Detroit Zoo gives small toad a boost

...Doing its share to preserve a drastically endangered species, the Detroit Zoo has 40 toadlets bouncing around four 10-gallon tanks in a quarantined room in its National Amphibian Conservation Center. Most of the toadlets, having grown into full-fledged toads, eventually will be FedExed to Wyoming, where they will be released into the wild to do all of the unsung valuable things amphibians do....

The Anti-American Right Wing

This is quite an eye-opener. Someone has finally spoken out about the 'deception' to war and the pressure by the 'political infrastructure' in the USA to permit exploitation of the entire nation of the USA.

Quite an eye-opener indeed. I appreciate the lady anchor for willingly speaking out about the issue. I am quite sure it was prompted by Dan Rather and his lawsuit, but, Katie's comments were about the lawsuit, it was as if a cathartic to the lies made to the nation as a whole. Katie is an interesting woman. Her life has not been without turbulence, nor has it been without admiration. But, in stating that I recognize the fabric of a strong woman with a voice that resonates in some very powerful circles and regardless of the 'ratings' of CBS and it's somewhat plagued existance with FCC hound dogs chronically on it's heels, it is still a very powerful media that reaches millions of American households everyday.

I realizing this reflection by Couric, I can't help but bring up some very disturbed and disturbing observations that are resonating at Murdoch's media network.

Today I was completely astounded by the attacks Sean Hannity of young Americans. Impressionable young people.

There were two scenarios during his three hour program that were most disturbed. Both placed young Americans 'at risk' and 'ridiculed.'

The first was a 'class-action' attack regarding young Americans that wear Gothic attire. He made states that would lead anyone to believe these young folks were sincerely disturbed for the way they dressed. No other reason, but, today on Hannity's radio show he proclaimed that ANYONE wearing Gothic attire were troubled and in need of loving attention.

Gothic.net (click here) is a literary culture that promotes reading material not very different than one would find coming from Steven King. I suppose to Sean Hannity these folks need to be shut down. This is the kind of extremism that pervades conservative talk radio everyday. It's biased to say the least, operates without any knowledge base and seeks chronically to victimize anyone that doesn't fit their mold.

During his dissertation regarding bigoted remarks about young Americans that dress in Gothic attire, Hannity turned to a telephone caller and stated, now is what I have said...is my view bigoted? Now mind you, without any authority, any demographics, any references but only his only opinion about this class of people in the USA he ranted on and on about the 'PROBLEMS' he sees as an issue. So what do you think any caller is going to say?

And true to form, when the caller was asked if the statements Hannity made were bigoted, the caller stated, no. The justification for that view of the Hannities bigoted comments was because in 'the real world' (I am not sure where these young Americans live, but, I thought it was in the real world.) people don't wear attire that would cause attention to be brought to themselves in that way. (Paraphrasing).

So, here was a caller agreeing with Hannity that people wearing Gothic attire have social problems, with all that body piercing and body art. That caller had a right to their opinion as does Hannity, but, are they willing to pay the price for bigotry. Because the truth of the matter is when the caller then identified himself as a Christian preacher that has a 'mission' to reform these young people they were doing nothing but basking in the sunshine of their own bigotry.

The truth of the matter is, that young Americans sometimes have trouble. But, that is across the board and Hannity offered no proof of a vast social problem needing focus to bring these young people to their senses. Young Americans sometimes have problems no different than their adult counterparts, but, their attire has little to do with it.

I recall once being in an orthodontists office of all things and having a conversation with a mother of a teenager there for adjustment to her braces. We chatted while waiting for the 'kids' to finish there appointment. We were the same, mothers concerned with our young folks, the pier pressures they face and the challenges their generation had to face in the future when this very nice, middle class mother's daughter came out of the office into the waiting room.

Here was a 15 year old, with full mouth of braces, dressed in black, very attractive and dressed in Gothic attire. I asked the woman as she stood to pay for her daughter's visit if any piercings interferred with the hardware from the braces. Both she and her daughter laughed and stated she only had pierced ear lobes and nothing else. In the same breath, this very pretty and drably dressed young woman stated, "We need to be going mom, I'll be late for cheerleader practice." It was truly an interesting moment and I am quite confident the young lady didn't dress in black at cheerleading practice.

Dressing any certain way isn't a matter of rebellion to the point of self-destruction, but, it is a fashion statement that some young people choose and that's the end of that discussion, except to realize there needs to be a class action lawsuit filed for the bigoted remarks on Hannity's syndicated radio show today.

The second scenario was even more disturbed. A young lady attending a university called the show stating how she listens to Hannity every day and seeks to make a difference at her chosen school much the way he thinks she should by standing up for 'what's right' only neither party stated what 'right' was. She was welcome to pass judgement of her school, but, what kept resonating with me was the fact, this was a university she was attending by choice. I don't know that young Americans are assigned to any particular university, they apply, right? What continued to be a quandry to me was the fact, as she stated, she was shunned socially on her campus. Now, I don't know about you, but, when a person takes an attitude regarding a social environment she doesn't consent to for whatever reason and makes it know there may very well be social repercussions because of those decisions. Being an adult and living with consequences is all part of it.

So what does Hannity tell this impressionable young American? To reassess her choice in universities thinking perhaps her unhappiness and disappointment should be a priority? No. Hannity stated that the price in life some people were burdened was because of the 'the right things' they felt important. Hannity, an aging syndicated columnist continued from there stating, "If you are not concerned regarding your Grade Point Average. If you are not planning on attending medical school or something were your grades are important, than 'stick it to them.' Stand up for what you believe in and confront the professors that don't provide the education you need. In other words, rather than reassessing her choices, she should sacrifice her future to move mountains on a university campus to undermine the very professors that would judge her work leading to confiring a degree. She should undermine the 'good standing' of this university, in the face of her future, for political hanky-panky with the cirriculum in some manner.

This was the advise Hannity gave a young and obviously impressionable woman which he more than likely does not know, couldn't begin to understand her circumstances in life and obviously doesn't care enough about EXCEPT to use her as a political tool while undermining her best interests in life.

This is allowed in the airwaves of the USA? Where is the FCC when it comes to radio anchors that endanger the lives of young Americans through bigoted attacks and bad advise advocating rebellion of one kind or another on a university campus?

This is an outrage and any Murdoch media corporation should have their American licenses pulled while class action lawsuits are filed for defaming an entire class of Americans.

This in reflection of Couric's statements only to realize the role the Right Wing Neocon media has played in deceiving the American public and CONTINUES to do so as an impetus to unjustified war.

Sad. Very sad.

Who owns the war? I realize Cindy Sheehan is opposing her and rightfully so, but, Speaker Pelosi made a good point.

She was on The Situation Room yesterday. She made the statement that "The Senate now owns the war."

I believe she is trying to bring concensus to the issue of Iraq, which is less about war and more about funding that brings deaths and genocide with so many in Iraq experiencing abject poverty and refugee camps, but, she made the observation that the Senate now owns a war they intend to keep in perpetuity at least for ten years.

It's disheartening to realize there is an entire Republican legislative agenda that creates and propagates war. It's a concern simply because there is the law of pre-emption and already the conservative talk radio shows are stating, 'We will be at war with Iran in the next year or two.' The way I interpreted that was to keep the Iraq War going until a majority of Republicans are returned to the Senate and House with the next election.

If the people don't have the will to change their legislature to a majority which can remove the USA from genocidal intent then there will be powers outside the Middle East that will. So much of what is also transpiring in conservative media is the 'defaming' of China to cause 'in time' a 'mind speak' that will resonate with the people of the USA to confront China and Russia should they take arms when the USA invades Iran.

In other words, the Right Wing Republicans are 'canting' to the next war and it will have global context with plenty of nuclear weapons exploding right regularly. That 'canting' revolves around a personalized agenda for the electorate surmounting the issue of personal wealth and greed. The 'local' talk shows give advise to listeners that is focused on an economic agenda that only Republicans would consent to and that is why Bush will never insure the under or uninsured. The Republican electorate is entrenched in a media driven voting scheme that links platitudes to war with 'survive the day' economics ONLY Red States could deliver.

The challenge to the slate of Democrats is to challenge southern economic strategies to deliver quality of life instead of quality of strife.

I am convinced the Republicans want this. The hate that is all a part of their conservative media is extensive, chronic and intended to turn the people of the USA against most nations that stand in the way of their agenda. That removes the democracy from the reach of the people of the USA. The American people, their treasury and any potential for quality of life then falls to the disposal of a Republican War Machine intent on 'an agenda' which does NOT include peace.

The USA has to look at what it's long term goals are and decide on diplomacy rather than war. If they do, then they have to choose a majority Democratic legislature with a President that supports initative to peace otherwise the next four years of Republican rule will bring the USA to self destruction at the hand of people that care little for the people and only thier agenda into war.

The one aspect that was sincerely disturbing regarding Speaker Pelosi's comments was the statement, "Impeachment is off the table." It should never be off the table in the House of Representatives. The House impeaches and the Senate tries the charges. Impeachment should be a very real alternative to a president intent on hurting the lives of children. Perhaps, the concern of Speaker Pelosi is that to impeach Bush means Cheney would have his finger on the nuke trigger. So, therefore, impeach Cheney first.

Howard Kurtz exhibits very limited cognition on Civil Rights

Bill Bennett and Howard "The Curtsy" Kurtz love to hear themselves talk so much they've lost the art of listening. Me first, no me first, no me first, no me first. Of course, each one always 'one ups' the other and needs to 'capture' the moment in the battle of the vocal cords. It's hard to believe these jerks are actually considered part of the brain trust.

I congratulate NPR for turning away the most oppressive president this country ever had. He couldn't exert his will over a network that is viewed as a precious will of the people. BUSH and MURDOCH CAN'T BUY PUBLIC RADIO !!!!!


The Supreme Court Just Took Us Back to the Days of Segregation (click on)
A 5-4 decision guts the vital Brown vs. Board of Education case that attempted to desegregate public schools.


In a 5-4 decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts on Thursday, the Supreme Court told local school districts that they cannot take even modest steps to overcome residential segregation and ensure that schools within their diverse cities themselves remain racially mixed unless they can prove that such classifications are narrowly tailored to achieve specific educational benefits. But they swear they haven't overturned Brown v. Board of Education. Writes the Chief Justice:
Before Brown, schoolchildren were told where they could and could not go to school based on the color of their skin. The school districts in these cases have not carried the heavy burden of demonstrating that we should allow this once again.even for very different reasons. For schools that never segregated on the basis of race, such as Seattle, or that have removed the vestiges of past segregation, such as Jefferson County, the way to achieve a system of determining admission to the public schools on a nonracial basis ... is to stop assigning students on a racial basis. The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.
To which, in sad dissent, Justice Stevens responded:
There is a cruel irony in The Chief Justice's reliance on our decision in Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U. S. 294 (1955). The first sentence in the concluding paragraph of his opinion states: "Before Brown, schoolchildren were told where they could and could not go to school based on the color of their skin." This sentence reminds me of Anatole France's observation: "[T]he majestic equality of the la[w], forbid[s] rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread." The Chief Justice fails to note that it was only black schoolchildren who were so ordered; indeed, the history books do not tell stories of white children struggling to attend black schools. In this and other ways, The Chief Justice rewrites the history of one of this Court's most important decisions....
The Court has changed significantly since...


Do I have say more? The Bush White House is a house of bigots. They place iconic figures in their administration while they legislate and decide to oppress the civil rights of a nation. The Republican Right Wing is hugely bigoted. Show me ONE minority anchor on FOX NEWS.



What's that other despicable radio show? Oh yeah, "The Big Talker FM." They are the worst bigots in the world. They have absolutely NO minority anchors EXCEPT when the 'regulars' are at some convention some place and then the minority anchors simply 'parrot' the same junk the bigots have to say. They never speak to the issues that affect minorities, the recent jerk from FOX NEWS, O'Reilly is a prime example of how completely idiotic they are.



O'Reilly goes into a Black Owned and Operated Cafe in New York City for the first time in his life and states, 'Gee, it's just like home.' GIVE ME A BREAK. I guess he had to get it right with God before he died.



Now Howard "The Curtsy" Kurtz is trying to take NPR's focus on 'No Tolerance to Stupidity' into a law that states, "George Bush gets what he wants when he wants it." Howard Kurtz and the Washington Post are self righteous 'wannabees' that sell 'junk' to the DC Public in order to sell papers. Whatever happened to The Washington Post that believed in the rights of Americans to stand against their government when policy was draconian and SIMPLY "W"rong.


I guess the New York Times needs to take out an ad in the Post to bring Americans home to real values rather than FCC values as dictated by Michael Powell. At least you know when he writes in the NYTimes it truly is propaganda and oppression and one can witness a sociopath at it's best ! At The Washington Post it's still legal to verbalize an opinion that is adverse to the Civil Rights of the nation while insitutions such as Columbia University are ridiculed for doing the very same thing !



Not long ago, earlier this year The New York Times did a crossword puzzle whereby the solutions all had the letters NPR in them. That's respect. Kurtz is a joke and can't recall when Civil Rights actually meant something in this country. Kurtz believes as the Republicans do, no taxes, the socially manipulative are the wealthy and rightfully so and the battle for civil rights is a thing of the past so they can pad their wallets rather than conduct moral policy, including the way Republicans can oppress the poor and deprive children of daycare, health care and a good education.



WHO CARES WHAT BUSH SAYS. HE'S MORE THAN A LAME DUCK, HE'S NO DUCK AT ALL. HIS PROPAGANDA NO LONGER HAS WINGS TO FLY. HE STATES NO, TO CHILDREN'S HEALTH CARE? HE AND CHENEY NEED TO BE IMPEACHED JUST TO SAVE AMERICAN LIVES ON THE 'HOMELAND.'



NPR Rebuffs White House On Bush Talk (click title to entry)
Radio Network Wanted To Choose Its Interviewer
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 26, 2007; Page C01
The White House reached out to National Public Radio over the weekend, offering analyst Juan Williams a presidential interview to mark yesterday's 50th anniversary of school desegregation in Little Rock.
But NPR turned down the interview, and Williams's talk with Bush wound up in a very different media venue: Fox News.

That was then: Juan Williams of National Public Radio interviews President Bush in January. NPR passed on the latest Bush interview.
(By Eric Draper -- White House, Via Getty Images)
POST A COMMENT
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in Register
Discussion Policy
Discussion Policy
CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Williams said yesterday he was "stunned" by NPR's decision. "It makes no sense to me. President Bush has never given an interview in which he focused on race. . . . I was stunned by the decision to turn their backs on him and to turn their backs on me."
Ellen Weiss, NPR's vice president for news, said she "felt strongly" that "the White House shouldn't be selecting the person." She said NPR told Bush's press secretary, Dana Perino, that "we're grateful for the opportunity to talk to the president but we wanted to determine who did the interview." When the White House said the offer could not be transferred to one of NPR's program hosts, Weiss took a pass....