Grieving in the aftermath of the CIA torture report

The report released by the Senate Intelligence Committee this week, the so-called "torture report," confirms a suspicion that many have had all along: the extent of the abuses perpetrated by CIA operatives was greater than previously known, and included techniques much more heinous than the (heinous enough) water-boarding.

I'm sick at heart, not only by the contents of the report, but also and more so by the reaction to it from many of my fellow citizens. Some random quotes from people with whom I've engaged on the topic:

• "I feel no compassion for those animals."
  
• "I will NEVER second guess or criticize those who put their lives on the line to keep all of us safe."
• "When it comes to terrorists there are NO Christian values for them. We don't use Christian values on Muslim terrorists who want to kill all our people in the name of Ala [sic]." 

How easily cast aside, those little angels we've created to comfort ourselves! Matthew 5:39, the Geneva Convention, the Golden Rule --meaningless platitudes, one and all. People! Can't you see that torture debases not only the victims, but the perpetrators? It dehumanizes them. It makes them beasts.

Fear does ugly things to people. And people have been justifying atrocities in the name of God for thousands of years. There's nothing new in it. But to see it unfold before my own eyes... oh, America! I grieve!

Foolishly I'd hoped that at this point in life I might have endured most of my disillusionment. This report, and the reaction to it, exposes that sentiment as naive.

So I'll say this: for my part, I advocate prosecution of all perpetrators of torture, regardless of their nationality or faith and no matter the justifications they put forth. But the apologist voices (most of them, the very people who regularly complain that the United States has strayed from its "Christian values") ensure that that will never happen.

And I'll still allow myself one hope: the hope that I will never condone torture. To do otherwise would be to relinquish my humanity and I won't do it!

I pray I have the strength to live up to that conviction.

Islamophobia comes to Portland

Pamela Geller's soon-to-appear-on-Trimet message

Nothing gets me more fired up than raging ignorance dressed up as patriotism.  Unfortunately, there's a lot of that these days.

Check this story from Oregon Live:

Anti-Islamic ad being posted on TriMet vehicles because transit agency is locked in by court ruling

As stated in the story, the provocative ad is from the so-called American Freedom Defense Initiative, which is an anti-Islamic group.  It's leader, Pamela Geller, does the redneck lecture circuit, preaching hate to the yahoos.

So what kind of a woman is Pamela Geller? Let her speak for herself:

• "Islam is the most antisemitic, genocidal ideology in the world."
  
  
• "Obama is a third worlder and a coward. He will do nothing but beat up on our friends to appease his Islamic overlords. All this is going down while Obama plays footsie at his nuclear nonsense campfire -- sucking up to Iran's enablers while beating up our allies."
  
• "It is well known that Obama allegedly was involved with a crack whore in his youth. Very seedy stuff. Why aren't [the media] pursuing that story? Find the ho, give her a show! Obama allegedly trafficked in some very deviant practices. Where's the investigation? . . . Back in the early 80's, there were only two reasons to travel to Pakistan. Jihad or drugs. I think he went for the drugs and came back with jihad."
   
• "Jews refuse to get on Obama's Trains". . . "Obama is pressuring Jews to "evacuate" from parts of Israel? And what Warsaw ghetto does the muhammadan [sic] president have in mind? I think I am gonna hurl. The Jews will not go. The Jews will not submit to this century's nazis [sic] and Mansourian poser."
   
• (On the passage of health care): "The moochers and the looters^*, the crooks and degenerates voted at 1 am this morning to rip the constitution to shreds, to rape the American people and to nationalize medicine."
   
• Repeatedly accuses Obama of being a Muslim: Geller's blog contains 267 posts tagged "Muslim in the White House?"
   
• Geller claims that "devout Muslims should be prohibited from military service" because she believes that Adolf Hitler and Nazism were inspired by Islam.
   
• In the wake of the terrorist attacks in Norway committed by Anders Breivik, she claimed that the young people killed were bound to become "leaders of the party responsible for flooding Norway with Muslims who refuse to assimilate, who commit major violence against Norwegian natives including violent gang rapes, with impunity, and who live on the dole." 

^*Note the Ayn Rand terminology.  Geller is a Rand disciple.
 

Pamela Geller

Geller claims that her organization is pro-Israel, but American Jewish groups see it differently.  Here's what the Jewish Community Relations Council and the American Jewish Committee had to say about the ads:

"We are steadfast in our support of Israel and our concern about the growing threat of Islamic radicalism, and steadfast in our opposition to anti-Muslim stereotypes."

Not that this statement gives Geller any pause, of course.   I don't know what kind of money there is to be made in peddling anti-Muslim hate speech, but at the very least, she gets lots of public attention.

If she was really pro-Israel, one might be inclined to believe that she'd have something to say about that Nazi group that tried to establish itself in John Day a while back.  But, no.  Nary a word about that.  I guess Nazis just don't stir redneck passions like Muslims.

There's nothing to be done about it.  Free speech is protected by the Constitution.

But I'll tell you this, as the spouse of a practicing Muslim:  Geller's gum-flapping puts me on dangerous ground.  Because the first time someone insults my wife in my presence, there will be consequences.  I can guarantee that.

Super Committee fail

With a team like this, how could they fail?

It should come as no surprise to anyone that the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, the so-called "super committee" has failed to reach an agreement about how to proceed in addressing the budget "crisis" facing this nation. 

The committee was formed to find a grand compromise between Democrats and Republicans over how to significantly reduce the federal budget deficit though some combination of budget cuts and revenue sources.  But now, after weeks of speculation by the political punditry, committee members from both sides of the aisle are admitting that they won't be able to reach an agreement in time to meet the deadline set for it.

But, of course, the "super committee" was never a serious endeavor.

Put aside all the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the supposed "death by a thousand cuts:"  the mandatory and automatic cuts to defense, education, and public housing programs scheduled for when the committee fails.  Most of those cuts don't go into effect until 2013... after next year's national election.

This highly-publicized failure is all part of the plan.  Both sides wanted it.  Both sides worked to attain it.  Both sides will use it to the hilt between now and November of next year.  (Who says bipartisanship is dead?)

Republicans will point to the failure as an indication that President Obama and the Democrats are not willing to cut entitlement programs and instead will demand tax increases.  Democrats will point to the failure as an indication that Republicans are beholden to corporations and lobbyists and care nothing at all about the hoi polloi.  And behind it all, the set-to-expire Bush tax cuts hang in the balance.

The "super committee" failure is the non-event to which both sides will point in an attempt to fire up their respective bases for the up-coming election.

Right now, I believe the Democrats have the upper hand.  The Occupy movement is still getting headlines, and may very well have contributed to the recent progressive electoral victories.  The national dialog has changed from a discussion about the debt crisis to a discussion about unemployment and income disparity.  Republicans have no ground to stand on with either of those issues.

But who knows which way the ever-shifting political winds will be blowing by next fall?

Rick Perry needs a history lesson

"Stahs and bahs forevuh!"

Is Rick Perry getting senile?  I ask because he seems to have trouble remembering his own public remarks.  Did he graduate high school?  Because he also has an astonishing ignorance of the US Constitution.  You know?  That (supposedly) sacred document which he so piously claims to revere?

Now that he is an announced candidate for the presidency, Perry says all his rooty-tooty redneck quips, all his nutty neo-Confederate annunciations, all his twangy Texas tough talk --all of that was taken out of context.

Last night, on Sean Hannity's show, Perry denied ever having suggested that Texas might choose to secede from the United States rather than bend the knee to the federal government.

But there's a problem.  His words are in the public record. Here's what he said:

"We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that? But Texas is a very unique place, and we're a pretty independent lot to boot." --Governor Rick Perry, April 15, 2009

Now he says he didn't mean it the way it sounded.

That's not all.  Here's what he said more recently. 



Here's the money quote, in black and white:

...when we came into the nation in 1845, we were a republic, we were a stand-alone nation. And one of the deals was, we can leave anytime we want. So we’re kind of thinking about that again. --Texas Governor Rick Perry

Aside from the offensive nature of Perry's remarks, they reveal a remarkable ignorance of the US Constitution.  This is on par with any of the stupid things that Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann has ever said. In 1869, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled on this constitutional misinterpretation, saying:

 [t]he union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation, except through revolution, or through consent of the States. --Texas vs. White

As I wrote, back in April, 2009:

Maybe someone can remind [Perry] that Texas actually did secede from the Union in 1861. Ken Burns made an excellent television documentary that can help educate the governor as to how it turned out last time.

The sight of Rick Perry standing on stage, holding his hand over his heart makes me want to puke.  A secessionist playing the patriot.  Simply revolting.

Can we get over it, already?

Plus ça change...

Although pundits and politicians have been reluctant up to now to call a spade a spade, conditions are progressing to the point where no one can deny it and remain credible:  the United States (and the world) is in the midst of a crisis unlike any we have seen in the last 80 years.  National unemployment hovers near 9% (that's the "official" rate; some analysts put the "actual" rate much higher).  Our infrastructure is falling apart.  Our national treasury is plundered.  An entire population, millions of people, exists unacknowledged within our borders.

It's a crisis of our own making, the result of our lack of vision and leadership; the result of our mutual contempt. 

We hate each other.  Not as individuals, mind you.  But as tribes, as factions.  Conservatives demonize the poor and the unemployed (as well as racial and religious minorities).  Liberals demonize corporations, religious fundamentalists and plutocrats.  And despite President Obama's continued efforts to bridge the gap, we despise each other so much that it seems impossible to work together.

...plus c'est la même chose

I want no association with beasts like Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe, Virginia Congressman Eric Cantor, South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint, or Minnesota Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann.  To the extent those creatures are aware of me, they hate me.  They hate people like me.  They reveal it in every public utterance, in every hypocrisy, in every mealy-mouthed slur. And, as far as I'm concerned, the sentiment is reciprocated.

So can we at least get over the red, white, and blue flag-worship fakery?  Can we refrain from pious and hypocritical declarations of patriotism?  Can we lay-off the crocodile tears that we shed every time we see some poor grunt come back from Afghanistan to hug his wife and kids?  Can we quit holding hands and singing "God Bless America?" 

Maybe that Texas lizard Rick Perry had it right, anyway.  Let's quit pretending that there is anything more important than destroying each other.  Let's be honest about the depth of our mutual hatred. 

Bring on Ragnarok!

Wisconsin update:  The outcome of the special recall elections in Wisconsin is inconclusive.  Democrats did manage to unseat two Republican state senators, but could not manage a third, leaving the Wisconsin Senate in the hands of the GOP with a one vote margin.  Both sides are claiming victory, but for my part, I'm disappointed.  I had hoped and believed that Wisconsin might be the beginning of something big, a peaceful populist uprising.

We are idiots

Well, here we are.  Roughly 96 hours away from a Federal credit default.  And doesn't it seem fitting?

This predicament is completely of our own making.  We, the citizenry of the United States of America, have entrusted our government to ignorant primitives enslaved by outlandish superstitions.  Earth is 7000 years old.  Cutting taxes raises revenue.  Global warming is a hoax.  

To tell you the truth, I can't make up my mind whether to hope that Congress can somehow turn us back from the abyss or if it might not be better to just let the whole house of cards come down.  After all, even as the castles crumbled, there would be some mighty beautiful flame-outs --corner office swindlers, robber barons, captains of embezzlement roasted and destroyed publicly.  That would be a glorious sight.  But, of course, the rest of us will burn too.

If the national election of 2004 didn't already prove it, this self-inflicted debacle ought to sweep aside any lingering doubts.  We are a nation of idiots.  Thank you, Tea Party.

Peter King and Charlie Sheen

King of the cowards

Peter King, New York Representative and Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, started his Muslim witch-hunt on Capitol Hill yesterday, in spite of the emotional statement of Minnesota Democrat Keith Ellison, the only Muslim member of Congress.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

It's hard to attribute Representative King's actions to anything other than naked pandering to ignorant Islamophobes, which, as we have seen, constitute a decent share of the so-called "Tea Party" movement. 

Remember when the Fox News freaks were all aghast about the 2009 report issued by the Department of Homeland Security warning of the dangers of right-wing extremist groups?  Oh, how the conservatives beat their breasts and wailed that they were being wronged!

But these same "freedom-loving patriots" have no problem investigating communities of a particular religious faith, Constitution be damned!  And demagogues like Peter King are happy to accommodate.  Don't look for any congressional investigations into the various right-wing terror incidents that have occurred with increasing frequency since Barack Obama was elected president.  (Just last night, in Spokane, Washington, the FBI arrested Kevin William Harpham, a known associate of the Neo-Nazi group, National Alliance, for attempting to use a "weapon of mass destruction" at a Martin Luther King Day parade in that city.  Read more here.)

Well, we knew that the 112th Congress would be bringing a big load of sh*t in with them.  Neither John Boehner nor Eric Cantor nor any other Republican faker can rein them in.

But, from a very (very) personal standpoint, this pogrom-in-the-birthing is a huge red flag.  People like Peter King are beyond shame.  Worse, they are dangerous.  Extremely dangerous.

A man coming apart

Speaking of shame:  Why are so many people seemingly obsessed with the antics of Charlie Sheen?  The man is obviously suffering.  He's obviously in crisis.

There's nothing to see here, folks.  Why take voyeuristic pleasure in watching him dissolve?  Haven't we all seen this with people in our own lives?  Haven't we all known people who have come apart?  (Indeed, how many of us have done so ourselves?)

It seems cruel and callous.  Let the man and his family find a way through this crisis without all the public jeering and humiliation.

Cookin' up a pogrom

Republican Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee Peter King (NY-03) is all set to hold hearings, which he has entitled "The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response."  Read more here.  Peter King, of the Republican Party (which claims to hold that government is too intrusive), plans to scrutinize the communities of fellow citizens to determine the extent to which they are "radicalized."

American citizens, does that make you feel uncomfortable at all? 

Have a look at this report from Orange County, California (home of the original Disneyland)...



Makes ya proud, don't it?   This hits home for me, of course.  But this country has always carried with it a nasty nativist sentiment that manifests itself in ugly ways.  It's nothing new.

The problem comes when this kind of bigotry is legitimized by public officials, as with the councilwoman in the video.  That's why I find Representative King's hearings to be not only insulting, but dangerous.

Here's what  Japanese-American lawmaker Mike Honda wrote this week in a San Francisco Chronicle op-ed:

Rep(resentative) King's intent seems clear: To cast suspicion upon all Muslim Americans and to stoke the fires of anti-Muslim prejudice and Islamophobia.  This should be deeply troubling to Americans of all races and religions. An investigation specifically targeting a single religion implies, erroneously, a dangerous disloyalty, with one broad sweep of the discriminatory brush.

(It's worth noting that Mike Honda spent his early childhood in a Japanese internment camp in the 40s).

We're not talking about some backwater cult here, for God's sake.  When government identifies and investigates communities based on their Constitutionally-protected religious practices, an important safeguard is violated.  As a society, we have set foot on a path toward pogrom.

Sister Sarah and the Tea-baggers

"Me no need fancy teleprompter."

Sarah Palin was at it again last weekend, blathering away in her dizzy, half-baked manner; spouting lots of cotton candy rhetoric, finely-tuned to appeal to tea-bagger ears; driving "serious" Republicans to distraction. And while it is perhaps best to just ignore her (the way one might ignore the public histrionics of a mentally-debilitated homeless person or a down-on-his-luck drunkard), so hilarious and revealing are her antics, that I simply cannot.  The vacuous drivel that comes from her mouth is stunningly sophomoric.  And it reveals so very much about her, about the people who purport to "believe in her." 

The venue was the much-ballyhooed "Tea Party Convention," held in Nashville, Tennessee, over the weekend:  supposedly the opening shot of a grass-roots movement that will right all of our country's wrongs by bringing about a "return to conservative principles."  And although the price for admission to the event ($549 per person.) seemed to belie its supposed grass-roots nature, there were enough attendees to put up a hearty "Run, Sarah!  Run!" when the former Alaska governor stood at the podium.

In support of my previous speculation that Ms. Palin is remaining on the national political scene merely to harvest dollars from her gullible and pathetic fans, the former governor of Alaska was paid over $100,000 to speak at the event.

But, don't worry, tea-baggers.  She promises to reinvest all her proceeds into "the movement" (har, har, har).  And, in the meantime, you can continue to pay handsomely for all her mavericky wit and wisdom.

Take, for example, these jewels:

• “How’s that hopey-changey thing workin’ out for you?”
  
• “To win that war, we need a commander in chief, not a professor of law."
  
• “This is about the people, and it’s bigger than any one king or queen of a tea party, and it’s a lot bigger than any charismatic guy with a teleprompter.” 

Wise.  Visionary.

But, alas, some of the sheen was taken off this shining vision for America when it was revealed that Sarah made use of her own makeshift teleprompter in the interview subsequent to her triumphal speech.  During that interview, Sarah bravely fielded questions that had been scripted and submitted to her in advance. But, careful examination of the video reveals that she had scribbled crib notes on the palm of her hand!

It's an old trick that I used myself back in my college days when I used to sweat calculus exams. But instead of trigonometric derivatives, Sarah had scrawled these powerful words: "energy, tax cuts, lift American spirits."

Profound. 

Well, I'll tell ya:  as she continues leading her faithful into a slow-motion political car crash, all the while relieving them of their disposable income, I'm positively flummoxed as to whether I should laugh or cry.

Oh, please...oh, please!

 And yet, I always choose the former.

Rush Limbaugh and the NFL

Pig to buy Rams?

Word has it that right-wing blowhard Rush Limbaugh wants to buy the St. Louis Rams' NFL franchise. Big football fan, apparently.

But Rush's big mouth is apparently getting in the way of a smooth power grab of the poorly-managed team. DeMaurice Smith, the executive director of the NFL Players union released a statement on Saturday, opposing Limbaugh's bid, saying "I've spoken to the Commissioner [Roger Goodell] and I understand that this ownership consideration is in the early stages. But sport in America is at its best when it unifies, gives all of us reason to cheer, and when it transcends. Our sport does exactly that when it overcomes division and rejects discrimination and hatred." (Read about it here.)

Rush has a history with the NFL, of course. Back in 2003, he was a color commentator for the ESPN show, Sunday NFL Countdown. Being the gasbag that he is, Rush stepped right into it when he made the following remarks about Philadelphia Eagles quarterback, Donovan McNabb, who is African-American:

I think what we’ve had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn’t deserve… --Fat Rush, 2003

Many found Rush's injection of race into the discussion to be offensive. After all, the NFL became racially integrated in 1946, a generation before the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (at least with respect to players --with coaches and owners, not so much). ESPN summarily showed Rush the door soon after he made these comments.

Rush Limbaugh is a petty, vindictive man in my judgment. And I suspect that this bid to buy an NFL franchise is a way for him to flip the bird at ESPN and at people who find him offensive. Whatever, Rush.

Two of the four black NFL players that entered the NFL in 1946 were Kenny Washington and Woody Stobe, who ironically, played for the Los Angeles Rams. I used to be a big Ram fan myself. The Rams were my team, mostly due to the fact that my dad's one-time football coach at Oregon State, Tommy Prothro, was the head coach of the Rams from 1971 through 1973. But I long ago gave up on the NFL, mostly because of the ridiculous catalog of rules that governed the game. By the time the Rams had achieved their only Superbowl victory in 1999, I had already lost interest.

Nonetheless, I hope Limbaugh's bid fails. I know that such a failure would gall him. And that alone is enough for me. But if the NFL rejects the bid, there is a possibility that it just might get through to some of the Ditto-heads that lap up Limbaugh's spew like cats at the milk pail: Rush Limbaugh is really not anyone to admire.

Tea-bagger sturm und drang is spent

Don't look now, folks, but those who advocate real health care reform, with a public option to pin back the ears of greedy health insurance executives, are going to win the health care debate. Earlier in the week, Republicans were positively gleeful that "public option" amendments to the health care reform bill put forth by the Senate Finance Committee failed to garner enough votes to be included. But watch and see who gets the last laugh.

Since that time, Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) has crafted an amendment that would allow individual states the option of negotiating with insurance companies for lower rates. In effect, this is a "back-door" public option, although Senator Cantwell studiously avoided calling it such. And it did make it out of committee, albeit by a single vote.

Consider also that Senator Tom Harken (D-IA) said on September 29 that he believes there are enough votes in the Senate to pass a public option by a "comfortable" margin. Then, just yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) stated flatly that a public option will be in the final health care bill.

There are all kinds of procedural hurdles to overcome (including an almost certain Republican attempt to filibuster) and some tough negotiations that must occur, but when the Democrats start talking like this publicly, it is a good indication that something is afoot.

So, what about all that sturm und drang that occurred in August, when the tea-baggers were waving their moronic signs and bleating about "death panels" and "pulling the plug on Grandma?" What about all that shrill wailing about encroaching socialism? Nascent fascism?

Well, there's a Mexican proverb that sums it up nicely: Perro que ladra no muerde. "The dog that barks doesn't bite." Or, put another way, they got nothin'.

When President Obama signs a health care reform bill that includes a public option, all the Glenn Beck tea-baggers and Rush Limbaugh dittoheads and Fox News zombies will once again be reminded that, although they have a Big Voice, there really just aren't that many of them. At least when compared to the overwhelming number of doctor's unions, labor unions, and, indeed, the general public, all of which support some form of "public option" by overwhelming majorities.

You poor clown! You lose again.

The tea-baggers are about to be handed another big defeat. Add it to the ever-growing list that starts with the 2007 mid-term elections, runs through the destruction of Junior Bush's Social Security reform ponzi scheme, the slaughter of the Republicans in last year's general election, and most recently culminated in the passage of the President's stimulus package early in the year.

The Republicans, for their part, are in dire straits. The rhetoric has devolved to the point where any hint of a willingness to work with the President or the Democratic majorities evokes hysterical vitriol. And, having catered to the every whim of their "base," Republicans have alienated anyone who is not a tea-bagger.

They'll continue to scream bloody murder as we move forward. But they can't stop it. Sound and fury, signifying nothing!

Tea-baggers and Dear Leader

Remember the uproar from freaked-out and freaky tea-baggers a couple weeks ago when President Obama scheduled a televised speech to schoolkids? The tea-baggers nearly lost it, fearing that their children would leave home in the morning, happy and carefree, full of the Fear of God, only to return in the afternoon as mindless Obama zombies, hell-bent on imposing socio-fascism on the nation.

Then, after the President delivered the speech, urging kids to pay attention in class, to be responsible for their own education, to stay in school, the tea-baggers were once again revealed as hysterical fools. Even Drum Major Newt Gingrich admitted that the President made a good speech.

Well, last week, tea-baggers attained new heights of apoplexy over this video footage of school kids in south New Jersey singing a song to welcome President Obama, who visited their school.



Well, I watched the vid, and the whole thing seems pretty harmless. But, given that I'm inclined to support President Obama, I'll allow that my opinion might be a tad colored. As I have said before, I think it is important that we do not indulge in a cult of personality, that we not be lured into the "Dear Leader" mentality. So, perhaps tea-bagger concerns about "indoctrination" deserve some consideration.

But tea-baggers, apparently, are selective in their objections. Check this vid of some nutty Christians and a cardboard cut-out of Junior Bush.

Talk about creepy! This video twists at my guts. Watching it, I experienced emotions similar to those I felt at a Christian rock concert I attended while I was in high school. The band of musicians (using that term loosely) had a lengthy proselytizing session, mid-concert, during which they did their "cry-pray-testify" thing. Traumatic!

Mockery and ridicule are generally good tools for dealing with people like this. But be wary. History has demonstrated it time and again: there are very few entities so dangerous as a bunch of "Christians" hopped-up on the Holy Spook. A crowd of nuts like this is right at the point where it starts picking up stones and casting them at "sinners."

What happened in Daniel Boone National Forest?

Daniel Boone National Forest, Kentucky

This morning I heard a story on the news that ought to raise alarm bells all over this country. It certainly startled and disturbed me. A federal census bureau worker, Bill Sparkman, 51, was found hanged with the word "fed" scrawled across his chest in the Daniel Boone National Forest in Kentucky. The body was discovered on September 12th, but the story is only now becoming public.

The FBI is investigating the case in coordination with Kentucky State Police to determine if the death is the result of foul play and, if so, whether it was related to Sparkman's status as a federal employee.

I'm not jumping to any conclusions. Let the investigation run its course. If the death is the result of foul play, there are any number of possibilities. For example, considering the remoteness of the (potential) crime scene, perhaps Sparkman stumbled onto a moonshine operation or a ganja cultivation plot and was silenced by its operators.

That's a dark thought, but another possibility is even darker.

Imagine some backwoods Kentucky hick, half-crazed on corn-squeezings and Glenn Beck, sitting in his tar paper shack with his AM radio blaring, storing up ammo for when the Feds come to put him in a FEMA concentration camp and force him to bow down to the n**ger. Along comes the unsuspecting and harmless Sparkman, with his clipboard and his questionnaire...

Not a pleasant subject for contemplation.

This could very well be another example of the right-wing domestic terrorism that has been plaguing this nation ever since the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. In just the last 15 months, there were the June arrests in Pima County, AZ. There was the incident at the Holocaust Museum, also in June. There was the murder of Dr. George Tiller in May. There was the July, 2008, incident where a terrorist opened fire with a shotgun in a church in Powell, Tennessee.

William E. Sparkman Junior: substitute teacher, Boy Scout volunteer, single father, and cancer survivor

If it turns out that this is a politically-motivated homicide, I wonder, will the media and government finally start using the term "terrorism" to describe this type of activity?

President Carter names the beast

"There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president."--President Jimmy Carter, September 16, 2009

Thank you, President Carter.

We've been tip-toeing all around this ever since the media made note of the vitriol that was being expressed at some of the Republican campaign rallies last year. And, let's face it, Republicans have become experts at soft-peddling their racism in such a way as to make it palatable for Middle America. Now, watch how they howl in the wake of President Carter's truth-speaking.

Charming, eh?

President Carter's remark was offered as commentary about the breech of decorum exhibited by US Representative Joe Wilson (R-SC) at President Obama's speech before a joint session of Congress. In effect, President Carter contends that Wilson's outburst was a sop to the racist element of the Republican party.

Representative Wilson's past behavior does little to dispel such assertions. He's an admirer of the wretched segregationist and original Dixiecrat, Strom Thurmond. The same Strom Thurmond who once said: "I wanna tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that there’s not enough troops in the army to force the Southern people to break down segregation and admit the nigra race into our theaters, into our swimming pools, into our homes, and into our churches." After Thurmond's death, when it became public knowledge that the late Senator had an illegitimate half-black daughter, Wilson denounced the story as a smear, even though Thurmond's own family acknowledged the woman's story as true. Wilson vehemently defended flying the seditious Confederate battle flag over South Carolina's state capitol. Wilson is a member of "The Sons of Confederate Veterans," which according to the Southern Poverty Law Center is a racist group.

As further evidence of the racism inherent in right-wing protests, consider also that, according to Ronald Kessler, author of In the President's Secret Service, the number of death threats against President Obama is four times the number of such threats against previous presidents. Are we to imagine that this is a result of President Obama's policies?

Although almost universally ignorant, not all tea-baggers are overt racists. But there is no denying the ugly, racist tone that permeates the tea-bagger protests.

President Carter has lived in the South, in Dixie, for his entire life. He is in a position to know the underlying sentiments of that region.

Regardless of the rhetoric that comes from hapless clown Michael Steele, or from drunken, lugubrious John Boehner, the fact is that there is a significant number of racists in the GOP; that the GOP is afraid to alienate these racists; that all of this is the result of Nixon's infamous Southern Strategy which came in the wake of the Civil Rights Act.

The White House, for its part, is trying to downplay the former President's remarks. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said "The president does not think [political opposition] is based on the color of his skin."

I suppose that President Obama might believe that. But he's a smart guy. A lot smarter than me. So, I doubt it. Politically, it makes sense for him to want to avoid this discussion. It's not a comfortable topic. But President Carter, showing true courage, has dragged the beast out into the middle of the room.

Here it is, people. What are we going to do about it?

Tea-bagger ignorance: Socialism = Fascism

Sigh...

I wonder, is it reasonable to ask tea-baggers, those apoplectic neo-Confederates who lost their political power in the last two elections, to limit their rantings to terminology that they actually understand? (Of course, such a stipulation might further reduce their diatribes to monosyllabic grunting, chest-thumping, and urinary territory-marking, but still...)

The level of ignorance on display at some of these town-hall meetings is just embarrassing. For example, a short while ago, I caught some video footage of an angry tea-bagger storming out of a town-hall held by Senator Arlen Specter (who is showing surprising fortitude in this debate). The tea-bagger looked to be a white (of course) man in his mid-forties. As he left he shouted at Specter: "You're a socialist, fascist pig!"

See? He was doing fine until he got to the big words.

Poor Mr. Tea-bagger is obviously unaware of the inherent contradiction in his furious outburst. Conflating fascism and socialism is like describing someone as "fat-skinny," or "stupid-smart." On the ideological spectrum, the two philosophies are at opposite extremes.

First, a quick definition of each, courtesy of Oxford English dictionary:

• Socialism: Freq. with capital initial. A theory or system of social organization based on state or collective ownership and regulation of the means of production, distribution, and exchange for the common benefit of all members of society; advocacy or practice of such a system, esp. as a political movement. Now also: any of various systems of liberal social democracy which retain a commitment to social justice and social reform, or feature some degree of state intervention in the running of the economy.
  
  
• Fascism: The principles and organization of Fascists. Also, loosely, any form of right-wing authoritarianism.

Note that socialism is loosely associated with progressive or left-wing philosophy, while fascism is (again, loosely) associated with that of the so-called right, or conservative movement. Still, these definitions are fairly vague and general, especially the fascism definition. So, maybe a little historical perspective might help.

Back in the day...

Best buddies?

Conveniently, we need go back only 70 years or so to get a couple real-world, contemporaneous examples.

For an example of socialism, there is Uncle Joe Stalin's Soviet Union. Of course, this is an imperfect example when one considers that the socialism that Karl Marx wrote about was modeled for industrialized nations. Most certainly not for Russia which, at the beginning of the 20th century, was an agrarian nation. And Stalin, the paranoid sociopath the he was, mostly used socialism as a vehicle to achieve his dictatorial powers. But in broad terms, we can see that there was some loose adherence to socialism through the nationalization of industry, state-control of distribution and exchange, and the (largely fraudulent) establishment of a "classless" society.

On the other side, we have Adolf Hitler's German version of fascism, which protected the existing social order by suppressing working-class movements. Fascists hated and feared labor unions and anything that smacked of populism. Tactically, fascists made good use of scape-goats (Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and socialists) to instill fear in the German hoi polloi.

These two states would seem to be diametrically opposed, yes? And that's why the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty of Non-Aggression, signed in August 1939, was such an incredibly cynical and despicable development. The idea that two nations, both of which were gearing up for war, would sign an agreement like that was appalling. (But, of course, we know now, just as many knew back then, that Hitler and Stalin each thought he had pulled a fast one on the other. As my brother-in-law, Tim, once said, "They were signing with one hand, and cocking their pistols with the other.")

And now we have...

Tea-bagger propaganda poster

So, as I've stated before, I don't feel that I should complain about the protests that are occurring all over the country, even if they are being organized and incited by Freedom Works or demagogues like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. People have a right to protest in this country.

And, if these angry fake patriots want to call those who advocate health care reform that includes a strong public option "socialists," that's okay with me, too. (I was registered to vote as a member of the Socialist Party of Oregon for years.) I suppose, in a certain sense, the idea of a public option, taken together with the recent government acquisition of some private industry, hints at socialism.

But, if that is true, is it not also true that knee-jerk objection to a change in the system, that visceral defense of the status quo, and the scape-goating of undocumented immigrants, "terrorists," and that old right-wing favorite, homosexuals, smacks of fascism?

Italian fascist propaganda poster

If they're going to do that, if they're going to call us "socialists," is it too much to ask that they then apply the "fascist" term to the contingent for which it is most apt? That is to say, to themselves?

Given their dim recognition of anything beyond the blather that gets fed to them through right-wing media channels, I'd say probably so. Ah, well.

Health care, capitalism, and angry tea-baggers

Bewildered tea-baggers

Good news, everybody! Congress is out for its August recess; its various members are holding town hall meetings to discuss health care reform. Now, we can all have our concerns and ideas heard, considered, and debated in the dignified and time-honored democratic tradition...

Heh. Right.

The reality, the phenomenon that is occurring all over the country, is that these town hall meetings have become passionate shouting matches, replete with crass insults and barely suppressed hatred... in short, they are real life replications of the nasty debates that occur daily on the internet.

So, what's behind all the passion? First, let's examine the health care issue.

Fear of Big Brother health care

There are genuine, legitimate concerns about health care reform. But those concerns aren’t being aired or debated. Instead, we have Sarah Palin talking about “Obama Death Panels.” We have private insurance companies hiring Freedom Works to perpetuate utterly false claims about government-mandated euthanasia.
The hard reality is that health care rationing is real. It always has been and always will be part of human society. It is an uncomfortable and difficult issue. I don’t pretend to know the correct course of action when, say, a 93-year-old is diagnosed with a kidney disease that can only be cured with very expensive treatments. I think those decisions are best left to the family.
But rationing is already being practiced by private insurance companies. Private entities deny health care claims based on the cost of treatments. Think about it: smaller payouts mean more profits! It’s capitalism. That’s the function of a corporation.
With a government-run health care system, modeled on the current successful and popular Medicare, the profit motive is removed. No one gets rich in government by denying claims.
Some of the objections to a public option are these:

1. A government program would "squeeze out" private sector companies.
   
   So, what's the problem? Why should a capitalist worry about the private sector? Laissez-faire capitalism is all about competition. If private insurance companies really are more efficient and provide better service than a government plan would provide, people will be willing to pay for their services, yes?
   
2. Health care recipients, who now ostensibly have legal recourse if their insurance providers deny claims, would somehow lose this option in a government run program.
   
   I don’t know what legal options will be presented to people who participate in a public option. But I do know that people go bankrupt all the time trying to challenge health insurance providers' claim denials. Generally, the providers are in much better position to afford legal bills than are private citizens. You can challenge private insurers in theory. But in practice you’ve got no chance. They can afford real lawyers.
   
3. A government health care program would be enormously costly.
   
   The Obama administration argues that reforming health care will actually save the government and the country money by containing health care costs. I shell out hundreds of dollars every month to my health care provider. Personally, I’d rather pay that same amount in taxes for a single payer plan run by the fed.
   
   (And, of course, this sudden concern expressed by conservatives for fiscal responsibility rings a little hollow when we make note that few of them complained about paying for the Iraq War, which has cost $3 trillion over 8 years. And Bush kept all of it off the books, paying with supplemental funding that was all borrowed directly from Chinese banks.)

Angry...so very angry
There's a lot of anger out there. I'm hesitant to complain about it. Fake patriots and deluded corporate shills have a right to scream and shout, just as left-wingers do (and did, throughout the Junior Bush years).

"I'm afraid, and it's your fault!"

Right-wingers, of course, have thrown all kinds of bigoted labels at people who protested the war in Iraq, people who demanded (and continue to demand) that the Bush administration be held accountable for torture and Constitutional abuses, people who despise Bush. So, no sense in complaining about the name-calling, eh?

But, I find it... amusing? interesting?... that there is so much passion around the issue. God knows, most of these people showing up at the town hall meetings have never before been to a public discussion. I believe that, at the core, there is an element of …something unseemly …in these town hall “protests.” I find it doubtful that the people at these town halls are all that angry about the health care proposal. I think what they are really angry about is that they lost the election; that they are politically exiled; that they are no longer dominant politically. They sense that the nation is fundamentally changing. Changing forever. And they will never again have the political dominance to which they have become accustomed.

They're afraid. They're bewildered and confused. And so they shriek and growl.
There is no political discourse in this country at the moment. I don’t know if we’ll ever return to anything that looks like civility.

Well, if it’s going to be mob rule, choose your mob and let’s get it on.

GOP reduced to neo-Confederates

We got too many Jim DeMints and Tom Coburns. It's the Southerners. They get on TV and go 'errrr, errrrr.' People hear them and say, 'These people, they're Southerners. The party's being taken over by Southerners. What the hell they got to do with Ohio?' --retiring Senator George Voinovich (R-OH)

I wonder, has Senator Voinovich been reading my blog? Now that he's retiring, Senator Voinovich seems to have recognized something that has been apparent to anyone not blinded by red/blue political zealotry.

The Republican party, in a sublime twist of historical irony, is now firmly in the hands of the descendants of the Old South. Some 140 years after Appomattox, the toxic spirit of the Confederacy lives on in the form of the very party that crushed and humiliated them in the 1860s. Alas, for Abraham Lincoln!

So, what is the basis for this assertion?

Firstly, so-called "conservatives" in the Republican party have very nearly succeeded in driving out anyone that does not adhere to the hard line. Senator Arlen Specter is the most recent example, of course. But, before him, there was Senator Jim Jeffords. And, as has been mentioned many times since the last national election, when Congressman Chris Shays (R-CT) was defeated, the GOP lost its last congressional seat in the entirety of New England.

The GOP is now, effectively, a single voting bloc, the largest of the multitude of factions in the legislative branch of government. Unlike the Democrats, who are an amalgamation of countless different interest groups (labor unions, racial minorities, gays, feminists), the Republican party has purged itself and is now a party almost exclusively for white Protestant conservatives.

Back in the days when this demographic was the unequivocal majority in the nation, the GOP could afford to tolerate other factions within its party. But now that national demographics have changed, the party needs lock-step unity; it can no longer suffer dissent within its ranks. And although there are white Protestant conservatives throughout the country, the old South is the one region where they still hold sway electorally and demographically.

Secondly, of course, there is the ugly not-so-subtle race-baiting, homophobia, and religious prejudice. These are the legacy of the nativism that Southern gentry exploited to such tragic effect in the early 1800s. As the national trends toward gay rights, immigration reform, and a diminution of Christian influence continues, conservatives will undoubtedly become even more recalcitrant.

Upon signing the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Lyndon Johnson lamented, "We have lost the south for a generation." Well, he was right on that score. But when you consider what we have gained in return --huge strides in racial and gender recognition, tolerance toward gays and everything else --it has been worth it.

Let the neo-confederates have their sh*tholes. Let them have the Republican party. We don't need it and we don't need them.