A Flaming Sun, A Bleeding Brain, A Trimmed Penis-- Metaphors for Now and for the American Experiment

Here is proof that you just never know what will happen. Every Day. Who knows? It’s a gamble, another chance, another fulfillment of the dream of the night before, whether you recall it-- or not.

Way back in the dark ages of the 1990’s, I recall talking with a discouraged friend-- who I told:

I know there are others like us out there;
I know that they will come out of the woodwork;
I know that we will hook up;
You have to believe in miracles.

Pre-Mega-Internet, Pre-DU, the next day, Jim Jeffords defected from the Republican Party.

Today the Solar Flare hits the Earth. You notice that your commute,.network, phone connections, business meeting, relationships, chance encounters, etc. are impacted and a bit freakier than usual-- or Not.

The news arrives that Circumcision can affect contraction of the AIDS virus and you look down and say Thank You-- or Not. The bad news comes from impoverished areas where they don’t have enough water and can’t afford soap -- for gawd’s sakes --- but who knows? Circumcisions health effects may outweigh the benefits and delights of the unmaligned foreskin. Who Knows!?!

And after your Party’s Miraculous Win in the Congress, about to be fulfilled in a New Session, in the face of a massive public outcry for Impeachment of the Current Administration for Crimes Against the American People and the Constitution-- next thing ya know, some Congress Member’s brain/blood things have grown too close together and started to leak and he had to go in the hospital and who knows what’s gonna happen?

The Truth Is, that’s Reality-- that’s how it ALWAYS is, so face it:

You are where you are, in The Land Of Opportunity and Promise.

You don’t know what’s gonna happen and you might as well do The Right Thing.

Right?





www.space.com/solar-flares/

Senator Johnson is going to be fine. I know this because we have all worked so hard and with such dedication to our democracy. I'm not a religious or superstitious woman by any means but I can FEEL it! We are taking our country back and there's nothing the throwbacks can do about it.

So sleep well and thank you for all your thought-provoking posts! :yourock:

this is a great opportunity for americans to wake up and smell the democracy. not only that-- it's the final opportunity.




and thank you, you made my day. :pals: "throwbacks" :spray:

And it is kind of like Tom Robins said once
" the last half of the twentieth century; A time where things are happening to fast to be comforting and to slow to be interesting"

In my life I have seen the change going from a real time of innocence growing up in the 50s (not like beaver, but still Innocent) through a time of great hope followed by despair and the destruction of our civilization and it's replacement with a more savage and selfish one.

And yet in the midst of all this, great scientific and teck changes that were never dreamed of in the 50s or 60s. and the realization that this technology could be one of mankind greatest assets. and even a solution to our problems.

Perhaps it is happening fast enough to be interesting.

in art occur in the last 25 years of one decade and the first 25 of the next....


"In my life I have seen the change going from a real time of innocence growing up in the 50s (not like beaver, but still Innocent) through a time of great hope followed by despair and the destruction of our civilization and it's replacement with a more savage and selfish one."

Well put. That change occurred with the rise of (Thom Hartmann calls it) Reaganism and we are still suffering through it.

"in the face of a massive public outcry for Impeachment"

Massive public outcry? Shit. I must've missed it.

I do agree to live life to the fullest and that we don't know what things may happen next. I just had trouble seeing how an insignificant solar flare or news about circumcisions play into that whatsoever. I also have no idea what you were trying to reference when you declared "might as well do The Right Thing", unless you just meant in general, which of course I always support (we all should always strive to do what's right, of course).

As far as Senator Johnson goes, hopefully for sake of himself and family he will be ok. My prayers continue to be with them.

What is Impeachment?

Impeachment is technically just an indictment, an accusation. Following impeachment, there is a trial and perhaps a conviction. Conviction requires removal from office. The accusation, the actual "impeachment", is made by the House of Representatives. Once impeached, the Senate conducts the trial.

Many people use the word "impeachment" to refer to the entire process. But technically it only refers to the formal accusation. Remember Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about having "sex" with Monica. He was then tried by the Senate but found not guilty and remained in office.



http://www.petitiononline.com/ddc12/petition.html

http://www.impeachbush.tv/impeach/bystate.html

Status of Impeachment in States

State Status
Alaska State Democratic party passes impeachment resolution NR7.
California Paul Koretz introduces impeachment resolution AJR39 in CA legislature! Sebastopol passed 5/18/06. Impeachment forum held at Democratic Convention 4/29. Berkeley passes resolution 4/25/06. Fairfax 7/5/06. On November '06 ballot in SF and Berkeley.
Colorado State Democratic party adds impeachment to platform on 5/20/06.
Illinois Karen Yarbrough (D-Maywood) introduces HJR0125 in the state Assembly, Champaign/Urbana have ballot initiative for Nov 7th
Indiana Lake Station rejects impeachment on April 13th.
Maine Kennebec County Democratic Committee passed April 20, 2006.
Massachusetts Amherst passes resolution.
Michigan National Lawyers Guild having a teach-in June 28th
Minnesota ImpeachForPeach.org promoting Do It Yourself Impeachment
Montana Montanans for Impeachment leading the charge.
New Hampshire Hanover passes impeachment 111 to 42 on May 9th, 2006.
New Jersey North Jersey Impeach Group working on state legislation.
New Mexico State Democratic party adds impeachment to platform.
New York Plattsburgh endorses HRes635 for investigation and possible impeachment.
North Carolina Meeting planned for April 27th at Durham Main Library
Oregon Lots of activity in the Portland Area. State dems pass resolution in 2005.
Pennsylvania State Senator Jim Ferlo launches impeachment petition campaign drive.
Rhode Island US Senate candidate Carl Sheeler calls for state impeachment.
Texas Impeachment resolution almost passes at stave Dem convention.
Washington Olympia considering passing a resolution.
Wisconsin 2005 Democratic Party Convention passed a resolution.
Vermont Rep. Zuckerman introduces impeachment resolution in State House.
Several cities and towns have also passed.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2914104

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2900544



Impeachment Overview
Bush has misled this nation for too long. His aggressive foreign policies and corporate give-aways threaten the well-being of all Americans and of other people around the globe. Those who love America cannot allow the damage from a Bush Presidency to continue any further. His actions are BLATANTLY illegal under International Law and our own Constitution. Now is the time, therefore, to impeach George Bush and high ranking officers in his cabinet.

I and I'm sure many others would probably consider a 'massive public outcry' to be a bit more, ya know, massive.

But to each their own.

constitutes a 'massive public outcry'.

We all want a massive public outcry. That's why we want thorough congressional investigations that reveal all the misdeeds plainly for all Americans to see, so that we may attain the massive public outcry that we seek.

As of yet, we have a minuscule public whimper; not a massive public outcry.

the links and sources provided show how extensive and organized the public outcry actually is.

that concepts are beyond them merely because they don't give in to an argument they consider illogical, isn't really a counter-argument. I understand the situation just fine, thank you. But if there truly was a 'massive public outcry', the media would have no choice in reporting it. In fact, it wouldn't even matter if the media reported it since a massive public outcry, based on the definition of massive, would be large enough that the majority of Americans would then be taking part in it.

Now I don't find that to be the case. I actually find the reality, or obviousness of the situation, to be that only a small minority are voicing outrage towards the concept of impeachment. A minuscule whimper; not a massive outcry.

And the reality of that needs to be heeded; for if the rest of us would fall prey to the notion that there already is a massive public outcry then most of our work would already be done. But that would be a totally naive consideration. The outcry isn't a hundredth yet of what we need it to be and isn't by any stretch of the imagination 'massive'. We need it to be. We want it to be. We must work hard for it to be. Hopefully we can get there with thorough congressional investigations that reveal all the things we need revealed to the public right in their faces. Maybe then we can see anywhere near a massive outcry. But there will need to be a ton of things that have to fall into place first in order for that to even be close to a reality. But I will hold onto hope that somehow we can attain it.

I guess there was nothing to be refuted.

Goodnight now.

It portrays an attitude of just blahing merely for the sake of blahing, with no logical blahsis for doing so other than just trying to blahse troublah.

I gave you a chance to show a blah that differed than that stated ablahve or a premise with blah, but now I am left only with what I stated above as the most likely intent based on your refusal to provide any reason for having blah with the blah.

And you have every right to blahsagree with the blah. I just blahrsonally find it to be blahly annoying and rude when someone does so with such few blahs and no blahxplanation or counter-blahrgument. It does nothing to blahpagate discussion and only blahs to cause blahnimosity.

If you aren't going to address them in a civil manner in an attempt to reach common ground, but instead are going to pursue this current course of empty provocation, than I guess the conversation is over and my points will remain logically sound and unrefuted.

I'm satisfied enough with my defense of my position and the strength in which I supported it; that there hasn't been anywhere close to a 'massive public outcry' but instead only a minuscule whimper, to not have to defend or support it any further unless you open the conversation back up with some meaningful and enlightening dialogue that gives reason for continuance.

Bye now.

 I Just Find It A Sign Of Blah And Blahmacy When One Blahs Something Without Any Blah Blah
It portrays an attitude of just blahing merely for the sake of blahing, with no logical blahsis for doing so other than just trying to blahse troublah.
I gave you a chance to show a blah that differed than that stated ablahve or a premise with blah, but now I am left only with what I stated above as the most likely intent based on your refusal to provide any reason for having blah with the blah.
And you have every right to blahsagree with the blah. I just blahrsonally find it to be blahly annoying and rude when someone does so with such few blahs and no blahxplanation or counter-blahrgument. It does nothing to blahpagate discussion and only blahs to cause blahnimosity.

to stand.

I'm not sure what benefit you think replying with the nonsensical 'blah blah blahs' is going to accomplish, since it is neither intellectual argument, civil discussion nor refutation of my sound logical points raised earlier. But if posting blah blah repeatedly is your only response to my well made points, would I be in the right to assume my points were unable to be refuted and were recognized as accurate? That's what I'm taking from this and it seems it would in fact be the case.

But regardless, this has now degenerated to empty discussion of blah's rather than one of context and substance so this thread should probably now come to an end.

Feel free to blah away, as in my eyes this debate has already ended with my reply #11 that thoroughly, logically and substantially supported my position and gave evidence as to why there has in fact been no massive public outcry.

"I'm not sure what benefit you think blahlying with the nonsensical 'blah blah blahs' is going to blahccomplish, since it is neither blahtellectual argument, civil diblahssion nor refutation of my blah blah blah raised earlier. But if posting blah blah repeatedly is your only response to my blah blah blah, would I be in the right to assume my blah were unable to be refuted and were recognized as blah blah blah? That's what I'm taking from this and it seems it would in blah be the case."

provocation and absurdity. I'd prefer the effort put into each post would be to discuss the issue or points raised rather than being degraded into nonsense.

So the only reason you see those replies from me is because I constantly am trying to get the discussion back on track to the point of it to begin with, since that was my concern to begin with. I think it's appropriate for a poster within a discussion to request a refocus on context and the issues at hand when presented with a reply of nonsensical irrelevance that was completely unrelated to the important issues being raised. Do you not think it's fair for such a request, when a topic is being discussed but a member chooses to unfairly derail it? I think such requests are perfectly fair, since responding to context is what we're supposed to be doing to begin with.

But I've let you get me too far into this in this subthread already. I should've refrained from responding with the first sign of the standard nonsense that causes these threads to go off track.

All I know is that in post #11 I gave you some quite extensive and logically powerful insights as to why your claim in the OP that there is 'massive public outcry' is a counter-productive assertion and also a false one. I'm not sure why after I made those points you chose to completely take the discussion off track rather than continue to discuss what the discussion was about to begin with. But that's not my choice. My choice was to simply keep trying to bring the discussion back on track, hence your comment of seeing the request over and over. If the threads weren't twisted off track of context to begin with, I wouldn't have to request that we go back to discussing the merits and context of the issue at hand.

So please, if you are to reply at all, please do so within the context of my post #11, of which was DIRECTLY related to the context of your OP and why I considered a part of it to be completely off base. That is what this discussion was about, and my role/position of this entire discussion. It is the only context that should be being replied to, since the debate of 'massive public outcry' vs minuscule whimper is the entire reason we're conversing right now to begin with.

I know there is a likely chance you will just blah blah blah again, but I figured I'd make a last attempt anyway to hear your counter-argument on my post 11, cause I'd be interested in hearing what you don't agree with in it or why you'd still consider the public outcry currently to be massive.

Homey don't play dat.

your comment claiming that " The significance of local and state official actions and legislation for impeachment is beyond you".

Saying that those concepts are beyond me is just quite simply, silly and disingenuous. To characterize it as silly is neither provocation nor absurdity. It is quite simply an accurate defense of a character attack and baseless counter argument that was thrown at me. I stayed on track completely in that post and did not derail the discussion whatsoever, despite the condescension in the claim that because I did not agree with you, the concept was beyond me (which by the way is not only a silly statement, but is a bit narrow-minded as well).

I'm still not sure why even now you are continuing this personal and unproductive tangent of our discussion, rather than getting back to the point of our discussion to begin with, which was a claim that there was currently a 'massive public outcry'. This current part of our discussion is empty and not capable of accomplishing anything meaningful whatsoever. May I ask why you would rather focus on this part of the discussion, which has nothing of value to yield, rather than the contextual part that mattered and responding to my points in post 11? I'm having trouble understanding why the bickering would be preferred over the substance.

If you reply in context I'll respond tomorrow, if warranted, as I'm off to bed.

:spray: You?! :rofl: Understanding?! :rofl: Why The--?! :rofl:
:yoiks: :rofl:

May I ask why you would rather focus on this part of the discussion, which has nothing of value to yield, rather than the contextual part that mattered and responding to my points in post 11? I'm having trouble understanding why the bickering would be preferred over the substance.

:evilgrin:

and I'm still groggy and I had too much egg nog last night. I'll be back and try this one again later.

based on hard and fast logic ("No-Brainers") that drives their decisions and actions -- and usually seems to free them up from actually making or taking any.

In the discussions about the future of the nation and the current administration -- and what this new Congress needs to do about it -- the majority of naysayers about doing the right thing are convinced that it's all about vote-counting and marketing the Party; predicting outcomes they have absolutely NO WAY of being certain about.

Too many love to predict an uncertain future and ignore the lessons of the past.

Happy Holidays, Skidmore :hi: