Saying it’s a choice is supposed to be very bad because it falls into a “right wing trap.” Everybody must say gays are born that way, that they can’t help themselves, that it’s-not-their-fault-they-found-it-that-way. Otherwise wingnuts can insist that re-education could work.

Bullshit.

Any kind of sex between any kind of people who can freely and knowledgeably consent is nobody’s business but their own.

The point isn’t whether you have a choice or not. That has nothing to do with it. The only point that matters is that nobody gets to tell you what kind of sex to have. Or not to have.

The only real “right wing trap” is granting the crazy premise that it’s okay to meddle in somebody else’s sex life if you can. Because that’s what the Aravosises of the world are doing. They’re saying it’s genetic, so they can’t help it, so give up already. Which means that if they could help it, then meddle away.

Again: bullshit.

People who freely and knowledgeably consent and are doing nothing to hurt others have a right to do anything they damn well please. Genetics and choice have nothing to do with the basic right to mind your own business.

Just because some gay people have made their stand on illogical ground is not Nixon’s fault. All she’s done is shine a light on it.

(I’d tell you to go read my chapter on Rights, but you know that already, don’t you?)
Crossposted to Acid Test

Well, lo and behold, this is not idle chatter.

Turns out ground has been broken on a 13.78-megawatt solar power system at the Naval Air Weapons Station at China Lake, CA.  The project is expected to provide over 30% of the facility’s annual energy requirement and save an estimated $13 million in costs over the next 20 years.  This is in keeping with a larger strategic plan to reduce the Defense Department’s reliance on foreign oil, shrink its annual $4 billion energy bill and ensure energy security in the event of a natural disaster or other unforeseen events [sounds ominous].

A year-long study indicated that of DOD’s huge landholdings in the Mojave and Colorado deserts, across which seven military bases in California were considered– Fort Irwin, China Lake, Chocolate Mountain, Edwards, Barstow, Twentynine Palms and El Centro—and two in Nevada [Creech and Nellis], 30,000 acres were deemed suitable acreage for solar production.  Future facilities could produce 7 gigawatts of electricity.  To put this in perspective that’s roughly equal to 7 nuclear power plants, sufficient to supply full electricity to the 5 California bases 30 times over, enough in excess to supply 780,000 California households.

This push for renewable energy use by the military has also been taken to the battlefield, namely Afghanistan.  Last year, the 3^rd Battalion 5^th Marines began operating with Ground Renewable Energy Networks, Solar Portable Alternative Communications Energy Systems, LED lighting systems, Solar Shades, and Solar Light Trailers.  In addition to reduced fuel savings, reports indicate that alternate energy use in remote locations decreases resupply convoy runs and subsequently the danger of IED attacks.  Lives saved is a definite plus.

But there’s more.  Army installations force-wide have implemented a 2020 goal of net-zero energy consumption, which means reducing energy consumption, and then producing power through renewable sources.

Kristine M. Kingery, director of the Army’s sustainability policy, said pilot installations in the program are “striving toward” goals the Army wants met by 2020.
 “With Net Zero, the idea is not just replace the energy with renewables,” Kingery said. “It’s the reduction, the repurposing, conservation and efficiency. Reduce usage, and replace what you are using with renewables.”

As the largest institutional energy consumer in the world, the Defense Department is providing a major infusion of funding for research and development and application of renewable energy projects, including advanced biofuels, the world’s largest rooftop solar project involving 127 bases, advanced fuel cells and advanced grid technology, just to name a few.

What I find remarkable about all this activity is how DOD’s push puts the Keystone pipeline controversy in an entirely different light.

As you may recall, the Republican objection to President Obama’s recent rejection of Keystone’s proposal was presumably all about jobs.  The numbers have been wildly overstated. The State Department, at best, estimated 5000-6000 temporary construction jobs created, not the 100,000 jobs Speaker Boehner recently cited. Or the 250,000 that TransCanada finally arrived at. But more importantly, claims have been made that the pipeline would help break our dependence on foreign oil.  This, too, has been proven patently false since the tar sand crude, once refined, had already been contracted for export to Latin America and Europe.  Even the material for the pipeline [primarily steel] was being supplied not by American suppliers but by India.

This a classic battle–the old vs. the new.  And who is leading the way?  The United States Military, an institution of conservative values, has taken the bull by the horns and said: Time to move on, boys.  The Era of Conservation and Renewable Energy is at hand.

There’s also the environmental impact of the pipeline, the danger of a leak, something pipeline supporters have openly mocked.  What is rarely mentioned is that tar sand oil requires heat and pressure to move the sludge-like material along its 1700-mile journey from the Alberta sand fields to Texan refineries.  Tar sand oil is toxic and very corrosive, making leaks far more likely.

What could happen?

Unfortunately, we’ve had a graphic example of exactly what could and did happen.  In Michigan, a tar sands leak, estimated at over 800,000 gallons, polluted 30 miles of the Kalamazoo River, July 2010.

And Quelle Surprise!  There was a resultant cover up.

Recall the Gulf of Mexico, BP and the environmental disaster of nightmarish proportions.

Then remember that the United States Military has clearly gotten the message and acted upon it: The Age of Fossil Fuel, the rush for Black Gold is coming to an end.  The way forward financially and security-wise is colored Green.

Which would you rather see–this?

Or this?

Personally?  I’ll take door number 2 and follow the generals into the future.

I’m still trying to recover from the flu and the MRSA infection.  I’ve spent a lot of time sleeping. The antibiotics are really nasty. I haven’t been able to stomach my coffee for nearly two weeks.  I wonder if I should just stick with green tea from now on?

There’s an interesting retort by Mark Thoma to a Matt Yglesias article suggesting that Obama supports Mercantilism.  That’s the precursor to Capitalism that was actually the basis of our country’s economy when it was founded.  Contrary to Republican lore, capitalism has its roots in mercantilism but really didn’t develop until the 1800s during the industrial age. As usual, Ygelsias’ understanding of economics is cursory and Thoma has no problem correcting his mistakes.

Here are what I think of as the “tenets of Mercantilism.” I’ll let you decide the extent to which they accord with the president’s policies:

Mercantilists believed gold and silver are the most desirable forms of wealth. They also believed that the wealth of a nation depended upon the quantity of gold and silver in its possession. To maximize their holding of gold and silver, countries should maintain a positive balance of trade (with every country in the early years, but in later years they thought that an overall positive balance of payments was the goal, not a positive balance with every country you trade with).

They did not see lowering costs of production, or production in general, as creating wealth. This was a time when guilds produced most goods, and they were very inefficient. Thus, there was no notion of say, using division of labor and innovation to reduce costs and gain a competitive advantage over other producers (producers were not thought to add any value to production — this was a big part of their belief that economics was a zero-sum game — when they looked at their society and history, they didn’t see much in terms of productivity led growth, or much growth at all, the key was to maximize your share of the wealth that existed rather than try to gain wealth through productive innovations). The key to wealth was arbitrage and astute trading, not production. So trade — and merchants who could win the trade battle — were the focus of attention. Nations became strong by winning the zero-sum trade game.

They promoted nationalism. Since everyone cannot have a positive trade balance – they saw trade as a zero-sum game – a country needs to be powerful in order to compete effectively. This led to a desire for a strong military, a strong navy in particular (many advocated war on land and war at sea as ways to increase wealth).

They promoted protectionism in all its guises to maximize exports and minimize imports.

They supported colonization. This was a source of cheap raw materials, and a captive market to sell the finished goods. This essentially creates monopoly power since they did not let other countries trade with their colonies.

There’s a lot more tenets that have no relation to Obama’s policies or modern economics for that matter.  Why do all these journalists  try to be armchair economists?

The man who said he’d rather be a decent one term president than have a second term says he wants a second term “badly”.

President Barack Obama today signaled an aggressive tact [sic] for his early re-election campaign, critiquing his Republican opponents by name and insisting he’s ready to “fight with every fiber of my being” for a second term.

“How much do you want it?” ABC News’ Diane Sawyer asked Obama during an exclusive interview in Las Vegas.

“Badly,” the president said, “because I think the country needs it.”

“Whoever wins the Republican primary is going to be a standard bearer for a vision of the country that I don’t think reflects who we are,” Obama said.

“I’m going to fight as hard as I can with every fiber of my being to make sure that we continue on a path that I think will restore the American dream,” he said.

Obama pushed back against what he called Republicans’ “rhetorical flourishes,” including Newt Gingrich’s oft-repeated contention that Obama is the “food stamp president.”

“First of all, I don’t put people on food stamps,” Obama said. “People become eligible for food stamps. Second of all, the initial expansion of food-stamp eligibility happened under my Republican predecessor, not under me. No. 3, when you have a disastrous economic crash that results in 8 million people losing their jobs, more people are going to need more support from government.”

“The larger point is this: that there’s going to be a debate over the next eight, nine, 10 months about how to move the country forward,” he said. “They’ve got an argument. They will make it forcefully. I think it’s an argument that is wrong.”

We’ll have to have Dr. Boomer look at the methodology on this one: Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice.

There’s no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience.

“Prejudice is extremely complex and multifaceted, making it critical that any factors contributing to bias are uncovered and understood,” he said.

The findings combine three hot-button topics.

“They’ve pulled off the trifecta of controversial topics,” said Brian Nosek, a social and cognitive psychologist at the University of Virginia who was not involved in the study. “When one selects intelligence, political ideology and racism and looks at any of the relationships between those three variables, it’s bound to upset somebody.”

Polling data and social and political science research do show that prejudice is more common in those who hold right-wing ideals that those of other political persuasions, Nosek told LiveScience. [7 Thoughts That Are Bad For You]

“The unique contribution here is trying to make some progress on the most challenging aspect of this,” Nosek said, referring to the new study. “It’s not that a relationship like that exists, but why it exists.”

The Republican debate last night opened with a free for all on immigration.

“The idea that I am anti-immigrant is repulsive,” former Massachusetts governor Romney told Gingrich following the former House Speaker’s live accusation. “You should apologize.”

Gingrich and Romney are running ads against one another in the state, where they are currently neck-and-neck in current state polling.

Gingrich and Romney have both committed to heavily campaigning in Florida where 50 delegates are up for grabs for a single candidate in the Jan. 31 primary. (Florida chose to flout Republican National Committee rules and allocate all of their delegates in a winner-take-all system.)

Texas Rep. Ron Paul has chosen not to actively campaign in the state and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum has been non-committal regarding whether he will even hold an Election Night party there.

In a rare moment of solidarity in the debate, Santorum and Gingrich voiced support for Romney’s “self-deportation” theory, which suggests illegal immigrants will leave the United States if they can’t find suitable employment.

“I actually agree with Governor Romney,” Santorum said. “We have to have a country that not only do you repect the law when you come here, you respect the law when you stay here.”

Barney Frank has announced his marriage plans with his longtime partner Jim.

Frank and Ready plan to wed in Massachusetts. Frank’s home state is one of six states, in addition to the District of Columbia, that permits gay marriage.

Frank announced in November that he would be retiring from Congress after 16 terms to pursue other opportunities. In 1987, Frank disclosed that he was gay, becoming the first openly gay member of Congress.

Ready and Frank have known each other since they met in 2005 at a fundraiser in Maine, and began a relationship in January of 2007 after Ready’s partner died. Ready works as a photographer and has a small buisness doing custom awnings, carpentry, painting, and welding according to Frank’s office.

Ready, like many political spouses, has occasionally found himself in the headlines. He was arrested in 2007 for growing marijuana outside his Maine home; Frank was present at the time he was arrested. Ready later pleaded guilty to a fine for civil possession, and related charges were dropped.

“I told him that our relationship could not develop if he could not promise me that he would not repeat this. He apologized, with great sincerity I believe, and he made that promise and has lived up to it,” Frank said in a statement in 2010.

Frank’s vows come at a crucial time for the gay-rights movement. In Maryland, New Jersey and Washington, bills that would legalize same-sex marriage are poised to pass this legislative session.

So, that’s some of the headlines that I’m following.  What’s on your reading and blogging list today?

Well I should actually say, “Let the games begin!”

As you are well aware, tonight is yet another damn GOP Debate. However, unlike the civilized one we had a couple of days ago, hosted by NBC at USF,  it is back to the loud Colosseum like crowd. Yup, CNN caved in to Newt’s demands and tonight proves to be one hell of a show. You won’t know if you are listening to an Ultimate Fight Championship…or a scene from Spartacus. So with that in mind, I give you the GOP Candidates…

Now, I just want to say that I was gone all day today, taking my daughter to the doctor in the county to the west of us, then heading down south over the big mountain to Gainesville.  So these images are not as “high quality” as I would have liked them to be.

See what I mean.  (I think the Santorum and Romney came out okay…)

I kind of envision Romney as an elite Roman businessman. It would have to be a despicable sort of business, perhaps one of those gladiator slave owner/trader. He would have to be rich off of the suffering of others, yet not get his hands dirty in the process. Of course, he would have no personality and the other slave owners/traders would make fun of his lack of social skills and a propensity for making lame ass jokes. When the big money men who run the Colosseum have big fundraiser parties,  you know for the next years gladiator season, they reluctantly invite Romney…he’s a bore, but he is a rich bore.

As for Newt, he has to be one of the slimy dudes in the Senate. He is and will always be a politician. (I stuck him on Charles Laughton…to get the correct girth.) I would expect him to be scheming and plotting his takeover of the Empire. He would be one vindictive son-of-a-bitch who has the goods on everybody, and uses that Intel to his advantage.  Of course he has had many wives…but no need to wait for cancer or another debilitating illness for him…poison is the name of the game. And why not, everybody does it.

Santorum would have to be the Caligula kind of Roman, he is just as crazy. For example, Santorum brings home a 20 week old fetus to play with…Caligula appointed his beloved horse, Incitatus, to the Roman Senate…need I say more?

Ron Paul, now I could see him being the only one of the four who would and could actually fight. Like a rebel that he is, he would always be on the wrong side of things…and have a very bad view of the empire. Aside from being worn out and hateful, he has a crazed bunch of followers who somehow believe he is an all-powerful wizard, and that they should start their own colony with their own set rules. Paul has looked around the Mediterranean for a nice island to call his own…Citizenship based on his approval, no Nubians need apply.

Okay, the debate should be starting in a few minutes. Sadly I have no links for you tonight, except for the live feed, which you can find here:

President – Election Center 2012 – Elections & Politics from CNN.com

Live feed:

Video – Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

Mormon temple in Belmont, MA, completed in 2000

I realize that’s a provocative title, but please stay with me. I’ll get to the point after some background.

I’ve been reading the new biography of Mitt Romney, The Real Romney by Michael Kranish and Scott Helman. I bought the book after reading a lengthy excerpt published by Vanity Fair, which focused heavily on Romney’s treatment of women when he was a powerful leader in the Boston Mormon church. I wrote about this in a Morning news post at the time.

I was disappointed to discover that the book itself is somewhat of a fluff piece–Boston Globe reporters Kranish and Helman put as positive a spin as possible on Romney’s history and his activities as a church and business leader. However, by reading between the lines and googling names, places, and incidents from the book, I’m still getting some useful information about “the real Romney.”

One prominent Mormon woman quoted in the book is Judith Dushku, associate professor of government at Suffolk University in Boston, and incidentally the mother of actress Eliza Dushku, who played Faith in the TV shows Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel and has appeared in a number of popular Hollywood movies.

Judith Dushku with daughter Eliza

Judith Dushku is a self-described feminist and a long-time contributor to the Mormon feminist magazine Exponent II. It was in this magazine that an anonymous author published the story of the Bishop Romney’s cruel treatment of her over a life-saving abortion. From the Vanity Fair article:

In the fall of 1990, Exponent II published in its journal an unsigned essay by a married woman who, having already borne five children, had found herself some years earlier [the late 1970s] facing an unplanned sixth pregnancy. She couldn’t bear the thought of another child and was contemplating abortion. But the Mormon Church makes few exceptions to permit women to end a pregnancy. Church leaders have said that abortion can be justified in cases of rape or incest, when the health of the mother is seriously threatened, or when the fetus will surely not survive beyond birth. And even those circumstances “do not automatically justify an abortion,” according to church policy.

Then the woman’s doctors discovered she had a serious blood clot in her pelvis. She thought initially that would be her way out—of course she would have to get an abortion. But the doctors, she said, ultimately told her that, with some risk to her life, she might be able to deliver a full-term baby, whose chance of survival they put at 50 percent. One day in the hospital, her bishop—later identified as Romney, though she did not name him in the piece—paid her a visit. He told her about his nephew who had Down syndrome and what a blessing it had turned out to be for their family. “As your bishop,” she said he told her, “my concern is with the child.” The woman wrote, “Here I—a baptized, endowed, dedicated worker, and tithe-payer in the church—lay helpless, hurt, and frightened, trying to maintain my psychological equilibrium, and his concern was for the eight-week possibility in my uterus—not for me!”

Romney would later contend that he couldn’t recall the incident, saying, “I don’t have any memory of what she is referring to, although I certainly can’t say it could not have been me.” Romney acknowledged having counseled Mormon women not to have abortions except in exceptional cases, in accordance with church rules. The woman told Romney, she wrote, that her stake president, a doctor, had already told her, “Of course, you should have this abortion and then recover from the blood clot and take care of the healthy children you already have.” Romney, she said, fired back, “I don’t believe you. He wouldn’t say that. I’m going to call him.” And then he left. The woman said that she went on to have the abortion and never regretted it. “What I do feel bad about,” she wrote, “is that at a time when I would have appreciated nurturing and support from spiritual leaders and friends, I got judgment, criticism, prejudicial advice, and rejection.”

Judith Dushku had a number of run-ins with Mitt Romney during his years as Stake President and Bishop in the Boston Mormon community. In fact, Dushku confronted Romney over the incident described above, after which he “broke off their friendship.”

The Vanity Fair article also includes Dushku’s description of the way Romney treated her when she wanted his permission [!] to visit the Mormon temple near Washington DC.

At one point while Romney was stake president, Dushku wanted to visit the temple outside Washington to take out endowments, a sacred rite that commits Mormons to a lifetime of faithfulness to the church. She had never entered a temple before and was thrilled at the chance to affirm her dedication to a faith she’d grown up with and grown to love. Earlier in her life, temples had been off limits to Mormons who, like Dushku, were married to non-Mormons. Now that rule had changed, and she was eager to go. But first she needed permission from her bishop and stake president.

After what she described as a “lovely interview” with her bishop and after speaking with one of Romney’s counselors, she went to see Romney. She wasn’t sure what to expect. Despite Romney’s willingness to allow some changes in 1993, he and Dushku had clashed over the church’s treatment of women. “He says something like ‘I suspect, if you’ve gotten through both of the interviews, there’s nothing I can do to keep you from going to the temple,’ ” Dushku recalled. “I said, ‘Well, why would you want to keep me from going to the temple?’ ” Romney’s answer, Dushku said, was biting. “He said, ‘Well, Judy, I just don’t understand why you stay in the church.’ ” She asked him whether he wanted her to really answer that question. “And he said, ‘No, actually. I don’t understand it, but I also don’t care. I don’t care why you do. But I can tell you one thing: you’re not my kind of Mormon.’ ” With that, Dushku said, he dismissively signed her recommendation to visit the temple and let her go. Dushku was deeply hurt. Though she and Romney had had their differences, he was still her spiritual leader. She had hoped he would be excited at her yearning to visit the temple. “I’m coming to you as a member of the church, essentially expecting you to say, ‘I’m happy for you,’ ” Dushku said. Instead, “I just felt kicked in the stomach.”

In the biography I’m currently reading, Kranish and Helman provide a several anecdotes which show Romney in a different light–times when he went out of his way to help members of his Mormon community. Admittedly, I haven’t finished the book yet, but so far I have found no examples of Romney being supportive of girls or women in this way–the beneficiaries of his largess and concern have all been male, unless you count the female relatives of his kindness, who may have incidentally benefited.

I googled Judith Dusku, and found this 2007 article at Scoop, a New Zealand site. Some bloggers noted the article at the time, but I had never seen before. The piece is an interview with Dushku by Suzan Mazur, who has written a number of investigative pieces about polygamous cults in the U.S. In the interview, Dushku discusses her relationship with Mitt Romney.

And here–finally–is the point of my title: A few years after the friendship ended, Romney ran for the Senate in 1994 against Ted Kennedy. Dushku was very surprised to learn that Romney was running as a pro-choice candidate. Dushku:

I was pleased and called, asking to see him. I told him I suspected that we had our differences, but that maybe I could work with him if he’d come to a really good position on women and childbirth.

And he said – Yes, come to my office.

I went to his office and I congratulated him on taking a pro-choice position. And his response was – Well they told me in Salt Lake City I could take this position, and in fact I probably had to in order to win in a liberal state like Massachusetts.

Suzan Mazur: Who’s “THEY”?

Judy Dushku: I asked him the same question. And he said “the Brethren” in Salt Lake City.

In other words, Romney was consulting with his church elders before deciding his positions on the issues, and they told him to lie! After Romney lost the election, Dushku congratulated him on making a “respectable showing” in the race. Here is Dushku’s description of the interaction.

I did go up to Mitt after his 1994 Senatorial race to congratulate him for making a respectable showing against Ted Kennedy, whom I had actively supported.

Suzan Mazur: And what did he say?

Judy Dushku: He said I’m so angry at you. I don’t ever want to talk about this again. And I don’t want to talk to you.

And I said, I’m sorry about that Mitt because I thought we could have our political differences and remain at least cordial.

He said – No. That’s not possible.

Now we know that over the years Romney has given millions to the Mormon Church–even in excess of the 10 percent he is required to give in order to remain a member in good standing. While he was at Bain, the company turned millions over to the church. From ABC News:

Romney has always been a major donor to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which requires that members “tithe,” or give 10 percent of their income to the church. His family charity, called the Tyler Foundation, has given more than $4 million to the church in the past five years, including $1.8 million in 2008 and $600,000 in 2009. But because Romney, whose fortune has been estimated at $250 million, has never released his personal tax returns, the full extent of his giving has never been public.

Newly uncovered stock contributions made during Romney’s Bain days suggest there is another dimension to Romney’s support for the church — one that could involve millions more than has been previously disclosed.

As part of just one Bain transaction in 2008, involving its investment in Burger King Holdings, filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission reveal that an unnamed Bain partner donated 65,326 shares of Burger King stock to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, holdings then worth nearly $1.9 million. And there were numerous others, giving the church a stake in other Bain properties, such as Domino’s Pizza, the electronics manufacturer DDi, the phosphates company Innophos Holdings, and Marquee Holdings, the parent to AMC Theaters.

The Republican presidential candidate’s campaign staff confirmed that some of the stock transactions were at Romney’s direction, but they would not say which ones.

Clearly, Romney’s relationship with his church is not equivalent to Jack Kennedy’s Catholicism. In 1960, when he was running for president, Kennedy famously spoke to Protestant ministers about his religion. He explained that he would be completely independent as President and that his decisions would not be influenced by the Vatican or local church leaders.

Frankly, Kennedy wasn’t a particularly devoted Catholic–he had been reared in a Catholic family just like I was, but there was little likelihood that his religion would influence his presidency. Nevertheless he had to respond to the anti-Catholic bigotry of the time.

Romney, on the other hand, has been deeply involved with his church as has his family for many generations. His great great grandfather Miles Romney was an early follower of Joseph Smith the founder of the Mormon church. (Frankly, Joseph Smith was delusional–perhaps schizophrenic, certainly certifiable–but that’s a story for another post.) Romney’s father was extremely active in the church and Mitt followed in his footsteps, taking a powerful leadership role in the Boston church.

Is he still taking “suggestions” from “the brethren” in Salt Lake City? Are they supportive of the many bald face lies he has been telling on the campaign trail about President Obama and about the economic crisis? How can we possibly be sure that any of his policies are his own and not handed to him by church leaders.

I’m sorry, I realize this may sound bigoted, but I feel the same way about robo-Catholic candidates like Rick Santorum. I don’t want political leaders who are beholden to their religious elders or who might base their decisions while in office on the basis of their religious beliefs or “suggestions” from religious leaders.

But after nonstop blathering served up by the GOP, only to be followed by President Obama’s Teddy Roosevelt impersonation [although I have to admit—the State of the Union was a surprisingly good speech], I thought a moment of palate cleansing might be in order.  In this case Dylan Ratigan offers up the sorbet.

Ratigan is someone willing to call out the shysters, the casino players and shakedown artists, including their political handmaidens for what they truly are, and ‘Greedy Bastards’ is the title of his newly released book.  The author’s name may ring a bell because Dylan Ratigan has a public platform on MSNBC, an hour-long show Monday through Friday.  The program airs at 4:00 pm, EST, in my neck of the woods.

Ratigan’s slant focuses on the collision of worlds, that of finance and politics, how the incestuous relationship is literally squeezing the life out of the United States.  His take is not an indictment of capitalism.  Rather it is an indictment of what is posing as capitalism, a system he refers to as ‘extractionism.’

Ratigan is not a newcomer or a pundit simply reading a script.  He worked the financial beat with Bloomberg News, serving as Global Managing Editor to Corporate Finance until 2003.  He’s also the former anchor and co-creator of CNBC’s Fast Money.  He has launched and anchored a number of financially-related broadcasts over the years but decided to leave Fast Money after the 2008 financial meltdown.  Ratigan has publicly stated that he was personally disgusted by the Wall Street banking sector’s shakedown of the American public.  The Dylan Ratigan Show was launched to provide discussion and analysis of the financial/government intersection, a system that has acquiesced to the wanton theft of the Nation’s wealth and resources by . . . Greedy Bastards, of course.

Though the show has been on air for three years, Ratigan has admitted that his voice was finally heard after an infamous meltdown last August.  It was an on-air rant that would have made Patty Chayefesky proud, a Howard Beale moment.

That woke people up!  It also led to Ratigan’s Get the Money Out [of politics] Movement, working towards a Constitutional Amendment to remove the corrosive element of money in the political sphere.  And then, there’s the book.

One thing I liked about Ratigan’s approach is that instead of pointing out one segment of the population for public pillorying, his title basically refers to a state of mind and the all too frequent way of doing business and politics in the 21^st century.

For instance, in the case of capitalism, Ratigan uses the example of venture capital, a subject that has come up in reference to Romney’s connection to Bain & Company, specifically Bain Capital.  From Chapter 1:

If I start a venture capital firm that lends out money to drug researchers trying to find new cures for disease, and I get rich doing it, then I made my money by investing in the productive future of the country. I used my money in a way that facilitated scientific innovation and a cure.  I’m what the director of the Havas Media Lab Umair Haque a ‘capitalist who makes.’  But instead, if I take the same money and use it to lobby for changes in government regulation—changes that help me trick a union into investing its retirement savings in flawed investments so that I can collect the commissions—then I may move as many dollars into my bank account as someone who funded cures for diseases, but I haven’t made anything.  I’m a ‘capitalist who takes,’ exploiting my power to influence the government for my own private gain, no matter the harm to anyone else.  I’m a greedy bastard.

The latter example, taking money from others without providing anything of value is, according to Ratigan, the opposite of capitalism.  An extractionist system loses increasing value over time until there’s nothing left.  Call it the vampire or vulture model. A system based on the extractionist principle, provides no incentive for people to make good deals, where both sides benefit.  Instead, it rewards those who take and give nothing in return.

Sound familiar?

Ratigan covers the areas that have pushed the extractionist model to the max: banking, education, healthcare, energy, trade negotiations and the unholy alliance of government and big money fueling the feeding frenzy of the Nation’s resources and our future.  But unlike many gloom and doom tomes, Ratigan offers solutions and  brings an optimism to the subject, namely that we have the ideas, the people and yes, even the money to solve what at times seems insolvable.  He concludes in a rather convincing way that what is needed is a realignment between investment and the needs of capable, innovative people.  If loans and investments offered the highest returns when they provided the highest value as opposed to simply taking the highest risk, then prevailing attitudes and business practices would shift and win/win deals would be created.

Sound like pie in the sky?  I don’t think so.  Yes, it’s a matter of will, public pressure to exact the necessary changes but this realignment idea is possible by citing the goals first, and then targeting the resources to get there.  Ratigan refers to this as hotspotting—zeroing in on the problem, determining what methodology provides the best results, and then aiming resources to match those needs.

Though some critics have dismissed this idea, it is very attuned to what Bill Clinton recently suggested in his Esquire interview about highlighting the successes and needs across the country, and then linking them, matching them up.  Just another turn on the realignment idea:

. . . the two best things you could do are the infrastructure bank and a simple SBA-like loan guarantee for all building retrofits, where the contractor or the energy-service company guarantees the savings. So that allows the bank to loan money to let a school or a college or a hospital or a museum or a commercial building unencumbered by debt to loan it on terms that are longer, so you can pay it back only from your utility savings. You could create a million jobs doing that because of the home models that are out there now.

There are these two guys on Long Island who started a little home-repair deal. They got thirty-five employees now, and they’re — they can go in, tell you how much they’ll save you. There’s an operation in Nebraska that’s in and out in a day, and they’re averaging more than 20 percent savings, and conservative Republican Nebraska is the only state in the country that has 100 percent publicly owned power.

And,

You’ve got Orlando with those one hundred computer-simulation companies. They got into computer simulation because you have the Disney and Universal theme parks, and Electronic Arts’ video-games division. And the Pentagon and NASA desperately need simulation, for different reasons. So there you’ve got the University of Central Florida, the biggest unknown university in America, fifty-six thousand students, changing curriculum, at least once a year, if not more often, to make sure they’re meeting whatever their needs are, and they’re recruiting more and more professors to do this kind of research that will lead to technology transfers to the companies. You’ve got Pittsburgh actually becoming a real hotbed of nanotechnology research. You’ve got San Diego, where there are more Nobel-prize-winning scientists living than any other city in America. You’ve got the University of California San Diego and other schools there training people to do genomic work. Qualcomm is headquartered there, and there are now seven hundred other telecom companies there, and you’ve got a big private foundation investing in this as well as the government, and nobody knows who’s a Republican or who’s a Democrat, they’re just building this networking.

We have fabulously innovative, creative people working on all kinds of things.  Our true wealth is in our people; our true value is . . .  us.

Ratigan is now on a 30-million jobs tour showcasing business enterprises that are, in fact, answering a need, offering value to their communities, providing jobs and in the best capitalist tradition—making a profit.

The endnote is that the country hasn’t lost its edge.  We’ve lost the path that works, the one that values quality and integrity.  Greedy Bastards will always exist, those hoping to make a quick buck [or trillions of bucks] off the backs of others. They have no shame.  The goal is to make them and their thievery the exception, not the rule.

Btw, Ratigan’s book is highly readable, written for the layperson.  No economic degrees required.  If you’ve been following the financial blowout and/or Ratigan’s show, this will be a fast review.  If you’re just starting to pay attention, consider the book a primer—what the country underwent and where we need to go.  The sooner, the better.  Ratigan encourages us to reclaim our voice, demanding that our people and country come first.

It’s a worthy message.  Read the book.  Get the word out.

Good Morning!!

I hate to tell you this, but there is another Republican debate tonight at 8PM, hosted by CNN in Jacksonville, Florida. We’ll be live blogging, as always. Being the twisted individual I am, I’m still enjoying watching the Republicans commit mass suicide, so I’ll be listening and updating even if no one else shows up. But I hope some people do! Now let’s see what’s in the news today.

I missed this in the run up to the SOTU last night: Speaker tells members what not to wear

Just seconds after an emotional tribute to Arizona Democratic Rep Gabby Giffords in the House of Representatives Wednesday, House Speaker John Boehner – who got a little choked up in the moment – suddenly felt the need to remind members that there’s a dress code on the House floor.

Boehner recovered his composure after embracing Giffords, who had just handed him her resignation letter. He looked around the chamber, and announced, “the chair would remind all members to be in proper business attire when you come to the floor of the House.”

Apparently enforcing the House dress code is one of the duties of Speaker that Boehner takes very seriously.

On Monday night, Boehner ran through some of basic rules of decorum on the floor, including the one about proper dress. “Members should wear appropriate attire however brief their presence might be,” the speaker said. And to the wardrobe offenders, Boehner said, “you know who you are.”

Obama and Geithner shake hands after SOTU

I know everyone has heard the news that Tim Geithner doesn’t expect President Obama to ask him to stay on as Treasury Secretary for a second term.

“He’s not going to ask me to stay on, I’m pretty confident,” Geithner said in an interview with Bloomberg Television today. “I’m confident he’ll be president. But I’m also confident he’s going to have the privilege of having another secretary of the Treasury.”

Ralphb commented on the SOTU live blog that Geithner “looked like he’d been gut punched” when Obama spoke about making banks pay fees on “transactions to pay for mortgage relief/refinancing.” Apparently Geithner wasn’t clued in about that ahead of time.

I’m wondering if they’ve been leaving him out of some of the meetings since Confidence Men revealed that Geithner was dismissive of presidential orders. Check out the facial expressions and body language in the above photo taken after the speech (I made it big so you could see detail). To me that doesn’t look like a friendly greeting. What do you think?

According to Business Week (see above link) two possible candidates to replace Geithner are Catfood Commission co-chair Erskine Bowles and North Dakota Senator Kent Conrad–both horrible choices IMO.

Conrad, 63, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee who said a year ago he won’t seek another term, is “a serious budget hawk on the left, well-liked and respected,” Calabria said.

Bowles, 66, is the former co-leader of Obama’s commission that drafted a plan to reduce the federal government’s debt.

Ariz. Gov. Jan Brewer lecturing President Obama

President Obama had another difficult interaction on Wednesday when he met wacky Arizona Governor Jan Brewer at Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport. From the Chicago Tribune:

During their brief encounter on the tarmac, intended to be a ceremonial welcome, Obama told Governor Jan Brewer that he disagreed with an account she had given of a meeting they had at the White House two years ago.

“He was a little disturbed about my book, ‘Scorpions for Breakfast,’” Brewer told reporters after the conversation. At one point during their chat, she pointed a finger at the president.

Brewer, who has differed with Obama over immigration policy in the past, handed him a letter asking him for a meeting to talk about Arizona’s economy when she greeted him. A White House official said the subject of the book came up after Brewer gave Obama the letter.

“The president said he’d be glad to meet with her again, but did note that after their last meeting, a cordial discussion in the Oval Office, the governor inaccurately described the meeting in her book. The president looks forward to continuing taking steps to help Arizona’s economy grow,” the official said.

I didn’t know she had written a book. In fact, I didn’t know she could read…. ABC News provides a little more detail on what the squabble was about.

Brewer complains in Scorpions for Breakfast that she and her staff were treated coldly by White House aides, prevented from taking pictures in the holding room outside the Oval Office and that their cell phones and cameras were “confiscated” by Secret Service.

“Too bad we weren’t illegal aliens, or we could have sued them,” she writes.

During her meeting with the president, Brewer said Obama was “condescending” and professorial, “lecturing” on his efforts to promote comprehensive immigration reform.

“It wasn’t long before I realized I was hearing the president’s stump speech,” she said. “Only I was supposed to listen without talking. Did he care to hear the view from the actual scene at the border? Did the opinions and observations of the people of Arizona mean anything to him? I didn’t think so.”

“He was patronizing,” she said. “Then it dawned on me: He’s treating me like the cop he had over for a beer after he bad-mouthed the Cambridge police, I thought. He thinks he can humor me and then get rid of me.”

After the interaction, Obama apparently walked away before Brewer finished giving him a piece of her mind (or what’s left of it), but she said she would “regroup.” I guess that means “get over it.”

In the run-up to tonight’s debate, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich have been lustily attacking each other. Romney must be doing something right, because he’s now running neck and neck with Newt (36% for Romney and 34% for Gingrich) after being behind the former Speaker by 9 points a couple of days ago. Santorum is trailing at 11% and Paul 9% CNN reports:

Gingrich…disparaged Romney’s personal wealth when asked about the former Massachusetts governor’s call for illegal immigrants to deport themselves.

“I think you have to live in a world of Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts and automatic, you know, $20 million a year income with no work to have some fantasy this far from reality,” Gingrich said at a “Meet the Candidates” forum in Miami, later adding: “For Romney to believe that somebody’s grandmother is going to be so cut off that she is going to self-deport, I mean this verges — this is an Obama-level fantasy.” [....]

Romney….said in the candidate forum, hosted by the Spanish-language network Univision, that such attacks were “unbecoming” for a presidential hopeful….”It’s very sad for a candidate to resort to that kind of epithet,” Romney said of the pulled ad. “There are differences between the candidates on these issues but we don’t attack each other with those kind of terrible terms.”

Newt Gingrich was heckled about his work for Freddie Mac at a rally in Coral Springs, Florida yesterday.

It was quite a scene as a scrum of journalists ignored the candidate and turned to Cara Jennings, who heckled Gingrich in the face of intimidation from his campaign workers, threats from nearby supporters, and the two police officers who showed up to flank her.

“Do you work for the people or Freddie Mac?” Jennings shouted at the former speaker, who was on a platform in a parking lot about 50 feet away.

“I work for the people,” Gingrich responded.

The woman kept shouting, and Gingrich implored her to give others a chance to hear him. But Jennings kept it up, and Gingrich continued engaging her.

Mitt Romney, feeling pressure over the low taxes he pays, tried to claim that his “real tax rate is closer to 45-50 percent.” Think Progress provides a transcript from Romney’s interview with Univision’s Jorge Ramos:

RAMOS: You just released your tax returns. In 2010 you only paid 13 percent of taxes while most Americans paid much more than that. Is that fair?

ROMNEY: Well, actually, I released two years of taxes and I think the average is almost 15 percent. And then also, on top of that, I gave another more 15 percent to charity. When you add it together with all of the taxes and the charity, particularly in the last year, I think it reaches almost 40 percent that I gave back to the community. One of the reasons why we have a lower tax rate on capital gains is because capital gains are also being taxed at the corporate level. So as businesses earn profits, that’s taxed at 35 percent, then as they distribute those profits as dividends, that’s taxed at 15 percent more. So, all total, the tax rate is really closer to 45 or 50 percent.

RAMOS: But is it fair what you pay, 13 percent, while most pay much more than that?

ROMNEY: Well, again, I go back to the point that the, that the funds are being taxed twice at two different levels.

Sorry Mitt, but you’re not a corporation, and besides, as Think Progress points out, most corporations don’t pay 35 percent taxes–in fact many corporations pay no taxes. Romney constantly tells out and out, bald-face lies. Is that de rigueur for the Mormon church, or does he get a dispensation because of all the money he contributes to them?

Brainwashed cult member Rick Santorum, whose campaign is going nowhere in Florida, appeared at a Baptist church in Naples, Florida. He told the audience that “the left” uses college education to “indoctrinate” young people.

“It’s no wonder President Obama wants every kid to go to college,” said the former Pennsylvania senator. “The indoctrination that occurs in American universities is one of the keys to the left holding and maintaining power in America. And it is indoctrination. If it was the other way around, the ACLU would be out there making sure that there wasn’t one penny of government dollars going to colleges and universities, right?”

He continued: “If they taught Judeo-Christian principles in those colleges and universities, they would be stripped of every dollar. If they teach radical secular ideology, they get all the government support that they can possibly give them. Because you know 62 percent of children who enter college with a faith conviction leave without it.” [....]

“I’ll bet you there are people in this room who give money to colleges and universities who are undermining the very principles of our country every single day by indoctrinating kids with left-wing ideology,” he said. “And you continue to give to these colleges and universities. Let me have a suggestion: Stop it.”

Santorum attended Penn State and went on to earn an MBA from the University of Pittsburgh and a law degree from Dickinson School of Law. But he’d rather have the proles stay uneducated so they’ll buy his crazy theocratic bullsh*t.

Santorum did have a license to practice law, but it has been suspended because he didn’t bother to pay his $70.00 per year fee to keep it active. He stopped paying in 1994 and was suspended in 2010. Maybe he decided being a lawyer was the devil’s work?

OK, that’s it for me. What are you reading and blogging about today?

Today marks the one year anniversary of the Egyptian Revolution…

It may not have been the place where the Arab Spring began, but it sure fanned the flames in places like Libya and Syria.

So tonight we are going to focus on today’s events in Egypt.

Egyptian protesters plan sit-in until army leaves | Reuters

Scores of Egyptian youth protesters marking the one-year anniversary of the uprising that ousted Hosni Mubarak bedded down in Tahrir Square and pledged to stay put until the ruling military council hands power to civilians.

United last year by anger at Mubarak and his 30-year rule, Egyptians were in high spirits on the January 25 anniversary but divided between activists demanding a swift end to army rule and those celebrating the strides their country has taken with its first free elections in 60 years.

The attempt to extend the protest, which the military had hoped to limit to a daytime celebration, raises the prospect of violence. A series of sit-ins in recent months have ended in clashes with security forces and left dozens dead.

“There will be a sit-in until they leave, by any means but they should leave,” said Alaa Abdel Fattah, a blogger who was detained by the army after clashes outside the state media offices, or Maspiro, left 25 protesters dead in October.

Egyptians mass in Tahrir to honour uprising – Middle East – Al Jazeera English

“Down with military rule” and “Revolution until victory, revolution in all of Egypt’s streets” were chanted by one group of mainly youths in an area of Tahrir on Wednesday.

Sherine Tadros, reporting from Tahrir Square, said: “For a section of people demonstrating here, it’s really just about military hijacking the revolution, and about Islamist parties and movements now making the gains instead of those who actually initiated the revolution.”

“But others say it is a rocky transition but it is still a transition pointing out to the fact that Egypt had first free and fair elections in decades and people’s assembly which reflects will of the people.”

Meanwhile, about 3,000 people, who were pardoned by the military rulers coinciding with the anniversary, have reportedly walked out of Tora prison located on the outskirts of Cairo.

The Lens has a series of photographs of today’s anniversary celebrations, marches and further protest:

Egypt and More – Pictures of the Day – NYTimes.com

Following many tweets today about the Anniversary, it was very upsetting to see so many people talking about the sexual assaults women where experiencing.

We all remember Lara Logan: Life is not about dwelling on the bad – NY Daily News

Lara Logan is back on the air, she’s got nine stories in the works at “60 Minutes” and a new show set to launch — but she still battles the demons of a horrific gang sexual assault, even sometimes while she puts her young daughter to bed.

“People don’t really know that much about (posttraumatic stress disorder),” she told the Daily News. “There’s something called latent PTSD. It manifests itself in different ways. I want to be free of it, but I’m not.

“It doesn’t go away,” she said. “It’s not something I keep track of. It’s not predictable like that. But it happens more than I’d like.”

Last Feb. 11, while covering the Egyptian uprisings in Cairo’s Tahrir Square, Logan was surrounded by an angry mob of men and ripped away from her CBS crew. She was viciously stripped and suffered a “brutal and sustained” sexual assault.

“I didn’t even know that they were beating me with flagpoles and sticks and things, because the sexual assault was all I could feel, their hands raping me over and over and over again,” she told “60 Minutes” last spring.

They tried to rip off chunks of her scalp.

“I was in no doubt in my mind that I was in the process of dying,” she said.

You should read the rest of this article, and then come back and read the various tweets I have copied below:

tarif_25january Ahmed Eltahawy

Egyptians Mark Their Revolution’s Anniversary with Mixed Feelings ti.me/yUIvIk.@monaeltahawy.Toppling a dictator but not his regime

6 hours ago

ghadasha Ghada Shahbender

“@acarvin: Wow. Just, wow. RT @eldahshan: Meet the greatest square in the world. Incredible photo, from AFP#Tahrir twitpic.com/8bm2jd” )

Psypherize Ahmad H. Aggour

A year has passed since #Jan25 with 945 people dead, more than 6,400 injured and not one police officer was sentenced. #Egypt

24 Jan

Retweeted 100+ times

LilianaSegura Liliana Segura

So moved by “In Tahrir Square,” a powerful tribute to #Jan25. Thank you to @sharifkouddous & all who made it possible to tell the story.

21 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply

 

Ghonim Wael Ghonim

Egyptian women leading #MustafaMahmoud march today https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=331683580214846&set=a.331683116881559.64905.104224996294040&type=3 #Jan25

1 hour ago

3arabawy Hossam عمو حسام

Today was the biggest march I ever attended in my whole life.. at least 100,000 were marching in Giza #Jan25 is.gd/gr74N4

3 hours ago

Sandmonkey Mahmoud Salem

Everyone is carrying pictures of the martyrs. #Jan25

 15 hours ago

monaeltahawy Mona Eltahawy

Unless women can march, protest or simply walk in any #Egypt street/square w/out protection of men then #Jan25 will fail.

5 hours ago

SummerNazif Summer Nazif

@

@monaeltahawy I was groped earlier today in the square but a guy from #Ikhwan saw what happened and saved me. Disgraceful.

Nooux Noha Hamed

@

@monaeltahawy sadly on my way home from the sq i was tellin my male friend that it’s hard to be inside the demo without a male..devastating!

SaraMaklad Sara Maklad

@

@Randaeltahawy @monaeltahawy and i’m tired of freaking out inside every time i pass by a group of guys on the street!

5 hours ago

SummerNazif Summer Nazif

@

@KarinDianeRyan @monaeltahawy you don’t have time to think when something like this happens, it’s scary how a touch can make you feel naked.

monaeltahawy Mona Eltahawy

Our revolution isn’t just against fascist regime; it must also be against misogynistic attitudes. We will not be silenced! #Jan25

monaeltahawy Mona Eltahawy

Tell me what happened. Are u ok, Menna? RT @memexoxo: @monaeltahawy It was ridiculous today. Absolutely disgusting.

5 hours ago

MomoAwadAllah Mary AwadAllah

@

@monaeltahawy @SalmaNoshokaty @NoorNoor1 my americn & swdish frnds wre badly harassd tday,pants,tops,&bras torn.all bruisd now.so frustratng

monaeltahawy Mona Eltahawy

Today we made it v clear #Jan25 continues but I’ll be damned if I stay quiet about sexual assault so that the revolution doesn’t “look bad”.

There is a website: HarassMap that has been keeping track of sexual harassment and assaults since 2004…

 

Have a good evening, and just a side note…we changed our twitter account name…if you have been following us, you don’t need to do a thing.

@SkyDancingBlogSky Dancing Blog

We just changed our Twitter handle from @skydancer66 to@SkyDancingBlog Stop by the blog & join the conversation:skydancingblog.com

No, this is not fantasy of sci-fi fiction.  The Roswell Park Cancer Center in Buffalo, NY has announced a mega-advancement in cancer treatment.  The new NY-ESO-1 dendritic cell vaccine will be custom-made to individual patients, removing cancer cells, treating them, and then injecting those cells back into the patient to kill the specific cancer and prevent reoccurrence, an all too frequent situation for the 12 million cancer patients across the country today.

Think about it.  Everyone I know has experienced cancer, seen the disease savage loved ones, friends, colleagues or even take a toll in their personal wellbeing.  As Siddhartha Mukherjee eloquently wrote in 2010, cancer is ‘The Emperor of all Maladies’ and, in fact, is stitched into our DNA.  This vaccine development is extraordinary news and indicates great promise to patients with bladder, brain, breast, esophageal, gastrointestinal, hepatocellular, kidney, lung, melanoma, ovarian, prostate, sarcoma and uterine tumors.

A win in the battle against cancer.  It doesn’t get much better that!

STATE OF OKLAHOMA

2nd Session of the 53rd Legislature (2012)

SENATE BILL 1418 By: Ralph Shortey

AS INTRODUCED

An Act relating to food; prohibiting the manufacture or sale of food or products which use aborted human fetuses; providing for codification; and providing an effective date.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:
SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 1-1150 of Title 63, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
No person or entity shall manufacture or knowingly sell food or any other product intended for human consumption which contains aborted human fetuses in the ingredients or which used aborted human fetuses in the research or development of any of the ingredients.
SECTION 2. This act shall become effective November 1, 2012″

Why? you may ask incredulously.

Well, because a Christian anti-abortion group [reportedly, The Children of God] has made ‘allegations’ that a bio-tech firm and several food companies used embryonic stem cells to test the flavor of food and even more egregiously used stem cells to enhance the flavor of specific food products.  The companies cited included Pepsi Co., Kraft, and Nestle.  The accused bio-tech firm, Semomyx, was also connected to Campbell Soup Co. After the original accusations were made, Campbell cut its tie with the bio-tech program.

Bad PR is bad PR.  And this, of course, is stomach churning.

But an accusation is easy to make.

The original allegations made last year went nowhere and the accused companies have flatly denied all charges.  In addition, it’s absolutely illegal [not to mention unethical] under US law to use stem cells in the alleged manner.

That’s the true beauty of a witch hunt.

All one need do is scream, WITCH!  Public passion is enflamed, fears are stirred and we’re off to the races [or the stake, as the case may be].  You can even get a state senator to introduce a bill that has absolutely no bearing to reality.  Hell, it might be worth a vote or two.

Of all the idiotic fears I’ve read, this takes the cake.  Not only is it disgusting fear-mongering, something the Republicans have turned into an art form, but it distracts from and delays any real effort in solving our economic issues.

Which are very real. And for which Republicans have few solutions.

But wait, let’s think about it as Stephan D. Foster, Jr. suggests at Addicting Info. [Addicting Info cites its mission as debunking Right-Wing propaganda.] If you were hell bent on forbidding any and all stem cell research and/or products for medicinal purposes, the sort that have been proposed for the cure of Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s or used to generate cell growth in brain or spinal-cord damaged patients, what better way to covertly outlaw scientific research than slide through a seemingly pointless bill outlawing fetuses entering our food chain.  As Foster states:

Depending on the source, stem cell treatments could fall under a ‘product that contains aborted human fetuses.’ You “consume” medicine in the same sense that you “consume” food; it enters the body and is processed in some fashion. Whether it is used for energy or to heal a damaged brain is irrelevant to this law.

Convoluted?  Crazy?

Certainly no crazier than Senator Shortey, originally unavailable for comment, who told Nicole Burgin, KRMG Talk Radio the following :

I don’t know if it is happening in Oklahoma, it may be, it may not be. What I am saying is that if it does happen then we are not going to allow it to manufacture here.

Oh, good Lord!  Is this a disciple of Rick Perry?  Senator Shortey claims he went ahead with the legislation because his research led him to believe a law was necessary.

Splendid!

Okay, I want a law of my own.  I propose the following: If aliens land on the earth, toting a cookbook? And if they ask for ‘volunteers’ to visit their fine planet? I want Senator Shortey and all like-minded legislators to be the first to board said aliens’ spacecraft.  Maybe they can convert a few Outworlders before the Barbeque gets going.

Pass the salt, please!