Uncle Sam Wants YOU. He Really Wants You...

I was going to start by saying that I can't imagine being 17 now, and facing a war wherein Americans were dying every day. I've seen a half century come and go, so it's been quite some time since I was that full of piss and vinegar.

But then, when I was 17 several dozen to hundreds young people every week were coming home from Viet Nam in flag-draped coffins (that were able to be photographed back then). So, while it's been a long time, I have deep in my memory that dull fear of the possibility that I might be sent to a distant place to die for something that no one could quite put their finger on.

There was very little fighting the good fight romance to the war back then, and the same can be said for now. In Iraq there's no specific person--an enemy whose troops have invaded other countries and must be turned back. We're the troops who have invaded a country, and a goodly percentage of the people there hate us and want us gone.

It's against that backdrop that the Army is having a hard time meeting its recruitment quota. With the US's unpredictable economy, and daunting outsourcing problems, many young people these days look around their respective home towns and see little of interest and few solid possibilities for the future. Military service seems like a viable possibility.

Ah, but then there's the Iraq war. I believe there's a collective sense that this was an elective war. And since they're the ones who pay the price, our volunteer military has every right to its doubts and its fears.

So a high school student in Colorado decided to do a little investigative journalism to see if his local recruiters would bend...or even break the rules to get him to sign up. The local news report on the matter is here and quite worth watching. Two separate recruiters urged him to lie, and even create a fake diploma to be accepted into the military.

This all hits a little closer to home though for me. Since my daughter has turned 16, she's gotten several items from the Army encouraging her to consider enlistment. As someone who's watched our president send more than 1500 Americans to their deaths for a war he can nowhere near justify to me, I'm angry that my child is being encouraged to consider the Army. Lord knows if Bush were of enlistment age, his privileged ass would see no combat.

The brave young men and women who volunteer to serve have every right to believe that their president will only send them to fight and die when all other possibilities have been exhausted. I feel horribly for those who believed that about this president because they were not only wrong, they were the ones who paid the ultimate price for his errors in judgment.

Doing My Sunday Best in the Name of Religion

I'm all worked up, and nowhere to go...so maybe where I should go is to blog city.

Where does this "I believe, therefore YOU must too..." attitude come from? I'm referring of course to this ever-increasing presence of the religious right in politics. Over the past several years, beginning with Reagan and culminating in the Bush administration, there's been a presence, then an influence, and now it seems a dominance of attitude over the Republicans by fundamentalists. These folks want to re-make the world, and the world they want to see is where there's no Rap, there's no porn, there's no abortion, there's prayer in school (whether you want it or not!), and the white girls date who it is they ought to date. You know what I mean.

Y'know, there are quite a number of things I'd like in this world. I'd like it if there were gates around Washington DC and at the checkpoint to get in there was a great big LOBBYISTMETER. If that Lobbyistmeter went off, then the person wouldn't be allowed into the nation's capitol.

I'd like it if all the manufacturers got together and issued a statement something like "we realize we haven't looked after this ol' world like we should. We're all going to try lots harder to stop polluting so much. Instead of resisting, we're going to embrace change on this issue. And by the way, we're sorry..."

I'd like it if all those morons with jacked up pickup trucks with huge tires and the stickers on the back window where someone is pissing on a Ford logo, or pissing on a Cheverolet logo, would all go and live in one state. Nebraska. Mississippi. I don't care where, but someplace far away from here. They're such obnoxious people.

I'd like it if everyone who wanted to work could get a job. I'd be happy to see everyone who's sick get the help they need to get better. I'd like to see the auto industry release every last invention it has which increases gas mileage.

There's a lot of things I'd like to have happen, but the down side to being a free country is that we all have the right to make bad decisions. It's a right we hold dearly here it seems, because we make so many of them.

Back to Fundamentalist Christians. Thank you, but no thank you. I don't believe that Jesus is on your side. He didn't believe in making war, and surely not for the half-baked reasons your leader cooked up. Jesus believed that people should embrace the truth because they felt they should embrace the truth. Not because they were pressured to do so by a government.

This marriage of the extreme religious right with the current day Republican Leadership is spooky. It ain't Taliban Spooky, but it's definitely Twilight Zone spooky. I urge you, resist it. If you're in a setting where someone wants to steamroll you with their religion, politely decline to participate. Or if they wanna argue, do! Let 'em know that there are other intelligent perspectives and that they don't get to ride roughshod over people who aren't on the same page as them. If they can't handle that, tough! This is America buddy; we all have a right to our opinions. Can't handle that? Then choose the Theocracy of your preference and move. This country has a freedom of--and from--religion. That means you can worship however the heck you want to...but that doesn't mean I have to.

More Shameful Republican Behavior

First off though, a tip of the hat to Congressman Henry Hyde. Though I'm about to read him the riot act, I also think it's important to note that at least Hyde was honest about this issue. Honesty is an increasingly rare attribute in politicians these days, even if what he's being honest about is a shameful event.

Hyde was recently asked if the Clinton impeachment was payback for the Nixon impeachment. He couldn't say it wasn't. "That's not an admission" you might offer, to which I'd reply "if it weren't payback the proper answer is something like "absolutely not!" Hyde's "can't say it wasn't" was PR-talk for "okay, I admit it: it was."

He went on to say that if he had it to do all over again, he probably wouldn't. He felt that at that time the Republican party had to stand for something and to walk away wouldn't have been right. And I agree with him. That's why the House is given the option to censure. Looking at things comparatively, censure is prison time, impeachment is the death penalty.

So the Republicans, in the name of standing for something, and in retaliation for the Nixon impeachment, sentenced Clinton to the most severe of penalties for his behavior. That kind of collective thought process isn't good government. It's shameful. They made two errors, compounded by the rest of reality, which I'll get to in a moment.
Error #1: making a decision based on retribution for absolutely un-related matters (the Nixon impeachment)
Error #2: giving the president the harshest penalty possible, instead of something which more befit the presidential misbehavior.

To top it all off, nearly all the movers and shakers on the Republican side--including Hyde-- were found to have participated in similar behavior themselves. Did they tender their resignations? Only one--Bob Livingston.

So the most severe of steps to rein in presidential misbehavior was done for reasons that weren't earnest, weren't what they were stated to be, and weren't in the national interest.

There's no way to take ego out of the political process--it's part-n-parcel to it. But we have to do better than this. And I'm ashamed to add that I suspect the quality of politicians has only eroded in the last 6 years, not improved.

There's No Hope. Not a Bit

There are times where you wanna grab a 2 X 4 and beat yourself upside the head, if for no other reason than because maybe if you do, it'll cause you to see the world in the skewed way that so many others do. Our country has gotten so strange that I've come to call the aspect of it (the strangeness where we hear from those in power that up is down, good is bad, that no child is left behind etc.) the bizarro world. Because really, reality in America defies definition these days.

Last night the wife and I were watching The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. It's one of our favorite parts of the day. Stewart is decidedly left of center, but with a very comedic twist. A cadre of irreverant and hilarious reporters deliver satirical takes on the day's top stories, and last night it was Samantha Bee's turn. Her focus: the "Town Hall" meetings that the Bush administration has been conducting throughout the nation.

These town hall meetings are every bit as genuine to open debate as Stepford is to the institution of marriage. As Swanson frozen dinners are to fine cuisine. As current journalism is to a free press.

So, in order to go in depth about the Town Hall Meetings, she sought out their originator, Frank Luntz. Well, ol' Frank has his own research company which you can find on the web. Right there on his web site he quotes someone who's diametrically 0pposed to what he does--Al Franken:
“Asking Frank Luntz if he understands public opinion is like asking Julia Child if she knows how to make a soufflé.”
Here in bizarro world you can quote people who hate what you do if it makes you look good.

Okay...so Samantha goes to talk to Frank Luntz, who's remarkably candid about what he does.
They watch a videotape of a Town Hall meeting and he points out that the most important thing is a good backdrop. The backdrop shown has a great smattering of Americans, including (he points out) a black, a woman, Asians...this appearing inclusive for the cameras is quite important.

And of course the big banner in the back, which says Saving Social Security. He points out that whatever this backdrop is, they need to be short-n-sweet, and to have a repetitive consonant (note the SSS).

As I'm being entertained, I can't help but note that one of the prime movers-n-shakers of the Republican party--this is the guy who came up with the name Clear Skies Initiative for a program which allows polluters to exchange the right to pollute with one another-- has gone on national television to point out the tremendous vapidity of their message, not to mention the techniques of how they sell such stupidity.

This, as I feel the need to point out again, is bizarro world. This is the world we live in today, where there is such a lack of shame that someone can stand proudly next to their work, which consists of marketing a pile of dog poo as something fabulous, something beautiful, something special, and say with earnest smiles that they do good.

Bizarro world. The US of A in 2005. Where what something's called is far more important than what it is. Where what something does is far less important than what it seems to do. Where what something appears to be is far more important than what it is.

I'd like to add some more to this, but for now, gotta run. I'm headed to the Home Depot so I can buy a 2 X 4.

The Essential Difference Between Them and Us

As the battle looms in the senate over whether or not they will change the Constitutionally-guaranteed right to filibuster, there are those of legal mind who can tell you more legalities than you have the patience to listen to. I'm going to stick to areas where I know a little something: psychology.

There is a Tsunami of conservatism in this country right now which threatens anyone with half a free-thinking bone in his body. If you're reading this blog, I'm probably talking about you. Why does it threaten? Because the evangelical Christian right isn't just content to raise their families how they want, home school with a ciriculum which conforms to their belief, have a stranglehold on the House, the Senate, the Supreme Court and the Presidency. No, that's simply not enough. They want to create such a grip on power that those who think differently are just shit outta luck. And perhaps even an endangered species.

I don't know about you, but my Christian upbringing taught me to believe that wasn't fair. One of the things that stuck with me, even after a lot of the rest went away is this: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Christian or not, that's powerful stuff, doncha think?

But back to politics: if they're able to wrest the last significant point of power Democrats have to resist their dominance, they'll be stocking judgeships with people of like mind and ruling propensities.

Still not rattled?

Once they do, they'll close "head shops" like the one in Austin where I bought my "Why is there always money for war, but not education?" bumper sticker. They'll decide that the internet is waaaay too free and clean it up. But as they "clean" it up, will they stop with porn, or will they continue on to places like this, where folks who don't believe as they do say what they want? Ladies--I suspect your right to choose will be gone within 2 or 3 years. Abortion's a darned ugly a thing, but not as ugly as the reality of not having the right to make your own decision about it. Then there's prayer in school.
Jewish? Just bow your head; the prayer will go by quickly.
Muslim? Look...you're lucky we tolerate you in these parts.
Atheist? Y'know what? I think you need an ass whuppin'...

So the difference between us and them is that I think they should have the right to be as Christian as they wanna be. But they don't think I should have the right to be who I am, if I'm not like them.

Two Important points here:
1. One of the key points of Christianity is Free Will. You're supposed to choose Jesus, not have him shoved down your throat.
2. This is America. They're proud Americans. Isn't this the land of the Free? Well...not if they get control.

So the difference between them and us is in my world, they're safe. In their world, I'm...well, the enemy.

The Most UN-Wise Choice for the UN

I've stayed out of the John Bolton for Ambassador to the UN fight. I mean, what do I really know about international politics? Finally I realize though, what the hell do I have to know about international politics when I know common sense?

You've probably heard the quotes from John Bolton, regarding the UN: "There's no such thing as the United Nations," John Bolton declared in 1994. ''If the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference.''

And this is the guy we're wanting to send to that building to represent us? Common sense tells me that if I work in the UN representing my foreign country, or even if I work there as a US citizen, Bolton probably despises me just because that's what I do.

North Korea has called him a "human scum and bloodsucker."
Allright. So you tell me: with North Korea factoring huge in our future as an alleged member of the Axis of Evil, how smart is it to have as your UN Representative someone who has earned such richly descriptive titles from them? Doesn't common sense tell you we ought to have someone who's not openly despised by one of our chief enemies?

And in this article it's revealed that Bolton is a serial abuser, in terms of his management style. Here, common sense tells me that the UN is supposed to be all about diplomacy, and we're looking to send a management-through-intimidation serial abuser to the UN?

Diplomacy. That word seems to have little meaning to Bolton. Here's one of www.dictionary.com 's definitions of the word: "Tact and skill in dealing with people." Sound like John Bolton to you?

Once again, these people calling the shots in DC are calling almost all the wrong ones. Could anything be more clear?

What's the Deal With Right-Wingers and Judges?

You'd think the recent bad hits Republicans had taken over Delay's veiled threats to judges ("The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior.") and then Senator John Cornyn's damned
stupid follow-up and reaction to it, that maybe they would take the foot off the accelerator a bit and let the engines cool.

There you go, using your common sense again! I'm talking about the Republican leadership, who, if you look very carefully, is on a mad rush toward a Taliban-esque one-ness of thought. It goes something like this:
We're always right. They're always wrong. Period.

And the only reason it's not something that I laugh about is that these folks aren't a curiosity. They're in charge.

But back to my original point. In this article we find that conservative leaders went to Washington to discuss the topic "Remedies to Judicial Tyranny." Mmm...to which tyrannical judges might they be referring? How about Reagan appointee Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy?

"Okay" you're thinking. "Just more theatrics from the bizarro parade of the right wing of the right wing party...no biggie, right?" Wrong. Then lawyer/author Edwin Vieira says this about Kennedy, quoting of all people, Joseph Stalin: "He had a slogan, and it worked very well for him, whenever he ran into difficulty: 'no man, no problem,' " Vieira said.

If you're scratching your head wondering exactly what that was supposed to mean, maybe you'd like to see the rest of the Stalin quote: "Death solves all problems: no man, no problem."

So...why hasn't Edwin Viera been at least questioned by police for threatening a Supreme Court Justice? Because as I said before, these folks are in charge. (this is the point where, if it hasn't before, you hear the Twilight Zone music and a chill runs up your spine.)

Don't Delay!

Let's Investigate Tom...Today!

Are you anything like me? I'm a guy who likes my government served straight up, hold the corruption, please. I've got no use for it.

But recent developments in the nation's capitol leave me shaking my head in disbelief. Or it would be disbelief if it weren't Tom Delay we were talking about. I've gotten to where I believe most anything about him.

The leader of the republican party in the House has been the subject of four separate ethics investigations. Ethics. Remember them? How does Mr. Delay reconcile his allegedly fundamentalist Christian beliefs with fundamentally corrupt behavior? And for that matter, how about his fundamentalist followers? Aren't they beginning to get a little uncomfortable about now? If you're going to err on the side of life, please also remember to err on the side of ethics!

Here's a handy site that's filled-to-overflowing with the transgressions of Tom Delay. The head of the Ethics Committee (Representative Joel Hefley) actually believed that he was supposed to help maintain Ethical standards in Congress instead of just be a figurehead, and did so. Boy, was he ever mistaken! Tom Delay (by way of Dennis Hastert) had him removed.

Interesting Tom Delay move #1: instead of changing your unethical behavior, change the head of the ethics committee!

Interesting Tom Delay move #2: Get rid of two Republican members of the committee who actually believed Delay had an obligation to behave ethically and replace them with two running buddies. Can you guess who one of them is? Well, it's none other than my very own living, breathing representative dedicated to the lower realms of mediocrity, Lamar Smith!

Question for you: do you think Lamar Smith's $10,000 contribution to Tom Delay's legal defense fund might signal that he's going to be an objective arbiter of Ethics? Letsee here...hell freezes over when?

And another question: could things get any worse? I suspect they can, even though that's awfully hard to believe!

What is it about Texas...

...that produces such world class rectal orifices? I really try to steer clear of name-calling, but Lawd a'mighty...these three stooges deserve every last name we can throw their way.

Hailing from Texas there's George W. (though he's as much a product of the northeast, despite that Texas accent that remarkably, no one else in his family has [explain that one, willya?]). There's Tom Delay...oh, don't get me started. And now there's John Cornyn.

Senator John Cornyn hasn't distinguished himself through too much bizarre behavior yet, but give him time. He's just getting started. Regarding the Terri Schiavo ruling he said this on the Senate floor:
"It causes a lot of people, including me, great distress to see judges use the authority that they have been given to make raw political or ideological decisions," he said.

Let me translate for you: "When judges rule other than the way I want it, that's ideological! Rule the way I want them to and they're good judges."

Why would I say that? Because if judges ruled to allow school-conducted prayer, there's not a snowball's chance in hell Cornyn would consider that a political or ideological decision. They'd consider them courageous and outstanding judges.

And if you're thinking "maybe we should allow prayer in school..." remember, there's not one law that says you can't pray in school. You can pray any time you want to. The law prohibits the school from conducting the prayer. The Jewish students, the Muslim students and the non-believers are quite glad that here in the land of the free they aren't compelled to pray in Jesus' name, just like Christians and Jews aren't too inclined to pray to Allah. As proud Americans, we ought to be glad that we have freedom of--and from--religion. You want religion to be the law of the land? Move to Iran!

But back to the Texas buffoon-du-jour, Senator Cornyn. Unwisely, he didn't stop there.
"I don't know if there is a cause-and-effect connection, but we have seen some recent episodes of courthouse violence in this country. . . . And I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters, on some occasions, where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public."

My grasp of the English language tells me that he's drawing a connection between courthouse violence and judges' decisions. He doesn't justify it, but linking the two together is in one sense, exactly that.
1. Judge makes bad ruling, so
2. As a result, this other guy does that.

When in fact what he should say is this:
1. Loony bin gets a gun, and
2. Loony bin shoots a judge.

Those judges aren't being accountable, so let's shoot them! To be fair, Cornyn doesn't suggest the loony bins' actions are justified. But to understand in any fashion their actions shows a perceived common ground on Cornyn's part. To have Tom Delay issuing a veiled threat, then John Cornyn vocalizing an even tenuous understanding of why the loony bins do what they do, all in one week...Lawd have mercy!

Texas has unleased an unprecedented spate of stupidity on the rest of the nation. If you've heard it from no other Texan, hear it from me now. I'm so sorry that these fools are running the show. 'Course, you all supposedly voted George W. back into office after having 4 years' worth of reasons not to...so I suppose there's enough blame to go around.

The Parade of Buffoons, Disguised as Leaders

Most of the time I shake my head and wonder how these guys have managed to get so far without being laughed out of their jobs. I'm talking about the Tom DeLays of the world. These folks are genetically incapable of understanding how anyone could see things differently than they do. But the worrisome part of their personalities isn't their ignorance. It's their outrage at the possibility anyone could see things unlike they do that should cause us concern.

Surely you've heard what Delay said about the judges who ruled against Terri Schiavo's parents? His veiled threat was irresponsible beyond words. And this guy isn't some two-bit congressman from a backwater district. He's the leader of the Republican party in the house. This is thug-like behavior. The best and brightest should be running things, not two-bit asses like Delay.

There is a slice of people in the right wing, and Delay is their figurehead, who obsess about right-to-life issues. Thing is, their right-to-life logic plays out very strangely. Some of them actually feel as though they have a right to kill in the name of "life." And while Bush isn't that strange, he's not against courting the votes and emotion of those who are. He rarely distances himself from the extreme right wing, because he taps into their passion for his own good.

While claiming he errs on the side of life, Bush managed to oversee the execution of 152 men and women in Texas prisons. And that's to speak nothing of the unnecessary war that Bush waged in Irag, which may have killed as many as 100,000 people.

This erring on the side of life stance is flimsier than a rained-on paper towel.

Bush and DeLay are masters at exploiting the emotions of a public which has a superficial view of the life-n-death issue. They take our outrage at murder and focus it on those convicted of murder. Fine. But what about their alleged respect for the culture of life? Where does Bush's logic go when as governor, he signed away the lives of 152 people?

Regarding Schiavo, he and DeLay embraced the life issue of a woman who's been brain dead for 15 years. What an emotional drain it's been for the family to maintain a shell of a person in a bed for a decade and a half! Terri Schiavo had long ago checked out. But the home video of her made her look as though she were "there." So that emotional button was pushed, and then exploited by the culture of life folks.

And then when it was all over and done with, Tom DeLay issued threats. Can someone tell me why he hasn't been arrested for this?

Their logic is inconsistent, and emotion-based rather than fact based. That's a volatile combination that scares me more than any terrorist.