ojai news at The Ojai Post :: blog, newspaper, events in Ojai, California

Bush in Africa

http://video1.washingtontimes.com/fishwrap/2008/02/bob_geldof_in_rwanda.html

hey Tyler! wake up! won't you clear all that spam out of the recent comments please?!

OK, OK, I'm awake. You sound like my dad back in high school. Sheesh.

Bush in Africa

If I were somehow able to hack this blog, I hope you know what kind of photo you'd all be looking at were you to click on the link in Brian's comment, "Bush in Africa".

In 1943, French playwright Jean Girardoux travelled through time to America in the present century. When he returned to Paris of his own time, he wrote a play, "The Madwoman of Chaillot," about Bush Republicans and the ills of a society that tolerates them.

Full of wit, insight and hope, his play revealed the solution to the ills that plague us.

For those who have not seen it, our own Ojai ACT is currently staging this play at the Art Center, for just two more weeks. The acting is excellent, and the madwomen (aka remarkably "disciplined nonconformists") are truly fabulous.

Get off your butts and go see it people! Call the Art Center and reserve tickets.

The hope of a secure and livable world lies with disciplined nonconformists who are dedicated to justice, peace and brotherhood. - Martin Luther King Jr.

Despite what was stated in a parallel blog response, there are many disciplined non-conformists around. In fact, I would count most of my friends in that category. When I was at Cal, there were many seemingly non-disciplined nonconformists hanging around in Golden Gate Park and the Haight, but Berkeley was full of disciplined (and at least temporarily) non-conformists. But it might also be argued that we were all conforming, simply to a different standard.
There certainly is a necessary discipline to teaching, writing, creating, running a business or running a farm. Those who lack it are merely dilatants and not practitioners.
While we all like the idea of peace, justice and brotherhood, I am reminded of the adage: “Everyone wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die to get there.” To me this means that we have to practice these precepts through a daily will to manifest them as well as the courage to speak out for them, to sacrifice for them, to make them part of our work, and not just slap them on our bumpers and go on with our lives.

Not real sure what Dvorah is talking about in her thread that really should have been a comment on this thread, but I do know what MLK was referring to. He was talking about people who, because of their sense of justice and decency, refused to side with the status quo when it came to segregation. In their denial of segregation they were non-conformist and they were disciplined in their opposition. Most people probably understand that, but Dvorah's thread was slightly confusing and could even be interpreted as insulting, though I doubt that was her intention.

Bush has done more than any other president to help Africa.

It doesn't take him out of the running for the Worst. President. Ever.

Of course not, the lib's could never say anything positive about him, even if he has kept the terrorists from attacking us again since 9/11. Funny how all the dimocrats were all for going in to Iraq until things got difficult.

"... even if he [Bush] has kept the terrorists from attacking us again since 9/11."

Gosh Brian, that's quite a mental trick there.

I'm sorry, but on WHOSE watch did 9/11 happen?

Seems like if you are going to dole out credit to Presidents for "keeping the terrorists from attacking us," you might look to the long line of Presidents who don't need an "again" added to the phrase.

The attacks were years in the planning, You blame Bush for the attacks and then you blame him for going after the perpetrators. And of course he was responsible for the hurricane and the green stuff between your cousin's feet etc, etc..

Brian, find yourself in a hole, you just dig deeper. don't you?

Pray tell, when did Bush "go after the perpetrators"?

Or are you still not aware that Osama remains free; that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11; and that the perps were mostly from Saudi Arabia, where your hero was recently seen licking the greasy toes of the local potentate?

President Ignores August 6th PDB (Presidential Daily Briefing) entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack In U.S.", instead goes on vacation in Texas for a month.

And Katrina? With three full days to plan, Bush and Co. ignored the warnings. AFTER Katrina hit, Bush was seen strumming a guitar, while Cheney bunkered up and Condi bought shoes and saw Spamalot on Broadway.

This is not a conversation a Republican wants to base on the facts, because Bush's actions are so blatantly indefensible. It's a constant shell game defending the Bush administration, with the same tired distractions (Liberals are bad, Brown people are bad, Congress overspends, Warrantless wiretapping is good for you, Gay marriage is scary) and some new ones (Bush is the greatest friend of Africa 4ever!)

Obama has won Wisconsin. That makes nine of the last nine democratic contests, and it's likely to be 10 of 10 when Hawaii is done in a couple of hours. Obama's lead among pledged delegates (those given based on the vote of the public) is now such that Clinton cannot win even if she wins all of the upcoming races hands down.

There is only one way Clinton can be the nominee for the Democratic Party. She would have to entice the super delegates to overturn the will of the people, and that won't happen.

Wrong on all counts. We know that Al Quada actually announced that thier battle ground was Iraq, and it has been documented that Al Quada had meet with Sadam, so we have been fighting the very people who are hell bent on destroying us, not Iraqis that want us out of their country, therefore your first point is not valid anymore.
We actually have some of the planners of the attacks in Gito and they are about to be tried, that point is now no longer usable. The Katrina hurricane, I seem to remember rows and rows of buses that were never used by the mayor of New Orleans, D'ya think that maybe if a Cat 5 hurricane is coming your way that it might be a good idea to get out of it's way? Maybe not if you need your nanny government to change your diaper for you.

Anonymous #16: Please see comment #5, and follow the instructions. Then, follow in the footsteps of your counterparts at the end of the play.

Problem is the "little people" would rather drill in a foriegn country than here at home. What makes our environment so much more important that we have to get our oil from other countries, is not their environment just as valuble as ours? If we were energy independant then we wouldn't need to be safe guarding one of the worlds oil supplies. But we're not energy independent because of the democrats, Can't drill at home, no nuclear power, what'a citizen to do?
If in the end the democrats lead the whole country down into a hole, I don't think I want to see the play.

#18, don't be afraid. The whole country does not go down a hole at the end of the play.

In fact, I think its fair to say (without being a spoiler) that at the end, the people who want to drill oil right at home are seen doing exactly what they want to do, happy, and with smiles on their faces.

So, don't be afraid. Go see it and enjoy.

Anyone see the eclipse? Tyler, get your camera out!

My little point-and-shoot doesn't take very good night photos. If anyone got a great shot, please check out the Submit Your Ojai Photos link...
http://www.ojaipost.com/ojai-photos.shtml

i saw it at about 1/3 and 1/2 eclipsed, and then lost it behind some clouds/fog. my point-and-shoot barely takes good pictures in daylight, so i'm also hoping someone snagged a sweet shot. how timely is that Submit Your Ojai Photos module? :)

evan - i think if you were to upload a photo to Flickr and tag it "ojaipost", then it would be immediately reflected in the left sidebar widget upon reloading a page (which displays photos chronologically I believe), and would be in the random pool of 10 photos on the Submit Your Ojai Photos page.

awesome, looks like Didj added a couple photos to the stream. He's going for the urban Ojai vibe. Nice.

beautifully enlightening!

but not what i meant. ;) i meant that it was timely of you to add that feature just before a sweet photo op like an eclipse! i guess in paradise, every day and place and moment is a sweet photo op though...

Ah indeed, a rhetorical question. :)

For you political junkies, the most interesting race continues to be on the Republican side....

Republicans Fight Over Essence: What Does It Mean To Be A Republican?
McCain "not a real conservative" says Rush Limbaugh.

Duluth, MN - Portending a possible Republican floor fight to come, conservative Republicans are in a tizzie over the front-runner status of all-but-certain nominee John McCain.

"The problem," says prominent radio host Rush Limbaugh, "is that he's not a real conservative. He does not embrace the platform."

Former Bush advisor Karl Rove added: "McCain has embraced the war and fear platforms of our party. But he is wobbly on the essential third platform: Hate. Without a visceral and vibrant hate plank, how can we win in November?"

McCain partisans argue that he has moved strongly toward the hate plank in this campaign, abandoning many of his positions on immigration, women's rights, and similar issues. And, says one top advisor who requested anonymity, "Isn't it enough to hate the "terrorists"? Do we have to hate brown people and "Liberals" too to win? We think voters this year may be looking for us to tone down the hate."

That kind of talk has the Republican base frothing at the mouth. "I'll vote for Hillary before I'll vote for that Liberal-loving, Illegal-loving McCain!" drooled on attendee recently interviewed leaving a church rally. "I voted for Ronald Reagan and both Bushes because they hate Liberals, minorities, women, kids, and the poor, and I'll be damned if I'm going to see a Republican President who is not committed to destroying those people in my America!"

McCain advisors are working around the clock to mollify the Republican base on this issue. "The truth is, John McCain has a long history of hate, and its our job to show that to the base."

Hardcore conservatives remained skeptical. "McCain co-sponsored an illegal alien amnesty bill with Ted Kennedy, an avowed and notorious Liberal. Even Hillary didn't do that," frothed Joe Scarbush on a recent broadcast. "The fact is, John McCain has no credibility as a hater."

So far, McCain strategists remain focused on war and fear, and they continue to try to urge the conservative base to go along. "If we keep hammering on war and fear, we can win in November. War and fear will get us in office. Then we can work on the hate," said one strategist.

Continued this strategist: "If we don't keep the White House, then where will we be? No war, no fear, AND no hate. Is that what Rush wants?"

Obama seems to be running on Peace, Love and Hope. McCain should just go ahead and embrace the hate, to add symmetry to the contrast this November. Peace, Love, and Hope - or War, Fear and Hate?

Which will America choose? spk, what odds do you give it will be the latter?

Did anyone else hear that F#*k head Bill O'Reilly say that he's ready to "LYNCH" Michelle Obama if he can determine that she doesn't like this country? Republican hate radio and television is going too far.

Did anyone else see this article from Tuesday's Washington Post?

"In the predawn hours of Jan. 29, a CIA Predator aircraft flew in a slow arc above the Pakistani town of Mir Ali. The drone's operator, relying on information secretly passed to the CIA by local informants, clicked a computer mouse and sent the first of two Hellfire missiles hurtling toward a cluster of mud-brick buildings a few miles from the town center...

Officials say the incident was a model of how Washington often scores its rare victories these days in the fight against al-Qaeda inside Pakistan's national borders: It acts with assistance from well-paid sympathizers inside the country, but without getting the government's formal permission beforehand."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/18/AR2008021802500_pf.html

According to the article, "at least 13" civilians were killed. The action was unilateral, without permission or cooperation of Pakistan. Supposedly, we are to believe that the heretofore unheard of target individual - who was assassinated - was a "high value terrorist" and "Al Qaeda leader."

Thom Hartmann this morning was making a point about how, if this flies, there would be no reason to object if Raul Castro fired a Hellfire missile at a Miami restaurant to kill the convicted terrorirst Posada Carriles (whose reported crimes include bombing an airliner, killing 73 passengers, bombing hotels, and even killing the baby of a pregnant woman he was torturing, but who the Bush adminsitration is sheltering).

I have a more basic question: How can we complain about 9/11 itself, if we claim the right to bomb innocent civilians in foreign countries?

If anyone can explain how Osama is worse than us after this incident, please do.

Are we better because we only killed "at least 13" innocents, instead of 3,000?

Is that all we've got?

Please help me understand here.

Bill "Odious" O'Reilly's Quote:

"I don't want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there's evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200802200001

Further to Comment #30:

I think this incident demonstrates that the War on Terrorism is over. Osama won.

The tactics of terrorism are now an acceptable, standard and normal way to resolve differences, embraced by the world's sole superpower.

So: What will Bush and McCain call their endless war now?

And further to #29 and #31 (Bill O'Reilly's wanting to "lynch" Michelle Obama):

Notice how he only wants to lynch her if she "really feels" how she said she feels.

That's KKK 101, isn't it? You only lynch the "uppity" ones, right?

So if Michelle Obama doesn't "really feel" that way, if she's quiet and goes along, no worries, Bill won't have a "lynching party" for her.

How exactly do people like Bill O'Reilly get to be on the airwaves?

Funny he should use the word really. That happens to be the word that was edited out of Michelle Obama's quote. She said: "For the first time in my adult lifetime I'm REALLY proud of my country." This whole "controversy" originated on the Drudge Report, were else. The original link on drudge sent you here which is another webpage owned by Drudge that plays videos and other crap. If you watch the video you can hear where the word "Really" was edited out of the speech so that it appeared that Mrs. Obama said: "For the first time in my adult lifetime I'm proud of my country." That quote has a totally different meaning than what she actually said. Further, the edit was a pure hack job. Since this was discovered on the Thom Hartmann show yesterday, Drudge has gone in and changed the heading above the video to include the word "really" even though the video is still edited. This edited version is what McCain started harping about and what prompted a clarification from the Obama campaign. This is the exact type of nonsense that the Repugs are going to try to do. Their first attempt has fallen flat on its face.

BTW, where are all the values voters when it comes out that McCain has been having an affair with a woman half his age? And not just any woman, but a high powered lobbyist with business before the committees in which (Keating 5)McCain is a member and one in which he was the chairman. It's some how okay for Repugs to be adulterers and corrupt?