10 Most Harmful Books

An obvious attempt for conservative weekly magazine Human Events Online to raise awareness of their trifling existence via the avenue of controversial books.

And yet, they are relatively surprising. For instance, Darwin's Descent of Man and Freud's Introduction to Psychoanalysis made only the list of honorable mentions [other Honorables: Ralph Nader, Margaret Mead, George Sorel, Simone de Beauvoir, Lenin, Foucault, John Stuart Mill].

And now, for the shocking, yet very revealing top-10 list of the absolute most damaging books to American culture, with direct Amazon links so that you can purchase them immediately, and links to the online editions so that you don't even have to purchase them to enjoy their dangerous glory [Titles link to Amazon; Authors link to online editions].

The 10 Most Harmful Books, chosen by a panel of crazies over at Human Events Online

1. The Communist Manifesto
Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels, 1848

2. Mein Kampf
Adolf Hitler, 1925-26

3. Quotations from Chairman Mao
Mao Zedong, 1966

4. The Kinsey Report
Alfred Kinsey, 1948

5. Democracy and Education
John Dewey, 1916

6. Das Kapital
Karl Marx, 1867-1894

7. The Feminine Mystique
Betty Friedan, 1963

8. The Course of Positive Philosophy
Auguste Comte, 1830-1842

9. Beyond Good and Evil
Freidrich Nietzsche, 1886

10. General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money
John Maynard Keynes, 1936

Obviously Marx and the significant Communist texts stand as dangerous counter-arguments to the clear-cut capitalism of contemporary Conservativism, and Mein Kampf is a toss-off dangerous book. Any list of the same topic would be foolish not to include it, so it is a default front-runner.

But are Kinsey's reports on human sexuality, Freidan's deconstruction of the myth of the modern complacent female, and Comte and Nietzsche actually "dangerous?"

Absolutely. They are texts that demand certain expansions: expansions of sexual expression as natural expression; expansion of gender roles as being improper, oppressive constructs; and various philosophical expansions beyond a core and simple acceptance.

These are the true dangers to Conservativism. Another way to consider this is to understand that Conservativism is threatened by systems of politics, gender roles, sexuality, and thought which strive beyond their prescribed, traditional roles.

Purple Power

Is the new political force to be reckoned with the so-called Purple Power of moderate Republicans and Democrats voting together [more often Democrats voting with Republicans than the reverse, of course]?

"If they're a Democrat from a red district, they have to be looking over their shoulders all the time, and [these votes] are a good way to demonstrate to the Republican-leaning independents in their districts that they have indeed sided with the GOP on a certain number of leading issues," says Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia.

"Why would the Democratic leadership lean on their vulnerable members?" he adds. "They are going to reserve the pressure for a few matters that really matter - and Social Security is the most obvious."

In addition to the electoral calculus, business groups have worked with Republican leaders to build support for issues such as tax cuts, bankruptcy reform, and class-action reform from the grass roots, especially targeting vulnerable Democrats.

More than half of the Democratic votes for repeal of the estate tax, dubbed by Republicans the "death tax," came from Democrats in districts that Bush carried in 2004.

...
Last week's vote to lift federal restrictions on stem-cell research marked a critical mass of Republicans also willing to buck their leadership - and to buck President Bush, who he'll veto the bill. The 50 Republicans who voted against this bill included more than half of those in districts won by Kerry in 2004.

"When the klieg lights are turned off, and no one is watching, it's amazing how much bipartisanship you can find on Capitol Hill," says Michael Frank, a congressional analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

Democrats who have supported GOP positions say it's a mistake to interpret their votes as a broad endorsement of the Republican agenda.

"Most of these Democratic votes were to protect themselves from attacks for being weak on crime or taxes - not out of affection for Republican or their agenda," says Rep. James Moran (D) of Virginia, who is working with Congressman Dreier to build bipartisan support for CAFTA, the Central America Free Trade Agreement.

Amnesty when Convenient

Tim Grieve at Salon:

As the folks at Think Progress note, the Bush administration has been more than happy to rely on Amnesty International's work when it's politically expedient -- say, to make the case for invading Iraq. But it's a different story now that Amnesty International has turned its attention to abuses by the United States.

Fighting off a sudden case of lame-duckness, George W. Bush held a press conference this morning in the White House Rose Garden, where he was asked about Amnesty's new report detailing allegations of abuse of detainees at Guantanamo Bay. The president's response: "It's absurd. It's an absurd allegation. The United States is a country that promotes freedom around the world."

Bush said that the allegations were made by people -- and we're assuming that he was talking about the detainees, not Amnesty -- "who hate America." That much may be true, but it doesn't make their allegations false.

Cheney's Iraq

Dick Cheney, in the same interview that he betrayed his offended nature at the un-PC language of Amnesty International's report, said that he still believes that the Iraq war was "the right thing" and that the Insurgency is in its "last throes." He also asserts that the war will be over in the timely fashion of 4 years time: by the time he and Bush leave office in 2009. This is much-temempered language from some of Cheney's Election comments on the war, calling it a "remarkable success story."

[Of course, there will be no negative repurcussions following the Invasion and 7 year occupation of Iraq, and the generations which endured this physical and psychological damage will be perfectly fine, bearing no resentment, etc etc etc. It also goes without saying that this is likely out of the realm of the timing that John Q Public in America thought we'd be in Iraq when we were being told we were going to Iraq in the build up to the Invasion. Remember "Major Combat has ended / Mission Accomplished?"]

Cheney seems to not believe reports that the Insurgency is, rather than dissapating, metastasizing and organizing as much against the current Iraqi government as against the American Occupiers. Apparently, Cheney thinks this will quell itself rather than take the form of the Movement that some fear that it has already begun to turn to.

Is this short-sightedness or steadfastness? Is the reluctance of The Administration to betray the Iraq Invasion based solely on thier knowledge that it will be forever pinned to their shoulders in the annals of history, and that if they, at least, if nobody else is able to, don't present a good side to it than there won't be a good side presented at all? Of course there are positive repurcussions to the war, such as the movement away from Saddam as being empowered, etc. However, it's hard to see the Invasion as having been a positive experience for anybody involved.

Things have not improved: since the Iraqis voted in their own government, violence has increased drastically for the average Iraqi citizen as well as US and Occupying soldiers; the transition to native security forces is slow and excrutiatingly dangerous; the international bodies supporting America are dwindling and facing internal criticism and scrutiny for their involvement; American sentiment has drastically fallen from support of The Administration and of Congress; and on and on and on.

These are not signs of positive change: they are signs of intense and traumatic international turmoil.

-----
UPDATE:
Bush effortlessly echoes Cheney's positive warm-fuzzy feelings about Iraq.

Democracy...?

From Randall Robinson over on the Huffington Post:

Of late, citizen-voters have found it increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to comply with Brandeis’ implied precept of citizen-oversight and self-education.

The governance of America is a vastly more complicated enterprise than it used to be. There is exponentially more of everything now than before. More citizens. More wealth. More power. More legislation. More laws. More crime. More enticements. More attenuation between governor and governed.

The legislators themselves seldom have time these days to read the bills they dispose of, thus making them, more than ever, vulnerable to pressure from well-heeled lobbyists.

...
Since 1977, ordinary Republicans and ordinary Democrats have voted into power officials that have overseen the largest transfer of wealth (to the rich from virtually everybody else) in American history. During this period, income (adjusted for inflation) decreased for half of America’s households at the same time that it rose some 500% (from 1.8 million to 10.6 million a year on average) for American CEO’s. The wealthiest 1% of Americans have as much disposable income as the bottom 100 million voters (Republicans, Democrats, assorted rubes) combined. All facilitated by officials the all too manipulable dispossessed installed in office.

Such is the consequence of ignorance, distraction and fear, all enemies of authentic democracy. While we weren’t watching, our country was stolen and its democracy became a farce.

Memorial Day

The AntiCentenarian celebrates a somber Memorial Day. In rememberance and honor of those who have fought and fallen, and those who continue to do so today.

Your Friendly Airways

This is familiar:

When the Central Intelligence Agency wants to grab a suspected member of Al Qaeda overseas and deliver him to interrogators in another country, an Aero Contractors plane often does the job. If agency experts need to fly overseas in a hurry after the capture of a prized prisoner, a plane will depart Johnston County and stop at Dulles Airport outside Washington to pick up the C.I.A. team on the way.

Aero Contractors' planes dropped C.I.A. paramilitary officers into Afghanistan in 2001; carried an American team to Karachi, Pakistan, right after the United States Consulate there was bombed in 2002; and flew from Libya to Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, the day before an American-held prisoner said he was questioned by Libyan intelligence agents last year, according to flight data and other records.

While posing as a private charter outfit - "aircraft rental with pilot" is the listing in Dun and Bradstreet - Aero Contractors is in fact a major domestic hub of the Central Intelligence Agency's secret air service. The company was founded in 1979 by a legendary C.I.A. officer and chief pilot for Air America, the agency's Vietnam-era air company, and it appears to be controlled by the agency, according to former employees.

Behind a surprisingly thin cover of rural hideaways, front companies and shell corporations that share officers who appear to exist only on paper, the C.I.A. has rapidly expanded its air operations since 2001 as it has pursued and questioned terrorism suspects around the world.

Of course, this is done during those events which offend the VP and The Administration: shadow interrogations where suspects are rushed out of American control into countries which do not or will not abide by the Geneva Conventions:

The authorities in Italy and Sweden have opened investigations into the C.I.A.'s alleged role in the seizure of suspects in those countries who were then flown to Egypt for interrogation. According to Dr. Georg Nolte, a law professor at the University of Munich, under international law, nations are obligated to investigate any substantiated human rights violations committed on their territory or using their airspace.

Dr. Nolte examined the case of Khaled el-Masri, a German citizen who American officials have confirmed was pulled from a bus on the Serbia-Macedonia border on Dec. 31, 2003, and held for three weeks. Then he was drugged and beaten, by his account, before being flown to Afghanistan.

The episode illustrates the circumstantial nature of the evidence on C.I.A. flights, which often coincide with the arrest and transporting of Al Qaeda suspects. No public record states how Mr. Masri was taken to Afghanistan. But flight data shows a Boeing Business Jet operated by Aero Contractors and owned by Premier Executive Transport Services, one of the C.I.A.-linked shell companies, flew from Skopje, Macedonia, to Baghdad and on to Kabul on Jan. 24, 2004, the day after Mr. Masri's passport was marked with a Macedonian exit stamp.

Welcome to Air America, your CIA front transport company: repurposed from the cold war era transport to your reliable modern Anti-terrrist human rights violations transportation provider!

Still With Us, but on Memorial Day

An old favorite and an early entry. It just makes sense to contemplate on this day by using some Metal-Pop patriotic ballads.

Still with us.

General Defense

While prisoners reported mistreatments to military tribunals, Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers defends the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay in the wake of the Amnesty International report comparing Camp X-Ray to the Russian Gulags:

The Pentagon's top general yesterday defended the treatment of detainees at the U.S. Navy prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and said the United States thinks al Qaeda leader Abu Musab Zarqawi is wounded, though it is not known how badly.

Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the United States has done a good job of treating detainees humanely. Muslims in several countries have protested in recent weeks about allegations that a Koran was flushed down a toilet at Guantanamo Bay as part of the interrogation of a prisoner.

The human rights group Amnesty International released a report last week calling the prison camp "the gulag of our time."

Myers called that report "absolutely irresponsible." He said the United States is doing its best to detain fighters who, if released, "would turn right around and try to slit our throats, slit our children's throats."

"This is a different kind of struggle, a different kind of war," Myers said on "Fox News Sunday."

"We struggle with how to handle them, but we've always handled them humanely and with the dignity that they should be accorded."

[it should be noted that Myers was not wearing his Abbie Hoffman shirt at the time of his Fox News appearance. This was strictly for formal appearances on Memorial Day.]

Dick Cheney, also, was "offended" by the announcement by Amnesty International:

"For Amnesty International to suggest that somehow the United States is a violator of human rights, I frankly just don't take them seriously," he said in an interview that was to air Monday night on CNN's "Larry King Live."

Amnesty International was scathing last week in its criticism of the way the United States has run the detention center at its naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

"We have documented that the U.S. government is a leading purveyor and practitioner of the odious human rights violation," William Schulz, executive director of Amnesty International USA, said Wednesday.

What is, of course, interesting about this whole issue is how quickly it turned around from Newsweek's fault to the Administration suddenly in defensive position. And, probably, rightfully so.

Keep writing those letters to congressfolk, folks!

Iraq Offensive and Resistence

The recent Iraq offensive has been met by strong resistence on every front. In coordinated, daily strikes, counterstrikes, and battle initiations the Insurgence seems to have transmogrified from a rag-tag group of violent militants looking for leadership [al-Sadr, etc], into a potentially more organized and resourceful group of guerillas. It seems that it took only 3 years for these factions to organize themselves into self-determined militias capable of carrying out violent coordinated strikes. While the parallel is not true and straight, it is not wholly unlike the organizational shift undertaken by American "Insurgents" during the American Revolution against the British.

This is not to sympathize with the Insurgent Iraqis who use vicious and terroristic tactics toward an unknown, undeclared goal. At times they seem more like anarchists than Mullahs. But it is important to understand, as best we can, the processes of growth this movement undertakes as we fight it.

The AntiCentenarian For Rowley

FBI 9/11 Whistleblower and 2002 Time Magazine Person of the Year (with all the whistleblowers) Colleen Rowley has announced her intention to run for Congress in Minnesota. This bodes well for Congress: General Stan can say from personal experience that her insight, ability, honesty, and core central system of values and true ethics are an asset to America.

Minnesotenarians: Rowley '06!

Some of Rowley's writings can be found here:

• Her Memo accusing the FBI of severe internal shortcomings which, if patched, may have averted some of the tragedies that occured on 9/11 [Her case directly dealt with Zacarias Moussaoui]
• Her Statements in Congress following the release of the memo and the Federal 9/11 investigations
• Her Pre-Invasion warnings that US actions against Iraq could increase terrorism

Euro

With the very fresh French "Non" vote on the European Union Constitution, a lot of speculation arises over the future of the EU. France's vote comes from the strange unification of the extreme left and right: the left fears the loss of the Welfare state if the EU moves toward American-style capitalistic practices; and the Right (anybody remember the surprise ultra-conservative presidential candidate Le Pen sneaking in to the last presidential election? This ultra-right agenda in France garnered exceptional momentum and indicated a general shift in France and Europe in general toward the Right, and in many cases, the extreme right) aruges that with further European integration the borders will be opened to more immigration and cultural conflict.

Well, the Euro will fall in value, and that will make General Stan's summer villa on the southern French Mediterrean shores at least somewhat mor affordable...

More soon.

Bombing in Buildup

Apparently, the US was increasing their bombing of Iraq during the 6 months prior to the period when the US went to the UN with their proposal of Iraq's WMD program and intent to go to war under the auspices of goading Iraq into giving the US any reason at all to invade:

THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an excuse for war, new evidence has shown.

The attacks were intensified from May, six months before the United Nations resolution that Tony Blair and Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, argued gave the coalition the legal basis for war. By the end of August the raids had become a full air offensive.
The details follow the leak to The Sunday Times of minutes of a key meeting in July 2002 at which Blair and his war cabinet discussed how to make “regime change” in Iraq legal.

Geoff Hoon, then defence secretary, told the meeting that “the US had already begun ‘spikes of activity’ to put pressure on the regime”.

The new information, obtained by the Liberal Democrats, shows that the allies dropped twice as many bombs on Iraq in the second half of 2002 as they did during the whole of 2001, and that the RAF increased their attacks even more quickly than the Americans did.

During 2000, RAF aircraft patrolling the southern no-fly zone over Iraq dropped 20.5 tons of bombs from a total of 155 tons dropped by the coalition, a mere 13%. During 2001 that figure rose slightly to 25 tons out of 107, or 23%.

File this one with devastating British documents condemning the war in various capacities and ripely ignored in America.

No Nails

Trent Reznor and the Nine Inch Nails have pulled out of MTV's movie awards because MTV vetoed the huge backdrop of Bush's face that NIN requested.

The band was slated to perform "The Hand That Feeds," the first single from its latest album.

A Los Angeles Times review called the song "a warning against blind acceptance of authority, including that of a president leading his nation to war."

"We were set to perform 'The Hand That Feeds' with an unmolested, straightforward image of George W. Bush as the backdrop. Apparently, the image of our president is as offensive to MTV as it is to me," Nine Inch Nails' leader Trent Reznor said in a statement posted on the band's Web site.

MTV said in a statement: "While we respect Nine Inch Nails' point of view, we were uncomfortable with their performance being built around a partisan political statement. When we discussed our discomfort with the band, their choice was to unfortunately pull out of the Movie Awards."

Review

The US has begun an internal process of reviewing the overall efforts of the War on Terror and the changing nature of al-Queda and the enemy of terrorism:

The Bush Administration has launched a high-level internal review of its efforts to battle international terrorism, aimed at moving away from a policy that has stressed efforts to capture and kill al-Qaeda leaders since the September 11, 2001, attacks and towards what a senior official called a broader "strategy against violent extremism".

The shift is meant to recognise the transformation of al-Qaeda over the past three years into a far more amorphous, diffuse and difficult-to-target organisation than the group that struck the US in 2001.

But critics say the policy review comes only after months of delay and lost opportunities while the Administration left key counter-terrorism jobs unfilled and argued internally over how best to confront the rapid spread of the pro-al-Qaeda global Islamic jihad.

President George Bush's top adviser on terrorism, Frances Fragos Townsend, said in an interview the review is needed to take into account the "ripple effect" from years of operations targeting al-Qaeda leaders such as Khalid Sheik Mohammed, arrested for planning the 2001 terrorist attacks, and his recently detained deputy, Abu Faraj al-Libbi.

"Naturally, the enemy has adapted," she said. "As you capture a Khalid Sheik Mohammed, an Abu Faraj al-Libbi raises up. Nature abhors a vacuum."

I suppose she means this al-Libbi, the one that was recently detained. That third-in-command al-Libbi who was either a determined brutal major leader of the terrorist organization, or little more than its manipulative, girl-crazy dishboy. When this story broke, The AntiCentenarian's own Long-Eared Ronin chimed in, and, undoubtedly, this story has fallen on many deaf ears and was not put into the MSM in any manner.

Townsend's invokation of the version of al-Libbi that is the devlish third-in-command terrorist mastermind is an outright denial of what al-Libbi might actually be. It is also a propaganda technique- it doesn't matter what Townsend herself knows about al-Libbi, so long as her audience (Americans) only know him as this one thing.

Of course, this is not the larger issue of the WoT, and is a more trifling argument about The Administration's use of evidence (or lack of use) for political methods. The fact that the WoT has shifted comes as little surprise. It has been largely ineffective, as evidenced by the unpublished release of the 2004 terrorism indexes. While it has evidently stymied attacks on Americans on American soil, it has simply displaced the fight to at least 2 theatres in the Middle East.

Battle Royale

Round 1: In Which Liberal Blogger General Stan Encounters Friendlies in the Opposition

And So Humble General Stan found himself in a situation only marginally familiar to him. A family friend from the opposing political spectrum, and also a man who is highly respected and admired, was being hosted as a family friend. Inevitably, the conversation took a turn into political territory which could only cascade into a potentially lengthy and interpersonally damaging series of debates bouncing from topic to topic.

The Players:
Liberal Blogger General Stan - a liberal blogger [and little else]
R - A retired Military Pilot and Christian Conservative

Rather than a detailed breakdown of the chords of debate (please just reference the polical blogosphere on both the left and the right for the terms of the debate as well as the points of discussion and the perspectives), I have only one thing to share.

I lost the "debate" as it were. Scroll all the way down to see why. Not that there was score being kept. And while there are some points I was able to at least present to R as viable perceptions with evidences behind them to support them, and while some of those I even believe I translated into meaningful arguments for his consideration (which is, as always, all one can truly do), I know how trite the exercise was.

Obviously both of us are strongheaded and have our own perceptions, histories, reading lists, and experiences we bring to the table along with our ideologies. These combinations make sea-change debates impossible: all we can therefore hope to garner is some sense of open discussion and compromise at the debate's conclusion.

I have to admit, as well, that I accepted very few of R's arguments on the grounds that I feel his evidence was more justification than justified, often circular, often intrinsically biased or closed-minded [as though mine were not.]; I also spewed forth many flawed ones which I hope he can reject without personal judgement of me.

But I have come to one great conclusion at the end of this night, these 6 hours of every current political topic being discussed:

R believes, at the very core, at, if not now, at some point in time the United States was just fine. And there are threats to that "truth," such as islamofascists and terrorists, as well as those internal forces such as aspects of agendas of extreme liberals, that are engaged in battle and must be essentially vanquished in order to return to that state. What, exactly, that time of stability, proper life was, I cannot say. But this is the core of the story: that there is almost nothing wrong with America, and that what is wrong can be fixed.

And I, I discovered, believe the opposite. That this perception itself is myth. That in the absolute best of American circumstance America has always been embattled and amidst intense struggle. That so much of what we do is contextual, and very complicated. But most of all, that not now or ever have things been "Okay" in America. They may be better than anywhere else, but they always are far from "good enough." That believing in a perfect America is placation.

And so, I find that R is an eternal optimist with tinges of realism: he sees these problems themselves as being fixable in an otherwise fine system. Why mess with it so much? It only causes more confusion and cultural strife.

And I am an eternal pessimist: I believe in the flaws of the system [political and cultural] as much as the structures that are positive and effective. But more than anything else, I believe that as much as anything is RIGHT about America, there are so many things that are WRONG, and that the cultural strife is something of a symptom of internal problems rotting away at things. Things like feminism come from America's oppression of women until only half-a-century ago [and with much work left to be done]. That racism did not end in the civil rights movement. That America's language divide is in a shift as great as the growing poverty discrepency. And that the War on Terror itself has idealistic flaws, but that the terror of 9/11 had indicators, that at least some of the building of the hate of America that is due to America's actions, and that solving these troubles is a multifaceted and absoultely difficult problem that is unsolvable by the War.

But what I believe is that there is something wrong, and that I have to do what I can to help right it- and at this moment it is criticism of The Administration.

And so the reason, you see, that I lost this debate, is because it was impossible for me to convince R that yes, there is something wrong here, that things are not just Okay, and that there is something we have to do about it.

This, it seems, is likely our challenge. R is a highly literate, educated, very experienced and smart person; he just believes that everything is fine.

So how do we communicate this narrative: that America has severe flaws that we need to work to fix? This, it seems to me, must be part of the Liberal agenda as we move forward. This development of a concept that things are not clear and okay, and that we must move to correct them.

No More Voting Machines... a little late.

Miami-Dade County's elections chief has recommended ditching its ATM-style voting machines, just three years after buying them for $24.5 million to avoid a repeat of the hanging and dimpled chads from the 2000 election.

Elections supervisor Lester Sola said in a memo Friday that the county should switch to optical scanners that use paper ballots, based on declining voter confidence in the paperless touch-screen machines and quadrupled election day labor costs.

Eeeeeeenterestingk.

Mayor On Trial

Wow...

The village mayor who challenged New York law by marrying gay couples last year will face trial, the state's highest court ruled yesterday.

Jason West, mayor of New Paltz, N.Y., faces 24 misdemeanor counts of violating the state's domestic relations law by marrying couples without licenses in late February 2004. He faces fines and up to a year in jail if convicted.

West 's actions came amid efforts in various states to wed gay couples after San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom allowed gay couples to marry in February 2004. Those efforts have largely been put on hold by the courts.

West has said he was upholding the gay couples' constitutional rights to equal protection -- and thus his oath of office -- by allowing them to wed in the Hudson Valley town in late February 2004.

A Health Care Conspiracy

Due to the lack of any action to stem the hemorrhage of Health care from the lives of Americans, a strange alliance has formed in secret to conspire against and strategize ways to quell the losses:

The participants, ranging from the liberal Families USA to the conservative Heritage Foundation and the United States Chamber of Commerce, said they had made progress in trying to overcome the ideological impasse that has stymied action on the problem for eight years.

...
Historically, such efforts have failed because of profound disagreements over the proper role of government. The group is far from any final agreement, but persist in seeking common ground, even as the problems of the uninsured have been eclipsed on Capitol Hill by Social Security and other issues.

The group also includes top executives from AARP, the A.F.L.-C.I.O., the American Hospital Association, the American Medical Association, America's Health Insurance Plans, the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, Johnson & Johnson, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the National Governors Association, Pfizer and the Service Employees International Union.

The group's overarching goal is to agree, by the end of this year, on proposals that expand coverage to as many people as possible as quickly as possible. By meeting in secret, the group has tried to shield itself from political pressures. Some of the proposals under discussion could lead to increases in federal spending or regulation, at a time when the government already faces large deficits and Republicans generally oppose further expansion of government.

Though federal policymakers talk little about the issue these days, the problems of the uninsured have been gaining urgency among people who provide and pay for health care, including employers.

Some of the concepts they're considering:

• The federal government could require parents to arrange health insurance for their children up to a certain age, say 21. If the children were not eligible for public programs like Medicaid, the parents could obtain tax credits to help meet the cost.
• If an employer does not offer health benefits to employees, the workers could designate amounts to be withheld from their paychecks, along with taxes. These amounts would eventually be forwarded to insurers to pay premiums.
• The federal government could provide tax credits to low-income individuals and families or small businesses to help them pay for insurance. The full amount of the credit would be sent directly to the insurer.
• Medicaid could be expanded to cover any adult with income below the official poverty level (about $9,600 for an individual). Each state would decide for itself whether to do this, and the federal government would provide financial incentives for states to take the option.
• The federal government would offer small grants to states to help them establish insurance purchasing pools. Individuals and small businesses could buy coverage through these pools.

Sounds interesting. At least somebody's considering this epidemic.

McCain for Bolton 05

Centrist John McCain, who was among the 14 Senators who wrestled power from the leadership on both sides during last week's Nuclear Option debacle and assisted in the allowance of Bush's extremist judges being able to fill their appointed seats, wants to broker another compromise to enable a vote on Bolton to UN Ambassador.

One of John R. Bolton's leading Republican backers, Senator John McCain of Arizona, signaled his support on Friday for a compromise in which the White House might allow Senate leaders access to highly classified documents in return for a final vote early next month on Mr. Bolton's nomination as United Nations ambassador.

...
Senators calling on the administration to share the documents "have some substance to their argument," Mr. McCain said.

"I think that we can resolve this over the recess and get this thing done and get John Bolton to work," he said. "I'm sorry there is going to be a delay."

Forty Democrats and one independent were able to delay a Senate vote on Mr. Bolton until after the Memorial Day recess, demanding that the White House first hand over information related to his conduct in two areas, involving an intelligence dispute over Syria and the handling of intelligence reports from the National Security Agency.

Mr. McCain was among 53 Republicans left stunned by the Democratic move, which foiled a Republican-led effort to bring the nomination to a final roll-call vote.

Meanwhile, The Administration, despite McCain's efforts, is staunchly opposed to the release of papers relating to Bolton's interference in intelligence information of Syria. This, of course, upholds The Administration's five-year effort to maintain a strick curtain of secrecy and deception surrounding their efforts.

''John Bolton enjoys majority [Senate] support, and it's a shame that Democrats are stopping a vote," said Erin Healy, a White House spokeswoman. ''This is about partisan politics, not documents."

...
Senate Democrats want to see documents relating to Bolton's involvement in a report alleging that Syria possesses weapons of mass destruction. But the administration has said that such internal communications must be kept private to ensure candor within the administration's policy discussions.

Democrats also want 10 National Security Agency intelligence intercepts that Bolton requested, to determine whether Bolton, undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, acted appropriately by asking for the names of Americans mentioned in the documents.

And so, the specter of "partisan" politics raises its head once again in Mr. Bolton's strange case. The Administration, bullheaded as always, refuses to awknowledge that their very nomination of this man who is a self-declared UN Agent of Admonishment is itself a partisan declaration against the UN, and that the Democrats and those opposed are due their right to cut through that.

A Shrill Review for a Summer Blockbuster

In its annual report on human rights worldwide, Amnesty International said the detention facility had become "the gulag of our times," equating it to the vast, brutal Soviet system of forced labor camps in which millions of prisoners died.

"I think that's a shrill assessment. They probably exaggerated for emphasis. I don't want to speak for them, but I do not share that at all. I think that's an uninformed view," Craddock said.

The United States holds about 520 detainees at Guantanamo, most caught in Afghanistan, and has classified them as "enemy combatants" not entitled to rights accorded to prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions.

Amnesty's perception on the point is one of pure human rights, disinterested from political motivations. While they may have a "different" view from Craddock and crew, it is likely not uninformed. It is, rather a synthesis of information that they have gotten that points to abuses and perceptions of abuse that are unacceptable. Craddock can call it uninformed, but what he really is saying is "opposing." "They believe we're harboring torture and abuse; and we think they're idiots."

So what's the real story with Guantanamo Bay? Seems to me that Amnesty has done what it can to get clarification, but the stories just keep radiating out of Camp X-Ray.

An Interactive Guide to US Torture

Slate has a must-peruse online interactive guide to contemporary American Torture in the era of the War on Terror. Check it out!

Delay and Order

In what may be the second near-wittiest Title of an AntiCentenarian heading, of gentle Giants of Intellect and Friendly Readers, Tom Delay has chastised the television series "Law & Order" for invoking his name. The line:

"Maybe we should put out an APB for somebody in a Tom DeLay T-shirt," the fictional police officer said.

Delay's response:

DeLay, in a letter to NBC Universal Television chief Jeff Zucker, called that reference a "slur."

"This manipulation of my name and trivialization of the sensitive issue of judicial security represents a reckless disregard for the suffering initiated by recent tragedies and a great disservice to public discourse," he said.

Delay's previous comments that simply reek with the goodwill of rational thought and sensitivity which seeks to engage the public in meaningful discourse concerning those judges:

"We will look at an arrogant, out of control, unaccountable judiciary that thumbed their nose at the Congress and president when given jurisdiction to hear this case anew and look at all the facts ... The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior, but not today."

Delay, The Hammer, the schoolyard bully beating the milk money from your pockets and lecturing you as your nose bleeds across the pavement on the cultural significance of the image of milk: sensitive, pure, ideal, and nourishing.

Pulling Out

The House of Representatives has rejected an amendment to the defense spending bill that would require The Administration to discuss, formulate, and propose a plan to pull US troops out of Iraq. There are no specifics needed in the bill, no timeline, and no binding legal terminology to it.

In other words, the House of Representatives refused to force The Administration to be held liable to even discuss bringing US troops home from the Invasion. Reasons given?

However, Republicans said the proposal, although it would have been non-binding, was ill-timed just before the national Memorial Day holiday honoring present-day and past sacrifices of American servicemen and women.

A strong response came from Congressman Duncan Hunter, Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, who said the amendment would have sent the wrong message to insurgents and terrorists in Iraq, and to U.S. soldiers. "It's a message sender to our troops who might feel if this amendment should pass, that the resolve of the American people is fading away. This is precisely the kind of message we do not want to send to friend and foe alike, and certainly not to the 140-thousand Americans serving presently in Iraq who feel that the country is strongly behind them," he said.

That it is ill-timed and that it will "send the wrong messages." These are moronic justifications for what should be obvious reasons- but the primary reason is that they are simply justifications and not veritable reasons to prevent even the consideration of leaving Iraq from discussion at all. It is clear that the only thing being accomplished is leaving The Administration as much room as necessary to make no committments to leave Iraq- which, some would say, tends to make one wonder if they ever will, or if they ever intended to.

The Vertex

The very very tip of the partisan point behind Frist's staunch efforts to ram through permanent alterations in the structure of the Senate is to alter the forces of government for as long as possible toward the conservative agenda:

The campaign to prevent the Senate filibuster of the president's judicial nominations was simply the latest and most public example of similar transformations in Congress and the executive branch stretching back a decade. The common theme is to consolidate influence in a small circle of Republicans and to marginalize dissenting voices that would try to impede a conservative agenda.

House Republicans, for instance, discarded the seniority system and limited the independence and prerogatives of committee chairmen. The result is a chamber effectively run by a handful of GOP leaders. At the White House, Bush has tightened the reins on Cabinet members, centralizing the most important decisions among a tight group of West Wing loyalists. With the strong encouragement of Vice President Cheney, he has also moved to expand the amount of executive branch information that can be legally shielded from Congress, the courts and the public.

So this trend exposes itself for what it really is: a consistent mobilization against Liberalism itself, with the effort to force the American Agenda toward a conservative mandate. Neo-Cons fit in well with this- action-oriented ideologues find the concept of a permanent alteration of government to be quite the juicy prospect.

Why are they so intent on accomplishing this now? Because, likely, they know that their majority is thin, and dissapating quickly. These are motions of nothing more than desperation, a quick burst of activity to accomplish what can while they can. It stands in stark contrast of Delay's push toward redistricting Texas Democrats out of office- the time for calculation and manipulation in secret has come to a close for the extreme Republicans, and the Democrats must continue to shear away the moderates from the party in order to prevent this current jingoist madness from infiltrating the very fabric of American government.

Now is the time to fight.

Delayed!!!

The John Bolton vote has been delayed!

Will the administration release their top secret documents?

Stay tuned kidderoos...

Secrets and Fear

Things are looking more and more dim for those of us with any kind of reasonable-ness and comprehension of what a good UN Ambassador looks like. Salon picks up from the Wash Post:

The likely-future United Nations ambassador, better known as the boss-from-hell, may be confirmed as soon as tonight.

At 6 p.m. this evening, senators will vote on whether to end the debate on John Bolton's nomination, according to the Washington Post, even though Democrats are still waiting for classified documents about Bolton's controversial work history, which the Bush administration has refused to release: "Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) said he and his allies are not trying to prevent an eventual confirmation vote, but have no other way to pressure the administration and demonstrate the Senate's displeasure over the records impasse,” reported the Post.

"Dodd urged Republicans to vote to continue the debate until the documents are released, even if they plan to support Bolton's confirmation. 'The opportunity to avoid this altogether is in the hands of the administration,' he said.

le gasp, le sigh.

Propaganda Catapult

Is Bush the ultimate meme-combatant? He thinks so, and Wonkette has the graphs to prove it.

"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." — Bush in Greece, New York. Crooks and Liars has the audio, for those of you into that sort of thing.

Which side of the catapult is Bush purporting to be on, exactly? Launchee, or Launcher?

Secret Meetings

Is North Korea in a serious desire to come back to the six-party talks, and if so, is Bush ready to handle it? Is there anyway to bargain with Kim Jong Il? Slate talks about the difficulties of reading North Korea, why Kim Jong Il plays so many games, and what has worked in the past:

At the same time, there have been successful negotiations with North Korea—maddeningly difficult, but successful. The 1994 Agreed Framework, negotiated by the Clinton administration, left open some loopholes (it was meant as a limited accord), but for nine years it kept 8,000 nuclear fuel rods locked up and constantly monitored, preventing North Korea from building as many as 50 A-bombs.

So, what should President Bush do? Stay on his high horse, refuse to negotiate (or, as he once put it, to "reward bad behavior"), and watch one of the world's loosest cannons go nuclear? Or acknowledge the risks, get ready to be annoyed, and sit down at the table? There's still time, maybe one last time, to make a choice.

This finality is distressing, obviously. It may be our last chance to stay this disaster before it becomes inevitable.

The Good News

Some of the Good Things going on in Africa that we may not be aware of:

• Africa's economies grew by more than 5 percent last year - their biggest expansion in eight years. Central Africa's oil boom spurred 14.4 percent growth for that region.
• Ghana's stock exchange is regularly one of the highest-performing markets in the world; in 2003, it was No. 1, gaining 144 percent, according to one analysis.
• Exports to the US from 37 African nations jumped 88 percent last year, to $26.6 billion. Jeans made in Lesotho are sold in US stores. Also, flowers from Kenya and vegetables from Senegal are regularly available in European shops.
• Use of cellphones and the Internet is growing faster in Africa than anywhere else, according to the United Nations.

These and other statistics are getting more focus amid efforts to boost Africa's image - along with the world's willingness to the public posturing over embryonic stem-cell research, on both sides of the debate, will not end anytime soon.

While I can't consider increased cell-phone usage as a viable "Good Thing," particularly when weighed against the continuing struggles in Darfur, Congo, Ethiopia, and beyond, the increase of economic prowess is a notable improvement, and will help to build aid efforts. The AIDS pandemic is only increasing, and both internally and externally the efforts to combat it are insufficient. The Good News of growth and development in Africa must be used as a political tool to garner more assistence and investment to foster growth and developement.

A Good Sign

Well hey. At least Americans care about voting on something:

On Wednesday's episode, it was announced that "Idol" got more than 500 million votes for the season.

Although the 2004 presidential election garnered 122 million votes, Thompson isn't worried. Voters got one ballot in Bush versus Kerry, he points out, while they could vote as many times as they wanted for Bo versus Carrie.

Although the season is over now, watch for the "Idol" machine to keep chugging.

The AntiCentenarian, for one, considers American Idol to be the pinnacle of American arts culture. And this, of course, makes every paid staff member [and unpaid intern] weep endlessly.

HydroBush

Is this some kind of a joke? Or is the AntiCentenarian simply mistaking the convenience of a lineage of cash from international industry/war/politics who has entrenched interests from the international oil trade for easy, cheap satire? Do any of us really believe that Bush or The Administration have anything other than a political interest in bringing hydrogen technology to American automobiles? Likely, Bush regards this technology as a niche-joke, something that he "knows" will never have the impact it needs to have to make significant changes in his lifetime, so therefore, he may as well bat the idea around to please those who call for it. It is also convenient for him- engage in a war for oil, claim it's not, append some energy "reforms" to help alternative fuel development.

When Bush has his first Q&A on alternative fuels, I hope somebody reminds him not to put his mouth around the hydrogen pump, for health as well as sexual image reasons. I also hope that somebody straightens him out and reminds him that no, the flux capacitor is not a meaningful part of fuel-cell technology.

Cocky GOP

"I would seriously hope that the president — and I really don't have much hope — but I wish the president had taken another look at this and found us someone," else, argued Sen. Joseph R. Biden (news, bio, voting record) Jr., D-Del.

"This guy should not be going to the U.N.," Biden said with an air of resignation.

But of course the GOP is so confident. These guys get whatever the hell they want. When they don't get everything, they bitch and moan; but keep in mind that even when they lose they win. I hope the Dems fight Bolton with more fury and fire then they have been.

Take A Look At My Face

Did John Bolton mishandle classified documents? Senator Rockefeller (D- WV) believes so. He outlines in a letter he's written to other senators one more reason why Bolton is an inadequate representative of the values of the United States:

"On at least one occasion," Mr. Rockefeller said in the letter, Mr. Bolton appeared to have shared with another State Department official information that he had received from the security agency about an intercepted communication. Mr. Rockefeller said that Mr. Bolton appeared to have done that even though the security agency had directed that "no further action be taken on this information without prior approval of the N.S.A."

Two letters written thus far, and neither of them are very blushing portrayals of this guy. Keep em coming. And Senate, Crikey... do the right thing with this vote and turn this guy down.

Film as Nonfiction

The current trend in film is undoubtedly one of Documentary. Fueled by the drastically lowered price of digital film-making which gives equiptment access to any would-be filmmaker, coupled with a more available market for niche and microcosmic studies, Docs have arrived. The NYT calls them the "flavor of the moment," and laments that, in this surprising new desire for documentary films, some qualitative aspects have been left behind:

But this boom, inspired by hits like "Spellbound" and "Fahrenheit 9/11," has its downside. Every week seems to bring another mediocre documentary, coasting on the strength of its content and its similarity to a better, more artistic film. Even as the genre leaps out of its niche, it is suffering from a tyranny of substance over style.

...
Nancy Buirski, founder and executive director of the Full Frame Documentary Film Festival in Durham, N.C., pointed to those works as likely incentives for filmmakers and distributors who are grabbing for the next nonfiction blockbuster, sometimes recklessly.

"People are buying up everything," Ms. Nevins said, even commissioning documentaries on the basis of three- or four-minute samples. As one gauge of a market gone wild, she pointed to "Mad Hot Ballroom," which Paramount Classics and Nickelodeon bought for a reported $2 million. "That's the kind of film that might have sold for about $250,000 five years ago," she said.

The two elements the NYT discusses are social content and filmmaking style, both of which are completely justifiable arguments. James points to the fantastic and beautiful "My Architect" as a personal opus film which shifts focus into a study of family, place, and art; and "Spellbound" as an example of a film which pushes from simply entertainment to a complicated study of class and education.

It also points to the upcoming Werner Herzog Film "Grizzly Man," which will, of course, be brilliant, as an expression of the creative capacity of films about the truth.

The question of good Docs is a huge one: they all must tell a social story, something worth thinking about. Not because the political content of the time dictates it or some reason along those lines, but because film is inherently a social medium. It is built to be experienced socially and discussed socially. Unlike a written testimony that can be used for an argument, film is meant to fuel the emotion and experience, but not solely the evidence of the argument.

So the doc will live and die by it's content: if it is compelling, fresh, and interesting, we'll watch it. But those few films that are all of the above coupled with meaningful social themes, those are the docs which have the fuel to affect culture.

-----
[Jump in line, kids! What are some of your most-admired documentary films? Keep in mind, television has documentaries, occassionally, as well! Mark your answers below. Please print, no cursive!]

Foreign Aid

The EU has decided that it should double it's foreign aid packages to assist in undeveloped countries with their massive social and cultural issues.

In Brussels, Louis Michel, the EU's development commissioner, told reporters: "If we lead the way, if we show that we are committed and ambitious to this extent, then other international partners will be obliged, I think, to follow suit and mobilise additional resources."

In London Mr Brown spoke of a "once in a lifetime opportunity to make a huge difference", but warned that it must be followed through at international meetings on aid, debt relief and fairer trade.

Bill Gates has doubled his contributions to his AIDS foundation to help stop the tidal wave of infection from occuring in India.

Director of the programme Helen Gayle said the spread of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in India was reaching "a critical juncture" with the level of infection rising by as much as 20 percent per year.

"We only have a small window of opportunity to prevent a widespread epidemic," she said.

Imagine if America decided it could double its Foreign Aid spending? While the US' contribution in 2004 was nearly $19 billion, it was also a trifling 0.16% of our GNP. The US Consistently falls last on lists of industrialized nations spending in foreign aid, and first in terms of military spending. If the US doubled its foreign aid packages wisely, it would contribute $38 billion, while upping its percentage of GNP still to only 0.32%, which would rank it as a median international donor by percentage. This would, of course, still compete with the huge nearly $420 billion military spending budget, which increases rapidly each year in proportion to the hole in Iraq that is dug beneath our feet.

Also- the discrepency between a culture of military spending and trifling foreign aid breeds discontent, ignorance, and denial of the many negatives that come with it. See: the previous post and this Global Issues site on the US' historical assistence to those who perpetrate human rights abuses.

Amnesty in 'Merican

While listening to the imutable Bill O'Reilly last night, I was struck by the force of some of his absolutism. That the "US is not just rounding up" people, calling them insurgents, and inprisoning them. That there's "No torture" in the military treatment of prisoners; that the military has "behaved magnificantly: name one thing that the military has done wrong;" and that the image of the US as a torturing and abusive prison warden does no damage to the US internationally [but only because it hurts America more to have a too-forgiving, compassionate America. His argument is a skewed version of relativism, which O'Reilly does so well: admonishes out reltavistic arguments in his combatants, offer a simple, clear cut, definitive alternative interpretation, and then back that argument up again with the same relativism he's just admonished. Classy.] The Talking Points Memo that corresponds to the episde I'm discussing can be found here.

The AntiCentenarian has no particular qualm with Bill O'Reilly, other than what we assume to be obvious [ie: That Bill O'Reilly's hypocritical, reductionist, bullying argument does little good], but I was struck by how unappologetic this stance is. To deny that the military has had any faults at all is to deny, for one thing, that Abu Ghraib is bad [Limbaugh: "Just some kids blowing off steam!"] in terms of human rights, international relations, or simple dignified civilization. To deny that the military has undertaken any actions against any persons in these wars other than those who have tried to kill us is to deny the fact of this, or this, or this. The problem to discuss is not whether these events occur, but whether Bill O'Reilly's absolutism builds a false awareness in the mainstream American culture.

And then, of course, there's this bombshell dropped just earlier this week from those vicious Amnesy Internationalists:

"The USA, as the unrivalled political, military and economic hyperpower, sets the tone for governmental behaviour worldwide," she said. "When the most powerful country in the world thumbs its nose at the rule of law and human rights, it grants a licence to others to commit abuse with impunity."

She said practices such as the detention without trial of more than 500 men at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba undermined US moral authority and had damaged the Bush administration's ability to put pressure on other countries for progress on human rights.

"The detention facility at Guantánamo Bay has become the gulag of our times, entrenching the practice of arbitrary and indefinite detention in violation of international law," she said. " Guantánamo evokes memories of Soviet repression."
Ms Khan likened the Bush administration's practice of holding unregistered prisoners, or "ghost detainees", at secret locations to tactics deployed in some Latin American countries.

The US government's use of dubious terms such as environmental manipulations, stress positions and sensory manipulation to describe the treatment of prisoners amounted to "cynical attempts to redefine and sanitise torture", she said. She also criticised what she said was the UK's acceptance of intelligence derived by torture in certain circumstances.

"To say in a 21st-century democracy that torture is acceptable is to push us back to medieval ages," she warned.

And suddenly, Mr. O'Reilly, it becomes evident that, yes, others do believe that what we're doing may be dangerous and damaging for generations to come.

Voinovich

Voinovich has sent a letter to all Senators expressing his grave concern over UN Nominee John Bolton, saying:

"In these dangerous times, we cannot afford to put at risk our nation's ability to successfully wage and win the war on terror with a controversial and ineffective ambassador to the United Nations," Mr. Voinovich wrote. He urged colleagues to "put aside our partisan agenda and let our consciences and our shared commitment to our nation's best interests guide us."

The White House remains strongly in favor of Mr. Bolton's nomination, and it is unusual for a Republican to break ranks so publicly by circulating a letter opposed to a Republican president's agenda. A copy of Mr. Voinovich's letter, dated May 23 but not circulated until Tuesday, was provided by a Senate Democratic aide opposed to Mr. Bolton.

The Senate's Republican leaders signaled today that they would try to push for a vote on Mr. Bolton by the end of the week. Senate Democrats have strongly opposed the nomination, and at a lunchtime meeting today, Democratic leaders were weighing possible moves to defeat the nomination, or to use procedural moves to delay or prevent a Senate vote.

...
Mr. Voinovich, a former mayor of Cleveland and governor of Ohio, previously described his decision to oppose Mr. Bolton's nomination as one that was based on conscience. In his letter to colleagues, he repeated a statement made earlier this month to the Foreign Relations Committee, in which he questioned whether Mr. Bolton would "have the character, leadership, interpersonal skills, self-discipline, common decency and understanding of the chain of command to lead his team to victory."

There are some who have said that those critics of Bolton's are living a fool's lie if they believe that "one man" can dismantle the mess that is the UN (or various incantations of this argument). But this is a flawed argument itself that shortsights the issue at the very core of the anti-Bolton tendencies in his opponents [obviously including the weather-wizened AntiCentenarian].

At issue is the fact that Bolton simply does not respect the UN, and that he desires it's dismantling. If not completely destoyed, he desires it to be completely retooled in the expression of pure American military, social, political, economic, and ideologic interests. The problem Bolton h8a's have with Bolton's nomination is that he was nominated- which speaks to teh desire of The Administration to have these ends met. Bolton is a symbol of anti-internationalism and reason- he is an unforgiving, passive-agressive beast of a man; and his simple nomination is telling of The Administration's disregard for any of the UN's stated goals of international, disinterested intervention and problem solutions.

And so, through Bolton, we see The Administration's true colors [the stripes, as it were], and this is what we take offense to. We refuse to believe that the contemporary world bows to the pressure of any ideological power, and therefore we reject the nomination, and the absolutism of The Administration's stance.

Fortunately, Voinovich sees through them as well, rejecting the mandated party-agenda for what must be considered, contemplated, and understood as truly "right," that this man has no business in the UN, and his ideology has no business in our policies or our hearts.

Cola Crusades

Some of us will be reminded that Mecca Cola is a cola manufactured in to support the Palestinian cause during the intifada in 2001 and has since gained a reputable foothold in the gloabl cola community.

As a part of international expansion strategy, Mecca cola will set up eight bottling plants in Indonesia by 2008.

The drink has made inroads in 64 countries. It produced more than 1 billion litres and has moved its headquarters from France to Dubai in 2004.

In an interview with the Bernama news agency, the company was quoted as saying that the biggest markets are in Mexico and Brazil, where consumers concerns are about “US colonialism”.

Dead on marketing, that Mecca Cola, although it is not dissimilar to Kale Lassn's Blackspot shoes taking on Nike. The problem with inverting a symbol such as cola to against the culture that produced it and used it as an imperial item [very few US logos and products are as globally iconic and ingrained as Coca-Cola], is that you're still using that item for the statement. The fact of the usage of cola will be tied to Coke, and the imperial tendencies will remain intact. The only thing that changes is the brand name. In other words, taking ownership of the brand item does not defeat the brand. And therefore, does not defeat the imperialistic sensibilities that created the brand.

In fact, all they've really done here is re-marketed the product as something against American interests. So they've built a cola enterprise to rival American, but they're waxing-poetic by using American sloganism to sell it.

Pretty soon we'll be facing Islamist "democracy" with a severe religious tilt that desires to undertake such actions as preemptive strikes. All of which America packaged and sold to world.

Guess Who's Back

Tom Delay!

Although, like syphilis, he never went away. Always an itch just beneath the skin. Tom Delay, the syphilitic corrupt political whore, back now to preach to us all on the evils of Stem Cells. It's a shame we have to endure The Hammer's demagoguery once again.

Rep. DeLay (R-Texas) has kept a lower profile since March, when he orchestrated an emergency Sunday vote to reconnect a feeding tube to Terri Schiavo, the brain-damaged Florida woman at the center of a heated ethical and legal debate.

That episode was followed by a steady stream of reports questioning three trips DeLay took abroad and examining his ties to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

-----
In a related note, it should be mentioned that The Administration shares the AntiCentenarian's concern with the modern spread of syphilis, and has doefully eased restraints on mercury emissions so that we all can feel protected from this horrible and timely disease.

For those of you concerned that you, as well, may have unknowingly or undesiringly contracted syphilis, here is a handy web-resource for you.

To Those Who Die In Seeking the Dream

Heat waves in Arizona have brought more tangible tragedies to the groups of people who every year attempt to illegally cross the border and find work in America, often in order to fulfill their own desire to rise from the poverty of their lives and participate in the so-called American Dream. [Other tragedies of this situation include the very fact of its existence: caused by economic forces and ideologic propganda out of any of our control; and the fact of the inherent protectivism and hysteria it inspires in potentially destructive ways.]

One was just 15. Another was a pregnant 24-year-old who died while her husband searched for help. A third was an unidentified, middle-age man who had sought shelter from the sun in an abandoned house. His body had been decomposing for at least two weeks.

All were found over the past few days during record-breaking heat that has led to a wave of death across Arizona's desert, with 12 suspected illegal immigrants reported dead since Friday night.

Dozens of other migrants were saved by nearly 50 rescue operations, the U.S. Border Patrol said. Volunteer doctors and nurses with the humanitarian aid group Samaritans also reported finding migrants in advanced stages of heat exposure, vomiting and in some cases drinking their own urine.

Many migrants come from tropical areas and are unfamiliar with extreme heat and aridity. Often smugglers lie about the difficulty of the trip.

Those of you looking for reasonable, humanistic means of helping these people even simply survive this journey northward [and hopefully tap into that legendary American Splendor] please support Elizabeth Ohmann and her Humane Borders project to man and maintain water stations. The alternative to individual vigilantism, with the inherent racism and jingoist problems and ecomonic conditions of it, is individual humanism and compassion.

Sticking Seriously

Mahmoud Abbas has his concerns that The Administration will promote the Israel-Palestine peace plan while simultaneously making deals with Isreal for political negotiation purposes. Abbas rightly feels that this would undermine the process. He also rightly expresses his fear- learned from the experience, time and time again.

Abbas said he would tout to Bush his achievements since being elected in January, including a ceasefire he wrung from militants and a start to security reforms -- both preconditions of a U.S.-devised "road map" peace plan.

But he would also urge Bush to make Israel uphold its obligations in the plan by, for instance, twinning the pullout of 8,500 settlers from Gaza by freezing construction in much larger settlements in the occupied West Bank.

"We will go and demand from the Americans to do their duty. What is their duty? It is to stick seriously to the road map," Abbas told the Arabic satellite television network al-Jazeera.

ie: To uphold their diplomatic promises for a peaceful resolution to the Mid East Crises.

[Some of which, of course, he has helped to greatly fuel. But that needs be left undiscussed.]

More US Soldiers Die

Within the last 24 hours, at least 7 lives of US military have been claimed. Since the January elections in Iraq, 207 US Soldiers have been killed, and more than 100 killed in the last two months combined. This flare-up is very painful.

Also, with the increased tensions come increased US raids of suspected Insurgent strongholds and homes, which leads to increased tensions and resentment from the Insurgents but also those who innocently endure the random seizures:

"They came here and detained people randomly," Mutlek said. "The families of the innocent people who have been detained will seek revenge."

Mutlek's brother, Yass, who had been listening to the conversation, stood and walked out to stretch his legs. An Apache helicopter was circling overhead. A moment later, he hustled back in.

"Look," he said, nodding toward the street, "the Americans are coming back."

It needs be noted that 800 Iraqi policemen and security forces have been killed since 2005 began, but by far this war has been brutal on the civilians of Iraq, where at least 22,000 have been killed since the invasion began.

Biologic Sarcasm

Sarcasm's brain function has been discovered, and it's within the prefrontal lobe:

No, it's true -- many of you don't go a day without dishing out several doses of sarcasm. But some brain-damaged people can't comprehend sarcasm, and Israeli researchers think it's because a specific brain region has gone dark.

The region, according to the researchers, handles the task of detecting hidden meaning, a crucial component of sarcasm. If that part of the brain is out of commission, the irony doesn't come through, the scientists report in the May issue of Neuropsychology.

"People with prefrontal brain damage suffer from difficulties in understanding other people's mental states, and they lack empathy," said study co-author Simone Shamay-Tsoory, a researcher at the University of Haifa. "Therefore, they can't understand what the speaker really is talking about, and get only the literal meaning."

Oh mighty readers of the AntiCentenarian, now how how Lowly General Stan understands the waves of hate-mails he has received:

All of you have severe prefrontal lobe damage.

-----
Clarification: What the AntiCentenarian seeks to do is maximize the capacities of the digital medium of the web log with the occassional literate capacities of metaphor in an effort toward cultural analysis, usually centered around politics, film, and literature [often just politics at this point, due more to laziness than necessity]. It has ruled any viable method as valuable, therefore satire, sarcasm, mockery, outlandish claims, and demonstrable hatred will all be employed alongside straight-forward thesis-driven analysis and heartfelt pleas for valuable assistnce and aid. Those unable to distinguish between the above methods are duly advised to quickly learn. And to get their prefontal lobes reattached from their own private lobotomized lives.

Compromise

What? A compromise was reached? The Centrists from both parties threatened to take over from the lunatic fringes?

"This is a good day for the country, a good day for the Untied States Senate," Ohio Republican Sen. Mike DeWine, flanked by fellow negotiators, told a news conference in announcing the accord.

"I say thank God," said Sen. Robert Byrd, a West Virginia Democrat. "We have lifted ourselves above politics."

And, at last, the American political machine grinds itself to its true purpose: compromise. Many of us may not be pleased we "won." Most of us will be pleased just for the mess to get pushed past. But all of us must agree that the corporate and ideological factions which pushed this showdown need be condemned: unfortunately, those ideologues belong primarily to the right. Bought rightist Senators. Those on the extreme left are guilty of hardheaded resistence to the challenge of protecting the minority interest in the Senate: obviously a political issue and done for political purpose.

I say Praise Be as well- let's get past this whole damn mess. And make sure those two judges don't hear any of my cases, or cases of the Constitution.

-----
UPDATE
Kos has some rightwing net chatter to share. Obviously not all of our compatriots across the aisles agree with the Compromise. And Kos is correct in his analysis: this anger over the "loss" is because they DID lose. We, actually, didn't have anything to win, we just needed to preserve Senatorial protections. But because the far right was gunning for a true prize: permanent limits on the power of the Democrats, they had everything to lose. And, in a way, they did. It must be said, however, that the left didn't win anything, either.

Polling Low

Bush, once again, nears his all time low polling point, as does Congress. Nice work, crew.

Forty-six percent of 1,006 adults polled over the weekend said they approved of the overall job Bush is doing, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll.

Over the past year, Bush's rating has hovered near 50 percent, with a low of 45 percent in March and a high of 57 percent just after his second inauguration and the State of the Union in February.

The 46 percent figure is down about 4 percentage points since a poll taken at the beginning of May.

On domestic issues, the president's approval ratings are at an all-time low -- 40 percent of respondents approve of his work on the economy and 33 percent approve of his plans for Social Security changes.

Bush fared best among respondents when they were asked if they approved or disapproved how how he was handling terrorism.

But while 55 percent of the people taking part in the poll approved, that figure was down 2 percentage points from a poll taken in April.

On the Iraq war, the president's approval mark remained low -- just 40 percent of those agreed with the way he is handling the situation.

The post-re-election honeymoon must really be over, if this poll is to be believed. Of course, every poll is ridiculous, but hey. They certainly serve, at times like this, to make us feel better.

-----
UPDATE
By "feel better," we at the AntiCentenarian mean that there's a smug self-righteousness attached to low presidential pollings. The fact that up to 10% of the population that voted for The Administration has sheared off from the critical mass of insanity that voted it in is encouraging to those of us who desparage in the dregs of society. However, this uplift is only a spark for the psyche- the fact remains that all of us are in despair over our current political divisiveness, unruly aggression, evidences of massive cultural manipulations, and the fact that some smarmy, moustachioed Scotsman sounded "the most right" of anybody we've come to know over the past week. So this poll is at the very most psychological reinforcement for our saddened outlook. It is, more than anything else, evidence of a society twisted beyond its point of negligence, bent backward into delirium, where no longer does it matter at all. We're stuck in it, and there's no way out. But hey, at least the Asshole polls low.

The Real Real People

Real People supported Blair's Labor Party in the last election. Real people who were paid, trained, and placed. Real, Astroturfing people:

But the Dispatches programme, The Dirty Tricks Election, is the first to show in detail how astroturfing works - and how sophisticated it has become. Campaign materials seen by Dispatches stress that 'more people trust the letters page than any other page of their local newspaper' and that local organisers should target it. The party also kept lists of professionals, such as doctors, senior police officers and teachers, who were not identifiable as Labour party members but could be relied on to speak supportively.

Among the American strategists drafted into the Labour campaign was Zach Exley, a Democrat and expert in internet campaigning who pioneered the use of emails to supporters appealing for money...

The technique, which began with Bush's Republican party encouraging pro-war letters to local newspapers, and then by Democrats to push Kerry, is said to have originated with pharmaceutical firms encouraging patients to write letters praising the effects of certain drugs. It is now so widespread in the US that country singer Chely Wright was recently accused of astroturfing a record, when members of her fan club bombarded radio stations asking them to play her latest song.

Yesterday a Labour Party spokesman declined to comment, adding: 'We cannot comment on the documentary because we have not had an opportunity to see it.' However, party sources said Kleeman had been escorted from the building within days of the election campaign starting after officials became suspicious of her behaviour.

Blair, Bush, Kerry, the huge and hugely rich pharmaceutical companies, and Chely Wright. One tactic shared between them.

Laura Heckled

Laura Bush's heckling on her recent trip Middle East bound has risen some eyebrows. She says she felt neither afraid nor threatened, and that the protesters were small in number.

But the Christian Science Monitor looks at what's behind Laura Bush's recent arrival as a political charmer: It brings a softer face to the grizzled edge of The Administration. As evidenced in the past, The Administration uses women to patch up the edges during politically volitile periods. It could be said that The Administration takes Laura Bush for granted, thrusting her into the limelight to charm and adore the crowds whose teeth have begun to show for her husband.

She trotted out and defended The Administration after the Plame Leaks were [not] discovered; she came out of hiding to defend hubbyPrez on his stem cell policies; and she, of course, came out in due time to defend the Federal Government's intervention in the Terri Schaivo debacle.

It seems clear that Laura Bush is The Administration's star defenseman - she comes out to charm and defend and steal the limelight away from the operative government- another mirror to deflect from to the smoke.

Tillman's Parents

When Pat Tillman's face was broadcast as frequently as every 15 minutes in the spring of 2004, he was elevated to noble American martyr, a young fighter who left his prodigious career as an NFL player and took up arms to defend his country. He was canonized by Fox News, and, true to form, other cable news stations that followed the lead of Fox, for being the most noble of American Dreamers- those who are willing to lay their lives on the line for Freedom.

But what they did not know, or at least, what they did not report, was the difficult circumstance of Tillman's death- that he was killed by friendly fire; a barage of gunshots from his own unit who mistook him.

His parents have felt the loss more than most of us. Their son has been stolen from them in life. But also, his memory has been stolen from them, co-opted by the fanatical news media and the military too-thirsty to make a hero out of a Tragedy.

"Pat had high ideals about the country; that's why he did what he did," Mary Tillman said in her first lengthy interview since her son's death. "The military let him down. The administration let him down. It was a sign of disrespect. The fact that he was the ultimate team player and he watched his own men kill him is absolutely heartbreaking and tragic. The fact that they lied about it afterward is disgusting."

And Adult Conversation

It is said that even the dozen US states without capital punishment are just one hideous murder away from bringing in the death penalty.

But recent years have seen a steady decline in the numbers of death sentences handed down, and a series of legal steps limiting the use of the ultimate sanction.

For the first time in decades, abolitionists are daring to think the unthinkable.

Professor Michael Mello, a former Florida capital crime defender, says for the first time in his life the US is "engaged in a grown-up debate about capital punishment".

While there are events so concievably horrible [some that have occured and some that have not] that even Liberal Blogger General Stan can accept an argument for enacting of the death penalty, the evidence stands so firmly against it, in his mind, that he can never accept the act of a government retalitory killing.

We will not debate certain evidences here. You can engage in the debate by Googling, or check here for a starting point on anti-death penalty arguments. Check here to see the other side, "debunking" these arguments [weakly, of course].

The reason is a moral perception above all else: that a state [read: any public body] has no right to determine the right of any other person to live or not. And that this right to life must be determined by higher powers.

For film reference, see Kieslowski's A Short Film About Killing or Decalogue #5, No End, and Noe's Irreversible to see the reprehensible damage brought about by great violence that seeks to bring justice for great violence.

In Afghanistan

Hamid Karzai, president of Afghanistan, demands justice for afghani detainees who were killed in prison. The news that the US treating their prisoners themselves with the same reverence they have to the holy book has carried over poorly. The UN is upset by the deaths and the abuses, and calls for punishment and justice. The report of the deaths:

The New York Times said U.S. army report centers on the death of a 22-year-old taxi driver known only as Dilawar and that of another detainee, Habibullah, who died at the U.S. base at Bagram, north of Kabul, in December 2002.

According to the report, Dilawar was chained by his wrists to the top of his cell for several days before he died and his legs had been pummeled by guards. "The file depicts young, poorly trained soldiers in repeated incidents of abuse. The harsh treatment, which has resulted in criminal charges against seven soldiers, went well beyond the two deaths," the newspaper said.

In sworn statements to army investigators, soldiers described mistreatment ranging from a female interrogator stepping on a detainee's neck and kicking another in the genitals to a shackled prisoner being made to kiss the boots of interrogators, according to the newspaper.

U.S. officials have characterized incidents of prisoner abuse at Bagram in 2002 as isolated problems that were thoroughly investigated, the newspaper said. Two army interrogators have been reprimanded and seven soldiers have been charged, it said.

How does The Administration respond to Karzai's demands for justice? By sending Secretary of State Rice a memo seeking to undermine his authority by calling him a weak leader on the efforts to slash poppy growth.

Switch blame to the other side, change the topic...