They say that the recruitment woes we are experiencing right now are due, in large part, to parents spearing their kids away from the military — don’t want to die in Iraq. Just in time for Father’s Day, Newsweek releases this touching cover-story.

“Fathers and Sons at War. The New Face of A Noble Tradition”, indeed.

Somewhere, as the expression “Osama Bin Laden’s body-guards” gets used to describe the inmates of Guatanemo Bay, and as we get treated to the supposed menu-list of the place…

“The U.S. believes he was the 20th hi-jacker. A moment-by-moment account of how they got him to talk.”

Leaks are an interesting phenomenom. The government leaks things at their own convenience.

… or just lead them to commit suicide?

I posted this at … my other blog. But suddenly I kind of realize the political import of it sort of demands I post it here. Beyond the abstractions and silly donkey-elephant games, the political climate has actual effects on actual people. Thus, we explore the programs set up the religious right to try to eliminate homosexuality.

This is essentially a `brainwashing’ program. Step I in Liftons criteria for such features isolation of the individual from people and information outside the group. This article has that in spades.

And the last bit – constructive criticism – is straight out of points three and four of Liftons criteria: cult of purity and internal discipline.

This has to be the most depressing experience you can go through at the age of 16.

No sexual/emotional misconduct. Any temptations, fantasies, or dreams are to be presented to one¹s staff worker only. Sexual misconduct includes viewing pornography, visiting an adult bookstore, emotional dependency, voyeurism, stalking, masturbation, mutual masturbation, or any form of genital or sexual contact with another person. Sexual temptation, as well as the above, is not to be discussed between clients. This includes MI’s (Moral Inventories) written on current sexual struggles or temptations).

Ah, yes. The “Honor System”. A typical hormonal teenager would probably have to go to “one’s staff worker” every fifteen minutes or so…

The clients may not wear Abercrombie and Fitch or Calvin Klein brand clothing, undergarments, or accessories.

Curious to mark out those two companies. They use sex appeal to market their clothing lines, as do many clothing lines. Actually I can almost go with this ban, for my own reasons… Creating Identity through clothing brand always made me squeamish.

It’s in the “Therapeutic & Staff Issues” that things become particularly jackbooted.

10. Absolutely no journaling or keeping a diary outside of the MI process unless directed or approved by staff.

Kill me now.

1. LIA wants to encourage each client, male and female, by affirming his/her gender identity. LIA also wants each client to pursue integrity in all of his/her actions and appearances. Therefore, any belongings, appearances, clothing, actions, or humor that might connect a client to an inappropriate past are excluded from the program. These hindrances are called False Images (FI¹s). FI behavior may include hyper-masculinity, seductive clothing, mannish/boyish attire (on women), excessive jewelry (on men), mascoting, and “campy” or gay/lesbian behavior and talk.

Gender Roles are non-transferable.

Actually, I wonder, if the goal is to turn your gay teenagers straight… why not bring in pornography (or a Maxim magazine of some ilk)? Aren’t we affirming heterosexuality here?

Refuge encourages all clients to first focus internally. Why is the client here? What is broken? What is the core motivation of the client¹s unhealthy behavior? Staff members will work with clients as they learn what is wrong and as they take the steps to articulate it. Second, staff emphasize the need for each client to seek the truth of God. What does He have to say about each client and his/her pain? The rules that follow are designed to both protect the client and facilitate his/her wrestling with God.

I think the client is there because their parents are fundamentalists who follow the preachings of James Dobson. To answer “What is broken” is to face the dark corridors of society.

5. Refuge clients may only read materials approved by staff.

Sigh.

6. No television viewing, going to movies, or reading/watching/listening to secular media of any kind, anywhere within the client¹s and the parent¹s/guardian¹s control. This includes listening to classical or instrumental music that is not expressly Christian (Beethoven, Bach, etc. are not considered Christian). The only exception to the media policy is the weekly movie.

Waitaminute. Beethoven, Bach, etc. are EVIL Secular Satanic megaphones that will lead your teen astray? None of that Jazz, I assume… what with its wonkiness… and lack of “wonderbread”-ees.

16. Total silence time at home begins at 9:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday. Refuge clients may use this time for resting, but are encouraged to make a habit of using it for a nightly quiet time with God.

Perhaps you could write down your thoughts in a journa– no wait. Perhaps you could clear your mind through listening to some classical mus– no. Um… How the heck are you supposed to spend “Quiet Time”?

18. Refuge clients are allowed a one-time 15-minute maximum closed bathroom door time for shower/grooming purposes. The only other closed-door alone time allowed is for using the restroom.

It is here that I laugh maniacally. Quietly subvert the dominant paradigm, everyone!

1. Be honest, authentic, and real.

That would require breaking EVERY SINGLE RULE I’ve read here.

9. Say “I love you _____” after each person is finished relating.

So John says to Bob “I love you” and Suzy says to Chrisina “I love you.” Doesn’t sound like we’re making progress here.

Is there any escape? Well, there’s Consequence #3:

Consequences for Rule Violation:

1. Constructive criticism from the group.
2. Ten to thirty-page written paper on rule violation.
3. Program dismissal. This does not need to be addressed with the client (The client may sabotage his/her own program due to purposeful dismissal consequences).
4. Isolation from the group.

Good luck to all involved. Keep on Trucking.

Last month’s federal court decision negating Nebraska’s voter-approved constitutional amendment protecting traditional marriage may have caused one Democratic senator to change his stripes on the issue of a federal marriage amendment. Focus on the Family’s James Dobson says he has been assured by Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson that the lawmaker has changed his position on the need to protect marriage at the federal level. “The senator now joins millions of Americans who recognize the threat posed by arrogant and activist judges who would deprive the people of their right to govern themselves,” Dobson says in a press release. “We look forward to working with Senator Nelson to pass the [Marriage Protection Amendment to the U.S. Constitution] in the months ahead.” Dobson also commends Nelson for making another commitment: supporting up-or-down votes on all but one of President’s judicial nominees who have been targeted by Democratic-led filibusters. “Senator Nelson is doing what an elected official should do — listening to what his constituents want and working to make sure they get it,” Dobson says. Nelson was one of the seven Democrats who was party to the bipartisan “compromise” derived to allow up-or-down votes on a limited number of the president’s nominees while still giving Democrats the option to resurrect the filibuster against nominees of their choosing.

Ben Nelson is largely useless, and if he were to switch to “Republican”, it would probably be difficult to notice… he’d turn a few degrees to the right, simply by being “whipped” and by working within the Republican Caucus. I find it surprising if Ben Nelson “changed his stripes”, and would think he would have supported this “ban” beforehand. And it’s difficult not to be disgruntled at any politician who careens with Nebraska — is Nebraska politics that desperate that that’s necessary? I know not from Nebraska… my sister married a Nebrakan — now transplanted to the state of Microsoft. They have a family photograph taken with Newt Gingrich in it. The father-in-law is a classic Union Guy type… but, judging from the electoral map, it seems like he belongs to a state just East — Iowa.

Mary Landrieu, somewhere in the top five in terms of Democratic Party Conservatism, was the prime sponsor of a “We apologize for Lynching Black People” resolution. The blogosphere, including the right-wing half is a’buzz on the Senators that did not support this measure.

I’m half-plussed here. On one hand, it’s merely a gesture. But gestures are important sometimes, hence it’s good for everyone of every political stripe to announce that their historical understanding of the United States includes the reality that the government sanctified Domestic Terrorism against Black Americans for a long, long time. (Getting everyone onto the same page, so to speak.) But… is Mary Landrieu doing anything a bit more substantial for the black community? Understand… she owes her most recent election in particular to the black vote. On the December Election day in 2002 (Louisiana has it so that if you don’t earn over 50% of the vote in November, you go to a run-off), the Democratic brass were crunching numbers, seeing Landrieu coming up short. They fired off a last-second call-out from Bill Clinton (“the first black president”tm) to mass-dial black communities to get out the vote… and hence Landrieu’s job was saved.

I just updated the sidebar mid-term election section, adding Ohio (“Coin-Gate” may be be poised to tear down the Ohio Republican Party), and the surprising Indiana. Curiouser and Curiouser.

I would like to congratulate the winners of the Portland Rose Festival Float awards.

More specifically, the winner of the Mayor’s Award to the float of the Church of Scientology.

Well, if you make a good float…

Okay… for a sort of “echo chamber duty”, picking out some of the most important news items of the day…

Item #1: The case of Philip A. Cooney — chief of staff for the White House council on environmental quality, or rather Corporate Whore”: The dozens of changes, while sometimes as subtle as the insertion of the phrase “significant and fundamental” before the word “uncertainties,” tend to produce an air of doubt about findings that most climate experts say are robust.

Mr. Cooney is chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, the office that helps devise and promote administration policies on environmental issues. Before going to the White House in 2001, he was the “climate team leader” and a lobbyist at the American Petroleum Institute, the largest trade group representing the interests of the oil industry. A lawyer with a bachelor’s degree in economics, he has no scientific training.

In one instance in an October 2002 draft of a regularly published summary of government climate research, “Our Changing Planet,” Mr. Cooney amplified the sense of uncertainty by adding the word “extremely” to this sentence: “The attribution of the causes of biological and ecological changes to climate change or variability is extremely difficult.” In a section on the need for research into how warming might change water availability and flooding, he crossed out a paragraph describing the projected reduction of mountain glaciers and snowpack. His note in the margins explained that this was “straying from research strategy into speculative findings/musings.”

Mr. Cooney’s alterations can cause clear shifts in meaning. For example, a sentence in the October 2002 draft of “Our Changing Planet” originally read, “Many scientific observations indicate that the Earth is undergoing a period of relatively rapid change.” In a neat, compact hand, Mr. Cooney modified the sentence to read, “Many scientific observations point to the conclusion that the Earth may be undergoing a period of relatively rapid change.”

Item #2: The closing of the House Judiciary Hearing on the Patriot Act. Rep. Sensenbrenner: AND: Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., a Wisconsin Republican and chairman of the panel, abruptly gaveled the meeting to an end and walked out, followed by other Republicans. Sensenbrenner declared that much of the testimony, which veered into debate about the detainees at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was irrelevant.

James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, speaking immediately after Sensenbrenner left, voiced dismay about the proceedings. ”I’m troubled about what kind of lesson this gives” to the rest of the world, he told the Democrats remaining in the room.

ITEM #3: … Darned it. I had two other news-items of some import I wished to stick here. Don’t remember what they were.

Ah well. The Toledo Blade has a page up with the various news-stories for their investigations into “Coin-Gate”… a curious scandal if there ever was one.

ITEM #4: Muse over Lindsey Graham’s solution to the recruitment-shortfall crisis that the military is struggling with:

“We have a chronic problem on our hands, not an acute problem,” said South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, chairman of a Senate subcommittee on military personnel. “We should assume there are going to be 100,000 troops in Iraq two years from now, and continuing losses. It is time to repackage this war and let Americans know we are fighting for freedom.”
— Lindsey Graham, Republican Senator of South Carolina

Harold Ford, Democratic Congressman of Tennessee and Senate hopeful, expresses a similar opinion.

How exactly do you “let Americans know that they are fighting for freedom”? (I think Bush says just that every day.)

ITEM #5: The curious case of the implementation of the Tobacco Settlement: Despite a key government witness asserting that $130 billion is necessary to fund smoking cessation programs, the Justice Department asked the Court for only $10 billion, surprising reporters and those familiar with the issue.

A person familiar with the situation, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the Los Angeles Times the change was “forced on the tobacco team by higher-level, politically appointed officials of the Justice Department,” including Associate Atty. Gen. Robert McCallum, who oversees the civil division.

Brad Carson, Democratic candidate for the Senate of Oklahoma in 2004, saideth this:

I don’t remember when I first realized that my campaign for United States Senate was in trouble. But one moment stands out. I was in Sallisaw, Oklahoma.
[…]

As I arrived at the church, my wife and I were given the church bulletin, which outlined the weekly selection of hymns and Bible readings. On the back of the bulletin, atop the blank space reserved for copious note-taking during the sermon, was the heading: “wwjv? pro-life or pro-death?” (I favored the partial-birth abortion ban but opposed overturning Roe v. Wade.) In the sanctuary, a 20-by-20-foot depiction of a fetus looked down upon the assembled throng from a projection screen. Superimposed upon the unsettling image–which morphed to show the fetus in various stages of gestation–was fact after fact about abortions in America.

Though there is a problem here with all of Brad Carson’s thoughts. He’s running in Oklahoma. He’s trying to woe the parish of right-wing church. Illinois had a candidate with pretty much exact political stripe of Brad Carson’s opponent (Tom Coburn)– name of Alan Keyes… the vote disparity between Coburn and Keyes tells you all you need to know about Oklahoma.

Never mind. There is a startling factor. The Kansas example, found in What’s the Matter With Kansas, and a personal testimony found with various unsundry characters regarding the “Summer of Mercy”, which was the start of the great Evangelical Fancy of Kansas Politics. Texas’s governor just suggested that gay veterans oughta get out of Texas. And Bush’s re-election cannot be understood without The Passion Of the Christ.