tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-86955191705429059322024-03-05T11:17:06.313-05:00Dispatches From the Culture WarEric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-25867060982334186172022-02-01T13:45:00.004-05:002022-02-01T14:00:35.259-05:00Black History Month 2022 in Florida<p> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Now that Black History Month is here, we finally have access
to the Florida Government-approved history curriculum for Florida students to
ensure no ‘divisive issues’ are present that might upset the little darlin’s:<br />
<br />
1. It is unclear when black folks arrived in the U.S., except that it was
definitely after White folks, who were totally here first, before anyone. No
one knows exactly why black people came here, but many scholars believe they were
tourists who got lost and decided to stay when they realized how much Freedom<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">™ could be
mined here. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">2. Black people have made many contributions to American life in
the following areas: Sports.<br />
<br />
3. There are many famous black people who have lived in the U.S. such as:<br />
<br />
a. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, who was a Christian and talked about God and was
revered by many people, gave a speech about how no one should get ‘special
treatment,’ was never given any trouble by anyone, and died peacefully in his
sleep. <br />
<br />
b. Rosa Parks, who led the reform of the Montgomery, AL mass transit system
when she realized the unfairness of freeloading poor people getting to ride
busses with gas paid for by the city, while other folks who owned cars had to
pay for gas out of their own damn pockets like chumps. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">c. Jackie Robinson, who played in Major League Baseball for his
entire career, was beloved and received standing ovations every game from White
folks, used to have dinner with all the owners of the teams in their private boxes
and often picked up the tab, because the owners were poor from paying him so
much to play. Still, not as good as Babe Ruth. <br />
<br />
d. and others, who we totally know about, but don’t have enough time to cover
in a month, which is all the time that we are allowed to spend talking about black
people because of Democrat federal government regulations. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br />
<br />
* It is important to remind students that all of the above people had dinner at
Mar A Lago with another famous black person, Fredrick Douglas, who was pals
with REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT ‘honest’ Abe Lincoln (sometimes known as ‘the Donald
Trump of the 19<sup>th</sup> Century’). They all signed notarized statements that
they support the REPUBLICAN party platform. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">** If time permits, you may mention that millions of White people
died at some point for the benefit of black folks, because their States’ Rights
were being threatened (probably by Democrats pretending to be REPUBLICANS). <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;">ALERT---- Any deviation from this curriculum will result in
termination, investigation and a visit from Warlord Aidid DeSantis’ private Army.<br /><br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEi_oQk80XR4soAkl-aQUwSPVafplf3JNqvufVmrBYlJYgLJD_cv5xcqg5MK-5HY3nT7tRANQpHK_LIsAjAwysvduI-RHlCvSgMgk2rlWLRqVRyocueruDdTbBNKP-cdDnkQOF7YgEX3FrQ7UgczahV5ZppBzAE2ApnHGjg0YELV0lwdGjowazoEwOzrcQ=s2000" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1180" data-original-width="2000" height="189" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEi_oQk80XR4soAkl-aQUwSPVafplf3JNqvufVmrBYlJYgLJD_cv5xcqg5MK-5HY3nT7tRANQpHK_LIsAjAwysvduI-RHlCvSgMgk2rlWLRqVRyocueruDdTbBNKP-cdDnkQOF7YgEX3FrQ7UgczahV5ZppBzAE2ApnHGjg0YELV0lwdGjowazoEwOzrcQ=s320" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p></p>Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-67387392862948006232020-09-14T15:44:00.001-04:002020-09-14T17:53:29.288-04:00An Historical Warning<p> </p><p class="MsoNormal">Let’s be clear about one thing: Donald Trump is not Adolf
Hitler. For one thing, he’s quite a bit dumber, much older, can’t give a proper
speech to save his life, and has none of the traumatic events in his past that
Hitler experienced as a young man that may have helped form him into what he
was. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Let’s be equally clear about another thing: they are both
cut from the same cloth. The purposefully incendiary rhetoric, the vague
promises of ‘action’ with no specific plan, the plentiful scapegoats on which
to blame all the problems of the world. But above all, Hitler and Trump share
these traits: the use of copious lies to not only obfuscate the truth, but to
degrade listeners’ ability to understand that truth actually exists, and the
one crystal clear message, “Only I can fix it.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It is also the case that the fascistic, or if you dislike
that term, authoritarian, takeover of the United States<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>will not happen the same way it did in 1930’s
Germany, the main reason being that we have a different political system. But,
to paraphrase something Mark Twain may or may not have said: History doesn’t
repeat itself, but it sure as hell rhymes. <br />
<br />
In 1932, no fewer than 2 different national elections were held in Germany, and
then one last one in 1933, because of the way the parliamentary system was set
up in the Weimar Republic. In each one the NSDAP or ‘Nazi’ party engaged in
voter suppression by threats of violence and by deriding the system as
‘corrupt.’ <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They slowly gained a
plurality in the Reichstag (parliament). Also, with the country (and the world)
in the grip of an economic emergency, and having lived through a very recent
world-wide viral pandemic, the Nazis used lies, division, fear of ‘socialism’
or ‘communism,’ the deliberate creation of chaos in the streets, and the idea
of a savior to convince people “what have you got to lose?” In 1933, Franz Von
Papen (who believed Germany needed a strong dictator), handed the
Chancellorship to Adolf Hitler (one year after Hitler had declined a prior
offer because Von Papen wouldn’t promise he could rule by fiat). Within a year,
emergency powers had been declared, the NSDAP’s largest rival parties had been
disbanded, and many of their leaders jailed. Full legislative power was given
to the Hitler, and eventually, only the NSDAP remained. The rest, as they say,
is history. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As I said, it won’t happen exactly like that here, because
our system and institutions are organized differently, and world circumstances
are not the same; but the echoes are strong and getting stronger. <br />
<br />
The Trumpist-Republican platform is a mass of seething vague promises of action,
lies meant to sow discord, and threats of what will happen if Trump does not
triumph. The Republican Party didn’t even create a new formal platform for the
2020 election; they simply said “refer to 2016,” as if nothing has changed in
the intervening 4 years. But is has. Through both planning and sheer
incompetence, Trump and his lackeys and enablers have weakened and undermined
many of those institutions that made us different from Weimar. He has all but
destroyed the professional civil service structure that is required for any
true government to function; he has derided and degraded the very idea of
service to the country as a whole, and equated personal loyalty to himself with
patriotic duty. <br />
<br />
He and his lickspittles have lied, constantly and egregiously, to everyone,
then denied those very lies when they have been presented to them, even in
recorded form. He has declared war against the independent and free press,
calling them, explicitly, an “enemy of the people,” by which he means <i>his</i>
enemy, because in Trump’s world, as in Louis the XIV’s, “L’etat C’est Moi.”<br />
<br />
He and his family and friends have used the public coffers to enrich themselves
in the most egregious ways, then waved their hands and said “nothing to see
here,” while refusing the legitimate requests of all bodies tasked with
executive oversight and checking such plutocratic excess. As such, he and his
minions have blurred the lines between the personal and the public, making a
mockery of federal law. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Like the NSDAP, Trumpists claim to be the party of ‘Law and
Order,’ while flouting the laws themselves, with the Whitehouse chief of staff
going so far as to declare that no one outside Washington cares about various
federal statutes that make illegal the use of public funds and property for
political gain, and utilizing the imprimatur of the symbols of government’s
power and authority to show naked support for one political party (or, if we’re
honest, support for one man.) <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The flying of Republican and Trump banners on the White
House grounds was akin to the display of the Swastika over the Reichstag in its
temerity to place the coercive weight of government behind the effort to crown
the man who would be king. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Like the Nazis, Trump has threatened the use of armed
enforcers at polling places to intimidate his political opposition, and like
all dictatorial personalities, has continually implied and stated that any
result other than his own victory is illegitimate. <br />
<br />
The Trumpist party has also carried on and expanded upon the recent Republican
trend of ‘legal’ voter suppression, with de facto poll taxes just being upheld
in Florida, and voter ID laws passed in many states to solve a non-existent
problem by disenfranchising as many ‘illegitimate’ voters as possible; by which
they mean, generally, urban voters of color. <br />
<br />
He has encouraged baseless conspiracy theories in his supporters in an attempt
to obfuscate and distract from actual issues and concerns of the public, and
has specifically supported the use of violence against those protesting the
excesses of his regime. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hitler’s themes “Germany above all” and “returning Germany
to greatness” are exactly the same as Trumpist slogans “America First” and
“Making America Great Again,” and have the same goal: to frighten a cowed
populace into supporting the only man who can defend them from that ‘other:’
the ‘untermenschen’ who would replace the upstanding (read: white) ‘patriotic’
citizen and destroy what are falsely claimed to be ‘traditional American
values.’ Hitler also talked about traditional German values, and how men and
women must be placed into their traditional ‘roles’ and not let them be
undermined by ‘communist, globalist, and liberal’ threats. <br />
<br />
This tweet from Trump:<br />
<br /><i>
“The Suburban Housewives of America must read this article. Biden will destroy
your neighborhood and your American Dream. I will preserve it, and make it even
better!”<br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" /></i>
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br style="mso-special-character: line-break;" />
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Is the modern equivalent of this poster:<br />
<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiya3a_WFJotdBC5CcMaoANa67uI5zVwlH9i_VK7AuVJMM6UaovJDaB14JN47f-4azbhanZ12WCKfcJwW2ob7BXYULA3DFNlTlP-3MPiFsqNAQlwMwqxwx6Fwqw3pgXy_sgPXYjx4-WuW7G/s600/women-rescue-german-families.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="400" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiya3a_WFJotdBC5CcMaoANa67uI5zVwlH9i_VK7AuVJMM6UaovJDaB14JN47f-4azbhanZ12WCKfcJwW2ob7BXYULA3DFNlTlP-3MPiFsqNAQlwMwqxwx6Fwqw3pgXy_sgPXYjx4-WuW7G/s320/women-rescue-german-families.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<p class="MsoNormal">(Text tells Wives if they want to rescue their families,
they need to vote for Hitler)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">And, of course, now we have convicted felon and Trump
whisperer Roger Stone, who would be in prison for his crimes except for the
unilateral intervention of his ‘Law and Order’ loving Dear Leader, explicitly
calling for martial law and an overthrow of the government if Trump should lose
the election. This isn’t some nobody from the sticks of Alabama, but a former
government official and close advisor to the so-called ‘president.’ Someone
with whom Trump still communicates and can be swayed by. <br />
<br />
Like the NSDAP, Trumpists love nationalist populism, but hate democracy,
because in a true democracy even those whom Trumpists deem unworthy get a
voice. In the ‘Dusseldorf speech,’<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>given
to German ‘industrialists (what we would now call CEOs and ‘entrepreneurs’)’ to
win them to the Nazi cause, Hitler <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>said:<br />
<br />
“<i>For the greatness of a people is the result not of the sum of all its
achievements but in the last resort of the sum of its outstanding achievements.
Let no one say that the picture produced as a first impression of human
civilization is the impression of its achievement as a whole. This whole
edifice of civilization is in its foundations and in all its stones nothing
else than the result of the creative capacity, the achievement, the
intelligence, the industry, of individuals: in its greatest triumphs it
represents the great crowning achievement of individual God-favored geniuses,
in its average accomplishment the achievement of men of average capacity, and
in its sum doubtless the result of the use of human labor-force in order to
turn to account the creations of genius and of talent. So it is only natural
that when the capable intelligences of a nation, which are always in a
minority, are regarded only as of the same value as all the rest, then genius,
capacity, the value of personality are slowly subjected to the majority and
this process is then falsely named the rule of the people. For this is not rule
of the people, but in reality the rule of stupidity, of mediocrity, of
half-heartedness, of cowardice, of weakness, and of inadequacy..</i>.. <b><i>Thus, democracy will in practice lead to the destruction
of a people's true values</i></b><i>.</i> “ (emphasis added)</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">(Also note the invocation of “God;” like Trump, Hitler had
little use for actual religion, but saw it as a tool to persuade the masses of the
rightness of his cause.) <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is the Trumpist attitude. They can not (yet) state it
explicitly, but it shows through in every action and political appointment, in
every cover-up of political ratfuckery and sham investigation of political
enemies, in every priority they set, and every meme they post. Whenever Trump
refers to himself in superlatives, this is what he means. ‘The people’ are but
the means to prop up the power and aggrandizement of those with the “very good
brains,” “the best words,” those who consume only “the most beautiful pieces of
chocolate cake.” In a word, they exist only to serve him. This attitude is
evident even from his very early practices in the business his daddy handed him, as
anyone who grew up in New York in the ‘80s can attest. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So, no, Trump isn’t Adolf Hitler, and the contemporary U.S.
isn’t Weimar Germany. But we are not special. There is no ‘American Exceptionalism’
as the Trumpists would have you believe. No magic protects us from the fates that have befallen other nations. While our history and institutions are
different, we are not immune to the rise of anti-intellectualist, nationalistic
authoritarianism. And, we are at an inflexion point. <br />
<br />
We can repudiate the Trumpists, and everything for which they stand, extirpate
Trumpism root and branch from the body politic, and salt the ground so that it cannot henceforth grow. <br />
<br />
Or, we can prevaricate like the Germans in 1932, and think, “it’s not that bad,
he’s a little uncouth, but at least the trains run on time.” <br />
<br />
And then, my friends, the Unites States we know will truly be gone. It won’t be Nazi
Germany, but it will be an authoritarian hellscape, it will be of our own
making, and in that way, it will be truly ‘American.’ <o:p></o:p></p>Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-23910067573834966622015-09-05T17:47:00.001-04:002015-09-05T17:47:13.412-04:00Kim Davis and the 1st AmendmentAs the howls of protest from the religious right echo throughout the Fox wasteland, let us be perfectly clear about one thing: if anyone has violated the 1st Amendment in this case, it is Kim Davis herself. By elevating her own peculiar religious beliefs above any other as part of her public duties, Davis has, <i>de facto</i>, established her particular brand of Christianity as the religion of Rowen County, Kentucky. Regardless of what the Christo-fascist "Liberty Counsel" will say, Davis has not been jailed because of her beliefs. She has been held in contempt of court for refusing to perform the duties that her job, and the oath she took when accepting that job, require. She, in traditional civil contempt parlance, has 'the keys to her own cell.' All she needs to do is promise not to interfere with her clerks performing their duties, and she is out. If she cannot do that, then she must resign. <br />
<br />
Cries of 'religious liberty' are inapt. The guarantee of religious freedom, as with all rights granted by the U.S. Constitution, is not absolute. Just as one's freedom of speech does not cover falsely crying fire in a crowded theatre, one's religious freedom ends where the rights of others begin. A public official may not establish her own beliefs as the official policy of a governmental entity, regardless of how 'sincerely held' they may be. Contrary to the dogma of the religious right, no god's law trumps the law of the United States, because only civil law has any practical effect. Those who want to follow their deity's commands are welcome to do so in their homes and private lives, and in public, in so far as they do not affect the rights of others. When equality is threatened by religious zealotry, the law must step in to put things right. Society would crumble otherwise. <br />
<br />
Further, the Liberty Counsel lawyers have danced along the line of ethical responsibility, and with this last phase, in my mind, jumped over it. They are using Ms. Davis' actual freedom as a revenue-generator, placing their client at risk for their own pecuniary gain. Any competent attorney knew she had no chance of winning at the federal appeals level. She should have been advised to either find a different job, or complete her legal duties as required. To encourage her to continue this case, as seems abundantly clear they did, is blatantly unethical. So, Davis is in jail because of her own inability to complete her duties, and the cynical machinations of a fringe group of religious zealots.<br />
<br />
So, while you may disagree with the Obergefell ruling, you can not cry about the 1st Amendment in Davis' case. To paraphrase our chief justice, 'religious freedom has nothing to do with it.' Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-19304393956375970322014-02-12T09:44:00.001-05:002014-02-12T09:50:00.327-05:00These Aren't the Drones You're Looking for...<br />
<br />
Previously, I mentioned concerns I have with regard to drone strikes used as targeted assassinations against U.S. Citizens and foreign nationals abroad. Mr. Obama has apparently mentioned these concerns in a Google+ chat he had with certain constituents last year. Unfortunately, I did not see that chat, and have been unable to locate a complete transcript, so I am using news reports to determine what was said. <br />
<br />
According to Yahoo! News, the president said that "it is not sufficient that citizens just take my word for it that we are doing the right thing." He stated that there have not been strikes against a U.S. Citizen on U.S. soil, and that he has to "work with Congress ... so people understand what's going on, what the constraints are, (and) what the legal parameters are.”<br />
<br />
This is a somewhat comforting assertion, but only in so far as it is followed through. Even during the "Cold War," it was, at least officially, against U.S. policy to target political adversaries for assassination. (Whether certain administrations actually followed this policy, including Kennedy, Nixon, and Reagan, is up for dispute,) But it seems, since 9/11, the U.S. has followed a policy that entails targeting of individuals who are citizens of countries with which we are not at war, for assassination, many times using the rather blunt instrument of unmanned drone strikes.<br />
<br />
Regardless of what some would have us believe, this is not analogous to bombing of command structures of enemies during war time. First off, no declaration of war has been made against any political entity. Secondly, we have no reason to suspect, because we are not given any evidence, that any of these individuals pose an existential threat to our nation, or to the lives of its citizens. <br />
<br />
The 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads that :""No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." <br />
<br />
The first thing to notice in this language is that the term "person" is used, not "citizen." One of the primary rules of statutory construction requires that we look at the plain meaning of the language used; especially when other words could have been substituted instead. The 5th Amendment does not simply protect U.S. Citizens on U.S. soil. By plain reading it applies to all "persons." <br />
<br />
Capital crimes are those that are eligible for the death penalty, which is essentially what we are discussing. With the exception of members of the military in wartime, the government can not hold any person to answer for a capital crime without first getting an indictment against that person from a grand jury. For those unfamiliar with grand jury process, generally, the prosecution presents its evidence to the grand jury, and the defendant need not be present, and in fact, while able to testify, generally is not able to fight the prosecution's case at this point. The point of the Grand Jury is to determine if the government has sufficient evidence with which to charge the individual with the crime alleged. <br />
<br />
So, my question to the president would be, have all those targeted by the drone strikes been indicted for crimes they have been alleged to commit? If not, what provision of U.S. law allows for the execution of these individuals, and what are the crimes for which they are being held to answer?<br />
<br />
Note this does not even get into the questions of national sovereignty of other nations, or the likelihood of collateral damage against innocents with the use of such weapons. Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-38493863366282321442013-04-19T16:10:00.001-04:002013-04-19T16:11:35.195-04:00Salient Points Regarding Boston Bombing As have many, I'm sure, I've been watching the news coverage of the search for the supected Boston Marathon Bomber, and I have a few points of concern:<br />
<br />
One: when did describing something as a "bombing" become not shocking enough for newscasters? It seems that every reference to the incident that occurred Monday has to include some adjective, often repeated twice: "horrific," "horrendous," "heinous." Why can't it just be described as a "bombing?" That's how it would be described if it occurred in a different country, even if more poeple had been killed and more destruction wrought.<br />
<br />
Second: Can we stop with the baseless speculation that these particular suspects were part of an "international terror cell?" There is absolutely no evidence, of which I'm aware, that these individuals were connected to any organization or group, especially Al Quaeda. One of the suspects is an American Citizen, the other a Lawful Permanent Resident. This is, by definition, a "domestic terror attack." Yes, they are of Chechnyan ethnicity. Chechnyan groups have no history of attacks on U.S. interests. In fact, the U.S. has, at many times, been sympathetic to Chechnyan issues due to Russian attempts to deal with Chechnyan seperatists. This article in Salon now seems even more relevant: <a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/16/lets_hope_the_boston_marathon_bomber_is_a_white_american/">http://www.salon.com/2013/04/16/lets_hope_the_boston_marathon_bomber_is_a_white_american/</a><br />
<br />
Third: In Texas, half of an entire town was destroyed, and at least 13 people killed in an explosion at a fertilizer factory that had not been inspected in 50 years, likely due to the Federal Government's lack of funding OSHA. That incident was many times more "horrific" than the Boston bombing, both in loss of life and destruction of property. And yet, the day after that "horrendous" event, when the Senate was questioning the nominee for Secretary of Labor, not a single question was asked about OSHA. Senators did ask about ridiculous conspiracy theories regarding the "New Black Panther Party." The news coverage on all networks, has been almost exclusively about the Boston incident. In Ohio, today, 4 people were found shot in the head in the basement of an apartment building. That is the same number of people killed in Boston by these suspects. Yet, the entire nation is focused on Boston. <br />
<br />
As a nation, we need to get over our fascination with "terrorism." I guess it's because these actions are more like a Hollywood movie than industrial accidents or every-day gun violence. But the real threat to our country comes not from "terrorist" groups, but from our reactions to them. When we begin to give this issue so much importance in our lives that all other, more serious threats to our society, such as rampant firearms use and the government's abdication of its responsibility to protect workers from unsafe work environments, specifically in dangerous industries, the terrorists win. <br />
<br />
Even at its strongest, Al Quaida was never an existential threat to the United States. The only way they can take down our country is with our help. And right now, we, as a whole, because of our reactions to these types of events, are the best friends Al Quaida could have.Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-58936011493966009752013-02-21T14:33:00.000-05:002014-02-12T09:42:36.702-05:00M-i-s-s-i-s-s-i-p-p-i<br />
Well, fellow Floridians, we may not know how to run an election, we have Rick Scott, Katherine Harris, the Koran-burning preacher, the Treyvon Martin case, and Jeffrey Loria, but we can thank our lucky stars for one thing: at least we're not Mississippi.<br />
<br />
You've no doubt heard that the mighty Mississippi Government became the last state to<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/02/mississippi-officially-abolishes-slavery-ratifies-13th-amendment/" target="_blank"> officially ratify the 13th amendment earlier this month</a> (Interestingly, after an Indian immigrant saw the film<em> Lincoln</em> and looked it up.) Yes, it was a clerical mistake over something that doesn't make a practical difference, but still; 1995 when the legislature finally abolishes slavery? And then they forget to file the paperwork? <br />
<br />
Well, on the heels of that, there's this <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gay-marriage-mississippi-newspaper-owner-140311568.html" target="_blank">stunning news</a>. Yes, a community newspaper gets enough hate mail, calls, e-mail etc. for filing a news story on the county's first lesbian wedding (that isn't even recognized by law,) that the editor feels compelled to defend it. The wedding, incidentally, was between a woman and her partner who is <em>undergoing treatment for cancer that may be terminal</em>. I'll let the editor of the <em>Laurel Leader-Call</em> say what I think is the takeaway from this:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"We have stories about child molesters, murders and all kinds of vicious, barbaric acts of evil committed by heinous criminals on our front page and yet we never receive a call from anyone saying 'I don't need my children reading this.' Never. Ever. However, a story about two women exchanging marriage vows and we get swamped with people worried about their children."<br />
</blockquote>
Stay classy MS! Stay classy!<br />
<br />Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-78378839447525608412013-02-14T13:57:00.003-05:002013-02-14T14:27:35.636-05:00The State of the State of the Union<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">Last night, President Obama gave the requisite “State of the Union”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>address.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>While it wasn’t quite FDR’s “New Deal,” or LBJ’s “Great Society,” it proposed an array of specific policy initiatives on a variety of important issues, from infrastructure improvement to early childhood education, to the federal minimum wage, to deficit reduction.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I had several issues with the specifics of the President’s plans, especially his pledge to be more “transparent” about how we conduct our foreign policy and the power of the executive branch to order the targeting of both American Citizens and foreign nationals for political assassination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>President Obama offered no specifics about how this transparency would be accomplished, or what criteria are currently being used to sentence human beings to death by remote control without due process of law as required by the 5<sup>th</sup> and 14<sup>th</sup>Amendments to the Constitution.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I also had some concerns about Obama’s pledge to use executive order to bypass Congress with regard to Environmental issues; although court decisions have more or less given the EPA (and therefore the executive branch) the power to enact “cap and trade” rules, it seems to me to be a better idea to use the legislative process. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: large;">What concerned me more, though, is the Republican response to the State of the Union which was presented by FL Sen. Marco Rubio.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As a FL resident for 16 years, I have become accustomed to Rubio being a dynamic speaker, and although I often disagree with his positions, I also often admire his ability to articulate them with a rational yet passionate delivery.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I was sorely disappointed in Mr. Rubio tonight, as his “rebuttal” was a simple rehash of GOP talking points, with no character or any specific policy initiatives.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact, listening to Republican speeches these days has become akin to the old “Frankenstein”Saturday Night Live routine: “Taxes Bad!!!!”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“Government Bad!!!”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“Guns Good!!!”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What was especially striking to me was Rubio’s hypocrisy with regard to social program spending.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The GOP Platform is clear that it opposes Federal Student loans (yes, it advocates Federal insurance of private loans, which is its own can of worms).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In Rubio’s response he stated that he couldn’t have gone to college without Federal Loans.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He also stated that both his parents benefited from the Medicare system.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And yet… These are all the things that Mr. Rubio’s party are eager to cut to ensure that taxes are not raised on the richest segment of the nation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What Mr. Rubio is essentially saying is, “Now that my loans are paid off, (a few months ago, apparently,) no one else need benefit from these programs. Medicare is good for my parents, but there’s no reason anyone else should benefit from that program.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And Republicans wonder why average Americans aren’t getting their economic policy?</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">Another issue is the current Republican effort to suppress the voting rights of minorities and those of lower socio-economic status.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is especially important in my state of Florida, because the GOP Governor, Rick Scott, and the GOP Legislature has done as much as possible to make it as difficult as possible for those in certain areas (read: areas that tend to vote Dem.) to cast their ballots.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They have done this through a combination of gerrymandering, punitive “voter ID” laws, creating obstacles for former prisoners to have their franchise reinstated, and the elimination of as many early voting days as possible.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is not only a problem in FL, but around the country, as bills are pending in PA to change the electoral law to divide electoral votes amongst districts, rather than awarding them to the winner of the aggregate state vote, because the Republican-controlled legislature has managed to draw districts in such a way that GOP Candidates would almost always come out of the state with more electoral votes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">These strategies are all reminiscent of the “poll Tax” and“literacy requirements” of Jim Crow days calculated to suppress black votes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Generally, the reasons given have to do with “voter fraud” issues.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Except that voter fraud has not been a major issue in any United States Election.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There are more UFO sightings every year than allegations of voter identity fraud.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When the State of Indiana was asked to defend its voter ID laws by a court, it could not cite a single instance of voter identity fraud in its history.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is the definition of a“manufactured crisis.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These laws are not necessary to protect the democratic process; in fact, they are cynically calculated to usurp that very process.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">Mr. Rubio’s response did not even mention the issue of correcting the system of elections in the U.S. that forces some individuals to wait in line, in some instances for 6 hours, to cast his or her vote.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This, of course, is likely because these difficulties tend to crop up in urban areas where the majority of voters have a tendency to vote Democrat.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(In FL, the problems in the Miami area can be directly traced to the elimination of extra early voting days, and more stringent ID requirements enacted by the Republican administration.)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;">There is no doubt</span> that the end of the President’s speech was a calculated bit of “political theatre” meant to appeal to the emotions of people with regard to gun violence and voter suppression.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As much as I would prefer that was not the strategy to be used, the underlying issues are very real, and until the GOP can come up with some sort of actual common-sense policy that would address them, they have little reason to object.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;"></span><span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: large;">So, it appears the State of the Union is business as usual, with the President articulating specific policies to address the problems facing the country, and the opposition party simply objecting to everything, without any substantive ideas of their own.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"></span>This is a pity, because our republic works best when good ideas are forthcoming from both sides of the aisle.</span> </span></span></span></span> </div>
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span>Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-33563533243501701042013-02-14T13:56:00.000-05:002013-02-14T14:29:07.905-05:00Progress and the State of Eternal War<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;">Two days ago, President Obama took the public oath of office for the second time.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>His inaugural speech, as is commonly the case with such addresses, was long on general rhetoric and short on specific policy measures.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It was, no doubt, historic on several levels, not least of which was the use of the term “gay” (used to describe individuals of homosexual orientation) for the first time in such an address, and the inclusion of the Stonewall Riots alongside the Seneca Falls Convention and Selma, thus equating the struggle of homosexuals for equal rights under law with those of women and African-Americans.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;">It was an address that gives hope for the beginning of a truly progressive administration that will at least attempt to start the process of reversing the damage done by nearly 30 years of an almost continually rightward shift in the economic, political and social discourse of the nation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It would, of course, be naïve to think that such changes will be easy or occur quickly, especially with a still largely obstructionist Republican Congress in power.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;">I would like to focus on one part of Obama’s speech that I think is at the heart of what can be done to redress the failure of previous administrations, including the President’s own first term, to adhere to the values and promise of the United States.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">President Obama stated that “<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">We, the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war.</span></span><span lang="EN" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN;">” </span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;">For at least ten years, we have been told, in true Orwellian fashion, that we are at war.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Not with a nation, or an economic system, but with an abstract concept that has an ever-changing meaning.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We have been told that there is a lurking, nebulous, and existential threat to our well being, and that threat is a word: “Terrorism.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;">Let’s leave aside, for now, the hypocrisy of the United States’ documented history of being a state sponsor of “terrorist” groups (both governmental and subversive) when it has suited our own policy agenda.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The idea that we can wage a physical war on an abstract concept is both ludicrous and a recipe for that very state of perpetual war the president describes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;">If Mr. Obama is serious about what he said in his inaugural address, there are a few steps he can take to make a concrete start if he wants to “win the peace:” <o:p></o:p></span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">1.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">Most importantly, the president should immediately, and without reservation, ask the Congress to repeal the “Authorization for Use of Force Against Terrorists,” which was a joint resolution passed by Congress on Sept. 14, 2011, and purports to give the president the power to use the military anywhere and everywhere “</span><i><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></i><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">Congress specifically granted this power to be in conformity with the War Powers Act in which the Legislative Branch of our government partially relinquished its Constitutional power to declare war.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This would be, of course, an act unprecedented in history, as no chief executive has ever willingly relinquished a power granted to him once it had been given.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But this one joint resolution puts us, for all intents and purposes, in a state of perpetual war, a war that cannot be won due to the simple fact that it is a war on an abstract concept, and not a specific enemy. </span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><span style="color: white; font-family: Calibri; font-size: large;"> </span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">2.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">The administration should call for the immediate repeal of those portions of the USA PATRIOT Act that expand the government’s powers in contravention of the 1<sup>st</sup>, 4<sup>th </sup>and 5<sup>th</sup>Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These portions include , but are not limited to: Sections 214, 215, 216 and 218, which expand the government’s power to spy on its citizens by requesting information on citizens from third parties without those citizens’ consent, search private property without notice to the owner of said property, expands the FISA exception to warrantless wire tapping of U.S. Citizens, as well as “trap and trace” searches that purport to gather only address information, but in practice result in the revelation of the content of private messages.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><o:p><span style="color: white; font-family: Calibri; font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">3.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The president should explicitly repudiate the so-called “Bush Doctrine” that advocates interference with the domestic politics of foreign powers and encourages the concept of “Preventative War.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He must also publically renounce the use of “enhanced interrogation methods” (i.e. torture), <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“extraordinary rendition” (i.e. kidnapping) and the use of unmanned aircraft for the purposes of political assassination.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These methods have caused possibly irreparable damage to the strength, standing and reputation of the U.S. as a global power that stands for the concepts of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Further, rather than achieving the stated goal of reducing the threat of attack on the U.S.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>these policies have created the conditions necessary for radical leaders to convince otherwise peaceful people to be complicit in attacks against a United States that is acting in an unjust manner. </span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><o:p><span style="color: white; font-family: Calibri; font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">4.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Mr. Obama should renounce the idea of “American Exceptionalism,” as an outdated, ethnocentric, and anti-democratic concept.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We must engage the world on an even footing, recognizing that our nation is, on average, no better or worse than any other, and that other countries have the right to establish and pursue their own policy interests within their own spheres of influence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><o:p><span style="color: white; font-family: Calibri; font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -0.25in;">
<span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">5.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The president must immediately close the gulag located in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and those detained there should either be charged with crimes in Federal Courts of competent jurisdiction where the evidence allows, or returned to the countries from which they were taken. </span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt 0.5in;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><o:p><span style="color: white; font-family: Calibri; font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;">If the president is serious about ending the state of perpetual war, these actions are indispensible, and can only serve to enhance the security and standing of the United Sates.<o:p></o:p></span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="color: white;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></o:p></span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Notice that Mr. Obama used the phrase “We the People,”when discussing the issue of perpetual war.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This entails that it is incumbent upon us, U.S. Citizens, to remember the principles set out in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and that if they are to have meaning, they must apply to everyone, across the board.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Terrorism is not an existential threat to the United States, unless we, the people, make it one.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We do this every time we compromise our core values in the name of “security” or some nebulous concept of revenge.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I have never been more ashamed to be American than the night the death of Osama Bin Laden was announced, as I watched Americans dancing in the streets, waving flags and celebrating the end of another human being’s existence.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The pictures could have been taken straight from some middle eastern countries celebrating the September 11 attacks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Is this what we are as a nation now?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A screaming mob howling for the blood of other people, and celebrating the extra-judicial killing of a man who posed no imminent threat to our individual selves?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I don’t pretend to know whether it was possible for Bin Laden to be taken alive to face due process of law. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is very possible he would not allow himself to be captured. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What I do know, is that an operation that was an obvious violation of Pakistani sovereignty and resulted in the death of a human being, no matter how we, as individuals felt about that human being, is cause for sober reflection on the state our nation is in, not a wild celebration.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If we truly believe in the rule of law, than we should never be happy when the law is eroded. <o:p></o:p></span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: white; font-size: large;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span lang="EN" style="color: black; mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="color: white; font-size: large;">Perhaps our president can help lead us to these conclusions; but in the end, it is up to us to realize, that in the words of the band </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: white; font-size: large;">Rush: “Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world, than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled.”</span> </i><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-70202877738143243542011-04-29T13:51:00.001-04:002011-04-29T13:58:54.213-04:00A Modest Proposal for The Donald<font face="arial"></font><div><br />It has come to my attention that many Americans are unaware of the huge threats facing our country today. What with the gay agenda, run-away government spending on useless programs like headstart, medicare, and social security, and the fascist attempt to turn us all into socialists by giving people access to healthcare, coupled with the constant threat of Middle-Eastern terrorism in our own country which has only been staved off by sending our people to be killed in other countries, the American way of life is in more danger now than in any time in our great nation’s history. </div><div><br /> This why it is more important than ever that we thoroughly vet those who might possibly try to attempt to lead us. I understand that Donald Trump is exploring the possibility of running for the Republican nomination for President of the United States. I applaud Mr. Trump for his past contributions to the economy and culture of our country, and for his desire to enter the public service. I do have one concern however.</div><div><br /> You see, I read on the internet that Mr. Trump’s grandparents emigrated from Germany. I also heard, somewhere, that our country was at war not once, but twice, with that country as recently as last century. Therefore, I have to wonder about Mr. Trump’s eligibility for the presidency. Please understand that I’m not saying he’s a German enemy combatant; I’m simply asking the question. </div><div><br /> So I am proposing that Mr. Trump release a copy of his long form birth certificate to the citizens of the United States. Now, an on-line posting is fine and good for some things, but, let’s face it, sometimes people lie on the internet. That is why I propose that Mr. Trump send a certified hard copy of his birth certificate to every registered voter in the U.S. Now, this should be easy, as registered voter lists are public record, and I’m sure Mr. Trump has a certified long-form birth certificate handy at all times, like all good Americans. But, to be generous, I’ll give him a month to complete the mailings. After all, we Americans are entitled to know the truth.</div><div><br /> In fact, since the popular current thought is that government should be run like a business, I think, that as Mr. Trump’s prospective employers, the American people need a completed W-4 and I-9 from him, along with the 2 types of acceptable identification as indicated on those forms. After all, if we are going to hire him to run the country, we have to make sure he’s not part of the illegal immigrant menace that threatens to destroy life as we know it.</div><div><br /> So, Mr. Trump, I know that after thinking about it, you will agree that this is best for the country. I await your correspondence with confidence. After all, it’s the least you can do if you want to hear those magical words: “You’re Hired.”</div>Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-44298788170426283172008-10-11T00:21:00.005-04:002008-10-11T02:08:05.782-04:00Johnny Dangerously and The American Right.John McCain has stepped back. We'll see how long it lasts, but after TV and radio ads run by his campaign that have accused Barak Obama of being "dangerous" and a"liar," McCain actually tried to douse some of his supporters' fire by saying that Obama is a "decent person and a person you do not have to be scared of as President of the United States." These remarks came at a "town hall"-style campaign rally that, like many others recently, featured heated rhetoric by the questioners, along with shouts of "traitor," "liar," "terrorist," and even "off with his head." So what are we to make of these outbursts? Frightened citizens wanting to protect their families, or desperate attempts by jaded Republicans to strike up some electoral fervor?<br /><br />First off, lets identify those making these kinds of comments. One gentleman, shaking with rage, implored McCain to attack Obama strongly in the next debate because the "Socialists are taking over our country." This person obviously didn't know that the very man he was talking to had "suspended his campaign" to try to push through the biggest government buyout of the private sector since the 1930s. It doesn't get much more socialist than that. This may have been an appropriate sentiment at a Ron Paul rally. But the Republican party is no protector of free markets unless it suits them financially.<br /><br />In another episode, a lady said "I don't trust Obama, I have read about him. He's an Arab." (I didn't hear the audio of the incident, but one can just imagine that it was pronounced ai-rab.) This woman apparently knows nothing about either physical or ethnic geography, not to mention nationality standards. In case she happens to read this, I'll explain:<br /><br />Barak Obama's father was from Kenya. Kenya is a country in sub-Saharan East Africa. Obama's father (whom he was named after) was raised a muslim, but it is unclear if he remained active in that faith when he went to college in the U.S. The elder Obama was what is sometimes (and overly simply) termed, a "Black African." The Arabs, a long time ago, enlaved many Black Africans, just as the Europeans did. That is why many black Africans are Muslims today, just as many of African descent in the U.S. are christian. The Arabs and the Black Africans historically do not get along. You may have heard of a place called Darfur, where Arabs have been killing and raping Black Africans for a number of years, mostly because they can. Obama's mother was of European descent. Therefore, even if it was in any way meaningful, you are incorrect in your assertion that Obama is an Arab.<br /><br />Sorry about the digression, but as you can see, we are not dealing with the sharpest bulbs on the porch here. Senator McCain and his campaign bear some responsibility for these kinds of sentiments. You run campaign commercials to convince people of your position. If your position, at least in your advertisements, is that someone is "dangerous" or a "liar," you are estopped, I think, from claiming to be surprised that some people believe it. It is possible that Senator McCain did not understand the visceral anger and hatred that these sentiments would elicit in people. But, if he was paying attention, he should have.<br /><br />And now we come to the real culprits in this situation: the religious and reactionary right. I'm speaking of people like James Dobson and Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and Billy Graham, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and Bill O'Reilly. These individuals, and the organizations that support and give air to their views have constantly poisoned the public discourse with hateful and spite-filled rhetoric, not to mention half-truths and outright lies. They have told Americans time and again that their very "way of life*" is being threatened. They have warned that the fall of American Society, nay, Western Civilization itself, is imminent, that the "end is near**" and that it is all because of the liberals, and progressives, and homosexuals, and socialists, and their bosom buddies, the "activist judges***." So what is a partially-educated, red-blooded American who believes in god, mom, Chevrolet (or Ford), and apple pie to do?<br /><br />Well, when a respected Senator, a war-hero, approves a message calling his opponent in the election "dangerous," our above hypothetical citizen takes him at his word. After all, it's just what all those "smart" people on the radio, TV, and the "intertubes" have been saying. If this Obama guy is the leader of all those things that are going to end with the destruction of everything these people hold dear, why wouldn't they be angry, and scared, and ready to do anything to stop him? It is the conservative movement, including behind-the-scenes movers like Dick Cheney and Karl Rove, that have set the stage for this kind of behavior. When you play on the basest emotions of people, on their fear, their uncertainty, their biological predisposition to dislike that which they don't understand or is not like them, then that is what you get. The basest reaction.<br /><br />Let me be clear. I am not calling for a move to silence any of the above individuals, or anyone like them. The greatest right the U.S. Constitution grants us is to say stupid, mean-spirited, even ridiculous, things. But, we, as a society, as a public, should hold them accountable for the atmosphere they create. Call them names, laugh at their silliness, pity how small their thought. But always point out that it is they that are dangerous. If American society is going to fall, it is the conservative movement that will be the death of it. Because it is the conservative movement that doesn't understand what is good and right about America. That tolerance is not a political catch-word used when you find something distasteful but don't want to alienate. That you can disagree with someone's ideas, but not be physically threatened by them. That diversity, not homogeneity, is, and has been, the strength of America for over two-hundred years. That there is no "traditional family," only people trying to live as families, which is what has always been the case. That America is not, nor has it ever been a "christian nation," just a secular republic, founded on the ideals of the Enlightenment, that allowed christianity to attain the influence it now has. And that the American people will not always follow those base instincts of fear and hatred.<br /><br />Perhaps John McCain has come to understand the danger of his rhetoric. I hope so. Because as the original Johnny Dangerously said: "I never should have picked a name like that. A name like that you gotta live up to."<br /><br />Too true.<br /><br />Legend:<br />* "Way of life" means a mythical nirvana where every set of two attractive (white) heterosexual parents raised two children, who grew up to be a doctor and a lawyer and took care of their parents in their golden years.<br /><br />**The end is near" must be interpreted in light of the bible, in which near can mean any time between Jesus' death and whenever god gets around to it.<br /><br />***an "activist judge" is defined as any judge who won't change the ideas found in the Constitution to agree with those set out by a tribe of bronze age nomad goat herders.Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-64988162229806128372008-09-09T23:20:00.016-04:002008-09-10T01:29:09.648-04:00GOP and McCain: Panderers or Hypocrites? The Answer May Surprise You (But Probably Won't)If anyone had any doubts as to whether the Republican Party is the party of hypocrisy and pandering, the recent Republican National Convention and the days following should have dispelled them completely. First, we have the selection of unknown Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin to be John McCain's running mate. No, sorry, she's more than that: she's (in his words) his "soulmate." So Mr. Maverick, agent of change that he is, nominates a woman with political views that track, almost exactly, those views of the reactionary religious right that have held sway in the White House for the past eight years.<br /><br />Ms. Palin (she probably hates being called Ms.) is anti-choice, even in cases of incest and rape. She is however, "proud" of her pregnant, unmarried 17-year-old daughter's "decision." We observers can only assume Sarah means her daughter's decision to engage in teenage, pre-marital sex that results in pregnancy, as it is clear bringing the baby to term is not a choice. Further, Ms. Palin is shocked, shocked I say, that the media has covered anything about her daughter's situation. It is "a matter that should be left to the family."<br /><br />Take your time and re-read that last paragraph, I'll wait. Yes, you got it. In the governor's eyes, the government is entitled to deny the right to choose abortion under any circumstances to everyone, but is indignant that anyone might meddle in the affairs of her family. Kids, can you say cognitive dissonance? It is exactly this kind of compartmentalisation of thought that is encouraged by Christianity in particular and religion in general. But that is a different rant.<br /><br />Speaking of religion, Hockey-Mom-in-Chief Palin believes that the war in Iraq is, to paraphrase the Blues Brothers, "a mission from God." Apparently, God's plan was to have the United States be the cause of over 1 million deaths, including both Americans and Iraqis, not to mention untold legions of the physically and mentally maimed, for the purpose of the aggrandizement of the Bush Administration's world view. (Of course, anyone who's read the Bible wouldn't be surprised; this kind of thing is God's M.O., after all.) Sarah, you really need to watch all this "maverick" thought, it might get you into trouble.<br /><br />Well at least she stands up to Washington and those petty bureaucrats that want to hand out free money to the states. Except when she proposed, in 2008, that her state's senator request $197 million in federal "earmarks," more, per capita, than any other state. But it's probably because Alaska is needy, what with all the avalanches and polar bear attacks, right? Well, it seems Alaska took in $10 billion in revenue, twice what it did last year, and swelled the coffers enough that Palin got the legislature to approve a $1200 payment to every Alaskan. This is in addition to the customary payment of $2000 given to every Alaskan annually out of the oil-wealth savings account, known as the Permanent Fund. Apparently Iraq isn't the only place with an oil-based surplus. The Permanent Fund now contains $35 billion, thanks in part to oil tax hikes that Palin signed into law last year.<br /><br />Now, you may ask: "Hasn't Palin accused Obama of wanting to raise taxes in every speech she has made?" Of course not silly, she only said it in one speech, it's just that she gives the same one every time. Besides, who cares as long as she has all that foreign policy experience by living in the state closest to Russia.<br /><br />I could go on for ages about our soon-to-be vice-MILF, but let's turn to the rest of the party, shall we? If you doubt that the McCain camp is pandering to the right wing of the party in its selection, consider this: Palin is being endorsed, enthusiastically, by the likes of James Dobson and Focus on the Family. Mr. Dobson declared earlier this year, on the <em>Dennis Prager Show,</em> that he "can not and will not vote for Senator John McCain." Focus on the Family has been taking women to task for years for "abandoning" the family unit and going to work. Yet here we have a mother with five children, one of whom has special needs (not to mention the 17 year-old who's getting ready to have one), and Focus on the Family is endorsing her to work in the second-highest office in the land. The word here kids is "hypocrite." But again, what can we expect from an organization that is "bible-based," considering the bible itself is a seething mass of contradiction.<br /><br /><div align="left">Further evidence of pandering has cropped up in the newest attack ads from the McCain Campaign. These accuse Sen. Obama as being for "sex-education for kindergartners." This stance is gleaned, according to McCain's ad, from Obama's support of Illinois SB0099, which was debated in the Illinois legislature while Obama was a member. Although the ad touts this as Obama's "legislative accomplishment," he didn't sponsor it, and the bill was never passed (it was tabled in 2003 before coming to a vote, and is, for all intents and purposes, dead.) That's lie #1. Lie #2 is that the bill was meant to teach "comprehensive sex education to kindergartners." The text of the proposed bill mentioned "grade k" twice, the most relevant mention of which was: <blockquote></blockquote></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="center"></div><div align="center"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="center">"Sec. 27-9.2. Family Life. (a) If any school district provides courses of instruction designed to promote wholesome and comprehensive understanding of the emotional, psychological, physiological, hygienic and social responsibility aspects of family life, then such courses of instruction shall include the teaching of prevention of unintended pregnancy and all options related to unintended pregnancy, appropriate to the various grade levels; and whenever such courses of instruction are provided in any of grades K through 12, then such courses also shall include age appropriate instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV AIDS. " (Stricken portions omitted.) <blockquote></blockquote></div><div align="left"></div><div align="center"></div><div align="center"></div><div align="center"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left">The other mention is here: <blockquote></blockquote></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="center"></div><div align="center"></div><div align="center">"Each class or course in comprehensive sex education offered in any of grades K through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV." (Stricken portions omitted.)</div><div align="center"><blockquote></blockquote></div><div align="left">Now, Mr. Dobson, Focus on the Family, and, one can presume, Mistress Palin, may have issue with this proposed bill because it mentions sex education and the prevention of unwanted pregnancy, which are anathema to the "God Squad" crowd. But to name it a call for sex education for kindergartners is not a Fox-news style "interpretation" or an issue upon which reasonable minds can differ. It is an outright <strong>lie</strong>. I imagine Karl Rove had his fingerprints on this, but the responsibility rests with John McCain. After all he "approved this message." There are no two ways about it; John McCain is a liar. <blockquote></blockquote></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left"></div><div align="left">From the above, I think it is apparent that the answer to the titular question of this post is a trick one: the GOP and John McCain are both hypocrites and panderers. They are also liars. But again, this should surprise no one who has been paying attention to the last 8 years of Republican rule. </div><div align="left"></div>Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-67567269619611550062007-11-12T14:25:00.000-05:002007-11-12T15:10:36.303-05:00Expectations of PrivacyDonald Kerr is confused. As deputy director of national intelligence, Kerr testified before Congress as it considers the "new and improved" Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act that it amended last year so as to allow the government to eavesdrop on communications inside the United States without a court order, as long as one end of the communication is believed to be outside the U.S. Lawsuits have been filed against large telecommunications companies alleging that the government is actually copying every call, e-mail and Internet site access that goes through some telecom centers. Unsurprisingly, the Bush administration, and people like Mr. Kerr, want a bill that gives the telecom companies immunity from such lawsuits, so that the overreaching of this government in its misguided attempts to "protect us" go unscrutinized. <br /><br />At an October intelligence conference in Texas, Mr. Kerr said he finds it "odd" that people are concerned about government eavesdropping when they are willing to allow "a green-card holder at [an Internet service provider] who may or may not have been an illegal entrant" to handle their data. He also pointed out that millions of people participate in social networking sites such as Myspace and Facebook, and allow information about themselves to be published in those fora. <br /><br /> Leaving aside the irrelevant misdirection regarding immigration status contained in the above quote, it is obvious that Mr. Kerr is in need of some quick lessons in the difference between choosing to release information, and having all one's conversations copied into a central database. Further, he may want to brush up on the difference between private entities and the government. <br /><br />What Mr. Kerr may have forgotten in the course of his civil service, is that the government wields enormous power over the lives of its citizens, a power even the largest and most well-organized corporations could only dream of having (yet). This particular government, furthermore, has shown it has no qualms at all about utilizing that power against anyone it deems a threat, regardless of Constitutional limits or international law. There is also, again, the issue of choice. In case Kerr is unfamiliar with the process, he should know that neither Myspace, nor Facebook, or any other social networking site requires anyone to publish their information. A choice to do so should not, in any way, lead us to the conclusion that that person, let alone all of society, has completely given up his privacy rights. <br /><br />What I find odd is that Mr. Kerr seems unaware of these distinctions. The mere fact that a member of the government, a deputy director of intelligence no less, can make such statements with a straight face shows how far we have allowed this administration to go in shaping public discourse and obfuscating the most basic issues of civil liberty. Congress must not cave in to these types of tactics and grant further power to a government that is, and has been for some time, beyond the pale of basic decency in its dealings with those that disagree with it, both abroad and here at home.<br /><br />The American people would do well to remember the quote usually attributed to Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up a little liberty for a little security will lose both and deserve neither."Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695519170542905932.post-49398699555671441662007-10-23T17:07:00.000-04:002007-10-23T18:12:42.025-04:00Why We FightThe term "Culture Wars" in its present connotation was probably coined by James David Hunter in his book of the same name. Hunter used it to describe a polarization of American political discourse into two camps: one with an <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">impulse</span> towards "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">progressivism</span>" and the other with an impulse towards "Orthodoxy." <br /><br />While Hunter used these terms in very specific ways, "Culture War" has taken on a broader meaning, and has been used by Patrick Buchanan and Charlton Heston in speeches meant to rally people to their particular causes. The idea now seems to <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">encompass</span> the entire struggle between "<span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">Conservatism</span>" and "Liberalism" (as modernly defined,) for the very "soul of America." <br /><br />More particularly, it is the struggle between those that believe a certain set of specific moral and ethical codes, derived from the somewhat vague "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">Judeo</span>-Christian" tradition should be paramount in all decisions informing government and society, and those that believe society is better served by keeping religious beliefs in the private realm and holding fast to the Enlightenment ideals which were the basis of much of the founding of the United States over 230 years ago. <br /><br />The last paragraph likely indicates to the reader where I personally stand on the issue, and I will be up front about the fact that I belong to the latter camp. <br /><br />As examples of what prompted me to begin this blog, I give you the following selections from some groups which threaten the ideas and values which have made the U.S. stand apart for two centuries:<br /><br /><blockquote>"<em>The Family Research Council (<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">FRC</span>) champions marriage and family as the<br />foundation of civilization, the seedbed of virtue, and the wellspring of<br />society. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">FRC</span> shapes public debate and formulates public policy that values human<br />life and upholds the institutions of marriage and the family. Believing that God<br />is the author of life, liberty, and the family, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">FRC</span> promotes the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">Judeo</span>-Christian<br />worldview as the basis for a just, free, and stable society</em>. "<br /></blockquote><br />These folks want to make sure that your family "institution" is agreeable to their particular religious view. <br /><br /><br /><blockquote>"<em>The American Family Association represents and stands for traditional<br />family values, focusing primarily on the influence of television and other media<br />– including pornography – on our society. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">AFA</span> believes that the<br />entertainment industry, through its various products, has played a major role in<br />the decline of those values on which our country was founded and which keep a<br />society and its families strong and healthy. For example, over the last 25 years<br />we have seen the entertainment industry "normalize" and glorify premarital sex.<br />During that time we have suffered a dramatic increase in teen pregnancies,<br />sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS and abortion as a means of birth<br />control. We believe in holding accountable the companies which sponsor programs attacking traditional family values. We also believe in commending those<br />companies which act responsibly regarding programs they support."</em><br /></blockquote><br />These people are under the impression that alleged increases in teen pregnancy, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">STDs</span>, and abortion are the media's fault. Apparently, the "institution" of family is not strong enough to withstand assault from the likes of Britney Spears.<br /><br /><blockquote><p>"<em>Concerned Women for America: The mission of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">CWA</span> is to protect and<br />promote Biblical values among all citizens - first through prayer, then<br />education, and finally by influencing our society - thereby reversing the<br />decline in moral values in our nation</em>."</p></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><p>These ladies are concerned that there are not enough "Biblical values" influencing our society. I wonder whether they support enslavement of defeated populations, human sacrifice, and the stoning of adulterous women and "rebellious" children. </p><p>And finally, straight from the horse's mouth:</p><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote><p>“<em>We need common sense judges who understand that our rights are derived<br />from<br />God. Those are the kind of judges I intend to put on the<br />bench</em>.” --President George W. Bush</p></blockquote><p><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote>Assuming Mr. President is speaking of the biblical god, I suppose that means we derive the right to have our cities destroy by fire and <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">sulphur</span>, and be turned into pillars of salt if we displease this god. I am eager to see Mr. Bush's appointees enforce such edicts. <p></p><p>The exaggerations in the above comments are meant to point out that picking which religious tenets to follow and which to reject is fraught <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">with</span> peril for a civilized society. It seems much better to lean on the philosophy of human rights and responsibilities in governing a modern nation. </p><p>This is why I oppose these groups and their ilk, and the attempts to subvert the U.S. Constitution to serve there own supernatural agendas. </p><p> </p>Eric Misenerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00982818940438846432noreply@blogger.com0