STOP TORTURING US WITH AN ENDLESS MOOT DEBATE ON TORTURE

Two speeches, given cross town of one another, one laying out our current administrations strategies, and one deeply rooted in the past and dripping with self denial......both covering the use of torture. Interesting viewpoints, but is this "enhanced rhetoric" really necessary? Can we please move on? What is done is done, and any additional bloviating on the part of Cheney will not change his public perception or legacy. Here are some excerpts of each speech, and links to the entire text if you still have the stomach for them. Let's hope this is the end of the dog and pony show. Cheney, for once could learn something from his former boy wonder...go home and quietly clear some brush......
"I believe with every fiber of my being that in the long run we also cannot keep this country safe unless we enlist the power of our most fundamental values. The documents that we hold in this very hall -- the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights -- these are not simply words written into aging parchment. They are the foundation of liberty and justice in this country, and a light that shines for all who seek freedom, fairness, equality, and dignity around the world.

....I know some have argued that brutal methods like water boarding were necessary to keep us safe. I could not disagree more. As Commander-in-Chief, I see the intelligence. I bear the responsibility for keeping this country safe. And I categorically reject the assertion that these are the most effective means of interrogation. (Applause.)

What's more, they undermine the rule of law. They alienate us in the world. They serve as a recruitment tool for terrorists, and increase the will of our enemies to fight us, while decreasing the will of others to work with America. They risk the lives of our troops by making it less likely that others will surrender to them in battle, and more likely that Americans will be mistreated if they are captured. In short, they did not advance our war and counter terrorism efforts -- they undermined them, and that is why I ended them once and for all. (Applause.)

"I can stand here today, as President of the United States, and say without exception or equivocation that we do not torture, and that we will vigorously protect our people while forging a strong and durable framework that allows us to fight terrorism while abiding by the rule of law. Make no mistake: If we fail to turn the page on the approach that was taken over the past several years, then I will not be able to say that as President. And if we cannot stand for our core values, then we are not keeping faith with the documents that are enshrined in this hall. (Applause.)

President Barack Obama (FULL SPEECH HERE)

"....9/11 caused everyone to take a serious second look at threats that had been gathering for a while, and enemies whose plans were getting bolder and more sophisticated. ......I was and remain a strong proponent of our enhanced interrogation program. The interrogations were used on hardened terrorists after other efforts failed. They were legal, essential, justified, successful, and the right thing to do. The intelligence officers who questioned the terrorists can be proud of their work and proud of the results, because they prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people. Our successors in office have their own views on all of these matters."

Those are the basic facts on enhanced interrogations. And to call this a program of torture is to libel the dedicated professionals who have saved American lives, and to cast terrorists and murderers as innocent victims. What's more, to completely rule out enhanced interrogation methods in the future is unwise in the extreme. It is recklessness cloaked in righteousness, and would make the American people less safe."

"If fine speech-making, appeals to reason, or pleas for compassion had the power to move them, the terrorists would long ago have abandoned the field. And when they see the American government caught up in arguments about interrogations, or whether foreign terrorists have constitutional rights, they don't stand back in awe of our legal system and wonder whether they had misjudged us all along. Instead the terrorists see just what they were hoping for--our unity gone, our resolve shaken, our leaders distracted. In short, they see weakness and opportunity."

Ex-Vice President Dick Cheney (FULL SPEECH HERE)

OBAMA / LIBERAL (in name only)

The Obama administration is barely into their 4th month of service, and the nation is beginning to see evidence of the vast differences from the Obama stump speeches, and his deeds in office. Although I will not go as far as Rachel Maddow and claim he has become George Bush, more and more I see how the country was duped, and we (although I was an ardent Clinton supporter) were duped yet again.

For liberals who viewed Obama as something of a savior after eight years of Bush, the discontents are piling up. He has pushed gun control to the back burner, used the state secrets privilege to try to quash lawsuits over warrant less wiretapping, opposed a “truth commission” to investigate alleged torture and sought to deny some legal protections to detainees in Afghanistan.

He promised a pull out in Iraq, and the closing of Guantanamo...all flipped on. And while he holds majorities throughout the beltway, he has made no effort to push his platform through the legislative branches.

And he’s made clear he’s in no rush to do immigration reform or repeal the military’s ban on openly gay service members. What's more, I am fully prepared for Obama to announce a moderate to replace Souter on the Supreme Court. So much for the liberal agenda we expected from the "most liberal Senator." As for his public platform and actions so far, I would label him an ultra-liberal in name only, and that is a disappointment for me beyond belief... is he already charting a path towards keeping his job, before he even does his job? With every passing day, I see the bungling of the Obama administration, and the consistent excellence over at the State department by Hillary Clinton and wonder what if...........

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22604.html#ixzz0FmHLsuRv&B.

ABORTION FOES RECEIVE A SHOT IN THE ARM WITH NEW POLL

For the first time since it began asking the question in 1995, Gallup reported Friday, a majority of adults questioned for its annual survey on values and beliefs -- 51% -- said that when it comes to abortion, they consider themselves "pro-life"; 42% consider themselves "pro-choice." (The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.) This represents a significant shift, Gallup noted. As recently as last year, 50% of respondents called themselves "pro-choice" and 44% identified themselves as "pro-life."

At the ends of the spectrum, the number of people who think abortion should be illegal in all circumstances has risen, to 22%, and the number who think it should be legal in any circumstances has fallen, to 23% -- a virtual tie. In the previous few years, people who opposed all restrictions outnumbered advocates of a total ban by a wider margin.

Do the math...this means 55% of the country either cannot form an opinion, or believe special circumstances must be the end all determinative factor. This is the kind of fuzzy math that will drive politicians crazy as they try to measure the pulse of their constituents. This kind of math may also effect the Obama supreme court nominee, as an individuals views on Roe V. Wade were always seen as a political lynch pin.

Of course one of the more prominent news stories touching on the abortion issue in recent months involves President Barack Obama's commencement speech and the bestowal of an honorary doctorate degree on him at the University of Notre Dame -- a Roman Catholic institution -- on Sunday. The invitation has drawn criticism from conservative Catholics and the church hierarchy because of Obama's policies in favor of legalizing and funding abortion, and the controversy might have been expected to strengthen the pro-life leanings of rank-and-file Catholics.

With the first pro-choice president in eight years already making changes to the nation's policies on funding abortion overseas, expressing his support for the Freedom of Choice Act, and moving toward rescinding federal job protections for medical workers who refuse to participate in abortion procedures, Americans -- and, in particular, Republicans -- seem to be taking a step back from the pro-choice position. However, the retreat is evident among political moderates as well as conservatives.
It is possible that, through his abortion policies, Obama has pushed the public understanding of what it means to be "pro-choice" slightly to the left, politically. While Democrats may support that, as they generally support everything Obama is doing as president, it may be driving others in the opposite direction.

THE SPEAKER HAS TO SHUT UP

Speaker Nancy Pelosi essentially said yesterday that she is the victim of a CIA information operation directed against the constitutional leadership of the United States. So what else is new?
At a news conference in which she appeared—as she always does, every time she speaks—to be lying, Pelosi said that the CIA briefed her in February 2002 about water boarding and other torture techniques being contemplated by the CIA, but was specifically told that water boarding was not being used. In fact, by that time, Zubaydah had already been water boarded 83 times. Pelosi adamantly insists that while the CIA told her that it thought water boarding was legal, her briefers said it was not being employed.

Speaker Pelosi is back pedaling as fast as she can, and leaving a trail of bread crumbs that must...MUST lead to her stepping down from the Speakership for the good of the party.....here is a timeline thanks to the blog The Pundit Guy.

She claimed she was never briefed on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques.
Then he stated she had not been briefed about the use of water boarding.
Then she confessed she did attend a briefing but there was no talk of any

enhanced interrogation techniques.
She then confessed she was briefed but she wasn’t made clear

on the definition of the techniques used.
Today, she confessed she was briefed but was never told about the fact

that waterboarding had been used on a terrorist suspect,

even though terrorist suspect Abu Zubaydah

had been waterboarded a month before she was briefed on the subject in Sept. 2002.

A ridiculous pattern of half truths to say the least. Think the CIA actually lied to her? I believe Leon Panetta, Democratic CIA head and a former Clintonite who went on the record as saying...

"Let me be clear: It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress. That is against our laws and our values. As the Agency indicated previously in response to Congressional inquiries, our contemporaneous records from September 2002 indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing “the enhanced techniques that had been employed.”

Let's be clear, she has alienated the congressional players in the House and Senate, and now she stands toe to toe with one of the most powerful members of the Obama administration in public, which must be having the president's head spinning.

Not only has Pelosi lost all respect of the conservative base, she is losing it with her own party. Witness the quote from California Senator Diane Feinstein, who chairs the Intelligence Committee, who responded: "I think it's a tempest in a teapot really. Speaker Pelosi should have known all of this, she should have stopped this, she should have done this or done that. I don't want to make an apology for anybody, but in 2002, it wasn't 2006, '07, '08 or '09. It was right after 9/11, and there were in fact discussions about a second wave of attacks."

Nancy Pelosi has become a political joke long before this latest gaffe, but now she has earned the ire of the Congress, and the distrust of the American people, including her own party (of which I am a loyal supporter...but enough is enough). Worse yet, she makes it increasingly difficult for President Obama to reach across the aisle and begin to reach some kind of bi-partisan stirrings in Congress.

This is not the first gaffe of the Speaker, and merely one more in a long string of embarrassments to the party. My favorite was when she discussed abortion claiming that the Catholics objections to abortion only developed with the birth of the pill fifty years ago or so....

We have to stop the bleeding. She has to go. I know it, the President knows it, and most of the country knows it. Her only usefulness is she makes Joe Biden look careful with his rhetoric.

CAPTION CONTEST

IT'S TIME TO CUT THE CRAP ABOUT TORTURE AND MOVE ON

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” on terrorist suspect Abu Zubaydah in September 2002, according to a report prepared by the Director of National Intelligence’s office and obtained by ABC News.
The report, submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee and other Capitol Hill officials Wednesday, appears to contradict Pelosi’s statement last month that she was never told about the use of waterboarding or other special interrogation tactics. Instead, she has said, she was told only that the Bush administration had legal opinions that would have supported the use of such techniques.
The report details a Sept. 4, 2002 meeting between intelligence officials and Pelosi, then-House intelligence committee chairman Porter Goss, and two aides. At the time, Pelosi was the top Democrat on the House.

The report also details dozens of other meetings with members of Congress -- though not with Pelosi present -- where the use of waterboarding and other interrogation techniques was described. The Senate intelligence committee’s chairman and ranking member, Bob Graham and Richard Shelby, were given a briefing similar to the one with Pelosi and Goss on Sept. 27, 2002, according to the report.
On Feb. 4, 2003, a briefing on “enhanced interrogation techniques” for Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., and Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, D-W.Va., revealed that interrogations of Abu Zubaydah and Abd Al-Rahim Al-Nashiri were taped. In addition, that briefing “described in considerable details” the techniques used, including “how the water board was used.”
A similar briefing the following day included Goss and Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., who by that time had become the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, when Pelosi moved on to become minority leader.

AN ABSTINENCE OF IGNORANCE

President Barack Obama's proposed 2010 budget would shift sex-education funding from abstinence-only programs to programs focused on reducing the number of teenage pregnancies. "The program will fund models that stress the importance of abstinence while providing medically accurate and age-appropriate information to youth who have already become sexually active," according to Obama senior advisers.

Obama wants to eliminate a $38 million state grant program plus a nearly $100 million pot of money that is supposed to be spent for abstinence education at the direction of the Administration for Children and Families, part of the Health and Human Services Department.
He would create a new $110 million "teen pregnancy prevention initiative," plus direct $50 million to states for pregnancy prevention programs.
The most positive results, Obama's budget plan asserts, come from programs that "provide a range of services in addition to comprehensive sex education, such as after school activities, academic support or service learning."

The Obama position is borne out by a recent poll by Mathematica Policy Research Inc, who found that children who took part in sex abstinence classes were found to be just as likely to engage in sexual intercourse for the first time at the same age as children who did not receive these classes, in a study the US Congress had ordered. According to this latest research, teenagers first had sex at the age of 14.9 years, regardless of whether they attended sex abstinence classes.

Does this mean we teach them that abstinence is impossible given that we are only human beings? Of course not. Does it mean we stress the availability and safety of abortion clinics? Of course not. But it should mean that we let today's children know that there are ways to express their sexuality and desires without the risk of pregnancy. And if this makes you uncomfortable, lets hope you don't have a daughter, like abstinence supporter Governor Palin. That worked out real well.....

WISHING YOU SUCCESS WITH SECEDING

Just one week ago he was suggesting that Texas may have to consider seceding from the union, Governor Perry decided he would get one more bit of national help before doing so.

Today in a precautionary measure, he requested the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provide 37,430 courses of antiviral medications from the Strategic National Stockpile to Texas to prevent the spread of swine flu. Currently, three cases of swine flu have been confirmed in Texas.

As asinine as that sequence of events were, all you have to do is look at some numbers from a very recent daily KO's poll and it will be obvious why Texas Gov. Rick Perry is talking secession in the run up to what will be a tough primary battle against Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson.

Poll taken 4/20-22. of likely Texas voters.

Do you think Texas would be better off as an independent nation

or as part of the United States of America?
US: 61 Independent nation: 35
Democrats: US 82, Ind 15

Republicans: US 48, Ind 48

Independents: US 55, Ind 40
Do you approve or disapprove of Governor Rick Perry's suggestion that

Texas may need to leave the United States?
Approve: 37 Disapprove: 58
Democrats: Approve 16, Disapprove 80

Republicans: Approve 51, Disapprove 44

Independents: Approve 43, Disapprove 50

More Daily KO's: What if we let them go and become an independent nation?

Ft. Hood, and it's $6 billion impact in central Texas, would be an economic boon to Detroit or any number of other economically depressed American regions. What, do the secessionists think they could keep those American military bases on their newly sovereign soil?
How about the $2.5 billion that NASA pumps directly into salaries of employees and contractors in the Houston area, not to mention ancillary economic benefits and the prestige of having one of the premier space facilities in the world? The American patriots in New Mexico would be more than happy to take that off Texas' hands!

My solution? Nationalize the oil fields and let the rest go. I wasn't for building a border fence until Governor Perry hit my radar. Now, I say let em' go. It's not like they never split away from the union before; they did in February 1, 1861, and joined the Confederate States of America on March 2, 1861, and became a valuable confederate supply resource through the war, along with supplying over 70,000 men to serve in the confederate army.

The prevailing rationale was spelled out in the Texas Ordinance of Secession, a document ratified by the state's Secession Convention on February 1, by a vote of 166 to 8. The document specifies several reasons for secession, including its solidarity with its "sister slave-holding States," the Federal government's inability to prevent Indian attacks, slave-stealing raids, and other border-crossing acts of banditry. It accuses Northern politicians and abolitionists of a variety of outrages upon Texans. The bulk of the document offers a justification of slavery and white supremacy, including this extract:
"We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable."

Some would say there are still many Texans who never abandoned these opinions. Either way, if they did seceed, they could have a ready made executive branch with George Bush and Tom De Lay.

A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH

Step one: stop the bleeding. Step two: middle class tax cuts. Step three: end the tax cuts for our wealthiest citizens. Step four: put some money into the hands of people who need it, and will spend it.

Whats next, you ask? Make sure everyone pays their share. Next up is addressing tax advantages for American companies who shelter profits in foreign countries, and individuals who shelter funds in off shore accounts, which are virtually impossible to track, or at least most thought.

So the Obama administration goes to Switzerland, and they agree to cooperate on a specific investigation, not a generic list of Swiss accounts held for Americans. Next step: vowing to "detect and pursue" U.S tax evaders and go after their offshore tax shelters. What is at stake? Just potentially $210 billion over the next 10 years. Very, very smart.

In announcing a series of steps aimed at overhauling the U.S. tax code, Obama complained that existing law makes it possible to "pay lower taxes if you create a job in Bangalore, India, than if you create one in Buffalo, New York. "
The president said he wants to prevent U.S. companies from deferring tax payments by keeping profits in foreign countries rather than recording them at home and called for more transparency in bank accounts that Americans hold in notorious tax havens like the Cayman Islands.
"If financial institutions won't cooperate with us, we will assume that they are sheltering money in tax havens and act accordingly," Obama said. Under the plan, companies would not be able to write off domestic expenses for generating profits abroad. The goal is to reduce the incentive for U.S. companies to base all or part of their operations in other countries, as well as hiring nearly 800 new IRS agents to enforce the U.S. tax code.

The current tax code, he said, makes it too easy for "a small number of individuals and companies to abuse overseas tax havens to avoid paying any taxes at all." Under existing laws, companies with operations overseas pay U.S. taxes only if they bring the profits back to the United States. If they keep the profits offshore, they can defer paying taxes indefinitely. Obama's plan, which would take effect in 2011, would change that.
Obama officials also said they would close a Clinton-era provision that would cost $87 billion over the next decade by letting U.S. companies "check the box" and treat international subsidiaries as mere branch offices. Officials said it was meant as a paperwork shortcut that is now a widely used and perfectly legal way to avoid paying billions in taxes on international operations. The White House said that in 2004, multinational corporations enjoyed an effective tax rate of 2.3 percent in the United States because of such allowances.

Critics (and many in Congress will lobby for their large corporate financial campaign supporters) will say it will do nothing more than cost job creations at home. No doubt this is a big initiative that will largely gauge Obama's ability to push his political agenda through the Democratically controlled Congress.

WHY MICHELLE'S $540 SNEAKERS ARE A BIG DEAL

While volunteering Wednesday at a D.C. food bank, the First Lady sported her usual J.Crew cardigan, a pair of utilitarian capri pants and, on her feet, a sneaky splurge: trainers that go for $540.

The blogs are all coming to the defense of the first lady, who should be able to spend their money anyway she sees fit. Trouble is, she represents. She represents an administration who is currently asking their supporters to cut back on expenses. Cut back on using energy. Cut back on unnecessary expenses and use the money to be more benevolent in helping their fellow man.

"They're shoes," the First Lady's reps sniffed when curious reporters inquired about the fancy footwear. Truth is, they are more than shoes. First of all, she wore them to a food bank. So while she wants to tout her awareness of the human condition and her willingness to help, all those that are hurting to the point of needing charity to eat and feed their families ran smack dab into a example of ignorant excess.

During the campaign, the Obama campaign pointed to McCain, a very wealthy man by any standard, as to his disconnect to the common American because of his money (remember "he doesn't even know how many homes he owns?"). I think part of the Obama charm was his common upbringing to many in the nation. He came from a single parent family with little or no wealth at all. He was not a wealthy person, in fact they needed help in buying their first home, albeit the kind of help that angered many. In fact, he took great care to project a simple lifestyle, up and to the point of seemingly wearing the same suit daily while he campaigned.

It's not the $540, we want them to be financially successful. We just want them to be sensible and not flaunt it. $540.00 could have been spent in many better ways, for example, $540 would have bought.....

54 malaria nets to save lives at www.nothingbutnets.org

25% of the cost of a fresh water well at http://waterwellsforafrica.org/

sponsor and feed a child for 10 months through http://www.worldvision.org/

one year’s worth of antiretroviral therapy (AIDS) for three people through http://www.joinred.com/

You get my point. I am not saying all of us don't spend money foolishly at times. I am not saying the first lady should adopt an Amish lifestyle. But to flaunt her riches at a food bank of all places, and in such a foolish way is over the top, and she deserves all of the criticism she will surely get. And don't tell me she may have gotten them free, she probably did. But in wearing them, she is sending out a signal to the American people. A very reckless signal at that. While 10% of our nation is unemployed, while our food banks are groaning at the increased patronage and families in need, and while nearly 50% of the world's population do not have access to safe and clean drinking water, maybe her expensive French sneakers should have stayed in the closet. That's all I'm saying.

A FORMER PRO FOOTBALL QUARTERBACK, KEMP NEVER PASSED ON ANYTHING IN THE HOUSE

He was, without question a legendary Republican leader. Strong on the military and a fiscal conservative. But for those who knew him, he was always the smartest guy in the room. That was his legacy, besides being a college and pro football hero, a nine time member of the House, former Secretary of HUD, and a former running mate of Senator Bob Dole (pictured above).

I never agreed with most of his political ideologies or conservative stances, but he always seemed like a decent man. A man of his word. We need more men in government with those traits. And now, at the age of 73, he is gone. and that's a shame, because as the GOP seeks to rebuild itself, they need all the role models they can get there hands on. Eric Cantor and Michael Steele take note. Jack Kemp, dead at the age of 73, and he lived every day of it.

NUANCE VERSUS NONSENSE

Obviously the fears over Vice President Biden have come home to roost ten fold, as he is humanly unable to let an given thought go unspoken, regardless of its ignorance. To date, the Biden Vice presidentcy has produced only an endless string of gaffes and slipups. On the other hand, the fears over Hillary Clinton....she will push her own agenda, you won't be able to keep Bill out of the limelight (or the Oval Office), she is not a team player, etc. etc., have proven to be as ignorant as a Biden off the cuff question and answer session. She alone has been the only true perfect note in the first 100 day symphony. She hit the ground running, she has pass blocked for the President, and she has been welcomed with open arms (and minds) all over the world. Don't tell me President Obama does not have regrets.

FRAGILE: HANDLE WITH CARE

Talk about your paradigm changes in perspective. We have gone from an arrogant administration who actually thought (and desired) a complete regime change in the Middle East, to a President who will look you in the eye and admit our mistakes. Admit our past mis-deeds and seek to resolve them, to discuss them, and to a certain extent, make amends for them.

While the Bush administrations two terms focused on our (perceived) omnipotence and super-powerdom, the first 100 days of the Obama administration are being spent wading through the aftermath of those eight contemptuous years of hubris.

Today, more than at any time in my lifetime, we are reminded of just how fragile this world truly is. Our economy, once considered impenetrable, has proven to be a house of cards left on its own. Millions of Americans are scrambling for jobs that simply do not exist at the moment, they have vanished waiting for the market place to reinvent itself.

It has been reported that the Pakistani government is dangerously close to be taken over by Al-Queda, including its nuclear capabilities. Lebanon is about to have another election, where Hamas has become a player on that political scene. And Iran is seeking to be a player on the nuclear scene, and experts state it is only a matter of time for that uncertain eventuality.

We still fight diseases across the globe that in civilized portions of the world have all been eradicated. Malaria still kills hundreds of thousands of Africans, especially the young. And a majority....a majority of the world's population live on nothing (less than $2 a day), have no sewage waste systems, and do not even enjoy clean drinking water.

Domestically, nearly one-third of our young drop out of high school, and for low income high school graduates, they have a better chance of landing in prison than graduating from a college program.

As if this were not enough, the world is fighting back in its struggle with its human occupants with an N1H1 "swine" flu that may come back this summer with the vengeance of the pandemic of 1918, and the deaths of literally millions of the stricken. And for all our accomplishments, for all our technology, the advise we get for avoiding catching this deadly monster is to wash our hands and sing "Happy Birthday" twice while we do it. Reminds me of the governments proclamation years ago to have plastic sheeting and duct tape on hand.

This world has turned into an inter-dependant pillow fight, only with higher stakes weaponry. Forget global warming and the ozone layer. We have bigger fish to fry. This world is at a very tenuous and fragile point in its existence, and we need more than statesmen to get us through. We need the worlds occupancy to get involved, to become increasingly more charitable and benevolent. We need everyone to see the enormous stakes at play, and act accordingly. Oh God, we are doomed.

SOUTER RETIREMENT WON'T CHANGE JUSTICE PHILOSOPHICAL MATRIX

As you read the recent retirement announcement of Supreme Court Justice Souter, you may have become overcome with delusions of liberal grandeur; especially if you remember who nominated him to the court, George Bush Sr. All I can say is calm down. Justice Soutar was, and is delightfully left leaning, especially for a Republican nominee. Bush Sr. nominated two Justices to the court in his tenure, Souter, who deeply disappointed him, and Thomas, who of course, did not.

Two of the Justices are enjoying advancing years (Stevens 89, and Ginsberg 76), but are decidedly liberal. No, for Obama to get a chance of moving the court left, he will need to replace one of the five conservative justices, and the odds are not nearly that good. The two eldest conservative justices are Kennedy and Scalia, both 73 years of age. Then comes Thomas at 61, Alito at 59, and Chief Justice Roberts, a spry 54.

Based on actuarial tables, here are the projected life expectancies of the remaining court....as morbid as it may seem.

Roberts (54) -- 25.14 years
Alito (58) -- 21.92 years
Thomas (60) -- 20.36 years
Souter (69) -- 13.93 years
Breyer (70) -- 13.27 years
Ginsburg (75) -- 12.29 years
Kennedy (72) -- 12.01 years
Scalia (72) -- 12.01 years
Stevens (88) -- 4.40 years

It goes without saying that Justice Stevens must consider retirement before year four of the Obama administration, or risk a one term Democratic administration, which would be a major liberal mistake making the left to right matrix 3 to 6. Justice Ginsburg at 75, might do well to do the same, if not for her career, at least her ideologies.

If you are a betting man, odds are 60% that one of the five conservative Justices will expire before 2016, the end of Obama's second term in office. The odds are practically minuscule (23%) that there will be a conservative spot open before the end of his first term in 2012, especially considering any of the five conservative justices would rather be rolled in on a dolly before they end their career during a liberal Presidents term in office.

MANTLE JOINS THE RED SOX

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., will announce this afternoon that he is switching to the Democratic Party. In a written statement today, Specter wrote, "Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right."
"Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans. When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing," Specter wrote.

Assuming Al Franken takes the Minnesota Senate seat, Democrats will have that magic number of 60 Senate votes necessary to pass any piece of legislation, and override any filibuster.

More from Spector, "My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords’ switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change."

Arlen Spector is a dinosaur. A legendary, gravel voiced Senator who votes his mind. If any five senators actually read an individual bill up for consideration, Arlen Spector would be one of them.

You can't guarantee which side of an issue Spector would take, that is what Senate whip counts are for. But he has always been someone the opposition could reach across the aisle towards with the confidence that he would reach back with something other than a hand full of fish hooks.

So while the math says 60, the vote may well be 58 (Leiberman as well). And that is OK with the democratic party. We respect people who vote their conscience, people who can spell public service without a dollar sign.

For the record, Arlen Spector is not leaving the Republican party....they left him. They left him eight years ago; in practice, in attitude, in demeanor and in actions. He just couldn't keep holding his nose anymore.

So for tomorrow the news will be that a major Republican senator has decided his party has become too extreme for him, and we hope others will reassess their party afflictions as well. The truth is, the Spector defection has less to do with Arlen Spector than it does the Republican party itself. The Republican party today is completely adrift in a moral and ideological abyss desperately seeking a leader (Steel ain't it, skin color not withstanding), and a platform they can announce without holding their noses. They will just have to figure it out with one less heavyweight.

SWINE FLU: NOTHING TO SNEEZE AT

If you are like me (and hopefully you are much smarter), your journey began with what a pandemic actually is. A pandemic is an epidemic of infectious disease that spreads through populations across a large region; for instance a continent, or even worldwide. This is opposed to an epidemic, which just means outbreaks of an illness exceed normal expectations. An epidemic can be, and usually is highly localized. A pandemic is wide spread and capable of taking over large areas; entire countries, continents or the world. That is what we are talking about.

The CDC reports that the symptoms and transmission of the swine flu from human to human is much like seasonal flu, commonly fever, lethargy, lack of appetite and coughing. Some people with swine flu also have reported runny nose, sore throat, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. It is believed to be spread between humans through coughing or sneezing of infected people and touching something with the virus on it and then touching their own nose or mouth. Swine flu cannot be spread by pork products, since the virus is not transmitted through food. The swine flu in humans is most contagious during the first five days of the illness although some people, most commonly children, can remain contagious for up to ten days.

The swine flu is very treatable. The swine flu is susceptible to two drugs licensed in the United States, oseltamivir and zanamivir. There is no danger of a shortage of these drugs. The national stockpile of antiviral drugs are being activated and should be fully deployed by May 3.

So, what should we do?

1. Wash your hands often, in hot soapy water, and for the amount of time it takes you to sing "Happy Birthday" twice (15-20 seconds).

2. Get enough sleep. This means slightly different things to different people, but try to get 8 hours of good rest each night to keep your immune system in top flu-fighting shape.

3. Keep hydrated with 8-10 8-oz. glasses of water each day to flush toxins from your system and maintain good moisture and mucous production in your sinuses.

4. Be vigilant of surfaces. This is as much a mindfulness exercise as anything else. Be aware of what public surfaces you touch, when you've shaken hands with someone, or when you're using something like a pen that others have recently used--and don't touch your face until you've had a chance to wash your hands.

5. Know when to get help. Swine flu can look like regular flu, so don't feel like you necessarily are infected if you're exhibiting flu-like symptoms. But do go to your doctor if you live in an area where there are documented cases, or if your symptoms are severe.

You should not panic, just be smart about it. You should also know that the U.S. government on Sunday declared the flu strain a public health emergency. No American deaths have been reported and most affected by the virus had light symptoms, and were recovering fast. But it has popped up in New York, Ohio, Kansas, Texas and California as well as Canada and Europe, raising fears of a pandemic.

President Barack Obama said he was monitoring the situation while bad news piled up from southern neighbor Mexico, where up to 149 people have died and more than 1,600 have been infected by the never-before-seen virus. In New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said more than 100 sick students at a high school in Queens were being tested and that 45 were confirmed or likely cases of swine flu. A first case was confirmed in northern California, where a student was found with the virus at a school in a Sacramento suburb. The school was closed. Ten other cases have been confirmed in southern California close to Mexico's border. Texas, meanwhile, confirmed a third case of swine flu near San Antonio. All three cases involve students at the same school, and Texas officials have closed 14 area schools in an attempt to contain it.

Needless to say, precautions should be taken if you live in these states especially, or if you have younger children, older adults at home, or any loved one susceptable to respiratory ailments, or have pre-exsisting respiratory conditions.

NATIONALIZED (AND RATIONALIZED) HEALTH CARE

Medicare and Medicaid. Our nationalized health care system. Over the past two decades, they have destroyed the budget to unreal proportions. Unfortunately, the worse is yet to come, as baby boomers are becoming of the age where they will need the most critical care of their life spans. It is estimated that a third to a half of ones lifetime health care costs are consumed in the last six months of life.

As Obama seeks to nationalize health care, plus reduce expenses wherever possible, the question becomes.....In an aging population, how do you keep them from blowing up the budget? There is only one answer: rationing.

Accordingly, Britain's National Health Service can deny treatments it deems not cost-effective -- and if you're old and infirm, the cost-effectiveness of treating your illnesses. In Canada, they ration by queuing. You can wait forever for so-called elective procedures like hip replacements.

Rationing is not quite as alien to America as we think. We already ration kidneys and hearts for transplant according to survivability criteria as well as by queuing. A nationalized health-insurance system would ration everything from MRIs to intensive care by myriad similar criteria.

This is the uneasy truth of pure economic survival for any health care program. And as distasteful as this might seem, it makes sense, from a financial standpoint. This is the time where a panel of doctors will completely survey your malady, and actually determine the return they will get on investing health care dollars, quite frankly, on you.

What are the mathematical chances of your survival, and your quality of life should you receive benefit of a procedure. Frankly, the option for many will be to spend precious health care dollars on comforting you the patient, and preparing you for the inevitable. This will especially be true if you have reached the national expected survival expectation.

Think this sounds like a bad movie plot?....don't. The unspoken truth is the insurance companies, and medical community as a whole may (and some say are) already making those unspoken determinations to a certain extent.

With financial resources at a premium, isn't this a near certainty, even if left uncommunicated to the patient in such fiscal terms? Aren't they already?

A COMMUNAL ECONOMIC RESPONSE

As the economic "crisis" deepens, many Americans are struggling to keep their heads above water financially. For many, this means a reexamination of their family budgets, seeking cuts in expenditures wherever possible.

For some, this means a resurgence of carpooling, or reducing energy usage, or finding ways to keep their food costs in line, up to and including growing your own food, or buying in larger quantities among multiple families.

For those of us old enough to remember leaner financial periods, these are not new ideas. The multi-family purchase of complete sides of beef, etc. were all the rage in the 60's. I can remember butcher shop plans for buying large quantities of meat, which included the free use of a freezer, and the savings were substantial. This was long before the advent of big box food centers, but it made financial sense.

I can even remember a time where seven families went in together and each made one dinner per week, large enough to feed everyone, and delivered them each afternoon to the houses on our block. Of course this did save energy (although not a concern at the time), but mostly it saved time and effort; as more and more families were responding to the economic challenge with the creation of two income families.

Which brings me to my current observations. As someone in the architectural coatings industry (all right, I sell paint), I try to find new construction or remodeling leads in my region, and as a result of this I have noticed a burgeoning rental vacancy rate, at least in the Southern California market. This didn't make sense to me at a time when many homeowners are losing their houses these days, but when interviewing a large volume rental property owner recently, I realized that many renters are feeling the pinch, and moving in with friends, family or their parents in an effort to save themselves money, as well as their new roommates. This not only saves money on rent, but energy (air conditioning costs out here are enormous), and food bills as well. Not to mention giving all concerned a support system.

And so, I have to ask.....Will this current economic crisis make communal living in vogue once again? We certainly have our share of condominium and town home communities in California, which is, in a way, the creation of a commune in and of itself, with one difference, most are comprised of strangers, but the advantages and potentials are there.

Do we really need these enormous 2500 square foot homes to heat and cool, and landscape and build pools behind? As the worlds resources dwindle, will this mode of living come out of fashion?

Just today, I took my family to the local nursery for some flowers to plant in our front yard, and I sparked a conversation with the manager (as I do), who told me the flower market is staying steady (cheaper than buying at a flower shop for gifts and occasions), but the eatable plant market is booming for him. Potted herbs, tomatoes, vegetable seeds, dwarf fruit trees and the like are all increasing in volume as many are seeing their back yards in a whole new way. Clearly, they are responding to the economic crisis in a very healthy way.

Whether forced by the economy, or as a prudent new found austerity, growing food makes sense. Doing your own laundry rather than dry cleaning wherever possible makes sense. Renting that empty spare bedroom may make sense, and carpooling or taking mass transit certainly makes sense.

Will these economic times force us to rethink the way we live, and spend? Will many see the advantages of a multi-family complex with which to share expenses and as a support community become popular once again? Probably not. we are Americans, and once the economy starts to grow, we will be right back at our own ways, but there is a sort of romance involved in the communes of the sixties. Many families pulling together and sharing expenses and resources to live a better life. Home schooling, community gardens, and a large, nuclear, or extended family.

Communal living could be a remarkably viable means for enriching lives; through sharing and maximizing of resources. Instead of owning many of any one product, you will own less, but share a wider range of items. By pooling the community money, creativity, skills, assets, ideas and resources you may find you could supply everyone's basic needs through communal energies. You might find an abundance of all things available to you, and an optimization in the efficiency of their use.

For example, sharing the use of automobiles, and making a communal dinner each evening. One car can serve numerous people, thus requiring fewer of them; and not only does everyone get a wholesome, nutritious meal each night, but they also only have to cook and cleanup once a week, or less, for example and then only as part of a team.

Does this make sense, or have I seen one to many episodes of "Big Love?" Let me know by clicking on the word comment below. Thanks, as always, for spending time in my world. "The World According to Kimba."

THE NEW G.O.P.: JUST SAY "NO"

As previously noted, Wednesday will mark the first 100 days of the Obama administration, a mere 5 months since the American voters soundly rejected the conservative platform, and its leaders. Five months since electing a Democratic House, a Democratic Senate, and a Democratic executive branch.

Surely this week every news outlet and Internet blog will feature in one fashion or another, a report card of the Obama administration at the 100 day benchmark, but what of the G.O.P., don't they deserve the same report card and scrutiny as the current administration?

From day one, the Obama administration has sought to reach across the aisle and make the current government more inclusive and less partisan. These efforts have largely gone down as a complete failure. Although certainly more of a publicity bound stooge than a party leader, Rush Limbaugh stated the conservative viewpoint better than most when he stated, "I hope he fails."

And that is the crushing blow to any bi-partisan endeavors President Obama may undertake. They hope he fails, and in doing so, they hope the country fails. Oh they say it is a hope that socialism and liberalism fails, ideologies that are the antithesis of the Democratic agenda. To be sure, if these methods prove successful, they will leave the Republican party with an uncertain future to say the least.

So they just say no. When the administration sought input on bailouts for mega institutions like AIG, whose tentacles reach far into our countries financial institutions, they just said no. When Obama sought input on governmental bailouts for financial sectors of the country, such as the banking industry, they just said no. When the administration suggested the repeal of the tax breaks for the countries wealthiest citizens as one solution to increase revenue, they just said no.

They knew if the banking industry failed, if AIG failed, the economy would fold like a house of cards, but their only input was "no." And they know the auto industry is in dire straits financially, and they are just saying no.

They know that the past eight years of the Bush administration has dealt our standing and morale perception in the world a severe blow. Yet, when our newly elected leader does so much as shake another leaders hand, or accepts a book from him, they scream "no"!!

When the administration so much as questions the adverse effect of pumping our atmosphere with pollutants, and suggests this practice may have a long term negative effect on the planet, they scream "no."

When Obama seeks more clarity and transparency in our government, including the release of memos on the origins of the Bush administrations torture definitions and practices, they just said no. They say it weakens the countries defenses, despite merely proving what the American people already knew, we torture enemy combatants, whether by our own hands, or when shipped to secret prisons we have establish throughout the world. They say Bush / Cheney did not lie when they said we do not torture, based on a John Yoo definition and memo. This is as insulting as it was ignorant, similar to when Clinton tried in vain to redefine "sexual relations." But they kept saying no despite overwhelming concrete evidence. Yet they keep saying no.

Their strategy is obvious. Go running into the night before they vote, or support any liberal attempt to improve the country, and hope like hell he fails. Then they can run on a platform that the liberal agenda and efforts have not, and will not work. It is their only hope for political success in the future. The same calls for change used by the liberals to unseat the conservatives can be used against the dems if the country does not improve.

Battle lines have been drawn, and the first 100 days have proven that the Obama administration is not afraid to act, with or without conservative support or positive input. He has the votes for the most part, to push his agenda exactly as he sees it, and he is not afraid to take responsibility for them.

He has shown he will not take "no" for an answer, and neither should the American people, because we have an inclusionary government and process. We welcome opposing views and public discourse to shape our policies, and never so much as during the Obama administration. President Obama has publically stated that he welcomes all opinions and ideas, except one....the status quo. Because those who refuse to help, those who want the status quo despite its failures, those who wish further harm to this republic, those who wish the country to continue to slide, and those whose only answer is to say no, are the failures. And when they come up for reelection, despite whatever the current condition of the state of the union, the American electorate will have only one alternative...to say "no."

THE FIRST 100 OBAMA DAYS

As the first 100 days of the Obama administration are nearing an end, news organisations will be giving the administration a report card of their progress thus far. Since the first days of FDR, it has been repeatedly stated that the initial 100 days are the most important in any administration, and certainly the Obama administration has felt the pressure more than any other administration since.

Despite a primary and election season that touted his lack of experience in almost every area, I personally think he hit the ground running in a manner I have ever witnessed in my lifetime. He has built an admirable team of rivals (although having some vetting issues with some of his political appointees, to be sure).

He has provided more access to the Presidency and the government than we have seen in a long, long time. From his numerous press conferences to the release of the torture memos, he has shown his awareness that he does work for the people of this country.

He has also made himself visible, along with his family. They have set an example of a cohesive family unit, and allowed the press to peek inside their personal lives, up to and including the selection of a dog for their children. He has brought back a humanness to the top spot largely lacking in the past five presidential administrations. He has staged public events, and even gone on the Tonight Show, although that appearance may have been best left off his social calendar.

He has reached out across the aisle in an attempt to achieve bi-partisan support for his initial actions (largely unsuccessful), and has included the other side in his cabinet and advisers.

He has reached out to leaders of the world in a way that no other President has done, by listening and admitting our past mistakes. For his lack of hubris and arrogance, he is the anti-Bush. And other leaders have responded thus far. You may not like the caliber of leaders he has spoken to, but this is not of our choosing. He has shown a willingness to end the cold war mentality of the previous administration, and for this alone, he should be commended.

He has begun to chip away at some of the ridiculous policies of the past, such as our relationship (or lack of) with our neighbor, Cuba. He has softened our restrictions on Cuban Americans, and the financial support they can give to their relatives back in their home land. I believe he will work further to end the embargo and begin to open up dialogues with Castro in an attempt towards normalcy again. He realizes our arrogance towards their lack of human rights in their country and our denial of our own is hypocritical at best.

He has taken swift action towards stopping our financial landslides, and job losses. The results are mixed so far, but I am optimistic that he and his advisers (if they can stay awake) are on the right path.

He has carried himself with a confidence and awareness that if he cannot cure most of the countries ills, he will be a one term President. He has also made public admissions when he has "screwed up."

An Associated Press poll shows that most people in the U.S. consider their new president to be a strong, ethical leader who is working for change as he promised in his campaign. Obama's job approval rating stands at a healthy 64 percent. For the first time in years, more people than not say the country is headed in the right direction, the poll says.

What is next? Hopefully a continued agenda at adopting issues from his platform. We need to look at our economic progress, the creation of jobs (green or otherwise), the re-establishment of permanent bans on assault weapons, the beginning of Iraqi troop withdrawals, talks with leaders foreign to us (Cuba and Venezuela would be a terrific start), the current education system and the teacher layoffs we are seeing across the nation, a softening on the war on drugs, and a good hard look at the non-violent offenders currently sucking the life (and finances) of our penal system, and much, much more.

Overall, despite the fact that I was, and continue to be a huge Clinton supporter, I am pleasantly surprised at the Obama administration in it's initial days. Overall score? I would give them a solid "B," and a tremendous potential for elevating that grade within the 6 month benchmark. Is every thing perfect? Of course not. But the man is not Merlin the magician. When you are given a country full of compost, you can't expect a bed of roses within 100 days. Given time, I think he will maintain his approval rating and more, as long as he stays humble, and keeps listening.

And that is the world....."The World According to Kimba"....as always, thanks for reading.

SO YOU WANT TO BE AN INTERNET STAR

So, mere blogging isn't enough for you. You want to take it to the next step. No problem. First step is an audio podcast, an embedded recording, which can be played on an MP3, or posted to your blog. Interested? Check out talk shoe. All you will need is to sign in, possess either a computer with a microphone or a mobile phone, and something to say.

Still not enough? You want your face plastered all over the Internet don't you, you narcissistic idiot? YouTube is a good first start. Sign up, record and post. This vehicle is normally reserved for shorter, quick videos. You can post pretty much what ever you would like, a joke, a song, a poetry reading, or a stupid cat trick. Your entry can be easily accessed by anyone with an interest, and can be easily posted on your blog as well.

Not enough? You want your own "show" don't you? You do live in a fantasy world. Well, not any more. Ustream is the free video pod casting platform for you. With UStream you can record your own actual TV show (starring you of course), or set up a 24/7 feed that is accessible to all. One such podcast is a stream of live termites. With Ustream, all you need is a computer with a web cam and a microphone and you are off and running.

You can do a live feed broadcast, and viewers can type in questions or comments during the broadcast. Check out on of the regular amateur shows, by someone named Chris Pirello. Practice up and you might get become as good as Bob Kushell, who broadcasts from his Van Nuys California garage, and actually books stars for his 5 minute "shows."

Pod casting, the social networking platform of the future, available free today.

GAVIN NEWSON DECLARES FOR CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has declared his candidacy for Governor of California, hoping to succeed Arnold Schwarzenegger. Newsom, a relatively fresh face on the political scene the past five years, announced his intentions in a very modernistic way...on Twitter. The Mayor will have his share of competitors out there, with the names of no less than Barbara Boxer and Antonio Villaragosa to contend with, although undeclared as of yet. Newsom's platform will include creation of green collar jobs, marriage equality for all, the experience of creating "Healthy San Francisco," an early form of universal health care, and 5 years of balanced budgets for the city of San Francisco. Not only balanced budgets, but the creation of "rainy day reserves" which were set aside for emergencies, such as we are going through now with the current economic situation, which have so far staved off the need to reduce teacher rolls or increase class sizes in S.F. Powerful arguments all.
And, he speaks Spanish...but does he speak union? As the unions go, so do a mass block of voters in the Golden State, the majority of which are Spanish speaking, and a major asset of Villaragosa, should he decide to challenge the Mayor.Not to mention Villaragosa's connection with the Democratic party, and Bill and Hillary Clinton, with a formidable Rolodex of fundraisers.

Youthful, smart, and experienced. Gavin Newsom from San Francisco, an attractive candidate for California Governor indeed, in what is already shaping up to be an interesting campaign season. I am not ready to declare, but I am intrigued at the prospect.

TORTUROUSLY CONVOLUTED LOGIC

Recent transcripts released by the Obama administration (fulfilling their promise of a more transparent government), includes the following snippets of one of the released memos......

We find that the use of the water board constitutes a threat of imminent death. As you have explained the water board procedure to us, it creates in the subject the physiological sensation that the subject is drowning. Although the procedure will be monitored by personnel with medical training and extensive SERE school experience with this procedure to ensure the subjects mental and physical safety, the subject will be unaware of these precautions. From the vantage point of any reasonable person undergoing this procedure in such circumstances, he would feel as if he were drowning at very moment of the procedure due to the uncontrollable physiological sensations he is experiencing.

Although the water board constitutes a threat of imminent death, prolonged mental harm must nonetheless result to violate the statutory prohibition on infliction of severe mental pain or suffering. We have previously concluded that prolonged mental harm is mental harm of some lasting duration, e.g., mental harm lasting months or years. Based on the foregoing, and based on the facts that you have provided, we conclude that the interrogation procedures that you propose would not: violate Section 2340A, or constitute illegal torture.

THE INTERNET IS GETTING CROWDED

As the Internet grows larger and larger, more and more opportunities for us to become involved open up, many of which are absolutely free. Here is a cursory list of the ones I am aware of. Most require little or no time passed the initial sign up stages. Many are entertaining and informative as well.
http://www.blip.tv/: "twitter" for music buffs
http://www.boxee.tv/: a very organized alternative to YouTube
http://www.blogger.com/: a blog publishing platform, and the one that supports this blog
http://www.classmates.com/: a social networking platform for catching up with your former classmates
http://www.facebook.com/: the most popular social networking tool out there
http://www.flicker.com/: a picture posting platform
www.hulu.com: watch videos, episodic television, etc.
http://www.linkedin.com/: a My Space platform for business purposes only
http://www.loopt.com/: a combination social networking platform, and location detector
http://www.myspace.com/: social networking platform, crowded with younger generations
http://www.movabletype.org/: a publishing platform for professionals
http://www.ning.com/: a customizable social platform, especially into creation of "communities"
http://www.power.com/: site that allows you to log in once and post to multiple social networking sites
http://www.qik.com/: stream and post photos from your mobile phone
http://www.shelfari.com/: post your library, and engage in discussions based on your literary preferences
http://www.squarespace.com/: a blog publishing platform
http://www.tripod.lycos.com/: a fee based blog and website publishing platform
http://www.twitter.com/: all the rage, allows you to post quick comments and follow others comments within your social circle, or anyone else with an account
http://www.typepad.com/: fee based blog publishing platform for small businesses
http://www.wikapedia.com/: a reader supported encyclopedia
http://www.wordpress.com/: publishing platform, competitor of blogger
http://www.youtube.com/: post or just watch others videos, including a huge music library
http://www.xanga.com/: a lesser used blog publishing platform
Extra credit for mobile phone users....
http://box.net: a mobile collaboration tool
http://rememberthemilk.com: a task management tool
http://evernote.com: multiple device synchronisation and storage tool

SPEND $10 AND SAVE A LIFE

Malaria is a disease caused by the blood parasite Plasmodium, which is transmitted by mosquitoes. Malaria, from the Medieval Italian words mala aria or “bad air,” infects more than 500 million people a year and kills more than a million— one person dies about every 30 seconds.

Malaria is both a preventable and treatable disease. It can be prevented by giving families and individuals insecticide-treated bed nets to sleep under and taking steps to kill mosquitoes where they breed and when they enter houses to feed at night. At the same time, anti-malarial drugs such as artemisinin and other combination therapies that are widely available can treat malaria before it becomes deadly.
Malaria has been brought under control and even eliminated in many parts of Asia, Europe, and the Americas. Yet in Africa, with increasing drug resistance and struggling health systems, malaria infections have actually increased during the last three decades.

Despite the magnitude of the problem, there is a simple and cost-effective solution to prevent malaria deaths. For just $10, we can purchase a bed net, deliver it to a family, and explain its use. Bed nets work by creating a protective barrier against mosquitoes at night, when the vast majority of transmissions occur. A family of four can sleep under an insecticide-treated bed net, safe from malaria, for up to four years. The benefits of bed nets extend even further than the family. When enough nets are used, the insecticide used to deter mosquitoes makes entire communities safer—including even those individuals who do not have nets.

www.nothingbutnets.net

Saving lives ten dollars at a time. Please help.

THE WORLD REACHES OUT TO OBAMA: WILL HE REACH BACK?

At the recent Summit for the Americas, President Barack Obama continued to impress the world with his unique level of diplomacy and honest talk. Previously he has admitted our nations faults and blame in our history, and has coupled these mea culpas with honest talk of anti-American sentiments and open hostilities towards us. During the Presidential campaign he suggested he would be willing to talk to any foreign leader without pre-conditions (although the Clinton campaign forced him to roll that back slightly and Obama clarified that he meant sending lower level inter mediators instead). Obama acted on these sentiments by not only talking to, but seeking out and shaking the hand of Venezuela's fiery leftist president, Hugo Chavez. Chavez, a harsh critic of America for a decade, told Obama: "With this same hand I greeted Bush eight years ago. I want to be your friend."

Obama also extended a hand to a leader Ronald Reagan spent years trying to drive from power: Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega. The Sandinista president stepped up and introduced himself, just before delivering a blistering 50-minute speech that denounced capitalism and U.S. imperialism as the root of much hemispheric mischief.

Cuba's Raul Castro, barred from attending the summit, reached out to the newly elected President as well. On Tuesday, Obama ordered an easing of travel and remittance restrictions for Americans with relatives in Cuba. Within hours, Castro — who took over from his ailing brother Fidel a year ago — responded with an offer of talks on "everything" that divides the two countries. meaning an open offer for talks since the Eisenhower administration, saying he's ready to discuss "human rights, freedom of the press, political prisoners — everything."

These recent examples of Barack Obama has signaled a complete shift from the Bush "you're either with us, or against us" diplomacy, and the world is obviously responding. Imagine, all of a sudden, the president -- the president of the United States, mind you -- is telling foreigners that we screw up from time to time. That we've gone our own way much too often. That we've been arrogant!

Now is the time for a paradigm shift in attitude by our nation to the world. It is time to release ourselves from the ignorant shackles of past administrations...a drug war that isn't working, embargo's that only serve to hurt the citizens of the countries embargoed, and a cold war against countries / regimes that has gotten us no where. Now is the time for what Obama has described as a "new beginning." Now is the time, and Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State can, and I think will make it happen. And it needs to start with Cuba and Venezuela. And that is the world....."The World According to Kimba" As always, thanks for reading.

THE ACT OF A HOPELESS MAN

"If you lose hope, somehow you lose the vitality that keeps life moving, you lose that courage to be, that quality that helps you go on in spite of it all. And so today I still have a dream. "
Dr. Martin Luther King The Trumpet of Conscience

Hope is more than emotion. In many ways hope is the life blood we need to survive. Without hope, we lose all perspective. Everything becomes dark and dismal. People lose their perspective. Little things add up to mountainous things, culminating in a mountain of despair.

"Mario" lost his hope today. With an ailing father, and the anticipation of being laid off at work, Mario lost his perspective. At the hospital he worked at about 20 to 30 people had already been laid off in the last few weeks, and some of the gunman's co-workers said there was a rumor he had been laid off that morning or was going to be among a number of people laid off in the next few weeks.

Mario lost all hope. So today, the hospital pharmacy technician went into work and shot his boss, a co-worker, and then put the gun to his temple and killed himself. "We do not know the reason," the Long Beach police chief said. "However, I think this is part of a trend ... probably because of the tension felt in our society." A "trend" puts it mildly.

Within the last week, a man in Washington state killed his five children, in Pennsylvania, a man killed three police officers who came to investigate a supposed "domestic disturbance" he reported, a man opened fire in a nursing home in California killing seven elderly patients, another in New York killed 13 people in an immigrant center, and a California man killed five relatives and himself at a housewarming party.

Murder is not a new concept. This isn't to rationalize murder in any capacity, but these people had no reason to murder the people they did. Finding a reason behind the senseless violence is difficult to do, but a major influence behind the recent fatal activity could be directly related to the state of the economy. It isn't any question that we are dealing with economic turmoil. With companies falling over like dominoes, massive quantities of people are losing their jobs, and with no money to line anyone's pockets, finding ways to feed, clothe and house one's family can become near impossibilities.

Watching CEOs become richer, getting the bailouts they've requested while the everyday working American has been begging for help for decades fosters frustration. It's no wonder that people have gone insane, killing random strangers, the ones they love and themselves. Maybe it's an escape; maybe they think this is the only way out.

Or, maybe they just lost hope.

THE HUMAN RACE-IST

Occasionally but not often, I as a full blooded member of the bland, white bread variety, will encounter someone who assumes I will tolerate the occasional racist remarks, undertones and comments. Somehow people think being white makes it palatable, or at least the odds will be in their favor.

As gutless as it may seem, for the most part I will either feign objection or let it go completely. People are people, nobody changes, and my making a big stink won't change them anyway (shame on me). Besides, I feel like a spy getting privileged information, and an unbiased look into the world of the truly hateful and ignorant (mostly ignorant).
This week I received an e-mail explaining how Iowans weathered the flooding without hoopla or need of help, while the good people of New Orleans demanded housing, money and charity. This included calls for Sean Penn and Spike lee to go directly up to Iowa to help, or straight down to hell to....well die I suppose. It was a classic white versus black message, or so I thought.
I also heard a disgraceful adjective for people of the Jewish faith from someone who had absolutely no idea I had married a Jewish woman, and have chosen to raise our child Jewish as well. His point being that Jews always demand a lower price than gentiles, and will fight you to the death for it. This came completely out of the blue from someone I thought incapable of it.
What is truly mind boggling is that one of these people (at least) claims to be religious, and the other one is actually a member of a minority group. Ironic to say the least.
Just as the Rockwell depicts (I grew up in the exact small town he lived in for a time), it takes all kinds in the world, and I have had enough. Enough us versus they, right versus left, Americans versus all Muslims, colors versus colors.

I have had enough. Just stop. It isn't funny. It never was.

And to all those I gutlessly failed to defend,

all I can say is I will do better.

I know I can be better. How about you?

FEE FI BO-BAMA, WHITE HOUSE DOG

Introducing Bo the Portuguese Water Dog, the latest edition to the Obama household, and the first dog ever in the Obama family. Surprisingly, neither the President or First Lady had a dog when they were children either...yet another area where the President has had little or no experience. Can't wait for the first press photo of the President walking the dogs...and collecting the poop from the White House lawn.

NEW RASMUSSEN POLL UNDERSCORES POPULARITY OF OBAMA PLATFORMS

Only 53% of American adults believe capitalism is better than socialism. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 20% disagree and say socialism is better. Twenty-seven percent (27%) are not sure which is better.
Adults under 30 are essentially evenly divided: 37% prefer capitalism, 33% socialism, and 30% are undecided. Thirty-somethings are a bit more supportive of the free-enterprise approach with 49% for capitalism and 26% for socialism. Adults over 40 strongly favor capitalism, and just 13% of those older Americans believe socialism is better.
Investors by a 5-to-1 margin choose capitalism. As for those who do not invest, 40% say capitalism is better while 25% prefer socialism.
There is a partisan gap as well. Republicans - by an 11-to-1 margin - favor capitalism. Democrats are much more closely divided: Just 39% say capitalism is better while 30% prefer socialism. As for those not affiliated with either major political party, 48% say capitalism is best, and 21% opt for socialism.

OBAMA: NOT ONE TO PASSOVER A JEWISH HOLIDAY

A mere week since his video and speech in Turkey reaching out to the Muslim world, including the admission that he was for a short time educated as a Muslim in his early childhood, has gone full circle and hosted the White Houses' first Passover seder to be actually attended by a President. Obama broke new ground Thursday by personally hosting a White House Seder dinner for the Jewish holiday of Passover. Though Seders had been held at the White House before, aides said, they believed this was the first attended by the president.

The Seder served a kosher-style spread including matzo, bitter herbs, a roasted egg and greens in the White House's old family dining room. The event was lauded by at least one Jewish group, the National Jewish Democratic Council."By hosting the first presidential Seder in America's history, President Barack Obama shows the personal and deep relationship he has with the Jewish community," Deputy Executive Director Alexis C. Rice told the Associated Press. "There is no question, Obama is a true friend of the Jewish community."

MARCH ON WALL STREET GOES FOR AN ENCORE

Chanting "Whose street? Our street!" hundreds of people rallied on Wall Street Friday to protest the billions of dollars in federal bailout money to big business. The protesters gathered in a steady rain behind police barricades and marched along Broadway and through the narrow streets in downtown Manhattan. They walked past the headquarters of American International Group Inc. and several banks that received federal funds to stay afloat. Some of the companies posted security guards outside their entrances. The march ended in Foley Square, near the federal courthouse. Police said four people who tried to block traffic by walking down the middle of Broadway were charged with disorderly conduct.

Thousands of New York protesters marched for the second day in a row on Wall Street Saturday, calling for an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and more government aid for struggling working people. The group United for Peace and Justice organized the event. The marching protesters carried signs and puppets and chanted as they went down Broadway, walked past the New York Stock Exchange, and ended up in Battery Park.

They also walked past companies that took federal money, including American International Group (AIG), which drew controversy for giving company executives bonuses after it received federal bailout money. Dubbed "The March on Wall Street: Bail Out The People Not The Banks," the protest attracted huge crowds of on-lookers although it was raining steadily almost the whole afternoon.The protest was co-sponsored by www.bailoutthepeople.org, who is demanding a moratorium on evictions and foreclosures, an end to both wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (bring the troops home now!), full support of the Employee Free Choice Act (union rights to stop layoffs, cutbacks), a moratorium on transit fare hikes, no increases in school tuition, immediate worker and immigrant rights, and single payer health care for all.
They plan additional marches and protests in thirty cities across the country on May 1st as well.

IT'S CALLED DIPLOMACY

President Barack Obama, spoken at the G20........

"In recent years we've allowed our Alliance to drift. I know that there have been honest disagreements over policy, but we also know that there's something more that has crept into our relationship. In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.
But in Europe, there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans choose to blame America for much of what's bad.
On both sides of the Atlantic, these attitudes have become all too common. They are not wise. They do not represent the truth. They threaten to widen the divide across the Atlantic and leave us both more isolated. They fail to acknowledge the fundamental truth that America cannot confront the challenges of this century alone, but that Europe cannot confront them without America.
So I've come to Europe this week to renew our partnership, one in which America listens and learns from our friends and allies, but where our friends and allies bear their share of the burden. Together, we must forge common solutions to our common problems.
So let me say this as clearly as I can: America is changing, but it cannot be America alone that changes. We are confronting the greatest economic crisis since World War II. The only way to confront this unprecedented crisis is through unprecedented coordination."

What a change this President is over the last one. He is willing to talk to any country, because nothing good will happen through a cold war mentality. He talks tough, albeit in an intelligent, thoughtful and non-confrontational manner.

But most of all, Obama is willing to look foreign countries in their collective eye and admits our great union is far from perfect. Not a hint of the arrogance and hubris which doomed the Bush II administration. He is willing to admit our mistakes, and ask the world to "unclench their fists" and join him in solving the world's problems.

While as a loyal Hillary Clinton supporter, I had reservations in regards to his complete lack of foreign policy experience, I am beginning to build some trust in his judgement. His approach is refreshing to say the very least. And SOS Clinton and the newly revamped state department is the first triumph of his administration.

I especially respect his tackling problems head on, and without hesitation, or reservation. He might be trying too hard to cure all of our ills in a hurried reckless fashion. His response is that most all of our ills are intertwined and completely dependant on our financial health, and there is no arguing that.

Quickly approaching the 90 day mark, for all of their gaffes and an alarming display of amateurish vetting irregularities in regards to his nominations, I still am extremely positive on his progress, and highly optimistic towards his potential.

Now if he can just get the economic indicators to begin to rise, this country may just fall in love with him again. And a little consumer confidence, and yes, a little Obama nation deja vu is all this republic needs to be on the rebound.