Dear Mara Liasson and Morning Edition,
When broadcasting Republican talking points and commercials, would you please check them for accuracy? They often lie openly, as they did in the ad you broadcast by Rep. Nancy Johnson on Sept. 19. Connecticut State Senator Chris Murphy actually supports the current law which allows for government interception of calls before an actual FISA court document is filed 72 hours later. I know that it's more work to research claims about issues, especially legal ones, but I think that's real journalism, don't you? Also, these issues appear to be an absolute distraction from Iraq and the real war on terror (which Bush appears to be fighting exclusively with his bully pulpit debates on torture and wire tapping). Can we ask when and how we are catching and fighting terrorists, outside of Iraq, soon? Thank you.
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Voters think political parties are the same
When people are just skimming the news for information, it is a shame that our media constantly tries to equalize our political parties in order to appear non-partisan. I find that the goals of Democrats are generally far healthier for our country than Republicans 9 times out of 10 or I wouldn’t support them (by the way, I’m supporting pro-life candidates even though I disagree with that position). Although we’ll find corruption everywhere, it’s just not as overwhelming among those who care less about stuff/money/status (and believe me I do care about stuff/money/status).
In a nut shell, Clinton's moral problems included an intern while running a healthy government but “Jesus is my philosopher” Bush has broken federal law (1), lied to get us into a morally problematic war (2), has given up on fighting terrorism (3) and has sold us to China. I think the bottom line of the folks in power right now is personal and corporate greed. There are greedy Democrats, but I wouldn’t call the party greedy—I would say that a few of the Democrats in office right now are part of the problem and not the solution (like getting money out of politics and creating a more efficient government), but I think many of the Democrats running, especially the military veterans, are full of good ideas that the press ignores. On Meet the Press on Sunday, Jim Webb was a great example of Democratic analysis and solutions for getting us out of Iraq and ahead of the real terrorists.
The press ignores Harry Reid and all the other Democratic leaders and say, “Where are the Democrats? The Republicans say this about Democrats” it’s maddeningly unfair for me to see our press do that all the time. It’s as if Republicans own everybody with a microphone—1984. Lies are stated all the time on TV and on the radio. http://www.mediamatters.org
(1) I've heard that the Republican congress is trying to pardon him right for breaking FISA laws by making it legal for the President to spy without court approval, but I find no news sources other than the ACLU and Moveon.org for this information.
(2) I find it morally objectionable that we are willing to use Iraqi people and their land as a backdrop for our "fly-paper" "fight it over there, not over here" logic, even though that argument makes no sense. Our civilian government is using our loyal military to create a fight against terrorists that did not exist until we got there; and mostly they are not "terrorists" they are fighting one another in a civil war. Saddam hated Al Qaeda and had no working relationship with them--when we invaded Iraq, we did Al Qaeda, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas a favor. Terrorists are happy right now--I'd like to see that reversed.
(3) Bush's "war on terrorism" consists of his passion (or Cheney's) for torture. Torture doesn't work (please, find me one case where it dramatically worked), the military opposes it, and the way we had it already allowed the fantasy emergency situation where a suspect has information that will help in that minute, humans can break the law. The military doesn't want to get back torture that we dish out! This is such an abstract, civilian argument and I can hardly believe it's a Christian one. I thought Jesus moved past the Old Testament "eye for an eye" argument. Why should we be like the terrorists? If we had a draft like Israel we'd all be fighting for the Geneva Convention. I just heard that this fight in Congress about torture is really to protect our torturer's from what the Red Cross is going to find out.
Bush's second tool to catch terrorists appears to be spying on terrorists without Congressional checks and balances. We're supposed to be in this fight together, Washington should work together, or is the fight against us, Mr. President?
Democrats, it's like this, maybe people think Clinton let bin Laden go, but it was Bush who let bin Laden go AFTER 9-11 at Tora Bora.
And as for Cheney's SUGGESTION the other day that we've stopped terroist attacks from happening here, there's no substantive EVIDENCE of that, and there were how many years of planning before/between the World Trade Center bombing and 9-11? EIGHT years. Plus, London's attack felt very close, to me.
In a nut shell, Clinton's moral problems included an intern while running a healthy government but “Jesus is my philosopher” Bush has broken federal law (1), lied to get us into a morally problematic war (2), has given up on fighting terrorism (3) and has sold us to China. I think the bottom line of the folks in power right now is personal and corporate greed. There are greedy Democrats, but I wouldn’t call the party greedy—I would say that a few of the Democrats in office right now are part of the problem and not the solution (like getting money out of politics and creating a more efficient government), but I think many of the Democrats running, especially the military veterans, are full of good ideas that the press ignores. On Meet the Press on Sunday, Jim Webb was a great example of Democratic analysis and solutions for getting us out of Iraq and ahead of the real terrorists.
The press ignores Harry Reid and all the other Democratic leaders and say, “Where are the Democrats? The Republicans say this about Democrats” it’s maddeningly unfair for me to see our press do that all the time. It’s as if Republicans own everybody with a microphone—1984. Lies are stated all the time on TV and on the radio. http://www.mediamatters.org
(1) I've heard that the Republican congress is trying to pardon him right for breaking FISA laws by making it legal for the President to spy without court approval, but I find no news sources other than the ACLU and Moveon.org for this information.
(2) I find it morally objectionable that we are willing to use Iraqi people and their land as a backdrop for our "fly-paper" "fight it over there, not over here" logic, even though that argument makes no sense. Our civilian government is using our loyal military to create a fight against terrorists that did not exist until we got there; and mostly they are not "terrorists" they are fighting one another in a civil war. Saddam hated Al Qaeda and had no working relationship with them--when we invaded Iraq, we did Al Qaeda, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas a favor. Terrorists are happy right now--I'd like to see that reversed.
(3) Bush's "war on terrorism" consists of his passion (or Cheney's) for torture. Torture doesn't work (please, find me one case where it dramatically worked), the military opposes it, and the way we had it already allowed the fantasy emergency situation where a suspect has information that will help in that minute, humans can break the law. The military doesn't want to get back torture that we dish out! This is such an abstract, civilian argument and I can hardly believe it's a Christian one. I thought Jesus moved past the Old Testament "eye for an eye" argument. Why should we be like the terrorists? If we had a draft like Israel we'd all be fighting for the Geneva Convention. I just heard that this fight in Congress about torture is really to protect our torturer's from what the Red Cross is going to find out.
Bush's second tool to catch terrorists appears to be spying on terrorists without Congressional checks and balances. We're supposed to be in this fight together, Washington should work together, or is the fight against us, Mr. President?
Democrats, it's like this, maybe people think Clinton let bin Laden go, but it was Bush who let bin Laden go AFTER 9-11 at Tora Bora.
And as for Cheney's SUGGESTION the other day that we've stopped terroist attacks from happening here, there's no substantive EVIDENCE of that, and there were how many years of planning before/between the World Trade Center bombing and 9-11? EIGHT years. Plus, London's attack felt very close, to me.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Who would vote for Bill Frist?
I just saw Bill Frist cementing his support for President Bush on the News Hour.
Hey Rhode Island, if you vote for Chafee (R) you're sealing a victory for Bill Frist and the GOP "don't catch Bin Laden, sink billions in Iraq, and ask questions later," road show.
Hey Rhode Island, if you vote for Chafee (R) you're sealing a victory for Bill Frist and the GOP "don't catch Bin Laden, sink billions in Iraq, and ask questions later," road show.
Simple things
Tonight I begin my quest to put Democratic ideas into accessible language.
So Karl Rove is waging wars all over this country to keep Democrats from winning seats in Congress--he historically uses lies and disortions to label people as simply weak, bad, or crazy. He does this, it seems, because Republicans can't win on their own merits.
I'm a Democrat. Democrats generally don't hire people to dig into their opponents records for negative information. I think it's because we actually have values like:
I teach my children that playing fairly benefits everyone.
I teach my children that you can win without someone else losing (win/win).
I teach my children that if you have to cheat to win, you're not winning.
I teach my children to show respect for other people.
I teach my children that people are not all bad or all good, we are all good and bad and let's hope the good outweighs the bad, greatly.
I teach my children that people matter more than things, or even ideas.
I teach my children that if you have to win by making someone else look all bad, you look all bad.
Peace
So Karl Rove is waging wars all over this country to keep Democrats from winning seats in Congress--he historically uses lies and disortions to label people as simply weak, bad, or crazy. He does this, it seems, because Republicans can't win on their own merits.
I'm a Democrat. Democrats generally don't hire people to dig into their opponents records for negative information. I think it's because we actually have values like:
I teach my children that playing fairly benefits everyone.
I teach my children that you can win without someone else losing (win/win).
I teach my children that if you have to cheat to win, you're not winning.
I teach my children to show respect for other people.
I teach my children that people are not all bad or all good, we are all good and bad and let's hope the good outweighs the bad, greatly.
I teach my children that people matter more than things, or even ideas.
I teach my children that if you have to win by making someone else look all bad, you look all bad.
Peace
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Democrats are unheard and disrepected
I've been recieving Media Matter's www.mediamatters.org updates every day. Yes, they do occassionally make more than a little something about a little thing, but most of the time their facts are absolutely correct--and equally depressing.
Over a week it has become apparent that Democratic leaders are regularly ignored and disrespected. When people say, "Democrats don't have a plan," or "Where are the Democratic leaders?" just say, "You can find them on the internet or C-Span--but the press ignores them."
Sen. Harry Reid's written and spoken response to Bush's 9/11 speech was not reported by ABC or CBS. Chris Matthews insulted Al Gore's leadership compared to "bad manager but charming" Rudy Giuliani with some nebulous judgement. MSNBC lied about a 9/11 poll that measures how Americans blame Bush and Clinton for 9/11 (they lied so that Clinton looked worse.) Republicans get away with lies to the media, Democrats get challenged on truths!! It really is a skewed game--and involves very shallow cults of personality.
I used to think that the media's motivation for promoting Republicans was to follow the ball of the team that's winning (well, they're in power, I wouldn't call them "winning") but I think there's more to the press' motivation than that. I sense that there's a really fundamental core of anti-intellectualism going on. Facts don't matter, truth isn't important, journalism doesn't exist, we're getting, "he said, she said," or rather, "he said this about him," and ego, "This is what I think."
In the press there seems to be little sense of the common good or, gasp, God's will.
Peace
Over a week it has become apparent that Democratic leaders are regularly ignored and disrespected. When people say, "Democrats don't have a plan," or "Where are the Democratic leaders?" just say, "You can find them on the internet or C-Span--but the press ignores them."
Sen. Harry Reid's written and spoken response to Bush's 9/11 speech was not reported by ABC or CBS. Chris Matthews insulted Al Gore's leadership compared to "bad manager but charming" Rudy Giuliani with some nebulous judgement. MSNBC lied about a 9/11 poll that measures how Americans blame Bush and Clinton for 9/11 (they lied so that Clinton looked worse.) Republicans get away with lies to the media, Democrats get challenged on truths!! It really is a skewed game--and involves very shallow cults of personality.
I used to think that the media's motivation for promoting Republicans was to follow the ball of the team that's winning (well, they're in power, I wouldn't call them "winning") but I think there's more to the press' motivation than that. I sense that there's a really fundamental core of anti-intellectualism going on. Facts don't matter, truth isn't important, journalism doesn't exist, we're getting, "he said, she said," or rather, "he said this about him," and ego, "This is what I think."
In the press there seems to be little sense of the common good or, gasp, God's will.
Peace
Friday, September 08, 2006
Democrats would benefit by pointing out, over and over, that Republicans get our arguments wrong--and by stating Democratic arguments simply and clearly.
Republicans have a self-interest to keep in power so they define our arguments as the opposite of what they want. The left takes it for granted that Americans understand that Democrats want to disable the terrorists, that we have more intelligent ways of doing it, and that's why we're like, "Gees, Bush is so incompetent, what the hell is he doing torturing prisoners in addition to not catching the terrorists?" Yes, we are the peace party--which means we are willing to fight for American peace--yet Bush's goal now is not PEACE. On this point, why are we so afraid to invoke Clinton's successful, brief war? There sits Bosnia, Croatia, et. al, peacefully co-existing. Iraq could use such a "let's break up and you live over there and rule yourselves, and we'll live over here. Peace."
In nature, behavior that goes in, comes out, patterns occur as above, so below. We do not benefit ourselves or our soldiers by adopting terrorist tactics. Guess what? The terrorists enjoy having Bush as their warmonger (the terrorists, like American hawks, thrive on having a constant state of war). Chris Mathews has it all wrong when he implies terrorists want Democrats to win...the terrorists helped Bush get re-elected by scaring us with Bin Laden just before the 2004 election (I still think Bush cheated to win the electoral college in Ohio and Florida, at least). The terrorists KNOW that fear works for the Republicans. But who cares about applying logic to big problems these days?
Republicans have a self-interest to keep in power so they define our arguments as the opposite of what they want. The left takes it for granted that Americans understand that Democrats want to disable the terrorists, that we have more intelligent ways of doing it, and that's why we're like, "Gees, Bush is so incompetent, what the hell is he doing torturing prisoners in addition to not catching the terrorists?" Yes, we are the peace party--which means we are willing to fight for American peace--yet Bush's goal now is not PEACE. On this point, why are we so afraid to invoke Clinton's successful, brief war? There sits Bosnia, Croatia, et. al, peacefully co-existing. Iraq could use such a "let's break up and you live over there and rule yourselves, and we'll live over here. Peace."
In nature, behavior that goes in, comes out, patterns occur as above, so below. We do not benefit ourselves or our soldiers by adopting terrorist tactics. Guess what? The terrorists enjoy having Bush as their warmonger (the terrorists, like American hawks, thrive on having a constant state of war). Chris Mathews has it all wrong when he implies terrorists want Democrats to win...the terrorists helped Bush get re-elected by scaring us with Bin Laden just before the 2004 election (I still think Bush cheated to win the electoral college in Ohio and Florida, at least). The terrorists KNOW that fear works for the Republicans. But who cares about applying logic to big problems these days?
Friday, September 01, 2006
Cultural Proportion
I just called a preschool that charges $1260 per month for tution for a 14-month old child.
That is $15,120 per year, before miscellanous fees--that's for 8am - 2pm, three times a week!!
Paying that for three or four years adds up to a private college education!
Now, I agree that quality childcare providers should be handsomely paid, so maybe it's not out of proportion to spend a lot on the very young. Maybe that investment leads to scholarships for those children in the future...but I don't think the stats of infant daycare (maybe preschool) hold up to that. So what are parents paying for?
Luckily, I can hire a quality daycare provider for a few hours a week so that I can continue my career at home. It took me over a YEAR to discover this and it just took calling childcare places and asking questions. I found a very helpful person at the Children's Creative Center. Through her, I found Connections for Children (.org). After several visits to home daycare providers, I found one I'm very comfortable with, hooray!!! If you work at home, a daycare is the best bet for you if your baby is under 3! I hired a babysitter and it would only work for me if she took my son to the park...sometimes it was too hot, too hard to walk, too far...etc.
Peace
That is $15,120 per year, before miscellanous fees--that's for 8am - 2pm, three times a week!!
Paying that for three or four years adds up to a private college education!
Now, I agree that quality childcare providers should be handsomely paid, so maybe it's not out of proportion to spend a lot on the very young. Maybe that investment leads to scholarships for those children in the future...but I don't think the stats of infant daycare (maybe preschool) hold up to that. So what are parents paying for?
Luckily, I can hire a quality daycare provider for a few hours a week so that I can continue my career at home. It took me over a YEAR to discover this and it just took calling childcare places and asking questions. I found a very helpful person at the Children's Creative Center. Through her, I found Connections for Children (.org). After several visits to home daycare providers, I found one I'm very comfortable with, hooray!!! If you work at home, a daycare is the best bet for you if your baby is under 3! I hired a babysitter and it would only work for me if she took my son to the park...sometimes it was too hot, too hard to walk, too far...etc.
Peace
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)