Film at 11.

Muffled Squeaks No Longer.

Of course the big news is Tom Delay’s indictment in using corporate funds for campaigns in Texas which is a violation of Texas state law. The centerpiece for the indictment is a $100K check that went from Tom Delay’s Texans for a Republican Majority Political Action Committee to the Republican National Committee which was then given to republican candidates in Texas and where that money came from. It’s political money laundering. Delay’s charge is general, conspiracy to violate state law, while his underlings are being charged with actually doing it.

Delay has accused the prosecutor that brought the indictment, calling him a partisan fanatic. Yet of 15 the major indictments Ron Earle has brought 11 have been against Democrats, so that one fell flat as soon as the Delay camp tried to launch it. This isn’t about party politics; it’s about the law. Given the depths of Delay’s moral and political depravity, it feels kind of like nailing Al Capone for tax evasion, but I’ll take it.

The Bush administration is facing accountability at last. Hallelujah! This month Brown & Delay, next month Karl Rove. Maybe we can bring up Rumsfeld on charges of gross incompetance for *still* not arming our troops properly and find out who authorized the torture at Abu Ghraib. I've been quiet as a mouse, letting the misdeeds of the Neo-Conservative Right in power speak for themselves, but there are times I just want to scream “I TOLD YOU SO!” I told all the Republican conservatives in 2004 that they had picked the wrong horse, to just let these jackasses go and wait for the next elections in 2006 & 2008 to pick a decent Republican candidates. But NOOOOOO, they were Republican, so they had to vote for them because they were Republican. This is what they get for their blind loyalty to political sub-group that is so blatantly, so solely out for power at any cost and don’t give a damn about the American people. Stop voting for one party over another just because your Daddy did, actually look at the damn candidates next time! The responsibility of freedom is vigilance; that means awareness of what the heck your politicians are doing, not simply checking off boxes on a ballot because they fall under the right column!

AAIGH!

*pant*pant*

You have no idea how long I have wanted to say that.

*breathes*

This isn’t a Democrat/Republican thing. I’m registered Green Party, I think they both suck. But I really, really, *REALLY* hate the Bush administration and the political depravity it has encouraged in their cronies. I disagree with some of John McCain’s positions but I respect him. I disagree with some of Kerry’s positions, but I respect him. I loathe the Bush Administration.

Republicans, just take your damn party back. Now. And Democrats, stop trying to be be Republicans. Now.

Lets Talk About Sex Bay-bee…

Bush Administration Seeks Recruits for the “War on Porn”.

This isn’t about child pornography, they’ve got an entire division devoted to stopping that, this is about Playboy, Penthouse and pay-per-view pornos in hotel rooms. I am not saying that children should be exposed to this material, but on the list of things the government is responsible for protecting us from, the “threats to families and children” they should be devoting time and tax dollars to stopping, this is pretty far down. Making sure kids do not see a Hustler magazine is the responsibility of the parents, not the government.

But what is it about the American culture that will allow people to watch very graphic autopsies (CSI) and a man being blown up with his bloody shreds raining down on witnesses (final episode of the first season of LOST) on prime time television without comment, but we have to have an entire task force of the FBI devoted hunting down nudie pics. Why is a nude woman or man considered a “threat to families and children”? What is so scarring and horrible about naked breasts or labia or penises that the government itself feels the need to crack down on it? Can someone explain to me exactly how the dynamic works that having a child view a naughty magazine endangers his or her family? How is it that a child seeing sex is somehow more damaging and (supposedly) dangerous than a child witnessing violence?

I’d like to point out that it was not *that* long ago that children were very aware of sex at an early age due to the pastoral and agricultural nature of our society. Back in the golden days of yore in frontier, self-reliant Americana, kids grew up very aware of sex as they watched the animals surrounding them and if they were poor and living in a one-room cabin, probably aware of when their parents were having it. The country seems to have survived that o.k..

All the valid arguments about the fine line between art and obscenity aside, personally I have no problems with pornography. I don’t even have problems with my boyfriends having pornography. Men are visual creatures and they enjoy it, so what? At the risk of TMI, I myself enjoy it from time to time. It's fun. Pornography can be addicting, overused/abused and destructive to relationships, but so can alcohol and gambling. So can any recreational escape. It is gambling or alcohol’s fault if the adult lacks the self-control to use alcohol or gamble in moderation? Is it the government’s fault if the parent can’t keep his or her stash of dirty mags out of the hands of his or her kids? What happened to personal responsibility? Aren’t Conservative Republicans supposed to be the party of personal responsibility?

We made alcohol illegal in the 1920’s. Did people stop drinking? Was there more or less violence and crime because alcohol wasn’t readily available? Right. So why bother with pornography?

You Knew Someone Was Going To.

Alabama State Senator, Al Queda and Pat Robertson Blame Hurricane Katrina on Sin.

I love it when Fundamentalists come together...they have so much in common.

There was a passage in a book I was reading once…in the story an adulterous wife’s husband died of a sudden illness and she was wracked with guilt, berating herself, saying that God was punishing her for her sin. A friend of hers asked if her husband has been a good man. The answer of course was yes. Theirs had been loveless, arranged marriage but he had always been kind to her.

“Why then, would his life count so little that God would throw it away to punish you? What makes you so much more important than him?”

How could the lives of the righteous count so little to God that he would destroy them to punish the wicked? For the loving God of the New Testament, it simply makes no sense. I always have to wonder about the Christians that dwell on the fire and brimstone, eye for an eye Old Testament God, ignoring Christ’s teachings of kindness and forgiveness. By focusing on the Old Testament, does that in fact make them Jewish? ;)

This wasn’t about divine retribution, this was about weather. About the only reason one can perhaps add to it is Global Warming, but that simply exacerbated storms not caused them. As the article points out, severe hurricanes had been seen before industrial pollutants and vanishing rainforests came into play. Scientists had been predicting the effects of a Cat5 on the Gulf Coast for 20 years. If anyone holds any blame it is all of America for ignoring their warnings and not being adequately prepared. Beyond that, no one is to blame. It is simply another face of Nature human beings live with and must acknowledge, accept and adapt to if we are to survive. If there is anything we as a people should take away from this is that we ignore Nature at not only our long term, but our immediate peril.