"Only dull people are brilliant at breakfast"
-Oscar Wilde
Brilliant at Breakfast title banner "The liberal soul shall be made fat, and he that watereth, shall be watered also himself."
-- Proverbs 11:25
"...you have a choice: be a fighting liberal or sit quietly. I know what I am, what are you?" -- Steve Gilliard, 1964 - 2007
"Next time I tell you someone from Texas should not be president of the United States, please pay attention." -- Molly Ivins, 1944-2007

Over 7000 8000(!!!) Posts and over 1,000,000 pages served

"For straight up monster-stomping goodness, nothing makes smoke shoot out my ears like Brilliant@Breakfast" -- Tata
"...the best bleacher bum since Pete Axthelm" -- Randy K.
Wednesday, April 07, 2010

Maybe it's because they hear stuff like this
Posted by Jill | 6:25 AM
While we shake our heads and wonder where the tormentors of Phoebe Prince get their ideas that bullying is a way to resolve anything, perhaps we should look at a sociopolitical climate where a potential presidential candidate uses the imagery of firearm sights on districts with candidates she wants defeated, and where politicians call people who talk of killing people they disagree with "patriots".

Like this guy:
A 63-year-old Yakima County man has been charged with threatening to kill U.S. Sen. Patty Murray over her support of the health-care overhaul.

The FBI and local police arrested Charles Alan Wilson at his Selah home early Tuesday. He later made an initial appearance in federal court in Yakima on one count of threatening a federal official. He was appointed a public defender and ordered to be kept in custody pending a detention hearing Friday.

According to the charges, staffers in Murray's office in the Jackson Federal Building in downtown Seattle had become concerned over phone calls by an unknown man in recent months. The calls came from a blocked number and often were made at night or on weekends.

Usually, according to a staffer, the calls were merely vulgar and harassing.

But on March 22, "the caller began to make overt threats to kill and/or injure Senator Murray," according to the complaint signed by FBI Agent Carolyn Woodbury.

In that call, a man the FBI says it has identified as Wilson stated, "I hope you realize there's a target on your back now ... Kill the [expletive] senator! I'll donate the lead."

In several other vulgar and profanity-laced messages left over the next week, the caller repeatedly threatened the Democratic senator's life and said he "hopes somebody kills" President Obama as well, according to portions of transcripts in the complaint.

In a call Sunday evening, according to charging documents filed in federal court, Wilson made reference to being in a group of protesters outside the Red Lion Hotel in Yakima last week when Murray was in town to speak at a Chamber of Commerce event.

Local tea party activists participating in the demonstration held signs protesting the health-care overhaul and equating President Obama's agenda with socialism.

"Yeah, we were outside waiting for you," Wilson said in his voice-mail message, records show.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Tuesday, April 06, 2010

I, on the other hand, WAS Phoebe Prince
Posted by Jill | 7:42 PM

Phoebe Prince haunts me. She haunts me because I WAS Phoebe Prince, or something akin to it when I was a kid. It started pretty early, because I was unusually short, and a bit chubby, and I could read already when I was in first grade and kids would rat me out for "just looking at the words" instead of reading just because I didn't move my lips when I read. It got worse in third grade when the other third grade teacher would scream at me and call me "weakling" because I would cry during dodgeball because kids throwing a big ball at me made me feel paranoid. I was this strange little kid who liked to read instead of climbing trees, who watched The Twilight Zone and The Outer Limits and drew pictures with the kids in the house at the end of the backyard, who were as weird as I was.

Then in fourth grade there was the boy who hit me on the arm every day. Then in seventh grade it was the boys in the youth group who called me "Zimmerpimple at school." And on and on and on. I was a lonely kid with few friends. A good chunk of the time I sat outside alone in high school at lunchtime writing moody poetry in a blank book. I had friends on occasion, usually kids as weird as I was. It was only when I got involved in community theatre that I had anything approaching a real social circle, and I was always on the periphery of that.

There were always misfits, there always have been. Some of them had the confidence to wear their misfithood proudly. One girl in high school had a beanbag dog she wore on her head all the time. It was a statement. I lacked the confidence to make statements, I just wanted to be like everyone else. I might have been smart and funny, but when you're a kid, and especially in high school, you just want to be pretty and popular.

I think the reason that Phoebe Prince haunts me is the same reason Megan Meier haunted me. These were not short, chubby, funny-looking girls who would be the obvious target of mean girls and mean boys. These were perfectly fine-looking, pretty girls, like any other high school girls, who for some reason became the targets of bullies. Phoebe Prince may have been an immigrant, but she was an immigrant from Ireland, which when I was in my teens would have made her the ultimate pretty shiksa that I envied. From my vantage point at the age of 55, where the scars of having been tormented by the prettier and the thinner and the more confident have long faded but can still come roaring back at vulnerable moments, it's a mystery as to why kids like this are targeted, today in a way that's far more vicious than anything that I experienced.

Attention to the Prince case now focuses on who knew what was going on, who should have known, who should have done something about it, and how. Nine teens are now charged with felonies and the truth about the vile filth that was showered upon Phoebe Prince endured is now coming out. Was it simply that her accent made her different? Was it some kind of anti-immigrant sentiment at home gone mad in these kids? I suppose during the trial of these kids we may learn just what it was about Phoebe Prince that incurred their wrath.

I look at the photos of Phoebe Prince, who looks like any other pretty high school kid, and then I think about the fabulous Gabourey Sidibe, who conforms to no conventional American standard of beauty, but who is cocky and confident and cowers before no one. What is it that makes Gabby Sidibe survive high school and become successful while Phoebe Prince takes her own life?

I can't even begin to imagine what my life would have been like if being a misfit then was the way it is now, where home is no respite because there's cyberbullying and mean girls exercise power by tormenting those they deem unfit because they don't buy their clothes at Hollister or Juicy Couture or whatever the hell the status symbol is these days. I look at my neighbor's seven-year-old, an adorable child with the kind of fiery red hair that so often describes a personality. This child is jaw-droppingly bright and articulate; a conversation with her is like talking to a 40-year-old. Her mother tells me that she too is often thought of as odd by her peers and they are trying to make home a safe, loving place for her. This kid is by any measure, fabulous, and I just hope and pray that her confidence and a loving family is enough to get her through the mean kid minefield that lies ahead of her.

Labels:

Bookmark and Share

I'm Not Phoebe Prince But...
I'm not some emotionally fragile child who's vulnerable to be bullied into suicide. Indeed, at some point, you have to factor in a bullying victim's already-existing emotional state and make a risky judgment call as to how responsible a bully is for a tragic end result.

Suicide is obviously an extreme reaction to bullying and stalking, one usually arrived at after the victim comes to the conclusion that there's no way out and no advocates to whom s/he can turn for help and advice. She could've deleted her Facebook page, weeded out and blocked certain people from commenting, chosen to ignore the taunts of her classmates in the real world. But 15 year-old Phoebe, tragically, thought she had no way out and hung herself from a banister in South Hadley, MA on January 14th.

I'm not Phoebe Prince or that emotionally vulnerable. I'm a tough-as-nails SOB with a thick hide but there's only so much even I can take, especially when innocent victims are getting created.

I've had my share of trolls at Pottersville (explaining why this is a Brilliant at Breakfast exclusive), especially since I got thrown out of my house over a year ago. My ex and her alarming change in personality and attitude toward me had inspired a herd mentality in which I literally cannot do or say anything right. For the last several months, when I threatened to contact the Attorney General's Office and swear out a complaint for online stalking, they went away and stopped commenting. They moved on.

Or so I thought.

Yesterday I got a photo from my grandson's aunt of Gavin opening the Easter basket I put together for him this month. There was no prohibition on my to not publish the picture on my blog (which I've done before, many, many times), so I put it up. It's an adorable picture and he's obviously happy with his presents. Below that I put up a picture of our dinner table and our Easter dinner. I enumerated what we had and then asked, "What did you have for Easter dinner?"

A nice, inoffensive post, you would think, right? I just wanted to show people that I could still make a little boy happy on Easter and that I had managed to somehow find happiness with my new SO on a holiday that I'd otherwise be spending alone.

An hour and a half after I put up the post, I got a panicked phone call from the aunt pleading with me to take the picture down. Ingrid's family was enraged that she'd sent me the picture and even more enraged at me from putting up a pic of a little boy that I've been strangely prohibited from seeing.

The police then came to my house at about 7:13 and started banging on the door like they wanted to beat it down. I saw the cruiser from my kitchen window and refused to open the door. It had already been the third time they've been sent to my home since June 8th and I had no wish to be yelled at for having committed no crime. Despite my refusal to take down the picture, I did so after the first visit just to take the heat off us.

But they came back exactly two hours later and this time were more insistent, banging hard on the door at two different times and even shining a flashlight through three of our four windows. Poor Barb was curled up in the fetal position in bed shaking and crying, looking for all the world as if we were under siege.

And perhaps we are.

I've already begun collecting information on resources can best help me file harassment charges against the local constabulary that, strangely, seems to be emotionally involved in this matter while completely lacking context. They've now been to my house at least four times that I know of, have called my cell phone (provided by Ingrid) three times (twice last night) and left a voice mail message.

That constitutes harassment, IMO. It apparently didn't matter to them that the first comment I got on that post was from someone in my ex's home who threatened to take Gavin's Easter basket from him and throw it through my window. To the Hudson, MA police department, I'm only a perp, never a victim.

So posting at P'ville will be light to nonexistent for the time being. I haven't been home since 7 AM because I can't stand the thought of them coming back and harassing me. I actually have to avoid my own home by ducking into an internet cafe.

If anyone can give me advice as to how to proceed, please tell me. I've already contacted the AG's office, the county DA's office and have reported this to at least one civilian agency. I know the fallout of my daring to defend myself will be enormous but I have to take a stand even if it means suing the Hudson PD and enduring even more harassment or worse.

I'm sick and tired of playing by bullshit, schoolyard rules and still getting kicked around. I'm fighting back.
Bookmark and Share

New Rule: A pedophile protection racket shall have no say over U.S. policy
Posted by Jill | 5:25 AM
None. And yes, Bart Stupak, I'm talking about YOUR church:
Catholic priest who has been criminally charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl in Minnesota six years ago is still working in his home diocese in India despite warnings to the Vatican from an American bishop that the priest continued to pose a risk to children, according to church documents made public on Monday.

The documents show that the American bishop warned the Vatican that the priest was accused of molesting two teenage girls whose trust he gained by promising to discuss their interest in becoming nuns.

A county attorney in Minnesota is seeking to extradite the priest from India in a criminal case that involves one of the girls, who said the priest had forced her to perform oral sex and had threatened her and her family.

The case took place during the papacy of Pope Benedict XVI, who has recently come under fire for his role in cases of sexually abusive priests in Germany and Wisconsin.

The case was handled after the Vatican clarified and streamlined its procedures in 2001 to respond to accusations of sexual abuse by priests. In the midst of a growing scandal, the Vatican has sought to defend the pope by pointing out that he was both an architect and a promoter of these procedures.

But the Vatican also says it defers to local bishops to decide how to treat accused priests, leaving it exposed to criticism that the church is not doing enough to rein in sexually abusive priests.

In 2006, the Vatican recommended that the priest simply be monitored, a document shows. A lawyer for the Holy See said in a statement that the Vatican had recommended that the priest be defrocked, but that canon law specifies that the decision rests with the local bishop. The bishop in India sentenced the priest to a year of prayer in a monastery rather than seeking his removal from the priesthood, according to documents and interviews.


It's time to bring the current head of this ring to justice.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Monday, April 05, 2010

And here I thought David Brooks was the stupidest fucking man on the planet
Posted by Jill | 5:25 AM
No, he's only the second dumbest. Ross Douthat takes the prize, for suggesting that CNN, "the most trusted name in news", which of late in hiring right-wing lunatics like Erick Erickson is trying to emulate Fox, should emulate The Daily Show instead:
What cable news needs, instead, is something more like what Stewart himself has been doing on “The Daily Show.” Instead of bringing in the strategists, consultants and professional outrage artists who predominate on other networks, he ushers conservative commentators into his studio for conversations that are lengthy, respectful and often riveting. Stewart’s series of debates on torture and interrogation policy, in particular — featuring John Yoo and Marc Thiessen, among others — have been more substantive than anything on Fox or MSNBC.

Even the thrust-and-parry sessions of “The Daily Show,” though, are limited by the left-right binary that divides and dulls our politics. They’re better than the competition, but they don’t give free rein to eccentricity and unpredictability, or generate arguments that finish somewhere wildly different than where you’d expect them to end up. This is what you find in the riveting television debates of the past: William F. Buckley versus Gore Vidal, Vidal versus Norman Mailer, anything involving Ross Perot. And it’s what you get from the mad, compulsively watchable Glenn Beck, who’s an extremist without being a knee-jerk partisan: You know he’s way out there on the right somewhere, but you don’t know what he’s going to say next.

Not even Jon Stewart thinks that The Daily Show is where anyone should go for news. And if Douchebag thinks that MSNBC is all-liberals, all-the-time, he's obviously never watched Morning Schmoe, or seen Chuck Todd at his smarmy, condescending, hacktacular best. The liberals on MSNBC are Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow -- and that's it. Perhaps if you are off on the Glennbeckian right, you think that Chris Matthews is a liberal, but anyone who went off on the manly man-ness of George W. Bush's stuffed codpiece does NOT, by any stretch of the definition, qualify as a liberal.

The tragedy of CNN is that it has simply refused to trust in what it has always done well -- deliver news. Wolf Blitzer thinks he has to be Bill O'Reilly. Campbell Brown does the semi-non-crazy Greta Van Susteren bit. They bring on people like Erickson to try to appeal to a Fox News audience that has never forgotten, or forgiven, Peter Arnett. They let a hard reporter like Christiane Amanpour get away in trying to appeal to the willfully ignorant, frothing Fox News masses who will never, ever, ever stray from their Lord and Master. Rick Sanchez tries to be hard-hitting at times, but he's inconsistent and his faux-Olbermann antics often seem nothing but clownish.

Occasionally we see traces of what CNN used to do. Its recent coverage of the Haiti earthquake was nothing short of spectacular. But like all the cable news networks, it spends too much time on scandals and sex and not enough time on actual news. And in trying to appeal to right-wing audience, it's forgotten that there are people out there who want actual televised hard news. Those people now have nowhere to go.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Sunday, April 04, 2010

Best San Diego Earthquake Blog Title
Posted by Jill | 9:15 PM
From TBogg:

Earth adjusts thong from between its buttcrack hemispheres

Now fortified with added puppeh!

If I start seeing it raining frogs, I may yet find religion.

Labels:

Bookmark and Share
Saturday, April 03, 2010

It isn't just Father Raniero Cantalamessa
Posted by Jill | 6:57 PM
Father Raniero Cantalamessa is the Franciscan who yesterday compared criticism of of Pope Pedophile Protector to anti-Semitism. The underlying outrage here is not the trivialization of anti-Semitism, something with which the Vatican is very familiar, given the Church's history of forced conversion and adherence to Catholic doctrine during the Crusades. the Spanish Inquisition, and Bart Stupak. The outrage is the implication that hating those who protect pedophiles is sort of like hating Jews, which means that Jews therefore protect pedophiles.

THIS is why Jewish groups are outraged, it has little to do with trivialization of the Holocaust. And it isn't just Cantalamessa either. Today I took a break from an entire weekend spent working (for a change; this is all I do these days...I don't even know how to cook anymore) and went for coffee with a friend I hadn't seen in a long time. She is in her 60's, and Roman Catholic. I asked her what she thought of all this, and she said that her faith is not rooted in the Pope or the Vatican (which of course makes her not really a Roman Catholic, but I didn't want to tell her that), but in her belief in God. Then she said that there is a place for forgiveness, and just as the faith of the Jews was not shaken by what they went through in the Holocaust, her faith isn't shaken by what the Church has done.

That's when my head exploded, leaving a mess all over the wall behind me.

I had to drop it right there, because otherwise I was going to have to confront her on drawing parallels between keeping one's faith when one is targeted for mass genocide, and keeping the faith when the leaders of your church for the last 40+ years are exposed as having either been or protectors of people who rape children.

So here we are.

Enjoy your chocolate bunnies tomorrow.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share

S. 3081=1984

The late Ronald Reagan was more right than he knew when he quipped long ago, "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'" On March 4, 2010, John McCain and his human colostomy bag Joe Lieberman officially declared war on the First Amendment by introducing S. 3081 or the Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010.

Moreso than even the 2002 USA PATRIOT Act or the Military Commissions Act of 2006, McCain's bill would suspend habeus corpus and Miranda rights for American citizens suspected of materially and willfully aiding agents hostile to the United Police States and its dwindling coalition allies. In other words, think of this as a sister, or Big Brother bill, to Jane Harman's HR 1955, one that passed through the House like shit through a tin goose by a shockingly bipartisan consensus, and could also designate you, me or anyone who speaks out against the government as an enemy combatant or belligerent.

As with the Military Commissions Act, at which McCain had offered but token resistance, S. 3081 would allow the government to arrest US citizens, interrogate them without counsel and without probable cause. They could also indefinitely detain you and take their sweet time in charging you for any crimes without the public at large being informed as to your legal status. It doesn't take a constitutional law scholar to see what a chilling effect this would have on the free speech rights of American citizens but one has to wonder what McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, a vocal free speech advocate, thinks about how this bill, if ratified (and I don't trust Obama to not sign it into law any further than I can throw Guantanamo Bay), would affect her beloved zombie hordes in the Tea Party.

It's obvious that out of all the political and ideological factions in this country, the greatest threat to the government by far comes from right wing extremists, secesionists (like Palin and Rick Perry), tax protesters (Grover Norquist, teabaggers) and those who think that a Republic can function without a democracy and ought to be run by Republicans in an endless fourth reich.

The only good thing to be said about the Teabaggers is that they can't keep their mouths shut and for now we can at least see and hear them and keep an eye on them. If McCain's bill gets passed then ratified, will forcing them underground make them less dangerous or more?

Of course, if S. 3081 does gets passed, that'll just be start of our headaches. It also depends on how evenly law enforcement agencies and the federal government will enforce this law and on whom.

In the immediate aftermath of September 11th and for years thereafter, we'd heard of the FBI monitoring antiwar groups and Quakers, mothers being detained at airports over breast milk and elderly men getting questioned by the FBI just for criticizing George W. Bush while working out in his gym.

Hardly any scrutiny was paid to those who bellowed their support for the war in Iraq and showed their support for the troops by mowing down memorial crosses set up in Crawford, Texas by Cindy Sheehan and Co.

Much has been made about the USA PATRIOT Act taking away our civil liberties and Constitutional protections but the fact is the precedent for this legislation lies in the reflections in millions of bathroom mirrors all over Middle America. The most vocal supporters of the war in Iraq, both past and present, were already very ready, willing and able to take away those very same free speech rights from those relatively few of us who'd protested the invasion of Iraq from the start. All the Bush-era gag orders imposed on the American people did was empower these pro-war zealots and legitimize their "They're Either With Us or Against Us" mantra.

But the question remains as to whether McCain's and Lieberman's full frontal assault on the First Amendment will have a chilling or enabling effect on the factions that are already arming themselves to the teeth and threatening the lives of US congressmen and their families and destroying government property. The idea of this new wave of zombie flesh being even more empowered by an increasingly paranoid government is alarming enough.

But what's even more alarming is this same zombie army being forced to go to ground and coalescing into an even better organized underground resistance.
Bookmark and Share

"All these Tim McVeigh wannabes here"
Posted by Jill | 6:24 AM
Watch as Sean Hannity's audience applauds him calling them "Tim McVeigh wannabes" -- as if that's a GOOD thing.




In case you've forgotten, or are too young to remember, this is what Tim McVeigh, the angry punk that the teabaggers who now control the Republican Party regard as a hero did:


But wingnuts don't want to see this photo, nor do they want to think about the outgrowth of their racist white supremacist insanity. Instead, they come up with this:

Catherine Crabill, a homeschooling mom and realtor who says "our Second Amendment rights were to guard against tyranny" and believes that the U.S. government was responsible for the Oklahoma City bombing,  is challenging incumbent Republican U.S. Congressman Rob Wittman.

[snip]

When contacted by the Washington Post in 2009, Crabill also defended remarks she made 15 years ago about the Oklahoma City bombing being orchestrated by the U.S. Federal government. Crabill was a member of "a militia known as the New Mexico Citizens Action Association", and had told the Washington Times "this heinous act of violence was the work of our government," which will "use it as an excuse to aggressively attack the growing militia movement across the country."

[snip]

"But Crabill also reiterated her view yesterday that the U.S. government was behind the Oklahoma City bombing, saying her views found support in a report by retired Brig. General Benton K. Pardin arguing that on the April 1995 bombing could not have happened without the assistance of internally placed demolition charges. She said the idea of her own government deliberately killing its citizens seemed farfetched even to her until the tragedy at Waco and the violent confrontation with Randy Weaver at Ruby Ridge in the 1990s."It would have been unbelievable if we hadn't seen [former Attorney General] Janet Reno destroy all those innocent people in Waco," Crabill said."

Gun control has been taken completely off the Democratic Party's list of issues. Barack Obama has said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about wanting to take people's guns. But every time there is a Democratic president, these people go absolutely bonkers, even though it was George W. Bush, after the 9/11 attacks, who presented the greatest threat to Americans' freedom to say what they want, do what they want, go where they want.

When the Oklahoma City bombings occurred, the militia movement was regarded as fringe. Now it has taken over the Democratic Party and a good chunk of the mainstream media. Fox News is essentially the network of the Aryan Nation and the militias. A man who was once regarded as a domestic terrorist is now held up as a hero by a television talking head.

We are in serious trouble.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share

Maybe we should try to drive Andrew Breitbart out of business based on lies and edited videotapes
Posted by Jill | 6:11 AM
The problem with exoneration is that once the consequences of the frame-up have occurred, what's really the point?

ACORN has been driven out of its business of advocating for the rights of low-income Americans, based on nothing but the lies and PC video editing skills of a right-wing punk, a wingnut internet site eager to showcase his work, and a mainstream media all too willing to take people like Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge as unimpeachable sources.

Brad Friedman has been tireless over the past months digging out the truth about the matter -- that contrary to what was reported, even in the New York Times, ACORN DID NOTHING WRONG. That's right. Nothing. Nothing wrong, nothing even borderline, NOTHING. Two attorneys general have viewed the infamous videotapes and found NOTHING.

A community advocacy organization has been driven out of existence because of LIES told in a society that is all too eager, in this age of a diminishing American pie in which everyone is going to learn how to live with less, to take out its rage on the poor, the powerless, and the dark of skin instead of on the corporatocracy that has bought and paid for our government.

First there was exoneration in New York. Now it's California:

Echoing the recent report of the Kings County, NY, District Attorney who completed a five-month probe finding "no criminality" seen in video tapes secretly taken of low-level ACORN and ACORN Housing workers last year in New York, California's Attorney General has now reached a similar conclusion regarding videos recorded in three different cities in the Golden State last Summer, according to a report released today which finds the workers "committed no violation of criminal law."

While describing "highly inappropriate behavior" by some of the workers caught on secret video tapes made by Rightwing activists, CA AG Jerry Brown's report finds that "the evidence does not show that the ACORN employees in California violated state criminal laws in connection with their conversations" with activists posing as a prostitute and her boyfriend.

In a press release announcing his 28-page report [PDF] (and accompanying 55 pages of attachments and exhibits [PDF] with it), the AG's office says the publicly released videos taken in Los Angeles, San Diego and San Bernardino were "severely edited."

Brown's statement in the announcement is highly critical of Rightwing activists James O'Keefe III and Hannah Giles, who posed as a prostitute and her law school boyfriend in the videos posted on Rightwing media mogul Andrew Breitbart's "Big Government" website last year and played extensively on Fox News, as well as other non-partisan media outlets.

"The evidence illustrates that things are not always as partisan zealots portray them through highly selective editing of reality," says Brown in the statement. "Sometimes a fuller truth is found on the cutting room floor."

His report notes that the office's "investigation has involved attorneys from all three legal divisions – Criminal Law, Public Rights, and Civil Law – as well as Special Agents from the Department’s Bureau of Investigation and Intelligence" and included a review of "the unedited recordings made by O’Keefe and Giles."

In exchange for "immunity from prosecution," O'Keefe and Giles provided "the full, unedited videotapes" to Brown's office who, therefore, "did not determine if they violated California's Invasion of Privacy Act" when secretly recording the ACORN workers. Those workers, he notes in his report, may still "be able to bring a private suit against O'Keefe and Giles for recording a confidential conversation without consent."

O'Keefe, Giles, and Breitbart have previously refused to release the unedited footage of their videos publicly. Brown's report details why they likely did not wish to, as important, often exculpatory details from each encounter were not included in the edited versions, released to much partisan fanfare last year.

Brown's report also echoes an independent investigation [PDF] released by former MA Attorney General Scott Harshbarger early last December, but unreported in the New York Times and many others. That report was commissioned by ACORN as an external review. In it, Harshbarger found serious organizational concerns with the four-decade old community organizing group, but "no pattern of criminality" as seen in any of the highly-edited, heavily-overdubbed video tape releases.

Despite repeated official investigations finding a complete lack of criminality in any of the O'Keefe/Giles/Breitbart tapes --- other than by the filmmakers themselves, who may have broken the law in at least two different states by secretly taping workers --- ACORN recently announced that the publicity from the hoax videos had succeeded in drying up their private funding, and forced them to shutter their doors as of today.

Of the four ACORN employees O'Keefe and Giles met with in three different California cities, none "committed, solicited or conspired to commit any criminal acts," says Brown in his report. "There is no evidence that any of the ACORN employees had the intent to aid and abet such criminal conduct or agreed to join in [O'Keefe and Giles purported] illegal conduct."

The Attorney General also confirms that O'Keefe never appeared in any of the offices "dressed as a 1970s Superfly pimp," as he had been edited to appear at the beginning and end of each of the videos. Neither did O' Keefe ever claim to be a pimp to any of the workers whose good natures, AG Brown says, O'Keefe and Giles preyed upon...


If you want to read more about how a couple of ideological punks, paid by a raging lunatic who can't deal with a black Democrat in the White House, brought down a group THAT DID NOTHING WRONG -- something that in today's media climate of "report whatever crap Drudge puts on his web site as truth" could happen to ANY group, you can read the whole sad story here. Brad ought to get a Pulitzer for this.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
Friday, April 02, 2010

If you were planning to buy an iPad to read the New York Times, don't bother
Posted by Jill | 8:16 PM
I mean, do you really need to spend 500 bucks on a gadget to read insightful "news" like this:
Asked to Declare His Race, Obama Checks ‘Black’

It is official: Barack Obama is the nation’s first black president.

A White House spokesman confirmed that Mr. Obama, the son of a black father from Kenya and a white mother from Kansas, checked African-American on the 2010 census questionnaire.

The president, who was born in Hawaii and raised there and in Indonesia, had more than a dozen options in responding to Question 9, about race. He chose “Black, African Am., or Negro.” (The anachronistic “Negro” was retained on the 2010 form because the Census Bureau believes that some older blacks still refer to themselves that way.)

Mr. Obama could have checked white, checked both black and white, or checked the last category on the form, “some other race,” which he would then have been asked to identify in writing.

There is no category specifically for mixed race or biracial.

Nothing quite like the Great Gray Lady, the same Liberal New York Times whose headquarters in New York Ann Coulter had said she wished Timothy McVeigh had bombed, devoting space to an article which boiled down to its essence says nothing but this:


Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share

Wild Bill Fuckup to the Rescue

...or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Pope.

I can understand Father James Martin's willingness in the Huff Po to choke off accountability for the Catholic Church's pedophilia scandal at the parish level, or maybe at the archdiocese level (as in Boston in 2002). After all, Father Martin works for a Boris Karloff lookalike who wields enormous power over a billion people and how embarrassing would it be to get defrocked over a blog post written for Arianna Huffington?

But it's Father Martin who's missing the big picture here, not the secular media that he begins to excoriate for ignorance. There's no evidence to suggest much less prove that these pockets of pedophilia that were occurring all over the world reached much higher than the parochial level.

However, it's been conclusively proven that Catholic priests' tastes for young boys was known for many decades and that this scandal not only stinks straight up to the Pope's gold throne, it's stayed there for at least five decades. A memo surfaced just a few days ago proving that the Vatican was warned about pedophile priests as far back as August of 1963, when Pope Paul VI first succeeded John XXIII.

Pam Spaulding at Pam's House Blend gives one of the best overviews of the snowballing scandal in all Blogtopia:
With Bill Donohue taking his pedophile defense publicity tour around the cable channels, the wheels are coming off of his wagon. Even the Vatican is circling its wagons around Papa Ratzi, who most certainly knows about all of these documents under wraps. Why? He's being named in a lawsuit and the plaintiffs seek to depose Benedict under oath.

That would be the same Wild Bill Donohue of the Catholic League, who never met a child-molesting, misogynistic Catholic man o' God he didn't love with an unhealthy devotion. If the Church of Rome had a shred of decency and survival instinct left, it would take the extraordinary measure of excommunicating Donohue to Siberia after chaining him during a novena to a buoy off the beach of Provincetown, Massachusetts. Because it doesn't help the RCC's cause any that Donohue is claiming the church sex scandal isn't a pedophile problem but a homosexual problem.

I can perfectly understand the NY Times' desire for, dare I say it, fair and balanced journalism to help offset the tsunami of damning evidence it's been publishing against the Catholic Church of late. But too often they've been willing to give a lunatic like Donohue house room when all he has to offer are lies, more lies and damned lies. That's why we have a Catholic media. The Times doesn't have to further pollute this already soul-polluting atmosphere of "blame the victim."

Donohue's insistence that these boys were "post-pubescent" and therefore not victims of pedophilia but victims of homosexuality also misses the big point: A priest, even by his very vow of celibacy, is already crossing a line he hasn't a moral right to cross, especially when every child-molesting priest (and there have been many, many of them) has the luxury of using the enormous power of the Vatican behind him against powerless teens and had abused a literally sacred trust.

And to whom were these boys supposed to go to unburden their souls and guilty consciences? The confessional and the seal that guarantees, to paraphrase the old Las Vegas motto, whatever happens in local parishes stays in Rome?

And this is somewhere else that Father James goes wrong: He's all too ready, willing and able to blame the secular media in his opening paragraphs for slinging criticism and abuse at a Catholic Church he claims they don't understand. But never a disparaging word is spoken by him about the Catholic media either soft-pedaling or even aiding in this conspiracy of silence and spin-doctoring.

Donohue hasn't a leg to stand on. We've already traced Ratzinger's role in covering this up to his archdiocese in Bavaria. We now know that Ratzinger knew about a priest who'd molested over 200 deaf boys at his parish in Wisconsin and refused to have him defrocked.

And maybe the Holy See Not is leading the call to circle the wagons because Joey Ratso's been named in a lawsuit in Kentucky. The Catholic Church is already lawyering up and are planning to introduce arguments such as:

  • The Pope being immune from prosecution simply because he's a head of state (executive privilege).

  • That the bishops who oversaw the abusive priests 50 years ago weren't actually working for the Vatican (like Blackwater claiming immunity from military justice because they were civilian contractors and that they were immune from civilian justice because they were contractors of the US military).

  • That the 1962 document doesn't provide prosecutors with a "smoking gun" (such as the Downing Street Memo).

  • It doesn't take a genius to see that the Catholic Church is just another shiftless, ultra right wing cult that not only refuses to take even partial responsibility for its high crimes and misdemeanors but will even play the blame the victim/blame the media game that we saw with Cardinal Bernard Law on the Boston Globe here in Massachusetts eight years ago and with the RCC with the NY Times. So, with all due respect, Father James, the fact that some of us are gentiles and are not Catholic Church insiders doesn't mean we can't recognize a decades-long coverup when we see it.

    Between beatings, molestation, reverse blaming the victims and the whistleblowers and the inevitable coverups that followed, in which abusive priests and even bishops would simply be moved from one parish to another before the innuendos began piling up, we're fully seeing now for the first time that this abuse of children is a moral pandemic and one not merely confined to a particular archdiocese in Boston.

    And when the Catholic Church's apologists like Bill Donohue begin rationalizing such blatant perversions that were done with impunity despite official warnings, it's time to be very, very afraid. It's rapidly becoming a referendum on the legitimacy of homosexuality and if the reverse blame game begins to gain traction, spittle-flecked maniacs like Donohue will only make it harder for still-silent and future victims of clergy abuse to come out and tell all in a public confession.
    Bookmark and Share

    Someone obviously doesn't realize Lost is fiction
    Posted by Jill | 7:16 AM
    I mean, I like Lost as much as anyone, but I recognize that it's a STORY. Unlike some people:

    A would-be saboteur arrested today at the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland made the bizarre claim that he was from the future. Eloi Cole, a strangely dressed young man, said that he had travelled back in time to prevent the LHC from destroying the world.

    The LHC successfully collided particles at record force earlier this week, a milestone Mr Cole was attempting to disrupt by stopping supplies of Mountain Dew to the experiment's vending machines. He also claimed responsibility for the infamous baguette sabotage in November last year.

    Mr Cole was seized by Swiss police after CERN security guards spotted him rooting around in bins. He explained that he was looking for
    fuel for his 'time machine power unit', a device that resembled a kitchen blender.

    Labels: , ,

    Bookmark and Share

    I wonder if "American Idiot" is set in Utah?
    Posted by Jill | 5:40 AM
    It isn't that Utah has a patent on American idiocy, it just seems that way sometimes:
    Some Utah County parents are calling on the Alpine School District to stop spreading "false educational ideas." First and foremost, the parents say, the district needs to clamp down on its use of the D-word: "democracy."

    This week, a spokeswoman for Utah's Republic, a group that advocates for a strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, asked the Alpine Board of Education to scrap its democracy-centered mission statement. The issue has sparked a dust-up over the past month, garnering petition signatures from hundreds of Alpine parents and a rebuke of the school board by the Provo Daily Herald's editorial board.

    Alpine's mission statement is "Educating all students to ensure the future of our democracy."

    But this nation is a republic, not a democracy, said Oak Norton, a Highland father of five and the founder of Utah's Republic. The Constitution guarantees every state a "republican form of government." "Karl Marx said, 'Democracy is the road to socialism,' " Norton said. A true democracy, he said, relies solely on majority rule and inevitably devolves into anarchy, which then sprouts socialist dictators.

    The term "democracy" is commonly used to refer to American society and the power of the people to participate in government, including through votes on ballot measures and representatives, said Kirk Jowers, director of the University of Utah's Hinckley Institute of Politics..

    "Technically the United States is a constitutional republic," he said. "However, leaders from both [political] parties have often referred to us as a democracy."

    At least until there was a black Democrat in the White House. But inconsistency of fear between when the president is a white right-wing Republican and a centrist black Democrat aside, here's how Merriam-Webster defines democracy:
    1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
    2 : a political unit that has a democratic government

    Funny how these people didn't care about rule of the majority when George W. Bush was in power. Back then they called everyone who disagreed with any policy as a traitor and a terrorist sympathizer.

    (via)

    Labels: ,

    Bookmark and Share
    Thursday, April 01, 2010

    Nothing to see here, just move on....move along now...
    Posted by Jill | 5:12 AM
    Hell, no.

    When an election is ACTUALLY stolen (not the ridiculous claims made by teabaggers that the all-powerful ACORN (which was all too easily toppled by a 25-year-old punk) somehow managed to get enough poor people to vote to give Barack Obama 56% of the vote in 2008), you don't just move on. Because the same people who stole the 2004 election will do it again if they have to in order to regain power.

    Brad Jacobson has a devastating series (Parts one and two) about how a FEC commissioner helped the Republican Party hide its role in vote suppression in the 2004 election.

    A little taste before you go read it:
    Caroline Hunter, a Bush-appointed Federal Election Commissioner who remains in office, provided misleading statements under oath in an effort to conceal Republican National Committee involvement in vote suppression activities during the 2004 presidential election, a Raw Story investigation has found.

    Legal experts say Hunter's submission of such statements under oath is a serious ethical and professional breach which could warrant a bar review and potential disbarment. At the time, Hunter was serving as deputy counsel to the Republican National Committee.

    In the final days of the 2004 presidential election, the Democratic National Committee files an injunction against the Republican National Committee in New Jersey federal court, alleging its involvement in using lists of returned mail to challenge 35,000 newly registered Ohio voters. This tactic, also known as voter caging, is historically employed to suppress votes from minority and low-income citizens who tend to vote Democratic.

    Now you know why the Republicans had to destroy ACORN. Yes, a couple of low-level employees at ONE office fucked up and got caught doing it. But the main reason ACORN became such a threat to conservatives was because the organization was trying to overcome the Republican Party tactic, established in the 2000 elections in Florida and used ever since, to drive minority voters away from the polls. Greg Palast has been documenting Republican vote suppression since 2000.. Funny, isn't it, how the media just went ahead and adopted the Republican line on ACORN (including the New York Times -- a travesty to which Brad Friedman has been trying to get the paper to own up), convincing people that a few people who might have gotten through the voting cracks are more of a threat to democracy than the hundreds of thousands of American citizens registered to vote who have not been allowed to because of Republican thuggery over the last decade.

    It didn't work in 2008, or perhaps it did and Barack Obama was allowed to win because the Republicans didn't want to clean up the mess they had made. But if you think that just because we have a Democratic president right now, they aren't gearing up to do it again, guess again. And without one of the largest organizations dedicated to ensuring that all American citizens who are registered to vote can do so, their path to a revival of election theft is wide open.

    Labels: , , ,

    Bookmark and Share

    If this is the false packaging they use now, imagine if they actually get her elected
    Posted by Jill | 5:02 AM
    The need to fabricate the public image of Sarah Palin is so strong that Fox News tried to resort to using old interview footage of L.L. Cool J and passing it off as hers to show that the Republican Party and the teabaggers aren't racist:
    Here's a chapter in the culture wars that no one saw coming: Sarah Palin and Fox News facing off against '80s rap star and actor LL Cool J.

    Popular conservative blogger Allahpundit tweaked liberals who accuse Tea Party supporters of racist sympathies, saying they'll be "shocked to find the alleged Grand Dragon of the tea-party movement making chitchat with a hip-hop legend."




    The problem is that no such chitchat was produced for the Palin show. LL Cool J, star of "NCIS: Los Angeles," tweeted Tuesday night: "Fox lifted an old interview I gave in 2008 to someone else & are misrepresenting to the public in order to promote Sarah Palins Show. WOW."

    When contacted by Yahoo! News for comment, a Fox News spokesperson explained that LL Cool J had been informed in 2008 that the interview was planned as a segment for "Real American Stories"--though of course the network couldn't have known at the time that Palin would be hosting.


    And it took them two years to get the show to the air? Hardly likely.


    Update: Looks like the confusion isn't limited to the hip hop genre. Toby Keith's publicist tells the New York Times that Keith has never done an interview with Palin and she had no idea he was being used in the Palin special. She believes that Fox will be recycling an interview Keith gave Fox in 2009.



    Fox News is no longer even the media arm of the Republican Party; it's the media arm of a movement that's about bullying, willful ignorance, bigotry, stupidity, and false packaging.

    Labels: , ,

    Bookmark and Share