["High court overhauls campaign financing"; as submitted to You Tube by WOODTV8 on January 21, 2010; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyMi8aipMsM]
Opinion Piece:
Perhaps the fact that corporations can now buy politicians in a forthright manner is (as "whacky" as this might sound) a "good" thing ("good" having about as much value as the American dollar right about now...) --- since not-for-profits, special interest groups and corporations appear to have been (in any number of cases) overtly and / or covertly doing so (i.e., buying politicians...) for quite some time, anyhow - and this latest "new rule" [in Bill Maher (sp?) speak] - simply tells "us" (in a more forthright manner) that what the people want (in terms of representation, laws, rules, etc) doesn't really mean (This is not a Democracy...) shi*.
Sad.
Unethical?
Criminal?
A matter of "acceptance?" --- in that it "is what it is" and "will be what it will be"?
I've been known to state that ours is a covert [hidden behind curtains one, two and three...] "caste system..."
Is "this latest" even uglier than that?
What is mightier - The dollar? The Bible (and/or other religious texts?)? A semi-automatic rifle? Or a baby tree that survives one of our mountain winters - and comes to full fruit in the Spring?
"Thou shalt not kill"...
The body?
The mind?
The spirit?
"Thou shalt not steal"...
Unless one is speaking of corporate political and financial rape?
"Thou shalt not..."
Speak the truth?
Speak at all?
Whisper?
Point two fingers out and three point back?
I guess.
Corporations have no God but the "God of Mammon" (money, riches, property, expansion...) --- so I guess it is fair to say who and/or what is going to be running this entire show (to which our representatives and political appointees bought the ticket) from now on...
Sad.
For sure.
It's back to art, poems and gardening [the world of politics has literally and figuratively made me sick...] for me.
NS
BTW, for those that might not know it, a person generally (there are exceptions) has a head, a body, two arms, two legs, eyes, a mouth, etc...
Which a corporation ["freedom of speech" --- my as*] does NOT.
Friday, January 22, 2010
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
King Jr. Palin Obama TaxPayer Funded Elections You Tube Videos and Personal Opinions...
I have to admit that after finding the following video - on Martin Luther King Day - I was pretty upset. Not so much because of what Barack Obama [this video was submitted to You Tube in 2008] had to say - but because of the context in which he was saying it [I have been and remain (albeit a bit weary and more cynical...) a big supporter of President Obama...] - and his references to Biblical scripture.
I was not easy on Sarah Palin during her run for Vice-President - largely (although not exclusively) due to the fact that she appeared to be playing the religous card [with her own particular flair and style...] for all it was worth...
But I was not aware, during that time, that Obama was [to the degree portrayed in the following video] doing [at least in this instance]the same...
My apologies there...
I try to do balanced internet journalism [whether through my own words or my video clip picks / music clips] - and my dedication to THE constitutional principal of "Separation of Church and State" (like that, collectively, of our founding fathers during the time period in which the "US Constitution" and the "Bill of Rights" were written) is [across the board] firm.
Yes, Martin Luther King Jr. was an incredible man; an incredible Civil Rights activist and a Christian minister...
Yes, Sarah Palin has made it [however one wants to frame it...] to the "big top..."
But is it fair to use religion as a step-ladder to the "top"? [It is no secret that certain religous bodies have made (This is against Constitutional law, is this not?) some major political contributions [This became real evident (and was often accomplished by front groups and such...) in the Bush Jr. era...]
Whether this [the use of religous lobbying / religio-political platforms / etc] be on the local level, state level or national level?
Is there any more integrity evident [or lacking in evidence...] when a political candidate [no matter whom, or running for what...] panders to the major religious lobbyists "out there" - than when a political candidate [no matter whom, or running for what...] panders to insurance lobbyists, pharmeceutical lobbyists - or any other type of mega-buck [the war machine keeps pumping, does it not?] lobbyists?
They offer Civics studies in publically funded colleges...
They offer religious studies in publically funded colleges...
They do not combine the two...
No more than they combine Civics with Pharmaceuticals 101 or Religious Studies with Pharmaceuticals 101...
For good reason?
I think.
The other issue that I take up with the following video is that Reverend Martin Luther King - a tremendous Civil Rights activist - stepped away from race issues towards the end of his life [Is it not true that placing too much focus on race issues, although these certainly have their place, is devisive...?] - and started to focus [this, right before his assassination...] more on socio-economic stratification and the exploitation of and general plight of [whether they be Black, White, Hispanic, other...] the poor.
Which is something that I "think" President Barack Obama (who has no doubt learned a great deal over the last few years) has at least a tentative "grip" on --- but needs (perhaps, and not in a church...) to address in a more forthright public manner.
Some people will, no doubt, love the following video...
Some people will, no doubt, dis-like the following video...
And some others, like myself, will analyze it - each one in the way he or she sees fit - finding some aspects of it heartening - and other aspects of it disheartening...
Depending on where one stands on any number of issues.
["Barack Obama Speaks at Dr. King's Church"; as submitted to You Tube by BarackObamadotcom on January 21, 2008; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf0x_TpDris]
In regard to the following video, I feel the need to remind people that it "did" take an awfully loooooooong time to decide whether there should be a streetlight or a stop sign at a particular uptown (local) intersection...
Which would lead one to believe that even beyond the obvious lobbyist issues we have in this country [be these lobbyist issues related to religous bodies, pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, major corporations, or whatever ...] --- with their potential for undue influence and/or corruption --- there are other major issues [Too much red tape? Too many committees, subcommittees, boards, exclusivity, secrecy and fine print?] to give some serious thought to as well...
["Lessig on Obama's First Year: Change Congress Chronicles"; as submitted to You Tube by ChangeYourCongress on January 19, 2010; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14dAwz0-HM8]
I love my country - and I consider myself a Christian [non-denominational / with a free-thinking edge...] in the best sense (my opinion) of the word...
Love and rationality are compatible in my book.
Peace and harmony [on a world-wide scale] are possible in my book.
And I sincerely believe that the integrity of each and every potential political candidate and/or office holder could be [We have the science, knowlege and technology to accomplish this...] evaluated [if we so chose] pretty deeply - prior to their election and/or appointments.
What to look for?
I believe a committment to integrity and social justice [in home, business, money and politics; and in regard to the "U.S. Constitution", "Bill of Rights", International Treaties, etc.] should top any list of questions [to be backed up by a proven track-record in this department] that political candidates "could" [How about a battery of psychological tests for political candidates? Lie detector tests evaluated by a number of different objective professionals?] be required to undergo...
And ones religious (or non) views and alliances (or non) should be left (100% --- this is personal information) out of it.
-------------------------------------
All of that said, I am strongly in favor of taxpayer funded elections [with a cap per individual and a complete public accounting of same put together for evaluation by the people...] - as was presented [in part; my personal opinions have been added here...] in the above video.
-------------------------------------------
In closing, I want to propose the idea that demonstrated values and ethics [Adherance to any particular religous faith or body is not, or should not be, a requirement here...] - versus what all-too-frequently turns out to be empty words and/or bogus (Money motivated?) affilations - should be the thermometer [keeping the "US Constitution" and "Bill of Rights" firmly in mind...] through which we take "our" temperature [Are we "sick?"] and the temperature of [Are they "sick?"] others...
Thank you for reading.
Your ideas are also welcome here.
NS
I was not easy on Sarah Palin during her run for Vice-President - largely (although not exclusively) due to the fact that she appeared to be playing the religous card [with her own particular flair and style...] for all it was worth...
But I was not aware, during that time, that Obama was [to the degree portrayed in the following video] doing [at least in this instance]the same...
My apologies there...
I try to do balanced internet journalism [whether through my own words or my video clip picks / music clips] - and my dedication to THE constitutional principal of "Separation of Church and State" (like that, collectively, of our founding fathers during the time period in which the "US Constitution" and the "Bill of Rights" were written) is [across the board] firm.
Yes, Martin Luther King Jr. was an incredible man; an incredible Civil Rights activist and a Christian minister...
Yes, Sarah Palin has made it [however one wants to frame it...] to the "big top..."
But is it fair to use religion as a step-ladder to the "top"? [It is no secret that certain religous bodies have made (This is against Constitutional law, is this not?) some major political contributions [This became real evident (and was often accomplished by front groups and such...) in the Bush Jr. era...]
Whether this [the use of religous lobbying / religio-political platforms / etc] be on the local level, state level or national level?
Is there any more integrity evident [or lacking in evidence...] when a political candidate [no matter whom, or running for what...] panders to the major religious lobbyists "out there" - than when a political candidate [no matter whom, or running for what...] panders to insurance lobbyists, pharmeceutical lobbyists - or any other type of mega-buck [the war machine keeps pumping, does it not?] lobbyists?
They offer Civics studies in publically funded colleges...
They offer religious studies in publically funded colleges...
They do not combine the two...
No more than they combine Civics with Pharmaceuticals 101 or Religious Studies with Pharmaceuticals 101...
For good reason?
I think.
The other issue that I take up with the following video is that Reverend Martin Luther King - a tremendous Civil Rights activist - stepped away from race issues towards the end of his life [Is it not true that placing too much focus on race issues, although these certainly have their place, is devisive...?] - and started to focus [this, right before his assassination...] more on socio-economic stratification and the exploitation of and general plight of [whether they be Black, White, Hispanic, other...] the poor.
Which is something that I "think" President Barack Obama (who has no doubt learned a great deal over the last few years) has at least a tentative "grip" on --- but needs (perhaps, and not in a church...) to address in a more forthright public manner.
Some people will, no doubt, love the following video...
Some people will, no doubt, dis-like the following video...
And some others, like myself, will analyze it - each one in the way he or she sees fit - finding some aspects of it heartening - and other aspects of it disheartening...
Depending on where one stands on any number of issues.
["Barack Obama Speaks at Dr. King's Church"; as submitted to You Tube by BarackObamadotcom on January 21, 2008; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf0x_TpDris]
In regard to the following video, I feel the need to remind people that it "did" take an awfully loooooooong time to decide whether there should be a streetlight or a stop sign at a particular uptown (local) intersection...
Which would lead one to believe that even beyond the obvious lobbyist issues we have in this country [be these lobbyist issues related to religous bodies, pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, major corporations, or whatever ...] --- with their potential for undue influence and/or corruption --- there are other major issues [Too much red tape? Too many committees, subcommittees, boards, exclusivity, secrecy and fine print?] to give some serious thought to as well...
["Lessig on Obama's First Year: Change Congress Chronicles"; as submitted to You Tube by ChangeYourCongress on January 19, 2010; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14dAwz0-HM8]
I love my country - and I consider myself a Christian [non-denominational / with a free-thinking edge...] in the best sense (my opinion) of the word...
Love and rationality are compatible in my book.
Peace and harmony [on a world-wide scale] are possible in my book.
And I sincerely believe that the integrity of each and every potential political candidate and/or office holder could be [We have the science, knowlege and technology to accomplish this...] evaluated [if we so chose] pretty deeply - prior to their election and/or appointments.
What to look for?
I believe a committment to integrity and social justice [in home, business, money and politics; and in regard to the "U.S. Constitution", "Bill of Rights", International Treaties, etc.] should top any list of questions [to be backed up by a proven track-record in this department] that political candidates "could" [How about a battery of psychological tests for political candidates? Lie detector tests evaluated by a number of different objective professionals?] be required to undergo...
And ones religious (or non) views and alliances (or non) should be left (100% --- this is personal information) out of it.
-------------------------------------
All of that said, I am strongly in favor of taxpayer funded elections [with a cap per individual and a complete public accounting of same put together for evaluation by the people...] - as was presented [in part; my personal opinions have been added here...] in the above video.
-------------------------------------------
In closing, I want to propose the idea that demonstrated values and ethics [Adherance to any particular religous faith or body is not, or should not be, a requirement here...] - versus what all-too-frequently turns out to be empty words and/or bogus (Money motivated?) affilations - should be the thermometer [keeping the "US Constitution" and "Bill of Rights" firmly in mind...] through which we take "our" temperature [Are we "sick?"] and the temperature of [Are they "sick?"] others...
Thank you for reading.
Your ideas are also welcome here.
NS
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Harold Ford Jr v Senator Gillibrand... You Tube Videos... Brave New World Foundation Video... Lessons in Not Eating Ones Own Toes...
My apologies for any adds or video links that might show up along with the following videos. I do not recommend clicking on them and I do not [I have not even watched them] endorse or oppose any of them...
["Harold Ford, Jr. May Run for N.Y. Senate Seat"; as submitted to You Tube by the AssociatedPress; January 12, 2010; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5Qe4qIGWT0]
["Gillibrand and Ford Square Off"; as submitted by MaristPoll on
January 15, 2010; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvGuSFXHFco]
[Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand 01182010; as submitted to You Tube by dnainfo on January 18, 2010; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYM_HVBYfQg]
["Meet Harold Ford, Jr.: Ann Coulter's Favorite Democrat..."; as submitted to You Tube by bravenewfilms January 13, 2010; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgBmQMSmCrY]
As someone that has been very impressed by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand...
I'd take the native New Yorker - gifted with a great intellect, class, basic manners, a positive record and style versus the guy [Talk about opinionated... What about what the constituents might want?] with a seemingly arrogant, locked-in-a-box, rude and obnoxious (my impressions, based on this video) side, any day!
Let's not eat our own toes...
Let's not take the elevator back down [referring to the Bush Jr. era] to the sewer...
Beware of stinky feet and anything that even slightly resembles [by word or by action...] a "golem"! [I'm thinking of the movie, "The Hobbit" ("Lord of the Rings"; JRR Tolkien) --- but "Webster's New World College Dictionary" (4th Ed.) defines a "golem" (in part) as a "a human being artificially created by cabalistic rites" (P. 610)].
NS
Addendum: Between the Far Left Liberals and the Far Right Conservatives [of whatever political party or parties they claim affiliation with...] I believe there is a happy medium...
Was I tough on Mr. Ford here? Yes.
Do I view him as an extremist - thus provoking an extreme (unusual) response from me? Yes.
Is extremism of any kind what we want to see take root (my apologies for the "golem" comment...) in America?
Let's hope - collectively - not.
["Harold Ford, Jr. May Run for N.Y. Senate Seat"; as submitted to You Tube by the AssociatedPress; January 12, 2010; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5Qe4qIGWT0]
["Gillibrand and Ford Square Off"; as submitted by MaristPoll on
January 15, 2010; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvGuSFXHFco]
[Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand 01182010; as submitted to You Tube by dnainfo on January 18, 2010; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYM_HVBYfQg]
["Meet Harold Ford, Jr.: Ann Coulter's Favorite Democrat..."; as submitted to You Tube by bravenewfilms January 13, 2010; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgBmQMSmCrY]
As someone that has been very impressed by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand...
I'd take the native New Yorker - gifted with a great intellect, class, basic manners, a positive record and style versus the guy [Talk about opinionated... What about what the constituents might want?] with a seemingly arrogant, locked-in-a-box, rude and obnoxious (my impressions, based on this video) side, any day!
Let's not eat our own toes...
Let's not take the elevator back down [referring to the Bush Jr. era] to the sewer...
Beware of stinky feet and anything that even slightly resembles [by word or by action...] a "golem"! [I'm thinking of the movie, "The Hobbit" ("Lord of the Rings"; JRR Tolkien) --- but "Webster's New World College Dictionary" (4th Ed.) defines a "golem" (in part) as a "a human being artificially created by cabalistic rites" (P. 610)].
NS
Addendum: Between the Far Left Liberals and the Far Right Conservatives [of whatever political party or parties they claim affiliation with...] I believe there is a happy medium...
Was I tough on Mr. Ford here? Yes.
Do I view him as an extremist - thus provoking an extreme (unusual) response from me? Yes.
Is extremism of any kind what we want to see take root (my apologies for the "golem" comment...) in America?
Let's hope - collectively - not.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Do You "Want Your Money Back" (?) VP Joe Biden / barackobama.com / Organizing for America... Credit Card - Haiti Issue... MoveOn.org Political Action... FAIR (New Site)... Petitions....
Photo (by NS) of the Cover of an Old "Jack and the Beanstalk" Book
Passing some information on:
I received the following a couple of days ago [Friday, 1/15/2010, via email) from Vice President Joe Biden via info@barackobama.com
"We want our money back"
"...President Obama announced our proposed Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee on the country's largest banks:
'My commitment is to recover every single dime the American people are owed. And my determination to achieve this goal is only heightened when I see reports of massive profits and obscene bonuses at some of the very firms who owe their continued existence to the American people...We want our money back, and we're going to get it.'
The fee would recover every penny loaned to Wall Street during the financial crisis and stop the reckless abuses and excesses that nearly caused the collapse of our financial system in the first place.
But the banking industry -- among the most powerful lobbies in Washington -- is already launching attacks to stop Congress from enacting the proposal.
Barack and I aren't backing down. But to win, we'll need the American people to add their voice right away.
Thankfully, OFA supporters are already signing on to a bold statement of support: "We want our money back -- and we stand with President Obama to make sure we get it.'"
To add your name to this, please go to http://my.barackobama.com/Banks
-----------------------------------------------------------
I received the following (yesterday, Saturday, 1/16/2010, via email) from Daniel Mintz at MoveOn.org Political Action (moveon-help@list.moveon.org):
"As the tragedy in Haiti unfolds, Americans are generously donating millions of dollars to aid organizations.
But when Americans donate to charity with their credit cards, the credit card companies get rich. In some cases they keep 3% of the donation as a 'transaction fee,' even though that's far more than it costs them to process the donation.
It's outrageous and wrong—and it needs to stop.
Can you sign this petition to the CEOs of the major credit card companies demanding that they waive their processing fees for all charitable donations?"
If so, please go to: http://pol.moveon.org/nofees/o.pl?id=18607-14968754-Yp.ozZx&t=3
--------------------------------------------------------
And, last but not least, another site and petition ( from FAIR at fair@fair.org ) to check out:
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/592/t/10115/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=2195 [The petition has to do with an ongoing "effort to keep hard-hitting, independent journalism on PBS."
--------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
"'... [No] man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief: but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.'
— Thomas Jefferson, The Statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom, enacted on January 16, 1786'" [This was yesterday's "Freethought of the Day at http://www.ffrf.org/ ]
------------------------------------------------
Doing what I can when I can where I can...
Peace, Love, Truth, Equality and Humane Justice,
NS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
