Friday, September 30, 2005

Conspiracy Theories

Do you believe in conspiracy theories? I'm torn on the issue, because I'd like to think we live in a world devoid of them, but with such a corrupt GOP party in power right now, I can't be sure of anything anymore.

I'm gonna share with you two theories of mine, one about John Bolton, the Bush-appointed US Ambassador to the UN, and the other about Vice President Dick Cheney.

I just heard that today Judith Miller, the New York Times reporter jailed because she refused to testify about the Valerie Plame case, will finally testify. Will she reveal her source? We know Karl Rove and Lewis Libby are both involved, but there is a third person from the Bush administration who is still unknown.

Is that person Bolton? At the time of the leak, he was working under then Secretary of State Colin Powell, and was very adamant to go to war with Iraq, to avoid reaching an agreement with Iran, and to hold steady against North Korea. The main weapon against him at his confirmation hearings -and the reason why he wasn't confirmed by the Senate for his Ambassadorship- is that he wouldn't accept intelligence that didn't confirm to his wishes and needs. He would threaten people with being fired if they didn't give him what he wanted. And what did Joe Wilson -Valerie Plame's husband- do? He told the world the intelligence Bolton had worked so hard to fabricate was a lie. How hard is it to imagine that Bolton wanted to get back at Wilson by divulging his wife's CIA identity?

Now, my conspiracy theory regarding him goes like this: Bolton comes up with the plan to out Ms. Plame. He tells Rove (nothing escapes the big black hole in the White House,) who approves, since he's no stranger to smearing campaigns himself, and somehow Libby gets involved. The plan backfires, since apparently it's sort of illegal -who would have thought?- to out a CIA operative, especially an undercover one like Ms. Plame, and an independent investigation is launched. Rove and Libby are unmasked, and soon the trap might snap around Bolton, so what can Bush do to help one of the people who helped him steal the election in 2000? (He was involved with the legal team that eventually would plead Bush's case to the Supreme Court.) He makes him an Ambassador, who enjoys diplomatic immunity and cannot be arrested (Bush's hand was forced here when the Democrats in the Senate threatened a filibuster to block his nomination; but fear not, Bush protects his own, no matter what!)

Brilliant. Rove must have thought of that one. Although, you'd think Rove would try to save himself first, unless the case against him and Libby isn't as strong as it is against Bolton.

What do you think of that?

Now, Cheney. He just went for knee surgery this past weekend (it was supposed to be on one knee, but they ended up operating on both.) It seems like it went well, and he's recovering, but he's had several heart attacks in the past and has at least a bypass and a defibrillator in his chest, so his health is not what I would call "great."

Usually a presidential ticket tries to hold on to the White House as long as it can. The president can run twice, and then he usually passes the baton on to the vice president, who can himself run twice. However, since the day he was selected by Bush, Cheney always held he'd never run for president. He would serve with Bush and be done. And nothing suggests he might change his mind and run in 2008 (also, I don't think he would EVER be able to win, which means that Rove would never allow him to run.)

Now, this means, plainly, that Bush's reign is over in three years (and not one moment too soon!) He doesn't have a 'prince' who someday might be 'king.'

And this is where my conspiracy theory comes in. Given that the Iraq war is terribly unpopular, Bush's poll numbers are in the crapper, the GOP's widespread corruption dominates the news, it's unlikely that Bush might try to attack another country, say Iran. What does he need Cheney for then? If no war can be waged, a hack like Cheney has very little to do, and we saw it when Katrina struck and the vice president stayed on vacation even longer than the president did. Rove might then force Cheney to "resign for health reasons" (who would doubt that, given his medical chart is probably longer than the Odyssey?), so that Bush can appoint a new vice president who WILL run in 3 years. Someone like Rudy Giuliani, vastly liked by Republicans and even some conservative Democrats, who could pose a real challenge to any Democratic challenger. He would even have 3 years of on-the-job training to show as credential. He might be unbeatable.

I wonder if that's what's in the cards. What do you think?

Discuss.

You win some, you lose some

He did it. Schwarzenegger vetoed the gay-marriage bill that had been approved by the California legislature a couple of weeks ago. He said he'd veto it, but I was still holding out hope that he'd change his mind and decide to stand up for civil rights instead of bigotry.

Now, all we can do is hope that the cases working their way up the legal system reach the Supreme Court -and we win- before a proposed constitutional amendment reaches the ballot, since we might very well lose that one. After all, Proposition 22, which said that only a marriage between a man and woman is valid, won with over 60% of the votes, so I consider the chance of the public voting in favor of a constitutional amendment as very likely.

Schwarzenegger's reason for vetoing the bill:
The governor said the state constitution bars the Legislature from enacting a law allowing gay marriage without another vote by the public and that Leno's bill wouldn't provide for that vote.

Schwarzenegger noted that a state appeals court was considering whether the state's ban on gay marriage is constitutional and that the issue would likely be decided by the California Supreme Court.

"If the ban of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional this bill is not necessary," he said. "If the ban is constitutional this bill is ineffective."
Sorry, Arnold (we can be on first name terms here, since you just trashed my civil rights,) but you miss the point of being a Governor here. Just because the Supreme Court might one day decide on the issue, doesn't mean that you can't be pro-active yourself. Like Mark Leno, the openly gay representative who sponsored the bill, said "Schwarzenegger has missed a historic opportunity to stand up for civil rights."
"He cannot claim to support fair and equal legal protection for same-sex couples and veto the very bill that would have provided it to them," Leno said. "Words are cheap. We're looking for action. We're looking for leadership."
Well said, Mr. Leno. We are looking for leadership, and apparently Schwarzenegger is more interested in not alienating the religious right (his political base) in order to get re-elected, than in standing up for all his state's citizens.

Shame on you, Mr. Governor. I despise you.

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 1 IT'S TOMORROW!! PS: as an aside, tomorrow another law in Connecticut becomes effective: only hands-free cell phone calls allowed.

Thursday, September 29, 2005

Thank you, but no, thank you.

I came across this letter from poet Sharon Olds to Laura Bush in which she declined an invitation to speak at the National Book Festival in Washington DC the same day of the anti-war demonstrations last Saturday. Olds rejected the invitation by saying:
But I could not face the idea of breaking bread with you. I knew that if I sat down to eat with you, it would feel to me as if I were condoning what I see to be the wild, highhanded actions of the Bush Administration.

What kept coming to the fore of my mind was that I would be taking food from the hand of the First Lady who represents the Administration that unleashed this war and that wills its continuation, even to the extent of permitting "extraordinary rendition": flying people to other countries where they will be tortured for us.

So many Americans who had felt pride in our country now feel anguish and shame, for the current regime of blood, wounds and fire. I thought of the clean linens at your table, the shining knives and the flames of the candles, and I could not stomach it.
Who could have said it better, but a poet?

Laura got zinged big time here. I really, really do wonder what she thinks of her husband's policies and actions. Does she have an opinion about them (who wouldn't?) Does she express them to him? Or would he hit her if she did? Maybe she's afraid of speaking up. I think I'd rather believe that then think she agrees with that troglodyte of a husband.

A crony?

Well, I just had a scary thought. Bush has the tendency to appoint or hire people who have helped him (or other cronies of his) in the past, like Michael Brown, former head of FEMA, or John Bolton, current US Ambassador to the UN. And we all saw how welcomed or effective there people, without a shred of experience or competence, really are.

Today, John Roberts, Bush's pick, was confirmed as Chief Justice. Will he turn out to be another crony? I know the Senators heavily scrutinized him and his work, and they all said he was quite brilliant and knowledgeable.

I also know that with Bush, you never really know for sure until it's too late.

Chief Justice #17

This just in from CNN:
The Senate today voted 78-22 to confirm Judge John Roberts as the nation's 17th chief justice. Senate approval capped a two-month process surprisingly free of the partisan rancor widely expected when President Bush nominated Roberts in July. All of the Senate's Republicans, and about half of the Democrats, voted for Roberts. Roberts is the successor to William Rehnquist, who died earlier this month.
Let's just hope for the best. At 50, he'll probably sit in that chair until 2040, minimum. Not a good prospect if he turns out to be a right wingnut, which is what the religious right is hoping.

The best thing about his confirmation? Scalia didn't get the job... and never will.

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 2 Feels unreal. Saturday.

Wednesday, September 28, 2005

Global Warming: A Reality

I posted earlier about the Arctic sea ice slowly melting away for good, and the dangers this would pose, including the increased violence of hurricanes. Here is another good article from The Independent, in which Sir John Lawton, chairman of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution and one of Britain's leading scientists, believes that super-powerful hurricanes now hitting the United States are the "smoking gun" of global warming.
Hurricanes were getting more intense, just as computer models predicted they would, because of the rising temperature of the sea, he said. "The increased intensity of these kinds of extreme storms is very likely to be due to global warming."
Thankfully, some people aren't afraid to speak up against the Bush administration's doctrine that denies the reality of global warming:
Asked what conclusion the Bush administration should draw from two hurricanes of such high intensity hitting the US in quick succession, Sir John said: "If what looks like is going to be a horrible mess causes the extreme sceptics about climate change in the US to reconsider their opinion, that would be an extremely valuable outcome."

"There are a group of people in various parts of the world ... who simply don't want to accept human activities can change climate and are changing the climate."

"I'd liken them to the people who denied that smoking causes lung cancer."
Recent research shows that hurricanes are getting more violent, suggests climate change is the cause, and shows that storms of the intensity of Hurricane Katrina have become almost twice as common in the past 35 years.
Sir John said: "Increasingly it looks like a smoking gun. It's a fair conclusion to draw that global warming, caused to a substantial extent by people, is driving increased sea surface temperatures and increasing the violence of hurricanes."
So, Mr. Bush, still convinced global warming doesn't exist? Even after your home state has been hit by a monster-hurricane itself?

How shortsighted of him, especially of a man DESPERATE to leave behind a splendent legacy. Instead, denying the existence of global warming (particularly in the face of so much evidence, and considering the number of people who will likely be affected by it -- let's say, 6 billion, give or take a few hunded...) will be likened to Reagan's ignoring the threat of AIDS and avoiding talking about it until it was too late to save thousands of people from the infection.

Bush will be remembered as the President who not only did nothing to prevent or fight global warming, he actually pretended it didn't exist and fought against the enactment of any preventive measure.

- -

Since The Independent requires a subscription, you can read the same article here, from Common Dreams News Center.

Lost

A new episode of Lost tonight on ABC. It's a really good show (it even just won an Emmy for Best Drama) and the second season started last week. We finally saw what's down the hatch, although we are probably more confused and intrigued than we were before.

We haven't seen anything about what happened to the people on the raft (at the end of season one, Walt was kidnapped - by the others!? - and the raft destroyed; Sawyer was also wounded by a gunshot, or so it seemed.) My guess would be that tonight's episode will either center on them or at least tell us how they're doing.

Parts of the raft probably got salvaged and they are on them, slowly floating back to the island. I just hope Sawyer doesn't die! ;-)

INDICTED!!

Well, well, well, what do we have here? It finally seems like justice is catching up with our Tom DeLay:
A Texas grand jury on Wednesday charged Rep. Tom DeLay and two political associates with conspiracy in a campaign finance scheme, an indictment that could force him to step down as House majority leader.
I would imagine he's pretty pissed.

What's that word again... Oh yes, schadenfreude.

Why do we destroy the only home we have?

I read this article on The Independent online and it worried me and saddened me to no end. We've been ruining this planet since the Industrial Revolution began, and we keep doing it today, at a faster and faster pace. And apparently, at least in the northern hemisphere (that's OUR hemisphere, people,) we have passed the point of no return, and things are only gonna get worse:
A record loss of sea ice in the Arctic this summer has convinced scientists that the northern hemisphere may have crossed a critical threshold beyond which the climate may never recover. Scientists fear that the Arctic has now entered an irreversible phase of warming which will accelerate the loss of the polar sea ice that has helped to keep the climate stable for thousands of years.

The greatest fear is that the Arctic has reached a "tipping point" beyond which nothing can reverse the continual loss of sea ice and with it the massive land glaciers of Greenland, which will raise sea levels dramatically.
According to the experts, this is the biggest loss of Arctic sea ice in the summer months in hundreds and possibly thousands of years. And they point out that this is not a one time low, on the contrary, "it is the fourth year in a row that the sea ice in August has fallen below the monthly downward trend - a clear sign that melting has accelerated."
"This will be four Septembers in a row that we've seen a downward trend. The feeling is we are reaching a tipping point or threshold beyond which sea ice will not recover."
Apparently, the extent of the sea ice in September, the last summer month, is the most valuable indicator of its health, and this year's record melt means that more of the long-term ice formed over many winters - the so called multi-year ice - has disappeared than at any time in recorded history.

Unfortunately, as more and more sea ice is lost during the summer, greater expanses of open ocean become exposed to the sun, and this in turn increases the rate at which heat is absorbed in the Arctic region. In fact, since sea ice reflects up to 80 per cent of sunlight hitting it, while dark water absorbs most of it, the overall heat content increases automatically.
Current computer models suggest that the Arctic will be entirely ice-free during summer by the year 2070 but some scientists now believe that even this dire prediction may be over-optimistic, said Professor Peter Wadhams, an Arctic ice specialist at Cambridge University.

"When the ice becomes so thin it breaks up mechanically rather than thermodynamically. So these predictions may well be on the over-optimistic side," he said.

As the sea ice melts, and more of the sun's energy is absorbed by the exposed ocean, a positive feedback is created leading to the loss of yet more ice, Professor Wadhams said.

"If anything we may be underestimating the dangers. The computer models may not take into account collaborative positive feedback," he said.
Since sea ice keeps a cap on frigid water, keeping it cold and protecting it from heating up, losing it is likely to have major repercussions on our climate, also because:
Changing land into ocean and creating a huge area of open ocean where there was once land will have a very big impact on other climate parameters as well.
I cannot even imagine that, if those estimates are indeed over-optimistic, the Arctic might be gone during my lifetime.

And that also means higher sea levels, which translate into more coastal area flooding, major metropolitan areas becoming un-inhabitable, and entire islands disappearing completely under the sea (some of the most gorgeous heavens on earth will be lost.)

A warmer ocean also means many more of those monstrous storms that just hit the south of the country in the past month. Imagine a hurricane season with storm after storm making landfall at categories 3 and above, one after the other. There wouldn't be any time to clean up and rebuild. The coast would have to be abandoned. Higher categories than 5 might have to be introduced (they said Rita would have been a category 6, if it existed.)

Furthermore, a warmer ocean would mean a completely different environment for all the animals living in it. Major migrations and/or extinctions might be unavoidable by many species of fish and mammals alike.

And obviously, hurricanes wouldn't be the only natural threat that would likely intensify with higher and warmer oceans. The added moisture in the air would certainly cause more tornadoes, hail storms, flooding, rainfall. Suddenly, a Blade Runner scenario of perennial rain doesn't look that far into the future anymore, does it?

- -

Since The Independent requires a subscription, you can read the same article here, from Common Dreams News Center.

CONSERVE ENERGY AND GAS!

That is the new Bush mantra, and it makes sense, not just in the wake of two devastating hurricanes, but as an energy policy in a country that
  • is the biggest consumer of natural resources in the world
  • is the number one polluter in the world, causing global warming
  • is overly dependent on the Middle East for oil consumption, thereby helping those same states it's trying to fight in the war on terrorism.
The problem is that right after telling us to stay home this weekend if we can, so as to save some gas, he takes his airplane and flies to Texas to check on Hurricane Rita's damage (I read recently it costs thousands of dollars to fly Air Force One.) Was it really necessary? No.

Was it necessary for him to go to the headquarters of the Northern Command before the storm hit, just to show he's following the storm closely? NO!

Even when he says something right, you can count on him to do just the opposite right after.

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 3 THREE DAYS OF TOTAL INEQUALITY LEFT IN CONNECTICUT PEOPLE!!

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

The Killer Flu

This BBC article talks about outbreaks in Indonesia of the H5N1 strain of the virus that carries the bird flu. Four Indonesians have been confirmed to have died from the virus, which has already killed dozens of people across Asia.

Indonesian officials have urged people not to panic, saying there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission. So far. However, as explained in my previous posting, health officials fear that if the virus combines with the human influenza virus (a likely possibility,) it could become highly infectious and lead to a global flu pandemic.

Despite the spread of the disease in Indonesia, the outbreak is still being classified at a level three alert by the World Health Organization, whose pandemic alert has six phases, ranging from zero infection in birds and humans to a full-scale pandemic. That's reassuring, since 3 is better than 6, but I'd prefer it to be zero.

The unsettling news:
The WHO has urged countries with infected poultry to use widespread mass culling as the best method of stopping the spread of the disease.

But the Indonesian government has only carried out limited culling, preferring to vaccinate poultry because of the expense of compensating farmers.
Money trumps human life everywhere in the world apparently.

Ok, this is really scary.

As if terrorist threats weren't enough to worry about, now this comes out. You probably heard of last year's bird flu in Asia. Well, now the avian flu could pose a far greater threat to everyone on the planet.

This ABC News article says "it could kill a billion people worldwide, make ghost towns out of parts of major cities, and there is not enough medicine to fight it." And forget about a vaccine. That's apparently way into the future. Even Bush is worried (which can't be a good sign,) saying "If left unchallenged, the virus could become the first pandemic of the 21st century."

Unfortunately, it looks like Bush took too long to react this time as well (what else is new?):
According to Dr. Irwin Redlener, director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, Bush's call to remain on the offensive has come too late.

"If we had a significant worldwide epidemic of this particular avian flu, the H5N1 virus, and it hit the United States and the world, because it would be everywhere at once, I think we would see outcomes that would be virtually impossible to imagine," he warns.

Already, officials in London are quietly looking for extra morgue space to house the victims of the H5N1 virus, a never-before-seen strain of flu. Scientists say this virus could pose a far greater threat than smallpox, AIDS or anthrax.

"Right now in human beings, it kills 55 percent of the people it infects," says Laurie Garrett, a senior fellow on global health policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. "That makes it the most lethal flu we know of that has ever been on planet Earth affecting human beings."
The biggest problem is caused by the fact that our immune system usually can fight off any kind of influenza strain, since it has seen it before in one form or the other. This form of flu, however, has never in history been in our species, so absolutely nobody has any natural immunity to it. Translation: we are all vulnerable, rich and poor, black and white.
"The tipping point, the place where it becomes something of an immediate concern, is where that virus changes, we call it mutates, to something that is able to go from human to human," says Redlener.
Scientists in Asia and around the world are now working around the clock as they wait for that tipping point. So far, scientists say that humans have only been infected by birds. However, they add, "every infected person represents one step closer to the tipping point."
"Once that virus is capable of not needing the birds to infect humans, then we have the beginnings of what can turn out to be this worldwide epidemic problem that the experts call 'pandemics'," Redlener says.
And, thanks to non-stop flights around the world, the avian flu could travel from China to New York within the first week. This is a series of scary quotes about New York City's scene:
"The city would look like a science fiction movie," according to Garrett of the Council on Foreign Relations. "It's extremely possible we'd have to quarantine hospitals. We'd have to quarantine sections of the city."

"There wouldn't be equipment and personnel to staff [hospitals] adequately that you could really call them a hospital," Garrett predicts. "You might more or less call them warehouses for the ailing."

"If you look at the expected number of deaths that could occur in cities across the United States, we are wholly unprepared to process those bodies in a dignified and respectful way," asserts Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. "We will run out of caskets literally within days."
If the flu does strike, victims at first would not know if it is the kind of easily treated flu that comes every year or the killer flu, which causes severe pneumonia. The draft report of the federal government's emergency plan predicts as many as 200,000 Americans will die within a few months. This is considered a conservative estimate.

Like I said before, it takes a really long time to make a vaccine, at least six months after the first outbreak, and then only in a limited supply. However, recently scientists learned of one medicine's potential to work against the killer flu H5N1, called Tamiflu.

Every country in the world is now stockpiling massive doses of Tamiflu (now sold on a first-come, first-serve basis,) but the US seems to have waited too long, and as a result we lag way behind many other countries. In Great Britain, for instance, officials say they have ordered enough to cover a quarter of their population. For the US to have the same coverage we should have over 70 million doses. The federal plan (inexplicably) only calls for 20 million doses, but we don't even have those: at the moment we only have 2.5 million in all. One tenth of the desired number of doses, which is itself only a third of the percentage of population coverage Britain has so far stockpiled. Unconscionable.
"I think at the moment, with 2.5 million doses, you are pretty vulnerable," warns professor John Oxford of the Royal London Hospital.

"The lack of advanced planning up until the moment in the United States, in the sense of not having a huge stockpile I think your citizens deserve, has surprised me and has dismayed me," he admits.
Even leading Republicans in Congress say the Bush administration has not handled the planning for a possible flu epidemic well (again, what else is new?) Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, said that the current Tamiflu stockpile could spell disaster:
"That's totally inadequate. Totally inadequate today."

"You know, I was down in New Orleans in that crowded airport now a couple weeks ago," Frist says. "And this could be not just equal to that, but many multiple times that. Hundreds of people laid out, all dying, because there was no therapy. And a lot of people don't realize for this avian flu virus, there will be very little effective therapy available early on."
The country's top health officials concede that a killer flu epidemic this winter would make the scenes of Katrina pale in comparison. PALE IN COMPARISON!!

Can you imagine a flu pandemic in the 21st century that decimated the world population? A ghastly thought to say the least. Unfortunately, it looks like it's only a matter of time before the virus mutates and starts wreaking havoc on the human population.

Scary indeed.

The horrors of war

I read this post from John on AMERICAblog yesterday and was very disturbed by the images. Go see them at your own risk.

This is the gist: US soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq have been snapping pictures of everyday "life" in those countries, as they see it, which means horrible images of bodies blown up, charred, chopped up, and of body parts that for the most part are unrecognizable.

The pictures are then sent to a website and uploaded for the world to see. Unfortunately, the website is a porn site. It looks like the soldiers wanted to gain free access to the pictures on the site, so the owner told them to send him pictures from the war zone and he would let them access the site for free.

Now, I say unfortunately because the controversy will likely focus on the fact that it's a porn website, that these horrible pictures are being exchanged for pictures about sex, and I don't think we should focus on that. This morning I happened to listen to AirAmerica Radio and they were interviewing the owner of the website, who defended his choice by saying that these pictures aren't shown anywhere else, because the media doesn't care, and so he decided to put them up so that at least people could gain a better understanding of what it means to be in a war zone.

I agree. Who cares if it's a porn site and if the soldiers do it to get porn pictures? The way I see it, they are at war, they can have any 'hobby' they want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else (and this is an amateur website, so people post their pictures willingly, it's not like they pay the models for the pictures.) What I believe is worth focusing on is that the pictures are real, and that they are horrible. And therefore, our soldiers are seeing horrible things day in, day out. That's what worries me.

I took a look at the pictures and was so disturbed I had to stop. The interviewer this morning said he'll never be able to get them out of his head. That's true, but what about the soldiers who actually LIVE them all the time? What are those images doing to THEIR minds? What happens to them when they come back? Do you think they can just forget them? By the little I've seen, it's impossible to forget stuff like that. I can't imagine if instead of a picture I saw the real thing. For months or years. That's probably why I'm for bringing the troops home. They've seen enough. For several lifetimes probably.

It is also unfortunate that the guys actually 'pose' in the pictures Abu Ghraib style. This shows us once again that what happened in that prison WASN'T an isolated incident. The soldiers are actually trained to act that way, to treat the prisoners and suspects (and now the dead) that way.

Yesterday, I was ticked off by the fact that they were posing in the pictures, but then I started thinking that, besides because they are trained to be tough and heartless, they are probably doing that as an outlet for their frustration, their fear, their anger. As a way of breaking down the power of those images, like when a horror movie frightens you and you laugh it off to avoid feeling too terrified.

Maybe the soldiers are, consciously or not, working through their inner demons, and this is a way of playing down those demons. Maybe the only way they have been able to figure out. I feel for them.

I can't imagine the horrors they see.

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 4

Monday, September 26, 2005

Rita's gone

Well, thankfully, Hurricane Rita didn't cause as much damage (or death) as Katrina did a few weeks earlier. Still, the response of the federal government was "evacuate everybody," which meant a major traffic congestion and people stuck on the highway for up to 12 hours under the sun. Not my idea of efficiency; call me cynical if you wish.
Having underreacted to Katrina, government officials—as well as the anxious public—were taking no chances with Rita. The result was a traffic jam that looked like a scene out of "Deep Impact," or, worse, the aftermath of a dirty bomb exploding in an American city.

Along the Gulf Coast south of Houston, the plan contemplated that 1.25 million people would evacuate. Twice that number took to the highways. They were caught in a hellish gridlock. Cars ran out of gas and had to be pushed off the road; babies and old people suffered in the 100-degree heat; a bus full of nursing-home refugees caught fire and exploded, probably because so many of the elderly brought oxygen tanks.
And just imagine that: who would have ever thought that evacuating a 4 million people city would cause so much traffic?! And let me tell you something else: I'm not at all impressed by Bush's response this time either. Last time he did nothing, so this time he tried to do everything he could. And overstretched.

Why did he leave the White House, to go to the headquarters of Northern Command in Colorado, to follow the storm? Was it necessary? I don't think so, since he could have done the same from the situation room in the White House (yes, I watch The West Wing) without stepping on the military's toes.

But he was desperate to show he was doing something, anything, this time around. So his handlers brought him to a military base, where evidently he didn't get as good a night sleep as he did in Crawford, Texas:
His eyes were puffy from lack of sleep (he had been awakened all through the night with bulletins), and he seemed cranky and fidgety. A group of reporters and photographers had been summoned by White House handlers to capture a photo op of the commander in chief at his post. Bush stared at them balefully. He rocked back and forth in his chair, furiously at times, asked no questions and took no notes. It almost seemed as though he resented having to strike a pose for the press.
Poor George. I wonder if he ever wondered about the people who slept little or nothing while still on the road, or still in Houston (apparently the homeless were left behind again.)

Furthermore, his leaving the White House this time, I believe suggests that that setting wouldn't have been enough to prepare for the storm's aftermath. So with Katrina, he did even less than we thought he did by not going back to DC.

What a failure of a president.

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 5

WOW!!

I've been so busy at work in the past few days (I even worked over the weekend!) that I really had no time to post anything on my blog. And now I'm so many postings behind... bear with me, ok?

Sunday, September 25, 2005

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 6

Saturday, September 24, 2005

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 7

Friday, September 23, 2005

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 8

Thursday, September 22, 2005

Civil Unions vs. Marriage

Love Makes a Family (LMF) is a statewide coalition of organizations and individuals working for equal marriage rights for same-sex couples in Connecticut. Thanks to its efforts, in 9 days Connecticut will become the second state in the nation to offer civil unions to its gay and lesbian citizens. A step forward, but not the full blown victory that we were hoping to achieve: the first state in the nation to willingly pass same-sex marriage legislation without being forced to do so by the courts.

Today, I got an e-mail from LMF about Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's release of a legal opinion stating that the State of Connecticut will recognize civil unions from Vermont and domestic partnerships from California but not marriages of same-sex couples from Massachusetts.

Below is the statement of Love Makes a Family President, Anne Stanback, with which I completely agree:
"Today's opinion by the Attorney General was a welcome clarification as to how the state of Connecticut will treat the civil unions and domestic partnerships from other states. But the Attorney General’s opinion shines a spotlight on why civil unions, while an expansion of needed rights and protections, leave same-sex couples with an insecure family status.

"Connecticut generally recognizes legal marriages from other states, even when those marriages are not performed in our state such as is the case with common law marriages. But today, Connecticut same-sex couples who have been legally married in Massachusetts —not to mention Massachusetts residents who were married and have since moved to Connecticut or who travel here each day for work— are being told that their legal marriages are invisible and invalidated.

"By choosing to recognize the civil unions and domestic partnerships from Vermont and California but not the marriages of same-sex couples from our neighboring state of Massachusetts, Connecticut is saying very clearly that civil union is not marriage and not its equal. Today’s opinion is yet one more example of why the fairest, least confusing way to recognize and respect the relationships of all loving, committed couples is to end discrimination in the civil marriage laws of our state."

Rita's fury

I heard this morning on the radio that Hurricane Rita's winds now reach 175 mph. Unimaginable. Totally scary.

Why do we tolerate genocide?

I was pointed to this Nicholas Kristof New York Times article by Ray. It's very disturbing and sad. Just last week, the United Nations was trying to pass a declaration saying that countries have an "obligation" to respond to genocide.
In the end the declaration was diluted to say that "We are prepared to take collective action... on a case by case basis" to prevent genocide.
The change in language was pushed by an unlikely coalition of countries: Cuba, Zimbabwe, Iran, Syria, Venezuela... and the United States.

Isn't that astounding? Doesn't that make you sick to your stomach? I mean, the US has had an embargo against Cuba for what, 4 decades? Iran is one the three countries on Bush's infamous Axis of Evil reference (Iran-Iraq-North Korea) and it's the next country in the administration's crosshairs. Syria, for some obscure reason, wasn't included in Bush's Axis of Evil (maybe he can only count up to three,) but it's now one of the main targets of the administration for its assistance to the resistance in Iraq. Venezuela... let's not even go there. Its democratically elected president and our forcibly appointed one have been in a standoff for years. Bush even supported (and probably financed) a military coup to unseat him, but he survived it and is now one of the most vocal opponents of Bush's policies. I don't really have much information on Zimbabwe, but how do you like our companions so far? Nice bunch we're hanging out with, uh?

It's atrocious and troublesome, and remind me again why we joined them? Oh, yes, to oppose a UN declaration that all countries are obliged to intervene if there is evidence of genocide anywhere in the world. Well, who would ever want to do that?! Why stop genocide? After all, isn't the Holocaust one of our proudest moments as a species?

Incredible. Bush should feel ashamed forever for such a wimpy, immoral, unethical choice. How un-Christian of him to turn his back on thousands, millions of people gang-raped, mutilated, burned alive, bludgeoned to death by evil regimes bent on eradicating unwanted minorities from their countries, Places like Rwanda a few years back and Darfur, Sudan, today.

The writer concludes his piece by pointing out that Bush isn't the only one to blame. No other nation seems to pay attention to the Darfur situation, and so is the media. But he lists a few things that our leader could do that wouldn't cost him, or us, virtually anything: speak out about the ongoing genocide to rile the world nations together against it and focus the public attention on the atrocities; impose a no-fly zone; appoint a presidential envoy to build an international coalition to pressure Sudan (just appoint another one of your cronies, but do something.)

Mr. Kristof uses the most apt word to describe the UN failure to pass a strong declaration: embarrassment.
It's embarrassing that in the 21st century, we can't even accept a vague obligation to fight genocide as we did in the Genocide Convention of 1948. If the Genocide Convention were proposed today, President Bush apparently would fight to kill it.
What a failure and an embarrassment of a president.

Bush zinged by another judge!

I came upon this excerpt on Time magazine about the sentencing to 22 years in prison of Ahmed Ressam, the so-called millennium bomber, who plotted to attack Los Angeles International Airport on the eve of the new century.

At sentencing, Judge John Coughenour "rebuked the Bush Administration, noting that 'we did not need to use a secret military tribunal, detain the defendant indefinitely as an enemy combatant or deny [him] the right to counsel'."

Way to go!! We should put him on the Supreme Court next.

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 9 We're in the single digits people!!

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

It's a MONSTER

I just got this breaking news e-mail from CNN:
Hurricane Rita reaches Category 5 status with maximum sustained winds of 165 mph, the National Hurricane Center says.
I can't even imagine 165 mph winds. Let's brace for another monster coming ashore, courtesy of global warming of course. Hopefully, since it's nowhere near land right now, it will lose steam before it reaches any coastal area, but I don't really know if that's a real possibility at this point. Does a storm tire of raging after a while? I do not know.

Cheney is an a**hole

This is the latest example of how out of touch with reality and ordinary people this administration really is. When, finally, a reporter found the guts to ask Vice President Dick Cheney why he hadn't immediately returned to Washington DC from his vacation when Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast, this is the matter-of-fact answer Cheney gave him:
"I came back four days early."
Some hubris from this arrogant hack! Who cares if people died and/or lost everything, he has nothing to apologize for. After all, he's Dick(head) Cheney and his interests trump all others.

See, he came back four days early, so we should all be thankful of his magnanimousness and shut the hell up! Imagine if he had had a bad day, or if we had pissed him off. He might have stayed on vacation till the end. Nice guy the religious right "put" in charge last year. Very Christian-like.

Just in case you don't already know (since the mainstream media hasn't been very good at reporting this,) while Bush was strumming a guitar in California and Rice was shopping for $3,000 shoes on Fifth Avenue, New York, Cheney was mansion-shopping a just-shy of $3 million second home. And wasn't spotted in DC until Saturday, a full five days after the storm had devastated New Orleans.

This is more from the article:
And you can see why Cheney is so testy. He had to miss four days of his vacation to help a bunch of people who probably had never voted Republican in their lives.

The same sense of irritation was noticeable in the initial post-Katrina public appearances by President Bush (though his handlers now seem to have him under control).

It was a sense of "Why me?" Wasn't a quagmire in Iraq enough of a burden? In addition to his own man-made disaster, did he have to deal with a natural disaster, too?
WHY ME?! How about because you ran for the job (twice!) and unfortunately got it both times (and not the just and fair way, may I add.)

Streaming Soundtracks

Whenever I'm at my computer, be it at home or at work, I always listen to streaming music. I love movies, I love music, the logical conclusion would be that I LOVE soundtracks, that is music from movies. Indeed, my favorite station is, by far, StreamingSoundtracks.com. I discovered this station a few months back and I've been an avid fan since. Unfortunately, especially at work, the signal isn't always constant. It buffers a lot. Well, I'm glad to say that in the past 3 days I've been able to listen to it non-stop, and it's been great. They must have done some upgrading of their web servers, 'cause here at work nothing has changed. Needless to say, I'm glad it's working all the time now. Let's just hope it isn't a fluke.

How stupid can you be?

I just read this post on AMERICAblog and this section is startling:
Two British servicemen, dressed in civilian clothes, were held at Basra's main police station after the incident. Outside, rioting began as the city threatened to descend into anarchy.

Last night, British forces used up to 10 tanks - supported by helicopters - to smash through the walls of the jail and free the two British servicemen. John Reid, the Defence Secretary, later confirmed they were back with UK forces.

Around 150 prisoners were said to have escaped during the assault, which was condemned as "barbaric, savage and irresponsible" by Mohammed al-Waili, the provincial governor. But the Ministry of Defence disputed the claim, saying that the release of the soldiers had been "negotiated".
A couple of comments here. First, if the local police arrested undercover British agents, for whatever reason, you don't just smash the jail to get them out. If we don't respect the local police force, how can we expect the Iraqis to do so? I'm sure there were other, better ways to get them back.

Second, how moronic is it to let 150 prisoners (among whom might be members of terrorist cells that will hit us in the future, or members of the ongoing resistance in Iraq,) run away just to show some muscle while you free two of your agents?!

Third, not only have they smeared the police reputation, now they've also destroyed their headquarters and a good number of their jail cells. How long is it gonna be before they can detain people there again and, especially, before the Iraqis will respect (or fear) them again?

We want to play the blame game.

I just saw this video from CNN and it's not good for the Republicans and Bush. 81% of Americans want an independent commission to examine what went wrong with the Hurricane Katrina's response, while 18% want Congress to do it.

Bush just appointed someone from his administration to do the official investigation, but since no one working for him has the guts to tell him anything bad happened or that he's wrong, how do you think she will be able to conduct an objective, thorough investigation in Bush's failure to prepare for such a catastrophe before it happened or to quickly respond to it afterwards?

In the video, Jack Cafferty had this to say about Bush's decision to investigate himself:
The public is not going to buy any of this stuff that comes out of Washington. They're not going to believe anything that comes out of these partisan reports or stuff that was done from within the White House. It just isn't going to wash. The game is up with John Q Public. They're not buying this stuff anymore.
Couldn't agree more. Enough of the lies, the whitewashing, the stonewalling, the deadlocking. We want answers. We want accountability. We want to play the blame game.

Is John Roberts gonna be a good judge?

I always thought the guy really wants the job, and therefore he'd do and say whatever it takes to be confirmed, only to go on and do whatever he wants after that, since no one at that point will be able to do a damn thing about it.

However, I just read an interesting opinion by John Aravosis on AMERICAblog, where he mentions that there are some people worried on the religious right that he might not be the wingnut they so desperately want and need to overturn decades of civil rights legislation and liberties for all Americans.

The problem, John points out, is that he might be lying to get confirmed, yes, but in doing so he'd be committing perjury, a crime for both man and God, and he might be perjuring himself after having sworn on the Bible itself:
The National Clergy Council spokesman acknowledges that Roberts may have been saying what he needed to in order to be confirmed -- but the nominee was under oath, and Schenck finds that worrisome.
Hmmm, interesting, isn't it? That's quite a dilemma for a religious guy like Roberts (a Catholic.) Do I lie to get the job even though I swore on the Bible and lying is a sin?

What would Jesus do?

Rita's turn

Hurricane Rita is now a category 4 hurricane and it's in the Gulf of Mexico already. It looks like it might hit Houston, Texas, thereby forcing the re-evacuation of the people moved there from New Orleans in Katrina's aftermath. Is Rita gonna destroy a city as well? If that happens, the US economy might be dealt a blow that could have repercussions worldwide. I'd like to hope it won't happen, but the hurricane is there, over a quarter of the gulf already, and those are the hottest waters around, a boon for a hurricane. Let's just hope the federal government this time won't wait a week before starting to look into it. At least this time Bush isn't on vacation.

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 10

Tuesday, September 20, 2005

SCOTUS battle

It hasn't really been much of a battle so far, with John Roberts, Bush's candidate to replace the late William H. Rehnquist on the Supreme Court's Chief Justice seat, basically tiptoeing around without answering any of the questions the Democratic Senators have been asking him.

Now the hearings are over and a vote is scheduled for next week. Today, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid announced his opposition to John Roberts, voicing doubts about his commitment to civil rights and accusing the Bush administration of stonewalling requests for documents that might shed light on his views.

It is unconscionable that the White House wouldn't release documents related to a candidate for the Supreme Court (let alone the Chief Justice post.) What are they trying to hide? It must be something pretty condemning, don't you think? Why else would they keep everything secret? If those documents painted him in a good light, I'm sure they'd have released them right away, right?

Well, only time will tell, since it looks like all the Republicans will vote for him and many Democrats as well, and Roberts will sit on the center seat of the Supreme Court probably for the next 35-40 years. Let's just hope he turns out to be a moderate and law-abiding judge, instead of a partisan hack and/or a religious right wingnut.

The Comeback

The Comeback was the latest HBO comedy produced by the same guy, Michael Patrick King, who produced the famed Sex and the City, and starring the excellent Lisa Kudrow, fresh off her engagement to the late series Friends. The expectations were high, the ratings less so, and HBO has opted not to renew it.

I immediately felt like the show was slow, not really boring, but certainly not electrifying. That's probably were the few who tuned in for the pilot switched channel. I decided to stick around, and eventually I was rewarded with a cute little gem of a performance from an actress I thoroughly respect and admire (ever since the first movie I saw her in, The Opposite of Sex.)

The show was supposed to be slow, because it tried to show the not-so-exciting existence of celebrities when they're off camera. It also tried to show how they are people just like us (same needs, same wants, same problems,) and how these reality shows that follow celebrities around are so overblown and totally fake (from the celebrities not really being themselves because on camera, to the editing room, where everything gets worked up for maximum audience reaction.)

I believe the show reached its goals admirably. The stories were well written and "realistic," and, most of all, they were rendered unbelievably well by Ms. Kudrow, who never made me doubt for a second that she indeed was Valerie Cherish, working on her personal comeback story.

The whole cast was also very good, especially Robert Michael Morris as Mickey, Valerie's queenie personal hair stylist who acted like no one knew he was gay, and Lance Barber as Paulie G, one of the two main writers of the show-within-show "Room and Bored," who was constantly rude and caustic towards Valerie.

In one word, brilliant. And all thanks to Lisa Kudrow.

I'll make sure to check out her next project, whatever it is. This one only reinforced my love and admiration for her.

Goodbye. And thank you.

The 57th Annual Emmy Awards

Sunday night the Emmys were handed out during a so-so ceremony that was actually the most watched since 2002. I was excited because Ellen DeGeneres, whom I adore, was presenting again, but this time she didn't shine like back in 2001, when she presented after the show had been rescheduled three times due to the 9/11 attacks.

The worst thing was certainly the introduction of the Emmy-Idol, where TV personalities sang four TV themes, competing for the best act. Donald Trump and Megan Mullally won, but that isn't saying much. The whole idea was terrible and hopefully DOA. It's also absolutely ridiculous that shows like these, perennially criticized for running overtime, introduce dumb sing-alongs that have absolutely nothing to do with any TV show nominated (not even American Idol) instead of focusing on the shows at hand. Isn't anyone with originality and imagination still around in the entertainment industry?!

As for the winners and losers... Everybody Loves Raymond and Lost won the top categories (comedy and drama) and I can't really complain. Coming off its final season run, Raymond's only real competition was Desperate Housewives (which can try again next year,) since Will & Grace is on a constant decline, and nobody really watches Scrubs and Arrested Development (although both are supposedly very good.)

Lost beat out Deadwood (I'm sure it's great,) and 24 without bothering me at all. It deserves more than those two shows. As for The West Wing and Six Feet Under, I love both of those shows and last season (the last one for Under unfortunately) they both shined for me. Still, Lost was great and totally original. So many shows are already trying to copy its success (we'll see how successfully.)

Acting categories winners:
  • Tony Shalhoub (Monk); probably the most deserving here; I'm glad it didn't go to Ray Romano by default just because it was his show's last season. Bateman is very good too, but no one watches his show.

  • James Spader (Boston Legal); I don't watch the show, but the way he strolled on the stage to hand out an award last night made me want to strangle him!! I think he's a good actor, and so are all the nominees, but I think Ian Shane deserved it more here; or Hugh Laurie.

  • Felicity Huffman (Desperate Housewives); she beat out Teri Hatcher (deservedly) and Marcia Cross (I say tie here); again, I'm glad Patricia Heaton didn't get it for the same reason why Romano didn't get it. As for Kaczmarek, her show is slowly dying (Fox moved it to Friday night, which is the equivalent of mercy killing in TV land,) plus, she has Bradley Whitford to look at, who needs an Emmy!!

  • Patricia Arquette (Medium); again, I don't watch the show, but I was shocked, especially when the list included Glenn Close (didn't watch her, but c'mon, it's Glenn fracking Close) and Frances Conroy (spectacular as always.) Both Jennifer Garner and Mariska Hargitay always receive high praises too, so, Patricia must be very, very, very good. Maybe I should check Medium out.

  • Brad Garrett (Everybody Loves Raymond); well, he's definitely good, but winning again... I think it's because it was the last season (and CBS now needs a spin off, so they all voted for him, I'm sure); both Jeffrey Tambor and Jeremy Piven (so cute) were probably more deserving; Sean Hayes is always over the top, even for me!!

  • William Shatner (Boston Legal); don't watch the show; I guess he's good, but I also think the Academy has a soft spot for him (the comeback kid;) Alan Alda, Terry O'Quinn, and Naveen Andrews (ahhh, Naveen...) were all fantastic, and therefore deserving. Oliver Platt is a good actor too, so I just hope Shatner deserved this one.

  • Doris Roberts (Everybody Loves Raymond); another win for Raymond, although she's always really good, and her career is probably now over for good. I love Megan Mullally's Karen Walker, but I can't complain.

  • Blythe Danner (Huff); well, what can I say, Blythe is one of my favorite actresses, and she's great, always. The list here was all top notch too. My guess, she deserved it. Plus, she was nominated three times last night (that has got to be a record,) so how bad would it have been to go home empty handed!
Guest acting wins were good choices too. Bobby Cannavale was one of four nominations for Will & Grace (4 out of 5, gosh, how can you lose, right?) and deserved to win even just for the kiss he shared with Eric McCormack (awww...) and Kathryn Joosten always chews the scenery, whatever she does (loved her in The West Wing, love her in Desperate Housewives.) Ray Liotta and Amanda Plummer are two very good actors, so I'm happy there too.

Other winners were Geoffrey Rush (gosh, I have to watch The Life and Death of Peter Sellers,) who's already won everything available with that role, S. Epatha Merkenson (who gave the funniest speech of the night,) Paul Newman (I missed this movie,) and Jane Alexander (I'll try to watch Warm Springs in October.)

Surprise win: Warm Springs over The Life and Death of Peter Sellers, which, like his star, had won everything available up to now. Springs must be very good though. Puzzling win: The Lost Prince (Masterpiece Theatre) over both Empire Falls (I haven't seen it, but it's an HBO production, so you can't really go wrong there) and The 4400, which I really liked. I mean, who even saw Prince??! Who even heard of Prince??!

Finally, I was very pleased that The Amazing Race, the best reality show ever, beat out ratings champions like American Idol, The Apprentice, and Survivor. Project Runway, on the other hand, was very good too. One of my favorites.

Overall, good choices.

North Korea: no, no, no, no, no, yes... maybe

It figures, it couldn't have possibly been that easy. Apparently Pyongyang has already changed its tune from yesterday. Now they demand that the US give them a light-water nuclear reactor (for electricity production) before they dismantle their nuclear arsenal (can you believe, we're not even talking of a nuclear "program" anymore, it's an arsenal already, in the hands of Kim Jong Il no less!!).

It looks to me like the North Koreans just tried to avoid the multi-party talks from breaking down without a deal when the US threatened to walk out, and now they're just stonewalling for more time (and aid obviously.)
In a statement broadcast on North Korean radio early on Tuesday morning local time, Pyongyang reiterated its "right to peaceful nuclear activities".

It said the US "should not even dream" it would dismantle its nuclear arsenal until Washington had provided it with a light-water nuclear reactor.

Both Japan and the US have rejected Pyongyang's demand for a reactor.

Japanese Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura said the North's demand was "unacceptable", Kyodo News agency reported.
We'll see what happens next.

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 11

Monday, September 19, 2005

North Korea: no, no, no, no, no, yes.

Wow, file this one under "Unexpected Course Alterations." Apparently North Korea changed its tune and decided to give up its nuclear weapons ambitions in exchange for the US promising not to attack it (either with nuclear or conventional weapons) and also providing aid and electricity.
Correspondents say the US was on the verge of walking out of the talks and heading home - a fact that may have been the clincher which forced North Korea to back down.
All the nations involved in the six party talks (China, Japan, South Korea, Russia, and the US) will actually provide the poor nation with energy assistance, as well as promote "economic co-operation in the fields of energy, trade and investment".

This is certainly a good development, given the shaky times we live in. The fewer desperate regimes without nuclear capabilities, the better. Let's just hope the deal will survive when the parties reconvene in November to iron out the details.

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 12

Sunday, September 18, 2005

Terry vs. Katrina

I read this New York Times article by Frank Rich about how Bush totally messed up with the whole Hurricane Katrina situation in the Gulf Coast, and when I read the following paragraph, my jaw dropped:
But a president who flew from Crawford to Washington in a heartbeat to intervene in the medical case of a single patient, Terri Schiavo, has no business lecturing anyone about playing politics with tragedy.

We're going to have to ask why it took almost two days of people being without food, shelter, and water for Mr. Bush to get back to Washington.
I had totally forgotten that just a few months back, when poor Terri Schiavo, brain dead for over a decade, was dying after her husband had given the order to take her off the machine that had kept her alive all this time, a culture war erupted on the national stage and everyone took sides.

Terri's parents didn't want to take her off the machine, but her husband did. So the parents sued him and each and every court they went to sided with the husband. The Republican Governor (and George W. Bush's brother) rushed legislation through to keep her alive, but it was struck down by the courts.

In an unprecedented move, the Republicans in Washington decided to pass legislation themselves to stop the court orders, but it didn't work (this was a state matter, so the federal government should have never intervened, and all federal courts agreed with the state courts -- the Supreme Court declined to take the case.)

Incredibly, the president, known for not working late, overnight, or on weekends, cut short a vacation (another one!!) in Crawford, Texas, to fly back to Washington DC in the middle of the night to sign the legislation the GOP Congress had passed.

All this turned out to be useless, since, like I said, every court, state and federal, sided with the husband, and eventually Terri was taken off the machine and died. What is striking however, is how quickly the president moved to "save" one person but didn't move at all to save hundreds or thousands at the end of August when the hurricane struck his neighboring state.

The different response is easily interpreted: Terri Schiavo was a white woman from a good (read rich) family, and her case had pitched the religious right on one side of the debate (every life is worth saving) and the courts on the other (ruling over and over again that she could be taken off the only machine that was keeping her alive.) The culture war between the people that helped put him in the White House and the courts for which Bush has such contempt (although, ironically, he was in the end put in the White House by activist judges, just not liberal ones,) demanded he intervene. A failure to do so could have damaged his image in his supporters' minds and eventually the GOP candidates in future elections.

The victims of Hurricane Katrina were poor and black, and there was nothing to gain politically from helping them since they mostly voted Democrat, lived in a Democrat state, elected a Democrat Governor, Senator, and Mayor. On the contrary, he thought, there would be a lot to gain if their elected Democratic officials didn't perform as they should have. The GOP would stand to gain from the windfall.

Alas, the elected Democrat officials might end up taking a hit, but Bush and the GOPers at large (who made a lot of remarkably STUPID comments in the aftermath of the storm, like "should we even bother rebuilding," or "we should punish those who chose not to leave the city") are certainly taking the most heat and might end up being hurt the most in next year's midterm elections.

The lesson here is the one we had already learned: if you're white and rich you count in Bush's eyes. If you're black and poor, he doesn't even see you. What a failure of a president.

The Constant Gardener

Last Saturday Ray and I went to a fabulous dinner and then to see this movie with Ralph Fiennes and Rachel Weisz. It's a good thriller directed by Fernando Meirelles (who previously made the gripping City of God) and adapted from a novel by John Le Carré.

Located in a remote area of Northern Kenya, the movie tells the story of a British diplomat, Justin Quayle, and his activist wife Tessa. Tessa is obsessed with improving the way of life of the African population and protect them from abuse, even if that means irking some pharmaceutical companies doing "business" there.

The parties due to lose from her actions don't sit idly by, and things go awfully awry. Justin, feeling guilty for not having supported his wife more in her struggle, starts getting involved himself, only to discover a web of lies and intrigue that goes beyond what anyone could imagine.

The acting is really good, from the whole cast, and Fiennes' performance is spectacular. Meirelles' direction is riveting and the cinematography captivating.

Grade: 8.5

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 13

Saturday, September 17, 2005

Happy Birthday!!

I should have posted this yesterday, but since I called Vitto today, I'm posting it now. Yesterday, it was his birthday (I didn't forget though, I sent him a card and two emails!!), so, again:
HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 14

Friday, September 16, 2005

OH MY GOD!!

I cannot believe I just read an article were the likely new leader of the opposition party in Italy just pledged to support civil unions for gays and lesbians if he were to defeat Berlusconi, whose mishandling of the country's economy, support for the Iraq war, and abuse of office in the attempt to shield himself from legal prosecution makes this a real possibility:
The potential leader of Italy's opposition party and former European Commission leader Romani Prodi has formally pledged to support civil unions for gay couples in Italy should he come to power.

Prodi, a staunch supporter of gay rights while leader of the E.C., wrote to the country's leading gay advocacy group citing his commitment to gay rights and legal recognition for partnerships.
Imagine how swiftly the Pope will move the Church's might to make sure he's defeated at the next elections...

Bush hates the environment. Loves big money.

That is the only conclusion anyone could draw after reading this Rolling Stone article on what our failed president is doing to our environment.

It was hurtful and shocking to read the extent to which this administration is going to cater to big money. Nothing is sacred for Bush, except his Dollar-God.

Here are a few excerpts:
Bush has reversed more environmental progress in the past eight months than Reagan did in a full eight years.

What can you say about the environmental record of an administration that seeks to test pesticides on poor children and pregnant women? That argues in court that a dam is part of a salmon's natural environment? That places a timber lobbyist in charge of the national forests and an oil lobbyist in charge of government reports on global warming? That cuts clean-air inspections at oil refineries in half, allows Superfund to go bankrupt and permits the mining industry to pump toxic waste directly into a wild Alaskan lake?

Since President Bush was sworn in for a second term, he has not only continued his unprecedented assault on the environment -- he's intensified it. In recent months, the administration has opened up millions of acres of pristine land to developers, allowing them to log and mine without leaving behind "viable populations" of wildlife. It allowed the import of methyl bromide, a cancer-causing pesticide that was due to be banned this year under an international accord signed by Ronald Reagan, and it scrapped plans to regulate lead paint in home-renovation projects, placing millions of children at risk for brain damage. And on August 8th, taking advantage of solid Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, Bush signed into law his long-stalled energy bill, a grab bag of industry favors that provides $10 billion in oil, gas and coal subsidies while exempting Halliburton and other polluters from environmental laws. The measure approves oil exploration in marine sanctuaries, greenlights drilling on millions of acres of public land in the Rocky Mountains and Alaska, fast-tracks sixteen new coal-fired power plants and provides cradle-to-grave subsidies for new nuclear reactors. In a grotesque fit of petro-nuclear synergy, the bill even funds research into refining oil -- using atomic radiation.

[N]otes Sen. Lincoln Chafee, a Republican from Rhode Island. "The environment has always been something that Republicans have been proud of -- but this administration sees it differently."

"I don't think what the EPA is doing is pro-business," says Attorney General Peter Harvey of New Jersey, one of thirteen states suing to overturn the rule. "I think it's anti-humanity."

"What's next?" asks Johanna Wald, director of land programs for the National Resources Defense Council. "Hiring poachers as park rangers?"

"You are supposed to find the best use of the land," says Kevin Curtis, vice president of the National Environmental Trust. "But the energy bill basically says, by statute, that oil and gas drilling is the best use of that land."

Public outrage has forced the administration to give up a few of its wildest schemes: "blending" raw sewage into drinking water, for example, or exempting 20 million acres of wetlands from the Clean Water Act. But most of Bush's efforts to gut the nation's environmental protections are so incremental, they go unnoticed by the public -- even when they have far-reaching consequences.
Like I said, reading this article made me furious (for what Bush is getting away with and for how long it will take to undo his damages -- although some things, like violating a pristine forest, can never be undone,) shocked me (for the kind of disregard and contempt Bush shows for the American people and our country,) and saddened me (because, like I said, Bush is virtually raping our environment right now, and rape victims rarely if ever fully recover.)

Nice legacy he's leaving behind.

George W. Potemkin

Potemkin villages were, purportedly, fake settlements erected at the direction of Russian minister Grigori Aleksandrovich Potemkin to fool Empress Catherine II during her visit to Crimea in 1787. Conventional wisdom has it that Potemkin, who led the Crimean military campaign, had hollow facades of villages constructed along the desolate banks of the Dnieper river in order to impress the monarch and her travel party with the value of her new conquests, thus enhancing his standing in the empress' eyes.
Now read Brian Williams account of what happened last night, when our failed president was preparing to give his will-this-save-my-ass speech:
last night there was rejoicing [...] when the power came back on for blocks on end. [...] The motorcade route through the district was partially lit no more than 30 minutes before POTUS drove through. And yet last night, no more than an hour after the President departed, the lights went out. The entire area was plunged into total darkness again, to audible groans.
Hence, Bush's new moniker. Well deserved, I might add.

Race in America

Black workers at a Tyson Food facility in Alabama are suing the company for violating their civil rights. This is their complaint:
A group of black workers is suing the world's largest poultry meat producer, accusing it of tolerating a racist workplace where African Americans were routinely abused and a "whites only" sign was pinned to the lavatory door.

...the workers allege that the lavatory was padlocked and only white workers were given a key, that workers hung a noose in one of the recreation rooms and annotated a picture of monkeys with the names of black staff. When the workers complained, they say the plant manager told them the facilities had been locked because they were "nasty, dirty [and] behaved like children".
It is incredible that in 2005 we still witness events like these in America. We just saw how the Republicans don't care about the black or the poor. Now we see that in the south segregation is still on many people's minds.

That is so sad and unfortunate. Why can't people accept one another regardless of the color of their skin? I would understand racism existing when different people are initially introduced to each other, but after centuries of co-existence?? How do you justify that? Haven't blacks proven they are equal to us yet? What kind of proof would those racists need?

I just feel bad for our children, since we will not be able to shield them from racism and bigotry for their whole lives. I hope Ray and I will do a good enough job with them to give them the tools to deal with situations like these.

Bush's speech

I obviously didn't watch it, since it would have been a complete waste of time to do so. Plus, I can't stand looking at that putz's ugly mug.

Anyway, this morning I read he said something like, "It was not a normal hurricane and the normal disaster relief system was not equal to it."

That's just moronic, to be kind. A hurricane is a hurricane. They're measured on a scale from 1 to 5 in terms of wind speed and violence, and that's pretty much it. There are no normal hurricanes. Are there normal earthquakes? Asteroids? Tornadoes? And are there abnormal ones?

Excuses, excuses, excuses. Pathetic. And expected, coming from a failed president desperately trying to save his ass.

I wonder if there are "normal" nuclear, chemical, or biological attacks, or if they fall under the "abnormal" category. In which case, God help us.

Was 9/11 preventable? Redux

This is incredible. Two years before 9/11 we knew that Mohamed Atta, the mastermind behind the most vicious attack on US soil was a terrorist.

Did the people in charge act on the information? Sort of. They ordered it destroyed. Well, that was smart! Such incompetence hopefully won't go unpunished. Almost 3,000 people lost their lives also because of that mistake.
A Pentagon employee was ordered to destroy documents that identified Mohamed Atta as a terrorist two years before the 2001 attacks, a congressman said Thursday.

The employee is prepared to testify next week before the Senate Judiciary Committee and was expected to name the person who ordered him to destroy the large volume of documents, said Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa.

Weldon described the documents as "2.5 terabytes" as much as one-fourth of all the printed materials in the Library of Congress, he added.

Weldon has said that Atta, the mastermind of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and three other hijackers were identified in 1999 by a classified military intelligence unit known as "Able Danger," which determined they could be members of an al-Qaida cell.
What else is there that we still don't know? One thing is sure, the person that gave the order to destroy information so important has the 9/11 victims' lives on his conscience forever.

Was 9/11 preventable? I feel for the families of victims' of that tragedy. Finding out information like this must be terrible.

Countdown to October 1, 2005

Days left to the start of legal Civil Unions for same-sex couples in Connecticut: 15

Pledge of Allegiance controversy

A judge again found the sentence "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance to be unconstitutional, and I agree with that. This is definitely not the last we hear of this matter, since it will probably end up going all the way to the Supreme Court, that is being currently re-staked with freshly appointed right wingnuts by our failed president.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God" violates school children's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God." and declared the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools unconstitutional.

The ruling favors Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow's view:
"All it has to do is put the pledge as it was before, and say that we are one nation, indivisible, instead of dividing us on religious basis."

"Imagine every morning if the teachers had the children stand up, place their hands over their hearts, and say, 'We are one nation that denies God exists,'" Newdow said.

"I think that everybody would not be sitting here saying, 'Oh, what harm is that.' They'd be furious. And that's exactly what goes on against atheists. And it shouldn't."
And for that reason I agree with him and the judge in this case. I just hope that the Supreme Court, when they get the case, will rule according to the law, and not bow to the huge pressure from the religious right.

Thursday, September 15, 2005

Bay State Win!

So, yesterday the Massachusetts Constitutional Conference rejected a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage and allow for civil unions. The amendment had passed the Conference last year, and needed to pass it again this year in order to be voted on by the people next year and, if approved, become part of the state constitution.

Having been rejected, the amendment is positively dead. The process would have to start all over again. The anti-same-sex marriage advocates withdrew their support from the bill (probably when they realized that it wasn't gonna survive, after many legislators that had voted in its favor had lost re-election last year,) hoping to get an amendment added to the constitution in 2008 by putting it directly to the voters.
"Gay marriage has begun, and life has not changed for the citizens of the commonwealth, with the exception of those who can now marry," said state Sen. Brian Lees, a Republican who had been a co-sponsor of the amendment. "This amendment which was an appropriate measure or compromise a year ago, is no longer, I feel, a compromise today."
Without his support, the measure failed by a wide margin: 157-39.

The first same-sex weddings took place on May 17, 2004, after the state Supreme Court ruled in favor of equality for all citizens. Since then, more than 6,100 couples have married.

I hope the next step is for the legislature to get rid of that ridiculous, one-hundred-years-old law that only allows a marriage to take place if the couple's home state would recognize their marriage. As such, no gay couple not actually residing in Massachusetts can legally get married there, since gay marriage isn't legal anywhere else in the US.

That law, which was designed to prevent an interracial couple from getting married in Massachusetts and then demanding their marriage be recognized in a southern state that didn't allow for it, is the one Republican Governor (and presidential candidate-hopeful) Mitt Romney has invoked to block gay couples living anywhere in the country from travelling to his state, get married, and go back home to demand their marriage be recognized by their state, not to mention the federal goverment.

Bush the loser

As thousands today, I saw the picture of Bush writing a note to Condoleezza Rice about going to the bathroom, and I didn't really think much of it. I figured, he needed to go, and maybe this time we shouldn't all gang up on him for that. After all, it's happened to me several times to have the urge to go to the bathroom and not being able to wait anymore.

But then I read this recounting of the scene:
"Tensions were running high as the world's most powerful men and women discussed international security and the future of the United Nations."

At the high-pressure meeting, President George W. Bush sat stern faced, surrounded by top diplomats and the largest gathering of world leaders in history."

The US President, an outspoken critic of the UN in recent years, picked up his pencil and wrote a short note to his Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Around him, the UN delegation wondered what secrets he was passing to his most trusted advisor.

"But the most pressing matter on the President's mind was nothing to do with international security - he was desperate for the toilet. "

'I think I may need a bathroom break. Is this possible?' he wrote.
I finally decided to post about it because this is just the latest example of the kind of failure this guy is. He's just a mask, he's not the guy in charge, he's just the real president's "face," if you will. How else would you explain his total lack of interest, his total detachment from what's going on around him?

It's Katrina's reaction all over again. Something important is going on, but I don't care. I'll just go on minding my own business. Someone else surely will take care of it for me. Like daddy and mommy always do. Karl, or Dick, or Condi, or Karen. Someone will make sure I look good again. I can keep on dreaming about the rapture.

What a total loser.

Bush the liar

Yesterday, Mr. Bush was at the UN headquarters in New York, addressing the assembly during the largest gathering of world leaders in history to discuss international security and the future of the United Nations.

This is what he had the gall to say:
"'Democratic nations uphold the rule of law, impose limits on the power of the state, treat women and minorities as full citizens,' he said. 'Democratic nations protect private property, free speech and religious expression."
Excuse me, Mr. failed-President, the last I checked the United States was a democratic nation, and yet, women are not treated the same as men and minorities are not treated the same as anyone.

Mitt Romney

Here's the latest hate-filled talking point from the gay-basher, civil rights-repeller, Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney:
Governor Mitt Romney raised the prospect of wiretapping mosques and conducting surveillance of foreign students in Massachusetts, as he issued a broad call yesterday for the federal government to devote far more money and attention to domestic intelligence gathering.
How did this guy get elected in probably the most liberal state in the country is really a mystery. And a scary one too. Just think about it. He'll probably run for the White House in 2008, and if he was able to fool the most liberal electorate that his conservative leanings weren't relevant and wouldn't affect the state, imagine what he can do nationwide, where he can find a captive audience of right wing haters.

A Quote By:

Wanda Sykes, comedienne, actress:
"I don't think the President should have taken responsibility.... I don't blame the President. I blame the American people. Y'all knew the man was slow when you voted him in. You can't blame the blind man for wrecking your car when you're the one who gave him the keys."
Couldn't agree more.

One dollar a day

Food for thought:
In 2005, more than one billion people still exist on less than $1 per day, while more than 800 million people do not have enough food to fulfill their daily energy needs.
How far would you go before breaking down if you suddenly had to live on less than 1 dollar a day?

Hate crimes bill

I just read that yesterday a hate crimes bill was inserted as an amendment into another bill and passed the House of Representatives. It's really a historic event, since similar bills failed to pass legislative session after legislative session.

Many crimes are committed every year (7,489 in 2003 alone,) "motivated by an offender’s irrational antagonism toward some personal attribute associated with the victim. Reporting by law enforcement is voluntary and it is widely believed that hate crimes are seriously under-reported."

It is really important that authorities be able to prosecute these crimes for what they really are, expressions of hate "against the victim’s perceived sexual orientation, gender, disability or gender identity."

The bill now needs to be approved by the Senate, and then will meet its biggest enemy: Mr. Bush. The president has so far never vetoed a bill passed by his Congress. Will this be the one that forces him to bring out "the pen"?

Was 9/11 preventable?

That's the question many people have been asking themselves since that fatal day in 2001, and it might be on many more people's minds when they read this excerpt from the 9/11 Commission report just made public by the Bush administration (gee, were they afraid it might be controversial if they had released it right away?):
A 1995 National Intelligence Estimate, a report prepared by intelligence officials, "highlighted the growing domestic threat of terrorist attack, including a risk to civil aviation," the commission found in a blacked-out portion of the report.

And in 1998 and 1999, the commission report said, the F.A.A.'s intelligence unit produced reports about the hijacking threat posed by Al Qaeda, "including the possibility that the terrorist group might try to hijack a commercial jet and slam it into a U.S. landmark."

[...]

"We assess that the prospect for terrorist hijacking has increased and that U.S. airliners could be targeted in an attempt to obtain the release of indicted or convicted terrorists imprisoned in the United States."
Scary stuff. And yes, that was under Clinton's watch (who did way more than Bush ever even thought of doing,) but he did try warning Bush about bin Laden when he left office.

Alas, to no avail.

Maureen Dowd Redux

A follow up on Maureen's editorial, since there is another very good point. She writes:
[T]he stories this week are breathtaking about the lengths the White House staff had to go to in order to capture Incurious George's attention.

Newsweek reported that the reality of Katrina did not sink in for the president until days after the levees broke, turning New Orleans into a watery grave. It took a virtual intervention of his top aides to make W. watch the news about the worst natural disaster in a century. Dan Bartlett made a DVD of newscasts on the hurricane to show the president on Friday morning as he flew down to the Gulf Coast.
This is unbelievable. Here you have the leader of the free world, the guy in charge of the most powerful and richest country on the planet, who casually and proudly admits not to read newspapers or watch TV.

Now, I think that's moronic, but hey, feel free to stay ignorant. But aren't you in the least curious about knowing something about the worst natural disaster ever to hit your country?! Are you telling me that in those first few days he never even happened to just pass in front of a TV screen and casually glance at the scenes of desperation?

Don't you want to find out how what's happening and how things are going? Even just as a conversation starter for your fundraising dinners. I mean, since everybody knows what's happening down there, maybe you should at least know that something is actually going on.

Incredible. Unconscionable. That's our boy, though. That's Bush's style. Indeed.