Blue Collar Politicstag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2008://12008-06-13T14:43:42ZPolitics from a Blue Collar point of view.Movable Type Open Source 4.1My "Dream Ticket!"tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2008://1.872008-06-02T16:30:29Z2008-06-13T14:43:42ZHere's your "Dream Ticket!"Jack Ballingerhttp://www.bluecollarpolitics.com/President: Barack Obama
Vice-President:Kathleen SebeliusSecretary of State: Joe Biden
Secretary of the Treasury: Charles B. Rangel (with Paul Krugman as Chief of Staff?)
Secretary of Defense: James Webb
Attorney General: John Edwards
Secretary of the Interior: Bill Richardson
Secretary of Agriculture: Tom Harkin (Chair Agriculture CommitteeSecretary of Commerce: Henry Waxman Member (House Commerce Committee , and Chair Oversight & Gov ReformSecretary of Labor: Ted Kennedy - if Ted not interested - Dennis J. Kucinich [or a Robert Reich redux]
Secretary of Health & Human Services: Hillary Clinton
Secretary of Housing & Development: Chris Dodd
Secretary of Transportation: Daniel K. Inouye
Secretary of Energy: Al Gore
Secretary of Education: Russ Feingold
Secretary of Veterans Affairs: Chuck Hagel
Secretary of Homeland Security: Gary Hart]]>
Impeach The Cheerleader, Save The World!tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.832007-02-10T14:00:36Z2007-02-10T14:16:59ZThere is one difference between the attack on Iraq and the coming attack on Iran.
In February 2003, many of us marched in the huge anti-war demonstration in NYC while others marched around our nation and around the globe.
Bush (and the media) paid little attention, and the US illegally attacked Iraq approximately 5 weeks later.
There is one difference between the attack on Iraq and the coming attack on Iran. The time span between demonstration and attack this time will probably be shorter . . . say 2-3 weeks.
In February 2003, many of us marched in the huge anti-war demonstration in NYC while others marched around our nation and around the globe.
Bush (and the media) paid little attention, and the US illegally attacked Iraq approximately 5 weeks later.
We violated international law and UN regulations, killed over a half-million innocent Iraqis (Bush would say we liberated them?), lost over 3000 of our most precious young warriors and misspent/lost.gave away hundreds of billion$ that our future generations will need to make up.
We've performed so poorly, even Bush's Russian pal (Pooty Poot) Putin is now chastising us for making the world less safe.
Russian President Vladimir Putin blasted the United States today for acting in a unilateral, militaristic fashion that he said "overstepped" its role and made the world a more dangerous place than during the Cold War.
"Nobody feels secure anymore, because nobody can take safety behind the stone wall of international law," he told an international security conference here attended by dozens of foreign and defense ministers and other officials, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates and a congressional delegation.
And, the reasons given for attacking Iraq, though now known to be lies and exaggerations, seem to mirror the reasons we now hear for attacking Iran.
Just this week, in a much delayed report, we were told:
. . . a Defense Department inspector general's conclusion that a Pentagon policy office produced and gave senior policymakers "alternative intelligence assessments on Iraq and Al Qaida relations" that were "inconsistent" with the intelligence community's consensus view in the lead-up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
On March 18, there will be a similar march in NYC, and other environs.
If you live in an area where a demonstration is being held, and you find you have other things to do on that day (things beside having open heart surgery, birthing your child, heading into danger in Iraq etc.), washing the blood of the future dead innocents from your hands may become a 24/7 job.
And, if this demonstration has as little effect as its predecessor(s), I hope that some truly courageous leader (which really lets out the top contenders for the Presidential race in '08, sans Chuck Hagel and, just maybe, an Edwards, Gore or even Vilsack) will use the term "General Strike" in an upcoming speech.
For when a war is called not as a vital national security interest, but to appease corporate interests by throwing fiscal sanity to the winds (when it comes to humongous contracts) and to guarantee a short term boost in fossil fuel for the victors, thereby stalling renewed efforts to find a desperately needed alternative source(s) of energy, the best way to get the corporate leaders attention is to hit them in the pocketbook.
(Yes, you offer up a days pay. But, as any corporate leader can tell you, a day spent on a general strike takes more than a day from the corporate finances.)
A second battle group has been ordered to the Gulf and extra missiles have already been sent out. Meanwhile oil is being stockpiled. Photograph: Reuters
US preparations for an air strike against Iran are at an advanced stage, in spite of repeated public denials by the Bush administration, according to informed sources in Washington.
The present military build-up in the Gulf would allow the US to mount an attack by the spring. But the sources said that if there was an attack, it was more likely next year, just before Mr Bush leaves office.
More here]]>
Yes, we'll have no restrictions/conscience!tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.822007-02-07T14:00:03Z2007-02-07T14:05:29ZOf course the US didn't sign on to a long-negotiated treaty prohibiting governments from holding people in secret detention. The other 57 civilized nations who thought secret detention was an abomination did not have the same baggage as we do.
Of course the US didn't sign on to a long-negotiated treaty prohibiting governments from holding people in secret detention. The other 57 civilized nations who thought secret detention was an abomination did not have the same baggage as we do.
The United States declined to endorse the document, saying its text did not meet U.S. expectations.
Of course it didn't meet our expectations. When it comes to restrictions, ANY restrictions, of actions by sovereign powers, the Bushies expect the final sentence to read: "The US, under GW Bush, is hereby exempted from any and all restrictions contained herein."
The Repugnants cringe when they read:
Louise Arbour, the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, said the treaty was "a message to all modern-day authorities committed to the fight against terrorism" that some practices are "not acceptable."
You see, as with the many Geneva Conventions, International Courts/law, UN resolutions and all other treaties and agreements the US joined, once Emperor Bush was elected/selected, things changed. We are now the class bully, and God help any other/weaker country that tries to stop us from committing (what those wimpy countries refer to as) crimes against humanity!
JB
---
U.S. Declines to Join Accord on Secret Detentions - washingtonpost.com
U.S. Declines to Join Accord on Secret Detentions
58 Nations Sign Separate Pact On Child Soldiers
By Molly Moore
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, February 7, 2007; Page A14
PARIS, Feb. 6 -- Representatives from 57 countries on Tuesday signed a long-negotiated treaty prohibiting governments from holding people in secret detention. The United States declined to endorse the document, saying its text did not meet U.S. expectations.
Louise Arbour, the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, said the treaty was "a message to all modern-day authorities committed to the fight against terrorism" that some practices are "not acceptable."
More here
[/BREAK]]]>
Mission Impossible? Yep!tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.812007-02-06T13:38:59Z2007-02-06T13:42:55ZJust about every expert agrees that the ONLY way to win against an insurgency is to be able to gain the trust of the vast majority of the population.
After attacking, invading and occupying their country, and after they've seen the results of our torture policy, cluster bombings and the outrageous actions committed by the unfettered contracted security forces our corporations use, we are so reviled in Iraq that we'd have a better chance of successfully pairing up Michael Moore and Ann Coulter than gaining the affections of the civilian populace.
Just about every expert agrees that the ONLY way to win against an insurgency is to be able to gain the trust of the vast majority of the population. (As I can attest from my own experience in Vietnam, doing so without an interpreter is damn near impossible. But, that's just one of the myriad of problems we face in Bush's Baghdad Blunder!)
After attacking, invading and occupying their country, and after they've seen the results of our torture policy, cluster bombings and the outrageous actions committed by the unfettered contracted security forces our corporations use, we are so reviled in Iraq that we'd have a better chance of successfully pairing up Michael Moore and Ann Coulter than gaining the affections of the civilian populace.
In todays Wash Post, we read how an Iraqi Army Major's wife, who holds a master's degree in English translation, fears "death" when asked if she'd work with Americans.
And her fear is NOT of being targeted by insurgents:
"With you? No. Not with you. Do I want to die?" she said. "I am afraid of you, I'm sorry."
When you can't win the single "heart and mind" of an English speaking allied officer's wife, your chances are much diminished as far as dealing with a farmer whose crops and livestock you've bombed, or whose children your bombs have crippled/killed.
As the soldier said:
Faced with an often distrustful, frightened populace, members of the task force said they doubted that adding thousands more U.S. troops would change this frustrating dynamic. One soldier, on his second tour in Iraq, said the attitude of the Iraqi civilians toward the Americans continues to deteriorate.
JB
=====
[/BREAK]
U.S. Unit Walks 'A Fine Line' In Iraqi Capital - washingtonpost.com
U.S. Unit Walks 'A Fine Line' In Iraqi Capital
By Joshua Partlow
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, February 6, 2007; Page A01
BAGHDAD, Feb. 5 -- The camouflaged American soldiers, weary from hours of struggling to talk with Iraqis during a patrol in eastern Baghdad, laughed with relief after an Iraqi army major's wife met them at her door. The soldiers had no interpreter. She had a master's degree in English translation.
"Do you want to work for the Americans?" asked U.S. Army Lt. Anthony Slamar, 26. "Do you want a job as a translator?"
The woman stepped back into her darkened doorway.
"With you? No. Not with you. Do I want to die?" she said. "I am afraid of you, I'm sorry."
More here]]>
Ah, yes. I remember it well!tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.802007-02-06T12:27:59Z2007-02-06T12:33:03ZSeems like only yesterday when the Republicans were castigating the Dems for even thinking the word "filibuster."
And the media! They had conniptions about the traitorous Democrats who would be such obstructionists when it came to trying to keep in check the "Majority."
Matthews et. al. would quickly remind all that "the people had spoken" when they elected a Repugnant majority.
Seems like only yesterday when the Republicans were castigating the Dems for even thinking the word "filibuster."
And the media! They had conniptions about the traitorous Democrats who would be such obstructionists when it came to trying to keep in check the "Majority."
Matthews et. al. would quickly remind all that "the people had spoken" when they elected a Repugnant majority.
Today, on NBC the political reporter virtually blushed at how "strong" the Republican minority had proved to be, by using the filibuster card to hold back a vote . . . a vote desired by that new majority, elected as those same "people's" representatives.
Here (below) in today's NY Times, the headline is written by the Repugnants, so they are referred to as "A ‘Robust’ G.O.P."
When the Dems threatened filibuster, it was an act of betrayal to our system. With the Repugs, not so much:
"I mean, we’re not stalling. We’re using, at the risk of being redundant, the power of a robust minority to guarantee that we get fair treatment."
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell
I can remember when Mr. McConnell advocated removing the Dems power to filibuster bills he liked.
But, that was then, this is now.
And, while it hurts to admit it, were I McConnell, and faced with such weak Democrats, I'd pull the same bullying tactics.
JB
=====
[/BREAK]
A Robust G.O.P. Blocks Senate War Debate - The Caucus - Politics - New York Times Blog
February 5, 2007, 7:43 pm
A ‘Robust’ G.O.P. Blocks Senate War Debate
By Kate Phillips
On the Senate floor just a short while ago, a pretty hot debate ensued before any real debate on Iraq resolutions was allowed, or actually not allowed by the vote following the debate about the proposed debate. The Senate went 49-47, the Democrats well shy of the 60 votes needed to moved ahead on one of the war resolutions.
As you may have anticipated through reports during the weekend and today, Republicans in the Senate voted in near unanimity tonight against the Democratic leadership’s intention to bring the Warner-Levin resolution opposing President Bush’s troop buildup to the floor for debate. From watching the roll call on the vote, it would appear that nearly all Republicans, excepting Susan Collins of Maine and Norm Coleman of Minnesota,voted to keep the Warner-Levin measure from being Topic A.
More here]]>
The Bush Mutinees!tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.792007-02-05T19:10:37Z2007-02-05T19:12:45ZI'm guessing that Bush is rolling marbles around in his hand while searching for missing strawberries?
I'm guessing that Bush is rolling marbles around in his hand while searching for missing strawberries?
On a less snarky note, congrats to the retired officers for coming forward . . . would that some of their active duty peers put America and their troops ahead of career considerations.
Nobody expects/desires a real mutiny. Just some honest answers in front of Congress, when called upon!
JB
[/BREAK]
Retired flags say Iran war would be disaster - Military News, Army News, opinions, editorials, news from Iraq, photos, reports - Army Times
Retired flags say Iran war would be disaster
By Jill Lawless - The Associated Press
Posted : Sunday Feb 4, 2007 9:11:56 EST
LONDON — Three former high-ranking U.S. military officers have called for Britain to help defuse the crisis over Iran’s nuclear program, saying military action against Tehran would be a disaster for the region.
In a letter to the Sunday Times newspaper, the retired officers urged President Bush to open talks “without preconditions” with the Iranian government in a bid to find a diplomatic solution.
The signatories were retired Army Lt. Gen. Robert G. Gard, a senior military fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation in Washington, D.C.; retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, former head of Central Command; and Vice Adm. Jack Shanahan, former director of the Center for Defense Information.
More here]]>
Moving Deeper Into Quicksand . . . But Doing So Smartly?tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.782007-02-05T13:44:18Z2007-02-05T13:45:58ZAs if there weren't enough similarities between the Vietnam and Iraq wars.
Kennedy's "The Best and the Brightest", were amongst the most educated groups of advisers ever to aid a President in the conduct of a guerrilla war.
As if there weren't enough similarities between the Vietnam and Iraq wars.
Kennedy's "Whiz Kids", who were often referred to as "The Best and the Brightest", were likely the most educated groups of advisers ever to aid a President in the conduct of a guerrilla war.
While it is always good to have intelligent advisers, people working under a President often conform their advice into something palatable to the Commander in Chief.
Asking them for advice on how best to escalate, when that can only move you deeper into a quagmire, is, as Vietnam proved, just a way to lose more young American lives so the tough decisions are left to future administrations.
JB
=====
[/BREAK]
Officers With PhDs Advising War Effort - washingtonpost.com
Officers With PhDs Advising War Effort
By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, February 5, 2007; Page A01
Gen. David H. Petraeus, the new U.S. commander in Iraq, is assembling a small band of warrior-intellectuals -- including a quirky Australian anthropologist, a Princeton economist who is the son of a former U.S. attorney general and a military expert on the Vietnam War sharply critical of its top commanders -- in an eleventh-hour effort to reverse the downward trend in the Iraq war.
More here]]>
Tim Carries Repugnant's Water - Throws Bucket On Edwardstag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.772007-02-05T12:50:46Z2007-02-05T18:43:28ZIf you regularly watch Tim Russert on Meet The Press, you already know at least 3 things: 1) Tim used his guest list and his questions in a manner that helped push for the warIf you regularly watch Tim Russert on Meet The Press, you already know at least 3 things:
1) Tim used his guest list and his questions in a manner that helped push for the war
2) Tim implicitly mocked the anti-war demonstrations/demonstrators as often as possible.
3) Tim lauded the Bushies as often as he could. (Damn near rolls over and presents his belly to Cheney!)
4) Tim hates most Dems, even though it was with the Democratic Party that he cut his teeth. (He seems cozy with Lieberman, and friendly to Biden and James Carville.)
If you've been watching the Scooter Libby trial, you now know:
5) The White House was well aware of Tim's bias, and used MTP to help counter criticism of the war!
By now you've learned another thing about NBC's high paid on-air personality:
6) If you're a candidate prone to speak about the obvious class war being waged in America, Tim ain't prone to treating you too well.
Edwards has apologized for his vote authorizing Bush to pressure Iraq, up to invading, if necessary, unless Saddam gave up the WMD Bush swore Iraq held.
Edwards was the FIRST of the Dems to admit being wrong, way back in 2005.
Yet Tim went OVER AND OVER the fact that Edwards had voted for the authorization. Tim said, numerous times, that Edwards was WRONG to vote that way.
Funny thing is, Tim has NEVER pushed the liars that used deception to get Congress, AND THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS, to support America's worst war crime EVER!
Why Edwards is, in Tim's view, the only one who should carry blame FOR BUSH'S LIES, I don't know.
(Ironically, the other thing that caught Tim's ire was Edwards truth telling on his plan for health care. Edwards made the sin of allowing that in order to tackle something as huge as health care, you have to be willing to use tax revenue to pay for it!
Edwards will soon learn why Bush's lies have little consequence. Telling hard truths is something the mainstream press will crucify you for.)
I do know, much like Dennis Kucinich in 2004, Tim and other MSM members will be spending much time trying to insure that the 2008 race comes down to a Dem and a Rep who can only be distinguished by which of the two bends over the furthest for corporate interests, and which cares the least about those earning somewhat less than millions per annum!
JB
=====
[/BREAK]
Edwards Again Says He Was Wrong to Vote for War - washingtonpost.com
Edwards Again Says He Was Wrong to Vote for War
By Matthew Mosk
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, February 5, 2007; Page A04
Of the 2008 Democratic presidential contenders who voted to give President Bush authority to wage war in Iraq, only one will have no chance to make a very public U-turn when resolutions opposing the president's new war plan come before Congress in the coming days.
That one is John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator who showed again yesterday that he will find other venues to parlay his Senate vote into an extended mea culpa.
More here]]>
Molly Ivins: RIP! (God must have needed a smile!)tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.762007-02-01T12:10:00Z2007-02-01T12:16:05ZI was hoping Molly Ivins would live at least long enough to piss on Shrub's grave
"If you think his daddy had trouble with 'the vision thing,' wait'll you meet this one,"
Ivins on George W. Bush in "The Progressive," June 1999.
I was hoping Molly would live at least long enough to piss on Shrub's grave . . . now I guess that's our/history's job!
JB
=====
[/BREAK]
Syndicated columnist Molly Ivins dies - Yahoo! News
"We are the people who run this country. We are the deciders. And every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war," Ivins wrote. "We need people in the streets, banging pots and pans and demanding, 'Stop it, now!'"
More here]]>
Spitting In The Wind!tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.752007-01-31T12:07:10Z2007-01-31T12:20:26ZMedia Matters has been doing a bang-up job of following the saga of Cpl. Joshua Sparling, a wounded veteran back home from Iraq.Media Matters has been doing a bang-up job of following the saga of Cpl. Joshua Sparling, a wounded veteran back home from Iraq.
Normally, I'd have enough respect for the service the soldier provided to give him a lot of slack, as far as any disparity in our views on the war or any other differences of opinion we might have.
And, as he is a seriously wounded returnee, I'd stand silent as he'd bash my views on Iraq, Bush and anything else he might like.
But when his false celebrity gets to the point that he can harm the whole anti-war movement, and thereby give a boost to Bush's Baghdad Blunder, with just a little well played mendacity, other vets should take him to task.
This guy Sparling is a disgrace. He's changed his story numerous times, going from "one protester spit at" him to "many protesters spit on" him.
On top of that, he's kinda stuck saying that the first "spitter" wore an 82nd Airborne patch, as he had said it the first time and saw it added to the reporters excitement.
OF COURSE IT DID!
Any idiot would be struck by the incongruity of a war protester who, supposedly, despised the troops (or just disturbed troops like Spurling?) wearing the patch of the military he despised???
I'm one of those with a story of being dissed when I returned from 'Nam. No spitting; just a cabdriver refusing service when he discovered I had just that moment returned.
But others had worse stories of harassment. The country was torn, with some (VERY FEW) blaming the "baby killer" troops, by proxy.
A guy like Spurling, or Vietnam Vets who exaggerate their trauma at being dissed at home, cast doubt on, and cause more suffering to, those who were really harmed by idiots who can't discriminate between the tool of war and the maniacs who are elected and wield the tools.
JB
=====
[/BREAK]
Media Matters - Still more questions for the NY Times regarding the alleged spitting incident
Still more questions for the NY Times regarding the alleged spitting incident
As Media Matters for America noted, in a January 29 article, The New York Times' Ian Urbina reported that a protestor spit "at the ground near" Cpl. Joshua Sparling, a wounded Iraq war veteran, during the January 27 anti-Iraq war protest in Washington, D.C. But the article offered no details regarding the alleged incident, giving rise to several unanswered questions, which Media Matters laid out. Sparling appeared on the January 29 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes and the January 30 edition of Fox & Friends and gave his own version of the events, contradicting some aspects of the Times' reporting.
More Here]]>
Support Our Barbaro?tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.742007-01-30T12:34:53Z2007-01-30T14:10:29ZYes, I too feel bad about Barbaro's fate. But I also wonder at the different world we would live in had the NY Times, and/or other major media outlets, made it standard policy to print such eloquent eulogies on their most prominent pages for EVERY human death taken in the blood filled desert called Iraq.
Yes, I too feel bad about Barbaro's fate.
But I also wonder at the different world we would live in had the NY Times,Wash Post and/or other major media outlets made it standard policy to print such eloquent eulogies on their most prominent pages for EVERY human death taken in the blood filled desert called Iraq.
Do not EACH of the over 3000 dead American troops rate at least as much coverage as the death of a horse most had only heard of from his winning of a single race?
Have we become so inured to the toll of war that our perspective is this far out of whack?
We vainly laud our human compassion in our treatment of such a marvelous beast, while, on a daily basis, most of us unconsciously ignore our own complicity in sending the younger generation in to see the elephant without the equipment needed to even grant a small edge of safety. (Of course, we now know of collateral brutality, like the torture of prisoners and illegal detention of thousands of innocents, are the offal of our Bushie butchery.)
Is absolution granted when we march, once a year or less, in protest?
(In one of life's cruelest ironies, there will be some who will suffer a moist eye over Barbaro who support Bush's desired escalation of this war that was lost before it began. I believe that, for them, all hope is lost!)
Would that ALL of the innocent victims, be they American troops, soldiers of other countries in the coalition of the billing or the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians, that Bush's Baghdad Blunder be given a small percentage of the corporate media ink that this horse will be granted, around the globe, today.
If we lived in such a world, war would not cease to rear its ugly head.
However, the brutality war brings, once exposed in such an honest, prominent and, yes, fitting manner would help insure that the people of each nation would need to be convinced war was necessary and unavoidable before they'd subject their children, or those of others, to the carnage inherent in the human abattoir called war. Especially in a war founded on lies and kept going through intimidation of critics, like our attack, invasion and long-term occupation of an Iraq now beset with a civil war, we have constructed a horrifically efficient yet senseless human slaughterhouse that leaves dead, crippled and psychologically razed kids such that it makes Barbaros's fate seem a Godly kindness.
JB
=====
[/BREAK]
One Horse Dies - New York Times
Editorial
One Horse Dies
Published: January 30, 2007
Why should we feel so much grief at the loss of one horse? After all, this is a world in which horses are sacrificed again and again for the sport of humans. Barbaro was euthanized yesterday, eight months after he shattered his right hind leg at the start of the Preakness Stakes. After an injury like that, most racehorses would have been put down minutes later. But every race is a complex equation — a balance of economics, athleticism, equine grace and conscience. Conscience often comes in last, but not in this case. Barbaro’s owners gave that horse exactly what he had given them, which is everything. It was the very least they could do, and yet it seemed truly exceptional in a sport that is as often barbarous as it is beautiful
.
More here]]>
Shielding us from the wrong sun/son!tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.732007-01-27T15:20:11Z2007-01-27T15:35:27ZUS offers global warming strategy Washington wants scientists to develop giant space mirrors and reflective dust to block sunlight.Could we look any dumber to the world community?
Washington wants scientists to develop giant space mirrors and reflective dust to block sunlight.
The US government wants the world's scientists to develop technology to block sunlight as a last-ditch way to halt global warming, the Guardian has learned. It says research into techniques such as giant mirrors in space or reflective dust pumped into the atmosphere would be "important insurance" against rising emissions, and has lobbied for such a strategy to be recommended by a major UN report on climate change, the first part of which will be published on Friday.
I guess Bush thought the old Jerry Lewis film, "Don't Raise the Bridge, Lower the River" was an inspired documentary?
I guess that any plan, no matter how daft, that doesn't ask us to cut down on our use of oil or investigate new renewable energy ideas, that might (God help us) cause some lowering of oil company profits, is a plan the current administration would fund.
Of course, even were this a plan that deserved discussion, would not the other countries on the planet have a right to be consulted, BEFORE WE TURN OFF THE SUN?
All this reminds me of an old, politically incorrect joke.
So, I'll change it a bit.
GW Bush to Nasa chief: "I want you to build a rocket that I can pilot to a landing on the sun."Nasa chief: "But Mr. President, you can't land on the sun. It would burn you up!"GW: "Well, you're not too bright. I'd land on it at night!"
Only, with GW as our President, this type of joke becomes a sobering reality.
[/BREAK]
=====
US answer to global warming: smoke and giant space mirrors | Climate change | Guardian Unlimited Environment
The US government wants the world's scientists to develop technology to block sunlight as a last-ditch way to halt global warming, the Guardian has learned. It says research into techniques such as giant mirrors in space or reflective dust pumped into the atmosphere would be "important insurance" against rising emissions, and has lobbied for such a strategy to be recommended by a major UN report on climate change, the first part of which will be published on Friday.
Article continues
The US has also attempted to steer the UN report, prepared by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), away from conclusions that would support a new worldwide climate treaty based on binding targets to reduce emissions - as sought by Tony Blair. It has demanded a draft of the report be changed to emphasise the benefits of voluntary agreements and to include criticisms of the Kyoto Protocol, the existing treaty which the US administration opposes.
More here]]>
"Democracy" in the US is still on life support!tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.722007-01-27T13:57:47Z2007-01-27T14:09:15ZHere in New York, which we like to think of as the leader of the modern world, we can't get one of the simplest electronic system on the planet [think ATM for voting] in place due to political bargaining for "favored" corporations, and the admitted collusion between "independent" testing/auditing firms and voting device corporations.
Here in New York, where we like to think of our city/state as the leader of the modern world, we can't get what should be just a clone of one of the simplest computer systems on the planet [think ATM for voting] in place due to political bargaining for "favored" corporations, and the admitted collusion between "independent" testing/auditing firms and voting device corporations.
Here's an excerpt from this morning's NY Times:
According to the documents, a federal auditor found last July that Ciber, the nation’s largest tester of voting machine software, did not follow its own quality-control procedures or conduct all the proper tests.
The documents indicate that in many cases, the lab simply used tests suggested by the voting machine manufacturers, rather than running standardized checks of its own. The auditor also criticized the lab for “acceding too quickly” to requests by the voting machine companies to modify the tests.
Voting machine experts have long been concerned about possible conflicts of interest in the testing, and some say the problems with Ciber have raised questions about the security and reliability of some of the machines now in use.
Let's remember, much blood and treasure was spent in gaining independence from the rule of the mighty few. And since, much blood and treasure was expended in attempts to keep this fragile system called "democracy" alive.
We all know of the shenanigans performed by ALL the political parties in past elections. And we've seen how that practice was refined by the Republicans since the 2000 judicial/electoral coup.
If we allow the corporations to continue to fiddle with our votes, and don't demand a recount friendly type of system, all is lost.
A receipt should be printed for each voter, simply certifying that the citizen has voted. (I'd also like to see a small tax credit, say $20, granted when said citizen includes a copy of that receipt with their tax return. And/or a sticker/pin given, to help embarrass/remind others to vote that day.)
Then, a paper copy of the actual votes (like your ATM receipt that lists your actions at the machine), without any identifiers as to the voter's identification, is given to the voter. The voter checks the printed copy for accuracy, folds it on the dotted lines, and puts it into the slot on top of a sealed box.
Those paper ballots remain available for any ordered recount.
Or, we can allow our democracy to fester some more, and die a horrible death due to citizen apathy.
The choice is ours!
JB
=====
[/BREAK]
New York Won’t Replace Voting Machines by the Fall - New York Times
By CHRISTOPHER DREW
Published: January 27, 2007
New York officials have given up on replacing the state’s aging voting machines by the fall elections, and some would like to put off buying new electronic voting systems until after the 2008 presidential election, state officials said yesterday.
New York is the last state to update its machines, and the latest delay comes amid growing questions about the work of a laboratory that was hired to help test the machines being offered by five bidders.
More here]]>
NYT: The Bait-and-Switch White Housetag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.712007-01-27T11:52:39Z2007-01-27T11:56:25Z The opening paragraph of today's NY Times Editorial seems to say it all:
The opening paragraph of today's NY Times Editorial seems to say it all:
We often wonder whether there is a limit to the Bush administration’s obsession with secrecy, its assault on the rule of law, its disdain for the powers of Congress, its willingness to con the public and its refusal to heed expert advice or recognize facts on the ground. Events of the past week suggest the answer is no.
Full editorial here!
[/BREAK]
]]>
Modern Tower/Quagmire of Babel?tag:www.bluecollarpolitics.com,2007://1.702007-01-26T13:21:30Z2007-01-26T13:24:01ZWell, after a half-century of American pressure/involvement, in an area that has long been friendly to America, we MIGHT have a chance to work out an agreement between people/neighbors who speak our language and are of the same country/background/history in Ireland.
Well, after a half-century of American pressure/involvement, in an area that has long been friendly to America, we MIGHT have a chance to work out an agreement between people/neighbors who speak our language and are of the same country/background/history in Ireland.
I see this as boding not so well for our successful involvement with people who despise us, have no common ancestry [unless we go back to a monkey's uncle somewhere near the garden of Eden? . . . and that would only count to those, on all sides, who believe in Darwin!], don't share our views/God/tastes/culture and whom almost all have lost loved ones [or had some tortured] by us.
I'm guessing that sometime around the first ship lands from our farms on Mars America might begin withdrawing her last troops from Baghdad!
JB
=====
[/BREAK]
Days of Decision in Ulster - New York Times
Editorial
Days of Decision in Ulster
Published: January 26, 2007
The militant Irish republican Gerry Adams and the fire-breathing unionist preacher Ian Paisley have long symbolized the irreconcilable extremes of Ulster politics. But over the next few days, they have the chance to lead the province into a new era of democratic self-rule.
