baliberal

Digby - 9/11 Symbiosis

2006-09-11T21:43:00.000-07:00

Anyone who isn't pissed off at what's happening to this country just doesn't get it.

Intolerant Christian (continued #4)

2006-09-11T21:03:00.000-07:00

The typical conservative fundamentalist Christian does not want to be an Intolerant Christian and they certainly do not see themselves in this way. And fortunately most are not. The majority of fundamentalists are good, well-meaning individuals who are woefully misled and misinformed. The typical American is not well informed about other peoples, cultures and religions. The American people are not stupid but too many are isolated and sheltered, or only knowledgeable about things of little consequence. They have a very limited worldview and don’t realize the harm that their leaders and pretend leaders do in their name. The worldview advocated by the Jerry Falwells, Pat Robertsons and Dr. James Dobsons of the Christian right are dangerous and their actions are causing problems not only for Americans, but also for the entire world.

As with most religions, Christianity has a violent history and has brought about immeasurable harm, as well as much good to the world. It was the ideas and ideals of Western Christianity that formed the foundation of societies that could produce the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment. These changes in European society had a dramatic impact on the future development of American society. However, beginning with the landing of the Pilgrims on Plymouth Rock, America has also had a very strong fundamentalist Christian influence. The arrival of thousands of Puritans and their attempt to establish a “city upon a hill” helped to set the stage for the future success of a conservative Christian theology in America.

After the upheaval of the American Revolution, the arrival of thousands of new immigrants in the early years of the republic and the cultural disruptions involved in establishing a new nation, the American people were ripe for a religious revivalist movement in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. This “Great Awakening” established an even more powerful conservative evangelical Protestantism that enhanced an already very strong fundamentalist underpinning within American society. However at the same time that the Baptist, Methodist and Presbyterian movements were spreading across America through the efforts of charismatic traveling preachers, an American political culture was being established that also placed an emphasis on religious tolerance and the freedom of each individual to worship as they pleased.

The established Congregationalist and Anglican churches were not happy about this development, which cut dramatically into their membership. The new churches were dependent upon this emphasis on freedom of worship since they were challenging the special status of the denominations that preceded them. Political and economic turmoil in early America also provided for a sense of uncertainty among a large portion of the population, which left them particularly open to fundamentalist message of this revivalist movement. America was a wild and unruly place and the women living the frontier, often left alone with their children found solace in this new movement, often bringing their reluctant husbands with them to the vast open-air camp revivals of the itinerant preachers.

Billmon!

2006-09-11T15:43:00.000-07:00

The Sixteen Acre Ditch

I couldn't agree more with almost everything Billmon writes today....well I agree with him most days, but with this post he expresses how I'm feeling.
Sad, but true!

History Lessons

2006-09-08T22:16:00.000-07:00

Before 9-11, settling the Arab-Israeli conflict could have gone a long way toward resolving the growing divide between America and Muslims around the world. And immediately following the horrific events of that day there was an opportunity to "force" both sides to give a little and move toward a difficult but acceptable arrangement for the establishment of a Palestinian state in return for recognition and acceptance of Israel.

Yes, terrorists, chiefly al Queda, had already begun to focus there attentions on the US before 9-11. And the Arab-Israeli conflict was only one of many grievances they held toward the US. But convincing the Israelis to compromise even just a little, would have forced moderate Muslims to see that although US was willing to use all of its power to go after terrorists, that our leaders were also willing to recognize the "legitimate" concerns of millions of Muslims. Instead, the Bush administration gave a free hand to Sharon to deal with the Palestinians in his own, often harsh and deliberately belligerent way.

With the current leadership in the US it may be too late to prevent the clash of civilizations that the neoconservatives and their rabid following in the "wingnutosphere" seem to so desperately want. The attack on 9-11 provided the neocons the perfect opportunity to demonstrate to the rest of the world just how "tough", the US is. After 9-11, the overwhelming majority of Americans wanted nothing more than to destroy al Queda, and anyone who supported them. Invading Afghanistan was the right thing to do. But for so many who still believe this, the idea that it would be done so incompetently just did not occur. It is now obvious that what would and should have been a success story is far from it five years later. Totally eliminating the Taliban would not have been easy, but the recent resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan would not have taken place without the eagerness of the Bush administration to shift its focus to Iraq. Ignoring, or at least not maintaining adequate resources in the struggle against the Taliban and al Queda was a serious failure of leadership and foresight that will likely haunt the US for years to come.

How could our leadership not have learned from the Soviet failures in Afghanistan? The Taliban and al Queda certainly did. Rather than stay and fight many of them fled as quickly as they could across the border to Pakistan, and the havens they were so familiar with from the struggle against the Soviets. Now that they have had time to recover, "they're back"! They have returned with a vengeance, and they've even had the opportunity to learn new tactics by watching the success of the insurgents in Iraq.

The Clinton administration certainly bears some of the responsibility for the problems confronting the US today. The Lewinsky affair undoubtedly diverted attention away from more important matters. Of course, the Republicans who tried so relentlessly to destroy Clinton, also contributed to the problem. If the Clinton administration had been as aggressive as many now claim they should have been, they would have been accused of trying to divert attention away from the presidents personal problems. Let's not forget, that was exactly what happened after the bombing of Sudan in 1996. If one were to try to cast blame for the mess that Afghanistan became, allowing for the rise of the Taliban and a safe haven for al Queda, we need to look back to the Bush Sr. Administration, and its failure to pay any attention to develops following the Soviet withdrawal, and the ensuing civil war.
More lessons from history that Bush the history major has not learned.

"Educator-in-Chief"

2006-09-08T22:08:00.000-07:00

So "the decider" has decided it's his responsibility to enlighten the uneducated masses of America. I can't remember where I read the above title, but it was a self-description by Bush. It would be funny if it weren't such a tragedy that we are being "led" by such a moron.

Broder n'stuff

2006-09-06T21:13:00.000-07:00

David Broder seriously needs to retire. His column calling on the media to apologize to Rove is ludicrous at best. He has to be best example of the bubble surrounding the Washington media. He admits that he hasn't written much about the Plame affair. It must be too complicated for him to wrap his puny little brain around. The way this administration has delt with the media, orchestrated by Rove......and he's asking the media to admit they were wrong, when the whole story behind this sordid affair certainly hasn't been told yet. So Rove was able to cover his ass and now Broder wants the media to kiss it.

Intolerant Christian continued #3

2006-09-04T19:31:00.000-07:00

My Brother's Keeper (continued)

Various denominations and sects of Christianity use a variety of aggressive and increasingly innovative methods in their attempts to proselytize their version of the Christian message. Their numbers are growing rapidly as a result. In general, the more mainstream Protestant denominations preach a message of love and tolerance, and are much less aggressive in their missionary activities. The evangelical and fundamentalist movements however place a special emphasis on the inherent sinful nature of humanity, and the message of these fundamentalist ministers is too often one that threatens what will happen to you if you do not live up to their vision of Christian perfection. Although evangelical and fundamentalist missionaries also preach the message of love and acceptance, they devote much of their time and resources to spreading a message of intolerance. By preaching against the “threat” of homosexuality to traditional marriage, by encouraging changing state and national laws to prevent homosexuals from having the right to adopt children, and in general by denying basic human and civil rights to homosexuals, these Intolerant Christians have abandoned the most important message of the Bible.

A major transformation of the evangelical and fundamentalist movement in the US occurred in the late 1970s and early 1980s when the Southern Baptist Convention was taken over by a more radical, and politically motivated leadership. The birth of the Moral Majority, led by Jerry Falwell and the success of Pat Robertson’s 700 Club added a new element to the American political and cultural mix. The incredible amounts of money raised by televangelists such as Robertson, movements such as the Moral Majority, and more recently by the Christian Coalition and the Family Research Council, and what is being raised today by the mega-churches, helps to fund their anti-abortion and anti-homosexual crusade, and the politicians who pander to their cause. They dedicate not only money. They also marshal tremendous human resources to advance their intolerant agenda.

Rather than raise money to address more important social ills, such as poverty, in this country and abroad, these Intolerant Christians have dedicated themselves to preventing others from attaining basic civil rights. This is a perfect indication of just how far so many have strayed from the true message of Christianity. The message of acceptance and love embodied in the text of the New Testament. Rather, they choose selective Old Testament passages to support their intolerance. Peace, love and understanding appears to mean to them only acceptance for those who share your views, love only for those who have proven that they are “true” Christians, and little, if any, understanding.

Despite the distortions of the Christian message by fundamentalists, it is important to not forget and to recognize all of the good that millions of Christians do. Even some fundamentalists. A perfect example of this is President Jimmy Carter, who is certainly a fundamentalist in many of his views. But what he has done for world peace and to help those who are less fortunate, could easily outweigh the contributions of all the so-called leading Christian conservatives. Many of those who spend countless hours of selfless sacrifice to improve the lives of the downtrodden, do so because they believe this is not only what Christ would have done, but also it is what God expects of them.

Unlike conservative Christians, liberal Christians believe that spending time and energy opposing abortion and gay marriage is not the most important activities called for in the Bible. One has to wonder if many of the socially conservative Christians who engage in selfless effort on behalf of the poor, rather than receive praise from their fundamentalist brethren in Christ, are not more likely to receive scorn for wasting time and energy on the poor, since they believe so many who impoverished are either criminals, or lazy, or are both lazy and criminals.

The Christian tradition of extending a helping hand to those in need may be the greatest legacy of Christianity, but this Social Gospel message has been drowned out by a message of intolerance. This intolerance extends to millions if not billions of their fellow humans, but in America it is especially focused on anyone who advocates alternative lifestyles and on all those who do not share their view of a “culture of life”. Oddly, it is often those who are the strongest advocates of a culture of life who are also the most vocal supports of the death penalty.

Intolerant Christian (continued #2)

2006-09-03T21:38:00.000-07:00

Disturbingly, there have been many Christians over the past two millennia who have through their ignorance, embraced intolerance, fear and hatred. Individuals who have committed unspeakably evil acts, all in the mistaken belief that they have a special provenance to fulfill, and those who have attained positions of power and influence within Christendom have inspired millions of people who have willingly followed the their lead, and committed equally evil deeds in their name. These are people who have embraced with a certainty that some find difficult to understand, that only they know the Truth, and that they were chosen to fulfill God’s mission on earth. And since this is the case, almost any act they or their followers commit in the name of God, has God’s sanction. American politics and government have been overtaken in the past decade by these Intolerant Christians. The United States today is the one country in the world with the wealth, power and the political culture that could make a real difference toward a gradual improvement in the human condition worldwide. But a theocratic America that embraces a fundamentalist religious theology also has the wealth and power to attempt to impose this vision on others. Most of the world will resist. Violently.

The evangelical and fundamentalist movements of modern day America envision using the power of the American government to spread their message of faith by using the message of democracy, in order to transform not only America but eventually the entirety of humanity. It is a misguided use of faith and religion. Rather than bring people together in an acceptance of a loving a peaceful Christ, the leaders of this movement are attempting to use their newfound political power to impose their view of Christianity on the American public, and the world. They are also attempting to suppress any of the ideas and attitudes of people that do not support their vision. In their view it is essential to repress those who do not agree with them so that they can build a “kingdom” on earth that will welcome the return of Christ. For many, Christ will not return until this is accomplished.

America was founded on a profound belief the inherent worth of each individual. And, with the adoption of our constitution, our system was enshrined with a conviction that all “men” are entitled to live a dignified life. The Judeo-Christian tradition was also an essential element in the development of an American socio-political culture that made this possible, as were the ideals of the Enlightenment. A Christian theology that encouraged the belief in the ultimate value of each human life was a necessary component to this cultural evolution. This Christian acceptance of the inherent value of each individual had earlier contributed to the intellectual transformation of European culture that began in earnest during the Late Middle Ages. With the Renaissance, the Scientific Revolution and the ultimately the Enlightenment, the essential elements needed for the development of a progressive Western society were established. This political and cultural transformation of Western Civilization culminated in the American and French Revolutions, and modern liberal civilization was born. But, in order to move beyond the ignorance, fear and hatred that religion can also inspire it was also necessary that Western society break away from the tradition of religious fundamentalism and religious intolerance. This was partially accomplished during the enlightened era of 18th and 19th century Europe and America, when so many great men and women built upon the contributions of earlier humanist philosophers and created democratic political systems that could, for the first time in the history of humanity, embrace fully the human right of all people to engage in the pursuit of happiness.

Given the tenor of the times today, one has to wonder if this belief in the dignity of each individual will continue to prevail. Conservative Americans loudly proclaim that liberal Americans pose a threat to the very nature of American society. Just as loudly they claim that liberals hate America. Liberals do not hate America, but many liberals do hate what people in power often do and have done, in the name of America and Americans. Liberals are also capable of looking critically at American history, while conservatives denounce this critical analysis as un-American. Intolerant American Christians cannot, or refuse, to see the ugly side of the American experience. This refusal to admit mistakes is particularly relevant today when one considers the level of corruption, and the willingness of so many supposed Christians to lie, cheat and steal their way to the top, and to do anything to stay there. The gravest threat to America does come from within, but it is not from liberals who value the inherent self-worth of all people, but rather from intolerant religious conservatives who believe their path is the only one which all of humanity must follow. It was Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s who posed a real threat to political freedom in America, and not the few communists he saw in the shadows. Just as too many in the conservative fundamentalist evangelical communities see enemies everywhere today, in one sense they are correct. We are faced with a grave danger to our way of life, but it comes from within.. When you perceive someone as an enemy and treat them as such, it is likely that they will become your enemy. This is why liberals and progressives in America are finally beginning to speak up in a way that just a few years ago many would have hesitated to do. Truly liberal and progressive Americans see the real threat to freedom in America, and we know in what direction to look for it. Of course fundamentalist religion is not the only problem. But what fundamentalist Christians are willing to do in the name of religion is a serious dilemma. The true Christian message that many believe in is a magnificently beautiful one. How can one get better than to say “love thy neighbor as thyself” or to insist that “the meek shall inherit the earth” and that one should “turn the other cheek” when threatened with violence or to declare yes, “I am my brother’s keeper.” However, too often, what is truly special about Christianity is too often brushed aside by those who insist that the most important message is that “everyone must eventually accept Jesus Christ as their savior,” or be condemned to the fires of hell.

Intolerant Christian (continued)

2006-09-02T21:49:00.000-07:00

My Brothers Keeper

“No kingdom has shed more blood than the kingdom of Christ.”
Montiesque

Since the first human gazed up at the stars and wondered why, mankind has endeavored to explain the purpose of existence. This ability to imagine and dream is perhaps the most incredible aspect of human nature And, throughout the millennia humanity has developed an amazing variety of ideas, or belief systems, in our struggles to bring meaning to life beyond the mundane trials and travails of everyday existence. Religious belief has also been the primary vehicle through which humankind has attempted to explain the unexplainable. We are naturally curious creatures and this curiosity has led us to believe that there must be more to life, and to believe that life must have a purpose beyond this simple everyday existence. Just as people have a natural fear of loneliness, as a species we also fear being alone. And just as a child who longs for protection from adults, as adults we long to have a protector or an all-powerful creator. And, we have imagined a creator who will offer, and provide the guarantee of immortality. According to those who believe, Christianity provides all of this and more, which certainly helps to explain the amazing success of what began as a small Jewish sect.

When we gaze at the stars and think about the vastness of the cosmos it is understandably easy to be overwhelmed. The belief in an omniscient intelligence or a guiding spirit that is always there to provide us with a helping hand is not easy concept to reject. We think that if somehow the cosmos is interconnected, and especially if it were created specifically for the benefit of humanity, then how special must we be. All religions attempt to answer the cosmic mystery, and explain humanities place within the cosmos. As many as two billion people today see a timeless wisdom embodied in the texts of the Old and New Testaments. Add in the Koran, which is also an outgrowth of the Judeo-Christian tradition, and three of the great world religions have been born, prospered and accepted as revealing the Truth of our existence by more than half the World’s population. There is a special genius within the pages of these texts. And along with the writings of early Buddhists they have all encouraged people to look beyond their own small tribal or ethnic identity and to see humanity as one people with a common destiny. However, it did not take long for individuals with selfish ulterior motives to begin to use these religious writings for their own personal gain. And for evil!

Too often throughout the past two millennia there have been those who have been willing to use the teachings of Christianity as a pretext to persecute those who do not agree with their interpretation what is sacred. Every religion has the potential for religious extremism. Religious zealotry and political extremism in the name of religion are unfortunately characteristic of the human condition. Because of the genuine desire of people to find meaning in their lives through their religious faith, we are too often easily manipulated by those with unscrupulous motives. Another common theme that runs through the pages of history is the willingness of those who claim to have a special relationship with God, to take advantage of this human desire for Truth for their own personal gain. The very nature of faith allows for a certain ease by which so many are deceived. There are undoubtedly many good and well-meaning individuals among the conservative evangelical and fundamentalist community of modern America. Although they may be mistaken in their vision of what is best for our society and in their interpretations of scripture, many do so with an open and loving soul.

However, when a movement becomes as successful as the conservative fundamentalist and evangelical movement has become, it is almost inevitable that unscrupulous individuals, people who are willing to take advantage of their naive and often uneducated followers, to attain positions of power. And, they are more than eager to use that power in unethical and immoral ways. These American conservative religio-political elites insist that religious freedom is an essential and “ordained” right of all humanity, but in reality they embrace religious intolerance towards anyone who does not ultimately accept his or her specific vision of God’s will. This kind of religious intolerance is a threat to any truly free society, and if taken too far, to the very future of humanity. Those who are the most certain about their beliefs are in essence the gravest threat to those who disagree with them. The examples of the extremes that people will go to attain their religiously inspired goals are innumerable, but the inclination to persecute others for their beliefs is based at least in part on ignorance, fear and even hate. One could almost forgive those who engage in this kind of religiously inspired intolerance if not for the damage they do to the lives of so many on a daily basis. Of course, there are also those who claim to “believe”, and to base their actions on this belief, when in reality they are just cynically acting for their own personal or political gain.

Intolerant Christians

2006-09-02T21:20:00.000-07:00

The Intolerant Christian

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God.”Epicurus

I plan to post on this blog a series of posts, which I will call The Intolerant Christian. These posts are not intended to be an all-encompassing philosophical treatise on the interaction of religion and politics in America, although I hope mythoughts are at least somewhat instructional regarding what may be the most important issue confronting American democracy today. America has reached a new stage in the relationship between its political and religious leaders, and the institutions they represent. A very powerful religiously inspired element within our society is determined to base all political ideas and ideals, all of their decisions and actions, solely on their limited vision of what a Christian society should be and do. The Intolerant Christians that I refer to throughout this series of posts, primarily consists of people who are socially conservative and belong to evangelistic and fundamentalist Protestant denominations, but also includes many conservative Catholics, who all believe that America was founded as, and should remain a Christian nation. These are the people who have what I believe is an extremely dangerous worldview. Not all Christians believe this way, however even moderate and liberal Christians are too often willing to excuse the behavior of these conservative Christians because they believe that “at least they are trying to do the right thing”. This is a threat to the basic pluralistic nature of American society, and to the democratic political culture of American civilization. This religiously inspired element embraces an “ends justifies the means” mentality that has been embraced by The Intolerant Christians of modern America. If this movement is successful in imposing its vision upon the nation, it will result in an America that is an intolerant theocracy, and will mean the end of liberal democracy as we know it.

Our founding fathers wisely warned against a possible “tyranny of the majority”. To avoid this possibility they created a constitutional form of government that protected the rights of the minorities, as well as the freedom to worship as we please. A “Tyranny of the Theocrats” led by Intolerant Christians who believe that all of the solutions they propose for our society are “inspired by God” is a nightmare that these wise leaders attempted to avoid. Referring to so many of those who believe in the Christian God as intolerant Christians is certainly harsh. But I believe it accurately portrays their attitudes, if not their intentions. In order to understand why this description of the such a large percentage of the Christian population of modern America is accurate, I will evaluate briefly the history of Christianity, in order to reveal where the potential for such behavior emanates. Unfortunately, Christians have engaged in “intolerant” acts in the name of God almost from the moment of the crucifixion. Christian apologists have always excused the inhuman acts of Christians by saying that it is not God, or Christianity, that inspires evil, but insists that these actions are merely the result of the misinterpretation of God’s will by imperfect men. But one cannot deny that they always claim that what they are doing, every evil or un-Christian thing, has been done in the name of God!

It's Hard to Not Be Pessimistic

2006-09-01T20:47:00.000-07:00

Today is one of those days that I find it hard to be optimistic about the future, not only of the US but also the world in general. Maybe I'm watching and reading too much of the MSM, although I do more than balance it out by surfing through the liberal blogosphere. I get so sick of hearing the wingnuts screech about how the liberal media is unfair, or even part of a liberal conspiracy intended to prevent the conservatives from accomplishing anything, that I could just scream. Anyone who doubts just how illiberal the MSM really is only needs to read the hatchet job that Fread Hiatt did on Joe Wilson on the editorial page of the Washington Post today.

First of all, I'd like to think that considering how badly the Bushcofascists have screwed things up over the past six years, that a majority of Americans would be ready to show them the door. And even though most polls give the dems a good chance of taking over the House this time around, somehow I just don't believe its going to happen. The demo leadership is just not as ruthless as the rethuglicans, and even though dems have made some progress on the raising of campaign funds, they'll still get outspent in the end. Plus, I'm certain that we are in for more than one October surprise, like a major terrorist plot being uncovered at the last minute.

Not only do I not have enough confidence about the dems regaining some political power, I also have serious doubts about what they would do with it if they did. Maybe its just because I'm a "radical dad" as my liberal daughter recently told her mother, but the leadership of the democratic party will not even attempt to do so many things that I think are essential, and even if they were willing to try the corporatists who really control the American political system would prevent them.

I am also becoming increasingly convinced that the Bushcofascists are going to expand their "war on terror" to include Iran. I used to think they'd take out Syria first, but I think they'd decided to go for the whole enchilada. I think this is more true today because of the difficulties we are having in Iraq. I think they now believe that the only way we will ever end up with an acceptable and friendly Iraq, is if we take out the Iranian "fascists" first. They will probably try to decapitate the regime with air power, hoping that their targeting of the nuclear facilites also takes out Ahmadenijad and most of the mullahs, thinking this will be enough to prevent a major Iranian terrorist sponsored retaliation. Yes, I do think these people are crazy or deluded enough to think this will work.

Well, I'm not sure but I think this rant helps me even if no one ever reads it.

badick

Daily musings

2006-06-28T21:22:00.000-07:00

What is up with Mitch McConnel voting against the flag amendment and are the wingnuts ready to burn him in effigy for it?

Red state dems voting for it I can understand but why would Reid and Feinstein and what are some of the other exceptions they would like to make to the 1st amendment?

With Afghanistan starting to look more and more like a mess how much is that going to effect our decision making on pulling troops out of Iraq?

The current Israeli "incursion" into the Palestinian territories should be good for a few more thousand terrorist recruits.

Issue Not Talked Enough About

2006-06-26T20:57:00.000-07:00

Other than on Altercation I don't see much written about the Palestinian / Jewish conflict on the blogosphere...........may just be the blogs I'm reading regularly. Anyway, in light of the connection of this conflict to the rise of Islamoextremism it is certainly a topic worthy of greater coverage. There is perhaps no greater example of religious intolerance than the current conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. On both sides. Americans generally have a natural affinity for the state of Israel. This is not simply because of the large Jewish population of the US and any undue influence that a powerful Jewish lobby purportedly has over the policies of the US government. Of course our common religious traditions play a big role as well in our affection for and support of the Israelis.

I think this support also comes down to an American willingness to pull for the little guy. The small state of Israel is surrounded by a sea of Arabs and has fought at least 4 major wars against them, often against overwhelming odds. Americans love an underdog, and early on in the existence of the Jewish state this was certainly the case. Not only this, but one could also say that the history of the Jewish people post-WWII is also perhaps the greatest comeback story of all time. After being almost eliminated by a genocidal maniac in Hitler the Jewish people were able to come together and arise from the ashes of ruin like a phoenix. Anyone who has read Exodus can not but help to admire the Jewish people and their difficult struggle for survival.

Yet the American love affair with Israel is also one that is fraught with difficulty. The neoconservatives who pushed for the war in Iraq did so at least in part because they believed that it would benefit our Israeli ally. However, the Iraq War could actually prove to make things worse for the state of Israel. While Saddam Hussein may have paid for terrorists to blow themselves up on Jewish buses, his state was not really a threat to the existence of Israel. The continuing US presence in Iraq and the impact that this is having on recruiting for the Islamofascists could prove to be a longer term threat.

Also, in gereral the US support for Israel continues to be a problem in our dealings with the Arab/Muslim world. While I am not advocating that the US should abandon its support for Israel it is essential that we do more to support a peaceful negotiation of the differences between the Israelis and Palestinians. Given the nature of American politics anyone questioning support for Isreal will quickly be ostracized. Somehow we have to get beyond this. The US government must be more forceful in convincing the Israelis to work out a negotiated settlement before it is too late..........if its not already. Things seem to be going in the opposite direction, especially the last few years under the Bush administration. All parties share some blame in this but it is time to move beyond the "blame game." My big concern is that a Democratic administration might not do much more to push the Israelis toward a peaceful settlement. Here is where the politics of the Jewish vote in the US unfortunately does make a difference. I don't know the answer to this delimma but I do know that as long as the state of Israel basically treats the Palestinian territories like Bantustans and the US doesn't at least seem to do something about it, our relations with the Muslim world will not improve and Islamic extremism is likely to continue to grow.

Iraq PM supports Dem plan for timetable

2006-06-24T18:37:00.000-07:00

So how is the "decider" going to deal with the Iraqis telling him they want the US to get the hell out. Kinda puts a kink in the whole "permanent bases from which we can control the oil strategy."

And how will they reconcile the issue of "terrorists / insurgents." Yes, most of the resistance in Iraq today could be called a legitimate national liberation struggle against an occupying power. Certainly that's how the majority of the Sunni insurgents see it. But these groups must have cooperated with the Al Queda terrorists. Giving them an unqualified amnesty seems problematic at best. How will the families who have lost loved ones in Iraq feel about this?

Merla Haggard........a rebel with a cause.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13520363/site/newsweek/

Little Ricky

2006-06-23T18:44:00.000-07:00

I have to admit that I can't do it very often, but every once in a while I listen to Rush's program when I have to be on the road for a few hours. Well, today was one of those days and although I didn't listen to the entire program it didn't take long to see that they had latched onto the WMD hype of Ricky Sanotorium. Rush had a guest host today who just couldn't understand why the administration wasn't totally behind this story. Of course the object of the whole "revelation" was a sad attempt by Ricky to appeal to the wingnut base to get behind his re-election and to maybe even confuse some of the voters who don't keep up on these things. Well getting the support of the dittoheads was easy enough, and he even got the support of JD "send em' all back to Mexico" Hayworth who was also on the program who repeated the lame excuse that the administration had moved on to more important matters, and that maybe some of those working at the Pentagon who refuted the significance of the revelation just weren't being as supportive of the president as they should be. I swear they get so caught up in their convoluted logic that they don't know the difference between what's up and what's down. I may have missed it, but I also have not seen a lot of condemnation by the media of Ricky.

And Christi, I couldn't agree with you more about Tony Snow. I also watched a short excerpt of his press conference on c-span and could he be a bigger jerkoff. I know he's supposed to be a really nice guy and he's certainly an upgrade from Scottie boy, but he's also an ass. And I thought this before reading that he was rude to Helen Thomas today, part of the presser that I missed. Speaking of Helen, she was also apparently the but the joke of another neanderthalicon, congressman King of Iowa, who said that if Zarqawi were lucky enough to get 72 virgins, they'd look like Helen. No class.

And of course the big news of the day about the Miami terrorists.........I agree totally with Bill Press who said on CNN today that the arrests were timed to take away from publicity of the story about the government snooping into Americans private financial records. Whether its a terror alert or a made up non-story they always come up with some way to dilute the bad news of the day.

The Evil Ones

2006-06-20T20:32:00.000-07:00

Okay, so I just finished watching the Frontline documentary on PBS. How can Colin Powell and George Tenet stay silent about what they know? After what was done to them it is difficult to imagine that at some point they will not write the tell-all book......but maybe they'll hold off until after Bush is out of office.

Speaking of Bush, does this documentary also not confirm that it was Darth Cheney and Rumsfeld, and their henchmen who concocted this tragedy, and that jr. is just along for the ride. Tell me these s.o.b.'s are not evil.

I don't personally believe in hell, but I have never wished more that I be totally wrong about something, for if there is one I have confidence that these assholes are going to burn for all eternity.

Mitt Romney "a wolf in sheep's clothing"?

2006-06-19T21:17:00.000-07:00

George "flag boy" Allen today on Hardball bragging about bringing religious freedom to the Iraqis.....is he really that clueless or just a lying ass. Probably both.

Question: Is America vulnerable to a religiously inspired extremist demagogue?

Just ponder for a moment the success of Karl Rove in creating a cult of personality around dubya. Now think of what he could do with someone who could actually string two coherent sentences together, add in a history that hints at moderation and Hollywood style good looks, and I believe you have Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. The only thing that prevents him being annointed the next great leader by the rethuglican neocons is his Mormon background. They are still not quite certain that the Bible belters will accept his "crazy religion" but I'm convinced they don't want McCain bad enough that they'll turn to the best alternative, and that has to be Romney.

Why do I think he is particularly dangerous. It is not just because of his religious beliefs. I don't know how devout a Mormon he is but if you've ever read any of the Book of Mormon you really have to wonder what he would be willing to do......... It has more to do with my general mistrust of the republican movement toward a theocracy, something that I have a sneaking suspicion that Romney would be willing to support even if he doesn't believe in it, which he might. I really have nothing to base this attitude about Romney on. He may be a wonderful guy who really has the best interest of America in mind. Nah!

The ability of the rethuglicans to enforce party discipline and unify behind their "conservative" message will be a threat in 2008 no matter who the candidate is, but the one that scares me the most is Romney. I honestly don't think our democratic system can survive another 4-8 years of republican rule without permanent damage to the separation of powers, not to mention how entrenched the conservatives will be in the judiciary. Somehow Romney makes me think of a TV character on a USA program called The Dead Zone. The lead character who can see the future, is trying to prevent a charismatic congressman from becoming president because he has a vision that the election of this congressman will bring on Armegeddon. I'm not saying that's what the election of Romney would do but with the way things are going for the US and the world in general, well it just makes me wonder.........

Lying Liars

2006-06-15T21:07:00.000-07:00

"....all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death." Revelations 21:8

If you would ask the average Christian if its important to always tell the truth, of course they would say yes. If you asked whether it is ever okay to tell a lie they might struggle to answer, but ultimately they would say that it is sometimes a necessity to at least stretch the truth a little. It is this kind of rationalization that must go through the mind of the rethuglicans on a daily basis since they are constantly telling blatant lies about soo many things. They must justify this reliance on avoiding the truth as a deliberate part of their electoral strategy by resorting once again to the same ol' "ends justifies the means" argument. Since they know whats best for American and since liberals are a threat to the continuing existence of the American way of life, then anything and everything must be done to prevent liberals from ever again becoming a political force in America.

We all know the big lies........the ones that got us into an unecessary war. And now these lies have led to more lies, just as lying always does. The Bush administration and the Rubber Stamp congress remind me of a cousin of mine, who as a teenager had become such a big liar that no one ever really paid any attention to what he would say. Why should any logical and thinking being believe anything they say, well according to the mainstream media interpretation its because they really are good leaders who are really trying to do the best that they can. And besides, they're all good Christians so how could they be lying about so many things. To call them on all of these lies the media would first have to admit their complicity in spreading and legitimizing this bullshit.

Further proof of their devotion to the prinicples of Christianity can be seen by going to Crooks and Liars and watching the video of Colbert interviewing a congressman and asking him to recite the 10 Commandments........even I could do better than 3.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/01/29.html#a6909

The Moron In Chief

2006-06-14T21:43:00.000-07:00

Okay, I'll admit I may not be the most articulate person in the world but every time Bush speaks at a press conference where he doesn't have a complete script in front of him, his inability to put two coherent thoughts together is painful to watch. I'm embarrassed for America as a nation. How can he possibly not go down as the greatest presidential failure ever. If the Iraq mess does not get better soon I'm almost certain that his legacy will be one of failure. Even if the Iraq situation miraculously improves he has done so many things so wrong, and has lied about what he has done so often, that historians will most certainly be more critical than the mainstream media is willing to be now.

It never ceases to amaze me how accepting the media is of his repetitive bullshit and how so many of them actually seem to admire the guy. They are followers and probably always have been. I realize they have to temper their criticism to some extent or what they write would never get by their corporate controlled editorial process, but can't they be creative enough to somehow express their disdain for his frat boy antics and attitude. His lack of maturity and insensitivity is referred to as playful banter rather than disrespectful intimidation that he obviously intends it to be. I can't even begin to remember how often I've heard him described as basically a nice guy and of course he's the kind of guy that most Americans would want to "have a beer with". Guess I'm just never going to understand the "cool kids crowd" because I find the guy disgusting, and an embarrassment to history majors everywhere.

But of course he's a good Christian. Speaking of religious developments Condi Rice appeared in front of the SBC today a bragged that when she completed her term as Secretary of State, it will have been 12 years since a white male has held that position. I'm sure the progressives at the SBC found that bit of news heartening. The media speculation about her as a presidential contender is also rather amusing. Although this may sound rather harsh, but to believe that the
conservative white population of this country would support a never married, black woman for president is rediculous at best.

Speaking of the SBC, they have decided to not totally abandon the public school system but instead they will try to take on a more active role by getting elected to local school boards.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/14/AR2006061400823.html

Oh joy joy! I can see it now their first item on the agenda will be weekly book burnings at the public square. Of course this is just a continuation of their overall strategy of bringing religion back into the schools so they can prevent public school teachers from teaching the evil secular theology of evolution and prohibit the teaching of tolerance for the "homosexual lifestyle". Once they've accomplished these all important goals they'll get around to whether theirs any actual "readin', writin' and rithmetic goin on".

Kinder-Gentler SBC

2006-06-13T20:58:00.000-07:00

So the Southern Baptist Convention elected a new leader today, and not someone who was the favorite of the powers-that-be. Could this indicate a potential developing conflict within the membership. Seems their may be a division between younger members who want to put more money into evangelical programs and the traditional power structure who are more concerned with other things........

The new leader claims that he believes in a literal interpretation of the bible and is a strong social conservative, but he's just not "mad about it".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/13/AR2006061300613.html

This new leader apparently promised to devote more $ to recruiting overseas and attempt to reverse the decline in baptisms in the US. Does this mean the evangelicals have peaked? I don't think so, since they have so much money behind them and their willing to use just about any method to recruit new members. However, the off-the-wall, even crazy comments of evangelical leaders such as Pat Robertson my finally be having an impact. I think that the social conservative movement is ultimately doomed to failure. The literal interpretation of the bible that they promote just won't stand the test of time, and science. But they're not going to go down without a fight. And if progressives don't stand together against their methods of fear and intimidation, they could prevail.

One other note on the religious front today. A new group religious leaders, one that even includes an important evangelical leader, have called on the Bush administration to reject torture.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/12/AR2006061201484.html

Of course the spokesbushie immediately stated the pat answer "we don't do torture". When are these guys going to get it? The rest of the world and a significant percentage of the American public is just not buying it anymore.

Economic vs. Social Conservatives

2006-06-13T20:32:00.000-07:00

The American corporate elite have willingly entered into an "unholy" alliance with the religio-fascist evangelical fundamentalists. This modern corporate elite have gotten everything they want from the Bush administration, from mega tax cuts to a more lax regulatory environment. This corporate elite has almost nothing in common with the religious conservatives who provided such a large percentage of the Bush electorate. In fact, many of those corporate elitists probably have a contemptuous attitude toward the religious extremists within the "republican coalition" but they know that they can not win without them.

I believe a big part of the bargain between the various powerbrokers, the political and corporate kingmakers, includes an agreement to fund the conservative social causes out of sheer greed. Greed for power and for more money. One has to wonder however when enough money is enough? Any objective view of the expansion of capitalism, from the "Robber Barons" of the late 19th century up through the Junk Bond kings of the 1980s, and continuing through the crony capitalists of Haliburton and Enron, must conclude that unrestrained and unregulated corporations present a threat to the overall economic well-being of the majority of the citizens of the US, and even of the world. The majority of social and religious conservatives can not see, or refuse to see, how this alliance with the corporate elite is really going against their own economic interests. Their obsession with gay marriage, abortion, stem cell research, and yes even Janet Jackson's tit on tv, blind them from dealing with much more important issues.

The success of the economic conservatives at coopting the social conservative movement to support their elitist economic policies is derived at least somewhat from a basic premise that a majority of Americans accept without question, that of "individual responsibility." Conservatives of all stripes believe that individuals are poor as a result of their own actions and behaviors. It is because they are either uneducated or lazy, or both, and that if they'd just work harder, either at getting a better education or at using what skills they have to improve themselves, then of course everything would be fine. Underlying this assumption is the belief of social conservatives that many of the problems of the poor are a result of some spiritual short-coming. Because they have not made a total committment to Jesus, the poor have turned instead to drugs or alcohol......Conservatives refuse to accept any societal responsibility for the condition of those who are less fortunate.

Exclusion Rules

2006-06-12T18:18:00.000-07:00

Well it looks as if the Anglican Church is ready to split wide apart over the issue of the ordination of a gay bishop a few years ago.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060612/ap_on_re_us/episcopal_convention

I guess the Christian message of inclusion and loving everyone has once again been rejected. The homophobia of conservative Christians is reaching a fever pitch, and unfortunately it doesn't seem as if it is going to end anytime soon. With Junior and his support for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, and the right wingnuts screeching about the threat to the American family, and the unwillingness of most democrats to take a principled stand against this bigotry, this issue is likely to gain in popularity and not just go away as many centrist dems would like it to.

The I support traditional marriage but don't want to change the constitution because its a states rights issue is just not going to hold up. Although I don't think the wingers will ever be able to gain enough support to actually get a constitutional amendment passed, they will cause more damage to the political culture in America over the next decade by continuing to raise this issue, adding further to the partisan rancor that has enveloped us. Eventually this is going to cost the Rethuglicans support as younger Americans who are a little more tolerant toward gay rights become a bigger share of the electorate, and as the "greatest generation"-which happens to be a little more homophobic, begins to pass on.

I have to admit this is an issue that I struggle with as well. Not my support for equal civil rights for gays, but the political ramifications of openly supporting either civil unions or gay marriage. I was really pleased when my son, who is 20 years old, recently expressed a more open attitude to homosexuals. In the past, like many teens growing up in small town America, he had expressed disdain or even disgust toward gays. I had hoped that he had been raised better, but it was one of those things that I wasn't sure about. It makes me hopeful that we are gradually moving toward a more tolerant society, but then I remember the what progressives are up against and I wonder just how far we have actually come.

I'm not a biblical scholar, but wasn't the Jesus supposedly placed on Earth so that all human sin could be forgiven, hence all sinners as well? Although I reject the idea that homosexuality is inherently sinful, shouldn't any good Christian be more accepting of the "weaknesses of the flesh", and be forgiving. If the same conservative fundamentalists who are so concerned about the sanctity of marriage and the threat of homosexuality put as much effort into actually helping those who are less fortunate, then maybe they could actually have an impact on American families. As anyone who has done any research into divorce would know, it is financial issues, and the problems associated with them that are the biggest challenge facing American families. There may be the occaisional family like that of the governor of New Jersey, broken apart because someone tried to deny their sexual inclinations, but the hyperventilating going on about this "threat" would be amusing if not for the negative impact that it can have on so many lives.

Markos and Digby

2006-06-11T21:03:00.000-07:00

Markos was excellent on Press the Meet today. If you haven't seen it go to Crooks and Liars. One of my big frustrations over the past few years has been watching democratic spokespersons seem like incompetents on national news programs. I know they are often playing with a stacked deck against them, and unlike the republican shills they do at least try to tell the truth most of the time but please........why can't the dems have more eloquent and intelligible speakers?

I also have to post this quote from Digby. If you don't read his blog you're missing out on some really funny stuff. Anyway, the thought of President Newt must be too too much for the digster........

"This guy takes himself very seriously as a military historian and strategist. He also
likes dinosaurs. In other words, he's a twelve year old geek who wants to play with real
soldiers. Like many wingnut "intellectuals" he seems to have some serious
developmental problems."

What is it with has been politicians who think they can be president, must be the "tricky dicky" success story. If Nixon could make a comeback then maybe even Newt can. Of course the dem side has its share of "would like to be's," from Tom Daschle to Edwards and Clark. Don't get me wrong, I like these guys okay, but do they really have a chance?

Finally, another day goes by and the rethuglicans have refused to unconditionally condemn the "pscycho bitch from hell" Coulter. Not a surprise!

Be Gentle

2006-06-10T21:48:00.000-07:00

Okay for those of you who are expert bloggers.......and more computer literate than I am, please be kind since I'm sure you can tell that I'm just getting started. I've put in links to the blogs that I visit most often and I think I have put the links in correctly??? I will add links later to other liberal sites that I visit occaissionally, and maybe even a few links to the "dark side" since its always good to follow what they are up to.

I will try to get to the point where I can post at least once a day for anyone out there who might find what I have to say of any interest. Most of my posts will be fairly brief, but I do hope to write some more extensive postings on the rising threat that I see......an American Theocracy.

misc. thoughts

2006-06-10T20:49:00.000-07:00

I recently had a colleague (I teach at a small community college) tell me that she really doesn't support the idea of a separation of church and state. She is married to a Methodist minister, but I have always thought of her as relatively progressive......I guess she probably doesn't think much of my support for same-sex marriage, which I'm sure I've mentioned to her.

I'm disgusted by all the attention Ann the "psycho bitch from hell" Coulter has been getting, but of course that's exactly what whe was going for. Somehow seeing her wearing a cross makes me wonder how someone like her could really believe that they are a Christian.....but since the neandertahl right has no clue what it means to be a Christian, I guess its not a surprise.

It would be funny if it weren't so scarry that people like Tom Delay and Coulter have come to represent the Republican party, and that they can get away with the bullshit that they do is a sad commentary on the state of our nation.

Religion and Violence

2006-06-06T19:36:00.000-07:00

The fundamentalist Christo-Fascists argue that onc can not have morality without religion. However, one could also argue that that the least violent societies today are the most irreligious, or even agnostic democracies of Western Europe (you could throw in Japan too). In fact, the most violent societies today are those that are also the most fundamentalist in their religious beliefs and practices. The Bush legacy, and that of his moralistic fundamentalist evangelical, Christo-Fascist supporters, will be one of violence and death, and a loss of whatever moral authority America might have attained in the 200 plus years before his abysmal presidency.
Although the essential message of Christianity may be one of peace and love, Bush and his followers long ago lost sight of this goal.

Relgion and Politcs

2006-06-06T18:37:00.000-07:00

Poverty breeds ignorance.
Ignorance breeds hate.
Hate breeds violence.

America has reached a new stage in the relationship between politcal and religious leaders. A very powerful religiously inspired element within our society is determined to create a Christian Theocracy. They are certain that America is in serious decline morally and ethically, and that their vision of Christianity is all that can save us as a nation and a people. Many would dismiss this radical religious element in America and would argue that there is no possibility that what they envision could ever come to pass. I wish this were true, but I'm afraid that it is not. At least it will be more possible if Americans who disagree with these radical Christo-Fascists do not stand up against it. That is exactly what I intend to do with this blog. If I am successful in only swaying the thoughts or actions of a few, I'll be happy. But to be honest I'm really writing this blog for myself......call it therapy.

Our founding fathers wisely warned against a possible "tyranny of the majority". To avoid this possibility they created a constitutional form of government that protected the rights of minorities, as well as the freedom to worship as we please for all Americans. Well, today we are endangered by a "tyranny of theocrats" led by Christo-Fascists who believe that all of the solutions they propose for our society are "inspired by God." Anyone who opposes them is not only un-American, but a radical liberal leftist who is also anti-Christian. Their vision of America is not the America that I believe in.