So much to look forward to ...

Follow that dream

Or not ...

I've got to hand it to Raul Grijalva ...

... he hasn't caved to the those (including Krugman) who think the indefensible Senate's protect-the-future-profits-of-the-'health'-insurance-industry bill should be passed now, right now, don't think about it further, just do what we say, right now. After all it can be fixed (by the same morons who can't produce anything halfway acceptable should their very lives depend on it) later. Sort-a-like Medicare Part D was fixed -- oh, but it hasn't been fixed, has it?

It takes guts, which so few in Congress have, to keep standing up for what it right as other Democrats, like Diane Watson of California, get down in the mud and slither towards their corporate paymasters.

I'm not sure why Krugman thinks the Senate bill is better than nothing ...

I think Krugman is, like many, confused between 'health' insurance and health care. I don't see how the Senate bill will ever get us to health care. If anything it will entrench the insurance industry further in determining who lives and who dies.

Krugman praises Barney Frank for changing his mind and saying, according to TPM that:

... With Assurances, He'll Vote For The Senate Health Care Bill

Assurance? Just who will give those assurances? Obama? The Senate? Reid? Pelosi? Don't make me laugh. It hurts.

Barney Frank then, apparently, says the following:

"A bill being passed [is in Democrats' best interest]--as long as it's being done in a way that's invulnerable to charges that it was jammed through, or the rules were disregarded. That's what I was afraid of was a disregard for the procedural rules: Bending the Byrd rule out of shape, or doing something with Paul Kirk's vote while awaiting certification--those things would be fatal."

Barney Frank seems to be a man afraid of his shadow. He's afraid to use or change procedural rules. He's afraid to do anything the Thugs may criticize him for. Well they are quite willing to criticize him for living. Should he just agree to die for them. He's given up on doing anything else. He sat there in Congress when the Thugs changed procedures when it suited them. Or just threatened to change procedures to get Dem compliance with the results that the Thugs got what they wanted and kept the rules in place should they lose their majority. They seemed to know the elected Dems wouldn't have the will to play hardball.

These are really creepy, craven Dems. Progressives have better ideas but if they are all cowards it will do them absolutely no good. I no longer can tell which Dems who express progressive ideals are cowards and which are closet Repugs. The result is the same ...

Progressives with guts can be counted on one hand.

... and Krugman seems to have lost his way awhile ago.

-------------
The following are the blog post I was reading when the above tirade took me over. No logic intended.

• The health insurance excise tax
• He Wasn’t The One We’ve Been Waiting For
• Krugman: "I'm pretty close to giving up on Mr. Obama"

There's a reason ...

Last time I ordered sesame seeds I decided to try some black ones in additional to the usual golden ones.

After using up all the golden sesame seeds I decided to make tahini; so that I could make hummus.

Well, the hummus was not esthetically pleasing in color -- though once one accepts the fact that something tastes good -and is good- one's automatic perceptions seem to adjust accordingly.

Today's quote ...

The very idea that an administration run by Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel and staffed with centrists, Wall Street mavens, and former Bush officials -- and a Congress beholden to Blue Dogs and Lieberdems -- has been captive "to the Left" is so patently false that everyone should be too embarrassed to utter it. For better or worse, the Democratic strategy has long been and still is to steer clear of their leftist base and instead govern as "pragmatists" and centrists -- which means keeping the permanent Washington factions pleased. That strategy may or not be politically shrewd, but it is just a fact that the dreaded "Left" has gotten very little of what it wanted the entire year. Is there anyone who actually believes that "The Left" is in control of anything, let alone the Democratic Party? The fact that Lanny Davis -- to prove the Left's dominance -- has to cite one provision that was jettisoned (the public option) and another which the Left hates (the mandate) reflects how false that claim is. What are all of the Far Left policies the Democrats have been enacting and Obama has been advocating? I'd honestly love to know.

So would I ...

Just thinking ...

I don't call my House Rep's office very often and I never call my Senators' offices (Joker McCain and Killer Kyl). I have called a few other Congressional offices.

My experience is that the people on the phone do not use that contact to find anything out about my opinions (other that the short blurb I have prepared) nor usually where I reside. It really seems a waste on their part, though, perhaps, they don't care what the callers think. Which is most likely the case. A trifle shortsighted perhaps.

Today's quote ...

We’re stuck with Obama patty-cake to dangerous political freaks for seven more years, likely, ...

Obama seems to be destroying the Democratic Party ...

Perhaps that's unfair. Maybe he's just helping its decline. Anyway, Obama appears more Bush-like with each passing day. Democrats are falling left and right.

Obama in his wisdom decided to insist on legislation that works against the interests of the America public while ensuring some of the main products of his 'reign' will be designed for and by the corporations which have, apparently, bought his soul as well as the souls of the majority of our Congress, Dem and Thug alike.

I'm particularly impressed by the critical thinking skill of the press who are charged with keeping us informed about all these machinations. Great comedy is the only thing good that seems to come from the quagmire our country's ruling structure has turned into. I particularly enjoyed the following article by Jane Hamsher:

Writing About Politics Is Hard

Interesting the way some of the best reporting seems to emanate from The Daily Show. It's a weird, weird world and it only seems to get weirder ...

I wonder, when -heaven forbid- we complete the slide into absolute corporate control with the ultimate goal of absolute economic slavery, will Obama understand his role in ensuring the resulting human misery. That is, is Obama's role in this active or passive. I'm still not sure ...

But one thing I am sure about is that not being quite as bad as George W. Bush is no compliment.

And, sadly, there is no reason that a person who breaks a barrier, such as being the first black person to be elected the President of the United States, must necessarily be a person of character. But it is definitely a shame and a disappointment when such is the case.

Today's quote ...

It is important to remember that the perfect was never mentioned in this health care debate. The very good was declared impossible and did not even have a place at the table when they started planning reform last year. Even good reform was dismissed almost immediately.

The debate this entire time has been between what might be labeled “decent reform” at best, and terrible corporate giveaway labeled “reform.” This is not about making the perfect the enemy of the good. We were never even offered the “good” as a compromise.

-- Health Care Reform to Date: So Very Far From Perfect by Jon Walker, firedoglake.com

Today's quote ...

... It's so striking how most of the policies we undertake in the name of combating Terrorism -- including our various invasions, bombings and occupations, and our always-escalating Surveillance State -- have exactly the opposite effect.

-- The backfiring of the surveillance state by Glenn Greenwald, salon.com

Today's quote ...

It's really remarkable that we've gotten to a point in American history where the Republican Party has managed to make fair trials for people who commit crimes "controversial." ...

-- It's Come To This by Adam Serwer, The group blog of The American Prospect

It's not just the Republicans. Obama is continuing to ensure that US Law has no meaning.

As Glenn Greenwald writes:

... the most significant consequence of his [Barack Obama's] first year in office, in the area of civil liberties, is that -- with a few exceptions (most notably torture) -- he has transformed what were once highly controversial Republican "assaults on the Constitution" into bipartisan consensus which both parties now embrace, thus ensuring -- as Baker put it -- "that much of the Bush security architecture is almost certain to remain part of the national fabric for some time to come, thanks to Obama." Thus, a President who imprisons people with military commissions or even no charges at all -- and constantly invokes secrecy claims to shield the Executive Branch from judicial review over allegations of lawbreaking -- is now hailed -- by progressives -- as a stalwart defender of "the rule of law."

Arizona Geology Stories for 2009 ...

... at Arizona Geology blog.

Home of the brave? Not even on TV ...

... We have Chris Matthews running around shrieking that he's scared of kung-fu-wielding Terrorists. Michael Chertoff is demanding that we stop listening to "privacy ideologues" -- i.e., that there should be no limits on Government's power to invade and monitor and scrutinize. Republican leaders have spent the decade preaching that only Government-provided Safety, not the Constitution, matters. All in response to this week's single failed terrorist attack, there are -- as always -- hysterical calls that we start more wars, initiate racial profiling, imprison innocent people indefinitely, and torture even more indiscriminately. These are the by-products of the weakness and panic and paralyzing fear that Americans have been fed in the name of Terrorism, continuously for a full decade now.

...

... What matters most about this blinding fear of Terrorism is not the specific policies that are implemented as a result. Policies can always be changed. What matters most is the radical transformation of the national character of the United States. Reducing the citizenry to a frightened puddle of passivity, hysteria and a child-like expectation of Absolute Safety is irrevocable and far more consequential than any specific new laws. Fear is always the enabling force of authoritarianism: the desire to vest unlimited power in political authority in exchange for promises of protection. This is what I wrote about that back in early 2006 in How Would a Patriot Act?:

The president's embrace of radical theories of presidential power threatens to change the system of government we have. But worse still, his administration's relentless, never-ending attempts to keep the nation in a state of fear can also change the kind of nation we are.

This isn't exactly new: many of America's most serious historical transgressions -- the internment of Japanese-Americans, McCarthyite witch hunts, World War I censorship laws, the Alien and Sedition Act -- have been the result of fear-driven, over-reaction to extrenal threats, not under-reaction. Fear is a degrading toxin, and there's no doubt that it has been the primary fuel over the last decade. As the events of the last week demonstrate, it continues to spread rapidly, and it produces exactly the kind of citizenry about which John Adams long ago warned.

-- The degrading effects of Terrorism fears by Glenn Greenwald

Terrorism: The panic is the point ...

Digby is so right:

The panic is the point. That's why they do terrorist attacks in the first place. And the damned bozo certainly succeeded, at least among the elites who, as far as I can tell, have worked themselves up into some kind of fugue state and are now practically speaking in tongues. It's embarrassing.

If they had the means to invade us outright they would. But they don't so their best bet is to make us react in such a way that benefits their goals using what few resources they have. And boy have they succeeded thanks to Bush the Lesser and now to Obama [the One Who Refuses to Use His Own Reasoning Powers].