Got my Sunday paper and my Mystic Monk coffee

First of all, peeps, the Sunday paper made me crazy today. People running around yapping about how Obama wants to take us all over like Big Brother and the gubmint just stomps on our liberties and controls our lives in minute detail... Then these same people, I bet you anything, I mean, practically I would bet my own soul if it were worth betting, that the staff, including the principal at Laramie Junior High School, who say a boy can't wear a wristband saying "I heart boobies" to support breast cancer awareness because the word "boobies" could offend someone... I bet these very same freaked out control freaks who are squandering an opportunity to do what the wristband is intended to do: bring up awareness and discussion of a pretty important and grave topic- are those same complainers about how the gubmint steps all over their rights.

And then these ranchers up in the Meeteetse area who want to keep a bunch of monks and their monastery out... ostensibly concerned about water, wildlife and traffic... I bet they bitch about the gubmint wanting to control them, too. Just like they want to control a few guys who keep to themselves for the most part. WTF, people? Come on, these guys roast coffee. And truly, do they look all that bad to you?

Then, to make the reading of the Sunday paper just about as unrelaxing as it can possibly get: The USA Weekend magazine or whatever it's called that arrives inside the local paper features an article about how brave Jon Stewart is for broadcasting the "fake" news. Argh?

These are strange times indeed. And really screwed up.

UWYo President Tom Buchanan to Eat Crow- NOT likely!

Peeps, I heard him on the radio this morning, recorded at the little panel discussion on freedom of expression in academia at the Hilton Garden yesterday (that's the upscale locale to make events look fancier than if they were just held in the Union Ballroom or something on campus.) Now, if you know me, if you know the fiasco that occurred when Bucky shut down the Geological Museum, if you have read this blog in the past or Keep Laramie Dinos or any of Meg Lanker's stuff about that or the Bill Ayer's fiasco that occurred last spring, you know that:

1) Our University President is just another businessman in a college suit (as are so many any more), who talks crap, and

2) I think he is full of shite and have confronted him personally on his heinous acts and have received nothing but his red face staring down at the table in reply (which, frankly, is almost satisfactory.)

So, he was saying, in this excerpt I heard on the radio this morning, that he will speak to the university community this coming Thursday about "lessons learned" from the Bill Ayers shenanigans. And do I believe he will own up to his irresponsible behavior? HELLZ no!

Then, to put the icing on the cake, Meg just posted on a favored social media site, a "Perspective" Buckster the Huckster (I like it; may keep it) wrote for the Casper Star Tribune just over a year ago, during the firestorm of protest over naming the Cheney International Center the Cheney International Center, called "Tolerance, Diversity Cut Many Ways."

(Aside, I find it more than a little disturbing that when I enter that building to visit a health professional here on campus, I am faced with a giant portrait of Dick and Lynn... Really, "Dick Cheney," and "health," whether his own, or that of say, US soldiers, Iraqi civilians, etc., just do not belong together, people.)

Anyway, in this "perspective," Bucky said the following:

"I have no quarrel with people expressing their views to UW. But good universities operate on principle, and the principle here is that tolerance and diversity cut many ways. Whether you are Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, Catholic or Protestant, gay or straight, white or black, you are welcome at the University of Wyoming. Should we subject potential donors and the purpose of their gift to public referendum? I think not.

"If we do, we lose sight of the fact that our role is to teach, not to indoctrinate. Good universities cannot distance themselves from all that is controversial. To do so would require rejecting mortgage brokers, bankers, pharmaceutical firms, sports figures, fast food chains, political leaders, historical figures, energy companies, uncommon religious groups, and Middle Eastern countries to name just a few."

Hahahahahahaha.

I am sorry, but you did not welcome Mr. Ayers to campus, did you? DID YOU?

As the Cloud Lurker would say, and has more than once when either Tommy Boy or Dick is mentioned, ew.

"fear is not enough to override the First Amendment."

Take that, you treasonous faux patriots!

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2010/04/william_ayers_must_be_allowed.php

Thanks, Meg Lanker, David Lane, and particularly Judge William Downes, for upholding our constitution, rather than pandering to the malicious shouts of a bunch of scared Wyoming citizens.

America, the Beautiful... Civilized discourse does still exist!

Peeps,

Vernon Shunn Well I appreciate your civilized approach which is more than I can say for some others on this page. Simply stated though, I have nothing against what Bill Ayers had to SAY, I am more against him as an individual and that actions he was involved with and condoned. I am very for free speech and I believe it to be very important but because of who he is not what he had to say was the main reason for his invitation being revoked. It was also revoked because of all the threats towards him, anyone who attended his speech and so on which is a serious safety issue and I dont feel that nobody's life is worth the risk of Bill Ayers visit here. Even though he invitation was revoked he was still paid the 5,000 some dollars he would have received if he had come and that should have compensated for his troubles. The reason I am against this lawsuit is that is for all the wrong reasons, Meg Lanker claims his first amendment was violated which from a particular standpoint some would agree but because that was not the reason his invitation was revoked this lawsuit is just silly and a waste of time. The university chose to sway to the side of caution and not risk an incident which i feel was the correct decision and does not warrant a lawsuit. I am tired of people assuming that this page is an attack on Meg, it clearly is not, it was created for civilized discussion and opinion sharing to inform everyone that mistakes were made and this lawsuit is only going to do more harm than good. I have been told that Meg did not sue when Cheney was allowed to speak but at the same time lives were not threatened and due to the way politics are in today society he would never be cancelled because he is one of the biggest donator's of funds to this university and that is just a side effect of today's politics. I hope this clears some things up for you, and feel free to ask more questions if there is still something I did not explain.

Lisa Cox Thanks! That is incredibly clear. I had an interesting conversation with a friend of mine this morning. Generally we agree politically, and we found ourselves at odds, but the bottom line is that we actually did our homework and had reasons for saying what we did to each other. I was really bummed out to get up this morning, looking forward to discussion, to find that there were all these people using the group as a... I don't know... I just cannot condone aggression like that, any more than I can condone Bill Ayers's violent actions in the 60s (whether or not people were hurt or killed.) It's the violence- and latent violence- that bugs me so much.

Take your point about Cheney: it keeps coming to my mind that it is indeed true that he was not threatened or harmed, despite that there were those who protested his visit. To me, that shows the hope that there are those out there who would hold civilized discourse and use their freedom of speech to protest without aggression in the form of slander, threats or outright physical aggression. On the other hand, BINGO! I think you are right on that the politics of the day dictate who is allowed and who is not, to speak on campus, and that being a reason, as opposed to educational opportunity, for a university administration to make a decision in this instance, is case in point why I have recently sworn off following through with getting a PhD and also have committed that when I am done earning the degree I am working on now, I will not go back into teaching, where I worked for many years.

And, all that said, despite my disagreement with Bill Ayers's past behavior with the Weather Underground, I admire his commitment to researching, forming theory and dispensing information on the injustices in our education system.

I believe I understand you, and I am really appreciative that you have made yourself clear. We can disagree on some aspects of this issue, but more than anything, I'm grateful we can agree on civil discourse rather than knee jerk reaction. The question that has come to my mind over and over around this entire issue, having seen the latter, is "Where does the fear arise that presses people to respond to a situation with such aggression?"

Thanks, and have a good weekend, and I hope that there are more people out there who will speak freely but thoughtfully.

Another reason to be proud to be an American...

... and "Christian:"

http://boingboing.net/2010/03/11/lesbian-panic-shuts.html

May the people of this land never fully step out of the dark ages. Preserve ignorance and intolerance for future generations.

Who says we don't care about our legacy?

Weigh in on the Scales of Justice

First frustration of the day: The Wyoming State legislature is considering passing a law that would consider a person who refused a breathalyzer test guilty of drunk driving.

OK, peeps, I understand those of you who have weighed in on the "don't drink and drive if you don't want to face the penalty," and "give our police officers all the tools we can to keep drunks off the road" and the "people die because of drunk driving and those who have been affected want drunks put away" messages.

But, you are missing my main point: This country is one in which the justice system presumes innocence until guilt is proven. Sure, if you commit a crime, you are guilty. But we don't automatically lock you up or kill you or whatever unless you are proven guilty. We all know this doesn't always work, right? That innocent people have been locked up for life, or killed, for crimes they did not, in fact, commit. Still, presumably we give a person a fair shake.

So, technically speaking, to me it seems that if a person says "no" to a breathalyzer, that person is not necessarily pleading guilty. Nor should that person be assumed guilty. That tool that could help the cops get a drunk off the road is not necessarily accurate. And although someone in this state has noted that the breathalyzer has yet to be shown to be inaccurate, that may be true in this state, but there are places in which the machine has, in fact, been proved inaccurate.

I also recognize that Wyoming is one of a few states that do not yet have on the books the law that says you are as guilty if you refuse as if you fail. None of this alters the fact that machines do not always work, nor does it alter the fact that in this country one is presumed innocent until proven guilty, yet refusing a breathalyzer, FOR ANY REASON, in the future in this state, and currently in several other states, can be used as an admission of guilt.

Boo hiss, guys. I could refuse a breathalyzer test out of the sheer pissed-offedness at being pulled over for speeding, the officer smelling alcohol on my breath because I had a beer with lunch two hours ago, and deciding because I was driving over the speed limit and have the scent on my breath, I am drunk. Come on!

With all due respect to Tim, my friend former cop who busted me for my stance earlier today on Facebook, there are officers out there who are not as goodhearted as he is. Really! Believe it? I've experienced this fact on occasion. But, to put the good cop- bad cop argument to rest, I have also experienced the kindness and helpfulness and humaneness of local, county and state law enforcement. So, for all you cop-haters out there, that's not the argument. They are people, just like the rest of us, prone to good days and bad days, and with the same human frailties we all have, which sometimes include giving someone a hard time who doesn't deserve it, just because we are in a bad mood.

I'm going to leave the subject of the breathalyzer now because there is ample room for debate on this one. I know my stance, and I have made it clear, I think. Lemme know if not, OK? If you've got this far.

Here is the next frustration over the concept of justice and human rights that I have had in the last 24 hours: Last night I read a blurb in TIME mag, and followed up today, about a French ban on the burka for Muslim women. French President Sarkozy supports such a ban, claiming the burka is not welcome in a society that values sexual equality.

What equality is that? If a lady wishes to wear a burka so she doesn't feel naked, as one Muslim woman claimed would be the effect of such a ban, then why can't she? What's really going on here? Where is respect for a person's preferred mode of dress? And I realize I step out on a limb here, because the counter to this question could be, "Is it OK, then, for a 20-year-old man to wear his goddam pants down around his knees so we can all see his plaid boxers? "OK?" OK, while I can't count the times I've told one of my students to haul his britches up so I wouldn't have to look at his underwear, technically speaking, I could look the other way, right?

On that note, my last comment for the day- I'm on a tear- is that I also read all these complaints in TIME's letters about how the aging generation can't find decent young people to hire and that "kids these days" are slackers without any respect for real work. Well, you dumb shites, who brought them up- or, I'm sorry, DIDN'T bring them up- to lack fundamental respect for people and work and the world. What the hell do you think they're trying to say? Duh.

I have to get off here and back to work before I blow a fuse. Before I leave, though, I love when people weigh in. Please do.

BTW, I totally missed my chance to yap with Bill Gates yesterday. Huh

Even the Swiss Are Rude.

Stupid, stupid, stupid, and just plain mean.

Vatican and Muslims condemn Swiss minaret ban vote

Religious leaders across the world have criticised Switzerland's referendum vote to ban the building of minarets.

The Vatican joined Muslim figureheads from Indonesia and Egypt, as well as Switzerland, in denouncing the vote as a blow to religious freedom.

France's FM Bernard Kouchner expressed shock at the ban which, he said, showed "intolerance" and should be reversed.

More than 57.5% of voters and 22 out of 26 cantons - or provinces - voted in favour of the ban on Sunday.

The proposal had been put forward by the Swiss People's Party, (SVP), the largest party in parliament, which said minarets were a sign of Islamisation.

More at the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8385893.stm

The best is French FM Koucher's intolerance of intolerance:
"I am a bit shocked by this decision," Mr Kouchner told France's RTL radio on Monday. "It is an expression of intolerance and I detest intolerance."
(Yeah, that's the country where the headscarf caused controversy when the gubmint decided to ban that "religious symbol" in schools.)

I get it, though. People are afraid of other cultures impinging on their own cultural traditions and rights, and that kind of behavior so outmoded, don't you think? I mean, when is the last time a white western country invaded some other nation to impose their own values and ways of living, including religion?

Why People Go Postal?

It is just not OK that I cannot mail a book to someone from the comfort of my own home if I have the book, a big envelope, a roll of tape and plenty of postage stamps and a mailbox right outside the door, if the book weighs more than 13 ounces. No; I am required to take the package to the post office and say, "I am not a terrorist, and inside this package that is labeled 'Media Mail' and looks from the outside, and feels if you touch it, like a book, is a book."

However, I could stick a little anthrax, or some other minute killer, into a regular envelope, attach a regular postage stamp, mail it from my home like a regular letter, by placing the envelope in my mailbox and raising the little red flag, and TADAAAA! People could die.

It's Not Over Yet

I got an e-mail the other day from Don Siegelman saying the 11th Circuit Court of Atlanta will hear his appeal on December 9. Remember him? Former Governor of Alabama that the Bush Administration sent to maximum security prison? Siegelman says, "The hearing will begin at 9:00 A.M. My case may not be the first case to be heard but we are confident it will be over before noon.

"As you know the 11th Circuit Court let me out of prison pending the outcome of my appeal, saying that there were 'substantial questions of law and fact likely to result in a reversal.'

"While we are hopeful, please say a special prayer that the 11th Circuit will rule favorably and that this horrible legal ordeal will finally come to an end.

"Thank you so much for helping to get us this far down the road to freedom: freedom from the Bush administration, freedom from war and racial prejudice and freedom from injustice.

"I am especially grateful for all you have done for my family and me over these past several months and grateful for your help in keeping Congress focused on digging for the truth."

It's not too late to go to http://www.contemptforrove.com/ to encourage your Congresspeople to hold Karl Rove accountable.

That said, we all know that over the last 8 years, the President and the Executive Office of our government have assumed extraordinary powers that place our system of checks and balances in danger. I won't go into detail here. On Saturday night the FFM and I were up late watching Book TV on C-Span 2 (Haha! Yes! I was not the lone geek in this!) Two authors spoke from the Miami Book Show, Naomi Klein, author of "The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism," and Jeremy Scahill, who wrote “Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army." These two talked, among other subjects, of the need to hold current political leaders accountable for the crimes they have committed, before they are able to sneak out of paying for their actions (if they haven't already set forces in motion to make sure they are able to get away scot-free.)

Then, yesterday on a hike, a new friend questioned whether or not it is worthwhile to pursue these people, or whether we the American people should simply look ahead. I am not one to seek revenge, but the idea of allowing people in such power positions to set such dangerous precedents for some reason just really doesn't appeal much to me. Besides, crap, if we can bail out a bunch of richy-rich money guys who screwed up and made bad choices (which they knew they were making) with hundreds of billions of tax dollars, surely the next administration can forego a couple quail-and-lamb suckups, I mean suppers, for the leaders of 20 powerful and up-and-coming nations, to take care of the matter of putting the right people behind bars.

http://www.contemptforrove.com/

http://www.change.gov/

http://www.congress.org/

Double-Sided Sticky Tape

So, this year if you happen to send Christmas presents to disadvantaged kids in foreign lands- you know, the ones who don't have shoes or running water or electricity, and every single one of them peers at his or her pitiful world through big wide puppy-dog eyes waiting for an American to save the day- you can feel like you're doing an extra helpful favor:

Tape measure: X-rays detected from Scotch tape

"...Escobar, a graduate student at the University of California, Los Angeles, reports the work with UCLA colleagues in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.

"He suggests that with some refinements, the process might be harnessed for making inexpensive X-ray machines for paramedics or for places where electricity is expensive or hard to get. After all, you could peel tape or do something similar in such machines with just human power, like cranking."

Don't get me wrong. There are disadvantaged kids in foreign lands, and even in our Own Land. And kids everywhere shouldn't get Christmas presents. They should! Even if the PC Police are out again this year trying to put a moratorium on the use of the word "Christmas" in public, and to apply a hefty fine and perhaps a little jail time on those who don't comply. Presents are fun. Kids should have fun. Grownups, too. Presents for everyone, no matter what our eyes look like or where we live or whether we have shoes to wear or wear them if we have them.

"But," you may ask, "is it SAFE to use Scotch tape? Have I been irradiating myself all these years with undue amounts of x-radiation? Will I die of cancer?" Perhaps you will. Who knows? But not caused by contact with Scotch tape. If that were the case, my Aunt Joan would have shriveled up and gone long ago, and she is still kicking. And I would be bedridden by now, or using up the remainder of my credit card balances on sweet trips to Scotland and Barcelona if I could walk, just before I go.

"Escobar noted that no X-rays are produced in the presence of air. You need to work in a vacuum — not exactly an everyday situation.

"'If you're going to peel tape in a vacuum, you should be extra careful,"'he said. But 'I will continue to use Scotch tape during my daily life, and I think it's safe to do it in your office. No guarantees.'"

OK, so no guarantees on the tape, but no guarantees on anything in life, right? And come to think of it, daily life in a vacuum is a reality for some of us.

Hoarding Regulations in America(?)

This morning I woke to an e-mail from my oldest friend in the world, Sam, entitled, "Hoarding Regulations in America(?)" She had attached some links to the subject of whether or not the government, fed or state, can take our personal stored food, and how much we can legally store in the first place. Interesting subject.

My first thought was, "Obscure law or conspiracy theory?" It seems there is a little bit of both going on.

If you go here: http://www.millennium-ark.net/News_Files/Exec.Orders/EOs.html, you can read about executive orders and a bit of the history surrounding the particular EOs that point to regulation of hoarding and fears of having our stores taken by the government. Here is my response, after reading this little piece, to Sam:

"As the author specifies in bold type, 11051--Provides FEMA complete authorization to put above orders into effect in times of increased international tension of economic or financial crisis. (FEMA will be in control in case of 'National Emergency').

"I believe there is a typo here and that this should read "international tension or economic or financial crisis." The original EO was instituted by FDR in 1939, during the Depression, which was worldwide in scope at that moment. During this time was also the rise of Hitler and the advent of WWII. Both were the case, international tensions and economic crisis, in fact, the economic crisis on a global scale (at least among the industrialized countries, which was instrumental in the war coming so quickly on the heels of WWI, and at all.)

"Now, here is where confusion and panic is allowed to arise, in the manner of conspiracy theory: Later on in the same passage, the author notes that... Who will determine how much food we can have in our house? FEMA. And the amount depends on the needs of all...not your needs or my needs...but the "welfare" of the needy.

"This statement is inaccurate. I mean it is inaccurate in the sense that nowhere do I see how an emergency such as attack by outside forces instigated by international tensions, or financial crash within the country can be or has been reduced, by Executive Order or otherwise, to mean 'welfare of the needy' in the sense that it is portrayed in this second boldface statement. 'Welfare of the needy,' when we are discussing the EOs, or the single EO under which Clinton, for reasons which elude me but that I will certainly research, out of historical and political curiosity, placed those EOs released by FDR, as far as I can glean from the language of the orders would refer to the fact that in such dire times, the entire nation's citizenry would be deemed "needy" to a higher degree than normal, because of a military or financial threat to everyone.

"So, what is implied in the author's statement, that the President could allow FEMA to come take your canned goods away from your cellar to feed someone else, is misleading. The orders, and the order as compiled into one, specify the seizure of people's goods for the purpose of ensuring that everyone has food, medical supplies, water, whatever... during a time of crisis- like rationing during wartime, except that we have to give our stuff up to the common pile. That is the reference of all this business.

"Now, I think it is still within our own individual power to decide whether or not we would 'hoard' our food and hide it so no one else could have it. Crap, I've read those apocalypse books, seen the movies, and I figure, being an anarchist, better to take responsibility upon myself to throw what I have into the pile and then help distribute it, than to be eaten by starving creeps or zombies down the road."

If my interpretation thus far is incorrect, someone let me know, because Sam shared my reply with a lot of people, and I ought to stand corrected if I am wrong.

On further investigation, it appears that Clinton's placement of all those EOs released in 1939 under one EO in 1994 was in direct response to threat of proliferation of WMD. So it says right in the order. What I cannot find, despite several bloggers out there claiming this, evidence that there is carte blanche executive authority to define the national emergency that would give FEMA the go ahead to come knocking at our doors and take away our Rice Krispies. In fact, the panel convened explicitly noted the extension of a National State of Emergency "as defined under United States Code, Title 50" as a resulting point of Clinton's order, and Clinton specifies laws within that code in EO #12919.

For those of you who are still worried, because essentially Clinton's EO gives FEMA, of all previously-proven-to-be-dangerously-ineffective agencies, the power to take control of you and your stuff in whatever time is deemed a National State of Emergency, or because the Bush Administration has lied to the people, and King George himself has time and again taken extreme liberties with his position, I am here to allay your fears! Don't forget that in just a matter of a few months, he will be gone, first of all. And FEMA has been transformed, too, remember? After Katrina? And there is hope for the future:

Peepscapes, John McCain could very well be elected our next President. And he is not getting any younger. Sarah Palin could become, by default, President of the United States of America. And then you'll have a mommy to take care of you and tell you what to do.

But, before I go to work, the best thing about all this? Title 50 of the United States Code, which outlines the role of war and national defense for this country once contained a chapter devoted entirely to Interference with Homing Pigeons Owned by the United States. Of course, it was repealed in 1948.

Is Rabbit Brush Kicking My Immune System's Butt?

I can tell fall is coming because I woke up this morning and thought how early it must be, because it was still dark, and why won't the melatonin work all night... and it was 5:30. I couldn't sleep anymore, so I just got up. Here I sit at the table, listening to a crow caw and a dog bark somewhere in the neighborhood, while my snout runs like crazy, and a fever, too. I don't know if it's insane allergies, or if I am coming down with a cold. So, I guess it's just as well we are missing a trip to Yellowstone to hang out with mi hermano y mi cunada this long Labor Day weekend, although the reason for not going is a sad one: HamCat is very sick.

So, anyway, the FFM recently claimed that I am angry in my blog entries. I disagreed, just to be difficult, I suppose, but there is of course truth to the statement. I mostly harp about politics, and I forgo humor sometimes for outright sarcasm. And when I'm feeling crappy physically, like I have been the past several days, I just get all the madder. Yesterday, for instance, I wanted to punch Vladimir Putin in the gut, really hard, and say, "Shut up and take care of your own bad business, you sniveling spoiled rotten baby." (Although I do not agree with most of the world that we should not recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states. They've been considered so, de facto, since the early 90s, and I am a fan of breaking away from something you don't like. Right?) Anyway, I just wanted to punch that man. Or grab him by the collars and pull his beady-eyed little face up close to mine and yell at him, like a frustrated parent yells at a selfishly whining kid. (I don't mean a kid with a real problem, like constipation.)

So, then last night the FFM and I came home from The Queen's house, where we had watched Obama's Historic Speech with her, Stevil, Kelli, Sandi and Mats and Cynthia, and we were talking about the speech, and I was glad that Obama did at least say, "These are the policies I will pursue," at the end of his long list of admirable but questionably feasible goals, but I'd wished he'd said, "But I need you, the American public, to help. I can't do this alone. I need you to go out and vote for Senators and Representatives who will support these policy initiatives and will help me make them real." Or something equally realistic and at the same time inclusive of the people. (VOTE FOR ME.) Because let's face it: The President of the USA cannot just walk into the White House, or Aubergine House, and do it alone, make whatever he sees fit happen. Well, unless he is the Bush Administration, and that's what got me going down the next road. (Plus, the peeps will hold Obama solely accountable when things don't happen that he mentions will under his watch, despite the illogical nature of the thought process leading to that laying of blame.)

As we discussed the subject, the knowledge of the American people about How Our Government Functions came up. I wondered if people get the cursory lessons in civics in 9th grade and then go on to forget them by the time they are 25. I don't know. I wouldn't know. My public school teaching certifications expired a few years ago when I decided to pursue a different path for a while and went back to school myself, and despite that I was at the same time teaching History and Political Science classes at the college level, because my paperwork lapsed, I am no longer qualified to teach in Our Public Schools. Yes, folks, it's true; that paper means everything. If you can't shove a piece of paper signed by someone who doesn't even know you and for which you paid half a week's salary (assuming you are employed at all) into the faces of those who would hire you, then it doesn't matter what you know or what you have done in the past several years. You cannot speak for yourself, you cannot prove yourself. You can try, but you must have that piece of paper from that faceless bureaucrat who knows- because he or she wields the pen- whether or not you can teach our children.

But, back to the subject. I'm just so dang grumpy! But here is what gets my goat, that I brought up last night as we were talking about who watches over us in what ways, including computers ticking away in the depths of government buildings on tax dollars, searching for just the right words in citizens' e-mails, to send a Suit to our doors. Now, I'm not being a paranoid conspiracy theorist here (though if I really jazz it up, perhaps I will get my time on Coast to Coast AM.) Karl Rove was able to skip out on a subpoena while an old political rival was tossed into maximum security prison on the Bush Administration's whim for months. And he hadn't committed a crime. OK, are you paying attention now? Do you like how our liberties have been squandered over the past eight years?

I don't complain much about where I live, and in fact have been found reminding those who do carp that we have much more freedom to speak and do as we please in this country than others. But I told the FFM last night that after I posted a conversation here on my blog between myself and Uncy, that pointed out quite properly some thoughts and feelings I have about some current relevant topics, that I went back in and edited my post, lest someone somewhere try to shut me down because I said something like "I want to annihilate those bitches who are all mad that Hillary isn't going to be President this time so are going to completely shoot themselves in the feet- and reproductive organs and pocketbooks and so on- by voting for McCain instead." Because I was afraid of offending someone so that I would be shut down so that I wouldn't be allowed to speak online anymore, I edited that post.

Well, this morning I'm here to say it's not just that I am feeling under the weather and so really bitchy myself, but that I made a mistake. I shouldn't have edited that post. People should be able to say what they feel and think, and not have to worry about someone suing them because they feel threatened by the term "annihilate," which is used figuratively, by the way, in case you just don't get it. So, yeah, I still want to punch Putin (and I mean the guy in Russia, not the people who own the coffee shop and hold Laramie's coffee drinking, people-watching, socializing public hostage on so many occasions with their insanely high prices) in the gut, hard. Or grab his collar and pull his sniveling little face up close to mine and yell at him. Does that mean I will do these things? That I am a threat to Mr. Putin, or to our current President, whose knees I have wanted to clock with a baseball bat for several years now, just so he can know what it is like to feel a little pain? No, of course not, sillies.

But, if I don't come back within a few days, you might want to check the nearest women's prison.

Oh, yeah, and now a shameless plug for my favorite orange juice, which tasted so cold and fresh and pulpy and just plain healthy as it slipped down my parched throat yesterday: Tropicana Pure Premium. (The photo? That's my very own carton, in the brand new fridge in my apartment. Look at that, how shiny, white and clean. Pretty sweet, huh?)

A Ninja in Aubergine House

I am going to check out ninja school. OK, Budo.

I'm pretty excited. And here is what Future Cabinet Member Uncy has to say about it:

Uncy: F$*&IN-A! Ninjas are sweet! And it's about goddamn time we had a ninja in the White^H^H^H^H^HAubergine House!

me: Hell yeah! I hadn't even thought of that! Maybe if I train really hard, I can go all stealth in the back door in November!

Uncy: Just totally flip-out and annihilate the other candidates?

me: Annihilate without their even knowing it! The guy who teaches here in Laramie has been doing so for 25 years. Class trains outside at LaBonte Park until it gets too cold in October- and too dark. I will send you the list of stuff in the schools.

me: It's actually Budo. The Bujinkan Dojo International is comprised of nine different schools: Togakure Ryu Ninjutsu, Gyokko Ryu Koshijutsu, Kukishinden Ryu Happo Hikenjutsu, Shinden Fudo Ryu Dakentaijutsu, Gyokushin Ryu Ninpo, Koto Ryu Koppojutsu, Gikan Ryu Koppojutsu, Takagi Yoshin Ryu Jutaijutsu, Kumogakure Ryu Ninpo.
Within these nine schools you can find eighteen traditional topics of study; they include: Taijutsu - unarmed fighting, Ninja Ken - ninja sword, Bojutsu - long and short stick fighting, Shurikenjutsu - throwing weapons, Yarijutsu - spear fighting, Naginatajutsu - halberd fighting, Kusari Gama - chain and sickle, Hensojutsu - disguises, Shinobi iri - stealth and infiltration, techniques, Sui ren - water training, Bo ryaku - strategy, Cho ho - espionage, Intonjutsu - escape and evasion, Tenmon - meteorology, Chimon - geography.

Uncy: METEOROLOGY! Damn, I mean, I knew ninjas were sweet and all, but I had no idea that THEY COULD CONTROL THE WEATHER!

me: I know it. And the GEOGRAPHY!Isn't that the same as controlling the world?

Uncy: Well, you'd obviously be able to make the Earth split open and swallow your enemies. I mean, DUH, right?

me: Like W?And Karl Rove?

Uncy: Yeah, though you've got to wonder if they wouldn't trigger the earth's gag reflex.

me: Well, it's like good ol' Dad says, when the Old Girl is ready to toss us all off, she'll just do it. Maybe the Bush Administration is the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Uncy: Could be. Plus McCain and his goddamn off-shore drilling isn't going to help.

me: I just want to howl at the crazy self-righteously p*ssed-off feminist b*tches who wanted Hillary and are all boo-hoo now and going to vote for McCain instead so they can lose their right to abortion. Can we all acknowledge these women aren't related to Mr. Spock in any way, shape or form, especially in that they are ILLOGICAL? (And petty, too. YUCK!)

Uncy: Amen, sister. I voted for Hil-dog in the primary, but I never once, not for a single f*&$ing nanosecond, considered voting for McCain just because she wasn't the eventual nominee. For f*&$'s sake. Have these people actually read or heard anything that McCain has said?

me: I forgive you for your indescretion. What cabinet post is it you want, anyway?

Uncy: He called the Vietnamese "gooks" for god's sake.

me: Well, I use some pretty choice words for Bush and his crew of miserable, selfish cronies, too.

Uncy: Me too, but I use words that can apply to anybody, like "soulless greedhead," "drink-addled knownothing," "brainless ninny", "hope-eating bacterium," "world-killing virii" and the like. I'd never say something like, "He's a nouveau-riche white trash fratboy punk."

me: All good for getting the point across, but I gotta know what post you want, Cabinet Head?

Uncy: Because that would be unfair to white people, fratboys, the n-riche and punks. Damn right. That's a good one. How about Anti-jackassery Czar.

me: That could work. Depending on your tactics, we could co-label you CEO of Population Control.

Uncy: That's cool too. I'm prepared to talk publicly about practicing zero population growth. (Blogger notes: Uncy has a couple kids. They're cute. And smart.)

me: Someone's got to do it. I worry about all these Hollywood yoyos having kids. I don't mean adopting kids and bringing them into the American Fold even, where they can be corrupted by privilege. I mean, HAVING BABIES.

Uncy: Yes, babies are the new Hollywood status symbol, and as usual, they have the most influence on society's least-capable. Like a dozen of teen girls in Glouscester. They come to think that having a baby is 'neat' and a way to make sure that somebody loves you. A way to get lots of attention. Save us, Jeebus.

me: That's right. Babies and teacup pets. Where is that Jeebus guy, anyway?

Uncy: He's just waiting until his big "*I* TOLD YOU *SO!*" is going to have the most massive impact, and we'll all be totally embarrassed.

me: I'm embarrassed already. K, got to take a shower and get to that thing I am lucky to have: WORK.

Uncy: Hear ya. Gotta work myself.

me: Later then. Be Ready to make your acceptance speech- on the back porch.

Uncy: HELL YEAHS!

(Now you know what you're in for if you vote for me. It could be an interesting and productive 4-8 years!)

Now for some real news: I was listening to Denver Progressive Talk Radio on the way home from my orthodontist appointment yesterday and heard Randi Rhodes talking with former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, the Democrat who served his state for 26 years in a variety of elected roles and was imprisoned by the Republican Bush Administration. He suggested people visit http://www.contemptforrove.com/. This is serious business:

"Urge Congress to Find Rove in Contempt.
"Recently, the House Judiciary Committee subpoenaed Karl Rove, demanding his testimony about his own role in the politicization of the Department of Justice and politically motivated prosecutions of Democratic leaders, including me.
"Karl Rove refused to even show up for the hearing, claiming that Congress has no power to compel senior White House officials to testify. That's outrageous. Yet again, Karl Rove has showed his callous disregard for the law and for Congress' constitutional role as a co-equal branch of government.
"It's time for Congress to act: Forward an email to your Member of Congress below, urging him or her to support a contempt resolution against Karl Rove. If Karl Rove won't respond to a legitimate Congressional subpoena, it's time to turn up the heat." (from the home page)

Is this nation built on a Constitution, or the whims of those we allow power?

Team China!

Wednesday, Aug 6, 2008 12:13 am EDT
China revokes visa of gold medalist, Darfur activist Cheek
By Chris Chase

Olympic gold medalist and outspoken Darfur activist Joey Cheek has had his visa revoked by the Chinese embassy, hours before the speedskating champion was set to fly to China. And he wasn't even planning on wearing a mask when he got there.
Chinese officials don't need a reason to revoke anyone's visa but, in their eyes, they had plenty of reasons to snatch Cheek's. He is the founder of Team Darfur, a group of 70 athletes whose goal it is to raise global awareness of the human-rights violations taking part in the Darfur region of Sudan. China's military, economic and diplomatic ties to Sudan have been well-publicized in the lead-up to the Games.
Said Cheek of his ban in a prepared statement:
"I am saddened not to be able to attend the Games. The Olympic Games represent something powerful: that people can come together from around the world and do things that no one thought were possible. However, the denial of my visa is a part of a systemic effort by the Chinese government to coerce and threaten athletes who are speaking out on behalf of the innocent people of Darfur.
Cheek was going to China to support the athletes on Team Darfur -- including soccer player Abby Wambach -- and to promote the cause, one that he has championed for years. After winning gold in the Torino Games, Cheek announced he was donating his $25,000 USOC bonus to Darfur and implored his sponsors to do the same. It seems that Joey Cheek is truly one of the good guys.
And now he's out of China before he even got there. With the Games getting closer (just two days away now), the world seemed ready to forget about all the Chinese issues in order to focus on the Games themselves. Unfortunately, China's actions make that impossible. In a time when we should be wondering who will light the Olympic cauldron, whether Michael Phelps can break an all-time record and how Liu Xiang will react to the pressure of 1.3 billion of his countrymen hanging on his every step, we're instead left to discuss the Chinese government's reluctance to allow any dissension in their country, despite repeated promises that they'd clean up their act when the Olympics came to town.
Photo via Getty Images

Perfect. China takes the attention away from Darfur and places it squarely upon China. There hasn't been enough already this Summer Olympic season. Right, there are sports scheduled to happen pretty soon there. A whole bunch of people from all over the world will convene to compete for gold, silver and bronze medals for exhibiting their athletic prowess. I know; this has been scarcely reported, but it's a little gem of fact.

Look for athletes from Team China to arrive in Vancouver for the 2010 Winter Olympics to make noise. They should be present and visible, barring denial of visas by the oppressive Canadian government.

Things to Make You Mad, If You're Not Already

I can't help but keep getting on here to gripe. And it seems to be, inevitably, about people's greed, myopia and self-centeredness.

A few weeks ago Queen Jan and I watched "The Wind That Shakes the Barley," a fine historical film about Ireland's War for Independence from Britain and subsequent Civil War in the early 20th century. Afterward, I wondered what would cause me to pick up a gun and shoot someone else.

Yesterday I finally found a reason to pick up a gun and at least wave it threateningly: the Burmese junta. Make no mistake; these people are greedy, not clueless, and keeping aid from their countrypeople in time of need is an act of genocide, in my book. Future cabinet member Adam seems a little more trigger-happy, saying, "The Burmese junta needs to be nuked and buried under 100 feet of concrete." (Don't let this scare you from voting for me. It simply means you can be assured of having a President in office who is passionate about the people and who is surrounded by others who are... compassionate?)

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23695383-5013871,00.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7398623.stm

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/finally-us-aid-touches-down-in-burma/2008/05/12/1210444335495.html

Here are some other reasons to get mad, if not to want to wield a gun, exactly:

--- People not paying attention when they are walking along the sidewalk and choose to walk 18 abreast, regardless of oncoming foot and bicycle traffic. What happened to sticking to the right and allowing others access, too? I will tell you what happened to that concept: People now grow up attached to computers and i-pods and live in virtual worlds and don't know how - or care- to pay attention to the immediate surrounding environment. (That's my theory.)

--- Chinese spammers (or any other spammers and hackers) who hack into e-mail accounts to try to get your money and your personal information and whatever else they can acquire in their greed. I am picking on Chinese spammers today because it appears that I (and all the people in my address book who got a poorly worded message from "me") was victimized by someone from China or who speaks Chinese in the wee hours of the morning while I was trying to sleep. On my old Yahoo account, which I kept for the purposes of accessing the local Freecycle group, and for no other reason. So, now I have deleted that account and have lost that access and will have to be very aware of all correspondence regarding my life, for who knows how long because thievery abounds in the world. And there is a limit to karma. I think I paid my dues a long time ago when I let someone get away with my first mountain bike and my first snowboard. I am ready to take up arms. (And if people are going to be so rude, they could at least take the time to use proper English grammar and spelling in their insults.)

That's enough, I suspect, at least for now.

Mysterious Missing Torches and Modems in the USA

I cannot say better than the Jim Christie and Amanda Beck of Reuters today (http://homepage.bresnan.net/feeds/displayNewsMLArticle.aspx?file=792110), what happened to the Olympic torch in San Francisco: "The Olympic torch's only stop in North America turned into the mystery of the missing flame on Wednesday, as San Francisco abruptly changed the route, angering both China supporters and protesters.

"Thousands of people converged along the announced scenic Embarcadero waterfront route. But after the opening ceremony, the first runner was flanked by blue-clad Chinese security officials and carried the torch into a warehouse. The torch eventually turned up miles away, leaving crowds baffled...

(Aside: Come on, people, you were really baffled by this?)

"San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom told Reuters that the route had to be radically changed at the last minute or the event canceled to ensure public safety.

"The bewildering changes united supporters and protesters who had been divided by politics. Both sides were angered by the sudden changes to the only North American leg of the torch's journey to the Beijing Olympic Games in August.

"'I think it's cowardly. If they can't run the torch through the city, it means that no one is supporting the games,' said Matt Helmenstine, 30, a California high school teacher who carried a Tibetan flag."

No one is supporting the games, Matt. These thousands of people are supporting a political struggle, one side or the other, choosing to become incited and impassioned by a cause without knowing the historical or political or social or ethnic or religious background or implications of the issue entirely, just like when Bush and his guys took us into Iraq on a quick jaunt to liberate the people and disseminate democracy. (So, why isn't he more popular? We seem to understand the mentality, en masse.)

Meanwhile, back in Laramie, I have chosen to become incited and impassioned by an event that offends my notion of human decency, no matter the culture, the politics, the time or the place. So, the Future First Man (just because April is hard, like Mexico, on me, and I took a really short hiatus from this blog, doesn't mean I'm not still campaigning. And just because neither Obama nor Hillary is expected to appear on Stephen Colbert's Philadelphia road show doesn't mean that he won't invite me along at the last minute)... anyway, the FFM ordered a modem so he could connect his new laptop for superfast internet. It did not arrive as scheduled on Monday. On Tuesday when he called Qwest to find out why, he was told the modem had been delivered via UPS and signed for. No, he had not signed; he had been at work. The woman at Qwest actually argued with him about whether or not he had been at work. This is enough to get a person all het up. At least me. Eventually, he learned that the modem actually had been delivered to Apartment 2 in his building, not to his apartment, and had been signed for there.

He went downstairs to Apartment 2 and found the occupant with the package opened (a package that had been addressed to him, the Future First Man.) The occupant claimed to have called Qwest to ask why the company had delivered him a modem, but had been put on hold and didn't want to wait for the answer. (Well, this is America, after all.)

I ask you, why would you sign for a package that was addressed to someone else? That had someone else's name on it? And then bring it into your apartment, in the same building, even, and open it and keep it as though you had purchased it your own self and possessed it outright?

A) Because some idiot put the wrong apartment number on the package, so it's mine. It came to my apartment. Who cares what the name says?

B) Because I am a starving college student, and no one has brought me to a free steak dinner in ages, so I need to sell it and use the money for a steak- and beer- and cigarettes if I have any leftover.

C) Because I am a straight-up thief.

If you answered A, I am at your door right now with my jacknife. B, you will wash the Future First Man's dishes until we move to Aubergine House, and I will think about throwing you a steak once in a while. Or at least some bones. Once we get in the house, your duty will expire, and so will the steak opportunity. You will not be allowed through the doors of such a hallowed establishment. If you answered C, a harmless looking young man from Antwerp with black hair and dark framed glasses, wearing a sweater from the 80s and arse kicking tight red pants, who likes to strike The Thinker pose while sitting in the frames of large windows, will be at your door soon to kick your arse.

This is a true story.