17 November 2006
let's start the weekend with some fun...
time is fleeting...
kind of a switch from Renee Fleming...
fun? huh?
just asking...
16 November 2006
an important question...
lately we all in the world have been bombarded by many important questions: Who should be our leaders? Is the conflagration in Iraq just? Is the US spinning down into a theocracy? Does nuclear power threaten more than just peace? Is marriage under attack?
But, isn't there a more underlying question? Something along the lines of "What really is important and might be the basis of all these other questions?
What gives meaning to everything else?
Some say religion or god. Some say philosophy. Some say humanity. Some say hope. Some say discovery.
The question I pose is quite simple and was put into play best by Richard Strauss in his opera "Capriccio."
I've literally seen hundreds of operas both live and on DVD/tape. Below is what I consider my favorite scene from all of opera featuring my favorite soprano, Renee Fleming. It is the final scene.
The countess confronted by the poet and the composer to make a decision as to what is more important - words or music - poem or composition - writer or musician - wonders why she has to make that distinction. This clip is eery in that the countess is both on stage singing the debate and in the audience watching it. The composer and the poet are also both in the audience. It's a tableau of life watching itself. The original reality?
I used to tell Ronald, "Life's a bitch and then you die." He would laugh hysterically. He died in 1990. I still miss him terribly some times. His death became a defining moment for me. I have not searched for the answers as much as the questions since that moment.
The answers are really unimportant. The questions determine what kind of life I have.
What do you think?
just asking...
But, isn't there a more underlying question? Something along the lines of "What really is important and might be the basis of all these other questions?
What gives meaning to everything else?
Some say religion or god. Some say philosophy. Some say humanity. Some say hope. Some say discovery.
The question I pose is quite simple and was put into play best by Richard Strauss in his opera "Capriccio."
What is more important? The words or the music? The poet or the composer?
I've literally seen hundreds of operas both live and on DVD/tape. Below is what I consider my favorite scene from all of opera featuring my favorite soprano, Renee Fleming. It is the final scene.
The countess confronted by the poet and the composer to make a decision as to what is more important - words or music - poem or composition - writer or musician - wonders why she has to make that distinction. This clip is eery in that the countess is both on stage singing the debate and in the audience watching it. The composer and the poet are also both in the audience. It's a tableau of life watching itself. The original reality?
I used to tell Ronald, "Life's a bitch and then you die." He would laugh hysterically. He died in 1990. I still miss him terribly some times. His death became a defining moment for me. I have not searched for the answers as much as the questions since that moment.
The answers are really unimportant. The questions determine what kind of life I have.
What do you think?
just asking...
15 November 2006
what's going on here (part VII)...
and on and on...
This man is unbelievable!
He's not thumbing his nose at us; he's giving us the finger.
The finger is always unfortunate.
Mr. Bush thinks that he is totally above the law and completely entitled to interpret his mandate as he sees fit.
Excuse me, but when did 48% (2000) and 51% (2004) signal a mandate?
just asking...
Source: Wall Street Journal, Wednesday, November 15, 2006
This man is unbelievable!
After calling for bipartisanship, President Bush surprised Senate Democrats with plans to renominate a controversial list of judges – some of whom may be unacceptable even to a few Republican senators.
He's not thumbing his nose at us; he's giving us the finger.
“It’s an unfortunate signal,” said one senior Democratic Senate aide.
The finger is always unfortunate.
Mr. Bush thinks that he is totally above the law and completely entitled to interpret his mandate as he sees fit.
Excuse me, but when did 48% (2000) and 51% (2004) signal a mandate?
just asking...
Source: Wall Street Journal, Wednesday, November 15, 2006
11 November 2006
what's going on here (part VI)...
sanity?
US 'open to Iran talks on Iraq'
will someone please tell me...
please...
is there hope? is it too much to ask?
just asking...
Source: BBC News Online
US 'open to Iran talks on Iraq'
will someone please tell me...
please...
is there hope? is it too much to ask?
just asking...
Source: BBC News Online
10 November 2006
beyond belief...
After the 2000 election Mr. Bush made it clear that he considered his vote to be a mandate to do whatever he wanted, even though he lost the popular vote and was given the election by the Supreme Court. [We should have known then that checks and balances was in jeopardy.] He said that he would be the uniter and steer a course as such.
His first days in office made it clear that he would not do what he said. He instantly began a reign of terroir with one self-proclaiming act after another. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead took on new meaning. He viewed his election as giving him the power to change the country, as well as the world.
Now, six years later and after Tuesday's election debacle for the Republicans and wing-nuts, he does the same thing. He tells the country that, again, he would be the uniter he was as governor of Texas. What does he then do? He pushes for Bolton's recess appointment to the U.N. to be verified before the 110th Congress ends. This in spite of both Democrats and Republicans against it. He comes forth with a laundry list of things that he wants enacted before the 110th Congress ends.
This man is truly out of his nut! He sees vote results that apparently the rest of us don't. He gives new meaning to audacious. He reads things in either a vacuum or from an All About Eve perspective. He gives a different spin to Richard Nixon's continual use of the line History will record without even saying the line.
He also is bringing in his father's advisors to help out. The media is almost implying that George 41 put his foot down and may have taken his son to the woodshed. I'm not sure anyone could do that to George 42 and have him take it serious. George 42 seems to be in his own little world. It's a world, as others have pointed out, that is the world of an addictive personality.
People who are alcoholics are alcoholics forever, taking a drink or not. Having lived through it all my life with my father, I recognize the state of not drinking but still not having the realization that you're not drinking. It's like the denial stage in Elizabeth Kubler-Ross' On Death and Dying or in the grieving process. I don't want to see what is going on so I pretend (deny) that it isn't and act the holier than me scene.
I saw the change in my father when he got past the denial stage and into the anger stage. Luckily, for him, the anger was directed inward at how he had hurt the people he loved. When he finally got to the acceptance stage, he became so serene, calm and loving - the way he always could be.
Some addictives never get past the denial stage or take an extremely long time in it. Mr. Bush appears to be one of them. He's placed all of his trust, all of his decision-making and all of his responsibility on other people and other entities. He may have just changed one addiction for another. Power? God? His faith? His place in history? just asking...
As Robin Williams repeatedly says, "Reality! What a concept.
Source: thoughts based on a post in americablog.com today Daddy's men to the rescue, but same old Junior
His first days in office made it clear that he would not do what he said. He instantly began a reign of terroir with one self-proclaiming act after another. Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead took on new meaning. He viewed his election as giving him the power to change the country, as well as the world.
Now, six years later and after Tuesday's election debacle for the Republicans and wing-nuts, he does the same thing. He tells the country that, again, he would be the uniter he was as governor of Texas. What does he then do? He pushes for Bolton's recess appointment to the U.N. to be verified before the 110th Congress ends. This in spite of both Democrats and Republicans against it. He comes forth with a laundry list of things that he wants enacted before the 110th Congress ends.
This man is truly out of his nut! He sees vote results that apparently the rest of us don't. He gives new meaning to audacious. He reads things in either a vacuum or from an All About Eve perspective. He gives a different spin to Richard Nixon's continual use of the line History will record without even saying the line.
He also is bringing in his father's advisors to help out. The media is almost implying that George 41 put his foot down and may have taken his son to the woodshed. I'm not sure anyone could do that to George 42 and have him take it serious. George 42 seems to be in his own little world. It's a world, as others have pointed out, that is the world of an addictive personality.
People who are alcoholics are alcoholics forever, taking a drink or not. Having lived through it all my life with my father, I recognize the state of not drinking but still not having the realization that you're not drinking. It's like the denial stage in Elizabeth Kubler-Ross' On Death and Dying or in the grieving process. I don't want to see what is going on so I pretend (deny) that it isn't and act the holier than me scene.
I saw the change in my father when he got past the denial stage and into the anger stage. Luckily, for him, the anger was directed inward at how he had hurt the people he loved. When he finally got to the acceptance stage, he became so serene, calm and loving - the way he always could be.
Some addictives never get past the denial stage or take an extremely long time in it. Mr. Bush appears to be one of them. He's placed all of his trust, all of his decision-making and all of his responsibility on other people and other entities. He may have just changed one addiction for another. Power? God? His faith? His place in history? just asking...
As Robin Williams repeatedly says, "Reality! What a concept.
Source: thoughts based on a post in americablog.com today Daddy's men to the rescue, but same old Junior
07 November 2006
freedom...
This has been on a number of weblogs in the last couple of days. One more now...
can we get it back? can we stop it from being attacked? can we make the democracy work?
just asking...
can we get it back? can we stop it from being attacked? can we make the democracy work?
just asking...
05 November 2006
what's going on here (part V)...
Pastor Dismissed for ‘Sexually Immoral Conduct’
He said that he apologizes for his sexual transgressions. BUT, is he apologizing because they were egregious in the eyes of his religion, because he is a hypocrite, or because he got caught? just asking...
Sex Scandals Not Unusual For Prominent Christian Leaders
Yes, there is a long line of these transgressors: James Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, Rev. Henry J. Lyons, Archbishop Eugene Marino, Rev. Terry Hornbuckle, Rev. Ted Haggard are the modern ones, but it goes back far longer. Popes, cardinals, archbishops, ministers.... [There has long been a story in my family of a great-great aunt who was the "housekeeper" for a prominent bishop or cardinal in southern Italy during the 19th century who had four children that lived in the manse with the bishop and her and who looked astonishingly like him.] So, why don't these transgressions meet the scandalous porportions in the eastern religions or more mainstream protestant religions like Anglicanism or Methodism? just asking...
Hypocrites?
David Frum thinks that it is better to be a transgressor than to be gay! Huh? In a nut, he proposes that men like Haggard who choose the "moral highground" of marrying, having children, preaching christian principles and encouraging people to live stable lives is more moral than a man who identifies his orientation and stands for his principles especially if they vilify traditional moral principles. Frum thinks that the former should be regarded as having a kind of virtue because he can seek forgiveness after slipping into sin through prayer. The latter is condemned forever because he will not see the error of his ways and does not ask forgiveness. Again - huh? Why would anyone ask forgiveness for being who they are? just asking...
Nazi 'master race' children meet
All right. Now this may be the answer to all the travails of the world: a group, designed by Hitler to bring about "Lebensborn" or "Font of Life" in order to identify, train and educate the future leaders of the empire. They have met in public for the very first time. Their goal is to support one another in their vilification and prejudice. They also mean to dispell the myth that the lebensbord were all blond hair and blue eyes. They included children from the countries the Nazis conquered. Does this mean that everyone is going to come out of the closet? just asking...
Kanye West Turns Whining Into An Art Form
"F--k this!" Kanye declared on the podium. "[My video for “Touch The Sky”] cost a million dollars, Pamela Anderson was in it, I was jumping across canyons and s--t! If I don't win, the awards show loses credibility. Nothing against you [J vs. S], but hell, man." O.K. Let me see if I get this right. Kanye West stormed out on stage at the MTV Europe Awards during the presentation of "Best Video" while winners Justice vs. Simian were at the microphone. He grabbed it and took MTVEurope to task for not giving the award to him because his video cost $1 million and Pamela Anderson was in the video. [It would have lost my vote right then and there.] So, I headed over to Veoh to watch the video. OMG! I should think that West would have wanted it buried. The song itself is horrid. It's bad rap, and that's difficult to say in the genre. Then I went and watched Justice vs. Simian's winning video "We Are Your Friends." Ain't much better, folks, but at least the music had a danceable beat to it. You be the judge. just asking...
or
Sources: New York Times, 365gay.com, National Review Online, BBC News, CB.com, veoh.com, youtube.com
He said that he apologizes for his sexual transgressions. BUT, is he apologizing because they were egregious in the eyes of his religion, because he is a hypocrite, or because he got caught? just asking...
Sex Scandals Not Unusual For Prominent Christian Leaders
Yes, there is a long line of these transgressors: James Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, Rev. Henry J. Lyons, Archbishop Eugene Marino, Rev. Terry Hornbuckle, Rev. Ted Haggard are the modern ones, but it goes back far longer. Popes, cardinals, archbishops, ministers.... [There has long been a story in my family of a great-great aunt who was the "housekeeper" for a prominent bishop or cardinal in southern Italy during the 19th century who had four children that lived in the manse with the bishop and her and who looked astonishingly like him.] So, why don't these transgressions meet the scandalous porportions in the eastern religions or more mainstream protestant religions like Anglicanism or Methodism? just asking...
Hypocrites?
David Frum thinks that it is better to be a transgressor than to be gay! Huh? In a nut, he proposes that men like Haggard who choose the "moral highground" of marrying, having children, preaching christian principles and encouraging people to live stable lives is more moral than a man who identifies his orientation and stands for his principles especially if they vilify traditional moral principles. Frum thinks that the former should be regarded as having a kind of virtue because he can seek forgiveness after slipping into sin through prayer. The latter is condemned forever because he will not see the error of his ways and does not ask forgiveness. Again - huh? Why would anyone ask forgiveness for being who they are? just asking...
Nazi 'master race' children meet
All right. Now this may be the answer to all the travails of the world: a group, designed by Hitler to bring about "Lebensborn" or "Font of Life" in order to identify, train and educate the future leaders of the empire. They have met in public for the very first time. Their goal is to support one another in their vilification and prejudice. They also mean to dispell the myth that the lebensbord were all blond hair and blue eyes. They included children from the countries the Nazis conquered. Does this mean that everyone is going to come out of the closet? just asking...
Kanye West Turns Whining Into An Art Form
"F--k this!" Kanye declared on the podium. "[My video for “Touch The Sky”] cost a million dollars, Pamela Anderson was in it, I was jumping across canyons and s--t! If I don't win, the awards show loses credibility. Nothing against you [J vs. S], but hell, man." O.K. Let me see if I get this right. Kanye West stormed out on stage at the MTV Europe Awards during the presentation of "Best Video" while winners Justice vs. Simian were at the microphone. He grabbed it and took MTVEurope to task for not giving the award to him because his video cost $1 million and Pamela Anderson was in the video. [It would have lost my vote right then and there.] So, I headed over to Veoh to watch the video. OMG! I should think that West would have wanted it buried. The song itself is horrid. It's bad rap, and that's difficult to say in the genre. Then I went and watched Justice vs. Simian's winning video "We Are Your Friends." Ain't much better, folks, but at least the music had a danceable beat to it. You be the judge. just asking...
or
Sources: New York Times, 365gay.com, National Review Online, BBC News, CB.com, veoh.com, youtube.com
what I'm reading...
I have this habit that I picked up from my father. It's called reading. He constantly had books, multiple books, that he was reading at the same time. I do the same thing. I can be reading anywhere from 5 - 10 books in the process of reading at any one moment.
Here is the current list. It kind of speaks to where my head is from time to time. Some of them have been in process for a while others I recently picked up.
In process:
The Conservative Soul: How We Lost It; How to Get It Back by Andrew Sullivan
The War of the World by Niall Ferguson
Misquoting Jesus by Bart D. Ehrman
The One-Percent Doctrine by Ron Suskind
Evolution's Rainbow : Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and People by Joan Roughgarden
Just finished:
When Nietzsche Wept by Irvin D. Yalom
Waiting in the wings:
Teacher Man: A Memoir by Frank McCourt
And They All Sang: Adventures of an Eclectic Disc Jockey by Studs Terkel
And in process for a long period of time:
Autobiographie Erotique by Bruce Benderson. [I bought this in Paris a year or so ago in it's original French. It hadn't been translated into English yet even though Benderson is from New York. It's slow going for me because of all the idiomatic language and colloquilisms. Even though it's now in English, entitled The Romanian: Story of an Obsession, I refuse to get it until I finish the original French.]
This list is in no way complete. there are piles of books all over the house. These are the ones in reach and current. I have others that I'll get around to eventually.
Reading is the most important thing anyone can do. It is the source of not only information but of pleasure, wisdom, riches, and position. I have been dedicated to teaching reading all of my professional life. When a kid can read, a kid can be/do anything he/she wants to be. If you have children, read to them every day. If you know children, buy them books that will last forever. If you have time, volunteer for a Literacy Program to give someone the gift you already have. It can change a life. Two lives - yours and theirs.
What do you have to loose?
just asking...
Here is the current list. It kind of speaks to where my head is from time to time. Some of them have been in process for a while others I recently picked up.
In process:
The Conservative Soul: How We Lost It; How to Get It Back by Andrew Sullivan
The War of the World by Niall Ferguson
Misquoting Jesus by Bart D. Ehrman
The One-Percent Doctrine by Ron Suskind
Evolution's Rainbow : Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and People by Joan Roughgarden
Just finished:
When Nietzsche Wept by Irvin D. Yalom
Waiting in the wings:
Teacher Man: A Memoir by Frank McCourt
And They All Sang: Adventures of an Eclectic Disc Jockey by Studs Terkel
And in process for a long period of time:
Autobiographie Erotique by Bruce Benderson. [I bought this in Paris a year or so ago in it's original French. It hadn't been translated into English yet even though Benderson is from New York. It's slow going for me because of all the idiomatic language and colloquilisms. Even though it's now in English, entitled The Romanian: Story of an Obsession, I refuse to get it until I finish the original French.]
This list is in no way complete. there are piles of books all over the house. These are the ones in reach and current. I have others that I'll get around to eventually.
Reading is the most important thing anyone can do. It is the source of not only information but of pleasure, wisdom, riches, and position. I have been dedicated to teaching reading all of my professional life. When a kid can read, a kid can be/do anything he/she wants to be. If you have children, read to them every day. If you know children, buy them books that will last forever. If you have time, volunteer for a Literacy Program to give someone the gift you already have. It can change a life. Two lives - yours and theirs.
What do you have to loose?
just asking...
04 November 2006
almost full circle...
Most of the time you read about celebrities making statements in the press denying and trying to extinguish rumors that they are gay. Neil Patrick Harris, on the other hand, had to put the kabosh on his being straight:
Well, now. The most avid denialist of gay rumors is probably Tom Cruise. He has sued people alleging if it's true or if isn't that they have had experience with him. I don't think that I believe that they did because they never say how good or bad he is in bed. One would think that this would grab bigger headlines and be news rather than the "he said/she said" content in the tabloids. [Personally, I could give two s****s if TC is gay or not. Except for playing Lestat in Interview with a Vampire I've never been impressed with his abilities. Event with "Interview" it was because he played Lestat as I had read him in the books.]
But, here we have Neil Patrick Harris who, after an article saying that he is straight, going out of his way to say that he is "proud" to say that he is a "content" gay man.
This does not bode well for the wing-nut christianists. Next thing you know, Rosie will be denying that she's from New Jersey. Oh, wait, she's from Long Island. Sorry, Rosie.
What's the world coming to?
just asking...
Actor Neil Patrick Harris Says He Is Gay
By Associated Press
Sat Nov 4, 2:01 AM
Aug. 19, 2006 file photo
LOS ANGELES - Neil Patrick Harris is gay and wants to quell any rumors to the contrary. "(I) am quite proud to say that I am a very content gay man living my life to the fullest," Harris tells People magazine's Web site.
The 33-year-old actor said he was motivated to disclose his sexuality because of recent "speculation and interest in my private life and relationships."
Harris stars on the CBS comedy "How I Met Your Mother." He started on TV as a teen, playing the namesake doctor on the series "Doogie Howser, M.D." Source: comcast.net Entertainment
Well, now. The most avid denialist of gay rumors is probably Tom Cruise. He has sued people alleging if it's true or if isn't that they have had experience with him. I don't think that I believe that they did because they never say how good or bad he is in bed. One would think that this would grab bigger headlines and be news rather than the "he said/she said" content in the tabloids. [Personally, I could give two s****s if TC is gay or not. Except for playing Lestat in Interview with a Vampire I've never been impressed with his abilities. Event with "Interview" it was because he played Lestat as I had read him in the books.]
But, here we have Neil Patrick Harris who, after an article saying that he is straight, going out of his way to say that he is "proud" to say that he is a "content" gay man.
This does not bode well for the wing-nut christianists. Next thing you know, Rosie will be denying that she's from New Jersey. Oh, wait, she's from Long Island. Sorry, Rosie.
What's the world coming to?
just asking...
03 November 2006
Misquoting Jesus...
A young monk arrives at the monastery. He is assigned to helping the other monks in copying the old canons and laws of the church by hand.
He notices, however, that all of the monks are copying from copies, not from the original manuscript. So, the new monk goes to the head abbot to question this, pointing out that if someone made even a small error in the first copy, it would never be picked up! In fact, that error would be continued in all of the subsequent copies.
The head monk, says, "We have been copying from the copies for centuries, but you make a good point, my son."
He goes down into the dark caves underneath the monastery
where the original manuscripts are held as archives in a locked
vault that hasn't been opened for hundreds of years. Hours go
by and nobody sees the old abbot.
So, the young monk gets worried and goes down to look for him. He sees him banging his head against the wall and wailing,
"We missed the "R" ! We missed the "R" !
His forehead is all bloody and bruised and he is crying
uncontrollably. The young monk asks the old abbot, "What's wrong, father?"
With A choking voice, the old abbot replies, "The word was...
CELEBRATE!!!"
Misquoting Jesus is actually the title of a book I've been reading. It talks about the very thing this joke is about. Who knows what the Bible actually said at the beginning? A perfect example that is happening right now is the christianists taking and quoting chapter and verse out of context. It's just another version of Misquoting Jesus. Click on the post title to find out more about the book.
30 October 2006
bull...
with the election next week, it's important to understand how some of the men and women running are ready for the gigantic task of making the laws of our vast country.
here's a little insight not revealed before today. [if anyone gets offended by it, remember the Divine Miss M's inimitable line...]
personally, i would trust the indian. wouldn't you?
just asking...
here's a little insight not revealed before today. [if anyone gets offended by it, remember the Divine Miss M's inimitable line...]
An Indianwalks into a cafe with a shotgun in one hand pulling a male buffalo
with the other. He says to the waiter:
"Want coffee."
The waitersays, "Sure, Chief. Coming right up."
He gets the Indian a tall mug of coffee. The Indian drinks the coffee down in one gulp, turns and blasts the buffalo with the shotgun,causing parts of the animal to splatter everywhere and then just walks out.
The next morning the Indian returns. He has his shotgun in one hand, pulling another male buffalowith the other.
He walks up to the counter and says to the waiter
"Want coffee."
The waiter says "Whoa, Chief!
We're still cleaning up your mess from yesterday. What was all that about, anyway?"
The Indian smiles and proudly says ..."Training for position in United States Congress:
Come in, drink coffee, shoot the bull, leave mess for others to clean up, disappear for rest of day.
personally, i would trust the indian. wouldn't you?
just asking...
I like the song...
even if the video is gratuitous,
i want to get up and dance...
even at 6 am!
enjoy...
eye candy for eveyone in the video!
i want to get up and dance...
even at 6 am!
enjoy...
eye candy for eveyone in the video!
29 October 2006
King George III = King George W...
and you thought you were safe...
Sources: Bush Moves Toward Martial Law & H.R. 5122: John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
Buried in the bill that contains much about the defense budget, insurance for military personnel, their families and veterans lies the seemingly innocuous yet infamous SEC. 1076. From the bill itself:
Then there are the words that ring out from the H.R. 5122: The President may employ.... It's his discretion. That is bolstered by the following: The President shall notify Congress of the determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1(A) as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days thereafter during the duration of the exercise of that authority.''.
as soon as practicable... leads to a lot of interpretation with lots of wiggle room. What if the president determines that the situation is so tenuous that it is not practicable for, let's say, 4 weeks because he is too busy saving the country? What if the Congress is on extended holiday recess? What if politicians are on summer hiatus? What if the president determines that informing the Congress is not praticable because he thinks that they may be involved with the emergency?
George III never had it so good.
Our forefathers fought a war to ensure the freedom of all men from the oppression of a government that is inflexible and relies on the right of might to have its will enforced at all costs - taxation without representation; billeting soldiers aka Amendment III in the Bill of Rights; Habeas Corpus aka the right to speedy trials. These are but three of George III major offenses at the time of the Revolution.
Where are checks and balances when the Congress hands this additional power to George W? Did they even know they were handing it to him? Why is this just coming out when George W signed the bill on October 17th?
just asking...
Section 1076 of the massive Authorization Act, which grants the Pentagon another $500-plus-billion for its ill-advised adventures, is entitled, "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies." Section 333, "Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law" states that "the President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of ("refuse" or "fail" in) maintaining public order, "in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy."
For the current President, "enforcement of the laws to restore public order" means to commandeer guardsmen from any state, over the objections of local governmental, military and local police entities; ship them off to another state; conscript them in a law enforcement mode; and set them loose against "disorderly" citizenry - protesters, possibly, or those who object to forced vaccinations and quarantines in the event of a bio-terror event.
The law also facilitates militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters, so called "illegal aliens," "potential terrorists" and other "undesirables" for detention in facilities already contracted for and under construction by Halliburton. That's right. Under the cover of a trumped-up "immigration emergency" and the frenzied militarization of the southern border, detention camps are being constructed right under our noses, camps designed for anyone who resists the foreign and domestic agenda of the Bush administration.
Sources: Bush Moves Toward Martial Law & H.R. 5122: John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
Buried in the bill that contains much about the defense budget, insurance for military personnel, their families and veterans lies the seemingly innocuous yet infamous SEC. 1076. From the bill itself:
SEC. 1076. USE OF THE ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES.
(a) USE OF THE ARMED FORCES AUTHORIZED.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Section 333 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
`` 333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and
Federal law
``(a) USE OF ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES.--
(1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the
National Guard in Federal service, to--
``(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United
States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or
other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or
incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the
United States, the President determines that--
``(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent
that the constituted authorities of the State or possession
are incapable of maintaining public order; and
``(ii) such violence results in a condition described in
paragraph (2); or
``(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic
violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrec-
tion, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition
described in paragraph (2).
``(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition
that-- ``(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or
possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that
State or possession, that any part or class of its people is
deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named
in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted
authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse
to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that
protection; or
H. R. 5122--323
``(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the
United States or impedes the course of justice under those
laws.
``(3) In any situation covered by paragraph (1)(B), the State
shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the
laws secured by the Constitution.
``(b) NOTICE TO CONGRESS.--The President shall notify Congress
of the determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1)(A)
as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days
thereafter during the duration of the exercise of that authority.''.
(2) PROCLAMATION TO DISPERSE.--Section 334 of such title
is amended by inserting ``or those obstructing the enforcement
of the laws'' after ``insurgents''.
Then there are the words that ring out from the H.R. 5122: The President may employ.... It's his discretion. That is bolstered by the following: The President shall notify Congress of the determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1(A) as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days thereafter during the duration of the exercise of that authority.''.
as soon as practicable... leads to a lot of interpretation with lots of wiggle room. What if the president determines that the situation is so tenuous that it is not practicable for, let's say, 4 weeks because he is too busy saving the country? What if the Congress is on extended holiday recess? What if politicians are on summer hiatus? What if the president determines that informing the Congress is not praticable because he thinks that they may be involved with the emergency?
George III never had it so good.
Our forefathers fought a war to ensure the freedom of all men from the oppression of a government that is inflexible and relies on the right of might to have its will enforced at all costs - taxation without representation; billeting soldiers aka Amendment III in the Bill of Rights; Habeas Corpus aka the right to speedy trials. These are but three of George III major offenses at the time of the Revolution.
Where are checks and balances when the Congress hands this additional power to George W? Did they even know they were handing it to him? Why is this just coming out when George W signed the bill on October 17th?
just asking...
"Road to Delusion"
Niall Ferguson in today's Telegraph.co.uk:
and asking, and asking, and asking...
Justice? Habeaus Corpus? Patriot Act? Waterboarding?
Honest friendship? Peace? Commerce? Iraq?
Power unchecked? Power as a source of being right? Power to right wrongs?
Washington, Jefferson and Adams would be leary of Mr. Bush. He has led the US into a quagmire and placed it near the brink of disaster. They would be aghast. James Madison would fall in apoplexy. [See the Federalist Papers.]
The current regime in Washington takes the opposite view: might makes right.
When will the US get back on the right track? When will the design of Washington, Jefferson, Adams, and Madison, backed by the courage of Lincoln to hold the country together at the cost of brother against brother, be taken to the next level of democracy in evolution?
just asking...
Source: Telegraph.co.uk with thanks for the heads up to Andrew Sullivan at Daily Dish
"We're not leaving," Mr Bush told Republican congressmen seven months later, [after the 2004 election] "[even] if Laura [his wife] and Barney [his dog] are the only ones who support me."
According to Woodward, Mr Bush once complained bitterly about the difficulty of finding a reliable Iraqi to lead the new democratic government in Baghdad. "Where's George Washington?" he exclaimed to his chief of staff, Andy Card. "Where's Thomas Jefferson? Where's John Adams, for crying out loud?"
This is a question many Americans have been asking themselves about their own leadership deficit, as the debacle of Mr Bush's second term has unfolded.
and asking, and asking, and asking...
Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people, under an efficient government, the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel. George Washington in his Farewell Address
Justice? Habeaus Corpus? Patriot Act? Waterboarding?
Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none. Thomas Jefferson
Honest friendship? Peace? Commerce? Iraq?
Power always sincerely, conscientiously, de très bon foi, believes itself right. Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views, beyond the comprehension of the weak. John Adams in a Letter to Thomas Jefferson on February 2, 1816
Power unchecked? Power as a source of being right? Power to right wrongs?
Washington, Jefferson and Adams would be leary of Mr. Bush. He has led the US into a quagmire and placed it near the brink of disaster. They would be aghast. James Madison would fall in apoplexy. [See the Federalist Papers.]
"Let us have faith that right makes might; and in that faith let us do our duty as we understand it." Abraham Lincoln at the time of America's bleakest moment
The current regime in Washington takes the opposite view: might makes right.
When will the US get back on the right track? When will the design of Washington, Jefferson, Adams, and Madison, backed by the courage of Lincoln to hold the country together at the cost of brother against brother, be taken to the next level of democracy in evolution?
just asking...
Source: Telegraph.co.uk with thanks for the heads up to Andrew Sullivan at Daily Dish
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)