SEOUL, South Korea (CNN) -- North Korea threatened military action Wednesday after South Korea joined a U.S.-led effort to limit the trafficking of weapons of mass destruction, the official Korean Central News Agency said. An image from North Korean television on April 9 shows leader Kim Jong Il in Pyongyang.
South Korea said Monday that it was joining the 6-year-old Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) because of "the grave threat WMD and missile proliferation is posing to global peace," said Foreign Ministry spokesman Moon Tae-young.
The effort is aimed at halting shipments of weapons technology, a rare source of hard currency for North Korea, but Moon said the south would continue to uphold a shipping agreement with the North.
"Our revolutionary armed forces ... will regard" South Korea's participation "in the PSI as a declaration of war ..." the North's official news agency said.
Pyongyang also announced it was no longer bound by the 1953 armistice that ended the Korean War.
The silver lining here is that for all the ways the Korean War could restart, at least we aren't waking up asking, "Where's Seoul?"
Already there are folks suggesting that this is proof that Bush failed or proof that Obama's foreign policy stances showed weakness as conservative pundits warned and has invited a more belligerent stand by our enemies. Others have noted the lose-lose situation we face with North Korea given their ability to cause massive devastation on South Korea even with just conventional weapons before we can even hope to stop them. The diplomacy is similar to a hostage situation where prior presidents have struggled to find what could be the breakthrough to ending the hostilities that have lasted all these decades.
Time will tell how far Kim is willing to push this current nonsense, but there may be hope for Obama supporters out there wondering if his Secretary of State and Vice President were serious about him being naive on foreign policy. Kim may be seriously considering direct talks but attempting to do so from a position of strength in order to get the most out of the interaction. This could end up being the first signs of engagement just as much as it could end up being a belligerent "hail mary" by an ailing despot at the end of his rope.
One can only hope that Obama is eventually vindicated here, no matter how unlikely it seems at the moment. The alternative could get damn ugly.
Remember the fallen. Honor them by taking care of those who fight on in the battlefields or back home.
As part of my continued support of the concept of "Don't do nothing"... another avenue of support brought to my attention this week: donating old cell phones. Doesn't matter what kind or how out of date. They get recycled and the money gets used for phone cards for troops to call home and stay in touch with their families where a phone call can mean everything in the world to them. We have a local drop off for this program here in town, and worth checking out if you have old phones stuffed in a drawer somewhere.
The local drop off point is:
Liberty Tax Service 1403 E Washington Urbana, IL 61802
For more information see the link above or here. As usual I'd like to plug for the local Toys For Troops organization here as well as the USO and AnySoldier and generally for any organization to help support our troops overseas, their families, and veterans needs.
I can think of few better ways to honor the fallen than to take care of those still in the fight, those that survived the fight, and their families.
As usual the chain mails of doom has gone into overdrive attempting to scare the bejesus out of anyone who is worried flaming nazis are going to start burning their Bibles. Factcheck.org answers some of the questions floating around about a bill that some fear mongers have claimed will silence churches and protect child preying pedophiles (in case it isn't obvious, the bill does neither):
We've received a number of questions about the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 that passed in the House on April 29 by a vote of 249 to 175, and its companion bill awaiting committee action in the Senate. Most of them focus on the impact of the bill as alleged by groups like the Traditional Values Coalition on its Web site and the American Family Association on its site and in e-mail alerts warning supporters about what's in store if the bill becomes law.
The queries mainly concern two claims made by these groups and others: that the bill would force priests and other religious figures to muzzle themselves rather than repeat or discuss any sections of the Bible that may be critical of homosexuality, and that the bill would extend special legal protection to pedophilia, incest and certain other behaviors that are either illegal or widely considered abnormal.
Several members of Congress have repeated similar assertions. In an April 29 speech on the floor of the House, Republican Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana said he feared the legislation "could have a chilling effect on the religious expression and religious freedom of millions of Americans." Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas, at an April 28 press conference, said, "When you look at sexual orientation and you examine the diagnostic statistics manual that sets out all of the medical and psychological conditions and the different names, there are about 30 different types of sexual orientations, and they can include exhibitionism and voyeurism or things that are so offensive such as pedophilia," all of which, Gohmert said, could be covered under the bill.
In reality, there's nothing in the bill that says pastors must zip their lips rather than denounce homosexuality, nor does it cover pedophiles, voyeurs, exhibitionists and dozens of other behaviors.
The full article is worth the read and factcheck.org is a good site to keep in your RSS blog feeds if you're into that sort of thing, or worth the occasional peak if you prefer.
Probably the most widespread part of the rumors floating around lately about the "log cabin illuminati" is to codify any criticism of homosexuality as a hate crime. Yet the bills the rumors point to don't repeal the first amendment and current hate crime laws that would be amended don't cover any such criticism. In fact, as the factcheck.org article points out, one of the bills in contention specifically states it doesn't apply to criticism:
Just to make sure nobody's words are suppressed, however, the bill addresses the issue directly with two "Rules of Construction" to make things crystal clear to anyone trying to interpret the legislation:
S. 909, introduced April 28, 2009: (3) CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit any constitutionally protected speech, expressive conduct or activities (regardless of whether compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief), including the exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment and peaceful picketing or demonstration. The Constitution does not protect speech, conduct or activities consisting of planning for, conspiring to commit, or committing an act of violence.
(4) FREE EXPRESSION- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to allow prosecution based solely upon an individual’s expression of racial, religious, political, or other beliefs or solely upon an individual’s membership in a group advocating or espousing such beliefs.
Of course, as the language above notes, the First Amendment doesn't protect all speech in every circumstance. This might be a good time to recall Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes' opinion for a unanimous Supreme Court in the 1919 case Schenck v. United States. Free speech, while a core American value, doesn't mean one can "falsely shout fire in a theater" and thereby cause a stampede, Holmes wrote. "The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger."
The upshot here: Speaking disapprovingly of homosexuals from the pulpit would be one thing; encouraging one's congregation to form a lynching posse Saturday at 4 p.m. at the water tower is quite another.
For groups that complain endlessly when media outlets distort an issue, they certainly seem to have few qualms about making crap up to scare every gullible yahoo out there into believing some really heinous nonsense.
-- UPDATE 10:47 AM --
The ad above makes some other claims as well, but I started to think this blog may seem incomplete without addressing some of the other accusations. Wikipedia has an entry about this organization with sources on the claims made for anyone interested:
According to the Human Rights Campaign, "actors make disproven claims about marriage for lesbian and gay couples" in the 2M4M advertising campaign.[18]
The actors in the video mention the following cases:
A California doctor who is forced to choose between her religious faith and her work
A member of a New Jersey church group which is punished by the state for opposing same-sex marriage
A Massachusetts parent who is unable to prevent the state from teaching her children that same-sex marriage is appropriate
The first actor refers to the Benitez case in California.[18] In this decision, the California Supreme Court found that a doctor at a fertility clinic could not violate California anti-discrimination law by refusing to treat a lesbian based on religious belief.[19]
The second actor refers to the Ocean Grove, NJ civil union controversy, in which the Methodist Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association refused to allow a lesbian couple to use its oceanside pavilion for a civil union ceremony. The court ruled that the group could not receive a tax exemption for the pavilion under the state's Green Acres Program, which is intended to encourage availability of property for public use. The group's beachfront property other than the pavilion itself retained the tax exemption.[20]
The third actor refers to the Lexington, MA Parker case, in which parents sued because their children were provided classroom materials that depicted same-sex marriages, including King and King, a picture book about a prince who marries another prince.[21] Judge Mark L. Wolf of Federal District Court found against them, stating in his decision that schools are "entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens",[22] and federal courts did not overturn the decision on appeal.[21]
While the first two are fairly obvious in how they spun the issue, the third may require slightly more explanation. The lawsuit actually claimed that the book, by discussing same sex marriage at all, constituted sex education, though the book has no sexual elements at all. Their argument made about as much sense as saying that discussing opposite-sex marriage constituted sex education... or that the story of the princess who kissed the frog was not only sex education but bestial sex education!
The argument in the ad strays from the case to depict a far broader argument that was not made (not made, most likely because pretending like gay marriage doesn't exist in a state where it does makes little sense at all).
The Indiana Atheist Bus Campaign is excited to announce its over-the-border expansion to neighboring Chicago, Illinois with the slogan “In the beginning, man created God” beginning May 18th.
On May 11th we launched in South Bend, Indiana with “You can be good without God”, a slogan that challenges the notion that a good moral code requires supernatural direction and religion has a corner on morality. Our Chicago slogan espouses the idea that man created God as well as all religions, and encourages public and critical examination of the merits of religious belief.
The new slogan chosen for a Chicago was entirely paid for by a private donor to the organization. All other donations received up to this point have gone towards ads in South Bend with the original slogan “You can be good without God.”
They updated their blog with a picture of one of the ads on a bus (click to enlarge):
But it still seems a bit odd without any news stories about it. Still interesting that the campaign may have begun to trickle across into our side of the border.
Again this post is from before the latest information. For the latest information see the most updated post here: Veterans Checks by June 30th?.
Here is the original post:
Someone accidentally stumbled across my post about last year's stimulus checks and may have thought that information applied to this year's stimulus bill. Just to be clear I'm updating those posts with links to this one.
All that information about where to put your VA benefits on tax forms? This was for last year's stimulus checks. We don't have to worry about that this time around.
The stimulus bill that passed this year doesn't require any specific information on your tax forms for veterans or those on social security disability (at least no information different than usual if you have to file tax returns).
For non-disabled folks the stimulus money comes in the form of less withholdings per check (or jobs if your area gets project money). For disabled folks either the VA or SSA will be issuing checks in the next couple months for $250 directly from them (courtesy of the United States Treasury).
If you currently get your disability checks in the mail or direct deposit, the stimulus check is supposed to come through the same way. If you're on both SSA and VA disability only one agency is going to issue you a check. (if you get two, you might have to give one back).
And no, I'm not talking about this idiotic anti-gay marriage ad. No a real storm... kicked our butts. Friend told me a nearby intersection was flooded. I said, "Nonsense! I can see that intersection from my windooooOOOLY SHIT!"
URBANA – A Sullivan man has been indicted by a federal grand jury of defrauding the Social Security Administration and Department of Veterans Affairs of approximately $280,000.
Robert J. Warren, 44, is tentatively scheduled to be tried in July. He was arrested Monday and appeared Tuesday in Urbana before U.S. Magistrate Judge David G. Bernthal, who released Warren pending trial. Advertisement
The 12-count indictment returned last week said that Warren served in the U.S. Navy from 1984 to 1988 and applied for veterans benefits in 2002 and social security benefits in 2004. Warren was granted V.A. benefits for being unemployable as a result of a service-connected disability and Social Security benefits for a mental impairment which caused him to be disabled.
The indictment alleges that beginning in 2002 and continuing to October 2008, Warren feigned and exaggerated various symptoms and causes of mental and physical disease and claimed he could not work around people, when in fact he worked at a tavern and was a volunteer member of the Sullivan Fire Department.
This particular story is particularly infuriating for me. A lot of the time periods for his claim are very close to my own battles with the VA and SSA. Beyond just defrauding veterans with real issues out of the money available to help them, he was using up the resources and putting more veterans further back in line to get the help they desperately needed. All the while, apparently, he was working two jobs and getting along just fine... making others wait, scrape, and suffer even longer. What a scumbag.
It's frauds like him who make it harder and harder for people with real issues to get the benefits they're entitled to. I can't help but imagine that it's cases like this that have turned both systems into a bureaucratic nightmare where every claimant is viewed with suspicion and the system becomes more and more adversarial.
But the blame isn't his alone. Both agencies involved here, the VA and the SSA, really seemed to drop the ball if they let this guy collect benefits for unemployability/disability to the tune of 280 grand. Both agencies are required to confirm income and work history for such benefits. Even short term work has to be explained in detail as to the reasons why you were unable to continue (was it due to your disability?) or how you were able to do the work even short time with your ailments (ie is intermittent severity consistent with your ailments/diagnosis).
Given the counts don't include IRS fraud of some sort, it's safe to say they didn't even bother to look for several years. Something they normally do initially and often to continue benefits.
Who suffers from this? The people who are really dependent on these programs. Not only does it take money out of an already financially strapped system, it adds new anecdotal evidence to the adversarial process to treat claimants with even more suspicion. The frauds make it harder on the folks who really need it. Hopefully his sentence will reflect who he has harmed.
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is celebrating Cinco de Mayo a little early.
On the eve of the Mexican holiday, Obama on Monday had an event in the East Room of the White House with Mexico's Ambassador Arturo Sarukhan (sahr-oo-KHAN').
Obama joked that it was "Cinco de Cuatro," botching a play on the Spanish word for "four" when he meant to say "Cuatro de Mayo," or the Fourth of May. He tried again, but he still did not get it right.
Now many right-wingers have given Obama heat on this for earlier campaign statements criticizing Americans for not being bilingual:
You know, it’s embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to Europe, and all we can say [is], “Merci beaucoup.” Right?
But to be fair this line is out of context. Immediately after that he said:
You know, no, I’m serious about this. We should understand that our young people, if you have a foreign language, that is a powerful tool to get ajob. You are so much more employable. You can be part of international business. So we should be emphasizing foreign languages in our schools from an early age, because children will actually learn a foreign language easier when they’re 5, or 6, or 7 than when they’re 46, like me.
So should we be "embarrassed" of our current president's gaffe? Probably not. Instead I recommend upholding the longstanding Cinco de Mayo tradition: blame it on the tequila!
Anyways Cinco de Mayo is about celebrating the embarrassment of the French, not ourselves. I can drink to that!
The uncut interview of Cliff May on the Daily Show discussing the debate over waterboarding and torture in general put the ADD/sensationalist/infotainment "news" outlets to shame. The interview ran long so only clips appeared on the television presentation, but they put the full interview online for those willing to hear these two duke out the two major perspectives on this issue:
Parts 2 and 3 are available by clicking the next video links at the end of the video stream or by clicking on the webpage links here: Part 2, and Part 3.
Political opinions and observations by a liberal Constitutionalist. Not affiliated with any political party.
Guest Author: Yaakov
Yaakov is a husband, and father of six who fancies himself an amateur philosopher. He endeavors to write his down ideas without concern for their originality but with great care not to be derivative. He is an unrepentant pragmatist with strong ideals focused on the ethical treatment of people and other creatures. His own blog is at http://kovaya.com/miscellany/
SEOUL, South Korea (CNN) -- North Korea threatened military action Wednesday after South Korea joined a U.S.-led effort to limit the trafficking of weapons of mass destruction, the official Korean Central News Agency said.
