What is our country coming to?

Earlier today, we learned about an offensive, racist billboard right here in Colorado--attacking President Obama and comparing him to terrorists. The billboard was created by Wolf Automotive, at their location here in Wheat Ridge, Colorado. Check out the photo to the right, then join the pledge to boycott.

http://www.ProgressNowColorado.org/WolfAuto

We called Wolf Automotive to ask them what their intent was in putting up that sign. The man we spoke with defended the sign, and indicated he has no intention of taking the sign down, and it was quickly apparent that he was a "birther."

The "tea party" movement and the "birthers" are becoming more and more outrageous. They're in the thrall of demagogues like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Peter Boyles, Sarah Palin, and right-wing elected officials in Colorado like Senator Dave Schultheis--who sent out a statement last week comparing President Obama to the 9/11 terrorists who flew United Flight 93 into the ground.

We'll defend anyone's First Amendment right to speak his or her mind. However, the "marketplace of ideas" that the First Amendment protects only works when everyone speaks out. If hate like that spread by Dave Schultheis and the owners of Wolf Automotive are allowed to go without a response, then we allow the perception that these ideas have merit.

We have both the right and the obligation under the First Amendment to publicly reject ideas that we find abhorent and offensive.

Please help us respond to this latest attack from the Right by doing a couple of things. First, please click on the link below and pledge to boycott Wolf Automotive until they take down this billboard.

http://www.ProgressNowColorado.org/WolfAuto

After you sign the pledge, we'll provide you the phone numbers for the Wolf Automotive Group--they have four dealerships located in Colorado, Wyoming and Montana. Please take a few minutes to call and ask them, respectfully, to take their sign down. We want to respond, but we want to resist being dragged into incivility by the hatred that we're confronting.

P.S. If you are on Twitter, please copy and paste the tweet below and share far and wide:

Join the Boycott! Wolf Automotive Group in CO WY & MT proud of their anti-Obama, anti-Muslim, racist hateful billboard. http://bit.ly/4KLxtz

P.S.S. Denver talk-radio host Peter Boyles has apparently been coordinating with Wolf Automotive for months on this. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=108289

Cross-posted at ProgressNow Colorado

A bit of war music for Veteran's Day, the dead cry, 'Remember me'  the mothers cry, 'I can't forget'  the nation cries, 'I know not war or sacrifice and we will forget'  MC

Music from "Mansions of the Lord"

The song was sung by the West Point Glee Club at the end of the movie "We Were Soldiers"

"The Mansions of the Lord" 

To fallen soldiers let us sing 
where no rockets fly nor bullets wing 
Our broken brothers let us bring 
to the mansions of the Lord 

No more bleeding no more fight 
No prayers pleading through the night 
just divine embrace, eternal light 
in the mansions of the Lord 

Where no mothers cry and no children weep 
We will stand and guard tho the angels sleep 
All through the ages safely keep the mansions of the Lord 

Words by Randall Wallace

"— Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s reported recommendation of 40,000 additional troops — is itself counterinsurgency light. In his definitive recent field manual on the subject, Gen. David Petraeus stipulates that real counterinsurgency requires 20 to 25 troops for each thousand residents. That comes out, conservatively, to 640,000 troops for Afghanistan (population, 32 million). Some 535,000 American troops couldn’t achieve a successful counterinsurgency in South Vietnam, which had half Afghanistan’s population and just over a quarter of its land area."

From the Bob Herbert op/ed, "Igniting the Growth of Jobs"

NY Times

'40,000 teachers lost their jobs in the last year.  16 to 29 year olds, worst unemployment ever since national records have been kept.  One in four black men in Illinois between the ages of 20 and 24 has a job.'

One of the regents of the University of Colorado, Michael Carrigan, told me that Colorado had a return on investment of 40 to 1 for each dollar invested in higher ed. The only figures I could find for Colorado was a 15.07 percent return.  New Jersey leads the nation with 42.32 percent, followed by Massachusetts 39.16, New York 37.82, California 36.53 percent.  All in all a substantial return on investment.  The lowest in the nation, predictably, was Mississippi at 6.49 percent.  Most surprisingly, Indiana is second from the bottom at 7.22 percent

Higher Ed Return on Investment for States

Most significantly, Herbert says this:

""The past," as William Faulkner told us, "is not dead. It’s not even past." The lessons of the Works Progress Administration and the Civilian Conservation Corps of the 1930s are right in front of us, ready to be studied, analyzed, updated and applied to the present-day needs of the country."

I hate to say this, but we are a country of nepotism, in our unions, our military, in corporations, in government.  Because of this "inbreeding" and counterproductive behavior, we must import the brightest minds/strongest work ethics from around the world to carry our water and be used as if indentured servants.  It is all a vast pyramid scheme where the unqualified extinguish the flames of the most gifted and reap the rewards off the backs of the timid.  Their only qualification?  Being members of the lucky sperm club.  Here's something the "conservative revision" Bible will surely leave out, "As you have done to the least of these......."  The least very much includes the youthful poor, who have no say in the conditions they find themselves in and obviously don't have the attention of those that have the most.  While we argue about war, healthcare, social justice, gay rights, Obama's Nobel Prize, etc., no one considers our most precious asset nor what should be our greatest legacy to them, "Liberty and Justice for all.."  This is what is great about the idea of America, eloquently pronounced in the Preamble of the Constitution, not just to ourselves but to our Posterity,  the word was capitalized unlike the word "ourselves":

CollegeInvest, the agency that runs Colorado's student-loan forgiveness and scholarship plans, lost track of many of the students it was supposed to help, managing to distribute only $91,000 of the $3.8 million lawmakers expected it to hand out last year.

The agency also spent $12 million in administrative expenses, not including salaries and benefits for 37 employees, a state audit found.

CollegeInvest gave 76 students a total of $91,000 in Early Achievers Scholarships in fiscal 2009, which ended June 30, state auditors said.

[...]

Auditors found that for the past two years, CollegeInvest had more than $12 million in administrative expenses, not including salaries and benefits for 37 employees.

The agency spent almost $10 in administrative costs for every $1 disbursed in the Early Achiever Scholarships, the audit said.

Because of a reporting error, an editorial on Page 10B on Friday about CollegeInvest said the division incurred $12 million over four years to get its scholarship program up and running. That amount covered all of CollegeInvest's operations, which includes scholarship programs, college savings plans and student loans.

Great writing and video clips

What "Capitalism" Is Not

By Terrance Heath Created 10/02/2009 - 11:26am

If I were to summarize message Michael Moore's new movie, Capitalism: A Love Story in one sentence, it would be this: Capitalism is not a form of government. That's the answer to the question posed at the beginning of the movie, via 1950s educational/propaganda films.

Capitalism is not a form of government. It is a tool we've allowed to be used as a weapon. We threw out the instructions and rules for its usage, and it became a weapon — much like a hammer can be used to build a house or smash a skull, depending on whether it's wielded by a carpenter or a psychopath.

Moore spends the rest of the movie showing us how we not only tossed out the rules, but junked every other tool in our collective toolbox, and left ourselves with the hammer. But everything is not a nail, and the hammer isn't suited to every aspect of the task in front of us. Moore gives us until the end of the movie to figure out what that seemingly abandoned task might be.

Capitalism is populated by people whose names we know and people whose names we don't — all characters in what Michael Moore has subtitled "a love story." We know the speeches of the former, and the stories of the latter, because we've watched those same stories unfold in our own communities in the last couple of years. The speeches were intended to arouse our passions, by retelling part the most recent chapter in the story of how we got here — the part that happened on Wall Street and in Washington.

Continued

Campaign for America's Future

Most Americans, looking at a globe, would be hard pressed to find Afghanistan. Americans on the whole know very little about the land or its people — and care even less. They know we’re at war over there, wherever it is, but if you were to ask what a Pashtun is or mention the name Abdullah Abdullah you would most likely get a blank stare.

Americans’ minds are on other things, like trying to figure out why, if the Great Recession is over, as Ben Bernanke seems to believe, the employment landscape still looks like a toxic waste dump.

A New York Times/CBS News poll found that eight years after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, there is a general feeling of disenchantment with our military involvement there and a desire to bring it to an end. About half of all Americans believe that the war has had no effect on the threat of terrorism, and a majority want the troops out of there in two years.

Americans are tired of the war. Some of the young people currently being outfitted for combat were just 10 or 11 years old when Al Qaeda struck the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001. They are heading off to a conflict that most Americans are no longer interested in. The difference between the public’s take on this war and that of the nation’s top civilian and military leadership is both stunning and ominous.

"General Hoar drew upon his experience with CENTCOM in the days leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq to stress the importance of allied cooperation, notably the ability to base military operations from Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey, as key to success in the region.   As U.S. strategy for the invasion coalesced, Hoar expressed misgivings, in particular regarding the number of troops committed to the operation.

A year after the official cessation of hostilities, Hoar continued to maintain that coalition forces did not have enough troops on the ground to accomplish their mission.  In December 2003, Hoar stated that Assistant Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, "...doesn't know much about the business he's in".  In testimony before the Senate committee on foreign relations on May 19, 2004, he stated regarding the situation in Iraq, "I believe we are absolutely on the brink of failure. We are looking into the abyss"

On September 7, 2004, Hoar and seven other retired officers wrote an open letter to President Bush expressing their concern over the number of allegations of abuse of prisoners in U.S. military custody.  In it they wrote:

The Miami Herald

September 11, 2009

BY CHARLES C. KRULAK and JOSEPH P. HOAR

In the fear that followed the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Americans were told that defeating Al Qaeda would require us to ``take off the gloves.'' As a former commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps and a retired commander-in-chief of U.S. Central Command, we knew that was a recipe for disaster.

But we never imagined that we would feel duty-bound to publicly denounce a vice president of the United States, a man who has served our country for many years. In light of the irresponsible statements recently made by former Vice President Dick Cheney, however, we feel we must repudiate his dangerous ideas -- and his scare tactics.

We have seen how ill-conceived policies that ignored military law on the treatment of enemy prisoners hindered our ability to defeat al Qaeda. We have seen American troops die at the hands of foreign fighters recruited with stories about tortured Muslim detainees at Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib. And yet Cheney and others who orchestrated America's disastrous trip to ``the dark side'' continue to assert -- against all evidence -- that torture ``worked'' and that our country is better off for having gone there.

In an interview with Fox News Sunday, Cheney applauded the ``enhanced interrogation techniques'' -- what we used to call ``war crimes'' because they violated the Geneva Conventions, which the United States instigated and has followed for 60 years. Cheney insisted the abusive techniques were ``absolutely essential in saving thousands of American lives and preventing further attacks against the United States.'' He claimed they were ``directly responsible for the fact that for eight years, we had no further mass casualty attacks against the United States. It was good policy . . . It worked very, very well.''

Repeating these assertions doesn't make them true. We now see that the best intelligence, which led to the capture of Saddam Hussein and the elimination of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was produced by professional interrogations using non-coercive techniques. When the abuse began, prisoners told interrogators whatever they thought would make it stop.

Torture is as likely to produce lies as the truth. And it did.

What leaders say matters. So when it comes to light, as it did recently, that U.S. interrogators staged mock executions and held a whirling electric drill close to the body of a naked, hooded detainee, and the former vice president winks and nods, it matters.

The Bush administration had already degraded the rules of war by authorizing techniques that violated the Geneva Conventions and shocked the conscience of the world. Now Cheney has publicly condoned the abuse that went beyond even those weakened standards, leading us down a slippery slope of lawlessness. Rules about the humane treatment of prisoners exist precisely to deter those in the field from taking matters into their own hands. They protect our nation's honor.

To argue that honorable conduct is only required against an honorable enemy degrades the Americans who must carry out the orders. As military professionals, we know that complex situational ethics cannot be applied during the stress of combat. The rules must be firm and absolute; if torture is broached as a possibility, it will become a reality. Moral equivocation about abuse at the top of the chain of command travels through the ranks at warp speed.

On Aug. 24, the United States took an important step toward moral clarity and the rule of law when a special task force recommended that in the future, the Army interrogation manual should be the single standard for all agencies of the U.S. government.

The unanimous decision represents an unusual consensus among the defense, intelligence, law enforcement and homeland security agencies. Members of the task force had access to every scrap of intelligence, yet they drew the opposite conclusion from Cheney's. They concluded that far from making us safer, cruelty betrays American values and harms U.S. national security.

On this solemn day we pause to remember those who lost their lives on 9/11. As our leaders work to prevent terrorists from again striking on our soil, they should remember the fundamental precept of counterinsurgency we've relearned in Afghanistan and Iraq: Undermine the enemy's legitimacy while building our own. These wars will not be won on the battlefield. They will be won in the hearts of young men who decide not to sign up to be fighters and young women who decline to be suicide bombers. If Americans torture and it comes to light -- as it inevitably will -- it embitters and alienates the very people we need most.

Our current commander-in-chief understands this. The task force recommendations take us a step closer to restoring the rule of law and the standards of human dignity that made us who we are as a nation. Repudiating torture and other cruelty helps keep us from being sent on fools' errands by bad intelligence. And in the end, that makes us all safer.

Charles C. Krulak was commandant of the Marine Corps from 1995 to 1999. Joseph P. Hoar was commander in chief of U.S. Central Command from 1991 to 1994.

Truth = Law?

"Where the law is subject to some other authority and has none of its own, the collapse of the state, in my view, is not far off; but if law is the master of the government and the government is its slave, then the situation is full of promise and men enjoy all the blessings that the gods shower on a state."

Plato circa 350 BC

Likewise, Aristotle endorsed the rule of law, writing that "law should govern", and those in power should be "servants of the laws." The ancient concept of rule of law is to be distinguished from rule by law, according to political science professor Li Shuguang: "The difference....is that under the rule of law the law is preeminent and can serve as a check against the abuse of power. Under rule by law, the law can serve as a mere tool for a government that suppresses in a legalistic fashion."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law

FYI, I sure am glad I finally figured out the html editor. :-))

They Say Trickle Down Economics is a good thing for business. What has worked even better for business-corporate welfare. The Democrats are mostly to blame, Democrat legislators recieve more money from the top 50 industries in every category except the automotive industry and by substantial margins.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/mems.php

Regarding Corporate Welfare

 "According to the Cato Institute, the U.S. federal government spent $92 billion on corporate welfare during fiscal year 2006. Recipients included Boeing, Xerox, IBM, Motorola, Dow Chemical, and General Electric. Alan Peters and Peter Fisher have estimated that state and local governments provide $40-50 billion annually in economic development incentives, which many critics characterize as corporate welfare."

"The U.S. Agricultural Department is required by law (various U.S. farm bills which are passed every few years) to subsidize over two dozen commodities. Between 1996 and 2002, an average of $16 billion/year was paid by programs authorized by various U.S. farm bills dating back to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, the Agricultural Act of 1949, and the Commodity Credit Corporation (created in 1933), among others. The beneficiaries of the subsidies have changed as agriculture in the United States has changed. In the 1930s, about 25% of the country's population resided on the nation's 6,000,000 small farms. By 1997, 157,000 large farms accounted for 72% of farm sales, with only 2% of the U.S. population residing on farms. "