headermask image

header image

because everyone knows blacks are lazy and shiftless, right?

coon coon coon

“I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on,” she said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article “that found how Sen. Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”

“There’s a pattern emerging here,” she said.

No kidding. The “pattern” is that the further that brass ring drifts away from Clinton, the harder she drives in that racial wedge, particularly in states where there are just enough African Americans to scare the whites, but not enough to overcome, politically, the electoral effect of that bigotry.

the race chasm

From David Sirota’s article The Race Chasm:

[The] dip in Obama’s performance in states with a big-but-not-huge African-American population is the Race Chasm — and that chasm is no coincidence.

It is in the chasm where Clinton has defeated Obama. These are states from Ohio to Oklahoma to Massachusetts, where black-white racial politics are ingrained in the political culture but where the black vote is too small to offset a white vote racially motivated by the Clinton campaign. This chasm exists in states whose population is above 6 percent and below 17 percent black, and Clinton has won them by beating Obama among white working- class voters.

Clinton, knowing big wins in the Race Chasm can fortify her firewall, has subsequently intensified her efforts to inject race into the campaign.

And you’re going to exploit that Chasm all the way to the convention, aren’t you, miss white lady?

It’s Jesse Helms vs. Harvey Gantt all over again.

Sphere: Related Content

Clinton’s not dead yet

Kudos to George McGovern for not helping her along.

Sphere: Related Content

r.i.p. mildred loving

paper dolls

And many thanks for this simple truth:

“We loved each other and got married,” she told The Washington Evening Star in 1965, when the case was pending. “We are not marrying the state. The law should allow a person to marry anyone he wants.”

From Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967):

In June 1958, two residents of Virginia, Mildred Jeter, a Negro woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, were married in the District of Columbia pursuant to its laws. Shortly after their marriage, the Lovings returned to Virginia and established their marital abode in Caroline County. At the October Term, 1958, of the Circuit Court of Caroline County, a grand jury issued an indictment charging the Lovings with violating Virginia’s ban on interracial marriages. On January 6, 1959, the Lovings pleaded guilty to the charge and were sentenced to one year in jail; however, the trial judge suspended the sentence for a period of 25 years on the condition that the Lovings leave the State and not return to Virginia together for 25 years. He stated in an opinion that:

“Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”

Wouldn’t it be great if such neanderthal thinking was part of the historical past? Not with Fat Tony around. From Scalia’s dissent in Lawrence v. Texas (2003):

Today’s opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct…

One of the most revealing statements in today’s opinion is the Court’s grim warning that the criminalization of homosexual conduct is “an invitation to subject homosexual persons to discrimination both in the public and in the private spheres.” … Many Americans do not want persons who openly engage in homosexual conduct as partners in their business, as scoutmasters for their children, as teachers in their children’s schools, or as boarders in their home. They view this as protecting themselves and their families from a lifestyle that they believe to be immoral and destructive. The Court views it as “discrimination” which it is the function of our judgments to deter. So imbued is the Court with the law profession’s anti-anti-homosexual culture, that it is seemingly unaware that the attitudes of that culture are not obviously “mainstream”; that in most States what the Court calls “discrimination” against those who engage in homosexual acts is perfectly legal; that proposals to ban such “discrimination” under Title VII have repeatedly been rejected by Congress…; that in some cases such “discrimination” is mandated by federal statute…; and that in some cases such “discrimination” is a constitutional right…

The Supreme Court’s final word in Loving should apply to all marriages between consenting adults:

These statutes also deprive the Lovings of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.

Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

But if McCain inherits the throne, there will be no chance of that:

“I will look for people in the cast of John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and my friend the late William Rehnquist — jurists of the highest caliber who know their own minds, and know the law, and know the difference,” McCain said.

We can only hope that we have people of Mildred and Richard Loving’s character and courage in the future to continue the fights against bigots - and for our basic freedoms.

Sphere: Related Content

why?

in donuts we trust

Why do we allow speculators to raise the price of commodities like food and oil by betting on how expensive those same commodities are going to be in the future?

Doesn’t that seem a bit suicidal, like betting against yourself, doubling down each time?

India may be on the right track: India considers suspending trade in food futures

If only we could generate enough political pressure - or even awareness of the problem - to overcome the political clout of the banks, commodities exchanges and brokerage firms.

But that would require an informed populace - and god knows the media can’t have that.

Sphere: Related Content

fear and greed

sea lion eating salmon

There are some sick fucks in this country with some serious entitlement issues:

Officials are investigating the deaths of six sea lions who appear to have been shot Sunday after climbing onto traps in the Columbia River.

Wildlife officials said that the bodies of the sea lions were discovered at noon Sunday on two floating traps just below Bonneville Dam.

“In each of the two traps were three dead sea lions,” Brian Gorman, regional spokesman for the National Marine Fisheries Service, said.

Four traps were installed near Bonneville Dam in an attempt to protect endangered salmon.

Both species are federally protected. Washington and Oregon have been authorized to trap California sea lions, then relocate the most serious predators. More than 60 of the California sea lions have been branded as frequent offenders eligible for removal.

Because, you see, we humans built the dams that devastated the salmon runs, so now we have to punish the sea lions for doing what comes naturally.

And for some fuckwits, trapping and relocating the sea lions wasn’t punishment enough - especially when the river fishing season was cut short and the ocean fishing season was canceled all together because our fucking dams kill too many fucking salmon.

Because those salmon are ours, goddamn it - dead or alive - and no glorified circus act is going to keep us from our god-given right to hunt and pillage.

And ranch on public wildlands without fear of wild animal predation:

wolf pelts and bounty hunter

The Bush Administration unilaterally de-listed the wolves of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming from the Endangered Species list on March 28, and since then at least 37 wolves have been slaughtered despite continuing bans on hunting in Idaho and Montana - and ongoing litigation to stop the de-listing by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Wyoming’s wolf management plan classifies wolves outside of the northwestern part of the state as predators, which allows unlimited, year-round shooting of them. Only in a small portion of the state where a string of federally designated wilderness areas surround Yellowstone National Park does Wyoming classify wolves as a trophy species.

In this area, the state will manage wolves through a set hunting season, which will include hunting quotas.

Idaho and Montana’s wolf management plans classify wolves as a game animal anywhere they roam. With last week’s delisting of wolves, hunters in these states may be able to pursue the wily predators as soon as this fall.

To ranchers, wolves are nothing but parasites; to others, they are objects of fear and loathing despite the non-existence of even a single report of human predation by a wild wolf in North America.

According to the NRDC, “The death toll could be even higher [than the 37 reported] since kills are not required to be reported immediately, and ‘shoot and bury’ tactics mean that some kills might not be reported at all.”

For some Americans (like Bush and Cheney), Manifest Destiny is not a history lesson, but a raison d’être. Their manhood is dependent on subjugation and violence, whether toward land that is unsuitable for ranching (all of the federal lands West of the Mississippi produce less beef than the state of Missouri alone), individuals that seek to protect that land, or the wildlife that has lived upon it for eons.

But according to the Bible, only humans matter, and Christian humans at that. The rest is here for us to consume or destroy.

And so slaughter is justified, in Wyoming and Iraq.

boy wounded in u.s. airstrike

The ugly daily fight for ground in the poor Shiite neighborhood of Sadr City unfolded Saturday at a small mosque next door to a hospital, damaging the hospital and a number of its ambulances, and near a group of children who were wounded as they gathered tin cans to sell for salvage.

The missiles that hit close to the Sadr General Hospital were American. After a night of clashes in the neighborhood, the Americans fired at least three “precision-guided munitions” at the small building next door to the hospital…

Haider Abbas, 10, was brought to the hospital with what appeared to be a gaping hole in his back and shrapnel injuries across his stomach. The boy screamed and whimpered in pain, barely able to answer a doctor’s questions.

“My friend brought me to the hospital, but we had to leave the other wounded kids behind,” he said. “The Iraqi Army refused to allow them to be evacuated, but my friend took me anyway.”

The doctor, Abdul Rahman Hadi, said the boy was bleeding internally. “He needs surgery quickly,” Dr. Hadi said. “The irony is that not one of his relatives has come because he is an orphan.”

Another victim of that attack, Ahmad Yahya, 31, whose leg was broken, said the Iraqi Army had blocked evacuation from the area of the attack. “I was with a group of about 15 children who were collecting the empty cans or the trash in Jamila,” he said. “I don’t know why this happened.”

Because the U.S. is run by rapacious cowards. It’s a cyclical feature of life here in the good old U.S.A.

If you’d like to voice your opposition to Congress, at least so far as wolf poisoning is concerned, you can use the NRDC’s form here.

You can voice your opposition to the slaughter - and any plans you might have for boycotting Wyoming’s tourism industry until it stops - to Wyoming’s Democratic governor Dave Freudenthal here.

Our son L. is desperate for a trip to Yellowstone, but that will have to wait until Wyoming comes to its senses.

Sphere: Related Content

Spotlight on Neo-Nazis and Anti-Immigration Activists

What is it with nativist nutbars and neo-Nazis? Anti-immigrant a-holes always pitch a fit when referred to as racists. Yet their knees turn to jelly for swastika-lickers, no matter how ancient or feeble the National Socialist.

Take 74-year-old Elton Hall. (Please, take him.) An Arizona organizer for the American Nazi Party back in the day, he’s now so radioactive that even Rusty Childress’ hate-group United for a Sovereign America pretends the geriatric goosestepper no longer exists. Nevertheless, the neurosurgeons at Patriots Border Alliance, a group of minutemen who broke free from the leadership of Minuteman Civil Defense Corps honcho Chris Simcox last year, have a pic on their Web site showing the crackpot Hitler-lover in a wheelchair, surrounded by fawning fans.

The header and caption for the image read, “PATRIOTS’ BORDER ALLIANCE HONORING ELTON HALL: In appreciation for your deactivated service, devotion, commitment to securing American borders and promoting THE RULE OF LAW.” Sniff. Gets you all teary-eyed, don’t it? All this affection for a dood who once bowed to ANP founder George Lincoln Rockwell, and who has no remorse for it, nor for his current icon-like status with kid skinheads.

Read whole article.

Sphere: Related Content

Confessions of a Precinct Committee Officer (part 1)

Got Democracy?

I don’t believe we are practicing any recognizable form of democracy in this country and here is just another example.

Let me say at the outset that I don’t blame anyone for this mess besides perhaps a justice system that is more concerned about promoting a “dog eat dog” world than administering wise jurisprudence.

I am a Democratic Party Precinct Committee Officer (PCO) in the 17th Legislative District. There are exactly 22 PCOs in the 17th LD.

Last week I attended a nominating convention on who the 17th LD Democrats will “nominate” for the primary elections.

And this is where the trouble begins. A couple of years ago, the 17th LD passed new bylaws prohibiting endorsement of any candidate prior to the primary election. This bylaw was intended to try and treat even-handedly all primary candidates and keep the primary a democratic process.

Well the Supreme Court has changed all this. Now we have a “top two” primary system where the two highest vote getters, regardless of party affiliation, automatically advance to the general election.

This causes a problem with regard to democratic principles. If you have two Republicans and four Democrats running in the primary, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that the two Republicans are statistically more likely to both be the top two vote getters since the Democrats will split their Democratic voting base four ways and the Republicans only by two.

So it behooves the political parties to try to have only one candidate or one “viable” candidate going into the primary to prevent such a result.

Now why does any of this matter? Whoever gets the nomination of the party will very often actually become the winner of the primary. This is because that person will get money, publicity, endorsements from various organizations and other perks that will lend a significant advantage over the others running. The non-nominated candidates will also find themselves under pressure to withdraw so as to not split the vote as mentioned above.

As a reaction to this top two primary system and the potential undemocratic results it permits, the state democratic party is requiring all legislative district organizations to pick a nominee for each race in the primary.

This violates the bylaws of the 17th LD Dems against endorsing a candidate prior to the primary election. Some would argue a nomination is not the same as an endorsement. I agree they are not exactly the same but a nomination certainly implies an endorsement and would thus violate the intent of the 17th bylaw against such an act by the organization.

So now we are voting at the next meeting to remove the endorsement provision of our bylaws in order to comply with the autocratic mandate of the Democratic State Party Chair Pelz to nominate a candidate. And if we don’t, Pelz will pick the nominee for us. Now how is that for grassroots empowerment!

Seems like it would be more democratic if we just abolished the two party system and the primaries, let people run on their own and let the best person win. Instant runoff voting anyone?

Got Democracy? Nope.

More to come…

Related articles:
It’s not just the 17th - Grassroots Dems balk at party orders - With ‘Top Two’ primary thrust upon them, Democrats struggle over how to nominate

PS: This is just a small part of the story. Please comment about what we want to do about this quagmire.

Sphere: Related Content

The Empire Strikes Barack

The Empire Strikes Barack youtube video (collapsible)

Sphere: Related Content

Chomsky on Iran (five parts)

Sphere: Related Content

why universal, single-payer, non-profit health coverage?

ollar caduceus

We all have stories like this:

My friend L. recently quit a high-pressure job after 20 years to help her husband out in his solo architecture practice. She had insurance for herself, her husband and the kids through her job, so after resigning she paid for COBRA while she waited for her family to be accepted into a stand-alone plan.

You know what happened next: she was diagnosed with a chronic condition while waiting for new insurance approval. So her husband and kids can get on the new plan, but she’s SOL unless she can get a doc to un-diagnose her (unlikely, since it’s a genetic condition that has plagued her brother for the last 30 years, and her grandmother before that). And her COBRA will run out December 31.

John McCain’s plan:

While still having the option of employer-based coverage, every family will also have the option of receiving a direct refundable tax credit - effectively cash - of $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families to offset the cost of insurance. Families will be able to choose the insurance provider that suits them best and the money would be sent directly to the insurance provider. Those obtaining innovative insurance that costs less than the credit can deposit the remainder in expanded Health Savings Accounts.

I don’t know about you, but my employer-based healthcare plan costs $450/month - just for me. My husband’s runs about the same, and our son’s - which we have to purchase separately, costs about $300/month.

So that’s $14,400 a year, and would likely be at least 50% more if J. and I were buying our own coverage, since I have degenerative hip disease, migraines and a family history of melanoma.

John McCain’s plan, in practice, would mean a 25% loss to our annual disposable income after his puny tax credit if we had to buy coverage on our own.

And as for universal coverage, McCain can get you there, if you can afford it:

One approach would establish a nonprofit corporation that would contract with insurers to cover patients who have been denied insurance and could join with other state plans to enlarge pools and lower overhead costs. There would be reasonable limits on premiums, and assistance would be available for Americans below a certain income level.

What’s a “reasonable limit on premiums” for a man who thinks $5,000 per family is enough to cover their health coverage costs? If my health insurance premiums are $20,000 a year for our family, and our after-tax joint income is $80k, I cannot afford health insurance. And I doubt our family will fall below the “certain income level” threshold McCain would set for whatever pittance of “assistance” that might be offered.

Neither Obama’s nor Hillary’s plans are perfect, but they move toward universal coverage and single payer - the only way to get profit out of the healthcare coverage equation*, and the only choice if we are to get anything like health equity in this country.

This does not mean that doctors can’t make a decent living. It just means you can’t profit by denying healthcare coverage, something that allowed the likes of CIGNA to pay its CEO a lavish bonus and stock options:

H. Edward Hanway received a salary of $1.11 million, a performance-based bonus of nearly $18 million, and other perks worth $32,021 including the use of company aircraft. He received $3.57 million worth of stock and option awards…

CIGNA reported a profit of $1.115 BILLION for 2007 - $1,115,000,000 that was not spent caring for the health of their customers last year.

$1,115,000,000 that could have paid for the coverage of almost 100,000 families. And they’re only 140th on Fortune’s list of the top 500 U.S. companies.

Rounding out the healthcare companies on the list:

25. UnitedHealth Group: profits of $4.654 billion, enough to cover 388,000 families for a year.

33. WellPoint: profits of $3.3454 billion, enough to cover 279,000 families.

85. Aetna: profits of $1.831 billion, enough to cover 152,000 families.

98. Humana: profits of $833.7 million, enough to cover 70,000 families.

179. Healthnet: profits of $193.7 million, enough to cover 16,000 families.

266. Coventry Health Care: profits of $626.1 million, enough to cover 51,800 families.

The remaining companies in the Forbes top 1000 had enough combines profits to cover another 43,000 families.

So those Forbes 1000 healthcare companies alone had sufficient combined profits to pay for healthcare for 2.4 million families.

And we have 40 million people uninsured in this country.

It’s shameful, isn’t it?

Sphere: Related Content

the lamest excuse

muslims a'punished

Q [Helen Thomas] How does the President intend to commemorate “Mission Accomplished” after five years of death and destruction?

MS. PERINO: What you’re referring to is the banner that ran — that was aboard the ship five years ago. President Bush –

Q I’m talking about the anniversary tomorrow.

MS. PERINO: Yes, I get — no, I understand. That’s the anniversary of when that banner flew on that ship. President Bush is well aware that the banner should have been much more specific and said “mission accomplished for these sailors who are on this ship on their mission.” And we have certainly paid a price for not being more specific on that banner. And I recognize that the media is going to play this up again tomorrow, as they do every single year.

And that’s why Dummy started his speech five years ago by saying, “MAJOR COMBAT OPERATIONS IN IRAQ HAVE ENDED.”

Shitheads. Don’t they know there’s no excuse for all the crimes they’ve committed in the last 7 years?

Of course they do. They just don’t give a fuck.

mission accomplished mailai

Sphere: Related Content

rally ’round the maypole

england's fertility man

Hooray, hooray - the First of May
Outdoor f*cking begins today!

At least for the critters. Here in the Pac NW it’s still a bit too cold & wet.

Enjoy your May revels, wherever you are.

Sphere: Related Content