i've moved!

i've moved to a real space on the web. it looks like crap now, but i will be updating the look for the future. for right now, however, the design looks like crap, but its a great new place to be!

come visit me:

www.mirroreddecadence.com

welcome.

news from other countries

i know that this piece of news may be, well, "common knowledge" within the states, but there is a big difference when an international news organization decides to report on it as well. this means that not only does the international community know about it, but it also shows them how American media is not reporting on certain things and how uninformed the general American public is.

the BBC reports that the Pentagon is keeping taps on what is posted online by soldiers as well as contractors. not only are they keeping tabs, they are trying to make sure that nothing is posted that would harm the image that the American government has painted. so when these videos from international troops and contractors come out, they are buried swiftly enough that you have to look for them, and the American media doesn't pick up the stories at all.

most people in other countries are appalled that we sit back and just let this happen. this is cause for revolution! but nobody in America, myself included, believes that we have reached the point needed for revolution (however with the news of the other stories on this page, it may be sooner than we wish). it hurts that i have to go to places like the BBC and German newspapers to get the unedited full story rather than what the media owners "allow" to be printed. the only reason for this is because the BBC has no interest in pulling punches when it comes to news about America (they would edit stuff that had to do with the UK). the American media, while good, is sorely lacking because of its obvious use as a tool for the government to tell people what they want to hear and paint a rosy picture.

if you disagree with this, there is a way you can prove it: show me a picture released by the government that shows the flag-draped coffins of our soldiers coming home from Iraq (and not the one used by the Dems for their commercial). if someone can produce that picture, then i will retract all my statements about the media being complient to the government. otherwise, the lack of pictures speaks for themselves. control is the issue. a journalist is supposed to be above and beyond politics. i guess America is just dirtier than most.

dropped to the second section

San Francisco is a very liberal area. you would assume that most people there are too. well, there is a good mix between the two, although the liberals tend to be a little more dominant. however, there are those who will do many things to provide information to conservatives who think critics of government should not talk. take for example, this article on police infiltration of anti-war groups.

this is really happening. it's been happening for awhile now, but only recently has it become so ramped up that the media is paying a little more attention. this runs along the lines of setting up "free speech zones;" it shouldn't happen. the city of Oakland should have to pay, they were in the wrong (whether it's an overzealous police department or just one guy who made the call).

but most importantly, this article was dropped to the second section. this is something that should be front page, left column above the fold. people should NOT have to look for this, and it should be getting much more media attention than is available right now. this is despicable. if you don't believe in a police state, where we all are watched, then why is this allowed to happen. anti-war protestors may get a lot of big ideas, but i would like to think that there is enough crime in Oakland to keep the officers busy (Oakland police is recruiting on a massive scale, so why spare the people?). i heard some gunshots near my house last night, but no cops come around. i guess they were busy watching somebody like me complain online (and in person) about the degredation of America that the Republicans are responsible for. i bet if the police took the same amount of effort they put into infiltrating the anti-war group into watching some of our elected leaders, there would be many more arrests. but alas, we must not forget the first rule of working: don't bite the hand that pays you.

CT-Sen again

ok, it's official in my eyes. the Aug 8 primary in CT is going to set the stage for how the rest of the November elections will work. everybody is paying attention to this race. if Lieberman wins, the status quo will be OK; running the same, staying the course. however if Lamont wins, many incumbent Senators will be in for a huge fight, as the people-powered progressive movement will have shown itself to be a hardball player in the political field (this will, on the good side, make sure that Senators pay more attention to their state rather than pander to Washington). i hope Lamont wins by a landslide.

in the spirit of that, we find more and more publications weighing in on Lieberman's political disaster. his voting record doesn't help him. nothing really helps him. the NYT is about to endorse Lamont on Sunday.

and Forbes has a great article on why Lieberman is going down the shitter.

Doug Schwartz, survey director at Quinnipiac University, said Lieberman polled ahead of Lamont only among voters 65 and older, those with incomes of less than $30,000 a year, and those without a college degree.

Lamont, 52, ran ahead in the survey among voters in all other age and income groups, as well as among those with college degrees, Schwartz said. Lamont outpolled Lieberman among men, 56-44 percent. Fifty-one percent of the women surveyed backed Lieberman, to 47 percent for Lamont, a statistically insignificant difference.

Forbes explains everything very precisely. it's not about pandering to the voters anymore. the people-powered movement is about action. Lieberman has not taken the one action that would have mattered to most of his constituents: he has not apologized for supporting the war but instead rabidly defends his, and bush's, position. maybe this will be the rabbit out of the hat at the end of September when Lieberman finds his back against the wall. but i just have to think: maybe Lieberman is looking over his shoulder and sees that wall 25 feet away, but he looks right through the glass wall that is only 5 feet behind him. tick-tock Senator Lieberman..

bush, once again, showing he is "the decider"

the White House, probably working overtime to try and get this to Congress before he loses total control, has put out a new bill. this "terror detainee bill" is an effort to try and get the Pentagon's tribunal system (which wanted to try the Gitmo detainees without going through the civil courts) passed.

the problem with this bill is twofold. first, it directly refutes Hamdan, rendering the Supreme Court verdict invalid. the Hamdan verdict said that detainees were subjected to the Geneva Convention, meaning that they had to be tried in a public court of law. this bill will make will set up tribunals and all people labeled "detainee" would be tried and sentenced in a private forum.

the second problem is the wording of the bill, which, according to legal experts, is essentially the next step toward facism:

U.S. citizens suspected of terror ties might be detained indefinitely and barred from access to civilian courts under legislation proposed by the Bush administration, say legal experts reviewing an early version of the bill.

no trial, no phone call, just jail. the important word in that caption is suspected. this is going to be like the Salem Witch Hunts all over again, with neighbors framing neighbors, or more importantly (and WORSE!), religious people "cleansing" America.

Legal experts said Friday that such language is dangerously broad and could authorize the military to detain indefinitely U.S. citizens who had only tenuous ties to terror networks like al Qaeda.

"That's the big question ... the definition of who can be detained," said Martin Lederman, a law professor at Georgetown University who posted a copy of the bill to a Web blog.

Scott L. Silliman, a retired Air Force Judge Advocate, said the broad definition of enemy combatants is alarming because a U.S. citizen loosely suspected of terror ties would lose access to a civilian court — and all the rights that come with it. Administration officials have said they want to establish a secret court to try enemy combatants that factor in realities of the battlefield and would protect classified information.

The administration's proposal, as considered at one point during discussions, would toss out several legal rights common in civilian and military courts, including barring hearsay evidence, guaranteeing "speedy trials" and granting a defendant access to evidence. The proposal also would allow defendants to be barred from their own trial and likely allow the submission of coerced testimony.

allowing coerced testimony. allowing hearsay evidence. barred from your own trial. no access to evidence within trial. you are a prisoner, with no rights. because you are suspected of possibly having ties with a terrorist network.

welcome to facism, America style.

CT-Sen

once again, Connecticut takes attention. it's probably the hottest race going on in America today. everybody knew about it. well, almost everybody. apparently, Lieberman is starting to wake up. this could make for something interesting. i understand the tactic of waiting until near the vote because that way the "issues" are fresh in the minds of people who go to the polls and they will vote on what they heard recently. except, this is different. it's not about what people hear last. in this race, the progressive Democrats now have a cause. this is a huge difference from just talking points. the Lamont crew wants to change the system. Lieberman doesn't.

that is really the source of this whole race. it's why Lieberman has gotten most of the money donated to his campaign from upstate New York and Washington, NOT from Connecticut (which Connecticut voters are aware of). Lamont is getting huge support from the state. they are lining up behind him, and he has raised more money in the state than Lieberman could hope for in this race.

earlier this week i was greatly saddened to see Senator Boxer get up and stump for Lieberman. she said she has done it on the principal of women's issues, but most women's rights groups seem to be lining up behind Lamont. she misrepresented what Lieberman has said about the day after pill. women's groups like NOW are amazed:

the National Organization for Women's political action committee backs Lamont partly because he supports requiring all publicly funded hospitals — including Catholic hospitals — to provide day-after emergency contraception to rape victims, while Lieberman doesn't. NOW also has dinged Lieberman for voting in January to let Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's confirmation proceed.

is this the stance you wish to take Senator Boxer? that is what you told me in response to my email, that you are with Joe 100% on all women's issues. what if you were raped and the hospital you went to refused to give you the pill? would you want to walk down (and it's more than 5 blocks to the next hospital on the west coast) to make sure you got that pill? or would you be pissed at the male doctor, who could never fully understand the situation, for refusing to help you? THAT is what your stance should be, Senator Boxer. most of California is pissed at you. personal or party loyalty should never come before the greater good. and if you don't think that helping rape victims receive immediate treatment at the nearest facility is a greater good... you may need to reevaluate yourself. i posed another question to Senator Boxer that was never answered by the staff she assigned to reply: if Lamont agreed with Lieberman on all other issues except for the Iraq war, would you still support Lieberman? too bad she didn't answer.

today i am proud to say that i donated as much as i could to Lamont. i encourage everyone to do the same. Lieberman does not deserve to hold a seat representing the people but promoting his own ideological views. come August 8th, American politics are going to change. August 8th will be the day that the people who say they represent the people of their state will realize that the people power their politics, and their going to take back the government we want it to be.

[UPDATE] it seems that tomorrow, in their editorial section, the New York Times will throw their support behind Lamont instead of Lieberman. if that doesn't start spelling trouble for Lieberman, i don't know what does. congrats to the NYTs for finally understanding that it's the people who matter, not those who think they represent them.

minimum wage & capital gains taxes

because these two are directly related right? i mean, the more you earn, the more you can leave to your heirs, so not getting taxed on that would be a great thing right? oh wait, the cut in tax doesn't really help if you only have $50,000 to leave to your children. capital gains taxes would certainly dent the number, especially to those who never had that $50k (and this number is already grossly inflated, for how many people really end up leaving more than $25k after all bills/costs are taken care of?) to leave to anybody.

so when the Democrats wanted to raise the minimum wage, the Republicans were upset. this is an election year! raising the minimum wage would strike gold with the voters. but, it's only benefiting the poor! we can't do that. so the Republicans decided to include extra conditions. as AP describes here, the estate tax was pinned onto the bill. so now if the Dems don't vote for it, the Republicans can say that they are against the raise! they literally held the American wage earnings bill HOSTAGE for their own greedy purposes!

i would like to provide examples, but i am not math-based. however, i found a great article breaking down just what this tax cut means to the rich. David Grossman (great guy) has put up a great diary explaining how much Paris Hilton would actually benefit from this bill. he uses Paris Hilton as an example (mostly because the numbers were more readily available, but it's still very striking), and finds that with this new tax cut, she will get another $91 Million (from what she would have gotten before the cut) if she was sole inheritor of about $350 Million.

so what really happened. the way i see the cause and effect goes like this: the average Joe earns more money over time (good thing), has a little more to put into the economy to buy things for himself and his family (good thing). but wait, prices seem to be going up a little bit. why is that? well, now that the CEOs and heirs can get more money, they start charging a little more to gain a little more. and now that they are paying less taxes, the government is either declining further by cutting education and health care programs to make up for the lack of funds (it's not like Joe will be contributing taxes to the point that he can single-handedly repair the budget cuts) to pay for things like Iraq. so now regular taxes start to rise to help make up for it. goodbye extra little bit of money that Joe used to have. that $2.00 pay raise just went straight to taxes. but $2.00 out of the theoretical $91 Million that Paris would get? according to Republicans she should get to keep that. i would dare say that the $91 Million that these new tax cuts give her would make a huge dent in the health care and education budgets.

but no, the rich people who believe they should run the country because they have been doing it for awhile and their families have been doing it don't need to believe in repairing the education and health care budgets. they can afford better stuff anyways, so they don't need to take out health insurance (i know they do, but if you can buy the hospital the insurance is moot), and they can send their children to private schools who actually pay teachers what they are worth (i believe all K-12 teachers should get at least $50k-$75k per year depending on grade). no, the rich obviously don't care about the average citizen of the country, so when time comes and you hear some Republican talking about how they voted for the minimum wage hike, ask them if they would have voted for the wage hike if the estate tax exemption was not included in it. if they say yes, they lie, for they had a chance to vote on it without this tacked-on "extra."

health care? what health care?

the prices of health care are soaring. good for private insurance companies, bad for the 70% of people in America who can't afford the proper health insurance coverage that they should be getting for free. the prices of hospitalization and any kind of surgery are also rising to the point where a 2nd mortgage on your house will not be enough to cover your heart bypass. so what do we do? outsource.

many companies and individual insrance holders are finding more and more that going to places like India or Thailand to have open heart or hip replacement surgery is cheaper than getting the work done in America. and that includes the plane ticket.

"This is hard-dollar savings," says Jonathan Edelheit, vice president of sales for United Group Programs, which offers a plan to self-insured employers that includes services at Bumrungrad Hospital in Bangkok, Thailand. "If we send someone there for a bypass, the employer saves $60,000 to $70,000. We would consider this a magic bullet."

travel companies are starting up that specifically get flights for medical procedures. it seems to be becoming a lucrative business. there is a term for it: medical tourism." our health system is crumbling around us, and only the high government officials (who can be rushed to Ceder Sinai to get 5 doctors to remove the spliner from the podium when talking to the Senate floor) can afford to go; they can afford to go because it doesn't cost them anything, it costs us. we are paying for health care that is not ours, but our government officials believe that private health care is the way to go. with more and more people going away, it is reasonably assumed that the other countries will get more experience, more money, and eventually be able to surpass the US as a medical leader.

we get less health care for every dollar we spend than many other countries (assuming a 1:1 ratio for currency). that is horrible. especially when we have the ability to fix this problem, if not for the greed. we do not have the best health care in the world; we have the most expensive. a very important distinction.

technology for the masses

awhile back, the telecoms convinced the American government to give them large subsidies so that they could lay fiber-optic cable all the way to people's homes. that project never really got off the ground, as the telecoms found that even though they would still make money, they would make more if they just left the lines the same but still took the subsidies. the telecoms promised fiber-optic cable and 100Mbps to all major metropolitan areas by 2006, and to most homes by 2008. we never reached that goal, and not even a T3 line holds the same speeds promised (and they are paying in the thousands per month).

alas, Paris looks to do what American telecoms couldn't. Paris will be laying fiber-optic cable direct to the home.

"For €70 ($88) a month, customers participating in the fiber trial get Internet access, digital television broadcasts, and unlimited telephone calls over an optical connection with a theoretical maximum data rate of 2.5Gbps downstream, and 1.2Gbps upstream. The price includes installation and activation of equipment at the customers' homes, and the first two months' access are free."

telecoms, don't tell us that it is impossible. you have been fleecing the government for years, and now it's time to pay up on the promises. we are nowhere near the top when it comes to internet speed/technology. we are intentionally stifling it to make sure that corporations get to pay their CEOs 150 times more than their average worker. expect this to be a huge success for Paris, and expect it to probably be picked up all over Europe, and then, finally, when Americans realize that we've been left in the dust to rot our big heads, the telecoms may actually decide to upgrade their lines.

[on a side note, i know of one company that understands this and is taking plans for the future. Google is buying up lots of dark-fiber (meaning fiber-optic cable that has been laid out but not in use). they have not said why, but if they put out an ISP, half the state of California would join if they could. if they do this, not even Comcast will be able to keep up unless they lay (or buy) their own fiber network.]


the US House of Reps also had another banging day on technology. they passed a bill that says schools and other public institutions should ban social networking and chat sites from access. sounds good. until you get to the title of the bill: Deleting Online Predators Act. again, in true fashion, the title has nothing to do with the bill. the bill does not enact any action against online predators, nor does it give money to police services who try and catch them. all it does is put blockades on the computer to limit where the user can go to online. this is a direct fight against MySpace, which has shown itself to be an easy way to reach out and "touch" [lol] someone. you have to remember something here. social networking sites, by definition, can include blogs. but here is the kicker: what about when the child is at home (i would assume most kids who don't have a computer at school would visit MySpace from their homes)? how does this "delete" child predators? this bill is a farce. all it will do is drive the more technologically advanced (that's right Senators, your kids know a hell of a lot more about computers than you do *ahem* Ted Stevens *cough*) further underground to copycat sites of MySpace that are just as unsafe. this bill, like most others passed lately, paints your children as the guilty party. welcome to facism; guilty before proven anything.

Putin puts the sqeeze on bush

President Vladimir Putin. president of Russia. home of the "not the dollar" currency. also home to one of the biggest natural gas fields on the planet. a nice tappable source that many countries, especially the US, wants in on.

however not all is well in Moscow. Russia still wants to become a member of the WTO. Putin thinks that it's been reasonably long enough to get a full voice. he's right. but America, or rather bush, doesn't see it that way. so when Russia asked to become a member, it was a big slap in the face when America said it would not support the effort. Putin expected bush to allow it. it was a slap in the face because the G8 meeting this year was held in Russia.

so Putin decided to hit where it hurts. Putin is blocking the American oil companies from trying to get in on the gas field. he will probably reject any bid made by American companies, and sell to Europe or Asia, who also want to be able to tap the fields. by doing this, Putin puts bush in a hard spot. you can't expect to tell a country that they cannot join an organization like the World Trade Organization and then try to bid on creating busniess and trade in that same country. only an idiot like bush would believe that (he wouldn't believe that other people won't listen to him anyways).

either way, i don't see this in any American papers. the link leads to the UK Guardian. its sad that the American media couldn't care less that bush just costs America a good source of gas energy. but then again, he's not a gas man, he's an oil man. looks like we'll be in Iraq for awhile longer.

nuclear attack threats

so we all know that FAUX news tends to be, well, a bit on the conservative side. they do try to keep up appearances, most notably on a little show called Hannity & Colmes, supposedly a "real" Dem and a real Republican. the Dem (Colmes) is farther to the right than Lieberman. so much for fair and balanced.

anyways, yesterday on the show they had Cham Dallas, director for the Center for Mass Destruction Defense. apparently, Mr. Dallas believes that a nuclear strike on American soil is eminent. so the new message is that nuclear weaponry is being used to attack the US and the new round of fear that this brings to people who don't want to think for themselves will make them flock to the polls and vote Republican.

but let me make one thing very clear: if there is a nuclear attack on American soil, sole responsibility for the attack will rest with the Republicans. they have control of everything. every piece of government, and most media services, are owned by them. they have total control over the national security of our country. anything bad happens they are to blame. yes, if nothing happens then they are responsible for that too, but then why spread the fear? the fear is a control device for masses who, again, don't wish to think for themselves. America, WAKE UP! we can stand strong if we stand together instead of giving up ourselves to "feel" safe.

Wal-Mart tries to "dump" Germany

Germany has shown itself to be a very people-oriented country. Wal-Mart had the bright idea awhile back to try and take their economy killing stores overseas to Europe. however, they encountered something that they haven't seen in America. Resistance.

it seems that the "social dumping" that Wal-Mart is so well known for in the US just doesn't fly there. the workers were organized (at least more so than here) and more importantly there was no "underclass" that is willing to do any job just for the crumbs from the table, so to speak. Wal-Mart tried to pull out their bag of tricks but was routinely put down by the local unions and by the common sense of the workers not to be treated like they were in a "circus."

but i just love this quote from the article:

Chicago's decision to establish a 10 dollar minimum wage for big box store workers and a 3 dollar hourly minimum level for other benefits has effectively exposed the company's weakness. It was going to pay its South Side workers only 7.25 dollars as an entry wage and has now declared that this will probably remain their only store in the city.

Wal-Mart deserves to go down in flames. yes they give cheap stuff. everyone knows it. but the major problem why Wal-Mart does not deserve to exist is because they treat their employees like expendable commodities (which, in America, they have proven time and again) instead of the most important part of the business to care about. take an example from Costco. they may be a little more expensive, but i'll shop there before Wal-Mart any day. at least the people actually like working there.

oil and the hot weather

oil prices are still rising. many are looking at crude prices and wondering when it will hit $100. it seems that the general feeling is that it is no longer a possibility, its a reality that will soon hit. news comes today that Shell has been forced to lower production of gasoline because of the war and the availability of crude. however, Shell also posted another quarter of record profits. Shell shares rose 2.24%, with the company posting a rise in profits of 36%.

"It is a very good performance for Shell ... even though production was lower. High oil prices obviously work well for the company," Jaap Barendregt, at FBS Bankiers said.

it also seems that global warming is still being debated (which is just sad). it also turns out that many of the opposition to the "claim" of global warming was based upon the findings of Peter Doran and his collegues, who wrote a paper detailing what was happening in Antarctica from 1986 to 2000. in today's NYT Op-Ed, he puts tries to make it stop, believing that even though what he found in Antarctica at that time disputed global warming, it was only in PART of Antarctica. and even then he believes that global warming is really happening. to top it off, he makes sure to let everyone know that he wants his name taken off the list of those who dispute global warming. thank you, Mr. Doran, for having the courage to speak up when your work is being used for something that you don't support.

election cycle

it must be the elction cycle that is making everyone so testy. or maybe it's the summer heat. either way, politics is getting to be a dirty business. with a nod to the movie The Godfather, a NY councilwoman found a severed horse's head in her swimming pool. if things are turning this nasty at the local level, what must bush be waking up to!? *gasp* *shudder* the horror! still, a severed horse's head seems to be going a little to far. no need for intimidation unless you are not rich enough to buy off the government worker. and even then, a face-to-face talk should accomplish more than a severed horse's head.

going west, Montana Senator Conrad Burns had a couple of his own. with 92,000 acre fires burning in Montana, Virginia firefighters were called in to help. afterwards, Senator Burns had some words to say on the issue. but instead of taking it up with the fire bosses or with the people who coordinated it, he walks up to the aftual firefighters who were waiting for rides home and point-blank tells them "they did a poor job" of fighting the fire. there is absolutely no excuse for this whatsoever. how dare he go up to the people who just helped SAVE his state from fire and tell them that they did a poor job. especially after they just finished! Senator Burns, the linked article may play it down, but you don't deserve to represent anybody in any state if this is the attitude you have towards good samaritans. maybe next time that wage hike comes around you may decide to speak up in favor (since you seemed so surprised that the firefighters weren't paid more).

up in arms, or maybe it's time to hide

the US government has shown that it can play both sides of the field when it comes to being challenged in court. Illinois has already dismissed the lawsuit against AT&T in that state, and California seems that it will be headed toward granting the lawsuit the ability to move forward. however in Missouri, the balance is off. the US government has enacted a civil lawsuit against the state officials, alleging

"that the State Defendants do not have the authority to seek confidential and sensitive federal government information and thus cannot enforce the subpoenas they have served on the telecommunications carriers."

what kind of bullshit is this!? if the head officials of the state wish to know what is going on in their state, and must bring a lawsuit to do it, then they damn well have the authority to seek confidential and sensitive federal government information. the federal government exists at the behest of states, not the other way around. bush's personal attorney AG Alberto Gonzales needs to get his head out of his ass.

on a better note, more and more people are distancing themselves from bush. Lt. Govenor Steele from Maryland was cited as an anonymou source in an article that said that the new "scarlet letter" was "R." when it was confirmed that he made the statements, he told reporters that the conversation was off the record. however, in an email obtained by the Maryland Democratic Party, it shows his office was notified of the article to make any corrections. no corrections were made, and no objections voiced. it's called ACCOUNTABILITY, Mr. Steele. Americans are starting to like it. get used to it or get out.


however, even during the elction cycle the Dems are going to have to go to work. i put my resume up for consideration for The Patriot Corps, a little project being initiated by Senator Feingold (they are looking for 20 people, not 15). i highly encourage others to do something like this. donate, volunteer, just get the message out! this is all so that people will be more educated about the elections coming up. Iraq is a hot-button issue. we need to push these kinds of issues in the faces of all politicians. this needs to happen because of things like spin, hooplah, and low voter turnout:

The White House sees the risk [of staying the course in Iraq] but is banking, in part, on the Democrats' history of not capitalizing on such moments [of weakness]. Bush advisers point to 2004, when the situation in Iraq appeared particularly dire, and yet the president won reelection and Republicans retained both houses of Congress.

Moreover, they note, Bush has three months to paint the Middle East conflict in terms of his vision of the fight against terrorism.

i would like to say something like "it's time to armor ourselves with truth" but that just doesn't quite get to my heart. the new slogan that i think will touch everybody: it's time to temper our actions with common sense.