The news just gets worse...
DaveG
skin of it's teeth.
The stuff I'm seeing on TV and on the web now is making for some scary
reading :-(
--
Dave
Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder
Monika Krug
> For a while, it looked like NO was going to be lucky and escape by the
> skin of it's teeth.
>
> The stuff I'm seeing on TV and on the web now is making for some scary
> reading :-(
Indeed.
Wednesday morning news: "People are breaking into supermarkets because
they have no more food."
Wednesday noon news: "Armed gangs are looting shops. Helicopter
evacuation from the Super Dome had to be halted because one helicopter
was shot at from the ground. A truck with medicine for a hospital was
taken by the looters."
THOUSANDS dead. An unimaginable number, who would have thought this
could happen in a first-world country.
Monika.
--
All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers ... Each one owes
infinitely more to the human race than to the particular country in
which he was born. - Francois Fenelon, theologian and writer (1651-1715)
E-mail address is valid until 4 weeks after the expiration date. Use
@arcor.de instead.
NonValidName
<monik...@expires-2005-08-31.arcornews.de> engraved this tome in
stone
>DaveG schrieb:
>
>> For a while, it looked like NO was going to be lucky and escape by the
>> skin of it's teeth.
>>
>> The stuff I'm seeing on TV and on the web now is making for some scary
>> reading :-(
>
>Indeed.
>
>Wednesday morning news: "People are breaking into supermarkets because
>they have no more food."
>
>Wednesday noon news: "Armed gangs are looting shops. Helicopter
>evacuation from the Super Dome had to be halted because one helicopter
>was shot at from the ground. A truck with medicine for a hospital was
>taken by the looters."
>
>THOUSANDS dead. An unimaginable number, who would have thought this
>could happen in a first-world country.
I have caught a couple of on screen mistakes by on-camera reporters
where they refer to "going back' to the USA from New Orleans. It looks
and in fact is something you associate with the poorest of the third
world countries.
I don't think our president gets it yet, but for the rest of the
country. the first reaction is shock and horror. But it's followed
closely by shame. How could government at all levels have failed so
completely? Shame!
Ken
When the chips are down, the buffalo move on.
(For email, change yoohoo dot com to yahoo dot com)
Monika Krug
> I don't think our president gets it yet, but for the rest of the
> country. the first reaction is shock and horror. But it's followed
> closely by shame. How could government at all levels have failed so
> completely? Shame!
I still don't get it. Okay, that people drown might be unpreventable.
But people sitting in the hot sun without water and food on top of their
houses or in a stadium for THREE DAYS? Surely the US must have lots more
planes, helicopters, busses, boats to get the people out and/or to get
water and food to them. Even if some of them will need 12 or 24 hours to
get into the area.
The taz (a German left-wing daily newspaper) says the reason is that
most of those left behind are black, so the government does not care
enough to get them out quickly. Do you think that's true?
NonValidName
>NonValidName schrieb:
>
>> I don't think our president gets it yet, but for the rest of the
>> country. the first reaction is shock and horror. But it's followed
>> closely by shame. How could government at all levels have failed so
>> completely? Shame!
>
>I still don't get it. Okay, that people drown might be unpreventable.
>But people sitting in the hot sun without water and food on top of their
>houses or in a stadium for THREE DAYS? Surely the US must have lots more
>planes, helicopters, busses, boats to get the people out and/or to get
>water and food to them. Even if some of them will need 12 or 24 hours to
>get into the area.
>
>The taz (a German left-wing daily newspaper) says the reason is that
>most of those left behind are black, so the government does not care
>enough to get them out quickly. Do you think that's true?
The few that weren't black shared poverty with those who were. There
is an unacknowledged sense in this country that the poor, the down and
out, the lower economic class and minorities somehow have brought
their conditions on themselves by laziness, promiscuity, who knows
why. But the rest of us are doing all right. It must be their fault.
That's very simplified, but I don't think it's much of an
exaggeration. So if they stayed in New Orleans when a category 5 storm
(at the time) was approaching, it's only another example of their poor
decisions. That saves us the necessity of examining why a provision
was not made by any government at any level to try to evacuate,
protect or even shelter these people from this catastrophe. They were
left to do for themselves what they could not possibly do for
themselves.
Let's just never mind that many of them were unemployed with no car or
money for other transportation. Those on welfare or social security
typically get checks on the 1st of the month, which Katrina
pre-empted. They should not have been there during the storm, let
alone 5 days later!
A commentary on one of our networks showed video of a black man
struggling with a large plastic garbage bag in chest deep water. The
original commentary had identified him as a looter who had just left a
grocery store. Another clip showed a white couple struggling with a
large plastic garbage bag in chest deep water. The original commentary
described them as victims who had managed to find food in an abandoned
grocery store.
Saying the sole cause of this disaster was skin color would be wrong.
Simple color blind institutional incompetence is probably much closer
to the truth. But that the government didn't care enough? Hard to
question that. They cared about the embarrassment of the media
coverage, but not about the people.
Had they been "middle class", the government would have been there
much sooner with much more. Shame on us!
Cliff
>Wednesday morning news: "People are breaking into supermarkets because
>they have no more food."
Bush is going to have them shot on sight it seems.
Problem solved.
Today's pictures:
Lots of poor Black survivors in New Orleans.
Bush in Mobile with highly selected White folks ....
http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s2i9131
--
Cliff
Cliff
<NonVal...@Yoohoo.com> wrote:
>They should not have been there during the storm, let
>alone 5 days later!
The press could find them easily.
After several days of press reports on the matters
bush & the neocons & "homelend insecurity" heard
of them.
No news while on vacation ....
Reminds me of those "WMDs".
--
Cliff
Hang Dog
>
> A commentary on one of our networks showed video of a black man
> struggling with a large plastic garbage bag in chest deep water. The
> original commentary had identified him as a looter who had just left a
> grocery store. Another clip showed a white couple struggling with a
> large plastic garbage bag in chest deep water. The original commentary
> described them as victims who had managed to find food in an abandoned
> grocery store.
>
Here it is:
http://theorem.ca/~mvcorks/lj/LootvsFind.jpg
NonValidName
engraved this tome in stone
>NonValidName wrote:
The coverage I saw had video rather than still images, but it was the
same people and the same events as appear here. Good find.
fwb
<monik...@expires-2005-08-31.arcornews.de> wrote:
>I still don't get it. Okay, that people drown might be unpreventable.
>But people sitting in the hot sun without water and food on top of their
>houses or in a stadium for THREE DAYS? Surely the US must have lots more
>planes, helicopters, busses, boats to get the people out and/or to get
>water and food to them. Even if some of them will need 12 or 24 hours to
>get into the area.
Especially when reporters seemed to be able to get there.
>
>The taz (a German left-wing daily newspaper) says the reason is that
>most of those left behind are black, so the government does not care
>enough to get them out quickly. Do you think that's true?
No. Remember this principle, because it works: Never attribute to
conspiracy what can be explained by stupidity.
Animated GIF Man
<tiv...@softhome.net> wrote in alt.aol.tricks :
>
> No. Remember this principle, because it works: Never
> attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by stupidity.
>
Thank you, Frank. I am going to repeat this to myself each
night for a week or so until it sinks in. I like it... a LOT.
--
Always,
Bob Hare, Jr. aka 'Animated GIF Man'
Official AOL Newsgroups FAQs Editor:
http://members.aol.com/AGMLiteForU/
[NOT an AOL employee, just a member]
OE users who wish to use OLE [only] for newsgroups
can download: yProxy_v1.3_setup-info-screenshot.zip
from my personal web site at: http://tinyurl.com/b2zdk
with installation, setup information + sample screenshot.
Thoth (for MAC) will also decode yEncoded files provided you
already have a working serial #. Developer has abandoned
this demo software, so you MUST already own a serial # or do
not bother to install. Thoth is at: http://tinyurl.com/a6chj
.
fwb
<monik...@expires-2005-08-31.arcornews.de> wrote:
>THOUSANDS dead. An unimaginable number, who would have thought this
>could happen in a first-world country.
It's a good question.
Then, again, http://twm.co.nz/drghtEuro.htm
Cliff
>No. Remember this principle, because it works: Never attribute to
>conspiracy what can be explained by stupidity.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_Razor
<G>
--
Cliff
TyMeDwn1st
There's a corollary to that, though, that can be paraphrased as "after
a certain level of incompetence is demonstrated, it should be
attributed not to incompetence but to malevolence."
--
Ty
Who is mostly just a
slightly skewed
Donna Reed
"I don't make judgments about why people chose not to leave but,
you know, there was a mandatory evacuation of New Orleans."
--FEMA Director Mike Brown, blaming storm victims for their
misery after Hurricane Katrina; CNN, Thursday, 9/1/05
fwb
<tymedwn1...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 18:16:34 -0400, fwb <tiv...@softhome.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 02:59:32 +0200, Monika Krug
>><monik...@expires-2005-08-31.arcornews.de> wrote:
>>
>>>I still don't get it. Okay, that people drown might be unpreventable.
>>>But people sitting in the hot sun without water and food on top of their
(snip)
>>No. Remember this principle, because it works: Never attribute to
>>conspiracy what can be explained by stupidity.
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_Razor
>
>There's a corollary to that, though, that can be paraphrased as "after
>a certain level of incompetence is demonstrated, it should be
>attributed not to incompetence but to malevolence."
I have been thinking about this post off and on all day.
And I really don't believe malevolence was involved in any way.
Rather, I think that there are persons in this country (indeed, in any
country) for whom the poor and the disenfranchised and the minorities
simple do not exist. They don't see them at all. So they become
definitely not a factor in any policy decision.
The currrent administration has pointed to wealth and power the way a
magnetiized needle points to magnetic north. I do not believe that
there was any malevolence in not rushing aid to those left in New
Orleans.
I think it is much worse than that. They simply did not see the
people left in New Orleans as, well, people. Indeed, they did not see
them at all. They weren't Ozzie and Harriet, therefore, well, they
weren't.
Stripped of its facade, evil is truly pedestrian and banal.
TyMeDwn1st
I see it just a little differently. *I* see a political mind set and
an administration firmly forging ahead to keep the privileged in even
greater privilege while the rest of us common folk slog through Life
without bothering to lift up our heads to see what's really happening.
I think that is its very own form of malevolence.
>I think it is much worse than that. They simply did not see the
>people left in New Orleans as, well, people. Indeed, they did not see
>them at all. They weren't Ozzie and Harriet, therefore, well, they
>weren't.
I think that's pretty accurate. I post to a couple of newsgroups and
lurk on a couple others, and I've heard the most mind-boggling
statements imaginable from folks who I thought had two brain cells to
rub together. One guy (who claims to be a Libertarian but seems to be
too far right for them as a rule) has continued to argue that the
people who didn't evacuate stayed put *only* because they expected to
be able to loot with impunity afterward. He also claims that within
hours of the refugees arriving in Houston the police were reporting a
sudden spike in robberies in the area. Let's see how that would play
out.... Four or five days living on the streets or in the <shudder>
Superdome or convention center with virtually no food or water. A
12-hour bus ride to Houston, delayed for hours while everyone boarding
a bus was searched for drugs and weapons. Two to three hours of
processing time while they got "registered" into the Astrodome.
Where does he think they got the time, energy, and weapons to
*immediately* run out and commit robberies.
Although I disagree vehemently with his politics, I've always thought
he posted with a certain calm logic and an attention to facts. Now I
see him as bigotry personified.
>Stripped of its facade, evil is truly pedestrian and banal.
There was a weird and enjoyable TV series several years ago titled
"Brimstone." The premise was that one soul in Hell was released by
the Devil temporarily to help recapture a dozen or so truly evil souls
who'd managed to escape. In one scene, almost a throwaway moment with
little emphasis, the Devil casually stooped next to some folks sitting
in bleachers, tied one guy's shoestrings together, and kept right on
talking to the protagonist. It was a striking piece of "business,"
illustrating perfectly clearly that no bit of meanness is too small
for the Devil.
fwb
<tymedwn1...@aol.com> wrote:
>I see it just a little differently. *I* see a political mind set and
>an administration firmly forging ahead to keep the privileged in even
>greater privilege while the rest of us common folk slog through Life
>without bothering to lift up our heads to see what's really happening.
>I think that is its very own form of malevolence.
I think we are finding the same thing, but defining "malevolence"
differently.
I'd defining it as an intentional attempt to do evil. I don't think
there was intent to do evil.
If I may be so bold, I think you are looking at the end result and
seeing that as malevolent. I'm looking at intent, you're looking at
result.
This is not a criticism, by any means, but an attempt to find
understanding.
The result was indeed malevolent. In my opinion, the fact that the
malevolent result proceeded not from intent, but from just not seeing
what the world is like makes it even worse.
At least someone who does evil on purpose has some sense of morality
and purpose. Someone who does great evil through inadvertence cannot
even claim that little connection with morality.
Am I off the mark (again)?
Cliff
>I do not believe that
>there was any malevolence in not rushing aid to those left in New
>Orleans.
Seems like there may have been a meeting with the shrubbie
whining about democrats in positions of power.
--
Cliff
Cliff
<tymedwn1...@aol.com> wrote:
>One guy (who claims to be a Libertarian but seems to be
>too far right for them as a rule)
You don't know about them?
"Rightwingers from Hell"?
http://www.rackjite.com/9looney.htm
--
Cliff
Cliff
<tymedwn1...@aol.com> wrote:
>Although I disagree vehemently with his politics, I've always thought
>he posted with a certain calm logic and an attention to facts. Now I
>see him as bigotry personified.
Just a typical winger <shrug>.
--
Cliff
Hang Dog
> On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 18:26:23 -0400, fwb <tiv...@softhome.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>I think it is much worse than that. They simply did not see the
>>people left in New Orleans as, well, people. Indeed, they did not see
>>them at all. They weren't Ozzie and Harriet, therefore, well, they
>>weren't.
>
>
> I think that's pretty accurate. I post to a couple of newsgroups and
> lurk on a couple others, and I've heard the most mind-boggling
> statements imaginable from folks who I thought had two brain cells to
> rub together. One guy (who claims to be a Libertarian but seems to be
> too far right for them as a rule) has continued to argue that the
> people who didn't evacuate stayed put *only* because they expected to
> be able to loot with impunity afterward. He also claims that within
> hours of the refugees arriving in Houston the police were reporting a
> sudden spike in robberies in the area. Let's see how that would play
> out.... Four or five days living on the streets or in the <shudder>
> Superdome or convention center with virtually no food or water. A
> 12-hour bus ride to Houston, delayed for hours while everyone boarding
> a bus was searched for drugs and weapons. Two to three hours of
> processing time while they got "registered" into the Astrodome.
> Where does he think they got the time, energy, and weapons to
> *immediately* run out and commit robberies.
>
But, but, but "They have never had it so good."
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001054719
http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?id=1&display=rednews/2005/09/06/build/nation/45-astrodome.inc
NonValidName
engraved this tome in stone
>On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 19:04:15 -0400, TyMeDwn1st
Here is a quote from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution front page,
Tuesday, August 30. This was before the dike break was reported. The
headline read "New Orleans spared worst."
"Some of them, it was there last night on Earth," Terry Ebbert, chief
of homeland security for New Orleans, said of people who ignored
orders to evacuate the city of 480,000 over the weekend. "That's a
hard way to learn a lesson."
I saw nothing wrong with this paragraph when I first read it. Now,
with hindsight it looks incredibly callous and unfeeling, particularly
from the top official on a CITY level who would have KNOWN of an
immobile underclass from previous "war games", including one held only
months ago.
Anyone for whom evacuation was NOT an option due to poverty was
already ignored at this point. Indeed, they were essentially ignored
as far as shelters were concerned, even though Katrina approached as a
category 5 storm.
These officials were the people who would have raised the initial
alarms and requested help from the Fed. Their initial response was
probably too little, too late and that theme was the rule until the
media rubbed everyone's nose in the raw, brutal inhuman reality.
Ultimately shame worked where humanity failed.
Trapped people were a known and studied phenomenon. The number of poor
and their inability to escape had been pointed out many times before.
Ignoring it this time was an act of malevolence begun by the city and
continued (continuing?) by the Fed.
On Bush's first trip to New Orleans he was telling the head of FEMA
what a splendid job he had done, even as the magnitude of the disaster
was being shown to the REST of the world. In my own obscure corner of
Northeast Georgia, I knew of the plight of the people at the
convention center long before the head of FEMA first acknowledged it.
Bush apparently ordered senior cabinet officials to get their pictures
taken caring in New Orleans. When Rumsfield took his turn, he arrived
at an airport overflowing with the dead and dying. The only indication
he gave of even noticing them was a failure to step on them. This is
not an administration capable of compassion. It's just beyond them.
The poor were failed by government on every single level. The
information they needed to deal with the problem was available to all
of them, and none of it was new or unique. It had all been shown in
previous studies and war games. I vote for malevolence. I don't think
merely "not seeing" works.
The sinking of the Titanic exposed Europe and America to the
consequences of their attitudes on class. The poor died because they
were poor. The rich lived because they were rich. It changed attitudes
dramatically, in it's time. Maybe Katrina can serve as our Titanic.
NonValidName
engraved this tome in stone
>But, but, but "They have never had it so good."
>http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001054719
>http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?id=1&display=rednews/2005/09/06/build/nation/45-astrodome.inc
That hurts. I LIKED Barbara Bush!
Dick Cheney's turn is coming up to make the photo op pilgrimage to New
Orleans. Hard to imagine a more touchy-feely event.
Hang Dog
> On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 13:21:46 +0100, Hang Dog <righ...@wobble.net>
> engraved this tome in stone
>
>
>>But, but, but "They have never had it so good."
>>http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001054719
>>http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?id=1&display=rednews/2005/09/06/build/nation/45-astrodome.inc
>
>
> That hurts. I LIKED Barbara Bush!
>
What made you change your mind?
> Dick Cheney's turn is coming up to make the photo op pilgrimage to New
> Orleans. Hard to imagine a more touchy-feely event.
>
Perhaps he'll take the opportunity to go shooting peasants.
http://tinyurl.com/648ee
Cliff
[
Barbara Bush said today, referring to the
poor who had lost everything back home and evacuated, "This is working
very well for them."
......
"And so many of the people in the arena here, you
know, were underprivileged anyway, so this--this (she
chuckles slightly) is working very well for them."
]
Cliff
<NonVal...@Yoohoo.com> wrote:
>The headline read "New Orleans spared worst."
It was.
It COULD have been a cat. 5 or worse. It
could have been at high tide (was it?). It could
have been a dead on strike, instead of moving to
the East. It could also have been with the Mississippi
at flood stage or above.
--
Cliff
Cliff
<NonVal...@Yoohoo.com> wrote:
>
>Dick Cheney's turn is coming up to make the photo op pilgrimage to New
>Orleans. Hard to imagine a more touchy-feely event.
HE'd have to cut his vacation a bit short, right?
He, Rumsfeld & Rove actually run about everything anyway.
There's no way one sock puppet could be so dumb all by himself
or make so many bad decisions or tell so many lies.
--
Cliff
NonValidName
engraved this tome in stone
>NonValidName wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 13:21:46 +0100, Hang Dog <righ...@wobble.net>
>> engraved this tome in stone
>>
>>
>>>But, but, but "They have never had it so good."
>>>http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001054719
>>>http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?id=1&display=rednews/2005/09/06/build/nation/45-astrodome.inc
>>
>>
>> That hurts. I LIKED Barbara Bush!
>>
>
>
>What made you change your mind?
Clueless? Condescending? Somehow, I expected better.
Cliff
<NonVal...@Yoohoo.com> wrote:
>>> That hurts. I LIKED Barbara Bush!
>>>
>>
>>
>>What made you change your mind?
>
>Clueless? Condescending? Somehow, I expected better.
??
--
Cliff
NonValidName
>On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 19:04:15 -0400, TyMeDwn1st
I am old enough to remember the civil rights struggle in this country,
and I remember the absolute segregation that preceded it. I saw and
lived with it as I grew up. There was a blue sky, green grass, colored
rest rooms, and no big deal. That was just the way the world was
made. I saw neither means nor necessity to change a single bit of it.
It was a huge majority of people like me that weren't particularly
mean-spirited but just didn't see that allowed systemic victimization
to occur daily at all levels of life. But we weren't malevolent!
I was old enough to remember how different the world looked when Dr.
Martin Luther King forced us to look at ourselves, and at "them" and
didn't allow us to just turn away. Suddenly there were constant images
on the black and white TV of violence being done to people for wanting
little things that I had always taken for granted. After I saw and
thought and shuddered, I looked at my world, the white world I knew,
with a bit of a different outlook. Why was the world this way? How
could people do these things to others just for an appearance
difference?
I think history ultimately decided that segregation and persecution
were NOT merely a matter of "not seeing", though I certainly
understand that concept. With maturity comes a responsibility to SEE
these things. History decided that not seeing WAS malevolent and
unacceptable. Dr. King understood that all along. I accept that
judgment on a personal level as well as a cultural one.
Now, all these years later, I've done it again. I just didn't see the
class and race neglect and disregard that is still pervasive in this
culture until people died and suffered needlessly. I've seen this
before. It's familiar
Those that survived were STILL treated like cattle, in spite of what
they had already endured. (Men in this line, women and children in
that line, and no, I DON'T care if you are families! You'll go to
different states ANYWAY!)
This time, it's me that is the "grown-up" that shouldn't have allowed
it to exist, let alone become pervasive and embedded. This cancer in
our society MUST be rooted out aggressively. For my own sake, I intend
to become a thorn in the side of any government that I can reach with
pen or computer. I am ashamed of myself. But I can at least change me!
Cliff
Another one well put.
Consider trying to educate a few wingers.
The curently prevailing attitude of "out of sight, out
of mind" is not productive in this anymore than it is
in allowing the fundies to rule & versify lest their feelings
get hurt.
If we each aid one or two over time .... it may add up.
--
Cliff
Monika Krug
This was very moving. You are a great person.
Monika.
--
All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers ... Each one owes
infinitely more to the human race than to the particular country in
which he was born. - Francois Fenelon, theologian and writer (1651-1715)
E-mail address is valid until 4 weeks after the expiration date. Use
@arcor.de instead.
fwb
<NonVal...@Yoohoo.com> wrote:
>This time, it's me that is the "grown-up" that shouldn't have allowed
>it to exist, let alone become pervasive and embedded. This cancer in
>our society MUST be rooted out aggressively. For my own sake, I intend
>to become a thorn in the side of any government that I can reach with
>pen or computer. I am ashamed of myself. But I can at least change me!
Ken, I did not have the energy to respond to this when you first
posted, but it is one of the most power post I have ever seen.
Sounds like your growing up paralled mine in many ways.
One cannot be faulted for living one's own life. We have to take care
of ours; we cannot always all be crusading.
But we do need to see through the gowns of the hypocrites and see the
nakedness under them and do what we can.
We can start, I guess, by voting. No, that's not it. We can begin by
trying not to be fooled.
http://www.thewho.net/discography/songs/WontGetFooledAgain.html
I think back to Lyndon Johnson, a deeply flawed man, one who had the
courage to put his career on the line to support the Civil Rights Act
of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (but not the courage to cut
and run in Viet Nam, even though he knew, as history has revealed,
that that was ultimately the only choice).
http://archives.obs-us.com/obs/english/books/mcnamara/top.htm
I don't have a lot of advice. Just keep on keeping on, I guess.
And remember that being an American means knowing why this country was
founded--and it was not founded to further enrich the rich--and what
the founders held dear. They did not hesitate to (well, maybe they
hesitated--they were human, but they did) put their lives and fortunes
and reputations at risk for freedom.
Not for money. Not for freedom from government, but for a better
government. Not for tax cuts, but for having control over their
taxes.
For them, government was not the problem (though Ronald Reagan so
characterized it); a *better* government was the solution.
All we can do is fight the good fight for truth (there's been damned
little of that from the executive branch lately), justice (not just
for the rich), and the American way (whatever that is).