Via the Arizona chapter of the Sierra Club, by way of Deb at Invisible Voices, an eloquent illustration of intersecting “isms.” In this case, racism/xenophobia (”ZOMG! ILLEGAL ALIENZ!!!1!!1!”) and speciesism (”ZUH? THERE ARE ANIMALS ON TEH BORDER?”):
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Dennis Kucinich
Date: Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 7:22 PM
Subject: Action Update: Make September 10th a day to change the world!
September 10th: The day before our world changed, a day to change the world!
Dear Friends,
On August 1st, I delivered to Speaker Nancy Pelosi; a petition bearing the names of over 100,000 Americans that, like us, feel that the President must be held accountable for abusing executive power and disregarding his Constitutional obligations.
Your voices have been heard and your support continues to send a powerful message to lawmakers. That is why I call on you again to help us in a new effort to deliver 1 Million signatures to Speaker Pelosi on September 10, 2008.
Together we can:
* Urge real Congressional action to hold President Bush accountable now
* Reinstate the authority of our Constitution
* Document crimes committed by President Bush for historical account
* Facilitate post-Administration law enforcement and prosecution
* Reset the standard for the incoming and future administrations
* Demand justice for the over 3,000 who died on 9/11and whose deaths were tragically exploited to take us into an illegal war in Iraq
* Demand justice for the estimated 30,324 U.S. military personnel who have been injured/wounded
* Demand justice for the estimated 4,138 U.S. military personnel who have been killed or died
* Demand justice for the 1 Million innocent Iraqis who have died*
* Avert another illegitimate looming war – this time against Iran
We need your active participation to deliver 1 Million signatures to Congress by September 10, 2008.
Please give at least ten of your friends the opportunity to stand up for our country - the way you and I have, by inviting them to sign the impeachment petition online at www.Kucinich.us. Send your friends an email invitation to sign the petition by clicking here.
Together we can make September 10, the day before the world changed, a day we change the world!
Thank you for your active and ongoing citizenship.
Dennis Kucinich
I wish I could say I’m shocked, but NOT.
The Democratic-led Congress this afternoon voted to put an end to the NSA spying scandal, as the Senate approved a bill — approved last week by the House — to immunize lawbreaking telecoms, terminate all pending lawsuits against them, and vest whole new warrantless eavesdropping powers in the President. The vote in favor of the new FISA bill was 69-28. Barack Obama joined every Senate Republican (and every House Republican other than one) by voting in favor of it, while his now-vanquished primary rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton, voted against it. John McCain wasn’t present for any of the votes, but shared Obama’s support for the bill. The bill will now be sent to an extremely happy George Bush, who already announced that he enthusiastically supports it, and he will sign it into law very shortly
Ah, yes. “Republican Lite” Hillary Clinton voted against the bill, while Obama, the candidate of the liberal/progressive left, He of Hope/Change/Unicorns/Ice Cream/Gold Brick Roads, voted for it. Cue Obamabot apolo-jism.
Sadly, Obama is just one of twenty (Fucking! Twenty!) Dems DINOS traitors to vote in favor of the bill:
Democrats voting in favor of final passage of the FISA bill:
Bayh - Carper - Casey - Conrad - Dorgan - Feinstein - Innuoye - Kohl - Landrieu - Lincoln - McCaskill - Mukulski - Nelson (Neb.) - Nelson (Fla.) - Obama - Pryor - Rockefeller - Salazar - Webb - Whitehouse.
On this list is my very own Senator, Claire McCaskill. Ahem.
Now, I know I’ve said previously that, due to McCain being evil incarnate, the only way I’d not vote for Obama come November is if strangles, juices and drinks a puppy live on Leno or somesuch, but meh. I’ve fucking had it - not just with Obama, but with the whole lot of ‘em. This two-party system bullshit has got. to. go. Usually I take great care to research the candidates - even the lowliest of the lot, right down to the town treasurer - and cast an informed vote. Hells bells, that’s exactly what I did in 2006. And, um, look at all the good it did, eh? So fuck it. I’m just gonna vote the party line. As in, I’m gonna go down the ticket, and vote for every third-party candidate that’s running against a DINO/RINO establishment douchenozzle. Green, Libertarian, Marijuana, Independent - anything but the Constitution Party (which is an oxymoron if ever you’ve heard one).
At least the integrity of my presidential voting record will remain intact. (I’m that rare asshole who voted for Nader in 2000 and again in 2004. *Waves*)
Note to Claire McCaskill: when I said you’d lose my support if you let your Obama endorsement determine your FISA vote, I meant it. You can suck on my left titty if you think I’ll help reelect you in 2012.
I’d put Feinstein on teh list, but she’s been Dead to Me for ages.
———————–
Tagged: fisa civil liberties war on terra 2008 elections barack obama claire mccaskill dinos puma obamabots stephen colbert the colbert report on notice dead to me flickr
C’mon, you know you want it.
Support Rep. Kucinich’s Articles of Impeachment @ Democrats.com:
We’ve waited years to find one Member of Congress brave enough to stand up for our Constitution, for which generations of Americans have fought and died. We are thrilled and honored that Dennis Kucinich has chosen to be that one genuine patriot.
Of course, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (CA-8), Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (MD-5), and Democratic Caucus Chair Rahm Emanuel (IL-5) all remain adamantly opposed to impeachment - despite the overwhelming evidence of High Crimes, including the “Phase II” report by the Senate Intellligence Committee and Scott McClellan’s new book.
And when Rep. Robert Wexler (FL-19) called for Judiciary Committee hearings on Kucinich’s Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Cheney in January, only 17 Democrats joined them: Neil Abercrombie (HI-1), Tammy Baldwin (WI-2), Michael Capuano (MA-8), Yvette Clarke (NY-11), Lacy Clay (MO-1), Steve Cohen (TN-9), Peter DeFazio (OR-4), Keith Ellison (MN-5), Sam Farr (CA-17), Raúl Grijalva (AZ-7), Luis Gutierrez (IL-4), Barbara Lee (CA-9), Gwen Moore (WI-4), Jim Moran (VA-8), Mike Thompson (CA-1), Ed Towns (NY-10), and Lynn Woolsey (CA-6).
So Kucinich’s heroic efforts will be in vain unless we inundate Congress with emails and calls (202-224-3121) showing our full support for Rep. Kucinich’s 35 Articles of Impeachment.
A PDF file with the full articles of impeachment is available here.
And, speaking of impeachment, go sign this petition from American Freedom Campaign. Like, last month.
Fire-breathing liberal, indeed.
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Congressman Robert Wexler - contact@wexlerforcongress.com
Date: Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Subject: Wexler Co-Sponsors First Bush Articles of Impeachment
Our effort to hold the Bush/Cheney Administration accountable has taken another dramatic step forward. Last night, Congressman Dennis Kucinich introduced the first Articles of Impeachment ever to be introduced against President Bush. It includes, in total, thirty-five Articles detailing this Administration’s blatant abuse of power. Today, I enthusiastically co-sponsored this vitally important bill.
I am grateful for Dennis’ leadership on this issue and for the steadfast support that countless Americans have given to both of our efforts to redeem our government and expose the crimes of Bush and Cheney.
I will now expand my efforts to secure impeachment hearings in the Judiciary Committee for these new Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush.
Many of the charges against President Bush are well known – and would shock the conscience of everyday Americans if only the national media would be willing to report on these stark facts.
The Articles present a stunning narrative of offenses that have go well beyond previous crimes committed by any US chief executive. In fact no President or Vice President in history has done more to undermine our constitution.
These charges are broad, with 35 separate allegations including the deliberate lies regarding WMDs that led us to war and the approval of illegal wiretapping of American citizens. The Articles also include new allegations of high crimes – including the explicit approval for high Administration officials to violate treaties and US law banning the use of torture.
Note to Chris Matthews: this is the sort of thing that ought to send a thrill up the legs of progressives. Then again, you’re not really a progressive.
(Via ImpeachBush.org.)
——————-
Tagged: video you tube impeach bush dennis kucinich articles of impeachment george w. bush war on terra
The Electronic Frontier Foundation isn’t on board with McCain’s “Straight Talk Express”, either:
On Wednesday, a McCain campaign spokesperson outlined a surprisingly reasonable position on whether to hold telcos accountable for illegally spying on millions of Americans. EFF applauded his position at the time.
But earlier today, the McCain campaign claimed that they had made a mistake, saying the report “incorrectly represented” his position, which now is that “companies who assist the government” should be granted amnesty in the pending FISA legislation.
The revised position is difficult to reconcile with McCain’s previous positions on the NSA warrantless wiretapping program.
Right after the New York Times revealed the Bush Administration’s warrantless wiretapping program, McCain expressed his doubts about the program, telling MSNBC “Theoretically, I obviously wouldn’t like it.”
When interviewed by CBS News, McCain was asked how he would feel if subjected to surveillance:
CBS: Well Senator, how do you personally feel about it. Not only are you a lawmaker, you’re also a citizen. If you are on a phone call to somewhere overseas, and you found out the government was listening in, how would you feel about that?
MCCAIN: In my case, or any other innocent American’s case, obviously I wouldn’t like that, just because of the privacy concerns….
In the telecom litigation, we are suing on behalf of these innocent Americans, all of whom have no connection to terrorism. And they do not like it any more than McCain does.
Speaking to Matt Lauer on the Today show that same month, McCain agreed with that “it is up to a court of law to find out if someone broke the law here and if punishment should be handed out.” Immunity for the telecommunications companies, however, would prevent the court from ruling on the legality of the President’s program.
More recently, McCain clarified his position on the underlying legal issues with the Boston Globe:
Does the president have inherent powers under the Constitution to conduct surveillance for national security purposes without judicial warrants, regardless of federal statutes?
There are some areas where the statutes don’t apply, such as in the surveillance of overseas communications. Where they do apply, however, I think that presidents have the obligation to obey and enforce laws that are passed by Congress and signed into law by the president, no matter what the situation is.
Okay, so is that a no, in other words, federal statute trumps inherent power in that case, warrantless surveillance?
I don’t think the president has the right to disobey any law.
In short, despite the ire of the conservative pundits like Andrew McCarthy, McCain has previously rejected the Bush Administration’s legal rationale for the warrantless surveillance program, sympathized with the millions of innocent Americans caught up in the NSA spying, and opined that the Courts should have the chance to determine whether the law was broken.
Given these statements, it is surprising and disappointing that McCain so strongly supports the Bush Administration’s efforts to prevent the courts from ruling on the claims of innocent Americans in the telecom litigation. Senator, it’s time to straighten your talk: please match your actions with your words, and stand up to defend the rights of Americans to be free from warrantless surveillance.
panderpanderpander.
[Previous stops on the Straight Talk Express: one, two, three, four, five, six and seven.]
—————————
Tagged: john mccain straight talk express 2008 elections war on terra eff electronic frontier foundation civil liberties warantless wiretapping telecom immunity
Leila Hussein was murdered on May 17. I wrote about the murder of her daughter, Rand Abdel-Qader, on May 13.
Leila Hussein lived her last few weeks in terror. Moving constantly from safe house to safe house, she dared to stay no longer than four days at each. It was the price she was forced to pay after denouncing and divorcing her husband - the man she witnessed suffocate, stamp on, then stab their young daughter Rand in a brutal ‘honour’ killing for which he has shown no remorse.
Though she feared reprisals for speaking out, she really believed that she would soon be safe. Arrangements were well under way to smuggle her to the Jordanian capital, Amman. In fact, she was on her way to meet the person who would help her escape when a car drew up alongside her and two other women who were walking her to a taxi. Five bullets were fired: three of them hit Leila, 41. She died in hospital after futile attempts to save her.
Her husband and sons remain free men.
(Via.)
————————–
Tagged: war war on terra iraq islam religion godbags allah Abdel-Qader Ali Rand Abdel-Qader murder misogyny women’s rights
Bah.
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) — Under a huge tent just outside the medical unit at Camp Liberty, shielded from the blazing sun, soldiers watch and cheer as two men at a time get their heads shaved. Clumps of hair fall to the hot sand below.
But they’re not just fighting the Iraqi heat. They’re showing solidarity with sick kids they don’t even know.
It started with a dare on St. Patrick’s Day 2000, when two guys shaved their heads to support children with cancer. Thus was born the St. Baldrick’s Foundation. In eight years, the awareness and fundraising organization says, events have taken place in 18 countries and the United States, “raising over $34 million and shaving more than 46,000 heads.”
Maj. Stephen Roberts knows a lot about bald heads. He’s a pediatric oncologist at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington. And he’s seen a lot of his young patients lose their hair to chemotherapy.
The kids he guides through treatment don’t seem fazed by it. “They’re just amazing, inspiring kids,” Roberts said. “They’re going through something more difficult than most of us can imagine and they do it with a level of grace and strength that I don’t think I could match.”
This year, Roberts planned to participate back home in Washington, but he deployed to Iraq. So he organized the shearing on the base.
Sounds like a nice feel-good story, right? Wrong.
Back in Iraq, the female soldiers can’t participate; Army regulations don’t allow shaved heads for women. But that doesn’t stop them from cheering the guys on — or making donations.
Fucking awesome. So first the patriarchy doesn’t want teh wimmins in the military because our lady bits will distract the men and cause them to rape us through sheer lust and sexual frustration. Then they object to us looking too masculine, too unladylike….you know, fitting in with the guys. We’re not even cool enough to show solidarity with kids with cancer (I thought we were supposedly the nurturing sex, yo!). Those uppity bitches, just who do they think they are?!!1! Next thing you know, they’ll be demanding to wear pantaloons and shit.
And don’t you just love how strong, competent military women have been reduced to cheerleaders for teh menz? IBTP.
Preemptive strike: Yes, I think the ban on earrings for men is ridiculous, too. If one sex is allowed earrings, then both sexes should be allowed earrings. But it isn’t an example of misandry, but homophobia. So there, MRAs.
UPDATE, 1:30 PM:
It occurred to me while doing Tae Bo this afternoon that the topic of women of color and “black hair” didn’t even enter my mind when I wrote this post. So let’s discuss.
Firstly, Why Tae Bo?, you ask. There’s an African American women in the DVD I’m using, and she’s got closely cropped hair. (Not to mention, a kickass physique that I totally envy.) So, given the “the politics of having kinky hair,” as Pam phrases it, what of WOC and the military? Are women with kinky hair allowed “manly” cuts, or are they expected to wear it to the collar? And if they’re required to keep it longish, what constitutes “neat” (which also appears to be in the military regs)? Would Cynthia McKinney’s so-called “wild” hair (an even more appalling description, which I refuse to quote, can be found here) be a grounds for a court-martial? Just how does the military square the intersection of sexist and racism they’ve created here? (Rhetorical question; they don’t.)
I’d also like to apologize for failing to recognize this in my original post. Sheer white privilege on my part. No, I definitely don’t want a cookie; how about a cracker instead? Perhaps a water cracker…those are English, right? Can’t get any whiter than a water cracker.
On the bright side, maybe this will inspire a bit of empathy the next time Shane gets flummoxed during a discussion of vagina-stuff.
———————-
Tagged: cancer hair beauty combat military war iraq feminism misogyny sexism homophobia
Two years ago, just after Hamas won the Palestinian parliamentary elections, I [James P. Rubin, of the Washington Post] interviewed McCain for the British network Sky News’s “World News Tonight” program. Here is the crucial part of our exchange:
[James P. Rubin] asked: “Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?”
McCain answered: “They’re the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it’s a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that.”
US Republican presidential candidate John McCain said over the weekend that he would be Hamas’s worst nightmare, while Democratic rival Barack Obama was clearly Hamas’s choice for US president.
“I think it’s very clear who Hamas wants to be the next president of the United States,” McCain, the putative Republican presidential nominee, said in a conference call on Friday with conservative bloggers.
“I think that the people should understand that I will be Hamas’s worst nightmare,” he said in response to a question from Jennifer Rubin of Commentary magazine.
Campaign spokesman Brian Rogers said Hamas support “is a legitimate issue for the American people to think about.”
“The reason for Hamas’s praise of Senator Obama’s foreign policy is his commitment to meet unconditionally with Iran… It is not only responsible to raise these critical issues in this election, but it would be the height of irresponsibility not to have this discussion with the American people,” Rogers said.
Obama’s foreign policy represented a “radical departure” from current standards of dealing with “rogue regimes,” he said.
McCain suggested that the support stemmed from Obama’s willingness to have diplomatic talks with nations like Iran.
“I never expect for the leader of Hamas… to say that he wants me as president of the United States,” McCain said. “I think it is very clear… why they would not want me to be president of the United States, so if Sen. Obama is favored by Hamas, I think people can make judgments accordingly.”
www.flickr.com
|
