Christmas Can-Can

***





***

Wizard of Oz – Alternate Ending

***

From “MAD TV”





***

37 Christmases

***

2009 makes the 37th Christmas I’ve celebrated. No, not that young; that Jewish. Our family celebrated Hanukah when we were kids – menorah and gifts. Beyond that not so much, although I may stand corrected by my two brothers. Christmas Eve was usually a Christmas lights tour through town then home to a Christmas-tree-less home. I had serious Christmas envy. Always did. I knew it wasn’t right. I mean, after all, I was Jewish.

My Italian-Irish Catholic good friend and former partner Jack gently introduced me to Christmas. In 1973 we got one another Christmas gifts and opened them Christmas Eve. That continued as our Christmas tradition. In 1978 we moved to an apartment with a space begging for a Christmas tree. I dared not say anything – I mean, after all, I was Jewish and a Christmas tree where I lived was …

Jack mentioned it. Seeing a lifetime of Christmas envy bubbling to the fore with my “yes”, he immediately laid down decorating rules: white lights and red bulbs. Period. We negotiated. (Well, he let me think I was negotiating.) Jack kindly granted me and my Christmas envy permission to hang tinsel and gold bulbs along with red ones.

Our most spectacular tree was in an apartment with 20 foot ceilings. The tree was around 18 feet tall. We bought more lights and bulbs that year; also borrowed a ladder. All 18 feet of that magnificent tree glistened.

Christmas tradition continues for me – trees and gifts. Opening gifts Christmas Eve from Jack I brought to others’ Christmas traditions.

To the purists – Hanukah is no Christmas. Thank you, Jack.

***

Franken to GOP: “You’re Not Entitled to Your Own Facts” on Healthcare

***

[Senator Al Franken points out the ludicrous basis on which Republicans oppose the healthcare bill.]

WASHINGTON -- In a few moments of heated but controlled anger on the Senate floor Monday evening, Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) slammed Sen. John Thune (R-SD) and the GOP for essentially lying about the nature of the Democratic health care bill, suggesting they haven't read it.

"We are entitled to our own opinions; we're not entitled to our own facts," Franken said. "Benefits kick in right away."

Thune then took the floor and stressed that "tax increases start 18 days from now" while "spending benefits don't start till 2014."

Franken got angrier and reclaimed his time. "Spending benefits start right away," he stammered, also rebuffing Thune's claim that the bill in all pain and no gain in the short-run. It "will prohibit insurance from imposing lifetime limits on benefits starting day one."

"He doesn't want to hear it," Franken said in a heated voice, while pointing to Thune. "We are entitled to our own opinions; we're not entitled to our own facts."

Lifetime benefits kick in on day one, and we shouldn't be standing up here with charts to say the exact opposite," Franken said. He also pointed out that "small business tax credits will kick in right away" and the bill closes the doughnut hole for Medicare Part D.

"Facts are stubborn things," he said, repeating: "We are not entitled to our own facts."

"I stand here day after day and hear my colleagues, my good friends from the other side, say things that are not based on fact," Franken declared. He also accused Republicans of not reading the fill.

During the exchange, Thune tried to interrupt and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) interjected, accusing Republicans of trying "monopolize our 30 minutes." Later, Brown said of the GOP: "Perhaps if you're going to vote against [the bill], you don't have to read it -- is that the way they think about it?"

"I will find that many of my colleagues, who I'm very friendly with, have not read the bill," he said. "And I think that if you're going to get on your feet and debate and make assertions, you should really be familiar with the content of the bill. I've only been here a while, so maybe I'm naive."

From: the raw story: http://rawstory.com/2009/12/franken-slams-gop-senate-floor-youre-entitled-facts/

***

President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech

***

***

I Am a New Yorker

***

I Am a New Yorker

Written by Vincent Pasquale, Maspeth, NY

[Kindly forwarded by Nathan, a fellow New Yorker]

I am a New Yorker

I do not live in the five boroughs or on the Island or Upstate

I may live hundreds or thousands of miles away

Or I may live just over the GW Bridge

But I am a New Yorker

I am a New Yorker

Whatever took me out of New York:

Business, family or hating the cold did not take New York out of me

My accent may have faded and my pace may have slowed

But I am a New Yorker

I am a New Yorker

I was raised on Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade and Rockefeller Plaza,

The Yankees or the Mets (Giants or Dodgers)

Jones Beach, Rye Beach, Orchard Beach or one of the beaches on the sound

I know that 'THE END' means Montauk.

Because I am a New Yorker

I am a New Yorker

When I go on vacation, I never look up

Skyscrapers are something I take for granted

The Empire State Building and the Statue of Liberty are part of me

Taxis and noise and subways and 'get outa heah' don't rattle me

Because I am a New Yorker

I am a New Yorker

I was raised on cultural diversity before it was politically correct

I eat Greek food and Italian food,

Jewish and Middle Eastern food and Chinese food

Because they are all American food to me.

I don't get mad when people s pea k other languages in my presence

Because my relatives got to this country via Ellis Island and chose to stay

They were New Yorkers

People who have never been to New York have misunderstood me

My friends and family work in the industries, professions and businesses that benefit all Americans

My firefighters died trying to save New Yorkers and non-New Yorkers

They died trying to save Americans and non-Americans

Because they were New Yorkers.

I am a New Yorker

I feel the pain of my fellow New Yorkers

I mourn the loss in my beautiful city

I feel and dread that New York will never be the same

But then I remember:

I am a New Yorker

And New Yorkers have:

Tenacity, strength and courage way above the norm

Compassion and caring for our fellow citizens

Love and pride in our city, in our state, in our country

Intelligence, experience and education par excellence

Ability, dedication and energy above and beyond

Faith--no matter what religion we practice

Terrorists hit America in its heart

But America's heart still beats strong

Demolish the steel in our buildings, but it doesn't touch the steel in our souls

Hit us in the pocketbook; but we'll parlay what we have left into a fortune

End innocent lives leaving widows and orphans, but we'll take care of them

Because they are New Yorkers

Wherever we live, whatever we do, whoever we are

There are New Yorkers in every state and every city of this nation

We will not abandon our city

We will not abandon our brothers and sisters

We will not abandon the beauty, creativity and diversity that New York represents

Because we are New Yorkers

And we are proud to be New Yorkers

***

Uganda to Jail, Execute Gays

***

In one of the most outrageous examples of state-sponsored hate laws the Uganda legislature is on the verge of passing a bill imposing heavy criminal penalties ranging from prison terms to life imprisonment to death on its gay citizens.

How serious is this? One example from the Washington Post:

“As Episcopalians in America were electing their second gay bishop, their Anglican cousins in Uganda were embroiled in controversial legislation that would put those bishops in prison for life, or condemn them to death.”

[newsweek.washingtonpost.com]

While writing this article, another blog updated the story stating that the death penalty was removed from the legislation. If true, a lucky sop to threatened multinational trade sanctions. Debate on the bill continues and reports on its provisions change daily if not hourly.

A compendium of its measures as summarized by several news organizations:

> Anyone convicted of a homosexual act faces life imprisonment.

> Death sentence for active homosexuals living with HIV or in cases of same-sex rape. "Serial offenders" also could face capital punishment.

[12/8/09 AP]

> Gays and lesbians convicted of having gay sex would be sentenced, at minimum, to life in prison.

> People who test positive for HIV may be executed.

> Homosexuals who have sex with a minor, or engage in homosexual > sex more than once, may also receive the death penalty.

> The bill forbids the "promotion of homosexuality," which in effect bans organizations working in HIV and AIDS prevention.

> Anyone who knows of homosexual activity taking place but does not report it would risk up to three years in prison.

[12/8/09 CNN]

> … [A] death sentence for active homosexuals living with HIV or in cases of same-sex rape. "Serial offenders" also could face capital punishment, but the legislation does not define the term. Anyone convicted of a homosexual act faces life imprisonment.

> Anyone who "aids, abets, counsels or procures another to engage of acts of homosexuality" faces seven years in prison if convicted. Landlords who rent rooms or homes to homosexuals also could get seven years and anyone with "religious, political, economic or social authority" who fails to report anyone violating the act faces three years.

[12/8/09 MSNBC]

> "In addition to outlawing 'any form of sexual relations between persons of the same sex' with penalties up to life imprisonment, the proposed bill criminalizes attempted homosexuality, the aiding and abetting of homosexuality, and promotion of homosexuality -- each carrying a possible prison sentence of seven years.

> Failure to disclose an offense is also punishable by a fine and three years in prison. And anyone with knowledge of crimes committed is obligated to report them to the authorities within 24 hours.

> The legislation also creates a new category of offense, 'aggravated homosexuality,' which is punishable with death. The latter crime would include having homosexual sex with a minor or someone with a disability or having homosexual sex while HIV positive (the bill makes no distinction about whether offenders must be knowingly infected to qualify)."

[12/7 The Washington Post]

Uganda is the latest country joining the backlash bandwagon against gay people in Africa as spreaders of AIDS while African gays become more vocal in protest. Nigeria already has similar laws in place punishing homosexuality with imprisonment or death. Thanks mostly to Rachel Maddow of MSNBC, the Ugandan hate laws have received mainstream media publicity before becoming law.

Maddow has also exposed direct involvement in this travesty by the American right wing – religious and political.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/34337416#34337247

The religious right’s ravings on homosexuality are so trite as to be briefly summarized: Leviticus 18:22.

In addition to the religious right is the political right. Allegedly among those involved with Ugandans pushing for this legislation is Oklahoma Republican Senator James Inhofe. Inhofe, along with other Republican lawmakers, is a member of “The Family”, a sort of spooky 70 year old Christian group running a C Street home for local politicos the likes of Governor Mark Sanford (SC) and Senators John Ensign (NV) and Tom Coburn (OK). The Family has direct ties to its Ugandan sister group behind the legislation.

Joining the religious and political right in supporting the Ugandan bill is the homophobic, cure gayness, lunatic fringe. Maddow’s interview with sexual reorientation advocate Richard Cohen:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/34337416#34337416

~~~

There are an estimated 500,000 gay people in Uganda. Imagine a half million people subject to imprisonment or death every hour of their lives solely for living their lives.

While the Ugandan hate crime legislation is debated, also being debated is New Jersey’s gay marriage bill. There are reasons why the Third World is the Third World.

~~~

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34331632/ns/world_news-africa/

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/12/08/uganda.anti.gay.bill/index.html

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gNOsUTPIL6zoTWAGRTzPqmx3__IgD9CFBHJ00 (AP)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-kapya-kaoma/the-us-christian-right-an_b_387642.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8406602.stm

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/10/28/ugandas_do_ask_do_tell?page=0,0

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2009/12/ugandas_anti-gay_law_rile_us.html

***

Switzerland (?!) Leads Muslim Backlash

***

Taking a page from the annals of blatant religious intolerance, Swiss voters banned the building of minarets on mosques. Minarets are the iconic towers rising from mosques from which muezzins call the faithful to prayer. Approved by 57% of the voters and 26 of 30 cantons, the ban enjoys the status of a constitutional amendment. There are four minarets in Switzerland, a country of 7.5 million, of which 450,000 are Muslim and of whom 45,000 practice their religion. Under existing law those four minarets are not permitted to broadcast the call to prayer outside the mosque itself, and are exempt from the ban (grandfathered in).

Swiss Minaret

Switzerland making religious intolerance a constitutional mandate? How could this happen in such a proper, neutral democracy as Switzerland? The right wing. No, not our right wing but the Swiss right wing. The nationalist Swiss People's Party labeled minarets as symbols of rising Muslim political power that could one day transform Switzerland into an Islamic nation. [AP Nov. 29, 2009] That idiotic hypothesis is all it took to get the sophisticated Swiss riled up enough to institutionalize religious intolerance. After all, nothing messes with neutrality like the possibility of being taken over by fanatical Muslims.

Anti-Minarets Poster

As our right wing is called the Christian right, should American Muslims fear their minarets and muezzins despite the First Amendment? Maybe not under an Obama administration but nothing’s to stop a future president (like the last one) to pay little mind to the Constitution. And, if history is any guide here, once religious fear mongering gets on a roll the Jews are next.

Is this so implausible? Don’t think so. Religious preaching and the religious right’s tentacles are already slithering into our society. Not a day passes without the Catholic Church and, to be fair, other religious institutions taking stands on social issues and putting political pressure on public officials to tow the religious line. Patrick Kennedy being denied communion in the State of Rhode Island is but one glaring example. The Archbishop of Providence, a well spoken man who stood up well to Chris Matthews, defended his position calmly and (in his world) logically as one does when convinced of its righteousness.

Today our office received a call from a local minister inquiring about insurance. “But first”, he said, “What do you stand for?” The underwriter who fielded the call, himself born-again, was dumbfounded at such an inappropriate, qualifying question from a religious figure. Our office is a mile from Manhattan in New Jersey.

So congratulations to Switzerland for safeguarding its neutrality by banning construction of minarets, thus staving off impending takeover by Muslim extremists. Catholics beware the Swiss feeling threatened by the Vatican – church steeples will be next.

***

Holder Bends Over for KSM

***

US Attorney-General Eric Holder’s decision to prosecute Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and 5 others held at Guantanamo charged in the 9/11 attacks (collectively referred to here as “KSM”) in United States federal court as criminal defendants grants them the full panoply of rights granted to all criminal defendants in US federal trials.

The decision to try KSM in federal court by US attorneys rather than under military law by a military war crimes tribunal automatically relegates them to the status of criminal. KSM will be treated no less fairly under American justice than a bank robber, white collar inside trader, kidnapper or murderer. A federal criminal trial open to the public and the media puts our justice system on display around the world, a statement by the Obama administration that America delivers on its promise of transparent justice for all. The possibility of American justice allowing KSM to be acquitted and released was deemed impossible by administration spokesmen. [Exactly how that will go poses questions suited to a separate article.]

There are SO many things wrong with this picture.

Assurances from our government that KSM will be convicted and executed make a trial nothing more than a show trial with the outcome predetermined. The Soviet Union did show trials; Iran still does. Ah, you say, what about the jury? After all, the Constitution mandates that the jury shall be of KSM’s peers. Well, not so much. KSM has no peers in the Manhattan jury pool or any other jury pool outside of Afghanistan, Iraq or Iran. Will he have at least an impartial jury willing to listen to the evidence before reaching a verdict? A jury drawn from the Manhattan jury pool in a courtroom blocks from Ground Zero already told by the government that KSM will be found guilty and die? No, I don’t think so. Impartial jurors will be impossible to find. Maybe a jury which won’t jump out of the jury box to strangle KSM, but not an impartial one.

Recent news is that KSM will plead not guilty and exercise his right to act as his own attorney. Ah – now there’s a scene we’d like to broadcast to the world: KSM blathering Jihadist nonsense with virtual impunity under the protection of the American justice system in a federal courtroom blocks from the destroyed World Trade Center site. But as a criminal defendant in the US criminal justice system, KSM is entitled to act as his own attorney and the international media have the right to report it.

The blathering Jihadist scenario plays right into the hands of KSM. Having consistently expressed his wish to die and become a martyr for the cause, he gets a bonus from the Obama administration – the opportunity to blather his Jihadist nonsense to the world from the protected forum of a federal court.

The public debate on whether the US mainland has prisons secure enough to hold KSM is inane. Of course it does. Top flight US maximum security prisons are no less and probably more secure than Gitmo. The more pertinent question is whether there is a top flight US maximum security prison (penitentiary) within daily travel distance from downtown Manhattan. There isn’t. So, where will KSM be locked up during trial? Obviously in a less than maximum security facility. And how will he be moved from a detention center to court? By bus and police motorcade. I’d imagine that highways will be closed, air cover will be provided, snipers on rooftops, etc. Great. Just what New York City (or any city) needs – a daily security risk inviting terrorists from around the world to take their best shot against our best.

While it is difficult to imagine much that would make New York City a greater target for terrorism, the KSM trial would succeed in doing just that. Any venue where KSM is tried in federal court automatically becomes a target. The effort by local law enforcement, i.e., the NYPD, state and federal law enforcement to keep the court and public safe will be nothing short of monumental. Why should any local or state government bear the expense of trying KSM? While there is a certain element of pride, satisfaction and revenge by trying them in New York City where their war crimes were committed, those are not compelling enough to take on the attendant issues and risks such a trial would create. I say this despite being a native New Yorker and knowing our incredible resolve and resilience.

Fundamental to this issue is whether KSM is a run of the mill criminal defendant or a war criminal. KSM proudly admits committing terrorist acts killing thousands. We are fighting a global war on terror. Therefore, KSM is a war criminal – not your kidnapper/bank robber common type of criminal. It follows logically that a war criminal should be tried by a military war crimes tribunal as were war criminals of World War II and the genocidal ethnic purification war in Kosovo. Let such a military war crimes tribunal convene in the security of a high max prison with federally funded ground and air military protection during the trial.

KSM is a war criminal properly tried by a military war crimes tribunal. To label and try him as anything else denies the global war on terrorism.

***

US Navy Silent Drill Team

***

US Navy Ceremonial Honor Guard Drill Team at the Norwegian Int'l Tattoo, Oslo, Norway

***

Mammograms Courtesy of Insurance Co.’s & USPSTF

***

Recommendations by the United States Preventive Service Task Force that women under age 50 need not have regular mammograms, as well as downplaying the role of self-examination, have created a firestorm of confusion and debate. It is important to note here that despite including “United States” in its name, the Task Force is an outside, independent panel of “experts” which merely makes recommendations. Secretary of Health & Human Services Kathleen Sebelius made it clear that the Task Force neither sets policy nor determines what services are covered by the federal government.

The recommendations did not say that detection doesn’t happen under age 50, just that it doesn’t happen as often. Guess that’s because the older one gets the greater the risk, making over 50 prime time for mammograms. Those struck with breast cancer at an earlier age would, according to these guidelines, not be diagnosed at an early stage thus dramatically decreasing their chances for survival. The panel played the percentages, statistics so loved by insurance companies.

The result of these guidelines is that women would be visiting their doctors less frequently. Less frequent visits mean fewer doctor and radiology claims for the insurance companies to pay. That certainly wouldn’t please doctors and radiologists, but would enrich the monopoly of health insurance companies as premiums are paid yet claims are not.

Not only are women confused and angry but also worried about insurance coverage for under-50 mammograms if the health insurer monopoly relies on Task Force guidelines to evaluate, i.e., deny, mammography claims. Even more money to the insurance companies.

So, you ask – why would a panel recommending treatment for breast cancer cut preventive care and save money for insurance companies? Well, it seems that were no breast cancer oncologists on the Task Force, but 3 Task Force members were insurance company executives.

Watergate source Deep Throat said “Follow the money”. Question answered.

***

Ball in the Hall

***

The ball finally made it into the National Toy Hall of Fame. Yes, that ball – the ubiquitous round thing that comes in so many sizes and weights. It was found worthy of the Class of 2009 along with Game Boy and Big Wheel.

Original inductees (1998-99) to the Hall, part of Rochester, NY’s Strong National Museum of Play, include Barbie, the hula hoop, crayons, Lincoln logs, Monopoly and other old favorites. Somehow ball missed that first class – a class usually larger than future ones in order to catch up with the greats. Ball didn’t make it.

Stick didn’t either. Stick got in with the 2008 class. More injury – kite was a 2007 inductee. Adding insult to injury, cardboard box won a spot in 2005 – a full four years before ball.

After a year long campaign Raggedy Ann was a 2002 inductee. After 5 years she was joined by Raggedy Andy, yet Barbie still yearns for Ken.

Ball (and stick while we’re at it) are as basic as toys get – cross-cultural toys going back thousands of years – the Adam & Eve of toykind. As cultures became more sophisticated toys evolved to suit the tastes of the people, yet ball and stick remain fundamental to play despite the mankind’s advances.

On behalf of ball and stick I resent their shoddy treatment at the hands of the National Toy Hall of Fame.

http://www.museumofplay.org/nthof/inductees.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Toy_Hall_of_Fame

***

Joe Lieberman’s Conscience (as it were)

***

Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) proclaimed that he cannot in good conscience allow a healthcare bill with any form of public option to reach the Senate floor. Conscience? Losing 2000 Democratic VP candidate, failed 2004 Democratic presidential contender, loser of his own state’s 2006 Democratic primary, enthusiastic campaigner for Republicans Sarah Palin and John McCain in 2008, and current chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee Senator Joe Lieberman has a conscience? No, Lieberman’s opposition to a public option does not display conscience. It displays his idiosyncratic, insidious political posturing and greed.

To Joe Lieberman: Shut up! You who shocked the Democratic caucus by campaigning for Sarah Palin to be president were John McCain’s health not to allow him a full term. In good conscience you were OK with placing the United States in the hands of Sarah Palin? What did you expect from a McCain administration, Secretary of Defense?

Lieberman will join the “just say no” Republican senators to filibuster a healthcare bill with any type of public option. His reason: sounds like the first step in the government takeover of healthcare. And that, of course, would lower the profits made by the full panoply of healthcare industries. Yes, a public option may cut into profits as the insurance companies would be facing good old-fashioned American competition. Yes, health insurers are exempt from federal antitrust laws. They get to agree on pricing across the health insurance industry. Introduce a modicum of competition via a public option and the insurance companies’ panties are in a wad. No wonder healthcare is so expensive!

The healthcare industry’s vast, well-paid cadre of lobbying firms has made the line between those passing legislation and those subject to it as fuzzy as it gets. Joe Lieberman has healthcare industry connections sprouting like those on an old fashioned switchboard. That Lieberman is “in bed” with the healthcare industry is well known. It’s the extent of the relationship which is unknown. What is known is that his wife Hadassah Lieberman works for the powerful lobbying firm Hill & Knowlton with connections to the healthcare industry. What is known is that Connecticut is rife with healthcare firms who are all vehemently opposed to healthcare reform. What is known is that Lieberman takes healthcare industry campaign contributions.

So where is your conscience, Joe Lieberman? With the thousands of Americans dying every year for lack of reform, or with personal, power seeking self interest?

Senator, you are no Democrat. Make a clean break with the Democratic caucus before the Democratic leaders grow balls and throw you out, committee chairmanship and all. You’re better suited to the Republican caucus so make a deal with those knuckleheads and join them. Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

***