It's hard to know what to make of Doug Hoffman's defeat last night. After the foam-flecked Glennbeckery, after Sarah's transfusion of roguery by proxy and a million bucks from the Club for Growth, the voters clubbed him with the first Democratic victory in his backwoods Republican bailiwick since the U.S. Grant administration. He had everything going for him but the votes writes Chris Kelly at The Huffington Post.
Everyone seems to want to make yesterday's elections seem like a precursor, an omen and a bad one for Democrats -- at least everyone who gets paid to make a ratings-generating ruckus. I'm not sure what it proves other than that third party candidates have little credibility, have no coat tails to ride on and don't benefit from party loyalty even when the party's big guns are saluting him.
"I believe America is turning the page to a new dawn"
said Hoffman. It's easy to say his metaphors are mixed and I think almost as easy to believe the chances of the Freakazoid Right for a comeback are too.
This week’s session of the series, “Women on the Evolutionary Edge” continues the discussion with this week’s guest speaker was Zen teacher, Diane Musho Hamilton. She has an impressive list of accomplishments as do all the slated speakers. The topic was about the adaption of women from the more “masculine” aggressive model of the recent past back to a more feminine model. The goal is to create a unique power base embracing both feminine and masculine qualities.
We women are being called to “mother” the earth like we “mother” our children and families. But this is not about stepping away from all we have accomplished but rather to be powerful and active agents of change, moving toward our highest potential while discovering how to be comfortable with our feminine side.
Women need to strive toward a true collaboration with men, fostering a deep mutual respect for our similarities and our differences, allowing for positive advancement.
And while there is a lot of positive energy in these sessions, there is also a need to explore some of the negative aspects that have affected women over the years. Without addressing our failings we cannot hope to move forward into more influential positions worldwide. And so we must own our reluctance to take full responsibility for our past positions. By allowing men to “take care of” us, we relinquished our ability to move up the ladder of corporate and political success. And as the feminist movement took hold and women began to push against those glass ceilings, we did not always support and encourage each other. In fact, it has been common for women to compete and behave aggressively toward each other.
We are entering a new era where many of our young women have no personal knowledge of gender bias. They are free to pursue whatever interests them without the stigma of having to consider if they are trying to do “men’s” work instead of “women’s work.” In order for both genders to work together to improve the world we live in, we must leave behind outdated labels and unproductive rivalries.
Women taking responsibility not only aids in advancing women’s equality but it also removes some of the burden from men who no longer have to be in the lead to define their masculinity and there would be much less stress for everyone if we work side by side, sharing the responsibility.
What a wonderful world THAT would be!
Peace & Love, Rocky
UPDATE!
My friend, Dan at Through The Woodsblog is doing a series of posts of quotes from people with November birthdays and he has a really terrific post on Sojourner Truth that seemed fitting to this post so, with his permission, I have lifted an excerpt:
"Then that little man in black there, he says women can't have as much rights as men, 'cause Christ wasn't a woman! Where did your Christ come from? Where did your Christ come from? From God and a woman! Man had nothing to do with Him.If the first woman God ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down all alone, these women together ought to be able to turn it back , and get it right side up again! And now they is asking to do it, the men better let them.Obliged to you for hearing me, and now old Sojourner ain't got nothing more to say."
Oddly enough, before the Newsweek staff announced this project my dear friend Marc Mitchell had already written two chapters of his own parody, titled Going Rouge: an American Life.
Chapter 1. To begin my life with the beginning of my life, I record that I was born. I can prove it. Birth certificates, particularly long-form birth certificates, are a handy thing to have, and I have one. It says plainly, that I was most definitely born in Sandpoint, Idaho, to Sarah (my mother) and Charles (my father) Heath (their last name, which I proudly took). All of my relatives are American. We were all born in the US, so I am an American, and this is my American life.
You know, people who aren’t born American are unfortunate souls. In my travels, and when looking out of my kitchen window at the land beyond, I can see into the eyes of the foreign people, and there’s nothing in those eyes but sadness and yearning. When I speak to people in other countries, they hang on my every word, waiting for me to tell them how wonderful they are, perhaps, or that everything is okay even though they’re not from Alaska. Or Idaho. Or any of the states comprising real America.
I recently went to Taiwan, I think, and was struck by the despair of the Chinese people who want desperately to be American, but can’t be because their government is Chinese. I said to the people, “It’s okay. Not all of us can be as lucky as me. America needs you to make our stuff. You serve a purpose.” A timid young man in the third row raised his hand and spoke in the native tongue--the Chinese have a beautiful language! It’s so full of vowels!--which the interpreter interpreted for me: “But lovely Sarah, if we can’t be American, we at least want to have you as our leader.”
I got an e-mail from Texas Senator John Cornyn this morning. Somehow I had the urge to take another shower. In the relentless crusade to mock, rebuke, deride, insult, sneer at and taunt the "opposition"Cornyn is an endless cornucopia of crepuscular reasoning and shady opinions, such as his assertion that the "delays" in supplying Texas and the United States with hundreds of millions of H1N1 vaccinations argue against the public option in health care reform.
"These delays and limited access make me question whether the government, which cannot run existing public health programs competently, should be trusted with even more responsibility – such as running a new government health plan. " [italics mine]
Of course Cornyn doesn't give examples of how the government can't run health care, either from Medicare, the Veteran's Administration or indeed from the Government health careCornyn and his cronies enjoy. Of course he doesn't have to, he's preaching to Republicans -- a faith-based group who never seem to question thetenebrous tenets of that faith. The Government just can't do anything right: Reagan said so and the Republicans are hell bent for leather to make sure it's self-fulfilling.
Perhaps John can explain what the failure of the oil industry that supports him to end oil shortages and give us 29 cents a gallon gasoline again argues for or against, or why we shouldn't say that Exxon can't run anything properly, including keeping tanker captains sober. One offensively stupid argument deserves another, I should think, and the argument that the Government can't do anything and so shouldn't be allowed to do anything is a stupid argument and an annoying one coming from someone who is part of the government and is stalling, obfuscating and sabotaging health care reform -- right after having supported Bush's massive increases of unaccountable executive power and failed wars for 8 years.
No, A public option for health care is a
"Trojan horse that will ultimately lead to a government takeover of our health care system. "
says John Cornyn: another way of invoking the slippery slope fallacy. If we allow A we'll allow A+B and if we allow A+B, we'll allow A+B+C. . . Of course any truth to this is no more than accidental because none of these steps compel the other, That's why we call it a fallacy, but again, he's arguing to Republicans and Lone Star Republicans at that, not exactly a constellation bright enough to light up the sky. Funny that he didn't argue that an invasion of Iraq would lead to a "government takeover" of the world or that warrantless surveillance and the end of Habeas Corpus would lead to a police state.
No, we're not on a slippery slope toward invading Ireland, the US Postal Service isn't going to take over DHL or UPS or FedEx and none of those could handle a minute fraction of the envelopes, post cards, advertising fliers or periodicals the USPS delivers. No, the public schools aren't going to take over the private schools and the Social Security Administration isn't going to take over your pension. The County Hospital or the VA hospital isn't going to take over the private hospitals. It isn't the "Government" producing the vaccines and if we had to depend on the profitability of doing that to induce the pharmaceutical industry to do it, we'd have far greater shortages and tens of millions who wouldn't get any and couldn't afford it and would help the disease spread because of it. Of course I'm sure Tex Cornyn will get his vaccination, one way or another. He'll get it for free. He gets all his health care for free, so why should he give a Texas damn about you?
Would you buy a used car from this man? That used to be a popular phrase back in the Nixon years when we were asked to buy his "secret plan to win the war." The secret was that there was no plan, but never mind, there was nothing to win and we didn't win it.
It's the first thing that comes to mind listening to the last ditch effort by Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell who is still telling us the public option will kill us all, although you can see he's having a hard time keeping his face straight while doing it. It's a prodigious effort of course, since he and his henchmen all have government health care just like the French and the Norwegians and the Germans and everyone else and all too many of them live to really ripe old ages because of it.
"I think if you have any kind of government insurance program, you're going to be stuck with it and it will lead us in the direction of the European style, you know, sort of British-style, single payer, government run system, and those systems are known for delays, denial of care and, you know, if your particular malady doesn't fit the government regulation, you don't get the medication. And it may cost you your life. I mean, we don't want to go down that path."
Yes, we do want to go down that path -- the majority of us anyway -- and it's an argument dependent on American ignorance of what the rest of the modern world enjoys and benefits from and chooses to have. There is no slope here, it's only his logic and his grasp of truth that's slippery. The problem with our health care cartel system is exactly the problem he tells us we will have if we abandon it and the coverage we have to buy now isn't even available to millions and millions. It may cost you your life and it's cost millions of lives already.
No, I wouldn't buy a load of fertilizer from this man and that's what he's selling and no matter how many times the truth is flung back at him, he'll continue. He's paid handsomely to continue and he's got a great health care plan as well which isn't known for denial, delay or enormous annual price increases like the one we have if we're lucky, young, in a good job and haven't ever been sick.
It's the old Republican song he's singing -- the corporate song, the best money can buy: I've got mine and screw you.
Pat Robertson -- where do I begin? I don't know whether his record speaks worse of American stupidity or of his character.
No, I'm not talking about the soliciting of funds for relief in Rwanda that actually were spent on Diamond mining operations in Zaire with dictator President Mobutu Sese Seko and to benefit other African genocidal madmen. I'm not talking about questionable use of Katrina relief funds or various tax-evasion charges. This Bozo runs a faith-based circus of stupidity and one of his side show acts is to be the grinch who stole Halloween or All Saints Day as it was known for a while.
Robertson's God forsaken parody of a broadcasting network, CBN, has a dire warning on its blog about virtually all Halloween candy having been "prayed over" by witches and carrying curses and spells which will be absorbed by any children eating it. Halloween is dangerous, it warns. Don't buy candy in October! It's a holy day, but if it's not a Christian holy day, it's a SATANIC holy day. Nice insult to the vast majority of humanity that's given up belief that ancient Celtic religious practices had anything to do with the Devil the Christians invented to demonize other religions.
"Curses are sent through the tricks and treats of the innocent whether they get it by going door to door or by purchasing it from the local grocery store." Says CBN.com
The colors orange brown and red are dedicated to Satan. Respect for the Earth is Satanic. Bonfires are about Satan, even the harvest is about Satan. Everything he doesn't like is Satan -- everything is Satan and the world is full of evil entities and magic and spells and his followers listen with a straight face.
I could go on, but there's enough raging pathological, libelous insanity and foul ugliness to drive any normal person to projectile vomiting. Read it yourself,** but there's something wrong with a nation that once considered this man for President, something insane about a Nation that still talks about witches and spells and a political party that embraces this ugly medieval madness.
** Since writing this last night, the article about witches, Halloween and demonic tootsie rolls has been removed from the site.View the cached article
That guy in front of you, the one who can't stay in his lane, who takes 20 seconds to respond to the light changing to green, who needs four lanes to make a turn, who slows down for green lights and sails through the red -- who amongst us hasn't made rude anatomical and ancestral references? Perhaps we should be more tolerant.
Steven Cramer, a neurology professor at the University of California Irvine, has published a study in Cerebral Cortex that indicates the presence of a gene variation in about 30% of the population that makes them not only bad drivers, but drivers that don't learn from their mistakes. I've read many studies showing that nearly all accidents are caused by a small percentage of drivers and that that group is not distinguished by high speed driving. They're just bad drivers and maybe we now have some idea why. As to whether this genetic marker occurs more frequently in some population segments? Why yes, I do have a ten foot pole, but it's on my boat and I'm not going there, thank you.
I don't want to put too much faith in one study, but I do like studies that confirm my prejudices and maybe the next time some idiot looks me in the eyes and pulls out onto the highway 5 feet in front of me or stops on the entrance ramp or cruises through the red making a right turn, I'll roll down the window and shout "You miserable, brain-derived neurotrophic factor deprived mutant!" instead of the usual.
Not long ago the Dalai Lama made a stunning statement; “The world will be saved by the western woman.”
This was spoken not as just an observation or opinion but also as a directive to women everywhere. What would prompt this purported holy man of Tibet to make such a decree?
There has been a shift of sorts happening over the last decade or so that is culminating in a redefining of gender roles. Women are bumping into fewer and fewer “glass ceilings”. They are holding positions of power and influence worldwide. Many times men are choosing to take on more domestic roles or are being pushed into such due to job loss.
This role reversal has become pretty mainstream and we are no longer surprised by it but what is different is the manner in which women approach their new role as monetary provider/ position of power.
In the past, women adopted a “masculine” approach to workplace promotions, sacrificing their feminine side in order to be taken seriously in a “man’s world.” Now some very influential women are trying to unite the many groups of women awakening to their potential into a larger, more cohesive group able to tackle some of the most difficult challenges of our time. Maria Shriver has called attention to this shift with her annual Women’s Conference. There is also an online series taking place each week bringing together thousands of women from around the world with extraordinary women visionaries as guest speakers.
The series centers around the question, “What is our role as women in creating the future of our world?” The series is called “Women on the Evolutionary Edge.” If you want to register for the series, you can do so HERE. It is never too late and you can join anytime. It has grown in just a few weeks to 15,000 registered participants from around the globe! And they are expecting many more in the coming weeks.
There are several ways to participate; you can call in and listen and then take part in a post discussion via phone or you can listen live and instant message. If you miss it completely as I had to this weekend because of a prior commitment, you have the option to download and listen to the recorded session.
This past week’s guest was Dr Jean Huston. Doesn’t ring a bell? Don’t feel bad, I vaguely recognize only a name or two on the list. But listening to Jean was illuminating. She has lived long enough to have known, Einstein, Helen Keller, Eleanor Roosevelt and Margaret Mead. You can google her to read about her extensive list of accomplishments and experiences.
The focus of this week’s session was on women working together to learn how to wake up to our potential strength and creativity, and then to empower other women by teaching them to do the same. Women have in them the capacity to be a part of the greatest change in world history, consciously choosing to practice joy and share it with others. That means abandoning whining and victimhood. We must come together and stand together in celebration of who we are, confident in the power we have to foster positive changes in our world.
The purpose of this awakening is not to take over the world but rather to work with men in partnership, inviting them to join the conversation and work in unison to create a sustainable future.
If any other women made it to this week’s session and have something to add, email me and I will post it below my observations. And, don’t forget, it’s not too late to participate HERE.
No offense intended to the Buddhists out there, but the middle path is often the road to hell. While I'm as apt to ask why we can't just get along as any other exhausted and beat up person, I'm not about to attempt it with the people who tell me that it's OK to launch into hysterical fugues of hyperbole about leading Democrats and things they never said or did, but insist that reacting to it in any way but submissive whimpering is nastiness or name-calling and a justification for further libel, slander, bigotry and threats.
I'm disgusted enough to dream about my own gun-toting tea party when citing established facts or exposing blatant lies of the previous administration are described as being just as bad as the furious lies about death panels, birth certificates and Presidential Marxism. Citing massive evidence for global warming is just as bad as comparing Democrats to Communists. Detailed studies showing that certain economic policies produce recessions, that markets self-regulate only within certain limits is just as bad as incitement to murder the President's family, as accusing him of murdering his grandmother and planning to murder yours. It seems to escape a great number of trolls that calling a thief a thief is not the same as accusing an honest man of stealing. Truth matters, facts matter and nothing but weeds grow in the space between facts and lies.
Is retaliation really the equivalent of unprovoked aggression, is self-defense? I don't think so. Is there a reasonable middle ground in an unreasonable attack against reason? I don't think so. Where after all can a middle ground exist between lies and truth; between insane accusations of Marxism or Fascism or extending Medicare being just like Pol Pot or Leon Trotsky? And where does the accusation of being the most, far-left radical Liberal ever to sit in the Senate intersect with the actual Obama who so far seems far too conservative for the people who voted for change?
Are we really the "party of hate" for "picking on" poor Rush for engaging in unprovoked and dishonest slander or trying to defend against him? Is there really any relationship between the label Liberal and the attempt to identify it with irrational hate, beyond the wish of an unscrupulous aggressor to distract us from discussing truth and responsibility?
No, the shadow world, the bizarre country between whatever the truth is and the worn out, beat up used car the Republican apologists are trying to sell is down some rabbit hole somewhere. Some twilight zone where all the terrible things we said about Nixon were untrue and just political, but none the less Obama, by beginning to denounce some of the lies told about him is "building an enemies list" just like Nixon. Nixon wasn't a bad guy they say; it was all political, but Obama is a bad guy for being like him -- even when he isn't. I told you this was a strange land.
Old Nixonian Lamar Alexander suggests that the administration might, like Nixon adviser and Watergate felon Chuck Colson, be planning to "use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies." So what advice is Lamar giving here? Obama should, he suggests, stop blaming the banks, should stop chastising the insurance companies, stop taking advice from advisers Congress hasn't approved ( remember when Bush asserted his right to do so and our non-right to know who they were or what they said?) and stop "calling out" members of congress who disagree with his policies. That's like "street brawling." Calling a lie a lie? That's the equivalent of Nixon's plan to use the IRS to "go after the Jews." That's just like burglary, Arson and obstruction of Justice!
Not.
Curiouser and curiouser, this path between truth and fiction and somewhere Lewis Carroll is watching this through a looking glass.
