Doing our best to enrage the left and right

Gas prices

2008-07-16T01:12:36Z

I haven't written in about a week, mostly because I just got disgusted with the whole political scene. Really, the Democrats and Republicans have once again proven they are the Janus/Harvey Dent party, and they're supporters will once again vote for them anyway because the have to support evil (the lesser of two) rather than support good. I have decided to write in "none of the above" for my choice regarding president just as a protest vote, that or the Green Party candidate. Screw the whiny Democrats. They wouldn't lose elections if they had candidates worth a rats behind.

As to gas prices, here's the thing:

American's are already switching to smaller cars. and this will have an impact, at least in this country. What needs to happen next is to make those people who drive gas hogs (like me) objects of ridicule and derision. (granted, I have made and will continue to make my own biodiesel, but that doesn't change the fact that a 1 ton, crew cab, 4WD, diesel pickup with a 6 inch lift kit is a waste of resources. I use it to haul manure, wood, my trailer when I work, and a host of other things, but I could do all that with a smaller, more efficient truck, but I can't afford to get a new one just yet, and I do use and need a truck.)

Anyway, why not start a campaign making those who drive fuel hogs uncomfortable with their choices, no matter what gas prices do? It is well passed the time when we should be driving electric, hybrid, and high mileage vehicles. We don't need SUV's. They are status symbols, that is all. Symbols of conspicuous consumption. Look what I can waste. A good ad campaign ridiculing that attitude would be just the thing.

The other half of this solution is to change tax laws such that no business gets to claim all their energy expenses, indeed, any of their energy expenses, as a write off. I see way too many vacationers driving pickups with company logos on the sides, obviously being used as personal transport. Most of these people do not need pickups and SUVs in their businesses, they choose them as status symbols. The problem is, the rest of America supports their fuel abuse, and so they continue on with that behavior.

I would start by disallowing 10% of their expenses, and would chop off another 10% every year, until the aforementioned business owners were paying the whole shot. As to passing the cost onto the consumer, they are doing that anyway, so, people would get a lower, less complicated tax bill, and businesses that have to compete would find themselves cutting fuel costs or being non-competitive.

(Okay, I know that a lower tax bill would not happen right away, but along with some other plans I have, it would happen. I suppose I should put what I want for a tax system out there. Maybe next time).

I would also do the same thing with electrical, heating, cooling, and any other energy costs. Eliminate the deductions, and give tax incentives for investing in energy efficient alternatives.

How to end the credit crunch

2008-07-08T23:35:06Z

Here's a great way to end the credit crunch in America. Don't pay your loans. If everybody did it, the banks would have no recourse. They'd all lose money, there wouldn't be a market for for anything repossessed, and there would be no way for the courts to handle all the problems that would arise. The only reason banks can do what they do now is because most Americans are decent, rule following folks who wouldn't dream of screwing the bank. But guess what, the banks are screwing them.

Look at the convoluted way credit is rated. No one truly understands the system that has been set up, everyone just goes along. I mean, c'mon, the fact that you were late on a utility payment is used as an excuse to jack up the interest rate on a credit card? The fact you applied for a loan downgrades your credit? then there are all those variable interest and interest only home loans that were handed out to whomever in order to entice those receiver into buying more than they could afford? Banks have been asking to be screwed.

There is also my own personal belief that most crises of this nature are somewhat artificially created just so those with money can expand their holdings. A bit cynical of me , I know, but folks with money do use these times to grab what they can at the expense of those who are losing everything.

So, if the majority of Americans got together and said "screw you", banks would certainly react in a way that was beneficial to the holders of loans. I would guess better terms would be in the offing almost immediately, and the plush offices, high salaries, and high dividends paid to stockholders would go right out the window.

Ok, I know there would be a whole lot of fallout. As I told my son, there would be a fundamental shift in the economy, given that America runs on credit. Paper money would be useless. The tax system would break down, and bartering would become more common. Hopefully, a lot of people would cease getting head over heels into debt, and banks would cease being so predatory, but the short term damage to the economy and basic social order wold be heinous. Still, it's an interesting intellectual exercise, and was one of the ways I postulated a major societal shift (disaster) could happen to this country. (The other one was an all out war over oil, since we can't seem to wean ourselves off of it.)

Such a thing as outlined above will probably never happen, but it is interesting to think of what things would be like if it did.

Vote for Obama?

2008-07-08T01:01:03Z

Supposedly, Barak Obama is a Washington newcomer, an outsider who is running to change politics in America, giving us a new, "outside the beltway" candidate with no close ties to the Washington power structure. He's a man of integrity, his word is good, and he is, above all else, NOT a typical politician.

So, what has he done so far:

First, in a bid to shore up his standing with religious (bigots?) people, he has endorsed, and committed to expanding George Bush's "faith based initiative" attack on the First Amendment. I would bet if someone from an Islamic organization asked him point blank if they could get funding for community outreach, they would get either silence or a caveat filled response that held Obama to nothing while sounding like he actually he gave an intelligible response.

Next, he has stated that he would "refine" his position on the war in Iraq,rather than holding to his statement that he would remove all combat troops within 16 months after his election. What does "refine" mean? Does it mean "all troops will be removed by the end of 16 months but the timetable within those 16 months may shift depending on developments" or does it mean" We can win in Iraq. I won't say the surge has helped, but things are stable and now I can look like a real hero if I keep the troops in longer"?

Sounds like BS to me. It also sounds like another useless politician who words mean squat.

Recently Obama spoke to AIPAC, the American-Israeli Political Action Committee. While it is heartening to have a politician once again that recognizes the power of diplomacy and dialog, his repeated assurances that Israel comes first are not rooted in change, but are rooted in getting votes and money from AIPAC.

Our politicians pretend Israel is important, but it is not. As allies, Saudi Arabia all the other middle eastern countries are more important that Israel. Our policies regarding Israel and the Palestinians have never been about putting the US first. America supported the founding of Israel because we didn't want all those new Jewish refugees and settlers in this country. We (as part of the United Nations) forced them on the Arabs, took away Arab land and gave it to the new Jewish immigrants. And, lest anyone forget, while the Arabs sponsored violence against the Jews in Palestine, the Jews started the terrorism campaigns. I have a friend who said the following regarding the re-establishment of Israel: "The United Nations ain't God".

Israel made sure their foundation was steeped in the blood of Arabs and Jews alike. It should be no surprise that said foundation is constantly reinforced with additional blood. Someone is going to have to explain to me one of these days why it is important to America to help sustain the bloodshed for a country that has, many times over, proven they are not good friends and allies of the US.
As for me, while I am not about to stand by and watch the Jews get slaughtered, I do not believe it is in the best interest of my country to continue to unequivocally support the Jewish state to the detriment of the natives.

One point. I do understand that it is the Arabs who constantly provoke the Jews. I think the Palestinians would like peace, but the Arab states which surround Palestine and Israel don't want peace to happen. I get it. Perhaps, if we'd quit buying foreign oil and stop funding those Arab states, things would get a little quieter all around the world. Another good reason for energy conservation.

" A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman, of the next generation" James Freeman Clarke

Barak Obama is just another friggin' politician

Thoughts on the Fourth

2008-07-05T00:23:48Z

The Fourth of July. The day we in America celebrate the foresight and character of a group of true patriots who we call our Founding Fathers. A day we celebrate living in the land they wrested from an unjust king and from the ruins of war created a nation unique in it's government.

Those daring men, who pledged "our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor" had the courage to stand up, put everything they had on the line, and forged a nation that has stood for over two hundred years.

Starting with the Declaration of Independence, and ending with the Constitution of the United States of America, using the free thinking of Western philosophy, throwing off the yoke of religion and the "rule by divine right" that was dominant in other governments of the time, they boldly drew up a document that, instead, celebrated the right of people to choose their own government. They produced a nation that stood unique. When Thomas Jefferson drew up the Bill of Rights, he used the Constitution to ensure that the abuses listed in the Declaration of Independence could never again be brought against the citizens of America.

Americans were ensured the right to freely practice their religion, without fear of reprisal from the Government.   Free speech, freedom to assemble and protest. Freedom to ask for redress from the government for wrongs committed by the government. Freedom from torture, from police harassment, from have your home searched by the police without just cause, the right to go to court, to confront your accuser, to not incriminate yourself. A country where you could not be held in jail indefinitely, but where proof
of probable guilt had to be obtained, and shown to the accused, or the accused walked free. A country where every criminal had access to an attorney, or could choose to represent himself. A country where a jury of ones peers decided guilt or innocence.

We were given a government that had checks and balances, where to chief executive was accountable by law, and where Congress was expected to enforce those laws. But most importantly, we were given a country in which the people ruled, where the people were expected to watch and debate the issues, where the people got to elect their representatives and the representatives reflected the will of the people, and where the people were willing to sacrifice for the good of the nation. America has been all those things.

Do you think America will ever be that way again?

America has fought to retain those things and that Government. We have stood up to dictators, have used our influence not to spread tyranny, but to free people from the yoke of oppression. Americans have sacrificed their lives, their fortunes but not their honor, to retain those ideals that America was founded on. We have been attacked, but we are a vast, wealthy, and strong nation. I do not believe we can ever be destroyed by any government on this earth. We can, however, destroy ourselves.

By listening to demagogues, those who would take advantage of our fears in uncertain times, by becoming selfish, putting our wants ahead of what America needs, by not being Americans, with faith in the country and Constitution that have given us all so much while asking very little in return, the America fought for by millions of men and women since 1776 will pass, and something else will be in it's place.

Some will call it America, but it will not be THE America founded in 1776. That America is already gone, given up by it's citizens because they took counsel of their fears instead of having faith in the wisdom of their Founding Fathers.

The old America, where the rights given to it's citizens in it's Constitution, where it's leaders were to be held responsible to the law, where it's congress and judiciary were expected to act, in concert, for the good of the union, to maintain the rights of the people, that America is on it's last legs.   It's not gone yet, but it has been severely damaged by it's elected officials, because it's people have grown apathetic and fearful.

It is possible de Toqueville was right, that America was doomed because it's people would find out, eventually, that they could vote for whatever they wanted, and that they would put selfish desire ahead of the nation.

I hope not.

Wake up people. It's not too late. We can become again the America we were, but only if you, the People, want it to happen.

"Rome endured as long as there were Romans. America will endure as long as we remain American in spirit and in thought"
                                                                                                                                                                                     David Starr Jordan

Odd thoughts, number one

2008-07-04T00:53:57Z

Odd thought #1 Eating their own.

My son signed me up for Ann Coulter's web letter, believing it is important to know what the enemy is up to. I find it amusing, especially when she turns on the Republican candidate. And so she has, more than once. John McCain does not carry enough hate and vitriol to be considered a true believer like Miss Coulter, he doesn't vilify his opponents nor engage in the polemics that have divided this nation, ergo he's not the candidate for her.

Anyway, the latest attack from Miss Coulter has to do with Mr. McCain's nay vote regarding opening ANWR for oil exploration and drilling. Miss Coulter seems to think, like a lot of other right-wing "intellectuals", that somehow, oil will immediately flow from ANWR and all our problems will be solved, the price of gas will plummet, and we can all go on our merry, wasteful ways. And, of course, we shouldn't worry about saving any bit of unspoiled wilderness for our children, because we have to take care of ourselves, not the future.

I do not understand what the issue is about high gas prices, particularly with regards to Republican's and their supporters. After all, the price of gas only reflects market forces which is what every good capitalist banks on. What we are seeing in energy costs is a direct result of removing government controls on the profits of power generators, as well as the total control of oil prices at the well heads in this country. I wonder how many oil well lessors are getting money for their product proportionate to the amount of money oil companies are making on crude these days?

Bottom line: Ann Coulter is out to lunch if she thinks drilling in ANWR will make any difference on oil prices, in the near or far term.

Odd thought # 2. It pays to be anti-American

Rush Limbaugh was awarded a new $400,000,000.00 contract for eight more years of anti-American rhetoric, paid for by the pseudo-patriots who listen to him daily, rejoicing as the economy goes up in smoke, the Constitution is destroyed, and the national debt just gets bigger and bigger. There isn't much more to say than that. Polemics pay, and what is actually good for America doesn't matter so long as the ratings are high and the dollar bills flow. Go Rush. Living the American dream, getting rich while destroying the very thing he purports to love.

Odd Thought #3. Barak Obama, uber congressman

I heard another Obama commercial today, this one telling us all what Barak Obama passed as a congressman somewhere or the other. Barak Obama didn't pass squat. He may have supported. He may even have drafted legislation that did what his commercial claims he did. But HE didn't pass anything. The collective Congress that he belonged to at the time did. He's not a dictator. He cannot "pass" anything. All he can do is support legislation and vote on same.

I will never understand why campaigns insist their candidates have superhuman abilities. Perhaps this is why Congressmen and women tend to lose touch with reality. All I want is a candidate who believes substantially the same things that I do, which is that America comes first, and I expect their actions to reflect their words, which is where John McCain loses me, as his actions have hurt my country.

Thus far the news has been interesting, and the commercials more so. Hopefully, I'll be able to continue writing to this blog on a daily basis. there is certainly enough BS to keep it full.

David J. Newland

Political ad comments

2008-07-03T00:11:13Z

Since we are in an election year are going to inundated with a wonderful mix of lies, half truths, and a small smattering of the real truth, I thought I would begin to disassemble ads by politicians running for election. As new ones appear, I'll do my best to skewer them.

SO, far John McCain is leading the pack on ads, at least here in northern Michigan. I've only seen one Obama ad, which is just a feel good, gee I'm just like you, guy next door ad. I suppose we'll have to wait for the "really, I'm a jihadist and am going to turn the country into a large, armed Muslim camp" ad to hit the TV. So far, that information is only available through the truth sellers on the Internet.

As for McCain, his ads have given me chuckles. Lets see, he sounded the alarm on global warming, five years ago, in defiance of the Bush administration. So, while a lot of us have known about the risk of global warming for twenty years or longer, apparently, no one sounded the alarm. Huh, imagine that.

Now Mr. McCain, having been so timely in his warning, has developed a new energy plan which, while lowering the price of gas, thus making it more affordable and easier to waste, will still, somehow, combat global warming. Of course, any new drilling will take upwards of ten years to get on line, and then new refineries will have to be built as well, but miraculously, at the end of that time frame, the price of oil will drop. Riiight. I got a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell too. Any takers?

For the past 50 years we have been on an energy wasting frenzy. The time has long since past when we could have worked towards less dependence on oil for transportation. Where was Mr. McCain's leadership when the transition to less wasteful forms of energy usage would have been less painful? He was part of Congress when the Reagan administration shut down the shale oil program, started by Jimmy Carter, on the pretense that the program was too expensive. Where was he on CAFE standards? On wind and solar power development? As they say in Mississippi, "that dog won't hunt".

There has been no leadership in Congress, or in the Presidency, by either party in regards to looking ahead at future issues and taking action now so we don't have to suffer through painful decisions in the future. All either party has done is what was necessary to ensure they won the next election. That's it. "Keep us in power, 'cause we're better than them". That is the only refrain Democrats and Republicans sing. It's their mantra. And their supporters, the electorate, know that neither party acts in the best interest of America, they just don't care. " I vote for the lesser of two evils" is what the explanation is if you ask, but evil is still evil. The downward slide of this country, economically, militarily, socially, will continue until people start voting for good, better, and best, not "the lesser of two evils".

Now for a comment that will upset a few people, unless they really stop and think, and that is about John McCain' s war record:

John McCain flew planes for the Navy during the Viet Nam war (unlike George "I'll fly 'em but I don't want to fight 'em" Bush. He got shot down and spent five years as a POW. Does this make him a war hero. I don't believe it does, explanation as follows:

To me, a hero is a guy or gal who gets up, faces his or her fear every day, and goes out and does the job anyway. MY son's a here for spending a year in Iraq and facing that carnage every day. Doing his job, keeping himself and his squad from harm as much as possible. Facing bullets, death and the loss of friends because he volunteered to do just that. That's heroism. Audie Murphy was a hero. The coastal river division men and women in Viet Nam, guys like John Kerry, a Silver Star winner, facing unknown assailants every day in those little boats, that's bravery. ( I met some of those river rats in Vallejo CCA, as I was going through Nuke School in 1975. Those guys have a few screws loose, perhaps, but their really good guys.)

John McCain did none of these things. What John McCain did was endure. Granted that takes strength, but is it heroism to survive? I don't believe so.

The other reason I don't call John McCain a hero is that he was the son of a US Senator. He was a great propaganda tool. I truly do not know how many other Americans survived for five years in a North Vietnamese prison camp, but I'll guess it wasn't many, and it may well be that Mr. McCain survived, in part, because of who his father was.

If any one thinks it is wrong that I question John McCain's war record, keep this in mind:

John Kerry was visciously attacked foru years ago, with a lot less reason, while John McCain did nothing. Heroic would have been to go on national TV, and make ads for John Kerry, denouncing those attacks. One of the things I took from the 2004 campaign was that anyones war record can be challenged, and so, I can question the "heroism" of Mr. McCain.

As a final thought, the ending line on the latest McCain commercial I've seen is that Mr. McCain will do "what's best for America.
In my opinion, that would mean:

Balancing the budget.

Actually paying for the war in Iraq.

Actually stopping the flood of illegal immigrants coming into this country

Getting out of Iraq

Setting national priorities that benefit America, not just special interests.

Telling the Saudi's to go to hell

Telling the Israeli's that, if they spy on us one more time, their foreign aid will dry up

Eliminating any act that has weakened the Constitution.

I still wouldn't vote for him, because I don't believe the Republican Party would support those actions, but I'd at least try to o support him if he got elected.

David J. Newland

and, putting together a plan for energy usage that is intelligent, forward looking, doesn't pander to oil companies, and will actually lay the groundwork for leading America into the next century

A Question of Patriotism

2008-07-02T00:38:48Z

Okay, so I haven't been here for awhile. Tragically, my son was hoarding the password, and I had no access.   That issue has been addressed, and sooo...

Patriotism. What is it? Do you know it when you see it, or do you only recognize it in extreme circumstances? Are all American heroes patriots, or do they "swap sides" depending on the issue? As a guide, remember; Benedict Arnold was, at one point, a hero of the Revolution. He lost faith in the Cause, however, and ended up the poster child for traitors instead.

I personally believe a patriot is someone who puts the good of his or her nation ahead of personal interest, sacrificing personal comfort, even life, for the good of the nation. Thus, a person speaking out on behalf of a cause, especially a cause benefiting the nation, would be a patriot, all the more if such an action is outside the norm for that individual.   Ditto, going to war, even if the war itself is wrong. One of the problems I have with anti-war protesters is that they too often target the soldier, not the person who sent them to fight. " Men crown the knave, and scourge the tool that did his will" A quote from " A Fool's Prayer" by E. W. Sill, and all too appropriate with regards to some peace activists.

This country has been under attack, from within as well as without. There are those who have attacked it who call themselves "patriots" and label those who have taken exception to their actions as the opposite. Demagoguery knows no political bounds, and no party affiliation.

I view the Constitution of the United States as the true wellspring of the strength of this nation. Without the rights we were given by a group of extremely thoughtful patriots, we would not be the nation we have been, and in some ways still are. The separation of powers, the system of checks and balances, the ability to amend the Constitution, and above all, the Bill of Rights, have made the American Constitution a document for all nations to emulate, if they so choose. Were America to disappear tomorrow, the gift of the Constitution to the world is one we can all be proud of.

Sadly, the Constitution written by our Founding Fathers has been attacked, the Bill of Rights weakened, the separation of powers all but destroyed, all in the name of "national security" by "patriots" seeking only to "ensure our safety".   It used to be the bumper sticker "I love my country but I fear my government" was, to me at least , just a sign of a paranoid right-winger. Now, I'm not so sure. Imagine Nixon and Hoover with the powers of the Patriot Act to use at their whim. A scary thought.

In my view, if you weaken the Constitution, you weaken America.   It cannot work any other way.

Thomas Jefferson once said that to engage in public debt, and then to pass that debt on to future generations, was immoral, that passing such debt forward to future generations was the ultimate in taxation without representation, yet we are over nine trillion dollars in the hole, paying out over one hundred thirty billion dollars a year in interest to such allies as China, Japan, our dear friends in the mid-East, and others who may actually be our friends. And there is no end in site. Are the "patriots "in this country ready to make the sacrifices that must be made to eliminate this debt? Is there anyone ready to argue that this debt is not harmful to America.

Just today Barak Obama stated his willingness to expand on the Bush Administration's "Faith Based Initiatives" program. I wonder if he is willing to give money to Islamic missions. Louis Farrakhan's Black Muslims have done a lot of good in lower class neighborhoods. Think his church will be eligible? If not, scratch that part of the First Amendment.

There are many other examples I could look at of people who have taken actions which, in my view, have damaged this country. The above are just the most egregious examples I can think of.

If you supported the Patriot Act, can you make the argument that your support strengthened the Constitution, or can you prove that America is better off with a weakened Bill of Rights? is the nation stronger because of the Patriot Act, not more secure, but stronger?

Can you make the argument that the national debt is good for America? Can you for certain prove that deficit spending is in the long term public interest?

If you can do these things, I would like to see the proofs. If you cannot, the question becomes:

If you voted in Congress or voted for a person or Party that in turn voted to support the Patriot Act and the deepening of the public Debt, are you a patriot?

Divided we fall

2008-02-06T00:24:05Z

I am on the road working in central California at the Diablo Canyon nuclear site. (hey, it's what I do). I arrived on Jan. 11, got settled in, and went hunting for a good deep tissue massage. I found a good masseuse, and had to wait for about 20 minutes for her to have an opening. So, I decided to take a walk.

Right outside of the health club where I was at is a Bank of America, and, as is my wont, I decided to check out the condition of the American flag they were flying. Lo and Behold, it was faded, tattered, and torn. It looked like it had been flying for years.

I went inside, wandered around until I found a management type, and explained to her my concern. Apparently, she never paid attention, as she was shocked to find that the flag was in such disrepair. She said she would take care of it, I thanked her, and I left.

I went back to the health club to get my massage. The masseuse was really good; She brought tears to my eyes.

While she was busy tearing my back up, I mentioned to her what I had seen and done about the flag. She informed me that I would get along great with her husband, as he was a real conservative too. Hence the title of this essay:

We have become so polarized and divided that this woman, who is really a very nice lady, assumed that I was conservative because I had spoken out about the condition of that flag. How did we get to the point that it is assumed conservatives take action on these issues and are patriotic, but progressives (liberals if you will), could care less?

This country has been divided, one side played off against the other, both sides being funded by the same corporate dollars. We have gone so far down this path that it can be assumed by reasonable people that one side or the other is unpatriotic and will not stick up for this nation. It is this division, being played up by both parties, being funded by the same corporations, which will do us (America) in.

Our Constitution is in shambles, thanks to both parties. Our economy is about to go down the tubes, thanks to both parties (face it folks, without a manufacturing base, we won't be much). Our government is almost nine trillion dollars ($9,000,000,000,000.00) in debt, thanks to both parties, and we allow ourselves to be divided by what, Abortion? Welfare? Waste in Government? Ladies and Gentlemen, we had better recognize that we have much more in common than we have differences, and we had better start celebrating those commonalties instead of celebrating our cultural differences.

We have been divided, and the America that was created in 1776, the America that was defended in 1941, then America that caused Richard Nixon to resign, no longer exists. The rule of law at the highest levels of our government no longer exists. The Constitution that has protected us from the excesses of our government no longer exists. If we don't unite, and unite soon, this country will prove De Toqueville's prediction that it would fail.

Personally, I'd like to ensure that doesn't happen.

David J. Newland

Bottling, and pitching

2008-01-13T04:29:23Z

Bottled two batches of brewhahah tonight. The first batch to be bottled was the cocoa-coffee wheat porter. However, I suspect something went horribly horribly wrong during sanitation as it was incredibly sour. I still bottled a few, in a purely optimistic mood.
The second batch I bottled was my original imperial cocoa porter. It tasted good out of the carboy, so we'll see.

Next brewing project is a Belgian, probably a Maudite clone. That will be for the spring, though, after Raven/Stellar and such. Hopefully, I can make it to at least one con this year. Liberty's out, Dragon's out. It's pretty much down to Raven or Stellar. I'd prefer Stellar, since I've never been there. But who knows.

I see that Klinton and McCain won the NH primary. It makes me sick. Clearly the citizens of NH care nothing for our country. You can quote me on that.

Kent

A few things...

2008-01-08T02:13:50Z

Dunno iffen any of you have ever heard of John McCutcheon. I GUESS he's considered a folk-singer, but it doesn't really come across as that folksy. His tunes are pretty catchy. However, what I really like about him is the fact that most of his songs are protests. Not like back in the '60s, but in a satirical, sardonic way. He's got "Monkey", about a school board in Kansas' decision to teach creationism instead of evolution. "Ashcroft's Army"...well, you can figure that out. What I was thinking about yesterday was "Talking Pat and Jerry Blues", about how Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell told the "moral majority" and the religious right that 9/11 happened because we tolerate homosexuals and other supposedly unsavory characters. And it got me thinking...
Hitler blamed Germany's hard-times on the Jews. Throughout history, hundreds of people have played on fear, hate, and misunderstanding in order to create a scapegoat and rise to power. Thus, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell are no different than Adolph Hitler. If we let individuals like that gain power, we will have another holocaust on our hands. Only this time it'll be liberals, Jews, gays, and anyone else who doesn't believe in the same god as those two bigots. I realize that Falwell is dead. Good. May God have mercy on his soul. Now, the thought comes to mind that Phelps could be in the same category as these two. Wrong. Phelps is a two bit con artist with a small, literally cult following. He's nothing, and will always be nothing.

On to other things...

Dad's off to California tomorrow, which makes me very sad. I love my Dad, which I tell him everyday, and I like having him around. He'll be back soon enough, and then we'll all be doing cheetah flips trying to get ready for his big project. I'm starting school in a few days, and I are excited.

Bottom line, check out John McCutcheon. He's funny, and talented, and says what he wants. Which may be a disappearing right.

Kent

A letter from Michael Moore, and a response

2008-01-04T17:40:33Z

First, the letter:

Who Do We Vote For This Time Around? A Letter from Michael Moore
January 2, 2008
Friends,

A new year has begun. And before we've had a chance to break our New Year's resolutions, we find ourselves with a little more than 24 hours before the good people of Iowa tell us whom they would like to replace the man who now occupies three countries and a white house.
Twice before, we have begun the process to stop this man, and twice we have failed. Eight years of our lives as Americans will have been lost, the world left in upheaval against us... and yet now, today, we hope against hope that our moment has finally arrived, that the amazingly powerful force of the Republican Party will somehow be halted. But we know that the Democrats are experts at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, and if there's a way to blow this election, they will find it and do it with gusto. Do you feel the same as me? That the Democratic front-runners are a less-than-stellar group of candidates, and that none of them are the "slam dunk" we wish they were? Of course, there are wonderful things about each of them. Any one of them would be infinitely better than what we have now. Personally, Congressman Kucinich, more than any other candidate, shares the same positions that I have on the issues (although the UFO that picked ME up would only take me as far as Kalamazoo). But let's not waste time talking about Dennis. Even he is resigned to losing, with statements like the one he made yesterday to his supporters in Iowa to throw their support to Senator Obama as their "second choice."

So, it's Hillary, Obama, Edwards -- now what do we do? Two months ago, Rolling Stone magazine asked me to do a cover story where I would ask the hard questions that no one was asking in one-on-one interviews with Senators Clinton, Obama and Edwards. "The Top Democrats Face Off with Michael Moore." The deal was that all three candidates had to agree to let me interview them or there was no story. Obama and Edwards agreed. Mrs. Clinton said no, and the cover story was thus killed. Why would the love of my life, Hillary Clinton, not sit down to talk with me? What was she afraid of? Those of you who are longtime readers of mine may remember that 11 years ago I wrote a chapter (in my first book) entitled, "My Forbidden Love for Hillary." I was fed up with the treatment she was getting, most of it boringly sexist, and I thought somebody should stand up for her. I later met her and she thanked me for referring to her as "one hot s***kicking feminist babe." I supported and contributed to her run for the U.S. Senate. I think she is a decent and smart person who loves this country, cares deeply about kids, and has put up with more crap than anyone I know of (other than me) from the Crazy Right. Her inauguration would be a thrilling sight, ending 218 years of white male rule in a country where 51% of its citizens are female and 64% are either female or people of color. And yet, I am sad to say, nothing has disappointed me more than the disastrous, premeditated vote by Senator Hillary Clinton to send us to war in Iraq. I'm not only talking about her first vote that gave Mr. Bush his "authorization" to invade -- I'm talking about every single OTHER vote she then cast for the next four years, backing and funding Bush's illegal war, and doing so with verve. She never met a request from the White House for war authorization that she didn't like. Unlike the Kerrys and the Bidens who initially voted for authorization but later came to realize the folly of their decision, Mrs. Clinton continued to cast numerous votes for the war until last March -- four long years of pro-war votes, even after 70% of the American public had turned against the war. She has steadfastly refused to say that she was wrong about any of this, and she will not apologize for her culpability in America's worst-ever foreign policy disaster. All she can bring herself to say is that she was "misled" by "faulty intelligence." Let's assume that's true. Do you want a President who is so easily misled? I wasn't "misled," and millions of others who took to the streets in February of 2003 weren't "misled" either. It was simply amazing that we knew the war was wrong when none of us had been briefed by the CIA, none of us were national security experts, and none of us had gone on a weapons inspection tour of Iraq. And yet...we knew we were being lied to! Let me ask those of you reading this letter: Were YOU "misled" -- or did you figure it out sometime between October of 2002 and March of 2007 that George W. Bush was up to something rotten? Twenty-three other senators were smart enough to figure it out and vote against the war from the get-go. Why wasn't Senator Clinton? I have a theory: Hillary knows the sexist country we still live in and that one of the reasons the public, in the past, would never consider a woman as president is because she would also be commander in chief. The majority of Americans were concerned that a woman would not be as likely to go to war as a man (horror of horrors!). So, in order to placate that mindset, perhaps she believed she had to be as "tough" as a man, she had to be willing to push The Button if necessary, and give the generals whatever they wanted. If this is, in fact, what has motivated her pro-war votes, then this would truly make her a scary first-term president. If the U.S. is faced with some unforeseen threat in her first years, she knows that in order to get re-elected she'd better be ready to go all Maggie Thatcher on whoever sneezes in our direction. Do we want to risk this, hoping the world makes it in one piece to her second term? I have not even touched on her other numerous -- and horrendous --
votes in the Senate, especially those that have made the middle class suffer even more (she voted for Bush's first bankruptcy bill, and she is now the leading recipient of payoff money -- I mean campaign contributions -- from the health care industry). I know a lot of you want to see her elected, and there is a very good chance that will happen. There will be plenty of time to vote for her in the general election if all the pollsters are correct. But in the primaries and caucuses, isn't this the time to vote for the person who most reflects the values and politics you hold dear? Can you, in good conscience, vote for someone who so energetically voted over and over and over again for the war in Iraq? Please give this serious consideration. Now, on to the two candidates who did agree to do the interview with me...

Barack Obama is a good and inspiring man. What a breath of fresh air! There's no doubting his sincerity or his commitment to trying to straighten things out in this country. But who is he? I mean, other than a guy who gives a great speech? How much do any of us really know about him? I know he was against the war. How do I know that? He gave a speech before the war started. But since he joined the senate, he has voted for the funds for the war, while at the same time saying we should get out. He says he's for the little guy, but then he votes for a corporate-backed bill to make it harder for the little guy to file a class action suit when his kid swallows lead paint from a Chinese-made toy. In fact, Obama doesn't think Wall Street is a bad place. He wants the insurance companies to help us develop a new health care plan -- the same companies who have created the mess in the first place. He's such a feel-good kinda guy, I get the sense that, if elected, the Republicans will eat him for breakfast. He won't even have time to make a good speech about it. But this may be a bit harsh. Senator Obama has a big heart, and that heart is in the right place. Is he electable? Will more than 50% of America vote for him? We'd like to believe they would. We'd like to believe America has changed, wouldn't we? Obama lets us feel better about ourselves -- and as we look out the window at the guy snowplowing his driveway across the street, we want to believe he'schanged, too. But are we dreaming?

And then there's John Edwards. It's hard to get past the hair, isn't it? But once you do – and recently I have chosen to try -- you find a man who is out to take on the wealthy and powerful who have made life so miserable for so many. A candidate who says things like this: "I absolutely believe to my soul that this corporate greed and corporate power has an ironclad

hold on our democracy." Whoa. We haven't heard anyone talk like that in a while, at least not anyone who is near the top of the polls. I suspect this is why Edwards is doing so well in Iowa, even though he has nowhere near the stash of cash the other two have. He won't take the big checks from the corporate PACs, and he is alone among the top three candidates in agreeing to limit his spending and be publicly funded. He has said, point-blank, that he's going after the drug companies and the oil companies and anyone else who is messing with the American worker. The media clearly find him to be a threat, probably because he will go after their monopolistic power, too. This is Roosevelt/Truman kind of talk. That's why it's resonating with
people in Iowa, even though he doesn't get the attention Obama and Hillary get -- and that lack of coverage may cost him the first place spot tomorrow night. After all, he is one of those white guys who's been running things for far too long.

And he voted for the war. But unlike Senator Clinton, he has stated quite forcefully that he was wrong. And he has remorse. Should he be forgiven? Did he learn his lesson? Like Hillary and Obama, he refused to promise in a September debate that there will be no U.S. troops in Iraq by the end of his first term in 2013. But this week in Iowa, he changed his mind. He went further than Clinton and Obama and said he'd have all the troops home in less than a year. Edwards is the only one of the three front-runners who has a universal health care plan that will lead to the single-payer kind all other civilized countries have. His plan doesn't go as fast as I would like, but he is the only one who has correctly pointed out that the health insurance companies are the enemy and should not have a seat at the table.

I am not endorsing anyone at this point. This is simply how I feel in the first week of the process to replace George W. Bush. For months I've been wanting to ask the question, "Where are you, Al Gore?" You can only polish that Oscar for so long. And the Nobel was decided by
Scandinavians! I don't blame you for not wanting to enter the viper pit again after you already won. But getting us to change out our incandescent light bulbs for some irritating fluorescent ones isn't going to save the world. All it's going to do is make us more agitated and jumpy and feeling like once we get home we haven't really left the office. On second thought, would you even be willing to utter the words, "I absolutely believe to my soul that this corporate greed and corporate power has an ironclad hold on our democracy?" 'Cause the candidate who understands that, and who sees it as the root of all evil --including the root of global warming -- is the President who may lead us to a place of sanity, justice and peace.
Yours,

Michael Moore (not an Iowa voter, but appreciative of any state that

has a town named after a sofa)

Now, the response:

Michael Moore Supports The War Support the War, Vote Democrat

Sir.

You saw those words on my sign across from the Bellaire theater in the Summer of 2007. I said it then and I stand by it now.
Hypocrite!!! Do you even know how many Democratic Senators and Congressman have supported the War in Iraq since it's inception? Do you even care how many of those same patriotic(?) Americans supported the Patriot Act? Have even one of those so-called "liberals" sponsored legislation to remove the truly heinous provisions of the Patriot Act, those that have trashed our rights and protections under the Constitution?

What about impeaching a lying President and his corrupt Administration? Is it Moore important to support the political aspirations of the Democratic Party than to support and protect the Constitution?

You have made a ton of money off the corruption of the Right, but have subscribed whole heartedly to the corruption of the Left. When will you, and those who think that you have a clue, come to realize that both parties are the problem. Both parties have been a part of the destruction of the American dream, both parties have been complicit in the trashing of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Remember, Bill Clinton signed NAFTA into law. Bill Clinton signed the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which has gone a long way toward limiting free speech on the airways. Democrats take money from PACS and lobbyists too. They take money from defense contractors. They get support from the American-Israeli PACS, people who have a vested interest in keeping war in the mid-East.

I don't pretend to know everything, but you, sir are mostly clueless if you cannot see the truth in what I am saying, and you are as morally bankrupt and Hillary if you will not admit these truths. There are two Parties in this country who have actively supported the elimination of all troops from Iraq. I represent one, the Green Party, where people like you, wearing blinders when you choose to and seeing only that which you want to see, would not last unless you decided to grow up and actually work for a better America, and not just a stronger Democratic Party.

I wonder if you really have the personal strength and commitment to actually survive such personal growth.

Sincerely,

David J. Newland
Green Party Candidate
MI First Congressional District

Running against a pro-War, pro-Life Democrat

Not all forward motion is progress.

2008-01-02T03:17:05Z

The purpose of this blog, for me, David, is very simple:

I have grown weary of the hypocrisy that abounds in this country. I m tired of the "Left " and "Right"wings of the political spectrum telling us how they are what this country needs, when both sides, in their political parties, have sold this country out.

The America formed during the Revolutionary War, the America which was kept whole during the Civil War, the America defended during WWI and WWII is gone, destroyed by politicians, Republican and Democrat alike, who are more interested in gaining and holding power than in adhering to and defending the Constitution they swore an oath to uphold.

Both sides lie, using warped "facts" and biased statistics to justify their positions, neither side acting in the best interests of America. From illegal immigrants to the national debt, from the Patriot Act to the "North American Union" politicians have increasingly destroyed what America was, turning it into something that the founders of this country would not recognize if they could see it now.

Republicans have catered to the worst parts of human nature, greed, fear, selfishness, to plunge this country into debt while eroding the basic freedoms this country was founded on, while Democrats go along with the flow rather than show an once of moral courage and stand for anything other than election.

As for my politics, I am a member of the Green Party, one who works nuclear power plants, who recognizes the need for a strong defense, and who owns a couple of guns (my son thinks I need more) . I also believe in a better foreign policy, that China is the biggest threat this country faces, and that the Constitution is the strength of this nation; Anything that weakens the protections guaranteed by the Constitution weakens that document, and consequently weakens this nation.

I believe every act taken by every American should have the ultimate goal of making this nation a better one.

David J. Newland

My (Kent) purpose:
Basically, I agree with my Dad on what he's said. The subject title is a mindset we share. Many times in the history of this country, politicians and other unsavory types have sold changes to us under the guise of progress, when in reality, it has been anything but progress. Political correctness is but one of these so-called "progressive moves". Dad and I stand for REAL progresss, back to the ways of our founding fathers. If Jefferson, Franklin, or Washington saw what America has become today, they would weep. Mostly, I think, because they expected this country to be around a lot longer than 200+ years. At the rate we're going, we won't be around as a "free" country for another 50, I expect.

I believe the way for us to save our freedom, and regain the freedoms we have lost, is by taking an active role in the policies of our country. Too many people just buy into whatever their particular politician says, without thinking. And then, there's the school of thought that says, "Well, that party is the lesser of two evils, that's why I vote for them." Great, but you're still voting for evil. Good work. I tend to be a bit more sarcastic and sardonic than my dad, but we believe a lot of the same things. Granted, he's a bit more Socialistic than I am. I think history has shown that Socialist/Communist/Marxist/Stalinist policies only bring oppression. But, hey, he does make some good points, unlike politicians, who only play on fear and greed and selfishness of the people. I hold both parties accountable equally. The idea that evil thrives when good men do nothing has been said countless times in one way, shape or form, and I see it at work everyday in our Nation's capitol.

Right now, Dad and I both agree that we should move to have Bush impeached, and Pelosi censured. Personally, I'd like to see Obama capture the Demican nomination, 'cause the idea of Hillary in the White House makes my skin crawl. The idea of a Republicrat continuing the policies of George W. Bush makes me physically ill. Now, if I had my way, we'd end up with a Green, or Libertarian in the White House, but I don't think enough people out there have the guts to vote for anyone but a major party member.

Coming from the service, I've seen what happens first hand when the bad guys win. The Taliban, and others like them, would reduce us all to living like cavemen again. While, of course, a few would enjoy the conveniences of modern living. It doesn't matter if we become a Socialist Aristocracy, or a Theocracy, us, the "little people" will be trod on even more than we are today. If we do not now find our voice, that voice will be silenced forever.

Kent