Mike's Blog Roundup
Newshoggers: Swiftboating John Kerry was just fine with Rethuglicans and our craven press, but don't ask 'em why getting shot down in an airplane qualifies McCain for the presidency. For that matter, don't mention it to the increasingly complicit Obama, either. Now might be a good time to thank General Clark for his "straight talk".
pandagon: Ignorance may be bliss but it's bad for democracy
The Pump Handle: DoD defies EPA on military site cleanups
Faithful Progressive: But...but... Condi said they weren't involved. Was she lying?
Progressive Blog Digest: All roundup, all the time. Nick Burbules is providing a public service.
HOLY CRAP: Tell congress to investigate cronyism in the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives...Bipartisan creationism in Louisiana...A pastor problem worse than Hagee...Christ Shot Down, missle shield a success...Obama says Dobson is 'making stuff up'...More religious disputes at the Service Academies...22 states are refusing Bush's abstinence-only sex-ed...Craig & Vitter take "New Stance" to affirm marriage...The E. Coli and the Creationist...The FundamentaList... Faith healer boasts of raising the dead, meeting saints, and even being told by God to heal a woman by kicking her in the face!
The last person that should be taking a "stance" on anything is Larry Craig.
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
And Vitter's position on defending marriage ranks right there with Ted Haggard's recovery from being gay.
Wow...who knew that healing someone was only a face kick away.
Maybe I might do some "healing" this weekend!
Obama has ZERO credibility now.
I quit.
The Office of Faith-Based Initiatives is one of the more graft-filled, corrupt rackets (in a sea of corrupt schemes) hatched by the Bush administration. The government has no reason to be in the religion business. That's why it's distressing to hear that Obama wants to EXPAND the Office.
WRONG!
theWalrus @ 5:
Yeah that has me totally pissed off! That office should not even exist!
Obama isn't moving to this mythical center, he is from the center.
Faith based initiatives my ass.
I would love to ask Obama WTF's up with this religious asskissin'?
And someone PLEASE remove that fuckin Hummer advert!
WTF?
Most useless vehicle on the planet.
While Mugabe is no pussycat, I can't help but wonder if I'd think or say the same thing
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080701/ap_on_re_af/africa_union_zimbabwe
How dare the west try to impose democracy? Hmm?
Disturbing to hear Obama and complicit used in the same sentance.
None of this would happen with Kucinich or Ron Paul. Obama's the loon. Not them.
liberalNmoderation @ 8:
The worst of it is that he actually believes this shit, that 'faith-based' groups are better at delivering services, and that they should be allowed to flaunt fair hiring and employment practices because they're 'religious.'
I bet you thought Barry was gonna "RESTORE" the Constitution, dincha...
Sucker fux...
bet yu thought Barry was gonna “RESTORE” the Constitution, dincha…
Sucker fux…
Yes. Yes, I did. Silly me. I was taking these inalienable rights way too seriously.
Looks like a lot of reich-wingers are earning McGrampa points today
Alice X (Chomsky Nader) @ 7:
All hail the Holey Ass!!!
The Republicans blatantly lied, denounced, & defamed, during the 2004 election, the military career of a war hero, John Kerry - and the Democrats did nothing.
Now here in 2008, the ex-general, Wesley Clark, says that he doesn't believe that getting shot down in a plane is a qualification for being president - which is TRUE - and the shit hits the fan.
And there in lies the problem. Republicans are bullies. Democrats are wimps.
When I was in grade school, throughout 5th, 6th, and most of 7th grade, I was bullied. I told my parents, who are staunchly non-violent, as I am, and they said, "ignore them," "don't be like them," etc. But it didn't stop. One day, at the end of 7th grade, one of the bullies was picking on me and started pushing me. I lost my temper, went balistic, and beat the shit out of him. He wasn't seriously hurt.
What did happen after that was the bullying immediately stopped.
When Democrats finally call out their opponents for what they are, bullies - in fact worse than that because they use surrogates - then the bullying will stop.
Bush and Rove swifboated Kerry. Now McCain and his henchmen are bullying Obama. Rather than Obama kissing McCain's butt when these attacks occurs, Obama needs 1 - defend Clark and 2 - challenge McCain to denounce attacks on Clark as low and unethical.
All Clark said was that he didn't believe that getting shot down is a qualification for being president. No big deal. But the Democrats let the Republicans control the message and all of a sudden, the Democrats are being pushed around while Republicans laugh it up.
Until Democrats stop acting like losers, they will be losers.
McCain In 2003: ‘I Absolutely Don’t Believe’ Military Service Alone Qualifies Somebody For President»
Regarding the swiftboating of John Kerry, I have said all along that the Republicans do not have a problem with those kinds of tactics, as long as they can keep them for themselves. The thought of anyone else dipping into their bag of tricks is what they can't stomach.
woody, tokin librul @ 12:
Part of me is hoping that he's just schmoozin for votes, but if so, then that's not really cool either.
I did think he was gonna at least steer the US back to a more sane course...but by appeasing the religious nutjobs...it appears he's headin towards crazy town...still though...I think he'll be a far better preznit than Bush was or McBain could be.
liberalNmoderation @ 19:
BTW...did you just call me a sucker?
Thomas Stone @ 16:
Well said and on the mark.
BTW…did you just call me a sucker?
did you support Barry in the expectation that he'd actually restore the Constitution?
If yes, then yes...
woody, tokin librul @ 22:
Hehehe fair enough, lol!
Obama is a huge mistake:
"Reaching out to evangelical voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is announcing plans that would expand President Bush's program steering federal social service dollars to religious groups and -- in a move sure to cause controversy -- support their ability to hire
and fire based on faith."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080701/ap_on_el_pr/obama_faith;_ylt=As4L.IN...
As a Christian, I want to remind people that the Creationist wackadoodles don't speak for me or most of the 2 billion Christians on the planet. They speak for a small minority with a loud voice, that speaks to the old primal values of "My gang yay! Your gang Boo!", something the Christian Left hasn't done as well for similar reasons to the secular Left. The Christian Fascists have hijacked Christianity in this nation, and we Christians who don't like what they've done with it, have a lot of work to do, and much blood on our hands for not speaking up.
Alice X (Chomsky Nader) @ 7:
Well said. Obama sees things from a typical upper middle-class perspective where religion is believed to be a wholesome thing. Maybe it says a lot that his slogan is "Change you can BELIEVE in." That's not committing to actually change is it? That might simply mean that if you want to believe it's change, that's enough.
Getting rid of faith-based bullshit and lifting the tax exemptions from religion would be the kind of changes I would support.
One more thing: where the Hell is that story about Obama's FBI statements? He seemed to go 180 degrees of where he went in a speech last week! Why is that not on C&L?
liberalNmoderation @ 19:
Well I hope he's not pandering to the wack jobs promoting abstinence programs. I could live with money going to inner city programs that actually help kids and the elderly.
I am officially now not going to vote for Obama.
Fuck him.
I don't care who wins now. It's all the same.
In ten years this country will be a fucking prison camp full of starving diseased slaves.
woody, tokin librul @ 12:
As a person of faith I like it no better than you do. Letting fanatics only a little bit away from the Saudi regime continue to do this is by no means a good thing, and most people who would take advantage of this from a religious perspective are of that mindset.
McCain is enlisting the henchmen of the Rove/Bush/Swiftboat gang to smear Obama and how does Obama repay General Clark for speaking the truth about McSame on his behalf? By distancing himself from Clark. Hello waitress, can I get an order of backbone over here please?
marko @ 28:
Welcome to the real world.
Both candidates are pathetic.
We are screwed 08.
Why can't they get someone like this to model Snorg Tees?
http://www.nilacharal.com/enter/celeb/images/MarilynMonroe.jpg
Alice X (Chomsky Nader) @ 7:
Welcome to 21st Century US politics, where the furthest Left you go in the US is only centrist by European and Japanese standards.
Sucks, don't it?
Travesty Alert:
Bush will speak at Monticello on July 4th. What would Thomas Jefferson's ghost say?
My is guess is he would be plenty mad.
Call the private Foundation that manages Monticello at 434 984-9822 and hit zero to comment. or e-mail at monticello.org
Thanks to those who have called and emailed
marko @ 28:
In other words, we'll be the Soviet Union. Yay, we go right into the arms of our former ideological enemy.
Aw, fuck, we're fucking screwed.I am thoroughly amused at all the surprise on this forum about Obama's "shift" to the "center". What part of "post-partisan politics" did you not understand in the primaries? To think that somehow it meant that he would wave a magic wand and turn everybody into progressive liberals, however nice that would be, is simple lunacy. It's not going to happen. These recent moves by Obama have just confirmed what I thought of him all along. He's a pragmatist, and of the best kind. He's got a vision, and he wants everyone on board. Don't be fooled by what the headlines the MSM (even the blogs) are throwing on these excursions into the center. If you really read into the stories and pay attention to detail, you'll see that all he's doing is compromising some of the subtleties while still hanging on to core progressive values. Observe:
1.) The FISA bill
People seem to think that the FISA bill as stands gives criminal immunity to the telecoms. Well actually, if you ask legislative experts who have read the bill (see KO's special comment last night), it doesn't. People also seem to think that if a FISA bill reaches W's desk without at least a partial immunity provision, he won't veto it. Given the past history on these bills, I wouldn't count on it. By voting for an amendment to strike immunity (even if it fails), and voting for FISA (and restoring the courts' abilities to perform oversight, something we'd all like to see), he gets the "security moms" (I hate that term) on board while still maintaining the ability to go after these scumbags in criminal proceedings. Isn't that what we all want anyway?
2.) Faith-based initiatives
I loathe the religious right as much as the next person, but no one can deny the large bloc of centrist and even left-leaning evangelicals out there who only listen to Dobson and Robertson and vote red because there's nobody else talking to them. These are people who sympathize with many progressive platforms (income equality, humanitarian aid, the environment, health care, etc.) who have simply been brainwashed to think that we're all a bunch of pinko atheists who want to take their churches away. Well I say it's about time to reach out to these people, and it's clear that Obama does too. And for those who think that Obama's faith-based proposals will just be a continuation of GWB, why don't you go and read the platform. The plan is aimed in areas where faith-based programs have been shown to actually make a difference, such as humanitarian aid and providing for the homeless and jobless... you know, things that we all want to see? Unlike the Bush programs, no money is included for the failed sex-"no"ed programs or other wedge issues. And unlike the Bush programs, Obama's plan is open to ANY religious organization, not just essentially no-bid contracts for Christian organizations.
Restore the Constitution @ 34:
As I said the first time, the only thing TJ would have objected to about the Bush Administration is the size of the government. Everything else would have been right up his alley, racism and all. He probably wouldn't understand, though, that somebody from a group he viewed as mentally and morally inferior is now on the fast-track to be Preznit.
liberalin@3 Let me know, Iam a healer as well,(have meds,will travel) Thomas@16. You are correct, the danger in confronting these bullies is that when you grab them they will pee all over you, maybe worse, take a handy wipe with you, General@24 You are one of the most reasoned christian thinkers I have heard, why does it seem like, the most far-out or crazy acting nuts out their get the most attendtion. ( just-a- wondering). You have a big job on your plate sir.--CEO
Comrade Rou @ 28:
I hope not as well, or to those insane creationist/intelligent design assholes.
While I am not against a religious group helping the needy, I am 100% against ANY religious group gettin MY tax money for anything. I'm agnostic, borderline atheist...and a member of group for TOTAL separation of church and state.
Obama's could more votes with this bullshit, than he stands to gain by pandering to these fuckin churchies!
WTFF?
CEO,citizens,eyes,open @ 39:
The answer to your question is simple. Fanatics are the most sensational group, and can make the best headlines. Most of the 1 billion Muslims don't blow themselves up, nor do most of the 800 million Hindus burn their wives who are still living with them when they die (anymore.) Marginalizing these types isn't enough, the sane Christians have to use both reason and emotional appeals to explain why that sort of fanaticism is destructive, while the hard-core fanatics must be dealt with the way Bush is trying to do with the Wahhabites. The only difference between a Mississippi Southern Baptist or Pentecostal and a Saudi Wahhabite or a Persian Twelver from the 1970s is that the former still think that everyone will convert to Christian Wahhabism by peace. The rest of us who still have some measure of Christian attitudes about us have to try to save the Faith from the madmen that want to destroy it.
Those madmen are not the bearded clerics in Baghdad, they're the faces in suits in the meetings of the Fundamentalist conventions.
liberalNmoderation @ 40:
I agree that we Christians need to not take tax dollars, not only did Christ state against it, but history's verdict on the church and taxes has been a bad one. I'm wise enough to know that we won't be somehow special in the Americas from the horrors done in Europe. I also agree we Christians need to treat the irreligious with better respect and acknowledge ya'll are just regular people like us aside from the God-belief. If Christians could let atheists and agnostics be free to be atheist and agnostic, then the contrast between religion and irreligion would be clearer. Let both be free to exist in mutual respect, and whichever one is better over the long run will be clear. OTOH, the nuts who've hijacked discourse keep on doing what they're doing and neither will come out to be anything special, because we'll all be bleached, glowing bones in green glass.
BigTallMatt @ 37:
Good post, BTM. I for one, am not surprised at comments here. The same posters that were attacking BO when he was running against HRC are still attacking him now. They won't be happy until McLame is in office and they can say that they "told us so".
Memo to Mike Re: Condi.
If her lips move - she's lying.
PS - the same goes for any Bush administration official.
ysbaddaden @ 15:
Holey as opposed to Holy!? Indeed.
BigTallMatt @ 37:
Can't deny you are making excellent points. Good thing someone is a bit more cool-headed than I am.
I still don't want my tax money going to ANY church, temple, synagogue, whatever...
Haven't churches been taking folks money for 1000's of years for that very reason... to help the sick and starving?
I mean...god is apparently broke...at least that's what they've been tellin their sheep...I mean congregations for a couple 1000 years now.
General_Rennenkampf @ 42:
Yer pretty cool General. I have nothing but love and respect for true Christians like yourself. It's the blind zealots I don't care for.
Nadnerb in NC @ 44:
And for most politicians, no matter their affiliation.
Alice X (Chomsky Nader) @ 45:
Aww, and here I thought that was a veiled reference to that story of the Biblical Mr. Ed. Anyone who gets that reference gets a cookie.
One of the most complete articles on the "alleged" spying that Israel has been involved in in the United States during the last who knows how many years.
http://www.amconmag.com/2008/2008_06_02/cover.html
June 2, 2008 Issue
Copyright © 2008 The American Conservative
The Spy Who Loves Us
Pay no mind to the Mossad agent on the line.
by Philip Giraldi
After Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard was sentenced to life in prison in 1986, the U.S. negotiated an understanding with Israel—a “gentlemen’s agreement” —stipulating that neither nation would thenceforth conduct espionage operations in the other’s territory without consent. But the agreement was a sham from the beginning. The Israeli government didn’t even honor its commitments in the aftermath of the Pollard case, failing to return the estimated 360 cubic feet of stolen information to enable the U.S. to conduct a damage assessment. The United States, for its part, continued to recruit and run agents inside Israel throughout the 1980s and 1990s. And it was known within the intelligence and counterintelligence communities that Israel did the same in the United States. David Szady, the FBI’s assistant director for counterintelligence, was so dismayed by the level of Israeli spying in the late ’90s that he called in the head of the Israeli Embassy’s Central Institute for Intelligence and Special Activities (Mossad) office and told him, “Knock it off.”
Great article by Jason Leopold about Scott Ritters continued efforts to shine the light
http://www.inteldaily.com/?c=173&a=7254
Wed, 25 Jun 2008 11:23:00
Scott Ritter: Iran Not Pursuing Nuclear Weapon, But U.S. Determined to Attack
By Jason Leopold
PDF version
(The Intelligence Daily) -- In 2002, Scott Ritter, the former Chief United Nations Weapons Inspector In Iraq, publicly accused the Bush administration of lying to Congress and the public about assertions that Iraq was hiding a chemical and biological weapons arsenal.
By speaking out publicly, Ritter emerged as one of the most prominent whistleblowers since Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers to The New York Times in the early 1970s.
Ritter’s criticisms about the Bush administration’s flawed prewar Iraq intelligence have been borne out by numerous investigations and reports, including one recently published by the Senate Armed Services Committee that found President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and other senior administration officials knowingly lied about the threat Iraq posed to the United States.
Another article by Phillip Giraldi
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/giraldi.php?articleid=13068
uly 1, 2008
Neocons Stay on Message
Philip Giraldi
Neoconservative pundits have a tendency to assert that something is true even if it is not and then repeat the assertion over and over again to give it credibility. Repeating a statement without subjecting it to any critical analysis is generally regarded as little more than a rhetorical gimmick. Last week's New York Times featured two splendid pieces by neocon attack dogs Bill Kristol and David Brooks that show just how far it is possible to twist reality when supporting the Bush administration policies in Iraq.
David Brooks worked for Kristol at The Weekly Standard before joining the Times as its resident compassionate conservative. The soft-spoken and somewhat diffident Brooks is far cleverer than the smirking and arrogant Kristol, and he is better able to wrap his arguments in a social and ethical context that often appears to be convincing. But both he and his former boss are classic neoconservatives with the usual tunnel vision about the outside world. Both back John McCain for president, both still support the Iraq war, both are passionate about Israel, both approve of torture and until recently Guantanamo, and both favor a military option against Iran. There is no separation between them on most political issues.
It’s All About The Price Of Oil
http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2008/07/01/oil35companies/
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
Watch this discussion on impeachment with John Conyers.
When will Democrats grow a pair?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPkBuQfZfFo
General_Rennenkampf @ 49:
Jesus riding into Jerusalem on his ass?
My dog used to do that on the carpet.
ysbaddaden @ 53:
Nope, the story where the foreign sorceror is on his way to curse the Israelite, and God makes his donkey talk.
How anyone could see that as more relevant to 21st Century society than Zeus turning into a swan and banging Leta, I dunno.
General@41 Thank you much, and once again I agree with LiberalIN@47, yer pretty kool and very down to earth, one more stupid question if you don't mind, do you view christian faith as more of a guideline of what ( and forgive me for this) the "magical being" had in mind for how we should live or do you believe it is a set of hard and fast rules under threat of death, hell and so on? I have a big prolbem with the bible, is it indeed the "word of god"? or did humans just write what he said in crayon? Christians with both feet planted on the ground are a bit rare these days, so I'am interested in how you reason it. thanks-CEO
CEO,citizens,eyes,open @ 55:
I have an answer, and it's sorta long, so I hope you don't mind the length:
Religion in general, and Abrahamic religions in particular are all about continuity, keeping traditions, maintaining closeness to Torah or Kokiji or the Apostolic Generation or the Prophet or the Avestas and the Vedas. Yet, as a human being, I see that this sense is a falseness, not at all connected to the way human beings work, much less the broad scheme of things. To focus on Christianity, the religion at the time of Constantine the Great was not the religion of the Apostolic Generation, what had been a Mediterranean sect based on an apocalyptic carpenter inspired by a charismatic leader had blossomed into communities all over Europe, and a serious challenger to the Indo-European religions of Europe. In the same way, today's Christian Fundamentalists, whether Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox are in no way connected to the geneses of their respective movements, 1054 for Catholicism and Orthodoxy, and 1500s for the various Protestant schools. The world has changed, as have all things since then. Were I to make the statement that I know what Rabbi Yehoshua taught, I as an American would be lying. To know the thoughts behind an apocalyptic Rabbi whose grip on his followers was so strong that his death only renewed their faith, is impossible. Times have changed too much since then. The Western Empire has fallen, and numerous Caliphates both Arabic and Turkish and then Western colonialism and now a Jewish state have all changed the landscape of the Levant since the days of Yehoshua bar Yosef.
To state that Christianity is a guideline or a hard and fast rule would be playing to my biases, having been raised in the Deep South in an Evangelical denomination (the Southern Baptist Convention, to be precise.) If I were to state it was a guideline, then I'd be ignorant of the noble communities (and the ignoble) that have built a Christianity with rules and prospered because of it. The monasteries of the Medieval European times were the place of the best Christians, and they had strict rules. Yet, their nobility is tarnished by withdrawing due to faith in a time of crisis. Whereas if I say a hard-and-fast rule, I risk slighting the numerous Christians like Roger Williams, Anne Hutchinson, the Anabaptists, today's Christian anarchists, the surviving remnants of the Christian 19th Century communes, the Desert Fathers, and so on.
Christianity's greatest weakness is also its greatest strength. It is divided into 2 billion people in 33,380 sects, but in all of those sects, it becomes as impossible to generalize about Christians as it is about Hinduism, or Buddhism, or Islam, or Judaism. The rules of Christianity vary so much from sect to sect, and I know that as a Southern Baptist that my denomination is extremely flawed. Like Anglicans, we started for a bad reason, much more horrific in our case. We started over the issue of slavery, on the wrong side. I would seldom tell someone if they are Christian to become a Southern Baptist, because this denomination has a darkness in it that owes its genesis to our evils of our founding. Christianity, in short, depends on the sect and your geography as to whether it is hard-and-fast rules. Evangelicalism says it's a guideline, but then cheats by adding rules after you convert despite being told there are none.
As for the Bible as the word of God, what we call the "Bible" and what "Biblical Inerrantists," the nuts you see with the 10 commandment in their yards, is a collection of 66 books to most people in the US, owing to our Protestant background. The Bible is 29 books to the Jews, arranged differently than all Christian sects, it is 66 books to the people you hear on TV, and 77 books to Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and most Oriental Orthodox, and to the Ethiopian Orthodox, it is 83 books, with a broader canon as well that is loosely defined. Each of these respective canons has been shaped by the history of their respective church, and in fact, if you wanted to know the oldest churches, and hence oldest canons in the world, one would have to look to the Armenian Apostolic church, which is the oldest denomination in the world, and then to the Ethiopians, and then to the Syrian Orthodox Church of Kerala, India. In short, whatever people tell you about their respective traditions, and whatever I would tell you about mine, it would be biased by my personal perspectives. The Bible is whatever the tradition says it is, no more, no less. Whether the tradition looks to the rejection of the Council of Chalcedon as its split, or the 1054 schism as its origin for Catholicism and Orthodoxy, or the 1500s-era division of the Western church as its origin, how those traditions developed would determine the answer. My tradition states it is the "Word of God," yet I cannot in good conscience state that a book written by human hands in an era when the existence of huge swathes of the world was unknown to the West is the Word of God. God left far too much out for it to have been his divine utterances, and I hardly see why God would focus on mildew instead of the vast majesty of the 13 billion year-old, 45 or so billion light years wide universe.
I hope that answers your questions.
I am tired of the net root "know it alls" who so freely condemn Obama for taking a pragmatic view of the thorny issues facing this nation. You criticize the MSM for saying what the powerful want to hear, but you judge and condemn Obama just as they do, and the only support you have is your own opinions. "Say what I want you to say, or I'll demonize you" is your fixed position. You're like spoiled children who want to have their way. I think a person who produces only his (or her) opinion has a questionable product; we all make mistakes. The free for all coming from the internet is hardly any better than swift boating to me. You whiners should actually do some research and quit quoting each other. You're doing all of us a disservice.
JoAnne Martinson @ 57:
I don't "know it all." But I know something about the Fourth Amendment and the separation of church and state. The fact that I like these things and would like a Democratic candidate for president to believe in them, too, doesn't make me a "whiner." It makes me an American engaged in civic discourse. A 'disservice' would be to remain silent when our core freedoms and basic principles are threatened. I'm sorry that disturbs you.
General_Rennenkampf @ 56:
Duuuuude!
That was intense....
I was raised Southern Baptist too...or at least they tried...I rebelled at a very early age against that BS.
And JoAnne Martinson@ 57.....
You're absolutely right, there is alot of that goin on, and I've done my share...I am actually trying to do research before I post...but in the heat of the moment, I tend to type away.
Comments are closed on this entry