Worst jobs most depressing

I'm so glad there's a study about this that I could just bip, because it was long overdue!

A new report by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration ranks occupations based on the rate of clinical depression - and effectively indicts the new economy's reliance on low-paying service jobs.

If I'd heard about this study without seeing the results, I'd have honestly guessed that food service jobs - you know, the jobs people who only have 3½ years of college are now expected to take (even though they would have gotten a much better job 15 years ago) - would have some of the worst depression rates. I'd guess that civil engineers and architects would have the lowest rates. Rates for folks such as myself - writers and other creators of art - would be slightly higher than average, while rates for people in factory and similar blue-collar jobs that have had relatively good benefits and organization (in America at least) would be lower than average.

My guesses would have turned out to be pretty much dead-on.

The category of "engineering, architecture, and surveyors" had the lowest rate of depression. But folks in "food preparation and serving related" jobs had a depression rate over twice that of engineers, surveyors, and architects - a rate surpassed only by those who tend to "personal care and service." Installers, repairers, and truck drivers seem to fare pretty well. Farmers don't have too much depression, probably because they're allowed to get sunlight. People in "arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media" fare worse than average - but not as badly as those in the health care field that takes up so much of the modern American economy.

In short, the fields that are growing the fastest tend to have the worst rates of depression - not to mention lower pay and fewer benefits.

In today's America, with the service sector dominant, getting a job could mean destroying your own health, unless you're among the few who have a degree (a process that itself usually costs money). While depression rates for the jobless are slightly higher than for the employed, much of that is probably accounted for by all the people who had good jobs but lost their jobs to the new economy and know things won't be better if they take the bad jobs that exist now. Who wants to be a victim of downward mobility? It runs against the grain of everything America is supposed to stand for.

Many of today's problems began in the '90s when Nazis in Congress yanked the security net out from under American workers. They wouldn't raise wages (despite inflation), they cut benefits, and they slashed (sorry, "streamlined") workforces. Then they blamed it all on the workers.

I think that if a college-educated factory worker loses their job and can't find any employment except making minimum wage at Booger Burger, and lives in a region with a high cost of living, and knows they're going to hate the burger job, they should be allowed to get a government benefit until they can find a job that's somewhere approaching the one they lost. Just think of it as being paid for by the highest-income taxpayers, who control the purse strings anyway and made the decisions that cost the worker their original job. These well-paid executives could just make things simpler by not costing workers their jobs, thereby not having the IRS and the Treasury act as middlepersons.

Forcing someone to take a job that they'll utterly loathe and which is inadequate anyway is almost exactly the same as the old Soviet practice of telling people what jobs they had to take. Honestly, what's the difference? If there is a difference, the current American practice is actually worse, because with the old Soviet setup there was at least a chance that someone might have made a living wage.

As things stand now, depression actually costs $30,000,000,000 to $44,000,000,000 in lost productivity annually in the U.S. - so by not guaranteeing better jobs, the system is really hurting itself in the long run.

What do the high-income Bushbots at Freak Rethuglic say about all of this? One wealthy commenter boasted, "I am not employed and am as happy as the proverbial lark." Lovely. Freepers are rich enough that they don't have to work and can gloat about it - yet they attack working-class people who are unemployed because of forces they had no control over. And the Freepers wonder why we don't kiss their asses.

(Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071013/ap_on_go_ot/depressing_jobs;
http://oas.samhsa.gov/2k7/depression/occupation.htm)

Guards who murdered teenager acquitted

The life of Martin Lee Anderson was short. In January of last year, the 14-year-old was beaten and suffocated to death by guards at a boot camp for juvenile offenders run by the Bay County Sheriff's Office in Florida. The half-hour-long beating - in which the guards also shoved ammonia capsules into the teen's nose - was caught on videotape. The fact that the teenager died from it is undeniable.

Despite this, the system continues to live in denial of the facts that stare the world in the face.

Videos can be found at: http://nospank.net/7163793.200k.wmv and http://www.miamiherald.com/top_stories/story/266196-a41411-t32.html

All this because the teen was "uncooperative." He didn't do anything violent to provoke the attack. He simply refused to participate in a 1½-mile run, and did not physically resist guards' actions. After seeing both videos, which display the nasty attitude the guards had towards the youths at the facility, it's clear that the teen's "uncooperative" stance was provoked.

Ten months after the violent death, there were still no arrests in the case, even though the perpetrators were clearly identifiable by the tape. Jeb Bush dragged his feet for so long that the teen's parents accused him of covering up the incident. Meanwhile, the system of rough juvenile boot camps fell into such disfavor among the general public that they were abolished. However, Jeb Bush was a strong supporter of these deadly boot camps. In addition, there was another documented instance of guards forcing ammonia into an inmate's face, and there had been at least 180 complaints about excessive force just at the Bay County boot camp.

Last November, charges were finally filed against 7 guards and one nurse. The nurse was charged because she did nothing to stop the guards from killing the teen. However, they were only charged with aggravated manslaughter, not murder like they should have been charged with. At the recent trial, Tampa's chief medical examiner testified that the teenager died from being suffocated by the guards shoving ammonia into his nose for minutes at a time. This contradicted Bay County's discredited declaration that he died of sickle cell. (Bay County's examiner was so incompetent that, in the autopsy report of a woman killed in a hurricane, he reported that the woman's testicles and prostate gland were "unremarkable." When he ruled on Martin Lee Anderson's death, he was practicing without a medical license, because he had negligently failed to renew it.)

But of course, in this society, children are the ones who are never considered right, and guards at confinement facilities are the ones who are never considered wrong. Hell, America's the only country in the world that actually rejected an international children's rights treaty, so we knew the country is run by child haters. Because the government hates kids, America's young people are considered property until they turn 18. And in this case, it's all the worse, because Freepers and racists are allowed to serve on juries. The all-white jury let the 8 boot camp employees off the hook for murdering the black teenager. (Click on the links for more detail of the story's racial aspect.)

So now the fatal torture of one teenager by 8 assailants can be caught on videotape, and the torturers go free. That's BushAmerica.

And what were the original charges that caused Martin Lee Anderson to be sent to the detention facility in the first place? He had been caught joyriding in his grandmother's car and trespassed at school. He hadn't murdered anyone. There's no evidence he did anything violent. Only those 2 offenses. In Florida, for a 14-year-old to commit these transgressions has in effect been made a capital offense, seeing how guards can go unpunished for brutally killing a teenager detained for these offenses. (Also, for his grandmother to get the insurance money to cover the car, she was required to turn him in, so that policy exacerbated what would have otherwise been a less serious matter.)

It's not over. The NAACP says it will petition the federal government for an indictment of the guards on civil rights charges. Hopefully, federal prosecutors will throw the book at the defendants - not like we expect it to happen, considering the Bush regime supports these youth boot camps. The acquittal of the guards also led to student protests at Florida's college campuses.

As if the teen's death and the acquittal of his killers aren't bad enough, right-wing State Rep. Jimmy Patronis is sponsoring a bill to make Florida taxpayers pick up the bill for the guards' legal fees. And, after the verdict, the incompetent Bay County medical examiner strolled about the courthouse smiling and laughing like the true asshole he is. Predictably, the Free Republic liars have resorted to race-baiting as they too gloat about the verdict.

Since the system's side wants to be nasty, it's my duty to point out that the photo of one of the murderous guards at the trial makes it look like he left his teeth embedded in the cock he drew on his autographed John Ashcroft photo.

What the fuck kind of boot camp does this shit anyway? The military has boot camp, but I doubt that they make recruits inhale ammonia or deliberately torture them to death. I believe it was Kentucky populist Gatewood Galbraith who observed that "full employment" in BushAmerica means 50% of the people are in jail and the other 50% are jail guards. It's called the people processing industry. It's a sign of the Freeper-style me-ism that plagues America.

The guards who were acquitted are nothing but thugs - and now similarly thuggish guards in other states will see the acquittal verdict as a sign that they have carte blanche to kill their inmates just as the youth in this case was killed. What ever happened to accountability?

(Source: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/16061084.htm;
http://nospank.net/n-p68r.htm;
http://nospank.net/n-q51r.htm;
http://www.miamiherald.com/top_stories/story/262339.html;
http://www.miamiherald.com/top_stories/story/266196.html;
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/10/12/bootcamp.death.ap/index.html;
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/oct/13/boot-camp-defendants-acquitted-all-counts)

Coulter has another John Hostettler moment

Feel free to skip this entry, because Ann Coulter is such an over-the-top crackpot that most people have probably stopped paying attention to her by now.

Coulter isn't exactly known for not being a bigot. But she's just so far gone now that I can't imagine that anyone can still think she's as brilliant as the Free Republic morons think she is.

In October 2003, Coulter was responsible for what David Brock called an "anti-Semitic screed" on the right-wing Townhall website. This past Monday, Coulter had another John Hostettler moment when she launched an anti-Jewish harangue on CNBC's 'The Big Idea'.

In Coulter's latest tirade, she declared America would be a better place without Jews and said that Jews should "perfect" themselves into Christians. While arguing with host Donny Deutsch about this statement, Coulter sniffed, "I give all of these speeches at megachurches across America, and the one thing that's really striking about it is how utterly, completely diverse they are, and completely un-self-consciously. You walk past a mixed-race couple in New York, and it's like they have a chip on their shoulder. They're just waiting for somebody to say something, as if anybody would."

What??? And what did that little tangent have to do with the rest of the interview anyway??? How much bigotry does Ann Coulter have to cram into one interview?

And what sort of wingnut megachurch would have Ann Coulter as a speaker?

But most conservatives consider Ann Coulter a genius, so that just goes to show what a mess conservatism has become. So have some laughs at conservatism's expense!

(Source: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003657196)

Idiot ISP trouble again

Ah yes, more ISP trouble today, courtesy of our local phone company (who else?) that provides our high-speed access.

This morning when I started work, the only sites I could access were my ISP's site and Google. I e-mailed the phone company about it and never got a response. Later, everything worked. But later still, nothing worked except my ISP's site - so I e-mailed them again and still didn't get a response. Then I called them and was treated to a recording about how they're aware of the problem and are allegedly fixing it (even though it's been going on all day). Now this blog works, but little else does.

I've hunted all over the phone company's site for my ISP's status page, and apparently there isn't one. There used to be one, according to Google, but it doesn't work anymore. Seriously, a high-speed provider in 2007 lacks a status page. Mind-boggling!

Instead, the phone company's ISP fills its website with this idiotic bullshit:


Nice to know I'm paying $30 a month for a celebrity gossip website instead of a high-speed ISP. Silly me!

Bush retaliates against Qwest because it failed to conspire with wiretap program

For all the rightism that just oozes from the whole industry, you'd think a telcom company would be safe from Bush's Nazism. But nooooo!

New documents reveal that the NSA and other government agencies have retaliated against Denver-based telcom giant Qwest because it failed to go along with Bush's illegal phone spying program. Apparently, at the insider trading trial of former Qwest CEO Joe Nacchio, this intimidation would have formed the basis of Nacchio's "classified information" defense, had the judge allowed him to use it. Nacchio planned to show that he had a meeting in February 2001 at the NSA headquarters to discuss a secret $100,000,000 project. At the same meeting, the NSA approached Nacchio about another project, but he refused to go along with it because he considered it illegal. However, the details of that project are censored from the documents.

Following Nacchio's refusal of the second project, the NSA retaliated against Qwest by refusing in July 2001 to award Qwest the first project.

The papers also show that Qwest was slated to build a multibillion-dollar government communications network and perform other government business, before it somehow lost this privilege.

Note that all of this happened before 9/11 - so now the child molesters who support Bush's wiretap program can't use 9/11 as an excuse as they're always so intent on doing.

One thing about all this is that the telcom companies that did collude with Bush now can't defend themselves by saying they didn't know it was illegal, considering Qwest knew it was illegal.

(Source: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/tech/article/0,2777,DRMN_23910_5719566,00.html)

Government wastes money on dragonfly cyborgs

I can't believe the government has money to waste on this shit, when it doesn't even have money for children's health insurance!

The Bush regime has been using your money to develop robotic dragonflies to spy on antiwar rallies. I shit you not. It sounds almost too off-the-wall to be true, but they're really spending money on this nonsense!

And people have already seen these cyborg insects at antiwar events! According to the Washington Post, "robotic fliers" have been in use by the military since World War II, and the CIA has had dragonfly robots for 30 years, but now they're more advanced than ever. A photo with the article shows how realistic they look:


They look real enough that those who saw them questioned whether they were living insects or small machines with wings.

No agency will admit to deploying the robotic insects. Well, of course they won't admit it. But an Army report says that flying cyborgs are common enough already that they may now "render military airspace chaotic and potentially dangerous."

Dragonfly cyborgs have been spotted by peace demonstrators recently and at least as far back as the 2004 Republican National Convention.

Think of how much taxpayer money is getting wasted on this baloney. Each mechanical dragonfly has got to cost tens of thousands of dollars, because they need batteries that are light enough to support hovering and rapid wing movement and powerful enough to keep them flying for long periods of time. And there's obviously not just one dragonfly, but many, in order to be spotted by several different people at several different events.

I notice I have seen a lot of weird-looking dragonflies lately at festivals and such, but until now I never considered it even within the realm of possibility that they could be robots with miniature cameras. But in today's police state environment, it does make sense. So be on the lookout for these.

(Source: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/9/10118/4071;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/08/AR2007100801434.html?hpid=topnews&hpid=artslot&sid=ST2007100801459)

DEA gives back money it stole from truck driver

Remember a couple months ago when the DEA stole over $20,000 from a truck driver at a weigh station in New Mexico (despite finding no evidence he had drugs)? The DEA informed him he would have to prove the money didn't come from illicit drug sales in order to get the money back, which flies in the face of the idea of innocent until proven guilty.

But the ACLU intervened on the driver's behalf, and now the DEA has been forced to return all the money it stole!

Ha ha, DEA! Ya really got smacked down, didn't ya?!

The truck driver still has a case looming against the New Mexico Police State Police.

(Source: http://www.elpasotimes.com/newupdated/ci_7081506?source=email)

Rat head found in green beans from Wal-Mart

First broken glass, now rat heads.

Recently a woman in Utah found a rat head in a can of Allen's Cut Green Beans that she had purchased at (you guessed it!) Wal-Mart. This gruesome discovery was followed up with a lot of corporate smugness the likes of which aren't unheard of in Big Business today.

Allen Canning spokesman James Phillips defended the rat head that was in the green beans. "This rodent was rendered commercially sterile. We cook each can individually at a temperature up to 265 degrees," Phillips sniffed.

Oh, for fuck's sake!

Allen Canning offered the customer a $100 settlement if she signed a liability release - but she wisely rejected this insulting offer.

But guess who the real victim is, according to Allen Canning? That's right, Allen Canning. Phillips accused the woman of "trying to ruin us through the media." Seriously. He really said that. Let's get this straight, James: Someone purchased a can of beans, found a rat head in it, then went to the local newspaper about it. How does this make Allen Canning the victim??? It never would have happened if Allen Canning hadn't put the rat head in its green beans. Ever hear of taking responsibility for stuff?

It turns out that something similar happened 2 years ago when an amphibian leg was found in a can of Allen's green beans in Illinois.

I guess that "Green Beans Are Lethal" poster I made in 7th grade turned out to be correct.

This scandal comes on the heels of a recall of ground beef made by Cargill Inc. and sold at Scam's Club after several customers became sick with E. coli.

(Source: http://www.sltrib.com//ci_7089145?IADID=Search-www.sltrib.com-www.sltrib.com;
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MEAT_RECALL_SAMS_CLUB?SITE=KYB66&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)

Vichy Democrats want to extend Bush's wiretap fascism

The Democrats must like losing elections.

When the story of Bush's eavesdropping scandal emerged, I thought he'd be impeached over it - because it's sort of like, uh, illegal, ya see. But who was I kidding? The Democrats in Congress are useless. They're the same wusses who won't repeal the 1996 telcom law, so why should we expect them to do anything but sit on their asses while they bleed voters?

Today's Democrats are...Republicans.

This past summer, right-wing congressional Democrats collapsed over their miserable selves to pass legislation to expand the Bush regime's wiretap powers. Some of the telephone conversations monitored were in fact strictly international: They were placed outside the U.S. to parties that were also outside the U.S. - but Bush monitored them anyway.

The morons in Congress actually passed this bill, and Little Idiot signed it into law. (Republican shitbag Dan Lungren was quoted as favoring the new law, naturally. If I remember correctly, Lungren tried to have someone thrown in prison a while back for wearing an anti-DARE shirt. So Lungren isn't exactly pro-American, seeing how he's against the Constitution and all.)

A contributor to Daily Kos said that when the Democrats caved to Bush, "Karl Rove was handed the last tool he needed to craft his 'permanent Republican majority.'"

Now the Vichy Democrats who people Congress want to extend Bush's wiretap powers - again! This after they said they'd reduce Bush's eavesdropping powers. The latest DLC bill would expand for several years the powers that the recent law temporarily granted to Bush. A Senate version of this proposal would retroactively change the law to give immunity to Nazi telcom companies that illegally conspired with Bush.

What the fuck's the point in supporting the Democrats any more? Granted, the GOPstapo is worse, but that's about the only reason. There needs to be a whole new party to run a candidate in every damn district next year. I was about ready to assume the Democrats were going to win next year after Bush's SCHIP veto. They could have run with the ball on that, but nope, the DLC ran its mouth again.

(Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/01/washington/01nsa.html;
http://bluespotblog.com/2007/08/house-oks-wider-wiretap-powers.html;
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20126385;
http://nevdem.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/5/184037/2270; http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/washington/09nsa.html)

Wingnutosphere harasses SCHIP family

Graeme Frost is a boy from a working-class family who - along with his younger sister Gemma - was critically injured a few years ago in a car accident. The Frosts relied on SCHIP - the government-funded children's health insurance program Bush seems intent on gutting. SCHIP saved their lives. Now Graeme, who is now 12, recorded the Democrats' weekly radio address last week.

This immediately incurred the wrath of right-wing terrorist website Free Republic, which promptly launched a harassment campaign against the boy and his family. Freepers promptly dug up as much personal information about the Frosts as they possibly could and posted it on online.

According to Freak Rethuglic, the Frost children go to private schools. Freepers claim this automatically makes them rich, because private schools cost money. What the Freepers don't tell you though is that the Frosts have scholarships that cover almost all their tuition. Even if they don't have scholarships, it still doesn't necessarily make them rich. Hell, even I went to a private school for several years, and do I look rich to you? If my folks could afford a private school, then you don't have to be swimming in dough to afford it.

Aren't Freepers always the ones who are praising private schools and complaining about how public school kids are nothing but gangbangers and stoners? I monitor that shitty little website, and it seems like almost everyone there who mentions having kids sends their kids to a private school.

So practice what you preach, Freepers. Or gag on piss.

It gets worse. Freepers dug up a marriage announcement in a newspaper from 15 years ago to determine that the Frost children's father, a woodworker, is self-employed. So they blamed him because the family didn't have health insurance and had to use SCHIP - when they should have really blamed insurers for making insurance too expensive. Yet the Freak Rethuglic thought police opposes state laws that would require big corporations to set aside some of their payroll for health insurance for workers. How's that for hypocrisy?

Then, of course, the Freepfucks promptly posted the Frosts' street address and offered all sorts of wild speculation about their economic standing - much of which contradicted itself. It makes about as much sense as, say, accusing an author who is known to earn money from book royalties of having no job (while failing to explain how said author could afford a new computer just a year ago).

Only a real bunch of scumbags like Freak Rethuglic would post personal information and ridiculous crap about a family all because they got coverage from SCHIP. Notice I said: like Freak Rethuglic - not limited to Freak Rethuglic. That wingnutosphere's a big operation, ya know. A contributor to RedState - a right-wing blog known for its frequent copyright infringement - expressed hope that SCHIP recipients "could die for all I care" and demanded hiring a private eye to investigate the Frosts to find out where they spend money. This contributor announced, "Then I'd do everything possible to destroy their lives with that info."

Michelle Malkin, an Ann Coulter-style loudmouth, admits on her website that she went to the Frosts' family business and interrogated a tenant in that building about his political beliefs. Then she scoped out the Frosts' home.

Congratulations, Malkin, you idiot, you just admitted to stalking - which is a criminal offense.

Graeme and Gemma Frost suffered permanent injuries in the auto accident of several years ago. Gemma suffered a brain injury. Only cowards and thugs harass injured children all because their parents used a government program to cover their medical bills. Free Republic and Michelle Malkin are cowards and thugs. Malkin and the Freepers have done stuff like this before, but this is the first time I can recall them going after 2 disabled children.

The government can spend money on a war on Iraq, yet conservatives get mad when the government spends money on injured children. But conservatives don't really know why they're mad anymore. They just are. So instead of arguing their point civilly, they resort to bullying and thuggery, like the big crybabies they are. Under their neatly pressed suits and blazers, conservatives really are ugly people.

At minimum, somebody has to make it so the wingnuts' thuggery doesn't pay. Right now, the media mostly just parrots their side, using the likes of Freak Rethuglic as sources. Then, when people start actually believing the wingnutosphere's lies, the wingnuts slap themselves on the back - and do the same thing to someone else later, because it worked so well the last time. The entire mainstream media - not just scattered sources - needs to be constantly on the lookout for the bullshit from right-wing blogs and debunk every last bit of it as quickly as possible.

Also, Michelle Malkin should be prosecuted for stalking. The Frosts have cause to go to the police right this very minute and file charges.

Somebody needs to stand up against the Far Right.

(Source: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/10/8/105939/723;
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/10/dems-poster-chi.html)

FBI fascism keeps innocent people from Canada

The FBI runs a database called the National Crime Information Center. This is the NCIC that you're always hearing about on your police scanner. The NCIC was designed to track fugitives and violent felons and to help find missing people - but don't tell that to the Bush regime, which instead uses it to track anyone who disagrees with the government.

Under Bush - being the scumbag he is - the FBI now uses the NCIC to keep tabs on antiwar activists. Former Senate candidate Medea Benjamin and retired Army colonel and diplomat Ann Wright have been arrested before in the supposedly "democratic" U.S. for protesting the Iraq War. These arrests landed Benjamin and Wright in the NCIC. They didn't have to be convicted of anything to be put in the database. All it took was an arrest over their dissent.

This is how America treats a retired Army colonel??? You've heard people talk about Vietnam vets getting spit on when they came home. These days, America's fighting men and women get spit on by the Bush regime betraying them.

Inexplicably, Canada relies on the FBI's database to screen visitors. So when Wright and Benjamin tried to visit Canada, they were told they had to apply for "criminal rehabilitation" and pay $200 costly dollars if they wanted to enter the country.

Medea Benjamin and Ann Wright call FBI's inclusion of their names in the NCIC an act of intimidation against dissidents. The New York Civil Liberties Union's John Curr says the Canadian government - in effect, the Harper administration - is complicit with Bush's suppression of free speech when it uses the FBI's database.

Stephen Harper wasn't Prime Minister yet when I went to Canada for a Colin Hay concert, but now I know why the customs agents deliberated for so long before letting me in the country. Nine years earlier, I got basically scorched by Newt's worshipers at NKU for being at the university library with my newsletter in my possession and got added to the NCIC for "trespassing." The charge was dismissed after I was proven innocent, but I was still in the NCIC. Not only that, but third-degree trespassing isn't even an arrestable offense under Kentucky law, so the arrest itself was illegal - yet NKU submitted my info the NCIC anyway.

If the NKU Taliban had pulled this shit nowadays, I'd fight them. Word to the wise: I don't like being intimidated.

(Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071004/ap_on_re_us/protesters_border)

Bush's excuses for vetoing SCHIP bill

Dictator Bush is such a liar that I shouldn't even be dignifying his excuses for vetoing the SCHIP bill with an entry here, but I need to show just how morally bankrupt the modern American brand of conservatism is.

When Congress passed a bill to expand SCHIP to provide health insurance to 10,000,000 more children, I didn't think Bush would actually be foolish enough to veto it. I know he wanted to, but I didn't think he'd want to put his party's political fortunes on the line.

But guess what? He vetoed it - thereby depriving millions of children (70% of whom are in families with an annual household income of under $41,300) of insurance.

Why? Bush said he wants to see "private medicine, not the federal government running the health care system." Um, George? Ever see 'Sicko'? Private industry runs the American health care system now. It doesn't exactly cause there to be, well, a health care system, does it?

Also, Bush complains that the bill would have moved the children covered by it from private insurance to government insurance - but this is an outright lie: Two-thirds of these children had no insurance to begin with. Not only that, but SCHIP, while funded by the government, isn't fully government-run: Private insurers still provide the insurance, and private doctors still provide the medicine. In fact, Bush and his cultists lied about almost every aspect of the bill, like when they falsely complained it only covers very rich families and undocumented immigrants. (It covers neither. The lie about it covering undocumented immigrants was spread by right-wing Missouri congressman Todd Akin.)

The silver lining in this roo-crackin' thundercloud is that, when Bush vetoed this bill, you could just hear the Republicans' political fortunes collapsing. Two-thirds of the American public supported the bill. If voters can keep this on their minds for another year, then election night in 2008 is going to be even more fun than in 2006.

Every time you hear someone complaining about "socialized" medicine or other services, it's almost always just a flimsy excuse.

(Source: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/top10/309;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/30/AR2007093001035.html;
http://www.bendweekly.com/Opinion/Editorials/9627.html)

Conservative War on Halloween steps up

It's that time of year again! Every year, some dominionist whack-a-doo complains about their local public school system celebrating Halloween - and the school, which is usually run by dominionists itself (because most schools are), happily buckles under and cancels the whole holiday.

This year it's happened again - this time at Kohl Elementary School in Broomfield, Colorado. The school has banned its Halloween festivities and replaced it with a tame fall festival in which kids won't be allowed to wear Halloween costumes. All because Halloween offended one fundamentalist loudmouth. The school did not bother to consult parents before electing itself the Grinch who stole Halloween. This fall festival even prohibits bringing in cookies that have jack-o'-lantern faces on them because this design is Halloween-related.

These days, all it takes is one religious zealot to steal Halloween for hundreds of children. Just one. Every time even one person complains about Halloween, the whole event gets canceled. Just as silly is the school falling over itself to come up with better sounding excuses for why it banned Halloween - and falling flat on its face. Even more pathetic, conservatives are already trying to shirk blame for the entire debacle.

The school is still allowing Halloween costumes at its annual carnival, which is on a weekend. But that's a fundraiser for the school, you see, and requires paid admission. So I guess costumes are just fine and dandy as long as the school can Make Money from it.

Inroads by the Far Right have been made at some other public schools that prohibit Halloween costumes that feature fake weapons or anything gory.

What a bunch of petty dictators the educrats are. They can't stand people having fun. And they don't understand separation of church and state either.

(Source: http://dailycamera.com/news/2007/oct/03/costumes-ruled-out-at-kohl-this-year)

America becomes land of Allowed Clouds

Memphis (10/5/07) - The America of today is like a big, gray Allowed Cloud that drenches us all.

My South Central U.S. tour won't be known for its Allowed Clouds, because unreasonable Allowed Clouds have become such a plague nationally that now we take them for granted.

Allowed Clouds aren't always bad. Every civilization needs rules. But bad Allowed Clouds have expanded like a fungus, shoving good Allowed Clouds aside. I try to avoid suburbs in my travels, because I don't like boredom - but the suburban-based phenomenon of bad Allowed Clouds is now strangling our cities like a boa constrictor.

I saw the rise of Allowed Clouds in action today in Memphis. There's this downtown mall that has this really right-wing dress code for customers. There's signs up everywhere in this mall that skeep about allegedly offensive t-shirts and ball caps being worn backwards. Um, it's a mall, not a fancy ballroom or an oppressive private school. Furthermore, people have to walk through this mall to get from the parking garage to the street - so busting them for wearing the "wrong" attire is doubly silly. Even if privately owned, malls have been made the commercial avenues of modern America. If you want to build a mall, don't expect people to become think-alike automatons upon entering the premises.

More importantly, how many malls had dress codes 20 years ago? The retail industry was getting along fine without such right-wing tyranny, so why ruin it now?

More silly Allowed Clouds? At least one of the cities on my trip has signs up on its public streets banning what they call "cruising" - a "crime" the cities define as driving around the block too many times. What ever happened to the public's right to use a public space? These recent ordinances are clearly unconstitutional under the right to peaceful assembly.

In a similar vein, in one of the cities where I bunked, I saw a campaign commersh for some right-wing politician who was running on a platform of stiffifying ordinances against loitering. Huh? Take up a cause people actually give a damn about - like, say, toe jam. And yes, they did say loitering, not littering. (I know some wiseass is going to ask.)

This beef-up sounds like yet another excuse by right-wingers to bust people because they feel like it. Either that, or they're trying to appeal to the few who think that the public being present on public sidewalks has to be suppressed in the name of a "healthy business climate."

So you see how Allowed Clouds can be powerful tools of the spoiled to wield against the people, and of political "leaders" who are so incompetent that they don't know how to keep order any other way. And there's no question that these unfortunate Allowed Clouds are far more common in America now than at any other point in my lifetime.

If we need another Allowed Cloud, it ought to be against greedy, monopolistic cable companies like Comcast. The cable in my motel room has been out all evening thanks to Comcast's fartpipery.

Slidin' into Slidell

Slidell, LA (10/4/07) - Nothing like trying out new material on the road, is there?

As I was driving from Birmingham to New Orleans, I was thinking of ways the government can protect the American worker and clamp down on corporate greed.

I got to thinking of the fact that, up until 60 years ago, organized labor had more freedom. In the good ol' U.S.A., it used to be illegal for states to pass unconstitutional work-for-less laws. But nowadays, work-for-less is pandemic in the South and West. This shame was made possible by the foul Taft-Hartley Act. For years after is passage, Democratic campaigns wanted to repeal this law - but attention to this matter dwindled to nothing when the DLC (the Republican wing of the Democratic Party) started flapping its gizzard.

What Congress should do is repeal Taft-Hartley. Unfortunately, I expect toilets to chew bubble gum before that happens.

(Uproariously, I'm writing this article in one of the most anti-worker parishes - counties - in a work-for-less state. I'd love to see the look on the Far Right's face!)

Congress should also peg the minimum wage to (whoosh...whoosh) inflation. In other words, when prices rise, the minimum wage should automatically go up to keep pace with prices. So far the only presidential candidate I know of to publicly support this idea is John Edwards. Congress gives itself a huge pay raise every year (despite this being unconstitutional under the amendment that forbids Congress from varying its pay in the middle of a term). If Congress raises its own pay, it can at least raise average workers' pay.

In recent years, America has replaced fair trade with "free trade." Under so-called "free trade", human rights take a back seat to corporate profit. The United States should end all trade with countries that suppress workers' rights to organize. If America did this, however, it would have to end trade with itself - unless (among other things) it halts the work-for-less laws that plague so many states.

Since Congress ain't gonna rein in the scab states, the rest of the states should shore up this absence by doing their best to enact trade barriers against repressive nations. Some states have selective purchasing laws to prohibit their own governments from buying from companies that do business with bad regimes. Activist federal courts have bowed to the globalists by trying to nix these laws, but the states need to stand up and be counted.

I've started putting my money where my mouth is by buying as little as possible when I pass through work-for-less states - thereby depriving their rulers of sales taxes. Comical, huh? I've become too accustomed to the gouging of us working people in my own area, but at least it's not a state law there.

Greed brings shoddy goods

Fultondale, AL (10/3/07) - The ever-increasing shoddiness of goods (or more accurately, bads) has been a pet peeve of mine ever since the days of big hair - and it's only gotten worse. As Ned Flanders might say, products today are shod-diddly-od-diddly-oddledy-doddledy!

This is surely true of almost anything electronic - which has gotten progressively worser for years. It wouldn't be so sad if it wasn't a hopeless botch of inventions that could improve the lives of billions, and if the global greed merchants weren't reaping even greater profits from their detestable wares - which today are often made from unpaid prison labor abroad. (This proves yet again what a bunch of spoiled babies the corporate greed hawkers are.)

Let me tell it like it is: A lot of electronic goods sold these days are crap. Even as the cost increases, the quality continues to tumble harum-scarum downhill. This is true of TV's, radios, headphones, and most other high-tech devices.

It's gotten so bad that now I take it for granted that any new electronic gadget is going to have issues. Recently, a TV set I buyed only 2 years ago died, and I replaced it with a 1983 set from a flea market that works perfectly - which proves quality of products has declined. By this time, I was conditioned to be thoroughly unsurprised by the newer set's self-destroyment.

But now I've had all I can stands and I can't stands no more! Recently I ordered a memory card for my trusty digital camera. The memory card is such a mind-numbing disaster that I can't believe anyone can sell such a piece of shit.

The memory card likes to ruin my priceless photos by failing to process them properly. The photos emerge utterly and completely ru! It burns me up inside. A pressing matter? Maybe not in my case. But the memory card breaking up a photo of a nude statue sighted in the middle of a roundabout on a road trip isn't nearly as serious as what can happen if an important agency buys this brand of memory card.

Think if, say, a police detective uses this brand of card to photograph a crime scene - only to return to the precinct to be confronted with that heartbreaking "Unsupported image file" plaint. I guess the maker of the memory card gets their rocks off on the thought of letting a serial killer go free because the chance to solve a crime gets dashed to pieces.

Now that capitalism has skimmed so much profit off its shoddy goods, maybe it should share its abundance with the world - the same world it exploits so shamelessly to pad its own bottom line.

Fact-finding mission looms

Just think! I'm going on vacation for the rest of the week in the South Central U.S. and A., so there will likely be no more entries here about the ravages of conservatism until Saturday (despite it being one of the more conservative regions of the country). Because part of my job is to regale and inform you with incisive populist commentary, I'll try to write up some stuff on paper while I'm away and post it when I get home.

So it's open thread time again. I know this is practically a brand new blog, but I'm expecting some action in the comments section here by the time I arrive home! Otherwise I'll eat my hat. (And who needs such a sight?)

Coulter blames Carter for 9/11

We usually don't give a shit what Ann Coulter says, but her latest tirade is almost too bizarre not to go unnoticed. We're bringing it to you only out of sheer fascination with how anyone can be such an idiot.

In an interview with the New York Observer, Coulter blamed Jimmy Carter for 9/11 - even though Carter had been out of office for 20 years when it happened. She also blamed Bill Clinton - conveniently ignoring the fact that there was 12 years of Republican misrule in the White House in the intervening era between Carter and Clinton.

More craziness? Coulter also declared that women shouldn't be allowed to vote, because the Democrats win more of the women's vote than the men's vote. She says barring women from voting is her "personal fantasy." On the other hand, this is the same Ann Coulter who illegally voted in the wrong precinct.

If Ann Coulter is the most visible commentator the Far Right can come up with, then it's just gonna get easier for us progressives to win elections. Coulter is the worst advertisement for conservatism since Neal Horsley. So keep entertaining us, Ann.

(And we know she's going to keep at it, because the wingnutosphere is hopelessly delusional enough to think she's helping their cause. They never learn, so we're not afraid they'll get her to stop after they read this entry.)

(Source: http://www.observer.com/2007/coulter-culture)

Wal-Mart sells trail mix containing broken glass (a blast from the past)

We've had this story on the backburner since early this year, but most of the media never brang it to the fore like they should have - even after Wal-Mart was caught putting phony barcode labels on recalled cat food - so we need to bring it forward and keep it there.

Several Wal-Mart customers found shards of glass and plastic in store brand trail mix that they buyed there - thus forcing a recall of the product. The trail mix originally came from an Ann's House of Nuts plant in North Carolina, but as we've pointed out before, Wal-Mart does have a hand in the manufacture of its brands.

Stuff like this seems to happen a lot with Wal-Fart, doesn' t it? I wonder why anyone still shops there - but then again, Wal-Mart's predatory ways have netted it a monopoly in some communities, so it's not like people have a choice.

(Source: http://www.backchannelmedia.com/newsletter/articles/7664/Wal-Mart-Recalls-Trail-Mix-Glass-or-Plastic-Reported-Inside)

America's Toilets & Testes threatens to disconnect critics

Because this is a day ending in 'y', you knew AT&T had to be at it yet again, and sure enough, they are.

Internet providers like to employ vague terms of service. Often they'll prohibit "offensive" content, a provision that could technically cover just about anything. Fortunately a lot of ISP's (especially small ones) won't enforce such vague terms against customers, as long as their content has some redeeming value and isn't defamatory. Many ISP's consider it wise to have these fuzzy provisions to protect themselves from being targeted by SLAPP lawsuits over what customers post, not to stifle legitimate expression.

But what AT&T is doing now is less ambiguous, and if it's allowed to continue or set a precedent, you can pretty much kiss the Internet goodbye.

First, a little bit about Worldnet, which is AT&T's dialup ISP: Worldnet is probably the most troublesome national ISP in America. Which is fitting because AT&T is probably the most vexing communications company in America. Which in turn is suitable because several years ago AT&T was the top corporate contributor to Republican political campaigns. I say Worldnut (which is not affiliated with the equally right-wing WorldNetDaily "news" site) is at the bottom of the heap because I've had dealings with one of its users impersonating me. For nearly 2 years, Worldnet refused to do anything about it.

Also, as of just a few months ago, I'm still finding copious Usenet spam from Worldnet users consisting of racist propaganda. These offensive posts are crossposted to 5 newsgroups - where they're not even on-topic.

Furthermore, America's Toilets & Testes has on several occasions made use of phone slamming to send me bills for phone services I didn't order. I refused to pay these bills - which forced AT&T to eventually stop trying to collect on them.

Now AT&T has unveiled new terms of service for users of its DSL Internet. Section 5 of this document is rather chilling: It seems to give AT&T the power to revoke users' accounts for daring to publicly criticize AT&T or any of its subsidiaries.

Isn't that like the government censoring dissidents? Listen, peeps, AT&T is a monopoly. In some areas, it's not just the only phone company but also the only high-speed Internet provider. Not only that, but it has a monopoly usually because governments gave it a monopoly in the form of exclusive franchise agreements. Censorship by AT&T in these cases is therefore government censorship. Even if the monopoly isn't government-established, AT&T's new policy is still fatal to the free flow of ideas if AT&T is the only provider in your area. AT&T's new restriction stinks of corporate tyranny and a desire to suppress dissent.

It's clear that AT&T is trying to silence those who rightly take issue with its deplorable practices. But even if it isn't a monopoly, it's questionable whether AT&T even has a right to censor content that's not illegal, because they're a common carrier. That would be a bit like the phone company disconnecting someone for criticizing them in a private phone conversation.

When people exposed how tyrannical the ToileTestes crew's new rule is, AT&T quickly shifted into damage control and denied that it plans to pull customers' accounts for criticizing AT&T. We can picture AT&T cursing in frustration because someone blew the lid off its plans.

If AT&T does pull accounts for legitimate dissent, it will encourage other Internet monopolies to do the same. Sooner or later there's going to have to be more oversight over the high-speed industry.

(Source: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070930-att-threatens-to-disconnect-subscribers-who-are-critical-of-the-company.html)

Court upholds awful Solomon Amendment

For years, one of my pet peeves with the way the ruling party conducts itself has been the fact that, under the Contract With America, the federal government began requiring educational institutions to toe the party line. I've pleaded, I've begged, I've implored people to look at what's going on - only to be told there's no way it can be happening because Newt/Lott/BushAmerica is the freest country in the history of the world.

Welp, here's the perfect example of exactly what I've been talking about: the Solomon Amendment. According to the all-powerful Wikipedia, the Solomon Amendment was enacted in 1996 by the insufferable 104th Congress, which in my view makes it null and void under the Spittle Doctrine. Even if it didn't, I think the law is clearly unconstitutional just based on what it says.

The Solomon Amendment was sponsored by the late Gerald Solomon, ultraconservative Republican congressman from upstate New York. It requires the government to discriminate against colleges that fail to give military and ROTC recruiters the same access as nonmilitary agencies and private employers. Under this illegal law, the government has to deny all federal money - even research grants - to schools that bar military recruitment on campus.

So if your college decides that having the military recruit students to fight Bush's wars doesn't fit the school's mission, then your school is out of luck. It either has to lose all its funding or let the recruiters on campus - no matter how much it conflicts with the school's stance. This became an even more serious issue when it was discovered that having military recruiters on campus violates school policies that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation (as the military disallows gays from openly serving). In other words, Congress in effect prohibited colleges from banning discrimination against gays.

With Congress policing the beliefs of colleges all over the land, you'd think it couldn't get much worse. But lo! It did. In 2001, with Bush's boot planted firmly in the nation's spine, Congress made it so that if a college that's part of a larger university bans recruiters, the entire university loses its funding.

A federal court later found the Solomon Amendment unconstitutional - but, believe it or not, the Supreme Court later reversed that decision. Why they did, I'll never know.

Now there's been another challenge to the Solomon Amendment. Yale Law School has been trying for years to halt military recruiters at its job fairs. But then the Bush regime announced it would withhold $350,000,000 a year from Yale University unless its law school did exactly what the recruiters wanted - so Yale took 'em to court. Last month, a federal appeals court ruled against Yale by upholding the Solomon Amendment.

So Yale now has no choice but to buckle under, because it's already clear where the Supreme Court stands. The ruling regime got its way. Again.

Most of the federal money Yale gets is for medical and scientific research. You read that right: The Bush regime was willing to impede medicine and science all because of politics.

If the federal government can bully Yale and control what it does, just think how badly it can push around less prestigious schools. Ivy League universities aren't exactly my field, but the more important issue is that the villains of the Republican Right are now able to just dictate politics to every institution of higher book-learnin' in America - from the most selective university to the most open community college. And they do this even after they claimed to be for local control and smaller government. The irony never ceases to amaze and anger.

(Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/01/nyregion/01yale.html)

Another moral panic that ought to float away

Oh no! "Moral values" hypocrites are offended again! What ever shall we do?

This is a story that pits the two components of modern conservatism against each other: Big Business and holier-than-thou moralism. According to rumor, there's a Wendy's commercial that shows customers floating, apparently after inhaling helium. But now the moral panic contingent is crying that the commersh encourages inhalant use.

Except it doesn't. Inhalants are toxins. Helium, however, is not a toxic substance. But, as with everything else, there are dangers associated with helium. Inhaling it from pressurized tanks, for instance, can rupture the lungs. Inhaling too much helium in too short of a time can in effect choke a person to death, because it crowds out the oxygen they need to breathe. (If you're inhaling from a party balloon, you'll pass out before you can inhale a fatal amount.) Even so, however, it's not a toxic inhalant.

In other words, helium is like just about everything else that isn't air. If they're going after the Wendy's ad, are they going to also go after ads that show scuba diving, because scuba diving increases the risk of inhaling water? Are they going to pull all the TV shows in which someone gets a pie in the face, because that increases the risk of inhaling pie filling?

Maybe they ought to just require every TV station to broadcast nothing but a blank screen all day to mimic the sight of oxygen.

In recent years, FedEx and Toys "R" Us have pulled commercials over this same thing. So at least now we know the "values" types aren't going after Wendy's just because they like Rick Santorum's Burger King ad better.

(Source: http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/apwire/D8ROPNAG0.htm;
http://www.slate.com/id/2143631)

McCain gets it wrong - again!

Ya know, a few years ago, John McCain might have been a somewhat effective (but not exactly spectacular) leader. But now all the Bush fart gas has rubbed off on him.

The other day, the Republican senator, talking about why he doesn't want a Muslim President, declared, "I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles, personally, I prefer someone who I know who has a solid grounding in my faith." He said that being a member of the Christian religion is "an important part of our qualifications to lead."

So I guess McCain doesn't believe in the part of the Constitution that prohibits religious tests for public office. And by the way, many of the Founding Fathers were not adherents of the Christian faith: Thomas Jefferson, for instance, was a deist. But you probably knew all this - unless your school system was like mine was and they never taught these facts in school.

McCain also claimed that the "Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation." Not only is the establishment of Christianity nowhere to be found in the Constitution, but the very first words in the Bill of Rights prohibits the establishment of an official religion.

I guess McCain figures he needs to shoehorn in some more constitutional ignorance in order to rescue his floundering bid for the Republican presidential nomination. Kind of like when he said MoveOn ought to be kicked out of the country. That's got to be why he says this stuff.

(Source: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/29/2007-09-29_mccain_no_muslim_president_us_better_wit.html)

Woman dies at airport jail

This is something that could have just as easily happened to you or a member of your family - not just at an airport holding cell, but in any other situation where there's no oversight over the authorities.

Last week, a 45-year-old woman was arrested at Phoenix's Sky Harbor International Airport after a conflict with the airline. (As is usual in the corporate world, the airline blew the woman's behavior out of proportion.) After police took the woman to a holding cell, she was found dead.

But you're not gonna believe this: Authorities are trying to shift blame onto the woman, saying she may have choked herself trying to break out of the handcuffs.

I don't buy that. How can a person choke themselves while trying to break out of handcuffs? And if they could, why didn't the cops stop the woman from trying to get out of the cuffs?

Like I said, the way things are today, you could be next - and that's why I'm writing about this incident.

(Source: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/09/29/national/a175650D03.DTL&tsp=1;
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070930/ap_on_re_us/airport_death)

Canada threatens to copy failed War on Drugs

Tell me if this doesn't have Bush's crap-caked fingerprints all over it.

Over in Canada, officials for Prime Minister Stephen Harper of the Conservative Party are threatening to mimic the failed anti-drug policies that have long ravaged the U.S. and A. (In addition, Harper is a climate change skeptic, but that's another matter entirely.) Harper's Health Minister Tony Clement declared that "the party's over" for illegal drug users. Conservatives also scuttled a popular bill that would have softened marijuana laws. As a result of the Harper administration's meddling, the number of people arrested for smoking pot has suddenly soared.

"The party's over"??? Didn't Mad Dog (the elder Bush) use these exact words regarding illicit drug users when he took power?

It's pretty clear the current Bush regime has some influence in Canada's latest crackdown. The U.S. government has long had a system of classifying and certifying other countries based on how willing they are to go along with the War on Drugs. Every so often, you hear of some move in Washington to decertify another country because it won't erect a gallows for every pot smoker. I know Congress in the '90s threatened to decertify Colombia because Colombia's Supreme Court legalized marijuana possession.

It looks like that North American Union (our continent's equivalent to the EU) that Bush supports is closer than we think, if Bush and Harper can coordinate failed laws together.

If Harper wants to waste Canadian taxpayers' money on this prohibition horseshit that doesn't work, then probably the only party that's going to be over is the Conservative Party. Harper's crackdown is really an old, stale, headline-grabbing blowhard gimmick that harms the public.

(Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070929.wharperdrug0929/BNStory/National/home)

Rick Santorum's new job

Remember Rick Sanitarium? He was the religious militant who served as a GOPee senator from Pennsylvania until losing reelection last year:


Santorum lost the election with the biggest margin of defeat for an incumbent U.S. senator in 26 years. Pretty funny, huh?

Well, lately I've noticed that ol' Frothy happens to look just like the guy in the hamburger costume in the Burger King commercials:

(Picture removed)

Ha ha, Frothy, you big loser!

Conservative photo hoax madness

Two or three years ago, the wingnutosphere was at the top of its game, but now it's simply miserable.

The conservative noise machine claimed this week that a banner displayed by an antiwar organization said, "We support the murder of the American troops." Naturally, however, the whole story turned out to be a hoax. The photo showing the banner was a bad photoshop job from a year ago. Nonetheless, a right-wing blog commenter (who is reportedly a member of an organization that beats up parents of fallen soldiers who oppose the war) claims to have seen the banner firsthand - despite the fact that the banner never existed.

Also this week, David Horowitz - of FrontPage infamy, not the 'Fight Back!' guy - made a fool of himself in a similar fashion. Horowitz has invented something he calls "Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week." To promote it, he distributed a photo that he claims is of a teenage girl being buried before being stoned to death in Iran. But this photo also turned out to be not what was claimed. The picture was actually of an actress in a 1994 Dutch indie film - not a real stoning.

I know Iran ain't exactly a human rights giant, but hey, if you're gonna post a photo from an indie film made in Holland 13 years ago, why tell people it's a new photo from Iran? That's just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. But then again, David Horriblewitz wasn't exactly known for being the most trustworthy guy around.

So just in the past week there's been at least 2 cases of the wingnutosphere distributing photos that they knew weren't real - and getting caught almost immediately. They never learn, do they?

This is just like the time during the invasion of Iraq when the Bush regime took over Iraqi TV and made those ridiculous propaganda broadcasts. The broadcasts purported to be Saddam Hussein telling Iraqis to surrender, but all they consisted of was a photo of Saddam torn from a newspaper, with his lower jaw being crudely moved up and down like in a cartoon. Furthermore, what was claimed to be Saddam's voice was just someone speaking English in a heavy accent. Because most Iraqis didn't speak English, the message's intended audience couldn't even understand it anyway! The only difference between this incident and this week's photo hoaxes is that the U.S. government actually wasted taxpayers' money on this shit!

(Source: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/9/28/153255/584)

Give a hoot! Find a candidate!

The website of WQAD-TV in Davenport, Iowa, hath provided this handy-dandy survey that lets you figure out which presidential candidate is closest to your views:

http://www.wqad.com/Global/link.asp?L=259460

I took this survey and discovered that Dennis Kucinich is closest to my views, while Mike Fuckapee ranks at the very bottom. Does that pib or what?

If Kucinich isn't the Democratic nominee, can he at least get a Cabinet position? Or is the DLC dead wood gonna have its way again?

Hurricane survivors lose homes to tough luck approach

It's hard to believe that 2 years after the hurricane that hit the New Orleans area that there's still people living in makeshift trailers because there's still no permanent housing for them (despite the government's promise to help them find that). But these improvised homes are the only homes they have now - and now they're being taken away anyway.

States, counties, and cities along the Gulf Coast are now decreeing that these trailers must close and that the 70,000 families who live there have to leave. Matthew Avara, Republicon (sic) mayor of Pascagoula, Mississippi, boasts, "It's an act of tough love." No it isn't, Matthew. It's a tough luck approach, not a tough love approach. If you love the people, you don't take their homes away without warning when they have nowhere else to go.

Haven't hurricane survivors been through enough already (much of it at the hands of the government)? It's like the state and local governments are actually trying to make life rougher than it already is. I'm sure that's the case, because I've known for years that's been the main goal of the Far Right. "Tough love" is a conservative code phrase for soaking the poor. (They used it in the welfare "reform" debacle too.)

Residents of the trailers have to demonstrate progress in rebuilding or get rid of the trailers - but they can't show any progress because they still haven't received money that was promised to them by insurers and the government. Furthermore, the local governments' actions are an illegal government taking. Folks had been issued these trailers and had been authorized to use them. Besides, some of them are on the property where their houses once stood! Are the cities saying you can't even live on your own property now?

That's the type of thing the so-called property rights movement should be focusing on. Not wealthy beachfront property owners on Lake Huron who expect the government to give them their own beach for free.

The nationwide housing shortage has hit the Gulf Coast especially hard, so that makes things even tougher for those who survived the hurricane.

What's really miserable are the excuses used by officials in a futile attempt to justify closing the trailers. They accuse the trailers and their inhabitants of bringing crime, hampering recovery efforts, and creating an unsafe situation in bad weather. But almost nobody's dumb enough to believe this bullshit, and even fewer actually believe that kicking people out of their trailers and into the streets reduces crime or makes them safer from the weather.

Exurbia speaks (rather, screams until it gets its way) again.

Also, a note to news organizations: It's not proper protocol to copy each other's articles almost verbatim. That means you, Sun Myung Moon's UPI.

(Source: http://www.postchronicle.com/news/breakingnews/article_212106269.shtml;
http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070928/NEWS/70928014)

Pedestrian alcohol tests struck down

A practice that's so profoundly absurd that we couldn't believe it was actually going on has now been struck down as the liberty destroyer it is.

Believe it or not, Michigan had a law that let police stop pedestrians under 21 and make them take breathalyzer tests to check for "under-age" drinking. Mind you, these were not motorists, and the cops weren't checking for drunken drivers. These were pedestrians. And they were checking 20-year-olds, not kids.

But now a federal judge has quite properly put the kibosh on that, saying police can't make pedestrians take a breathalyzer test without first obtaining a search warrant. It's that not-so-little thing called the Fourth Amendment, y'know.

I still think they ought to lower the drinking age. If you're old enough to die in one of Bush's wars, then certainly you're old enough to drink. I know nowadays it's taboo to express this opinion (thanks to all the whiny exurban soccer parents who are against free speech), but that's my belief and I'm stickin' to it.

(Source: http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070926/UPDATE/709260451/1003)