Erin Stout: Universities Cannot Provide Benefits to Employees' Same-Sex Partners, Michigan Court of Appeals Rules

(It will be interesting to see if there will be an employee/faculty drain on the colleges/universities of states that forbid these benefits to the colleges/universities of states that do allow it. I know that in California's higher education system they have the very fair system in which anyone can put their partner--no matter the sex and they do not have to be legally married--on their health care benefits. Courtesy of Virginia Blum.)

Universities Cannot Provide Benefits to Employees' Same-Sex Partners, Michigan Court of Appeals Rules
By ERIN STROUT
Chronicle of Higher Education

Michigan's public universities and other state-government agencies cannot provide health-care or other benefits to same-sex partners of their employees, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.

In an opinion released on Thursday, the court said that such benefits violate an amendment to Michigan's Constitution that bans gay marriage. A three-judge panel interpreted language in that amendment as barring public employers from recognizing same-sex unions in any way, including offering benefits. Institutions affected by the ruling include the University of Michigan, and Michigan State, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Michigan, and Wayne State Universities.

Officials at the University of Michigan said that they were "deeply disappointed" in the ruling and would support an appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court, as well as seek an immediate stay while the case is appealed.

Laurita Thomas, an associate vice president of the university and its chief human-resources officer, said in a written statement that the university is allowed to provide health benefits through the end of the year or through the end of the current contract for "bargained-for" employee groups.

"As an employer, we offer benefits to our employees and their dependents in order to recruit and retain the very best faculty and staff," she said. "Our benefits program allows us to be competitive with peer institutions, including private universities, across the country."

The ruling overturns a decision in Ingham County Circuit Court that approved same-sex benefits in a case brought by National Pride at Work Inc., a gay-rights advocacy group, and several individuals against the governor of the state and the City of Kalamazoo. That decision was appealed by Mike Cox, state attorney general.

The Court of Appeals ruling last week rejected arguments that universities have a degree of independence that allow them to offer such benefits.

Meanwhile, Ms. Thomas said, the University of Michigan "will continue to promote access to health benefits for our employees and their families."

Link

Starting a Literary/Cultural/Arts Journal

I'm thinking about starting one in Lexington (welcoming contributions from people from everywhere)... we have a lot of amazing people here in this community and I think we could make some noise/create some beauty.

I'm thinking about a combination of literature, art/photographs, film/book/music reviews, attending/photographing alternative events, cultural/societal critiques and interviewing people...

Although, I'm still figuring this out as I develop it, I do have experience and the will to carry it out... these kind of ventures usually require equal parts vision (goal-directed and future-thinking), stupidity (I like to think of this as being a dreamer, square society likes to call it stupidity, maybe we are both right in that it involves being oblivious of the fact that you probably can't do that), passion (a pure love for what you are doing that will help you tackle the impossible) and luck (I've been building up good Karma for awhile and I am ready unleash it).

I have been the managing editor for four academic print journals, edited and designed books for The Unit for Contemporary Literature and Fiction Collective Two and was a founding member of two long-running zines (one in St Louis and one in Normal, IL). I was a long-time music reviewer for zines on the West Coast and I'm currently a review editor for the cultural studies journal Reconstruction (and have edited and recruited the essays for two complete issues in the last two years: "Rhetorics of Place" and "Theories/Practices of Blogging")

I'm thinking of putting it online because it is relatively free, or for a nominal fee for web space, which I can cover, and we could remain independent for as long as we want free of the taint of corporate influences (except for any free music they might want to send our way)--at least until someone offered us a ridiculous amount to sell our souls.

So why am I interested?

1) I'm tired of wasting my energy on other people's projects/publications

2) I'm most happy when I am creative... this is something that I could really get into...

3) I think Lexington really needs something like this... I mean really the Ace is not much of an Alternative source when they have the society events on page three???

What do I want to know from anyone that might be interested?

My question is would anyone be interested in participating in this project if i get it going and if so what would be your interest? Creative... organizational... cheerleading (publicizing)...

anyone know a good web designer who might be interested in taking part (for the glory... thinking independent here...)

can you spread the word and ask creatives if they would be interested... i learned publicity from underground music clubs in san diego and word-of-mouth is amazing (my last journal issue I actually recruited written work from people from 22 countries simply through word of mouth publicity)

I know a lot of you are busy b/c of work, school, social lives and other things--people would contribute what suits them, just carve out their space in the journal/zine...

I really work best bouncing ideas off of people... its stimulating--so feedback is appreciated...

I leave with a poem by Marge Piercy, political in tone, but her message is about the power of people coming together to effect change on many levels, and for me creative expressions is transformative and liberating, helping us imagine possibilities for liberating our minds from the comformitive shackles that are used to reign in our explorative jouissance:

What can they do
to you? Whatever they want.
They can set you up, they can
bust you, they can break
your fingers, they can
burn your brain with electricity,
blur you with drugs till you
can t walk, can’t remember, they can
take your child, wall up
your lover. They can do anything
you can’t blame them
from doing. How can you stop
them? Alone, you can fight,
you can refuse, you can
take what revenge you can
but they roll over you.

But two people fighting
back to back can cut through
a mob, a snake-dancing file
can break a cordon, an army
can meet an army.

Two people can keep each other
sane, can give support, conviction,
love, massage, hope, sex.
Three people are a delegation,
a committee, a wedge. With four
you can play bridge and start
an organization. With six
you can rent a whole house,
eat pie for dinner with no
seconds, and hold a fundraising party.
A dozen make a demonstration.
A hundred fill a hall.
A thousand have solidarity and your own newsletter;
ten thousand, power and your own paper;
a hundred thousand, your own media;
ten million, your own country.

It goes on one at a time,
it starts when you care
to act, it starts when you do
it again after they said no,
it starts when you say We
and know who you mean, and each
day you mean one more.

Hiking Cowles Mountain in San Diego

I was on a very big high this day because I had just climbed Cowles mountain twice (I was trying to hike as much as I could before I left SD):

Foreign Service Institute Language Courses

(Courtesy of UFO Breakfast Recipients)

A great resource for those learning other languages:

Foreign Service Institute Language Courses

Indy Media

No branches in Kentucky (yet) ... why does that bother me?

Indy Media

James Horrox: Leo Strauss and the Cult of the Noble Lie

Leo Strauss and the Cult of the Noble Lie
by James Horrox
Get Underground

As the “Free World” slowly but surely catches on to the idea that its so-called ‘War on Terror’ is largely an elaborate fabrication, an illusion brought into being by Western leaders in order to justify the execution of long-held policy objectives, it is becoming increasingly clear that this one gargantuan, overarching fiction of our times has been propped up by an infinite multiplicity of smaller, auxiliary untruths. As new tales of corruption, faulty intelligence and ham-fisted governmental cover-ups unfold in Western “media”, it is becoming ever more self-evident that the culture of institutionalized deception in Washington is one deeply embedded in the strategy of those who have shaped United States policy during Bush’s tenure in the White House. While the reputation for dishonesty acquired by Britain’s Labour government during recent years is widely seen as symptomatic of a simple pathological inability to tell the truth, coupled with a desperate need to explain an ever-growing catalogue of blunders and a truly dazzling ineptitude at being even remotely subtle vis-à-vis lying through its teeth in order to do this, in Washington it’s a different story altogether; the strategy of deception so demonstrably fundamental to the Bush administration’s modus operandi is calculated, deliberate, and a crucial part of a new era in American politics.

* * *

The centrality of organized deception to the U.S. policy agenda is attributable in large part to a controversial political thinker by the name of Leo Strauss. Until recently, outside the political and academic arenas Strauss (1899-1973) enjoyed a position of relative obscurity, but as the principal ideological inspiration behind the Neoconservative movement he has over the last few years found himself on the receiving end of all manner of accusations, particularly as blowback from neocon bellicosity has finally begun to elicit something resembling meaningful dissent within the ranks of the American electorate. In fact, the first mainstream mutterings about Strauss began as far back as 1996, when Time magazine identified him as one of the most influential and powerful figures in Washington, “the man most responsible for the Newt Gingrich ‘Conservative Revolution’ on Capitol Hill", and the intellectual godfather of Newtzi's ‘Contract on America’ blueprint for vicious fascist austerity. Not long afterwards Canadian academic Shadia Drury echoed these claims in her highly acclaimed book Leo Strauss and the American Right, in which she paints a somewhat less-than-complimentary picture of the thinker; Drury again stressed the centrality of his ideas to neoconservative ideology and her book prompted a certain amount of discussion of Strauss’s role in modern U.S. politics in the sub-mainstream media. But it wasn’t until several years later, after the neocons had assumed power, after the twin towers had fallen, after the Project for the New American Century had taken the reins of the foreign policy agenda and America had made clear its intentions of all-out global war, that Strauss’s name began to enter everyday conversation.

So Why So Controversial?

In response to an article of mine on Get Underground in early 2006 I was rebuked by one zealous reader for rather glibly referring to Strauss as a “Nazi philosopher”. The reader in question cited the fact that Strauss “was Jewish and fled Germany in 1934” as evidence of his being nothing of the sort. Strauss was indeed Jewish, but the claim that he “fled” Nazi Germany is a more disputed one; it has been suggested that he in fact left the country in pursuit of a better position abroad, and that he did so on the “warm recommendation” of the jurist Carl Schmitt. In 1934 Schmitt, a prominent Nazi Party member widely known as ‘Crown Jurist of the Third Reich’ was personally responsible for arranging a Rockefeller Foundation scholarship for Strauss which enabled him to leave Germany to study in England and France. In 1937 Strauss arrived in the United States where he would remain until his death in 1973. During his career he occupied various academic positions in U.S. universities including a stint at the New School for Social Research, and most notably a Professorship at the University of Chicago where a young Paul Wolfowitz and Abram Shulsky were among his students.

Although Strauss repeatedly professed disgust for the Nazi regime in Germany, much has been made of his early relationship with Schmitt (to be fair, Strauss actually broke off all contact with Schmitt after leaving Germany), and also of his interest in the political philosopher and Nazi Party Member Martin Heidegger, for whom he continued to express admiration throughout his career. To attribute totalitarian sympathies to Strauss purely on this basis would be as unfounded as to do so on the basis of his similarly controversial affinity with the ideas of Friedrich Nietzsche. But while his supposed political loyalties with respect to key figures in the Third Reich have been enough to earn him the revulsion of many within the contemporary Left, it is for his own philosophy that he has attracted the most damning and most justifiable criticism.

In 1999 Drury set the ball rolling with her argument that Strauss is responsible for inculcating “an elitist strain” in American political leaders that “promotes imperialist militarism and Christian fundamentalism”. She accuses him of teaching that “perpetual deception of the citizens by those in power is critical because they need to be led, and they need strong rulers to tell them what's good for them.” For Drury, Strauss was nothing less than “a Jewish Nazi” whose “pretense of American patriotism and piety hid a cynical and extremist antidemocratic ideology”. This ideology has its roots in ideas contained in Plato’s Republic, a book Strauss dedicated much of his academic career to studying and one on which his own philosophical outlook would be based. A staunch follower (or skewed interpreter?) of the latter’s concept of the Philosopher King, Strauss essentially put forward a belief in a totalitarian system run by a sophist elite who saw their mission as “absolute rulers”. This elite would rule over the populace through deception and consolidate their position of power by disseminating myths designed to keep the general population in blissful ignorance and docile servitude. Strauss thus believed in a hierarchical social structure that sees society divided into two classes: the elite who should lead, and the masses who should follow. Unlike Plato, whose Philosopher King (a hypothetical paradigm and one never meant as a blueprint for reality) is more of a ‘benign dictator’ with the altruism and moral rectitude to be able to govern genuinely in the interests of the people, Strauss is unconcerned with the moral character of these leaders; rather, according to Drury, he believed that “those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right – the right of the superior to rule over the inferior.”

Deception for Strauss is therefore not just an unavoidable bi-product of politics but a central and necessary part of it, a condition of “perpetual deception” between the rulers and the ruled being the sine qua non of a stable society. Strauss suggests that “noble lies” therefore have a key role to play in uniting and guiding the mass of the population – the elite, in other words, need to proliferate certain “myths” in order to give people meaning and purpose and to ensure stability in society, on the basis that a populace dedicated to the relentless examination of what Nietzsche called “deadly truths” can never be conducive to social cohesion and a stable social order. As another Strauss analyst summarizes, he advocates a society in which “the people are told what they need to know and no more”, and he puts forward certain key myths that he claims all governments need to exert control.

Important among these is religion; in Strauss’s eyes religion is essential in order to impose moral law on the masses, and for this reason he had a “huge contempt” for secular democracy.While the elite few, he argued, are capable of absorbing the nonexistence of any moral truth, the masses would not be able to cope, and “if exposed to the absence of absolute truth, they would quickly fall into nihilism or anarchy [sic]”. But while advocating religion as an instrument of social control, he stressed that it was solely for the masses – the rulers who preached it need not be bound by it. Indeed, it would be ridiculous if they were, seeing as the truths proclaimed by religion were “a pious fraud” – i.e., lies.

Another crucial myth Strauss advocated was that of nationalism. Following a Hobbesian line of thinking he argues that mankind’s inherently aggressive nature can only be restrained by a powerful nationalistic state: “because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed,” he wrote. “Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united – and they can only be united against other people” [my italics]. In other words, Strauss believed that “a political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat”. Moreover, according to Drury “following Machiavelli, he maintained that if no external threat exists then one has to be manufactured”.

To read the rest of the essay

Free Skool--Congratulations on Your 2nd Anniversary

(Courtesy of IndyBay. What would it take to start these all of over the U.S., and the world, Lexingtonians we could use something like this...? we could also use an Independent Media Center...)

Free Skool Marks Two Years of Learning Outside the System

Grassroots project has grown to include hundreds of classes and continues to blur the line between teachers and students.

Santa Cruz, CA, February 1st, 2007: Two years ago this spring, Free Skool Santa Cruz started as an idea between friends. It was a resuscitation of an old idea: interactive and informal learning in a non-institutional, non-hierarchical setting outside of the monetary economy. In other words, friends sharing what they know with others in an informal skill-sharing network. And in two years, Free Skool has offered over 260 different classes on everything from DIY-philosophy such as bike repair and knitting to more academic subjects such as local and radical history.
In fact, looking at the quarterly-produced Free Skool calendar -- with classes offered almost every single day -- it is nearly impossible to easily summarize the breadth of the subjects offered. "History of the Future" falls next to "Don't Die! Wild Foods." " Polynesian Star Navigation" cozies up to "Surveillance Camera Walking Tour" on the Free Skool calendar. More mainstay classes -- language, yoga, cooking, and art. -- also round out the schedule.

As much as possible, Free Skool works to blur the line between teachers, students, and organizers. Teachers make most of the arrangements for their classes including subject, material, timing, and location. Classes are informal, egalitarian, and are held in homes, social spaces, and parks. "We are all students and we are all teachers here," says the Free Skool website. And once a quarter, students, teachers, organizers, and community members all pitch in to put on the Free Skool Community Picnic.

Organizers view Free Skool as an intrinsically radical project. It is not only a framework in which students and teachers can share what they know, but a direct challenge to institutional control and the commodification of learning. It is a completely grassroots effort, with no outside funding or support, a bunch of individuals working collectively and autonomously to make it happen.

New Free Skool teachers are always welcome. The deadline to submit new classes for the upcoming Spring Quarter is February 10th.

Spring Quarter runs March 1st to May 31st. Calendars for the new quarter will be available mid-February on-line and at most cafes, bookstores, and community centers in Santa Cruz and beyond. The Free Skool Santa Cruz website, which offers the current calendar, class reviews, and discussion, is at Free Skool

Patrick Martin: The Libby perjury trial and the Washington media establishment

The Libby perjury trial and the Washington media establishment
By Patrick Martin
World Socilist Web Site

...

The Miller discussions are particularly important because they reveal that the White House and the Washington media were discussing the charges raised by Ambassador Wilson well before he made them publicly in an op-ed column July 6, 2003 in the New York Times. His allegations—that the White House included false information about alleged Iraqi purchases of uranium in Niger as part of Bush’s January 2003 State of the Union speech—were first reported, without his name attached, in a column by Nicholas Kristof of the Times in May 2003.

The White House quickly identified Wilson as the unidentified official cited by Kristof, and a struggle began to vilify the dissident former ambassador and challenge his credibility. There was particular sensitivity to the role played by Vice President Cheney: in 2002, Cheney had demanded the CIA look into allegations of an Iraqi connection to African uranium deposits, a mandate that ultimately led the agency to send Wilson to Niger, where he found no evidence of any recent Iraqi attempts to purchase uranium.

Miller testified that when she met with Libby on June 23, 2003 he “appeared to be agitated and frustrated,” particular complaining that the CIA was engaged in “a perverted war of leaks” about the Wilson trip to Niger. Did she know, he asked, that Wilson was married to a CIA operative named Valerie Plame? He described Mrs. Wilson’s job with the agency and suggested that her influence had led to her husband’s selection for the mission.

The Times reporter had just returned to Washington from Iraq, where she had spent several months “embedded” in a secret military intelligence unit that was scouring the country for evidence of “weapons of mass destruction,” but finding nothing. This was a subject on which Miller had written numerous articles and one book, all of them supporting the claims that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was accumulating a huge stockpile of such weapons.

Libby had praised this work and became a regular source for Miller’s writings—or to put the relationship more precisely, Miller had become a favorite mouthpiece for the Bush administration to disseminate pro-war propaganda in the period before and during the US conquest of Iraq.

It was in this capacity of co-conspirator in the promotion of war that Miller was meeting with Libby. That is the only explanation for the next encounter of the two, at the Hotel St. Regis in Washington on July 8. This came two days after the New York Times op-ed piece by Joseph Wilson, exposing a key aspect of the administration’s WMD fraud.

In a breakfast meeting that lasted two hours—the length suggests more a working session of confederates than an interview between a government official and a nominally independent reporter—Libby proposed that Miller write an exposure of Valerie Plame Wilson, attributing the information he was supplying to “a former Hill staffer.” This description that was technically true, since Libby had once worked on Capitol Hill as a Republican congressional staffer, but deliberately misleading, aimed at disguising the role of the Bush administration in damaging a critic.

Miller claimed in her testimony that Jill Abramson, the Washington bureau chief of the Times, vetoed the proposal, but Abramson denies this. In any case, no story appeared, and the Times published nothing on the subject until after a July 14 column by right-wing pundit Robert Novak, naming Plame and describing her role at the CIA.

Miller testified as a witness for special prosecutor Fitzgerald, who had her jailed for 85 days in 2005 to compel her to answer questions about who in the Bush administration had discussed the Plame/Wilson affair with her. She only dropped her refusal to testify after a cryptic letter from Libby, discharging her of any promise of confidentiality, and suggesting—perhaps in coded language—that the two were “joined at the roots.”

The Libby case is not the only criminal proceeding in which Fitzgerald has compelled Judith Miller to testify. She took the stand last November in the trial of Muhammad Hamid Khalil Salah, suburban Chicago grocer, and Abdelhaleem Ashqar, a former university professor from suburban Washington, DC, on charges that the two men had organized financial support for Hamas, the group that is currently the elected leadership of the Palestinian Authority, but classified as a terrorist organization by the US government. Coincidentally, that trial ended Thursday with a jury acquitting the two men of all terrorism charges, while finding them guilty of lesser offenses of lying to federal investigators.

This trial, which attempted to retroactively criminalize support allegedly given to Hamas in the early 1990s, deserves separate analysis. The significance of Miller’s role is that she was called as a rebuttal witness to challenge Salah’s claims that he had been tortured by the Israeli secret service Shin Bet, whose evidence was a major part of the prosecution case. Two Israeli secret policemen testified in the trial, with their faces and voices disguised.

Miller described witnessing an interrogation of Salah by Shin Bet in 1993, while she was reporting for the New York Times from Israel. He didn’t appear to be a torture victim, she said, “He was boasting. He was jaunty. There was no reason to believe that he had been subjected to that kind of treatment.”

Aside from the dubious value of this testimony—Salah was interrogated for weeks, while Miller saw him for a few minutes—there is the extraordinary fact that Miller was invited by then Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Shin Bet chief Yaakov Perry to sit in on a Shin Bet interrogation of a “terrorist,” and the Shin Bet agents even suggested that she could ask questions.

Under cross-examination, Miller claimed that her visit to the Shin Bet interrogation center had been approved by a Times editor. Which editor, she was asked. “I don’t recall,” she answered. “We had a lot of editors.” She admitted that the interrogation had been conducted in Arabic, which she does not speak, and that she relied on the translation of a Shin Bet interpreter. She also claimed she could not recall whether she tape-recorded any part of the session, although she had described using a tape recorder in a 1998 radio interview. Miller was asked directly, by Salah’s attorney Michael Deutsch, “Have you ever been used as a Mossad asset?” Miller said no.

Miller wrote about the interrogation of Salah in a 1993 article for the Times, although she concealed the fact that she had actually been present at the session. In a 1996 book of her reporting on the Middle East as a Times reporter, however, she recounts the incident in detail, noting the invitation to join in the formulation of questions to the suspect, and asking the self-damning question, “Where was the line between journalism and participating in an official inquiry, and, for all I knew, torture?”

That after these revelations Miller remained a Times correspondent for the next decade demonstrates that the newspaper’s top leadership was perfectly willing to employ a de facto agent of the Israeli and American intelligence services, and even promote her as a path breaking investigative reporter.

To Read the Entire Article

Turner CEO Apologizes for Boston Scare; Haircuts in the 70s

(Courtesy of Nicholas)

BOSTON (AP) - Turner Broadcasting System apologized to Boston-area residents on Friday for a security scare that had bomb squads checking out electronic signs that were part of a nationwide marketing campaign for its subsidiary Cartoon Network.

Phil Kent, Turner's chairman and CEO, made the apology in full-page ads in Boston newspapers for "the confusion and inconvenience" caused as highways, bridges and river traffic were shut down in several areas while police checked out the signs, some of which had protruding wires.

"We never intended this outcome and certainly did not set out to perpetrate a hoax. What we did is inadvertently cause a great American city to deal with the unintended impact of this marketing campaign. For this, we are deeply sorry," Kent said.

"Our focus today and in the days ahead is on demonstrating to you the sincerity of our desire to do what is right. What happened in Boston is a humbling reminder that reputation is something we earn every day. We are working to regain your respect," the letter said.


(AP) The office door of marketing firm Interference Inc. is shown Thursday, Feb. 1, 2007 in New York....
Full Image


Turner spokeswoman Shirley Powell said the company is in discussions with Boston city officials on how to best make amends.

Mayor Thomas Menino has estimated the costs in Boston alone would be more than $500,000. Costs incurred by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, state police and the cities of Cambridge and Somerville could amount to another $500,000, officials said.

The blinking electronic signs were placed in nine other cities across the country, displaying a profane, boxy-looking cartoon character. They caused barely a stir.

But in Boston, the signs sent a wave of panic across the city where hijackers launched the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Boston officials angrily vowed to hold Turner responsible.

To Read the Rest of the Article

Even better check out the performative-absurd response of the two men who set up the signs around Boston and were arrested in the aftermath:

Press Conference: Haircuts in the 70s

A Friend Sent Me These Questions... Feel Free to Adapt and Post Your Own Responses (in other words do we really need to tag people anymore?)

[Marital Status] Single
[Shoe size] 9 ½
[Parents still together] the ones that raised me—birth father m.i.a.
[Siblings] four brothers
[Pets] tortoise shell cat named cleo(patra)
FAVORITES
[Color] green
[Number] 9
[Animal] jaguar
[Drinks] depends, in a hot place an imported beer, at a dinner party eating food a good red wine, hanging with my buddies at the cabin perhaps a bourbon—but always, without a doubt, my favorite drink, as strange as it may sound, is a clear, clean, glass of water (or hot tea when needed)
[Soda] don’t touch the stuff—and if I do I act crazy
[Book] too many, I’m currently reading Vellum: the Book of Hours (fiction) and Jung and Education (nonfiction)
[Flower] I saw blue roses the other day that brought me to a standstill, otherwise I appreciate Ocotillo flowers because they are precious desert flowers that rarely bloom and when they do it is so amazing!!!
DO YOU
[Color your hair?] no
[Twirl your hair?] no
[Have tattoos?] no, when I was younger I decided that I didn’t want to be co easily identified
[Have Piercings?] at one time in multiple places—they closed back up
[Cheat on tests/homework?] I have
[Drink/Smoke?] yep
[Like roller coasters?] absolutely, but only for short periods of time
[Wish you could live somewhere else?] YES!!!
[Want more piercings?] no
[Like cleaning?] I like a clean place, like cleaning no, luckily my first desire overrides the second statement
[Write in cursive or print?] print
[Own a web cam?] no
[Know how to drive?] from the smallest cars to the biggest trucks
[Own a cell phone?] yes, unfortunately
[Ever get off the damn computer?] when I am not working
HAVE U EVER
[Been in a fist fight?] yes
[Considered a life of crime?] as a profession or as a hobby?
[Considered being a hooker?] no
[Lied to someone?] yes
[Been in love?] yes
[Made out with JUST a friend?] yes
[Been in lust?] today—yes!
[Used someone] anyone who says no is lying
[Been used?] too many times
[Been cheated on?] yes
[Kicked someone in the nuts?] no
[Stolen anything?] yes
[Held a gun] yes, and shot it
CURRENTS
[Current clothing] jeans and t shirts
[Current mood] crazy and amused
[Current taste] relaxed
[What you currently smell like] who knows, but my soul is the whispering pine tress of the California mountains, or perhaps it is the clear clean taste of an Oregon babbling brook… who knows, come sniff me and tell me ;)
[Current hair] brown
[Current thing I ought to be doing] go to sleep
[Current cd in stereo] pavement
[Last book you read] Dogville vs. Hollywood (I’m a film teacher and it is one of my favorite recent film books)
[Last movie you saw] Last King of Scotland (in the theater) Yes (with friends on DVD)
[Last thing you ate] You mean food? Pesto … (olive oil, garlic, basil, pine nuts) and pasta
[Last person you talked to on the phone] Lea, my insurance agent
[Do drugs?] everyone does one way or the other--what's your drug, have you deciphere your "algebra of need"?
[Believe there is life on other planets?] it seems that it must be possible—otherwise… we are just this amazing circumstance of fortune that should have never happened in the billions x billions x billions x billions of opportunities… hmmm ….
Remember your first love?] hi Monique
[Still love him/her?] Yes, and she is getting married this February and I still love her xoxo
[Read the newspaper?] online these days
[Have any gay or lesbian friends?] yes, and relatives
[Believe in miracles?] yes
[Do well in school?] yes (high school dropout = professor)
[Wear hats] only when it is cold
[Hate yourself?] I gave that up—it wasn’t really helping
[Have an obsession?] today? Or tomorrow?
[Collect anything?] books
[Have a best friend?] yes
[Close friends?] steph/amy/tim/zack/liz/jeff/bob/rik/tina/wes/danny
[Like your handwriting?] don’t think about it much
[Care about looks] my taste involve the spirit of a person and their looks
LOVE LIFE
[First crush] Rosie (sounds like a song???)
[First kiss] Rosie (nice to have your first crush and first kiss the same???)
[Do you believe in love at first sight?] yes
[Do you believe in "the one?"] see above

[Are you a tease?] yes
[Too shy to make the first move?] depends, sometimes I’m supremely confident, sometimes I am very shy, sometimes I am unaware, sometimes I am way to aware….
ARE U A
[Daydreamer] excuse me what did you say? I was somewhere else….
[Bitch/Asshole] I vacillate
[sarcastic] not really—but I have my moments
[Angel] my grandmother who said she would always watch over me
[Devil] my shadow
[Shy] I am very—but I struggle to overcome it
[Talkative] see above

Why My Comment Moderation Switch Is ON

I recently engaged in a long heated discussion with another blogger on this site. The blogger would post a couple of comments a day (always on the same post) and I, of course, would reply. It soon got ugly because in my discussions (and arguments) I usually like to define what it is I am talking about and make some connections-- I expect the same from those who engage with me at this site--my daily commenter didn't like this and began to criticize me for being 1) a man 2) negative

Let me address each in turn:

1) Yes I do have a penis and I suppose that may (or may not) give me some tendecies, but I reject simplistic deterministic dismissals that I am just a man and part of this grand conspiracy to keep women down (excuse if I am wrong, as a supporter of women's and gender-based social-justice issues, I always thought that we were trying to move past this type of thinking?). My statement to this effect just made my commenter even more mad (not mad in a creative way)/nasty (not nasty in a fun way) because of a need to fit my critique of this commenter into a deterministic dismissal that would allow this commenter to avoid ever addressing the critiques and permit this commenter to climb up on a dais and make pronouncements of my essential unworthiness because I have an outie and not an innie (in case my babbling has caused you to drift, we are not talking about belly buttons here).

2) I stated on this site that I was trying to avoid negative forces (this constant commenter who refused to provide any clarificiations of the positions being professed and dismissing all responses as simply examples of negative masculinity--a good example), not that I am never negative, angry, dark, cynical, mocking, afraid, anxious, etc... just that i was trying to avoid these things. I view the world and all of us in it as engaged in this crazy imporbable absurd dance of life--this causes me to be playful, absurd, questioning (constantly), laughing, and puzzled in order to make sense out of the chaos and to deal with the madness (I don't know about the rest of the world, but Americans who think everything is OK and don't sense the absurdity/chaos make me very, very nervous).

Anyway, the commenter then proceeded to send me emails at my film studies email, my personal email--multiple emails everyday... I will be the first to admit that I soon moved from amused to annoyed to angry--wishing to avoid those negative feelings I blocked the blogger from my emails and set the moderation button on at this site.

I apologize to anyone else this may inconvenience (I always like immediate posting of comments)

Globalization: Theory/Studies/Ethnographies

I've been busy studying other areas and have ignored this for awhile ... what would you (yeah you reading this) suggest?

Thanks for any comments/suggestions!

Nancy Gregg: Get Over It

(Dedicated to the family, friends, enemies, and strangers, who insisted I just "get over it")

Get Over It
Nancy Gregg
My Town (posted by Harlan Bennett)

An Excerpt:

I am an American. I will not be dismissed, minimalized or marginalized, especially by hypocrites like Scalia et al, who persist in throwing rocks at my patriotism from inside their glass houses.

I will not be preached to by warmongering pseudo-Christians; I will not be reminded of the importance of family values by people who have no values at all. I will not be lied to, stolen from, manipulated. I will not be assuaged by meaningless rhetoric; I will not be lectured on the topic of honesty by people who wouldn't recognize the truth if it walked up to them on the street and bit them in the
ass.

I will not be condescended to by people who are as immoral as they are greedy and self-serving. I will not be shooed away from the adult dinner table like an ignorant child, while the alleged grown-ups plot the destruction of my own nation, or the nations of others. I will not be told to remain silent in the face of wrongdoing. I will not relinquish a single freedom that is my birthright as an American.

And no, I WILL NOT GET OVER IT.

When my fellow citizens are suffering, I will speak out for them, and stand with them. When disaster strikes, I will not GET OVER IT by going shopping, or attending a birthday party, or catching a ballgame. REAL AMERICANS don't do things like that - and besides, it seems pretty obvious that those jobs are already taken.

REAL AMERICANS do not need to be told how to act, or how to react. We know what needs to be done, and we do it every time. Within minutes of the 9/11 attack, firefighters, police officers, and emergency workers were on the scene. They risked their lives to save others without hesitation. Not one of them walked away in an attempt to GET OVER IT. And dare I say it? Not one of them found it necessary to stop and read The Pet Goat in its entirety before springing into action.

REAL AMERICANS don't condone torture, secret prisons, or rendition. REAL AMERICANS don't look at photographs from Abu Ghraib and GET OVER IT. REAL AMERICANS don't watch footage of dead Iraqi children on the nightly news and GET OVER IT. REAL AMERICANS don't read about their soldiers being wounded and killed in an ill-disguised attempt to put MONEY into the pockets of the rich and the powerful and GET OVER IT.

This Administration, and the elected officials who support it, have brazenly picked a fight with myself and my fellow citizens. Wrong move, wrong crowd. They obviously don't know who they're up against. You see, real Americans don't GET OVER IT when it's their own country under siege. They don't kneel, they don't bow, they don't yield.

The American people are now standing knee-deep in a foul-smelling liquid. They know what it looks like, what it smells like; they KNOW what it is. So stop telling us it's raining. Stop trotting yourselves out into the public square with your half-truths and your spin. We all know the emperor has no clothes; don't insult our intelligence with grandiose descriptions of his wardrobe.

Entire Rant ;)

On You Tube: Media Coverage of the January 27th Washington D.C. Peace/Antiwar Protest

(Courtesy of Rebbeca Glasscock and You Tube)

Media Coverage of the Protest

This is a FOX5 coverage--what is most amusing is their statement that there was a somewhat smaller group of pro-war protestors (hundreds of thousands of Peace protestors and 20 Pro-War protestors... hmmm, yeah that is somewhat smaller...), there emphasis on a minor event where people charged the Capitol steps, and their huge emphasis on Jane Fonda's appearance (knowing the gut reaction of their target audience) with no mention of any other speakers that were present. There was this 12 year old named Maria who spoke to the Washington Mall crowd, she was very inspirational and the best speaker of the whole event--I look forward to what she will do in the future!

Most telling for me--hundreds of thousands of protestors and not one arrest!!!

(Message from Jessica Hays)

Minimum Wage Lobby Day!
$$$$$SSSSSSSSSS$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Thursday, February 8
$$$$$SSSSSSSSSS$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Kentuckians For The Commonwealth is launching a focused lobby day to push HB 17, legislation that will

· raise KY’s minimum wage to
$7.00
· expand its coverage to tipped employees
· index that wage to the cost of living, so it doesn’t flatline again.

We can get this passed! You can make the difference!

No lobbying experience necessary! On-site training!

Quick Facts: Cost-of-living changes since
1997:Food + 23%
Housing + 29%
Medical care + 43%
Child care + 52%
Gasoline + 134%
Minimum Wage has flatlined: 0%

Twenty-nine states and D.C. have raised their minimum wage. Ten of these have laws that index the minimum wage to adjust for cost of living increases. Come share your stories about our need to raise Kentucky’s wage!

We’ll team up to tell legislators our arguments and stories about the need to raise the wage.
If you’re interested in taking part in this lobby day, please contact Jessica Hays at 859.533.0613 or jessicabreen@kftc.org. We’ll meet in the Capitol Annex, Room 113 on Feb. 8 at 9:00, but come when you can!

R.E.M.: Fretless

(Has been getting to me today...)

Fretless
R.E.M.

He's got his work and she comes easy
They each come around when the other is gone
Me, I think I got stuck somewhere in between
I wouldn't confide in the Prodigal Son
The die has been cast, the battle is won
The bullets were blanks, a double aught gun
I couldn't admit to a minute of fun

They come and they come and they come and they come
I accepted with a gentle tongue
No words spoken, no need to speak
Take it, stomp twice, ring the bell
Tether that ring and phrase
Enough with the rifle and talk already
We all know what it means
Take this conversation to your great divide
I can only swallow what I ate
And I don't hate him
And I don't hate her

They come and they come and they come and they come
I accepted with a gentle tongue
No heart broken, no need to speak
(Don't talk to me) Don't talk to me about being alone
(Don't talk to me) Don't talk to me about being alone
(Don't talk to me) Don't talk to me about being alone
Reach for each other before you leave
Reach peace with an E-A-C
Don't threaten me with a gentle tease
Don't threaten me with angry
Please, please, please
Don't try to tell me what I am

They come and they come and they come and they come
I accepted with a gentle tongue
No words broken, no need to speak
(Talk to me) Don't talk to me
(Talk to me) Don't talk to me

Katrina vanden Heuvel: Top 10 Solutions for a More Perfect Union

(Courtesy of Rebecca Glasscock, fellow DC marcher/protestor... these suggestions are so essential I had to put the whole article up...)

Top 10 Solutions for a More Perfect Union
By Katrina vanden Heuvel,
The Nation and AlterNet

The "thumping" taken by the Republican Congress on election day was not just a rejection of K Street corruption and the catastrophe in Iraq. It was a call to action on issues that are more immediately relevant to people's lives. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will begin to answer that call by pushing a "100 Hours" agenda -- including common-sense legislation to increase the minimum wage, cut interest on student loans and open the way for Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices.

That's a good beginning, but it's only a down payment on a broader agenda. Progressives now have the opportunity to develop a new vision that returns power to the American people for the first time in generations. But to-do lists don't add up to a vision. But Democrats must show they are serious by passing bold measures that define a new "people's agenda." With that in mind, here are ten existing pieces of legislation that deserve to be passed by our new Congress. Some of these bills are eminently passable, a few are related to the "100 Hours" agenda and others can be seen as long-term goals. But all would help return our nation to the path to a more perfect union (note: Bill numbers may change in the new Congress).

1. Healthcare for All
More than 47 million Americans are now living without health coverage. Representative John Conyers's United States National Health Insurance Act (HR 676) would create a single-payer healthcare system by expanding Medicare to every resident. All necessary medical care would be covered -- from prescription drugs to hospital services to long-term care. There would be no deductibles or co-payments. Funding would come from sources including savings from negotiated bulk procurement of medications; a tax on the top 5 percent of income earners; and a phased-in payroll tax that is lower than what employers currently pay for less comprehensive employee health coverage. With 78 Congressional co-sponsors, and the endorsement of more than 200 labor organizations as well as healthcare groups, there is muscle and momentum behind this bill. To get involved, check out Healthcare-Now.org.

2. Counting Every Vote
Representative Rush Holt has introduced the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act (HR 550) requiring all voting systems to provide a voter-verified paper trail to serve as the official ballot for recounts and audits. It would also insure accessibility for voters with disabilities. The bill, which was introduced in February 2005 and which currently has 222 bipartisan co-sponsors, was tied up in committee by the Republican Congress. Senators Hillary Clinton and Barbara Boxer and Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones introduced the Count Every Vote Act (S 450 and HR 939), which also calls for a voter-verified paper trail and would improve access for language minority voters, illiterate voters and voters with disabilities. Co-sponsors of that legislation include Senators John Kerry, Frank Lautenberg, Patrick Leahy and Barbara Mikulski, and seventy-nine House members.

3. Healthy Families Act
According to Washington Post columnist Amy Joyce, "nearly half of all private-sector workers in the United States do not have a single day of paid sick leave. And more do not have a paid day off that can be used to care for a sick child." Seventy-five percent of low-wage workers lack paid sick leave -- the very people who can least afford to take a day off and still be able to pay the bills. In 2005 Senator Edward Kennedy and Representative Rosa DeLauro introduced the Healthy Families Act (S 932 and HR 1902) -- a bill that would require employers with fifteen or more workers to provide one week of paid sick leave for those who work thirty or more hours a week. Employees who work less than that would receive prorated leave. The leave could be used to care for family as well. The new Democratic Congress is expected to hold hearings on the legislation, which has fifteen original co-sponsors in the Senate and seventy-one in the House, in early 2007.

4. The Right to Organize
The Employee Free Choice Act (S 842 and HR 1696) would strengthen workers' freedom to organize by requiring employers to recognize a union after a majority of workers sign cards authorizing representation. It also would create stronger penalties for management violations of the right to organize when workers seek to form a union. Currently there are 214 co-sponsors of Representative George Miller's House bill (including fourteen Republicans) and forty-four co-sponsors of Kennedy's legislation in the Senate (including Republican Senator Arlen Specter). This legislation would go a long way toward helping the 57 million nonunion workers in the United States who, according to polls, would form a union tomorrow if given the opportunity.

5. No Permanent Bases in Iraq
Representative Barbara Lee, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, has proposed House Conference Resolution 197, which declares that it is "the policy of the United States not to enter into any base agreement with the Government of Iraq that would lead to a permanent United States military presence in Iraq." By passing this bill, Congress can send a clear and immediate signal to the Iraqi people and the international community that the United States has no intention of staying in Iraq indefinitely. There were eighty-six co-sponsors of Lee's legislation, including three Republicans.

6. Stop Outsourcing Torture
Representative Ed Markey's Torture Outsourcing Prevention Act (HR 952) directs the Secretary of State to submit to Congress an annual list of countries where there are substantial grounds for believing that torture or cruel and degrading treatment is commonly used in detention or interrogation. The bill prohibits the direct or indirect transfer or return of people by the United States for the purpose of detention, interrogation, trial or other purposes to a listed country. Given the recent history of black sites, torture flights, innocent victims and suspension of habeas corpus, this legislation should be an immediate priority. It is one modest step in the right direction. It currently has seventy-seven co-sponsors.

7. Access to Higher Education
Senator Richard Durbin and Representative George Miller's Reverse the Raid on Student Aid Act (S 2573 and HR 5150) would cut interest rates on college loans for student and parent borrowers. The legislation would save $5,600 for the typical student borrower, who currently graduates with $17,500 in student-loan debt. The Durbin-Miller legislation cuts interest rates in half, from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent, for students with subsidized loans, and from 8.5 percent to 4.25 percent for parents. Earlier this year, the GOP Congress cut $12 billion out of federal student aid programs to help finance tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans. The average tuition and fees at four-year public colleges have risen 40 percent when adjusted for inflation, since 2001, according to the College Board's Annual Survey of Colleges. And the average student debt has increased by more than 50 percent over the past decade, according to the Project on Student Debt. With economic inequality and the concentration of wealth reaching unprecedented levels, improving access to higher education is essential. It also is critical if we are to reverse the trend of the US workforce lagging behind other nations in education.

8. Free and Independent Media
Representative Maurice Hinchey sponsored the Media Ownership Reform Act (MORA -- HR 3302), which seeks to restore a diverse media by significantly lowering the number of media outlets one company is permitted to own in a single market. Since 1996 the Federal Communications Commission has promoted massive media consolidation by increasing that number, allowing telecommunications corporations to buy up a larger share of television and radio stations, newspapers and other media outlets, and forcing independent and local media owners out of business. There are sixteen co-sponsors of MORA in the House.

9. Public Financing of Campaigns
Representative John Tierney introduced the Clean Money, Clean Elections Act (HR 3099) last year with thirty-nine Democrats and one Independent as co-sponsors. The bill establishes a voluntary system that offers candidates an option for public financing and reduced rates on broadcast advertising in exchange for self-imposed limits on campaign financing and spending. Participating candidates get a dollar-for-dollar match, up to a set limit, if a nonparticipating opponent spends more than the basic public-financing grant. This system would free candidates from the burden of continuous fundraising; allow those who obtain a prescribed number of contributions to run regardless of their economic status or access to large funders; and, perhaps most important, eliminate the skewed priorities caused by the financing of campaigns by special-interest contributors.

10. Clean Energy
Last May Senator Maria Cantwell introduced the Clean EDGE Act (S 2829) with twenty-four Democratic co-sponsors. The bill sets a goal of reducing US petroleum consumption by 6 million barrels a day by 2020 -- or 40 percent of America's projected imports. It mandates that 25 percent of new vehicles sold in the United States by 2010 be flex-fuel capable (able to run on higher blends of biofuels, which help to displace petroleum), rising to 50 percent by 2020. It also sets a national goal of installing alternative fuels at 10 percent of US gas stations by 2015. The bill also makes gas price-gouging a federal crime. It ends subsidies for major oil companies and extends incentives for renewable energy and efficiency technologies. To shrink US dependence on fossil fuels and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the bill requires that 10 percent of all US electricity come from renewable sources by 2020. A report by the Apollo Alliance and the Economic Policy Institute estimates that the Clean EDGE Act would create more than 500,000 jobs, including tens of thousands in states hit hardest by the loss of 3 million manufacturing jobs.
This list is by no means all-inclusive. But these are good and important initiatives that address longstanding and formidable challenges.

Katrina vanden Heuvel is editor of The Nation.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute.
Link to the Article

Sidney Blumenthal: The Myth of McCain

The myth of McCain: Once the presumptive next US president, the Republican frontrunner's popularity has nose dived
by Sidney Blumenthal
The Guardian

When Senator John McCain appeared at the Conservative party conference in Bournemouth last October as the presumptive next president of the US, the stars seemed fixed in the firmament for him. The myth of McCain appeared as invincible as ever.

His war story - a bomber pilot shot down over North Vietnam in 1967, held prisoner for five years and tortured - is the basis of his legend as morally courageous, authentic, unwavering in his convictions, an independent reformer willing to take on the reactionaries of his own party, an "American maverick" as he calls himself in his campaign autobiography.

The titles of his books reflect the image: Character Is Destiny, Why Courage Matters, and Faith of My Fathers. Defeat at the hands of George Bush in the battle for the Republican nomination in 2000, in which he was subjected to dirty tricks, completed his canonisation. The press corps so venerated him that he called them "my base".

McCain's political colleagues, however, know another side of the action hero - a volatile man with a hair-trigger temper, who shouted at Senator Ted Kennedy on the Senate floor to "shut up", and called fellow Republican senators "shithead ... fucking jerk ... asshole". A few months ago, McCain suddenly rushed up to a friend of mine, a prominent Washington lawyer, at a social event, and threatened to beat him up because he represented a client McCain happened to dislike. Then, just as suddenly, profusely and tearfully, he apologised.

Many Republicans who have had dealings with McCain distrust him (not just conservatives but traditional Republican moderates too). While taking rightwing positions on social issues such as abortion and gay marriage, his simmering resentment of Bush led him virtually to caucus with the Democrats in early 2001 (before September 11). Then, abruptly, he rushed to embrace Bush.

McCain's political advisers believe that he would easily be elected president in 2008, but fear that he might not capture the nomination. In 2000 he did not win a primary state where the voting was restricted to Republicans. So McCain decided to let the election take care of itself as he won over the party faithful. He campaigned enthusiastically for Bush in 2004. He sought to reconcile with the religious right, whose leaders he had called "agents of intolerance" in 2000.
McCain had belatedly taken the lead in opposing Bush's torture policy, an issue that could not be more personal for him. But after the supreme court last year declared Bush's secret tribunals for detainees and use of extreme interrogation techniques illegal, the president sought congressional approval of his version. At first, McCain fought Bush, but the right attacked him. McCain quickly capitulated, even agreeing to suspension of habeas corpus. Someone close to him explained to me that McCain calculated he could continue to play the issue when he became chairman of the Senate armed services committee in the next Congress. Asked about the chance that the Democrats might take control, McCain declared: "I think I'd just commit suicide."

As the neoconservatives abandoned Bush's sinking ship, McCain welcomed them aboard. "McCain began reading the Weekly Standard and conferring with its editors, particularly Bill Kristol," the New Republic magazine reported. And he hired a board member of the neocon Project for the New American Century, Randy Scheunemann, as his foreign-policy aide.
McCain positioned himself as consistently belligerent, even to Bush's right: in favour of bombing Iran and North Korea. He also proposed a "surge" of troops into Iraq, an idea gleaned from the neocons. If Bush had adopted the Iraq Study Group approach of diplomacy and redeployment, which McCain had assailed as "dispiriting", the right would have hailed McCain as a prophet with honour. However, importuned by the same neocons who had sold it to McCain, Bush seized upon the "surge".

McCain had trapped himself. He is now chained to Bush. As Bush's war has escalated, McCain's popularity has nose dived. Still the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, he might have made himself more acceptable to the base, but his political strategy has shattered his myth. Bearing the burden of Bush, he may have become unelectable.

To Read the Rest of the Article

Sarah Anderson: Torture Sours U.S.-Canadian Right-wing Lovefest

Torture Sours U.S.-Canadian Right-wing Lovefest
By Sarah Anderson, AlterNet

Stephen Harper, Canada's conservative Prime Minister, campaigned on strengthening ties with the Bush administration. But the love affair has ended over the American "rendition" of a Canadian citizen to Syria

A U.S. Ambassador lashed out against a foreign official last week for standing up to the Bush Administration - and it wasn't against Hugo Chavez or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or any of the other usual suspects.

It was Canadian Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day - a fundamentalist creationist, anti-abortion, anti-gay rights hawk who once spoke at a "Canadians for Bush" rally. At the onset of the Iraq war, he published a pro-Bush letter in the Wall Street Journal with Stephen Harper, who would become Canada's Prime Minister in 2006. Day and Harper blasted their own government's opposition to the U.S. invasion and lauded the Bush administration's "fundamental vision of civilization and human values."

That conservative lovefest is now over. Last week Day and U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Wilkins exchanged the most hostile tit-for-tat to date over the case of Maher Arar. In 2002, U.S. authorities detained Arar, a Canadian citizen, at JFK airport. After accusing him of having links to al Qaeda, they sent him to Syria, where he was tortured for nearly a year before being released without charge.

After an exhaustive inquiry, an independent Canadian commission cleared Arar of any terrorist ties last fall. On January 26, the Ottawa government announced it would apologize for its role in the debacle and compensate Arar to the tune of about US$8.5 million, plus legal fees.
But while the Canadian government has now admitted that Arar is indeed the innocent computer engineer and father of two he always said he was, the Bush Administration continues to insist that Arar belongs on their "no-fly" list of terrorism suspects. This has meant that Arar, who spent 10 months in a grave-like underground cell, continues to live under a cloud of secret accusations.

Despite his ideological affinity for President Bush, Prime Minister Harper has not been oblivious to the fact the U.S. government is about as popular among Canadians today as it was when the Americans invaded in the War of 1812. In October, he was moved to ring up Bush and ask him to "come clean" about the Arar affair. He even went so far as to ask that Bush acknowledge "the deficiencies and inappropriate conduct that occurred in this case." That, of course, was as likely as the President admitting to shirking his Vietnam War National Guard duties.
The most U.S. Justice Department officials offered to do was brief the Canadians on the dirt they supposedly had gathered about Arar from their own sources. When this finally occurred last week, Stockwell Day, Canada's version of our Homeland Security chief, promptly declared it bogus.

"We've looked at all their information and there is nothing that materially changes our position," Day told reporters. "Mr. Arar is not a threat, nor is his family."

link to read the rest of the article

My Initial Reponse to the Protest; Karen Houppert: Voices of Protest; John Nichols: DC Marchers Challenge Congress to End War

(CNN, Washington Post and other mainstream news media organizations are again purposely underestimating the crowd size of the protest in DC {this is a common deceptive practice that has been documented in past anti-war protests and led to retractions from news agencies as varied as the NYTimes and NPR for low balling crowd estimates in earlier protests} stating it was in the tens of thousands, pure BS, having taken pictures from the capitol steps of the entire crowd massed on the Washington Mall, and marching in the massive flow of people that looped completely around the long streets circling the capitol building and the Washington Mall, I can tell you that the crowd was easily in the 100s of thousands, if not the half million estimated by organizers. Also reports of young radicals charging the capitol steps and physical confrontations between them and the police are misleading and distorted. As the march started there was a group of young, exhuberent/passionate radicals who ran toward the capitol steps and began chanting and mocking the government symbol, but I was standing right there with my friend William taking pictures and there were no physical confrontations. This protest was impressive, it was exhilirating, and life-changing. It was great to gather together and interact with so many passionate, hard-working, dedicated people working to build peace and put a stop to the war. I have loads of pictures that I will start posting with commentary and I would like to hear from others who participated in the various protests around the nation... if you post something leave a link or feel free to add your comments here.)

Voices of Protest
by Karen Houppert
The Nation

For this day anyway, the peace movement seemed to have called a cease-fire in its ongoing debate over how to allocate its limited resources: Is it better to work in electoral politics and propel antiwar representatives to Congress or take to the streets with shows of grassroots power? Saturday's protest organizers apppeared to concede these are complementary tactics: grassroots organizing has indeed shifted public opinion against the war; this shift in public opinion, coupled with some strategic work to get antiwar politicians into office has clearly paid off.

Conyers acknowledged the impact of the November elections. "[George Bush] is the commander of the military but he's not the commander of the citizens of this country," he said, to roars of approval. "Not only is it in our power to stop George Bush, but it's our obligation."

"The women of this nation spoke loud and clear in November," Feminist Majority Foundation President Eleanor Smeal reminded the crowd. "They said 'no' to this war."

Speaker after speaker referred to the elections as a referendum on the war and insisted the American people had sent a clear mandate to Congress: End US occupation of Iraq.

The clock is ticking on that mandate. Nowhere was this more evident than among the military families, vets, and soldiers whom this peace movement has always made room who have been front and center in this and protests. Dozens of military families crowded on stage at one point to speak of personal experiences in Iraq orwhat it was like to lose a family member to this war. More filled the backstage overflow area because they couldn't fit, and Iraq War veterans in camouflage were evident in this crowd.

Mary Geddry, a member of Military Families Speak Out, came from Coquille, Oregon with her eleven-year-old daughter, Sarah, to push for a swift end to the war. In their case, the stakes were particularly high. Mary Geddry's son, John, is a Marine who served two tours in Iraq before getting out of the military--but as a member of the Individual Ready Reserves, he is eligible to be called back to duty at any time. He is slated to return to Iraq for a third tour in May.

"Seven times the vehicles he was traveling in were hit with IEDs [improvised explosive devices]," says Mary Geddry. "He survived, but he's definitely screwed up." "He attacked our brother on Christmas eve," pipes up Sarah.

Mary Geddry explains her son now suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder and that he is on medication for it. He also suffered some hearing loss and has carpal tunnel syndrome--but none of this disqualifies him from service.

"Wanna see a picture of him?" Sarah asks, whipping out her digital camera and flipping through the shots until she comes to one of her brother, John, smiling up from where he lounges on the living room sofa. "He's really cute, right?"

Though she says her son is very disillusioned with the military, and thinks Americans aren't making any friends in Iraq, he remains conflicted about vocally protesting the war because he feels responsible for his fellow marines who are still over there and doesn't want to be perceived as not supporting them.

To Read the Entire Report

DC Marchers Challenge Congress to End War
by John Nichols
The Nation

Actor Sean Penn summed up the new energy -- and the new focus -- of the anti-war movement Saturday, when he turned George Bush's own words against the president.

Just hours after the president had again reasserted his false claim to authority to pursue a war that is not wanted by the American people or the Congress, Penn told anti-war demonstrators gathered in Washington that Bush would be wise to review the Constitution.

"In a democracy," the actor told the cheering crowd, which organizers said numbered in the hundreds of thousands, "we are the deciders."

Saturday's anti-war demostrations, which filled the streets of cities from San Francisco to Washington, marked a return to form for an anti-war movement that had trouble building momentum during the three years that followed Bush's decision to launch a preemptive war against a country that posed no serious threat to the United States or its allies. During the period from 2OO3 to 2OO6, Bush's Republican Party had complete control of the machinery of government, and his allies were successful in assuring that Congress would not serve as any kind of check or balance on the presidency.

Though polls showed that most Americans thought Bush had been wrong to take the country to war, and that they disapproved of his handling of the conflict, demonstrations seemed fruitless because the president held all the cards. Many opponents of the war poured their energies into electoral politics, hoping to restore at least a measure of balance to the federal government by putting opposition Democrats in charge of at least one house of Congress. On November 7, the work paid off, with the election of Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.

So it was that one of the most popular signs at Saturday's rally in Washington read: "I Voted for Peace."

An equally popular sign, distributed by United for Peace and Justice, the group that played a central role in organizing the demonstrations, read: "Congress: Stand Up to Bush!"

Both signs were necessary messages on Saturday because, while there is no question that Americans voted November 7 for peace, there is still a great deal of uncertainty about whether the Congress that was elected will, in fact, tell the president that it is time to bring the troops home.

Some members of Congress do get it. Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Lynn Woolsey, D-California, addressed the Washington rally, urging activists to lobby the House on behalf of comprehensive legislation she has sponsored to withdraw Congressional approval for the war and implement a rapid yet orderly withdrawal of U.S. soldiers and civilian contractors from Iraq. The second most senior member of the House, Michigan Democrat John Conyers, was there as well, telling the crowd that: "George Bush has a habit of firing military leaders who tell him the Iraq war is failing," said Conyers, who then looked out at the crowd and shouted: "He can't fire you."

"He can't fire us," added the House Judiciary Committee chair, referencing the Congress that he said should block funding for Bush's plans to maintain his war. "The founders of our country gave our Congress the power of the purse because they envisioned a scenario exactly like we find ourselves in today. Not only is it in our power, it is our obligation to stop Bush."

To Read the Rest of the Report

Matt Renner: "Perfect Storm" for Peace Movement

"Perfect Storm" for Peace Movement
By Matt Renner
t r u t h o u t | Report

On the heels of the president's State of the Union address, Judith LeBlanc, co-chair for the United for Peace and Justice coalition, described the situation as a "Perfect Storm" for the peace movement.

"We have majority opinion and very vocal opposition across many sectors of the people," LeBlanc said. "We also see an incredible spiral of crisis and dying in Iraq, and we have a president who is pushing us into a constitutional crisis because he refuses to listen to the will of the American people. We have a Congress that is listening, with many members who were elected because the war is a critical issue for their constituents. We must act; we must be in the streets; we must make real the mandate for peace."

United for Peace and Justice is a coalition of over 1,300 advocacy groups that share a common goal. According to their web site www.UnitedForPeace.org, they plan to work on local, state and national levels "to turn the tide; to overwhelm war with peace."

According to LeBlanc, UFPJ has been holding briefing sessions with the new Democratic majority since the midterm elections. "What the congressmen say, without qualification, is 'stay in the streets, keep it loud, keep it vocal, keep it visible, because that is the wind at our backs,'" LeBlanc said.

What organizers claim will be a massive rally, with numbers in the hundreds of thousands, will be held in Washington, DC, on Saturday, January 27. Dubbed the "Peace Surge" by organizers, the rally is scheduled to begin at 11 a.m. EST with speeches, followed by a march around the Capitol. Speakers and participants will include Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson, Representative (and presidential candidate) Dennis Kucinich, Representatives Maxine Waters and Lynn Woolsey, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, and actors Danny Glover, Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins.

"A long [presidential] campaign is a very good thing for the peace movement because it will give candidates time to travel across the country and hear what the people want them to do about Iraq," LeBlanc said. "The debates and the statements made by many of the candidates will be seen in sharp relief against the statements that President Bush continues to make. We want a national discussion; we want all the candidates to respond to the urgent need for a plan to end this war and to help the Iraqis rebuild their nation. You are going to see a very different Republican primary contest. Every candidate has to respond to this central issue."

According to UFPJ, the action is meant to send a message: "Congress, end the war." The group has embraced the Bring Our Troops Home and Sovereignty of Iraq Restoration Act of 2007 - legislation that would bring all US Forces out of Iraq in six months.

Representative Woolsey, one of the bill's co-authors, said: "The Congress has already appropriated funding that will support our troops and keep this occupation going for at least another six months. That funding instead should be used to finance an aggressive withdrawal plan that brings our troops home to their families. Our bill would do exactly that."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Renner is a reporter and radio producer and a recent graduate of the University of California at Berkeley.

LINK

Saif Rahman: Five Reasons Why I'll March on January 27

(I'll be there with 55 fellow Lexingtonians who have gathered resources to get a bus to go to the protest--feets in the street, voices shouting, comrades linking arms, power to the people, we are not going to stand for this anymore.)

Five Reasons Why I'll March on January 27
By Saif Rahman
Foreign Policy in Focus

A few times a year, thousands of people break out their tied-dyed t-shirts, collect all of their peace buttons, make snarky yet provocative posters, and hop on a bus to what has become a political and social ritual: the protest.

Martin Luther King Jr. once said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." Not being silent has in fact become a staple of the American people's diet, and one can see that with the consistent anti-war activities that have been organized over the past four years.

On January 27, United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ) is holding a massive protest against the Iraq War in Washington. We (I'm a member of the coalition's steering committee) will once again not be silent. Buses and vans are coming from at least 30 states and 111 cities packed with people who will bestow a historic welcome to the new Congress that we just helped elect and aim to change the trajectory of this war.

Since even before the war started, UFPJ and its more than 1,400 member groups have organized countless events, both nationally and locally, demonstrations large and small, have educated millions of people, and helped to mobilize and make visual the citizenry that is actively opposing this war. The coalition has led and expanded the peace movement and provided a steady, consistent anti-war message, which has been the major force behind the swaying of public opinion from supporting this administration's decisions in the wake of 9/11, to the realization that this war was and still is illegal and immoral.

In the wake up 9/11, the president had the highest job approval rating since Franklin D. Roosevelt, at 90%. Today, the Presidents approval rating stands at lowly 34%. The public's approval on the Iraq War has virtually flipped from the beginning days of the war when 71% of the country approved of Bush's war, to now 70% disapproving of it. Public sentiment is a powerful thing and the drastic change can be attributed to the constant message of the peace movement - that this war is illegal, immoral, and destroying our country and the world.

Now that the majority of the country shares our opinion, The Jan. 27 peace march will trumpet UFPJ's unwavering message once again of "Bring All the Troops Home Now" to the streets of Washington, and we are going to make the new Congress listen.

Why March?

Most wars have two things in common: a few people make the decision to go to war and the majority of the people suffer from those decisions. There has been this divide in this country for too long, and we need to consistently fight it. Young American soldiers are the ones who have to fight the war and die. Veterans are the ones who have to come back from war and be abandoned by their governments. Military families are the ones who day in and day out have to worry about whether their loved ones will come back. Young people are the ones who can't go to college because money for student loans has gone to pay for the war. The people of the Gulf Coast are the ones who see everyday first handedly what it looks like when their own government invests more into immoral wars than rebuilding our communities.

That is just in the United States. The Iraqis are suffering on a massive scale. An estimated 600,000 Iraqis have lost their lives since the March 2003 invasion and many people across that country have no clean water or electricity. This madness has to stop.

Even if you, like most Americans, oppose this war, why march? Why protest? Why hold up signs in the middle of winter and walk around in a big circle? And how is that going to end the war?

Plenty of critics of mass peace movement mobilizations say that this practice is outdated and stale. Essentially, they are asking, "Why bother?"

Sure, it's hard to see sometimes how a public demonstration helps to achieve any political goal. But for me, a protest is not only one of the various means that activists can use to achieve a political end. It's also is something deeply and sincerely personal.

Here are the reasons, both political and personal, that I will be marching with thousands of others on January 27th. I hope you are convinced that you should be there too....

1) Build on political momentum: The political moment is now. After the remarkable election last November, in which people overwhelming voted for a change in Iraq and therefore a change in Congress, we as the peace movement need to build on that momentum. Although public sentiment completely disagrees with President George W. Bush and agrees with UFPJ on ending this war, the commander-in-chief intends to send more troops into Iraq. Voting and public opinion are evidently not sufficient to change Bush's course. We have been right all along, not the Administration or the 108th and 109th Congress. We have helped to change the overall sentiment about the war in this country. We have a new Congress, which will only do something about the war if people from across this nation come to their doorstep, knock loudly and demand they end the occupation and bring the all the troops home now.

2) Strengthen Community: It is a truly amazing sight to see thousands of people, from every corner of this country, demonstrate for peace and justice. The endorsers of this march include everyone from the National Youth and Student Peace Coalition to Grandmothers for Peace, from religious organizations like Pax Christi to the Buddhist Peace Fellowship, political organizations such as the Progressive Democrats of America and MoveOn.org. This is, with certainty, a community of people fighting for the same thing. People save up money, take days off from work, organize buses from their towns and when they get here, they sleep on couches and floors, all for a cause bigger than their individual selves- for peace. We do it to build a community that consistently comes together to resist those who send ordinary young people to war. It is extremely important that this community of dissenters remains constantly visible, not only to the rest of this country-but also to the rest of the world.

3) Learn from People: My father always told me the best way to learn is from other people. Whenever I go to a demonstration I meet some of the most intelligent and altruistic people I have ever met. Literature is distributed with information that you can't read in newspapers, events are planned that you can't attend elsewhere, and bright people, eager to engage in conversation, are in abundance. From the 22-year-old Iraq veteran, to the mother who tragically lost her daughter in the war and Iraqi-Americans against this war, from the first-time protester, to veterans of the Vietnam War era protests-it's a privilege to hear those perspectives with one's own ears. A collective grouping such as this is bound to have valuable information and ideas exchanged that will further propel this movement.

4) Be Part of History: Thirty-nine years ago Dr. Martin Luther King led a group of protestors in Chicago against the Vietnam War. Seventy-six years ago, Gandhi led the Salt Satyagraha where he and his followers marched to Dandi to protest the unjust taxation of salt by the British Empire. And 87 years ago Helen Keller protested by marching with actors for labor rights. It is because of that tradition that I love to march, knowing that I am part of something much bigger than myself. The consistency of photographs of people expressing themselves in the streets is vitally important to have in our history books. When people look back at January 2007, they should remember the march on Washington as the defining moment of our time, just as Dr. King's, Gandhi's, and Helen Keller's marches did during their time.

5) Have Fun: Lastly, and most importantly-it's a hell of a lot of fun. It is almost like being a rebellious kid again. You get to yell and scream, hold up signs and banners, bang on random objects-all aimed at people in power. At the same time you have opportunities to learn, meeting interesting people, be part of history, all while playing a part in the movement for peace.

Effectiveness

I believe when people question the effectiveness of these marches, they do have a point. It's hard to measure the impact of demonstrations. Immediate policy outcomes aren't the only factor. How do you measure how much thousands of people might have learned? How do you measure bonds being built and communities strengthened? How do you know how history would have unfolded if people did not consistently organize and mobilize against injustices?

Ending a war is no easy task. If one were to size it down to a simple plan, the peace movement has completed the first few steps: 1) We have helped drastically shift public opinion against the Iraq War; 2) We have helped fundamentally change the composition of Congress, which as Senators George McGovern and Mark Hatfield proved with the Vietnam War, has the power to end this quagmire.

All we have left to do is make this new Congress end this war...now.

How is this demonstration going to help accomplish this last step?

Iraq Veterans Against the War member Geoff Millard (who served in the Army for more than eight years, and spent 13 months in Iraq) I believe answered that question best at a United for Peace and Justice organizing meeting for the demonstration,

"When members of Congress say that cutting funds for this war and immediate withdrawal is 'off the table' - they are dead wrong. They don't set the table. We set the damn plates down. We set the damn forks down. And we tell them what is for f'ing dinner. And if thousands of people come to their door, sit down at the table, and tell them that-they will listen."

It is because of people such as Martin Luther King, Jr. and Geoff Millard that I am helping to mobilize this demonstration, and why thousands of us will march in Washington. It is because of them, and your need not to be silent, that I think you should march on January 27th too.

--------

Saif Rahman is the Movements Coordinator for Institute for Policy Studies and Youth and Activism Editor for Foreign Policy In Focus. He is on the Steering Committee for United for Peace and Justice.

To find out more information on the March on Washington on January 27, visit United for Peace and Justice.

Classes Offered at Good Foods Co-Op

(There are many things that we lack in Lexington, but we are very fortunate and privileged to have one of the best locally owned and operated Co-Op's in the nation. Support healthy choices--and choices is the key here--by shopping, and even becoming a member of Good Foods. Check out their wonderful recipes and their cafe dining is one of my favorites in town. Thanks to everyone who works so hard at Good-Foods and conrgatulations on your current expansion of the store--including the rumor that there might soon be a second store. Inspiring news in a society dominated by corporate food stores.)

Loney Chiropractic Spinal Screening

Instructor: Jeremy Loney, D.C.
Date: Saturday, February 3
Time: 2-4 p.m.
Fee: FREE
Location: Good Foods Community Room


Loney Specific Chiropratic will offer FREE spinal screenings. Participants will receive a brief evaluation on how well their nervous system is functioning.



What You Must Know about Treating Cancer, Part 2

Instructor: James Roach, M.D., Midway Center for Integrative Medicine
Date: Saturday, February 10
Time: 10-11:30 a.m.
Fee: $15/owners $17/others
Location: Good Foods Community Room

Dr. Roach's students requested a follow-up to his January class. He will discuss prevention and complimentary approaches for treating cancer. Don't miss this informative class.


Better Eating for Life: Eat Whole Grains

Instructor: Beth Loiselle, R.D., L.D.
Date: Saturday, February 10
Time: 2-3:30 p.m.
Fee: $8/owners $10/others
$100 if you sign up for entire series (12 classes)
Location: Good Foods Community Room

You'll learn why and how to incorporate whole grains into your diet, starting with where you are now; and you'll soon be reaping whole grain benefits. You'll read labels from food packages, sample some whole grains probably new to you, and you'll take home many recipes.




What is a Co-op?

Instructor: Ann Marx, Owner Services Manager
Date: Tuesday, February 13

Time: 8 - 8:45 p.m.

Fee: FREE
Location: Good Foods Community Room

We are opening our staff training to anyone interested in learning about the cooperative form of business, the co-op movement's remarkable roots and the colorful history of Good Foods Co-op.


Celebrating Greek Cuisine
Instructor: Sondra Scalos
Date: Saturday, February 24
Time: 9:30-11:30 a.m.
Fee: $13/owners $15/others plus a $10 grocery fee
Location: Good Foods Community Room

Sondra learned to cook at age 12 with her father, James Scalos, a prominent local chef, and has been cooking authentic Greek cuisine for her friends and family for 20 years. Sondra will feature her family recipes for Spanakopita, Gyros & Baklava. Delicious!




Acupuncture for Pain Relief
Instructor: Robert Fueston, M.S.O.M., Dipl. O.M.
Date: Saturday, February 24
Time: 2-3 p.m.
Fee: FREE
Location: Good Foods Community Room

How pain can effectively be treated with acupuncture and the causes of pain--i.e. Why do I hurt? Free initial consultation and treatment for participants if seen within 3 weeks of the lecture (a $95 value). This lecture is expected to fill quickly. Robert has a Masters of Science in Oriental Medicine, is a nationally certified Acupuncturist and Chinese herbalist, Reiki Master and teacher.

The 7 Keys to Organic Gardening, Part 2

Instructor: Jerome Lange, Casey County Organic Farmer
Date: Tuesday, February 27
Time: 7-9 p.m.
Fee: $10/ owners $12/others
Location: Good Foods Community Room

Part 2 will focus on watering, weeding, organizing, thinning, spacing, and timing. Jerome, a Casey County organic farmer and author, has been perfecting his approach to organic farming for 25 years. Learn more tips from the expert.

I Hope God (if there is one or many) Has Better Things Than to Ensure Football Victories

Just a thought after watching the owner of the Indianapolis Colts and the head coach successfully credit their amazing (it was a great, riveting game) victory to god/lord (I wonder which one?). I wonder how that makes the talented, dedicated and heroic (you would have to have seen the game--as anyone knows I usually slam on pro sports, but this team was really impressive when it counted) players feel?

Just hoping, with all that is going on in the world, that if there is a god/gods that they are busy doing other things than ensuring that the Indianapolis Colts are winning their football games.

Amen!

Chris Hedges: The Radical Christian Right Is Built on Suburban Despair

(Courtesy of The Chutry Experiment)

The Radical Christian Right Is Built on Suburban Despair
by Chris Hedges
AlterNet

Millions of Americans live trapped in soulless exurbs which lack any kind of community, leaving them feeling isolated and vulnerable. Without alternatives for their social despair, they flock to demagogues promising revenge and a mythical utopia.

...

In the United States we have turned our backs on the working class, with much of the worst assaults, such as NAFTA and welfare reform, pushed though during President Clinton's Democratic administration. We stand passively and watch an equally pernicious assault on the middle class. Anything that can be put on software, from architecture to engineering to finance, will soon be handed to workers overseas who will be paid a third what their American counterparts receive and who will, like some 45 million Americans, have no access to health insurance or benefits.

There has been, along with the creation of an American oligarchy, a steady Weimarization of the American working class. The top one percent of American households have more wealth than the bottom 90 percent combined. This figure alone should terrify all who care about our democracy. As Plutarch reminded us "an imbalance between the rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all republics."

The stories believers such as Learned told me of their lives before they found Christ were heart breaking. These chronicles were about terrible pain, severe financial difficulties, struggles with addictions or childhood sexual or physical abuse, profound alienation and often thoughts about suicide. They were chronicles without hope. The real world, the world of facts and dispassionate intellectual inquiry, the world where all events, news and information were not filtered through this comforting ideological prism, the world where they were left out to dry, abandoned by a government hostage to corporations and willing to tolerate obscene corporate profits, betrayed them.

They hated this world. And they willingly walked out on this world for the mythical world offered by these radical preachers, a world of magic, a world where God had a divine plan for them and intervened on a daily basis to protect them and perform miracles in their lives. The rage many expressed to me towards those who challenge this belief system, to those of us who do not accept that everything in the world came into being during a single week 6,000 years ago because it says so in the Bible, was a rage born of fear, the fear of being plunged back into a reality-based world where these magical props would no longer exist, where they would once again be adrift, abandoned and alone.

The danger of this theology of despair is that it says that nothing in the world is worth saving. It rejoices in cataclysmic destruction. It welcomes the frightening advance of global warming, the spiraling wars and violence in the Middle East and the poverty and neglect that have blighted American urban and rural landscapes as encouraging signs that the end of the world is close at hand.

Believers, of course, clinging to this magical belief, which is a bizarre form of spiritual Darwinism, will be raptured upwards while the rest of us will be tormented with horrors by a warrior Christ and finally extinguished. This obsession with apocalyptic violence is an obsession with revenge. It is what the world, and we who still believe it is worth saving, deserve.

Those who lead the movement give their followers a moral license to direct this rage and yearning for violence against all those who refuse to submit to the movement, from liberals, to "secular humanists," to "nominal Christians," to intellectuals, to gays and lesbians, to Muslims. These radicals, from James Dobson to Pat Robertson, call for a theocratic state that will, if it comes to pass, bear within it many of the traits of classical fascism.

All radical movements need a crisis or a prolonged period of instability to achieve power. And we are not in a period of crisis now. But another catastrophic terrorist attack on American soil, a series of huge environmental disasters or an economic meltdown will hand to these radicals the opening they seek. Manipulating our fear and anxiety, promising to make us safe and secure, giving us the assurance that they can vanquish the forces that mean to do us harm, these radicals, many of whom have achieved powerful positions in the Executive and legislative branches of government, as well as the military, will ask us only to surrender our rights, to pass them the unlimited power they need to battle the forces of darkness.

To Read the Entire Article

Political Theory Online

Big archive of sites online:

Political Theory

My Tarot Card Reading

This summer when I was camping, my good friend Paul did a tarot reading for me and these were the cards... I have been meditating on these for the last six months and this was my interpretation of the cards...

Past: Trust
Dealing with trust issues. Fear and anxiety as a result--learning to come to terms with what I experienced and moving past them to a new way of thinking and being.

Present: Abundance
Recognizing the abundance and possibilities of life. Recognizing the potential of now, living in the moment, recognizing what I have now.

Future: Past Lives
Developing a holistic outlook, piecing together the fragments, self-actualization. Remembering/recognizing the past, considering the future, in order to live productively now.

Meditative Card: Courage

This card blew me away. It is the quality I am searching for ... the courage to be a good man, the courage to be a good example as a teacher, the courage to love others, the courage to be myself and let others also be who they will be (not try to force them to be what i think they should be), the courage to deal with dissapointments, the courage to be honest and forthright, the courage to confront injustice and cruelty, the courage to develop my spiritual/creative side, and the courage to live productively.

March on Washington: Stop the Escalation of the War (Jan 27th)

Now is the time to fight for our rights, for what is right, you and I and you and you ... now is the time!!! We are getting a bus to go from Lexington, if anyone is interested, but also carpool, do whatever you can to get there... Here is a funding opportunity for students who want to go to the protest.)

Campus Progress Funding

The March on Washington