Friday, November 18, 2005

Response to the other side...

In July I posted here about Bernie Goldberg's 'new book' The 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America( and Al Franken is #37)with the blog title- I (hate) America. The reason I put the (hate) in parenthesis is because I do NOT really hate America, but according to the right I do. The right has a huge chip on their shoulders with their ‘If you’re not with us, you’re against us’ mentality. They claimed often that if Kerry was elected president the question wouldn’t be IF we were attacked again, but WHEN.
I titled the post I (hate) America because an author had published a list of 100 people who, according to him are hurting America. Most of these people are democrats, or people who question the republican attack machine. I put in my post the ‘attacks’ on Ted Kennedy. Ted is MY representative, and I felt he did a good job by voting against the president to allow W to attack Iraq. I personally like many of the people on the list, and indeed, there’s a link on this page and my own blog to Ted Rall [15]. The only reason I can see for Rall to be on the list, is because he has a dark sense of humor and uses it against the republicans.
I disliked this list because you have bunch of bleeding heart liberals © and no right wing hate monkeys © like Bill O’ Reilly or Ann Coulter on it or any of the Fox News crew, people who are destroying American culture far faster then the left.

I bring all this up because Evan brought to my attention the fact that someone recently responded to this post- with the following-
sue Brantley said...
Then leave America! You won't be missed and America will be a lot better for it.

Now I think from my post and hers, that she didn’t read my post. She didn’t get any level of Irony or that I’m sick of the right attacking the left. I don’t think that LIBERAL is a dirty word. And I’m proud to be one.

I’m not leaving the U.S. because guess what- I’m not in a teeny tiny minority. It’s not like Reagan where W. won all but one state…. Even if you allow for ‘republican’ reality, in 2000- W. won the electoral vote but NOT the popular vote- more people voted for Gore (and others) then W. W won in 2000 because of the electoral college. In 2004, while W. might’ve won based on fear, it hasn’t lasted.
In current polls, the American people agree with ME more then they agree with W. W’s polls numbers say less then 40% of America think he’s doing a good job and 70% of America [ a super majority] want the U.S. out of Iraq. W feels he doesn’t have to listen to polls because HE knows what’s right, I say he doesn’t listen to polls because he’s a spoiled little rich kid who wants to do what HE wants and not what the people want. Another majority that W doesn’t listen to is the majority of Americans who believe that Abortion should be legal.

So I have no plans on leaving, I have as much right to be here as anyone else. Did any of the Right Wing Hate Monkeys © leave when Clinton was in the White House? No… They tried everything in their power to demonize Bill ‘N Hillary and get them out of power… Now the left is trying to do the same thing and the right brands us traitors, liars and tells us to either get with the program, leave OUR country (as this woman did to me) or be smited by THEIR god for not getting with the program( as Pat Robertson did to a small town for refusing HIS god in THEIR school).
Ain’t gonna happen. We’re mad as heck, and we’re not gonna take it any more. We’re staying in the U.S. to try to take OUR country back in 2006.

Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Right to Privacy

The following was printed today in the editoral section of the NYT. So many of you might've already read it... BUT I want to make sure as many people read this as can... As it's a darn good idea.

Estelle Griswold is a name that anyone who cares about women’s rights, access to birth control, freedom of expression (read: looking at porn in your own home), and gay rights should familiarize themselves with. In a decision in 1965, the Supreme Court overturned Estelle’s conviction on charges that she—horrors!—made birth control available to married couples. At the time Connecticut—Connecticut!—had a law agin’ that sort of nonsense, as the state believed it was its job to discourage straight people from havng recreational sex. (Believe it or not, the having of recreational sex used to be a controversial topic. Sex, as many believed and few practiced, was strictly for procreation.)

The Supreme Court struck down that idiotic law, stating that it violated the “right to privacy.” Much flows from Griswold, including 2003’s Lawrence v. Texas, which found that even homos had a right to privacy, and that consensual, private homosexual sex can’t be criminalized. (That was the end of sodomy laws in the U.S.) You can read all about Griswold here.

Problematically, a right to privacy is not explicitly mentioned anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. The majority argued that the right was among the “unenumerated” rights implied by something called the “penumbrus,” which sounds like something that a sodomy law would prevent you from touching with your tongue.

Here we are, decades after Griswold, and social conservatives and liberals are constantly arguing about whether or not the right to privacy, which is a popular right (naturally enough), and one to which most Americans believe they’re entitled, is actually a right to which Americans are entitled, constitutionally-speaking. Liberals love it because the RTP underpins our constitutional right to have access to birth control, abortion services, gay sex, porn. Social conservatives hate it for that very reason.

The debate raged when John Roberts was being confirmed …, and it is raging again as Sam Alito’s nomination to the Supreme Court makes its way through the Senate …. Is the RTP in there? Or isn’t it?

I find myself wondering why we don’t just put it in there? If the Republicans can propose a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, can’t the Dems propose a “Right to Privacy” amendment? Since the RTP is popular (unlike the anti-gay marriage amendment), the Dems should put it out there and let the Republicans run around the country explainging why they’re against a right to privacy—not a winning position. Then, once it passes, we’ll be spared the debate over whether or not the RTP is in there every time a conservative is nominated to the Supreme Court.

The Right to Privacy Amendment—c’mon, Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Ted Kennedy, Patty Murray, Barak Obama! Propose it

Saturday, November 12, 2005

If you're not with them, they want you to go to H***

Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson warned residents of a rural Pennsylvania town Thursday that disaster may strike there because they "voted God out of your city" by ousting school board members who favored teaching intelligent design.
All eight Dover, Pa., school board members up for re-election were defeated Tuesday after trying to introduce "intelligent design" -- the belief that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by a higher power -- as an alternative to the theory of evolution.
"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God. You just rejected him from your city," Robertson said on the Christian Broadcasting Network's "700 Club."

The above quote is why I detest organized religion… because in my mind, it’s about the pope/rabbi/nut job telling you if you do NOT do what THEIR god tells you to do, their god will get angry and do something BAD to you.

I was happy when I read about the town’s choice, not only did the town’s vote agree with my choice on ‘intelligent design’, BUT they told the school board that the school board doesn’t speak for them. It’s important in a republic, such as we have that when someone you vote for doesn’t properly represent you, you vote for someone else. In 2002, when Kerry voted FOR the war in Iraq, I didn’t damn him I simply voted against him. I knew he would still win without my vote, but I wanted to send him a message. Sadly he didn’t get the message, as seen from his run in 2004, but I tried to let him know how I felt in a proper manner. I didn’t threaten to take away his cookie [as did the guy who’s the current pope], thus damning him.
I really don’t like people whose only response when you disagree with them is ‘go to hell!’ Which it turns out, is usually where I want them to go.

Friday, November 11, 2005

Veteran's Day

I went by Boston's City Hall for a possible job lead.
While I knew today was Veteran’s Day... I really didn't give any thought to what might be going on by City Hall. And indeed I felt pleasantly surprised.

Yes there were a bunch of soldiers in dress uniforms, but most of the crowd around the 'official' event were aged vets with sweatshirts saying 'impeach bush' and signs reading 'support the troops, bring them back' and the Kerry quote[ that got far too little airtime in the 2004 election] " 'How do you ask a soldier to be the last person to die for a lie?"

This made me proud. I stopped to talk to one of the vets that had an impeach bush t-shirt. I wanted him to know that 'younger' people were listening to him. I told him that I felt it was a darn shame that the media has let us down... When was the last time they mentioned how many Iraqis have died due to the war or mentioned the depleted uranium weapons the U.S. is using Iraq. He nodded, and shook his head and agreed with me.

I was happy to have chatted this man up. He said that he had been arrested with Cindy Sheehan in D.C. I told him that I was proud of what he and Cindy were doing. How I felt it was important to keep educating people on what the U.S. is doing in Iraq and how it's affecting the citizens of both nations.

I hoped that he left with as good a feeling as I did. While I don't think any soldiers will be coming back until next year; my current hope is that since it's an election year, with people like Cindy Sheehan and this man, perhaps the moderate republicans will start agreeing to bring back the troops for fear of losing their seats in '06.

Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Makes me Sick.

Ok when I found out about this story I got physically sick.

Basically the IRS is going after a church for preaching that the Iraq war is wrong. The reason this makes me sick, is because a) In the past year or so I've read many stories about churches helping the army recruit and b) The current Pope( ya know the Nazi) in the 2004 election said that Kerry should be refused communion because he was pro-choice. Where was the IRS then? or C) Where was the IRS when the church started coming out against GAY marriage?

I guess places of worship aren't allowed to be political IF they go against W.'s religious ideas.

Tuesday, November 08, 2005

Vote Today!

Yeah... I know it's an odd year and all BUT there are several important things going on arround the country.
Here in Boston there's a mayoral race, same goes with NYC; two governor races in Va. and NJ; and of course the govenator's initiatives in Ca.

Not saying how YOU should vote[dems/against the initiatives] but that you should go to the polls and be counted.

Friday, November 04, 2005


I’m against Alito for one simple ruling. He’s decided that LEGALLY women shouldn’t get abortions without the ‘child’s’ father’s approval. I can think of several situations where that is just going to make the woman’s life a lot harder. But Alito, like a lot of religious conservatives don’t care a fig for a woman’s life just the seed in their belly.
This is unacceptable to me… and should be unacceptable to every feeling person in the United States.
To me abortion is a ‘litmus’ test… as it’s about a person’s privacy- in fact that’s how Roe V. Wade was settled, by ‘privacy laws’. Same goes for gay rights, if someone disagrees with the Lawrence V. Texas ruling; I’d prefer them not to be on the bench (and that includes the justices CURRENTLY on the bench who voted that gay sex isn’t legal). I’d rather the Supreme Court made companies act in a ‘proper’ manner then people.

Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Media Changes

A short time ago Uniquecrash5 asked me 5 questions… and one of them was what can be done to fix the American political system? I answered here, about how I wanted to change the all or nothing system we have- feeling that run off voting would be the best ‘quick fix’ for our system.
HOWEVER this made me want to blog about changes I feel MUST be done to the media. At the beginning of the radio age, the U.S. government was smart enough to LEASE the airwaves. Saying that the radio waves, and latter tv waves, belong to us as in ‘We the people’. Neither of the following ideas is new, but I think they are both good.

The first was presented to me over a decade ago by my step father, who is a fiscal republican (didn’t vote in the last two presidential elections), cheaper ads for campaigns, making it easier to run for office. One of the biggest problems with today’s politics is the current system favors the rich and the sell outs. In order to launch a good campaign, you have to raise OODLES of money to pay for radio and tv ads… so people know who you are( and/or how evil the other candidate is). By making tv and radio stations discount the amount they charge candidates you get rid of a lot of the evils of fund raising. Again it’s a simple thing that will never get done because a) politicians do NOT want to make it easier for people to run against them and b) the ‘special interest’ groups would lobby against this as it would make them lose MAJOR power.

The other idea, which would NEVER get past the republican controlled senate, go back to the pre Reagan, Equal Time Law/Act. Basically in the 40s, 50s, 60s ,and 70s Networks had ‘equal time laws’, which means for each story they did about one candidate, they’d have to do one about the other candidate… for each commercial they sold to one side, they’d have to sell equal time to the other side.
This chance of this being reinstated is about as likely as me throwing a brick and hitting Evan’s front window in Ca.
It won’t be done because the republicans have Fox News to help them do their dirty work. The republicans have radio stations and at least one entire network spewing their spin 24/7, there is no way they’d allow it to be shortened to 12/3 ½ … or worse to have Al Franken have a show following Bill.
But it would make the news a bit more fair and balanced.

Scares the heck out of me...

Ok... I read this story on Media Matters and it scares the stuffing out of me.

Basically someone called O'Reilly and had the NERVE to disagree with the fair AND balanced
O'Reilly. Now being fair AND balanced O'Reilly said
Anyway, we get another nut on the air. That's the worst part of doing this. Ninety percent of the callers are good, and then you get nuts. Now, we should go to their house. We should all go because I can get their addresses when they call in. We can trace them back, and we should all go over and surprise them

Get it. If you call The FACTOR and disagree- O'Reilly thinks he has the right to tell EVERYBODY where you live. Guess that's O'Reilly's way of looking out for you.

So I went to the game store to warn my friends there NEVER to call Fox for fear that they'll track him down. He pointed out that Fox had sorta done this....

By "sorta" I mean they put the address of a home an Islamic radical, but the 'terrorist' had moved out THREE YEARS AGO.
Can you imagine being in a house that Fox has labeled owned by a terrorist. I think the couple who live there should sue Fox- as should the town( as they have to have police make extra patrol arround the house to make sure the couple is safe)

And I warn you people not to call Fox... or think of calling them... for fear of O'Reilly unleashing his ditto heads( or whatever his unthinking fan base is called).

And that's DREW looking out for you.