Rick Scott Aspires to Do as al Qaeda Did
In 2001, terrorists capitalized on George Bush’s inattention and extended vacation to strike at America. Now, Rich Scott’s Conservatives for Patients’ Rights believes it can adopt al Qaeda’s tactics by attacking our country while the President is on vacation. "Even on vacation, the President will get no quarter on the public option from Conservatives for Patients’ Rights." And they’re running an ad that somewhat bizarrely tries to mock Obama’s vacation.
There are obvious problems with this strategy. First, regardless of what you think of the White House strategy on health care, mocking Obama for taking the first week of vacation he has had all year will only invite comparisons with Bush, who spent 977 days at either Camp David or Crawford during his presidency–well over a year on the pig farm where he twiddled as New Orleans drowned and blew off warnings about an imminent al Qaeda by dismissing briefers for "covering their ass." Conservatives for PR may be trying to mock Obama by suggesting he’s traveling to an effete location with no brush to clear. But at least this President hasn’t spent significant portions of his term AWOL during crises, like Bush did.
The big question is whether our press corps will step up to the challenge.
Already, they have enabled groups like Conservatives for PR to use terrorist tactics–the staging of scary public spectacles–to hijack the debate on health care. The media has magnified fake fear-mongering stunts rather than calming the fear by cutting through the misinformation. And perhaps predictably, the usual suspects are out pitching Conservatives for PR’s nonsensical ad for them. Apparently, Joe Scarborough and Mike Allen don’t understand that treating this ad seriously–reporting this ad without, at the same time, highlighting the irony of attacking Obama on an area in which he exposes Bush’s failures by comparison–only proves that they have been captured by the fear-mongerers hoping to put profits above Americans’ lives.
No matter, though. The President may be headed off for his reasonable one week vacation. But the rest of us will remain vigilant: you and me, the 5,000 people who have given $300,000 in a matter of days to reward those who will stand up and defend real health care reform, and of course, the tireless Jane, who I hope takes a long week on a beach once we win this fight.
Rick Scott assumes that we citizens fighting to defend this country against those mobilizing fear in the service of corporate profits will let down our guard. But if he believes that, he might as well retire to a pig farm to clear brush, because he has badly underestimated the citizens of this country.
And the MSM ignored the one of the earliest health care reform rallies in D.C. a week before the break. They were to dizzy covering the OBama beer summit all day (even RAchel). Must have seen that same damn clip of the beer gang 30 times in several hours that evening. Not a whisper about the well behaved pro health care reform group. They were just too well behaved.
Forgot to mention that the following Tuesday after that rally in D.C. Chris Matthews had the balls to ask “where is the other side(pro health care reform folks)” Hell Matthews so missed covering the rally the week before and the next week spent hours covering the “me firsters” Although I do appreciate his hammering of the gun toting nuts at these gatherings Can you imagine if Code Pinkers had been packin guns at their protest when Bush, Rumsfeld or Rove were showing up. All hell would have broken lose, their asses would be hauled off to the pokey
Wondering what the church folks will do now that Obama has called them out by name on Health care reform
Obama calls health care ethical, moral obligation
Calls take place of town halls as White House may shift tactics
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — President Barack Obama took his pitch for health-care reform to religious leaders on Wednesday, calling reform an ethical and moral obligation, as his proposed overhaul continued to face a charged political environment and the White House was reportedly preparing to shift tactics for pushing changes in the nation’s health system.
In remarks to leaders from groups including the African Methodist Episcopal Church and the Islamic Society of North America, Obama also sought to tamp down what he said were rumors about the plan
————————————————————————
Just really wish one person would ask the screamers at those town hall meetings “how many of you consider yourselves Christians” You know 90% of the people in those rooms would raise their hypocritical hands. Hell these people are willing to step right over those without health care or people begging on the streets to go in those rooms and shout down a more compassionate health care system.
Keep thinking about going to one of those meetings with a sign that says What would Jesus do? WWJD…but I might get shot
http://www.marketwatch.com/sto…..2009-08-19
You know I got an email about that conference call? I feel more stupid than usual.
I was not impressed with that call. It struck me a stage managed event, with a five minute drive-by from the President at the end.
Maybe it was aimed at less-politically aware folks than me in the religious community, and if so, it may have helped bring them up to speed. But the religious community HAS been stepping up on this for quite some time. PICO and others have been pushing, pushing, pushing — but they have gotten no media publicity for it.
The National Catholic Reporter has a writeup of it here. Most of what Obama himself said was not “calling out” religious folks, but knocking down rumors and lies:
My own denomination — the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America — has been pushing for health care reform for years, guided in part by a 2003 social statement “Caring for Health: Our Shared Endeavor.”
Having watched the Obama team’s methods for “leading” on the health care reform, I am not impressed. The idea that Obama “called out” religious leaders is laughable, and I for one am offended at your notion that I need to be called out.
You may not need to be called out. But I often find many so called Religious folks total hypocrites (and I grew up Catholic) especially many of the people with little crosses around their necks swinging their Bibles at some of those meetings while they step over people without health care to oppose coverage for all.
good for you for walking the talk
Hearing your experiences projected onto all Christians does not make it any easier to walk the walk, nor does your conditional “you may not need to be called out” help either. If you don’t know how I’ve been working on this, you haven’t been paying attention.
Get off your high horse, please, and keep your generalizations and stereotypes to yourself.
Not just my experience. The Christian hypocrites are all over the place. Hiding behind their religions using them like shields to block criticism and then taking stands that blatantly lack empathy and compassion.
You are not the only one who has been working on this issue for years. High horse? Turn that finger around.
And I will not stop calling out hypocrites..and there are plenty of them at those town hall meetings who go to church on Sunday.
You’ve really misdiagnosed the problem and that demonstrates why you should leave the religious-based criticism to folks like me and Peterr. There is indeed a lot of hypocrisy among the leadership of the so-called Religious Right, but that’s not the problem with the folks showing up at the town halls. They’ve been manipulated into thinking that their cultural biases have a religious basis. They are sincere, but deeply misguided. Hurling insults at them will only make them retreat further into their cocoon of ignorance. Defusing their impact at town halls requires patience and finesse.
I don’t think I have misdiagnosed a part of the problem at all. I know there are Religious folks who walk the talk. But I also know that there are many who hide behind their religions why they spew, hatred, racism, and support a system that leaves millions unable to access health care.
When this hypocrisy is brought up the hypocrites get really pissed
Will not be leaving it up to Peter or you
Just to make sure we’re talking about the same thing, go take a look at the Wikipedia page on hypocrisy. That’s the sense that I’m using the word. By that definition, I’m quite sure that most of the religious folks who show up at town halls to shout down advocates of health care reform are not hypocrites. Are they engaging in hateful and racist behavior? Sure, a lot of them are, but they don’t know that.
You know who gets madder than a hypocrite who’s called out for their hypocrisy? Someone who is accused of hypocrisy when they fail to live up to their own moral code. Do you really think that the best thing to do is to make those people at the town halls even angrier? I don’t. Even you are right about this and I’m wrong, do you think your approach is helpful? Does it get us closer to health care reform? If so, how?
There is a word for a person who hates all Christians just because they’re Christians. That word is “bigot.”
Shame, shame.
Never said anything like that…show me where I ever said I hate all Christians.
You know there are millions of Christians and other religious zealots who are complete hypocrites.
Of course you didn’t specifically say so in those exact words, but it’s quite obvious that you mean it. We’re not stupid, you know.
“not stupid” ????
You know there are millions of Religious bigots and hypocrites. And there are millions of Christians, Muslims and Jews who support health care reform.
Christians Ramp Up Opposition to Health Care Bill
http://www.charismamag.com/index.php/news/22741
Conservative Christian leaders are ramping up their opposition to a health care reform bill that they say opens the door to government-funded abortion.
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins hosted a press conference today on Capitol Hill calling on Congress to oppose the reform measure that he said amounts to a government takeover of health care.
—————————————————————
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/277338
Religious Right: Health Care Reform is Against God’s Plan
By Carol Forsloff
James Dobson is a right wing conservative leader of Focus on the Family who was adamantly opposed to the election of Barack Obama, declaring he would take away religious rights.
Christian groups are being urged to swamp town hall meetings. Some are being asked to attend and read the riot act to supporters of health care reform. It is, after all, against God’s plan for health reform, some religious right leaders now say.
God and politics are the hot combination in the health care debate. As Obama was painted by some religious right members as the anti-Christ or worse, now his reform measures are being attacked as against the law of God. Health care reform is one area of attack, with town hall meetings going on all over the country. But what do they say about why God doesn’t want people to have health reform?
———————————————
Christians Weigh In On Health Care Reform
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..50332.html
Peterr,
As a former Lutheran (MoSyn, not ELCA) I’m glad to see your work on this. As a current Mennonite, I would also like to point out we’re working hard on this issue as well. In fact in July we passed our own resolution at our biannual Mennonite Church USA convention.
Christianity admittedly has many skeletons in our closet, but we also have a long, fairly consistent history of helping the poor and healing the sick. This is an issue that should resonate with most Christians and people of faith from all traditions.
Trying to imagine it. Keep thinking of a Fellini movie. Pink holsters; pink handled pistols; pink assault rifles. Mary Kay on steroids.
Leen,
You say maybe the rally was ignored by the media because the participants were too well-behaved. I think that is a serious point and that needs to be considered when planning the next event. I’m not advocating the kind of obnoxious behavior shown by the wingnuts but something splashy and eye-catching that will play well on TV news. I’m thinking of the Kiss float they used in Connecticut, for example. Can the creative types come up with good images to dramatize our position on health care?
You’re missing the point. Media dollars support the opposing positon. They will only cover a pro-health care event only if it can bring embarrassment to that cause.
I understand your cynicism, but I’m not ready to concede your point. There are ways to get media attention. Our side has to be a lot smarter and more creative to do it, but it can be done.
Sorry, but my cynicism is very deeply ingrained. I’m of the firm belief that if the pro-care rallies can be kept media-neutral, it will be a victory.
I am kidding when I say maybe pro health care advocates/single payers advocates should start packing guns. Is that what it takes to get the MSM’s attention? Sure seems like it
Rich [sic] Scott will never retire. There is not enough money and power in the world to satisfy that creature’s cravings.
Well deserved vacation
Martha awaits… no Hurricane Bill… hope he stops in and visits Teddy.
Today: Sunny intervals; breezy, warm and humid A thunderstorm in spots in the afternoon
Tomorrow: Mainly cloudy, a shower;
Sunday: winds subsiding Mostly sunny Plenty of sunshine
I think the vacation officially starts on Monday, but I don’t know if they’ll be up there this evening.
That is the whole reason for his trip. So, it really is a “working” vacation.
Or, I could check the White House scheduling announcements, and know that he goes to Camp David today, not Martha’s.
Thanks. That’s why I’m not a vacation planner… my wife handles the details since I’ve been know to fuck things up…
I suspect the issue is that the Obama’s are actually paying for this on normal terms, which means you get one week, and only one week. So you can’t go friday to Monday (10 days0 without blowing an extra tens of thousands.
well… it could be worse. He could outsource government to Blackwater and then go on a permanent vacation pulling weeds on a Texas ranch.
Have you seen this
Mad as hell Doctors…hit the road
https://madashelldoctorstour.com/Home_Page.html
This is a fatster special and I can’t link to it anymore, but NYT, page A15, yesterday:
“In a ruling that threw into doubt one of the government’s main counterterrorism tools, a federal judge said the Treasury Department acted unconstitutionally three years ago when it froze the assets of an Ohio charity suspected of aiding terrorists….In the last eight years, the Treasury Department has used its broadened authority [imposed by executive order] to freeze tens of millions of dollars in assets held by eight charities within the United States and hundreds of other groups and individuals outside this country, all without warrants and court approval.”
James G. Carr. appointed by Bill Clinton, is the judge.
“Citing British seizures and searches without warrants in colonial America, Judge Carr called the Fourth Amendment “a bulwark against the abuses and excesses of unchecked government authority.” He said that “nothing in our Fourth Amendment jurisprudence or constitutional tradition supports complete elimination” of the need for the government to establish probable cause, allow judicial review and use court warrants in such cases.”
That’s a drop, let’s hope the drought it breaking.
As Sam Seder would say, “Surprise! Surprise!”
Lemme see. What is the appropriate response? Oh yes.
We do not negotiate with terrorists, Senator Baucus. Got that?
Kudos to headline writer for this post on FDL front page: “Rick Scott Determined to Strike in US”. Chortle.
Would it be possible to use the full name at one point in an article when the acronym is used?
Who invented acronyms? We are becoming a nations of Twits.
You mean like these two mentions in teh first paragraph?
Admittedly, I did fuck with the acronym. Scott chose “CPR” surely intending to evoke real medical procedures. But I think Conservatives for PR is much more apt.
Is there more known about the Martha’s Vineyard Attack? Getting it out with logical responses will dull the effect of their “Quick Boat” tactics.
Personally I think the President’s drop in the polls is caused by us lefties, tired of his pussy footing around with the crazy right. Those numbers will come right back up with some decisive action. I think the GOP is like a boxer dead on his feet; it is time to put the KO to them.
That would be “swift boat.”
Of course, the MSM is ignoring groups in favor of health care reform. Some of their biggest advertisers are the very same companies that are ripping all of us off.
Can anyone spell O-X-Y-M-O-R-O-N?
I think W kicked his addiction to brush clearing sometime the end of January this year. Just an ordinary suburban guy now.
Hope there will be no photos of Obama windsurfing or eating brie. That’s what nazis and socialists do. heh.
Obama’s fetish for bipartisanship will ultimately destroy his administration, the Democratic Party and eventually the nation. The die has been cast and the Republicans and the loons smell blood in the water and are going for the jugular. Obama choose poorly as did those who voted for him.
As one of those who voted for Obama, I must disagree that we chose poorly. Given the choices we had, I don’t think we could have done any better.
I’m disappointed too, but clearly a McCain administration would have been even worse. And quite frankly, the first Clinton administration was just as disappointing and I see no reason to believe a second one would have been much different either.
I don’t disagree that Obama’s fetish for bipartisanship has to potential (even likelihood) to be ruinous, but I just don’t see that we had any better options (sadly).
Hillary, probably only a slight improvement.
OT – apparently some members of the Bush admin still have their memories intact! Card and Townsend are out now saying that Tom Ridge is wrong, they know he’s wrong bc they remember vividly that all threat level adjustments were specifically done only after insuring that there was no political aspect to the decision. Amazing.
http://www.politico.com/news/s…..26313.html
At least Card and Townsend didn’t go in search of a proofreader for 11tth grade Algebra texts named Minder to get their story out. Bush’s Homeland Security Advisor is “mystified” by Tom Ridge – it’s no wonder she wasn’t up to coping with a massive felony conspiracy to violate FISA, but I guess not being on howdy terms with the FISCt Chief Judge bc of your own pecadillos in his court might leave you out of the loop.
And Card clinches the whole thing. After all, he says that DHS had the final call on terror levels and that the President always followed the recommendation from DHS. Or not.
So Card remembers saying that to whom and for why/what? If only a journalist had been there to ask him… Well, at least if it was NSC, no one overtly political was involved, no one like a Condi Rice …
Politico’s description of how “Card also disputed Ridge’s claim about a plan to specifically integrate DHS and FEMA disaster relief prior to Katrina” by quoting him as saying, “He did have a reorganization plan and there was a huge debate that I’m not sure was limited to FEMA,” is a novel read too.
Did I already use amazing?
Jane’s new post has been up for about 20 minutes and I think she wants some company: “77% Want “Choice” Between Public Plan and Private Insurance”
More OT, sorry, Worms in a Can WaPo article on investigations of military defense attys for GITMO detainees who may have showed pictures taken by other orgs to detainees for the purpose of getting them to identify those who tortured them – pictures may have included CIA operatives. This is the kind of mess you get when you use undercover operatives for torture. Protect covert identities – check. Rights of defendants to dig into the evidence about what happeend to them in connection with their torture and defense – check. Government coverup of torture authorized at the top levels – um shouldn’tbebutisacheck. Lawyers subject to a chain of command involve chief torture coverupper – shouldn’tbebutisacheck.
What a freakin mess.
That’s an interesting can o’ worms, though. Good for the ACLU and the defence lawyers.
The government just seems to be holding to the position that no good deed will go unpunished. Why should anyone feel any loyalty at all to an interrogator who was committing criminal acts? I sure don’t feel any loyalty to our CSIS guys who behaved improperly at GTMO, in Syria and Sudan and who knows where else.
http://harpers.org/archive/2009/08/hbc-90005578
Horton with a bit more. No particular law is being cited yet, although after the AIPAC case I’m guessing they are trying to fit things into either IIPA or the Espionage Act, which have substantial penalties. But how do you claim that it is illegal to defend you client, based on his statements being tortured out of him, while you are held to a standard that you can’t talk about his torurers and torture bc they are “secrets.”
Obama is not digging in and handling any of this, even though Tenet, Hayden et al are being reduced to secretly funding the upcoming “Good Night, Law” picture book to get their message out.
thanks for this
“If the defense can demonstrate torture, then the “admission” will be excluded and the prosecution will have to build its case on other evidence. If coercion was used, then the details of the coercive conduct are essential to establishing whether the “admission” can be accepted.”
Why would the admission be excluded?
Piggy-backing–Why is Obama continuing Blackwater (note the present tense)?
C.I.A. Said to Use Outsiders to Put Bombs on Drones
By JAMES RISEN and MARK MAZZETTI
Published: August 20, 2009
WASHINGTON — “From a secret division at its North Carolina headquarters, the company formerly known as Blackwater has assumed a role in Washington’s most important counterterrorism program: the use of remotely piloted drones to kill Al Qaeda’s leaders, according to government officials and current and former employees.
“The division’s operations are carried out at hidden bases in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where the company’s contractors assemble and load Hellfire missiles and 500-pound laser-guided bombs on remotely piloted Predator aircraft, work previously performed by employees of the Central Intelligence Agency. They also provide security at the covert bases, the officials said.”
More.
Yesterday on Democracy Now. Jeremy Scahill reported that Blackwater has about 20 different names and ways that they present themselves.
I had no idea that Afghanistan Warlord Dostum had been an employee of the CIA
Scahill “Xe is so yesterday”
http://www.democracynow.org/20…..assacre_at
{{{fatster}}}
You’re making me cry, man. Many thnx.
This:
is the part that blows me away from that story. They drop it in so casually, but here’s what they are saying. We have covert bases in a Pakistan, a sovereign nation and a sovereign nuclear nation and a nation that we have not declared war against and a nation we have no SOFA agreement with etc. Those covert bases are being used to launch missiles within Pakistan at Pakistan residents and with the known result so far to date of killing numerous Pakistani civilians as well as suspected terrorists.
Those “covert” bases IN PAKISTAN as well as Afghanistan are “secured” by mercenaries. Whoa. And so what do the mercenaries do if the covert bases are raided by Pakistani govt forces? What have we “contracted” with them for on “security.” Jeeminee. Who the hell is Obama getting his advice from?
Awhile back I linked to a story (might not have been this one exactly, I rely way too much on being able to re-google the same results at later times) about Blackwater in Pakistan and how they are causing big problems – and that was before any knowledge that they were there with carte blanche to “secure” drone killing bases.
http://thecurrentaffairs.com/u…..hawar.html
When the article jumps from this:
to this
keep in mind that they are now clearly and unequivocally equated with America – Blackwater, the mercenaries for hire to any dictator and for any dirty work and who have racked up all kinds of civilian deaths with no consequences – – that’s America overseas. Xe =We, the people
Oh, and while they are doing the uber secret security work at the covert bases, they are really doing a spiffy job on that low profile stuff. Meanwhile, they are supposedly in Pakistan to work for CAII, Creative Associates International, Inc., a US company with multimillion $ contracts to carry out “development” projects in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas. Yeah – that all works great. Gin’em up, send ‘em in as hirlings of a “private” company that is going out to “do good” in FATA to counter the the Taliban hold, then as they get the whole countryside in an uproar by virtue of their very presence, and provoke the Pakistan Interior Ministry to put them under watch:
then hand them the job of protecting “covert” sites and give them an open-ended authorization to make those sites “secure.” No trouble waiting to happen there.
No chance that you will increase the risk that any and every single development or aid project will be viewed even more as an undercover military-esque or CIA operation, legitimate to be “targeted” as a vehicle to cover up drone attacks on civilians instead of a legitimate aid effort.
No chance that you will end up having your Embassy further and further discredited as they trot out the lies to protect the contract mercenaries:
.
“I mean, as long as, ya know, we aren’t talking about the US mission to blow up places in Pakistan”
FinderFintor added. /sFrom the older article:
Ok – they didn’t add “blowing up parts of Pakistan” but apparently the Pakistanis are a little SWIFTer than someone thought.
And here’s one of the really reassuring aspects – put Blackwater square in the middle of a super sensitive mission and well, at least you know that you only have American killers working on it, not those untrustworthy Pakistani guys who supposedly keep tipping off the Taliban and stuff. Right?
Oh yeah – it’s all good.
“They also provide security at the covert bases”
Understatement of the day.
Terrorists are collateral damage in our war on Pakistani Wedding Parties.
Is it Stranger in a Strange Land where the guy makes the discovery that sometimes you laugh because it hurts?
As usual, you connected all those dots and nailed it the results down to a fare-thee-well.
I have a minor, but significant disagreement with one line in this post:
First, terrorism is a tactic, but it’s a tactic of overt violence employed against the unsuspecting to overturn the status quo. That’s not what’s happening here. We need to call these folks out for what they are really doing. This is political intimidation directed at maintaining the status quo, an effort to impose a minority viewpoint (held by folks who believe they are entitled to power) with the implicit threat of violence directed against majority. The deceptions, the deliberate disruption of discourse, and the display of weapons are intended to subvert the democratic process.
WO, could not agree more.
in addition, it has always seemed to me that, when folks resort to such extreme tactics, it is a strong indication that they are desperate, desperate enough to get so defensive they take the offensive.
a good sign that they know they’re fighting a losing battle on this issue, and very bad sign that they so belligerently assume they can do this, and get away with it.
great points
You didn’t say “a few of the church folks” or “some of the church folks” or even “many of the church folks.” You said “the church folks” are the ones standing against health care reform. You took a swipe at everyone who claims to be Christian with your broad brush, making no distinctions between those who work and labor for real reform and those who stand in its way.
Are there Christian hypocrites? Absolutely — but note also that religious hypocrites were among Jesus’ favorite targets for condemnation.
Never said anything like this and do not feel this.
“There is a word for a person who hates all Christians just because they’re Christians. That word is “bigot.”
You can spin all day and never find anything like this that I have ever said or thoughs
There is a word for a person who hates all Christians just because they’re Christians. That word is “bigot.”
leen, fwiw, i have not seen the tone in your posts here that others are claiming, tho you are asserting a fairly hard line on the matter. likewise, the responses to that hard line have been a bit harsh.
that said, i think if all involved in this sorta side discussion were to just step away from the table for a few minutes, it would become clear that there is not an iota of difference on where you all stand on these matters.
I am letting it go….need to go paint another roof.
But here is where I think there is a difference. I think Religion can be used as a shield to hide hypocrisy and bigotry and my sense is that Peter and WO do not.
My question for them
So Peter and William Ockham do you think there is a vast space between what some Religious folks claim they believe about compassion, empathy,love for your neighbor and actively and sometimes viciously opposing health care for all? Do you see a contradiction?
Did you even read my comment @ 45, where I said “Are there Christian hypocrites? Absolutely . . .”
Yes and Yes.
Glad to see you added “some” as a modifier to “Religious folks.” That would have been much more helpful in your very first comment in this thread.
good to let it go, not so good to persist in the question.
fwiw, i agree that religion can be used as a shield. in most cases, i think it plays a psychological role to comfort us when faced with the unknown. not a denigration, just a fact.
so different folks have different levels of fear of the unknown, which leads to different levels of zeal or desperation, and perhaps even hypocrisy.
but this is not the fault of religion, per se; it’s just part and parcel to being human. just as much as being charitable and compassionate and seeking justice and care for all is part and parcel to being human.
what a piece of work we are! no need to blame an abstract noun for the many tangible foibles of all us feckless folks.
lllphd, you may want to check out recent MSNBC Ed Show video clips for the interview with sojo.net’s Jim Wallis, a really interesting thinker about the nexis of politics and religion.
My personal observations the past few years: a lot of Americans have been treated like expendable dirt, sucked dry by finance interests [aka, banks and insurance companies, including healthCos], and by globalization.
Americans assume ‘the Market’ will take care of everything.
And we’re competing in a world where other countries do **not** leave everything to ‘the Market’, which means the playing field got whacked out while our politicos, especially the GOP, basically continued to exacerbate the problem by clinging to ideology rather than having the courage to see clearly.
I view the C-Streeters as using religion as you point out, as a shield or ‘protection’ from a scary world, which they make even scarier by refusing to come to grips with reality because they confuse God with ‘the Market’: omnipotent, omniscient. These are the people who think that mountains can be bought and sold, while they and theirs cut a 35% cut of each deal.
The evangelicals that I associate with Wallis are courageous, principled people in my limited experience. For them, their faith is a huge source of strength. These are the people who move mountains, and if you’re lucky enough to know a few, well then… you’re lucky enough ;-))
hi there!
and yes, love jim wallis! there is actually much for us to be heartened about in all this. for starters, these folks are not presenting a good or inviting picture. i don’t believe the poll numbers suggesting the deathers and gun-toters are denting support for reform will hold up. as i mentioned yesterday, there is bound to be an ‘incident’ that will galvanize the country against that ilk. their numbers are dwindling; it’s only the MSM coverage that makes them look more menacing than they really are. which i think addresses ew’s point.
fact is, there is a disconnect between true evangelicals and this rightwing faction out there. where did i see that expressed yesterday? something about the differences between pat roberts and the national council of evangelicals (or some such org. likewise, the christian coalition of america numbers have been dwindling for years. and like you, i know a whole host (heh heh) of evangelicals who are principled and active and yes, very courageous and bold. especially when they finally saw through bush’s hypocrisy and stood up against him.
one point i disagree with: i don’t believe the average american puts any faith whatsoever in the market, and this is a real fertile area that should be explored more fully. while these folks have been led to believe the market protects us from dreaded red communism, so they think they support it, at the same time they are no less furious about all the money-grubbing and lopsided injustice coming from the corporate sector than we are! the freedomwatchers surgically separate these issues from the flash points that will get their public riled up, and hope that no one gets it. if democrats had been equating the healthcare problems with corporate greed more insistently, they never would have been so blindsided by these remarkably distorted and inane details like the death panels.
but we can’t really blame the dems about the message. given that we know most of these folks who are making so much noise are doing so because they listen to rush and hannity and bill and glenn, why would we believe they’d ever take seriously any information coming from anywhere else???
in any case, this brings me to my original point here: i’m now scared poopless because jon and stephen are leaving the air for a 3 week vacation, right when we need them the most!!!
Agree completely!
“Wondering what the church folks will do now that Obama has called them out by name on Health care reform
You didn’t say “a few of the church folks” or “some of the church folks” or even “many of the church folks.” You said “the church folks” are the ones standing against health care reform. You took a swipe at everyone who claims to be Christian with your broad brush, making no distinctions between those who work and labor for real reform and those who stand in its way.
Are there Christian hypocrites? Absolutely — but note also that religious hypocrites were among Jesus’ favorite targets for condemnation.”
Peterr, I have been following the hourly news on Minnesota Public Radio of the proceedings of the ELCA now in Convention in downtown Minneapolis, as they are using the week to make significant progress on their relationship with the GLBT communities and members in their midst.
Got a taste, or at least an interest, in this sort of church politics when I worked for about ten years back in the 60’s as executive director of an ecumenical Civil Rights ogranization, and with 34 different Religious Groups part of it, all trying to pass support at the state and national level for various parts of the Civil Rights Agenda — each Denomination with its own traditions and sets of rules, it is not at all Greek to me, in fact I like having my memory teased as I listen to the reports from the ELCA as they deliberate.
Anyhow, the first vote on the Theology of it all, passed by one vote where a supermajority was required on Wednesday. Also on Wednesday, at about 2PM just as the voting was about to begin, there was a tornado in downtown Minneapolis, which ripped the steeple off Central Lutheran — the Conference Church, and damaged the Minneapolis Convention Center roof where the Convention was in process. They stayed in session, and held the vote anyhow. There has been lots of local comment on this — right wing radio types saying that God was telling the Lutheran’s not to take that vote. But there has also been some good will, some in the GLBT community apparently are taking up a small collection to be donated toward repair of the steeple. MPR has broadcast a few of the speeches now from the Theology debate, very interesting.
Today there are four votes that do not require a super majority, and these deal with permitting Gay and Lesbian Clergy to serve when they are in committed relationships. The first vote passed about noon (at least it was on the noon news), by about 200 votes, there being roughly a thousand voters in the Convention. I understand there will be another vote on a liturgy for blessing committed relationships, and then there is another which is being put up as something for opponents — the creation of something like a separate Synod for those who don’t want Gay Pastors in Committed relationships. (I doubt if that will pass)
Anyhow Leen — this is how it is done. I think it has taken ELCA about 20 years of discussion and voting to get to this point. Up till now they have accomplished ordination for celibate Gay Pastors, and they have mandated study of the modern understanding of Hetro and Homosexuality, and that brought them first to open membership, then ordination, and now finally to partnerships, and theological revisions that support this. What they are finally doing this week deserves much praise — they sure are not supporting any proposition 8’s, or damning folk.
And this is how it went back in Civil Rights Days — (Except then ELCA was divided into three parts). And by the way, at this convention apparently they went back and pulled out previous resolutions on Health Care, and reaffirmed them with a charge to support what is currently being put on offer.
Now ELCA doesn’t include Missouri Synod, nor does it include Wisconsin Synod. (In Fact Michelle Backman is Wisconsin Synod, and she thinks any Health Care Reform would be a sin of Socialism.) But the majority of Lutherans in the US are ELCA (a third of Minnesota Church members are ELCA) so it is a good day on the GLBT side of things, and with the reaffirmation on Health Care — good for supporting Health Care.
Compared to the Roman Catholics — the difference is stark. The Vatican has sent a special investigative unit to the US to investigate the 90% of US Nuns who are linked through the Leadership Conference. One of the charges is that they aren’t following the Vatican on not supporting ordaining women, and tolerating homosexuality. The Nuns are in conference currently in New Orleans to discuss how to deal with this new Inquisition.
Two Conferences on the Mississippi — one making progress, and the other still in love with the dark ages.
Sara,
I read every word of your post with pleasure and was very impressed with your intelligence and your way with words. Until I got to the very end where you accused the Vatican of conducting another “Inquisition.”
When I saw that, the air went out of that balloon and my spirits sank.
It is not an Inquisition.
Why you would ruin such a beautifully written message by tacking on such an odious ending is beyond me.
It is amazing that those involved in the exu in the last 9 years are using the playbook for propaganda designed by the national socialists of 1933. History is the only thing they are apparently able to understand. So they repeat it. Again, and again, and again…..
There are no new ideas in politics. They have discarded the good ones and they remember only those that have led the world to substantial misery.
The father of public health care here was a Baptist minister, Tommy Douglas, who became leader of the CCF/NDP (social democratic party) and forced a minority Liberal government to act. That’s how it gets done. (Tommy was voted greatest Canadian of all time in a big CBC contest a few years ago; he is also grandfather of Kiefer Sutherland; everybody loves Tommy, although not enough people voted for him.)
The United Church of Canada (Presbyterian, Methodist, Congregationalist) is one of the leading social-justice organizations in the country. Quebec, nominally the most Catholic province, is also the most socially liberal.
Christianity isn’t the problem.
Can be part of the problem.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/277338
The Christian Coalition of America has a similar message, warning Christians about Barack Obama’s health care program as alien to God and Christian teachings. They maintain “that reform of health care would “provide care to illegal aliens, while rationing care to elderly and disabled American citizens.” This pits seniors against immigrants in the health care reform debate. They also declare on their webpage, “Stop the takeover. Visit our action center.”
Other groups gathering to make an assault on health care at town hall meetings include Americans for Truth, The Family Research Council and Focus on the Family. Focus on the Family specifically requests members to attend town hall meetings and “demand that abortion funding be explicitly excluded from any reform bill.”
The American Family Association tells its members to keep the pressure on: “Don’t let the liberal left silence you! The future of our country and our children and grandchildren is at stake.”
All of this occurs as more and more people have lost jobs and health insurance and people continue to be excluded from health insurance plans because of pre-existing health conditions. These issues, however, don’t seem to be addressed in the Christian right message that declares health care reform as proposed not to be part of God’s plan and therefore to be rejected.
…”father of public health care…”
and father of donald sutherland!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..62288.html
No, not father of Donald Sutherland — father-in-law. Father of Shirley Douglas, Sutherland’s first wife.
ETA: Oh, I see why you mentioned Donald, though. Yes, he has good politics. Good for him.
ah; my bad. but still, family.
Not bad at all — they’re a good group, although I can’t figure out wth Kiefer thinks he is doing with that awful show.
sheez, no kidding. gives me the willies.
not long ago spent an evening with a dear old dfh pal who got religion (after his son killed himself, so ya gotta forgive), and he and his assembly of god (sarah’s crew) wife (also dear and truly wonderful) watched a little tv. they chose — shockingly — 24!!
i’d never bothered to watch even a clip, though i knew the scandalous premise, so i stuck it out under the auspices of ‘education’. wow. education indeed.
i was lucky enough (heh heh) to catch the episode where jack and his dad are saved from kidnappers and head straight to the home of jack’s brother, who has apparently been implicated. replete with storm troopers, they terrorize the man’s family, haul his wife and kids away, and proceed to hook this guy up to electrodes that supposedly create excruciating pain without so much as a scratch. (all without so much as even a passing thought about legal protocols, human rights, and oh yeah, he’s my brother!!)
word has it the guy has been selling nuclear detonators to terrorists, detonators that his father’s company makes.
so jack jacks up the voltage, sears the neurons, but his bro don’t break. so he leaves the room (supposedly another attack is imminent? don’t recall, but surely…!) to his brother and father. bro implores his father to believe that he’ll never ever snitch on him; seems papa jack is the mastermind of all this. so dad the mastermind proceeds to crank it all the way up and snuffs his own son!
now, mind you, i’m turning green throughout all this, absolutely horrified at what i’m watching. so when the commercial break comes (too weird for words in that context), i say as much. to which, my bornagain buddy launches all the sound and fury of a very very desperately scared s***less and enraged, well, zealot. stuff about if i’d walked through his door with a bomb and his god-given rights and all that….stuff.
my friend is, honest to god, a very very gentle and mild-mannered person. some would call him a creampuff. i swear, it’s the truth. but — and he’s the first to admit it — despite his hippy days, he’s a redneck at heart. so this tirade really shocked me; i was shaking all over and could hardly breathe. when he finally calmed down enough to stop ranting, i could only manage to squeak, ‘ahem, mighty christian of ya, pal.’
of course, that launched another tirade.
it doesn’t take a phd in psych to figure out what he’s so defensive about. bear in mind, he had also been divorced by his son’s mother, so from one angle he had only himself to blame for his son’s death; from another, of course, it was all her fault, but my friend — completely true to his truest spirit — could not go there. but unlike the boy’s mother, he did not descend into what i would claim a normal pit of deep grieving and depression; instead, he turned to god and tried to put it all behind him. god’s will and all that pablum. instead, it remains churning inside him, festering and desperately seeking outlets like the one i described here for release.
sorry to go on about this, and there’s far more to the story than what i’ve shared, but i suspect you’ve grasped my point already. i really really dearly and sincerely love this man. he is, without question, the salt of the earth. but because i know his story, i can forgive his shortsightedness and truly pathetic attempts to maintain control over his world in ways that in fact work to his own undoing and expose, yes, hypocrisy.
there but for the grace of god, you know, go you and i.
all these crazy whackos parading around these town meetings with hateful epithets and even intimidating weapons, they each have a story. not all of them will be quite as sympathetic as the one i’ve shared, and some will still be outright infuriating in their shallow selfishness. but how are we to know? and how dare we presume to know?
this is the part of the christian message i take very seriously. and no, i am not a christian; i frankly believe our minds are too puny to come any where near close to comprehending what’s behind the universe(s) we experience, so the best i can do is practice awareness and equanimity for myself and hope that it works well enough to avoid harming others, especially the least among us. it works, it fails; i am human. what i fear is that, in my failings and my fears, i become more like those who are so afraid they become the monsters they rail against.
the man many call the christ shared this remarkable (and very liberal!) message, and just like all good ideas, it has all too often been co-opted by the worst among us. that is clearly, given history, very human.
yet another opportunity to exercise that compassion that seems to be such a challenge for so many among us. i just know i want to avoid with as much as i’ve got becoming like them.
“Christianity isn’t the problem.”
Perhaps it is the way Christianity has been “used”?
“Old Testament” “Christianity” was used to justify the destruction of the “heathen” native peoples of our own country.
“Old Testament” “Christianity” was used to justify slavery in our own country.
WO is correct. Today’s scared and frightened “Christians” who cannot understand the need of each to be a ‘good’ Samaritan were misled. Misled by people who claim to be Christian.
The Blackwater mentality of killing the infidel is embraced and led by a “Christian” (an Eric Prince among men) who regards it as a holy crusade.
And, we were often told that our previous President had daily chats with God. (THOSE transcripts must be very interesting. One suspects that George did most of the talking, and that God was more a factotum than anything else, at least in what passes as George’s mind.) I often wondered why “notable” Christians never seemed much bothered, at least publicly, by that particular circus. Certainly no Christian of “stature” ever questioned it, that I am aware of. No one ever asked George just what God had to say about war, torture, or deceit. Maybe George wasn’t listening?
Christianity may not be the problem … but the way that those in power often use it just might be.
Christianity when it is used to blind people to truth and the humanity of others, is just as dangerous, so far as I’m concerned, as any other philosophy which is perverted to the crass purposes of those in poweer.
DW
Well, I don’t think the OT/NT distinctions are irrelevant, but to me the real problem is that we just haven’t taught basic democratic structures and principles well enough in our schools, so a lot of people are easy targets for cynics who want to confuse them, make them feel as though their values and very lives are being challenged by others.
Why do so many people not grasp, eg, that separation of church and state is meant to protect religious freedom first of all? It isn’t meant to suppress anyone’s voice — just the opposite.
It does impose a responsibility/restriction on anyone who takes public office, though. That person cannot govern through his own private moral perspective — he has to turn to the constitution for guidance, not any sectarian dogma. For some reason, a lot of people have been taught that there is something wrong or immoral about that; they feel threatened by anyone who can make Christ’s distinction between the things that are God’s and the things that are Caesar’s. There’s the nub of the problem, and I’d love to see a few politicians brave enough to defy the sentimentalizing blurring of the lines.
What would happen if a candidate for president were to refuse to answer questions about his/her private faith?
I have always wondered just precisely WHAT is Caesar’s?
Money?
The license to kill?
The inherent “right” of the powerful to do as they wish to the weak?(Which is the view of the Straussian Dancers and the neo-cons who has so recently bedeviled us.)
The “right” to pillage and plunder the planet?
Presumably whatever “belongs” to the rest of us lies “somewhere”, either between or beneath … both God and Caesar … but that has never been clear to me.
Is the government, any government, legitimate or not, Caesar?
Was Bush Caesar?
Is Obama?
Perhaps it is the “Market”?
Rendering unto whatever is claimed to be Caesar appears, to me at least, to be a significant part of the many problems facing our species.
Mostly, because such rendering apparently absolves individual human beings of the responsibility of behaving AND thinking like human beings.
However, as an atheist, it is likely that I shall never understand.
The “Render unto Caesar” is not the important part of that story. To fully understand what that phrase means and why it flummoxed his opponents, you need to know both the story and the background. The Roman province of Iudaea was quite troublesome and subject to recurring tax revolts. In fact, it probably wasn’t worth the trouble to the Romans, except that it was close to Egypt and Egypt fed the whole Empire.
As presented in the gospels (and I’m not asking you to accept the truth of the story, just its presentation), the enemies of Jesus are trying to trap him by forcing him to directly challenge Roman authority or lose face with his followers and the public at large. Here’s the story:
Notice that Jesus says “Show me a denarius”. Everybody knew what was on a denarius, but Jesus specifically asks them produce the coin. This is to demonstrate their complicity with the Roman occupation. There were lots of different types of currency in circulation at the time. Jesus is implying that there were only two reasons for having a denarius. Either you had gotten it to pay the tax (the Romans didn’t accept other currency for tax payments) or you had gotten it as a payment from the Romans. Either way, the person carrying the denarius had already accepted Roman authority. I read the “Render unto Caesar” as Jesus saying, “The Romans already own you. Give them back the coin and then you can give your allegiance to God.” Jesus wants his questioners and his followers to admit their own agency and responsibility instead of being blind followers.
Thank you, WO.
That is the best explanation of the “rendering” remark I have ever heard.
However, it does not appear that such an interpretation is the one which holds sway among the many myths which people “believe” about Christianity.
Most interpretations suggest that there is a legitimate role, quite separate, for both God and Caesar, and that people owe their allegiance to both.
When it comes to religion it is all a matter of interpretation or “belief” in terms of how the practitioners of such religions choose (or are instructed) to perceive the meaning of their creed.
Christianity has gone through many changes and were today’s Christians to be magically transported back to the early Christian era they would be struck by the essentially “socialistic” nature of those earlier Christian Communities. Not to mention the fact that there were extant “gospels” which were subsequently deemed inappropriate and banned.
For Christianity to become the official religion of Rome, it had to divest itself of certain notions antithetical to a top-down hierarchy, and a singular “interpretation” putting temporal power in the hands of a Caesar and religious power in the hands of a Pope … which is where we are today. (Although America tried to separate the two, the Political Class is more than happy to claim that we are a Christian nation when it suits their purposes even if few or none “practice” what they “preach”.)
Again, WO, much appreciation, not simply for your answer, but for the wisdom, insight, and sensibility which you consistently share with the rest of us.
DW
Beautifully explained. Thx, WmO.
Thanks! Fascinating.
Forgive me for this one, because I am NOT an expert. I’m sure skdadl or others who know much better than I will intervene and provide a more correct response.
As a child, I thought Jesus was saying to his people to pay their taxes to the Romans as they were supposed to do, and to worship their deity within their own community. The Romans were perfectly ruthless once riled. But as long as people did pay their taxes to Rome, and did not make too much of a fuss, they were allowed to worship in their traditional ways. The Romans did not destroy synagogues and temples and replace them with Roman places of worship and demand veneration of Roman gods.
Jesus also admonished his people to ignore the Zealots who were eager for a showdown with Rome. He predicted, accurately, that the Romans would ruthlessly suppress such an uprising and the temple at Jerusalem would be destroyed.
It is within those contexts that I surmise (perhaps mistakenly or naively) that Jesus said to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s (taxes) and to God what is God’s (their worship).
Thnx for yr forbearance.
Thank you, fatster.
As a young child I was encouraged to think about the “rendering” in precisely that fashion …
As a somewhat older child, at twelve years of age, when I was to be taken into the church (Methodist) as a member, I began to have some questions. This “rendering” business being one of them.
I didn’t get to ask the Pastor about it however as I had invoked his wrath by wondering aloud in catechism class, whether the many miracles said to have been performed by Christ were actual, literal events (I had begun to hear that some of the miracles performed by certain “ministers” were of questionable authenticity) or subsequent “interpretations” added later to (as the Brits some years ago said in the much ignored “Downing Street Memo”) “sex up” the story. I didn’t use those terms, of course, and was of the opinion, which I stated clearly, that Christ’s example of humanity, compassion and empathy were sufficient unto themselves as inspiration for the rest of us.
My questions sufficiently disrupted the class that the Pastor must have felt that I had hijacked the class and was a “disruptive influence” as he told my parents. My mother was mortified. My father took it rather differently … when the ultimatum came down, that I should either quietly accept the truth of what I was told, or that I would be asked to leave, my father told me that the choice was mine to make.
So at the next meeting, when asked if I would accede to the generally held belief, I said I was not, in what I felt was good conscience, willing to do that.
I was invited to leave.
And thus began my spiritual journey.
fatster, to you as well I offer my deepest appreciation, not merely for responding to my comment, but for being a heavy-hitting member of the wheelhouse gang. Your comments and links are always most informative, and in these days of our nation’s continuing shame, very important.
Should our nation ever attain its proper humanity, spirit and soul, Marcy and the gang will have played a most significant role.
My thanks to all of you.
DW
Your father was a very wise man. I’m sure your spiritual journey will continue to enrich you and, in turn, benefit the lives of many who come in contact with you. Thanks ever so much for your generosity toward me. We’ll get there, DWBartoo. We have no choice, we fellow questers; that’s just what we do.
Thanks so much for sharing your story, DW. That choice was probably the best gift you ever gave your father.
So Peter and William Ockham do you think there is a vast space between what some Religious folks claim they believe about compassion, empathy,love for your neighbor and actively and sometimes viciously opposing health care for all? Do you see a contradiction?
well, ew, i’m sure with you in your concerns about the MSM being on vacation in their coverage of all this. god knows they’ve been on this permanent vacation from real journalism for well over a decade now. far more concerned about this fact than obama taking a real and deserved break.
but frankly, i have to say i’m most concerned of all because ‘our boy’ — that would be jon and stephen — will be on vacation for the next three weeks!!
especially after watching stewart take down betsy ‘death panels’ mccaughey last night, i realize just how important their satirizing of the bastardizing of the truth has become.
and boy, do we need it now!
hey, michael steele is triple daring obama to pass the bill! “you got the votes’!
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/…..-the-bill/
can’t say as i disagree with him.
O/T. ” It’s been a long time comin’ . . .” and hell has frozen over.
William Calley apologizes for My Lai massacre
By Dick McMichael – Special to the Ledger-Enquirer
“William Calley, the former Army lieutenant convicted on 22 counts of murder in the infamous My Lai Massacre in Vietnam, publicly apologized for the first time this week while speaking in Columbus.
‘“There is not a day that goes by that I do not feel remorse for what happened that day in My Lai,” Calley told members of the Kiwanis Club of Greater Columbus on Wednesday. His voice started to break when he added, “I feel remorse for the Vietnamese who were killed, for their families, for the American soldiers involved and their families. I am very sorry.”’
More.
And more OT – Via Josh Gerstein at Politico:
And even more OT from Josh Gerstein of Politico:
Heh heh; I bet dollars to donuts the government will then try to impeach anything useful Rabbini gets out of KSM by arguing that KSM is not a reliable witness on the issue. But, you know, he is either reliable and credible on terrorism issues or he isn’t. What a clusterfuck of muck.
and @ 102 – how will that tie in with the rulings to the contrary in the Moussaoui and Padilla cases I wonder?
Turkeys – but this issue, of using classification and state secrets to cover up unconstitutional activity, is what should have been being hammered for a long time now in the courts, everytime these bizarre state secrets claims were made.
So they Department of Justice, charged with pursuing crime, says – hey, there’s all kinds of things that go into figuring out whether or not what was done is illegal or not. In making that argument – they flat out lie, bc under Bush and now Obama, the only one of these elements “Facts concerning whether surveillance may have occurred, how any surveillance may have been undertaken, under what authority, and the need or exigent threat the surveillance (if any) was intended to address in particular circumstances, would be relevant to assessing the lawfulness” that has mattered or been given any weight by DOJ is the one I bolded. Comey admitted as much under his questioning – the rest is farce, and they make sure everyone knows it is farce by adding on that, despite what those list of elements might, theoretically, be, it doesn’t really matter bc any examination of any of them “have been properly protected by the Government’s privilege assertion.”
So hey judge, all there’s all kinds of things that we would need to talk about, including whether or not the President authorized this (which is like, ya know, the only thing us Presidential Crime Consultants care about) but guess what – punked you into reading the list, bc hahahaha, the things you look at to see whether or not a crime was committed don’t matter bc the Office of the President, that authorized the crimes, is now saying no one can look at the evidence of whether it was a crime bc it’s a state secret. I swear they must recruit from the pool of auditioners from Jackass the Movie who also had a legal degree. Who knew such a big pool would only have a shallow end?
Reminds you of the torture arguments. We didn’t take this hammer and batter this child’s head with the “intent” to cause pain and fear of life and loss of life – we did it to ask questions. We didn’t take all kinds of DOJ and Presidential crime and surround it with classification and invocations of state secrets with the “intent” to cover our asses on our crimes – we did it to protect magical surveillance wizard who poofs info into existence for us.
The heart of the bad, though, takes you back to when Obama was first showing who he was and who he was going to be, with the FISA amendments where he agreed to make unConstitutional searches “legal” under a repulsive legislative scheme and pass out amnesty for the breaches of the Constitution from before the legislation.
argh
Labor is steppin’ up!
San Francisco’s Public Option a Model for America’s Health Care Reform
Steve Smith, director of communications at the California Labor Federation, highlights a real-life example of public option at work.
“For most working families, the idea of a health care public option is just a notion. But in San Francisco, it’s reality. And it works.
“AFL-CIO President John Sweeney joined San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, California Labor Federation Executive Secretary-Treasurer Art Pulaski and San Francisco Labor Council Executive Director Tim Paulson at City Hall yesterday to urge Congress to pass health care reform with a strong public option, touting the success of the city’s universal health care system.”
More.
I have to say that labor’s activism and support for health care is coming as a really pleasant surprise.
Also, I know that some regulars around these parts turn up their noses at TIME and Joe Klein, but he’s just written a superb, and deeply human, analysis of the fact that the Rich Scott type of GOP extremists reveal the depth and degree to which that party has now been taken over by nihilists.
That is certainly what I’ve observed in my region, and this analysis by Klein is IMHO quite important in terms of trying to see current American political dynamics clearly.
readerOfTeaLeaves, I hoped to find you here. At this link Bill Moyers gives a 90 minute PBS special back in 1987. IMO, it is the best clip I’ve ever seen. While watching it, I asked myself, “who at FDL should write the diary to present this documentary as it deserves?”
Your name quickly surfaced. Yes, it’s a long one, but at the end I was wishing it would go on and on.
Please give it a look, ROTL. I would be most pleased to see your evaluation and presentation.
I’m deeply honored that you thought of me, and I’ll give it a look this evening and comment here after I do so, acquarius74 ;-))
Big Happy here at your reply, readerOfTeaLeaves! You’ll understand why it has to be you when you watch it. :-) -> -> ->
Hooboy… after watching that 1987 stunner from Bill Moyers, I have 12 pages of note, so my thoughts won’t jell in one day… to be continued on Seminal or elsewhere…
Hooboy…
Thanks, readerOfTeaLeaves … “brick by brick, my citizens, brick by brick…”
Now you know why the diarist has to be you.
If anyone else wonders what rotl and I are raving about, here’s the link again.
Detainees Shown CIA Officers’ Photos
Justice Dept. Looking Into Whether Attorneys Broke Law at Guantanamo
By Peter Finn
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 21, 2009
………………….
Investigators are looking into allegations that laws protecting classified information were breached when three lawyers showed their clients the photographs, the sources said. The lawyers were apparently attempting to identify CIA officers and contractors involved in the agency’s interrogation of suspected al-Qaeda terrorists in facilities outside the United States, where the agency employed harsh techniques.
If detainees at the U.S. military prison in Cuba are tried, either in federal court or a military commission, defense lawyers are expected to attempt to call CIA personnel to testify.
The photos were taken by researchers hired by the John Adams Project, a joint effort of the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, to support military counsel at Guantanamo Bay, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the inquiry. It was unclear whether the Justice Department is also examining those organizations.
………………..
If proved, the allegations would highlight how aggressively both military lawyers and their allies in the human rights community are moving to shed light on the CIA’s interrogation practices and defend their clients.
Defense attorneys, however, described the investigation as an attempt by the government to intimidate them into not exposing what happened to their clients
Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/…../20…
@78
“We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another. “
Jonathan Swift.
I would like to see a commercial juxtaposing triple amputee Max Cleland-in a wheelchair- sitting outside the gate at Bush’s Crawford Ranch, circa Swiftboat Summer of ‘04, and waiting…and waiting…for Bush to come out of the house…which Bush NEVER did ,to accept a letter Cleland was attempting to deliver regarding Swiftboat tactics.
Split screen THAT with the hundreds of thousands of uninsured,lined up,waiting…and waiting -for healthcare,but NO ONE comes to open the gate, nor listens to their pleas for a public option.
ooh; very way cool idea. you should fine somewhere to pitch that.
or pull it together yourself on youtube.
seriously
@83
A voice over could say something to the effect …”In 2004 it was about Swiftboating…In 2008,it’s about slow boating health care reform.
Don’t let pirate lobbyists hijack the public option.”
as per my prediction that these incidents will come to haunt the gop:
http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/…..-arrested/
That is going to hurt. It should.
Paint a roof?
done
…metal roof…sticky oil based paint.
Paint job will last 8-10 years
and, just as jon and stephen have been carrying the free press banner on the front lines for us, here is michael moore’s latest trailer:
http://www.businessinsider.com…..ves-2009-8
this may serve to fill in the jon/stephen void in the next few weeks, and if the film’s opening is timely enough, it might even garner some support from the ranks of those who are capable of realizing that, hey, it’s the corporations who don’t want reform! what was i thinking?!?!
@86
I am not technology savvy…but I would more than gladly and freely offer up the idea to any here who are.
Man is the only animal that speaks….or…lies.
And the only one (it is claimed) who experiences embarrassment (and needs to …).
Lots of lying.
Little embarrassment.
Someone upthread was discussing Pat Robertson.
There is so much more about Robertson,and his background, than most of us in the general public have been told-particularly by the MSM.
I HIGHLY recommend this article.It PRE dates Sharlet’s book about The Family.
A LONG article,but worth every word.The source of early Robertson $$$ funding is of particular note.
If one cannot read it all at once,may I strongly recommend bookmarking for future reference?
WAY more than just about religion,its where political power intersects with PseudoChristianity.
EXPOSÉ: THE “CHRISTIAN” MAFIAThe term “Christian Mafia” is what several Washington politicians have termed the major conspirators and it is not intended to debase Christians or infer …
http://www.insider-magazine.com/ChristianMafia.htm – Cached – Similar
“Conservatives for PR”
Simply elegant, EW. Do they have a mole in their midst? Maybe they should drop trying to hijack the health care debate immediately so they can find out.
@82
I think there’s a lot to that.
ot
need a laugh
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Follow-up:
‘Death Panel’ Originator Resigns As Director Of Medical Company
By Rachel Slajda – August 21, 2009, 5:48PM
“Betsy McCaughey, possibly the first person to equate end-of-life counseling with government-enforced euthanasia, has resigned from the medical equipment company where she was a director.
“McCaughey, a former lieutenant governor of New York, appeared on The Daily Show last night to talk about health care reform, and was repeatedly torn down by host Jon Stewart.
“Cantrel Medical Corp., which creates specialized medical devices such as dialysis machines, announced today that McCaughey submitted her letter of resignation yesterday.”
Link.
“Why you would ruin such a beautifully written message by tacking on such an odious ending is beyond me.”
Simple… Friends of mine for perhaps 20 years are at that meeting in New Orleans. We collaborated in the 1980’s on establishing an AID’S Service Agency at the beginning of the epidemic, and have kept in touch ever since. That’s what they call it, and they have been sent by their orders to the meeting.
I also recently had a conversation about this with a member of the Teaching Order with which I studied way back when (Remember, I am pretty Senior here), and that conversation was to the same point. Leen would know which order I am talking about, because she attended High School in the same building where I went to Grade School for a couple of years — yes, way before any of the reforms post Vatican II.
I think the good nuns have a right to call it as they see it, and unless you have some sort of personal reason to call it by another name, and they are your friends, well just use their language. Rather like those formerly called Negroes deciding to be Black, then African-American, and then Afro-American.
Hyperbole cheapens real injustice. Always has, always will.
So… it’s not a real injustice, then? In your eyes, I mean?
The Vatican seems to think that women are of no real value, unless they’re nurses, teacher, or mothers. The rest of us, well, we can find someplace else … until the Vatican decides that it owns that venue also. (Not exaggerating: it claims that it’s entitled to speak for all Christians everywhere, including all of those who are not RC. And that it has the Only Correct Answer.)
Had a very similar experience in Catholic religion classes (everyday for 12 years). The first time I was willing to come out with the questions that had to do with some of the Catholic teachings was when I was 14 and in a comparative religion class (became intrigued with Buddhism at that point in my life) and was willing to ask a few of the questions I had had for years. Sister Maryanne almost threw me out of the class.
Thus my eyes were opened and my spiritual began.
Clearly my big objection is when people hide frightful attitudes and actions behind their alleged religious beliefs. Millions