Ghost Dansing Comments [Radio Weblog]
Political Commentary and Analysis

 














Subscribe to "Ghost Dansing Comments [Radio Weblog]" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

 

 

  05 July 2004

Bigoo.ws images for your blog

My friends at Lucianne.com would most certainly enjoy Dr. Dean's recent article in the Daily Camera. Unfortunately, nobody has posted it yet. In it he elucidates, once again, aspects of the Propaganda methodology practiced by Dubya and his Republican administration, and once again, propaganda designed to undermine the studied information provided by experts; in this case Scientists.

With challenges coming from experts in Military Affairs and Operational Art, Diplomacy and State Craft, Economics, various Defense and Security subspecialties, and more, Dr. Dean highlights yet another realm of expert endeavor that Dubya and his Political Party has sought to suppress.

Increasingly I see the term "Orwellian" associated with Dubya and his Republican administration. Orwell, of course, was the author of 1984, a novel that envisioned totalitarian societal control through the careful and universal employment of thought control through propaganda. One of the methods I remember is one called "double speak". That is when one embraces a word, and then convolutes the meaning to tacitly embrace its near opposite. Such has been done with the term "conservative" itself. Why there are people running around calling themselves "conservatives" that are extremist reactionaries of the worst kind.. but that is a different story.

Let's have a look at the article:

Bush's war on science

By Gov. Howard Dean M.D.
July 5, 2004

"I write this week's column as a physician.

The Bush administration has declared war on science. In the Orwellian world of 21st century America, two plus two no longer equals four where public policy is concerned, and science is no exception. When a right-wing theory is contradicted by an inconvenient scientific fact, the science is not refuted; it is simply discarded or ignored.

Egregious examples abound. Over-the-counter morning-after contraceptive sales are banned, despite the recommendation for approval by an independent panel of the Food and Drug Administration review board. The health risks of mercury were discounted by a White House staffer who simply crossed out the word "confirmed" from a phrase describing mercury as a "confirmed public health risk." A National Cancer Institute fact sheet was doctored to suggest that abortion increases breast-cancer risk, even though the American Cancer Society concluded that the best study discounts that. Reports on the status of minority health and the importance of breast feeding are similarly watered down to appease right-wing ideologies.

What about global warming? After withdrawing from the Kyoto Treaty, the Bush administration distanced itself from a climate report the Environmental Protection Agency wrote, because it affirmed the potential worldwide harm of global warming, the existence of which Bush had denied. The global-warming section of the 2003 EPA report on the environment was extensively rewritten, then dropped entirely.

Fighting HIV? Bush's initiative to help fund HIV efforts in Africa was trumpeted by the press, while the National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control quietly removed information on the benefits of condoms and safe sex education from domestic HIV Web sites.

Presidential scientific commissions have long enjoyed relative immunity from politics. Presidents of both parties have depended on impartial, rational advice from such groups for decades. Yet under the Bush administration, there has been a concerted effort, led by Karl Rove and other political ideologues based in the White House, to stack these commissions with Republican loyalists, especially those who espouse fundamentalist views on scientific issues.

Recently, a scientist and a bioethics professor were dismissed from the blue-ribbon Council on Bioethics when they disagreed with the Bush administration's proposed ban on new stem-cell line development to cure a variety of diseases. In a similar vein and an unusual move, the nomination of public-health experts to a CDC lead paint advisory panel were rejected by Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson, and replaced with researchers with financial ties to the lead industry. The Union of Concerned Scientists, with 20 Nobel laureates and several former scientific advisers to Republican presidents, has issued its scathing Report on Scientific Integrity condemning these practices.

Is it any wonder that these outrages have been perpetrated on an unsuspecting public and an enfeebled press? Not when you consider that this is an administration that has put forth deliberately misleading proposals like the Healthy Forests Initiative, which removes barriers to clear-cutting, and the Clear Skies Initiative, which weakens existing safeguards on mercury, sulfur dioxide and other pollutants dumped into the air by power plants. When the oil industry writes national energy policy and the HMOs and drug companies draft our Medicare legislation, who is looking out for truth, scientific integrity and the public interest?

Will it be long before a prominent panel of fundamentalist theologians, conservative columnists and a few token scientists take up the question of whether the theory of evolution should be banned from the nation's classrooms? Stay tuned. In George Bush's America, ignorance is strength."

Howard Dean, former governor of Vermont, is the founder of Democracy for America, a grassroots organization that supports socially progressive and fiscally responsible political candidates. Email Howard Dean at howarddean@democracyforamerica.com.


7:15:52 PM    comment [] trackback []

This site is a member of WebRing. To browse visit here.
Bigoo.ws images for your blog

As I've said to my friends at Lucianne.com many times, the public policy solutions provided by the right-wing partisans of the Republican Party are absolutely vacuous; they are ineffective. Simply banning all abortion procedures for whatever reason is like standing on a mountain top and screaming at the top of your lungs "ABORTION IS BAD!"

It may feel good, and one is  proclaiming a absolute truth of God, and pointing to the profound folly and self-destructive nature of Man, however it does nothing by way of providing workable Public Policy.

The partisan, Republican solution begs the questions: So you're against abortion, great.. Then What? How will you deal with medical advances that can detect horrible birth defects earlier and earlier in pregnancy? What will you do about the black-market that is spawned performing back-ally, unsanitary abortions on scared teenagers? What will you do to those who seek abortions? What will you do to wealthy citizens who go abroad to get abortions? How will your Public Policy and Law on abortion attack the socioeconomic and cultural environment within which abortions become a viable option as a birth control procedure?  In short, how will YOUR Public Policy and Law prevent even one abortion? I would suggest they have no good answers.

There are many that understand profoundly the higher moral issues, informed by Faith, that illuminate our Human predicament.. our mortality, our limits, our imperfections in the face of God. These insights are not the private realm of the Republican so called "religious right", or "religious conservatives".

My friends at grappled with the issue once again with Senator Kerry's pronouncment of his Faith-Based beliefs... somhow they cannot see the wisdom of Church-State separation, or realize that the utterance of acrimony, sanctimony and condemnation do not workable Public Policy and Law make. Government is all about making workable Public Policy and Law. The pronouncments of the Church seldom translate directly into workable Public Policy and Law. If it did, we could just make the Bible, and the Quran, and whatever other Religious document that is out there, amendments to the constitution and we'd all be set. There are some people in the Middle East and the Muslim world that are trying to do that. Americans think that it won't work for them. I wonder why the so called "right wing, conservative Christians" think it will work for us?

From Lucianne.com:

Kerry Says He Believes Life Starts at Conception
Washington Post , by Jonathan Finer

Original Article

Posted  7/4/2004 11:15:13 PM

As Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) campaigned across Iowa on Sunday with Gov. Tom Vilsack, widely reported to be on Kerry's vice presidential short list, both men dodged repeated questions about whether their joint appearance might be a preview of the Democratic ticket. But even as he tried to avoid making news Sunday, Kerry broke new ground in an interview that ran in the Dubuque, Iowa, daily, the Telegraph Herald.

Comments:


Reply 1 - 7/4/2004 11:17:45 PM

Then he believes in legalized murder, interesting.


Reply 2 -  7/4/2004 11:17:59 PM

Kerry's handlers never told him not to try and sit on a barbed-wire fence.

http://www.lucianne.com/threads2.asp?artnum=151818

My comment, responding to a New York Times article a few weeks ago, is what I would add to theirs:

ghostdansing - 8:30 AM ET June 27, 2004 (#8393 of 8498)

The Bishops vs. the Bible

This is a profound article. The issue of abortion, as matter of public law and policy requires elevated discourse, within the context of insight that transcends the rhetoric of "prolife-prochoice". The article does not note, probably for the sake of decorum, that the jewel in the crown of the so called "prolife" movement, i.e. the legal ban on abortions for any reason, derives from the most banal and shallow of thought processes, and is perhaps the most abysmally ineffective policy one can conclude to address the issue of abortion. The approach is ineffective, would incur socio-legal architectures that would be unsustainable, and would probably result in the resurrection of a black market for abortions that is ameliorated to some degree by the current "permitted but regulated" policy. It (the "prolife" solution) is entertained for purely partisan political purposes. The Supreme Court, with Roe v Wade engaged the issue from the standpoint of deciding wherein lies the appropriate locus for decision, as a public policy. Though not comprehensive, it neither endorses nor condemns the practice of abortion, and lays a foundation for policies which could actually decrease the incidence of abortion, certainly to the degree that it is employed as a modality of birth control.

The Article:

Kerry Says He Believes Life Starts at Conception

By Jonathan Finer
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 5, 2004; Page A06

"As Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) campaigned across Iowa on Sunday with Gov. Tom Vilsack, widely reported to be on Kerry's vice presidential short list, both men dodged repeated questions about whether their joint appearance might be a preview of the Democratic ticket.

But even as he tried to avoid making news Sunday, Kerry broke new ground in an interview that ran in the Dubuque, Iowa, Telegraph Herald. A Catholic who supports abortion rights and has taken heat from some in the church hierarchy for his stance, Kerry told the paper, "I oppose abortion, personally. I don't like abortion. I believe life does begin at conception."

Spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said that although Kerry has often said abortion should be "safe, legal and rare," and that his religion shapes that view, she could not recall him ever publicly discussing when life begins.

"I can't take my Catholic belief, my article of faith, and legislate it on a Protestant or a Jew or an atheist," he continued in the interview. "We have separation of church and state in the United States of America." The comments came on the final day of a three-state Midwest swing, during which Kerry has repeatedly sought to dispel stereotypes that could play negatively among voters there.

President Bush's campaign said these instances are further evidence of what it says is Kerry's propensity for misleading flip-flops.

"John Kerry's ridiculous claim to hold conservative values and his willingness to change his beliefs to fit his audience betrays a startling lack of conviction on important issues like abortion that will make it difficult for voters to give him their trust," said Steve Schmidt, a Bush campaign spokesman.

On Sunday morning, the day the candidate's abortion comments appeared in the local paper, Kerry sat in a church pew near Vilsack, also a Catholic who supports abortion rights, and his wife, Christie, one of Kerry's earliest backers in Iowa.

Afterward, several parishioners asked him about his position on abortion and his vote against a recent bill that would have banned the late-term procedure opponents call "partial birth" abortion, according to a reporter for the Telegraph Herald who sat behind Kerry's pew. Kerry replied that he would have supported the ban if it had included an exception for the health of the mother.

Kerry took Communion during Mass, which a few Catholic bishops have publicly said he should not do because of his abortion views.

"I wish he was against abortion, but I don't think that'll get settled," said Helen Willenberg, 83, a Catholic who met Kerry later in the day. "But I still hope he wins."

Later, Kerry and Vilsack walked the same Cascade, Iowa, parade route, shaking hands with voters, but rarely walking alongside each other or conversing publicly.

"Come on up here, Mr. President, we've got room for you," said a man seated on the porch of the Hughes Realty agency, as Kerry hopped over to say hello. There were also scattered Bush signs, some Bush stickers on folks holding Kerry signs and at least one heckler, in a T-shirt that read "W in '04," who yelled, "Kerry go home."

With speculation rampant Sunday, Kerry's daughter Vanessa told CNN that even she had tried but failed to get a hint from her father about his choice as running mate.

Asked whether he had decided who would join his ticket, Kerry said, "I made a decision to get a drink and eat some lunch." Afterward, the group proceeded to Dyersville for a photo opportunity on the spot where the 1989 movie "Field of Dreams" was filmed.

Surrounded by a half-dozen Little Leaguers with baseball gloves, Kerry ambled across the diamond into the thigh-high Iowa corn. As the children's heads disappeared, the 6-foot-4 senator ducked out of view, re-creating a scene from the movie, in which long-dead baseball players vanish after a game.

Kerry took a turn at bat, fielded ground balls at second base and pitched to an assortment of kids, and later to Vanessa Kerry, who, along with her sister, Alexandra, joined him on the campaign trail over the weekend.

At an evening barbecue at a home in Independence, Iowa, Kerry told about 200 supporters how happy he was to be back in the Hawkeye State. Kerry's comeback victory in the Iowa caucuses Jan. 19 propelled him to the front of the Democratic pack.

"I was being mentioned on the obituary pages here," he said, half-jokingly, before thanking those gathered for backing him and asking them to continue their support."


6:57:13 AM    comment [] trackback []


Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website. © Copyright 2007 Ghost Dansing.
Last update: 10-03-2007; 14:23:31.

July 2004
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Jun   Aug