The magnitude-8.8 earthquake that rocked the west coast of Chile last month was violent enough to move the city of Concepcion at least 10 feet to the west and the capital, Santiago, about 11 inches to the west-southwest, researchers said.

As if that wasn’t amazing enough

NASA scientists have also credited the quake with shifting the Earth’s axis enough to create shorter days. The change is negligible, but still worth noting: Each day should be 1.26 microseconds shorter, according to preliminary calculations. A microsecond is one-millionth of a second.

Holy WOW Batman! I know a microsecond isn’t anything to worry about.. but sweet Jesus, that earthquake was so large it changed time!

It was so violent it moved an entire city 10 ft to the west.

That’s just crazy to think of. It’s something you think of happening during the Permian Period when the world was the super continent of ‘Pangea‘, not in our time.

I’ll tell you something else.. the 2012 predictions don’t look so crazy when you read about the effect of Chilean earthquake do they..?

ok, well maybe they do a little. But it does make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Chile Earthquake Damage Seen From Space (space.com)
• Chilean Earthquake Shortened Earth’s Day (science.slashdot.org)

Those kinds of questions are probably left to a psychiatrist couch. They probably have something to do with a need, going back to high school, to be accepted by what they perceive to be the ‘cool kids’. Why those who are fiscally conservative (and that’s the only reason they are a Republican) can’t just be a Blue-Dog Democrat is beyond me.  So those are questions that just have to remain unanswered.  The one we can now answer  though is more general, more encompassing.

What kind of people are Republicans and what kind of people donate to Republicans?  Well, thanks to the Republican National Committee…we have a list.

stef's diary :: :: Daily Kos

They are people driven by fear, they have extreme negative feelings, hate if you will, against the administration, they are weak and cave into peer pressure, they are brown-nosers who want access, they are ego-driven and most of all they are reactionary.

Ouch. I don’t care who you are, that has to hurt. Then again, most Republicans are probably so ego-driven that they don’t realize that they are in this list, to them this is a list of those ‘other’ Republicans.

I’d ask Mike where he fell in this list that his party has said he is a part of, but he’s so far into the kool-aid that even hearing what his religious leaders really think of him doesn’t matter.  Even  though this is what his own party thinks of him and the other members, he, like the others who are either driven by.. well pick something from  the list.. to turn their backs… Thou shalt have no other God beside the GOP and all.

On a happier note, we know what will be the issues for the coming up elections. Fear and we even know what kind.

stef's diary :: :: Daily Kos

and we got a sneak peek at the signs we can look forward to.

stef's diary :: :: Daily Kos

Fear of Socialism, huh.. that’s original

What’s sad is that there isn’t a single policy issue in the 72 pages of motivational material laid out by the RNC.  But even that is not as sad as not a single Republican noticing that. They are running on hate, peer pressure and reactionary impulses of the easily frightened, what do they need policy for?

The worst part of all is a party that thinks this of it’s members. Why would anyone stand with a group that thinks so little and so negatively of it’s own people?

While others are probably enjoying this issue for their own reasons, I find it insulting and frankly unconscionable, but after seeing everything we have seen since a black man took office.. I can’t deny that in many case the Republicans nailed it. That doesn’t mean I think all of their donors and supporters are like this, not like they obviously do, but you can’t watch Hannity or Beck, listen to Rush or Beck.. support Palin or Bachman and not have a few of those things on the RNC list in your make up. The fact that this kind of ‘Faux news’ and ‘rhetoric’ is so popular only shows the amount of reactionary, ego-driven, easily scared people that have become a part of the Republican party.

One thing is for sure, those must be some damn nice “tchochkes” they give out to donors to make people ignore what their party thinks of them.

**********UPDATE*********

Poltico is reporting that

“Rob Bickhart, the Republican National Committee official behind the embarrassing fundraising presentation reported this week by POLITICO, has been paid at least $370,000 since last June by the RNC in salary and consulting fees

wow..he “makes more than the President of the United States” and as if that wasn’t enough..

Between Bickhart’s salary – he is on pace to earn a little more than $196,000 annually – and his consulting fees – which tallied $240,000 in the second half of last year alone – it appears Bickhart could receive north of $500,000 per year from the RNC

That’s a lot of money given to someone who was only able to come up with a ‘fear’ campaign geared towards the ego-driven, reactionaries.

Here’s a question, I expect Mike and some other Republucans to believe him, but do we really believe that Michael Steele didn’t know how his very own “finance director” was planning to “urge top donors and fundraisers to use “fear” of President Barack Obama to raise cash”? While labeling party-members that way? Isn’t one of Steele’s job fundraiser? If so, would he really not know how the RNC was going to do that?  I don’t know that I buy that.

Not that Steele will lose his job, they need him as the scapegoat if they don’t take back the House and Senate like they have predicted. I do wonder how being labeled these horrible things by their own party will affect fund-raising  and thus their ability to finance the type of  “fear” campaigns they plan on running.

Related articles by Zemanta

• RNC fundraising document: Use fear of Obama’s “socialist” agenda to raise dough (hotair.com)
• Third graders running RNC insult own donors (dailykos.com)
• Still waiting for the RNC’s apology (washingtonmonthly.com)
• The RNC, the Church of the Savvy, and where to make political donations (trueslant.com)

“It’s clear that the American people want health insurance reform.  They aren’t interested in Democratic ideas or Republican ideas.  They’re interested in the best ideas to reduce costs, guarantee choices and ensure the highest quality care.

They’re interested in ideas that will put them back in control of their own health care.

Throughout the debate on health insurance reform, Republican concepts and proposals have been included in legislation.  In fact, hundreds of Republican amendments were adopted during the committee mark-up process.  As a result, both the Senate and the House passed key Republican proposals that are incorporated into the President’s Proposal.”

A lot of GOP ideas… and that’s just Obama’s plan.. hell the Senate plan had 160 GOP amendments..

“Of the 788 amendments filed,67 came from Democrats and 721 from Republicans. (That disparity drew jeers that Republicans were trying to slow things down. Another explanation may be that they offered so many so they could later claim—as they are now, in fact, claiming—that most of their suggestions went unheeded.) Only 197 amendments were passed in the end—36 from Democrats and 161 from Republicans. And of those 161 GOP amendments, Senate Republicans classify 29 as substantive and 132 as technical.”

of course they still voted no..

Why is the only way to bipartisan cooperation is if the Democrats fully embrace the GOP plan?  Shouldn’t the losing party be happy to get a seat at the table.. a seat that gives them almost half of everything they want? Is a bill with 49% (R) input and 51%(D) input not bipartisan enough when the country elected the (D) to decide the majority?

I simply don’t get how the GOP can get away with lying that there’s been no effort to include them. But,even more than that, I can’t understand this demand that  they should have their way in total  if the country is to see any bipartisanship come out of congress.  Is it the prefix ‘Bi’ that throws them? Do they think if they do anything ‘Bi” then they are supporting the homo’s? (disclosure, I love the ‘mo’s.. and this one will back me up on that).

What?

Can you come up with a better reason why the GOP is so anti ‘BI-partisanship” even going so far as to deny it exists when  the bipartisan components are so flamboyantly displayed?

Related articles by Zemanta

• GOP still won’t take ‘yes’ for an answer (washingtonmonthly.com)
• Obama Keeps All-Democratic Health Care Option Open (abcnews.go.com)
• GOP leader Boehner flips out because Obama had temerity to offer a HCR proposal (americablog.com)
• Senate Democrats Still Look to Reconciliation (politicalwire.com)
• to the Sound of Tea Partiers’ Heads Exploding: (brothersjuddblog.com)

Interesting post, EKG. It’s nice to see the left has found a new target for its vitriol now that George W. Bush is out of the picture.

“Mass movements can rise and spread without belief in a God, but never without belief in a devil.”

-Eric Hoffer, THE TRUE BELIEVER (1951)

I’m sure Palin-bashing is a pleasant distraction from President Obama’s serial failures. At the very least, hatred for her has provided the faithful with a rallying point.

I ignored his glossing over of President Obama being a target of vitriol himself and  asked him to enumerate Obama’s ’serial failures’.  His reply was

Failure to get his health care bill and Waxman/Markey passed, even with total Democratic control of Congress; extraordinarily high unemployment rates; a rapidly rising deficit (over and above what was “inherited”); failure to close Guantanamo; take your pick. You can throw in failure to secure the Olympics for Chicago and declining poll numbers too.

as I started to answer him, I realized that these questions and answers deserve more space than the comments section of another blog-post. So I decided to answer them here….

First off, John.. I don’t know you. I don’t know if you are an extreme right winger, I don’t know if you are unbend-able in your opinions, I don’t know if you tow the party line no matter where it takes you. I know you are a friend of Mike’s, but I don’t know if you are as obstinately against looking at things from another perspective as he is or not. Because of this… uncertainty, I am answering with the assumption that you can see a different way of viewing things if shown, or explained.. I’m assuming that you are moderate and not hard-extreme like Mike.

No one likes to be blamed and no one likes their party to be blamed… but no one likes the other party to actually be at fault and share none of the blame and instead pile it all on one side. Of course I am going to place blame with the GOP on many issues, what I will wait to see from your reply to this is if you can see why I would blame them.. maybe not that you agree that they are to blame for alot of it, but maybe..hopefully.. you will admit that they do share, alot, in what is going on today. This is not a ‘well he did it first’ kind of blame. I believe I am laying out a valid argument. I hope to get more than “well you did it first” or the condescending  “LOL” and  “eyerolls” from you in your reply.

Now, on with the blog.

I agree with you John, it is Obama’s failure that Health reform has stagnated. He took it on faith that when Grassley, Snowe and other (R) said they were willing to work on a bi-partisan  solution,they meant it. The rest of us were hearing Grassley call it a ‘death panel’ and how people should fear Obama’s health reform and how he’d never vote for it when he was home on the weekends, but the ‘bubble’ Obama lives in, the same that all Presidents live in, prevented him from hearing that “weekend, rally the base” talk.

I don’t think it was until Lieberman’s extreme, blatant and almost joyful bragging of this ‘partisan ‘obstruction’ that Obama finally wised up. When Lieberman, who just a few years ago ran on his “medcare for 55″ policy and was saying everywhere he could that this was the only solution he would support…immediately turned against it because, as he  said,  ‘well since liberals like my plan, I’m against it now’,  I think the President started seeing what he was up against, and what he was up against was illogical and unreasonable opposition. Do you atleast agree that Lieberman’s flip on his own idea and the reason he gave, prove this illogical and unreasonable position?

Even if you don’t think it was illogical or unreasonable, how can you fault President Obama for not getting things done in that kind of atmosphere? We aren’t talking about anything rational that can be explained or even expected. Republicans  and that includes Lieberman(I), were turning on their own plans, things they had campaigned on, the second after President Obama said “Hey, you know what.. your way does sound better so let’s include it”

Rising deficit

On Jan. 7, 2009, two weeks before Obama took office, the CBO reported the deficit was projected to be $1.2 trillion

At least  you gave blame to Bush for the 1.2 trillion of it..

The CBO – which provides the official estimates of the budgetary impact of legislation and events such as wars and recessions – cites the housing market collapse and the financial market turmoil as the main culprits for the shortfall. The federal government has tried to combat the crisis by so far committing $7.2 trillion in investments and loans primarily to financial institutions.

The current recession “will probably be the longest and the deepest since World War II,” the CBO said. The economic deterioration since September, which was the last time CBO made deficit projections, is the biggest contributor to a sharp decline in tax revenue projections. The CBO expects tax revenue in 2009 to fall by $166 billion, or 6.6%, from the previous year’s collection.

That revenue decline, in turn, is the biggest reason for the worsening outlook over the next decade, said Diane Lim Rogers, chief economist at the Concord Coalition, a deficit watchdog group. “The revenue effect is huge.”

and Obama does own his own share.. But we know that he does not ‘own’ the entire  problem. Why is it then that he is saddled with it? Where was this outcry of ‘budget deficits’ going back 3 years and more? How is this President Obama’s doing? He added to what was there yes, but what was the alternative when he stepped into the Oval on day one? You and I along with McCain and so so many others, know that had he won, McCain would have had to do the same exact things Obama did and would have had the same exact deficit today.. This really isn’t an Obama issue.. we all know this but since it’s going on under his watch-he gets the blame..Ok fine, but then we do have to put blame on the person who did create it.  No, this isn’t a “he did it so I can to” this is a ‘I really had nothing to do with all of it, so stop blaming it all on me argument and that is based in reality, not GOP partisan amnesia and fantasy.

When Obama stepped into office he had to deal with 2 unpaid wars, unpaid tax cuts, a wall street collapse, a housing market collapse, an infrastructure that had been neglected for 10 years. The Bush budget deficit projections never included the war price, when Obama put it into his, like it should have been done in the 1st place.. it didn’t help his numbers at all, but atleast it was honest. Unlike those who are supposed to give us ‘fair and balanced’ news..

During the April 3 edition of Fox News’ America’s Newsroom, on-screen text repeatedly falsely claimed that President Obama’s $3.6 trillion fiscal year 2010 budget is “4x bigger than Bush’s costliest plan.” However, President Bush submitted a $3.1 trillion budget for FY 2009. For FY 2008, Bush submitted a $2.9 trillion budget.

**Link to screen shot**

But Obama deserves the blame for all this hiding, collapse and the unpaid bills that all came due just a few short days before he came into office? Which turned out to be more than anyone.. anyone ever expected as more came to light in the coming days after his inauguration? If you truly feel this blames lays on President Obama’s lap, can you explain how you came to that decision?

High unemployment

Yes.. there is.. but you can’t look at 700,000 jobs lost per month when he got there to 11,000 in December 2009 and call that a failure.. and you can’t look at the numbers we were at, are still at now and expect it to change the next day.. or even the next year, not if you’re also not going to allow a larger stimulus bill/recovery act. So Obama was wrong on his optimism those 1st days that the unemployment numbers wouldn’t rise past a certain level, fine. But is he to blame that the numbers rose to that level or just to blame for not realizing just how bad things were a split second after he got there?

Is it the loss of jobs you blame him for or the bad prediction on jobs lost?

Like it, love it, hate it… when no one else is spending any money… the government has to. For the Government to also stop spending money is a catastrophe on a scale that we’ve never seen before. When no one, banks, businesses,people on the street are spending anything.. the government has to. It has to beg,borrow and yes, steal to spend money in order to get people spending money spending again. McCain,Romney,Huckabee.. Reagan.. all would have had no choice, given the exact same circumstance,  but to do the same. Or they would have watched while the country crumbled into oblivion the way Nero did. The ones like Mike, who argue that no, the government shouldn’t have spent a penny, can’t prove that their way would have been the right way or that we’d be any better off. They can’t prove it because there isn’t a time machine to take us back. So to me this argument is one of pure partisan fantasy. It cannot be proven and yet the GOP swears their way was the correct way. What’s worse is, they make 1/2 the country believe in this unprovable feary-tale. This is where the ‘faith’ and almost ‘religious like’ belief comes into play and it is the cornerstone of a lot of the GOP’s argument..

You can’t prove God doesn’t exist therefore he must be real.

They can’t prove no stimulus or Tarp would have worked better, therefore it must be true.

I call bullshit on both accounts… You want me to believe we shouldn’t have spent the money on the banks and on the recovery act, then prove it to me. Prove to me that not spending it would have worked better, that we would be in a better place, telling me  you are right only because you say so doesn’t work, I am not a believer in your religion I need more proof than that.

By the way, John.. Most of the “YOU” I use are not directed at YOU.. it is a general term used when speaking. I  hope you understand that.

Continuing on..

Failure to secure the Olympics?

Are you kidding? 1/2 the country didn’t want the Olympics

Forty-three percent (43%) of Americans say it’s a bad idea for President Obama to go overseas at this time to help Chicago make its final presentation to the International Olympic Committee

John Boehner blasted the President for trying to get them

“Listen I think it’s a great idea to promote Chicago but he’s the president of the United States, not the mayor of Chicago,” Boehner said. “And the problems we have here at home affect all Americans and that’s where his attention ought to be.”

and every night they were rewarded with their opinions by the likes of the GOP and Fox news telling them how bad it would crush us, how much money it would take, how horrible it would be. How dangerous Chicago is

Yes, Fox news is a factor when they have the massive viewer ratings they have, add them into Rush’s 20 million people a week rating and all of them chiming in on the evil that is the Olympics and why would we get it over a country literally begging to have to it because they want it?

But ok, Obama didn’t get the Olympics… that’s a failure on his part. But is that really something to hold against him? out of everything… is that an issue that truly pisses you off and just sticks in your craw?

Gitmo.

I’ve thought about this. Was Obama the naive one to think he could wave his ‘magic negro’ wand and close Gitmo? Or were we the naive ones to think he could wave his ‘magic negro’ wand and close Gitmo? I think it was both. I think a lot of us listened to his speeches and felt the inspiration and hope in that new era he talked about bringing. I think those of us who didn’t roll our eyes and didn’t decide that election night to do everything we possibly could to make his life hell and oppose everything.. everything he tried, actually believed this was the guy to change Rome back into the days of it’s purity,prosperity,glory and power. We (wrongly) assumed that Washington was also sick on the status quo, that Washington wanted to move on to a better place. That the country didn’t care if it was a Republican or Democrat, man or woman, black or white in office, we just wanted hope and change and not more of the same thing we had had for so long. We were all naive.

President Obama owns the failure to close Gitmo, but he doesn’t have sole ownership. Jesus, trust me I know it’s like a broken record to say the GOP also owns this since they stood in the way and did everything in the power to make sure 1/2 the country was against closing Gitmo and bringing the detainees here..but it is the truth. Through fear mongering and out right lies, GOP congressmen,governors,speakers,pundits went out to their communities , viewers, listeners and said “No way! Not in my yard, these guys are dangerous,these guys can’t be held in our prisons, these guys are super-powers that can only be controlled in Cuba” and we both know, hell we all know this is factually untrue. We are holding terrorists right now on our soil, we are holding terrorist right now in our prisons, we have been holding them for years. We are holding people who are worse! We, as Americans, have some of the most dangerous criminals in the world in our prisons right now. We have brain-eaters,baby-rapers,kidnappers,tortures,sex-slave traffickers ,abusers,bombers,pyromaniacs,serial killers, mass murders.. and we have extremely smart and devious   criminals like Madoff, Abramoff and hunderds of others. But somehow we’re ill equip to incarcerate men who have probably never had running water until they got to our prision camp?

That’s the most bogus of all feary-tales ever told. This idea that America is too weak, too incompetent and unable to imprison anyone is incredulous. If this is your belief, that we are just unable to rise to meet this ‘danger’ can you explain your reasoning to me, explain it without “Because they should be in a military tribunal”

All of this leads to a drop in polls.  You’ve seen the link to the numbers of Fox and just Rush, that doesn’t include Beck and all the other conservative radio. When  they are all, from top to bottom on the same line in the play book, all condemning,ridiculing, mocking, lying,inflating.. all giving out the worst of the wosrt bias,slanted partsian spin.. add that in with an entire section of Congress that doesn’t just stand in the way, but also makes up feary-tales and they believe it, polls are going to decline. How could they not?

And what about that anyway. Isn’t it normal for Presidential numbers to come back down to a reasonable level?

The other day I was reading the comments on a reputable news sources story about this Baradar capture, 75% of them were things like “Well, now that we can’t waterboard the guy the CIA will never get anything out him, Thanks Obama for ruining this country once again!” If the only tool in the CIA arsenal is waterboarding… then we really are fucked. Because it’s the opinion that begs the conclusion that the CIA has always and only water-boarded prisoners to get information and it was just the 2-3 years that they were legally allowed to that the were able to function at full capacity in the light of day. The point I’m making is, somehow people  think that CIA  doesn’t know how to get information from anyone without waterboarding them? Is this not the most insane thing you’ve ever seen? Why is this?Where did they get the idea that this was the only tool the CIA had? If  you can truthfully answer that, they you should be able to understand most, if not all of what it is I’m trying to show you.

Who is to blame for this? Not Obama.. but it is what he must fight against. The problem is you cannot argue with someone with that mindset. Their belief is again, religous like.. and cannot be changed,altered or enlightened.

Finally, I saved the best for last… “even with the democrats in control of congress”.. This is the most used response that I  see for pretty much everything. This idea that just because the Democrats had a filibuster  proof margine and didn’t use and some how it’s their fault is ridiculous . Listen, I’m going to tell you a secret that could get my liberal-card revoked ( )  unlike the GOP, there are different levels of (D). We don’t all think with one brain, we don’t all follow the leader like a flock of birds, that is what makes us ‘liberal’ or the favorite slam of the GOP, ‘radical’ . We think for ourselves and decide accordingly and not according to party/leader doctrine. We are just not that  ‘religious-like’ in our faith and the following of party ‘dogma’. There are Democrats who don’t believe in abortion, there are some like me who believe in the death penalty and guns rights. To condem anyone.. any party  for not just towing the party-line is asinine  and to blindly follow the party-line used to be a bad thing.. but today, with the entire GOP saying “You can’t even get your party to all vote the same way and use that fillibuster proof majority” is so exquisitely  sad, but still not as sad  wanting and forcing any one party to act that way. I just can’t believe anyone, anywhere would want and encourage people to just blindly vote all (D) or all (R) depending on their party and then ridcule and condem anyone when they didn’t.

Besides any of that, this isn’t a one party system, the other side is supposed to help govern also!

This excuse…“Hey, you guys control congress.. it’s not our fault” and those using it are right though, the problem is the next thing they say to their audience,readers,constituents… and the next thing is invariably

“The Democrats need to listen to the country and work bi-partisanly”

In one hand there is a dare to use the majority, in the other.. a crying to all who will listen that if we don’t do something…have rallies, write letters, send in campaign money.. the Democrats will use their majority. It’s insane! They are literally damned  for not using it by the GOP and some of their own and damned  if the think about using it.

So John, what would you have them do? Which ‘evil’ do the Democrats pick?  Do they follow in the last administrations path and issue Executive Orders, recess appointements, signing statements and push through everything the President says to push through no matter the consequence and just hope that the GOP won’t cry about it too much? Do they forget their own values and beliefs and just vote (D) all the way down the ballot like the GOP does and is encouraging, or really, daring them to do? What is your solution to this? When one party refuses to even come to the table don’t they force the other party to act as a single mind? Force the other party to do it all on their own, with their own philosophies?

Maybe the GOP is comfortable using a single-mind, but this is not and has never been the “Democratic” (party or poltical system.) way..

The GOP has blanketed the world with this falsehood that they want bi-partsanship on every issue, and yet just last week when invited to a health care summit, an ‘exachange of ideas’.. quite a few high ranking GOP’ers said they might be willing to come to the table…. just come to the table now, not vote a certain way or concede a certain point,  but they might show up to the President’s bipartisan effort for health reform meeting but only if the  Democrats dropped their health reform idea and adopted the GOP version. Eric Cantor flat out said that the “only way to bipartisan cooperation is if the Democrats fully embrace the GOP plan!” What? How is that bipartisan? How is that anything other than a great big “Screw you, It’s my way or no way and that’s the only bipartisan I agree with.. do it yourself if you don’t like it! Just remember I will blame you for doing it yourself if you do”

You cannot, as the losing party give that kind of demand.. that kind of close-fist demand.. and then claim you are the bipartisan party, yet they do, and no one calls them on it.  So I ask you once again, is this really an OBama failure and where is any ire at the party that is actually holding bipartsianship hostage?

To me President Obama failures are..

He has moved away from a public option. He promised me a public option and I believed him. He has let the message on this and so many other issues get away from him. He had the advantage and he expected to find ‘Statesmen’  and ‘Adults’ in congress who wouldn’t bastardize everything they could to score a political point and while he’s finally decided to come out swingng and get the truth out.. he’s wasted vaulable time and his ‘capitol’ in the interim.

I see it as a failure that he is still giving contracts to the likes of Blackwater and doing it even though we know they are the evil of all evil. Why do we need to privately fund any war with a bunch of mercenaries? Why do we need them for private security? Why can’t we use the money and build up our military and pay our troops more? Atleast they have rules,laws and codes they must follow. Blackwater and the likes do things with our money and in our names that I do not think the majoirty of us want done in our name. I do not agree at all with their continued government funding. Bring the military back to do the jobs in our name with the honor and integrity that they will bring with them.

I see President  Obama’s lack of authority with Wall Street as another failure. He needs to force those CEO’s to either get their sweet-ass to the proverbial ‘come to Jesus’ meeting.. or risk immediate stripping of the ‘handout, even if that means selling off part of the company to get back the money given to them. I don’t know who these people think they are, but when the President of the United States tells you to come to a meeting.. your sorry ‘hand-out-taking’ ass better get there before the ink is dry on the invitations. I don’t care if it was ‘foggy’ or not, take the damn train.

I don’t care about GOP crying that “OBama hates capitalism .. Obama is an enemy to buisness” because it’s  a load of crap, what we had leading up to this meltdown was not capitalism .. it was rape pure and simple. It’s time Obama starts acting like the President he is and do something about these guys.

And finally.. He has failed at installing a new way of doing it, he has failed at starting a new era of bi-partsianship.  He hasn’t failed for the lack of trying, he’s failed for the lack of realism. He believed he could change the climate of hate that is the US congress. Not a single congressman from either house or either party can say or do anything without checking a poll 1st. They are not there to govern like Obama is, they are there for the power and the paycheck. It is President Obama’s failure to not see this that irks me the most. It is his failure to not see that, no matter which way he goes the entire Right side will be against him as proven time and time again, even by adopting their own policies.. they will go against him. They will and have cut off their noses to spite their face.

President Obama is already lambasted as a socialist even when he’s cut taxes and wasn’t the one to create the largest ’socialist program’ in a generation or more. Well,  if they are going to call him one anyway, then why not use that and go more radical on his ideas. We just proved a lot of the country is pro-radical change, even our supreme court is. So it is a failure on Obama’s part not to use the gift he’s been given by the Right. He will be slaughtered and lied about by them no matter what he does.. so he might as well do as he wants.

John, thank you for your comments.. I hope I have addressed them in a way that maybe didn’t change your mind.. but atleast gave you a different point of view and a way to look at it

Related articles by Zemanta

• GOP hypocrisy turns hilarious (dailykos.com)
• Huge 2009 Budget Deficit — Just One More Conservative Failure (seeingtheforest.com)
• Obama Speech Confronts GOP on Bad Politics, Hypocrisy (time.com)

huffingtonpost

For $549 a plate,you’d think they could get the old girl some index cards.. I mean sure, she or any GOP member for that matter can’t ever use a teleprompter again after all of their mocking of  Obama’s admitted overuse of them, but are they  really back to 7th grade cheating?

huffingtonpost

ok, here’s the thing… you can’t come out on stage and  one of the 1st things you do is mock the President’s  use of teleprompters  when you’ve got freaking crib-notes written on your hand..  a cheat sheet  for your one-on-one Q & A session. Not if your honest anyway.

We’re past hypocrisy when you do this kind of thing and well into ridiculous and petty!  Not that I mind ridiculous or petty,  it’s the mocking of your betters that bothers me. While I’m at it, what kind of ‘grass-root’ movement charges so much to get into their convention that only the elite of the cream of the crop can get into the convention. $549 a plate? In this economy? If it’s truly as Sarah put it, and not about the money, then why is she making $100,000 off the speech that would cost her ‘real American’ family of four $1400 to get in? That’s just to get in the door, that doesn’t include the flight to get there, or the gas to drive or food and lodging.

Do you think  she understands the irony of this ‘let them eat cake’ atmosphere she’s promoting while calling for another revolution?

Yeah,me either.

As for this idea that these people are the model of conservative? Is it that the Tea-party movement doesn’t care about the truth or that they don’t understand it? While Governor, Palin not only took that money for her bridge to nowhere but she forced oil companies to pay each resident of the state a stipend each year. Don’t get me wrong, I agree with this policy, but since my counter-part calls me a socialist, I would be in agreement with a socialist policy like taking money from private companies and spreading it to the populist. But can you really be a conservative when you take such huge amounts of money from the government  and from the private sector and spread it around to people who didn’t earn it?

If you’re Sarah Palin or a Tea-party member, the answer is yes.  It’s those other socialists and pork-spenders that they don’t like.. the ones with (D) after their name, the ones who elected a black man, the one who is a black man. Oh yeah, that’s something else we learned this weekend, finally the Tea-party movement declared their belief..

[Tom Tancredo]...former Colorado congressman told the first National Tea Party Convention in Nashville this weekend, where he lathered up the crowd with a speech that offered this reason for Obama’s election: “We do not have a civics, literacy test before people can vote in this country.”

Obama was elected, Tancredo said, because of “people who could not even spell the word ‘vote’ or say it in English.”

That’s right, we don’t have literacy tests anymore..you know the tests that kept blacks from voting. But hey, this is a good thing, there is no reason to hide behind a hood anymore Tancredo has de-robed the party and frankly I’m happy for them. think about it, it must be difficult to hide behind your hate that way for fear that if you let it out, people will know you really are racist. From the sounds of the cheers and applause, those waiting for Sarah Palin and listening to Tancredo are also glad to finally drop their mask!

I guess it’s just part and parcel of what we have to look forward to, an entire section of the country who believe Palin is more equipped to run this country over the likes of not just President Obama, but Hilary Clinton and *gasp* John McCain.  I guess as long as she has her cheat-sheet written on the palm of her hand, we’ll be safe when Putin ‘rears his head’.

What do you think the Tea-party group will do when they realize that  she is not like them and she is taking money out of their childrens mouths to not be like them?  It is about the money and fame for her, if it wasn’t she would have donated the money she ‘laundered’ through her PAC back to the Tea-Party cause.  How much more proof do you need in order to believe  she’s as phony as a $3 bill and as sincere as a prostitute. People, she used the money donated to her PAC to buy her own books. On the face of it that’s not to horrible, but when you look at how she received royalties for all those bought and paid for books.. you wonder which mob-boss taught her how to launder money so well. This isn’t the liberal media coming after her for taking donations to the RNC and using it to buy clothes for her and her family, this is a pretty shitty deal she’s pulling on her donors. It’s no wonder some Tea-party member were worried about ‘profiteering’ and the ’scammy’ feeling they were getting from this convention Sarah was headlining. These people are out of work and hurting, her answer is to use their much needed money to buy her book and since she can’t just out right keep their donations,  this is the 2nd best thing.

I feel bad for the real  tea-party member who was sucked into this abyss. I do believe there are people out there who really do want less government spending and intrusion. I believe that for the 1st time in their lives, after mocking the ‘left’ for all of the grass-root protesting, they finally got up their own moxie and listened to the hoopla Foxnews was spewing to  them and backed the party that they thought was the real deal. These people are about to be disillusion more than they ever were before and for them I am sorry. I only hope they wise up to the scammy-ness of where their party is going. I know these people don’t like the ‘Harvard educated’ elite, and the idea of a Nobel being awarded to a President is akin to treason,  but is this really the person you want at the next G8  summit?

HuffingtonPost asks 2 great questions on this cheating issue..

This would mean:

A) That she knew the questions beforehand and the whole thing was a farce. (Likely.)

and

B) That she still couldn’t answer the previously agreed-upon questions without a little extra help.

I don’t know, but I don’t like either answer. One proves she’s a hack and not only does she and the promoters of the convention know it but they’re doing everything in their power to make you sure never find out, and the other proves she’s an idiot. Regardless of the spin, neither prove she’s capable of commenting on politics, much less running a country.

At the end of the day the ‘true believers’ will not believe even what their eyes show them and their ears tell them. Ironically it was not us Obama-phytes who drank the koolaid, it is the Palin/Tea Party supporters.  Obama-phytes didn’t believe he was a bastard son who was really born in Africa, because we didn’t we were called pod-people, I should know, I called them that.  But anyone who says Sarah Palin is a real Conservative, is really smart, is really capable of running this country over the likes of even John McCain..stay away from them because that is your pod-person. That is the Jim Jones follower and like those poor souls, these are just as dangerous. They will do everything in their power to elect this woman to the Presidency of the United States even if it’s forcing her poison down throats of every “real” American and real conservative in this country. I don’t believe all members of the Tea-party movement are as race-hating as those who Sarah Palin read her hand to, but if the ones who aren’t don’t stand up and renounce her and this kind of call for the good old days of Jim Crow, they might as well be.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Tea Party movement: five highlights (newstatesman.com)
• Stefan Sirucek: Did Palin Use Crib Notes in her Tea Party Q&A? (huffingtonpost.com)
• Tom Tancredo to Tea Partiers: ‘Thank God John McCain Lost’ (blogs.wsj.com)
• Tancredo says Obama won because we lack a ‘literacy test before people can vote in this country.’ (thinkprogress.org)
• Tandredo Sets Tone For Tea Party Convention: People Who Can’t Speak English Put Socialist In White House (alan.com)
• Tea Bagger Tancredo Yearns for Return of Jim Crow-Era ‘Literacy Tests’ at Polling Place (bradblog.com)

Washington (CNN) — Senior Obama administration officials revealed late Tuesday they’ve secretly gained the cooperation of family members of Umar Farouk AbdulMutallab to help get the Christmas Day airline bomb suspect talking.
The cooperation effort has led to actionable intelligence that could help prevent terror attempts on U.S. soil, the senior officials said.

No torture, no waterboard,no stress positions,no violation of human rights or our own laws… and he’s actually talking and without a military tribunal to boot!

The senior administration officials said that since AbdulMutallab began talking to investigation again last week, he has been cooperating on a daily basis. The officials added the information gained from the interrogations has been disseminated throughout the intelligence community.

One of the senior Obama officials, who bluntly said the Republican attacks have “frustrated the hell out of me,” asserted that gaining the trust of the family was the best way to handle the case and helped the administration gain valuable intelligence from the suspect, who is believed to have ties to an al Qaeda affiliate in Yemen.

“It could be used to disrupt other attacks,” one of the senior Obama officials said of the intelligence gleaned from AbdulMutallab in the interrogations, who added the president has been getting regular updates on what the suspect has been revealing.

The Republican response so far is to complain that President Obama has wasted these 6 weeks, but let’s have some truth for once shall we…

U.S. military teams and intelligence agencies are deeply involved in secret joint operations with Yemeni troops who in the past six weeks have killed scores of people, among them six of 15 top leaders of a regional al-Qaeda affiliate, according to senior administration officials.

The operations, approved by President Obama and begun six weeks ago, involve several dozen troops from the U.S. military’s clandestine Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), whose main mission is tracking and killing suspected terrorists. The American advisers do not take part in raids in Yemen, but help plan missions, develop tactics and provide weapons and munitions. Highly sensitive intelligence is being shared with the Yemeni forces, including electronic and video surveillance, as well as three-dimensional terrain maps and detailed analysis of the al-Qaeda network.

I know some were worried about AbdulMutallab being mirandized and like John McCain, were trying to attack for Eric Holder for his decision and I guess prosecute him for treason(ok, not the treason part-or are they) but it looks like they can put those feary-tales to bed.

“It is also my understanding that Mr. Abdulmutallab has provided valuable information. Is that correct?” Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein asked.

“Yes,” Mueller replied.

Mueller then confirmed that the interrogation has continued despite the fact that the suspect had been advised of his right to have a lawyer and remain silent.

Now this is something I also found to be of interest

Since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, politicians and the courts have wrangled with the thorny question of how to treat suspected terrorists. The Supreme Court has not weighed in on whether the government has the right to hold a civilian as a military prisoner, and both times it appeared the court would get the chance to decide, President George W. Bush opted instead to bring the cases in civilian criminal courts

George Bush was hard on terror; he, Dick Cheney and those like them are the only ones who can keep us safe. President Obama, following their plan makes us look weak to our enemies though and thus makes us more vulnerable to attacks. How does that work?

The fact is we have a 100% success rate in trying terrorists in civilian court and as far as I know the only ones walking around and back to their old tricks, are walking around because Dick Cheney released them! We’ve killed or captured more terrorist leaders under Obama’s 1st year than we did in the last year of Bush. We’ve had more ‘drone-launched missile strikes’ in President Obama’s 1st year than in Bush’s last 3 years. We are spending more money to “expand secretive Special Operations units, deploy more unmanned aerial drones” , but somehow it’s not good enough because President OBama doesn’t torture, because he doesn’t throw everyone into a military tribunal, because he  treats people as the laws this country was founded on tell him to treat people, so  he is still weak on terrorism. If anything, the increased drones attacks,increased terrorist casualties, successful interrogation of a  terrorist should prove that not only is he not weak on terrorism, but that he’s doing something pretty right.

Alas… like the elusive Osama Bin Laden tape that surfaces only after some major event has happened, I expect a carefully worded press release from the most elusive of all creatures, Dick Cheney. Fox news and the conservative blogosphere need something to come after Mr. Obama on since he ate them for lunch at the GOP retreat last week, coupled with this new information on the lack of torturing actually working and Cheney is probably being roused from his slumber now.

I don’t expect anyone from  the right to commend the President for a job well done,that would be ridiculous and let’s face it, the halfhearted attempt would come out more condescending than anything else. The GOP for all it’s glory has painted themselves into a corner. In their quest to dismiss this President, they have painted him as a weak, incompetent, unintelligent, lying, dangerous,socialistic,Nazi-like, thief looking to steal your money to give it to the poor and your guns to give them to the Muslims.  I’m sure there is something to nit-pick about and if not, they can take a page out of a GOP strategists memo and just lie, but I thought this was a pretty good job of getting the guy to talk without having to drown him 1st.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Bomb suspect said to be talking with federal agents (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• U.S. military teams, intelligence deeply involved in aiding Yemen on strikes (starting-points.blogspot.com)
• U.S.: Airline terror suspect cooperating (msnbc.msn.com)
• Quote of the Day (washingtonmonthly.com)

But who are these gigantic corporate oligarchs bent on buying and selling Congressmen like shares of penny stocks?  In this case, the corporate behemoth was Citizens United.   “CZ” as we hip kool kids like to inappropriately nickname everything, is an non profit conservative organization set up to distribute films and documentaries to promote conservative causes.  In this case, they intended to buy time to air their film, Hillary: The Movie on DirectTV.  The Federal Elections Commission found that running the movie and commercials for the movie was considered “electioneering” and prohibited both the commercials and the movie itself from being shown.

Now, I’m not some big city lawyer, just a simple country boy blessed with the common sense that God has seen fit to bestow upon all of his non-attorney children, so really that is already more information I need to know to decide in which direction to go on this decision.

The government banned a movie.

That really should be all that needs to be said about this.

Sadly though, in times like these, when the word freedom is generally interpreted to mean getting something for free, the plain language of the First Amendment…

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

…just doesn’t seem to be a good enough argument anymore.

Have we really slipped so far off our moorings that a law that allows the government to ban books if they have a hint of political advocacy within a certain time frame to a federal election is supported by much of the country?

My first amendment rights are fully protected if I want to create “art” of a crucifix in piss, or make a sculpture of Mary out of shit.  Why then, that calls for a NEA grant!  But political speech, which was the very core of the Founders intent in crafting the 1^st amendment in the first place, should be regulated and banned?

I can’t imagine these same liberals would have felt that justice was being served if the FEC had banned Fahrenheit 911 from being shown in the 60 days leading up to the 2004 general election.  Apparently some right leaning legal group never thought of it, but up until the overturning of much of McCain–Feingold last week, that would have been perfectly legal to do.

A further irony is that McCain-Feingold explicitly exempts media corporations, such as major newspapers and broadcast companies.  These are corporations after all.  However specifically excluding them from McCain-Feingold is telling in itself.  Is it the government’s position that if they were not specifically excluded from the law, the FEC could regulate the coverage of media companies?  That’s why the canard about corporations being treated as people ring false to me.  The founders clearly didn’t intend that a newspaper owned as a joint stock company had no right to publish. That makes free expression a privilege granted by the government, not a right.  Equally ridiculous, if the Bill of Rights doesn’t apply to corporations, does that mean the police require no warrant to search a company building?  Can a local government forbid a company from allowing prayer breakfasts on its premises?  Wouldn’t want a corporation treated like a person with the right to worship would we?

Although I think ekg’s vision of a return to the draft, banning of abortion, and evolution tossed out of the classroom in favor of the Old Testament is off the wall wacky, I can’t really predict what the long term results of this decision will be on the body politic. I don’t know that we will like the results.  However I know that I have to default to freedom.  This is not “hiding behind the 1st Amendment” or judicial activism, but a return to upholding the literal meaning of the 1st Amendment.

Liberals love to toss Ben Franklin’s warning of choosing security over liberty around as if they were playing catch in the backyard, but I’ve come to realize that they don’t really know what that means.  They will gladly toss freedom of speech over the side of the ship of state if they think they can accrue some short term political benefit from it. 

“Liberals” sure have changed.

I am sad that we’ve gone so far down the road away from liberty that this argument even has to be made.  Forty years ago, a liberal would have defined himself by how supportive he was of free expression.  No more.  Now he merely defines himself by what he hates.

Now that the Supreme Court has made ‘whoring’ legal, we can all look around at the last time our Government wasn’t bought and paid for by big business.  Sure, there have always been politicians in the pockets of these groups  but that’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about the politician that is specifically sponsored by some interest group like a  NASCAR driver or what can now be called, the “Future of politics in this country”.

Imagine, Big Tobacco gets tired of the FDA restrictions and bad publicity they’ve gotten.. what to do- what to do.. Now they have the answer, they hire X amount of politicians and pay for all the attacks ads and smearing propagandist movies  that they can and then run them 24/7 on every channel and in every paper they can find in the politicians area all the way up to election.. and on election day.. Viola! Instant game changer, now they have X amount of paid senators who will work to change the laws against tobacco so they can start to rehabilitation their selves with the new “Pro-Smoking” TV spots they will be allowed to run after their candidates trim a few laws in their favor.  If that doesn’t work? Hell, they’ll just buy  more candidates in the next election.

The 1st thing we’ll see to go are the Unions. That of course makes the GOP happy! In fact this decision has them squirming for joy right now, they are salivating and as we speak placing “For Sale” signs on their office doors. This is a republicans wet-dream and at 1st they will be extremely happy with their new toy. Eventually though they will come to find out what all whores find out, it’s not always easy fucking for money… sometimes you’re forced to do things with that creepy guy who smells bad and afterward you just feel dirty and used inside. But guess what? By that time it’s too late, even the GOP will be disillusioned when they realize Pandora’s box is opened and looking them in the eye, it’s just a shame they won’t be able to do anything about it.

We all know there are some people out there who can be bought for any price so what happens when that person is given unlimited funds to win an election? I’ll give you a hint: Sarah Palin Wins Presidential Election.  As Alan Grayson said it will no longer be the senator from Iowa, it will now be the Senator from Exxon-Mobile.

So what can we look forward to and why is this a bad thing? Well for starters, after the Unions go then any Wall Street reform will be out the door as well and if we thought Wall Street was getting away with murder before… you ain’t seen nothing yet.  Think about it, before… groups like AIG or Bank of America were barred from spending too much money to directly influence an election.. but now the money we gave them to get back on their feet can go towards electing a Congressman who doesn’t believe Wall Street should have to pay anything back, or start loaning any money again, or  have any restrictions,checks or balances in any way..What’s that you say? You don’t like that idea? Well sorry my friend, you are just a single voter with limited funds.. AIG and BOA are now more important voters with billions to spend electing their chosen candidate. C’mon, do you really think your $25 dollar donation can compete with their $25 million? Of course  it can’t  so that means candidates will no longer listen to their constituents, they won’t have to.. they only have to listen to and help the interests of the big corporation who funded their campaign.

How does this change things? Ohh count the ways..

EPA? HA! Corporation can now buy candidates to lessens dumping restrictions.. the money they save from the loosened restriction can go towards buying more politicians.

FDA? Hey, hormone infused animals, irradiated produce and weeding out the ‘downer cows’ from the healthy ones all effect the bottom line.. In the ‘New world’  paid-for politicians can change FDA guidelines to help these companies and their bottom line. Not that their bottom line and our health go hand in hand and in fact they are mostly on opposite sides of the room, but look.. your $25 donation just doesn’t go as far as it used to.

New and untested drugs going on the market whenever the Big Pharma wants is another gift that’s been bestowed upon us by the infinite wisdom of John Roberts, Antonin Scalia,Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Anthony Kennedy.

Global warming Out! Pollution control out! Toxic dumping Out! Bad meat recall Out! Dangerous toy recall Out! Bad tires out!  Low cost housing Out! All social programs Out! Abortion and divorce Out! Reducing age limits on cigarettes and alcohol In! Reinstating the draft In! Drilling and strip mining In! Anti-trust laws Out! Monopolies In! Separation of Church and State Out! No prayers in school Out! Evolution in class rooms Out! Creationism In! Mom and Pop small town stores Out! Wal-mart on every corner In! Untested drugs In! Lawsuits against drug companies for knowingly testing unsafe material on the population Out! Reduction or banishment of minimum wage In! Low to no taxes on the rich and business In! Taxation without representation In! The middle class Out!

The list is endless, anything..anything any big corporation or special interest wants is now up for sale. The insurance conglomerates admitted to spending millions on ads to disprove the need for health reform. $20 million from 6 of the largest health insurers  was quietly being pumped  into third-party television ads aimed at killing or significantly modifying the major health reform bills moving through Congress. Now add another $100 million to buy a few politicians and what do you think the health debate will look like then? I see it as a war, a war over which Congressman can give the most to whichever insurance company pays the best. We the people? I laugh.. We don’t exit anymore.. how can we, we are single entities with limited funds going against massive blocks whose primary goal is not the best interest of the common man, but the best interest of the share-holder, and if buying a few dozen school board superintendents,mayors,governors,Congressmen, Judges  and a President increases the bottom line..then the CEO and Board members are required by law to do it. Now they have the pathway to accomplish it.

Hyperbolic fiction? Does it really matter now? You can’t do anything to change it even if this isn’t dooms-day, conspiracy, fiction.. do you get that part yet? It doesn’t matter anymore, the country can be bought and paid for by big business and interest groups and they have more money than you so there’s no stopping it now.  Think about this, Presidents select Supreme Court Justices, if Big Tobacco gets their paid-for President and Congress in.. they also get their Supreme Court Justice nominated.

According to the New York Times, during the last election cycled, the Fortune 100 companies alone had combined revenues of $13 trillion and profits of $605 billion. A third of the Senate is up for reelection every two years. Let’s say the largest corporations give an average of $10 million to each Senatorial Candidate. (Of course, to sway an election, it would be more in big states like New York, Texas and California, and less in small states Wyoming, Montana and Rhode Island.) That would be $3.3-$3.4 billion every two years. Let’s say they spent another $4 billion on the Presidential election every 4 years or an average of another $1 billion a year.

For less than 1% of their profits, the 100 largest corporations would likely be able to control the Senate and the Presidency, and through that, the Supreme Court. (This doesn’t even count contributions from the next 400 companies in the Fortune 500, or from slightly smaller corporations.) Good luck passing legislation to limit greenhouse gases, regulate insurance companies, or to reign in the power of the big banks.

So you see, it doesn’t matter if this is fictional bullshit or the reality waiting for us… nothing can be done to stop it from happening. It’s now trust we are to give companies like Big Tobacco,Big Oil, Big Pharma,Wall Street, Big Insurance and we all know they would never do a thing to harm us, they would never screw the public to better their bottom line and bonus’, would they…

We had a good run while it lasted.. But now? Well, corporatist dystopia here we come.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Supreme Court’s Gift To The Chamber of Commerce, Big Oil (huffingtonpost.com)
• The Supreme Court’s gift to big business (money.cnn.com)
• Get ready for even more bought elections (laobserved.com)
• SCOTUS: America For Sale To Highest Bidder (crooksandliars.com)
• US Supreme Court abolishes political funding restrictions (telegraph.co.uk)
• SCOTUS Overturns Ban on Corporate Political Expenditures (dailykos.com)
• Testing time, pray for us: CJP – >The Nation (teabreak.pk)

Christmas Day found my mother in law insisting that we all go to the movies to see Avatar; specifically the IMAX 3D version, but the IMAX Theater was all the way across town… whahh….  I was not averse to seeing the movie, far from it.  It was a movie I was waiting for.  But I would have been happy to see just the regular movie version much closer to where I live.

But… I would have been wrong.  Seeing that movie, in IMAX and 3D, is the only way to see it.  The movie’s raison d’etre is after all, visuals.  That’s the big selling point; something that looks fantastic on screen that you’ve never seen before.  On that basis, the movie fulfilled the hype.  The visuals are lush, fantastic, and certainly something much beyond what I’m used to seeing on the screen. It provides the perfect beauty of a painting with the realism of … well real life.  The visuals of the movie are art, in and of itself.

As for the story… well if you’ve already seen the movie, you know it.  In fact, if you haven’t seen the movie, you still know it.  It’s pulled intact from Hollywood’s grab bag of twenty or thirty standard movie plots.  If you’ve seen any Hollywood movies in your life time, then you’ve already seen this one.  Dances with Aliens is a pretty succinct description.  But good story telling is good story telling.  I enjoyed the movie immensely even knowing how the story would play out.  Knowing the formula doesn’t necessarily ruin a movie for me.  The fun is the journey.

But I didn’t see much more than that.  Good popcorn type fun, but others saw much more into the movie than I did.  Science Fiction author Steven Barnes, who wrote about the movie at the author’s website, had a more unique view of the movie, If Spike Lee had directed Avatar?  Although that seems to be a subject ripe for a Mad Magazine satire, to Barnes it brought up issues of light skinned Na’vi lording over the darker blue skinned ones.  I didn’t even notice if there were various shades of blue among the alien Na’vi.  My view of a Spike Lee directed Avatar would have included the Na’vi calling each other “motherfucker” a lot and including an ending that would be totally incomprehensible to me.

But what really struck me was a finally throw away line at the end of the piece:

Oh…and if Spike had directed Avatar, there would have been at least one black male character to identify with. Say…the other Avatar scientist? Maybe one of the support staff?

What made me marvel a bit at this line is that after watching the movie, I never realized nor had it occurred to me that there were no black characters in the film.  True Zoe Saldana was one of the major characters of the film, but she was in blueface for the entire film so her film character was that of the alien Neytiri.  Anyway, she’s Dominican so it’s unclear to me if she regards herself as Hispanic or as Black.  That’s a whole nuther kettle of fish.

But Barnes comment was a reminder to me of how on a day to day basis that white people are isolated from race.  In America, we live in a white world.  If you’re white in the US, you just don’t have to think about race that much.  If I turn on the TV, I don’t worry about finding someone on the screen to identify with.  Firstly, because there is no one like me, and secondly, being able to live so removed from race and racial issues, the odds are against me not finding a “character to identify with.”  For Barnes, the issue is probably in his face on an almost daily basis.

Thanks to the television of Norman Lear, I grew up watching shows with predominately black casts, such as The Jefferson’s, Sanford and Son, and Good Times.  At least as a child, I had no problem identifying with the characters.  But television, like me, grew up.  Television expanded from 4 or 5 channels in a metropolitan area to 30, 40, then 70 or more channels on cable television, not counting digital channels.  Thirty or forty years ago, everyone, black and white, watched the same shows.  Now both the television and movie audience is much more segregated.  There is a channel for every taste, and ethnic and racial group.  We are gaining in choice, but we are clearly losing something else.  Perhaps a common popular culture?

But maybe, just maybe, there was more to James Cameron’s vision than a casting oversight.  Among the “human” cast, actors Dileep Rao (Dr. Max Patel), Sigourney Weaver (Grace Augustine), and Michelle Rodriguez (Judy Chacon) were the only “good guys” in the film.  Other than Sam Worthington’s Jake Sully, all of the “white” males were bad guys.  Women and Asians were the good guys.  Given Cameron’s politics, that was probably intentional.  It rather fits into the story and Cameron’s worldview.  Maybe Barnes should be glad that black males were left off this list, although in a broader sense, he may have brought up a good point.  One that I would never have noticed if it hadn’t been pointed out to me.

Most stories, but particularly in science fiction, require a sympathetic character that we need to identify with in order to be drawn into the story and to introduce whatever strange world we are being introduced to.  But how much does that sympathetic character need to be like us in order for us to really empathize with him or her?  Do they have to have the same skin tone, the same sex?  And if the movie doesn’t provide that, is it a slap in the face to the viewers who don’t look like our protagonist? 

But I didn’t notice those things watching the film, but I’m pretty sure that if I had walked into that theater and every character had been black, I would have noticed.  The question I can’t answer is, would I have felt as excluded by that theoretical movie as Steven Barnes did from Avatar?

Maybe Spike Lee should take a crack at a remake…

Related articles by Zemanta

• Review: Powerful ‘Avatar’ Stuns the Eye, Seduces the Heart (wired.com)

As a longtime fan of the Stargate franchise, I was looking forward to the new entry in to the Stargate television family, Stargate Universe.  Although I have to admit I was a bit cautious in my expectations.  The Stargate shows, Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis, have been in my opinion damn near perfect science fiction TV.  The premise, that aliens thousands of years ago had kidnapped humans from Earth and settled them all over the galaxy as slaves via a Stargate, a massive ring that allows instantaneous travel between solar systems, allows just about any type of potential science fiction plot device.  In one episode the heroes could be halfway across the galaxy liberating humans from an evil alien overlord; in the next they could be downtown in Colorado Springs, getting a pizza.  Or sometimes in the same episode.  Humor and current pop culture references kept the show anchored in the here and now, while at the same time allowing the traditional action adventure in the stars.  Earth and the US Air Force manage to beat technologically superior aliens time and again.  Go us!

But when I first heard the premise of the show; humans trapped on an Ancient spaceship halfway across the universe, my first instinct was, “Uh oh, this is going to be Stargate’s Voyager.  Voyager was the second to last in the Star Trek shows, which has a starship from the Star Trek Federation… halfway across the galaxy.  The purpose was to take advantage of the Star Trek franchise but at the same time pull away from the usual cast of situations and aliens, which had started to grow stale.  It was a concept that had only meager success, and showed the franchise was on life support, finally flat lining during Star Trek Enterprise.

But the producers had promised an “edgier” Stargate than the previous incarnations.  Edgier?  Full frontual, or a FX-like use of profanity?  But setting down to watch the premiere episode I was afraid edgier would merely mean the same thing as it meant to the makers of Heroes; cut the lights off and film in the dark.  Note to TV producers: noir doesn’t mean filming without klieg lights.  At this point, the brightness level on my TV is all the way up and I still can’t see what’s going on in Heroes.  If I decide to finish the season for that show, I may just finish it as podcasts and listen to them since I can’t see what’s happening on the screen anyway.

And in the premiere episode Air, that started to look like what they meant.  The quick premise of the show, is that a planet that has unique properties and Stargate, has a secret military base.  The  Earth base personnel, who were on the planet to discover the mysteries of the “Ninth Chevron” figure out how to use the unique gate just as the planet comes under the attack of perfectly timed aliens.  Beating a hasty retreat through the Stargate, the base survivors discover themselves on board an Ancient (a humanlike highly technological race that disappeared tens of thousands of years ago in the Stargate mythology) starship, with no means to power the ship’s stargate to get back to Earth.

Naturally the ship is in total darkness when they board.  Edgy.

The first couple of episodes of the show revolve around the crew trying to wrap themselves around solving the most basic survival needs, as the episode names indicate, Air, Light, Water… Episodes filled with the grimness and stress of their situation, but little humor or action to break the ice.  Frankly, not bad episodes, but not great either.   However I’m embarrassed to say it took me until the most recent episode, Justice, to figure out what “edgy” was supposed to mean.

The producers were not doing the Stargate version of Voyager; they were doing the Stargate version of Battlestar Galactica.

Galactica (the updated version, not the 1970’s feathered hair version) was almost revolutionary in it’s approach.  It stripped out the aliens, weird spatial phenomena, time travel, technobabble, and other props of the SF genre and just left the people; highly imperfect people.  Heroes were not always heroic, or truthful, villains were not always villainous, or lying.  Galactica raised the bar on TV science fiction, making it an adult drama, and the Emmy’s that Galactica won during its 5 season run bear that out.

So I consider myself fully on board with Stargate Universe now, and feel free to recommend the show, although with caveats.  While Galactica had me hooked with the first miniseries that launched the show, I’ve been mulling over Stargate Universe.  I was not hooked until recently.  It may be that just my expectations of what a Stargate show should be made me blind to what the producers were trying to do with this version of Stargate.  This isn’t your geeky father’s Stargate.  It definitely has a different feel to the show, dare I say edgier?

Why bring this up now?  The show has been on for months.

True, but the show is on a brief hiatus until the spring and tomorrow the Syfy channel is running all nine of the previously aired episodes back to back all day.  So if you are out of work, nerdy, and somehow missed the previous showings, now is a good opportunity to catch up.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Stargate Universe Premiere Overnight Rating Numbers (screenrant.com)