President John F. Kennedy on being a liberal...

"I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves

I believe also in the United States of America, in the promise that it contains and has contained throughout our history of producing a society so abundant and creative and so free and responsible that it cannot only fulfill the aspirations of its citizens, but serve equally well as a beacon for all mankind. I do not believe in a superstate. I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can do the job and do it well. But I believe in a government which acts, which exercises its full powers and full responsibilities. Government is an art and a precious obligation; and when it has a job to do, I believe it should do it. And this requires not only great ends but that we propose concrete means of achieving them.

Our responsibility is not discharged by announcement of virtuous ends. Our responsibility is to achieve these objectives with social invention, with political skill, and executive vigor. I believe for these reasons that liberalism is our best and only hope in the world today. For the liberal society is a free society, and it is at the same time and for that reason a strong society. Its strength is drawn from the will of free people committed to great ends and peacefully striving to meet them. Only liberalism, in short, can repair our national power, restore our national purpose, and liberate our national energies.

What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

President John Fitzgerald Kennedy

          I see how you are!  My page hit count was way up yesterday.  That either tells me you have been busy lately and not had the chance to visit for a while and today was my lucky day, or it means you are a perv.  LOL!  I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt.  Really, I am.  Uh-huh. 

          Hey, time to get serious.   "Internet network operators have recently argued they should be permitted to charge higher rates for some services than others. This would give network operators the ability to sell priority status to content providers. In exchange for a fee, certain content would receive priority over general traffic and move from point to point more quickly. Network operators claim these fees would permit network upgrades and the creation of new services. They also argue this tiered service option would benefit consumers by managing Internet traffic more effectively and therefore offering a higher speed Internet.  Internet content providers are generally opposed to any attempt to undermine the current impartiality of the Internet.  These companies, which provide the “content” of the Internet, believe net neutrality is crucial for the continued growth and success of the Internet. Content providers argue that permitting priority pricing on the Internet would restrict consumer choice and activity and would fundamentally undermine the internet." Herb Kohl, US Senate.  http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2006/04/26/house-committee-vote-results-the-momentum-shifts-in-our-favor/#comments

        Today, a Republican-dominated House Committee caved to telecom companies like AT&T and voted to gut Net Neutrality, the Internet's First Amendment. It's too bad we lost the vote, but more important votes on this issue are coming—and what the big telecom companies weren't expecting was that we'd get as many votes as we did. 

Because of thousands of phone calls from people like you, some members of Congress who recently voted against Net Neutrality in sub-committee switched and voted for it in full committee!  Politicians are scared when they realize we are paying attention.

Congress needs to hear from us right away—the good guys deserve thanks, the bad guys deserve outrage, and those who weren't on the committee need to know their constituents demand they vote for "the Markey Amendment" for Net Neutrality if it comes before the entire House of Representatives in coming weeks.

Can you call your Representative right away?

Let us know you called at:
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1670&id=7416-6956345-Z2qqjTQPiNGPSzdcrMDBdg&t=2

When you click the above link, you can check today's vote to see if your Representative is on that committee that voted.

If they voted no on the Markey Amendment to preserve Net Neutrality, you can express your outrage and tell them you expect them to switch their vote on the House floor. If they voted yes, your encouragement will let them know they did the right thing.  If they are not on the committee, tell them you support Net Neutrality and ask how they will vote on the House floor if the Markey Amendment comes up for a vote.

Rep. Ed Markey's amendment is the only true Network Neutrality proposal. If your member's office says something like, "Yes, we support Network Neutrality," it is important to insist they support Rep. Markey's amendment. Anything else is a decoy lacking teeth and is intended to provide political cover to members of Congress who cave to big telecom companies and gut Internet freedom.

The battle has just begun, and we've already proved that regular people can make a difference in this fight to preserve Internet freedom

Thanks for all you do.

–Eli Pariser, Adam Green, Noah T. Winer, and the MoveOn.org Civic Action team
  Wednesday, April 26th, 2006
  
P.S. Here is a recap of the Network Neutrality issue:

• We are fighting to protect Internet freedom. Internet companies like AT&T and Verizon are spending millions lobbying Congress to gut Network Neutrality—the Internet's First Amendment. The "Markey Amendment" would protect Net Neutrality.
• Net Neutrality ensures that all speech is treated equally online so the public can view the smallest blog just as easily as the largest corporate Web site. Without Net Neutrality, Internet companies could rig the playing field—forcing websites like MoveOn and Google to pay "protection money" to work properly.
• Internet freedom has made the Internet great. The idea that everyone's site gets treated the same has led the Internet to be a revolutionary force for economic innovation, civic participation, and free speech. We're fighting to keep this rule in place to keep the Internet great.
• Get more details at www.SavetheInternet.com

            I had to work out of town today and was telling a friend about my blog and encouraged that friend to take a gander.  There was some light hearted bantering involved as my friend (X) is of a different political philosophy than I.  It was all fun and games for a little while but then X said something that, try as I might, I just could not comprehend.  X claimed that George W. Bush is the greatest president in all history.  HUH?  That was just so unfathomable (thank god for spell check) that I really could not think of a way to respond to my friend.  In hind sight I would have asked X what they based such a bold and out of touch statement on.  Could it be his prowess as Commander In Chief?  Perhaps X would tell me about how the CIC fully understood the culture in Iraq before the invasion, clue me into the real reason he went to war, and explain to me the comprehensive exit strategy he has in place. 

Maybe X found him unflinchingly committed to the environment and how allowing increased oil and gas drilling on public lands in the West and how overturning a ban on allowing snowmobiles to tear up Yellowstone Park will help preserve remnants of a pristine wilderness for our children.  Regarding global warming; GE and Duke Energy Corp have come out in support of limits on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse-gas emissions.  Eighty-six evangelical leaders called on Bush to curb greenhouse gases because they felt they had a moral duty to point out that global warming is endangering the earth.  http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000100&sid=atNDDfPMAanE&refer=germany 

            Well maybe George W. is not the greatest Environmental President ever but I bet X may have felt the economy is in pretty good shape.  Oh wait.  We have the largest deficit in the history of the nation.  But that doesn’t really matter.  Deficit schmessifit, what is really important is how families are doing in the Bush economy.  Real median household income declined 3% from 2000 to 2004.  The percentage of households with earnings classified as middle class shrank 1.5% during the same period.  In 2005 real average weekly earnings fell 0.4%.  Savings rates are the lowest they have been in 73 years and credit card debt is at an all time high of $9,312 per household.  Oh and one more thing.  In state college tuition is up 25% across the nation since 2001.  http://www.parade.com/articles/editions/2006/edition_04-23-2006/Middle_Class_feature

            Maybe Bush has a stellar record on preserving our civil rights?  Um, no.  How about Education?  Yeah, he is the Education President after all.  President Bush has provided the smallest increases for education since 1996, has failed to fully fund his No Child Left Behind initiative and froze Pell grants to a level of below 34% of the average cost of attending college.   http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-new.cfm?doc_name=tp-108-2-81

            Well, one thing we can be sure of.  Everybody cares about health care.  And President Bush has given us Health Savings Accounts to help us buy insurance.  In reality, “The proposed tax credits are too small to make health coverage affordable for the vast majority of the uninsured and would move more people into the individual insurance market, which can deny coverage, restrict their benefits, or charge very high premiums for those in less-than-perfect health.” http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-new.cfm?doc_name=fs-108-2-32

            With President Bush’s rich oil background surly we would be proud of his stellar accomplishments with a comprehensive energy policy and his ability to keep down the costs we pay at the pump.  I can’t even do this one.  The last time I filled my Yukon it cost me $73 so I took it home and parked it.  Since then I have been riding my Harley.  The last time I got gas for the Harley it cost me $14!  Before Bush was in office we could fill my wife’s Subaru for $14. 

            Well, if President Bush is the greatest ever it must be because of his leadership and integrity because it doesn’t look to me like he is much of an issues guy.  In fact this was the one issue my bantering friend referenced as I stood in shock and awe at “the” disclosure.  X said it was appreciated how he “tells it like it is” and that he is “the decider”, once he makes a decision he sticks with it.  That would be okay if he told the truth, made the right choices and provided the resources to accomplish the decisions he makes.  Leadership?  “WASHINGTON, April 24 (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush's public approval rating has fallen to 32 percent, a new low for his presidency, a CNN poll showed on Monday.   The survey also showed that 60 percent of Americans disapprove of the way Bush is handling his job.”  http://today.reuters.com/business/newsarticle.aspx?type=tnBusinessNews&storyID=nN24277708   

             I pointed out to my friend that on September 6^th, 2001 the Bush Administration was warned to take Al-Qaeda threats against the United States very seriously by a reputable authority on national security and ignored the warning.  When I told my friend the expert was Gary Hart I got a glimpse into what makes 31% of Americans think George W. is okay. (The other 1% of the 32% who approve of him are fiscally motivated) The problem with Gary Hart and his credibility according to my friend was infidelity.  You could never heed a warning or accept as fact anything ever said by a man who had relations with a married woman who was not his wife.  And Bill Clinton was the worst President ever because of his tryst with Monica Lewinsky.  I wish my world view were so simple.

            It is what it is.  Today was what it was and it was spectacular!  I have a little combination wind-burn/sun-burn thing going on my face from all the fun in the sun today.  My son and I hooked up with four other friends and did the wolf pack thing on our Harleys today.  As we were putting together our plans all my son cared about was that the ride include lunch.  I guess he is sick of the wilted lettuce and Baco’s sandwiches I have been preparing lately.  Okay, seeing as how we had those four days last week I guess I was getting a little sick of them also.  On a day like today, it being early spring and all, one of the destinations of choice is always the Sutliff Bridge.  Sutliff is or was a little town between the burgs of Lisbon and Solon, Iowa and is nestled cozily on the Cedar River.  The Sutliff bridge was built in 1898 to replace a ferry service allowing access to the Johnson County Seat for area residents.  It was retired in 1981.  The bridge is built of iron, Parker trusses and is a span wood trestle 827 feet long. 

            What makes this such a wonderful stop is that the destination is a throwback in time.  The prime attraction would be Baxa’s Sutliff Store and Tavern which was built around the turn of the century.  Little has changed in all these years.  The tavern looks like it maybe has never had a coat of paint over the original and the interior is wonderfully out of date.  The greasy gut bomb cheeseburgers are to die for but they make a grilled pork tenderloin that is always hard to pass up.  On a given Saturday in the summer there will be as many as one hundred motorcycles parked out front but rarely fewer than a dozen.  The destination is equally popular with bicyclists and boaters.  It is not uncommon to share a picnic table on the historic bridge with various combinations of bikers and boaters and everybody agrees that the slowed down atmosphere does a body good. http://www.sutliffbridge.com/main/index.php  There is something very relaxing about eating your lunch in the sun with the swift flowing river visible through the gaps between the planks of the historic bridge. 

            I would be remiss if I did not point out that to get to Sutliff, whether you make your approach from the north or the south you must travel the rolling hills of the Grant Woodesque Iowa countryside.  The big and gentle sweeper curves leave little to be desired for those of us who like to twist the throttle and lay hard into a curve.  T’was a find day indeed.

**WARNING!***WARNING!***WARNING!***WARNING!***WARNING!***WARNING!**

Be afraid, be very afraid.  The idea of writing a post about masturbation has gotten into my head.  I am fighting off the urge to write this post but... well sometimes a guy has to do what a guy has to do.  I'm thinkin' mid week some time.  I'm waiting for my confirmation my Mom won't be anywhere near a computer.  Worry not.  Graphic details are not my style.

Complaining loud and often that the media is liberal does two things:  It pulls the media toward the conservative agenda and it creates a perception of victimization on the part of conservatives.  If the press is so liberal lets take a look at how they treated Al Gore in his presidential race against George W.  A study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and Princeton Survey Research found that Bush received twice as much favorable coverage as Gore in the last two months before the election in 2000.  Regarding President Bill Clinton, a Nexis search revealed 68,096 stories about Whitewater, which ended up a confirmed witch hunt without merit.  When there were real and credible allegations that Bush had committed insider trading as an executive with Harken Energy there were only 110 stories written about it in the liberal press.  Regarding both our current and past President and their stellar draft histories, there were 13,641 stories about Clinton and his academic exemption.  Stories relating to President Bush and allegations of his being AWOL from the Air National Guard were mentioned only 49 times during the 2000 campaign cycle.  Take It Back, James Carville & Paul Begala.

            One of the largest media conglomerates in the world is Clear Channel Communications.  Its owner, Lowry Mays, is very active in right wing Republican circles.  He was an investor with George W. in the Texas Rangers, a deal which saw George W earn $14 million dollars from a very small investment. http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/6432174?rnd=1128445270750&has-player=unknown  Rolling Stone magazine describes Clear Channel as “A behemoth that, at the end of 2003, controlled 1,182 radio stations, 788,000 billboards and 103 venues in the U.S., not to mention an event-promotion business that sold more tickets in the first half of 2003 than its closest forty-nine competitors combined. There is no bigger company in the music business, and none with such close ties to conservative politics.”

            Clear Channel is but one example of concentrated media.  Consider the owners of mass media; Time Warner, Viacom, Disney, Bertelsmann and News corp.  Call me biased but I just don’t see them making editorial decisions from a flowered VW hippie van while bemoaning the injustice of corporate tax cuts.  Aside from corporate executives even the journalists themselves are well paid.  Only 5 percent of journalists reported income of less than $50,000 in 1993 and most reported annual incomes of over $100,000. http://www.fair.org/index.phhp?page=2447 Yeah, these are people who are going to be untrustworthy as they apply their craft with respect to the moral integrity of tax cuts for the wealthy.  These are the people who will champion the cause of the oppressed over corporate interests.  Yep, the corporate media mega-conglomerates and their affluent journalists are liberally biased and George W. Bush is a rancher.

Ron Reagan said in an interview about George W. Bush and his desire to project himself as similar to President Ronald Reagan, "What amuses me more but sometimes annoys me is trying to actually embody the persona of Ronald Reagan. I mean, it actually went to the lengths of going out and getting this boy a ranch so that he could have a ranch just like Ronald Reagan. I--God, I just hoot when I see him out there on that ranch." and “My father was much more of a rancher than he was. This is a guy who used to, you know, build his own fences, curry his own horses, saddle his own horses, you know, cut his own firewood. You know, George Bush sallies forth in his pickup truck to go torment small animals. And he's got that little "lady trim whiz," you know, chainsaw that he uses to trim the hedges for the cameras when they're there.  http://www.uncommonknowledge.org/800/821.html

I’m not saying media bias is good or bad, wait, yes I am.  Media bias sucks.  What is worse than media bias is the misconception that it is liberally biased.  If you believe Rush Limbaugh with regards to liberal media bias… well, if you believe Rush Limbaugh about anything get the hell out of my blog! 

"No one can terroize a whole nation, unless we are all his accomplices." Edward R. Murrow