Saddam's comments at the gallows have been determined, and contrary to initial reports he did not go to his death telling people to go to hell. 

"Fallen tyrant" taunted in Saddam video

By Claudia Parsons Sun Dec 31, 10:31 AM ET

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - "The tyrant has fallen," a witness shouted after Saddam Hussein dropped through the trap door of the gallows, his neck broken in an instant by the rope moments after exchanging sectarian taunts with onlookers.

Grainy footage of the execution, apparently shot on a mobile phone by a witness who was standing below looking up at the gallows, was circulating widely on the Internet on Sunday, a day after Saddam was hanged for crimes against humanity.

As the hangmen prepare him for his final moment, some of those invited to attend standing below the platform taunted the former president, who was executed on Saturday before dawn.

One man shouts "Moqtada, Moqtada, Moqtada," a reference to cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who heads a powerful Shi'ite political movement and a militia blamed by Washington and Sunni Arabs for running death squads targeting Saddam's Sunni Arab minority.

Saddam, the noose around his neck, appears to smile and shoot back: "Is this what you call manhood?"

Another onlooker, despite pleas from another for witnesses to observe the proprieties, yells: "Go to hell!" and Saddam, seemingly accusing his enemies of destroying the nation he once led, replies: "The hell that is Iraq?"

The sound was muffled and at times indistinct, leading some who initially heard low-quality versions of the video to conclude Saddam had made rather different comments.

Another voice can be heard shouting "Long live Mohammed Bakr al-Sadr," referring to a relative of Moqtada al-Sadr killed in the 1980s.

Though Sadr's movement is a major force in the coalition government of Shi'ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, the outspoken comments by his supporters in the execution chamber may fuel charges by Saddam's defense lawyers and his supporters in Iraq and the wider Arab world that the process has been "victors' justice."

The video, lasting about two-and-a-half minutes, shows Saddam drop through the trap door while still intoning the Muslim profession of faith. He was abruptly cut off in the second verse: "I bear witness that Mohammad..."

After he falls, the cry "The tyrant has fallen" is audible over shouting and other comments that could not be made out.

The video bore out witness comments that the 69-year-old former leader, who looked calm and composed as he stood on the gallows in an official video broadcast on Saturday, had shouted angry political slogans while masked guards were bringing him into the execution chamber once used by his own feared intelligence services.

Toward the end of the film, Saddam's body is shown swinging, eyes partly open and the neck bent almost at right angles to one side. The film is punctuated by flashes, apparently as witnesses took photographs.

As anyone who turned on the news today or yesterday is aware, Saddam Hussein is dead.  He was hanged just before dawn, Baghdad time, and thus his sentence was carried out.  Watching the video, we see an old man, slightly afraid, but resigned to his fate.  He almost seems confused.  Grainy footage of his body, wrapped in a white shroud and spattered with what looks like blood, corroborate the news. 

I confess to finding out last night, and the first word from my mouth was a savage, "Good."  My gut reaction to the news was the satisfaction of knowing that an opponent has been defeated. 

But there was another thought that entered my head, put forth by one of the people I was with at the time.  He said that he felt sorrow that the man had to be executed.  He felt it was a shame that things had to go to those lengths.  And as he said that, I re-examined my position.

I realized that, contrary to my initial gut reaction, my thoughts and feelings ran much along the same lines.  Is it better to execute a man for his crimes, or to imprison him for life?  Watching the video of his final steps to the gallows filled me with pity.  Pity for a murdering despot who had destabilized the Middle East for decades.  Pity for a man who attempted to eradicate an entire people.  I pitied the old, broken Saddam Hussein.  I found myself hoping that he died well. 

Why?  Why is it that despite his opposition to my country and his obstruction of the goals of peace did I find myself wishing that we might have kept him imprisoned until his natural death?  Is it because of the proclamations of his martyrdom that followed soon after?  Yes, this death will steel the resolve of men who might kill more of our soldiers.  Was it the idea that every man, regardless of religion, race, past crimes or evil intent is still a man with a human soul and therefore deserving of human dignity?  I think that what happened is the Catholic part of me spoke up, quietly and with some force.

Now, I'm no Sister Helen Prejean (incidentally, there's another Sean Penn reference...I think I have a problem).  I believe that the death penalty is justified in some instances, and that sometimes its use is absolutely necessary.  According to my understanding of the Church's position on the death penalty, it should be meted out only in those cases of extreme violence and mayhem when incarceration would not adequately protect the public from further attacks.  With our prison system, this is not so much an issue.  It's pretty hard to escape from those things.

But this article I found also made me think that perhaps our Church leaders are drawing a line in the sand.  In that article, the spokesman for the Vatican reiterates the Church's opposition to the death penalty, but it makes no mention of the circumstances in which it is acceptable.  There is a movement in the Church to put capital punishment on the same tier as abortion, but I can't reasonably get behind that.

I think we have it right...rarely acceptable in civilized society, but surely an avenue.

What worries me the most is that gut reaction I had.  That savage, leering part of me that would have mocked his death to his face, forgetting that he is still a person.  I find myself worried that not enough people take the time to examine their feelings and realize why the death penalty should be rare.  It's for our own humanity's sake that we not get too comfortable with it.

I recently found an item on Drudge that piqued my interest.  Two reasons:

1.  The topic is global warming.
2.  The news outlet is the New York Times.

When we put those two together it generally makes for a fretful, glaringly idiotic piece of tripe journalism designed to subtly reinforce that notion that only baboons aren't concerned about global warming.

While of course the implications of climate change are important, what I take issue with is the notion that somehow it's almost entirely our fault.  We don't generally hear the global warming skeptic's point of view, simply because the people doing the reporting aren't interested in a bland, moderate, "science-y" story.  They want a headline, and nothing screams headline better than a catastrophe of our own making that threatens our very planet's viability.  In that light we must follow crusading intelligentsia like Al Gore who bravely speak the truth despite ridicule from ignorant doubt-mongers.  Manbearpig, anyone?  I'm super serial.

It's pretty frickin' funny (when it's not shattering my faith in our elected officials) that many of the same people who lambast President Bush for going into Iraq with 'faulty intelligence' are the same ones who call for the US to endure punishing emissions protocols and the like without any call for a balanced study of global warming.  Considering that there is not quite as much credible evidence for man-made global warming as for Iraq's WMDs, I think it's a hoot/holler.

But of course, when you're dealing with the fate of the planet then things like evidence must come second to things like good sound bytes. 

I've mentioned this briefly, but it's worth repeating:  Global warming does exist.  You only have to step outside in your shorts and polo this Christmas to figure that one out.  While extra warm winters like this one are somewhat aberrant, statistically, there is a trend towards warmth over the past century and a half.  The questions on the minds of balanced individuals are:

1.  Is this phenomena actually being accelerated by the pollution of our industry?
2.  Is there any reasonable step we can take to curb rapid global climate change if in fact our industry is making an impact?
3.  In the event that the planet continues to grow warmer, what steps must be taken to adapt to that climate change? 

I catch so much hell from people when I bring up the fact that the planet is constantly changing and that our ecological footprint is not as big as some would like to believe.

The parting thought is that even if global warming is only mildly influenced by our activities, we should still strive to preserve the natural beauty of our planet.  And we should colonize Mars.  That is all.

I think from time to time I will also present things that make me want to use profanity and rail against the hopelessness of it all.  I'll call it my Dumb S@#$-ometer, and I'll assign a random value to it.  A cumulative total will be applied to my blog, so that I'll know when to trade her in.

School accuses 5-year-old of sex harassment

by ERIN CUNNINGHAM
erinc@herald-mail.com

HAGERSTOWN - A kindergarten student was accused earlier this month of sexually harassing a classmate at Lincolnshire Elementary School, an accusation that will remain on his record until he moves to middle school.

Washington County Public Schools spokeswoman Carol Mowen said the definition of sexual harassment used by the school system is, "unwelcome sexual advances, request for sexual favors and/or other inappropriate verbal, written or physical conduct of a sexual nature directed toward others."

Mowen said that definition comes from the Maryland State Department of Education.

According to a school document provided by the boy's father, the 5-year-old pinched a girl's buttocks on Dec. 8 in a hallway at the school south of Hagerstown.

Charles Vallance, the boy's father, said he was unable to explain to his son what he had done.

"He knows nothing about sex," Vallance said. "There's no way to explain what he's been written up for. He knows it as playing around. He doesn't know it as anything sexual at all."

The incident was described as "sexual harassment" on the school form.

School officials consider a student's age and the specific action when determining what administrative action to take, Mowen said.

Lincolnshire Principal Darlene Teach and Mowen said they were unable to discuss he incident involving the Lincolnshire student.

Teach said any student, regardless of grade level, can be cited for sexual harassment.

"Anytime a student touches another student inappropriately, it could be sexual harassment," Teach said.

School administrators at a Texas school in November suspended a 4-year-old student for inappropriately touching a teacher's aide after the prekindergarten student hugged the woman.

"It's important to understand a child may not realize that what he or she is doing may be considered sexual harassment, but if it fits under the definition, then it is, under the state's guidelines," Mowen said. "If someone has been told this person does not want this type of touching, it doesn't matter if it's at work or at school, that's sexual harassment."

The incident will be included in the boy's file while he remains at Lincolnshire, but Mowen said those files do not follow students when they move on to middle school.

She described the incident as a "learning opportunity."

During the 2005-06 school year, 28 kindergarten students in Maryland were suspended for sex offenses, including sexual assault, sexual harassment and sexual activity, according to state data. Fifteen of those suspensions were for sexual harassment.

During the 2005-06 school year, one Washington County prekindergarten student was suspended from school, and 12 of the county's kindergartners were suspended for various offenses, according to state data.

Oh Lord.  Do you know, this is the kind of reactionary crap that makes me want to homeschool my kids?  These two women are defending their position!  How in the Hell can a 5-year-old sexually harass anyone?  I remember clearly that when I was 5, everyone was getting naked and examing things.  Is that sexual?

Our culture is so hyper-sexualized that we can' t believe that something like this could be innocent of any sexual feeling.  These are the same people who study Kinsey and think that infants can enjoy sex.  With that mentality, of course an exchange like this would be sexual harassment.  Of course.

Dumb S@#$-age for this trip: 73

For your reading pleasure, the continuation of my blog from yesterday.

The most effective forms of de facto censorship are pre-emptive. Systemically, we are encouraged to keep our heads down, out of the line of fire - to avoid the danger, god forbid, that someone in the White House, on Capitol Hill, or a media blow-hard might take a shot at us.

But, as a practical matter, most of the limits on creative expression and other forms of free speech come from self-censorship, where the mechanism of corporate clout offers carrots and brandishes sticks. We avoid a conflict before the conflict materializes. We reach for the carrots and stay out of range of sticks.

Decades ago, Fred Friendly called it a "positive veto" - corporations putting big money behind shows that they want to establish and perpetuate. Whether in journalism or drama, creative efforts that don't gain a financial "positive veto" are dismissible, then dismissed. We may not call that "censorship." But whatever we call it, the effects of a "positive veto" system are severe. They impose practical limits on efforts to bring the most important realities to public attention sooner rather than later...

As I understand what he's saying, corporations will put money into something that they want to succeed, and this results in more viewership/success for the program, hence more people being influenced by the corporation.  So, as it relates to free speech, if powerful interests do not back certain statements or news stories or 'creative efforts,' those things are lost.  In that light, it becomes more difficult for those with an anti-corporate message to have their views heard.

This just occurred to me.  Certain sections of the country have more capital to play with, both economic and political.  Say, New York City.  New York City is worth more electoral votes than a number of states put together.  Is it fair to say that without places like Texas and the other states (minus California, New York's perky blonde sister) New York's interest would dominate the nation to the exclusion of, say, Mississippi?  We'd all ban trans fat and indoor smoking!  I mean, New York is pretty much everywhere already, and benefits from its exposure.  Just a thought, and not one I have the energy to explore in depth.

Now, as far as creative expression, I don't think we have much that is 'censored' nowadays.  Look at Grey's Anatomy, HBO, the porn industry, etc.  If someone wants to do a groundbreaking, artistic and offensive show, absolutely nothing prevents them.  Is he complaining that there is no money in it?  I mean, not many people will understand the finer points of pissing on a crucifix for art.  In that sense, you can expect limited patronage, and therefore limited exposure of your views.  People have the freedom to refrain from supporting things they don't like.

We're beginning to see more revealing images of this war. But it's later now, isn't it? What we have to pay attention to are the results of these "practical limits." One, is that wars become much easier to launch than to halt.

Especially if you whine and second-guess yourself instead of doing the job.

I've got a feeling about how we can begin to change this process and I want to pass it by you. Children grow up in our country -- many by the way, under conditions of extreme poverty -- and are told from a very early age "You will be accountable!" "With freedom, comes responsibility!" And so the lecture goes...Democratic and Republican alike. Lie-cheat-steal, and there will be consequences! Theft will be punished. Actions that cause the deaths of others will be severely punished. The message, from leaders in Washington, news media, mom, dad, and church is clear. Criminals MUST be held accountable.

Now comes the awesome part.

Now, there's been a lot of talk lately on Capitol Hill about how impeachment should be "off the table." We're told that it's time to look ahead - not back...

Can you imagine how far that argument would go for the defense at an arraignment on charges of grand larceny, or large-scale distribution of methamphetamines? How about the arranging of a contract killing on a pregnant mother? "Indictment should be off the table." Or "Let's look forward, not backward." Or "We can't afford another failed defendant."

Our country has a legal system, not of men and women, but of laws. Why then are we so willing to put inconvenient provisions of the U.S. constitution and federal law "off the table?" Our greatest concern right now should be what to put ON the table. Unless we're going to have one set of laws for the powerful and another set for those who can't afford fancy lawyers, then truth matters to everyone. And accountability is a matter of human and legal principle. If we're going to continue wagging our fingers at the disadvantaged transgressors, then I suggest we be consistent. If truth and accountability can be stretched into sham concepts, we may as well open the gates of all our jails and prisons, where, by the way, there are more people behind bars than any other country in the world. One in every 32 American adults is behind bars, on probation, or on parole as we stand here tonight.

Because 1 in every 32 Americans broke the law and got caught.  Is it wrong when a rich man buys his way out of jail?  Yes.  Is it wrong when a poor black man goes to jail because he stole a television?  No.  Accountability is there regardless of social standing.  What Mr. Penn has forgotten is that life is not fair.

Which is to say that, globally, the United States is number one at demanding accountability and backing up that demand with imprisonment. But, when it comes to our president, vice president, secretary of state, former secretary of defense...this insistence on accountability vanishes. All of a sudden, what's past is prologue. And we're just "forward-looking." But some people can't just look forward. Men and women stationed in Iraq at this moment, under orders of a Commander-in-Chief so sufficiently practiced in the art of deception, that he got vast numbers of American journalists and the most esteemed media outlets of this country, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, NPR, and PBS to eagerly serve his agenda-building for war. And the process also induced vast numbers of artists and performers (probably even some in this room tonight) to keep quiet and facilitate the push for an invasion in Iraq.

Deception is a tool of governance.  The uninformed will not understand nuanced political decisions.  I'm sorry, but I'm with Hamilton on this one.  You can't trust the mob to do what is right, only what serves the mob.  So, get the mob to believe that what is right is what they want.  The Romans knew this 2000 years ago, but Sean Penn doesn't.  Or, he's just pissed about it.

I'm sure many people who I met in Baghdad, both in my trips prior to and during the occupation, now similarly cannot just look forward. With lives so entirely shattered by a violence of occupation - an ongoing U.S. war effort and the civil war that it has catalyzed. All on the back of a crumbled infrastructure, following eleven years of devastating U.N. sanctions.

And, where is the accountability on behalf of the American dead and wounded, their families, their friends, and the people of the United States who have seen their country become a world pariah. These events have been enabled by people named Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld, and Rice, as they continue to perpetuate a massive fraud on American democracy and decency.

Now we're getting into the strong language.  But we should remember that the only reason America is a 'pariah' is that it is the most powerful nation on the planet.  When the United States sent tsunami relief money (more than anyone in the world) did we hear a thank you?  No.  What I remember is hearing criticism from other countries because the US did not send enough money fast enough. 

So somebody attacks America in 2001, and stirs up the hornet's nest.  Now America is fighting anyone associated with it to prevent further attacks.  So far, it's working.  We've been there longer than in WWII, I think, at a cost of only 3000 dead.  But history shows us that America has no stomach for long fights.

And confound you, Sean Penn, democracy is NOT what we are all about.  We're a Republic.  Say it!  "...Perpetuate a massive fraud on American republicanism and decency."  He just doesn't want to say Republican.

On January 11, 2003, I made an appearance on Larry King's show following my first trip to Iraq. I suggested that every American mother and father sit down with a scrap of paper and pencil and scribble the following words: Dear Mr. and Mrs. So-and-so -- We regret to inform you that your son or daughter so-and-so, was killed in action in Iraq. I then asked that those mothers and fathers complete that letter in whatever way might comfort them should they receive it. When one considers what a bewildered continuation of those words a parent might attempt to write today, it seems inconceivable that this country could've ever bought into this war. Who were those mothers and fathers believing in?! We know it's not the administration alone, but a culture at large, cloaking itself in self-righteousness, religion, and adolescent hero-dreaming machismo. Would they have believed Rush Limbaugh if they'd known he was high as a kite on OxyContin? Would they have believed the factually impaired Bill O'Reilly if they knew he was massaging his rectum with a loofah while telephonically harassing a staffer? Hannity, had they known he was simply a whore to the cause of his pimps - Murdoch and Ailes? Or the little bow-tie putz, if they knew all he was seeking was a good laugh from Jon Stewart? Maybe our countrymen and women were listening to Ted Haggert while he was whiffing meth and boning a muscle-headed gigolo? Or Mark Foley seeking junior weenis? Joe Lieberman, sitting Shiva? And Toby Keith, singing about how big his boots are?

Oops, I was wrong earlier.  He didn't call the President a pimp.  It was Rupert Murdoch.  My bad.  However, Mr. Penn is still mistaken in assuming that just because the messengers are *gasp* human beings with faults that we should assume the message they serve is equally full of faults.  I have to say though, the bow-tie guy...well it takes a certain kind of man to pull off the bow-tie, and he just can't manage it.

"Oh, there goes Sean...he had to go and name-call. They say he can't help himself." Or, did I name-call? Maybe I just quickly summed up 7 or 8 little truths. Oh, no, you're right - I name-called. I said, "putz". I take it back. Or, do I? Did I say "whore?" Pimp? These are questions. But, the real and great questions of conscience and accountability would not loom so ominously -- unanswered or evaded at such tremendous cost -- without our day-to-day failure to insist on genuine accountability. Of course we'd prefer some easy ways to get there. But no easy ways exist. Not a new Congress. Not Barack Obama. And, not John McCain. His courage in North Vietnamese prison makes him a heroic man. His voting record in Congress makes him a damaging public servant. We have gotta stand the f#$% up and show the world how powerful are the people in a democracy. That's how we regain our position of example, rather than pariah, to the world at large. And that is how we can begin to put up our chins and allow pride and unification to raise our own quality of life and security.

Well he's right about Obama.  Of course, why is it that he can't refrain from dropping the F-Bomb?  If I were accepting an award for free speech I think I could curb my salty language for 10 minutes.

AGAIN, confound you Penn!  When we stand the f#$% up and show the world how powerful the people are in a republic, THEN maybe you'll make sense.  Democracy is a dangerous, self-serving tool of the mob.  Democracies only last until the people realize they can vote themselves funds from the treasury.

They tell us we lost 3,000 Americans on 9/11. Is that enough? We're about to match it. We're within weeks, if not less, of killing 3,000 Americans in Iraq. I ask Speaker Pelosi, can we put impeachment on the table then? Without former FEMA chief Mike Brown being held accountable, post Katrina (scapegoat though he may have been) we'd have had the same chaos and neglect when Rita hit Houston. Think about it. And, the same people who trumpet deterrence as a justification for punishment when we speak of "crime and punishment," will boast their positive thinking when dismissing the deterrent qualities of an impeachment proceeding.

The losses are acceptable and well below the levels of Vietnam, which is the last war we lost because of a lack of will.  Katrina was a failure of local government, and should be recognized as a symptom of relying too heavily on federal guidance.

What is impeachment? It's not a Democratic versus Republican event. Not if used responsibly. If the House of Representatives votes to impeach this president, is he thrown out of office? No, he is not thrown out of office. That is not what impeachment is. Impeachment is the opportunity to proceed with accountability and give our elected senators, democratic and republican, the power to pursue a thorough investigation. The power to put the truth on the table. Mothers and fathers are losing their kids to horrifying deaths in this war every single day. Horrible deaths. Horrible maimings. Were crimes committed in enlisting the support of our country in this decision to go to war? For the moment we're living the most spineless of scenarios; where the hawks abused impeachment eight years ago, now, the rest of us politely refuse to use it today. Let's give the whistle-blowers cover, let's get the subpoenas out there, and then, one by one, put this administration under oath. And then, if the crimes of "Treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" are proven, do as Article 2, Section 4 of the United States Constitution provides, and remove "the President, Vice President and...civil officers of the United States" from office. If the Justice Department then sees fit to bunk them up with Jeff Skilling, so be it.

Ridiculous.  He has his head in the sand.  The one thing that the terrorists want in this war is for us to get so fed up that we just quit.  Even better, let's boot President Bush out of office and we can get some pantywaist to really appease them.

So...look, if we attempt to impeach for lying about a blowjob, yet accept these almost certain abuses without challenge, we become a cum-stain on the flag we wave. You know, I was listening to Frank Rich this morning, speaking on a book tour. He said he thought impeachment proceedings would amount to a "decadent" sidetrack, while our soldiers were still being killed. I admire Frank Rich. And of course he would be right if impeachment is all we do. But we're Americans. We can do two things at the same time. Yes, let's move forward and swiftly get out of this war in Iraq AND impeach these bastards.

Charming!  Winston Churchill would be proud.  Patrick Henry too.  But if the American people are going to cop out of this war then we should at least stop spending money on things that won't solve our problem.  Impeaching the President would be a waste of tax dollars.

Christopher Reeve promised to get out of that chair. Well, I don't know about you, but it feels like he's up now and I wouldn't be standing here if it weren't on his shoulders. Let it be for something.

Just a bit too much, Sean...

Georgie, there's a crowd downstairs.

Sean, you're lucky we live in a republic.  Otherwise, the state of Texas would democratically vote to shoot ya.  Don't forget that it wasn't just the king who died in the French Revolution...a couple visionary free thinkers bought the farm too.

Thank you and good night.

This blog was a bit long, I think.  I believe that in future posts I will limit myself to sound bytes and short news articles.  It was difficult to respond to anything in depth with this speech, since it went everywhere.

Suffice it to say, first major blogging attempt is completed, and I enjoyed it. 

Christmas traveling is tonight.

Sean Penn was awarded the Creative Coalition's "2006 Christopher Reeve First Amendment Award."  According to the Coalition, the award is given to those who "...are dedicated to the sanctity of the first amendment and its free speech provision."  His comparison of the President with a pimp didn't hurt his chances.  Let's look at his acceptance speech.

The Christopher Reeve First Amendment Award. For the purposes of tonight and my own personal enjoyment, I'm going to yield to the notion that I deserve this.

Ok, this is the obligatory humorous introduction.  And I'm sure it comes off differently in person, but I'm inclined to think that Sean Penn might be a bit arrogant.  I know, it's crazy.

And in the spirit of that, tell you that I am very honored to receive it. And for this I thank the Creative Coalition and my friend Charlie Rose. It does seem appropriate to take this opportunity to exercise the right that honors us all - freedom of speech.

Is Freedom of Speech a right?  Or is it a liberty?  I think this is an important distinction.  A right is something that comes from a Higher Authority, something we cannot deny without committing an injustice.  Life is what we would call a right.  The government has the ability to curtail our freedoms, and so we have limits placed on the government, known as liberties.  Being free to say what you want, even about the government, strikes me as something that is entirely dependent upon the government's good will.  Right or Liberty?  "Societal right" is the correct term, I think.  A social contract and all.  Am I splitting hairs?  Have I got my definitions crossed?

Note for later:

The original title for the Louis XVI comedy called "Start The Revolution Without Me" was one of my favorites. That original title was "Louis, There's a Crowd Downstairs." But I'll come back to that...

He does!

Words may be our most civil weapons of change, when they connect to actions of sacrifice, or good will, but they have no grace or power without bold clarity. So, if you'll bear with me, borrowing a line from Bob Dylan, "Let us not talk falsely now - the hour is getting late."

I always quote musicians when I talk about the most pressing issues of the day.  "“Well, you know, like, I don't really give a f%$# what the general public think.”  -Sid Vicious

Global warming

Oh.  Wow.  Way to start the list.  Global Warming.  This is a serious issue and we absolutely must address it.  You see, unless intelligent people stand up and present evidence for this so-called crisis, we're going to be led into decades of punishing emissions controls for no reason at all.  Why?  Because the Earth is going to warm up on its own and we can't stop it.  Global warming does exist, but by gum it's not our fault.  The earth warms and cools periodically, and has done so throughout time.  The last Li'l Ice Age started in the 1300s or thereabouts and things went pretty badly for a few hundred years.  It's only been 156 years since the cool period ended.  Serious environmentalists understand the need for balance on this issue.  Al Gore does not.  Senator James Inhofe, while vilified by the press, has a cool head about things.  I'll talk about him later on.

Massive pollution

Pollution is bad, yes. 

Non-stop U.S. war in Iraq

Good grief.  It's not that hard.  We did Iraq already, it's called the Philippines.

Attacks on civil liberties under the banner of war on terror

Abraham Lincoln should be impeached.

Military spending

You and I, U.S. taxpayers, spend 1 1/2 billion dollars on an Iraq-war-'focused' military everyday, while social needs cry out.

While I am not a fan of the tax structure in the U.S., I don't think that warrants a jab at our military.  Why the emphasis on focused?  We're not losing battles in Iraq.  We're losing them here.

Health care

Education

Always important, though our ideas on the execution would probably differ. 

Public transit

I like public transit.  Really, I do.  If you are in the city, it's tops.  If you live out in the country like most of America...you need a car.

Environmental protections

Sure, we need to be good custodians of the Earth.  But humans come first.

Affordable housing

I work for Habitat for Humanity.  As long as people earn their houses, then there's no reason to punish them with $150,000 ranchers.

Job training

What?  How hard is it to pick up a mop or flip a burger?  I don't understand this.  If you want a job you work so that you become qualified for it.  Flip burgers to pay for college to get the job managing people who flip burgers. 

Public investment

Does he mean that the public should have more investment capital?  Because I agree with that.

And, levy building.

And, cheap shot.

We depend largely for information on these issues from media industries, driven by the bottom line to such an extent that the public interest becomes uninteresting.

Ok.  This sentence is grammatically confusing.  Mrs. Crocker in 8th grade English given an F to this sentence she would have.

And should we speak truth, we stand against government efforts to intimidate or legislate in the service of censorship. Whether under the guise of a Patriot Act or any other benevolent-sounding rationale for the age-old game of shutting down dissent by discouraging independent thinking and preventing progressive social change.

There is some question of whether the "progressive social change" Mr. Penn mentions wouldn't in fact be a regression.  Mostly it's sex stuff, and I just can't see the point in making laws to protect certain sexual behaviors.  Take the prohibitive laws off the books, if you must, but don't give the behavior special status.  I'm particularly sick of the homosexuality norming effort being compared to the Civil Rights movement.

Hello!  My name is Neal, and I'm going to be doing some blogging here.  I've never had a blog, but it seems like a lot of fun.  By fun, I mean that it seems like a good opportunity to formulate my thinking and get some feedback on it. 
I suppose that I should outline what I'll be talking about here.  I think we'll have a pretty good mix of politics, both foreign and domestic, not to mention my thoughts on pressing issues such as global warming and how it affects the price of tea in China.  Every once in a while, I'll update you on my impending marriage and how I'm preparing for/enjoying it.  I think perhaps I will discuss computer games and science fiction trivia at odd points.
I admire belligerent people for their moxie, but I don't like them and feel their approach to getting things done leaves much to be desired.  I'd rather smile and handshake my way into getting what I want than raise my voice.  That doesn't always work.
I invite anyone to comment on my posts, and call me out when you think I'm wrong.  Don't be surprised if I calmly, quietly refuse to budge.  Unless I'm faced with hard facts, I'm pretty stubborn.  However, I pride myself on facing said facts and adapting to them.
I don't know if I like the layout of this blog just yet.  I may tinker with it.  In the meantime, I direct you to this.  Savor the flavor of British pwnage.