Columbus Day and hero worship

So today is Columbus Day in the United States. The day is named after Spanish explorer Christopher Columbus, whose voyages to the Americas initiated Spanish colonization in the continental region. Many public schools and governments observe this holiday.

Even though Columbus's only voyage in the modern U.S. lands is in the Caribbean territories like Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, the greater nation considers the Columbian voyages significant enough in US and continental American history to honor Columbus with a holiday. Beneath the celebration of the voyages lies a darker side to Columbus and his followers. Generally, Columbus was a perpetual violator of human rights. Among his sins: slave trading, religious proselytization, and spreading diseases that contributed to the deaths of many indigenous peoples wherever Columbus went.

Already, the cities of Seattle and Minneapolis have recognized the darker side of Columbus and have decided to recognize the 2nd Monday of October as "Indigenous People's Day" instead. Obviously, in today's fast-paced, must-post-my-thoughts-on-Facebook-now society where kneejerk reactions take precedent over critical thinking whenever long-held traditions or conceptions are challenged, the mainstream reaction to the Minneapolis and Seattle moves is a big load of derp, like "why aren't those cities focusing on the real issues of the day" or "typical libtard political correctness", without touching the concerns that the city councils had about Columbus Day in the first place.

When people idolize notable individuals, they tend to think that the accomplishments of the individual outweighs the flawed baggage, in this case Columbus. No one denies that Columbus changed the world very significantly. All that those who advocate "Indigenous People's Days" ask for is to think about the consequences of Columbus's actions. Also, the people that media, teachers, whoever teach us to respect and see as great almost always have flaws.

If you're reading this from the UK, you probably know about Jimmy Savile. The TV presenter had been a respected part of UK popular culture from the '60s to '90s and used his celebrity to raise lots of money for charities and hospitals. When Savile died in 2011, young and old Britons paid their tributes to Savile whether they knew about Savile from watching him introduce musical performers on Top of the Pops (1964-1979) or his "make a wish for kids" show Jim'll Fix It (1975-1994).

But soon, Britons' fond memories of Savile turned into utter disgust and disappointment. In September 2012, while Barack Obama and Mitt Romney were the top newsmakers in America, across the Atlantic, some quite disturbing revelations about the late Savile's past became a daily top story. It turned out that Savile was a serial child molester throughout his years as a BBC TV presenter. His celebrity intimidated his victims or potential witnesses from reporting his crimes to police; whenever police did question Savile (in the late 2000s) it was far too late for any real prosecution to take place.

Today, the San Francisco 49ers beat the St. Louis Rams on Monday Night Football. The arrests of multiple 49ers players over the 2014 offseason has been frequently reported in Bay Area media. Most controversially, Ray McDonald continues to play for the 49ers despite being arrested for domestic violence (but charges are still pending as of now). Aldon Smith is currently serving a nine-game suspension for multiple violations of NFL rules that stem from a drunk driving conviction as well as arrests for other crimes like illegal guns and a bomb threat. And, Chris Culliver is still playing for the Niners despite being criminally charged and sued for a hit-and-run (allegedly also for threatening his victims with brass knuckles). All these men were also part of the 49ers defensive squad that helped the team to the past two NFC championship games and the 2013 Super Bowl. But are they really people worth idolizing, now?

Let's not blindly make heroes out of notable figures in history or culture. We've got to take honest, realistic evaluations of the lives that our "heroes" lead.

Conspiracy theory time: Super Bowl halftime shows and election years.

(This post isn't serious it's just for kicks.)

2004: New England Patriots in the Super Bowl. Justin Timberlake exposes Janet Jackson's breast during Super Bowl halftime show. FCC fines CBS. Republican incumbent George W. Bush wins re-election, and exit polls show that moral values were the leading concern issue in the year's election.

2012: New England Patriots in the Super Bowl. M.I.A. flips the bird during the Super Bowl halftime show. What happens next...

In 2004, the Democratic nominee for president was John Kerry, a US Senator from Massachusetts. This year, a Republican contender for president is a former governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney. However, former US Senator from Pennsylvania Rick Santorum has now taken a temporary lead in the primaries.

Massachusetts. Super Bowl halftime shows during election years. Obscene incidents during those shows.

Could it be that the New England Patriots, M.I.A., and Justin Timberlake were acting as Republican undercover operatives during the Super Bowl?

Also the Chicago Sun Times reports about a man named Robert Dewey Hoskins who escaped from a California mental hospital. Hoskins was convicted of stalking and threatening Madonna in 1996. I think this Hoskins guy may be an operative too if he takes retaliatory action against Madonna regarding the halftime show.

The really scary story about Newt Gingrich the media did NOT discuss

I quit watching the evening news shows on ABC/CBS/NBC around the time after Charles Gibson retired and the morning shows (even worse in terms of serious news vs. entertainment) waaaaay earlier. I get my news now from the PBS Newshour, NPR, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and various Internet sites as well. Now Newt Gingrich is being confronted with a claim from his 2nd ex wife that he asked for an open marriage after he was caught cheating with his mistress turned current wife. On Thursday night's CNN debate, moderator John King opened the debate giving Gingrich and opportunity to respond. Gingrich went off on an angry attack on the media for bringing up this story:

Every person in here knows personal pain. Every person in here has had someone close to them go through painful things. To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary a significant question for a presidential campaign is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine. My two daughters wrote the head of ABC and made the point that it was wrong, that they should pull it, and I am frankly astounded that CNN would take trash like that and use it to open a presidential debate.

Astonishingly, Gingrich never took accountability for his own bad behavior. (So much for the party of personal responsibility...or as the has-been candidate, fellow Georgian, and creepy man Herman Cain put it..."blame yourself!") Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus took Gingrich to task in her column "Newt Gingrich blames media for a mess he created".

We get the idea that Gingrich is a moral hypocrite for stumping for family values despite his history of marital infidelity. But there's this scarier part of Gingrich, what he would do as president. The Guardian, a British newspaper, reported on Wednesday, "Newt Gingrich: I would ignore supreme court as president":

Newt Gingrich has pledged that on his first day as president he will set up a constitutional showdown by ordering the military to defy a supreme court ruling extending some legal rights to foreign terrorism suspects and captured enemy combatants in US custody.

The Republican contender told a forum of anti-abortion activists ahead of South Carolina's primary election that as president he would ignore supreme court rulings he regards as legally flawed. He implied that would also extend to the 1973 decision, Roe vs Wade, legalising abortion.

"If the court makes a fundamentally wrong decision, the president can in fact ignore it," said Gingrich to cheers.

(...)

Gingrich said the first confrontation would be over its historic ruling, known as the Boumediene decision, that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantánamo Bay have the right to challenge their detention in US courts.

And this isn't the first time Gingrich has suggested such a view towards Sup. Ct. cases, see "Newt Gingrich says he'd defy Supreme Court rulings he opposed" (LA Times, 12/17/11).

The Seriously, America? tumblr commented: "Andrew Jackson took this approach—so it’s been tried. It resulted in the Trail of Tears." (That case Pres. Jackson ignored would be Worcester v. Georgia...and I recently learned that Worcester is pronounced "wusster" not "war-ces-ter") Also, Gingrich seems to be swimming into Nixonian territory, as the disgraced Richard Nixon famously said in the 1977 David Frost interview: "...when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal."

More likely in the media you'll hear about Gingrich's personal life or horse race type issues than how candidates would approach different areas of government. Searching for media coverage of Gingrich's supreme court views, I found that CNN's Situation Room afternoon news show on Dec. 19 devoted a whole interview with legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin about Gingrich's December statement (search "activist judge" in this transcript and you'll get there). On Dec. 27, host Wolf Blitzer interviewed Gingrich and included a question about Gingrich's view on activist judges:

BLITZER: ...On justices of the Supreme Court, lower courts, you've made some very controversial comments that if you disagree adamantly with some of their decisions, you wouldn't hesitate to subpoena these guys, these judges, bring them forward, and not -- and basically ignore their decisions.

I asked Jeffrey Toobin, our Senior Legal Analyst, he's an authority on the US Supreme Court, as you probably know. I asked him whether or not you have a basis from which to speak on this issue, and I'll play the clip --

GINGRICH: OK.

BLITZER: -- of what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: The courts have the last word. You don't like it, you can change the constitution, you can have new justices on the Supreme Court, you can even impeach a federal judge.

But you cannot haul them in and beat them up in front of a Congressional committee. You cannot use the police to intimidate judges. That is something that is fundamentally against American constitutional history.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GINGRICH: Well, he's wrong --

BLITZER: All right. Jeffrey Toobin.

GINGRICH: Look, Jeffrey's wrong on two counts. First of all, the courts are not the last word. The courts are one of three last words. The constitution's designed around a balance of power between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. There is on superior branch. Hamilton --

BLITZER: But until new legislation is passed --

GINGRICH: No.

BLITZER: -- the rule of the -- the decision of the Supreme Court stands.

GINGRICH: Only in the case of the law. Not in -- only in the case. Lincoln says in his 1861 inaugural address the Dred Scott case extending slavery over the whole country is not the law of the land. And he says, furthermore, you would eliminate our freedom if nine people could decide it.

Jefferson, when asked if the Supreme Court was supreme over the president and the Congress said that is absurd. That would be an oligarchy.

Jeffrey ought to look at the 54-page paper at Newt.org where, as a historian, we lay out the historic case. Alexander Hamilton says the courts would never pick a fight with the legislature and the executive because, in fact, they would lose the fight. Now, that implies something about relative strength.

Lastly, he has made my case. He said judges can be impeached. The first step towards impeachment is hearing testimony. The question I was asked was, could Congress compel testimony? By definition in an impeachment case, they can compel testimony.

Other broadcast media coverage of Gingrich criticizing activist judges (from a Lexisnexis search):

• (an aside) Reuters did a critical article about Gingrich's comments about arresting judges: "Gingrich's nods to history don't impress scholars"
• NBC's Mike Viqureira commented at the end of a generic report about the Saturday 12/17 developments of primary campaigns: "[Gingrich] has more controversial comments tonight about what he calls liberal activist judges, today telling reporters on a conference call that some judges should be subpoenaed to testify before Congress to explain their rulings, sometimes for whole courts to be abolished in some circumstances, even suggesting that presidents can ignore judicial rulings that they don't like." That was it. (NBC Nightly News, 12/17/11, see 1:45 mark of the linked video)
• The next Sunday morning, CBS's Bob Schieffer asked Gingrich about his comments, and Gingrich reaffirmed his position. (Face the Nation, 12/18/11)
• The following Monday, Gingrich did more judicial-bashing at a speech in Iowa, and NPR did a full story (All Things Considered, 12/19/11)
• Also, MSNBC's Ed Schultz interviewed Rice University historian Douglas Brinkley from a critical angle about Gingrich's comments (The Ed Show, 12/19/11)
• MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell interviewed former Minnesota Republican chair and Michele Bachmann chief of staff Ron Carey (The Last Word, 12/19/11)
• Otherwise, LexisNexis produces no results from ABC, CBS, and NBC reporting on Gingrich's comments on 12/19 or anytime later.. I watched the PBS Newshour that day and heard nothing there either. Lexis also showed modest coverage by the cable networks. This topic drew much discussion on the Democratic Underground forum.
  
• The conclusion: the media just forgets like a Republican elephant and wants sensationalism, not substance.
  

W-H-Y should religion be an issue regarding public policy??

American politics can get REALLY silly when the debate focuses on how religious/faithful a candidate can be. This story "For Romney, Social Issues Pose New Test" will be on the front page of Sunday's NY Times:

Mr. Romney has tried at every stage of the race for the Republican presidential nomination to focus on the economy, and he did so again on Saturday, when he appeared here at the Values Voter Summit, a gathering of social conservative activists.

But he also felt compelled to reiterate that he was in sync with social conservatives as he ran through his positions on abortion, marriage, judicial appointments and religious values. And as other speakers condemned homosexuality and raised questions about whether a Mormon is a true Christian, Mr. Romney emphasized that tolerance and civility were conservative values.

(...)

Beyond Mr. Romney’s substantive positions, his faith is re-emerging as a concern among some evangelicals. On Saturday, a conservative activist speaking after Mr. Romney, Bryan Fischer, said without naming Mr. Romney that the next president had to be a man of “genuine” Christian faith. On Friday, a backer of Mr. Perry described Mr. Romney’s faith as a cult.

Mr. Perry later said he disagreed with that characterization, and some evangelical leaders said they were less concerned about Mr. Romney’s being a Mormon than about his stand on the issues.

This is one of the 100s of reasons (OK i may be exaggerating) that I choose to remain an atheist and I'm thankful that I never attended church service or religious schools in my life, not even when I was a little kid. And if Republicans seriously get into these silly arguments over faith and heavily seek the concerns of blue-nosed religious fundamentalists in public policy such as in education, reproductive freedom, gay rights, etc., then I'm never going to vote Republican in my life as long as this horrendous, disturbing connection with Republicans and creationists/homophobes/anti-rationalists continues.

Furthermore, Republicans just cannot STAND anyone who doesn't represent the Judeo-Christian ideal, whether in attacking the Mormon Mitt Romney for not being Christian enough or smearing Barack Obama as a Muslim. Given the rise in anti-Muslim sentiment in the US post-9/11, the Muslim smear obviously was a dog-whistle appeal to the more bigoted Americans just like Ronald Reagan speaking about states' rights in Philadelphia, Mississippi (a town where in 1964 three civil rights workers were murdered) in 1980 was. This fear of the occult (the religious buzzword for the unknown, outside the realm of faith) drives all the lies and idiocy from the right when it comes to religion in American public policy. That's why you'll encounter "where is separation of church and state?" or "America is a Christian nation" all the time in conservative commentators, speeches, etc.

In fact, when Christine O'Donnell ran for Vice Pres. Joe Biden's former US Senate seat in Delaware (won by Democratic candidate Chris Coons thankfully), she risked getting laughter in mockery for claiming that SoC&S is not in the Constitution. Well, what's so hard about "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"? Basically: RELIGION IS AN INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, THE GOVERNMENT CAN'T FORCE ONE FAITH ON THE PEOPLE OR PROHIBIT ONE? DO YOU GET IT, FUNDAMENTALISTS? Although the constitution obliges the government to defend one's right to observe a faith, the government is not obliged to uphold the values of the faith itself. Thus, when will the supreme court ever break apart the faith-based initiatives division of the White House? Furthermore, the question liberals/secularists need to challenge conservatives should be: where in the Constitution indicates that the nation shall be governed under Christian values? That should stump those strict constructionists who insist that original intent of the founders should guide federal laws.

And yes, as an atheist I have voted for Christians for political office. I vote for candidates based on their political positions and experience, not trivial personal traits like how religious or non religious they are. HOWEVER, if a candidate repeatedly puts on the God/faith peacock feathers in campaigns or backs causes championed by the Religious Right, the candidate loses my vote. I remember reading the 2010 California voter guide and seeing one of the third-party right-wing candidates (either of the American Independent or Constitution Parties) boasting about God in the campaign statement.

If Chris Christie did decide to run for president, he'd need to explain the Hudson Tunnel

NY Times: "N.J. to Repay U.S. $95 Million Over Hudson Tunnels":

On Friday [September 30], Gov. Chris Christie and Ray LaHood, the federal transportation secretary, announced that New Jersey would pay back $95 million that the federal government had provided for a pair of rail tunnels under the Hudson River that were projected to cost $8.7 billion. The effort, known as Access to the Region’s Core, or ARC, was one of the biggest public-works projects under way in the country when Mr. Christie decided to cancel it one year ago.

Mr. Christie maintained that his state could not afford to shoulder potentially huge cost overruns on the project, which would have doubled the train capacity between New Jersey and New York City. His unilateral decision to scrap the tunnels enraged Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, who had spent years lining up $6 billion in commitments from the federal government and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

Mr. LaHood, who was also angry at Mr. Christie, demanded that New Jersey repay all of the $271 million in federal money that had gone toward the early stages of building the tunnels. The governor responded by declaring, “We are not paying the money back.”

And Republicans preach "fiscal responsibility" all the time. If Christie did join the primaries, campaign ads would devastate him over stealing about $150 million.

Most surprising of all? "Sarah Palin will not run for president in 2012" either. Otherwise the Republicans would've handed Obama an easy victory that year, something they do NOT want as Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell famously said about the GOP agenda: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

Federal budget cuts in 1959 restrained an economic recovery. Hear that, Washington?

I just finished reading the book Dwight D. Eisenhower by Tom Wicker, part of the American Presidents book series by Times Books, the book-publishing arm of the New York Times Company. In the wake of Congress' current budget-cut debate and the recession, I came across this narrative of the 1959 budget agenda (pp. 113-114):

Neither for the first nor last time, Eisenhower had misjudged the Democrats. In 1959, rather than being profligate spenders, they decided to outdo the president in reducing federal expenditures. By the time the two congressional parties were done leap-frogging over each other in ever bigger spending cuts, the fiscal 1960 budget they adopted featured a $269 million surplus. That may have please the White House but the inescapable economic fact was that such a dramatic one-year swing in federal spending—from a $13 billion deficit to a nearly—virtually strangled the economic recovery that had begun in April 1958.

In 1959, moreover, the Federal Reserve, which had been ritually keeping money tight since 1956, actually raised the crucial discount rate from 2.5 to 4 percent. Restrictive fiscal and monetary policy combined resulted in the shortest economic expansion of the post-war year, and in April 1960 the economy began sliding into a new recession, which was to last into 1961.

Vice President Richard Nixon would run for president in 1960 and lose against Senator John F. Kennedy, a Democrat from Massachusetts. According to Wicker, "economic recession was prominent among the many factors that gave John F. Kennedy his razor-thin victory" (114). Similarly, I predict that a recession will influence a Republican victory over President Obama in the 2012 election. Poor economic conditions often influence voters to vote against the political parties in power. It happened in 1960, when voters decided not to elect the termed-out Republican Dwight Eisenhower's vice president to the highest executive position and instead opted for the Democrat, JFK. Similar thing in 1980 following an energy crisis and rising unemployment, when the incumbent Democratic president Jimmy Carter lost to the Republican former governor of California, Ronald Reagan (who would win re-election in 1984 despite a yearlong recession during his first term). In 1992, President George H.W. Bush (R) lost his re-election bid to the Democratic governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton after compromising with Congressional Democrats to raise some taxes to reduce a budget deficit and rising unemployment in 1991 and 1992.

(update) Note how during the 1950s the top tax rate was...91%...a possible contributing factor to the 1959 surplus. Although the late '90s also had budget surpluses, the top tax rate then was a much lower 39.6%.

Ed Schultz commentary on tax cuts

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Al Sharpton wants the FCC to clamp down on racist speech on the radio?

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Now, I hate hate hate HATE Rush Limbaugh, perhaps the second biggest ignorant doofus on the radio next to Glenn Beck. I like to be informed about current events and politics and hell maybe have a bit of humour or irreverency along with it...but c'mon, Rush Limbaugh's non-stop use of racial metaphors like "reparations" to describe the Obama administration and its programmes such as settlements for black farmers accusing the US Dept of Agriculture of discrimination is just...stupid.

This video clip that I embedded is of the Rev. Al Sharpton interviewed on MSNBC's The Ed Show. Now, there's no doubt that sensible people would be offended (intellectually and sensibly) by Limbaugh's non-stop politically incorrect rhetoric. But to have the FCC police racist speech on the airwaves...I don't know if that'll ever stand First Amendment muster.

Federal law currently makes obscene speech illegal to broadcast: (emphasis mine)

Obscene speech is not protected by the First Amendment and broadcasters are prohibited, by statute and regulation, from airing obscene programming at any time. According to the U.S. Supreme Court, to be obscene, material must meet a three-prong test: (1) an average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest (i.e., material having a tendency to excite lustful thoughts); (2) the material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and (3) the material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. The Supreme Court has indicated that this test is designed to cover hard-core pornography.

So that's part of why The Howard Stern Show had to leave FM airwaves after 2005. By that time Stern had signed a contract with a satellite radio company.

The FCC's current indecency policy explains why some of your favourite songs (especially rap and rock music) need to be edited for the radio. Especially all those N-words in rap songs. Before you call Sharpton a hypocrite for targeting Rush Limbaugh instead of Lil Wayne: yes, Rev. Sharpton has spoken out against misogyny and vulgarity in hip hop multiple times...for example at a rally in 2007 after the Don Imus controversy, and in a 2002 editorial "The Hip Hop Generation" (included in Davey D's newsletter from 12 December 2002). In this case however, I don't know if Sharpton also wants urban radio stations to stop playing music that reinforces negative stereotypes about black Americans (such as illiteracy, sexuality, criminality, etc.) Examples of rap songs that create negative stereotypes of blacks:
- Sex: "Every Girl" by Young Money, "What's Your Fantasy?" by Ludacris, "Bojangles" by Pitbull, "Lollipop" by Lil Wayne, "Get Low" by Lil Jon & the East Side Boyz, "Hot in Herre" by Nelly, ooh the list goes on and on and on!!!!
- Crime: "The Boss" by Rick Ross, "What U Gon Do" by Lil Jon & the East Side Boyz, pretty much any song by any rapper who wears bling bling/refers to "rocks"/"blunts"/drugs/etc. and any song that promotes gang fights and stuff like that
- Illiteracy: "Crank That (Soulja Boy)" by Soulja Boy, "Country Grammar" by Nelly, and pretty much any over-popular rap song that uses overly simplistic lyrics and especially Bay Area hyphy rap with all that "go dumb" stuff

While it is noble for Rev. Sharpton and others to speak out against the hateful rhetoric of right-wing bloviators like Limbaugh, making such speech unlawful on public airwaves won't really help much. Limbaugh might as well just move to Sirius Satellite Radio or XM; in fact, disgraced radio host Laura Schlessinger plans on making a comeback on XM next year. Schlessinger, known as "Dr Laura" (even though her doctorate is in physiology she frequently gave relationship advice on her radio show), infamously repeatedly used the N-word towards a black woman caller; Dr Laura apologised and resigned. Former terrestrial radio hosts who moved to satellite, such as Howard Stern, still have substantial followings in their new mediums. Furthermore, the Internet also provides a highly accessible forum for any wannabe Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck.

While the Supreme Court upheld the FCC indecency policy in the much-appealed 2009 FCC v. Fox case regarding accidental obscene language in live broadcasts (but got overturned by a fed appeals court the next year), the court has ruled variously on hate speech:
- In the 1942 case Chaplinksy v. New Hampshire, the high court ruled that fighting words (this case was about a Jehovah's Witness calling a police officer a "racketeer" and "fascist") aren't protected free speech.
- The 1992 case R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul dealt with a city ordinance "punishing the placement of certain symbols that were 'likely to arouse anger, alarm, or resentment on the basis of race, religion, or gender.'" The high court overturned the conviction of Robert A. Victoria, a teenager who burned a cross on a black family's yard. Now regarding hate speech on the radio chances are the Supreme Court could use this case to defend Limbaugh and co. as it's previously found a law banning expression inciting race-based hatred unconstitutional.
- 11 years later, in Virginia v. Black, the court found that a Virginia state law banning cross-burning that had intent to intimidate was constitutional as cross-burning was a "particularly virulent form of intimidation" yet overturned the conviction of a cross-burner due to flawed jury instructions that blurred ideology and intimidation intents.

Better than a "speech code" on the radio would be expanded media presence for the left wing via the Fairness Doctrine, which seeks balance, not censorship! Broadcasters have had since 1987 to be responsible when handling controversial issues...and what do you have? In 2007, a study by the Center for American Progress found: "91 percent of the total weekday talk radio programming is conservative, and 9 percent is progressive," and "2,570 hours and 15 minutes of conservative talk are broadcast on these stations compared to 254 hours of progressive talk—10 times as much conservative talk as progressive talk." In 2010, the top conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh had a weekly listenership of 15 million, about 6 times as much as the top liberal radio host (2.75 million each for Alan Colmes, Ed Schultz). Hate speech is just one of those situations in which the best solution is counter speech not a government ban. There's a reason why bloggers like PZ Myers can criticise and even denigrate religion all they want and not get arrested in the US.

Rand Paul supporter stomps on liberal activist and demands that activist apologize!

The Huffington Post reports:

Tim Profitt, the Rand Paul supporter behind the white sneaker that notoriously stomped on a MoveOn activist's head in Kentucky, sought to play down the importance of the incident Tuesday, and went so far as to ask the victim for an apology.

"I don't think it's that big of a deal," Profitt told WKYT. "I would like for her to apologize to me to be honest with you."

While the victim, Lauren Valle, said Tuesday that she believed the campaign workers' violent reaction to her presence there was "premeditated," Profitt told WKYT that he thought Valle was following a strict protocol with the intent of creating controversy.

A local news report including footage of the incident is here...warning: the video contains violent content, viewer discretion is advised.

This is just so fucked up I'm tempted to write this parody of OneRepublic's "Apologize" to reflect Tim Profitt's mind (this link is the Timbaland remix; original version here): (lyrics here):

(VERSE 1)
I just pulled off your wig
And shoved you to the ground,
Now I'm stomping on your head
So hard you can't get out,

You tell me that you're hurting,
Then you go and call me out, but wait,
You tell me to say sorry
But I'd rather turn around, and say

(CHORUS)
I don't need to apologize, but you do!
I said I don't need to apologize, but you do!
I don't...

(VERSE 2)
Democrats have no chance, they will fall,
get shot and lose
Lauren, you deserved what you got
So don't try to sue

Americans are voting red, firing all the blues
So please sa-ay...
Sorry that you came here
Tricking us into welcoming you
I hate your face!

(CHORUS)

So fuck Tim Profitt and his idiotic irresponsible ways. James O'Keefe anyone? Stay classy, Mr. Profitt!

Finally, I'd just like to say that Rand Paul is a kook. What kind of respectable politician would say that businesses have the right not to follow the Civil Rights Act?

Obligatory "I'm back" post

What blocked me from blogging was: Twitter, too much Facebook, a clogged DVR, school, and concerns about way too much other stuff besides this website.

In brief:

• I finished my 2nd semester at SJSU with yet another great GPA (3.686) and average 3.867.
• A couple weeks ago, I enrolled in all but one of my classes for the fall semester. Right now I'm taking Physics 4A (Mechanics) at San Jose City College so that I can take PHYS 51 (Electricity & Magnetism) next semester. Problem is? All sections at SJSU for that class are full and so I'm waitlisted there right now and might take that class at junior college (in which case it's called Phys 4B).
• I just began watching That '70s Show again thanks to KICU. Apparently the last season's opening titles used a "circle" format rather than the car.
• The Steve Wilkos Show has new episodes this week after a monthlong (?) hiatus.
• President Obama just nominated Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the US Supreme Court, and the Senate held confirmation hearings on the last week of June. Obama's second nominee to Supreme Court, and second woman overall. Kagan has no judicial experience but as Solicitor General has argued many cases to Supreme Court on behalf of the US government.
  
• A jury in Los Angeles found former Bay Area Rapid Transit police officer Johannes Mehserle guilty of involuntary manslaughter in his fatal shooting of Oscar Grant at the Fruitvale BART Station in Oakland. Although involuntary manslaughter carries just a 2-4 year sentence to state prison, because the jury found that Mehserle personally used a gun to kill Grant, that adds 3-10 years, and thus up to 14 years behind bars. The community in Oakland has believed that Mehserle should've been convicted of 2nd degree murder (15 to life), and thus there was a lot of disappointment.
• I still haven't found a job since November besides one day working at a polling place during the June 8 primary election. Oh well, I think a lot of people have it worse.
• Michael Jackson died on June 25, 2009. Just 11 days before the 1st anniversary of Jackson's death, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor ruled that Dr. Conrad Murray, the doctor who prescribed drugs to Jackson days before he died, may keep his medical license! Grr!
  

Kudos to the FCC for ruling "Saving Private Ryan" not indecent

On Veteran's Day 2004, several ABC affiliates in the US pre-empted the network's national showing of the 1998 Oscar-winning film Saving Private Ryan because of its numerous use of profanity (such as the F-word) and graphic violence...all intended to depict the realities of World War II. Nine months earlier, Justin Timberlake exposed one of Janet Jackson's breasts at the Super Bowl XXXVIII halftime show. For that incident, the broadcasting network CBS was fined $550,000 in September 2004. (This fine is currently under legal review in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals following an order by the US Supreme Court)

Right now I'm watching the Frontline documentary "Obama's War". It was shown on Oct. 13, 2009, on primetime on PBS. In my area, KQED at 8PM. I don't know whichever parental guidelines rating (like TV-PG, etc.) that it got since it wasn't shown on screen, but there was a viewer discretion screen that said "tonight's program contains graphic imagery". The clips of military members engaged in war in Afghanistan left the F-words uncensored. In an era where groups like the Parents Television Council have intimidated networks into censorship, I applaud PBS for choosing to leave the profanity to show the realities of the environment where the men and women fighting for our freedom inhabit every day while we enjoy our luxurious lives in the free world. It's as verbally rough as it's geographically, since in the middle east days can get even hotter than in Las Vegas.

I googled to see if anyone's reacted to this also. Read Daniel Hennis's comment on this article:

I was watching PBS last night, the program about the current situation with Afghanistan and Pakistan. I was greatly disturbed that the f-word was left in, clear as a bell, THREE times in less than thirty seconds. I reported it to the FCC (because I doubt PBS's elitist leftist program managers would care to do anything about it otherwise). Normally, I allow my children to watch SOME of PBS's programming, but it's falling on my popularity list. I can tolerate some of the socialist indoctrination, but I will not tolerate profanity of that magnitude.

Daniel Hennis, Kuna, ID

Well Daniel, your complaint will be likely flushed down the john...the FCC will most likely not fine PBS as it did to ABC back in 2004 for Saving Private Ryan.

Two other comments on this article accused the title of having a bias against Obama. Other comments praised the documentary for being better than most mainstream reporting.

14 raucous protestors arrested at UC Regents meeting

Previously, I blogged about the heckling incidents of the year: at Congress members' town halls, the confirmation hearings for Sonia Sotomayor, and the MTV Video Music Awards. Today, the San Francisco Chronicle reports that University of California police arrested 14 protesters - students, alumni, faculty, and staff of the UC - for disrupting a regents meeting. The protesters' grievances were over the ongoing budget crisis.

2009: Year of the heckler?

Tonight is the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards. The most talked-about moment of the awards show was when rapper Kanye West interrupted country-pop singer Taylor Swift's acceptance speech for her video "You Belong With Me".

MTV Shows

Kanye West has had a reputation for angry outbursts before at MTV award shows, notably in last year's European Music Awards and in the 2004 American Music Awards and 2006 MTV EMA's too. Blogger Pete Cashmore at Mashable asks whether this was probably a staged stunt, as happened three months earlier at the MTV Movie Awards when Sacha Baron Cohen "mooned" Eminem in the stands. Well since Taylor Swift and her mother were clearly upset by this mess, and West was evicted from the show, and Beyonce (won Best Video for "Single Ladies (Put a Ring On It)" even offered Swift another chance to speak, I hope it was staged, or else I will hate Kanye West even more than when he did the terrible auto-tuned album 808s & Heartbreak. Even other VMA nominees and winners have spoken out against West. Finally, he did the mandatory thing: apologize.

From all this, and maybe some raunchy Russell Brand jokes I missed because I don't have cable but heard about the Kanye incident from my friends, I wonder if the Parents Television Council is gonna raise a fuss over the awards, as they did last year.

This all reminds me of past incidents this summer where there were openly disruptive hecklers.

For example, as various members of Congress held town hall meetings to address President Barack Obama's proposed health care reform, conservatives have disrupted the speaking Congress members loudly and raucously because they feel that the reform is "socialism" and an oppressive "government takeover of health care". Here are some NBC Nightly News reports about that nonsense:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

In August, the Senate held confirmation hearings for then-Judge Sonia Sotomayor. An abortion protestor hollered while Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) interviewed Sotomayor. Others followed. Of course, once again by conservatives concerned over the apparent liberalism of Sotomayor. But she was confirmed anyway.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

And most recently before the Video Music Awards, Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) yelled, "You lie!" at President Obama when he accurately stated that health care reform will not serve illegal immigrants.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) has died

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, a liberal Democrat who championed universal health care among other causes, has died from brain cancer at the age of 77. He had been in the senate since 1962.

This summer is gonna be best remembered by a bad economy and deaths of notable people. On August 11, Edward's older sister Eunice Kennedy Shriver, founder of the Special Olympics, also died.

The deaths just keep on coming this summer...

It all started with the passings of pop culture icons David Carradine, Farrah Fawcett, Ed McMahon, and Michael Jackson this June. And over the past week, we've seen the passings of three more icons: former South Korean president Kim Dae-jung (today, aged 85), conservative columnist and Valerie Plame leaker Robert Novak, and rock musician and electric guitar pioneer Les Paul (August 13, 94).

Speaking of Kim, when I was researching about Kim, I came upon this 1998 CNN article covering his presidential inauguration. That article reported that among his dignitaries were Jackson and former Philippines president Corazon Aquino, both of whom died this summer.

Obama's press conference: The orchestra-pit theory in action

Consider Roger Ailes's famous question: "If you have two guys on a stage and one guy says, 'I have a solution to the Middle East problem,' and the other guy falls in the orchestra pit, who do you think is going to be on the evening news?"

Now, the news media has demonstrated this clearly by emphasizing the very last question from Wednesday's televised primetime news conference, when reporter Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times asked the President about the Cambridge police wrongly arresting Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates. Obama suggested the police "acted stupidly". That was just one question in a news conference where most of the 10 questions were about health care reform. Guess what really made headlines? Watch the videos below and see for yourself.

NBC's Today, July 23

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Compare this to how much time was spent to cover the health care aspects:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

On the satirical Daily Show, Jon Stewart hosts a properly proportional segment:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
White House M.D.
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Joke of the Day

Sotomayor confirmation hearings began today

So far today the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor have been just the Senate Judiciary Committee members' commentary and Sotomayor's speech. Her speech was so deep, articulate, and moving, with her narrative of how her Puerto Rican immigrant mother worked hard with her and her brother despite their low income. As for the senators, Republicans pressed Sotomayor with the usual "activist judge"/alleged racism, while Democrats had all sorts of hopeful and praising things to say. Heck, even South Carolina Republican Lindsay Graham decided to be nice for once.

There were also some celebrity guest appearances at today's session. When the newly elected Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) - yes, the former Saturday Night Live/Air America Radio star Al Franken, in case you've been living in a cave all year - began his remarks, Norma McCorvey (the Jane Roe of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court case) hollered along with another protestor. Then, when another Democrat, Dianne Feinstein of my home state California, began speaking, another protestor yelled: "Her record--What about the unborn. Abortion is murder! Stop the genocide of unborn Latinos!" Then, SJC chair Patrick Leahy (D-VT) actually had to remind the audience to remain silent for the rest of the session. I actually saw the Feinstein incident live on PBS (locally on the digital KQED World channel). Because I always wake up late during the summer, I missed most of the earlier senators remarks. The hearings started at 10AM Eastern, which is 7AM in the Pacific Time Zone. Unfortunately, 10AM is my average wake-up time when there's nothing to do during the day. I think I need to move to the East Coast if I want to keep my sleep schedule and political informacy.

But later during the afternoon on The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer (KQED broadcasts it live from Washington, that's why it's on at 3PM PT), I got to hear a condensed version of the session, but not Franken. You can watch Franken getting interrupted on the Washington Post website.

Tomorrow, I'll wake up early to watch Round 2 of the hearings.

The recession and violent crime (updated)

With the economy in recession since the banks failed back in the fall, the War in Iraq draining millions or billions of dollars daily from the government's budget, and jobs disappearing as time goes by, there seems to be a spike of violent crime--at least in the world of the news media.
On Feb. 15, an NBC Nightly News report covered funding cuts for various American police departments

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Examples:
- Nov. 16, 2008: Computer engineer Jing Hua Wu, who was laid off from his job at Santa Clara semiconductor company SiPort, kills SiPort CEO Sid Agrawal, vice president of operations Brian Pugh, and human resources head Marilyn Lewis.
- Feb. 8, 2009: R&B singer Chris Brown assaults girlfriend/singer Rihanna, gets arrested, and will be arraigned on Monday, Apr. 6. This incident was the subject of non-stop discussion that month, and Rihanna cancelled her Grammy Award performance on that day because of the attack. Brown pled not guilty.
- March 8, 2009: Rev. Fred Winters is shot to death during a sermon.
- March 10, 2009: Murder-suicide in Alabama
- March 20, 2009: Following hateful/destructive vandalism, threats of a school shooting circulated the Internet last night. That led the majority of students not to show up at Evergreen Valley High School today. During the same week, rumors spread about gang initiation meetings
- March 21, 2009: In a shootout, high-school dropout and parolee Lovelle Mixon kills four Oakland police officers before being shot dead himself.
- March 29, 2009: Devan Kalathat murders four family members and wounds his wife; after the shooting he kills himself.
- April 3, 2009: Vietnamese immigrant Jiverly Wong (born Voong) shoots dead two people at a Binghamton, N.Y. immigration center. He recently lost a job.
- April 4, 2009: Richard Poplawski shoots three Pittsburgh police officers to death and wounds two others when they came responding to a domestic dispute call. Poplawski was expelled from Catholic high school and joined the Marines to seek his GED. At least he's now in custody.
- Later that day, a father in Seattle killed all five of his children and committed suicide. His name is James Harrison.
- April 7: Another murder-suicide, this time in Alabama, but not related to the older one
- April 9: Gunman kills one, injures three at Korean Christian retreat in Riverside County, Calif.; armed man in police pursuit over three felony warrants disrupts traffic in I-80 near Lake Tahoe, Calif.
- April 11: Sunday School teacher Melissa Huckaby is arrested for the murder of 8-year-old Sandra Cantu, who'd been missing since March 27 and found dead April 6. Rennie Pratt is arrested for allegedly murdering her boyfriend, Oakland attorney Michael Porcella last night.
- This weekend two of the network news magazines did stories on gun policy: CBS's "60 Minutes" and ABC's "20/20"
- April 16: Hospital worker kills two co-workers & himself; 8- and 10-year old boys arrested for armed robbery attempt
- April 17: In Cupertino, Calif.: Couple attacked, with husband severly injured and wife killed; two fifth-graders in San Jose are suspended for a failed "stabbing-for-hire". A man is stabbed on his way to the food store and is identified a week later as Enrique Flores.
- April 24: "A man was shot and killed in East Oakland in broad daylight Friday in the city's fourth homicide in a week, police said."
- April 25: Marketing professor George Zinkhan of the University of Georgia is a suspect in an off-campus shooting.
- April 26: Children hit by gunfire in Oakland
- more?

Where's the morality of pro-traditional marriage figures?

It seems hard these days to find a "morally straight" advocate of traditional marriage (the "man and woman" type). A list of pundits (politicians, activists, etc.) serves to prove my point here. But first let me share my latest disappointment.

On Saturday, I watched a recording of the previous day's episode of Dateline NBC where Ann Curry interviewed pastor Rick Warren. Rev. Warren will speak at Pres.-Elect Obama's inauguration ceremony on Jan. 20, 2009 (the day after MLK, surprise!) Curry asked questions about the bad state of the economy and then on his position on "same-sex" marriage. Warren brought up some pretty good points in his interview that I bet no one could ever disprove. NBC News has posted a transcript on its website and a link to a video.

But then at the end of the interview Warren admitted this:

"I don't think gay marriage is any threat to marriage. So that's not why I'm voting the way I did. I think divorce is a bigger problem to marriage than anything else."

Whoa wait a second. Rev. Warren, if you really really think that divorce is so much more of a problem than SSM, why don't the churches start enacting anti-divorce laws? I predict that we'll see "Prop. 8.5" that'll outlaw divorce in the 2010 election ballot. Naw, I ain't serious, but I'm just saying that if the conservative "pro-family" activists really want a perfect society they've got to go after everything else that's wrong with the world.

And now I dare you to challenge these of Rev. Warren's remarks:
"Well, here what I'm saying. I've had many gay friends tell me, "Well, Rick, why shouldn't I have multiple sexual partners? It's the natural thing to do." Well, just because it seems natural doesn't mean it's best for you or society. I'm naturally inclined to have sex with every beautiful woman I see. But that doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. And why should I reign in my natural impulses and you say, "Well, because I have natural impulses towards the same sex, I shouldn't have to reign them in." Well, I disagree. I think that's part of maturity. I think it's part of delayed gratification. I think it's part of character."

"For 5,000 years every single culture and every single religion has defined marriage as a man and a woman, not just Christianity [but also] Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism."

"Tolerance used to mean, "I treat you with respect even though we disagree." Some people want tolerance to mean now that all ideas are equally valid. That's nonsense. There are some things that are right and there are some things that are wrong."

And now my list of "hypocritical" proponents of "traditional love"
Unfaithful = having divorced or cheated, or just hypocritical on opinion against alternative marriage
Faithful = married to one partner constantly; remarriage only due to death of current partner
The morality of...Pro-"Traditional Marriage" politicians
Unfaithful
- Dick Cheney (Vice President, Republican, 2001-2009) - The Bush/Cheney team has like Clinton/Gore back in the day pushed for laws banning same-sex marriage, such as the Federal Marriage Amendment. But VP Cheney had no problem with his own daughter Mary getting married to another woman and having children with her.
- Bill Clinton (President, Democrat, 1993-2001) - signed Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 - but nearly cheated on Hillary! Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey sued him for sexual harassment; and then Bill's wild adventure with that White House intern almost got him expelled from office.
- Newt Gingrich (former Speaker of the House under Clinton) - From a man who's been married four times in his lifetime and has a lesbian half-sister who works for the pro-gay group Human Rights Campaign, try believing his proclamations supporting traditional marriage. Seriously!
- Phyllis Schlafly (activist, president of Eagle Forum) - Although she's an opponent of SSM, one of her sons, John, is gay.
- David Vitter (Senator, Louisiana, Republican, 2005-present) - typical Republican/conservative opponent of same-sex marriage but was a client of the "DC Madam" prostition ring.
Faithful
- Larry Craig (Senator, Idaho, Republican, 1981-2008) - voted for DOMA and other oppositions to same-sex marriage; got arrested over the Minneapolis airport bathroom incident, doesn't exactly qualify as a gay act; stated in news conference he "love[s] his wife"

Newstalgia on Bush

By now, a lot of Americans still remember the incident where Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zaidi threw his shoes at President Bush during a press conference. That incident has been played often on the news, late-night shows, and even spun off into online Flash games!

With George W. Bush leaving office in about 30 days from today, why not have a look back at a funny incident that happened with Bush's father, George H.W. Bush, who served as Ronald Reagan's vice president from 1981-1989 and President from 1989-1993.


Here's a New York Times article on the incident. Happy holidays!