Down We Go

Thanks to Cookie Jill over at Skippy's place here is a link to a must read over at the Great Orange Satan. It's basically a compilation of articles from the European press about where the U.S. sits in relation to other 'civilized' nations when it comes to health care, and other safety net issues. It will piss you off.

Here is just a sample:

(Daily Mail.co.uk) - America starves as executive pay rockets:
50MILLION people go hungry while Wall Street fatcats take home millions
By Daniel Bates
16th November 2010
A record one in six American families went hungry last year because they did not have enough food, a shock survey has revealed.
Some 17.4million U.S. households - 50 million people - were classified as ‘food insecure’ which meant they regularly skipped meals even if they wanted to eat. Others went for entire days without eating and handed round smaller portion sizes to make their meagre offerings suffice.
The news comes as it is revealed that top U.S. executives saw their pay and bonuses shoot up last year in the face of the worst recession for 80 years.
Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/...

Brit Hume is Such an Ass

Brit Hume managed to insult all of us Buddhists over the weekend by suggesting that Tiger Woods should abandon his Buddhism and turn to Christianity if he wanted to recover from his transgressions.

Since it is FOX News I am not expecting an apology but if it was any other religion that was so insulted we would be hearing much more hue and cry.

It is quite obvious Brit has no knowledge of Buddhism but interestingly in his ignorance he is somewhat correct. Since the whole idea of 'sin' is a foreign concept in Buddhism it is true that Buddhism doesn't offer the same kind of "redemption and forgiveness" as does Christianity. We do, however, offer the Eightfold Path and the Four Noble Truths that helps us understand the reasons and solutions for such destructive behavior. Seeing as how Buddhists have been applying the precepts and practices taught by the Buddha for 25 centuries quite successfully we can comfortably tell Brit to go away until he has fully grasped the Three Pure Precepts;
I like them expressed as taught by Shunryu Suzuki Roshi, founder of the San Francisco Zen Center

With purity of heart, I vow to refrain from ignorance.
With purity of heart, I vow to reveal beginner's mind.
With purity of heart, I vow to live, and be lived, for the benefit of all beings.

Then again there is always the other side of the coin as expressed by Elephant Journal  who vows vengeance.

Little does Brit realize that not only are we Buddhists temperamentally unable to forgive, our various secret ninja societies will hunt him down and unforgive him until he cries out in the dark for his mother.

Loud Minority

You really have to ask yourself why the GOP(translation=wingnut right) is given so much media coverage and why the mainstream media give anything they say any credence.
Just yesterday the Washington Post/ABC News poll came out showing "Only 20 percent of adults identify themselves as Republicans, little changed in recent months, but still the lowest single number in Post-ABC polls since 1983."

While I wonder why anyone would care what Newt Gingrich has to say on any subject but he immediately jumped on the poll...

"Well, it tells me first of all that the poll's almost certainly wrong. It's fundamentally different from Rasmussen. It's fundamentally different from Zogby. It's fundamentally different from Gallup. It's a typical Washington Post effort to slant the world in favor of liberal Democrats."

To beg the point even further as to why anyone would care what Newt had to say, everything he says is patently false. The latest CBS News poll found 22% identify themselves as Republicans. The latest AP poll found 21%. Ipsos/McClatchy put the number at 19%. Gallup had the highest total for the GOP, at 27%, but the Pew Forum study had it at 23%, while NBC/WSJ found 18%.

Surprisingly, when you average those together, you find out that about 21% of the public are self-identified Republicans.

I understand the concept of 'loyal opposition' but you just have to wonder why the media (FAUX news excluded) are giving so much time and credence to a party that represents only one fifth of the nation. What's even more amazing is that you don't even have to listen to them to know what their output will be...

"If it's good for America and good for the average American then we're against it and oh yeah, Obama is a socialist Kenyan who hates white people and is going to take away your guns."

More Sacrifice?

I missed part of President Obama's press conference last night because I wasn't paying attention to the time. I did, however, catch the strange question from NBC's Chuck Todd. I've mulled it over I still find it hard to believe he, or anyone in the corporate media are so clueless, that they feel justified in asking such a question.

"Some have compared this financial crisis to a war, and in times of war, past presidents have called for some form of sacrifice. [...]

"Why, given this new era of responsibility that you're asking for, why haven't you asked for something specific that the public should be sacrificing to participate in this economic recovery?"

The president answered by pointing all of the myriad ways in which Americans are already sacrificing during this crisis. That should have reset Todd's brain and recalled it to reality but it didn't. In a follow up, Todd asked why Obama has called on "specific" sacrifices from Americans. Once again, the president explained, " American people are making a host of sacrifices in their individual lives."

The problem with Todd's question points out something that the media just doesn't seem to grasp. "Sacrifice" comes in two flavors. The first is "no choice" as in millions of Americans have lost their jobs, homes, savings, and health care. They aren't sacrificing because they want to or because it is the right thing to do. These are the people that President Obama is trying help. These people have already sacrificed quite a bit and it is what is making the economy bad. If the president asks Americans to sacrifice more, it will just make the economy that much worse.

The other kind of "sacrifice" is "voluntary". It's where I have more than I truly need and so I share it with you, even if by doing so I have to eat macaroni one meal a week instead of roast beef. "Sacrifice" is not the millionaire giving his pocket change to a bum on the street...that's some form of charity but painless. Sacrifice entails loss, either involuntary or voluntary. Someone making a seven figure salary that voluntarily gives most of it away to the needy and then lives on the $100,000 left over is sacrificing the "high life" and doing good work but still "sacrifice" is a strong word.

Somehow the media seems to believe the president is going about this all wrong. Obama should ask us to sacrifice more during the crisis. The administration should make conditions even more difficult for Americans. Yes, some of the top 10% should maybe take a little off the top and spread it around or pay a little higher tax rate as Obama has suggested but unless there is another World War where we need to sacrifice for the war effort then Americans are sacrificing plenty, thank you very much.

How can these people be so completely backwards...very strange.

Get Focused

All this talk and news coverage about Sarah Palin this and that and pregnant daughters is pushing a lot of important stuff out of the news cycle. It is not important in the grand scheme folks. It is obvious that McSame picked Palin for all the wrong reasons and for strictly political reasons.
We are not seeing anything in the corporate media about the "gestapo" tactics of the police in MSP and the tremendous effort by the government to suppress constitutionally protected free speech and assembly. We are not getting any hard information on any issues. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might as well be non-existent.

There really are some serious things to discuss and understand.

You Decide

I was sitting in the bar tonight having my usual soup and salad and as is predictable they had Faux News on. They were covering the rescue of hostages held in Columbia for 5 years and surprisingly enough the rescue coincided with McSame's visit. Imagine that!

McCain goes to Colombia.

Coincidentally Colombians launch an operation to rescue Americans held hostage for 5 years.

It is my patriotic duty to ask why they picked this particular moment to rescue these hostages and what, over the last five years prevented this operation.

Is it a coincidence?

You decide. Inquiring minds want to know.

A VP for McSame?

John Cole points out, quite correctly, that if being a jet jockey and a Vietnam vet is all you need to be President then a perfect VP for McCain would be our friend from California Randall "Duke" Cunningham.

During his service, Cunningham and his Radar Intercept Officer “Irish” Driscoll became the only Navy aces in the Vietnam War, flying an F-4 Phantom from aboard aircraft carriers, and recording five confirmed kills. He was one of the early graduates of the Navy’s TOPGUN school that taught dogfighting techniques to F-4 Phantom pilots and Radar Intercept Officers (RIOs).

Considering his rather shaky political career and criminal bent, I would say his a perfect representative of today's GOP. General Clark is still catching shit over his 'non insult' to McBush. It's enough to make you scream.

Standing by What He Said

Updated below:

I suppose all of you have seen and/or heard about the faux flap some in the media are creating over General Wesley Clark's comments about McSame. The GOP and media are trying to make McBush's military service off limits as a campaign issue. Ignore the fact that he was nearly last in his class at the Naval Academy and that while being a POW and a veteran are reasons for respect, they don't make any difference in his qualifications for President. Good for General Clark. Because he's right. Even though the Obama campaign quickly tried to distance themselves from the issue and dissed the comment, he should stand by what he said. The media can damn well take another look at exactly what General Clark said and then try and tell us where he's wrong or disrespectful. Here is what Clark said today:

There are many important issues in this Presidential election, clearly one of the most important issues is national security and keeping the American people safe. In my opinion, protecting the American people is the most important duty of our next President. I have made comments in the past about John McCain's service and I want to reiterate them in order be crystal clear. As I have said before I honor John McCain's service as a prisoner of war and a Vietnam Veteran. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in Armed Forces as a prisoner of war. I would never dishonor the service of someone who chose to wear the uniform for our nation.

John McCain is running his campaign on his experience and how his experience would benefit him and our nation as President. That experience shows courage and commitment to our country - but it doesn't include executive experience wrestling with national policy or go-to-war decisions. And in this area his judgment has been flawed - he not only supported going into a war we didn't have to fight in Iraq, but has time and again undervalued other, non-military elements of national power that must be used effectively to protect America But as an American and former military officer I will not back down if I believe someone doesn't have sound judgment when it comes to our nation's most critical issues.

Every word is the truth and there is absolutely no disrespect or denigration of McSame's service. This love affair the media has McBush is very tiresome. Let's deal and with the issues and the truth and quit trying to fly wing man folks. The country is facing serious issues and we deserve a media that tells the truth. They had no problem allowing all the lies about Kerry's service get traction and you see where that got us.

Update: Steveaudio finds a petition from votevets applauding Gen. Clark for telling the truth, and listing things that McSame's POW experience doesn't make him qualified to deal with.

Updated to correct some stupid spelling mistakes.

No Slack for HRC

I's pretty disgusting how Hillary is being treated in the media. Yesterday the entire bunch of them were all aghast at the fact that she got a little emotional at a campaign stop. Hello, I would like to see anyone of these breathless cretins do what she has been doing nonstop for the last year or so. Nothing she does is right. She is either too cold and calculating or too "girlie" emotional to be President. I was very distressed to see John Edwards take the opportunity to imply that she was not strong enough to be president.

Even The Huffington Post, a supposed liberal outlet, is reflecting Arianna's hate of anything Hillary and trashing her at every opportunity. Here is the first graph of Arianna's current post...

Hillary Clinton has apparently decided on which lines of attack to use against Barack Obama in New Hampshire: all of them. When it started, Clinton's poll-tested candidacy came down to telling voters, "Whatever you like, that's what I am." But it turns out that, so far, what voters like is Obama. So now her sputtering campaign strategy has shifted to telling voters, "Whatever you don't like, that's what Obama is." Clinton and her surrogates are attacking from every direction, hoping something will stick. The attacks are as varied as they are contemptible. Let's take a look at the dirty laundry list. Put on your galoshes, the mud is mighty thick.

I am no HRC supporter as you know, but even she deserves an even break and some balanced coverage. I sure as hell don't want the media selecting my candidate and that is what is happening once again. All Obama gets is positive press and all Hillary gets is negative press while Edwards gets ignored completely. Don't put it past the press to follow the will of their corporate masters and encourage the nomination of Obama because that is who the GOP has decided is their best chance of beating. The GOP wins elections by divisiveness and hate. What better target to generate hate than a black man with a cloud of Muslim over his head and a middle name of Hussein and whose last name is just one letter away from the great bogeyman himself? Just saying.

It will very interesting to see how Obama handles the onslaught from the press and the right wing when and if he succeeds in defeating Hillary for the nomination. Once the Hillary hate has no target then the press and the wingnuts will have nothing to stop them from turning their pent up rage on Obama. Does anyone want to make a small wager on how many times you see Obama's middle name Hussein used in the media? How about how many times there is a hint about being a closet Muslim or turning the White House into a madrassa? How many "typos" about Osama(I mean Obama) do you think you will see. I am not even going to mention what they will do concerning his race. If you think about how they right wing noise machine turned war hero John Kerry's war record and Purple Hearts into a liability then you ain't seen nothing yet.

How about we get some coverage of each candidate's actual voting records and accomplishments as Senators? Too much trouble and might make people think. Not going to happen.

CNN MIA

No, I didn't watch the GOP debate. I did read some reviews and looked over the questions. Ask yourself why CNN, that selected the questions from those submitted, did not have a question for the candidates on the number one issue of concern to Americans. That would be healthcare.

We did get a good question about going to Mars however.

It is also funny this morning the the wingnuts are going crazy now that it turns out that some of the questions were asked by Democrats.

To quote Mad Michelle..."All citizens must be investigated before being allowed to ask questions of our leaders."

Giuliani Gone?

Interesting dynamic going on in the MSM tonight. After Politico broke the story today about Giuliani charging the costs of his affair with Judith Nathan to agencies within the NY government and claiming "security" as the reason for cover-up it is the lead story on the FOX News Web site and on Drudge but not a peep on CNN which is doing the GOP debate tonight.

Why does CNN think they can keep the lid on a story they surely know about? All of the questions for tonight's debate are already decided and in the can so Giuliani won't have to deal with explaining why he thought it appropriate to charge his extramarital sex to government agencies mostly supposed to be aiding the poor. He can still prance around and pretend to be the frontrunner. However the public likes nothing better than sex and money in the same story so Rudy is going to have to deal with this tomorrow at the latest. This story has all the attributes of one with legs so he is not going to sweep it aside with tales of derring-do on 9/11. Should be very interesting to see if his campaign can survive this. When you have lost Roger Ailes and Matt Drudge where do you turn?

Countdown to Baloney

I just got back to the hotel and turned on CNN and good old Wolf. They have a countdown ticker on the bottom of the screen showing the minutes and seconds until the Republican debate. WTF. I didn't watch the last Dem debate did they do the same thing? You would think it was the second coming.

Priorities

Just so you don't miss it...of the bullets under "Latest News" on CNN's website "Video appears to show Britney run red light" is number10 and number 12 is "Blind teacher gauges students by their "auras". Both are burning topics I know and I just can't understand why they aren't higher.

Update: I forgot to mention that the banner reads "OJ arrives in court." Glad to hear as we all need to know where the hell OJ is.

Very Successful Jerk

Looks like there is a big market for being an asshole and a jerk.

On his daily radio talk show, Glenn Beck portrays himself as an average guy, a recovering alcoholic and a comedian who regularly injects humor into his conservative politics.

This week he can add another description: very wealthy.

Premiere Radio Networks, a subsidiary of Clear Channel Communications, is expected to announce today that it is extending Mr. Beck’s contract. Two sources with knowledge of the deal said it was valued at $50 million over five years, through a combination of salary and profit-sharing from syndication.

Just another reason not to listen to a Clear Channel Station. The Dixie Chicks trashing made me tune them out forever but just in case you are still listening to one of their stations maybe this will be the straw.

They Just Don't Get It

I haven't commented on this except on a couple of other blogs but I am going to wade in here. Yesterday, CNN's star pignoramus Glenn Beck said, on his radio program:

I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today.

Today, USA Today got a reaction:

A spokesman for Beck expressed surprise that bloggers are seizing on this quotation as an example of incivility. "To most rational people, unfortunately still means unfortunately," Chris Balfe, the show's producer, tells On Deadline through a spokesman.

So three quarters of a million Americans have been forced to evacuate their homes and a thousand or more homes have gone up in smoke and Glenn Beck along with his staff doesn't see anything wrong with accusing these Southern Californians fleeing wildfires of, "hating America". They apparently don't think accusing these people of "hating America" is actually germane. The fact that Glenn added "unfortunate" to the fact that these people who "hate America" were losing their homes makes everything hunky-dory. The lack of sensitivity and compassion is unbelievable.

Of course there is still no reaction from CNN. It is really not surprising seeing that Beck was an classless idiot when they hired him and this kind of crap is what they evidently hired him for. You keep hoping for some kind of class from a major network and global presence like CNN but you continually are disappointed.

Off topic: I would be remiss here if I didn't give CNN some credit for keeping Christine Amanpour on staff and congratulating her on her investiture today as Commander in the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, "for services to journalism." She was presented the recognition today by Her Majesty the Queen in London.

What Troop Reduction?

Updated below

In the following extract from the NY SUN note that the media is already parroting the lie that Patraeus and Bush are going to draw down troops by next year. This is a lie. The troops that made up the surge are and have always been due to rotate out next spring and we don't have the resources to replace them. The media is allowing the White House to scam the public with this lie...shameful.

Democratic leaders this month have hinted that they will not seek a withdrawal date as a condition of the temporary funding bills that expire this month. This may be in part because the White House already has agreed to withdraw some 30,000 soldiers by next summer, leaving 130,000, or the pre-surge troop levels, for the height of next year's political season. President Bush will address the nation tomorrow and is expected to endorse the withdrawal strategy previewed this week by General Petraeus on Capitol Hill.

Update: Even the Associated Press is help foster the lie.

WASHINGTON — President Bush will tell the nation Thursday evening that he plans to reduce the American troop presence in Iraq by as many as 30,000 by next summer but will condition those and further cuts on continued progress, The Associated Press has learned.

At least Anderson Cooper and CNN are telling it straight:

CNN's Anderson Cooper is in Iraq, reporting live from there this week as the Iraq debate here at home intensifies. This exchange is from yesterday's show:

COOPER: Michael Ware, Petraeus said that as many as 30,000 troops could leave by the beginning of next summer. It was sort of presented as though that was an operational decision.

In truth, it is really an operational necessity. The U.S. can't maintain these current troop levels, without putting even more strain on the -- on our already strained troops. Is that correct?

WARE: Yes, that is correct, Anderson. In fact, I'm struck by the way people are regarding General Petraeus' discussion of -- of those troop levels until July of next year. People are acting like he has just announced some sort of phased withdrawal. Well, no, not at all. That was the timeline for the so-called surge in the beginning.

Indeed, it wasn't a surge. It was a one-year escalation of U.S. forces. And the clock was due to run out on that escalation in the summer of next year anyway. So, that is not a revelation at all.

He Needs to be In Jail

Jim DeRosa over at DeRosaWorld reminds us this morning that we still don't have any answers to why George W. Bush is not in jail at this very moment. There is a litany of lies that have gone unchallenged that led us and the Congress to allow the Iraq disaster to happen. This from Jim.

Who took the pictures? Who verified the pictures. Who authorized the pictures as evidence? Pretty easy questions to ask.

"In a town hall meeting in Bloomsburg, Pa., this week, Rep. Paul Kanjorski, a 12-term congressman, said that shortly before Congress was scheduled to vote on authorizing military force against Iraq, top officials of the CIA showed select members of Congress three photographs it alleged were Iraqi Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), better known as drones. Kanjorski said he was told that the drones were capable of carrying nuclear, biological, or chemical agents, and could strike 1,000 miles inland of east coast or west coast cities."

"In October 2002, President Bush said in Cincinnati that “Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological; weapons across broad areas.” He said that he was concerned “that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs for missions targeting the United States.” In that same speech, he claimed, “Iraq possesses ballistic missiles with a likely range of hundreds of miles—far enough to strike Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, and other nations—in a region where more than 135,000 American civilians and service members live and work.” Bush further claimed, “Surveillance photos reveal that the regime is rebuilding facilities that it had used to produce chemical and biological weapons.” Those claims were later proven false."

Why is he still President?

Mission Accomplished

No mention of the increasing civilian death toll.
No mention of the fact that the Iraqi government is all but collapsed.
No mention of the possibility of a coup.
No mention of the 725 additional American deaths.
No mention the Bush had to fly in on the QT because of the chaos.
No mention that Bush didn't dare go anywhere near Baghdad.

During Bush's "surprise" visit to Iraq yesterday, he said:

...if the kind of success we are now seeing continues, it will be possible to maintain the same level of security with fewer American forces.

But what are the headlines this morning?

• Bush: More Gains in Iraq Could Lead to Drawdown ...Washington Post
• Bush, In Iraq, Says Troop Reduction Is Possible...New York Times
• Bush Hints at Troop Reductions...Atlanta Journal-Constitution
• Bush Hints at Iraq Drawdown if Gains Continue...Chicago Tribune

Those headlines tell you the whole story of the media in this country. If the White House says it then it must be repeated without modification or question. No facts Mam...just more lies and half truths.

One Thing That Was Not Our Fault

This is a quote from Bush's speech yesterday. Have you seen anyone in the media other than a blogger call him on it? NPR had such luminaries as Max Boot on yesterday afternoon to "analyze" the speech and none of the "experts" called it the lie it is.

"Whatever your position in that debate, one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens," Mr Bush said, mentioning reprisals against US allies in Vietnam, the displacement of Vietnamese refugees and the massacres in Cambodia under Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge."

The president of the United States is actually blaming his own country for the Cambodian genocide. Just to be clear, Pol Pot's rise to power was enabled by U.S. war policies in SE Asia but it surely wasn't enabled by our withdrawal from Viet Nam and for the record it was the newly created communists who ended the genocide in Cambodia. How can the MSM let Bush get away with this crap?

Close Call

It was nearly the end for the old Fallenmonk tonight. I came back to the hotel from dinner and unthinking picked up the TV remote and clicked on the beast. Robot like I coded for CNN and up came a commercial. Suddenly some ancient protective instinct took over and I punched the up channel arrow... I don't know why. I glanced down at the USA Today on the desk and there it was. Paris Hilton on Larry King Tonight. I almost got it full frontal with no warning. The old ticker is still racing. Fortunately I came to rest on PBS and there is a program with Paul Simon winning the Gershwin prize. So far its been Stevie Wonder and Lyle Lovett doing Simon,

The Goddess looks out for those who respect her power.