Politics, Everyday, All day... morning, noon and night....

[Simply Joel]

BEDROOM RIGHTS

By William F. Buckley Jr.

I am in favor of the First Amendment guarantee of free speech, with one exception. Nobody should be permitted to say flat-out that "the government should stay out of the bedrooms of America." What if a civil-rights hate act was being conducted in the bedroom? For that matter, what if Daddy was forcing his way with a 10-year-old girl? Or Mom was starving her 10-month-old boy?

The phrase is an idiotic invocation of a taboo whose single purpose, in current usage, is to illegitimize concern about sexual activity. Said John Kerry, "Abortion should be rare, but it should be safe and legal because the government should stay out of the bedrooms of America." Just by the way, the bedrooms of America aren't where abortions are had; they're where seeds are planted that lead to abortions.
That government should stay out of the bedrooms of America has come to mean an ever-increasing area of official non-concern. There is to be no concern over sodomy in the bedroom. But are there limits? What about incest? We know that infanticide is just plain illegal, even if undertaken in the bedroom -- provided the infant is at least 1 day old. If the infant is minus 1 day old, it's all right to snuff him/her out, and go to church on Sundays.
We bump now into a second maxim, to which insufficient thought is given. "John Kerry is a believing and practicing Catholic," said his campaign spokesman David Wade. "His faith has played an important role in his life, but he also believes in the separation of church and state."
Well, so do us guys, Wade. But when John Kerry approaches the altar rail to present himself for communion, why are so many people saying that he should be given communion? If we have a separation of church and state, then the right of the church is to decide who does and who does not receive communion. If you are saying that a member should be given communion even if he counsels laws that violate rights believed by the church to be universal, then you are not arguing the separation of church and state. You are arguing the supremacy of the state. State believes abortion OK; therefore, church must not discriminate against anyone who also says it is OK.
Or is the complaint against the Catholic Church that it is laying down laws not only for Catholics, but also for non-Catholics? But if the moral commandments of a church extended only to the treatment of its own members, then it would be fine to ignore the rights of people who were merely, oh, Hindus, or Jews. It is another thing, of course, to limit the sanctions of a church to its own members. A Catholic bishop would be presumptuous if he announced that Al Franken would not be welcome at the communion rail. It is widely understood, and not resented, that only Catholics go to the Catholic communion rail, the same kind of thing as only Democrats go to Democratic caucuses.
But now we have a Nigerian cardinal in the Vatican who has reaffirmed the right of an American Catholic bishop to deny communion to someone who votes in favor of permissive abortion laws. The organization of the Catholic Church is centralized. The pope is the head of the church, but bishops are vested with authority that is theirs, and includes, in this case, the authority to deny communion to those who flout precepts thought by the bishops to be central to moral obligations.
The difference between giving communion to John Kerry, presidential candidate, and giving communion to John Doe, who voted for a local abortion law, is that Kerry is a public figure, and therefore a transgressor whose transgression is a public act, inviting reprisal, like the protester who draws attention to himself by proclaiming his defiance. To upbraid a bishop for denying communion to a public figure who espouses permissive abortion laws is to upbraid him for upholding the doctrine of the separation of church and state. If the churchman allows himself to be governed by state practices, he violates that separation.

[DVD Burner]

YEAH BABY!



What an exciting day.

[Simply Joel]

IMHO... Bill Buckley Jr is about as dry as a popcorn fart.

[DVD Burner]

IMHO... Bill Buckley Jr is about as dry as a popcorn fart.

I can only imagine what that smells like hoping never to experience the reality.

And what's up with that guy anyway? Is it a speech or mental impediment?

Also,

I like McCain. Anyone that listens to NIN and has the sense of humor that he has is a-ok with me. But what is the deal with the love for Bush?

Deserves being repeated again.

[stuart]

mccain does not love bush. Don't be fooled for a moment. Mccain is a wiley mofo. He gets his strategic digs in.

[Ranger Genius]

Waste not, want not.

"We should use the ones we have." It cracks me up.

[DVD Burner]

So,
Speaking of Bedroom Rights,

lets see now. Sex and politics have diffrent responses with diffrent outcomes.

If you get a little BJ on the side ( consentualy ) you get impeached but if you go all out and pull out the whips and chains you get a little bit o' help keeping it quite.

[DVD Burner]

Rummy claims that it was the military that found the problem with the abused Iraqi prisoners at his town hall meeting today.


Was'nt it the Red Cross?

[Apollonaris Zeus]

Rummy claims that it was the military that found the problem with the abused Iraqi prisoners at his town hall meeting today.

Found the problem! That's a fucking laugh. They knew about the abuses because they had condone it for the last several fucking wars. The Gulf to Afghanistan War. Hey lets not forget the Vietnam and Korean too.

The DOD had to come out because they were forced to because there was soldiers too good a people to continue the DOD's Intelligent's lies!

I don't believe anything Buckley says cuz he's high on POT!

A II Z

[Apollonaris Zeus]

The sad part is there are superiors that are going to get away with this shit and these lowly weekend wariors are going to do the time for them. i hope they come out and rat on their superiors but somethings tells me that will be covered up by this nazi administration!



Oh hey, lets not forget the Dirty weapons made with nuclear waste!


A II Z

[DVD Burner]

I don't believe anything Buckley says cuz he's high on POT!

Hey hey hey,

Lets not down m good green buddy.

Waste not, want not.
"We should use the ones we have." It cracks me up.

Cracked me up too.

[DVD Burner]

That was a lot of work.

[Simply Joel]

May 12, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Hold Fast, Idealists
By WILLIAM SAFIRE

WASHINGTON — Last month, the angry charge at the 9/11 commission was that our intelligence was weak and ineffective. That was because the terrorists were at war and we were not. This month, with the U.S. at war with terror, the angry charge is that our intelligence was cruelly un-American.

Last month, Democrats joined a book-promoting author to try to place the blame for failing to stop Al Qaeda's attacks on an unconcerned President Bush and the bumbling heads of the C.I.A. and F.B.I.

This month, Democrats led by Michigan Senator Carl Levin are imputing blame for the pornographic sadism of a dozen guards and interrogators to a chain of command on up to Donald Rumsfeld and Bush. The abuses, Levin charged, were "clearly planned and suggested by others."

Clearly? That was not the subsequent testimony of Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, emerging as a genuine hero in this sordid mess. Assigned by top commanders to investigate, he did his job without fear or favor. No other military anywhere would permit such searing self-examination.

Taguba said, "A few soldiers and civilians conspired to abuse. . . ." But the names Taguba's report named were not important enough for those who want to use this scandal to justify their opposition to this war until the nation wearies of the conflict and the Bush administration can be ousted.

Those of us who believe in the nobility of exporting freedom cannot trivialize the scandal. But we need not let our dismay at the predations of some self-photographing creeps overwhelm the morally sound purpose of our antiterror campaign. Nor should the dereliction of some officers detract from the brave and upright service of almost all our warriors.

Though polls show that most Americans understand this, the atmosphere in the BosNyWash corridor is that of panic. Even some of my hard-line brethren are urging that we throw a few leaders off the sled to palliate the pack in pursuit; others offer an emergency exit strategy that is "cut and walk fast."

That strikes me as the essence of the "Democracy Now" notion of The Weekly Standard. Its editors want to short-circuit the present schedule of an interim government appointed June 30 to arrange elections early next year. Instead, they propose elections this September with a big increase in U.S. troops, presumably to prevent terrorist electioneering near the polls, accompanied by French and German troops who would be induced to serve "to support elections."

Nice peace if you can get it. To return to the real world: we and the Brits and the U.N. and Iraqi leaders are working out a plan now that offers a fair chance of a transition to full sovereignty with elections next year and without civil war. The concurrent buildup of a multiethnic police force would be followed by the coalition's orderly withdrawal. That's doable.

The U.N. envoy at first floated out a trial balloon of an interim regime of nonentities forswearing all ambition. He is now busily revising that in consultation with Iraqi power brokers. As the local pols get a piece of the transition action, they — with assorted technocrats — will have a stake in the election process and should help our troops there protect an election.

But won't the Iraqi people be driven crazy by pictures from Abu Ghraib prison and embrace the pro-Saddam terrorists? My Kurdish friends say that's nonsense. They remember the 5,000 innocents Saddam gassed to death in Halabja — nor have the Shiites forgotten his mass graves. Many Iraqis may be resentful of the current American protection, but most are not sore enough to wish us gone yet, or to submit again to Sunni rule.

Lost in the fixation on our self-condemnation is what may be a turning point in Najaf, the holy Shiite city. The hate-filled junior cleric leading his private militia against us is not only taking casualties from American soldiers, but is also facing vocal opposition from residents who want him to take his troublemakers out of town.

That means that Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who has recently seen Kurdish leaders, recognizes the challenge to his leadership of the Shiites. It may also lead to a recognition of minority rights by the majority in a rudimentary democracy in tomorrow's Iraq.

Pessimism may be in the saddle today, but hope for Iraqi freedom is in the wings. Wait and see.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[Simply Joel]

May 9, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Cursed by Oil
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

I visited the Japanese cellphone company DoCoMo in Tokyo 10 days ago. A robot made by Honda gave me part of the tour, even bowing in perfect Japanese fashion. My visit there coincided with yet another suicide bomb attack against U.S. forces in Iraq. I could not help thinking: Why are the Japanese making robots into humans, while Muslim suicide squads are making humans into robots?

The answer has to do in part with the interaction between culture and natural resources. Countries such as Japan, Korea, Taiwan and China have relatively few natural resources like oil. As a result, in the modern age, their first instinct is to look inward, assess their weaknesses, try to learn as much as they can from foreigners and then beat them at their own game. In order to beat the Westerners, they have even set aside many of their historical animosities so they can invest in each other's countries and get all the benefits of free trade.

The Arab world, alas, has been cursed with oil. For decades, too many Arab countries have opted to drill a sand dune for economic growth rather than drilling their own people — men and women — in order to tap their energy, creativity, intellect and entrepreneurship. Arab countries barely trade with one another, and unlike Korea and Japan, rarely invent or patent anything. But rather than looking inward, assessing their development deficits, absorbing the best in modern knowledge that their money can buy and then trying to beat the West at its own game, the Arab world in too many cases has cut itself off, blamed the enduring Palestine conflict or colonialism for delaying reform, or found dignity in Pyrrhic victories like Falluja.

To be sure, there are exceptions. Jordan, Qatar, Bahrain, Dubai, Morocco and Tunisia are all engaged in real experiments with modernization, but the bigger states are really lost. A week ago we were treated again to absurd Saudi allegations that "Zionists" were behind the latest bombing in Saudi Arabia, because, said Saudi officials, "Zionists" clearly benefit from these acts.

Someone ought to tell the Saudis this: Don't flatter yourselves. The only interest Israelis have in Saudi Arabia is flying over it to get to India and China — countries that actually trade and manufacture things other than hatred of "infidels."

The Bush team has made a mess in Iraq, but the pathologies of the Arab world have also contributed — and the sheer delight that some Arab media take in seeing Iraq go up in flames is evidence of that. It's time for the Arab world to grow up — to stop dancing on burning American jeeps and claiming that this is some victory for Islam.
One thing about countries like Singapore, Korea, Taiwan and Japan, they may not have deserts but they sure know the difference between the mirage and the oasis — between victories that come from educating your population to innovate and "victories" that come from a one-night stand by suicidal maniacs like 9/11.

As I said, the Bush team has made a mess in Iraq. And I know that Abu Ghraib will be a lasting stain on the Pentagon leadership. But here's what else I know from visiting Iraq: There were a million acts of kindness, generosity and good will also extended by individual U.S. soldiers this past year — acts motivated purely by a desire to give Iraqis the best chance they've ever had at decent government and a better future. There are plenty of Iraqis and Arabs who know that.

Yes, we Americans need to look in a mirror and ask why we've become so radioactive. But the Arabs need to look in a mirror too. "They are using our mistakes to avoid their own necessity to change, reform and modernize," says the Mideast expert Stephen P. Cohen.

A senior Iraqi politician told me that he recently received a group of visiting Iranian journalists in his home. As they were leaving, he said, two young Iranian women in the group whispered to him: "Succeed for our sake." Those Iranian women knew that if Iraqis could actually produce a decent, democratizing government it would pressure their own regime to start changing — which is why the Iranian, Syrian and Saudi regimes are all rooting for us to fail.

But you know what? Despite everything, we still have a chance to produce a decent outcome in Iraq, if we get our eye back on the ball. Of course, if we do fail, that will be our tragedy. But for the Arabs, it will be a huge lost opportunity — one that will only postpone their future another decade. Too bad so few of them have the courage to stand up and say that. I guess it must be another one of those "Zionist" plots.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[Simply Joel]

May 8, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Those Sexy Iranians
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

SHIRAZ, Iran — If, as the poet Philip Larkin observed, sex began in 1963, it has finally reached Iran over the last year.

True, girls and women can still be imprisoned for going out without proper Islamic dress. But young people are completely redefining such dress so it heightens sex appeal instead of smothering it.

Women are required to cover their hair and to wear either a chador cloak or an overcoat, called a manteau, every time they go out, and these are meant to be black and shapeless. But the latest fashion here in Shiraz, in central Iran, is light, tight and sensual.

"There are some manteaus with slits on the sides up to the armpits," said Mahmoud Salehi, a 25-year-old manteau salesman. "And then there are the `commando manteaus,' with ties on the legs to show off the hips and an elastic under the breasts to accentuate the bust."

Worse, from the point of view of hard-line mullahs, young women in such clothing aren't getting 74 lashes any more — they're getting dates.

"Parents can't defeat children," Mr. Salehi mused. "Children always defeat their parents."

And that's what Iran's baby boomers, a wave of 18 million people 15 to 25 years old, are doing. They will transform their country, just as baby boomers in the West changed America and Europe. I don't think Iran's theocracy can survive them, for I've never been to a country where young people seem more frustrated.

The regime's problem is that Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini exhorted Iranians to have more children, and they responded — today, 60 percent of the country's population was born after his Iranian revolution. And these young people are determining social mores and carving out a small zone of freedom for themselves.

In one sense, the relaxation in clothing requirements is superficial, and some Iranian women have scolded me for asking them about head scarves when they are more angry about discrimination in divorce, child custody and inheritance rules. But the clothing rules affect every woman every day and raise the central question in Iran's future: should a few aging male mullahs still determine the most basic and intimate elements of every Iranian's life?

From that vantage point, it looks to me as if the revolution is sputtering. The mullahs are refusing to accept real democracy, but they are giving in to popular pressure in some areas. The draft is immensely unpopular among young men, for example, so this year the hard-liners shortened the service requirement. More important, individual Iranians are reclaiming their individuality and their autonomy — and how they dress is the best measure of that.

The morals police no longer order women to cover up stray hairs. These days, the fashion is for brightly colored, glittery see-through scarves, worn halfway back on the head.

"It's possible head scarves will be gone in another year or two, the way things are going," said Amir Suleimani, a scarf salesman in the Tehran Bazaar. "God willing."

No wonder conservative newspapers in Tehran denounce Iranian women for strolling around "nude."

The baby boomers include Saghar Tayebi, a 17-year-old in Isfahan who wore a tight manteau with high slits, embroidered jeans and a red headband. Her mascara was hefty and her lipstick bold, and her sleeves were rolled up to reveal lots of bracelets. Lots of hair escaped her scarf. But when I asked her whether she dreamed of wearing Western-style skimpy clothing, she looked aghast.

"We totally reject that," she said indignantly. "We don't want that freedom."

Conversations with young people like Saghar suggest that youths want to remain good Muslims, and that some are happy enough in an Islamic republic — but that, above all, they want to laugh and love. Many are not overtly political, nor sure exactly what kind of government they want, but they do know that this isn't it.

"We want fun," declared Tannaz Haj Hosseini, a 20-year-old university student who was out with her boyfriend in Tehran. "There's no joy here."

I protested that her nail polish and see-through scarf — not to mention the boyfriend — underscored the progress in Iran. A few years ago, she would have been lashed.

"I don't compare myself with 10 years ago," she said. "I compare myself to what I could have and don't."

Ayatollahs, look out.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[DVD Burner]

Colin Powell!


Did ya see that today?

[Simply Joel]

"You can force integration. You can do all the busing. But how do you give all the students the education they need, especially in a place with so much poverty? That's the harder part."
BARBARA J. DAVIS, a Topeka school official and cousin of Linda Brown, plaintiff in the 1954 school segregation case.

[Simply Joel]

May 16, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Tyranny of the Minorities
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Question: What do the Shiite extremist leader Moktada al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army have in common with the extremist Jewish settlers in Israel? Answer: More than you'd think. Both movements combine religious messianism, and a willingness to sacrifice their followers and others for absolutist visions, along with a certain disdain for man-made laws, as opposed to those from God. The big question in both Iraq and Israel today is also similar: Will the silent majorities in both countries finally turn against these extremist minorities to save their future?

On May 2, the Jewish settlers mobilized enough members of the right-wing Likud Party to defeat Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan for a unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and all its Jewish settlements (7,500 Israelis live on 35 percent of Gaza, while 1.3 million Palestinians are squeezed into the other 65 percent). Polls in Israel consistently show a large majority of Israelis want to get out of Gaza. Nevertheless, Mr. Sharon, for now, has submitted to the Likud Party vote — even though Likud is only one faction in his ruling coalition and his coalition represents only a little over half the country.

The ability of the settler minority to impose its will on the Israeli majority means that Israel is not staying in Gaza to defend itself anymore — its own defense minister says it would be safer to leave. It is now staying in Gaza to preserve a settler fantasy — that Israel can and must keep every settlement everywhere.

As Ari Shavit, the Haaretz essayist, wrote on Friday: "The current war has been redefined since the events of May 2. On that day, the current war ceased to be a war on terror. It ceased to be a war for Israel's existence. May 2, 2004, the war became a war of not-a-single-settlement [is to be given up]. The young guys of Givati [an Israeli army unit] who were blown up with their armored personnel carrier on Tuesday in Gaza differ from all of their comrades who have been killed there since September 2000. They differ, because they are no longer the victims of extremist Islam. They are no longer the victims of Arafat's insanity. They are the victims of the settlement enterprise. The attempt of the organized settlement movement to force on the citizens of Israel a war that is not their war is unforgivable."

The Israeli silent majority is now taking to the streets under the banner: "Only The Majority Decides." The question is: Will Mr. Sharon, the patron of the settler movement, take on the settlers in the name of that Israeli majority and in order to save Israel? Meir Sheetrit, an Israeli cabinet minister from Likud who has been urging Mr. Sharon to carry out his plan anyway, told me his advice to Mr. Sharon has been very blunt: "Either you make history, or you will be history." An editorial in Haaretz was equally blunt: "A zealous, religious and messianic minority already led the people of Israel to the destruction of the Second Commonwealth 2,000 years ago. Now the struggle is over the Third Commonwealth."

There is also obviously a struggle for Iraq. Last Tuesday, two big events happened in Iraq — but only one of them made headlines. One was disclosure of the horrific beheading of Nicholas Berg. The other was the peaceful demonstration by 1,000 Shiites in Najaf, telling Moktada al-Sadr to get out of town. Sadr's men fired their weapons into the air and shouted at the demonstrators, but the demonstrators shouted right back. The future of Iraq, and the chances of America salvaging any decent outcome there, depend on which event — the Berg murder or the anti-Sadr march — turns out to be the emerging trend.
This anti-Sadr march was a truly rare event in the modern Arab world — a large public demonstration by Muslim moderates against armed Muslim extremists. It could only have happened in a post-Saddam Iraq, where, even in the turmoil, people have enough freedom to do such a thing. But it will only define post-Saddam Iraq if it becomes a real movement among the Shiite silent majority and not just a one-day parade. "We need the moderate Shiites to take charge of the streets and their own future," a U.S. commander in Iraq told me. "Otherwise, it will become a problem for them and for us."

I am a big believer that what a culture or a society deems to be shameful and illegitimate is the most important restraint on how its people behave. It takes a village. But it also takes a silent majority to act. I'm confident that will happen in Israel, which is already a democracy. And Iraq will only become a democracy if the same happens there.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[Simply Joel]

May 18, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
In Iraq, America's Shakeout Moment
By DAVID BROOKS

here's something about our venture into Iraq that is inspiringly, painfully, embarrassingly and quintessentially American.

No other nation would have been hopeful enough to try to evangelize for democracy across the Middle East. No other nation would have been naïve enough to do it this badly. No other nation would be adaptable enough to recover from its own innocence and muddle its way to success, as I suspect we are about to do.

American history sometimes seems to be the same story repeated over and over again. Some group of big-dreaming but foolhardy adventurers head out to eradicate some evil and to realize some golden future. They get halfway along their journey and find they are unprepared for the harsh reality they suddenly face. It's too late to turn back, so they reinvent their mission. They toss out illusions and adopt an almost desperate pragmatism. They never do realize the utopia they initially dreamed about, but they do build something better than what came before.
This basic pattern has marked our national style from the moment British colonists landed on North American shores. Overly optimistic about the conditions they would find, the colonists were woefully undercapitalized, underequipped and underskilled. At Jamestown, there were three gentlemen and gentlemen's servants for every skilled laborer. They didn't bother to plant enough grain to see them through the winter.

But they learned and adapted. Settlement companies were compelled to send more workers, along with axes, chisels, scythes, millstones and seeds. Eventually the colonies thrived.

Centuries later, it was much the same. The guides who aided and fleeced the pioneers who moved West were struck by how clueless many of them were about the wilderness they were entering. Their diaries show that many thought they could establish genteel New England-style villages in short order. They leapt before they looked, faced the shock of reality, adapted and cobbled together something unexpected.

And it is that way today. We are tricked by hope into starting companies, beginning books, immigrating to this country and investing in telecom networks. The challenges turn out to be tougher than we imagined. Our excessive optimism is exposed. New skills are demanded. But nothing important was ever begun in a prudential frame of mind.

Hope begets disappointment, and we are now in a moment of disappointment when it comes to Iraq. During these shakeout moments, the naysayers get to gloat while the rest of us despair, lacerate ourselves, second-guess those in charge and look at things anew. But this very process of self-criticism is the precondition for the second wind, the grubbier, less illusioned effort that often enough leads to some acceptable outcome.
Today in Iraq local commanders seem to be allowed to try anything. We are allowing former Baathists to man a Falluja Brigade to police their own city. We are pounding Moktada al-Sadr while negotiating with him. There is talk of moving up elections so when an Iraqi official is assassinated, he is not seen as a person working with the U.S., but as a duly elected representative of the Iraqi people.

Some of these policies seem incoherent, but they may work. And back home a new mood has taken over part of the political class. The emerging responsible faction has no time now for the witless applause lines the jeering jackdaws on left and right repeat to themselves to their own perpetual self-admiration and delight. Even in a political year, most politicians do not want this country to fail.

There are, for example, members of Congress from both parties who feel estranged from this administration. They feel it does not listen to their ideas. But in this troubled hour, they are desperate to help. If but a call were made, they would burst forth with intelligent suggestions: about Iraq, about political tactics, about getting additional appropriations.

Remember, the most untrue truism in human history is that there are no second acts in American life. In reality, there is nothing but second acts. There are shakeout moments and, redundantly, new beginnings. The weeks until June 30 are bound to be awful, but we may be at the start of a new beginning now.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[cowboyangel]

No more bad dreams......I don't want to permanently move to Cherkasy Ukraine

[DVD Burner]

after posting in "the Berg video" thread several times, really, because of this wonderfully new eplaya format of no edit or delete buttons, I decided to post this information here instead.

IMRA Newsletter
Kol ha-Ir: This Is How the CIA Operates in Israel and in the Territories * Exposure
November 24, 2000 pp. 54-60

[Kol ha-Ir is a weekly newspaper in Israel. The translation is courtesy of Women In Green]

The American intelligence agency bears the main responsibility for the military development of the Palestinian Authority. CIA agents organized courses for snipers, trained special units, and provided sophisticated listening devices, all in exchange for security cooperation with Israel. Now George Tenet, the head of the organization, and John O'Connor, station chief in Israel, have become the only communications channel between the sides. No great success has been chalked up

Read the rest of the artical here.

[cowboyangel]

yo political burners have I got something for you to smoke on.......George Lakoff ......fresh from Bezerkeley......this is heavy stuff that's making the rounds in progressive circles right now...streaming video will be posted on my site this weekend........burn republicans burn

[cowboyangel]

Dr. George Lakoff is awesome!!! This guy is a linguistics prof at UC Berkeley, has written a number of books and is now gaining alot of notice with his analysis of the language at the bottom of the political crap heap.
He's worth a listen especially if you are inclined to advance progressive politiical values on the shit-scene.
Check it out at http://www.brightpathvideo.com realplayer required

my humble, non-commercial, free website

[glam_daddy]

Raising money for the Kerry campaign:

http://www.cafeshops.com/thezonestore

[Alpha]

We had a fundraiser party at the house last night, raised $1700! I'm pretty stoked.

[Last Real Burner]

Well now we may be able to vote Bush out with the new electronic voting machines!...... (or maybe not)
http://www.gwbush04.com/touchscreenvotingdemo.html

American Public: Hey you cheated!!!!

Bush: (shrug) Pirate!


"What do you mean the fight is fixed?"

politically,
mr smith

[DVD Burner]

I cant remember right now but is'nt there something in Greek mythology about Socrates/Plato politics, art and the republic?

[DVD Burner]

Also,

if Abu Ghraib prison is demolished, would that be destroying evidence?

[cowboyangel]

evidence is all around.....just needs truth tellers to stop selling their souls to the devil to get it out.... this IS starting to happen odd as it may seem

[DVD Burner]

RENO 911!




You cant get more Burningman mixed with politics than that.