Airing Voter Fraud Concerns

Random Thoughs on Politics has posted about the dirty politics in this election. Interesting reading. It obviously focuses mostly on the attempts to intimidate voters.

And also great reading, Respectful of Others writes an great post on applying common sense to the fear of "voter fraud." It will likely not amount to any actual voter fraud. And for the record, I am one of those people that she is referring to who is registered in two counties. I moved in June, sent in my registration in, and got my new information about two weeks ago. Maybe three. But when I wasn't sure where I was supposed to vote, I called my old county, and I am still registgered there. It's not illegal unless I vote twice. But does that mean that there could be more registered voters in Medina County than actual voting age individuals. Maybe.

But she discussed the three alleged problems (according to Republicans), that being (1) People are registering at addresses where they don't live, as evidenced by returned mail; (2) There are more registered voters than eligible voters in some Ohio cities; and (3) People have been submitting voter registrations under names like "Mary Poppins" and "Mickey Mouse." She gives answers for the first two, showing how they aren't problems at all, and not even suggestive of voter fraud. The third one is a problem, b/c the NAACP was actually paying individuals to register voters. I am sure that everyone heard about the crack for voter registration story. Of course, other than the NAACP registration where individuals were paid for the numbers they registered and independently decided to lie to get more money, there has been no evidence that any of the VOLUNTEERS registering voters have registered even one ineligible individual, try as they may. So this problem isn't as widespread as they would like us to believe. More importantly, Mary Poppins may have registered to vote - and that challenge is legitimate. But Mary Poppins isn't actually GOING to show up to vote. So that (legitimate) third concern really isn't a real concern - but highlights why no organization should be able to pay individuals to register voters.

So wanna hear gross? I have my ID for work clipped to my pant pocket. One of those bungee things so that I can swipe it as necessary. Anyway, today, for the first time ever, I dropped it in the toilet. Which normally would only be eww gross. But no. Today there was a sign that read, "Ladies, the water was shut off on Saturday 10/30. The toilets were able to be used, but not able to be flushed. We apologize for any inconvenience." Umm...inconvenient?? Try gross.

Second, Halloween. First, why don't I have the types of friends who throw Halloween parties? Why are they always on tv? Who are these peple? I haven't had a Halloween party since law school. I never thought that law school would be the pinacle of my social life...I am officially pathetic.

And sticking with that Halloween theme, I was amazed at how parents go trick-or-treating with their older kids. I think my parents stopped when I was around 10. But here, teenagers are still with their parents. Wow. And most *aren't* with friends. And I am amazed that kids are so...greedy. I have this big bowl with candy, and I will let them choose any two that they want. It's amazing how many kids will take more than that, an entire handful. Give me a break. On a side note, I have to throw away my Halloween socks. I have had them since 1994 and they are so worn. Holes in them. Bye socks.

I took a political compass quiz and learned that my beliefs are on par with Gandhi, Nelson Mandella and The Dali Lama. Nice... Specifically, I am Economic Left/Right: -5.62 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.64.

A poll of Europeans found Israel, North Korea, Iran...and the Unitd States as the greatest threats to world peace. Great company we have there. Two of Bush's "axis of evil" are TIED with us for second place. Nice.

Signs of a Kerry victory??

The Redskins lost this weekend. Since 1933 (when the Boston Braves were renamed the Redskins) the result of the Redskins' final home game before the presidential election has always accurately predicted the White House winner. If the Redskins win, the incumbent party wins. If they lose, the incumbent party is ousted. (Of course, this was the year that the Red Sox destroyed an 86 year old curse - that is really only 16 years.)

I still don't see it. I expect Rove & the Republicans to steal this election again. Notably, Ohio and Florida.

"We'll take your children away if you vote Kerry..."

From Scrutiny Hooligans, and Vast Dairy State Conspiracy, check out this handout being circulated to around Milwaukee's African American communities. I *have* to think that this is a sarcastic thing. But at the same time, it does seem to go into their entire thought process that Republicans seem to have to do anything to prevent people from voting.







If this is legit, this is beyond frightening. Your children will get taken away from you?? Are you serious? If you've already voted in any election (i.e. the May general election) you can't vote now? Oh my gosh, if this doesn't target lower socio economic individuals, I am not sure what does.

On another note, the reason that there are new people registered to vote is that they are unhappy with the current administration. If they were satisfied, they'd be slackers and let the 9 old guys on the Supreme Court decide, like they have done for years...

1918

Oh, and A New York Escorts Confessions, who I found via James, has the great Nike (Just Do It!) commercial for the Boston Red Sox. If you have any type of emotions, any love of baseball, any sense of history, or any belief in curses, you will love this commercial. Check here.

Bush supporters point guns at Kerry supporters and try (again) to steal Florida - meanwhile, Ohio does all it can to *not* count votes

I heard Jerry Springer speak today. It was mostly about him wanting to be governor of Ohio (in 2006) and his plans for the state. I'll say, in the last week I got to hear Edward Norton and Jerry Springer. (He looks a lot older in person that I expected. Then again, he said that he was over 60 so that can't be that much of a surprise.)

Oh my gosh. A Bush supporter pointed a gun to the head of a Kerry supporter. That is frightening.

And before the election even starts, Bush is ahead of Kerry. Guess that's what happens when your brother is governor??

And why are they giving provisional ballots if they don't count? Why bother? Here's my concern with provisional ballots. I am voting at a school down the street. EXCEPT - TODAY the street closed for 6 weeks. We can't drive on the street. So in order to vote, everyone will have to WALK there. I don't get it. Why not close the street in a week from today?? I obviously don't need to point out that I live in a largely democratic area...but seriously, my real concern is, where exactly can I vote? I literally have to walk down my street, then down the other street, then down the third street. It's about a mile. How many people are going to walk to vote? I hope that they open the street, but as they just open it today, it doesn't seem likely. It's weird.

I find it interesting reading about Republicans voting against Bush. "I have been a registered Republican since I first became eligible to vote. I've been an Air Force officer for 20 years, first on active duty and now in the reserves. I gladly voted for Ronald Reagan in 1980 and supported his battle to win the Cold War. If called to serve in Iraq, I would willingly do my duty for my country. You might think I'm a slam-dunk for the Republican ticket this year, but you'd be wrong. I backed John McCain in the 2000 primary, but I did not vote for George W. Bush and I'm even more opposed to him after seeing his performance over the past four years. I can't say I'm a big fan of John Kerry, but he's a smart guy and I'm willing to give him a chance because Bush has done such a bad job and shows so few signs of improvement that he doesn't deserve to get reelected. This letter explains why I'm voting against my Commander in Chief." Check here.

I can't believe that Boston swept the Cardinals. (Are they really America's Team?) Guess when they end the "curse" they do it in style. Oh, and when Jason said that Theo Epstein could sleep with anyone he wanted within a 250 mile radius of Boston, I'd actually expand that. He's "wicked" hot...



And because the Sox won, he was soaked in champagne. Yum...

Finally, I sent an email to several of advertisers concerning the Sinclear anti-Kerry broadcast. Reporting some of their email responses:

Yum Consumer Affairs: Thank you for taking the time to contract us to let us know your perspective about Sinclair Broadcasting's plans to air a controversial film. Please know that we had no plans to advertise on this program. We are very interested in quality television advertising and we encourage advertising on programs that reflect the positive image of our products.Thank you again for writing, we appreciate hearing from you. Yum! Consumer Relations

General Mills (as much as I support free speech...no more Cheerios for me): Thank you for contacting General Mills. Many consumers have written to share their views on this issue. Some have urged General Mills to use its influence as an advertiser to ensure that the media reports the news in an unbiased manner. Some have urged General Mills to continue advertising, and have threatened to withdraw support for our products if we alter our advertising plans. Passions run deep on both sides, particularly this close to an election. Whenever possible, General Mills does strive to preview the programs on which our advertising appears. We do so to assure that we do not advertise on programs inconsistent with the family-oriented nature of our products. This works well with entertainment programs produced and available for advance screening, but pre-screening of news broadcasts is usually not possible. Our view in this area is clear. We believe one of the fundamental elements of our society is the freedom of the press. Companies such as ours, in our view, should not attempt to influence, control or pre-empt the content of news through the leverage of advertising sponsorship. To do so would undermine that fundamental freedom. From time to time, any one of us as viewers may consider a particular news story to be inaccurate or imbalanced. News organizations do err. Judgment is not always well applied. One major news organization recently acknowledged that errors were made in stories relating to the current presidential election. When such errors occur, certainly a price is paid in terms of reputation. But errors and questionable judgment are an acceptable price to pay, in our view, to assure the presence of a free and independent media in our society. As viewers, each of us is free to make a choice. We can choose to patronize or not patronize programs with our viewership. We can choose to patronize or not patronize particular television stations, or even entire networks. Similarly, advertisers may choose not to sponsor certain broadcasts, a particular network or specific publications because of their journalistic standards and judgment. But advertisers should not attempt to control or pre-empt news programming prior to broadcast or publication. That, in our view, would be inappropriate. In this instance, as in the example cited earlier, passionate voices are calling on advertisers to insert themselves into the election by threatening to boycott those who remove or who do not remove their advertising. We choose to stand with freedom of the press. We welcome the views that you and others have shared with us. You may rest assured that we will remind the networks we sponsor that the integrity of their reporting reflects on the companies that advertise during their broadcasts. Hopefully, you will understand our views – and the importance we place on a free press. Again, thank you for taking the time to contact us and share your views. Sincerely, General Mills

Some poor small local business that was just included: To whom it may concern, it is simply amazing the response I have gotten from all over the country in regards to the Sinclair program to be shown. To be listed with the likes of "Arby's, Circuit City and U.S. Cellular, I am wondering if the budget I have spent with channels 18/24 in Milwaukee is to much. I can only imagine that these company's had to spend in the millions to get your attention and Rank & Son has a budget less than $800.00 per month. WOW, talk about getting out to the people! That might sound a little sarcastic, but I am trying to make a point. We are a small metro car dealership in Milwaukee and some how got on this list of company's that literally spend millions. ...

Iams: Dear Concerned Consumer: Thanks for contacting us about Sinclair Broadcast Group's plans to air "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal." We haven't reviewed the content of this program, nor would we advertise in it. One of our guiding principles is that we don't advertise in programs where there is expression for or against a given political candidate. The way we spend our advertising dollar is important to us. For most TV programming, we're able to review the content on a show by show basis before making any advertising decisions. You may see some of our commercials air on the Sinclair Broadcast Group's network during shows that we've already agreed to appear in. The networks also have control over TV programming and can choose to preempt regularly scheduled programming with different programs, such as this one. We appreciate your comments and I'm sharing them with those responsible for television sponsorship. Sincerely, Marilinn Iams Consumer Care, North America

Just thought I'd put out there the opinions of some advertisers.

Lunar Eclipses and Politics

First, everyone remember to watch the full lunar eclipse tonight. It would have been cooler if it actually occurred on Halloween, but we’ll take what we can get.

Second, looks like the Republicans in Florida are planning to steal the election again. "Two e-mails, prepared for the executive director of the Bush campaign in Florida and the campaign's national research director in Washington DC, contain a 15-page so-called "caging list".
It lists 1,886 names and addresses of voters in predominantly black and traditionally Democrat areas of Jacksonville, Florida." However, going after a minority such as African Americans to prevent them from voting is against the law. Interestingly enough, as the Washington Post points out, "Republicans are spending these last precious days devoting nearly as much energy to suppressing the Democratic vote as they are to mobilizing their own. " Yes, here in the US everyone vote counts - except when the Republicans don't want it to...

Third, more proof that the smart people are voting Kerry. "Strikingly, Bush leads Kerry in the poll among lower- and middle-income white voters, but trails his rival among whites earning at least $100,000 per year. Bush also runs best among voters without college degrees, whereas Kerry leads not only among college-educated women (a traditional Democratic constituency), but among college-educated men — usually one of the electorate's most reliably Republican groups in the electorate."

Finally, via Erin - isn't this fucking frightening?? The interesting this is, over the weekend the Judge was talking about how it was odd b/c when Bush's father was in the white house, he would campaign for him and spoke well. I wonder...

I heard Edward Norton speak last week. He discussed the attack on our civil liberties and pointed out that the Constitution (currently being ignored) was actually just a list of complaints to another tryant named George. I found him very interesting.

The fact that not enough people seem to care about this assault on our civil liberties is astonishing. All I can think about is how far we got in the 50s before someone FINALLY said, "Have you no decency sir? Have you no shame?" and before it finally sunk in what was going on around them. Until it gets so bad that people are going to hear that statement and REALLY hear it, it won't make a difference. Right now, those of us asking the questions are like an annoying bug. Sooner or later, sink in. It's just a matter of waiting. And every time I think that it has to be almost dawn, it gets a little darker...

So it’s awful when Kerry points out that Cheney’s daughter a lesbian and it wasn't a choice but being who she is, but it’s ok when Alan Keyes calls her a "selfish hedonist??" I don’t get Republicans.

And I have to say - I was glad to see Clinton out on the campaign trial. It's good tosee that he's doing better.

On a personal front, a few more things from polling voters last week. First, Rooy - is that a guy or girls name? And how is it pronounced? Second, as I might have mentioned, some compassionate conservative told me to go to hell. Nice... Third, I am really bad at numbers. I actually have dyscalculia. So I'm making calls and trying to be VERY precise. And I get a hold of a woman and ask to speak to the woman. She tells me - who is that? I told Mario to end it with her. I will kill him" and hung up on me. So Mario, man, I'm sorry. Annie was the next woman I was supposed to call, and it's just bloody bad luck that you apparently had an affair with an Annie.

Fourth, I tried changing a light bulb by myself - failed. You know those jokes, how many blondes does it take to change a light bulb? I can't laugh anymore. I have lost that right. Actually, let's review my weekend. I drove to PA for dinner. On the drive back on Saturday night (yes, I drove there on Saturday am and drove - most of the way - back Saturday night), my car starts jerking. NOT good. All I know to do to a car is put in gas, put in oil, and check to see if the the tires are flat. (No, I can't CHANGE a tire. I know HOW to, but i'm not strong enough to take off the lugnuts, as I learned on 90 on my way to Boston one year). Anyway, I decide to put in oil because I'm 10,000 miles OVER my last scheduled oil change (lecture me later). Anyway, I buy oil (the wrong numbers, I later learned, but who knew oil had numbers anyway?) and I go to put it in. I'm not strong enough to take the oil cap off. I'm at some gas station, 30 miles away and still 5 1/2 hours away from home, totally alone in the world, and ready to cry b/c it's 10:00 pm and I can't get the oil cap off. So after half an hour, I just give up and decide to go home and fuck it. My car didn't blow up; I consider this a positive step.

Then Sunday night, I have the 4 lights in the family room, and 3 are burnt out, so it's dark and hard to see. I don't have the right TYPE of light bulb, but hey, I have a light bulb, right? So whatever. I get my step stool to reach it. I grab the light bulb - and shatter it. Cut my thumb. Blood. Ickiness. Again I'm ready to cry b/c I'm a miserable failure at this entire house thing and what the hell was I thinking when I thought that I could be a responsible adult?? And then my cats want to see what's going on so they walk over. I jump off the stool (and cut my foot - more blod and more ickiness) and try to usher them away, but my one cat refuses to budge. So I put him in his cage right near me. Go upstairs and get the vacuum cleaner and turn it on - and my cat starts having a heart attack right there in the cage b/c of the vacuum cleaner. AAGH! So after I get all that taken care of, I go back to try to change the light bulbs because it's obviously still dark. Except the one that is shattered, I can't grab it to twist it off without cutting myself more (now my pointer finge is bleeding and ickiness.) So I go to a different one (if at first you don't succeed, give up and try something else). Anyway, THAT one I manage to take the light bulb off...from the part that is screwed in. So litererally, I'm holding the light bulb and the screw part is STILL screwed in. Sigh. So I've been in the dark...

Gutting the Geneva Convention

When you don't wanna follow the Geneva Convention (or when you are caught violating it by transferring a dozen non-Iraqi prisoners out of Iraq in the past 18 months, in violation of a provision in the conventions that bars civilians from being deported from occupied territories), just decide that it doesn't apply.

Me, I'm glad that the Bush administration has ruled this way. I mean, that means that when terrorists do the same to us, they are technically obeying the law. The short sightedness of this administrationi s astounding. Does he not realize that everything he does (such as preemptively striking a nation that poses no harm and gutting the Geneva Convention) he creates a past practice for other countries to do the same thing. And as any attorney will tell you, stare decisis, whether a good or bad decision, is a powerful tool.

Candles

I guess that it was bound to happen. After two years, the powers that be (aka the office administrator) sent out an email saying that we can no longer burn candles. :( Allegedly b/c the smell is disrupting people’s allergies. I say allegedly b/c when I asked if we could burn non-scented candles then, I was told no b/c it was a fire hazard. Now, this irritates me b/c I’ve been burning them for two years, and if I wanted to burn the place down, I would have by now. But what can you do? Other than look for a new job. Which I just might do. The problem is, most law firms want you to be a cookie cutter attorney. And I’m most decidedly not. When I’m wearing a suit, I swear that I look like a teenager playing dress up. Some people wear a suit and you look at them and say, "that is an impressive person with power." I wear a suit, and you struggle not to smile at the sight of me trying to pretend to be adult. And fail. Gosh, I spend enough friggin' time here that I should be able to burn candles if I want too...

Bush's (False) Religion

A few interesting articles. First, s question whether Bush is actually a Christian. Then, a more biting attack, where a Conservative Christian actually called Bush a facist. And, of course, The American Conservative editorial endorsing Kerry...

As God Is His Witness

By Ayelish McGarvey
Web Exclusive: 10.19.04

Bush is no devout evangelical. In fact, he may not be a Christian at all.

Late in the summer, at the Republican national convention in New York, a movie billed as the conservative alternative to Fahrenheit 9/11 debuted for the party faithful. The film, George W. Bush: Faith in the White House, opens with a montage of a billowing American flag, a softly lit portrait of Jesus in Gethsemane, and a shot of the tawny profile of our 43rd president with his eyes gazing heavenward. Myriad times throughout the film Bush is referred to reverently as a man of faith.

Like no president in recent memory, George W. Bush wields his Christian righteousness like a flaming sword. Indeed, hundreds of news stories and nearly half a dozen books have evinced a White House that, according to BBC Washington correspondent Justin Webb, “hums to the sound of prayer.” Yet for the past four years the mainstream press has trod lightly, rarely venturing beyond the biographical to probe the depth, or sincerity, of Bush's Christian beliefs. Bush has no doubt benefited from the media’s reluctance; Newsweek, for example, in the heat of the run-up to the Iraq War, ran a cover package on the president’s faith under the headline “Bush and God” -- a story whose timing lent the war the aura of having heavenly sanction. Even lefty believers like Jim Wallis, editor of Sojourners, and Amy Sullivan, journalist and Democratic adviser, politely maintain that Bush’s faith is strong, if misguided.

Indeed, in an 8,000-word lamentation appearing in The New York Times Magazine last weekend, Ron Suskind attempted to trace Bush’s lack of intellectual curiosity, and the policy disasters that have stemmed from that, back to his relationship with God. “That a deep Christian faith illuminated the personal journey of George W. Bush is common knowledge,” Suskind wrote. In other words, the devil, as it were, is lurking among the articles of faith, but not in the heart of the man.

This is a huge mistake, because when judged by his deeds, an entirely different picture emerges: Bush does not demonstrate a life of faith by his actions, and neither Methodists, evangelicals, nor fundamentalists can rightly call him brother. In fact, the available evidence raises serious questions about whether Bush is really a Christian at all.

Ironically for a man who once famously named Jesus as his favorite political philosopher during a campaign debate, it is remarkably difficult to pinpoint a single instance wherein Christian teaching has won out over partisan politics in the Bush White House. Though Bush easily weaves Christian language and themes into his political communication, empty religious jargon is no substitute for a bedrock faith. Even little children in Sunday school know that Jesus taught his disciples to live according to his commandments, not simply to talk about them a lot. In Bush’s case, faith without works is not just dead faith -- it’s evangelical agitprop

Richard Land directs the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the conservative Southern Baptist Convention, the nation’s largest Protestant denomination and a group that enjoys a close relationship with the Bush administration. In an interview for Frontline earlier this year, Land denounced the scriptural cherry-picking on the part of contemporary American Christians. “It's only been in the last half-century when you've had the rise of groups [in] modern Christendom who believe in what I call ‘Dalmatian theology,’” he explained. “The Bible's inspired in spots, and … [t]hey think they can reject large chunks of Christian Scripture and biblical revelation that they don't agree with … .”

But while Land’s censure was probably intended for liberals, so, too, does it apply to the president. For George W. Bush does not live or govern under the complete authority of the Bible -- just the parts that work to his political advantage. And evangelical leaders like Land who blindly bless the Bush White House don’t just muddy the division of church and state; worse, they completely violate Scripture.

Jesus, after all, didn’t do politics.


* * *
The president’s storied faith journey began at the bottom of a bottle and led him all the way to the White House. But though these accounts ramble on for hundreds of pages about his steadfast leadership and prayerfulness, they all curiously rely on one single event to confirm that Bush is a man transformed by a deep Christian faith: He quit drinking and took up running instead. “I would not be president today," Bush himself told a group of pastoral social workers in 2003, "if I hadn't stopped drinking 17 years ago. And I could only do that with the grace of God."

But Christianity is more than teetotalism and physical fitness. Conservative believers liken a Christian conversion to a spiritual heart transplant -- one that completely transfigures a person’s motivations, sensibilities, relationships, and actions. In the Book of Ezekiel, God tells his children:

“I will give you a new heart, and put a new spirit in you. I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws … .” (emphasis added)
Judging him on his record, George W. Bush’s spiritual transformation seems to have consisted of little more than staying on the wagon, with Jesus as a sort of talismanic Alcoholics Anonymous counselor. Bush came to his faith through a small group program created by Community Bible Study, which de-emphasizes sin and resembles a sort of Jesus-centered therapy session.
But sin is crucial to Christianity. To be born again, a seeker must painfully acknowledge his or her innate sinfulness, and then turn away from it completely. And though today Bush is sober, he does not live and govern like a man who “walks” with God, using the Bible as a moral compass for his decision making. Twice in the past year -- once during an April press conference and most recently at a presidential debate -- the president was unable to name any mistake he has made during his term. His steadfast unwillingness to fess up to a single error betrays a strikingly un-Christian lack of attention to the importance of self-criticism, the pervasiveness of sin, and the centrality of humility, repentance, and redemption. Indeed, it is impossible to imagine George W. Bush delivering an address like Jimmy Carter’s legendary “malaise” speech (in which he did not actually say the word “malaise”) in 1979. Carter sermonized to a dispirited nation in the language of confession, sacrifice, and spiritual restoration. Though it didn’t do him a lick of good politically, it was consonant with a Christian theology of atonement: Carter admitted his mistakes to make right with God and the American people, politics be damned. Bush, for whom politics is everything, can’t even admit that he’s done anything wrong.

Save for a few standout reporters, the press has done a dismal job of covering the president’s very public religiosity. Overwhelmingly lacking personal familiarity with conservative Christianity, political reporters have either avoided the topic or resorted to shopworn clichés and lazy stereotypes. Over and over, news stories align Bush with evangelical theology while loosely dropping terms like fundamentalist to describe his beliefs.

Once and for all: George W. Bush is neither born again nor evangelical. As Alan Cooperman reported in The Washington Post last month, the president has been careful never to use either term to describe his faith. Unlike millions of evangelicals, Bush did not have a single born-again experience; instead, he slowly came to Christianity over the course of several years, beginning with a deep conversation with the Reverend Billy Graham in the mid-1980s. And there is virtually no evidence that Bush places any emphasis on evangelizing -- or spreading the gospel -- in either his personal or professional life. Contrast this to Carter, who notoriously told every foreign dignitary he encountered about the good news of Jesus Christ.

If he is anything at all, Bush is nominally Methodist, the denomination of his home church in Dallas. John Wesley, Methodism’s founder, emphasized an emotional “warming of the heart” to Christ as fundamental to conversion. (That self-help ethos is evident in the resident’s “compassionate conservatism.”) But Wesley was equal part freedom fighter: As a pastor in 17th-century England, he was barred from the pulpit for crusading against the abhorrent evils of slavery. Wesley died a poor man, his life a testament to Christ’s exhortation of charity in the Gospel of Mark: “Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.”

Bush, on the other hand, is no ascetic firebrand. The president has a net worth of nearly $20 million, and there is no indication that he is on the brink of abandoning his fortune to live righteously with the poor. And unlike Wesley, Bush has never compromised his political standing to challenge the conservative status quo -- regardless of its Christian righteousness.

The president is, safe to say, a “Dalmatian” Methodist.


* * *
Two months prior to launching his first presidential campaign, Bush sat for an interview with The Dallas Morning News to discuss the role of religion in his life and his politics. He spoke evasively and didn’t seem comfortable discussing his Christian conviction. “I view my religion as very personal,” he explained. “I want people to judge me on my deeds, not how I try to define myself as a religious person of words.”

But the president’s supporters in Christendom cling to his words as prima facie evidence of his deep Christian faith. And though Bush is not an evangelical, he certainly talks like one. As has been often noted, Bush effortlessly speaks the language of the born again, and his remarks are loaded with subliminal messages to the nation’s 60 million white evangelicals. Ironically, the theology embedded in this language is not even the president’s own -- it belongs to Michael Gerson, Bush’s crack speechwriter, himself a devout Christian and a graduate of Wheaton College, the “evangelical Harvard.” Far too often, though, the press confuses Gerson’s words with Bush’s beliefs.

The distinction is critical, as the press, as well as many of Bush’s most ardent supporters, curiously points to the president’s words, not his deeds, as evidence of his deep Christian faith. In Alan Cooperman’s recent Washington Post article, David Frum, a (Jewish) former Bush speechwriter, said of the president’s religious beliefs, “If you want to know what George Bush really thinks, look at what he says.”

Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, has met with the president and advised the Bush White House. “I sat down with [Bush],” he told me. “What I do know is that … [the president] is an honest guy who really believes what he says.”

Bush’s attraction to Jesus jargon is no accident. As an aspiring pol, he learned early on that religious language could give him the cowboy cred he needed to woo voters in Texas. Doug Wead is a close friend of the Bush family and a prominent evangelical motivational speaker. Wead worked closely with the president when he advised George Bush Senior during the 1988 presidential campaign. “There’s no question that [George W. Bush’s] faith is real, that it’s authentic … and there is no question that it’s calculated,” Wead told Frontline. “I know that sounds like a contradiction.”

Wead taught Bush Junior to “signal early and signal often” when he spoke to conservative Christians on behalf of Bush Senior. “George would read my memos, and he would be licking his lips saying, ‘I can use this to win in Texas,’” Wead told Guy Lawson in an article that appeared last year in GQ.

But in the Bible, Jesus Christ disdained insincere religious posturing. In the famed parable of the tax collector and the Pharisee, the penitent taxman prayed in a far corner of the temple and wept, hiding his face from God in shame. The Pharisee stood up, front and center, and exalted himself, thanking God that he was better than other men. Christ was unequivocal: “I tell you that [the tax collector], rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

The president has made sure to tell any Christian media outlet that would listen that he reads the Bible daily. Does he skip over the Gospel of Luke?

Bush’s defenders would argue that reproving the president’s Christian commitment is opportunistic and cheap, perhaps even sinful. They would say that an outsider could never appreciate the depths of the man’s private religious conviction.

But just as voters will judge his economic track record and his failed war in Iraq, so, too, must believers hold Bush’s actions as president to the standard of his professed Christian beliefs. After all, Bush made religious faith his characterological calling card from the outset of his very first campaign. Scripture says we have a right to scrutinize such claims; indeed, Scripture even obligates Christians to protect one another from creeping sinfulness. The author of the letters to the Hebrews in the New Testament left no room for interpretation on this point: “Take care, brethren, lest there should be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart … . But encourage one another day after day … lest any one of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.”

Just who will boldly hold the president accountable to Scripture? Sycophantic religious conservatives are heavily invested in politics; they dare not rock the boat. Religious liberals are cast aside as partisan. And as Amy Sullivan noted recently in The New Republic, Bush does not regularly attend church -- he doesn’t even have a pastor or fellow congregants to keep him on the straight and narrow.

For Bible-believing Christians, nothing in the entire world is more important than “walking” with Jesus; that is, engaging in a personal relationship with their savior and living according to his word. With this in mind, I recently asked Haggard, himself the pastor of a large church in Colorado, why the president, as a man of supposedly strong faith, did not publicly apologize for continually misleading Americans in the run-up to the Iraq War. Instead, Bush clung zealously to misinformation and half-truths. I asked Haggard why, as a man of Christian principle, Bush did not fully disavow Karl Rove’s despicable smear tactics and apologize for the ugly lies the Bush campaign spread over the years about Ann Richards, John McCain, and John Kerry, among others. After all, isn’t getting right with God -- whatever the political price --the most important thing for the sort of Christian Bush has proclaimed himself to be?

Haggard laughed as though my questions were the most naive he’d ever heard. “I think if you asked the president these questions once he’s out of office,” Haggard said, “he’d say, ‘You’re right. We shouldn’t have done it.’ But right now if he said something like that, well, the world would spin out of control!

“That’s why when Jimmy Carter ran, he [turned out to be] such a terrible president. Because when he [governed], he really tried to maintain [his integrity] and those types of values -- and that is virtually impossible.”

The pastor returned to my charges of Bush’s deceitfulness. “Listen,” he said testily, “I think [we Christian believers] are responsible not to lie [sic], but I don’t think we’re responsible to say everything we know.”


* * *
Bush’s religious backers like Haggard point to the president’s policy agenda as evidence of his spiritual ideals. The Christian spirit of compassionate conservatism, they say, infuses Bush’s commitment to policies like faith-based social services; many believers hold that a poverty of the spirit is at least partly to blame for such social ills as drug abuse and crime. Bush’s stance on abortion and other so-called life issues is also in concordance with the conservative Christian worldview. And the administration’s proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, while theologically dubious, certainly resonates among more traditionalist believers. Even the war in Iraq, on which Bush famously consulted his heavenly (rather than earthly) father, was proffered as an Old Testament-style battle between the forces of good and The Enemy, as such Christians refer to Satan. “Our responsibility to history is already clear: to answer these attacks and rid the world of evil,” the president declared after September 11.

But the aforementioned issues are Christological softballs, as it were. After all, Bush’s positions on such matters land him safely in Republican territory. Never once has the president crossed party lines to uphold Christian principles such as aiding the poor or caring for the environment, for example. Much more of the president’s record reveals a man with a far deeper commitment to partisanship, or just simply being right -- even at the expense of clear biblical teaching.

Ironically, the Bush’s policy on embryonic stem-cell research, often described by its opponents as a triumph of theocracy over sound public policy, is better understood as just such a victory of partisanship over religious principle. It seems like a lifetime ago, but the debate over embryonic stem-cell research in the summer of 2001 was pitched as a battle between blinkered religiosity and scientific progress. On stem cells, Bush walked a fine line between two powerful constituencies early in his term: To his right, freshly empowered evangelicals and conservative Catholics vehemently opposed the destruction of live embryos, often referring to the cell clusters as “the tiniest human beings”; to his left stood the scientific community and, according to an ABC News/Beliefnet poll conducted at the time, 58 percent of Americans who supported the research.

On the campaign trail, Bush himself bandied about Catholic “culture of life” lingo while siding with religious conservatives who unequivocally opposed embryonic stem-cell research. "During the campaign, President-elect Bush ... said that as president he would oppose federally funded research or experimentation on embryonic stem cells that require live human embryos to be discarded or destroyed," spokesman Ari Fleischer told reporters in early 2001. The message was clear: Opposing embryonic stem-cell research was a matter of conscience for the new president.

But as Bush’s political viability waned, so, too, did his Christian conviction. By August of 2001, he had finally located the political sweet spot: The president ultimately approved federal financing for research on 60 stem-cell lines that had already been harvested, but prohibited the creation of any new ones. The resulting policy is neither scientifically nor religiously defensible. If the destruction of embryos is the moral equivalent of murder, it should be banned; if it is not, there is no reason to restrict federal funding to already extant stem-cell lines. The decisive ethical issue here concerns the status of the embryo and the legitimacy of its destruction. Bush's position amounts to saying that murder is OK as long as it isn't done with federal funds. But while there may be little that can be said in favor of Bush's position from a moral or research point of view, it's the perfect answer to the president's political program. His base gets messages like “[embryonic stem-cell research] leads down a slippery slope [toward] designer clones,” while a general audience recently received a communiqué from the Bush campaign bragging that he "delivered the first funding ever for embryonic stem-cell research."

Conservative Christians call this moral relativism. But in the simpler language that George W. Bush prefers, it’s a “flip-flop.”


* * *
In Exodus, the Ninth Commandment admonishes, “Thou shalt not bear false testimony against thy neighbor.” God wasn’t joking around there. But time and again, Bush and Rove have relied on repugnant lies to discredit their opponents. In the final days of the Texas governor’s race in 1994, barroom rumors swirled that Governor Ann Richards was a lesbian, and that she had appointed “avowed homosexuals” to her administration. Those rumors were lies, but Bush won the race.

In 2000, Bush squared off against John McCain in the hotly contested Republican presidential primary in South Carolina. Rather than go one on one with the war hero and popular pol, Bush let shady henchmen do his dirty work for him. In the final days before the showdown, Bush supporters waged whisper campaigns and distributed parking-lot handouts spreading the vilest of lies: that McCain was mentally unfit to serve after his long captivity in Vietnam; that his wife was a drug addict; that the senator had fathered a black daughter with a prostitute.

Bush won that race, too.

Little has changed this time around. When the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth emerged this summer to attack John Kerry’s admirable military service in Vietnam, veteran observers of past Bush campaigns immediately recognized Karl Rove’s handiwork. And with less than a month to go until November, the conservative Sinclair Broadcast Group abruptly preempted regularly scheduled television programming to air a propaganda film that denigrates Kerry’s war record. The media markets affected by this decision just happen to be in swing states.

Just how low will George W. Bush stoop for a victory?

For most candidates running for office, foul play is par for the course. But Bush is not like most other candidates. If he is a Christian, he is called to be the salt of the earth, the light of the world, a beacon of goodness and righteousness in a society havocked by moral depravity. In late May, Bush said as much to a group of Christian media players during a rare unscripted interview.

“I think a person's faith helps keep perspective in the midst of noise, pressure, sound -- all the stuff that goes on in Washington … ,” he explained. “It is one of the prayers I ask is that God's light shines through me as best as possible, no matter how opaque the window … .

“I'm in a world of … fakery and obfuscation, political back shots, and so I'm very mindful about the proper use of faith in this process And you can't fake your faith, nor can you use your faith as a shallow attempt to garner votes, otherwise you will receive the ultimate condemnation.” (emphasis added)

You can't, that is, if "ultimate condemnation" is your real concern. For the purposes of winning elections, it seems to do just fine.

Ayelish McGarvey is a Prospect writing fellow.
Copyright © 2004 by The American Prospect, Inc. Preferred Citation: Ayelish McGarvey, "As God Is His Witness", The American Prospect Online, Oct 19, 2004. This article may not be resold, reprinted, or redistributed for compensation of any kind without prior written permission from the author. Direct questions about permissions to permissions@prospect.org.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Christian Republican speaks to other Christians
Beware: the GOP has become a fascist cult
By Karl W. B. Schwarz
Online Journal Contributing Writer

October 23, 2004—Many people are getting in touch with me asking about what I see, what I know, and why as a Conservative Christian Republican I am not backing Bush-Cheney and would not vote for them at gun point.

I have been telling Conservative Christians that who should be howling at the top of their lungs is not the Liberal Left, it is the Far Right Christian Conservatives for they are being lied to, seduced and misled even more so than the Liberal Left. They are being seduced into fascism and that is not Christianity.

Christians are admonished in the Bible to be leery of new prophets for all prophecy ended with the coming of Christ the Messiah. In the Book of James we are warned of the evil that comes from the mouths of men. James 3:5-6: "Likewise the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell."

Book of James 3:9: "With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in Gods' likeness. Out of the same mouth comes praise and cursing."

Unless you are deaf, dumb and blind, Christians need to come to grips with the fact that Bush-Cheney are lying to the world and that is not a mark of Christian virtue, nor is it a mark that the Bible tells us to seek, or to follow as Christians.

One does not have to look very far or dig very deep to find one lie after another that has come from Bush-Cheney. It is all an agenda; it is all about empowerment and greed and doing anything they wish, to anyone, and wrapping that all up as lies and spin to deceive us all.

I see it very clearly and if you saw it as clearly as I do, you would not vote for them at gunpoint, either, for to do so would be making yourself a deluded Christian that is not using discernment, that is following liars, and is on the wrong course.

Many Christian teachings give step-by-step advice on how to recognize a religious cult, and the same basic steps are necessary to recognize a political cult. If you know what to look for, and take the time to study closely, you can accurately recognize that Bush-Cheney is a cult of lust, power and greed, none of which are considered Christian virtues.

How to Identify a Cult

Here's a few guidelines to recognize a cult. If several of these apply to a group which has approached you, think twice before getting involved.

Do they put the demands of the group before family, school, and interests?

Are they vague about what their beliefs are until you're in the group?

Does the leader demand unquestioning agreement or obedience?

Is the leader a charismatic person who claims special spiritual powers?

Does the group change your sleeping and eating patterns?

Does the group keep you in constant group situations and promote dependency?

Does the group feel that only they have spiritual truth and that all other groups and churches are wrong?

Do group members keep contacting you even after you have told them you are not interested?
In fact, if you look real close at Bush-Cheney and understand the fundamental dynamics of what brought Hitler to power, how he controlled the masses, how he sold the Great Lie, it is very easy to see that Bush-Cheney "Compassionate Conservatism" and Fascism are one in the same. Many hear the term "Neocon" and do not recognize that in its current operative sense, it is a term meaning New World Order Fascist.

Following are the Fourteen Common Threads of Fascism and how to spot fascism. I ask that you read and think, as an American, as a Christian. Use the mind that God gave you and use discernment that the Bible warns you to use as a shield against following wrong or evil. I have taken the Laurence W. Britt section headings and written what I have to say to you Christians, coming from me as a Christian about each of those 14 points.

Fascism Anyone?

"Fascism's principles are wafting in the air today, surreptitiously masquerading as something else, challenging everything we stand for."

By Laurence W. Britt

The cliché that people and nations learn from history is not only overused, but also overestimated; often we fail to learn from history, or draw the wrong conclusions. Sadly, historical amnesia is the norm.

We are two-and-a-half generations removed from the horrors of Nazi Germany, although constant reminders jog the consciousness. German and Italian fascism form the historical models that define this twisted political worldview. Although they no longer exist, this worldview and the characteristics of these models have been imitated by protofascist regimes at various times in the twentieth century. Both the original German and Italian models and the later protofascist regimes show remarkably similar characteristics. Although many scholars question any direct connection among these regimes, few can dispute their visual similarities.

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. We were purportedly attacked by al Qaeda, but Bush-Cheney do not want any of us to know who the American and foreign names are that FBI translator Sibel D. Edmonds found in translating those documents and who financed 9-11. We were told Saudis did it, but what Sibel found disputes that and Bush, Cheney and Ashcroft put a federal gag order on her so you and I cannot know whose names are on that list.

Stop and think—what does protecting the identity of American and foreign names have to do with "national security" except to prove "WHO DID IT?"

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. If you have not figured it out yet, the USA PATRIOT Act and Patriot Act II are undermining the freedoms of all of us, treating us all as al Qaeda suspects, and is part of a larger New World Order objective. Consider this—there are some who want the American Dream only for themselves and you do not get to have it if they win. We are also having many things "done in our name" in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere that Americans would reject if they knew the truth. What is really disgusting is that both sides of the aisle are doing it to America. Their wealthy masters (contributors) are telling them to. They are making the big bucks and we are getting stuck with the debt, the dead and maimed soldiers, not to mention the burdens their families are bearing and the burdens the rest of our families are enduring, all in the name of lies, imperialism and greed.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The entire world now knows that Bush lied about Iraq. I have made millions come to know that the Taliban had signed a contract with Argentina based Bridas Corporation to build that pipeline we now control across Afghanistan. The shortest and cheapest route to the sea for $10+ trillion in oil and over $3 trillion in natural gas is from Turkmenistan, across Afghanistan, Pakistan to the ocean.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. George W. Bush is not Caesar and our troops are not Roman Legions out to do the bidding of the Wealthy Elite.

5. Rampant sexism. I hear one woman after another talking about how "hot" George W. Bush is and why they support him. This election is about the fate of this nation and has nothing to do with following a liar. I do not think the Stepford Wives is what ladies want to be, but there is plenty of Republican sexism and plenty of misleading to sell it as something it is not. They want your vote, other than that could not care less what you think, feel, want or need.

6. A controlled mass media. If you think you are getting all you need to know from Clear Channel, CNN and FOXNews, you need to look around and consider that maybe they are not being truthful with you, and maybe there is more going on in this world than Scott & Laci Peterson, Kobe Bryant, Michael Jackson, etc. Maybe the media is answering more to their masters than to the truth. Maybe they do not show us the facts because their wealthy masters will not let them. How can you make a decision with only lies to found a decision upon?

7. Obsession with national security. To the point of treating all of us as al Qaeda suspects, lessening our freedoms for "security" that is non-existent. Always remember, what government takes away they rarely if ever give back. Consider the words of Thomas Jefferson—"where the government fears the people, there is freedom. Where the people fear the government, there is tyranny." Welcome to current day America. Homeland Security is protecting the government, not you and your family, loved ones and friends.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Separation of church and state is so that the government cannot dictate or ordain what each of us is to believe when it comes to religion. What has slowly evolved is a circumstance where our religion elite and government elite are pursuing the same end and I do not see a healthy future in that department. God is our Lord, not George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Jesus Christ is our Savior, not George Bush or Dick Cheney. Our church is within each of our hearts, not in the idle words from Washington, DC.

9. Power of corporations protected. What you have been witnessing over the past 12-16 years is the "Corporatization of the U.S. Government" and that by its very definition is fascism. That is why the corporations grow more powerful as you grow weaker. That is why they have the American Dream and many Americans do not and will not. That is why corporate fraud is not punished but if you do anything wrong, are punished. Richard W. Behan, author of The GOP, Inc calls them Movement Conservatives, and I call them Financial Terrorists. We are describing the same thing, but he is describing the disease and I am describing in my book the etymology of how that disease is systematically ruining this nation, this world and diminishing the lives of us all; how it kills hopes, dreams, futures. Richard is a Liberal and I am a Conservative and on this, we totally agree.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Three million jobs lost, many of them organized labor positions and just in case one has a Ph.D or MBA, quit complaining and take the Wal-Mart job, lose your home, health care, etc. Look around you, Christians, at the hopelessness you see in the faces of those around you and the sheer indifference of the government that pretends to lead us, be us. When was the last time you saw goodness, integrity, honor, Christian values come out of DC? Such does not come from there, so be careful with your answer.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Extend that to include freedom of speech, freedom of dissent, etc. If you stand up against this fascism, your "report" is sent to the Homeland Security Counter Terrorism Division, which in part explains why Homeland Security is protecting this government, not this nation, and in part explains why they just cannot seem to find the real terrorists. They are almost totally focused on U.S. citizens as the terrorist they fear. In my book, I define Financial Terrorists, what they do that creates the other forms of terrorism. We are not hated for our freedoms—we are hated for abusive U.S. policies and that is driven not by you and me, but that is driven by DC and their wealthy corporate masters. Greed is not a Christian virtue.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Lest you have not noticed, Ashcroft is batting 0 for 5,000 in the department of nailing the bad guys. I sent a letter to President Bush, Kerry and the Democratic National Committee on September 30 and these were two of the demands for the truth I put before these leaders and wannabe leaders:

2. I demand to know what energy companies were in that Cheney Energy Task Force meeting and what discussions there were as to the steps that would be taken to remove the Taliban and Bridas Corporation as the last remaining obstacle to the United States controlling the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline. I met that company in 1999 and have known since then about the Bridas v Unocal, $15 billion interference of contract lawsuit in US District Court, Southern District of Texas. I also know about the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision on September 9, 2003 that upheld the Bridas $500 million arbitration settlement and the March 22, 2004 denial of Writ of Certiorari at the United States Supreme Court, Case 03-1018, Turkmenneft v Bridas

3. I demand to know how many prisoners are being held at GITMO and other places that are either BRIDAS EMPLOYEES or are persons that know all about Bridas Corporation and what your administration did to get control of that Trans-Afghanistan pipeline.

This administration is more focused on defending themselves against Americans who do not buy off on their lies than looking for al Qaeda. They are more concerned about four more years of entitlement to plunder this nation and others abroad. They are totally focused on taking over trillions of dollars worth of oil even with lies and making war to do so. That is not a mark of Christian virtue.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Just look at Cheney-Halliburton and one should have all they need to know. Look at the "no rule of law" brought against Enron, Tyco, Williams Communications Group, Global Crossing, etc., etc., etc., and the millions of investors plowed under the in wake. You are poorer and they are wealthier than ever. When you figure out that the robber barons are the major campaign contributors to both parties and they want "legal rights under color of law" to plunder you, let me know. You will have had an epiphany.

14. Fraudulent elections. The 2000 Election still stinks to high heaven. If you have not heard, all across the U.S., Republicans are signing up people to vote. If Republican, those are being recorded; if Democrat, being discarded in the trash. That is not American; that is abusive, deceitful and un-American. Check Voter Fraud, KLAS, George Knapp, Las Vegas, NV.

I spent election night 1994 with RNC Finance in Washington, DC at the Renaissance Hotel, 10th & K Streets, at the table of William J. McManus, former RNC Treasurer. I pulled out of the RNC (Republican National Committee) when I learned that the Contract with America and the media spin was actually a Contract On America. It is all about Big Corporate business and socially malevolent to folks like you and me. Look close, pay attention.

Remember ladies and gentlemen, the U.S. government is not America, merely the instrument of government in America. We are America, not them. U.S. Corporations are not America, merely businesses based here. We are America, not them.

When they lie to us to lead us, they do not deserve to lead us. This is in Chapter 1 of my book. You would be wise to read it and heed it:

"It is not a pleasant thought, or one that's often discussed, but lies are at base coercive. Deceit is a form of control. More than a few philosophers have compared the coercive force of lies to the power of violence. So even if they are common, they are not as benign as people pretend. Lies undermine the value of information, each one leaving us less able to trust the truthfulness of what we hear—or read, as the case may be. Lies are more subtle than guns, but as threats to personal freedom, they should be regarded as no less dangerous."—Mara Leveritt in the Arkansas Times

Consider what you are voting for November 2:

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."—Thomas Jefferson

Do you want Our America, or their Fascist Amerika? What you just read is what they have done to Our Nation. Through slow operations they have perverted it into tyranny.

Karl W. B. Schwarz lives in Little Rock, AR and is the author of "One-Way Ticket to Crawford, Texas, a Conservative Republican Speaks Out." He is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Patmos Nanotechnologies, LLC and I-nets Security Systems, a designer of intelligence and UAV systems.


And here's The American Conservative editorial endorsing Kerry. It's actually really interesting b/c The American Conservative editorial isn't exactly endorsing Kerry, but rather believes that a Kerry victory will force the Republican Party to reevaluate and turn from the neoconservativism of Bush and those currently running his administration. (It assures it's readers that "If Kerry wins, this magazine will be in opposition from Inauguration Day forward.") However, as a conservative, he explains that "George W. Bush has come to embody a politics that is antithetical to almost any kind of thoughtful conservatism" and "Bush has behaved like a caricature of what a right-wing president is supposed to be, and his continuation in office will discredit any sort of conservatism for generations." The article itself is extremely interesting.

Chief Justice Rehnquist

Supreme Court Chief Justice Rehnquist has cancer.

Again, all the Supreme Court Justices are old (other than Thomas, all over 65) - Rehnquist is 80 himself - and there may be many changes (Stevens, Rehnquist, O'Connor, and Ginsburg are my guesses).

I can't imagine another 4 Scalia/Thomas judges! People say that the talk of controlling the Supreme Court isn't a real concern. This just highlights why it is. Right now, it's a loose 5-4 conservative majority. If Ginsburg and Stevens retire, then it's a strong 7-2 stronghold - with 4 of those manical in their out of date views, wanting to live like it's the 1700s, able to reach back through time to know what the framers though when they wrote the Constitution, and not allowing society to change in any way. Great...

Just another reason why Bush must be defeated.

Why John Kerry?

Mustang Bobby posted an editorial endorsement from the Des Moines Register. He felt it important enough to post in it's entirety - and so do I. Rather than just say why NOT Bush, as most endorsements have done, this lays out WHY John Kerry.

About half of Americans have lost confidence in President Bush, yet many hang back from embracing the alternative. That's unfortunate, because Senator John F. Kerry is a wise and decent man who has the makings of a fine president.

Still, there's little wonder that voters have doubts. Most of what they think they know about the senator comes from a masterful job of "defining the opposition" carried out by the Bush campaign and its surrogates before most people got a chance to know the real Kerry.

So Americans were introduced to Kerry the flip-flopper. Kerry the softie on defense. Kerry the wild-eyed liberal. Kerry the appeaser who will let terrorists attack America.

It's sad that an incumbent president chose to employ so much of his vast campaign resources to tear down his challenger, and not to cite his own accomplishments or to move the nation ahead. But perhaps that's precisely the difficulty the president faces.

His presidency has been one of bold leadership undermined by a failure to achieve meaningful results. The resolute leader Americans rallied behind after Sept. 11, 2001, sidetracked the country into a mess in Iraq. The fiscally responsible, compassionate conservative Americans thought they elected, the man we hoped would improve schools, lower the cost of health care and find more jobs, has failed to do so and instead run up an unprecedented national debt.

The president, whose swagger in adversity and plain-folks straight talk can be so appealing, has failed to see the reality of the problems or outline a road map for progress for the next four years.

National polls show the president's disapproval numbers hoving near 50 percent.

Now it is time to take the next logical step and recognize John Kerry as someone who could do better. It's time to see Kerry as the person he is, not as the caricature created in the president's campaign ads.

Kerry won the presidential debates because the man Americans saw on live television differed from the caricature. Americans saw a thoughtful, experienced, exceptionally well-informed candidate who cares deeply about his country and its people.

They didn't see Mr. Perfect. Kerry tends toward wordiness and overexplanation. His positions on some issues - such as being nearly indistinguishable from Bush on Iraq - are unsatisfactory. His New England reserve comes off as aloofness. It takes time to gain an appreciation of him.

A search for the real John Kerry should focus on his 22 years in elective office - unblemished service as Massachusetts lieutenant governor and U.S. senator. The strongest indication of his success is that the people of Massachusetts - the cradle of American liberty - chose four times to elect him to the Senate.

Yes, Kerry is liberal. But what's to fear from a liberal president? That he would run big deficits? That he would increase federal spending? That he would expand the power of the federal government over individuals' lives? Nothing Kerry could do could top what President Bush has already done in those realms.

Kerry is not the stereotypical liberal in any case. According to the "Almanac of American Politics," Kerry is "more respectful of economic free markets" and more inclined to an expansionist foreign policy than other liberal Democrats. He has been a champion of small business. He was an early supporter of the conservative Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit-reduction act.

An overview of Kerry's 20 years in the Senate shows a conscientious lawmaker, popular with the home-state voters. Kerry's legislative interests have run to investigating government wrongdoing, strengthening law enforcement, securing health care for children and preventing nuclear proliferation. He has a strong record on the environment.

Most interesting - and relevant to Nov. 2 - Kerry has a reputation for being able to work across party lines. He worked well with Republican Gov. William Weld for the common good of Massachusetts. He worked with Republican Senators John McCain and Bob Smith on POW/MIA issues.

That's a key quality, especially in an angrily polarized America. Of President Bush's shortcomings, the most disappointing is the betrayal of his promise to be a uniter. America should be united at times like these - and was for a shining moment after 9/11. But the president let that slip away, deepening divisions by adopting a my-way-or-the-highway cocksureness on both domestic and foreign affairs.

It can be assumed that the next president, be it Bush or Kerry, will do everything in his power to make America safe from terrorism. That's job No. 1, and the American people will stand for no less. But on the broad range of other issues, Kerry has more to offer. He is in touch with the middle class. He is better informed on health care and has sound ideas for creating jobs. He understands that protecting the environment need not be a drag on the economy but can be a great boon as new energy technologies are developed.

By nature, he is more of a uniter than Bush.

It won't be easy. The partisans on neither side will go silent on Inauguration Day. If Kerry wins, those who have been attacking him will do their best to undermine his presidency. The same will be true on the other side if Bush is re-elected.

But Kerry, we believe, has a better chance of overcoming that anger. It is the nature of the man to listen and to respect others. He does not tend toward vindictiveness or in-your-face triumphalism. There is a dignity about him. We have watched him from early in the Iowa caucus campaign through a grueling general-election campaign in a battleground state. We have seen Kerry grow and develop in presidential qualities to the point we're confident in recommending him as a person of common sense and decency - a leader who has what it takes to bring Americans back together.

I'll be the first to agree that the endorsements are often unimportant. However, some of them make points that the avarage voter should (but isn't) asking.

When internet dating fails, go for billboards...

Some political comedy

Oh my gosh, this is hysterical. From Dyskeptic.

And speaking of comedy, check out Enjoy The Draft.

Finally, a joke from Where the Dophins Play:
Q: What's the difference between Iraq and Vietnam?
A: Bush had a plan to get out of Vietnam.

A few fun websites to check out:

Kerry Hater for Kerry

Botox Kerry

Osama Sweepstakes (October 31 is currently willing...)

Build a new candidate (choose between Kerry and Bush)

Bush is Lord (yikes...)

Too Stupid To Be President

Until health care is run as a service and not as a business, we are going to have problems in the US with health care

I went to the Judge's reunion yesterday. I spent more time in the car on ONE DIRECTION than I spent at dinner. And naturally, we got into political discussions. The Judge is a Democrat, appointed and friends with Clinton, and his political stance is known. I felt bad for the secretary b/c the Judge was totally toying with her. "I might vote for Bush" [insert secretary's clapping] "because he has never made a mistake. He told me." and "I might vote for Bush" [insert secretary's cheering] "because I support affirmative action and, the way I see it, Bush is America's first affirmative action president." Each time she thought that he was serious.

She kept saying, "I'm a Democrat and I'm voting for Bush." At one point, I said, "I could call myself a Republican but that doesn't mean that I am." She is one of those Bush supporters who believes everything that the administration is saying. She still believes that Iraq has WMD (and they are just hiding), then changed it to "the terrorists are in Iraq" and then said that we are there b/c Saddam tortured his own people. When I kept asking why, if she is right in claiming that is an appropriate reason to be there, we weren't in Saudi Arabia or North Korea or China, she said that they were all the same. I mean, and then we went back to the weapons were in Iraq. Another clerk , a Republican said, "I am glad that people think these wrong things b/c it's a vote for Bush." I was floored...you would rather have an uneducated voter because it's a vote for your guy than have the American public know the truth and make an informed decision?? Ugh!

We were also talking about how flu shots are just not as profitable as other types of medical shots - and health care isn't a service, it's a business. One of the clerks with daughters said that he had a big problems getting mumps and measles shots last year for the same reason. So I come back this year and read that:

"Preventing a flu epidemic that could kill thousands is not nearly as profitable as making pills for something like erectile dysfunction, a decidedly non-fatal condition. Viagra, for example, brings in more than $1 billion a year for its maker, Pfizer. The profits to be made from selling flu vaccine are measly in comparison. If selling flu vaccine were as lucrative as marketing Viagra, sports broadcasts and the nightly news would be flooded with commercials warning that "winter is almost here; ask your doctor about flu vaccine" - and it would be available to anyone who wanted it. Instead, while many of those at risk of the flu go without the vaccine, primetime programs are sponsored by the makers of Viagra ("Get back to mischief"), Cialis ("Will you be ready?") and Levitra ("Stay in the game").

To understand what has gone wrong in health care, one need only look at the booming market for prescription drugs. Once upon a time, drugs were a needs-based product. You received a prescription when you were truly ill. Now many drugs are demand-driven, just like Froot Loops and Lucky Charms. Instead of using the cartoon characters that sell cereals, the drug companies employ celebrities."

Do I think that the flu vaccination problem is Bush's fault? Actually, no. The fact that what should be a service is run like a business - cost analysis - that is the problem. Does Bush have a plan to address that?? He isn't even properly identifying the problem. The fact is, the flu vaccination shortage is the symptom for the problem, not the cause of the problem. And we are not even good at health care. "We spend more per capita on health care than any other developed country. Yet on the important yardsticks, like life expectancy measured in healthy years, we don't even rank among the top 20 nations. In fact, according to the World Health Organization, we come in an embarrassing 29th, sandwiched between Slovenia and Portugal."

In other election news, this is the reason that I am going to volunteer as a challenger for the Democratic Party in Lake County on election day (assuming that I can get the day off work).

Meanwhile, Republicans are switching parties of college students. Are the Republicans going to go into the polling booth and vote for them as well?

And like Ohio, Pennsylvania, another important swing state, has said that Nader will not be on the ballot there either. This is a troubling statement though, "Mr. Nader would continue to appeal rulings made on the state level, even after the election."Great...just what we need, the courts involved after the election for a guy not even on the ballot. (This shows where Nader is and isn't on the ballot, if anyone is interested.) One of the clerks made an interesting point - if (as appears to be likely) the election is contested for months again in the courts like last time, as our attention is focused on that, wouldn't that be a good time for terrorists to attack? Though there doesn't appear to be any such evidence that such an attack is in the plans. But really, I don't think that for an independent, it's a bad thing to require that the people supporting to put you on the ballot are registered voters. Isn't that the same as the primaries for the parties - they decide who the candidate will be from registered voters?? Though I still believe that the election should not be decided by courts, but the Supreme Court has asked for this. (And how do they count those votes so quickly anyway?)

And in football - 43 seconds into the game, Cleveland was already down 7-0. Nice...This is going to be one of those types of games, huh?

And I think I'm getting sick -- I've had a sinus headache for about 27 hours -- coincidentally, the amount of time when I was in the car driving...

Where Is Our Constitution When We Need Our Liberties Protected From Tyrants?

Via mousemusings, comes the story of just how far our First Amendment has truly fallen. Where is the outrage?? Since when is this obscenity?




"I know it when I see it" -- and this sure as hell ain't it...What are we teaching our kids??

I have to drive to Scranton PA tomorrow. In case you were wondering what that means, I have to wake up, drive about 6 1/2 hours to have DINNER, and then drive back. That's it. Driving across PA via 80 just might be the most boring thing ever. At least there is the possibility that the leaves will be changing. Why subject myself to Scranton PA, when I couldn't wait to leave the year I was there? Well, the Judge that I worked for has a "reunion" every year. In December. Last December there was a friggin' blizzard on the way home, and I complained, so he changed the date of the reunion, which of course, makes it so that I *have* to go. So yes, I have 13 hours of driving for a 3 hour dinner...

Tonight I made calls to voters for Kerry's campaign. I was all flustered when there were multiple voters on the same telephone number - who do you ask for? Then, you identify yourself and ask if they have a moment, and one guy actually told me, "you Kerry people can go to hell." Aahh...so should I mark that down as a Bush supporter??

Fun story, calling these voters, one was actually old "friend"...what does one do?? I figured, I'm getting an answering machine about 95% of the time, what are the odds that he's home on a Friday night? So I called to leave the message...and he was home. D'oh. I was so flustered, I accidentally skipped over the start of the speech (the part asking if it was him - I knew it was him already). Then I just felt dumb. I recognized his voice right away (it helped that I knew it would be him before I called) but I'm not sure if he realized it was me - then again, after that many years, why would he expect a random Kerry caller to be someone from a half a decade ago? Anyway, he was in the middle of dinner, but said I could call tomorrow and he would answer the questions. I will take that as confirmation that he was a Kerry supporter. See, I had good taste even in high school...

Chech out the alternate realities of Bush and Kerry supporters - I knew Bush supporters were loco. This explains so much...
Bush Supporters Misled
A new study by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) shows that supporters of President Bush hold wildly inaccurate views about the world. For example, "a large majority [72 percent] of Bush supporters believe that before the war Iraq had weapons of mass destruction."Most Bush supporters [57 percent] also believe that the recently released report by Charles Duelfer, the administration's hand-picked weapons inspector, concluded Iraq either had WMD or a major program for developing them. In fact, the report concluded "Saddam Hussein did not produce or possess any weapons of mass destruction for more than a decade before the U.S.-led invasion" and the U.N. inspection regime had "curbed his ability to build or develop weapons."

According to the study, 75 percent Bush supporters also believe "Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda." Most Bush supporters [55 percent] believe that was the conclusion of the 9/11 commission. In fact, the 9/11 commission concluded there was no "collaborative relationship" between al-Qaeda and Iraq.

Bush supporters also hold inaccurate views about world public opinion of the war in Iraq and a range of Bush's foreign policy positions.

Just reaffirms what I always suspected - Bush supporters are idiots...

Why Not Nader??

First, when the hell did Halloween become a light holiday? Not the candle in a pumpkin kind of lights, but strings of orange pumpkin and white ghost lights that otherwise are identical to Christmas lights? I don't get it. From what I remember from my childhood, Christmas lights two months away from Christmas was...trashy. Now it's cool to have them out starting in October???

Second, I know a lot of people who are planning on voting for Ralph Nader. They sincerely want to send a message to the two party system. I understand that desire. I actually think the system would improve (read: be less corrupt) if there were more than two (real) parties. Monopolies are bad, whether a telephone company, cable service, or political parties. Despite this, I don't think that this is the time to make that stance. Too much is at stake with another four years of Bush. A friend warns me that this approach will not work b/c the Republicans can dig up these candidates on demand, so in 4 or 8 years, they'll just have another tyrant on the podium waiting to rob us of our freedom. He's worried that liberals are constantly voting out of fear rather than out of principles. I understand that, but at the same time, I read this open letter to George Bush and concur.

Dear Ralph:
You have publicly expressed your dismay at what you perceive to be a loss of nerve by those of us who supported you in the 2000 presidential race, but now endorse Senator Kerry. It is not a question of nerve. It is a question of pragmatic good judgment in a time of deep national crisis.

I bought into the argument in the 2000 election that there was little consequential difference between Bush and Gore and joined with you to send a signal to the Democratic Party and build the Green Party. The judgment that there was no consequential difference between the two establishment candidates has proven to be more wrong than I ever imagined possible. If Gore were president, the United States would not be bogged down in a pointless and unwinnable war in Iraq; we would not have the biggest budget deficit in our history; and we would not be experiencing a massive rollback in civil liberties and in environmental, health, and worker protections. We might not even have had 9/11. You more than anyone should be aware of this.

With regard to differences between Bush and Kerry, I must admit to having serious questions about a political system that offers us a presidential choice between a rich white male graduate of Yale University and a rich white male graduate of Yale University. However, to deny the significant differences between Bush and Kerry on issues ranging from environmental protection, nuclear proliferation, women’s rights, civil liberties, the Supreme Court, labor rights, and national security is intellectually dishonest. Furthermore, Kerry has a stunning advantage over Bush in his intelligence, honesty, emotional and moral maturity, understanding of the world beyond America’s borders, respect among foreign leaders, his ability to admit and learn from mistakes, and his capacity to articulate a coherent sentence. These are far from inconsequential differences.

Bush stands on his record. Indeed, the accomplishments of his administration have been breathtaking. In less than four years it has turned the largest budget surplus in our nation’s history into the biggest deficit; presided over the first net loss of jobs since President Herbert Hoover; squandered lives, money, and international reputation on an unwinnable war with no exit strategy against the wrong enemy; weakened milestone environmental protection laws like the Clean Air Act; exacerbated inequality, threatened Social Security and Medicare, undermined guaranteed overtime compensation and key labor rights; dismantled what once were considered unassailable Constitutional rights; appointed extremist judges to our country’s courts; and established a new military doctrine of pre-emptive nuclear war.

Perhaps Bush’s greatest failure is in the area he claims to be his greatest strength: national security. The most devastating terrorist attack in human history occurred on his watch. Three years later his administration has yet to identify and charge a single U.S.-based accomplice. Nor has it charged anyone with responsibility for the subsequent anthrax attacks. The administration that immediately identified Osama Bin Laden as the September 11 ringleader could not find him in Afghanistan; so it invaded Iraq and captured Saddam Hussein instead.

I have no illusions that Kerry will be a great progressive leader, but he will at least be a competent leader. At this point a return to competent plutocracy as usual will be a major improvement over gross incompetence and naked fascism — and this improvement is the best we can hope for in the 2004 election.

Whatever the original intention of your campaign, the only issues that have gained any attention center on personal ballot access for a candidate whose main support comes from his sworn enemies. You have not even positioned your run to build a third party.

Like Bush's war against Iraq, your campaign is the wrong war against the wrong enemy for the wrong reason. Tragically, it has come increasingly to appear that its primary intention is to throw the election to Bush to extract your personal vengeance against the Democratic Party, an outcome that will serve only to further harm your reputation and the hard-won victories of your lifetime of service.

George W. has become well known for his inability to admit a mistake and his self-righteous dismissal of all who challenge him. You risk history saying the same for Ralph Nader. When so many of your once closest friends and most ardent lifetime supporters urge you to withdraw and your main support comes from those on the Republican far right who detest everything you stand for, perhaps you should take note. Your one hope of avoiding further harm to your country, your cause, and your own reputation is to announce that you have made your statement and that now it is time for your remaining supporters to cast their ballots for Kerry.

This is a time for unity among all of us concerned for democracy and the future of America. We simply cannot afford four more years of what may be the most extremist, corrupt, and dangerously incompetent administration in U.S. history.

--David C. Korten
David C. Korten is the author of "When Corporations Rule the World."

Choking Advisory...

The American Medical Association has issued an advisory. The Universal choking sign has been revised. The new one is shown below.

Old symbol:




New symbol:

Hamm keeps Gold

I am really glad that they decided that Paul Hamm got to keep the Olympic Gold. Any scoring errors were not his fault. The fact that the FIG president Bruno Grandi had asked Hamm to voluntarily turn over his medal was disgusting in the first place. Moreover, if you know you are behind going into the final event, you turn it up just a touch - maybe that's the difference. It's a silly argument. You can't say that Y still follows X and is still before Z. Maybe someone behind one slips in an extra X to try to pull ahead. I feel they made the right decision.

Fun, politics and baseball

From Jen comes The Voting Time Warp spoof of the Rocky Horror Picture Show. Think the Jib Jab stuff.

She also linked this game that is just addictive in a "this is so easy" kind of way. Umm....did I mention that I have work to do? The baseball game is good too. I'm talking on the phone...here's why I don't want to go back on my ADHD medication. When I was, I wasn't able to multi-task as effectively. (Perhaps its open to interpretation whether I'm effective now??)

What I really want to discuss is this alleged voter fraud going on in western Pa, (Meadville is where I went to college!) Ok, that little personal tibit aside, this is serious concern. The fact remains that most of these allegations right now are being made against the Republicans. (Ironically, despite these attempts, I heard today that Bush realized he has no chance in PA and is pulling his ads there to focus on...Ohio. Great...like we don't already have enough.) Despite this, I think that it's a problem with both parties rightnow, and groups supporting both candidates. Extremism is not unique to Republicans (it's just uglier on them...) ;-)

If I can (which may not be possible with my upcoming trial) I have a few plans for voting day. In Ohio, each party can have one "challenger" at each poll site to attempt to prevent individuals from voting under four specific grounds. The Democrats are going to have challengers only at lower income and minority areas. We fear/expect the Republicans to attempt to strike voters in these areas because they largely vote Democratic. In contrast, we do not plan to strike voters of our own. We are not going to largely Republican polling locations to strike voters we think would be more likely to vote Republican. Our sole goal is, when the Republican challenger strikes a potential voter, pull them out of the line (the concern is that the strikes will come at lunch or another busy time in attempt to essentially shut down the polling place while this is being dealt with) and make sure their claim is valid without preventing other voters from voting as quickly as possible. These challenges are all political. Even elections officials have said that challengers will slow down the voting by create longer lines. But the fact that this has to be done is really sad. (Oh, the reasons that someone can challenge a voter is simply to claim that they don't believe that you're old enough, a U.S. citizen or a resident of the precinct you're voting in. Not sure how you would know if they were a resident or not. Or a US citizen. It's not like they have tattoos.) Both parties say that they don't plan to strike people for the sake of striking them - but can you see how giving us this power is just a bad thing in general? Anyway, I was asked to be a striker.

Unless it's so far apart that it's obvious, this election is going to be contested due to this political mess. And here's my thing. The courts asked for this. Specifically, the Supreme Court asked for this. They stepped into politics in the last election and have turned elections into a court matter. It's not that I support it; I thought they compromised the courts and themself by doing so 4 years ago. But the fact is, they opened the door to this.

How does one now know their second cousin? Maybe it's because I'm Greek, but I can't fathom it. Nevertheless, I think it's hysterical that Bush's second cousins support Kerry for President. Their slogan is, Blood is thinner than oil. "Bush Relatives for Kerry grew out of a series of conversations that took place between a group of people that have two things in common: they are all related to George Walker Bush, and they are all voting for John Kerry." These are people who are EMBARASSED to be related to the president. (Me, I'm embarassed to have him as my president, so I understand their pain.) Some of the testimonals are dead on. "The mantra of 'You're either with us or against us' was certainly, as our president might say, decisive. However, what I sensed during these four years, for the first time in my life as an American, was the idea was that it wasn't O.K. for this country's citizens to debate the big issues facing us today."
The article discussing the website is found here.


Finally, baseball. WHY THEY HECK DID THEY BRING IN PEDRO?!? That might be the single biggest piece of jackassery that I've ever seen. Your (occasional) #1 pitcher was scheduled to start game 1 of the World Series, you are up by 7 runs, your starting pitcher was showing no signs of struggle or wear, he can't beat NY, he pitched Monday (so this is two days of rest) and probably now (pitching on Wednesday) he can't pitch again until...Monday. I even think Sunday is pushing it. So you've lost him until game 3 now (which is probably Tuesday, actually). Like I said, jackassery. To prove my point, he gives up two runs already. Idiots.

But let's assume, 3 outs into the future, that the Red Sox wins. Does the story become the Red Sox amazing come from behind win (which has never happened before) or is the story the Yankees collapse? Who will (or won't) Steinbrenner fire? (If Cashman is fired, anyway we can get him here in Cleveland?) Do they stick with Torre? Oh, I would LOVE to see Steinbrenner just go off.

The Curse...

Oh my God, I think that David Ortiz is ready to break the Curse himself if it kills him. I was one of those people who wrote y'all off when you went 0-3, and I swear that I will take back every bad thing that I ever thought about you if you just knock those cocky assed Yankees on their asses. Oh my god, a grand fucking slam. I wonder what that feeling is in the collective throat of every fan in Yankees stadium right now???

I am addicted to Lost, and I think I'm just confused most of the time. It's fantastic. His dad *is* on the island? But he's dead? But his body is missing? I mean, if the crash made the old paralyzed guy walk, can it bring the dad back to life? So many questions, so few answers.

Have I mentioned that I have a trial starting soon? I'm not sure if this one will really go or not. We have a motion for summary judgment pending that, truth be told, we *should* win, though I don't have a good feeling about it. (They *lied* in their affidavits, I mean directly contradicted their testimony and flat out lied, and it will be obvious - but is a Judge going to make that determination? Probably not.) But the facts in this case are so - amazing. For us. Greatly so. Meanwhile, we have refused to make any settlement offer at all. I mean, not even nuisance value. So the Plaintiffs are pissed off. It's beautiful. The Judge wants us to settle (I think that's why he isn't ruling on the motion - it's been pending since May) and is putting some pressure on us (and I am sure he will at the final pretrial on Nov. 1) but he can't really *force* us to. But the thing is - I am floundering with everything that has to be done in a relatively short period of time, with everything else that I somehow have to find time to do. Ugh!

CIA suppresses 9/11 Report

I am so sick and tired of the government deciding what I can and can't be trusted to know. Like seeing the CIA report on Kennedy's assassination is somehow going to destroy the world. Or, the Bush administration's decision to suppress a CIA report on 9/11 until after the election. I realize it was a great line, but Jack Nicholson's famous "You can't handle the truth!" was, after all, a movie.

"It is infuriating that a report which shows that high-level people were not doing their jobs in a satisfactory manner before 9/11 is being suppressed," an intelligence official who has read the report told me, adding that "the report is potentially very embarrassing for the administration, because it makes it look like they weren't interested in terrorism before 9/11, or in holding people in the government responsible afterward."

Meanwhile, the legislature has asked the CIA for the report, to no avail. This report is two years in the making, and Congres has been asking for the report for two weeks. Understandably, after 9.11, people wanted answers. Go figure. Those pesky Americans, wanting a "why." Congress asked the CIA "to determine whether and to what extent personnel at all levels should be held accountable" for intelligence breakdowns cataloged in a joint congressional investigation of Sept. 11. They did their part, and it allegedly names names. High ranking names. Yet the CIA refuses to release this report at this time. Nope, sorry, maybe later you can know the results of this investigation that your tax dollars went into funding.

The only reason that the Kennedy report is not public, or this report is not public, is because each day, the American public wakes up and thinks, "I don't care about X." Perhaps if more people cared, we'd have answers.

Right now, I just feel like the teenager whose parent doesn't trust her.

The Red Sox and Bush's Record on Civil Rights

First, I have to give a shout out to the Red Sox. Yes, people doubted you adter you went down 0-3. I'd like to say that I wasn't one of them, that I was a believer the entire time...but I haven't been. I wrote you off. Actually, after you lost game 1, I started doubting (b/c really, Pedro just doesn't impress me. Do you blame me that after seeing him pitch in the ALCS?) And I have to say, Schilling just proved the difference between a good pitcher (like Pedro) and a gamer. Schilling is a game. A true, play for the love of the game old school tough gamer. And going into game 7, I hear...no one had ever come back from an 0-3 deficit before?? Well, no one ever took it to game 7 before either, did they??

Second, here's a real shocker. Bush Gets 'F' in Civil Rights. That seems so...dead on.
Bush Gets 'F' in Civil Rights By Marjorie Cohn
Tuesday 19 October 2004

While many of our citizens prosper, others doubt the promise, even the justice, of our own country. The ambitions of some Americans are limited by failing schools and hidden prejudice and the circumstances of their birth ... We do not accept this, and we will not allow it ... And this is my solemn pledge: I will work to build a single nation of justice and opportunity...
- President George W. Bush, Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 2001.

George W. Bush has betrayed this promise, according to a 180-page draft report of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Redefining Rights in America - The Civil Rights Record of the George W. Bush Administration, 2001-2004.

Bush rarely uses the terms "civil rights," "diversity," or "discrimination." When he does, it's usually in reference to a historical celebration or holiday. "The dearth of substantive presidential statements reveals that civil rights is not a priority for this administration," according to the draft report.

Even when Bush does state a commitment to the protection of civil rights, his actions belie his rhetoric. The draft report "finds that President Bush has neither exhibited leadership on pressing civil rights issues, nor taken actions that matched his words." Bush "has not defined a clear agenda nor made civil rights a priority." The net increase in Bush's requests for civil rights enforcement agencies was "less than those of the previous two administrations."

It is not surprising that the Republicans on the Civil Rights Commission have resisted the release of the report until after the November election. They were rebuffed, however, in their attempt to remove the draft report from the website.

The draft report finds: "President Bush does not speak about civil rights initiatives often, but when he does he promotes the faith-based program more than any other. He has presented the initiative as an end to discrimination against religious organizations, using terms such as 'remove barriers,' 'equal access,' and 'equal treatment,' which convey that such programs have civil rights relevance. In reality, the program does not remove barriers to discrimination. On the contrary, it allows religious organizations that receive public funds to discriminate against individuals based on religion in employment."

Whereas the leaders of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s and 1960s, and César Chávez with the United Farmworkers Union, used faith to sustain them, Bush uses it as a bludgeon. Bush's faith actually undermines the protection of civil rights. This agenda comes through loud and clear in the draft report: "The faith-based initiative, a so-called civil rights action, actually constitutes a retreat, not an advancement from employment discrimination," especially against gays and lesbians.

Instead of leading him to protect civil rights, Bush's faith has victimized the most vulnerable among us. In nearly every category of civil rights analyzed in the draft report, Bush receives a failing grade. His record is abysmal in education, fair housing, voting, gay and lesbian rights, affirmative action, environmental justice, racial profiling, protection of disadvantaged groups, and judicial nominations.

Equal Educational Opportunity
Bush frequently touts the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), which he widely promoted, and which garnered bipartisan support. "Despite its worthy goals, however," the draft report says, "NCLB has flaws that will inhibit equal educational opportunity and limit its ability to close the achievement gap." For example, "NCLB does not sufficiently address unequal education, a major barrier to closing the achievement gap between minority and white students." Furthermore, Bush did not exhibit leadership to make sure NCLB was sufficiently funded, "leaving state and local school boards, teachers, and administrators without the resources to comply with the law."

Fair Housing
"Policies instituted under the Bush administration have diminished housing opportunities for poor, disproportionately minority families," the draft report concludes.

Election Reform
In spite of the national angst over the 2000 presidential election process, and Bush's promise "to unite the nation and improve its election system, the President has failed to act swiftly toward election reform," finds the draft report. "As a result of the President's inaction, little will change before the 2004 elections, and the problems that linger, unless resolved, will most likely disenfranchise some eligible voters." Indeed, evidence has emerged that raises the specter of widespread violation of voter rights. (See truthout's Voter Rights page.)

Christopher Edley, Jr., dean of Boalt Hall School of Law at UC Berkeley, and member of the Civil Rights Commission, documented voter suppression and disenfranchisement "approaching a torrent" in a recent article in Newsday. "The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, on which I sit," wrote Edley, "has heard many hours of testimony on these abuses, and civic groups are sounding alarms. Dismayingly, Attorney General John Ashcroft has not met the rising flood of examples with high-profile investigations and criminal indictments. Instead," noted Edley, "state and local officials face little more than embarrassment in the media."

Gay and Lesbian Rights
Although Bush appointed some gay rights supporters to Cabinet and administrative positions, he "has stated unequivocal support for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages. If passed," states the draft report, "the amendment would be the first in U.S. history to limit rather than preserve and expand the rights of a group."

Affirmative Action
The draft report concludes that Bush's "stance on affirmative action is equivocal at best ... He has not exhibited strong leadership on this issue where leadership is vital." While celebrating diversity, Bush's administration filed a brief with the Supreme Court opposing university policies that allow race to be considered as one factor to promote diversity in college admissions. "To speak about the importance of diversity without acknowledging the role of affirmative action or the need for comprehensive data is to disregard the remaining vestiges of discrimination," wrote the authors of the draft report.

Environmental Justice
Minority and low-income populations are disproportionately affected by environmental pollutants. Toxic waste dumps are frequently located in neighborhoods populated mostly by people of color. Yet, under the Bush administration, the Environmental Protection Agency "has taken few actions to ensure that minority and low-income persons are not disparately affected by environmental contamination and has failed to develop a standard for assessing how exposure to hazards affects public health," the draft report reads.

Racial Profiling
Early in his term, Bush promised to end racial profiling. He issued guidelines to prohibit racial profiling in federal law enforcement. However, after the September 11 attacks, Bush's attorney general rounded up immigrants of Arab, Muslim and South Asian descent. These men were not suspected of criminal activity, but were targeted solely on the basis of their national origin. "Many detainees alleged mistreatment by prison guards, including being hosed down with cold water, strip searched, forced to sleep upright in freezing conditions, denied food or legal representation, and kept in their cells for long periods."

Immigrants
The draft report examines three Bush administration proposals on immigration. "All lack strong civil rights protections for immigrants," it finds. "President Bush has endorsed policies that allow discrimination against certain groups in the processing of asylum applications," for example, Haitians.

Native Americans
"President Bush has acknowledged the great debt America owes to Native Americans. However, his words have not been matched with action." He has not requested sufficient funding for tribal colleges and universities, Native American health care, or housing programs. "In 2003," according to the draft report, "President Bush terminated funding for critical law enforcement programs, including the Tribal Drug Court Program. Experts agree that problems with the criminal justice system in Indian Country are serious and understated." Bush's "lack of commitment to the nation's trust responsibility to Native Americans ensures that their education, housing, and law enforcement conditions remain substandard."

Women
"President Bush's record on women's issues is mixed. Economic gains for which he has paved the way are overshadowed by other actions that have set back women's rights." His administration launched a program to improve women's access to capital by creating a Web site and conferences, but abolished the Department of Labor's Equal Pay Initiative. Bush "attempted to redirect Title IX enforcement, but ceased his effort after overwhelming public expressions of support for the law." The draft report didn't mention that the Bush administration has resisted the ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, which has been ratified by 177 countries, including more than 90 percent of the member states of the U.N.

Judicial Nominations
"Many of his nominees and appointees do not support civil rights protections. The effect may be eventual weakening of civil rights law," according to the draft report. It cites objections from myriad civil rights organizations to several of Bush's nominees, "claiming that the administration is trying to pack the judiciary with anti-civil rights ideologues." (See my editorial, Bush's Judges: Right-Wing Ideologues.)

The Disabled
The Bush administration has implemented some programs to benefit the disabled, including an initiative to integrate disabled persons into the labor force, and proposed funding for it. The draft report finds that although it is "too soon to measure the ultimate impact of the administration's efforts, the disability rights community has embraced them."

Bush Betrayed His Promise of Justice and Opportunity
Bush has excluded civil rights leaders from policy discussions and refrained from soliciting input from anyone other than his own close circles, according to the draft report. When challenged on his civil rights record, Bush simply points to African-Americans Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice and that ends the discussion.

"Under Attorney General Ashcroft, the Department of Justice's enforcement of civil rights has become less vigorous, indeed almost passive, and the pursuit of civil rights cases has waned significantly," the draft report finds.

It concludes: "The administration's statements frequently do not match its actions. Its civil rights promises often suffer for lack of funding and ineffective implementation." Bush has significantly reduced funding for programs that benefit low-income individuals and minority communities. "Failing to build on common ground, the Bush administration missed opportunities to build consensus on key civil rights issues and has instead adopted policies that divide Americans."

Marjorie Cohn, a contributing editor to t r u t h o u t, is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, executive vice president of the National Lawyers Guild, and the U.S. representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists.

Now he's what's relevant about this article to me. I was at dinner tonight with my father and siblings, and I stated that I felt that Bush was moving us backwards in terms of civil rights. And my conservative father disagreed with me, telling me that you could hold the same position and the party moved then the party changed and you didn't. He said that Bobby Kennedy would have been a Republican. Umm...when exactly did the Republicans advocate civil rights?? Whatever.

Anyway, I'm exhausted, damn baseball, and I'm off to bed.

Edward Norton

When I was in high schoool, I remember seeing Primal Fear. I thought that the actor was great, though it was the first time I ever saw him and it was just like, "oh, he's good." Now, of course, Edwaerd Nortion has been in great movies like Fight Club, Mystic River, and Rounders and you expect him to be good. He's an Academy Award nominated and Golden Globe winning actor.

And as he got older (or stoppped playing characters that were...intentionally simple (though actually brilliant)) he has gotten hotter.

Which is why I am MOST excited to go to the Cuyahoga Community College Foundation Scholarship Funds Presidential Schlarship Luncheon tomorrow, where he is the keynote speaker. I am even willing to play "lawyer" and put on a suit for this event. Dressing up for Edward...There are a few times when it's cool being an attorney and getting to attend some of these events...

Bush v. Kerry

From Jen comes the Bush v. Kerry quiz. Damn...I didn't expect to be so pro-Bush...

You preferred Kerry's statements 89% of the time You preferred Bush's statements 11% of the time Voting purely on the issues you should vote Kerry Who would you vote for if you voted on the issues? Find out now!

Women and the Draft

In the United States, every male 18 to 25 years of age is required to register for the Selective Service. In the event of a war, they are possibly subjected to involuntary military service, should the draft be reinstated. (I won't discuss whether the draft is essentially slavery, a violaiton of the Constitution.)

The draft generally works when the President and Congress (AKA the Bush's puppets) authorizes a draft because “a crisis occurs which requires more troops than the volunteer military can supply.” The draftees are chosen based on a lottery system, based on birthday. Ages 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25. They generally try not to call 18 and 19 year olds, though if it goes on long enough, it becomes necessary. (We can only kill so many early to mid 20 year olds, once you discount those who have enough influence (AKA money and connections) to someone get out of the draft.) Low lottery numbers are then ordered to report for a physical, mental and moral (??) evaluation to determine if they are fit, and if so, sent of to fight a war they don’t believe in in a place they don't want to be.

However, obviously females are not required (or allowed!) to register. The Selective Service law specifically refers to "male persons" in stating who must register and who would be drafted. Therefore, in order for women to be required to register with Selective Service, Congress would have to amend the law. (Don't hold your breath - I can't imagine that Bush, who refused to go himself, would be willing to send his draft age eligible daughters to war, so discount that idea from ever happening.)

What surprises me is that with all the rumors about whether the draft will be reinstated, no one has even really discussed who a potential draft would include, specifically, whether a draft will include females. And whether a draft could NOT include females in any way. In fact with all the draft talk, the subject of "females" is NEVER broached.

The Supreme Court, in Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57, 101 S.Ct. 2646, 69 L.Ed.2d 478 (1981) upheld the constitutionality of the draft as applying only to men. Essentially, the case held that women who were excluded from combat service by statute or military policy were not similarly situated to men for purposes of a draft or registration for a draft and therefore, Congress' decision to authorize registration of only men did not violate the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Simply stated, this decision says that since all men registered with the Selective Service are considered combat replacements, and since Congress forbids women to go into combat, women should not be registered. "If mobilization were to be ordered in a wartime scenario, the primary manpower need would be for combat replacements." Rostker, 456 U.S. at 76 (quoting S.Rep.No.96- 826, p. 160 (1980), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 1980, 2650). Since women as a group are not eligible for combat, women are not eligible for the draft. “The existence of the combat restrictions clearly indicates the basis for Congress' decision to exempt women from registration. The purpose of registration was to prepare for a draft of combat troops. Since women are excluded from combat, Congress concluded that they would not be needed in the event of a draft, and therefore decided not to register them.” Rostker, 456 U.S. at 77.

The Rostker logic is flawed on its face. Even accepting that outdated, skewed perception that women should not be in combat, Rostker presupposes that every man called for involuntary military service will be used for combat, and that no man called will be used for the approximately 90% of military jobs which are non-combat related. Therefore, even if the combat restrictions remained in place, you could still require women to register for the draft, and if their number was called, place them in non-combat related positions. See generally Royster, 456 U.S. at 83-84 (White & Brennan dissenting).

Second, the Nineteenth Amendment gives me the right to vote. If I happen to be pro-war, I could vote for pro-war candidates, knowing that, hey, I won’t have to be subject to any of their decisions. Is that fair to those who are subject to them? Should only males be permitted to vote then, just get rid of the Nineteenth Amendment altogether?

Next, ideally, women enjoy exactly the same civil rights as men. Therefore, exempting all females from even the possibility of involuntary military service in any capacity is equality, how again? Doesn’t the concept of “equal civil rights” somehow equate to equal civil responsibilities?

On a side note (like that's new for me!) I’ve read some polls that suggest that adults with children “well outside” the draft age or only female children, are much more in favor of the draft than those with male children within the draft age. I’m not surprised. It’s so much easier to be willing to “sacrifice” when you are not personally called upon to sacrifice, but merely volunteering others to sacrifice. (Bush - cough - Bush.) However, it is clear that the American public is not blind to gender. Sad or not, America is more willing to see her sons die in a war than her daughters. This may be the one true reason that the draft will not be reinstated - no politican wants to be the one who sends our girls out to fight and die in combat - talk about suicide.

Of course, that back door (slavery) draft will sure as hell continue...

Need A Date?

So maybe I'm the last person in American to learn about this, but in the latest issue of Crate and Barrel, Marc, a photo assistant, slipped his name and number on a dry erase board in an office photo.




The "Dinner with Marc" message is gaining him attention - and dates. He said that he has over 5000 calls and is going on a country wide tour, going on dates with all sorts of people (couples, singles, interesting people).

His number is 510.872.7326 for those who can't read it in the photo, don't get Crate and Barel, and want to have dinner with Mark. He is travelling around the country. In fact, he'll be in the Cleveland area in January (good planning there!) so perhaps I should call him...

At first Crate and Barrel was upset, but as the publicity mounted, he reported that they are ok with it, though he does owe the CEO dinner.

Need to figure out a Bush mistake?

I got this months ago but no longer had the link until I thankfully saw it on Any Which Way. Bush can't think of 3 mistakes during his administration. Hell, Bush can't even think of 1 mistake. Luckily, the Center for American Progress is not so delusional (I realize I'm delusional, watching the Red Sox/Yankees game. Give up the vain hope the Yankees will all be struck by lightening). In fact, back in MAY, they came up with a list of 100 Mistakes for the President to Choose from. (If you click on the original, the underline will take you to supporting links).

During a prime time press conference on April 13, President Bush was asked to name a mistake that he has made since taking office and what he has learned from it. Bush, who was unable to answer the question, admitted "maybe I'm not as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with [a mistake]." But weeks later, Bush still hasn't answered the question. In the interest of assisting the President with this surprisingly difficult task we've compiled this list of 100 mistakes he has made since taking office:

Iraq
1. Failing to build a real international coalition prior to the Iraq invasion, forcing the US to shoulder the full cost and consequences of the war.

2. Approving the demobilization of the Iraqi Army in May, 2003 – bypassing the Joint Chiefs of Staff and reversing an earlier position, the President left hundreds of thousands of armed Iraqis disgruntled and unemployed, contributing significantly to the massive security problems American troops have faced during occupation.

3. Not equipping troops in Iraq with adequate body armor or armored HUMVEES.

4. Ignoring the advice Gen. Eric Shinseki regarding the need for more troops in Iraq – now Bush is belatedly adding troops, having allowed the security situation to deteriorate in exactly the way Shinseki said it would if there were not enough troops.

5. Ignoring plans drawn up by the Army War College and other war-planning agencies, which predicted most of the worst security and infrastructure problems America faced in the early days of the Iraq occupation.

6. Making a case for war which ignored intelligence that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq.

7. Deriding "nation-building" during the 2000 debates, then engaging American troops in one of the most explicit instances of nation building in American history.

8. Predicting along with others in his administration that US troops would be greeted as liberators in Iraq.

9. Predicting Iraq would pay for its own reconstruction.

10. Wildly underestimating the cost of the war.

11. Trusting Ahmed Chalabi, who has dismissed faulty intelligence he provided the President as necessary for getting the Americans to topple Saddam.

12. Disbanding the Sunni Baathist managers responsible for Iraq's water, electricity, sewer system and all the other critical parts of that country's infrastructure.

13. Failing to give UN weapons inspectors enough time to certify if weapons existed in Iraq.

14. Including discredited intelligence concerning Nigerian Yellow Cake in his 2003 State of the Union.

15. Announcing that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended" aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln on May 1, 2003, below a "Mission Accomplished" banner – more U.S. soldiers have died in combat since Bush's announcement than before it.

16. Awarding a multi-billion dollar contract to Halliburton in Iraq, which then repeatedly overcharged the government and served troops dirty food.

17. Refusing to cede any control of Post-invasion Iraq to the international community, meaning reconstruction has received limited aid from European allies or the U.N.

18. Failing to convince NATO allies why invading Iraq was important.

19. Having no real plan for the occupation of Iraq.

20. Limiting bidding on Iraq construction projects to "coalition partners," unnecessarily alienating important allies France, Germany and Russia.

21. Diverting $700 million into Iraq invasion planning without informing Congress.

22. Shutting down an Iraqi newspaper for "inciting violence" – the move, which led in short order to street fighting in Fallujah, incited more violence than the newspaper ever had.

23. Telling Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan about plans to go to war with Iraq before Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Counterterrorism
24. Allowing several members of the Bin Laden family to leave the country just days after 9/11, some of them without being questioned by the FBI.

25. Focusing on missile defense at the expense of counterterrorism prior to 9/11.

26. Thinking al Qaeda could not attack without state sponsors, and ignoring evidence of a growing threat unassociated with "rogue states" like Iraq or North Korea.

27. Threatening to veto the Homeland Security department – The President now concedes such a department "provides the ability for our agencies to coordinate better and to work together better than it was before."

28. Opposing the creation of the September 11th commission, which the President now expects "to contain important recommendations for preventing future attacks."

29. Denying documents to the 9/11 commission, only relenting after the commissioners threatened a subpoena.

30. Failing to pay more attention to an August 6, 2001 PDB entitled "Bin laden Determined to Attack in U.S."

31. Repeatedly ignoring warnings of terrorists planning to use aircraft before 9/11.

32. Appointing the ultra-secretive Henry Kissinger to head the 9/11 commission – Kissinger stepped down weeks later due to conflicts of interest.

33. Asking for testimony before the 9/11 commission be limited to one hour, a position from which the president later backtracked.

34. Not allowing national Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice to testify before the 9/11 commission – Bush changed his mind as pressure mounted.

35. Cutting an FBI request for counterterrorism funds by two-thirds after 9/11.

36. Telling Americans there was a link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda.

37. Failing to adequately secure the nation's nuclear weapons labs.

38. Not feeling a sense of urgency about terrorism or al Qaeda before 9/11.
Afghanistan

39. Reducing resources and troop levels in Afghanistan and out before it was fully secure.

40. Not providing security in Afghanistan outside of Kabul, leaving nearly 80% of the Afghan population unprotected in areas controlled by Feudal warlords and local militias.

41. Committing inadequate resources for the reconstruction of Afghanistan.

42. Counting too heavily on locally trained troops to fill the void in Afghanistan once U.S. forces were relocated to Iraq.

43. Not committing US ground troops to the capture of Osama Bin Laden, when he was cornered in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan in November, 2001.

44. Allowing opium production to resume on a massive scale after the ouster of the Taliban.
Weapons of Mass Destruction

45. Opposing an independent inquiry into the intelligence failures surrounding WMD – later, upon signing off on just such a commission, Bush claimed he was "determined to make sure that American intelligence is as accurate as possible for every challenge in the future."

46. Saying: "We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories."

47. Trusting intelligence gathered by Vice President Cheney's and Secretary Rumsfeld's "Office of Special Plans."

48. Spending $6.5 billion on nuclear weapons this year to develop new nuclear weapons this year – 50% more in real dollars than the average during the cold war – while shortchanging the troops on body armor.

Foreign Policy
49. Ignoring the importance of the Middle East peace process, which has deteriorated with little oversight or strategy evident in the region.

50. Siding with China in February, 2004 against a democratic referenda proposed by Taiwan, a notable shift from an earlier pledge to stand with "oppressed peoples until the day of their freedom finally arrives."

51. Undermining the War on Terrorism by preemptively invading Iraq.

52. Failing to develop a specific plan for dealing with North Korea.

53. Abandoning the United States' traditional role as an evenhanded negotiator in the Middle East peace process.

Economic
54. Signing a report endorsing outsourcing with thousands of American workers having their jobs shipped overseas.

55. Instituting steel tariffs deemed illegal by the World Trade Organization – Bush repealed them 20-months later when the European Union pledged to impose retaliatory sanctions on up to $2.2 billion in exports from the United States.

56. Promoting economic policies that failed to create new jobs.

57. Promoting economic policies that failed to help small businesses

58. Pledging a "jobs and growth" package would create 1,836,000 new jobs by the end of 2003 and 5.5 million new jobs by 2004—so far the president has fallen 1,615,000 jobs short of the mark.

59. Running up a foreign deficit of "such record-breaking proportions that it threatens the financial stability of the global economy."

60. Issuing inaccurate budget forecasts accompanying proposals to reduce the deficit, omitting the continued costs of Iraq, Afghanistan and elements of Homeland Security.

61. Claiming his 2003 tax cut would give 23 million small business owners an average tax cut of $2,042 when "nearly four out of every five tax filers (79%) with small business income would receive less" than that amount.

62. Passing tax cuts for the wealthy while falsely claiming "people in the 10 percent bracket" were benefiting most."

63. Passing successive tax cuts largely responsible for turning a projected surplus of $5 trillion into a projected deficit of $4.3 trillion.

64. Moving to strip millions of overtime pay.

65. Not enforcing corporate tax laws.

66. Backing down from a plan to make CEOs more accountable when "the corporate crowd" protested.

67. Not lobbying oil cartels to change their mind about cutting oil production.

68. Passing tax cuts weighted heavily to help the wealthy.

69. Moving to allow greater media consolidation.

70. Nominating a notorious proponent of outsourcing, Anthony F. Raimondo, to be the new manufacturing Czar—Raimondo withdrew his name days later amidst a flurry of harsh criticism.

71. Ignoring calls to extend unemployment benefits with long-term unemployment reaching a twenty-year high

72. Threatening to veto pension legislation that would give companies much needed temporary relief.

Education
73. Under-funding No Child Left Behind

74. Breaking his campaign pledge to increase the size of Pell grants.

75. Signing off on an FY 2005 budget proposing the smallest increase in education funding in nine years.

76. Under-funding the Title I Program, specifically targeted for disadvantaged kids, by $7.2 billion.

77. Freezing Teacher Quality State Grants, cutting off training opportunities for about 30,000 teachers, and leaving 92,000 less
teachers trained than the president called for in his own No Child Left Behind bill.

78. Freezing funding for English language training programs.

79. Freezing funding for after school programs, potentially eliminating 50,000 children from after-school programs.

Health
80. Not leveling with Americans about the cost of Medicare – the president told Congress his new Medicare bill would cost $400 billion over ten years despite conclusions by his own analysts the bill would cost upwards of $500 billion over that period.

81. Silencing Medicare actuary Richard Foster when his estimates for the Administration's Medicare bill were too high.

82. Letting business associate David Halbert, who owns a company which stands to make millions from new discount drug cards, craft key elements of the new Medicare bill.

83. Underfunding health care for troops and veterans.

84. Allowing loopholes to persist in Mad-Cow regulations.

85. Relaxing food labeling restrictions on health claims.

86. Falsely claiming the restrictions on stem cell research would not hamper medical progress.

87. Reducing action against improper drug advertising by 80 percent.

Environment
88. Abandoning the Kyoto Treaty without offering an alternative for reducing greenhouse effect.

89. Counting on a voluntary program to reduce emissions of harmful gasses—so far only a tiny fraction of American companies have signed up.

90. Gutting clean air standards for aging power plants.

91. Weakening energy efficiency standards.

92. Relaxing dumping standards for mountaintop mining, and opening the Florida Everglades and Oregon's Siskiyou National Forest to mining.

93. Lifting protection for more than 200 million acres of public land.

94. Limiting public challenges to logging projects and increased logging in protected areas, including Alaska's Tongass National Forest.

95. Weakening environmental standards for snowmobiles and other off-road vehicles while pushing for exemptions for air pollution proposals for five categories of industrial facilities.

96. Opposing legislation that would require greater fuel efficiency for passenger cars.

97. Reducing inspections, penalties for violations, and prosecution of environmental crimes.

98. Misleading the public about the Washington mad cow case and the likely effectiveness of USDA's weak testing program.

99. Withdrawing public information on chemical plant dangers, previously used to hold facilities accountable for safety improvements.

Other
100. Cutting grants to state and local governments in FY 2005, forcing states to make massive cuts in job training, education, housing and environment.

The Progressive Blog Alliance

A public service announcement - as many may know or have noticed, I am part of the Progressive Blog Alliance.

Our Mission Statement
We are an emergent self-organized network of independent citizens and activists whose broad agenda includes world peace, human rights, sustainable development, environmentalism, and social justice. We do not identify with a singular nation, but rather our world society as a whole. We recognize that on a fundamental level we are all one. Blogging is our medium; our message will be the story of a new world.



You can see the many members of the alliance under the blogroll. Read away!

Tucker Carlson Wants To Get His Ass Wiped Buy Jon Stewart Again??

Actually, Tucker, the way that I saw it, you were the one who looked ridiculous.

NEW YORK (AP) - How's this for a feud that straddles the line between politics and entertainment: CNN's bow-tied conservative Tucker Carlson vs. "The Daily Show" host Jon Stewart.

Carlson on Monday fanned embers still hot from their "Crossfire" confrontation, saying Stewart looked ridiculous during his CNN appearance and was a sellout for publicly backing Democrat John Kerry for president.

Stewart, appearing on the debate show Friday, angered Carlson by saying "Crossfire" is "partisan hackery" that does little to advance the cause of democracy.

And that was the mild stuff.

"You have a responsibility to the public discourse, and you fail miserably," Stewart said.

Responded Carlson: "You need to get a job at a journalism school, I think."

"You need to go to one," Stewart shot back.

Carlson complained that for a comedian, Stewart wasn't being very funny.

"Come on," he said. "Be funny."

"No," Stewart said. "I'm not going to be your monkey."

Carlson chided Stewart for lobbing softball questions when Kerry appeared on "The Daily Show" last month.

Later, Carlson told Stewart he was "more fun" on his Comedy Central show, and Stewart called him a jerk - although he used a more vulgar term.

"I thought that he looked ridiculous," Carlson said in an interview Monday, "and I think the tape makes that clear."

Carlson said Stewart continued lecturing the "Crossfire" crew after the show went off the air. "I wasn't offended as much as I was unimpressed," he said.

Stewart wasn't talking about the confrontation on Monday, a spokesman said. Comedy Central executive Tony Fox said there may be some regret over the vulgarity, but that Stewart has been a longtime critic of cable news networks and their political argument shows.

The comedian hasn't gone out of his way to endorse Kerry. In a public forum last week in New York, he was asked who he would vote for, and he said he'd back the Democrat.

Carlson noted that many of the great comedians kept their political opinions to themselves, not for fear of offending anyone, but because it could hurt their art.

"You're selling out," he said. "If you are a satirist or an acute social observer, and he is, and all of a sudden you suspend disbelief on someone or suck up rather than prod or poke someone, people will look at you and say, 'Even if I agree with you, I don't like it,'" he said.

Fox said "The Daily Show" poked fun at people in power, regardless of their party. Most people who watch Stewart are aware that he leans to the left politically.

"I don't think it really impacts the show at all," he said. "The show does what it does regardless of Jon's political persuasion."

A Day In The Life Of Joe Republican - Fwd

Joe gets up at 6 a. m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of coffee, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to insure their safety and that they work as advertised.

All but $10 of Joe's medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, so now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist whacko liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays, and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to unionize.

If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of someone else's stupidity or incompetence.

Its noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.

After work this evening, Joe plans to visit his father at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for automobile safety standards.

Joe arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house that was financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.

Joe is happy to see his father, who is retired and lives on Social Security as well as a union pension since a wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.

Joe gets back in his car for the ride home and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day.

Joe agrees; "we don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."

When A Soldier Disobeys An Order

Earlier, I commented about how my cousin stated that his Unit in Afghanistan was without essential supplies. Little did I know at the time that this problem was so widespread, that some soldiers were soon going to be forced to take a stand after their repleated complaints that complaints that the convoy was hauling contaminated fuel and their vehicles were in poor working order and were not sufficiently protected with armor. Can you imagine how hard it was for these people to turn their backs on an order? They are trained to put their lives in danger and follow orders, fighting in a war that has since proven to be unnecessary. These men and women out there deserve to have the support and the supplies they need, not be disciplined for refusing a dangerous mission without proper armor.

Soldiers Saw Refusing Order as Their Last Stand (found here)
By NEELA BANERJEE and ARIEL HART
Published: October 18, 2004

ACKSON, Miss., Oct. 17 - What does it take for a man like Staff Sgt. Michael Butler, a 24-year veteran of the Army and the Reserve who was a soldier in the first Persian Gulf war and a reserve called up to fight in the current war in Iraq, to risk everything by disobeying a direct order in wartime?

1. On the morning of Oct. 13, the military says, Sergeant Butler and most of his platoon, some 18 men and women from the 343rd Quartermaster Company, refused to deliver a shipment of fuel from the Tallil Air Base near Nasiriya, Iraq, to another base much farther north.
The Army has begun an inquiry, and the soldiers could face disciplinary measures, including possible courts-martial. But Jackie Butler, Sergeant Butler's wife, and her family in Jackson say he would not have jeopardized his career and his freedom for something impulsive or unimportant.

The soldiers, many of whom have called home this weekend, said their trucks were unsafe and lacked a proper armed escort, problems that have plagued them since they went to Iraq nine months ago, their relatives said. The time had come for them, for her husband, to act, Ms. Butler said.

"I'm proud that he said 'no,' " Ms. Butler said. "They had complained and complained for months to the chain of command about the equipment and trucks. But nothing was done, so I think he felt he had to take a stand."

Other soldiers completed the mission the platoon turned down, the military kept functioning, and the Army has cast the incident as isolated.

But as the soldiers involved in the refusal in Tallil and others begin to speak out, it is growing more apparent that the military has yet to solve the lack of training, parts and equipment that has riddled the military operation in Iraq from the outset, especially among National Guard and Reserve units.

Brig. Gen. James E. Chambers, commander of the 13th Corps Support Command, which the 343rd reports to, said at a news conference in Baghdad on Sunday that he had ordered two investigations into the incident and the concerns expressed by the 18 soldiers "regarding maintenance and safety.''

General Chambers said preliminary findings showed that the unit's trucks were not yet armored and were among the last in his command to get such protection, because they usually functioned in less dangerous parts of Iraq. None of the trucks in his command were armored when they arrived in Iraq, General Chambers said. He told reporters that he had ordered a safety and maintenance review of all trucks in the 343rd.

"Based on results of this investigation other actions may be necessary,'' the general said, but he added, "It's too early in the investigation to speculate on charges or other disciplinary actions.''
General Chambers described the episode as "a single event that is confined to a small group of individuals.''

A number of Army officers contacted in recent days said such an apparent act of insubordination was very unusual, particularly among such a large number of soldiers in a single unit and especially since the military is all volunteer.

The incident has prompted widespread interest among military families who have complained in months past of inadequate equipment and protection for their soldiers.

Nancy Lessin, a leader of Military Families Speak Out, which opposes the war, said she had been flooded with calls and e-mail from families with a simple message: What had happened to the reservists echoed the conditions their own soldiers experienced in Iraq: a shortage of armored vehicles, especially for part-time soldiers' units; convoy missions through dangerous stretches without adequate firepower; and constant breakdowns among old vehicles owned, especially, by National Guard and reservist units.

"This is absolutely striking a nerve," Ms. Lessin said. "People are saying, 'This is the same thing that happened to my son,' and if the Army tries to spin this as 'just a few bad apples,' people need to know that these are common problems and what these soldiers did required a tremendous amount of courage."

Nothing seems to separate the men and women who defied their command in Tallil from the tens of thousands of others now in Iraq, their families say. The 343rd was drawn mainly from Southern states like the Carolinas, Alabama and Mississippi, and the military said Friday that the 343rd had performed honorably during its tour in Iraq.

1. The soldiers in the platoon are described as devoted to the military and unabashedly patriotic. A wall of Sergeant Butler's living room is covered with certificates and citations from the Army. Another member of the 343rd, Specialist Joe Dobbs, 19, of Vandiver, Ala., had his bedroom painted the dark blue of the American flag. And another soldier in the unit, Sgt. Justin Rogers of Louisville, Ky., liked to walk around town in his uniform when he was home on leave, said Chris Helm, a 14-year-old high school student and his first cousin.

When Sergeant Rogers went home for a two-week leave in July, his brother Derrick asked whether the war and all the deaths were worth it. "His answer was simple," Derrick Rogers said. "He said, 'If I didn't feel like it was worth it, I wouldn't be there.' ''

Ms. Butler did not want to speak for her husband on his feelings about the war. Better he should do that when he is finally home, she said, which is scheduled to be sometime next year. But Sergeant Butler knew he would be called up, once the war against Iraq was begun in March 2003. Late last year, he reported to Rock Hill, and quickly, his confidence was shaken, his wife said. He saw that the equipment to be shipped with his unit was "not very good," Ms. Butler said.

Once the unit arrived in Iraq, the inadequacy of the platoon's equipment and preparedness was thrown into sharp relief against the dangers the country posed. Although the unit is based near Nasiriya in the Shiite-controlled south, which is not as volatile as Sunni-dominated areas, the whole country has been convulsed by battles and uprisings during most of the 343rd's tour of duty. "This is not the first time that there has been a problem with these charges and stuff, with them not having armor, not having radios," said Beverly Dobbs, mother of Specialist Dobbs. "My son told me two months ago - he called me, he said, 'Mom I got the scare of my life.'

"'I said what's wrong?'" Ms. Dobbs said. "He said, 'They sent us out, we come under fire, our own people was shooting and we didn't even have radios to let them know.' They're sending them out without the equipment they need. I don't care what the Army says."

Families that spoke to the soldiers this weekend received slightly differing accounts of what happened the morning of Oct. 13. They all said, however, that fuel the soldiers had to deliver was unusable because it had been contaminated with a second liquid. They all said the soldiers were under armed guard. General Chambers denied both assertions. Relatives say that Sergeant Butler, Sgt. Larry McCook of Jackson and Specialist Scott Shealey of Graysville, Ala., have been identified as three of five "ringleaders" of the incident and reassigned to other units on the air base. Specialist Shealey's parents said their son said in a telephone call that he was going to be discharged.

"He'll be home in three to four weeks, that's what he's being told," said Ricky Shealey, Specialist Shealey's father, a retired Postal Service supervisor and former sergeant in the Army. "He's depressed," Mr. Shealey said. "He just can't believe it's happening."

Ms. Butler said her husband did not know what he might be facing and had heard nothing about a discharge. Other families said the military had yet to contact them to explain the situation. The families have not hired lawyers yet, in large part because they are uncertain what charges might be brought against their relatives.

Some families are reaching out to one another through e-mail and phone calls, offering help and discussing strategy. They have contacted their members of Congressmen. Others, like Ms. Dobbs and her family, are glued to television news, awaiting some clarification of the incident.
Ms. Butler has her big family to lean on, and on this Sunday, the day after the phone call from her husband, they went to church and turned to their neighbors, friends and faith. Ms. Butler went to the altar rail of Zion Travelers Missionary Baptist Church and told the congregation: "My husband has been in the Army more than 20 years, but refused to take those men in that convoy. He said it would be suicidal.''

"So, I'm going to ask you to pray for me," she said, "because he is not going to take no other men's children into the land of death."

She bowed her head, and so did everyone else. "Lord, Sister Butler needs you," the Rev. Daniel Watkins said, shutting his eyes tight. "Her husband, he needs you. All the soldiers in Iraq, they need you."

Monica Davey contributed reporting from Chicago for this article, and Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Dexter Filkins from Baghdad.

Unamerican

Are you unAmerican? Watch the video ((Didn't Know I Was) Unamerican - by Ian Rhett) from True Majority Action to find out.

Yes, this "unAmerican" label has been thrown at us so much that some people are actually running scared from the label "liberal." You heard Bush throw it out repeatedly in the debates, as if that somehow tainted Kerry with evilness. "You are either with us or with the terrorists..." It is amazing that standing up to those in charge when they are going against the American ideals and taking away Constitutional rights is somehow just as bad as being a terrorist.

Perspective...use it or lose it.

Jon Stewart says what millions want to - Tucker Carlson is dick

Since everyone else is doing ok (ok, first Jen and then Curtis but I believe in peer pressure, and it's extra innings in the ALCS anyway so I ain't going to bed anytime soon - damn Yankees), I may as well mention the Jon Stewart v. Tucker Carson fight on Crossfire. Actually, that's not quite true. More accurately, it was the Jon Stewart v. the media catfight. Truth be told, I didn't see it live. But thanks to the internets, you can see the video here. (Best yet, with the commercials taken out!)

I have to say, even if I wasn't a huge fan of Jon Stewart, which I am, I would have enjoyed this exchange. And Carlson seemed so surprised by (and unprepared for) the attack. Ahh...certain things make me happy.

The fact that a allegedly serious news medium would honestly compare itself to The Daily Show and essentially whine, "if you don't have to ask difficult questions and be accurate, why should we?" just signifies what's wrong with the media. He's comedy - you aren't. Give me a break! Jon Stewart said it best:

STEWART: Now, this is theater. It's obvious. How old are you?

CARLSON: Thirty-five.

STEWART: And you wear a bow tie.

CARLSON: Now, come on.

STEWART: Now, listen, I'm not suggesting that you're not a smart guy, because those are not easy to tie.

CARLSON: They're difficult.

STEWART: But the thing is that this -- you're doing theater, when you should be doing debate, which would be great.

STEWART: It's not honest. What you do is not honest. What you do is partisan hackery. And I will tell you why I know it.

CARLSON: You had John Kerry on your show and you sniff his throne and you're accusing us of partisan hackery?

STEWART: Absolutely.

CARLSON: You've got to be kidding me. He comes on and you...

STEWART: You're on CNN. The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls.

Ugh! Begala and Carlson clearly weren't prepared for a serious Jon Stewart with a message he wanted to get across. Have they not seen his show or read his book? Yes, he's funny snarky, but do they not realize that (1) he knows his shit; and (2) he clearly has a mesage.

The full written transcript can be viewed here.

And the perfect thing: the media is talking about Stewart's appearance, which I'm sure is exactly what he wants. Because the more the media talks about it, the more likely that it is going to strike the average American...hey, what exactly ARE they doing??

* * * * *

From New York Daily News

Jon Stewart torches 'Crossfire' hosts

BY HELEN KENNEDY
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON - It wasn't meant to be funny, but Jon Stewart of "The Daily Show" got in a dustup with his "Crossfire" hosts yesterday that left viewers laughing.
Stewart, who is promoting a new political-humor book, surprised the talk show mavens by being deadly serious.

He went after "Crossfire" hosts Tucker Carlson and Paul Begala for turning politics into cartoonish conflict instead of illuminating issues.

"What you do is not honest. What you do is partisan hackery," Stewart said.

"I'm here to confront you. ... You have a responsibility to the public discourse, and you fail miserably. ... It's hurting America," he said.

Carlson, clearly angry, replied, "Jon, I'm sorry. I think you're a good comedian. I think your lectures are boring."

He called Stewart John Kerry's "butt boy" for lobbing softball questions at the candidate on "The Daily Show."

"I thought you were going to be funny. Be funny," he told Stewart.

"I'm not going to be your monkey," Stewart replied.

After a commercial break, the sparring resumed.

Carlson: "You're more fun on your show."

Stewart: "You're as big a d--- on your show as you are on any show."

As the credits rolled, Stewart said sarcastically, "Well, that went well."

* * * * *

From MTV.

Jon Stewart Bitchslaps CNN's 'Crossfire' Show

In what could well be the strangest and most refreshing media moment of the election season, "The Daily Show" host Jon Stewart turned up on a live broadcast of CNN's "Crossfire" Friday and accused the mainstream media — and his hosts in particular — of being soft and failing to do their duty as journalists to keep politicians and the political process honest.

Reaching well outside his usual youthful "Daily Show" demo, Stewart took to "Crossfire" to promote his new book, "America (The Book): A Citizen's Guide to Democracy Inaction" (see "Jon Stewart Writes A History Textbook That — At Last! — Features Nudity"), but instead of pushing the tome, Stewart used his time to verbally slap the network and the media for being "dishonest" and "doing a disservice" to the American public. After co-host Tucker Carlson suggested that Stewart went easy on Senator John Kerry when the candidate was a guest on "The Daily Show," Stewart unloaded on "Crossfire," calling hosts Carlson and Paul Begala "partisan hacks" and chiding them for not raising the level of discourse on their show beyond sloganeering.

"What you do is not honest. What you do is partisan hackery," Stewart said. "You have a responsibility to the public discourse, and you fail miserably.

"I watch your show every day, and it kills me. It's so painful to watch," Stewart added as it became apparent that the comedian was not joking. He went on to hammer the network, and the media in general, for its coverage of the presidential debates. Stewart said it was a disservice to viewers to immediately seek reaction from campaign insiders and presidential cheerleaders following the debates, noting that the debates' famed "Spin Alley" should be called "Deception Lane."

"The thing is, we need your help," Stewart said. "Right now, you're helping the politicians and the corporations and we're left out there to mow our lawns."

While the audience seemed to be behind Stewart, Begala and Carlson were both taken aback. The hosts tried to feed Stewart set-up lines hoping to draw him into a more light-hearted shtick, but Stewart stayed on point and hammered away at the show, the hosts, and the state of political journalism. Carlson grew increasingly frustrated, at first noting that the segment wasn't "funny," and later verbally sparring with the comedian.

"You're not very much fun," Carlson said. "Do you like lecture people like this, or do you come over to their house and sit and lecture them; they're not doing the right thing, that they're missing their opportunities, evading their responsibilities?"

"If I think they are," Stewart retorted.

The conversation reached its most heated moment when Carlson said to Stewart, "I do think you're more fun on your show," to which Stewart replied, "You're as big a dick on your show as you are on any show."

"That went great," Stewart could be heard sarcastically saying as the show went off the air (a transcript of the show is available on CNN.com).

In an era when the media is increasingly fragmented and viewers can surround themselves with programming that falls right in line with their own views, be they on the right or the left, Stewart's blast seemed especially on point. It seems fitting that the tirade came on a day when much of the media attention focused on the presidential race was directed at the mention of Vice President Dick Cheney's daughter during the last presidential debate, as opposed to the issues addressed at that debate.

—Robert Mancini

* * * * *

And Salon.

Jon Stewart: Crossfire "hurting America"

"I think you're a lot more fun on your show," said Tucker Carlson to "Crossfire" guest Jon Stewart this afternoon. "And I think you're as much of a dick on your show as on any other," Stewart shot back. It wasn't the faux avuncularity we've come to expect from Stewart on "The Daily Show" but there, of course, he's playing a role. Here he was himself -- and he wasn't buying any of it.

From the moment Stewart sat down he made no secret of how repugnant he found the show. In fact, he said to Carlson and co-host Paul Begala that he had been so hard on the show he felt it was his duty to come on and say to their faces what he has said to friends and in interviews. What he said was that their show was "hurting America," and he was being only slightly hyperbolic. Stewart told them that when America needed journalists to be journalists they had instead chosen to present theater.

Carlson, trying to affect an air of dry amusement that a comedian would presume to lecture him, important pundit that he is, but looking as if his bow-tie were about to start spinning, could barely contain his outrage. In an absolutely mind-boggling moment, Carlson tried to counter Stewart's criticism by pointing out that during John Kerry's recent appearance on "The Daily Show," Stewart asked the candidate softball questions. "If you want to measure yourself against a comedy show," Stewart said, "be my guest."

Paul Begala tried to put a more conciliatory face on things by pointing out that theirs was a "debate" show. Stewart was having none of it. "I would love to see a real debate show," he said. And went on to tell them that instead of holding politicians' feet to the fire by asking tough question, "you're part of their strategy. You're partisan -- what's the word? -- uh, hacks."

It's almost a cliche by now to talk about "The Daily Show" being more trusted than real newscasts, but Stewart showed why. He pointed out to Carlson that he had asked Kerry if he really were in Cambodia but "I don't care," and when Carlson asked him what he thought about the "Bill O'Reilly vibrator flap," Stewart said, "I don't." It was as concise a demonstration of the triviality of the media as you could hope for.

"I thought you were going to be funny," Carlson said toward the end of the interview. Stewart responded, "No, I'm not going to be your monkey." And that was what was so bracing.

Stewart's "Crossfire" appearance is going to generate talk about how prickly he was, how he wasn't "nice" like he is on "The Daily Show." But prickliness is just what was needed. If you've built your reputation as a satirist pointing out how the media falls down on the job, you're not going to make yourself a part of their charade.

I've heard people talk about "The Daily Show" as an oasis of sanity, a public service. I couldn't agree more. Stewart's appearance on "Crossfire" was another public service. He went on and acted as if the show's purpose really was to confront tough issues, instead of being the political equivalent of pro wrestling. Given a chance to say absolutely what he thought, Stewart took it. He accomplished what almost never happens on television anymore: He made the dots come alive.

Reasons not to be a Cleveland sports fan...

I've already talked about how Cleveland is the most tortured sports city in America. But in case you weren't convinced...

Cleveland sports a misery nonpareil
Wednesday, October 13, 2004

Warning: Becoming a Cleveland sports fan can cause feelings of anger, envy, self-pity and depression.

Anger is a serious side-effect and should NOT be treated by putting your foot through the TV set.

For envy, scrub the skin vigorously with hot, soapy water to rid it of the pea-green color that often develops after visiting cities with championship teams.

Cleveland fans suffering from infectious pity should be quarantined, particularly because many like to throw pity parties.

There is no known cure for Cleveland sports depression, however, except waiting 'til next year.

Cleveland sports fans should never be allowed around pointed objects, banana peels, open manholes or incoming meteorites.

If you become a Cleveland sports fan, do not operate heavy machinery after a Browns loss to the Steelers. This especially applies if you have been drinking Iron City beer in an unfaltering manner for prolonged periods of time.

Becoming a Browns fan leads to serious cross-species confusion, as well as to a compulsion to bark and chase bones. Browns fans have been petrified by boredom when the team has the ball more quickly than a control group watching haircuts. Other serious consequences include rabies, distemper, and the inability of the sun to shine on every Dawg's tail every day.

Becoming an Indians fan can mean comporting oneself like "PowWow the Indian Boy," fixating on 1948 and defending sociopaths who hit home runs.

Becoming a Cavaliers fan means you have to ignore Ted Stepien, the fact that a Cavs player deliberately shot at the wrong basket to pad his stats and Jim Paxson's overall record as a general manager.

Clinical tests have shown that Cleveland sports fans react in a disturbing manner to certain words. Avoid "drive," "fumble," "shot," and "Red Right 88." Names such as "Elway," "Jordan," and "Mesa" can also create abnormal reactions.

"Belichick" is acceptable in Cleveland sports circles today. A heavy dose of "Belichick," however, invariably produces expressions of exasperation, followed by the words: "Who knew?"

Do not, under any circumstances, use "Modell."

If you choose to become a Cleveland sports fan, start by getting your rest. Do not short-rest your starters.

Remember 1964. Do not watch "The Dirty Dozen," as this will only increase dysfunctional behavior.

An ounce of prevention might be worth a pound of cure, but do not play a prevent defense.

Cleveland sports fans can experience double vision. It is important to maintain cognitive distinction between Alex Ramirez and Manny Ramirez.

Cleveland sports fans always see the glass as half-full of ashes.

Physical examination of Cleveland sports fans indicates they suffer from sympathetic pain. They might not have sustained teeny-tiny cracks in their legs, but they have not been X-rayed yet, either. Their guts have feelings. Even their clothing is sympathetically tailored. Every Indians fan is believed to have shallow pockets in his pants.

Should your child want to become a Cleveland sports fan, consider a V-chip and parental controls. Scientists are currently working on making Indians, Browns and Cavaliers caps child-proof.

Your child will learn that every day is not a nice day during the first white-out. It does not have to be emphasized all over again on any given Sunday.

To reach this Plain Dealer columnist:
blivingston@plaind.com, 216-999-5754

New York Times - John Kerry for President

John Kerry for President
Published: October 17, 2004

Senator John Kerry goes toward the election with a base that is built more on opposition to George W. Bush than loyalty to his own candidacy. But over the last year we have come to know Mr. Kerry as more than just an alternative to the status quo. We like what we've seen. He has qualities that could be the basis for a great chief executive, not just a modest improvement on the incumbent.

We have been impressed with Mr. Kerry's wide knowledge and clear thinking - something that became more apparent once he was reined in by that two-minute debate light. He is blessedly willing to re-evaluate decisions when conditions change. And while Mr. Kerry's service in Vietnam was first over-promoted and then over-pilloried, his entire life has been devoted to public service, from the war to a series of elected offices. He strikes us, above all, as a man with a strong moral core.

•

There is no denying that this race is mainly about Mr. Bush's disastrous tenure. Nearly four years ago, after the Supreme Court awarded him the presidency, Mr. Bush came into office amid popular expectation that he would acknowledge his lack of a mandate by sticking close to the center. Instead, he turned the government over to the radical right.

Mr. Bush installed John Ashcroft, a favorite of the far right with a history of insensitivity to civil liberties, as attorney general. He sent the Senate one ideological, activist judicial nominee after another. He moved quickly to implement a far-reaching anti-choice agenda including censorship of government Web sites and a clampdown on embryonic stem cell research. He threw the government's weight against efforts by the University of Michigan to give minority students an edge in admission, as it did for students from rural areas or the offspring of alumni.

When the nation fell into recession, the president remained fixated not on generating jobs but rather on fighting the right wing's war against taxing the wealthy. As a result, money that could have been used to strengthen Social Security evaporated, as did the chance to provide adequate funding for programs the president himself had backed. No Child Left Behind, his signature domestic program, imposed higher standards on local school systems without providing enough money to meet them.

If Mr. Bush had wanted to make a mark on an issue on which Republicans and Democrats have long made common cause, he could have picked the environment. Christie Whitman, the former New Jersey governor chosen to run the Environmental Protection Agency, came from that bipartisan tradition. Yet she left after three years of futile struggle against the ideologues and industry lobbyists Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney had installed in every other important environmental post. The result has been a systematic weakening of regulatory safeguards across the entire spectrum of environmental issues, from clean air to wilderness protection.

•

The president who lost the popular vote got a real mandate on Sept. 11, 2001. With the grieving country united behind him, Mr. Bush had an unparalleled opportunity to ask for almost any shared sacrifice. The only limit was his imagination.

He asked for another tax cut and the war against Iraq.

The president's refusal to drop his tax-cutting agenda when the nation was gearing up for war is perhaps the most shocking example of his inability to change his priorities in the face of drastically altered circumstances. Mr. Bush did not just starve the government of the money it needed for his own education initiative or the Medicare drug bill. He also made tax cuts a higher priority than doing what was needed for America's security; 90 percent of the cargo unloaded every day in the nation's ports still goes uninspected.

Along with the invasion of Afghanistan, which had near unanimous international and domestic support, Mr. Bush and his attorney general put in place a strategy for a domestic antiterror war that had all the hallmarks of the administration's normal method of doing business: a Nixonian obsession with secrecy, disrespect for civil liberties and inept management.

American citizens were detained for long periods without access to lawyers or family members. Immigrants were rounded up and forced to languish in what the Justice Department's own inspector general found were often "unduly harsh" conditions. Men captured in the Afghan war were held incommunicado with no right to challenge their confinement. The Justice Department became a cheerleader for skirting decades-old international laws and treaties forbidding the brutal treatment of prisoners taken during wartime.

Mr. Ashcroft appeared on TV time and again to announce sensational arrests of people who turned out to be either innocent, harmless braggarts or extremely low-level sympathizers of Osama bin Laden who, while perhaps wishing to do something terrible, lacked the means. The Justice Department cannot claim one major successful terrorism prosecution, and has squandered much of the trust and patience the American people freely gave in 2001. Other nations, perceiving that the vast bulk of the prisoners held for so long at Guantánamo Bay came from the same line of ineffectual incompetents or unlucky innocents, and seeing the awful photographs from the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, were shocked that the nation that was supposed to be setting the world standard for human rights could behave that way.

•

Like the tax cuts, Mr. Bush's obsession with Saddam Hussein seemed closer to zealotry than mere policy. He sold the war to the American people, and to Congress, as an antiterrorist campaign even though Iraq had no known working relationship with Al Qaeda. His most frightening allegation was that Saddam Hussein was close to getting nuclear weapons. It was based on two pieces of evidence. One was a story about attempts to purchase critical materials from Niger, and it was the product of rumor and forgery. The other evidence, the purchase of aluminum tubes that the administration said were meant for a nuclear centrifuge, was concocted by one low-level analyst and had been thoroughly debunked by administration investigators and international vetting. Top members of the administration knew this, but the selling went on anyway. None of the president's chief advisers have ever been held accountable for their misrepresentations to the American people or for their mismanagement of the war that followed.

The international outrage over the American invasion is now joined by a sense of disdain for the incompetence of the effort. Moderate Arab leaders who have attempted to introduce a modicum of democracy are tainted by their connection to an administration that is now radioactive in the Muslim world. Heads of rogue states, including Iran and North Korea, have been taught decisively that the best protection against a pre-emptive American strike is to acquire nuclear weapons themselves.

•

We have specific fears about what would happen in a second Bush term, particularly regarding the Supreme Court. The record so far gives us plenty of cause for worry. Thanks to Mr. Bush, Jay Bybee, the author of an infamous Justice Department memo justifying the use of torture as an interrogation technique, is now a federal appeals court judge. Another Bush selection, J. Leon Holmes, a federal judge in Arkansas, has written that wives must be subordinate to their husbands and compared abortion rights activists to Nazis.

Mr. Bush remains enamored of tax cuts but he has never stopped Republican lawmakers from passing massive spending, even for projects he dislikes, like increased farm aid.

If he wins re-election, domestic and foreign financial markets will know the fiscal recklessness will continue. Along with record trade imbalances, that increases the chances of a financial crisis, like an uncontrolled decline of the dollar, and higher long-term interest rates.

The Bush White House has always given us the worst aspects of the American right without any of the advantages. We get the radical goals but not the efficient management. The Department of Education's handling of the No Child Left Behind Act has been heavily politicized and inept. The Department of Homeland Security is famous for its useless alerts and its inability to distribute antiterrorism aid according to actual threats. Without providing enough troops to properly secure Iraq, the administration has managed to so strain the resources of our armed forces that the nation is unprepared to respond to a crisis anywhere else in the world.

•

Mr. Kerry has the capacity to do far, far better. He has a willingness - sorely missing in Washington these days - to reach across the aisle. We are relieved that he is a strong defender of civil rights, that he would remove unnecessary restrictions on stem cell research and that he understands the concept of separation of church and state. We appreciate his sensible plan to provide health coverage for most of the people who currently do without.

Mr. Kerry has an aggressive and in some cases innovative package of ideas about energy, aimed at addressing global warming and oil dependency. He is a longtime advocate of deficit reduction. In the Senate, he worked with John McCain in restoring relations between the United States and Vietnam, and led investigations of the way the international financial system has been gamed to permit the laundering of drug and terror money. He has always understood that America's appropriate role in world affairs is as leader of a willing community of nations, not in my-way-or-the-highway domination.

We look back on the past four years with hearts nearly breaking, both for the lives unnecessarily lost and for the opportunities so casually wasted. Time and again, history invited George W. Bush to play a heroic role, and time and again he chose the wrong course. We believe that with John Kerry as president, the nation will do better.

Voting for president is a leap of faith. A candidate can explain his positions in minute detail and wind up governing with a hostile Congress that refuses to let him deliver. A disaster can upend the best-laid plans. All citizens can do is mix guesswork and hope, examining what the candidates have done in the past, their apparent priorities and their general character. It's on those three grounds that we enthusiastically endorse John Kerry for president.

Here.

Sometimes Life Isn't As We Expect It To Be

So what have I been up to? In an ideal world, I would have left Cleveland for Columbus at 3 pm Wednesday with another newbie going to the seminar (as the "newbies" are now third year lawyers...maybe I need a new name for us). Of course, I'm Greek, which means I'm always running behind. Always. So at 5 pm, I'm still in my office packing up, not at the bar in Columbus with my friend. Aargh. My cell phone rings - it's my grandmother.

Yiayia: Are you at home?
Me: No, I'm at work.
Yiayia: [defeated] Oh. [pause] Can you come over now?

Uh oh. Fuck. It's obviously a bad time to go over. I'm late. I only slept three hours last night. I don't want to drive to Columbus in the dark. I want to get to the hotel ASAP, sit in the hotel bar and watch the last debate with my friend (a crazy Republican). But I'm Greek; you don't say "no" to your grandmother. She can ask you to come over solely to open a fucking pickle jar, and you do it, no questions asked. (True story, about a month ago, my grandmother called and asked me to come over. I drove the 45 minutes from my house to hers, and asked what was up (remember, no questions asked) and she hands me a picture from when I was in 7th or 8th grade -- I can tell from the awful perm I was sporting and no, you absolutely may not see a picture. I thought all suck evidence had been destroyed. Where was I? Oh, yeah, she hands me a photo and says, "Stephanie, what year is this?" That was it.)

I dutifully went over there to see whatever picture or whatever she needed me for. So I get there, and standing in the driveway is my cousin. Yes, the one in Afghanistan. Except right now, he's standing right in front of me in my grandparents duct taped driveway (long story. Actually, no it's not: you know how driveways get cracks in them? My grandfather duct tapes the cracks), hunched against the wind, smoking a Marboro Lights cigarette. And I'm definitely not in Afghanistan. So the obvious conclusion, even to my shell shocked self, is that he's in Cleveland. I was floored.

Evidentally, they get 2 weeks off when stationed overseas for more than 12 months. They have no say over when their break is - whether it is approximately midway, a few months after they arrive, or a few months before they return. It's just...whenever. They wanted him to take his break now since he had to come stateside to bring back additional troops. It wasn't really a choice. He has a bit more grey hair that when I last saw him 4th of July. (He turned 30 in Afghanistan. He turned 25 in Kosovo. I guess he believes in spending milestone birthdays in war zones??)

A few scary things. He said they are supposed to have 180 rounds of ammo at all times, and he (and everyone else) is down to 90. And no indication that theu will soon be getting what they need. Second, there are bombs built into the sand and they are detonated by remote. There are radio signals which jam the remote. If you have one on every other car, it will completely prevent them from using the remotes. Rather than having one for every two cars as needed, they have one. For the entire unit.

So we watch the debate together. (It's real interesting to watch the debate with an 85-year-old conservative WW2 veteran who hates Bush perhaps even more than I do.) So I didn't leave for Columbus until maybe 11:30. Ugh! I was exhausted. My friend kept calling to see why I wasn't at the hotel bar to have a drink with him. Umm...drinking now would get me arrested. So I got three hours of sleep. Again. Great way to start the seminar...Compelling topics. Class action. Collateral torts. Employing foreign nationals. Taxation. Need I go on? I could barely contain my excitement. In fact, just recalling it now is giving me the chills...

That evening, I was going out with my friend, an OSU third year who is joining our firm next fall, and an OSU second year we have a summer associate offer out to. (Yes, our endless stream of interviews is over.) We were out from 6-2:45. So I was exhausted. Again. Or is that still? I stumbled back to the hotel. (Yes, I stumbled. Yes, I was drunk. You caught me, ok? I tried to hang with my friend - and he can obviously outdrink me.) But the 2L that we are recruiting, she asked me for a disparate impack outline for her law review note. That she needed by Friday. So at 3 am, I'm drunk. Trying to figure out how to log onto the firm system, to work the directory, find the document, and email it to her. Did I mention that I was completely soberly challenged?? You can imagine how productive I was. Then, since I was logged into email I saw that I had 19 messages. They can wait, right? Obviously not to my drunk self. I had to email a friend back. And I wasn't in the best position to email, I'm sure. Let's just say that when my alarm went off (after 3 hours - night 3 in a row!) I amazingly wasn't hung over. I was, however, still drunk until about 1 pm. Day 2 lectures were just fantastic - thanks for asking.

Friday night I slept 10 hours - which (for all you math majors out there) is one more MORE than I slept Tuesday-Thursday nights put together. Boy, did I need it.

Can you believe this?

Calling All Conservative Bloggers!

You exposed RatherGate by proving the CBS documents were fake -- nice work! But now the liberals have found a bunch more documents so our work is not done. Let's get to work proving that these are fake, too!

Dick Cheney's DUI
George W. Bush's DUI
George W. Bush's Second DUI
Bush and Cheney have excellent judgement and would never get behind the wheel while drunk.

Memo to Ken Lay
Second Memo to Ken Lay
Ken Lay has been indicted on felony fraud charges -- there is NO WAY he was this close with President Bush.

Bush Daughters' Possession of Alcohol
It must be fake: This is clearly a liberal media snow job on these poor girls.

Osama Warning Document Part 1
Osama Warning Document Part 2
This so called "official document" suggests that Bush was asleep at wheel before 9-11. Get real.

Are there any other fake documents we are missing? Please send them to us so we can post them on this site for conservative bloggers to debunk.

Oh my god...are they serious?

In other fun news, check out the Global Rich List, from Left is Right. I have learned that I am the 35,289,565 richest person in the world...There are 5,964,710,435 people poorer than you. That puts me in the top 0.588%. Considering my student loans, house payments, bank account, and 401K, that is pretty pathetic. Of course, they don't ask those questions.

Five thoughts -- for now

Some of my thoughts later, but for now...

First, check this out that Cam found. Are they kidding me? Patriotic ice cream?? Oh my god. What exactly does Nutty Environmentalist taste like, you ask? Well, it tastes like butter pacan, duh. I Hate the French Vanilla? Whatever. I guess there is a fool always ready to part with his dollar...

Second, I have quite the t-shirt collection. I have been thinking of turning my older t-shirts (all older than 6 months, except me REM t-shirts) into a quilt. My best friend showed me this excellent website where they will turn my t-shirts into a quilt (I get to choose the size pased on the number of shirts I have) and then all proceeds go to support projects and services which strengthen the potential of deaf and hard of hearing youth. If anyone has been tossing around this idea as well, I really recommend this.

Third, my friend sent me this Charles Darwin quote to explain so bad decisions I made in my 20s. "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." Ouch...

Fourth, from my friend Mel comes this website - it's a game where you "run" for president by picking a platform, fundraising, dealing with the media - unfortunately, it's unrealistic b/c you don't mudsling.

Finally, from Sarah, (and I encourage the Republicans, completely PC individuals, and those without a sense of humor to stop reading now), Voting for Bush is like running in the special Olympics. Ok, yes, I know how completely un-pc that is, but shit, it made me laugh.

Leaders of tomorrow

Words aren't even necessary...




From here.

Zorba

My younger sister just called me. She had a bad dream about our dog (a 10-year-old golden retriever, literally the sweetest thing in the creation of the world). Anyway, she went downstairs to see and feed him, and he had taken a box of pins, OPENED them, and appears to have eaten some of them! I Ihave no idea why he would do this (I said he was the sweetest thing, not the smartest thing), but now I have all these nightmares of ripped stomaches and internal bleeding. :(

Get Out And Vote

Check out this incentive to vote that Jason found. People are pledging to vote on election day. They are also pledging to have sex election night. People sign up as either a citizen (pledging to withhold sex from non-voters for the week following the election), a patriot (pledging to have sex with a voter on election night and withhold sex from non-voters for the week following the election), or an American hero (pledging to have sex with a voter on election night and withhold sex from non-voters for the next four years). Disclaimers include:

**Pledge-fulfilling sex must be consensual, legal, and generous. And safe. And hot.
**Acceptable sexual positions include, but are not limited to: missionary, doggy-style, cowgirl, reverse cowgirl, leapfrog, butterfly, humpback whale, cling wrap, squashing of the deck chair, accordion, reverse piggy-back, advanced ("twin") leapfrog. Male-male, female-female, group, and oral variations of these positions can also be used to satisfy the pledge.
**Taking the pledge indicates a good-faith effort to abide by its provisions. Pledge-takers who have violated withholding provisions become effective non-voters, and are barred from sex with fellow pledge-takers.
**Pledge-takers who fail to vote are forbidden from masturbating. (Exemption: pledge-takers who are not eligible to vote are encouraged to masturbate frequently.)
**"Cybersex" does not satisfy the pledge, dorkwad.
**Non-voters may render themselves eligible for sex with American Heroes by voting at least twice in local, primary, and/or 2006 congressional races. Those voting in only one such race qualify to perform, but not receive, oral sex on American Heroes.
**Achievement of a Votergasm during election-night sex is probable, but not guaranteed. Those encountering difficulty reaching Votergasm are encouraged to slow things down, talk about it, and reduce the pressure. Other techniques include the use of massage oils, toys, "dirty talk," "ballot stuffing," and "exit polls."
**Per the U.S. Constitution, children conceived on election night are eligible for gigantic interest-free loans from the U.S. government, and special t-shirts.

There are even Votergasm Parties - I assume they can still be called by their traditional name -- orgies. Somewhere, the porn industry is addressing the problem that politics is messing with their turf...


And Matt devised a nice little drinking game for the debate tomorrow. Me, I'll be in some hotel (hopefully) in Columbus. I HATE Columbus, best friend who lives there aside, because the first time I went there was for the bar exam, the most miserable three days of my life. So yes, I hold it against the city years later. (Ok, 3 years later, and I've held grudges a hell of a lot longer). This is for the Midwest Labor and Employment Law Conference. Truly, this is as exciting as life gets. Unfortunately, I need to report this year, and I am 12 CLE credits shy. (Actually, as of today, I'm 17 shy, but we have our firm seminar at the end of the month that is required for another 5 credits.) So this is a nice, two day jaunt that gives me 12 credits. How perfect is life? This means I won't have to take bankruptcy law CLE credits in December. AND since I already have my "lawyers-are-alcoholics-who-abuse-drugs-with-the-highest-suicide-rate-and-you-can't-sleep-with-clients-and-don't-lie-to-the-court" ethics/substance abuse/professionalism CLE (we need 2 1/2 hours every 2 years - in case we forget these things) I'm all good to go and Ohio will let me practice law for another two years...

The Return of Bitch Counsel

So Bitch Counsel never *really* left my life. She was more like a sunburn. It stops hurting, but then it starts to peal and itch. (Like how I pretended I know something about sunburns after I've had two of them in my 28 years of existence?)

Anyway, yes, we settled the case, but they have been fighting over the settlement for 6 weeks now. I say "they" because I have had nothing to do with it. Bitch counsel is evil incarnate, and I want nothing to do with her. So the junior partner and she have been going back and forth. She files a motion on Tuesday to enforce the settlement b/c we say that we didn't agree to things that she said we agreed to. (I so fear this settlement is going to unravel...)

The junior partner drafts something to file today, when we realized on Friday that today is Columbus Day, so lots of people won't be at work (or so I'm told) and the courts will be closed. So we have to file it Friday. One problem with this: neither the junior partner nor Yoda (the senior partner) were in on Friday. D'oh! So the partner whose client is was edited the junior partner's brief and brought it to me to sign. (He can't sign it b/c he's not an attorney or record on the case. I was the only attorney of record in the office.) So I sign the motion and filed it.

So I get a letter today from Bitch Counsel stating that that the brief contains a factual misrepresentation concerning interest and stuff that I have no idea about because, again, I didn't write the motion. Truthfully, I didn't even read the Motion. I just signed it. (Talk to me about Rule 11 sanctions later.) Anyway, she writes, "It is notable that Stephanie, rather than [the junior partner] signed the motion, since I have never had any conversation with Stephanie regarding interesting on the settlement." (Umm...actually, it wasn't notable at all, I was the only one of record in the office; it's just the way things work in a big firm...)

Anyway, I freak out (who? me? hard to believe, huh?) and take it to the partner who's client it was. He tells me he'll take care of it. 15 minutes later, Yoda called me. Our conversation:
Yoda: Hey Steph, how are you. (I hate "Steph" by the way, an NO, none of you can call me Steph unless you are Yoda.)
Me: The letter?
Yoda: You know, I have to say Steph, this is a real serious thing, lying to the court. You can't be doing that in court pleadings.
Me: I didn't write the brief. [Junior partner] wrote it and [partner who's client it is] edited it.
Yoda: Denying culpability. That's not an excuse. It's unacceptable. It's exactly what the Nazi's did. [Wait a minute, did he SERIOUSLY just compare me to a nazi? For real?? Oh my God. At this point, he kept talking about things but I was so stunned and so scared that I have no idea what he said. Literally. Never happened to me before. I knew at the moment that Yoda was going to fire me.] :( All of a sudden, I hear muffled laughter in the background. Yoda tells me:
Yoda: It's all right, Steph, I have the real culprits here. You have been doing a great job with everything.
Me (still stunned): Yoda! That was mean! Was [junior partner] in on it? Oh, [junior partner], I thought we were friends.

So...that was my day. I've been made fun of the entire time. And what's worse, the KNOW how gullible I am. They just took advantage of my trusting nature. I'm the same person who believed that my secretary could fire me (long story. But she was convincing, which resulted in me telling a named partner for "fuck that" when he tried to give me an assignment.)

Final REM Reminder and other thoughts

Don't forget! The Move On/ACT Vote for Change grand finale concert is today (Monday, October 11). It involves all the artists. So REM! (Oh, and other bands like Pearl Jam, Death Cab for Cutie, Dave Matthews Band, Bruce Springsteen, John Fogerty, Bonnie Raitt, Jackson Browne, the Dixie Chicks,and Bright Eyes, etc etc etc.) The finale is in DC, and if anyone is in DC and is going...first, I hate you. Second, I want a full report! For those of us who aren't, it's being broadcast on the Sundance Channel, starting at 6:30. If you don't have Sundance, you can see it at www.vfcfinale.com with media player.

In other news, in an effort not to disappoint my father anymore for being a bad adult, I went full out "kitchen." I received Corning Ware from my aunt and uncle as a housewarming gift, so I have FIVE circle or oval things to cook food in. THEN I went to the grocery store and bought some seasoning. I got Italian seasoning, oregono, chili powder, soy sauce, flour, cinnamon, garlic poweder, onion powder, Pam cooking spray, vinager (white and cider, who knew it came in multiple flavors?) Brown sugar, and chicken bouillan cubes. If anyone can tell me what one DOES with this stuff (other than the chili powder. Not to brag, but I make great chili) please let me know immediately. ALSO, if there are things that I am missing that "normal" kitchens have, I would appreciate the advice. Yes, I know I still need the dishes, but this was a major baby step, no? For now, my $1 KMart dishes will work.

(Unfortunately, I needed sugar to cook the stir fry last night, and THAT I didn't have. While flour looks similar in the package, it didn't look similar enough when I opened it to put it in where I needed sugar. So I'm still a failure I guess.)

Oh, and a puzzing question. While Bush is on vacation (like yesterday) or campaigning, who is in charge of the country?? Should Bush win in '04, and SOMEHOW the world not end (though I still posit that Bush's reelection will be the beginning of the end of the world), obviously the rumors about Hillary, and Edwards hasn't hurt his name any (though not being involved in politics if he loses, however, may be, as his Senate term is over). But when I lived in PA, there was a lot said about Rendell...watch him.

I also learned that 32% of the country carries under $20 in cash on a regular basis. Yes, I am part of that 32% (they also said that 43% carries between $21-$53.

Finally, the Yankees made the ALCS. As I hate the Yankees more than life itself, I must root for Boston. Now, I realize that Boston hasn't won since forever, but really, they are so irritating about it. If they win, their entire identity collapses. That can be extremely traumatic. Really. Also, they bemoan the Yankees for their payroll...but really, they aren't innocent in the payroll problems that have plagued baseball in the last 10 years. Still, they are not the the Yankees. And as Katie said, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Election Cancelled!

I may have mentioned before that I love Andy Borowitz. He's originally from Ohio, thus the Ohio love. ;-) Actually, though, I am aware that people out there DON'T get the love that us swing states have been getting - and as one of the biggest swing states, and one at a statistical tie, we get more love than we can handle. They might as WELL say this - it's what they all MEAN...

ELECTION CANCELLED; FOCUS GROUP IN OHIO TO PICK PRESIDENT
Bush, Kerry Tailor Messages to Nine Voters

With just three weeks to go until Election Day, the Federal Election Commission stunned the political world today by announcing that the election would be cancelled and that a focus group of nine voters in Ohio would pick the nation's next president instead.

The focus group, consisting of four men and five women, are expected to convene every day between now and Nov. 2 with electrodes glued to key regions of their bodies to measure their every response to President George W. Bush and Sen. John Kerry.

While reaction to the FEC's move was mixed, one election official in Florida praised the decision to cancel the vote: "This is kind of a relief, because we tested our new electronic voting machines last week and none of them really worked."

Moments after the FEC's announcement, the two candidates pulled their political ads from every state but Ohio and started tailoring their messages to appeal to the nine all-important focus group members.

At a rally outside the building where the focus group is housed, Sen. Kerry said, "President Bush's policies have helped Halliburton, but they have not helped Janie Darlington of 3562 Glenridge Road."

While the FEC's decision to place so much power in the hands of a focus group is undeniably controversial, one FEC official argued that it is not without precedent: "After all, nine people decided the 2000 election, too."

Elsewhere, Bush strategist Karl Rove hailed the president's performance in the second debate, giving credit to improved radio reception by the bulge in the back of his jacket.

Superman

I woke up this morning to the news that Christopher Reeve died. Though not unexpected (he looked almost translucent his last public appearance), the news left me quite sad. Due to my age, I obviously grew up with Superman as an idol. It's hard not to - the character Superman is a true hero, without flaw. As I grew up, Christopher reeve became just another actor, typecast as Superman, the ultimate hero, and no other role seemed appropriate for him.

In 1995, we learned what a true hero was. When he was paralyzed from the neck down, doctors saying he would never move again, unable to even breathe on his own, given a 7 year life expectancy, rather than hide from the world that once associated him with a super hero who could not be hurt, he showed great courage in making his plight public. He showed the strength of will (able to breathe off the respirator for periods of time, able to slightly move his fingers, toes, elbows, and feel hot and cold after he was told it wasn't possible.) And most importantly, giving a voice to stem cell research.

Was he the first person who suffered for a disease or disability that stem cell research could potentially cure? Absolutely not. However, an average joe isn't going to garner the attention calling for stem cell research that Christoper Reeve was able to due to his celebrity. He can't speak at the Academy Awards. The Democratic National Convention. That is unfortunate that so many had no voice for years, and yet, wonderful that Christopher Reeve gave a voice to to such an important cause.

It appears that when I was a child, I choose my heroes wisely...

Bush images

Found here.

The highs and lows of emotions

So in an half an hour of watching tv yesterday, I saw the last 5 minutes of Center Stage and cried, and last 5 minutes of Signs (a truly horrible movie, and one I’ve seen before) and cried and had to drive to the grocery store to buy cheese. Umm...I suspect that someone has PMS. (I just freaked out every male reader, didn’t I?) This doesn’t count all the emotions I had during the Ohio State game. I learned some swear words I didn’t even know that I knew. Ugh. Now I want lemon juice. (For the record, I want lemon juice b/c I want to make avgolemono. I don't just want to drink lemon juice. I said that I suspected I have PMS, not that I was pregnant!)

In watching Launch, I was reminded how much I adore REM’s video Bad Day. You can also catch it on REM’s website. It’s brilliant. What I like about Launch though, is that it’s as random as me. It just went from REM to Josh Groban. Find me a radio station with that type of variety.

And I hated more than anything else working on a sunny Saturday. Every one I fear is the last of the year. Ugh! (At least it's cold out today, so I'm not so bitter.) But I have thousands upon thousands of documents to get through. STILL! I'm going cross-eyed. (And yes, I've been drinking some as I've been doing diligence - wouldn't you be? - but I don't think that's why I'm seeing double.)

Dred Scott = Roe v. Wade

Paperwights Fair Shot makes a compelling argument that when Bush talked about Dred Scott in Friday's debate, what he actually talking about was promising to nominate Supreme Court Justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade.

Bush couldn't say that in plain language, because it would freak out every moderate swing voter in the country, but he can say it in code, to make sure that his base will turn out for him. Anti-choice advocates have been comparing Roe v. Wade with Dred Scott v. Sandford for some time now. There is a constant drumbeat on the religious right to compare the contemporary culture war over abortion with the 19th century fight over slavery, with the anti-choicers cast in the role of the abolitionists.

This comparison apparently is well-known in certain circles, and has been written about extensively.

The odd things we find in old coat pockets - and the Philosophy major in me was intrigued by the third

This was dated November 29, 1998 from the Syracuse Herald American. Page AA-5. I have no idea why I have it. I found it in the inner pocket of an old coat of mine. At first, I assume that the crinkled papery sound was money in an old coat, so at first I was pleased. I got this and I vaguely remember reading her column every Sunday. But I have no idea why I help the article. Though I can't figure out why it was so important to me to cut out and save for...6 years, obviously it was, and so I thought I'd share it. It's like peakinig back into who I was, except I can't remember.

Silent treatment effective, but it’s not good for you.

“Dum dum de dum dum . . . we hear the sounds of silence.” Yep, that’s my theme song when people make me mad. I’ve always been a firm believer in the silent treatment. Myabe it’s because I came from such a big family; shouting was how we handled everyday conversation, so to stand out or make a point, silence was the way to go.

That was me, all right, the sensitive, brooding type. If people pushed my buttons, I simply refused to speak to them until they missed my sparkling conversation so much they would apologize for whatever egregious wrong that had done me - whether they had done it or not. Of course, they usually had, because I was perfect and rarely did anything wrong myself.

Yep, I was a professional. I learned from the master myself, my brother Joe, who once went sex full months without speaking to me in high school. I thought it was because I had scratched one of his albums; turns out he had some sort of nodule on his vocal cord. Hey, who knew? He still made a darn valid point, as far as I was concerned.

According to the latest studies, however, this might not be the best way to deal with anger. (Sigh.) You know, just once I’d like to see a study confirming that I might’ve actually been doing something right all these years; for instance, establishing the health benefits of drinking milk out of the carton. Just once.

At any rate, the silent treatment, while infinitely effective at annoying the object of one’s anger (according to my own research) can actually be detrimental to one’s health. Apparently, it saps one’s mental energy. Of course, so do television and anything more than casual interaction with the opposite sex, if you ask me. But, hey, no one did.

So can you imagine that? The one thing I do really well, not being good for me? I think that’s absolutely ridiculous, the thought that something as easy as being quiet can sap my mental . . . um . . . yeah. Hello. What was I saying? I know it was something very important . . . darn.

Well, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that I emphatically did not scratch that blasted album in high school, and so he had no right to make his friends ignore me and not take me to the homecoming dance. OK - hang on. It’s coming back to me. That wasn’t what I was talking about, was it? Sorry.

Oh, I know! I was talking about the silent treatment sapping my brain. Right. Well, it certainly does no such thing.

But why do I do it anyway? Logically, wouldn’t it be easier just to spit it out? What deep, dark emotion prevents me from sharing my innermost thoughts with the people I love? Oh, that’s right. I know what it is. I’m mean. It’s true. Even my mother thinks so.

You see, I could never spontaneously say, “Honey, would you please empty the trash?” What would come out is, “You know, if you actually got into the garbage bag and jumped up and down for a while, you could probably get another tissue in there.”

It’s how I handle anger. I never said I was proud of myself.

But that was the old me, darn it. I’m turning over a new leaf. I’m going to start sating what’s on my mind - nicely, if I have to - because it’s the healthy thing to do. Everybody always says that people who yell and scream and don’t hold anything back live forever, so as of now I’ve got a new theme song. Come on, people, sing along with me:

“You know you make me want to -!”


Maggie Lamond Simone is a free-lance writer who lives in Syracuse.

I also kept this one. (Not sure of the date, but it must be 1998 as well, b/c it talks on the opposite side on a reunion in 1999). Same author.


Doggne it, I have to cook for him

Cook for him? I thought incredulously. Now they want me to cook for him?

I don’t understand it. I thought I’d done everything right since we’ve been together. I’ve read all the books. I’ve worked on my temper and my tendency to dote. I’ve learned hot to show my love without being overbearing and coddling, I’ve given him space and been there when he needed a hug. I never dreamed I had a capacity for this kind f love, and I’ve tried so hard not to screw it up.

But cook for him?

It’s hard to tell where this all started; we’ve run the whole relationship gamut over the past few years. I know him inside out, better than he knows himself. I know when he doesn’t feel well or when he’s just mopey because of the weather. I know what he thinks and why he thinks it, what he feels and why he feels it. He’s my soul mate.

SO I guess this little problem just sort of snuck up on us. Maybe it was inevitable. Maybe I spoiled him or gave in too mich, as I am wont to do in such a relationship. I thought I finally had one trained just right, but maybe all of this time it was the other way around.

I mean, really. Cook?

See, I was always an independent kinda girl; some might’ve even called me self-centered and irresponsible (my parents come to mind). I had no cares, no worries about anything that didn’t specifically involve me. I didn’t have to think about another’s health or whether he was getting enough sleep. And, frankly, I miss it sometimes. The past can be difficult to release.

But I’ve released most of it now, since he’s come into my life. The baggage, the anxiety, the need to self-destruct. We’ve learned when to compromise and when to stand strong, which behavior is acceptable and which is inappropriate, what we want and what we need, and how to give and receive love.

And we’ve also learned, together, our roles, our desires, our expectations and limitations, because that’s how it is in a relationship. You learn together and grow together and love each other no matter what.

Or at least that’s what I thought. But we seem to have hit an unforeseen stumbling block, a possibly insurmountable chasm dividing our usually unshakable bond. Apparently, because I give him what he wants instead of what’s best for him, he’s developed a food allergy of some sort, and in order to determine which food, I have to cook for him.

“Oh, it’s nothing,” they said with an enthusiasm I just didn’t share. “A little lamb, some whitefish, brown rice, a few boiled potatoes and carrots. You’ll catch on in no time.” Yeah. I’ll catch on all right, I thought. I’ll catch the next rain outta here. Enough is enough.

I’ve given up half of my bad and all of my house for him I feed him, pick up after him and indulge his love of the outdoors when I’d rather be watching television. And though, like many members of the male species, he isn’t big on communication, I’ve learned to understand his every mood, his every thought. I doubt he’s even capable of understanding mine.

And now I have to cook for him?

Apparently I do, and I will. It’s a matter of health, you see, not a matter of yielding to anti-feminist logic. It’s not like I’m dressing up in kinky clothes or anything. He needs a special diet, and so I will cook. If I would lay down my life for him, then certainly I can do this one small thing.

I have to go now; I have to figure out how this oven works. After all, he’s the only dog I have.


And finally, this was in there. Go Plato.

What's your major? What's it worth to you?

Here are the annuual earnings in 1993 by college undergraduate majors for man and women aged 35-44, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Men: top five majors
1. Engineering.....$53,286
2. Mathmatics.....$51,584
3. Computer Science.....$50,509
4. Pharmacy.....$50,480
5. Physics.....$50,128

Women: top five majors
1. Economics.....$49,170
2. Engineering.....$49,070
3. Pharmacy.....$48,427
4. Architecture.....$46,363
5. Computer Science.....$43,757

Men: bottom five majors
1. Philosophy/religion...$31,848
2. Social Work.....$32,171
3. Visual/Performing Arts.....$32,972
4. Foreign Languages.....$33,780
5. Education.....$34,470

Women: bottom five majors
1. Philosophy/Religion.....$25,788 (Luckily, I make a little more than that)
2. Education.....$27,988
3. Home Economics.....$28,275
4. Social work.....$28,594
5. Agriculture.....$28,751

"BAD Dog! That's my weiner!"

Oh my gosh! Jenn over at Live From New York reports that a man accidentally cut off his, excuse my french, dick, and man's best friend ate it for dinner.

Man Mistakenly Cuts Off Penis, Dog Eats It
BUCHAREST (Reuters) - A elderly Romanian man mistook his penis for a chicken's neck, cut it off and his dog rushed up and ate it, the state Rompres news agency said Monday. It said 67 year-old Constantin Mocanu, from a village near the southeastern town of Galati, rushed out into his yard in his underwear to kill a noisy chicken keeping him awake at night." I confused it with the chicken's neck," Mocanu, who was admitted to the emergency hospital in Galati, was quoted as saying. "I cut it ... and the dog rushed and ate it." Doctors said the man, who was brought in by an ambulance bleeding heavily, was now out of danger.

Sadly, it's true. I found it over at MSNBC.

Bush's Slogan For Debate #2 - "At Least It Was Closer"

A few overall thoughts: Was anyone else interested in Bush’s blue tie? Red is the power color – people made comments that Edwards maroon tie wasn’t as powerful and strong as Cheney’s red one. So why does Bush go blue? Because it’s a calming color, and then maybe people would ignore if his face started going crazy again?? I mean, if he wanted to go truthful, it should have been purple. Ever notice that purple was the color of the evil stepmother/queen etc in all fairy tales? Bush does better with the town hall format than the first. He has people to talk to. With the debate, he just talks to Kerry and that gets him rattled easier. I think that Bush did better than last debate. (I know, hard not to, he had lowered expectations so much.) Even though his responses is just the same stuff over and over. Nothing new. Absolutely nothing substantial. Even in a debate, as the incumbant, he spends more time attacking Kerry that lauding his own record. Gee, I wonder why... Whenever NBC went to a split screen when Kerry was talking, Bush was clenching his jaw. Or biting his lip. Shaking his leg. Or winking at the camera. Yeah, that is MUCH better than the scowling. Putz. (Though Bush did get points from me to making fun of his scowling. I so enjoy the self-deprecation.) Though if I had to hear Bush laud the Patriot Act one more time, I was moving to Canada. And WHY did the moderator continue to let Bush talk w/o granting him the time or overall break the rules? That annoyed the shit out of me!! Does anyone else think with these two guys leaping out of their stools, they just really want to put on the boxing gloves and go at it with each other. I would pay-per-view to see that. (Speaking of I hear that Fahrenheit 9/11 is going to be on pay-per-view the night before the election.) I did have a point though – why not allow the candidates to really debate? To comment to each other. To argue with one another. None of this ole bullshit. I think that Kerry took this debate as well, but Bush didn’t kill his reelection hopes with his performance. He didn’t look incompetent, like he did after the first debate. I think he lost the debate, but Kerry is a smarter, more skilled debater than he is. Bush lost the first debate; Kerry won the second. Bush’s whineyness was getting to me. With almost every answer. I’m supposed to think this guy can be president when he sounds like a child when you just took away his doll?

And now some specifics. All the questions, some of the answers. Mostly just impressions though.

First question to Kerry deals with him as wishy-washy. Kerry doesn’t appear to be discussing himself at all, going into Bush and WMD and no child left behind and the jobs. I have no idea what he’s talking about with respect to this question. I liked the “You can be certain and still be wrong” of last week, personally. Bush "I can see why people think he's wishy-washy. He is." Good line. I don’t think that it is necessarily true. But as new evidence comes in or when it is apparent that something is not working, you better change the strategy. (Note to OSU: Zwick should not start today…) but the point is, it’s a good soundbite. Keep in mind the short attention span of your audience…Bush played that card well. Not on substance though. Still weak there.

Second question to Bush about the president's belief that war was justified even without WMD. Bush goes into a flashback clinch to the first debate and the "Global Test" line. Again, just going with the superficial soundbites, not with the actual truth or accuracy is Bush’s strongest suit in this reelection.

Kerry’s third question asks if he would use same plan as Bush in Iraq. Kerry quotes a few Republicans. I think this is a good strategy, especially early in the debate. When Kerry quoted Bush’s daddy last week, Bush was thrown and pissed and had no response. Good strategy to try to unsettle him early. That’s actually a smart move. This time it didn’t work, but it was a valiant effort. Kerry lays out his plan and Bush comes back and calls it the Bush plan. But anything involving other countries – Bush can’t get the international community’s support because of his actions already. For those who understand that, they understand the difference. I think that most people in the US are stupid though. Bush again turns to “wrong war, wrong place, wrong time.” Kerry responds that the right war was Bin Laden and there were no WMD. Bush replies “hey, we thought they were there, you thought they were there.” That’s seems to be his theme tonight. Whining, “you thought so too….” Ugh.

Bush’s fourth question concerned her family’s anti-American feeling they experienced when abroad. Bush lists a bunch of decisions that were unpopular and necessary. Kerry goes back to last weeks “more of the same" superficial soundbite – even though that IS what Bush is unapologetically offering. I don’t like just the superficial soundbite stuff - from either candidate. Kerry quotes Bush from 2000 only going to war if there was an exit strategy and points to all the reports that there isn’t one and calls him a bloody liar. Ok, he didn’t. His words were much more … politician-y. But the point was there. Bush broke his word. And Bush is clenching his teeth again. Shaking his leg. He SO wants to go punch Kerry in the mouth…

Kerry’s fifth question asks about Iran's nuclear threat. Kerry first says "I don't think you can just rely on U.N. sanctions," which is ironic with his statement concerning Iraq. He then blames the president for inattention to Iran. (There’s a slogan for ya. “How many countries can Bush invade, all at the same time? Give him four more years and find out.”) Bush clenching teeth again. Seriously, does this baffoon think it isn’t noticeable? Wait, is Bush WINKING now?!? What the heck? I’m so intrigued by Bush’s facial impressions (not scowling, but just…grinding teeth, biting lips and winking) that I am not even sure what Kerry is saying. HA! Bush starts his response by saying, “that answer almost makes me want to scowl.” He gets laughs, he connects with the audience, and without saying anything of substance. Yeah, that seems like Bush. All style and no substance.

Bush’s sixth question concerns the prospects of a draft. Bush mentions “the internets. He says something about replacing troops with unmanned vehicles to save "manpower and equipment." Now, I’ll admit that I don’t know if that’s even possible, but really, that wouldn’t save equipment, would it? Wouldn’t you need MORE equipment? He categorically says no draft. Am I just cynical? I don’t see how that is going to be possible, for Kerry or for Bush. Bush says that the all volunteer army works, but they have stopped letting people OUT when their service time is up b/c they have not enough people to replace them. How is that working? Kerry starts listing military leaders who support him. Now he mentions the backdoor draft and says that his military policy most resembles a couple of Republicans, Reagan and Eisenhower. Bush jumps off his stool and starts to yell. The moderator tries to get in another question but Bush tells him he has to be able to respond, the moderator is trying to redirect the question and Bush just cuts him off and starts talking. This is really annoying watching Bush just break the rules without penalty again and again, yet really funny at the same time. Bush is completely out of control. Way to go, Commander in Chief. Wait? BUSH MENTIONS POLAND? HAS NO ONE TOLD HIM POLAND ANNOUNCED THIS WEEK THAT POLAND IS PULLING OUT?? Well, if Bush was unaware of it, he can’t be now. Kerry told him in response.

Kerry’s seventh question asked whey have there been no terrorist attacks domestically since 9/11 and how will he keep it that way. Kerry stumbles on Bush’s previous quote that it is "not a question of when but if." Oops. That’s a Bushism. Kerry goes to the lack of intelligence stemming from lack of international cooperation – this is a really important thing, the lack of international cooperation that Bush is capable of receiving, but I fear that not enough Americans understand it. Kerry brings up bag x-rays but not cargo x-rays on airplanes again (I thought this was an excellent point last week as well, but probably over the heads of most people, who don’t WANT to think of OTHER ways terrorists can hurt them and would rather focus on the SAME things happening again.) He ties the weaknesses in security to Bush’s tax cuts going to him, Bush, and the moderator. Bush is clenching his jaw, jiggling his leg, and winking all at the same time. Seriously, is he having a seizure on stage?? Bush goes back to Kerry’s 1993 vote to cut intelligence. (If we are looking in the past, we should be able to hear about Bush’s 1972 cocaine arrest, and 1976 drunk driving arrest, which was off limits even in 2000.) Kerry is shown smiling wryly. He should be careful. That may come across as "this guy is an idiot." I mean, he IS, but so is a lot of the American public. Please don't go Gore on me! Bush goes back to the how can you when the war on terror if you think it's the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time comment. Ugh.

Bush’s eighth question concerns him blocking importation of cheaper drugs from Canada. It's AMAZING that Canadian drugs don't kill Canadians who take them, huh? And did he just say that you may hear in December that he will flip flop? (Bush says he doesn’t want drugs from Canada coming from third world countries.) One of the best lines of the night. When Bush was whining about all the things that Kerry hasn’t done, Kerry comes back with, “We did something you don't know how to do: balance the budget." Sweet.

Kerry’s ninth question asked about Edwards as his VP if he is pro medical rights. Kerry points out that Edwards authored the Patients' Bill of Rights. Bush says that Kerry was the most liberal senator which was hard with that bunch. First, I’d respectfully disagree with the latter half of that sentence. Second, I was fairly certain that was Teddy Kennedy, who is a DIFFERENT Massachusetts Senator. But even if I’m right, that doesn’t matter. These undecided voters are undecided this long, you really think they are paying close enough attention to the election to check to make sure stuff is accurate. And THESE are the people deciding the next president. So Bush gets a point for making the term “liberals” seem dirty. Kerry notes that Bush is trying to scare people with labels, and asks what "compassionate conservatism" means, and lists all the evils of Bush/Cheney’s administration. Well, not all of them, or else the debate would still be going on. But I think he made a strong point, and turned Bush's comment around on him. I wonder if he was expecting that, or if he just thought that quickly. He is a skilled debator and can think on his feet faster than Bush.

Bush’s tenth question asked a question I didn’t wholly follow, concerning the Republican majority Congress and why he hasn’t vetoed spending plans not approved by the American people. I think that the reason that I don’t understand the question is that Bush started talking about the war and homeland security. He says something about the tax cuts and I THINK he said the word “depression" but maybe it was recession? Anyway, Kerry is smiling again as he writes down stuff. Bush seems winded, but mentally (ok, a game of checkers would do that) AND physically. Seriously, is he ok?? Because Cheney is charge scares the shit out of me too. Kerry is going back to health care. That seems unrelated. Ahh, here’s what I want. Bush took the huge surplus and turned it into a huge deficit. He says it’s the first tax cut ever during a war b/c you can’t realistically do both. Is that true?? I don’t know. If it is, it’s a point. Hell, it’s probably a point either way. The moderator asks a follow up question to Bush about how to cut the deficit without retrenchment, and Bush is back to how he was the first debate, pissed off because he is being questioned. He says that the recession was one of the shortest in history. Wait, this recession is over?? Seriously? Bush says this with a straight face??


Kerry eleventh question asks Kerry to swear to the camera that he won't raise tax burdens to families making less than $200,000. “Read my lips, no new taxes.” Ugh. Kerry does. Dramatic, but probably a mistake. What bothered me about the question is that Bush couldn’t ask or challenge Kerry to do so. Nor, I believe, can the moderator. So why can the moderator choose a question where the questioner can? This seems to break the spirit, though not the letter, of the rule. (ETA: Hardball guesses that next election – 2008 – that will be a rule). Kerry starts quoting McCain. Again going for the Republican quotes. I like the strategy. It was rather effective and rattled Bush the first debate. Bush is off his stool talking before Kerry even stops talking. He keeps saying, “it’s just not credible.” He’s got a whine to his voice that isn’t going to play well to the public – this is the president, not a whiny spouse. You want to respect him. He sounds like a child. I can just about hear, “na-uh. You’re lying.” It occurs to me that Bush did well in the debates against Gore in 2000 because he didn’t have a record to be attacked on. The “better to be certain than right” Bush can’t stand to be questioned on decisions that he made. Did he seriously just ask if his time was up?? Umm…you have those lights. Aren’t there where you can see them? I would expect so, but maybe I’m wrong.

Bush’s twelfth question concerns his record as environmentalist. Right here my friend called me b/c Boston just made the ALCS. I vaguely heard Bush just list stuff. I vaguely heard Kerry say something about the Red Sox. (The timing of my friends call is certainly ironic) And I heard Bush say something about the air quality being better.

Kerry’s thirteenth question asked about America remaining competitive in manufacturing. Kerry starts talking about health care?? WTF? I’m still on the phone, so maybe I missed something? He talked about outsourcing as well. Bush just appears to make a joke about not knowing he owned a timber company. Everyone laughs, so he does the joke again. And again. He’s definitely connecting with the audience. I’m not sure why he brought it up – did I miss Kerry say something? Oye, I need to be not on the phone. Besides, I thought the big joke after Cheney’s comment was that due to the $84 interest Bush had, he was a “small business” that Cheney was said would be unfairly taxed.

Bush’s fourteenth question concerns citizens' rights inherent in Patriot Act. Bush doesn't think that my rights are being watered down by the patriot act? Is he serious?? Kerry says he’s been consistent in wanting to revise the Patriot Act and points to other Republicans who also think that it needs to be revised. Shot on Bush grinding his teeth as Kerry is listing all the REPUBLICANS who think that Bush is making mistakes. It’s not as obviously effective this time, but the quoting of the Republicans against Bush is clearly a winning strategy. This is just as great as the scowling. Does he think we don’t notice? He’s been either biting his lip or grinding his teeth all night. And shaking his leg. Does he have ADHD?

Kerry’s fifteenth question concerns stem cell research. Kerry is really offtrack here. He is clearly flustered by this question. He’s fumbling around. He sounds like Bush generally does. I can’t even figure out why. He starts dropping names though. Nancy Reagan, Michael J. Fox. That might gain favor with these undecided people. Chris Reeve! Superman!! Rule!! But ultimately, a weak answer. Luckily, Bush makes no sense either. He has funded it, but he had hard decisions to make and so you can’t do it but you can sometimes? I am lost. Kerry must be too – he points out that Bush is saying yes and no. Bush jumps up before Kerry is done – AGAIN! Why the hell are you the moderator if you aren’t going to do anything to stop it? Anyway, Bush actually explains what the heck me meant. What he’s allowing have already been destroyed so it’s not allowing the destruction. A thin line – but at least I know what the heck he means.

Bush’s sixteenth question asks who he'd appoint to Supreme Court. Bush ain’t telling. He wants strict constructionists. These individuals are also known in some circles as “psychics who would charge $2.99 a minute anywhere else for knowing exactly what was in the framers minds 200+ years ago.” Or maybe that’s just my circle. Whatever. He mentions the judges in Cali who decided the “under God” case. Then he says not someone who voted for Dred Scott. Is Bush SERIOUS?! The case was in 1857. Can you even imagine?? I would HOPE that the racist perception of 150 years ago isn’t someone you’d want to be making decisions. But then again, saying he wouldn’t appoint that judge is easy b/c they are all dead asshole. He kinda messed up what the decision actually held. He says that they upheld slavery by reading into the Constitution and saying slaves were personal property. Actually, Dred Scott was before the 14th Amendment was passed in 1866. Score to Kerry for saying that the Supreme Court IS at issue in this election. That is actually my greatest fear. Kerry mentioned Bush’s quote. "What we need are some good conservatives" on the bench and pointing out that Scalia and Thomas, two of the worst judges imo, are Bush’s favorite justices.

Kerry’s seventeenth question apparently wanted a guarantee that the questioner’s tax dollars would not go towards funding abortion. The courts have already said you don’t have a right to say you don’t want your tax dollars going towards something you don’t support. Despite that, Kerry’s pretty weak on the answer. I am not even really following him. Bush comes in attacking – he can’t say he doesn’t know b/c he voted against parental notifications and against partial birth abortions. However, Kerry returns – his rebuttal is better than his initial answer. You need exceptions always. The health of the mother. The teenager whose father raped her and is pregnant should not have to tell her father that she wants an abortion. Even many pro-life individuals would support those exceptions, and Bush’s extreme examples managed to let Kerry skate over the fact that he actually is pro-choice. Bush made a strategic mistake there.

Bush’s final question asked three instances where he made a wrong decision and how he corrected them. Bush refuses to name a single mistake. Then again, this is the same person who said that he didn’t make any mistakes not that long ago. Kerry asks “Gut check time. Was this really going to war as a last result?" Bush returns to the $87 billion. Kerry repeated last weeks, "I made a mistake in how I talked about it; he made a mistake in going into Iraq."

Closing: Why have Kerry and Edwards had to go first in EVERY closing argument?? I think they have had the first question all three times as well. I thought that it was a coin flip? All three times it was them? Grr…

As for Bush’s comments, does he think that he’s out of the recession? Yes Bush, history will look back, and it will NOT be kind to you. Be prepared to join William Harding… Where are we Bush? You gained 1.9 million jobs but you lost more than you gained. And yes, home ownership is at an all time high. But so is bankruptcy, asshole. And Bush, Iraq IS going to fail. It's inevitable.

Mike Mills - not exactly Michael Stipe, but still bloody brilliant

We all know that I worship Michael Stipe. But the truth is, I love all about REM. So (slightly feeling like I'm cheating on Michael), check out what Mike Mills wrote for the Orlando Sentinel on October 6. I love him as well. Just a bit less than Michael Stipe.

As we’ve traveled around the United States the last year or so, we’ve sensed a growing unhappiness with the direction of our country. We started talking about it in the band and realized we all felt the same unease. In the past, we’ve always pretty much worked as individuals and stuck mostly to local politics because we felt that is where one can really make a difference. But in this situation, we felt we had to do something as a group. If there were ever a time to speak out, this is it.

We want America to put a new president in the White House.

We travel all over this country, which gives us an opportunity to speak with people from all walks of life. The press may talk a lot about a supposed great cultural and political divide in America, red states vs. blue states, right vs. left, but we see a different America. We see a nation of shared values and common purpose –a desire for peace and prosperity, equality and opportunity, democracy and freedom.

That’s what these elections are about: the soul of America. Under president Bush the rich have gotten richer, the poor are poorer and the middle class has lost ground. The number of people in poverty is up by more than 4 million, many of them children. One million jobs lost since 2001 is the worst record of any President since the Great Depression. More than 5 million Americans have lost their health insurance since Bush took office. That is class warfare.

This administration is amazingly inept and incompetent. John Ashcroft in charge of justice? The man thinks dancing is a sin. Look at all the people they’ve arrested and held for months only to release them when they can’t make a case. Dick Cheney formulates our energy policy in secret meetings with energy producers and no one else. Donald Rumsfeld tries to transform the military yet ignores the advice of his generals, contributing to the quagmire in the Middle East. One thing they’re best at is hiding the true nature of what they’re really doing behind great sounding names. “Healthy Forests” lets the timber companies clear-cut more of our national forests. “Clear Skies” lets the corporate polluters off the hook. This administration constantly says one thing and does another, and that is wrong.

Worst of all, President Bush led us into war in Iraq under false pretenses, with no clue about what would happen after we occupied the country. His neoconservatives cooked up a bunch of unverified intelligence on supposed Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and sold it to us as fact. So now we’ve lost more than 1,000 brave Americans with 7,000 maimed and wounded, the majority since Bush declared, “mission accomplished.” There doesn’t seem to be any plan for getting out, but he keeps insisting all is well in Iraq even though a recent intelligence report from the CIA paints a dismal picture of possibilities there. That is deception, not leadership.

Now, in this campaign, Bush and Cheney seem to have decided to try to scare people into voting for them. Their convention was a weeklong attack, filled with foam-at-the-mouth speeches and outright lies. They continue to try to put fear into the hearts of Americans. Dick Cheney even predicted a terrorist attack if we do not “make the right choice” and vote for his ticket. These are the politics of fear.

Remember how it was after September 11th? We stood together and the rest of the world stood with us, ready to help. But President Bush wasted that sense of unity by leading us into an optional war in Iraq. He accomplished what the terrorists could not: He united our enemies and divided us from our friends. Now his reelection campaign seeks to do the same to Americans -- to divide us from one another.

We can’t tell you who to vote for, but we’re going to vote for John Kerry. He is a man of experience, conviction and intelligence; possessing in abundance the qualities America needs in its President. If you are still undecided about this election, we urge you to read as much as you can about the Bush administration. Look at what they’ve done instead of what they’ve said. Look at the facts.

Then we hope you’ll join with us and Vote for Change on November 2nd.

Mike Mills
REM

Bush is a cheater

So Jason has found some interesting stories that I managed to miss. Notably, the allegation that Bush might have had a wire and was FED his answers during the first debate (really, those answers were the best that his staff could do? No wonder the country is in shambles.)

* * * * *

The theory is that Karl Rove and his minions gave their incoherent and intellectually-challenged candidate a secret little earplug connected to a wireless receiver, so that he could be provided with answers and clever punch lines when he heard a question and came up empty.

Remember the peculiar interjection "Now let me finish!" which Bush blurted out angrily during the debate in Miami? It attracted the attention of commentators and observers, because no one had interrupted him.

No one we could hear, that is.

The comment came out of nowhere, because he was right in the middle of his answer, well within the prescribed time limit.

But what if someone, realizing that the president was flailing around desperately for an answer, had jumped into his earpiece, irritating him.

In fact, a hidden wire connected to Karl Rove or some flunky transmitting for Rove would also explain Bush's peculiar, hunched over stance and his frequent expressions of annoyance, as well as the uncomfortably long silences at odd points in his statementswhich looked just as if he were listening carefully to some instructions!

We shouldn't be surprised if it has come to this. Remember how Ronald Reagan used to use cue cards for everything? He even had cards that reminded him to say "Good Afternoon" when meeting a head of state (I guess out of fear he might say "Good Morning" when it was afternoon).

* * * * *

When You Need To Hear About Good In The World

The Ticket
by:Tony Keyes

Story Editor: Joyce Schowalter

Towards the end of July 2004, Japan's west coast was beset by another typhoon, the latest in a record-breaking series to hit the mainland. The news featured typhoon rains for days. Large areas in Niigata and Fukui prefectures (states) were devastated. My wife's in-laws are from that area; we were relieved they escaped real damage. Luckily, they lived on high ground. Others not so lucky were missing; at least three people were dead.

The TV showed roads washed away, bridges collapsed, houses half-buried in mud and flotsam, cars washed away by the floodwaters' force. It showed images of people on rooftops escaping floods below, waiting to be rescued, waving and calling for help to helicopters filming them.
Thousands were evacuated until the floodwaters receded.

Despite the grim coverage, only days later did a report finally bring tears to my eyes. Somebody sent a letter to the Fukui disaster management center, addressed to the prefecture Governor. They expressed condolences to those who had suffered loss, and offered assistance in the form of a lottery ticket. They apologized for sending the ticket without cashing it, and for not delivering it in person, as they wished to remain anonymous.

The prefectural government found that while the return address on the letter was invented, the ticket was real. It was a ticket for the nationwide "TAKARAKUJI" lottery held a month previously. Not just any ticket -- the winning, top prize ticket of 200 million yen (US$1.8 million).

After the taped news report, the announcer wondered aloud what kind of person would do such a thing. This person had held this winning ticket over a month, probably planning all the ways they would enjoy their newfound wealth. Probably they wondered how to invest it, how much to splurge, what luxuries to buy first, whether they could quit their job, how their life would change in so many ways.

Yet this person, who received a once-in-a-lifetime stroke of good luck, chose to let it go. They realized that others needed that good luck more than they did. It was a person selfless enough to give it all, rather than give a portion and retain most. Someone humble enough to apologize for not delivering the money in person, and for troubling the prefectural government to cash the ticket. Someone wise enough to realize that helping others may be a bigger prize than lottery winnings.

At a press conference, the Governor of Fukui promised the money would be divided among the families whose homes were lost or damaged. He said he wished he could meet the donor directly, and thank them face to face. Expressing thanks is an important Japanese social responsibility.

Yet the donor's choices created a gift within a gift. Each person helped by the donor may now wonder of everyone they meet: Is this the one who was selfless, wise and humble enough to give up their lottery ticket to help us in our time of need? Is this who I should thank?

From here.

Reaching over 35,000 subscribers in 106 countries, this is...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HeroicStories #554: 5 October 2004 www.HeroicStories.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
***
SUBSCRIPTIONS to HeroicStories are FREE. Just send a blank message to join-heroicstories@lyris.net or visit http://www.HeroicStories.com (to UNSUBSCRIBE, see the end of this message) COMMENTS about stories are always welcome -- please include your first name and location: Comments@HeroicStories.com TO SUBMIT A STORY, see our submission guidelines, tips and information at: http://www.HeroicStories.com/submit.html
PUBLISHED BY HS & Son, Inc., PO Box 55213, Seattle, WA 98155, USA. HeroicStories is a trademark of HS & Son, Inc. Newspapers can get the stories as a regular feature column for FREE. For details, send your paper's editor to http://www.heroicstories.com/column.html

Copyright 2004 http://www.HeroicStories.com -- All Rights Reserved. All broadcast, publication, or copying to the WWW, e-mail lists, or any other medium, online or not, is prohibited without prior written permission from HeroicStories. However, permission is granted to circulate this publication via manual forwarding by e-mail to friends providing that the text is forwarded IN ITS ENTIRETY, from the "Reaching more than" line on top through the end of this paragraph, and NO FEE is charged. We request that you forward no more than three copies to any one person -- after that, they should get their own subscription.

*Posted with permission ofHeroicStories*

Presidency 101 Global Test

From Curtis from Atrios.

An Idiot-Proof Checklist for Newscasters

CBS News had issued . . . "an idiot-proof checklist" for company idiots to use when deciding whether documents relating to a news story were forged or not:

1. Do not read any documents on the air if the source said he got them from "some guy at the mall."

2. Disregard all emails and instant messages purportedly from the Vietnam War.

3. Official government correspondence and memoranda are rarely, if ever, signed with a smiley-face.

4. If the document has references to a ham sandwich, potato salad and Diet Coke, it is not an authentic government document. It is Andy Rooney's lunch order.

From The Borowitz Report. Once again, evidence that Andy Borowotz is god...

Why I Have No Respect for Case

Hmm...you are are a buncha nosy bastards. ;-) If it matters any, I cannot respect Case because they admitted me into their law school.

Basically, what happened was I applied to a bunch of law schools over Thanksgiving break my senior year of college. Right before finals, Case called one of the professors who gave me a recommendation - my advisor and the head of the pre-law department at my college - to discuss me, and he asked me to call them. I did. The Dean of Admissions at Case Law School told me that I had the grades to get into Case (really, what does that require anyway?) and the LSAT scores, but they had concerns with my personal statement. She said that if I was willing to write another personal statement, she could guarantee my admission, however, if I choose not to, then Case was afraid that they would have no place in the class of 2001 for me.

Now, it may surprise people, but I actually AM capable of writing in complete, coherent sentences every once in a while. Case's problem with my personal statement was that in the second or third sentence, I swore. Specifically, the word "bitch." And the specific sentences was "This has led some people to call me a bitch." The law is a basically conservative freaks who consider themselves liberal when they wear plaid ties.

I was beyond offended. I politely told her that in fact, I was capable of writing another personal statement. I assured her that Case would love it and would admit me in a second and all would be happy. Then I paused and said, seemingly as an afterthought...if you didn't know me (I think and often speak quickly, if not wisely, when I'm pissed), "Unfortunately, when the first day of class came, the person who arrived would be the person who wrote the first personal statement." I worried aloud that they would not be happy to have such a student, and confessed my fear that I would not be happy in such a close-minded and restrictive atmosphere. So I told her that I feared Case was going to have to have the class of 2001 absent Stephanie. And our conversation ended. (And TRUST me, she called my advisor and he was PISSED at me.)

Now imagine my surprise in February when I was admitted.

And here's my thing. It wasn't even their threat not to admit me. I can respect that. That's their prerogative. And I'm sure that my personal statement affected other schools in some manner. No, what bothered me the most, the reason that I am completely incapable of respecting Case, is because, if you are going to make a threat, you better be willing to follow through. They ultimately weren't. I can't respect that.

And now you know, the rest of the story...

The Race At Case

So the debate was held in Cleveland last night, at Case Western University (the one law school I have absolutely no respect for whatsoever, but that’s another story). "The Race at Case" they were calling it, isn’t that clever??

Anyway, after much cajoling, I finally convinced my best friend that she wanted to drive like 3 hours to come to the Debate Watch Party (outside) and the Rally with John Edwards afterwards. (Just so you all understand what type of friend we have here, she couldn’t leave work until like 5:45 pm., and she had to leave Cleveland to drive back to her work at 5 am this morning.) The DWP is basically a bunch of people who stand outside in the cold (the low for the evening was in the 30s) and watch the debate on two big movie screens. The rules appeared to be, whenever Edwards says anything, you clap and cheer loudly so you missed what Cheney said in return. (I did my part.) Thousands of people attended. I am *not* a happy winter-y person, so I was wearing two lawyers of pants, two layers of socks, four lawyers of shirts, a coat (my friend told me it looked bullet proof. Oh, but I love my coat...), gloves, a hat, and a scarf. I was, for the most part, warm enough.

After the debate was the John Edwards rally, so everyone moves closer to the stage (I was ultimately 25 yards away), which was opened with Fingerhut, who is running for Senate. I, of course, don’t like Voinivich (who I *did* vote for the first time) because of what he’s done - or rather, not done - while my Senator. But really, Fingerhut is the best that the Democrats could do?? No wonder the state is in shambles...

Anyway, after his opening "vote for me, I have no money so I’ve been walking" spheel, and few other people (including, yet again, Mayor Jane Campbell speaking), John Edwards came. With his whole family, who were all introduced to us. His parents, kids, wife, and him. He gave a stirring rendition of preaching to the choir. And he's as attractive in person as he is on tv. The best part was, he is asking rhetorical questions, and we are all answering like good rally peoples. We were on a "no!" roll ("Is this the best we can do?" "Do we want another 4 years of Bush and Cheney catering to big businesses?""Do we want another 4 years of the same?") And at one point, he asked if it sent mixed messages to the troops in Iraq to go to Congress and petition to have their pay cut while they were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. The crowd - or at least the people by me, led by a 14 year old kid - all shout "NO!" I turn to my best friend and say, "That answer was yes." Ten seconds later, Edwards says, "You got that answer wrong, by the way." (We were forgiven, it was midnight, some people had been drinking probably, they were college students, and as I said, the 14 year old leading us was passionate, but perhaps...not necessarily the best person to follow in such things.) ;-)

A Mother's Grief

This is really sad.

Mother of soldier killed in Iraq collapses, dies
'Her grief was so intense,' hospital worker says

TUCSON, Arizona (AP) -- A 45-year-old woman collapsed and died days after learning her son had been killed in Iraq, and just hours after seeing his body.

* * *

"Her grief was so intense -- it seemed it could have harmed her, could have caused a heart attack. Her husband described it as a broken heart," said Cheryl Hamilton, manager of respiratory care services at University Medical Center, where Unruh-Wahrer worked as a respiratory therapist.

Unruh, a combat engineer, had been in Iraq less than a month when he was shot during an attack on his unit.

Several days after learning of his death, his mother had gone to the hospital complaining of chest pains, Hamilton said. She was feeling better the next day but saw her son's body Saturday morning and collapsed that night in her kitchen.

* * *

Seriously, she may not have died in Iraq, but she is yet another casualty of the Iraq War.

I want my president to be smarter than I am. I don't ask much, but I want him to be smarter than me.

Thanks to Sarah for this link about the Vote for Change Concert in Rolling Stone. We all know that I went to the Vote for Change concert Saturday. And that there were protesters, both inside and outside. (One inside said she was a big REM fan and does not plan to buy REM's latest CD, Around The Sun - which came out TODAY people, so head to a Best Buy to get it! - because of their political beliefs. Ahh...ok, but you will pay $75 to hear them live? Idiot. That $10 million they are raising is going to the liberal 527s's eforts to liberalize voters.)

But anyway, why with all the criticism, are they doing it? (Yeah! Because musicians and actors give up their First Amendment right to have an opinion and speak that opinion when they sell their first CD or act in their first movie!) In their own words, the artists discuss why this election matters so much:
_ _ _ _ _

Dave Matthews
DAVE MATTHEWS BAND
I'm an immigrant and America has been great to me. This country represents a dream of what people of widely varying backgrounds can create together. This election is not only about what this country is now. It's also about what it can be. I'm an American, and it's my responsibility to say what I think. With what I see in the world today, I cannot justify not standing up and saying, "I feel with every bone in my body that this country is going in the wrong direction."

We've got to get somebody new in the White House. Being from South Africa, I know how much the rest of the world fears the United States right now. It's like if the world is a room, and everybody is in there, and suddenly somebody walks in who is seething and has headphones on, and the music is playing really loud, and he's armed. That's the way the world sees us. Everyone is on tiptoes, afraid of what this country might do. It's bound to scare everybody.

Natalie Maines
DIXIE CHICKS
Do I fault Bush for skipping out during Vietnam and using his wealth to get him out of the war? Not at all. I would do the same thing to protect my child. Is it cowardice? Probably, but I'm a big coward myself. What sickens me is how Bush is trying to base his entire election on September 11th, as if he owns that day. I hope people don't fall for that. Bush took us into war for his own personal vendetta and for the personal gain of his cronies in the oil business. Yes, there was an evil man in power in Iraq, but now we're killing innocent people. If the media showed us the deaths of women and children being hit by our bombs, people would be outraged. I want the killing to stop. I want our soldiers to come home.

Fat Mike
NOFX
Once you know the facts, there's no question whether you should vote for Bush or Kerry. One of them represents the most elite people in America; the other is funded by labor unions and environmental groups. One wants prayer in school; the other doesn't. One thinks guns don't need safety devices; the other does. The stakes are too high - I'll take my chances with the guy that's backed by the Sierra Club rather than Halliburton.
People tell me, "You are a drunk and you play in a punk band. Why the fuck should we listen to you?" Musicians travel the world, and we see the hatred against America. We put out Rock Against Bush to get information out, because the media aren't doing their job. The response has been incredible. We've found that kids mostly care about the economy. I talked to this one kid in North Carolina who works at Kentucky Fried Chicken. He heard Michael Moore mentioned in one of our songs, so he went out and saw Fahrenheit 9/11 and got the entire work crew at KFC to register to vote. That is the grass roots - you touch a few people, and then they touch a few people. It keeps me going.

It pisses me off when people call us unpatriotic. True patriotism is loving your country enough to try to make it better. We are fucking traveling the country to spread the word. That is what patriotism is.

Ryan Key
YELLOWCARD
I voted for Bush in 2000. I was fresh out of high school. That's the way my parents were voting, so I just voted that way. If I could take it back, I would. Our president has pulled a blanket of fear over the country. He told us he had reasons to go to war, but where are the good-old weapons of mass destruction?

I've met so many people whose loved ones have died in Iraq. A woman named Cindy, whose husband was shot down in his F-18, came backstage at one of our concerts and collapsed in tears - she was hysterical with grief. She gave me her husband's picture. We talked about the election and how upset we were that her husband had to be where he was in the first place. That finalized it for me. If people who look to the commander in chief for support and wisdom don't trust him, it's time for a new one. That's all there is to it.

Chuck D
PUBLIC ENEMY
Today is the first day of school for my kids. I got one in eleventh grade and another in fifth grade. The older one looks upon this election almost like it's pop culture. One day she asked me about Fahrenheit 9/11, and she was talking about it like it was the latest Usher concert. You know, it's gonna be her world. And when a bunch of fifty- and sixty-year-olds fuck it up for them, that's not a cool thing. Sending these twenty- and thirty-year-olds overseas to fight and die, what the hell is that all about? The real axis of evil is Bush and Cheney. They have detached America from the rest of the planet by invading Iraq. Whenever people start saying God anointed them to do something, it's a turnoff, because I don't think anyone has God's beeper number.

Boyd Tinsley
DAVE MATTHEWS BAND
I've gone to Walter Reed Hospital and spent some time with kids who have lost their arms and legs fighting in Iraq. They're eighteen, nineteen, twenty years old, and they're the kind of kids who go to Dave Matthews Band concerts. They're brave and strong and willing to fight. But maybe they're fighting a war they didn't have to fight. We respect our Republican fans. But as a band, we all feel that the country is not going in the right direction.

Adam Levine
MAROON 5
I don't trust George Bush. I think he's a pawn. The people who are running this country are extremely intelligent; I think George Bush is just as much in the dark as I am, and it scares the shit out of me. He's about as far from a regular guy as possible. When your father is head of the CIA, then president of this country, and you breezed your way through college and dodged the draft, that doesn't make you a regular guy. Bush comes from privilege, and he has led an extraordinarily easy life.

I don't know when Republicans decided that being stubborn was a sign of integrity. Part of being a good president is being able to change directions when necessary, but Bush is inflexible. I'm worried about how dire things are in this country, but I have faith that Americans will get together and realize that we can live together securely if John Kerry is elected. I have been apathetic as a voter. But now I realize that the most important thing eighteen-year-olds can do is vote.

Adam Horovitz
BEASTIE BOYS
I don't understand the George Bush argument. If you wanna argue Republican or Democrat, that's one thing, but Bush - I haven't seen the argument as to why this guy should get four more years. I don't see why he should be running a baseball team, let alone be president. At one of the Democratic debates, Al Sharpton said, "I can guarantee that any one of us on the stage right now in his sleep would make a better president than George Bush."

What's at stake in this election? War. People's freedoms around the world and here at home. Women's right to choose, prayer in school, my grandmother getting medicine - the list could keep on going. This election really does seem crucial. If Bush gets re-elected, he will feel like the possibilities are limitless, that he can really do whatever he wants.

Jeff Tweedy
WILCO
When people ask why this election is so close, I can't explain it. It's like trying to figure out how Billy Ray Cyrus sold 10 million records. The Republicans have done an extremely good job of appropriating populist themes. They somehow make it seem as though they're a party of the people, even though their policies hurt some of their most ardent supporters.

Bush's hypocrisy is simply staggering. He argues that stem-cell research is not justified because of the sanctity of unborn life - yet he insists that dropping bombs on innocent people will lead to a better world. I'm also worried that if he is re-elected, he may have the chance to appoint more conservative judges to the Supreme Court. He could undo three generations of progress in this country toward civil equality and women's rights.

I will vote for John Kerry, and I'll do it with a good conscience. I believe that he's our only shot at steering this ship back to some calmer waters. I agree that Kerry has flip-flopped on some ideas, but I take that as a sign of intelligence. I trust someone more if he re-examines his positions and has the ability to be introspective. There's no end to the horrific things you can do when you believe you're always right.

Alicia Keys
It's important for all of us to be aware of what's going on. I know it hurts to pay attention. Sometimes you're like, "I don't want to think about this crap." For young people, especially, it seems like politicians aren't speaking about our lives. But Kerry is passionate, and he's trying to get young people to pay attention, so that's pretty cool. He understands that we need to do more to improve education. So many dollars have been taken out of the schools under Bush, and they just get worse and worse.

To me, Bush comes off like a person reading a script. I thought his response to September 11th was very insincere. The entire time, he seemed disconnected, like he didn't experience the same thing the rest of us experienced. He rushed into the war in Iraq abruptly, like a boy playing with a truck: "This is my truck! You stepped on it, so I'm throwing your truck out the window!" It wasn't handled the way a real adult would handle a situation.

John Mellencamp
The polarization caused by this election is not good for anyone. I played "Pink Houses" at an Indianapolis Colts game recently, and people booed. This is in Indiana! I've never been booed there in my life. Kerry-Edwards offers us a fresh start. It is a ticket of hope.

During the Vietnam War, you couldn't turn on the TV without seeing an image that made you sick. Guys with legs blown off, guys just lying there dead. It made our nation say, "Fuck this! Even if we win, we lose." If the media showed that stuff now, people would have a whole different take on Iraq.

I'm afraid they're going to reinstitute the draft. I have daughters who are nineteen, twenty-two and thirty. If Bush gets re-elected, those Mellencamps are all going to be in the Army. So might you.

Melissa Etheridge
For women, our road will always be more difficult - yet all the Bush administration does is put huge potholes in our way. John Kerry has consistently been on the side of equal opportunity, and he supports a woman's right to choose. He is a smart man. He knows that the subject of same-sex marriage will be resolved within the next decade in the courts, and all he has to do is stay out of the way. He was one of only nineteen senators who voted against the Defense of Marriage Act - he knew it wasn't right, and he knew what the future holds. I just want a president who will not stand in the way of change, and John Kerry will not.

Tom DeLonge
BLINK-182
My brother is a member of the Special Forces stationed in the Middle East, so I have a direct connection to the war in Iraq. When Blink-182 played there six months into the conflict, the troops were not happy about their friends getting shot at and dying. They want to believe that what they're doing is worth their lives. But every reason Bush gave for invading has been found to be wrong.

Before he was elected president, he bankrupted three companies, was an alcoholic for a while and had six years of government experience. His decision-making process and communication skills are so bad that there's nothing he can do without pissing off the world. Kerry would restore respect for America. He understands that there are great cultures and great thinkers across the globe. He won the military's second-highest honor in Vietnam, and he spent twenty years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The guy has so much experience it's unreal. He deserves a shot.

Bush is like someone's old dad who just doesn't get it, a person who's not able to grow or change. Among musicians, no one is backing Bush. Except for Ted Nugent, the guy who wears loincloths.

Serj Tankian
SYSTEM OF A DOWN
Bush and Cheney and their whole team have been a disaster for the U.S. and the rest of the world. The U.N. has been neutralized as a peaceful solution to conflict. The war in Iraq has become a brutal occupation; our soldiers die not knowing why they were sent there in the first place. We went from a surplus economy to a high deficit. Unemployment is up, the dollar is down, and the environment is weeping. We need someone with a high degree of both intelligence and compassion in the White House, someone deserving of the good will of the American people. Bush and Co. do not deserve us as their public.

Steve Earle
We are engaged in a war with fundamentalist Islam that we can't win. But we have a president who has become a fundamentalist himself, and he thinks he can win it. The administration is fond of saying that the terrorists hate us because we're free. That's not true - they hate us because we support the House of Saud and Israel. Until we're willing to talk about those two things, we're going to be in big trouble.

You can't cut taxes and conquer the world at the same time. Nobody's ever tried to do that, and the reason is because it's stupid. What part of world history did Bush miss? The way you build an empire is you tax the fuck out of your citizens and draft the fuck outta them, 'cause you have to have an army and you have to feed them. The thing that scares me more than anything else is that if Bush is re-elected, he's gonna have to institute a draft next year. They're gonna need some fresh bodies out there, and they can't do that without a draft. I've got a son who's twenty-two and a son who's seventeen, so I've got a dog in this fight. That's why I support John Kerry.

Mike D
BEASTIE BOYS
I have no sense of Bush as a man. It's impossible to distinguish his personal interests from the interests of those closest to him. What is his own agenda, vs. the agenda of guys like Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz? I don't think I've ever heard him speak on an issue where it seemed to be coming directly from himself.

John Kerry offers the promise of returning to the democratic system I was brought up believing in. He wants to provide the opportunity and education and health care we deserve. He wants to safeguard the welfare of all citizens, especially the poor - not just those who have the most. He wants to get us back to being a responsible and respected world citizen, as opposed to a careless, misdirected, hated bully. It's really one of history's great lost opportunities that we squandered all the good will we enjoyed from the rest of the world after September 11th.

Mickey Hart
THE DEAD
The front page is filled with Iraq, terrorism, the deficit, all these giant threats. It's like we've got a bad CEO. Nothing personal, Mr. Bush, but I don't think you're running this country well. I think you're running it into the ground, and it's my personal opinion that we need a regime change. You're fired. That's all. Nothing personal, man. Maybe we'll go out and have a glass of wine sometime and talk about it after the election. He might be a charming guy. But, boy, is he a fucked CEO.

Will.i.am
BLACK EYED PEAS
This election is not about the war in Iraq - it's about the war we're neglecting in our own country. We should be more concerned about people who are on drugs, who can't get a meal, who aren't being educated. Our education system is fucked up. Teachers are getting paid nickels, and I'm getting lots of money to rhyme cat with bat. This election should be about how we are doing as a whole. From that standpoint, I think Bush has been a horrible president. There are people all over the world who depend on us, but they think we don't care about them - we'd rather watch American Idol. Bush doesn't understand that there is so much we can learn from the rest of the world. We're not in the world by ourselves, but we act like we are.

Moby
It's important to get swing voters to support Kerry. But it's also important to communicate with conservative Republicans and say, "Listen, by traditional conservative criteria, George Bush is a bad president. His foreign policy is in shambles, his economic policy is in shambles." You can be conservative and still not like George Bush. People like him because they think he seems like a strong guy who would be good to have a BBQ with. But shouldn't you hold the president to higher standards than who would you like to have a BBQ with?

Jadakiss
It's about goddamn time people started waking up. I got two kids, and I don't want no war going on while I'm raising them. Everything that is happening right now is gonna be their social-studies lesson. We need to get things on the right track for them. We got to get some more jobs for people, because that's gonna be the main problem for years to come. A lot of felons can't get jobs, and that creates more crime.

There's definitely a lot of hatred for Bush right now. He lost my trust a long time ago, when I woke up in my bed and found out the election had been rigged. I think Kerry's aiight. Everyone always ignores the hood, but I think he's a little bit more for the people than Bush. I'm for whatever is gonna make a little bit of a change. It gotta start from a pebble to get to a boulder.

Art Alexakis
EVERCLEAR
I was an elected delegate from Oregon to the Democratic National Convention. The more I've gotten to know Kerry, the more I think he's the man for the job. I'm inspired by his humanity and his strength to be able to say unpopular things. He came back from Vietnam and said, "We're making a mistake there." This was a decorated guy, and these horrible Swift-boat people are trying to make him into a bad guy by picking four words out of a sentence and repeating them over and over. It's sad. The Republicans refuse to talk about issues - they just try and make people who are Christians believe that Bush is the only choice. As a Christian, I am offended and ashamed by that - but then again, I am offended and ashamed by most people who call themselves Christian.

Ben Gibbard
DEATH CAB FOR CUTIE
I voted for Nader in the last two elections, but I'm going to vote for Kerry this time. If Bush had won an election based on 100 percent of the eligible people voting, I'd be pissed, but I couldn't complain because I'd at least know I'm in the minority. But only forty-five percent of the eligible population voted last time, and less than half of them voted for Bush.

He is like the distant friend who somehow ends up going to the party with you, and you worry he's going to get drunk and say the wrong thing and just start talking craziness. He opens his mouth and I can't trust what's gonna come out of it. By making a fool out of himself, he makes a fool out of all of us.

Bob Weir
THE DEAD
Ralph Nader is the most arrogant and narcissistic guy I've ever met. I had a meeting with him in the early Nineties. I was jazzed going into the meeting, and I was disgusted leaving. I don't think I've ever met a bigger asshole. If he hadn't run in the last election, we wouldn't be in Iraq and thousands of people wouldn't have died needlessly. And still he's well pleased to go in and be the spoiler again!

Harry Truman said that the one crime more heinous than treason is war profiteering, and yet we have the company that our vice president is still on retainer to - which is illegal - making a huge fortune. Every time the terrorists blow up another pipeline over there, Halliburton makes millions of dollars pasting it back together. They don't even have to be pumping oil to be making money. This is who owns our government now.

Though I've never really endorsed a political candidate before, I'm going to have to this time. I liked the look in Kerry's eye when I met him. He looks like an aware human being and a guy with a sense of humor. So we're just going to have to hope and pray that the debates go well.

Jackson Browne
The people who are in charge now are old hands who were involved in the governments of Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Bush Sr. They're radicals and zealots whose attitude is "Bring it on." Some of them want a presence in the Middle East for oil, and some just want a front-row seat for the apocalypse.

Here at home, it's hard to imagine the number of environmental gains that have already been rolled back by the Bush administration. It's like a football game: They have given the ball to corporate interests and sent them down the field while they block for them. It's not conservatism - it's just the opposite. They are using up our natural resources and selling them to the highest bidder. This administration has no respect for the rule of law itself. Whenever anyone tries to protect the environment, they just get their gnarliest and meanest lawyers to out-ugly everyone.

Eddie Vedder
PEARL JAM
I supported ralph nader in 2000, but it's a time of crisis. We have to get a new administration in. All of us who supported Ralph last time should get down on our knees and say, "Can you bow out on October 3rd? We'll get back to the ideals you're fighting for on November 3rd."

A year ago it seemed impossible to criticize Bush, because of September 11th. The Dixie Chicks and Michael Moore were attacked for speaking out. Now you've got books full of facts that show how Bush has failed. Those people dissenting a year ago were right.

We have to stop treating the rest of the world like our subjects. What is the only institution more powerful than the United States government - one that can move things in a different direction? It's the American people. It's the voters. That's what I feel most strongly about: encouraging people who don't normally vote to understand their responsibility.

Mike Mills
R.E.M.
The vote for change tour is a wake-up call. We may alienate some fans over this. I don't like that - I prefer to have music stand apart from political feelings. But this is so important, it's worth it. If I piss a few people off, good. Because, frankly, I'm scared. Unlike a lot of political issues, this is literally life or death. Kerry understands how the world works, in a way that Bush does not. When Bush ran the first time, I realized something: I want my president to be smarter than I am. I don't ask much, but I want him to be smarter than me.
_ _ _ _ _

And for those who are interested, this entire tour will finish on October 11th in a concert with everyone in Washington, D.C. (Stephanie's note: I believe this will be televised on the Sundance channel - which is, or course, an opportunity to see REM...I trust you all to make the right decision)

Political Polls

My sole Republican friend, Jen (I'm all about the diversity) points to a poll where Bush is ahead of Kerry by five points. (Of course, if you try to click on it, it's a bad request...) (And how excited am I that Jen quoted from the Cleveland Plain Dealer?)

However, Jen likes that side of the story. Meanwhile, the New York Times/CBS poll shows a tie at 47% each (This is the SAME poll that showed Bush ahead by 8 percent less than a month ago - predebate). Likewise, the latest Gallup poll show a statistical tie, Bush at 49% and Kerry at 47%. And the latest Neweek poll show another statistical tie, John Kerry at 49% and Bush at 46%. Does that mean anything? Not much with the actual election. I just wanted to make sure that everyone received the full story... ;0)

And speaking of one sided stories, Dan Rather's career may be over because of the Guard memos, which it appears that he did not investigate as he should have. Yet Carl Cameron over at Fox INTENTIONALLY creates an entire story of alleged Kerry comments, which are posted online and on Fox (Creative) News and nothing happens at all? (He probably got

The right wing/Republican Party's PR team, aka FAUX News (you know, "fair" and "balanced") makes me sick. "We report (lies), and you decide (and we think that the average American is dumb enough to believe us.)"

Do you know that more Faux viewers than ANY other news station STILL believe that Saddam had ties to 9/11 and that we HAVE in fact found WMD in Iraq? Faux's evidence comes in the form of stuff that Bush could understand, meaning dumbed down: "You spell Iraq I-R-A-Q. Now, IR stands for Iraq. That leaves AQ. And what does AQ stand for. That's right, Al Queda. Very good, Faux viewer. You get a gold star for the day. Now, don't do anything stupid like try to check the facts..."

I only drink to find my keys . . .

Yes, I finally have a reason to drink...

If you can't find your keys or can't remember what you're doing this weekend, the cure to your memory glitch may be in an alcoholic drink or two a day. Reuters reports that a new study from the University of Texas in Dallas has determined that older women who enjoy one or two drinks every day have better memory skills than their non-drinking friends.

"Moderate drinkers reported less depression, had higher self-reported health, performed better on instrumental everyday tasks...and (had) improved memory performance," Dr. Graham McDougall, associate professor of nursing at the university, said in a statement releasing the study findings, which were based on a five-year survey of men and women with an average age of 75.

During the study, some of the women were asked to remember items such as a story, the placement of hidden objects, future intentions, and connecting random numbers and letters. Reuters reports that those who drank alcohol in moderation did better on the tests than those who did not drink at all. "In addition to their actual performance on tests, the confidence of those who drank was higher and they used more strategies to facilitate memory," McDougall said.

I have to move...

According to the quiz at Find Your Spot.com (found via Jennifer, of course) I have learned that: (1) I should move; (2) I should definitely be in Louisiana (I've never even visited)...


Las Vegas, Nevada
New Orleans, Louisiana
Henderson, Nevada
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Little Rock, Arkansas
Honolulu, Hawaii
Alexandria, Louisiana
Lafayette (Cajun Country) Louisiana
Baltimore, Maryland
Las Cruces, New Mexico
San Bernardino, California
El Cajon, California
Natchitoches, Louisiana
Shreveport-Bossier City, Louisiana
Sacramento, California
New Haven, Connecticut
Los Angeles, California
Providence, Rhode Island
Monroe, Louisiana
St.George, Utah
Riverside, California
Boston, Massachusetts
San Diego, California
Albuquerque, New Mexico

Thoughts from a Serviceman

"We're fighting two wars and he gives tax cuts depriving us of much needed equipment (equipment that would save lives) to give 95% of the tax break to the nations most 4% wealthy. The response here is yeah, but Kerry is for abortion. NO HE ISN'T!! No one is for abortion. He's against the government legislating what a woman can and can't do with her body. Bush and his let's legislate morality while I get richer and kids die to help my oil empire is wearing very thin with me. If the troops in Iraq were over here instead the Taliban wouldn't be able to move without getting lit up, but no we have to fight one legitimate war on top of an illegitimate one with no plans for either."

I wonder where Bush gets his idea that the soldiers are blindly following him? You can give them a gun, you can tell them to defend us, and they will do it because it's their job. But don't pretend that they are so stupid that they don't see what is going on.

It's The End Of The World As We Know It Disappointment

So the Move On/America Coming Together Vote for Change concert the other night was amazing. It was supposed to start at 7 but didn't actually start until almost 7:30. But they played until just after midnight. That was over 4 1/2 hours of music. Sweet. Not as much snarky Bush comments as I was hoping for/expecting. Sadly. Most of it was telling people to register voters by 4 pm Monday. Though later in the evening, Michael Stipe was wearing a Kerry t-shirt.
First, the opening emo band (I hate that word, by the way, and the fact that Bright Eyes appears to be a self-described emo band makes me cynical as to whether they are the Dashboard Confessionals type of sound that I actually adore), Bright Eyes, was pretty good. I had never heard of them before. The lead singer was a spitter. I mean, it was hysterical he was such a spitter. They had the video feed, and we were all debating whether his hair was wet and is was flying off his hair or whether he was spitting. Later, it became clear that he was spitting every time he annunciated. Hysterical. He made the only real Bush comment, when he said that when you are the sole superpower, you can't have a fucking moron in charge, and that a vote for Bush was like shitting in your own bed.

Michael Stipe was all over. I mean he was great, just like he always was (wearing a white suit and looking as adorable as ever with his blue eyes and dimples.) But he'd start to tell stories and forget where he was in the story. And another point, he started singing the wrong verse to Man On The Moon and had to stop the rest of the band and make them start the verse over. (Bruce Springsteen came out and sang Man On The Moon with him.) He admitted that the night before (their first live performance since Nov. of last year) they were all nervous and that he still was. And I was irritated because people in the crowd kept yelling "Bruce" during REM's set. Umm...hello, this isn't some unknown opening act. This is RE fucking M. Grr... The biggest sin of the evening was that they didn't sing It's The End Of The World As We Know It. Ugh! I mean, it's their closing anthem and they deprived me of it. Ugh Ugh Ugh! :( I couldn't have been more depressed about that if I tried. Not that I didn't love my REM on stage. I was in heaven. But that song is like...bliss. So saddened even though I was happy. I really like Final Straw and they played that though (as well as about 5 songs off their new album, including Leaving New York, which Michael was REALLY into and sang with his eyes closed). They played Losing My Religion, which the crowd liked, and opened with The One I Love, which the crowd also dug. Because we are in Ohio he played Cuyahoga, but I don't think they play that anyone else but here. (But everytime they play here... I am basing that solely on the fact that the four times Ive heard them here, they have, but when I saw them in Toronto they did not.)

When Bruce Springsteen came in, it was apparent that I just don't know any Bruce Springsteen songs. In fact, John Fogarty played with him in about 6 songs, and I knew more of those songs that I knew of Bruce Springsteen songs. Ah, well, I bought the ticket for REM anyway. At one point, Michael came out and they sang Because The Night. That was awesome. For the last few songs, everyone was on stage. It was one crowded stage. They closed the night all singing The People Have The Power. Sweet. I just don't get the Bruce appeal. And he was like a preacher.

Sitting behind me was some old guy from California who bought tickets and flew in just for the concert. It was interesting. He is a lifetime Republican. And when I say a lifetime Republican, he has voted for every Republican president since Eisenhower. He said for the first time in his life, he is casting a vote for a Democratic presidential candidate. He told me, "I didn't leave the Republican Party; the Republican Party left me."

My favorite part were the Republicans there. Less thatn 1% but they were there with their Bush/Cheney t-shirts and signs. Umm...this is a liberal concert. Do you really think there are any undecided at the concert that are going to see their signs (among the sea of Kerry stuff - which EVERYONE else had on - and think, "Oh, wait, Bush and Cheney are running? Oh, I better think about this." The people were already made up. So their 1% wasn't doing anything. Even better, they paid at least $75 for these tickets. And that money is going to put ANTI-BUSH ads on the tv in these swing states. You just paid the 527s to promote that message. Bravo.

And beforehand some protesting outside who hadn't bought tickets (THAT I understand) made a comment that they do not believe that singers should be talking politics and that they have a right not to buy the artists music. You know what, you absolutely have that right. But guess what, these artists realized they would lose some fans and sales, and they decided that the sales weren't as important to them as getting their opinion out.

I'd also like to say that Bring Ohio Back (a Hollywood thing) was also in town, which had Chad Lowe, Martin Sheen, Hilary Swank, Kevin Bacon and Kyra Sedwick, among others, walking around the West Side Market and other areas registering people to vote. So anyway, they were all at the Vote for Change Concert. And of the two in Cleveland (the other was the Dixie Chicks and James Taylor) they ALL went to the REM one. I'd like to say that I saw them there and that I got to meet them - wouldn't that be a cool story - but I didn't even know they were there until the next day. At the concert I mean, I knew they were in town with Bring Ohio Back.

Of course, what we are all wondering - yes, my mother is still mad at me for missing the wedding, she gave me a lecture on appearances and sometimes we have obligations and must do things that we don't want to do. Sigh. Why do my "obligations" include attending weddings for my cousins when I will just be miserable the entire time? Fuck appearances.

And in a side bit of fun, I did go to the wedding part (I just missed the reception) and so going through the receiving line, my godparents asked me, "When are we going to get married." Sigh. Didn't we just have that conversation at the family reunion in July? And at the Greek festival the next month? And the wedding shower the week after that? It's getting old. So I'm irritable (because nothing is more irritating that a Greek wedding with all the "woman is subservient and must obey her husband" blah - oh, wait, having to explain to my relatives that I'm not going to get married just for the sake of being married IS more irritating.)

Where was I? Oh, yes, so I'm irritable and I tell them "Never." My godmother - at her son's wedding - gets tears in her eyes and said, "you aren't going to invite me to the wedding?" Shit. (I'm only SOMEWHAT consoled by the fact that it was her son's wedding and that she was emotional overall.) "No, I meant that I'm not getting married." [I don't necessarily mean that, but I'm SO tired of the question. I'm thisclose to telling my family that I'm gay just to get them off my case (and get them praying for me every night. I can probably use the karma). Of course, then I'll meet some guy and fall in love and get engaged, and one day they will tell him that they are so happy that I met him because I'm gay and then I'll have to explain why I lied to my family, and he'll think that I'm pure evil for lying to my family like that, and we'll break off our engagement, and then it will just confirm to my family my lie in the first place, after my fiance and I break off our engagement. So obviously, lying to my family is out.]

Again, where was I? Oh, yeah, I tell her I'm not getting married. So my godfather tells me, "You are too smart to not get married." Umm...what does that even mean??? What is too smart to not get married? Or too smart to get married? I was under the impression that getting married about about love, not about logic. Maybe that's my problem there. I've been waiting to FEEL something and evidentially I'm just supposed to think something. My godparents have two more kids they can concentrate on rather than me...

OH, and you want to hear bogus? They opened with their vows! Greek Orthodox weddings traditionally don't HAVE the vows like you see on tv.) Oh, if anyone wants to read about Greek Orthodox weddings (though I can't imagine why), check here.

And in sporting news: Ohio State lost Saturday night TO NORTHWESTERN (can you GET any more pathetic? I doubt it. I can't think of anything more pathetic.) The Browns won Sunday at home against Washington (I was at my grandparents swearing at the game for most of it, and my cousins from Chicago were all laughing at me. Umm...I realize that you've been out of Cleveland for the last 15 years, but come on, you never lose your team. Ugh.) (Does anyone else find it ironic that I'm fundamentally opposed to commitment except when it comes to my sports teams?) The Indians lost the first game Sunday (Saturday's game was postponed in the 12th inning b/c of the college football game - have you ever heard of anything more ridiculous?!? and they picked up the game in the 12 inning on Sunday) and they won the second game. So they finished the season at 80-82. They have a lot to build on. Omar answers come on Monday (PLEASE KEEP OMAR!) Most importantly, by winning, they DENIED the Twins home field advantage throughout the playoffs, so they have to go to NY for round one (instead of playing Boston with home field advantage.) So that was the weekend of sports. I'm not sure if it's a good or bad weekend. I still need to process it.

And on an unrelated note, I heard that Jack and Bobby was already renewed for 2005. Yay. I adore that show.

Greek Orthodox Weddings

The Greek Orthodox wedding ceremony is an ancient and beautiful service. A unique part of the ceremony is that the Bride and Groom do not say any vows. The ceremony itself shows the couples’ willingness to come forward and be married, and accept God into their new home. Holy matrimony is a Sacrament during which the Holy Spirit is invoked to join together two individuals as one. Unified in Christ they live together in His love, mutually fulfilling and complementing each other. The Marriage Ceremony of the Orthodox church is full of ritual and symbolism. Each of the acts, which you will observe solemnized today, has a special meaning and significance.

The ceremony consists of two parts: The Service of Betrothal and the Ceremony of the Sacrament of Marriage. Each part of the ceremony has a special meaning and is significant in the joining of husband and wife.

The ceremony starts as the Bride and Groom are each handed white candles to symbolize their willingness to accept Christ into their lives.

Some important elements of the Greek Orthodox ceremony include that the couple must have a religious sponsor(s). They are called Koumbaro (male) or Koumbara (female). They serve as an important witness to the union. Also, during the ceremony, certain acts and phrases are repeated three times. This represents the Holy Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The Service of Betrothal
The Bethrothal Service, which in earlier times marked the begnning of the engagement period, is now an ntegral part of the Wedding Service. As the service begins, the priest lights two white candles, which he hands to the female and male to be held throughout the service. The lit candle remind them that Christ will illumnate their way through life. The priest then offers petitions for the health, happiness, and spiritual welfare of the couple.

The Rings
The focus of the Betrothal is the exchanging of rings. The rings are blessed by the priest who takes them into his hand and, making the sign of the cross over their heads, says: "The servant of God ___ (male), is betrothed to the servant of God ___ (female), in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit" (Three Times) and then vice-versa. The Koumbara or Koumbaro then exchanges the rings three times, taking the bride's ring and placing it on the third finger of the right hand of the groom and vice versa. The reason the rings are placed on the right hand is because it is the right hand of God that blesses, and to which Christ ascended. The Koumbara or Koumbaro then exchanges the rings three times on the couples’ fingers. The exchange signifies that in married life the weakness of one partner will be compensated by the strength of the other. This symbolizes the strength of the married couple. The wearing of the rings is a sincere pledge of faithfulness towards each other throughout life.

The Ceremony of the Sacrament of Marriage
The Sacrament of Marriage consists of many important parts. As the priest concludes his prayers and beseeches God to "Join these thy servants, unite them one in mind and one in flesh.", he joins the right hands together of the Bride and Groom, and they stay joined until the end of the ceremony to signify the "oneness" of the couple and the union of the couple.

The Service of the Crowning
The Service of the Crowning that follows is the climax of the Wedding Service. The crowning of the couple with the stefana (two flowered crowns wreaths attached by white ribbon) signifies glory and honor that God crowns them with. The ribbon symbolizes the unity of the couple. They are crowned as the king and queen of their own kingdom, the home, which they will rule with wisdom, justice, and integrity: they will be masters of their home as Christ was crowned Head of the Church. The Koumbaro or Koumbara also plays a part by interchanging the crowns on the couples’ heads three times to symbolize the intertwining of their lives and to crown them in equality, dignity, and love.

The Common Cup
The crowning is followed by readings of the Epistle and the Gospel. The Gospel reading describes the marriage of Cana at Galilee, which was attended and blessed by Christ and where He performed His first miracle. The miracle converted water into wine and was given to the newlyweds. Thus, wine is given to the couple as a remembrance. This is the "Common Cup" of life denoting the mutual sharing of joy and sorrow, the toek of a life of harmony. The drinking of the Common Cup serves to impress upon the couple that they will share everything in life, joys and sorrows, and that they are to "bear one another's burdens." Their joys will be doubled and their sorrows halved because they will be shared.

The Dance of Isaiah, aka The Ceremonial Walk
The priest will then lead the Bride and Groom in a circle around a table on the altar three times. On the table are the Gospel and Cross. The steps around the table represent the unending journey of husband and wife, as they take their first steps as husband and wife, and the Church, in the person of the priest, leads them in the way they must walk. This way is symbolized by the circle at the center of which are the Gospel and the Cross of the Lord. This expresses the fact that the way of a Christian life is a perfect orbit around the ceter of life, who is Jesus Christ, our Lord. The Koumbaro or Koumbara walks behind the married couple holding the stefana in place. As the bride and groom are led around the table three times, three significant hymns are sung. The first speaks of the indescribable joy that Isaih, the Prophet, experienced when he envisioned the coming of the Messiah upon the Earth. The second reminds us of the martyrs of the Faith, who received their crowns of glory from God through the service of their lives. The third is an exhaultation of the Holy Trinity.

The Removal of the Crowns
After the Ceremonial Walk, the priest asks God's blessing on the newly wedded couple. He prays that they will be granted length of life, fair children, prosperity in life and faith, and that they be filled with all of the blessings of the earth. The priest then removes the crowns and asks God to grant the couple a long, happy life together, and asks everyone wtnessing the marriage to add their prayers to theirs that GOd may bless their life together. He then separates the couples’ joined hands, reminding them that only God can separate the couple from one another.

This concludes the ceremony and the Bride and Groom are officially married!! Note the lack of any vows. Not done. Also note the lack of "if anyone objects" and "kiss the bride."

The Jordan Almonds
Sugarcoated almonds are given as a favor (koufeta). The almonds are an ancient cultural tradition. The fresh almond has a bittersweet taste that is symbolic of life itself. The sugar coating is added with hope that the life of the new family has more sweetness than bitterness. When presented to the guests, they represent abundance and sweetness of life.

Other Important Facts
The Greek Orthodox faith is conservative, yet emblematic at the same time. It is very fulfilling spiritually. If a couple wishes to be married in the Greek Orthodox church, there are a few thoughts to keep in mind. One member of the couple must be Greek Orthodox. The non-Greek Orthodox partner must be baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity. Also, the couple cannot get married on certain holy days. The three greatest ones that come to mind are Lent, the first two weeks in August, and January 5th, the eve of Epiphany. Easter is the greatest holiday in the Greek Orthodox church, and Lent is a time of prayer, remembrance, and worship. August 15th is the Assumption of the Virgin Mary; the day believed to be when Mary ascended into Heaven after her death. Epiphany principally commemorates the revelation to the Gentiles of Jesus Christ as the Savior, as portrayed by the coming of the Three Wise Men.

See here.

Time Marches On

Thursday was my best friend from high school's 30th birthday. I might have mentioned her before - freaking out b/c not married with kids by 25 - and we aren't close anymore (and shockingly, haven't been since she was 25).

Anyway, since it was her 30th birthday, which is a big deal, I called to wish her a happy birthday. She wasn't that interested in talking. Shocker. I guess I should have expected it. In the two years that I've been back in Cleveland, we've gotten together once. If you add up all the times she's called me in the last two years, you'll probably not need two hands, and certaintly not need three. And yet still, I'll call her two or three times a year to say hi and for a moment across telephone wires, try to stop time. (It doesn't work, if you were curious.) Besides, not much is is going on in her life. I mean, she went in Friday (yesterday) to have a C-section for her second child and all. So obviously, nothing new has gone on in her life since we last talked in March. She has never once asked me how work is or anything with my life. And then she will send Christmas cards, writing how much she misses me and everything. It is so easy for people to say things that they obviously don't mean??

But enough of that, because tonight is the Vote for Change tour. With REM! Which means, since they tried to be evil cancelled the Akron concert later this month (and it really irritates me that I have to pay for the service fee for a concert cancelled more than a month later), this is my sole opportunity to see REM.

Round 1 - Kerry

"The only consistent thing about my opponent's position is that he's been inconsistent. He changes positions. And you cannot change positions in this war on terror if you expect to win."

Ahhh...Bush's sole desperate comment. No matter the question, this was what he tried to revert back to. Unfortunately (for him), Kerry FINALLY responded to the flip flopping charge (one that is actually unfair, if you *actually* look at his positions instead of listening to the political spin) "It's one thing to be certain, but you can be certain and be wrong." That was a great line, and it emphasizes the problem with Bush. He would rather stay on his initial path - since proven to be wrong - than go back on something he said or did. Kerry is right: June, July, August, and now September - each month the number of injuries and casualties in Iraq has INCREASED. Maybe it's time for Bush and co. to admit that what he is doing ISN'T working. Why THIS defeat for Bush was so compelling: because the area where Bush is seen as "strongest" is homeland security and terrorism. (He is going to struggle to say that the economy is good in a debate.) So Bush just took his STONGEST position and completely turned into a pissy, ill-prepared deer in headlights. Sweet.

Oh, wait, that's not completely fair to Bush. He has a second coment. He also kept going back to the "wrong war, wrong time" comment. Unfortunately, the majority of the country ALSO feels that the war was a mistake. I don't think that is going to score any points George.

Bush appeared to constantly lose his train of thought, he fumbled and bumbled and stumbled over words (though DID manage to pronounce "nuclear"). The few times that ABC's camera went to Bush while Kerry was talking he looked extremely angry, filled with dramatic eye rolling (does anyone else remember Gore's mistake of sighing and rolling his eyes? Bad call George). Bush couldn't answer the questions posed to him (and come on, were any of those questions a big shock? I could have written them and had 95% of the same stuff.) Bush's most effective line was "pre-September 10th mentality" but (1) he didn't explain or follow-up on that; and (2) actually, wouldn't it be pre-September 11th mentality?

Bush was repetitive with "mixed messages" and "changed his position" charges - absolutely nothing new. He had no answers for the questions, you often got the sense that he wasn't even answering them, he had no explanation to resolve the problems posed, and most importantly, he came across as completely impersonable.

Kerry - after a first question/answer that made me a bit worried - was focused, on point, answered the questions, outlined his position, and allowed the national audenice to get a sense at to his positions and how he differs from Bush, something that has been sorely lacking for his campaign. He attacked Bush on Iraq, answered the "flip flop" charge, and with his, "It's one thing to be certain, but you can be certain and be wrong" comment, turned Bush's "conviction" into stubbornism.

Bush desperately needs Kerry to be seen as indecisive - it's all that he has to go with. Because the recent Bush support isn't because people suddenly approve of Bush as president. But rather, his negative campaigning against Kerry as indecisive has been effective. But if Kerry can counter - or refute - that charge, then Bush is in trouble. And in a state like Ohio, which is still very much open for grabs - the commercials were effective before debates started b/c it was all there was. But

Immediately after the debate, a Cleveland Ohio poll had advantage to Kerry at 59% (and with Nader off the ballot in Ohio, the Republicans have some concern), the MSNBC poll had Kerry at 74%, the ABC poll had Kerry at 45% (with Bush at 36%), The CBS poll had Kerry at 44% (and Bush at 26%) and the CNN poll initially had Kerry at 79%. (It later moved to Kerry 53%, Bush 37%.)

I guess that Bush's hometown newpaper realized what people are realizing after the debate - Bush doesn't have a single answer to the questions or problems.