Much That Is Hidden

.
I now stand convinced of what a friend told me about there scarcely being anything cuter than a baby in a pumpkin patch.













Where do you stand?
.

Labels: Max, photography

.


I hate to say that in the middle of a drought, but there exists an even more extreme natural disaster if the need to go to the country and shake off the dust of Babylon is not met soon. Of course I realize that rain has its rinsing effect, but if it shows now it won't be happy summer dancing rain.

So come if you can, and definitely come as you are.
.

Labels: HOOTenanny, music, wildlife

.
The progressive political action committee (PAC) Democracy for America (DFA), founded by Howard Dean (HD) in 2004, is holding a Presidential Primary Pulse Poll (PPPP) to decide which candidate deserves their support. I voted for Representative Dennis Kucinich (DK), the only candidate who aligns 100 percent with my political views on 11 major issues: Iraq, Immigration, Taxes, Stem-Cell Research, Health Care, Abortion, Social Security, Presidential Line-Item Veto, Energy, Same-Sex Marriage and the Death Penalty. You can take the same poll I did to determine how the candidates align with you (an O' Tip to Kelso's Nuts, who love us).

FWIW, on my list below DK was Sen. Chris Dodd, with whom I disagree on Iraq and Immigration. The next five candidates, all Democrats (duh), were tied according to the poll's scoring, but as the disagreement issues varied widely I'd place them thusly: former U.S. Senator Mike Gravel (endorsed by Ralph Nader, for whom I voted in 2000), New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, former U.S. Senator John Edwards, Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barak Obama. At the bottom of the list of Dems is Senator Joe Biden.

I was surprised to see that next in line, starting off the Republicans on my list (as if this matters in the slightest, but humor me), is Mr. 9-11 himself, Rudy Guiliani, and with a poll score identical to Biden's no less. Ron Paul holds second place alone among the Repubs, with Mitt Romney a distant third. Fourth place is held in tie by Jim Gilmore and Sam Brownback, while the basement party is attended with equal fervor by John McCain, Duncan Hunter and Mike Huckabee. Call Ripley's, because I actually agree with those last three on one different issue each.

Back to DFA, so far I have only seen the first three pitches of candidates Kucinich, Edwards and Obama, and I see something kind of interesting. DK's letter to DFA members imploring them to support him in the poll runs in right at 1300 words. Not a taciturn fellow, and I will offer some highlights from his concise address in a sec. By contrast, Edwards' plea was just over 700 words while Obama didn't even log half of that. I've already heard my man so technically what the the rest of the pack has to say is moot but I look forward to seeing how seriously (or not) they consider this.

Okay, KUCINICH HIGHLIGHTS (with various emphasis added by moi):

"I know that many of you agree with me that half measures, compromises, misguided thinking and hollow rhetoric are not the answers. They are symptomatic of the problems, and, to a regrettable extent, the causes of the problems. That's why we are in a war, and why we're moving ever closer to another. That's why our Constitutional rights and protections are being violated every day. Why 47 millions Americans are uninsured and another 50 million are under-insured. Why millions of American jobs have been outsourced."

"I am the only Democratic presidential candidate who campaigned against and voted against the war authorization resolution in 2002 and every supplemental appropriation since..."

"Five years ago, I presented evidence to my colleagues in the House and Senate based on my own intelligence analysis which showed that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction and was not a direct threat to the U.S. or our allies. I rallied more than 120 members to vote against the authorization. The defense offered by other candidates - 'If I knew then what I know now' - is a feeble excuse for making the wrong decision when it mattered most to make the right decision. Many of us did know then because we weren't tricked or bullied by the White House. We knew it was wrong, and we knew the consequences. But what makes the newfound anti-war claims of some other candidates even more indefensible is that they voted to continue funding the war, year after year, at least until their Presidential campaigns began."

"Right now the Congressional leadership is unwilling to challenge the President. My plan, embodied in HR 1234, would end the war, end the occupation, establish an international security and peacekeeping force, begin the process of reconciliation, and provide the kind of support needed for reconstruction. My target is not 2013. My target is three months after taking office. In the meantime, we in the Congress, with your support, must use every means at our disposal to stop the White House from launching a new war on Iran with the same flimsy, deceptive and outright fraudulent claims it used five years ago."

"I am the only Democrat running for President who voted against the unconstitutional and illegal U.S.A Patriot Act. The other candidates were wrong then, and various federal court rulings have made that abundantly clear. We can't condone the shredding of our Constitution in the name of 'national security.' And we can't support leaders, candidates or policies that do."

"I am the only Presidential candidate who supports a truly universal, single-payer, not-for-profit health care system to cover all Americans. Every other plan preserves, and in some cases, enhances the role of private, for-profit insurance companies that make their billions by not providing coverage. Forcing Americans to buy private insurance denies the moral obligation of this nation to provide coverage for its citizens. Any scheme that provides subsidies or other financial incentives to for-profit providers to make coverage less expensive or more accessible is just that: a scheme. It further enriches the insurers, at taxpayers' expense, and would still not guarantee full coverage or universal availability. Michael Moore has endorsed my health care plan (HR 676), as have thousands of physicians, nurses, and labor union members. It's time to catch up to the rest of the industrialized nations and declare that health care is a right, not a commodity that some people can afford and others can't."

"I am only the presidential candidate willing to demand the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney. This President and this Vice President have committed serious crimes worthy of impeachment. This it not a personal attack against the Vice President. It is about the sanctity of the Constitution. This democracy must be protected against leaders who have no regard for the Constitution or the rule of law. The mechanism for taking action against such leaders is impeachment. We, the people, have not only the right but the obligation to stop this. HR 333, which I introduced, is the appropriate recourse under the law to hold those leaders accountable and answerable."

"My candidacy for President of the United States is about who we are as Americans. It is about who we are as Democrats. It is about who we are as progressives. There are clear distinctions between my friends in this race and me -- major differences on every issue of importance to me and to you. I stand proudly for my core beliefs. Only if you and others with the courage to hold the Party and its candidates accountable will we be able to make progress on a real agenda for real change in this nation. And by doing what's right, all of us together, we can send a proud and powerful message that we know what - and who - is wrong. And, very simply, we've had enough."

So there you have it. If you are inclined to jump on DK's DFA bandwagon you can go cast your vote HERE. If you are inclined to jump on DK's campaign bus you can go HERE. And please, no comments about jumping on DK's wife.

Labels: 2008, couldn't we just TRY a hardcore lefty for four years folks?, Kucinich, politix

.
I've dusted off an old post from last year that I've decided to make my Official Mission Statement and Policy. The linky is to the left. Always to the left, baby.

Labels: rules - that's a hoot

.
It is time once again to delve into the archives of my Doctor Dictionary Word of the Day. In spite of my sesquipedalian proclivity, today's selections are of a "WTF?" nature as to the frequency of their usage and/or that they just seem made up. As always, I offer an example of my usage in italics:

matutinal \muh-TOOT-n-uhl\, adjective: Relating to or occurring in the morning.
Walk me out in the matutinal dew, my honey.

abstruse \ab-STROOS; uhb-\, adjective: Difficult to comprehend or understand.
Maybe you thought I was the Packard Goose, or the Ronald McDonald of the nouveau-abstruse.

dolorous \DOH-luh-ruhs\, adjective: Marked by, causing, or expressing grief or sorrow.
Despite having lost all his cash, he felt dolorous.

disquisition \dis-kwuh-ZISH-uhn\, noun: A formal discourse on a subject.
¿Nadie cuenta con la disquisición española, sí o no?

lumpen \LUHM-puhn; LUM-puhn\, adjective; 1. Common; vulgar. 2. A member of the underclass, especially the lowest social stratum.
As the cop walked his beat by the river, he took notice of the hot and lumpen night.

celerity \suh-LAIR-uh-tee\, noun: Rapidity of motion or action; quickness; swiftness.
Mindful of his impending dinner with André, Cecil flitted through the produce section with celerity.

abecedarian \ay-bee-see-DAIR-ee-uhn\, noun: 1. One who is learning the alphabet; hence, a beginner. 2. One engaged in teaching the alphabet. 3. Pertaining to the letters of the alphabet. 4. Arranged alphabetically.
5. Rudimentary; elementary.
Okay, we get it. Abecedarian, yeesh.

excursus \ik-SKUR-sus\, noun: 1. A dissertation that is appended to a work and that contains a more extended exposition of some important point or topic. 2. A digression.
The censors were up all night working on their excursus of Professor Dipshit's disquisition.

animadversion \an-uh-mad-VUHR-zhuhn\, noun: 1. Harsh criticism or disapproval. 2. Remarks by way of criticism and usually of censure -- often used with 'on'.
Animadversion has got to be the stupidest word I've ever come across.

flibbertigibbet \FLIB-ur-tee-jib-it\, noun: A silly, flighty, or scatterbrained person, especially a pert young woman with such qualities.
With the possible exception of flibbertigibbet.

bloviate \BLOH-vee-ayt\, intransitive verb: To speak or write at length in a pompous or boastful manner.
And the LORD spake saying, "Thou darest bloviate in my presence? That be my turf, jack."

supposititious \suh-poz-uh-TISH-uhs\, adjective: 1. Fraudulently substituted for something else; not being what it purports to be; not genuine; spurious; counterfeit. 2. Hypothetical; supposed.
Reading the definition above, it makes me wonder why linguists of yore had to create a word as pretentious as supposititious. Hey, you forgot "fake."

gallimaufry \gal-uh-MAW-free\, noun: A medley; a hodgepodge.
Though somewhat abstruse and dolorous, I was delighted to see a gallimaufry of flibbertigibbets bloviating with celerity their animadversions of the excursus on the lumpen masses of the tenements.

* with O'pologies to Mathman
.

Labels: fun, language, words

.
Regarding my last post on a reaction to Islamic culture in America, I concede up front that radical Islam is currently head and shoulders above any other violent, zealous terrorist sect of any other religion. But we’ve the U.S. has got this “War on Terror” all backasswards. I forthwith strike “we” from my discussions of this as I’m tired of inferring that average citizens share responsibility for this debacle. And while it’s unfortunate that sometimes all we average citizens seem to have left is Monday morning quarterbacking, still I gotta say it takes an idiot of a leader to request that the enemy “bring it on.” Seems to me you should keep your damn mouth shut and bring it to them. If we had wise leaders who didn’t play act success and revel in “shock and awe” but instead rallied the free nations to form an effective coalition of the seriously pissed off, we’d be mopping up the very last of things here in year five.

In 2005 my dropped jaw was lonely among the nodding heads in a room where a certain U.S. senator compared Iraq to the struggle of the American colonists rebelling against Britain in the late 18th century. Yet even leaving that one to wallow in its absurdity, others who have gulped the neocon’s Kool-Aid® in mass quantities have claimed the struggle is on par with our role to liberate Europe and the Pacific from Axis tyranny. Equally absurd (still, it must be mighty tasty, OH YEAH!), but since we just had the luxury of a historical fast forward of 165 years or so, let’s do the run down from there to now.

One big difference between 1941 and 2001 is that the latter came upon us a just a bit more quickly. World War II was raging hard for a couple of years before the U.S. had no choice left but to commit troops. But in watching Ken Burns’ The War I was astounded by the much closer look at the motivation and sacrifice of Americans back then. Not only did the U.S. emerge from the greatest modern economic catastrophe to defeat major industrialized enemy nations on two huge fronts (and contributed vast amounts of materiel to help the Soviets on a third), it produced the most fearful weapon of mass destruction ever imagined, and then paid handsomely to rebuild the countries that it vanquished. Franklin D. Roosevelt didn’t execute the political end of things flawlessly, but he knew the Axis powers were on a tear, and when the hour came at Pearl Harbor he knew it was go and that go was nothing less than balls to the wall. Add to that his leadership qualities that got the essentially complete cooperation and motivation of the nation behind the cause, combined with the luck of developing the A-bomb first, and it was just a matter of time (and bodies) for an Allied victory.

One fact I learned from Burns’ documentary demonstrates the radical shift the country went through in record time: in 1941 U.S. automakers manufactured well over one million cars, while in the three years following only a few hundred new cars were made. The Ford plant in Ypsilanti, Michigan took just a few months to retool for building B-24 bombers, which had more than 10 times the number of parts of a car. At its peak the plant ended up cranking each one out in just over an hour. All I can think to say of that is Fuck. Ing. A.

But within five years of that great and terrible victory America plunged into another conflict that cost it 130,000+ casualties and achieved a mere stalemate that firmed up the roots of the Cold War to drag on for decades. Before two of those decades passed there would be yet another conflict in eastern Asia with American combat casualties in excess of 360,000 and millions of civilians killed or wounded. What happened? Perhaps it was that these conflicts presented a nebulous concept of a cause to fight for, and that American capitalism, in its zeal for wartime profit bolstered by jingoist propaganda to fight communist expansion, got outfoxed by the more nuanced approach of the Soviet Union (who never committed combat troops to either Korea or Vietnam). But O’Tim, Ronald Reagan defeated communism in the end. Um, right... that’s for another post, now run along sonny.

So now we are in the midst of the vaguest war imaginable. Monty Python stalwart Terry Jones put the neo-conceit of the “War on Terror” in humorous perspective. “How is ‘terrorism’ going to surrender?” he wrote in his 2005 book Terry Jones’s War on the War on Terror. “It’s very hard for abstract nouns to do anything at all of their own volition.” On the political side, if George W. Bush had as much acumen for command as FDR had in his fingernail things would be a whole lot different. Ulterior motives have also been the order of the fight against terror, making it far from a just or even credible war and therefore subject to a great probability of failure at worst or readjustments that will take many decades at best. What with war being hell and all, the fight needs unequivocating SOBs like George Smith Patton Jr. and, if you’ll permit a brief throwback to the 1860s, William Tecumseh Sherman running the show, not ambitious executive branch lapdogs like Petraeus and Tommy Franks. Let’s pause here for a couple of juicy quotes from the aforementioned battle-hardened dudes:

“You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out...You might as well appeal against the thunderstorm as against (the) terrible hardships of war.” - Gen. Sherman, to the city fathers of Atlanta prior to evacuating the populace and burning the city down.

“If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody isn’t thinking.” - Gen. Patton, probably to some subordinate whom he smacked and made cry.

Another part of the puzzle is the media and its lack of curiosity about the neoconservative thinking on how the U.S. should step up its presence in the Middle East. One of the most glaring examples is in a report that neocon think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC) released in 2000 called Rebuilding America’s Defenses (the complete report is at http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf). PNAC, which deems itself “a nonprofit, educational organization whose goal is to promote American global leadership,” put forth in this report some startlingly prescient analysis, stating, “While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein,” and “The process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor.”

Holy full circles, Batman! That’s some frightening shit. Jones explained how this and other salient facts get the media gloss-over. “The problem with the media is they are primarily owned by corporations, and corporations are pro-establishment. Newspapers and television start using the vocabulary of politicians, and that’s the way bias creeps in.”

PNAC fellow Director Gary Schmitt acknowledged that they were up front about regime change, but maintained that Saddam’s removal was U.S. policy predating the Bush II administration, and that the left had cherry-picked such quotes from the report since its release. “I see it all the time,” he said. What I’m pretty sure was a less common sight for Schmitt and certainly for the mainstream media was any candor about cherry-picked evidence used in the run up to Iraq part deux.

The final piece is us, and I have to strike my previous statement about striking “we” from this discourse, for in the end we are all to blame, not just Bush and his Republican cronies. We’re well aware of this administration’s shortcomings and goings, and so is Congress, who is still taking every opportunity to avoid taking any opportunity to get something done to correct our erroneous course. Can the 2008 national elections bring about any sensible results? Despite my doubts, I’ll be voting, if only to claim my right to 1,400-word rants.

So then enough of that, and on to more important things. In honor of our “War Is Hell” edition, try some XTC and “Sgt. Rock” (complete with that Top of the Pops lip-synching that would give anyone stage fright!):


.

Labels: Bush, dead bodies, politix, rants, terms of enragement, turrists, war

.
I received a blanket e-mail via my company's mailroom address with the subject line, "RE: CHRISTMAS STAMP What The Heck is The Matter with this Country??" Here is the message (verbatim):

I would guess that the 'Postal Chief 'must be Muslim too. I won't buy his stamp either....."And have a very 'MERRY CHRISTMAS"

Infuriating. It is true, I checked snopes.com.

CHRISTMAS STAMP

How ironic is this??!! They don't even believe in Christ and they're getting their own Christmas stamp, but don't dream of posting the ten commandments on federal property?



This one is impossible to believe. Scroll down for the text.

If there is only one thing you forward today.....let it be this!

REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of Pan Am Flight 103!

REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993!

REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the Marine Barracks in Lebanon!

REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the military Barracks in Saudi Arabia!

REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the American Embassies in Africa!

REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the USS COLE!

REMEMBER the MUSLIM attack on 9/11/2001!

REMEMBER all the AMERICAN lives that were lost in those vicious MUSLIM attacks!

Now the United States Postal Service REMEMBERS and HONORS the EID MUSLIM holiday season with a commemorative first class
Holiday postage stamp. Bull!

REMEMBER to adamantly and vocally BOYCOTT this stamp
When purchasing your stamps at the post office. To use this stamp would be a slap in the face to all those AMERICANS who died at the hands of those whom this stamp honors.

REMEMBER to pass this along to every patriotic AMERICAN you know!!!

The myriad wrongness here is astounding. Just taking on the most obvious point, one of our editors was enterprising enough to "Reply to All" with this clarification: "This is NOT a Christmas stamp. It marks the end of Ramadan, a Muslim holiday."

To which I, being much less of a neck sticker-outer, replied only to him: "Thank you sincerely for clarifying that for everyone that got spammed by this, Ralph [not his real name - I don't stick other people's necks out either - ed]. Perhaps there is a need to also clarify (or determine) company policy regarding unsolicited e-mails, no?"

To which Ralph [ibid] replied, this time just to me, "You wouldn't believe some of the stupid emails I got in response."

ME: "I probably would, but if you are of a mind to paraphrase, I give you my ear (eyes)."

I will update this post should Ralph forward any of the aforementioned stupidity upon me. And to bring all my readers up to speed, here be further clarification from amaana.org, a personal Shia Muslim's website (which appropriately points out in its disclaimer, "Allah says in the Quran 'Do not revile the faith of others as they may revile Allah in return"):

For the last 1400 years, over one billion Muslims throughout the world pay special attention to the esoteric (batin) matters by practising the exoteric (zaher) fasting by refraining from dishonesty, stealing, unethical actions, and other activities that would lead one astray. A Momin's (believer's) life is a journey to become one with the Essence and her daily life is a mirror of her spiritual beauty.

During Ramadan, Muslims fast from sun-up to sun-down daily, not having anything to eat, drink, smoke or indulging in sexual relations. A special feast is prepared for the breaking of the fast, where everyone present is invited to partake of the dinner after the all-day fast.

The month ends with special festivities on the Eid al-Fitr (Day of Feasting) celebration when families and friends truly rejoice for having completed the commandment of Allah by successful abstinence and by zikr (remembrance of Allah) at all times.

So now let's talk about The FEAR. The FEAR has been around a looong time, as evidenced by the ostensibly holy scripture commonly known as The Old Testament and the first book therein (paraphrased here):

Abraham said, "The fear of God ain't in this place, and they would be a-slayin' me most fersuredly."

The FEAR is no mere emotion, as is often assumed, nor are her siblings The DOGMA, The HATE, The IGNORANCE, The SCHADENFREUDE, The XENOPHOBIA and Anorexia (who has pretty much split out on her own because she is so not into the encumbrances of a definite article and all caps). The FEAR is well known among historians and especially sociologists who have researched the use of verbal influences on mental collectives. The FEAR camps near every pulpit nearly every sabbath, imbuing her self-righteous Way To Be upon the malleable masses who come to love her "enlightenment."

America is rife with The FEAR, and in recent years she has strengthened her grip outside the traditional religious territory. She's there in the media ("We now go to Ted in the newsroom, who has a report about something totally new that can screw up your life, and will just leave it at that") and of course politics, never more evident than this campaign season, where the Republicans are hot on the twisted version of FDR's adage, "We have nothing to lose but fear itself."

Yes, The FEAR has power. The FEAR is a master of divide and conquer. The FEAR got George W. Bush elected in 2004. In a vicious circle of voting block influence, The FEAR has Congress paralyzed from protecting civil liberties (oh how The FEAR hates civil liberties) and doing the decidedly un-fearful majority voter's bidding.

And now The FEAR, in a genius move that reveals the depth of her bag of tricks, has folks worrying about postage stamps. As a strong believer in Thomas Jefferson's apocryphal Wall of Separation, I can't say I'm all tickled about any religious stamp being produced in government-run facilities. But the USPS is it's own strange gig in the bureaucratic U.S. of A., and I guess if they can sponsor a bike team then they have sort of grandfathered in their right to do whatever the hell they please. Like any retail business, the bulk of their profits comes during the winter Saturnalia frenzy, so I wish them gods peed luck <-- derived from Lucifer, BTW <-- in their endeavors to prosper.

What's bothering me is this endless parade of The FEAR among people who supposedly have an all-powerful savior who, through some sanguineous transubstantiation, is supposed to have their back. C'mon, Christians! Jesus Up for Christ's sake! If you don't want to vote for a Muslim, fine. But don't characterize ONE man's victory to the House of Representatives as some pre-apocalyptic abomination that justifies questioning his qualifications. Along the same lines, it's a fucking postage stamp, OK? You (nor I, for that matter) are compelled to buy it because it doesn't appeal or apply to us. End of story, not beginning of boycott. And ohmylord the Postal Chief [sic] is a Muslim? That's gotta be one of the seals cracking open, surely.

"What The Heck is The Matter with this Country?"

Indeed.
.

Labels: Assholery squared, don't mix, Holy Crap, politix, rants, religion, The FEAR, TJ

.
In cruisin' the blogs this evening I came to realize that it's been a while since I had The Woober Twins posted up here, so here's some doggie love:



From younger days (of all concerned)...





























I don't have to care because I'm beautiful

Labels: doggies, family, photography

.



Allen Ginsburg's controversial (aka watershed) poem turns 50 today.

Hat tip to Aiko Annie

Labels: madness, poems everyone poems, words, writing

.
I might hafta mosey over and see what this fuss is all about:

Secessionists meeting in Tennessee
By Bill Poovey, Associated Press

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. - In an unlikely marriage of desire to secede from the United States, two advocacy groups from opposite political traditions — New England and the South — are sitting down to talk.

Tired of foreign wars and what they consider right-wing courts, the Middlebury Institute wants liberal states like Vermont to be able to secede peacefully.

That sounds just fine to the League of the South, a conservative group that refuses to give up on Southern independence.

"We believe that an independent South, or Hawaii, Alaska, or Vermont would be better able to serve the interest of everybody, regardless of race or ethnicity," said Michael Hill of Killen, Ala., president of the League of the South...(read more)

Killen, huh? Perhaps the vice-president is from Lynchburg (rrrummpish!). And this is the first I've heard of northern leftists that are pushing for secession. I always figured those pinko pansies would opt for the "leave it" part of the old two-part "America:" slogan.

But seriously, that this is happening right down the road is titillating. I've had passing "what ifs?" on this subject through the years, but I wasn't aware of any concerted effort beyond some weak bumper sticker aphorisms. But reading this I must say I can see how this scenario is becoming less and less of an ideological pipe dream and more and more a distinct possibility, given the current polarized state of affairs here. Libertarians have been working on a similar separatist tack on a minimized electoral basis (I didn't dig in to see how well it was going but my guess would be "not particularly").

Could an ideologically divided United States of America work? It seems to me that the shaky ground right off the bat would be in the implementation of national defense. Certainly there would have to be some sort of non-aggression pact in place to keep the peace between states, but is that something that could stand the test of time and it's changing political winds? What about trade? Or labor? Immigration?

So I'm seriously considering a trip downtown this week, assuming the secessionists might have some answers or at least food for thought. My ideological appetite would of course be more aroused by the tofu of the pointy-headed liberals than by the greasy barbecue of the good old boys, but I'm open-minded. I've never considered states rights to be a bad thing - the founders set up the constitution that way for a reason, and one of those was surely so that differing regions could adjust their structure of government to best suit the purposes of their peoples. The concept has indeed gotten a bad rap for its association with southern racist/secession thinking (if you can call it that). As the University of North Carolina history professor says in the article, it's a surprise to see the liberals conferring with the League of the South, "an organization that's associated with a cause that many of us associate with the preservation of slavery."

My gut feeling is that these two groups are likely just too fringe-y to accomplish anything, but that they have come so far as to gather and talk is enough to gain my interest.

UPDATE: Unfortunately I wasn't able to make it to the conference, but here is the article from the Chattanooga Times-Free Press.
.

Labels: gummint, politix, riiiiights, The South

.
This is going to be great:



Here's a brief HuffPo take on John Cusak's new film War, Inc. (along with a very weird but funny scene). Beyond that I recommend Cusack's conversation with investigative journalist Naomi Klein, author of The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism

Makes you laugh, makes you cry.
.

Labels: film, hooray for Hollywood, humour, politix, war

.

.

.

Labels: family, Max, photography