Isle of Sanity

Respite

2012-01-29T22:17:00.000-07:00

Aaaaah:

Fabulous Music, Even Better Cause

2012-01-27T17:00:00.003-07:00

This arrived today:

You can sample (listen to clips) or order - just click the pic and it will take you there. 73 songs from some amazing artists for only $24.99 (though you could round up significantly and it would still be a great deal for a wonderful organization, Amnesty International)!

Here's the title cut from the man himself:

The Graduate & Mittness

2012-01-26T10:21:00.005-07:00

I adore Dustin Hoffman; by far my favorite actor. However, sadly, when I hear the word 'plastic' two things come to mind; neither of which are good.

First:

Second:

Okay, many adjectives come to mind for Willard but plastic is the first 'p' word. Of course 'pretzel' candidate fits as well - and petulant is also apropos ... no wait, that's George Will.

*Click on the pics to bring you to reference article(s).

Asymptotic

2012-01-16T08:32:00.004-07:00

Martin Luther King, Jr. had hoped that " ... my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character...

While we may be closer to the color of one's skin at least not being an overwhelming factor in our judgement, sadly, the content of one's wallet remains an overarching measure of one's worth in our society. Thus it has always been; thus it will likely always be.

Times change and cultural mores shift, gays are the new (or perhaps given history it'd best be characterized as renewed) blacks. As the U.S. population becomes increasing Hispanic, it will shift again. There will remain an underlying economic caste system that ensures the unequal nature of access and opportunity.

Martin Luther King would not be satisfied and we shouldn't be either.

Palatability

2012-01-05T09:12:00.002-07:00

Is there enough money in the universe to make Mitt Romney palatable?

Romney's Bet

2011-12-11T15:13:00.003-07:00

No, not the fact that he's betting on Repugnicans who otherwise can't stand him to fall in line once he's the nominee but the $10,000 bet he challenged Perry to in the Iowa debate last night.

The bet illustrates two points: 1) Romney's an ass (okay, we already knew that) and 2) Rick Perry's not exactly Mr. Fast on His Feet (okay - we knew that too). Never mind that the bet was challenging a lame point in the first place, Rick Perry could have significantly increased his appeal among the Tea Party Ignorati had he responded ... What? Only $10,000 that's less than pocket change to you Mitt- why not make it $10 million .. must not be very sure of yourself - eh?

Irony

2011-12-07T10:25:00.002-07:00

So, we have highly sophisticated technology in remote controlled drones but they can't be pre-programmed to self-destruct when failing to follow designated instructions or, in the very least, be destroyed by remote command? To be fair, who could have predicted a technological failure?

OK, Maybe There Is A God

2011-11-12T18:09:00.002-07:00

Not that it will stop the most arrogant, obnoxious, pretentious fans in college football but TCU beat Boise State tonight. I ask once again, what substantive team has BSU EVER beat? Yes, they beat OK in the Fiesta Bowl with OK being led by what the 3rd or was it 4th-string QB? They beat OR after taking out the starting QB in the 1st quarter and beyond that? Nothing. Now they lose to an un-ranked team - that is the true quality of your football team ... deal with it.

Priceless

2011-11-11T13:56:00.002-07:00

I don't think learned means what this puzzlemaster seems to think.

Hope & Sanity Or Not

2011-11-09T00:00:00.005-07:00

So, maybe there is a little hope; a little sign of some residual sanity in the country. But no, Obama has to effing screw that up as well. Again I say - why the hell did anyone for for this jackass?

But, then again, Obama is the biggest argument against the likely Repugnican nominee, Romney - because the question becomes why bother - they're one in the same - no leaderships skills, no convictions, just a lot of empty rhetoric. We already have that so is it really worth their going to the polls to switch out one for the other - I guess will see which one the nutjobs on the right hate the most. Either way our country is doomed for at least another 4 years.

Hell Hath No Fury ...

2011-08-18T16:40:00.004-06:00

like a few Tuscan Monks. Ah yes, more religious nonsense. Upset by recent thefts of bibles from their church in Florence, the monks prayed for god to smite the thief with a bout of diarrhea. Hmmm, maybe the thief will leave a little deposit next time to assure the monks that his digestive system is quite intact.

Seriously, if there were a god, I have to think that he/she would consider this kind of prayer, at the very least spam and might he/she not wonder wtf happened to vengeance being his/her province?

Christians are just so damn hypocritical, inane and predictable. Given Obama's abysmal performance, another one of these wack jobs may end up in the White House too.

The Weather Service & Prayer

2011-08-18T12:55:00.003-06:00

The National Weather Service is apparently predicting more of the same for Texas and Oklahoma this fall - clearly they're not taking into consideration the fierce praying of Perry and his acolytes. Now, riddle me this ... had one of the first public 'prayer sessions' been closely followed by rains you know they would be claiming that their prayers were answered so why don't they now come to the conclusion that god just isn't that into them or perhaps someone else prayed to their god asking Texas to be punished for having foisted GWB on the nation or even maybe there is no god at all -naw, no alternative explanations - it's faith.

Credibility

2011-08-04T07:50:00.003-06:00

I saw this sticker on the left rear of an unnecessarily large (of course) SUV/MMV and I thought ... they do have a point. However, all credibility was lost by the presence of an Otter sticker on the lower right.

Rather like Michele Bachmann's brain - there are a great many things that worry me about it - but her migraines aren't among them. Likewise, Obama has demonstrated he's an ass on many levels and multiple fronts but not because he's a socialist or secret muslim.

Numbers and Balls

2011-07-30T08:01:00.003-06:00

Hey Obama,

139 thousand idiots from Ohio voted for John Boehner over 69 million spread throughout the U.S. voted for you (I admittedly and without regret was not one of them). What happened to your "elections have consequences" - there are several million people that wish that were so- grow a pair. If there is anyone who entered the office more ill-prepared to ... what's the word ... lead - it hasn't been in my lifetime.

Obama Back To Default Position Of Stupidity

2011-07-18T06:52:00.003-06:00

So, no first. Not that this is really a surprise, however, Krugman, is wrong ... it's beyond sad, it's truly pathetic. What a colossal ass. Change you can believe in - a Democratic president being just like the ignorant blithering jackass he replaced only with less blather.

Apropos Headlines

2011-07-01T18:48:00.004-06:00

And here I thought helicopter was his mode of transportation. I know ... an insult to baboons everywhere; my apologies.

Oh Yes He Did

2011-02-25T15:56:00.010-07:00

Under the heading of unintentional irony, I give you the asshat himself, GWB (or rather his spokesperson on his behalf):

"The former president has no desire to share a forum with a man who has willfully and repeatedly done great harm to the interests of the United States," Sherzer said in a written statement.

Wow. Even if there were evidence, rather than the bloviation of pols, that Assange (through Wikileaks) had done harm, let alone great harm to the US, he'd have to go quite some way to match the devastation of W. One also wonders just how schizophrenic an organization has to be to have these two as invited speakers. Bush - still a petulant prat; no surprise there.

When The Twain Meet

2011-02-25T10:42:00.003-07:00

What's the difference? It also gives new meaning to Polish joke (click on pic for link). Along similar lines I find it interesting that christians have all sorts of issues with islamic theocracy but wouldn't have any problems having policy decisions based on nothing but religious beliefs (as long as they're christian) in this country.

Damn, He's Good

2011-01-14T09:59:00.002-07:00

I've heard of being honored with an award posthumously but performing a miracle after your death ... that John Paul. The catholic church ever trying for relevancy.

Wishing On The Moon

2010-12-21T01:02:00.003-07:00

It's Not The Economy Glass, Stupid

2010-09-20T08:08:00.011-06:00

Evidently, Obama made these comments at a DNC fundraiser last week:

Democrats, just congenitally, tend to get -- to see the glass as half empty. (Laughter.) If we get an historic health care bill passed -- oh, well, the public option wasn't there. If you get the financial reform bill passed -- then, well, I don't know about this particular derivatives rule, I'm not sure that I'm satisfied with that. And gosh, we haven't yet brought about world peace and -- (laughter.) I thought that was going to happen quicker. (Laughter.) You know who you are. (Laughter.) We have had the most productive, progressive legislative session in at least a generation.[my emphasis]

Perhaps the problem isn't the glass that is half-empty but the suit that is completely so.

It also might have something to do with the vast majority of Americans of every political stripe (though more so for Democrats as Repugnicans manage to ram through all manner of egregious legislation with their (Democrats) assistance regardless of which party is in the majority) being cognizant of the fact that it has been over 30 years since they've had any representation in Congress.

That this recent legislative session should pass as the most "productive" and "progressive" further illustrates the point and your "historic" health care bill accomplishes approximately this:

I'll Stick With My Maybe ...

2010-09-17T16:33:00.004-06:00

on Elizabeth Warren's temporary appointment. So did he make her an adviser/assistant to merely avoid a confirmation battle or so he could throw a bone to progressives ahead of the midterm elections hoping an appeasement will get them out to the polls? You know what I think; only time will tell. Kick some ass, Elizabeth.

Speaking of Unlikely Events ...

2010-09-07T17:01:00.001-06:00

The preposterousness of heaven aside, does anyone really think those two would have made it there?

A First .... Maybe

2010-09-02T16:55:00.003-06:00

Is Obama actually going to do something intelligent and beneficial? I certainly have my doubts but then again, I suppose he could appoint her as pure gesture and render her powerless - that wouldn't surprise me (he's certainly into empty rhetoric and gesture). We'll see.

Shocked

2010-08-26T07:42:00.002-06:00

I don't know about you but I'm shocked I tell you. Shouldn't the headline read something like Self-denial Overcome, Mehlman Realizes What Most Everyone Else Knew All Along -that he's the not-so-rare species of hyprocritical, gay, Republican and, of course ... an ass.

Mosque Mania

2010-08-21T08:18:00.004-06:00

I admit, I'm against the mosque at ground zero (not that it's actually at ground zero but that's another issue entirely) but I'd be against it anywhere - as well as being against the churches of catholic, baptist, evangelical ...etc.. and most especially the mormon cult buildings that mar the landscape in these parts. I'm against them because I believe we'd be a whole helluva a lot better off if people would lose their ridiculous superstitions and act on rational thought rather than faith.

Yes, we have freedom of religion allowed by the first amendment but we supposedly also have separation of church and state - with tax exempt status (the government determining which entities qualify for exemption) how is that not 'establishing religion'?

That said, on a scale of things to worry about - forget the mosque. This should be of much greater concern.

Viva La Difference?

2010-08-19T22:44:00.004-06:00

Again. Bush v Obama this time on transparency:
*I had to decrease the opacity by 20% to ensure the difference would be noticeable on screen, however, this should not be misconstrued as my thinking that the difference between these administrations is even of that magnitude.

Viva La Difference?

2010-08-12T16:09:00.006-06:00

Robert Gibbs was right when he said, “I hear these people saying he’s like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested,” -Clearly, Obama's and Bush's policies are nothing alike. Take the wars for example ... Unlike Bush, Obama is focusing on the good war.

Figures from 2008/2010 in this report (pdf file link).

He (Gibbs) also claims that liberals will still show up in November to vote for the Dems -but won't they be worried about being taken aside for drug testing?

The Perfect Note

2010-08-05T10:32:00.005-06:00

Well, the perfect song actually. I'm still plodding through my iTunes library and am on the Ys now (sorting by song title) and came upon this song and thought there couldn't be a more apt expression of what progressives think about Obama's performance to date. Take it away, Stevie:

We are amazed but not amused
By all the things you say that you'll do
Though much concerned but not involved
With decisions that are made by you

But we are sick and tired of hearing your song
Telling how you are gonna change right from wrong
'Cause if you really want to hear our views
"You haven't done nothing"!

It's not too cool to be ridiculed
But you brought this upon yourself
The world is tired of pacifiers
We want the truth and nothing else

And we are sick and tired of hearing your song
Telling how you are gonna change right from wrong
'Cause if you really want to hear our views
"You haven't done nothing"!

Jackson 5 join along with me say
Do da walk- hey hey hey
Do da walk- wow wow wow
Do da walk- co co co
Do da walk- naw naw naw
Do da walk- bum bum bum
Do da walk

We would not care to wake up to the nightmare
That's becoming real life
But when mislead who knows a person's mind
Can turn as cold as ice un hum

Why do you keep on making us hear your song
Telling us how you are changing right from wrong
'Cause if you really want to hear our views
"You haven't done nothing"!
Yeah

Jackson 5 sing one more time say
Do da walk
Do da walk- oh
Do da walk- co co co
Do da walk- sing it Jackie!
Do da walk- bum bum bum
Do da walk- um
Sing it loud for your people say
Do da walk- um um um

Do da walk- stand up be counted, say
Do da walk- co co co
Do da walk- ow
Do da walk- bum bum bum
Do da walk- ah hum

At Least There's Hope For Kansas

2010-01-29T14:44:00.002-07:00

The state of our country under McNotSoHopeyEven LessChangey may not be too great but at least murder is still murder in the Kansas bible belt.

Now that a Kansas jury has decided that bogus religious beliefs are not justification for murder maybe elsewhere in the country it will be decided that neither are they justification for the denial of equal rights. Well, at least until it gets to the yahoos that decided corporate free speech rights were included in our Constitution.

Bollocks

2010-01-19T22:44:00.002-07:00

Look what was hiding in 'drafts' - don't know why I didn't publish at the time ... maybe I was going to add something. Oh well...

The Lede of this NY Times article is News Analysis A Year Later, Voters Send A Different Message

Conventional wisdom proffered by some media hack (in this instance Adam Nagourney though insert name here would fit just as well) has for too long been conflated as analysis rather than mere opinion. Don't get me wrong, Obama and the Dems will no doubt take away the villagers garbled opinion on the Repug win in MA and do more of what they're already doing wrong but that doesn't make the conclusion(s) correct.

Was a different message sent or was it a signal that the original message about wanting change had fallen on deaf ears. I don't think most citizens do want bipartisanship - what they want is apartisanship -they want congress to act as though the most important thing they do is not get re-elected but act as public servants while they're in office and represent the citizens day in and day out.

I still can't fathom why anyone would have thought that Obama would have effected any change but we live with the electorate we have not the electorate we wish we would have.

Shorter SCOTUS

2010-01-11T10:52:00.002-07:00

We know how the biologically ignorant religious bigots don't have a rational leg to stand on but we don't want the American public at large to see what assholes they are so we say it wouldn't be fair to broadcast the Prop 8 proceedings. Keeping the citizenry in the dark is the job of the Supreme Court of the United States ... didn't you know?

Things That Make You Me Laugh

2009-12-31T09:33:00.005-07:00

AT & T is dropping Tiger Woods.

Yes, a company that willingly (and illegally) funnels the private phone conversations of millions of Americans to the NSA, thinks its reputation might be sullied by Tiger Woods' philandering. [that's to say nothing of their lousy coverage and worse customer service]

Yes, Virginia, There Is No Evolution

2009-12-28T08:23:00.004-07:00

Yes, some omniscient, omnipotent Intelligent Designer (spelled G-O-D) created toads that look like dead leaves on a forest floor, insects that mimic flower parts, birds that blend into tree bark and ... ... ... why would he/she not? [pic is link to Nat'l Geo article]

Now if we could just get members of Congress and the current White House resident to imitate individuals who actually cared about and represented those they were sent to DC to serve. I'm thinking Jesus will return before that happens.

Halfway

2009-12-22T09:42:00.003-07:00

Well, I'm halfway through my iTunes library with this tune (Lonesome Desert Blues -which seems fitting) from Maria Muldaur:

On a related note, it seems I'm not the only one who thinks Mr. Obama has no apparent convictions. It would have been nice if a few more of you would have noticed how empty was his rhetoric during the primaries.

I Love a Duet

2009-12-06T17:14:00.003-07:00

but none more than with these two crooners who so obviously enjoy each other -listen to the fun:

It's Been Said Before ...

2009-12-02T20:39:00.003-07:00

but I'll say it again. I cannot comprehend why any liberal or progressive individual would have cast a vote for Barack Obama.

The death of journalism illustrated ...

2009-11-06T08:04:00.002-07:00

in a mere two sentences.

Stable. Interesting word choice because I should think this man wasn't particularly stable even before he met with a bullet. Then we go to the second sentence ... nice transition. And it took three of them to write this article (multi-authorial attribution being the norm these days) - I suppose it took all their collective brain power to de-sensationalize the headline by only blaming the major for the rampage.

It's a wonder people aren't trampling over one another to get their newspaper fix. It's one thing for the Idaho Statesman, a publication that would have to improve many fold to even be considered a merely dreadful paper, but there was a day when one could expect more from The Times (LA or NY).

Speaking of the Statesman, I caught Mi-Ai Parrish's (the publisher) talk at the City Club on News 91 the other day and ...Oh. My. Gawd. This individual makes a living in a field of words? Talk about failing upward but then again it may be upward in position though certainly not in papers as she has previously worked for the San Francisco Chronicle, The Chicago Sun-Times and the Minneapolis Star Tribune. I don't have hopes for the Statesman reaching the pinnacle of merely dreadful any time during her tenure.
[screenshot of LA Times article]

Prodigy

2009-10-11T09:49:00.003-06:00

Since my itunes library has grown I've found there are way too many pieces I don't hear often enough so I've taken to spending a little time each day, either with my cuppa in the am or in the wee hours, streamlining (removing unnecessary duplicates of slightly different versions, reducing all the artwork to 202 x 202 pixels) and rating the tunes. I'm now in the "Fs" and just came across this:

And I couldn't help but think of the phenomenon that Michael Jackson had become - and not to take anything away from acknowledging his musical genius but ... Stevie 12. Years. Old. Damn.

Nobel Awarded on Spec

2009-10-09T09:55:00.003-06:00

Excuse me? Obama was awarded a Nobel Peace prize?

It's not unusual for many to disagree with any particular choice of the committee, however, I can't recall another instance where an award was given (other than the presidency of the US - but not a Nobel) on speculation of actions based on rhetoric.

What. A. Joke. This diminishes all other prizes awarded by the committee.

To borrow from Barney Frank, on what planet do they spend most of their time?

PSA - Opportunity

2009-08-04T14:55:00.005-06:00

An opportunity is what the CableOne phone center rep called it. When I called to ask why, as a long-time customer of theirs, I was paying the monthly rate for 'premium' service but receiving the transmission rates of of 'standard' service, the rep informed me that as consumers called they were being made aware of the 'opportunity' to upgrade speeds for the same service fee or maintain their existing broadband speed at a reduced rate ($10/month).

Also, presumably in an effort to maintain cable television viewers, they have put daily usage limits that will be prohibitive of video streaming - let's say if you want to watch a movie through Netflix. Where's the FCC when they're needed?

So, if you've been with CableOne for awhile I suggest you contact them to ensure you don't continue to be overcharged because they're certainly not going to contact you.

Unfortunate Choices in Advertising

2009-06-10T09:54:00.003-06:00

Is that legal?

Fun with Photoshop

2009-01-06T10:02:00.004-07:00

Somewhere ~~over~~ at the end of the rainbow. I say somewhere because the shot was taken somewhere in OR but I don't recall where. Sometimes you need a little serenity. You won't get fries with it but (as always) you can click to biggie size the pic.

Fun with Venn Diagrams

2009-01-05T13:56:00.000-07:00

Exhibit A

They Call Me Mr. President

2008-11-05T08:05:00.001-07:00

Bring on the Fat Lady

2008-11-04T19:28:00.002-07:00

Obama takes Ohio and McCain/Palin is but an ugly memory.

It's Obama in a Landslide

2008-11-04T00:25:00.004-07:00

Obama gets 15 of the 21 votes cast in Dixville Notch, NH. They had 100% turnout. The bad new is the last Democrat picked in Dixville was Hubert H. Humphrey in '68 and we know how that turned out.

UPDATE: Hart's Location also goes for Obama 17 to 10 with 2 write-in votes for Ron Paul.

*Hopin' for a Landslide

2008-11-03T20:47:00.000-07:00

A picture is worth a thousand words and as the inimitable Daryl Cagle states with this one - there's only one way for McCain to win this election. If McCain/Palin comes out on top tomorrow, the Republicans have stolen the election. Again. Fortunately, I don't think this one is close enough for that to happen.

But a mere Obama win is insufficient - we need a landslide. And by we, I don't mean Democrats, I mean Americans, our allies, and the global community of which we are a part (or used to be at any rate). But mostly, our nation. We need to lay waste to the heinous fear-mongering, race-baiting, demonizing, and use of religion as both weapon and tool that have become staples of the modern Republican party. But, as they say on teevee, more on that later.

I don't think for a minute that tomorrow will end our long national nightmare ... it was a long time in coming. It's easy to blame Bush and the last eight years for everything (and Obama has certainly tried to make that case) but that's letting way too many Americans off the hook. At this juncture I almost feel sorry for Bush (almost). After all, other than the Iraq war, he didn't do anything that Ronald Reagan hadn't already done -yet no Republicans will be calling for his sainthood anytime soon.

No it's the ignorance and/or greed that led too many Americans to propel to viable candidacy a ne'er do well bully and drunk (with little concern for the consequences) that brought us here after our incomplete rehab from the Reagan/Bush years. I often wonder how they can sleep at night with the deaths of thousands upon thousands of innocent Iraqis and 4189 (and counting) of our military personnel on their conscious but then I suspect they spend as much thought on those lives as they did on the consequence of their vote (though I'm certain many have a flag on their car/home and a nice magnetic yellow ribbon on their vehicles).

My desire for a blowout tomorrow does not reflect any conversion to Obama devotee for me. I do not think he is (or will be) a transformational leader. He's most certainly not a progressive and -change? Well, I won't hold my breath but I am willing to be pleasantly surprised.

In the interest of full disclosure, I mailed my ballot a few weeks ago and cast a vote for Nader. I would have written in a candidate but as those ballots are handled separately I didn't want to contribute to an unnecessary delay in the vote tallying. However, in considering the consequence of my vote, had Obama had the slightest chance of taking Idaho's electoral votes I would have cast my vote for him (but yes, I am sick of the lesser of evil scenarios every four years).

The fact of the matter is that we have a political system in which two self-serving parties, neither of which represents the interests of the majority of Americans particularly well, rule (perhaps that more than anything will lead to our downfall). The end result for this election is a choice of Obama and not-Obama (although those of us in some of the solidly red or solidly blue states can choose an alternative without having disastrous consequences). While Obama/Biden is far from my choice for an ideal ticket, the McCain/Palin ticket is deserving of little more than ridicule (which is pretty sad for those of us who thought we had already hit rock bottom with George W. Bush).

Obama was correct in asserting that John McCain is George Bush redux but not merely because McCain, by his own admission (that's admission Sarah, not admittance), voted with Bush more than 90% of the time but rather because they are very nearly twins.

Jim Hightower once said of George W. Bush that he was "born on third and thought he'd hit a triple" and the same could be said of John McCain. McCain got where he is not because his personal character but by his paternal lineage. But while George W was able to steal home in 2000, John McCain was left on base. Like Bush, McCain the younger was a hothead and a hotdog but he also was never going to be promoted to admiral like his father or grandfather. While we might empathize with his desire to upstage them by becoming Commander-in-Chief that's certainly not a reason to vote for him.

If you're a hotdog behind the controls of a plane you'd better be a hotshot pilot as well but McCain was mediocre at best and we'll never no how much his hot-dogging contributed his being shot down and taken as a POW nor will we know how much disciplinary action his behavior drew or precisely the reasons he'd failed to be promoted because, like his medical records, John McCain's military records are off-limits. McCain is touted as a hero and I don't know whether or not he was one (his military records would provide the evidence) but I do know that we've thrown the word around like too much seasoning and not only has it dulled our taste-buds, it belittles true acts of heroism and those that perform them. He was a POW but that is a matter of circumstance and not a personal qualification for anything let alone president. McCain's hotheaded temperament has been well-documented and it also makes him ill-suited for the office.

I suppose it's ageism to suggest that we don't need someone born in 1936 to lead us in the 21st century yet while I can think of several men of similar age that appear to have their full mental faculties (Alan Alda, Warren Buffet, Jimmy Carter - just off the top of my head), John McCain is not one of them.

If we live long enough, we're all likely to succumb to dementia (she thinks as she readily came up with Berkshire-Hathaway but took another few seconds to recall Buffet) but it's clear that certain factors advance the progression. One such factor is stress and it would be hard to imagine anything more stressful than life as a POW. So while McCain may appear to be lucid much of the time, the fact he can lapse back to Vietnam and refer to the crowd at his campaign rally as "my fellow prisoners", makes it hard to argue that he's of entirely sound mind.

One might argue that his selection of Palin as running mate is another indication of his mind failing but I think it represents cowardice and/or cynicism at their worst. Cowardice in allowing your running mate to be selected for you and/or cynicism in using the religious right as a tool (a means to an end) once again and believing women and rural voters so shallow that dangling a female before them is all that it would take to garner their vote (yes, I know there's a small segment for whom this strategy will work).

So there you have it. McCain in a nutshell. Regardless of what you think of his policy positions (and there are not many on which I'd agree with him) or his campaign's race-baiting and fear-mongering tactics -he's too ill-tempered, a coward or cynic and signs of his mental instability alone (Did you watch the debates?) should be cause for worry and sufficient reason to reject him as a viable candidate for the office of president.

*Droppin' the "g" there is me bein' all quaint and folksy like and I assure you that, as a Minnesota native, I can throw in the Scandahoovian influence with the best of them so, perhaps, I should run for office (after all I've paddled my canoe to Canada from Rose Lake in the BWCA so I have foreign policy credentials up the ol' wazoo or is that the ol' Wasilla).

Beyond McCain's balancing on dementia's doorstep, his physical health is also an issue. Several bouts of cancer and several hundred pages of medical records are not only a testament to his advanced age but his relative health yet his records have not been made available for assessment so we're left with average life span of 75 years to assess McCain's viability through a single term.

First, we might assume, given his voluminous medical records (and the little we do know about crashes, cancer and torture and temperament), that for McCain it will be something less than this average. Second, these determinations are based on how long individuals born today might be expected to live and John McCain was born many, many, many yesterdays ago. So, statistically speaking, John McCain is probably already dead and just hasn't realized it (realization will come tomorrow). That means that if you are voting for the McCain/Palin ticket you are voting, in all likelihood, for Palin as president.

Sarah Palin is a dimwitted, ignorant rube and McCain's selection of her as running mate is an insult to every woman and rural resident with a semi-functional brainstem. Seriously, how stupid (not to mention full of yourself) do you have to be to believe that the President of France is going to call you for a chat let alone talk about hunting from a helicopter with you. However, not realizing an obvious hoax is one thing but her part of the conversation given she believed she was speaking with Sarkozy ... this is one stupid female.

Ignorant, and willfully so, because, for one thing, she continues to misstate the duties/role of the VP even though she has been corrected on more than one occasion - you think she could just memorize the correct response at some point.

A rube because, among other things, she thinks the proximity of Alaska to Russia confers some foreign policy credential on her.

Sometimes the options are so ludicrous, so ridiculous there's nothing for it but to laugh - McCain/Palin is such an option.

While a reasoned comparison of the two tickets (Obama is everything McCain is not - young, vigorous, even tempered and thoughtful - both are reasonably intelligent) argues for an Obama/Biden win, it has little to do with the necessity of a landslide.

A landslide is needed to make it clear that we, as a united people, Americans, will no longer tolerate the hatred, racism and bigotry that has been cultivated by the Republican Party and harbored by religion.

I'm not saying that racists, bigots and haters are only on the right side of the political spectrum but what I am saying is that, as an institution, today's Republican Party, through its spokespersons, candidates and national committee recruit, incite, foster and give voice to these people. As an institution, they promote divisiveness not on issues or particular candidates but on class attributes.

The Republicans may have rendered liberal and conservative meaningless (I'm still trying to figure out how a word that has liber [free] as a root can be a negative and I can't for the life of me discern what is conservative about the modern Republican unless it refers to the number of people to which they believe wealth and power is due) but that's not the same thing as rendering them useless.

No, liberal along with elite, has become something to avoid. Elite used to mean the best of the best -Nobel Laureate, Navy Seal, olympic athlete, summa cum laude graduate -but now although it's synonymous for educated, literate, well-informed, articulate, in Republican vernacular it is also something to hate (hence the attraction of Palin who is none of that while Obama is, as we all know by now, a liberal elite). I can understand why Republicans and Evangelicals are united in their derision of higher education as studies have shown that the higher education you have attained the less likely you are to be either a Republican or religious (particularly a fundamental Christian/Evangelical) but I can't understand why this would work as a divisive tool with the average voter - why they wouldn't prefer to elect someone demonstrably smarter than they are? Nonetheless -a hate-mongering tool used routinely on the stump and in ads by Republican candidates and the RNC.

One would think that Republicans would have to employ a little more subtlety (right former-Senator, Allen?) when fomenting racism and bigotry and, more often than not they do - they talk about Obama being different, not seeing America as they do, using his middle name (for no apparent reason), they may darken a candidate's skin color in an ad, talk about defending marriage (or failing to do so) rather than denying rights but their intent is clear - bring the hatred, the dark side, the base if you will, to the fore in a despicable effort to further their agenda -consequences be damned. Here, unfortunately, is where they partner with religion.

For those who hide behind or use religion as an excuse to be, for example, against gay marriage - I call bullshit. I don't care what inanity you believe, the facts are that every religious sect cherry-picks its dogma by selective interpretation of its given holy text so why is their vehemence saved for something that's barely mentioned? They dismiss some things by metaphor others by the state of the culture at the time the text was written but not homosexuality. I suspect most of this is due to ignorance of biology (but a discussion of our woefully inadequate educational system is for another time) - they believe homosexuality is a choice.

Galileo was imprisoned as a heretic for advocating something we all (well most - the whole functioning brainstem thing) take as given now - that the earth revolves around the sun not the geocentric view given a literal interpretation of the bible -interpretations were modified. While scientists haven't yet identified the specific genetic and epigenetic factors responsible for sexual orientation there is no doubt that it is not the result of making a conscious choice.

The Mormon Church (one of the most inane religious sects) has spent more than $20 million dollars to deny gays and lesbians the right to marry in California and I'm still trying to figure out how same-sex couples marrying is a threat to heterosexual marriage but then I've only been married 30 years (tomorrow) so I suppose we could still be torn asunder. I think the Mormons have cause for worry though because when the good Christians are finished with the homosexuals they'll need another target - maybe it will be those that they don't think are real Christians -like Mormons.

In his first inaugural address, Lincoln closed by saying:

We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield, and patriot grave, to every living heart and hearthstone, all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

Obama is not a Muslim and even if he were that would not make him an enemy. Same-sex couples are not our enemies. Hatred racism and bigotry born of ignorance ... that is the enemy. I don't believe in angels but I believe in the notion of the better angels of our nature and hope you bring them along to the polls. We need a landslide to save us from our darker nature. Don't give it voice. Don't vote McCain/Palin.

At the very least, as Jim Hightower writes today:

As we traipse merrily into our voting booths, let's revisit the quaint notion that a government ought to be minimally competent.

Finally, I'm fairly certain I can count the times I've thought George Will was right about something on less than my full complement of fingers but I sure hope he's right here. Oooh - Larry Sabato's crystal ball, which has a fairly good track record, is also looking very promising and it's tragic that Obama's grandmother didn't live to see it.

It Takes a Swede

2008-02-04T23:16:00.000-07:00

To point out what myself and others, who are not caught up in the groundswell of the making-history rationale of candidate selection, have seen all along ... we have no left. Of the two Republican-lites, Obama is the worst. This is the kind of pandering, faith-based bipartisan wheeling and dealing you can expect with his leadership. The pretzel politician; he'll Bob-Barker us into oblivion.

Hillary stands up for MoveOn and votes against senate condemnation for their Petraeus ad, while Obama, as is often the case for controversial votes, doesn't bother to vote. MoveOn members endorse Obama.

Ah ... the American electorate. None more fickle, shallow, lazy or ill-informed. And so it is that:

From a European perspective, US politics are an ongoing battle between the extreme Right and the middle Right. The Republican presidential candidates are really, really scary people in my view. So all of us in the world at large who live under the shadow of US political hegemony are holding our breaths, hoping that Clinton or Obama will make it into office. They're pretty bad, but the alternative would be unspeakably dreadful.

The bar so low but the placement ... ours.

Enter Stage Left

2008-01-30T20:37:00.000-07:00

Spoiler alert.

Left* With No Choice

2008-01-30T07:55:00.000-07:00

It appears that Edwards will drop out of the race today. Given the huge crowd yesterday in Minnesota, I find it difficult to believe that he would drop out before Tuesday unless it has to do with Elizabeth's health - she was not with him yesterday. My daughter, who was at the rally, said he appeared weary but she chalked it up to exhaustion ... perhaps, not.

Be well, Edwards family.

*double entendre intended

Can They Hear You Now?

2008-01-27T12:22:00.000-07:00

Last Thursday the U.S. Senate [The House not even being in session because the Republicans, who after their years in power with a 2 1/2-day work week are having difficulty adjusting to a nearly 4-day work week, needed a break] killed the only semi-sane FISA bill (Judiciary Committee bill) and where were your candidates ... your wanna be leaders? [I say your because I have no intention of voting for either Clinton or Obama]

Nowhere in sight. Encourage them to act like leaders and be in DC to vote no on cloture for the heinous FISA bill that the Bush Administration and GOP are pushing [with additional help from the twat, Harry Reid, who while both honoring GOP bill holds and not requiring them to actually filibuster Dem bills has failed to extend the same respect/courtesy to Senator Dodd -a member of his own party].

Read this from Senator Dodd, a former presidential candidate who has demonstrated leadership on this important issue as well as others affecting the erosion of our constitution.

Pay attention. Make some calls, send some faxes. Demand accountability. Demand oversight. Demand leadership.

Update: Well. Well. Guess the phone calls had an impact. Clinton and Obama will both be in DC to vote against cloture tomorrow.

Nontrivial Empty Gestures for $600, Alex

2008-01-27T08:36:00.000-07:00

A gift for the investor who has everything.

What is a stimulus package.

In an election year we can depend on the usual bipartisan 50 point drop in I.Q. of our elected representatives. Hey Congress ... try stimulating this.

Larry the Grammarian

2008-01-08T23:07:00.000-07:00

Oh. My. This just keeps on getting better. Larry's lawyer filed a 27-page brief formally initiating an appeal of the judge's October ruling rejecting his plea withdrawal argument.

In it they argue that wittle Warry's actions couldn't have been a crime because 1) they could not have been offensive to the officer because he invited Craig's response and 2) the law states that "the conduct at issue have a tendency to alarm or anger others" and there was only wun wittle officer.

Another 0.25%

2008-01-08T21:58:00.000-07:00

No, not interest rates but the approximate additional percentage of the electorate that cast their votes in New Hampshire today.

Hillary stole Obama's crown and perhaps the largest state in the union will, for the first time since this ridiculous primary system was installed decades ago, have an impact in deciding our nominee.

It doesn't mean the outcome will be any better (I don't imagine the coverage will change. Edwards will remain invisible, Hillary's just a girl so she can be attacked from 360° and Obama gets a free ride) but at least it will be decided by a larger portion of the voting population and a most definitely more representative cross-section.

Once again, the ratio of Dems/Rep was reported about 2:1. So the message to the Republican candidates is that your peops are not that into you.

The Headline That Should Have Been

2008-01-04T16:06:00.000-07:00

IOWA VOTERS DIVIDED ON WHO SHOULD LEAD COUNTRY

Anything other than that dismisses the votes of the majority of Iowa caucus participants.

Two things are crystal clear from the Iowa caucus yesterday. A three-way Democratic split demonstrates that Iowans are in some disagreement over which specific candidate should be the nominee, but the nearly 2:1 Democrat:Republican caucus turnout and the fact that Hillary, the 3rd place Democratic vote-getter received nearly twice as many votes as the leading Republican candidate, Huckabee, leaves little doubt as from which party Iowans think the next president should come.

Obama's Premature Ejaculation Oration

2008-01-04T08:56:00.000-07:00

Yes, with more than 60% of the caucus voters in a single state voting for a candidate other than him, he makes a speech as if he's not only won the Democratic nomination, but the presidency.

...Years from now, you'll look back and you'll say that this was the moment, this was the place where America remembered what it means to hope...

America? Hardly. Yes, this the change we need. We've never had a sanctimonious empty suit in the White House before.

The Trouble with Elections

2008-01-03T12:03:00.000-07:00

I was driving around the other day and saw a vehicle with the Darwin fish emblem and a Ron Paul sticker on the bumper - makes you wonder how little the person knows about his other wacky positions.

That's the problem with elections - an astoundingly uninformed electorate.

Hillary as a progressive and Obama as a change agent ... right.

Hey Iowa, ABCO (Anybody But Clinton or Obama) - you owe us for Kerry last time around.

Fun w/ Venn Diagrams

2007-12-05T13:01:00.000-07:00

You know I never thought Barbara Walters could out dumb *teh dumb of that blond chick. However, a few months ago she added Sherri unsure of the earth's roundness Shephard to the show and now ...she's even outdone herself. Sherri evidently hasn't heard of B.C. because she doesn't believe " ... anything predated christians ..." and that Jesus came before the Greeks and the Romans.

But hey, she's just a talk show flunky on a program of which the viewership primarily consists of those possessing a similar level of sophistication but what of a presidential candidate?

Yes, Mike believer of creation, nonbeliever of evolution Huckabee who touts his theology degree as a foreign policy credential can't, apparently, even keep up with current events. Never mind that the National Intelligence Estimate has been in the news for days (as well as numerous times during the Bush reign) and that the Idiot in Chief (a member of Mike's own political party) thought it significant enough to hold a presser but elect-me Mike don't know nothin' 'bout no 'telligence. [my apologies to Margaret Mitchell. Also, obviously, the diagram is not to scale. Although Sherri and Mike are truly huge ignoramuses they certainly don't comprise quite the percentage of their ilk represented in the pic.]

And for the record ... you don't get to not believe in Evolution; it's not a belief system. Nor is it random or an accident. However, evolution deniers are correct on one point ... it's not a fact. Not a single one anyway. It's many many facts based on voluminous observations and testable, and tested, hypotheses leading to the theory.

You see, while it may be used in a manner to indicate as much, a theory is not a hunch. It's not something flimsy or weak but a very strong foundation that has been strengthened and refined over time. Evolution may never be a law, not owing to any deficiency but because laws tend to be mathematical in nature -equations with predictable solutions.

But while there's not any all encompassing evolutionary equation for which we can enter v, w and x evolutionary variables to solve for z that's not to say it doesn't have predictive capability. As a demonstrated theory that's a necessity. Long before the fossil record obliged by contributing a physical record, features of expected transitional species to fill in existing gaps in the evolutionary trail were predicted by scientists. For example, Tiktaalik discovered only last year looks (as expected) like a cross between primitive fish and the early tetrapods (4-legged animals) and represents the earliest appearance of tetrapod features - and around 12 million years before the first tetrapods.

Let's face it, most people find it difficult to solve even simple mathematical equations (another failure of our educational system but that's a topic for another day), evolution is a complex theory and the scale of evolutionary time is hard to fathom (perhaps especially so for such an ego-centric population as is our nation) but we really have to start to be aggressive in challenging all of this 'random' nonsense. It's just plain wrong. Wrong and dangerous.

Of course, like every other man of intelligence and education I do believe in organic evolution. It surprises me that at this late date such questions should be raised.

That was from Woodrow Wilson in 1922. Look where we are today. It's sad. It's depressing. Looking at the Republican candidates for president certainly doesn't assuage the feeling. Seriously, when was the last time the Republican party fielded a candidate that wasn't bat-shit crazy?

Okay, tirade finished. Sometimes you just have to get it out.

*Not a typo ... convention.

The God-Forsaken Rockies

2007-10-28T22:06:00.000-06:00

Not so chosen after all. Never mind belief in a supernatural entity keeping tabs on us all, it takes a particular arrogance to think that entity would care about the outcome of any given sporting event let alone backing a particular team. I don't really care about baseball but when the Rockies made it into the World Series, I wanted Boston in 4. Thank you, ~~God~~ Sox!

Hitting the Sauce Juice

2007-10-28T12:04:00.000-06:00

Craig who, of course, never solicited sex in the MSP airport restroom, having lost the appeal to withdraw his guilty plea, tries another tack. Along the lines of OJ Simpson's If I Did It approach, Larry now wants us to believe (or rather a MN appeals court judge to swallow) that though he didn't do it, if he were to have done it, he should not have been able to plead guilty to it, because it would not have been a crime, as it would have represented free speech and therefore would have been protected by the Constitution.

Irony, along with hypocrisy, is alive and well in the Republican party. Craig who has acted as a rubber stamp for this administration while they have shred that same document by the use of torture, illegal wire-tapping, denial of habeas and the latest proposal of retroactive immunity for the criminally-inclined telecom corporations, thinks his solicitation of sex in a public bathroom should be a protected legal right.

We also learned that Craig had Mr. Martin (a criminal defense attorney) on retainer not merely before he entered his guilty plea but before he was even arrested.

While I never bought Craig's lie that he didn't consult an attorney before rendering his plea, the fact that he included that apparent lie in his formal (legal) filings with the court is tantamount to lying under oath. I categorize the lie as being apparent only in the sense that Larry hired an attorney to expressly defend him from the onslaught of the Idaho Statesman in efforts to out him as a nasty, naughty gay boy yet apparently was too embarrassed to let him in on his little arrest issue.

So, the saga continues and we can look forward to new allegations and other humiliating reports about the sad, pathetic, senator who refuses to admit he's no longer wanted by his party or his constituents. Maybe someday this will be made into an opera.

A Work Around

2007-10-11T12:40:00.000-06:00

Larry LaRocco, while not trading places, has been familiarizing himself with the vocations of various people across the state in an effort to understand how best to represent them in the U.S. Senate. Here's lucky number 11:

Codes

2007-10-05T13:37:00.000-06:00

Never mind the trolling-in-bathrooms-for-sex secret code, evidently closeted gay republican politicians have a special addendum of their own.

I mean what are the chances that this is merely a coinky dink?

Joey DiFatta, Republican Councilman from Nola evidently withdrew from a state senate campaign when reports of his lewd behavior were about to surface.

In one instance he got caught doing the wide-stance-toe-tapping shuffle in a restroom and in both instances, when asked for his identification, he "produced his commission from the St. Bernard Sheriff's Office identifying him as a captain". [my emphasis]

The attempted power play didn't work for him either. Too bad for these guys that nobody else seems to think they're quite as important as they think themselves to be.

It's Lying Time Again ...

2007-10-04T18:48:00.000-06:00

Craig won't leave the senate

He said he'd leave if stuck with his guilty plea

The judge didn't buy his line and we didn't either

It's one more renege, back to DC and lying time [to the tune of It's Cying Time Again]

Get outta the boat, Larry.

I have to agree with Larry and Billy on one thing though, I was disappointed in Judge Porter's decision today.

Not, mind you, that is was wrong - but I was soooo looking forward to the jury's field trip to the men's room to see a demonstration on just how wide one's stance has to be to reach into the next stall. I know if I were the prosecutor, I would have insisted on it.

And the perp walk. We'll never get to see Larry to the wide stance perp walk.

Some days it just doesn't pay to get out of bed.

Breaking News: Craig in Court

2007-09-26T14:24:00.000-06:00

Evidently the judge has decided not to decide yet. He won't likely be deciding 'til after the 30th. Poor Larry ... it's a conspiracy.

Priorities

2007-09-25T16:44:00.001-06:00

[click pic to biggie size; data from here]

Yes, to ensure (in theory, because in actuality this is a state-run program) no one gets covered that shouldn't and the funding levels will have no regard to cost of living (that is people who live in areas like NY where the salaries are higher but the cost of living is as well - the income cut-offs remain the same); they'll vote it down. Get the troops out of Iraq? No. Ensure the troops have as much time at home as on tour in Iraq - no. Keep voting for these fiscal conservatives [what an oxymoron that is] and they'll keep digging us into a hole any time they're left to govern.

Update: It appears that Mr. Simpson voted in favor of the bill today.

If I were a cynic, I might suggest that he did so knowing that The House did not have a veto-proof majority so his vote was moot. Mike can have his cake and eat it too. He can tell his constituents (of which I thankfully am not one ... oh wait -never mind) that he understands, it's a travesty that the program didn't get renewed but, after all, he voted for it. So he is, of course, blameless.

That's what I might suggest were I a cynic but, then again, you have to admit that vote was a 180-degree turn from his earlier position:

...The Democrat bill is an underhanded, devious step towards Hillary-care: a government-run, government-mandated health insurance plan for everyone, regardless of income, age or citizenship.

...This bill is bad for Idaho and bad for children.

I believe I've previously discussed other aspects of Rep. Simpson's presentation of the bill.

Cynic? Who, me?

Fun w/ Venn Diagrams

2007-09-24T19:56:00.000-06:00

Oops ... He Did It Again

2007-09-24T18:38:00.000-06:00

While this picture may not be worth a thousand words, it's likely worth a whole heckuva lot more than the dozens of words in this note. And doesn't Larry have neat printing? [my emphasis]
Doesn't seem to indicate that Craig was all that stressed out or in any disagreement with the prosecutor does it? If Craig thinks this is going to play well, he ought to love the prosecutor's affidavit. [pdf] Here are just a couple of juicy tidbits:

13. (p. 3 of 33) ... I explained that the plea petition would be filed with the court and the petition and conviction would be a matter of public record. [As I said before, I couldn't believe he didn't know this and now, it appears, he was definitively informed of the fact.]

14. (same page) During the July 17, 2007 phone conversation, the Defendant expressed that he was in a difficult situation as a result of the nature of the charges and his position as a ~~member of a zealous homophobic party~~ United States Senator. I responded to the Defendant that I had appreciation for the fact that this was probably a difficult situation and told him that it was a situation regarding which he should seek advice from an attorney. ...[emphasis mine]

It's hard to argue misunderstanding of the situation based on these statements by the prosecutor. But if Craig's note and the prosecutor's affidavit don't sink him, take a gander at the prosecutor's motion to dismiss [pdf] that was filed in court today. Basically, the prosecutor isn't buying Craig's argument and calls him out for his political theater:

B. (p. 39 of 41) The Defendant Has Not Been Diligent in Seeking a Withdrawal of His Plea but Instead Has Waited in an Apparent Attempt to Gauge the Public Response to His Arrest and Political Turmoil.

It's difficult for me to imagine how Craig could possibly come to the conclusion that this exercise was going to come out favorably for him regardless of the legal outcome. Based on the prosecutor's motion, I don't think the legal outcome will be favorable either.

Irony: Alive and Well

2007-09-24T10:32:00.000-06:00

About whom would you think this statement might be made:

You've isolated your nation. You've taken a nation of proud and honorable people and made your country the pariah of the world.

This would have been my guess -but I would have been wrong.

No, this was George W. Bush commenting on someone else - not the other way around. Specifically, his comment was directed at the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Did anyone catch Scott Pelley's interview with Ahmadinejad on 60 minutes last night?

Was it just me or was he totally out of line with his arrogant and accusatory tone right at the outset:

PELLEY: Mr. President, do you intend to press your request to visit the World Trade Center site in New York?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, it was included in my program, if we have the time and the conditions are conducive, I will try to do that.

PELLEY: But the New York Police Department and others do not appear to want you there. Do you intend to go there anyway?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, over there, local officials need to make the necessary coordinations. If they can't do that, I won't insist.

PELLEY: Sir, what were you thinking? The World Trade Center site is the most sensitive place in the American heart, and you must have known that visiting there would be insulting to many, many Americans.

AHMADINEJAD: Why should it be insulting?

PELLEY: Well, sir, you're the head of government of an Islamist state that the United States government says is a major exporter of terrorism around the world. [my emphasis]

One has to wonder if Scott would have asked this of any member of the monarchy from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (you know the country from which came the majority of 9/11 hijackers). But chances are some of them have already visited there - they certainly would not be denied. And, why exactly would it be insulting? There is no evidence and, as far as I know, no claim to date that Iran had anything to do with the attacks (merely the entirely false and premeditated claims that Saddam/Iraq was involved).

Next, Pelley basically accuses Ahmadinejad's government of killing Americans in Iraq based on our government assertions that he takes as fact. Ahmadinejad then questions whether Pelley is a journalist or a politician and mentions that Saddam's WMDs were facts as well.

Ooh, an American journalist being questioned as to their role as journalist or Administration Mouthpiece -not something that happens often here, that had to hurt.

Pelley, again speaking for all Americans, attacks Ahmadinejad for smiling when he's querying him about having American blood on his hands.

Hmmm - inappropriate smiling. Does that evoke a picture of anyone? Has Pelley or anyone else in the MSM asked George W. Bush about the sh*t-eating smirk planted on his face even when discussing the sacrifice of our troops in Iraq?

Ahmadinejad then illustrates that he's more aware of the position of the American people with regard to Iraq than either the DC punditry or, apparently, Scott Pelley and he questions whether Mr. Pelley has the right to speak on behalf of the American people.

Pelley doesn't have the right to speak on my behalf - that's for certain but, more importantly, is this anyway for an American journalist to address the leader of another country? Never mind that it's ludicrous at this juncture to take anything that the Bush administration states as fact, Pelley's demeanor is as insulting, arrogant and counter-productive as Bush's foreign policy.

Near the end of the interview, Pelley insists that Ahamadinejad name a trait that he admires in Bush. Excuse me? I, as a patriotic American (one who actually served in the military) can't come up with a single redeeming quality of George W. Bush and given all the insulting rhetoric Bush has spouted about Ahmadinejad he's suppose to what ... turn the other cheek and say something nice about George?

The very premise of the question is absurd and when Ahmadinejad turns it around on Pelley, the best that he can come up with is that Bush is a religious man. Speaks volumes.

Finally, Pelley quotes Bush's comment referred to above and asks him to respond to it. Okay, I am not the only one who thought the quote was about rather than from Bush. I queried two people today (who did not see 60 minutes), reading the quote and then asking them to tell me to whom the quote was referring - the immediate response was Bush in both instances. Here's the exchange in the interview:

PELLEY: I take it you can't think of anything you like about President Bush.

AHMADEINEJAD: Well, I'm not familiar with the gentleman's private life. Maybe in his private life he is very kind or a determined man. I'm not aware of that. I base my judgment on what I see in his public life. Having said that, I think that President Bush can behave much better. There were golden opportunities for President Bush. He should have used them better.

PELLEY: I asked President Bush what he would say to you if he were sitting in this chair. And he told me, quote, speaking to you, that you've made terrible choices for your people. You've isolated your nation. You've taken a nation of proud and honorable people and made your country the pariah of the world. These are President Bush's words to you. What's your reply to the president?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, President Bush is free to think as he pleases and to say what he pleases. I don't oppose the freedom of speech. I believe in freedom of speech. President Bush is free to say what he pleases. But these would not change the truth. So that President Bush knows the Iranian people are dearly loved today. We can very well put this to the test to find out who has become isolated. Again, maybe one of my friends could go to another country and a friend of President Bush could go to the same country, find out which one of us is isolated. You're free to choose any country you like. I don't think that President Bush has said these things. Rather, I prefer to think that this is your impression of what the president has said.

PELLEY: I'm quoting the president directly for the record.

AHMADEINEJAD: This is a direct quote? So, well, this tells me that there's a great divide between us.

A great divide indeed. Another thing that struck me when reading the transcript of the interview today was the, how shall I say it, creative editing that went into the broadcast as well. Let's just say that you might come away with a different impression of Ahmadinejad's responses in reading the transcript than from having watched the 60 minutes presentation. What a shoddy piece of journalism.

The Right Rights

2007-09-23T23:01:00.000-06:00

What a great week for democracy in America.

It's good to know that Craig, who's fighting for rights he perceives he is owed as a member of the elite senatorial class, could take time out of his busy schedule to show up in DC and join Crapo to vote to deny the rights of others:

1) Habeas corpus - Never mind that our forefathers thought this right so important they sought to address it in the constitution, nonetheless congress with its passing of The Military Commissions Act back when the freedom-and-independence-loving Republicans were in power in 2006 suspended this right. Democrats attempted to restore the right but the GOP really isn't into the restoration of rights.

2) No taxation without representation. It seems to me there was a revolution or a war of some kind fought over this one but, again, Republicans don't think the population in the District of Columbia, which is greater than that of the state of Wyoming, deserves to be represented in congress. Blocked again by the individual-rights-loving Republicans. Of course, unlike the lily-white-red-voting Wyomingites the majority in D.C. are black and typically vote blue.

Did I miss anything? Oh yes, while our esteemed senators are willing to allow more of our young men and women die in Iraq to cover Bush's ass they stood up and condemned Moveon.org's ad calling General Paetreus out for the political whore that he is. Well, we've reached a new low now with our representatives condemning free speech on our dime.

As Edmund Burke said, all that's necessary is for good men to do nothing. Imagine if Colin Powell would have had the courage to speak up and resign before he enabled this administration to get us into this war in the first place, if Paetreus would have had the integrity and resolve to put forth the truth in his testimony before congress. Two generals ... good little soldiers both.

Backyard Entomology

2007-09-12T18:14:00.000-06:00

Anyone have a clue as to the ID of this little guy/gal?

Fun w/ Venn Diagrams

2007-09-11T18:28:00.001-06:00

Craig's Little SM Freak Show

2007-09-11T17:17:00.000-06:00

Okay, so maybe not SM but masochistic to be sure.

At this point Craig should just go down to The Grove and piss himself in public as it could hardly be more pathetic an act than his filing this petition [pdf file] to withdraw is guilty plea.

If pride truly does go before the fall, Craig is still standing. His arrogance laid bare as a Full Monty in his motion.

From the very first sentence in the motion we are drawn back to his failed power play in Minnesota when he presented a young officer with a senate ID card in hopes of intimidating him:

Pursuant to Rule 15.05 of the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure, Larry Edwin Craig, a United States Senator from Idaho ("Senator Craig") [per usual, my emphasis], hereby moves this Court for an Order allowing him to withdraw his guilty plea entered in the above-captioned action on August 8, 2007.

Wow. One might wonder what the significance is, other than to ~~intimidate~~ influence the court, of his being a senator in this instance. They're not merely going to mention the fact but let you know at the outset that he will be referred to, from this point on, as Senator Craig (for just how long that holds remains to be seen).

Lost in the *outcome-based-ethics of the GOP, coverage by the mainstream media, and the takes of late-night comedians, the power trip is in good measure what this is about. After all, he's no ordinary citizen by gawd and he should not be subjected to this. His ID card, like a magic wand, should have made it all disappear. His magical powers having failed him, he hoped to bury the incident with the quietest of guilty pleas - one in which he would not have to submit to the humility of a public appearance; he mailed it in.

Now we're to believe it was Craig who was intimidated, by the Idaho Statesman no less. To even address the ludicrous nature of this assertion is to lend it too much credence. It would take only a casual perusal of past issues to disabuse anyone of this notion, the fawning of the articles and editorials so saccharine as to be barely digestible. I don't know Dan Popkey's political persuasion (or that of the paper's editors) but based on his ~~writing~~ pandering, I'd say he's definitely in the I-wanna-be-with-the-power-brokers club.

The latest evidence was perhaps the August 12th non-article article by Popkey as to whether Craig would run for re-election. While most any Idahoan (or certainly Boisean) with a pulse was aware of the reason for Popkey's leave, not many likely knew of his interview with Craig upon the completion of his investigative query. In hindsight it would appear as though the article did serve a purpose - signaling to Craig that he was safe. Granted this was after Craig entered his guilty plea and I've little doubt that he was panicked that news of his arrest might start that snowball rolling but that doesn't mean that the plea was "not knowingly and understandingly made" as his motion asserts.

Let's back up a bit.

Senator Craig states that he did not consult an attorney regarding the incident yet, 11 days after his arrest, he returned to the airport police station and requested information for his attorney. He was either lying then (if that's the case perhaps it was another failed attempt at intimidation hoping they might drop the charges if he informed them he'd involved a lawyer) or he's lying about not seeking counsel prior to his guilty plea. It is interesting to note that in his affadavit (a legal document appended to the motion) Craig chooses his words a little more carefully, stating "I did not seek advice of counsel on the date of my arrest" and then talks separately about signing the plea petition even though he did not believe himself to be guilty [more on that later] and that he did not seek advice before entering that plea. It's not clear whether or not he means at any point in the interim or whether he's being deceptively specific.

His basic argument now (after having consulted an attorney) is that he's not an attorney and can't be expected to have understood the "intricate" constitutional rights he was waiving by entering his plea ... a judge should have asked him about it.

As I've stated before, I'm not a lawyer, I have never been a lawyer, I don't do those things ... but I am aware of Miranda, as well as the 6th amendment, and what those rights entail -as are the majority of Americans if the variety and longevity of Law and Order(s) are any indication.

Are we to believe the senator didn't know that everyone is allowed their day in court? On the contrary, he didn't want a day in court, he wanted to avoid that at all costs hence his choice to mail a plea.

We're evidently supposed to also believe that Craig doesn't know that arrests are a matter of public record. Again, according to the motion, since the officer said he wouldn't go to the press, Craig had an expectation that all would be hush hush and that should be viewed as a "promise" that would be "binding on the courts and parties". You have got to be shitting me. This is pathetic - if the man is that stupid, that should be a crime in and of itself.

Further, they want to be able to withdraw his plea because "there is insufficient factual basis, as a matter of law, to support his plea of guilty". The because-you-didn't-prove-it excuse. Well, the senator could have exercised his right to a trial, then the prosecutor would have had to prove his or her case or maybe the judge would have tossed it but he decided to enter a guilty plea - the ball was in his court.

Apparently Craig is even confused by the nuanced difference between the words guilty and innocent. He pleaded guilty but now he "submits that he is innocent of the charges against him".

Look at the the copy of his plea agreement (appended to the motion). It does not take an attorney to discern the following from the document: precisely what you're pleading to, what rights you are waiving in entering the plea, acknowledgment of whether or not you are represented by counsel, specifically that you are not making any claim of innocence and also the (detailed) rights you are waiving by not entering the plea in person.

To suggest that Craig is innocent and naive is simply not credible. In reviewing the interview one wonders where is the outrage of an innocent heterosexual man? [nowhere in the tone of that interview to be sure] Perhaps more telling, however, is Craig's use of "entrapment". The only way he could think of it as entrapment is if he thought that the officer's moving his foot slowly up and down had been done in response to his foot tapping (solicitation) and that it was an enticement for Craig to continue. Craig may not have acted wisely at any juncture but he knew what he was doing every step of the way.

I agree with the cop ... embarrassing.

*Outcome-based ethics. Notice that Republicans are only morally outraged when the result of advertising their faux ethics will have a desirable outcome. Vitter, with prostitutes? Well, hey, it's straight sex and he comes from a state with a Democratic governor - leave well enough alone. Instead, they can show their moral superiority while running that homo Craig off and they're guaranteed another sheep from that state. Yet we're to believe it's only because Craig entered a guilty plea, not the arrest itself - only in their warped world view is that a positive assertion.

Legalese Ease (or Not)

2007-09-05T19:33:00.000-06:00

What did I say? Uh-huh.

Lawyers not involved in the case have said Craig faces a difficult challenge, pointing to Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure requiring that *a defendant show a "manifest injustice" to withdraw a guilty plea.

In Craig's case, he voluntarily signed a plea agreement that included a provision stating that the court would not accept such a confession of guilt from anyone who believed himself innocent.

Piece of cake, Larry.

*I don't think they made people think I'm gay is going to cut it.

Oh, and Butch, ya' know how you like to keep 'em guessing and do things contrary to what's expected of you... Call me, I could make myself available for a stint in the senate. Think of what that would do. This little scandal -it'd be forgotten in less than 24 hours.

Let the Good Times Roll

2007-09-05T11:55:00.000-06:00

Larry Craig is apparently having second thoughts about resigning. Never mind how schadenfreudelicious^TM it will be to watch the GOPers falling all over themselves to retract their previous stance, if this article is any indication of the talents of the crack team Craig has hired to revive his image - get me some popcorn. In the mean time, here's a little friendly advice, Senator:

First, don't let your spokesman use phrases like " he's not crying in his bedroom".

Second, using Spector as a bellwether for changing your announcement to intend to resign -probably not such a great idea. I don't mean to imply that Arlen can't be counted on for the strength of his conviction but ... you have been in the senate, right?

Third, you should really examine how an attorney's other clients have fared. You know Vick is likely doing some time in the big house and have you seen Gary Condit on the hill as of late? [Not to mention the character of his other high-profile clients - wouldn't want the whole guilt by association to raise its ugly head. Iverson and Vick are not exactly Boy Scouts but I suppose you're going for a tougher, more manly image - so maybe that's okay, big guy. Although you wouldn't want that stance getting any wider.]

Fourth, I think your ethics attorney may have already tripped coming out of the gate when speaking of other Senate ethics cases:

“If you look at all the cases the Senate has tried, they’re all bribery, treason, taking gifts from outsiders, all things that are expressly prohibited by law, rule or statute,” Brand said.

So, his hotshot DC lawyer is going to argue that the Senate Ethics Committee shouldn't have jurisdiction in this case because all other ethics cases have dealt with actions that were illegal, unlike Senator Craig's actions which merely violated a Minnesota statute and, therefore, were not prohibited by law or statute. It would appear Mr. Brand took Tortured Logic 101 with Bush. Hey, it may not make sense but I'm sure he's on solid legal footing there - no worries.

While you're up could you get a couple of cokes and some jujubes -it could be awhile before intermission.

Update: [from original posting of 9/4/07 10:35 PM]

Senator Craig is sooo gay [how gay is he?] - he can't even dial a phone straight. [Yeah, I know]

Perhaps more interesting (though no unexpected) is that while KHQ reports the entirety of the voice message Craig left on the phone:

"Yes, Billy, this is Larry Craig calling, you can reach me on my cell. Arlen Specter is now willing to come out in my defense arguing that all he know that I've been railroaded and all that. Having all that we've reshaped my statement to say it is my intent to resign on September 30. I think it is very important for you to make as bold a statement as you are comfortable with this afternoon. I hope you could make it in front of the cameras. I think it would ride the story that I am willing to fight that I have quality people out there fighting in my defense and that this thing could take a new turn or a new shape, it has that potential. Anyway give me a buzz, or give Mike a buzz on that, we are headed to my press conference now. Thank you, bye."

The Statesman reporter/editorial staff saw fit to excise the emphasized portion above.

[So, he wants his attorney to make as bold a statement as he is comfortable with ... Comfortable with legally because Craig has admitted his guilt to his attorney or comfortable with personally as Billy knows Larry is gay. Could you do it in front of the cameras - I need all the help I can get here - I think maybe little Larry had spent some time crying in his bedroom. Nice deletion Statesman.]

Jeralyn thinks Craig may have a shot at his plea reversal as the mail-in plea form doesn't inform him of his right to counsel - but what's a defense attorney suppose to say. Craig was given his Miranda warning by the officer and that's on tape - I don't believe the law states that an individual has to be made aware of his or her rights at every step of the process.

You can listen to the message here.

Sunday Special: Let's Be Frank

2007-09-02T17:18:00.000-06:00

What he didn't say

Contrary to local media reports, Senator Craig did not apologize to Idahoans in his resignation statement yesterday. [ooh yesterday? Who said it was going happen yesterday?] What he said was:

I apologize to the people of our great state for being unable to serve out a term to which I have been elected.

Hmmm - I'm sure he does regret being unable to serve out his term but that hardly constitutes an apology in any way shape or form.

He also did not state that he would vigorously fight the charges against him.

His website does indicate that he has retained a lawyer to "handle issues pertaining to the Senate Ethics Committee investigation".

He refers queries about his legal defense with regard to the Minnesota incident to Judy Smith who will be handling "all other legal affairs".

I think his response is along the same lines as his showing the young officer his senate ID card and his indication that suing Mike Rogers, the blogger who first outed him, was not out of the question - bluff, bluster, idle threats.

There will be no suits and I would further suggest there will be no attempt to withdraw his plea.

First, Senator Craig entered a straight plea, not an Alford plea that would avoid admission of guilt. No doubt there is language that basically says he was not coerced in any way and was offering a truthful plea. Attempting to withdraw it now would suggest that he was lying in his initial plea; I'm not a lawyer so I don't know if that would constitute perjury but ...

Second, if he withdraws his plea, the original charge will be reinstated (a felony I believe) and you can bet all sorts of details, about let's say, just how far out of the way this particular restroom may have been relative to the expected path Craig would have taken in changing planes, will come out. A chance he wants to take? I think not.

As an aside, not that it was reported but, Craig stated:

I hope I have served you and our state to the best of my ability.

Not I hope you know/believe that I have served you, but that he hopes he has done so.

He hopes? Doesn't he know? If he doesn't know, who does?

Penalty - Delay of Game

Puhleez, can you get over it already. I am so damned sick of hearing about how wonderful the BSU bronco football team is and how last year's Fiesta Bowl was the greatest game in college history ... blah, blah, blah. You would think that there was nothing else positive about Boise, Idaho other than this athletic program.

Let's be frank, the Fiesta Bowl? A miracle on ice -it wasn't.

Yes, Oklahoma has 9 national titles; 8 of the 9 were prior to 1986. Both teams had starting quarterbacks that were seniors except:

While Zabransky was in his 3rd year as starting quarterback, Oklahoma's quarterback a fifth-year senior (owing to the fact that he was red-shirted as a junior not being needed at either the quarterback position that he wanted or as a wide receiver, the position he played the previous season), was in his first season as starting quarterback and this, only because the starter was removed from the team in August for NCAA violations. In fact, prior to last season Thompson (OK's QB) hadn't played any minutes in that position since 2003 when he was last a second string quarterback.

Thompson threw 3 interceptions and lost a fumble.

Yes, those are the things of which the greatest ball games are made [I know it was all BSU's amazing defense].

That said, did Chris Petersen coach a helluva a game? Indeed he did. Credit, where credit due.

Update: And Another Thing

Just to get this out ahead of the election cycle -could we please find some political commentators who aren't completely worthless?!!

Granted Jim Weatherby sounds like a genius compared to Jasper LiCalzi (who sounds as though he graduated from the same educational system, "like as such", that produced Miss Teen South Carolina), but still.

Makin' Book and More

2007-08-30T20:50:00.000-06:00

If I were a betting ~~man~~ gal, I'd say Saturday (or late Friday evening), after everyone has hit the road for their weekend destinations, for the announcement of Craig's resignation. That'll give him a couple of dead news days for the smoke to dissipate.

Craig's denials just aren't credible. But then, that's not really news. His denials, especially the preemptive one, have never been credible. Craig has never been a particularly nice or honest man. One might even say he's been a bad, naughty, nasty boy. Before this latest brouhaha over his peccadillo in the men's restroom, I was going to take him to task for the fundamental dishonesty [much like Simpson's] displayed on his website. It seems kind of pointless now but what the heck.

Although his denial presser has moved them off the front page, he has "releases" where he blames the Democrats for the failure of congress to pass any legislation and, get this, for the lack of fiscal responsibility. Yes, two Republican administrations (Reagan and the current White House occupant) digging our country into a hole several trillions of dollars deep (Bush decimating trillons in surplus first) and Craig wants to lecture Democrats on fiscal responsibility. But what can you expect from a guy who blames a newspaper (especially one who has gone out of its way to fawn all over him) for his pleading guilty to extranecessary^TM restroom activities.

As an aside, credit where credit due. While I may disagree with ~~a few~~, ~~several~~,~~many~~, most of his positions, Sen. Crapo's website represents all we should expect from that of an elected official. It's informative and has clear statements of his positions, information on legislation he's working on, complete contact information (and an invitation to do so) and links to the congressional record so we can see how he is voting on our behalf. Thank you, senator.

Rep. Sali? There's really no point is there? He's just fundamentally* insane.

* double entendre [for Sali supporters -here you can look it up]

Creationism

2007-08-27T23:57:00.000-06:00

In a manner of speaking anyway.

Republicans. Christians. Values [we'll take it at face value for the purposes of this rant] voters. The Bushes, Romneys, Crapos, and Salies create the Mark Foleys and Larry Craigs of the world. See, for whatever reason, they believe your tripe ... homosexuality is bad. Then when they're forced to hide and suppress their natural human emotions and urges they seek out the safety of strangers and anonymous assignations.

Yes, Democrats are significantly more accepting and that's why among their ranks they have Barney Frank, an openly gay congressman in a committed relationship living in that sinful state of Massachusetts where homosexual couples are allowed to wed. [It should be noted that MA has the lowest divorce rate in the U. S. -so much for destroying heterosexual marriage; the highest rate by far being in those christian values red states -go figure]

So, here's a clue people. No matter what your beliefs and your ignorance of biology tell you, you have as much choice in deciding your eye color as individuals have in "choosing" their sexual orientation and no amount of prayer is going to change that. [or change anything for that matter as studies have shown]

I know, I don't have any links to reference material tonight but I am just so sick of the pious and their continual obsession with controlling the lives of others that they can do their own searches and find the damn data themselves -it's readily available.[though that doesn't mean it's within their grasp]

Yes, starting tomorrow we'll hear their reactions (to something that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone with an IQ above 12 and not in religious denial) and on whatever bizarre scale they have of sin gradation, you can be sure that it won't be Craig's deceit, or the damage he's caused to others lives that will cause their disappointment and anger ... it'll be his homosexuality. It's bad. It may not be mentioned as often in the bible as greed or sloth but surely that's an oversight because it's even worse than murder. Abortions be damned but we'll have our death penalty. Can I get an amen?

Okay, I'm done now but I won't feel better until they keep their damn religion out of our government and laws. And read some friggin history books people - yes, Sali, that means you.

How about some Thomas Paine, you know one of the guys who actually fought for our freedom and without whom our little revolution would likely have failed. Yes, Tom Paine, the revolution, the constitution -an avowed atheist. And not the only one. There's a difference between being a nation of *christians which, by majority, we are now and a *christian nation which we were not and, hopefully, will never be. Amen.

*Don't comment to tell me I forgot to capitalize christian(s); if I thought it worthy of a capital I'd have given it one.

He Said - He Said ... Right

2007-08-27T16:52:00.000-06:00

What did I say? Can we now call him out for the amoral, hypocritical lying sack of human waste that is Larry Craig.

I know I should be more generous and humane as he is obviously a very troubled individual who, psychologically, cannot come to terms with his own homosexuality and were it not for the fact that his support for bigoted anti-gay measures adversely affects many other humans who don't seek to control the lives of others, maybe I could empathize with Mr. Craig.

Given his character, I have little doubt he will continue to attempt to lie his way out again. And what of our ace political reporter/columnist who took a leave of absence to investigate the senator based on previous reports of his homosexual activities - he couldn't even find an arrest report.

I don't want to hear any more from the Idaho Republican Party and their alleged values - legislate that two loving, committed people that admit their homosexuality cannot be united in marriage (which should be up to the given church) or civil unions but couples like the Craigs, no problem -they'll sanctify their charade.

One Down

2007-08-27T07:50:00.001-06:00

One less grossly incompetent, totally dishonest, morally bankrupt boob is gone. [yes, I could have just said Republican as it's been synonymous since about 1980]

Would that there weren't so many in line to replace him. Recess appointment anyone?

Neat Trick

2007-08-19T22:31:00.000-06:00

Ah, yes, private prisons.

So we take one private entity (who even by IDOC Reinke's admission is going to want a return on their investment) and Otter thinks they are going to build a prison and are going to be willing wait years before they even recoup those costs let alone make a profit and we're going to save money.

First, the annual costs of maintaining those prisoners is going to be more expensive than doing so in the state system - why?

Primarily because our correctional officers are paid a pittance here in Idaho even relative to other states correctional departments let alone private entities and secondly - did I mention return on investment? That is, profit.

And we wonder how trillions in surplus not only evaporated but plowed into the reverse depths of trillions in deficit. It's the math, stupid. Not their strong suit.

A Healthy Discussion

2007-08-19T22:06:00.000-06:00

Rep. Mike Simpson falls somewhere between disingenuous and downright deceitful in his representation of the house bill to re-authorize the State's Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

Aren't you tired of the bogeyman tactics; leaders are supposed to assuage fears not create or exacerbate them. Simpson goes for the double-whammy of scripted Republican scare tactics that have somehow become the norm in this country. He raises the dual specters of illegal aliens and socialized medicine to elicit knee-jerk reactions that work to his liking, rather than rational examinations which might bolster public opinion [even among Republican respondents¹] on universal health care which, as indicated in nationwide polls², is contrary to Mr. Simpson's position.

I call bullshit. As a citizen of Idaho and the U.S. - it's my job. It's our job. We don't get paid for it and it sure would be nice if there was a journalist, perhaps a political columnist, who got paid to keep tabs on these things for us but we clearly can't count on it. [I still have not been able to fathom how that man receives a paycheck for his worthless drivel - nice gig]

Back to Mr. Simpson. First he claims that this new bill "radically expands coverage to virtually anybody^__including illegal aliens." Are you mad yet?[you're supposed to be]

Well, let's examine the actual bill, shall we?

No one, myself included, is going to wade through a 502-page document but let's just check out the highlights. Under the heading Subtitle D:Populations (as in, you know, populations of people that would be covered under the new bill) what do we find?

Here's a snapshot:

First, Sec. 131. Optional coverage of children up to age 21 under CHIP. [optional because what Mr. Simpson fails to inform you of is, as always was the case, the states determine eligibility - this does represent an increase if the state chooses to add this benefit because the original legislation covered individuals to age 19]

Second, Sec. 132. Optional coverage of legal immigrants under the Medicaid program and CHIP. [So, Rep. Simpson may not be disingenuous maybe he's merely illiterate]

Section 133 is immaterial to the discussion here and Section 134 I'll get back to in a minute.

Third, Sec. 135. No Federal [sic] funding for illegal aliens.[hard to miss that one - what do ya' say, Mikey?]

Fourth, Sec. 136. Auditing requirement to enforce citizenships restrictions on eligibility for Medicaid and CHIP benefits.

Admittedly, I'm not a lawyer but that seems to indicate there are eligibility restrictions based on citizenship and there's going to be some requirement [i.e., accountability - a term unfamiliar to the modern day Republican] to have audits to ensure no unnecessary funds are distributed. Sure enough, on page 68 we find the audits are necessary:

in order to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Secretary that Federal funds under this title or title XXI are not unlawfully spent for benefits for individuals who are not legal residents.

Now I don't know who else might be contained in Mr. Simpson's "virtually anybody" that this bill purportedly was expanded to cover but it, apparently, does not include illegal aliens.

I'll skip over his other inflammatory language about increasing border security instead of spending billions of dollars on benefits to these illegal aliens that, well, they're not actually going to receive because, frankly, there's only so much time. As I said, I don't get paid for this and there's only so much one can review in a couple of hours on a Sunday evening and there are a few other issues I'd like to address.

Next, he's aghast that adults will be covered. Well actually, more adults, as adults have already been covered. In various keyword searches of the bill I didn't find anything about eligibility requirements (for adults) let alone changes in those requirements. I suspect the reason is, as previously mentioned, the states (even in the original bill) were given great latitude in defining those parameters of the program.

Everything I read in this document indicates that federal expenditures are based on state population data of children under the age of 19. This is where (I think) section 134 may be relevant, which states, briefly, that states cannot exercise waivers to cover individuals other than low-income children or pregnant women unless, basically, the state can demonstrate that all the eligible children in the state are already covered (p. 67).

This would appear to be an added restriction on waivers that states have already been able to apply for under the initial legislation. Doesn't sound like expansion to me but if it is, it's exercised at the state level. So, if he wants to take issue with the states or address the loophole that was apparently in the original bill, then by all means ...

Next he plays with numbers, using the most egregious example of children from a family making over $82,000 a year being eligible. Are you outraged? [you're supposed to be] Is it true?

Again, in the actual bill (on p 67 -where is defines all the things that must happen before a state can allow for individual other than children or pregnant women to be covered) it refers to:

... targeted low-income children in families with incomes less than 200 percent of the poverty line.

Given the federal poverty guidelines (for the 48 contiguous states and DC) list an income for a family of 8 as $34,570 with $3,480 added for each additional child, Mr. Simpson's example would represent a family with 9.9 children making his $82,000.

I think we can all agree that wouldn't represent either the norm or a wealthy family as he intimates.

Granted some state programs kick in at other levels. For example, in Maryland families are eligible up to 400% poverty. However, families in the 200-400% range must pay a premium to participate in the program.

To suggest that Mr. Simpson's example is a little misleading would be a gross understatement. [link for data]

Finally, well as far as what I'm going to touch on tonight anyway, he talks about the Democratic bill being "devious" and "underhanded" with a "stealth provision" to ... [yes, you guessed it, I was wrong it wasn't a dual specter but a full on triple threat] raise taxes. [You'd think the Republicans could at least come up with a new meme]

The taxes would consist of a 45 cent cigarette tax [do we really need to go over the topic of the health care expense smoker's represent again?] and a $2 per person [that's annually] health insurance tax to fund research into cost-effective medical treatments.[now that's seriously scary; link to data].

Rep. Simpson states:

"If Democrats want to implement a national healthcare system, then Congress should have that debate, openly and publicly. "

If this hit piece is any indication of his idea of an honest and open debate, you can expect this won't be the last time I'll be calling out -bullshit, Mr. Simpson.

It's sad when we can't take our elected officials at their word and, unfortunately, it's not a new phenomenon. Ask yourself about possible other motivations the politician/candidate may have for a given position. Frankly, I was surprised to learn that 70% of Mr. Simpson's campaign contributions last election cycle came from Political Action Committees (PACs; interest groups) with the healthcare sector being his second largest donor.

Here's another clue, if the rhetoric appears designed to evoke emotion rather than thought and they don't provide any data to back up their assertions - call them on it. I intend to.

Perhaps a new campaign slogan is in order for Mr. Simpson:

Simpson for Congress '08: More Hyberbole, Less Fact

Kind of catchy don't you think?

¹In a poll conducted by GOP consultant, Tony Fabrizio, 51% of the Republicans responded that universal healthcare coverage should be the right of every American.

²In a NYTs/CBS poll form February of this year 64% thought the federal government should guarantee health care insurance for all Americans; only 27% thought it wasn't the role of the federal government [tantalizingly close to the percentage of Bush support].

For more information on SCHIP go here.

Sunday Special: Let's Be Frank

2007-08-12T22:00:00.000-06:00

First, if Larry Craig decides not to run for re-election, we know why. But it won't be because of any outstanding investigative reporting by a Statesman' journalist [the term could not be used more loosely]. At least Craig does his (alleged) fellating in the privacy of a men's room, while others do it on the pages of a newspaper [again, the whole loose definition]. Seriously, Mike Rogers' record in this area aside, if you don't think Larry Craig is a ~~gay~~ hypocritical man then your gaydar is in dire need of repair.

Second, Mr. Tibbs again. I'm sorry but I really cannot let this slide. The Boise City Council meets once a week, on Tuesdays. I know the math is hard but that's, at most, four times a month. But wait. It gets better. On only one of those Tuesdays each month -again, for clarification, that would be one day a month -that they meet during the day. You know during the hours that one might need to ... I don't know ... let's say, schedule a doctor's appointment. So Mr. Tibbs, are you honestly expecting Boiseans to believe that July 24th was the only available date for a doctor's appointment that you made in advance?

Third, Mitt Romney won the Iowa straw poll! Let's get real. Romney got 4,516 votes at a cost of ~$2,200/vote. That's on par with primary vote totals for candidates in each of Idaho's 35 legislative districts that have, let's say, a population of 40,000 people. [just to make it easy 1.4 million state population divided by 35 legislative districts] Except this is a statewide poll in a state with a population of ~3 million people. Only ~14,302 people bothered with the poll at all -so, 4,516 represents slightly less than one third of the votes cast (31.5%). Big. Deal.

Speaking of Hot Air

2007-08-12T20:09:00.000-06:00

We sure hit the trifecta here in Idaho this week.

First we have the Toady Trio of Otter, Crapo and Craig whose collective ignorance of wildfire management and rancher-pandering were displayed as prominently as Pinocchio's proboscis when they trotted out their criticism of the handling of the Murphy Complex fire. Enough already. Haven't Iraq, Katrina and the obfuscation of any scientific analysis shown how disastrous it is to have Republican cronies or pols planning or implementing anything these days?

Then we have whack job My God is Better than Your God Sali showing his complete ignorance of history claiming that religious diversity and changes brought about as a result of it are bad "for the longevity of this country" and couldn't possibly have been envisioned by our forefathers. Except they were. While you (Bill) may pledge allegiance under God, our forefathers did not; neither did their money bear the words In God We Trust and oaths were not made to God.

They wanted freedom from religious persecution and for religious expression (or the right to not have religious belief at all -hence the ban of any religious test for office).

It's a good thing we ran off those white supremacists, we wouldn't want anyone thinking we were a state of bigots - it's not as though we'd elect them or pass discriminatory constitutional amendments. Yes, multiculturalism is bad. Sieg Heil, Sali! [there's got to be a song in that somewhere - later]

Finally (well, thirdly, as it won't be the end of their lunacy) we have they call me Mr. Tibbs. Who after having been rightfully rebuked [from the Statesman no less] for the bogus complaint he filed against Beiter (to the ethics committee created by this mayor) comes back for more as he whines that "I was not advised by council leadership to stay for any significant issues".

Shorter Tibbs: Nobody told me what to do; make me the leader.

Oh yeah, the complaint was unanimously rejected by the ethics panel.

Morning Visitation

2007-08-12T08:33:00.000-06:00

One of the things I enjoy about living here in Boise (in addition to the great weather¹) [I know, who adds footnotes to their blog posts] are the hot air balloon appearances between 7 ² weekend mornings throughout the summer. In recent years we've had two emergency landings in our subdivision one in which my neighbor was rudely awakened when a balloon grazed her roof before landing one street over. No damage to either (home or balloon) and the chasers had the balloon packed up before many neighbors were even out and about.

Certainly, hot air balloons are not unique to Boise but they do add to the eclectic character of the city that has a quaint downtown, a Romney temple or car dealership on alternating corners, a wonderful outdoor amphitheater for Shakespeare, a Ten Commandments monument (no longer in the park -but I won't go there) and in the midst of it all -a stray llama or two (or three).

This past week I was driving over to a friend's place in the Collister neighborhood and here was this guy walking down the street with three llamas in tow as though they were just out for their afternoon constitutional. Just one of the things, along with the hot air balloons, that evokes a spontaneous smile. No scotch necessary, but caffeine? Am I breathing? Sometimes methinks if this city were a person it'd be schizophrenic.

¹ Although if this past July represents a global warming trend our wonderful banana belt will soon be gone and we'll just be Arizona North.

² Phraseology borrowed from a long-time apunctual³ [how about that - a footnote-appended footnote] friend to indicate about when we'd meet up but allowing for an hour or so margin of error on either side.

³ Apparently I've created a new word but I rather like it and it is my blog. Apunctual: The new truthiness.