Palin dissing the press she needs in the "Lower 48"

Just considering Palin's frequency in calling the media "lazy" and not giving them "handouts" like a schedule of events.   I find this interesting name-calling considering every Alaskan still receives a state "handout" from the government-run Alaska Permanent Fund every year (taken by the state from oil profits), and most Alaskan families who moved there before 1986 received their land for FREE (by no means were they lazy), through the federal Homestead Act--including a neighbor of mine back then. Perhaps the media can say, "We're rubber, you're glue..."

Are, or were, vaccines the left's climate denial?

I can't say I wasn't ever scared of the stories surrounding vaccines when faced with sticking needles in my first baby.  I spoke to a lot of people who worked with Autistic children who were convinced that vaccines were NOT the cause, and I'm there too now.  I also consulted my guru Andrew Weil who recommended it, and felt gratified and awed when I watched what vaccines used to be like in the John Adams series. UGH!

In an attempt to put my chidren less at risk, I spaced out their vaccines and asked about Mercury (most of which was removed by 2003, I believe).  It did show up last year in the flu vaccine!  But I couldn't help but wonder the game of deadly roulette the people who I knew who didn't vaccine were playing.  How would or could they insulate their children from the diseases of our global world?  Especially in a major city like L.A.?  Their sheltered kids would go to school with protected kids who could bring germs from anywhere. I would bet a lot of home school parents didn't vaccinate their kids...and perhaps they will get vaccinated now.

For me, the anti-vaccine movement was the left extremist belief in risks we could not prove, but we knew the greater risks--grounded in history.  So the left believed in an unproven risk (a major disease caused by vaccines), and the right denies a proven one (global warming).  They don't seem to have the same deadly weight, but sometimes they can.

Looking back to July

I was just checking some old videos and came across this one. I'm not that familiar with Michelle, and am not impressed, wow, what B.S. (notice how much she says, "everything," "always," "entire," and what an apologist for racial intolerance), but I stopped watching the Today show when Bush was president because that guy beside Michelle, Matt and the Today producers, seemed so out-of-reality-enamored of Bush. What is fascinating about this video is how clearly disgusted Matt is by the words spewing out of Michelle's mouth. Look at Matt's face! Worth a watch to me!

CNN and MSNBC: VP festival

I watched a painful "Biden Revealed" on CNN tonight. The family basically danced for the cable "news" network, while the CNN producers cut Biden down with innuendo, biased commentary that related skewed "facts," (e.g. they made Biden's well informed "partitioning of Iraq" advocacy and lack of support for the surge sound like lunacy and a recent failing in foreign policy). Most of the piece had this ridiculous music that sounded full of dread and fear--it was usually played during an "if they win..." moment and it was run long and hard while they showed footage from the convention in Denver.

Contrast this with the MSNBC show on Palin. I was initially skeptical because they glowingly interviewed her family and friends and spent minutes on childhood photos and high school videos, and it all seemed so perfect. But the report has been professional otherwise, reporting accurately the criticisms and problems with her candidacy. Noticeabley, MSNBC refrains from extensive "commentary" on the candidate's "situation" which CNN was unable to stop doing. In other words, they show Palin f-ing up without discussing how or interviewing partisans to help point it out. They give her a fair shot, but don't gloss over the real problems she's been having and might have.

If only the MSM gave liberals the same treatment.

Bull Shit McCain/Palin

I didn't want to watch this. We're house hunting with 2 kids under 4, so it's not like we don't have anything to do.

Country First. No.

Power First.

Let's ask Palin why she belongs to a secessionist group and why she censors public libraries. And let's ask John McCain exactly where it is in the Constitution that innocent Americans can be RAIDED because they use cameras. And we'll all ask the MSM why they haven't covered this fascist police action!!

Family Values. No.

Willful Ignorance.

I'm sorry, but if abstinence education and advocacy "works" then...what happened there at ground zero?

I stopped watching it, I only caught the end where she endorsed a "great man" for President. That would be Obama. She supported Pat Buchanon in 2000...

I haven't had the stomach to watch the key note speech, how many times did he lie or mention 9-11?

Peace.

The MSM hammer

Obama's "inexperienced" BS! Yes, Vigilante, can we please tear McCain's corrupt, unethical, pandering experience apart sometime soon? And, more important, can we hear over and over and over about Lugar Obama? And transparent government?

We have to lie about Cindy to get John elected...

Wow, I'm stunned. I'm adopted and I just see this political lie as a line that should never be crossed. "Daddy, why did YOUR campaign get my adoption story wrong?" Bizarre.

Obama Flap

I watched the Rev. Wright Press Club Q & A and, unless I'm Obama who might take offense at being called political (oh please!), I can't find what was so outrageous. It is factual that our intervention in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, and our military training of Osama bin Laden preceded 9-11; our Ambassador said our chickens were coming home to roost.

Is it really that crazy to believe that our government had something to do with HIV? I don't believe that, but then, I haven't researched it either--and it's not impossible in the context of the rest of our history: as in do "white" people know about the Tuskegee "Experiment", forced sterilizations in hospitals on black women, and more recently, the reporting of the actual importation of drugs into the black community by the CIA? And in any case, REV. WRIGHT IS NOT OBAMA! Obama strikes me as a quietly religious person who lives a very secular, politically active life. It seems obvious that he belonged to Wright's church because of it's ties to the black community, not Wright's bombastic preaching. Let's see, does Obama strike you as a leader or a follower? Exactly.

However, I think Wright may be on to something when he claims that the press is attacking the black church. Think about it. I think the press, Hillary, and the right wing are really trying to make us see Obama as BLACK and RELIGIOUS in the skewed way that Wright's being smeared. There are people in this country that will do ANYTHING to stop Obama from being elected...he's like a Kennedy.

I also find Wright's views of our government's policies very consistent with the preaching of my Methodist father. It's pretty simple: God is good, war is not. Criticizing our government should not be outrageous (I'll never get that conservatives don't trust government yet won't defend our right to criticize it; a paradox) and is consistent with most liberal moral philosophies whether religiously based or not. I think many atheists are just ticked off that Obama actually seems to believe in God; a view I find shockingly intolerant for Americans to hold.

Cheney and the Telecoms

I heard him say that if we don't let corporations break the law upon government request then we'll have another 9-11. CORPORATIONS BROKE THE LAW AND COMPLIED WITH GOVERNMENT REQUESTS BEFORE 9-11, DARTH.

In the last debate Hillary said...

something like, "We are not going to use race and gender in this campaign." Well, that lasted about an hour. Outrageously, here is Bill saying that "black" people will vote for Obama, and that women will vote for Hillary. Someone should ask him, who does he expect "black" women to vote for? What a racially aware guy this is--he's talking to "white" folks here, the slime ball.

IDs and illegal immigrants in the West

I went to Arizona in 2004 to register Democrats to vote with a clip board and paper registrations. We went to places like Wal-Mart and Costco. There were definitely immigrants around, and probably illegal ones at that. They wouldn't come near us.

They do not vote.

Republicans on this are corrupt, lying bastards. Let's hope the Supreme Court doesn't buy their arguments.

Be scared about your children, and scare your children.

This is outrageous. All in the name of saving children from harm! It shows how a friendly stranger can lure our young children into dangerous situations. No shit. I have no idea how this video would prevent these occurrences. Do they advocate using the tactics in the video? If so, what doesn't come out in teaser for the DVD is this:

1) Fooling children teaches them to not trust US--it's the adults crying wolf and it's a foolish thing for a parent to do to a child.

2) In both of these situations, the children trusted actors who, as far as I can tell, weren't actually criminal or insane. Not to say that the criminal and insane can't be pathologically charming; but I remember being a suspicious kid who could read people pretty well. So these kids actually displayed good judgment about the PEOPLE who approached them--only to have that judgment later questioned within a humiliating "don't you listen to me about strangers?" gotcha atmosphere. Great job, parents--it's like morphing a puppy into a monster!

Let's make sure these kids are scared to ask for help from anybody when they might actually need it!

Which gets to my political point here; we are in such a culture of FEAR that we're teaching our kids that they must fear all adults. No, we can't leave our kids alone until they are a mature 16+, but that doesn't mean we have to scare the bejesus out of them, and us, until then.

Where are the stories about us helping new schools in Iraq?

If we have failed to prevent the murdering of Christians in Iraq, and probably helped motivate these deaths because of our own violence, and Christians can no longer live in FREEDOM, how do we save Iraq from itself?

Where's CNN?

The big lies

It is absolutely 1984 that Karl Rove is falsely blaming Democrats for rushing to war in Iraq (the bigger the lie, the more it's believed, right?) and that President Bush is now calling Congress a do-nothing. If the Democrats in Congress needed in any help, Bush is now providing it because his athttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.giftacks on Congress make ME want to defend "impeachment off the table" Pelosi. Thom Hartman has noted on his show that the House has actually had an ambitious agenda, that gets stalled or changed in the Senate and then gets vetoed at the top (e.g. Healthcare insurance for children).

For Bush to say Congress isn't doing anything cries out for a "then what the hell are you vetoing? Oh yeah, poor children's access to healing."

The Senate did this!!

And who needs enemies when your "friends" report the "news" like this: Feingold responds to Joe Klein

And of course, WWW III and Iran.

Bush, Cheney and the U.N. override Iraq's representative government

Thanks, Vigilante. I think every American should understand what's happening here.

How many days until we bomb Iran, Dick?

So Rice is cutting off banks and condemning an influential Iranian militia...what affect could that possibly have in Iran? Any ideas?

So there's no change in policy in Iran (which is really only the rhetoric of one man, as far as I can tell), then we bomb?

As far as I can tell, there's nothing stopping these nuts from doing this except a public campaign by move-on. I think we need to get verbal commitments from our Senators and Representatives, today.

Basically, if we need to bomb Iran, we have time to make that decision after these neocon nutjobs are out of office.

Can you imagine if that's what the 2008 election will come down to? Bomb Iran or not?

Don't believe your own eyes

Everyone is talking about the JFK "plot" as if it is real. Hillary says something baffling, "Clinton said, 'I take all of these plots seriously, unless proven otherwise. There's no reason to be second-guessing.'"

WHAT? NO REASON?? How about an administration BENT on manipulating every shred of "evidence" so that it fits their agenda, on their time schedule?!

I noticed this:

"When the JFK plot was first discovered in January 2006, the NYPD's counterterrorism division ran a mile-by-mile survey of the pipeline. The NYPD also increased surveillance using helicopters and harbor boats."

2006

2006??? Then why did this story hit right before a Democratic debate and just happen to be the primary issue that that WOLFIE wanted answered?

The only "evidence" I've yet to read about in the Press or hear on TV is the following:

"He [the terror suspect] can be heard on the tapes [produced by a federal informant, described below] speaking of his hate and murderous urges during the time he worked as a cargo handler at Kennedy Airport.

"These things used to come into my brain - well, I could blow this place up," he was recorded saying. "I would sit and see a plane taxiing up the runway. And I would say, if I could get a rocket, then I could do a hit."

He apparently came in contact with people from Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago who harbored that same murderous hate for America. He is alleged to have already been hatching a plot when he encountered a man who had been working as a government informant since 2004 in an effort to get a reduced sentence on a pair of drug trafficking cases [and CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY].

The informant worked his way into the midst of the conspirators and reported that they intended to explode a fuel line that runs 40 miles from New Jersey through Staten Island and Brooklyn to JFK Airport. Defreitas is quoted in the criminal complaint as saying the plot would destroy "the whole of Kennedy" along with nearly everyone there and part of the surrounding neighborhoods.

Alleged plot

Emphasis added.

I watched the Today show this morning, NBC's answer to Fox News, and they had the "expert" Steve Emmerson on the show spouting on about how much some Muslims hate us. He had far more to say about hate than any facts about this case...he said something about tapes and VIDEO showing compelling evidence that this was a real threat (I have yet to find any other account of video evidence against the defendent). His supporters have private interests, not educational ones.

I know I shouldn't be but I am STUNNED that the press has yet to grow any SKEPTICISM after the wake of Iraq and the Bill Moyer's special.

The crazy bearded guy in a Brooklyn court room has not been found guilty yet, and nearly everybody's accepting that his plot had legs. Let's start asking more questions and not accepting non-academic and independent researchers as experts on anything. We might as well ask historical novelists for help and guidance in this war.

I've got a question for Hillary, "Why are you drinking the diet pepsi?"

THEY WON'T FOLLOW US HOME!!!

I can't stand to hear President Bush justify this OCCUPATION by threatening us that we'll get hit IN THE U.S. if we stop occupying Iraq.

IT'S A LIE!!!!!

We could get hit anytime unless we vigilently prevent it.

It's been only 6 years since 9-11, Bin Laden waited 8 years between World Trade Center attacks.

I hope to God our CIA and FBI is focused on that little pattern, otherwise we might get another attack right before our country elects another president.