The one thing, the only thing that mattered in the George Zimmerman case

Police dispatcher:  "Are you following him?"

 Zimmerman:  "Yes"

 Dispatcher:  "Okay. We don't need you to do that."

Mr. Flip-Flop, at it some more

This time, caught on tape.

How the "small government", "Conservative", Right Wing Republicans are operating

It's stupid. It's shameful. It's irresponsible. This should stop.

We surely hate government, don't we?

"Conservatives" and their desire for big, controlling government

Occupy the courts today!

The Move to Amend organization (www.movetoamend.org) is organizing a day of peaceful occupation and protests nationwide at Federal Courts today, Friday, January 20. This is the anniversary of the Supreme Court's monumental--and monumentally wrong--Citizens United decision which gave corporations the legal ability to pour unlimited amounts of money into political campaigns, among other things. Here's what you need to know: 11:30am to 1:30pm, Gather in Ilus Davis Park immediately across the street from the Charles Evans Whittaker Federal Courthouse at 401 E. 9th Street, KCMO. Plan to dress for cold weather! Contact: Mary Lindsay, MTA Kansas City, KCMoveToAmend@gmail.com; (816) 885-9996. See you there! Additional link--you can go here to register for the event: http://action.citizen.org/p/salsa/event/common/public/index.sjs?event_KEY=72556

Occupy the courts tomorrow!

The Move to Amend organization (www.movetoamend.org) is organizing a day of peaceful occupation and protests nationwide at Federal Courts tomorrow, Friday, January 20. This is the anniversary of the Supreme Court's monumental--and monumentally wrong--Citizens United decision which gave corporations the legal ability to pour unlimited amounts of money into political campaigns, among other things. Here's what you need to know: 11:30am to 1:30pm, Gather in Ilus Davis Park immediately across the street from the Charles Evans Whittaker Federal Courthouse at 401 E. 9th Street, KCMO. Plan to dress for cold weather! Contact: Mary Lindsay, MTA Kansas City, KCMoveToAmend@gmail.com; (816) 885-9996. See you there! Additional link--you can go here to register for the event: http://action.citizen.org/p/salsa/event/common/public/index.sjs?event_KEY=72556

Occupy the courts this Friday

The Move to Amend organization (www.movetoamend.org) is organizing a day of peaceful occupation and protests nationwide at Federal Courts this Friday, January 20. This is the anniversary of the Supreme Court's monumental--and monumentally wrong--Citizens United decision which gave corporations the legal ability to pour unlimited amounts of money into political campaigns, among other things. Here's what you need to know: 11:30am to 1:30pm, Gather in Ilus Davis Park immediately across the street from the Charles Evans Whittaker Federal Courthouse at 401 E. 9th Street, KCMO. Plan to dress for cold weather! Contact: Mary Lindsay, MTA Kansas City, KCMoveToAmend@gmail.com; (816) 885-9996. See you there! Additional link--you can go here to register for the event: http://action.citizen.org/p/salsa/event/common/public/index.sjs?event_KEY=72556

On "corporate personhood"

Montana State Supreme Court Justice James Nelson, on "corporate personhood", as set forth in the 2010 US Supreme Court's "Citizens United" ruling: "Corporations are not persons. Human beings are persons, and it is an affront to the inviolable dignity of our species that courts have created a legal fiction which forces people—human beings—to share fundamental natural rights with soulless creations of government. Worse still, while corporations and human beings share many of the same rights under the law, they clearly are not bound equally to the same codes of good conduct, decency, and morality, and they are not held equally accountable for their sins. Indeed, it is truly ironic that the death penalty and hell are reserved only to natural persons.” No one could say it any better, more forcefully or clearer. Thank you, Justice Nelson. Link: http://www.alternet.org/story/153623/montana_high_court_says_%27citizens_united%27_does_not_apply_in_big_sky_state?page=1

How great would this be?

Here's the deal--you're Margaret Thatcher. You're not especially physically attractive and you fight your way to the top of British politics. You're also into very austere, punishing, Right-wing, Conservative, heartless government.

And that's just the beginning. Much later, after you've long-since retired, none other than Meryl-freaking-Streep is tapped to play you on the big screen.

Further proof, as though we needed it, that life is grossly, grossly, too frequently punishingly unfair. (Think happy thoughts, campers).

One is not the other, that's all

Big news last eveing

Big news last evening: First, according to the Star, "Voters in two urban Kansas City areas chose candidates Tuesday to fill vacancies in the Missouri House of Representatives, and Democrats were elected for both." Yeehaw. That's great news. Second, Locally, no surprise, the city voted for the zoo tax initiative. At least, the ones who showed to vote did, for better or worse. Here's hoping that turns out well. Third, Ohio voted down the curbs on union power. Third and finally, Mississippi defeated that whole "person begins at conception" idea, thank goodness. All in all, with the reports nationwide on different votes and elections, it was a night that went very much against Republicans, big business and the Right Wing. Yeehaw. Now, on to 2012. Links: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/08/3255360/kcs-ellington-morgan-elected-to.html; http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/08/3255333/clay-county-passes-zoo-tax-jackson.html; http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-09/ohio-repeals-union-law-to-set-stage-for-2012.html; http://news.yahoo.com/ohio-voters-reject-republican-backed-union-limits-021951331.html; http://news.yahoo.com/miss-defeats-life-fertilization-ballot-prop-041831234.html

Request for Washington

It's simple, really. Would you people please, please, put the nation first? Would you put the country before all else, please, for the love of God, country and all that is good? Is that so much to ask? Would you forget your political party and, to repeat, PUT THE COUNTRY FIRST? Please. We're begging you. (You chuckleheads). Oh, and put yourelves last.

Here we go again: Money for big business but not the "little guy"

Yessir, here we go again. "Conservative", big business folks who likely want "small government" and for people to "stand on their own two feet", so to speak, are now declared as coming down on the side of tax breaks for businesses to bring sporting events to Missouri. From the Star's website: Missouri lawmakers to consider incentives for sports events JEFFERSON CITY--Although Missouri has hosted amateur sports events such as NCAA Final Four basketball games and U.S. Olympic trials, some public officials say if the state wants to continue to draw such events — and the dollars of fans who watch them — it must be willing to put some cash on the line. State lawmakers are proposing new tax breaks for groups that organize amateur sporting events and for donors that help provide financial backing. Supporters say it's necessary to keep pace with Texas and a growing number of other states that are offering sports incentives. The sports proposal is part of an expansive overhaul of Missouri's tax credits to be considered during a special legislative session that starts Tuesday. These are the same people who, just a short time ago, didn't want to extend unemployment benefits to the "working stiff" of the state but just have some companies come along and ask for tax breaks and you get them running at you like nobody's business. And here I thought we had budget problems. Silly me. Link: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/09/05/3122199/missouri-lawmakers-to-consider.html

Why Libertarianism will never work

There is an article out last week by John Stossel over at reason.com (that name cracks me up) titled "How libertarianism can fix what's wrong with America." In it, he writes on a new book out by Reason magazine Editor Matt Welch and Reason.tv Editor in Chief Nick Gillespie: The Declaration of Independents: How Libertarian Politics Can Fix What's Wrong With America. Sorry to rain on anyone's parade but this just isn't going to ever happen. Ever. The reason why Libertarianism can't "fix what's wrong with America" is because Libertarians can't decide and agree on--and never will--how small "small government" is supposed to be. Some will say no government at all. Others will say "only this much." Still others will say, "Well, we've got to add this." Get, say, a dozen Libertarians in a room and ask them how much government we should have. They'll never agree. Then, imagine thousands of them, collectively, at, say, a national convention. Fights would soon break out, I feel certain. They can never be a cohesive group because they'll never be able to decide the size of government and what its functions are to be. It'll never happen. Stossel writes "The big change they see stems from independents' refusal to be absorbed by any party." This "refusal to be absorbed" is more an indication of our own national fracturing and splintering, not evidence that we're coming together--or going to--to fix our problems. I say again, the way to "fix America" is to get the wealthy people's and corporation's money out of our government. We have to get them to stop legally buying our representatives and so, our legislation and government. If we can't or don't do that, nothing will change and we are doomed to failure, as a nation. And trust me, usually I'm an optimist. Links: http://reason.com/archives/2011/06/30/a-new-day-in-politics; http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1586489380/reasonmagazineA/

"YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"

Remember that now-old movie line from Tom Cruise's character?

Well, it applies to too many of us Americans when it comes to our national budget deficit spending.

To wit:

Think and assume that Republicans are the ones who are good at cutting budgets and deficit spending?

Think again:

"Dwight Eisenhower was last Republican President to preside over a balanced budget. He had a balanced budget in 1956 and 1957.

Since then, there have been two presidents to preside over balanced budgets, LBJ in 1969 and Clinton in 1998 through 2001.

During the last 40 years there have been five budget surpluses, all five were under Democratic Presidents: 1969, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001.

As we joked when we were kids at home:  "Hurts, don' it?"

Links:  http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/23/959315/-Empirical-Evidence-That-Proves-Conservatism-is-Destroying-America

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Which_republican_president_balanced_a_budget#ixzz1HRBkNpr7

The latest heart-attack news I thought we already knew

This came out yesterday from CNN:

   Heart-attack risk spikes after sex, exercise

(Health.com) -- Exercising or having sex roughly triples a person's risk of heart attack in the hours immediately afterward, especially if the person does those activities infrequently, according to a new analysis in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

See?  I thought we learned that years ago, at least since 1979, with Nelson Rockefeller's death:

Nelson Rockefeller Dies in the Saddle

The official coroner’s report, issued by the competent New York State authority, states that Nelson Rockefeller died of a heart attack while he was having sexual intercourse. 

Enjoy your "hump day", y'all.

No pun intended.

Links:  http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/03/22/health.risk.sex.workout/index.html?eref=rss_topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+%28RSS%3A+Top+Stories%29
http://theamericanchronicle.blogspot.com/2010/02/strange-death-of-nelson-rockefeller.html
http://www.reformation.org/megan-marshak.html
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=nelson+rockefeller's+death&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=ee6ab499cd4cc77a
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/rockefellers/peopleevents/p_rock_n.html

It's a whole other country, all right

Texas. Oh, yeah, like their advertising campaign of a few years ago said, it's a "whole other country", all right.

The proof this week?

It seems there is a small town--Harrold, Texas--that is letting its school's teachers and faculty carry sidearms.

Yeah. Guns.

Whereas the rest of the country--and maybe the world--sees the countryside as bucolic, peaceful and quiet, this town feels it must arm itself "just in case", because it's 20 or 30 miles from the nearest Sheriff's office. Should something happen, they want to be ready.

To me, this is further proof of why I want to stay away from that "God-fearing", gun-totin' state of Texas. Between their right-wing, narrow-minded, again, God-fearing, evangelistic viewpoints and their collective stance on guns, of which this is further proof, I'd just as soon not go. Outside of fun- and music-loving, more liberal Austin, which I'd only visit, you literally couldn't pay me enough to live in that whole, big place called Texas. No, thanks.

There are plenty of people who view Texas the way Californians view--or used to--their state of California. That is, there is no other place to live. But for me, between the heat and these various ways of thinking just become more and more proof of why I want to stay away.

And they won't be disappointed if I do.

See the full story here:
http://www.newsdaily.com/stories/n15386617-texas-guns/

Whatever happened to conservative government and keeping it out of our lives?

I'll Trade You the 2nd Amendment for the 4th
by Cenk Uygur
Fri Jun 27, 12:22 PM ET

Conservatives are thrilled about the Supreme Court decision settling the 2nd amendment issue in favor of individual gun owners (versus the idea that gun rights are only within the framework of a well-regulated militia). They are celebrating the constitution today. God bless their hearts. I wish they did that more often and about more amendments.

I believe in gun control. I believe that guns do kill people. In fact, they are designed to kill things. It is indisputable that they make killing a lot easier. That's what they're made for.

But I believe my side has lost this issue for now in the court of public opinion and in the Supreme Court. There are actually two different issues here. One is the policy argument concerning how much gun control we should have. The other is the constitutional argument of what the second amendment means.

I think it is reasonable to disagree on the meaning of the second amendment. In fact, I'm torn on it. If I heard this case myself as a judge and ultimately came down against the majority decision (which is not a certainty at all, I think this presents an excellent and close constitutional question -- apparently the Supreme Court agreed since they split 5-4 on it), I still wouldn't find the majority position unreasonable.

So, I am happy to concede that we should follow the second amendment to the letter of the law (as interpreted in this case). Now, can conservatives find it in their heart to agree that we should also follow the fourth amendment to the letter of the law? And if they can't, what possible logical or constitutional arguments can they have for fervently defending one amendment and rejecting another?

The fourth amendment clearly states that the government needs a warrant with probable cause in order for it to conduct a search or seizure. The Bush administration has been in flagrant violation of this for seven years now. They refuse to get warrants to wiretap conversations of Americans speaking with or emailing people abroad. This is clearly illegal and unconstitutional. But here conservatives find the constitution a little more inconvenient.

Justice Scalia warned after the recent Guantanamo Bay case, that the majority had almost certainly caused the deaths of many Americans with their decision. I think that's absurd hyperbole. But what is entirely possible is that the second amendment decision written by Scalia will lead to many more American deaths. But I don't begrudge him that. If he thinks that's the correct interpretation of the amendment, then our only recourse is to pass another amendment overriding it (not going to happen). We'll have to live with the extra deaths. Freedom isn't free.

But here, I propose a very fair trade. I will trade the second amendment for the fourth amendment. If the Bush administration releases the fourth amendment that it is currently holding hostage, I'm happy to consider the Supreme Court decision on the second amendment final and decisive. You keep the second amendment, we keep the fourth.

That seems like the fairest possible trade. My guess is that conservatives won't bite. They will continue the party line about how crucial it is that we follow the constitution when it comes to the second amendment and how important it is that we ignore the constitution when it comes to the fourth.

(original Yahoo post here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20080627/cm_huffpost/109531

_______________________________________________________
Back to yours truly here, with a weekly/monthly note: More than 40 American soldiers died in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq in the last month, with 20 coming in just the past week. Thanks, as ever, "W".

Oh, and to each and every person who voted for George W. Bush for President in either 2000 or 2004 or, God forbid they did it twice, both, our nation would like to give you a big, hardy "thank you" for the arbitrary war in Iraq, the largest deficit spending in the history of our nation, the division of the American people, $142.00 per barrel for oil and $4.00 per gallon for gas.

It's a real treat.