jump to navigation

So… what is new in military equipment? 25 August 2007

Posted by marisacat in WAR!.

Boy this looks lousy and lethal to me:


A painted Hungarian military helicopter flies over the town of Szolnok. The Nato code for this Russian-made aircraft is ‘Hind” – hence the painting.  [AP from the BBC]

Just a Saturday thread… 😉




1. msxeno - 25 August 2007

It appears to be crying. Or am I projecting ?

2. marisacat - 25 August 2007

well, thre is a tear there….

3. supervixen - 25 August 2007

Wow. To think that someone spent a lot of time and energy painting that thing on a helicopter.

Speaking of unsettling images, this video is a festival of unattractive faces. Can’t you see mcjoan screaming “NO MORE WIRE HANGERS!!”

4. .Marie - 25 August 2007

If you haven’t seen the Robbins/Maher et. al clip, recommend it:


The end is priceless.

5. msxeno - 25 August 2007

sv, I really can’t sit through that sort of thing when I’m already queasy. Can’t you slap a surgeon general’s warning on it or something ? Those who’ve been advised to cut back on their intake of smarm and close-ups of incredibly bad hair should see their doctor before taking KosTube.

Granted, nobody but my friends and immediate family like looking at me, but at least I’ve figured out that once you’re over eighteen, it’s time to stop wearing pigtails for photo ops.

6. marisacat - 25 August 2007

Well the point is that helicopter gunships, some of them, can move in close for the kill.

In the height of the invasion, I fell asleep one afternoon and dreamed of new bombs, a new sort of cluster bomb, where many small bomblets would fall to earth and nto explode, but later as children would approach, because the bomblets would throw rainbows, THEN they would epxlode.

Rather what I see with a zoo animal painted on the side of a gunship, already moving in low.

7. Sabrina Ballerina - 25 August 2007

Mitm, thank you for that link to the Glen Ford article in the last thread.

Re PFF – I think it has great potential to post serious stuff that would be troll-rated out of existence on the BBBs. There are some kos defenders there already.

Peeder should invite Cindy Sheehan and others to provide updates on her candidacy. Ron Paul supporters also, and Kucinich. Maybe even the candidates themselves. Gravel too.

I see Hunter lying in the LA Times about DK not being ‘only about winning’. Lol! I would go find Kos’ own statements if it were worth the effort, but I think most people already know the truth about that statement.


And thereisnospoon is back on the FP of MLW! Hilarious. Who really runs that blog or did I imagine MSOC’s statement on Blacksabbath’s blog that she herself would have removed him from the FP had he not resigned? Say anything seems to be their MO. Just like kos himself.


glad to be back (10.20 / 5)

I took something of a blogging sabbatical–not because of anything that happened here, but just a variety of things–working on several projects, and lack of inspiration for topics…
ready to get back in the saddle though.

by: thereisnospoon @ Fri Aug 24, 2007 at 18:10:53 PM CDT


Brother Can You Spare a Tip? (10.80 / 10)
Tips for TINS’ work on this diary.

Visit my private space for political meanderings Political Sapphire

by: shanikka @ Fri Aug 24, 2007 at 17:46:43 PM CDT


They subscribe to the rightwing theory that you just ignore ‘misteps’ and continue on no matter how badly you screw up. He has more than women to worry about as he, MissL and DK, FDL, MYDD will never recover from their blatant ignorance regarding the issue of ‘diviersity at YrlyK. Which is now all forgotten on the BBBs.

8. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

Marie, the ending of that video with Robbins, Martin, Hayes, and Maher was priceless–Robbins got in the ultimate zinger!

We were discussing people with brains who present a progressive viewpoint well on television. I wonder if Tim Robbins is interested in leaving behind the glamour of Hollywood and running for public office? Eh, most likely not. That’s the problem: if people are really bright, they don’t want to run for public office. Now let’s ask ourselves: why is that?

9. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

Ted Nugent wants Obama to suck on his gun.


Um. Ted. This is the post Freudian world you’re dealing with and some of us just might read something into it.

10. Sabrina Ballerina - 25 August 2007

Lost in spam.

11. msxeno - 25 August 2007

I’d rather see Obama and the rest suck lemons. It represents my feelings about the two-party system so perfectly.

12. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

About 1200 people and about 300 organizations in Newark NJ today in the 100 degree heat.

Conyers took a bit of heat_ and a lot of people chanted “impeach impeach” when he spoke. The gang at the Daily Kos might make something of it but the only ones who were genuinely rude were the LaRouchites. Everybody else just enaged in a bit of heckling.

When Amira Baraka spoke he and slammed all the white people in the crowd for dissing Conyers, said none of them understood what an anti-imperialist hero Conyers is and that it shows that the white anti-war movement is detached from black anti-imperialists.

All in all though it was the most interracial coalition I’ve ever seen. The Nation of Islam was even pushing their newspapers on white people as if they were just another Trotskyite sect. I’ve been wanting to read the “Final Call” for awhile and I’ve never had the guts to go up to Harlem to buy one so that wasn’t totally unwelcome.

Donald Payne, local Congressman, also spoke. There was a taped message from Michael Moore and about 1000 other speakers but they did the smart thing and broke the speakers up between before the march and after the march so they avoided the usual Answer pitfall of having people drift away during the endless speakers list.

To the great dismay of my progressive Democratic Daily Kos side, I noticed a giant puppet and a few Mumia signs.

But on the whole there was a prett good effort to link the lack of health care to the war and to diffuse the anti-immigrant tensions that have been getting worse after the murders of a few weeks ago.

I didn’t see many Latinos though. It was mostly white leftists and blacks but a thorough mixture of both.

13. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007

Robbins was great last night.

Hayes turns my stomach. Fucker.

14. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007

with all respect to Baraka, Conyers has betrayed himself, betrayed his supporters and betrayed the tradition which spawned him.

15. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

Robbins was great last night.

Hayes turns my stomach. Fucker

Actually I think they didn’t take enough time to really nail him on the 9/11/Saddam thing. They let him get his little talking point in.

And they both talked about the war as more of a fuckup than a war crime. It wasn’t a fuckup. It was the successful murder of a whole country and a million people.

But I won’t be too hard on Tim Robbins since he’s done more to end the occupation of Iraq than I ever will.

16. Marie - 25 August 2007

ST – had that same recollection and thought right after I hit the “say it” button. Robbins has far more natural ability for politics than Franken does (can’t imgine that he’ll be very good Sen., like Biden, he likes the sound of his own voice too much).

Plus, wouldn’t you rather see Susan on the TV than Maria? Or any other politician’s significant other for that matter. Why do Californians only elect GOP “actors?” Not even good actors much less ones with other talents (I refuse to consider body building along with steriod chomping a talent. And I still like Barry Bonds, even if he did take steroids.)

17. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

with all respect to Baraka, Conyers has betrayed himself, betrayed his supporters and betrayed the tradition which spawned him.

Conyers also said that he supported the Newark and Detroit rebellions in the 60s.

Actually he tried to act as a peacemaker in Detroit and to tell people to get out of the streets and go home.

But I think Baraka needs to be listened to. Blacks aren’t going to trust white leftists if they spend a lot of their time attacking the black liberal elite. Yes, Conyers needs to be criticized but the issue of black loyalty to the Democrats isnt’ something you can just dismiss out of hand.

I got a whiff of Steve Gilliard in Baraka’s speech. It was “you white people don’t understand what it’s like to be uninsured and need health care and nobody you know has been to Iraq so shut up you stupid yuppie”.

Some truth to it. Nader is horrible on race issues. And a lot of blacks don’t trust white progressives.

18. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

#7: Sabrina, Re: TINS resurrection to the frontpage of MLW.

If you look at TINS’ comments, you’ll see that he quit the site “forever” (which isn’t as long as it used to be):

well then marvel in your infinite wisdom (0.33 / 3)
I’ll say this: I’ve never seen as dogmatic a group of people anywhere, on any forum right or left, or any so averse to honest disagreement. There are a lot of freepers more open-minded and prone to rational debate than the 7- or 8-person posse here ganging up on me lately.

If your intent was to drive me off MyLeftWing permanently, you’ve certainly managed that. Enjoy the fruits of your labor, I’ve got better things to do than waste my time with this bullshit.
by: thereisnospoon @ Fri Aug 10, 2007 at 20:45:10 PM CDT
[ Parent ]


And note that he specifically quit in the context of being more unpopular than a needle seller at a balloon convention.

TINS does not appear to have his frontpaging abilities restored; Shanikka, his fellow conservative who agrees with TINS that women need to take “responsibility” for what men do to them whilst drunk, promoted his diary.

All is forgiven and all is forgotten. Down the memory hole.

And remember: When someone says that they’re through with you FOREVER, you reply: “So, see you in a couple of weeks?”

As to who’s “running” MyLeftWing: Hm, everybody and nobody? Depends on what day you pop in there, I suppose, and which one of MSOC’s 1001 administrators have the keys to the shop that day.

19. msxeno - 25 August 2007

I’d have imagined that Baraka would be all for impeachment, but then again– what do I know about poetry ?

“It is very ill-considered and, frankly, cavalier to make use of Vietnam in such a way to extricate himself from the Iraq debate,” said Ton Nu Thi Ninh, former deputy chair of the foreign relations committee of Vietnam’s National Assembly. “Opening this up again can only rekindle resentment, antagonisms that have been put on the shelf for the sake of looking into the future.”

Vietnam was “an unjustified and a wrong war in the first place so to start analyzing things only from the withdrawal of US troops is really puzzling”, she said. “The root of the problem is not the withdrawal, it’s the very fact of starting up the war in the first place.”

Swiped from The Distant Ocean. The Real Lesson of Vietnam.

20. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

I’d have imagined that Baraka would be all for impeachment

I’m sure he is.

21. msxeno - 25 August 2007

…Nader is horrible on race issues…

Huh ?

And if Baraka is for impeachment, Conyers makes a strange bedfellow, and he just seems to me like another obstructionist a la’ Pelosi.

22. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

a lot of blacks don’t trust white progressives.

With good cause, I’d say. Blacks vote Democratic at the 90%+ rate–more than any other ethnic group–and get nothing for it.

The Democratic Party, as an institution, has been falling over itself for the past 25 years trying to figure out how to win without the black vote. The Hunt for the Great White Bubba has been largely fruitless, however, so the Democrats are forced to rely on the black folk time and again, but with the implicit understanding that black Americans will receive absolutely no repayment for their loyalty: no jobs programmes, no decent health care or education programmes, no urban re-development, nothing of tangible benefit to blacks. The Democrats can’t even bring themselves to get behind ending the so-called “Drug War” that is a racist attack on the black community, nor to endorse gun control (young black men are 5 times more likely to be murdered than any other group).

Where else can black people go? I’d say a new political party that attracted disgruntled white progressives who DO want to do something for black Americans, and blacks themselves, would throw a damned good fright into the Democrats. A long-overdue reckoning, I might add.

23. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

But I think that what went on in Newark today needs to go on every month in the Iraq Moratorium, that size, with that number of organizations and with well known speakers.

Have these rallies in every majority minority district with Congresssmes with safe seats. Have Michael Moore actually come instead of just sending taped messages. Have Tim Robbins come.

Newark has a very different feel from white gated Morristown or Manhattan. The security and police presence is much less intense.

Have these in Newark, Detroit, Oakland, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Madison, every place that can produce them.

Then can concentrate police and security in gated communities like Manhattan but they can’t do it everywhere at the same time.

Eventually it will get to the point where you’re marching down the Turnpike and not Broad Street and Mr. Investment Banker trying to catch his plane will have to take notice.

24. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

Huh ?

I’ve heard Nader pressed on shows like Democracy Now about the prison industrial complex or the drug war or racism and he just doesn’t seem to connect.

Maybe not horrible but he wouldn’t play well in front of an all black audience.

25. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

And if Baraka is for impeachment, Conyers makes a strange bedfellow, and he just seems to me like another obstructionist a la’ Pelosi.

Yes. I would have thought so too but this was a mostly black city in front of a half black crowd that cheered Baraka when he said lay off Conyers.

So its not something you can just dismiss. I’m not saying its right. But I am saying its there.

26. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

But don’t get me wrong. I’ve never seen a more integrated anti-war march. Seriously, when you’ve got the Nation of Islam, Military Families Speak out, and various suburban anti-war groups coming together that’s progress.

27. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

Re: Conyers–

The rumour being circulated about Conyers is that if he attempts to initiate hearings that would lead to impeachment, Pelosi will remove him as Chair of the Judiciary Committee. If so, that’s an extraordinary threat Mme. Pelosi made to a senior member of Congress.

If the rumour is true, and I were Conyers, I’d call her bluff (and that’s what it is). How the hell is Pelosi going to strip Conyers of his position without landing in a kettle of hot soup herself? I wouldn’t play games with her nor with the Constitution: I’d come right out and dare Madame Speaker to take away my committee chair if she didn’t like the way I ran things.

28. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

Oh. And there were no, zero, none, zilch, nada Ron Paul supporter in sight.

They came out in force for the anti-immigrant march in Morristown and ignore the anti-war march in Newark.

That doesn’t say good things about them in my mind.

29. marisacat - 25 August 2007

the issue of black loyalty to the Democrats.

hmmm, well I like to quote from Malcolm’s Ballot or the Bullet. That is hwere I got my deep belief and desire for VOTING BLOCS.

Poeple need to learn the value of the ballot, of withholding it. If they bother to continue to vote, that is..

All people. Not holding my breath tho.

Twenty-two million black victims of Americanism are waking up and they’re gaining a new political consciousness, becoming politically mature. And as they become — develop this political maturity, they’re able to see the recent trends in these political elections. They see that the whites are so evenly divided that every time they vote the race is so close they have to go back and count the votes all over again.

And that…which means that any block, any minority that has a block of votes that stick together is in a strategic position. Either way you go, that’s who gets it. You’re — You’re in a position to determine who will go to the White House and who will stay in the dog house. You’re the one who has that power.

You can keep Johnson in Washington D.C., or you can send him back to his Texas cotton patch. You’re the one who sent Kennedy to Washington. You’re the one who put the present Democratic Administration in Washington D.C. The whites were evenly divided. It was the fact that you threw 80 percent of your votes behind the Democrats that put the Democrats in the White House.

When you see this, you can see that the Negro vote is the key factor. And despite the fact that you are in a position to — to be the determining factor, what do you get out of it? The Democrats have been in Washington D.C. only because of the Negro vote. They’ve been down there four years, and they’re — all other legislation they wanted to bring up they brought it up and gotten it out of the way, and now they bring up you. And now, they bring up you. You put them first, and they put you last, ’cause you’re a chump, a political chump.

30. msxeno - 25 August 2007

Sorry, Hair Club. Nader isn’t perfect but I’m not swallowing “horrible on race” without something a little more concrete than your memory of one or two radio shows. It’s easy enough to find his actual positions on the issues using google. Also, Crashing the Party has some good commentary from him regarding race and poverty.

Also, frankly the BAR/BC split shows that it’s not just White progressives who have multiple complaints about people like Conyers. I think it’s a mistake to consider this as merely a gap between Black and Whites. Ignoring schisms within communities doesn’t make them disappear. Just as ignoring race doesn’t make racism disappear.

31. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

Sorry, Hair Club. Nader isn’t perfect but I’m not swallowing “horrible on race” without something a little more concrete than your memory of one or two radio shows.

It was phrased poorly.

Let me rephrase it. He and his program don’t have wide appeal in the black community.

32. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007

it’s not just whites. Glen Ford and Bruce Dixon are A LOT harder on Conyers’ betrayal than I ever could be:

But at the age of 77, with 44 years of Congressional seniority, John Conyers has the power to make his own choices and make them stick. At this stage in his career and at this political juncture, if he is determined to do something, John Conyers is practically bulletproof. The Speaker and other leading Democrats know that retaliation against Conyers for unleashing the dogs of impeachment would tear the Democratic party apart, perhaps permanently. In fact, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has nothing she can use to enforce her will upon Chairman John Conyers that will not injure her more severely than him. The only forces with real leverage on John Conyers, now nearing the end of his career, are what he wants his legacy to be, and what we who have invested in him for all these years demand from him.
Will progressive forces be content to allow John Conyers, after all these years, to be just another Democrat, taking orders from campaign contributors, and allowing the Bush administration license to continue its crimes for another year? Or will they insist that he rediscover his courage and integrity, and keep the promises he has made to black and progressive America. The next few months will tell. What will be the legacy of Congressman John Conyers.

33. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

Or maybe even that isn’t the way to phrase it.

How about “white leftists should expect that blacks are willing to join a rebellion against the democratic party just because it’s partly in their interests to do it.”

34. msxeno - 25 August 2007

Shadowthief, I don’t understand that either. (#27) We all remember how they screwed McKinney out of her seniority when she returned to office, though. Presumably Conyers is not convinced that he could win a stare-down with Pelosi despite the huge opposition to Bush and the war. (And some articles I’ve seen showed Black and Black-owned media opposed to the war from Day One in greater numbers than Whites.) But there are a lot of frightened people in that party. Frightened of losing their perks and prestige. It’s a shame and a waste and I try not to think about it too much.

35. marisacat - 25 August 2007


Yes but Shadowthief, my suspicion is that she has also GIVEN him things. Or not drawn attention thru the media to other things.

Zoe Lofgren used to be very interesting, she came out almost the earliest for Dean. But I notice very very quiet about all things now. And for some months. i also read a few months ago that Nancy removed hmmm ugh. Cannot think of the name, one of the women from the CBC from a chair, a rther importatn chair on immigration. Zoe’s district is part of Silicon Valley, immigration and more importantly VISA issues are a big deal there. No news there.

Greatly increased Zoe’s power in her district.

Nobody is saying much about Conyers other than this tug of mini war.

At the moment.

36. msxeno - 25 August 2007

…Let me rephrase it. He and his program don’t have wide appeal in the black community.

Not even this community ?

Sorry. I couldn’t resist. :p

37. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

I remember Steve Gilliard just before he died thought it was a VERY BIG DEAL that Conyers and Rangel had moved into senior positions in Congress.

I think there might be the impression that if given enough time Conyers and Rangel and people like them could get real power in Congress and start slowing down the redistribution of income upwards.

Note. I think this is wrong and I think the fact that Pelosi clamped down on Conyers proves it. But I don’t speak for the black community. Neither, of course, does Baraka but he certainly does more than I do.

38. marisacat - 25 August 2007

oops I mean Nancy removed one person from the chair and GAVE IT to Zoe…
sorry that was not clear.

39. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

Marisacat, thanks for the reminder from Malcolm. Smart man and smart strategy–if people got together as a bloc (particularly white progressives and black Americans) and boycotted one election, what was left of the Democrats would damn well listen to that bloc on the next go around. We wouldn’t be begging THEM to listen to us; they’d be begging US to listen to THEM.

As for Ralph Nader on race, Commondreams has a 2000 article entitled “Ralph Nader’s Racial Blindspot” that may be relevant to this discussion:

By contrast, Ralph Nader is actually addressing some of the big issues affecting people of color. In tackling thorny topics such as corporate globalization, environmental abuse and child poverty, Nader often speaks to problems that have their most devastating affects in communities of color. However, he almost never points to the racial dimensions of these issues. His silence is rendered more conspicuous by the sudden Republican and Democrat attention to the topic. Considering the fact that Nader works to appeal to an audience of “progressives,” many of whom are people of color, his colorblindness, is also strategically shortsighted.

Among the 19 issues listed on the official Nader2000 website, including such entries as “Clinton-Bush-Gore,” “Fair Trade,” and “Industrial Hemp,” concern for racial justice is not obvious. The topic is largely absent from Nader’s speeches, even in his talk at the NAACP convention. In the past year, he has shied away from some of the most heated racial issues facing communities of color and been absent during difficult moments of national racial turmoil. He has yet to take a pro-active stance on the phony “war on drugs,” racial profiling, militarization of the border, the incarceration of Mumia Abu-Jamal, the bombing of Vieques, the rise in police brutality and was absent following the acquittal of the four officers who slayed Amadou Diallo.

That Nader is coming under fire for relegating race to the peripheries is neither new or surprising. During his 1996 campaign for the presidency, he failed to take a stand against Proposition 209, which ended affirmative action in the state of California. Nader defended himself by saying, “I’ve come to believe that in a political campaign, if you don’t focus on basic, fundamental, democracy issues and corporate power, the media will scatter you in terms of other issues.”

Link: http://tinyurl.com/37qoga

So while Nader is progressive on so many issues, he doesn’t specifically connect them to black people–which I think is what HCFM was saying. That’s the problem with a lot of white progressives–they don’t make the connection of “This is the issue” and “Here’s how it affects YOU”.

40. Hair Club for Men - 25 August 2007

But also, speaker after speaker after speaker (and most of them black) slammed the Democrats on welfare reform and the war on drugs.

It’s possible people are just contradictory. They understand the Democrats will screw them but will vote for Hillary anyway because they think they’ll screw them less.

It’s possible that Bush and the Republicans come off as such blatent, horrific, genocidal white supremacists (and they certainly come off that way to me) that even the corrupt inadequate complicit Democrats are better.

Who knows. I didn’t talk to everybody there. It would be interesting to really hash these things out in the open.

41. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007

Let’s Face It: The Warfare State Is Part of Us

The USA’s military spending is now close to $2 billion a day. This fall, the country will begin its seventh year of continuous war, with no end in sight. On the horizon is the very real threat of a massive air assault on Iran. And few in Congress seem willing or able to articulate a rejection of the warfare state.

While the Bush-Cheney administration is the most dangerous of our lifetimes — and ousting Republicans from the White House is imperative — such truths are apt to smooth the way for progressive evasions. We hear that “the people must take back the government,” but how can “the people” take back what they never really had? And when rhetoric calls for “returning to a foreign policy based on human rights and democracy,” we’re encouraged to be nostalgic for good old days that never existed.

The warfare state didn’t suddenly arrive in 2001, and it won’t disappear when the current lunatic in the Oval Office moves on.

Born 50 years before George W. Bush became president, I have always lived in a warfare state. Each man in the Oval Office has presided over an arsenal of weapons designed to destroy human life en masse. In recent decades, our self-proclaimed protectors have been able — and willing — to destroy all of humanity.

We’ve accommodated ourselves to this insanity. And I do mean “we” — including those of us who fret aloud that the impact of our peace-loving wisdom is circumscribed because our voices don’t carry much farther than the choir. We may carry around an inflated sense of our own resistance to a system that is poised to incinerate and irradiate the planet.

Maybe it’s too unpleasant to acknowledge that we’ve been living in a warfare state for so long. And maybe it’s even more unpleasant to acknowledge that the warfare state is not just “out there.” It’s also internalized; at least to the extent that we pass up countless opportunities to resist it.

Like millions of other young Americans, I grew into awakening as the Vietnam War escalated. Slogans like “make love, not war” — and, a bit later, “the personal is political” — really spoke to us. But over the decades we generally learned, or relearned, to compartmentalize: as if personal and national histories weren’t interwoven in our pasts, presents and futures.

One day in 1969, a biologist named George Wald, who had won a Nobel Prize, visited the Massachusetts Institute of Technology — the biggest military contractor in academia — and gave a speech. “Our government has become preoccupied with death,” he said, “with the business of killing and being killed.”

42. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

Here’s what I think’s really going on with Conyers:

If Pelosi threatened to remove Conyers from his committee chair, Conyers would have just laughed at her naivete. How, pray tell, would she do that with bringing the dogs of hell to her own doorstep?

No, what’s really happening is that Conyers doesn’t believe that impeachment can succeed, and he doesn’t want his “legacy” to include “failed attempt to impeach Vice-President Cheney and/or President Bush”.

Conyers has made this about HIM, not about US and not about the Constitution. And I’m sure he lulls himself to sleep at night by thinking, “Well, we’re tying Bush and Cheney up in knots, so impeachment’s not necessary.”

Screw Conyers and screw his legacy. I don’t believe the rumours that Pelosi has threatened to remove him, and I absolutely do not believe that Conyers couldn’t and wouldn’t call her on such a threat if he wanted to.

Conyers isn’t impeaching because he doesn’t want to. The man has made a political calculation on a matter of principle, with the result that his much-prised “legacy” is forever tarnished: The Honourable John Conyers (D-MI), who could have stopped Bush and Cheney from attacking Iran and killing tens of thousands of people simply by initiating impeachment proceedings (even if they weren’t successful!), but didn’t because he wanted to preserve his “legacy”.

Conyers is an old man, and old men can become overly reckless or overly cautious.

43. marisacat - 25 August 2007

Frankly I see a lot of the same scheisse in


Pete Stark



Go home. Let new shits step up I AM SICK OF THEM ALL.

Throw Barney Frank there too, and Ike Skelton… and Oberstar too.

And a few others.

44. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007

Is It Time to Legalize Drugs?

The abstinence-only approach to drugs isn’t different from sex or alcohol; and it’s an ideology reminiscent of Prohibition-era rhetoric. It failed then, and it’s failing now. Continuing to criminalize drugs is just exacerbating bad situations by, for example, increasing the U.S. prison population. Of the 2.2 million people currently behind bars, 31 percent are there for nonviolent drug offenses; and black men are in prison at higher rates than ever, further criminalizing a group of people.

Since Foreign Policy has their articles behind a subscription wall, I went looking, and found the complete piece on a Cannabis forum:

“Legalization Will Never Happen”

Never say never. Wholesale legalization may be a long way off–but partial legalization is not. If any drug stands a chance of being legalized, it’s cannabis. Hundreds of millions of people have used it, the vast majority without suffering any harm or going on to use “harder” drugs. In Switzerland, for example, cannabis legalization was twice approved by one chamber of its parliament, but narrowly rejected by the other.

Elsewhere in Europe, support for the criminalization of cannabis is waning. In the United States, where roughly 40 percent of the country’s 1.8 million annual drug arrests are for cannabis possession, typically of tiny amounts, 40 percent of Americans say that the drug should be taxed, controlled, and regulated like alcohol. Encouraged by Bolivian President Evo Morales, support is also growing in Latin America and Europe for removing coca from international antidrug conventions, given the absence of any credible health reason for keeping it there. Traditional growers would benefit economically, and there’s some possibility that such products might compete favorably with more problematic substances, including alcohol.

The global war on drugs persists in part because so many people fail to distinguish between the harms of drug abuse and the harms of prohibition. Legalization forces that distinction to the forefront. The opium problem in Afghanistan is primarily a prohibition problem, not a drug problem. The same is true of the narcoviolence and corruption that has afflicted Latin America and the Caribbean for almost three decades–and that now threatens Africa. Governments can arrest and kill drug lord after drug lord, but the ultimate solution is a structural one, not a prosecutorial one. Few people doubt any longer that the war on drugs is lost, but courage and vision are needed to transcend the ignorance, fear, and vested interests that sustain it.

Of course, the prison-industrial complex and the racists who cheer it on will make ending our obsession w/ locking people up for victimless crimes pretty hard.

45. msxeno - 25 August 2007

Shadow, I remember that article. In the long form it’s just a wee bit more nuanced than one would gather just from that excerpt. Especially by the standards of Commnon “Dem Or Die” Dreams.

46. marisacat - 25 August 2007

Yes but… CommonDreams (which prints plenty that is not party centric) drew that article on Nader from


47. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007
48. msxeno - 25 August 2007

As regards race and the two-party system, an oldie but a goodie.

…Hence, my dilemma. I have a hundred grievances against the Democrats, but for a lot of self-respecting people of color like me, supporting Republicans is simply not an option. Telling me we don’t need third parties because I can “choose” between Republicans and Democrats is telling me I have no choice at all. And telling me that if I want “education reform” or “campaign reform” or “environmental reform” then I have to “join Arnold” and those sicko Republicans is telling me that you don’t really want reform at all and all your bitchin’ about “reform” is just another way of saying “Why should I be taxed to support those people?”…

… I have judged Republicans and Democrats by the content of their character.

I reject them both. –Alex Walker at California Greening

49. marisacat - 25 August 2007

oopps here is the link to the long form article, rather than the current FP at Colorlines

50. msxeno - 25 August 2007

Well, Mcat, that would explain why the full article isn’t just some idiotic screed along the lines of Nader Helps Bush Kill and Eat Black Children !! The excerpt Shadow quotes doesn’t really do it justice.

But let’s face it, by and large, Common Dreams was terrible on 3rd Party issues in 2000 and since then it’s only gotten worse. I’ve lost track of how many times some clown will go and on about how much the DP sucks, but by the final paragraph it’s always Vote Democrat or Bush Will Eat Our Children !! Or some similar shit. I’ve scarcely been over there at all in the last three years. I’m bored with the day-trippers. Always taking me half the way there. :p

51. marisacat - 25 August 2007

Maybe I am skimming past grafs (commonDreams is one page and Colorlines is split, on two pages) but it looks to be the same article to me.

52. marisacat - 25 August 2007

that would explain why the full article isn’t just some idiotic screed along the lines of Nader Helps Bush Kill and Eat Black Children !!

Except that is not what the article is.

53. Marie - 25 August 2007

Legalize, regulate and tax pot and coca. Set aside at least 80% of those tax dollars to fund drug treatment (within a Medicare for all system) and real drug education. That would mostly eliminate the use of the ugly meth drugs. Release all the non-violent, incarcerated drug users and expunge their criminal record for drugs after three years probation. (That alone would save a lot of dollars.) Sign trade agreements with those countries that produce pot (high tariffs on this would encourage domestic production), and coca – that gets rid of most of the narco-terrorists. Would reduce the smuggling “infrastructure which would make it that much harder for any terrorist thinking of using that route to get into the country (more imagined than real threat).

With that fewer people would come in contact with illegal drug peddlers and be less vulnerable to enticements to try heroin. But the crime associated with heroin use is still a blight and therefore, would dispense it through clinics for addicts (and always offer them quality treatment care). That would put a crimp in the business of trafficing in that drug.

Oh, yes, hemp might be a good cash crop to grow.

That takes care of a lot of problems without spending a penny, saving gobs on prisons and the criminal justice system (maybe they could go after more of those sex slave and child porn traders) and generating a few bucks for education and healthcare. Yeah, sure coca consumption would rise for a while but the novelty will mostly fade with time. For a country that has exalted the miracles of captalism and consumer choice, we sure don’t practice it in the one area where it flourishes in spite of all the laws and efforts to stamp it how. How dumb is that?

54. msxeno - 25 August 2007

That would explain why the full article isn’t just some idiotic screed along the lines of Nader Helps Bush Kill and Eat Black Children !!

Except that is not what the article is.

I thought that’s what I said.

55. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007

I agree Maria …

too bad Americans are so damned irrational and prone to believing bullshit agitprop to make a reasonable decision about drug use.

56. msxeno - 25 August 2007

Is coca in its unrefined (plant) form even any more dangerous than a couple of espresso shots ?

57. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

Re: Nader and the Common Dreams article.

The Common Dreams article is the opinion and analysis of one person, and is not meant to be considered the final word on the subject of Nader and his treatment (or non-treatment) of racism.

My own take on it is that Nader is not so different from many white progressives, who do not explicitly talk about racism either because they underestimate its existence or else because doing so alienates other white folks. I don’t think ANY white person really “gets it” when it comes to the issue of what it’s like to walk around with a black skin in America: the daily feeling many blacks have is that they are under siege, constantly suspect and constantly on the alert. Can you imagine living that way? Can you imagine the frustration of trying to find some white person who looks you in the eye and says, “I understand?” I can’t, not really.

I think most blacks have given up trying to communicate with whites, or are on the verge of giving up. I don’t know exactly what it will take to bridge that communication gap, but I do know this for a fact: most whites don’t really LISTEN to what black people are telling them. Again and again (and this has been my own reaction), whites fall into a defencive mode when blacks talk about racism (especially racism among white liberals): I’m not a racist! I’ve never discriminated against anyone and my hero is Dr. King or Malcolm X and so forth.

White people shutting their mouths and opening their ears when a black person tries to talk to them–an increasingly rare event–might be a good starting point. It’s not easy, because I’ve been on the receiving end of that, and the anger and frustration black Americans have pent up is frightening to behold.

58. Revisionist - 25 August 2007


I have been raped enough over my cigarrettes. Just decrimilize. I dont want to pay $150 for a bag of dirt weed. Keep your democratic paws off my smoke.

59. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007
60. Marie - 25 August 2007

msxeno – have no idea. But probably wouldn’t be a big seller. Guess we’ll have to let our pharmaceutical companies refine it. — How about a joint venture including all of them. They’re going to need a little financial help when we pass Medicare For All.

Should have included that legal age for consumers would be up to the states – eighteen for pot and twenty-one for coke would be reasonable – and the penalties for supplying to underage kids would be very stiff indeed.

61. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007

well, I think Nader would argue that economic justice is a human rights issue, that corporate hegemony hurts everyone, and the poor and minorities more.

62. msxeno - 25 August 2007

Shadow, none of that is up for debate, at least not for me.

But it seems to me that even POC who want out of the two-party trap are simply brushed aside in discussions of these issues. I hear over and over again that the Greens are “too White.” But if I post about Greens who are not White (some of whom are trying to fight the good fight in spaces like the one linked to above and Green Commons) it seems like nobody cares. I guess the rationale is that such folks are “not typical.” Well, so fucking what ? Chomsky and Silber aren’t “typical” for White Americans in their views and that’s never stopped bloggers of conscience from considering the veracity of what they have to say.

Frankly, I UNDERSTAND why most POC are still Democrats, but damned if I’m going to retreat back to that party as if it’s the answer to all the shit you describe. It’s not.

63. BooHooHooMan - 25 August 2007

There’s no tax on pot????

64. Revisionist - 25 August 2007

No marie. Keep the governmnet out. Treat pot like an agricultural product like watermelons. Let people grow and sell as they please. It needs no government intervntion or regulation unless they want to certify it organic or something. Its something people can grow them selves in their backyard.

We dont need Monsanto in the pot business.

65. marisacat - 25 August 2007

as if it’s the answer to all the shit you describe. It’s not.

let’s cover one thing here. This is not a DP centric site. Some here may vote big D locally or nationally. Or they may not.

Some are like me, a bat out of hell years ago… others I assume are still in the party.

This is not a DP centric site.

66. Marie - 25 August 2007

Revisionist – first it wouldn’t be dirt weed, although I’m sure there would be a market for different grades. Sort of like there is for alchohol. Would even be a place for the boutique growers. And even a licensing facility for home growers (like home brews) On pricing — in a legal environment, would guess that production costs would be higher than that for tobacco, but still far below the current market price. Am sure that you could get better quality, pay heavy taxes and still spend half or less than what you spend today, unless you increased you consumption.

67. marisacat - 25 August 2007

Unfortunately the hard reality is that too many interests ON ALL SIDES are served by keeping it illegal.

68. marisacat - 25 August 2007

uh it is not going legal.

It is my understanding that one of the lobbying groups that work to make sure it says ILLEGAL are growers and smugglers.

And frankly once the regulators got hold of it, it would go up in price and likely for shit product.

LOL and MJ is NOT my drug of choice. Just been in CA too long and been a chronic pain patient (my dr was a Republican, well tied in locally and nationally, he had run federally licensed methadone clinics in So Cal) adn worked in a criminal def firm.

Combination of informants you might say.

69. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

Actually, Ms. Xeno, I’m done with the Democratic Party. As for the Greens or any non-Establishment party, Greens must understand that blacks or other POC, as you say, are going to be very hostile and suspicious towards anybody who says “come to us and be partners in our coalition”. They’ve heard that for so many years from the Democrats, and had their trust betrayed again and again.

It’s going to be hard work to build a truly progressive political coalition in the United States because so many of the potential partners–environmentalists, feminists, civil libertarians, peace activists, racial minorities–have been burned time and again. There’s an enormous amount of fear and mistrust–which I think was the plan all along: sow the seeds of mistrust amongst the different groups that would form a progressive political coalition to make it difficult, if not impossible, to organise them.

What will it take to unite all these disparate elements? A couple of things:

The economy is going to have to get a whole hell of a lot worse AND we’ll need some open-minded, charismatic leaders who can unite people in a feeling of trust. And no, ideas are not enough; of that, I’m convinced (if they were, Nader would be President!). Feelings are important, and people have got to have that feeling they can TRUST those who say they will lead them. People trusted MLK, for example.

The Demorepublican party is arranging the first circumstance as I write these words; as to the second, I trust in American history, because this nation has always been big enough and diverse enough to bring up the right man at the right time. You think that men like FDR and MLK and RFK were accidents? I don’t. These men arose from a nation that, in the end, is too big, too complex, and too diverse to prevent their rise.

70. keirdubois - 25 August 2007

Well, I’ve just discovered that the dkosser hates rock. Oh well. Pearls, swine, blah blah blah.

71. Revisionist - 25 August 2007

The only thing that hasnt been effected by inflation is my pot. I have paid the same more or less for 25 years.

72. msxeno - 25 August 2007


This is not a DP centric site.

Yes, I know. But since I never was one to shut up and quit when I’m ahead, I’d propose mentioning California Greening next time you do a list of pollination sites. Would you consider it ? They seem pretty all right to me.

There are people (not you, Mcat) who will use the problems of someone like Nader to discredit anything and anyone wanting to make that move out. Which just strikes me as infuriatingly disingenuous. Because those problems are in nearly everyone’s bones in this country. Separatism would, under those circumstances, be the move to make. NOT a move to shore up Hillary, who (to build on what Madman says) can prattle about Ebony and Ivory side by side on the piano keyboard until the cows come home, but still is a lot less evolved on the issues than Nader.

73. msxeno - 25 August 2007


…Greens must understand that blacks or other POC, as you say, are going to be very hostile and suspicious towards anybody who says “come to us and be partners in our coalition”…

[beats herself over head with laptop.]

GREENS are NOT 100% WHITE !! There are Greens struggling to make the party more inclusive and to address race issues. Not all, but some.

Never mind. I think it’s time for a break. My brains hurt.

74. Marie - 25 August 2007

Yes, Marisa – but they are the MINORITY.

Revisionist – there are many good public policy reasons for regulations. We don’t want farmers spraying a bunch of toxic chemicals on the plants. Would prefer that industrial agriculture companies not be allowed in the business or corporate processors or marketers. Co-ops would be fine. Regulation could also be used to ban marketing in any form and in any medium. Regulation could also help the consumer to know the “proof” of what they’re buying – dirtweed, mild and primo.

Plus we do need a revenue source for drug treatment that is seriously underfunded these days. And there are going to be a lot of cokeheads in the short run. However, no more bs sin tax going into the general revenue coffers.

75. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

I’d like to see a group organised that would publicly boycott the 2008 elections–in a big way.

The way to demonstrate this public boycott would be to run an alternate slate of candidates–not on an official ballot, and the results would not have any legal consequence–in every state. Tally up millions upon millions of votes for the candidates (or issues) we want and don’t get from the Imperial Corporate War Party or whatever it is they’re calling the Democratic-Republican borg collective this week.

The boycott bloc would open its own polling places and people would have to register to NOT vote.

In Chicago, of course, people could show up and not vote as many times as they wish. It’s important to respect local tradition and customs, I think.

76. marisacat - 25 August 2007

well when I get to another post (and I found that one exhausting, surprisingly) i had planned to go back to the original pollination post and pick up the sites you suggested in that thread and the thread the next day. And some others mentioned by other commenters.

The tough reality is that I am up for so little now. Probably barely two real posts a week. Not an easy thing to face, frankly.

But here is one thing, nader is going to get discussed. It is not the end of the world. Owen Paine of SMBIVA accused me of “nader hostility” Geesh. And Kerry is going to get discussed too. Same as I have done for years…

I find all the front runners, both parties to be close to horrifying. I found the run in -4 insulting beyond belief.

As I said not a Dem Centric site. Hardly pro anyone tho.

77. marisacat - 25 August 2007

SSorry marie, I dont’ know what this refers to:

74. Marie – 25 August 2007[Edit]

Yes, Marisa – but they are the MINORITY.

78. Revisionist - 25 August 2007

Plus we do need a revenue source for drug treatment that is seriously underfunded these days.

let people pay themselves. I pretty much think the entire treatment/recovery industry is a scam. No one has to go thru all that bullshit to quit smoking cigarettes.

79. Marie - 25 August 2007

Revisionist – not being a pot smoker, I’m not too familiar with the pricing. Last I heard, and this is going back 10-15 years it was $100 an ounce. In the mid-seventies it was $30-35 for high quality stuff and $40 -50 for top of the line. Can’t see any reason why good quality in a legal, regulated and taxed enviroment couldn’t beat $30.

80. Marie - 25 August 2007

Marisa # 67 — started typing when that was at the bottom of the thread. Must keep that in mind.

81. marisacat - 25 August 2007

I bought mroe than an ounce as a present for friends for Xmas, about 8 years ago. Whole buds, full and they glistened. I was told it was very excellent.

I paid 125.00. It was about 5 good sized buds.

82. marisacat - 25 August 2007

oh no marie, majority interests want to keep it illegal.

Who do you think is the minority?

83. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

Ms. Xeno:

Please don’t abuse your laptop nor your poor head. The laptop warranty doesn’t cover such acts, and unless you’re applying to be a frontpager on DailyKos, you’ll need all your brain cells fully functional.

I’m not under the illusion that all Greens are white liberal Volvo-driving granola munchers. I’m saying that many blacks and Latinos, just to take two groups, are VERY suspicious of EVERYBODY who says they want a multiracial coalition. They’ve been hearing that from the Democrats for years, and turns out Democrats want the votes but don’t want to do anything to earn them.

So merely presenting a programme of political change, or pointing to prominent POC in the Green Party, are insufficient to convince many POC that the Greens (or whatever party) is for them. If you want an analogy, think of a woman who’s lived with a neglectful husband her whole life: she may not recognise Mr. Right when he comes along (or we can reverse the genders if you like…or make them a gay couple…whatever works for you!).

If the Greens want to demonstrate that they are the party of a multiracial coalition, they need to get out front on issues of prime importance to POC, not only on the national but at the local level. Gaining the needed visibility and credibility is a monumental task, and beyond my ability to comprehend or organise, but I think that’s the general idea.

What amazes me about the Democrats is that although in 25 years they’ve never gotten a majority of the Bubba vote, they keep chasing Bubba (talk about slow learners) and don’t pay back their black supporters for their decades of loyalty (talk about being taken for granted). I’ve slowly come to realise that, too, may be part of a plan: discourage blacks from voting for ANYBODY and thereby reduce their influence in politics.

84. marisacat - 25 August 2007

Democrats were handed the beginnings of the greatest coalition, as of 40 or so years ago.

That is my belief. they never wanted it. It is SO CLEAR that they should have gone in the direction of a worker, womens’, POC, disenfranchised etc party.

In coalition with the middle class and the marginal middle class.

But it meant constant work in the trenches, recruiting, organising, coaliotion building.

They did not want it.

Teddy Kennedy after 04 bitched that only 43% of eligible blacks in MS are registered to vote. (Manning Marable confrims that number)

Hell. But the Democrats never wanted to make the alliances, by owrking in the trenches, to build the Dem party into a living breathing current thing in the SO. they did not LOSE the so. They relinquished it.

85. Marie - 25 August 2007

Revisionist – tend to agree with you about drug treatment for pot – probably no reason for it. A better case can be made for treatment for other drugs – but that industry is so unregulated that it’s difficult to know how effective it is. That’s why it should be within our new medical system. That way we could evaluate the differing effectiveness of the treatment modalities. That’s the practical aspect, but

the more important aspect is the PR. The public will feel better about legalizing these drug knowing that it comes packaged with more and better drug treatment facilities and that they don’t have to pay for them. I’m okay with targetted use taxes. For example, the states and feds have been collecting gobs of money on cigarettes like forever and all we hear from them today is how much it costs the states to supply medical care for smoking related illnesses. Well, duh, use the taxes you collect — am sure those far exceed tax dollars going for smoking related medical care.

86. Marie - 25 August 2007

Marisa – aren’t you a nice friend.

Meant that those that profit from this prohibition — excluding those in the underground economy of it — are a minority when compared with those who think it’s all a bunch of crap, that includes liberal and libertarians. The mushy middle can go either way depending on who makes the best case and get the PR done. So far the left is doing a lousy job at it.

87. marisacat - 25 August 2007

take my word for it, pot is not oging to be legalised.

The most that might happen is what we had under Clinton. Bong shop city… and a real loosening for “medical marijuana”.

Since I have a hard time envisioning more than a single one term and mybe two term D president, it will then be clamped down on as the parties revolve thru the door.

88. marisacat - 25 August 2007

Marie, it suits big pharma that pot and other drugs remain on the street and not be legal.

89. Revisionist - 25 August 2007

RE Pricing —

It depends on where you are. LA, NY can be higher. And some people price higher for “quality”. I still pay around $100 for an ounce but have paid $50 for a few grams of “primo”.

The pot now is generally better quality than in the early 70’s. The big diffence now is that it doesnt have a name. In the early 80s we had Muia Wowie, Acuplucu/Columbian Gold, Scents etc. Now its just generic or Hydro.

I smoke mostly great Arkansa skunk weed.

The problem with rating quality is that its subjective. THC levels might determine it but it depends on when it was harvested and what species it is etc. An avid smoker can tell by looks and smell, is it hairy etc. The only thing they could regulate is weight by seed and stem.

There isnt a any real problem now with the product aside from find a good dealer.. The only spraying done is by OUR government.

The problem is because its an agricultural product that can be grown anywhere is that the govenrment can never really tax the income of the dealers. They would have to heavily regulate the product and tax consumers instead of just the income of growers and dealers. One the taxes start there will be a fed tax and a state tax and a sales tax.

The ideal situation as a comsumer would be to go to the Framers market and buy it like you cantelopes or to a nursey like you would buy plants. Anyone with a plot of land can grow it. Or in a city any old warehouse can be fitted with lights and start production. But he government wouldnt want that because there would still be the tax question. There would IMO still be strong laws and fines and jail for growers and sellers with only the consumers not having to worry about possession.

90. Marie - 25 August 2007

Marisa #84 – the DEMs forty years ago were shell shocked. Most of them never really understood the New Deal, only that it kept all those southern racists in the DEM camp. Half of them didn’t understand Vietnam and being so thoroughly propagandized by the Cold War were lost. Their frame of reference was that war was good for the economy. Its as if their self confidence became intertwined with the MIC. The twin blows of Korea and Vietnam and all the racists running from the party left them focused on loss and not new opportunity. They kept looking for ways to get those folks back instead of saying good riddance. And they could never get them back if all those minorities, women etc. didn’t shut up.

They never bothered to build a new and more robust coalition after LBJ specifically pointed out that the Equal Rights Amendment meant that the south was gone for a generation (that was optimistic). Worse they actively thwarted any effort to build it. They didn’t want the world to change. Didn’t want any disruption in their club. They should have all joined Strom as he headed for that exit door.

91. Revisionist - 25 August 2007

Marie also —

I have probably smoked pot nearly or every other day everyday for 25 years.

I ran out last week and I am too broke to buy any. I’ve gone cold turkey! No DTs. No need for treatment. Its more of a craving than addiction. Like I would really like some Hagaan Daz Chocolate Chocolate Chip right now too.

Internet addiction is a bigger problem inthis country than pot addiction.

92. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007

you may not realize it, but if you’re not a fundie, you’re an illegal alien in the US, even if you were born here:

But absolutely nobody has picked up on another little segment I found at least as horrifying — even before I found out it had a local Seattle angle.

The clip above is Rev. Joe Fuiten, pastor of the Cedar Park Church in Bothell, WA. In it, he carefully explains that Christian-based social conservatism is the way it’s always been in America. And anyone who disagrees, he says, is — flat out — an “illegal alien here.”

Considering how the GOP has been using “illegal immigration” as an excuse for suspension of all kinds of civil rights, this characterization should give us at least as much pause as the “Battle Cry” footage does. We’ve been arguing recently that the Christian right no longer even tries to make a secret of the fact that it considers itself a master race, endowed by the Creator with rights and privileges that exceed — and even negate — those of non-believers.

Now, we have the pastor of a large regional mega-church right there on national TV, asserting that those who disagree with his theology are defacto aliens in their own country. Yep. That’s right. If you’re not a born-again fundamentalist Christian, you can just turn in your passport and your sample ballot now. And don’t bother trying to collect on any of the public services your taxes pay for, either. You don’t have any more right to be here than someone who spent two days and nights crawling across the Rio Grande to pick strawberries. In fact, according to Rev. Fuiten: you have no rights worth respecting at all.

93. Miss Devore - 25 August 2007

just woke from a short nap wherein I dreamt that I was in a lockdown in a Saudi Arabian mall with an xray technician from a university health clinic. in another scene, I was “taken away” in a fighter jet, and I asked the pilot not to torture me by doing aerial acrobatics.

so now I am awake and read this bit of hilarity from Us News & world via rawstory:

“The buzz among top Bushies is that beleaguered Attorney General Alberto Gonzales finally plans to depart and will be replaced by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. Why Chertoff? Officials say he’s got fans on Capitol Hill, is untouched by the Justice prosecutor scandal, and has more experience than Gonzales did, having served as a federal judge and assistant attorney general.”

I almost went into work today to try to get accomplished what was impossible yesterday, but I’m glad I decided against it for all the on-line laughs I’ve had today.

94. marisacat - 25 August 2007

They didn’t want the world to change. Didn’t want any disruption in their club. They should have all joined Strom as he headed for that exit door. marie

yeah but Marie that is what I said. They ran screaming from what the post war years offered. And they still are, running from it.

Teddy Kennedy threw in with Nixon and HMOs just the way he threw in with Bush and NCLB.

But WHEN THEY LOSE AN ELECTION THEY TOUGHT WAS IN THE BAG then they bitch over the black vote in MS.

Either or. But don’t bitch for what ain’t.

95. marisacat - 25 August 2007

well we all know Chertoff is crazy. last we heard from him it was his gut talking.

And the Dems will confirm him.

so stuck.

96. Marie - 25 August 2007

Revisionist – price seems high to me.

We’re probably arguing taxation policy and not economics. In the current system you’re paying tax on pot indirectly. First the taxes to support the criminal justice system – and that isn’t cheap. Second in the price you pay for pot. If you could get it for a 25% of what you now pay, do you really care how much of that cost is in direct taxes? And you would also have the option to buy something better for a few dollars more. (btw one step below retail was $25/oz for A. Gold in the late seventies)

Just sell the stuff in the store — wherever fine tobacco products are sold. Might put the cocaine behind the counter in pharmacies to limit sale to adults.

Marisa – we must also do universal medical care either before or at the same time. Offering them the concession on cocaine would be an inducement to get on board — or they could just sit back and watch as their profits dwindle. Most Americans hate big Pharma; so they are not undefeatable.

Just throwing some things out there to keep in mind when the economy crashes and we have to put together a better one. That’s the time when Americans will sign on to almost anything.

97. Marie - 25 August 2007

‘Revisionist – from what I know and have seen, pot is less harmful than alcohol. Most people can manage to consume either or both with no problems. But some people can’t and they should have access to some form of treatment when they want it.

Marisa #64 – agree but most of them aren’t really Democrats anymore. Or have narrowed the definition so much that it’s been reduced to a few public social policies. Not exactly inspiring to the uneducated mass of voters. Sharpton had that great line in the last election about dancing with the one that brought you. Too bad he’s nothing more than an egocentric shyster.

98. marisacat - 25 August 2007

we must also do universal medical care either before or at the same time. Offering them the concession on cocaine would be an inducement to get on board — or they could just sit back and watch as their profits dwindle. Most Americans hate big Pharma; so they are not undefeatable.

Oh Marie.

Did you read Medicare Part D? I did as I had to. Utter sell out to the insurance companies iwth soft balls to the pharmaceuticals.

Have you read the policy proposals from Massachusetts to OR on what passes for Universal health Care?

Edwards has a cute sop to the idea of extending medicare (both Geo McGovern and Dean in his earlier incarnation delineated this) but that will be whipped away in a heart beat. Krugmen acted like ti was the best thing since sliced bread and the “crime reporter” whose stuff is at Counterpunch and at CommonDreams named what professor has been shopping about the dusty old plan that Edwards glommed onto.

Total sell out to the insurance companies.

San Francisco rolled out its health care policy this month to cover the 82K uninsured. Because newsome was pushed from the left for years. But while it is a good beginning, and will help to take care of poor, uninsured, working uninsured etc… it really is a city trying to seve itself.

Marie pot is classed as a drug iwth herion, cocaine is NOT going legal. Not as long as we are hip deep in Afganistan and that is the only going business outside of higher rents in Kabul.

Under what scenario do you envision all this coming to pass?

Because Medicare Part D is over 60 fucking plans to pick from.

The ONLY good the party might ever have done ws go for Single Payer.

They never did and they never will. Insurance underwitten so called universal care is not that.

And the ONLY reason the Dems are even slightly on board with the louosy plans is that many big employers want out of medical coverage entirely.

99. marisacat - 25 August 2007

Well marie, Sharpton is all over the cables as a representative of the Democrats.

Another reason I left. Not a think in common. Nothing.

100. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

It’s clear that the Democratic Party had a coalition in the mid-1960s with which they should have governed–well, forever.

Why did they relinquish that coalition? It was clearly a conscious decision, but who made it, and why?

I’d say that the ruling class realised about 1965 that they couldn’t beat this progressive coalition–so they needed to co-opt it and thereby destroy it so that the Republican Party could rule. Or, more importantly, the ruling class wanted the Dems co-opted and corruptly so thoroughly so that no matter which party won an election, the ruling class was not threatened.

There were some men who couldn’t be bought off, so they were killed off: MLK and Malcolm and RFK and other, lesser-known men. Thus did the ruling class preserve and consolidate their power.

The exhibition of “people power” in the 1950s and the 1960s scared the living daylights out of the owners of America, Inc., and they have taken steps in the past 40 years to ensure that those days never happen again.

How do you beat them? Same way they were beaten in the 1950s and 1960s: organise outside the two major political parties and creature so much pressure that something’s just got to give.

101. supervixen - 25 August 2007

Marie: That’s the time when Americans will sign on to almost anything.

My guess is that Americans will go in the opposite direction – less freedom, less choice, less openness. More authoritarianism, more conservatism, more hatred, more fear. Fear will be driving everything.

102. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

Any regime predicated on fear, and fear alone, will always fail. Sooner or later, people become inured to the horrors and become so desperate that they will

The ruling class of the United States has changed: this new lot lack the finesse of their forefathers. They weary of the pretence of allowing “the people” a voice and want to rule outright.

As I’ve long predicted, their greed–for money, for power–will be their undoing. They will overreach–they are overreaching–and the backlash will be like a bullwhip cracking back in their faces.

103. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

Well, when WordPress starts posting my comments before I’m done typing them, it’s time to pack it in for the day. The last paragraph of my comment at #102 should end:

“so desperate that they will lose their fear”.

Thanks, WordPress wankers.

104. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007

they abandoned it b/c Americans are racist and classist (even though most are of a lower class than they think they are). They abandoned the public square, the shared public good, the public schools, the libraries and so many other things b/c the courts finally said what should have been obvious all along … Americans should share, and treat each other fairly, with justice, no matter their skin color or class. They Donklephants, overwhelmingly led by people beholden to resentful whites for years, just could allow that to happen.

105. marisacat - 25 August 2007

Wp has been hiccuping for around 24 hours. They took the site down for unlanned maintenance last night for a couple hours.

Don’t think they did enough. The pages, esp the “back stage” pages are very very slow.


106. CSTAR - 25 August 2007

Marisa: re

people need to learn the value of the ballot, of withholding it. If they bother to continue to vote, that is..

I have to admit, sadly, that I’ve disagreed with this idea in the past, and even more tragically, accepted the idea of the “wasted vote”. Can you imagine now if we had Lieberman as “el vice” or even as “el presidente”?

The idea that act of withholding a vote is a political act should be one of the themes of your site. Withholding the vote is not a passive act; in many parts of the world it is (or was, 20 years ago in places like Brazil ) the only possible form of political expression. Withholding the vote is not an expression of an utopian desire, but almost the exact opposite, that is the idea, that a candidate for elected office must provide a clear minimum standard of acceptability.

107. marisacat - 25 August 2007

I agree CSTAR

withholding the vote is a political act.

108. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

Sorry to burst in with meta again, but…

MSOC has now decided that hijacking diaries is a preferable alternative to the “hard work” of banning people.

Exhibit A:


You can’t spell “passive-aggressive” without “aggressive”.

And yes, I visit MyLeftWing for my daily dose of appalling behaviour–as if I don’t get enough doses IRL.

109. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007
110. Madman in the Marketplace - 25 August 2007

Big Brother Democracy – Naomi Klein

Recently, as protesters gathered outside the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) summit in Montebello, Quebec, to confront US President George W. Bush, Mexican President Felipe Calderón and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the Associated Press reported this surreal detail: “Leaders were not able to see the protesters in person, but they could watch the protesters on TV monitors inside the hotel…. Cameramen hired to ensure that demonstrators would be able to pass along their messages to the three leaders sat idly in a tent full of audio and video equipment…. A sign on the outside of the tent said, ‘Our cameras are here today providing your right to be seen and heard. Please let us help you get your message out. Thank You.'”

Yes, it’s true: Like contestants on a reality TV show, protesters at the SPP were invited to vent into video cameras, their rants to be beamed to protest-trons inside the summit enclave. It was security state as infotainment–Big Brother meets, well, Big Brother.

The spokesperson for Prime Minister Harper explained that although protesters were herded into empty fields, the video-link meant that their right to political speech was protected. “Under the law, they need to be seen and heard, and they will be.”

It is an argument with sweeping implications. If videotaping activists meets the legal requirement that dissenting citizens have the right to be seen and heard, what else might fit the bill? How about all the other security cameras that patrolled the summit–the ones filming demonstrators as they got on and off buses and peacefully walked down the street? What about the cellphone calls that were intercepted, the meetings that were infiltrated, the e-mails that were read? According to the new rules set out in Montebello, all of these actions may soon be recast not as infringements on civil liberties but the opposite: proof of our leaders’ commitment to direct, unmediated consultation.

Elections are a crude tool for taking the public temperature–these methods allow constant, exact monitoring of our beliefs. Think of surveillance as the new participatory democracy; of wiretapping as the political equivalent of Total Request Live.

Fucking creepy.

111. liberalcatnip - 25 August 2007

Okay. How did I miss this last fall? Moustahces for the Majority

I wonder what they plan to grow next fall…

112. Sabrina Ballerina - 25 August 2007

Miss x, thanks for the link to California Greening. Was not familiar with them … btw, I hope you’re feeling better.

Marisa,, have you heard from Tuston? Just wondering about him and hoping he’s okay.

Keir,, consider the source … lol!

Interesting diary regarding DK stats and predictable reaction from some of the loyalists. Do NOT burst their bubble, especially with facts:

The Real Traffic Numbers for dKos
by Spec20 [Subscribe]
Sat Aug 25, 2007 at 03:38:17 PM PDT

A few days ago Kagro wrote something in a comment that you see a lot here at dKos: “The daily readership of Daily Kos exceeds all but the largest daily newspapers in America.”

Well, maybe not.

Spec20’s diary :: ::
The number that Kagro and Kos cite so often is the visitor number generated by Site Meter, but that number is misunderstood. It is not a count of unique daily visits; it is actually unique visitors every 30 minutes.

Site Meter explains its algorithm is this way: “Site Meter defines a ‘visit’ as a series of page views by one person with no more than 30 minutes in between page views.”

In other words, if you click to dKos after being idle or absent for at least 30 minutes, you are counted as a new visitor. And most of us are habitual visitors, clicking here several times a day and generating multiple hits. I click once in the morning before work, a couple times while at work (at least) and a couple more times in the evening. That counts me as 5 visitors in one day.

I think five is a fair factor to apply to the Site Meter numbers for dKos: Rather then 500,000 unique visitors per day, the real number is probably closer to 100,000 or less.

Newspaper circulation figures are for the number of issues sold, which carries a couple of important distinctions from dKos: A copy of a newspaper is often read by more than one person (while a pageview is not) and readers must pay money for newspapers while dKos is free. The visitor count at dKos would certainly be much lower if all readers had to subscribe to see any part of the site.

The growth of dKos has been remarkable, but to compare the Site Meter numbers to circulation figures for newspapers is misleading. And it is meaningless.

I think he’s being more than fair … and many of those page views are by people who are not fans.

113. wilfred - 25 August 2007

#109 Great link Madman. They raided the treasury and how, and have absolutely no concience about it.

114. Shadowthief - 25 August 2007

Spec20 is SO banned.

115. Marie - 25 August 2007

Marisa — Medicare Part D has to go — wasn’t including that in my call for universal coverage.

Contrary to appearances, this country has been trending left for decades. A quick example, my very Catholic Republican aunt was told me about a church group picnic. The parish priest biked to the picnic with a male friend. Both were dressed in skimpy Speedos. My aunt suggested to the priest that they might want to put on a t-shirt. I sort of raised my eyebrows and my aunt said, “Oh, most of them are gay these days.” They are used to it. (She and mother other aunt along with their husbands took me to a dinner at the German social club. Both of their husbands had become members. When I pointed out that one of them was Polish and the other Swiss, they shrugged, well, these days they have to take what they can get. And my 65 year old uncle seemed to be the youngest of the lot.)

Not voting is a political act, but not a very effective one. Although wouldn’t claim that it’s any less effective than voting for most DEMs. Sadly, the lesser of two evils usually still gets my vote in a close race. Don’t expect much out of them except to be slightly less evil than the alternative. And yes, for those in VA it was worth voting for Webb for two reasons. At least DEMs can now hold some hearings and you never know what might pop out in one of them. Second, it took the GWB clone Allen out of the ’08 race and if not for that loss, I would have been deprived of watching the parade of the most ridiculous cast of GOP wannabe POTUS candidate assembled in my lifetime. It would have been the Allen and McCain shew and very dull. OTOH, an Allen – Hillary match-up could have left the GOP in the driver’s seat when all the walls come tumbling down.

The forces against are formidable – and I’m not optimistic – a little, highly practical dream now and again is good for the soul

116. Sabrina Ballerina - 25 August 2007

Mitm, thanks for the link to that Rolling Stones article. There was a diary on DK about it, haven’t read it, but it stated the article ‘could end the war’!

Also, from Mitm on the protests being video-taped. I think the age of this kind of protest is over. What does it accomplish other than to allow them to demean and harrass tens of thousands of people while the media rarely covers them?

It would be far easier to coordinate, using the Internet, never having to be subjected to stupid Robo Cops and their abuse, a huge strike, or something that involves taking away money from them! They do not care about anything else. These protest create business, money is spent on travel etc. Why give them that? Attack them where it hurts, like we said here before, crash the stock-market as a protest. Enough people do have stock now to at least make a threat.

And my pet peeve since they refuse to provide health-care for ordinary people, take away theirs. Let them pay for it.

Revisionist, I meant to say, that Blog Maid pic is hilarious!

117. marisacat - 25 August 2007


Part D is a recent so called benefit. And it iindicates how very fucked is our mess. As do the several policies coning forth in the past months.

Sorry I jsut don’t live in the same world. I am fixed on how very hard it will be to get out of the mess, the holes they keep digging in congress and too often at the state level.

118. marisacat - 25 August 2007

The story you tell marie of the church group is of how people have allowed freedom into their own lives.

It is meaningless in the bigger picture of the political mess we are in.

It really is.

119. Marie - 25 August 2007

On the Great Iraq Swindle

While Bechtal and Parsons have pocketed a lot of money from this war, both were financially viable before then, although I suspect in the end they will find that their greed seriously damaged their core operations. KBR was in deep trouble before their guy became the Oval Office puppet master. Quick money does not translate into building a strong operation and usually the reverse is true. IMHO the long term future is probably not good for this one.

Yesterday I looked at the reports on the WTC Deutsh Bank building. What I can’t figure out is how the general contractor Bovis could be so sloppy as to work with an unqualified subcontractor. Multi-million subcontracts for a complex and technically demanding job just don’t get awarded to shell companies (John Galt Corporation — I kid you not). Can’t even understand how Galt could have purchased the necessary insurances coverages. This is in NYC – not Iraq. Something ugly has happened in the construction industry in the past several years and I don’t know what it is, and therefore, can’t project how serious or unreversible it might be.

120. marisacat - 25 August 2007

just a thread.


121. BooHooHooMan - 25 August 2007

I bugged out on the Newark 1200 covered in poison ivy all over except little mr. happy, soaked in the ocean, may not be able to work till its under control. Reading along, lots of great stuff throughout. ST got me thinking re leadership and How do you beat them? Same way they were beaten in the 1950s and 1960s: organise outside the two major political parties and creature so much pressure that something’s just got to give.

I sense more of a strategic withdrawal on social issues in the 50’s and 60’s while the reactionaries/ the MIC still got their Korea, Suez,the Installation of Pahlavi in Iran, their Viet Nam, the Six Day.

Opportunity has opened up economically for minorities. The opportunity to play in the game. To ride anywhere in the herd-off to work. The opportunity to change the rules of the game or shit-can the game itself is another matter….

The anti affirmative action or as RW-ers say “quotas” resonates mostly among those who have no experience WRT unspoken hiring practices. Still, it resonates among fair minded naive individuals caught in the illusion that the rules of “the game” — that the game itself is equitable. I say “equitable” intentionally as there are entire Continents full of individuals ready to remind each other that “life isn’t fair” {duh} to mutually relieve themselves of acting upon equitable alternatives.

We are in a Culture and Class Perma War, perhaps the nature of things a s Marx says, but most certainly by the determination of what Hillary says is “a vast RW conspiracy” She should know. I don’t mean to say she or a guy like Markos is in on it from jump. It is the co-option, the co-option that is perhaps the most useful weapon to come out of and be deployed by the Militaty Industrial Complex.

I think Charismatic trustworthy leaders are essential in leading an opposing coalition coupled with strategic thinking along the lines of Mao’s Protracted Peoples War or the type of community sustaining work of Hamas. Hell we had it here for a generation’s stretch when the wobblies and early unions were swapping pot luck. Speaking of pot …I actually haven’t imbibed* the Leaf of Enlightenment for 25 years . It must show in my writing. The last I can remember, you could buy a pound of Columbian for 375, and minty delicious Hawaian sinsy for 500 an lb, not that I was ever a part of a wholesale pot buying co-op, mind you….

im·bibe (m-bb)
v. im·bibed, im·bib·ing, im·bibes
1. To drink.
2. To absorb or take in as if by drinking: “The whole body . . . imbibes delight through every pore” Henry David Thoreau.
3. To receive and absorb into the mind: “Gladstone had . . . imbibed a strong prejudice against Americans” Philip Magnus.
4. Obsolete To permeate; saturate. <<<—ah, the good old days…

122. marisacat - 25 August 2007

oh yeah the future is so bi partisanly bright.

“This law was a genuine political amalgam,” said John McDonough, executive director of Health Care for All, a Massachusetts advocacy group that played a central role in the debate and sometimes clashed with Romney. “It is absolutely true that Mitt Romney contributed a lot to this law, and it is also true that there is a lot from other sectors and other sources.”

As governor, Romney embraced the idea of requiring individuals to obtain medical insurance as an alternative to requiring employers to do so. The latter approach contributed to the 1990s political defeat of a plan put forward by President Clinton and First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton. (She is now seeking the Democratic presidential nomination.)

In fall 2005, the Democratic speaker of the Massachusetts House signaled that he would be open to the individual requirement. That paved the way for a deal, which included a small tax on employers that did not provide coverage.

Romney vetoed the employer charge but was overridden by the Legislature.

Romney’s latest plan is basically a compilation of standard Republican ideas. He supports tax-sheltered health savings accounts for routine medical expenses, coupled with lower-cost catastrophic insurance for major illnesses. And, like President Bush, he would let states use federal funds that now pay for hospital care for the uninsured to help citizens buy private insurance.

Most of these approaches have little support from Democrats, who control Congress.

But some of the leading Democratic presidential candidates have warmed to the idea of an individual mandate: Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards supports it, and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama would require parents to have coverage for their children.

“Obama and Edwards have both endorsed an individual mandate,” said health economist John Holahan of the nonpartisan Urban Institute, who formerly did work for a nonprofit that helped keep the Massachusetts dialogue moving. “You would think that [Romney] could bring the country together on something like this, given that it’s accepted by some of the Democratic candidates.”

The Galen Institute’s Turner, a critic of the Massachusetts plan, said Romney may yet do that.

“Romney is more tempered than other candidates [on healthcare], and he may be able to be a more sophisticated negotiator,” she said.

“In a general election, he’s going to have to go back more toward the center, I would think.”

123. Francis L. Holland - 26 August 2007

A fresh analysis of the timeline of the life of Markos C.A. Moultisas Zúñiga (MAMZ), based on testimony he gave in his speech at the Commonwealth Club on June 2, 2006, proves that MAMZ must have been at the CIA for AT LEAST one year, and maybe TWO YEARS. Wiki: Markos Moulitsas Zúñiga

This means that after MAMZ completed the standard six-month CIA interviewing period, he must have accepted to be trained by the CIA WITH PAY in the months that followed.

This is NOT what MAMZ has told the public, and it appears that he must clearly have lied about the nature and duration of his involvement with the CIA. In his June 2, 2006 speech to the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco, MAMZ said that he began “interviewing” at the CIA in 2001.


During the Commonwealth Club speech, MAMZ ALSO said that his time at the CIA ended when he began working for Howard Dean. However, upon reviewing the historical record, it was only on 18 months later, on June 9, 2003 that MAMZ “officially” announced at DailyKos that his consulting firm, (Jerome) Armstrong/Zúñiga, had won a consulting contract with Howard Dean’s presidential campaign.

On June 9, 2003, MAMZ announced at DailyKos, “I’ve been on the road a lot the past few months ( . . . ) the bulk of it was for my new political consulting firm (alongside my partner). I spent this weekend in Burlington, VT, where we officially accepted work on behalf of presidential candidate Howard Dean” DailyKos Archives

So, count the months: Even if MAMZ began his time at the CIA on December 31, 2001, he would have to have still been there 17 months later if he turned down permanent employment at the CIA because he began to work for Howard Dean. Wiki: Markos Moulitsas Zúñiga

This analysis of the timeline is based on MAMZ’s own words. This proves that, based on MAMZ own recollection of events, he MUST have worked at the CIA for at least 18 months, including a full year AFTER he started DailyKos.

Since MAMZ started DailyKos May 22, 2002, the inescapable conclusion of this analysis of the timeline is that MAMZ was employed and training at the CIA for at least 17 to 18 months during the very same period when he was leading an ostensibly leftist anti-war blog.

It does seem to present a very serious conflict of interest and breach of the public trust to lead an anti-war blog at the same time that one is secretly working for a Government agency whose job is to investigate, infiltrate and disrupt anti-war activities.

Because the proof comes from a careful analysis of MAMZ’s own words, this is no longer in the realm of “conspiracy theories.” It is an infiltration in-fact of the anti-war movement and the Democratic Party by an employee of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Because of censorship issues at MyLeftWing (in that we have been ordered by the owner, Maryscott OConnor, not to investigate the MAMZ/CIA facts any further at that blog, and some of us have been banned for insisting on doing so) Peeder of MyLeftWing has started a new blog – “Political Fleshfeast” – specifically for the purpose of continuing the investigation and analysis of CIA infiltration the Establishment blogosphere, blog apartheid, and other issues whose investigation leads to bannings at the Establishment blogs.

At this new blog, the blogger who first broke the story at MyLeftWing of MAMZ’s CIA involvement, Stupiddy, has been re-analyzing the biographical information provided by Markos C.A. Moulitsas Zúñiga (MAMZ).

To make this story easier for the reading public to follow, I have prepared a MS Word-based chronological timeline table of Markos C.A. Moulitsas’ life, that makes the graphic and visual case that MAMZ was probably on the CIA payroll for as long as two years, based on his own statements.

124. msxeno - 26 August 2007

Shadowthief, (#83) you want more visibility. All I can say is that I feel an obligation to make worthwhile opinions visible where I can. That’s what I was trying to get at. It’s lousy enough that BBB’s snub these folks without me doing it to.

Mcat (#76) :

…The tough reality is that I am up for so little now. Probably barely two real posts a week. Not an easy thing to face, frankly…

Well, I hope you feel better soon regardless of how many posts you feel like putting up. Yeah, I know I have a perfectly good LJ, but about seven people on the planet read it. I just figured that a link here would get more hits than my own cranky corner of Paradise.

And of course people should discuss whomever they want. I like to think I got over my “Shut up shut up” phase on the net several years ago, with exceptions made for rare cases like Stomach Flu Boy. 😉

125. marisacat - 26 August 2007

ms xeno

Please: feel free to link to anything you wish, on a daily basis. There is no prohibition here against USING the thread space as you wish.

Best I can tell from the traffic numbers, the threads are highly read. Because the posts, such as they are, sit entirely on the page and one need not click open a particular post to read it in full.

But people do, a third of the traffic clicks on a particular thread each day. SO they are reading the threads.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: