Hah! Palin, Obama, Lipstick, and fast boats

Funny commentary on how lipstick, pigs, pitbulls and donkeys are part of the political mash. Gotta love the deft hand of Rove in the campaign!

Who's Next?

Iran continues to build its nuclear capacity, while North Korea has apparently returned to its evil machinations and is putting back together what little it agreed to dismantle.

This is the poisoned fruit of the Bush administration's tree. Remember phrase "punish the innocent and reward the guilty?" Sure, Saddam's government was guilty of many things. But not WMD. And certainly not of 9/11. But better to show strength, flog a perceived threat (and clean up daddy's unfinished business and snag a little oil), than actually tackle a serious enemy.

By serious enemy I am referring to the two "Axis of Evil" countries that would entail serious military operations to subdue, and even greater resources to control over the long term. Our military has chewed through billions of pork barrel project dollars, including absurd amounts on 'Star Wars' technology, at the expense of better pay and benefits to recruit more soldiers to the ranks, or practical technologies to protect the troops in the field.

As America's coin in the world declines, other countries will slip into the resulting vacuum. China, with its economic buying power. Russia, with it's kleptocratic power. It's a dark gloom into which we slide, even with a changing of the guard expected in Washington. And the spirit of change, while an instantiatable ideal in America, will in now way auger for a sea change in the threats to America and the world from fanatics who care more about their power than their people.

Maybe we'll need those nuclear space lasers and Star Wars technology after all...

Palin Revisionism

I edited my previous post, "The Palin Paradox," after seeing that (a) I was getting a lot of hits from a right-wing blog called "Eagle Forum Alaska," and (b) said blog pulled their post. That post championed Governor Palin's embracing abstinence-only education. My comment (now redacted because of the broken link) pointed out that Governor Palin wholeheartedly embraced the Bush policies on not teaching any sex education other than not having any (my definition, not theirs).

We all know the best way to do quiet people is through denial, right? C'mon, stand up for your values! The Big Lie won't work, since the Eagle's posting data is found in many other places. And the Big Distraction didn't work, as Gustav fizzled out.

The brave thing to do, the moral thing to do, is to honestly champion what you, and your governor, believe in. So put the page back up, where we can all read it!

The Palin Paradox

The conundrum of Bristol Palin's pregnancy is a great snapshot of modern American views on sex education:

1. "Good girls" do. (Are there "bad girls?")
2. Lust trumps sex ed
3. Parents, even governors, can't stop kids from having sex
4. And, of course, pregnancy is a rational consequence of sex!

I'm pleased that Bristol's parents are behind her. And that the father has (a) stepped forward and (b) will do the "right" thing and marry her. It's a great lesson for parents that would otherwise distance themselves from the little trollop (their POV, not mine), or do some other non-linear thing.

I'd like conservative or religious readers to think for a moment, and then comment on the following question: how can sex education and/or policy be changed so as to decrease the chances that other daughters of religious families get pregnant? At what point is it a better choice to explain prophylactics (physical or chemical) over the chance of an unplanned pregnancy?.

The Anti-Christ is Here (Thank God!)

Wow. I didn't know I was rooting for the antichrist. I mean, as a Jew with a sharp tongue, I certainly _hope_ I'm rooting for the other guy. Just not that one. Whatever he stands for. Our people have no connection to 'The Rapture,' a construct of 19th century umm, passionate people. I disingenuously paused, because, again, as a Jew, the whole thing is hooey to me. We didn't have a 1st coming, so the second one makes no sense. We have no hell, only the absence of being part of God. There's no purgatory. No wacky 'what SHALL we do with all these unbelievers.' No fire, no brimstone. [Full disclosure: while Christianity is fully Thanotic (death- and afterlife-focused), Judaism does refer to this life as the 'prosdor' (literally: the hallway) and the next life as the room. But we Jews get do-overs in the form of reincarnation, and a chance for our souls to make right what we failed in previous lives.]

The Obama = Nicholae Carpathia idea is hideous. It's hateful, paranoid, and smacks of all the things for which the KKK was and is reviled. The Nazis used fear of the Jew, the unknown, the other to kill my family. And the hateful, prejudiced, zealots aligned with the McCain campaign are using the exact same tactics now, in 2008.

Debate is great. McCain certainly presents a different set of options to Obama. I welcome discussions of substance, of the priorities, strategies and even tactics of the two candidates in solving our upcoming problems. But bringing religion into this is a wedge designed to scare the Evangelical, the dim-witted, or those that bought the last lie: that Obama is actually a Muslim. Not that that is wrong in any way! (I'd love to see a Muslim President! He'd be just as fair as Kennedy was, as a Catholic, in a majority Protestant country.)

Perversions and Perverts

The perversions of Amerikans frustrates me. Today there was a story on CNN (see link) referring to a "swinger" group that coerced children into having sex.

Rampant sexuality scares people; definitions are definitely in order!

• Swinging is between consenting adults. Pedophilia is adults on children.
• Swinging involves consenting adults. Children, by definition, cannot consent.
• Swinging is between singles and couples. Pedophilia is sexual assault on a child.

Please, don't anyone think I approve of swinging personally. IMHO, marriage is between consenting adults, for the purpose of entering into a long-term relationship with a loved one. Or several. And "swinging" is for fornication with (sometimes randomly selected) people with whom there isn't such a relationship. Morally, ethically (and, if there are kids involved, as a parent) I object.

But swinging is not pedophilia. And trying to mix the two together perverts, a very basic level, grownup decisions, however misguided, with violent sexual assault on children.

The case is before the courts is about the rape, pedophilia and illegal acts committed by the Mineola Swinger's Club, which clearly consists not of consenting adults, but sick child rapists. But the media, not making the distinction between 'swingers' and 'pedophiles,' commits a grave sin of omission. It's the media's sacred responsibility to tell the truth, even if it's not socially or conventionally convenient. Swingers, open marriages, gays, lesbians, polyamous couples and others all exist in the real world. We might not all agree or believe in their legitimacy, but it's a cruel punishment to besmirth a societally unpopular label with the grotesque tar of rape.

Shame, shame, shame!

May His Name be Blessed

I generally regard 'News Fleas' as being replaceable and generally irrelevant, but Tim Russert's untimely death has thrown a wrench into my asinine assumption.

Each generation has its cadre of honest, blunt, frank and otherwise weatherbeaten tellers of truth. Tim was one of them, and, especially in this charged election year, he will be missed. Perhaps more than in decades past, where the differences between candidates were accented, rather than blurred, Mr. Russert was a speaker to power, and an honest reflection of the vaunted and villified 'man on the street.' He asked the questions we would never be able to phrase, given candidate management systems and infrastrutures build specifically to keep their lauded 'chosen one' from having to respond to the direct spear thrust of the honest question.

Tim spoke truth to power, and, like the Jewish "Ethics of the Fathers," was the one who asked the blatant questions where others feared to go. We need more like him, even more now that he is gone.

Baruch Dayan Emet. And may God help us see the truth from the lies this fall.

2B, or not 2B: Work permits are the question

H-1B visas, which permit foreign professionals of various ilks to work legally in the US, were all issued by late winter. H-2B visas, essentially created for migrant farm laborers, were sunset when Congress let a key provision lapse.

Let's consider the implications:

• We have national shortages of doctors, nurses and all manner of technical professionals. For example, HMOs have squashed the profitability out of these careers. $60,000 is a lot of money, but for the work a nurse must do for years to reach that lofty number, it's almost better to get into sales, or something equally less messy and regimented. $60k for someone from the Philipines or Pakistan is a huge boon: for people with a work ethic, this means they can support entire extended families back home. That's not a slam: even accounting for the weak dollar, the standard of living in these countries is much lower than for the United States.
  
• Picking grapes or tomatoes is back-breaking work. For the extremely low pay proffered, only people who can't flip burgers, greet people at Wal*Mart, or wrangle carts at the grocery story would apply. To say nothing of the gas bill they'd incur just getting to and from the farms.

Americans are supposed to have choices, and our alleged free market system currently gives more choices to people in hedge funds, finance and arcane niche careers. For the millions worried about their chances of enjoying their old age, the current economic climate does not, to say the least, bode well.

Refunds and Recipients

Let's do a little math, shall we? Uncle Sam, in the name of "economic stimulation," is giving each of us $600, plus $300 per child, of our own money back, to help pull our economy back from the brink.

Let's see where that goes...

Eighteen months ago gas prices in, oh, say Baltimore, were low. about $2.12 a gallon. That's about the time agribusiness started spooling up for the great ethanol ripoff.

Price now: $3.55. So, assuming 12,000 miles a year, that's 18,000 miles times. At an average of 21.9 MPG, that's $1,060.27 more for the next 18 months, assuming (LOL) that the price of gas won't rise any more.

That's the big gorilla. For those of you not afflicted with a car, here's a small one:

Got Milk? Got Money? According to a NY Daily News article in January, milk prices are up 36% year-to-year. So what was $3.18 is now $4.41. I guess it's a good thing we're using less of it, since cows are eating corn that would otherwise be used for ethanol.

Makes a great case for breastfeeding and leaving it at that, only the cost of soybeans has also risen, due to the diversion of acreage to growing corn for ethanol instead of food. But these are trivial rises.

Bottom line: the $1,800 a family of four (with two cars) would receive from the government's economic stimulus package melts, just opposite the $2,120 in additional cost just from gas increases, not to mention all the other food and essential goods increases.

So if someone wants to stimulate the economy, I have the following suggestions:

1. Stop making ethanol from corn. It's increasing food prices all over the world, and competing with feed corn for livestock and milk production.
2. Put negative price pressure on the cost of a barrel of oil. Price increases are a function of purchase of oil on the spot market; refineries and distributors peg their increases to them.
3. Oil companies are engaging in profiteering. While Libertarians might rejoice in this exercise of the free market at work, it puts an incredible burden on those of us who depend on this liquid for our lives. Trucks, trains, planes, automobiles, generators... you know, civilization as Americans like it? If an electric trading company decided it wanted to play with the cost of electricity... oh, wait: Enron! Anyone seeing this? ExxonMobil's excessive profits are at the cost of the entire US economy, and if the government really wants to loosen the pressure on it's citizenry, getting prices audited and under control is a big deal. (And before anyone talks about price control, realize that cutting Strategic Reserves oil stocks loose is a direct form of price control as well.)
   

Well? What are you doing sitting around? Go and tell people!

Teen Sex Here!

The blogosphere and the press, even the former Grey Lady, are atwitter with pictures of Hannah Montana's naked back on Vanity Fair. And references to her wearing a green bra that was visible under her shirt. Compare this to the ability for the public -- anyone in the public -- to see girls or women with backs naked but for a single strand of fabric for the back of a bikini top. This isn't even about sexy -- except in the way in which visual innuendo inflames minds.

I'm not sure what disturbs me more: parents that give their children up to be sexualized and prostituted by the mass media, or the corporations that pimp out underaged children and then, mortified by their sexualization, make even more money on the rebound.

The Spears' clan? Multiple children.

Compare this to the way the Jackson Five were "exploited." Or the Partridge Family. How did the child cast of "Sound of Music" work their teenage lives?

Sure, kids in the spotlight have been around since well before Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland. And child actors have self-destructed because of the glare of the limelight -- or the demons lurking in the shadows. But the machinery and money around children, along with the dual fascination for sexy tweens and concurrent prurience around sex, make for a toxic environment for children with the lethal combination of talent and good -- or at least well marketed -- looks.