How much danger are we really in?

by Rich Miles

These are parlous times. The fickle American electorate, especially those styling themselves "independents" (or, God forbid, "Teabaggers"), not content with 1 year's worth of progress toward undoing the depredations of the 8 Bush years, threaten to send us back onto our journey to the era and ethos of the Salem witch trials, electing as an early harbinger the telegenic but otherwise pretty much useless Scott Brown to fill the seat formerly occupied by the finest humanist the U.S. government has ever known, Ted Kennedy. Who knows why the same people who elected Kennedy in, most recently, 2006 elected an inexperienced pretty boy who would betray everything Kennedy ever stood for barely three years later? Who knows if his election (Brown's) is the harbinger of Republican re-ascendancy that so many brain-dead, lacking-in-creativity so-called pundits have hailed it as in recent weeks?

One can only hope not. Dear God, please not - not another X years of Talibancy in America. We really might not survive it again. We almost didn't last time. As strong as America can be in its best times, we almost didn't survive 8 years of irresponsible frat-boy pandering to every twitch of the extreme right that was the Bush "administration".

But this is where we're aiming, if cooler heads don't manage somehow to prevail - another indeterminate period of right-wing dictatorship, perhaps actually managing this time to destroy our Constitution and its freedoms as they tried to do last time.

America is strong. Americans make it so. But it is NOT invulnerable. It is most assuredly not invulnerable to its own strengths. We cannot ALL keep calling those who disagree with us un-American. We cannot keep attacking each other's gods, cannot keep making OUR god the ONLY god, and castigating all those who believe otherwise. We cannot simply continue to abandon our strengths in the name of patriotism. Remember the famous Samuel Johnson quote: "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel". In fact, don't EVER forget that quote. It could save our country some day.

Let me recommend two works of art for your perusal: first is either the film or the novel "A Tale of Two Cities". I recommend this because, in a recent viewing of the film, it occurred to me to wonder, HOW did France go so unrelentingly mad for so long? After all, there were other countries which had lived under tyranny then escaped it. Why did the French go so guillotine-mad? And what sorts of parallels might there be in America today? Do you think it's impossible that we could some day become such a dictatorship, and then fight our way out from under it, and then murder those who put us there? Do you think this could never happen in America? Unlikely, yes. Impossible, no. Not by a long chalk. The events of the past 9 years show us that - we have been at each others' figurative, and sometimes literal, throats for almost all of that time.

And things like the Bush dictatorship, and the election of Scott Brown and others like him, lead us not TO that place, but in the general direction of it. And as we see in Dickens' masterpiece, sometimes TO the place but not IN it is all it takes for formerly good people to adopt evil ways.

Here is the second recommendation I mentioned above: perhaps not technically a work of art, but information we can use, and should: GOP Hits its Stride, But Faces Rifts over Ideology

The one glimmer of hope in all this, the one thing that remains true throughout all the evils of the Republican Party, is that no matter how much power they get, they will ALWAYS overreach eventually. They learn nothing from their mistakes, because they don't see them as mistakes.

And that is the only way America will be saved. Some day. Some day.

Krugman gets right to the point

by Rich Miles

If I were a woman, I'd try very hard to convince Paul Krugman that I should be the mother of his children.

But I'm not, so all I can do is try to spread the word to the world that Paul Krugman knows what's going on in the world better than almost anyone else on earth. Not just in the realm of economics, his area of special expertise, but in general. In general, he knows how badly things are getting screwed up, and how badly all of us are getting screwed in the process. He realizes that there are larger forces at work in the world. Not conspiracy-theory, tin-hat kind of stuff, but just purely observational stuff about how the wealthy, and the fat cats, and the plutocrats (arguably all three are the same people) are seeking not just to stay rich, but to get ever richer on the backs of the poor and the middle class. Paul Krugman knows this, and tries to tell us about it every chance he gets, because he realizes the danger of it, not only for the poor and the middle class, but for the wealthy as well. They're killing us, but in the process they're killing each other as well. One can only hope they finish each other off before they do us.

Because you see, the world is degenerating into a constant battle between the plutocrats, and the rest of us. The plutes have more resources to bring to bear, but there's a lot more of us poor folks.

Still and yet, the fact that there are people in the world who have waaaay more money and stuff than the average, way more than they really need, but want more and more and more, is very disheartening. I mean, I don't have all I want in the world, but I like to think that the difference between me and the plutes is that I expect to earn whatever more I get, while these plutes I keep talking about expect either to steal it, or have it handed to them. Whut up wid dat?

The world is not as it once was, kiddies. There have always been obnoxiously rich people in the world, but they haven't always been willing to walk over the faces of the rest of us to increase their holdings. There may have been some such people since time immemorial, but generally I think the wealthy didn't find it necessary to drive us poor folks to extinction. At least, that's the way it appears to me as I study history.

But in any case, we're at war these days - with the rich, who don't have the good sense to realize how much they need us peons. And how much they need to pay for the privilege. I don't want ALL of anyone's provender - I just want the part I earn. And I want the rich folks to believe the same way. Whether that will ever happen, I don't know. But I don't want to have to fight a war with anyone for what is mine.

RM

Rush Limbaugh is not only an asshole...

...he is the biggest asshole in the whole world!!!

by Rich Miles
================================================================================

Now, why do I say this, you may be wondering? Well, I'm glad you asked me that!

It's because of what he (Limbaugh) said, from his vacation locale no less, about President Obama's pledge of assistance to Haiti since the horrible earthquake that took place there on January 12.

Limbaugh said (are you ready for this?) that the President's rescue effort was - I'm not kidding though I wish I were - TOO QUICK!!

That's right - too quick. After his blow buddy George W. Bush allowed a US city, New Orleans, to founder and drown in filthy waters for arguably YEARS now, ol' Rushster thinks that Obama's pledge to Haiti in less than 24 hours of American assistance, and $100 million in aid, and all the rest, is TOO QUICK. That it's pandering to black voters (which of course makes it clear that Bush's response in New Orleans was a big ol' fuck-you to black voters, can't accuse Georgie of pandering to black voters!)

So that's why I think Rush Limpballs is the biggest asshole in the whole world. Care to offer a more cogent opinion? Or another nominee, perhaps?

Sorry, soldier - you have a uterus

by Rich Miles

Army Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo, the head of American forces in Northern Iraq, has banned pregnancy under his command.

That's right - it's now against Army regulations to get pregnant.

Now, this is the very definition of mixed emotions for me - I really don't know which way to look on this one.

I have for years been an advocate for responsible penis and vagina use, and abhor the massive number of inadvertent pregnancies in all segments of our society, including the military. I personally have no biological children ('bio-kids', as I coined them.) That's just how good *I* am.

But according to a story printed in the military newspaper Stars and Stripes, any member of the armed forces who becomes pregnant or impregnates another servicemember, including married couples both in the service, could face a court-martial and jail time.

Note that "or" clause - OR anyone who impregnates another service member. This includes married couples who are both in the service. If one is and the other isn't, I guess only the service member gets busted.

Now, how are we to think about this matter?

On the one hand, it's at least gender-neutral, since both the impregnee and the impregnor are liable for these penalties. Since it's nearly impossible to hide one's paternity these days, both parties will face sanction. That is, IF they are both members of the military. Frankly, not a very frequent occurrence.

But on the other hand, what de fuck BIZNESS is it of the military command structure as to whether a couple choose to conceive? Married or no?

And then on the inevitable third hand, do the armed forces in essence own yo' sorry ass for as long as you're in the service? And do they thus have the right to tell you that you can't get knocked up, or do any knocking up?

Col. David S. Thompson, the inspector general for all soldiers in Iraq, says that this is a legal order. I'm not quite sure of that. I have too much experience of the military SAYING that something is legal etc., and just waiting for it to be proven so or not at a future date - kicking the can down the road, as they say.

So perhaps it remains to be seen. But my initial response to this knowledge is that it's just SOOOOO very illegal, even for the military, to pass down an order like this.

I'd enjoy reading your comments on this. I really need guidance.

What does it take to learn?

by Rich Miles

So I'm sitting here multitasking, that is, watching TV and reading blogs etc., and all of a sudden, two HUGE (to me) obvious thoughts pop up out of the mire, to wit:

1) Most Americans don't realize why we're at war, and

2) Almost no one has made the obvious connection between the fact that Joe Lieberman is from Connecticut and the fact that he is doing his level best to defeat national health care reform legislation.

Let us address #1 first. It's traditional, after all:

Ever hear the expression "Defense industries"? Ever given any serious thought to what it means?

It means billions of tax dollars flowing from government coffers into the hands of privately owned corporations and private individuals. I mean, in the worst of times for the nation, it's absolutely necessary that things flow that way.

But in the BUSH of times, in which we've been living for 8 of the past 9 years, the money was made to flow in that direction, no matter the need for national security, etc.

And this is what it seems most people don't realize. They can spot when there is government waste in other areas, but for some reason it doesn't occur to them that the treasury can be deliberately drained in time of war.

This seems obvious to me, and perhaps to you as well - but do you remember the last time someone pointed it out in no uncertain terms? That "we're being robbed by being at war"?

I don't think I ever saw that. But it's true nonetheless. The Iraq War, and now the Afghan War, are nothing more - NOTHING more - than ways for unscrupulous war profiteers to appear to be serving the national interest while in reality robbing the country. And American soldiers are dying in service of this venal enterprise.

You see, the Bush administration was all about the money. In fact, it's arguable that every administration since, oh I don't know, Washington was all about the money. But Bush (and his pals) were just that much more obvious in his ways of robbing us. In fact, that was what pissed me off the most about him and his pals: he robbed us, then laughed at us when we noticed our wallets were a little light. Or missing.

See, everyone knew he and his cronies were robbing us. It's just that damn few people knew they were using the armed forces and the federal procurement system to do it.

Which brings us to point 2: Joe Lieberman is from Connecticut. You know - the INSURANCE capital of the nation?

And you remember how he surpassed all expectations for fundraising when he ran against, and almost lost to, Ned Lamont?

Gee, I wonder how all that happened? Don't you?

So there are your two obvious points for the day. Not very elegantly presented, perhaps, but true nonetheless. At least as far as I can tell.

And even without proof, don't the above two points make perfect sense? Doesn't even require too much in the way of paranoia, does it?

How do we stop it? How do we make the corruption in our government stop?

Because it's everywhere, and it's killing us.

What We Can Learn from Movies

by Rich Miles

Those who know me well know that I am an inveterate film buff. I would rather watch a film from the 1930's than from the 2000's, and Turner Classic Movies is the best thing that ever happened to television, as far as I'm concerned.

Well, anyway - the reason I mention all this now is that I am in the process at this very moment of watching a film that has much to say to us. It's not a terribly well-known film, though it has some quite popular actors in it. James Stewart, Margaret Sullavan, Robert Young, Maria Ouspenskaya, Ward Bond, Frank Morgan, among others whose names and faces most of us would recognize, film buffs or no.

The film is called "The Mortal Storm". It was made in 1939 and released in 1940, even before the full ramifications of its subject matter was known worldwide.

And quite a subject matter it has, too. The film is about the beginnings of Nazism in Germany. ALL the beginnings, most especially the ugly ones.

And in addition to being something of a historical document showing how fascism took root in Germany back then, and the powerlessness of the average man and woman in the face of such psychic and physical violence, it also manages to be something of a precursor to the world as it is today.

I know, I know, everyone always calls his adversaries Nazis. Rush Limbaugh has been doing it for years with his "Feminazis" shtick, among many others on both sides of the political spectrum.

But if ever there were a filmic demonstration of what fascism actually looks like, at ground level and in the daily lives of men and women, this film is it.

An eerie moment, reminiscent of far too many things, takes place early in the movie. Here's a short description of it:

Germans were well known for their fondness for singing - group singing in bars and restaurants especially. Such a group sing takes place with the local Nazi cell leading the song.

And they sing an early Nazi anthem, with their arms raised in the traditional Nazi "Heil Hitler" salute.

And it reminded me for all the world of the way fundamentalist Xtians often raise their hands while they sing supposedly rapturous hymns to the alleged almighty.

It's not a perfect analogy, but it is a spooky reminder, or precursor if you prefer.

Those who seek to control the hearts and minds of others often make the same outward moves and gestures every time it happens.

And now - how did we get to this point? Where supposed "Christians" have become our 21st century Nazis?

And more to the point - what do we do about it now?

As Jimmy Stewart and Margaret Sullavan are about to escape over the border into Austria, he gives her one last chance to change her mind: "Shall we go, over the border? Or shall we go back?"

And she says, "Back to what?"

Good question.

The Secret of the North

by Rich Miles

There's a dirty little secret being revealed in Massachusetts. You know, that state up north where the former governor, Mitt Romney, rammed through a universal health care bill REQUIRING that all residents of the state have health insurance? The state where they actually FINE residents who don't have the money for health insurance?

And a writer named Wendy Button, a former speechwriter for some of the brightest lights in liberal thought, has written a summary with an admittedly subjective, what-I'm-not-getting-from-it POV. But Ms. Button's description has the advantage of being from the perspective of someone who has gotten her insurance from a reasonably priced (yes, there is such a thing) place like Washington DC to the state with the highest health insurance premiums in the country.

Click on the link and read Wendy Button's description of how she went from insured to can't afford to be insured in one geographical move. It's a cautionary tale not only for NOT moving to Massachusetts, but for our Congress as they seek a path through the maze to universal health care.

This doesn't seem an impossible task. Can we reduce it to its simplest form?

Nah. I mean, this is American politics we're talking about, after all. We have that serious, major fuck-up period to go through, then 20 or so years later it gets fixed. More or less.

I'll never live that long.

Financial Ramifications of Birth Control

by Rich Miles

'...in the words of Mike Thomas of the Orlando Sentinel, "The minute sperm enters egg, we have a person. One way birth control pills work is by thinning the womb so if an egg is fertilized, it will not implant. Some Christians consider this an abortion."'

Is it me, or are the religious nuts getting even nuttier with each passing headline?

I mean, read that opening graf again. "Some Christians" consider this an abortion? What the FUCK do I care what "some Christians" think?

In fact, I question the entire premise that "some Christians", or any Christians, think at all. It's my contention that, by the simple act of being Christians, they relinquish all claim to "thought" or "consideration".

But I digress.

The above quote is from an article by Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux called "Birth Control Threatened by Recession", in which several other such ridiculous and sexist ideas are propounded as well (on the con side, I'm pleased to report.)

I recommend you read the entire post. Especially if you live in Florida. Florida is a loony bin in this and other wingnut regards. But then, if you live there, you already knew that.

Seriously, the abject lack of respect for women - not MORE respect than is accorded men, but simply ANY respect at all - is just galling, for lack of a better word. I mean, there is a definitive link between global warming and reproductive rights, and the main stumbling block to the link is that women must not be allowed to decide whether or not they have children. I mean really, WTF?

Read the whole thing, and decide for yourself.

The Jews have the right idea

by Rich Miles

News reports out of Jerusalem today tell us that former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert has been indicted on charges of public corruption. It was the first ever indictment of a current or former Israeli prime minister, and is an extension of corruption charges that were originally filed during Olmert's tenure as prime minister.

Now, I don't have a clue as to whether Olmert is guilty or not. But I do know this: if guilt by association were an acceptable legal principle in Israel, Olmert would already be fried or at best would be on his way to the frier.

But so far it's only an indictment, so we'll pretend for the time being that Olmert is innocent until proven guilty, though I don't know for certain if THAT is an accepted Israeli legal concept either.

Anyway, here's the point I want to make with this: what if the Israelis, one of our staunchest allies if not best friends in the region, did this in part at least to show us a valuable lesson: that a strong and democratic nation can indeed arrest, indict, try and convict a former leader (prime minister, president, etc.) without the country in question falling apart at the seams?

And what if we, fairly intelligent as a nation, got the clue and indicted our former president for much the same charges and more, and in the process managed to punish the worst criminal we ever elected?

Is it possible? Could we yet punish Shrub? Not commensurate with his sins without resorting to the death penalty, which I personally abhor even for Shrub, but what if we could do that?

What would it do to our international prestige? Would we look like asses in the international community? Or would we, as I personally contend, look better for having acknowledged our mistakes and sought to redress them?

I don't know if Israel is that devious. But I do know that the arrest and indictment of Olmert sets an international precedent that we should not ignore.

I myself would pay a quarter to watch the trial of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney on TV.

What's a few measly popularity points?

by Rich Miles

OK, OK, we don't want to pull a George W Bush and deny the facts, but there are extenuating circumstances:

President Obama's job approval ratings have fallen below 50%.

But you see, he's done some pretty profound and brave shit in his first 7 months in office, and it should be expected that a number of people are going to be against him because of that. This whole health care initiative has probably cost him 8-10 points in the polls. No one knows where it's going to go - no one knows if it's going to pass, or tank taking Obama's presidential fortunes with it. And of those who have changed their minds about Obama in the past few months, I'd wager that a good 8-10 points' worth have changed simply because they think Obama is gonna crash and burn, and they don't want to be seen to be supporting a loser.

So I'm not too worried about Obama's loss of some popularity points. I rather doubt he is either, in fact he says in the linked article that he's not. Not in the same arrogant way that GWB wasn't concerned, but nonetheless.

After the health care initiative has made it to the floor, and been voted on, and passed, we'll revisit this issue. And my guess is, if it DOES pass, and I think it will, then Preznit Obama's job approval rating will lodge somewhere in the low to mid-70's.

At least, that's what *I* think...