Mr Mahatma--who is a Mr in real life--lives in the valleys of Southern California with his wife, a herd of Dears, and an impressive collection of books. Pnorny!
He is reachable at:
littlemrmahatma@yahoo.com

All writings are copyrighted 2003-2008 and trademarked: Little Mr. Mahatma

tBlog Mirror

Some fun links:
Little Miss Attila - polar opposite and origin of LMM.

Critical Sites:
Dr. Forbush Thinks
Slashdot
Games Slashdot
UserFriendly
James Randi
Snopes
Home of the Underdogs
The Sun Online

For those generous in spirit, heart, and wallet:

Gibson's "Passion" was touted as an accurate portrayal of the final moments of the life of Christ. This despite that scholars don't really know what exactly happened to Christ and certainly Gibson's work can't truly be called accurate since he based it off of interpretations of the New Testament, itself edited and revised. Gibson's film was fiction pushed as nonfiction and the faithful flocked in such numbers that Gibson is now one of Hollywood's most powerful producers. Critics lambasted the violence and the inherent anti-semitism, but since so much of Religion is blind interpretation and calls to Faith, the criticisms fell on deaf ears. Rationality didn't apply.

Moore's film is propaganda and is pushed as such. He presents the "other side of the coin", alternative interpretations of the Bush Administrations actions and sayings. Moore is presenting non-fiction as, well, non-fiction. You can criticize his manipulations of the facts and snippets but you can't criticize that the snippets were there for all to see. Moore didn't use computer graphics to doctor the snippets, no phony blood - just sheer manipulation to drive home a point: the Bush Administration is dangerously using the Government (OUR Government) for its own devices.

And I find it scary that someone like Little Miss Attila and others went and saw "The Passion" and were profoundly moved by it's accuracy (despite the fiction). Yet these same people happily lambast "Fahrenheit 9/11" without seeing it, despising it for its manipulations. Both sides of the coin exist in terms of Moore's subject. You can find Bush's speeches on the Net. Moore is simply presenting the flipside. With Gibson however there is no flipside. Any attempt to portray the last moments of Christ in any fashion than that popularly believed will be severely lambasted or minimized and forgotten. No two sides to that coin.

Bush's America consists of Right-wing reactionaries who are afraid of Truth, Knowledge, and Thinking, who see violence and strength of arms as the only means to gain respect, who support each other through Faith as the solution to all problems, who see people who disagree with them as enemies. Moore, despite all criticisms, is showing that there's a reality under the Bush fantasy. You don't like it? Tough, blame Bush, not him. Moore doesn't have American blood on his hands because of his propaganda.

And the more I think about the two films, the more scared I am by what they represent and what America has come to. That we even need a film like "F 9/11" shows how much control and manipulations our Government has over the Media, that the Rightists want to thoroughly squelch Moore's film show how much our country has fallen. I feel that if our country continues our downwards slide to the Right we'll be little more than an American version of the enemies we profess to fight, where censorship runs rampant, where you must believe in (the Christian) God, where the poor see their future in terms of the Military or McDonalds, where the rich have their own set of rules and blatantly lord them over the populace.

Is this our America? Run in secret by politicians who speak with empty words, who maneuver for friends and corporations, who see their own power gain as more important than governing? Is this our country where a blatant violation of our Constitution like "In God We Trust" on our money raises more concern than the blood shed in a war based on lies and distortions?

Bush has ruined America and I fear Kerry won't be much of an improvement. We need solutions. We need an overhaul to the system to allow American voices to be heard over the shuffling of kickback checks. Removing the Electoral College is a start. Open-source, accountable electronic voting machines and removing partisan voting are improvements. If we want all Americans to vote than we have to give them a reason to - choices; honest elections - instead of the same-old, same-old. Come November let's get rid of Bush as a start...

DRM Bad And Here's Why
From Cory Doctorow, this is a must read about Digital Rights Management.

Bakersfield Blaze
My mother wanted to take her grandkids to see a real baseball game but she didn't want to deal with Dodger Stadium, parking, downtown LA traffic, and high prices so for Father's Day weekend she suggested (meaning she bought tickets ahead of time then told me we were going) that we go see the Bakersfield Blaze, the A-team for the Tampa Bay Devil Rays.

Bakersfield?!? No one, particularly from LA, goes on vacation to Bakersfield. It's not normal. They grow things in Bakersfield. Tractors are an accepted form of transportation in Bakersfield. For Pete's sake, Buck Owens lives in Bakersfield.

So we went to Bakersfield...and had a great time. The Bakersfield Blaze stadium was small and non-threatening; the people were friendly and well-behaved. My kids loved it. Unfortunately the game went in to extra innings and we left before the outcome (Blaze won!), and we didn't snag any fly balls or win a 20" flat-screen TV (courtesy of Best Buy) but we ate peanuts and all the junk food. We cheered and razzed and sang.

Bakersfield. Who'd a thunk it!

I had forgotten that when you enter they give you a teaser token, like giving a cigarette to a kid. One puff and you're hooked. Sure enough, my kid looked around, tried a game, got the ticket, and wanted more. More tokens! More tickets! Max the credit card! I splurged for $10 bucks worth of tokens (40 plus a bonus 10!) if anything to keep my title of "Cool Dad". This on top of the tokens we go from the party host and a coupon good for 100 tickets. My kid quickly learned the technique of the "slow pull" when retrieving tickets out of the games. You can usually get one extra ticket that way but you have to make sure to not play the game again until after someone else. As it was quite a few machines ate our tokens outright so I figured it was turnabout.

The pizza. I ate 2 slices of pepperoni pizza ands a slice of sausage. My dreams last night were vivid, complex, and something out of a magic mushroom orgy. My kid woke up loopy too but he got to bed late. Forget drugs. I'm sticking to The Pizza!

The birthday celebration. On cue, out comes Chuck E., on comes the TV and the animatronics. Everybody sing! My kid looked lost, unsure what was going on. The Pizza may have had a quick effect on him because he didn't sing or clap or play along. Maybe he's too damn cynical, the little blighter. As for Chuck E., well, I wouldn't have minded a can of Instant Napalm or a cattleprod. He got off this time but only due to the abundance of kids between me and him. My kid ate a piece of birthday cake and declared it pretty awful, this from a child that snacks on crayons.

Finally after two hours we ran out of tokens. We had 335 tickets but my kid had to have a faux lightsaber which was 500 tickets. The clerk working the counter gave a shrug and handed over a lightsaber. I don't know whether it was standard policy to grossly round-up ticket counts or the clerk didn't care but bless him. That was one happy 5-year kept occupied for a long ride home. Driving home I calculated that we spent $10 to get 500 tickets of value - two cents per ticket. The light saber probably costs maybe a buck wholesale...we're talking gross profits and I didn't even buy food.

Yeah, Chuck E. occupies a special spot in my Hall of Loathing, right next to Microsoft and George W..

She can beatify me any time...woof! Callisto 4ever!

Oil Mismanagement
Buried in the Times (and I mean buried) was a tiny paragraph about how the oil pipelines in Iraq aren't being monitored in terms of flow and cash revenue and that the whole process is open to smuggling and mismanagement.

No!!! Really?!? But American Companies are in control and they are the epitomy of honest and upright management. The Friends of Bush and Cheney are beyond reproach and, and, and damn the Liberal Media for printing LIES and DISTORTIONS suggesting otherwise.

Pity the LA Times buried the column. But, really, it's more of same with the Bush Administration and the Friends thereof.

Yep, I'm taking my youngest kid to a birthday party at Chuck E. Cheese.

Don't let the commercial fool you with smiling children playing nicely together in an expansive play area, where "kids can be a kid".

Let me explain how a typical "UpChuck D. Cheese" works. You go in with your little loved ones. Immediately your well-behaved angels turn into drooling, demanding hellions. To play the games, those loud, colorful, loud, enticing games you have to buy tokens. Give the tokens to the kids and off they go to play games. Here's the kicker. Most of those games give a reward in the form of tickets. Get enough (note that word - enough) tickets and you can exchange them for prizes. Mind you that the prize that your kids absolutely must have happens to be the one that they need just a few more tickets. And so begins the cycle of whine, money, play, tickets, whine, money, play, tickets until your nerves are worn and your wallet empty. Sure, being a kid means throwing a fit for Mommy or Daddy to give them ten more dollars for tokens.

And the smiling children you see in the commercial? Forget it. It's open warfare for the games that give the most tickets or that happen to be "broken". Little kids are easy prey and dropped tokens and tickets disappear in milliseconds.

Expansive play area? Sure, with a body density rivaling a Tokyo train at rush hour. These places profit off of volume so the more kids crammed in the better. Think mosh pit.

To add insult to injury is the food, particularly the pizza. I haven't had pizza like what they serve since my dorm days at college many moons ago. Back then they served and we ate this cardboardy-type square with grey on it. The grey might have been the cheese or the tomato sauce, we never figured it out and we didn't care. It was cheap. At Chuck E.'s the pizza isn't cheap but you'll eat it out of necessity, something to take your mind off the mayhem happening off the starboard bow, to dull the pain knowing that your little darling is likely learning how to jimmy open an arcade game. If marijuana were ever made legal Chuck E.s would clean up. At the least they should serve a tequila valium cocktail.

The worst part is that the last time I took the kids to a party at a Chuck E.s I swore that I would never, ever take them there again.

Putin and Iraq
How convenient. How timely. Putin has confirmed that - indeed! - Hussein had links to terrorism. This earth-shattering revelation appeared as a teeny blurb in the L.A. Times. This news is so important that even Bush hasn't waved it around. Sorry Putin. For whatever deals you expected to come out of this revelation, it's too little, too late. No one believes this crap any more. Bush has lost all credibility. The best link so far is that in 1994 some Iraqi muckety-muck may have met with some al Qaeda muckety-muck. Yep, that's a link - a meeting in 1994. Send in the troops. Let's roll!

As I repeat again and again, we are talking two distinct issues here, not one. The first is the "War on Terrorism" as begun from 9/11. Bush has failed. He had the world's sympathies and alliance. He had the Taliban in Afghanistan removed as he pursued bin Laden to the hills on the border of Pakistan. He was going after a known terrorist and the world cheered him on. Then he changed direction.

Issue two: the Neocons had an agenda for changing the Middle East. Perhaps for oil, for power, for strategy, for all of the above, in any case Bush shifted the focus from chasing bin Laden to deposing Iraq. But the Neocons needed a reason and the "War on Terrorism" seemed a likely excuse IF a link between Hussein and al Qaeda could be found, IF Hussein could be seen as a threat to the U.S.. I won't rehash the lies and distortions used by Bush, you've read them and are likely bored by the same-old.

Point being we have two things going on with the Neocons trying desperately to muddle the two together in the publics eye. Don't be confused. Don't be fooled. Bush and the Neocons have proven themselves incapable of dealing with either issue. And sadly we are in a "War on Terrorism" and we are in Iraq. What we need now is a leader who can see beyond mere bully tactics and can use diplomacy. It may be Kerry ; it's certainly not Bush.

"Court: No Right to Keep Names From Police


Mon Jun 21,11:21 AM ET


By GINA HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Monday that people do not have a constitutional right to refuse to tell police their names.


The 5-4 decision frees the government to arrest and punish people who won't cooperate by revealing their identity.


The decision was a defeat for privacy rights advocates who argued that the government could use this power to force people who have done nothing wrong to submit to fingerprinting or divulge more personal information.


Police, meanwhile, had argued that identification requests are a routine part of detective work, including efforts to get information about terrorists.


The justices upheld a Nevada cattle rancher's misdemeanor conviction. He was arrested after he told a deputy that he didn't have to reveal his name or show an ID during an encounter on a rural road in 2000.


Larry "Dudley" Hiibel was prosecuted, based on his silence and fined $250. The Nevada Supreme Court sided with police on a 4-3 vote.


Justices agreed in a unique ruling that addresses just what's in a name.


The ruling was a follow up to a 1968 decision that said police may briefly detain someone on reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing, without the stronger standard of probable cause, to get more information. Justices said that during such brief detentions, known as Terry stops after the 1968 ruling, people must answer questions about their identities.


Justices had been asked to rule that forcing someone to give police their name violated a person's Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable searches and the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.


Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said that that it violated neither.


"Obtaining a suspect's name in the course of a Terry stop serves important government interests," Kennedy wrote.


The ruling left the door open for what Kennedy said would be an unusual case in which revealing a name would be incriminating. But he said generally, disclosing an identity is "so insignificant in the scheme of things."


Marc Rotenberg, president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said America is different 36 years after the Terry decision. "In a modern era, when the police get your identification, they are getting an extraordinary look at your private life."


He said the ruling for Nevada "opens the door to what could become a routine fishing expedition among government databases," after police stop innocent people.


The police encounter with Hiibel happened after someone called police to report arguing between Hiibel and his daughter in a truck. An officer asked him 11 times for his identification or his name.


Over and over again Hiibel refused, at one point saying, "If you've got something, take me to jail" and "I don't want to talk. I've done nothing. I've broken no laws."


In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens (news - web sites) said that Hiibel "acted well within his rights when he opted to stand mute." Also disagreeing with the decision were Justices David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg (news - web sites) and Stephen Breyer (news - web sites).


Justices were told that 20 states have similar laws to the Nevada statute upheld by the high court: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, and Wisconsin.


The case is Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of the state of Nevada, 03-5554."

And if you don't tell them they get to "interrogate" you.

Welcome to Bush's America where in the name of fighting terrorism you will have no privacy and no rights, where you're either a supporter of Bush or a terrorist - got it?

Iraq and Terrorism
I find it disgustingly ironic that the Bushies are using these terrible civilian decapitations as justification for invading Iraq. That is, Bush (and cronies) used the "War on Terror" as a false premise to invade Iraq and now Terrorism is worse, and because it's worse we had reason to invade - huh? The Bushies were never for logic (makes their brains hurt), instead playing off emotions and Faith.

But, they say, Hussein had links to al Qaeda. Well, sure, Bush has links to al Qaeda too. Quit with the semantics. Hussein never had a working relationship with al Qaeda, no grand schemes in the making, and certainly never a threat to the U.S.. Having a link doesn't mean jack, like I know someone who knows the kid of Ozzy Osbourne doesn't mean I have a working relationship with Ozzy. But the Bushies don't want people to think that deep. The Bushies want to call the definitions and it's not working. You can easily track how the Bushies started out by claiming a link between Hussein and al Qaeda, then changing it to a link between Hussein and al Qaeda-like groups, and finally a link between Hussein and terrorist groups.

Sorry folks, the justifications that the Bushies gave for invading Iraq didn't play but it didn't matter the Bushies were going in no matter what. It disgusts most Americans; it disgusts most Iraqis. Terrorism is increasing and as awful as these beheadings are, expect more because when it comes to fighting Terrorism Bush has proven himself incapable and incompetent. Don't believe me? Ask Osama who's smiling somewhere.

Eric Schmitt and Thom Shanker/New York Times
Thursday, June 17, 2004


WASHINGTON Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, acting at the request of George Tenet, the director of central intelligence, ordered military officials in Iraq last November to hold a man suspected of being a senior Iraqi terrorist at a high-level detention center there but not list him on the prison's rolls, according to senior Pentagon and intelligence officials.


This prisoner and other "ghost detainees" were hidden largely to prevent the International Committee of the Red Cross from monitoring their treatment and conditions, and to avoid disclosing their location to an enemy, officials said.


Major General Antonio Taguba, the army officer who in February investigated abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison, criticized the practice of allowing ghost detainees there and at other detention centers in Iraq as "deceptive, contrary to army doctrine, and in violation of international law."

And...

Rumsfeld Ordered Secret Arrest in Iraq


Thu Jun 17, 8:27 AM ET


By MATT KELLEY, Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON - At the request of CIA (news - web sites) Director George Tenet, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld ordered the military to secretly hold a suspected terrorist in Iraq (news - web sites), a Pentagon (news - web sites) spokesman said.


The suspected terrorist has been held since October without being given an identification number and without the International Committee of the Red Cross being notified, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said. Both conditions violate the Geneva Accords on treatment of prisoners of war.

Two interesting things. The first is - surprise! - Rumsfeld repeatedly violated international law. But this is OK because as long as Rummy didn't violate U.S. law because that's what Bush sez. We are the law in case you haven't figured it out.

The other item of interest are the other "ghost detainess" implying this wasn't a one-time deal but a pattern of abuse which typifies this Administration. Abu Ghraib was no fluke; it was policy coming on down from as high as Rumsfeld if not higher. Again, did Bush know or will he pull a Reagan and claim he was out-of-the-loop? If Bush knew then he's as guilty as the rest. If he didn't know then he has no business being President with an Administration running amok. He should be damned either way but we're the ones suffering while "Teflon" Georgie slides out of the light.

What's funny or sad is that if this were any other team their accomplishment of getting to the Finals would be applauded. Consider the injuries during the year and The Court Case. Consider the opponents in the Playoffs - Houston with Yao Ming, San Antonio - the defending champs with Duncan, Minnesota with Garnett the MVP - a gauntlet unlike any other. For any team to survive that run and end up in the Finals should be held in awe.

But this is the Lakers. The moment they announced the signing of Malone and Payton the expectations were nothing less than the Championship and they almost did it. Despite the injuries, the feuds, the scrowl, the lack of triangle - they almost did it. But Detroit showed what it takes to win - teamwork, hard work, attention, desire, and focus. Congratulations to Detroit and next year we'll see them again - same time, same place, different outcome.

Iraq and al Qaeda
Not surprisingly another report (9/11 Commission) supports the non-existence of a direct link between Hussein and al Qaeda, despite claims to the contrary by Cheney (oh, he of loud mouth and lack of evidence). The invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism! What Bush was trying to do was use "The War On Terrorism" to justify his agenda of bringing "Democracy and Freedom to the Middle East". It didn't work. And, worse, Bush is losing the War and failing to bring Freedom. He's brought a demonstrable increase in terrorism and bloodshed to the Middle East. By shifting focus away from bin Laden to Hussein he gave a green light to terrorist groups instead fo a warning signal. By deposing Hussein without a plan for country reconstruction he brought confusion to the Iraqis; he brought mismanagement and fiscal irresponsibility as Halliburton and other companies demonstrate American Business policies.

And we're paying for it. Over $100 BILLION wasted in Iraq, numerous American lives lost in the fraudelent folly foisted on us by Bush. Again Halliburton is being charged and investigated for overcharging and wasteful spending, now tallied in the billions.

9/11 brought home the "War on Terrorism". If Bush had focused on that and had pursued and caught bin Laden from the very get-go, he'd likely find himself validly elected President in November. If he had found valid justifications for his actions in Iraq instead of selective and faulty intelligence, he'd be elected in November. Instead he and his neo-con buddies stupidly tried to use the War to justify the Invasion even though there was no connection. By trying to force the issue and dupe the World they only duped themselves. We live in a world where information travels light-fast, where people can't be as easily fooled because there's always someone online willing to call the bluff or, at least, play Devils Advocate. We called you bluff Mr. "President".

Cruds. Kerry is no great piece of work but he has to be better than Bush. And those who say Bush should be re-elected because he's the enemy we know, I disagree. We've seen what Bush can do and we don't want any more of it. At least Kerry has some intelligence and that's a start, a change for the better.

Fresh French Fries
The USDA with grants from the French Fry industry (whatever they're called) has declared support for classifying french fries as "fresh", as in fresh vegetables in fruit. The reason is that french fries are "minimally processed" and can expire (go bad). The lunacy and idiocy of this policy is well beyond absurd. French fries are coated, cooked, and packaged. Most foods will spoil over time, even man-made foods - that doesn't make them fresh. Honey - which crystalizes but doesn't spoil - would never get classified as fresh by this logic.

"Fresh" should mean lack of additives, preservatives, or cooking. A peach that gets picked, boxed, shipped, and is still edible the next day is fresh. A peach that is picked, boxed, and coated with a preservative isn't fresh. A peach semi-cooked and canned isn't fresh. A peach picked fresh and frozen is "fresh frozen" but not fresh.

French fries aren't fresh and a simple experiement could show the point. Let's make two teams of USDA upper management. We'll give one team real fresh fruits and vegetables for a solid week. The other team will get french fries and any other fruit and vegetables that are coated, cooked, and can expire - for a week. After the week let's compare the weight and cholesterol fot he two groups. My guess is that the group eating real fresh fruits and veggies will be in better health than those on the "fresh" fruits and veggies. So USDA ready for a test?

A couple years ago I took a vacation in Amsterdam and in my wanderings I came across a Chinese bookstore on Damrak. Went in and there to my amazement was "Three Kingdoms" in a nice boxed set (not for sale in the U.S. - wonder why?). Bought it, read it, loved it - all 2,300 plus pages of it. It got a little tedious in the last 100 pages or so but a good read if the topic remotely interests you. And now it's available in the U.S.. Check out the zshop of the fine seller zhihongx. I recommend this cheap, cheap version. If you'd like to download the book in ebook format or just read it online, this www.threekingdoms.com is unsurpassed.

Recently I got an urge to play "Three Kingdoms" and while snooping for reviews of the latest PS2 incarnation I ended up on Yellow Bridge that talked about the other great classics of Chinese Literature. My interest was piqued. I didn't buy "The Scholars" but I did order the others sets (cheap!) from Zhihongx. Eventually in the mail I got a nice heavy package - thousands of pages to lose myself in. My eyesight would pay heavily and Xena would have to wait.

First up was Journey To The West, over 2,300 pages. I lasted 350 pages. The story is eventually about a Monk and three companions travelling to the "West" in retrieve some Buddhist sutras. The beginning sections - the part I read - tell of the rise of Monkey to a near God and his downfall, followed by the beginnings of the Monk and the start of the quest. My problem with the story and what caused me to put the book down was the lack of empathy I felt for the main characters. Monkey, simply put, was an obnoxious self-centered ass. The Monk was a whiny coward. They may have become heroic by the end of the tale but the slow build-up killed the enjoyment. Plus, the tale is very heavily laced with Buddhism - not a bad thing - but if you're not into the religion and mythology, it gets quickly dull. Not recommended for the impatient.

A Dream Of Red Mansions was the second book I tackled and, honestly, I couldn't get past 100 pages (out of 2,556 pages). It's a romance story but it spends so much time on relationships and class differences that the plot if any disappeared. Sadly, another not recommended (at least for guys).

I'm currently reading Outlaws Of The Marsh (AKA Water Margin) and enjoying it very much. Easily as much as "Three Kingdoms". It's 2,149 pages of action and intrigue, honor, corruption, heroes, and villains and that's in the couple of hundred pages I've read so far. The story (from the cover blurbs) is about a group of people forced to become outlaws because of Governmental corruption and other circumstances, essentially when good people have to become "bad". Highly recommended!

Bush, G-8 Leaders, and Iraq
"President Bush appealed to his big-power allies Thursday to do more to guide Iraq's transformation into a stable democracy, saying the "Iraqi people need help" to defend themselves, rebuild their country and hold elections." Translation: We've screwed up the country even further. We've no idea what to do. My popularity is plummeting. Help!!! (And send money!)

Psychology, Statistics, and Critical Thinking
Psychology is one of "those" classes that you take in High School or College: sleep through class, take the final, get the "A". Yet, I believe that Psychology (the study of behavior) should be a required class, more so than Geometry or Trigonometry. It could be a cornerstone of a program to teach kids how to live in a world of consumers by focusing on Marketing, Advertising, and human behavior. It could teach Statistics and the abuse thereof ("4 out of 5 dentists..."). And it could focus on critical thinking, how to separate the cow from the cow patties. It could touch upon Persuasion and propaganda, how words can sound so important in the mouths of politicians but really stand empty of substance.

If I taught the class (and I've been tempted but it's a money thing) I would gloss over much of the history but still emphasis the roots and ties of Psychology to Philosophy. I would teach the difference between Science and Junk Science and let no topic be sacred, let no student be unchallenged. The students would learn a lot about themselves, about their belief systems and how it affects their behavior.

It would be the most useful and dangerous "Required" class ever taught. Students sleep at their own risk. (sigh!)

Comparing the cross to the figure of Pomona is faulty in that while both are religious figures very few people know of Pomona while the cross is a recognized icon which has a current significance. The cross is still used by a very active religion whereas Pomona is gone, a figure from a past belief system. Or to put it another way Los Angeles has a tremendous Jewish history, would people get upset if the seal had a Star of David on it but not a cross? You bet! They'd be demanding the removal of the Star or an equal opportunity for the cross. And to be fair if one religion gets their icon allowed then others should be allowed as well since LA has a history that spans cultures and religions.

The argument that the cross is historical and represents the Missions is counter-argued that the Missions themselves represent the destruction of a native people and further counter-argued that Pomona therefore holds little historical value other than the name. We have no missions or temples to Pomona in our history!

I agree with ACLU that this is a violation of Church and State, and I agree with the city that the cost will be enormous to make the necessary changes. A solution would be to phase in the changes and spread the cost over several years. Both the ACLU and the city should find comfort in that. Heck, the city could probably make a buck by selling the old seals. I would also suggest that to make the seal look nice simply move one of the two nearby stars over to where the cross was - making the Hollywood Bowl icon look like it's truly under the stars.

Lakers and Pistons
I'm debating whether to sue the Lakers to reclaim the costs for my ulcer medicine. Note to Lakers: "The Pistons aren't going to give you the Championship. You have to take it. Play some D. Play some O. Attack the basket. Get Billups and either Wallace in foul trouble. Play smart." I think the winner of game 3 will take the series. Go Lakers!

Rumsfeld and Torture
All these memo leaks and reports sure make it look like, at the very least, Rumsfeld knew and approved of some forms of torture. Whether it goes all the way to the top is debatable but I'd like to think that Bush wouldn't be "out of the loop" a la Reagan on this topic. So, will Rumsfeld assume Personal Responsibility as per the Republican/Neocon Party line and resign? Doubtful, very doubtful and very sad. This is why this Administration is so unloved - no responsibility, no accountability.

The Compassionate President
Bush keeps harping that he's the "Compassionate President" but compassionate for whom? Compassion is empathy, to feel anothers pain. Is he compassionate for the suffering Americans he's ignored while tromping through Iraq? Is he compassionate for the students he's leaving behind by gouging Education? Or for those who've lost their jobs?

Or even simpler. How can a person call himself the "Compassionate President" and also the "War President"? The two do not mix. One does not lead to the other. That Bush is so involved and blinded by Iraq unequivocally demonstrates his lack of compassion as he ignores all the other crises (such as running this country in an effective and positive manner).

How about a new name: Ex-President.

C'mon, you knew I was going to say something like that.

In this way I feel he is direct precursor to George W. - someone who appears to act according to the wishes of others without much too offer intellectually by himself. Someone who appears above responsibility and is devoted to the point of blindness to a pet opponent (whether Russia then or Iraq now).

Reagan demonstrated that the U.S. President can be nothing more than a talking head and if that's a sign of greatness then, yes, Reagan was great. However reducing the Presidency to a symbolic position with others making the decisions (remember George "I am in charge!" Schultz), reduicing the position to where the President can take occassional nods at meetings, instead of an active involvement certainly disqualifies Reagan as a great President.

But as a person his charm and charisma were unquestioned, his humor cutting and self-effacing, and it is this person we shall miss. Ronald Reagan the person.

After my stomach acid settled to a manageable level I thought the cliche of "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." So if the Right-wing religious types want Creationism to be next to Evolution in Science class then it's only fair that if they are to be considered equal that Evolution MUST be taught next to Creationism in Reilgious Schools and in Church services. This could be a tremendous opportunity for Science to spread the scientific method of inquiry, to talk about evidence, replicability, hypotheses and theories, peer review, and critical thinking. Or since the Creationists want their belief taught without the bother of the Scientific Method, the Evolutionists can use the same line of thinking while teaching in Church.

Using Darwin's "The Origin of Species" the Evolutionists can quote, misquote, stretch the meanings of sentences. They can forgo any rational thought and just appeal to people's instincts and emotions. They can endlessly repeat "Darwin wrote it! That proves it!". No need to bother with experimental evidence, they can ask people to believe in Evolution as a matter of Faith. And to detractors they can sneer "Prove us wrong!"

What a great opportunity but why stop there. Certainly every other belief of how we got here would deserve equal time in both the Churches and Schools, opening the door to other views...(see where this can lead?)

Promotion of religion in any form doesn't belong in our Public schools, not in our Pledge, not in our Science classes. That there's not a greater public outcry over the attempts of Creationists to destroy our scholastic system horrifying demonstrates how low our society has sunk in terms of rational and critical thinking. But then again look at what President Bush is doing...and cringe.

These are the typical headlines we see. Fingerpointing, accusations, everyone is guilty except Bush. Not Bush. Never Bush. Not George "Personal Responsibility" W. Bush. He's the "Compassionate Conservative" whatever the hell that means. And as his Administration, like our country, falls apart, he still avoids and evades, bob and weave. There was a sketch on 'MAD TV' many years ago showing the elder Bush tutoring the younger on how to evade nasty topics. Keep the target moving and that's what Bush, in reality, is doing. Hard questions about Iraq? Talk about Patriotism and supporting our troops. Iraqi Prison abuse? Talk about a few rogue military types. Gas prices too high? Talk about Faith initiatives.

Evade and avoid.

Bush likened the War against Terrorism to World War II, the war against tyranny. Huh? The two are not remotely comparable. WW2 was fight against a megalomaniac bent on annexing the world. Terrorism doesn't have an obvious leader whom upon removal the group would collapse. In WW2 many of Hitler's underlings were planning for peace. Not so with terrorism. WW2 was a fight between nations. Terrorism is a fight that spans nations. In WW2 we mastered intelligence gathering and used it wisely. Here we gather intelligence and use it only if it justifies a foregone conclusion (like an invasion of Iraq).
Most importantly, WW2 was arguably a justified war. The pursuit of Bin Laden is justified. The invasions of Iraq wasn't, despite what Bush tells us. No WMDs, no threats to the U.S., no support of al Qaeda. Invading Iraq just to remove an evil tyrant is not enough of a justification for then we should have long ago invaded Cuba or North Korea or Libya...

No matter how Bush explains the invasion of Iraq he stills partakes of the old bob and weave. Open-ended, no-bid contracts to buddy companies, sky high gas prices - the stink of oil permeates Iraq and Bush. What we want from Bush is openness regarding the business connections behind the invasion.

Bush talks about the never-ending quest for Freedom and Democracy and he's right. As long as his ilk subvert the American Process for their own gains, our quest won't end. Our challenge and duty as Americans is to not allow our Nation to be manipulated for personal gain, not to allow our Military to be used for personal gain. Do you want your kids dying so that Bush or Cheney can make a friend happy? It's about real American Patriotism called Truth, Justice, Freedom.

During the TV interview Ron Paul compared Iraq to Vietnam in that we have two choices regarding the quagmire: withdraw or escalate. Bush has repeatedly called for staying so the first option is out, leaving the second option. Escalation, as Vietnam should have taught us, leads nowhere. Ron Paul felt we should withdraw.

I agree considering we shouldn't have been there in the first place but I think there's a third option - the Bush option and that is to simply stay there but without escalating - yet. Just keep an American presence until the U.N. sends in forces, until the Iraqis can truly take over, or until there's nothing left to loot. I like how Bush talks about Democracy and Freedom and then tries to foist Chalabi as the new Head. Ooops, Chalabi's out. Foist a CIA crony...ooops he's out. Foist...oh the Iraqi Council voted someone in? Democracy!!!

Bush and his cronies have absolutely no idea how to handle a peace or to build a country. Bush can't even keep the U.S. going so what makes him or his cabinet experts on building other countries? Answer: What do they get out of it?

Bush's only strength for vote gathering lies in the notion that he "understands" terrorism, that he's being strong and resolute on terrorism. Ron Paul's not fooled. We're not fooled. Bush knows nothing about stopping terrorism, otherwise he'd have gone after Bin Laden and stayed after him until Justice was served. Instead Bush veered to Iraq to fulfill other priorities.

Bush doesn't understand terrorism. He understands War against Nations - that's easy. Afghanistan, Iraq - those were easy targets but terrorists are different. They can hide in nations but necessarily be supported by nations. We have had terrorists in the U.S. - Timothy McVeigh, for example. He wasn't state sponsored so the notion of going after nations harboring terrorists falls short (unless we have plans to conquer the world - Democracy Uber Alles).

That Bush doesn't understand terrorism and is only spreading paranoia plays right into the terrorists hands. For a minimum of effort the terrorists can achieve a maximum of results. 9/11 was the result of years of planning, study, and careful execution. Now with Homeland Security and their nebulous alerts a terrorist need only pick up a phone to cause an event to get cancelled or a freeway closed or a mall cleared. The terrorists only have to threaten instead of execute to achieve interruption. For a $0.35 call they can achieve millions of dollars of disruption.

Vietnam was a different type of warfare, one that didn't play by our rules. Iraq is proving the same and that Bush doesn't understand terrorism is again demonstrated by his reluctance to get us out. That Bush today compared the War against Terrorism to World War II shows that Bush is desperate. We didn't invade Germany to stop Hitler in the early 1930's. Hitler wasn't a threat to the U.S. and had many supporters in our Government. Hussein shot his wad in the early 1990's and got his butt spanked. He didn't then try to take over the Mid-East. Fact is, he said he didn't have WMDs and he was telling the truth. Bush lied to get his agenda through. Plain and simple - the bad guy told the truth and the good guy lied.

Bush: "Bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq, Bush has argued, will undercut the stagnation and despair that feeds the extremist ideologies of al-Qaida and its terrorist allies." And that's why al Qaeda is now in Iraq recruiting like crazy. Al Qaeda wasn't a player with Hussein around and now look. Al Qaeda is not feeding off despair, they're feeding off disgust. Disgust over Bush and his cronies saying one thing and doing another. Freedom! Democracy! Whoops - prison abuse (but we're not as bad as Hussein).

'"Part of winning the war on terror is spreading freedom and democracy in the Middle East," Bush told reporters at the White House before leaving for Colorado on Tuesday.' So does that mean Saudi Arabia is next? They've supported terrorists. How about Iran? They got nukes in development. How about Pakistan? They've got nukes and terrorists.

You can't stop terrorism by increasing fear, paranoia, secrecy, and military invasions. It comes through communications and openness. It comes through fulfilling hopes and dreams, instead of creating new nightmares. Bush has neglected bin Laden, a known terrorist, to pursue Iraq. Hussein was a bad boy but he could have been toppled later AFTER the capture of Bin Laden and with perhaps more valid evidence for the need that what was used.

What truly sickens me are those folks think that any criticism of Bush Policy is unpatriotic. That we should blindly support our troops in whatever endeavors. We want their quick and safe return but we deplore the policy that put them in harms way.

More Faith Needed
"The Associated Press


Presidential Revival: President Bush speaks Tuesday at the White House National Conference on Faith-Based and Community Initiatives being held in Washington.


WASHINGTON - President Bush, trying to revive a stalled initiative, said Tuesday the doctrine of separation-of-state should not prevent religious groups from competing for government money to help the needy.


"I'm telling America, we need to not discriminate against faith-based programs," Bush told a White House conference of community leaders. "We need to welcome them so our society is more wholesome, more welcoming and more hopeful for every single citizen."


Opponents of Bush's initiative, launched in the early days of his administration, worry that government would wind up paying for religion. They also object to allowing taxpayer-funded groups to hire and fire based on religious persuasion. But the proposal is popular with religious groups, a key political constituency of Bush's, and he is pushing it as an election-year initiative.


"I fully understand it's important to maintain the separation of church and state," Bush said.


"We don't want the state to become the church nor do we want the church to become the state. We're in common agreement there."


"But I do believe that groups should be allowed to access social service grants so long as they don't proselytize or exclude somebody simply because they don't share a certain faith," he said."

And how pray-tell would the Government know whether proselytizing was happening? Would there be an oversight committee? What, exactly, would constitute proselytizing?

But wait there's more...

"Bush Promises Faith Groups Cultural Change


United Press International


President Bush Tuesday promised a change in U.S. culture to help faith-based organizations, creating three more federal centers for faith-based initiatives.


"It's hard to be a faith-based program if you can't practice faith," Bush told attendees of the first national annual White House Faith-Based Initiatives Conference in Washington.


"And the message to you is: we're changing the culture here in America," he said. "And we're making progress. We're changing the attitude here in Washington, D.C."


Bush signed an executive order Tuesday creating three more centers in federal departments -- for the Department of Commerce, the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Small Business Administration.


These new centers join seven others that Bush created to help grass-roots faith-based organizations find federal funding.


"Government can't spend money on religious programs simply because there's a rabbi on the board, cross on the wall or crescent on the door. I view this as not only bad social policy -- because policy bypassed the great works of compassion and healing that take place -- I viewed it as discrimination, and we needed to change it," he said."

Noooo, the Government can't and shouldn't spend money on religious programs because they're religious programs!!! The job of the Government is to Govern, provide services for the people. A Government should not be pushing a religion, any religion. If religious institutions want to provide services, fine, let them. Keep the Government out of it.

Bush is only further opening the breach of the wall between Church and State. "In God We Trust" and "Under God" yesterday. Faith-based initiatives today. Tomorrow, public affirmations of Christianity as being the true U.S. religion? This is exactly how terrorism gets started, by eliminating Freedoms...