"I'm not talking about Medicare, I'm Talking about Socialized Medicine"

Obamacare - Socialized Medicine; for some "them is fighting words."  But why?

On her blog site, Maxine Udall highlights well a frustrating discussion many of us have had:

An elderly relative started complaining about "Obamacare" and how it would lead to "socialized medicine." Knowing the person had heart surgery courtesy of Medicare and was receiving ongoing monitoring and care, I said, "I didn't realize you were so unhappy with Medicare." To which I received the reply: "I'm not talking about Medicare, I'm talking about socialized medicine."

"How is Medicare different from socialized medicine?" I asked.

"Medicare isn't socialized," came the reply. "I pay for it. I pay every month and when I've had surgery, I've had to pay some of it. Medicare is like any other insurance."

"Well," I said, "I know you're paying a premium for Part B and I know there are copayments and deductibles, but Medicare is a government run health insurance program."

To which the reply was: "But I'm talking about socialized medicine. You know that whenever the government gets involved in anything, it never does a good job."

"I had no idea you were having problems with Medicare." said I. "I always had the impression you were pretty satisfied with it. And with the VA, too. I know you've used the VA for some care recently. What problems have you had with Medicare or the VA?"

"Well, none with Medicare or the VA, but I'm not talking about Medicare. I'm talking about socialized medicine."

"So you're happy with Medicare?"

"Yes."

"Would you mind if your [adult] children could buy into it? Your son is unemployed. Would it be OK if he could buy into Medicare?"

"Well, sure. As long as he has to pay like I do."

You were all wondering how someone could say, "Keep your government hands off my Medicare?" Well, there you have it. Now that I've told you, I'm still not sure I understand it. It was one of the most frustrating and at the same time enlightening conversations I have had in a long time. The person with whom I was conversing is intelligent, educated, and not senile.

So there you have it.  Like so many they are opposed to "socialized medicine" but "keep your hands off my Welfare."  It's really frustrating, but then when they also say - "wells sure my kids can have Medicare too if they pay for it" - it becomes discouraging.  Discouraging in that we are both talking about the same thing and the same result (affordable health-care for all) but we end up disagreeing over "characterization."

How is Medicare not "socialized medicine?"  Or better yet, if Medicare is ok, then why would a governmentt run plan for all not be okay and why would it be called "socialized medicine?"

The difficulty in dealing with those who oppose "Obamacare", climate deniers (and the birthers and so many others) is not that they don't understand the evidence – it's that evidence has nothing to do with their belief. The denial comes from deep-seated emotional commitments and fears, in unthinking adherence to some political ideology and, often, in a perceived financial interest in not knowing – and they simply cannot hear rational arguments.

"If they're for it," many Americans reason, "Then it's a bad idea whether or not I understand it. Therefore, I'm against it."

So from now on whenever I hear that some Republican is opposed to "Obamacare" I plan on telling those who listen, that yes the Republicans wish to repeal Obamacare and Medicare.  And when Republicans deny it, make them explain why Medicare isn't the same as Obamacare.  Hell, the Republicans are already moving to drastically reduce and change Social Security, so you know Medicare isn't far behind.

In a letter to The New York Times, Scott O. Lilienfield, a psychology professor at Emory, wrote that much of our political discourse is marked by "rampant confirmation bias," in which people "deny, dismiss, and distort evidence" that is not consistent with their beliefs. The fifth of Americans who hold that Obama is Muslim are unquestionably those for whom the president can do no right. Casting him as a Muslim is a convenient—and provocative—form of devaluation in a society which is fearful of Muslims in general. "Muslimers"—if I may put it that way—are of the same ilk as "birthers," those who maintain (again, without a shred of evidence) that Obama was not born in the United States, rendering him ineligible for the White House. (Obama's Muslimization is a way to render him ineligible, culturally, to be an American president.)

I have said it before and I will say it again.  I do not understand how you vote Republican if you are elderly and if you are not a multi-millionaire.  If it is because of "conservative social issues", wouldn't you be better off voting for more conservative democrats or trying to get your democratic representatives to adopt more conservative ideology?   When those Republicans finally succeed in taking away your Social Security and eliminating that socialized medicine program called Medicare, at least you will have solice sleeping on the steps of your boarded up Church (because like you, all of the other parishioners went broke - the rich will still have their "members-only" church in the Hamptons).

I'll Have A Burger And Fries With That Blow-Job Please

Time is reporting that Zurich, Switzerland officials have made proposals to add "sex boxes" to the city. The idea itself is adopted from German cities like Essen and Cologne, and will be a way for prostitution to continue on behind closed doors.

The boxes will serve as quickie drive-throughs, so-to-speak, and will free up city streets from unsightly acts that haunt Zurich residents whose homes overlook the city's red light district. "They get up to all sorts in broad daylight - and we're sick to death of looking at it," one resident told the U.K.'s Metro.

"We can't get rid of prostitution, so have to learn how to control it," Police spokesman Reto Casanova said.

If McDonald's would add gas pumps and the "sex-boxes" we could truly do one-stop shopping.  Think of all the gas we would save. 

Talk about adding a little special sauce to my meat ... paddies. 

Plus the kids would have a McDonald's play land and so would the dads.

I didn't know the Swiss were so creative.

Plus, no need to pump it yourself anymore.

The Anti-Beck Rally

Mulit-tasking Masturbation - When There Is Just Not Enough Time In The Day

Paris Hilton and her boyfriend Cy Waits are just so ... yesterday - being arrested for cocaine possession and driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol (respectfully).

And we have all seen the tragic consequences of texting or tweeting while driving.

But you just can't slow down Colondra Hamilton.  Girl is busy.

The Cincinnati woman was pulled over during a traffic stop when cops noticed that she was driving a 2008 Pontiac with overly tinted windows.  When they looked inside, they noticed that her pants were unbuttoned and there was a vibrator on her lap.

After being questioned by the police, Colondra Hamilton admitted to engaging in "auto erotic manipulation," while watching a porno movie that was playing on a friend's laptop in the passenger seat! 

At least she wasn't watching some boring Disney movie with the kids.

She was arrested and booked on a misdemeanor for driving with "impaired alertness" and drug paraphernalia possession for a "broken piece of crack pipe" found in her purse.

Wow. Colondra was busy.

Watching a movie on her friend's lap top, a little "auto erotic manipulation" (I think she should get bonus points for coming up with such a masterful and enticing definition of "flicking the bean") and, perhaps, smoking a little crack.

That is multitasking madness.

Girls just want to have fun!

So what now?  Mother's Against Masturbation!

Party On Dudes - OUT OF CONTROL Bribes, Prostitutes, Warlords... U.S. Can't Keep Tabs On Foreign Subcontractors

Where are Bill and Ted when you need them?

Bill: It is indeed a pleasure to introduce to you a gentleman we picked up in medieval Mongolia in the year 1269.

Ted: Please welcome, the very excellent barbarian...

Ted, Bill: ...MR. GENGHIS KHAN!

[All the students applaud wildly for Khan]

Ted: This is a dude who, 700 years ago, totally ravaged China, and who, we were told, 2 hours ago, totally ravaged Oshman's Sporting Goods.

Huffington Post is reporting that as the U.S. military anticipates withdrawal from Iraq and transferring of vital functions to civilian businesses, foreign subcontractors are playing an enormous role in war zones. Often operating through larger big-name U.S. contractors, they ferry supplies such as ammo and weapons through dangerous terrain. They provide translators and food for troops, help build military outposts, and keep soldiers and civilians safe. Without such local and regional subcontractors, the modern military says it could not operate in two war zones halfway around the globe.

Sounds innocent enough?  Well ... customary contracting rules don't apply, and even big U.S. companies aren't always sure whom they are ultimately paying. That can lead to fraud and shoddy work. 

It is not just bad work.  The government suspects certain foreign subcontractors providing security in Afghanistan of bribing both sides in the conflict -- officials of the U.S.-supported Afghan government as well as leaders of the Taliban.

In Baghdad, a whistleblower is alleging that Middle Eastern subcontractors with special security access sneak prostitutes into the highly secure Green Zone, in an effort to persuade contractors and the U.S. military to hire the company.  Possession of a security access card allegedly allowed a contractor to escort up to five people into the Green Zone without having his automobile searched, the DCIS interview report said. One reconstruction contractor based in the Mideast "managed to routinely have prostitutes at their parties," the whistleblower alleged in the report. The FBI record of the interview indicates the whistleblower alleged to agents that the prostitutes were young Iraqi women, "generally dressed in what he described as 'belly-dancer' outfits."

And back at home we were worried about "gays" in the military.  Stupid us.

But it is not just prostitutes.  An investigation by the House oversight subcommittee on national security found that multiple private security subcontractors were warlords, strongmen, commanders, and militia leaders -- adversaries who are "in fundamental conflict with U.S. aims to build a strong Afghan government," according to a subcommittee report, "Warlord, Inc."

Warlord, Inc?  Sounds like a most excellent video game.

Raymond DiNunzio, head of investigations for the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, reported that the U.S. may be helping its enemies. The government "does not have the ability to monitor Afghan security contractors or determine the nature of their affiliation or allegiance," he said.  In Iraq, meanwhile, U.S. money for trash collection, administered by a bevy of foreign subcontractors, has allegedly ended up in the pockets of insurgents, according to one investigation.

So we may be paying subcontractors who turn around and shot back at our soldiers.  How stupid are we?

Who are the biggest Warlords of all?  Probably all of the American defense contractors who make Billions off of our war funding.  If the Tea Party members want to cut wasteful spending, START CUTTING OUR DEFENSE SPENDING.

Prostitutes, parties, drugs ...  Cue Bill and Ted:

Abraham Lincoln: Fourscore and...

[looks at his pocket watch]

Abraham Lincoln: seven minutes ago... we, your forefathers, were brought forth upon a most excellent adventure conceived by our new friends, Bill... and Ted. These two great gentlemen are dedicated to a proposition which was true in my time, just as it's true today. Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!

Pope Glenn Beck To Restore Christianity To The Huddled Masses

From the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, broadcaster Glenn Beck has told a crowd of tens of thousands of people gathering on the National Mall that their country has "wandered in darkness" for too long. And he began his rally on a religious theme, saying that "America today begins to turn back to God."


Wow, so God has anointed his Holiness, Glennedicktus Becktus, as his messenger on Earth to restore God to America.

Where do you even start with that? I say let's look at the premises that America had lost or turned its back to "God."  So I guess first, he is calling most of us heathens. It is really good to know that Mr. Beck is in such a position of authority and is so omnipotent as to cast that judgement out upon we the ungodly mass.

Now I don't care if he calls me ungodly (I don't believe in God), but last I checked most Americans do. So I assume that they are not being "good enough" Christians for you Mr. Beck?

But are Americans really so anti-God? Of all of its Western neighbors, Americans are amongst the very highest in terms of attending church.

But you, Pope Glennedicktus, and your assorted Cardinals, Sarah Palin, Sharron Angle, Michele Bachmman, Jim Miller, would know better would you not? We need to be more "God-like" in your eyes. What exactly does the Church of Beck stand for?

Well, not providing medicine to the poor, because that is Socialism. We really need to get rid of the devil-drug "Obama-care" because the poor should just get jobs to pay for medical care.

And we need to end this over dependence on food stamps and social programs, because that is Nazism. Cardinal Angle often speaks of our over-coddling the hungry and not allowing them to starve for themselves. It is our fault that they don't get jobs to buy food. Shame on us.

And we need to stop providing McMansions to the homeless, least we become Communist. There are plenty of leftover card-board boxes around from which they can take shelter.

So now that Pope Glennedicktus is restoring Christianity to his humble people, he and his Cardinals also wish to "reclaim the civil rights movement". Yes, on the 47th anniversary of civil rights leader Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech and at the same spot on the National Mall, on the steps of the memorial, these enlightened few ask that you don white and "reclaim" civil rights. Confused?

Al Sharpton said that "In '63, they went to Washington for a strong national government to protect civil rights." "He and Palin are going there for a weak national government and to advocate state rights."

It seems to me that "reclaim" is simply the same slogan as "take back", i.e. take back America from the blacks, Mexicans, homosexuals and Jews. It is the Crusades of the 21st century. Beck, Palin, Angle, Bachmann and Miller are leading "God's" army to reclaim America.

These self-anointed demagogues are frightening!

This delusional omnipotence - this grandiose view of ones own self-worth and importance - this psychopathological idea that only you have the answers - this megalomaniacal belief that anyone who disagrees with you is your enemy - IS DANGEROUS.

Idiot Of The Decade - Sharron Angle - Her Delusional, Grandiose, Psychopathological Meglomania

Sharron Angle.  It is shocking that one person can create such controversy.  Her latest?  Sharron Angle twice refuses to disavow her claim that there are "domestic enemies" in Congress.

During a 2009 interview, a right-wing talk show host told Angle that there are "domestic enemies" and "homegrown enemies" within the "walls of the Senate and the Congress." Angle replied: "Yes, I think you're right."


In an interview with a conservative talk show host yesterday, Sharron Angle was given two clear chances to disavow the claim that there are "domestic enemies" within Congress, an assertion she previously expressed unequivocal agreement with. Both times, Angle refused.
 
She is not alone though.  One person who commented about this story had this to say:

"Sharron Angle is absolutely correct about domestic enemies in congress. These are the very ones who took an oath to support and defend the US Constitution against foreign and "domestic" eneies [sic] when they took their seats in congress, yet, they consistantly vote to weaken the constitution; violate the provisions of the constitution and display antiamerican [sic] attitudes by rejecting the majority of American voters and taxpayers. They are domestic enemy [sic] when they continue to spend without any consideration of what the taxpayer is going through; they are domestic enemies when they show arrogant attitudes toward [sic] the American citizen when they seek to redress the government; they are domestic enemies when the [sic] refuse to hold Obama accountable for not enforcing the immigration laws of the land; they are domestic enemies when they support socialist programs at the expense of our free market system. Yes, Sharron Angle, there are domestic enemies in congress."

So as I read it, Sharron Angle and others (like the commentator above) believe that anyone who disagrees with them or has a policy with which they disagree is a "domestic enemy"!!!

Who appointed them GOD?  I don't even believe in God but they do and they believe that what they say should be the law of the land.

This delusional omnipotence - this grandiose view of ones own self-worth and importance - this psychopathological idea that only you have the answers - this megalomaniacal belief that anyone who disagrees with you is your enemy - IS DANGEROUS.

We the people are not enemies simply because we have different view-points.  Calling other Americans, members of Congress, "domestic enemies" degrades us all.

Sharron Angle - you are an embarrassment to all that is good with this Country.

Read more about the ever not so charming Ms. Angle:

http://suspiciouspackaging.blogspot.com/2010/07/idiot-of-day-sharron-angle-rape-is-part.html

http://suspiciouspackaging.blogspot.com/2010/07/idiot-of-day-sharron-angle-tea-party.html

http://suspiciouspackaging.blogspot.com/2010/06/idiot-of-day-sharron-angle-tea-party.html

http://suspiciouspackaging.blogspot.com/2010/08/obama-is-antichrist-hate-still-runs.html

http://suspiciouspackaging.blogspot.com/2010/08/food-stamp-usage-hits-18-sequential.html

http://suspiciouspackaging.blogspot.com/2010/07/our-favorite-idiot-of-day-has-been.html

http://suspiciouspackaging.blogspot.com/2010/07/gop-mantra-is-now-tough-shit-for.html

Paris Hilton Arrested On Cocaine Charge

I don't like to comment on celebrities, there are more than enough sites for that.  I am sure Perez Hilton can fill you in on all the more lurid details, but it is being reported by the AP that:

Paris Hilton was arrested on the Las Vegas Strip late Friday after police saw a cloud of what they suspected was marijuana smoke wafting from the windows of a black Cadillac Escalade driven by her boyfriend, then found a small amount of cocaine in her possession.

I am not here to pass judgment on Paris or her boy-friend for doing drugs.  We are each responsible for our own behavior and I am not one to sit in judgment.  However, drinking or doing drugs and driving is just irresponsible. 

I, like most of us, have in my life made mistakes and used poor judgement and have driven after one too many drinks. I was lucky and never got a DUI or had an accident.  Regardless, it was stupid and very irresponsible. I have been at dinner parties and had way too much wine and have in that altered state thought I was fine to drive. Good friends will usually remind you (me) you are not.  It is something I take very seriously now and will never do.


Three easy concepts depending on your finances: Call a friend, Call a Cab, Use a Car Service or use the Personal Driver already on the pay role.

So her arrest is a reminder to us all, do not drink or do drugs and drive.

Heartbreaking - Gut Wrenching - You Have To Watch - Pass It On

If you never watch videos, if you never click online, if you just don't know - you really MUST watch this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJGmMFIGbIY&feature=player_embedded.

Words cannot really express how heartbreaking this video is.  But it is so important to watch.

And pass it on.

We must all know!!!

Has The Tea Party Been Hijacked By Conservative Christians?

The Tea Party movement was initially identified by the core principles of anti-tax and anti-government.  It was a libertarian ideology of less government and more power to people and the States.

In a previous article I wrote about the three ideologies which were teh basis of the Tea Party and how the dispute over which one was it central theme was causing the Tea Party to lack a central identity - "What Flavor of Tea (Party) Do You Like?"  See HERE

Increasingly the focus of the Tea Party seems to be identifying around conservative political issues.  And with the success of Joe Miller in Alaska you have to wonder of the Tea Party is now dominated by Conservative Christians.  Are abortion politics behind Joe Miller’s surprising GOP Senate primary showing in Alaska? And has the Tea Party, which launched as a grassroots anti-tax movement, embraced a Christian conservative platform on divisive social issues?

In Alaska, the last few weeks of the election season were dominated by a contentious debate over Measure 2, a ballot initiative that requires doctors to obtain parental consent before performing an abortion on an unmarried minor, or face felony charges and up to five years in prison.  Measure 2 passed decisively, 55 to 44 percent, drawing support from many of the same socially conservative voters who chose the pro-life Miller over Murkowski, one of only three pro-choice Republicans in the Senate.

The Huffington Post points out that:

The Alaska election results underscore the extent to which the Tea Party movement and its candidates—strongly anti-abortion rights politicians such as Miller, Sharron Angle in Nevada, Marco Rubio in Florida, Rand Paul in Kentucky, and Ken Buck in Colorado—have come to be affiliated with Christian conservative ideals, even as Tea Party organizers say they have little interest in social issues.

For its part, Tea Party Express spokesman William Owens, a prominent Christian conservative with a history of pro-life activism, said Wednesday in an interview with The Daily Beast that the group steers clear of abortion because it wants to “focus on the most important things. The whole thrust of the Tea Party movement came out of fiscal irresponsibility and government overextending itself.”

But Miller, who received more than $550,000 in donations and on-the-ground support from the California-based Tea Party Express and frequently tweeted about his Tea Party affiliation, made his antiabortion stance a central part of the Alaska Senate primary. In June, he sent a fundraising letter to “pro-life supporters” criticizing Murkowski’s support for Roe v. Wade and stem-cell research, as well as her opposition to the “Mexico City Policy,” which under President George W. Bush prevented American foreign aid dollars from funding abortion services.

Another Tea Party Express favorite of whom I have written is Nevada Republican Senate nominee Sharron Angle, who has come under fire for her views on abortion and homosexuality. In a June radio interview, Angle suggested rape victims should avoid abortion, turning “a lemon situation into lemonade.”  (See my story HERE.) She has also stated that God wants her to win.  (See HERE)

All of this begs the question - are these Tea Party candidates winning based on their fiscal issues (anti-tax, small government) or based on social issues (anti-abortion, anti-gay rights)?

It it very difficult to reconcile a libertarian ideology (power to the people as opposed to the government) with the Conservative christian ideology (governmental laws imposing Christian social "morals") and sooner or later one of the two must fail.  If the christian ideology wins, then the Tea Party becomes nothing more than (and is indistinguishable from ) an ultra-conservative branch of the Republican party.

If this change does come to pass, will it help or hurt Republicans?  Will it not just tear the republican party into two contentious groups?  Or will it fire up the Republican base?

When candidates like incumbent Lisa Murkowski loose, you have to wonder if it is hurting Republicans more than helping them.

What Is The Definition Of Megalomaniac? - Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck Compares His D.C. Rally To Moon Landing, Iwo Jima, Rise Of Lincoln (This is a Quote From Huffington Post)

Meglomania has been defined as:

1. a mental illness characterized by delusions of grandeur, power,wealth, etc.

2. A deep need or craving for power

3. an obsession with doing extravagant or grand things.

So let's look at Glenn Beck.  In a recent, melodramatic, video promotion of a rally Mr. Beck will have in Washington, he makes comparisons to Rosa Parks, the Wright Brothers, and the moon landing.

He claims he is going to reclaim the Civil Rights movement.  Does he even know what the civil rights movement was?

Glenn said: "we started the civil rights movement".  Not really sure what he means by "we"?   Wasn't he born in 1964?  The march on Washington was a year before he was born.

As one commentator said:

I've watched a few short clips of Glenn Beck today. Just to familiarize myself with the man. I confess I don't know half as much about him as you all seem to. But going just on what I saw today in these clips, he seems to be a hyper-emotional person who believes he is pivotal to the well-being of the entire country.

I'll agree, I do not know his work, but he does seem to think that he has some supreme importance to the world.  It seems to me that the charlatans like Beck and Limbaugh are nothing but salesman selling their favorite product--themselves. The more moronic they can be the better their moronic fans adore them. The more the moronic fans adore them the more money they make. People think that having the soapbox means they actually know something. The only thing Beck and Limbaugh know is how to line their own pockets.



I end with a quote from John Stuart Mill

"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it."

Fu*k Fair And Impartial - Fox Rejects Ad About Its GOP Donation, Admits News Corp Opposes 'Democratic Candidates'

As you may have heard, progressive media watchdog group Media Matters proposed running an ad on Fox News about News Corp's $1 million donation to the Republican Governors Association (RGA). 

The idea behind the Media Matters ad was to bring viewers' attention to the political activities of News Corp, which is the Rupert-Murdoch run parent company of Fox News. According to Media Matters, Fox News has devoted just 17 seconds of airtime to the organization's RGA donation, despite extensive coverage by other outlets.

Now Fox and Media Matters are in a war of words over why Fox refused to air the commercial.  However what is undisputed is that News Corp did give $1 Million to Republicans to oppose democratic candidates and Fox news had virtually zero coverage of the donation.

So how is it that Fox can claim any level of impartiality or even-handedness in reporting the news?  It seems they don't really care and are just going to present the news as they see fit.

William Randolph Hearst did that too and helped create "yellow journalism" — sensationalized stories of dubious veracity.  Now Fox creates stories of dubious veracity.

According to Wikpedia:

Hearst's use of yellow journalism techniques in his New York Journal to whip up popular support for U.S. military adventurism in Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines in 1898 was also criticized in Upton Sinclair's 1919 book, The Brass Check: A Study of American Journalism. According to Sinclair, Hearst's newspaper employees were "willing by deliberate and shameful lies, made out of whole cloth, to stir nations to enmity and drive them to murderous war." Sinclair also asserted that in the early 20th century Hearst's newspapers lied "remorselessly about radicals," excluded "the word Socialist from their columns" and obeyed "a standing order in all Hearst offices that American Socialism shall never be mentioned favorably." In addition, Sinclair charged that Hearst's "Universal News Bureau" re-wrote the news of the London morning papers in the Hearst office in New York and then fraudulently sent it out to American afternoon newspapers under the by-lines of imaginary names of non-existent "Hearst correspondents" in London, Paris, Venice, Rome, Berlin, etc.

I would swear it was Fox news of which they were speaking.  More hegemonic ideology by media giants.

Dan Quayle's Son Wins Congressional Primary

I don't know if this news says more about Arizona or more about just how crazy politics have become.

Ben Quayle, the son of former vice president Dan Quayle, unexpectedly won his Republican primary for a House seat in Arizona on Tuesday despite a slate of bad press. Controversy enveloped Quayle after he was accused of writing for the site TheDirty.com under the pseudonym Brock Landers, which is the name of a porn star from Boogie Nights.

Campaigning as a family-values conservative, Quayle first denied then admitted that he wrote for the sex-steeped Arizona website.

Quayle allegedly compared his own physique to the Sistine Chapel and wrote things like “Long story short, on a scale of 1-to-10, I'm awesome” and "My moral compass is so broken I can barely find the parking lot." He also cut a campaign ad in which he called President Obama “the worst president in history.”

Quayle also sent out a campaign mailer promoting his family values that flopped when it was revealed two little girls in the ad weren't his children. He and his wife do not have kids.

Hitler Jewish? DNA Tests Show Dictator May Have 'Had Jewish And African Roots'

DNA tests apparently show that the Nazi dictator may have had Jewish and African ancestry.

The British newspaper The Daily Telegraph says that saliva samples were collected from 39 Hitler relatives:

A chromosome called Haplogroup E1b1b1 which showed up in their samples is rare in Western Europe and is most commonly found in the Berbers of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia, as well as among Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews ...

Haplogroup E1b1b1, which accounts for approximately 18 to 20 per cent of Ashkenazi and 8.6 per cent to 30 per cent of Sephardic Y-chromosomes, appears to be one of the major founding lineages of the Jewish population.

Why is that relevant?  "Hitler would not have been happy," said Professor Ronny Decorte in a Google translation of the Knack's web-version of the story. Decorte, a genetics expert from Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (a Flemish research university), says that Hitler apparently wasn't "Aryan" -- what the Nazi would have considered "pure."

But even more than that, it is relevant because it shows that we all have more in common than we have differences.  So next time one group spouts hate or fear towards another, ask yourself how you would feel if the targeted group was related to you.

It also highlights yet again, the dangers of fear and hate based politics.  While Hitler may be one of the most extreme examples, the politics of fear and hate have no winners.

Existing Home Sales Plunge 27.2%, Record Drop, Trounce Expectations Of 13.4%, Lowest Number Since May 1995

Last week I posted an article about how the home-sales number might be very bad.  Well the number is out and it isn't bad - its catestrophic. 

The NAR reports: July Existing-Home Sales Fall as Expected but Prices Rise:

Existing-home sales, which are completed transactions that include single-family, townhomes, condominiums and co-ops, dropped 27.2 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 3.83 million units in July from a downwardly revised 5.26 million in June, and are 25.5 percent below the 5.14 million-unit level in July 2009.

Sales are at the lowest level since the total existing-home sales series launched in 1999, and single family sales – accounting for the bulk of transactions – are at the lowest level since May of 1995.

Total housing inventory at the end of July increased 2.5 percent to 3.98 million existing homes available for sale, which represents a 12.5-month supply at the current sales pace, up from an 8.9-month supply in June.

Months of supply increased to 12.5 months in July from 8.9 months in June. A normal market has under 6 months of supply, so this is extremely high and suggests prices, as measured by the repeat sales indexes like Case-Shiller and CoreLogic, will start declining.


And in the more bad news category (if you have dealings with the State of California) - California has just passed a measure which for the second time in as many years (going all the way back to the Great Depression), will allow it to use IOUs in lieu of payment on everything from supplies to contracted services and health-care costs, so it can actually preserve cash to make payments to its generous debtors.

Elisabeth Hasselbeck - Not Necessarily What You Might Think?

If you follow SusPack you know that I have been critical of Elisabeth Hasselbeck for many of her positions.  She often seems to take a staunchly conservative viewpoint without seeming to have a strong philosophical reason to support such a stance.  So an article today - Elisabeth Hasselbeck: 'I Actually Support Gay Marriage,' President Obama 'Incredibly Cool Guy' - really surprised me.

In a two-part interview with Fancast, the conservative co-host of "The View" came out in support of gay marriage and described President Obama as "an incredibly cool guy."


"I am not ultra-ultra-conservative on every issue. I actually support gay marriage," she told Fancast in part one. "I think the gay marriage thing would definitely surprise people. I mean, for some people, it will surprise them to the point that they won't want to hear it. 'No, that can't be, I really want to have this sort of idea of her in my head,' so I sort of rain on their parade there. I am a person that does believe that life begins at conception, but I also don't believe that the government should tell women what to do with their bodies. So I'm torn there in terms of supporting laws [for or against abortion]. I always say I would rather change a heart than a law. I think it has to start there. Always trying to mandate, mandate, mandate this or that is not the way that I believe this country should run."

Hasselbeck said it would be more appropriate to describe her as a "Federalist" than a "conservative."  Federalist are generally considered much like libertarian, they believe in greater State's rights.
 
So it makes me wonder - is the " right wing "View" chick" just a marketing ploy? Is being so far "to the right" just her brand so The View can have conflict and debate or is she really as conservative and contrary to liberal ideals as she often seems? Regardless, it is refreshing to hear someone have opinions that are separate from issue to issue and not just checking the boxes all the way down one column or the other.


I appreciate that she is at least thinking about all these issues. So many Americans just sit back and do and say nothing.

Is The Tea Party Movement A Fraud - A Front For Big Business - Pawns Of Rich Men

If you have watched any Tea party event, one theme that is common is that it is a grass-roots organization, formed of the people and by the people.  It is this populist appeal that draws many people to it and its message.  But what would these people think if their "message" was simply being controlled by rich and very powerful men - that they are simply pawns in a much larger game.

The New Yorker has a very interesting article about the Koch family and Koch Industries.  Haven't heard of them?  Maybe they don't want you to know all about them.  From the New Yorker:

The Kochs have long depended on the public’s not knowing all the details about them. They have been content to operate what David Koch has called “the largest company that you’ve never heard of.” But with the growing prominence of the Tea Party, and with increased awareness of the Kochs’ ties to the movement, the brothers may find it harder to deflect scrutiny. Recently, President Obama took aim at the Kochs’ political network. Speaking at a Democratic National Committee fund-raiser, in Austin, he warned supporters that the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in the Citizens United case—which struck down laws prohibiting direct corporate spending on campaigns—had made it even easier for big companies to hide behind “groups with harmless-sounding names like Americans for Prosperity.” Obama said, “They don’t have to say who, exactly, Americans for Prosperity are. You don’t know if it’s a foreign-controlled corporation”—or even, he added, “a big oil company.”

Still don't know who they are?

With his brother Charles, who is seventy-four, David Koch owns virtually all of Koch Industries, a conglomerate, headquartered in Wichita, Kansas, whose annual revenues are estimated to be a hundred billion dollars. The company has grown spectacularly since their father, Fred, died, in 1967, and the brothers took charge. The Kochs operate oil refineries in Alaska, Texas, and Minnesota, and control some four thousand miles of pipeline. Koch Industries owns Brawny paper towels, Dixie cups, Georgia-Pacific lumber, Stainmaster carpet, and Lycra, among other products. Forbes ranks it as the second-largest private company in the country, after Cargill, and its consistent profitability has made David and Charles Koch—who, years ago, bought out two other brothers—among the richest men in America. Their combined fortune of thirty-five billion dollars is exceeded only by those of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett.

The richest men in the world.  Are their interests totally benign?

Five hundred people attended a Tea Party summit recently, which served, in part, as a training session for Tea Party activists in Texas. An advertisement cast the event as a populist uprising against vested corporate power. “Today, the voices of average Americans are being drowned out by lobbyists and special interests,” it said. “But you can do something about it.” The pitch made no mention of its corporate funders. The White House has expressed frustration that such sponsors have largely eluded public notice. David Axelrod, Obama’s senior adviser, said, “What they don’t say is that, in part, this is a grassroots citizens’ movement brought to you by a bunch of oil billionaires.”

So what is their message?

The Kochs are longtime libertarians who believe in drastically lower personal and corporate taxes, minimal social services for the needy, and much less oversight of industry—especially environmental regulation. These views dovetail with the brothers’ corporate interests. In a study released this spring, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst’s Political Economy Research Institute named Koch Industries one of the top ten air polluters in the United States. And Greenpeace issued a report identifying the company as a “kingpin of climate science denial.” The report showed that, from 2005 to 2008, the Kochs vastly outdid ExxonMobil in giving money to organizations fighting legislation related to climate change, underwriting a huge network of foundations, think tanks, and political front groups. Indeed, the brothers have funded opposition campaigns against so many Obama Administration policies—from health-care reform to the economic-stimulus program—that, in political circles, their ideological network is known as the Kochtopus.

A former Koch adviser said, “They’re smart. This right-wing, redneck stuff works for them. They see this as a way to get things done without getting dirty themselves.” Rob Stein, a Democratic political strategist who has studied the conservative movement’s finances, said that the Kochs are “at the epicenter of the anti-Obama movement. But it’s not just about Obama. They would have done the same to Hillary Clinton. They did the same with Bill Clinton. They are out to destroy progressivism.”


It seems that the "apple" doesn't fall far from the tree - all you have to do is look at their father - Fred Koch.

In 1958, Fred Koch became one of the original members of the John Birch Society, the arch-conservative group known, in part, for a highly skeptical view of governance and for spreading fears of a Communist takeover. Members considered President Dwight D. Eisenhower to be a Communist agent. In a self-published broadside, Koch claimed that “the Communists have infiltrated both the Democrat and Republican Parties.” He wrote admiringly of Benito Mussolini’s suppression of Communists in Italy, and disparagingly of the American civil-rights movement. “The colored man looms large in the Communist plan to take over America,” he warned. Welfare was a secret plot to attract rural blacks to cities, where they would foment “a vicious race war.” In a 1963 speech that prefigures the Tea Party’s talk of a secret socialist plot, Koch predicted that Communists would “infiltrate the highest offices of government in the U.S. until the President is a Communist, unknown to the rest of us.”

He admired Benito Mussolini. 

And what of his sons?  Lee Fang, of the liberal blog ThinkProgress, has called the Kochs “the billionaires behind the hate.”  Gus diZerega, a former friend, suggested that the Kochs’ youthful idealism about libertarianism had largely devolved into a rationale for corporate self-interest. He said of Charles, “Perhaps he has confused making money with freedom.”  A top Cato Institute official said that Charles “thinks he’s a genius. He’s the emperor, and he’s convinced he’s wearing clothes.”

And the emperor doesn't hesitate to use his wealth and power.  Charles Koch, in a newsletter sent to his seventy thousand employees, compared the Obama Administration to the regime of the Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chávez. The Kochs’ sense of imperilment is somewhat puzzling. Income inequality in America is greater than it has been since the nineteen-twenties, and since the seventies the tax rates of the wealthiest have fallen more than those of the middle class.

So who is really benefitting from the Tea Party?  You can bet that the Kochs will, but will you?

Idiot Of The Day - Carl Paladino - Poor Should Be Placed In Prison Dorms And Take Hygiene Classes

Republican candidate for governor Carl Paladino said he would transform some New York prisons into dormitories for welfare recipients, where they could work in state-sponsored jobs, get employment training and take lessons in "personal hygiene."
Paladino, a wealthy Buffalo real estate developer popular with many tea party activists, isn't saying the state should jail poor people: The program would be voluntary.


But the suggestion that poor families would be better off in remote institutions, rather than among friends and family in their own neighborhoods, struck some anti-poverty activists as insulting - as it should.

Carl, while you are at it, let them eat cake too!

Throughout his campaign, Paladino has criticized New York's rich menu of social service benefits, which he says encourages illegal immigrants and needy people to live in the state. He has promised a 20 percent reduction in the state budget and a 10 percent income tax cut if elected.

Carl is rich.  Of course he wants cuts in taxes.  And what does he care about social services?  He is just like Sharon Angle, the poor are poor because we coddle them too much.  Why work when you can barely get by and watch as your kids go hungry.  So much easier.

Ketny Jean-Francois, a former welfare recipient and a New York City advocate for low-income people, said Paladino's idea shocked her.


"Being poor is not a crime," she said. "People are on welfare for many reasons ... Is he saying people are poor because they don't have any hygiene or any skills?"

Is The Big One Near - Massive Quake Is Overdue for Southern California

If you live in California then one question we all have is "when is the Big One due"?

A new report shows that it might be sooner than expected.

New research shows that major earthquakes have struck southern California far more frequently than previously thought -- and the next one could be just around the corner.

The study from geologists at the University of California Irvine and Arizona State University showed that massive quakes -- of magnitude 6.5 or greater -- have hit the region's San Andreas fault line at intervals of between 45 and 144 years.

With the last major earthquake in 1857, that means Southern California is overdue a massive quake.

"The next earthquake could be sooner than later," Lisa Grant Ludwig, a UC Irvine earthquake expert and co-author of the study, told The Los Angeles Times. "It was thought that we weren't at risk of having another large one any time soon. Well, now, it might be ready to rupture."

Previously, experts that thought the quakes occurred once every 250 years to 450 years.

The team of scientists obtained their results by studying ancient charcoal samples in the Carrizo Plain portion of the San Andreas fault line.


The charcoal fragments during earthquakes, so dating the fragments can pinpoint the time of earthquakes. The results were published Friday in Geology, a journal.

A quake of just 7.8 magnitude -- less than the 1857 earthquake -- could spread chaos through some of California's biggest cities, including Los Angeles, according to a study by the state Emergency Management Agency.

"You would see buildings collapse, you'd see people trapped, you'd see roadways collapse. You'd see widespread destruction," Kelly Huston, assistant agency secretary for public and crisis communication, told Fox News.

The 1857 quake is known as the Fort Tejon quake, though it is believed to have originated in Parkfield, Calif. The earthquake tore south on the San Andreas fault for 200 miles, near the northern edge of what is now LA County, then headed east toward the Cajon Pass.

The shaking, which lasted between one minute and three minutes, was so powerful that the soil liquefied, causing trees to sink into the earth.

At the time, LA's population was a mere 4,000. Now it's 9.9 million.

The new information "puts the exclamation point" on the importance of residents and policymakers preparing for a major earthquake, Ludwig told Agence-France Presse.

Ludwig is in favor of policies mandating earthquake risk signs on unsafe buildings, and making inspectors in home-sale transactions reveal degrees of risk.

Still, not everyone is quite so alarmed by the study's findings. Morgan Page, a geophysicist with the United States Geological Society, told Fox News that more research needs to be done before the theories about the San Andreas quakes can be accepted as definitely true.

The study is ""rather controversial. Some people support the work, and some people think there may be problems with it," she told Fox News.

What The F*** Is Going On - NOAA Claims Scientists Reviewed Controversial Report; The Scientists Say Otherwise

Are we watching one of the biggest frauds perpetrated upon us is a long time?  Is this simply gross ineptitude?  I am talking about the federal report which was recently released about the fate of the oil that BP spilled in the Gulf of Mexico.  You know the one.  The skimpy, four-page report dominated an entire news cycle earlier this month, with contented administration officials claiming it meant that three fourths of the oil released from BP's well was essentially gone -- evaporated, dispersed, burned, etc.  The one that said almost all of the oil had "disappeared" and that the Gulf was doing miraculously.  Did anyone really believe the report in the first place?

Well the Huffington Post has a report out today that suggest something very suspicious is at work - is the report just suspicious packaging?

In responding to the growing furor over the public release of a scientifically dubious and overly rosy federal report about the fate of the oil that BP spilled in the Gulf of Mexico, NOAA director Jane Lubchenco has repeatedly fallen back on one particular line of defense -- that independent scientists had given it their stamp of approval.


Back at the report's unveiling on August 4, Lubchenco spoke of a "peer review of the calculations that went into this by both other federal and non-federal scientists." On Thursday afternoon, she told reporters on a conference call: "The report and the calculations that went into it were reviewed by independent scientists." The scientists, she said, were listed at the end of the report.

But all the scientists on that list contacted by the Huffington Post for comment this week said the exact same thing: That although they provided some input to NOAA (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), they in no way reviewed the report, and could not vouch for it.

So is Lubchenco lying?  Intentionally distorting the truth?  Just a blathering idiot?  All of the above?  Well ...

In addition to disputing Lubchenco's characterization of their role, several of them actually took issue with the report itself.


In particular, they refuted the notion, as put forth by Lubchenco and other Obama administration officials, that the report was either scientifically precise or an authoritative account of where the oil went.

Ian R. MacDonald, an oceanographer at Florida State University who was not one of the scientists on NOAA's list, sees this latest incident as part of an ongoing problem.  "The consistent theme," MacDonald said, "seems to be to minimize the impact of the oil -- and to act as a bottleneck for information."

There you have it.  Just SUSPICIOUS PACKAGING.

Image - Tom Siglich, Journal Resister Newspapers

Market Crash - Real Estate Sales - Market News

I periodically post articles about the stock market and home sales which I find interesting.  A number of you have commented that you like the articles because they present points of view that you do not often see in the main stream media.  These stories are not investment advice, but it is always nice to be informed.

The first story tonight is from Zero Hedge and is a follow on to a story I had earlier about the "Hindenburg Omen" -  Word(s) of the Day - Hindenburg Omen - Investment Advice?.  If you didn't read the article, the Hindenburg Omen is a technical analysis pattern that is said to portend a stock market crash. It is named after the Hindenburg disaster of May 6, 1937, during which the German zeppelin Hindenburg was destroyed.  Today Zero Hedge reports:

Longs may be forgiven if they are sweating their long positions over the weekend: not only did we just have a second, and far more solid Hindenburg Omen confirmation today, with 82 new highs, and 94 new lows, but the Saturday is the day when Iran launches its nuclear reactor, and everyone will be very jumpy regarding any piece of news out of the middle east. As for the H.O., the more validations we receive, the greater the confusion in the market, and the greater the possibility for a melt down (or up, as the case may be now that the market is unlike what it has ever been in the past). Furthermore, with implied correlation at record levels (JCJ at around 78), any potential crash will be like never before, as virtually all stocks now go up or down as one, more so than ever before. And should the HFT STOP command take place, the future should be very interesting indeed (at least for the primary dealers, and the Atari consoles which are unable to VWAP dump their holdings in the nano second before stuff goes bidless).

Many are saying the Hindenburg Omen doesn't prove anything.  Frankly I don't know, but in this market anything can happen.

More troublesome is an article from MISH'S about housing sales.

MarketWatch is reporting the consensus for July existing home sales is 4.85 million SAAR (seasonally adjusted annual rate).

And from Dow Jones: Week Ahead

"July existing-home sales ... likely declined 4.3% from June"

June sales were reported as 5.37 million, so a decline of 4.3% would be 5.14 million SAAR.

Note: July existing home sales will be reported next Tuesday.

Housing economist Tom Lawler's preliminary forecast was 3.95 million SAAR (based on a bottom up analysis).

Many of the regional reports showed sales declines of 20% or more from July 2009 when the NAR reported sales of 5.14 million SAAR. A 20% decline from July 2009 would be in the low 4 millions ...

Maybe the MarketWatch and Dow Jones consensus numbers are incorrect (other numbers will be released later today), or there is probably going to be a big miss next Tuesday. Take the WAY under! 

 
If what Mish reports holds true it should be very bad for the market and home prices.  Not only will the sales number be horrendous but it will be significantly off forecast.
 
Looks like next week may be a little dicey!

Iraq Posses A Clear And Present Danger To Us - The Deficit Poses A Clear And Present Danger To Us - You Need to Sacrifice

The same bunch of misfits politicians who brought you the Iraq Invasion (cough - cough - Republicans and certain Blue Dog Democrats) and drove the defense budget up to astronomical amounts (which at the time, these same politicians said was only 2% of GDP) now say that over the next twenty years the cost of a decent retirement for our aging population will cost an ungodly 2% more of GDP and we can't afford it.

So every time you hear about someone saying "we need to cut Social Security" you know what they are talking about.  They are talking about a "horrific" 2% (as compared to Gross Domestic Product) increase.  The same 2% that the warmongers couldn't wait to spend to invade another Country because the invaded liberated country posed such a threat to us.  Oh wait, turns out there was no real threat.  And there is no real threat now.  It is just the same politicians misfits attempting to subject us all to absolute poverty so that Big Business can turn us into serfs.

So what does the "average-Joe" think?

Voters want Congress to “do something” about the deficit, but 57% do not want national defense cut, over 65% do not want Medicare eligibility age raised, 64% do not want the retirement age raised, 74% want Medicare to provide more help to poor seniors.

They think (64%) capping Medicare/Medicaid payments to providers is okay and 58% think the rich should pay Social Security taxes on more of their income.

And while you're at it, do something about the deficit.

Unfortunately we are as confused as the politicians.  Only difference is that we are worried about our families and children and the future.   The politicians misfits are more worried about being re-elected and padding their pockets and those of their buddies, Big Business.

Religious Intolerance - The Intolerance of Those Claiming To Be Religious – Christian Theocracy

Throughout history, the one common denominator of most religions is the ideal of doing good and being a better person. Personal sacrifice, humility and integrity are also fundamental tenants.


So why is it that one religious group can hate and fear another group so badly? It isn't a new phenomenon. The Romans persecuted the Jews. Christians conducted the Crusades.

So the claim that Muslims are out to destroy Christians is just a continuation of a very old story.

It is said that the most horrific acts in history have been done in the name of "God".

I just don't get it. Well I do really; because none of this " God" fiction is real, so it makes humans that believe that God is real, crazy.

If you follow my blog you know that I don't believe in a "God" – at least the “god” that is talked about among most major organized religions. I just have too many questions for which there are no good answers. First and foremost, why would an all powerful being inflict so much pain and suffering on his people, especially the poor and downtrodden? Perhaps there is a larger force at work. I admit I do not have the answers but it seems to me that the stories of "Jesus" are really no different than those of Mercury, Venus or Zues.

I am in wonder of the majesty of nature and our universe. I also agree with the Dalai Lama:

"I believe that the very purpose of our life is to seek happiness. That is clear. Whether one believes in religion or not, whether one believes in this religion or that religion, we all are seeking something better in life. So, I think, the very motion of our life is towards happiness...."

So I sit here perplexed about the ongoing fight over the Ground Zero Mosque, which is really more of a community center. To review: the Cordoba House will be two blocks away from the actual WTC site. It's being installed by American citizens, the chief of whom, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, is an American citizen who has worked with the Bush administration on Muslim outreach. These are peaceful Muslims who had absolutely nothing to do with the terrorist attacks nearby. The opponents have dubbed it the "Ground Zero Mosque" suggesting it is being built by terrorist and will be offensive to the memory of those who died.


While I have my own issues with organized religions, I believe strongly that everyone should be entitled to practice whatever religion they choose. Religion can be good. It provides comfort to millions. And the basic ideals of sacrifice and humility are valuable lessons for us all. So I just get so confused at the amount of time one religious group spends in seeking to defame and destroy another.

It seems straight forward to me - this country was founded on Freedom of Religion. The pilgrims fled Europe because they were being persecuted for the way they worship-- and now here we are doing the same to other Americans. Either we are a country that believes in Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech or we are not. If we live up to what we proclaim, then there are no grounds to deny the building of a Muslim Community Center anywhere in this country.

It must be an election year because Republicans are once again rolling out September 11 as a wedge issue. You know, because they care about honoring the fallen - when it helps them politically.

If we take Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and Newt Gingrich at their word, their objection to the proposed community center two blocks north of Ground Zero is that the entire area is hallowed ground, and a Muslim facility so close to the site is an insult to the victims and heroes of September 11.

Of course this is entirely about stirring up anti-Muslim fear and demagoguery to score political points. It is a cheap and obvious exploitation of the widespread American prejudice that anyone who happens to be a Muslim is equally as guilty and offensive as the terrorists who hijacked and crashed two airplanes into the World Trade Center towers. Timothy McVeigh was raised as a Christian ... why not ban all Churches in Oklahoma City then? Or should we outlaw Catholic churches in light of all the sex abuse cases of priests molesting choir boys?

This theocratic mindset is dangerous. What this theocratic mindset illustrates is how actions are perceived depending on who is doing them. When a Conservative has extra-marital sex, they are a good person doing a bad thing. When a liberal is faithful to their spouse, they are a bad person doing a good thing. The default is that Christians are fundamentally good, but they sometimes do bad things, like murder gay people. Non-Christians are fundamentally bad, but they sometimes do good things, like allow Christians to discriminate against Muslims. Theocrats always know who the evil doers are - the ones for whom laws are made for - everyone except themselves.

This all comes down to persecution. One religious group persecuting another and if you don't practice a religion, they all persecute you. Ultimately if you are in a religion it is as if you are in a gang and your allegiance is with that gang and its rules. You must join the “gang” or be persecuted. Once you are a member of a religion (the gang) your allegiance is with that gang and its rules. Worse still, when the rules of the gang contradict the rules of the government - like it does here- you are asked to choose the rules of the gang or else.

There should be no question what to do but laws are blatantly ignored. That has been the problem throughout history – it is what religion has always done – and is why religion has no place in our government.

What are others saying?

• Ted Olson, former George W. Bush solicitor general, attorney behind the case against California's gay marriage ban, and husband of a woman who died aboard the plane that crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11, said Wednesday that President Obama was right about his analysis of the "Ground Zero Mosque" as a constitutional right protected by the First Amendment.
• Peter Beinart writes: "Yesterday, I wrote about what the "Ground Zero" mosque disaster reveals about the Republican Party. In short, it reveals that the Bush administration was a false dawn. Bush, for all his flaws, believed that the GOP should be a universalistic party based on traditional values, a big tent for “faith-based" conservatives of all races and creeds: Muslims, Hispanics, Mormons, African-Americans, whatever. Now it is clear that the post-Bush GOP is a far nastier creature: A party seething with hatred towards vulnerable religious and ethnic groups."
• Robert Creamer writes: "Every time a Republican 'leader' attacks the notion that a mosque be built two blocks from Ground Zero, they legitimate the claims of Bin Laden to young impressionable Muslims across the world.
• Donna Marsh O'Connor writes:  "Why would we support a mosque at Ground Zero, particularly when there are many families who say it pains them? And, too, because we know it really does. We are all, 9/11 families in pain. We do it because it's American."
• Carla Seaquist writes:  "Let's face the fact: What does it mean to assert that a mosque "desecrates" hallowed ground? It means that the desecrating being done is by people who are evil, unclean. And that is wrong, wrong, wrong."
• A group of conservative GOP Muslim and Arab American officials:  In a letter to Republican leaders, the group of authors criticized members of the party for abandoning the principle of tolerance that has defined the GOP from Lincoln to Bush. In the process, the authors -- who include former Bush administration official Randa Fahmy Hudome and former Reagan administration official and prominent D.C.-based lawyer George Salem, as well as David Ramadan, who worked on both of George W. Bush's campaigns -- make similar philosophical and substantive arguments as other defenders of the proposed Cordoba House.

But then there are others who have a much more extreme viewpoint.

Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association Wants to Deport American Muslims.  Why, because he says that Islam is a religion of hate and Christianity is pure. That Jesus was the “Prince of Peace.” (I guess Fischer never heard about the Crusades. We know that Cheney did because he instituted means of “enhanced interrogation” which were used during the Crusades which were then referred to as torture.)
Next month, Fischer will be going big-time: He is listed as a "confirmed speaker" at the Family Research Council’s Values Voter Summit (the AFA is an event sponsor), which is scheduled for September 17-19 at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, D.C. Other confirmed speakers include Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, Rep. Mike Pence, and Mike Huckabee. It will be interesting to see what kind of reception he gets from the crowd if he goes full-bore Islamophobic. My guess is somewhere between shock and awe.


So let’s look into that idea that Christianity is a “better” religion.

We don't actually know what Jesus preached about anything (or even if there was an actual Jesus who bore any similarity to the legendary one). I'm not saying he didn't exist, but there certainly are no historical records proving his existence. And the words he supposedly said were not written down until 150 to 400 years after his supposed death, meaning multiple generations lived and died before Jesus' words transitioned from oral tradition to written gospels.

And, for what it's worth, the Koran is an often self-contradictory document, much like our Bible. You can find what you want in it. For every avocation of murder of the unbelievers (we have similar passages in the Bible) there are appeals for peace and tolerance. It's no more right to cherry pick the Koran that to cherry pick from Biblical passages.

So let's look at some "peaceful" Bible passages:

Leviticus 20:9

"'If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother, and his blood will be on his own head."

Exodus 22:20

Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the LORD must be destroyed.

Deuteronomy 14:6-10

“If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is of thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. Thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God.

Leviticus 24:16

"Anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death."

Acts 3:23

"And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear the prophet, shall be destroyed."

Chronicles 15:13

All who would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman.

I don't believe that most Christians are bad or evil.  Nor do I believe that these passages were meant to promote hate and fear.  But why are so many so quick to condemn Muslims?

Hate and fear are divisive. The politics of using divisive issues to whip up your base is like smoking around a powder keg. We are all at risk!

Robert Creamer sums it up nicely.

It is also obvious that this is yet one more in a string of attempts by mainstream Republican leaders to win elections by dividing Americans against each other. The attack on Democrats who support the right of Muslim Americans to build a place of worship two blocks from Ground Zero in New York lies squarely in the tradition of the Republican "southern strategy" that fanned the fires of racial resentment and scapegoated black "welfare queens." And of course it's hot on the heels of Republican attempts to whip up fear of gay Americans and their right to marry, or depicting Latino Americans as encouraging pregnant Hispanic mothers to sneak across the border in order to "drop anchor babies" to guarantee American citizenship.

One big difference: All Muslims did not attack the United States that September day. A small group of radical Muslim terrorists attacked the United States. And they attacked all Americans -- including Muslim Americans -- many of whom died at Ground Zero. Chicago's Irish-American Mayor Daley was infuriated when a bunch of young "patriots" marched on a Chicago-area mosque after 9/11. He put it clearly when he said, does it make everyone who is Irish a terrorists because of the IRA?

America was founded on the concept of Freedom of Religion.  If you are a Christian you should stand up for the rights of religious Muslims to build their own house of worship.  Freedom only works if we are all free.  Don't let hate and fear win out.

Greek Bonds Slump As Austerity Backfires, Country Enters "Death Spiral", And The Violent End Game Approaches

One of the stories I have been following is the economic crisis here in the US and throughout the world.  I have noted before that Greece was in serious trouble and now comes a new story from Zero Hedge.

Those patiently following the Greek Bond-Bund spread to its inevitable conclusion have been fully aware that the plan that Europe is betting its entire future on, is patently flawed: namely that austerity, by its definition does not, and will not work. In fact, instead of bringing stability, austerity will slowly but surely eat away at the economy of whatever country it is instituted in - in some cases slowly, in others, like Greece, very rapidly. Indeed, the Greek spread has now risen to levels last seen during the early May near-revolution in Athens, at well over 800 bps. And for the specific consequences of austerity, Germany's Spiegel has done a terrific summary of what it defines as a "death spiral" for the Mediterranean country: "Stores are closing, tax revenues are falling and unemployment has hit an unbelievable 70 percent in some places. Frustrated workers are threatening to strike back. A mixture of fear, hopelessness and anger is brewing in Greek society." Spiegel quotes a a typical Greek: ""If you take away my family's bread, I'll take you down -- the government needs to know that. And don't call us anarchists if that happens! We're heads of our families and we're desperate." All those who think violent strikes in the PIIGS are a thing of the past, we have news for you. The (pseudo) vacation season is over, and millions of workers are coming back. They may not have money, but they have lots of free time, lots of unemployment, and even more pent up anger. Things are about to get very heated once again, first in Greece, and soon after, everywhere else.

Expect things to get much worse before they get better.  As I have said, Greece may be a harbinger of what happens to many States here (California - Illinois - etc.).

Former US Envoy To UN John Bolton Says "Israel Has 8 Days To Strike Iran"

In an interview with Fox Business News, former US envoy to the UN, John Bolton, told the channel that if Israel wants to prevent Iran from acquiring a working nuclear plant, then a military strike must be launched against the Bushehr nuclear power facility within the next eight days. Specifically, Bolton was envisioning the projected August 21 launch date of the nuclear power plant, which Zero Hedge noted previously. According to Bolton, once the Bushehr facility is operational it will be too late for a military air strike against Iran because such an attack would affect too many Iranian civilians due to the spread radiation.

But according to "Neo-Con think," it's a serious danger if it goes online and THEN we bomb it, releasing radiation. So to protect Iranians we need to bomb now!


Imagine a Government with Palin at the helm and Bolton by her side.  Republicans love war!! They have already bankrupted us with two wars they lost and now they want another war? Do you really think that Iran will blow somebody up with a nuke? What would the retaliation look like?

UPDATE:

The latest development in the neverending saga of Iran, comes via the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) which states that according to the Gulf states, the military option may be the best option to deal with the Iranian nuclear program, as the contra-Iran axis is now complete. The article also reflected "the Gulf states' growing tension and concern regarding Iran's nuclear program, and mentioned their proximity to the Bushehr reactor." What is scary is that the straw man of military intervention is pretty much presented as a fait accompli, and alternatives to military intervention are not even considered as an option. The timing could not be worse: as we highlighted earlier, John Bolton believes that there is ticking clock (through the 21st) after which the option of "striking" Iran with manageable casualties becomes negligible. And lastly, and certainly not making matters any easier, was the earlier revaluation by AFP, that Iran is preparing to unveil an array of weapons next week. An impartial reader would be forgiven if left with the impression that at this point a military operation is all but granted. Yet, keeping an eye out on spot oil, indicates that the realistic chance of an incursion is still negligible, at least as judged by oil prices. We believe that is still one of the best advance warnings indicators of a geopolitical shift. Unfortunately, if the oil market is in any way comparable to stocks in its predictive ability, it just may be that oil is, for once, a reactionary indicator instead of forward looking, in which case it will be useless as a predictive force.

News Corp. Gives GOP $1M - So Much For Fairness In The Media

As if Fox News weren’t carrying enough water for the Republican Party already: News Corp., the parent company of Fox News, has donated $1 million to the Republican Governors Association, which is run by Mississippi Governor and potential 2012 presidential candidate Haley Barbour. Politico’s Ben Smith says “the huge contribution to a party committee is a new step toward an open identification between Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. and the GOP.” In a statement, News Corp. said “News Corporation believes in the power of free markets, and the RGA’s pro-business agenda supports our priorities at this most critical time for our economy." News Corp. also owns the New York Post and The Wall Street Journal.

How can Fox now say that they are an impartial news media source?

Even if you are Republican this should bother you, A LOT.  Would you feel comfortable with a news organization which was controlled by the KGB?  Or which was financed by Middle-Eastern oil interests?

A free and impartial media are the cornerstones for democracy in America.  If the source for your news is biased, then the decisions you make may not be based on what you need to know.

This is a perfect example of the hegemonic ideology of which I have written.  Rupert Murdoch' with his power and money is able to control a way for people to see reality in the way he wants them to by owning media outlets. It is bias because they are his views. Using his own money for a bias network as well as directly giving it to candidates. We see his ideologies imposed on the World through his slanted reporting of reality.