the sad state of free speech
I read Joan Walsh at Salon.com. In a recent article she was discussing what had happened when a controversial talk radio host made a bid to become part owner of an NFL team with some other investors.
In the article she wrote about the sad state of free speech in this country in that individuals think the right to free speech also guarantees he or she will face no consequences for that speech. I agree wholeheartedly. If you live an die by your mouth like a "Rush" it seems you are likely to wear the badge of free speech like talisman as if it will shield you. It brings to mind the idea of consequence and responsibility. Personal responsibility and the understanding that actions have consequences seems so lacking in many individuals in today's society. I hesitate to attribute it to a generation since the ability to accept and just as important take responsibility is more like a personality flaw than a result of your age.
When I was reading Joan's blog, it also reminded me of an interview I saw with George W. following the Dixie Chicks, Natalie Maines, controversial statements. He said something pretty true of the situation that should be a lesson to all especially his fellow republicans like Rush. Forgive my recalls not what it used to be but what I heard him say in that interview was that sure, every American has the right to free speech, but you can't whine about the consequences and if a bunch of people want to bulldoze your cd's because you said something not nice about the president, that's how the cookie crumbles. And, don't you know that Rush was one of many on the "crush the Dixie Chicks" bandwagon then. Branding them heretics and traitors while out if the same mouth now offering gems like "I hope Obama fails" and as Joan provided, “bend over, grab the ankles” for Obama because he’s black. Disgusting.
So, Rush, if the NFL doesn't want to align itself with you that's just a consequence of your mouth and not some global liberal conspiracy. Man up you wimp. Speak your mind all you want. Just stop your whining and accept responsibility.
Stay tuned...next post, I'll be writing about the tension between "Live and Let Live" and "Leave No Trace" after camping for a few days in Terlingua.
On the Mindless Menace of Violence
A fellow on twitter posted a link to a YouTube video from a speech Robert Kennedy gave in 1968. I was moved to tears over it and in light of the more visible extremists these days, I watched with more sorrow than I even I expected. I wish I could find just the audio because the video's images are more politically charged than I can appreciate but I offer the link to view it. It's probably what was so compelling to me anyway. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_Vll-t0H6A
Every day, I grow more fearful of what other American's are threatening than I do of any foreign threats. Men with guns, yards from the president, quoting Jefferson's tree of liberty is threat to our very existence. And, this is just one example of hundreds. Frightening.
The text of the speech is offered below.
rallying cry
I attended a rally at Gilley's for Health Care Reform host by Organizing for America. I enjoyed feeling the positive energy of the crowd. It was not a discussion about the specifics just a rally to engage citizens in the movement.
Health Care Reform Rally
There was an assortment of local speakers and after receiving hundreds of emails over the last few years, I finally got to see what Mitch Stewart looks like when he took the stage as the final speaker. Most where very inspirational. I was surprised at the crowds response to the District Attorney. Admittedly, I know nothing about him. I am interested in reading up on him .
Mitch Stewart, Executive Director Organizing for America
I was going to shoot (pictures) the protestors when I left, but they were gone before the rally ended so instead I took shots of OFA's "Let's Get it Done" bus for the tour.
See the - Full Gallery.
Health Care
Four Reasons Why the Public Health Care Option is Irrefutable from Cenk Uygur Host of The Young Turks
1. The government doesn't have to advertise. No marketing budget means less costs to pass down to the consumer.
2. The government will not take a profit. That is about 10-30% of costs wiped out immediately. Private companies by their nature will add a certain percentage to the product for their own profit. That comes directly out of our pocket. An option that doesn't take profit also doesn't take as much money from us.
3. The government will have enormous negotiating leverage with drug companies and health care providers, so they can drive down the costs to the consumer even more.
4. It is an option! If it turns out that the government option does not work as well or costs more, no problem, just use the private insurance you have now. This is only an option you have in a more competitive market. Who can argue with that?
Makes sense to me...
on marriage and prop 8
From the Dallas Observer blog a commentor offer this:
"I'm one of those libertarian whackjobs who think the government should get out of marriage. Marriage is a religious institution. Anything else is special form of legal partnership/civil union. The government should offer a standard legal partnership/civil union contract. Anything that does not fit that contract would have to be drawn up on their own (preferably with a good family law attorney)."
I am not a libertarian whackjob but it sums up my opinion perfectly. Other than that, I am pretty sick of the issue and more importantly how it is used almost exclusively as a political wedge. I'd much rather legislators concern themselves with the economy in light of the 32% loss my retirement account has suffered in the last 5 months.
oh, and, Separation of church and state is an illusion.
On Torture
I've been staying out of this discussion because I am not sure how to articulate my personal feelings and it's just not an area I feel confident that I have all the facts. However, I thought this point was too right on not to it share. I stole it entirely from Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish on Why Is Torture Worse Than Warfare, Ctd.
Christopher Orr makes an important point:
...when a group of combatants are badly outnumbered, or surrounded, or otherwise very, very unlikely to win a conflict, they have a considerable incentive to surrender--but only if they believe they will subsequently be treated with mercy. That is why individuals, and nations, surrender. If, by contrast, a group of combatants believes that, by surrendering, they are only making themselves vulnerable to further harm--specifically torture and/or death--they have no incentive at all to stop fighting.
Though I still don't think there is any way to prosecute those responsible without further tearing apart this country. Add to that my feeling that the list has got to be too damn long to even fathom to true cost of the impact of prosecution especially in time, money and humanity.
Calendar
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « May | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |||
Archives
On Twitter... @danishaw
- Want to know what is being said on the internets ( icudk )? http://www.noslang.com/ 6 days ago
- Is wondering how all the Hotter Than Hell peeps (@thuchton & @LinZCastilleja) are holding up...as I sit in a nice air conditioned house. 1 week ago
- Indy — at Claddagh Irish Pub http://gowal.la/c/2nBDD?137 1 week ago
- More updates...
Posting tweet...
Powered by Twitter Tools.