Booman Tribune ~ A Progressive Community

[UPDATE] II 24 republicans join dems in sending articles of impeachment to Judiciary

by supersoling
Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 08:55:22 AM EST

Yesterday Dennis Kucinich spent 4 and a half hours reading 35 articles of impeachment against George W Bush for High Crimes and Misdemeanors, presenting evidence for each charge.

"More than two centuries ago, the Founders of this country set forth a procedure for Congress to follow in the event of grave abuse of power by the Chief Executive. That process is impeachment. In the face of the monumental deceit and disregard for the Constitution that we have witnessed on the part of the President over the past seven years, Congressman Kucinich's initiation of this process is neither fanciful nor futile, neither vengeful nor vindictive; it is the sober fulfillment of his sworn duty as a Congressman to follow the law without regard to personal consequence and misguided political stratagem. It is, quite simply, an act of patriotism ."

THAT is a goddamned patriot!
Where is Obama?
Where is Clinton?
Where is McCain?
Where is any democrat for that matter?

All hail Keebler elves! More at After Downing Street.org Update [2008-6-10 22:51:20 by supersoling]: The clerk of the House is now reading Kucinich's Impeachment Articles into the record on c-span. There may be a vote as early as tomorrow. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Update [2008-6-12 8:39:8 by supersoling]: II Yesterday 24 Republicans joined Democrats in an overwhelming vote to send Kucinich's 35 Articles of Impeachment to the House Judiciary Commitee for review. The vote was 251 to 166 See Kucinich's statement here.

"It is now imperative that the Judiciary Committee begin a review of the 35 Articles. I will be providing supporting documentation to the committee so that it can proceed in an orderly manner. The weight of evidence contained in the Articles makes it clear that President Bush violated the Constitution and the US Code as well as International law. "It is the House's responsibility as a co-equal branch of government to provide an effective check and balance to executive abuse of power. President Bush was principally responsible for directing the United States Armed Forces to attack Iraq," Kucinich said. "The June 5th Senate Intelligence report convinced me it was time to act."

Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Jay Rockefeller,

"In making the case for war, the Administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent. As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed."

Many more groups are joining Kucinich in leveling pressure Congress to proceed with the impeachment process. Among them: Veterans for Peace , who protested in John Conyers office.

Please go to After Downing Street's site linked above and join in the efforts to bring all available pressure to bear on Conyers and the House Judiciary Commitee.

[UPDATE] II 24 republicans join dems in sending articles of impeachment to Judiciary | 64 comments (64 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 5)

Why?

Because Li'l Denny has big ears and believes in UFO's?

I think not.

This is America, supe.

The fix is ALWAYS in.

Bet on it.

But if you do bet on it, make sure that you know which way the fix is headed.

My bet?

Obama's in like Flynn.

I can hear Mayor Daley laughing now. All the way from hell.

We finally got a Chicago machine guy in there. And he's a schwartze!!!

AHHHH ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

He was never very demonstrative, y'know. Bein' the Mayor and all. Serious work, don'tcha know.

He's laughing on the inside.

Yup.

Riiiiight.

Regarding Obama?

Be careful what you wish for.

You may just get it.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 09:50:42 AM EST

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 10)

Regarding Obama?
Be careful what you wish for.
You may just get it.

eh? My expectations of Obama are zero. I know, he has the ears, but not that elfin magic.

As far as Chicago and it's machine goes, that's not why Obama is in. He's in because he's a vanity candidate extraordinaire. He's in because the democrats aren't concerned about winning this trip, but because they think he broadens thier financial horizons and and broadens thier base of power for the future. He's in because the democrats have been losing the AA base they've enjoyed playing for the last 40+ years and needed a little passion play to keep 'em in the fold.

Anyway,
the fix is always in. Pelosi, even Conyers now, are playing the game they're told to play.

Me?
Kerry was my last roll of the democratic dice. I'm out of the two party system now, for good because I see no reason to expect either party, but especially the democrats, to come back to me. To come back to the country or the people. And if it's all down hill from here, at least I can look myself in the mirror and say that principle still trumps pragmatism.

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 10:35:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 7)

Agreed!

Now that's some real progressive thought and analysis. Thanks, Super.

Share. Share resources, share delight, share burdens, share the healing. Sharing will bring us back from mass suicide. www.share-international.org

by Isis on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 11:32:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 8)

I think it's common sense.
To forego impeachment in this most egregious case is to kick the legs out from under the congress for the future and, as far as I'm concerned, grease the skids and open the door for a future dictator who might be far worse than Bush. The democratic leadership isn't stupid. They haven't shelved impeachment or thier ability to end war funding because they're dumb or frightened. It's because it doesn't serve thier long term interests.
Kucinich, thankfully is a little bit different. At least he's entered his dissent into the record, and if it goes to a vote, so will the yays and nays be there for all to see. It may not have an impact now, but someday when historians look for when the country ceased to be a viable democracy it'll be plain to see who still loved and fought for it and who chose to turn away.

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 12:09:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 2)

What you don't understand is the very serious effort to prosecute them criminally after they leave office. I'll not talk about these efforts, but they are underway.

Which would you rather see? Impeachment, or actual jail time?

"If you look for the social economic motive, you will not have to wait for history to tell you what was propaganda and what was truth." - George Seldes

by Real History Lisa (lpeaseRemoveThis@gte.net) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 03:59:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 3)

What I understand is what I see with my own eyes, Lisa. And that amounts to about jack. There is no serious behind the scenes efforts that involve democrats. Maybe there is a non-partisan effort by elder statespeople and legal experts. Bugliosi is attempting to persuade State's District Attorneys to bring murder charges against Bush, but it sounds like the wrong angle.

No, read the quote in the diary. It is the congress that has the solemn duty to defend and protect the Constitution from a rogue president.

One more thing.
Is Kucinich priveleged to this information that you won't speak about? Or is he an idiot like me who doesn't understand these serious behind the scenes efforts you find necesarry to point out?

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 06:50:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (none / 1)

He has his ideas, others have theirs. I'm not denigrating him. But there are limited resources, and SO MANY things to fix. Impeachment will never pass, so the Democrats don't want to waste time on that. But there are several in Congress and elsewhere working on plans to make sure they pay so this can't happen again.

"If you look for the social economic motive, you will not have to wait for history to tell you what was propaganda and what was truth." - George Seldes

by Real History Lisa (lpeaseRemoveThis@gte.net) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 11:38:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 4)

Then you and I and them too I guess have different interpretations of failure. If the democrats as a body allow this president to skate away without so much as a censure then they are just as guilty as George Bush of eviserating the document upon which this country functions and of kneecapping any future congress' power to protect what's left of the constitution and the people from losing what's left of their rights.

For a supporter of a politician who fancies himself in the image of MLK and RFK

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 05:45:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

continued.... (4.00 / 4)

....for a person who supports a politician who fancies himself in the image of MLK and RFK, I find your rationale for appeasement and abandonment of principle disturbing. Those men would not have foregone fighting and possibly losing on principal for the sake of political expediency. I'm glad that I can say I lived when they lived, even if was too young to be aware of them. It connects me to a time when there were still some who stood on principle regardless of the prospects of failure and despite the great risks.
This country and it's ability to produce people of that character no longer exists.

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 05:53:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 4)

Constitutional law professor Turley @ Crooks and Liars

Olbermann: "I've often argued here, that even if you don't think the words aren't lead to any actions, say the words anyway, simply to get them on the record for history and simply because, nothing has ever changed from bad to good in this country without somebody first saying, this is bad. Assess the importance of what Dennis Kucinich did last night."
Turley: "You know, it is very important. The fact is, that this is not supposed to happen the way it's happened in the last seven years. The framers, I think, would have been astonished by the absolute passivity, if not the collusion of the Democrats in protecting President Bush from impeachment. I mean, they created a system that was essentially idiot-proof, and God knows we've put that to the test in the past few years, but I don't think they anticipated that so many members of the opposition would stand quietly in the face of clear presidential crimes."

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 07:54:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 4)

Dead on. There is the way it is supposed to happen, well written, thoughtful, supposedly sacred and unalterable. Then there is how it has happened. As I've always maintained the Dems are just the 'Good Cop' in the backroom beating the American people have been taking for generations. They are Pepsi.

I guess, I just prefer to be lied to because I have empathy rather than greed.

Viva Presidente Ezequiel - Aquí no hay quien viva!

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 09:36:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Like Fitzmas? (4.00 / 4)

I don't say they're not trying. But will they succeed? We have seen failure before.

There is another problem, which Supersoling alludes to. What good does it do, really, if they see jail time but the Constitution is not restored? THAT is a scenerio I can imagine too easily. I still remember "the system worked." Of course it did: The smoothest scam in the world.

by Gaianne on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 08:40:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 8)

Which would you rather see? Impeachment, or actual jail time?

Both.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 08:49:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 4)

If they won't do anything about Bush while he is still in office, why should I believe that they will do anything when he's gone? I'm sure there will be something more important to deal with. The past is done, why stir up everything?

With that line of reasoning, maybe we should close all the jails. Akuna Matata.

Land of the watched, because of the cowed.

by hens teeth on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 01:28:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (none / 1)

I think it's an incredible marker of who one is by whether they like or hate Obama. I appreciate the campaign - it lets me know who to trust here, and who not to.

"If you look for the social economic motive, you will not have to wait for history to tell you what was propaganda and what was truth." - George Seldes

by Real History Lisa (lpeaseRemoveThis@gte.net) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 03:58:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 7)

I think it's an incredible marker of someone's character, or lack of it, when they get to define how a person will be judged based on a test that makes you either a supporter or a hater. It's that short step to calling people who find Obama lacking racists. And it's beginning to take a toll on my sense that people here are essentially fair. But if you're really saying I or anyone else hates him and therefore can't be trusted because I can't and won't support his old brand of politics any longer, then I thank you for making my decision to no longer consider you honest an easier decision.

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 07:01:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (3.33 / 3)

No. It reveals how deeply underinformed you are about Obama. I never said anything re you being a racist.

"If you look for the social economic motive, you will not have to wait for history to tell you what was propaganda and what was truth." - George Seldes

by Real History Lisa (lpeaseRemoveThis@gte.net) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 11:38:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 3)

By the same logic, there is approximately 25% of the population that considers you (and all of us here) deeply underinformed about George W. Bush.

Just sayin'.

Tengo un sueño.

by ejmw (ewitham (at) umich (dot) edu) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 12:12:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 5)

Is it possible for you to have an exchange with someone who doesn't support your candidate without habitually pointing out what you see as their lack of (insert insult here)? Going into the general election it might be wise to revise your persuasive angle of attack if you have any hope of luring enough supporters to push him over the top.

As a working class, low education white male (i.e. leper to the creative? class), this condescending approach of yours is becoming less amusing as it is offensive. I am not much younger than you. I've been politically engaged as a participant in the great activist protests of the late 60's since i was 8 little years old. I have been vetting and voting for democrats for nearly 30 years now. You can go on insulting me and the many like me as long as you like but you face a rude awakening when you realize the magic dust wasn't as potent as you were deluded into believing.
Now I'm finished talking about candidates and their shortcomings.

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 06:22:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (none / 1)

As a constituent of Senator Obama, I thought I knew him pretty well. Yesterday however, I had a very pleasent surprise. I called his DC office to ask for some help in something I have been involved for some time, and I have to say I have never been treated by anyone in Congress as his office treated me. All I can say is that they provided me with a email address of one of his aids,so I could contact them directly. Of all the years I contacted Congress, I was always tod to write a letter... which would have probably been stashed in a pile for some time. Not with him. If that is a prelude of what is to come, way to go Senator!!!

If you want me to go back to the place that I was born, tell your corporations to leave my country (Leon Gieco)

by cruz del sur (nicodk@sbcglobal.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 11:39:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 6)

Either with us or against us, eh?

uh oh...

Hard to appreciate a campaign that sets natural allies against each other, presents false dichotomies and false choices as our only options and makes people at once mourn the un-electability of real (even elfin) reformers while deriding the one realistic route to such reform through a general election: abiguity.

Underinformation vs the inability to trust - could be a Greek Tragedy. I guess from an intrigue angle I can really 'appreciate' it too.

It aint November yet, anyone who is 'right' now only has to wait for the rest of us to catch up. Kidding aside, Frustration is indeed the curse of the Visionary. Occasionally impatience too.

Viva Presidente Ezequiel - Aquí no hay quien viva!

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 11:53:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 4)

Obama is a politician. Probably one of the better ones, but definitely not the answer to all problems. The cult of personality is a very dangerous thing.

Land of the watched, because of the cowed.

by hens teeth on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 01:35:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 4)

It makes me really sad to hear you say that, RHL.

by mythmother (mythmother (at) gmail.com) on Thu Jun 12th, 2008 at 01:41:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (4.00 / 2)

Is Obama a product of the Chicago machine he took out? (Or was it 'over'?)

Is he also a product of the Clinton machine he took out? (Soon to be 'over'?)

'The Fix' is starting to sound like the rather reasonable idea that there is one future we will all live through..

.. but it seems that you think it is an act of someone's will...

My question is who, as in names, does this sort of fixing?

Is it just that people 'know' what they should do, or do they have middle-management 'Fixers' conferences to distribute the next '5 year plan'?

Recognizable patterns are not all man-made...

Viva Presidente Ezequiel - Aquí no hay quien viva!

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 03:53:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Didn't even make the news. (none / 1)

Was on NPR this am, including brief clip of clerk reading in text.

Viva Presidente Ezequiel - Aquí no hay quien viva!

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 09:06:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

PS (4.00 / 6)

I believe in UFO's too.

Share. Share resources, share delight, share burdens, share the healing. Sharing will bring us back from mass suicide. www.share-international.org

by Isis on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 11:33:56 AM EST

Where were the Dems? (4.00 / 4)

They were afraid the Moron in Chief would mock them on Fox News.

Obama is a Patriot

by Steven D on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 03:24:04 PM EST

Re: Where were the Dems? (4.00 / 2)

Why should they care what fox or Bush have to say about them at this point?

They're not afraid. They're embarrassed by Kucinich. Nice opposition ya got there.

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Tue Jun 10th, 2008 at 06:34:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where were the Dems? (4.00 / 2)

My apologies if my response to you came off as rude, Steven.

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 05:28:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Where were the Dems? (4.00 / 4)

No offense taken. They cared because they were moral cowards, as are most people. Few of us are willing to stand up for what is right in the face of criticism or pressure from others, and that is particularly the case with politicians. The Paul Wellstone's of the world are few and far between.

Obama is a Patriot

by Steven D on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 06:55:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

SALUTE (4.00 / 4)

super, I give you a hardy SALUTE sir,

BRAVO

I know many here don't care too much for what AG has to say most times, but they might want to pay some attention, here and there ; )

It is a game they are playing, and beleive me, they know how the majority of the general public think...

some people can call it racist, or whatever, the truth is, their going for checkmate...

excellent article super...and you have called it spot on.

peace bro

"what a wonderful world"- Louis Armstrong

by infidelpig (rdewaynetaylor01@earthlink.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 07:10:07 AM EST

Re: SALUTE (4.00 / 2)

I'll take an outside the box guy like Ag anytime over the conventional everyman/woman.

Peace to you as well and always a pleasure to see you.

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 07:58:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: SALUTE (4.00 / 4)

Without the box, who could be outside? I wonder what the world would be like if there was no 'box'.

There is a place where the preference for the 'awake', or whatever you want to call folks ('Those who have bet on It?'), connects back to Elitism, an alluring pitfall to all Progressives. (The easiest answer to the question of "Why the hell do these folks FALL FOR ALL THE CRAP??!!" is that they are unthinking or dumb or fooled or foolish. That's obviously not always correct. I think a lot of are busy.)

Outside the box thinking is one thing, but on some level shouldn't the goal be accommodating and even celebrating the 'everyman' (careful of the unintended secondary meanings of words)? IMHO this is the same problem I have with the very concept of a superdelegate.

Democracy is not herding cats, it's 'Cats Rule', no? I'm not really sure any more... Then again we are a actually a Republic, so it's 'GoGo Gatdget Superdelegates', I guess.

Elitism masquerading as Progressivism/Populism is the Bogeyman against which Repugs and the like can rail against with much success (Obama will be a target of such stuff, rightfully or not). Unless this exposure is carefully limited, it's an major Achilles heal. Not calling anyone 'round here an elitist, but rather just hoping folks will guard themselves against sounding that way.

Hermit? Elitist? Right? Everyman? Who knows...

Viva Presidente Ezequiel - Aquí no hay quien viva!

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 09:30:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: SALUTE (4.00 / 3)

I think democracy is "Aristocats Rule" :o)

I can see your point about being careful not to label the everyman/woman in an elitist way by claiming to have a deeper understanding of events and solutions. My meaning was more along the line of anti conventional thinking/sheepitude. No doubt you agree there is that,? AG for all his rhetorical bluster is right about many things. Just as he's wrong too. What I appreciate though about him is the ways he stretches the process of comprehending environments and discerning hidden intent on the part of the powered. better to stretch and come up empty or wrong than to calcify inside the milk box.

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 09:43:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Calcify inside the milk box. (4.00 / 3)

Kudos on the turn of phrase.. Near perfect. I'd suggest 'carton' for the consonance and the allusion to lost children...

As usual, the best answer is a balance of both sheepitude (reduces the chaos and expense of constant revolutionary/transitional change) and unconventional thought (reduces 'lemmingism'), of course.

IMHOP, it would be wonderful if all our systems, personal, governmental and beyond would function using options (YES and/or NO) vs choices (YES or NO).

Viva Presidente Ezequiel - Aquí no hay quien viva!

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 10:49:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You write: (none / 1)

Outside the box thinking is one thing, but on some level shouldn't the goal be accommodating and even celebrating the 'everyman'

Through the haze of your bad syntax, I seem to hear you calling me an elitist, no? Someone who does not celebrate the so-called "everyman"?

Listen up, anarchronarchist. I all depends on which "everyman": you most admire. I live in a largely minority world...working class NYC, with a strongly minority subdivision called jazz and latin musicians as my real home. I know a lot of "everymen" and everywomen, too, and MOST of them think that middle class white urban and suburban liberal/progressives and the entire media system off of which most of those types feed is full of shit.

I ride the NYC subways a great deal, mostly in the late morning/early afternoon and around 5-6 PM, and one of my little hobbies is checking out what newspapers people are reading. What newspapers and what parts of the newspapers. Easily 90% of the English speaking working class of ALL races read the NY Post or Daily News, and they either read local news...what affects them most, stuff like crime and the local pol hustle (FUCK Bloomberg and the real estate interests that he so ably represents) or escapism like sports. Ditto the Spanish newspapers.

Most of the middle class types (Only about 10% of the subway population except in heavy midtown areas. YOU know. Where they feel safe?) read the NY Times, and they are busily sucking up the liberal agenda in serious think piece after serious think piece. That or reading about creative ways to spend their extra money. Overpriced restaurants and shows, business news, real estate and so on.

When my friends talk about Repubs AND Dems, about politics in general, they are almost universally "out of the box". Out of YOUR box, for damned sure.

It is you who appear to me to be the elitist, anarchronarchist. You and your spiffy little Olbermann/PBS/NPR clones.

And then you write:

Not calling anyone 'round here an elitist, but rather just hoping folks will guard themselves against sounding that way.
Hermit? Elitist? Right? Everyman? Who knows...

And in doing so you seal the deal. You put some heavy packing tape around the edges of your own box...one in which you do not even know that you are living, most obviously...mark the box "FRAGILE!!! SOFT, MOODY WEAK MIDDLE CLASS LIBRULS. DO NOT SHAKE. CANNOT STAND THE IMPACT OF COMMITMENT" and lean back, confident in YOUR "rightness".

You cannot even take a personal stand.

Too bad.

No stand, no action.

Just talk.

Later...

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Thu Jun 12th, 2008 at 10:55:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Libruls (4.00 / 2)

Yet.. While I've got yer ear...

Interesting Straw Man I've become. So you don't like Fragile White Liberals. They totally suck just like all them 'Types'.

OK!

As far as commitments, alright, alright... You win!

Will you marry me?

But seriously, be careful with the assumptions. I spend about 60-70 hours a week on average building a more color/wealth-blind and influence free government. I don't mean activism, I mean literally making the hardware/digital infrastructure to do so. It's not glorious, but it's actually getting some pretty big things done. I just wish I had more time to get more of it done each day.

Know all those Post/NYT articles that piss folks off about how this well-connected Manhattanite got this sweetheart development deal or that just because they are so-and-so's cousin? Or in suburbia, the Mayor's son. Or the Sherrif's contributors. Or... Well 'uncommitted' folks like me (and a lot more committed ones) are going to quietly put a stop to that, town by town, county by county state by state. Since there was no legislative or courtroom battle to win to get started, it's not news. Nor is it saving the world, or making up for all those American stains. In my small contribution, I'm just trying to do my part every day to deliver on the principle of fairness at the core of the America I want my kids to grow up in.

While the box exists, and I've got the chance to literally rewire it, I will.

To mix metaphors with my hazy syntax:

There was a time when I believed that 'Rocking the Boat is a Drag - You gotta sink the boat' was the only way to think about things. I still think the passengers on this liner would be better off heading overboard (or at least not paying for their tickets), but since I can't (or have any right to) make them do any of that, the best I can do is try to make the services onboard a bit more fairly distributed to all passengers.

How's the commitment scene on your end? The more we understand each other, them more I'm sure this marriage will last (did you say 'Yes'?).

Viva Presidente Ezequiel - Aquí no hay quien viva!

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Thu Jun 12th, 2008 at 02:57:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Libruls (4.00 / 3)

I like having AG around because he has unorthodox ideas. Who else can tell you to throw your television in the ocean in one breath and then tell you it's A-OK to reelect one of the ruling dynasties that led us into this clusterfuck in the next?

by BooMan on Thu Jun 12th, 2008 at 03:06:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Libruls (4.00 / 2)

You undersell him. Ever wonder why all the talking heads always yell and act all outraged and stuff - it just sells more than facts alone. It's just more interesting.

Viva Presidente Ezequiel - Aquí no hay quien viva!

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Thu Jun 12th, 2008 at 04:41:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Libruls (none / 0)

The very fact that you have been hypnotized into believing that the Clintons are or ever were "one of the ruling dynasties that led us into this clusterfuck" is evidence enough as far as I am concerned to recommend that TV/ocean interface that you mention, Booman.

From 1992 darkhorse to ruling dynasty in what? 12 years? 15? When did you begin to refer to them as a "dynasty"? When did you stop supporting them? (Betcha you did. Betcha.)

The Rockefellers are a dynasty. The Bushes are mere gofers in that particular set of royal courts and onthe evidence of their 3 or 4 generation-long service to the rulkers they might also be called a dynasty. So is the secret government that has essentially running this joint by hook, crook, media manipulation or bullet since right after WW II.

Poor white-raised Bill and middle class Hillary?

One generation bootstrappers.

NOT "dynasty".

But you swallow the line. Hook and sinker, too.

OK.

They made mistakes.

they also made some successes.

An Ameriucan Axis od Evil?

please.

i think not.

Wake the fuck up.

How.

That TV/ocean thing would be a VERY good start.

But you can't.

Why.

Addiction.

Too bad.

Have fun surfing. Bit I gotta warn you. The water's polluted.

With mind control stuff.

So it goes.

Later...

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Fri Jun 13th, 2008 at 11:22:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Bad click. Meant to edit mistypes. Pisses me off. (none / 0)

So it goes.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Fri Jun 13th, 2008 at 11:24:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Libruls (none / 0)

AG-

you seem to have zero understanding about the Democratic Leadership Council, who is behind it, and how the Clintons interface with it. You are so concerned about televisions that you missed the real object that needed to be thrown in the ocean. Hint: it just was.

by BooMan on Fri Jun 13th, 2008 at 11:46:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Libruls (none / 0)

Oh. It's the DLC that's the dynasty. NOW I understand. And someone "threw it in the ocean." Right? Who did this again? Oh. One of the good guys. Barack Obama. I feel SO much better. Barack Obama The one that just put his tongue so far up AIPAC's ass that it came out of that organization's mouth.

SDo...who told you how bad tghe Clintons were?

When did you change your mind? because I'll bet you were a Clinton supporter in 1992 and 1996.

The DLC was a Clinton-dominated organization, Booman. Its dominant figures lost. When they won, they called the shots. Now that they have lost, someone else is calling the shots. 12 or 15 years from now you...or people just like you...will be calling whatever arises out of Obama's efforts some sort of evil dynasty. That's what Dems do. Shoot winning Dems in the foot. And that is EXACTLY why the Ratpubs have been in power for about 80% of the time since FDR's legacy faded out.

I think that you have been played by the media, Booman.

Sorry.

That's the way I have seen it. MASSIVE support for Obama, massive resistance to HRC. Even the right wing media. Or should I say the MORE right-wing media.

And now that she is out of the way...watch the tide swing towards McCain.

Watch.

If of course you still have the eyes to do so after staring at all of that chaff.

Watch.

And hopefully come to your senses.

Watch.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Fri Jun 13th, 2008 at 09:23:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Libruls (none / 0)

I don't expect you to remember everything you read here but how many times have I said that I did not vote for Clinton in 1996?

If you look at the New Democratic Coalition, you'll find them to be a hodgepodge of centrist Dems. Some, like Rush Holt and Patrick Murphy, are among my favorite Democrats. But others, like Jane Harman and Ellen Tauscher and John Barrow and Chris Carney and Shelley Berkley and Eliot Engel and Melissa Bean and Rahm Emanuel, are just the types of Democrats that will sell our civil liberties down the river and support wars of choice for a song.

The way they think about national security and economics, is so far from progressive that I can't support them or their reelection. I want better Democrats to replace them. Why is that hard for you to understand?

You actually think John McCain has it within him to improve his luck by campaigning?

by BooMan on Fri Jun 13th, 2008 at 09:37:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You write: (none / 0)

I don't expect you to remember everything you read here but how many times have I said that I did not vote for Clinton in 1996?

Hmmmm...

How about 1992?

The way they think about national security and economics, is so far from progressive that I can't support them or their reelection. I want better Democrats to replace them. Why is that hard for you to understand?

i understand your desires perfectly, Booman. I share them.

My fear...and fear is the operative word here...my fear is that you will throw the Presidency out with the bathwater.

You ask:

You actually think John McCain has it within him to improve his luck by campaigning?

Ain't ABOUT "luck", Booman. Not really about McCain, either.

It's about the media and its tidal pull on the minds of the American sleeple.

By any stretch of the imagination G. W. Bush was the worst candidate ever runfor the Presidency by a major party , at least during my lifetime.

It wasn't luck that he won in 2000 and 2004, it was sheer media manipulation. Old-fashioned fixing done with a very effective overlay of media complicity.

JUST like the run-up to the Iraq War, which was one of the most blatant and most effective pieces of yellow journalism ever to rear its reptilian head above our vast and fruitful plains chock full of sleeping silent majority members.

Try to remember how utterly silly the whole Swift Boating thing appeared to most of us when it was first launched.

Hmmm...

That wasn't "luck" either.

McCain is backed by the same forces as was Butcher Boy.

Once he publicly swore his fealty to their chosen...and now departing...frontman, it was all over.

Now he is theirs. And they will support him the same way that they supported Butch.

Down and dirty like w MOTHERFUCKER.

YOU know...like the Clintons play?

Do not understimate these people.

Trillions of dollars are at stake.

They will do whatever is necessary in order to win.

"It's just business."
"Nuthin' personal."
"Bada BING!!!"
"Now about that uppity black bitch Michelle an the rest 'a them goddamned darkies..."

Shit, Booman. You do not even have to LOOK for their Swift Boat equivalent.

It's already here.

John McCain's "LUCK"!!!???

Sheeit.

This is going to get so nasty we will be LONGING for some good ol' fashioned dirty politics.

And wishing Hillary was around to take some of the heat as well.

Bet on it.

Watch.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Fri Jun 13th, 2008 at 11:10:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You write: (none / 0)

No one said this wasn't going to get nasty. But I got news for you.

Bush would have lost 35 states in 2004 if gasoline had cost $4.29/gallon at the pump.

In 2004 eight/tenths of the Establishment was morally invested in the war. And that most definitely included the media. And out pitchman was a repentant warmonger. Repentant warmongers don't make good pitchmen. Neither do unrepentant warmongers make good pitchwomen, as we've just learned.

Bush may have been a bad candidate but he at least knew how to stay on message and not contradict himself everytime he opened his mouth...like John McDifferent McSame.

Have you actually watched McCain campaign? Have you seen him do a town hall meeting? He makes Dan Quayle look like The Natural.

You know what killed Kerry? Flip-flopping is what killed Kerry. McCain flip-flops more before lunch than Kerry did in the whole campaign. And it's all on YouTube now.

You know what else? We now have Democratic governors in almost every purple state: Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, Michigan, Wisconsin, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, New Hampshire, even Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, and Iowa.

We've got more money. The press actually likes Obama rather than hating him like Gore or being put-off by him like Kerry.

Then there is party self-identification differentials, youth turnout, black turnout, and Republican disgust with McCain over his hostility to evangelicalism, his support of campaign finance reform, and his immigrant amnesty bill.

We're dealing with a party that couldn't even field a candidate for senate in Arkansas or Massachusetts, and couldn't recruit a candidate to run in Montana or South Dakota in a presidential election year. The head of the NRSC says they'll have a great election night if they only lose four senate seats. They have 70 vulnerable House seats two years after losing 30 seats.

It's hard to express how bad the Republicans have it and you're afraid? You need to buck up.

by BooMan on Sat Jun 14th, 2008 at 12:30:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You write: (none / 0)

Sorry, Booman.

All of the Fitzmasses past haunt my nights.

I would do almost anything to end this nightmare.

Clinton as VP?

Sure.

VPs are controllable.

Plus...I do not think that you are right.

Especially when you say:

Bush would have lost 35 states in 2004 if gasoline had cost $4.29/gallon at the pump.

Not if the media were on his side. there is ALWAYS someone else to blame.

I repeat...you are playing three card monte with no spotter.

You seem to think that the game is on the level.

It is not.

Please permit me to rewrite the following lick of yours in more...accurate...language.

Here's the lick:

You know what killed Kerry? Flip-flopping is what killed Kerry. McCain flip-flops more before lunch than Kerry did in the whole campaign. And it's all on YouTube now.

And here is my reharmonization of it. More advanced chords, using higher functions. More tensions, less vanilla notes. Bartok rather than Beyoncé.

You know what killed Kerry? Media dispersed flip-flopping is what killed Kerry. McCain flip-flops more before lunch than Kerry did in the whole campaign. But none of it is on the news networks now. Nor will it be.

What is AND WILL BE on the news networks? That which is inescapable about Barack Obama. His skin color. He doesn't have to flip flop or gaffe or any other media-viraled word (Of which you use a great number. But they haven't reached you. You are invincible. Immune. Riiiiiiight. They control on little bits and bytes cat feet.) nor do the controllers have to do any more than show his image. And even better (even blacker) Michelle Obama's image.

Skin deep Swift Boating.

OH so convenient!!!

No rebranding possible.

GOTCHA!!!

This is the tactic that they have been planning from the first words of encouragement and advice for Obama from Karl Rove right on through the continuous pummeling of Hillary Clinton and the relative gentleness with which Barack Obama has been handled by such "news" outlets as Drudge, Fox, CNN and most of the whole rest of the broadcast scene.

You don't see it.

Why? Because you watch it too much and thus have been so habituated to the forest of lies...news AND advertisements...you ingest every day that you cannot single out the individual, tactical trees from the overwhelming mass of lying, strategic forest.

So it goes.

Watch.

You say:

The press actually likes Obama rather than hating him like Gore or being put-off by him like Kerry.

"The press" likes whoever they are told to like.

Hired to like.

Guided to like.

Watch.

The first to turn?

My bet.

"I get tingles all up and down my leg" Tweety Bird.

Watch.

He knows what happens to people who try to not toe the line in a position of real media power. Not off in some leftiness ghetto.

They get heart attacks and stuff.

Watch.

It's mid-June now?

The first turns will begin after July 4th.

And they will continue.

Helped no end by all KINDS of shit that will be run at Obama.

And if that doesn't work...there's always Iraq.

Watch.

Without Clinton...a squeaker for Obama.

If we're lucky.

And 4 years of Carteresque paralysis as a result.

For the left? Fitzmas comes but once a subject. But it always comes eventually.

Watch.

Goodness really has nothing to do with it.

Watch and see.

Betcha.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Sat Jun 14th, 2008 at 02:21:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Libruls (4.00 / 2)

heh, heh...niiice :o)

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Thu Jun 12th, 2008 at 07:48:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Let me ask you a question, anarchronarchist (none / 0)

You write:

Know all those Post/NYT articles that piss folks off about how this well-connected Manhattanite got this sweetheart development deal or that just because they are so-and-so's cousin? Or in suburbia, the Mayor's son. Or the Sherrif's contributors. Or...Well 'uncommitted' folks like me (and a lot more committed ones) are going to quietly put a stop to that, town by town, county by county state by state. Since there was no legislative or courtroom battle to win to get started, it's not news. Nor is it saving the world, or making up for all those American stains. In my small contribution, I'm just trying to do my part every day to deliver on the principle of fairness at the core of the America I want my kids to grow up in.

Please be more specific.

How are you and your allies going to change the whole direction of human history? Because from the Pharaohs and before right up to today's Bushaohs and Coporataohs, that's the way it's worked.

Moderate it? Possibly.

Stop it? Quietly or otherwise?

Even mass executions have not succeeded. Look at the Russian Revolution for all you need to know about that idea.

I repeat. Please be more specific. If what you say makes real, practical sense to me I will be there in a NY minute.

Bet on it.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Fri Jun 13th, 2008 at 11:02:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let me ask you a question, anarchronarchist (none / 1)

Without dropping the whole business plan (yes, I'm private sector). Basically the idea is that computer systems are a lot better at enforcing rules than when it's left to a person's discretion (explicitly or defacto).

Prime Example: Municipal Tax Lien Sales - auctions of liens by cities or other gov'ts on properties for non-payment of utilities or taxes. The reason that they are done as auctions (in many states) is to get the best deal possible for the debtor while still pawning the responsibility of playing repo man on the willing private sector. Bidders are supposed to bid the interest rate they can charge the debtor down and down, even to the point of paying some of the lien off or a premium to the gov't to win the lien. Corruption regularly defeats the goal of the auction format and really screws people in the already in the worst positions in exchange for excessive profits to the wealthy (those that have enough to make a career of bidding on this stuff in the first place):

Bidders collude with each other and the staff running the Sales to keep their profits as high as possible. Holding or mishandling or selectively distributing the lists of what is going to be on sale is another corruption of the system. Sometimes municipal staff just call on their buddies and ignore the bids of everyone else. It's a big problem, a money laundering method, and the cause of endless expensive investigations by the FBI, etc. It's a cluster fuck that ends up doing the opposite of what it was intended to do on almost all counts because of human intervention all along the process.

This whole deal can now be easily done via software, where lists of sale items are automatically published and updated from the master tax records, etc. and bidders are all heard with equal weight and the debtor gets their fair shake. Eliminating collusion completely may not be possible, but the whole thing becomes much more efficient, above board and saves tons of tax money for better things.

This same scenario plays out in Development and Planning Departments, with selective granting of permits, selective distribution of what should be public information, inappropriate rezoning of properties for tax evasion purposes, collusion, corruption, etc. It's endless and has been SOP in local and state governments for ever (and Fed Gov't too, but that's above my paygrade. So far.). I develop similar solutions for this sort of monkey business.

Nothing is perfect, but you can take some giant steps in the right direction pretty easily through modernizing govt infrastructure and methods.

Like I said, we're not fixing any of the big sexy issues here, but I really do feel our work is going to have a positive effect on tons of people's lives over time and kind give more of a fair shake to all folks, regardless of who they are - and save a ton of tax money at the same time so we can do crazy things like freeze or lower tax rates while improving services.

That kinda stuff.. not sure if this sort of effort would inspire anyone, but I get a lot of great feedback from everyone involved and get to go to work feeling that I make some small difference while I do what I enjoy doing - solving problems.

Viva Presidente Ezequiel - Aquí no hay quien viva!

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Fri Jun 13th, 2008 at 04:50:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let me ask you a question, anarchronarchist (none / 1)

it's all part of the larger Digital Progressivism Movement, D.

by BooMan on Fri Jun 13th, 2008 at 05:15:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let me ask you a question, anarchronarchist (none / 1)

So...how are you going to enforce this plan?

How are you planning on putting it into operation?

You can't just say to the Bloombergs and their subordinates "OK fellas. Jig's up. Just leave peacably now...no hanging around trying to resist."

This is not snark, anarchronarchist. I am really curious.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Fri Jun 13th, 2008 at 09:10:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let me ask you a question, anarchronarchist (none / 1)

it's called progressive reform, arthur. Remember that movement from the turn of the last century? Remember trust busting and woman's suffrage and prohibition?

New Progressivism is about using digital technology to create greater transparency and fairness in government, media, commercial transactions, medical decision making, etc.

anachro makes a widget that progressive governing bodies can use to create fairness in Sheriff's sales. Non-progressive governments won't want it and won't buy it. But it will clean up corruption and increase fairness where it is adopted.

Likewise, Obama's campaign didn't get rid of the power of big money in presidential politics, it just vastly reduced its power. Other campaigns chose to rely on the old model and got school-e-oed.

There's a lesson in there.

by BooMan on Fri Jun 13th, 2008 at 09:46:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let me ask you a question, anarchronarchist (none / 1)

I can't force anyone to buy software, but it just makes sense if you want to get re-elected in these low tax-base times: make more efficient gov't and you don't have to piss anyone off while slashing budgets. It's bipartisan for politicians to save their own asses. Sometimes a state mandate to provide a new service triggers the change over to a digital infrastructure. Some beaurocrats just think it's the best thing to do for their town. We mostly respond to public requests for proposals from governments - so a strong, unsolicited demand is out there. Luckily, it doesn't take an act of congress to allow local government to remake themselves in order to function more as always intended.

Viva Presidente Ezequiel - Aquí no hay quien viva!

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Sat Jun 14th, 2008 at 01:34:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You write: (none / 1)

sorry not talking to you.

Viva Presidente Ezequiel - Aquí no hay quien viva!

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Thu Jun 12th, 2008 at 02:27:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hey (4.00 / 6)

I've been offline for a few days because of storms. But way to go Super. Being the media.

"Have you no sense of decency, sir. At long last, have you left no sense of decency?" -- Boston Attorney Joseph Welch, taking down Sen. Joseph McCarthy.

by BostonJoe on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 09:33:35 AM EST

Re: Hey (4.00 / 4)

I waited in vain last night for those storms to roll across the Sound and blow this heat out of here. I love standing in/listening too/smelling/feeling the power of a good sturdy squall line :o) Always reattaches me to the Mother. Oh well. The sky is clear and blue today nonetheless and I'm finally feeling a bit better after having been sick with a respiratory infection for nearly two weeks now. That's the only reason I can spend time blogging on a week day.

Thanks

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 09:50:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: [UPDATE] But he has big ears and believes in U (4.00 / 7)

jonathan turley on olberman's show last night:

..."You know, it is very important. The fact is, that this is not supposed to happen the way it's happened in the last seven years. The framers, I think, would have been astonished by the absolute passivity, if not the collusion of the Democrats in protecting President Bush from impeachment. I mean, they created a system that was essentially idiot-proof, and God knows we've put that to the test in the past few years, but I don't think they anticipated that so many members of the opposition would stand quietly in the face of clear presidential crimes."
video at C&L

astonished indeed.

lTMF'sA...the revolution will not be televised...Peace

by dada on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 12:15:11 PM EST

Re: [UPDATE] But he has big ears and believes in U (4.00 / 2)

Thanks for catching that, Dada.

Jonathon Turley being interviewed by Olberman is a pretty mainstream occurrence. But somehow the seriousness of what Turley is saying, almost a Paul Revere moment, is lost on the masses. I don't get it.

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 07:17:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: [UPDATE] But he has big ears and believes in U (4.00 / 3)

You write:

I don't get it.

Get it, supe.

In fact...you have it already.

You just don't realize it yet.

You write:

Jonathon Turley being interviewed by Olberman is a pretty mainstream occurrence.

And there it is.

Sensory overload.

Information glut.

The media blasts out masses of bullshit 24/7. When something real does happen, it is covered over in cow dung before it can be widely noticed.

If the equivalent of Joseph Welch's' "Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?" statement were to be uttered by some honest and valiant functionary in a well documented public situation regarding the ongoing, mass-murdering criminality of this government...including the criminality of those who will not impeach the bastards although it is their nominal duty to do so as leaders a so-called opposition party...if something that profound and well spoken WERE to be said, it would be covered over by some 25 paragraph load of self-referential bullshit spoken by some "official" opposition guy like Olbermann and everyone would continue to snore right on through the ongoing collapse of this country and society.

KO's got a job to do, too.

Bore us into apathy.

Snark even the serious people who appear on his show into irrelevance.

So it goes.

The modern sportscaster's approach to politics.

It's just a game, folks. Look!!! I can even make jokes about it. Don't worry. Be happy. I'm on it.

Yeah.

He's on it.

Like shit on a plate.

And its end result?

Yawn. I think I'm gonna go to bed, Betty. This newscast/newsgame must be a repeat. I'm pretty sure I saw it last week.

Yup.

So it goes.

The only solution available?

TURN THE MOTHERFUCKERS OFF!!!

NEWSTRIKE!!!

MEDIASTRIKE!!!

and

CULTURESTRIKE!!!

VAYA!!!

But...

NOOOOOOOOOoooooooo....

And the murderous farce continues.

So it goes.

Later...

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Thu Jun 12th, 2008 at 11:20:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: [UPDATE] But he has big ears and believes in U (none / 1)

I'll have to upload the youtube of me scratching my head 24/7 at the state of the world to better express what I mean when I say I don't get it, AG.

Of course I get it. But I don't accept it. That's the head scratcher. I think the problem is not so much that people don't catch the news. It's more that the news of impeachment is too boring to hold their attention for long. Doesn't have enough porn and intrigue attached to it. Like the Clinton impeachment trial. Remember the little bear that Bill reportedly gave to Monica as a gift? Just an ordinary, boring little detail. Until the prosecution juiced it up for us and turned it into the secret, "we're still on the same page, wink, wink, aren't we Monica?...fuck the republicans coded message 7 days of the Condor stealth bear...uh huh."

That's where the meat gets buried. Not in a landslide of ordinary garbage, but as a needle in a haystack of smut.

Btw, I found out about Turley's appearance on KO's show through the net, not the tv. I don't watch that shit. But I won't be chucking the whole deal because most of it sucks. I just got finished watching an autobiography Jim McKay. Now that's an everyman who saw beyond the medals of the Olympics and the titles. Who else could get Americans to fall in love with a dominant Russian gymnast like Olga Korbut in the heat of the cold war than McKay?

That's what's missing from today's version of entertainment and reporting.

Anyway,
I get it, I got it, and I'm trying to share it.

ps
there's this new NFL channel that replays entire games.
Did you know the Giants won the Superbowl? :o)

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Thu Jun 12th, 2008 at 08:24:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: [UPDATE] But he has big ears and believes in U (4.00 / 7)

A real profile in courage. Oh how I wish that the Democratic party had half of the courage and integrity of Dennis Kucinich.

It's not about looks or character politics (young black guy vs. white boomer woman vs. big ears and UFOs). These are merely the tools we use to discredit certain people and to avoid real discussions of the issues. After all, Reagan was open to astrology and many on the right believe the earth is only 6,000 years old and our current president hears the voice of God. Kucinich is only "kooky" because we let him be characterized as kooky. Liberals think that if they heap scorn on Kucinich all of a sudden their opponents will think of them as reasonable, moderate people. What liberals fail to see is the short-sightedness of this policy. As soon as they throw Kucinich under the bus the reporter or GOP hack will give them a little, teeny, bit of credit for being sensible, only to later throw a gasket and accuse the moderate Dem of being a terrorist appeaser or some other nonsense.

Throwing Kucinich under the bus doesn't make liberalism seem more palatable to middle America--it shows middle America that liberals don't have the courage of their convictions and makes sure that "liberal" remains a dirty word. Dems don't have to agree with Kucinich on everything but stop kneecapping him! If you are going to talk about the fact he saw a UFO (not necessarily believes in aliens) then please talk about the other supernatural beliefs of other "mainstream" candidates.

Many on this site heap scorn on Kucinich. Makes me wonder what is going on psychologically with progressives in which they feel the need to mock the one politician that is unafraid and unapolagetically liberal. Probably no other candidate shares the policy views of so many people on this site but he is probably the one Democrat (besides Clinton) that gets the most scorn

There is no better advocate for liberal positions than Kucinich. Take away his looks and the way the media and GOP have characterized Kucinich to the public (with an assist by the Dems) and you have the best debater on behalf of liberal issues. He doesn't back down and he is good at arguing and laying out the liberal cause. We need many more like him.

And we need liberals to stop shooting liberal messengers to preempt the inevitable GOP/media smear campaign. Preemptively shooting your allies is no way to fight.

Why do liberals hate themselves so much?

by SFHawkguy on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 02:09:35 PM EST

Re: [UPDATE] But he has big ears and believes in U (4.00 / 4)

Thanks for a great comment and a stirring defense of Kucinich and liberalism itself.

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 07:20:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: [UPDATE] But he has big ears and believes in U (4.00 / 3)

Yes Super, that definitely is a great comment, & thank you for posting this diary. I actually read it yesterday, & came back for the added comments. Now get back to work. Hope you feel better soon.

The difference between theists and atheists is that the atheists don't set the theists on fire for refusing to agree with them.

by KNUCKLEHEAD on Wed Jun 11th, 2008 at 11:14:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

[UPDATE] II 24 republicans join dems in sending articles of impeachment to Judiciary | 64 comments (64 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)