This amazing little tool will strip emails of all those <, indents, blank lines, and word or line breaks that makes some much-forwarded emails hard to read.
http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Friday, November 12, 2004
I would be proud to say that I wrote the following paragraph but I didn't.
I would be proud to say that I wrote the following essay, but I didn't. I understand that credit goes to a woman in Cleveland whom I never met. It captures better than I have been able my feelings and views about the election.
--------
It would be difficult to fully communicate my disappointment in a simple email. On the other hand, slipping out into the hall and drowning myself in the mop bucket would mean that someone else would have to feed my dog.
The American people have spoken, and they have sent the world a message: "We're barely bright enough to chew our own food."
Incompetence, incoherence, inarticulateness, pettiness and random savagery apparently do not deter the majority of Americans. The thing that really, REALLY matters to Americans? Homos. And foreigners. Both must be stopped at any cost.
Americans voted overwhelmingly in favor of bigotry, amending state constitutions around the country to prevent same-sex couples from having any rights beyond the right to live on the margins of society. We clearly have far more to fear from The International Homosexual Conspiracy(tm) than we do from North Korea and the collapse of the American health care system.
Apparently, we are truly a nation of slackjawed yokels, awed only by grotesque displays of wealth and violence, reverent only of the bossman and beholden not even to our children, since we seem content to mortgage their future in favor of a $300 tax refund that we have traded for decent jobs, healthcare, and a just society.
We make pious noises about worshipping a Just and Merciful God, while doling out destruction and horror upon the innocent, pausing only to pat ourselves on the back for waging a "just" war to rid the world of tyrants that audaciously aspire to exist after they lose their utility to us in endless low-level conflicts to control the world's oil supply.
We seem to have become cheap, venal, vulgar and petty while we apparently don't have the ability to reason our way out of the dilemma of taking care of the sick, watching out for the elderly, and teaching our children not to be credulous, callow dupes.
To my friends from the UK, France and anyone to whom they choose to forward this, I feel that I owe you an apology. It is as if I have brought an orangutan to high tea. While he flings shit at you and tries to snatch pastries from your plate, I am left wondering how I might make it up to you.
The world's richest and most powerful nation seems to have lost its moral compass. We have lost interest in leading by example in favor of taking by force. I would like to say that I believe that one day in the future America might regain its senses. Unfortunately, I am not terribly optimistic. The best I can offer you is to remind you that Nixon also won a second term.
--------
It would be difficult to fully communicate my disappointment in a simple email. On the other hand, slipping out into the hall and drowning myself in the mop bucket would mean that someone else would have to feed my dog.
The American people have spoken, and they have sent the world a message: "We're barely bright enough to chew our own food."
Incompetence, incoherence, inarticulateness, pettiness and random savagery apparently do not deter the majority of Americans. The thing that really, REALLY matters to Americans? Homos. And foreigners. Both must be stopped at any cost.
Americans voted overwhelmingly in favor of bigotry, amending state constitutions around the country to prevent same-sex couples from having any rights beyond the right to live on the margins of society. We clearly have far more to fear from The International Homosexual Conspiracy(tm) than we do from North Korea and the collapse of the American health care system.
Apparently, we are truly a nation of slackjawed yokels, awed only by grotesque displays of wealth and violence, reverent only of the bossman and beholden not even to our children, since we seem content to mortgage their future in favor of a $300 tax refund that we have traded for decent jobs, healthcare, and a just society.
We make pious noises about worshipping a Just and Merciful God, while doling out destruction and horror upon the innocent, pausing only to pat ourselves on the back for waging a "just" war to rid the world of tyrants that audaciously aspire to exist after they lose their utility to us in endless low-level conflicts to control the world's oil supply.
We seem to have become cheap, venal, vulgar and petty while we apparently don't have the ability to reason our way out of the dilemma of taking care of the sick, watching out for the elderly, and teaching our children not to be credulous, callow dupes.
To my friends from the UK, France and anyone to whom they choose to forward this, I feel that I owe you an apology. It is as if I have brought an orangutan to high tea. While he flings shit at you and tries to snatch pastries from your plate, I am left wondering how I might make it up to you.
The world's richest and most powerful nation seems to have lost its moral compass. We have lost interest in leading by example in favor of taking by force. I would like to say that I believe that one day in the future America might regain its senses. Unfortunately, I am not terribly optimistic. The best I can offer you is to remind you that Nixon also won a second term.
CON SESSION SPEECH: From The Wish I'd Said That Department
Adam Felber is a comedian who often appears on NPR's "Wait, Wait,Don't Tell Me" quiz show. This was posted on his blog. Did you notice his candidacy? Well, here's his concession speech.
Former candidate Felber, flanked by his family and supporters, steps up to the podium in the bright autumn sunlight. Cheers and applause are heard.
My fellow Americans, the people of this nation have spoken, and spoken with a clear voice. So I am here to offer my concession. [Boos, groans, rending of garments]
I concede that I overestimated the intelligence of the American people. Though the people disagree with the President on almost every issue, you saw fit to vote for him. I never saw that coming. That's really special. And I mean "special" in the sense that we use it to describe those kids who ride the short school bus and find ways to injure themselves while eating pudding with rubber spoons. That kind of special.
I concede that I misjudged the power of hate. That's pretty powerful stuff, and I didn't see it. So let me take a moment to congratulate the President's strategists: Putting the gay marriage amendments on the ballot in various swing states like Ohio... well, that was just genius. Genius. It got people, a certain kind of people, to the polls. The unprecedented number of folks who showed up and cited "moral values" as their biggest issue, those people changed history. The folks who consider same sex marriage a more important issue than war, or terrorism, or the economy... Who'd have thought the election would belong to them? Well, Karl Rove did. Gotta give it up to him for that. [Boos.] Now, now. Credit where it's due.
I concede that I put too much faith in America's youth. With 8 out of 10 of you opposing the President, with your friends and classmates dying daily in a war you disapprove of, with your future being mortgaged to pay for rich old peoples' tax breaks, you somehow managed to sit on your asses and watch the Cartoon Network while aging homophobic hillbillies carried the day. You voted with the exact same anemic percentage that you did in 2000. You suck. Seriously, y'do. [Cheers, applause] Thank you. Thank you very much.
There are some who would say that I sound bitter, that now is the time for healing, to bring the nation together. Let me tell you a little story. Last night, I watched the returns come in with some friends here in Los Angeles. As the night progressed, people began to talk half-seriously about secession, a red state / blue state split. The reasoning was this: We in blue states produce the vast majority of the wealth in this country and pay the most taxes, and you in the red states receive the majority of the money from those taxes while complaining about 'em. We in the blue states are the only ones who've been attacked by foreign terrorists, yet you in the red states are gung ho to fight a war in our name. We in the blue states produce the entertainment that you consume so greedily each day, while you in the red states show open disdain for us and our values. Blue state civilians are the actual victims and targets of the war on terror, while red state civilians are the ones standing behind us and yelling "Oh, yeah!? Bring it on!"
More than 40% of you Bush voters still believe that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11. I'm impressed by that, truly I am. Your sons and daughters who might die in this war know it's not true, the people in the urban centers where al Qaeda wants to attack know it's not true, but those of you who are at practically no risk believe this easy lie because you can. As part of my concession speech, let me say that I really envy that luxury. I concede that.
Healing? We, the people at risk from terrorists, the people who subsidize you, the people who speak in glowing and respectful terms about the heartland of America while that heartland insults and excoriates us... we wanted some healing. We spoke loud and clear. And you refused to give it to us, largely because of your high moral values. You knew better: America doesn't need its allies, doesn't need to share the burden, doesn't need to unite the world, doesn't need to provide for its future. Hell no. Not when it's got a human shield of pointy-headed, atheistic, unconfrontational breadwinners who are willing to pay the bills and play nice in the vain hope of winning a vote that we can never have. Because we're "morally inferior," I suppose, we are supposed to respect your values while you insult ours. And the big joke here is that for 20 years, we've done just that.
It's not a "ha-ha" funny joke, I realize, but it's a joke all the same.
Being an independent candidate gives me one luxury - as well as conceding the election today, I am also announcing my candidacy for President in 2008. [Wild applause, screams, chants of "Fel-ber! Fel-ber!] Thank you.
And I make this pledge to you today: THIS time, next time, there will be no pandering. This time I will run with all the open and joking contempt for my opponents that our President demonstrated towards the cradle of liberty, the Ivy League intellectuals, the "media elite," and the "white-wine sippers." This time I will not pretend that the simple folk of America know just as much as the people who devote their lives to serving and studying the nation and the world. They don't.
So that's why I'm asking for your vote in 2008, America. I'm talking to you, you ignorant, slack-jawed yokels, you bible-thumping, inbred drones, you redneck, racist, chest-thumping, perennially duped grade-school grads. Vote for me, because I know better, and I truly believe that I can help your smug, sorry asses. Vote Felber in '08! Thank you, and may God, if he does in fact exist, bless each and every one of you.
[Tumultuous cheers, applause, and foot-stomping. PULL BACK to reveal the rest of the stage, the row of cameras, hundreds of unoccupied chairs, and the empty field beyond.]
Posted by Adam Felber at November 3, 2004 02:43 PM | TrackBackKnow Your Values and Frame the Debate--The Essential Guide for Progressives
A friend writes:
Lakoff wrote a terrific article in the Sept 03 issue of The American Prospect, along with one by Deborah Tannen--together they were that issue's cover stories under the banner "How Republicans Hijack Language"; Lakoff's piece was called "Framing the Dems--How conservatives control political debate and how progressives can take it back." We sure did followed that advice, didn't we? Well, maybe we progressives did, but our candidate, not being a progressive anymore, probably felt the advice also no longer applied.
Tannen's article was "Let Them Eat Words--Lingustic lessons from Frank Lutz", the evil who was profiled on the last Frontline. He's the one responsible for Clear Skies, Partial Birth Abortion, etc.
The articles are still available online at their website
Lakoff: http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=6862
Tannen: http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=6861
None of us are naive about the dastardly neocons, but this was scary stuff. And we saw it played out daily over the last 4 years. The articles were real eye-openers for me, and everyone I referred to them. Sounds like this book may be an expansion of his article. Must reads, all.
"Please... everyone who wants to learn how to argue progressive
issues so as to be competitive with the powerful right wing wave
in this country right now... PLEASE read this book (thin, quick
read, inexpensive and life-changing):
**Don't Think of an Elephant**
Know Your Values and Frame the Debate--The Essential Guide for Progressives
by George Lakoff"
Lakoff wrote a terrific article in the Sept 03 issue of The American Prospect, along with one by Deborah Tannen--together they were that issue's cover stories under the banner "How Republicans Hijack Language"; Lakoff's piece was called "Framing the Dems--How conservatives control political debate and how progressives can take it back." We sure did followed that advice, didn't we? Well, maybe we progressives did, but our candidate, not being a progressive anymore, probably felt the advice also no longer applied.
Tannen's article was "Let Them Eat Words--Lingustic lessons from Frank Lutz", the evil who was profiled on the last Frontline. He's the one responsible for Clear Skies, Partial Birth Abortion, etc.
Here's an excerpt: "How many would get all worked up about an exceedingly rare abortion procedure (that the Alan Guttmacher Institute estimated represents less than one-fifth of 1 percent of all abortions performed in the United States in 2000)? But attach the name "partial-birth abortion" and a second-trimester fetus becomes a half-born baby. Legislation to outlaw the vaguely described medical procedure then becomes another success in chipping away at constitutionally protected abortion rights -- as well as a wedge issue to defeat Democratic candidates. According to an insider in Al Gore's 2000 Tennessee campaign, the vice president's opposition to this legislation was one of the factors that turned many Tennesseans against their home-state candidate.
Who among us wants to call ourselves anti-life? Win the name game and you're more than halfway toward winning the battle. Win enough naming battles and you're on your way to winning the war."
And one more:
"The cynicism in Luntz's advice is astonishingly explicit. On the subject of the gender gap, for example, he informed Republican members of Congress that they could woo women with words (no need for troublesome deeds). While acknowledging that women (like the caller to the radio talk show) care about education, he cautions against trying to back up promises with actual programs:
I begin with the premise that we must do no harm. That is, we should not undermine our growing strength among working-class white men (1994 set a modern-day record) in our efforts to reach out and communicate to women. I refuse to advocate an educational strategy that leads to a net loss of votes just to win over a few women and silence a few media critics. It would be unwise and foolish. ...These excerpts come from a document that Luntz circulated to Republican members of Congress in 1997 titled "The Language of the 21st Century." The section that came to my attention was "Addressing the Gender Gap," but it provides a blueprint reflected in Republicans' rhetoric in other areas as well. Luntz's advice boils down to this: Forget action. Improve your image by revising the way you talk. Let them eat words."I do not subscribe to the notion that we must change our substance or create a separate women's agenda. Listening to women and adapting a new language and a more friendly style will itself be rewarded if executed effectively and with discipline.
The articles are still available online at their website
Lakoff: http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=6862
Tannen: http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=6861
None of us are naive about the dastardly neocons, but this was scary stuff. And we saw it played out daily over the last 4 years. The articles were real eye-openers for me, and everyone I referred to them. Sounds like this book may be an expansion of his article. Must reads, all.
The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy
The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy --by Steven F. Freeman, Ph.D. "As much as we can say in social science that something is impossible, it is impossible that the discrepancies between predicted and actual vote counts in the three critical battleground states [Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania] of the 2004 election could have been due to chance or random error... The likelihood of any two of these statistical anomalies occurring together is on the order of one-in-a-million. The odds against all three occurring together are 250 million to one. As much as we can say in social science that something is impossible, it is impossible that the discrepancies between predicted and actual vote counts in the three critical battleground states of the 2004 election could have been due to chance or random error.
Systematic fraud or mistabulation is a premature conclusion, but the election's unexplained exit poll discrepancies make it an unavoidable hypothesis, one that is the responsibility of the media, academia, polling agencies, and the public to investigate."
This excerpt is from a daily Citizens For Legitimate Government briefing, called Breaking News and Commentary. CLG does great work. In addition to Breaking News, they have at least three Yahoo discussion groups. people post all kinds of great articles and links, as well as rant, though the volume of daily mail from each of those groups is more than I can handle. That's why I now just get Breaking News.
Three thumbs up.
Thursday, November 11, 2004
LETTER FROM PETER COYOTE ON BLACK BOX VOTING AND LOCKDOWN ORDERS ABOUT NEWS COVERAGE AT THE NETWORKS
These kinds of lists (that Peter writes, below) and other compilations are all over the net, including the sites at end of this post. But what he writes about the "lockdown orders" at the networks is pretty scary--though hardly surprising.
Already, of course, the propaganda machines are trying to label us all as conspiracy-theory nutcases or paranoids. Maybe some of us are, but let me remind you of two of my favorite quotes:
"Paranoia is just having all the facts."--William Burroughs.
And of course you all know this anonymous one. "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you."
The letter:
Nov 09 2004 22:49:01
" There is a bumper sticker I saw months ago that sums up the current state of affairs in our country regarding what is the biggest news story you'll neversee on the General Media reported. It said "IF YOUR NOT OUTRAGED, YOUR NOT PAYING ATTENTION".On Friday I received a phone call from a good friend who works at CBS--I've known her for years and she is a Producer for some of the news programs, one well known one in particular. She tipped me off that the news media is in a"lock-down" and that there is to be no TV coverage of the real problems with voting on Nov. 2nd. She said similar "lock-down orders" had come downlast year after the invasion of Iraq, but this is far worse--far scarier. She said the majority of their journalists at CBS and elsewhere in NYC are pretty horrified--every one is worried about their jobs and retribution Dan Ratherstyle or worse. My source said they've also been forbidden to talk about it even on their own time but she was pissed and her journalistic and moralintegrity as what she considers to be a gov't watchdog requires her to speakout, while be it covert and she therefore asked me to "spread" the word...She said that journalism and the truth is at stake. She said another friend ofhers, a producer at MSNBC, said that an anchor by the name of Keith Olbermannhad brought it up on his show on Friday eve and the axe came down. He'satleast fighting back and talking about it on his "Blog", but she said that people there are worried that he's going to be fired by higher ups. She saidat this point the only way that the "real news" was going to be if the peoplestarted talking about it and made a big enough stink about it to our electedofficials, the FEC, and "noise" to the international media, that our own media won't have any choice but to cover it. (Yes, this is really happening in the good ole' supposed "democratic" free press of the US of A). The only place you'll see this talked about right now is on the internet and onAirAmericaRadio.
Everyone--this is serious....I can't emphasize it any more than saying ifthere was ever a time to speak up and take action it is NOW. If you are feeling sick to your stomach (like me) about the possibility of 4 more yearsunder Bush and the future of our country, and yet you feel helpless, here'syour opportunity to take action. Imagine if you saw a loved one drowning--whatdo you do? Well, our country's democracy is drowning and she needs us. In anemail I sent you last night, I used the F-word--FRAUD and mentioned to youthat I felt strongly that there is a lot of mounting evidence that thiselection was not clean. I say that not only out of a result of my observationswhile out in the field as a poll watcher in the key battleground state ofOhio, I say it with the knowledge and information of reports that have been circulating around the country in various voting precincts involvingirregularities and problems with the voting machines and numbers not matchingup with the exit polls or actual numbers of registered voters in variousprecincts. I've been busy researching this issue and compiling for you belowsome details of these reports and where you can get more info:To believe that Bush won the election, you must also believe:
1- That the exit polls were WRONG...(remember--they have been used for over adecade and considered reliable)
2- That Zogby's 5pm election day calls for Kerry winning OH, FL were WRONG. He was within a less than 1/2 % point margin of error in his 2000 final poll andprevious polls for other elections.
3- That Harris Poll last minute polling for Kerry was WRONG. They were alsowithin a 1/2% point margin of error in their 2000 final poll.
4- The Incumbent Rule #I (that undecideds primarily break at the end for the challenger)was WRONG.
5- The 50% Rule was WRONG (that an incumbent doesn't do better than his final polling)
6- The Approval Rating Rule was WRONG (that an incumbent with less than 50%approval will most likely lose the election)
7- That Journalist Greg Palast was WRONG when he said that even before theelection, 1 million votes were stolen from Kerry. He was the ONLY reporter tobreak the fact that 90,000 Florida blacks were disnfranchised in 2000.
8- That it was just a COINCIDENCE that the exit polls were CORRECT where thereWAS a PAPER TRAIL and INCORRECT (+5% for Bush) where there was NO PAPER TRAIL.
9- That the surge in new young voters had NO positive effect for Kerry, eventhough it was the largest number of youth voters 18-29 ever and a huge jumpfrom 2000 and they were over 55% in favor of Kerry.
10- That Bush BEAT 99 to 1 mathematical odds in winning the election.
11- That Kerry did WORSE than Gore against an opponent who LOST the support ofSCORES of Republican newspapers who were for Bush in 2000.
12- That Bush did better than an 18 national poll average which showed himtied with Kerry at 47. In other words, Bush got 80% of the undecided vote toend up with a 51-48 majority--when ALL professional pollsters agree that the undecided vote ALWAYS goes to the challenger.
13- That Voting machines made by Republicans with no paper trail and with no software publication, which have been proven by thousands of computerscientists to be vulnerable in scores of ways, were NOT tampered with in thiselection.
Some Examples: (There are many more, but I won't list them all here--this is to give you an idea)
- The City of Gahanna in Ohio discovered a discrepancy that gave 4,000 votesto George Bush. After media scrutiny, city officials have admitted to anelectronic "glitch" that caused the problem.
- In Broward County, FL, errors in software code caused a referendum ongambling to be completely overturned. The error caused totals to count backwards after reaching a ceiling of 32,500 votes. The problem existed in the2002 election as well however the issue was never resolved by the manufacturerof the electronic voting machine.
- In North Carolina, a Craven County district logged 11,283 more votes than voters and actually overturned the results of a regional race."
For more info, go to: http://www.blackboxvoting.org or
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1106-30.htm
Already, of course, the propaganda machines are trying to label us all as conspiracy-theory nutcases or paranoids. Maybe some of us are, but let me remind you of two of my favorite quotes:
"Paranoia is just having all the facts."--William Burroughs.
And of course you all know this anonymous one. "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you."
The letter:
Nov 09 2004 22:49:01
" There is a bumper sticker I saw months ago that sums up the current state of affairs in our country regarding what is the biggest news story you'll neversee on the General Media reported. It said "IF YOUR NOT OUTRAGED, YOUR NOT PAYING ATTENTION".On Friday I received a phone call from a good friend who works at CBS--I've known her for years and she is a Producer for some of the news programs, one well known one in particular. She tipped me off that the news media is in a"lock-down" and that there is to be no TV coverage of the real problems with voting on Nov. 2nd. She said similar "lock-down orders" had come downlast year after the invasion of Iraq, but this is far worse--far scarier. She said the majority of their journalists at CBS and elsewhere in NYC are pretty horrified--every one is worried about their jobs and retribution Dan Ratherstyle or worse. My source said they've also been forbidden to talk about it even on their own time but she was pissed and her journalistic and moralintegrity as what she considers to be a gov't watchdog requires her to speakout, while be it covert and she therefore asked me to "spread" the word...She said that journalism and the truth is at stake. She said another friend ofhers, a producer at MSNBC, said that an anchor by the name of Keith Olbermannhad brought it up on his show on Friday eve and the axe came down. He'satleast fighting back and talking about it on his "Blog", but she said that people there are worried that he's going to be fired by higher ups. She saidat this point the only way that the "real news" was going to be if the peoplestarted talking about it and made a big enough stink about it to our electedofficials, the FEC, and "noise" to the international media, that our own media won't have any choice but to cover it. (Yes, this is really happening in the good ole' supposed "democratic" free press of the US of A). The only place you'll see this talked about right now is on the internet and onAirAmericaRadio.
Everyone--this is serious....I can't emphasize it any more than saying ifthere was ever a time to speak up and take action it is NOW. If you are feeling sick to your stomach (like me) about the possibility of 4 more yearsunder Bush and the future of our country, and yet you feel helpless, here'syour opportunity to take action. Imagine if you saw a loved one drowning--whatdo you do? Well, our country's democracy is drowning and she needs us. In anemail I sent you last night, I used the F-word--FRAUD and mentioned to youthat I felt strongly that there is a lot of mounting evidence that thiselection was not clean. I say that not only out of a result of my observationswhile out in the field as a poll watcher in the key battleground state ofOhio, I say it with the knowledge and information of reports that have been circulating around the country in various voting precincts involvingirregularities and problems with the voting machines and numbers not matchingup with the exit polls or actual numbers of registered voters in variousprecincts. I've been busy researching this issue and compiling for you belowsome details of these reports and where you can get more info:To believe that Bush won the election, you must also believe:
1- That the exit polls were WRONG...(remember--they have been used for over adecade and considered reliable)
2- That Zogby's 5pm election day calls for Kerry winning OH, FL were WRONG. He was within a less than 1/2 % point margin of error in his 2000 final poll andprevious polls for other elections.
3- That Harris Poll last minute polling for Kerry was WRONG. They were alsowithin a 1/2% point margin of error in their 2000 final poll.
4- The Incumbent Rule #I (that undecideds primarily break at the end for the challenger)was WRONG.
5- The 50% Rule was WRONG (that an incumbent doesn't do better than his final polling)
6- The Approval Rating Rule was WRONG (that an incumbent with less than 50%approval will most likely lose the election)
7- That Journalist Greg Palast was WRONG when he said that even before theelection, 1 million votes were stolen from Kerry. He was the ONLY reporter tobreak the fact that 90,000 Florida blacks were disnfranchised in 2000.
8- That it was just a COINCIDENCE that the exit polls were CORRECT where thereWAS a PAPER TRAIL and INCORRECT (+5% for Bush) where there was NO PAPER TRAIL.
9- That the surge in new young voters had NO positive effect for Kerry, eventhough it was the largest number of youth voters 18-29 ever and a huge jumpfrom 2000 and they were over 55% in favor of Kerry.
10- That Bush BEAT 99 to 1 mathematical odds in winning the election.
11- That Kerry did WORSE than Gore against an opponent who LOST the support ofSCORES of Republican newspapers who were for Bush in 2000.
12- That Bush did better than an 18 national poll average which showed himtied with Kerry at 47. In other words, Bush got 80% of the undecided vote toend up with a 51-48 majority--when ALL professional pollsters agree that the undecided vote ALWAYS goes to the challenger.
13- That Voting machines made by Republicans with no paper trail and with no software publication, which have been proven by thousands of computerscientists to be vulnerable in scores of ways, were NOT tampered with in thiselection.
Some Examples: (There are many more, but I won't list them all here--this is to give you an idea)
- The City of Gahanna in Ohio discovered a discrepancy that gave 4,000 votesto George Bush. After media scrutiny, city officials have admitted to anelectronic "glitch" that caused the problem.
- In Broward County, FL, errors in software code caused a referendum ongambling to be completely overturned. The error caused totals to count backwards after reaching a ceiling of 32,500 votes. The problem existed in the2002 election as well however the issue was never resolved by the manufacturerof the electronic voting machine.
- In North Carolina, a Craven County district logged 11,283 more votes than voters and actually overturned the results of a regional race."
For more info, go to: http://www.blackboxvoting.org or
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1106-30.htm
SOME OF THE CRAZY THINGS YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE--OR ELSE
This post is from another blog, and one of our favorites: http://xymphora.blogspot.com/ . Unlike with my blog, you can't subsscribe, but it's worth checking out regularly.
The link below to Peter Coyote's lists takes you to a letter he wrote to the Yahoo group Political-Research, which I just joined. His letter and the list are mighty impressive, and I am going to post it here later.
"Peter Coyote lists just some of the crazy series of things you have to believe in order to believe that George Bush actually won the election (see an earlier letter from Coyote here). I'm amazed at how easily the left has rolled up on this issue. It is not an exaggeration to say that this stolen election represents the United States slipping into fascism, a problem that is usually irreversible without a lot of really bad things happening to a lot of people. World war is the usual outcome, and the attack on Falluja, expressly couched as a religious Crusade (see here or here, and here), is clearly intended by the Christian Zionists to lead to that goal. If you make the connection between the people behind the computer voting machine companies, their insane religious desire to see the Apocalypse in the Middle East, and the grim future of the world evidenced by the completely unnecessary attack on Falluja, you have to come to the conclusion that there is no time to wait for another election. It is not morally acceptable for the American left to allow the Apocalypse to happen without even the slightest attempt at a fight. It is insane to save your energy for the next election, when the chances are there won't be one."
The link below to Peter Coyote's lists takes you to a letter he wrote to the Yahoo group Political-Research, which I just joined. His letter and the list are mighty impressive, and I am going to post it here later.
"Peter Coyote lists just some of the crazy series of things you have to believe in order to believe that George Bush actually won the election (see an earlier letter from Coyote here). I'm amazed at how easily the left has rolled up on this issue. It is not an exaggeration to say that this stolen election represents the United States slipping into fascism, a problem that is usually irreversible without a lot of really bad things happening to a lot of people. World war is the usual outcome, and the attack on Falluja, expressly couched as a religious Crusade (see here or here, and here), is clearly intended by the Christian Zionists to lead to that goal. If you make the connection between the people behind the computer voting machine companies, their insane religious desire to see the Apocalypse in the Middle East, and the grim future of the world evidenced by the completely unnecessary attack on Falluja, you have to come to the conclusion that there is no time to wait for another election. It is not morally acceptable for the American left to allow the Apocalypse to happen without even the slightest attempt at a fight. It is insane to save your energy for the next election, when the chances are there won't be one."
20 Ways To Maintain A Healthy Level of Insanity
20 Ways To Maintain A Healthy Level of Insanity
1. At Lunch Time, Sit In Your Parked Car With Sunglasses on and point a Hair Dryer At Passing Cars. See If They Slow Down. 2. Page Yourself Over The Intercom. Don't Disguise Your Voice. 3. Every Time Someone Asks You To Do Something, Ask If They Want Fries with That. 4. Put Your Garbage Can On Your Desk And Label It "In." 5. Put Decaf In The Coffee Maker For 3 Weeks. Once Everyone Has Gotten Over Their Caffeine Addictions, Switch To Espresso. 6. In The Memo Field Of All Your Checks, Write "For Sexual Favors." 7. Finish All Your sentences with "In Accordance With The Prophecy." 8. Dont use any punctuation 9. As Often As Possible, Skip Rather Than Walk. 10. Ask People What Sex They Are. Laugh Hysterically After They Answer. 11. Specify That Your Drive-through Order Is "To Go." 12. Sing Along At The Opera. 13. Go To A Poetry Recital And Ask Why The Poems Don't Rhyme. 14. Put Mosquito Netting Around Your Work Area And Play Tropical Sounds All Day. 15. Five Days In Advance, Tell Your Friends You Can't Attend Their Party Because You're Not In The Mood. 16. Have Your Co-workers Address You By Your Wrestling Name, Rock Hard. 17. When The Money Comes Out Of The ATM, Scream "I Won!, I Won!" 18. When Leaving The Zoo, Start Running Towards The Parking Lot, Yelling "Run For Your Lives, They're Loose!!" 19. Tell Your Children Over Dinner, "Due To The Economy, We Are Going To Have To Let One Of You Go." And The Final Way To Keep A Healthy Level Of Insanity.......
1. At Lunch Time, Sit In Your Parked Car With Sunglasses on and point a Hair Dryer At Passing Cars. See If They Slow Down. 2. Page Yourself Over The Intercom. Don't Disguise Your Voice. 3. Every Time Someone Asks You To Do Something, Ask If They Want Fries with That. 4. Put Your Garbage Can On Your Desk And Label It "In." 5. Put Decaf In The Coffee Maker For 3 Weeks. Once Everyone Has Gotten Over Their Caffeine Addictions, Switch To Espresso. 6. In The Memo Field Of All Your Checks, Write "For Sexual Favors." 7. Finish All Your sentences with "In Accordance With The Prophecy." 8. Dont use any punctuation 9. As Often As Possible, Skip Rather Than Walk. 10. Ask People What Sex They Are. Laugh Hysterically After They Answer. 11. Specify That Your Drive-through Order Is "To Go." 12. Sing Along At The Opera. 13. Go To A Poetry Recital And Ask Why The Poems Don't Rhyme. 14. Put Mosquito Netting Around Your Work Area And Play Tropical Sounds All Day. 15. Five Days In Advance, Tell Your Friends You Can't Attend Their Party Because You're Not In The Mood. 16. Have Your Co-workers Address You By Your Wrestling Name, Rock Hard. 17. When The Money Comes Out Of The ATM, Scream "I Won!, I Won!" 18. When Leaving The Zoo, Start Running Towards The Parking Lot, Yelling "Run For Your Lives, They're Loose!!" 19. Tell Your Children Over Dinner, "Due To The Economy, We Are Going To Have To Let One Of You Go." And The Final Way To Keep A Healthy Level Of Insanity.......
CALLING THEM WHAT THEY ARE
Now, more than ever, I read the Smirking Chimp. You can read all the essays and articles, and sign up for daily email summaries here: http://www.smirkingchimp.com/index.php
After I wrote the prior posts, I came across Joe Bageant's column 'Hung over in the End Times' on the Smirking Chimp site. It's at http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php?sid=18653&mode=nested&order=0
It's sub-headline is: "If liberal society is to survive the rise of the Godwacks, we need to start by calling them what they are."
This is one damn terrific article--it's terrific , mostly because it supports my own contentions, but also because he's a terrific writer, and funny too. He grew up in fundamentalism, and understands more than most of us that " ...You cannot talk to these people and you cannot reach them with words or language. Not unless it is Biblical or Koranic or scriptural. Dialogue is impossible even though, publicly at least, they claim to want dialogue. (Take it from me. What they want is to convert you. I've wasted years on that dialogue gig.) Their only language is religious rhetoric and that's damned narrow stuff. Combined with the emotionalism of the born-again consciousness state, it reduces them to incomprehensible psychotics, especially when they feel threatened, which is constantly. Calm psychotics, but delusional and unreachable people nevertheless. ..there can be no dialogue because that which is not born of reason cannot be reasoned with. These people not only do not negotiate, they cannot even hear you."
Later in the article he says, "Don't kid yourself about making peace with these people. And for god's sake don't believe the pundit's horseshit about it being about "values." It is about a minority among us who want to stamp out all the advances made during the Enlightenment -- take us back to Biblical Law, wars and rumors of wars. And it is about a band of dyspeptic, neoconservative money grubbing bastards who knew how to exploit our ancient and destructive legacy, the war making Calvinist fundamentalism brought here by the Scots Irish and still smoldering across the heartland. By now most of you who live where you can buy a copy of the New York Times without special ordering it, or feel free to walk down the street arm in arm with a lover of another race, are starting to wake up. All I can say is that you have worse enemies than you know, and they will still be around next election. If there is one. And they can crush us if they manage to align themselves with the same kind of oppressive bastards they did this time. Which they will. They never cease, proof of which is that what we saw last November was the culmination of twenty years of organizing. What to do about it is still being debated, but to my mind, publicly calling these people what they really are would be a damned good start. "
I'm doing my part.
I'd reprint the whole thing here, but it's better than mine, so I won't.
After I wrote the prior posts, I came across Joe Bageant's column 'Hung over in the End Times' on the Smirking Chimp site. It's at http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php?sid=18653&mode=nested&order=0
It's sub-headline is: "If liberal society is to survive the rise of the Godwacks, we need to start by calling them what they are."
This is one damn terrific article--it's terrific , mostly because it supports my own contentions, but also because he's a terrific writer, and funny too. He grew up in fundamentalism, and understands more than most of us that " ...You cannot talk to these people and you cannot reach them with words or language. Not unless it is Biblical or Koranic or scriptural. Dialogue is impossible even though, publicly at least, they claim to want dialogue. (Take it from me. What they want is to convert you. I've wasted years on that dialogue gig.) Their only language is religious rhetoric and that's damned narrow stuff. Combined with the emotionalism of the born-again consciousness state, it reduces them to incomprehensible psychotics, especially when they feel threatened, which is constantly. Calm psychotics, but delusional and unreachable people nevertheless. ..there can be no dialogue because that which is not born of reason cannot be reasoned with. These people not only do not negotiate, they cannot even hear you."
Later in the article he says, "Don't kid yourself about making peace with these people. And for god's sake don't believe the pundit's horseshit about it being about "values." It is about a minority among us who want to stamp out all the advances made during the Enlightenment -- take us back to Biblical Law, wars and rumors of wars. And it is about a band of dyspeptic, neoconservative money grubbing bastards who knew how to exploit our ancient and destructive legacy, the war making Calvinist fundamentalism brought here by the Scots Irish and still smoldering across the heartland. By now most of you who live where you can buy a copy of the New York Times without special ordering it, or feel free to walk down the street arm in arm with a lover of another race, are starting to wake up. All I can say is that you have worse enemies than you know, and they will still be around next election. If there is one. And they can crush us if they manage to align themselves with the same kind of oppressive bastards they did this time. Which they will. They never cease, proof of which is that what we saw last November was the culmination of twenty years of organizing. What to do about it is still being debated, but to my mind, publicly calling these people what they really are would be a damned good start. "
I'm doing my part.
I'd reprint the whole thing here, but it's better than mine, so I won't.
IGNORANCE ISN'T BLISS; IT'S...IGNORANT
Check out this chart at http://chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.htm. It's going around the net, you've probably seen it.
Actually, while this may be fun, the Economist, which originally printed the chart, printed a retraction: "Last week we published a list that purported to show the IQs of states voting for George Bush and Al Gore in 2000. Alas, we were the victim of a hoax: no such data exists. By way of apology, here are two very crude ratings of states' intelligence—and how they voted." http://www.economist.com/World/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2692859
But so what. One sign of a truly stupid person is making the choice to remain ignorant when presented with facts. This explains not only the election but abstinence-only programs, creationism, and their time-honored tradition of selectively choosing passages from the bible to support their particular loci of ignorance. After all, why let a fact stand in the way of a good opinion?
What else would one expect from people who believe in The Rapture; 17% of those 70 million self-identified Evangelicals believe the world will end (the Rapture) in their lifetime. So we are now in the end times, according to them. After Israel is established, God will swoop down and transport only the true believers to Heaven, and smite everyone else, including the Jews--except for 144,000, and I have no idea why. Comic relief?
Bush is one of those evangelicals.
But of course there's more to this story than ignorance. There's venality. Oh, there's plenty of that.
Look at Bush denying global warming, encouraging homophobia, and prohibiting stem cell research from that perspective. Denying established scientific consensus certainly appeases his conservative Xian "base" so widely blathered about, as does his homophobia; but he has more than one base. Now that the cabal has again stolen the presidency*, he can concentrate on his real base--the rich and powerful robber barons of capitalism, whose allegiance he cemented--as if he needed more stickiness--with his tax cuts. Who benefits most from ignoring environmental concerns? Big Energy,of course. Who benefits from prohibiting stem cell research? Big Pharma. Explore every issue where this administration obstructs or overturns progressive policies and name your industry that benefits. Those Christians ain't benefiting on the material plane, that's for sure. They're getting screwed over as much as we are; in fact even more, since those red states rely even more on government largesse than the blue states, and most of that largesse these days is going up the chain, not down. Another fact they choose to ignore.
It sure is annoying, though, that their willful ignorance so negatively impacts the rest of the sentient world, and for long beyond their much-prized Rapture date.
While I'm fairly sure Bush's membership in his religious cult is hearfelt (with this man and his co-conspirators one can't be truly sure of any integrity), his desire to please and enrich his corporate daddies trumps most of his dedication to his fellow religious bonkjobs. Religion is his foil. He used it, as so many have before him, to maintain power. And he maintains power for the main purpose of increasing tribute to plutocracy.
*How do we define "stolen?" Will it prove to be voting corruption again, as many progressive organizations are investigating now? Maybe. But a cabal that wins by the nastiest lying and distortion of fact I've ever seen, by manipulating a system filled with loopholes in the most corrupt way, by stooping so low that the bar is on the floor--well, that's theft to me. Regardless of how the voting recounts come out, this team has stolen another chunk of our still-evolving democracy and threw it into the garbage disposal. They've stolen more than the election. They've stolen hope that America could become the idealistic Democracy that 54 million voters, in their unrelenting ignorance, think it already is. That's a capital offense.
Actually, while this may be fun, the Economist, which originally printed the chart, printed a retraction: "Last week we published a list that purported to show the IQs of states voting for George Bush and Al Gore in 2000. Alas, we were the victim of a hoax: no such data exists. By way of apology, here are two very crude ratings of states' intelligence—and how they voted." http://www.economist.com/World/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2692859
But so what. One sign of a truly stupid person is making the choice to remain ignorant when presented with facts. This explains not only the election but abstinence-only programs, creationism, and their time-honored tradition of selectively choosing passages from the bible to support their particular loci of ignorance. After all, why let a fact stand in the way of a good opinion?
What else would one expect from people who believe in The Rapture; 17% of those 70 million self-identified Evangelicals believe the world will end (the Rapture) in their lifetime. So we are now in the end times, according to them. After Israel is established, God will swoop down and transport only the true believers to Heaven, and smite everyone else, including the Jews--except for 144,000, and I have no idea why. Comic relief?
Bush is one of those evangelicals.
But of course there's more to this story than ignorance. There's venality. Oh, there's plenty of that.
Look at Bush denying global warming, encouraging homophobia, and prohibiting stem cell research from that perspective. Denying established scientific consensus certainly appeases his conservative Xian "base" so widely blathered about, as does his homophobia; but he has more than one base. Now that the cabal has again stolen the presidency*, he can concentrate on his real base--the rich and powerful robber barons of capitalism, whose allegiance he cemented--as if he needed more stickiness--with his tax cuts. Who benefits most from ignoring environmental concerns? Big Energy,of course. Who benefits from prohibiting stem cell research? Big Pharma. Explore every issue where this administration obstructs or overturns progressive policies and name your industry that benefits. Those Christians ain't benefiting on the material plane, that's for sure. They're getting screwed over as much as we are; in fact even more, since those red states rely even more on government largesse than the blue states, and most of that largesse these days is going up the chain, not down. Another fact they choose to ignore.
It sure is annoying, though, that their willful ignorance so negatively impacts the rest of the sentient world, and for long beyond their much-prized Rapture date.
While I'm fairly sure Bush's membership in his religious cult is hearfelt (with this man and his co-conspirators one can't be truly sure of any integrity), his desire to please and enrich his corporate daddies trumps most of his dedication to his fellow religious bonkjobs. Religion is his foil. He used it, as so many have before him, to maintain power. And he maintains power for the main purpose of increasing tribute to plutocracy.
*How do we define "stolen?" Will it prove to be voting corruption again, as many progressive organizations are investigating now? Maybe. But a cabal that wins by the nastiest lying and distortion of fact I've ever seen, by manipulating a system filled with loopholes in the most corrupt way, by stooping so low that the bar is on the floor--well, that's theft to me. Regardless of how the voting recounts come out, this team has stolen another chunk of our still-evolving democracy and threw it into the garbage disposal. They've stolen more than the election. They've stolen hope that America could become the idealistic Democracy that 54 million voters, in their unrelenting ignorance, think it already is. That's a capital offense.
NO PUN INTENDED
NO PUN INTENDED
1. Two vultures board an airplane, each carrying two dead raccoons.
The stewardess looks at them and says, "I'm sorry,
gentlemen, only one carrion allowed per passenger."
2. Two boll weevils grew up in South Carolina. One went
to Hollywood and became a famous actor. The other stayed
behind in the cotton fields and never amounted to much. The second one,
naturally, became known as the lesser of two weevils.
3. Two Eskimos sitting in a kayak were chilly, but when they lit a fire in
the craft, it sank, proving once again that you can't have your kayak and
heat it, too.
4. A three-legged dog walks into a saloon in the Old
West. He slides up to the bar and announces: "I'm looking for the man
who shot my paw."
5. Did you hear about the Buddhist who refused Novocain
during a root canal? He wanted to transcend dental medication.
6. A group of chess enthusiasts checked into a hotel and were standing in
the lobby discussing their recent tournament victories. After about an
hour, the manager came out of the office and asked them to disperse. "But
why?" they asked, as they moved. "Because," he said, "I can't stand chess
nuts boasting in an open foyer."
7. A woman has twins and gives them up for adoption. One of them goes to a
family in Egypt and is named "Ahmal." The other goes to a family in Spain;
they name him "Juan." Years later, Juan sends a picture of himself to his
birth mother. Upon receiving the picture, she tells her husband that she
wishes she also had a picture of Ahmal. Her husband responds, "They're
twins! If you've seen Juan, you've seen Ahmal."
8. These friars were behind on their belfry payments, so they opened up a
small florist shop to raise funds. Since everyone liked to buy flowers from
the men of God, a rival florist across town thought the competition was
unfair. He asked the good fathers to close down, but they would not. He
went back and begged the friars to close. They ignored him. So, the rival
florist hired Hugh MacTaggart, the roughest and most vicious thug in town
to "persuade" them to close. Hugh beat up the friars and trashed their
store, saying he'd be back if they didn't close up shop. Terrified, they
did so, thereby proving that Hugh, and only Hugh, can prevent florist
friars.
9. Mahatma Gandhi, as you know, walked barefoot most of the time, which
produced an impressive set of calluses on his feet. He also ate very
little, which made him rather frail and with his odd diet, he suffered from
bad breath. This made him ... what?
A super callused fragile mystic hexed by halitosis.
10. And finally, there was a girl who sent ten different puns to friends,
with the hope that at least one of the puns would make them laugh.
Unfortunately, no pun in ten did.
1. Two vultures board an airplane, each carrying two dead raccoons.
The stewardess looks at them and says, "I'm sorry,
gentlemen, only one carrion allowed per passenger."
2. Two boll weevils grew up in South Carolina. One went
to Hollywood and became a famous actor. The other stayed
behind in the cotton fields and never amounted to much. The second one,
naturally, became known as the lesser of two weevils.
3. Two Eskimos sitting in a kayak were chilly, but when they lit a fire in
the craft, it sank, proving once again that you can't have your kayak and
heat it, too.
4. A three-legged dog walks into a saloon in the Old
West. He slides up to the bar and announces: "I'm looking for the man
who shot my paw."
5. Did you hear about the Buddhist who refused Novocain
during a root canal? He wanted to transcend dental medication.
6. A group of chess enthusiasts checked into a hotel and were standing in
the lobby discussing their recent tournament victories. After about an
hour, the manager came out of the office and asked them to disperse. "But
why?" they asked, as they moved. "Because," he said, "I can't stand chess
nuts boasting in an open foyer."
7. A woman has twins and gives them up for adoption. One of them goes to a
family in Egypt and is named "Ahmal." The other goes to a family in Spain;
they name him "Juan." Years later, Juan sends a picture of himself to his
birth mother. Upon receiving the picture, she tells her husband that she
wishes she also had a picture of Ahmal. Her husband responds, "They're
twins! If you've seen Juan, you've seen Ahmal."
8. These friars were behind on their belfry payments, so they opened up a
small florist shop to raise funds. Since everyone liked to buy flowers from
the men of God, a rival florist across town thought the competition was
unfair. He asked the good fathers to close down, but they would not. He
went back and begged the friars to close. They ignored him. So, the rival
florist hired Hugh MacTaggart, the roughest and most vicious thug in town
to "persuade" them to close. Hugh beat up the friars and trashed their
store, saying he'd be back if they didn't close up shop. Terrified, they
did so, thereby proving that Hugh, and only Hugh, can prevent florist
friars.
9. Mahatma Gandhi, as you know, walked barefoot most of the time, which
produced an impressive set of calluses on his feet. He also ate very
little, which made him rather frail and with his odd diet, he suffered from
bad breath. This made him ... what?
A super callused fragile mystic hexed by halitosis.
10. And finally, there was a girl who sent ten different puns to friends,
with the hope that at least one of the puns would make them laugh.
Unfortunately, no pun in ten did.
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
WAS THE ELECTION STOLEN?
Well, yes.
The truth is out there.
Soon it'll be here--and everywhere.
For now, check out http://blackboxvoting.org/
Am I the only wondering why everyone to the left of Joe Lieberman except the Kerry campaign is investigating this?
The truth is out there.
Soon it'll be here--and everywhere.
For now, check out http://blackboxvoting.org/
Am I the only wondering why everyone to the left of Joe Lieberman except the Kerry campaign is investigating this?
FUCK THE SOUTH
I wish I'd written this. My only complaint is the anonymous author is too easy on these bonkjobs. I was just getting warmed up. Please sir, may I have some more?
"Fuck the South. Fuck 'em. We should have let them go when they wanted to leave. But no, we had to kill half a million people so they'd stay part of our special Union. Fighting for the right to keep slaves - yeah, those are states we want to keep.
And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really?
Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?
No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier. Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real you are you Johnny-come-lately "Oooooh I've been a state for almost a hundred years" dickheads. Fuck off.
Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't paying for your fucking bridges, bitch.
All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. "Let the Spanish keep it, it’s a shithole," we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.
The next dickwad who says, "It’s your money, not the government's money" is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. That’s right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It’s too easy, asshole, they’re blue states. It’s not your money, assholes, it’s fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.
Let’s talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping dickwads? Well? Can you guess? It’s fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marriage universe. Yes, that’s right, the state you love to tie around the neck of anyone to the left of Strom Thurmond has the lowest divorce rate in the fucking nation. Think that’s just some aberration? How about this: 9 of the 10 lowest divorce rates are fucking blue states, asshole, and most are in the Northeast, where our values suck so bad. And where are the highest divorce rates? Care to fucking guess? 10 of the top 10 are fucking red-ass we're-so-fucking-moral states. And while Nevada is the worst, the Bible Belt is doing its fucking part.
But two guys making out is going to fucking ruin marriage for you? Yeah? Seems like you're ruining it pretty well on your own, you little bastards. Oh, but that's ok because you go to church, right? I mean you do, right? Cause we fucking get to hear about it every goddamn year at election time. Yes, we're fascinated by how you get up every Sunday morning and sing, and then you're fucking towers of moral superiority. Yeah, that's a workable formula. Maybe us fucking Northerners don't talk about religion as much as you because we're not so busy sinning, hmmm? Ever think of that, you self-righteous assholes? No, you're too busy erecting giant stone tablets of the Ten Commandments in buildings paid for by the fucking Northeast Liberal Elite. And who has the highest murder rates in the nation? It ain't us up here in the North, assholes.
Well this gravy train is fucking over. Take your liberal-bashing, federal-tax-leaching, confederate-flag-waving, holier-than-thou, hypocritical bullshit and shove it up your ass.
And no, you can't have your fucking convention in New York next time. Fuck off. "
Click here to contact the author.
And read on, where I reference this article and give its website.
"Fuck the South. Fuck 'em. We should have let them go when they wanted to leave. But no, we had to kill half a million people so they'd stay part of our special Union. Fighting for the right to keep slaves - yeah, those are states we want to keep.
And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really?
Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?
No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier. Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real you are you Johnny-come-lately "Oooooh I've been a state for almost a hundred years" dickheads. Fuck off.
Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't paying for your fucking bridges, bitch.
All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. "Let the Spanish keep it, it’s a shithole," we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.
The next dickwad who says, "It’s your money, not the government's money" is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. That’s right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It’s too easy, asshole, they’re blue states. It’s not your money, assholes, it’s fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.
Let’s talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping dickwads? Well? Can you guess? It’s fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marriage universe. Yes, that’s right, the state you love to tie around the neck of anyone to the left of Strom Thurmond has the lowest divorce rate in the fucking nation. Think that’s just some aberration? How about this: 9 of the 10 lowest divorce rates are fucking blue states, asshole, and most are in the Northeast, where our values suck so bad. And where are the highest divorce rates? Care to fucking guess? 10 of the top 10 are fucking red-ass we're-so-fucking-moral states. And while Nevada is the worst, the Bible Belt is doing its fucking part.
But two guys making out is going to fucking ruin marriage for you? Yeah? Seems like you're ruining it pretty well on your own, you little bastards. Oh, but that's ok because you go to church, right? I mean you do, right? Cause we fucking get to hear about it every goddamn year at election time. Yes, we're fascinated by how you get up every Sunday morning and sing, and then you're fucking towers of moral superiority. Yeah, that's a workable formula. Maybe us fucking Northerners don't talk about religion as much as you because we're not so busy sinning, hmmm? Ever think of that, you self-righteous assholes? No, you're too busy erecting giant stone tablets of the Ten Commandments in buildings paid for by the fucking Northeast Liberal Elite. And who has the highest murder rates in the nation? It ain't us up here in the North, assholes.
Well this gravy train is fucking over. Take your liberal-bashing, federal-tax-leaching, confederate-flag-waving, holier-than-thou, hypocritical bullshit and shove it up your ass.
And no, you can't have your fucking convention in New York next time. Fuck off. "
Click here to contact the author.
And read on, where I reference this article and give its website.
VALUES
Feeling sorry, like you need to tell the world "It Ain't Me, Babe....No No No It Ain't Me You're looking For, Babe (From B. Dylan, a popular artist from ancient times when only Love meant never having to say your sorry): www.sorryeverybody.com
Tired of this nonstop Rove propaganda-machine bazzfazz about red state "values" (now its "values voters"--but I guess that's marginally better than "security moms) and the punditry's continued dead-from-the-neck-up goosestepping blather about how they didn't vote for us because we're arrogant and condescend to the southern sensibility. That we think they're stupid? Well, http://fuckthesouth.com/and http://www.bobsgeek.info/dfus.gif
Because
1) They ARE stupid. Yes, it's true. It's always the stupid ones who don't know they're stupid, after all. I mean, look at Ben Affleck--I mean Britney Spears--that is, Clarence Thomas...OK, don't, you're right. Some things are just too painful.
2) They're selfrighteous sanctimonius whining fanatical hypocrites whose idea of values means it's OK to hate and kill as long they get to decide who gets hated, who gets dead,and how it happens. Oh yeh, evolution is only a theory. Here's a theory--evolution bypassed these pre-hominids. Apologies to pre-hominids, and damn you, evolution. What where you thinking? Clearly they're not descendents of Homo-erectus, because Homo-erectus was significantly brainier than his predecessors--except for that subset knows as Log-Cabinids. Evolution, you may be fickle, but you got a great sense of irony.
3) As Carville said a few years ago, "We're right, they're wrong." (Even an idiot can occasionally say something wise--except, apparently, the Chosen One in the oval office)If the Democrats in their clearly finite wisdom decide to pander to these fools (I mean the media--come on!) instead of defending the real values of any just society, like Volvos that run on carbs--they're just gonna die anyway--then, as my 8th grade general science teacher used to yell at us, "no culture, no future, no hope."
Betty Bowers, America's Best Christian, Says: "The party that so gloriously brought this country the fabulous Red Scare of the 1950s, in a bit of an about-face, has now made the godly throughout America scared they are not a Red. State, that is. With this in mind, I have drafted this handy list as a quick reference to determine if you are living in one of those demon-infested Blue States – or Jesusland!" http://www.bettybowers.com/nl_redorblue.html
Meanwhile, time to buy property in Tierra del Fuego.
Well, illuminati, are you happy now?
--Thorath Ovgahd
Tired of this nonstop Rove propaganda-machine bazzfazz about red state "values" (now its "values voters"--but I guess that's marginally better than "security moms) and the punditry's continued dead-from-the-neck-up goosestepping blather about how they didn't vote for us because we're arrogant and condescend to the southern sensibility. That we think they're stupid? Well, http://fuckthesouth.com/and http://www.bobsgeek.info/dfus.gif
Because
1) They ARE stupid. Yes, it's true. It's always the stupid ones who don't know they're stupid, after all. I mean, look at Ben Affleck--I mean Britney Spears--that is, Clarence Thomas...OK, don't, you're right. Some things are just too painful.
2) They're selfrighteous sanctimonius whining fanatical hypocrites whose idea of values means it's OK to hate and kill as long they get to decide who gets hated, who gets dead,and how it happens. Oh yeh, evolution is only a theory. Here's a theory--evolution bypassed these pre-hominids. Apologies to pre-hominids, and damn you, evolution. What where you thinking? Clearly they're not descendents of Homo-erectus, because Homo-erectus was significantly brainier than his predecessors--except for that subset knows as Log-Cabinids. Evolution, you may be fickle, but you got a great sense of irony.
3) As Carville said a few years ago, "We're right, they're wrong." (Even an idiot can occasionally say something wise--except, apparently, the Chosen One in the oval office)If the Democrats in their clearly finite wisdom decide to pander to these fools (I mean the media--come on!) instead of defending the real values of any just society, like Volvos that run on carbs--they're just gonna die anyway--then, as my 8th grade general science teacher used to yell at us, "no culture, no future, no hope."
Betty Bowers, America's Best Christian, Says: "The party that so gloriously brought this country the fabulous Red Scare of the 1950s, in a bit of an about-face, has now made the godly throughout America scared they are not a Red. State, that is. With this in mind, I have drafted this handy list as a quick reference to determine if you are living in one of those demon-infested Blue States – or Jesusland!" http://www.bettybowers.com/nl_redorblue.html
Meanwhile, time to buy property in Tierra del Fuego.
Well, illuminati, are you happy now?
--Thorath Ovgahd
Tuesday, August 10, 2004
MICHAEL MOORE'S SPEECH AT THE "TAKE BACK AMERICA" FORUM IN BOSTON DURING THE DNC.
I mentioned this speech in an earlier post. Here it is.
Transcript of Michael Moore's speech:
I don't know what it is with right-wingers and Republicans. They seem to have hijacked over the years the word "patriotism", the American flag, these things. And it's an odd thing. I have been thinking about this lately. Because the true patriots are those who believe the important thing is to ask questions, you know. To dissent when necessary. And I know a lot of people have seen my film and the obvious bad guy in the movie is George W. Bush. But there's the unstated villain in the film. And that's our national media.
You've seen the film. Right? A lot of them are mad at me right now because I can't go on a show without them, you know. But I would be mad if I were them too, because the film outs them. It outs them as being for the Bush administration. It outs them as people who were cheerleaders for this war. It outs them as, to be kind to those who are actually good journalists, journalists who fell asleep on the job. Journalists who didn't ask the hard questions. The one thing I hear when people come out of the theater over and over again is I never saw that on the news. Right? I never saw those Black congressmen being shut down one after another. Did anyone see that?
I didn't know there was a riot at the inauguration parade. I never saw the egg hit the limo. I never saw that! I don't hear from the amputees who sit in our hospitals, 5,000 or 6,000 of them. How come I don't hear from them on the nightly news? I don't hear from the mothers. I don't see them on the evening news, the mothers of children who have been killed in Iraq and who state their opposition to this war. I haven't seen them on the news.
Why haven't I seen this? I live in a free and open country that has a free and open press where you can show us anything. That's the great thing about America. You can show us anything! You can ask any question you want to ask. And this is my humble plea to those of you from the press here. And don't any of you take this personally. I don't mean it this way, but I – we, the people, we need you. We need you to do your jobs! We need you! To ask the questions, demand the evidence! Demand the evidence! Don't ever send us to war without asking the questions!
You do us no service by hopping on a band wagon, by becoming cheerleaders, by looking the other way, because you know that's the safest way to play it if you want to keep your job. Or, you are just afraid of being accused of being un-American if you were to ask a hard question to the President or his administration. That's not un-American. That's pro-American! To ask the questions. That's patriotic! But I know it was rough. I know in those first days of the war, I know. I stood on an Oscar stage five days into the war. I know what the mood was like. It was not easy to say we are being led to war for fictitious reasons. Right?
And those of you who felt the same way at the beginning of this war, you know, remember what it was like at work or at school? You had to be kind of careful. Right? And if you expressed any opposition to the war, you had to immediately say, but I support the troops! Right? But I support the troops. You didn't need to say that. Of course you support the troops. You've always supported the troops. Who are the troops? The troops are those who come from the other side of the tracks. The troops are the people who come from families who have been abused by the Bush administration. You've always supported them. You've always been on their side! This no one should question that!
The way that you don't support the troops is to send them into harm's way when it isn't necessary. The way that you hate the troops is when you send them off, some of them, to their death, so that your rich benefactors can line their pockets even more. The Halliburtons, the oil companies. That is anti-American. That is unpatriotic. You do not support the troops when you do that. The thing here is, and again, and I am not picking on the press who are here, but it is true. We are talking about our mainstream national media. A media, for instance, NBC, owned by General Electric. You know, I understand General Electric now has over $600 million worth of contracts in Iraq. They are war-profiteers. It doesn't surprise me that their news arm has failed to do the job that it needs to do to tell the truth to the American people about this war. There's nothing surprising about that. I understand that.
I understand the Matt Lauers and the Lisa Myers and the people that have to work for this entity. You have cameras and microphones and the ability to get into places of power that the people in this room can't get in. To ask these questions. And the great thing about this country is you can ask any question you want. You can ask any question you want and not be arrested. Right? You would not be sent to prison if you ask a question. So what has prevented you from asking the question? But you've got the little lapel flag pin. Right? And the TV. Screen filled up with American flags flying. See, we are patriotic. We are patriotic. But you've thrown down with the wrong people. You haven't just been embedded. You've been in bed with the wrong people. You've listened to those in power and just report their lies as truths....
The majority of our fellow Americans are liberal and progressive when it comes to the issues. That's not just me saying this or wishing it to be true. Every poll shows that the majority of Americans believe in women's rights. The majority of Americans want stronger environmental laws. The majority of Americans want government laws much the majority of Americans are pro-labor. Put down the whole list of issues, Americans, whether they use the label or not, and most Americans don't like labels, but most Americans in their hearts are liberals and progressives. It's just a small minority of people who hate. They hate. They exist in the politics of hate. They don't believe two consenting adults should have the right to be in love and share their lives together and be legally protected by the state for doing so. What would motivate that?
What business is it, anyway, of these people? These, they aren't patriots. They are HATE-triots and they believe in the politics of HATE-riotism. That's where they stand and patriotism is where real Americans stand. And that's the truth....
They keep saying that this is a 50/50 country. This is not a 50/50 country. In their wildest dreams, it's a 50/50 country. Look at all the polls I just, and I've got all the statistics in my book and I cite them all. And these aren't left wing polls. These are Gallup polls and even ABC and CNN polls and they go right down the line and you see where Americans are at. When they, when you hear about this close election, about the 50/50 country, don't forget the key words they always use. In a poll of likely voters. Likely voters. This is how far behind the media is with the times in which we live. They are using an old paradigm. They only poll people who have consistently voted in previous elections. But the other 50% of the country doesn't vote. If they wanted to be honest, they could say it's a 50/50/50 country because they never ask the other 50% how they feel. And I got to tell you, this is what they are in for a big surprise.
Come November 2, the other 50% you can't compare this election to any election before September 11, 2001.
That day and since that day has made average Americans more aware of what's going on in the world. They want to know more about what's going on in the world. They talk politics now. We all know this. Right? At work, you go in the bar, people are talking about politics. Anywhere you go, people talk politics. It's cool now to talk about politics. Right? It's uncool if you don't know what's going on in the world. It's uncool to be apathetic. Now that has not been the case for most of our lives much. Right? If you talked too much politics you were seen as kind of strange and wonkey. Right? But that's not the case. That's why John Stewart is so popular, because people want to talk about politics. They want to hear about it, and that's the big story that the media has missed. That there's been this shift in the country. And who are these 50% who don't vote? Who are they? Are they the wealthy and the privileged?
No. They are the people who have been most hurt by the Bush administration. They are people of color. They are single moms. They are poor. They are working class. They are young people. These are the people most affected by the policies of the Bush administration and they are now talking politics. And they are not apathetic. And I think we are going to see a significant number of them leave the house on November 2 and come out to vote.
I believe we'll have the largest percentage of people voting in our lifetime come November 2! I really, really believe, you don't hear that, though. You won't see that story reported because they are just focusing on likely voters from 1992, 1996 and 2000. And it's a 50/50 country. Like if they just keep repeating it enough, it will be true. It's a 50/50 country. Put your heels together now. It's a 50/50 country.
I got to tell you, I have traveled across this country quite a bit in the last year. It ain't a 50/50 country. People are angry. They want Bush out of the White House. They want to be able to send their kids to college. (applause) They want to be able to go to the doctor. This isn't a 50/50 country. Speak the truth. Come on. Take a real poll. Take a real poll!
A few weeks ago I was flipping around on the dial and I came across a NASCAR Race on FOX and there was NASCAR champion Dale Earnhardt Jr. He said what would you do, what did you do the night before while you were getting prepared for the big race? He said, "Well, I took my crew to go see Fahrenheit 9/11." And then he said, and "I think all of America should see this movie." I fell off the couch! I said a little prayer for George W. Bush. I'm thinking oh, my God, I hope he's not watching this race now and eating pretzels!
Whoa. I thought, man, if the movie has gone that far into middle America, and this is where the country's at, how come we don't know this? How come this isn't being reported? What's wrong here? Well, we have our conventional wisdom and our conventional wisdom tells us that the paradigm that we have been following over the last 20 years is the one we must follow and that's the one we are worried about. Thank you. It doesn't hurt to report the truth. It's ok. You know. I was on a, one of those morning talk shows and after we went to commercial, the person who was interviewing me said you know, you are right, I mean when the war started, it was very difficult here to book the people we wanted to book, ask the questions we wanted to ask. In fact, I got a memo about my tone of voice. And apparently the brass had received a call from the Dick Cheney's office is what – and said that he didn't like my tone of voice. And I got a memo on it to watch my tone of voice. Well you've got to tell that story! You've got to tell that story. I can't. Well why? They can't fire you.
You are like one of the most well-known people in America. And, you know, you've got to tell this story. If you don't tell it, I'm going to wait like maybe another week. What's today? Within the week, I will put this on my web site. I'll tell the whole story and I'll name who said it. So this person is unnoticed now and I am doing it in a friendly way. Because this is a good person. You know? Just that I think the people deserve the truth and they need to know how the decisions get made behind the curtain. Who is pulling the strings here? Who's calling the shots? It's like, coming from where I come from politically, we always are in this place of yeah, the man this and the man that and this corporation and this and that and there's probably a part of us that says oh, you know, it's really, there's, maybe it's not that bad. You want to believe it isn't that bad. You know? And then, they have made the mistake of giving me a peek behind this curtain and I've seen this happen and it's stunning to me, for instance this whole experience with Disney not releasing the film and it's like what? – you know, the film has gone on now to make more money than any Disney film this year.
It shocked me at the time, because the way I have been able to get my work out there over the years is that usually when the media companies, greed always supercedes politics or personal animosity toward me. Oh, I can't stand the guy. Oh, how many books did he sell last week? Well, OK. Print a few more. You know this incredible flaw of capitalism that has always worked in my favor.
You know the old saying that the rich man will sell you the rope to hang yourself with if he can make a dollar off it? That will eventually be their undoing. But this time it didn't happen. This time a film made for a very small amount of money that will now make, you know, at least a quarter billion dollars around the world by the time it's done, the greed didn't motivate them to release this film. I couldn't figure it out for the longest time and it took a Canadian journalist to finally do the story and thank god for the Canadians, you know?... The Canadians really do like us. They just wish we would read a little more and – but it took a Canadian journalist to write that perhaps one of the problems that Mr. Moore had with Disney is the fact that the Saudi world family owns almost 17% of Euro-Disney. And that in 1994, Prince Walid, one of the richest men in the world, and a member of the Saudi Royal Family, wrote Michael Eisner and Disney a check for over $300 million to bail out Euro-Disney. And the people that helped put the thing together to bring the two together was a company called the Carlyle group.
Now my film was already done, you know, but I was like can it get any worse? Are they everywhere? But no journalist will ask Mr. Eisner or Disney the question: Will that have anything to do with the decision because their good friends maybe don't look that good in this movie. But this is what, just a small example of what we have come to expect. But the good news is that things are going to change very soon. And the other side, the unelected side, who occupy our white house, they are not going to go peacefully. They like being in charge with no mandate. All right? They actually believe they could take us to war based on no mandate from the people. And they knew that they had to lie to the people to get them to believe that Saddam Hussein had something to do with September 11th and that there were weapons of mass destruction and this, this, and that.
So they aren't going to go without a fight. And believe me, they are better fighters than we are. They have proven themselves; you have to give them their props for that. I mean, they are up at 6:00 in the morning trying to figure out which minority group they are going to screw today. The hate that they eat for breakfast. I mean, our side, we never see 6:00 in the morning unless unless we have been up all night.... So they are going to fight and they are going to smear and they are going to lie and they are going to hate. And we have to get out there and counter that with the truth. We have to get out there and we have to get up and we have to get moving. And we must not stop between now and November 2. No stopping! No stopping! I'm telling you, if we don't do it....
[R]eporters have been asking me while I have been here at the convention, so how do you square the fact, this John Kerry, that he voted for the war? And my answer to them is similar to the answer actually I gave a soldier who stopped me on street a short time back. And he said to me, you know, I was on a ship off Iraq the night of the Oscars and we watched you give your speech. And we booed along with the audience. I was very angry at you for what you said that night but now that I have been there and served my tour in Iraq, what you said was the truth. They sent us there under false pretenses. And he said to me I want to apologize to you for booing at you on that ship. And I said to him, you owe me no apology. It is we, the American people, who need to apologize to you for sending you into harm's way based on a lie. I apologize to you. And I said to him your only crime is that you believed your president. Why would you apologize for believing your Commander in Chief? You are supposed to be able to believe your commander in chief. You are supposed to be able to believe the president.
Because if we don't have that, that basic thing of being able to believe what comes out of the mouth of the president of the United States, my friend, what are we left with? What are we left with if you can't believe anything that's being said from the man who sits in the white house? John Kerry did what 70 to 80% of our fellow Americans did. He believed. And he believed that he was going to do something in a different way, but he believed in the majority of our fellow Americans believe. Do we point our finger at them now? Do you point your finger at your neighbors and your friends who supported the war at the beginning but no longer support it because now 54% of this country believes the war is wrong and never should have been fought? Do you?
Does one in this room sit on your high horse and look down at them? Oh, you supported the war! I didn't! Does anyone in this room have that attitude to your friends and neighbors and family members? Of course not. Of course not. People come to the wrong conclusions at their own speed. And you know what, friends? We are getting better at this. Because during Vietnam it took years before we figured it out. This time, it only took months. It only took a few months before the majority of Americans figured out how wrong this president was.
And that applause is for our fellow Americans, because they will always respond in the right way when given the truth. They will always come from a righteous place when they have the facts and information available to them. As soon as it was made available, as soon as that happened, they create, the shift took place, didn't it. And it's a long way from the 16 months but not that far, really, from those first days of the war. We now are the American majority. Would are with them and they are with us. And this is the American majority that's going to show up on November 2 and remove George W. Bush from the White House. I so believe that.
But it's only going to happen with our hard work and us coming from a good and gentle place with those that we speak to in the coming months. To hold out our hand and say, come on. It's ok. I mean, you should see some of the mail I am getting from Republicans. I love these letters. You know? Because there are good Republicans. And I predict we are going to see Republicans for Kerry movements across the country. Because a lot of people who call themselves Republicans are that way because they, you know, they just don't like the government sticking their hand in the pocket. Right? That's really their big issue. You know. You've got one in your family. Come on. Everyone in here. Right? They just don't like paying their taxes. Do they? Hum? [laughter] ok. But they are good on everything else, aren't they. They believe women should be paid the same as men. Right? They don't believe companies should be dumping crud into the river. Right? They don't believe assault weapons should be made available easily on the streets. They are good on all the other things. They just don't want their hard-earned money taken out of their pocket.
Well, all we got to do is show them how George W. Bush has taken this money from them and from their children and grandchildren. These are the people that are going have to pay off this incredible debt that this war has created. George W. Bush has gone from being the compassionate conservative to the anti-conservative. He doesn't really believe in conservative values. And we need to do that. But here's my plea to the Democrats and to Mr. Kerry. You will not win this election by being weak kneed and wimpy and wishy-washy and lacking the courage of your convictions. The only way this is going to happen is if you stand up forthrightly and say what you believe and push for the liberal progressive agenda that the majority of America already agrees with. If you move to the right, thinking that's how you are going to pick up a few extra votes from that very small sliver of likely voters who haven't made up their mind yet, if you give up the very principles and things that the people in this room and those delegates believe in, to get those few votes over there, you will encourage millions to stay home.
The people who are already feeling disenfranchised who are full of despair and have sunk into their own cynicism believing what's the use? What's the use? You know, if the Democrats move that way, they will in the only energize the base, the base will stay home. I went to one of these meeting of ACT, I forget what it stands for. America coming together, one, two, and they put up on the screen a map of Cleveland, Ohio and they showed a precinct in Cleveland that was 96% African American. 96%. Total vote are turnout in 2000, 13%. You can't get more base of the Democratic Party than African Americans and if you don't have a message that will inspire them to come out on Election Day and tells them with no B.S. and shows them how their life will be better, we will not win this election....
I say this not to rain on the party. We are all in this together. And as they said last night, we have a big tent. And all of us, from conservative democrats to greens who are voting democrat, are all in this tent right now for one common goal. That's to get our white house back in our hands, the majority's.
And a word about Ralph Nader. Yes, the Republicans do love Ralph. I just came from Michigan where Ralph turned in 50,000 signatures. 43,000 of which were gathered by the Michigan Republican party. This is a painful thing to witness, because of the great Americans, Ralph Nader is one of them. His legacy, what's done for this country has been incredible. And what I and others try to explain to Ralph before he decided to run is that you already did your job. The Democratic Party of 2004 is not the Democratic Party of 2000. The threat that you posed in 2000, they got the message. And it was carried on by Howard dean and Dennis Kucinich and others in this year. And they helped push the Democrats toward where the majority of Americans that liberal progressive majority, is at.
You did a great thing and now, they are in a better place. You have to admit that. Even Al Gore of 2004 isn't the Al Gore of 2000. He's moved! And all you have to do, if you think the Democrats this year are the same as the democrats four years ago, ask yourself this question. Do you think john Kerry will ask Bill Clinton not to campaign in Arkansas for him? Hum? I don't think so. So my appeal to the Nader voters, to the greens out there, is that we have a different job to do this year....
I think that when it comes to that day people will know what to do. But I would not have the Democrats spending any time attacking Ralph Nader. All right? That is the wrong way to go. What the Democrats should be doing, and I have heard Kerry say this, is we need to give, we need to give those who are thinking of voting for Ralph Nader, a reason to vote for John Kerry. That is the right answer.
When I was in Cannes with the movie, I showed it to the American students whose were working there. There were about 200 of them. At the end of the movie, I asked them, let me just ask you a question, how many of you are college-aged student, how many of you are thinking for Ralph Nader? Nearly had a lot of them raised their hand. I invited Kerry's daughter, Alexandra, to come and sit in the back. They didn't know she was there. And she witnessed this. And we went out to lunch afterwards and she was shocked. How could they, after watching this movie, for two hours, with the message of the movie that seems to be that Bush must go, that nearly half of them would say they are still considering voting for Ralph Nader?
I think I saw one poll recently that said 12% of 18-25-year-olds are planning on voting for Ralph Nader. And I said to her, I said you have to tell your dad that, you know, because they, some of the kids that gave their reasons and they spoke with all that great honesty that comes out of an 18 or a 19-year old. Right? Because there's [beep] right? When you are 18 and 19. And they call you on it really quickly. I said you need to tell your dad that the way to deal with this is to take the strong stand that needs to be taken. The majority of Americans are already with you. Don't be afraid. Speak out on these issues. Speak out about health care in the right way. Don't put ads on TV that say we will provide health care for nearly all Americans. Don't do that. Stand up for something. Don't be afraid. Don't try to be the hamburger version of the Republican Party. And I think he got that message. And I think that from what I've heard in recent weeks, I got to say this and I've said this to everybody here who's been asking me about the war.
One thing I do know about Kerry, he will not invade a country like George W. Bush did. I believe in my heart of hearts – that this man, because you know, when you have been shot three times and you have been in that situation and you know this – if you have family members whose have been to war, if you have parents who were in World war II, my dad always says to me, he was in the Marines in the south pacific and he said, you know, if you have been there, you never want to see anybody else go there. And you want it to be the last resort. And so in my heart, I trust that when he says that. In closing, I just want to thank you for everything that everyone here has done. We are all in the same boat together....
I am glad these rallies are taking place, because, you know, I don't know how the press will write about these gatherings of these rallies.... This is not a niche of the Democratic Party. The things that the people in this room believe in is where the American public is at. Especially where I believe a large chunk of that 50%, that non-voting public, is at. And it's going to be our job to get them out on November 2 and that's what we are all going to do. Thank you very much for being here. Thank you.
This speech was transcripted by Amy Goodman's Democracy Now!
VOTE OR WE'LL KILL YOUR DOG
I wrote this again in response to someone on either the Citizens for Legitimate Government list or Speak-Your-Peace.
CLG is at http://legitgov.org/
SYP is a Yahoo group, at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Speak-Your-Peace/?yguid=186198871
Whether it's because of Kerry or the Democrats policies on Iraq or their
lack of seriously controlling corporate influence, or for any reason,
many people on the left feel in good conscience that they cannot vote
for Kerry. They may or may not vote for Nader, but are sympathetic to
his call that both parties are essentially in bed with corporate
America, and that Kerry's plans for Iraq are not that different from
Bush's.
Because this list is about Peace, many invoke the fact that neither
candidate can be called anti-war. Bush obviously so, and Kerry because
he won't support US total withdrawal from Iraq immediately or in any
case sooner than we want. And that he has supported actually increasing
troop levels there.
Ya got us there.
But one of the reasons, obviously, for being anti-war, as of course we
all are, is to prevent needless human suffering and death.
In that regard, Iraq is a minor player, as I'll illustrate.
So I must ask you which candidate, outside of Iraq, contribute to and
increase human suffering and death, and which will not only not increase
it, but work to reduce it. And also to consider that, again outside of
Iraq, the actual number of deaths--actual and clearly to come-- directly
linked to this administration's policies, vs those that would be linked
to a Democratic presidency..
The other Bush policies that result in increased death and suffering are
well known to readers of this list, but are worth repeating. They mostly
involve sexual and reproductive freedom, and amount to an unprecedented
attack on women. A war, in fact.
I mentioned previously that Bush's reinstatement of the abortion gag
rule for international health and reproductive care agencies in
developing countries has resulted in the deaths of 300,000 women.
Estimates are of 10,000 civilian and military Iraqi deaths, and 1000
Americans. 5000 Americans are seriously wounded, and I don't know the
count of Iraqi wounded, but it surely is in the thousands.
We all consider those to be needless, but so are those of 300,000
women. That's vs 11,000 known dead in Iraq.
The World Aids Conference this week highlights the other front in the
Bush wars, and there are three main factors.
1. Obstructing making anti-viral drugs affordable: We know of Bush's
interests in protecting Big Pharma via the Medicare bill, which is a
megabillion dollar windfall for that industry. The US's pressuring of
poor countries to relinquish rights to make the generic drugs in return
for free trade agreements is consistent with this policy.
2: Promoting abstinence instead of condom use: The administration's
policy is ABC--Abstinence, Being Faithful, and Condoms, in that order of
priority. They believe that condom use promotes promiscuity. (That
policy applied in the US has resulted in increased rates of teenage
pregnancy and STD's.) The US does not make much effort to counter absurd
claims that condoms are ineffective, nor does it want to challenge it's
main ally in this death march, Uganda, which has adopted the Bush ABC
approach.
3. Funding: It's still apparently little known that of the
already-insufficient $15B Bush has promised over the next few years to
fight AIDS in Africa (vs the $200B Bush will ultimately use to fight
Iraqis in Iraq), 1/3 of that money must be devoted solely to abstinence
programs.
I've copies two articles, below, that go into more detail on these
factors, But the end result is millions of unnecessary cases of AIDS in
the developing world, and millions of unnecessary deaths, both of which
not only bring about major suffering but economic devastation as well,
as family breadwinners die off and nations' workforces are decimated.
So let's compare:
Deaths from the Iraq debacle: 11,000 so far
Deaths from Bush's other policies: Millions
All of the policies that contribute to Bush's war on women, sexual and
reproductive freedom will be dismantled or reversed under a Democratic
administration.
So it seems clear and irrefutable that to be truly anti-war, one must do
all one can to defeat Bush. And that means voting for Kerry. The person
who does not vote out of protest over the Democrat's positions on two
war fronts (Iraq and the battle for control of our democracy) thereby
accedes the third front (the war on women and reproductive freedom and
AIDS) to the reactionaries, and rather than preventing needless death
and suffering, actually contributes to them.
Surely that is not the intent of the non-voter, but it is the result.
Please reconsider. The struggle to eliminate armed conflict as anything
but a last resort will continue no matter what, and for the foreseeable
future, regardless of who wins this November. But the number of deaths
from other "wars" will continue in the millions if Bush wins. If
conscience and principle are the guiding forces, how in good conscience
can one contribute to these millions of deaths on the grounds of
protesting thousands of deaths. It may be unseemly to reduce this to a
numbers game, but it surely is one. The greater good needs the
non-voters hearts to listen to these pleas, bite the bullet yet again,
and vote.
Here are the two articles:
*AIDS is "Terrorism'' Richard Gere Tells World AIDS Conference
by Vijay Joshi
The Associated Press/
(Bangkok) France accused the United States of ``blackmail'' tactics to
pressure poor countries into ceding rights to make cheap generic HIV
drugs, while the AIDS conference issued a stirring call Tuesday to get
more medicine to millions of needy in the developing world.
``A vicious terrorist is out there. It is not Osama bin Laden, it is
AIDS,'' Hollywood actor Richard Gere told the conference. ``The biggest
threat to our livelihood, our happiness is AIDS.''
A U.S. official denied the French allegation as ``nonsense,'' while
conference delegates lamented World Health Organization figures that
show only about seven per cent of the six million people in poor
countries who need anti-retroviral treatment are getting it.
``All of us with the power and responsibility to make a difference, can
only hang our heads in shame,'' said Jim Kim, WHO's AIDS director. ``We
know what we need to do. We know prevention and treatment must be
accelerated together.''
Since the last AIDS conference in Barcelona in 2002 generated optimism
about the availability of new anti-retroviral drugs, six million people
have died of AIDS and 10 million have become newly infected.
``By these measures of human life _ the ones that really matter _ we
have failed. And we have failed miserably to do enough in the precious
time that has passed since Barcelona,'' Kim said.
The number of people on treatment has doubled in the developing world to
440,000. UN officials hope to treat three million people there by 2005.
Cost of the drugs is a key issue. European and U.S. pharmaceutical
giants make most of them, protected by patents and costing as much as
$5,000 US ($6,600 Cdn) per person per year.
Some developing countries such as Thailand, India and Brazil are making
cheap generic drugs but not enough to reach everybody. Some 38 million
people are infected with HIV, mostly in poor countries: 25 million in
sub-Saharan Africa and 7.2 million in Asia.
French officials accused the United States of pressuring poor countries
to relinquish rights to make the generic drugs in return for free trade
agreements. In a written statement to the conference, President Jacques
Chirac called that tactic ``tantamount to blackmail.''
France's global ambassador on AIDS, Mireille Guigaz, said Chirac's
comments were not aimed at creating new tensions with the United States
but were ``a question between the United States and developing countries.''
``The United States wants to put pressure on developing countries who
try to stand up for their own industries,'' Guigaz said. ``This is a
problem.''
World Trade Organization rules give developing countries the flexibility
to ignore foreign patents and produce copies of expensive drugs in times
of health crises. All WTO members including the United States have
signed an agreement to respect that clause.
But there is nothing to prevent a country from imposing patent
restrictions in a bilateral trade agreement, such as the one Washington
is negotiating with Thailand.
A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, called the French
allegations ``nonsense,'' and insisted the trade agreements will be
consistent with WTO rules that will allow poor countries to make generic
drugs.
``There really is no issue,'' he said.
Chirac also called on rich nations to raise donations to the 2{-year-old
UN Global Fund aimed primarily at fighting AIDS by $3 billion ($4
billion) per year. Wealthy countries have committed only a fifth of the
$3.5 billion ($4.6 billion) the fund needs for next year, UN officials said.
A group of African protesters interrupted a French minister delivering
Chirac's message to demand more AIDS funding from developed G-8 countries.
``Shame! Shame!'' they chanted in harmony for nearly a minute. Activists
at the venue have also splashed red paint on posters of the G-8 leaders.
*Condoms vs Abstinence Divides World AIDS Conference
by Ian Mader
The Associated Press
Posted: July 12, 2004 11:02 am ET
(Bangkok) AIDS conference delegates were deeply split over the use of
condoms Monday, with Uganda's leader drawing criticism for insisting
they are less effective for HIV prevention than campaigns to promote
abstinence and loving relationships.
President Yoweri Museveni's comments on the second day of the
International AIDS Conference were in line with the policy of U.S.
President George W. Bush but at odds with a majority of researchers and
AIDS activists at the meeting.
Condoms have been promoted as a front line defense against AIDS by
countries such as Thailand where a campaign to get sex workers to insist
on condoms yielded a more-than-sevenfold reduction in HIV rates in 13 years.
An epidemiologist tracking Asia's emerging epidemics told conference
delegates that additional countries - including China and Bangladesh -
face HIV problems largely driven by prostitution, and that promoting
condoms is best to block further spread.
``I disagree with (Museveni) ... condoms are greatly shortchanged in
Africa as a prevention method,'' said Tim Brown, of the Hawaii-based
think-tank East West Center. ``If you increase condom use by 50 per
cent, I guarantee you that HIV will go down by 50 per cent.''
Uganda has waged a successful battle against the spread of HIV in a rare
success story for sub-Saharan Africa - though some experts say it's
unclear how that success has been achieved.
Museveni said loving relationships based on trust are crucial, and that
``the principle of condoms is not the ultimate solution.''
``In some cultures sexual intercourse is so elaborate that condoms are a
hindrance,'' he told a conference plenary session. ``Let the condom be
used by people who cannot abstain, cannot be faithful, or are estranged.''
Museveni, in a departure from many western proponents of abstinence
before wedlock, said marriage should be flexible, and that sticking with
someone when a relationship turns sour might mean that an unfaithful
partner brings home an infection.
``Ideological monogamy is also part of the problem,'' he said.
Uganda pioneered a strategy that later became known as ``ABC'' or
``Abstinence, Being faithful, and Condoms'' - in that order - a policy
backed by Bush. Critics have said promoting condoms should come first.
Uganda has brought its infection rate down from more than 30 per cent in
the early 1990s to about six per cent of the country's 25 million people
last year.
Many conference delegates criticized the Bush administration's AIDS
funding initiatives for requiring that one-third of the money allotted
for HIV prevention support abstinence-until-marriage programs.
``In an age where five million people are newly infected each year and
women and girls too often do not have the choice to abstain, an
abstinence-until-marriage program is not only irresponsible, it's really
inhumane,'' U.S. Congresswoman Barbara Lee said, presenting a report by
family planning group Population Action International.
Lee, a California Democrat, and other delegates urged more spending to
expand the availability of affordable condoms in the developing world.
Activists at a youth session punctuated those demands with a song to the
tune of Queen's We Will Rock You - with the lyrics, ``We want, we want
protection!''
Some 25 million of the 38 million infected with HIV worldwide are in
sub-Saharan Africa, but the virus is taking root increasingly in Asia,
where 7.6 million are infected.
In Asia, the sex trade has been the main engine behind infections in
countries such as Thailand and Cambodia, where epidemics exploded by the
late 1980s - sparking aggressive responses including campaigns to boost
condom use, said Brown.
Other Asian countries where the proportion of men who visit prostitutes
is lower will face the same problem but more slowly.
``The slowly evolving epidemics of Asia are very dangerous, because they
will grow steadily and silently,'' Brown said, and are less likely to
prompt aggressive government responses.
Brown said China and Bangladesh are potential hotspots because their
rate of condom use is only about 10 per cent.
©Associated Press 2004
CLG is at http://legitgov.org/
SYP is a Yahoo group, at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Speak-Your-Peace/?yguid=186198871
Whether it's because of Kerry or the Democrats policies on Iraq or their
lack of seriously controlling corporate influence, or for any reason,
many people on the left feel in good conscience that they cannot vote
for Kerry. They may or may not vote for Nader, but are sympathetic to
his call that both parties are essentially in bed with corporate
America, and that Kerry's plans for Iraq are not that different from
Bush's.
Because this list is about Peace, many invoke the fact that neither
candidate can be called anti-war. Bush obviously so, and Kerry because
he won't support US total withdrawal from Iraq immediately or in any
case sooner than we want. And that he has supported actually increasing
troop levels there.
Ya got us there.
But one of the reasons, obviously, for being anti-war, as of course we
all are, is to prevent needless human suffering and death.
In that regard, Iraq is a minor player, as I'll illustrate.
So I must ask you which candidate, outside of Iraq, contribute to and
increase human suffering and death, and which will not only not increase
it, but work to reduce it. And also to consider that, again outside of
Iraq, the actual number of deaths--actual and clearly to come-- directly
linked to this administration's policies, vs those that would be linked
to a Democratic presidency..
The other Bush policies that result in increased death and suffering are
well known to readers of this list, but are worth repeating. They mostly
involve sexual and reproductive freedom, and amount to an unprecedented
attack on women. A war, in fact.
I mentioned previously that Bush's reinstatement of the abortion gag
rule for international health and reproductive care agencies in
developing countries has resulted in the deaths of 300,000 women.
Estimates are of 10,000 civilian and military Iraqi deaths, and 1000
Americans. 5000 Americans are seriously wounded, and I don't know the
count of Iraqi wounded, but it surely is in the thousands.
We all consider those to be needless, but so are those of 300,000
women. That's vs 11,000 known dead in Iraq.
The World Aids Conference this week highlights the other front in the
Bush wars, and there are three main factors.
1. Obstructing making anti-viral drugs affordable: We know of Bush's
interests in protecting Big Pharma via the Medicare bill, which is a
megabillion dollar windfall for that industry. The US's pressuring of
poor countries to relinquish rights to make the generic drugs in return
for free trade agreements is consistent with this policy.
2: Promoting abstinence instead of condom use: The administration's
policy is ABC--Abstinence, Being Faithful, and Condoms, in that order of
priority. They believe that condom use promotes promiscuity. (That
policy applied in the US has resulted in increased rates of teenage
pregnancy and STD's.) The US does not make much effort to counter absurd
claims that condoms are ineffective, nor does it want to challenge it's
main ally in this death march, Uganda, which has adopted the Bush ABC
approach.
3. Funding: It's still apparently little known that of the
already-insufficient $15B Bush has promised over the next few years to
fight AIDS in Africa (vs the $200B Bush will ultimately use to fight
Iraqis in Iraq), 1/3 of that money must be devoted solely to abstinence
programs.
I've copies two articles, below, that go into more detail on these
factors, But the end result is millions of unnecessary cases of AIDS in
the developing world, and millions of unnecessary deaths, both of which
not only bring about major suffering but economic devastation as well,
as family breadwinners die off and nations' workforces are decimated.
So let's compare:
Deaths from the Iraq debacle: 11,000 so far
Deaths from Bush's other policies: Millions
All of the policies that contribute to Bush's war on women, sexual and
reproductive freedom will be dismantled or reversed under a Democratic
administration.
So it seems clear and irrefutable that to be truly anti-war, one must do
all one can to defeat Bush. And that means voting for Kerry. The person
who does not vote out of protest over the Democrat's positions on two
war fronts (Iraq and the battle for control of our democracy) thereby
accedes the third front (the war on women and reproductive freedom and
AIDS) to the reactionaries, and rather than preventing needless death
and suffering, actually contributes to them.
Surely that is not the intent of the non-voter, but it is the result.
Please reconsider. The struggle to eliminate armed conflict as anything
but a last resort will continue no matter what, and for the foreseeable
future, regardless of who wins this November. But the number of deaths
from other "wars" will continue in the millions if Bush wins. If
conscience and principle are the guiding forces, how in good conscience
can one contribute to these millions of deaths on the grounds of
protesting thousands of deaths. It may be unseemly to reduce this to a
numbers game, but it surely is one. The greater good needs the
non-voters hearts to listen to these pleas, bite the bullet yet again,
and vote.
Here are the two articles:
*AIDS is "Terrorism'' Richard Gere Tells World AIDS Conference
by Vijay Joshi
The Associated Press/
(Bangkok) France accused the United States of ``blackmail'' tactics to
pressure poor countries into ceding rights to make cheap generic HIV
drugs, while the AIDS conference issued a stirring call Tuesday to get
more medicine to millions of needy in the developing world.
``A vicious terrorist is out there. It is not Osama bin Laden, it is
AIDS,'' Hollywood actor Richard Gere told the conference. ``The biggest
threat to our livelihood, our happiness is AIDS.''
A U.S. official denied the French allegation as ``nonsense,'' while
conference delegates lamented World Health Organization figures that
show only about seven per cent of the six million people in poor
countries who need anti-retroviral treatment are getting it.
``All of us with the power and responsibility to make a difference, can
only hang our heads in shame,'' said Jim Kim, WHO's AIDS director. ``We
know what we need to do. We know prevention and treatment must be
accelerated together.''
Since the last AIDS conference in Barcelona in 2002 generated optimism
about the availability of new anti-retroviral drugs, six million people
have died of AIDS and 10 million have become newly infected.
``By these measures of human life _ the ones that really matter _ we
have failed. And we have failed miserably to do enough in the precious
time that has passed since Barcelona,'' Kim said.
The number of people on treatment has doubled in the developing world to
440,000. UN officials hope to treat three million people there by 2005.
Cost of the drugs is a key issue. European and U.S. pharmaceutical
giants make most of them, protected by patents and costing as much as
$5,000 US ($6,600 Cdn) per person per year.
Some developing countries such as Thailand, India and Brazil are making
cheap generic drugs but not enough to reach everybody. Some 38 million
people are infected with HIV, mostly in poor countries: 25 million in
sub-Saharan Africa and 7.2 million in Asia.
French officials accused the United States of pressuring poor countries
to relinquish rights to make the generic drugs in return for free trade
agreements. In a written statement to the conference, President Jacques
Chirac called that tactic ``tantamount to blackmail.''
France's global ambassador on AIDS, Mireille Guigaz, said Chirac's
comments were not aimed at creating new tensions with the United States
but were ``a question between the United States and developing countries.''
``The United States wants to put pressure on developing countries who
try to stand up for their own industries,'' Guigaz said. ``This is a
problem.''
World Trade Organization rules give developing countries the flexibility
to ignore foreign patents and produce copies of expensive drugs in times
of health crises. All WTO members including the United States have
signed an agreement to respect that clause.
But there is nothing to prevent a country from imposing patent
restrictions in a bilateral trade agreement, such as the one Washington
is negotiating with Thailand.
A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, called the French
allegations ``nonsense,'' and insisted the trade agreements will be
consistent with WTO rules that will allow poor countries to make generic
drugs.
``There really is no issue,'' he said.
Chirac also called on rich nations to raise donations to the 2{-year-old
UN Global Fund aimed primarily at fighting AIDS by $3 billion ($4
billion) per year. Wealthy countries have committed only a fifth of the
$3.5 billion ($4.6 billion) the fund needs for next year, UN officials said.
A group of African protesters interrupted a French minister delivering
Chirac's message to demand more AIDS funding from developed G-8 countries.
``Shame! Shame!'' they chanted in harmony for nearly a minute. Activists
at the venue have also splashed red paint on posters of the G-8 leaders.
*Condoms vs Abstinence Divides World AIDS Conference
by Ian Mader
The Associated Press
Posted: July 12, 2004 11:02 am ET
(Bangkok) AIDS conference delegates were deeply split over the use of
condoms Monday, with Uganda's leader drawing criticism for insisting
they are less effective for HIV prevention than campaigns to promote
abstinence and loving relationships.
President Yoweri Museveni's comments on the second day of the
International AIDS Conference were in line with the policy of U.S.
President George W. Bush but at odds with a majority of researchers and
AIDS activists at the meeting.
Condoms have been promoted as a front line defense against AIDS by
countries such as Thailand where a campaign to get sex workers to insist
on condoms yielded a more-than-sevenfold reduction in HIV rates in 13 years.
An epidemiologist tracking Asia's emerging epidemics told conference
delegates that additional countries - including China and Bangladesh -
face HIV problems largely driven by prostitution, and that promoting
condoms is best to block further spread.
``I disagree with (Museveni) ... condoms are greatly shortchanged in
Africa as a prevention method,'' said Tim Brown, of the Hawaii-based
think-tank East West Center. ``If you increase condom use by 50 per
cent, I guarantee you that HIV will go down by 50 per cent.''
Uganda has waged a successful battle against the spread of HIV in a rare
success story for sub-Saharan Africa - though some experts say it's
unclear how that success has been achieved.
Museveni said loving relationships based on trust are crucial, and that
``the principle of condoms is not the ultimate solution.''
``In some cultures sexual intercourse is so elaborate that condoms are a
hindrance,'' he told a conference plenary session. ``Let the condom be
used by people who cannot abstain, cannot be faithful, or are estranged.''
Museveni, in a departure from many western proponents of abstinence
before wedlock, said marriage should be flexible, and that sticking with
someone when a relationship turns sour might mean that an unfaithful
partner brings home an infection.
``Ideological monogamy is also part of the problem,'' he said.
Uganda pioneered a strategy that later became known as ``ABC'' or
``Abstinence, Being faithful, and Condoms'' - in that order - a policy
backed by Bush. Critics have said promoting condoms should come first.
Uganda has brought its infection rate down from more than 30 per cent in
the early 1990s to about six per cent of the country's 25 million people
last year.
Many conference delegates criticized the Bush administration's AIDS
funding initiatives for requiring that one-third of the money allotted
for HIV prevention support abstinence-until-marriage programs.
``In an age where five million people are newly infected each year and
women and girls too often do not have the choice to abstain, an
abstinence-until-marriage program is not only irresponsible, it's really
inhumane,'' U.S. Congresswoman Barbara Lee said, presenting a report by
family planning group Population Action International.
Lee, a California Democrat, and other delegates urged more spending to
expand the availability of affordable condoms in the developing world.
Activists at a youth session punctuated those demands with a song to the
tune of Queen's We Will Rock You - with the lyrics, ``We want, we want
protection!''
Some 25 million of the 38 million infected with HIV worldwide are in
sub-Saharan Africa, but the virus is taking root increasingly in Asia,
where 7.6 million are infected.
In Asia, the sex trade has been the main engine behind infections in
countries such as Thailand and Cambodia, where epidemics exploded by the
late 1980s - sparking aggressive responses including campaigns to boost
condom use, said Brown.
Other Asian countries where the proportion of men who visit prostitutes
is lower will face the same problem but more slowly.
``The slowly evolving epidemics of Asia are very dangerous, because they
will grow steadily and silently,'' Brown said, and are less likely to
prompt aggressive government responses.
Brown said China and Bangladesh are potential hotspots because their
rate of condom use is only about 10 per cent.
©Associated Press 2004
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)