Thursday, May 07, 2009
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
The GOP Deserves Its Current State of Isolation
by Joseph Palermo on HuffPo
Every Sunday I look forward to reading Frank Rich's column in the New York Times. He's one of the few commentators the Times has who can both write and think. Last Sunday he offered a lament of sorts about the current state of the Republican Party. "We need more than one functioning party," he writes, "not just to ensure checks and balances and pitch ideas at a time of crisis, but to temper this president's sporadic bursts of overconfidence and triumphalist stagecraft." Rich digs deep to unearth signs of "sporadic bursts of overconfidence" citing three superficial examples from the last presidential campaign. His point got me thinking about whether or not we should be concerned, as many journalists seem to be, about the fate of the GOP. This argument would have more weight if we were discussing policy differences between Ike Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson. But the modern Republican Party has been largely in power since 1981 and during the brief periods when it found itself in "opposition" it behaved so miserably it does not deserve our sympathy and regrets.
... read the rest on HuffPo after the click.
Every Sunday I look forward to reading Frank Rich's column in the New York Times. He's one of the few commentators the Times has who can both write and think. Last Sunday he offered a lament of sorts about the current state of the Republican Party. "We need more than one functioning party," he writes, "not just to ensure checks and balances and pitch ideas at a time of crisis, but to temper this president's sporadic bursts of overconfidence and triumphalist stagecraft." Rich digs deep to unearth signs of "sporadic bursts of overconfidence" citing three superficial examples from the last presidential campaign. His point got me thinking about whether or not we should be concerned, as many journalists seem to be, about the fate of the GOP. This argument would have more weight if we were discussing policy differences between Ike Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson. But the modern Republican Party has been largely in power since 1981 and during the brief periods when it found itself in "opposition" it behaved so miserably it does not deserve our sympathy and regrets.
... read the rest on HuffPo after the click.
Sunday, May 03, 2009
Los Angeles Archdiocesan Youth Commission Logo
Yup. It's the real thing. I wonder what the message is ...
It's either an example of total obliviousness or an attempt at "truth in advertising".
Saturday, May 02, 2009
100 Days of Spin
What Obama said -- and what has been said about him.
After 100 days in office, we find President Obama is sticking to the facts – mostly.
Nevertheless, we find that the president has occasionally made claims that put him and his policies in a better light than the facts warrant. He has claimed that private economists agreed with the forecast in his budget, when they were really more pessimistic. He's used Bush-like budget-speak trying to sound frugal while raising spending to previously unimagined levels. And he has exaggerated the problems his proposals aim to cure by misstating facts about school drop-out rates and oil imports.
At the same time, there's been no shortage of dubious claims made about the president by his political opponents. Republicans have falsely claimed that Obama planned to spend billions on a levitating train and that his stimulus bill would require doctors to follow government orders on what medical treatments can and can't be prescribed, among other nonsense.
And those whoppers are mild compared with some of the positively deranged claims flying about the Internet. No, the national service bill Obama signed won't prevent anybody from going to church, for example. And no, he's not trying to send Social Security checks to illegal immigrants.
... read the rest on FactCheck.org after the click.
After 100 days in office, we find President Obama is sticking to the facts – mostly.
Nevertheless, we find that the president has occasionally made claims that put him and his policies in a better light than the facts warrant. He has claimed that private economists agreed with the forecast in his budget, when they were really more pessimistic. He's used Bush-like budget-speak trying to sound frugal while raising spending to previously unimagined levels. And he has exaggerated the problems his proposals aim to cure by misstating facts about school drop-out rates and oil imports.
At the same time, there's been no shortage of dubious claims made about the president by his political opponents. Republicans have falsely claimed that Obama planned to spend billions on a levitating train and that his stimulus bill would require doctors to follow government orders on what medical treatments can and can't be prescribed, among other nonsense.
And those whoppers are mild compared with some of the positively deranged claims flying about the Internet. No, the national service bill Obama signed won't prevent anybody from going to church, for example. And no, he's not trying to send Social Security checks to illegal immigrants.
... read the rest on FactCheck.org after the click.
Friday, May 01, 2009
What does your religion teach you?
The more often Americans go to church, the more likely they are to support the torture of suspected terrorists, according to a new survey.
More than half of people who attend services at least once a week -- 54 percent -- said the use of torture against suspected terrorists is "often" or "sometimes" justified. Only 42 percent of people who "seldom or never" go to services agreed, according to the analysis released Wednesday by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.
... read the rest at CNN after the click.
More than half of people who attend services at least once a week -- 54 percent -- said the use of torture against suspected terrorists is "often" or "sometimes" justified. Only 42 percent of people who "seldom or never" go to services agreed, according to the analysis released Wednesday by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.
... read the rest at CNN after the click.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
If we don't hold our own accountable for their actions in our name ...
... someone else will.
from the Daily Beast
In a ruling in Madrid today, Judge Baltasar Garzón has announced that an inquiry into the Bush administration’s torture policymakers now will proceed to a formal criminal investigation. The ruling came as a jolt following the recommendation of Spanish Attorney General Cándido Conde-Pumpido against proceeding with a criminal inquiry, which was reported in The Daily Beast on April 16.
... read the rest after the click.
from the Daily Beast
In a ruling in Madrid today, Judge Baltasar Garzón has announced that an inquiry into the Bush administration’s torture policymakers now will proceed to a formal criminal investigation. The ruling came as a jolt following the recommendation of Spanish Attorney General Cándido Conde-Pumpido against proceeding with a criminal inquiry, which was reported in The Daily Beast on April 16.
... read the rest after the click.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Are you Worried about the Flu?
from The Nation
When House Appropriations Committee chairman David Obey, the Wisconsin Democrat who has long championed investment in pandemic preparation, included roughly $900 million for that purpose in this year's emergency stimulus bill, he was ridiculed by conservative operatives and congressional Republicans.
Obey and other advocates for the spending argued, correctly, that a pandemic hitting in the midst of an economic downturn could turn a recession into something far worse -- with workers ordered to remain in their homes, workplaces shuttered to avoid the spread of disease, transportation systems grinding to a halt and demand for emergency services and public health interventions skyrocketing. Indeed, they suggested, pandemic preparation was essential to any responsible plan for renewing the U.S. economy.
But former White House political czar Karl Rove and key congressional Republicans -- led by Maine Senator Susan Collins -- aggressively attacked the notion that there was a connection between pandemic preparation and economic recovery.
Now, as the World Health Organization says a deadly swine flu outbreak that apparently began in Mexico but has spread to the United States has the potential to develop into a pandemic, Obey's attempt to secure the money seems eerily prescient.
... read the rest in The Nation after the click.
When House Appropriations Committee chairman David Obey, the Wisconsin Democrat who has long championed investment in pandemic preparation, included roughly $900 million for that purpose in this year's emergency stimulus bill, he was ridiculed by conservative operatives and congressional Republicans.
Obey and other advocates for the spending argued, correctly, that a pandemic hitting in the midst of an economic downturn could turn a recession into something far worse -- with workers ordered to remain in their homes, workplaces shuttered to avoid the spread of disease, transportation systems grinding to a halt and demand for emergency services and public health interventions skyrocketing. Indeed, they suggested, pandemic preparation was essential to any responsible plan for renewing the U.S. economy.
But former White House political czar Karl Rove and key congressional Republicans -- led by Maine Senator Susan Collins -- aggressively attacked the notion that there was a connection between pandemic preparation and economic recovery.
Now, as the World Health Organization says a deadly swine flu outbreak that apparently began in Mexico but has spread to the United States has the potential to develop into a pandemic, Obey's attempt to secure the money seems eerily prescient.
... read the rest in The Nation after the click.
Friday, April 24, 2009
A Problem with Tortured Logic
If you start with the premise that America is ALWAYS the good guy; always pure, always above board, always moral and ethical, then you have to conclude that everything that is done in the name of the country is good and positive.
"America does not torture" is the only conclusion that one can come to, considering that premise. If America is always good, then it follows that anything that is done in the name of America must also be good. If torture is defined as NOT good, then whatever done in the name of the country must not be torture ... because torture is bad. Therefore "America does not torture" becomes a hard and fast position.
The problem is that in mistaking a conclusion for a premise requires one to either ignore or redefine the evidence to fit the narrative that assumes America is always the good guy.
In real world logic, one first assembles and analyzes the evidence and then, based on the evidence, draws a conclusion.
I think it's important to make clear that, if the US engaged in torture, as the evidence seems to suggest ... the fact, in and of itself, does not make America bad. However, the means and degree to which we address the issues of law and justice involved will constitute evidence, one way or the other.
"America does not torture" is the only conclusion that one can come to, considering that premise. If America is always good, then it follows that anything that is done in the name of America must also be good. If torture is defined as NOT good, then whatever done in the name of the country must not be torture ... because torture is bad. Therefore "America does not torture" becomes a hard and fast position.
The problem is that in mistaking a conclusion for a premise requires one to either ignore or redefine the evidence to fit the narrative that assumes America is always the good guy.
In real world logic, one first assembles and analyzes the evidence and then, based on the evidence, draws a conclusion.
I think it's important to make clear that, if the US engaged in torture, as the evidence seems to suggest ... the fact, in and of itself, does not make America bad. However, the means and degree to which we address the issues of law and justice involved will constitute evidence, one way or the other.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
The Stockholm Syndrome
The Daily Show puts socialism in perspective:
... or catch the video on Comedy Central.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M - Th 11p / 10c | |||
| The Stockholm Syndrome | ||||
| ||||
... or catch the video on Comedy Central.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Insanity
We used waterboarding a total of 266 times on two terror suspects ...
Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.
If only we'd waterboarded one of them just one more time ... maybe we could have solved the Lindberg kidnapping or unraveled the Kennedy assassination!
Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.
If only we'd waterboarded one of them just one more time ... maybe we could have solved the Lindberg kidnapping or unraveled the Kennedy assassination!
The Pima County Fair 2009
Mondrian on the Midway
Flight of Fancy
At the Ticket Booth
Nathanial and Marina
Wind Power - Not a New Idea, By Any Means
In Our Past
Catalina Highway
On the way to Summerhaven, AZ on the Catalina Highway:
Looking out across the Santa Catalina Mountains and the east side of Tucson, AZ in the Sonoran Desert. Sabino Canyon is right, center in the picture.
Looking down on the Catalina Highway from a "pull off" on the Catalina Highway (taken about 30 yards from the previous shot).
Watch out for the first step. It's a long one.
Looking out across the Santa Catalina Mountains and the east side of Tucson, AZ in the Sonoran Desert. Sabino Canyon is right, center in the picture.
Looking down on the Catalina Highway from a "pull off" on the Catalina Highway (taken about 30 yards from the previous shot).
Watch out for the first step. It's a long one.
We've heard it all before
from Mike Lux on HuffPo:
Conservatives know this country is at a historical crossroads, and I suspect that what they fear most is that they are just as much on the wrong side of history as their ideological ancestors were in the 1860s when the end of slavery was being debated, in the early 1900s when women's suffrage was being debated, in the 1930s when social security and the minimum wage were being debated, and in the 1960s when the civil rights were being debated. In every single one of those historical debates, conservatives:
... more after the click.
My comment: Obviously, conservatives gravitate to the party of ideas. Of course, you're aware that conservatives haven't always been Republicans and liberals haven't always been Democrats. Right?
Lincoln was a liberal and a Republican, taking the final step in ending formalized slavery with the Emancipation Proclamation. (Rush Limbaugh, titular leader of today's Republican party, recently made an impassioned defense of slavery. According to Rush, it simply wasn't that bad.)
Teddy Roosevelt was a liberal and a Republican. He was also a trust buster, breaking up corporate monopolies and a conservationist, setting aside huge tracts of land for the the National Parks system - two actions that today's Republican conservatives would find an anathema.
Conservatives know this country is at a historical crossroads, and I suspect that what they fear most is that they are just as much on the wrong side of history as their ideological ancestors were in the 1860s when the end of slavery was being debated, in the early 1900s when women's suffrage was being debated, in the 1930s when social security and the minimum wage were being debated, and in the 1960s when the civil rights were being debated. In every single one of those historical debates, conservatives:
- labeled their opposition socialists (and worse)
- called for states' rights instead of a federal solution
- said that they were the true heirs of the founding fathers, and were the keepers of America's traditions and values
- warned that the charges being proposed were frighteningly radical, and would destroy the economy
- that big government would lead to a destruction of all of our most basic liberties
... more after the click.
My comment: Obviously, conservatives gravitate to the party of ideas. Of course, you're aware that conservatives haven't always been Republicans and liberals haven't always been Democrats. Right?
Lincoln was a liberal and a Republican, taking the final step in ending formalized slavery with the Emancipation Proclamation. (Rush Limbaugh, titular leader of today's Republican party, recently made an impassioned defense of slavery. According to Rush, it simply wasn't that bad.)
Teddy Roosevelt was a liberal and a Republican. He was also a trust buster, breaking up corporate monopolies and a conservationist, setting aside huge tracts of land for the the National Parks system - two actions that today's Republican conservatives would find an anathema.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)