When Your Number’s Up, It’s Up, But What a Way to Go

by Sandy Sand

If I were younger and not approaching codgerhood, I probably couldn’t say this, but I know I’d think it.

Our ultimate demise is as sure as the moon rise, and any of us can leave this world at any time by having a bland, old, unnoticed heart attack that will only get an honorable mention in the newspaper if a family member bothers to pop for an obituary.

Not so for Eugene Caldwell, 78, a devout San Francisco 49ers fan, who met his match and his maker when he was stampeded by a frightened police horse in the parking lot of Candlestick Park.

It goes without saying that condolences go to his grieving family, even those named in the will, and it is my fervent hope that Caldwell’s family does not sue the City by the Bay.

It was a freakin’ accident, beyond the control of anyone, and the culmination of a long life that ended with his beloved 49ers, and earned him eight column inches in the Los Angeles Times.

How many of us can write that as our epitaph?

Ms. Sand is a codgeress-in-waiting while living on the Left Coast in Southern California.
Source: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-candlestick31-2008aug31,0,5208459.story

McCain's choice of Palin. Oops!

(Yes, the cover is real. Alaska Magazine, February 2008)

McCain's campaign team may think they have scored a coup with the selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as the Republican nominee's running mate. Yes, it was a shocker and even those of us who vehemently oppose four more years of McSame, have to admit it was, on the surface, a brilliant move -- for someone who has no record to run on and no promises except more of the same.

After the gloating wears off, watch "the surprise" seal McCain's campaign coffin once and for all.

First off, you can't just pluck an unknown barely out of a part-time mayoral job in a city of 10,000 people and expect women across the country to shout "Solidarity! Let's make history!" Not when the current administration has us embroiled in two wars, put us on poor terms with other world powers, and has tanked our economy. Not when the top dog on the ticket is a 72-year-old male with questionable health who receives Social Security disability and can't remember if he owns seven or 10 homes.

Second, within hours of being introduced by McCain, thousands of us were watching a March videotaped interview Palin did with Newsweek where she dismissed those offended by the gender-biased media sniping at Hillary Clinton as "whiners." Hey McCain, those "whiners" happened to be the disgruntled Clinton supporters you hoped to bring under the Republican's tent with that slick choice of Palin. Oops!

Palin's a woman, but she hardly represents what we have come to know as "women's issues," particularly among those of us who follow public policy. She's a prominent member of Feminists For Life, an anti-choice lobbying group masquerading as a feminist group. She's a member of the NRA, but when did that become a harbinger of women's rights? She was a beauty contest winner, and therefore a beauty "contestant." She has insinuated her personal religious beliefs into public education by supporting the teaching of creationism alongside science in public schools.

She's clueless about what the job entails. As reported by Politico, When Larry Kudlow of CNBC asked her last month about the possibility of becoming McCain's running mate, she said:

“As for that VP talk all the time, I’ll tell you, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day? I’m used to being very productive and working real hard in an administration. We want to make sure that that VP slot would be a fruitful type of position, especially for Alaskans and for the things that we’re trying to accomplish up here for the rest of the U.S., before I can even start addressing that question.”

Apparently, Palin is the last to know that back in 2000, Dick Cheney revised the VP position description. He made it the number one slot, and the role of president is strictly window dressing now.

McCain and the RNC have consistently pecked away at Barak Obama's lack of experience. They can't use that anymore. Maybe the brilliant move wasn't so brilliant after all.

Skinner, owner and administrator of DemocraticUndergound, put it quite nicely:

I suspect that there was some calculation that selecting a woman for the ticket would motivate some Democratic women who supported Senator Clinton during the primaries. Personally, I find it hard to believe that supporters of Senator Clinton would be moved by this pick. Palin is an anti-choice former beauty queen -- she has none of the experience, depth, or gravitas that Senator Clinton has. In fact, I think this selection is an insult to women who supported Senator Clinton. McCain thinks they are stupid, and that selecting any woman would be enough to win their support. It doesn't matter who it is -- as long as she has ovaries.

Even some Republicans from her home state were surprised and less than thrilled at the news:

Observations in the Anchorage Daily News, Announcement stuns, splits Alaska political world:

"She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?" -- Republican Lyda Green, Alaska's state senate president from Palin's hometown of Wasilla.

House Speaker John Harris, a Republican from Valdez, was also astonished at the news. He didn't want to get into the issue of her qualifications.

"She's old enough," Harris said. "She's a U.S. citizen."

Hillary Supporters! What Part of “Supreme Court Life Term” Don’t You Not Understand?

by Steve Young

So your candidate lost.

The one who would fight for the rights of women and minorities. The one who would never allow Roe vs Wade to be overturned. The one who would fight for the just due for our veterans who were forgotten by the President and the Republican legislators the second their service was done.

The one who the talk radio Lords of Loud lambasted for years, and did so with small basis and smaller principle, except to bury her until they realized that infighting within the Democratic Party would make for great fodder and possible continuation of the corruption of rights, economy and honor that’s been shamefully perpetuated against the people of this country for the past eight years.

And now, because your candidate lost, instead of supporting a candidate who would fight for the rights of women and minorities; who would never allow Roe vs Wade to be overturned; the one who would fight for the just due for our veterans who were forgotten by this President and the Republican legislators the second their service was done.

The one who the talk radio Lords of Loud lambasted ever since they thought he had a chance of winning the nomination, and did so with small basis and smaller principle, except to bury him until they realized that infighting within the Democratic Party would make for great fodder and continuation of the corruption of rights, economy and honor that’s been shamefully perpetuated against the people of this country for the past eight years.

Instead of him, you’re either going to sit out or vote for the man would negate the rights of women and minorities; the one who would push for Roe vs Wade to be overturned; the one who would block just due for our troops who were forgotten by the President and the Republican legislators the second their service was done; the one who the talk radio Lords of Loud lambasted until they thought he had a chance of winning the nomination, and did so with small basis and smaller principle, except to bury the Democratic presidential candidate so a Republican President could continue to corruption of rights, economy and honor that’s been shamefully perpetuated against the people of this country for the past eight years.

The more you fight against your good interest the more the Right will continue to use you and laugh at you all the time they’re doing it.

Feel vindicated?

Award-winning TV writer, author, Steve Young blogs at the appropriately named http://www.steveyoungonpolitics.com/

White Paper Justifying Iraq War Written Three Months before Intel Report Arrived

White Paper Justifying Iraq War Written
Three Months before Intel Report Arrived

A war based on deception and fraud Worldpassion cc

National Security Archive Stunner

Michael Collins
"Scoop" Independent News
Washington, DC

The National Security Archive released a report Friday Aug. 22, 2008 that sheds even more light on the premeditated lying and deception that took the United States to war in Iraq. The findings are based on new evidence compiled by Dr. John Prados and published by the National Security Archive. See "White Paper" Drafted before NIE even Requested , "Scoop" Independent News, Aug. 24, 2008.

Most notably, Prados shows the depth of the deception perpetrated against citizens and Congress regarding the alleged threat to U.S. security posed by Iraq. It had appeared that the White House rewrote the Oct. 1, 2002 National Intelligence Estimate and then issued that doctored report to Congress on Oct. 4, 2002. Prados reveals convincing evidence that the Oct. 4 White Paper had already been written by July 2002. He shows that it was only slightly altered after the final NIE arrived. This White Paper served as the basis for the war.

The unavoidable conclusion is that the Bush-Cheney White paper "justifying" the invasion was developed a full three months in advance of the intelligence data and analysis that should have served as the basis for that justification. The National Security Archive summed it up succinctly:

"The U.S. intelligence community buckled sooner in 2002 than previously reported to Bush administration pressure for data justifying an invasion of Iraq,

"The documents suggest that the public relations push for war came before the intelligence analysis, which then conformed to public positions taken by Pentagon and White House officials. For example, a July 2002 draft of the "White Paper" ultimately issued by the CIA in October 2002 actually pre-dated the National Intelligence Estimate that the paper purportedly summarized, but which Congress did not insist on until September 2002." National Security Archive in "Scoop' Independent News, August 24, 2008.

The seemingly endless war in Iraq has become a total disaster on multiple levels for all involved. The awful toll in human deaths and casualties is largely ignored but real nevertheless. Over 4,000 U.S. soldiers have been lost in battle and tens of thousands injured. In excess of one million Iraqi civilians are dead due to civil strife unleashed by the invasion. The U.S. Treasury is drained and the steep decline in respect for the United States around the world is just beginning to manifest.

The United States political establishment responds with collective denial on a scale that's incomprehensible. In the presidential campaign, the only sustained public commentary on the war comes from the Republican presidential candidate John McCain who makes the bizarre claim that U.S. is "surrendering" with victory in clear sight. McCain touts the surge without noting that 4.0 million Iraqis are "displaced from their homes." Nearly ten percent of Iraq's population is either dead or injured and there are 5.0 million Iraqi orphans.

This pathological view of victory claims the "surge' is a success in the context of a devastated population in an obliterated nation lacking in the most essential supplies and services; a nation where death continues on a shopping spree

The report by Dr. Prados makes it clear that the executive branch was responsible for creating whatever information they found necessary to justify war and they did it by posing security threats from Iraq and demanding that intelligence briefers fill in the details

Summary of Findings by Prados, National Security Archive

"A recently declassified draft of the CIA's October 2002 white paper on Iraqi WMD programs demonstrates that that (the White) paper long pre-dated the compilation of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraqi capabilities.

"Bush administration and the Tony Blair government began acting in concert to build support for an invasion of Iraq two to three months earlier than previously understood.

"A comparison of the CIA draft white paper with its publicly released edition shows that all the changes made were in the nature of strengthening its charges against Iraq by inserting additional alarming claims, in the manner of an advocacy, or public relations document.

"The draft and final papers show no evidence of intelligence analysis applied to the information contained." August 22, 2004

One Final Hope to Avoid a Tragic War

Ultimately, the White House had what it wanted by July 2002. When the National Intelligence Estimate arrived from an intimidated intelligence community, there was still one hope of a rational outcome on the rush to war. The NIE delivered to the White House on Oct. 1, 2002 noted that the one scenario in which Iraq would attack the United States involved a U.S. attack on Iraq that threatened Saddam Hussein's survival.

The following is brutally simple. The one way to cause the hypothesized (and erroneous) claims of Hussein's intent to attack the United States is to go to war and threaten his regime. Therefore, refraining from war was the best way to protect the United States.

"Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or CBW against the United States, fearing that exposure of Iraqi involvement would provide Washington a stronger cause for making war.

"Iraq probably would attempt clandestine attacks against the U.S. Homeland if Baghdad feared an attack that threatened the survival of the regime were imminent or unavoidable, or possibly for revenge." Key Judgments, National Intelligence Estimate, Oct. 2002

That was deleted entirely. The July White Paper was "complete" and sent to Congress as the evidence justifying the invasion of Iraq.

In the most supreme of ironies, many members of Congress failed to even review the distorted White Paper before voting overwhelmingly to approve the invasion.

Is there any hope that this same legislative body can remedy the great wrong they helped create? Is there anyone who believes that this or any future White House will move with the urgency necessary to end this war? Will anyone ever be held to account for this series of premeditated deceptions?

END

This article may be reproduced in whole or in part with attribution of authorship, a link to the article and acknowledgment of any images or other material user.

See full report with links to primary evidence at Scoop Independent News

Bravo! Annie of Miami Got Her First Tattoo at 80

by Sandy Sand

Bravo for Annie of Miami. She knew what she wanted and she went for it.

Crazy, that at age 80 Annie's wanted to get a tattoo? No. Her reasons were most practical, sensible and came as a total surprise to the tattoo artist, who must have heard it all.

A petite, active, intelligent, witty, wise and forward-thinking senior, Annie said she wanted a "tasteful" 'A'" with pizzazz on her upper arm, because she lives alone and Miami is a hurricane magnet.

“You never know what will happen,” she said, and if she were to be swept away by a hurricane, she wanted a very identifiable signature permanently affixed on her body.

The tattoo artist, who seemed to be flummoxed by her request to be tattooed, must have been living a cave, or not keeping up with the news from Iraq. Having their names tattooed on their bodies is commonly practiced by Iraqi men who are in fear of being murdered, dismembered or blown up, and they want a way of being easily id'ed by their families.

Obviously, Annie may have been keeping up with the news, and heard that particular bit of info from Iraq, because it could very possibly have been where she got the idea. On the other hand, she’s bright enough and astute enough to have come up with it on her own.

Or, maybe she got the inspiration from clicking around on the ol' television, and was watching one of the tattoo shows like the one I saw Annie on. It doesn't matter. She had the moxie to ignore all the naysayers, including her own family, and marched into the tattooist artist's parlor and got what she wanted.

I am both fascinated and repelled by tattoos, and if it weren't for a miserably, hot, muggy Sunday afternoon and wanting to nothing more than lie in bed and mindlessly click around the TV channels, I never would have known about Annie and her black and scarlet tattooed letter "A."

I think the reason I landed on this particular show and stuck with it, was because of the drop dead gorgeous women who were getting tattooed.

I'm not talking about a small, tasteful, inconspicuous tat on the ass like a tiny rose or butterfly. I'm talking about nearly full-body tats.

Even the barbed wire tattoo Pamela Anderson has encircling her upper arm is kind of intriguing.
Some tattoos are interesting and even fun; some are tasteful and discreet; some are so bold and so garish it makes one wonder if it isn't true that some people have taste where they sit, or the person I'm thinking of should have a tat where she sat. I'm not saying people shouldn't paint their bodies any way they please, but I wonder if it ever occurred to them that some tats can be quite distracting.

Wouldn't they rather whomever they're speaking with look into their eyes rather than into the side of their neck or their arms?

Of course, there's always the women who have a rose or some such thing tattooed on or between their breasts. Who knows, maybe that's exactly where they want eyes to focus.

I also have to wonder what is going on in the heads of these gorgeous women who cover their bodies with art and pierce themselves in some really rather odd places. A small belly button ring, well that's kind of sexy, but studs in cheeks, tongues, foreheads, temples and lips...I don't get it.

If I were a man, I wouldn't want to kiss a woman with a ring in her nose or a tongue stud. I just thought, perhaps there are other talents that a tongue-studded lady can do to pleasure a man without him having to kiss her on the mouth.

The women on the show who had ten or twelve piercings in each ear reminded me of a friend who boasts of having sixty pairs of earrings. I just laugh and tell her she can only wear one pair at a time. I guess that's not if you have so many holes in your head.

A man with one or two tattoos isn't particularly bothersome. Guys will be guys. But the men who don't have one square micron of natural skin showing, well that's something else again. They seem to be obsessed with tattooing. What, oh what are they going to do when there's no place left for the tattoo artist to ply his trade.

Are they going to go into some kind of technicolor withdrawal? Will they curl up on an artist's palate and dry up like so much left over paint? Will they foolishly try to gain weight, stretch the skin to make room for more...which won't work? Have they considered what they'll look like when they're old and wrinkled? Maybe they have; maybe they don't care.

Perhaps there's a way of tattooing over a tattoo, the same way Tom Hattan who hosted a kid's cartoon show in Los Angeles, and could take a child's name and turn it into a choo-choo or a puppy.

I will never understand why someone, especially a woman would want to cover her entire body with art. Don't they like themselves? They are trying to hide who and what they are as human beings from themselves and the world? For some inexplicable reason they like them? Is this their way of being exhibitionists? They do it because they can? Are they into pain?
I'll never know, but I can be pretty sure that the reasons are as varied as the people who are tattooed.

It's not like I haven't thought that a tiny tat on the point of the hip or on the back of the hip might not be fun. At the same time I shudder to think what it will look like when that same butt with its cute picture of Tweetie Pie looks like an old prune.

Let's face it, getting a tat just for fun isn't so smart; it's not like they can be washed off. And I just found out it costs about four time more to get a tattoo removed, than to get one.

Whenever I see someone with a tat, my thoughts will rush immediately to Annie.

May she and her beautiful "A" live in harmony and health for many years. May they remain good friends and the reason they got together never becomes a harsh reality.
Likewise, whenever the silly thought of getting one myself flits through my mind, I'll smile and think of Annie doing it for me, and I will think about getting a decal.
=============
Sandy Sand began her writing career while raising three children and doing public relations work for Women's American ORT (Organization for Rehabilitation through Training). That led to a job as a reporter for the San Fernando Valley Chronicle, a weekly publication in Canoga Park, California. In conjunction with the Chronicle, she broadcast a tri-weekly, 10-minute newscast for KGOE AM. Following the closure of the Chronicle, Sand became the editor of the Tolucan Times and Canyon Crier newspapers in Burbank. She is currently a guest columnist for the Los Angeles Daily News and contributor to ronkayela.com

Can you blame her for being angry?

Harriet, age 26, is one of three bald eagles in permanent residence at the National Eagle Center in Wabasha, MN. The eagle study and rehabilitation center is located along the banks of the Mississippi and the raptors’ migratory path.

While recognizing their regal bearing, bald eagles have always seemed to me to have an angry or disapproving look about them.

Harriet, who came to live at the Center after being hit by a car while feeding on some road kill, still retains a somewhat disheveled appearance.

Considering what the nation has endured these past years, the look seems fitting. She was a guest on the Colbert Report last summer on the occasion of her species being removed from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s endangered list.

P' off and not taking it anymore

What are the chances of this happening here?

The Gulabi Gang of Uttar Pradesh in northern India have been taking matters into their own hands since 2006.

Members of the gang, whose numbers range from 200 to a thousand, depending on your sources, wear pink (gulabi) saaris and carry sticks and other implements in an effort to protect their sisters from violence and occasionaly wreak revenge on male abusers or keep local officials honest.

Sampat Pal Devi (pictured in foreground), the founder and a mother of five, told the BBC last fall that "we are a gang for justice."

Lately I've been wondering if, should we (God forbid) fail to stop McSame-ness in November, people will react, you know, decisively against corruption and inequality?