This made me wonder about the studies for lesbians and their risk for HIV infection. In 1997, Susan Cochran, a UCLA public health epidemiologist, stated that lesbians were at more risk for infection than originally perceived. She stated:
While the risk of female-to-female transmission of HIV does appear to be small, judging lesbians' risk solely on this issue ignores evidence that some lesbians may use intravenous drugs and engage in sexual relations with men -- often young gay men -- according to the studies appearing in a special edition of the journal Women's Health.
I have to agree with Susan, even though this information is a bit dated. I know of many lesbian women who engage in sexual behavior that puts them at risk for catching the AIDS virus:
1. participating in sexual activity with partners they don't well
2. participating in sexual activity with partners they may know well, but the partner isn't aware she has the infection
3. participating in sexual activity with partners who participate in unprotected sex with men (that partner may or may not be bisexual)
The list goes on and on. Yes, there are lesbians who have sex with men. Now, before any of you men out there get all excited and start jumping on your AOL messenger to find lesbians, let me just tell ya: they'll find you if they're interested. Usually this kind of activity happens in very particular circumstances and does not happen because the lesbian can't find another woman for her sexual activity. What circumstances would that be? Wouldn't you like to know!
I get pretty frustrated with the arrogance and ignorance of many lesbians who proclaim, "lesbians don't get AIDS." Bullshit. We certainly can -- just like anybody else. What bothers me even more is the lack of education many lesbians have about safe sex. We kinda scratch our heads and go, "Safe sex? Now how do you do that with another woman?" I won't go into particulars. That's an entirely different blog, or perhaps meant for the comments section.
I read somewhere once that only 1 out of 10 lesbian women get tested every year to determine if they've been infected with HIV. That number is pretty damn low. But, I wonder how many heterosexuals get tested every year.
05.31.04 (8:18 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
I never really thought of this until I read this article. U.S. air Marshals are just as easy to spot as unmarked police cars. There's another glitch in the Dubya Administration's system designed to fight terrorism. Yeah, I know. I can hear your response. What are the "liberals" doing, at least Dubya is doing something? Well, I for one, wouldn't put these U.S. Marshals in a suit, tie, and shiny shoes. Most business travelers don't even dress up when traveling.
One day, I was at the convenient store. I walked out to my car to see what I knew was an unmarked police car parked next to me. A tall, lanky sorta guy walks to the car and gets in. He was wearing a simple TV shirt, a pair of faded jeans, finished with a pair of dirty sneakers. Had he not gotten into an unmarked police car, I wouldn't have known he was a cop. I don't suppose they would allow the janitor to take a cop car out to the convenient store.
The point? Someone was a complete idiot when putting the U.S. air marshal plan into place. As I've been accused of not thinking before I write, umm . . . at least my writing has nothing to do with the potential safety of thousands of people. I would say that someone didn't think before implementing that plan.
So, in response to What are the liberals doing? At least Dubya is doing something?. Well, you're right. But, using a wet mop to dry a floor is a bit pointless -- even if you are doing something.
05.31.04 (1:05 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
A judge recently threw out a lawsuit by one of Madonna's exboyfriends. I don't know which one. There were so many. This exboyfriend sued St. Martin's Press, the publisher of a book that shows a picture of him and Madonna -- with a caption that describes him as a gay man. The exboyfriend considers this libelous. Judge Nancy Gertner disagreed.
The issue here is not whether calling someone gay is considered slander or libel. Judge Nancy Gertner wants to avoid setting any precedence by ruling on this issue at all. The bigger issue is: by ruling in favor of the exboyfriend, Gertner stated, she would, in some way, "legitimize the prejudice and bigotry that for too long have plagued the homosexual community." Arline Isaacson states that calling someone gay shouldn't be considered an insult at all. It would be akin to calling someone Black, or Jewish, or Catholic.
I'm not too sure I agree with that. If I'm Jewish and you called me an Atheist, I think I would be insulted. If I'm Mexican and you called me Black, I think I would be insulted. If you accidentally call a man a woman, I think he would be insulted. I'm not agreeing with Isaacson's logic at all; however, I do recognize the difference between an insult and slander. I've called my exhusband a jackass many times. That's hardly slander, but it's definitely an insult.
Madonna's exboyfriend didn't ask the court to rule on whether he was insulted or not. He asked the court to determine if placing the label "gay" on his name was slander. I think it would depend on the effect that label (and I hate using the word label) has on the exboyfriend's life. If the exboyfriend is attempting to get into show business and the label is a hindrance, I would argue that there's a thin line there between insult and slander.
There have been other court rulings that have decided that calling someone a homosexual is indeed defamatory; however, those laws were based on prejudice against homosexuals and laws that banned homosexual activity. With the recent changes that have lifted the ban on homosexual activity, allows for civil unions in Vermont, and allows homosexuals to legally marry in MA, Gertner didn't feel it necessary to rule in favor of the exboyfriend because those usual prejudices embedded in the law are slowly dismantling --giving homosexuals more equal rights. Based on these changes, the word "gay" is no longer synonymous with "bad" or "immoral" -- based on Gertner's argument.
Tom Cruise sues magazines all the time for calling him gay. Why? Because the label "gay" on Tom Cruise will ruin his net worth in Hollywood. So, why can't Madonna's exboyfriend sue her publishers? Because he's not Tom Cruise.
05.30.04 (7:37 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
I somehow missed Ann's editorial on the Iraq prison "abuse" issue (notice we're still not using the word "torture"). As usual, she skipped all around the issue (after it took her quite some time to figure out just [b]how[/b] she would approach the issue). She decided to turn it into a "media" issue -- nevermind what actually happened over there. And of course, her editorial is full of "the liberals this, and the liberals that." You have to read it. It's enough to make ya sick.
And then, there's her editorial about how the US lost the Vietnam war (it was another media issue according to Ann). She's connecting it to the war in Iraq and somehow blaming the liberal media for the way things are going.
Abu Ghraib is the new Tet offensive. By lying about the Tet offensive during the Vietnam War, the media managed to persuade Americans we were losing the war, which demoralized the nation and caused us to lose the war. And people say reporters are lazy.
Of course, the usual "liberals this, and liberals that" is all over the place in this op ed piece. This article will make ya sick, too.
05.30.04 (7:17 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Ok, as I regurgitate even more news stories, I must talk about this one: Bush Keeps Saddam Gun at White House. Ok, so I might find this a bit tacky if it weren't Dubya. But since it's Dubya, well . . . I find it well within his character. And yes, I am making fun of Dubya.
Ok, so I ticked someone off because I made fun of the Ann Coulter doll. Oh come on. It's really funny! And apparently, I can't use the same whiny ass tactics that Conservatives use when they constantly blame liberals for everything, by constantly stating "the Conservatives will hate this!" Blah, blah, blah . . . So, anyway.
Sorry I haven't posted in a week. Life got a little busy with school (no, not Junior High school like some of my anonymous posters). I have about 9 months left until I finish my MBA. From there, I plan to become a selfish, money hungry, lobbyist who buys everything I want. No, that comment does not mean I have anything against money hungry bastards. Give me a break, will ya?
Ok, so perhaps I should clarify what the SistersTalk blog [b]is not[/b]. This blog [b]does not claim to be[/b]:
1. Factual 2. Liberal 3. Supportive of the Democratic party, although I do blog for Kucinich I think the Democrats are a lost cause 4. Supportive of Republicans -- lost cause, dead cause, done. Stick a fork in it. 5. Representative of all gay/lesbian people 6. Representative of all black people 7. Representative of all black females 8. Serious 9. Funny 10. Hot 11. Cold 12. Lukewarm 13. Journalistic (the writer is not a journalist)
What exactly is the SistersTalk blog? It's where I bitch about whatever I want to bitch about. It's where I celebrate good news. It's where I pass along interesting information. It's whatever you get from it.
05.23.04 (2:27 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
In a show of good faith, and a effort to give Dubya [b]some [/b]credit, a recent report from AP writer Daniel Cooney says Iraqis feel safer now than they felt during Saddam's 23-year rule. It's too bad that wasn't really our purpose in being there, but it's nice to see a[b] little [/b]bit of good in the situation.
I'd be leery of the wolf in sheep's clothing if I were the people of Iraq.
05.22.04 (11:14 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
As I continue my quest to piss off as many Conservative, pro-war, pro-Dubya, sons-of-bitches I can, I'm posting this article I received via the Lesbian News newsgroup. I predict the typical responses to this article will be: "those teachers are all liberal bastards who led those students astray!" Obviously, high school students are incapable of critical thinking and deductive reasoning, so they were definitely led astray by the likes of these miserable underqualified liberals.
There, I've predicted the Conservative rebuttal, so they can spare us the trouble -- unless they have something [b]different[/b] to say.
[b]Hard lessons from poetry class: Speech is free unless it's critical[/b] [i]By BILL HILL[/i]
Last update: 15 May 2004
Bill Nevins, a New Mexico high school teacher and personal friend, was fired last year and classes in poetry and the poetry club at Rio Rancho High School were permanently terminated. It had nothing to do with obscenity, but it had everything to do with extremist politics.
The "Slam Team" was a group of teenage poets who asked Nevins to serve as faculty adviser to their club. The teens, mostly shy youngsters, were taught to read their poetry aloud and before audiences. Rio Rancho High School gave the Slam Team access to the school's closed- circuit television once a week and the poets thrived.
In March 2003, a teenage girl named Courtney presented one of her poems before an audience at Barnes & Noble bookstore in Albuquerque, then read the poem live on the school's closed-circuit television channel.
A school military liaison and the high school principal accused the girl of being "un-American" because she criticized the war in Iraq and the Bush administration's failure to give substance to its "No child left behind" education policy.
The girl's mother, also a teacher, was ordered by the principal to destroy the child's poetry. The mother refused and may lose her job.
Bill Nevins was suspended for not censoring the poetry of his students. Remember, there is no obscenity to be found in any of the poetry. He was later fired by the principal.
After firing Nevins and terminating the teaching and reading of poetry in the school, the principal and the military liaison read a poem of their own as they raised the flag outside the school. When the principal had the flag at full staff, he applauded the action he'd taken in concert with the military liaison.
Then to all students and faculty who did not share his political opinions, the principal shouted: "Shut your faces." What a wonderful lesson he gave those 3,000 students at the largest public high school in New Mexico. In his mind, only certain opinions are to be allowed.
But more was to come. Posters done by art students were ordered torn down, even though none was termed obscene. Some were satirical, implicating a national policy that had led us into war. Art teachers who refused to rip down the posters on display in their classrooms were not given contracts to return to the school in this current school year.
The message is plain. Critical thinking, questioning of public policies and freedom of speech are not to be allowed to anyone who does not share the thinking of the school principal.
The teachers union has been joined in a legal action against the school by the National Writers Union, headquartered in New York City. NWU's at-large representative Samantha Clark lives and works in Albuquerque.
The American Civil Liberties Union has become the legal arm of the lawsuit pending in federal court.
Meanwhile, Nevins applied for a teaching post in another school and was offered the job but he can't go to work until Rio Rancho's principal sends the new school Nevins' credentials. The principal has refused to do so, and that adds yet another issue to the lawsuit, which is awaiting a trial date.
While students are denied poetry readings, poetry clubs and classes in poetry, Nevins works elsewhere and writes his own poetry.
Writers and editors who have spent years translating essays, films, poems, scientific articles and books by Iranian, North Korean and Sudanese authors have been warned not to do so by the U.S. Treasury Department under penalty of fine and imprisonment. Publishers and film producers are not allowed to edit works authored by writers in those nations. The Bush administration contends doing so has the effect of trading with the enemy, despite a 1988 law that exempts published materials from sanction under trade rules.
Robert Bovenschulte, president of the American Chemical Society, is challenging the rule interpretation by violating it to edit into English several scientific papers from Iran. Are book burnings next?
[i]Hill is a retired News-Journal reporter.[/i]
Free speech is only free speech if you're supportive of the United States; supportive of the Dubya Administration; and you agree with the social class in power at the time. Yep, sounds about "RIGHT."
05.22.04 (9:08 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
As I was logging in to make this post, I saw the headline: "The World Despises the Ugly American!!!!" I was thinking, "Yeah, so what?" We don't have a problem with the world creating negative stereotypes about everybody else -- including the nasty, vile, dirty, Iraqis who are so disorganized, ignorant, and prehistoric that they need the United States to teach them the way things should [b]really[/b] be done. To do that, we will appoint their governmental officials, make them curse Islam, and tell them they [b]will [/b]have a democracy. Hmm . . . seems like a pretty damn ugly thing to do to me.
So anyway, I was taking a break from life and chatting in the Gay.com chat rooms. My favorite: LeatherDykes. Well, that's my favorite this week. I won't go into too many details. So, someone clicked on my profile, found my blog, and started a conversation about Iraq. And then, reality set in. You know, the reality that homosexuals are raised in the same environment that heterosexuals are raised in. Yeah, that reality.
I was very disappointed in a lot of things I read from one "Daddy" in the room. She referred to the Iraqis as "those people" and said things like, "if they killed their own people, why wouldn't they kill us?" Basically, she wasn't bothered by what the soldiers in Iraq did because she viewed "those people" as naturally inclined to violent ways. She saw the soldiers as taking an automatic defensive stance against "those people" who are assumed to be naturally violent.
Somehow we got on the subject of morals. Of course, we debated the issue of who had more morals. She claimed the US had more morals than Iraq; I claimed the US had few morals, if any at all. By the end of the conversation, she'd decided I was a moron.
One woman I was flirting with asked me, "Do you always have that effect?"
05.21.04 (1:05 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Ok, just to point out a few things here (and, I don't have to be fair and balanced because I'm not a journalist).
In my opinion, the United States did not go to Iraq to rescue the Iraqi people from a horrendous dictator who killed his own people. The United States government could care fuckin' less about such things. Here's why I say that:
Between 1973 and 1983, the Chilean Dictator Gen. Augusto Pinochet murdered over 3,000 of his own people. Pinochet took over the country and refused to return the country to democratic rule -- something the US claims it's fighting so hard to see in Iraq. The United States did not rush to save the Spanish people. Why should the United States invest military labor and tax dollars in a war in Spain when Spain really has nothing the United States wants? Let's see. . . who was President during that 10 year time span? Richard Nixon -- a Republican from 1969 - 1974; Gerald D. Ford -- a Republican from 1974 - 1977; Jimmy Carter -- a Democrat from 1977 - 1981; and Ronald Reagen -- a Republican from 1981 - 1989.
The United States turns a blind eye to the fact that the President of Zimbabwe [b]denies food [/b]to millions of people while he's out spending tons of foreign currency on expensive hotels and fancy items. The people of Zimbabwe suffer because of the government's land seizure policies. Isn't that the same as "killing your own people?" Before you say, "it's not the same!" How would you feel if Dubya made a bad decision which resulted in millions of Americans dying, and he's off spending what looks like pay-off money from foreign countries? When the people speak out against the government, they are made to suffer. Many people believe those who speak out are killed because they disappear and are never found. Isn't that what Saddam supposedly did? The US does nothing because . . . well, because Zimbabwe doesn't have a damn thing the US wants.
See: England Cricketers to Face Protests. Yeah, I hear ya. It's all propaganda. Keep tellin' yourself that if it makes ya feel better about what we're doing in Iraq.
Ya know, I could go on, with case after case -- but what good will it do? I get so fed up with the people who act as if the only people capable of developing a logical thought are those who agree with Dubya. How dare they assume that the rest of us don't read and do our research. If you ask me, they are the ones who don't do their research. If they do, they look for evidence to support ONLY what they want to support.
Well, your theory is flawed. With this hypothesis, your p value is 1. I don't give a damn what you say. The United States did not go to war to save the people of Iraq from a leader who kills his own people. That was the propaganda the Dubya administration fed the people who were not well-read. If that is the case, the United States would be kickin' ass all over the place. You need a new theory.
05.21.04 (8:41 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
As a former customer of SBC Ameritech, I know I would never want to work for that company. I'll never use their service again. I would buy and train a carrier pigeon if SBC Ameritech was the last available telecommunications company in the world. It comes as no surprise that the Union at SBC Launched a Strike in 13 States. It seems the company and the union can not agree on health care, pension plans, and job security issues. Employees are increasingly concerned about the possibility of outsourcing -- as they should be. Lots of other companies with similar processes and systems are sending jobs to India, why not SBC Ameritech? Don't make these employees come to work on Friday and find out they don't have a job on Monday -- which is kinda how companies [b]prefer[/b] doing it. I know how it works.
I've been the HR person who keeps it a secret, smiles in your face, and hands you a pink slip on Friday. Why tell you a month in advance and risk you leaving before I can replace you or before I'm prepared for your departure? After all, the company's bottom line is what's most important. The company's not worried about you and your damn kids. That's the reoccurring theme in my MBA classes -- the bottom line. It's a sad thought.
The politicians are really "showin' their asses" lately. That's a term my grandma and mama used all the time when I used to misbehave.
The latest:
Pelosi Accuses Bush of 'Incompetence' on Iraq. Republicans Say Democratic Leader Went Over the Line.
Umm, this from the grown men who are fighting amongst themselves and arguing about who gets to call themselves a real Republican? Give me a fuckin' break.
Marc Racicot, the chairman of the Bush-Cheney campaign, described Pelosi's comments as a ''reprehensible attempt to blame America for the actions of terrorists,'' and called on Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry to repudiate her remarks.
Now wait just a damn minute. You people (Republicans) were just throwin' darts at each other about that very damn thing! And why should Kerry repudiate her remarks? Bush didn't have to step in and break up the brawl between the dumb ass Republicans who were arguing about who was a real Republican and blaming each other about the discord in the Republican party!
These are people who are making laws for the country. A buncha fuckin' whiney ass cry babies who cut off one argument with a fellow Republican or Democrat only long enough to attack the opponent when the opponent says something deemed inappropriate. Close your eyes and imagine a buncha grown folks in suits standing around bitchin' about gawd knows what (because they don't really know) when they really need to get some organization, get their heads out their asses, set their political agendas aside (both parties) and do what's right for the country.
Somebody's mama needs to go through the House with a can of whoop ass.
Source of quotes by the ridiculous politicians: Pelosi Accuses Bush of 'Incompetence' on Iraq -- By JIM ABRAMS, AP
05.20.04 (3:04 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Well, I completely forgot what I was gonna blog about yesterday because . . . well, the service was down because, well . . .
Anyway, I did see something in the news today that just made me laugh and laugh. It reminded me of my post from a few days ago about the Conservatives who planned to vote for Kerry. I had joked about the bar brawl between the Conservatives fighting over who was a real Conservative and who wasn't. Well, in the news today, I saw this:
[b]Feud Erupts in GOP Today Over Who's a Real Republican[/b]
"The speaker is correct in that nothing we are called upon to do comes close to matching the heroism of our troops," he said. "All we're called upon to do is not spend our nation into bankruptcy while our soldiers risk their lives. I fondly remember a time when real Republicans stood for fiscal responsibility."
The conflict erupted as Hastert laid down a budget making it easier to pass future tax cuts regardless of their impact on the federal deficit. McCain and a group of GOP moderates in the Senate want to rein in deficits by making tax cuts harder.
Apparently, the fake Republicans and the Real Republicans are arguing about the war in Iraq, abuse of Iraqi prisoners, tax cuts and budget deficits.
Is there a difference between a real jackass and a fake jackass? I don't know.
Anyway, this isn't the post I wanted to make yesterday, but that's all I have. It's great be back to tblog and all its popups!
05.18.04 (4:02 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
So, the attempt to distract begins again as Dubya renews his quest to write discrimination into the Constitution. Word has it that he has called on Congress to move things along and get that Federal Amendment that bans gay marriages done. Now damnit! We must defend and protect all Americans from the homos.
Well, I don't expect any better. He's dumb and he's desperate.
And speaking of not expecting any better, I received a personal account of an anti-gay marriage rally in Arizona from a member of the newsgroup [i]Lesbian News[/i]. Michelle Steiner writes:
Who would hold an outdoors rally from noon to 1:30 PM in Phoenix in late May? Why the anti gay-marriage folk, that's who. But they did tell all their adherents to wear white "to signify the purity of marriage"; I think it was because of the heat. The temperature got into triple digits.
I got there about 11:15 (a quarter hour earlier than I had planned; traffic was light today), and found them easily enough. Most of the were carrying signs that said "Protect Marriage" or "No Judicial Activism." I was carrying a sign that said, Marriage is a Civil Right. NO SPECIAL RIGHTS FOR HETEROSEXUALS" and had a pride flag taped to it.
I met only about a dozen or so of people on our side during the two hours or so that I was there. The opposition kept their promotions pretty much limited to their churches, so word about it didn't get out until fairly late. Two of the women I met got married Saturday in Phoenix; one is the president of ICAN; she told me that she'll have a photo of my sign on that sight later today. See that site for info about the marriages, and the demonstration on Tuesday.
I didn't speak to any of the opposition unless spoken to first. I had some very interesting and polite conversations with some of them. I found that when discussing the Bible, I knew more than they did.
When some of them said they would pray for me, I invited them to do so, and jokingly said, "as long as it is 'pray' with an 'a' and not 'prey' with an 'e.'" When asked to join them in prayer, I declined, saying I didn't mind them praying for me, but I would not pray with them. When they finished praying, I thanked them. This happened three or four times during the day.
One of them, another one of us, and I were jointly interviewed by a reporter. I think she said she was from Channel 3, but she was taking notes, without a camera or microphone in sight. In addition, I was interviewed by Channels 5 and 12, Galavision, Telemundo, and one or two independent producers.
One of their security people tried to keep me out of their assembly area, and the courtyard in front of the state supreme court building. I asked his authority (he had none) and said it's public property and I had just as much of a right to be there as they did. He became more insistent, and politely but firmly refused to leave. One of the other security people finally dragged him off because he was starting to become loud and abusive.
I did get into a shouting match with one person (or rather, a group of people); when he started shouting at me, I shouted back at him. Telemundo got part of it on tape.
I'll be at the rally Tuesday morning to support the ministers who conducted the weddings on Saturday.
Michelle, you go girl! Thanks for the update.
I did see some pictures of these anti-gay protestors all dressed in white. I laughed, but then I felt almost afraid at the same time. I mean, these people are actually protesting againt two people gettting married because they're of the same sex. What else are they capable of? I will not say that religion makes people do foolish things because that's just not true. I will say that people use religion as an excuse to do foolish things -- including standing out in the 100+ Arizona heat protesting about 2 people getting married. What the hell (no pun intended) were they thinkin'?
Andrea is a dear friend of mine, although I don't know why. I was pretty rude to her when we met because I viewed her as a "womanizer" and made no secret of it. With just the right touch, Andrea brought out a side of me that most people don't see. My initial impression of her was dead wrong. Although we share very few of the same interests, we understand each other. Read her blog and get a peek of her awesome sense of humor.
Right now, Andrea is a member of the TDS women's pro cycling team. If you visit her blog, you'll read all sorts of funny stories about her adventures on the road. After you read her blog, visit her Quest for the Olympics page and see what you can do to help. Andrea and I would both appreciate it a lot.
05.17.04 (10:47 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
A small amount of the nerve agent sarin was found in a shell that exploded in Iraq, the U.S. army said Monday in the first announcement of discovery of any of the weapons on which Washington made its case for war.
At this point, I think the American people will have a difficult time believing much of anything the military, the CIA, the Dubya Administration, Powell, Rice, Rumsfeld, or anybody else says right now.
One spare round with "a small amount of nerve agent" is not what I would call a weapon of mass destruction. If there are any military buffs who really know their weapons and can tell me something different, PLEASE do so. If they found a warehouse full of these things, please, alert the press! I think the Brigadier General is reachin' here.
05.17.04 (10:01 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Ok, so I've seen it all. My intent for this morning's post was to be a thorn in a Conservative's ass by celebrating the first legalized gay marriages in the United States -- taking place in MA. You know, that thing many Conservatives and Religious Rights wanted to defend and protect because it's so sacred (even though quite a few of them are divorced). Yep, I'm being a "gawd damn liberal" by pointing that out. Anyway, that was going to be the intent of this post; however, my attention was diverted by a posting I saw on PatriotActs. I'm so easily distracted.
It seems, there are a group of Conservatives who are planning to vote for Kerry. Now, before I even discuss their intent to vote for that spineless weeny, I just want to say: DAMN, what a surprise! Now, will there be a bar brawl over who gets to call themselves "real Conservatives?" Will the real Conservative please stand up?
Actually, voting for Kerry doesn't really make ya any less of a Conservative if ya ask me. It just makes ya appear "less Conservative." That sounded funny. Let me re-read that sentence. I'll rewrite it. Voting for Kerry doesn't make ya a liberal. It just makes ya appear "less Conservative." Much better. With all his deep pocket lobbyists and lack of attention to civil rights issues, I'd say we're getting a watered-down version of a Conservative. Less filling, tastes like shit.
And not to divert anymore attention from the historical event, congratulations to the first gay and lesbian couples in history to legally wed in the good ole United States of America -- the land of the free and equal. Now, these legally wed homosexuals can pay their taxes as full and equal citizens.
05.16.04 (7:24 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Reported by Reuters:
Citing current and former U.S. intelligence officials, The New Yorker said the interrogation methods were part of a secret "special access program" that gave advance approval to kill, capture or interrogate so-called high-value targets in the war against terrorism.
As the Iraqi insurgency grew and more U.S. soldiers died, Rumsfeld and Defense Undersecretary for Intelligence Stephen Cambone expanded the scope to bring the interrogation tactics to Abu Ghraib, the article said.
In the interest of fair and balanced reporting, I have to say I did not speak to these current and former U.S. intelligence officials myself, so I can't say with accuracy that they did indeed state that Rumsfeld approved the interrogation tactics used against Iraqi prisoners (of which 70 - 90% were arrested by mistake). In addition, I can not state that even if I had spoken with these current and former U.S. intelligence officials that they were telling the truth because I was not there and I did not hear Rumsfeld issue the order myself. I encourage you to go forth and find your own sources of information if you're interested in finding a more balanced viewpoint.
So, now that I've stated my load of Conservative bullshit, I'm inclined to believe that Rumsfeld issued the order; however, you are indeed free to believe whatever you like.
So, we have more secrets from the Dubya Administration. This Presidency is turning out to be much more interesting than the Clinton Presidency.
[b]Still [/b]no word whatsoever from Ann Coulter on this issue. She's still working on her "damn liberals are responsible" argument for this issue. It may take her awhile so I'll hang back and keep watching.
John Kerry . . . what the hell is up with him? His responses to all of this are just so . . . "Duh, I don't know." Know what I mean? They lack any real substance or conviction. The man is so spineless. He's too afraid to make a strong statement about [b]anything[/b] -- including Iraq right now. Why? Because he's not quite sure how the voters feel. He and Dubya are neck and neck in the polls and Mr. Spineless is keeping his mouth shut and playing it cool. It's such a sad thing to see that John Spineless Kerry is all the Democrats had to offer us as an alternative. If Nader turns out to be a cause of concern, then it's just what the Democrats deserve for giving us crap to choose from.
05.15.04 (2:32 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
And on with the liberal antics. . . .
Received in my morning press releases was this:
50 Items of gay interest to be auctioned on eBay during July
Brother Help Thyself (BHT), Baltimore-Washington's gay community chest, announces a unique internet auction fundraiser, 'Gay on eBay", featuring items that will appeal to the gay community. Starting July 10, fifty unusual, and sometimes provocative, items will be available for bidding on the eBay online auction site. The auctions will close on July 18. All proceeds of the auctions will be donated to BHT, which in turn will help fund BHT's annual grants to gay and lesbian service organizations. In 2003, BHT distributed grants totaling in excess of $100,000 and anticipates exceeded that amount in 2004.
The fundraiser, a service project of the District of Columbia Bear Club, involves many local businesses, leather / motorcycle clubs, and sports teams who are donating the items being sold on eBay. The DC Bear Club will administer the eBay auctions and ship items to the auction winners. Payment for items will be made through eBay's electronic payment facility, PayPal, and will be deposited directly into BHT accounts.
The eBay auctions will feature items that will be of interest to gays and lesbians. John Copes, President of the DC Bear Club, said, "We want this event to be fun for everyone, and at the same time, raise a lot of money for BHT. We will be selling everything from uniforms to gay history memorabilia." The club will also host a donation collection party where local celebrities and title holders will be photographed with items.
So, if you're looking for some great stuff and you want to support the gay agenda (you know, the "AGENDA" -- that thing the Conservatives and Religious fanatics swear we're secretly plotting to use to destroy everything that's right with the world), check out the seller [b]BHTauction[/b] July 10 - July 18, 2004. Please, even if you're not gay and you're an ally, check out the auctions anyway. You too can secretly plot to destroy all that's right with the world.
By the way (and yes, I'm gonna ramble for awhile, so grab your coffee) . . .
Did ya notice that all the talk of gay rights and gay marriage rights has kinda fizzled away lately? It's kinda hard for the Conservatives and Religious fanatics to use anti-gay rhetoric to distract America when ya have oh, a heap-o-shit goin' down in Iraq right now. That was the Dubya campaign plan though: distract with anti-gay rhetoric. Now, now you Conservative readers, don't get all pissy. You know that was the case. If you can prove otherwise, please respond to this post in the comments section so that we may have fair and balanced reporting.
But, see . . . the Police Union wasn't distracted. They dumped Dubya's ass faster than a pimp dumps a bad bitch. Will the Conservatives say that the men and women in uniform who protect us while we sleep are mindless liberal idiots? Will the Conservatives say that the men and women in uniform who we trust to protect our children while they are away from us during the day are mindless liberal idiots? Go ahead. Say it. And when the Fire Fighters Union dump Dubya's ass and support Kerry, call them mindless liberal idiots, too. They didn't fall for the distraction. They know what's really going on. They know that Dubya made promises to them that he didn't keep.
I think (oh yes, I can think) that many people resisted the lure of Dubya's distraction -- at least in the end we'll see that. And trust me, resisting the lure of Dubya's distraction doesn't make ya dumb. It doesn't even make you a closet liberal. It just goes to show that you know there are other things going on in the world.
05.15.04 (11:46 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
And "John" says on Blogarama about the SistersTalk Blog:
Not really worth the time to read. It's just another generic conservative-bashing, mindlessly liberal blog. If you agree with that kind of thought, you won't read anything that you haven't already thought for yourself. If you're on the other side, it just reinforces liberal stereotypes. Either way, it's all regurgitation; if you're looking for something thoughtful, balanced, or even remotely insightful, go somewhere else.
If you agree with anything I say here on SistersTalk, you're a "mindless liberal". Spoken like a "true Conservative." Anything I say here is all "regurgitation." See, didn't I tell ya that these folks think:
A. If you disagree with Bush, you can't develop a reasonable thought
B. If you disagree with Bush, you're mindless
C. If you disagree with Bush, you're just a Conservative-basher
D. If you disagree with the Republicans, you're just a what. . . say it with me . . . a DAMN LIBERAL!
I just wanted to point out that I noticed "John" never responds to any of my comments here. This would give John the opportunity to defend the honor of the Conservatives and point out my many flaws on a regular basis; however John did take advantage of the opportunity to slam my blog under my Blogarama review. Typical coward-like behavior, yes? See, the difference between people like me and "John" -- I don't hide. If I have something to say, I say it -- loud and clear, using my full name and a photo. Oh, am I a "damn liberal" for pointing that out? Oh, I also noticed "John" didn't leave a link to [b]his[/b] blog so that we could take a look at it to see [b]his[/b] balanced review of what's going on. I mean, he knows how to really do it, right? Why not show us how to do it!
I think I will file this comment under . . . the Humor category. If there was a Garbage category, it would go there.
05.14.04 (3:49 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
They backed Clinton in 1992. They backed Clinton in 1996. They changed their course and backed Bush in 2000. Today, the International Brotherhood of Police Officers says:
"After three and a half years of disappointing leadership under George Bush, we need to change course . . .
The union has announced that it will back John Kerry. That's really only a minor swerve in the road, but I'm sure many people welcome the change.
We can expect Fire Firefighters to announce their endorsement of Kerry anyday now. In March, I read an article about Fire Fighters being very disappointed in Bush and his use of photo opportunities with Fire Fighters immediately after 9/11 for his campaign, yet he failed to follow through on many promises he made to the International Association of Fire Fighters.
Let's see. Who's next? The Teachers Union? This [i]No Child Left Behind [/i] program was a total botch job -- not to mention a complete invasion of privacy. Military recruiters now have the right to a high school student's contact information and a school counselor has to give it to them. So, when the recruiters are calling you up and hassling you about joining the military, you got Dubya to thank for that one.
05.12.04 (10:47 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a Republican from Texas, said members of Congress were overreacting when they expressed disgust and anger after seeing the latest prison abuse pictures. Members of Congress viewed over 1,600 new images taken by personal digital cameras. Congress is afraid of releasing these images to the public for fear of more international outrage. Here are the images that Tom Delay says members of Congress are overreacting about:
1. Male prisoners forced to masturbate 2. Female prisoners forced to have sex with one another 3. A male prisoner forced to sodomize himself with an unknown object 4. A male prisoner repeatedly hitting himself against a wall as if to make himself unconscious 5. Female prisoners forced to expose their breasts and perform other sex acts
Tom Delay says that the ones who are overreacting are the ones who have a political agenda and were against the war to begin with.
05.12.04 (4:59 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
In my usual Wednesday morning therapy session, I talked about all the things going on in Iraq and how it's affecting my emotional health -- especially since I write about it a lot and I tend to get very emotionally involved in events. It may not seem like I'm emotional about much because I do look at the politics of the events. So, separating the politics for the moment, I'd like to think about Nick Berg. Yes, it's hard to separate politics from the name Nick Berg, but it's not impossible.
Nick's family probably isn't watching much TV or listening to the radio. TV reporters and journalists are most likely hounding this family for interview opportunities. We can probably expect to see a full hour show about his life soon--where he grew up, where he went to school, his high school sweetheart, those kinds of things. Media hype. His family needs to grieve in peace. I certainly hope the media will allow the family to do so.
Nick was a casualty in a war -- one of many. I'm certainly not minimizing his family's loss. I would never do that. I think we should all be grieving for the lives lost, not only lost American lives, but lost innocent Iraqi lives as well. This is what anti-war protestors grieved about before it happened. Now, those people who supported the war can grieve about it now. It doesn't take hindsight to know that war will result in many lost lives -- even innocent lost lives. You don't have to be a Conservative, or even smart, to know that.
05.11.04 (11:17 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Words from a fiction writer who wants so badly to be a journalist we take seriously:
Liberals are the only known species whose powers of reasoning are not improved by the benefit of hindsight. Not only are they always fighting the last war, in most cases they're surrendering. -- Ann Coulter
Ann's own doll. Looks just like Barbie!
She calls herself a "journalist" and she was selling THAT doll from her website. I saw it there awhile back and just laughed and laughed. She even has a [b]huge[/b] photo gallery on her site. I kid you not. I think she wants us to believe she's the Barbie of Journalism. I swear it is! Can we say [b]conceited bitch[/b]?
I noticed she's conveniently not even mentioning the abuse in Iraq in this article -- which is dated 2 days after the story actually broke. I'm waiting to see her usual "those damn liberals" analysis of the whole Iraq abuse issue. She will certainly twist, turn, and reach into the depths of all that fiction writing experience and find a way to make this a "damn liberals" thing.
How Ann [b]attempts [/b] to work her magic (but forget that educated people do read her shit) . She traces steps in history in an attempt to prove that the liberals and the past Democratic presidents are the reason for 9/11 and, essentially, the mess in Iraq. She often goes back to Jimmy Carter! Her opinion pieces are written with really long-winded [i]prose[/i] (notice I used the word prose and not journalism) that take a while to chew on. When you're finished reading, you kinda just sit back and wonder what point she was trying to make about the Democrats. Sometimes you feel the need to read it again, not because you're dumb, but because you really didn't understand what the hell she was trying to get at. Especially because you [b]know[/b] there was a Republican president in there somewhere and she kinda glossed over events that happened during his presidency. If she has to talk at length about a Republican president's term because something really significant happened, then she always finds a way to blame it on the Democrats ("Congress was controlled by Democrats at the time so the President's hands were tied" -- that kinda thing).
See, Ann knows that . . . well, a lot of people aren't very well-read. So she just spews her shit and throws out the numbers, the names, the dates and really acts like she knows what the hell she's talking about. She doesn't expect that there may be a few of us who have actually developed some critical thinking skills and can smell her shit a mile away. Of course, anyone who disagrees with her is a what? Say it with me: "a damn liberal." Say it again with feeling!
Or maybe she really does believe what she writes. The thought of that scares me; however, she has lots of company.
05.11.04 (11:50 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
I was at a study group meeting yesterday trying to get some statistics homework done and we ended up talking about Iraq and the prison abuse issue. It's all anyone can talk about lately. I had to take my boys along to the study group meeting and they ended up listening to the conversation. On the way home (a 45 minute drive), it was difficult having a conversation with them about everything that's going on because how do you explain these things to an 11-year-old and a 9-year-old.
I started with trying to explain the whole point in the Iraq war. I told them Americans were told there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and now, after over a year of searching, we've yet to find them. I said, "it's kinda like someone telling you there's a huge pink elephant in your living room and you go looking for it for over a year. Ya just can't miss a huge pink elephant, can ya?" I realize it's more complicated than that, but really people. Ya really can't miss a huge pink elephant in your living room -- unless it's not there.
We then talked about why the prisoners were abused. I told them that some of the abuse happened during the interrogations -- while they were trying to get these prisoners to spill the beans about the big pink elephant (WMD) that's isn't really in your living room (Iraq). It was an interesting conversation -- for me anyway.
I saw in the news some very disturbing pictures of a naked man being terrified by soldiers and attack dogs. Now, I ask you: how much of a threat are you when you're one person standing completely naked, in front of strangers, covering your private parts because you're humiliated? An Army General who investigated the activity -- not the media, not a "damn liberal" -- stated that the soldiers had no discipline, poor leadership, and absolutely no training. Now, for all the pro-Dubyas and those who will still choose to look to the Left and the Center for someone to blame, I ask you: does this Army General have an agenda? After all, he would have the expertise to state that someone besides these soldiers should share the blame:
''A few soldiers and civilians conspired to abuse and conduct egregious acts of violence against detainees and other civilians outside the bounds of international laws and the Geneva Convention,'' Taguba told the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Why, I would call that terrorism. Using the word abuse is simply not harsh enough. But, because they're Americans, we've decided not to use the word "terrorism" in association with Americans. Conspiring to abuse and conduct acts of violence . . . hmm, that sounds a lot like what we have accused the Shiites of doing in their own land against American soldiers. Dubya certainly called them terrorists and "enemies of Democracy." Perhaps now Americans have a better picture of what's been going on in Iraq and can better understand why the people have revolted and are standing up saying, NO MORE, get the hell out of OUR COUNTRY. We don't want you here.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. . . I can hear it now. The Ann Coultres and the other pro-Dubyas saying: "it's all anti-Bush propoganda." Oh, all those pictures of naked Iraqi prisoners being humiliated, abused, and some even killed at the hands of Americans is all staged to make Dubya look bad. People are only exposing this scandal to make Dubya look bad. All these "damn liberals" are gonna get the US blown up because we give a damn about a buncha fuckin' Iraqis. Yeah, well, stick it where the sun don't shine; that's all I have to say to the likes of the Ann Coultres of the world. Based on limited knowlege, Americans supported protecting the US, but not like this.
Source of Quote: General Testifies Training, Leadership to Blame By PAULINE JELINEK
05.10.04 (10:52 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
They say their mission was to find the weapons and find Saddam. They say they were given directives to make the prisoners talk. They say they were given directives from commanders, military intelligence officers, CIA operatives and civilian contractors who conducted interrogations. That's the defense the soldiers who are facing court martials are using. And you know what, I am inclined to believe that defense. I believe these soldiers were made to believe that the prisoners they were interrogating were nothing more than dirty, filthy, no good, terrorist Iraqis. Look at the shame these prisoners were made to suffer.
Another report out of London, not a US based paper, states that Britain was warned about the Iraq torture charges over a year ago. Now, the people are trying to force the British Secretary of Defense to admit whether Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair knew about it. If he did, that meant Bush knew about it a year ago. Why? Blair and Bush have been joined at the hip about Iraq since day one -- each covering the other's ass all the way.
The mission was to find weapons of mass destruction -- by any means necessary. No weapons found, design a new mission: create democracy in Iraq -- by any means necessary. We have to tell the American people somethin'. We've spent $87 billion already!
The whole damn thing just keeps falling apart and very few Conservative, pro-Bush folks want to look to the Right to see why. They're too busy lookin' to Left and the Center bitchin' about the "damn liberals" and what we've done (or not done) through intermittent Democratic presidency to create this present mess in Iraq -- as if the outspoken liberals sent our troops to Iraq to look for weapons of mass destruction after the 9/11 event that had little to do with Iraq or weapons of mass destruction. Yes, history does build up to crescendo -- a climatic event. But damn, Dubya really screwed this one up.
Now that our soliders are involved in scandal and have been put to shame, placed in the middle of Dubya's mess, Americans are struggling with their own sense if patriotism. We don't know how to react to something like this. We have soldiers in Iraq risking their lives; yet, a few soldiers have tainted the reputation of "AMERICA." That's a difficult thing to deal with for the many people driving around with their American pride stickers on their bumper stickers. How will they feel now that we are the subject of ridicule?
05.09.04 (7:54 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Ok, so I'm reading reviews of "Popular Blogs" on another site and the number one popular blog is written by a young girl who is using her looks to promote her blog. Hey, it's America. You go girl. Work that shit. The Miss America pageant ain't about being smart; that pageant is about being HOT! Do we really care how smart the contestants sound when they answer the questions? Nope! She better not be ugly in that evening gown. So, Ms. Thang over there on her hot blog has been socialized well in good ole America. Now, usually I would bust her shit out all over the SistersTalk blog, but she's young and impressionable. So, I won't say who she is. Besides, she'll be over here herself soon enough to defend herself; that's what they always do.
Here are some of the comments from the guys who read her blog:
She's hot, brings up interesting topics, some good debate, I don't agree with her but she's hot so I give her a 10. -- Rated By: Brian
Rated 3 on Saturday, 13 March 2004 She's very cute; too cute for anyone to break the news to her that she's just not that bright or interesting.-- Rated By: John
Rated 1 on Thursday, 11 March 2004 This is by far the most pretentious and fluff-filled site I have encountered. -- Rated By: Jay
Almost all her comments are from men & young boys --even on the blog, and well, rightfully so. The blog is marketed to men and horney young boys. But, it's not a sex site or anything like that: it's a "philosophy site" that's categorized in Faith & religion -- full of doctored pictures of a young, "hot" (term used loosely by me because I personally don't think she's hot), blonde, co-ed.
She's having philosophical debates about everything from race, religion, gay rights, and affirmative action -- most of which had me yelling at my laptop monitor saying "where the hell does she get this shit?" It's apparent she's taking quotes from school textbooks and simply rewriting them for her blog posts, using very little critical thinking in her work. No, I don't assume this because she's using her looks to promote her blog. I know this because I was an udergrad once too and actually [b]paid attention [/b] in class.
If she were really smart, she'd throw some ads on that fucker and make some money before people start figuring her out. She certainly gets a lot of traffic. She could buy herself more Abercrombie gear.
05.09.04 (11:03 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
I thought this was quite indicative of what we could expect from good ole Dick:
"Don Rumsfeld is the best secretary of defense the United States has ever had," Cheney said in a statement from his office late on Saturday. The statement appeared to signal a White House push to rally Republicans behind the embattled Rumsfeld.
"People ought to get off his case and let him do his job," said Cheney, a Republican.
I agree, Dick. Rumsfeld should do his job. Nobody's stoppin' him. Now, I can't say that we should blame Rumsfeld. I always go back to the sinking ship analogy. As of January 2000, George W. Bush took over this ship. It's sinking. The person who's ultimately responsible for a sinking ship is the Captain. The Captain would be George W. Bush.
I was reading all the updates on the Iraq prison abuse and people seem so surprised that in the midst of all this is a female soldier. The media shows pictures of her with a cigarette in her mouth, half-cocked smile, hangin' with the boys. That's a far cry from the sweet, down-home, innocent Jessica Lynch POW story the media fed us. I'm not surprised at all to see a woman in the mix of all this. I've been saying all along that women go along and play along -- especially in socialization situations. No, I'm certainly not blaming anyone else for this woman's behavior because there are many women and men who wouldn't dream of behaving the way this woman did. I do know many women who want to fit in. I know many men who want to fit in. These people do what they feel is necessary -- and sometimes get much pleasure in doing so.
This female soldier's family has been quoted as saying it's "just not like her." How do they know what's "like her"? Many gay and lesbian people are closeted for years because they don't want to suffer any isolation from their family. Many adults keep secrets from their family about the nature of their true character for the same reason -- fear of isolation. I feel very sorry for this family because of what they now have to deal with: especially because of the soldier's gender. Most people just expect better of women. It's unfair to place that kind of burden on a woman -- expecting natural kindness just because we have tits and a chocha.
I certainly hope this doesn't open the door for those ridiculous arguments that state women don't belong in war situations because the stress is just too much to bear. If Rumsfeld was doing his job, he'd have better trained soldiers in Iraq -- be it male or female. That's a much better argument to have, yes?
05.07.04 (6:44 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
I've been waiting to use the mostly teenage, and very over-used, homophobic phrase "so gay" in a good way for so long. Today, I get to do that. In a press release I received via email today, I learned that Lago Vista High School in Texas will allow same-sex couples to attend the prom.
Student Sherrell Ingram, who is not gay, wanted to take her female friend to the prom and was prohibited from doing so. Sherrel and her mother insisted that the school district drop its policy that prohibited same-sex couples from attending the prom, and when the school refused to do so, Sherrell and her mother, Ginger White, filed a lawsuit. They were very concerned that this policy was unfair to gay and lesbian students. This mother-daughter team won their lawsuit and the school district has suspended its policy while the school district puts more thought into its role in sponsoring school activites.
That's right. Kick some Texas ass. Dubya will return to a different kinda Texas -- with the sodomy laws being overturned and now high school proms becoming "so gay." I would love to see him return sooner than later.
Anyway, congrats to Sherrell and her mother Ginger.
05.07.04 (10:41 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
I've been trying to refrain from commenting about Dubya's Defense Secretary because, well, I've already criticized his girl and his boy (Rice and Powell). His Administration really makes me cringe. A Canadian made a very good point way back when he criticized the Bush Administration in an eBay auction that was banned last July. He created the Axis of Weasles Art Cards which featued Bush as the Ace, Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Ari Fleischer (who used to be Bush's mouthpiece until it was obvious he wasn't very good at making Bush look smart), John Ashcroft, Dick Cheney (of course -- who could forget good ole Dick? Dick who?) and Condoleeza Rice.
eBay banned the sell of these playing cards after many users wrote in complaining about them. Apparently, eBay is not to be used to promote a political cause **cough**. Well, I've seen many, many, auction ads placed where it is so obvious (even to a blind and mute man) the seller is promoting a political cause. This particular seller could not promote his political cause. eBay backed down and eventually allowed the seller to place his items back on the site, but by that time, he didn't need to do that. The media had caught on to the story and provided this website with so much free advertising that this guy didn't need to pay eBay shit to post his auctions on their site. No publicity is bad publicity, right?
And as I digressed again. . . I was going to criticize Rumsfeld. It won't have nearly the punch it would have had if I done it sooner.
So, Rumsfeld was keeping secrets from Dubya about soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners, eh? That doesn't surprise me. Dubya's administration is all about lies and keeping things from the people; why not keep things from each other - if he really did keep that from Dubya as they claim. At this point, I wouldn't believe a word of it. The ultimate goal for Dubya is to implement a democratic society in Iraq so the US can get what it wants -- what's a few dead Iraqi prisoneers to him in the scheme of things? The problem lies in what this does to his reputation -- particularly during an election season. No, I'm not saying he advocated it or even suggested it. What I am saying is that he [b]might[/b] have known and activated selective hearing because of his ultimate goals for Iraq.
Think about it: we're learning about all these things Dubya[b] did [/b]know about and did not inform the American people about. Would you put it past him to have known about the prisoner abuse before this all came to public light? After all, Rumsfeld knew and said nothing and he's standing by Rumsfeld. Why would he do that?
05.04.04 (11:05 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
I've just finished reading a news article that talks about the US soldiers in Iraq who killed Iraqi prisoners. One prisoner was killed by a private contractor who worked as an interrogator for the CIA. One soldier shot and killed an Iraqi prisoner who threw a rock at him. In total, there were 25 Iraqi prisoners killed by US military personnel -- based on the information the government has selectively chosen to release. They will not release the names of the soldiers who killed these Iraqi prisoners.
I ask this of you . . . if Iraqi military personnel killed US prisoners of war (especially a US prisoner who threw a rock), we would quickly call them terrorists. May we call these US soldiers terrorists? Or, are not allowed to do that because they are Americans? People have opted to use the word "Un-Amercian" to describe these soldiers.
We are such hypocrits and are quite selective with our choice of words.
05.03.04 (9:03 am) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Ok, a little pop culture (as promised waaaay back). I know, does it have to be Menudo? YES! I read an article today that Menudo is coming back. For those of you who may not remember who the hell Menudo is, this is one of the first really popular bubble-gum boy bands -- responsible for developing Ricky Martin's career. Yep, that's right. Ricky Martin. The way the band worked was young boys would audition (usually age 12 - 13) and would remain in the band until they were 16 -- at which time they were booted out and replaced with a new boy. The concept worked because, well, teenage girls are fickle and love a new boy every 2 years. The producers wanted to get rid of the boys before their voices changed and their appeal wore off.
So, guess who was a HUGE fan of Menudo? Ya promise not to laugh? I was! You said you wouldn't laugh! I was the only Black girl in school who was obsessed with a Puerto Rican boy band. Wait, I take that back. There was one more. She and I ended up being great friends. Ricky Martin was not one of my favorites though. As I look back on this obsession, I've analyzed why I was obsessed with this boy band. Bear with me, ok? (oh, here she goes -- off on a tangent)
I'll keep it short. Ya know how a lot of young boys look like girls with short hair? If you cut a young girl's hair, she looks like a tomboy, or you really can't tell if she's a girl or a boy -- unless puberty has set in. (no, I'm not some sick perv, trust me). When I was 15, I found myself attracted to people who appeared gender neutral. Still today, that's the case. I'm most attracted to women who are androgynous, or women who don't feel the need to be excessively femme or excessively butch. Of course, umm . . . in the end, all that matters is whether she's a good woman and makes a lot of money (just kidding).
By the way, why is it that no one ever hits on me?
I digressed. That's my pop culture post for the month.
05.01.04 (2:49 pm) posted by Genia
vote for me on digg and reddit
Well, the situation in Iraq is getting worse and worse, despite Dubya's declaration of "Mission Accomplished" well over a year ago. Apparently, there are accusations of alleged abuse of Iraqi prisoners. I made sure I worded that statement as [i]alleged abuse[/i] because the Ann Coultres and pro-Dubyas of the world will swear this is all anti-Bush propaganda designed to make Dubya look bad and undermine his re-election effort. They'll also swear that even if 6 soldiers did abuse a few Iraqi prisoners, the world will still be a better place once the US forces democracy on Iraq -- regardless of the means in which we get it done.
A few quotes that jumped out of me:
President Bush has condemned the mistreatment, saying he shared ''a deep disgust that those prisoners were treated the way they were treated.'' He said that is ''not the way we do things in America.''
Actually, Mr. President, that's exactly how we do it in America. Why do you keep painting this picture of "Wholier-than-thou-Americ a"? We abuse our children. We abuse our wives. We abuse our elderly. Give me a fuckin' break.
''They were ugly images. Is this the way the Americans treat prisoners?'' asked Ahmad Taher, 24, a student at Baghdad's Mustansiriyah University. ''Americans claim that they respect freedom and democracy - but only in their country.''
Well said, Ahmad. I agree. America takes care of America, and don't let any of the propaganda fool ya. The only time we take an interest in any other country and pretend we care is when they have something we want. I would like to believe that we're a caring nation (as a whole), but we're not. There are individuals and groups who care (they care a lot), but as a whole, the US's policies are designed to take care of the US only.
And lastly. . . when you have a leader who does whatever he wants, it seems quite likely that some soldiers will follow his lead. I read something in one article about this alleged abuse that these sodiers were not aware of the Geneva Convention which states they can not abuse prisoners. It seems that simple human decency would prevail here and tell them that placing bags over these people's heads and abusing them while they're naked would not be a kind thing to do. I don't know, call me a liberal.
liberal bloggers
