Jun. 8th, 2010

silveradept: A star of David (black lightning bolt over red, blue, and purple), surrounded by a circle of Elvish (M-Div Logo)
Good morning, those who seek the missives of justice and want criminals to be tried for their crimes. Flashing backwards to the past from our current time, it seesm fairly unambiguous that the rpevious administrator admitted to authorizing the torture of at least one detainee at Guanatanamo Bay, in violation of the United Nations Convention on Torture, which the United States is a signatory to. Such an admission should result in his arrest and prosecution, but more likely, nothing will happen. (One almost wonders whether these revelations are appearing precisely because he knows nothing will happen.) Even if allegations that the previous administration also conducted unethical experiments on their detainees are substantiated (the evidence presented is available at Physicians For Human Rights), nothing will likely happen. It’s infuriating at times to see the reasonable causes and enough stuff that a trial should at least be held, even if conviction doesn’t happen, but then see nobody lift a finger to do it.

On a different issue, but no less aggravating, A mural showcasing the diversity of a school in Arizona has been the subject of drive-by racial epithets and taunts, including a campaign by a city councilman to whiten the skin tone of the children on the mural. (Said councilman has been sacked form his radio job over the remarks.) And Egypt's highest court upheld the decision to strip Egyptian citizenship from women who marry Israeli men.

And then there are the disturbing cases where police departments use anti-recording laws to prosecute citizens taking video of officers at work, especially when the officers at work are doing things that hurt their reputation or things that are clearly off-procedure, like excessive force.

Out in the world today, while attempting to unite Afghanistan under the control of the central government, NATO has been helping to build a private army up into great power by sing them as contractors to protect personnel and equipment. And despite the assurances that troops will be leaving there, money is being poured into building new special operations headquarters in the country. (And the worst bit about it? The broken-down place we think of as Afghanistan now is nothing like what it used to be.)

United States military personnel claim that a string of recent offensives has left the Iraq branch of al-Qaeda devastated.

Sao Paulo, Brazil, hosted what they claimed to be the world's biggest LGBT pride parade.

Brazil was also the setting for an experiment for a city that has managed to basically ensure that all of its residents have access to high quality locally grown affordable healthy food. For very little money in the city budget. Why can’t we do something like that?

Improvements for Guantanamo Bay, despite the continued push to close the place down. If you believe that there is indeed an actual push to close it down.

The Bishop of Rome called for the international community to stop ignoring the plight of Christians in the predominantly Muslim areas of the world, calling for the need to have religious freedom everyehere. Hopefully the Bishop of Rome will be similarly accomodating about Muslims and other religions in the Chrisitan and Catholic world, and not commit an act of mass hypocrisy by claiming they need to have their souls saved or otherwise be converted from their religion.

Iran has offered to scort the next blockade-running flotilla full of aid. Whcih will certainly give a lot of people the excusese they need to do all sorts of things, should this come to pass.

Finally, I’m sure many of the prescient peoples on my list have already jokingly or otherwise said that soon we’ll need to protect the Canadian border against terrorists sneaking in, much like we have to protect the Mexico border against brown people from the south (The law is a joke, btu it’s not funny.). Well... that joke isn't necessarily a joke any more.

Domestically, an off-duty officer apparently shot at a marine thirteen times in an altercation outside a nightclub where the officer believed the marine was hitting on his girlfriend. Being a police officer, odds are good that he will escape any actual punishment for his actions, or at least be able to bargain down and justify to something not actually punishing.

A candidate for the governor of South Carolina was called a "REDACTED] raghead" and accused of being a Sikh masquerading as a Methodist, in much the same way that Barack Obama is supposed to be a secretly a Muslim. Doing the name calling was a state senator, who has now claimed he meant his remarks in jest and tried to downplay the severity of his statements. In the context of two men who were trying to get into Somalia so as to join terrorist training camps, it doesn’t seem like sucha good idea now, does it, Senator?

On economics, the spectre of a double-dip, because the defecit hawks want to cut spending now, when the right way to go about it is to wait until the markets have recovered enough to institute cuts. Of course, when you see headlines proclaiming the federal government is now $13 trillion USD in debt, you can see why the defecit hawks would start shouting louder now. In other places, they want to blame the government's current actions as the reason why the private sector isn't recovered, as if new regulations or other such things were dragging down the engine instead of letting it rev back up to where it was before in unergulated gambling and speculation, or there are complaints about how much incentive there is not to hire someone because of government spending.

Wal-Mart has teamed up with American Public University to permit their workers to earn up to 45 percent of an associates or bachelors degree through their work at the company. Well, that’s nice, but how are they going to find time and money for the other 55 percent if they’re still working at Wal-Mart?

British Petroleum has purchased spaces on Google searches related to oil and oil spills so as to promote their corporate explanation page near the top of the search results, in the spot marked for commercial and purchased links. They say it’s because the public needs to know what they’re doing to fix things, but the cynics and skeptics say they’re trying to control the flow of information and rebuild their public image by getting people to read their PR. Mr. Cline suggests the truth is that the entire oil industry model needs to change, so as to stop letting them profit at the expense of the environment and the people affected by even normal operation. That said, if you’re an oil company exec, you probably want to set up your respite spot in Mississippi, whose governor thinks there's nothing wrong and that oil isn't a problem there. That would be with the tar balls and such, yes. And, of course, the CEO of BP says it's all uncharted stuff, and that the private sector needs to do more in the wake of the disaster, sure, if we have to.

The Kentucky State Legislature put forth a resolution expressing their copmlete support for all bits of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, seen primarily as a Take That against the hypothetical libertarian musings of Rand Paul, Republican Senate Candidate from Kentucky.

In technology, Senator Lieberman puts forward a bill to allow the government to take over civilian networks in case of an emergency. Assuming they’re considered critical infrastructure. One would think those networks have already been redundancied and hardened so as to take a hit and keep on walking.

Scientists may have hit on a possible reason why acupuncture works - the needles manipulate natural bodily responses to pain and trauma.

Also, a radar-like system to help the blind navigate.

Finally, video game players, who routinely control things in an alternate universe, are apparently better at lucid dreaming, where one attempts to control things in an alternate universe.

In the opinions, Ms. Siskind starts the fire by declaring that she would rather follow the "pro-woman" movement of Palin, Coulter, and Malkin, embracing work and motherhood and being all-inclusive, than be a "feminist", the shrill, clique-y people who didn't even support Hillary Clinton becoming a Presidential candidate. What’s missing here is that Palin and her pro-woman department are for reinforcing gender stereotypes and roles, so they’re going to seem less harsh and more warm and welcoming - they’re not going to be portrayed as shrill harpies demanding to wear pants and do the same work the menfolk do. They’d love to see a woman in charge, sure, but I wonder how much of that would be wrapped up in making sure she was married and a mother and “pro-life” and was dead-set on making sure no other woman could follow her by removing her ability to choose those things, and never lost her temper or played hardball.

Mr. Ebert shows us the path he walked, from systematic racism, through civil rights, through marriage, and now back around again to the mural in Arizona where a dark-skinned kid was getting hatred from the people around him, because they didn’t like the dark-skinned kid. He asks the important question - “How did they get that way?”, but he has no answer. He doesn’t know how it happens, why it happens, in the modern times, the supposedly post-racial times, that murals depicting dark-skinned people get hated on and ordered to change the skin tone, until the people who don’t want that in their community fight back and get it back to a proper color. Where it was linked from, one of the commentators raised the point that Ebert is looking through a privileged lens, and so he might not have an answer because he doesn’t know how to see it properly, to see that racism never really went away, it just became illegal.

Mr. Beisner believes he's found the next great junk science - the need to protect the diversity of species. From there, he suggests, the governments will once again reach into private lives to seize control and dictate to private individuals what they can and can’t do. Running on the theme, Mr. Medved says that the response to the BP disaster is a perfect example of how the federal government can't actually do anything to make your life better - state and locals might be able to, but the feds just can't do it. So clearly, one should reject every “big government” idea proposed by this administration as being similarly unable to work.

Mr. Barnes says the President's hopes of re-election rest on the removal of Nancy Pelosi from her position as the Speaker of the House (through Republican takeover), because Pelosi is too unacceptably liberal, big-government, and spend-happy to let the President shift to the right and get enough appeal from conservatives to get re-elected.

Mr. Fischer makes commentary on the oil spill by expressing how much he expects the Obama administration to try and push through a cap-and-trade bill under the cover of the crisis, like the health care bill and the stimulus bills before it, instead of making sensible decisions about infrastructure, like “Drill, Baby, Drill”. Mr. Cooper echoes this idea while laying the blame for lax regulation at the feet of the regulators for creating regulations that were ornerous and Market(A.P.T.I.N.)-killing. Not at all because of the revolving door between industry and government or anything like that. Mr. Goodwin goes all the way and says that the President is just incopmetent, and this most recent disaster is just another accusaion of his unsuitability for the job. The person with the most sane response to this is, remarkably, Bill'sO, who shrugs and says that the whole thing is out of the hands of the President, and that intellectually honest people would admit to this. It looks bad for a President who always wants to appear in control, he notes, but that’s about as far as things go.

On the matter of the flotilla, Mr. Krauthammer says the world is working to systematically de-legitimize all of Israel's options to defend itself, because we are apparently tired of those meddlesome Jews existing in their own state. Mr. Murphy blames the world and UN as being too quick to judge Israel, with the new footage from the IDF cut to make them look like they were attacked and killed people in self-defense. Mr. Krauthammer probably sees his justification in Ms. Thomas's remarks about the need for Israel to stop meddling and building in Palestine and Ms. Pryor's condemnation of the people who will sit idly by and let such remarks happen, getting scorn for allowing conditions that produced millions of dead Jews in the 1930s and 1940s. (Ms. Thomas is retiring from her post over the remarks and has since apologized.)

Last out of opinions, the idea that one should not think of the Tea Partiers as intellectual anything, but simply as the defenders of the attitude that "we do not need an elite to govern us", the people whose trust that things are being managed well has been destroyed sufficiently that they've become politically active. They have never been influenced by intellectuals, so they won’t pay any attention to them or their arguments that half the stuff they’re talking about is horribly old-fashioned and well out-of-date. They’re a core demographic that is fighting back against the idea that The Elite Know Better Than You with whatever weapons they can lay their hands on. That makes brilliant sense, accounts for the lasting ability of the tea partiers, despite their lack of good or new ideas, and gives even the most intellectually elite of us a reason to listen to them long enough to take their attitude and then apply it to our intellectual lives, so as to make things better, and possibly usher in the next elite that is supposed to undo some damage while creating their own.

And last for tonight, Apparently the Children of Earth didn't totally wreck the Torchwood Institute - they're baaaaaaack. And radio no longer has the beautiful strains of the Dr. Demento show - now we'll have to go on-line to get it.

Oh, and one more thing. ten peopel got into the "championship round" of the National Spelling Bee, broadcast on primetime, despite only four of them having actually maanged to spell a word to advance. The rules had their provision, but boy, that doesn’t seem all that fair at all, does it? Better to play it out like Sasuke - if there’s nobody there that make it, well, that’s what happens.
silveradept: The emblem of Organization XIII from the Kingdom Hearts series of video games. (Organization XIII)
Ah, the Republican Party. You can be rather amusing at times, especially when pushing a very partisan agenda and trying to disguise it as a reasonable survey. Shall we take a swing at your latest "Obama Agenda Survey!" (lightning, lightning, thunder, minor organ chord, lightning, lightning) and see what sort of delightful biases you have in your questions before you try to get us to donate to you?

  1. Do you agree with Barack Obama and the Democrats that taxes should be raised for the sake of "fairness," regardless of the negative impact it is likely to have on the economy?


  2. Unless Chairman Steele is an economist, his ass-talking to straight-talking ratio is pretty high. First, I don't think anyone raises taxes because it's "fairness", unless they're talking about how people and corporations who make enough money to sit comfortably in higher tax brackets do their damndest to make themselves appear like they're common folk with low tax obligations and deserving of tax credits. I think, if we were talking about "fairness", we'd look first at ending tax credits and breaks for corporations and people that make profits several times in excess of a minimum wage, no-benefits salary. After that, if we still were short (and with the spending plan for this administration, we're short), we could talk about tax hikes in the name of raising more revenue to balance the budget. That's the kind of fairness Chairman Steele doesn't want.

  3. Do you believe the federal government has gone too far in bailing out failing banks, insurance companies and the auto industry?


  4. Two Republican-initiated things and one Demo...no wait...Three Republican-initiated bailouts that the Chairman is now trying to pin on the Democratic successors. They were considered necessary at the time, so score one Hypocrisy for the RNC. As for the question, it probably would have been better for everyone if all of those banks and insurance companies had collapsed, but the shocks and consequences of them doing so would have likely made for a big mess for regular people's assets and investments. Now that they're restablized, the question is how to extract their tendrils and return them to institutions that can fail without taking everything else down with them.

  5. Do you support amensty for illegal immigrants?


  6. What kind, Chairman? Blanket amnesty? Programmatic amnesty? An amnesty-type program where those here illegally pay their fines, take their courses, and then get put onto a list for potential citizenship, assuming they keep their noses clean and continue to obtain work visas and permits legimitately? Some of those are better ideas than others. Republicans should be insulted - the Chairman thinks that just the word amnesty will induce a visceral "OUT!" in you that you'll blindly donate money to them because they might oppose one form of it.

  7. Should English be the official language of the United States?


  8. Ah, finally a question that can get a straight response: No. For as much as nativists like the idea of being able to enforce "English-only" and feel like they've obtained some measure of dominion over immigrants (or the ability to deny them any sort of government services unless they speak the language), the heritage of the United States is too rich, and the idea of a democratic zone where everyone here legally can participate too powerful, to have it be arbitrarily boxed-in by a language barrier.

  9. Are you in favor of granting retroactive Social Security eligibility to illegal immigrants who gain U.S. citizenship through an amnesty program?


  10. If someone's been paying Social Security taxes, they should be retroactively eligible for all the years they've been working. If their employer has been withholding them or employing them illegally without paying the tax, that's the employer's problem. The workers should still be eligible for as long as they've been working at the point where they can pay the taxes in that they personally owe.

    The question is another amnesty dog-whistle, though.

  11. Do you believe that Barack Obama's nominees for federal courts should be immediately and unquestionably approved for their lifetime appointments by the U.S. Senate?


  12. Chairman: Did you believe that Ronald Reagan's or either of the George Bushes' nominees for federal courts should be immediately and unquestioningly approved for their lifetimes appointments by the U.S. Senate? If you said "Yes", then you have no real standing to be indignant if others believe the same about Democratic nominees.

    The smart and sane answer to any question about unquestioning approval to high courts is "Oh, hell no!" It does carry the caveat that objections raised must also be sane and reasonably intelligent. Saying that a lack of published work makes one unable to confirm where someone sits on the bench is sane, saying that "empathy" is a quality that justices should not have is not sane.

  13. Do you believe that the best way to increase the quality and effectiveness of public education in the U.S. is to rapidly expand federal funding while eliminating performance standards and accountability?


  14. And another loaded question. I'd like to see in what eveidence the Chairman bases his questions, because I'm pretty sure that President Obama has not spoken out in favor of reduction of accountability and performance by schools. If the Chairman bases his question on support for the elimination of No Child Left Behind, I trust the word of people actually educating that No Child Left Behind is a black hole and needed to be repealed five minutes before it was signed into law. If the Chairman is talking about the unionization of teachers and the supposed difficulty in firing poor-performing teachers, the Chairman is instructed to pay better attention to what factors actually influence school success, starting with the Infamous Brad commentary on it linked in May 2010.

  15. Do you support the creation of a national health insurance plan that would be administered by bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.?


  16. What, you mean Medicare? Already done, an as far as I recall, Chairman, most of your Republican colleagues are die-hard supporters of Medicare (not least because their constituencies would flay them alive, put them on the rack, and then re-enact the myth of Procrustes with them if they made a whisper of getting rid of it), even as they try to take all the government dollars of Medicare and force people to buy private insurance plans with it.

  17. Do you believe that the quality and availability of health care will increase if the federal government dictates pricing to doctors and hospitals?


  18. See Medicare above. Up to you to decide whether or not quality and availability increase or not when the government dictates prices, but one must also keep in mind that at the moment, most doctors compain about the red tape not being worth the reimbursement. A streamlined process for reimbursement and/or a single-payer system might make it very worthwhile.

  19. Are you confident that new medicines and medical treatments will continue to be developed if the federal government controls prescription drug prices and sets profit margins for research and pharmaceutical companies?


  20. Confident? Yes. A company that does not innovate is eaten for lunch by its competitors or by some start-up that comes out of left field with a new process of finding or manufacturing X, Y, or Zed. Even with profit margin or price controls, companies will find research tasks to complete that will earn them revenue. (And, if you want to be cynical, corporations are already good at hiding how much profit they make from the government. They will mysteriously always find a way of coming in under the cap, while their shareholders rejoice in increasing amounts of dividends.)

  21. Are you in favor of creating a government-funded "Citizen Volunteer Corps" that would pay young people to do work now done by churches and charities, earning Corps Members the same pay and benefits given to military veterans?


  22. Dog-whistle! Two of them, and at different pitches, no less! We're supposed to distrust the government reaching into our religious and charity work, because Government Is Inefficient (and worse, it might give charity to people that don't desrve it, like the poor, the brown, the black, the non-Christian, y'know, THEM), and we're supposed to be resentful at these potential citizen volunteers for getting the same pay and benefits as the people who go off to fight our wars and possibly die.

    And don't we already have AmeriCorps or something like it that's a government-funded paid volunteer organization? It's pretty strange when you keep talking about these things like they're new, when they're already here and doing quite well.

  23. Are you in favor of reinstituting the military draft, as Democrats in Congress have proposed?


  24. Unlesss you can prove that someone actually is in favor of it, and ou have the legislation in THOMAS to prove it, you're talking out your sphincter again. Reinstitution of the draft is a suicide gesture for a politician.

  25. Do you believe that the federal government should allow the unionization of Department of Homeland Security employees who serve in positions critical to the safety and security of our nation?


  26. Almost a non-loaded question, but then they go and talk about safety and scurity, conjuring up the spectre of a terrorist rubbing his hands in glee and preparing to strike because "Their security people are on strike! They're defenseless!" Excepting, y'know, for the precedence in the country's history where there are unionized employees that are not allowed to strike by law because their jobs are vital to the smooth running of the country. Plus, wouldn't you want people in critical position to be paid appropriately and not burnt out? Unionization helps with that, believe it or not.

  27. Do you support Democrats' drive to eliminate workers' right to a private ballot when considering unionization of their place of employment?


  28. I'm assuming this is the EFCA option question. EFCA, which does not actually remove the right to a secret ballot, suggests that when most people say they want to put the question of unionization to a vote, it's because they want to have a union. If that's actually the case, then the secret ballot is a fairly unnecessary expense and would only give an employer time to threaten-without-threatening the employees about what sotr of consequences await them should they choose to organize, if not find cause to fire someone because they started the petitioning drive. However, if someone insists, the regular process is still followed.

    It is a nicely phrased question, though, in trying to paint the Republicans, long the party of anti-unionism and union-busting, as defenders of the union and its secret ballot.


No more questions. It's been a rather bumpy ride from top to bottom, but also very instructive on how not to phrase your loaded, propaganda-style questions so that people won't notice they're responding to a tilted field. Either that, or it's instructive on what the RNC thinks the mindset of the average Republican is that they can pander in that most naked of ways to them and they'll be fired up and donate to the cause.

Profile

silveradept: A kodama with a trombone. The trombone is playing music, even though it is held in a rest position (Default)
Silver Adept

August 2025

S M T W T F S
     12
345678 9
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 27th, 2025 12:10 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios