Strangers Almanac

New Element Discovered

2006-04-10T12:02:00.000-05:00

A major research institution (majoring in "Intelligent Design") has just announced the discovery of the heaviest element yet known to science.

The new element has been named "Bushcronium." Bushcronium has one neutron, 12 assistant neutrons, 75 deputy neutrons, and 224 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an Atomic mass of 311.

These 311 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since Bushcronium has no electrons, it is inert. However, it can be detected as it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A minute amount of Bushcronium causes one reaction to take over 4 days to complete, when it would normally take less than a second.

Bushcronium has a normal half-life of multiples of 4 years but it does not decay, instead, it undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.

In fact, Bushcronium's mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, which in turn forms isodopes. This characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientists to believe that Bushcronium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as "Critical Morass."

When catalyzed with money, Bushcronium activates FoxNewsium, an element which radiates orders of magnitude and also generates energy (albeit as incoherent noise), since it has 1/2 as many peons, but twice as many morons.

Mark Your Calendars Folks!

2006-03-30T09:55:00.000-06:00

Mark this in RED on your calendars! Remember this date...because this may NEVER happen again!

I actually AGREE with republicans on something!
That something is immigration law.

I DO NOT support amnesty of ANY KIND for anyone who crossed our border ILLEGALLY--I believe amnesty rewards these people for breaking U.S. law. I say, round up the illegals and send their asses home. THEN, if they would like to go through the LEGAL PROCESS to imigrate to the U.S. and become citizens, they should be welcome to do so.

Think about it this way: If YOU were to enter Mexico (or Guatamala, Brazil, etc.) ILLEGALLY, would you be allowed to send your kids to public schools there? Would you be allowed access to that country's social programs...(their equivalent to our Medicaid, Food Stamps, Welfare, etc.)?

ABSOLUTELY NOT! Why not? Because the immigration laws of those countries PROHIBIT it. These countries do not REWARD you for breaking their immigration laws.

Yet, these same countries expect the U.S. to OPEN our borders wide to unlimited immigration of their citizens to OUR country...AND expect us to give these illegals ALL of the rights that our own citizens enjoy.

BOTTOM LINE IS, THESE COUNTRIES GET ANGRY AT THE U.S.....FOR TRYING TO ENFORCE THE SAME IMMIGRATION LAWS THEY HAVE IN THEIR OWN COUNTRIES!

Why are they such hypocrites about this? It is because these countries have become DEPENDENT on the MONEY that these illegals send back to their family members in their homelands.

It makes me physically ILL to watch thousands of ILLEGALS carrying Mexican flags in OUR streets and DEMANDING the SAME rights as LEGAL immigrants and lifelong U.S. citizens. This amounts to thousands of people FLAUNTING the fact that they BROKE U.S. LAWS--they are PROUD of that fact! (Again, in my opinion, every last one of those protesters who ARE illegal should be rounded up and sent back to their native countries.)

If Mexico is SO great, then they should GO BACK! If they really want to stay here, they might consider trying to show the rest of us that....by flying the American flag instead of all those Mexican flags.

It also makes me physically ILL to watch Senator Ted Kennedy and others stand up and compare this situation to the Civil Rights Movement.

This is NOTHING LIKE the Civil Rights Movement, folks! (African Americans should be OUTRAGED at that comparison, in fact.) African Americans did NOT come here illegally--hell, they didn't even come here VOLUNTARILY! African Americans were FORCED to come here against their will.

***I should note right here that the part of U.S. immigration law which allows illegals to stay in this country if their child is born in the U.S. was written for the purpose of dealing with the situation of what to do about freed slaves.*** It was NEVER meant to be used the way it is being used today--pregnant illegals waddling across the border into the U.S. as soon as their water breaks so their child can be born here and they can stay in the country.

Second, this is NOT about "RACISM"--what it IS about is HOMELAND SECURITY!

I am NOT a racist. I DO NOT advocate COMPLETELY CLOSING our borders...but we NEED to KNOW EXACTLY WHO is crossing those borders and WHY-- for SECURITY REASONS. (And that became particularly important AFTER 9/11.)

Terrorists are NOT "stupid savages" as our current administration would like us all to believe. I'm quite sure they figured out a LONG time ago just how easy it is to slip across the border into the U.S. by coming up through Mexico. They KNOW how POUROUS our southern border is! EVERYONE KNOWS THAT! In fact, I have no doubt there are probably would-be terrorist learning to speak Spanish as I write this, so that they can more easily slip across our southern border.

Another issue at play here is the DRUG TRADE. I live in northwest Arkansas, where my state (AND the state of Oklahoma as well) have passed laws keeping psuedoephedrine (cold medicines, allergy pills, etc.) behind the pharmacists' counters to prevent folks from using them to make METH. This law HAS cut down on the number of meth labs operating INSIDE our state. However, it has NOT even made a DENT in the SUPPLY--the MAJORITY of meth found in Arkansas and Oklahoma today....is IMPORTED from MEXICO.

(Remember the tunnels under our border with Mexico that were found recently? Remember what was found IN those tunnels? ILLEGAL DRUGS.) 18 wheelers are pulled over on I-40 here in Arkansas and searched all the time...and almost WEEKLY a truck driver or someone driving a large RV is charged with transporting cocaine or meth. That meth comes from Mexcio.

Here in northwest, Arkansas, we have a VERY high immigrant population--legal AND illegal. (The headquarters for Tyson Foods, George's Poultry Processing AND Butterball are all located here.) The (Mexican and South Amerrican) immigrant population has become SO large that last year, Springdale, AR had to build a SECOND public high school to make room for them all.

I lived in Rogers, AR for almost 5 years. I would walk into my local WalMart store and find that NO ONE around me was even speaking English! It was a strange experience--like walking into a foreign country...or walking onto another planet.

Which leads to yet another issue-- the CRIME RATE in areas with a large illegal population. The CRIME RATE in the Rogers/Springdale/Bentonville area seemed to SKYROCKET in the 5 years I lived there...and is STILL rising today. Whenever there's a murder, robbery, etc. reported on the local news...9 times out of 10, the perpetrator will be hispanic. I'm not saying this to be a racist or anything...it's just a FACT.

GANG VIOLENCE and incidents of GANG GRAFFITI have also skyrocketed in this area...and these are NOT white, Asian, or African American gangs either. They are ALL Hispanic gangs!

We already HAVE Immigration Laws in place, folks! ALL we have to do is ACTUALLY ENFORCE THEM! And they CERTAINLY don't need to be WATERED DOWN, as Congress is advocating.

These Senators and Representatives need to realize that ILLEGALS CAN'T VOTE. And the majority of LEGAL immigrants say that the immigration laws should be enforced and that penatlies should even be STIFFENED! There's a recent poll out there that SAYS just that!

The bottom line is...we NEED to KNOW EXACTLY WHO is crossing our southern border and WHY. The ONLY way to accomplish that is to CRACK DOWN on ILLEGAL immigration.

We can reform our immigration laws if necessary...AFTER we SECURE our BORDERS! For our own homeland security, we NEED to secure the border FIRST.

Where's the Outrage?!

2006-03-28T08:42:00.000-06:00

Polls show that the majority of Americans now feel that invading Iraq was a mistake. It's about time these folks pulled their heads out of their hineys. (Too bad they couldn't manage that 3 years ago.)

So, if the polls say a majority of Americans disapprove of the war in Iraq, then why aren't there more protestors out there on the streets?

I'll tell you why: There are still way too many folks out there who are NOT DIRECTLY AFFECTED by this illegal war. They don't have friends family members, or even anyone they know who is serving in Iraq. So, they can still go about their everyday activities without what's happening in Iraq even crossing their minds. (The average American tends to be UNinformed, UNeducated, and Uninterested in anything that doesn't affect them DIRECTLY.)

What's more, Americans have not been required by this administration to make a single sacrifice in the name of this war. Other than paying quite a bit more to fill up their Escalades and their Humvees--and maybe putting one of those magnetic "yellow ribbons" on that aforementioned ga-guzzling SUV to "support the troops"-- nothing is really being required of us at all.

Wanna know how to get these apathetic folks to stand up and DEMAND an end to this war PRONTO? I've got 3 words for you:

REINSTATE THE DRAFT.

I'll bet if you pull those bright-eyed, shiny-toothed, gawd-fearing, corn-fed, white, fundamentalist, Sunday school going, conservative young folks from their families and send them down the road to the nearest induction center ... we'd see some hell-raising protests going on...REAL FAST!

The INSTANT their OWN kids were in danger of being sent to "defend our freedom" (and I use that phrase in the LOOSEST terms imaginable) in Iraq, I predict you'd see thousands of republicans raising nine kinds of hell--DEMANDING that the troops be brought home IMMEDIATELY.

Remember When...

2006-03-19T15:27:00.000-06:00

REMEMBER WHEN CLINTON HAD A 60% APPROVAL RATING AND THE REPUBLICANS IMPEACHED HIM?

REMEMBER?! THE MAN GOT A BLOW JOB IN THE OVAL OFFICE! HE LIED ABOUT an ENTIRELY PERSONAL MATTER-- AND THE REPUBLICANS IMPEACHED HIM. REMEMBER?!

If there is one teaspoon of morality in the entire Republican Party, I'll kiss George W. Bush's ass in the middle of Broad Street. And the Democrat Party is a bunch of spineless weenies. My 1 year old great nephew has more sense than that entire sorry bunch in Washington.

Remember when Clinton was in office...and we had a BUDGET SURPLUS?! Remember when everyone had jobs?! Remember when we WEREN'T at war?!

**Just as an aside here, do you know WHY there were NO al-Queda operatives IN Iraq BEFORE we invaded? Do you know WHO was keeping al-Queda out of Iraq before? SADDAM! That's right, folks...Saddam's military and security forces were KEEPING them out! He didn't WANT al-Queda in his country! He wanted NOTHING to do with them!

So much for our Chimp-in-Chief's theory that Saddam had connections to 9/11....

Un-American, Unpatriotic, Unethical and Irresponsible...

2006-03-19T15:17:00.000-06:00

It is un-American and against the principles and values of American patriotism for the Congress to not comprehensively investigate the illegal use of National Security Agency (NSA) human and technical resources for spying on U.S. citizens in any manner within the United States.

At the least, there should be an independent investigation headed by independent appointed counsel.

The disservice performed by both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate during the terms of George W. Bush against the American people should be addressed by law as well as by election. This Congress is a sham.... is clearly abdicating its oversight responsibilities spelled out by our Constitution... and the members of said legislative bodies, in the vast majority of cases, are not worthy of serving the people who elected them.

Exposing the CON in CONservative:

2006-03-19T13:52:00.000-06:00

Let's count those wonderful CON "achievements" and expose the "CON" in CONservative:

#1) Emergency Management: Cons completely failed to manage the first large-scale emergency since 9/11. Despite all their big talk and hundreds of billions of dollars spent on homeland security over the past four years, this administration proved itself stunningly incompetent when faced with an actual emergency.

#2) Fiscal Management: RepubliCONs bankrupt America. America is broke. No wait, we're worse than broke. In less than five years these borrow and spend-thrifts have nearly doubled our national debt, to a stunning $9 trillion. These are not your father's Republicans who treated public dollars as though they were an endangered species. These Republicans waste money in ways and in quantities that make those old "tax and spend liberals" of yore look like tight-fisted Scots.

#3) Katrina relief: Eleven thousand spanking new mobile homes sinking into the Arkansas mud. Seems no one in the administration knew there were federal and state laws prohibiting trailers in flood zones. Oops. That little mistake cost you $850 million -- and counting.

#4) Medicare Drug Program: This $50 billion white elephant trampled many of those it was supposed to save. The mess forced states to step in and try to save its own citizens from being killed by the administration's poorly planned and executed attempt to privatize huge hunks of the federal health safety net.

#5) Afghanistan: Good managers know that in order to pocket the gains of a project, you have to finish it. This administration started out fine in Afghanistan. They had the Taliban and al Queda on the run and Osama bin Laden trapped in a box canyon. Then they were distracted by a nearby shiny object -- Iraq. We are now $75 billion out of pocket in Afghanistan and its sitting president still rules only within the confines of the nation's capital. Tribal warlords, the growing remnants of the Taliban and al Qaeda call the shots in the rest of the county.

#6) Iraq: This ill-begotten war was supposed to only cost us $65 billion. Another LIE !!! It has now cost us over $300 billion and continues to suck $6 billion a month out of our children's futures. Meanwhile the three warring tribes Bush "liberated" are using our money and soldiers' lives to partition the country. The Shiites and Kurds are carving out the prime cuts while forcing the once-dominant Sunnis onto Iraq's version of Death Valley. Meanwhile Iran is increasingly calling the shots in the Shiite region as mullahs loyal to Iran take charge.

#7) North Korea: Ditto. Also add to all the above the example North Korea set for Iran. Clearly once a country possesses nukes, the CONS drop the veiled threats and want to talk... (not negotiate... because they WILL NOT negotiate with terrorist). Whatever!

#8) Social Programs: It's easier to get affordable -- even free -- American-style medical care, paid for with American dollars, if you are injured in Iraq, Afghanistan or are victims of a Pakistani earthquake, than if you live and pay taxes in the good old U.S.A. Nearly 50 million Americans can't afford medical insurance. Nevertheless the administration has proposed a budget that will cut $40 billion from domestic social programs, including health care for the working poor. The administration is quick to say that those services will be replaced by its "faith-based" programs.

Well... just saying it don't make it so...

"Despite the Bush administration's rhetorical support for religious charities, the amount of direct federal grants to faith-based organizations declined from 2002 to 2004, according to a major new study released yesterday....The study released yesterday "is confirmation of the suspicion I've had all along, that what the faith-based initiative is really all about is de-funding social programs and dumping responsibility for the poor on the charitable sector," said Kay Guinane, director of the nonprofit advocacy program at OMB Watch..

#9) The Military: Overused and over-deployed and run by a deserter from the National Guard and a VP Chickenhawk who took 5 deferments from Vietnam because he had "other priorities"! Some call him a chickenhawk... I consider him to be chickenshit.

#10) Trade: under current GOP CONtrol of ALL branches and ALL Washington, we are approaching a $1 trillion annual trade deficit, most of it with Asia, $220 billion with just China -- just last year.

#11) Energy: Record high energy prices. Record energy company profits. Dick Cheney's energy task force meetings remain secret. Need I say more?

#12) Consumers: CONservative economics finally did it last year -- they achieved a negative savings rate. (Folks in China save 10 percent, for contrast.) If the government can spend more than it makes and just say "charge it" when it runs out, so can we. The average American now owes $9,000 to credit card companies. Imagine that. Yeah, I know... CONservatives didn't force consumers into debt... they just led the way and set the example.

#13) Human Rights: America now runs secret prisons and a secret judicial system that would give Kafka fits. And the U.S. has joined the list of nations that tortures prisioners of war. (Shut up George! We have pictures!)

But don't bother George W. Bush with any of this. While seldom right, he is never in doubt. Doubt is Bush's enemy. Just "stay the course" and don't worry about a thing. How can he worry when he has no doubts?

What a PROUD record of "ACHIEVMENTS"!

THE IMPORTANT 9TH AMENDMENT

2006-03-02T09:10:00.000-06:00

We don’t hear much about the Ninth Amendment. I like the Ninth Amendment. And for several reasons and the big one is that it leaves so much room for the imagination.

Here are the words of the 9th Amendment:

“The enumeration in the constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

How about that? There are rights held by the citizens of this nation that are not enumerated. Damn right there are and the “right to privacy” is one of them.

We know that the 1st Amendment gives us the right to free speech and freedom of the press--that’s very clear--however, the right to privacy wasn’t listed and is held as a right under the 9th Amendment.

This gives further support to the 4th Amendment regarding search and seizure and warrants when it comes to listening to our phone calls, reading our mail, looking at our library reading list, etc.

Think about all the rights our forefathers had at the beginning of this nation. And think about all the changes and the new rights that have come into being. Of course they are not all written down. We take them for granted. And they are protected by the 9th Amendment.

At the beginning non property owners could not vote. Now, non property owners have just as much right to a vote as anyone else.

At the beginning of this nation people could own slaves--now, that is no longer a right. People have a right not to be slaves. And that condition has been made by an Amendment to the Constitution.

The right for a woman to have an abortion is not listed in the Constitution. It is a right demanded by the women of the United States and protected by a ruling of the Supreme Court. Women have made this a fundamental right. No one is forcing anyone to have an abortion and the government cannot prevent a woman from having one.

The right to disagree with this government is fundamental. The right to assemble and to furnish grievance to this government is guaranteed.

Some will say that we should protest in a quiet and dignified manner by writing letters. My friends, “quietly protesting” is an oxymoron. To get attention you have to raise hell. And “raising hell” so to speak aggravates governments and it scares governments--as it should.

Maybe the time has come to enumerate some more rights. And by doing so insist that others still exist and new ones will come into being.

Let’s read the 9th Amendment again:

“The enumeration in the constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

I like it.

Norm. aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS

SOME WORDS ABOUT IRAQ....HUH?!?

2006-03-02T08:47:00.000-06:00

1) Iraqi oil will pay for this war. **(Haven't seen a PENNY from Iraqi oil so far...and it's NEVER GONNA HAPPEN.)

2) They will welcome us as liberators. *(Yeah...riiiight!)

3) They have nuclear weapons. *(Found to be not true.)

4) They have chemical weapons. **(also NOT true.)

5) They have biological weapons. (Nope...not true either.)

6) Saddam has killed thousands of his own people. --(HUH?!?) *So far, Bush has killed thousands MORE innocent Iraqi civilians in just the past 2 YEARS than Saddam killed the ENTIRE time he was in power.

7) Saddam tortures prisoners. --(HUH?!?!) *We don't torture our OWN prisoners here in the good ol' US of A--we ship them off to other countries like Syria, who torture them FOR us. That way WE don't get OUR hands dirty. (or bloody as the case may be.)

8) Iraq is a breeding ground for terrorism. --(HUH?!?!) *Well...it is NOW, but it wasn't until WE invaded. Saddam was actually fighting to keep terrorists OUT of his country!

9) The number of Iraqi civilians slaughtered --since the invasion--as many as 250,000. --(HUH?!?) **See item number 6.

10) Number of Iraqi's tortured by Americans--countless. **( again, probably a MUCH higher number than Saddam has tortured in his entire time in power.)

11) The number of U.S. Military Personnel slaughtered during and since the invasion--2,288.

12) The number of U.S. wounded since the invasion--19,000.

13) The cost of the war to this time--$243,402,318,292. **(to see the up to the minute cost, check out www.costofwar.com )

Saddam was not threatening nor considered a threat by his neighbors. **(soooo, remind me again--what the HELL are we doing in Iraq in the first place?!)

POVERTY AND REPUBLICANS

2006-03-02T08:38:00.000-06:00

It’s difficult to talk to Republicans about poverty. They just look at you like there is no such thing or if there is it’s not a problem. And the minimum wage of $5.15 established in 1997 is fine with them.

I doubt if George W. Bush and his economic advisors even look at the statistics relevant to poverty. It’s just not a Republican thing.

The Feb. 12, 2005 Economist reported that in 2004, after-tax corporate profits reached their highest level as a proportion of GDP in 75 years. Yet, the gulf between the “haves” and ”have nots” is reaching crisis proportions.

Census data released this past August suggests that the number of Americans in poverty grew slightly in 2004 (the most recent year for which data is available) to 12.7 percent from the 12.5 percent recorded the previous year, representing about 37 million Americans.

Since 2000, the number of people living in official poverty has increased by 5.4 million. But according to experts, that number vastly underestimates the real total. There are studies that challenge this data and put the real number closer to 18% --or 48 million Americans currently unable to afford the most basic necessities. And there is another study that goes with 25% or close to 70 million Americans in poverty.

Whatever the real number may be--it’s not acceptable. Not in 2006. Not in an age when we can have such controls on the distribution of wealth.

Just take a look at the countries with a wide disparity regarding the distribution of wealth and you can see why we need to take action. Ours is a shameful condition. America can be a fairer and more decent nation in regard to money.

Norm. aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS

On the Poor...

2006-02-18T12:32:00.000-06:00

As long as Americans live in gated communities, don't provide monies for educating the poor, don't provide for the slow and sick and mentally ill (emptying instutions) and turn those unable to help themselves out on the street in the name of AUTONOMY... the rich aren't going to recognize the need.

SEEING how people have to live and just reading about them are ENTIRELY different matters.

JUST A REMINDER from Norm...

2006-02-18T11:55:00.000-06:00

I and many others have served our government in defense of the Constitution of the United States. A Constitution that establishes a structure consisting of three equal branches of government: executive, legislative and judicial. This Constitution provides for equal protection for all and for very strict protection of the rights of the citizens of this great country.

This Constitution is our country. Without it there is no America as most of us know it. And when someone comes at me with the view that this is a "Christian country" I want to remind them of the following:

THE BEATITUDES OF JESUS CHRIST

"Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven"
"Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted"
"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth"
"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness. for they shall be filled"
"Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy"
"Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God
"Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God"
"Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for My sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you"

It is my view that our government is a secular government. Since no religion is mentioned in our Constitution except to secure freedom of religion and to make sure that no religious test is required to hold public office. In fact all religions are equally protected and all non-religion is protected.

For those that hold Christianity in very high regard, I appeal to you to require your
Leaders--that’s church and governmental--to hold the Beatitudes of Jesus Christ in high regards. Shouldn't they?

Morality and ethics are important to those of us that may not possess the faith required of Christians. And while not limited to the following, I suggest that people in position of leadership in our government concern themselves with the following:

THE 7 SOCIAL SINS OUTLINED BY GANDHI.

1. POLITICS WITHOUT PRINCIPLE
2. WEALTH WITHOUT WORK
3. COMMERCE WITHOUT MORALITY
4. PLEASURE WITHOUT CONSCIENCE
5. EDUCATION WITHOUT CHARACTER
6. SCIENCE WITHOUT HUMANITY
7. WORSHIP WITHOUT SACRIFICE

None of the principals or so-called sins listed above seem to apply to the leaders of our federal government. The Republican Party appears to be devoid of any of the above listed traits. They are about power and corruption.

There are more Christians on the left/liberal side of politics than on the right, observed George Lakoff, but they are not organized to even remotely the same degree as the Christian right. It’s time to push back against the hate mongering of the fundamentalist.

Norm. aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS.

Fourteen Defining Characteristics Of Fascism...Sound Like Anyone YOU know?

2006-02-18T11:40:00.000-06:00

Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes.

Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized

5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.

6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

What WE Stand For...

2006-02-18T11:36:00.000-06:00

ISSUES! ISSUES!

Howard Dean, speaking on Face the Nation, February 12, 2006 framed the Democratic platform/agenda for election year 2006 as:

ONE, we want honesty and openness back in government again.

TWO, we want a strong national defense, first of all, based on telling the truth to our citizens and our soldiers before we send troops abroad to defend America.

THREE, we want American jobs that will stay in America using energy Independence as a new industry to create millions of construction and manufacturing jobs.

FOUR, we want a health-care system that works for everybody, just like 36 other countries have in the world.

FIVE, we want a strong public education system so we can have optimism and opportunity back in America.

NO LONG LAUNDRY LIST! JUST 5!

Why the Democrats Lost...

2006-02-18T11:34:00.000-06:00

The Democrats' mistake was in thinking that a disastrous war, national
bankruptcy, erosion of civil liberties, corporate takeover of government,
environmental destruction, squandering our economic and moral leadership
in the world, and systematic Administration lying would be of concern to the
electorate.

The Republicans correctly saw that the chief concern of the electorate was
to keep gay couples from having an abortion.

Interesting Prediction...from a Very Famous Republican...

2006-02-18T11:23:00.000-06:00

"Corporations have been enthroned. An era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people . . .until wealth is aggregated in a few hands. . . and the Republic is destroyed."

..........[Abraham Lincoln]

***Of course, anyone who knows his/her history realizes that the Republican Party of Lincoln does not even remotely resemble what is referred to as the GOP today. (Actually, the party of Lincoln's platform looks a HELLUVA LOT like the platform of the current DEMOCRATIC Party.)

So, all you republicans who like to take credit for "freeing the slaves"...well, that's technically not the case at all. Your current set of beliefs don't even remotely match those of the Republican Party of Lincoln.

I guess that means pretty much ALL "republicans" of today are RINO's, doesn't it? ("Republicans In Name Only")

A Few Interesting Quotes...

2006-02-02T10:36:00.000-06:00

"We need an energy bill that encourages consumption."
- George W. Bush in Trenton, NJ, September 23, 2002

"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over
and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of
catapult the propaganda." - George W. Bush, May 24th, 2005.

"Some men see things as they are and ask 'Why?' I dream things
that never were and ask 'Why not?'" - Robert F. Kennedy

"A black man voting for the Republicans makes about
as much sense as a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders."
- J. C. Watts' father (a black man)

"HANNITIZED" PEOPLE = LOBOTOMIZED PEOPLE"

"The SPIRIT we have, NOT the WORK we do, is what makes us IMPORTANT to the people around us." --Sr. Joan Chittister

"When the government violates the people's rights, insurrection is,
for the people and for each portion of the people,
the most sacred of the rights and the most indispensible of duties."
--Marquis de Lafayette

"How does it become a man to behave towards the American government today? I answer, that he cannot without disgrace
be associated with it." -- Henry David Thoreau

"In Democracies, we, the people, have the power to
shape national and international policy
-- to seek the good and shun evil...
To have this power and fail to use it
makes us accomplices of the killers.
The job now is to spread the word
and inspire the public confidence that
the good we want can prevail."

- Archbishop Desmond Tutu

Bush as a Saint?

2006-01-08T11:13:00.000-06:00

President George W. Bush was scheduled to visit the Methodist Church outside Washington as part of his campaign.

Bush's campaign manager made a visit to the Bishop, and said to him "We've been getting a lot of bad publicity among Methodists because of Bush's position on stem cell research and the like. We'd gladly make a contribution to the church of $100,000 if during your sermon you'd say the President is a saint."

The Bishop thinks it over for a few moments and finally says, "The Church is in desperate need of funds and I will agree to do it."

Bush pompously shows up looking especially smug today and as the sermon progresses the Bishop begins his homily:

"George Bush is petty, a self-absorbed hypocrite and a nitwit. He is a liar, a cheat, and a low-intelligence weasel. He has lied about his military record and had the gall to put himself in a jet plane landing on a carrier posing before a banner stating 'Mission Accomplished.' He invaded a country for oil and money, and is using it to lie to the American people. He is the worst example of a Methodist I've ever personally known...

...But compared to Dick Cheney and the rest of his cabinet, George Bush is a saint."

It's Not ALWAYS the "Other Guy"...

2005-12-20T11:31:00.000-06:00

Given what we have learned about sending prisoners to other countries for interrogation, under the "renditions" policy of the Bush administration, together with Bush's vow to continue spying on American citizens, I am reminded of the poem by Pastor Martin Niemoller, a German citizen who learned too late that it's not always "the other guy":

When they came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Robot Bartender

2005-12-19T14:36:00.000-06:00

A man enters a bar and orders a drink. The bar has a robot bartender. The robot serves him a perfectly prepared cocktail, and then asks him, "What's your IQ?"

The man replies "150" and the robot proceeds to make conversation about global warming factors, quantum physics and spirituality, environmental interconnectedness, string theory, nano-technology, and sexual proclivities.

The customer is very impressed and thinks, "This is really cool."

He decides to test the robot. He walks out of the bar, turns around, and comes back in for another drink.

Again, the robot serves him the perfectly prepared drink and asks him, "What's your IQ?"

The man responds, "about a 100."

Immediately the robot starts talking, but this time, about football, NASCAR, baseball, supermodels, favorite fast foods, guns, and women's breasts.

Really impressed, the man leaves the bar and decides to give the robot one more test. He heads out and returns, the robot serves him and asks, "What's your IQ?"

The man replies, "Er, 50, I think."

And the robot says... real slowly....

"So............... ya gonna vote for Bush again?"

The Ultimate in Outsourcing

2005-12-18T10:47:00.000-06:00

Congress today announced that the office of President of the United States of America will be outsourced to India as of December 31st, 2005. The move is being made to save the President's $400,000 yearly salary, and also a record $521 billion in deficit expenditures and related overhead the office has incurred during the last 5 years. "We believe this is a wise move financially. The cost savings should be significant," stated Congressman Thomas Reynolds (R-WA).

Reynolds, with the aid of the Government Accounting Office (GAO), has studied outsourcing of American jobs extensively. "We cannot expect to remain competitive on the world stage with the current level of cash outlay," Reynolds noted. Mr. Bush was informed by email this morning of his termination. Preparations for the job move have been underway for some time.

Gurvinder Singh of Indus Teleservices, Mumbai, India will be assuming the office of President as of October 1st. Mr. Singh was born in the United States while his Indian parents were vacationing at Niagara Falls, thus making him eligible for the position. He will receive a salary of $320(USD) a month but with no health coverage or other benefits.

It is believed that Mr. Singh will be able to handle his job responsibilities without a support staff. Due to the time difference between the US and India, he will be working primarily at night, when few offices of the US Government will be open. "Working nights will allow me to keep my day job at the American Express call center", stated Mr. Singh in an exclusive interview. "I am excited about this position. I always hoped I would be President someday."

A Congressional Spokesperson noted that while Mr. Singh may not be fully aware of all the issues involved in the office of President, this should not be a problem because Bush is not familiar with the issues either. Mr. Singh will rely upon a script tree that will enable him to respond effectively to most topics of concern. Using these canned responses, he can address common concerns without having to understand the underlying issues at all.

"We know these scripting tools work," stated the spokesperson. "President Bush has used them successfully for years." Mr. Singh may have problems with the Texas drawl, but lately Bush has abandoned the "down home" persona in his effort to appear intelligent and on top of the Katrina situation.

Bush will receive health coverage, expenses, and salary until his final day of employment. Following a two week waiting period, he will be eligible for $240 a week unemployment for 13 weeks. Unfortunately he will not be eligible for Medicaid, as his unemployment benefits will exceed the allowed limit. Mr. Bush has been provided the outplacement services of Manpower, Inc. help him write a resume and prepare for his upcoming job transition.

According to Manpower, Mr. Bush may have difficulties in securing a new position due to limited practical work experience. A Greeter position at Wal-Mart was suggested due to Bush's extensive experience shaking hands and phony smile. Another possibility is Bush's re-enlistment in the Texas Air National Guard. His prior records are conspicuously vague but should he choose this option, he would likely be stationed in Waco, TX for a month, before being sent to Iraq, a country he has visited.

"I've been there, I know all about Iraq," stated Mr. Bush, who gained invaluable knowledge of the country in a visit to the Baghdad Airport's terminal and gift shop. Sources in Baghdad and Falluja say Mr. Bush would receive a warm reception from local Iraqis. They have asked to be provided with details of his arrival so that they might arrange an appropriate welcome.

Bush (flip) versus Bush (flop)

2005-12-17T18:44:00.000-06:00

Not to beat the flip flop theme to death--serious injury will do fine--but have you been keeping up with the string of Bush versus Bush statements? You know, the ones where Bush was against something before he was for it?

Recent examples:

Bush: I oppose the 9/11 commission.
Versus
Bush: I support the 9/11 Commission.

Bush: We do not torture and I oppose the McCain anti-torture bill.
Versus
Bush: I support the McCain anti-torture bill, it's a fine piece of legislation.

Bush: I do not comment on ongoing criminal investigations.
Versus
Bush: I think Tom DeLay, currently under criminal investigation, is innocent.

I like a man who knows what his positions are and sticks toone whenever it seems convenient. And did you catch his explanation for his Tom DeLay is innocent comment? All of them?

Explanation 1: It's okay to comment on the DeLay case, because it's further along than the Plame investigation.

Followed by widespread ridicule because that's pretty obviously not true.

Followed by explanation 2: The president was simplyexercising his executive prerogative to comment on what hewants to comment on.

Followed by widespread ridicule because, frankly, what the Hell does that mean?

Followed by explanation 3: I never said that I had an opinion that Tom DeLay was innocent. I only meant thatwe're all entitled to a presumption of innocence untilproven guilty.

Followed by widespread cries of give me a break!

That isn't what you said, that isn't what you meant, and it probably won't even be your explanation by next Monday. I have no problem with Bush believing in the presumption of innocence. I have a lot of problems with him believing in the presumption of public gullibility and public amnesia.

Can the English language survive?

2005-12-17T12:18:00.000-06:00

"The vast majority of our imports come from outside the country." - George W. Bush

"If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure." - George W. Bush

"One word sums up probably the responsibility of any Governor, and that one word is 'to be prepared'." - George W. Bush

"I have made good judgments in the past. I have made good judgmentsin the future." - George W. Bush

"The future will be better tomorrow." - George W. Bush

"We're going to have the best educated American people in the world."

- George W. Bush

"I stand by all the misstatements that I've made." - George W. Bush

"We have a firm commitment to NATO, we are a part of NATO. We have a firm commitment to Europe. We are a part of Europe." - George W. Bush

"Public speaking is very easy." - George W. Bush

"A low voter turnout is an indication of fewer people going to the polls." - George W. Bush

"We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur."
- George W. Bush

"For NASA, space is still a high priority." - George W. Bush

"Quite frankly, teachers are the only profession that teach our children." - George W. Bush

"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it." - George W. Bush

"It's time for the human race to enter the solar system."
- George W. Bush

WE HAVE BEEN LIED TO BEFORE

2005-12-17T11:43:00.000-06:00

Ever wonder why government lies to the people? Maybe because they can’t stand to reveal their ineptness or even violations of law. And, probably because most of the time they don’t get caught. Let’s think about a few big lies.

Recently it was disclosed about what happened in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964. (Had a large affect on my life) These documents, now four decades old, seem to confirm that there was no second attack on U.S. ships (USS Maddox and USS Turner Joy) on the 4th of August and that President Johnson ordered retaliatory air strikes against North Vietnam on the basis of intelligence that either had been "mishandled" or "misinterpreted" or had been deliberately skewed by subordinates to provide him the excuse he was looking for to attack North Vietnam. (sound familiar?) A BIG LIE THAT CAUSED OVER 50,000 AMERICANS TO BE KILLED.

And then in 1968 Nixon promised to end the Vietnam War. He did not. He ran on the same premise in 1972, and won again--- got elected twice on the same promise. No doubt he behaved like a cheap swindler. Later he was forced to resign for his bad behavior and lying. HIS BIG LIE CONTRIBUTED TO THE DEATH OF OVER 50,000 AMERICANS.

Then history provided us with the most accomplished liar of recent times. President Ronald Regan could lie and never twitch. His lying contributed to more than 70,000 political killings in El Salvador, more than 100,000 in Guatemala and close to 50,000 in Nicaragua. Remember he called his killers “Freedom Fighters.” He even had the audacity to compare bands of killers to be the moral equal of our founding fathers. And of course history will not forget the Iran-Contra scandal. Remember how we sold stuff to Iran to get money to illegally assist the killers. THE GREAT COMMUNICATOR WAS THE GREATEST OF LIARS.

We can never forget how President Clinton lied to us about permitting an adult young woman to give him a “blow job.” How awful. No one died--in fact this brought joy to the President but terribly offended those whose base of morality is “crotch oriented.” VIOLATIONS OF “CROTCH ORIENTED MORALITY” don’t kill anyone.

Let us come to the present day--George W. Bush does not lie about sex--that we know about. I suppose he lies merely about war and peace. Most particularly he has consistently lied about Iraq's nuclear capabilities as well as its missile-delivery capabilities. He lied about Iraq being a terrorist nation and a threat to the national security of the United States. He has caused thousands of Americans to be killed or wounded in war because of his lying. And he has killed 10’s of thousands of innocent Iraqi’s.

BUT, REMEMBER THIS--HE HAS NOT LIED ABOUT HIS PENIS.

History reveals that we can’t trust our government. They consider us to be idiots and treat us like we are enemies of the nation. Stay tuned for the next big lie. It’s coming soon.

Why Can't We ALL be "Right"?

2005-12-17T11:29:00.000-06:00

For those of you who believe that YOUR religion is the only correct belief: The following quotations are, perhaps, some of the best examples of religious thinking one can find. - most of which predate contemporary Christianity.

The following quotations could provide a challenge for folks to understand other parallels with other faiths which concur with, but pre-date fundamentalist christian dogma and religiosity which occurred long before there was any American Christian belief system, let alone what we call Christianity today in the United States. =

Brahmanism: This is the sum of duty: Do naught unto others which would cause you pain if done to you.: Mahabharata 5:1517

Christianity: All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.: Matthew 7:12

Islam: No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother what which he desires for himself. Sunnah

Buddhism: Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.: Udana Varga 5:18

Judaism: What is hateful to you, do not to your fellowmen. That is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary.: Talmud, Shabbat 31:a

Confucianism: Surely it is the maxim of loving-kindness: Do not unto others that you would not have them do unto you.: Analects 15:23

Taoism: Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss.: T'ai Shag Kan Ying P'ien

Zoroastrianism: That nature alone is good which refrains from doing unto another whatsoever is not good: for itself. : Dadistan-i-dinik 94:5

Why do Christians seem to have this DESPERATE NEED to feel they are the ONLY ones who will go to heaven? This desperate NEED to feel SUPERIOR to EVERY other faith on earth?

Think about it: Would it really be so horrible if ALL of us were right?

Another Timely Quote to Think About...

2005-12-12T20:57:00.000-06:00

"Cowardice asks the question: is it safe?
Expediency asks the question: is it politic?
Vanity asks the question: is it popular?
But conscience asks the question: is it right?
And there comes a time when one must take a position
that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular-
but one must take it simply because it is right"

-- Martin Luther King Jr.

Still Applicable Today....

2005-12-10T18:09:00.000-06:00

"A true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies. A revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast between poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists in the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa, and South America only to take profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say: 'This is not just.'"

- Martin Luther King Jr.

Some Timely Twain (Mark, NOT Shania)...

2005-12-07T21:09:00.000-06:00

"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself
that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception."

~ Mark Twain. The Mysterious Stranger 1916.

More G.W. Jokes

2005-12-07T15:32:00.000-06:00

Campbells announced today that they will be stocking America's shelves this week with "G. W. Soup." It consists primarily of a weenie in hot water.

Chrysler Corporation is adding a new car to its line to honor G. W. Bush. The Dodge Drafter will be in production in Canada this year.

When asked what he thought about foreign affairs, G. W. replied, "I don't know, I never had one."

American Indians nicknamed G. W. "Walking Eagle" because he is so full of shit he can't fly.

G. W. lacks only three things to become one of America's finest leaders: integrity, vision, wisdom.

G. W. is doing the work of three men: Larry, Curly and Moe.

G. W. revised judicial oath: "I solemnly swear to tell the truth as I know it, the whole truth as I believe it to be, and nothing but what I think you need to know."

Bush the "Post Turtle"

2005-12-07T15:19:00.000-06:00

A 70-year-old Texas Rancher got his hand caught in a gate while working cattle. He wrapped the hand in his bandana and drove his pickup to the doctor. While suturing the laceration, the doctor asked the old man about George W. Bush being in the White House.

The old Texan said, "Well, ya know, Bush is a 'Post Turtle.'"

Not knowing what the old man meant, the doctor asked what a Post Turtle was.

The old man looked at him and drawled, "When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a Post Turtle."

The old man saw a puzzled look on the doctor's face, so he continued to explain:

"You know he didn't get there by himself, he doesn't belong there, he can't get anything done while he's up there, and you just want to help the poor dumb bastard get down."

Driving in a Snowstorm

2005-12-07T15:13:00.000-06:00

Suppose you are a passenger in a car on a dark night in the middle of a howling snowstorm. And the driver turns into a one way street -- in the wrong direction -- at full throttle. You alert the driver that he is going the wrong way, but all he says is, "God is on our side. I'll make it go in our way because we have the biggest, best car in the world." It is too dark to look into his eyes and see whether he is stupid or mad.

But all you know is that he steps harder on the gas pedal, as you try to point out the one way street signs pointing in the opposite direction. Meanwhile, as cars swerve to avoid you -- their horns blaring -- you see a massive garbage truck off in the distance heading your way. You frantically warn the driver, but he calmly tells you, "Jesus is with us. I will not change my route."

Well folks, George W. Bush is driving that car -- and we are the passengers.

Something ALL Americans Should Keep in Mind

2005-12-06T11:00:00.000-06:00

“Just as nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances there is a twilight, and it is in such twilight that we must all be aware of change in the air — however slight — lest we become unwilling victims of the darkness.” — William O. Douglas

Some Will Believe Anything

2005-09-24T20:41:00.000-05:00

I have learned that humans can come to believe anything, and to behave passionately and dangerously in keeping with that belief---any belief. While most beliefs are usually about religion I understand that secular beliefs can be just as dangerous if carried to the extreme. That is one reason that Atheism is to dogmatic for me. Agnosticism is a better word to describe me. Deism when thought of as the God of Nature or Natures God has some appeal. Of course I behave like a cultural Christian--that‘s because of exposure.

I live in a world where if I sin (break the law) against the government I am given a trial and if found guilty I am punished accordingly. Maybe for a traffic ticket or some other minor indiscretion I receive a fine. For more serious violations I would receive stiffer punishment. However, some Christians tell me that if I don’t agree with them I will be punished for eternity. That’s a long time for disagreeing. And they also tell me if I agree with them after living this way for many, many years that I will have eternal life. That’s damn egotistical insofar as I’m concerned. What could anyone possibly do to deserve eternal life and second why would they want it? I’ve had a good life and when it’s over it’s over.

With all the different beliefs coming at me from all over the world I think the silliest is the one about a Muslim zealot giving his life for the cause and he will go to heaven where he will be served by 72 virgins. What a surprise if the virgins happen to be 72 large males about 6 foot tall with lots of hair on their bodies and very large penises. Not a good time to get on your knees and pray to Mecca.

When humans no longer exist on this planet, and I seriously believe that day will come, the bugs and worms will be appreciative. Since they were here first for a very long time it would seem reasonable for them to stick around after humans are gone.

I have also learned that politics and religion are two subjects that should be discussed only by intelligent people.

Norm. aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS.

More Words from the Crosseyed Turkey

2005-09-24T20:17:00.000-05:00

WE NEED TROOPS

There is no line at the Recruiting Stations. All the indicators are that all branches of Service will come up short this for their recruiting goals for the year 2005. They will do o.k. during the summer--schools out and jobs are not paying very much for those that have no college plans.

Where are all of those Young College Republicans that adore George W. Bush? I suppose they are filling out their applications for the various fraternities, accepting invitations to homecoming parties and doing job interviews with investment bankers. I don’t know of any of them that are signing up as volunteers to fight in Iraq.

But, don’t worry. Mr. Rumsfeld has a plan. Contractors can do a lot of the work and then he can hire mercenaries in the form of foreigners that are looking for work or even to becoming American citizens. The French did it, the British did it, and the Romans did it because it was the least expensive way to acquire soldiers.

Once in a while someone mentions bringing back the draft. Think about that one. What would the country club Republicans do for their children and grandchildren? Probably send them to Canada--if Canada would take them.

You want to see the streets of the United States run with blood? Just try to implement a draft of the loyal Bush supporting youth of this country. Maybe the churches would help with the Christian crusade by providing their children?

What about my children? Well they both served and are now in their 40’s and have wives and children. They may have turned Republican by now. My wife served and now she is on Medicare--I think she is a Democrat. I did a Navy career and I’m on Medicare. My Grandchildren are still a little young--eldest is a 16 year old girl--she talks like a Democrat.

If volunteerism won’t work and it’s fairly clear there is a big lack of political will to institute a draft, it looks like hiring foreigners is the only road left. So much for patriotism or as Thomas Paine once described them--

"summer soldiers and sunshine patriots."

Or, we could come home. After 20,000 casualties, a civil war, and the price of oil up to near $70.00 a barrel. This policy is a disaster----coming home is something to consider.

NORM. aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS

"Light Bulb Change Accomplished."

2005-09-24T20:05:00.000-05:00

**Notice: For those of you out there who seem to have no sense of humor--this IS a JOKE. (It IS pretty accurate though.) If you "don't think it's funny"--you're either a republican, or your name is probably "Clint"--and either way, that's YOUR problem.

How many members of the Bush Administration are needed to change a light bulb?

A: Ten

1. One to deny that a light bulb needs to be changed.

2. One to attack the patriotism of anyone who says the light bulb needs to be changed.

3. One to blame Clinton for burning out the light bulb.

4. One to tell the nations of the world that they are either for changing the light bulb or for darkness.

5. One to give a billion dollar no-bid contract to Haliburton for the new light bulb.

6. One to arrange a photograph of Bush, dressed as a janitor, standing on a step ladder under the banner: "Light Bulb Change Accomplished."

7. One administration insider to resign and write a book documenting in detail how Bush was literally in the dark.

8. One to viciously smear #7.

9. One surrogate to campaign on TV and at rallies on how George Bush has had a strong light-bulb-changing policy all along.

10. And finally, one to confuse Americans about the difference between screwing a light bulb and screwing the country.

See the light?

A Moral Question to Ponder--

2005-09-20T11:41:00.000-05:00

Where do you stand morally?

This test only has one question, but it's a very important one. By giving an honest answer, you will discover where you stand morally. The test features an unlikely, completely fictional situation in which you will have to make a decision.

Remember that your answer needs to be honest, yet spontaneous. Please scroll down slowly and give due consideration to each line.

THE SITUATION:

You are in New Orleans to be specific. There is chaos all around you caused by a hurricane with severe flooding. This is a flood of biblical proportions. You are photo journalist working for a major newspaper, and you're caught in the middle of this epic disaster.

The situation is nearly hopeless. You're trying to shoot career-making photos. There are houses and people swirling around you, some disappearing under the water. Nature is unleashing all of its destructive fury.

==================================

THE TEST:

Suddenly you see a man in the water. He is fighting for his life, trying not to be taken down with the debris. You move closer. Somehow the man looks familiar. You suddenly realize who it is. It's the President, George W. Bush.

At the same time you notice that the raging waters are about to take him under forever. You have two options-you can save the life of the President, or you can shoot a dramatic Pulitzer Prize winning photo, documenting the death of one of the world's most known men.

=================================

THE QUESTION:

Please give an honest answer.......

Would you select high contrast color film, or would you go with the classic simplicity of black and white?

Norm's Observations on Republican Thought Processes (is that an Oxymoron?)

2005-09-20T11:21:00.000-05:00

It seems that all an individual Republican mind has to do is figure out what other Republicans are thinking, and then they think that way too. I suppose we can call that second hand thinking or even third or fourth hand thinking--another term could be “group think.” If they form a circle and hold hands there is a small chance for original thinking. I doubt they will ever do that.

The last original thought by a Republican leader was by Teddy Roosevelt when he created the National Park system. Let’s see, that was about 90 years ago. Maybe they can come up with something original again in the next 90 years?

The idea of a Republican leader creating something instead of destroying something is highly unlikely. Maybe they could form up a circle and come up with something. Does anyone out there know the scientific term for “circle thinking” or should it be “circular thinking?”

Norm. aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT'S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS

**In reference to republicans, I think calling it a "CIRCLE JERK" rather than "Circular Thinking" is probably more accurate, Norm.**

Don't Pet a Republican (a Timely Warning from Norm)

2005-09-20T11:04:00.000-05:00

BEWARE OF REPUBLICANS AND DOGS

I’ve heard it said, “If you pet a dog you end up with a full time job.” The same sort of behavior can be expected when you agree with a Republican. I suppose that I agree with Democrats about 80% of the time. That does not mean that I agree with Republicans 20% of the time. There are other ideology’s around and issues involved.

I don’t usually mention when I agree with the Republican position or oppose a Democrat position because they (Republicans) get so hopeful that they will claim that I’m turning Republican. They even get excited and may think there is a conversion about to happen. Hell, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. And as an old Marine Gunney Sgt. Told me, “Doc, be careful, even a bad shot will hit a target once in a while.

The Republican spin these days is that the fault of the destruction of New Orleans lies with the Democrat Mayor and Democrat Governor of Louisiana and not with the President. Let’s say that for the purpose of argument that I agree that there is a considerable amount of responsibility for the condition of safety, evacuation, poverty and overall planning by the City of New Orleans and by the State Government. Such a position on my part does not relieve the Federal government of it’s responsibility to the people of the Gulf Coast. The Fed’s responded slowly and with to few people and to little resources.

Even though it was a Democrat idea, I was opposed to the creation of Homeland Security. And it did come into being during the first term of the Bush Administration. I felt at the time that the Bush Administration wanted this because President Bush was overwhelmed by the responsibility for making decisions regarding domestic affairs and a tragedy such as 9-11. I also felt the Republican Party thought this was an opportunity to get a better handled on the politics of the bureaucracies.

It seems my thinking has been right all along. The neo-con’s have infiltrated every bureaucracy with imbedded political hacks. Reports I’ve received and my observations reveal it was the Defense Department that first felt the old Soviet technique of putting a civilian political officer with all of our ranking military officers. It’s been a very noticeable act--whenever one of the military officers appears on television there is a civilian political officer with him/her. Now they are at every level of the Federal Government. I think it’s time to review the old “spoils system.”

The condition of New Orleans was well known to the Federal Government. For many years the domestic situation regarding crime, corruption, poverty, poor education, and topography were well known by the Federal Government. Now that this “wart on the nose” of our nation is exposed to the world some of our “Right-Wing Pundits are trying to lay the blame on the Democrat government of New Orleans and Louisiana. This is ridiculous! They are blaming the poor under-educated people of the city of New Orleans for it’s lack of preparedness for this natural disaster. How dumb do they think the rest of us are?

How about the destruction of the rest of the coastal area? Is that the fault of some welfare state? I don’t think so. How about the damage done to adjoining Plaquemin Parish and Jefferson Parish where the majority of the population is white, educated, and affluent? Is this destruction to be laid at the feet of liberal local government? Come on--this is silly.

I will agree that there could have been much better planning on the part of local governments. That doesn’t mean that I agree with Republican pundits. By the way, how long have Republicans been in charge in Washington? There--think about that.

Norm. aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS.

Wise Quotes from a Very Wise Man

2005-09-20T10:57:00.000-05:00

"A highwayman is as much a robber when he plunders in a gang as when single; and a nation that makes an unjust war is only a great gang."

-- Benjamin Franklin (to Benjamin Vaughan, 14 March 1785)

"It has been for some time a generally received opinion, that a military man is not to inquire whether a war be just or unjust; he is to execute his orders. All princes who are disposed to become tyrants must probably approve of this opinion, and be willing to establish it; but is it not a dangerous one, since, on that principle, if the tyrant commands his army to attack and destroy, not only an unoffending neighbor nation, but even his own subjects, the army is bound to obey? A negro slave, in our colonies, being commanded by his master to rob or murder a neighbor, or do any other immoral act, may refuse, and the magistrate will protect him in his refusal. The slavery then of a soldier is worse than that of a negro!"

--Benjamin Franklin ( to Benjamin Vaughan, 14 March 1785)

I Have a Confession to Make...

2005-09-18T20:29:00.000-05:00

You know, I don't admit it often (and NEVER to a republican), but I occaisionally agree with a republican politician. (Shhhhhhhh! Don't tell anyone! Lol.) Not only that, but I CAN (and often do) give credit where it is deserved--even if the recipient happens to be a republican.

Example: FEMA and our federal government have already given Texas a ton of money "to help find hurricane evacuees employment,etc.". Here in Arkansas, we had some 100,000 evacuees processed through Fort Chaffee. (We STILL have some 60,000 remaining in the state). Unlike in Texas, here in Arkansas many of the evacuees ARE planning to STAY and start a new life. Yet, FEMA and the federal government had (as of a week ago) not given Arkansas a penny to help. (Is our republican administration punishing us because this is the home state of Bill Clinton? lol.)

Anyway, about a week ago, our governor, Mike Huckabee (a republican) picked up the phone, called the president and confronted him about why there was no aid for those evacuees here in Arkansas. The man gets credit from me for that--and I understand there are funds now on the way. I've never particularly liked the man--I don't believe a Southern Baptist preacher has any business in the Arkansas Governor's mansion. (As my grandmother always used to say. "ANY minister who WANTS to enter politics ISN'T a very good minister.")

But here, I think Governor Huckabee did the right thing, and I have no problem saying so.

No, believe it or not, I do not despise ALL republicans--just most of them. Lol. Heck, there was a time when I would vote for a republican or two on the state or local levels--I judge people on their qualifications and whether or not they're doing a good job rather than their party.

I judge them--regardless of party--on the FACTS. That is why I despise this administration so much. It isn't that they are republicans--rather, it is that the FACTS tell me they are NOT doing what is best for my country and its people. The FACTS tell me these people are dishonest, uncaring, and downright corrupt. And if this administration were DEMOCRATS.... well, based on the FACTS I have right now, I would feel EXACTLY the same about them--and I would have absolutely NO qualms about saying so publicly.

That's the difference between the republicans and most democrats I know. Democrats are thinking people. *(As President Bill Clinton put it, "When people THINK, Democrats get elected.") Democrats tend to base their opinions on documented facts. And if the FACTS say that an administration is corrupt, most democrats I know will be the first to say so--EVEN if that administration happened to come from their own party.

The majority of republicans I know, on the other hand, will deny, deny, deny--no matter WHAT the facts say. To them, it seems to be all about the party, and they can overlook ANY wrongdoing perpetrated by one of their own. It requires NO thought on their part to do this.

**It also requires NO thought on their part to go to church and have their pastor TELL them what to believe and who to vote for. (I know...that isn't SUPPOSED to happen in churches in America--it is illegal--but believe me it DOES happen here in Arkansas on a regular basis.)

"Tax and Spend" vs "Tax and BORROW"

2005-09-18T20:20:00.000-05:00

You know folks, I can remember when it was the DEMOCRATS who were referred to as "loving to spend your money". I think these days the REPUBLICANS have more than surpassed them--these people spend more of "our money" than the
democrats ever THOUGHT of spending. AND when they've worked their way through OUR money--why, they just BORROW more.

The most striking difference in the spending habits of the two parties, I think, is the fact that democrats tend to spend "our money" on things that benefit the lower and middle classes in this country--while the republicans spend even MORE of "our money" (not to mention the BORROWED money that our children and grandchildren will be paying back) on things that help ONLY the wealthiest Americans.

Call them "tax and spend" democrats, if you like---but at least the democrats believe in paying as you go. I personally prefer "tax and spend" to "BORROW and spend" ANY DAY.

The Pledge and my Personal "Religious Experience"

2005-09-17T16:06:00.000-05:00

IS the "Pledge of Allegiance" uncontitutional? Well...yes, and no.

Yes, the Pledge, in its current form is indeed uncontitutional. The ORIGINAL Pledge is NOT. All of the "God stuff" wasn't added to the Pledge until the 1950's. So, church folks should REALLY get over themselves and DEAL with the fact that, though they can say the Pledge in it current form in their churches anytime they please, it IS unconstitutional to FORCE that SAME version of the Pledge on PUBLIC SCHOOL children.

The VERY simple solution is--go back to the Pledge as it was ORIGINALLY written (without the references to "God") for the purpose of public schools. If you church folks want to recite the Pledge of Allegiance--"God" and all--in your church services and such, then be my guest.

You know, Jesus said to "render unto Caesar those things that are Caesar's...and those things that are God's unto God." It seems to me that He is saying that God's Law and MAN's Law are (and SHOULD BE) two completely different and SEPARATE things. I believe that's called "Separation of Church and State"--and there it is, right there in the Good Book.

I believe even Jesus knew that Christianity (much like democracy) cannot be FORCED on people by guns, bombs, or threat of death. You have to FIND your OWN way to "God"--and everyone's "way" is different. Neither Christianity nor democracy can be successfully forced down someone's throat if they don't want it, or are not ready for it. In both cases, you have to WANT it.

Thinking about this last night made me think about my own "spiritual experience" as a child. My "religious experience" was a disappointment, quite frankly.

Growing up, my mother had me in church every time the doors were open. When I was 13, I "walked down the aisle" in First Baptist Church in Fort Smith, Arkansas. It wasn't MY church--wasn't even in my hometown. (A group of us were there for some kind to "teen conference" thing.)

I have to admit right here that, I did this TOTALLY to please my mother. At 13, I was at that stage where NOTHING I ever did or said pleased her. This was one thing I KNEW would make her happy--so I went through with it.

Of course, when we returned home, my baptism was arranged for the very next Sunday during the morning service. I had this idea that I would be somehow "changed" after being dunked in that water--but when it was over, I didn't FEEL different. To be honest, I really didn't feel a thing. But my mother was happy for once--so that was okay.

I also think I had this idea that, once I had been baptized and joined the church, the kids I went to church with, (who also attended school with me), would HAVE to treat me differently (read treat me like a human being). THAT didn't happen either. In fact, some of those kids treated me even WORSE after I joined the church.

As it turned out, I felt at least as out of place in my own church as I did in school. (I was too tall, too fat, too smart, and my parents weren't wealthy enough...and in my small town school, you were judged totally according to those criteria.) I was made to feel just as much an outsider in my own church as I was at school.

Needless to say, by the age of 14, I'd had my fill of "organized religion". I decided that I might have to go to school 5 days a week and be treated like dirt--but I'll be damned if I was going to inflict the SAME treatment on myself on the weekends as well by attending Sunday School and church. So, at that point, I stopped attending church at all. From then on, with very few exceptions, I have only set foot in a church to attend a wedding or a funeral. I have probably attended a church service 2 or 3 times over the past 20+ years.

I have not "turned my back" on my faith. I am a believer. I just don't happen to believe I will go to Hell because I choose not to put on a fancy dress and high heels and go sit with a bunch of "sheeple" while a pastor TELLS us what we should think and believe--I prefer to think for myself and interpret the Bible for myself, thank you very much. And I don't NEED anyone to be a "middle man" between "God" and myself--I can speak to "God" on my own ANYTIME and anywhere I choose.

"Welfare State" My ASS!

2005-09-10T23:04:00.000-05:00

I should’ve known it wouldn’t take long for republicans to try to use Katrina and the aftermath as some sort of commentary on “why we should get rid of the Welfare State”. They cite all the “looting , raping, and killing” that is RUMORED to have taken place in and around the city of New Orleans. (These ARE nothing more than rumors, by the way. I have YET to see or hear from ANY witnesses of these crimes. On the cable news channels, all I’ve really seen is people looting diapers, formula, food and water—all necessities for survival.)

Okay, yes, we know there are a lot of bad people in America--some of us were aware of this years ago and it didn't take some 20 years and a major hurricane for us to know it. This isn't the first time we've seen looting in America. We've had riots and looting before...remember the Rodney King verdict?

What went a long way to contribute to the lawlessness in this case is the fact that the poor black people in New Orleans felt they were abandoned and left to die by their government. As Colin Powell just said Friday evening in his 20/20 interview...

"I don't think it's racism, I think it's economic When you look at those who weren't able to get out, it should have been a blinding flash of the obvious to everybody that when you order a mandatory evacuation, you can't expect everybody to evacuate on their own. These are people who don't have credit cards; only one in 10 families at that economic level in New Orleans have a car. So it wasn't a racial thing - but poverty disproportionately affects African-Americans in this country. And it happened because they were poor."

He's right, of course. Shouldn't it be COMMON SENSE that people without money and without cars would have a hard time trying evacuate on their own? So, if we had 48 hours notice BEFORE Katrina made landfall, shouldn't our government have been using that time to send buses or something down there to HELP these people evacuate? Wouldn't that have probably saved quite a few lives?

But instead, this administration sat back and BLAMED the poor folks--who had no money and no transportation-- for not evacuating. We said it was their own fault for not leaving!

I don't think we should use this disaster to argue for getting rid of "the welfare state". If a lot of those people hadn't felt abandoned by their government, maybe there would've been less of this rumored looting, raping, and killing?

I'm not saying there would've been NO crime--as I said before there ARE bad people in America--I'm just suggesting that there might've been less of it had those people been HELPED to evacuate BEFORE they found themselves in the desperate situation they found themselves in after Katrina.

An Idea for the Bushes

2005-09-10T23:01:00.000-05:00

I just received this from a group of friends...thought I would pass it on:

"We think in a good faith demonstration of REAL family values , the Bush family should open up the Crawford Ranch for victims of Hurricane Katrina. There's plenty of room. It's relatively close. and it shows a willingness to do more than a symbolic kissing of babies. We'd like to see this spread around the web as a grass roots movement until it's heard at the Ranch. So spread the word...."

What do you suppose are the chances of that happening?

Hey, I was just thinking: Cheney has a place in Wyoming, does't he? There's not much out there except cattle--I'll bet HE has TONS of room to house hurricane evacuees, right?

They're Coming for YOU Next, Tommy-boy!

2005-09-10T22:47:00.000-05:00

On Thursday, a grand jury indicted a political action committee formed by U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and a Texas business group in connection with 2002 legislative campaign contributions.

The FIVE felony indictments against Texans for a Republican Majority and Texas Association of Business involve the misuse of corporate money to influence Texas elections in 2002. The 2 groups worked together to circumvent the election code and funnel corporate money into campaigns.

Texans for a Republican Majority allegedly illegally accepted a political contribution of $100,000 from the Alliance for Quality Nursing Home Care. (A couple of people involved in this PAC have already been indicted on charges of money laundering, among other things.)

Four indictments against the Texas Association of Business include charges of unlawful political advertising, unlawful contributions to a political committee (Texans for a Republican majority) and unlawful expenditures such as those to a graphics company and political candidates.

No charges have been filed against Tom DeLay himself---YET.

Right now, it seems my dream of seeing Tom DeLay handcuffed and dragged off the Senate floor...in front of God and everyone...might one day soon become a reality!

Tommy-boy better watch his back--they're getting closer! tee,hee,hee! I have my fingers crossed.

Republicans STILL Can't Seem to Find Their Balls

2005-09-10T22:41:00.000-05:00

I watched a Republican Senator from Louisiana on CNN a few nights ago. Paula Zahn was asking him if he really thinks that the head of FEMA (among others) should lose their jobs over this mess in New Orleans. He said DEFINITELY...but not until AFTER the evacuations are completed AND the bodies are collected, etc.

*(Since then “Brownie” has been taken off the job by Chertoff—who isn’t a helluva lot more competent—and sent back to Washington DC. I suspect we will soon hear of Mr. Brown’s resignation as head of FEMA.)

Zahn then worked her way UP the chain of command, trying to find out who in that chain of command the Senator felt were at fault here. I was REALLY disappointed in this Senator, because...just like in every other situation...when Zahn started asking if the PRESIDENT deserved any of the blame, the Senator started to back down...he obviously was afraid to even insinuate that Bush might be culpable in any way! (The typical gutless response from republicans in Congress when it comes to these sorts of things.)

I looked over at my 84 year old father and said, "You know, he would probably gain a LOT MORE respect from his constituents in Louisiana if he would be HONEST and admit that the president DOES share in the blame for this mess. Of course, that will NEVER happen, because somewhere in the past 5+ years, the republicans in Congress have lost their backbones and misplaced their balls."

I was hoping that, if this disaster accomplished ANYTHING positive, that it would cause the republicans in Congress to grow backbones and find their misplaced balls. No such luck.

The more I think about it, I can sort of understand why they are reluctant to impeach George W. Bush. If Bush were booted out of the White House on his privileged alcoholic ass, that would leave —DICK CHENEY—as President.

Now THAT folks, is frightening. THAT thought frightens EVEN the Republicans! Better to have an inept moron in the nation’s highest office than to have someone as evil and conniving as Cheney.

The Erradication of Poverty...or the Erradication of Poor PEOPLE?

2005-09-10T22:34:00.000-05:00

A few days ago, a group of us were discussing the fact that hurricane Katrina has brought to the forefront just how MANY Americans really ARE living in poverty. The poor in this country, after all, have become virtually invisible over the past 5 years or so.

My friend Gerald, an expatriate in Munich wrote…

“If finally citizens and our leaders wake up and instead of tax cuts for the rich develop a comprehensive program to fight and eradicate poverty and inequality that would be long overdue act of responsible government.”

Yes, that would be wonderful indeed. But if John Bolton's first act as our UN Ambassador is any indication it will NEVER happen--at least not as long as the republicans are in control. Mr. Bolton's very first suggestion as UN Ambassador was that they completely scrap the UN program that to erradicate poverty all over the world by 2015. (I guess erradicating poverty isn't something he--or the administration that appointed him---really care anything about.)

Yeah, this administration REALLY likes poor people, don't they? Sometimes, I think they were actually HOPING that Katrina would wipe out all the poor folks in New Orleans--or at the very least make it necessary for them to be relocated. (Kinda reminds me of how they "relocated" the Native Americans when we wanted their land.)That way, the wealthy white folks in the area could rebuild the city the way THEY want it--which, no doubt, means there will be NO low income housing built in the "new" New Orleans.

So many of the poor evacuees who are here in Arkansas right now are talking about STAYING here--many won't ever really be able to afford to move back to New Orleans anyway. (Plus, as I said before, I'm sure there will be NO low income housing built when the city is rebuilt. )

So, I'd say if it WAS their aim to "get rid of" the poor folks in New Orleans--they seem to have succeeded. This was definitely NOT the type of "erradication" of poverty that the United Nations had in mind.

Turnabout is Fair Play, Mr. Cheney

2005-09-10T22:14:00.000-05:00

In the middle of a carefully staged CNN photo op for Vice President Dick Cheney, one Gulfport resident had the guts to wade out into the flood waters just off camera and SCREAM out...

"GO FUCK YOURSELF MR. CHENEY! GO FUCK YOURSELF, YOU ASSHOLE!"

The Secret Service promptly subdued the man, and of course CNN promptly yanked the video off its website--but not before I saw it.

I laughed until I CRIED. And as I laughed (and cried) I wondered to myself if, by chance, Senator Patrick Leahy had seen what I was seeing. If he DID see it, I'm pretty sure he laughed his ass off too.

I'm sure Senator Leahy would probably agree that this couldn't have happened to a MORE deserving guy...and the gentleman's exact words could not have been MORE fitting.

I understand the gentleman, Ben Marble, (a doctor in the Gulfport area) has lost his home and everything he had in hurricane Katrina, and is now auctioning off a copy of this video on ebay. I hope he gets a ton of cash for it.

Quote of the Day...

2005-09-10T22:10:00.000-05:00

"To be poor in America was to be invisible, but not after this week, not after those images of the bedraggled masses at the Superdome, convention center and airport. No one can claim that the post-Reagan orthodoxy of low taxes and small government, which does wonders for the extremely rich, also inevitably does wonders for the extremely poor. What was that about a rising tide lifting all boats? What if you don't have a boat?"

- Eugene Robinson, columnist.
Source: The Washington Post

Leave My Child Alone!

2005-08-24T12:53:00.000-05:00

Did you know...that the infernal "No Child Left Behind Act" has a sneaky Pete section requiring high schools to turn over student information to military recruiters? Yikes. What do we do? Any way you look at it, this is a family privacy nightmare, another strong-arming of our local schools, and a creepy warm-up to the Draft.

Whether you're a parent, teacher, school administrator, veteran or just another adamant American concerned about privacy rights, look on this site for appropriate actions you can take:

http://www.leavemychildalone.org

Adventures in Immigration

2005-08-24T12:43:00.000-05:00

If you are ready for the adventure of a lifetime, TRY THIS:

-*Enter Mexico illegally. Never mind immigration quotas, visas, international law, or any of that nonsense.

* Once there, demand that the local government provide free medical care for you and your entire family.

* Demand bilingual nurses and doctors.

* Demand free bilingual local government forms, bulletins, etc. Procreate abundantly.

* Deflect any criticism of this allegedly irresponsible reproductive behavior with, "It is a cultural U.S.A. thing. You would not understand, pal."

* Keep your American identity strong. Fly Old Glory from your rooftop, or proudly display it in your front window or on your car bumper.

* Speak only English at home and in public and insist that your children do likewise.

* Demand classes on American culture in the Mexican school system.

* Demand a local Mexican driver license. This will afford other legal rights and will go far to legitimize your unauthorized, illegal, presence in Mexico.

* Drive around with no liability insurance and ignore local traffic laws.

* Insist that local Mexican law enforcement teach English to all its officers.

Good luck! You'll be demanding for the rest of time or until you're dead. Because it will never happen. It will not happen in Mexico or any other country in the world except right here in the United States. Land of the naive!

Some Wisdom from my Older Sister

2005-08-24T12:15:00.000-05:00

The following "letter to the editor" of our local newspaper was actually written by my oldest sister, but she was afraid to sign her name because some of the good Christian people in her church might hold it against her. How sad is that?

I have no church that I attend on a regular basis myself, and so, I agreed to sign MY name to the letter and send it along to the local newspaper. I'll be very interested to see if they have the guts to actually print it.

A little background info: We have several folks around here who write in to the "Southwest Times Record" (which I not-so-lovingly refer to as the SWeaTRag) spewing all kinds of vile hateful things about the gay and lesbian community. I live about 4 miles from the Arkansas/Oklahoma border, and so these intolerant redneck jackasses come from BOTH states.

***************************************

Having lived in Texas for 21 years, I thought the dumbest people in the U.S. lived there-- example: the "idiot" living in the White House. I now know some of those people have slipped across the state line into Oklahoma and Arkansas. (The woman from Pocola, OK who thinks there is a conspiracy for the homosexual community to take over the country and molest every child in their path.)

Lady, if you haven't noticed lately, homosexuals are the most open-minded, fair, unbiased, and tolerant people IN this country. When was the last time you heard of a hooded group of homosexuals burning crosses in yards or a drive-by shooting committed by a car load of homosexuals?

HOMOSEXUALS DO NOT MOLEST CHILDREN--PEDOPHILES DO!!!
You know, those people who could live next door to you and even share your ideas.

It is very hard for me to teach forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, and love (things Jesus taught) to me grandchildren when people like you are out there spreading hate.

*******************************************

All I can say is...You GO, Sis!

Pat Robertson: Christian Terrorist

2005-08-24T11:40:00.000-05:00

As everyone who doesn't live under a rock knows by now, Pat Robertson called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on his "700 Club" TV show on Monday.

He made some INCREDIBLY LAME excuse about Venezuela being a "foothold for Communism". He actually used the threat of COMMUNISM! Excuse me but...ummmm...I think the Cold War ended quite a few years ago Mr. Robertson. (He used the "commie" argument, of course, because just last week Chavez was in Cuba, visiting Fidel Castro when he once again spoke out against President Bush's ILLEGAL war in Iraq.)

Does this mean that Robertson will now continue using this tired "Commie" excuse...just as Bush continues to use that "Saddam was involved in 9/11" load of crap? Both hoping that if they repeat it enough, the uneducated and uninformed average American will believe it?

The truth of the matter is that Robertson's call for the murder of Hugo Chavez has ZERO to do with "the spread of Communism", or even "radical Islam". The simple fact is, Mr. Robertson... AND the Bush administration...want Chavez SILENCED. From almost day 1 of this Iraq ivasion, President Chavez has PUBLICLY...at EVERY opportunity...CONDEMNED the actions of the Bush administration. He has called the war in Iraq ILLEGAL. He has called Bush himself a WAR CRIMINAL....and just a few days ago, President Chavez compared the Bush administration to... the MAFIA!

ALL PRETTY DAMNED ACCURATE, IF YOU ASK ME.

I have now seen the Pat Robertson "video" multiple times over the past couple of days. I noticed that he referred to Chavez as a "dictator". That shows how little Robertson knows. Chavez is not a "dictator" but a DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT. In fact, I'd wager that the election of Hugo Chavez was probably MORE legitimate than than the past TWO U.S. Presidential Elections.

**NOTE: My misspelling of the word "Christian" here IS deliberate.**

Isn't it at all disturbing to "Khristian" republicans out there that Pat Robertson...this so-called "man of God"...is calling for another man's ASSASSINATION?! If they were, in fact, REAL "Christians", this would very deeply disturb them, as this is NOT at all the kind of thing Jesus taught.

But of course, most of the rest of us KNOW the truth: that the ONLY "Khristian" issues the GOP is AT ALL interested in are...abortion and homosexuality. And even those 2 issues are, for a majority of "khristian" republicans, more about passing judgement on others and feeling "superior" than anything else. (Passing judgement on others, btw, is something their own "god" commands them NOT to do.)

And when it comes to Jesus' teachings....of forgiveness, acceptance, tolerance, and love...well the Republican Party has NO ineterest in those things at all. They also have NO interest in "helping those less fortunate" or "loving your enemy"...Jesus taught those things as well.

"Khristians" need to look at the bracelet on their wrists...the one that says "WWJD"...
and ask themselves...

What WOULD Jesus do? Would Jesus spew the kind of HATE that is now being spewed by the likes of Pat Robertson? How would Jesus feel about that kind of HATE being spewed "in HIS name"?

Personally, as a liberal democrat who was raised in a Southern Baptist church, I have always believed that...when the "end times" come, there will be a LOT of "Khristian" republicans who will be DAMNED surprised where they wind up.

That's why I always suggest that they be sure to pack their 60 SPF sunscreen: I hear it's damned HOT where they're going.

More of the Wisdom of Norm...

2005-08-22T11:07:00.000-05:00

WE HAVE TO CHANGE

If there is a progression of change in the next 100 years that matches the past 100 years there are going to be a lot of changes. And with an earth populated with about 6.5 billion folks the affect of the change can be overwhelming.

Here in the United States we are approaching 3 million people which is slightly less than 5% of the worlds population. There are going to be changes in the world that can have a negative impact on our few people if we don’t make some changes in the way we think and operate.

Our big problems lie in two main arena’s --politics and religion. We have to have changes in our political methods that are not affected by religion. And we have to have religion that has a positive effect on the changes we will be undergoing. If we don’t do this the United States of America will be a backward nation in 40 to 50 years.

It’s simple reasoning--China has 1.3 billion people and they want things for their people. India has reached 1 billion people and they want better things for their people. They want wealth and happiness. They will need energy, communications, and education. And they seem to be willing and wanting at this particular time in history and I imagine that want will continue.

We have to stop spending our time quibbling about “Intelligent Design” vs. “Evolution” and worry about Mathematics and Science. We have to quit fussing about “prayer in school” and worry about “Reading, Writing, and Arithmetic.” We need to solve the “Social Security” and “Medicare” problems without battling opponents that want to destroy them. We have to recognize that there is a global warming and that it’s going to have serious ramifications whether the warming be cyclical or man made. We have to worry about decent paying jobs before we worry about the return on stock investments. We have to place “human rights” above “property rights.”

I’m willing to participate in a dialogue regarding any of the above if our intention is to solve problems and is not an attempt to impress some particular philosophy or religion upon anyone. I want to hear intelligent comments based on science and logic not on faith alone. Sure we can have faith in many different ways but it cannot stand alone to solve the problems that we will be facing.

Politics are fine as a sport but the system seems to have concerns other than the progress of humanity. And, as for religion, I’ve give up. The zealous behavior of some makes for a dangerous world.

Norm. aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS.

The Pot Calling the Kettle Black? (Again)

2005-08-22T10:47:00.000-05:00

I can't tell you how many times I've been told that I am "giving aid and comfort to the enemy", because I do not support this ILLEGAL invasion of a sovreign nation.

That's why I find THIS particular quote SO interesting. This is what Tom DeLay had to say about HIS OWN "failure to support the troops" in Bosnia during the Clinton Administration:

"You can support the troops but not the president." --Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

Yet ANOTHER case of UNBELIEVABLE hypocricy from the GOP!

Sorry Mr. DeLay, but as my grandfather used to say..."What's good for the goose is good for the gander". This quote of yours is STILL TRUE...no matter PARTY AFFILIATION of the man in the White House.

If *I* am "giving aid and comfort to the enemy"...(whatever the hell that means anyway)....then folks Mr. DeLay was doing the SAME back in 1999. It's just that simple. There's just NO way to spin this to make it otherwise.

Do These Quotes Sound Familiar?

2005-08-21T20:30:00.000-05:00

Here are a few ineteresting quotes to read and think about:

"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years."

--Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

**************************************

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"

--Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

*************************************

"[The] President... is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."

--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

*************************************

"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."

--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

***************************************

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."

--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

***************************************

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning... I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."

--Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

***************************************

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today."

--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

***************************************

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."

--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

***************************************

Sounds like all of these quotes could refer to Iraq, doesn't it?

Nope...They are quotes from when Clinton committed troops to Bosnia!!

I find the last quote...by Governor George W. Bush of TX...particularly interesting.

Why is it that we "needed an exit strategy" when Clinton was in the White House...but for some strange reason, we don't need one NOW?

Also very interesting, is the quote above from Sean Hannity of Faux News, asking how the president is going to explain to the parents of fallen soldiers "why their child had to die".

Excuse me...but isn't this EXACTLY the question that Cindy Sheehan is wanting President Bush to answer for HER?!

Yet now, Sean Hannity and fellow Faux News personality Bill O'Reilly are SMEARING Mrs. Sheehan at every opportunity for DARING to ask that SAME question Hannity himself asked just a little over 5 years ago!

**Incidentally, there are AT LEAST 2 MAJOR differences between Clinton's operations in Bosnia, and Dubya's ILLEGAL invasion of Iraq.

1) Not a SINGLE U.S. soldier was killed in action in Bosnia.

We've lost about 1800 in Iraq so far...and there's no end in sight.

2) We went into Bosnia to stop ETHNIC CLEANSING (like what Hitler was doing to the Jews during WWII...remember WWII?).

We went into Iraq because....ummmmm...well, I honestly don't KNOW why we went into Iraq. There've been about TEN different "reasons" given so far..and I'm sure we haven't heard the LAST one yet.

Isn't it AMAZING how the Republican Party's stance on war changed 180 DEGREES.... how they changed INSTANTLY from "Doves" into "Hawks"...

...based SOLELY on the PARTY AFFILIATION of the president occupying the White House?!

ADMIT IT FOLKS...BILL CLINTON WAS A PRETTY GREAT PRESIDENT IN SPITE OF A ONE TIME THING WITH MONICA, WASN'T HE ?

The Definition of "Service"

2005-08-17T20:53:00.000-05:00

At one time in my life, I thought I had a handle on the meaning
of the word "service". "The act of doing things for other people."

Then I heard terms such as "Internal Revenue Service",
"Postal Service", "Civil Service", "Service Stations".

And I became confused about the word "service". This is not
what I thought "service" meant.

One day, I overheard two farmers talking and one of them
mentioned that he was having a bull "service" a few of his cows.

It all came into perspective.

For National Friendship Week

2005-08-17T20:40:00.000-05:00

Amazing numbers and a great message for National Friendship week:

*NOTE: before anyone goes off to snopes.com to disprove these figures...I KNOW they are no longer EXACTLY accurate. (These figures were obtained a few years back, and so will be a bit off because of population increase since then.) However, I do not believe that these small inaccuracies make the message of acceptance and tolerance in this piece invalid. And so, I am posting it anyway...PUT ON YOUR BIG GIRL PANTIES AND DEAL WITH IT.

If we could shrink the earth's population to a village of precisely 100 people, with all the existing human ratios remaining the same, it would look something like the following:

There would be:

57 Asians
21 Europeans
14 From the Western Hemisphere, both north and south
8 Africans

52 would be female
48 would be male

70 would be nonwhite
30 would be white

70 would be non-Christian
30 would be Christian

89 would be heterosexual
11 would be homosexual

6 people would possess 59% of the entire world's wealth and all 6 would be from the US.
80 would live in substandard housing
70 would be unable to read
50 would suffer from malnutrition

1 would be near death; 1 would be near birth
1 (yes, only 1) would have a college education
1 would own a computer

So, when one considers our world from such a compressed perspective, the need for acceptance, understanding and education becomes glaringly apparent.

The following is also something to ponder...

If you woke up this morning with more health than illness...you are more blessed than the million who will not survive this week.

If you have never experienced the danger of battle, the loneliness of imprisonment, the agony of torture, or the pangs of starvation ... you are ahead of 500 million people in the world.

If you can attend a church meeting without fear of harassment, arrest, torture, or death...you are more blessed than three billion people in the world.

If you have food in the refrigerator, clothes on your back, a roof overhead and a safe, place to sleep...you are richer than 70% of this world.

If you have money in the bank, in your wallet, and spare change in a dish someplace ... you are among the top 8% of the world's wealthy.

If your parents are still alive and still married ... you are very rare, even in the United States and Canada.

If you can read this message, you just received a double blessing in that someone was thinking of you, and furthermore, you are more blessed than over two billion people in the world that cannot read at all.

Someone once said: What goes around comes around.

So, work like you don't need the money.
Love like you've never been hurt,
Dance like nobody's watching.
Sing like nobody's listening.

Live and Demonstrate the enjoyment you feel just being where you are.

Above all, join in, contribute, participate and bring along as many folks who will join you in your celebration of life as you can. And, after you've done all of this, add conservation or our precious earth and all that/who inhabit it and start all over again.

It's National Friendship Week.

It MUST be the NBA, Right?

2005-08-17T20:33:00.000-05:00

Can you imagine working for a company that has a little
more than 500 employees and has the following statistics:

It MUST be the NBA, right?

36 have been accused of spousal abuse

7 have been arrested for fraud

19 have been accused of writing bad checks

117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses

3 have done time for assault

71...repreat 71 cannot get a credit card because of bad credit

14 have been arrested on drug-related charges

8 have been arrested for shoplifting

21 currently are defendents in lawsuits, and

84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last year

Can you guess which organization this is?

Give up yet? ....Scroll down, citizen!

It's the 535 members of the United States Congress.

The SAME idiots that crank out hundreds of new laws each
year designed to keep the rest of us in line.

More of Norm's Words of Wisdom:

2005-07-29T18:11:00.000-05:00

THE REPUBLICAN ERA--BEGINNING OF THE END

The ranting of many Republicans on television, and the print press ( I don’t listen to radio) is near hysterical proportions. You would think they have not won an election in twenty years. For “goodness sake” they are in charge and have been for a long time. They are screaming about the “liberal press” as if they can’t get a word in edgewise to the public. They are near panic.

I think what’s happening is that they realize their day in the sun is coming to an end. The “Ship of State” is like a huge Navy Carrier-- takes a while to turn it around when its going at full speed. The American people are beginning to realize that they have been duped in both domestic and foreign policy direction by the leadership of the Republican Party.

Fringe Republicans--and some of their Democrat supporters are concluding that this Administration is flinging it’s arms in desperation over the Presidents Iraq policy and his failures on the domestic front. Some Conservative’s and Libertarians are beginning to question the policies. Terrorist attacks are increasing all over the world; liberty infringements are increasing in the United States; Administration integrity more questionable every day; increasing energy cost; and in general a public irritation about many things. The beginning of the end has arrived.

The end of this Republican era will come sooner or later and many of us feel it should be sooner rather than later. I’m finding it more difficult to find overt support for this Administration every day. And, I’m out there in the public practically every day conversing with the people in this overwhelming conservative community. Many Republicans don’t want to talk about what’s happening. They are confused and hurt.

Here are a few things that have been happening that are contributing to the mess we have. They are not in any order of importance.

Loss of tax progressivity. (Tax cuts for the rich)

Failure of the minimum wage to keep up with inflation.

Gasoline prices (taking money out of the working class pockets amounts to a wage cut)

Loss of union clout and membership.

Increased deregulation.

The deficit. (Its huge interest payments go to the banking and investor class.)

Increased personal and corporate debt. (Again, interest payments go to banking class and investor class.)

Falling individual welfare benefits.

Increased corporate welfare (which allows exploding CEO pay).

Outsourcing of jobs to other nations

Failure to control illegal immigration

The mis-management of the so-call “War on Terrorism.”

The loss of personal liberty

The loss of respect by the rest of the world

I suggest you add to this list.

The “Ship of State” has sprung a leak and they can’t pump the bilge water faster than it’s flowing in. The ship is running in a circle looking for direction and it’s full of American people that are becoming aware of the distortions that have been imparted to them. Yes, distortions, lies, falsehoods--put it anyway you like--the public is beginning to understand what has been done to them.

This Republican “Ship of State” is likely to sink fairly rapidly. If this ship continues to leak for the next year at the present rate it will be difficult for the Democrats to lose--although they may find a way. And I don’t see any effort on the part of the Administration to stop the leak. Bush can’t change lanes in his race to disaster. The coalition of conservatives, christian zealots, neo-conservatives, libertarians, main street republicans and corporatist is about to fall apart. So be it.

Norm. Walker aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS

DeLay Is At It Again!

2005-07-29T17:35:00.000-05:00

Around 4 a.m. on Wednesday morning, DeLay slipped a $1.5 billion giveaway into the energy bill to big oil companies - including Halliburton and Marathon Oil. This last minute addition to the energy bill will DOUBLE the tax incentives to the richest oil companies of them all, Halliburton and Marathon Oil.

Oil companies, of course are DeLay's largest campaign contributors.

Aren't Senators and Representatives "hired" by the American people, to DO WHAT IS BEST FOR US?! Or, have I gotten that all wrong?

This latest stunt by DeLay is all too typical of how today's corrupt (republican) Congress operates. They got to where they are because the American people trusted them to do what is best for us. Unfortunately, as soon as they get there, they basically turn around and say,

"Screw you! Big business gives me big MONEY! I'm gonna do what THEY tell me to...no matter HOW much it hurts the average American. I don't KNOW any average Americans personally...this doesn't affect anyone I know...so I don't care."

So, where is the ACCOUNTABILITY?! I'll tell you where it is...this is how our republican Congress thinks: They believe in accountability, morals and ethics...but ONLY for democrats.

Here's how it works:

Bush LIES about WMD. Bush LIES about an emplied "connection" between Iraq and 9/11. He even LIES about Iraq "trying to buy enriched uranium for Niger". ALL of these have been PROVEN to be LIES. (And lets not forget the "Downing Street Memo".)

So, what happens to our president for telling these lies that have cost OVER 1700 American soldiers their lives so far?

NOTHING! Nada. Not a damn thing. NO accountability. No consequences.

Karl Rove and Scooter Libby commited TREASON against the United States when they leaked the name of a covert CIA agent to reporter Robert Novak, who then told the entire world who Valerie Plame was.

**By the way folks, if you know your recent history, you might remember that Karl Rove was FIRED from George H. W. Bush's administration...for LEAKING CLASSIFIED INFORMATION. Does anyone happen to remember WHOM he leaked that classified information to? That's right folks...it was his buddy...ROBERT NOVAK! Coincidence? I think not!**

But lets get back to my point. Valerie Plame's name was leaked OVER 2 years ago. What has been done about this so far? What has happened to Rove and Libby as a result of their treasonous leak?

Again, the answer is...NOTHING! No consequences. No accountability.

President Bill Clinton tells ONE LIE. He lies about a PERSONAL MATTER...one that Congress had NO RIGHT to ever ask him about in the first place.

So,what happened to President Clinton because of ONE single lie...which I might add cost NO American lives?

Why, he was IMPEACHED IMMEDIATELY!

What we have here, obviously, is a HUGE DOUBLE STANDARD.

Democrats are required to have morals and ethics..and they can NEVER lie about ANYTHING. Whether it's any of our damn business or not.

Republicans...well, they have no such standards in place for themselves. For them ANYTHING GOES. Lie, cheat, steal all you want...we're in power, so there ARE no consequences. There is NO accountability.

Judge Speaks Out...

2005-07-29T17:31:00.000-05:00

A judge in the case against the 'Millenium Bomber' has some
choice words for the fear mongers...

"..I would like to convey the message that our system works. We did not need to use a secret military tribunal, or detain the defendant indefinitely as an enemy combatant, or deny him the right to counsel, or invoke any proceedings beyond those guaranteed by or contrary to the United States Constitution. ...We can deal with the threats to our national security without denying the accused fundamental constitutional protections. ..."

-- U.S. Western District Judge John Coughenour, while sentencing 'Millennium Bomber', Ahmed Ressam.

A Phishy Parody

2005-07-28T18:51:00.000-05:00

My friend Phishy writes a lot of song parodies as sort of a hobby. Here's his latest about the chimp in the White House:

"IF I ONLY HAD A BRAIN"
(sung to the tune of "if i only had a brain")

i just wile away the hours
avengin' for the towers
intelligence, i feign
and your head, you'll be scratchin'
when you hear the schemes, i'm hatchin'
if i only had a brain

my function is a riddle
i never get to fiddle
i'm not part of the chain
dick and dad do the thinkin'
while i sit here, dumbly blinkin'
if i only had a brain

oh i can tell you why
my input is ignored
i've done stupid things
so many times before
now, they won't let me play no more

my IQ's next to nuffin'
but i must keep on bluffin'
to make you think i'm sane
in iraq, we will tarry
cause its war, that makes me merry
if i only had a brain

We Need MORE Like This!

2005-07-05T14:55:00.000-05:00

My friend Andrew sent this along to me. It was written by the daughter of a friend of his.If we had MORE 20-somethings like this one, George W. would have NEVER been allowed a second term.

The "MTV crowd" seemed to attend and enjoy the concerts put on in support of Kerry and Edwards by folks like Springsteen and REM. Unfortunately, when it came time to follow through at the ballot box....well, most of them didn't even bother to get out of bed.

************************************************************

We need more twenty somethings like this one:

The following was written by a friend of mine's daughter. She is in her late 20's and is very aware of what is going on in our country. What she has to say is stated so eloquently, I felt the need to forward it on.

*********************************************************

Hello All,

I am sure by now everyone knows about the retirement of Justice O'Connor. I imagine that most of you met the announcement with the same feelings of shock,worry and fear that I felt upon reading the news this morning. What does this mean for us? I have heard a countless number of people tell me that the appointment of a new Justice by the Bush Administration is nothing to fear, that there is no possibility that Roe v. Wade will be overturned or that a case will be brought before the Court that will even make that a possibility. We all know this to be completely untrue.

We know what this current administration has done, is capable of doing, and will set out to do in the environment of ignorance, passivity and apathy that is currently infecting our country. And we know that Bush's promise to nominate a Judge guided by the law, and not personal politics, is as true as his vow to lead by the same set of guidelines.

What can we do to affect change and make our voices heard as we wait for the anti-choice Judge Bush will most certainly nominate for O'Connor's vacated seat? We can speak up, loudly and consistently, and we can act. We MUST act.

This is not only about the President appointing a Judge who will be anti-choice, but one who will most certainly reinterpret and redefine many of the vital freedoms we take for granted. This appointment will not result in a series of far-reaching results, but in destructive and resonant decisions that will effect everyone, including the disenchanted and unmotivated generation that failed to make sure that Bush did not see a second term.

We cannot allow this to happen.

Today I received email after email from Planned Parenthood, NARAL, Americans for Democratic Action, the ACLU and on and on. Please get involved with these groups immediately and permanently. Bush is traveling until July 8th, at which time he will return to the White House and begin sorting through the short list of nominees that the men who really run this country will provide him.

We must not allow ourselves to be governed by madmen and presided over by partisan lawmakers. We cannot allow the highest court in our land, one of the last supposed bastions of nonpolitical decision making, to be populated by judges whose allegiance is to the religious right and to a President with no sense of what truly IS right.

Please take one day or night a week to attend a rally, to work in a Planned Parenthood office, to educate friends and family about what a momentous and frightening precipice on which we are standing. And please do not stop after the effects of today's decision wear off and we allow our activism to be defined by listening to NPR and shaking our heads with disgust at every mention of Bush and his cronies. The effects of Bush's nominee will continue on far longer than our passive outrage and intellectual justification for inaction.

This will be a long fall from which we will not recover.

There are some of you who remember what this country was like before abortion was legal. And, sadly, we are all beginning to understand what it is like to live in a country where our rights as individuals are beginning to erode. Do not allow this to continue unchecked. This fight is at our door, it is breathing down our neck and, in this moment, there can be no excuse for not getting involved.

If you cannot donate time, please donate money. Countless organizations will need donations as we step up the fight to make sure a judge of integrity, intelligence and a nonpartisan agenda is placed in O'Connor's vacant seat. We have the wrong person in the office of the President, lets make absolutely sure we have the right person in one of our highest seats of judicial power.

I know most of you have read these kind of pleas from me before, asking you to get involved, and that my tendency towards hyperbolic rhetoric can make them easily dismissible. And I know right now it feels as if we don't have the power to effect change. Don't believe it.

This is a clear, and urgent wake up call and we cannot allow the Bush administration to convince us that we have no say, no power, no authority to steer this country in the direction that it should go. There is nothing we can do today to change the current administration, but there IS something we can to to prevent it from further destroying our rights as citizens and as human beings. Please stand up, speak out and get involved.

-Emily

Here are some sites you can go to find out ways to get involved.

www.plannedparenthood.org
www.adaction.org
www.aclu.org
www.naral.org
www.moveon.org

Don't Apologize for Diversity

2005-07-03T10:39:00.000-05:00

Here's another thing I wish the Democrats would stop apologizing for: the way we embrace diversity. Diversities of peoples, of cultures, of ideas...and yes of course of opinions. We're accused of not always speaking in a unified or organized voice. To borrow from the kids, "well, duh." Sure, we're not in robotic lockstep like the Republicans right now. Thank the Lord.

So hooray for the voice of Howard Dean. It's one of many and presents a dynamic that must be part of our equation. Do I always agree with him? No. Does he even embarrass me at times? Sometimes. Do I think his voice is critical to the recovery of the Democratic Party and in the larger picture, this country? Absolutely.

So, fellow democrats, lets STOP apologizing for being free-thinkers...for having a mind of our own and using it. I'm through apologizing for being well-educated. "God" created us all with a free will and a brain...and He expects us to USE THEM!

Comments on the President's Speech...

2005-07-03T10:28:00.000-05:00

THE PRESIDENTS SPEECH

I’ve noticed, over several years, that when a President of the United States starts getting unfavorable polling numbers they head off to a military base to make a speech. The Commander-In-Chief aspect of their job makes for support when they are with the troops. Security is also a lot easier. And if you are a George W. your propaganda is more apt to be accepted on a military base than in Home Town, America.

I watched the Presidents speech and I listened carefully. If he truly believes the stuff he said he is dumb. Otherwise he is lying--big time. Of course he could be a willing dupe and be both dumb and a liar.

I normally don’t listen to anything “W” has to say. He opens his mouth and my resentment arises immediately. I have always thought of him as a disgusting individual.

If he expects me to believe that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 he is demented. And if he believes I agree with him on any matter he is living in an surrealistic atmosphere. The one item that I could approve of was the attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan--he mentioned only twice. I wonder why? George W. Bush will leave a legacy of lies to the Presidency. His deceptions and 19th Century political views will paint him as the worst President in modern history. When true Historians, instead in Republican pundits, evaluate his performance my Great Grandchildren will have a picture of a bad man. It’s highly likely that other parts of the world will label him a criminal.

The idea that “W” is a great War-Time Leader is repulsive to millions of us. His disgraceful description of his war time successes reveals his betrayal of the American people. No doubt he should be impeached and removed from office.

I noticed in this mornings news that the President received no bounce in the polls for his speech. Maybe, just maybe the American people are catching on to the real “W”. And maybe, just maybe the troops are catching on. No doubt if we had a decent Congress he would be impeached and removed from office.

Bush can speak and speak and speak and to little avail. He is a liar and a crook and the majority of The American people are becoming more and more aware of his deliberate action to deceive them. He cuts taxes for the rich and raises the price of oil for his contributors.

He calls the insurgents in Iraq terrorist. I call them participants in a civil war. They want their country back and they want to sell their oil. Bush wants their country and their oil. He wants a Market Economy and they want a Socialist Economy. He wants them to be Christians and they want to be Muslims. The United States attacked Iraq--Iraq did not attack the USA-- and Iraq has not been and cannot be a threat to the United States.

IMPEACH BUSH

W” is an embarrassment to my country.

Norm. Walker aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY

PEACE MAKERS OR WAR MAKERS?

2005-06-27T19:50:00.000-05:00

More from my friend Norm:

PEACE MAKERS OR WAR MAKERS?

It’s Sunday and it’s been very quiet for me this Father’s Day. Norma took me to breakfast at “Cracker Barrel” early this morning. I watched a couple of news shows on the television and read the Sunday paper. I listened to some talking heads and some religious folks for a few moments and the following occurred to me.

First, let’s me be very up front with any reader of this material. I am not a practicing Christian. I’m of the opinion that Atheism and Agnosticism are far to dogmatic for me. I don’t pretend to have any understanding of supernaturalism. So classify me as you wish.

My beliefs are based on a lifetime of observation of human conduct. No doubt, they have been heavily influenced by a culture dominated by Christianity. That is why, at times, that I refer to myself as a Cultural Christian. I was taught to understand the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Let me assure you that my understanding does not include the views of many of today’s Christians that support our governments behavior. And don’t start thinking that I’m opposed to all wars. I was a career Navy man and have been exposed to more than one production of propaganda. I assure you that association with the warrior class does not make one a lover of war.

I was taught that Christ was for peace. In other words Christ was opposed to war. I was taught that Jesus said: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God" (Matt. 5:9).

I have no intention of trying to tell Christians what their religion teaches, they should have some understanding of that themselves. However, I soundly reject the teaching that a war on terrorism takes precedence over ethical and legal norms. Terrorism should cause us to have greater concern about these matters.

Some things ought never be done : torture is wrong and not a productive way to obtain the truth. The accidental killing of innocent people (collateral damage) during the deliberate destruction of property of the enemy is wrong. Using weapons and methods that cause indiscriminate killing is wrong.

I reject the teaching that America is a "Christian nation," representing only virtue, while its adversaries are nothing but vicious. I have traveled far too much to many nations and had relations with too many people of other nations to believe that all of them are evil people. People of other nations love their spouses, their children, and their families just as much as people of this country--sometimes I think more so.

I reject the teaching that any human being can be defined as outside the law's protection. I reject the demonization of perceived enemies, which only paves the way to abuse; and I reject the mistreatment of prisoners, regardless of supposed benefits to their captors.

I reject the teaching that those who are not for the United States politically are against it or that those who fundamentally question American policies must be with the "evil-doers." People of other nations of the world are not inherently evil because they live in a particular place.

If Jesus is the big authority for Christians then they should stop being so disobedient and quit spreading the junk that our government and our country is behaving in a Christian way toward the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course I’ve been accusing Christians of being hypocritical for a long time and they are doing nothing at this time to convince me otherwise. They use Jesus to support their particular views when it suits them.

It’s very clear that Iraq was not a threat to their neighbors. They did not possess weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was not and never has been a threat to the United States. Iraq was not the home of any of the people that attacked the United States.

We have been lied to by people that call themselves Christians. They make me ashamed of my government. They are abusing our military personnel. They are abusing the future citizens of this country by amassing a great debt to fight an illegal war. And Christians are praying for this sort of behavior? Why?

Norm. Walker aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS

More Words of Wisdom from Norm

2005-06-27T19:42:00.000-05:00

Senator Durbin acted like another weak-kneed liberal when he issued an apology on the floor of the Senate regarding his words about GITMO. Damned if I would have done that. He should have stood his ground and let the Republicans piss and moan. I'm not backing down a damn bit about anything I say that may offend a Republican. They deserve it.

And don't tell me that our troops don't abuse prisoners. Hell, they even abuse our own troops that are in the brigs around the military. How do I know this? I provided health care to those prisoners. I griped about it then and I'm griping about it now. Human beings don't deserve to be physically and mentally abused. And the fact that the enemy sometime in the past has done so is no goddam excuse. We don't lower ourselves to the conduct of the enemy. It's Un-American and the Republicans can go to hell.

I'm sick and tired of a bunch of mealy mouth Democrats sucking up to every right wing nut in this country. So we lose elections--we shouldn't lose our principles. Eventually the people will catch on that when a Republican mentions reform--he really means destroy.

Howard Dean is doing the right thing. And it don't make any difference who the Democrat candidate may be--the Republicans will spend a great fortune lying about them--and I do mean lying.

George Bush does remind me of Benito Mussolini and that's a fact and I'm sticking to it. And the Iraqi insurgency does remind me of the Algerian insurgency against the French. And history is full of very good reasons why we should never have went to Iraq and why we should get out now.

Norm. aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT'S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS.

That's tellin' em Norm!

Rove Should be FIRED!

2005-06-27T19:31:00.000-05:00

Hey, has anyone else noticed that REPUBLICANS can say whatever the hell they want...whether it's based in fact or not....and NO ONE insists they apologize?!

Did Senator Leahy ever get an apology from Cheney? I don't think so. And Cheney's comment showed LESS class than anything I think I've ever heard from ANY politician...of ANY party. Shouldn't the PRESIDENT of the SENATE have a little more CLASS than to tell a US Senator to "go F- himself"? Honestly!

And that snide comment about "therapy and understanding after 9/11" that Rove made about the democrats....using an event in recent history that profoundly affected ALL Americans...of BOTH parties...just to score cheap political points? That is just dispicable...and if ANYONE needs to apolgize, it's Rove.

But it will NEVER happen....because NO ONE demands accountability from these people! No accountability for what they SAY ...no accountability for what they DO.

**(It isn't JUST the democrats who need to grow a backbone folks...the republicans in Congress who KNOW that what this administration is doing is WRONG...and don't have the BALLS to DO something about it are even WORSE!)

Rove's comment should SHOW the American people exactly what the Neocons think about "caring about others"...they think the idea of compassion toward other human beings is for "pussies".

That being said, it seems to me that people like Bush, Cheney, and Rove have SOME NERVE claiming to be "christians".

"Compassonate Conservatives" MY ASS!

What is the Definition of the Word "IS"? Deja Vu?

2005-06-27T19:24:00.000-05:00

With the Downing Street Memos being made public, the GOP seem to be taking a page from the Bill Clinton playbook as asking..."What the definition of 'FIX" is". They seem to think that the word "fix" means something different in Britain than it does in the US.

These same folks are now making requests that they think may "help them understand the definition of 'fix' "..."namely, that Blair produce the former intelligence chief and the drafter of the minutes of July 23, 2002 for a news conference or open parliamentary session and let reporters or legislators pursue clarification." ....

This has GOT to be a joke, right? I mean, reporters and legislators can't POSSIBLY be SO stupid that this would actually be necessary...can they?

I think they are just so DESPERATE to NOT believe their beloved Chimp-in-chief has LIED to them that they'll come up with ANYTHING to excuse it. ("Duuuhhh...well, maybe 'fixed' means something different in English than it does in American?" ) Puh-LEEZ folks...we speak the SAME laguage!

As Col. Patrick Lang, USA (ret), said folks...."Fixed is fixed, man."

I think that's pretty self-explanatory, don't you?

Women in Combat

2005-06-27T19:11:00.000-05:00

After a bunch of female soldiers were attacked in Iraq a few days ago, the trained Chimp in the White House said over the weekend that "we do not assign woemn to the front lines".

I have to say, that's one of the most moronic things I've ever heard come out of this man's mouth in a while. This one might just make my top ten list. Why? Well, think about it...

Exactly where ARE the "front lines" in Iraq and Afghanistan? In Iraq, much of the fighting is occurring in the city streets. Then there are the roadside bombs and the suicide bombers. This is NOT a conventional war by ANY means.

That being said, aren't the "front lines", WHEREVER there are insurgents with weapons....and that's pretty much EVERYWHERE, isn't it? So, it seems to me that if we want women OFF the "front lines", the only way to accomplish that would be to...send them ALL home, right?

That's not even what bugs me the most about women in combat though. Ya know what bugs me *most* about women being over there at all? It's the fact that there are families here in the US where BOTH mother AND father are in Iraq now...at the same time. The kids are with grandparents or whatever. I'm sorry, but I don't think that should EVER happen.

Enron's Fastow (sp?) and his wife were allowed to serve their prison time CONSECUTIVELY "because of the children". (The wife served 11 months of a year sentence first...then when she was released, her husband went in to serve his time.) If this couple were MY parents or yours...they'd have BOTH gone into the slammer at the SAME time...to hell with "the children". In anyone else's case, the children would've gone into the foster care system. Just goes to show you what MONEY...even STOLEN money...can buy you in the courtroom, doesn't it?

Anyway, back to my original point: If we can allow the Fastows...(who stole MILLIONS from Enron stockholders and employees)....to do this to accomodate their children, then WHY can't our military "accomodate" our soldiers (male and female) and allow ONE parent to stay home while the other serves their tour of duty BEFORE sending the other parent?

Anyone have an answer for that one?

Republicans and Ethics

2005-06-27T19:04:00.000-05:00

It absolutely amazes me just HOW blinded to the truth republicans really are....and the worst part is, they CHOOSE to wear those blinders. What Moyers said in his recent speech was absolutely the truth...

"Ideologues don’t want you to go beyond the typical labels of left and right. They embrace a world view that can’t be proven wrong because they will admit no evidence to the contrary."

You know those people out there who believe that "it's ONLY racism if it's against blacks"? Those people who actually believe that if they refer to white people... and Asians... and Native Americans... and Latinos with nasty racial slurs that it isn't racism? But if anyone EVER says the "N-word"...well THAT is racism?

Well, there seems to be a similar thing going on when it comes to republicans and ETHICS. They seem to believe that "ethics only matter when it involves sex" (as in Clinton's affair with an intern). But when it comes to Tom DeLay, who has broken numerous Texas State Laws...well, "that's really no big deal". When their Chimp-in-chief LIES to them about his reasons for this illegal and unjust war...well, "that's no big deal" either. They seem to believe that the end justifies the means and lying is perfectly acceptable...but ONLY if you happen to be a republican.

Another perfect example of what I'm talking about here: Mark Felts came out and admitted some weeks ago that he was indeed Deep Throat. Now keep in mind, this whole thing happened some 30+ years ago. The FIRST thing I hear on TV is Pat Buchanan calling Felts a TRAITOR! He has some nerve, don't you think?

I submit that, had Nixon been a DEMOCRATIC president, Mr Buchanan would be calling Felts a HERO...and the ONLY fact that would've changed in the case would've been the party affiliation of the president. This shows you just how willing republicans are to IGNORE COMPLETELY any corruption or lies coming from one of their own.

Dick is a WHINER...neener, neener, neener.

2005-06-16T18:57:00.000-05:00

Here are a few exerpts from a recent news story I read. This is EXACTLY the kind of BULLSHIT I was talking about in my last post! Note how Cheney's "responses" have NO basis in fact. Rather, they are like insults hurled on the schoolground. (My comments are in blue below.).....

*********************************

"Howard Dean is "over the top," Vice President Dick Cheney says, calling the Democrats' chairman "not the kind of individual you want to have representing your political party."

***Oh yeah...and Tom DeLay IS?! Puh-Leez! And what about Mr. Cheney himself?! It doesn't take a whole lot of class to tell a senator to "go fuck himself" does it? Is MR. CHENEY himself REALLY "the kind of individual you want to have representing your political party"?! ***

"I've never been able to understand his appeal. Maybe his mother loved him, but I've never met anybody who does. He's never won anything, as best I can tell," Cheney said in an interview to be aired Monday on Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes."

***The above is nothing more than a junior high attempt at an insult...and as MOST of what comes out of Mr. Cheney's mouth tends to be...it is also BLATANTLY FALSE! GROW UP Mr. Cheney!***

Dean was elected governor of Vermont five times between 1992 and 2000.

***Hmmm...elected Governor FIVE TIMES. Seems to me someone BESIDES "his mother" loves him. Five times...hmmm...isn't FIVE the number of DEFERMENTS YOU got while the Viet Nam War was going
on, Mr. Cheney? ***

In recent weeks, Dean has described the GOP as "pretty much a white, Christian party" and said many Republicans have "never made an honest living." Republican leaders have called on him to apologize, and even some Democrats have distanced themselves from his remarks.

**Oh yeah...well it happens to be TRUE, which is more than I can say for anything that comes out of DICK's mouth!

Oh, and BY THE WAY Mr. Cheney...Howard Dean had also served competently in the Vermont House of Representatives AND as the Lieutenant Governor...so, I think quite a few MORE people than just his mother "love him".**

"So far, I think he's probably helped us more than he has them," Cheney said in the interview taped Friday.

**I wouldn't count on that Mr Cheney.**

"That's not the kind of individual you want to have representing your political party."

**Again, I have TWO words for you here Mr. Cheney: "Tom DeLay".**

***************************************

In conclusion, I have some advice for BOTH parties:

For those democrats described here as "distancing themselves" from Dean...

FOR GOD'S SAKE GROW A FREAKIN' BACKBONE!!!

And for all you WHINEY republicans out there...

THE TRUTH HURTS...PUT ON YOUR BIG GIRL PANTIES AND DEAL WITH IT!!!

Howard Dean Apologize? Don't You Dare!

2005-06-16T18:47:00.000-05:00

Recently, there's been feigned outrage from the GOP because Howard Dean referred to the Republican Party as a party of "White Christian Males". There are folks actually demanding an apology! To those folks I say...DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH!

Why is it that republicans seem to say whatever the hell they want about democrats...no matter HOW uncalled for...whether it is actually TRUE or NOT...and NO ONE asks them to back down or apologize...EVER? Yet, Howard Dean is expected to back down and even apologize for his recent comments about the Republican Party? I don't think I ever heard Mr. Cheney apologize after telling Senator Patrick Leahy to "go fuck himself"....and that shows a hell of a lot LESS class than ANYTHING Howard Dean has ever said.

I guess it has been assumed for SO long that WE are the "nice guys"...the "good guys" who never offend anyone...even though they may desperately DESERVE to be offended. I sincerely hope that Howard Dean is about to change that. I have long felt that the Democratic Party needs to start calling things as they see them, and NOT apologize for it. I have long felt that we needed to learn to FIGHT BACK....after all, in most cases fighting DIRTY really isn't even necessary. The majority of the time, the FACTS are on our side already.

So, to all you GOP jerks out there, let me just say...

NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!

"Defending our Country"?! ..."Fighting for our Freedom"?! REALLY?!

2005-06-03T15:00:00.000-05:00

I know as I write this that some folks are going to be very upset with me. They will call me "unpatriotic" and probably a few things that are even worse. But this has bugged me for quite some time now, and I'm going to say it anyway.

Let me say first that I have the utmost respect for our men and women in uniform. They are doing their duty... which is to do what their Commander-in-chief orders them to do. They do it without complaint. They do it even though I'm quite sure some of them don't agree with what's being done. They serve honorably and you have to recognize that.

Having said that, let me just say that if I hear one more TV news anchor say that our military men and women are in Iraq "fighting for our freedom" or "defending our country"...well, I'm just going to scream!

Can someone please explain to me how it is that they are "defending our country"? In reference to our men and women in Afghanistan, that phrase would apply. Iraq, however, is not-- nor has it ever been--a threat to the U.S. Not one of the 9/11 hijackers was from Iraq. The WMD our president claimed Saddam possessed have been shown never to have existed. So, where exactly was the threat?

I also find it ironic that people say our military is in Iraq "fighting for our freedom". Our "freedom" was never in jeopardy as far as I can see--at least, it wasn't until AFTER 9/11. That's when our freedoms started being slowly eroded away-- not due to any threat from Iraq.-- but rather, via our own Patriot Act.

It seems to me that the US is it's own worst enemy.

A Riddle...

2005-06-01T09:38:00.000-05:00

Can you guess the name of this person? This person...

1) When young, put firecrackers in the mouths of frogs and watched, with glee, as the frogs exploded.

2) Chased younger, smaller siblings around the house with a BB gun.

3) Got Cs in college, thinks it's funny.

4) Boozed and took drugs, hung around pools and chased girls (getting at least one pregnant and providing her the money for an abortion).

5) Used the National Guard to avoid being drafted and sent to fight in a war he could care less about - Vietnam.

6) Used booze and drugs until he got grounded from flying.

7) Left the Guard without permission to "work" on a political campaign, but came in late every day and annoyed the real workers.

8) Stayed drunk until the age of 40.

9) Had Dad and Dad's friends get him four consecutive jobs running four companies...ALL of which he ran into the ground.

10) Became governor of a big state.

11) Became president of the United States, Declared war for the hell of it.
Became Ruler of the World.

Of course, this MIGHT not work for everyone. There are a few elements missing here:

1) You would have to be born into a rich and powerful family that has NO scruples about anything.

2) You also must be free of ethics, morality or honesty. You must "understand" that only suckers play by the rules of honesty, decency and fairness.

3) You must reject all of those silly notions, portray yourself as a religious person (oops, I almost choked on that one), be willing to punish anyone who gets in your way, not let anything interfere with your passion for destroying the American middle-class and, lastly, never admit error or tell the truth.

Of course, the person described here is...GEORGE W. BUSH.

MORE Republican LIES...

2005-05-18T23:15:00.000-05:00

The GOP is now running political ads in Arkansas and Oklahoma about 2 of Bush's judicial nominees (women) that the democrats refuse to confirm. It tries to make democrats sound sexist. This commercial ALSO makes the claim that there is a "crisis on the bench"...that there are SO many empty judgeships that "thousands of people's cases are being delayed".

The truth is, Democrats have confirmed OVER 200 of Bush's nominees...they have only refused TEN. Clinton's nominees didn't fare NEARLY that well in a republican-controlled Congress. In fact, if I remember correctly, there were nearly 200 empty judgeships during Clinton's administration...now, I'd say THAT was a crisis, wouldn't you? Well, at the time, republicans insisted that it WASN'T a crisis.

When Senate Majority Leader Frist insists that "the fillibuster has NEVER before been used against a judicial nominee", is he knowingly LYING...or is he just STUPID? And which is worse? If it was a LIE, then it was a pretty BIG one, as not only was it USED against a judicial nominee, it was used against a nominee for CHIEF JUSTICE....and by Frist's OWN PARTY.

Anyone remember Abe Fortas? 1968? Not just ANY judicial nominee...he was nominated for CHIEF JUSTICE of the SUPREME COURT by LBJ. Remember what happened to him? If I'm not mistaken that nomination was...ummm...defeated by a fillibuster. That fillibuster was carried out by....the REPUBLICANS.

The Roots of Violence:

2005-05-18T23:12:00.000-05:00

"Wealth without work, Pleasure without conscience, Knowledge without character, Commerce without morality, Science without humanity, Worship without sacrifice, Politics without principles."

Mahatma Gandhi: Indian leader, 1869-1948

Quotes for our Chimp-in-Chief to Consider

2005-05-18T23:08:00.000-05:00

"If you love peace, then hate injustice, hate tyranny, hate greed - but hate these things in yourself, not in another"

- Mahatma Gandhi

"Deeds not words"

- Motto 22nd Infantry Regiment

"The ordinary man, we have to face it: it is every bit as true of the
ordinary Englishman as of the ordinary American is an Anarchist. He wants to do as he likes. He may want his neighbor to be governed, but he himself doesn't want to be governed."

-George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)

An Open Letter to Senator Frist and the GOP

2005-05-18T22:40:00.000-05:00

Senator Frist, I do not believe you are doing what is best for this country. I believe instead that you are making a CAREER decision...you want to be president someday, and think this is a good career move. It doesn't even seem to matter to you that the majority of Americans are AGAINST ending use of the filibuster.

You seem to have ZERO foresight when it comes to this issue. As both Senator McCain AND Newt Gingrich have said repeatedly, you will NOT always be in the majority. (History tells us you won't.)

When the democrats take back control of Congress (and they undoubtedly WILL), will you then whine about how "YOUR minority voice is being silenced"?

Democrats have had many many opportunities over the years to do what you're trying to do...but they never did it. Why? Well, I believe that is because THEY know it is WRONG no matter WHICH party does it. Silencing the minority voice goes against EVERYTHING our founding fathers stood for, and you KNOW it. It was wrong THEN...and it is WRONG NOW.

If you go ahead with this despicable scheme, I hope we voters give Congress back to the democrats in 2006. And when you start to whine about how your "minority voice is being silenced", democrats can say "TOUGH SHIT GUYS...YOU DID THIS TO YOURSELVES."

**BTW, if that trained Chimp residing in the White House REALLY wanted to "work with the democrats", he would find some QUALIFIED judicial candidates instead of sending the SAME ones BACK that have already been rejected before.

One of the nominees you insist on forcing through, Pricilla Owens, has been criticized REPEATEDLY by your OWN Attorney General, who referred to her as an activist judge. (and I think that was one of the nicer things he said about her.)

Another of these female nominees described Social Security as "grandparents CANNIBALIZING their grandchildren"! That sounds pretty damned radical to me.

Your nominee for US Ambassador to the UN has said REPEATEDLY that he despises the UN with every fiber of his being. What's more, he's a complete jackass and treats everyone he works with like garbage. As Senator Voinovich stated..."If Bolton worked for a private corporation, he would've been FIRED." Personally, I would go so far as to say that Mr. Bolton would have a hard time holding a job in the private sector AT ALL with the kind of behavior he has exhibited.

Bottom line: If you want your nominees CONFIRMED, maybe you should think about sending people who are actually QUALIFIED for the positions. God knows, Kindasleazy Rice has ZERO qualifications to be Secretary of State. She is certainly NO Madeline Albright...not even close.

Impeach Bush!

2005-05-13T12:46:00.000-05:00

**More words of wisdom from my friend Norm**

IMPEACH BUSH? YES!
By Norm. Walker

I’m glad to have some time to make some political comments. I’m not out of the game--just busy with some other matters.

There is no doubt in my mind that George W. Bush has committed impeachable offenses of the highest nature. His deception regarding the invasion of Iraq will go down in history as one of the worst moves of any President. Ignorance is not an impeachable offense nor is it against the law. However, the gutless Congress we have should be doing something to rein in this goober-head.

President Bush represents views of people that are clearly out of touch with science, economics, and modern government. They are throwbacks to the 1920’s. His proposals regarding Social Security are wrong and they are not made to reform--they are made to destroy.

His foreign policy is totally out of touch with reality. He practices imperialism while voicing democracy. Most of the world despises him. He ignores unilateral opportunities with North Korea. He encourages illegal immigration from Latin America. He supports the policies of sending American jobs overseas in support of cheap labor.

Of course we can’t overlook the energy problem here in the United Sates. And his oil company buddies are making more money than ever. He is working to dismantle a lot of our environmental protections. He practices excessive secrecy and promotes government propaganda to deceive the American people.

The President is destroying our Army. I see it nearly every day. It is stretched very thin. The Reservist and National Guardsmen are quitting at every opportunity. How do I know this? I talk to them. They tell me. They are disgusted with the Administration and with many of the senior Officers that continue to suck up to an incompetent Commander in Chief.

In my young days I was told that God looked after drunks and sailors. Let’s add one more-----President George W. Bush.

I say he still deserves impeachment. A low life if ever there was one to occupy the White House.

Wake Up America!!!

2005-05-12T22:37:00.000-05:00

OK ....

The world now has proof:

Our former Secretary of State has said publicly that he presented the U.S. "cause de guerre" using false documentation he was told was factual and truthful, but which he now knows was neither.

The Bush administration ignored facts and misrepresented factual intelligence information regarding (1) trucks and facilities which the world was led to believe were solely for the purpose of manufacturing and storing WMDs in the form of biochem and nuclear arms, (2) aluminum tubing was mis-identified purposely to "inform" the world that Iraq was seeking and continuing to build its nuclear arms capability ...

Of course we know far more now than we did back in 2002-2003. And, what we know now are truths about the deception, the fabrication, the illegal decisions and activities that occurred behind the scenes to create the impression that the United States and other nations were about to be attacked by "terrorist and Iraqi hordes."

Wake up America!!! We have a President and his administration acting outside the laws of the United States and, in fact, outside international humanitarian and diplomatic laws of the world. Your President, by his attitude and his actions, has established the United States as a rogue nation operating blatantly outside our domestic and international law.

This should not be acceptable, and should be grounds for impeachment at a minimum.

Can IMPEACHMENT be Far Behind?

2005-05-09T14:19:00.000-05:00

For at least 3 years now, I have been saying that the CIA and its British counterpart, MI-6, were ordered by their countries' leaders to "fix facts" to "justify" an unprovoked war on Iraq. Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, and former National Security Council official Richard Clarke were saying it as well...but the U.S. Media has largely ignored this story in favor of celebrity trials and affairs.

Now...at long last...the London Times has reported there is documented PROOF! The London Times report, is based on a newly discovered document, that in 2002 British Prime Minister Tony Blair chaired a meeting in which he expressed his support for "regime change" through the use of force in Iraq and was warned by the UK's top lawyer that such an action would be illegal. Blair also discussed the need for America to "create" conditions to justify the war."

Now Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) has authored a letter calling on President Bush to answer questions about a secret U.S.-UK agreement to attack Iraq...and so far Eighty-eight members of Congress have signed on to it.

I would like to think that impeachment cannot by far behind, but I seriously doubt the Bush administration will even bother to answer to these charges. (They just figure if they keep on lying...if they tell the lies enough times...then it will just magically become true.) Unfortunately,
I honestly don't think the majority of republicans in Congress have the backbone or the balls to insist on accountability from this administration.

Here's a copy of the letter sent to the president by 88 members of Congress, demanding answers:

May 5, 2005

The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States of America
The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue,
N.W. Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We write because of troubling revelations in the Sunday London Times apparently confirming that the United States and Great Britain had secretly agreed to attack Iraq in the summer of 2002, well before the invasion and before you even sought Congressional authority to engage in military action. While various individuals have asserted this to be the case before, including Paul O'Neill, former U.S. Treasury Secretary, and Richard Clarke, a former National Security Council official, they have been previously dismissed by your Administration. However, when this story was divulged last weekend, Prime Minister Blair's representative claimed the document contained "nothing new." If the disclosure is accurate, it raises troubling new questions regarding the legal justifications for the war as well as the integrity of your own Administration.

The Sunday Times obtained a leaked document with the minutes of a secret meeting from highly placed sources inside the British Government. Among other things, the document revealed:

* Prime Minister Tony Blair chaired a July 2002 meeting, at which he discussed military options, having already committed himself to supporting President Bush's plans for invading Iraq.

* British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw acknowledged that the case for war was "thin" as "Saddam was not threatening his neighbours and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea, or Iran."

* A separate secret briefing for the meeting said that Britain and America had to "create" conditions to justify a war.

* A British official "reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

As a result of this recent disclosure, we would like to know the following:

1) Do you or anyone in your Administration dispute the accuracy of the leaked document?

2) Were arrangements being made, including the recruitment of allies, before you sought Congressional authorization go to war? Did you or anyone in your Administration obtain Britain's commitment to invade prior to this time?

3) Was there an effort to create an ultimatum about weapons inspectors in order to help with the justification for the war as the minutes indicate?

4) At what point in time did you and Prime Minister Blair first agree it was necessary to invade Iraq?

5) Was there a coordinated effort with the U.S. intelligence community and/or British officials to "fix" the intelligence and facts around the policy as the leaked document states?

We have of course known for some time that subsequent to the invasion there have been a variety of varying reasons proffered to justify the invasion, particularly since the time it became evident that weapons of mass destruction would not be found. This leaked document - essentially acknowledged by the Blair government - is the first confirmation that the rationales were shifting well before the invasion as well.

Given the importance of this matter, we would ask that you respond to this inquiry as promptly as possible. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Members who have already signed letter:

Neil Abercrombie, Brian Baird, Tammy Baldwin, Xavier Becerra, Shelley Berkley, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Sanford Bishop, Earl Blumenauer, Corrine Brown, Sherrod Brown, G.K. Butterfield, Emanuel Cleaver, James Clyburn, John Conyers, Jim Cooper, Elijah Cummings, Danny Davis, Peter DeFazio, Diana DeGette, Bill Delahunt, Rosa DeLauro, Lloyd Doggett, Sam Farr, Bob Filner, Harold Ford, Jr, .Barney Frank, Al Green, Raul Grijalva, Louis Gutierrez, Alcee Hastings, Maurice Hinchey, Rush Holt, Jay Inslee, Sheila Jackson Lee, Jessie Jackson Jr., Marcy Kaptur, Patrick Kennedy, Dale Kildee, Carolyn Kilpatrick, Dennis Kucinich, William Lacy Clay, Barbara Lee, John Lewis, Zoe Lofgren, Donna M. Christensen, Carolyn Maloney, Ed Markey, Carolyn McCarthy, Jim McDermott, James McGovern, Cynthia McKinney, Martin Meehan, Kendrick Meek, Gregory Meeks, Michael Michaud, George Miller, Gwen S. Moore, James Moran, Jerrold Nadler, Grace Napolitano, James Oberstar, John Olver, Major Owens, Frank Pallone, Donald Payne, Charles Rangel, Bobby Rush, Bernie Sanders, Linda Sanchez, Jan Schakowsky, Jose Serrano, Ike Skelton, Louise Slaughter, Hilda Solis, Pete Stark, Ellen Tauscher, Bennie Thompson, Edolphus Towns, Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Chris Van Hollen, Nydia Velazquez, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Maxine Waters, Diane Watson, Melvin Watt, Robert Wexler, Lynn Woolsey, David Wu, Albert R. Wynn

Truth in Advertising? NOT!!

2005-05-07T19:18:00.000-05:00

The GOP is now running political ads in Arkansas and Oklahoma about 3 of Bush's judicial nominees (women) that the democrats refuse to confirm. It tries to make democrats sound sexist. This commercial ALSO makes the claim that there is a "crisis on the bench"...that there are SO many empty judgeships that "thousands of people's cases are being delayed".

The truth is, Democrats have confirmed OVER 200 of Bush's nominees... they have only refused TEN. Clinton's nominees didn't fare NEARLY that well in a republican-controlled Congress. In fact, if I remember correctly, there were nearly 200 empty judgeships during Clinton's administration...now, I'd say THAT was a crisis, wouldn't you? Well, at the time, republicans insisted that it WASN'T a crisis.

When Senate Majority Leader Frist insists that the fillibuster has NEVER before been used against a judicial nominee, is he knowingly LYING...or is he just STUPID? And which is worse? If it was a LIE, then it was a pretty BIG one, as not only was it USED against a judicial nominee, it was used against a nominee for CHIEF JUSTICE....and by Frist's OWN PARTY.

Anyone remember Abe Fortas? 1968? Not just ANY judicial nominee...he was nominated for CHIEF JUSTICE of the SUPREME COURT by LBJ. Remember what happened to him? If I'm not mistaken that nomination was...ummm...defeated by a fillibuster. The fillibuster was carried out by....the REPUBLICANS.

I can't understand why democrats aren't running political ads refuting these claims. If we DON'T call republicans out on EVERY lie and half-truth, they'll just continue to lie...and the average uneducated uninformed American will continue to BELIEVE their lies.

Freedom of Religion (by Norm Walker)

2005-04-09T12:57:00.000-05:00

FREEDOM OF RELIGION

A couple of day’s ago I was surfing the channels on the tube when my attention was caught on one of the C-SPAN channels of a group of people calling for the impeachment of the Supreme Court. Later one of the speakers called on Congress to disband the entire federal judiciary. One of the speakers was Judge Moore--the fellow that put the big rock in the court house with an engraving of the Ten Commandments which was ordered removed by the higher courts.

These folks were all religious zealots that are hammering away at the Constitution of the United States with interpretations that just don’t hold water with me. I have a lifelong commitment to “uphold and defend the Constitution” and I have read it enough to develop some understanding and when I have trouble with some principal I have the Supreme Court decisions to turn to.

Folks, just stop and think--there are more than 1,500 different religions in the United States and my sources tell me there are over 360,000 churches, synagogues and mosques in this country. These religions and churches exist due to the protection provided by our Constitution and a secular government. Not one religion or any single church, synagogue or mosque provides protection for the individual’s rights to practice their own beliefs.

The free exercise clause of the First Amendment guarantees the right to practice one’s religion free of government interference and the establishment clause requires the separation of church and state. And the people have every right to defend themselves against the encroachment on their liberty by any religion and the government has a duty to guarantee that right.

I am opposed to the use of taxpayer money to support any religious activity whether it be local, county, state, or federal money. There are many religions, many churches and there can only be one law that must be enforced for all. Religious groups are not exempt from law just because they happen to be in the majority in a specific community.

Back to these folks that want to destroy the judiciary. What would they have us do? Should we obey the semi-literate ramblings of some evangelistic preacher rather than the learned decisions of our courts? I think not.

Religious liberty is important and deserves protection and the governments at all levels in this country must keep out of religion-- when it is not breaking the law.

Norm. Walker aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS

Pope John Paul II (1920-2005)

2005-04-03T21:49:00.000-05:00

Over the past 2 or 3 days, I've seen millions of Catholics all over the world "praying for the Pope". Why? The Pope, of ALL people doesn't *need* anyone's prayers...I'm sure he could probably say it a whole lot better than any of us can anyway, right?

People all over the world were SAD at the news of Pope John Paul II's passing yesterday. Again, I have to ask...why? He's gone home, hasn't he? Shouldn't we be HAPPY for him? (Shouldn't we be happy for Terri Schiavo too, for that matter? By artificial means, she was basically kept FROM going to God for 15 years, wasn't she?)

Pope John Paul II had TWO PhD's...one of them being in ETHICS. So, can someone please explain to me why George W. Bush thinks he belongs anywhere NEAR this great man's funeral?

This great man who, frankly had WAY more to do with the Berlin Wall coming down than Reagan did. This great man who went back to his native Poland and showed his support for the Solidarity movement...showed them how to succeed without violence.

This Pope was a man who OPPOSED this illegal invasion of Iraq. In fact, he also OPPOSED the Gulf War back in '91. Here's what Pope John Paul II thought of war:

"Social justice cannot be attained by violence. Violence kills what it intends to create."
-- July 3, 1980

"We cannot pretend that the use of arms, and especially of today's highly sophisticated weaponry, would not give rise, in addition to suffering and destruction, to new and perhaps worse injustices."-- Message to George H.W. Bush, January 15, 1991

"NO TO WAR! War is not always inevitable. It is always a defeat for humanity."
-- January 13, 2003

"When war threatens humanity's destiny, as it does today in Iraq, it is even more urgent for us to proclaim with a loud and decisive voice that peace is the only way to build a more just and caring society. Violence and arms can never solve human problems."-- March 22, 2003

And what did Pope John Paul II think about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict?

"The Holy See has always recognized that the Palestinian people have the natural right to a homeland, and the right to be able to live in peace and tranquillity with the other peoples of this area."-- March 22, 2000

This Pope was also Pro-life...in the TRUE sense of the word. (Not like these incredible hypocrites who CALL themselves "pro-life", yet are all FOR the death penalty.) He respected and held sacred ALL life. The unborn, the disabled, and yes...even the life of a criminal.

"Modern society has the means of protecting itself, without definitively denying criminals the chance to reform. I renew the appeal I made most recently at Christmas for a consensus to end the death penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary."-- January 27, 1999

What did he think of our corrupt and greed-driven society?

"A disconcerting conclusion about the most recent period should serve to enlighten us: side-by-side with the miseries of underdevelopment, themselves unacceptable, we find ourselves up against a form of superdevelopment, equally inadmissible. because like the former it is contrary to what is good and to true happiness. This superdevelopment, which consists in an excessive availability of every kind of material goods for the benefit of certain social groups, easily makes people slaves of 'possession' and of immediate gratification..."-- March 13, 1998

Man, did he ever have the US pegged on that one!

I Despise Hypocrites...of ALL Faiths...

2005-04-01T08:10:00.000-06:00

I was fooling around on Slate in the Fray last night when I came across the following post that was posted by someone (I am assuming a woman) who called herself “Corel”…

“asshole liberal whores hate anyone who is decent. Congratulations to your side for committing a 41 year old abortion.”

My, my, my...what a "good Christian attitude"! Of course he/she was referring to Terri Schiavo. Resembling that remark…(at least the “LIBERAL” part) Lol….I just could not resist responding to his/her unwarranted attack.

Here’s what I wrote back:

“Stop pretending you KNOW this woman and give damn just so you can believe you are somehow superior, you hypocritical jackass!

I'll bet you're FOR the DEATH PENALTY, aren't you?!

I'll bet you CALL yourself "Pro-life"...but you're FOR executing people! It seems to me that if you're Pro-life, you should be Pro-LIFE....and I mean ALL life.

Let me explain something to you about Biblical law. That "Eye for an Eye" crap is found in Leviticus, if I'm not mistaken. That's in the OLD Testament. JESUS says in the NEW Testament that "an eye for an eye is the OLD way...and is not the way of the Kingdom". Tell me, what part of that DON'T you people understand?!

You need to get off your moral high horse and shut the hell up. Christianity did not INVENT morals.

Judaism, Islam,and many other faiths are OLDER than Christianity...ALL faiths have morals. AND...ALL faiths respect life...ALL life. That is, except Christianity. Christians seem to "pick and choose" which lives they respect.

The truth is, "morals" can exist WITHOUT religious faith. Morals are a matter of COMMON SENSE and DOING WHAT'S RIGHT. I know PLENTY of agnostics and even atheists who have MORE morals than a lot of Christians I know.”

Maybe I could’ve been a bit more civil about it, but dammit, this person wasn’t the least bit civil in his/her attack….and you usually get back what you put out. Besides, I felt Sooo much better having written it! Lol!

A Living Will

2005-03-31T11:09:00.000-06:00

With the passing of Terri Shiavo this morning, I sincerely hope the GOP's USING of that poor woman as a political football is now over. **Just as an aside, does anyone else find it ironic that this woman...who got in this condition as a result of anorexia nervosa, died after her... feeding tube was taken out?

Recent news shows how important it is that each of us has a living will. The form below will prevent outside interference should you end up in dire straits in the future.

LIVING WILL

I, _________________________ (fill in the blank), being of sound mind and body, do not wish to be kept alive indefinitely by artificial means.

Under no circumstances should my fate be put in the hands of peckerwood politicians who couldn't pass ninth-grade biology if their lives depended on it.

If a reasonable amount of time passes and I fail to sit up and ask for a cold beer, a shot of tequila or vodka, or a martini, it should be presumed that I won't do so ever again. When such a determination is reached, I hereby instruct my spouse, children and attending physicians to pull the plug, reel in the tubes and call it a day.

Under no circumstances shall the members of the any Legislative body or Court enact a special law to keep me on life-support machinery. It is my wish that these boneheads mind their own damn business, and pay attention instead to the health, education and future of the millions of Americans who aren't in a permanent coma and who nonetheless may be in need of nourishment.

Under no circumstances shall any politicians butt into this case. I don't care how many fundamentalist votes they're trying to scrounge for their run for the presidency or other political office in 2008, it is my wish that they play politics with someone else's life and leave me alone to die in peace.

I couldn't care less if a hundred conservative and/or religious zealots send e-mails to legislators in which they pretend to care about me. I don't know these people, and I certainly haven't authorized them to preach and/or crusade on my behalf. They should mind their own damn business, too.

If any of my family goes against my wishes and turns my case into a political cause, I hereby promise to come back from the grave and make his or her existence a living hell.

SUPPORT THE TROOPS--OPPOSE THE WAR

2005-03-30T17:10:00.000-06:00

*More words of wisdom from my friend Norm:

SUPPORT THE TROOPS--OPPOSE THE WAR

I have a lifelong commitment to American troops. I don’t have such a commitment to any particular administration or policy. There are those that argue that if you support the troops you are supporting the policy. And there are those that say if you are not supporting the President and the policy you are not supporting the troops. HORSE HOCKEY!

The “absolutist” see support for the war and support for the troops as one issue. That’s just about as reasonable as thinking if you oppose the President you are opposed to America. I can assure you that opposing this President is about one of the most American things anyone of us can do.

It takes a big hunk of ignorance not to be able to separate the policies of this government from our military that fulfills the tenants of their obligations. I support the concept of our military being obedient to the elected officials--that don’t make me agree with the decisions of those elected ones.

As a free and thinking individual I am also able to agree in one sense to one or more parts and to disagree with the others. Going to war is not a decision of the military. It is a decision of the elected ones. So me supporting the troops is not even close to the same view that I support the war in Iraq.

Yes, I agreed with the decision to clean up Afghanistan and the Taliban and to try to run down Osama Bin Laden. I did not agree with the land invasion and conquering of Iraq. I thought the President was lying then and I think he is still lying. Iraq was no threat to the United States and is not a threat at this time and we are still there killing innocent people. We’ve been killing Iraqi’s since August 1990--that’s almost 15 years of continuous warfare against a sovereign county and an ancient nation that has never attacked the United States outside it’s own borders. And every reason the President has told us he had for doing this has proven to be a lie.

I sincerely believe that those of us that support the troops and think the war is wrong have a solemn duty to do all we can to influence the Congress to vote to cut off funds for this war and to bring the troops home and most of all to “impeach the President.”

Let’s don’t send any mixed signals to our troops. Let’s show them we admire them. Let’s tell them we love them. Let’s do good things for them and their families and let’s bring them home. This President is mistreating our military.

Norm. aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS

Moral Values Speech

2005-03-29T07:15:00.000-06:00

Dr. Robin Meyers
Oklahoma University Peace Rally
November 14, 2004

As some of you know, I am minister of Mayflower Congregational Church in Oklahoma City, an Open and Affirming, Peace and Justice church in northwest Oklahoma City, and professor of Rhetoric at Oklahoma University.

But you would most likely have encountered me on the pages of the Oklahoma Gazette, where I have been a columnist for six years, and hold the record for the most number of angry letters to the editor.

Tonight, I join ranks of those who are angry, because I have watched as the faith I love has been taken over by fundamentalists who claim to speak for Jesus, but whose actions are anything but Christian.

We've heard a lot lately about so-called "moral values" as having swung the election to President Bush. Well, I'm a great believer in moral values, but we need to have a discussion, all over this country, about exactly what constitutes a moral value -- I mean what are we talking about? Because we don't get to make up morals as we go along, especially not if we are people of faith. We have an inherited tradition of what is right and wrong, and moral is as moral does.

Let me give you just a few of the reasons why I take issue with those in power who claim moral values are on their side:

When you start a war on false pretenses, and then act as if your deceptions are justified because you are doing God's will, and that your critics are either unpatriotic or lacking in faith, there are some of us who have given our lives to teaching and preaching the faith who believe that this is not only not moral, but immoral.

When you live in a country that has established international rules for waging a just war, build the United Nations on your own soil to enforce them, and then arrogantly break the very rules you set down for the rest of the world, you are doing something immoral.

When you claim that Jesus is the Lord of your life, and yet fail to acknowledge that your policies ignore his essential teaching, or turn them on their head (you know, Sermon on the Mount stuff ,like that we must never return violence for violence and that those who live by the sword will die by the sword), you are doing something immoral.

When you act as if the lives of Iraqi civilians are not as important as the lives of American soldiers, and refuse to even count them, you are doing something immoral.

When you find a way to avoid combat in Vietnam, and then question the patriotism of someone who volunteered to fight, and came home a hero, you are doing something immoral.

When you ignore the fundamental teachings of the gospel, which says that the way the strong treat the weak is the ultimate ethical test, by giving tax breaks to the wealthiest among us so the strong will get stronger and the weak will get weaker, you are doing something immoral.

When you wink at the torture of prisoners, and deprive so-called "enemy combatants" of the rules of the Geneva convention, which your own country helped to establish and insists that other countries follow, you are doing something immoral.

When you claim that the world can be divided up into the good guys and the evil doers, slice up your own nation into those who are with you, or with the terrorists -- and then launch a war which enriches your own friends and seizes control of the oil to which we are addicted, instead of helping us to kick the habit, you are doing something immoral.

When you fail to veto a single spending bill, but ask us to pay for a war with no exit strategy and no end in sight, creating an enormous deficit that hangs like a great millstone around the necks of our children, you are doing something immoral.

When you cause most of the rest of the world to hate a country that was once the most loved country in the world, and act like it doesn't matter what others think of us, only what God thinks of you, you have done something immoral.

When you use hatred of homosexuals as a wedge issue to turn out record numbers of evangelical voters, and use the Constitution as a tool of discrimination, you are doing something immoral.

When you favor the death penalty, and yet claim to be a follower of Jesus, who said an eye for an eye was the old way, not the way of the kingdom, you are doing something immoral.

When you dismantle countless environmental laws designed to protect the earth which is God's gift to us all, so that the corporations that bought you and paid for your favors will make higher profits while our children breathe dirty air and live in a toxic world, you have done something immoral. The earth belongs to the Lord, not Halliburton.

When you claim that our God is bigger than their God, and that our killing is righteous, while theirs is evil, we have begun to resemble the enemy we claim to be fighting, and that is immoral. We have met the enemy, and the enemy is us.

When you tell people that you intend to run and govern as a "compassionate conservative," using the word which is the essence of all religious faith-compassion, and then show no compassion for anyone who disagrees with you, and no patience with those who cry to you for help, you are doing something immoral.

When you talk about Jesus constantly, who was a healer of the sick, but do nothing to make sure that anyone who is sick can go to see a doctor, even if she doesn't have a penny in her pocket, you are doing something immoral.

When you put judges on the bench who are racist, and will set women back a hundred years, and when you surround yourself with preachers who say gays ought to be killed, you are doing something immoral.

I'm tired of people thinking that because I'm a Christian, I must be a supporter of President Bush, or that because I favor civil rights and gay rights I must not be a person of faith.

I'm tired of people saying that I can't support the troops if I oppose the war -- I heard that when I was your age, when the Vietnam war was raging. We knew that that war was wrong, and you know that this war is wrong--the only question is how many people are going to die before these make-believe Christians are removed from power?

This country is bankrupt. The war is morally bankrupt. The claim of this administration to be Christian is bankrupt. And the only people who can turn things around are people like you--young people who are just beginning to wake up to what is happening to them. It's your country to take back. It's your faith to take back. It's your future to take back.

Don't be afraid to speak out. Don't back down when your friends begin to tell you that the cause is righteous and that the flag should be wrapped around the cross, while the rest of us keep our mouths shut.

Real Christians take chances for peace. So do real Jews, and real Muslims, and real Hindus, and real Buddhists--so do all the faith traditions of the world at their heart believe one thing: that life is precious. Every human being is precious.

Arrogance is the opposite of faith. Greed is the opposite of charity. And believing that one has never made a mistake is the mark of a deluded man, not a man of faith.

And war -- war is the greatest failure of the human race -- and thus the greatest failure of faith.

There's an old rock and roll song, whose lyrics say it all: War, what is it good for? absolutely nothing.

And what is the dream of the Prophets? That we should study war no more, that we should beat our swords into plowshares and our spears into pruning hooks.

Who would Jesus bomb, indeed? How many wars does it take to know that too many people have died?

What if they gave a war and nobody came? Maybe one day we will find out.

Time to march again my friends. Time to commit acts of civil disobedience. Time to sing, and to pray, and refuse to participate in the madness.

My generation finally stopped a tragic war. You can too!

MY COUNTRY HAS CHANGED--FOR THE WORSE

2005-03-28T20:38:00.000-06:00

**More words of wisdom from my friend Norm, He's much older than myself and so his observations are particularly interesting to me.**

MY COUNTRY HAS CHANGED--FOR THE WORSE

My country has changed a lot since I was a boy. Either that or I’ve changed a lot. Maybe there is a little bit of both or a lot of both. I think some of the changes are for the better, both for me and the country. Yet, I’m left feeling sort of uncomfortable by some of the actions of my government and by my fellow citizens.

I was born in 1934--right in the middle of the Great Depression--just about the time Social Security was created. And why was it created? Because the stock market took a big dump and stole money from millions leaving so many old poor people that it was thought necessary to develop a safety net to prevent such a thing happening again.

And when I say stole from the poor that’s exactly what I mean. The con-artist from Wall Street and the banking system made such an appeal to the natural greed in all of us that they broke down the existing system and broke a great number of Americans. They stole from the American people.

And now, along comes a President of the United States that stands before of all of us and lies like the con-artist of old. The Social Security system is not in crisis. So why does he say so? Because he and the Republican leadership want to help the con-artist steal from the poor people of this country. It’s that simple. They want their hands on the billions of dollars that flow through the Social Security system.

They are running propaganda adds on the television stations that remind me of the techniques of Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Joseph Stalin. No doubt in my mind--the Republican Party is being run by “evil people” out to do “evil things” to the working class in my country. They must be stopped.

More than 1,700,000 jobs have been lost so far during the Bush presidency. That's the worst record of any president since Herbert Hoover and the Great Depression. But, while Europe has known higher rates of unemployment from time to time, the difference is that Europe generally enjoys a "safety net" for those unable to work or to find work. Not so in America. According to the US Census Bureau about 36 million Americans are living in poverty. That's the highest number since 1998 and in America today, that means relying on charity - on soup kitchens and food banks - and the charities are overwhelmed.

O’ yes, the America I grew up in is becoming more unrecognizable every day. And the propaganda flows and flows and no conservation is taking place--just staged performances. It’s really disgusting and scary.

If ever a President deserved to be impeached and removed from office this one cannot escape his place in history. He is a danger to the nation.

Norm. Walker aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS

DON’T DEFINE ME

2005-03-28T20:03:00.000-06:00

**My friend Norm sent me this earlier today. He always seems to be able to put into words (better than I can) what I feel. I thought I'd share this with everyone.**

DON'T DEFINE ME

I don’t like to put people into categories or define them narrowly. Usually each of us is more complex than some simple grouping. But, there are people that are referred to as Right Wing Christians that I find offensive to most of my sensibilities. I think my conclusion is influenced by the media that portrays these folks and being insensitive to the views of anyone else in the world. They seem to assume that they have the divine right to define me. I don’t like that one little bit and I don‘t accept it.

I’m far from convinced that there is anyone or any group that has a monopoly on the truth. Those that attempt to convince me that their interpretation of some biblical verse is more right than any other are more aggravating than I like to deal with. And those that attempt to convince me that religion is the sole basis for morality are simply wrong.

My simple education and reading of history reveals that morality is based on many factors. The influences of the culture each of us is exposed to as we grow up is a very important factor. The law--yes, the law of the land has more effect on morality than any other item. Those who say that “morality cannot be legislated” are full of it. It’s done all the time in all countries. Philosophy makes important contributions to the morality of a society--and, so do economic conditions. Regardless of religion most people are well intentioned.

When I’m in need of heart surgery I consult a heart surgeon. When I need dental work I go to a dentist. When I need my car fixed I seek out an auto mechanic. And when I want my children educated I seek out an educator. And this kind of thinking goes on regarding many, many subjects. What I don’t need is someone telling me what I should think regarding my spiritual well-being. I can handle that.

And anyone that delights in the thought that because I disagree with them that I will be punished for eternity (IN HELL) (that’s a long time) should realize that I think they are very wrong. The idea that someone should be severely punished for not accepting a particular view is very offensive and I’m to the age and point in life that I don’t mind saying so.

Does all this make me an atheist or agnostic? Probably not because I find these views a little to dogmatic. And if I am, that don’t give anyone else the unabashed right to offend me by trying to define me. I am just me and at my age not for much longer and that’s no big deal either. I see no evidence anywhere that this planet finds my or your life of any considerable importance. There are over 6 billion people and they each impose some sort of damage to this earth.

I accept most religious people as being “well intentioned” and decent sorts. I usually like most of them and enjoy a little repartee with them. And I believe I have a duty to my country to defend their right to believe as they do. I just ask for the same.

Norm. aka CROSS-EYED TURKEY
IT’S ALL IN HOW YOU LOOK AT THINGS

Editorial Policy

2005-03-25T11:59:00.000-06:00

1) The Wall Stree Journal is read by the people who run the country.

2) The Washington Post is read by people who *think* they run the country.

3) The New York Times is read by people who think they *should* run the country and who are very good at crossword puzzles.

4) USA today is read by people who thinki they *ought* to run the country but don't really understand the New York Times. They do, however, like their statistics shown in pie charts.

5) The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind running the country--if they could find the time--and if they didn't have to leave Southern California to do it.

6) The Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to run the country, and did a far superior job of it, thank you very much.

7) The New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too sure who's running the country and don't care as long as they can get a seat on the train.

8) The New York Post is read by people who don't care who's running the country as long as they do something scandalous, preferably while intoxicated.

9) The Miami Herald is read by people who are running another country but need the baseball scores.

10) The San Francisco Chronicle is read by people who aren't sure there *is* a country, or that anyone is running it...but if so, they oppose everything they stand for. There are occaisional exceptions if the leaders are handicapped minority feminist atheist dwarves who also happen to be illegal aliens from any other country or galaxy provided, of course, they are not Republicans.

11) The National Enquirer is read by people who are trapped in line at tha grocery store.

12) None of these is read by the guy who is running the country into the ground.

BUSH OFFERS RETIREES OPTION OF SERVING IN IRAQ

2005-03-21T09:36:00.000-06:00

Social Security Participants Given Wide Choice of Iraqi Cities to Patrol

After receiving only muted support for his sweeping proposals to overhaul Social Security, President George W. Bush attempted to sweeten the pot today, offering all retirees the opportunity to serve in Iraq.

With most insiders calling the president's proposal for individual investment accounts dead on arrival in Congress, the White House hopes that Mr. Bush's offer of guaranteed military service to all retired Americans will find more favor.

Speaking at a rally in Detroit today, the president told his audience, "In the year 2054, the Social Security trust fund will be bankrupt, but the war in Iraq will be alive and well."

Under his new plan, the president said, upon reaching the age of 59 every participant in the Social Security program would be offered the opportunity to begin basic training for what Mr. Bush called "the adventure of their lives."

According to the president, retirees would be "totally free to choose" which Iraqi city they would like to patrol from a list of twenty cities including Baghdad, Tikrit, Fallujah, and oil-rich Kirkuk.

Mr. Bush added that the average retiree serving in Iraq would earn approximately $1500 a month, which would be boosted to $1800 if the retiree should somehow stumble across weapons of mass destruction.

In Washington, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said he was "intrigued" by the notion of spending his retirement years in Iraq but that he had decided to run the World Bank instead.

Elsewhere, antiwar protesters across Europe marked the second anniversary of President Bush ignoring antiwar protesters across Europe.

The Destruction of the System of Checks and Balances, Phase 2

2005-03-20T07:51:00.000-06:00

We taxpayers are now paying for a SUNDAY session of Congress...so they can discuss "saving" Terry Shiavo! For God's sake they need to stay out of this...leave this woman alone...and let her die with dignity. These people REALLY make me sick.

Now Bill Frist is claiming that Shiavo "isn't really in a vegetative state", but he's NEVER examined her. He has apparently found a neurologist somewhere who would say that she isn't in a persistant vegetative state....but folks, this is no different than any other court case. ANYONE on ANY side of the issue can find a so-called "expert" to say whatever THEY want him or her to say....as long as you PAY that expert enough for their "opinion".

But that wasn't even the worst of it. Yesterday, outside of the Senate, I saw TOM DeLAY telling reporters why his "morals" said that "saving Shiavo is the right thing to do"! Now tell me THAT isn't the height of hypocricy...Tom DeLay talking to reporters about his MORALS! I question how much that man really KNOWS about morals...he certainly doesn't know a damn thing about ETHICS.

Don't kid yourselves folks, this is NOT about Terry Shiavo. These politicians could really give a damn less about Terry Shiavo. This is about republicans in Congress taking this opportunity to now tear down the system of checks and balances even further by trying to circumvent the law.

We already had ZERO checks and balances between the Executive and Legislative branches. Now, they want to tear down the checks and balances between Legislative and Judicial branches. If they succeed at doing this, there will be absolutely NO oversight between branches....NO ACCOUNTABILITY WHATSOEVER. Our Constitution says the legislative branch is NOT to MAKE laws...and Congress is NOT to interpret the law.

If they succeed, this republican controlled Congress will be effectively setting a precedent that allows them to for all practical purposes OVERTURN the decision of a federal court...possibly even the US Supreme Court, just because the decison the court came to isn't what THEY wanted!

Pretty scary when you think about it, isn't it?

Robert Byrd's Cry for Freedom in the U.S. Senate

2005-03-19T07:39:00.000-06:00

Remarks by U.S. Senator Robert C. Byrd

U.S. Senator Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., delivered the following remarks in the Senate, urging his colleagues to back away from the so-called "nuclear option" that would stifle debate first on judicial nominees, and then, perhaps, on all legislation. If you weren't fortunate enough to witness this on CSPAN...it was quite impressive....if this speech doesn't wind up in History Books, it will be a damn shame.

"Freedom is a fragile thing and never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom and then lost it have never known it again." -- Ronald Reagan

I rise today to discuss freedom. Not the grandiose world-wide "freedom talk" one hears so much of. No. Not far-flung foreign policy goals. Rather my concern today is preserving our freedoms right in our own backyard here at home. Freedom, like a good garden, needs constant tending. One must watch for the worms in the wood. As Wendell Phillips, the abolitionist, orator, and columnist once said, "Eternal Vigilance is the price of liberty." One must pay the price if one wants the blessing.

In a culture where sports metaphors are more common public parlance than historical analogies, our unique form of government, carefully restraining powers while protecting rights, presents a special challenge to maintain. The "winning is everything" philosophy so beloved by Americans may, without careful balance, obscure the goal of justice for all that must be the aim of a representative democracy. Demeaning minority views, characterizing opposition as obstructionist, these are first steps down the dark alley of subjugating rights.

Majorities can prevail by numerical force; they do not need protection from minorities. Yet, some would have us believe that minority voices threaten the larger public good in the case of presidential judicial appointments. The opposite is true. It is minorities who are most in jeopardy without fairness from the Federal bench. The persecuted, the disadvantaged, the poor, the downtrodden - - these are the very citizens who need the strong protection of an unbiased legal system. Appointees to the Federal Bench should be scrutinized for traces of ideological rigidity, or allegiance to political movements which could cloud impartial judgment. I, for one, do not favor activist judges of any stripe. I do not think that the proper role for a judge is to make new law from the bench, and my own preference is usually for strict Constitutionalists. "Conservative" judges can hold activist views just as can "liberal" judges. Such labels tell us very little. What we should strive for on the Federal bench is blind justice, that is justice absent a political agenda.

Judicial appointments must never be a "sure thing" for the bench, simply because they please the majority party, whether that majority is Democratic or Republican. Federal judges enjoy life tenure, making decisions of huge importance to the lives and livelihoods of our citizens. They are accountable to no one and no President can fire them. It is ridiculous to suggest that mere superiority of numbers in the Senate should, alone, guarantee confirmation. Such a claim reduces the Constitutional advice and consent function of the Senate to a pro forma rubber stamping of presidential judicial appointments, whenever the President's party controls the Senate. We are talking about a separate branch of the Federal government here which wields tremendous power. There is no God-given right to a seat on the Federal bench. Should a minority have only the recourse of delay to defeat a judicial candidate of concern, that minority is well within its rights to filibuster. In fact, they would be derelict in their duty if they did not. There is no shortage of candidates for the Federal bench. Another name can always be offered. Our aim should be to select excellent judges acceptable across a wide spectrum of political views.

There was a time in this country when men and women of opposite political parties could reason together to achieve such goals. There was a time when the concerns of honorable men and women serving in this Senate received the respect of fellow members of the Senate, even though they were in the minority. Now, I am very sorry to observe, the Senate and the country are so polarized and politicized that nearly all dissent is discarded as obstructionist and politically motivated. Get out of the way is the cry. Few take the time to consider other views. If 41 members of the Senate have objections to any judicial candidate, perhaps those objections should be heeded. Perhaps that nominee should not serve. Perhaps the minority is right. Senate service often reminds me of a game of "red rover." We line up like two opposing camps and run as hard as we can at each other to score points. The talk show mavens keep the fires fanned, and through the din honest discourse is nearly impossible. I worry about a country whose major political pastime is not finding compromise, but seeking conflict. The people are not well-served. The courage to speak out about one's convictions is in scarcer and scarcer supply. Where are the 21st century's profiles in courage? President John F. Kennedy's Pulitzer Prize winning book, Profiles in Courage, lionized public servants who did not fear to stand alone, like Senator George Norris of Nebraska.

From 1806 to 1917, there was no ability to invoke cloture in the Senate. But, in 1917 a cloture rule passed after a filibuster by twelve determined Senators who opposed U.S. intervention in World War I. That debate began when President Wilson asked Congress for the authority to arm U.S. merchant ships against Germany. The House of Representatives passed Wilson's bill -- the "Armed Ship" bill -- by a vote of 403 to 13. But a handful of determined United States Senators who opposed U.S. intervention in World War I, including Republican George W. Norris of Nebraska, launched a filibuster with far-reaching consequences. George Norris' filibuster killed President Wilson's bill, though Wilson resurrected its contents by Executive Order shortly after the filibuster ended.

Nebraskans and in fact, the entire nation, were consumed with rage at George Norris because of public disclosures that Germany had promised Mexico several U.S. states if Mexico would align itself with Germany in war against the United States.

The New York Times called Norris and others, "perverse and disloyal obstructionists," and editorialized that, "the odium of treasonable purpose will rest upon their names forevermore." The Hartford Courant called them, "political tramps." The New York Sun called them "a group of moral perverts." The Providence Journal called their action "little short of treason," and the Portland Free Press said they should be "driven from public life."

Senator George W. Norris, this Nebraskan from the heart of America, suffered merciless abuse, vicious invective, and public scorn, tarred by public sentiment, savaged by a strident press in the grip of a public filled with hate of Germany at the start of World War I. Yet, he was and is an
American hero.

George Norris was "fearful of the broad grant of authority" that President Wilson sought to go to war, and "resentful of the manner in which that authority was being 'steam rolled' through the Congress." How history repeats itself.

In Senator Norris' words:

I will not . . . even at the behest of a unanimous constituency, violate my oath of office by voting in favor of a proposition that means the surrender by Congress of its sole right to declare war. . . I am, however, so firmly convinced of the righteousness of my course that I believe if the
intelligence and patriotic citizenship of the country can only have an opportunity to hear both sides of the question, all the money in Christendom and all the political machinery that wealth can congregate will not be able to defeat the principle of government for which our forefathers fought.

When George Norris went home to explain why he had filibustered in the face of universal criticism, he sought an open meeting in Lincoln, Nebraska. "I had expected an unfriendly audience," Norris wrote. "And," he said, "it was with some fear that I stepped forward. When I stepped out on the stage, there was a deathlike silence," he said.

Senator Norris began, President Kennedy tells us, by stating simply: "I have come home to tell you the truth."

After more than an hour, the crowd in Lincoln, Nebraska, Kennedy wrote, roared its approval.

Many have written extensively -- and with legitimate fear -- of what could happen if men without the courage of their convictions simply sat back and let themselves be swept away by a powerful majority, including George Orwell writing of the horrors of power run rampant, of a world run by "thought police," who seek to control not just information, but the speech and thoughts of every individual citizen. In 1984, Orwell recorded what life would be like under the thumb of Big Brother, with no autonomy of thought or speech. George Orwell's fictional warning against Big Brother should encourage us all to ponder, cherish, and protect our precious freedom to think and speak freely. And the means to that end is protecting the right to dissent. Orwell said of liberty, "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." That right will be in jeopardy if a misguided attempt to eliminate the filibuster succeeds.

Robert Caro, winner of the Pulitzer Prize for his renowned book about Lyndon Johnson, made Orwell's point in a letter to the Senate Rules Committee in June 2003. "Many times in America's history, the right of extended debate has been used to defend causes with which I profoundly disagree. . ." "Nonetheless," he said, "great care should be taken in placing new restrictions on that right. Senators who are considering doing so should understand that they will be taking a step that has significant implications for the balance of powers created under the Constitution, and also for another very fundamental concern in a democracy: the balance between majority and minority rights."

Caro stressed that the Framers gave the Senate strong protections from transient public passions or executive pressure, and that the Constitutional Convention kept the Senate small, so that it would have, in Madison's words, less propensity "to yield to the impulse of sudden and violent passions, and to be secluded by factious leaders into intemperate and pernicious resolutions." Madison believed that, ". . . there are more instances of the abridgement of freedoms of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." Madison was right.

The loss of freedom will not come as a thunderclap. Rather, if it goes, it will slip silently away from us, little by little, like so many grains of sand sliding softly through an hour glass. The curbing of speech in the Senate on judicial nominations will most certainly evolve to an eventual elimination of the right of extended debate. And that will spur intimidation and the steady withering of dissent. An eagerness to win -- win elections, win every judicial nomination, overpower enemies, real or imagined, with brute force -- holds the poison seeds of destruction of free speech and decimation of minority rights. The ultimate perpetrator of tyranny in this world is the urge by the powerful to prevail at any cost. A free forum where the minority can rise to loudly call a halt to the ambitions of an over zealous majority must be maintained. We must never surrender that forum, the United States Senate, to the tyranny of any majority.'

This House is a sanctuary; a citadel of law, of order, and of liberty; and it is here - - it is here, in this exalted refuge; here, if anywhere, will resistance be made to the storms of political phrensy and the silent arts of corruption; and if the Constitution be destined ever to perish by the sacrilegious hands of the demagogue or the usurper, which God avert, its expiring agonies will be witnessed on this floor. -- Aaron Burr, March 2, 1805

The so called nuclear option, if successful, will begin the slow and agonizing death spiral of freedom and speech and dissent and it will be witnessed on this Floor.

If the Shoe FITS, Dubya....

2005-03-19T07:34:00.000-06:00

Failure
========
A man can fail many times,
but he isn't a failure
until he begins to blame somebody else.

~John Burroughs~