"Bluecorky21" has officially sold his Christmas bonus gift on Ebay.
"Bluecorky21" is an Aircraft Mechanic who works for Horizon Airlines. For his Christmas bonus this year, he was not blessed with a turkey, a ham, a gift certificate...no, he was given a collectable coffee mug.
"Bluecorky21" said the mug is fine china - because the word "China" is printed in fine print on the bottom. The winner received not only the coffee mug, but a piece of chocolate wrapped in gold foil (there were five pieces, but his kids ate four of them), and a tea bag, so he or she will have something to drink from the "priceless" mug.
The seller wanted to buy his kids a Playstation2 this year, so he recommended his kids go stand by a freeway on-ramp, holding a clever sign and the coffee mug to be filled by the kindness of strangers. Apparently, there was already someone standing at the on-ramp, so he turned to Ebay.
The lucky winner of this bid was "Hournyc."
more info:
The actual ebay auction (with pictures)
a Google search for "Horizon Airlines"
12.26.2004
12.01.2004
The Morality Issue - at the Capital City Free Press...
My new article, "Caution: Hijacking in Progress" is in the December issue of the Capital City Free Press.
"What is moral about starting wars?....How does passing laws that result in more harm to our environment fit into a collection of good morals?"
And while you're there, be sure to read the Off the Record with Joseph O. Patton section titled, "A Closer Look at Moral Values in a 'Red State.'"
Capital City Free Press
"What is moral about starting wars?....How does passing laws that result in more harm to our environment fit into a collection of good morals?"
And while you're there, be sure to read the Off the Record with Joseph O. Patton section titled, "A Closer Look at Moral Values in a 'Red State.'"
Capital City Free Press
11.21.2004
NYC Restaurant refuses to serve Bush twins....
This is from Gawker.com:
"Freemans, tuesday night the 16th of nov. the bush twins , along with 2 massive secret service men, tried to have dinner. they were told by the maitre'd that they were full and would be for the next 4 years. upon hearing, the entire restaurant cheered and did a round of shots... it was amazing!!!"
wow.
more info:
Gawker.com
"Freemans, tuesday night the 16th of nov. the bush twins , along with 2 massive secret service men, tried to have dinner. they were told by the maitre'd that they were full and would be for the next 4 years. upon hearing, the entire restaurant cheered and did a round of shots... it was amazing!!!"
wow.
more info:
Gawker.com
11.14.2004
Arnold in 08?
A new ad campaign is launching soon in California in support of allowing naturalized citizens to run for President.
Under the current language of the Constitution, only "natural" citizens can be President, but a Silicon-Valley based company is sponsoring the ads advocating a Constitutional amendment to allow "naturalized" citizens to run.
A quote from Lissa Morgenthaler-Jones appears in the ad: "You cannot choose the land of your birth. You can choose the land you love."
If they were to allow naturalized citizens to run, would they also allow former Presidents to run again?
The Governator vs. Bill Clinton in 08?
Why not?
more info:
Ads to Back Schwarzenegger Presidential Bid
Under the current language of the Constitution, only "natural" citizens can be President, but a Silicon-Valley based company is sponsoring the ads advocating a Constitutional amendment to allow "naturalized" citizens to run.
A quote from Lissa Morgenthaler-Jones appears in the ad: "You cannot choose the land of your birth. You can choose the land you love."
If they were to allow naturalized citizens to run, would they also allow former Presidents to run again?
The Governator vs. Bill Clinton in 08?
Why not?
more info:
Ads to Back Schwarzenegger Presidential Bid
11.04.2004
Congratulations to the State of Alabama for moving backwards by about 50 years!
Alabama, and the majority of its citizenry can pat themselves on the back for voting in such a way as to continue to be the butt of every "Southern" joke on any late night television show.
Alabama, besides helping reelect a president who has trampled environmental laws, started wars resulting in thousands upon thousands of deaths, helped all those poor CEO's get those tax breaks they had been missing, lost jobs, and, as many have said, generally made the world a more dangerous place, you have also taken a 50-year step into the past.
Alabama has placed a racist in place one of the Alabama Supreme Court. Tom Parker, who has been called, "a man not afraid of the [rebel] flag" won the election, placing Alabama back into the stereotypes that have haunted this state for years. Parker, who was endorsed by Roy Moore (another person so stuck in an ideology that law and logic have no meaning) and the (neo-secessionists and racists) League of the South, will now make sure that all White Anglo-Saxon Protestants who profess their faith and love for Jesus Christ will receive justice.
Not only did this state elect a bigot, it also voted "no" on Amendment 2, which would have deleted the Jim-Crow wording from the state's constitution. The wording that many of us had hoped would be deleted mandated poll taxes and segregated schools. Thank god that the federal laws already outdated those moronic ideas anyway, but just for once, I had hoped that Alabama would do the right thing and reject that stuff anyway.
The Christian Coalition and Roy Moore were very much against Amendment 2. They claimed that there was some wording added to the Amendment that could potentially raise taxes. Apparently, some of the wording that would be deleted said that the state does not have a duty to fund public education.
Apparently, throwing money at the Alabama education system has not fixed the problems. In Montgomery County, there is a 10% sales tax on everything. That is one of the highest sales tax rates in the country, but every year, our "leaders" tell us how much worse the education system is getting.
But really, this state voted for Bush, Parker and "no" on Amendment 2. How educated can we possibly be?
more info:
As of now, the Amendment 2 vote has not been finalized, but it does not look good. The Montgomery Advertiser article "Amendment Two close to defeat" can be found here.
Alabama, besides helping reelect a president who has trampled environmental laws, started wars resulting in thousands upon thousands of deaths, helped all those poor CEO's get those tax breaks they had been missing, lost jobs, and, as many have said, generally made the world a more dangerous place, you have also taken a 50-year step into the past.
Alabama has placed a racist in place one of the Alabama Supreme Court. Tom Parker, who has been called, "a man not afraid of the [rebel] flag" won the election, placing Alabama back into the stereotypes that have haunted this state for years. Parker, who was endorsed by Roy Moore (another person so stuck in an ideology that law and logic have no meaning) and the (neo-secessionists and racists) League of the South, will now make sure that all White Anglo-Saxon Protestants who profess their faith and love for Jesus Christ will receive justice.
Not only did this state elect a bigot, it also voted "no" on Amendment 2, which would have deleted the Jim-Crow wording from the state's constitution. The wording that many of us had hoped would be deleted mandated poll taxes and segregated schools. Thank god that the federal laws already outdated those moronic ideas anyway, but just for once, I had hoped that Alabama would do the right thing and reject that stuff anyway.
The Christian Coalition and Roy Moore were very much against Amendment 2. They claimed that there was some wording added to the Amendment that could potentially raise taxes. Apparently, some of the wording that would be deleted said that the state does not have a duty to fund public education.
Apparently, throwing money at the Alabama education system has not fixed the problems. In Montgomery County, there is a 10% sales tax on everything. That is one of the highest sales tax rates in the country, but every year, our "leaders" tell us how much worse the education system is getting.
But really, this state voted for Bush, Parker and "no" on Amendment 2. How educated can we possibly be?
more info:
As of now, the Amendment 2 vote has not been finalized, but it does not look good. The Montgomery Advertiser article "Amendment Two close to defeat" can be found here.
10.27.2004
Quotes to think about...................
Senator Hillary Clinton:
"Kerry may sometimes change his positions to fit the facts. But Bush changes the facts to fit his positions."
John Stewart of The Daily Show in an interview with Newsweek:
Interviewer: "From a purely comic perspective, do you want four more years of Bush?"
Stewart: "Well, from a purely comic perspective, you'd want Mr. T to be president. That would be truly fun. But no, I don't cheer for the demise and erosion of the world purely for my own professional standing. I can write jokes about anything."
John Kerry for President
"Kerry may sometimes change his positions to fit the facts. But Bush changes the facts to fit his positions."
John Stewart of The Daily Show in an interview with Newsweek:
Interviewer: "From a purely comic perspective, do you want four more years of Bush?"
Stewart: "Well, from a purely comic perspective, you'd want Mr. T to be president. That would be truly fun. But no, I don't cheer for the demise and erosion of the world purely for my own professional standing. I can write jokes about anything."
John Kerry for President
10.26.2004
Florida 2000 is already showing its ugly head
Albuquerque, New Mexico....
Some early voters are having trouble with the new touch-screen voting machines...
Kim Griffith, an early voter, said that she went there to vote for John Kerry, but when she touched John Kerry's name, "a green check mark appeared before President Bush's name."
Other voters said the same thing, complaining how they had to "correct" their vote 5 or 6 times.
Election officials say the machines work well, and that the people are using the machines wrong. Bernalillo County Clerk Mary Herrera says that some of these voters could have "leaned [their] palm on the touch screen and it hit the wrong button."
November 3 is going to be very interesting.
more info:
Some Early Voters Say Machines Mark Incorrect Choices (ABQ Journal)
Some early voters are having trouble with the new touch-screen voting machines...
Kim Griffith, an early voter, said that she went there to vote for John Kerry, but when she touched John Kerry's name, "a green check mark appeared before President Bush's name."
Other voters said the same thing, complaining how they had to "correct" their vote 5 or 6 times.
Election officials say the machines work well, and that the people are using the machines wrong. Bernalillo County Clerk Mary Herrera says that some of these voters could have "leaned [their] palm on the touch screen and it hit the wrong button."
November 3 is going to be very interesting.
more info:
Some Early Voters Say Machines Mark Incorrect Choices (ABQ Journal)
The Politics of Religion
My new article titled, "The Politics of Religion in '04" was submitted to the Capital City Free Press for the November issue, but because of the upcoming election, the editor saw fit to post it early.
You can read it here.
...and be sure to check out the rest of the Capital City Free Press site here.
You can read it here.
...and be sure to check out the rest of the Capital City Free Press site here.
10.24.2004
Hate group endorses Michael Peroutka for President in 2004
The League of the South, a neo-secessionist hate group, had a special guest speaker at their 11th Annual national conference - Michael Peroutka.
Peroutka, the Constitution Party’s presidential candidate, said that getting the support of the League was an “easy task.” The League, like Peroutka, takes the Constitution literally, favoring “outlawing abortion, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service and making America a Bible-based republic."
While Peroutka believes that the GOP is “committed to an anti-American agenda,” he supports Republicans like Tom Parker (surprised?) and Roy Moore.
“Principles over politics” is Peroutka’s party’s motto, so he says he is not against all Republicans.
Concerning Tom Parker’s ties to hate groups (like the one he was addressing at this conference), Peroutka called the allegations “nonsense,” saying that the rebel flag “stands for justice, decency, integrity, and honesty.”
He went on to say, "There are those who have said it represents something else, but I believe that's historically inaccurate, a perversion."
While Parker doesn’t claim to be affiliated with the League of the South or the Council of Conservative Citizens (which in his case would be like attending a church every week without actually “joining” it), Peroutka is more open about his membership in the League.
A “multi-organisational (sic) group of Southern Leaders and Conservative Activists,” under the name “Southerners for Peroutka” has a banner ad on their web site that says:
“Effective January 21, 2005,"
“Illegal Immigrants: Deported."
“Roe v. Wade: Ignored."
“Sodomy-based Marriage: Voided."
“IRS: Abolished."
“Department of Education: Abolished."
“2nd Amendment: Shall Not Be Infringed."
“Can all this really be done?"
“President Peroutka 2004”
First of all, I can’t seem to make sense of a League of the South having a national conference. Is it national or is it just Southern? Is Peroutka running for President of the United States, or President of the South? President of the Confederacy? President of the ignorant racists and bigots?
Next, the Amendments are part of the Constitution, so if you take the Constitution literally, you cannot advocate a Bible-based republic. Read the First Amendment, and take it literally. Then read the Fourteenth Amendment, and take it literally. Oh, but I forgot – On yet another racist web site that supports Peroutka, they referred to the “bogus passage of the 14th Amendment.” So, I guess to Peroutka and his Constitution Party, taking the Constitution literally really means taking the parts you like literally and calling the parts you don’t like “bogus.”
When the statement was made that "There are those who have said [the rebel flag] represents something else, but I believe that's historically inaccurate, a perversion,” he was speaking to a neo-secessionist group who hates the 14th Amendment, which freed slaves. The League of the South are the ones who are “misrepresenting” the flag – and he’s a member (And let’s not forget about Tom Parker. We’ll call him an “honorary member.”)
Some say that ignorance is bliss. Peroutka wants to abolish the Department of Education. Hhhmmmmm…..
More info:
Montgomery Advertiser's article on the League's "national" conference (with a whopping 150 people in attendance)
Peroutka's propoganda on the web
[Ignorant]Southerners for Peroutka
Racists call the 14th Amendment "bogus"
Fun Fact: There are over 70 people who are running against George W. Bush. Click here for the complete list.
Peroutka, the Constitution Party’s presidential candidate, said that getting the support of the League was an “easy task.” The League, like Peroutka, takes the Constitution literally, favoring “outlawing abortion, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service and making America a Bible-based republic."
While Peroutka believes that the GOP is “committed to an anti-American agenda,” he supports Republicans like Tom Parker (surprised?) and Roy Moore.
“Principles over politics” is Peroutka’s party’s motto, so he says he is not against all Republicans.
Concerning Tom Parker’s ties to hate groups (like the one he was addressing at this conference), Peroutka called the allegations “nonsense,” saying that the rebel flag “stands for justice, decency, integrity, and honesty.”
He went on to say, "There are those who have said it represents something else, but I believe that's historically inaccurate, a perversion."
While Parker doesn’t claim to be affiliated with the League of the South or the Council of Conservative Citizens (which in his case would be like attending a church every week without actually “joining” it), Peroutka is more open about his membership in the League.
A “multi-organisational (sic) group of Southern Leaders and Conservative Activists,” under the name “Southerners for Peroutka” has a banner ad on their web site that says:
“Effective January 21, 2005,"
“Illegal Immigrants: Deported."
“Roe v. Wade: Ignored."
“Sodomy-based Marriage: Voided."
“IRS: Abolished."
“Department of Education: Abolished."
“2nd Amendment: Shall Not Be Infringed."
“Can all this really be done?"
“President Peroutka 2004”
First of all, I can’t seem to make sense of a League of the South having a national conference. Is it national or is it just Southern? Is Peroutka running for President of the United States, or President of the South? President of the Confederacy? President of the ignorant racists and bigots?
Next, the Amendments are part of the Constitution, so if you take the Constitution literally, you cannot advocate a Bible-based republic. Read the First Amendment, and take it literally. Then read the Fourteenth Amendment, and take it literally. Oh, but I forgot – On yet another racist web site that supports Peroutka, they referred to the “bogus passage of the 14th Amendment.” So, I guess to Peroutka and his Constitution Party, taking the Constitution literally really means taking the parts you like literally and calling the parts you don’t like “bogus.”
When the statement was made that "There are those who have said [the rebel flag] represents something else, but I believe that's historically inaccurate, a perversion,” he was speaking to a neo-secessionist group who hates the 14th Amendment, which freed slaves. The League of the South are the ones who are “misrepresenting” the flag – and he’s a member (And let’s not forget about Tom Parker. We’ll call him an “honorary member.”)
Some say that ignorance is bliss. Peroutka wants to abolish the Department of Education. Hhhmmmmm…..
More info:
Montgomery Advertiser's article on the League's "national" conference (with a whopping 150 people in attendance)
Peroutka's propoganda on the web
[Ignorant]Southerners for Peroutka
Racists call the 14th Amendment "bogus"
Fun Fact: There are over 70 people who are running against George W. Bush. Click here for the complete list.
10.19.2004
The Montgomery Advertiser broke the Tom Parker story today
In today's issue of the Montgomery Advertiser, the story about Tom Parker and his ties to hate groups appears.
Their article is here: http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/NEWSV5/storyV5PARKER19W.htm
The story I published yesterday appears below.
Their article is here: http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/NEWSV5/storyV5PARKER19W.htm
The story I published yesterday appears below.
10.18.2004
Republican Supreme Court Candidate Poses with Hate Group Leaders
Tom Parker, a Republican candidate for the Alabama Supreme Court, was shown posing with members of the Council of Conservative Citizens and the League of the South. Both organizations are classified as hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Leonard Wilson, a board member of the Council of Conservative Citizens, a white supremacist hate group, and Mike Whorton, the Alabama state leader of the League of the South, a “neo-secessionist” hate group, appear with Parker as Parker proudly holds the confederate battle flag.
The Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Report tells of Parker visiting Pat and Butch Godwin’s home in Selma, joining them as a speaker in a birthday celebration in honor of Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest. Along with being a wealthy slave trader, Forrest was the first grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.
Parker admitted to the Birmingham News that he was present at the Godwin’s home in July for the party, and said that Forrest had later tried to deactivate the Klan “because he was ‘shocked’ by it.”
The Godwin’s have reportedly attempted to block acknowledgement of the 1965 Selma to Montgomery March on Capitol Grounds, but they have attempted, through their organization called “Friends of Forrest, Inc.,” to place a statue of Forrest on public property. So far, all attempts have been unsuccessful.
Prior to the Forrest birthday party, The Intelligence Report tells of Parker appearing in Elba, AL, at the funeral of Alberta Stewart Martin. Martin was believed to have been the last living widow of a Confederate soldier. Parker passed out confederate battle flags to the attendees.
Parker was quoted in the Birmingham News as saying, “If there is any more appropriate place for the display of the Confederate battle flag than at the funeral for the last Confederate widow, I would like for someone to explain it to me. Political correctness should not cause people to dishonor our history.”
Parker calls the Southern Poverty Law Center “the most liberal, politically correct law firm in the country.”
Parker was former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore’s adviser, and happens to be the only one of the three candidates Moore endorsed in the primaries to win – and that win was by a narrow margin.
While Parker aligns himself with the Christian right, I still cannot figure out what is so “Christian” about hatred and bigotry. That is why I support Robert H. Smith for Alabama Supreme Court, Place 1.
more info:
Intelligence Report: Honoring the Confederacy
Birmingham News article on Parker
Robert H. Smith for AL Supreme Court
Alabama Democratic Party
Leonard Wilson, a board member of the Council of Conservative Citizens, a white supremacist hate group, and Mike Whorton, the Alabama state leader of the League of the South, a “neo-secessionist” hate group, appear with Parker as Parker proudly holds the confederate battle flag.
The Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Report tells of Parker visiting Pat and Butch Godwin’s home in Selma, joining them as a speaker in a birthday celebration in honor of Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest. Along with being a wealthy slave trader, Forrest was the first grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.
Parker admitted to the Birmingham News that he was present at the Godwin’s home in July for the party, and said that Forrest had later tried to deactivate the Klan “because he was ‘shocked’ by it.”
The Godwin’s have reportedly attempted to block acknowledgement of the 1965 Selma to Montgomery March on Capitol Grounds, but they have attempted, through their organization called “Friends of Forrest, Inc.,” to place a statue of Forrest on public property. So far, all attempts have been unsuccessful.
Prior to the Forrest birthday party, The Intelligence Report tells of Parker appearing in Elba, AL, at the funeral of Alberta Stewart Martin. Martin was believed to have been the last living widow of a Confederate soldier. Parker passed out confederate battle flags to the attendees.
Parker was quoted in the Birmingham News as saying, “If there is any more appropriate place for the display of the Confederate battle flag than at the funeral for the last Confederate widow, I would like for someone to explain it to me. Political correctness should not cause people to dishonor our history.”
Parker calls the Southern Poverty Law Center “the most liberal, politically correct law firm in the country.”
Parker was former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore’s adviser, and happens to be the only one of the three candidates Moore endorsed in the primaries to win – and that win was by a narrow margin.
While Parker aligns himself with the Christian right, I still cannot figure out what is so “Christian” about hatred and bigotry. That is why I support Robert H. Smith for Alabama Supreme Court, Place 1.
more info:
Intelligence Report: Honoring the Confederacy
Birmingham News article on Parker
Robert H. Smith for AL Supreme Court
Alabama Democratic Party
10.14.2004
Sinclair Broadcast Group should change its name to GOP TV (or did Fox News already take that one?)
Just when you thought the Vietnam War was over......
Sinclair Broadcasting Group, Inc. has decided to preempt its regularly scheduled programs to bring you an attack movie (oops, I mean "documentary") called "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal."
This "documentary" is nothing more than an attack movie created to belittle Democratic Presidential Candidate John Kerry.
Now, I really can't say that I'm surprised that Sinclair is airing this. If you'll remember back to April of this year, the name Sinclair was in the news. They ordered all of their ABC affiliate stations not to air a special edition of "Nightline", the news show hosted by Ted Koppel.
The special edition of "Nightline" that Sinclair refused to show was an episode in tribute to our soldiers who were killed in the Iraq War. (At that point, the death toll was over 500.) In the show, Ted Koppel would read the name of the soldier while a picture of the soldier would be on the screen.
Sinclair's General Council, Barry Faber, said of the episode, "We find it contrary to public interest," and Sinclair issued a statement saying that the program "appears to be motivated by a political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq."
Arizona Senator John McCain called Sinclair's decision "in short,...unpatriotic."
The "Nightline" episode never took a position on the war - it only read out names and showed pictures in tribute to fallen soldiers.
Now, a company that won't allow its stations to pay tribute to our soldiers is preempting programming to attack someone who was a soldier. Take a moment to let that sink it.
The "Stolen Honor" web site calls the movie "A documentary exposing John Kerry's record of betrayal."
Now what was Sinclair bitching about there being a "political agenda"???
From CNN: "According to campaign finance records, four of Sinclair's top executives each have given the maximum campaign contribution of $2,000 to the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign...
"...The executives have not given any donations to the campaign of Sen. John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic nominee, the records showed."
And according to OpenSecrets.org, Sinclair has donated $67,784 in political contributions. 97% of that money went to Republicans. 3% to Democrats. Imagine that.
Some people have said that "Stolen Honor" should be played because "Fahrenheit 9/11" is on TV, but these people tend to be morons who don't understand that there is a difference between network television and pay-per-view. Don't be a moron. Know the difference. If "Stolen Honor" was airing on pay-per-view right beside "Fahrenheit 9/11", there would be no problem.
Over 60,000 people have signed an online petition to stop Sinclair Broadcasting from playing partisan politics with the airwaves. Sign up at www.stopsinclair.org
more info:
Stop Sinclair
CNN article about Sinclair and "Nightline"
Sinclair (GOP TV) home page
"Stolen Honor" attack-umentary
Open Secrets tracks campaign contributions
Boycott Sinclair Advertisers: the blog
Sinclair Broadcasting Group, Inc. has decided to preempt its regularly scheduled programs to bring you an attack movie (oops, I mean "documentary") called "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal."
This "documentary" is nothing more than an attack movie created to belittle Democratic Presidential Candidate John Kerry.
Now, I really can't say that I'm surprised that Sinclair is airing this. If you'll remember back to April of this year, the name Sinclair was in the news. They ordered all of their ABC affiliate stations not to air a special edition of "Nightline", the news show hosted by Ted Koppel.
The special edition of "Nightline" that Sinclair refused to show was an episode in tribute to our soldiers who were killed in the Iraq War. (At that point, the death toll was over 500.) In the show, Ted Koppel would read the name of the soldier while a picture of the soldier would be on the screen.
Sinclair's General Council, Barry Faber, said of the episode, "We find it contrary to public interest," and Sinclair issued a statement saying that the program "appears to be motivated by a political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq."
Arizona Senator John McCain called Sinclair's decision "in short,...unpatriotic."
The "Nightline" episode never took a position on the war - it only read out names and showed pictures in tribute to fallen soldiers.
Now, a company that won't allow its stations to pay tribute to our soldiers is preempting programming to attack someone who was a soldier. Take a moment to let that sink it.
The "Stolen Honor" web site calls the movie "A documentary exposing John Kerry's record of betrayal."
Now what was Sinclair bitching about there being a "political agenda"???
From CNN: "According to campaign finance records, four of Sinclair's top executives each have given the maximum campaign contribution of $2,000 to the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign...
"...The executives have not given any donations to the campaign of Sen. John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic nominee, the records showed."
And according to OpenSecrets.org, Sinclair has donated $67,784 in political contributions. 97% of that money went to Republicans. 3% to Democrats. Imagine that.
Some people have said that "Stolen Honor" should be played because "Fahrenheit 9/11" is on TV, but these people tend to be morons who don't understand that there is a difference between network television and pay-per-view. Don't be a moron. Know the difference. If "Stolen Honor" was airing on pay-per-view right beside "Fahrenheit 9/11", there would be no problem.
Over 60,000 people have signed an online petition to stop Sinclair Broadcasting from playing partisan politics with the airwaves. Sign up at www.stopsinclair.org
more info:
Stop Sinclair
CNN article about Sinclair and "Nightline"
Sinclair (GOP TV) home page
"Stolen Honor" attack-umentary
Open Secrets tracks campaign contributions
Boycott Sinclair Advertisers: the blog
10.06.2004
New Scandal - No, not Oil for Food - Underwear for Votes
Just when you thought you had heard it all..........
Michael Moore (Fahrenheit 9/11, Bowling for Columbine) may soon be a wanted man. Literally.
In the state of Michigan, four county prosecutors, at the request of the Michigan GOP, have been asked to file charges against Michael Moore.
The charge: Giving underwear and Ramen noodles to students in exchange for their promise to vote on November 2.
The Michigan GOP says that this is illegal, calling it "bribery" and "coercion", and a violation of Michigan's election law.
Michael Moore is currently on his "Slacker Uprising Tour 2004" where he encourages students to get involved in the political process. He tells them that he understands their distrust of politicians, but also says that this election is too important not to get involved.
Moore says, "Keep sleeping 'til noon! Keep drinking beer! Stay on the sofa and watch as much TV as possible! But, please, just for me, on 11/2, I want you to leave the house and give voting a try -- just this once. The stakes this time are just too high...
"If they promise me that they'll do this, I give the guys a 3-pack of new Fruit of the Loom underwear, and the women get a day's supply of Ramen noodles, the sustenance of slackers everywhere."
This proves two things:
1. Life is stranger than fiction.
2. Republicans do have a sense of humor.
more info:
State GOP says Michael Moore illegally offered underwear in exchange for voting
Slacker Uprising Tour 2004
Republicans, Out of Ideas, Ask Prosecutors to Arrest Michael Moore
Michael Moore
Michael Moore (Fahrenheit 9/11, Bowling for Columbine) may soon be a wanted man. Literally.
In the state of Michigan, four county prosecutors, at the request of the Michigan GOP, have been asked to file charges against Michael Moore.
The charge: Giving underwear and Ramen noodles to students in exchange for their promise to vote on November 2.
The Michigan GOP says that this is illegal, calling it "bribery" and "coercion", and a violation of Michigan's election law.
Michael Moore is currently on his "Slacker Uprising Tour 2004" where he encourages students to get involved in the political process. He tells them that he understands their distrust of politicians, but also says that this election is too important not to get involved.
Moore says, "Keep sleeping 'til noon! Keep drinking beer! Stay on the sofa and watch as much TV as possible! But, please, just for me, on 11/2, I want you to leave the house and give voting a try -- just this once. The stakes this time are just too high...
"If they promise me that they'll do this, I give the guys a 3-pack of new Fruit of the Loom underwear, and the women get a day's supply of Ramen noodles, the sustenance of slackers everywhere."
This proves two things:
1. Life is stranger than fiction.
2. Republicans do have a sense of humor.
more info:
State GOP says Michael Moore illegally offered underwear in exchange for voting
Slacker Uprising Tour 2004
Republicans, Out of Ideas, Ask Prosecutors to Arrest Michael Moore
Michael Moore
10.02.2004
Bush vs. Kerry: The Campaigns
Be sure to check out the new issue of the Capital City Free Press.
My new article, "Bush vs. Kerry: The Campaigns" is now up in the October issue.
Find out what is true and false regarding the Bush and Kerry campaigns. "Yes, it would be nice if the media would do this for us, but why would they go to such trouble for free when they can make tons of money from all the advertising of the parties involved (or you can put quotation marks around “involved” if you’re Bush’s chief political strategist Karl Rove speaking about the Swift Boat ads)...."
Read more here.
Capital City Free Press
My new article, "Bush vs. Kerry: The Campaigns" is now up in the October issue.
Find out what is true and false regarding the Bush and Kerry campaigns. "Yes, it would be nice if the media would do this for us, but why would they go to such trouble for free when they can make tons of money from all the advertising of the parties involved (or you can put quotation marks around “involved” if you’re Bush’s chief political strategist Karl Rove speaking about the Swift Boat ads)...."
Read more here.
Capital City Free Press
9.15.2004
9/11 Widows Endorse John Kerry
A group of widows and one woman injured on 9/11 have officially endorsed John Kerry for President.
They cite many reasons, including the Bush administration's many fights with the 9/11 Commission on issues of funding, and time. They also cite the Bush administration's fight against the formation of a 9/11 Commission.
They are angry that the President has tied 9/11 in to attempt to justify a war in Iraq, especially while Osama bin Laden, terror suspect #1, is still running free.
But as we saw President Bush say in regards to the capture of bin Laden, "I just don't spend that much time on it, to be honest."
So, our President is not concerned with capturing the man who orchestrated the murder of 3,000 Americans? Oh well, at least he got Saddam, because as Bush said, "After all, this is a guy who tried to kill my dad at one time." Yes, Mr. Bush, you now have your revenge, and who knew that all it would cost would be the lives of 1,000 brave Americans?
more info:
9/11 Widows Group to Endorse Kerry
Bush not worried about bin Laden
"[Saddam] tried to kill my dad"
John Kerry for President
They cite many reasons, including the Bush administration's many fights with the 9/11 Commission on issues of funding, and time. They also cite the Bush administration's fight against the formation of a 9/11 Commission.
They are angry that the President has tied 9/11 in to attempt to justify a war in Iraq, especially while Osama bin Laden, terror suspect #1, is still running free.
But as we saw President Bush say in regards to the capture of bin Laden, "I just don't spend that much time on it, to be honest."
So, our President is not concerned with capturing the man who orchestrated the murder of 3,000 Americans? Oh well, at least he got Saddam, because as Bush said, "After all, this is a guy who tried to kill my dad at one time." Yes, Mr. Bush, you now have your revenge, and who knew that all it would cost would be the lives of 1,000 brave Americans?
more info:
9/11 Widows Group to Endorse Kerry
Bush not worried about bin Laden
"[Saddam] tried to kill my dad"
John Kerry for President
New York City Fined during the Republican National Convention
From Newsweek (September 13, 2004 issue):
"As many as 500,000 people packed New York City's streets to protest the president and his policies days before he arrived.
"By the weekend, police had arrested more than 1,800 demonstrators, many of whom were jailed for well over 30 hours.
"Hundreds were set free by late Thursday night, after a judge held the city in contempt and fined it $1,000 per protester."
To the unnamed judge mentioned in the article, we Americans thank you for upholding our First Amendment right of free speech, and our right to assemble ourselves and petition...
And thanks for fining the city that tried to take those rights away - that is what is known as the icing on the cake.
"As many as 500,000 people packed New York City's streets to protest the president and his policies days before he arrived.
"By the weekend, police had arrested more than 1,800 demonstrators, many of whom were jailed for well over 30 hours.
"Hundreds were set free by late Thursday night, after a judge held the city in contempt and fined it $1,000 per protester."
To the unnamed judge mentioned in the article, we Americans thank you for upholding our First Amendment right of free speech, and our right to assemble ourselves and petition...
And thanks for fining the city that tried to take those rights away - that is what is known as the icing on the cake.
9.14.2004
An Open Letter to Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions
Dear Senator Sessions,
I recently started reading about the Innocence Protection Act, an act that, from what I understand, will require DNA testing and provide adequate council for people accused of capital crimes. The Act's sponsors included many Republicans, Democrats, and Independents in both the House and the Senate.
It has already passed in the House, but I read that you, and our former Attorney General Bill Pryor, do not support this Act. Is it that you think our justice system is working fine?
I read this quote from Bill Pryor: "If your concern is to protect the innocent from being executed, then you need not worry; it is not occurring and is highly unlikely to occur."
So is it not true that at least 96 people have been set free from death rows around the country since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976?
Then I read that you think this Act would curtail state control of its criminal justice system and give anti-death penalty activists a greater role in appointing lawyers than sitting judges, and raise the standards for a lawyer's competency to unattainable levels.
Are you still against the Innocense Protection Act? Do you care that there is a possibility that innocent people could be on death row in your own state? Why should we not be a more responsible society and really prove beyond a "shadow of a doubt" that someone is guilty before we sentence them to die?
DNA testing would help. So would appointing competent lawyers.
I sincerely hope that you will change your mind and support this Act.
-Josh Carples
more info:
Contact Senator Jeff Sessions
Innocence Protection Act
http://www.fa-ir.org/alabama/corrupt/drinkard.htm
I recently started reading about the Innocence Protection Act, an act that, from what I understand, will require DNA testing and provide adequate council for people accused of capital crimes. The Act's sponsors included many Republicans, Democrats, and Independents in both the House and the Senate.
It has already passed in the House, but I read that you, and our former Attorney General Bill Pryor, do not support this Act. Is it that you think our justice system is working fine?
I read this quote from Bill Pryor: "If your concern is to protect the innocent from being executed, then you need not worry; it is not occurring and is highly unlikely to occur."
So is it not true that at least 96 people have been set free from death rows around the country since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976?
Then I read that you think this Act would curtail state control of its criminal justice system and give anti-death penalty activists a greater role in appointing lawyers than sitting judges, and raise the standards for a lawyer's competency to unattainable levels.
Are you still against the Innocense Protection Act? Do you care that there is a possibility that innocent people could be on death row in your own state? Why should we not be a more responsible society and really prove beyond a "shadow of a doubt" that someone is guilty before we sentence them to die?
DNA testing would help. So would appointing competent lawyers.
I sincerely hope that you will change your mind and support this Act.
-Josh Carples
more info:
Contact Senator Jeff Sessions
Innocence Protection Act
http://www.fa-ir.org/alabama/corrupt/drinkard.htm
9.02.2004
Swift Boat Vets for What?!
Be sure to visit the Capital City Free Press for the September issue, featuring my new article, "Swift Boat Vets for What?!".
"If you haven't heard all the back and forth "bomb throwing" (a term Bill O'Reilly loves to use when talking about Michael Moore, and anyone who disagrees with his whole "I'm here for the folks" charade) between the John Kerry and George W. Bush campaigns mixed up in the whole Swift Boat Veterans for "Truth" mess, then please change the channel away from MTV once in a while (at least give yourself time to read the ticker at the bottom of CNN - then you can finish watching that Britney Spears video on mute)...."
Read more at the Free Press
"If you haven't heard all the back and forth "bomb throwing" (a term Bill O'Reilly loves to use when talking about Michael Moore, and anyone who disagrees with his whole "I'm here for the folks" charade) between the John Kerry and George W. Bush campaigns mixed up in the whole Swift Boat Veterans for "Truth" mess, then please change the channel away from MTV once in a while (at least give yourself time to read the ticker at the bottom of CNN - then you can finish watching that Britney Spears video on mute)...."
Read more at the Free Press
8.18.2004
Who really got Bush's tax cuts?
That's a good question, and the answer you believed, at least until now, has really depended on whether you considered yourself "left" or "right", "liberal" or "conservative", pro-Kerry or pro-Bush....
Well, Sean Hannity can officially, to quote Bill O'Reilly, "shut up."
In Newsweek's "Conventional Wisdom" section (August 23, 2004), it says, "Nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office confirms that the top 1 percent got one third of the Bush tax cuts."
It goes on to say, "In ads, Bush honors sacrifice. When will those guys?"
Let's look at that statistic and let it sink in for a moment. The top 1% got 1/3 of the Bush tax cuts....
So that means that 99% of the population got to divide the two thirds that were left after Karl Rove, Enron's Ken "Kenny Boy" Lay, and Dick Cheney's old pals at Halliburton got their share.
Someone should tell Sean Hannity not to believe everything he reads in the Weekly Standard or the Republican National Committee's newsletter.
................................
Speaking of the Newsweek article, there's another interesting thing about Dick Cheney. "[Cheney] ridicules Kerry for saying U.S. should be more 'sensitive' in terror fight. Yo, Dick, Bush said same thing in March."
Public Speech: Free
Leather Shoes: $250
Reading about Dick Cheney putting his foot in his mouth: Priceless
There really are some things in life money can't buy.
more info:
Newsweek
Well, Sean Hannity can officially, to quote Bill O'Reilly, "shut up."
In Newsweek's "Conventional Wisdom" section (August 23, 2004), it says, "Nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office confirms that the top 1 percent got one third of the Bush tax cuts."
It goes on to say, "In ads, Bush honors sacrifice. When will those guys?"
Let's look at that statistic and let it sink in for a moment. The top 1% got 1/3 of the Bush tax cuts....
So that means that 99% of the population got to divide the two thirds that were left after Karl Rove, Enron's Ken "Kenny Boy" Lay, and Dick Cheney's old pals at Halliburton got their share.
Someone should tell Sean Hannity not to believe everything he reads in the Weekly Standard or the Republican National Committee's newsletter.
................................
Speaking of the Newsweek article, there's another interesting thing about Dick Cheney. "[Cheney] ridicules Kerry for saying U.S. should be more 'sensitive' in terror fight. Yo, Dick, Bush said same thing in March."
Public Speech: Free
Leather Shoes: $250
Reading about Dick Cheney putting his foot in his mouth: Priceless
There really are some things in life money can't buy.
more info:
Newsweek
8.09.2004
Who holds the Keyes to hypocrisy?
As we see in the political world almost daily, a politician's words usually end up coming back to haunt him - whether it's John Kerry voting for the $87 billion, then against it, or George W. Bush being against a constitutional ban on gay marriage in 2000, then promoting one in 2004.
After the Jack Ryan sex scandal (the GOP's ex-senatorial candidate from Illinois who was formerly married to actress Jeri Ryan, not the character from the Tom Clancy novels), the GOP did not have a candidate to run against Barack Obama, one of the Democrats' rising stars.
As of Wednesday night, August 4, the GOP extended their invitation to conservative talk-show host Alan Keyes.
You might remember Keyes from his attempt to get the Republican Presidential nomination in 1996 and 2000. Or you might remember him as being one of those 10-Commandments supporters who arrived in Montgomery, Alabama during the Roy Moore controversy (where you could hear individuals in the crowd say how "articulate" he is, with the rest of the sentence being "for a black man".)
Alan Keyes accepted the GOP's offer, and is planning to move from his home state of Maryland to Illinois so that he can run for Senate...to...um...represent the people of Illinois.
One could say that in politics there is a fine line between irony and hypocrisy...enter Alan Keyes.
Alan Keyes appeared on Fox News in March of 2000, and had this to say of Senator Hillary Clinton:
"I deeply resent the destruction of federalism represented by Hillary Clinton's willingness to go into a state she doesn't even live in and pretend to represent the people there...So I certainly wouldn't imitate it."
Of course not, Mr. Keyes, and we would not expect you to.
more info:
Hypocrite Alan Keyes Said Carpetbagging is Wrong
Illinois GOP offers Senate nod to Alan Keyes
After the Jack Ryan sex scandal (the GOP's ex-senatorial candidate from Illinois who was formerly married to actress Jeri Ryan, not the character from the Tom Clancy novels), the GOP did not have a candidate to run against Barack Obama, one of the Democrats' rising stars.
As of Wednesday night, August 4, the GOP extended their invitation to conservative talk-show host Alan Keyes.
You might remember Keyes from his attempt to get the Republican Presidential nomination in 1996 and 2000. Or you might remember him as being one of those 10-Commandments supporters who arrived in Montgomery, Alabama during the Roy Moore controversy (where you could hear individuals in the crowd say how "articulate" he is, with the rest of the sentence being "for a black man".)
Alan Keyes accepted the GOP's offer, and is planning to move from his home state of Maryland to Illinois so that he can run for Senate...to...um...represent the people of Illinois.
One could say that in politics there is a fine line between irony and hypocrisy...enter Alan Keyes.
Alan Keyes appeared on Fox News in March of 2000, and had this to say of Senator Hillary Clinton:
"I deeply resent the destruction of federalism represented by Hillary Clinton's willingness to go into a state she doesn't even live in and pretend to represent the people there...So I certainly wouldn't imitate it."
Of course not, Mr. Keyes, and we would not expect you to.
more info:
Hypocrite Alan Keyes Said Carpetbagging is Wrong
Illinois GOP offers Senate nod to Alan Keyes
8.05.2004
'Bushism' or Freudian Slip?
At the signing ceremony of the Department of Defense's 2005 Appropriations Act, Bush gave a speech in which he "misspoke".....or did he?
Bush:
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we...They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
It's good to know that Bush and al Qaeda think alike.
If the election goes well in November and we're inaugurating John Kerry as President, Bush won't have to look too far for a job opportunity. Our allies in England (London, to be exact) are looking for someone to be the nation's first court jester. They haven't had one since 1649. According to the add, you "must have [your] own outfit (with bells)."
more info:
Bush "misspeaks" during signing ceremony
Help Wanted: Court Jester
Bush:
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we...They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
It's good to know that Bush and al Qaeda think alike.
If the election goes well in November and we're inaugurating John Kerry as President, Bush won't have to look too far for a job opportunity. Our allies in England (London, to be exact) are looking for someone to be the nation's first court jester. They haven't had one since 1649. According to the add, you "must have [your] own outfit (with bells)."
more info:
Bush "misspeaks" during signing ceremony
Help Wanted: Court Jester
8.01.2004
Bush-Cheney '04 and the Race Card
The Arizona Daily Star reported that the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign has requested to know the race of one of the Star's reporters who would be covering an event.
The article states that all journalists who cover presidential or vice-presidential events must undergo a background check and provide their name, birthday, and social security number.
The Star provided all of that information willingly, but still received a call from the campaign asking to provide the reporter's race.
Why would the campaign need this other information?
According to Danny Diaz, a spokesman for Bush-Cheney '04, the journalist's race was needed for security purposes. When asked if it was typical White House practice to ask for that information, or if the journalist, Mamta Popat, was singled out because of her name (which is Indian), Diaz referred those questions to the Secret Service.
The Star's managing editor, Teri Hayt, refused to give the information, saying, "One has to wonder what they were going to do with that information...Because she has Indian ancestry, were they going to deny her access? I don't know."
Christine Walton, an organizer for the event, had asked two other Star editors for the journalist's race before speaking with Hayt. The other editors also refused to release the information.
Walton said the Secret Service needed to know so that they could differentiate between Popat and someone else who may share the same name.
Hayt called it "a very lame excuse."
After all, there were probably going to be a lot of "Mamta Popets" attending the event that day.
more info:
"Bush camp solicits race of Star staffer"
The article states that all journalists who cover presidential or vice-presidential events must undergo a background check and provide their name, birthday, and social security number.
The Star provided all of that information willingly, but still received a call from the campaign asking to provide the reporter's race.
Why would the campaign need this other information?
According to Danny Diaz, a spokesman for Bush-Cheney '04, the journalist's race was needed for security purposes. When asked if it was typical White House practice to ask for that information, or if the journalist, Mamta Popat, was singled out because of her name (which is Indian), Diaz referred those questions to the Secret Service.
The Star's managing editor, Teri Hayt, refused to give the information, saying, "One has to wonder what they were going to do with that information...Because she has Indian ancestry, were they going to deny her access? I don't know."
Christine Walton, an organizer for the event, had asked two other Star editors for the journalist's race before speaking with Hayt. The other editors also refused to release the information.
Walton said the Secret Service needed to know so that they could differentiate between Popat and someone else who may share the same name.
Hayt called it "a very lame excuse."
After all, there were probably going to be a lot of "Mamta Popets" attending the event that day.
more info:
"Bush camp solicits race of Star staffer"
"Owning the word liberal" at the Capital City Free Press
Be sure to check out my new article, "Owning the word liberal" at the Capital City Free Press.
"Now can someone please explain to me why being free from bigotry, favoring reform proposals, being open to new ideas and being tolerant of others is "evil" or something to be ashamed of?"
Read more here.
Check out the Free Press here.
"Now can someone please explain to me why being free from bigotry, favoring reform proposals, being open to new ideas and being tolerant of others is "evil" or something to be ashamed of?"
Read more here.
Check out the Free Press here.
7.28.2004
If Ignorance is Bliss...
...then there are a lot of happy people in the world today.
In a country as diverse as the USA, one might think that 40+ years of civil rights might teach people a valuable history lesson about the perils and dangers of racism, prejudice, and generalizations.
And then 9/11 happened, and it gave hate groups and other ignorant people a new race to focus their hatred on - Arabs.
Of course, many of these hate group members cannot tell the difference between someone from Mexico and someone from Saudi Arabia. In fact, the only reason they can differentiate between Spanish and Aramaic is because they went to a Mexican restaurant after seeing "The Passion of the Christ."
And I know you're thinking, "Well, that's only in places like Alabama and Mississippi, and maybe in some rural areas."
The scary part is that it's everywhere. 50 States that are supposed to be "united".
Tolerance.org, a project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, has documented violence against Arabs and Muslims, and they have arranged it by State. They also have many ideas and programs to help fight hate and promote tolerance. Check out the link here: Tolerance.org.
Visit the Tolerance site, the Southern Poverty Law Center site, and the Montgomery Peace Project* site to get information on how you can get involved to promote Peace and Tolerance.
*(Montgomery Peace Project is not affiliated with the Southern Poverty Law Center or Tolerance.org).
More info:
Tolerance.org
Southern Poverty Law Center
Montgomery Peace Project
In a country as diverse as the USA, one might think that 40+ years of civil rights might teach people a valuable history lesson about the perils and dangers of racism, prejudice, and generalizations.
And then 9/11 happened, and it gave hate groups and other ignorant people a new race to focus their hatred on - Arabs.
Of course, many of these hate group members cannot tell the difference between someone from Mexico and someone from Saudi Arabia. In fact, the only reason they can differentiate between Spanish and Aramaic is because they went to a Mexican restaurant after seeing "The Passion of the Christ."
And I know you're thinking, "Well, that's only in places like Alabama and Mississippi, and maybe in some rural areas."
The scary part is that it's everywhere. 50 States that are supposed to be "united".
Tolerance.org, a project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, has documented violence against Arabs and Muslims, and they have arranged it by State. They also have many ideas and programs to help fight hate and promote tolerance. Check out the link here: Tolerance.org.
Visit the Tolerance site, the Southern Poverty Law Center site, and the Montgomery Peace Project* site to get information on how you can get involved to promote Peace and Tolerance.
*(Montgomery Peace Project is not affiliated with the Southern Poverty Law Center or Tolerance.org).
More info:
Tolerance.org
Southern Poverty Law Center
Montgomery Peace Project
7.18.2004
Forwarding Deception
The internet has truly changed the way we communicate and find information.
Email is a great way to stay in touch, but many people are using it to spread falsehoods and lies - some unknowingly.
In recent weeks, I received two email forwards. Most people forward emails they like or agree with, rather than find out if it is true first. It is amazing what information you can find with a simple GOOGLE search.
Email #1: "Fwd: The Real SOCIAL SECURITY"
This extremely partisan email consists of half-truths and outright lies blaming Democrats for anything and everything wrong with Social Security, and people more concerned with an agenda than truth forward this without checking the facts.
Luckily, using the power of the internet, I stumbled across a web site, who seems to be non-partisan by the way, who investigated the claims of this email - FactCheck.org.
While Democrats were blamed for taxing Social Security benefits, FactCheck.org shows a photo of the President signing the tax bill into law. The year? 1983. The President? Ronald Reagan.
Click here to read the FactCheck.org article. It shows the original email along with the truth.
Email #2: "Fwd: Beware - Heinz Kerry"
This email makes outrageous claims that Senator John Kerry's wife, Teresa, has been donating money to fringe political groups and organizations through the Tides Foundation.
It begins with her life's history - where she grew up, went to school, who she married, etc. It then attempts to paint her character as moving to the "far left" and how she would be a dangerous first lady.
One thing the email does not do is give any references as to where the "information" was attained. In no way does it back up it's many claims.
Maxwell King, President of Heinz Endowments, clears up the falsehoods in the email, and gives the background to where the rumor started.
The "story" (if you can call it that) originated in an opinion column by the Capital Research Center, a conservative organization based in Washington, D.C. In the "story", the argument is made that the money from the Heinz Endowments can be used for anything the Tides Foundation wants to use it for.
There are many problems with this argument - a main one being that there is a legally binding contract. Because of this contract, every cent from the Heinz Endowments must go to specific projects in Pennsylvania. It cannot be "redirected" into anything else.
There are other problems with that argument, and King explains them in detail.
Click here to read the email and the facts at this Urban Legends Reference Page.
more info:
FactCheck.org
Urban Legends Reference Pages at Snopes.com
Urban Legends
Tides Foundation
Email is a great way to stay in touch, but many people are using it to spread falsehoods and lies - some unknowingly.
In recent weeks, I received two email forwards. Most people forward emails they like or agree with, rather than find out if it is true first. It is amazing what information you can find with a simple GOOGLE search.
Email #1: "Fwd: The Real SOCIAL SECURITY"
This extremely partisan email consists of half-truths and outright lies blaming Democrats for anything and everything wrong with Social Security, and people more concerned with an agenda than truth forward this without checking the facts.
Luckily, using the power of the internet, I stumbled across a web site, who seems to be non-partisan by the way, who investigated the claims of this email - FactCheck.org.
While Democrats were blamed for taxing Social Security benefits, FactCheck.org shows a photo of the President signing the tax bill into law. The year? 1983. The President? Ronald Reagan.
Click here to read the FactCheck.org article. It shows the original email along with the truth.
Email #2: "Fwd: Beware - Heinz Kerry"
This email makes outrageous claims that Senator John Kerry's wife, Teresa, has been donating money to fringe political groups and organizations through the Tides Foundation.
It begins with her life's history - where she grew up, went to school, who she married, etc. It then attempts to paint her character as moving to the "far left" and how she would be a dangerous first lady.
One thing the email does not do is give any references as to where the "information" was attained. In no way does it back up it's many claims.
Maxwell King, President of Heinz Endowments, clears up the falsehoods in the email, and gives the background to where the rumor started.
The "story" (if you can call it that) originated in an opinion column by the Capital Research Center, a conservative organization based in Washington, D.C. In the "story", the argument is made that the money from the Heinz Endowments can be used for anything the Tides Foundation wants to use it for.
There are many problems with this argument - a main one being that there is a legally binding contract. Because of this contract, every cent from the Heinz Endowments must go to specific projects in Pennsylvania. It cannot be "redirected" into anything else.
There are other problems with that argument, and King explains them in detail.
Click here to read the email and the facts at this Urban Legends Reference Page.
more info:
FactCheck.org
Urban Legends Reference Pages at Snopes.com
Urban Legends
Tides Foundation
Lucky for O'Reilly....
Lucky for Fox News' Bill O'Reilly, The O'Reilly Factor is pre-recorded.
Live television doesn't always give you enough time to edit your own spin for the "no spin zone."
David Cole was asked to appear on The Factor recently, and this was the first time he agreed to come on the show (and his last).
He wrote about his experience for The Nation, and apparently, Mr. O doesn't like to be called out for his own spin.
Click here to read the article.
Live television doesn't always give you enough time to edit your own spin for the "no spin zone."
David Cole was asked to appear on The Factor recently, and this was the first time he agreed to come on the show (and his last).
He wrote about his experience for The Nation, and apparently, Mr. O doesn't like to be called out for his own spin.
Click here to read the article.
7.02.2004
The Search for Truth in Corporate Media
My new article, "The Search for Truth in Corporate Media", appears in the July issue of the Capital City Free Press.
"Did Saddam Hussein have ties to Al Qaeda? The answer to this question depends on which news channel you're watching, or which newspaper you're reading, or what web site you're on. In today's level of mass confusion, the 'truth' is hidden in rhetoric - in the difference between 'collaborative relationship' and 'long-established ties'.".......
Read the rest of the article HERE.
Click here for the Capital City Free Press.
"Did Saddam Hussein have ties to Al Qaeda? The answer to this question depends on which news channel you're watching, or which newspaper you're reading, or what web site you're on. In today's level of mass confusion, the 'truth' is hidden in rhetoric - in the difference between 'collaborative relationship' and 'long-established ties'.".......
Read the rest of the article HERE.
Click here for the Capital City Free Press.
6.29.2004
Adolph Hitler is the new spokesman for Bush/Cheney '04
Actually, that title is not a joke.
Maverick Media produced a video for the Bush campaign called "Kerry's Coalition of the Wild-Eyed." In this video, it shows video clips of John Kerry, Michael Moore, Dick Gephardt, Howard Dean, and Al Gore...oh yeah, and Adolph Hitler.
In the scenes of Hitler, the words "sponsored by MoveOn.org" appear at the bottom. That is misleading.
Here's the real story:
MoveOn.org sponsored an ad contest called "Bush In 30 Seconds" in which there were over 1,500 submissions received. These submissions were put on the website www.bushin30seconds.org for the public to vote on and critique. Two of the submissions compared Bush and Hitler as warmongers.
It is important to note that MoveOn.org did not film or sponsor these ads. In fact, Wes Boyd, the founder of the MoveOn.org Voter Fund, released a press release saying, "The claim that MoveOn.org sponsored the ads comparing President Bush to Adolf Hitler is deliberately and maliciously misleading."
Boyd agreed that the Hitler ads "were in poor taste", and said that he "deeply regret[s] that they slipped through our screening process."
Now the Bush campaign is using the same footage that they spoke out against - to attack John Kerry. It is also worth noting that John Kerry had nothing to do with the MoveOn.org ads, but that doesn't stop the Bush campaign ad from saying, "The following video contains remarks made by and images from ads sponsored by Kerry Supporters."
The Bush campaign going from being angry about the MoveOn.org ads to its use of the ads to attack John Kerry is not the only irony in this scenario.
Remember 2002, during the Senate race in Georgia between Max Cleland and Saxby Chambliss? There were ads attacking Max Cleland, questioning his patriotism. (And for the record, Max Cleland is a triple amputee. He lost both legs and one arm in a grenade explosion in Vietnam. I could not find any record of Saxby Chambliss serving in the armed forces.)
In his press release, Wes Boyd says, "Contrast this attack with the behavior of the RNC and its allies when supporters of President Bush used TV ads morphing the face of Sen. Max Cleland (D-GA) into the image of Osama Bin Laden during the 2002 Senate race."
Contrary to what ideologues might think, dirty politics really does go both ways.
Here is John Kerry's response to the Bush ad (found on the Newsweek web site):
"'The fact that George Bush thinks it’s appropriate to use images of Adolf Hitler in his campaign raises serious questions about his fitness to spend another four years in the White House,' campaign spokesperson Phil Singer said in a statement. 'Adolf Hitler slaughtered millions of innocent people and has no place in a campaign that is supposed to be about the future and hope of this nation.' The Kerry campaign called on the president to remove the video from his Web site."
more info:
"Kerry's Coalition of the Wild-Eyed"
Newsweek's article with Kerry's response
Bush plays the Nazi Card @ slate.com
Wes Boyd's press release
Sen. Max Cleland: experiencing war
Bush In 30 Seconds
Maverick Media produced a video for the Bush campaign called "Kerry's Coalition of the Wild-Eyed." In this video, it shows video clips of John Kerry, Michael Moore, Dick Gephardt, Howard Dean, and Al Gore...oh yeah, and Adolph Hitler.
In the scenes of Hitler, the words "sponsored by MoveOn.org" appear at the bottom. That is misleading.
Here's the real story:
MoveOn.org sponsored an ad contest called "Bush In 30 Seconds" in which there were over 1,500 submissions received. These submissions were put on the website www.bushin30seconds.org for the public to vote on and critique. Two of the submissions compared Bush and Hitler as warmongers.
It is important to note that MoveOn.org did not film or sponsor these ads. In fact, Wes Boyd, the founder of the MoveOn.org Voter Fund, released a press release saying, "The claim that MoveOn.org sponsored the ads comparing President Bush to Adolf Hitler is deliberately and maliciously misleading."
Boyd agreed that the Hitler ads "were in poor taste", and said that he "deeply regret[s] that they slipped through our screening process."
Now the Bush campaign is using the same footage that they spoke out against - to attack John Kerry. It is also worth noting that John Kerry had nothing to do with the MoveOn.org ads, but that doesn't stop the Bush campaign ad from saying, "The following video contains remarks made by and images from ads sponsored by Kerry Supporters."
The Bush campaign going from being angry about the MoveOn.org ads to its use of the ads to attack John Kerry is not the only irony in this scenario.
Remember 2002, during the Senate race in Georgia between Max Cleland and Saxby Chambliss? There were ads attacking Max Cleland, questioning his patriotism. (And for the record, Max Cleland is a triple amputee. He lost both legs and one arm in a grenade explosion in Vietnam. I could not find any record of Saxby Chambliss serving in the armed forces.)
In his press release, Wes Boyd says, "Contrast this attack with the behavior of the RNC and its allies when supporters of President Bush used TV ads morphing the face of Sen. Max Cleland (D-GA) into the image of Osama Bin Laden during the 2002 Senate race."
Contrary to what ideologues might think, dirty politics really does go both ways.
Here is John Kerry's response to the Bush ad (found on the Newsweek web site):
"'The fact that George Bush thinks it’s appropriate to use images of Adolf Hitler in his campaign raises serious questions about his fitness to spend another four years in the White House,' campaign spokesperson Phil Singer said in a statement. 'Adolf Hitler slaughtered millions of innocent people and has no place in a campaign that is supposed to be about the future and hope of this nation.' The Kerry campaign called on the president to remove the video from his Web site."
more info:
"Kerry's Coalition of the Wild-Eyed"
Newsweek's article with Kerry's response
Bush plays the Nazi Card @ slate.com
Wes Boyd's press release
Sen. Max Cleland: experiencing war
Bush In 30 Seconds
6.23.2004
Club for Partisan Political Ads
I've seen a new political ad attacking Senator John Kerry recently on Fox News Channel. (And no matter how much Sean Hannity likes the ad, it was not sponsored by Fox News.)
The ad starts with Kerry in the year 1971, during a Congressional testimony, saying, "We cannot fight Communism all over the World, and I think we should have learned that lesson by now."
Then you see the late Ronald Reagan in 1987 at the Berlin Wall, saying, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"
Next, we see George W. Bush in 2001 at Ground Zero saying, "I can hear you, the rest of the world hears you, and the people who knocked these building down will hear all of us soon."
The ad then repeats the quote from Kerry, and ends with "John Kerry: Wrong then, Wrong now."
The ad was sponsored by an organization called Club For Growth, a politically right-wing Republican group.
Let's examine the ad:
John Kerry mentioned "Communism", not to be confused with "Terrorism." I can see where the Reagan quote would be appropriate in this scenario, but Bush never decided to fight Communism, and Communism is not dead.
If you think Communism is dead, just ask the people in China, North Korea, Vietnam, or Cuba.
Kerry made his comment in 1971, after coming back from the Vietnam War, which had recently ended. After we lost the Vietnam war, that country remains Communist to this day. So while Reagan may have done some good, he did not eliminate Communism from the world.
John Kerry's comments were regarding the Vietnam war, and had nothing to do with the "War on Terror".
Here's what they didn't mention in the ad:
While John Kerry was risking his life in Vietnam, where was George W. Bush? Was he in the Texas Air National Guard? Was he in Alabama training? Was he in Alabama campaigning for his dad's friends? Did he ever show up for his drills? Did he go AWOL? He has his dental records, so we know he got his teeth cleaned, but what else was he doing?
Club For Growth is more about partisan politics and ideologies than growth. This country needs a strong leader, who knows more about diplomacy than being a "Bring-it-on" cowboy.
more info:
John Kerry
George W Bush
Club for Growth
Vietnam War
Communist Nations
Did Dubya go AWOL?
The ad starts with Kerry in the year 1971, during a Congressional testimony, saying, "We cannot fight Communism all over the World, and I think we should have learned that lesson by now."
Then you see the late Ronald Reagan in 1987 at the Berlin Wall, saying, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"
Next, we see George W. Bush in 2001 at Ground Zero saying, "I can hear you, the rest of the world hears you, and the people who knocked these building down will hear all of us soon."
The ad then repeats the quote from Kerry, and ends with "John Kerry: Wrong then, Wrong now."
The ad was sponsored by an organization called Club For Growth, a politically right-wing Republican group.
Let's examine the ad:
John Kerry mentioned "Communism", not to be confused with "Terrorism." I can see where the Reagan quote would be appropriate in this scenario, but Bush never decided to fight Communism, and Communism is not dead.
If you think Communism is dead, just ask the people in China, North Korea, Vietnam, or Cuba.
Kerry made his comment in 1971, after coming back from the Vietnam War, which had recently ended. After we lost the Vietnam war, that country remains Communist to this day. So while Reagan may have done some good, he did not eliminate Communism from the world.
John Kerry's comments were regarding the Vietnam war, and had nothing to do with the "War on Terror".
Here's what they didn't mention in the ad:
While John Kerry was risking his life in Vietnam, where was George W. Bush? Was he in the Texas Air National Guard? Was he in Alabama training? Was he in Alabama campaigning for his dad's friends? Did he ever show up for his drills? Did he go AWOL? He has his dental records, so we know he got his teeth cleaned, but what else was he doing?
Club For Growth is more about partisan politics and ideologies than growth. This country needs a strong leader, who knows more about diplomacy than being a "Bring-it-on" cowboy.
more info:
John Kerry
George W Bush
Club for Growth
Vietnam War
Communist Nations
Did Dubya go AWOL?
6.16.2004
Michael Moore is experiencing the "Marilyn Manson effect"
A well-known fact is that controversy usually gets major publicity - especially when it comes to entertainment or politics. Remember when Marilyn Manson released the "Antichrist Superstar" album? During his tour for that album (and many subsequent albums/tours as well), there were large numbers of religious groups outside the concert venue with bullhorns and picket signs protesting the show.
Who showed up at each of these protests, furthering Marilyn Manson's popularity?
The media.
That's right. The media was always there - documenting, filming, broadcasting live, spreading the word about Marilyn Manson. During all of this controversy, his fan base grew.
Right now, Michael Moore, the award-winning director of "Bowling for Columbine" and author of the best-sellers "Stupid White Men" and "Dude, Where's My Country", is experiencing this "Marilyn Manson effect". He has a new film coming to theaters on June 25, 2004 called "Fahrenheit 9/11", and it has been receiving international publicity.
If you haven't followed all the controversy so far, here's the quick version:
Miramax, owned by Disney, puts $6 million into the film. Disney's CEO, Michael Eisner, said that neither Disney nor Miramax will release the film because of multiple excuses (depending on what day you read about it). "Fahrenheit 9/11" debuts at the Cannes Film Festival and wins the top award - the Palme D'or. Film is bought from Disney and will be distributed by Lions Gate Films and IFC Films in the US.
Now, an organization called "Move America Forward" is actively boycotting the film, asking their members to send emails to movie-theater owners (email addresses provided on their site), asking them not to show "Fahrenheit 9/11", calling it a "Bash America" film.
Just like Marilyn Manson, this boycotting will increase Moore's popularity, and more people will see this film.
Here's a quote from the "Move America Forward" web site:
"After it was pre-screened, one Blame American First viewer cried, 'It made me wanna burn my passport.'"
Conservatives love to call their opponents the "Blame America First" crowd, but it doesn't make much sense when you think about conservatives like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.
September 13,2001, Jerry Falwell goes on Pat Robertson's 700 Club and makes the following statement regarding the terrorist attacks of 9/11:
"I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way - all of them who have tried to secularize America - I point the finger in their face, and say, 'you helped this happen.'"
Pat Robertson's response: "Well, I totally concur."
Sounds like these conservatives were blaming certain groups of Americans for 9/11. So who is the "Blame America First" crowd again?
On the Laura Ingraham show today, she actually said something that I agreed with (imagine that) regarding the Michael Moore boycott. She was saying that this boycott was helping Michael Moore...and she's actually right on this one.
One thing that is taken for granted in this country is the First Amendment, guaranteeing the right to free speech. Attempting to stifle free speech sounds like an attempt to move America backwards, not "Move America Forward".
More info:
Michael Moore
Fahrenheit 9/11
Move America Forward
Michael Moore's book and films
Pat Robertson
Pat Robertson's 700 Club
Jerry Falwell
Falwell eats his words
Laura Ingraham
Lions Gate Films
IFC Films
Marilyn Manson
Who showed up at each of these protests, furthering Marilyn Manson's popularity?
The media.
That's right. The media was always there - documenting, filming, broadcasting live, spreading the word about Marilyn Manson. During all of this controversy, his fan base grew.
Right now, Michael Moore, the award-winning director of "Bowling for Columbine" and author of the best-sellers "Stupid White Men" and "Dude, Where's My Country", is experiencing this "Marilyn Manson effect". He has a new film coming to theaters on June 25, 2004 called "Fahrenheit 9/11", and it has been receiving international publicity.
If you haven't followed all the controversy so far, here's the quick version:
Miramax, owned by Disney, puts $6 million into the film. Disney's CEO, Michael Eisner, said that neither Disney nor Miramax will release the film because of multiple excuses (depending on what day you read about it). "Fahrenheit 9/11" debuts at the Cannes Film Festival and wins the top award - the Palme D'or. Film is bought from Disney and will be distributed by Lions Gate Films and IFC Films in the US.
Now, an organization called "Move America Forward" is actively boycotting the film, asking their members to send emails to movie-theater owners (email addresses provided on their site), asking them not to show "Fahrenheit 9/11", calling it a "Bash America" film.
Just like Marilyn Manson, this boycotting will increase Moore's popularity, and more people will see this film.
Here's a quote from the "Move America Forward" web site:
"After it was pre-screened, one Blame American First viewer cried, 'It made me wanna burn my passport.'"
Conservatives love to call their opponents the "Blame America First" crowd, but it doesn't make much sense when you think about conservatives like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.
September 13,2001, Jerry Falwell goes on Pat Robertson's 700 Club and makes the following statement regarding the terrorist attacks of 9/11:
"I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way - all of them who have tried to secularize America - I point the finger in their face, and say, 'you helped this happen.'"
Pat Robertson's response: "Well, I totally concur."
Sounds like these conservatives were blaming certain groups of Americans for 9/11. So who is the "Blame America First" crowd again?
On the Laura Ingraham show today, she actually said something that I agreed with (imagine that) regarding the Michael Moore boycott. She was saying that this boycott was helping Michael Moore...and she's actually right on this one.
One thing that is taken for granted in this country is the First Amendment, guaranteeing the right to free speech. Attempting to stifle free speech sounds like an attempt to move America backwards, not "Move America Forward".
More info:
Michael Moore
Fahrenheit 9/11
Move America Forward
Michael Moore's book and films
Pat Robertson
Pat Robertson's 700 Club
Jerry Falwell
Falwell eats his words
Laura Ingraham
Lions Gate Films
IFC Films
Marilyn Manson
Why don't the pundits act like their heroes?
Two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Arthur Schlesinger Jr. has a great article in the June 14, 2004 issue of Newsweek regarding the leadership of Ronald Reagan. In his article, he says of Reagan:
"He was not mean-spirited like Nixon, with contempt for blacks, Jews and liberals, nor did he regard political opponents as enemies of the republic."
It's too bad today's conservative commentators don't follow the actions of one of their heroes. The attacks that spew from the conservative pundits today range from terms like "un-American" and "treasonous" to "terrorist sympathizers".
In other words, Ann Coulter owes the world an apology.
more info:
Newsweek
Ann Coulter
"He was not mean-spirited like Nixon, with contempt for blacks, Jews and liberals, nor did he regard political opponents as enemies of the republic."
It's too bad today's conservative commentators don't follow the actions of one of their heroes. The attacks that spew from the conservative pundits today range from terms like "un-American" and "treasonous" to "terrorist sympathizers".
In other words, Ann Coulter owes the world an apology.
more info:
Newsweek
Ann Coulter
6.02.2004
Less is Moore
Leaving work around 6 pm, I only had one hour to get to the polls before they closed. I rushed there, making good time. I walked up to the line, showed my I.D., and was asked, "Republican or Democrat?".
I really don't like having to choose. I like to vote for people, not parties, so I responded with "Do I have to choose?".
Well, I had to pick one, but which one to pick....hhhmmmmm....well, I thought about what I was doing, and realized that I could either vote for someone, or vote against someone - so I picked Republican.
This is what entered my mind. I thought about how Roy Moore had made a mockery of the Alabama Supreme Court, metaphorically pissed on our Constitution's First Amendment, defied his job, and caused Alabama to become just another joke for the national media. Then I thought about how he endorsed certain candidates for the Alabama Supreme Court, and how they must be stopped.
All those ads, mail-outs, and radio commercials about how they will stand up for Christian values...but no mention of the law. Is it too much to ask for a judge to stand up for the law? To obey the law? To do your job?
I have no problem with someone standing up for their religious beliefs, but making your entire political campaign on it is wrong unless you're running for a Priest position.
I thought that I may be the only one who had done this until I read the Montgomery Advertiser's article: "Few Voters, Tight Races".
Here is an excerpt of the article:
"But others were drawn to the polls because they opposed Moore's slate of candidates.
'I came out specifically to vote against those candidates who Roy Moore supports,' Montgomery resident Terry Harris said. "I am a firm believer in the separation of church and state."
The outcome of the vote:
Only one of the three judges that Moore endorsed won, and that was by a narrow margin.
Mr. Terry Harris, you're a good man.
"Moore" info:
Few Voters, Tight Races
I really don't like having to choose. I like to vote for people, not parties, so I responded with "Do I have to choose?".
Well, I had to pick one, but which one to pick....hhhmmmmm....well, I thought about what I was doing, and realized that I could either vote for someone, or vote against someone - so I picked Republican.
This is what entered my mind. I thought about how Roy Moore had made a mockery of the Alabama Supreme Court, metaphorically pissed on our Constitution's First Amendment, defied his job, and caused Alabama to become just another joke for the national media. Then I thought about how he endorsed certain candidates for the Alabama Supreme Court, and how they must be stopped.
All those ads, mail-outs, and radio commercials about how they will stand up for Christian values...but no mention of the law. Is it too much to ask for a judge to stand up for the law? To obey the law? To do your job?
I have no problem with someone standing up for their religious beliefs, but making your entire political campaign on it is wrong unless you're running for a Priest position.
I thought that I may be the only one who had done this until I read the Montgomery Advertiser's article: "Few Voters, Tight Races".
Here is an excerpt of the article:
"But others were drawn to the polls because they opposed Moore's slate of candidates.
'I came out specifically to vote against those candidates who Roy Moore supports,' Montgomery resident Terry Harris said. "I am a firm believer in the separation of church and state."
The outcome of the vote:
Only one of the three judges that Moore endorsed won, and that was by a narrow margin.
Mr. Terry Harris, you're a good man.
"Moore" info:
Few Voters, Tight Races
The Partisan Lie Detector at the Capital City Free Press
Be sure to check out my new article, "The Partisan Lie Detector" in the June issue of the Capital City Free Press.
Here are the links:
Capital City Free Press
The Partisan Lie Detector
Here are the links:
Capital City Free Press
The Partisan Lie Detector
5.14.2004
Publicity for JoshCarples.com and A New Voice for the Right that's Wrong
Publicity
JoshCarples.com, "the news according to joshcarples", has been linked on the Capital City Free Press' web site. Their link has been added to the News/Politics link section to the right of this page. Be sure to check them out. Thanks to Joseph O. Patton, Montgomery has a progressive voice beyond the corporate media.
A New Voice For the Right that's Wrong
Just what America needed - a new ultra-right-wing, liberal-hating, and much of the time illogical personality on the radio. We really didn't have enough of those already.
Enter Rusty Humphries, a person who could very well become the next Sean Hannity in my opinion - and the two are a lot alike, really. They're both loud and obnoxious and rarely make a believable argument.
Now, I admit, I'm not an avid listener of Rusty. I'm usually at work during his show (unlike many other Americans - "Thank you, Mr. President"). The few times so far that I have heard at least a segment or two of the show, I notice an angry person who is...well...wrong - a lot.
During his show a couple of weeks ago, there were people calling in, talking about the Iraq War ("Gulf War II") and John Kerry. Rusty, with his oh-so-angry tone said, "John Kerry killed my dad." No, really. Are you still laughing? Rusty really said that John Kerry killed his dad. Apparently, Rusty's dad was killed during Vietnam, and because John Kerry (who fought in Vietnam, instead of jumping in front of the rich-kid line to be a Texas Air National Guardsman like our current commander-in-chief) returned from Vietnam and protested the war, Rusty's dad died.
First of all, I'm not attempting to show any disrespect to Rusty's dad. There are many brave soldiers who fought in Vietnam, and died in Vietnam, and I respect them and their sacrifice. What's disrespectful is his blaming John Kerry for his dad's death.
...and of course, Rusty ends his show that day yelling, "Am I the only one who remembers 9-11?!"
No, Rusty, you're not. You just remember it in a different way than what happened.
I remember everyone saying that Osama bin Laden and his terror network, al Qaeda, orchestrated and carried out the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Rusty's memory apparently consists of the 9-11 attacks with flashing images of an Arab in them, and he's just not sure whether that Arab is Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein. See, Rusty's a bit confused, as was our President a little over a year ago.
I remember watching Bill Maher's hour-long special that was based on his book, "When You Ride Alone, You Ride With Bin Laden." Bill mentioned the toppling of the Saddam statue in Iraq, and how someone said that we should melt the Saddam statue, and use it in a new World Trade Center building. The person said something to the effect of, "That'll show the rest of the world..." Bill said, "Yeah, that'll show the world that we can't tell one Arab from another."
Well, Rusty, no one's disputing that Saddam was a bad guy. Really, even the people who are against Gulf War II are glad that Saddam is out of power. We just believe that we went about it the wrong way.
...and at this point, we would hear arguments...
Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.
Where?
Saddam gassed his own people.
Yes, and we should have been pissed enough to do something about that when it happened in the 80's.
Saddam violated 17 UN Sanctions. If the UN does't enforce them, we have to.
Israel has violated at least 30, Turkey has more than 20, Morocco has more than 15. When are we going to enforce them?
We went over there to liberate people.
Good, because we have a history of liberating people, right? Was that was the first and second World Wars were about? What about Vietnam? Korea? It's all about the people, huh?
Here are some questions for you:
Saddam was accused of having nuclear weapons. North Korea admitted having a nuclear program with nuclear weapons. Why are we in Iraq instead of North Korea?
(My guess is that there's no oil in North Korea.)
Was Bush planning to attack Iraq before 9-11 even occurred?
(According to a new book by Bob Woodward, "Plan of Attack", maybe so.)
Is this war, at least partly, Bush's personal vendetta?
(This is from a 2002 speech found on CNN.com in which Bush said of Saddam, "After all, this is the guy who tried to kill my dad.")
Hey, at least the President isn't blaming John Kerry for trying to kill his dad. Take notes, Rusty.
More info:
Capital City Free Press
Rusty Humphries
(***If you go to Rusty's web site, he has a link on there of the actual video of Nick Berg being decapitated. Do not download that video unless you are prepared to be sickened. Honestly, he wasn't decapitated, his head was sawed off. It's horrible and brutal, and one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen. I can't even imagine what the Berg family is going through right now, and I truly hope that people reach out to them and give them support in these times.***)
"After all, this is the guy who tried to kill my dad."
Bill Maher - "When You Ride Alone, You Ride With Bin Laden"
Bob Woodward - "Plan of Attack"
JoshCarples.com, "the news according to joshcarples", has been linked on the Capital City Free Press' web site. Their link has been added to the News/Politics link section to the right of this page. Be sure to check them out. Thanks to Joseph O. Patton, Montgomery has a progressive voice beyond the corporate media.
A New Voice For the Right that's Wrong
Just what America needed - a new ultra-right-wing, liberal-hating, and much of the time illogical personality on the radio. We really didn't have enough of those already.
Enter Rusty Humphries, a person who could very well become the next Sean Hannity in my opinion - and the two are a lot alike, really. They're both loud and obnoxious and rarely make a believable argument.
Now, I admit, I'm not an avid listener of Rusty. I'm usually at work during his show (unlike many other Americans - "Thank you, Mr. President"). The few times so far that I have heard at least a segment or two of the show, I notice an angry person who is...well...wrong - a lot.
During his show a couple of weeks ago, there were people calling in, talking about the Iraq War ("Gulf War II") and John Kerry. Rusty, with his oh-so-angry tone said, "John Kerry killed my dad." No, really. Are you still laughing? Rusty really said that John Kerry killed his dad. Apparently, Rusty's dad was killed during Vietnam, and because John Kerry (who fought in Vietnam, instead of jumping in front of the rich-kid line to be a Texas Air National Guardsman like our current commander-in-chief) returned from Vietnam and protested the war, Rusty's dad died.
First of all, I'm not attempting to show any disrespect to Rusty's dad. There are many brave soldiers who fought in Vietnam, and died in Vietnam, and I respect them and their sacrifice. What's disrespectful is his blaming John Kerry for his dad's death.
...and of course, Rusty ends his show that day yelling, "Am I the only one who remembers 9-11?!"
No, Rusty, you're not. You just remember it in a different way than what happened.
I remember everyone saying that Osama bin Laden and his terror network, al Qaeda, orchestrated and carried out the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Rusty's memory apparently consists of the 9-11 attacks with flashing images of an Arab in them, and he's just not sure whether that Arab is Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein. See, Rusty's a bit confused, as was our President a little over a year ago.
I remember watching Bill Maher's hour-long special that was based on his book, "When You Ride Alone, You Ride With Bin Laden." Bill mentioned the toppling of the Saddam statue in Iraq, and how someone said that we should melt the Saddam statue, and use it in a new World Trade Center building. The person said something to the effect of, "That'll show the rest of the world..." Bill said, "Yeah, that'll show the world that we can't tell one Arab from another."
Well, Rusty, no one's disputing that Saddam was a bad guy. Really, even the people who are against Gulf War II are glad that Saddam is out of power. We just believe that we went about it the wrong way.
...and at this point, we would hear arguments...
Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.
Where?
Saddam gassed his own people.
Yes, and we should have been pissed enough to do something about that when it happened in the 80's.
Saddam violated 17 UN Sanctions. If the UN does't enforce them, we have to.
Israel has violated at least 30, Turkey has more than 20, Morocco has more than 15. When are we going to enforce them?
We went over there to liberate people.
Good, because we have a history of liberating people, right? Was that was the first and second World Wars were about? What about Vietnam? Korea? It's all about the people, huh?
Here are some questions for you:
Saddam was accused of having nuclear weapons. North Korea admitted having a nuclear program with nuclear weapons. Why are we in Iraq instead of North Korea?
(My guess is that there's no oil in North Korea.)
Was Bush planning to attack Iraq before 9-11 even occurred?
(According to a new book by Bob Woodward, "Plan of Attack", maybe so.)
Is this war, at least partly, Bush's personal vendetta?
(This is from a 2002 speech found on CNN.com in which Bush said of Saddam, "After all, this is the guy who tried to kill my dad.")
Hey, at least the President isn't blaming John Kerry for trying to kill his dad. Take notes, Rusty.
More info:
Capital City Free Press
Rusty Humphries
(***If you go to Rusty's web site, he has a link on there of the actual video of Nick Berg being decapitated. Do not download that video unless you are prepared to be sickened. Honestly, he wasn't decapitated, his head was sawed off. It's horrible and brutal, and one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen. I can't even imagine what the Berg family is going through right now, and I truly hope that people reach out to them and give them support in these times.***)
"After all, this is the guy who tried to kill my dad."
Bill Maher - "When You Ride Alone, You Ride With Bin Laden"
Bob Woodward - "Plan of Attack"
5.09.2004
Montgomery, Alabama, Can Be a Scary Place When You Think About It
When you think about it, Montgomery can be a scary place sometimes, although it can seem rather subtle. Here's the story:
What is probably Montgomery, Alabama's most popular source for local television news, WSFA channel 12, regularly has a poll on their web site (wsfa.com) in which people can vote on whatever question they ask at the time.
Currently, as of this article, the question is:
"Do you believe allegations of abuse by U.S. military personnel in Iraq are overblown?"
Here are the results as of May 9, around 1pm central time:
Yes: 65%
No: 31%
Undecided: 4%
After seeing part of the 10 o'clock news on Friday, May 7, I probably could have predicted these results. During the story regarding Abu Ghraib prison and Secretary of Defense Donald "Rummy" Rumsfeld, they got a "local reaction" to the story. Of course, being in Montgomery, nothing makes for better television than finding a redneck who continues to sport the infamous mullet haircut, and asking him serious questions about politics.
When asked the poll question, the unknown redneck, which we'll refer to as "Billy Bob", answered (and I paraphrase), "They'd be doing a lot worse to us if we was [sic] in the same situation."
(His answer isn't the only thing that's sad here. I find it sad and insulting that the national news media looks at Alabama and thinks we are all like "Billy Bob", but that could have a lot to do with the fact that "Billy Bob" is always the one who ends up on the news giving his opinion on world politics, unless his wife, "Billie Jo" ends up on there with her curlers and mumu instead.)
I find it sad that 65% of people who voted in that poll say that the allegations are "overblown". Do they really know what the allegations are? Or do they think it stops where the pictures on Fox News stops? (Because you know that here in the USA, we always get the whole story from our corporate-owned media conglomerates, right?)
According to a May 3, 2004 story on the WSFA web site, entitled "Torture Report Details Coming Out":
"A 53-page Army report includes allegations (among others) of the punching, slapping, and kicking of detainees; videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees; forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing; placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee’s neck and having a female Soldier pose for a picture. "
And that's not all that happened. According to articles by BBC News and Alternet.org, they quote a report by The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in which the ICRC's investigations found that the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib were "widespread, and in some cases 'tantamount to torture'."
Apparently, some people here in Montgomery don't constitute what happened as "torture" because they think it's just "overblown."
The BBC News article, "Red Cross saw 'widespread abuse'", said that "The Red Cross mentions a number of 'serious violations of humanitarian law', including beatings and prolonged solitary confinement. "
The Nation magazine had this to say in an article titled, "The Horror of Abu Ghraib":
"The appalling images--seven naked Iraqis piled on top of one another as two grinning GIs look on; a kneeling detainee posing as if he is performing oral sex on another naked, hooded male inmate; the battered body of a dead prisoner packed in ice--have led to criminal charges against six US soldiers and administrative penalties for seven officers. "
There have been many allegations of prisoners being sodomized by Coalition forces, and the military personnel who are being charged with these crimes are blaming a lack of training, or even "an unclear chain of command or responsibility", according to the Charlotte Observer. The Charlotte Observer's "Becoming a Monster" article says something I think we can all agree with:
"No training is needed to know not to sodomize a man with a broomstick. No one at any point in a military chain of command should have permitted it. This is not merely a mistake. It is an exercise in inhumanity, and a costly defeat for the American effort in Iraq."
The Irony:
In The Nation's article, Saudi commentator Dawud al-Shiryan said on Al Jazeera's English version web site, "Abu Ghraib prison was used for torture in Saddam's time. People will ask now: 'What's the difference between Saddam and Bush?' Nothing!"
The Charlotte Observer published a quote by philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche from "Beyond Good and Evil" (1886):
"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster."
According to "Billy Bob", it would have been worse if the situation was reversed, but don't we as Americans put ourselves at a higher standard? "Americans are different." said Senator Joe Lieberman during Rumsfeld's testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, "That's why we're outraged by this. That's why the apologies were due."
Rumsfeld has mentioned other pictures and videos of abuse that have not made it to the media yet, so we should expect more of this to come. Many questions will be answered. Will Rumsfeld lose his job? Will this create more violence in Iraq? Is this war really another Vietnam?
But don't worry, Montgomerians, according to "Billy Bob", it's all just "overblown."
More Info:
Torture Report Details Coming Out (WSFA)
Hard to Say You're Sorry (Alternet)
The Horror of Abu Ghraib (The Nation)
Rumsfeld Testifies Before Senate Armed Services Committee (complete transcript - Washington Post)
Red Cross saw 'widespread abuse' (BBC News)
Becoming a monster (Charlotte Observer)
What is probably Montgomery, Alabama's most popular source for local television news, WSFA channel 12, regularly has a poll on their web site (wsfa.com) in which people can vote on whatever question they ask at the time.
Currently, as of this article, the question is:
"Do you believe allegations of abuse by U.S. military personnel in Iraq are overblown?"
Here are the results as of May 9, around 1pm central time:
Yes: 65%
No: 31%
Undecided: 4%
After seeing part of the 10 o'clock news on Friday, May 7, I probably could have predicted these results. During the story regarding Abu Ghraib prison and Secretary of Defense Donald "Rummy" Rumsfeld, they got a "local reaction" to the story. Of course, being in Montgomery, nothing makes for better television than finding a redneck who continues to sport the infamous mullet haircut, and asking him serious questions about politics.
When asked the poll question, the unknown redneck, which we'll refer to as "Billy Bob", answered (and I paraphrase), "They'd be doing a lot worse to us if we was [sic] in the same situation."
(His answer isn't the only thing that's sad here. I find it sad and insulting that the national news media looks at Alabama and thinks we are all like "Billy Bob", but that could have a lot to do with the fact that "Billy Bob" is always the one who ends up on the news giving his opinion on world politics, unless his wife, "Billie Jo" ends up on there with her curlers and mumu instead.)
I find it sad that 65% of people who voted in that poll say that the allegations are "overblown". Do they really know what the allegations are? Or do they think it stops where the pictures on Fox News stops? (Because you know that here in the USA, we always get the whole story from our corporate-owned media conglomerates, right?)
According to a May 3, 2004 story on the WSFA web site, entitled "Torture Report Details Coming Out":
"A 53-page Army report includes allegations (among others) of the punching, slapping, and kicking of detainees; videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees; forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing; placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee’s neck and having a female Soldier pose for a picture. "
And that's not all that happened. According to articles by BBC News and Alternet.org, they quote a report by The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in which the ICRC's investigations found that the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib were "widespread, and in some cases 'tantamount to torture'."
Apparently, some people here in Montgomery don't constitute what happened as "torture" because they think it's just "overblown."
The BBC News article, "Red Cross saw 'widespread abuse'", said that "The Red Cross mentions a number of 'serious violations of humanitarian law', including beatings and prolonged solitary confinement. "
The Nation magazine had this to say in an article titled, "The Horror of Abu Ghraib":
"The appalling images--seven naked Iraqis piled on top of one another as two grinning GIs look on; a kneeling detainee posing as if he is performing oral sex on another naked, hooded male inmate; the battered body of a dead prisoner packed in ice--have led to criminal charges against six US soldiers and administrative penalties for seven officers. "
There have been many allegations of prisoners being sodomized by Coalition forces, and the military personnel who are being charged with these crimes are blaming a lack of training, or even "an unclear chain of command or responsibility", according to the Charlotte Observer. The Charlotte Observer's "Becoming a Monster" article says something I think we can all agree with:
"No training is needed to know not to sodomize a man with a broomstick. No one at any point in a military chain of command should have permitted it. This is not merely a mistake. It is an exercise in inhumanity, and a costly defeat for the American effort in Iraq."
The Irony:
In The Nation's article, Saudi commentator Dawud al-Shiryan said on Al Jazeera's English version web site, "Abu Ghraib prison was used for torture in Saddam's time. People will ask now: 'What's the difference between Saddam and Bush?' Nothing!"
The Charlotte Observer published a quote by philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche from "Beyond Good and Evil" (1886):
"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster."
According to "Billy Bob", it would have been worse if the situation was reversed, but don't we as Americans put ourselves at a higher standard? "Americans are different." said Senator Joe Lieberman during Rumsfeld's testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, "That's why we're outraged by this. That's why the apologies were due."
Rumsfeld has mentioned other pictures and videos of abuse that have not made it to the media yet, so we should expect more of this to come. Many questions will be answered. Will Rumsfeld lose his job? Will this create more violence in Iraq? Is this war really another Vietnam?
But don't worry, Montgomerians, according to "Billy Bob", it's all just "overblown."
More Info:
Torture Report Details Coming Out (WSFA)
Hard to Say You're Sorry (Alternet)
The Horror of Abu Ghraib (The Nation)
Rumsfeld Testifies Before Senate Armed Services Committee (complete transcript - Washington Post)
Red Cross saw 'widespread abuse' (BBC News)
Becoming a monster (Charlotte Observer)
5.02.2004
Just what Montgomery, Alabama needed....
In the heartland of pickup trucks, rebel flags, rednecks, and Roy Moore, Montgomery, Alabama, now has another country music radio station.
This reminds me of the famous line from "The Blues Brothers" when they were going to perform at a country bar. When asked what type of music is normally performed there, the bar tender replied, "We got both kinds - Country and Western."
WBAM in Montgomery, which is found on the FM dial at 98.9, has changed from a Top-40 station to become the new country station. The word "progression" wouldn't really be the best term here - going from Top-40 to Country seems to be more of a lateral move.
Montgomerians, you now have a choice: Country or Western....
...and as for the State of Alabama.....well, at least we're not in Mississippi.
more info:
WBAM the new kid country radio's block
(The link above is the actual title of an article in the Montgomery Advertiser. It seems like a word or two has been left out, like maybe "is" or "on", but that's how they worded it, or should I say: "that how worded it?")
This reminds me of the famous line from "The Blues Brothers" when they were going to perform at a country bar. When asked what type of music is normally performed there, the bar tender replied, "We got both kinds - Country and Western."
WBAM in Montgomery, which is found on the FM dial at 98.9, has changed from a Top-40 station to become the new country station. The word "progression" wouldn't really be the best term here - going from Top-40 to Country seems to be more of a lateral move.
Montgomerians, you now have a choice: Country or Western....
...and as for the State of Alabama.....well, at least we're not in Mississippi.
more info:
WBAM the new kid country radio's block
(The link above is the actual title of an article in the Montgomery Advertiser. It seems like a word or two has been left out, like maybe "is" or "on", but that's how they worded it, or should I say: "that how worded it?")
4.18.2004
Darkness and Silence: In Just Two Weeks
Air America Radio has been silenced in two of its biggest markets - in only two weeks of broadcasting.
This is very disappointing to many people, including myself (not that I can pick up the station in my car anyway). It's disappointing that an alternative voice has been silenced. Listen to talk radio (that is, if you can stomach the hatred spewed by most of the hosts). The vast majority of talk radio is hosted by ultra-rightwing conservatives who speak the same rhetoric on a daily basis. It's rather sad much of the time.
Sean Hannity arguing points that are pointless. For example, he argued recently that if a catastrophe happened in the next few years involving weapons of mass destruction, and those weapons were linked back to Saddam, and we had never gone into Iraq....do I really need to go on? Or are "what if" situations OK to use as an excuse for war?
Laura Ingraham, Ms. "Shut up and sing" herself, always talking about Hollywood's "elites", which are usually anyone who's ever been in a movie (or even musicians) and disagrees with her.
Glenn Beck spending close to 45 minutes talking about how you should not buy Michael Moore's "Dude, Where's My Country", which, coincidentally, sold a helluva lot more copies than his book, "The Real America."
Bill O'Reilly - Mr. "Independent" but almost always on the conservative side. The crusader in the social war against "secularism". Fair and Balanced?
Rush Limbaugh - not too much to say here. Even most conservatives think of him as a "big, fat idiot".
Now let's play a game:
Name at least 3 radio hosts who are considered "liberal".
I know of one, and there may be more, but if there are, I sure can't think of any except for Alan Colmes...and here's something I'm sure many people in Montgomery, AL did not know........
Alan Colmes' radio show is on the air - in Montgomery, AL.
Yes, amazingly, there is a liberal on the radio - even though he's on at 9pm, he's on the radio in Montgomery, AL. I'm surprised there hasn't been some kind of revolt against the station that carries him.
Until Air America radio gets this dispute settled in Chicago and L.A., (and until they are carried in more markets) you can still listen to them on their website: http://www.airamericaradio.com/. Be sure to check out the O'Franken Factor, as well as all the other great programming on there.
...and be sure to check out Alan Colmes on AM 1170 at 9pm in Montgomery, AL.
More info:
Air America Radio
Liberal Radio Goes Dark
This is very disappointing to many people, including myself (not that I can pick up the station in my car anyway). It's disappointing that an alternative voice has been silenced. Listen to talk radio (that is, if you can stomach the hatred spewed by most of the hosts). The vast majority of talk radio is hosted by ultra-rightwing conservatives who speak the same rhetoric on a daily basis. It's rather sad much of the time.
Sean Hannity arguing points that are pointless. For example, he argued recently that if a catastrophe happened in the next few years involving weapons of mass destruction, and those weapons were linked back to Saddam, and we had never gone into Iraq....do I really need to go on? Or are "what if" situations OK to use as an excuse for war?
Laura Ingraham, Ms. "Shut up and sing" herself, always talking about Hollywood's "elites", which are usually anyone who's ever been in a movie (or even musicians) and disagrees with her.
Glenn Beck spending close to 45 minutes talking about how you should not buy Michael Moore's "Dude, Where's My Country", which, coincidentally, sold a helluva lot more copies than his book, "The Real America."
Bill O'Reilly - Mr. "Independent" but almost always on the conservative side. The crusader in the social war against "secularism". Fair and Balanced?
Rush Limbaugh - not too much to say here. Even most conservatives think of him as a "big, fat idiot".
Now let's play a game:
Name at least 3 radio hosts who are considered "liberal".
I know of one, and there may be more, but if there are, I sure can't think of any except for Alan Colmes...and here's something I'm sure many people in Montgomery, AL did not know........
Alan Colmes' radio show is on the air - in Montgomery, AL.
Yes, amazingly, there is a liberal on the radio - even though he's on at 9pm, he's on the radio in Montgomery, AL. I'm surprised there hasn't been some kind of revolt against the station that carries him.
Until Air America radio gets this dispute settled in Chicago and L.A., (and until they are carried in more markets) you can still listen to them on their website: http://www.airamericaradio.com/. Be sure to check out the O'Franken Factor, as well as all the other great programming on there.
...and be sure to check out Alan Colmes on AM 1170 at 9pm in Montgomery, AL.
More info:
Air America Radio
Liberal Radio Goes Dark
3.28.2004
Uncovered: Truth vs. Deception
TRUTH
I know it's been a while since this site was updated, but today, I saw a documentary that was truly great. If you get a chance, see "Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War". It is "the story of how truth became the first American casualty in Iraq."
When there's an administration talking about weapons of mass destruction (WMD's), it gets attention, and after 9/11, the whole country listened....we listened to an administration tell us that there was an imminent threat to our security....an evil man who has WMD's, and we know he has them and we know where they are....
That changed. Once the US troops got into Iraq and the war was "over", the confidence about WMD's decreased, while the rhetoric increased. "he's got WMD's and we know where they are" soon became "they're in an area near Tikrit, somewhere east, north, west, and south of there." Well, that narrows it down. We can now say that the WMD's are in a direction (i guess the specific direction is classified, huh?) of a city in a country in the Middle East. You can go to Hollywood and get a much more detailed "map to the stars".
Next, the entire country was told that Saddam has ties to al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden or "UBL" on Fox News. That's interesting considering that UBL considered Saddam a "socialist infidel". I know I always call my close associates "socialist infidels". Maybe it's a term of endearment to them....
There is so much more to the misleading that is better told from the experts, the CIA analysts and the UN weapons inspectors, the ones featured in "Uncovered".
To see uncovered, visit MoveOn.org and TruthUncovered.com.
DECEPTION
Sometimes, some things just make you laugh, but then you realize that you find humor in something that other people take seriously as factual evidence. I'll explain.....
World Net Daily (WorldNetDaily.com), a conservative news source, had an article on it's main page with this title: "Gun-toting Outkast rapper featured at Democrat event: Member of soul duo pictured brandishing firearm part of fund-raiser with ex-presidents, candidates."
The way this article is worded, it sure sounds like a member from Outkast was brandishing a gun at a Democrat event. Democrats are the ones who have historically pushed for tougher gun laws, fighting such strong conservative-supporting groups like the National Rifle Association (NRA). (For more on the NRA and gun-control, watch the oscar-winning film "Bowling for Columbine" by Michael Moore.)
The article states that Presidents Carter and Clinton were there at this "star-studded fundraiser".
The article leads the average person to ask: "Why was a member of a rap group brandishing a weapon at a Democratic fundraiser?"
The answer is simple: He wasn't. That's right, Andre3000 of the rap duo "Outkast" was not brandishing a gun at this event. He was performing at the event, but there was no gun.
Misleading, yes. The title would have you believe something happened that didn't. Luckily, I read the article and figured out what was going on.
Apparently, World Net Daily went to the Outkast web site (outkast.com) and saw a publicity photo (that was obviously staged) of Andre holding a gun with smoke rising from the barrel.
Somehow, the creativity of the World Net Daily author got the best of him/her, and instead of making a headline that was non-deceptive, he or she decided it would just be more fun to make it seem like Democrats have fundraisers and gunshows all at the same time.
On the World Net Daily site, the picture of Andre appears with this phrase underneath it: "Outkast member brandishing gun."
When I was in college, Journalism and Creative Writing were two separate classes.
more info:
MoveOn.org
Uncovered
Bowling for Columbine
Michael Moore
World Net Daily article featuring Outkast
Outkast
I know it's been a while since this site was updated, but today, I saw a documentary that was truly great. If you get a chance, see "Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War". It is "the story of how truth became the first American casualty in Iraq."
When there's an administration talking about weapons of mass destruction (WMD's), it gets attention, and after 9/11, the whole country listened....we listened to an administration tell us that there was an imminent threat to our security....an evil man who has WMD's, and we know he has them and we know where they are....
That changed. Once the US troops got into Iraq and the war was "over", the confidence about WMD's decreased, while the rhetoric increased. "he's got WMD's and we know where they are" soon became "they're in an area near Tikrit, somewhere east, north, west, and south of there." Well, that narrows it down. We can now say that the WMD's are in a direction (i guess the specific direction is classified, huh?) of a city in a country in the Middle East. You can go to Hollywood and get a much more detailed "map to the stars".
Next, the entire country was told that Saddam has ties to al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden or "UBL" on Fox News. That's interesting considering that UBL considered Saddam a "socialist infidel". I know I always call my close associates "socialist infidels". Maybe it's a term of endearment to them....
There is so much more to the misleading that is better told from the experts, the CIA analysts and the UN weapons inspectors, the ones featured in "Uncovered".
To see uncovered, visit MoveOn.org and TruthUncovered.com.
DECEPTION
Sometimes, some things just make you laugh, but then you realize that you find humor in something that other people take seriously as factual evidence. I'll explain.....
World Net Daily (WorldNetDaily.com), a conservative news source, had an article on it's main page with this title: "Gun-toting Outkast rapper featured at Democrat event: Member of soul duo pictured brandishing firearm part of fund-raiser with ex-presidents, candidates."
The way this article is worded, it sure sounds like a member from Outkast was brandishing a gun at a Democrat event. Democrats are the ones who have historically pushed for tougher gun laws, fighting such strong conservative-supporting groups like the National Rifle Association (NRA). (For more on the NRA and gun-control, watch the oscar-winning film "Bowling for Columbine" by Michael Moore.)
The article states that Presidents Carter and Clinton were there at this "star-studded fundraiser".
The article leads the average person to ask: "Why was a member of a rap group brandishing a weapon at a Democratic fundraiser?"
The answer is simple: He wasn't. That's right, Andre3000 of the rap duo "Outkast" was not brandishing a gun at this event. He was performing at the event, but there was no gun.
Misleading, yes. The title would have you believe something happened that didn't. Luckily, I read the article and figured out what was going on.
Apparently, World Net Daily went to the Outkast web site (outkast.com) and saw a publicity photo (that was obviously staged) of Andre holding a gun with smoke rising from the barrel.
Somehow, the creativity of the World Net Daily author got the best of him/her, and instead of making a headline that was non-deceptive, he or she decided it would just be more fun to make it seem like Democrats have fundraisers and gunshows all at the same time.
On the World Net Daily site, the picture of Andre appears with this phrase underneath it: "Outkast member brandishing gun."
When I was in college, Journalism and Creative Writing were two separate classes.
more info:
MoveOn.org
Uncovered
Bowling for Columbine
Michael Moore
World Net Daily article featuring Outkast
Outkast
2.20.2004
Question: What does California and Alabama have in common?
Answer: Both states have officials who disobey higher authority.
You're wondering who I'm talking about now, right?
If you guessed San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, you're right.
If you're reading this, you probably already know that the reason Moore is the former chief justice is because he disobeyed a federal court order to remove the 10 Commandments monument from the Alabama Judicial Building. And like I've said before, It's not because of the 10 Commandments, it's because of his disobedience.
Well, in San Francisco, Mayor Newsom has been issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples.
According to the Montgomery Advertiser, "More than 2,000 gay couples have been married despite a California law that unambiguously forbids same-sex marriages."
The Moore/Newsom comparison was first introduced in an editorial in the Dallas Morning News.
The Dallas Morning News editorial writer says, "It's a serious matter when officials whose responsibilities are to enforce the law flout it." He's right. It is a serious matter.
What people don't realize is that there is a right and wrong way to go about change. A public official deliberately disregarding a law or a higher court's authority in either situation is wrong, no matter which side you believe in.
These leaders should work with supporters to change the law rather than take it in their own hands. They don't believe in vigilante justice, and they shouldn't believe in vigilante lawmaking.
More info:
Moore, Newsom peas in a pod
Dallas Morning News
You're wondering who I'm talking about now, right?
If you guessed San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, you're right.
If you're reading this, you probably already know that the reason Moore is the former chief justice is because he disobeyed a federal court order to remove the 10 Commandments monument from the Alabama Judicial Building. And like I've said before, It's not because of the 10 Commandments, it's because of his disobedience.
Well, in San Francisco, Mayor Newsom has been issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples.
According to the Montgomery Advertiser, "More than 2,000 gay couples have been married despite a California law that unambiguously forbids same-sex marriages."
The Moore/Newsom comparison was first introduced in an editorial in the Dallas Morning News.
The Dallas Morning News editorial writer says, "It's a serious matter when officials whose responsibilities are to enforce the law flout it." He's right. It is a serious matter.
What people don't realize is that there is a right and wrong way to go about change. A public official deliberately disregarding a law or a higher court's authority in either situation is wrong, no matter which side you believe in.
These leaders should work with supporters to change the law rather than take it in their own hands. They don't believe in vigilante justice, and they shouldn't believe in vigilante lawmaking.
More info:
Moore, Newsom peas in a pod
Dallas Morning News
2.12.2004
Update - Alvin Holmes doesn't drink bourbon, just scotch
This is an update to yesterday's stories: "Why it pays to be a lawmaker" and "Can't we all just get along".
Here's some advice for the average citizen: If you're going to argue with the authorities that pulled you over for drunken driving, make sure they don't have you on videotape.
Yes, a fuzzy videotape has emerged in the Alvin Holmes/D.T. Marshall drunken driving situation, and Holmes says the wet spot on his "britches" (to quote the Sheriff) was due to him spilling a soft drink on himself.
Holmes also claims that the "bourbon and beer" comment was a joke. He says that he doesn't even drink bourbon - only scotch.
Read the article here.
Have comments on this or other stories? Speak your mind here.
Here's some advice for the average citizen: If you're going to argue with the authorities that pulled you over for drunken driving, make sure they don't have you on videotape.
Yes, a fuzzy videotape has emerged in the Alvin Holmes/D.T. Marshall drunken driving situation, and Holmes says the wet spot on his "britches" (to quote the Sheriff) was due to him spilling a soft drink on himself.
Holmes also claims that the "bourbon and beer" comment was a joke. He says that he doesn't even drink bourbon - only scotch.
Read the article here.
Have comments on this or other stories? Speak your mind here.
2.11.2004
"Why it pays to be a lawmaker" or "Can't we all just get along?"
One title just wasn't enough, oh no, not when a story has to do with Alabama Representative Alvin Holmes and Sheriff D.T. Marshall.
Part one: "Why it pays to be a lawmaker"
This is interesting: Alabama's state constitution provides "legislative privilege" to lawmakers, which means that they cannot be arrested for any reason except for "treason, felony, violation of their oath of office, and breach of the peace."
The Monopoly guy would be proud - There really is such a thing as a "get out of jail free card." (Monopoly is a registered trademark of Hasbro, Inc., a company that should not engage in lawsuits with the owner of JoshCarples.com for the mere mention of its name. Thank you.)
So what exactly can a lawmaker get away with and what happens when a lawmaker becomes a lawbreaker?
That brings us to.....
Part two: "Can't we all just get along"
Many of you might remember that quote from the the Rodney King/LAPD days when that entire police department had the reputation of Vic Mackey (a name you would recognize if you watch "The Shield" on the FX channel. FX is a registered trademark of....nevermind).
In the post 9/11 world of today, that quote would probably be more prevalent if we (as Americans) had a longer attention span than the average five-year-old. A growing issue in Bush's "Crusade", which later became known as the "War on Terror", is the subject of racial profiling.
And honestly, right after 9/11, how comfortable would you be sitting next to someone of Arabian descent on an airplane? Probably not that comfortable if you're honest with yourself. Does that make it right? No. But I am convinced that it is sometimes a human defense mechanism.
But to clarify the point, there is a difference between a defense mechanism and ignorance. If you want to see pure ignorance in action, find a member of the KKK and wait til he opens his mouth.
A story appeared in the Montgomery Advertiser today, telling the story of one lawmaker by the name of Alvin Holmes, who was pulled over recently by Deputy Gil Robinson. Holmes was pulled over because he was weaving in and out of his lane on Interstate 65. According to the article, the deputy approached Holmes, noticing that "the representative's speech was slurred and that there was the smell of alcohol on his breath."
According to Sheriff D.T. Marshall, "Mr. Holmes also had liquid on the front of his britches. It appeared that he may have urinated on himself, but he could have spilled something on himself."
Imagine this happening to a normal citizen, you know, a non-lawmaker. What would have happend to you or me in this same situation? Would we be arrested? Forced to sober up in a jail cell? Fined?
But under Alabama's constitution, Mr. Holmes did not commit treason, or a felony, or any of that other stuff that could have gotten him in trouble, so he was free to go. No ticket. Possibly a warning (if he remembered what the deputy may have said - memory gets to the level of "fuzzy" at that point.)
So what happened next you ask? Holmes said he was pulled over because of racial profiling. Holmes is a black man, and Marshall is a white man, and they have never seen eye-to-eye politically so far.
But Marshall didn't pull Holmes over. A black deputy (remember Gil Robinson from a few paragraphs above?) pulled Holmes over, not the white sheriff.
Of course, Marshall says that the racial profiling accusation is "ridiculous".
To me, it sounds rather ridiculous, but I'm not willing to make a final decision about it - I mean, let's not forget, this is Alabama we're talking about. Any state whose citizens worry more about a huge 10-Commandments rock than the budget crisis, education shortfalls, and umemployment rate, has other issues to deal with.
Bonus section: So what's the lesson we've learned?
#1. If you're going to drive drunk, you should first get elected to office (or have the last name Bush).
#2. Lawmakers really are above the law.
#3. If you live in Alabama, rocks are more important than people.
#4. The word "britches" is used far more often in Alabama than any other state (except maybe Mississippi).
#5. Hey, at least we're not in Mississippi.
For more info:
Sheriff disputes lawmaker's racism claim
Part one: "Why it pays to be a lawmaker"
This is interesting: Alabama's state constitution provides "legislative privilege" to lawmakers, which means that they cannot be arrested for any reason except for "treason, felony, violation of their oath of office, and breach of the peace."
The Monopoly guy would be proud - There really is such a thing as a "get out of jail free card." (Monopoly is a registered trademark of Hasbro, Inc., a company that should not engage in lawsuits with the owner of JoshCarples.com for the mere mention of its name. Thank you.)
So what exactly can a lawmaker get away with and what happens when a lawmaker becomes a lawbreaker?
That brings us to.....
Part two: "Can't we all just get along"
Many of you might remember that quote from the the Rodney King/LAPD days when that entire police department had the reputation of Vic Mackey (a name you would recognize if you watch "The Shield" on the FX channel. FX is a registered trademark of....nevermind).
In the post 9/11 world of today, that quote would probably be more prevalent if we (as Americans) had a longer attention span than the average five-year-old. A growing issue in Bush's "Crusade", which later became known as the "War on Terror", is the subject of racial profiling.
And honestly, right after 9/11, how comfortable would you be sitting next to someone of Arabian descent on an airplane? Probably not that comfortable if you're honest with yourself. Does that make it right? No. But I am convinced that it is sometimes a human defense mechanism.
But to clarify the point, there is a difference between a defense mechanism and ignorance. If you want to see pure ignorance in action, find a member of the KKK and wait til he opens his mouth.
A story appeared in the Montgomery Advertiser today, telling the story of one lawmaker by the name of Alvin Holmes, who was pulled over recently by Deputy Gil Robinson. Holmes was pulled over because he was weaving in and out of his lane on Interstate 65. According to the article, the deputy approached Holmes, noticing that "the representative's speech was slurred and that there was the smell of alcohol on his breath."
According to Sheriff D.T. Marshall, "Mr. Holmes also had liquid on the front of his britches. It appeared that he may have urinated on himself, but he could have spilled something on himself."
Imagine this happening to a normal citizen, you know, a non-lawmaker. What would have happend to you or me in this same situation? Would we be arrested? Forced to sober up in a jail cell? Fined?
But under Alabama's constitution, Mr. Holmes did not commit treason, or a felony, or any of that other stuff that could have gotten him in trouble, so he was free to go. No ticket. Possibly a warning (if he remembered what the deputy may have said - memory gets to the level of "fuzzy" at that point.)
So what happened next you ask? Holmes said he was pulled over because of racial profiling. Holmes is a black man, and Marshall is a white man, and they have never seen eye-to-eye politically so far.
But Marshall didn't pull Holmes over. A black deputy (remember Gil Robinson from a few paragraphs above?) pulled Holmes over, not the white sheriff.
Of course, Marshall says that the racial profiling accusation is "ridiculous".
To me, it sounds rather ridiculous, but I'm not willing to make a final decision about it - I mean, let's not forget, this is Alabama we're talking about. Any state whose citizens worry more about a huge 10-Commandments rock than the budget crisis, education shortfalls, and umemployment rate, has other issues to deal with.
Bonus section: So what's the lesson we've learned?
#1. If you're going to drive drunk, you should first get elected to office (or have the last name Bush).
#2. Lawmakers really are above the law.
#3. If you live in Alabama, rocks are more important than people.
#4. The word "britches" is used far more often in Alabama than any other state (except maybe Mississippi).
#5. Hey, at least we're not in Mississippi.
For more info:
Sheriff disputes lawmaker's racism claim
1.23.2004
The General vs. The Deserter: The Spin Starts Here
On tonight's episode of "The O'Reilly Factor", Bill O'Reilly resorted to name-calling.
Here's what happened:
O'Reilly was commenting on Thursday's Democratic Presidential Debate, specifically the part where ABC News' Peter Jennings questioned Wesley Clark about the support given to him from "controversial filmmaker" Michael Moore. Moore has officially endorsed Clark for President in '04, and is the best-selling author of Downsize This!, Stupid White Men, and Dude, Where's My Country, as well as the filmmaker behind the award-winning Bowling For Columbine.
Moore said that he would love to see a debate between Clark and Bush, and he said the debate would be "The General versus The Deserter", referring to many articles in major newspapers about Bush's service (or lack thereof) in the Texas Air National Guard. According to the articles, there is a year where Bush is....well....AWOL. He's just unaccounted for.....for a year.
On the O'Reilly Factor, Bill called Michael Moore (and Stuart Smalley) a "smear merchant". Yes, O'Reilly fans, it's true - your "humble correspondent" resorted to name-calling, proving that the Spin actually STARTS here. O'Reilly also made the statement that "people who hate America love Michael Moore". That seems rather libelous.
The underlying problem with this situation is what is known as "lazy journalism". Mr. Jennings is a respected journalist who has been in the news business for many years, and he knows better (or really should know better) than to just say things without checking facts. He was implying that there is no evidence that Bush is a "deserter", when in fact there are many news articles that speak of his suspicious missing year of service.
What's the lesson we've learned here, kids? You can go AWOL without being prosecuted...IF your last name is Bush.
Wow, it seems that last name gets you a lot. It lets "C" students get into Ivy League Schools. It gives drug users a chance to make it in politics. And it also gets you the title of "President" even if you didn't get the most votes. Thank you, members of the Supreme Court, for helping America make up its mind. How in the world did we ever choose presidents in the past without them stepping in to save us?
In all fairness, Bill O'Reilly is not always wrong, just as Michael Moore is not always right. That statement comes from me reading Dude, Where's My Countryand Bill O'Reilly's Who's Looking Out For You? Both authors bring up valid points in many areas.
It just seems shameful to me that O'Reilly only considers certain liberals "smear merchants", while he considers conservatives who act the same way on the other side of the political spectrum friends (i.e. Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity).
Here is a letter I emailed to O'Reilly, and I encourage anyone reading this who cares about ethical journalism and this country to email Bill and ask him to actually be "fair and balanced" like his network claims to be:
TO: oreilly@foxnews.com
Subject: The Smear Merchant Spin
Mr. O,
The spin actually started when you referred to Michael
Moore as a "Smear Merchant". People who like America
can also like Michael Moore. It seems on the Factor
that liberals get the "Smear Merchant" tag while your
"friends" such as Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity don't.
Is this fair and balanced?
Josh Carples
Montgomery, AL
For More Information:
Michael Moore has links to the "deserter" news articles
Bill O'Reilly's site at Fox News
Wesley Clark for President
Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (Fair)
Here's what happened:
O'Reilly was commenting on Thursday's Democratic Presidential Debate, specifically the part where ABC News' Peter Jennings questioned Wesley Clark about the support given to him from "controversial filmmaker" Michael Moore. Moore has officially endorsed Clark for President in '04, and is the best-selling author of Downsize This!, Stupid White Men, and Dude, Where's My Country, as well as the filmmaker behind the award-winning Bowling For Columbine.
Moore said that he would love to see a debate between Clark and Bush, and he said the debate would be "The General versus The Deserter", referring to many articles in major newspapers about Bush's service (or lack thereof) in the Texas Air National Guard. According to the articles, there is a year where Bush is....well....AWOL. He's just unaccounted for.....for a year.
On the O'Reilly Factor, Bill called Michael Moore (and Stuart Smalley) a "smear merchant". Yes, O'Reilly fans, it's true - your "humble correspondent" resorted to name-calling, proving that the Spin actually STARTS here. O'Reilly also made the statement that "people who hate America love Michael Moore". That seems rather libelous.
The underlying problem with this situation is what is known as "lazy journalism". Mr. Jennings is a respected journalist who has been in the news business for many years, and he knows better (or really should know better) than to just say things without checking facts. He was implying that there is no evidence that Bush is a "deserter", when in fact there are many news articles that speak of his suspicious missing year of service.
What's the lesson we've learned here, kids? You can go AWOL without being prosecuted...IF your last name is Bush.
Wow, it seems that last name gets you a lot. It lets "C" students get into Ivy League Schools. It gives drug users a chance to make it in politics. And it also gets you the title of "President" even if you didn't get the most votes. Thank you, members of the Supreme Court, for helping America make up its mind. How in the world did we ever choose presidents in the past without them stepping in to save us?
In all fairness, Bill O'Reilly is not always wrong, just as Michael Moore is not always right. That statement comes from me reading Dude, Where's My Countryand Bill O'Reilly's Who's Looking Out For You? Both authors bring up valid points in many areas.
It just seems shameful to me that O'Reilly only considers certain liberals "smear merchants", while he considers conservatives who act the same way on the other side of the political spectrum friends (i.e. Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity).
Here is a letter I emailed to O'Reilly, and I encourage anyone reading this who cares about ethical journalism and this country to email Bill and ask him to actually be "fair and balanced" like his network claims to be:
TO: oreilly@foxnews.com
Subject: The Smear Merchant Spin
Mr. O,
The spin actually started when you referred to Michael
Moore as a "Smear Merchant". People who like America
can also like Michael Moore. It seems on the Factor
that liberals get the "Smear Merchant" tag while your
"friends" such as Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity don't.
Is this fair and balanced?
Josh Carples
Montgomery, AL
For More Information:
Michael Moore has links to the "deserter" news articles
Bill O'Reilly's site at Fox News
Wesley Clark for President
Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (Fair)
1.11.2004
Once, Twice, Three Times a Loser...........
Wow!
I just read an editorial in the Montgomery Advertiser that sums up all the stuff I've been saying about Roy Moore this whole time!
The link is below and it's well worth reading.
Here are some excerpts:
"In his personal life, Moore is free, and always has been, to practice his religion as he feels led to practice it. He, like any other American, can worship as he chooses in his home or in any house of worship or in any private forum. Government has in no way impinged upon his rights."
Wow, that sounds familiar.......here's more:
"But Moore again like any other citizen is not free to impose his personal religion or any other kind on anyone else. He is not free to use his public position to push his personal religious beliefs on anyone else.
"Nor is he free to ignore with impunity the orders of a higher court. That blatant violation of the Canons of Judicial Ethics, not his practice of his faith, is what cost him his job. And it should have."
See, I'm not the only person who says that Moore did not lose his job because of his faith. He lost it because he disobeyed a federal court order. It actually has nothing to do with his faith - it has to do with his actions.
According to the article, Moore lost his case at every step of the legal process: He lost the first time in the US District Court, the second time at the 11th District US Court of Appeals, and the third time when the US Supreme Court refused to hear his case.
Unlike Moore and many of his followers, however, I don't need a government (or newspaper) to affirm my personal beliefs for me to feel whole......
Here's the link:
"Moore never made to choose"
I just read an editorial in the Montgomery Advertiser that sums up all the stuff I've been saying about Roy Moore this whole time!
The link is below and it's well worth reading.
Here are some excerpts:
"In his personal life, Moore is free, and always has been, to practice his religion as he feels led to practice it. He, like any other American, can worship as he chooses in his home or in any house of worship or in any private forum. Government has in no way impinged upon his rights."
Wow, that sounds familiar.......here's more:
"But Moore again like any other citizen is not free to impose his personal religion or any other kind on anyone else. He is not free to use his public position to push his personal religious beliefs on anyone else.
"Nor is he free to ignore with impunity the orders of a higher court. That blatant violation of the Canons of Judicial Ethics, not his practice of his faith, is what cost him his job. And it should have."
See, I'm not the only person who says that Moore did not lose his job because of his faith. He lost it because he disobeyed a federal court order. It actually has nothing to do with his faith - it has to do with his actions.
According to the article, Moore lost his case at every step of the legal process: He lost the first time in the US District Court, the second time at the 11th District US Court of Appeals, and the third time when the US Supreme Court refused to hear his case.
Unlike Moore and many of his followers, however, I don't need a government (or newspaper) to affirm my personal beliefs for me to feel whole......
Here's the link:
"Moore never made to choose"
1.09.2004
Is Moore really that newsworthy?
If it wasn't for the Montgomery Advertiser's daily dose of Moore, Moore, Moore, I just don't know how the religious right who run this State could survive. How many times can you repeat the same thing over and over again without it getting old?
All this does is bring up the same old questions over and over again....
Why must the State affirm a religious belief for it to be valid?
Why does Moore still act shocked that he lost his job?
Why does Moore feel that his actions speak for the entire State?
Maybe if Mister Former Chief Justice would think on that last question, he could get some answers in his own life. I, for one, think it is a sad day when a government has to back a religion just so people will feel "safe" in their beliefs. And we know the conservative media personalities can never make their minds up. One minute, they say that this country was founded on Christianity (or "Judeo-Christian values"), the next minute, they're saying how this is a secular country, and that's why we've prospered as a nation. Make up your minds.
I'm sick of people saying that Christians are losing all their rights and symbols, and that Christians are losing control of this country because of "liberal judges" and secularists like the ACLU. Oh No, not the big bad ACLU! Wake up! Christians run this country! Look at ol' Dubya - the most powerful man in the world - he doesn't hide the fact that he's religious. Recently, the media has covered which Democrats running for Dubya's job are religious, and how their religious beliefs will affect their numbers at the polls. A poll was taken about how many Americans want a religious leader running the country.
Here's the solution - for all you people who want a religious president - there's one running this year...........
Al Sharpton!
That's right - the Reverend Al Sharpton. You want a religious person running the country? What better way to see that than to vote for a Reverend? He's the one who always comes across the best in the debates anyway. It's about time we have a Black man in the White House. Let's change history this year. He's a Democrat - and he's the most religious candidate - a Reverend.
Al Sharpton for President in '04!
more info:
More Moore in the Montgomery Advertiser (Yawn)
Al Sharpton in 2004!
All this does is bring up the same old questions over and over again....
Why must the State affirm a religious belief for it to be valid?
Why does Moore still act shocked that he lost his job?
Why does Moore feel that his actions speak for the entire State?
Maybe if Mister Former Chief Justice would think on that last question, he could get some answers in his own life. I, for one, think it is a sad day when a government has to back a religion just so people will feel "safe" in their beliefs. And we know the conservative media personalities can never make their minds up. One minute, they say that this country was founded on Christianity (or "Judeo-Christian values"), the next minute, they're saying how this is a secular country, and that's why we've prospered as a nation. Make up your minds.
I'm sick of people saying that Christians are losing all their rights and symbols, and that Christians are losing control of this country because of "liberal judges" and secularists like the ACLU. Oh No, not the big bad ACLU! Wake up! Christians run this country! Look at ol' Dubya - the most powerful man in the world - he doesn't hide the fact that he's religious. Recently, the media has covered which Democrats running for Dubya's job are religious, and how their religious beliefs will affect their numbers at the polls. A poll was taken about how many Americans want a religious leader running the country.
Here's the solution - for all you people who want a religious president - there's one running this year...........
Al Sharpton!
That's right - the Reverend Al Sharpton. You want a religious person running the country? What better way to see that than to vote for a Reverend? He's the one who always comes across the best in the debates anyway. It's about time we have a Black man in the White House. Let's change history this year. He's a Democrat - and he's the most religious candidate - a Reverend.
Al Sharpton for President in '04!
more info:
More Moore in the Montgomery Advertiser (Yawn)
Al Sharpton in 2004!
1.03.2004
A New Year, and an election year...Mr. Show says "Vote"
A new year of new events - leading up to the big election coming in November, where voters will decide to vote for change, freedom, and civil liberties, or decide to keep the mis-leader of the War on Terror around four more years. That's four more years of losing constitutional freedoms, tax cuts for the rich (yes, Mr. O'Reilly, I said it - for the rich), and Oil, Oil, Oil.
Many questions will be answered in the near future. Will the election be Bush vs. Dean? Will Wesley Clark pull ahead? Will Hillary jump in at the last minute and take over the democratic party? Will other democrats back Dean if he gets the nomination? Will Joe Lieberman ever officially wear a "Hello, my name is: Republican" name tag?
Let your voice be heard. Vote. Listen to Mr. Show.
There's an interesting interview with comedian David Cross on Alternet.org. Many people know him from his HBO series "Mr. Show". A funny guy, and also very political. Probably considered one of the "Elites" by conservative political commentator Laura Ingraham, who seems to put any TV personality who doesn't like Bush in that category. Hey Laura, why don't you "Shut Up and Sing"?
Here is a quote from Cross about voting: "It's pretty galling that I know people will wait in line for a weekend to see a f*ckin' movie that's gonna be there for three months, but won't wait in line for 12 minutes to vote. If not for yourself, then for everyone else, it's truly one of the most selfish things you can do. Just the fact that you won't educate yourself on the issues. It's truly one of the most selfish things you can do. Especially because so many people have suffered to obtain that right, or obtain the idea of that right."
And how right he is. We've all seen it. People get this my-vote-doesn't-count attitude and refuse to get involved or care about what goes on. Some people think "It doesn't affect me," but it does. It all affects you in one way or another. What if we got half the people who think their vote doesn't cout out to the polls this election? What kind of difference would it make when the last president only "won" (not really) by what - 537 votes?
Here's what Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly want you to just "get over": The guy with the most votes did not win in 2000. George W. Bush officially became the first Supreme-Court-appointed President in the history of this country.
If you're wondering how the person with the most votes lost, there's a book you should read - "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" by Greg Palast. Palast is an investigative journalist who thoroughly examined the whole Florida situation right after the "election" (put in quotes because we use that term loosely).
Here is a list of books to read for the New Year:
"The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" by Greg Palast
"Stupid White Men" by Michael Moore
"Dude, Where's my Country" by Michael Moore
"The Oh Really? Factor" by Peter Hart (of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting)
...and to be fair, also read "Who's Looking Out for You?" by Bill O'Reilly (always get both sides)
"Lies, and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them" by Al Franken
"When You Ride ALONE, You Ride With Bin Laden" by Bill Maher
Here are some sites for more information:
David Cross Interview
I Know What You Did Last Election
Impeach Bush
Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting
Mis-Leader
Move On
Bush In 30 seconds
Many questions will be answered in the near future. Will the election be Bush vs. Dean? Will Wesley Clark pull ahead? Will Hillary jump in at the last minute and take over the democratic party? Will other democrats back Dean if he gets the nomination? Will Joe Lieberman ever officially wear a "Hello, my name is: Republican" name tag?
Let your voice be heard. Vote. Listen to Mr. Show.
There's an interesting interview with comedian David Cross on Alternet.org. Many people know him from his HBO series "Mr. Show". A funny guy, and also very political. Probably considered one of the "Elites" by conservative political commentator Laura Ingraham, who seems to put any TV personality who doesn't like Bush in that category. Hey Laura, why don't you "Shut Up and Sing"?
Here is a quote from Cross about voting: "It's pretty galling that I know people will wait in line for a weekend to see a f*ckin' movie that's gonna be there for three months, but won't wait in line for 12 minutes to vote. If not for yourself, then for everyone else, it's truly one of the most selfish things you can do. Just the fact that you won't educate yourself on the issues. It's truly one of the most selfish things you can do. Especially because so many people have suffered to obtain that right, or obtain the idea of that right."
And how right he is. We've all seen it. People get this my-vote-doesn't-count attitude and refuse to get involved or care about what goes on. Some people think "It doesn't affect me," but it does. It all affects you in one way or another. What if we got half the people who think their vote doesn't cout out to the polls this election? What kind of difference would it make when the last president only "won" (not really) by what - 537 votes?
Here's what Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly want you to just "get over": The guy with the most votes did not win in 2000. George W. Bush officially became the first Supreme-Court-appointed President in the history of this country.
If you're wondering how the person with the most votes lost, there's a book you should read - "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" by Greg Palast. Palast is an investigative journalist who thoroughly examined the whole Florida situation right after the "election" (put in quotes because we use that term loosely).
Here is a list of books to read for the New Year:
"The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" by Greg Palast
"Stupid White Men" by Michael Moore
"Dude, Where's my Country" by Michael Moore
"The Oh Really? Factor" by Peter Hart (of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting)
...and to be fair, also read "Who's Looking Out for You?" by Bill O'Reilly (always get both sides)
"Lies, and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them" by Al Franken
"When You Ride ALONE, You Ride With Bin Laden" by Bill Maher
Here are some sites for more information:
David Cross Interview
I Know What You Did Last Election
Impeach Bush
Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting
Mis-Leader
Move On
Bush In 30 seconds
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)