The "Pretenders"

No, not them.

These are the folks--leftist/prog bloggers, pundits and Pols, the 'changey-hopey" crowd, i.e.--who continue to seek so avidly for, and to insist so valiantly on finding reasons OTHER than deep-seated, endemic, still mostly undiluted racism in USer culture to explain the rabidly vocal "resistance" to "President Obama's" ostensible desire to reform the provision of health-insurance for average Murkins.

The question is: What provokes this large, vitriolic cabal of (mainly working- and lower- and lower-middle class, mainly white) citizens, many of whom are already recipients of the State's largesse, to rage so furiouslt against proposals that, if enacted, would improve THEIR OWN health care, either by offering a 'public' option or by eventually eliminating the Health Insurance Parasites as middle-men, altogether?

And the answer, as plainly as ever has been possible to enunciate, is good, old Murkin institutional (as if there were any other kind) racism. Here's Tim Wise, a widely known lecturer on the subject:


Scholars studying the phenomenon have always averred that racism is not mostly, or even particularly, about individual acts of bias, bigotry, or discrimination. Individuals possessed of those demons exist in all human groups. But it has often been difficult to point to non-abstract examples (explicit 'systems,' or 'policies') which would satisfactorily illuminate the relevant social/political outlines of institutional racism in practice. The unfolding health insurance/health care 'debate' provides a paradigmatic case-in-point. That is, it is an OBVIOUS iteration of the (implicit) "racist" system by which the "superior" majority uses its political power to deny equal, fair access to a 'public good' (improved health care) to the despised, "inferior" minority, even though it means the majority will also be deprived (albeit less so).

And the animosity generated by the right-wing against the policies attributed to Obama apparently stems from the perception--fondly, even rapturously promulgated by the drooling fucktards of the flying-monkey right, the militia movement, and the nativist morons like Dobbs and Beck--that Obama is a disloyal, "un" or "anti" American 'plant' or 'mole' foisted off on the electorate by the "liberals" in an elaborate exercise in Affirmative Action aimned at finally ending the power of the "superior" majority.

(That may happen, in 100 years, but it won't be because of any health-insurance plan Obama happens to sign into law later this year.)

If you've not heard/of Tim Wise, now's the time to start.
Scholars studying the phenomenon have always averred that racism is not mostly, or even particularly, about individual acts of bias, bigotry, or discrimination. Individuals possessed of those demons exist in all human groups. But it has often been difficult to point to non-abstract examples (explicit 'systems,' or 'policies') which would satisfactorily illuminate the relevant social/political outlines of institutional racism in practice. The unfolding health insurance/health care 'debate' provides a paradigmatic case-in-point. That is, it is an OBVIOUS iteration of the (implicit) "racist" system by which the "superior" majority uses its political power to deny equal, fair access to a 'public good' (improved health care) to the despised, "inferior" minority, even though it means the majority will also be deprived (albeit less so).

And the animosity generated by the right-wing against the policies attributed to Obama apparently stems from the perception--fondly, even rapturously promulgated by the drooling fucktards of the flying-monkey right, the militia movement, and the nativist morons like Dobbs and Beck--that Obama is a disloyal, "un" or "anti" American 'plant' or 'mole' foisted off on the electorate by the "liberals" in an elaborate exercise in Affirmative Action aimned at finally ending the power of the "superior" majority.

(That may happen, in 100 years, but it won't be because of any health-insurance plan Obama happens to sign into law later this year.)

Scrape the ridiculous rhetoric away, and it comes down to the fact that, for now, anyway, it is still considered bad form to stand aside and shout "Nigger" at black folks, so those who feel compelled to do it (and that seems NOT to be a small number of Middull Murkins) have fastened on 'issues' around which to organize their rage at being "led," even nominally, by an "inferior" race...

Make no mistake: That IS the issue, has always BEEN the issue, and will always BE the issue...

Barack Obama, Protector of Torturers

(Cartoon by 'Mr. Fish; used w/out permission)

Ahhhh, Transparency!!!

The headline on Jason Leopold's piece on The Public Record says it all:

Obama Promises Senators He Will Help Pass Bill Banning Torture Photos

President Barack Obama sent a letter July 29 to Senators Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham informing them that he would work with Congress to ensure legislation is passed that would block the release of any photographs and videos depicting U.S. Soldiers abusing detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan captured after 9/11.

The disclosure was made in a footnote in a 33-page petition the Obama administration filed Friday with the U.S. Supreme Court. Neither the White House nor spokespeople for Lieberman and Graham responded to phone calls and e-mail queries seeking a copy of the letter.

The petition confirms that the contents of the 44 images at issue, which was first reported by The Public Record, includes one in which a female solider pointed a broom at one detainee “as if I was sticking the end of a broom stick into [his] rectum.”

Other photos at issues show U.S. soldiers pointing guns at the heads of hooded and bound detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan. The filing also notes that the detainee abuse was investigated by the U.S. Army’s Criminal Investigation Division and “three of the six investigations led to criminal charges and in two of those cases, the accused were found guilty and punished.” [Background on the photographs can be found HERE and HERE.]

The petition requests that the high court take up the administration’s appeal of a lower court’s ruling requiring the Department of Defense to turn over the photographs to the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit in 2003 to gain access to the images.

In June, the Senate unanimously passed the Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009, an amendment to the Supplemental Appropriations spending bill sponsored by Lieberman and Graham. The House of Representatives referred the amendment to two House committees on June 18 where it is pending.

Additionally, on July 9, the Senate unanimously passed the amendment again as it was attached to the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill.

“The President recently informed the sponsors of the pending detainee photograph legislation that he “support[s] this legislation” and “will work with Congress to get it passed,” says the footnote in the Supreme Court petition prepared by Solicitor General Elena Kagan, quoting from Obama’s July 29 letter to Lieberman and Graham.

The bill has faced opposition in the House and that may explain why the Obama administration has decided to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court if the House kills the measure altogether

Lieberman, I-Conn., and Graham, R-S.C., were sharply critical of Obama’s decision not to fight a final ruling in March by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that called upon the Department of Defense to release the photographs. Obama indicated he would abide by that decision but he abruptly shifted his stance after he was publicly criticized by the likes of Dick Cheney and his daughter, Liz.

Lieberman and Graham’s amendment would authorize the Secretary of Defense to prohibit the release of the abuse photographs and videos for three years and renew it for three year intervals thereafter. The Obama administration would presumably drop its appeal if the House passes the legislation when it returns from its summer break in September.

Darryl Compton Executive Director of the Bay Area Radio Museum & Hall of Fame.

(Artist's impression of Lee Rodgers, five minutes from air)

The estimable Mr Spocko gives a lesson today in the things he does best: reasonable, rational appeals to common sense and common decency, to combat the vile and malign forces deployed by the fascisti to interrupt, and ultimately commandeer, the democratic discourse. His target is, as it frequently is, a certain Bay Area radio pundit/hate jock named Lee Rodgers, who is to be inducted into some local celebrity "hall of fame>." Spocko deftly and adeptly flays Rodgers' rotting, feculent, diseased 'persona' in ways which are both ruthless and exemplary. I just wish I thought a lot more people would be able to actually comprehend what he's so amply and ably demonstrating.

There is a preface which is, in Mr. Spocko's usual, elegant, clear way, eminently readable, and contextual, after which the letter begins:

Darryl:

I know the Hall of Fame is a popularity contest and a lot of very vile broadcasters are popular, but before you honor Lee Rodgers you might want to actually listen to some of his current shows to see how far he has descended from the Lee Rodgers you and others might have known at one time.

You can listen on the Internet to a current show and hear some of his genocidal comments directed toward directed toward Iraqi's, Muslims and liberals.

In addition to his desire to "massacre every last damn one" of the Iraqis he is un-apologetically pro-torture. And if you think that Rodgers apologized for his torture comments, think again. He did NOT apologize for talking about torturing the blowing the brains out of a criminal (link) Here's audio of Rodgers not apologizing for those comments and embracing them. (Link)

Suggesting that someone suspected of a crime be burned alive is just another day on Rodger's talk radio (You will note his old sidekick, Melanie Morgan, added the "hogtied" to the being burned alive comment, I guess when she wants someone to die in a fire she really wants to make sure it happens.) These vicious comments aren't just one time outbursts, they are the backbone of his show, along with his name calling and his constant talk about testicles (link to multiple audio clips)

I suppose Rodgers will have to come back to the Bay Area to pick up his award, but he clearly hates San Francisco and the majority of the people in the city. I know this because he says so almost every day as he broadcasts out of his home in Arizona.

And that's just for starters. The sum and total of the post has the net effect of 1) making Rodgers (justly, imho) out to be a vlie, foul-mouthed, hate-spewing racist bigot, and 2) offering the aforesaid "Darryl the choice of his party, or his soul.

Me? I'm guessin' Rodgers is still going in the Bay Area Radio Museum & Hall of Fame.

Blackwater Founder/Eminense Gris, Erik Prince

There seems to be a significant amount of evidence that suggests that Bushevik ally, and private warlord/violence impressario Erik Prince could, and SHOULD, face murder charges.

It couldn't happen to a nicer, more deserving fellow than this fascist smudge of runny catshit. Jeremy Scahill (who else) delivers the indictment at The Nation (and Democracy Now):

A former Blackwater employee and an ex-US Marine who has worked as a security operative for the company have made a series of explosive allegations in sworn statements filed on August 3 in federal court in Virginia. The two men claim that the company's owner, Erik Prince, may have murdered or facilitated the murder of individuals who were cooperating with federal authorities investigating the company. The former employee also alleges that Prince "views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe," and that Prince's companies "encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life."

Jeremy's quite the propagandist. You'll note how the character-blackening, but apparently otherwise irrelevant accusations of general beastliness arre grafted seemlessly onto the charges? There is more meat here, which helps with the context.

In their testimony, both men also allege that Blackwater was smuggling weapons into Iraq. One of the men alleges that Prince turned a profit by transporting "illegal" or "unlawful" weapons into the country on Prince's private planes. They also charge that Prince and other Blackwater executives destroyed incriminating videos, emails and other documents and have intentionally deceived the US State Department and other federal agencies. The identities of the two individuals were sealed out of concerns for their safety.

These allegations, and a series of other charges, are contained in sworn affidavits, given under penalty of perjury, filed late at night on August 3 in the Eastern District of Virginia as part of a seventy-page motion by lawyers for Iraqi civilians suing Blackwater for alleged war crimes and other misconduct. Susan Burke, a private attorney working in conjunction with the Center for Constitutional Rights, is suing Blackwater in five separate civil cases filed in the Washington, DC, area. They were recently consolidated before Judge T.S. Ellis III of the Eastern District of Virginia for pretrial motions. Burke filed the August 3 motion in response to Blackwater's motion to dismiss the case. Blackwater asserts that Prince and the company are innocent of any wrongdoing and that they were professionally performing their duties on behalf of their employer, the US State Department.

Go reat the rest. It's pretty chilling, especially when we recall that the Bushevik regime gave Blackwater virtually a carte blance to police New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

Not To Unnecessarily Belabor The Remains Of A Decomposing Equine, But...

"CONDUCT UNBECOMING A JUNGLE MONKEY - BACK TO ONE'S ROOTS."

theMom (Attentive Aphorist), following the story of the slimy Officer Barrett (him the of Gates-gate follow-up outrage, and late also of the Boston Police Department)--who has lodged a legal complaint against the Department, demanding compensation for treatment he considers to have been unfair and discriminatory--chased down the unredacted text of Officer Barrett's 'crie 'd'coeur' sent to Boston Globe columnist Yvonne Abraham, and posted it this morning.

Qouth she: "This is the e-mail which Mr. Barrett chose to send enmasse. Yes, I believe he is a racist. Yes, I believe he is sexist. Yes, I believe he is a complete fucking moron!!"

Article writer, That was, by far, the worst article I've ever read. I am a former English teacher, writer, current police officer. father, husband and military veteran. You need to be corrected and I certainly hope others have attempted, for your written messages and material is so 4th grade level. I am embarrassed I paid the 1.50 for the paper [rest assured, it is my aim to tell as many readers The Boston Globe and your biased reporting is both sub standard and strictly one sided]. For you are not professional and basically, your writing is ridiculous. A reader may assume, per your article, that criminals are never well-dressed with a tucked in polo [2nd paragraph] . Your defense [4th paragraph] of Gates while he is on the phone while being confronted [INDEED] with a police officer is assuming he has rights when considered a suspect. He is a suspect and will always be a suspect. His first priority of effort should be to get off the phone and comply with police, for if I was the officer he verbally assaulted like a banana-eating jungle monkey, I would have sprayed him in the face with OC deserving of his belligerent non-compliance. Further [5th paragraph], a reader may assume that crimes only happen in back alleys at 0300?! You're kidding me, right? Are you still in the 5th grade, Catholic School? That paragraph was as pathetic as jungle monkey gibberish - I might as well ax you the question. "Is this your first test at reporting?" You do not understand roles, tactics and dangers police officers face, as apparently you think no one wearing a polo might possess a firearm or knife on his/her person. Might you fathom a woman could be a criminal? Or are criminals all hairy, dirty, stinky, mean looking ugly men? You are a hot little bird with minimal experiences in a harsh field. You are a fool. An infidel. You have no business writing for a US newspaper nevermind detailing and analyzing half truths. You should serve me coffee and donuts on Sunday morning. My last point counters your final 2 paragraphs, in which you state Gates is "this immensely famous expert on race" - you really have to be kidding me? Famous for what? Expert why and says who? What has he done for me and my family? What has he done for the law enforcement community or military veterans or to secure freedoms and our borders in this country? What has he done to help limit and reduce my income tax? He has proven to work to get himself attention and become a wealthy lecturer. He lectures students on the subject of racial ethics and profiling. Jee whiz. I must attend that lecture lest I lose my identity and right to free speech and the right to celebrate God and beliefs as I see fit. I am not a racist. but I am prejudice towards people who are stupid and pretend to stand up and preach for something they claim is freedom when it is merely attention because you do not receive enough of it in your little fear-dwelling circle of on-the-bandwagon followers. You mention Gates' charges were dropped but that it was too late to stop the damage? Damage? Still kidding? You need to serve a day with the infantry and get swarmed by black gnats while manning your sector. Or you just need to get slapped, look in the mirror and admit, "Wow. I am a failure. I am a follower. Who am I kidding?" Again, I like a warm cruller and hot Panamanian, black. No sugar. Your final statement reads, "Gates, whose great success has allowed him to transcend the racial divide-" to which I ask, when did he transcend? He indeed has transcended back to a bumbling jungle monkey, thus he forever tremains amid this nation's great social/racial divide that makes it a free and great nation mixed with crazy and awkward differences. Go ahead, ax me what I think? Gates is a goddamned fool and you the article writer simply a poor follower and maybe worse, a poor writer. Your article title should read CONDUCT UNBECOMING A JUNGLE MONKEY - BACK TO ONE'S ROOTS. JB

"Of course, I just had to highlight all the "jungle monkey" references. I trust you can pick out the "ask" problem. So don't make me ax you again!"

(Would that be the "syntask?"...Ed.)

As I remarked on her site, if this guy was the quality of cop that his prose reveals him to have been an 'English teacher,' then neither profession is significantly impoverished by his banishment.

Officer Barrett, Boston Police Department His Lawyer

All glories and tribute to Sadly, No! productions

Climate-change Denier Anthony Watts

DOTOF™: the invaluable Pharyngula/PZ Myers.

Watt was not too happy with his public evisceration, however, and scurried off to get it taken down. Here it is, reposted. Enjoy — it's a very good takedown of the climate denialist claims.

What's so interesting, as much as anything, are the criteria by which NOA measures change...