Turn Left @ hypocrisy.com

Just to prove I’m a bipartisan critic, let me tell you how disgusted I am by the lowlife character of Senator Dianne Wilkerson. For those of you who might be unfamiliar with Wilkerson, she became the first African American woman ever elected to the Massachusetts state senate back in 1993. In spite of having a long and suspect history (federal tax evasion, ethics violations and perjury), Wilkerson managed to serve eight terms before losing this year to Sonia Chang-Diaz. Here in Massachusetts, we simply thought her past had finally caught up with her. That was before October 28, however. What we have learned from her latest brush with the law is that there’s no limit to Wilkerson’s level of greed.

On Tuesday, October 28, Wilkerson was arrested by the FBI on public corruption charges. Wilkerson was caught on tape accepting a bribe and stuffing it in her bra (not only greedy, but tasteless as well). She has apparently accepted $23,500 in bribes in connection with the use of her office as State Senator. Unfortunately for Senator Wilkerson, those she was working on behalf of over the past 18 months just happened to be undercover agents.

The FBI, in conjunction with the Boston Police Department Anti-Corruption Unit, began the investigation into Wilkerson’s alleged activities in the spring of 2007. Between June 2007 and March 2008, Wilkerson accepted $8,500 in cash payments from undercover agents (and a cooperating witness) for her assistance in obtaining a liquor license for a Roxbury nightclub. In exchange for this payout, Wilkerson pressured the Boston Licensing Board, the Mayor and the City Council. She also held up pending legislation in the State Senate.

Even though I’m a Democrat, I believe that Wilkerson should be removed from office. I fully expected that to be the outcome. Yet even I am amazed at how quickly the ceiling fell in here. It took maybe a day or two for her Democratic colleagues and prominent black clergy to fully abandon her. Since October 28, Wilkerson has already been censured, stripped of her committee positions and asked to resign. At the time of her arrest, Wilkerson was mounting a write-in campaign to try to win back her seat. At first, she refused to give it up, but she was soon beaten down. However (and you knew this was coming),there is at least another political figure - on a national level - who has not been censured, asked to resign, or told to stop his re-election bid. Any idea who I’m talking about? Here’s a hint: He’s not black and he’s not female. Yes, I’m referring to none other than Senator Ted Stevens, who has already had a jury conviction in his corruption trial and may spend time in prison for his crimes.

Even now most of Stevens’ Republican colleagues speak fondly of him and seem content on giving him a pass. While he has given up his co-chairmanships and ranking member positions (according to Republican rule), Stevens is allowed to vote in the Senate, speak on the Senate floor and participate in committee work. He’s even back on the road trying to get re-elected to yet another term! So, what’s the difference between Wilkerson and Stevens?

Aside from race, gender and Stevens’ conviction, there’s scale and the fact that Wilkerson took cash while Stevens received gifts and services. In fact, Stevens received roughly $250,000 in gifts and services from Veco Corporation, an energy company and the state of Alaska’s largest employer. Veco provided renovations to Senator Steven’s home (gratis, of course) that more than doubled its size. The work involved a new first floor, a new garage, a new first- and second-story wrap around deck, new plumbing and new wiring. Senator Stevens, of course, neglected to report this substantial gift. Have you seen any of the before-and-after pictures? Although Stevens was never actually charged with ‘bribery,’ the indictment states that Stevens “could and did use his official position and his office on behalf of VECO.” Now, if that doesn’t spell bribery, what does?

Perhaps it’s not all race and gender. Perhaps one could argue that it’s also the difference between corruption’s effect on local vs. national politics. However, there does appear to be just a hint of disparity here.

While everyone’s preoccupied with the election (and with good reason), George Bush is going about his usual business of taking care of business. A George Bush full-frontal assault in the name of cronyism usually means bad things for the general populace. This time is no exception. It appears that the Bush administration is poised to enact a number of federal regulations that will weaken protections for the environment and potentially compromise public safety. Some of these regulations will ease rules for or lift constraints on private industry (such as power plants, mines and farms).

For example, one rule (proposed by the National Marine Fisheries Service) would eliminate the requirement that environmental impact studies be prepared for certain fisheries-management decisions. According to PEW research, this proposed new rule is “wildly unpopular,” inspiring 194,000 public comments, as well as protests from 80 members of Congress and 160 conservation groups. In spite of this, unnamed sources have reported that the administration has promised to have this rule enacted by the end of November.

Another rule showing blatant disregard for the public health would (get ready) allow current emissions from a power plant to match the highest levels produced by that plant. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is opposed to this rule because it worses global warming by allowing millions of tons of additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. As if this isn’t enough, two additional rules would continue to weaken air quality standards.

One would ease limits on emissions from coal-fired power plants located near national parks. Another rule would allow increased emissions from oil refineries, chemical factories and other industrial plants with complex manufacturing operations. What exactly are complex manufacturing operations, and who makes those judgments? That sounds pretty broad to me. Continuing the environmental assault, the Bush administration is considering a new federal regulation that would ease rules designed to keep coal slurry waste from finding its way into Appalachian streams. Still others could compromise the safety of the general public.

It’s a good thing for George Bush that his everyday actions have become pretty irrelevant in the publics eye. That’s what he’s counting on. He talks tough about terrorism and continuously reiterates our need to be vigilant. George Bush uses the shadow ‘war on terror’ to justify every vile action he’s approved during his term of service. In the meantime, he’s busy behind the scenes supporting new regulations that compromise our safety by relaxing counter-terrorism rules requiring customs brokers to provide shipping data in advance. So much for the Bush administration’s commitment to securing our ports. This is one president who has absolutely no scruples. There hasn’t been one president like him since Tricky occupied the oval office. George W. Bush could care less about being a sell out. He could care less about his reputation. He’s only concerned with accomplishing as much as he can for his business friends before his term is up. He knows damned right well that the American people have a short memory. After all, Richard Nixon - once remembered in infamy - practically died at the top of the respectability meter. It’s an amazing phenomenon.

Unfortunately, a new administration will not easily be able to roll back these regulations once they have taken effect. This requires labor-intensive regulatory proceedings, including lengthy periods of public comment, drafting of new regulations and (mandated) reanalysis. In summary, President Bush is taking a parting shot at the American people by guaranteeing them dirtier air and water for years to come. Did we really expect anything else from a president who has consistently shown a blatant disregard for the welfare of the American people and the law of the land?

The election is just days away and pace is picking up, particularly around the Republican party. You’ve just got to wonder what side of the rainbow they’re working, though. Here’s what I’m talking about:

• In spite of being found guilty on all seven felony corruption counts, Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) has vowed to fight on in his bid to win reelection against Democrat Mark Begich. The guy should just step down. What ever happened to that slogan… you know the one…isn’t it Country First? Where have I heard that one before?

• Sarah Palin, herself recently found guilty of abuse of power, actually suggested that Ted Stevens resign. Why doesn’t she take her own advice? In fact, it seems that Sarah is in hot water again. A new ethics complaint accuses the governor of using her official position for personal gain. This time, she is accused of charging the state of Alaska $21,000 for her three daughters’ commercial flights since taking office in December 2006. Her daughters were not invited to the events and their attendance served no legitimate state business. Talk about the ultimate in hypocrisy. Between Stevens and Palin, you’d swear there was something in the water up there.

• Earlier this week John McCain finally addressed the economy. He took a few moments to warn the voting public that the Democrats would ruin the economy. Forgive me, but hasn’t eight years of Republican rule already done that? If this isn’t “ruined,” what is? While we’re at it, let’s address the McCain notion that Barack Obama’s tax plan is nothing but Socialism. Guess what? Socialism is part of the fabric of American life. We’ve always had a graduated tax plan in this country. In Obama’s plan, there’s nothing new under the sun.

• In yet another ‘hail Mary’ attempt to destroy Obama’s image, the pit bull with lipstick is now accusing the Democratic presidential candidate of having PLO ties. This time, it’s about Obama’s association with Rashid Khalidi, a leading scholar of Middle Eastern studies at Columbia University. Yes, he is a contemporary of Obama. He has also been an outspoken critic of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories and of our policies toward Israel. Know what? So what? I’m also critical of our policies toward Israel. This is AMERICA. We’re supposed to be able to disagree with our government without being called traitors or terrorists. This all or nothing notion about patriotism has been concocted by the Republican party. In the Constitution, it plainly states that we have a right to a redress of our grievances. It’s called FREEDOM, people. What the Republicans want is a dictatorship.

• John McCain has built his campaign around this fictional Joe the Plumber character. You know, the guy who wants to buy a plumbing business but cannot. I say fictional because the guy isn’t even a licensed plumber and he hasn’t paid his taxes. His real name is Samuel Wurzelbacher. Here’s what Joe (Samuel) has to say: ” I know just enough about foreign policy to probably be dangerous…I have no idea where John McCain’s position is…I honestly want people to go out and find their own reasons. I tell people not to listen to everyone else’s opinion. I’m not going to have them start listening to mine.” I could be wrong, but building the campaign around Joe the Plumber might be a strategic mistake on Senator McCain’s part. No?

• And finally, we’re back to Sarah Palin again. In an October 24^th speech on autism, she proved once again she doesn’t know what the hell she’s talking about most of the time. This time, she mocked “fruit fly research” as a big waste of money that has “little or nothing to do with the public good.” Had Palin done her homework, she’d know that the exact opposite is true. This gets back to my accusation that she’s intellectually non-curious. She really is. If she’s going to talk about a subject, she should know about the subject. Palin should have known that a recent study of Drosophila fruit flies showed that a protein called neurexin is essential for proper neurological function, making it clearly relevant for autism research. In fact, fruit flies are the foundation of much of modern genetics. They have helped us to learn about heredity, genome structure and congenital disorders. (Yes, Sarah, they’ve even helped us understand the “e” word - that’s evolution.)

Well, that about wraps it up for tonight. I’m not sure I can handle much more of this intellectual stuff anyway.

You betcha. It gets worse every time Sarah Palin opens her mouth. That’s the stage we are at right now. She continues to be an embarrassment to John McCain and the Republican party. Palin also should, by now, have frightened a number of Americans. Friday evening (October 24) on the NBC News with Brian Williams she proved just how big a right-wing extremist she truly is. Here’s the exchange:

Williams: Is an abortion clinic bomber a terrorist, under this definition, governor?

Sarah Palin: [Sighs] There’s no question Bill Ayres, under his own admittance, was, um, one who sought to destroy, er, our US Capitol and our Pentagon. That is a domestic terrorist. There’s no question there. Now, others who would want to engage in harming innocent Americans or facilities, that, uh, er, that would be unacceptable. Uh, I don’t know if you’re going to use the word “terrorist” there, but it’s unacceptable and, uh, um, it, er, would not be condoned, of course, on, on our watch, but [sigh] I don’t know what you’re asking is if I regret referring to Bill Ayres as an unrepentant domestic terrorist. I don’t regret characterizing him as that.

Sarah Palin did her usual amount of stumbling around the English language, but it’s pretty clear that she operates on pretzel logic. She’s truly twisted. In other words, if someone is going to bomb or destroy a government building, the definition of ‘terrorist’ fits. If, however, they are only going to destroy unimportant facilities (like, say, an abortion clinic) or harm innocent Americans, she doesn’t know if the term ‘terrorist’ fits. In her mind, the difference between William Ayers (a terrorist) and Eric Robert Rudolph (not a terrorist) is the choice of buildings and causes. Sarah Palin needs a dose of reality. The Eric Robert Rudolphs of the world are terrorists. Period. Perhaps a quick review would help, so I went and researched the definitions from a number of sources. In order to define the word ‘terrorist,’ one has to define ‘terrorism.’

Terrorism: The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

Terrorist: A person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.

Based on these definitions, the only conclusion a reasonable person could come away with is that abortion clinic bombers, or even better - anti-abortion violence advocates - are terrorists. There’s no gray area here; seems pretty clear. However, since her triumphant debut at the the Republican Convention, Palin has proven herself to be anything but reasonable. That a candidate for public office did not immediately label these despicable creatures ‘terrorists’ is despicable in itself. It’s an outrage. I just cannot figure out what the difference is between radical Muslim bombers and radical Christian bombers. There isn’t any difference. What does this suggest about our GOP vice presidential candidate? It suggests that Sarah Palin is a right-wing extremist. She basically just put the good hockey mom seal of approval on those who perpetrate anti-abortion violence.

Where does the ‘terrorist’ hair splitting start for Sarah Palin? Is it simply that she defines terrorists as only those individuals who hate the US government and want to destroy government buildings? Or is it that anti-abortion violence is being committed in the service of God so, therefore, it is not terrorism? By now, everyone knows that logic. Say you kill an abortion doctor or destroy an abortion facility. So what? Look how many innocent babies you’re going to save! It’s what God would want. Haven’t we heard that rhetoric over and over again when it comes time for domestic anti-abortion terrorists to justify their deeds? It’s a shame she wasn’t allowed to expand and expound on her position. Then we could have seen how far up the line on the hypocrisy scale she placed. John McCain came to her rescue and redirected the interview. Of course, Senator McCain doesn’t much want to talk about the issue either, given his voting record.

In both 1993 and 1994, John McCain voted against making “bombings, arson and blockades at abortion clinics, and shootings and threats of violence” federal crimes. He also opposed Colorado’s “bubble law.” This law prohibits abortion protesters from coming within 8 feet of women entering abortion clinics. McCain also voted to allow those who have committed violent acts at or harassment of women who go to reproductive-health clinics to avoid paying fines assessed against them by declaring bankruptcy.

You can put lipstick on a pig, but you can’t cover up the smell. And right now the Wicked Witch of Wasilla smells pretty bad. If Senator McCain is looking at the most recent polls with open eyes, he’ll come away with the conclusion that Sarah Palin is the single biggest detriment to his presidential candidacy. Yes, that’s right. At this point in the 2008 presidential race, his association with Sarah Palin is a bigger liability than his association with President Bush, the most unpopular president in American history. While McCain spends his time blaming left-wing feminists and the liberal media for Palin’s drop in popularity, the fact is that Sarah Palin has brought this on herself because she fosters the politics of divisiveness and exclusion.

It was Sarah Palin who decided that the McCain campaign get nasty. I believe that she referred to it as “taking off the gloves.” And, of course, McCain listened and approved the strategy of moving away from the issues and into character assassination. It was immediately after that Palin began to stretch the truth about Obama’s association with the Weather Underground’s Bill Ayers. She accused Obama of “palling around with terrorists.” The right wingnuts in the McCain camp knocked this one out of the park, yelling out epithets like, “kill him,” “terrorist,” and “off with his head.” Even Dick Morris (remember him?) got into the act by stating that Obama’s association with Ayers is the equivalent of being friends with Osama bin Laden. Once again, the Republicans jumped on the politics of fear and invoked the “terrorist” theme. Hell, why not! George Bush has used this to successfully control the quivering American population for the past eight years. See. There it is again. Somehow I just can’t get away from drawing similarities between McCain and Bush.

While McCain has received kudos for toning this ugliness down over the past couple of weeks, let’s be frank about it. McCain only toned it down publicly when the Secret Service announced that it was interested in finding the people in the McCain audiences that were yelling these little ditties. Truth be told, McCain then quietly invested in ‘robocalls’ (automated messages) that linked Obama and Ayers. Again, here’s a similarity between McCain and Bush. President Bush used ‘robocalls’ in 2004 to sink John McCain in South Carolina. Might I suggest to the Secret Service that the people yelling in the McCain-Palin crowd were only accessories after the fact. The root of the problem, the instigator, is Sarah Palin (with John McCain’s backing).The McCain campaign has managed to tap into the lowest common denominator in American society: The ultra-patriotic, God-fearing bigot.

Palin’s divisive nature continued at an October 16 fund raiser in Greensboro, North Carolina, where she said, “We believe the best of America is not all in Washington, D.C. We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard working very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation.”

Let’s not stop there. Palin certainly didn’t. “This is where we find the kindness and goodness and the courage of everyday Americans. Those who are running our factories and teaching our kids and growing our food and are fighting our wars for us. Those who are protecting us in uniform. Those who are protecting the virtues of freedom.”

The upshot here isn’t that she’s insulting Washington, D.C. No sir. She’s insulting everybody who isn’t living in a small town. Those living in, say New York, Chicago, or San Francisco apparently are not real Americans. Secondarily, Palin is accusing those who disagree with our government of being un-patriotic. I suspect that Sarah Palin spends very little time educating herself about our forefathers and what they had in mind for our government. She prefers her history to be Palinized because it better suits her purpose. She might be interested to learn that our forefathers not only called for protecting the Constitution from threat by forces outside our government, but also from those within our own government who seek to undermine it’s basic principles. We’ve had plenty of that over the past eight years, and a McCain-Palin regime promises even more. By the way, I’d like to take the opportunity to remind Sarah Palin that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have been equal opportunity killers. Americans from all walks of life (not just farmers and factory workers) and from everywhere across our nation (not just small towns) have been killed. However, they have not died protecting the virtues of American freedom as she suggests. They’ve died protecting our access to Middle Eastern oil in order to feed our all-consuming addiction.

Speaking of assaulting the Constitution, the Wicked Witch of Wazilla has broken with McCain and emphatically stated her support for a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. I’d call singling out one group for oppression to be divisive. Wouldn’t you? And wouldn’t you call a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage writing discrimination into the Constitution? This very act undermines the basic principles behind the Constitution. If an amendment is added, it should strengthen the Constitution, not weaken it. The objection to same-sex marriage is clearly based on religious ideology. For example, we now know that the Mormon church is the driving force behind California’s Amendment 8. There is no place for religious ideology in the formation of national policy. That is why there is a separation between church and state. The issue of same-sex marriage is a question of basic civil rights. It is not a topic to be voted upon by Congress, and it does not belong on any ballot in any state.

So, here we are with November 4^th fast approaching. I learned today that the GOP has spent more than $150,000 on make-up, clothing and accessories for Sarah Palin and her family since she was selected as McCain’s running mate. She spent $13,200 on make-up alone during the month of September (so much for being just an average hockey mom). It’s all about image, but image only goes so far. While it may be possible to physically transform Sarah Palin’s appearance into something more vice presidential, it’s almost impossible to hide the dark side of her divisive and un-Christian character. That has been laid bare for all to clearly see.