The last couple of weeks, I’ve been going back over and over to one article: “Neocons on a Cruise: What Conservatives Say When They Think We Aren’t Listening,” by Johann Hari from the Independent UK (via Alternet) from July 17, 2007.

I lie on the beach with Hillary-Ann, a chatty, scatty 35-year-old Californian designer. As she explains the perils of Republican dating, my mind drifts, watching the gentle tide. When I hear her say, “Of course, we need to execute some of these people,” I wake up. Who do we need to execute? She runs her fingers through the sand lazily. “A few of these prominent liberals who are trying to demoralise the country,” she says. “Just take a couple of these anti-war people off to the gas chamber for treason to show, if you try to bring down America at a time of war, that’s what you’ll get.” She squints at the sun and smiles. “Then things’ll change.”

Wha?

Is this really how they think? I want to think these people are exceptional. I want to, but I don’t. Could they pull the trigger, or are they just spewing the same old mindless empty words?

read comments (0)

“The state has become hostile to religion.” So says Chris Buttars. He’s going to have to do more than say it to convince me. Has he actually ever been outside of Utah to see how the rest of the world works?

Utah’s hostility to religion has inspired his introduction of S.B. 111, a bill in the Utah state Senate in support of the free exercise of religion through T-shirts. The bill has been substituted by another bill, which means they have added, edited, and cleaned it up. But, it’s still there.

Didn’t we already have the constitutional guaranteed right to exercise our religion through T-shirts? Speakers at the Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee meeting told Senators that the right is already guaranteed. The constitution isn’t enough for them, apparently.

If the right is already guaranteed, what is Buttars up to? Keep your eye on the bill as it is cut and pasted through the Utah state Legislature. Surely the intention behind this is more than just blogger fodder. If you figure out what he is up to, tell me.

read comments (0)

What is the real reason the federal government denies support for science?

It would be simplistic to say the budget crisis currently experienced by so many federal research agencies is a matter of funds being diverted to war. Congress failed to approve the budgets while there was a Republican majority in both houses in a matched set with the executive branch (and, I would argue, the judicial branch–but that’s a non-budgetary matter). It isn’t that they didn’t have the power to approve budgets if they had shown the will.

Just don’t find science important?

Just don’t think the world will be around long enough to justify the investment?

Can’t see how the research will benefit shareholders? (”What? No shareholders in Congress? My mistake. I must have confused it with something else.”)

I suspect many of the people who have the power to set the overall agenda aren’t seeking truths. I suspect they already have in hand as many truths as they can believe. What, then, could scientific research do to enrich their lives? On the contrary, scientific research has the potential to upset their lives by contradicting their truths about the age of the Earth, the origins of life, the sources of human sexuality, and–I think the most important point lately–how they expect the Earth to end. Gay evolutionary scientists who are concerned about climate change just don’t fit their worldview. They are not seeking to find out about the world, which is what one would expect from a scientist. They are seeking to tell the world about itself, which is what one would expect from preacher.

So? Preach, of course. And deny. That’s the answer. That’s what the Decider does. Also he ignores, as well as sending Tony Snow out to spread Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt about everything not on the Decider’s daily agenda. Fear Uncertainty Doubt. That’s FUD for short–a marketing strategy at work on many levels in the government. At the same time as denying, it appears to be important to place science denial experts in charge of government science, particularly environmental science. Preach, deny, ignore, and switch.

In the meantime, do they expect the world to end before we hold them accountable? I know I say this over and over. HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE. The new Congress seems to be heading in that direction. Congratulations on the first 100 hours. Now, could you approve those spending bills rather than extending the stopgap resolution until September 30?

“Except for the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security, the government is being financed under a stopgap resolution. It expires Feb. 15, and Democrats said they planned to extend a similar resolution through Sept. 30.” William J. Broad, “Congressional Budget Delay Stymies Scientific Research,” New York Times, January 7, 2007.

UPDATE: I caught the replay of Science Friday with Ira Flatow (NPR) from Jan 12.  Science funding.  Great interview.

read comments (0)

I wanted to think that a sweeping Democratic victory last November meant we faced less danger from the creeping fascism of creepy fascists. I was wrong, of course. The drive for authoritarian control is still apparent in a huge number of stories outside the average top ten–and sometimes lurking in the headlines.

Find a religious authoritarian under a variety of rocks.

• Evangelical Christians are using various levels of government to preach to captive Americans, resulting in unconstitutional use of taxpayer funds to indoctrinate prisoners and crossing the constitutional line separating church and state.

• The Pentagon Prayer Team, shown in the Christian Embassy video that is getting some notice, makes no pretense of separating church and state. It is quite obvious that they prefer no separation at all–as long as the church running the state is evangelical Christian, naturally.

• Efforts to exert influence over police and military result in evangelical Chistians holding at least 50% of chaplaincy appontments. So far. That is just the tip of the influence, of course. Do you think being part of the military or police should imply that one is: a) Republican, and b) evangelical Christian? It might be easy to say that it shouldn’t, but being honest about your own experience, does it?

• George W. Bush gets his orders from a higher power rather than from the U.S. citizens who (sort of) elected him. (See Mike Luckovich’s take on this higher power.) Even Spider-Man knows a super-villain when he sees one.

Rather than calling these people on their attempts to skirt the laws of the U.S. that separate church and state, those traditionally outside the evangelical right are courting them. I’m thinking of Mitt Romney, willing to do anything radically conservative, it would seem, in order to gain the influence needed to be run credibly for President.

Do you need more information than a few articles can give you? Read a few books. There are many books on the radical religious right and their Christian Reconstructionism. These are just two that have been released recently. Follow the links from them to find a web of alarm.

The Theocons: Secular American Under Siege by Damon Linker. Read an excerpt. Read reviews.

American Fascists by Chris Hedges.

DING DING DING.

We need more than alarm. We need clarity and action. We must be determined to fight those who attempt to undermine our rights.

How far are we down the road to fascism? And, what can we do about it?

read comments (0)

The Iraq Study Group Report. It has dominated the news today. Who says what? What are the comments? How was the book published? What does the report itself say?

It says Iraq is in the midst of a grave and deteriorating crisis. It says Bush policies have failed. According to polls, Americans agree. (All but the red blogging Americans, apparently.) Gore assures Bush the people’s opinions are not about him. Peter Hart of FAIR encourages the media to broaden the debate during the inevitable week of prime time coverage. I haven’t read the report yet, so I don’t know if the report considers the real costs of the war.

The report is downloadable on NPR or for sale in book format on Amazon. There are even reviews on Amazon. The readers bought, received, and read the report already? It was only printed Saturday night and delivered to stores on Monday morning.

Of course, the content of the report blends perfectly with the hearings and Senate vote on the nomination of Robert Gates to be the new Secretary of Defense. I listened to the Armed Services Committee hearings yesterday. As many noted, the committee embraced Gates (even though the Democratic Underground didn’t). I think I heard Hillary Clinton blow him a kiss.

All of the Senators were certainly senatorially polite. Several of them thanked him for his candor. I’m sure that does create a completely shocking new tone to be able to even dream that a Republican nominee would admit that Iraq is a violent mess and staying the course is not a viable option, while all other options remain on the table.

As I listened to him, I wondered if George Bush, a famously stubbon president, would listen to Gates if he made the same observations to Bush. As I listened to coverage of the Iraq Study Group Report, I wondered whether he would actually and personally read it. And, if he does read it, will he genuinely consider the recommendations of his close allies? Given the responses and the insistence that the administration hasn’t used the phrase “stay the course” for three weeks nows (wow, three whole weeks), it seems possible.

Nevertheless, call me skeptical.

Tomorrow the Armed Services Committee will hear testimony on the Iraq Study Group. Hugs and kisses all around.

read comments (0)