get the u.s. out of my... foreskin?

The amazing thing about the health care debate in this country is that just when you think it couldn't possibly get any more ridiculous (see death panels, Sarah Palin), it does. Evidently, the Centers for Disease Prevention and Control is considering whether to encourage universal circumcision of baby boys born in the United States. Now, on the surface, this seems like a fairly reasonable proposal to consider. After all, numerous studies have shown that circumcision reduces the risk of men contracting HIV during heterosexual intercourse by as much as 60%. The World Health Organization already recommends that male circumcision be considered as a way to reduce AIDS transmission in parts of Africa.

But--as potential benign as a public health campaign to encourage infant circumcision may seem--it is actually, according to right wing anti-health care crusaders like Rush Limbaugh, the government's attempt to institute a circumcision mandate. Limbaugh went on to warn that: "If we need to save our penises from anyone, it's Obama." So, there you have it: universal health care is really part of Obama's secret mission to wage war against American male genitalia (for that matter, this whole circumcision thing probably has to do with the fact that he's a Muslim).

And if that isn't enough to convince you that Obamacare is an Islamofascist communist scheme, the Republican party wants you to know that you may well not even be covered by this government run "health care rationing system.". That is, if you're a registered Republican. A recent RNC fund-raising survey included the following question:

It has been suggested that the government could use voter registration to determine a person's political affiliation, prompting fears that GOP voters might be discriminated against for medical treatment in a Democrat-imposed health care rationing system. Does this possibly concern you?

That's right, now the Democrats can pull the plug on Grandma not only if she's deemed an unproductive member of society but also if she voted Bush into office.

the end of an era

When Edward Kennedy succumbed to brain cancer this morning, it marked the first time in nearly 60 years that there hasn't been a Kennedy in the Senate. Ted Kennedy, as the only Kennedy brother to live past the age of 46 and, perhaps, fulfill at least some of that enigmatic dynasty's furious potential, leaves an undeniable mark on this country. He was, in many ways, the perfect liberal. Hailing from the bluest state in the Union and the most storied political family in American history, reelection was never much of a concern (his smallest margin of victory came in 1994 when he defeated Mitt Romney by a mere 58% to 41%). Tainted by the infamous Chappaquiddick incident and an ill-advised presidential primary bid in 1980, Kennedy fully abandoned any aspirations for national office. Instead, he devoted himself to progressive causes in the Senate, from raising the minimum wage to expanding federal health insurance for children to opposing the war in Iraq. He was an unabashed liberal at a time when Republicans were successfully transforming the concept into a dirty word. He carried out his battles to the bitter end, continuing to serve the people of Massachusetts and the United States as he always had: just last week, he asked the Massachusetts state legislature to change the law concerning Senator succession to allow Governor Deval Patrick to appoint a temporary replacement upon his death. Ted Kennedy was a deeply flawed man (as evidenced by what can only be generously referred to as youthful indiscretions), but he was a brilliant politician who managed to transform himself into one of the greatest and most influential Senators in American history.

At a time when the congressional Democrats (and even erstwhile champion of the progressive cause, President Obama) seem desperate to back away from anything that smacks of the slightest hint of "socialism" while destroying the best chance for health care reform in the process, it is important to recall what can and has been achieved by a single American legislator. No one can replace Ted Kennedy, but perhaps, in the wake up of his death, some Democrats in congress will be inspired by his example and attempt to carry on his mantle of liberal lion.

about those terror alerts...

Remember those terror alerts under the Bush administration? You know, that delightful color-coded warning system whose meaning seemed to run something along the lines of: "FYI: there may be an increased chance of some heinous attack somewhere in the US at some point. There's nothing you can do to protect yourself (and we're certainly not going to give you any useful details about the threat), but we think you should go about your day with a little more fear in your heart."

Evidently, this scientific approach to fear-mongering was, in fact, politically motivated (who would've thunk? well, you know, other than the busloads of liberal journalists who have been decrying the system for years). In his new book, Tom Ridge, former homeland security secretary, admits that Rumsfeld pressured him to raise the terror alert on the eve of the 2004 election in an effort to improve W.'s reelection chances. Tom Ridge (to his credit?) quit three weeks later because he "wanted to spend more time with his family." On the flip side, of course, Ridge had been vehemently denying that politics played any role in the system up until now (which, out of sheer coincidence, happens to be two weeks before the release of his book "The Test of Our Times"). So, as often happens with the secrecy-shrouded Bush administration, it remains difficult to determine exactly who is lying about what when.

so wait... now we're OUTSOURCING assassination attempts?

The CIA has a long and glorious history of flouting international law by engaging in state-sponsored assassinations. (Apparently, those crazy folks at the United Nations think that people, EVEN people the U.S. government doesn't particularly like, deserve a fair trial before being summarily executed.) So, when Leon Panetta finally told Congress that the CIA had been developing plans to assassinate senior Al Qaeda operatives since 2001, it really shouldn't have come as much of a surprise. However, news broke yesterday that the CIA had actually hired Blackwater USA (yes, that Blackwater USA) to assist with these attempts to locate and kill high-level terrorists. That's right, the CIA is now outsourcing assassinations.

Furthermore, this was all part of a "top secret" operation--so secret, in fact, that Cheney ordered that it had to be kept hidden from lawmakers (you know, like the ones on the Congressional Intelligence Committee). Yet, despite falling into the Bush administration's grossly expanded category of things that must be concealed from the legislature, the CIA, in its infinite wisdom, decided that large parts of this ultra-secret plan could not only be revealed to but also carried out by a private corporation with an (at best) contentious human rights record.

albany gets back to work - or why state government really doesn't need more power

After a five-week standoff between Republicans and Democrats (two Democratic defections left both parties with 31 members, an evidently untenable situation in state politics) in the New York Senate, the legislature returned to work yesterday. What brilliant compromise led to the resumption of government during the worst economic crisis this country has seen since the Great Depression? None. Instead, one of the idiots who defected in the first place, Pedro Espada, Jr., returned to the Democratic fold. The best part? In the new leadership structure, Mr. Espada will serve as majority leader. (Don't worry, that might not actually mean anything in state politics. But apparently it was enough to convince Mr. Espada to return the Democrats rather than face marginalization a proposed power-showering agreement between one Democratic faction and the Republican party).

The debacle in the New York Senate is merely the most vivid recent illustration (the very fact that Sarah Palin managed to be elected governor of an entire state was probably enough for me) of why transferring more power to the states might not be the brilliant idea Republicans make it out to be. (Or, you know, used to make it out to be until they discovered the wonderful uses of a large government, like unlimited military spending). Throw in Governor Sanford's mysterious week-long disappearance (later, he admitted, due to an affair with an Argentinian woman) and Governor Palin's puzzling resignation (as far as anyone could gather from her rambling speech, the perseverance of the military inspired her to step down in the face of adversity, or at least in the face of bad press and the prospect of being a lame duck governor) and it's a wonder anyone could support shifting more power to this set of politicians. The federal government is not, obviously, the model of brilliance and efficiency (but, then again, as we've all learned in recent months, neither is the private sector), but it is increasingly clear that it remains far superior to state legislatures, at least in terms of marginal functionality.

"death to the dictator"

After an 11-day lull, thousands of Iranians took to the streets again (despite numerous threats of retribution springing from the reigning regime) to commemorate the tenth anniversary student uprising of 1999. At the time, the riots, in response to hundreds of basiji storming the University of Tehran after a reformist demonstration, posed the greatest challenge to the government since the Islamic Revolution. Naturally, those tremors pale in comparison to today's persisting turmoil in the wake of the contested election.

Sadly, the Iranian government appeared to be as good as its word. In the midst of regime's continuing rhetoric about the foreign media agitators (whose journalists have conveniently been banned from the country), it has continued to crack down ever more brutally on those who dare to continue to protest. The demonstrators were greeted with hoards of riot police and basiji militiamen who beat them back with batons, tear gas and gun butts. The government seems determined not to back down -- but every night millions of Iranians continue to climb to their roof tops to shout "Allah'u Akbar" (a la 1979 Islamic Revolution).

more clerics break with khamanei

Despite the increasing crackdown on the opposition (complete with alleged confessions of top reformists officials), a prominent group of religious leaders, Association of Researchers and Teachers of Qum, declared the contentious election and the new government to be illegitimate yesterday. Furthermore, the released statement went on to call upon other mullahs to stand against the election results and likened the 20 protesters killed during the opposition demonstrators to the martyrs who died for the cause of the Islamic Revolution. The group not only directly defied the rule of Ayatollah Khamanei, whose word is supposed to reign supreme, but also continued to strengthen the allegorical connection between today's reformers and those of the Islamic Revolution (and, by logical, extension between today's government and that of the Shah). Naturally, the group in question has no real political power, but the symbolic significance of this act should not be overlooked -- the fact that an Association created by Khomanei himself has now turned against his successor is momentous indeed.

Meanwhile, of course, the Iranian government continues its increasingly ludicrous attempts to paint Mousavi as an American agent. Today, the Kayhan newspaper published a damning editorial in which its editor-in-chief, Hossein Shariatmadari, accused Mousavi of "terrible crimes," including murdering innocent people, holding riots, co-operating with foreigners and acting as America's fifth column." Such an editorial (despite its appearance in one of Iran's most prominent newspapers) is unlikely to actually sway anyone's views, especially given the close relationship between Shariatmadari and Khamanei. However, it does serve as an increasingly overt threat that the Iranian government intends to arrest Mousavi if he continues his steadfast refusal to back down.