Lt. Col. Vindman ended his opening statement with a stirring plea that had some spectators wiping away tears: “Dad, my sitting here today, in the U.S. Capitol talking to our elected officials is proof that you made the right decision 40 years ago to leave the Soviet Union and come here to United States of America in search of a better life for our family. Do not worry. I will be fine for telling the truth.”
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Monday, December 29, 2008
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Friday, December 26, 2008
From Kevin's website:
While Kevin holds a BA in English literature from Dartmouth College, he pursued harmony, composition and orchestration throughout his undergraduate career. Upon graduating, he returned to his hometown of Boston for private study with Thomas McGah, head of the composition department at Berklee College of Music, and jazz studies with Mitch Coodley and Mick Goodrick. Kevin moved to Seattle in 1983 where studied classical guitar with Gary Bissiri.
At home in a variety of music genres, Kevin has performed or recorded with groups ranging from the Seattle Symphony to the Seattle Guitar Quartet, Dave Koz, Arnold McCuller of the James Taylor band, Greg Adams of Tower of Power, Roger Fisher of Heart, Rita Coolidge, and the peerless Assad Brothers.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
LIMBAUGH: Back to this October surprise. I am just wondering — as I say, it can’t be proven — I’m just wondering if a lot of this was by design to create economic panic. Remember now — the Iraq war had dominated everything, and the economy was said to no longer be an issue in the campaign for the first time. Corruption, other things were — ethics (well, the Republicans had those problems) — but the economy wasn’t. They wanted to create economic crisis, a mindset of this.
Monday, December 22, 2008
This story is far worse, and it involves the Office of the President of the United States, since Karl Rove is deeply implicated.
George Bush aide dies in plane crash
Mystery surrounds the death of a Republican pollster, recently compelled to give evidence about alleged election fraud in the 2004 election in Ohio, after he was killed in a plane crash.
By Toby Harnden in Washington
Last Updated: 8:57PM GMT 21 Dec 2008
Top internet strategist Michael Connell, 45, was the only person in his single-engine private plane that crashed three miles short of the Akron-Canton airport on Friday night as he prepared to land after flying from College Park, Maryland, close to Washington.
He had worked on Mr Bush's two presidential campaigns, advised John McCain this year and was also linked to allegedly missing White House emails in the 2006 controversy over a string of firings of US attorneys.
The death of the married father of four immediately triggered conspiracy theories amid speculation that he had been about to reveal embarrassing details of the complicity of senior members of the Bush administration in fixing an election and destroying incriminating emails.
In a blog posting entitled "One of my sources died in a plane crash last night...", Larisa Alexandrovna of The Raw Story revealed that Mr Connell had been talking to her about the Ohio case alleging that vote-tampering during the 2004 presidential election resulted in civil rights violations.
"Mike was getting ready to talk. He was frightened... I am not saying that this was a hit nor am I resigned to this being simply an accident either. I am no expert on aviation and cannot provide an opinion on the matter. What I am saying, however, is that given the context, this event needs to be examined carefully."
A house was damaged in the 6pm crash in freezing conditions but no one apart from the pilot was killed or injured.
"He suffered massive traumatic injuries over his entire body," said Harry Campbell, the local coroner's chief investigator. "His death was instantaneous."
Mr Connell was president of GovTech Solutions and New Media Communications. A web designer, he had created a website for Ohio's secretary of state that presented the results of the 2004 election in real time as they were released.
He had refused to testify or to hand over documents relating to the systems he had created for the 2004 and 2006 elections but was compelled to do so by subpoena in October and appeared in court in Cleveland, Ohio – the state which gave President George W Bush victory in 2004 – to give a deposition the day before Barack Obama won the presidential election.
A lawyer bringing the voter fraud case described Mr Connell as "a high IQ Forrest Gump" because he had been at the scene of so many "crimes" involving Republicans and the Bush administration.
Mr Connel's company website states that he "has served as internet consultant to scores of prominent senators, governors and members of Congress, as well as the Republican National Committee and five Republican National Conventions".
REPORTED IN JULY 2008:
By John Michael Spinelli
Thursday, 24 July 2008
GOP Threatens “Valerie Plame” Style Strike Against Wife of IT Mastermind if He Doesn’t Become Fall Guy for Gaming the 2004 Ohio Election
COLUMBUS, OHIO: The little story about how the GOP cyber-gamed the Ohio presidential election in 2004 is growing by the day, spurred on to greater heights Thursday when an Ohio election attorney asked the Ohio Attorney General to provide immunity protection to Mike Connell, the GOP IT mastermind who built various computer systems they say not only won Ohio for President Bush in 2004 but led to many other wins for Republicans over the years of the Bush Administration.
A key figure in the grand strategy of the Grand Old Party to build a cyber system that could assure permanent control by Republicans of key offices, state and federal, is Mike Connell, an Ohio native some refer to as a “High IQ Forrest Gump” for his brilliance in masterminding the construction of various computer systems associated with election procedures and data security, including the so-called firewall in Congress.
Ohio Attorney General Asked to Protect Key Witness in Election Fraud Case
In an email sent to OhioNewsBureau by lead attorney Cliff Arnebeck, who filed a federal lawsuit in August 2006 asserting the GOP gamed the system and won the state by suppressing the votes of various progressive-leaning groups like students and African Americans and who wants to revive the case to protect the integrity of the 2008 election, Nancy H. Rogers, the former dean of the law school at The Ohio State University and interim Attorney General, was asked to provide immunity protection services to Connell.
The immunity request from Arnebeck to the Ohio AG was triggered by information from a confidential source that Karl Rove, a kingpin GOP strategist, threatened that if Mike Connell doesn’t go in the tank for cyber-rigging the 2004 election in Ohio, his wife will be sued for lobbying law violations. Using this kind of hardball tactic to rain retribution down on an individual for not allowing himself to be “thrown under the bus” smacks of the identical retaliation tactic used to punish Valerie Plame by outing her as a spy for remarks made by her husband Joe Wilson before the commencement of the war in Iraq that no evidence existed for uranium being sold by Niger to Saddam Hussein.
In an email to the General Mukasey at US Dept. of Justice, Arnebeck said “We have been confidentially informed by a source we believe to be credible that Karl Rove has threatened Michael Connell, a principal witness we have identified in our King Lincoln case in federal court in Columbus, Ohio, that if he does not agree to "take the fall" for election fraud in Ohio, his wife Heather will be prosecuted for supposed lobby law violations. This appears to be in response to our designation of Rove as the principal perpetrator in the Ohio Corrupt Practices Act/RICO claim with respect to which we issued document hold notices last Thursday to you and to the US Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform.”
Continuing, Arnebeck said, “I have informed court chambers and am in the process of informing the Ohio Attorney General's and US Attorney's offices in Columbus for the purpose, among other things, of seeking protection for Mr. Connell and his family from this reported attempt to intimidate a witness.
“Concurrently herewith, I am informing Mr. Conyers and Mr. Kucinich in connection with their Congressional oversight responsibilities related to these matters.
“Because of the serious engagement in this matter that began in 2000 of the Ohio Statehouse Press Corps, 60 Minutes, the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, C-Span and Jim VandeHei, and the public's right to know of gross attempts to subvert the rule of law, I am forwarding this information to them, as well.”
In an exclusive interview with OhioNewsBureau, Arnebeck said he expects to meet in person next week with attorneys in the Ohio AG’s office on his request for immunity filed today. Stressing that his aim is to enhance his lawsuit of 2006, Arnebeck said, "I’m not trying to screw things up. I want to help not hinder.”
Asked what other offices could play a role, if they chose, in his campaign to unravel the Matrix behind what he and computer experts like Stephen Spoonamore say is going on but no one has yet to prove exists, Arnebeck said the Office of Ohio Secretary of State, the chief of elections, could use its legal authority to interrogate Connell, or initiate her own inquiry into the matter if she wants to hold off on the federal case. Arnebeck said Judge Algenon Marbley, who’s in charge of his case, has had members of his staff informally informed of the direction Arnebeck and his co-counsel, Bob Fitrakis, want to take the case along with their request to recover various emails of Karl Rove and the US Chamber of Commerce they feel makes their case.
“We want to cooperate,” Arnebeck said in a telephone interview today, about working with all offices on finding the truth behind efforts to build an effective but undetectable system that tilts close elections to Republicans.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
There are plenty of culprits, like lenders who peddled easy credit, consumers who took on mortgages they could not afford and Wall Street chieftains who loaded up on mortgage-backed securities without regard to the risk.
But the story of how we got here is partly one of Mr. Bush’s own making, according to a review of his tenure that included interviews with dozens of current and former administration officials.
From his earliest days in office, Mr. Bush paired his belief that Americans do best when they own their own home with his conviction that markets do best when let alone.
He pushed hard to expand homeownership, especially among minorities, an initiative that dovetailed with his ambition to expand the Republican tent — and with the business interests of some of his biggest donors. But his housing policies and hands-off approach to regulation encouraged lax lending standards.
Mr. Bush did foresee the danger posed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored mortgage finance giants. The president spent years pushing a recalcitrant Congress to toughen regulation of the companies, but was unwilling to compromise when his former Treasury secretary wanted to cut a deal. And the regulator Mr. Bush chose to oversee them — an old prep school buddy — pronounced the companies sound even as they headed toward insolvency.
As early as 2006, top advisers to Mr. Bush dismissed warnings from people inside and outside the White House that housing prices were inflated and that a foreclosure crisis was looming. And when the economy deteriorated, Mr. Bush and his team misdiagnosed the reasons and scope of the downturn; as recently as February, for example, Mr. Bush was still calling it a “rough patch.”
The result was a series of piecemeal policy prescriptions that lagged behind the escalating crisis.
“There is no question we did not recognize the severity of the problems,” said Al Hubbard, Mr. Bush’s former chief economics adviser, who left the White House in December 2007. “Had we, we would have attacked them.”
Looking back, Keith B. Hennessey, Mr. Bush’s current chief economics adviser, says he and his colleagues did the best they could “with the information we had at the time.” But Mr. Hennessey did say he regretted that the administration did not pay more heed to the dangers of easy lending practices. And both Mr. Paulson and his predecessor, John W. Snow, say the housing push went too far.
“The Bush administration took a lot of pride that homeownership had reached historic highs,” Mr. Snow said in an interview. “But what we forgot in the process was that it has to be done in the context of people being able to afford their house. We now realize there was a high cost.”
Friday, December 19, 2008
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Every time Obama tries to get away from slimey partisan attacks THE WINGERS TRY TO PULL HIM BACK IN!
Here's Gingrich on the subject:
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich sent a rather scathing letter to Mike Duncan on Tuesday, accusing the RNC chairman of engaging in "a destructive distraction" by attempting to tie Barack Obama to Rod Blagojevich. In particular, Gingrich hit the RNC for putting out a web ad that made it seem as if the President-elect was hiding a nefarious chapter of his personal history with the embattled Illinois Governor.
"The RNC should pull the ad down immediately," Gingrich writes.
I was saddened to learn that at a time of national trial, when a president-elect is preparing to take office in the midst of the worst financial crisis in over seventy years, that the Republican National Committee is engaged in the sort of negative, attack politics that the voters rejected in the 2006 and 2008 election cycles.
The recent web advertisement, "Questions Remain," is a destructive distraction. Clearly, we should insist that all taped communications regarding the Senate seat should be made public. However, that should be a matter of public policy, not an excuse for political attack.
In a time when America is facing real challenges, Republicans should be working to help the incoming President succeed in meeting them, regardless of his Party.
From now until the inaugural, Republicans should be offering to help the President-elect prepare to take office.
Furthermore, once President Obama takes office, Republicans should be eager to work with him when he is right, and, when he is wrong, offer a better solution, instead of just opposing him.
This is the only way the Republican Party will become known as the "better solutions" party, not just an opposition party. And this is the only way Republicans will ever regain the trust of the voters to return to the majority.
This ad is a terrible signal to be sending about both the goals of the Republican Party in the midst of the nation's troubled economic times and about whether we have actually learned anything from the defeats of 2006 and 2008.You go Gingrich. I've tried to explain this to my conservative friends but they seem not to want to step away from the old politics of attack and destroy. They seem not to believe that President-elect Obama wants to end that destructive culture and bring this nation together.
Thank you Newt Gingrich and all other reasonable conservatives who understand that we will accomplish nothing if we continue down this path.
Monday, December 15, 2008
On the December 14 edition of Fox News' Hannity's America, discussing prosecutor and U.S. attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's December 9 press conference on the arrest of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D), host Sean Hannity stated that "what [Fitzgerald] said was, 'There's no allegation in the complaint that the president-elect was aware,' " adding, "I found that as sort of almost like a parsing of words." As evidence, Hannity asserted that "the word 'president-elect' was mentioned -- what -- I think some 44 times" in the criminal complaint against Blagojevich, and said that "is a pretty high, high number." His comments followed an assertion he made on the December 9 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, that "the word 'president-elect' is mentioned 44 times in the document. Pretty troubling."
In fact, with one exception, none of the 44 instances in which "president-elect" was used in the complaint actually mentions any alleged conduct or statement by President-elect Barack Obama, much less any conduct or statement amounting to wrongdoing. The one exception consisted of an allegation that Blagojevich complained that Obama would not give him anything other than "appreciation."
In every other instance, the complaint mentioned "president-elect" in the context of Blagojevich's alleged desires, expectations, or plans for extracting favors in return for the Senate seat; in the context of the president-elect's victory having created an open Senate seat; or in the context of, as in one mention, "media reports indicat[ing] that Senate Candidate 1, an advisor to the President-elect, was interested in the Senate seat if it became vacant, and was likely to be supported by the President-elect."
Someone should tell Hannity that by his dishonest and harebrained logic, one could say that Jesus taught his disciples to pray about "temptation" and "evil," when he taught them the Lord's Prayer. What's the "evidence" of that statement? The words "temptation" and"evil" are mentioned in the prayer. That's really troubling.
Why do people listen to Hannity the branleur?
BAGHDAD — Thousands of Iraqis took to the streets Monday to demand the release of a reporter who threw his shoes at President George W. Bush, as Arabs across many parts of the Middle East hailed the journalist as a hero and praised his insult as a proper send-off to the unpopular U.S. president.
The protests came as suicide bombers and gunmen targeted Iraqi police, U.S.-allied Sunni guards and civilians in a series of attacks Monday that killed at least 17 people and wounded more than a dozen others, officials said.
Journalist Muntadhar al-Zeidi, who was kidnapped by militants last year, was being held by Iraqi security Monday and interrogated about whether anybody paid him to throw his shoes at Bush during a press conference the previous day in Baghdad, said an Iraqi official.
He was also being tested for alcohol and drugs, and his shoes were being held as evidence, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media.
Showing the sole of your shoe to someone in the Arab world is a sign of extreme disrespect, and throwing your shoes is even worse. Iraqis whacked a statue of Saddam with their shoes after U.S. Marines toppled it to the ground following the 2003 invasion.
Newspapers across the Arab world on Monday printed front-page photos of Bush ducking the flying shoes, and satellite TV stations repeatedly aired the incident, which provided fodder for jokes and was hailed by the president's many critics in the region.
"Iraq considers Sunday as the international day for shoes," said a joking text message circulating around the Saudi capital Riyadh.
Palestinian journalists in the West Bank town of Ramallah joked about who would be brave enough to toss their shoes at Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, another U.S. official widely disliked in the region.
The old guy's got some pretty decent reflexes!
Saturday, December 13, 2008
WHITE HOUSE SAYS "NO ROOM" TO OBAMAS' REQUEST TO MOVE TO BLAIR HOUSE (Is there no inn for them to room?)
It's the Christmas season, and incredibly, we're hearing the news story of a family being turned away from, well not exactly an inn, but a House. And it's the next First Family of the United States of America that is being told "there is no room."
The Obamas hoped to enroll their daughters at the Sidwell School after the Christmas break on January 5th, and inquired if Blair House would be available to them for this special request. According to the WH, Blair House is traditionally made available to the incoming President-elect and family 5 days before the inauguration, which would make that January 15.
White House officials declined to disclose specifically who is using Blair House during that period, for what purpose or how they could take precedence over the president-elect of the United States when it came to government housing; one White House official would say only that it had been booked for “receptions and gatherings” by members of the departing Bush administration. Those receptions, the official said, “don’t make it suitable for full-time occupancy by the Obamas yet.”
So the Obamas are now looking for an alternative place to stay for a few weeks, though they presumably are not searching Craigslist for a sublet.
Obama transition officials, who have been trying hard to highlight how well the Bush and the Obama families have been getting along, were quick to say that they were not angry about being turned away. “The White House has been extremely accommodating to the Obama family needs — and the entire process has been smooth and friendly,” a transition official said.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Behind the debate over remaking U.S. financial policy will be a debate over who’s to blame. It’s crucial to get the history right, writes a Nobel-laureate economist, identifying five key mistakes—under Reagan, Clinton, and Bush II—and one national delusion.
There will come a moment when the most urgent threats posed by the credit crisis have eased and the larger task before us will be to chart a direction for the economic steps ahead. This will be a dangerous moment. Behind the debates over future policy is a debate over history—a debate over the causes of our current situation. The battle for the past will determine the battle for the present. So it’s crucial to get the history straight.
What were the critical decisions that led to the crisis? Mistakes were made at every fork in the road—we had what engineers call a “system failure,” when not a single decision but a cascade of decisions produce a tragic result. Let’s look at five key moments.
No. 1: Firing the Chairman
In 1987 the Reagan administration decided to remove Paul Volcker as chairman of the Federal Reserve Board and appoint Alan Greenspan in his place. Volcker had done what central bankers are supposed to do. On his watch, inflation had been brought down from more than 11 percent to under 4 percent. In the world of central banking, that should have earned him a grade of A+++ and assured his re-appointment. But Volcker also understood that financial markets need to be regulated. Reagan wanted someone who did not believe any such thing, and he found him in a devotee of the objectivist philosopher and free-market zealot Ayn Rand.
Greenspan played a double role. The Fed controls the money spigot, and in the early years of this decade, he turned it on full force. But the Fed is also a regulator. If you appoint an anti-regulator as your enforcer, you know what kind of enforcement you’ll get. A flood of liquidity combined with the failed levees of regulation proved disasterous.
Greenspan presided over not one but two financial bubbles. After the high-tech bubble popped, in 2000–2001, he helped inflate the housing bubble. The first responsibility of a central bank should be to maintain the stability of the financial system. If banks lend on the basis of artificially high asset prices, the result can be a meltdown—as we are seeing now, and as Greenspan should have known. He had many of the tools he needed to cope with the situation. To deal with the high-tech bubble, he could have increased margin requirements (the amount of cash people need to put down to buy stock). To deflate the housing bubble, he could have curbed predatory lending to low-income households and prohibited other insidious practices (the no-documentation—or “liar”—loans, the interest-only loans, and so on). This would have gone a long way toward protecting us. If he didn’t have the tools, he could have gone to Congress and asked for them.
Of course, the current problems with our financial system are not solely the result of bad lending. The banks have made mega-bets with one another through complicated instruments such as derivatives, credit-default swaps, and so forth. With these, one party pays another if certain events happen—for instance, if Bear Stearns goes bankrupt, or if the dollar soars. These instruments were originally created to help manage risk—but they can also be used to gamble. Thus, if you felt confident that the dollar was going to fall, you could make a big bet accordingly, and if the dollar indeed fell, your profits would soar. The problem is that, with this complicated intertwining of bets of great magnitude, no one could be sure of the financial position of anyone else—or even of one’s own position. Not surprisingly, the credit markets froze.Here too Greenspan played a role. When I was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, during the Clinton administration, I served on a committee of all the major federal financial regulators, a group that included Greenspan and Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin. Even then, it was clear that derivatives posed a danger. We didn’t put it as memorably as Warren Buffett—who saw derivatives as “financial weapons of mass destruction”—but we took his point. And yet, for all the risk, the deregulators in charge of the financial system—at the Fed, at the Securities and Exchange Commission, and elsewhere—decided to do nothing, worried that any action might interfere with “innovation” in the financial system. But innovation, like “change,” has no inherent value. It can be bad (the “liar” loans are a good example) as well as good.
The rest is here.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Obama honeymoon continues, poll shows
From CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser
Obama is enjoying a nearly 80 percent approval rating.
Monday, December 8, 2008
By Tim Jones Tribune correspondent
9:16 AM CST, December 8, 2008
UPDATE: The Supreme Court has turned down an emergency appeal from a New Jersey man who says President-elect Barack Obama is ineligible to be president because he was a British subject at birth.
The court did not comment on its order Monday rejecting the call by Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick, N.J., to intervene in the presidential election. Donofrio says that since Obama had dual nationality at birth -- his mother was American and his Kenyan father at the time was a British subject -- he cannot possibly be a "natural born citizen," one of the requirements the Constitution lists for eligibility to be president.
Donofrio also contends that two other candidates, Republican John McCain and Socialist Workers candidate Roger Calero, also are not natural-born citizens and thus ineligible to be president.At least one other appeal over Obama's citizenship remains at the court. Philip J. Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pa., argues that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii as Obama says and the Hawaii secretary of state has confirmed. Berg says Obama also may be a citizen of Indonesia, where he lived as a boy. Federal courts in Pennsylvania have dismissed Berg's laws
‘Shut up about the birth certificate’
By Jay Bookman
Monday, December 8, 2008, 05:36 PM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Conservative writer David Horowitz, writing in the conservative National Review, advises his fellow conservatives to “shut up about the birth certificate,” as the headline on his article puts it.
“The continuing efforts of a fringe group of conservatives to deny Obama his victory and to lay the basis for the claim that he is not a legitimate president is embarrassing and destructive,” Horowitz writes. “The fact that these efforts are being led by Alan Keyes, a demagogue who lost a Senate election to the then-unknown Obama by 42 points, should be a warning in itself….
“It is not conservatism; it is sore loserism and quite radical in its intent,” concludes Horowitz.
“Respect for election results is one of the most durable bulwarks of our unity as a nation. Conservatives need to accept the fact that we lost the election, and get over it; and get on with the important business of reviving our country’s economy and defending its citizens, and — by the way — its Constitution.”
I confess I do have some sympathy for the “birthers,” though. As an outsider, it’s hard to distinguish between the zany arguments that get official approval by the conservative establishment — things like Bill Ayers, Michelle Obama’s infamous “whitey” tape, the claim that Obama is a closet Marxist — and those arguments that are considered beyond the pale. I mean, where does one draw the line between acceptable lunacy and unacceptable lunacy?
Apparently those within the movement have a hard time figuring it out as well, which is why Horowitz had to send out a memo explaining the official ruling.
h/t Illiterate Electorate
The Workmans Friend
When things go wrong and will not come right,
Though you do the best you can,
When life looks black as the hour of night -
A pint of plain is your only man.
When money's tight and hard to get
And your horse has also ran,
When all you have is a heap of debt -
A pint of plain is your only man.
When health is bad and your heart feels strange,
And your face is pale and wan,
When doctors say you need a change,
A pint of plain is your only man.
When food is scarce and your larder bare
And no rashers grease your pan,
When hunger grows as your meals are rare -
A pint of plain is your only man.
In time of trouble and lousey strife,
You have still got a darlint plan
You still can turn to a brighter life -
A pint of plain is your only man.
-- Flann O'Brien (Brian O'Nolan)
The poem was written by Flann O'Brien/Brian O'Nolan, one of my favorite writers.
These are some of the books he's written that I've loved:
At Swim Two Birds
The Third Policeman
The Dalky Archive
The Hard Life
The Poor Mouth
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Saturday, December 6, 2008
If the long-form birth certificate were released, with its unequivocal identification of Hawaii as Obama's place of birth, the cycle would almost certainly continue. Rush Limbaugh already suggested that Obama's trip to Hawaii to see his ailing grandmother, who died not long after, was somehow connected to the controversy. Others, like Michael Savage, followed Limbaugh's lead, saying Obama was going to Hawaii to alter the record.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Conservative TV personality O'Reilly urged viewers to call Gov. Chris Gregoire's office.
Gregoire spokesman Pearse Edwards says the office has been getting about 200 calls an hour, as well as e-mails.
That prompted a lawmaker from Spokane to stage a protest at the Capitol, demanding the holiday tree be called a "Christmas tree." It also led a local real estate agent to sue the state to allow the nativity display depicting the birth of Jesus.
Some people, influenced or inspired by Seinfeld, now celebrate the holiday in varying degrees of seriousness; some carefully follow rules from the TV show or books, while others humorously invent their own versions.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Whether they're Christian or not, they have this in common: They do not forgive and will not forget what happened in 1969.
They have no knowledge of how Senator Kennedy reconciled this awful tragedy with his god--and they certainly don't believe in redemtion and the power of good works as penance for past wrongful behavior. This attitude is in direct contradiction to the teachings of their Personal Savior, Jesus Christ. This spiteful, vindictive posture toward Senator Kennedy says more about them and their galloping hypocrisy and anti-Christian behavior than it does Senator Kennedy.
I salute Senator Kennedy and wish that more people had the courage, humility, and forebearance that he has shown over the years.
James Carroll of the Boston Globe writes this about the unique award Harvard University recently conferred on Senator Kennedy:
Ted Kennedy, the champion
By James Carroll
December 1, 2008
Monday, December 1, 2008
This is hilarious, except it really isn't.
After you get over your first reaction of disbelief, then hilarity, it's, well, depressing and then terrifying that in this technologically advanced country in the 21st century, we still have people who think that it's perfectly fine to spread lies and misinformation about their fellow Americans.
These people are frightened and grossly uninformed. What a great combination for doing harm to people.