Skip to content


The Politics Thread - Read the First Post

The place for kittens to discuss GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered) issues as well as topics that don't fit in the other forums. (Some topics are off-topic in every forum on the board. Please read the FAQs.)

girl, you know it's true...

Postby maudmac » Sat Oct 09, 2004 7:31 am

It's really pretty sad when things that used to be the "paranoid rantings of conspiracy theorist lunatics" start looking like they might actually be true. I tend to believe a lot of conspiracy theory stuff, because I tend to believe the worst about the Bush Administration, because it tends to be true. (Osama-as-October-Surprise has been discussed on CNN, for example. Nancy Pelosi talks about it and it gains a level of credibility no blogger could accomplish.)



Quote:
A Milli Vanilli President



By Dave Lindorff

Features > October 8, 2004



President George W. Bush has claimed that that God speaks to him. More worldly voices, it now appears, may also be speaking to him at key moments.



Viewers and journalists watching Bush in his first debate with Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry have commented on his odd behavior in Miami. To some he seemed peevish and antsy-almost wired.



Now there is evidence that he may have been-in an electronic way-by having cues and lines fed to him through a hidden high-tech earpiece.



Several things about the first debate have led to this speculation.



Many people who watched the debate remarked on Bush’s sometimes-bizarre comments and behavior during the evening. At one point he angrily blurted “Now, let me finish!” midway through a long, timed answer and well before he would have received a warning light to wrap up his comments. Compounding the strangeness was that he didn’t seem to be addressing his remark to either moderator Jim Lehrer or Kerry and no one had spoken or even hinted at interrupting him.



A voice coming through a hidden hearing device also would explain several long silences occurring at odd points in the president’s answers and his odd expressions and eye movements.



Alert viewers also raised questions about the square object situated between President Bush’s shoulder blades, clearly visible pressing through his jacket during rear-view camera shots as he was leaning over the lectern. According to the debate rules, the Democrats and the Republicans agreed that neither candidate would be shot from behind. According to a source familiar with the debate negotiations who refused to speak on the record, it was Republicans, lead by debate negotiator Jim Baker, the former secretary of state, who insisted on this odd condition.



Experts familiar with spyware suggest this bulge in the jacket could have been an “inductor” for receiving signals sent from someone offstage feeding the president answers through a hidden, wireless earpiece. The advantage of using such a device, rather than simply a micro-radio receiver in the president’s ear canal, is that an inductor can broadcast any scrambled or unscrambled message to an ear receiver at extremely low power-so low that the signal would be undetectable beyond a few feet.



Speculation that the president may have been getting help with his answers is supported by evidence that he has been using an earpiece for some time. According to a number of viewers, news reports on CNN, Fox and MSNBC of Bush’s D-Day commemoration speech in France, for instance, picked up a voice feeding the president his lines just before he spoke them and broadcast them. A clip of a CNN broadcast o the president’s D-day address in France clearly includes the sound of another voice leading the president through his lines.



This technique is familiar to television correspondents, some of who tape their remote reports and play them back through earpieces to broadcast their remarks smoothly on camera.



Repeated calls to the White House and the Bush campaign for comment on whether Bush uses an earpiece and for an explanation of the obvious bulge under his tailored jacket have been ignored.



The Kerry camp also refuses to comment.



Americans ought not be surprised should it turn out their president is having lines fed to him. Ronald Reagan was provided cue cards for every occasion by his staff and sometimes his wife, even one reminding him to say “Good Afternoon” when meeting heads of state. And most presidents give speeches written and honed by professional speechwriters. But receiving answers during a presidential debate clearly violates established rules.



In 1990, Milli Vanilli was forced to return their award for Best Vocal Group after it was revealed that the pop duo hadn’t sung the songs on their album and that they routinely lip-synched performances.



It remains to be seen how Americans will react should they discover they have a Milli Vanilli president.



Meanwhile, if the Kerry campaign is smart, they’ll either ask that the candidates agree to be frisked before tonight’s St. Louis debate, or Kerry himself, instead of shaking hands with the president, should give him a manly pat on the back. Another possibility: in this less formal, town-hall setting, Kerry could begin by doffing his jacket, leaving Bush the choice of exposing his wire of looking like a stuffed shirt all evening.



when i hear music it makes me dance

maudmac
 


Re: Pope calls communism "necessary evil"

Postby darkmagicwillow » Sun Oct 10, 2004 1:28 pm

Quote:
If I take myself as an example (not because I'm egoistic but because I often thought about all the little (often historical) things that, if changed, would have prevented my parents from meeting), can I be sure that I wouldn't exist without WW2 (Nazism) and Communism (and WW1, for that matter)? No of course not. But the chances of any of my pretty much 'rooted-to-the-soil' family leaving their home and voluntarily moving somewhere else are not good. That they would move from one small town to just the one where my other parent lives across the country does not seem any more likely. And then they would have to meet. And be single at the time. It's possible but highly unlikely.




Even if your parents had met, the chances that they would have produced the same sperm and egg cells and conceived a child with that particular combination of sperm and egg is essentially zero. It's theoretically possible for parents to have two children on different occassions who are nonetheless identical twins because they share the same genetic complement, but it's so improbable it's almost certain that such an event never happened in the history of homo sapiens. Highly unlikely is a wildly optimistic description of the situation, and that's just the beginning of the difficulties of making an identical you under different historical circumstances.



If there had been no Hilter or Stalin, the world may or may not have been a better place, but it's certain that virtually no one from Europe born since then would be here today if they hadn't existed and exerted such a drastic influence on history. Of course, there would be different people, some closely related and some not. Even in North America, the consequences would be drastic with no deaths due to WW2 (though a Japanese-American War seems likely in any event, though the course would certainly be different) and no Baby Boom plus many unknown historical events taking their places.

--

"Omnia mutantur, nihil interit." -- "Everything changes, but nothing is truly lost."

Edited by: darkmagicwillow at: 10/10/04 12:32 pm
darkmagicwillow
 


Re: Pope calls communism "necessary evil"

Postby Diebrock » Mon Oct 11, 2004 1:56 am

Eh, I know that, DMW. But to be honest, fruitless mental ponderings regarding different historical outcomes or how one little change in (mostly world not personal) history could effect my family, country or the world are a lot more fun for me than thinking about biological things like what would have happened if my mother had had a bad headache at the time I was conceived.

Not that my mother or father ever had sex, of couse!:paranoid

_________________

Independence is my happiness, and I view things as they are, without regard to place or person; my country is the world, and my religion is to do good.

I've kissed her best friend. I've reached into her best friend's pocket and fished around for keys. And I gave her best friend my number. I must be doing something totally, totally wrong... - TBSOL by Dreams

Diebrock
 


Re: Pope calls communism "necessary evil"

Postby Kieli » Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:15 am

Quote:
Not that my mother or father ever had sex, of course! :paranoid


Squick Factor set a little to low to go down that route, eh, DB? :eyebrow I hear you, loud and clear.


Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

Kieli
 


Yesterday: Conspiracy theory/Today: news item

Postby Gatito Grande » Wed Oct 13, 2004 5:39 pm

It's official: it is now impossible to be too paranoid about the mo'fo' Republicans. :paranoid



Quote:
Voter Registrations Possibly Trashed



(Oct. 12) -- Employees of a private voter registration company allege that hundreds, perhaps thousands of voters who may think they are registered will be rudely surprised on election day. The company claims hundreds of registration forms were thrown in the trash.



Anyone who has recently registered or re-registered to vote outside a mall or grocery store or even government building may be affected.



The I-Team has obtained information about an alleged widespread pattern of potential registration fraud aimed at Democrats. The focus of the story is a private registration company called Voters Outreach of America.



The out-of-state firm has been in Las Vegas for the past few months, registering voters. It employed up to 300 part-time workers and collected hundreds of registrations per day, but former employees of the company say that Voters Outreach of America only wanted Republican registrations.



Two former workers say they personally witnessed company supervisors rip up and trash registration forms signed by Democrats.



"We caught her taking Democrats out of my pile, handed them to her assistant and he ripped them up right in front of us. I grabbed some of them out of the garbage and she tells her assisatnt to get those from me," said Eric Russell, former Voters Outreach employee.



Eric Russell managed to retrieve a pile of shredded paperwork including signed voter registration forms, all from Democrats. We took them to the Clark County Election Department and confirmed that they had not, in fact, been filed with the county as required by law.




So the people on those forms who think they will be able to vote on Election Day are sadly mistaken. We attempted to speak to Voters Outreach but found that its office has been rented out to someone else.



The landlord says Voters Outreach was evicted for non-payment of rent. Another source said the company has now moved on to Oregon where it is once again registering voters. It's unknown how many registrations may have been tossed out, but another ex-employee told Eyewitness News she had the same suspicions when she worked there.



It's going to take a while to sort all of this out, but the immediate concern for voters is to make sure you really are registered.



The company has been largely, if not entirely funded, by the Republican National Committee. Similar complaints have been received in Reno where the registrar has asked the FBI to investigate.




www.klas-tv.com/Global/st...v=168XRvNe



But wait, there's more! (and this just in Nevada alone :shock )



Quote:
Nev. Move to Block Some Dem Voters Fails



ADAM GOLDMAN

Associated Press



LAS VEGAS - Elections officials have rebuffed an attempt by a former GOP operative to purge about 17,000 Democrats from the voter rolls in the battleground state of Nevada, where the two presidential candidates are in a dead heat.



Larry Lomax, the Clark County registrar of voters, rejected the challenge filed by former state Republican Party Chair Dan Burdish last week that claimed the Democrats should be removed from the rolls because they were inactive voters.



Lomax said Burdish could only challenge voters in his precinct, and then only if he has personal knowledge that they are inactive.



"I don't think pulling names off a database equates to personal knowledge," Lomax said.



Under state law, voters are placed on "inactive status" if they move and don't update their addresses within 30 days of receiving notice to do so. Their registrations are then canceled if they don't vote in two consecutive federal elections.



Democrats have criticized Burdish for trying to influence the hotly contested congressional race between Republican Rep. Jon Porter and his Democratic challenger, former casino executive Tom Gallagher, in the 3rd District.



But Burdish denied trying to disenfranchise people, saying he only wants to prevent people from voting "in a local district they are not allowed to vote in."



The latest polls have showed President Bush and Democratic Sen. John Kerry running within a few percentage points of each other in Nevada. Democrat Al Gore lost the state by fewer than 22,000 votes in 2000




www.mercurynews.com/mld/m...553.htm?1c



GG Can you believe this sh*t? :rage Of course you can. :sigh Out



In other news---



Stop the presses! The NRA has endorsed Dubya! :crazy









Gatito Grande
 


Re: Voter blocking

Postby Kieli » Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:03 pm

And this is supposed to be the Democracy we're touting to the world as an example?? :wtf Hmm, sounds like we've been taking notes from those dictators we support around the globe. Democracy in name only and when it suits our leaders' political aims. This crap has got to stop and dammit, why hasn't the President called for a stop to this? This is violating our rights and as such, Voters Outreach should be arrested on voter fraud and felony charges. No talking; just lock their asses up. :fit2


Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

Kieli
 


Re: Pope calls communism "necessary evil"

Postby 4WiccanLuv » Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:32 pm

Quote:
Voters Outreach should be arrested on voter fraud and felony charges. No talking; just lock their asses up.




I agree, but this should also apply to ACT and ACORN, who are using the same tactics for the Democrats. I have yet to hear the DNC ask to put a stop to this.



We all should be outraged. This is getting ridiculous and out of hand. However, it is not only the Republicans, as the media would have you think. Here are some instances of Democrat voter fraud.



California

Florida

Pennsylvannia

Ohio

Minnesota



Here are a few of many examples of intimidation and crimes committed against Republicans. Since I live in California, I have decided against putting a Bush/Cheney sticker on my car, coz It'll most likely get keyed or vandalized. I have some friends that have been verbally attacked for sporting GOP stickers. :wtf



Union members target Republicans

Vandalism in Alaska

Vandalism in Spokane

Democrats Gone Wild

"Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others." - Groucho Marx

4WiccanLuv
 


Re: Pope calls communism "necessary evil"

Postby Kieli » Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:42 pm

Quote:
I agree, but this should also apply to ACT and ACORN, who are using the same tactics for the Democrats. I have yet to hear the DNC ask to put a stop to this.



We all should be outraged. This is getting ridiculous and out of hand. However, it is not only the Republicans, as the media would have you think.


I'm an equal opportunity ranter. Democrats should know better than to do this.



A gay Republican....*sigh* That sounds like such an oxymoron...right up there with a gay, black, lesbian Republican :wtf


Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

Kieli
 


Re: Pope calls communism "necessary evil"

Postby Warduke » Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:58 pm

Quote:
Since I live in California, I have decided against putting a Bush/Cheney sticker on my car




While you're at it, get this one too. They go hand in hand.





Quote:
A gay Republican....*sigh* That sounds like such an oxymoron...right up there with a gay, black, lesbian Republican




What's that old saying again...With friends like this, who needs enemies?


Firefox: One Browser To Rule Them All.

Warduke
 


Re: Pope calls communism "necessary evil"

Postby Kieli » Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:03 pm

Quote:
Close....a Hispanic Lesbian *newly* registered Republican. The Dems are beginning to scare me, they've gone plum loco.


Oh and your homophobic Republican president hasn't scared you yet? :sheep


Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

Kieli
 


Re: Pope calls communism "necessary evil"

Postby 4WiccanLuv » Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:13 pm

Quote:
Oh and your homophobic Republican president hasn't scared you yet?




Um...no!

"Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others." - Groucho Marx

4WiccanLuv
 


Re: Yesterday: Conspiracy theory/Today: news item

Postby Gatito Grande » Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:20 pm

Lookie, lookie. :sigh Oh well, if I can't say something nice . . . :sh



But I can say *plenty* nice about John Kerry, who whupped Dubya's sorry *ss yet again tonight.



I learned from Kerry about pay-as-you-go, and how no one would be forced into a healthcare plan they didn't want, and how the right to control my own frickin' body would be protected, and how the Bible says (as it does, James 2:17) that "faith w/o works is dead" and that it inspires Kerry to want an America that does more "loving thy neighbor as thyself" (as in creating more jobs, and ensuring children, and raising the minimum wage, and continuing the fight for civil rights).



From Dubya I learned about his first date w/ Laura :stink , and that I shouldn't get a flu shot, and how horrible Ted JFK is (oh, unless he's a swell guy who "worked w/ me on No Child Left Behind" ), and he knows people pray for him because of his "feeeelings" (guess that explains his certainty about "Saddam's weapons of mass destruction," huh?), and most of all, how the U.S. Constitution has to be protected . . . from me. :mad



GG Would an Official Kitten Endorsement be appropriate, and how would we deliberate on such an issue? :hmm Out

Gatito Grande
 


Re: Party Lines

Postby Kieli » Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:30 pm

Quote:
Um...no!


To reiterate what GG said, "Oh well, if I can't say something nice . . ."


Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

Kieli
 


Re: Pope calls communism "necessary evil"

Postby xita » Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:19 pm

GG, I own it, I think if I agreed, that would be enough :p Or we could vote... which lol.. I think I kinda know which way that would go lol.

- - - - - - - - - - -
"Trust is a risk masquerading as a promise."


xita
 


Re: Politics

Postby sam7777 » Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:15 pm

The Republicans have been scaring me for a long time, they've gone prejudiced and bigotted. The moderates have become extinct in the Republican Party since the right wing took over. I simply can't vote for a party that is dividing this country by using hatred and bigotry against gays. The Democrats are clearly more moderate. I wish they were more liberal about gay marriage for one but at least they are not using bigotry to attack a group of people simply to sure up their base. The Republicans have left both the compassionate and the convervative and moved into the hateful right wing. I am an Independent but will be supporting the Democrats in this election because I will not support a party that refuses to appeal to anyone outside of their right wing base. The Republicans have left the good of this country behind in their turn to right wing extremism. As an Hispanic and immigrant in California, I have seen their bigotry first hand in laws like Prop 187. I won't vote for a party that hates me and mine. California's electoral votes will go to John Kerry so my vote will be going to elect a good man no matter who wins.

_____________________

I still see dead lesbian cliches

Edited by: sam7777  at: 10/13/04 10:46 pm
sam7777
 


polarization, it's not just for sunglasses anymore

Postby maudmac » Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:44 pm

I wonder what historians will have to say about this time. I am probably too young (31) to have a really good personal perspective on how the political landscape in this country has changed, but I know I've never felt such tremendous heat pouring off people when the subject of politics comes up. The hotter one side gets, the hotter the other side gets, and we're both feeding off each other's escalating hostility. And, increasingly, we're believing that one party or the other will destroy the whole country if they are allowed to run it. In my more objective moments, I think it's fascinating to watch all this occurring (locally, nationally, and internationally).



But my objective moments have become increasingly few and far between. Because I genuinely believe that the worst thing that could happen to the United States is four more years of Bush. I am filled with rage for him and for what the GOP stands for. It's antithetical to everything I hold dear and believe is right and good and true for humanity.



Neither this nation nor the world should be subjected to more Bush or more GOP policies. They benefit who? Gluttonous and greedy US corporations benefit. While the good people of this country have to work harder and longer to keep a job, to get a job, to pay for health insurance, to buy the baby shoes, to pay the gas bill, to simply survive. While blood flows through the streets of Iraq.



Democrats are not saints. And I'm not a Democrat, either. My political heart is Green as grass, though I will be voting for Kerry/Edwards. All parties should be called on their shit, whether it comes out of an elephant's ass or a donkey's. The Kerry campaign has run political ads that are every bit as inaccurate as the Bush campaign's are. That can't and shouldn't be denied.



In the face of everything Bush has done and will do, though, the thing I feel more than anything else is a desperate desire for it to stop. And I will never understand how LGBT people, people of color, the poor and working class, how they can support Bush or the GOP. I no longer want to understand that. It's unconscionable to me. It's being a party to your own oppression.



If any good comes of this polarization, I hope that it is that enough people who aren't interested in oppressing us will be motivated to vote out our oppressors.


when i hear music it makes me dance

maudmac
 


Re: Party Lines

Postby sam7777 » Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:49 pm

Maudmac: People are so angry about politics now because there is so much as stake. For gays, another four years of Bush means another four years of seeing our rights eroded.



Even the Log Cabin Republicans found they could not endorse Bush and disavow the anti-gay campaigns being waged by some in the GOP: Gay Republicans Admonish GOP Over Homophobic Campaigns
Quote:
Log Cabin Republicans Tuesday called on the Chairman of the Republican National Committee to publicly disavow anti-gay campaigns being waged by some in the GOP.



In an open letter to party Chairman Edward Gillespie the nation's largest group of gay Republicans chastises the party leadership for allowing the campaigns to vilify gays.



"Chairman Gillespie, you have an obligation as the leader of our party to stand up for the millions of fair-minded Republicans across this country that you are supposed to represent," the letter signed by LCR Executive Director Patrick Guerriero said.



" Mr. Chairman, there are many important issues that are being debated this election cycle, and using anti-gay scare tactics only serves to distract American voters from the real issues. If you believe, as we do, that the Republican Party truly is the party best equipped to win the war on terror, reform government and strengthen our economy then you should make it clear that there is no room in a legitimate public discourse for this type of fear-mongering."



A party spokesperson said Gillespie had not seen the letter.



The RNC has admitted to sending mailers to voters in Arkansas and West Virginia that seek to equate the recognition of gay and lesbian families with banning the Bible. (story) Guerriero in his letter to Gillespie calls the mailer "dishonest and disgraceful " and says that it "represents a new low in this election cycle."



On Sunday night in South Carolina, Republican Senate hopeful Jim DeMint, during a debate with his Democratic opponent Inez Tenenbaum, said that he believes gays and lesbians should be barred from teaching in the public school system. (story)



Guerriero also points to a letter from Ohio Secretary of State, Ken Blackwell that claims that the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign has asked him to coordinate the effort to amend the state constitution banning same-sex marriage.



" This claim is especially troubling, considering that Mr. Blackwell is the official charged with verifying whether or not the Amendment supporters have gathered the requisite signatures to place it on the November ballot," notes Guerriero.



The letter lists a half dozen other instances of "gay bashing" by GOP candidates, including the party platform that "seeks to marginalize gay and lesbian families. "



Log Cabin Republicans have refused to endorse the Bush-Cheney campaign for re-election.
You can find the full text of Guerriero's letter here in case you think a gay publication is unfairly biased against Republicans. He cites mutiple examples of Republican anti-gay tactics. I simply can't support a party that embraces bigotry.

_____________________

I still see dead lesbian cliches

Edited by: sam7777  at: 10/13/04 11:03 pm
sam7777
 


Re: polarization, it's not just for sunglasses anymore

Postby maudmac » Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:53 am

It occurred to me that the gay marriage issue is very different from other issues, at least in my mind. I'm talking about issues that I might argue with a Republican (or a Democrat) about. I can agree to disagree about most, maybe even all, other issues. Those old dinosaurs, abortion and capital punishment, I feel very strongly about them, but I can see where those who disagree with me are coming from and they make good points. The same for issues that are sexier lately, like tax reform, healthcare, church vs. state, immigration, even the so-called War on Terror and all this Iraq business. The strength of my convictions about those issues doesn't keep me from seeing that there is some validity to the other side's position, even if it's a bit tenuous, in my opinion.



Same-sex marriage, on the other hand, there is absolutely NO valid argument against it. None whatsoever. Other than straight up bigotry. And I have to question the intentions, the level of hatred it requires for a party or a politician to go to such great lengths to make same-sex marriage a major issue right now.



Is it so hard to say NO to bigotry?


when i hear music it makes me dance

maudmac
 


Re: polarization, it's not just for sunglasses anymore

Postby Culzean » Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:33 am

Some impressions from the debate:



* Did anyone else notice Dubya's behavior on the subject of John McCain? Kerry had mentioned McCain by name a few times as an example of his previous efforts to reach out across party lines and work with Republicans.



Dubya began slamming the podium and announcing that McCain supported HIS candidacy, not Kerry's. He was essentially throwing a little tantrum and saying "Quit saying his name. He's MY friend!"



* How about the question on raising minimum wage that Dubya answered by discussing education? In answer to another question, he said his administration would do whatever it took to help people, and they would spend whatever they needed to spend. One of his reasons for giving tax breaks was to allow people to have money to spend. And yet he doesn't want to raise minimum wage?



* When the commentator asked Dubya what he would say to someone who had lost his job to overseas outsourcing, Dubya talked about sending that guy to Jr. College, and how education was an answer to this problem.



The trouble is, that guy probably already has a BA or MA degree, and going back to Jr. College isn't going to help.



* Bush made a few points about the need to support business. I think it would make a lot of sense to support big business if big business supported American workers. The trouble is, they don't. They are merging, not because they have to in order to survive, but because they want to go from being a big company to being a giant company. They want to swallow their competitors. And in the process they lay off thousands of people, fix prices, and outsource jobs. Then the Administration wonders why consumer spending is down?



* One thing that has always annoyed me about debates is that when a candidate doesn't want to answer a question, he just doesn't. He talks about whatever he wants to talk about. I wish the commentators would nail them on that and keep asking the same question until it gets answered. If the entire debate is spent trying to get them to answer one question, then so be it.



* And finally, the part of the debate that truly frightened me. Bush openly stated that he wants to spread freedom and democracy throughout the world, and that Iraq and Afghanistan are on the path. He made similar comments in an interview not too long ago.



There's a price to pay for "liberating" people, and he's not the one paying it. He's all excited about these militaristic coups, but still grants Most Favored Nation status to China for trade.



Bush truly scares me. I've seen a bumper sticker that reads, "Leave no Billionaire Behind." That's Dubya. He's only looking out for a few hundred (very rich) people in this country. And he seems to have no qualms about sacrificing others.



I am going to be SO nervous on Election Day.

Culzean
 


Re: polarization, it's not just for sunglasses anymore

Postby Gatito Grande » Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:42 pm

Cynicism-watch: Charges urged in Afghan prisoner deaths - Army investigators say 28 soldiers should be punished.



These homicides occurred almost 2 years ago, but the charges are just coming forth now . . . a week after the U.S.-backed/Official candidate-endorsed Afghan election. Coincidence? :happy (And it's not even debateable---DOD officials have said as much---that the almost-certainly deadly "re-taking of Fallujah" is not scheduled to begin until after the U.S. election :spin )



Holley, I think the reason that "the gay marriage issue is different," is that it's not really about marriage (and we LGBTs make a mistake if we buy into the propaganda that it is). It's about officially making a group of people into (perpetual) second-class citizens. It's about discrimination, plain and simple.



Look at it this way (in terms of last night's debate): is being a Jew "a choice"? Some might say Yes, some might say No. But no one, outside of a bigoted, racist fringe, would dream of saying that some American legal institution had to be "protected" from them.* :mad



GG And yet, that's what we have to endure: being raised, in the debate, as an object of discussion (of whether we're sinners or freaks) :rage Out



And then, the GOP has the unmitigated chutzpah to say that Kerry is out of bounds for citing Mary Cheney . . . when he was the one saying that she is "being who she is," one of "all God's children," and that her civil rights (in her partnership with Heather [can't remember her last name]) ought to be protected!!! :angry



*It's true that, twenty or so years ago, there were a few Republicans who wanted to proclaim (legally or Constitutionally, I can't remember) the U.S. a "Christian nation" (the direct analogy to "declaring marriage is between one man/one woman). But the point is, even Ronald Reagan & Co. quickly shot them down/shut them up. :miff

Gatito Grande
 


Re: It gets more fucked up every day

Postby Kieli » Thu Oct 14, 2004 4:44 pm

US refuses to join UN Plan for Women

Quote:
Eighty-Five Nations Back Population Agenda



Wed Oct 13, 8:04 PM ET U.S. National - AP





By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer



UNITED NATIONS - The United States has refused to join 85 other heads of state and government in signing a statement that endorsed a 10-year-old U.N. plan to ensure every woman's right to education, health care, and choice about having children.



President Bush's administration withheld its signature because the statement included a reference to "sexual rights."



U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kelly Ryan wrote to organizers of the statement that that the United States was committed to the Cairo plan of 1994 and "to the empowerment of women and the need to promote women's fullest enjoyment of universal human rights."



"The United States is unable, however, to endorse the world leaders' statement," Ryan said, because it "includes the concept of `sexual rights,' a term that has no agreed definition in the international community."



Ryan did not elaborate on the Bush administration's objections to the phrase "sexual rights," but at past U.N. meetings U.S. representatives have spoken out against abortion, gay rights and what they see as the promotion of promiscuity by giving condoms to young people to prevent AIDS.



The statement of new global support for the Cairo plan was given Wednesday to Deputy Secretary-General Louise Frechette by media mogul Ted Turner, who has lent significant financial support to the world body through his United Nations (news - web sites) Foundation.



The 1994 Cairo program, signed by 179 countries, including the United States, says women have the "right to make decisions concerning reproduction, free of discrimination, coercion and violence as expressed in human rights documents."



The support statement notes that in 1994 "the world's governments and civil society committed to an action plan to ensure universal access to reproductive health information and services, uphold fundamental human rights including sexual and reproductive rights, alleviate poverty, secure gender equality, and protect the environment."



While progress has been made, the statement says the world is facing an exponential increase in HIV, a growing gap between rich and poor, persistently high death rates related to pregnancy and childbirth, and inadequate access to family planning services.



The Cairo support statement was signed by leaders of 85 nations including the entire European Union, China, Japan, Indonesia, Pakistan and more than a dozen African countries as well as 22 former world leaders, notably Presidents Carter and Clinton.



The Bush administration responded only on Tuesday to organizers who had asked for the president's support.



While refusing to sign the followup statement, the United States did endorse a platform that specifically mentioned reproductive rights a year after the Cairo plan was adopted. The endorsement came at the 1995 U.N. women's conference in Beijing.



The United States took a leading role in drafting the Beijing document, which states: "The human rights of women include their right to have control over and decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality, including sexual and reproductive health, free of coercion, discrimination and violence."



Bush has blocked $34 million in congressionally approved annual assistance to the United Nations Population Fund, alleging the U.N. agency helped China manage programs that involved forced abortions. China calls the charge baseless.





Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

Kieli
 


Re: polarization, it's not just for sunglasses anymore

Postby sam7777 » Thu Oct 14, 2004 7:07 pm

Kieli: Sadly that is furth proof that W does not stand for women:

Dubya's kind of girl



Vandalism of campaign signs happens just as often to Kerry/Edwards as the other guys:

Thefts of posters pose disturbing sign of the times

Democrats seeing upswing in sign thefts

Kerry, Bush signs vanish



Political signs a favorite target of vandals, thieves
Quote:
Edward Carpenter is positive his John Kerry and Lincoln Davis signs were in his front yard when he went to bed Monday night.

When he awoke Tuesday morning, the signs were missing.



"They are completely gone," Carpenter said. "It is obvious they were stolen and probably destroyed."



He also noted that other Kerry signs in his neighborhood have turned up missing.



At the same time, Bush signs in his neighborhood have appeared to have gone untouched.



"They only take the Kerry signs," he said.



Carpenter is one of many political advocates in Tullahoma to report stolen or vandalized signs.



Rosa Lee Moore, a volunteer with the Democratic Party, also had her signs taken from her yard.



"They were repaired and we placed them back up," Ms. Moore said. "I don't want to accuse anyone because I don't know who did it."
And also in California: Report Vandalism
Quote:
The Republicans are not the only ones experiencing political intolerance. I have experienced people screaming profanities and displaying obscene gestures as I campaigned for the Kerry-Edwards ticket. Many of my friends and I have had our Kerry/Edwards signs stolen, and I know of other supporters who have had their cars keyed for displaying a Kerry bumper sticker.



The lampposts in my front yard have been shot with a BB gun. Unfortunately, reports of politically driven vandalism and violence committed against both Kerry and Bush supporters are on the increase throughout our country. These attacks are a violation of our right to express ourselves freely in this political debate and are a threat to our political freedom. This threat is not uniquely a Democratic problem or a Republican problem, but a problem facing us as Americans regardless of our political affiliation.
To imply that Republicans are the primary victims is misleading at best. What is a uniquely Republican problem is their anti-gay party platform. I refuse to vote for that.



The Bush administration has completely divided this country in a time of war when we need to stick together. America deserves better.



ETA: More Republican Voter fraud:

Oregon

Nevada

Florida

Michigan

Maine

Iowa



Bullies at the Voting Booth



The Republicans have a vested interest in having fewer people turn out to vote since Bush is only interest in apppealing to his base. Voter fraud that prevents any citizen from voting is wrong.

_____________________

I still see dead lesbian cliches

Edited by: sam7777  at: 10/14/04 7:04 pm
sam7777
 


Re: polarization, it's not just for sunglasses anymore

Postby LunaMuses » Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:21 pm

Lynn Cheney actually used the word "tawdry" in reference to Kerry's mentioning of her daughter in the debate. We're talking guady, cheap, shameful, or indecent. He said nothing of the sort.



There's a funny thing about Bush and all of his anti-gay preaching, though. The irony of his VP's lesbian daughter is well-established. Gays are bad enough for Bush to push for an amendment to the *Constitution*, but not bad enough for Bush to say, "Look Dick, you can't be my VP because you have a daughter whose lifestyle is against my values." Fact of the matter is, it doesn't even really matter to Bush that she's gay--so why not just admit it?



Some convictions.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics!" - Benjamin Disraeli

LunaMuses
 


Re: polarization, it's not just for sunglasses anymore

Postby mscheckmate » Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:25 am

This is what Republican Senatorial candidate Alan Keyes said recently:



Quote:
Keyes said: "The essence of ... family life remains procreation. If we embrace homosexuality as a proper basis for marriage, we are saying that it's possible to have a marriage state that in principal excludes procreation and is based simply on the premise of selfish hedonism."



Asked whether that meant Mary Cheney "is a selfish hedonist," Keyes said: "That goes by definition. Of course she is."




I don't recall the Cheneys expressing public outrage at Keyes' statement.



Mary Cheney is in charge of her dad's campaign. Before that, she made her living as a "professional lesbian," working for Coors brewing as a liason to the GLBT community. She and her long-time partner, Heather Poe, appeared onstage with the Cheney family after Cheney's debate with Edwards, and were photographed sitting together in the audience at the Republican National Convention. It's not as if Kerry outed her. Nor did he insult her, as Keyes did.



By the way, Lynne Cheney's lesbian-themed novel, "Sisters," was scheduled to be reissued this year by its publisher. Lynne put a stop to that, saying that the book wasn't her best work. You can read it here, www.livejournal.com/~lynnecheney/ and judge for yourself.:wink



"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it." G.W.Bush,Washington,D.C., 7/26/01, commenting on negotiating with Congress.

Edited by: mscheckmate at: 10/15/04 2:57 am
mscheckmate
 


Re: It gets more fucked up every day

Postby jaex » Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:43 am

Mscheckmate i also have the same thought why lynne cheney didn't come out and defend her own daughter when Alan keyes called her daughter selfish hedonist. Who is the not good man here? Kerry or keyes? Kerry didn't spoke ill of her daughter and he got attacked whereas keyes who is a republican insulted her daughter she just pretend not to hear it. Who is the hypocrite?:spin

Maybe kerry shouldn't have mention her name but who is worst? Lynne cheney and the republicans are worst and hypocrites.



I am truly disappointed at the Cheneys' behaviour.

:no



jaex
 


Re: polarization, it's not just for sunglasses anymore

Postby Jimmi Magnus » Fri Oct 15, 2004 9:40 am

Quote:
They are really scared of real democracy over there
One of my friend comments on sam7777's link concerning bullies at the voting booth.

And when you have countries of the world that are not willing to participate in an organized effort to try to persuade a country to behave in a civilized way, it encourages them simply to continue on its merry way. And that's a problem, D. Rumsfeld

Jimmi Magnus
 


Re: polarization, it's not just for sunglasses anymore

Postby gspiggott » Fri Oct 15, 2004 4:03 pm

Alan Keyes has a daughter who is a ,"selfish hedonist" too who also works for her lunatic father.If the Cheney's are so proud of Mary why didn't they have her up on the stage during the Republican convention?



gspiggott
 


Republicans trashing Democrat voter registration forms

Postby darkmagicwillow » Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:31 pm

There seem to be lots of voter registration fraud problems this year, with

Voters' Outreach of America mispresenting itself as a nonpartisan group and trashing Democrat registrations while registering Republicans, and antoher supposedly nonpartisan but GOP-funded group called Sproul and Associates turned away Kerry voters while registering Bush voters. Also, today

Bush-Cheney New England campaign chair Jim Tob resigned over election fraud issues.




The mainstream media doesn't seem to be doing a good job of covering this problem, but you can check the Voter Registration Fraud Clearinghouse for a state-by-state breakdown of the news as it arrives. Talking Points Memo also keeps up with election fraud stories.



With such a close election, events like these along with the trivial ease of tampering with electronic voting machines like those used Florida are going to decide who becomes the next US Preisdent.

--

"Omnia mutantur, nihil interit." -- "Everything changes, but nothing is truly lost."

darkmagicwillow
 


Re: polarization, it's not just for sunglasses anymore

Postby sam7777 » Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:41 pm

Jimmi Magnus: I'd say the Republicans are more scared than the Democrats are of real democracy.



Democrats, Republicans Charge Vote Improprieties
Quote:
Democrats on Wednesday charged that the national Republican party was linked to a group accused of trying to stop Democrats from registering to vote in at least two Western battleground states, Nevada and Oregon.



The accusations come as voters rush to meet registration deadlines and election officials around the country report surging registrations, with just three weeks to go in the cliffhanger U.S. presidential campaign.



"We have learned from news reports that a Republican organization, Voters Outreach for America, has been registering voters and then ripping up the forms when registers identify themselves as Democrats," Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe said in a telephone briefing.



"According to the news reports, the groups have been largely, if not entirely, funded by the Republican National Committee," McAuliffe said.



The Republican National Committee said in a statement it had a "zero tolerance policy for anything that smacks of impropriety in registering voters."



It accused the Democrats of applying "selective outrage" and said Democrat-aligned groups had also faced allegations of "systemic voter registration fraud." The Republican statement cited the progressive group ACORN, which says on its Web site it has registered 200,000 new voters this election cycle and made "non-partisan" get-out-the vote appeals.



ACORN officials have said they have tightened procedures to reduce errors.



The reports from Nevada and Oregon, and similar concerns expressed in Arizona, Pennsylvania, Maine and Missouri, were the latest in a series of alleged campaign dirty tricks involving groups aligned to both major parties.



Election officials in several states have turned over thousands of suspicious voter registration forms for investigation, many of them with bogus addresses, fictitious names or forged signatures.



In Oregon, authorities said they planned to investigate allegations made to a Portland television station by a canvasser hired by Arizona-based Sproul & Associates. The man said he had been instructed to accept only Republican voter registration forms.



The canvasser said he might throw out Democratic registrations since he was not going to get paid for them.

When Republicans complain of "voter faud" by Democrats it's mostly due to their turning in alot of new voters with incorrect sign up information. There are procedures to check voter reg forms for accuracy and ACORN for one has "tightened procedures to reduce errors" (see above). When Republicans commit voter fraud is more in the form of trying to get rid of voters not add them like the Republican organization, Voters Outreach for America which "has been registering voters and then ripping up the forms when registers identify themselves as Democrats". The difference that I see is that Democrats are not trying to stop Republicans from registering to vote whiel Republicans are trying to stop Democrats from registering to vote. Any group canvassing to register voters will pick up bogus information which is why registrations should be checked as the laws require. Personally, I'd rather err on the side of letting peeople who are legallly able vote than do what the Republicans are doing using techinicalities like the weight of the paper of the registation form to prevent people who should be able to vote to do so. The Republicans are trying to suppress the vote.

_____________________

I still see dead lesbian cliches

Edited by: sam7777  at: 10/18/04 10:18 am
sam7777
 


Re: Republicans trashing Democrat voter registration forms

Postby Gatito Grande » Fri Oct 15, 2004 9:59 pm

Actually, sam, what I see is that, in a sucky economy where people take any work they can find, people getting paid to register new voters (per voter) have a natural incentive to "be creative." That's what ACORN has apparently been doing. It's illegal, and should be stopped, but it's not going to mess up the election (do you really think that any of these "fake voters" are going to lead to real voters voting more than once? Hardly.)



Republican wage-slave voter registration gatherers are getting paid per voter too . . . hence the outrage of the whistle-blower, when he found that some of his new voters were getting trashed (probably w/o him getting paid for them). This practice (preventing actual voter registration, through fraud) does have the ability (nay, likelihood) to mess up the election, hence it is qualitatively worse than the sort of graft ACORN has been doing.



GG Again and again, in political scandals, you see this difference: Dems are in it for the money, Republicans for the ideology (see Nixon's "Enemies List," or Watergate, or Iran/Contra, or all the sh*t happening under Dubya now). The reason for the difference? (IMO) Republicans know that, if they can just push their ideology through, they can set up the system such that it automatically shovels money and power their way---no need to play around the margins (w/ bribery and kickbacks and such) like the Dems do. :miff Out



*****************************************************************************



ETA: And the hypocrisy just keeps on comin' . . .



Quote:
Wednesday, Oct. 13



Pete Coors' male nude review



Over the past three decades, gay rights have been a thorn in the side of the Coors family. After family foundations poured millions into anti-gay conservative causes, beginning in the 1970s, gay consumers boycotted the company's beverages. Today Coors boasts some of the most pro-gay employment policies in the nation. Yet even Mary Cheney, in her brief stint as a company flack, couldn't improve its reputation. Many gay bars still refuse to stock its beer.



So perhaps it's fitting that the issue is bedeviling Pete Coors' U.S. Senate campaign from Colorado. The Coors scion is facing Democratic state attorney general Ken Salazar in a race that could determine partisan control of the Senate. In an Oct. 10 appearance on NBC's "Meet The Press," Coors, chairman of the brewing company, spouted the predictable right-wing Republican line opposing same-sex marriage and adoption rights.



But then Tim Russert artfully cornered Coors on his company's sponsorship of the Black & Blue 2004 Festival in Montreal, which includes "raunch fetish night" and a "male nude revue."



That led to this enlightening exchange:



Russert: "You see no inconsistency between sponsoring male nude revues and fetish balls and opposing gay adoption and gay marriage?"



Coors: "I don't."



Russert: "None whatsoever?"



Coors: "No."



Russert: "And you're comfortable sponsoring those kinds of events? That's part of traditional family values?"



Coors: "Look, this is a very -- you know, people are going to have a lot of different ideas about what this is all about. But it is about recognizing that everybody -- everyone in this country -- should be valued for what they are, and I believe that's the way we recognize it at our company."



In a nutshell, this is Coors' argument: If right-wing Republicans can make money sponsoring gay parties, all the better. Those profits can then be poured back into anti-gay political activity. But if those same people come asking for equal rights under the law, they can take a hike in the Rockies.



Talk about bitter beer.




From Chris Bull's Gay.com blog, found here.

Edited by: Gatito Grande at: 10/16/04 12:35 am
Gatito Grande
 

PreviousNext

Return to Board index

Return to The Kitten

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests


Powered by phpBB The phpBB Group © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007
Style based on a Cosa Nostra Design