Bush isn’t sorry

common dreams has this up on an unapologetic George W. Bush .  The cartoon says it in ways that words could never come close.

From Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary:

so·cio·path Listen to audio/ˈsoʊsijəˌpæθ/ noun

plural so·cio·paths

[count] : someone who behaves in a dangerous or violent way towards other people and does not feel guilty about such behavior
— so·cio·path·ic Listen to audio /ˌsoʊsijəˈpæθɪk/ adjective
▪ a sociopathic personality ▪ sociopathic behavior ▪ He is sociopathic.
~~~~~~~~~~
Oil company profits and/or new business from the Iraq War.  This was one of my arguments for my friend who was in the military–that the war was being fought for oil.  She was adamant that we would not be lied to about weapons of mass destruction.
From the article:
At the same time, representatives from ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Halliburton, among others, met with Cheney’s staff in January 2003 to discuss plans for Iraq’s postwar industry. For the next decade, former and current executives of western oil companies acted first as administrators of Iraq’s oil ministry and then as “advisers” to the Iraqi government.

~~~~~~~~~

Note further down the word privatization.  Sound familiar??

I tried to search for Afghanistan profiteering, but coming up empty.  I’ll wager that it’s the same, since there is an oil pipeline there.

I found this on the companies that profit the most from war.

Feeding the dark side.

 

 

Finding the Art

I’m sad to say that I just discovered this today, after having been here three years….but I couldn’t have afforded it, anyway, so it’s bittersweet…

They posted a funny advertisement poster on the grocery’s bulletin board, but I couldn’t find the corresponding poster on their website.  It’s called “Disaster Preparedness” and mocks the rules of Preparedness.   One rule was that there was probably a disaster underfoot if the electricity has been shut off, your cell phone doesn’t work, your neighbors are hysterical, and dogs are no longer running through the streets…:p

This site promotes the films I like.  I love, love, love independent films that aren’t the same old, same old.  I like the ones that make me think–that make me step outside the box….

….and I like the ones that highlight the aspects of society that are not all glamour, such as The Station Agent.   I picked this up at the library, and am sad that I’ll not get to see it anymore once I leave here.  It’s one of those tales that you don’t see that much out of Hollywood–and it’s well written enough that you empathize with Fin without feeling sorry for him.  It’s a wonderful story of friends’ experiences in life–a story of every day people.

 

 

Targets of drones not always criminal

common dreams has a link up to this McClatchy piece on the targets of drones–an estimated 3,500 people killed.

From the piece:

“The United States has gone far beyond what the U.S. public – and perhaps even Congress – understands the government has been doing and claiming they have a legal right to do,” said Mary Ellen O’Connell, a Notre Dame Law School professor who contends that CIA drone operations in Pakistan violate international law.

~~~~~~~~~~~
Mary Ellen O’Conell, from that radical leftwing university of Notre Dame.  :p
More:

The administration has declined to reveal other details of the program, such as the intelligence used to select targets and how much evidence is required for an individual to be placed on a CIA “kill list.” The administration also hasn’t even acknowledged the existence of so-called signature strikes, let alone discussed the legal and procedural foundations of the attacks.

~~~~~~~~
Does anyone else see the irony of Diane Feinstein being so anti-gun violence a la Newtown, but apparently thinks drone strikes are okay??
I also have an issue with calling drone strikes “self defense”.  It is self defense when you are face to face with someone and they are coming at you with fists, guns, or knives–then by all means, you have a right to defend yourself.  But hiding a thousand miles away in some darkened room with television monitors while you pull the trigger….um, no…not self defense in my book.  It’s cowardly.

Thatcher

The comments here are priceless on Margaret Thatcher’s passing.  Gah, I used to think so well of this woman in my repub daze.  Arrgh.

And even if I had the money, I would not have seen Meryl Streep’s version of her.  I was afraid that the worst would not come out, and from the comments on the movie, my guess was accurate.  Trying to make her into someone to admire?  Wow, Streep has gone so far away from Silkwood. 

The comments on feminists praising Thatcher as being a woman that “made it” is spot on.  One doesn’t have to look any farther than Hillary Clinton to see that.

I mean, really, Clinton makes a big deal about being asked about her clothes, and there are feminists who applaud that thinking she’s being assertive. Pfft.  Men are asked about the suits they wear.  I wouldn’t know what an Armani suit was if not for that.  And a man could not walk into a courtroom, to use the above example, in jeans and flannel shirt and expect to be given the same consideration from a judge that he would if he were wearing a suit.  Men notice other men’s suits, but they’re not as obvious about it.  It may come out as “hey, nice suit” and left at that.

Should a person be judged by appearance?  Absolutely not.

In my personal observation, we are becoming worse about judging folks by the outside instead of the inside.  Our cultural programming, from watching shows like Survivor, among other things,  buys into the notion that others are superior.  Some see clothes as an indicator of superiority.  I remember that it wasn’t so much so before we moved away from an agricultural (family farm) culture.  I remember when Levi’s became the preferred jean and you were “uncool” if you didn’t have those jeans.  Uncool = lesser person.  This also coincides with “poor person”,  btw….

Somehow our culture became twisted along the way and “rich people” became associated with “good people”.  Being poor, one comes to assess folks not on their bank accounts, but on their actions.  What do they do with their funds?  Do they help others or spend their time degrading others and, like the Kochs, do their best to make sure that they have it all?

 

Anyway, Margaret Thatcher and Ronnie Reagan were the architects of what we’re dealing with today–the culture of greed.  “I’ve got mine, screw you.”   or “I’ve got mine, and I want yours, too.”

More on the Arkansas spill

You know, there are days when I wish that I was wrong, and this is one of them.

So…my first inclination was right–that they were trying to control the message and access to the area by the press….it would appear that the press corps are going to have to start having body guards.

At least there is one aerial photo of the mess here.

New resource from PR Watch

PR Watch has this press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 4, 2013
CONTACT: Nikolina Lazic, nikolina@prwatch.org, (608) 260-9713

A REPORTERS’ GUIDE TO THE “STATE POLICY NETWORK:” THE RIGHT-WING THINK TANKS SPINNING DISINFORMATION AND PUSHING THE ALEC AGENDA IN STATES
New Resource Details “Think Tanks” Tanking Americans’ Rights

MADISON, WI — The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD), the publisher of the award-winning ALECexposed.org investigation, is releasing a new web resource, http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Portal:State_Policy_Network for reporters and citizens about the activities of Tracie Sharp’s State Policy Network (SPN) and its state “think tank” members. Although the funding of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is approximately $7 million a year, funding for SPN, its 59 state operations and the controversial Heartland Institute — an SPN ally like ALEC that tries to change both state and federal law — has topped $80 million in recent years. And these SPN operations often function like an echo chamber of the corporate-funded ALEC agenda.

CMD’s three-month investigation, http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/04/11909/reporters%E2%80%99-guide-%E2%80%9Cstate-policy-network%E2%80%9D-right-wing-think-tanks-spinning-disinform uncloaks some of the major funders of SPN’s expanding operations in the states and raises major concerns over whose agenda these groups are advancing in the state:

1. Mystery Funds. This investigation identifies hundreds of thousands of dollars, and perhaps much more than that, which Sharp distributes to these organizations but that is not disclosed to the IRS as passing through SPN’s books. It is possible that Sharp is distributing or designating funds made available via the Koch-connected “DonorsTrust” and “Donors Capital Fund” or some other stream of cash for the state operations she helps grow. However, some of the big bucks at her disposal did not show up in SPN’s 990 form in the same year it was distributed to an SPN group. See the SourceWatch article on SPN Funding for more.

2. Even More Koch Money Than Previously Known. This guide also flags that substantial funding for some SPN state operations has come from Koch Industries itself and not only the Koch family foundations. That is, hundreds of thousands of dollars, at least, hav been spent by the privately held energy conglomerate controlled by two of the richest billionaires in the world, Charles and David Koch. The total amount is secret because it is not passing through the Koch foundations, which are required to disclose their disbursements. The total amount of Koch money spent on SPN-related efforts to change state laws and spin the news is understated by analysis of their foundation spending alone. See the SourceWatch article on SPN Funding for more.

3. Trying to Change the Law, but Reporting Little or No Lobbying. Like ALEC, SPN and its affiliates seek to change state laws, but report little or no lobbying. That means that corporations and individuals (like Koch Industries and others) that fund their operations can get a tax write-off for funding SPN efforts. See the SourceWatch article on the SPN Agenda for more.

4. SPN Funders Help Some Interests Get Multiple Votes on ALEC Bills. The relationship between SPN affiliates and ALEC is strong and is funded by some of the same donors. That means that some corporate interests like the Kochs get, in effect, multiple votes to change the law on ALEC task forces, where corporate lobbyists and special interest groups like SPN operations vote as equals with elected officials behind closed doors. A particular ALEC task force may have multiple Koch-funded operations — including a lobbyist from Koch Companies Public Sector, a special interest representative from an SPN operation like the Goldwater Institute, and reps from national Koch-controlled or fueled groups like David Koch’s Americans for Prosperity (AFP) and the Charles Koch-founded Cato Institute, along with the Heritage Foundation, a long-time ally of the Koch agenda. Through ALEC, SPN helps write templates to change state laws; then ALEC members vote in secret for those bills; and then SPN supports the introduction or adoption of those bills as law, sometimes with help from David Koch’s AFP echo chamber in a state.

5. SPN Funders Have Included Some of the Richest and Most Ideological Families in the Country. Fueling SPN-related efforts is a bevy of right-wing billionaires and foundations beyond the Koch brothers and including the Bradley Foundation, DonorsTrust and Donors Capital Fund (large donor-directed funds), the Olin Foundation, the Richard and Helen DeVos Foundation (the Amway fortune), the Coors-related Castle Rock Foundation and the Adolph Coors Foundation, the McCamish Foundation, the JM Foundation, and the Smith Richardson Foundation. SPN-related activities are also funded by the Roe Foundation, the charitable arm that is part of the legacy of Thomas Roe, the man who helped launch SPN over two decades ago, after telling one of his allies, “I’m going to capture the states,” just like Ronald Reagan was going to capture the U.S.S.R.

6. SPN’s Legislative Agenda Is Frequently Buttressed by Its Forays as “Press” and the Echoes of Its Allies in the Growing Right-Wing State “Press” Corps. As CMD was one of the first to document, SPN groups like the Goldwater Institute are hiring people to act as reporters, and the legislative agenda of SPN is increasingly echoed by the growing right-wing infrastructure of groups that pose as press. Some even get their stories or “reports” picked up as news and delivered to state newspapers as a “wire” service like the Associated Press, as with the Franklin Center’s Watchdog.org groups and the Ryun brothers-allied “American Majority” and “Media Trackers” operations.

This Reporters’ Guide details how SPN works, who funds it, what the network’s groups do, and looks at some of their legislative goals, including undermining workers’ rights and weakening unions as well as undoing renewable energy laws and expanding ways in which tax dollars are redirected to the private sector, for example through funding so-called “virtual schools.”

Key resources include:

1. PRwatch Special Report with Key Findings: http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/04/11909/reporters%E2%80%99-guide-%E2%80%9Cstate-policy-network%E2%80%9D-right-wing-think-tanks-spinning-disinform

2. State Policy Network Main Portal: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Portal:State_Policy_Network

3. SPN Funding: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/SPN_Funding

4. SPN Ties to ALEC: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/SPN_Ties_to_ALEC

5. SPN Members: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/SPN_Members

6. SPN Agenda; http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/SPN_Agenda

7. SPN_Founders,_History,_and_Staff: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/