The Year of The Year Award

For those of you not familiar with the silly but savage satire of Fafblog I suggest you check it out when you are in need of a chuckle. Today they bring us the Year of the Year award.

.....And a darkhorse candidate was the year 1 AD for Bush-Cheney fans who saw the president as the rebirth of Jesus.

But the winner is:

But in the end we had to give it to 1296 for its blase acceptance of torture, feudalism and theocratic rule.

Didn't think I could find THIS belief out there ...

I think I just need to pass this along without comment:

"U.S. Should Not Help Tsunami Victims."

Read the whole thing. It gets worse as you go on.

(If you're curious about the philosophy behind that awful essay, you can read about it on Wikipedia.)

$8.4 million ...

I'd like to quote something from what I am realizing was one of my most overly hasty posts of the decade:

In the days after September 11, Amazon, eBay, and Yahoo collected millions upon millions from the American public at an amazing speedy rate. Why aren't we doing that now? Because we weren't attacked? BECAUSE IT'S NOT US?

And then point you with a vague sense of mixed pride and embarrassment to here.

$8,404,889.

*blink*

[takes a big bite of post]

Hmm. Tastes like some sort of fowl. Corvus brachyrhynchos, I think.

Why not a drive up window?

Bull Moose reports that not only are house Republicans trying to make it easier for felonious characters like Tom the Bugman Delay to hold leadership positions they are trying to make it easier to accept bribes from lobbyists.

The article [WAPO] also notes that the Delayicans will reverse two additional rules,

"Republicans, returning to the Capitol on Tuesday after increasing their House majority by three seats in the Nov. 2 election, also want to relax a restriction on relatives of lawmakers accepting foreign and domestic trips from groups interested in legislation before the House.

A third proposed rule change would allow either party to stop the House ethics committee from investigating a complaint against a member."

What's next? A drive-by window on the side of the Capitol where lobbyists can conveniently drop off their checks and carry-out their desired legislation? And the window can be attended to by a friendly Tom DeLay who can urge the lobbyists to "super-size" it!

The Moose can only believe that Newt must be downcast and glum over the behavior of his progeny. DeLay was always Newt's adversary - couldn't Newt just offer a few choice words on Fox to admonish these betrayers of his legacy?
The Delayicans might be the gravediggers of the House Republican majority.

The Moose continues to believe that Tom DeLay will be the end of the Republican Party as we know it. Well as I know it right now it can't come soon enough.

Another blog on the roll

Jazz has convinced me that we can put my blog on the blogs to the right. I wasn't sure if this was a good idea, as it isn't politically oriented or even more insight into my mind or opinions. It's a work of fiction that I add to occassionally, and I thought it would be challenging to write in a blog format. So you can see Dear Dear Diary in the listing on the right now. Please, if you do decide it is worth visiting, read from the beginning. Things will go in order, and I am not sure if jumping into the middle will make any sense.

I want to stress again Jazz is not Frank and I am not Jeannie- this is not our life- I made it up. But hopefully, you'll find it horrifyingly funny.

"Moral Values" and George W. Bush

I oppose the death penalty in large part because I question the "Justice" system's ability to impose it fairly. Even those of you who favor the death penalty should be shocked by this article by Sister Helen Prejean in the New York Review of Books, Death Texas Style. It concerns the death penalty in Texas and George W. Bush.

In the twenty-first century, a state governor represents the last vestige of the "divine right of kings," because he has absolute power over life and death� especially when such power is entrusted to politicians motivated more by expediency than by conscience. Faced with a pending execution, no governor wants to appear callous about human life.

What George W. Bush says:

Bush has said: "I take every death penalty case seriously and review each case carefully.... Each case is major because each case is life or death." In his autobiography, A Charge to Keep (1999), he wrote, "For every death penalty case, [legal counsel] brief[s] me thoroughly, reviews the arguments made by the prosecution and the defense, raises any doubts or problems or questions." Bush called this a "fail-safe" method for ensuring "due process" and certainty of guilt.

The reality:

...[Alberto] Gonzales admitted that his conferences with Bush on these cases typically lasted no more than thirty minutes. Berlow confirmed this for himself when he looked at Bush's appointment calendar for the morning of Washington's execution and saw a half-hour slot marked "Al G�Execution."

The callousness of George W. Bush shocked even Bush supporter, conservative Tucker Carlson:

In his autobiography, Bush claimed that the pending execution of Karla Faye Tucker "felt like a huge piece of concrete...crushing me." But in an unguarded moment in 1999 while traveling during the presidential campaign, Bush revealed his true feelings to the journalist Tucker Carlson. Bush mentioned Karla Faye Tucker, who had been executed the previous year, and told Carlson that in the weeks immediately before the execution, Bianca Jagger and other protesters had come to Austin to plead for clemency for her. Carlson asked Bush if he had met with any of the petitioners and was surprised when Bush whipped around, stared at him, and snapped, "No, I didn't meet with any of them." Carlson, who until that moment had admired Bush, said that Bush's curt response made him feel as if he had just asked "the dumbest, most offensive question ever posed." Bush went on to tell him that he had also refused to meet Larry King when he came to Texas to interview Tucker but had watched the interview on television. King, Bush said, asked Tucker difficult questions, such as "What would you say to Governor Bush?"

What did Tucker answer? Carlson asked.

"Please," Bush whimpered, his lips pursed in mock desperation, "please, don't kill me."

Carlson was shocked. He couldn't believe Bush's callousness and reasoned that his cruel mimicry of the woman whose death he had authorized must have been sparked by anger over Karla Faye Tucker's remarks during the King interviews. When King had asked her what she planned to ask Governor Bush, Karla Faye had said she thought that if Bush approved her execution, he would be succumbing to election-year pressure from pro�death penalty voters.

But it can't be blamed on politics or election year pressure.

Bush was receiving thousands of messages urging clemency for Tucker, including one from one of his daughters. "Born-again" evangelists such as Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, normally ardent advocates of execution, urged him to commute Tucker's sentence. When Pope John Paul II urged Bush to grant mercy to Tucker.....

What it can be blamed on Bush's intellectual laziness combined with a complete disregard for human life. Is it really so surprising that he spent 3 days clearing brush in Crawford after the worst human disaster in recorded history?
I suggest that you read the entire article as I just hit the high points here. Sister Prejean sums it up:

As governor, Bush certainly did not stand apart in his routine refusal to deny clemency to death row petitioners, but what does set him apart is the sheer number of executions over which he has presided. Callous indifference to human suffering may also set Bush apart. He may be the only government official to mock a condemned person's plea for mercy, then lie about it afterward, claiming humane feelings he never felt.

OK red staters, these are the "moral values" you voted for, think about it.


Cross posted at MEJ because I think it's important.

Donation idea

Here's an idea that I have lifted off another list.

If you are hosting a party for the New Year, consider putting out a donation basket. Label it clearly as going to one of the many relief organizations for the Tsunami aid. (Or, you can do your favorite charity too). But clearly label it. You may get a hatful of change, but every little bit helps. And then give it!

And please do not drive drunk on Amateur Night. Hire a cab, or use public transport, or stay home. I promise I'll do the same. I've got my bottle of champagne already cooling in the fridge. :)

George W. Bush for President, of Iraq

In the LA Times Patt Morrison gives us a number of reasons why George W. Bush would be the perfect Iraqi President.

The reasons for Bush to become president of Iraq:

� The United States is already on Bush autopilot; his agenda is safe in the hands of Dick Cheney, who wrote a lot of the playbook anyway.

� Karl Rove is getting bored and needs a real challenge, and Iraqi campaigning makes the rhetorical phrase "political bloodletting" real.

� Bush could wear his "mission accomplished" flight suit all the time.

� Iraq is running out of its own politicians.

� Short campaigns mean less time to be caught in tongue-twisting contradictions.

� Bush can institute his Social Security reforms without carping from elderly voters' lobby or economists � Iraqis may not live long enough anyway.

� It guarantees that the U.S. gets exactly the kind of leadership it wants in Baghdad.

� As a Texan, he'll fit right into a country that has more guns than cars.

� Iraq has a crying need for someone who knows the "awl bidness."

� The climate is more like Texas' than D.C.'s.

� Many Iraqi people also speak English with an accent.

� Unmarried daughters have to live at home and stay out of trouble.

� Thanks to Saddam Hussein's precedent, no problem defying international treaties.

� He could find himself signing a death warrant for Hussein, the guy who "tried to kill my dad."

� No alcohol � no temptation to fall off the wagon.

� No term limits.

� Iraqis love faith-based initiatives.

Works for me.

A Mea Culpa from Mike

I'm sorry to clutter up the main page with this, but I feel since I attacked a particular blogger on these pages, I owe him an apology with the same prominence.

My name is Mike, and I'm the guest blogger who made the post below entitled "$40 Mill for the Prez's Party -- $15 Mill for the Homeless, Sick & Dying." The person who is the head honcho of this blog is Jazz, but there are other bloggers, named Mu, Ron, Tami, and Georg. You can tell who the author of a post is by looking at the "posted by" credit directly beneath the posts' title.

If you would like to e-mail me about this article to curse me out, please write me here. Please do so instead of writing to Jazz.

In the aforementioned post, I singled out The Waiter, the blogger behind the well-written funny Waiter Rant blog, as an example of a behavior I don't find useful: simply posting links to charities without actually donating to same. However, at the time that I did this singling out, I really had no evidence one way or the other that he had or had not donated, and it was extremely unfair and wrong of me to single him out in such a fashion. (And, as it turns out, he had indeed donated.)

My intention behind the rant was simply that I do not feel that bloggers should be satisfied with the sole goal of disseminating charity links to increase awareness this time around, especially given the massiveness of this disaster. I've both blogged and read blogs for quite some time, and over that time, I've observed a very concerning behavior/tendency in the Internet community at large: the tendency to consider blogging -- in and of itself -- action on an issue. Don't get me wrong, I do recognize that blogging can indeed have a positive effect on issues, but I honestly don't feel it is as effective as many other actions out there, such as a real paper letter to a Congressperson, attending a rally, finding and attending or donating to a grassroots group for your cause, etc. There are lots of "real life" actions that could have greater effect on extremely concerning issues, if bloggers would simply push their chairs away from the computer. Note that I don't exclude myself from this criticism.

That having been said, it was entirely unfair, and quite wrong, of me to single someone out as an example of this behavior for no good reason aside from they happened to be the last place I had seen the set of links. Waiter, I apologize.

I should also clarify that the quotation from Scripture was meant solely to apply as criticism towards the Administration's lackluster donation of $15 million, which I found extremely unimpressive when compared to expenditures for something as insignificant as the President's various upcoming 2005 inaugural parties. It was not directed to bloggers. This Administration and this President has continually professed a deep tie with God and with Christ. Regardless of my own beliefs, I find particularly galling for him to then ignore one of Christ's most prominent teachings about alleviating suffering. It strikes me as hypocritical and immoral in the extreme.

Sorry for the controversy. We now return you to the normally astute commentary on Running Scared.

$40 Mill for the Prez's Party -- $15 Mill for the Homeless, Sick & Dying

There's a great deal of "let me help by doing figuratively nothing" thinking on the Internet as a result of the tens of thousands dead and millions made homeless as a result of the earthquake and resulting tsunami. What am I criticizing? Posts like this, and I've run across this exact same post -- almost in the exact same order -- on about a dozen blogs now.

Don't get me wrong. I like this guy's blog. He is often a brilliantly funny writer. But this sort of post is worse than nothing, because it gives the poster a sense that he's done something altruistic, when he's actually done nothing useful at all -- just recycled information already made available in hundreds of locations already.

Are you a blogger and you'd like to help? Actually go and give money to those relief organizations. Don't just post links and feel as if you've done something. This is one situation where passing along information is doing nothing. I don't consider that this blog entry, for example, will help anyone actually suffering out there. But when I open my wallet after my next paycheck and send something, that'll help.

In the days after September 11, Amazon, eBay, and Yahoo collected millions upon millions from the American public at an amazing speedy rate. Why aren't we doing that now? Because we weren't attacked? BECAUSE IT'S NOT US?

And ... why not just let our government send relief?

Well, our government isn't sending troops as relief workers. They're needed to die so we can secure our oil companies' profits over in Iraq.

And it's sending money, but it isn't really sending money. Yes, we're sending $15 million, but did you happen to notice we're spending $40 million on the President's inauguration? And that's not even the funds we'll be spending on His Excellency's security.

So if it's going to come from somewhere, it's got to come from the American people. But of course, it won't. I don't have faith in the American populace finding enough compassion within themselves to do anything massively considerable. We're more concerned about our own daily lives.

And as for those idiot neocons in the White House who claim to believe in Jesus Christ, let me outright post part of the passage of Scripture I mentioned on Christmas:

I was hungry and you gave me no meal, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was homeless and you gave me no bed, I was shivering and you gave me no clothes, sick and in prison, and you never visited. Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.

I honestly am not sure if I believe Christ was Lord, but it's amazingly galling that people who confess to believe in His teachings are so blatantly ignoring such a central lesson of their faith when there are, at one whack, millions of hungry, thirsty, homeless, shivering, sick people out there.

Never before has our leaders' hypocrisy been painted in such bright, primary colors.

It is time to invade Cuba

No not Castro, the American military base at Guantanamo Bay.
A Devil's Island for Our Times by Robert Scheer.

It is time to invade Cuba and put an end to what has become another Devil's Island in the annals of government-sanctioned torture. The barbaric treatment of political prisoners on the island is made no more palatable by being conducted in the name of an ideology that claims to be liberating the world from its shackles.

Once again, we are witnesses to the ugly truth bound up in that philosophical contradiction that the ends can justify the means: Desecrations of the human body and spirit can never be righteously justified by high-minded appeals to the needs of the masses. Fortunately, a few brave U.S. intelligence agents have managed to penetrate the security of a morally repugnant Cuban gulag and documented both the barbaric acts occurring on the island and their state-sanctioned rationalizations.

"On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food, or water," wrote an FBI agent who gained access to the prison compound. "Most times they had urinated or defecated on themselves and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more."

Yes, this is not the Brutal regime of that tyrant Castro but the work of the US military.

Even more troubling is that the FBI agents make it clear this is not the work of a few poorly supervised sadists. Their reports refer to what they described as a new � and very much secret � executive order on prisoner treatment by the president at the top of the camp's chain of command, which allowed for severe interrogation tactics, including "sleep deprivation and stress positions" combined with "loud music, interrogators yelling at subjects and prisoners with hoods on their heads."

I was a member of the US military intelligence community from 1968 through 1971. One of the first things we learned was that when you torture people you learn what you want to hear but you don't learn the truth. This behavior only points out the gulag mentality of the democratically elected tyrants in charge. And to think they were reelected on "moral values". This does not represent the moral values of a modern society but the moral values of the Spanish Inquisition. Oh, that's right, I forgot that 50+ percent of the US population actually does want to return to the 16th century. Well it looks like you have gotten your wish.
Note
Jeff at Red Hair & Black Leather tells us why Bush and company may have a reason to invade Cuba. Hint; one word that starts with an "O".

Pets are your responsibility

One of the things that pissed me off over the weekend that I had to swallow and hide and pretend didn't matter for the sake of Family was what my brother and his wife have done to yet another of their cats. Some folks have heard me say a few snide comments about my brother before. He's my baby brother, and when he stops acting like a big baby, I'll stop calling him one.

He does have a very soft heart for animals and children, I can give him credit for that. But he doesn't have a lot of responsibility. He's perfectly happy to take home the cute fuzzy thing, but when it grows up, and he can't take care of it, off to the pound the animal goes. He learned this behaviour from our mother, for which I will never forgive her. For example, George and Colin were acquired from the shelter after my mother dropped them off. I did not speak to her for a month. I am currently smelling Colin's cabbage- scented farts as he sleeps on my lap, but poor George passed on years ago and is buried in our backyard.

When he met his wife, she had two cats, BJ and Midnight. BJ is a holy terror who attacks everyone who visits. Midnight is very sweet and hunts laps. But my sister-in-law loves BJ. Time passed, and my brother wanted a dog, because he loves dogs. So the year they got their first child, he got a big loveable goofy dog. Did I mention he was BIG? The following Kissmoose, he got in his head to get a kitten for his wife, and I did my best to talk him out of it. But he could not walk by the kittens in the mall without wanting to get her one. They named the long haired puffball Sydney, and the poor thing spent most of the time hiding from the other cats and the small child.

When they had another child, they finally realized, "Hey, this is a lot of beings living in this tiny 3-bedroom house." Their solution? Ditch a cat.

They called me. They knew I had volunteered at the pound, and could I recommend a good shelter? I exploded in expletives, of course. If you take an animal home, you take it home. It is your new family member. You get its problems and its joys- and its poop, and you take care of it. And you fix it so it won't breed and make more problems. (At least my brother does believe in spaying and neutering- The PETS anyway). I know the shelters in their area well, and I know how long it would be before a neurotic cat would be killed. I told him to bring the cat here.

We renamed him Pepe, and he's recovered well enough to be out and social and play, and most of the time he gets on with the other cats. You can see his pic here.

I have recovered my anger at their abandonment by now. They do not ask after the cat. But I still brag about him, as I'd brag about any of my kids.

What pissed me off is that I learned that Midnight is not living with them any more. They took her to the shelter. She is solid black, petite, and very affectionate. She may have a chance. But how many people want to adopt 10 year-old cats? I am afraid that she won't have a chance. And they will not tell me which shelter, nor how long ago, and I cannot keep my temper in check to ask for more information. I cannot comprehend how you can keep a cat for 10 years, and then throw it away. It is simply beyond me. I think the only reason why he took the cat to the shelter instead of bringing her here was because of the lecture I gave him last time about ditching pets.

While I don't want to continue to house my family's rejected pets, I will if that is the only option compared to taking them to the shelter. At least here, I know they'll be loved and not tossed out.

We can only hope

Bull Moose tells us about the gift that keeps on giving from the Republican leadership.

The Abramoff/Scanlon/DeLay/Reed/Ney Indian gambling scandal is truly the gift that keeps on giving. Yesterday's Washington Post reported on the latest episode which involves the Indian gambling money enabling Abramoff to wine and dine his trusty Republican allies in luxury boxes at various major sports venues in the nation's capital. It will come as no surprise to veteran Moooseketeers that even the upright, God-fearing, gambling hating GOPers are among those enjoying Abramoff's gaming largesse,

"For most politicians, fundraising is a dreaded chore. But until recently, Rep. John T. Doolittle of California and other members of the House Republican leadership had adopted a painless solution: fundraising events in luxury sports boxes leased largely with the money of Indian gaming tribes, where supporters snacked on catered fare in plush surroundings as they watched the Wizards, Caps, Redskins or Orioles.

"Doolittle, a Mormon, is an ardent opponent of casino gambling, so it is somewhat ironic that he would invite supporters to watch the Wizards play the Sacramento Kings from an MCI Center suite paid for by casino-rich Indian tribes. But the plaque at the door to Suite 204 did not say Chitimacha or Choctaw. It said "Jack Abramoff," a name synonymous with largesse and influence in the GOP-controlled Congress."

And there might be more than the Lord's law that was being violated here because evidently unreported in-kind campaign contributions were being made in these wages of sin skyboxes. That pesky devil is always at work attempting to undermine the righteous ones!

The Feds are on the case and the Moose thinks this may be the beginning of the end for the House Republicans.

In this week of 2005 predictions, the Moose urges one and all to keep an eagle eye trained on this scandal because it may the beginning of the end of House Republican rule. The GOP has achieved in ten years what it took four decades for the Democrats to accomplish. One can only marvel at the extent to which the decadence of power has enveloped the House Republicans in such a brief period of time.

It could be their ethical Waterloo.

We can only hope that the Bugman and his crooked crew will get their just rewards.

Earthquake

Just a quick note, there is plenty of news on the earthquake and tsunami in the Indian Ocean so no need to repeat it here. Brad DeLong does have a first hand account from an American who was on the Indian Coast that is worth a read.

A Christmas story to warm the heart.

From MEJ's Bill in DC

College Republicans' Fundraising Criticized

The College Republican National Committee is under fire for using front organizations to collect millions of dollars in contributions, including money from elderly people with dementia.

During the 2004 campaign, the group sent out direct-mail solicitations under such letterheads as "Republican Headquarters 2004" and "Republican Election Committee."

One four-page letter asked prospects to send $1,000 together with an American flag pin for President Bush to wear to "Republican Headquarters" to ensure that Bush knows "there are millions who are giving him the shield of God to protect him in the difficult days ahead."

In small print at the bottom of one page, the letter notes: "A project of and paid for by College Republican National Committee."

Many donors complained that they thought the money was going directly to the Republican Party, and not to the college group, which is no longer affiliated with the GOP.

Apparently the young "Republicans" are learning to be scam artists early. This should have been enough to warm the heart of the biggest scam artist of all, Karl Rove. The chairman of the College Republican National Committee, Eric Hoplin, is a Rove clone. Of course when the story first broke he claimed that the "liberals" were out to destroy him.