Daily Music SelectionKroger is a mostly Midwestern supermarket chain that is, for reasons unknown, promoting Sarah Palin’s new book, as well as giving her an opportunity to sign books in-store. To me, it is completely inappropriate for a grocery store chain to advocate for any potential political candidate, but especially one as controversial and extreme as Sarah Palin. A good friend of mine in Ohio has forwarded the following message to me, and I’ve included Kroger contact info after the message, as well as my email to Kroger CEO/Chairman David Dillon. If you feel as strongly as I do about this, please contact Kroger and let them know it, and then pass this on. Dear friend, relative or countryman/woman, Ginny and I heard a rumor on Sunday that a Sarah Palin book promotion was being planned at the Harpers Point Kroger (Cincinnati) store. Today we stopped by to see for ourselves and, sure enough, Sarah will appear for a book-signing on Dec. 3 at that store. A sign was posted on the door and a huge display of books was near the front entrance that you almost had to walk around to get in. We spoke to the store manager with our…
If you listen to the Obama administration, certain pols and the rhetoric of those associated with a certain previous administration, you would think Wiki Leak releases were the end of the world. Assets will dry up. People killed. Intelligence turn senseless, deaf, dumb and blind. Of course we’ve heard this all before with the Pentagon Papers and other Wiki leaked leaks. In fact the Bush administration was good at turning this kind of thing into all about whomever leaked it, or even about if it was the original document. Never you mind if it varies not one iota from the content of the original: the wrong font means it has to be all bogus. This is the new mindless “standard.” If it endangers the powers that be; might expose their evil doings, their incompetence or that some situation is damn near hopeless, then the most important thing is the secrecy. If releasing something provably endangers assets, actual lives, but it’s politically convenient for an administration to release the info: even if that release is done in a way that’s highly selective and skewed… well that’s okey dokie.
Written by Martin Cloughley Just before I arrived in Vietnam in 1970, as a young, gung-ho, kill-a-commie-for-freedom, Australian army captain, President Richard Nixon of the United States ordered the invasion of a neighboring nation. Not a neighbor of America, of course, but a place that was neighbor to the country that had been taken over by America. During the ten years’ war in Vietnam US Presidents and their foolish and supposedly ‘patriotic’ patsies in the House and Senate sent 58,267 of their fellow citizens to their deaths. The Vietnam Memorial in Washington is a wonderful tribute, but it’s also a dire monument to the everlasting condemnation of wicked morons who imagined they were supporting ‘Freedom’ by sending so many of their country’s soldiers to be killed. Just like in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“And thou shalt eat it [as] barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man, in their sight.” – Ezekiel 4:12 Drop another log on the fire, so to speak. “If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.” – Deuteronomy 22:22 And yet those pious C Street gentlemen John Ensign and Mark Sanford still walk among us. (I forgot; Old Testament rules only apply to gays.) “These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, a false witness that speaks lies, and he that sows discord among brethren.” – Proverbs 6:16-19 Has anyone told Fox News? “Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and…
…how can a bright-enough president repeatedly miss the key ingredient for greatness, even popularity? How can his entire staff dismiss the two irrefutable lessons from a dimwitted predecessor: 1) never diss your base in your first term (goodbye, re-election); and 2) never forget legacies are rarely about what you do, even say, but how aggressively you tag your generation’s most pernicious enemy? Written by Robert Becker How quickly the meteoric prince has fallen to earth, with a thud. The splashy campaigner has morphed into a cross between Neville Chamberlain, England’s Nazi appeaser, and George Armstrong Custer, rushing into an ambush at the Little Big Horn. Few recall Chamberlain, whose compromises to belligerent Hitler spurred, rather than deflected war – not that I am offering absurd Nazi parallels. And yet, appeasing bullies is a curious strategy for a newcomer once rich with political capital. Everyone knows Custer, the forerunner George (to our W.): he simply thought the world of himself, presumed invincibility, ignored intelligence, and was wiped out by indigenous guerilla-warriors, latter day insurgents. Certainly, no comparisons apply: our Big Little W. had better PR, nailed a $7 million book advance, and triumphs today, in Dick Cheney’s welcome absence, as America’s…
Written by Robert Parry George W. Bush, in his memoir Decision Points, says he was shown a copy of a purported memo about his shirking of his National Guard duty before a story citing the document appeared on CBS’ “60 Minutes-2,” and the former president gloats over the resulting controversy that cost the jobs of anchor Dan Rather and his star producer Mary Mapes. Bush’s account also suggests that the White House may have had a larger role in discrediting the memo than generally understood.
“It’s plain hokum. If you can’t convince ‘em, confuse ‘em. It’s an old political trick.” – Harry S Truman Your Tattlesnake has had running arguments with various Teabaggers and Tea Party sympathizers for many months now and they all share the same tactic: Should you ask a question they can’t answer or make a point they can’t refute, they start screaming at you or rudely talking over you, as if the volume of their voice can eradicate reality and reason. This leads not to debate, but confrontation, and that seems to be what they want. Beyond that, exactly how do you ‘debate’ people who insist: – There are no racists in the Tea Party movement; – It’s Obama and not George W. Bush who started the TARP bailouts of the banks and Wall Street; – The terrible economy is exclusively the fault of Obama and his liberal social programs; – All of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s social programs were complete failures; – Social Security, Medicare, the VA and the GI Bill were/are not liberal social programs; – Obama has raised taxes for the poor and middle-class; – Obama is a Muslim/socialist/communist (take your pick) plotting the downfall of the US backed…
