Jack & Jill Politics

Michelle's father was buried at the macabre cemetery??...

AFTERNOON OPEN THREAD IS UP!!!

NEW YORK, Jul. 13, 2009
NAACP To Use Latest Technology To Fight Racism
NAACP Marks Centennial In NYC; To Announce New Ways To Fight Racism With Texts, E-mail, Video

The NAACP may be 100 years old, but it's using the latest technology to fight racism.

The NAACP will officially launch the program to monitor incidents of police misconduct at its annual convention in New York City. Members are gathering there to mark NAACP's centennial; The civil rights group was founded in New York City in 1909.

The "rapid response system" would allow people to send texts, e-mails or video reports of police abuse to the association via cell phone.

Attorney General Eric Holder is scheduled to address the convention Monday afternoon. President Barack Obama is slated to speak on Thursday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/13/ap/hi...

Did anybody read this?
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2009/07/naac...
Do you remember this part?
I’ve seen the following happen:

They hired a bunch of white, mostly male consultants to help re-launch their website in time for the convention. Which, btw, so far, it’s not looking so re-launched just yet. (Full disclosure, my company bid for this work and was not selected.) #FAIL
Several people at the small Bay Area meeting, including me, mentioned that we had signed up online as dues-paying members once at NAACP.org only to never receive a message. Not even one to renew membership. All the NAACP staff nodded and mentioned they’d heard that too. To date, I still have yet to receive a single membership email. This was MONTHS ago. I can’t understand an organization that is uninterested in communicating with and retaining paying members online. #FAIL
I have emailed the NAACP’s new director of IT and Ben Jealous (after being rejected for the web work) personally to let them know I’m willing to help and to offer further discussion on guest blogging on JJP. No response. Rinku Sen of ARC, Van Jones (formerly of Green for All), James Rucker of Color of Change AND um, Michael Blake, Director of African-American Outreach at the White House have all guest-blogged on JJP but I guess the NAACP ain’t interested in talking to you. Sorry! #FAIL
The NAACP failed to sponsor or even show up to the premier (and only) conference of black bloggers — Blogging While Brown, despite having a large staff and doubtless, representatives in Chicago who could have been tapped to reach out to this powerful and influential group of emerging African-American leaders who collectively reach millions of the target audience on subjects ranging from entertainment to fashion to IT to politics. All the bloggers surveyed said that they are interested in and blog about political and social issues. Better believe that Color of Change with a staff of around 5 or 6 people sent a representative to join us. #FAIL
The NAACP managed to take credit for the Jena 6 victory as if it happened because of them. Yet, in fact Color of Change and black bloggers did the heavy lifting here while the NAACP Legal Defense Fund was asleep at the wheel. They spent more than half the money they raised for Jena 6 on themselves and raised 10 times LESS than Color of Change. Pitiful. #FAIL
Despite national attention around its historic convention, the NAACP blog has not been updated (as of today) since June 26, 2009. #FAIL
The NAACP twitter account, owned by someone connected with the NAACP at a high level, still has yet to follow anyone and has released zero tweets as of today. Yet the corporate-sponsored @NAACPwebcast twitter account is somewhat lively. There are tons of influential black people on twitter. I talk to them daily. Ugh. #FAIL
The @NAACPWebcast twitter account is lively as mentioned but it’s following twice as many people as are following it. This means that people are largely declining to follow it in return. And the people powering this account have yet to tweet and respond to anyone — it’s a one-way conversation. The NAACP is not interested in helping you with the webcast or engaging in any form of dialogue with black people online. #FAIL
A few people are using the #naacp hashtag but few of them are black bloggers or black online influentials. Certainly no media seems to be using it as far as I can tell. #FAIL
The NAACP Facebook Fan Page has over 3000 fans, but the organization has yet to post one thing on its own wall. #FAIL
The NAACP Group Page on Facebook has over 4000 members, tons of wall posts — including most from racists and white supremacists. There appears to be no official NAACP spokesperson active there. There was however this poignant and desperate wall post (no response = #FAIL):
Duane G. Davis Sr. 1402 Lochner Rd.Apt A Baltimore Md. 21239 Dear Ms. Lisa Madigan Concerning our recent correspondence dated 1-16-09 (08 IG 00094):regarding the issue of my request for your office to investigate my charges of political and judicial miss-conduct does needs to be addressed through your office. We seem to have a failure in our communications. During my illegal incarceration Ms. Shirl Nelson and my family members called your office and informed you that I was being illegally detained. Her phone records and my letters to Mr. Griffin is proof of my attempts to receive Due Process and Equal Protection. The Whistle Blowers Act is designed to Snitch on corrupt public official and bring them in front of the courts to have them held accountable. I have sent you information ever since 3-3-08. And every time I request your help or attention you give me reasons why you can not h

The new NAACP has yet to lead a successful campaign on behalf of African-Americans. Instead, they’ve jumped on board several campaigns already established by other organizations such as Troy Davis (led by Amnesty International), Oscar Grant (led by Color of Change), the New Yorker cover with Michelle and Barack Obama (led by black bloggers and you) are a few that come to mind. Even the Philly pool incident elicited only a statement from the NAACP but no call to action such as you’ve seen here and on other black blogs and videos. Supporting others’ campaigns is a good strategy to repair frayed alliances and create new ones. But it ain’t the same as actual leadership. #FAIL
The NAACP recently advertised for a social media specialist but only as a contract worker and only for 6 months. I spoke to someone - a smart, standup guy - at Blogging While Brown who had been interested until he realized they weren’t serious. We both had to roll our eyes. #FAIL
The NAACP has done zero black blogger outreach (as far as I can tell) for their big convention. Guess they must think we’re going to write about it anyway. Word: we’re less interested than you might think. #FAIL
Ben Jealous recently wrote an article on the NAACP blog and published on CNN all about how the NAACP is still “radical” — an concept he borrowed in part from conversation with me. Yet, this same organization who couldn’t manage to acknowledge Blogging While Brown (which was attendedn by folks like WordPress/Automattic, ATT, EbonyJet.com, BlogHer, Free Press and many others) did manage to open the New York Stock Exchange on July 9th. No one who can be considered radical is opening the New York Stock Exchange. Ever. Some folks on Wall Street until recently, you might remember, enriched themselves at our expense in the subprime mortgage debacle. The NAACP is officially brought to you by The Man and The Powers That Be.

This is why there is a JackandJillpolitics, super spade, Mirror on America, Black Snob. You can galvanize all these blogs into making a point and having their posters/readers act.

Be great to see the NAACP fight racism in public school re-districting, or media management, or other areas not related to crime.

Exactly. If we defend and support basic human rights and racial equality, there would be lower incidences of crime.... ya think?

The NAACP's effort to enter the 21th century is commendable. I wonder how well this have been thought out, meaning, will there really be "rapid response", are there really resources available to respond? If they didn't, they will be slam for failing to respond to hundreds of requests for help with a staff of less say 5.

Embarrassed Republicans and Ignorant Libertarians=Libertardians

Please bear with this dude as he explains the above equation. LOL!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8dYkXgZ5Tc

Duplication

Let's hear it for Command Sgt. Maj. Teresa King y'all!

1st female drill sgt. school commandant named

COLUMBIA, S.C. — The first woman chosen by the Army to lead its school for drill sergeants said Thursday she does not expect any trouble commanding the service’s toughest instructors.

“It doesn’t matter if you are male or female,” Command Sgt. Maj. Teresa King said in a telephone interview. “I have always found that if you enforce your standards, people will respect you.”

King, 47, said she hopes her selection will inspire other women in the military.

“If I can do it, other female soldiers can,” she said.

Full Story:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/07/ap_army_d...

Do I hear Aretha and Annie Lenox singing in the background??
www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0EDX07Kgj0

Today's Conversation:
Consider This the Black Woman's Version of ACT UP!
http://tinyurl.com/larav6

Thanks for your links. Your blog always gives me a lot to think about.

Thanks.

Obsidian Wings Blogger Hilzoy, retiring from blogging effective Friday. I liked her writings, but sometimes ya gotta move on to continue your own path.

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2...

SONIA SOTOMAYOR CONFIRMATION HEARING OPEN THREAD IS UP!!

I am so impressed with Candy Crowley's makeover. She's my fav!

Obama Names Surgeon General
He Says Benjamin Would Be Voice in Health-Care Debate

By Alexi Mostrous and Michael D. Shear
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, July 14, 2009

*Nice pic of Dr. the Prez and Sebilius

Regina M. Benjamin, an Alabama family physician who served for almost two decades as one of the few doctors in a shrimping village along the Gulf Coast, was nominated as U.S. surgeon general yesterday by President Obama.
Flanked by the president and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius at a Rose Garden ceremony, Benjamin, 52, promised to act as "America's doctor" if appointed.
Her nomination comes more than three months after Obama's first choice for surgeon general, CNN chief medical correspondent Sanjay Gupta, pulled out, leaving the administration without a top health official even as the H1N1 flu was reaching pandemic proportions worldwide.
Obama used the announcement to stress his commitment to passing health-care reform legislation, and he said Benjamin would be a crucial voice in the debate. "For nearly two decades, Dr. Regina Benjamin has seen in a very personal way what is broken about our health-care system," he said. " She represents what's best about health care in America: doctors and nurses who give and care and sacrifice for the sake of their patients."
Benjamin has garnered nationwide praise for founding a rural health clinic in Bayou La Batre, Ala. More than 40 percent of the town's 2,500 residents have no health insurance.
The physician, who in September received a "genius award.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

Holder Faces Avalanche Of Work, and Scrutiny
Attorney General Blasted From Left, Right

By Carrie Johnson and Krissah Thompson
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
July cannot be counted as the warmest of months for Eric H. Holder Jr. The attorney general clashed with Congress over national security policy, fielded complaints from federal judges upset with bungled evidence and, in the most painful indignity, cracked his tooth.

Then came a bombshell three days ago that has sent Washington political circles reeling: Holder's inclination to appoint a prosecutor to examine whether interrogators tortured terrorism suspects during the Bush years. The disclosure has exposed him to new scrutiny even among colleagues in the Obama administration, where views about unearthing divisive episodes from the past are hardly uniform.
All of that took a back seat yesterday when Holder, 58, arrived in his home town of New York for a rousing speech to the NAACP, where he had served as an intern decades ago. Seated between civil rights icon Julian Bond and the group's president, Benjamin Todd Jealous, at a luncheon during the organization's centennial convention, Holder was lauded by the crowd as a symbol of pride and progress in his ascent to becoming the nation's first black attorney general.
Before he took the stage, a woman shouted, "I got your back."
"That's a good thing to hear today," Holder replied.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

Holder and the Obama admin have to cleanup the mess left from the previous admin, a mess where the constitution was literally suspended. The previous admin effectively dismantled sections and changed sections mission within DOJ, like the civil rights division. And, there are still B____ admin holdovers within the DOJ and other govt agencies generating discord. Yesterday, this article: GOP, Holder battle over New Black Panthers posted here describe the GOP efforts to have Holder put the New Black Panthers under the spotlight..

Jeff Sessions, the Rethug from Alabama, is the designated Sotomayor Attack Dog!

He is not really asking relevant questions, just rambling about his opinion. He is not even listening to her, just spewing venom.

he's got nothing to lose, everyone already knows he's an ignorant bigot & apparently his constituents don't have a problem with that. having him as the attack dog leaves other republicans a chance to try and appear slightly less hateful (in case some of their constituents haven't noticed their true feelings yet); and even if they don't quite manage, they'll come up smelling roses by comparison.

That's it!

He is totally ignoring her answers to his questions.

Not even listening! If she started reciting poetry he wouln't even no the difference. She should just say "Go to hell Sessions and call for the vote. Have y'all ordered my black robe yet?"

It's alright...she's going to be confirmed, so he's just pi**ing in the wind:).

Jeff Sessions......Saaaaaaaaaaaaa>>>lap

He is soooo nauseating!!

Here we go.....

He's talking about the New Haven Lawsuit!!!

Yes...I just keep repeating in my head what Graham said:

"unless you have a complete meltdown, you will be confirmed'

It is going to be ugly...but the goal will be achieved..confirmation.

Poor Sotomayor having to endure this asshole.

I was listening to the local AM radio talk show host state that Hispanic women are unable to control their emotions and are known for being hot tempered and he's just not sure Sotomayor will be able to control her emotions when makign a ruling.

Don't you just hate stereotypes? That is like how they couldn't handle how unperturbably cool Obama was during the primaries, they wanted to see the hot headed, intemperate NIGGA on display..o how the angry black male would have made their day.

Phuck them. Sotomayor knows full well, what they want to see and she is not going to hand a 'meltdown' to them based on 'hot Latin' blood.


ugh!

Of course...the Supreme Court will be trying to have dignified hearings and you just know she'll get all in the face of Mookie (Unca Clarence) and start going off just like Tina did in Do The Right Thing.

Make NO MISTAKE about it, Sessions and the rest of his GOP ilk had the MELTDOWN after Barack Obama became the 44th POTUS, and the meltdown is overflowing since PBO nominated a Latina woman to sit on the old boys court.

Unca Clarence melted down like the Wicked Witch of the West! "She's gonna get choo my pretty"

Uncle Clarence, who hates anything to do with race. Who was a definite EEO and AffAct hire/admitee...played the race card HARD during his hearings..when after being asked about LONGDONG SIlver video rentals said:

'this is a high-tech lynching'

O he knew how to play race politics when it came to his ass, but he won't lift a finger now, despite having endured the same racism.

can't stand that man.

LMAO!

Church!!!

!!

As my son prepares to leave for college next month, I challenge him to be an engaged student, responsible for his own learning. A person who thinks, challenges and reflects goes about creating him/herself from the inside out.

So I found this article to be of particular interest.

Nearly all my professors are Democrats. Isn't that a problem?

"After I posed that question, two faculty railed against me. That's a sure sign that universities should address the lack of ideological diversity."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0713/p09s02-coop....

Education that liberates the individual has to be a conscious act that allows for a relationship to exist between the student and the teacher that is bidirectional, NOT so one-sided. Students must become involved in the act of creating knowledge, not simply reproducing knowledge that already exists.

You do realize that chosing enter into academia is an individual decision and if individuals who are Republican, or Libertarian or Conservative, Apolticial etc, that is their decison. It isn't as if schools are denying individuals who are not Democrats (which encompasses a large range of views) the opportunity to attend graduate school, work to obtain a PhD, and apply for faculty positions. Could it be that more often, individuals inclined to a life of the mind, are often not terribly motivated by financial renumeration, and such individuals are more likely to swing a bit more to the liberal side? Also, if it is say a math class, or a science class, or a class on Victorian literature, who the hell cares what party they are in? Even in some political science classes, it doesn't matter unless you are discussing lots of theory. I even had a political science prof who REFUSED to tell us what party he was when we asked. You are creating a pretty unfair arguement, and there are schools that have predominately conservative staffs, Pepperdine, Brigham Young, a number of Christian universities, I could go on. If it is that important to you then send your son to a school like that.

Well stated Lisa!

Agreed. But read the article. What is most revealing about this student's experience was the reaction of the two professors and the observation by the student that "political partisanship can corrupt the elements of higher education that should be valued the most."

Partisanship should be differentiated from ideology. Partisanship is a hindrance to diversity of thought and opinion, be it from the left or the right.

I don't think it's a problem. I'm actually glad that very few of my teachers or fellow students agree with what I have to say.

I'm more at ease in the face of outright opposition (and occasional hostility) than I am talking to an amen corner. Force me to defend what I believe, I'll do the same to you, and everyone benefits from the exchange of ideas.

Sure D, but student should be encouraged to think and speak for themselves. This student journalist should be commended for his bravery, but for every one such student, how many 'go along to get along' to get the higher grade, and in turn do not grow, do not make their mark on an institution, but rather adapt, conform to the ideological demands of that institution and merely preserve a status quo.

True, they should....

...but where there's a lack of that enoucragement, they should be thinking/speaking for themselves anyway.

Then again, I'm not a traditional student, so my outlook's a little different.

I think we as conservatives have allowed ourselves to be "pushed" out of these institutions, or made to think we've got to keep our beliefs quiet. That's our failure, and doesn't really have a lot to do with who the school hires.

Gotta stop running scared.

True, but peer pressure is not the provenance of adolescents. Colleges and universities should create a welcoming and encouraging environment if they want to remain vibrant, relevant and have an impact on the future.

However, how many are more concerned with self preservation?

In college I watched a fascinating documentary titled, "Why Man Creates" and it explored the often futile search involved in creative exploration. One man had spent his entire life exploring a problem and after years and years, he was proven wrong. Did he try to shut down those who proved him wrong? No. He simply started anew. He was more concerned with advancing human knowledge than he was in advancing himself. That should be the role of institutions, to be incubators and conduits for the expansion of human knowledge and creativity.

deleted

deleted

Be careful for what you wish for.Your son will be a progressive democrat.

Until he grows up and becomes conservative.

What's the quote about being a liberal at 20 and a conservative at 40?

That's a reflection of not growing up.

How so?

Exactly. And then a liberal again at 70.

That's not something to look forward to....

I know, but it is not inevitable! My mom was still a staunch conservative at 73 while my Dad constantly ribs me about looking forward to all the 'free stuff' the government's gonna give him. Then I quickly remind him that it's not free, I, my husband, and my kids will be working hard to give that 'free stuff' to him!

and he deserves it for a lifetime of hard work.

"that's a sure sign that universities should address the lack of ideological diversity."

political views are not necessarily ideology. Rather, it is a philosophy concerning policy and not a fixed ideology. Wherein the ideology drives all means to the ends. In contrast, Democrats are willing to take into account all new variables and points to create a policy that is encompassing of the whole rather than a narrow fixed ideologic view.

In order, to have that type of open, flexible mind with a fluid intellectual requires confidence and assurance about one's own cognitive abilities to comprehend the complexities and variances that are espoused in the process. On the other hand fixed views, which are typically expressed by GOPrs espouse minds lacking in the ability to critical think through new ideas and variables, such that the very differneces the ideas pose challenge a core ideology and leaves the individual bereft and vulnerable now that their core beliefs (facts)are shown to be inconsistent and irrational based on facts and reasoning. unessential ..thus they become obdurate and unwilling to engage productively to reach what would be new conclusions that do not necessarily uphold their 'belief' system.

Belief (ideology) system thinkers typically cannot handle an academic environment as it creates tremendous self-doubts and the individual is unable to function without their fixed ideology to guide them.

In other words...ideology is the antithesis of diversity of thought.

I don't remember any of my professors outside of the sociology department pushing any ideological views. The only thing I remember my professors telling me is when the paper was due.

Me too...this is another made-up distraction tactic by conservatives - painting colleges and universities as inherently unfair to their "thinking.".....since when has political debate been a part of Intro to Calculus II or Freshmen English 101?

Agreed, however I don't think it is a 'made-up distraction' but a valid topic for discussion and debate. Calling it a 'made-up distraction' is in and of it self a statement designed to stifle discussion, proving the point that partisanship can corrupt the elements that are most valued in higher education: critical thinking, constructive criticism, and intellectual exploration.

Not true. Look at how the Left value ideology over diversity of thought when it comes to global warming and evolution. Where does the Left allow for science to determine the truth of those theories? "Consensus of opinion" is good enough for them to consider these theories now fact, when they have still yet to be definitively proven.

That isn't true. Global warming and evolution weren't even considered political issues until a handful of right wing religious exteremists with limited scientific background got involved. Also, generally for a scientific idea to be considered a theory it must be thouroughly examined and be subjected to numerous experiments and peer review studies before it gets the title of theory. There is a great deal of evidence to show that there is some sort of climate change going on, and there have been numerous revisions to the view of how that is taking place. At one point, in the 70's and 60's they thought it would be global cooling, then global warming, now scientists are begining to think an era of warming could eventually lead to cooling. Also, global warming has not been given the moniker of a theory and it has taken years of study, argument and proofs for evolution to reach the level of being considered theory. Scientists do not throw around the term theory lightly.

I think you are seriously giving academics, particualarly scientists, who constantly question, re-test, quantify, and re-examine ideas, a very very short shrift and grossly underestimating them.

Not at all. Serious academics and scientists must always question, re-test, re-examine, as you suggest...and they must also be prepared to be proven wrong.

What is so extreme about believing that God is the creator of all life. That God is responsible for creating the conditions that allow life to evolve and adapt?

What is so extreme about believing that man cannot control the forces of nature, or force the planet to adapt and conform to our actions in a way that man chooses?

To be sure, life evolves and adapts. And equally as true is that climate change is a part of the history of our planet. But the source of life and nature, the how and why are still yet to be determined and questions that man will continue to explore long after you and I leave this Earth.

Political partisans seek to exploit knowledge and science for their advantage. It is the academic who strays into partisanship that poses a threat to higher education.

"What is so extreme about believing that God is the creator of all life. "

While 'extreme' is not an apt characterization..I can say that it is a factless assertion.

"What is so extreme about believing that man cannot control the forces of nature"

Um, no one believe man could fly..until the Wright brothers


," or force the planet to adapt and conform to our actions in a way that man chooses?"

Um, we have changed the eco system with our use of fossil fuels and petrol.

"Political partisans seek to exploit knowledge and science for their advantage."

And so conservatives that use religion and values to exploit the masses to their advantage are somehow better?

Best of luck to you and yours as your son goes to college. That has to make you proud to have gotten him thia far. I only have one question that does not require a response. Who picked the college?

Thank you. We are so proud. He grew so much throughout High School, transforming from a good student to an exceptional student. To see him mature and take responsibility, and to become a disciplined student who learned to balance academics, sports and service was a joy to behold and we look forward to helping him achieve his goals for the future.

As to your question. He did. We told him that he could attend any college he could get in to. We counseled him about what type of school would be best for him (choice of majors,size, location, student body, etc). He checked out large public universities as well as small, private ones. He quickly ruled out the larger campuses because he enjoys a smaller setting where he can get to know his teachers and have access to them. He wanted to go to a school where he felt he could be the most successful academically, while still allowing him to have a well-rounded college experience.

I was pleased when we attended orientation as listened to the Provost speak of the university's philosophy which placed great emphasis on encouraging students to become 'engaged students', inviting the to talk to their teachers at every opportunity in the hopes that together student and professors would learn from each other to create knowledge. The Provost referenced Paolo Freire's "Pedagogy of the Oppressed" and his talk sparked a very lengthy discussion between me and my son about the value of developing relationships with your teachers.

"He did"

You know why educators,scientists are Democrats?Its because they value learning ,while republicans value ignorance.

lol

Nonsense, I think conservatives make the mistake of letting their religion debunk proven science but to make a stereotypical statement like that is asinine.

What 'proven' science do you speak of?

Evolution is not proven science but a theory. Same is true for 'global warming.'

What do you have to say about the science that tell us that human life is created when the sperm meets the egg, and left to develop will create a viable human being?

What do you say about the science that tells us that stem cells from adults are proven to be more effective in advancing medicine than embryonic stem cells?

"What do you say about the science that tells us that stem cells from adults are proven to be more effective in advancing medicine than embryonic stem cells?"

That is false. Embryonic stem cells are far more useful in advancing medicine than adult stem cells. They simply pose different challenges.

Well if religion trumping science is not ignorance..what is it?

That is very insulting and not at all true. Diversity is not merely about color and gender. True diversity is found in an environment where no opinion is suppressed or too dominant.

In many of today's colleges and universities student are oppressed, forced to simply recite that which already exists. Student must adapt, conform, rather than grow and create.

In many of today's colleges and universities student are oppressed, forced to simply recite that which already exists. Student must adapt, conform, rather than grow and create.

Huh? So, are you suggesting things like facts, established theory and known variables are oppressive ideas forced upon students to stunt their growth?

Of course eb.......all that science malarkey just confuses us anyway.

Not facts. Facts are absolute. Established theories exist only until they are disproven or proven definitively. Who will challenge, transform or reform if constructive criticism and intellectual examination are disallowed in order for an institution to continue to exist purely for its own sake?

The Earth was flat until it was not.

Ok, in that case I believe my premise that 2+2=5 should be taught in all the schools.

The Earth was considered flat until it was scientifically proven it was round. Its not a theory.

"True diversity is found in an environment where no opinion is suppressed or too dominant. "

False.
That is like saying there is no right or wrong. Diversity of thought is about IDEAS...not ideology.

Right and wrong are often subjected to ideological standards.

What about such studies as medical ethics? Who is right and who is wrong when it comes to the issue of abortion? Science has clearly proved that life begins at conception, yet ideology justifies the taking of that life, even if we as a society believe that murder is wrong.

Or what do we say about a government run healthcare program that would choose to deny a hip replacement to an 80 year old who cannot afford to pay for the procedure, because it is too costly?

Ideas are not free to exist in society unaltered by society.

"Right and wrong are often subjected to ideological standards."

Wrong. Right and wrong are based on FACTS not ideology. That is the core difference between principles, beliefs and values. One is based on FACTS, proven with evidence. The other is about subjective views, and beliefs.

"ideology justifies the taking of that life, even if we as a society believe that murder is wrong. "

The law alone decides when an act is murder. When soldiers killed it is not murder, when individuals commit manslaughter it is not deemed murder and in cases of assault it is called self-defense. Murder is defined on the circumstances UNDER the LAW.

"Who is right and who is wrong when it comes to the issue of abortion? "

The individual's privacy is the law. Abortion is not the issue, the issue is privacy. Individuals who want to create another category of murder, based on religious beliefs calling them the unborn have no factual or legally grounds to make their case. Thus the law is based on the right to privacy. Not subject to individual religious beliefs. Individuals who do not have those religious views, rightfully based on evidence, consider life not viable outside the womb as not a human being. Thus not murder.

If we have laws about murder that do not deem it murder in all circumstances, than the right to privacy is such a circumstance where one's actions are not murder, given the fetus is not viable outside the womb.


Ideas are what make us an open society. Not ideology. There is freedom of religion, and the right to pursue liberty and happiness under the law.

You make valid points, but you cannot categorically say that you are right and I am wrong, which is what the political partisans on the left and the right attempt to do in order to dominate and control debate, public opinion and policy.

As to the question of abortion, there is no denying that if left to develop without interference, life inside the womb will in due time become viable outside the womb. That is a fact.

So, what is murder. Murder is the deliberate and willful taking of a human life.

Abortion is a procedure created by man to interfere, stop life from developing, protecting a woman and a man from the consequences of their actions. Making abortion safe, legal and rare does not change the fact that abortion stops the natural process of life. So what you deem NOT to be murder can also be seen clearly by others as murder. As citizens they have a right to express how they would like to see their government act in response to the issue of abortion, climate change, health care, etc.

And so we debate, engage, hone our opinions, change or solidify our beliefs. We grow as individuals and revel in our freedom.

If you say that abortion stops life from developing then that concedes it is not life.

If you say that murder is the deliberate and wilful taking of a human life, then you have to concede that manslaughter, self-defense, and soldiers killing is not defined as DELIBRATE and WILFIL but rather not deliberate ( manslaughter), self-defense ( not wilful) and soldiers at war ...deliberate and willful but nevertheless not considered murder.

Which means, even if the death of the fetus is deliberate and wilful under the law it can be classified as NOT MURDER just as soldiers killing is.

You know whats insulting?Teaching that the Earth is 6000 years old.Now if you want to go thru life stupid,dont force my child to have a case of the stupid.When conservatives deny global warming, biology, geology evolution I wouldnt want to be taught by self proclaim know nothings.

That's the point Conserv's making though, though....your child should be able to question that, without being made to feel stupid, supressed, or failing their class.

If they disagree and can make their case based on more than the talking points of the day, they should be on an equal footing with the rest of their class.

Naw, individuals who base their views on religiousbeliefs are unsubstantiated by the facts, must demonstrate a non-religious factual basis for their beliefs or they can not be imposed on others, nor do others have to countenance their stupidity ..when it has no rational factual basis.

They can't make their case on any factual grounds which is why they are NOt on equal footing.

Why?

The point's not to impose anyone's ideas, the point's to encourgage a discussion. A bunch of people sitting around saying "yeah, abortion's wrong" (just an example) isn't a discussion; they may as well be holding hands and singing.

I thought part of the point of education-especially higher education-was to get you to learn and think on your own.

So for me, if I was teaching a class and one of my students disagreed with me, I'd be more interested in what they based their opposition on than just the basic fact that they disagree. And that's what I'd grade them on.

I hear you and see your point but then,
why encourage discussion on something which has no factual basis? Abortion is a religious issue.

Religion vs. the right to privacy.

Individuals learn to think by using facts and evidence to process and analyze..when the 'facts' are simply beliefs and religion..then it is NOT a discussion of ideas but one that at it's core is about religious views. Thus, the contentiousness of the discussion...who can challenge anyone's religious views without it turning into a divisive non productive argument?

Beliefs are not facts. In fact, most people would defer to respect for the religious views vs. offending the individual about their chosen religion beliefs. Afterall, it would be unAmerican to do otherwise..

I might allow the student to express their 'beliefs' but the discussion that ensued would clearly delieniate the difference between facts, evidence, and someone's belief system.

In short, what one would be encouraging is a discussion based on the law and the right to privacy and the right of an individual to believe as they chose based on their religion.

Why encourage discussion upon which there is no factual basis. What is there to discuss about 1 + 1 = 2. Nothing.

But when life begins is just as concrete. When a sperm meets an egg, events are set in motion that if left uninterrupted most likely will result in a new, viable human life. That is not a religious view but a scientific fact.

When life begins is far from concrete.
That is a scientific fact. Only religion doubts that.

Why would anyone want to encourage discussion on something which has no factual basis?

to....delieniate the difference between facts, evidence, and someone's belief system.

That doesn't mean, though, that the argument shouldn't be supressed or ignored. How is that productive? What if someone takes an opposing belief, researches it, and forms their own opinion from that?

Isn't that the overall goal...the experience of learning vice the ability to regurgitate?

(and yeah, I may have spelled that wrong)

I think I spelled it wrong as well, it's delineate : )

I don't know necessarily that I would suppress or ignore, but I would engage it knowing that ultimately we are going to be countering religious views with facts, and that in and of itself may devolve into a ugly situation.

The goals are admirable. But when it comes to matters of faith. Facts seldom sway, they create doubt, insecurity and thus an overarching defensiveness which does not typically allow the individual to acknowledge the factual truths as it so rocks who and what they believe at their core.

In short, it is extremely difficult to moderate such a discussion in a meaningful and productive manner.

Faith does not allow for doubt.

The core issue to me, is which will we allow to prevail...the individual right to privacy or the right to religious freedom?

Because, if we view 'killing the unborn' as murder we are deferring to religious tenets..specifically Christianity as it is the ONLY religion that does NOT believe life begins at birth but rather at conception.

How do we balance that in our society which has religious freedoms and individual freedoms i.e. the individual right to privacy?

To me the answer is easy, under our Constitution we cannot make any laws that abridge the right to religious freedom, thus the right to privacy prevails...as to do otherwise means that those who do not hold Christian beliefs are being legally prohibited from actions based on a religious belief.

Oh, yeah...there comes a point when the discussion becomes preaching. And that's where it should be stopped.

Take abortion and put it in the context of healthcare. I've heard (and I've got next to no time to look on my own) that a government-sponsored healthcare system would pay for abortions. IF that's true, then I'd oppose it, because the Declaration says that life is an inalienable right that the Constitution says government can't take without due process.

On that argument, religion's left at the door.

No, that's the problem, religion is not left at the door.

If we oppose it based on 'inalienable right to life'

The core question is when does life begin?

Religions say one thing, but they are not backed by fact.

As we all know, individuals may be breathing on support system but is that life? If the fetus is not viable outside the womb is it life?

Who determines when life begins?

Great commenatry, WRB.

Life begins with BREATH.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it, until BREATH ceases.

I don't think life begins at conception....but you can disagree with that
and still have the argument, I think.

I do not believe it begins at conception either.

If you disagree with that, that IS where the argument begins in the context of what the original 'discussion' you posed

One of the more interesting things I found out LONG ago was that most insurance companies would not insure infants until the 14th day of life. This was in relation to LIFE insurance. And - it could be different now; I don't know that.

There are rigid ideologues on the left and right to be sure, but to not allow them a voice on college campuses, and deny students the experience of being exposed to the greatest diversity of thought and opinion will only retard a student's ability to grow as an individual.

Name a rigid ideology on the left, please. Individuals who choose to adhere to ideological beliefs limit their own growth as an individual which is why they can't tolerate diversity.

Saying the sky is not blue or there is no such thing as gravity is NOT diversity of thought..it is ignorance based on the ignoring reality of fact.

It shatters their core ideological beliefs on the basis of sound reasoning and facts.

Their development is retarded by their own obtuseness and WILFUL ignorance of the facts.

Big Government is better than Big Business.

Nuclear power is bad for the environment.

Global warming is man-made.

Embryonic stem cell research is more effective than adult stem cell research.

Evolution must negate the existence of God.

I do not know one conservative who does not believe that the sky is blue or that gravity exists.

But you must concede that there are many moral and ethical questions that allow for many opinions and theories to exist.

I like how you start the morning off with...Truthtelling! :)

Whose Identity Politics?

By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, July 14, 2009

The only real suspense in the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor is whether the Republican Party will persist in tying its fortunes to an anachronistic claim of white male exceptionalism and privilege
Republicans' outrage, both real and feigned, at Sotomayor's musings about how her identity as a "wise Latina" might affect her judicial decisions is based on a flawed assumption: that whiteness and maleness are not themselves facets of a distinct identity. Being white and male is seen instead as a neutral condition, the natural order of things. Any "identity" -- black, brown, female, gay, whatever -- has to be judged against this supposedly "objective" standard.

Thus it is irrelevant if Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. talks about the impact of his background as the son of Italian immigrants on his rulings -- as he did at his confirmation hearings -- but unforgivable for Sotomayor to mention that her Puerto Rican family history might be relevant to her work.

Thus it is possible for Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) to say with a straight face that heritage and experience can have no bearing on a judge's work, as he posited in his opening remarks yesterday, apparently believing that the white male justices he has voted to confirm were somehow devoid of heritage and bereft of experience.

The whole point of Sotomayor's much-maligned "wise Latina" speech was that everyone has a unique personal history -- and that this history has to be acknowledged before it can be overcome. Denying the fact of identity makes us vulnerable to its most pernicious effects. This seems self-evident. I don't see how a political party that refuses to accept this basic principle of diversity can hope to prosper, given that soon there will be no racial or ethnic majority in this country.

There is more.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

No one should deny 'the fact of identity' but identity MUST be overcome for true justice to prevail. "Empathy" is an emotion but to quote Aristotle, "The law is reason free from desire." Empathy is a desire to share another's feelings and emotions, to put oneself in another's shoes. Empathy is a desirable trait for a legislator, but not a judge.

The judge's ability to 'put oneself in another shoes' is essential when make decisions which will impact society as a whole. We are a country of laws, because we believe that there will be justice under the law.The laws are there to create an orderly society and thus their impact on society must always be considered in making decisions. As the law is what prevents tyranny.

Identity need not be overcome for justice to prevail.

No. The judge must interpret the law in accordance with our Constitution and apply the law as written. It is the role of the legislature to exercise empathy when creating and writing laws.

So you agree with separate but equal,restrictions on women's rights,corporate rights over individual rights and the rights of white male's over everyone else.

Yeah I figured you would agree with that whole "3/5ths" thing.

I wholeheartedly agree! The negative identity of ones skin color and race MUST be overcome for true justice to prevail in these racist United States.

That was such a spot on editorial by Eugene.

I recommend it to all.

Goldman executives sold $700m of stock
Goldman Unloaded Stock After Lehman
While benefiting from a $10 billion government payment, Goldman Sachs executives sold nearly $700 million of stock after Lehman Brohters collapsed last September. During a comparable period a year earlier, Goldman partners sold less than $450 million in stock. The sell-off comes at an awkward time for the leading financial firm―executives were cashing in right as the U.S. government was providing assistance to the financial sector. The bank was expected to report strong second-quarter earnings Tuesday based on rebounding trading profits.

Read it at Financial Times
Posted at 6:12 AM, Jul 14, 2009

By Greg Farrell in New York

Executives at Goldman Sachs sold almost $700m worth of stock following the collapse of Lehman Brothers last September, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Most of the sales occurred during the period in which the investment bank enjoyed the support of $10bn from the troubled asset relief programme.
Goldman rebounds from crisis of confidence - Jul-14
Record fundraising buoys banks’ earnings - Jun-28
Ex-Goldman employee accused of cyber-theft - Jul-07
In depth: US banks - May-07


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/01ca4732-6fed-11de-b835...

For me, there are no surprises learning that new virus resembles 1918 virus. I have been following mishaps with 1918 virus for awhile. Are you surprised learning that the 1918 virus is like the new virus and that a familiar newsmaker stands to make a fortune ?

Flashback:Scientists Resurrect Deadly Flu Virus

(Oct 6, 2005) Scientists have resurrected one of the world's great killers in the laboratory, hoping that the genetic secrets within the 1918 influenza virus will help them predict and combat the next major microbial threat to mankind. In a contained laboratory at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, scientists used reverse genetics to re-create the 1918 flu virus that killed 20 million to 50 million people, according to studies released Wednesday. Scientists say that although the 1918 strain probably does not represent a significant human health threat today, it can provide insight into dangerous types of contemporary influenza, such as the highly lethal avian strain now circulating among birds, which some scientists fear could evolve into the next catastrophic pandemic. "This is truly a spectacular event," Dr. John Shanley, professor of medicine and director of infectious diseases at the University of Connecticut Health Center, said of the studies published in the journals Nature and Science. "To resurrect a virus and gain useful scientific information from it is remarkable." An analysis of the genetic structure of the 1918 strain, also known as Spanish flu, reveals that it was an avian influenza, like the current H5N1 strain that has infected poultry and migratory birds in Asia and caused scores of human deaths.

Rumsfeld stands to make a fortune on royalties

(Oct 30, 2005) Rumsfeld stands to make a fortune as a panicked world population scrambles to buy a drug worthless in curing effects of alleged Avian Flu. Tamiflu was developed and patented in 1996 by a California biotech firm, Gilead Sciences Inc. Gilead is a NASDAQ (GILD) listed stock company which prefers to maintain a low profile in the current rush to Tamiflu. That might be because of who is tied to Gilead. In 1997, before he became US Secretary of Defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld was named Chairman of the Board of Gilead Sciences, where he remained until early 2001 when he became Defense Secretary. Rumsfeld had been on the board of Gilead since 1988 according to a January 3 1997 company press release

New flu resembles feared 1918 virus: study

(July 14, 2009) The new H1N1 influenza virus bears a disturbing resemblance to the virus strain that caused the 1918 flu pandemic, with a greater ability to infect the lungs than common seasonal flu viruses, researchers reported on Monday. Tests in several animals confirmed other studies that have shown the new swine flu strain can spread beyond the upper respiratory tract to go deep into the lungs -- making it more likely to cause pneumonia, the international team said. In addition, they found that people who survived the 1918 pandemic seem to have extra immune protection against the virus, again confirming the work of other researchers.
"When we conducted the experiments in ferrets and monkeys, the seasonal virus did not replicate in the lungs," said Yoshihiro Kawaoka of the University of Wisconsin, who led the study.

WHO says new flu "unstoppable", calls for vaccine

(July 14, 2009) Saying the new H1N1 virus is "unstoppable", the World Health Organization gave drug makers a full go-ahead to manufacture vaccines against the pandemic influenza strain on Monday and said healthcare workers should be the first to get one.

Every country will need to vaccinate citizens against the swine flu virus and must choose who else would get priority after nurses, doctors and technicians, said Dr. Marie-Paule Kieny, WHO director of the Initiative for Vaccine Research.

Several reports showed the new virus attacks people differently than seasonal flu -- affecting younger people, the severely obese and seemingly healthy adults, and causing disease deep in the lungs.

Now for something really funny.Sarah Palin can write even though what she is talking about I have no idea.
The 'Cap And Tax' Dead End
By Sarah Palin
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...

Don't you just *love* how easily *Sarah Palin" was published in the august pages of the Washington Post? They fire Dan Froomkin but hire the likes of Bill Kristol (fully demonstrating the advantage of nepotism especially when intelligence is in short supply)? Pay for play "salons"?

Then again, I think I know how "Sarah Palin" was published.

The Post just gets sorrier and sorrier every year.

oh i'd love to hear her take on how the cap & trade plan that she & mccain campaigned on, is suddenly going to bring about the end of the world...oh wait, we're not supposed to remember that once again she was "for it, before she was against it."

Yesterday I read the GOP leaders tried to do an intervention with her to help her succeed in her current job, that didn't work. You need a decoder ring to listen to anything she says and now she miraculously flings out printable op-eds? Who are her ghostwriters?

didn't realize I hit the button twice.

Please, we know damn well Palin didn't write that. If she did, the editors of the paper must havve lost their minds trying to construct coherent sentences.

Why didn't she write about her genuis solutions to cap and trade taxes white dubyah was shitting on America? Go away BITCH, PLEASE!

Glenn beck Slams Softball Questioning of Sotomayer...But There Were No Questions Today (Video)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/13/glenn-...

Glenn Beck is very upset with the softball questions that the Senators offered up to Judge Sonia Sotomayor during her first day of confirmation hearings. To prove his point, Beck played a video montage of Democratic senators praising Sotomayor, notably in statements and not questions.

Unfortunately for Beck, there were no questions today. The first day of the hearings is when Senators and the nominee make opening statements.

Just goes to prove what an idiot he is. What did Dean Wormer say in Animal House "...fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life." He may not be drunk (though he is allegedly a recovering alcholic) he is fat and stupid, and with all of the assinine things he says, it would probably be better if he was drunk or high or on something. At least that would explain it.

Yup!

Ya know .....

Doesn't it just make you want to get in your car, drive to wherever this idiot lives and smack the SHIT right up & out of him.

Even the little bit I'd heard and read GAVE the time-line, and if I'm not mistaken - the chairman (Sen. Patrick Leahy) of the committee TOLD Judge Sotomayor what to expect this week.

Beck practices what I call "deliberate stupidity."

.... oh wait ....

Beck is playing to his audience, giving exactly what they want. That is the truly sad part, that he actually has an audience.

As my Grandmother would say...He takes the cake! lol

Mornin'

Good Morning, Myth! :)

Mornin'

Mornin'

Mornin'

Mornin'

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/home_top_stories...

The decision is made Creative Steps will not go back and will proceed w/ lawsuit.
As I wrote yesterday I think a negotiated outcome is better as the money will go to the lawyers, whom I would rather see at the bottom of the pool. The only result will be one more closed pool because Philly can't keep their own pools open(I can't ignore that Mayor Nutter just summarily shut them all and was forced to backtrack. It was doen w/ public/private partnerships which is the route he should have taken to begin w/. As someone w/ a rep for forging public/private partnerships, I have never gotten over this move). So the following is where we are now.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/2009...

Good, For many reasons, I am happy Creative Steps decided not to go back to that pool.

The Obama Family looks tired!

Yeah, from Moscow, to Italy to Ghana and back to USA...probably produces some SERIOUS Jet lag..traveling to 3 continents even on AF1 is going to be exhausting.

fyi.....& there is a link in the article to presente.org which has a poster you can download with a picture of Sotomayor which says "I stand with Sotomayor." Yesterday, I noticed people protesting in D.C. were holding up some similar to this.

http://www.americablog.com/2009/07/making-repub...

"Making Republicans own Rush's racism on Spanish-language radio"

Wow, did anyone know about this?
http://www.drlaniac.com/Articles/view.asp?file=...

It's a good thing I never was into energy drinks.

There was a story here about the owners of energy drink (Savage's wife and son ??) who were distancing themselves from Savage to protect their product.

Budget deficit tops $1 trillion for first time - The federal deficit has topped $1 trillion for the first time ever and could grow to nearly $2 trillion by this fall, intensifying fears about higher interest rates, inflation and the strength of the dollar.

Here’s a chart - Deficit nosedives

June budget gap $94.32 billion, record for June - The U.S. government rang up a $94.32 billion budget deficit in June, a record for the month … The Treasury Department said on Monday that June marked the ninth straight month in which the government had run a deficit. In June 2008, the budget enjoyed a $33.55 billion surplus … Through the first nine months of fiscal 2009, the government has racked up a $1.086 trillion deficit. That compares with a shortfall of only $285.85 billion in the comparable year-ago period.

Obama continues to break old records whilst setting new ones…

The President looks tired as a mule.

Yes, he does look tired. It's probably Jet lag and the pressure and stress of having to come back and get congress to help pass that healthcare bill.

Yeah, he is feeling the stress. But his family helps him escape some of it but the presidency is a real non-stop pressure cooker.

Good Morning.Your Tuesday Jam.Enjoy
Breakwater - No Limit (1978)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_uF3npmqg4

I love that dress!

aaaawwww they look good and tired