Tuesday Mashup (6/7/11)

It’s bad enough that I have to do my best to avoid Christine Flowers of the Philadelphia Daily News on Fridays, but apparently, I have to do so now at other times during the week; here, she’s uncharacteristically polite in criticizing Sister Mary Scullion, a legendary figure in these parts for her work on behalf those who are disadvantaged in however many ways, particularly the homeless…

…I couldn't disagree more with Sister Mary's op-ed this week in the Inquirer, which berated Councilman Frank DiCicco's proposed legislation concerning the homeless. Like many of the bill's critics, Scullion believes it's more punitive than it needs to be in that it lets police deal with a homeless person without first contacting a social-service agency, as mandated by law.

Sister Mary conjures up an almost fascistic scenario where the government has the power to arrest vulnerable people on a whim when she writes:

"The problems with DiCicco's bill, beyond its sheer inhumanity, are manifold. Frivolous citations would create legal problems for homeless people, hampering their efforts to get housing and services and break the cycle of homelessness. Violations of their basic rights could lead to costly litigation. And enforcement would waste precious city resources while forcing many homeless people out of Center City and into nearby neighborhoods, shifting the problem rather than solving it."

As noted here from last March (depicting a scenario that, while “fascistic,” is also fairly likely to occur if DiCicco’s ordinance is passed)…

A little over a week ago, First District Councilman Frank DiCicco introduced Bill 110386 in an attempt to amend the 1999 Sidewalk Behavior law to, in his words, “give police … more authority … as to people who are aggressively panhandling …” by ordering those officers to arrest homeless persons without even attempting to first get the assistance of social service professionals who are trained to deal with the kind of financial, mental health, and/or substance abuse problems that many of those human beings have. The current law, which requires such mental health involvement, ain’t broken and therefore doesn’t need to be fixed. In fact, it has become a national model as noted by (Sister Mary), co-founder of Project H.O.M.E., an advocacy group for the homeless.

There are already laws on the books addressing harassment, terroristic threats and simple assault to deal with real criminal behavior if that’s what DiCicco is truly worried about. But that’s not really what he’s worried about. What he’s really stressed about is what he actually said, which is that “hotel guests … are uncomfortable” with having to deal with those kind of people. Well, whooptie-goddamn-do! Tell those upper-crust fancy pants that we’re blue-collar folks here in Philly, and we’re tough enough to deal with the trauma of encountering—GASP!—a talkative guy wearing ragged jeans who hasn’t showered in a few days.

I have worked in downtown Philadelphia, and the missus and I have journeyed to a variety of locales in Philadelphia primarily for dining out, but for other activities also, along with the young one on occasion. And based on our experience, I think Michael Coard of The Philly Post is absolutely right. You just don’t make eye contact if you see someone approaching you who looks like they plainly do not belong in that area. Or, on the rare instance where you happen to be accosted, call 911 at your first opportunity (though I think that is just as likely to happen on a concrete or cobblestone city sidewalk amidst steel-and-glass monuments to corporate America as it is among leafy suburban glades).

So I’m not a bit surprised to see that Flowers basically wants to lock up anyone who didn’t seem to have the wherewithal to emerge one day as a celebrated Philadelphia media columnist and lawyer, or some other well-to-do occupation, in the name of her twisted notions of Christianity. Particularly since, given this column in which she said that anyone who voted for Obama isn’t a real Catholic, she has at best what I would consider to be a depraved notion of spirituality anyway.

Next, I guess I’m supposed to weep crocodile tears over the departure of Bush Dog Dan Boren, who announced here that he will not seek another term in the U.S. Congress from Oklahoma (and the prognosticators say this seat will likely go Republican – gee, ya’ think?).

With that in mind, I give you the following:

Basically, Boren never met a Dubya tax cut that he didn’t like, as noted here (Think Progress commemorated the ten-year anniversary of the first batch here, with the requisite ruinous effects - more here).

As noted here, he opposed any legislation that set a timeline for troop WD from Iraq.

Boren said here that Obama was “the most liberal senator” in Congress and “had no intention” of endorsing him for the White House during the 2008 election (heh).

He accused Obama of being “weak on defense” (an evergreen Repug charge) even though the defense budget was paired by a Republican SecDef, Robert Gates (here).

Boren opposed health care reform here (of course).

He voted against three animal protection measures in the House in 2008, the only Dem to do so, as James Wolcott tells us here.

Lastly, he said here in January 2010 that Democratic congressional losses that fall would be “a good thing” for the party (sadly, his prediction was realized, though how “good” it turns out to be remains to be seen depending on November 2012 I guess).

So yeah, barring a cosmic miracle, Boren’s seat will officially go Red in about 17 months or so. Of course, given his record, it’s hard to argue that an actual Democrat held the seat anyway.

In addition, we learn the following from the Globe and Mail up north here, namely, that perhaps the most notorious liar in the world who still walks upright will appear at a symposium with Fareed Zakaria in a week or so…

The American war against Vietnam, the Pakistani massacre of Bengalis in 1971 (an estimated 1.5 million killed), the operations of the Shah of Iran’s secret police, the brutal Pinochet years in Chile, the secret U.S. bombing of Cambodia that made possible the Khmer Rouge’s genocidal killing fields (1.5 to 2 million dead), the bloody 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus (an estimated 150,000 refugees), the betrayal of the Kurds in 1974-75, the Indonesian slaughter of some 100,000 East Timorese, the war against the government of Angola, the entrenchment of apartheid in South Africa.

No one will ever know how many millions of ordinary citizens were killed, maimed, tortured, brutalized or displaced in these merciless operations. A U.S. Senate subcommittee on refugees estimated that more than three million civilians were killed, injured or rendered homeless in Southeast Asia alone from 1969 to 1975.

And we do know this: By a curious coincidence, all of these horror stories have in common the very man who’s soon coming to Toronto, Dr. Henry Kissinger (somehow the only PhD in the world who’s regularly called Dr.). As Richard Nixon’s national security adviser and both Mr. Nixon and Gerald Ford’s secretary of state, Dr. Kissinger enabled or endorsed every one of them.

And this describes a typical Kissinger manoeuvre…

In a meeting with presidential speechwriter Michael Gerson in early September 2005, Kissinger was more explicit: Bush needed to resist the pressure to withdraw American troops. He repeated his axiom that the only meaningful exit strategy was victory.

"The president can't be talking about troop reductions as a centerpiece," Kissinger said. "You may want to reduce troops," but troop reduction should not be the objective. "This is not where you put the emphasis."

To emphasize his point, he gave Gerson a copy of a memo he had written to President Richard M. Nixon, dated Sept. 10, 1969.

"Withdrawal of U.S. troops will become like salted peanuts to the American public; the more U.S. troops come home, the more will be demanded," he wrote.

The policy of "Vietnamization," turning the fight over to the South Vietnamese military, Kissinger wrote, might increase pressure to end the war because the American public wanted a quick resolution. Troop withdrawals would only encourage the enemy. "It will become harder and harder to maintain the morale of those who remain, not to speak of their mothers."

Two months after Gerson's meeting, the administration issued a 35-page "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq." It was right out of the Kissinger playbook. The only meaningful exit strategy would be victory.

Kissinger also said in February ’07 that Dubya had “a secret plan” to end the Iraq war (hmmm, wonder what other Repug president had “a secret plan” to end a war? Think “I am not a crook” – this post also details how Nixon and Kissinger sabotaged the 1968 peace talks on Vietnam, thus allowing the war to continue for seven more horrendous years).

One day, Kissinger’s physical body will die, which will be a belated deterioration, his soul having died decades ago.

Finally, Andrew Breitbart clone Michael Walsh bellows as follows here (and yes, I’m still in shock that, after having defended Anthony Weiner, it turns out that he was guilty of the underwear pic after all, though I can’t think of a word to describe how pathetic our discourse is that, while our “gilded age on steroids” economy continues to plod along, our wars rage, our civil liberties continue to erode and our planet continues to melt, a picture of an erect member and the legal doings of a former Dem senator seem to rule the day for our corporate media).

(The title of Walsh’s screed, by the way, is “Behold The Face of the Modern Left”)…

In his combination of unctuousness, mendacity, mock-reasonableness, petulance, bullying, hypocrisy, overweening arrogance, brazen aggression, self-pity, victimhood, and bogus moral preening, it’s hard to beat Congressman Anthony Weiner. He’s the perfect face of the modern American Left in all its glorious pathology; why anyone takes these people seriously is utterly beyond me, so transparent are they. And yet for some, their sweet nothings continue to resonate.

It should be noted that Walsh has apparently also written for Irrational Spew Online under the alias of David Kahane, which is the name of an aspiring screenwriter in the film The Player who is killed by an irate movie producer (I suppose that fits the typical “oh I’m such a poor victim of that evil li-bu-ruul media” conservative mindset).

And as noted here, Walsh once ridiculed House Dem Steny Hoyer for speaking out against violence as a result of the Tucson tragedy, even though, as noted here, 10 Democrats received threats of violence after their health care votes (and Orange Man Boehner spoke out against those threats, even though he was guilty of that tactic himself against former Dem House Rep Steve Driehaus…that and much more is noted here; basically, except for former rep Paul Kanjorski threatening Lex Luthor in Florida, which I don’t condone even though Scott is horrible, I can’t find a comparable instance of bad Dem behavior).

Also, for good measure, it should be noted that Walsh referred to James O’Keefe’s lawbreaking here (for which O'Keefe entered a guilty plea) as “spitting on the sidewalk” (U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval described O’Keefe’s breaching of security at the office of Sen. Mary Landrieu as “an extremely sensitive matter,” so I think it’s safe to say that Judge Duval did not agree).

So to sum up, Walsh demonstrates perceived victimhood, a tolerance of violence against his enemies, a total inability or lack of desire (or both) to demonstrate any empathy whatsoever (on health care in this case), and a complete disregard for the rule of law.

Behold the face of the Radical Right.

Oh, and as noted here, Walsh describes “David Kahane” as “a complete idiot who never understands that the joke’s always on him.”

I rest my case.

Oh, and as long as we’re continuing to pile on Anthony Weiner (And by the way, CNN, why do I now have to know about Weiner’s wife too? Any pics on Mrs. John Ensign?), let’s just take a breath and remember something, OK?

This guy consorted with prostitutes and continues to serve in the U.S. Senate. And don’t give me that crap about how the voters of Louisiana, in their eternal, dunderheaded stupidity, sent him back to Washington. He should have had the guts to quit long before then.