Innocents Abroad

Bolivia's December elections have been postponed or cancelled. I wonder what kind of mood this will put people into. One of the indigenous candidates for President is blaming the US Embassy. Police used tear gas to suppress an anti-US protest near the embassy yesterday, but that one was focused on our harboring of a former president Bolivia's Human Rights Assembly accuses of genocide. Keep an eye on Blog From Bolivia for updates. I'm leaving for Cochabamba in a few hours.

(I'm really not worried. We're going to be with nice people doing good work, in a peaceful part of the country far from where all this is playing out. I'll post more in a couple weeks.)

Civic Lesson Update - Shut Up and Give Money

After writing a note to Bond, Talent and Cleaver, I received a nice response from Emanuel Cleaver and reluctantly concluded that my two Republican Senators were going to ignore a polite and earnest inquiry from a constituent. I joked that they may have paid more attention if I were rich.

My joke was prescient! Guess what? I finally heard from Bond!

The only problem is that he was writing not to respond to my inquiry, but to deliver this message: "Please make a secure online donation today to Jim's campaign of 25, 50, 75 or even a hundred dollars. Please consider donating before the September 30th financial filing deadline."

This is just so freaking weird I don't even understand. Is "Jim" (I'm glad Bond didn't call his nerdy little buddy "JT") too bashful to ask me for money himself? Did somebody in the Republican Party realize that Talent is so unlikeable and repugnant that even Kit Bond stands a better chance of talking me out of a check? Is Talent so incompetent that Bond needs to do his fundraising?

I truly am surprised at the incompetence of my Republican Senators. Ignoring an inquiry from a constituent is inexcusable - even the most junior legislator understands that you always respond to your constituents. It makes me wonder if the Republican human resources team has managed to put a Mike Brown in every office.

A Book in Which I Hope You Have No Interest

"Nordie's at Noon" is about 4 women who were "too young" for breast cancer, but faced it nonetheless. Three of the authors survived. One of the survivors is a friend of mine.

I hope the topic is essentially irrelevant to each of you, that all women already are doing their examinations, etc., and that nobody you know, young or old, is ever diagnosed with breast cancer. But reality says that cancer will touch you, and that someone you know may appreciate a copy of this book.

The Party of Values Voters

Bill Bennett: "I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down."

48 Hours

In a little less than 48 hours, we'll be departing for two weeks in Cochabamba, Bolivia. While there, we will do touristy stuff along with converting a cow barn into a schoolroom.

Two weeks without regular access to email, my iPod, driving, ties, work worries, much American, Missouri or local political news, television, the NFL, pundits, Boulevard Pale Ale, the class I'm taking, Cardinals baseball, or any of the other things that normally consume my hours.

Should be a wild experience. Wish me luck!

Brownie Blames "Dysfunctional" State Government

Is this supposed to make Missourians feel any more secure? I'd trade Blunt for Blanco any day.

Daddy Blunt - Top Thirteen Most Corrupt

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics In Washington (CREW) released yesterday a 93 page report on the thirteen most corrupt members of Congress. The list includes both Democrats and Republicans - this is not a partisan effort. Missourians can be proud that one of their own made the cut:

Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO) is a fifth-term Member of Congress, representing the 7th district of Missouri. In 1999, two years after taking office, Rep. Blunt was handpicked by then-Whip DeLay to serve as Chief Deputy Whip, and Rep. Blunt assumed the role of Whip in 2003, when DeLay became the Majority Leader. Rep. Blunt’s ethics issues stem from his misuse of his position for the benefit of his family.

Legislative Assistance to Family Members

Legislative Assistance for Philip Morris

In 2003, Rep. Blunt divorced his wife of 31 years to marry Philip Morris (now Altria) lobbyist Abigail Perlman. Before it was known publicly that Rep. Blunt and Ms. Perlman were dating – and only hours after Rep. Blunt assumed the role of Majority Whip – he tried to secretly insert a provision into Homeland Security legislation that would have benefitted Philip Morris, at the expense of competitors.

In addition, Rep. Blunt’s son Andrew lobbies on behalf of Philip Morris, a major client he picked up only four years out of law school. Notably, Altria is Rep. Blunt’s largest campaign contributor, having donated more than $270,000 to political committees tied to him.

Legislative Assistance for United Parcel Service, Inc. and FedEx Corp.

In 2003, Rep. Blunt also helped his lobbyist son Andrew by inserting a provision into the $79 billion emergency appropriation for the war in Iraq to benefit U.S. shippers like United Parcel Service, Inc. and FedEx Corp. The provision required that military cargo be carried only by companies with no more than 25% foreign ownership. UPS and FedEx were seeking to block the expansion of a foreign-owned rival’s U.S. operations. Andrew Blunt lobbies on behalf of UPS in Missouri, and UPS and FedEx have contributed at least $58,000 to Rep. Blunt since 2001.

Members of the House are prohibited from "taking any official actions for the prospect of personal gain for themselves or anyone else." 5 CFR §2635.702(a). By pushing for legislation that would benefit Philip Morris and UPS, and, as a consequence, his then-girlfriend and his son, Rep. Blunt may have violated this provision.

Federal law also prohibits public officials from directly or indirectly demanding, seeking, receiving, accepting or agreeing to receive or accept anything of value in return for being influenced in the performance of an official act. If Rep. Blunt accepted campaign contributions from Philip Morris, FedEx or UPS in exchange for legislative assistance, he may have violated the bribery statute.

Matt Blunt’s Political Campaigns

Family connections have also helped Rep. Blunt’s son, Missouri Governor Matt Blunt, who received campaign contributions from nearly three dozen influential Missouri lobbyists and lawyers when he ran for governor of Missouri in 2004, half of whom had provided financial support to his father.

In 2000, when Matt Blunt was running for Secretary of State, Rep. Blunt was involved in an apparent scheme to funnel money through a local party committee into Matt Blunt’s campaign committee. Committees tied to Rep. Blunt contributed $90,000 to the 7th District Congressional Republican Committee which, in turn, contributed $76,000 to Matt Blunt’s campaign committee. In addition, Altria – the company for which Blunt’s wife is the top lobbyist – made a $24,000 contribution to Matt Blunt’s campaign, and a $100,000 contribution to the 7th District Congressional Republican Committee.

The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct should investigate these campaign funding schemes to determine whether Rep. Blunt violated the law by improperly using his political connections to fill the coffers of his son’s campaign chest.

Moreover, Rule 23 of the House Ethics Manual requires all members of the House to conduct themselves "at all times in a manner that reflects creditably on the House." The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct should investigate the various schemes used by Rep. Blunt and his son to fund his son’s campaign to determine whether or not they reflect creditably on his position in the House.

Legislative Assistance for Jack Abramoff’s Client

Rep. Blunt and his staff have close connections to uber-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who is the subject of criminal and congressional probes. In June 2003, Mr. Abramoff persuaded Majority Leader Tom DeLay to organize a letter, co-signed by Speaker Hastert, Whip Roy Blunt, and Deputy Whip Eric Cantor, that endorsed a view of gambling law benefitting Mr. Abramoff’s client, the Louisiana Coushatta, by blocking gambling competition by another tribe. Mr. Abramoff has donated $8,500 to Rep. Blunt’s leadership PAC, Rely on Your Beliefs.

If, as it appears, Rep. Blunt was accepting campaign contributions from Mr. Abramoff in exchange for using his official position so support a view of gambling law that would benefit Mr. Abramoff’s client, he would be in violation of the law.

Trip to Korea

Rep. Blunt attended a luncheon in Seoul in January 2002, that was paid for by the Korea-U.S. Exchange Council (KORUSEC), a registered foreign agent. House Rules provide that a Member, officer or employee may not accept travel expenses from a foreign agent. The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct should investigate whether Rep. Blunt violated this prohibition by accepting reimbursement for travel from KORUSEC.

I wonder how the so-called "values voters" feel about the scumbag they selected.

Hurricane Coverage Suggestion

Many media commentators complain about the cliched coverage of hurricanes by having some reporter standing outside in the wind, shouting into a buffeted microphone that yes, indeed, it really is windy in a hurricane. While many ask that the stations not insult our intelligence or waste our time with such shots, I think they should be encouraged. The only modification I would seek, though, is that they be restricted to areas nearby scrap metal dumps or hubcap stores.

Father Kinerk Resigns from Rockhurst University

Father Kinerk has announced his resignation from the Presidency of Rockhurst University, effective at the end of this academic year. I have had the opportunity to get to know him, and he is a wise, modest and compassionate man, who has quietly helped Rockhurst reshape its future and enhance Kansas City. I respect him too much to question his reasoning - though I wish he would stay.

Civics Lesson - Shut Up!

It's been over a week since I emailed my Congressional representatives about the foolishness of giving tax breaks to millionaires that are already dead. Rereading the brief note, I believe it was polite and worthy of a response.

While Cleaver was kind enough to respond, Bond and Talent have apparently decided that my comments warrant no response. Rather than explain why they apparently believe that the children of millionaires deserve a tax break during times of ridiculous deficits, neither Bond nor Talent has responded to the legitimate and polite inquiry of a constituent.

While I am not naive enough to believe that my note would have convinced them to vote against the country-club set, I was naive enough to believe that they would at least respond. Perhaps if I told them I'm rich . . .

Charlie Harris - New Leader for Missouri Bar

The Missouri Bar is having its Annual Meeting in Kansas City this week, so beware of hordes of drunken lawyers roaming in packs. Among the good news to come from the meeting is that Charlie Harris prevailed in an election which will result in him becoming of the Missouri Bar. Charlie's a good guy and will do a great job - I'm glad the election went his way.

Civics Lesson Update

I sent my note to Bond, Talent and Cleaver on Sunday - it's Wednesday morning, and Cleaver is the only one who's responded. He got back to me on Tuesday morning. Perhaps the disparity comes because it is a lot easier to write a letter starting with "You're right" than it is to start one with "The reason I support handing out tax breaks to the spawn of dead multi-millionaires while running up records budget deficits is . . ."

Here is the body of Cleaver's reply:

Thank you for contacting me with regard to H.R.8. I appreciate your taking the time to contact me about this important issue.

As you may be aware, this legislation would permanently extend the repeal of the estate tax. When this temporary repeal was first enacted as part of the President's 2001 tax cut package, the federal government was projected to be operating on huge surpluses. Now, however, the federal government is operating at an all time high deficit and is expected to do so for the rest of this decade. In light of this budgetary outlook, it is critical that we do not enact tax reform measures that jeopardize the ability of the government to operate effectively or place the responsibility of repaying massive debt on future generations.

The permanent repeal of the estate tax is expected to costs $280 billion in revenue from 2011 through 2015. However, contrary to the assertions of the Republican majority this legislation would only benefit a small number of estates. These facts are at odds with my belief that tax reform measures must be simpler, fairer and responsible. I also believe that reform measures should not shift any additional tax burden to the middle class. By pushing this bill forward, the Republican majority continues to demonstrate its belief that the middleclass and our children should pay for tax breaks for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans.

I am opposed to legislation that solely benefits the rich at the expense of our children, the middleclass, small business, and those in our society who have the least means. As a result, I voted against H.R. 8. I did support, however, a Democratic substitute that would have cost 1/3 less than H.R. 8 and would have provided relief to 99.7 percent of all estates.

Again, thank you for sharing your views with me on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to do so in the future.

Sincerely

Emanuel Cleaver, II

Member of Congress

(Update: Jim Talent has not replied to my thoughts about the estate tax, but he did manage to send me a solicitation for funds this morning. Most disconcertingly, he included a PS signed "JT". Eww. First off, that moniker belongs to James Taylor. Second, to borrow a phrase from Tony, you have all the charisma of a colonoscopy, so don't try your hand at informality, okay?)

Bush Administration - Some Fliers Are More Equal

Airline security since 9-11 has been a wasteful exercise in perception control and governmental dominance. Cat Stephens and nail clippers are grounded, while the shoe bomber and ceramic knives are flying our friendly skies. I've already expressed my thoughts about some of the serious issues raised by airline security.

Now, we learn that the staff of the Transportation Security Administration is ready to make some changes. Kip Hawley, an assistant secretary of homeland security (I can remember a more innocent time when a chillingly vague and authoritarian title like that would have only existed in the Soviet Union), has had his staff put together a memo of suggestions. The media, including the horribly inept KC Star, are buzzing about suggestions to allow ice picks, bows and arrows, and razor blades on flights.

What blows my mind is that among those suggestions, I kid you not, is the proposal that "certain categories of passengers be exempt from airport security screening, such as members of Congress, airline pilots, Cabinet members, state governors, federal judges, high-ranking military officers and people with top-secret security clearances." Now, I'm a pretty bright and imaginative person, but I would have to work a long time to come up with a more obnoxious idea than that one.

What kind of a world have we created that Americans are actually discussing giving government officials open exemption from the rules the rest of us live under?? When did we create a ruling class, above suspicion and bureaucratic interference?

Of course, it is the symbolism of this proposal of political privilege that outrages me, but I also think it's a bad plan substantively, as well. One extremist Republican Congressman has already been caught trying to board a flight with a loaded 9 mm Glock. Personally, I wouldn't trust Zel Miller with a weapon, either. Would you? The Bush administration would.

(Explanation - The Star earned my criticism this morning by utterly failing to mention the proposal to exempt VIPs from its article on the topic. A graphic accompanying the article included the concept, but, if you depend on the Star for your news, that's all you'll see. Pathetic.)

Sam Tops His Father

A few years back, I managed to sneak into a dinner party and get my picture taken with Hillary Clinton. Sam topped his old man this weekend, scoring a picture with the Clinton we all can agree on . . .

Civics Lesson

I sent the following email to my senators and my representative in Congress. If I get any interesting responses, I'll share them. (I normally would not have bothered to send this to Cleaver, assuming that he would be on the correct side of the issue, but he sold us out horribly for the MBNA gift - bankruptcy "reform" - so I don't automatically trust him anymore.)

I understand that Congress may soon be considering a permanent repeal of the estate tax. I hope that you will stand up for the common Missourians, and refuse to go along with this misguided gift to the ultra-rich. We all know that this is not about family farms or small, mom-and-pop businesses. This is about dead multi-millionaires. And, at a time when our president is presiding over the largest domestic-spending increases since I was a child, we cannot afford to roll back governmental revenues any further.

I hope you will be on the side of the average Missourians, rather than the dead multi-millionaires.

Thank you for your service to our state and country.

(Update: Katrina may have delayed consideration of repeal of the estate tax, since even republicans see the disconnect between poor neighborhoods flooded because of republican failures, and handing out tax breaks to do-nothing heirs of billionaires, but at least one republican ghoul is trying to use Katrina to support this insanity. Alabama Senator Sessions is desperately seeking a dead multi-millionaire in the wreckage. I wonder if someone that despicable actually smells bad.)

Driving Across Missouri

Yesterday evening was my 20th law school reunion. Of the trip there, the less said the better. 3 hours to Columbia - bumper to bumper to Oak Grove. And someday, you little prick in the black Mercedes sports car, you're going to drive all the way up to the barrels before attempting to merge, and I'm going to be waiting for you with that bazooka my second amendment friends want me to have, and . . .

The reunion itself was a good time, but not very blogworthy. Unless someone out there knows what happened to a classmate of ours named Kim Copeland . . .

But the ride home was wonderful. Missouri is a pretty state, even from the vantage point if I-70. Rolling hills, pretty streams, lush greenery, bright wildflowers. We were even blessed by seeing billboard-sized proof of our governor's failure to impose Puritanism on our state. Not being in the market for a super-sized dildo or a movie about plastic-breasted nymphos molesting pizza-delivery men, I didn't stop, but it's nice to know that when I feel the need, I won't have trouble finding the places on I-70 catering to it.

I hope Blunt and Bartle enjoy the trip as much as I did.

Bush Vows Disaster Review for U.S. Cities

Wow. That's some kind of leadership. Four years after 9-11, and untold billions of dollars spent on homeland security and emergency preparedness, now he decides it might be a good idea to look at how to respond to a disaster.

If you voted for Bush, you owe me a public apology.

Distasteful Gloating for Slacker Granny

KC Star columnist Mike Hendricks wastes the left side of today's Metropolitan section gloating over the fact that the press managed to generate enough bad publicity for Positronic that it wound up rehiring Barbara Roberts. Barbara Roberts was babysitting her grand-daughter while her daughter and son-in-law went to New Orleans the Friday before Katrina (on a "business trip", the papers reported. Umm, yeah). They got stuck, so she didn't go to work, even though she had already used all her vacation time. When she finally chose to return to work, she was fired.

Apparently, I'm pretty much alone in my lack of sympathy. The slacker granny won the sympathy of more than a thousand emailers, who bombarded the president of the company with hate.

People, unlimited vacation time is not a fundamental right. Yeah, she was stuck in a tough spot, babysitting her grandchild while the parents couldn't get back. But whose fault is that? Who made her use up all her vacation time and then agree to take that chance? Who prevented her from coming up with a "Plan B"? What makes her think she can use all her leave time, acknowledged as liberal, and then unilaterally decide to take more?

But the thing that really chafes me is in the next-to-last paragraph of Hendricks' gloating column. After she gets her job back because she participated in a campaign to generate bad publicity for the company that gives her a paycheck and good benefits, she manages to find a new bad attitude. “It’s too bad,” Roberts said. “I’d like to see people do these things from the goodness of their hearts, rather than from pressure.”

Too bad, indeed. Good thing she's not coming to me for a job.

Good Sense on the Business Page

The Kansas City Star's business page is usually a sheet of lay-offs, stock quotes and right-wing trickle-down conservatism. That's why it's particularly gratifying to see a bit of truth and common sense appear there this morning.

Columnis Floyd Norris addresses the Republicans' attempt to repeal the Estate Tax. In a nutshell, the Republicans are trying to give the absolute pinnacle of their country club society a $280 billion gift, in the form of a tax break for dead multi-millionaires.

At a time when many in our country are suffering, I think we can move dead multi-millionaires a couple notches down on the list of targets for compassion.

Best Covers

A lawyer listserve I'm on distracted itself from political bickering with the question of what are the best covers ever done. Here's what I came up with. Anybody care to add, subtract, or multiply?

1. Elvis Costello - "My Funny Valentine". Classic song, best version ever.

2. Sinead O'Connor - "Nothing Compares 2 U", covering Prince. That voice is haunting.

3. Cake, "I Will Survive", covering Gloria Gaynor. Irresistible.

4. Cracker, "Rainy Days and Mondays", covering the Carpenters. Turns out, if you add an edge to their sound, the Carpenters had some first class material. I have an album made up entirely of Carpenters covers.

5. Indigo Girls, "Tangled Up in Blue". Perhaps my favorite Dylan song, brilliantly done.

6. Willie Nelson, "Georgia On My Mind", covering Hoagy Carmichael and Stuart Gorrell. Off the album "Stardust". If this album doesn't get your partner feeling romantic, you might as well go fishing.

7. Bruce Springsteen, "Jersey Girl", covering Tom Waits.

8. Warren Zevon, "Knockin' On Heaven's Door", covering Bob Dylan. This comes off a haunting album released after he knew he was dying.

9. Beatles, "Rock and Roll Music", covering Chuck Berry. I'm not a huge Beatles fan, but I had to sneak Chuck Berry in here somehow . . .

10. Hendrix, "All Along the Watchtower", covering Dylan. All Hendrix needed was a starting point . . .

BTW, this list was helped along by The Covers Project, an ambitious project to build a "six degrees of separation" chain for music.

Diversity in Kansas

One wedge issue employed by members of the right wing to split our country apart is the issue of non-English speakers in the United States. For example, some are excited by mandatory English language classes as an additional hurdle to citizenship.

Their motives are transparent, but ought to be stated clearly. Some don't like hearing Spanish spoken in the streets. Some are annoyed by brown people talking "gibberish" around them. Many resent having to press "one" to proceed in English when they're in an automated phone system. They talk about "preserving the core of American identity", which, I suppose, has something to do with monoculturalism.

One of the many problems with their arguments is the fact that their view of America is based on watching too much "Leave it to Beaver", and not enough reading of history. This morning's Kansas City Star has an interesting article about "low German" in Northeast Kansas - a language that thrived in an immigrant population, and is still spoken by many. For years, the language dominated the region. Young people are now taking classes to recapture this bit of their heritage.

Somehow, bilingualism seems a lot more palatable when they're not speaking Spanish, doesn't it?

It's Time for "Sing Along With Nero!!!"

Superimposed photos taken on the same day:

Bush does his best to "turn that frown upside down."
From Boing Boing, via Kos.

Pink or Grey? Neither, Thanks

A bunch of right-wingers are all atwitter about a silly essay written by a guy named Bill Whittle, in which he divides the world into tribes of steely, competent Greys and weak, evil Pinks. Please, don't read it because I link to it. It really isn't well written, and it's a waste of your time. But, if you've already read it because one of your right-wing friends has forwarded it to you with a breathless "This is wonderful" or "Prepare to read someone who speaks the truth", then here are my comments, which I prepared as an email to an acquaintance who wondered why I think it is chest-thumping, lying, illogical garbage.

Okay, as for the chest-thumping macho thing, I'll just pull a few quotations as illustration. I don't think they'll require any further commentary. If you want it, let me know . . .

- "Now please pay attention to this, because I’m not going to state it again, and if you don’t hear it now much mischief will follow"

- "Now, with that said – have we all heard that loud and clear?"

- "I hate those sons of bitches with all of my heart."

- "If such a thing is not self-evident to you, please get off my property. Right now. I should tell you I own a gun and I know how to use it."

- "(And anyone who even thinks about selling short Reykjavik as a symbol for those eight years of steadfast resolution should see my gun warning, above)."

S______ - that's only going through about half of his bombastic piece of crap - there's more, but I think you get the idea.

More importantly, I suspect, you want to know where he lies. Well, first off the whole thing is intellectually dishonest. He's either stupid or he's intentionally creating a false division of the world into two camps. But that's a little deeper of a criticism than I owe you for this one - you want some examples of where he tells actual, provable lies. Fair enough.

- "My Tribe doesn’t make excuses." - Lie. That is exactly what he is doing for President Bush in much of this piece. When he calls Bush "grey" at the very same time the Bush administration is spreading provable lies about what happened in the run-up to Katrina, all in a pathetic attempt to make excuses for his own failures, that's a lie.

- "My Tribe does not believe that a single Man can cause, prevent or steer Hurricanes." - This is a lie because it completely misrepresents what anybody is saying about the hurricane. No commentators are claiming that a single man can cause, prevent or steer a hurricane. His attempt to distinguish his tribe from another is based on a lie in this instance.

- "my Tribe does not and has never made someone else responsible for their own safety, and that of their loved ones." Complete and utter bullshit. If he's counting on the police tonight, or the military, he's counting on someone else. If tries to dodge that reliance by claiming that those people are members of his tribe, then remind him that he relied on Bill Clinton for 8 years as Commander in Chief.

- "$500 million would be less than 10% of every outspoken celebrities' combined wealth. That money could take every poor person in LA county and put them into much nicer apartments than the one I live in. They could, at a stroke, shame the President, the Congress, and the evil NeoCon warmongers by putting every displaced person in New Orleans in a Marriott for a year." No. That's simply not true. In Los Angeles county alone, in 2002, before Bush's failed economy put even more people into poverty, there were 1,683,869 people in poverty. http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/saipe/saipe.cgi. I refuse to believe he's living in an apartment for less than $300 in LA. Does he honestly think that dividing $500 million among the god-knows-how-many displaced persons would truly get them into a Marriott for a year? He's either stupid or misleading us on purpose. (And, while we're on this point, how about Halliburton giving us 10%? Or Cheney? Or that over-privileged windbag, Barbara Bush?)

- "And in Louisiana last week the governor cried and the mayor blamed everyone but himself, and half the country bought every single stinking Pink lie about global warming and missing National Guard units and blamed the sheepdogs while the wolves raped and pillaged and looted everything in sight." No, that's simply not true. The "wolves" did not rape and pillage and loot everything in sight. There are no confirmed rapes, or pillages, for that matter, and, even if there were some, it was not everything in sight. He's lying about he scope of the lawlessness. Why? To downgrade his fellow man.

Had enough? There are more, but, really, factual mistatement are hardly the bulk of this jerk's problems. The problem is that his logic is totally off.

For example, what's with the pink and grey crap? Is he intentionally alluding to the Confederacy when he uses grey as "his" color? There's no other real reason to choose that color, is there? But there is a group of dimwits who are ready and willing to attack the blacks of New Orleans, and grey is a loaded choice for that a bunch of them.

And why pink? He's not trying to call those who disagree with him homosexuals, is he? Oh, no, he wouldn't do that, would he? Of course that's what he's trying to do, and he can kiss my pink ass.

But, S_____, the real problem is that people cannot be divided as he tries to do. Guess what? Some of those brave people he lauds on 9-11 were liberals, and were alert to race issues, and would not have supported the war in Iraq distracting us from hunting down bin Laden. They were, in every sense of the definition he makes up, pink. But they had courage, and they were willing to do the right thing.

And his grey examples are guilty of weakness and cowardice. Regardless of whether you believe he went AWOL, Bush clearly and inarguably used his daddy's status to send someone else off to Viet Nam in his place.

This guy's "rah, rah, we're better than them" psychosis is contemptible. His verbal sleight of hand, through which he claims that everyone who knows how to build a building, or who is decent, or who knows how to give or follow an order is on his side, is transparent nonsense.

In all seriousness, it is pathetic to read his posturing on paper about how good he and his fellow white people are. His supposition about how "his tribe" would survive in the Superdome is laughable - they'd be fucking each other over like an Enron board orgy, and we all know it. His repeated threat to go get his penis substitute gun is just embarassing.

I've spent too much time on this guy. I hope this suffices to give you a flavor of what I think of his essay.

Second Amendment - 18th Century Wisdom in the 21st Century

The time has come to repeal the Second Amendment.

It no longer serves a valid purpose, and the harms inflicted upon our society by the sloppiness of gun manufacturers, retailers, and owners are unacceptable.

The way I see it, there are three groups of people who think they benefit from the Second Amendment - hunters, self-defendants, and crazy people who think that they're going to stave off tyranny with their deer rifles.

The first group, I'm sympatico with. I used to hunt when I was a kid, and I'd happily do it again. So, let's set this thing up where guns can be made available to them under far more secure circumstances. No more shotguns and deer rifles in closets and under beds, or WalMarts stocked with weapons waiting for the first looter to get there. For people who want to use guns for their hobbies, like hunters and skeet shooters, let's do what we can to keep them happy. Their hobby, however, doesn't strike me as one rising to a level justifying Constitutional protection. They ought to be on the same Constitutional footing as philatelists and bird-watchers.

As for the self-defendants, I can understand where they're coming from. On one occasion, when I was swept up in fear, I wished that I had a working pistol and the knowledge of how to use it. But, the fear passed, and the real root of my fear was my imagination.

That doesn't mean that there aren't times that having a pistol would do people some good. But it's a cycle. Most of the reason people think they need guns is because they think others have guns (and sometimes, they're right). But, speaking from personal experience, I've lost a lot more friends and relatives because other people had guns than because there were too few guns around. If you want to defend the Second Amendment on a cost-benefit analysis, you're going to wind up losing.

Finally, the anti-tyranny crowed blew their chance when then allowed the government to "usurp" their authority to own machine guns and nuclear weapons. Theoretically, these people had a point a long time ago, but, now that technology has made muskets an ineffective choice for governmental overthrow, let's not let them kid us. Private gun ownership is not going to prevent governmental tyranny, no matter how carefully you've studied Red Dawn.

Some Hopeful Information about Tulane

This blog has been set up by a Tulane student, "to allow everyone to coordinate information about damage to uptown, news about Tulane, and pictures of property." While the concerns of a bunch of relatively well-off students at a prestigious university may seem relatively minor in light of the devastation wrought on people's lives by the storm and its aftermath, it's good to see that their university experience may, perhaps, survive. I know some great kids who will be very happy if that happens.

Ali - For Those Concerned

2 weeks ago tonight, my family rolled into New Orleans, 14 hours after setting forth from Kansas City. Saturday, we wandered around the French Quarter, drove down hip and bohemian Magazine Street, visited the spectacular Tulane University campus, and ate the best dinner of my life at a restaurant named HerbSaint. Sunday, we had beignets, dropped Ali off at Tulane, and headed toward Memphis.

Saturday morning, Ali instant messaged us and told us she wanted to come home. We had heard from a friend with connections that an evacuation order would be issued later in the day. We called around, and got her a direct flight to Kansas City, to return on this past Wednesday. Personally, I was happy to have her come home, but a part of me thought it made just as much sense to stay there and either go with the rest of the university or mosey on over to the Superdome to ride it out. I am such a stupid midwesterner, and I'm truly blessed that my daughter is smarter than I am.

So, Ali's home, safe and sound. She's been super, donating water to the relief effort, enrolling at Rockhurst University (which has been unbelievably helpful and kind). I know she's hurting for missing her opportunity to have a freshman first semester at a beautiful campus in a thriving city, but she's also wise enough to realize that the people who surrounded her less than a week ago are living through a hell that only few can imagine (and I hope is lined up for Bush for eternity when he meets his maker).

It's been a wild week. The most important thing to me is that Ali is safe and sound. The saddest thing is that so many are not. And the glorious city I loved less than two weeks ago is changed, changed utterly, and even a terrible beauty is hard to foresee.

Rumsfeld: "While no one condones looting, on the other hand, one can understand the pent-up feelings that may result from decades of repression."

But don't get the wrong impression. He's talking about Iraqis, not his fellow Americans. He has compassion for those he enabled to loot their country's art treasures, but Bush is spouting law and order nonsense for those who are trying to survive on bread and water.