Maven University

2012-01-27T01:21:00.000-07:00

"If I miss my touch-up, it'll be all your fault!"

2012-01-22T22:25:00.000-07:00

Unfortunately, it would appear that the Burmese military makes "peace" with one ethnic group so they can better train their guns on another: From the New York Times

Watch it and weep.

2012-01-16T00:55:00.000-07:00

For the whole film, click here.

There's a part of me that loves watching these Republicans eat their own. But then there's the part who hates to see what's happening to our country.

Obama's Re-election Strategy

2012-01-12T23:11:00.000-07:00

No one has spelled it out quite so clearly:

The Birthplace of Our Gadgetry

2012-01-11T21:15:00.000-07:00

Buddy and the Sales Department

2012-01-11T03:31:00.000-07:00

While in Thailand, I'm relying on my trusty laptop and the Internet to keep me up-to-date with the goings-on in the 2012 presidential campaign (which already seems like it has been going on forever). Yesterday's New Hampshire primary was rather boring and predictable, but two mostly overlooked phenomena caught my eyes and ears.

The first is the plight of Buddy Roemer. In case you're asking "Buddy Who?" here's a brief fill-in. Buddy is running for president with a war chest made up of donations of no more than $100 per donor. A former congressman and governor of Louisiana, Buddy wants to set an example of how to run an honest, sleaze-free campaign of, by and for the people.

Fat chance.

Buddy claims (and I suspect he's telling the truth) that every time he attempted to enter into the Republican debates, the bar was raised higher on his entry. First, he wasn't pulling high enough in the polls. Then when he increased his poll numbers, he tried again and—get this—was told he hadn't raised enough money! That's right, in order to participate in the debates, which of course have been produced or at least carried by America's media conglomerates, Buddy would have to be able to buy lots of airtime.

The second thing that snagged me was comments I heard from some of my favorite pundits, including, I'm sad to say, Rachel Maddow. They went something like this: "Let's hope that this race isn't over yet, that it keeps going!" I processed that sound byte this way: "Oh, no! Heaven forfend the race from ending before every last superPAC dollar has bought every last second of available air time in every local market!" The sales department rules.

The presidential "debates" have been going on since last summer. In September, I wrote an entry to this blog speculating on why I believe we've been treated to one debate after another ad nauseum. Buddy's plight and Rachel's lament seem to support my contention.

Unless the American people put a stop to this madness, our politicians will continue becoming little more than puppets of private interests (by the way, that's the classic definition of fascism). Fortunately, growing numbers of my fellow citizens feel the same way I do, and some of them are taking action. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has posted a petition on his website to gain support for his proposed constitutional amendment excluding for-profit corporations from the rights given to natural persons. A similar effort is underway by a coalition of organizations and individuals called Move to Amend. At the very least, it should be incumbent on every citizen who loves the United States and wishes to see it survive to sign these petitions.

Meanwhile, Buddy Roemer sits on the sidelines while the battle of the moneyed titans continues. And no one's gettin' fat except the media.

Congress bashing isn't enough!

2012-01-04T03:23:00.000-07:00

I've heard said that a key element of President Obama's re-election campaign will be some serious swiping at our very unpopular Congress. Who can blame him: our current Congress is a blight on our constitution and indeed on our very way of life. Go for it, Barry.

However, there's something else the President must do at the same time if his strategy is to yield any decent results: he must get out of the Oval Office and pound the pavement for Democratic Congressional candidates. There's no sense in his complaining about the Nasty Boys who have inhabited the Capitol unless he does everything a President can do to get rid of them.

Whoever wins the Republican nomination (and isn't that race a nail biter), the Republican mantra will be the same: Barak Obama's presidency has been a colossal failure, and the country can't take four more years of the status quo. There's lots of reason to argue the first half of that statement. President Obama has a long list of accomplishments to his name, and I'm sure he and his politicos will tout them tirelessly.

However, I'm afraid I must agree with the second half: we can't survive as a nation with four more years of stalemate. Even if President Obama is re-elected—and I certainly hope he is—crippling standoff in Washington threatens to destory us. The nation's credit rating is declining, not because of overblown debt, but because Congressional obstructionists have put our ability to make our payments on time in constant jeopardy. Investment in this country is lackluster, not because we have a greedy, lazy workforce, but because pro-growth policies are nearly impossible to enact. If the Congress doesn't turn Big-Time Blue, we may as well not re-elect the President because he won't be able to get anything done.

As distasteful as I find the current lineup of Republican contenders, I'll be watching very carefully to measure the support Obama gives Congressional and Senatorial candidates during the upcoming race. If he seems to be complaining about the current Congress and not actively working to change it, I may just have to hold my nose.

Four more years of deadlock is not an option.

Hard to watch..

2012-01-03T21:35:00.001-07:00

The subtitles on this documentary are a bit fuzzy, but the content should be seen by every Jew, or for that matter, anyone who believes in religious liberty.

Bye, guy...

2011-12-19T02:41:00.000-07:00

Thanks for not destroying the planet.

I know it's all over the Web, but I can't help myself...

2011-12-14T19:52:00.000-07:00

It's just so emblematic of this year's presidential campaign. Forgive me.

Fashion Statement?

2011-12-07T22:16:00.001-07:00

When Hillary Clinton and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi posed for a photo op before their December 2 meeting, I couldn't help but notice that they were dressed nearly identically, right down to hairdos. Aung San Suu Kyi's hairdo was nothing new for her, but Hillary's certainly was. Topping off the do, Hillary substituted Aung San Suu Kyi's trademark flower with a white pearl scrungee. The effect was nearly the same.
Okay, thought I, perhaps Hillary thought it best to reflect her hostess as a matter of courtesy and respect. Surely, the remarkable Lady merits very special treatment by the US Secretary of State.

But then, Hillary gave her now-famous gay-rights speech in Geneva yesterday in the same do! Is she still paying homage to The Lady? Did she not have time to get to the hairdresser? Or is this the new Hillary look?

I'm no fashion maven, but I do suspect a political message. The Lady, as Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is known throughout Burma, has devoted the better part of her life to achieving freedom from oppression for her people. She has suffered greatly through imprisonments and years of house arrest. It is only over the last few months that The Lady has enjoyed some freedom of movement within her own country, to which I believe she's still confined. I suspect that by emulating her, Hillary Clinton is acting in The Lady's stead, broadcast her message of freedom and democracy across the globe.

You go, girl. Some day, you'll earn your flower.

Divine Wrath

2011-11-07T08:59:00.000-07:00

Three earthquakes jolted the United States over the weekend. Saturday morning, an earthquake of magnitude 4.7 hit 40 miles outside of Oklahoma City; by Saturday night, a second quake hit the same area. This time it was a magnitude 5.6, and was felt all the way into Wisconsin.

The third quake, 3.1 in magnitude, seems to have been dubbed the "Berkeley quake." It hit during the day on Saturday. Its epicenter was in Piedmont, near Berkeley but actually a neighborhood of Oakland (and a very high-rent one at that). You remember Oakland, the town where the cops beat up Kayvan Sabeghi, a veteran Marine who defended our freedom in Iraq, because he dared exercise that freedom during Occupy Oakland?

If I hear one more right-winger speculate that the "Berkeley" quake was in retribution for San Francisco's gay marriage law, I think I'll puke.

An Open Letter to Merrill Lynch

2011-11-04T10:47:00.000-06:00

Dear Merrill Lynch--
Thank you for your unsolicited email, letting me know that there's been a Great Global Shift in wealth. Gee, I never could have figured that one out for myself. Please remove my email address from whatever list you put it on.

Ever on guard against spam and its attendant misdeeds, I didn't click on your email, but instead went to the front page of your ml.com website. Sure enough, the promise of the Great Global Shift video is right there with a nice, prominent button to view it online. However, when I click on the button, your website opens up the still image that's on the front page. Nothing more.

Now come on, fellas, if you're going to purloin a mailing list (I never signed up for anything on ML or BofA), and launch a big push to grow your bottom line--with its attendant management bonuses--by getting ever more small investors' hard-earned money into your pockets, the very least you could do is make sure that the link on your front page is working properly.

Duhhh!

Free advice to the financial services industry:

2011-10-30T13:40:00.000-06:00

Stick to being bulls. Stop being pigs.
Thomas Friedman

What a Difference Four Days Make

2011-10-28T13:26:00.000-06:00

Here's a story which appeared on the Politico website on October 17, about Eric Cantor's upcoming address the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66173.html. In it, a Cantor aide described how "The speech will zero in on how Washington could help a “a single working mom…a small business owner…and how we make sure the people at the top stay there.”

Four days later, the "text" of Cantor's undelivered speech shows up on The Daily Pennsylvanian: http://thedp.com/r/9c222e3c. Apparently Cantor backed out when he discovered that the school was unable to meet its obligation not to let real people into the room. The "text" describes how Cantor's family pulled itself up by the bootstraps from its humble beginnings. Not a word about making sure "the people at the top stay there."

So I'm curious: Did Cantor actually change his mind about delivering the speech in person because part of the Pennsylvanian contingent of the 99% were there ready to greet him? Or had he no intentions of showing up there in the first place?

What a difference four days can make.

Debate Dementia

2011-09-28T09:41:00.000-06:00

The 2012 election season is well underway, and has been so for at least two months already. Remember the "good old days" (2008) when the Presidentail campaign season began with the Iowa caucuses? What happened? Why am I being desperately hit up for money a year-plus ahead of the election?

As a retired marcom person, my tendency is to look at events from a marketing point-of-view. I might fantasize, for example, that I were in charge of advertising sales at a large cable network like CNN. Stubbornly high unemployment is limiting my ability to sell commercial airtime to automobile and pharmaceutical companies. Yet with the Supreme Court's Citizen's United decision allowing virtually unlimited fundraising, there's a treasure trove of advertising dollars out there that are just waiting to be spent.

My boss might argue that the network's airtime is already crammed with political advertising during the campaign season. "How could we expect to squeeze out more advertising dollars? If we simply raise prices (which we surely will), that still doesn't wring out the phenominally big bucks out there."

"Ah," I reply, "we get the candidates to start the season earlier!" The boss is interested, but skeptical. I continue: "Let's 'sponsor' a debate during the preceding summer. Airtime is cheaper anyway because of summer breaks, so let's give some of it away to hopefuls of the 'out' party, you know, the ones who have been accumulating all these piles of cash. A nice, lively debate will stir up the pot a good three or four months in advance of the usual primary season. And as a bonus, it'll cause the 'in' party to start their advertising early, in order to protect their 'in' status."

Not to be one-upped in this ruse, all the networks joined in, even the public one that doesn't accept political advertising. The result: Debate Dementia. It's brillant. Wish I had thought of it.

These Yiddin Ain't Kiddin'

2011-09-15T11:28:00.000-06:00

Democrats have spent the last couple of days in a daze over the trouncing that took place in New York's 9th Congressional district. While Nevada's 2nd district also went red—in a big way—on the same day, that district has been Republican since it was formed after the 1980 census. However, New York's 9th has been in Democratic hands for the last 88 years. What happened?

Now doubt, it didn't help that Anthony Weiner resigned over an acute case of narcissim, and of course, the whole country's in a very foul mood right now due to rising unemployment and poverty. Who could blame anyone for wanting to see change right now? As devoted a Chicago Democrat as I am, even I would like to see a reasonable Republican step forth to give Obama a run for his money (unfortunately, I haven't noticed any reasonable Republicans lately).

No, there's something else going on in the NY 9th to which Barack Obama had better pay very close attention: Jews are abandoning him in droves over his policy—or lack thereof—on Israel.

The Prez had better come to realize that the Arab Spring, the chilling relations between Israel and Egypt and Israel and Turkey, and a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state by the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza, which could soon be rubber-stamped by United Nations, has given Israel a seriously bad case of the jitters. And when Israels gets the jitters, American Jews become downright apoplectic.

To be sure, the Israeli government has stubbornly refused to stop building new settlements in the West Bank or expanding existing ones. Make no mistake: Israel has not limited itself to land needed for its security. The government there has long pandered to ultra-right-wing religious factions, which it needs in order to remain in power. I understand that Barack Obama would like to put a stop to this land grab, and frankly, so would I.

However, the dramatically changing landscape in the Mideast has emboldened Palestinian Arabs, many of whom now believe that they don't need no stinkin' peace settlement. To make matters worse, the long-held, but very silent American formula for peace in the region, i.e. pre-1967 borders modified by a land swap, was proclaimed out-loud by President Obama in a speech last May. The Palestinian Arabs would have to be deaf and blind not to think they have the current American President right where they want him. What on earth was he thinking?

The Palestinian Arabs have a century-long history of terrorizing Jews who dared to resettle in the ancient Jewish homeland, and now they believe the stage is set for "driving them into the sea," which has been their objective all along. Even the most secular American Jews will do anything in their power to prevent this—including dumping a President whom they even suspect of sitting by and watching it it happen.

Call this single-issue voting if you will, but the Jewish people—from one end of the religious and political spectra to the other—clearly understand that their safety and security everywhere in the world depend on a safe, secure Jewish homeland. And they're joined by hundreds of thousands of fundamentalist Christians who believe that a Jewish Israel will fulfill their messianic vision. Nothing will make the Republicans realize their dream of a one-term Obama presidency faster than the prospect of a weak, compromised Israel.

The Prez needs to get this through his head fast! A good start—but just a start—would be putting a screeching halt to any attempts at Palestinian statehood without a signed, sealed and delivered regional peace settlement.

Forward to the Past

2011-07-24T15:42:00.000-06:00

I'm currently reading a book by Robert Bonfil, Professor of Jewish History at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The book, "Jewish Life in Renaissance Italy," recounts the rather widespead immigration of Jews into several of the republics of Italy during the 15th and 16th centuries. Jews were permitted immigrate to urban areas mostly to serve as money lenders to the poor.

The author points out that these money lenders served a useful and necessary role in Italian society because the rulers of the republics had no interest in taking care of the poor or elevating their living standard. The author gives two reasons: first, poverty enabled Christians to practice "charity;" and second, a poor underclass provided cheap labor, particularly for working the land. Nonetheless, the rulers of the time understood that in order to be of any use, the poor would require a minimal subsistence. How convenient that Jews expelled from Spain, Portugal, Sicily, Napoli and elsewhere during the Inquisition were available to fill this need.

Oh dear, thought I as I read this. That's exactly what the Tea Party types seem to be trying to accomplish here. By getting government out of the assistance (and education) business, they can create an underclass which will serve them on the cheap. They and their overlords are promoting return to the European feudal system of old. Europe has subsequently outgrown this barbaric system, and here we are, rapidly moving toward it. No wonder these characters want the US to default: That will dry up the credit on which people have been eeking by. Look for small-time money lenders to start showing up. I sure hope this time Jews won't be pushed into this role.

Israel's 60th

2011-07-20T11:31:00.000-06:00

Mazel tov!

A 21st-Century Herod?

2011-07-14T10:26:00.001-06:00

Pirkei Avot, or Ethics of the Fathers is a collection of sayings by rabbis of the Talmudic period. It is studied, in whole or in part, by Jews everywhere. I'm convinced, however, that Eric Cantor never heard of it.

Had he, he might have learned this: "Shemaya says: Love work; despise positions of power; and do not become overly familiar with the government." (Chapter 1; Verse 10) Shemaya was head of the rabbinical court during the reign of Herod, the Jewish figurehead king who ruled Israel with Rome's blessings.

Nineteen centuries later, German Rabbi Sampson Raphael Hirsch commented on Shemaya's advice: "...we must preserve our ability to follow our own principles...'love work,' for this leads to economic independence..'despise positions of power,' for leadership is enslavement. A person in power will do things to protect his own power and prestige, thinking that he must do them. Such activities are frequently contrary to his own views."

Other than a few years in the family real-estate business, Eric Cantor's career has consisted of running for and holding political office. Even as a college freshman, Cantor worked as an intern for a Republican congressman. He was elected to the Virginia House of Delegates while still in his 20s, and has been climbing the political ladder ever since. Now he smells John Boehner's Speaker seat, and he seems to be willing to destroy the full faith and credit of the United States government in order to nab it.

Based on Shemaya's pronouncment, one might suspect a Talmudic suspicion of government. Rabbi Chanina, a deputy to the High Priest during the Roman occuation of Israel, proclaimed otherwise: "Pray for the welfare of the government, because if people did not fear it, a person would swallow his fellow live." (Chapter 3, Verse 2) Indeed, prayers for the host government have been offered in synagogues around the world for centuries, even when host governments were less than hospitable to Jews.

By allowing the U.S. government to default on its financial obligations, Eric Cantor demonstrates an abhorrence for government and the rule of law. One need only take a look at the unintended consequences unfolding in Minnesota to see what happens when government is strangled. Even Grover Norquist only wanted to "shrink the government to a size where it can be drowned in a bathtub." Cantor is actually trying to drown it!

Needless to say, Mr. Cantor is not about to ask my advice, so I'll offer it unsolicited: Find a nice synagogue near your home and start learning the classic Jewish texts. In particular, look for a class in Pirkei Avot. Only then will you be able to understand exactly how far off-base you are.

"Jews Can't Fly"

2011-07-05T10:20:00.004-06:00

This morning, I received a viral email under the subject heading "Gratitude!" from a friend and long-time supporter of Israel. It contained an extensive exerpt of an interview given by Dr. Arieh Eldad, an Israeli plastic surgeon and member of the Israel Knesset, to the publication New English Review.

In it, Dr. Eldad described how a young woman from Gaza became a suicide bomber after having been treated for severe burns by Israeli plastic surgeons. To add to the heinous nature of her intended crime (she was caught before she had a chance to carry it out), she and her bomb were headed for the very hospital that treated her. Dr. Eldad concluded his story by saying, "This is only one example of the war between Jews and Muslims in the Land of Israel. It is not a territorial conflict. This is a civilizational conflict, or rather a war between civilization & barbarism."

Fair enough. However, the next line, "Bibi gets it, Obama does not" sounded suspiciously un-Israeli-Parlimentarian. Ever the skeptic, I looked up the "Gratitude!" story on Snopes. The story is true (except for the way in which the woman received her burns), and is indeed Dr. Eldad's account. That is, everything up to and including "a war between civilization and barbarism." The line "Bibi gets it, Obama does not," along with the usual pleas to pass the email along, were added by someone else later.

This is a classic example of how the American right takes a mostly-accurate story and twists it to slam our President. In fact, this is the second example I've seen in as many days.

There's a story going around that Delta Airlines is entering into a partnership with Saudi Arabian Airlines, which will require that Delta Airlines refuse to fly Jews on any plane that lands in Saudi Arabia. In actuality, the story is a little more complicated than that (you can read about it in The Jewish Week).

However, that hasn't stopped right-wing publications like World Net Daily from blaming Obama for not standing up to the airline: "White House press secretary Jay Carney today closed down expectations that the president might address allegations of anti-Semitism by Delta Air Lines when he refused to allow the question to be asked."

Apparently, this prompted someone to send around an email entitled "Jew can't fly, but the rest of us can. White House refuses to weigh in." A line in the email proclaims, "Older people remember how Nazi Germany gradually started down the road to the Holocaust, one small step at a time. There are parallels to current events, strangely coincident with the advent of the Obama White House."

The email looked a lot like recent entries in right-wing Arizona blogs under the heading "Ben Franklin" of the "American Post-Gazette." Most of ol' Ben's blogs are directed against the recall of right-wing Arizona legislator Russel Pearce. This particular email, on an entirely different subject, doesn't appear to have been published on the Internet. Possibly whoever did write it wanted to add some right-wing bona fides by borrowing ol' Ben's masthead and signature.

These examples and others are part of a concerted effort by the right wing in this country to discredit our duly-elected President and place its own anti-government, uncompromisingly corporatist Tea Partiers into political power. These are the same undemocratic forces who want to bring down the United States government and create worldwide financial chaos by refusing to increase the debt ceiling.

American Jews must be ever vigilant against this type of vicious propaganda. Today it's directed at Jews, but it could just as easily be directed against Jews whenever it suits the propagandists' purposes.

Lady in Waiting

2011-05-27T10:57:00.003-06:00

We have a new neighbor. Sarah Palin just bought a house at 29005 North 82nd Street, about two miles from us in Scottsdale. I feel sorry for the coyotes.

I'm guessing she's here to wait for John McCain to retire or die. I think she's fully aware that she could never be elected President, but Senator from the Great State of Arizona is another story. Many Republicans here adore her, and the Democrats here are experts at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. That amounts to the easiest, cheapest way I know of to hit a serious jackpot. If I were her, I'd do it. Besides, it's damned cold in Alaska.

Can't wait to sip a latte with her at AJs.

Is the Internet providing valuable information, or just telling you what it thinks you want to know?

2011-05-16T13:41:00.002-06:00

Don't miss:

Antisemitism apparently remains out of fashion in America

2011-04-07T10:05:00.003-06:00

As they say in the Old Country, "...shechecianu, v'kiamanu, v'higianu l'zman hazeh." Blessed is the One who kept us in life, sustained us and enabled us to reach this moment:

"Why Glenn Beck lost it"
by Dana Milbank

Sharing My Pain With Jeff Merkeley

2011-03-01T17:13:00.002-07:00

I just mosied on over to the facebook page of Jeff Merkeley, the new Senator from the great state of Oregon. Jeff wants us all to share our horror stories about what the GOP budget cuts will do to us. Emphasis, of course is on Planned Parenthood, college students and the Wisconsin public employees. However, he did extend this invitation:

"Real people's livelihoods are at stake - we can't let the GOP pretend budgets are only about numbers. Share your story so Jeff can fight for you."

So I shared my story. It went like this:

"I'm 68 years old. The COLA on my Social Security hasn't increased for two years running. But my gasoline has increased. And my food has increased. But they tell me those aren't taken into account when calculating the COLA because they're "too volatile." Well guess what: when gas jumped seemlingly overnight from $2-something to $4 a few years ago. that was volatile; when it came down to $3 and stayed there, that's not volatility; that's the cost of living going up!

I know we all have to pull in our belts during this crisis, because after all, the guys who plundered our national treasury are your colleagues' contributors (and maybe even yours), and surely our esteemed Senators and Congressmen aren't going to take their plunder away from them. But while you're all coddling the super-rich and the vulgar-rich, please keep in mind that unless you keep their grubby hands off the Social Security program, many of this country's seniors are going to take it in the chops. And a lot of us aren't too old to get out there and raise a good old fashioned, geriatric-hippie fuss."

To all my geezer friends and family: get ready to hit the streets!

Is Fox Doing Teshuvah?

2011-02-24T13:47:00.001-07:00

Or will Shep Smith be out of a job by the end of the week?

Come Watch the Fox Guard the Chicken Coop...

2011-02-23T12:55:00.001-07:00

When "Second Amendment Remidies" Rule

2011-01-09T13:13:00.003-07:00

Finally, the ADL shows some betzim

2010-11-11T15:04:00.003-07:00

This news release is from the Anti-Defamation League:

Glenn Beck's Remarks About Soros And The Holocaust 'Offensive And Over The Top'

New York, NY, November 11, 2010 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today criticized as "completely inappropriate and offensive" remarks by Glenn Beck on his radio and television programs, in which he inaccurately connected George Soros, who was then a young boy, to the actions of others in sending Jews to death camps during the Holocaust.

On his November 10 radio show, Beck described how Soros, who was born in Hungary to Orthodox Jewish parents, "used to go around with this anti-Semite and deliver papers to the Jews and confiscate their property and then ship them off. And George Soros was part of it. He would help confiscate the stuff. It was frightening. Here's a Jewish boy helping send the Jews to the death camps."

Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director and a Holocaust survivor, issued the following statement:

Glenn Beck's description of George Soros' actions during the Holocaust is completely inappropriate, offensive and over the top. For a political commentator or entertainer to have the audacity to say – inaccurately – that there's a Jewish boy sending Jews to death camps, as part of a broader assault on Mr. Soros, that's horrific.

While I, too, may disagree with many of Soros' views and analysis on the issues, to bring in this kind of innuendo about his past is unacceptable. To hold a young boy responsible for what was going on around him during the Holocaust as part of a larger effort to denigrate the man is repugnant.

The Holocaust was a horrific time, and many people had to make excruciating choices to ensure their survival. George Soros has been forthright about his childhood experiences and his family's history, and there the matter should rest.

The Mad Tea Party

2010-10-28T17:47:00.007-06:00

No kidding. This is what our political scene looks like, less than a week before the election. Keith Olbermann summed it up beautifully last night:

L'Shana Tova!

2010-09-08T10:56:00.002-06:00

In the Biblical creation story, the universe, earth, seas, sun(s), moon(s), etc. were created in six days. According to the Jewish calendar, the end of the 6th day, i.e. the anniversary of the creation of mankind, will take place early this evening.

Here's something to ponder: the eons that passed from the big bang until homosapiens first stood upright is only six days on the Creator's calendar. I believe that the six days are logarithmically ordered, i.e. many millions of years passed from the first day (big bang) to the second day (creation of the Milky Way, or in biblical terms "separation of the waters above from the waters below"), whereas day six, the day on which animals and humanity were created, was only a couple hundred thousand years long.

Homo sapiens is the only creature with a sense of linear time. Thus, when humanity was created, the two calendars converged, so that humans would understand the workings of creation "in real time," so to speak.

In other words, the only obstacle to reconciling the creation story with modern scientific evidence is our lack of understanding of the Divine Calendar. If one is willing to accept the idea of a Divine Calendar that's different than our own, then the scientific mind should have no problem reconciling the two views of creation.

Whatever your religious beliefs or observances, I wish you a happy convergence of the two time machines.

Shana Tova--Happy New Year

2010-08-29T16:36:00.006-06:00

What were you thinking, Al?

2010-08-06T12:30:00.004-06:00

This morning, I finally understood why comedy and tragedy are two sides of the same coin. Here's a letter I just sent to Senator Al Franken, after he screwed up royally on the Senate floor yesterday.

Yesterday, I received an email from the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, asking me to call my Senator, Jeff Bingaman, and urge him to sign your statement calling for Elizabeth Warren to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I hate making phone calls, but this issue is so important to the American people that I spent the better part of the day yesterday screwing up my courage to do it.
Then I heard on the news this morning about your foolish antics from the dais of the Senate Floor. I was crushed! How can I contact my Senator and ask him to sign up with the Class Clown?
Recently, you've taken up two of the most important causes (Warren and Net-neutrality) to protect the American people from the big-business interests who are swallowing us alive. I was so proud, so hopeful. Way to go, Al!
Then apparently Stuart Smalley moved in and shot you in the foot. Your Smalley psyche has made it all the more difficult for these key causes to be taken seriously.
I'm glad you apologized to Senator McConnell, but believe me, he wasn't the one whom you hurt. The American people are hurting, and for a brief time, some of us thought you might be able to help. Instead, we now fear that you may be the Second Biggest Buffoon that Minnesota has sent to Washington.
I will call Senator Bingaman today, but only to ask him to support Warren, not to sign your statement. As for you, perhaps you could take advantage of that delicious healthcare you're getting now, and get some help.

For anyone who would like to hear Shirley Shirod's full speech...

2010-07-22T18:10:00.001-06:00

Here's the raw data:

Obama's Last Chance

2010-07-21T09:46:00.009-06:00

Hanging from the lamp over my dressing table in New Mexico is this remnant of the 2008 Obama campaign: a button that says "Hope."

Like most Americans who voted for Barack Obama, hope sprang eternal that the takeover of our country by multinational corporate interests would be stemmed. It hasn't.

It's been 18 months, and many of us have continued trying to cut the guy some slack. After all, he inherited two wars and the worst economy since The Great Depression. As if that were't enough, he's had to deal with an ecological disaster that has devastated the souteastern portion of the country. I wouldn't want his job.

Nonetheless, in the name of "cooperation" and "bipartisanship," Barack Obama delivered a stimulus package that was too small to stimulate, a healthcare reform law with no healthcare reform in it (and only minimal reform of the health insurance industry) and now a banking reform law that does precious little to reform the financial system. That is, except for one saving provision: The creation of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is intended to serve as a watchdog to prevent the kinds of deceptive and heavy-handed practices that have driven consumers into bankruptcy, loss of their homes and worse. Probably the most compelling description of the antics of Americas biggest banks can be seen in "Maxed Out," the 2006 feature-length documentary directed by James Scurlock. The movie showcases the lives (and in some cases deaths) of several people who lost everything as a result of our lax credit laws.

One of the featured contributors to "Maxed Out" is a woman by the name of Elizabeth Warren, Professor of Law at Harvard Law School -- where she teaches contract law, bankruptcy, and commercial law -- and chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel that was created to investigate the U.S. Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), which we've all come to know and love as the 2008 Bank Bailout. The idea for a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was hers.

Elizabeth Warren is the strongest candidate that Obama could possibly find to head up this new bureau. Throughout the previous decade, she has been a tireless advocate of control over the heinous practices of the big banks. She would assure that the new bureau would actually offer consumers some protection. So of course, Timothy Geithner doesn't want her anywhere near the job.

The appointment of Timothy Geithner to the post of Treasury Secretary was the first hint to Progressives that Obama either had no intention of bringing about real change, or discovered once he stepped into the Oval Office that he wouldn't be calling the shots. Geithner, former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, is the quintissential Wall Street insider, the proverbial fox in charge of the chicken coop. Why Obama appointed him is anyone's guess. Perhaps he believed that only an insider could understand the complex machinations of Wall Street sufficiently to bring about reform. Unfortunately, Geithner's familiarity the Street seems to mostly serve the Street. Small wonder that he doesn't want a pesky reformer as head of a new bureau that's supposed to bring about reform.

This presents Barack Obama with what could easily be his last chance to prove to his base that he means business. It goes pretty well without saying that the Senate would never have an opportunity to cast an up or down vote on Warren; a certain fillibuster by Republicans (and ersatz Democrat Ben Nelson) would assure that. However, he can make a "recess" appointment of Warren when our Senators take their little-deserved August vacation. This would preclude a Senate confirmation, at least through the remaining months of the current legislative session, giving Warren an opportunity to organize the new bureau and afford it some teeth.

Obama has yet to show the kind of huevos it would take to do this. However, if he clearly understood that Americans are watching and waiting, just maybe he'd play things a little less "safe" than he has to date. That's why I'm urging anyone who happens past this blog, or others like it, to sign a petition urging him on.

I don't know about my fellow Progessives, but this is my last hope for the man. C'mon, Mr. President: Make us proud of you.

This Guy Has a Point...

2010-07-21T09:41:00.001-06:00

The Governor Who Hates Her State

Bryan Curtis correctly points out that the "invasion" of Arizona is not so much by Mexicans as it is by masses of white people from conservative enclaves of other states.

Satan hides in the details.

2010-07-06T10:13:00.007-06:00

As Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Obama prepare to meet in the White House today, a hue and cry is calling out from several liberal quarters, including The New York Times, about the tax-exempt money that is pouring from the United States to support expansion in the West Bank. I have a comment, and it is "oh, oh!"

It is true that tax-exempt American dollars have been finding their way into Israel and the territories for decades. Some wind up in Jewish hands, and some in Palestinian hands. Most serve humanitarian purposes, but some may be used to buy arms.

Whatever the mix, it might be very tempting for the Obama administration to cut off some if not all of this money. It would serve as a gesture, so the hue and cry goes, to put U.S. money where the U.S. mouth is with regard to settlements in the West Bank. However, carrying out the enabling change in the tax code could easily open up a can of worms that may be very difficult to keep under control.

For example, there are several yeshivot, institutes of higher Jewish learning, that are located outside of the pre-1967 borders of Israel. Some are as close in to Israel as East Jerusalem. Would Jews in America lose their ability to contribute to these yeshivot? What about hospitals and clinics that serve residents of the West Bank? Many of these serve Israelis and Palestinians alike.

More importantly, who will determine which charities are supporting activities in the West Bank, and to what extent? Could this not lead to loss of tax deductions for just about any charity operating in Israel because some of their funds might wind up in the settlements?

While we're talking slippery slopes, what about organizations that support charitable causes elsewhere in the world where we have an interest? Shall we prohibit tax deductions to charities that support hospitals and schools across Africa or southern Asia, just because we don't like the regime that's currently in power? Shall charitable causes be turned on and off as American political winds blow?

It makes sense to limit Americans' tax deductions on implements of war, just as it makes sense to limit Americans' taxes being spent on such items by our government. The devil, however, lies entirely in the details.

Chosen for What?

2010-06-27T16:45:00.002-06:00

It is with great pain that I place this entry into the Maven University library stacks. Maybe someday, someone will come along and read it.

Last week, I was listening to one of my favorite liberal talk-show hosts, when she told a caller on no uncertain terms that as a Christian, he has a lot of work to do, but that she is one of the Chosen People and doesn’t have to do anything.

Okay, so she was angry at the caller for blasting her earlier in the day on a right-wing radio show. Nonetheless, her declaration was a) Dead wrong; and b) Just the sort of grist that anti-Semites love to throw into the fire.

But never mind this normally clever young lady who knows she’s Jewish but has no idea what it means. If Judge Martin Leach-Cross Feldman is also Jewish (and I can’t imagine why else his daughter, Jennifer Pulitzer Feldman, would have been married by a rabbi), he’s left her standing still.

If Judge Feldman’s name had only sounded Jewish, then what he did was make a fool of himself and a mockery of our court system. However, it appears the good judge is indeed Jewish, in which case he’s also committed a hilul Hashem, Hebrew for the profanation of God’s name.

Why on earth would a judge with a long, apparently outstanding career, set himself on fire like that? Not only did he issue one seriously sloppy ruling in his placement of an injunction against the moratorium on deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, but he did so as a heavy investor in the oil industry. Really, did he think no one would find that out? He knows full well that his financial disclosure statements are in the public record.

Judge Feldman could have sold his multitude of investments in the oil industry as soon as he found out that the case was his. If that would have cost him serious financial hardship, he could have easily recused himself from the case. Why didn’t he?

Perhaps all those oil holdings didn’t just come from a judge’s salary or gifts from his wife. Perhaps the Judge has enjoyed the opportunity over the years to rub elbows inside the top private clubs in New Orleans, something not many Jews get to do. Perhaps he owed his friends in the oil biz, and it was payback time. Perhaps he could feel the screws being put to him by his friends. Or perhaps he fell victim to a bad case of hubris, and really thought he was above the laws of the land.

Perhaps all of the above. It doesn’t matter. The net result was to sully the laws—and name—of God. To flaunt the laws of human ethics that have guided the Western world since the time of Moses. The Book of Deuteronomy is replete with restrictions on the behavior of judges; Jews have studied these laws in minute detail for centuries, which may explain why so many Jews become lawyers. Even if Judge Feldman had been a Christian—or a Moslem for that matter—he should have known that the teachings of these religions also place high demands on judges.

Assuming Judge Feldman is indeed Jewish, he joins a long list of Jewish slime balls—from Jack Abramoff to Robert Stein and Phillip Bloom to Bernie Madoff—who haven’t a clue why they were chosen (some of that blame, I’m afraid, lies with Jewish parents and religious teachers). I’m sure some of them really believed that they were chosen for a privileged life.

Guess again. Jews were chosen for one thing and one thing only: responsibility. We were chosen to carry out the laws of Western civilization in general, and the Jewish commandments in particular. Jews were chosen to serve as a light to the nations, to set an example of moral, upright behavior.

If Jews don’t wake up and start living up to this responsibility, Helen Thomas will be far from the last one to tell us to go somewhere else.

Specter finally gets his cummin-uppins.

2010-05-21T15:03:00.001-06:00

Ya know, sometimes revenge is best served cold.

An unusual spring

2010-05-11T11:37:00.002-06:00

All the water from this year has made for a hefty allergy season, but it's also given us this.

Who woulda' thunk?

2010-04-22T21:33:00.003-06:00

When I sent over a package of kielbassa to my doctor last year, who would have guessed that I was starting a trend?

Errors and Delays: the Talx Business Plan

2010-04-04T02:27:00.002-06:00

The Talx Corporation helps employers process and fight unemployment claims. Now get this: according to a New York Times article, critics say its errors and delays keep jobless workers from collecting benefits. Well duh, that's the whole idea!

The Plutonomy Theory According to CitiCorp

2010-04-04T02:03:00.003-06:00

Wanna know what America's financial institutions think of us? Here's a serious read on it:

A Sane Conservative Voice

2010-03-25T15:57:00.004-06:00

I never thought I'd say this: I wish there were more David Frums in the world!

Waterloo
by David Frum
frumforum.com

Conservatives and Republicans today suffered their most crushing legislative defeat since the 1960s.

It’s hard to exaggerate the magnitude of the disaster. Conservatives may cheer themselves that they’ll compensate for today’s expected vote with a big win in the November 2010 elections. But:

(1) It’s a good bet that conservatives are over-optimistic about November – by then the economy will have improved and the immediate goodies in the healthcare bill will be reaching key voting blocs.

(2) So what? Legislative majorities come and go. This healthcare bill is forever. A win in November is very poor compensation for this debacle now.

So far, I think a lot of conservatives will agree with me. Now comes the hard lesson:

A huge part of the blame for today’s disaster attaches to conservatives and Republicans ourselves.

At the beginning of this process we made a strategic decision: unlike, say, Democrats in 2001 when President Bush proposed his first tax cut, we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo – just as healthcare was Clinton’s in 1994.

Only, the hardliners overlooked a few key facts: Obama was elected with 53% of the vote, not Clinton’s 42%. The liberal block within the Democratic congressional caucus is bigger and stronger than it was in 1993-94. And of course the Democrats also remember their history, and also remember the consequences of their 1994 failure.

This time, when we went for all the marbles, we ended with none.

Could a deal have been reached? Who knows? But we do know that the gap between this plan and traditional Republican ideas is not very big. The Obama plan has a broad family resemblance to Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts plan. It builds on ideas developed at the Heritage Foundation in the early 1990s that formed the basis for Republican counter-proposals to Clintoncare in 1993-1994.

Barack Obama badly wanted Republican votes for his plan. Could we have leveraged his desire to align the plan more closely with conservative views? To finance it without redistributive taxes on productive enterprise – without weighing so heavily on small business – without expanding Medicaid? Too late now. They are all the law.

No illusions please: This bill will not be repealed. Even if Republicans scored a 1994 style landslide in November, how many votes could we muster to re-open the “doughnut hole” and charge seniors more for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to banish 25 year olds from their parents’ insurance coverage? And even if the votes were there – would President Obama sign such a repeal?

We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement, and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat.

There were leaders who knew better, who would have liked to deal. But they were trapped. Conservative talkers on Fox and talk radio had whipped the Republican voting base into such a frenzy that deal-making was rendered impossible. How do you negotiate with somebody who wants to murder your grandmother? Or – more exactly – with somebody whom your voters have been persuaded to believe wants to murder their grandmother?

I’ve been on a soapbox for months now about the harm that our overheated talk is doing to us. Yes it mobilizes supporters – but by mobilizing them with hysterical accusations and pseudo-information, overheated talk has made it impossible for representatives to represent and elected leaders to lead. The real leaders are on TV and radio, and they have very different imperatives from people in government. Talk radio thrives on confrontation and recrimination. When Rush Limbaugh said that he wanted President Obama to fail, he was intelligently explaining his own interests. What he omitted to say – but what is equally true – is that he also wants Republicans to fail. If Republicans succeed – if they govern successfully in office and negotiate attractive compromises out of office – Rush’s listeners get less angry. And if they are less angry, they listen to the radio less, and hear fewer ads for Sleepnumber beds.

So today’s defeat for free-market economics and Republican values is a huge win for the conservative entertainment industry. Their listeners and viewers will now be even more enraged, even more frustrated, even more disappointed in everybody except the responsibility-free talkers on television and radio. For them, it’s mission accomplished. For the cause they purport to represent, it’s Waterloo all right: ours.

Can we, or can't we?

2010-03-25T08:36:00.002-06:00

Moslem "Tea Parties?"

2010-02-09T11:29:00.004-07:00

Here's a video of a very ugly incident at University of California Irvine, in which a mob prevented Israel's ambassador to the U.S. from being able to speak:

Apparently, such incidents are happening all over the world, on an increasing and more hateful basis every day. Such incidents have occurred at the London School of Economics, Columbia U. in NYC, and at York and Concordia Universities in Toronto. At York, a group of Jewish students was actually chased into a building under threat of physical violence by a mob. These kinds of incidents are increasing and getting worse. It is reminiscent of Germany in the late 1930's, when good people did not stand up against tyranny and the tyrants became stronger and, eventually, took over.

If you wonder where such hate comes from, here's a clue. This short article and two-minute video were produced by Hamas TV. They're just one example of the garbage being strewn all over the media, across the Mideast.

If you've had enough, you can support the work of StandWithUs, an international Israel advocacy group that focuses primarily on educating students about the history and politics of the region.

Let's do our best to put an end to this toxic malarky once and for all.

No matter your political leanings, this is Irresistable!

2010-01-22T09:34:00.003-07:00

Is it time to break the banks?

2010-01-10T09:36:00.032-07:00

"Have you seen the little piggies,
Crawling in the dirt?
And for all the little piggies,
Life is getting worse.
Always having dirt to play around in."

George Harrison wrote these lines for the Beatles White Album. Who did he mean by the "Piggies?" Charles Manson thought he was referring to white America, but it's hard to take any thought of Charles Manson seriously. Others assumed he meant the police, who were less-than-affectionately referred to as pigs during the '60s when the White Album was produced.

I, on the other hand, think he may have meant the banks, Or does that attribute more prophecy (or memory) to Harrison than he merited?

Harrison's "Little Piggies"—crawling in the dirt, life is getting worse—sure seem to reflect the 25-50% of mortgage holders in the United States who have either defaulted on their mortgages or are in danger of doing so. Many of these little piggies knew what they were getting into, and decided to take the chance anyway. Others were lured by unscrupulous bankers and mortgage brokers into purchasing or borrowing against homes which were way beyond their means. Either way, ever increasing numbers of them find themselves crawling around, trying to play in their over-leveraged dirt for just one more month.

"Have you seen the bigger piggies
In their starched white shirts?
You will find the bigger piggies
Stirring up the dirt,
Always have clean shirts to play around in."

It hardly requires an MBA in Finance to understand this analogy. These are the guys (and occasional gals) who took our money (your taxes and mine) to pay themselves big bonuses instead of renegotiating little piggy loans. Perhaps their shirts aren't as starched as they were in the '60s, but they continue to play around with our money until the next time they hold us up for more.

"In their sties with all their backing (read that the Fed),
They don't care what goes on around.
In their eyes there's something lacking,
What they need's a damn good whacking."

Rumor has it that George Harrison's mother wrote the line about the "damn good whacking." I'm not surprised; it would take a mother to come up with an appropriate solution to banker myopia and recalcitrance.

Now it would appear that at least some of the little piggies are beginning to understand this. The "whacking" seems to be taking on two forms.

Today's (1/10/2010) New York Times Magazine carried an article entitled, "Walk Away From Your Mortgage!" It reports a trend among some mortgage holders called "strategic defaults." In other words, if a little piggy's mortgage is so much bigger than the value of his or her home, why not just walk out and rent? After all, these piggies haven't a chance of recovering the money they put in to purchase the dirt in the first place. Never mind that such "stregic defaults" depress the value of the neighborhoods which the little piggies abandon. Or that they could force the big piggies to come back to the public trough that much sooner. Anything to have good dirt to wallow in.

Shame on the New York Times. Not for reporting on this trend, but for encouraging it with their overtly suggestive headline. Surely there's a better way to let the banks know of our displeasure besides destroying our neighborhoods.

It turns out there is. I invite you to visit moveyourmoney.info, a database of community-based banks which have received a grade of “B” or above from Institutional Risk Analytics. Institutional Risk Analytics measures factors like profitability, lending default experience, capital adequacy, loan and unused commitment exposure and operational efficiency. Give moveyourmoney.info your zip code, and it will provide you with a list of qualified community banks and credit unions within or close to where you live. Go ahead...give it a try.

I've been banking in a community bank for years: Los Alamos National Bank in Los Alamos, New Mexico. LANB was the first bank in the country to win the coveted Malcom Baldrige Quality Award from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, an office of the Department of Commerce. All of the bank's deposits are invested within the State of New Mexico. What's more, the bank takes back the servicing of the loans it sells, so borrowers continue to deal with their local bank long after closing.

"Everywhere there's lots of piggies,
Living piggy lives.
You can see them out for dinner,
With their piggy wives.
Clutching forks and knives to eat their bacon."

We can put a stop to this form of American cannibalism, without destroying our neighborhoods or giving up the American Dream. Let's start putting our money where our mouths are.

Lies, Damned Lies & Statistics

2009-12-03T10:09:00.012-07:00

A friend just gave me a copy of an opinion piece from Newscorp's Wall Street Journal written by Fouad Ajami called "The Arabs Have Stopped Applauding Obama." I've copied and pasted the article below. I also responded to my friend as follows:

I read the article you left me on how "The Arabs Have Stopped Applauding Obama." The article points out that the 2009 surveys demonstrate a drop in US approval among Arab nations. So I went over to www.pewglobal.org to look at their numbers. Here's what I found:

Turkey: Ajami points out that the "favorables are 14%. Bad number, right? He neglects to mention that they were 9% two years earlier!

Egypt: Ajami points out that the favorables are a paultry 27% from "a country that's reaped nearly 40 years of American aid." In 2007, however, the favorable was 21% and in 2008 it was 22%. While blasting Obama for not doing a good job in the interenational arena, Ajami fails to point this improvement out.

Jordan: Unchanged from 2002 to 2009. However, it's favorability rating dropped as low as 1% during the Bush years, specifically '03, after the invasion of Iraq. Even bringing it back to where it was (25%) before we swaggered into Iraq is indeed an accomplishment!

Lebanon is even more dramatic. Our appovability was at 36% after the invasion of Iraq, and remained in the 20s-40s throughout the Bush years. It's now 55%! Ajami doesn't mention Lebanon, because those numbers shoot his weakness and obsequity theory out of the water.

Pakistan: Ajami's correct here. Our approvability in Pakistan continues to decline. That may have something to do with CIA drone missles pummeling their countryside, a practice which Obama has continued. Ajami fails to point out that the "decline" he decries has been going on steadily for the last four years.

So much for the Arab world. Take a look at Indonesia, a non-Arab Moslem country. Our approvability dropped into the toilet from 75% to 15% after the war in Iraq. It's been on a steady uphill ever since, but spiked from 37% to 63% over the last year. Admittedly, that may have something to do with Obama's childhood ties to Indonesia; he might be considered a bit of a "favorite son."

Now look at "Old Europe," as W liked to call it. Since the election of Obama we've gone fro 53% to 69% in Britain, 42% to 75% in France, 31% to 64% in Germany and 33% to 58% in Spain (I guess no one cares what Italy thinks). These numbers don't reflect a "softening" of our enemies, which is what Ajami thinks is most important. However, it does reflect a firming up of our allies. Given our current economy and ambitions in Afghanistan and elsewhere, we need our friends more than ever.

If we are to EVER convince the Arab peoples that our (American) way of doing things is worth emulating, then we need to stop wasting our time "settling accounts with tyrants" and get on with positive engagement wherever possible.

Figures lie and liars figure. Ajami, a Senior Fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution, has wielded them around to prove that Obama's foreign policy is a "labyrinthe of its own making." Given the mess Obama inherited, I'd say he's working miracles.

The Arabs Have Stopped Applauding Obama

By Fouad Ajami

'He talks too much," a Saudi academic in Jeddah, who had once been smitten with Barack Obama, recently observed to me of America's 44th president. He has wearied of Mr. Obama and now does not bother with the Obama oratory.

He is hardly alone, this academic. In the endless chatter of this region, and in the commentaries offered by the press, the theme is one of disappointment. In the Arab-Islamic world, Barack Obama has come down to earth.

He has not made the world anew, history did not bend to his will, the Indians and Pakistanis have been told that the matter of Kashmir is theirs to resolve, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the same intractable clash of two irreconcilable nationalisms, and the theocrats in Iran have not "unclenched their fist," nor have they abandoned their nuclear quest.

There is little Mr. Obama can do about this disenchantment. He can't journey to Turkey to tell its Islamist leaders and political class that a decade of anti-American scapegoating is all forgiven and was the product of American policies—he has already done that. He can't journey to Cairo to tell the fabled "Arab street" that the Iraq war was a wasted war of choice, and that America earned the malice that came its way from Arab lands—he has already done that as well. He can't tell Muslims that America is not at war with Islam—he, like his predecessor, has said that time and again.

It was the norm for American liberalism during the Bush years to brandish the Pew Global Attitudes survey that told of America's decline in the eyes of foreign nations. Foreigners were saying what the liberals wanted said.

Now those surveys of 2009 bring findings from the world of Islam that confirm that the animus toward America has not been radically changed by the ascendancy of Mr. Obama. In the Palestinian territories, 15% have a favorable view of the U.S. while 82% have an unfavorable view. The Obama speech in Ankara didn't seem to help in Turkey, where the favorables are 14% and those unreconciled, 69%. In Egypt, a country that's reaped nearly 40 years of American aid, things stayed roughly the same: 27% have a favorable view of the U.S. while 70% do not. In Pakistan, a place of great consequence for American power, our standing has deteriorated: The unfavorables rose from 63% in 2008 to 68% this year.

Mr. Obama's election has not drained the swamps of anti-Americanism. That anti-Americanism is endemic to this region, an alibi and a scapegoat for nations, and their rulers, unwilling to break out of the grip of political autocracy and economic failure. It predated the presidency of George W. Bush and rages on during the Obama presidency.

We had once taken to the foreign world that quintessential American difference—the belief in liberty, a needed innocence to play off against the settled and complacent ways of older nations. The Obama approach is different.

Steeped in an overarching idea of American guilt, Mr. Obama and his lieutenants offered nothing less than a doctrine, and a policy, of American penance. No one told Mr. Obama that the Islamic world, where American power is engaged and so dangerously exposed, it is considered bad form, nay a great moral lapse, to speak ill of one's own tribe when in the midst, and in the lands, of others.

The crowd may have applauded the cavalier way the new steward of American power referred to his predecessor, but in the privacy of their own language they doubtless wondered about his character and his fidelity. "My brother and I against my cousin, my cousin and I against the stranger," goes one of the Arab world's most honored maxims. The stranger who came into their midst and spoke badly of his own was destined to become an object of suspicion.

Mr. Obama could not make up his mind: He was at one with "the people" and with the rulers who held them in subjugation. The people of Iran who took to the streets this past summer were betrayed by this hapless diplomacy—Mr. Obama was out to "engage" the terrible rulers that millions of Iranians were determined to be rid of.

On Nov. 4, on the 30th anniversary of the seizure of the American embassy in Tehran, the embattled reformers, again in the streets, posed an embarrassing dilemma for American diplomacy: "Obama, Obama, you are either with us or with them," they chanted. By not responding to these cries and continuing to "engage" Tehran's murderous regime, his choice was made clear. It wasn't one of American diplomacy's finest moments.

Mr. Obama has himself to blame for the disarray of his foreign policy. American arms had won a decent outcome in Iraq, but Mr. Obama would not claim it—it was his predecessor's war. Vigilance had kept the American homeland safe from terrorist attacks for seven long years under his predecessors, but he could never grant Bush policies the honor and credit they deserved. He had declared Afghanistan a war of necessity, but he seems to have his eye on the road out even as he is set to announce a troop increase in an address to be delivered tomorrow.

He was quick to assert, in the course of his exuberant campaign for president last year, that his diplomacy in South Asia would start with the standoff in Kashmir. In truth India had no interest in an international adjudication of Kashmir. What was settled during the partition in 1947 was there to stay. In recent days, Mr. Obama walked away from earlier ambitions. "Obviously, there are historic conflicts between India and Pakistan," he said. "It's not the place of the United States to try to, from the outside, resolve those conflicts."

Nor was he swayed by the fate of so many "peace plans" that have been floated over so many decades to resolve the fight between Arab and Jew over the land between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean. Where George W. Bush offered the Palestinians the gift of clarity—statehood but only after the renunciation of terror and the break with maximalism—Mr. Obama signaled a return to the dead ways of the past: a peace process where America itself is broker and arbiter.

The Obama diplomacy had made a settlement freeze its starting point, when this was precisely the wrong place to begin. Israel has given up settlements before at the altar of peace—recall the historical accommodation with Egypt a quarter century ago. The right course would have set the question of settlements aside as it took up the broader challenge of radicalism in the region—the menace and swagger of Iran, the arsenal of Hamas and Hezbollah, the refusal of the Arab order of power to embrace in broad daylight the cause of peace with Israel.

The laws of gravity, the weight of history and of precedent, have caught up with the Obama presidency. We are beyond stirring speeches. The novelty of the Obama approach, and the Obama persona, has worn off. There is a whole American diplomatic tradition to draw upon—engagements made, wisdom acquired in the course of decades, and, yes, accounts to be settled with rogues and tyrannies. They might yet help this administration find its way out of a labyrinth of its own making.

Mr. Ajami, a professor at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, is the author of "The Foreigner's Gift" (Free Press, 2007).

I've just about had it!

2009-11-23T17:57:00.006-07:00

Today, I received the slimiest of the slime: a long litany of accusations and insinuations against Barack Obama. It could take forever to reply to them all. And even if I took it on, by the time I finished, the Obama haters behind these "viral" emails will have thought of something else with which to slime him.

So instead, I'd like to request that the source of this email come up with his or her sources. I received this email from someone who received it from hcc4649@hotmail.com. Hey, there, hcc4649: how about some sources for these accusations?

If not, I'll wait until the next time I have nothing better to do than look a few of 'em up myself. I'll try to separate exaggeration, inaccuracies and downright lies from those that do hold up as having come from a reliable source, or any source who's willing to explain the sin in question in greater, verifiable detail.

The people of this country overwhelmingly voted Barack Obama into office because they had high expectations of him. It's indeed true that not all of those expections are being met. He wasn't that experienced in politics, but he was highly trained in community leadership. Barack Obama is a follower of the Communitarian way of thinking.

That's NOT Communism; it's Communitarianism. As Wikipedia so aptly puts it: "communitarianism emphasizes the need to balance individual rights and interests with that of the community as a whole." That's balance, folks. This country's been out of balance for so long, hardly anyone can remember when it was in balance.

I'm sure you don't believe Barack Obama represents your culture and values. That's ok; hold your nose, but stop trying to destory him -- that's un-American. He was sent to Washington to represent the culture and values of the majority of voting Americans. It's called democracy with a small "d." When the majority of American voters did so, they took a chance that his abilities would match his vision.

Barack Obmam promised the American people--all of us--that he would repair our badly broken health-care system. He promised to slow the increase of greenhouse gases that threaten our atmosphere. And he promised to improve our economy long-term by improving our education system.

So far, all he's been able to do is deal with the big, ugly mess he inherited. Like the mess created by an overheated economy for the last 30 years, which finally had the plug pulled out from under it by the banks and ponzy-schemers. Or an unwinnable war, which began as a search for the bad guy and continues as an ongoing quagmire. Or a vicious minority that doesn't waste its time opposing his agenda; it just stands in the way of his getting anything done at all. As the Onion put it so succinctly last year: "Black man given world's worst job."

The people who voted for Barack Obama understand his vision, but they're not convinced that he'll be able to deliver in face of the brilliantly coordinated attack that has been mounted against him by defenders of the staus quo.

Nice job, folks.

The text of the email follows. The subject was: "If George W. Bush..."

If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how he inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes? If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved? If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan's holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved? If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved? If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved? If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky? If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , would you have approved? If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip? If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current in their income taxes, would you have approved? If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to "Cinco de Cuatro" in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the 5th of May (Cinco de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment? If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word "advice" would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as proof of what a dunce he is? If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on Earth Day, would you have concluded he's a hypocrite? If George W. Bush's administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually get what happened on 9-11? If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence? If George W. Bush had created the position 32 or more Czars who report directly to him, bypassing the House and Senate on much of what is happening in America , would you have approved. If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved? If George W Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved? If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved? If George W. Bush had spent more than all the Presidents combined since George Washington, would you have approved? So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive? Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this in 10 months -- so you'll have 3 years and 2 months to come up with an answer.

A Matter of Life and Death

2009-10-08T06:31:00.009-06:00

Keith Olbermann has been absent from his TV show Countdown a lot lately. In this 45-minute segment he tells you why, and relates his heart-wrenching, first-hand experience with our broken health-care system. It ain't pretty, but it's most definitely worth the time--and the agony. If you wish to view it full-screen, you can do so at the Countdown website, or pull the podcast from iTunes.

Ya Just Couldn't Make This One Up.

2009-10-04T20:40:00.002-06:00

From the Daily Telegraph:
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad revealed to have Jewish past
By Damien McElroy and Ahmad Vahdat
Published: 7:30AM BST 03 Oct 2009

A photograph of the Iranian president holding up his identity card during elections in March 2008 clearly shows his family has Jewish roots.

A close-up of the document reveals he was previously known as Sabourjian – a Jewish name meaning cloth weaver. The short note scrawled on the card suggests his family changed its name to Ahmadinejad when they converted to embrace Islam after his birth.

The Sabourjians traditionally hail from Aradan, Mr Ahmadinejad's birthplace, and the name derives from "weaver of the Sabour", the name for the Jewish Tallit shawl in Persia. The name is even on the list of reserved names for Iranian Jews compiled by Iran's Ministry of the Interior.

Experts last night suggested Mr Ahmadinejad's track record for hate-filled attacks on Jews could be an overcompensation to hide his past.

Ali Nourizadeh, of the Centre for Arab and Iranian Studies, said: "This aspect of Mr Ahmadinejad's background explains a lot about him.

"Every family that converts into a different religion takes a new identity by condemning their old faith.

"By making anti-Israeli statements he is trying to shed any suspicions about his Jewish connections. He feels vulnerable in a radical Shia society."

A London-based expert on Iranian Jewry said that "jian" ending to the name specifically showed the family had been practising Jews.

"He has changed his name for religious reasons, or at least his parents had," said the Iranian-born Jew living in London. "Sabourjian is well known Jewish name in Iran."

A spokesman for the Israeli embassy in London said it would not be drawn on Mr Ahmadinejad's background. "It's not something we'd talk about," said Ron Gidor, a spokesman.

The Iranian leader has not denied his name was changed when his family moved to Tehran in the 1950s. But he has never revealed what it was change from or directly addressed the reason for the switch.

Relatives have previously said a mixture of religious reasons and economic pressures forced his blacksmith father Ahmad to change when Mr Ahmadinejad was aged four.

The Iranian president grew up to be a qualified engineer with a doctorate in traffic management. He served in the Revolutionary Guards militia before going on to make his name in hardline politics in the capital.

During this year's presidential debate on television he was goaded to admit that his name had changed but he ignored the jibe.

However Mehdi Khazali, an internet blogger, who called for an investigation of Mr Ahmadinejad's roots was arrested this summer.

Mr Ahmadinejad has regularly levelled bitter criticism at Israel, questioned its right to exist and denied the Holocaust. British diplomats walked out of a UN meeting last month after the Iranian president denounced Israel's 'genocide, barbarism and racism.'

Benjamin Netanyahu made an impassioned denunciation of the Iranian leader at the same UN summit. "Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium," he said. "A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies the murder of six million Jews while promising to wipe out the State of Israel, the State of the Jews. What a disgrace. What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations."

Mr Ahmadinejad has been consistently outspoken about the Nazi attempt to wipe out the Jewish race. "They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets," he declared at a conference on the holocaust staged in Tehran in 2006.

The moment we've been waiting for...

2009-09-09T17:41:00.001-06:00

Okay, you health-care advocates: here's the Prez's speech:

War Against Women in the Congo

2009-08-24T12:25:00.009-06:00

Pray for the integrity of the government; for were it not for the fear of its authority, a man would swallow his neighbor alive.
Rabbi Chanina in "Ethics of the Fathers," The Babylonian Talmud

Did you know that millions of people have been killed as a result of war in the Congo in the last several years? Did you know that one of the primary "tactics" of this war is rape? I guess it's easy to ignore atrocities in faraway Africa, especially since any natural resources which they may have had to offer Americans were long-ago pillaged during the "colonial" period. But the victims of lawless, government-less brutality are real people--and they're predominantly women.

This segment of CBS's 60 Minutes, from August 19, describes what's going on there in no uncertain terms. Warning: it'll curdle your blood. The Panzi Hospital in Eastern Congo, which is featured in the story, is a recipient of funds from The Fistula Foundation (on which I serve as a Board member). The organization is devoted to mending childbirth injuries in women, usually resulting from a delivery gone wrong. However in the Congo, these same injuries often result from unbridled violence against women.

Que pasa, Tomas?

2009-08-21T16:50:00.005-06:00

What in the world is going on with Thom Hartmann? I started to listen to his (free) KPOJ podcast. It opened with a recorded announcement--by Thom--that circumstances prohibit continuation of the "free" podcast, and to subscribe at his website. So I moseyed on over to thomhartmann.com. There I was invited to fork over eight bucks a month (or nearly 60 of them up front for a year). No biggie, huh?

Actually, it is. I'm retired, on a fixed income and a very tight budget. Just like the people currently having the living daylights scared out of them over healthcare reform. I expect a corrupt system to do everything they can to continue raking me over the coals, Heaven forfend I get sick. When the CEO of United Healthcare denied payment of his share of my well-woman exam, I just shrugged my shoulders. After all, a guy's gotta make a buck.

But somehow, I expected more of Thom Hartmann.

I've been a faithful listener to Thom for years now. I've read a couple of his books, and was very impressed with his amazing breadth of knowledge. Never did I dream that, at this most critical time in our history, Thom would go for the brass ring. Did it ever occur to him that some--if not many--of his listeners would find this a hardship?

If it's really an inability to keep the kpoj podcast online, surely he could have found sponsors for his website podcast...he's a popular guy. However, subscriptions are cash flow, and there's no need to pitch sponsors. Sounds delish; hope he doesn't get heartburn.

I'm no Fox News fan, but this you gotta see:

2009-08-13T18:27:00.000-06:00

An Open Letter to My Friend J.P.

2009-08-11T13:34:00.006-06:00

Hi, there, J.P. --
What a surprise to receive an email message from you. I hope you and your family are doing well.

I attempted to read the Obama Health Care Plan only to discover that there isn't one. Currently, the only thing out there is HR 3200, which has been referred to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, Education and Labor, Oversight and Government Reform. I believe only one committee has reported it out so far. There's a long way to go before this legislation passes in the House, is reconciled with one from the Senate and is signed into law by President Obama. Only the Almighty knows what it will look like by then.

I currently carry three health care plans: Medicare, Tri-Care (my husband is retired Navy) and United Healthcare (part of my husband's retirement plan from Los Alamos National Laboratories). I recently had an annual physical, something which should be part of any good health-care program. Medicare and Tri-Care each paid their share; United Healthcare denied payment, and I had to pick up their share of the bill. And I'm not the only one: United Healthcare has a reputation for delays, denials, lies and outright fraud every time someone turns in a claim under one of its retiree insurance plans.

Routine denial of payment has become United Healthcare's stock-in-trade, and they've profited greatly from it. I'm sure you know that they've been successfully sued a number of times by individual patients, groups and states for their unsavory business practices. Unfortunately, the fines that resulted from these lawsuits haven't been enough to hurt them or their highly over-compensated management staff (2005 total compensation for United Health Care's CEO was $8.3 million, compared with: Wellpoint, Inc, $5.2 million; CIGNA, $4.7 million; Sierra Health, $3.4 million; Aetna, Inc, $3.3 million; Assurant, Inc, $2.3 million; Humana, $1.9 million; Health Net, $1.7 million). You may not consider this rationing and denial of care, but I sure do. Now these bandits are spending millions more to support scare advertising, disruption of town-hall meetings and "viral" emails like this one.

There is no provision in HR 3200 that denies care to ANYONE. The only thing that comes close enough to be labeled "rationing" or "denial" is in Sec 1751 (a), Medicaid non-payment for certain health care-acquired conditions. This provision, which denies payment for claims filed by doctors to correct their mistakes, has been in the Medicaid law all along. HR 3200 merely restates it. Go ahead; look up Sec 1751 in HR 3200 and see for yourself.

Fortunately, both copies of HR3200 that I've examined (the link in Janda's email and one from the Government Printing Office) are available in searchable text. Try this: search the document for National Health Care Board. IT AIN'T THERE! There is, however, a provision calling for a Clinical Prevention Stakeholders Board. Its purpose is to "advise the Task Force on developing, updating, publishing, and disseminating evidence-based recommendations on the use of clinical preventive services." A similar board, to provide the same advice on community prevention, is also called for. These "boards" report to a Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services and the Task Force on Community Preventive Services respectively. Both task forces deal with PREVENTION, and have nothing whatsoever to do with approval or denial of care to the sick.

As for the role of ANY entity in denying care to ANYONE, then-Texas Governor George W. Bush signed into law revisions to The Texas Advance Directives Act, also known as the Texas Futile Care Law, which is now Chapter 166 of the Texas Health & Safety Code. It set up formal procedures to allow a health-care facility to discontinue life-sustaining treatment against the wishes of the patient or guardian ten days after giving written notice, if the continuation of treatment is considered medically inappropriate by the "treating medical team." Prior to Bush signing these revisions (in 1999 at the end of his tenure, I might add), no procedures were required for a hospital in Texas to deny care to a dying patient; the original law resulted in at least one death: six-month-old Sun Hudson, who had a lethal congenital malformation. How's that for "Right to Life!"

Here's another one to Google: Comparative Effectiveness Research (TITLE IV, Subtitle A). Janda claims that the purpose of the Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research is to "slow the development of new medications and technologies in order to reduce costs." Well, I guess it's possible that new meds and technologies might be slowed if they have to prove their effectiveness against existing meds and technologies, which is something they don't have to do now. The drug companies are currently under no obligation to test their drugs against existing treatments, only against placebos. That's one reason why we're seeing a plethora of new drugs on the market claiming to be effective for this condition or that, but are no better and in some cases worse than what's already around. I refer you to Powerful Medicine by Dr. Jerry Avorn (Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Chief of the Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics at Boston's Brigham and Women's Hospital) for a discussion of this deficiency and others in the FDA's new-drug approval process.

Hey, JP, I'm getting tired of having to present the truth behind Janda's claims. Why don't you look up the rest of them for yourself? Try the National Coordinator for Health Information and Technology, and let me know what you think.

So what are guys like Janda up to? What's with the "facism," "eugenics" and other inflammatory labels? Could it have to do with the Republican Party's call to defeat health-care legislation "at all costs," which they think will "crush" the Obama administration? George W. Bush just allowed one of America's all-time biggest fascists, Dick Cheney, to run his administration--and the country--into the ground. Did Democrats spend millions going around calling the administration "facist?"

No, I don't think this has anything to do with facism, or eugenics, or denial-of-care. I think it has to do with an over-bloated industry defending its right to go on cheating the American people unabated. And, I think has to do with whatever's left of the Republican Party, mostly far-right Southerners, attempting to defend their lilly-white world by bringing down a black president. What an unholy alliance.

There are a lot of legitimate arguments to make against HR 3200, the biggest being how to pay for the darned thing. But this crap only belies the greed, disingenuity and/or racism of its perpetrators. I really thought more highly of you than to fall for it, much less expect me to.
Linda

=================J.P.'s Original Message=============

From: J.P. Puette
To: J.P. Puette
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: Dr. Dave Janda: The One Word to Describe Obamacare - Facsist

This is not fear-mongering. If you have time to read the Obama Health Care Plan, you will be able to find that everything said here is true. Sounds a little like a "eugenics plan" to me!

Make your voices heard, or it will be your health plan.

J. P. Puette

Scary stuff, from HR 3200...

Subject: Fwd: Dr. Dave Janda: The One Word to Describe Obamacare - Fascist
Written by Dr. Dave Janda
Thursday, 23 July 2009

As a physician who has authored books on preventative health care, I was given the opportunity to be the keynote speaker at a Congressional Dinner at The Capitol Building in Washington last Friday (7/17).

The presentation was entitled Health Care Reform, The Power & Profit of Prevention, and I was gratified that it was well received.

In preparation for the presentation, I read the latest version of "reform" as authored by The Obama Administration and supported by Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid. Here is the link to the 1,018 page document:

Let me summarize just a few salient points of the above plan. First, however, it should be clear that the same warning notice must be placed on The ObamaCare Plan as on a pack of cigarettes: Consuming this product will be hazardous to your health.

The underlying method of cutting costs throughout the plan is based on rationing and denying care. There is no focus on preventing health care need whatever. The plan's method is the most inhumane and unethical approach to cutting costs I can imagine as a physician.

The rationing of care is implemented through The National Health Care Board, according to the plan. This illustrious Board "will approve or reject treatment for patients based on the cost per treatment divided by the number of years the patient will benefit from the treatment."

Translation.....if you are over 65 or have been recently diagnosed as having an advanced form of cardiac disease or aggressive cancer.....dream on if you think you will get treated.....pick out your coffin.

Oh, you say this could never happen? Sorry.... this is the same model they use in Britain.

The plan mandates that there will be little or no advanced treatments to be available in the future. It creates The Federal Coordinating Council For Comparative Effectiveness Research, the purpose of which is "to slow the development of new medications and technologies in order to reduce costs." Yes, this is to be the law.

The plan also outlines that doctors and hospitals will be overseen and reviewed by The National Coordinator For Health Information and Technology.

This " coordinator" will "monitor treatments being delivered to make sure doctors and hospitals are strictly following government guidelines that are deemed appropriate." It goes on to say....."Doctors and hospitals not adhering to guidelines will face penalties."

According to those in Congress, penalties could include large six figure financial fines and possible imprisonment.

So according to The ObamaCare Plan....if your doctor saves your life you might have to go to the prison to see your doctor for follow -up appointments. I believe this is the same model Stalin used in the former Soviet Union.

Section 102 has the Orwellian title, "Protecting the Choice to Keep Current Coverage." What this section really mandates is that it is illegal to keep your private insurance if your status changes - e.g., if you lose or change your job, retire from your job and become a senior, graduate from college and get your first job. Yes, illegal.

When Mr. Obama hosted a conference call with bloggers urging them to pressure Congress to pass his health plan as soon as possible, a blogger from Maine referenced an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance.

He asked: "Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?" Mr. Obama replied: "You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about."

Then there is Section 1233 of The ObamaCare Plan, devoted to "Advanced Care Planning." After each American turns 65 years of age they have to go to a mandated counseling program that is designed to end life sooner.

This session is to occur every 5 years unless the person has developed a chronic illness then it must be done every year. The topics in this session will include, "how to decline hydration, nutrition and how to initiate hospice care." It is no wonder The Obama Administration does not like my emphasis on Prevention. For Mr. Obama, prevention is the "enemy" as people would live longer.

I rest my case. The ObamaCare Plan is hazardous to the health of every American.

After I finished my Capitol Hill presentation, I was asked by a Congressman in the question-answer session: "I'll be doing a number of network interviews on the Obama Health Care Plan. If I am asked what is the one word to describe the plan what should I answer."

The answer is simple, honest, direct, analytical, sad but truthful. I told him that one word is FASCIST.

Then I added, "I hope you'll have the courage to use that word, Congressman. No other word is more appropriate."

Dr. Dave Janda, MD, is an orthopedic surgeon, and a world-recognized expert on the prevention of sports injuries, particularly in children. His website is noinjury.com .

Web Site Story

2009-08-11T11:00:00.005-06:00

At last: some comic relief:

I'm sick of the "Birthers."

2009-07-29T10:13:00.019-06:00

I have a much juicier conspiracy theory, and I don't think it's been proven wrong yet.

Michael Jackson's cardiologist, Dr. Conrad Murray, is being "investigated" in the murder of his patient. Well no, it actually isn't he who's being investigated, but rather his office records and personal effects. His home and office were "raided," weeks after the superstar died of cardiac arrest under Murray's care. The toxicology reports still aren't in, so police still haven't officially "suspected" murder or manslaughter.

Ya know, I worked as a lab tech for a few years during the '60s, then in medical diagnostic marketing. Even back then, a toxicology study never took this long. So much more so with today's advances in assay techniques. Why are these toxicology studies taking so long?

I don't know much about the recording or entertainment industry. Michael Jackson's last dress rehearsal was recorded at the same quality level as if it were a live performance. Is that common? Maybe it is, but wouldn't you just love to own the rights to that footage? What a goldmine!

In fact, since he died, everything Michael Jackson ever touched has become worth a fortune. That would never have happened as long as he was alive.

Michael's popularity had been on a steady decline since his legal problems. The concert series was to be his big comeback. His health and emotional state were probably not so teriffic, and when he learned that he would have to do 50 performances, he made it clear that he couldn't do it.

I suspect Michael Jackson was physically and emotionally incapable of making a comeback; at least not enough of a comeback to meet budget projections. But a dead Michael Jackson...wow, now you're talking bucks!

Remember Howard Beale? At the end of that brilliant cinematic masterpiece, "Network," Howard Beale was declared to be "the first known instance of a man who was killed because he had lousy ratings."

Michael Jackson may become known as the first known instance of a man who was killed because his image was worth more than he was.

Hekhsher Tzedek

2009-07-26T11:56:00.013-06:00

I used to think that faithful adherence to Jewish law would help make me a better person. In some ways, it did: Observing the Sabbath gave me a sense of peace, and tuned me in to the value of community. I admired my observant co-religionists for rising above the "I, me, my" values so rampant in America. I did my best to emulate them.

For years, I listened to countless rabbinic admonitions against speaking ill of my fellow Jews. But I noticed that speaking ill of each other seemed to be a favorite Jewish pastime. It always seemed to be justified by the claim that one must "warn" a fellow Jew of harm that can come to him or her by associating with an "evildoer." I looked the other way, figuring that these perpetrators of loshon hara (evil speech) were exceptions and not the rule. I can't do that any longer. I just keep running into loshon hara with at least the frequency as the admonitions against it.

Over the last several years, Americans have been treated to footage of Jews in black hats being frog-marched off to the pokie for one form of corruption or another. The latest, Rabbi Levy Rosenbaum, has admitted to--of all things--organ trafficking. We're not talking about some runaway Jew here; Rosenbaum is a religious leader who has given all his fellow Jews a black eye. A religious Jew who publicly disgraces himself not only puts his fellow Jews in danger of antisemitism, but defames his Creator at the same time. Rosenbaum surely knows this.

Then there's the kashrut game. Having very few intellectual pursuits, observant Jewish women chat constantly about what's kosher and what isn't, and where to find the latest kosher delectable. Having nothing else to talk about with these women, I became a big player of this myself.

Then I noticed it becoming nasty. A won't eat at B's home because B serves food that has been processed under a particular kosher authority that A doesn't like. Recently, I was admonished by a "friend" for purchasing something with a "dubious" certification. Mind you, that "friend" had never been willing to come to my home for a meal, even prior to discovering that I bought this particular product.

Kashrut, which is supposed to hold Jews together, is being used by many to keep us apart. It's really sad, but not half as sad as learning that Agriprocessor, America's biggest (and nearly only) kosher meat processing plant, had been violating child-labor laws and employing (and abusing) illegal immigrants for years prior to being raided in 2008. The company is now in bankruptcy, but the facility is still in use by many of the "holiest" of kosher meat processors.

This week, I learned about a ray of hope in this disgusting mess. It's called Hekhsher Tzedek, i.e. "righteous kashrut certification." A creation of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism and the Rabbinical Assembly, Hekhsher Tzedek certification will be awarded to kosher food companies who comply with standards in the areas of employee health, safety and training; wages and benefits; corporate environmental impact; and corporate transparency. The seal is not intended to replace the current kashrut certification, but to augment it by assuring consumers that products not only comply with Jewish dietary laws, but Jewish laws of social justice as well.

It's about time!

My disillusionment has not caused me to abandon my love of God, Judaism or the Jewish people. However, it has caused me to shift my focus away from the games played in the Orthodox world and toward building a stronger personal relationship with my Creator. I think my rebbe of blessed memory, Rabbi Dovid Zeller, is probably looking down from his heavenly abode and also saying, "It's about time!"

One way to pay for universal healthcare

2009-07-22T20:31:00.003-06:00

Everyone deserves a chance at good health, rich, poor or somewhere in between. What no one deserves is healthcare on-the-house. If universal healthcare is to work, everyone will need to do their part to stay healthy.

Of course, there's no way to provide government incentives to get people to take care of themselves. At least not directly. Uncle Sam can't impose a "fat tax" on people, nor send the FBI out to make sure they exercise when they're supposed to.

What the Old Man can do, however, is tax people's bad habits. The Uncle's been doing that for years with cigarettes and alcohol. Why not do it with carbs?

Let's have a federal excise tax on all prepared foods and beverages that exceed a standardized carbohydrate level. This will drive up the cost of soft drinks and sugary foods. It's the ideal way to get heavy consumers of this stuff to pay for the consequences: diabetes, heart disease, sleep apnea and other obesity-related conditions.

Unfortunately, it'll hit members of the Corn Refiners Association and their packaged-foods customers particularly hard. The corn refiners produce high-fructose corn syrup, one of their biggest money-makers, and one of worst culprits in the obesity pandemic.

I really don't want to pick on one of the few industries still left in the United States. However, corn growers can barely grow enough corn right now to meet the increasing demand for bio-fuels (have you tried to buy corn this summer for under 50¢ an ear?). Surely growers and refiners can continue to keep their stockholders happy--and CEOs rolling in dough--even with a tax on corn syrup.

Let's get the very people who wind up over-using the healthcare system to either pay their fair share, or better yet, curb their sweet teeth. Go ahead, O pansy Congress of ours. Take a few bucks less next year from the corn industry, and save a lot of American lives.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

2009-06-23T14:54:00.007-06:00

Pictures of the protests taking place in Iran today bring memories of the last time Iran was in this kind of turmoil. In 1979, women were also prominent during the demonstrations leading up to the overthrow of the Shah. Then instead of jeans and scarves, the women were out in full force in black garb and veils. I remember thinking at the time, "I wonder how long it'll take for these women to discover that they can't take the costume off." I guess we know now.

It seems that Iranian women have always played a major role in determining their country's future. The big question: What made them do a 180?

Would someone please pass the crow?

2009-06-16T21:55:00.005-06:00

No sooner did I write about the silence at MSNBC on the subject of healthcare reform, than Keith Olbermann (with help from Bill Maher) did a story on healthcare reform. I'm delighted to be proven wrong. Maybe GE really is keeping their hands off MSNBC's editorial content. I certainly hope so. Way to go, Keith.

MSNBC and Sarah Palin: A Love Story

2009-06-14T23:50:00.008-06:00

There's one thing very nice about watching Keith Olbermann in podcast format: the little timer that pops up at the bottom of the screen. It would have been a real hassle to time his story on the Sarah Palin-David Letterman feud had I watched it on cable. Thanks to iTunes, I can tell you that he covered that tempest in a teapot for a full 14 minutes on Friday (June 12)...the lead story, mind you.

What on earth is going on at Countdown? After relying on this program to deliver the kind of news and commentary that I needed to hear for the last several years, the show is being turned into a three-ring circus, and a rather abusive one at that. It's happening at a time when the country is in very big trouble, with serious problems facing the President and Congress which MSNBC helped to elect. Why are 14 minutes of precious airtime being devoted to slamming Sara Palin?

I haven't heard one word on Countdown (or on Rachel Maddow's show for that matter) on the biggest, hottest issue under debate in Congress at the moment: healthcare reform. The pressure being put on Congress to refrain from making needed changes to our failing healthcare system is going completely un-noticed. Why isn't Olbermann's razor-sharp tongue lashing out against the vested interests that are fighting healthcare reform tooth and nail?

Oh, wait a minute...that's right. One of those vested interests, General Electric, signs Keith Olbermann's paycheck. Among its many businesses, GE markets ultra-high-ticket medical imaging systems like MRIs and Computerized Tomography. These systems, while surely miraculous in their capabilities, are being grossly oversold to hospitals and imaging practices. In order to pay for all this cool stuff, the owners need to do lots of imaging. Doctors are encouraged to order imaging studies whether patients really need them or not. Thus all this sophisticated gadetry becomes a big contributor to soaring healthcare costs.

If healthcare reform is to be successful, some sort of brakes will have to be put on the acquisition of these behemoth imaging systems. GE ain't gonna like that. Surely Keith and Rachel can't say anything nice about healthcare reform, so better they say nothing at all.

GE also provides high-ticket items for the oil and gas industry and credit services to businesses and consumers. I guess MSNBC won't be covering those hot issues any time soon, either.

Wow, despite all the verbal abuse they fling at her, MSNBC must really love Sarah Palin.

Whose Ox is Being Gored?

2009-05-27T10:06:00.008-06:00

It appears that the right's main argument against the confirmation U.S. Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor as Supreme Court Justice will likely center around her concurring with the majority in the Ricci v. DeStefano case. The case, which seems to pit competing members of the New Haven, Connecticut Fire Department against each other based on their ethnicity, is currently in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, and is rapidly being plastered all over the media.

Without getting into details of the case, the Third Circuit sided with the City of New Haven, which believed it was complying with the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In other words, they decided the case based on the law and not on "empathy" with the plaintiff. You would think conservatives would admire that, wouldn't you?

Not so fast. The right seems to believe that "empathy" is a legitimate yardstick when the court empathizes with conservative causes. Doug Kendall and Dahlia Lithwick nail it on Slate.

I'm confused...

2009-05-24T12:01:00.002-06:00

Could someone out there please explain our Congress is choosing to keep Gitmo open in order to prevent the terrorists there from plaguing innocent Americans, while making it easier for other terrorists to bring their firearms into our National Parks?

So what exactly is Dick Cheney up to?

2009-05-17T17:52:00.038-06:00

While the words of Dick Cheney are jamming the airways like a Clear Channel property, they provide very little insight into the man's dark psyche. Cheney is taking a serious chance defending torture as a welcomed addition to the U.S. defense toolbox. He proudly admits his involvement in deploying a torture "program" throughout our military, as well as the CIA and its contractors. Why would he leave himself open to prosecution like that?

The most obvious reason given by the media is his belief that he'll never face trial for his deeds. Thus far, the Obama administration doesn't appear to be contradicting this. A corrolary belief is that if he is brought to trial at some point, he'll be vindicated because any jury in the land would surely understand that torture is the only thing that stands between us and total capitulation to our enemies.

I've been mulling over two other possibilities. Both are based on what we've come to learn about torture: it can strenthen the resolve of its subjects to go on fighting. If Cheney can sucessfully bully the Obama administration into continuing the torture program, the U.S. could remain at war indefinitely. Yummmm.

With this in mind, the first possibility is that Cheney fancies himself a Horseman of the Apocalypse, specifically the Red one:

"And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword." (Revelations 6:4)

As such, Cheney fancies his "great sword" hastening the "End of Days," when his messiah can make an appearance, save believers and exercise terrible judgements on non-believers. With what we now know about Bush's military intelligence reports reaching his desk with scriptural quotes on their covers (see one post below), this delusion is not altogether impossible.

A more this-worldly alternative is that Cheney's current waxings are consistent with the long-term, right-wing Norquistian goal to "starve the beast." The longer we're at war, the more depleated the U.S. treasury, the sooner the Federal government can be forever "drowned in a bathtub." As an added bonus, depletion of the treasury would likely be accompanied by corresponding enrichment of Cheney's master, Halliburton (and likely Cheney himself).

It would seem that the Bush administration did its best to bankrupt this country during its tenure, but it needed a little more time. By pushing the Obama administration toward increasingly bellicose "security" measures, Cheney's rantings could help provide it.

I believe that, like Wall Street, Dick Cheney operates on the twin emotions of greed and fear. The fear side seems to be getting a lot of press lately. What about prying open this guy's head and examining the greed? Or would that hit his observers too close to home?

Now why do you suppose style.com put this on their men's pages?

2009-05-17T15:39:00.005-06:00

Don't miss The Gospel According to Don Rumsfeld. Even if you're a chick. And if you're Keith Olbermann's producer, it could be your next WTF moment.

Wish I'd said that...

2009-05-17T00:43:00.009-06:00

Actually I did, two posts ago ("Rick Perry Make My Day"). I realize that most of my posts here aren't all that noteworthy or copy-worthy. But Keith Olbermann's latest WTF entry sounded very familiar (and, of course, deliciously embellished). Hmmmmm....

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Specter Does Teshuvah Now, Avoids Yom Kippur Rush

2009-04-28T15:11:00.007-06:00

(from the New York Times, April 28, 2009)

The following is a statement from Senator Arlen Specter on his decision, after four decades as a Republican lawmaker, to switch to the Democratic party.I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.

Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.

When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.

Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.

I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.

I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.

I deeply regret that I will be disappointing many friends and supporters. I can understand their disappointment. I am also disappointed that so many in the Party I have worked for for more than four decades do not want me to be their candidate. It is very painful on both sides. I thank specially Senators McConnell and Cornyn for their forbearance.

I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re-election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania’s economy.

I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.

While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.

My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords’ switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.

Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy’s statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.

Rick Perry, Make My Day!

2009-04-19T15:22:00.000-06:00

Texas Governor Rick Perry whooped it up at a 'Don't Mess With Texas' tea party rally on Wednesday outside Austin's city hall. During the event, people waved "Don't Tread on Me" flags, and some shouted, "Secede!"

Love those patriots. The minute things aren't done in Washington to their liking, they're ready to secede from the union.

After the party was over, Perry suggested to reporters that his constituents might some day get so fed up they would want to secede from the union. "We've got a great union," Perry said, "There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that." He added that when Texas entered the union in 1845 it was with the understanding it could pull out (a questionable claim).

I have a thought: let 'em go! Maybe even help them leave. Offer amnesty to anyone wishing to leave the new Texas entity (except, of course, suspected war criminals) for a period of a year. Once Texas is no longer a part of the United States and suspected war ciminals lack the protection of the U.S. government, any country in the world is free to go after them.

Let the Texans keep every tax dollar they've been sending to Washington; naturally, they'll lose every dollar they receive in return, but they'll be ahead by six cents on the dollar (see Tax Foundation Report). Let 'em have it.

Allow Americans to send money to family in Texas, but only if the fledgeling government doesn't take a cut. Allow U.S. medicines to be sold to them at full retail prices, just like Medicare pays now. The drug companies oughta love it.

Pull out any movable military assets, and let the new entity keep the buildings and grounds. Destroy any un-movable assets (i.e. missle silos) that might endanger U.S. national security. Members of the U.S. armed services and other Federal agents and emplopyees can sign up with the new entity's government or be offered similar positions within the United States if they choose to leave.

Build a security fence between Texas and the U.S. Require Texans to have passports for entry into the U.S. Require them to have papers to work inside the U.S. Offer them the same benefits extended to guest workers from Mexico to the U.S. After all, they'll most likely be annexed to Mexico eventually anyway, don't you think?

With only 98 total members of the U.S. Senate, Republican procedural maneuvering should no longer be a problem. Then perhaps President Obama can accomplish what we Americans sent him to the White House to do.

Hey, Rick: don't let the security gate hit your fanny on the way out.

A Different Seder

2009-04-19T15:03:00.000-06:00

I received the following email today:

Subject: "Seder in the White House-Oy Vey"

There is apparently bigger news this week than the historical Passover story, when millions of Jews freely walked out of Egypt amongst incredible G-dly wonders and miracles after 210 years of slavery. It is reported that US President Barak Obama, along with his family, attended the second night Passover Seder in the White House with staff and friends. This is believed to be the first White House Seder attended by an American president.

William Daroff, who runs the United Jewish Communities' Washington office, stated that this occurrence is "a testament to how far we have come as a Jewish people in America." Daroff continued his awe of this joyous event by noting, "Jews are a vital component in the mosaic that is American culture and society. This night is indeed different from all other nights."

For those of us whose memory is longer than a week, we recognize this act of brotherly love as not quite different at all. Jewish history tells us that when we are warmly welcomed into arms of countries in which we have been exiled, our downfall in those host cultures cannot be far behind.

Let's start with the Passover story itself. The Torah tells us about the miraculous rise of Joseph, the son of our father Jacob, into the house of Pharaoh. After 22 years in jail, overnight Joseph becomes the second in command of Egypt, the greatest nation at the time. Joseph saved from starvation during a severe famine all of Egypt as well as most of the world. In doing so, Egypt acquired incredible wealth and fame. Joseph was honored and beloved by all.

However, as the Torah then states, A new king arose over Egypt, who did not know of Joseph. (Exodus 1:8) It is explained that everyone knew Joseph. But it was convenient to ignore Joseph's monumental contributions to Egypt in order to enslave and humble the Jewish people. Pharaoh began the slavery of the Jews by deceiving them into showing their patriotism to Egypt by having them build cities to safeguard Egypt's wealth. We are told that Pharaoh, himself, joined the labor force in order to symbolize that everyone was considered equal. However, the situation for the Jews quickly deteriorated until they were completely enslaved and tortured.

In the 4th century B.C.E, the story of Purim takes place. King Ahashverosh makes an erroneous calculation based on prophecy that the time for the rebuilding of the Jewish Holy Temple in Jerusalem has passed. He is so happy that the Temple has not been rebuilt that he holds a 180-day celebration. Along with citizens from all or the King's lands and against the warnings of the great Mordechai, the Jewish people attend this party. Not only is there tremendous immorality but also King Ahashverosh displays the magnificent treasures and holy vessels looted from the destroyed Temple and adorns himself in the Jewish priestly robes. Soon after this, the decree to destroy the Jewish people is declared.

The Talmud asks, Why did the Jews of that generation deserve extermination? The answer given is that the Jews derived pleasure from the feast of King Ahashverosh. Perhaps they could not refuse the invitation of the King to his party. However, they did not have to feel proud and honored to attend the King's feast filled with the disgrace of its participants and, perhaps even more importantly, the dishonor of the items from the Holy Temple.

In 1492, King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain declared the Edict of Expulsion for all Jews. Not long before this, Rabbi Meir Melamed became the financier to the King and Queen and Don Isaac Abarbanel held an equally prominent position in the Spanish royal court. Although thousands of Jews either chose or were forced to convert to Catholicism in order to protect themselves from the inconceivable, their efforts proved ineffective, for their persecution and expulsion had already been decreed on high. Even Queen Isabella is known to have stated that the evil ordinance was arranged by G-d, Himself.

In Pre-Nazi Germany, the Jewish people created a similar fate for themselves. Jews fought side by side with the Germans in World War I and were praised as being one with the Germans and their cause. Intermarriage was rampant and Jews were free to enter cultural, political, and educational institutions as equals. They were proud to be more German than the Germans. In fact the German Jewish Reform movement went so far as to declare that, Berlin is our Jerusalem and Germany is our Zion. We all know how this story ends.

It is interesting to note that last year Obama's entourage was campaigning in Pennsylvania on Seder night. His team held a Seder at the Sheraton Hotel. When they reached the closing wish of the Haggadah, "Next year in Jerusalem", Mr. Obama and others jokingly added, "Next year in the White House." Has the White House now become our Jerusalem?

Let us not forget our history and let us remember that history has a way of repeating itself. (May G-d protect us.) How many American Jews are celebrating the fact of the White House Seder, just as the Persian Jews celebrated the feast with Ahashverosh?????

I couldn't help but reply:

I read with interest your email about the "Seder held in the White House (oy veh)" this Pesach. I certainly agree with you that just because there's a Pharoah in the White House at the moment who seems to be trying to honor the religions of all Americans, doesn't mean that his successor(s) will. After all, behind every teabagger who showed up for a party this week, there was surely a dominionist (someone who considers America a "Christian country" which should be ruled by Christian doctrine) right behind him.

No one doubts that HaShem could turn things around in a moment. Nonetheless, although we faced the Babylonians, the Assyrians, the Romans, the Spanish and the Nazis later in our history, we celebrate our exodus from Egypt. Just as despots have risen up one after the other to teach us this lesson or that, we express our gratitude to HaShem for giving us the zchut (merit) to be living in a beneficent environment.

Let's keep our eyes open on the future, but be sure to bless HaShem for His goodness now. Ha shana ha ba'a b'Yershulaim (next year in Jerusalem); but in the unlikely event that we don't get there, it's nice to know that we may just have another year of peace where we are.

2009-03-22T19:51:00.000-06:00

I never thought the day would come when I would agree with Rudy Guliani on something: Timothy Geitner has to go.

Geitner didn't belong in the position in the first place. Putting a Wall-Street insider in charge of the U.S. Treasury is like appointing the fox to guard the chicken coop.

Where I'm sure Mr. Guliani and I differ is in who should replace him. Rudy told Sean Hannity that he thinks we need someone in there with "real business experience." You know, someone who has grown a business and made a payroll. A roll-up-the-sleeves kindofa guy.

Personally, I'd prefer somone who understands money. I'd also like someone whose only connection with Wall Street is as an observer. Someone like Paul Krugman.

Rudy would shudder at the very thought. He'd point out that Krugman is an intellectual, an ivory-tower type. He's never run a business. He's just sits around and "thinks."

Well, yea, Krugman teaches, writes and thinks. He just won the Nobel Prize in Economics for his thinking about determinants of trade and location of economic activity. He's a vigorous advocate of free trade, but also supported greater regulation of the mortgage industry before it was fashionable to do so.

Sounds like a good Obama match to me. What do you think, Mr. President?

American Pirates

2009-03-19T20:30:00.000-06:00

I've been wondering for years now how Grover Norquist planned to shrink the U.S. Government to a size where it could be drowned in a bathtub. We'll, I guess we now know: with pirates! Here's how my friend Keith feels about it:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Are they serious?

2009-03-03T14:00:00.000-07:00

I recently received an email blasting the Obama administration and its move toward "Socialism" (as if the author knew what the word meant). Then it went on:

"David was telling me of this movement that’s growing in this country to arm themselves and stock up for when a revolt or civil unrest breaks out. Before, when I’ve heard of these groups, I thought it was a bit far-fetched. Honestly, now… I’m not so sure that these people are so off-base, and I’m honestly thinking that that might be the most sane thing to do right now."

Indeed, Sean Hannity posted a poll on his website asking people if they support secession.

Ya know, we liberals have suffered pretty silently over the last 30 years while the American government and economy has been steadily eroded and the American middle class steadily destroyed. You didn't hear cries of "secession" or "civil war," even from left-leaning Californians who live in the world's 20th largest economy and could easily manage on their own. You know why? Because liberals are true American PATRIOTS: "My country, right or wrong, my country."

But just let things not go the right-wingers' way for a while, and they're all ready to secede or revolt. Some patriotism.

Good riddins. Be sure to take Texas with you.

For you political junkies with nowhere else to turn...

2008-11-03T20:41:00.001-07:00

Time for some Comic Relief

2008-10-07T15:23:00.001-06:00

911(tm)

2008-09-10T22:08:00.000-06:00

2008-09-10T16:04:00.001-06:00

Attack? Who's attacking?

2008-09-10T15:47:00.000-06:00

Who's attacking Sarah Palin? I'm not aware of attacks on her person, or her family. Just on her record.

If I recall, the attack accusations begin within 20 minutes or so of the Sarah Palin announcement, when even the most hardened media pundit was reeling from the surprise selection.

Sarah Palin' accused Obama of "saying one thing about Pennsylvanians in Pennsylvania and another in San Francisco." She was referring to his comment at a San Francisco gathering that some people turn to "guns, religion and xenophobia" when they lose their jobs. I don't recall him singling out small-towners. However, he may have been singling out ADD/ADHDs without knowing it.

Although Barak Obama is doing his best to hold "One America" together, he's not having mush luck. Perhaps there's good reason: there may actually BE two Americas, but they may have nothing to do with race, region, religion or gender. Rather, America may divided into those who tend toward ADD (attention deficit disorder)/ADHD (attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder) and those who don't.

Last year, a paper appeared in the journal Clinical Endocrinology, demonstrating that long-term stress in a pregnant woman can lead to developmental disabilities, especially ADD and ADHD. Long-term stress causes the pituitary gland to pour elevated levels of the hormone cortisol into the bloodstream. From the bloodstream, cortisol can spill over into the amniotic fluid. Researchers found elevated amniotic cortisol levels in fetuses as young as 17 weeks.

Current thinking is that the in-utero environment prepares a fetus for life outside the womb. Elevated cortisol levels "warn" the fetus that it's not very peaceful out there. The result is increased development of the brain's "flight or fight" apparatus (toward the brain stem) and diminished development of the frontal portion of the brain, where mental focusing and sequential reasoning take place.

Common sources of long-term stress include work-related (i.e. mother afraid of losing her job, long-term exposure to flickering computer screens) and exposure to television, especially (although not necessarily limited to) violent programming. These stimulators are increasingly common in our society, and may be causing an ever increasing incidence of ADD/ADHD.

My guess is that Karl Rove and his operatives are all too aware of this phenomenon. Witness the Republican convention. I believe that gruesome 9-11 "tribute" was specifically designed to produce a fear (read that stress) reaction in viewers, especially those who are most susceptible to it. Follow that with short, carefully crafted sound bytes (Good Christian Lady Under Attack!) and the troops get all riled up.

I'm afraid the prescription won't be of much help in this election, and it isn't very feminist-friendly. Pregnant women need to leave work much earlier than they do now--probably by the end of the first trimester--in order to assure a peaceful in-utero environment for frontal lobe development. They also need to maintain that peaceful environment for at least the first 18 months of the child's life, the time during which most brain wiring takes place.

It would also help if they killed their televisions.

House poor?

2008-08-24T15:34:00.000-06:00

Poor John McCain can't figure out how many houses he has:

How many do you have? Oh, for the record, I have one-half, and my husband has one.

Wanna have some fun with Maureen Dowd?

2008-07-27T18:35:00.000-06:00

Maureen Dowd just wrote the sweetest article about Barak Obama: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/27/opinion/27dowd.html?ex=1374811200&en=b32d2938da4370f5&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

Obama hits it out of the park!

2008-03-18T22:52:00.000-06:00

Politics and Misogyny

2008-01-20T13:55:00.000-07:00

I'm not a compulsive forwarder, but I sent this on to every woman whose email address I could scare up.

Politics and Misogyny
By BOB HERBERT
January 15, 2008

With Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s win in New Hampshire, gender issues are suddenly in the news. Where has everybody been?

If there was ever a story that deserved more coverage by the news media, it’s the dark persistence of misogyny in America. Sexism in its myriad destructive forms permeates nearly every aspect of American life. For many men, it’s the true national pastime, much bigger than baseball or football.

Little attention is being paid to the toll that misogyny takes on society in general, and women and girls in particular.

Its forms are limitless. Hard-core pornography is a multibillion-dollar business, having spread far beyond the stereotyped raincoat crowd to anyone with a laptop and a password. Crowds of crazed photographers risk life and limb to get shots of Paris Hilton or Britney Spears without their underwear. At New York Jets home games, men regularly gather at Gate D to urge female fans to expose themselves.

In its grimmest aspects, misogyny manifests itself in hideous violence — from brutal beatings and rape to outright torture and murder. Fifteen months ago, a gunman invaded an Amish schoolhouse in rural Pennsylvania, separated the girls from the boys, and then shot 10 of the girls, killing five.

The cable news channels revel in stories about women (almost always young and attractive) who come to a gruesome end at the hands of violent men. The stories seldom, if ever, raise the issue of misogyny, which permeates not just the crimes themselves, but the coverage as well.

The latest of these obsessively covered stories concerned a pregnant marine, Maria Frances Lauterbach, who had complained to authorities that she had been raped by a fellow marine. Her body was found last week buried in a backyard fire pit in North Carolina.

It just so happens that the Democratic presidential candidates are campaigning this week in the misogyny capital of America: Nevada. It’s a perfect place to bring up the way women are viewed and treated in this society, but don’t hold your breath. Presidential wannabes are hardly in the habit of insulting the locals.

Prostitution is legal in much of Nevada and heavily promoted even where it’s not. In Las Vegas, where prostitution is illegal but flourishes nevertheless, Mayor Oscar Goodman has said that creating a series of legal, “magnificent” brothels would be a great development tool for his city.

The fundamental problem in all of this is that women and girls are dehumanized, opening the floodgates to every kind of mistreatment. “Once you dehumanize somebody, everything else is possible,” said Taina Bien-Aimé, executive director of the women’s advocacy group Equality Now.

A grotesque exercise in the dehumanization of women is carried out routinely at Sheri’s Ranch, a legal brothel about an hour’s ride outside of Vegas. There the women have to respond like Pavlov’s dog to an electronic bell that might ring at any hour of the day or night. At the sound of the bell, the prostitutes have five minutes to get to an assembly area where they line up, virtually naked, and submit to a humiliating inspection by any prospective customer who has happened to drop by.

If you don’t think this is an issue worthy of a presidential campaign, consider the scandalous way that women are treated in the military and the fact that the winner of this election will become the commander in chief.

The sexual mistreatment of women in the military is widespread. The Defense Department financed a study in 2003 of female veterans seeking health assistance from the Department of Veterans Affairs. Nearly a third of those surveyed said they had been the victim of a rape or attempted rape during their service.

The Associated Press reported in 2006 that more than 80 military recruiters had been disciplined over the course of a year because of sexual misconduct with young women and girls who had considered joining the military.

There continue to be widespread complaints from women about rape and other forms of sexual attacks in the military, and about a culture that tends to protect the attackers.

To what extent are the candidates of either party concerned about these matters? Do they have any sense of how extensive and debilitating the mistreatment of women and girls really is?

We’ve become so used to the disrespectful, degrading, contemptuous and even violent treatment of women that we hardly notice it. Staggering amounts of violence are unleashed against women and girls every day. Fashionable ads in mainstream publications play off of that violence, exploiting themes of death and dismemberment, female submissiveness and child pornography.

If we’ve opened the door to the issue of sexism in the presidential campaign, then let’s have at it. It’s a big and important issue that deserves much more than lip service.”.

Thanks for trying, Governor.

2008-01-11T13:37:00.000-07:00

Who will meet his/her Waterloo?

2008-01-03T14:36:00.000-07:00

Based on my previous entries, it should come as no surprise that I believe we must seriously change course in this country, or we'll be down the tubes soon. So here I am, putting my money where my mouth is here in Waterloo, Iowa.

I've been here for ten days now, campaigning for our governor, Bill Richardson of New Mexico. In addition to believing that Bill has the best skill set to do what needs to be done to save our country, I came here to watch our democracy in action. I haven't been disappointed.

Iowans are intensely involved in furthering our democracy. Their laws doggedly insist that their caucus usher in the opening of our presidential selection process. They pay dearly for this privilege. They are literally hounded for weeks on end prior to their caucus by presidential hopefuls of every stripe. Many of them resent the intrusion, and become downright rude to canvassers during the final days.

Most Iowans, at least among the Democrats, are proud of the role they play in our democracy. Their especially proud of their ability to prove the punditry wrong. As a supporter of Bill Richardson, I'm rooting very hard for them.

In three hours, I'll walk into a precinct here in Waterloo as an "observer." As a New Mexican, my role will be limited by the caucusing rules, but apparently I'll be able to act as a cheerleader for Bill's supporters in the room.

After the caucus--and the ensuing party, of course--I'll be leaving here for the Des Moines airport and home. I'll have more to tell you later, along with pictures from this incredible week.

A reply to Bro

2007-12-20T13:45:00.000-07:00

Bro's original message

Ponder this: A CNN interview with Newt

Okay, Bro, I've pondered--
I listened to the entire thing. This despite the fact that I can't stand to look at Newt Gingrich or hear the sound of his voice.

On many fronts, I think he's right. Iraq was a total diversion from fighting the war on terror. Of course Newt's former colleagues in the Congress gave Bush the green light to invade Iraq, knowing full well that Hussein had nothing to do with 9-11, the biggest attack ever on American soil.

Their little adventure there has caused nothing but chaos in a country that was ruled by a vicious strongman, but one who knew that only a vicious strongman can control all of the warring tribes and Moslem factions who reside there. Our government managed to f--k it up big-time, and as a result, Iraq is now lousy with Al Qaida operatives (or at least franchisees who use the name Al Qaida because they know it strikes fear in the hearts of Westerners).

So pardon me if I'm a bit skeptical about Ahmadinejad and his nuclear designs on Tel Aviv. He might fanticise about it in his dreams at night, but 1) he's at least five years away from trying and 2) if he did try it, Iran would be vaporized. Even he's not that crazy: there aren't enough virgins in Paradise to go around for all the dead Moslems that would create.

That doesn't mean I'm not scared out of my wits. Of course I am, but not of Ahmadinejad and his fellow Iranians. I'm not worried about Newt's grandchildren losing wars against those awful Moslems. I'm much more worried about the millions of Americans who are losing their paychecks, their pensions, their health care and worse of all, their civil liberties.

It's likely that Newt's grandchildren will inherit the oligarchy being created in this country, but yours probably won't. You've managed to maintain a comfortable position in an ever-shrinking middle class (for which I am eternally grateful), but unless you're in a position to leave your children a fortune, they could face an ever greater struggle just to stay alive.

Did you know that people who have health insurance are twice as likely to survive cancer for five years as people without (heard that stat on the radio this morning)? As American jobs wind up in China, more and more Americans are without employer-paid healthcare, and can't afford to buy it themselves on the meager wages they're pulling down in the service sector. That amounts to millions of Americans who have an ever-shrinking chance of surviving a catastrophic disease. Newt's afraid of losing an American city, yet the number of people who will die because of lack of health-care is far greater than the population of just about any city in America. Unfortunatley, the Newts in this country aren't worried about them.

But if you're still more scared of the Moslem bogeyman, consider this: Halliburton, which holds contracts either directly or indirectly, wholly or in consortia, in nearly every sector of our strategic preparedness (including the labs up here), has packed up and moved its headquarters to Dubai. Last I checked, that's a Moslem country with intimate ties to the Saudis, the folks who really DID bring us 9-11. When the Bush Administration got caught trying to turn our ports over to the Bahrainis, they "backed off" by giving the contracts to a British front organization. In effect, the Bahrainis, also Moslems with intimate Saudi ties, now control our ports.

Now c'mon, Bro. You're a very clever guy. Why aren't you putting 2+2 together? Sisty

ps. Still think you oughta have a read, Bro: http://www.amazon.com/Shock-Doctrine-Rise-Disaster-Capitalism/dp/0805079831/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197912900&sr=8-1

Autumn in Northern New Mexico

2007-12-06T01:22:00.000-07:00

Dixon, NM, November 2007

No wonder Eve was tempted

2007-12-06T00:13:00.000-07:00

Dixon, New Mexico, November, 2007

The Source of the Scuttlebutt

2007-12-05T23:11:00.000-07:00

The Dean has an assignment for you: carefully study the latest National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities, or forever hold your peace.

Oh, and don't miss the last page, where the authors compare this assessment with that of 2005. In the left column, the 2005 assessment expresses "high confidence that Iran currently is determined to develop nuclear weapons..." Compare that with the 2007 assessment: "Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program."

In other words, in 2005 our best and brightest were assessing Iran's "state of mind," while this time around, they reported on what they believe the Iranians are actually doing. Why the difference?

I suspect that the 2005 estimate, or at least the published summary (the original of which I've been unable to locate on the ODNI site), was deliberately made as vague as possible in order to give the Bush administration lots of room to carry out an aggessive foreign policy against Iran...which is, of course, exactly what they've been doing.

Lately, however, things have been getting too hot, with U.S. warships having recently been loaded for bear with nuclear warheads and moved into the region. Fearing another disasterous foreign adventure that would further cripple our military (not to mention the Persian population), the brass finally worked up the huevos to push ODNI into getting the 2007 report out the door, with weasel words edited out.

Thanks, fellas. History will look very kindly on you.

A Memorable Moment on Cable TV

2006-08-31T21:07:00.000-06:00

I love Keith Olbermann. For one thing, he's a babe.

But there's a lot more to love about this former sportscaster. And last night, he proved worthy of my affections.

Two days ago, our illustrious Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, addressed the American Legion. Ever comfy preaching to the converted, Rumsfeld got a bit carried away. He likened those who oppose the Iraq war to the "appeasers" of the '30s. "Some seemed not to have learned history's lessons," he chided.

The press called him on it big-time. But no one called it as well as Keith:
Wanna listen? (Sorry about the commercials.) I sure hope this link stays live for a while.

Korach

2006-07-03T22:54:00.000-06:00

It would be tempting to assume that the Bible is antithetical to democracy.

Did not Korach, in the Book of Numbers, lead a rebellion in the desert against Moses, accusing him and his brother Ahron of building an oligarchy? Did he not point out that every Israelite was as holy as every other Israelite, and should have an “equal opportunity” to ascend to the priesthood? And did God not express his displeasure with Korach by opening up the earth, which swallowed him whole, along with two of his co-conspirators and all their wives?

It would seem that God and democracy were at serious odds, except that Korach’s complaint couldn't have really been with Moses and his brother. Korach was their first cousin, and he wasn’t stupid. He knew Moses well enough to know that he could never bring himself to speak untruths in God’s name. What's more, he must have been quite familiar with the Law that God gave Moses on Sinai, and knew that God clearly specified that Ahron and his sons were to be accorded the priestly caste.

Korach’s fight was with the Law.

People like Korach proclaim lofty ideals, all the while aspiring to expand their own power. They disdain the laws that govern civil society. They’re only interested in fomenting “regime change” to their advantage.

The Founding Fathers of America understood the Biblical lesson. They gave us a Constitution which, although man-made, was clearly fashioned after God’s Law. It wasn't filled with flowery theological musings or lofty proclamations of democracy. It was carefully crafted to ensure that no man—or group of men—would come to amass more power than the Constitution itself.

The Founding Fathers knew that it was one thing to wax poetic about democracy and quite another to live by it.

Korach’s sons came to see their father for who and what he was, and were spared his fate. They went on to become beloved among their Levite tribesmen, and accompanied the ritual Temple service with their beautiful music (it is said that echoes of their music can still be heard in Flamenco).

The prophet Samuel, a direct descendent of Korach, learned the family lesson well. Samuel is known for his struggles to ensure that when the Israelites clamored for a mortal king, the newly anointed one would clearly understand his obligation to live under the same Law as his subjects.

It follows then that subsequent Korachs to our own day are not necessarily descended from their infamous progenitor. They just seem to pop up in the gene pool from time to time. May God protect us all from them until they are swallowed up once more.

Do we really need a "marriage amendment" to the U.S. Constitution?

2006-06-04T15:19:00.000-06:00

The Bush Administration is at it again. They're creating another Straw Man to whip the base up into a frenzy prior to the '06 election.

The Republican-led groundswell is building for an amendment to the U.S. Consitution that would prohibit gays or lesbians from marrying. Considering that the Defense of Marriage Act was passed by a Republican congress and signed into law by a Democratic president (Bill Clinton), is such an amendment really needed? Should it be hogging Congressional time, money and talent while war, natural disasters, global warming, border and port security, disappearing healthcare and so many other pressing issues take a back seat?

The "Defense of Marriage" act left the decision about whether or not to allow same-sex marriages up to individual states. Every state is free to prohibit same-sex marriage and to deny recognition of such marriages consumated in other states. Many states, in fact, have done just that and the law is settled. Others however, are still debating the issue in their legislatures and state courts. Such is the natural, organic process by which state law is decided and settled.

That's not good enough for the Bush Administration. In his June 3 radio speech, George Bush threw out a red herring: "If that [Defense of Marriage] act is overturned by activist courts, then marriages recognized in one city or state might have to be recognized as marriages everywhere else."

Hey wait a second, George. State courts have no jurisdiction whatsoever over the Defense of Marriage Act, which is Federal law. While there are some who think the act wouldn't meet a constitutional sniff test, our current Supreme Court has already declined to hear challenges. Even if they were forced to hear a challenge, no doubt this court would come down clearly on the side of the act.

No, I'm afraid the real reason why a marriage amendment is coming up now has nothing to do with the courts or the states or even the "morality" of same-sex marriage. It has to do with getting "the base" out to the polls this November.

If the Democrats take the House and/or Senate this fall, assuming even a fraction of the new Congressional Democrats actually have a spine, George Bush and/or his handlers could conceivably find themselves out of work. At the very least, with anything resembling balance of power restored to American government, Bush's role as "The Decider" would be in jeopardy. That's a pretty terrifying prospect for a cabal that's Hell-bent on world domination.

The first attempt at straw-men were "illegal aliens." The attempt may have whipped up some white folks at the border, but it alienated agribusiness no end (not to mention the undocumented workers themselves). So, in typical Rove style, the administration found a substitute straw man.

This one happens to be gay.

What, Me Worry?

2006-05-14T20:50:00.000-06:00

Staying on Subject

2006-05-01T22:20:00.000-06:00

Have you noticed how adept the Bush Administration is at changing the subject? Worse, have you noticed how slavishly the media lets them get away with it?

I'm not just talking about Fox news or even the networks. This time around, Air America fell into the trap.

Remember Dubai? Hard to believe that just last February, Americans were up in arms about turning management of American ports over to an Arab nation whose citizens (and banks) were involved in the tregedies of 9/11. Yet two days ago, when President Bush approved the takeover by a Dubai-owned company of American plants that make parts for jets and tanks, we heard nary a whimper. Why?

Here's my guess: the Administration's propaganda machine changed the subject. One day the subject was takeover of American security interests by Dubai. The next day the subject was port security in general. The next day it moved to border security...are you with me?

From border security, the subject magically switched to illegal immigration, where it has remained. A few incendiary statements, like a couple of right-wing congressmen suggesting that illegals be arrested, and the bait was taken. Immigrants hit the streets in protest. Pundits debated. Talk shows devoted hours toward advancing one viewpoint or another. Meanwhile, the administration pounded another nail into the coffin of our nation's security.

When will they learn?

Bushies Divert More Than Attention

2005-09-14T23:05:00.000-06:00

It seems bringing power and water to Hattiesburg Mississippi's hospitals took a back seat to bringing them to nearby Colonial Pipeline. Under whose orders? None other than that Halliburton Hoodwink Artist, Dick Cheney. I guess that's why he emerged from his Wyoming hideaway: the bastard smelled money!

'Diversion' Raises Many Questions
From the Hattiesburg American
September 15, 2005

It was all pomp and circumstance in Collins Tuesday.

A number of federal officials - including Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman, Interior Secretary Gale Norton and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta - traveled to Collins to heap praise on workers who labored to restore power to the Colonial Pipeline four days after Katrina ravaged South Mississippi.

But here's the rub: The project was undertaken - at the request of the White House - for the express purpose of providing fuel to the northeast United States. It also delayed the restoration of electricity to rural hospitals - Stone County Hospital in Wiggins and George County Hospital in Lucedale - by at least 24 hours, as well as the restoration of a number of water systems powered by the South Mississippi Electric Power Association.

Moreover, there was a very real risk that the voltage required to get the pipelines flowing would knock out power to Wesley Medical Center in Hattiesburg. Given the multiple problems Forrest General Hospital was experiencing, the area's looming health care crisis could have become a tragedy if power had been cut to Wesley.

Was the national gasoline crisis so serious that it necessitated restoring pipelines for Colonial immediately?

And did this issue take precedence over the needs of hurricane-ravaged South Mississippians?

Or is this one more example of the federal government's failure to comprehend the height, length and breadth of the challenges confronting our region?

You can't fault the effort of Jim Compton, general manager of the South Mississippi Electric Power Association, and his crew. In fact, what they accomplished - restoring electricity to the substations that power the pipeline, in 16 hours - was extraordinary.

You can't even fault Compton's decision to divert his crews from other projects to the pipeline. Compton said he believed it was "a presidential directive to get those pipelines operating."

But one thing is perfectly clear: The last thing South Mississi needed - especially at the height of the Katrina disaster - was a diversion of any and all available resources and manpower.

Now you see it; now you don't.

2005-09-07T09:52:00.000-06:00

Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu describes Dubya's New Orleans photo op.

Landrieu Implores President to "Relieve Unmitigated Suffering;" End FEMA's "Abject Failures"

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu, D-La., issued the following statement this afternoon regarding her call yesterday for President Bush to appoint a cabinet-level official to oversee Hurricane Katrina relief and recovery efforts within 24 hours.

Sen. Landrieu said:

"Yesterday, I was hoping President Bush would come away from his tour of the regional devastation triggered by Hurricane Katrina with a new understanding for the magnitude of the suffering and for the abject failures of the current Federal Emergency Management Agency. 24 hours later, the President has yet to answer my call for a cabinet-level official to lead our efforts. Meanwhile, FEMA, now a shell of what it once was, continues to be overwhelmed by the task at hand.

"I understand that the U.S. Forest Service had water-tanker aircraft available to help douse the fires raging on our riverfront, but FEMA has yet to accept the aid. When Amtrak offered trains to evacuate significant numbers of victims -- far more efficiently than buses -- FEMA again dragged its feet. Offers of medicine, communications equipment and other desperately needed items continue to flow in, only to be ignored by the agency.

"But perhaps the greatest disappointment stands at the breached 17th Street levee. Touring this critical site yesterday with the President, I saw what I believed to be a real and significant effort to get a handle on a major cause of this catastrophe. Flying over this critical spot again this morning, less than 24 hours later, it became apparent that yesterday we witnessed a hastily prepared stage set for a Presidential photo opportunity; and the desperately needed resources we saw were this morning reduced to a single, lonely piece of equipment. The good and decent people of southeast Louisiana and the Gulf Coast -- black and white, rich and poor, young and old -- deserve far better from their national government.

"Mr. President, I'm imploring you once again to get a cabinet-level official stood up as soon as possible to get this entire operation moving forward regionwide with all the resources -- military and otherwise -- necessary to relieve the unmitigated suffering and economic damage that is unfolding."

Today's aerial tour of the 17th Street levee will be featured tomorrow on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos. Later, Sen. Landrieu will also appear on CBS's 60 Minutes.

The Bursting Point

2005-09-06T13:55:00.000-06:00

By David Brooks
The New York Times
September 6, 2005

As Ross Douthat observed on his blog, The American Scene, Katrina was the anti-9/11.

On Sept. 11, Rudy Giuliani took control. The government response was quick and decisive. The rich and poor suffered alike. Americans had been hit, but felt united and strong. Public confidence in institutions surged.

Last week in New Orleans, by contrast, nobody took control. Authority was diffuse and action was ineffective. The rich escaped while the poor were abandoned. Leaders spun while looters rampaged. Partisans squabbled while the nation was ashamed.

The first rule of the social fabric - that in times of crisis you protect the vulnerable - was trampled. Leaving the poor in New Orleans was the moral equivalent of leaving the injured on the battlefield. No wonder confidence in civic institutions is plummeting.

And the key fact to understanding why this is such a huge cultural moment is this: Last week's national humiliation comes at the end of a string of confidence-shaking institutional failures that have cumulatively changed the nation's psyche.

Over the past few years, we have seen intelligence failures in the inability to prevent Sept. 11 and find W.M.D.'s in Iraq. We have seen incompetent postwar planning. We have seen the collapse of Enron and corruption scandals on Wall Street. We have seen scandals at our leading magazines and newspapers, steroids in baseball, the horror of Abu Ghraib.

Public confidence has been shaken too by the steady rain of suicide bombings, the grisly horror of Beslan and the world's inability to do anything about rising oil prices.

Each institutional failure and sign of helplessness is another blow to national morale. The sour mood builds on itself, the outraged and defensive reaction to one event serving as the emotional groundwork for the next.

The scrapbook of history accords but a few pages to each decade, and it is already clear that the pages devoted to this one will be grisly. There will be pictures of bodies falling from the twin towers, beheaded kidnapping victims in Iraq and corpses still floating in the waterways of New Orleans five days after the disaster that caused them.

It's already clear this will be known as the grueling decade, the Hobbesian decade. Americans have had to acknowledge dark realities that it is not in our nature to readily acknowledge: the thin veneer of civilization, the elemental violence in human nature, the lurking ferocity of the environment, the limitations on what we can plan and know, the cumbersome reactions of bureaucracies, the uncertain progress good makes over evil.

As a result, it is beginning to feel a bit like the 1970's, another decade in which people lost faith in their institutions and lost a sense of confidence about the future.

"Rats on the West Side, bedbugs uptown/What a mess! This town's in tatters/I've been shattered," Mick Jagger sang in 1978.

Midge Decter woke up the morning after the night of looting during the New York blackout of 1977 feeling as if she had "been given a sudden glimpse into the foundations of one's house and seen, with horror, that it was utterly infested and rotting away."

Americans in 2005 are not quite in that bad a shape, since the fundamental realities of everyday life are good. The economy and the moral culture are strong. But there is a loss of confidence in institutions. In case after case there has been a failure of administration, of sheer competence. Hence, polls show a widespread feeling the country is headed in the wrong direction.

Katrina means that the political culture, already sour and bloody-minded in many quarters, will shift. There will be a reaction. There will be more impatience for something new. There is going to be some sort of big bang as people respond to the cumulative blows of bad events and try to fundamentally change the way things are.

Reaganite conservatism was the response to the pessimism and feebleness of the 1970's. Maybe this time there will be a progressive resurgence. Maybe we are entering an age of hardheaded law and order. (Rudy Giuliani, an unlikely G.O.P. nominee a few months ago, could now win in a walk.) Maybe there will be call for McCainist patriotism and nonpartisan independence. All we can be sure of is that the political culture is about to undergo some big change.

We're not really at a tipping point as much as a bursting point. People are mad as hell, unwilling to take it anymore.

America's Chernobyl?

2005-08-31T22:31:00.000-06:00

At times like these, one can't help but wonder what her Higher Power had in mind.

Obviously, some holy rollers on the right are already blaming Katrina on homosexuals and abortion clinics, of which New Orleans lacked neither. The looting and lawlessness, however, brought something else to mind: Baghdad.

Remember Baghdad after the U.S. invasion? Remember the devastation from the bombing? Remember the looting of priceless vestiges of Mesopotamian civilization from the Iraq Museum?

Could New Orleans be my Higher Power's Cosmic Payback?

Somewhere else comes to mind as well: Chernobyl. Ronald Reagan has been credited for bringing down the "Evil Empire" practically single-handed -- depending on whom you ask, of course. What's less popular wisdom is that he had a lot of help from the Soviet Union's own apparachiks. A blatant disregard for nuclear safety procedures created the Chernobyl disaster, in which a chain reaction in a nuclear reactor went out of control, creating explosions and a fireball that blew off the reactor's lid. No fewer than 135 thousand people had to leave their homes due to radiation contamination. That was 1986. Within five years, the Soviet Union was no more.

It's been known for years that New Orleans was a disaster waiting to happen. But our politicians gave the levee in New Orleans, which was sadly in need of repair, a lower priority than the war in Iraq, tax cuts for the top 1% and, most recently, a pork package that includes bridges to nowhere in Alaska. Now that the inevitable has happened, perhaps Americans will be awakened from their long sleep and have finally had enough.

Perhaps New Orleans is my Higher Power's way of doing a Cosmic Cleanup.

2005-08-09T23:18:00.000-06:00

This lady should dispell all doubts as to whether Coronado Island can compete with South Beach.