Friday, November 20, 2009

I Don't Say "The Pledge." I Just Don't/Won't! So I Admire This Young Man


Asked by a seemingly hostile interviewer what it means to be an American, 10-year-old Will Phillips said: "Freedom of speech. Freedom to disagree." I hope this is symptomatic of the rest of his generation, though I seriously doubt it is.

Arkansas 10-Year-Old Won’t Pledge Allegiance Until Gays Gain Equality
A 10-year-old Arkansas boy name(d) Will Phillips has decided that he cannot in good conscience pledge allegiance to the flag as long as the country for which it stands refuses legal equality to its GLBT citizens.

That stand has brought young Mr. Phillips anti-gay taunts in the lunch room, but admiration from around the country, reports a Nov. 5 Arkansas Times article. The West Fork School District fifth grader clashed with a substitute teacher for his refusal to stand for the pledge, prompting a call to Will’s mother, Laura Phillips. When the principal acknowledged that Will has the right to refuse to say the pledge, Ms. Phillips asked that her son receive an apology--a request that the principal declined to honor.

A 1943 Supreme Court decision found that schools may not punish students for refusing to recite the pledge. Objections to compulsory recitation of the pledge arose from the Jehovah’s Witnesses on the basis that their religion does not permit expressions of allegiance to anything other than their own religion and to God. The Jehovah’s Witnesses lost their first case before the Court in 1940, and reportedly suffered from bias-motivated violence in the aftermath of that case. The Court’s 1943 decision reversed the earlier finding, and students have had the right to decline saying the pledge since then, although socially such refusal is often met with disapproval.

Such has been the case with Will Phillips’ stand, but he hasn’t backed down. Laura Phillips told the Arkansas Times that her 10-year-old is "probably more aware of the meaning of the pledge than a lot of adults. He’s not just doing it rote recitation. We raised him to be aware of what’s right, what’s wrong, and what’s fair."

Fairness in this case is more than a mere abstraction, since the family has a number of openly gay friends and has participated in GLBT equality events such as Pride parades. Will, who told the newspaper that he would like to pursue a career in law when he’s older, could not square the tenets of the pledge with the political realities faced by his family’s GLBT friends, whose family and individual rights are under constant challenge. "I really don’t feel that there’s currently liberty and justice for all," said Will.

That led the young man to his decision not to pledge his allegiance due to the injustice he perceived to prevail against gays and lesbians. He discussed the matter with his family and then took his stand--or rather, refused to stand with the rest of the kids when the time for the pledge came around each morning. The first week of the young man’s protest happened to be a week when a substitute teacher, a friend of Will’s grandparents, was in charge of the class; as days went by, the teacher grew more aggravated, until finally she took Will to task.

"She got a lot more angry and raised her voice and brought my mom and my grandma up," Will told the Arkansas Times. "I was fuming and was too furious to really pay attention to what she was saying. After a few minutes, I said, ’With all due respect, ma’am, you can go jump off a bridge.’"

That was enough to get Will sent to the principal’s office, which was when his mother received a call. The principal "said we have to talk about Will, because he told a sub to jump off a bridge," recounted Will’s mother. "My first response was: Why? He’s not just going to say this because he doesn’t want to do his math work." Upon learning the specifics of the exchange, Laura Phillips requested an apology for her son. "She said, ’Well I don’t think that’s necessary at this point,’" Laura Phillips told the Arkansas Times.

Will’s mother tweeted about the incident, and family friends informed the media. Support has poured in from around the country, and some of Will’s classmates have also been supportive.

But not everyone, said Laura Phillips, has been supportive, and those who oppose Will’s stand "are much more crazy, and out of control and vocal about it than supporters are."

Moreover, Will’s stand for equal rights for gays has led those who disagree to attack him personally with anti-gay epithets: "In the lunchroom and in the hallway, they’ve been making comments and doing pranks, and calling me gay," Will said. "It’s always the same people, walking up and calling me a gaywad."

That hasn’t been easy for Will, who skipped fourth grade but seems older than his age, especially in contrast to some of his peers. Said Laura Phillips, "It’s really frustrating to him that people are being so immature."

The interviewer from The Arkansas Times asked Will what it means to be an American. The answer: "Freedom of speech. The freedom to disagree. That’s what I think pretty much being an American represents."

Thursday, November 19, 2009

"And The Slimy, Shiftless Fuckers Aren't Gonna Try To Fix The Planet, Either"

Susie Madrak (Suburban Guerilla)-- with what under her circumstances seems to me to be quite an admirable display of sang froid--quotes, at some length, from "the Clenis'" former Labor czar and persistent gadfly, Robert Reich's analysis of the rather staggering array of missed chances and unfinished compromises that's going to come out of Congress as a "health insurance reform."

He says he still has hope.

But he's paid to have hope.

Not me.

That slimy, slippery Obama as much as told 'em ALL, right from the jump that all he wanted was a bill he could claim was 'reform.' That's all that we're gonna get...

Will he sign it at half-time at the Superbowl?
What (TF--W) Happened?
Nov 19th, 2009 at 4:53 pm by Susie
Robert Reich on Harry Reid and the public option:
First there was Medicare for all 300 million of us. But that was a non-starter because private insurers and Big Pharma wouldn’t hear of it, and Republicans and “centrists” thought it was too much like what they have up in Canada — which, by the way, cost Canadians only 10 percent of their GDP and covers every Canadian. (Our current system of private for-profit insurers costs 16 percent of GDP and leaves out 45 million people.)

So the compromise was to give all Americans the option of buying into a “Medicare-like plan” that competed with private insurers. Who could be against freedom of choice? Fully 70 percent of Americans polled supported the idea. Open to all Americans, such a plan would have the scale and authority to negotiate low prices with drug companies and other providers, and force private insurers to provide better service at lower costs. But private insurers and Big Pharma wouldn’t hear of it, and Republicans and “centrists” thought it would end up too much like what they have up in Canada.

So the compromise was to give the public option only to Americans who wouldn’t be covered either by their employers or by Medicaid. And give them coverage pegged to Medicare rates. But private insurers and … you know the rest.

So the compromise that ended up in the House bill is to have a mere public option, open only to the 6 million Americans not otherwise covered. The Congressional Budget Office warns this shrunken public option will have no real bargaining leverage and would attract mainly people who need lots of medical care to begin with. So it will actually cost more than it saves.

But even the House’s shrunken and costly little public option is too much private insurers, Big Pharma, Republicans, and “centrists” in the Senate. So Harry Reid has proposed an even tinier public option, which states can decide not to offer their citizens. According to the CBO, it would attract no more than 4 million Americans.

It’s a token public option, an ersatz public option, a fleeting gesture toward the idea of a public option, so small and desiccated as to be barely worth mentioning except for the fact that it still (gasp) contains the word “public.”


And yet Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson mumble darkly that they may not even vote to allow debate on the floor of the Senate about the bill if it contains this paltry public option. And Republicans predict a “holy war.”

But what more can possibly be compromised? Take away the word “public?” Make it available to only twelve people?

Our private, for-profit health insurance system, designed to fatten the profits of private health insurers and Big Pharma, is about to be turned over to … our private, for-profit health care system. Except that now private health insurers and Big Pharma will be getting some 30 million additional customers, paid for by the rest of us.

Upbeat policy wonks and political spinners who tend to see only portions of cups that are full will point out some good things: no pre-existing conditions, insurance exchanges, 30 million more Americans covered. But in reality, the cup is 90 percent empty. Most of us will remain stuck with little or no choice — dependent on private insurers who care only about the bottom line, who deny our claims, who charge us more and more for co-payments and deductibles, who bury us in forms, who don’t take our calls.

I’m still not giving up. I want every Senator who’s not in the pocket of the private insurers or Big Pharma to introduce and vote for a “Ted Kennedy Medicare for All” amendment to whatever bill Reid takes to the floor. And if this fails, a “Ted Kennedy Real Public Option for All” amendment. Let every Senate Democratic who doesn’t have the guts to vote for either of them be known and counted.
(Boldface Emphases, Susies; others supplied--W)
This was never NOT gonna turn out this way, was it?

No, it wasn’t. There was NEVER the least, slightest scintilla of a chance that it would eventuate in any way other than it has proven to go.

And, may I say that, though I am not happy to report it, this was exactly what I have long said anyone with more cognitive competence than a mollusk should have anticipated?

The grip of the enormous financial interests is just too tight.

"thePrez" is not the one to loosen their stranglehold. If he posed even the slightest threat to the established order, he would NOT be in the exalted position he now occupies. He'll never nip a finger--much less take a chunk out of--the hands that curried and cosseted and carried him to this present pre-eminence. Are you 'Ucking kidding me?

It mighta been different if, like the auto industry, the Health Insurance parasites had had a well-cared-for, grateful unionized work-force the Owners needed to bust. But the cubicle drones a re passive, compliant, unresisting, grateful for any suck-ass job.

And here's the thing all this tells me, loudly: The 'uther'uckers aren’t gonna try to fix the climate, either.

Nagahapun.

Hide and watch…

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Oh NOZE!: "Going Rogue" Goes "Rogue."


Jimmy Fallon? Well, ummm, okay, I guess...

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

My Obligatory "Palin, the Parvenu," Post

I knew the moment her name was announced to accompany McCumstain's on the Puke ticket that they had decided to throw the election to the Dims.

Why?

Innit obvious? To escape and displace their responsibility for --and public anger over-- the fantastical array of spectacular Bushevik clusterfux: the climate, the economy, the wars, health care, environmental degradation, and increasing fascist proclivities of the electorate, etc, etc, etc.


So the Pukes arranged it so that the Dims would (gleefully) take control of, and absorb the national vitriol for, the worst collection of effectively insoluble crises, castrophes and the aforesaid clusterfux ever to be assembled under one Government in the history of the WORLD.

By the end, Bush/Cheney was hated. Nobody claims they weren't almost universally loathed. Bush claimed the lowest approval rating on record. Even WHITE people hated them.

So the idea, of course, of giving the angry white people somebody other than another white guy to hate (if only for a while) was brilliant!

Obligingly, the Dims complied, by making the contest about "novelty": the first woman nominee or the first PoC nominee. Either Hillary or Obama would have sufficed. Hillary wouldn't have had it any easier. Instead of racism, misogyny would have been the dominant meme, is all...

But in Murka, it's just easier to gin up racial hatred than gender resentment.

Mission: Obama'd...

Monday, November 16, 2009

Whoi Gnu?: Anti-Immigrant Fucktard Teabaggers Lack A Sense of Humor

A very courageous young man in pulled off some pretty outrageous guerilla theatre at the expense of a band of nativist rightards in Minneapolis last weekend.
This weekend, the nativist right-wingers at ALIPAC and the National Policy Institute organized a series of "Tea Parties Against Amnesty."

However, at the rally in Minneapolis, the anti-immigrant demonstrators got punk'd by a young man who called himself "Robert Erickson".

"Erickson" got up and delivered a rant against European immigration. At first the crowd was whooping and hollering as he talked about the rights of "real Americans" -- but then it gradually tapered off as he went on and they realized they'd been had.


There was apparently a bit of good ol' boy violence after the truth had eventually penetrated the clouds of "stooooopid" that fill the heads of such folk, and they apparently beat up some of "Erickson's" accomplices, all within view of the 'pigs' who were there for security...

Now For Something Completely Different


Sometimes, it's just too depressing to pay enough attention to the events of the day to make fun of them. So just enjoy some echt Python...

DOTOF™ to the estimable blog-scourer, Eli Cates on Facebook.

Sunday, November 15, 2009

"Joe Biden" Does SNL

Saturday, November 14, 2009

SCROTUS Justice Kennedy Disses 1st Amendment

Is it, actually, any wonder that the Capital Hill press corpse lay, limply supine, at the feet of the "authoritarian" Busheviks and willingly fellated them for 8 long years, given the training to which they were subjected in the schools?

This was the NYTimes hed:


From Justice Kennedy, a Lesson in Journalism

The story under the hed is a paradigmatic case of how the unspoken but unappealable structures of undemocratic power saturate even such enclaves of privilege as "The Dalton School" in Manhattan:
By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: November 10, 2009
WASHINGTON — The school newspaper at Dalton, (an elite) private school in Manhattan, contained a cryptic note from its editors last Friday.

"We are not able to cover the recent visit by a Supreme Court justice due to numerous publication constraints,” the note said. It promised “an explanation of the regrettable delay” in the next issue.

It turns out that Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, widely regarded as one of the court’s most vigilant defenders of First Amendment values, had provided the newspaper, The Daltonian, with a lesson about journalistic independence. Justice Kennedy’s office had insisted on approving any article about a talk he gave to an assembly of Dalton high school students on Oct. 28.

Kathleen Arberg, the court’s public information officer, said Justice Kennedy’s office had made the request to make sure the quotations attributed to him were accurate.

The justice’s office received a draft of the proposed article on Monday and returned it to the newspaper the same day with “a couple of minor tweaks,” Ms. Arberg said. Quotations were “tidied up” to better reflect the meaning the justice had intended to convey, she said.

Ms. Arberg indicated that what had happened at Dalton was unusual. “Justice Kennedy does not have a general policy for making such requests,” she said. “The request was most likely made by a member of his staff in an effort to be helpful.” Justice Kennedy declined a request for an interview.

Ellen Stein, Dalton’s head of school, defended the practice in a telephone interview. “This allows student publications to be correct,” she said. “I think fact checking is a good thing.”

But Frank D. LoMonte, the executive director of the Student Press Law Center, questioned the school’s approach. “Obviously, in the professional world, it would be a nonstarter if a source demanded prior approval of coverage of a speech,” he said. Even at a high school publication, Mr. LoMonte said, the request for prepublication review sent the wrong message and failed to appreciate the sophistication of high school seniors.

“These are people who are old enough to vote,” he said. “If you’re old enough to drive a tank, you’re old enough to write a headline.”...

But Mr. LoMonte said the demand from Justice Kennedy’s office crossed a line.

“It’s a request that shouldn’t have been made,” he said. “That’s not the teaching of journalism. That’s an exercise in image control.”
Not journalism, perhaps, but then journalism mostly today is just managing the outflow of public relations from monied interests, and being careful to offend as few of them as possible with allusions to truth or fairness.

This story illustrates a larger problem, to me, and I do not give a ragged rat's rosy red ass if Red Sonia did the same thing a month before: Official muzzling the press. Exclusion is the primary form of censorship.

Where is written that public officials, occupying public offices, often for life, are ENTITLED to control what is said about them in response to their public utterances? Every public utterance they make is legitimate evidence to be used in interpreting such positions as they take in written opinions (for the Courts) or their legislative deliberations. Especially in front of an audience, and ESPECIALLY if that audience paid admission, the speech of Justices, et al, cannot legitimately be withheld from the public eye and ear. How may "the Press" be excluded from a speech by a Justice on the Supreme Court?

Oh, yeah, now I remember: "DON'T TASE ME, Bro!!!!!@

No one with any more acuity than a sand-dollar would trust Kennedy to uphold the rights of the People in any contest with CorpoRat power/

Friday, November 13, 2009

Colo Puke Schultheiss: "Worst Person In the WORLD"



Beck and Dobbs would qualify any day, any time they opened their feculent, reeking gobs. Schultheiss is probably basking in his 15 minutes.

I would consider myself in abrogation of the social contract if I didn't try to put a boot up this motherfuckler's ass, were our paths to cross on the street someday...

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Colo GOPuke Pol Implies Obama Hijacked WhiteHouse

It was this fellow, here, to the left.

Smiling, avuncular (probably a former insurance seller who would have been much happier in the Church; he has that smarmy, priestly smile, nest paw?), Colorado State Senator David Schultheis twittered this opinion to his tweeties the other day. Now he's backing and filling like the motherfucker he most assuredly and undeniably revealed himself to be.

Is it significant that he represents Colorado Springs?

John Cole on Balloon Juice linked to THIS DPost story:
State Sen. David Schultheis said he didn’t intend for a Twitter post accusing President Barack Obama of “flying the U.S. plane right into the ground” and ending with “let’s roll” as a threat or a reference to United Flight 93, which crashed during the 2001 terrorist attacks.

“Let’s roll” reportedly were the last words of Todd Beamer before he and other passengers tried to gain control of their hijacked jet. The plane crashed into a Pennsylvania field short of its intended target.

The tweet stirred ire and some support for the Colorado Springs Republican, whose standard eschewal of political correctness has earned him criticism in the past.

Schultheis’ full tweet Tuesday was: “Don’t for a second think Obama wants what is best for U.S. He is flying the U.S. plane right into the ground at full speed. Let’s roll.”
I have a cherished sib who moved to The Springs area about 5 years ago, fleeing New Mexico, where she had lived her entire adult life and most of her childhood. She and her husband have gotten to the point that they cannot stand it anymore. They had put their house--which is stunning, both of itself and considering the vistas and the proximity to the forest--on the market only a week before the collapse of the markets last year. When we speak, she wistfully reminds me that I did warn them, before they bought, back in '04, about the political climate there. In fact, they actually asked me if I had any knowledge of it. So I told 'em what I knew. In Cole's comments, someone put it this way:
“It’s the buzzard capital of the world, a sink of blunt trauma symptoms, sun-starers, and a sort of gray, bourbon-addled dirt-dumb wealth, the last mostly around the preposterously snooty has-been glam-trash B________ hotel.”
and
“I haven’t once been surprised to learn that the deep-stupid Christianist garbage that converts dumb people’s souls into worldly power comes from Colorado Springs.”
Tidy summation, imho...Elsewhere, this same paragon of conservative virtue was recorded saying he was "hoping" was that children of HIV-positive mothers would become infected and survive as a lesson in consequences of profligacy. This asshole is a piece of work:
What I’m hoping is that yes, that person may have AIDS, have it seriously as a baby and when they grow up, but the mother will begin to feel guilt as a result of that. The family will see the negative consequences of that promiscuity and it may make a number of people over the coming years … begin to realize that there are negative consequences and maybe they should adjust their behavior. We can’t keep people from being raped. We can’t keep people from shooting each other. We can’t keep people from jumping off bridges. People drink and drive, and they crash and kill people. Poor behavior has its consequences.
I believe if I saw that punitive, judgmental asswipe on the street, I would not be able to live with myself if I did not at least try to plant a pointy-toed, corral-soaked, shit-encrusted, high-heeled boot in his goddam nutsack. This shitwhistle gives "arrogant fucktard" a whole different meaning...

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Murdoch, Inc...

There's another media tempest churning up the sick chop of the Internetsea this week as it emerged that (is he "Sir"?) Rupert Murdoch, president and CEO of NewsCorp, which owns Fox properties, the NY Post, and the WSJ, the Fleet Street magnate, owner of all the significant media in Australia (much on trhe order of Berlusconi's empire in Italy), and recently coined "American citizen" owner of a vast, mostly scurrilous network of hatred and disinformation in the US, apparenly regards Barack Obama as a "racist" particularly from his conduct over and during Henry-Louis-Gates-gate.

The webosphere is on tenterhooks, some say, awaiting the reaction of the WhiteHouse, but so they've been studiously mum on it, thus generating whole bytes of speculation from the virtual pundit-o-sphere, and of course those poor creatures chained to the 24-hour news-cycle must use everything they can lay their hands on to fill those 44 min/hr. (Which is why this is the age of the apotheosis of the "Big Lie.")

Leaving aside the fact that the white man accusing the African-American man of "racism" was (at least once, before he switched over here--but he may have dual citizenship?) a powerful member of the dominant majority in a country wherin, until the beginning of WW II, some of the dominant majority organized hparties of sportsmen whi went hunting the animals in the indigenous population--the "abos"-- for sport...

No, really you cannot leave that aside, really. It really IS a bit much, frankly.

All part an parecel of the package.

Remember, when Murdoch endorsed Obama? Everyone wondered why. But it occurred to Y'r Ob'd't S'v't at the time, and seems still true to him today:


Barack Obama will turn out to be the best thing EVER for Murdoch, Inc.

Better, even, than titties on p.3! Really!

Y'naow, Rupe's jist troyin t'gin up a buck'er two, myt. Nuttin t'see heaah.

'E knows it's schtick, and Obamer knows it's schtick, 'n' all's fayha in luv 'n' war, innit, myt?

Ol' Rupe's got him a troupe of hucksters, and a load of reeking shit to sell, and an eager, stupid, fearful, wrothful audience craving to suck it up. wholesale. And 'is audience is growin', ain't it, myt?


It's a fuukin'circus. And while we're frothing over Beck's latest outrage or O'Reilly's most recent affront, or Hannity's errant ignorance as they repeat the Owner's talking points back and forth among the trained seals that are shills for the owners, the cut-purses are out in the crowd passing legislation and making policies, and starting wars under our very (entertained, distracted) eyes.

You can read Alternet's version of events here.

Heayuh, shove 'nother shrimp up yer barby?