5 Years After 911: A Bad Recipe for Democracy

5 Years After 911: A Bad Recipe for Democracy

At a ceremony at the Pentagon this morning, Vice President Dick Cheney called this a "day of national unity." Looking back five years, the call Mr. Cheney raised for unity landed flat and hollow. No doubt, all of our hearts, our healing thoughts, and our prayers are with our fellow Americans who lost loved ones in the 9/11 tragedy in New York, Washington D.C., and Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Our common human values unite us on such a day. We are united in compassion. When it comes to matters of government however, I believe that our leaders should have seen to it that the unity that they hawk like the new barkers of the modern-day Infomercial was not just an annually-found sentimental essence of a long lost passing fancy, but instead they should have helped to forge a perennial unity among American citizens.

It should not have to take a day like 9/11 to remind us that, in America, we were once united for a brief time. A heavily partisan and  politicized foreign policy drove us apart and caused the world to separate themselves from us not long after that ill fated day.

It should not be overlooked that it was free citizens of a peaceful country who were on the front line that day. It was a time of innocence and false security. Before 9/11, our President's administration knew we citizens were in peril - that the aviation system was under great threat - but they chose not to cause us to "panic" and bought our distrust with their deliberate silence. When the question "Are we safer five years later?" is asked and the President tells us that we are safer because of a war in Iraq, the great paradox - is, based upon what we know about the clandestine nature of this fear-mongeringadministration, we citizens have no clue - and no trust that the Bush administration or many of our Congressional leaders have a real grip as to whether or not we're at more risk than we were five years ago.

A war in Iraq has not changed the threat that hangs over innocent civilians here or anywhere in this world. It has fractured important alliances and confidences. The president and vice president repeat again and again that we fight terrorists in Iraq so we won't have to fight them here at home. Consider the impossible reconciling of the question of freedom, security, and sheer geography. If you asked an American traveling to Topeka, Kansas or Birmingham, Alabama if they feel safer now than five years ago, you'd probably get a positive answer. If you asked that same American traveling to London, Brussels, Madrid, Paris, Rabat (Morocco), Singapore, Jakarta, Jerusalem, New York City, or Los Angeles, the answer would indubitably change. Americans who travel to major international cities  are at great risk, and they know it. What does freedom mean when the security provided by your nation's foreign policy confines you to remain  within the borders of your nation for that promise of freedom and security to be fulfilled? If you add the fact that our civil liberties are restricted at a time of an undeclared, unsuccessful, and terrorist-recruiting series of wars within a war that has no end in sight, what you have is a grave danger - not only to the safety of Americans, but also to the health of their American democracy.

It's a bad recipe for American democracy. The proof is in the pudding.

The truth is that we citizens of America are less free and secure now than in just about any period in American history. It took five years for the fallout and the government's disgrace to be realized.

Five years ago, innocent American citizens wandered through the smoke and the darkness at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9/11. A new kind of soldier was born on that day in America. The first of our kind was seen in the actions of everyday citizens like Edgar Emery, a hard-working American who died a hero's death at the Trade Center while escorting five co-workers, including one who'd had just completed a round of chemotherapy, into a stairwell and walked down 12 floors, reaching the 78th floor and the express elevator, with Mr. Emery giving encouragement all the while. Being your brother's keeper took on a whole new meaning. When a stranger with a backpack stands next to you in the subway, the new awareness that you are in The Army of the Millions - not born of fear, but by information - is palpable. There were once hundreds of fundamentalists whose ideology and resentment toward the West  drove them to entertain the thought of killing innocent human beings. Today, there are thousands more emboldened young men and women who are ready to join the Islamic fundamentalist cause, thanks to a war-myopic administration in Washington, D.C. and a Congress that has failed to listen to the democratic voices of the people they swore to represent.

In a nation with leaders who wished to strengthen and empower citizens, there would be no fear mongering. We wouldn't hand out medals to people like former CIA chief George Tenet, who'd failed our nation miserably and who had been indecisive when we needed him to be decisive; then reticent when we desparately needed clarity from him about WMD in Iraq. We'd fight fundamentalists tooth and nail, but we wouldn't politicize secret CIA prisons and we wouldn't publicly expose our CIA agents because we'd understand that politicizing war only weakens our chances of beating the enemy in a vicious game. That vicious game is not meant to be the kind of game that has to be turned into horror stories to cow frightened and helpless-feeling citizens into duct-taping their windows and cowering in a corner (unless they're feeling brave and patriotic enough to go to the mall and shop). Five years after 9/11, we realize that the elected leaders of America don't trust or respect the views of their own constituents. Since we have but ourselves to rely upon in this new struggle which eats away at our base emotions, it seems that a good government would have empowered us and trusted us with facts and education rather than stoking the fires of fear within us for five wasted years. A strong nation is a nation whose citizens participate in making their communities safe and watch out for one another. We are the soldiers we never asked to be, but fate has conscripted us to our own self-defense.  

Although we citizens are divided on political questions, we are all caring people who are are still groping through the smoke and darkness of 9/11, thanks to a foreign policy that solves nothing and serves as a recruitment vehicle and an isurance policy for more terror; an administration who has deliberately misled us; Congressman who have ignored our concerns; and a government that has frightened us rather than strengthened us.  

On Meet the Press yesterday, Dick Cheney made excuses for staying a failed and disastrous course in Iraq. He said, if we change the course, what is Hamid Karzai going to think? What about Musharraf? I'd like to ask Cheney, "What about the people of your nation who appeal to their representatives every day for an end to a senseless strategy to "fight terror" in Iraq, whose government never had a connection to 9/11? In a representative democracy, no one seems to be listening to the new soldiers of America - the citizens.

It's a bad recipe.

Meanwhile, it's five years later and disappointed 9/11 widows (called "witches" and "harpies" by Republican darling Ann Coulter) still wait for the truth and they no longer believe that the intelligence agencies failed, suspecting instead that the failure lied in the hands of Pentagon leaders who did not pass along information to law enforcement.

It's a bad recipe.

One year ago, Hurricane Katrina showed us that we didn't care enough about our nation's infrastructure, which is one of the most important necessities for a strong civil society. Katrina proved we were not prepared for catastrophic emergency. All the rhetoric and promise about Homeland Security making us safer was swept away with the great flood.

It's a bad recipe.

President Bush had the comfort and support of the world on September 11, 2001, and he squandered it. He lacks the humility that the leader of a powerful nation needs to succeed.

It's a bad recipe.

The culture of U.S. torture and fear permeates the nature of our society and the way the world sees us.

It's a bad recipe.

The Iraq war has cost this nation 177 million dollars a day and the President has never called upon the nation for any kind of personal sacrifice. Instead, ideas that promote the elimination of taxes for the wealthiest put more burden upon the working class in America.

It's a bad recipe.

Poverty in America is on the rise while the Bush economy grows, taking on third-world characteristics. We see a staggering amount of concentrated wealth that recalls to us the memory of the pre-Depression days.

It's a bad recipe.

We are all Americans.

That is the message our leaders should be sending to us, but I'm not hearing it. Instead, we still have Donald Rumsfeld staying the same failed course which is disconnected from 9/11/01 and we get leadership in whom we lose more faith by the day, even though the Secretary of Defense is coddled by the Bush Republicans. 2662 Americans have been sent to their deaths in Iraq, a Muslim country that did not attack us and a war metaphorhas been used to win elections for those same Bush Republicans.

A bad, bad recipe.

On 9/11/06, we are crying for a new Betty Crocker. Unity is not gelling. If the cake is going to set, someone needs to take the poisonous ingredients out of the recipe.

Hillary Clinton and Polarization

Hillary Clinton and Polarization

Time magazine say those who "love" Senator Hillary Clinton have "an edge" over those who "hate" her. This is based upon a survey taken; the question was asked of Time readers. Look at the results. It isn't much of an edge. For whatever it's worth, this survey clearly shows that Senator Clinton is an incredibly polarizing political leader. In today's American political atmosphere, it isn't surprising. It isn't "good" and it isn't "bad." It's a reflection of the atmosphere in D.C., led by a GOP who have made a consistent effort to put anyone who opposes them in a mythic class of "Bush-haters" and "terrorist-huggers." This type of venom is repulsive to those elected Democratic leaders who simply wish for reasoned debate on war, human rights, and domestic issues. It's no wonder there's a clear ideological division straight down the middle.

The question is: Do we want to move ahead with a mind to end polarization? Who will lead the D.C. crowd toward good old fashioned bipartisanship? Is it even possible, with the Rush Limbaughs on the right and the new talk radio voices of the left? America is deciding where they want to be - in a political sense - with a wider variety of media choices today than ever before in history. The "second superpower" known as the internet is revealing the grassroots' true opinion - on the left and on the right.

The "center" is more of a myth than an actual solidified ideological position. "The center" represents those who have no strong opinion one way or the other - no radical leanings - some because even though they are well informed, they resent partisanship and radicalism - and too many because they are not well-read or well informed. How much free time does the average working adult have (or wish to devote) to concentrating on the issues? At election time, citizens go out to vote because it represents a patriotic duty to them, and often that duty runs far short of being properly informed. Talking points are all some citizens hear - and those talking points have been venemous and bitterly partisan.

Thanks to our leaders in Washington DC - our president, our Congress - and the wide choices in the media who report on those leaders' positions and public statements - polarization may simply be a fact of American political life for quite some time.

Tar Heel Tavern

Tar Heel Tavern

Tar Heel Tavern's up at Billy's place!

The Water Lily

The Water Lily



Broad water-lilies lay tremulously,
And starry river-buds glimmered by,
And around them the soft stream did glide and dance
With a motion of sweet sound and radiance.
- Percy Bysshe Shelley





Those virgin lilies, all the night
Bathing their beauties in the lake,
That they may rise more fresh and bright,
When their beloved sun's awake.
- Thomas Moore




But it chanced the other day that I scented a white water- lily.... It is the emblem of purity.... What confirmation of our hopes is in the fragrance of this flower! I shall not so soon despair of the world for it, notwithstanding slavery, and the cowardice and want of principle of Northern men. It suggests what kinds of laws have prevailed longest and widest, and still prevail, and that the time may come when man’s deeds will smell as sweet. Such is the odor which the plant emits.... It reminds me that Nature has been partner to no Missouri compromise. I scent no compromise in the fragrance of the water-lily.
- Henry David Thoreau



Water Lilies
Claude Monet

Photographs taken on Adirondack ponds - all by Jude Nagurney Camwell

Scholastic Provides Rewritten Guide to Focus on Critical Thinking

Scholastic Provides Rewritten Guide to Focus on Critical Thinking

The Scholastic company, who withdrew a guide to the upcoming docudrama about 9/11 two days ago because they "believe it was not in keeping with their high standards," has "rewritten this guide to focus more sharply on the issues of the docudrama as well as the background events."

This program is highly controversial because:

As a docudrama, it contains imagined scenes that some of the political figures who lived through the period say are misleading and inaccurate.

It is an emotional portrayal of a period leading up to one of the searing events of our time—one which I personally witnessed first-hand from our Scholastic offices (less than a mile from the World Trade Center site). Several of our employees’ family members died in the attack.

It is being broadcast in a period just before the 2006 elections. A major election issue is the relationship between terrorism, the war in Iraq, and other conflicts in the Middle East and Afghanistan. As such, The Path to 9/11 is viewed by some as political and partisan.

The new guide can be seen here.

NY25: Rep. Walsh Caught Flip-Flopping

NY25: Rep. Walsh Caught Flip-Flopping

At Daily Kos, a blogger from Rochester, N.Y. has posted an audio of a question he asked of Congressman James Walsh about the minimum wage issue, claiming that he received far less than an honest reply.

This USATODAY article shows that Rep. Walsh voted "Yes" last June for a raise in the federal minimum wage on an appropriations committee that had no official jurisdiction on the issue. The amendment was attached to a bill funding health and education programs, and it was expected to be likely stripped out when the measure came to the House floor.

When his vote counted on a similar amendment - Rep Walsh's vote was with the Bush Republicans - and that vote was "No". According to the Post Standard's Peter Lyman, the DCCC has accused Rep. Walsh of flip-flopping on the minimum wage. Rep. Walsh gave the excuse that he voted for the first amendment because it was attached to the spending bill for the Labor Department, where "it belonged."

Should the question of "belonging" change your representative's core support of raising the incredibly embarrassing $5.15 federal minimum wage? Are voters right to point out the hypocrisy here? 37 million Americans are living below the poverty line today.

You decide.

Bolton is toast

Bolton is Toast

Steve Clemons is reporting that John Bolton's confirmation as U.N. ambassador is all but dead - squashed flat - finito.

In his book Our Endangered Values - America's Moral Crisis, President Jimmy Carter questions some of John Bolton's past statements about the very international organization that he represents on behalf of our country. Mr. Bolton, who is the United States' ambassador to the United Nations, has publicly stated that he thinks it's a "big mistake for us to grant any validity to international law even when it may seem in our short term interest to do so." He has insisted that the United Nations is "valuable only when it directly serves the United States." Bolton represents the revolutionary new foreign policies of the United States. While he was undersecretary of State for arms control, Mr. Bolton made some false statements about Cuba's involvement in the production of biological weapons and when he could not force intelligence agents to corroborate his statements, he attempted to have some of them discharged. President Carter believes this kind of action epitomizes the kind of politicization of intelligence that has led to the Iraq WMD fiasco.

President Carter, recognizing that there are as of yet no commonly accepted definitions for this type of activity in shaping policy, has chosen to use "fundamentalism" to describe the conglomeration of characteristics attributed to neo-conservatives and/or to the extreme right wing. These are the people who dominate the highest councils of American government and approve of preemptive war as an acceptable avenue to reach an imperialistic goal. A dependence upon military force to expand America's influence has dramatically reduced the attractiveness of our political, cultural, and religious offerings to the world. He believes that our great nation could realize "all reasonable dreams of global influence if we properly utilized the advantageous values of our religious faith and historic ideals of peace, economic, and political freedom, democracy, and human rights."

John Bolton has been carrying the ball for President Bush at the U.N. The failure of his conformation leads us to see that the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee are seeing the value of the return to tradional diplomacy, which has been appropriately utilized by every Oval Office predecessor of George W. Bush.

The True Path to 9-11

The True Path to 9-11: What ABC won’t tell you by Kevin Hayden

Don't miss this definitive piece by the owner and chief operator of the American Street.

An excerpt:

After the USSR fell apart, our Presidents have had to redefine alliances, revamp our military for post-Cold War needs, compete with the rising oil needs of the world’s two largest populations in China and India, modernize our communications technology in the midst of a global information technology revolution, recognize that groups of terrorists were utilizing those same technological advances to build global terror capacities, counter that growing threat, and still seek, via diplomacy, the proper balance of ‘carrot-and-stick’ initiatives to try and move major oil supplying nations to less repressive societies, and to try to do so with minimal loss of life.

That’s a pretty tall order that takes time to achieve. From the time the USSR dissolved till the 9-11 attacks occurred was just under ten years. All three presidents during that period countered terrorists throughout, but each also made some choices that caused some terrorists to react with further violence. As none of the three presidents was a mindreader, it was generally impossible to predict the logic of terror masterminds, especially when new ones arose -like Bin Laden - who were largely unknown.

Yet, as information about such key terrorists grew, analysts could occasionally make successful predictions about likely responses. And that had to be weighed along with other intel data, in presidential decisions about Bin Laden and other Al Qaida leaders, as the avalilable knowledge about them grew. Thus, it’d be reasonable to expect that Bin Laden was unknown to the first President Bush, that Clinton, especially in his second term, would gain some advantage from the growing knowledge and the second President Bush would have the broadest knowledge of all available to him.

Satirist Fearguth has created his own artistic statement about ABC's decidely partisan fiction:



More Americans Get Their Distorted History
From ABC Than From Any Other Source

Most Blatant Lie of the Day: Marc Platt on Disney Disaster

Most Blatant Lie of the Day: Marc Platt on Disney Disaster

"We've portrayed the essence of the truth of these events."

This humdinger is from Marc Platt, executive producer of the Disney/ABC disinformation drama about 9/11 that is drawing strong protests regarding misrepresentations of the public figures from the Clinton administration and disgust from Americans who value a modicum of accuracy and political fairness in their television dramas about real-life political events - or who simply hate lies.

*As if he - or any of us - have a patent on the "essence of the truth" about anything at all. This "essence" stinks out loud.

See my prior post. In the late '90s, Clinton was just a "dog-wagger" to rightwing Republicans when he specifically and consistently warned them about terrorism; they made political stew of him at every opportunity rather than working with him to create an office much like Bush's Homeland Security to protect Americans; and now Disney and ABC will pile on him for not doing anything. Go figure.

See: THE WEEKLY ACTION COALITION: Tell ABC to Tell the Truth About 9/11!


*Last week, I wrote:

It's high time for former President Clinton to get real - to get angry - and to speak out.

Today I'm proud of President Clinton for speaking out and fighting this horsecrap. ABC and Disney will learn what economically nasty effects a boycott can have if they run this thing.

*The Christian alliance known as Cross Left provides us with an opportunity to voice our opinions to Disney.
See: A Despicable, Irresponsible Fraud

Open to the winds

"My heart is open to all the winds..

Wherever God's caravans turn, the religion of love shall be my religion. And my faith."


- Aribi, 13th Century
Sufi traveler and mystic

Message of Solidarity in Faith From Shalom Center

Message of Solidarity in Faith From Shalom Center

From Faithful America:

"Beneath the scorching sun of hate is a tent of peace - where all are welcome."

Yesterday's admission by President Bush that the C.I.A. has been operating secret prisons abroad stunned the world. More alarming still is his admission that "alternative methods of interrogation" are being used. These, along with the out-of-control violence in Iraq, growing unrest between the U.S. and Iran, and upcoming 5-year anniversary of 9-11 are just a few reminders of how hate and fear have taken hold in the press, in Washington, and in our lives.

Yet we as people of faith know that hate and fear need never be the last word. Every major religion teaches that the greatest power of all is the power of love.

On Monday, the anniversary of 9-11, you will have the opportunity to send a letter to President Bush expressing your thoughts about 9-11, the war in Iraq, Iran, and our national priorities. Together we will remind the White House that we choose to be guided by faith and grounded in love - not fear.

However, there is much more we as persons of faith can do right now. Imagine if somebody came up with a way for the many communities of faith in our nation to come together around the common dreams of seeking peace, ending poverty, and healing planet earth? Our friends at the Shalom Center, inspired by a unique alignment of religious calendars, have done just that. Now, stick with me here - because this isn't something that happens every day:

In 2006-07 the sacred Muslim month of Ramadan (starting about 9/24/06) coincides with the sacred Jewish month that includes Rosh Hashanah (9/23), Yom Kippur, and Sukkot. October 1 is Worldwide (Protestant/ Orthodox) Communion Sunday. October 2 is Gandhi's birthday. October 4 is the Feast of St. Francis of Assisi. After '07, this confluence will not happen again for thirty years!

The Shalom Center invites you to join the members of the Tent of Abraham, Hagar, & Sarah* as they connect partners around the country in shared events during the fall of 2006.

Here is a unique opportunity for Christians, Jews, Muslims, and other believers to SHARE in community events such as:

Arranging for each church/synagogue/mosque to host one meal for members of the others, after nightfall during Ramadan.
Planning public Interfaith Walks for Peace and Reconciliation that go between church, synagogue, and mosque, pausing at each for prayer.
Jews inviting Muslims, Christians, and others into the Sukkah, a leafy hut that is open to the earth.
Muslims inviting other communities to join in celebrating Iftar (the break-fast) after sunset on a night of Ramadan.
Churches inviting other communities to join in learning about and celebrating the teachings of Francis of Assisi.
Learn more at www.tentofabraham.org. You can also contact the Shalom Center at 215.844.8494.

Indie Film Review: Military Intelligence and You

Indie Film Review: Military Intelligence and You

At a time when we citizens of the U.S. are still scratching our heads over former Secretary of State Colin Powell's pre-Iraq war intelligence presentation to the United Nations in 2003, all of which was wrong, wrong, wrong and for which he is embarrassed today, a new film strikes a rather heartsick humorous chord.

Military Intelligence and You! is a unique satirical film that I had the opportunity to recently preview. It's a war spoof by Dale Kutzera, who has worked as a screenwriter for the past six years, first co-creating and producing the VH-1 series “Strange Frequency” and later on staff at the CBS series “Without a Trace.”

You can see my review of the film at Blogcritics.

Rumi Quote/Guest House

photo by Jude Nagurney Camwell


This being human is a guest house
Every morning a new arrival.
A joy, a depression, a meanness,
some momentary awareness comes
as an unexpected visitor.
Welcome and entertain them all!
Even if they are a crowd of sorrows,
who violently sweep your house
empty of its furniture,
still treat each guest honorably.
He may be clearing you out for some new delight.
The dark thought, the shame, the malice,
meet them at the door laughing,
and invite them in.
Be grateful for whoever comes,
because each has been sent
as a guide from beyond.

- Mowlana Jalaluddin Rumi

Tar Heel Tavern #80

Tar Heel Tavern #80

Ron Hudson has done a great job with this week's Tar Heel Tavern - #80. Don't miss Bora's entry on dolphins, where he debunks fallacies about and defends the lovely creatures' intelligence. He even throws in a lesson about neutrons, axons, and glia. And did you know that crows are highly intelligent creatures with huge capabilities for episodic memory, play, problem-solving, spatial orientation and perhaps even insight?

Billy the Blogging Poet tells us why we should boycott Jet Blue. It involves a t-shirt like the one worn in the photo you'll see at this article. Speaking of the blogging poet, next week please send your submissions to Billy.

HIV/AIDS: Senator Clinton Treated Unfairly by National BCC

HIV/AIDS: Senator Clinton Treated Unfairly by National BCC

Former President Bill Clinton leaped to the defense of the Bush administration's global AIDS efforts [Emergency Program for AIDS Relief or PEFPAR] recently, saying the United States is spending more to fight HIV than any other government.

Dr. Tom Raflaski, an internist in Albany specializing in HIV in Albany NY, sees things in a different light. 10 percent of all people in the world with HIV, mostly Westerners, receive 90 percent of the treatment. Data show that free access to HIV care may be the most important determinant of treatment success and prevention. Widespread HIV treatment reduces viral load so that transmission is reduced. Generic drugs can bring treatment cost down to a mere 50 cents a day. Dr. Rafalski points out that President Bush has fought the use of generics and universal access.

The domestic scene is also different. The former president's wife, Senator Hillary Clinton, has cast a lone protest vote on Senate approval of a bill (S 2823) that had passed the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Senate last May. The bill would reauthorize the Ryan White Care Act. There was good reason for that vote, even though her vote is being treated with anger by some activists. She voted to hold out until a new funding formulation is worked out to make the funding equitable based upon not only the number of state-to-state cases of HIV postive citizens, but the numbers of full-blown AIDS patients in her state of New York as well. New York has one of the highest HIV/AIDS rates in the nation, and Senator Clinton could not stand idly by and see such political injustice being done.

The Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency (CARE) Act, enacted in 1990 and reauthorized in 2000, is the centerpiece of the federal government’s efforts to improve the quality and availability of care for medically underserved individuals and families affected by HIV/AIDS. The CARE Act, administered by the HIV/AIDS Bureau of the Health Resources and Services Administration, provides funding to states, territories, and other public and private nonprofit entities to develop, organize, coordinate, and operate more effective and cost-efficient systems for the delivery of essential health care and support services to people living with HIV/AIDS and their families. [LINK]

I deeply regret seeing people like Harry C. Alford, chief executive of the National Black Chamber of Commerce playing the race-card. [as witnessed in the Washington Post]. Senator Clinton has said that the result of the bill as passed from the Committee would unfairly shift millions of dollars in funding away from New York and other states that have been hardest hit by the epidemic, jeopardizing their ability to provide vital care and treatment services.

If the $2 billion-a-year allotment that has been regularly reauthorized is no longer enough, our representatives should be fighting tooth and nail for more overall funding instead of fighting each other for the crumbs. In the past, funding allocations have been a matter of contention, but if the number of citizens in the South who have contracted HIV is rapidly increasing, the overall amount of funding available should be raised proportionately.

A commenter named North Dallas Thirty at a site called GayPatriot.net makes a strong statement about race and I wonder if his (or her) distaste for Senator Clinton has overtaken his common sense:

The reason Hillary wants to protect HIV/AIDS funding as it is now is simple; it’s in the perfect balance for what she needs.

She can claim at cocktail parties for white liberal gays how she protected their money.

She can claim at black church fundraisers that “those Republicans” just try to keep blacks down by not approving more funding for them amd reinforce their victimization and dependence on her.

This redistribution of funds based on where they’re actually needed neutralizes her on both sides — which is why she is fighting it so vehemently.

The commenter completely forgets that men aren't the only human beings who contract the HIV virus or who struggle with the symptoms of AIDS. Any American leader or citizen who plays the race, gender, or sex card over AIDS is truly disgusting to me. HIV/AIDS effects all people the same devastating way, regardless of their color, their sexual orientation, or their gender.

I support Senator Clinton's efforts because I can see clearly why she has chosen to take action that could be considered risky for her political image. I don't give a care that she's thinking about running for President. I know that's not why she made this decision. On August 31, Stephen Waldron of the Central New York HIV CARE Network in East Syracuse, NY wrote to the Syracuse Post Standard and said, in part:

..Sen. Clinton has taken a courageous stand on behalf of persons living with HIV and AIDS in New York state - and on behalf of HIV-positive persons throughout the country who benefit from Ryan White-funded services. [..] The best way to ensure more adequate funding for HIV/AIDS services to persons of color across the nation is through adequate increases in appropriations to the Ryan White CARE Act - not diverting funds from high-impact states like New York. Unfortunately, appropriations to the Ryan White CARE Act have remained static (except for modest increases in the AIDS Drug Assistance Program) for six years. [..] Until fundamental flaws in the reauthorization bills are corrected - a process that seems increasingly unlikely - it will be preferable to delay reauthorization, in which case current funding provisions will continue in effect.

I'd be the first person to volunteer to support an agenda that provides a hell of a lot more funding for those who are coping with and managing the symptoms of HIV/AIDS right here at home. But I won't stand for petty back-biting. I know that I am not alone.


*Related Story: 'NO' to AIDS Formula
- Syracuse Post Standard editorial
Sept 1 2006

__________________

TOTAL REPORTED AIDS CASES BY KEY STATES AND TERRITORIES, 2003 [pdf LINK]

New York 162,446
California 133,292
Florida 94,725
Texas 62,983
New Jersey 46,703
Illinois 30,139
Pennsylvania 29,988
Puerto Rico 28,301
Georgia 27,915
Maryland 26,918


_______________

Quoted at CBS Online

Quoted at CBS Online

I was quoted by CBS online on August 30th re: this Daily Kos diary.

Faith Friday

Faith Friday

• Frederick Clarkson has a great summary of rescued Daily Kos diaries on the Religious Right.

• Tim Simpson has an answer for conservatives who claim that Warren Buffet was only saying that he was against the estate tax repeal because he had lawyers and accountants working on his estate so that he would not have to pay a cent.

• Faithful Progresasive reports that poverty in post-Katrina America just keeps getting worse under George W. Bush.

• Lydia Cornell has received a letter from an officer (also a blogger) stationed in Iraq, and she urges her readers to send out a care package to these men and women who are serving our country. She even provides an address.

• At Street Prophets, PastorDan says that he believes the Church is at its best when it trends toward the counter-cultural. He quotes from a current column by Southern Baptist ethicist and leader David Gushee, who'd offered his opinion about the Iraq war last June:

"...as Christians, we need a distinctively Christian witness that calls followers of Jesus back to faithful obedience to the teachings of the Bible. We need to analyze dismal human realities, such as war, in light of what Jesus said about them, rather than using merely worldly categories of thought."

At Levellers, Michael Westmoreland-White also discusses Mr. Gushee's break with Just War tradition.

ABC Docudrama: Neglecting Pre 9/11 and Post 9/11 Realities?

ABC Docudrama: Neglecting Pre 9/11 and Post 9/11 Realities?

At Daily Kos, blogger theyreal is reporting that there's an upcoming ABC docudrama that will blame Clinton and Democrats for 9/11. Allegedly, Conservative leaders are pumping it up for all its worth.

Disgusting.

Who's failed to capture Osama Bin Laden each and every day for the past 5 years?
George W. Bush, thanks to the divisive, failed, and stubborn perversion he calls a foreign policy.

After all the educated warnings given to the Bush administration by the likes of Richard Clarke and Sandy Berger. they knew - don't let anyone tell you that the Bush administation didn't know that attacks were imminent in this country.

Their bungling and hanging out at the Texas ranch while death warrants were being written by Bin Laden for innocent American civilians can't easily be passed off to the Clinton administration, because Clinton knew about the danger all along and tried, actively and intelligently, to warn and protect us!

In the pre-9/11 world, back in the late 90s when rightwing as*holes were doing all they could to hunt and drag down the POTUS, they contributed directly to exposing our nation to sheer peril. Rightwing trash poo-pooed terrorism warninings and cried out for appeasing Bin Laden themselves - all at the expense of President Clinton's credibility.

It's high time for former President Clinton to get real - to get angry - and to speak out.

~~~~~~~~

The most important point to remember, in my opinion, is that we had a pre 9-11 world and a post-9-11 world.

Those worlds are nearly strangers to one another.

Look at this information from an AP article in 2004 about the preliminary findings of the 9/11 Commission:

Both civilian and military officials of the Defense Department said that neither Congress nor the American public would have supported large-scale military operations in Afghanistan before Sept. 11, 2001.

The GOP Clinton-witch-hunters would have gone all 'WAG-THE-DOG' on Clinton if he'd asked for a ground war on terror. They would have accused him of creating distractions to get America's mind off Monica Lewinsky. That's how much these rightwing bozos thought (and cared) about the threat of terrorism.

Here's just ONE horrific (but true) example from a 1999 article by rightwing harpy Phyllis Shlafly about Bill Clinton and his clear pre-9/11 world terrorism warnings. Schlafly tired to make Clinton look like a liar and an exaggerator. This was the late 90s-MO of rightwing fools and detractors, and we can see how it actually harmed American security via political shenanigans that bordered on evil intent. This is from Schlafly in 1997 (my own comments are in bold letters):

"...Bill Clinton is riding high since his "not guilty" verdict and, unfortunately, the Republican Congress is letting him get away with his foreign and domestic grabs for power. Kosovo is much more important to Americans than just pictures on the evening television news about a faraway conflict.

First, it's a "wag the dog" public relations ploy to involve us in a war in order to divert attention from his personal scandals (only a few of which were addressed in the Senate trial). He is again following the scenario of the "life is truer than fiction" movie Wag the Dog. The very day after his acquittal, Clinton moved quickly to "move on" from the subject of impeachment by announcing threats to bomb and to send U.S. ground troops into the civil war in Kosovo between Serbian authorities and ethnic Albanians fighting for independence.........

Second, by putting U.S. troops in Kosovo, Clinton is provoking terrorist attacks by Islamic radicals connected to Saudi renegade Osama bin Laden, who has declared a worldwide war on Americans. Fanatics bent on jihad against the "Great Satan" United States could hardly ask for a more tempting target than Americans deployed close to terrorist bases in northern Albania.

(note: It appeared Schlafly would rather have had us appease than fight so Bin Laden wouldn't bother us. In reality, Schlafly was wrong, anyhow. Bin Laden was supportive of Albanian Muslims/KLA, and curiously, so was the U.S.).

..Even more dangerous, entering the Kosovo war may provoke terrorist retaliation within the United States. It's not only our U.S. troops who will be put in mortal danger. Bin Laden has stated unequivocally that all Americans, including "those who pay taxes," are targets.

(*note: So we should have appeased Bin Laden??)

Clinton predicted on January 22 that it is "highly likely" that a terrorist group will attack on American soil within the next few years. He is using this risk as the excuse to create a Domestic Terrorism Team headed by a military "commander in chief," with a $2.8 billion budget. We should not underestimate the deceit and deviousness of Clinton's plans to use aggressive presidential actions to wipe out public memory of his impeachment trial......

(*note: An excuse. Hear that? Using terrorism as an excuse.....what a fool this woman was - as were so many like her at the time.)


Clinton has already issued a Presidential Decision Directive to authorize military intervention against terrorism on our own soil. Secretary of Defense William Cohen said in an Army Times interview that "Terrorism is escalating to the point that Americans soon may have to choose between civil liberties and more intrusive means of protection."

Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre has been floating the idea of designating a unit of U.S. troops as a Homelands Defense Command to take charge in case of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Hamre argues that the military's role should be formalized under a four-star general, and he has even speculated about creating a bi-national command with Canada called the "Atlantic Command."

(*And you thought Homeland Security was Bush's idea, right?)


The far-reaching nature of the plans being discussed within the Clinton Administration is indicated in the Autumn 1997 Parameters, the scholarly publication of the Army War College. The article predicts that "the growing prospect of terrorism in our own country . . . will almost inevitably trigger an intervention by the military." The article casually adds, "legal niceties or strict construction of prohibited conduct will be a minor concern."

(*note: General Tommy Franks recently said the same thing about those "legal niceties".)


The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 is supposed to protect us against a President using the Army to enforce the law against civilians. The spectacle of the military patrolling the streets of U.S. cities is something that should happen only in totalitarian countries and in movies like The Siege....."

(*note: And yet rightwingers think Bush's idea to take a chunk out of Posse Comitatus is fine and dandy.)


--Phillis Schlafly [Schlafly Report March, 1999]

This is how divisive politics helped bring about 9-11. Shame on all who participated then..and now.

__________

UPDATE: Members of Bill Clinton's administration are furious over having been so blatantly misrepresented by this Disney disinformation drama.

Quote of the Day - David Sirota

Quote of the Day - David Sirota

My featured quote of the day is from David Sirota. He's talking about the Washington Post's front page story this Sunday about the Democratic Party's position on the Iraq War, in which he believes the newspaper makes a highly misleading statement about the Republican Party's position:

"Here's the thing - politicians either support a plan to draw down troops at some point in the future, or they support leaving U.S. troops in Iraq indefinitely. There is no "middle ground" and there is no "third way." Being for one of those positions automatically means you are against the other position, and vice versa - it's a zero sum question, no matter how much the Washington Post, the Beltway neoconservatives or D.C. Republican Party operatives try to fudge the issue with warmed over double talk. In other words, this is the one of the times where Bush's black-or-white world view is actually applicable: you are either for ultimately bringing troops home, or you are against ultimately bringing troops home - and thus for leaving them as targets in the Iraqi shooting gallery indefinitely."

Mr. Sirota's entire opinion can be seen at his Daily Kos diary.

After Katrina: Bush and GOP Have Neglected Poverty

After Katrina: Bush and GOP Have Neglected Poverty

On today's Fox News, Bush point-man on Hurricane Katrina, Don Powell, proved to America that the Bush adminstration is intent upon rebuilding the curtain that hid the face of poverty from our eyes for far too many years in the city of New Orleans. Mr. Powell appeared proud to say that he was satisfied that the ports, energy, and tourism were "back." He said nothing about the President's blatantly broken promises to attend to the poverty that has been so pervasive in the city. If anyone who heard Mr. Powell speak on Fox News this morning had suspected that the government's slow response to the hurricane was due to racism or class discrimination, their concerns may have been further reinforced. Don Powell looked like he didn't care about the people while he was concentrating on the fact that the money-machine was rolling in the region.

Shortly after Katrina, George Lakoff had best explained how the hurricane had moved the issue of poverty into the forefront of America's consciousness:

"The Katrina tragedy should become a watershed in American politics. This was when the usually invisible people suddenly appeared in all the anguish of their lives -- the impoverished, the old, the infirm, the kids and the low-wage workers with no cars, TVs or credit cards. They showed up on America's doorsteps, entered the living rooms and stayed. Katrina will not go away soon, and she has the power to change America."

Last September, NY Times columnist David Brooks had anticipated "political disturbance" because of the fact that the victims of the terrible storm were predominantly black and poor. He explained how floods are also civic examinations. He said:

"Amid all the stories that recur with every disaster - tales of sudden death and miraculous survival, the displacement and the disease - there is also the testing. Civic arrangements work or they fail. Leaders are found worthy or wanting. What's happening in New Orleans and Mississippi today is a human tragedy. But take a close look at the people you see wandering, devastated, around New Orleans: they are predominantly black and poor. The political disturbances are still to come."

Almost a year ago in his Jackson Square speech, President Bush said that "the floodwaters exposed a deep-seated poverty that has cut people off from the opportunities of our country," yet he hasn't taken discernable steps to do a thing about it. Newsweek's Jonathan Alter mentions an article written one year ago that suggested the hurricane's wrath had prompted a fresh look at "The Other America" — the 37 million Americans living below the poverty line. Today, Mr. Alter points out that the federal government's neglect of the problems of the poor is not in the least "benign." Congress has been MIA on the issue of Poverty, and if you look at their tax cuts for the wealthy and their immoral budgeting efforts, it is easy to get a sense that this Republican-controlled governnment firmly agrees with Grover Norquist's "drown American social safety net in the bathtub" style of governing.

It is evident that the Philadelphia Inquirer's editors can see the forest for the trees in their editorial:

In the days and weeks that followed [Katrina], pundits, politicians and others expressed remorse that their nation had allowed the situation to get so out of hand in New Orleans. Not just post-Katrina, but before, when the poverty that made the storm's victims so vulnerable was cultivated. Their hand-wringing commentaries got the president's attention and focused the nation's attention on the many holes in its safety net - for about 11 seconds. That was then, and this is now. A year later, Washington's approach to the issue of poverty amid plenty in America is little changed: Ignore it as much as you can.

Newsweek's Michael Eric Dyson suggests that those who experienced a heightened state of consciousness about poverty after Katrina and focused on the government's need to attend to the problems of the poor that affect us all have been disappointed by the Bush administration and GOP-led Congress in the past year, when they had every opportunity to use their power to do something aboout it. Instead, the president (with a willing GOP-controlled Congress} have "failed to foster public policy and legislation that helps the poor to escape their plight. Instead, Mr. Dyson suggests, President Bush "remains intent on slashing tens of billions from social programs that help the poor combat such a vicious legacy.":

In the aftermath of the tragedy, Katrina’s violent winds and killing waters swept into the mainstream a stark realization: the nation’s poor had been abandoned by society and its institutions long before the storm. Since then, we have failed to acknowledge that grinding poverty is fueled by social choices and public-policy decisions that directly impact how many people are poor and how long they remain that way.

Over 70% of the Dutch economy operates below sea level and over 70 percent of the deaths from Hurricane Katrina were (mostly poor) people over 60 years old. Half a telephone directory after the worst natural disaster in America's recent history, the Bush administration and GOP-controlled Congress have shown that, with all of its wealth, their America isn't an efficient or caring place. If we were to be politically caustic, Katrina's wrath which took more than 1,000 (mostly poor) people in the city and displaced tens of thousands (mostly poor) people could easily be seen as a helpful Republican tool for eradicating poverty from New Orleans.

The tragedy surrounding Katrina had morally called, required, and empowered all of us to change America. It had driven Senator and 2004 VP candidate John Edwards’ “Two Americas” message front and center – and straight into our hearts and minds. American citizens heard the call, and what did the Bush administration and GOP-controlled Congress do about poverty? They ignored it after enough time had passed and once they felt that the cry of the poor had left the consciousness of the American public. They went on to pass one of the most immoral budgets ever seen and they are fighting minimum wage increase unless it comes in a package with more obscene tax cuts for the richest.