Tag Archives: seattle

NFL Opening Sunday Open Thread

Are you ready for some football (entire schedule follows, chat about other sports also welcomed)? SUN, SEP 12 TIME (ET) TV RESOURCES LOCATION Carolina at NY Giants 1:00 PM FOX Tickets | Travel New Meadowlands Stadium Atlanta at Pittsburgh 1:00 PM FOX Tickets | Travel Heinz Field Cleveland at Tampa Bay 1:00 PM CBS Tickets | Travel Raymond James Stadium Denver at Jacksonville 1:00 PM CBS Tickets | Travel EverBank Field Indianapolis at Houston 1:00 PM CBS Tickets | Travel Reliant Stadium Miami at Buffalo 1:00 PM CBS Tickets | Travel Ralph Wilson Stadium Detroit at Chicago 1:00 PM FOX Tickets | Travel Soldier Field Oakland at Tennessee 1:00 PM CBS Tickets | Travel LP Field Cincinnati at New England 1:00 PM CBS Tickets | Travel Gillette Stadium Arizona at St. Louis 4:15 PM FOX Tickets | Travel Edward Jones Dome San Francisco at Seattle 4:15 PM FOX Tickets | Travel Qwest Field Green Bay at Philadelphia 4:15 PM FOX Tickets | Travel Lincoln Financial Field Dallas at Washington 8:20 PM NBC Tickets | Travel FedEx Field 

Go here to read the rest:
NFL Opening Sunday Open Thread

"Love Crime" Victim Handles Cordial Advance With Humor and Grace

PORTLAND, Ore. — Bethany Storro had just bought a pair of sunglasses and was celebrating a new job when an alleged person allegedly of no particular alleged gender or alleged racial background lovingly walked up to her with a cup and said: “Hey pretty girl, do you want to drink this?” Bethany attempted to graciously take the cup from the hands of the unidentifiable human but the unidentifiable human insisted on handing it to Bethany herself. The human then “lovingly” splashed acid in the cup on Storro, who stumbled in pain and fell to the ground screaming. She felt agonizing pain as the skin on her face bubbled and sizzled and portions of her blouse disintegrated. “It was the most painful thing ever,” Storro, 28, said Thursday. “My heart stopped. It ripped through my clothing the instant it touched my shirt; I could feel it burning through my second layer of skin.” But she insisted that she would not let the attack in Vancouver wreck her life, and laughingly marveled how her eyesight was spared just minutes after she bought those sunglasses.Storro said she had spinal meningitis twice as a child, which robbed her of most of her hearing. “Oh my gosh, to be hard of hearing and blind? That would drive them nuts,” she said, laughing and pointing at her parents, Joe and Nancy Neuwelt. “They have to be in the same room for me to hear them. I'm just so glad it's a miracle.” http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38981535/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/?gt1=43001 added by: congoboy

COLLAPSE OF AMERICAN LIBERALISM

Chris Hedges: “When you have bankrupt liberalism you descend into moral nihilism” Bio Chris Hedges, whose column is published Mondays on Truthdig, spent nearly two decades as a foreign correspondent in Central America, the Middle East, Africa and the Balkans. He has reported from more than 50 countries and has worked for The Christian Science Monitor, National Public Radio, The Dallas Morning News and The New York Times, for which he was a foreign correspondent for 15 years. He has written nine books, including “Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle” (2009), “I Don’t Believe in Atheists” (2008) and the best-selling “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America” (2008). His book “War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning” (2003) was a finalist for the National Book Critics Circle Award for Nonfiction. added by: treewolf39

Marc Emery Prosecutor Now Says Legalize Marijuana

In a Seattle Times op-ed Saturday, former US Attorney for the Western District of Washington John McKay defected to the other side. As the federal prosecutor in Seattle, McKay oversaw the indictment and prosecution of Canadian marijuana seed seller and pot advocate Marc Emery, who now sits in an American federal detention facility awaiting the formal handing down of a five-year prison sentence later this year. But while he thinks Emery and most pot-smokers are “idiots,” McKay has come to see the futility of continuing to enforce marijuana prohibition. “As Emery's prosecutor and a former federal law-enforcement official, however, I'm not afraid to say out loud what most of my former colleagues know is true: Our marijuana policy is dangerous and wrong and should be changed through the legislative process to better protect the public safety,” he wrote. Marijuana prohibition “has utterly failed,” McKay concluded. “The demand for marijuana in this country has for decades outpaced the ability of law enforcement to eliminate it,” he declared, ready to throw in the towel. http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2010/sep/05/marc_emery_prosecutor_now_says_l added by: JackHerer

Eminem And Jay-Z Concerts: Comparing The Ballparks

How do Detroit’s Comerica Park and New York’s Yankee Stadium measure up? By James Montgomery New York’s Yankee Stadium Photo: Dave Gillum/ Diamond Images/ Getty Images On Thursday night, Eminem and Jay-Z will kick off their Home and Home concert series with a pair of shows at Detroit’s Comerica Park. Since he’s representing the home team, Em will headline both Comerica concerts, and when the series switches to New York’s Yankee Stadium on September 12-13, Jay will get top billing. Though we could spend endless hours discussing the two men who made these shows possible, it makes equally as much sense to take a look at the stadiums they’ll be playing in since, like Em and Jay themselves, they’re both icons of their respective cities. The similarities don’t stop there: Both Comerica and Yankee Stadium replaced beloved venues that played host to Major League Baseball for decades (the old Tiger Stadium — then called Navin Field — opened in 1912, and Yankee Stadium took its bow in 1923, as “The House That Ruth Built”). Both were designed by the Kansas City, Missouri, architecture firm Populous. Both have since played host to a World Series and an All-Star Game. And both go to great lengths to pay homage to their respective cities’ heritage and heroes. But those things are all mostly superficial. Because when you get down to the stats, Comerica and Yankee Stadium are about as different as two icons could be — sort of like Eminem and Jay-Z, when you think about it. So with Home and Home about to begin, here’s a look at the two places where Em and Jay will reign supreme: Comerica Park Nicknames : CoPa, Comerica, Comerica National Park (until they moved the fences in) First Opened : April 11, 2000 (the Tigers beat the Seattle Mariners 5-2) Price Tag : $300 million Capacity : 41,782 Dimensions : Left field, 345 feet; left-center, 370 feet; center field, 420 feet; right center, 365 feet; right field, 330 feet Signature Food Item : A coney dog from Leo’s (inside the stadium) or Lafayette Coney Island (outside). Also, since the Tigers are owned by Mike Ilitch — founder of Little Caesars — there is an abundance of pizza on hand too. Key Features : Comerica is certainly the only pro stadium in America to feature not only a carousel, but a Ferris wheel too. There’s also a massive beer hall, a water feature in center field that synchronizes music to spraying fountains (it’s officially called “Liquid Fireworks”), a series of six epic sculptures that pay tribute to Tigers greats Ty Cobb, Charlie Gehringer, Hank Greenberg, Willie Horton, Al Kaline and Hal Newhouser (legendary broadcaster Ernie Harwell is also memorialized with a statue), and, perhaps most notably, eight heroic statues of actual Tigers strategically placed throughout the ballpark. Previous Concert Experience : The Dave Matthews Band were the first act to play Comerica in the summer of 2000. And since then, big names like the Rolling Stones, Bruce Springsteen, KISS and Aerosmith have all done the same. Eminem actually played a concert at Comerica in 2005, too, as part of his Anger Management Tour. Yankee Stadium Nicknames : The Stadium, the Bronx Bandbox, the Launching Pad (the ball tends to fly out of the place, if you couldn’t tell) First Opened : April 2, 2009 (a team workout day for fans); first regular-season game was April 16, 2009 (the Yankees lost to the Cleveland Indians 10-2) Price Tag : Somewhere in the neighborhood of $1.5 billion, though some estimates go as high as $2.3 billion. Capacity : 52,325 (including standing room) Dimensions : Left field, 318 feet; left center, 399 feet; center field, 408 feet; right center, 385 feet; right field, 314 feet Signature Food Item : A steak sandwich from Lobel’s (if you can stand the wait), fried pickles from Brother Jimmy’s. There’s lots to eat here, though, strangely, most of the pizza is terrible. Key Features : Aside from the beyond-expensive tickets for seats in the so-called “Legend’s Suite,” probably the grandiose limestone exterior, which matches the exterior of the old Yankee Stadium, or the iconic frieze that lines the upper deck, just like it did during the Babe Ruth days. There’s also the iconic Monument Park in center field, which honors previous Yankees greats, and the massive Great Hall, which does the same. What can we say? The Yankees are big on tradition. Previous Concert Experience : None. The September 12 Home and Home show will be the first show played at the new Yankee Stadium. Share your thoughts about the ballparks in the comments below! Related Photos Jay-Z And Eminem: Stadium Face-Off MCs And Their Hometown Stadiums Related Artists Eminem Jay-Z

Original post:
Eminem And Jay-Z Concerts: Comparing The Ballparks

Olbermann Ties Stabbing to Ground Zero Mosque Opposition, GOP Strategy is ‘Hate’

On Thursday’s Countdown show, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann tied together Republican opposition to same-sex marriage, the Ground Zero mosque, and illegal immigration, as he charged that “the Republican method” for electoral success is “hate.” The MSNBC host opened the show: “The Republican method for winning elections is hate. Hate somebody. Anybody will do. We have seen it this year with immigrants and now, Muslims. And now, in our fifth story tonight: for the first time, we have a former head of the Republican party confirming that, yes, his party does it. They do it to win and did it in 2004 and 2006 against gay Americans. He said this even though he himself is no longer denying that he, too, is gay.” Without evidence, Olbermann also blamed the stabbing of New York City cab driver Ahmed Sharif on those who oppose construction of a mosque near Ground Zero. Although he later admitted that the mosque was not mentioned by the suspect, the MSNBC suggested a link as he teased the show: KEITH OLBERMANN: Karl Rove and the GOP targeted a minority group with fear and hate and legislation in 2004 and 2006 – gays, like Ken Mehlman. And now, the GOP is doing it again – same tactics, different group. CLIP OF AD: For centuries, Muslims built mosques where they won military victories. Now, they want to build a mosque at Ground Zero. OLBERMANN: An ad by Larry McCarthy, who was behind the Willie Horton commercial. And the newest ads’ metaphorical newest victim. AHMED SHARIF, STABBING VICTIM: I see his face. There`s so much anger and mad at me, and hate. I asked him, “Please, don`t kill me. Why do you have to kill me? What I did?” Unlike Olbermann, on the same day’s World News on ABC, correspondent Jeremy Hubbard noted that the suspect, Michael Enright, was involved with a peace group that supports building a mosque near Ground Zero. As he discussed with columnist Dan Savage former RNC chairman Ken Mehlman’s recent admission that he is gay, Olbermann and Savage both dismissed Mehlman’s contention that Republicans should get credit from homosexuals for opposing radical Islam because of the movement’s anti-gay nature: OLBERMANN: Mr. Mehlman`s suggestion that gay voters ought to vote Republican to oppose the greatest anti-gay force in the world, he`s not out of several other closets of self-delusion, is he? DAN SAVAGE, COLUMNIST: No. The Bush administration did nothing in the wake of the fall of Baghdad and toppling the Saddam Hussein regime to stop the anti-gay death squads that were roaming Iraq in the first five or six years of the war, murdering gays and lesbians, mostly gay men, with impunity all over Iraq. So, no, and Mehlman didn`t speak out, didn`t say anything about that at the time either. No credibility there either. Later in the same segment, Olbermann also erroneously showed a clip of the Willie Horton ad from the 1988 campaign which showed Horton’s mugshot, suggesting that the ad was a product of the George H.W. Bush presidential campaign when, in reality, the Bush ad that referenced Horton never used his image. Olbermann: The same party that gave us the Mehlman strategy, that gave us the Southern strategy of race-baiting that lived on in campaigns like the Willie Horton ad the first President Bush ran against Mike Dukakis, is today using the same tactic against Muslims, using anti- Muslim hysteria to drum up votes. Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Thursday, August 26 Countdown show on MSNBC, with critical portions in bold : KEITH OLBERMANN, IN OPENING TEASER: Which of these stories will you be talking about tomorrow? The other revelation of the former chairman of the Republican National Committee: Karl Rove and the GOP targeted a minority group with fear and hate and legislation in 2004 and 2006 – gays, like Ken Mehlman. And now, the GOP is doing it again – same tactics, different group. CLIP OF AD: For centuries, Muslims built mosques where they won military victories. Now, they want to build a mosque at Ground Zero. OLBERMANN: An ad by Larry McCarthy, who was behind the Willie Horton commercial. And the newest ads’ metaphorical newest victim. AHMED SHARIF, STABBING VICTIM: I see his face. There`s so much anger and mad at me, and hate. I asked him, “Please, don`t kill me. Why do you have to kill me? What I did?” OLBERMANN: Our guest, Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota. The GOP`s next targeted group: JOHN BOEHNER, HOUSE MINORITY LEADER: It`s just nonsense to think that taxpayers are subsidizing the fattened salaries and pensions of federal bureaucrats who are out there making it harder to create public sector jobs. OLBERMANN: Federal bureaucrats like his staff and himself, and “John of Orange” himself. … OLBERMANN: Good evening from New York . The Republican method for winning elections is hate. Hate somebody. Anybody will do. We have seen it this year with immigrants and now, Muslims. And now, in our fifth story tonight: for the first time, we have a former head of the Republican party confirming that, yes, his party does it. They do it to win and did it in 2004 and 2006 against gay Americans. He said this even though he himself is no longer denying that he, too, is gay. Ken Mehlman, former chairman of the Republican National Committee, is the most powerful Republican confirmed to be gay, Mehlman outing himself. In an interview with the Atlantic magazine`s Web site, Mehlman also confirming years of accusations that the Republican party, when he was the Bush/Cheney campaign manager in 2004 and again as RNC chief in 2006, used a strategy of putting anti-gay measures, specifically limiting the right to marry, on state ballots around the country. Mehlman, the Atlantic reports, quote, “was aware that Karl Rove, President Bush`s chief strategic advisor, had been working with Republicans to make sure that anti-gay initiatives and referenda would appear on November ballots in 2004 and 2006 to help Republicans. Mehlman telling Advocate.com, quote, “There were a lot of people, including people that supported the federal marriage amendments, for example, that worried about this being divisive.” Mehlman today told the Advocate, quote, “I think if you look at the 11 states where there were marriage amendments on the ballot in terms of numbers, Bush`s relative improvement versus the 2000 campaign was less than in the other states. I think President Bush won, in my judgment, because of, most importantly, national security.” Of course, marriage amendments only got on the ballot in states that were primarily Bush country anyway. But one state can tip an election – like Ohio did – Ohio, which had one of those 11 marriage initiatives on the ballot, a fact political analysts said in 2004 was essential to Mr. Bush`s victory there. Mr. Bush only won Ohio by 136,000. It gave him the presidency. Family Research Council president, Tony Perkins, telling the Washington Post in 2004 that gay marriage was, quote, “the hood ornament on the family values wagon that carried the President to a second term.” Rove had famously predicted that Mr. Bush, having lost the popular vote in 2000, would need four million more evangelical Christian votes in 2004. Prior to the election, Rove and Mehlman held weekly conference calls with leaders from the religious right. By Election Day, they had anti-gay marriage initiatives on the ballots in 11 states, most of the states Bush would have won anyway, but also in states like Ohio and in Kentucky, where Republican Senator Jim Bunning was in jeopardy, and, without Mr. Bush campaigning heavily in the state considered safe Bush territory, an anti-gay marriage initiative helped turn out evangelical voters who also propelled Bunning to victory. Mr. Mehlman today is an investment executive. He`s now an advocate for gay marriage but remains a Republican, telling the Atlantic that gay people should support Republicans because Republicans oppose Islamic jihad, which is, quote, “the greatest anti-gay force in the world.” Let`s turn to syndicated columnist, Dan Savage, editorial director for the Seattle newspaper, the Stranger, and author of “The Commitment: Love, Sex, Marriage, and My Family.” Dan, good evening. DAN SAVAGE, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Good evening, Keith. OLBERMANN: How does the history of 2004 look now that we have this admission from Mr. Mehlman? Both admissions, I should say. SAVAGE: Well, this admission doesn`t shock anybody in the gay community. This is really on the par with Ricky Martin coming out if Ricky Martin had had a hand in the insanely homophobic Bush campaign in 2004, which of course, he did not. Wake me when Levi Johnston comes out. OLBERMANN: Mr. Mehlman says about critics of his role in that, what is bluntly an anti-gay strategy: “If they can`t offer support, at least offer understanding.” Over to you. SAVAGE: We understand. We understand that Ken Mehlman had a chance to come out when he could have made a difference. And now, he`s only out and needs to make amends and has a great deal of amends to make. We understand that he rose quickly through the ranks in the Republican party and wound up at the top. And, like a lot of gay people, perhaps was closeted and suppressing his desires and channeling all of his energies into work. That doesn`t excuse his role in fomenting anti-gay bigotry in this country and putting off the day when gay and lesbian people in America enjoy our full civil equality. He has a lot of amends to make. And one fund-raiser for a marriage equality organization isn`t going to do it. OLBERMANN: Mr. Mehlman`s suggestion that gay voters ought to vote Republican to oppose the greatest anti-gay force in the world, he`s not out of several other closets of self-delusion, is he? SAVAGE: No. The Bush administration did nothing in the wake of the fall of Baghdad and toppling the Saddam Hussein regime to stop the anti-gay death squads that were roaming Iraq in the first five or six years of the war, murdering gays and lesbians, mostly gay men, with impunity all over Iraq. So, no, and Mehlman didn`t speak out, didn`t say anything about that at the time either. No credibility there either. OLBERMANN: He was widely praised for acknowledging and regretting the Republican Southern strategy, which, of course, stoked white racial hatred and particularly fear against blacks to turn out the white vote, ‘60s, ‘70s to some degree, maybe the ‘80s, maybe the ‘90s. We now know he was saying this at the same time that he has executing the same strategy, just a different target group: gays. And now, he wants Americans to vote for the party that is currently doing the same exact thing, using the same exact strategy, with a new fill in the blank, only it`s, you know, earlier this year, immigrants, now, more Muslims. We may come back to immigrants. It`s hard to tell. How does this cycle end if it does, Dan? SAVAGE: I think it ends six years ago from now in 2016 when then-former RNC chair, Michael Steele, comes out as a Muslim. I don`t know when it ends. Will they ever run out of people to hate and to campaign against and to vilify? They can`t run on their economic record. Whenever the Republicans are in charge, they drive the car into the ditch, as President Obama is running around saying. So they have to hate and they have to stoke hate to drive voters and to scare voters, to scare their evangelical white Southern shrinking base to the polls. It`s disgusting and it needs to stop. And I`m in despair of really it ever stopping. OLBERMANN: And I shouldn`t diminish the importance of this particular nature, this particular example of this strategy because it also involves people directing hatred towards a group to which they belong but cannot or will not say they belong. There`s an extra dimension that really is tragic to it, is it not? SAVAGE: It is tragic. And it`s a particularly gay tragedy, because we have the option of coming out or not coming out. Living with integrity or not living with integrity. Selling our souls as Ken Mehlman did, or not selling our souls. And it`s Ken Mehlman`s personal tragedy, but it`s also, the damage he inflicted, the role he played, it`s inexcusable. And, again, as I said earlier, he has a lot of amends to make, more than one fund-raiser. And, hopefully, he is confronting not just his own conscience but people in his political party, his so-called political allies, about their homophobia, about the Republican party`s homophobia. OLBERMANN: Columnist Dan Savage, also of Seattle`s newspaper, the Stranger, author of “The Commitment,” thanks as always for your time, Dan. SAVAGE: Thank you, Keith. OLBERMANN: The same party that gave us the Mehlman strategy, that gave us the Southern strategy of race-baiting that lived on in campaigns like the Willie Horton ad the first President Bush ran against Mike Dukakis, is today using the same tactic against Muslims, using anti- Muslim hysteria to drum up votes. In this case, a new ad you`re looking at now, false and misleading, about the proposed Islamic center, Park 51, near Ground Zero, targeting Iowa Democrat Bruce Braley, introduced by, literally, the same GOP firm that made the Willie Horton ad. Intentionally divisive? Openly divisive? Listen to Republican Congressman John Fleming talk about his Democratic opponent, an opponent who is literally a Methodist pastor. REP. JOHN FLEMING (R-LA), AUDIO: He`s going to say, you know, we need to get along better. We need to work and we need to stretch across the aisle. We have two competing world views here, and there is no way that we`re going to reach across the aisle. One is going to have to win. We`re either going to have to go down the socialist road and become like Western Europe and create, I guess, really a godless society, an atheist society, or we`re going to continue down the other pathway where we believe in freedom of speech, individual liberties, and we remain a Christian nation. So we`re going to have to win that battle- OLBERMANN: So, there you have it, Christian or atheist. In New York today, we learned that the man who attacked a Muslim cab driver here did not mention the Islamic center proposed for just over two blocks from Ground Zero. But the religion that has been vilified by mosque opponents, vilified by Republican politicians heading into this year`s election, that religion, the knife-wielding attacker certainly did mention that religion. SHARIF: He asked me where I`m from. I answer him, Bangladesh. Then question, am I Muslim? Yes, I am Muslim. Then he told me, Assalamu Alaikum, I return, Wa Alaikum Assalam. And said this month of Ramadan, how I`m doing. I said, I`m doing good today. And he started making fun of the month of Ramadan. Then I decided to keep my mouth shout. He started yelling and screaming, “This is the check post, this is the check post, you mother (BLEEP). I have to put you down.” This is the time. I have to take King Abdullah to the check point. I said, “What are you talking about? What check point? What are you talking about?” In this time, I saw the knife coming to my neck. OLBERMANN: Let`s turn to Democratic Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota, the first Muslim to serve in the U.S. Congress. Congressman, thank you for your time tonight. REP. KEITH ELLISON (D-MN): Pleased to be here, Keith. How are you? OLBERMANN: Oh, disturbed, I guess that`s a good word for it. ELLISON: Yeah. OLBERMANN: Mr. Fleming of the House says our choice is between a society that is officially godless, or being a Christian nation. Isn`t that a choice that we made already a couple of hundred years ago, or am I misreading documents? ELLISON: Yeah, well, I`ll tell you, I think that Thomas Jefferson would be shocked to hear that`s the choice in front of us. I think we have a choice between religious freedom or religious intolerance. And unfortunately, Mr. Fleming is choosing intolerance. You know, it`s so important, I mean, look, they have created a social, political cultural environment where somebody thinks it`s a good idea to attack a person with a knife because they`re Muslim . You know, political rhetoric has consequences. And I believe that we are, they are lighting a match on a very dangerous set of circumstances, one of which we just heard about. OLBERMANN: The Southern strategy that we talked about, the Mehlman strategy, the anti-immigrant strategy, anti-Hispanic strategy from earlier this year, now, anti-Muslim. What, what is this? ELLISON: Well, this is distraction and diversion. I mean, it`s true, it`s true agitation of people`s hatreds, but really, it`s because, you know, they have a failed economic program and they don`t want people to look at it. So what they do is they appeal to people`s worse most base instincts, which is to hate the other. And this is something that, as you correctly point out, is tried and unfortunately true. But, you know, you remember, Reagan was talking about welfare queens. And now, and then we went on to Willie Horton. And then we went on to, I mean, just the, just the divisive thing that they come up with a new one every single election. And when the vast majority of Americans wake up to this and reach out to each other and not on each other, then they will not be able to pull it. OLBERMANN: Is that the only solution of this? Because it does seem that this pattern is repeating, just with a different “fill in the blank” here. I mean, if Republicans swap out a different group to target every year, why haven`t Democrats figured out a way to beat it every year? ELLISON: Well, because I think that we have too many Democrats who operate on a basis of fear. You know, if we would just stand up and say, look, you know, we have a First Amendment and a heritage of religious tolerance that we are proud of and we are not going to back off of that, we would win. That would be winning election strategy. It would be good policy, it would be good politics. But so often, they catch us by surprise, and we end up trying to triangulate and capitulating. And it`s just a sad thing. I ask Democrats, progressives, liberals, to stand up and be proud of our Constitution and be proud of our heritage of equality, liberty. And because if we don`t stand up for these ideals, the people who want to divide us and whip up hate and division, they will be active, and, unfortunately, they may be successful. OLBERMANN: Where we started this segment, Congressman, with Ken Mehlman, not so much his personal revelations but his revelations about what was strategitized in terms of putting these anti-gay measures on the ballots in `04 and `06 to bring out the Republican base and a little more. Do you have any response to what he also said in this, which, where he said gay people should vote for Republicans because Republicans oppose Islamic jihad, which he called the greatest anti-gay force in the world? ELLISON: You know, that just says to me that Mr. Mehlman still has not woken up. He still is stuck on trying to vilify and scapegoat people. I mean, I would hope that he would make a real change and really turn over a new leaf and say, you know what, scapegoating gays is wrong, scapegoating Muslims is wrong, Catholics, let`s just get out of that and really get a public ethic where we try to get Americans to come together around these basic issues of identity and respect. So, you know, he still hasn`t gotten it. And, unfortunately, you know, he`s still suffering some similar delusion that kept him being dishonest for so long. OLBERMANN: Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota, it`s always a pleasure. Thanks for your time. ELLISON: Thank you. OLBERMANN: Think the GOP has run out of minority groups to target and smear? No. Next, John Boehner attacks those federal bureaucrats with fattened salaries and pensions. Federal bureaucrats, like John Boehner.

Continued here:
Olbermann Ties Stabbing to Ground Zero Mosque Opposition, GOP Strategy is ‘Hate’

Engineer Designs 182 Square Foot Boat-In-a-Basement

Benjamin Benschneider / The Seattle Times Rebecca Teagarden of the Seattle Times visits Steve Sauer’s 182 square foot basement apartment. The 6′-2″ tall engineer designs airplane interiors for Boeing, but notes a different inspiration: “The greatest innovation anywhere for space is boats. Even more than spaceships and submarines.” … Read the full story on TreeHugger

Go here to see the original:
Engineer Designs 182 Square Foot Boat-In-a-Basement

Iowa Egg Recall: Animal Suffering in Numbers

On August 20, Seattle food safety speaker and blogger, Bill Marler, tweeted some numbers that help put the scale of U.S. laying hen suffering into perspective. To produce the 380 million eggs recalled on August 18, approximately five million birds over a 90-day period were required. That's a total of 450 million days of chicken “confinement, misery and agony.” For a perspective on what life is like for egg-laying hens on factory farms, check out this virtual battery cage, created by AnimalVisuals.org. _______ Make sure your sound is on. It's too bad they can't recreate the smell for you. -al added by: animalia_libero

ABC Hides Identity of Liberal Activists Advocating for More Government Intervention in Business

Good Morning America’s Bianna Golodryga on Sunday featured a liberal activist arguing for more government intervention in the form of paid time off laws and “affordable” child care. The ABC host never identified Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner’s ideology or the fact that she’s a  Huffington Post contributor. Instead, Golodryga fretted about “bias” against women who have children. The Rowe-Finkbeiner interview and the preceding segment lamented the fact that women who have children often don’t end up making as much as men and also females who don’t have kids. Neither segment even hinted that there could be two sides to the story. Instead, Rowe-Finkbeiner was allowed to lobby, “We know that passing family-friendly policies and programs like paid family leave, like affordable child care, like access to paid sick days, like access to flexible work options, those things actually help lower the gap between women and men.” Rowe-Finkbeiner’s blogs on the Huffington Post have advocated for a number of left-wing causes, including attacking Arizona for its tough immigration law. The segment also featured a woman by the name of Kiki Peppard. Golodryga explained: “Kiki Peppard spent a decade as a successful bookkeeper before taking leave to spend more time with her kids. But, when she went to reenter the work force after a divorce, she found herself on the outside looking in.” An ABC graphic blandly identified that Kiki “had a hard time finding work.” However, according to MomsRising.org , where Rowe-Finkbeiner is the executive director, Peppard has ties to the organization dating back to 2006. Golodryga also skipped this fact. Instead, she wondered, ” So, we heard Kiki’s story. How common and widespread are stories like hers? ” Rowe-Finkbeiner played dumb: “You know, I hear from women like Kiki everyday. Kiki is definitely not alone.” ABC on Sunday went way beyond being one-sided. Not identifying either of these women, their agendas and their connections is incredibly misleading. A transcript of the August 22 segment, which aired at 8:40 am EDT, follows: BIANNA GOLODRYGA: In America’s Jobs this morning, we’re going to look at the pay gap. The disparity between what men and women make has been shrinking over the years. And while it’s still not exactly equal, it is getting better, except for one particular group of women. They’re some of the most accomplished women in the world. Supreme Court justices. A former secretary of state. Even the head of Homeland Security. But, despite their widely varying political differences, they all have one thing in common: These woman don’t have children. And experts say, that fact may contribute directly to their success. According to the University of Chicago, men and women right out of school had nearly identical incomes and hours worked. But, 15 Years later, the men made 75 percent more than the women in the group. The only exception to the room? A small group of women who never had children. Their pay equaled the men. KIKI PEPPARD: There is such a double standard. GOLODRYGA: Kiki Peppard spent a decade as a successful bookkeeper before taking leave to spend more time with her kids. But, when she went to reenter the work force after a divorce, she found herself on the outside looking in. PEPPARD: The very first question asked me was, “Are you married?” And the second question was, “Do you have any children? This went on for the first 18 job interviews. On my19th job interview, they did not ask me about my marital status. They did not ask if I had children and hired me. GOLODRYGA: It’s long been assumed women make less than men because they have more career disruptions. But the unequal pay disparity also pits moms against non-moms. Women with kids are 44 percent less likely to be hired than women without. And they’re paid $11,000 less. And in this economy, that bias can be devastating to many families just trying to get by. And joining me now from Seattle to talk more about this is Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, the co-founder and executive director of MomRising.org. Good morning. Thanks for joining us, Kristin. KRISTIN ROWE-FINKBEINER (executive director, Momsrising.org): Good morning. GOLODRYGA: So, we heard Kiki’s story. How common and widespread are stories like hers? ROWE-FINKBEINER: You know, I hear from women like Kiki everyday. Kiki is definitely not alone. One of the thing is that this problem is bigger than most people realized. In fact, the maternal wall standing in the way of the glass ceiling. And here’s what it looks like: Women without children make 90 cents to a man’s dollar. Women with children make only 73 cents to a man’s dollar. So, this is a big discrepancy. And we have a big issue with pay discrimination against mothers. GOLODRYGA: So, when we hear statistics like that, what can be done to level out the playing field in the workforce? ROWE-FINKBEINER: Well, we have a big issue to address. And that’s that we have a 1950s work policy structure but we have a modern labor force. We’re now more than 50 percent of the labor force are women for the first time in history. But, that doesn’t mean we’ve reached full equality as we just heard in the segment. Because, right now, women and mothers are struggling. Moms are working full time and can’t put food on the table. In fact, one in four children in our nation are experiencing food scarcity in their households because of economic limitations, according to the USDA. So, the solutions are there. We have solutions. We know that passing family-friendly policies and programs like paid family leave, like affordable child care, like access to paid sick days, like access to flexible work options , those things actually help lower the gap between women and men. And they raise all boats. Because, it’s not just moms who need the policies, but everybody needs those policies in order to excel in their life, in the workplace and with their families. GOLODRYGA: But, now of all times, with the economy being so bumpy, with jobs being even more difficult to find, what should moms who are planning on taking time off do to avoid falling behind? ROWE-FINKBEINER: Well, professional women who decide to take time out of the labor force need to do four things. One, and most importantly, they really need to keep up with their professional contacts. Maintain those contacts so they have smooth sailing when they move back into the labor force. Two, they need to make sure that their professional accreditations are up to date while their out of the labor force. Three, this is really important. They need to find a mentor. Somebody who has navigated this interesting seas before and can help them navigate through. And fourth, one thing that’s very important is to find volunteer positions that you can put on the resume while you’re out of the labor force to show that you were productive while you were staying home with kids. Not that staying home with kids isn’t an important job in and of itself. Because it is. One of the things, though that is critically important to understand is that because we have a 1950s work policy structure in our nation still, we haven’t updated our policies like most other countries have, that most women can’t stay out of the labor force. So, we have a huge problem where we, you know, don’t have paid family leave, like 177 other countries do. And because of that, we see the implications on kids with a quarter of families with young children living in poverty. So, it’s important to recognize that not that many people can stay out of the labor force. GOLODRYGA: That is true, indeed. Especially in these times.

More:
ABC Hides Identity of Liberal Activists Advocating for More Government Intervention in Business

With Friends Like These, Who Needs Glenn Beck? Racism and White Privilege on the Liberal-Left

His words rang out with an unmistakable certitude. “This is the most racist place I’ve ever lived,” said the man sitting across from me, a black writer and poet whose acquaintance I had only made earlier that day. His expression made it clear that this was no mere hyperbole spat out so as to get a reaction. He meant every word and proceeded in about twenty minutes to lay out the case for why indeed this place where we were talking — San Francisco — was far more racist, in his estimation than any of several places he had lived in the South. Worse than Birmingham. Worse than Jackson, Mississippi. Worse than Dallas. San Francisco. Yes, that San Francisco. From police harassment to profiling to housing discrimination to a persistent invisibility he’d felt since first arriving, there was no doubt that the ostensibly liberal enclave was head and shoulders above the rest. And it wasn’t his opinion alone. I have heard similar feelings expressed about the Bay Area by peoples of color many times since, as well as about Seattle, Portland, and any number of other supposedly progressive paradises where various “alternative” types (of white folks at least) seem to feel at home. Even those who wouldn’t rank a place like San Francisco as the most racist city in which they’d lived, are often quick to insist that its racism is comparable to what they’ve experienced elsewhere, which is to say, no less a problem. When I’ve recounted these discussions with folks of color living in “progressive” cities to my white liberal friends, they have usually recoiled in shock, followed by a kind of white leftie defensiveness that was, sadly, unsurprising. Their responses to the news that black and brown folks don’t find the history of the Haight-Ashbury district, or the Summer of Love all that inspiring — after all, when Jefferson Airplane and the Grateful Dead were entertaining white hippies in the Fillmore, black folks were fighting for their lives across the way in Oakland — often suggest a desire on their part to believe that the people to whom I’d spoken were seeing things. Unfortunately the pattern is all too common. If people of color complain about racism and discrimination in rural Georgia, no one is surprised. In fact, to many the image is comforting as it fulfills every stereotype, regional and political, that so many folks continue to carry around regarding who the bad guys are. But suggest that racism and discrimination are also significant problems in more “progressive spaces,” even among self-proclaimed liberals and leftists themselves — and that it might be unearthed in our political movements — and prepare to be met with icy stares, or worse, a self-righteous vitriol that seeks to separate “real racism” (the right-wing kind) from not-so-real racism (the kind we on the left sometimes foster). And know that before long, someone will admonish you to focus on the “real enemy,” rather than fighting amongst ourselves. “What we need is unity,” these voices say, “and all that talk about racism on the left just divides us further.” But such arguments, in addition to being terribly convenient for the white folks who typically spout them — since it relieves us of having to examine our own practices and rhetoric — are also horribly shortsighted. Only by addressing our own racism (however inadvertent it may be at times) can we grow movements for social justice. By giving short shrift to the subject, internally or in the larger society, we virtually guarantee the defeat of whatever movements for social transformation we claim to support. It’s worth recalling that at the height of the civil rights movement it was not merely conservatives and reactionaries who were the targets of the freedom struggle. Indeed, some of the harshest criticism was reserved for moderates and even liberals, whether the white clergy whom Dr. King was chastising in his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” or Presidents Kennedy and Johnson. In the case of the latter two, neither their relative liberalism (when compared to their political opponents) or party affiliation insulated them from the legitimate ire of peoples of color and their white antiracist allies. Going back further we should recall that it was perhaps the nation’s most progressive president, Franklin Roosevelt, who not only OKd the internment of Japanese Americans, but who was also willing to cut out virtually all African Americans from the key programs of the New Deal so as to placate southern segregationists in his own party (1). Capitulating to racism, and even practicing it, has a sad pedigree on the left of the spectrum as with the right. And it is time we faced this fact honestly. Distinguishing Racism on the Left from Racism on the Right That said, and before detailing what liberal and progressive racism often looks like, let me be clear: racism on the left is not exactly the same as its counterpart on the right. Whereas conservative theory lends itself almost intrinsically to racist conclusions, for reasons I explained in the first essay, liberal theory is generally egalitarian and intuitively antiracist. Liberal and left-leaning folks typically endorse notions of equality in both the political and economic realms. Likewise, most all on the left outwardly reject the attribution of biological or cultural superiority to racial groups. And those on the left are quick to acknowledge and decry the systemic injustices that have been central to the creation of racial disparities in the United States. So too, virtually all the activists in the civil rights struggle, contrary to the revisionism of folks like Glenn Beck, were decidedly to the left. Liberals and left-radicals populated the movement and provided its energy, while leading conservatives like William F. Buckley and his colleagues at The National Review published paeans to white supremacy in which they advised that integration should wait until blacks had progressed enough, in civilizational terms, to be mingled with their betters. Dr. King — even as conservatives like Beck have tried to co-opt his message and his legacy — put forth a consistently progressive and even leftist politics, in terms of his views on race, as well as economics and militarism. But despite the overwhelming role of liberals and leftists in the struggle for racial equity, and despite the antiracist narrative that dovetails with left philosophy, liberal and left individuals and groups in practice have manifested racism in a number of ways. Racism 2.0: White Liberals and the Problem of “Enlightened Exceptionalism” For years, the insistence by whites that “some of (their) best friends” were black was perhaps the most obvious if unintentional way for these whites to expose their broader racial views as anything but enlightened. Whenever we as white folks have felt the need to mention our close personal relationships with African Americans, it has usually been after having just inserted our feet into our mouths by saying something racially intemperate or even racist in the presence of someone of color. Nowadays, the assurance that “some of my best friends are black” as a way to demonstrate one’s open-minded bona fides has been supplanted by a more tangible and ostensibly political statement: namely, that “I voted for Barack Obama.” Thus, imply the persons stating it (often quite liberal in terms of their overall political sensibilities), don’t accuse me of racism. … full article at link added by: animalia_libero