Archive for the 'freedom' Category
Posted on July 4, 2009 by Dr. Denny under 1st Amendment, Constitution, Scholars & Rogues, censorship, civil liberties, democracy, elections, free speech, freedom, government, history, homeland security, human rights, national security, politics, privacy, public interest, totalitarianism [ Comments: 1 ]
I am a citizen of the United States of America. In this country, I can criticize my government as intelligently, as profanely, or as stupidly as I wish. I can call the president of the nation an unintelligent, uninspiring, and incompetent leader — which I have done. I can call my representative in Congress a buffoonish party hack — which I have done — and urge his removal from office by the voters. I can attack the policies enacted by government at all levels as often as I wish.
I can assemble with others to complain about the government. I can petition the government for redress of grievances. I can practice a religion free of government interference. Most importantly, I have the right to speak my mind. I can say whatever I want about the government short of advocating violence against it. I am free to speak or write critically about the actions or inactions of my government.
I can be a critic of my government because for hundreds of years, hundreds of thousands of Americans before me fought and died for my right to do that.
Full Story »
Posted on June 13, 2009 by Dr. Denny under Internet, Scholars & Rogues, Web, advertising, blogging, censorship, citizen journalism, culture, democracy, education, entertainment, freedom, government, journalism, media, new media, popular culture, public interest, social media, society, technology [ Comments: none ]
There is much you need to know to wisely direct your life. At some point, an event may occur that you cannot personally witness. Suppose the consequences of the event affect you — without first-hand knowledge of the event, will you be aware of it? Will you be able to react to it?
You will want to know what happened. You may not immediately want to know what someone else thinks or feels about what happened. That may come later. You first want someone to tell you clearly and with minimal subjectivity what happened with no opinion or impression attached.
You live in a second-hand world. You need someone to observe the world first-hand when you cannot. Who will you trust to faithfully do that for you?
Full Story »
Part six in a series
Wu Tao stands at the front of the bus, microphone in hand, radiating charm.

Wu “Harry” Tao (right) talks with St. Bonaventure
professors Carl Case (left) and Darwin King at the
Winter Palace in Xi’an.
As our group rides around Xi’an, Wu Tao serves as our tourguide. He stands in the bus’s center aisle and regales us with stories about the city’s past. He wears a dark t-shirt with a big numeral “8” on it—which has made him easy to find in a crowd—jeans, a pair of open-toed sandals, and a million-yuan smile.
When he points something out to us and tells us its name, he carefully repeats it and even spells it out for us to ensure we can follow him.
Tao is his given name while Wu is his family name, but Chinese custom puts the family name first, then the given name: Wu Toa.
Like many Chinese, Wu Tao has an American name, too: Harry. “Like Harry Potter,” he says with good-natured amusement. A lot of things appear to amuse him. He smiles freely and chuckles often.
The students are wild about him. Full Story »
Posted on April 25, 2009 by Brian Angliss under ClimaTweet, Congress, Democrats, Republicans, United States, capitalism, economy, energy, environment, freedom, global warming, government, policy, politics, public health, public interest, science, trade [ Comments: 5 ]
S&R has been following Newt Gingrich’s lies about energy and climate since last year when he pushed the “Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less.” lie in response to last summer’s oil price woes. On Friday, Gingrich appeared as a minority witness, on a panel all by himself, before the House Energy and Commerce Committee - Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment hearings on the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES). S&R has reviewed Gingrich’s prepared remarks for today’s hearing and has determined that Gingrich is still up to his old tricks of lying to Congress and the American people. Full Story »
Posted on April 24, 2009 by Dr. Denny under 1st Amendment, Constitution, Internet, Scholars & Rogues, Web, capitalism, citizen journalism, corporate governance, democracy, education, free speech, freedom, journalism, media, new media, news, newspapers, public interest, social media [ Comments: 6 ]
I expect the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, a newspaper I’ve long admired, to go belly up — even though I have no specific information about its finances and whether it is, indeed, in danger of folding.
But this week, it gave its product to me for free. I would have gladly paid up to 5 cents to read just one of its stories. But the JS didn’t charge me. What kind of business model allows me to consume a product for free?
I learned of the story through an e-mailed version of Romenesko, the legendary (or infamous, depending on your POV), media news page at Poynter. org, the Web site of the Poynter Institute, a journalism think tank.
The Poynter e-mail contained this tease: “Wisconsin university football coach bans student reporters (http://www.jsonline.com/business/43539347.html).” I clicked on the link and —ta da — there it was, a story written by JS reporter Don Walker. Free. Didn’t have to pay a penny. And I would have. Gladly.
I know this isn’t a rare phenomenon. I suspect you’ve read news for free online, too. Bet you kinda expect it to be free, even demand that it be free. Perhaps you think it’s some kind of birthright. But in the long run, if you do not pay for the product of professional journalists, you will lose one of your best defenses against secrecy, corruption, and tyranny.
Full Story »
Posted on April 4, 2009 by Dr. Slammy under 1st Amendment, Bush administration, Christianity, Constitution, Islam, Religious Right, Scrogues Gallery, censorship, civil liberties, conservatives, culture, democracy, entertainment, free speech, freedom, fundamentalism, music, politics, popular culture, progressives, radio, religion, war, women [ Comments: 27 ]

We do not want this war, this violence, and we’re ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas. - Natalie Maines
I don’t even know the Dixie Chicks, but I find it an insult for all the men and women who fought and died in past wars when almost the majority of America jumped down their throats for voicing an opinion. It was like a verbal witch-hunt and lynching. - Merle Haggard
Last night over dinner the subject of The Dixie Chicks came up, and I got mad all over again. Which is unfortunate, because when you think about artists that talented the last thing on your mind ought to be anger. But still, it’s been six long years now since “the top of the world came crashing down,” and I can’t quite free myself of my rage at the staggering ignorance that led so many Americans to piss on the 1st Amendment by attempting to destroy the careers of Natalie Maines, Martie Maguire and Emily Robinson. Full Story »
A Flip Through the Karen Annals
The Karens, as well as other ethnic groups, actually arrived in Burma before the majority group known as the Burmans (as opposed to the Burmese, all the citizens of Burma). But, in the sixteenth century, the Burmans conquered most of Burma and proceeded to impose their will on the ethnics.
But the modern “origins of the ethnic hatred. . . can be traced back to the Anglo-Burmese wars,” writes Benedict Rogers in his 2004 book World Without Evil: Stopping the genocide of Burma’s Karen people. The Karens assisted the British in their efforts to conquer the Burmans. The British, in turn, allowed them a measure of autonomy (in part, also, because they were too far-flung to rule). The ethnics’ first taste of freedom was an ironic byproduct of British colonialism. Full Story »
Have you ever stumbled into a situation where something made you crave your long forgotten bad habit or addiction again, just one more time? You’d repeatedly proven yourself stronger than your old needs or patterns and were no longer even tempted. But then, perhaps because of the phase of the moon and the alignment of the planets, you found yourself suddenly and unexpectedly thrust back to the threshold of that need?
That happened to me earlier this week. For the first time in 14 years, I smelled cigarette smoke and it smelled good…. Full Story »
Posted on March 10, 2009 by Dr. Slammy under Congress, MIllennial Generation, Obama administration, Religious Right, Republicans, conservatives, corruption, culture, democracy, education, freedom, fundamentalism, government, history, innovation, journalism, justice, liberals, lobbying, media, neocons, policy, politics, progressives, public interest, race relations [ Comments: 40 ]
Dear Mr. Buffet, Mr. Gates, Mr. Turner, Mr. Soros, Ms. Winfrey, and any other hyper-rich types with progressive political leanings:
If this essay has, against all odds, somehow made its way to your desk, please, bear with me. It’s longish, but it winds eventually toward an exceedingly important conclusion. If you’ll give me a few minutes, I’ll do my best to reward your patience.
_______________
In the 2008 election, Barack Obama won a landmark political victory on a couple of prominent themes: “hope” and “change.” He has since been afforded ample opportunity to talk about these ideas, having inherited the nastiest economic quagmire in living memory and a Republican minority in Congress that has interpreted November’s results as a mandate to obstruct the public interest even more rabidly than it was doing before. Reactions among those of us who supported Obama have been predictably mixed, but even those who have been critical of his efforts to date are generally united in their hope that his win signaled the end of “movement conservatism” in the US. Full Story »
Those who own a property have the right to continue owning that property, and what they do with their justly owned and acquired property is entirely their own look-out.
If you happen to be the owner of a unique piece of art, say the Mona Lisa, and you decide to set fire to it, then that is a terrible tragedy, but it is your property. No government should ever have the right to intervene.
Apartheid in South Africa was a crime against humanity. You can argue the reasons. Some say that it was racial prejudice translating into attempted genocide. Others that it was a violation of human rights of equality and justice.
Full Story »
The economy is in free fall; peanut butter has become a deadly killer; and you’re worried about the fate of the planet due to our collective, environmental profligacy. What you’re looking for is a silver bullet, an elegant solution that addresses multiple problems. Well, by God, Eleanor Roosevelt has an answer for you. Long considered a quaint relic of American history, her decision to dig up a portion of the White House lawn is being dusted off and discussed beyond the confines of hippie communes and Whole-Food stores. The Victory Garden has found a new home on page 36 of The Economist (2/28 - 3/6 2009) and managed to nibble into a little bit of concrete outside the USDA headquarters in Washington. Just in time for the season of seed catalogs and the yearly perfection of mental gardening.
Full Story »
Last week, actor Tom Hanks called Mormons who supported California’s Proposition 8 “un-American.” Today Hanks apologized.
He shouldn’t have, because he’s right.
Anyone who would support curtailing the civil rights of a minority group is un-American. Codifying discrimination in a state constitution or in the U.S. Constitution is un-American. And supporting people who aim to curtail civil rights and codify discrimination, as the LDS Church did with regard to Prop-8, is un-American.
And I’ll say this to anyone who supported Prop-8 - you acted un-American too.
Early today hackers launched an attack against the SoapBlox network, wreaking havoc with a significant number of progressive blogs (including Pam’s House Blend, My Left Wing and several state-focused sites). At one point it looked as though the whole network may have been trashed, although at this point it seems that some sites (like our friends at Square State) were mercifully unaffected (for the time being, anyway). Some that were initially taken down are now back up and running.
It’s not yet known who was behind the attack.
Paul Preston, who runs the network, was understandably at the point of despair early today, posting a note saying that the operation was dead. Fortunately his latest missive notes that things are stabilized and moving ahead, and for this we’re grateful. Full Story »
Posted on January 2, 2009 by Bonesparkle under Bush administration, Constitution, Republicans, civil liberties, conservatives, corruption, crime, freedom, history, neocons, politics, war [ Comments: 1 ]
In 1977, former president Richard Nixon offered up some interesting thoughts on the concept of legality.
FROST: So what in a sense, you’re saying is that there are certain situations, and the Huston Plan or that part of it was one of them, where the president can decide that it’s in the best interests of the nation or something, and do something illegal.
NIXON: Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal.
FROST: By definition. Full Story »
Posted on January 1, 2009 by Brian Angliss under Islam, Israel, Middle East, diplomacy, foreign policy, free speech, freedom, government, policy, politics, terrorism [ Comments: 5 ]
I’m continually appalled, although no longer surprised, by what both sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (”the conflict” from now on) are willing to do. Islamic Jihad sends a suicide bomber and blows up a bus loaded with Israelis who’s only crime is being Israeli - Israel bulldozes the bomber’s family’s home. Israeli special forces assassinate a leader of Hamas - Hamas responds with Katyusha rockets launched willy-nilly at Israeli towns. Hezbollah kidnaps Israeli soldiers - Israel invades Lebanon and cluster bombs on entire Lebanese villages.
It’s been going on for so long now that we can’t even assign blame anymore. I got pull-off-the-road-and-calm-down furious on Monday when, in an interview on NPR’s All Things Considered Monday afternoon, a Gaza politician claimed that either a) Israeli collaborators had launched the rockets into Israel as a pretext or b) there had been no launches at all and Israel was faking the whole thing. And I got just as furious this morning when I the Israeli ambassador to the U.S. refused to admit that Israeli commandos had been assassinating Hamas leaders during the cease fire in yet another NPR interview.
Hammurabi came up with the first written code of laws - an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. And the result of following that law is that Israelis and Palestinians have each become toothless, blind, deaf, mute, and stupid. Full Story »
Posted on November 26, 2008 by whythawk under business, civil liberties, civil rights, culture, democracy, freedom, fundamentalism, gay rights, government, innovation, liberals, libertarians, progress, society [ Comments: 5 ]

A person consists both of their being and of the works that their being produces. Whether those works are physical or as intangible as the time spent on a particular task.
A traditional Westminster approach to politics, with a typical Left / Right political duopoly, has become the gold standard of democratic representation. It is also conflicted and inherently incapable of resolving its core contradiction. Full Story »
Posted on November 3, 2008 by Guest Scrogue under 1st Amendment, Constitution, Ramsey Case, Religious Right, crime, culture, democracy, education, entertainment, freedom, fundamentalism, history, journalism, law, media, popular culture, public interest, society [ Comments: none ]
by Michael Tracey
Let me return to a period which is widely regarded within the advanced industrial societies as a high water mark of public service broadcasting, the BBC in the early 1960s. A key figure from those years was Sir Arthur fforde (that is the correct, if old-fashioned spelling of his name), in my view quite possibly the greatest of the chairmen of the BBC. In 1963 he published a little booklet called What is Broadcasting About, which was printed privately in an edition of 400. In this at first curious piece he tries to lay out a theological context for what was happening within the BBC, which was then at the height of its creative and social impact on British society, and causing all kinds of heartburn among what used to be called the Establishment. Full Story »
Posted on October 29, 2008 by Guest Scrogue under Arts, Literature & Culture, Ramsey Case, capitalism, censorship, civil liberties, culture, democracy, education, entertainment, freedom, innovation, justice, media, music, newspapers, policy, politics, popular culture, public interest, radio, sex, society, telecommunications, television [ Comments: 4 ]

by Michael Tracey
It isn’t just that there is an appetite for scandal, sex, sleaze, death narratives, it is also that feeding such appetites can be very profitable. The fact is that an essential problem with today’s media, one that has been gestating for many years, even decades, lies with the families and trust-funders that own media chains, and with the media moguls that, like great beasts, roam the landscape of a new grim cultural ecology, gobbling up this and that tasty morsel, a television station here, a newspaper there, forever seeking to sate their own insatiable appetite. Full Story »
Posted on October 25, 2008 by Wendy Redal under Christianity, Religious Right, Supreme Court, United States, civil liberties, civil rights, conservatives, elections, freedom, fundamentalism, gay rights, government, liberals, policy, politics, poverty, religion [ Comments: 84 ]
2 Timothy 1:7: “For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.”
James Dobson and the Christian Right activists at Focus on the Family seem to have forgotten that scriptural promise. Then again, there is a great deal of the Bible they seem to have forgotten, or chosen to blatantly ignore. Their real “focus” is on scare tactics to frighten conservative evangelicals away from any flirtation with voting for Barack Obama, who may as well be the devil incarnate masquerading beneath a veneer of seductive charisma.
The latest instrument in this campaign of emotional intimidation is a “Letter from 2012 in Obama’s America,” [download PDF at website] produced by Focus on the Family Action, the PAC arm of Dobson’s organization. Full Story »
Posted on September 18, 2008 by Wendy Redal under Christianity, DNC, Democrats, Religious Right, Republicans, Scholars & Rogues, Supreme Court, abortion, civil liberties, conservatives, elections, freedom, fundamentalism, government, health care, human rights, liberals, policy, politics, progressives, religion, society, war, women [ Comments: 14 ]
That’s the debate I’ve been having with an old college friend whom I’ve recently reconnected with. He’s become a Catholic since we knew one another back in the ‘80s, and is a deep-thinking, deeply principled man. He will not be voting for Barack Obama in November. Nor will he be voting for John McCain. He will vote, but he will cast a blank ballot. He urges me, if I am serious about my moral commitments, to do likewise. Neither candidate, in his opinion, cares enough about ‘life issues’ to merit an affirmative vote.
The New York Times reports that other Catholics are struggling with what do with in the upcoming election. The most troublesome issue for many remains abortion. Some, like Joe Biden, believe we must make accommodations for differing views in a pluralistic society, despite his own embrace of personhood at conception. Others, like my old friend, see Biden’s support for legal access to abortion as no different from espousing the Holocaust – if not in deed, then in complicity.
Can a Catholic possibly vote for a Democratic candidate who has regularly received a 100% approval rating from Planned Parenthood and indeed, as a state senator, voted against an Illinois version of the Born Alive Infant Protection bill passed by Congress? Can I, as a person of faith who believes all life is sacred? I am going to answer ‘yes,’ and in so doing, proclaim myself also a utilitarian and a realist, with all the moral conundra that pragmatism involves. Full Story »
|