Thursday, November 1, 2001
Christian the Lion
If you haven't seen the video of Christian the Lion and you feel like having a good cry, hop over to Scattershot Thoughts. Take kleenex.
Wednesday, October 31, 2001
Refusing to Share My Circle
I posted this over at Preserve, Protect and Defend first, but I'm trying to start a groundswell and this blog has more readers— so I'm putting it here, as well.
xxx
Again, I'm stepping away from the teachings, tonight. In fact, I'm so far out of the fold that I'm not even thinking about that circle made up of dots right now.
I don't care where on the circle this guy is— I believe he's in the wrong place simply by virtue of the fact that he is sharing this earth with me. There's got to be something wrong with that scenario.
Here's what's got me so enraged:
What Was He Thinking?
More to the point—does he think? Does he have a brain?
Senator Schultheis of the Colorado General Assembly stated publicly that he opposes the AIDS testing of pregnant women. Even having a private thought like this, imnsho, disqualifies him from holding office.
When he received the inevitable and well deserved flak for making such a statement, he defended it. He said that he hoped the child born to a woman with AIDS would contract the disease—thereby causing its mother to feel guilty.
To his mind, the child’s suffering and premature death takes second chair to making a statement about the woman’s “promiscuity”.
Of course, it is not a given that the mother had engaged in promiscuous sexual behavior. Furthermore, if she had, by Schultheis’ lights, acted in such a fashion, that does not mean that any objective observer would agree with his view.
And if she had, even in an objective light, acted irresponsibly? According to Schultheis, we should condemn her child to this deadly disease.
Oh, and by the way—Senator Schultheis is on the Health and Human Services Committee of Colorado's Senate. I'm not kidding—I couldn't make this stuff up.
For what it’s worth, I sent an email to Senator Schultheis calling him out as the misogynist and child-hater he is and urging him to step down from office. I think we should stuff his inbox!
In case you’re interested in joining the fray, here is his email address:
senatorschultheis@gmail.com
xxx
Again, I'm stepping away from the teachings, tonight. In fact, I'm so far out of the fold that I'm not even thinking about that circle made up of dots right now.
I don't care where on the circle this guy is— I believe he's in the wrong place simply by virtue of the fact that he is sharing this earth with me. There's got to be something wrong with that scenario.
Here's what's got me so enraged:
What Was He Thinking?
More to the point—does he think? Does he have a brain?
Senator Schultheis of the Colorado General Assembly stated publicly that he opposes the AIDS testing of pregnant women. Even having a private thought like this, imnsho, disqualifies him from holding office.When he received the inevitable and well deserved flak for making such a statement, he defended it. He said that he hoped the child born to a woman with AIDS would contract the disease—thereby causing its mother to feel guilty.
To his mind, the child’s suffering and premature death takes second chair to making a statement about the woman’s “promiscuity”.
Of course, it is not a given that the mother had engaged in promiscuous sexual behavior. Furthermore, if she had, by Schultheis’ lights, acted in such a fashion, that does not mean that any objective observer would agree with his view.
And if she had, even in an objective light, acted irresponsibly? According to Schultheis, we should condemn her child to this deadly disease.
Oh, and by the way—Senator Schultheis is on the Health and Human Services Committee of Colorado's Senate. I'm not kidding—I couldn't make this stuff up.
For what it’s worth, I sent an email to Senator Schultheis calling him out as the misogynist and child-hater he is and urging him to step down from office. I think we should stuff his inbox!
In case you’re interested in joining the fray, here is his email address:
senatorschultheis@gmail.com
Wednesday, April 18, 2001
Today, I sent an email to President Obama. I hope enough of these are sent so as to catch the attention of his staff and they get brought to his attention.
Since a groundswell of small donations got him into office—I hope a groundswell of angry voices will wake him up to the disastrous mistake he is making.
xxx
The defense, 'I was just following orders' didn't work in Nuremberg. Why should it be allowed here?
And, what about holding accountable the people who gave the orders? And the people who drafted the memos giving the people who authorized torture the justification for their orders?
If the President refuses to take action against torture-- thereby giving precedent to the presidents who follow him --I will find it necessary to donate as much money as I can to any Democrat who challenges him in his next primary. I will campaign for him or her, as well.
If Mr. Obama secures the nomination, I will be compelled to vote for a Republican president for the first time in my life.
After all, if Mr. Obama does not appoint a special prosecutor and throw his full weight behind this matter---- what is the difference?
Since a groundswell of small donations got him into office—I hope a groundswell of angry voices will wake him up to the disastrous mistake he is making.
xxx
The defense, 'I was just following orders' didn't work in Nuremberg. Why should it be allowed here?
And, what about holding accountable the people who gave the orders? And the people who drafted the memos giving the people who authorized torture the justification for their orders?
If the President refuses to take action against torture-- thereby giving precedent to the presidents who follow him --I will find it necessary to donate as much money as I can to any Democrat who challenges him in his next primary. I will campaign for him or her, as well.
If Mr. Obama secures the nomination, I will be compelled to vote for a Republican president for the first time in my life.
After all, if Mr. Obama does not appoint a special prosecutor and throw his full weight behind this matter---- what is the difference?
Tuesday, April 17, 2001
Now We Know
I'm departing from the usual sort of post I put in this blog. Somehow, I can't go on just as if nothing had happened. I'll return to my usual format, soon. But, for now, I simply cannot move on without purging my soul a bit. Please forgive this lapse.
xxx
It’s official. We now know what the torturers did in our name. I, for one, can’t live with what I know. I just can’t.
I’m not sure where to go from here with this post. What can I say?
People were deprived of sleep.
People were slapped.
People had their heads banged into walls.
People were manacled in body-cramping positions for hours on end.
People had their faces “walled”. I’m not sure what “walling” is—but I can guess.
People were locked in boxes filled with insects.
People were deprived of food. Physicians were on tap to advise the torturers about how few calories people could be given for extended periods before they starved to death.
People were kept in very cold conditions. If they covered themselves with their prayer rugs, the rugs were taken away. The justification? They were being ‘uncooperative’.
Waterboarding was justified by saying that we didn’t mean to harm people. We proved it by having a doctor in attendance while it was going on. Scratch that. We had medical personnel available.
What does ‘medical personnel’ mean?
What does ‘available’ mean?
And why does that matter?
If you watched Rachel Maddow last night you were treated to a demonstration of just what waterboarding is.
I wanted to turn away. I forced myself to watch. After all, this was done in my name. It was done to ‘make me safe.’
I don't feel safe.
xxx
And, yesterday, Obama said, "We must move forward."
What he is really saying is this:
We must not prosecute the people who did this in our names.
We must set a precedent so that any future president or CIA director can, without fear, disappear anyone s/he wishes to take off the street. Any president can lock people up indefinitely without access to counsel. Any president can dispense with Habeas Corpus whenever it becomes inconvenient to uphold. Any future president can order the torture of human beings without fear of prosecution.
Any president [including this one] can choose not to 'preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States' if it is inconvenient to do so.
Any president can simply refuse to honor his oath of office as it benefits him personally or politically.
So, I ask you: Do you feel safe?
I'm departing from the usual sort of post I put in this blog. Somehow, I can't go on just as if nothing had happened. I'll return to my usual format, soon. But, for now, I simply cannot move on without purging my soul a bit. Please forgive this lapse.
xxx
It’s official. We now know what the torturers did in our name. I, for one, can’t live with what I know. I just can’t.
I’m not sure where to go from here with this post. What can I say?
People were deprived of sleep.
People were slapped.
People had their heads banged into walls.
People were manacled in body-cramping positions for hours on end.
People had their faces “walled”. I’m not sure what “walling” is—but I can guess.
People were locked in boxes filled with insects.
People were deprived of food. Physicians were on tap to advise the torturers about how few calories people could be given for extended periods before they starved to death.
People were kept in very cold conditions. If they covered themselves with their prayer rugs, the rugs were taken away. The justification? They were being ‘uncooperative’.
Waterboarding was justified by saying that we didn’t mean to harm people. We proved it by having a doctor in attendance while it was going on. Scratch that. We had medical personnel available.
What does ‘medical personnel’ mean?
What does ‘available’ mean?
And why does that matter?
If you watched Rachel Maddow last night you were treated to a demonstration of just what waterboarding is.
I wanted to turn away. I forced myself to watch. After all, this was done in my name. It was done to ‘make me safe.’
I don't feel safe.
xxx
And, yesterday, Obama said, "We must move forward."
What he is really saying is this:
We must not prosecute the people who did this in our names.
We must set a precedent so that any future president or CIA director can, without fear, disappear anyone s/he wishes to take off the street. Any president can lock people up indefinitely without access to counsel. Any president can dispense with Habeas Corpus whenever it becomes inconvenient to uphold. Any future president can order the torture of human beings without fear of prosecution.
Any president [including this one] can choose not to 'preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States' if it is inconvenient to do so.
Any president can simply refuse to honor his oath of office as it benefits him personally or politically.
So, I ask you: Do you feel safe?
Thursday, January 18, 2001
[Posted 1/18/09]I’m sorry this post is late. We had some excitement over here. A telephone pole in my yard caught fire and my cable got fried— so I’ve been offline for a while.
Anyway, we’ve come to the end of Michael’s explanation of how we construct our personalities and, being the procrastinator I am, I haven’t decided where I’m going next.
I did buy those books I told you about a couple of weeks ago, so I’ll glance through those and find something interesting to post as soon as I get my ass in gear.
Be warned, it may be after Tuesday. I’ll probably be glued to my tv till then. You understand how it is.
See you soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
