WITHOUT A DOUBT, THE ZEALOTS AND TRUE BELIEVERS OF "COMPLETE AND FINAL" DENATIONALISATION OF STATE SOCIAL SECURITY IN THE UNITED STATES (as documented here, here, here, here and here) are drooling in sheer, unadulterated envy (and then some) @ the news that Treasury Secretary Paulson has declared the current State system to be in clear and present danger of "financial unsustainability," with the current Social Security Trust Funds set to be bankrupt by 2041 unless "drastic measures" are timely undertaken.

As in "complete and final" denationalisation of the "failed and failing" State system, preferably through a "taxpayer lawsuit" filed by some Joe Sixpack type who can be easily influenced enough to parrot, and on cue, the line of denationalisation advocates acting as a United Front for the purposes of same, seeking to have the current State system declared bankrupt "financially as well as morally" (even to the extent of covering related legal expenses and costs)--all the while unaware that the whole is really nothing less than exploitation for shameless publicity purposes of a "winning of hearts and minds" sort.

Made all the more unaware because of trick and deception ... not to mention unaware that what the "sponsors" of the Petition for Bankruptcy really want is nothing less than "gifting schemes" of the kind using PayPal in furtherance thereof, packaged as "retirement savings plans" as pervert the whole idea of mutual self-help hyperconservatives enjoy holding dearly, targeting in particular the Lower Working Classes....

Two teenage Bulgarian sisters have been rescued by Italian police from a circus in which one of them is said to have been forced to swim with piranhas.

Police say that while the 19-year-old sister had to swim in a transparent tank, the 16-year-old had snakes draped across her body and suffered bites.

Four members of the family have been freed from what has been described as a "circus of horrors" south of Naples.

Three men have been arrested and charged with holding them in slavery.

The women were paid €100 (£78/$156) a week, forbidden to leave the camp and forced to work 15- and 20-hour shifts, according to police.

The Bulgarian family has now been moved to a safe house but their case highlights the plight of people caught up in human trafficking networks in Europe.

The European Union estimates that 500,000 people are affected by trafficking every year in Europe.

In 2006, more than 100 Polish workers were freed from forced labour camps in the Puglia region of Italy where they had been promised seasonal farm-work.

But then again, you could just imagine Branson being home to such a sick and depraved "circus" promoted as "wholesome family entertainment" alongside the likes of Shoji Tabuchi, Mel Tillis, Tony Orlando and other examples of what Cal Thomas described as "nutritious patriotism" in entertainment form, appealing mostly to Kankerdom with easily-manipulated patriotic feelings crossing, as required, into jingoism.

Especially so the young girl dressed up in mermaid costume and forced to swim with the aforementioned piranhas, not to mention "cultural heritage" excusing blackface minstrel routines and other politically-incorrect displays thereof pandering to the crudest of racist feelings in said target audience. 

THE DEADLY JAPANESE PUFFERFISH, KNOWN LOCALLY AS FUGU, has to be processed by special means to remove the inner organs as carry the toxins which have given it a nasty reputation.

Those processing same have to hold a special licence before being allowed to handle or serve fugu.

And fugu cannot, under any circumstances, be served to anyone in the Imperial Household, from Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko on down.

Which makes the following recent "WaiWai" item from the Mainichi Daily News of Tokyo a more than adequate demonstration that the old Latin proverb aubent pays, aubent mores ("different lands have different customs") applies equally regardless of where in this small world, after all, we reside:

Criminal charges hanging over a fishmonger for selling deadly puffer fish to a foreign woman who died after eating it are not worthy of sympathy, but instead are his just desserts, anglers tell Shukan Shincho (2/14).

Feudal era warlord Toyotomi Hideyoshi issued the first ban in Japanese history on eating fugu puffer fish over 400 years ago after dozens of his soldiers preparing to take part in his ill-fated invasion of Korea died after eating it, and it's common knowledge among Japanese that the delicacy should only be eaten after careful preparation to remove its poisonous innards.

So it would seem natural to have some sympathy for the chairman of Morita Suisan, the fishmonger from Hitachinaka, Ibaraki Prefecture, now facing criminal charges for selling puffer fish to a Thai woman who boiled it whole and ate it, suffering a week of agony before she died as a result of the puffer fish's poison flowing through her body. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

"It's illegal to sell fugu to anybody who doesn't have a special license to prepare it. But Morita Suisan has apparently been selling puffer fish to anyone and everyone," a reporter from a national daily tells Shukan Shincho. "And Morita Suisan didn't have any employees licensed to cook fugu, either. They've been selling whole fugu without a second thought for more than 20 years."

In defense of Morita Suisan, it's common knowledge that the fugu is dangerous. Even the 45-year-old Thai woman who died questioned the seller about a lack of a license before she bought it. The fishmonger reassured her, saying that she'd be safe as long as she removed the scales before eating it. Normally, scaling a fugu also involves taking out its toxic organs. What the fishmonger didn't realize was that the woman would take the scales off the fish, but keep its insides intact as she used the fugu to flavor a bowl of Thai-style tom yang kun soup--with deadly results.

Few Hitachinaka locals, however, are prepared to show sympathy toward the seller, Morita Suisan, for what some may say appears to have been a tragic accident.

"No way," a member of the Hitachinaka fish market tells Shukan Shincho. "Everybody who's heard about this incident says (the charges facing) Morita Suisan are exactly what it deserves. Everybody hates the chairman of Morita Suisan. He's horrible to whoever he meets, is a real tightwad and shunned by all and sundry here.

"I remember the local festival here about five or six years ago. There was a group of guys carrying a portable shrine along the road, but they tipped it upside down when they got in front of Morita Suisan as a sign of protest against the company."

The company chairman himself, who the weekly doesn't name, appears unperturbed by what people are saying about him.

"It's a fact that we caused an accident, so I can understand why people are talking about us," he says to the weekly. "It's a free world, though, so I can't stop them from saying what they like."

Hiroshi Itakura, professor of law at Nihon University, however, has something to say that the chairman may not like.

"People who sell fugu to someone who doesn't know how to prepare it or eat it properly should be aware that doing so could have fatal results," the criminal law expert tells Shukan Shincho. "There are more than sufficient grounds to prosecute for manslaughter. And a conviction carries a maximum term of 5 years imprisonment."

THE TITLE MAY BE AFRIKAANS FOR "SUFFER THE LITTLE CHILDREN," but I think such relates to a couple of interesting stories of late from across the world as relate to just how cruel and sadisto children can be subjected, especially when "discipline" is expected to be the object.

First off, there's the strange and sickening case of a onetime corrective school/orphanage in the Channel Islands enclave of Jersey by name of the Haut de la Garenne ("rabbit warren heights" in the Norman French patois known locally as Jerriais), until recently a youth hostel: Over recent weeks, some 160 former residents thereof came forward to the local police with tales of abuse and cruelty back when they were so resident in the 30 years before its closing in 1986, reinforced with police dogs discovering fragments of human skulls in several underground chambers as were suspected of having been sadistically abused to their deaths.

As a reporter for the BBC explained it:

More than 160 people who claim to have been abused at Haut de la Garenne have now spoken to police, and all are believed to be telling the truth about the rapes, beatings and torture which they say occurred here during the 30-year period being investigated by police.

Some say they were drugged with valium before being abused at drunken parties organised by staff, to which people from outside the home were invited.

It was those first-hand accounts which led police to focus on a bricked-up cellar beneath one wing of the building.

When police broke through to it on [February 27th] they found a room measuring 12ft by 12ft and around 8ft deep.

Within it mountains of rubble, and - crucially - features which corroborate the victims' stories.

What they also found was a further wall beyond which they believe is another chamber yet to be investigated.

And now a former member of staff at the home has informed them of a third underground chamber - a store room - which will also be investigated.

The victims of abuse at the home say their allegations were never taken seriously.

"Most of us were vulnerable children who were taken into care through no fault of our own," one told me.

"But as soon as you went into Haut de la Garenne it was assumed that you were no good. It was our word against theirs and nobody believed us."

Until 2006, that is, when police began investigating the claims. Last November they went public with it.

At the same time Jersey's former health minister, Stuart Syvret, launched an outspoken attack on the institutions of government in Jersey of which he had once been a part.

They had, he said, engendered a "culture of disregard" to the protection of vulnerable children and accused the island's senior politicians of covering up the abuse.

(In any case, Haut de la Garenne had a nasty reputation for sadistic abuse and maltreatment of its residents long before the now-infamous name was adopted in 1960: First opened as the Jersey Industrial School in 1867, it became the Jersey Home for Boys in 1900, during which time one former inmate recalled seeing a fellow such having his fingers cut off @ the tips following a flogging with a very sharp cane.)

Suffice it to say, though, that the revelations of Haut de la Garenne's sadistic excesses have cast a rather glaring light into the quasi-secretive political ways of the States of Jersey, as explained by the BBC:

Neither part of the UK, nor entirely independent from it, Jersey is a nine miles wide by five anomaly.

The quirks of history, from which its blend of British and French culture evolved, have also rendered the island, literally, a law unto itself.

Although tourists flock to its golden beaches, the island's status as a tax haven and its dark history of Nazi occupation loom large.

And long before the latest abuse accusations surfaced, Jersey had gained a reputation for idiosyncrasy.

Threat of sanctions

The writer Victor Hugo - author of Les Miserables and a one-time Jersey resident - described the Channel Islands as "pieces of France dropped in the sea and picked up by England". History bears him out.

When the English King John lost the Duchy of Normandy in 1204 to France, Jersey's inhabitants chose to remain loyal to their erstwhile Duke.

The islanders were confirmed as subjects of the English crown, but were never absorbed into England nor, subsequently, Britain. They held onto their own judicial system, and remained more or less self-governing.

As a result, Jersey's official status is a British crown dependency. It relies on the British government for defence and international representation, but pays no taxes to London, sends no MPs to Westminster and retains its own Norman legal code.

Culturally, it has developed into a curious blend of its two neighbours, where English is spoken but Norman names abound. Some islanders still speak Jerriais, an odd blend of Norman French and Norse.

Prying eyes

The ability of this tiny island, with a population of just over 91,000 to make its own rules (it does not belong to the EU) has allowed it to develop its status as a tax haven.

With no VAT, no capital gains or estate tax and income tax capped at 20%, Jersey has attracted both wealthy incomers and investors attracted by the lure of offshore banking. Although its maximum speed limit is 40mph, the island has the highest concentration of Porsches in the world.

But like any other tax haven, Jersey has relied on being able to keep private information away from the glare of prying eyes.

Until 2002, it refused to share information on tax evasion with the world's largest economic monitoring group, the OECD. It only relented under threat of sanctions.

This "culture of concealment", the island's former health minister Stuart Syvret claimed when interviewed by a BBC News website reporter when the Haut de la Garenne allegations became public, was responsible for Jersey's failure to address child abuse in its midst.

Jersey's parliament, the States, may be democratic: It is composed of 12 senators and 29 deputies, all directly elected, and 12 constables appointed by parish councils.

But the lack of a strong party system - all members of the States are currently independents - has led to what Mr Syvert identifies as a lack of scrutiny and a "one-party state".

But this ability to keep their own counsel in the face of outsiders has been a source of pride for many on the island - in particular, during occupation by Nazi Germany during World War II.

Resistance was only ever passive, and an estimated 900 children were the results of liaisons between local women and German soldiers. But there was no pro-Hitler political movement as in other occupied areas, and no islanders were implicated in handing over Jews. Indeed one Jerseyman, Albert Bedane, concealed a Dutch Jew, a French prisoner of War and Russian slave labourers from the SS.

*************

STAYING ON THE SUBJECT OF "SUFFER THE LITTLE CHILDREN," FROM AUSTRALIA COMES WORD OF REVELATIONS that long-haul truck drivers "Down Under" have solicited sex from Aboriginal girls in a remote part of New South Wales state.

As The Sydney Morning Herald (via AAP, as in Australian Associated Press, the major wire service down there) reported:

Truck drivers have been accused of participating in a child sex trade using indigenous girls in a remote NSW town, a report says.

It's alleged that girls as young as eight in Boggabilla have had sex with the drivers in exchange for cash and in some cases have been drugged and raped, ABC TV reported.

There have been no prosecutions because the girls refuse to testify, people aware of the cases said.

One unidentified girl told the broadcaster that she had two 14-year-old friends who had sex with truck drivers passing through town in exchange for about $50.

One teenage girl had been selling sex for many years, Boggabilla resident Judy Knox said.

"It's believed that she started when she was about eight years old ... she'd recently become a mother, 15-year-old mother," Ms Knox told ABC TV.

Most of the girls sold their bodies so they could buy drugs like speed and ice, the report said.

There are also allegations of drink spiking, with girls waking up in state capital cities not remembering how they got there.

In response to the report, an Australian Trucking Association spokesman said: "Most trucking companies ban passengers from the cabs of their trucks.

"Professional truck drivers know that their truck cabin is a workplace."

NSW state MP Kevin Humphries said he told police about child prostitution and truck drivers a year ago but the girls refuse to report the drivers.

"Until people actually step up and say 'Yes I will be a witness I will verify that', it makes it very difficult for the police to actually follow through on anything," Mr Humphries told ABC TV.

In a statement, NSW Police said: "Police have been working very hard with other government agencies to obtain evidence of child sexual assault.

"We continue to work closely with the community to gain information that can lead to arrest."

Boggabilla is about 750 km (465 miles) north of Sydney.

Now, reader ... imagine what the situation would be like if children of welfare "basket cases" were tricked into turning tricks for truck drivers just to get out of welfare all the quicker (cf. Neal Boortz' infamous suggestion to a Katrina refugee in Atlanta)....

CERTAIN SCIONS OF THE GOP, PARTICULARLY SO IN OKLAHOMA, ARE HAILING STATE LEGISLATOR SALLY KERN as a "hero" for recent remarks in closed session about a supposed Conspiracy involving the Greater Homosexual Agenda--said remarks being made available via YouTube, ultimately via the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund (hat tip in this instance to the Right Wing Watch blog @ People For the American Way).

Here's the video in question and controversy:

• The misadventures otherwise known as the ur-RAHOWA Against Terrorism in Iraq, and the socioeconomic harm posed to the nation and world.
• The use of flawed, misleading or otherwise inaccurate intelligence, let alone the claims of less-than-credible channels trusted in certain high-level channels of trust and confidence as reliable, to justify said misadventures.
• The consequences of risky "sub-prime" and "Alt-A" mortgage lending upon poor, undereducated and easily-influenced families tricked into taking out such mortgages for the sake of a Classless Ownership Society.
• The worsening gap between rich and poor, and the moral as much as socioeconomic consequences ensuing--especially aggravated by the warped and misguided policies of their droogs otherwise known as His Fraudulency's Great Within.
• The consequences of a mindset holding that low taxes=jobs=social stability upon education, infrastructure, scientific progress and research, etc., etc.
• Further "trickle-down" effects of the ur-RAHOWA upon the Greater Collective Good of the Nation, especially so job losses, worsening inflation, depletion of savings to make ends meet and general consequences.
• The greater social, socioeconomic and moral consequences of laissez-fare socioeconomic thought expected to be seen by suchlike of their ilk as Great White Father of the Lower Classes (especially so "chronic and habitual welfare cases" somehow expected to be in need of "empowerment" only through the free market after "generations of being conditioned to accept false and un-American doctrines" indirectly).

With those in mind, I should like to ask why these should be glossed over as part of the greater electoral agenda, instead paying greater attention to an obvious non-issue like the Greater Homosexual Agenda and the Moral Risk so ensuing upon "our antient and pecuilar soverignty and soverign identity."

see more crazy cat pics

WITHOUT A DOUBT, PROJECTION (AS IN SHIFTING TO OTHERS BLAME FOR WHAT MAY BE THEIR OWN UNDOING) is a common propaganda tactic in the conservative prolefeed machine.

As in blaming "liberal elements" (with "liberal" being subtle anti-Semitic code, perchance) for "reckless and utter disregard for truth" in the media when, in fact, such is commonplace among conservative-leaning media channels. And, come to think of it, see Truth as a subjective, to be perverted and manipulated as required to serve the Greater Conservative Agenda.

Put another way, Joe Sixpack should not be expected to handle the truth "lest such lead to error."

In any case, the following BBC News Online story illustrating how reporters for Chinese state broadcaster CCTV were "advised" to handle certain "sensitive" news items recently may be insightful for what sort of "journalistic standards and ethics" conservatives would like to see imposed for service to their own warped agenda, let alone Truth:

When journalists at China's national broadcaster CCTV log on, one of the first things that pops up on screen is a notice about what not to report.

These notices are often short and seldom say who has authorised them, but they all contain strict instructions about how to report a story.

Journalists were recently warned off a health scandal, told how to report the death of Benazir Bhutto and had to steer clear of a Hollywood film story.

Censorship has been an everyday feature of news reporting in China for as long as the Chinese Communist Party has been in power.

But this wide range of so-called sensitive stories shows that, in China, any story on any subject at any time can still fall foul of the censor's red pen.

No explanation

As 2007 came to a close, it was three very different stories that received particular attention from censors working at China Central Television (CCTV).

On 19 December, journalists received a notice banning them from carrying reports about the death of a pregnant migrant worker.

The news had previously been widely reported in the Chinese media.

The saga began when the woman was rushed to a Beijing hospital with what her husband said was a simple cold.

But doctors said she was suffering from pneumonia and needed an emergency caesarean.

Her husband, believing the hospital wanted to charge him for an expensive and unnecessary operation, refused. Three hours later his wife was dead.

The terse notice banning CCTV journalists from reporting this story did not say why it was sensitive, but health is a hot topic for ordinary Chinese people.

Many suspect doctors prescribe expensive drugs and order unnecessary tests and treatment to boost their salaries.

Two days later, the CCTV censors were worried about another story - reports that China had banned some Hollywood films from Chinese cinemas.

Censors decided this story could not be reported at all.

Again, the notice did not say why, but there has been trade friction between China and the US for some time.

Perhaps the government did not want to add to the tension by talking about another potential trade dispute between the two sides.

'Avoid drawing fire'

The third story that caused problems was the death of Pakistan's former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto two days after Christmas.

China and Pakistan are close allies, and the government presumably did not want to cause a friend unnecessary trouble.

Of course, it would have been hard to simply ignore the assassination, so on 28 December CCTV journalists received explicit instructions on how to report the killing.

Reporters were told to stick to the facts and not connect the incident with Pakistan's internal turmoil or mention the possibility of terrorism.

"Avoid drawing fire against ourselves. Avoid being drawn into Pakistan's internal contradictions," the notice read.

And this time journalists were told exactly who had authorised this order - the party's Central Propaganda Department.

These three stories are just the tip of the iceberg, according to David Bandurski, a researcher with the Hong Kong-based China Media Project, which monitors the media in China.

"There are all kinds of bans and missives against all kinds of stories for different reasons," he says.

Certain subjects are always out of bounds in China, such as speculation about China's national leaders.

Other issues, such as health, education and inflation, are closely monitored because they are potentially controversial.

CCTV journalists were recently told to follow the lead of Xinhua, China's national news agency, when writing reports about fuel price rises.

Sometimes even innocent stories can become sensitive, such as a recent debate about digital TV, because it touched on the issue of consumer rights.

'Wriggle room'

Despite the obstacles, Mr Bandurski says many Chinese journalists are keen to push the boundaries of what is allowed.

"The media is becoming savvy about which stories are completely taboo and which stories have some wriggle room, even for a short time," he says.

The media was not always so strictly controlled in China.

Zhan Jiang, a journalism professor at Beijing's China Youth University for Political Science, says there was more freedom to report political issues in the 1980s.

But that relatively relaxed period came to an abrupt end in 1989 with the crackdown on the Tiananmen Square protesters.

The professor is not optimistic that things will improve in the short term for Chinese journalists.

"On one hand, (Chinese President) Hu Jintao suggests goals to aim for, such as democracy and the rule of law," says Mr Zhan.

"But, on the other hand, the forces that oppose democracy, the rule of law and particularly freedom of speech are powerful."

=============

STAYING WITH MUCH THE SAME MATTER FOR THE NONCE, KUDOS ARE DUE MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA for exposing to air and sunshine the sort of issues which the forces of conservative Zealotry and True Belief as control the mainstream news media "behind the scenes," as it were, want avoided for the sake of "protecting readers from serious error of judgement"--as in expecting Joe Sixpack to not handle the Truth.

Case in point, from last week's Media Matters roundup, as addressed how the Establishment Media is handling John McCain's campaign vis-a-vis certain sensitive standpoints--in this case, his associations with weird and unwholesome religious as were addressed in this recent Open Letter for starters:

Given intense media scrutiny of controversial comments made by a religious leader with ties to Barack Obama, many--including Media Matters--have wondered when news organizations will devote the same attention to John McCain's ties to Rod Parsley and John Hagee.

In February, shortly before the Ohio primary, John McCain stood with Rod Parsley in Cincinnati, declaring him a "spiritual guide." Parsley returned the compliment with his endorsement of McCain, who he praised as a "strong, true, consistent conservative." Parsley has written that "America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion [of Islam] destroyed." As David Corn has explained, "Parsley, who refers to himself as a 'Christocrat,' is no stranger to controversy. In 2007, the grassroots organization he founded, the Center for Moral Clarity, called for prosecuting people who commit adultery. In January, he compared Planned Parenthood to Nazis." He has suggested that the U.S. government was complicit in facilitating black genocide.

McCain won another key endorsement in February: John Hagee, founder and senior pastor of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio.

Hagee has said of Hurricane Katrina, "[W]hen you violate God's will long enough, the judgment of God comes to you. Katrina is an act of God for a society that is becoming Sodom and Gomorrah reborn." Hagee later defended his comment by saying, "I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God, and they are--were recipients of the judgment of God for that. ... there was to be a homosexual parade there on the Monday that the Katrina came. And the promise of that parade was that it was going to reach a level of sexuality never demonstrated before in any of the other Gay Pride parades. ... I believe that the Hurricane Katrina was, in fact, the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans."

Hagee has written, "I encourage every person who has biblical beliefs to contact their congressman and their senator on a regular basis and implore them to pass this constitutional amendment recognizing only the marriage between a man and a woman. If we fail to achieve this, the gates of hell will be opened. It will open the door to incest, to polygamy, and every conceivable marriage arrangement demented minds can possibly conceive. If God does not then punish America, He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah."

Hagee once announced plans to hold a "slave sale" to raise money. According to the San Antonio Express-News, "Hagee, pastor of the 16,000-member Cornerstone Church, last week had announced a 'slave sale' to raise funds for high school seniors in his church bulletin ... The item was introduced with the sentence 'Slavery in America is returning to Cornerstone' and ended with 'Make plans to come and go home with a slave.' " And Hagee has written "Do you know the difference between a terrorist and a woman with PMS? You can negotiate with a terrorist" and "only a Spirit-filled woman can submit to her husband's lead. It is the natural desire of a woman to lead through feminine manipulation of the man. ...The man has the God-given role to be the loving leader of the home."

According to Hagee, McCain actively sought his endorsement.

But despite McCain's embrace of Hagee and Parsley, their controversial views have not drawn the media scrutiny that has been given to Obama's relationship with his pastor.

Time's Michael Scherer actually claimed the McCain-Hagee connection has gotten extensive media coverage: "With rare exception, the press errs on the side of making a big deal out of anything that can be considered a 'scandal.' McCain's endorsement by Hagee got lots of negative newspaper, blog and network news coverage."

"Lots" of "network news coverage"? The names "Hagee" and "McCain" have been mentioned in the same news report exactly one time on ABC--in a comment by Democratic strategist Donna Brazile. CBS has covered the matter in two brief reports. NBC has mentioned the endorsement one time, in a report that referred only vaguely to the fact that "some of the televangelist's public remarks have offended Catholics."

"Lots" of "negative newspaper" coverage? The New York Times has mentioned Hagee's endorsement of McCain in two articles. Both times, the Hagee mention was buried at the end of an article about another topic; combined, the two passages totaled only 251 words. Neither made any mention of Hagee's comments about Katrina, or gays, or women. The Washington Post has mentioned Hagee's endorsement of McCain in only two brief blurbs, only one of which noted any controversy surrounding the endorsement--and, like the Times, that one mentioned only Hagee's comments about Catholics. Post columnist E. J. Dionne did briefly criticize McCain for not distancing himself from Hagee--but he, too, ignored Hagee's comments about Katrina, gays, and women.

Scherer's claim that "McCain's endorsement by Hagee got lots of negative newspaper, blog and network news coverage" was simply false; the endorsement has been all but ignored by the three networks and the nation's two most important newspapers.

By contrast, a Nexis search for "Obama and Jeremiah Wright" reveals 22 hits ... in The Washington Post alone. And 25 more in The New York Times (22 for "Obama and Jeremiah A. Wright" and three for "Obama and Jeremiah Wright.") And 15 hits in the NBC transcript database--all since March 14. Fifteen more in the CBS database since March 14. Twenty-two more in the ABC database since March 13. That is "lots of negative coverage." And that is a huge imbalance.

While Scherer falsely claimed that McCain's ties to Hagee have gotten "lots" of attention, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough took another approach: claiming that McCain's embrace of Hagee is utterly unremarkable.

On the March 19 edition of MSNBC's Race for the White House, Rachel Maddow pointed out the "double standard" in the media's coverage of the situations. Scarborough responded by claiming, "This is not a serious argument. ... This is a ridiculous argument when you consider that Barack Obama is talking about his spiritual adviser for 20 years. Hagee didn't baptize McCain's kids. Hagee didn't marry McCain. John McCain's first book wasn't based on a sermon by Hagee."

Scarborough's argument might seem to make sense--there is no doubt that Obama has closer ties to Jeremiah Wright than John McCain does to John Hagee. But this argument is backwards. Wright is Obama's pastor; their relationship is presumably far more personal than political. Indeed, it may not be political at all. McCain, on the other hand, sought Hagee's support solely for political purposes. His relationship with Hagee is nothing but political. Hagee's political views, therefore, are much more relevant than Jeremiah Wright's, as they are the entire basis for the McCain-Hagee relationship.

(Purely personal piffle: How do we know Rod Parsley's notions on "moral clarity" didn't exactly come by way of Al Cohol, Mary Jane, Old Lady Snow and/or Sally D?)

THECAMPAIGN FOR AMERICA'S FUTURE, BY WAY OF THINK PROGRESS, would like to call your timely attention to another reason why John McCain is undeserving of your electoral support in Indecision 2008:

As America's war in Iraq enters its sixth year, Sen. John McCain is hoping that his long effort to send thousands more U.S. troops--a "surge" that has helped lower casualties--will propel him into the White House.

But McCain's record on Iraq is decidedly mixed. If the Arizona Republican proved prescient in his calls for a military buildup, many of his other predictions and prescriptions turned out wrong.

Before the war, McCain predicted a quick and easy victory, not a vicious insurgency. He issued dire warnings about Saddam Hussein's supposed weapons of mass destruction but didn't read the full 2002 National Intelligence Estimate that showed gaps in the intelligence.

Soon after the March 2003 invasion, however, he began criticizing the Bush administration's management in Iraq and clashed repeatedly with then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. In mid-2003, he started advocating a larger U.S. force to battle the insurgency, a strategy the White House finally approved last year.

McCain did not publicly embrace or join the hard-core neoconservatives who pushed hardest to unleash the U.S. military against Baghdad before the war. But McCain backed many of the same policies.

He repeatedly urged backing Iraqi emigre groups, internal dissidents and other proxy forces to overthrow Hussein. His hawkish views carried weight as a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which oversees the Pentagon.

In 1998, he was among the cosponsors of the Iraq Liberation Act. The law set "regime change" in Baghdad as U.S. policy and mandated support to opposition groups seeking to overthrow the dictator.

Among the major beneficiaries was the Iraqi National Congress, a London-based exile group headed by Ahmed Chalabi.

The CIA had initially sponsored the group but broke with the controversial leader in 1997, saying he could not be trusted. Under the new law, Chalabi's group received almost $33 million from the State Department, until U.S. officials found financial improprieties and ended the arrangement.

McCain and Chalabi met several times but were not close allies, aides to both men said. "Sen. McCain wasn't pushing one group over another," said Randy Scheunemann, McCain's chief foreign policy advisor.

Asked by The Times this month if he regretted backing the 1998 law, which produced few discernible results other than bolstering Chalabi, McCain said he did not. Chalabi, though initially touted by neoconservatives as a future leader of Iraq, failed to garner significant support in elections.

McCain said that by 1998, U.N. sanctions against Iraq were "breaking down" and Hussein had defied numerous Security Council resolutions. "Every intelligence agency in the world believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction," he added. "The policy was not successful."

McCain cited the same reasoning when asked why he and nine other congressional leaders urged President Bush in a letter dated Dec. 6, 2001, to next target Iraq since the Taliban regime had collapsed in Afghanistan.

It is "imperative that we plan to eliminate the threat from Iraq," the lawmakers wrote. "We believe that we must directly confront Saddam sooner rather than later."

Later that day, McCain told MSNBC that it is "possible, if not probable, that internal opposition forces can prevail over time." Asked if it wouldn't require 100,000 U.S. soldiers as occupation troops, McCain demurred. "Oh, no," he said. "I don't think so at all."

Those predictions proved inaccurate. Worse, U.S. forces and local militias then were searching in vain for Osama bin Laden in the Tora Bora redoubts of eastern Afghanistan. U.S. intelligence later concluded that Bin Laden had escaped the dragnet in early December, prompting criticism that the White House ignored the Al Qaeda chief to focus on Hussein.

McCain doesn't buy it.

"I know of no one who believes attention to Iraq at that point diverted our attention from Tora Bora," McCain said, when asked about the timing of the letter. "We should have put more boots on the ground there to apprehend [Bin Laden]. Everyone agrees. But I have no reason to believe that because we urged attention to Iraq, it had any tactical effect on the battleground."

No Al Qaeda link

By the following fall, McCain offered unstinting support to the Bush administration as it sought to rally the nation for war. In September 2002, McCain told CNN that he expected "an overwhelming victory in a very short period of time."

But McCain openly disputed Bush administration claims that Hussein appeared linked to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. "I doubt seriously if there's this close relationship between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein," he told CBS News in September 2002.

Postwar investigations, including the 9/11 Commission Report and a report this month financed by the Pentagon, found no evidence of a "collaborative relationship" between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi regime.

In October 2002 McCain again rose to back the Bush administration when it sought congressional approval for a resolution to use force if necessary to disarm Iraq. The Iraqi tyrant, McCain repeatedly warned his colleagues, was "a clear and present danger" to U.S. security.

"He has developed stocks of germs and toxins in sufficient quantities to kill the entire population of the Earth multiple times," McCain said, according to the Congressional Record. "He has placed weapons laden with these poisons on alert to fire at his neighbors within minutes, not hours, and has devolved authority to fire them to subordinates. He develops nuclear weapons with which he would hold his neighbors and us hostage."

Like all but a few members of Congress, McCain read only the summary of the National Intelligence Estimate sent to Congress that month, according to longtime aide Mark Salter. Asked why, Salter said in an e-mail that the summary was "pretty informative."

The summary, which was later declassified, warned with "high confidence" that Saddam was building a fierce array of illicit weapons. But CIA officials say the full classified text contained numerous caveats about the intelligence.

In fact, none of the weapons existed. After the invasion, the CIA-led Iraq Survey Group concluded that Hussein had abandoned or destroyed his chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs after the Persian Gulf War in 1991, a dozen years earlier.

When the invasion began, McCain told MSNBC that he had "no doubt" U.S. forces "will be welcomed as liberators" in Baghdad. But he changed his views after his first visit to Baghdad, in August 2003, as the insurgency was beginning.

Returning home, McCain began calling for the deployment of thousands more troops. The policy set him sharply at odds with the White House, his party and military commanders. Virtually alone in Congress, McCain pushed for a larger force with growing urgency over the next 3 1/2 years as casualties mounted and public support plummeted.

The Bush administration finally agreed to send nearly 30,000 additional troops early last year, bringing the current total to about 155,000. The so-called surge has helped curb both the sectarian slaughter and anti-U.S. attacks, according to the Pentagon.

"I give the guy a lot of credit on this issue," said Kenneth Pollack, who headed Persian Gulf affairs in the Clinton White House and now works at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution in Washington. "He figured out the right answer. And the administration was dead set against it."

Expertise challenged

But McCain's claim to expertise came under attack Tuesday after he had completed a two-day visit to Iraq, his eighth tour of the war zone. During a news conference and in a separate radio interview, he charged that Iran was training Al Qaeda operatives in Iraq. He quickly apologized after he was advised that the Teheran regime supports militant Shiite groups, not the rival Sunnis who make up Al Qaeda. "I'm sorry," McCain said. "The Iranians are training extremists, not Al Qaeda."

McCain's aides said he merely misspoke when he mixed up America's adversaries, but the Democratic National Committee immediately challenged his supposed knowledge and judgment on Iraq.

Democrats contend that McCain's support for Bush's unpopular war policies outweighs any differences he has had with them. In New Hampshire this month several dozen protesters loudly chanted "Bush, McCain, more of the same" when the presumptive Republican nominee arrived for a town-hall meeting in Exeter.

U.S. troops must remain until Iraq is secure, no matter how long that takes, McCain told the crowd. He ridiculed promises by his Democratic rivals, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, to quickly pull troops out. "A date for withdrawal would be a date for surrender," he said.

The key to victory--and probably the White House next fall--McCain said, is whether American casualties start to rise again. If the surge is seen as failing, McCain warned, support for the war will evaporate.

"I am confident about this strategy," he declared. "I will stick with it under any circumstances. But I don't know if the American people will stick with it."

THERE ARE NO DOUBT GOING TO BE TIMES GALORE, ESPECIALLY SO OVER THE SUMMER VACATION PERIOD, WHEN PARENTS will ask the children to leave the house after  breakfast and not return home until @ least the supper hour.

In other words, "get lost."

And to be thus for the sake of the parents, perhaps out of fear they might "suffer a nervous breakdown" or somesuch if they keep hanging around the house all day and "waste time needlessly" or otherwise "take up valuable space" lying around, watching TV, playing video games or surfing the Internet.

The thinking, perhaps, being they would be better off "making wise use of their time" @ the local mall, nearby playgrounds, amusement or waterslide parks (especially if season passes are on offer, the better to give parents a good way to get their kids out of the way), community fairs, that sort of thing, while the parents engage in things they're afraid the kids will find out about.

Like perousing kinderporn online.

And having that nagging sort of paranoia that the police will find out--especially if there turns out being a loud and chaotic police raid on their house just as the kids come home from their day out ahead of the dinner hour.

Not to mention the parents cooking up all form and manner of patsies for the kids to use in case the likes of security guards @ the mall or ride attendants @ amusement parks start asking questions or otherwise get suspicious, even expecting them to memorise such "just in case."

Yet, you have to ask why parents would want to do such a sick thing anyway @ the expense of their kids, even if the desire is to get them to "make the most of their time," "get some exercise, fresh air and sunshine" or otherwise "leave [the parents] alone." Sometimes, even adding all manner of potentially anecdotal, "friend-of-a-friend" (FOAF) stories about the summer recreation programmes @ the local Community Centre not to be trusted as "safe places" because of the counsellors and supervisors being "crazy people" or otherwise "dangerous" (as in their being, perhaps, pedophiles or child pornographers lying below radar) in contrast to the food court @ the local mall.

The same, I suppose, likely to apply where the family has a summer beach house "down the shore" or somesuch--only in such an instance, the "advice" would include spending "quality time" in town (especially along the local Boardwalk or equivalent) or on the beach.

All in all, you have to ask yourselves why parents would allow themselves to go to such depths, all the while risking charges of Child Neglect, Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor, Failure to Exercise Responsibility for their Children, usw., in such otherwise well-intentioned requests. And, when the time comes, what sort of excuses the parents will resort to in the courts, especially when the Child Welfare intervenes to have the parents declared Morally Unfit and the children removed into foster care in spite of incredible "horror stories" the parents will resort to spreading as a scare tactic.

Let alone the judge alluding to Peter and Lois Griffin (per Family Guy) in taking exception to the parents' acts, deeds and exploits vis-a-vis their children--and the "notoriety" such brought upon the community.

"Think about it"

IN THE WAKE OF THE THEN-SOVIET UNION'S INVASION AND OCCUPATION OF AFGHANISTAN IN LATE 1979/EARLY 1980, A NUMBER OF NATIONS, AMONG THEM THE UNITED STATES, elected to boycott the Moscow Summer Olympic Games in 1980 as a show of protest.

As if in reprisal, the then-Soviet Union and several of its Warsaw Pact/COMECON satellites (with the notable exception of Romania) boycotted the Los Angeles Summer Olympic Games in 1984, prompting the Soviets to offer up a counter to the Olympics which they called "the Friendship Games" for those so boycotting.

Now, it seems as if hints are being dropped in certain circles suggesting that a few soverign nations may consider ignoring the Call to the Games of the XXIX Olympiad in Beijing this summer in response to China's late crackdown in Tibet, with varying accounts on the number of casualties (Beijing officially claiming 16 dead, whereas the Tibetan Government-in-Exile contends the figure is closer to 130) and Beijing's "show no mercy" mentalities on the "ringleaders" behind the late ultraviolence in Lhasa.

And there are still ripple effects from what happened in Tibet recently:

• This morning's Olympic Torch Lighting ceremonies on the Plains of Olympia, outside Athens, were briefly disrupted when a protester displaying a "Free Tibet" banner briefly made an appearence before Greek security forces subdued the protester.
• Pro-Tibetan sympathisers in the Nepali capital of Kathmandu (including a few Buddhist priests) have held protests which were all too often met with police baton charges and scuffles; one such yesterday saw six killed and twenty Buddhist priests detained.

Too, you also have concerns as to whether Beijing's official categorical pledges on controlling air-pollution levels during the Olympics will remain empty such, still putting pressure on some nations as to whether such may also be an excuse to boycott.

Not to mention Chinese police authorities banning broadcasters covering the Beijing Olympic Games doing reports from Tiananmen Square in central Beijing, fearing the likelihood of "China's image being seriously compromised" in case, say, human-rights protesters unfurled banners before the cameras with the Forbidden City in the background.

*************

HOW HIS FRAUDULENCY'S GREAT WITHIN AS ARE INVOLVED IN THE UR-RAHOWA AGAINST INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM will look upon newly-elected Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gillani (Pakistan People's Party/P3) as a credible ally in the aforementioned ur-RAHOWA is anybody's guess.

Especially considering where Prime Minister Gillani has pledged to order the release from detention of such lawyers as were detained under predecessor Perez Musharaf's period of emergency rule following Benazhir Bhutto's assaination. That, and an international enquiry into the circumstances behind the aforementioned assaination under United Nations control.

One reason why the Great Within needs to be all the more watchful is because of the P3's coalition with the Muslim League, which may not be quite familiar to the Great Within when it comes to terrorism-related issues and matters of interest to the "inside of the inside."

*************

TRY IMAGINING INDECISION 2008'S ISSUES INCLUDING SOMETHING ABOUT "GROSS NATIONAL HAPPINESS" BEING MAINTAINED as necessary to national identity and cohesion.

Yet in the remote Himalayan mountain kingdom of Bhutan, "gross national happiness" is used to describe the belief of balancing socioeconomic development with respect for traditional values and the environment. And such is the guiding principle in their first-ever legislative elections today for a 47-seat National Assembly as marks the end for the last absolute hereditary monarchy among the world's soverign nations.

Bhutan's current monarch, King Jigme Khesar Namgyang Wangchuck, is expected to remain as, more or less, a symbolic figurehead; but then again, expect considerable support across the desolate kingdom to remain for the monarchy, even if horses and pack mules had to be used to deliver ballot boxes and electoral materials to remote villages and many returning to their native villages from the Bhutani capital of Thimpu to cast ballots--one widely-reported example being that of a woman walking some 370 miles over two weeks from Thimpu back to her native village just to help write history.

Something worth thinking about in the greater debate heading into Indecision 2008.

*************

HIS FRAUDULENCY'S GREAT WITHIN, AND THEIR PRO-WAR DROOGS, AREN'T GOING TO LIKE THE LATEST MILESTONE IN THE IRAQI THEATER of the ur-RAHOWA Against International Terrorism: Videlicet, the 4,000th American casualty in the five years of misadventure so ensuing, so averaging about 800 troop casualties a year.

Let's just hope news of the 5,000th such coincides with the proximity to Indecision 2008--THAT alone should be enough to make the balloting even more seriously drawn-out, and then some....

*************

THE CLOSET APOLOGISTS FOR APARTHEID SOUTH AFRICA AND THEIR ARCHITECTS, DIE AFRIKANER VOLK, are not amused @ last week's address by Democratic Presidential wannabe Barack Obama on the interrelationship between race and Presidential qualifications, as People For the American Way's Right Wing Watch blog thus notes:

A few voices on the Right have expressed partial praise for Barack Obama’s speech on race, but by and large, right-wing commentators have stuck to the script, picking over the parts where Obama mentioned the country’s racial wounds, excoriating him for failing to disavow affirmative action or liberal economic policies, and generally promoting the idea that Obama is some kind of Manchurian candidate who secretly hates both America and white people.

But if Obama hoped to start a national conversation about race, he succeeded, in a way. Many right-wing commentators have proved willing to redirect their attacks on Obama to a discussion of their views on African Americans in general. Cal Thomas opined that “black people should be listening to” Bill Cosby, not Rev. Wright. Ann Coulter announced that she had had enough of blacks talking about racism:

But the "post-racial candidate" thinks we need to talk yet more about race. How much more? I had had my fill by around 1974. How long must we all marinate in the angry resentment of black people? …

We treat blacks like children, constantly talking about their temper tantrums right in front of them with airy phrases about black anger. I will not pat blacks on the head and say, "Isn't that cute?" As a post-racial American, I do not believe "the legacy of slavery" gives black people the right to be permanently ill-mannered.

Unfortunately, the online videos of Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s church appear to be the first exposure some on the Right have had to blacks or the African American church. Human Events reporter Ericka Anderson admitted as much: “Those of us outside the black community lack any deep knowledge of black churches. The only black minister we are very familiar with was Martin Luther King, Jr.” Anderson added, “He never damned America.”

George Neumayr, editor of the Catholic World Report, was apparently scandalized by what he described as the “feverish” church-goers in the videos “hopping up and down like hyperactive children” as they follow their “buffoonish[],” “sashaying” pastor.

Perhaps we should leave the final word to Pat Buchanan, who has made a career out of claiming that “white America” is under constant threat from other ethnicities. Before Obama’s speech, Buchanan pined for the “Negroes” of the 1950s:

That Wright is a revered preacher in black America also tells us that, far from coming together, we Americans are further apart than we were in the 1950s, when Negroes could be described as Christian, conservative and patriotic. Malcolm X and Elijah Muhammad did not speak for black America then. Roy Wilkins, Whitney Young and Dr. Martin Luther King did. But Jeremiah Wright makes Stokely Carmichael and Rap Brown sound like the Mills Brothers.

After the speech, Buchanan was more blunt, writing that “Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.”

What is wrong with Barack's prognosis and Barack's cure?

Only this. It is the same old con, the same old shakedown that black hustlers have been running since the Kerner Commission blamed the riots in Harlem, Watts, Newark, Detroit and a hundred other cities on, as Nixon put it, "everybody but the rioters themselves."

Was "white racism" really responsible for those black men looting auto dealerships and liquor stories, and burning down their own communities, as Otto Kerner said--that liberal icon until the feds put him away for bribery.

Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America.

Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to.

This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard.

(Purely personal piffle, especially regarding mein emphasis on the preceding: Methinks Pat Buchanan won't be satisfied unless White America's response is nothing less than a return to the likes of Jim Crow and apartheid--especially among such scions of "the Silent Majority" as are poor, undereducated or homeschooled and easily-influenced, let alone holding down menial positions with little or no real advancement potential and traditional prime targets for recruitment by the weird and unwholesome who take unscrupulous advantage of "white trash" elements.)

glitter-graphics.com