab shortly before his death at the camp also is missing, as is a photo of Hatab that was taken during questioning.

What kind of idiots run the investigations in the Marines? Are the Keystone Cops in charge of the evidence? I think this is incredibly pathetic for the Marines. Something in this investigation stinks (and it is not the organs that were left on the tarmac to rot). It is amazing how all that evidence conveniently disappeared. If I were the presiding judge, Col. Robert Chester, I would see who had the evidence last. Talk to them and ask them to produce it. If they could not, I would lock them up. I would lock up every one who was involved with the case until someone spoke. I would be willing to wait.

Somehow I think the "loss" of evidence will be a common occurrence in the Iraqi investigations. These "losses" will only show the world that we cannot handle our own trials and other countries may not hand over American military members because they will point to cases like this.

State of Emergency

Last night I went with my boyfriend and saw Margaret Cho at the Majestic Theatre in San Antonio. I had not been in it before. Most of the time, I had gone to the Empire Theatre which is just around the corner and just a bit smaller. The Majestic is a very beautiful theatre. The inside looks like a Spanish mission. Very nicely done.

I had a pretty awesome seat. Not front row, but right on the floor. Bruce Daniels, Margaret Cho's opening act was great. He, like me, does not understand the concept of Log Cabin Republicans. He also thought Condoleezza Rice was going to be a "strong black woman in the White House." Much to Bruce's disappointment it turned out, he said she was like a house "N-"word in Roots working in the big house and ignoring all the field "N-"word.

Margaret Cho then walked on stake. She was hilarious. A couple of times, I had to take deep breaths and tune her out because I was laughing so hard. Thank goodness I did not have a Coke or whatever to drink last night because the people in front of me would have been soaked. Either that or it would have come out my nose. If She is in your city, during her "State of Emergency" tour, you need to go and check her out.

Later, we went to a club in San Antonio. We waited in line for Margaret Cho to sign autographs. She and Bruce Daniels signed a t-shirt that I had made for the show. It had "CHO BEAU" on it. I had it and nine others made for a trip a group of my friends and I went to earlier this year for Margaret Cho. It was sort of like a pre-"State of the Emergency" tour show. She was trying out some of the material she used in last night's show.

I had a really great time last night. I'm glad I got to share it with my boyfriend. If you get a chance, see the "State of the Emergency" tour.

IBM Selectric

Who would have thought that keyboarding in high school would be so useful today? It sounds like I am dating myself, but I am not that old. I went to high school in Louisiana for my freshman and sophomore years. My high school did not have the most up-to-date technology in the schools; it was Louisiana, after all. So I took keyboarding because I thought it would help me type in programs faster on my computer at home. What can I say? I was a geek back then, and I still am - and proud of it! The typewriter we used was the trusty IBM Selectric typewriter. I remember that it could do superscripts and subscripts. It was a bit cumbersome, but it did it.

What do my keyboarding experiences have to do with anything today? Well, "experts" now question the authenticity of the documents.

Independent document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines said the memos looked like they had been produced on a computer using Microsoft Word software. Lines, a document expert and fellow of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, pointed to a superscript a smaller, raised "th" in "111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron" as evidence indicating forgery.

Microsoft Word automatically inserts superscripts in the same style as the two on the memos obtained by CBS, she said.

Please! I know that the IBM Selectric typewriter I used created superscripts and subscripts because I did them. Now, my IBM Selectric may not have been the same kind if IBM Selectric typewriter Lt. Col. Jerry Killian used when he wrote the memoranda, but Sandra Ramsey is full of it, in my opinion.

I wonder how independent Sandra Ramsey is? Where did she get her money and who has been paying her? CBS stands by their assertion that the documents are 100% authentic. For my money, I do not think CBS would go on the air with these documents if they were not certain these documents were the real deal.

Bush and his gang are attacking the credibility of these documents because they have nothing else to fall back on. They said in 1999 they released all Bush's military records. They lied. They said last year, after releasing more military records, that they released everything. They lied again. Then after these documents came out, they released more documents. They now say they released all the military documents on Bush.

If they lied to us the first time they said they released the documents, why should be believe them now? In my eyes, they lost credibility when they lied to me the first time. And to quote the saying (properly), "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I will not be fooled twice by this administration.

Fear Pimp

"If we make the wrong choice, then the danger is that we'll get hit again -- that we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States. And then we'll fall back into the pre-9/11 mindset, if you will, that in fact these terrorist attacks are just criminal acts and that we're not really at war. I think that would be a terrible mistake for us"

Those are the words of Vice President Dick Cheney. Basically, what he is saying is that if Americans do not vote for Bush/Cheney this November, the US will be hit again. That is a crock of shit!

Dick Cheney is a fear pimp. Monger is too nice a word. He is a fear pimp because every time the poll numbers go down or bad news about Iraq, Afghanistan, or the Bush administration comes out, he prostitutes Tom Ridge and the Department of Homeland Security to flash that oh so sexy leg of "terrorism warning." If that does not work, he prostitutes John Ashcroft and the Justice Department to flash the shoulder of "We just caught some nasties and are charging them!" (Then they quietly drop the charges).

Here are the issues. Before September 11th, The Clinton administration did use the resources available to find and capture those who committed terrorist crimes - case in point, the World Trade Centre bombing. Bush and Cheney were warned by the Clinton administration that Osama bin Laden was a looming threat. Since that threat came from the Clinton administration and the Bush administration did not want to do anything with them they ignored them.

Then September 11th happened and they Bush/Cheney administration swung into overdrive. They used September 11th to pass everything from the Patriot Act to Tax cuts. They used that day to go to war with Iraq.

They did practically nothing before September 11th to prevent it. Now Cheney wants us to vote for Bush? I think not.

Direct Orders...

I have a pretty interesting insight into George Bush's service (or lack thereof) while he was in the TexANG. No, I am not old enough to have served, but I served in the Air Force. I also come from a family with a strong background in the Air Force (and the military, for that matter).

I know that when you are given a direct order, you accomplish that order unless it is unlawful. If you disobey that direct order, usually you would have to face consequences.

How is it that George Bush, who claims to be the war President (but wants to be a peace President), could get away with disobeying a direct order? Why did he disobey it in the first place? I know, from familial experience (my uncle is a pilot in the Air Force Reserves, but was on active duty for a long time) that the flight physical is pretty extensive. I can only guess it is as extensive now as it was then. Maybe George Bush knew it was. Maybe he was afraid they would find something (not physical or mental) that would have disqualified him from flying. Maybe, as Kitty Kelley alleges, Bush was on blow and he knew the physical would find this out.

Whatever the reason, whether he was on blow or was just simply blowing off the physical, he should have been brought up on UCMJ charges for disobeying a direct order. I place some of the blame on the leaders of the TexANG at that time who did nothing. I think they did nothing because the rewards of not doing something to "Georgie" were higher than the rewards if they did something.

Military members (and voters in general) who are going to vote on November 2nd need to think long and hard about their choices. Do they want someone who used family connections to get out Vietnam or someone who despite his family connections went to Vietnam? Do they want someone who disobeyed direct orders from a commanding officer to get out of duty? Do they want someone who did the bare minimum to get by?

From what I have read, Bush likes to see things in black and white. I do not think the choice between the two could be more black and white.

I Can't Explain...

"I can't explain why that wouldn't be in his record, but they were found in Jerry Killian's personal records."

That is what White House communications director Dan Bartlett told CBS's "60 Minutes II" after they presented him with memoranda showing that bush was suspended from flying and what he needed to do to fulfill his commitment to the TexANG.

I can tell you that I know why those memoranda would not be in his records. Friends in the TexANG pulled them because those memoranda would make him look bad when he was running for Governor of Texas and, later, as President of the US.

It would be interesting to note what kind of cushy jobs his superiors at the TexANG received after Bush became Governor. What kind of primo jobs did those who wiped Bush's records get. No one pulls memoranda like that out of someone's records out of the kindness of their hearts.

Look, in George W. Bush, you had a guy who was a consummate slacker. He even admits he was. He did the bare minimum he did to get by. He did not need to work hard because his family (and family name) was always around to pull him out of tough situations. Look where it got him. His family pulled strings so he did not have to go to Vietnam. His family pulled strings so his businesses were saved by wealthy (sometimes Saudi) investors. He has never had to responsibility for his actions.

We can see his failure to take responsibility today. He blames everyone but himself and his administration for the failures that lead up to September 11th. He blames everyone but himself and his administration for what is now happening in Iraq. I can name dozens of more ways that he and his administration have failed to take responsibility, but I would be typing all day.

Why anyone would want to elect someone who was not willing to take responsibility for their actions is beyond me. In November, many people will. I wonder what that says about them.

LCRs

The Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) today voted to not endorse George W. Bush in the race for the US Presidency.

Good for them. Although, I cannot believe it took them four years to come to this. I know how hard it is for some people to go with your principles instead of with the herd. Thankfully, 22 of the 24 members of the LCR who voted today voted against giving their endorsement to Bush. The other two must still feel loyalty to a President and party that would like to see them have many of the rights and privileges they seek erased.

For the life of me I cannot understand the mind set of members of the LCR. I understand that they have conservative values. I understand that they seek lower taxes, strong national defense, personal responsibility and a commitment to individual liberty,etc. However, the Christian right has hijacked the Republican party to such a degree that the Republican platform, for all intents and purposes, dismisses the unity the LCR was trying to establish. The Christian right would seek to make sodomy illegal again, remove work place protections against harassment and discrimination, and deny rights.

In any case, I am glad they are not endorsing Bush. Through his actions, Bush has shown me that he is not a uniter. Hell, he cannot even unite his own party.

What's Good for the Goose...

A group, Texans for Truth, has put together a website and advert questioning George W. Bush's service (or perhaps lack thereof) while he was a member of the Texas Air National Guard. They are asking for contributions to help get their advert on the air.

I think it is a worthy cause simply because it will do for George Bush what the SBWfL adverts did for Kerry. I also do not believe he fully answered questions regarding his service (or alleged lack thereof). Why was he grounded? Is it because he refused to take a medical. If it was because he refused to take a medical, was it because of another problem he had with illicit drugs (as Kitty Kelley alleges). Did he serve in Alabama? If he did, where is the evidence? I have several unanswered questions and I know others do too.

So please, contribute and see if George W. Bush answers the questions?

Catch Phrase

One of the catch phrases that I kept on hearing over and over again in the interviews and speeches given during the Republican National Convention is "activist judges." From what I gathered, an "activist judge" is one that makes laws from the bench based on his or her own whim. Another phase I heard regularly was "special rights." Let me tackle the first catch phrase, "activist judge..."

Apparently many a Republican at the Convention failed their civics class in either high school or college. Just as a refresher, our country is based on the concept of checks and balances of the three branches of our government. The Executive branch, Legislative branch, and Judicial branch each work to keep one another in check. For example, if the Legislative branch passes a law the President, as head of the Executive branch, can either pass that law or veto it. If the law passes, it can be challenged in court, the Judicial branch, to determine if that law is constitutional or not. If the law is, then it goes into effect. If the law is not, it gets struck down and the Legislative branch starts the process over and creates a law that can pass both the Executive and Judicial branches of government.

Now that the civics lesson is over, the judges who strike down laws against abortion or uphold the rights of gay and lesbian women are no more of activist judges than those who struck down Brown versus Board of Education and other laws that paved the way for African-Americans to try to have the same opportunities as white Americans. These people who are using the code phrase, "activist judges," are the same cut from the same cloth as the people who during most of this country's history would have prevented both African-Americans and women from attaining the same rights as white men.

The rights that African-Americans and women wanted were not "special rights." They were the rights that white men had taken for granted for centuries - the right to own land, the right to vote, the right to enter into public office, etc. The rights that gays and lesbians want are no more special than the rights that heterosexuals take for granted each and every day - the right to visit loved ones in hospitals, the right to joint property, the right to insurance benefits, the right to inheritance, etc. Some on the Right claim these rights and benefits can be granted by going and visiting a lawyer. Oh, if that were only the case... Some can, but I have read many stories of partners being refused visitation while their loved one was in the hospital. I have read many stories of partners who have had what was left to them when their loved one passed away ripped from them when their partner's family contested the inheritance in court. I have read many stories where partners could not get insurance for their partner of many, many years.

The Right likes to use catch phrases like "activist judge" and "special rights" because if they repeat them over and over and over again then someone will pick up what they say and print it. Once printed, it becomes record and more people can get that false idea into their head. Those catch phrases are used to obscure the hatred, racism, homophobia, and nastiness that these people feel. If they put a pretty face on their hate, they may be able to fool people. I sincerely hope this November Americans will not be fooled by hate and divisiveness.

Blow

Kitty Kelley, according to an article from the Mirror, (thanks Atrios for the link) alleges in her book, The Family: The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty, that George W. Bush first used cocaine in the mid-1960's and took it as late as 1992 - when George H.W. "Poppy" Bush was in office at Camp David.

During the 2000 Presidential election, George W. Bush's people said Bush had not taken illegal drugs in the past 25 years. If Kitty Kelley is right, then that means Bush lied in 2000. What should happen in this upcoming debate is someone should ask bush if he has ever taken any illegal substances. If he says he would pass a background investigation going back seven years, the moderator should then ask< "How about if you go back 20, 30, or 40 years?" Maybe the moderator should be blunt and ask him point blank if he ever used cocaine and when was the last time he used it.

Personally I do not care if President Bush used blow and drank like a fish. Those are not reasons why I am not going to vote for him. However, he would be a hypocrite if he was for the "War on Drugs" and did them at the same time. Being a hypocrite, though, would not be a surprise to me. It seems like it is a prerequisite for this administration.

Arnie's Austrian Memories

I am beginning to wonder at the selective recollection that many speakers have had during the Republican National Convention. Dick Cheney selectively remembered the bills Kerry voted against which he claims would have eliminated weapons systems (they would not), but forgets that he cut several pounds of flesh off the Department of Defence carcass.

Now we have Arnold Schwarzenegger selectively remembering what it was like living in Austria after World War II. It seems his recollections are false. I like to term them lies.

Arnold was born on June 30, 1947. He says,

"I saw tanks in the streets. I saw communism with my own eyes."

Which is amazing because the area where he lived, Styria, and the neighboring province of Carinthia, was controlled by the British. On top of all that, the Soviets already had left Styria in July 1945, less than three months after the end of the war. Unless Arnold used the time machine developed by Skynet, I doubt he could have seen Soviet tanks in the streets. He may have seen tanks, but they were probably French, American, or more likely, British.

From the article:

In his convention address, Schwarzenegger also said: "As a kid, I saw the Socialist country that Austria became after the Soviets left" in 1955 and Austria regained its independence.

But Martin Polaschek, a law history scholar and vice rector of Graz University, told Kurier that Austria was governed by coalition governments, including the conservative People's Party and the Social Democratic Party. Between 1945 and 1970, all the nation's chancellors were conservatives -- not Socialists.

What's more, when Schwarzenegger left in 1968, Austria was run by a conservative government headed by People's Party Chancellor Josef Klaus, a staunch Roman Catholic and a sharp critic of both the Socialists as well as the Communists ruling in countries across the Iron Curtain.

Schwarzenegger "confuses a free country with a Socialist one," said Polaschek, referring to East European Communist officials' routine descriptions of their countries as Socialist.

Polaschek saw the moderate Republican governor's recollections at the convention as a tactical move. Schwarzenegger, he said, was "using the old Communist enemy image for Bush's election campaign."

So basically Arnold was making stuff up for the convention. Like I said, he lied. I have another source who can substantiate that what Arnold said is not true - my mom. Like Arnold, she was born in Austria. Unlike Arnold, she was around, briefly, during soviet occupation of Austria. Since she would have been but a baby, she has no direct recollection of these events. However, she told me what life was like in Austria before she and her mother, my maternal grandmother, moved to West Germany. I believe my mom's accounts more than I believe Arnold's because her stories matched the historians' accounts. They are not made up or embellished.

When will the selective memory recall - lying - stop?

Leaving the Party

I was listening to an interview Michelangelo Signorile had with Minnesota Republican Senator Norm Coleman. Michelangelo asked the Senator who he voted for in 1992 and 1996. Norm answered that he had voted for the Democratic candidate. Michelangelo tried to get him to say it, but Norm would not utter the name of the 42nd President, Bill Clinton. It sounded to me as if Clinton's name was almost like uttering a curse word. Michelangelo wisely moved on, but asked some some questions along the same line.

He asked who Senator Coleman would vote for this year, and Coleman responded that since he was now a Republican, he would vote for Bush. Michelangelo asked if he could ever vote for a Democrat again, and Norm said that he could only vote for Republicans. Then, to Michelangelo Signorile's credit, Norm was called on that. He asked why he voted for Democrats for so many years and then suddenly switched to the Republican party. Norm responded that the Democrats had left him, not the other way around.

I am going to call Senator Coleman on that too. He is a liar. The Democrats did not kick him out; he defected from the Democrats. He is a fair-weather politician. When the opportunity was greatest under the Democrats he was with them. When he saw his chance to jump ship and desert the party he had been a member of all these years, he did it. Now he has to prove that he is a good, loyal Republican, so he votes Republican all the way. He even said as much in his interview. He used the excuse that the party left him and that he did not leave the party. Senator Norm Coleman is such a disingenuous opportunist.

If Senator Coleman had any kind of spine in him at all, he would have tried to change the party from within. He does not, though. When the going got tough, he got going. Changing a party from within takes time, hard work, and perseverance. Qualities which Norm Coleman demonstrates he does not have when he deserted the party he was a part of and supported for many, many years.

What the...

Two men who lived in Wilkeson, Washington - Stephen Paulson, 21, the son of Mayor Doug Paulson, and Troy Loney, 19 - decided that they could shoot a stray Siberian husky with a bow and a single arrow. They shot the dog with the arrow over and over again until it finally died. They claimed they were not being cruel to the dog and were trying to put the stray out of its misery.

Excuse me, but that is so fucked up! From the article on ABC News, Doug Paulson said,

"We shot it with a bow," he told KOMO-TV, but he denied they shot the dog several times, saying they were just trying to put the stray out of its misery.

"I'm not cruel to animals, I just figured I would do what's best," he said

.

However, the dog was shot with the one arrow by Paulson and Loney at least ten times, according to witnesses. Now the prosecutors have an uphill battle because the judge, Judge Thomas Felnagle,

ruled for the defense that to make the case for animal cruelty it will not be enough for the prosecution to prove the two defendants killed the dog in the manner the witnesses described. They must prove Paulson and Loney wanted to make the dog suffer.

I wonder if the good Judge has any pets. Would he want to see his pets get shot by an arrow, have that arrow pulled out, and have that process repeated until his pet died? Would the good Judge rule that if they killed someone they had to actually want to kill someone in order for them to be prosecuted. Judge Felnagle is just as fucked up as Doug Paulson and Troy Loney. He should be ashamed of himself that those words ever came out of his mouth.

Forty-Three

I had heard comments about Bush's phony softball game when Jenna and not-Jenna (Barbara) - the Bush twins - introduced their father who was speaking from a softball game. The comments were, basically, that the whole event was staged. I thought to myself, "Certainly not. No one would be that disingenuous as to stage a softball game for sheer political backdrop. Would they? That would be much like the movie 'Wag the Dog.' No. Bush would not stoop that low."

But he did. Sadly, No! has the pictures to prove it. Softball player after softball player all had the same number on their jersey (43). Bush, incidentally, is the forty-third President. Hmmm. I could see one person having the number 43 on their jersey, but not more than one.

After thinking about it, it did not surprise me. Bush and his team staged the "Mission Accomplished," Commander Codpiece aircraft carrier landing. Bush and Cheney's speaking events are limited to those who sign a (misspelled) loyalty oath where those in attendance pledge fealty to Bush and Cheney. Thanksgiving dinners for troops in Iraq use plastic turkeys as props.

It might be a subliminal plot by someone in the White House to show this Presidency is actually nothing more than props,staged presentations, and smoke and mirrors. I don't know. All I know is that as each day goes by, I get surprised less and less by what this administration is willing to do to fool the American public.

Dear CNN,

I used to enjoy the coverage CNN provided to news. However, something has been troubling me about what's happening to CNN. Recently, I have been reading than your ratings are dropping. Faux News and MSNBC fare better in the ratings race than "The Most Trusted Name in News." Why is this?

I think I have an answer. CNN is trying desperately to be Faux News and ends up looking like Faux News Lite. It cannot even be considered a reasonable facsimile of Faux News. CNN, stop trying to imitate Faux News. Stop going after the sensational Lacy Peterson-type stories. Stop being in the "infotainment" business and get back to your roots - news.

CNN stop trying to be Faux News Lite. How do you beat Faux News? Hire real journalists. Hire real reporters. Hire anchors who are not afraid to question. CNN needs to do the job of a news organisation an reveal the truth. I am 100 percent certain if CNN would have done its job the way a news organisation should, it would not be in the ratings dump it is in now.

To summarise, CNN, get off your collective asses and report the news.

Sincerely,

TexProdigy

Mary Cheney Is A Sinner (part 2)

As Louis Carroll would say, "It just gets curiouser and curiouser." The Chicago Tribune's article fleshes out the Alan Keyes' shot in the foot statement he made about Mary Cheney.

The earlier article referenced by Yahoo! News did not have many details. I was pretty sure Michelangelo Signorile elicited Alan Keyes' response. I did not know Corey Johnson was helping him with the interview. Way to go Michelangelo and Corey!

Keyes then continued to win people over with his charm by chastising reporters for "not giving his candidacy a fair shake" and leaving the Black America's Political Action Committee (BAMPAC) breakfast early. Keyes added, winning even more support, "The delegation knows that our job here is to win the election, not to spend time schmoozing with one another, however joyful that may be."

(sarcasm) Alan Keyes really knows how to win friends and influence people! (/sarcasm)

Alan Keyes is in the Illinois Republican Senate race for his own selfish need to be in the spotlight. I think even Illinois Republicans can see that his actions prove that. I think they will abandon Alan Keyes in droves. They may not necessarily vote for Barack Obama, but I think Keyes has left such a bad taste that they will not support him.

Mary Cheney Is a Sinner

Mary Cheney, Vice President Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter is a sinner. Do not take my word for it. Alan Keyes, the Republican candidate for the Illinois Senate said so. Since he is a Republican it must be so. When asked by Sirius OutQ if Mary Cheney was a selfish hedonist, Alan Keyes responded, "Of course she is. That goes by definition."

Alan Keyes broke Ronald Reagan's 11th Commandment - Do not attack other Republicans. Alan Keyes picked the wrong daughter to trash. I would have thought as eloquent a speaker as Alan Keyes is, he would have had the intellect to say something else. He could have said, "That is a private matter between the Vice President and his daughter." Nope. He messed up big time!

It is one thing to attack your political opponent on the issues. Many politicians even hurl personal attacks at their opponents. However, to attack the daughter of your own party's Vice President is just crazy. My prediction is that Barack Obama's win on November 2nd will be gigantic. Alan Keyes is his own worst enemy. Every time he opens his mouth more crazy talk comes out. Voters in Illinois, whether they are Democrats or Republicans, can see that.

What's Goin' On?

I understand the pain Marvin Gaye was singing about in his awesome song, "What's Goin' On?" As a Buddhist I try to live by the precepts and do no harm to living things. I only wish others would do the same. Doing things like Blowing up two planes, killing people by blowing up a train, holding innocent children hostage, blowing up two buses in Israel, etc. is not going to win people over to your cause.

Killing people is not the answer. Unfortunately, terrorist organisations cannot seem to get that through their thick skulls. As long as one group of people feel powerless to negotiate in good faith with a more powerful group - the Chechens and the Russians, the Palestinians and the Israelis - extremist factions within those groups will resort to violence and killing to attempt to accomplish their ends.

The only way I can see for these things to end is if a powerful, unbiased third party can step in and help negotiate with both sides in good faith. The US used to fill that role. Since the Iraq war, however, the US is seen as an imperial power that takes the side of the Russians over the Chechens, that takes the side of the Israelis over the Palestinians, that takes the side against the "Axis of Evil." Many countries see the US as a country that does not deal in good faith with others. Until we can be impartial, we can never expect things to change.

Do not misquote what I am saying. I am not "blaming America." The world is a complicated web. Every decision that the leaders of the US have made came with consequences. Some of those seeds of those decisions bore the fruit of peace and prosperity. Some of those seeds bore the bitter fruit of violence, death, and destruction. A leader needs to have the vision to make decisions that will not cause blowback years down the road. Using force do accomplish those decisions should be done only as a last resort. Using force as a first resort can only lead to sowing the seeds of violence, death, and destruction for all involved.

Sneaky, Sneaky...

Several months ago John Ashcroft interrupted regularly scheduled programming to tout an achievement by his Justice Department. Ashcroft spoke at lengths about the "Detroit 6" and described to Americans how they were a terror cell.

Now, under the shadow of the Republican Convention, the Justice Department is seeking to dismiss the terror charges against the "Detroit 6." Yahoo! News, provides the details.

The original prosecution was rife with a "pattern of mistakes and oversights." No, really!? When they do get a new trial, the most they will be charged with is fraud. So, John Ashcroft's "major victory on the war on terror" was all a hoax used to keep Americans scared. He used the "Detroit 6" to instill in Americans that Al Qaeda was right in America's back yard and ready to strike at any second.

The mainstream media (the so-called liberal media) will not report this fraud by John Ashcroft and his Justice Department. They are having too much fun being media whores at the moment trying to show America those lovely pictures of all those moderate Republicans. Now Faux News is showing those "smelly, nasty, neo-hippie" protesters fighting and causing problems. You know their footage is going to be used in Republican adverts and will be used to reinforce the notion that the protesters are equal to Al Qaeda and what is happening in Iraq.

That Is So Gross!

From Gothamist Food:

Hot Dogs and Chianti: Don’t save the Chianti for just Italian food. This strong, bold wine made from the Sangiovese grape goes well with seasoned foods and will bring out the spices in the hot dog

I do not drink (By choice. I never got anything out of drinking so I do not do it.), but I know that beer goes well with hot dogs, burgers, and BBQ. Chianti with hot dogs is just so gross.