Stormy Weather

The irony of Billy Graham winding up his visit to New York City just as the president Bush is set to address the nation in an attempt to garner support for war is pulchritudinous.

The Reverend Billy Graham is the most apolitical evangelical minister I can think of. One can only presume that he is in sync with the message of rendering onto Caesar what is Caesar's. His work of bringing people to Jesus Christ is not filled with direction or missions; he leaves each follower to follow their own heart with the guidance of Jesus as they come to know him. He tells people up front what to expect from their commitment. He stands in higher esteem than all of the other notable evangelicals, some of whom seem to have been corrupted by money, fame or power by contrast.

Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. (Matt.5:1-12).

Thus begins The Sermon of the Mount, which distilled The Ten Commandments into two. Instead of learning what not to do the people were given the knowledge of what to do and the power of love was forever unleashed to the multitude.

This is true because within each of us is some element of good. We come to it from a wealth of experiences but we arrive at the same place--serving goodness. Love is a drawing of the soul toward something, much as hatred is a drawing away. To these I would add another force--confusion--a reticence to either love or hate but to maintain a controlled, if not somewhat confused, state. Within each of us these three forces co-exist to some degree; we are all repulsed, enticed by, or attempting to control something at sometime. Only one of them, however, is good, the one that draws us to learn, to grow, to nurture to expand our horizons, to ease suffering.

Perhaps it is easier to think about this notion on a societal level rather than searching our own souls for the truth. Society is, after all, our reflection. There are trends in our society that indicate direction; we often refer to these trends as modernization. There are events, both notable and notorious which indicate our capacity to do both good and evil. There are the systems by which we try to control our direction--law, economics, education, religion and so forth.

The trends indicate that we have made significant progress in our ability to alleviate suffering; scientific and technological breakthroughs are occurring almost daily. They also indicate that there is more suffering than ever before by virtue of a rising population, steadily declining resources and a lack of will by people who have become desensitized by the magnitude of the problem.

The current events on a sociological scale are more promising but still reveal an eagerness to destroy in the name of power. The horror of war, of starvation, of senseless slaughter remains a secret between the witnesses and the dead--unspeakable but real all the same. At the same time there is an unprecedented consolidation of power and wealth.


Each of our systems is stressed by virtue of an innate conflict on how to proceed with the mounting difficulty of feeding, educating, ministering and governing so many people. The innate conflict generally concerns central versus local and personal control of the immediate tasks before us. It seems clear to me that in this day of information sharing local control should be supported, not controlled by, a central organization that can share information, shift resources make note of problems and suggest alternative courses of action. By settling the conflict between the virtues of a central vs. a local authority and consciously allowing each to thrive, we can devote our energies to more urgent needs and to greater effect. Such an arrangement, however, requires a defining of roles--a contract or agreement of constitutional proportion. The likelihood of this occurring in the short term is remote. This leaves us with only one alternative--to act as if there were an agreement by demanding support rather than control at the centralized levels of authority. There is an exception that must be adhered to by all: The good of the many outweighs the good of the few. This proviso is open to abuse and should always be open to public debate, especially in times of war. (Karl Rove}

Looked at in these terms our inability to improve the quality of life on this planet is largely systemic (the deck is stacked). We are driven by the status quo rather than ideals. We seem to be enticed by little and repulsed by much, like individuals adrift in a stormy sea. There is an alternative: as individuals we must ask ourselves where are we drawn by love and how can we go there? "All men will be sailors then until the sea shall free them." Leonard Cohen

Meanwhile the president Bush will use the soldiers at Fort Bragg as a backdrop {no irony there) for his message which will be the most oblivious and obvious obfuscation of his miserable little career.

Taking a Breather

there's too much shit going on right now that I can't seem to grasp all of it, and make some sense of it. Each seems to be a piece of a puzzle piece:

the Downing Street memos, and the media's reaction
the Iraq war
the Afghanistan war
the threat of new war with Iran
the recent public humiliation of frist by the president bush
the bolton nomination
the continued craveness of the democrats
the open and notorious corruption of the republicans
the evil hearts of the right-wing 'christians'
the looting of the US Treasury by the rich and powerful
the destruction of the safety nets for the working classes
the list goes on.

I'm going to spend some time reading Mario Milosevic's Conditional Reality, and get myself re-centered.

And then, I'm going out 'shop-dropping'.

the joke

Bush's WMD 'Joke': Is the Media Still Laughing?
By Greg Mitchell
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/pressingissues_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000964303%20%20


[…]
…So allow me to focus, instead, on one brief moment in the Thursday forum, which took me back to a connected, equally brief, Washington moment last year. It represents one of the most shameful episodes in the recent history of the American media, and presidency, yet is rarely mentioned today.

It occurred on March 24, 2004. The setting: The 60th annual black-tie dinner of the Radio and Television Correspondents Association (with many print journalists there as guests) at the Hilton. On the menu: surf and turf. Attendance: 1500. The main speaker: President George W. Bush, one year into the Iraq war, with 500 Americans already dead.

Now you may recall what happened. President Bush, as usual at such gatherings of journalists, poked fun at himself. Great leeway is granted to presidents (and their spouses) at such events, allowing them to offer somewhat tasteless or even off-color barbs. Audiences love to laugh along with, rather than at, a president, for a change. It’s all in good fun, except when it’s in bad fun, such as on that night in March, 2004.

That night, in the middle of his stand-up routine before the, perhaps tipsy, journos, Bush showed on a screen behind him some candid on-the-job photos of himself. One featured him gazing out a window, as Bush narrated: “Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere.” According to the transcript this was greeted with “laughter and applause.”

A few seconds later, he was shown looking under papers, behind drapes, and even under his desk, with this narration: “Nope, no weapons over there” (met with more “laughter and applause”) and then “Maybe under here?” (just “laughter” this time). Still searching, he settles for finding a photo revealing the Skull and Bones secret signal (more “laughter”).
[…]

---

Mr Mitchell asks dana milbank of the Washington Post, if he’s still laughing over the tasteless and odious ‘no WMD joke’ skit the president bush put on for the gala he mentions above. I wonder too. Shit for brains milbank treats Rep. Conyers’ forum as a joke.

In Democrats Play House To Rally Against the War, Friday, June 17, 2005; Page A06
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/16/AR2005061601570.html?nav=hcmodule, he mocks the efforts of hundreds of thousands of Americans who oppose bush’s obscene war, and who want answers to the questions posed by the memos recently published in the UK, the Sunday Times. Starting on May 1. That’s 7 fucking weeks, shithead. And you’re still laughing? Laughing about the fact that we are still killing kids in Iraq. And their mothers. And their fathers, and their brothers, sisters, aunts, and uncles? And you’re still laughing at the more than 1700 American military killed?

For what, milbank? So little georgie can have a comedy skit for your entertainment? Because if that’s all it is, and that IS all there is, then you are one sick, perverted person. So, I tell you what, dana, go here, http://www.bushflash.com/year.html, and then go here, http://www.bushflash.com/y2.html. Then go visit the maimed and crippled military at Walter Reed. Then tell me if you’re still laughing. No, tell the world. That would fit your ego. You and bush. So wrapped in yourselves that you can’t see other people as real people. Tell me, do you hear voices too?

Letters to the Editor 6/12/05

Earned pension
6/12/2005
http://www.news-press.com/

United Airlines has no right to cancel the company retirement plans. Such plans are part of "agreed-to" negotiations between the company and personnel. The retirement payments were agreed to as part of the employee's pay! The employees gave up part of their pay to be put aside for retirement. The money is not a gift from the company. The company has absolutely no right to it.

William B. Nash
Fort Myers


Stealing is rule
6/14/05
http://www.news-press.com

Re: "Earned pension," William Nash, June 12. Mr. Nash seems to have forgotten the times we're living in. Of course, United Airlines is entitled to steal the workers' pensions. After all, isn't it the president who is stealing our Social Security, and our Treasury, and our children's futures? Stealing it with his tax cuts to the rich, and the need to finance his obscene war in Iraq.

Why, if it's good enough for the president, it should be good enough for corporations. Start collecting dog food recipes, and deal with it.

Tom Marshall
North Fort Myers

Serial Killers in the White House

I ran across this in a book I’m reading, in a section dealing with serial killers.

[…]
As in all serial rapists and murderers, the perpetrator operates in a world of power, control and domination…
[…]
As with most psychopathic and sociopathic cases, there is no remorse, coupled with considerable manipulation of people and various systems.
[…]

and further on,

[…]
…but a lot of what motivates serial killers also motivates kids in the inner cities and kids in small towns who are going out on a Saturday night and, for the thrill, the excitement, basshing people, assaulting people…
[…]
…they see murderers seeking the ultimate control, power over life and death…
[…]

And when we remember that the bush liked to blow up frogs as a kid, according to friends, it would seem that the president bush fits this pattern. How’s that for a scary Sunday morning thought? We have a man, who’s finger is on the button of the ultimate controller of life and death for the world, who is a serial killer.

Further evidence of his Iraq war crimes has been published in today’s Sunday Times in the UK, Ministers were told of need for Gulf war ‘excuse’. In this article, by the same people who brought us the Downing Street Memo, we find this:

The suggestions that the allies use the UN to justify war contradicts claims by Blair and Bush, repeated during their Washington summit last week, that they turned to the UN in order to avoid having to go to war. The attack on Iraq finally began in March 2003.

The briefing paper is certain to add to the pressure, particularly on the American president, because of the damaging revelation that Bush and Blair agreed on regime change in April 2002 and then looked for a way to justify it.

see also: Cabinet Office paper: Conditions for military action http://tmars.iwarp.com/guerrilla_campaign/document/UK_CabinetOfficepaper_050612.html

It’s going to be interesting to see how long before the CCMA put all this together, if ever. The frustrating part for me is that all the necessary facts and evidence are now out in the public realm, and still little georgie boy and his criminal minions are still enjoying life and dancing on the graves of those they have killed.

A boy and his poodle

Bush and Blair Deny 'Fixed' Iraq Reports
By Elisabeth Bumiller
Published: June 8, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/08/international/08prexy.html?

WASHINGTON, June 7 - President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain presented a united front on Tuesday against a recently disclosed British government memorandum that said in July 2002 that American intelligence was being "fixed" around the policy of removing Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

"There's nothing farther from the truth," Mr. Bush said in his first public comments about the so-called Downing Street memo, which has created anger among the administration's critics who see it as evidence that the president was intent to go to war with Iraq earlier than the White House has said.

"Look, both of us didn't want to use our military," Mr. Bush added. "Nobody wants to commit military into combat. It's the last option."

Mr. Blair, standing at Mr. Bush's side in a joint news conference in the East Room of the White House, said, "No, the facts were not being fixed in any shape or form at all."

The statements contradicted assertions in the memorandum, which was first disclosed by The Sunday Times of London on May 1 and which records the minutes of a meeting of Mr. Blair's senior policy advisers more than half a year before the war with Iraq began. [...]

---

Wow. What a surprise. I never would have guessed.

tony, georgie, too bad. You're 36 days late and definitely a dollar short. What tony? georgie told you the only way you were getting anything out of him was for you to do him this little favor?

how did you put it back when the memo was disclosed? "There's nothing new there" No denials. No denials from bush. Tough shit, old boy. You waited too long.

You both thought it was going to just go away, didn't you, You knew the ass-licks in the CCMA (Consolidated Corporate Media of America) would bury it. You assholes forgot about the 'internets' where it has been hammered on daily. For 36 days. And you know what happens? It starts to become news, because people start talking about it, it gets mentioned, people e-mail each other. That becomes a market, and you know sooner or later someone is going to go try to capture that market, and the story breaks in the CCMA, and that's it. Toast.

No, poodle boy. You and little georgie just go on. You really don't think anyone really believes you now, do you?

I know that I shouldn't be picking on people whose self-esteem is so low that they have to kill people to feel manly. So ordinarily, I'd leave the two of you alone. But, you actually ARE killing people. You do know that, don't you?

Pots and Kettles

He criticized China for increasing military spending despite the absence of a threat from another country
[…]
Rumsfeld said the Pentagon's annual assessment of China's military capabilities shows China now has the world's third-largest military budget, behind the U.S. and Russia.
from The Associated Press
Saturday, June 4, 2005

U.S. officials have said they are worried that Chavez's dominance of his country's courts, military and other state institutions, combined with his government's persecution of political opponents, puts Venezuela's democracy at risk.
from Reuters
Sunday, June 6, 2005

Two fascinating looks at the delusional bush administration. The bush borrows us into bankruptcy (a large share picked up by China) to finance his obscene wars. Over 50% of his budget request goes to the military. This is separate from the comparatively paltry amount for veterans’ benefits. As a country, we devote more of our resources to the military than the next 20 countries combined. And the plain fact is, the US can already destroy any country it decides to. And still he wants to develop new nuclear weapons.

We watch our children sent off to fight in bush’s obscene wars, but, if they lose the life lottery, we don’t see them come home. They are sneaked home in their lonely coffins on their way to their lonely graves, mourned only by their families and a small circle of friends. A waste. A heart-breaking waste.

As for the second piece of drek, it’s a good description of the US, as it is under the president bush. I find it cold-heartedly cynical and hypocritical of the bush administration to be criticizing any country for what it does itself.

The president bush has lost all moral authority to speak to anyone about right or wrong. His wars continue; his corporate allies continue to trash the environment and screw their workers and shareholders; the media have become ass-lickers; and his Congressional allies continue to trash the Constitution. All of them blinded by their lust for money and power, and led astray by the voices in their heads.

So, the question is this: Do we continue to allow this group of maniacal petty despots to destroy America? Do we allow them to destroy our children’s futures? Do we just sit on our hands and watch this destruction engulf us?

We need to decide what kind of America we want. We need to decide now, not in 2006 or 2008. Now. And if we want a change from the bush nightmare America, we need to be working for it now.

Recess Appointments

What IF John Bolton Gets a Recess Appointment to U.N. Ambassadorship?
The Washington Note
June 02, 2005
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000695.html


Constitution of the United States
Adopted by convention of States, September 17, 1787;
Ratification completed, June 21, 17881
Article II.
Section. 2.
Clause 3: The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Now, I may be reading this wrong, but this says that for a president to be able to make a recess appointment, the vacancy must occur during the recess. It doesn’t say the president can appoint people that are waiting for confirmation just because the Senate goes on recess. The vacancy in the UN post has already been addressed by the president bush. He nominated john bolton. The Senate has already started into the confirmation process. If the bush appoints bolton during the recess, I’ll go so far as to say that he violates his oath of office to protect the constitution, not go against its plain language here. The bushistas are all ranting and raving against what they call ‘activist judges’, so why are they not calling on bush to stop these recess appointments (remember also Pryor, or Pickering)?

Apparently, if they don’t like the result, they say it’s wrong. If they like the result, well then, that’s another story. Now then. Before anyone gets all huffy about other presidents using the appointment power in the same manner, read Clause 3 again, and decide for yourself how I feel about that.

Or this http://guerrillacampaign.blogspot.com/2005/04/advice-and-consent.html