Cocktales - Archived Blog Posts

[cocktales]

Yep, the rumor mill is running rampant once again with reports that Chief Justice Rehnquist will announce his retirement come Friday!

I know, I know, last week when asked if he was going to retire he said, "It's for me to know and for you to find out!" lol

He's still a tough old bird and holds his cards pretty close to his vest.......as always!

So, President Bush, looks like you will have an opportunity to have a legacy of greatness or less than greatness!

If you allow your religious convictions to interfere with your ability to lead correctly and appoint not by legal abilities; but people you know who will control the court and change it to meet the religious right's convictions.........you are indeed a fool!

Kennedy and his allies were taken by surprise last Friday when O'Connor declared she was leaving. Democrats had expected Rehnquist to go first. Since Rehnquist's replacement by a conservative would not change the court's balance, Kennedy could keep his filibuster gun in the closet for now. O'Connor's bombshell raised the possibility of a conservative switch on the court, and Kennedy reacted to the new climate quickly.

We all know Chief Justice Rehnquist is getting lamer and lamer as time goes on and it's only a matter of time before he "has to" retire for medical reasons.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor kinda pulled the rug out from under Rehnquist by retiring and stealing his thunder, so to speak. He is now waiting for her retirement to cool down a bit and then announce his retirement.

Now, back to President Bush.

Bush said that the country deserves a “dignified process of confirmation.” I agree, except that’s just more Bush-speak for “Let me have my way without arguing over it.” The only way we can have a dignified confirmation process is if he appoints someone who is ideologically neutral.
Bush has never had to replace a Supreme Court justice. In fact, it has been 11 years since the last time one was appointed.

He might offer up a surprise nominee. He has taken a lot of flack lately over some of his other appointees, including his choice for U.N. ambassador, John Bolton. He may not be in the mood for yet another confirmation battle.

But don’t look forward to any moderation on Bush’s part. He is one of the most obstinate presidents in decades. So his nominee will probably be an arch-conservative. If so, anything’s possible in the Senate.

Hell, if the abortion ruling is over-turned, we may have millions of women marching in the streets in protest!!!

Bush, are you listening to the people???

 

[cocktales]

(I couldn't resist using an opponents bumper sticker~!) lol

Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, the third-ranking Republican in the Senate, refused yesterday to back off on his earlier statements connecting Boston's ''liberalism" with the Roman Catholic Church pedophile scandal, saying that the city's ''sexual license" and ''sexual freedom" nurtured an environment where sexual abuse would occur. "The basic liberal attitude in that area . . . has an impact on people's behavior," Santorum said in an interview yesterday at the Capitol. "If you have a world view that I'm describing [about Boston] . . . that affirms alternative views of sexuality, that can lead to a lot of people taking it the wrong way," Santorum said.

Santorum, a leader among Christian conservatives, was responding to questions about remarks he made three years ago on a website called Catholic Online. In those comments, Santorum said, "It is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political, and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm" of the clergy sexual abuse scandal.

I find this sort of conclusion Sen. Santorum made to be about the most un-intelligent statement ever made by a man of supposedly such high ranking....

If he wants to alienate a sector of the population; well, consider it done!!

 

[cocktales]

It really is hard for me to believe. If you want to come to the U.S., all you have to do is get a student Visa and then come and then stay without any consequences....since it seems like U.S. Immigration cannot keep track of all who come and stay anyway!!!

This problem reared it's ugly head after the 9/11 incidents whereby the Arab pilots came to the U.S. as students and took flying lessons, with Immigration being none the wiser of their activities or where abouts!

Frankly, the situation has NOT been corrected even as we speak today!

Quotas? Sure we have said quotas on the record; but when it comes to actual numbers, who knows??
Why can't we force people in "status" here to comply with Federal Regulations?

Until we get a hand on the comings and goings of people into the U.S. (actually the said problematic ones coming to the U.S.) then we will NOT be able to keep the undesirables from entering and doing damage to us.

Hell, we cannot even properly manage the Southern border of the U.S.!

 

[cocktales]

Did Karl Rove "deliberately" disclose Valerie Plame as a secret agent for the CIA?

What is the legal basis behind the whole case?

The law says that you have to have known the person is a covert agent and that you have to intentionally disclose that. Not accidentally disclose it, but intentionally disclose it.

Based on what we know so far, Karl Rove did not do that.

Now, that’s the legal standard, but there is a different standard politically. That’s what is being debated now.

Rove has testified before the grand jury, now we know the contents of this e-mail, and we know that [Time magazine reporter] Matt Cooper will testify. But, based on what we know so far, Rove never used her name, which is not as important as the fact that he did not reveal that she was a covert agent.

I think everyone should remain calm and wait for the verdict, the investigation, to see if there is a smoking gun in this case.

Did the White House do Joe Wilson's wife in by naming her as an under-cover agent to get even with him for his report on the African connection to Iraq??

I think everyone deserves a trial before a hanging, don't you?

 

[cocktales]

John G. Roberts, age 50, was nominated by George W. Bush replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court. He is described by many as a brilliant lawyer and was considered the most talented advocate before the court before he was appointed to the Federal bench.

Roberts sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. He was nominated in 2003 by President George W. Bush. He was also nominated by the first President Bush, but he never received a Senate vote.

He has been a prominent GOP attorney in private practice in Washington and between 1989 and 1993 he was the Principal Deputy Solicitor General in the first Bush administration. Roberts attended Harvard College and Harvard Law School, clerked for Justice Rehnquist on the Supreme Court and has argued frequently before the court.

Roberts' nomination to the appellate bench attracted support from both ends of the ideological spectrum.

Some 146 members of the D.C. Bar signed a letter urging his confirmation, including officials from the Clinton administration. The letter stated: "He is one of the very best and most highly respected appellate lawyers in the nation, with a deserved reputation as a brilliant writer and oral advocate. He is also a wonderful professional colleague both because of his enormous skills and because of his unquestioned integrity and fair-mindedness."


Many say he is as conservative as one can get; but Roberts, with 20 months on the D.C. Circuit, has few opinions or other writings that have attracted enemies. As a result, some conservatives have made unflattering comparisons between Roberts and Supreme Court Justice David Souter, whose short stint on the 1st Circuit before being appointed in 1990 by President George H.W. Bush failed to reveal Souter's moderate-to-liberal leanings on some issues.

Justice elect Roberts was confirmed by the Senate to the D.C. Circuit 99-0.....However, he may NOT have as easy a time, this time. Bush deliberately picked him because of his short span in the District Court with few opinions about him; thus less controversy.

I think he will be a fair thinker and strictly enforce the constitution. Hopefully, he will go along with the will of the people when it comes to controversial decisions like Roe V Wade, etc...

 

[cocktales]

For a second time in two weeks, 3 subway trains and one double-decker bus was attacked!!

After Thursday's London blasts, the bombers fled when detonators went off, causing small blasts, but failed to detonate the bombs themselves.

A massive hunt is under way for the men. Analysts believe evidence from the four scenes - at Oval, Shepherd's Bush, Warren Street and on a bus in Shoreditch in east London - could throw light onto the bomb attacks carried out on 7 July.

On Thursday, it is thought detonators went off, causing small blasts, but failed to detonate the bombs themselves.

The attempted attacks caused travel chaos across the capital, with several lines closed and Tube stations evacuated.

Scotland Yard commissioner Sir Ian Blair said the attacks had been intended to kill people.

Londoners, how are you all dealing with this? We cannot even fathom your stress as you try to go on with your daily lives! You did it once; but can you do it again today!!!

Know that the world and especially the U.S. understands your situation and we are with you in spirit as you try to continue with your daily lives!

 

[cocktales]

Reverend Willie Wilson will NOT apologize for Gay remarks.

Rev. Willie Wilson angrily refused requests by black gay leaders to apologize for a July 3 sermon in which he gave graphic and disparaging descriptions of the sexual relations of lesbians and gay men and declared, “Lesbianism is about to take over our community.”

Wilson’s defiant response this week prompted members of an ad hoc group of black gays to call for his resignation or dismissal as executive director of the Millions More Movement march, a national black civil rights event called by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. The march and related events are scheduled to be held in D.C. in October.

In a description of lesbian and gay male sex acts that critics have said was not fit for children, Wilson said such acts “ain’t natural” and go against biblical teaching.

“Can’t make no connection with a screw and another screw,” he said. “It takes a screw and a nut,” he shouted.

In his sermon Sunday, July 17, Wilson took issue with portrayals of him as anti-gay.

“Ain't no church in Washington, D.C., unless it's a gay church, that has done more to reach out to the gay … community than Union Temple,” he said, according to a report in the Washington Post.

The lack of response from the Millions More Movement leaders prompted some black gay activists to call for a possible boycott of the October march.

The black gay community became hopeful and enthusiastic earlier this year when Farrakhan invited gays to take part in the march and said gays would be fully included in the planning process.

“That was double-speak,” “Now we know he was insincere.”

How can Rev. Wilson be allowed to continue to spew his speech of vile and contempt for the Gay community of Washington, D.C........since it is very significant in size!!

He must go!

 

[cocktales]

"I've decided I'm coming out," Jane Fonda said.

Hundreds of people in the Santa Fe, NM audience cheered loudly when Fonda announced her intentions to join the anti-Iraq war movement.

"I have not taken a stand on any war since Vietnam," she said. "I carry a lot of baggage from that."

Fonda incited controversy in July 1972 when she was photographed sitting on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun while on a tour of the country to drum up support to end the war.

I was in Viet Nam when Jane Fonda went to Hanoi! I was there while hundreds of Americans were being killed when Jane Fonda went to Hanoi!

.........and afterwards, when I returned home via the San Francisco International Airport, people spit on me as I came through customs in my uniform and yelled filthy names at me!

I've "NEVER" forgiven Jane Fonda for her stance on the Viet Nam War!

I'm NOT sorry either.....I have friends names on the Viet Nam Memorial who died while Fonda was consorting with the North Vietnamese...

Now, what good will her travelling all over the country in a bus, telling everyone how we need to be out of Iraq?

The war is over Jane! Yes, we have wonderful men and women in the military in Iraq.........they are there to assist the Iraqis in establishing a Democracy...and yes, some are targets for the insurgents.......the outsiders trying to prevent Iraq from becoming an independent, free country.

Now, how will the men and women of the military feel, knowing the American people are NOT supporting them while they risk their lives in Iraq everyday??

I wonder how many military people in Iraq will have the same feelings about Jane Fonda I have from my experiences in Viet Nam??

 

[cocktales]

It is one of the great natural wonders of the world -- and it will soon to be joined by an engineering marvel and it's only 3 hours by highway to it from Las Vegas!


A fantastic glass bridge arcing 60-feet out over the grand canyon -- giving visitors an unobstructed view 4000-feet straight down.


Sheri Yellowhawk, tribal executive says "That's gonna be a scary view. It's gonna be exciting. It's gonna be a once in a lifetime view.


It may be scarey indeed having nothing more than sheets of glass separating you from eternity.


But the bridge has been engineered to withstand 100-mile per hour winds, magnitude 8 earthquakes -- and hold the weight of 71-jumbo jetliners.


The glass bridge -- officially called the canyon skywalk -- been under construction for months here on the west rim of the grand canyon.

It's being built on Hualapai tribal lands -- and the tribe hopes it will become one of the biggest attractions in the southwest.


The project is expected to be completed by the end of this year and when it's up and running, the hualapai expect as many as 3-million people a year will come here -- and take a walk out over the edge.


The idea for the skywalk came from las Vegas tour operator David Jin, and its It has taken nearly a decade to turn his dream into a reality.


But not everyone was sold on the idea at first.


There were elders -- and others -- concerned about any construction on pristine native lands. So it took a few of the elders who agreed with the project to convince the others to allow the project to go on and provide for the future of the tribe.


Tribal Executive Sheri Yellowhawk says "We had the area blessed. We had the elders come out and they talked about it and they said We would like to keep our land the way it is, but we have to look at the future of our kids, to have something that's economically feasible for their future


The financial future of the Hualapai is tied to tourism. They are not a gaming tribe.


But they are betting that -- when it comes to the skywalk -- if they build it -- you will come

 

[cocktales]

The Hyatt Hotel in downtown New Orleans with all the windows on the North side of the tower blown out!!!

I know I am sounding very very insensitive right now; but people let's face reality here....

We continue to see people trying to re-claim the beach from nature, the outer-islands, the so-called protection from tides....where nature will only claim what is already their own; but yet we want to build high rise condo's there and live right on the beach!!!

History has proven that it will repeat itself time and time again and it's not a secret where all the hurricanes and floods of the worlds happen year after year! Yet, we have people who refuse to leave those areas and continue to want the tax payers to continue dumping money into this bottomless pit of spending....re-building so that nature's fury will destroy property and cost lives time and time again!!!

Hey, I grew up in the southern part of this country (US) and right along the Gulf Coast where Katrina just blasted them yet again. I know of what I speak, 'cause I lived it too....

Naysayers of the world, prove me wrong. Tell me of my errors and why I am all wet about my theories on disasters and nature....

 

[cocktales]

New Orleans..........water, water everywhere and nothing left to drink!!!

Yesterday I was upset, mad, angry, stressed over the after-effects of Hurricane Katrina and I wrote a seething blog about people living in areas where we continually have disasters, over and over again.......people re-build again and again and the tax payers end up footing a lot of that re-building!

Well, today I am some-what apologetic for what I said after seeing those poor people along the Gulf Coast region of AL, MS and LA!!!

I have never seen such destruction; albeit a bomb dropped from a jet.........that's what it all looks like!

I was a student at the University of Alabama and worked for the Red Cross there and in 1969 I manned the phones and helped a lot during Hurricane Camille. I thought that was bad; but now the hurricane to measure all hurricanes will now be Katrina NOT Camille!!!

To all the people of the region, to the family members of those people who read my blog, I am sorry for being insensitive to the needs of the people suffering there and I pray for their safety and return to normalcy...soon!

However, I do hope people who try to conquer nature by building condo's on beaches so close to the shoreline that disasters such as this will certainly ruin their homes...DO NOT attempt to conquer Mother Nature...it will not happen!

Please, re-build, re-locate in a place where you are safer and NOT building for disaster once again when the "BIG ONE" comes again!!

Good luck and God Bless to all affected by Hurricane Katrina!!

 

[cocktales]

For nearly 30 minutes, he stood in a largely lifeless New Orleans and, to recast his presidency in response to one of the nation's most devastating disasters, sought to show that he understands the suffering. He spoke of housing and health care and job training. He reached with rhetorical confidence for the uplifting theme that out of tragedy can emerge a better society, and he groped for what he lost in the wind and water more than two weeks ago: his well-cultivated image as a strong leader.

It was not the president's most stirring speech, but it conveyed a sense of command far more than his off-key efforts in the days immediately after the storm, when he often seemed more interested in bucking up government officials than in addressing the dire situation confronting hundreds of thousands of displaced and desperate people.

But if the speech helped him clear his first hurdle by projecting the aura of a president at the controls, it probably did not, by itself, get him over a second: his need to erase or at least blur the image of a White House that was unresponsive to the plight of some of the country's most vulnerable citizens and failed to manage the government competently.

I think that if we play the "blame game" that no one is without blame in this disgrace of human suffering we all witnessed in the after-math of Katrina!

Clearly, the City of New Orleans with it's Mayor and the Governor of Louisiana are at fault too. How many times have we heard about what would happen to the people of New Orleans if the "big one" had a hit on the city???

Just think about all those school buses that sit in the flood ravaged City of New Orleans, that "could have" been used to drive the down-trodden and poor who could ill afford a way-out of the city when the Mayor declared an evacuation!!!

........and, if I had been Governor, I would have shouted to high-heavens about my people of New Orleans and I would have been on the bridges or in the Superdome or the Civic Center right along with the hungry, thirsty and dieing people of my state!!!

But that's just me!!! IMHO!

 

[cocktales]

It's sad when someone does not belong to the inside group of people, and that's the case with Harriet Miers and her nomination to the Supreme Court.

It's terrible that the far Conservative Right had influence in stopping this nomination. I guess the only people who are considered qualified are the previous judges who have a "record" so that the Senators can see in black & white how the judge "voted" in each and every case so as to provide a track record of how they stand on particular issues. It's just not fair, for that proves that not everyone plays on an even filed of play!

I think probably Ms. Miers "could have" been a good Justice if given the opportunity. I guess though some people do not feel the same. They want someone they can determine their votes before they even get in the Court!

I just hope President Bush doesn't bow to the hard-nosed conservatives and nominate one of their own; otherwise, it will be a stale-mate in the Judicial Committee and the nominee will never see the light of day for an up or down vote!

 

[cocktales]

Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito helped write a 1986 Justice Department decision in favor of firing people with HIV from the workplace if and when they test positive, Tuesday's Washington Post reported.

The ruling stated that federal disability protection laws didn’t prohibit discrimination based on insufficient medical knowledge.

Alito explained the decision to the Post by saying he “had to interpret the law as it stands.”

Judge Alito will be interrogated this week by the Senate Judicial Sub-committee on his views and whether or not he should be allowed to be voted on to become an associate Supreme Court Justice or not!

I think his views on people with HIV/AIDS is defenitely a reason NOT to allow him to become a justice!

He probably is against homosexuals as well; but I'm sure no one would ask him that question; but if President Bush chose him, you bet he hates us!

I say send an email to your Senator and tell him or her NOT to vote for Judge Alito!!!

 

[cocktales]

Does your pharmacist play doctor? (Or priest?)

Maybe the prescriptions your physician have prescribed for you haven't offended your pharmacist to date. Maybe your private medical life so far has passed beneath notice of the state-licensed professionals who would pass final judgment on what prescription is and is not appropriate for you.

Or maybe you've been turned away by a pious druggist who thought your morality was not up to snuff, and were wondering if there was anywhere else you could go to avoid do-it-yourself pharmacology.

In Jasper, WY, a druggist refused to dispense HIV/AIDS meds because he is against homosexuality!

Now you can know. Planned Parenthood has published a pharmacy scorecard, showing which pharmacies fill doctor's prescriptions, and which pharmacies prefer to play doctor themselves.

You have to love Target. They're willing to hire people who don't wan to do the very job they're applying for. And their own employee's bigotry and bias matters more to them than the emergency health needs of their own customers.

So let's ask druggists if they also support the following ideas:

- Check out clerks who verify how fat you are before selling you that package of potato chips?
- Pharmacists who don't want to fill prescriptions for Jewish customers who killed Christ.
- Pharmacists who don't want to help customers who worship a "Satanic counterfeit" (read: "The Pope," in fundie-speak).
- Pharmacists who only dispense HIV medicine to "innocent victims" of AIDS.
- Pharmacists who want proof that women seeking emergency contraception were really raped, and that they didn't "deserve it."
- Pharmacists (or cashiers) who are Christian Scientists - can they refuse to sell any medicine, even aspirin, to anyone?
- Pharmacists who won't sell birth control pills to unmarried women, condoms to unmarried men, or any birth control at all because God doesn't want people spilling their seed.
- Can fundamentalist Christian employees refuse to interact with gay people in any way, shape or form since gays are sinners, abominations, biological errors, and very likely pedophiles?

And that's the point: Providing governmental and corporate cover for personal prejudices in what is supposed to be a trusted profession and what in fact is a government-licensed and government-regulated business smacks of institutional discrimination. And, of course, Target is not alone in backing religious holier-than-thou-ism with the force of corporate lawyers and PR campaigns. There are people who believe women must be punished for having sex, and now, in the 21st century, they have corporate and governmental backing, leaving women to fend for themselves when it comes to healthcare.

What next? Racist doctors refusing to treat "those people"? Parking lots refusing to admit cars with bumper stickers for the "wrong" party? Citizens blocked from attending a governmental event because of their voter registration? --Oh wait, that's already been happening.

This sounds very much like the kinds of things that were happening centuries ago, when a young man and pregnant woman were turned away from an inn and she had to deliver her baby in a manger.

There always will be bigots wrapping themselves in the flag or piety or genetic theories, but do we have to institutionalize their narrowness in order to defend their right to be stupid? Is this the direction we want to be going as a country?

 

[cocktales]

(My blog today is written as influenced by the main boards Hot Topics on the same subject)

Lies come in a lot of flavors.

Some are mild little things commonly known as “white lies”, and others are huge monstrous untruths, with an underlying intention to not only deceive, but in that very deception to cause harm to someone, or something. Often lies can be unintentional. These are the lies that are repeated or parroted, with little or no regard for the actual veracity of the facts. While they are repeated with great conviction and sincerity, the teller of these prevarications has no real knowledge that he or she is in fact a liar. These can usually be forgiven, unless the liar refuses to recant after being informed of the real truth.

The one that can'’t be forgiven easily is the OPINION that a person states as fact. When called out they’ll come up with all kinds of nonsense to support the alleged honesty of their beliefs. Just because they believe it, dozen’t make it true. Very few will ever admit to this type of lie. Pointing out facts and truths to them only makes them dig in their heels. Very often they’ll go so far as constructing elaborate “alternate realities” in their own minds. Most rational people call that insanity.

Next up are the grey lies that are intended to protect, soothe, and generally “make things better”. (”No, that dress doesn’t make you look fat”…. “Oh yes, your baby is a beautiful child” ….”the car accident was pretty bad, but help is on the way and you’ll be fine”) This type of lie crosses the line when it’s used to promulgate an agenda that the teller sincerely believes is a Really Good Thing™ Some people are honestly convinced that they, and they alone, know what’s good for you and will stop at nothing, (even lieing) to save you. These are the lies of the Communists, Radicals, the True Believers, the Deep Intellectual Thinkers, and the Social Reformers. The liar knows they are lieing but believes it’s OK, since it’s for the greater good of all. (The end justifies the means, … it’s OK to blow innocent people up because…etc.)

The Lie of Vanity is considered one of the milder types. It’s most often told to try and gain favor or popularity. It’s cause seems to originate in insecurity. It’s easy to just dismiss this out of hand, but the listener should still maintain caution. A person that lies to enhance their own reputation probably won’t stop at that, but will go on to a more serious permutation; the lie that’s designed to denigrate, humiliate or chastise some other person. Gossiping falls somewhere in this area, with it’s rich mixture of truth mixed with lies and innuendo. Carried to extremes this type of lie is at the root of racism and totalitarian governments.

More obvious is the next type, the Lie of Protection. It’s usually uttered when a person is discovered doing something that’s wrong or illegal. This lie is intended to persuade the listener that the liar is somehow innocent, that the listener is instead the person who fails to see the truth. These usually fail miserably unless performed by a consummate liar with many years of experience.

The Lie of Omission is harder to detect. It’s fairly common and used by many people, from kids, ( Honest, I was just out with some friends…) who fail to mention that one of the friends is a crack dealer, to politicians, (This appropriation bill provides decent living standards….) who fail inform that there is no way to fund it without overburdening those who actually pay the bills; the taxpayer. Make up your own scenarios, there are thousands to choose from.

There’s the lie of greed and graft. This wicked untruth is meant to enrich or advance the liars well being, and the hell with anybody that gets hurt. The sociopath knows these dark realms well. Here’s where the conman and the cult leader live. He or she will tell you anything, no matter how outrageous, to get their way. Their lies are designed to gain them wealth or power or some other twisted end. They may come disguised as the more gentle lies of omission, or the soothing lie, but their underlying intent is only designed to benefit the liar. Any good that comes to society or other individuals is merely incidental. This type of liar has an uncanny ability to draw others into their construct of lies, making them willing dupes and shills.

Those are the basic types I can think of offhand, I’m sure there are more. Of course in the dingy bargain-basement bins of lies there always the mix-and-match opportunity.

Combining lies of various sorts makes the world an interesting place.

Hey, it sounds like maybe I agree to people telling lies........well, don't we all? We all do it almost every day of our lives to protect someone we love's feelings........and that can't be too bad as a lie now, can it??

 

[cocktales]

On Monday, Mayor Nagin said God wanted New Orleans to be predominantly black and said he didn't care what the predominantly white Uptown section of the city had to say about it.

"I don't care what people are saying Uptown or wherever they are. This city will be chocolate at the end of the day," he said. "This city will be a majority African-American city. It's the way God wants it to be."

After the statement, he insisted he wasn't being divisive.

"How do you make chocolate? You take dark chocolate, you mix it with white milk, and it becomes a delicious drink. That is the chocolate I am talking about," he said. "New Orleans was a chocolate city before Katrina. It is going to be a chocolate city after. How is that divisive? It is white and black working together, coming together and making something special."

Nagin, first elected in 2002, was supposed to come up for re-election next month. However, state officials postponed the city election until April because of the disruptions caused by Katrina.

Mayor Ray Nagin of New Orleans told people yesterday who was to blame for the post-Katrina disaster in New Orleans. It's God!

"Surely God is mad at America. He sent us hurricane after hurricane after hurricane, and it's destroyed and put stress on this country," Nagin said as he and other city leaders marked Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

"Surely he doesn't approve of us being in Iraq under false pretenses. But surely he is upset at black America also. We're not taking care of ourselves."

It’s so racist. Imagine a white mayor of a slightly majority white city saying, “____ville will be vanilla city again.” He’d be ruined. But not Nagin the Incompetent Blowhard.

Recall this poor fool. There is already a recall underway for the governor, it is time to clean up a bit more and get this racist bigot out of the city he let drown and then has the gall to blame it on God.

......and we wonder "why" the City of New Orleans or the State of Louisiana was "NOT" prepared for Katrina and why they did NOT get the poor people who they knew could NOT get out of the city on their own, out!!!

If I was the Mayor of New Orleans or the Governor of Louisiana, I would resign and be so very ashamed of myself for NOT doing my job!!!

Amazing, isn’t it? I’m waiting for the Left to get themselves worked into a tizzy over Nagin’s comments, though it probably won’t happen. He'll get a "pass" because you know, the stress and all he's been under.....!!!!

Can you imagine the shock and anger from the likes of Je$$ie Jack$on and Al $harpton if a WHITE Mayor had said these statements?

Sadly, that dream that one of the greatest Americans that ever lived, Martin Luther King, has been deferred, but I suspect that even he wouldn't have guessed by whom.

You think I am upset, you damned right I am!

 

[cocktales]

Before the Golden Globes and the subsequent Oscar buzz, "Brokeback Mountain" had already garnered the "most-talked-about-movie-around-the-water-cooler" award -- among straight women and gay men, at least.

The talk wasn't centered around the plot or the breathtaking cinematography, but rather on husbands and boyfriends who refused to watch it at all.

Many straight men I've talked to say they have no desire to see cowboys "getting-it-on"! I wonder is this homophobia, or just the plain difference between men and women???

I hope it is the latter (I can dream can't I)...

Hey, it's difficult for wives/girl-friends of straight men to get them to go see a "chick-flick" after all...-- all that talk about emotions, relationships and icky, touchy-feely subplots are enough to send any man running for the hills. You might as well ask him to go shopping with you, for you will probably get the same result!!

I guess to ask married men to acquiesce and to go to the movie........well, I cannot think of a good one!!! Anyway, it's never gonna happen!

Just think about it, the movie has very little to do with sex and more to do with emotions is just a double-whammy. So, you here you have a movie trying to explore the feminine side of cowboys, for God's sake, a macho cowboy!! It's all about feelings! Ewwwww!!

Now, after the Golden Globe's trophies were given to Brokeback Mountain, I figured I would ask some of my male straight friends, you know, survey their feelings....

Several men said they were not uncomfortable at all, and enjoyed the film immensely.

But then there were the others:

One friend says he avoids "chick-flicks" like the plague and doesn't even consider that it's about men "doing-it" for he wouldn't go if it was women...

So far, my initial feeling that men simply did NOT want to see what they thought was a "female film" was holding true to form. The guys said they weren't homophobic (maybe that was because they know I am Gay....but hope NOT)but that they simply did NOT want to see any homosexual acts on the big screen.

One of my friends said why would I want to spend my good money to see two guys in love at the movies? And, not only that, but you take one of the most "manly" occupations you could ever think of "a cowboy"....now this should really drive the straight guys out there absolutely crazy!!!

I also have a friend of mine who I think is some-what on the fence when it comes to accepting me and Gays in general. When I asked him about going to see BBM he said, "I am straight and I have no interest in seeing it"!
I just cannot envision me sitting in a movie theatre watching two men making out/kissing, etc. Sure I believe that Gays and others can do whatever they want to do behind closed doors; but I don't want to think about it and I surely don't want to see it for it turns my stomach.....(whew) Well, I asked didn't I???

One married friend admitted that he was uncomfortable seeing the film because the thought of seeing the intimacy between two men would frankly make him ill.
But his wife talked him into going to the film with him (probably with-holding sex or food from him) but, he said he was glad she did "force" him to go for the intimacy in the film was slight and the film itself was excellent, well-made and it was definitely deserving of all the awards it received. (wow, now that was a refreshing answer!)

I just wish I could say many of the other guys had answered my question about seeing BBM like the latter did; but I guess that would have to be in a parallel universe where there is NO homophobia and people treat all people with equal and due respect regardless of their sexuality!!!

 

[cocktales]

*I have delibertly delayed my writing about this horrible "bashing" incident because I was/am so hurt and upset by yet another attempt to cleanse our society of Gay people!!!


A man by the name of Jacob Robida entered Puzzles Bar about midnight and at some point asked the bartender if the lounge was a gay bar. The bartender said it was.

Then he walked to the back of the bar where two men were playing pool. He pushed one to the ground, then pulled a hatchet from his sweatshirt and began swinging at the man's head.

Other patrons tackled the man, sending the hatchet sliding across the floor, the bartender said. That's when the man pulled out a handgun and fired. The man stabbed one patron and shot two others.

The picture above is Jacob Robida who got away and is still at large and is considered armed and dangerous.

New Bedford does NOT have a history of violence against Gays and indeed this is the district in which Representative Barney Franks represents. Since he is a Gay politician, I guess all of us are surprised of this happening in his district; but people it can happen anywhere!

I read where a lot of Robida's friends are saying he is NOT considered homophobic because he has not openly said anything bad about Gays; but in his bedroom, police officers found Nazi regalia and anti-Semitic writings on the wall. So he is NOT exactly an alter boy!

What is going on? You would think that in this time of the 21st century people, especially younger people like this young man would be more tolerant and not homophobic like say older people.........wouldn't you?

What causes a person to take his fury out against a segment of the population and actually try and kill them?

Now do we wonder why so many Gay people do NOT want to come out of the closet?

 

[cocktales]

Now That Didn't Take Long did it??

I wondered just how long it would take for the Republicans to make an issue of the Roe V Wade case, and it didn't take long for a state to come up with something to challenge the legality of abortions in the U.S.....

........and now from the great State of South Dakota:

Lawmakers in South Dakota overwhelmingly approved legislation Thursday that would prohibit almost all abortions in the state. House Bill 1215 passed 47-22, after representatives voted against inserting amendments that would exempt women impregnated as the result of rape or incest. The bill, which now goes to the state Senate, makes an exception if the women’s life is in danger....

Representative Roger Hunt (R-Brandon), the chief sponsor of the South Dakota bill, said the timing is right for the "Women's Health and Human Life Protection Act," in the wake of the new Supreme Court appointments: conservatives John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

I do hope that these fine judges, with all their fine credentials will take case law and the constitution into practice when they hear these cases that will change the history of the U.S. forever...I know the Republicans are hopeful, like the coming of the Messiah, that the new judges will over-turn Roe V Wade and make abortions illegal once more....then, we will once again have women getting abortions in dirty back alleys and either dieing or not being able to have any more children because of a botched abortion...

Please, please judges, DO NOT alter that which we've enjoyed in giving women care-taker status over their own bodies and leaving judicial practices outside the bedroom door!!