How about listening to Muslims?

Leave it to the GOP such as Charles Krauthammer, Bill Bennett, Senator McCain and etc. to pay absolutely no attention to reality as they use the situation in Iran to look for political attacks on President Obama.  And leave it to “The Daily Show” with Jon Stewart” to come up with the one rebuttal that counts.  Stewart invited onto his show one Reza Aslam(?) who certainly understood the situation in Iran far better than the sour grapes eating GOP did, the moment the U.S. took sides on the Iranian issue, it would become a death sentence for the revolutionary movement.  And when you think about it, the fellow is entirely correct.  A 30 year history in which the U.S. meddled in Iranian affairs not necessarily to the better.  The U.S. also became the perfect foil for dudes such as Khomeni to rail against in his lifetime.  For Ahmedinejad to run against in the “elections” now being protested.  Aslam said that he didn’t think that McCain, et al had Iran’s best interests at heart.  That would be just as correct.  What is at the heart of Krauthammer, McCain, etc. bitching and moaning is that they are only looking for political leverage here on the home front to further target Dems as weak on… yada, yada, yada.  So a question for my readership, you can certainly respond if you wish; what ever happened to “no to foreign entanglements?”  Or for that matter, what ever happened to a people’s desire to bring about change by their own will?  Interference not asked for could in fact kill a nascent democratic movement instead of helping it to survive.  And I am sure that Bennett and etc. doing so much bleating about Obama’s “cowardly response” really aren’t concerned about that either.  As long as they can get at a party and a president that bested them on 4 November 2008.  How about that.

So, why not listen to the Muslims?  Maybe they do know a thing or two about the sort of future they would like.  The ones in Iran finally got very tired of oppressive state religion which determined whom would become president as opposed to the vote of the people.  Literally, a totalitarian dictatorship.  Why not listen to the ones in Iran; they took to the streets because they didn’t like to outcome of Ahmedinejad’s being put back into office long before the final votes were counted?  Their opposition was entirely homegrown.  And that was despite charges that Great Britain and the U.S. was “meddling” into Iranian affairs by Khamenei in his recent speech.  Actually, the U.S. had not meddled, as Aslam noted.  So, does McCain, Bennett, Krauthammer and etc. actually believe in human rights for Iranians being constantly beaten for assembling and speaking out against injustices?  Or are they more interested in seeing a GOP president and a return of a GOP majority?  Excuse me, but only such self interested political agendas would make the party not now in power totally tone deaf to the rest of the world.

And maybe they want an Armageddon so that Christ will finally come down from the heavens.

---

On the birther front; yeah, yeah; the people who throw out lawsuits left and right in various states trying to overturn a legitimate election; trying to remove a sitting president from office over a birth certificate…

One such “birther” adherent has pushed the issue for months since the 4 November 2008 election.  If Obama would just show his “real” birth certificate.  He did.  What Sarah Obama was reported to have said through carefully edited transcripts.  What some fellow signed an affidavit to assert that he “heard” her say that Obama was born in an Mombassa hospital.  Which one?  There’s Barack Obama sr and Barack Obama jr.  Maybe Sarah gave birth to her son in a hospital in Mombassa, but to the best of everyone else’s knowledge who went ahead and did the research; the grandson was born in Hawaii.  But of course, those who did the research are not to be believed.  On the other hand, those who have been engaging in the birther scam and who haven’t to date come up with something valid to hang a lawsuit on; they can be believed.

If Obama would just show his “real” birth certificate, it would all go away.  Obama showed his real birth certificate and that was how it got started.

At some point, the “birther” radicals are going to simply have to accept the fact that Alger Hiss stories of rags to riches; the poor who can pick themselves up by the bootstraps and make some claim to fame; can equally apply to minorities and those of mixed race.

As it is, I can think of nothing better as a weapon against the GOP by the Dems in the next election cycle.  See all these birther guys wasting taxpayers’ money with all these ridiculous attempts to unseat a legitimately elected president?  And just look at who they are supporting now! Can you really trust that GOP contender for the White House with such an anti-democratic faction working on his behalf?  Only the birthers could do the most to discredit what remains of the GOP.  Which is also why the GOP esp. and the so-called “conservative commentators” in particular fail to discuss them.  If they are ignored, will they just go away?  Not yet.

What it will take is for the group to be publicly ridiculed and questioned as to why they are motivated to question Obama’s legitimacy to be in office.  It must be because he isn’t “white enough.”  No other president has ever had that kind of challenge presented to him; even those who were first British settlers by descent before they became American by Revolutionary war.  Pretty sad.

Criticisms, criticisms.

I figured that this letter, funnier than hell ought to get a wider audience before discussing David Broder. (At least it’s short.)

TEA PARTYProtesters form political spectrum

In response to Fiona Gressler’s “Tea talk absent during Bush spending” on June 12, your answer is: “We the people” were happy that (1) We were kept safe; (2) we had a Republican president to balance the Democratic Congress; and (3) we still had the right to express our opinions without being called “racial” and “radical.”
If you watched any real news or attended a “We the People” tea party, you would see that there are just as many Democrats as Republicans protesting the ridiculous spending by our congress and president. Trillions of dollars are a far cry from millions!

Donna Lopez
Athol

Libby, Montana; that is the town where the asbestos mine formerly run by W.R. Grace is located, a town that is now dying from asbestos contamination.  During the last 8 years, as this saga of Libby, Montana was unfolding (as also reported by “The Inlander”); the GW administration dragged its heels on even helping the townspeople because I suppose that GW’s EPA was more for protecting the interests of W.R. Grace than seeing that justice was done on the behalf of that company’s employees, families and etc.  Only since the Obama administration has the EPA begun to take the initial steps toward rectifying a very bad situation there.  (Source:  Spokesman-Review editorial, “The Inlander”)  If letter writers such as Lopez were to dismiss totally the situation at Libby, Montana then yes, she could certainly argue that the previous Republican president “kept us safe.”  More accurately, GW didn’t hold accountable those business interests that were only interested in their profit margins as opposed to their customers and employees; let alone their neighbors.

Polls are tricky things, and David Broder wants to use polls as a rationale for attacking Obama on spending and etc. much like Lopez in that.  Well, according to the latest bright light on the horizon toward future economic recovery; Coeur d’Alene, Idaho is among those 6 metropolitan areas that is most likely to bounce back from the current recession by the end of 2009 (Source:  Coeur d’Alene Press and Spokesman-Review).  Well, that heavy deficit spending in the area of “trillions of dollars” flowing into the pockets of the American people that Lopez and other TEA Party goers carped so much about seems to have done some good.  Whereas the spending by the previous administration was either flowing out of country (Iraq) or solely into the pockets of the haves and have mores.  Only because Obama seems to have put a safety net under the American people to prevent any further free falling to hit with a hard bump way down there some where, do those polled find themselves “increasingly critical” of his domestic policies in particular.

Well, let’s put it bluntly; if Obama wants to try to save GM, Chrysler, the banking system and etc.; he is first looking toward jobs and the American people even before he shores up those same businesses with billions of dollars.  Who else is going to take over the American manufacturing of automobiles if in fact GM disappeared off the free market map?  Precisely, an American company that would be able to start from scratch, have the investors lined up, have the factory ready to go, and produce the car of the future?  One doesn’t exist! They were called “The Big 3″ automakers for a reason, they managed to squelch all start up companies in this nation and were only forced to compete with one another until foreign automakers began exporting far better manufactured cars into the U.S.  So, unless a foreign automaker takes over an American company; as was apparently the case with the Fiat and Chrysler deal, letting those companies bite the dust wouldn’t be an option.  This nation would have ultimately lost even more of its manufacturing base and this nation would become even more dependent on foreign manufacturers.  Which says a lot about the underlying ignorance of those polled.  Just as it says a lot about the underlying ignorance of Mr. Broder.  Obama must spend trillions to try to shore up a nation, its marketplace and a people that GW had allowed to decay over the last 8 years.

And in my estimation, Donna Lopez suffers short term memory problems, there was only a real Democratic Congress in the last two years; but enough GOP existed in that threadbare majority to block thoroughly any Dem initiative out there.  And when the GOP had ascended to a solid majority; they went as wild on the spending front as GW was more than happy to sign a blank check for them.  If that will tell you anything.  And by the way, tax cuts, tax breaks and any other subsidy also constitutes spending.  So, GW spent some trillions of dollars including the War in Iraq and Afghanistan, while in office.  And the people of Libby, Montana would disagree with Ms. Lopez’ assessment that GW had “kept them safe.”  GW’s d0mestic policies kept no one safe.

After the killings

George Tiller being gunned down in his church by a hate-filled Scott Roeder. Von Brunn killing an African-American security guard at the Washington, D.C. Holocaust Museum. And within days of extremism leading to violence, the Spokesman-Review publishes “Outside voices,” of selected excerpts from various (3) newspaper editorials all attacking the violence of the last week. And Leonard Pitts, jr. Who had his own chills up the spine moments of having to recount the hatred that has led to such terrible tragedies.  You most certainly could not call it anything else.

Of one such editorial in question, the author suggested a “change in the language” in order to reduce the incidences of hate-filled violence.  Well now, wouldn’t that be nice.  However, hate-filled rhetoric that comes from the various punditry that tends to populate certain “news shows,” esp. on Fox News Channel; is how they get their ratings.  And even if (as in the case of Bill O’Reilly) were to admit that such hate-filled rhetoric as calling an abortion provider a “baby killer” before a national audience did lead to the unhinged doing something about it; I highly doubt that the O’Reillys, the Hannitys, the Savages would do anything about “changing the language.”  Why would they “drive away a customer base?”  After all, anyone who’d listen to inflamed anti- this or that rhetoric is likely to be that unfortunate percentage of the people for whom hatred of this and that has never really gone away.  And they, in the 10s of thousands, to maybe a few million strong will look for an outlet, someone willing to listen to their venting, and lead them by the nose to ever more fervent extremism.  The tip of that iceberg is ultimately violence.

By visiting various message boards, chat rooms, blogs and etc.; I do know that hatred is alive and well in this nation.  When the Spokesman-Review posted a blog about the Dr. Tiller murder and the Operation Rescue(ing themselves from boredom) reaction to it; the thread came alive with those who wished to hold the woman solely accountable for her pregnancy and the death of the fetus.  Or who couldn’t quite find it within themselves to condemn the killing of the doctor.  Or who could indeed defend the woman’s obtaining the legal abortion service.  But the thread of hatred also appeared in printed letters to the editor which the Spokesman-Review had also published in its print edition.  The 10 to 1 argument that there is something wrong with you if you defend abortion rights.  The 10 to 1 argument that even though the death of Tiller being wrong, what he did was so fundamentally worse.  The self-righteousness, how so much more I am morally superior to all the rest of you benighted souls.  But in each and every case, the claims of “moral superiority” came with a caveat.  Precisely, that even if an anti-abortionist can say that abortion for reasons not relating to medical emergencies (and in some cases rape and incest) is murder; hatred is their underlying cause toward activism.  Hatred of the woman for rising above her aloted station.  Hatred of the doctor who’d willingly perform the procedure.  Hatred of the SCOTUS decision that made the procedure legal.  And in the teachings of Christ, hatred is the same as murder.

Most assuredly, hatred led to extremist behavior. And then onto murder.  I can certainly sympathize with Pitts wishing that after the civil rights struggle it had just all gone away.  It actually never did.  Whether as this morning’s editorials pointed out, Hispanics being held responsible for the souring of the economy.  Correction:  you can’t hold them responsible for the souring of the economy; but you can most certainly hold employers of illegal aliens accountable because they prefer cheap labor to a more expensive and American work force.  Just as you could also proclaim greed as a viable factor in why much of the economy ultimately went south.  But that it took years, decades; before the economy began to crumble under the weight of it.

But instead of being honest; the hate machine would rather deflect to anyone else but the people I have advocated for, the Bernie Madoff’s who definitely “made off” with millions billions of wealthy people’s money in a Ponzi scheme that I; the advocacy of less gvt wouldn’t have cared to hear that guys like Madoff could take advantage of lax regulations.  Instead, even though guys like Madoff become a reason  for greater gvt regulation; I must fear its “socialist power.”  Even though companies such as GM made itself anti-competitive by looking to gvt to delay and delay yet again seeking out and making use of the cutting edge technology that other companies in other countries such as Japan were willing to employ to ride out ever increasing gas prices that ultimately had consumers dumping gas guzzlers and seeking fuel efficient cars; I must only fear the Obama administration that offered federal bankruptcy protection to GM.  In short, in such hatred is a real lack of soul searching.  Not the cause, not the effect, only the consequence.

Reactionary is a word found in the dictionary.  Reactionary is an opposition force.  However, while one may be a “reactionary force” to defend something, one can also be a “reactionary force” out to destroy something as well.  Reactionary being applied here to all of the above:  is a behavior or a conduct applied to a situation “after the fact.”  Not to a situation as it occurred, or is on-going, but after the fact.  After the fact of Obama becoming president, only then are tea parties held.  After the fact of Obama and a majority Democrats assume control at the federal level, only then must cries of “socialism” begin to resound from sea to shining sea.  Never mind that the other reactionaries; those who flocked to the polls in droves; tired of a broken health care system, tired of no longer being the preferred work force here in this country, tired of the wealthy getting wealthier at their expense and etc.; put the Obama administration in by a majority vote.  What does that say?

What it does say is that the 25% or less of the populace who employ extremist language hates the country, the people and the democratic process that put an African-American into the White House and a Dem majority in Congress.  That many haters.  And they were on full display during the general election of 2008.  They also lost.

The general summary of such people:  they failed to grow up.  It is solely because of them that the GOP has become a minority without an inspiring leadership.  And through their extremism, they will continue to remind people as to why they ought not vote for the party that catered to such extremism during the last 8 years.  Nor is there a moral imperative in such hate.

“Changing the language,” would need to be only one of the starting points to end such destructive behavior.  Actually accepting one’s moral obligations to one’s God, one’s spiritual leader (Christ in this case) and the rest of society would have to be the rest of those factors.  Until the O’Reilleys, the Hannitys, the Savages and etc. begin to recognize that for themselves; it ain’t gonna happen.

The Dr. George Tiller Death

In the days after the shooting death of Dr. George Tiller, who has performed “controversial late term abortions,” the latest Kathleen Parker editorial. And you do have to hand it to her, she has no problem calling a spade a spade.  Precisely, Randall Terry of Operation Rescue(ing themselves from boredom) as well as Alan Keyes whom in Parker’s most correct view tend to muddy up the message.  And as Parker herself declared in her republished to the Spokesman-Review (Spokane, Washington) editorial, “makes her want to write checks to Planned Parenthood.”  Yeah, that bad.  Essentially, an editorial that argues, the messenger becomes the message.

As Ms. Parker also correctly notes; the GOP continuously catering to what becomes an extremist faction also tends to drive away what she regards as the more moderating voices to tone down the strident.  However, I should offer a correction to the claims that the wackoes are “right wing.”  I know what “the right” meant during the Reagan era:  limited gvt, individual liberty, constitutional constraints on gvt, a hands off free market view, anti-Communism, pro-military might, personal responsibility, against “collective rights.”  But during the Reagan era and beyond, those whom the GOP attracted with their guns, God, the fetus and gays screed; can’t be called “the right” by any stretch of the imagination.

In the Reagan era, gvt was against the individual rights of men.  In one of Reagan’s speeches can be found these words, “Government is the problem and not the solution.”  In the 1980s, this was defined as the epitome of conservative thinking.  Fresh off active duty Military; having seen for myself the danger of totalitarian thinking (I had paid a visit to the 1K zone that existed at the time between a divided Germany); I was greatly attracted to much of what was then called conservative thinking.  Too much gvt can be a threat.  The U.S. Constitution initially drafted by its framers and ratified by the people, ultimately the same done with the Bill of Rights, those amendments that put even further constraints on the power of gvt, ought not be superceded.  A people who truly believed in self-government would presumably be more self-reliant, more self-sufficient and therefore demand less from gvt.

However, with the guns, God, fetus and gays crowd; the only way such special interests could justify their existence is if they demanded more from gvt; when they weren’t waxing hysterically their fear and hatred of it, depending on whom was in power.  Wackoes, yes; but “right wing” is a bit more problematic.

Conservative as generally defined during the Reagan era (which mantra is now mostly taken up by the Libertarian party) seemed to be legitimate enough at the time.  But “conservative” seems to have become a catch phrase for arguments adopted since that time that once would have been absolutely unthinkable during the Reagan era.

• Limited gvt coupled with self-government:  Apparently, the limited gvt argument was only applicable to those other interest groups:  feminists, labor unions, minorities obtaining equal rights.  But when it comes to “my” agenda, I am all about demanding that gvt fulfill my expectations.
• Personal responsibility:  Not really can I trust you to recognize right from wrong, so I am going to impose my own version of the nanny state.  Such as demanding laws that define who can marry, such as making certain abortion procedures illegal, such as attempting to ban any form of fetal research.  Even more than this, I am going to demand money from your wallet so that I can employ my religious affiliation as an act of charity (the GW era); or insist that you hand over your tax dollars so that I can have that redistribution of wealth in the form of a tax voucher for my private school.  In short, “personal responsibility” as imposed by the state.

To put it bluntly, James Madison famous for his tax protests of church deacons being able to dip into the public purse for private income (that in fact only their specific church congregations should be providing) would be rolling in his grave.  The Republican party after all complained heavily (and no doubt with an eye to political gain) about the Democrats who held that the more gvt the better, the more regulations the better, the more people who could depend on a “kindly despot” of a gvt, the better.  At the time, it was a legitimate complaint.

But since that time who is it that now wants more gvt, more regulations, more people who can be dependent upon a “kindly despot” of a gvt; at least as long as it is in the hands of Republicans, oh you got that right, the guns, God, fetus and gays crowd.

Families have managed to survive or not for a long time without specific laws defining that marriage must only exist between one man and one woman.  If they survive, it would have been because an ernest effort was made by the families themselves toward surviving intact.  In short, gvt wasn’t needed to dictate whether and how families survived.  But gvt seems to have been needed when it came to families that would not survive; thus the no-fault divorce laws.  And in reaction to that, the “God” crowd who felt that “no-fault divorce” made it far too easy for families to simply break up.  And therefore, we must set in motion all efforts that through gvt we can force people who married to stay together “for the sake of the kids,” natch.  We might fear too much regulation (that favors labor unions and consumers); but we are expected to replace it with the regulation of the individual (fully contrary to the conservative idea of individual liberty).  From imposing by way the of gvt concepts of “family” onto the general public, to opposing abortion, stem cell research, and ultimately gays obtaining the most equal of rights inclusive of marriage; the social engineering religious activist apparently does not believe in self-sufficiency, self-reliance, gvt is the problem and not the solution, not if the gvt can be used to advance his agenda instead.  What would make him different from the Democrats and the special interests who hung like barnacles on the Dems’ boat?  Not really.  Not when such an individual or such a group doesn’t actually employ a conservative attitude once defined under Reagan.  In short, I can’t be bothered with actually doing it myself.

Hard work and the satisfaction with a job well done seems to have been replaced among the guns, God, fetus and gays crowd with our rallies, our hostile and hystrionic attacks, our TEA parties, and etc. to effect not the direction of the country, but of the government.  The gvt that has been wrested away from the GOP and placed through the democratic process firmly in the hands of the hated Democrats.  Our rallies, hostile and hystrionic attacks, our TEA parties, and etc. are a rejection of the fact that the American people made a choice on 4 November 2008 that made the GOP a decided minority.  Our hostile and hystrionic attacks, our TEA parties and etc. states categorically that when the people rose up and demanded change, our partisanship was on the greatest display declaring how unacceptable it was that the democratic process could actually exist in the first place.  Especially if it could put in place a Dem president and a Dem Congress.  We no longer had the gvt we desired, and so we shall engage in shrill attacks against the one we have now.

And now for the man with the gun.  Scott Roeder it seems is a fellow with plenty of certitudes.  Described at the time as an Old Testament kind of guy.  Well, the Ten Commandments declare all right that thou shalt not murder, but murdering in the name of the “child,” seems to be quite all right in Roeder’s world.  Problem with Roeder’s thinking:  an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, is this matter of personal injury.  Roeder isn’t and never was personally injured by the choice of a woman, any woman to have an abortion or to seek out Dr. Tiller for his services.  Which says what, exactly?  Precisely, that Roeder never believed in personal responsibility, individual accountability, his Christian limits (you can swing your fist as hard as you want but that it must not hit another person’s nose) when it came to a person who did not live as Roeder would have preferred he do so.  In short, Roeder happened to be of a totalitarian mindset that led him to kill an “abortion doctor.”  Isn’t that the crux of the matter?  The guns, God, fetus and gays crowd are totalitarian in nature.  Calling it “right wing” is to lend it legitimacy that it doesn’t deserve.

Racist and sexist

8 years ago, Judge Sonia Sotomayor made what has now become a most infamous speech, it involved these 32 words in which she described herself as a wise Latina woman who might just make decisions as a judge better than a white male. 8 years ago, that was back in 2001.  So, 8 years ago, where was Rush Limbaugh whining about the racism and sexism of this Latina and Roman Catholic judge?  (Source:  “Smart Bombs” Gary Crooks of the Spokesman-Review.)  I guess he wasn’t.  But then Judge Sotomayor wasn’t in the running for the U.S. Supreme court and the last president to nominate her to the federal bench anywhere, was a Republican by the name of George H.W. Bush.  Apparently, one can give quite a pass to Judges put on the bench by GOP presidents.

Gary Crooks mentioned in his latest “Smart Bombs” a Latino and Roman Catholic judge that the GOP wanted for SCOTUS and the Democrats protested vigorously.  Of course, the GOP made this argument that there must be something wrong with the Dems for opposing a minority for that position.  Well now,  the Democrats probably had a reason for opposing this Roman Catholic Latino judge, and it had to do with his politics. So 8 years later, Judge Sotomayor has been nominated to SCOTUS by a Democrat and abruptly her “unfortunate use of words” gets dredged up and jammed in her teeth.  Isn’t that amazing?

In the same paper, same day, a republished Kathleen Parker editorial about the same judge in question.  This time, Ms. Parker is literally chastising the wrathful among the “GOP faithful” for their particular attacks on Judge Sotomayor.  How about that, Kathleen Parker who is not known for giving much in the way of kudos to the Dems at any time, does have a few nice things to say about Obama’s pick.

I think I have my own chastisements for Limbaugh and etc.  It is this little matter of lacking in consistancy.  So, McCain lost, get over it.  White men don’t always make good decisions nor are they always wise.  After all, the last White Man to hold the highest office in the land made a known series of very bad decisions.  People who make bad decisions pretty constantly aren’t “wise.”  And when they go into denial about their bad decisions, that’s not wise either.  So, Limbaugh, are you still hurting that no matter how many tricks you pulled on the airwaves prior to 4 November 2008; McCain still lost to Obama?  Did it really flabergast Limbaugh to have misread the American mood that completely?

Kathleen Parker did mention the purveyor of white hot anger, Limbaugh as being among those who should back off on instant judging of Sotomayor.  Well, he should.  A Latino Roman Catholic who might have entered SCOTUS except for the Dems fierce opposition to his politics; and the GOP played no less than the race card when castigating the Dems for not simply caving in and fully approving a fellow despite his extreme positions, based of course on race; also have no leg to stand on when it comes to rendering a judgment on Sotomayor’s words.  According to one GOP member of the Senate declared that “she was no better than the rest of us.”  That’s quite a put down.  It suggests of the Senator that he feels utterly intimadated by that Latina Jurist.

---

On KREM 2 News this evening, some wild-eyed anti-abortionist took aim at a doctor who provides the procedure and killed him within his own church.  Anti-abortion=pro-death.  Guess we don’t need to see some of that God is Love rhetoric, forgiveness, leave the judgment to God as long as there is a cause.  And a reason to take a life.  Sad.  Very sad.