|
Nobel Peace Prize 
Thu Mar 11, 2010 at 14:20:06 PST
|
|
Great Choices and to orgs that won't misuse!
Obama Donates Nobel Prize Money to 10 Charities
 The White House has announced that President Obama has donated the $1.4 million given to him in conjunction with the Nobel Peace Prize to ten charities, including the Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund and the United Negro College Fund.
While President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last October for his work toward global peace, most of the money has gone toward charities focused not on peace but on educational opportunity.
The most money -- $250,000 -- went to Fisher House, which provides housing for families of patients being cared for at major military and VA medical centers. >>>>>
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 880 words in story)
|
|
Sat Dec 12, 2009 at 00:59:36 PST
|
(10 am. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
The Anti-Imperialist League was founded in 1889 as an opposition group, intended to counter what was then seen as an imperialistic approach toward Cuba and the Phillipines.
After the Spanish-American War (April-August, 1898), the Treaty of Paris, finalized in December, 1898, granted the United States control over Cuba, Guam, the Philippines, and Puerto Rico.
Twain had resided in Europe during the war, and returned to the United States, disillusioned, in 1900. He soon joined the Anti-Imperialistic League, supporting their work with a number of writings, and remained a member for the rest of his life. According to one account, Twain served as the group's vice president from 1901 until his death in 1910. He was convinced that the United States could not function as both an empire and a republic.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 1526 words in story)
|
|
Fri Dec 11, 2009 at 07:08:08 PST
|
|
President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize Speech reads to me, in many ways, more like a sermon than a political or ideological treatise. That those who report and announce the news are either commenting upon a very small segment on that which was said, or taking a very minor section of the speech completely out of context like the increasingly malcontent Howard Fineman is regrettably par for the course. Nothing silences more than visionary language and far-sighted analysis, and notably none of it can be spun out into confusion by two split-screen talking heads yammering away at each other on a simultaneous satellite feed. We do a lot of talking these days, but frequently not a lot of listening.
Kathleen Parker and other pundits responded merely to this section, as it is the easiest to pick apart, but much like everything else in the world, full context is crucial to fullest understanding.
"For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history, the imperfections of man and the limits of reason."
With those words, Obama aligned himself with conservatives, who believe in the fallibility of human nature and in an enduring moral order. At the same time, he left room for moral conundrum: the difficulty of reconciling two seemingly irreconcilable truths -- "that war is sometimes necessary, and war at some level is an expression of human folly."
As for the former assertion, not necessarily. As a Quaker, I daily navigate this own moral conundrum, as Parker phrased it. No amount of eloquent justification will ever sway me from the belief that war in all forms and for all reasons is morally wrong. Still, I do believe that while evil and good might be indebted to shades of gray, I do not believe in a hierarchy of sin and transgression. Wrong is wrong in a moral context and I leave it purely to the law of humans in a court to determine which wrong is more offensive than the next. Moreover, believing that human nature is inherently imperfect does not necessarily mean that we ought to wrap our arms around this fact and fail to continue working to improve conditions for our fellow person. Though I might believe that direct revelation from the Inward Light of God is a deeply, personal individual one which may vary from being to being, I do not believe that the liberty inherent in embracing one's own path means one also gets the right to formulate for himself or herself precisely what constitutes good or evil, divisive or unifying. Peace, as Obama mentioned later in the speech, comes with sacrifice and sacrifice is a team sport. We will never arrive at it as a people unless we devote as much common energy towards securing peaceful means as we do when we channel our blood lust in the direction of an enemy who has wronged us.
We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth that we will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations - acting individually or in concert - will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.
Again, I disagree with the President. But to return to conundrums and paradoxes, in this instance I recall the 1927 film version of the famous anti-slavery book Uncle Tom's Cabin, written by Harriet Beecher Stowe. The original novel portrays Quakers in heroic terms, eager to put their very lives on the line by actively transporting slaves by way of the Underground Railroad to Canada. One of the main characters, Eliza, miraculously makes her way across a frozen river into the North, pursued by dogs, and carrying her child with her. After being rescued by a kindly man from an adjacent farm, she finds a settlement of Friends who agree to send her towards freedom. She and her young son eventually escape slavery and settle beyond the reach of the Fugitive Slave Act, which required even Northerners to return runaway slaves under penalty of law.
The movie version, however, modifies the original plot considerably. Eliza makes her way across the frozen river as before, but is this time rescued from the ice and the damp by a particularly dexterous Quaker man. He and his wife eagerly agree to give both Eliza and her child a place to stay for a while, but notably do not stand up to an armed slave catcher by the name of Loker when he knocks at their door the next day. Full of good intentions, naive, utterly helpless to resist, and wholly powerless in the end is this version's portrayal of Quakers and non-violent resistance. Both renderings have their own bias and both border on propaganda at times. Both, it must also be pointed out, have a degree of truth to them as well.
That aside, to me, the very heart of the speech lay in this passage.
As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to recognize how similar we are, to understand that we all basically want the same things, that we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and fulfillment for ourselves and our families.
And yet, given the dizzying pace of globalization, and the cultural leveling of modernity, it should come as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish about their particular identities: their race, their tribe and, perhaps most powerfully, their religion. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we are moving backwards. We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines.
This passage challenges me to examine again my own goals and intents. The urge to surrender our individual identities on behalf of progress or perceived progress can sometimes be believed as doing away altogether with the depth and breadth of religious expression. While this is a fear of conservative people of faith more so than their brethren on the left, even I am gripped at times by a similar anxiety. In a desire to keep alive the rich uniqueness of my own faith group, I do not wish to see it incrementally reduced to nothing in the process. In that spirit, I push hard that we Friends might never forget the biblical underpinnings that inspire what we believe and which led to the formation of our Testimonies. Average Americans already, if a relatively recent survey is to be believed, selectively choose the precepts they incorporate into their own individual canon from a variety of religions.
By a three to one margin (71 percent to 26 percent), Americans say they are more likely to personally develop their own set of religious beliefs than accept a comprehensive set of beliefs taught by a church or denomination, a Barna study, released Monday, shows.
Born-again Christians were among the groups least likely to adopt an a la carte approach to religious beliefs, but even most in this group say they have mixed their set of beliefs (61 percent).
In other words, the Barna survey's findings show that people no longer look to denominations or churches for a complete set of theological views. Rather, combining beliefs from different denominations, and even religions, is becoming the norm.
While tribalism and factionalism, particularly along religious lines has done much to set us apart from each other and has even compelled us to kill others in times of war, I find nothing wrong with separate identities, provided they do not separate us in the process. The Esperanto movement in linguistics, for example, sought to provide a international secondary language. The concept was predicated on the belief that the human race was needlessly divided by language barriers and that men and women could use Esperanto as a lingua franca to be used in conversation with those of other nationalities or those who spoke a different primary tongue. The intent was never that Esperanto would replace one's native language, merely that it would facilitate diplomacy.
If this process were merely the latest evolutionary step, I would not have reason to be afraid, but I sometimes worry that we are jettisoning not just our religious identities, but our shared sense of purpose and love for our fellow being. The post-modernist believes that all we are these days is that which we ourselves have created and that we are only as deep as our own constructed reality. What a sterile world that would be, were it to be true! Let us not make idols of our own cynicism, too.
One must not forget the paradoxical story of the Tower of Babel as found in Genesis.
Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. As people moved toward the east, they found a plain in Shinar [Babylonia] and settled there...They said, "Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth." But the LORD came down to look at the city and the tower the people were building.
The LORD said, "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other." So the LORD scattered them abroad from there over the face of the whole earth; and they stopped building the city. That is why it was called Babel--because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.
At face value, one would assume that God's purpose in this act was to keep people divided, else they find more value within themselves than devotion to a God. In accordance with a literal interpretation, God is a jealous deity who desires no rivals and quickly strikes back against the idea that humanity through collective action might eventually believe that it feels it no longer has no use for God. Perhaps it speaks to the very idea of faith, as well, and with it the assertion that human endeavoring and human construction can never fully explain the divine or rationalize away the need for a higher power. Some interpretations over the years have seen the building of the Tower as a contemptuous and rebellious act toward God himself, in effect declaring war on God's supreme authority. God does work in mysterious ways, after all.
So are we meant to be divided, else total unity rip our moral fabric and station to shreds? Is division just a part of life that serves as a deterrent, else we get too big for our britches? If one is a Christian, one believes that we are all a part of the metaphorical Body of Christ. Some faith groups or denominations have sought to define it different ways, but the concept itself is more or less the same. Though often used to reinforce this belief in shared Christian fellowship, St. Paul's words in his first letter to the Corinthians can be read to go beyond just devotion to a particular religion or a particular cause.
Now, dear brothers and sisters, regarding your question about the special abilities the Spirit gives us...There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. God works in different ways, but it is the same God who does the work in all of us. A spiritual gift is given to each of us so we can help each other. To one person the Spirit gives the ability to give wise advice; to another the same Spirit gives a message of special knowledge, to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, He gives one person the power to perform miracles, and another the ability to prophesy.
He gives someone else the ability to discern whether a message is from the Spirit of God or from another spirit. Still another person is given the ability to speak in unknown languages, while another is given the ability to interpret what is being said. It is the one and only Spirit who distributes all these gifts. He alone decides which gift each person should have. For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ.
President Obama concluded his speech this way, saying,
Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. We are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us.
But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. The nonviolence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached - their faith in human progress - must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey.
For if we lose that faith - if we dismiss it as silly or naive, if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace - then we lose what is best about humanity. We lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass.
Amen.
|
|
Discuss
:: (3
Comments)
|
|
Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 04:57:43 PST
|
|
The bloviators walked all over the ceremony, the king's speech, world class entertainent, etc.
Christiane Amapour, David Gergen, and Craphole Crowley's opinions exceed world opinion.
Regardless, Obama is going balls to the wall "War is Peace!"
Fuck you, Bro'.
|
|
Discuss
:: (8
Comments)
|
|
Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 02:16:14 PDT
|
(10 am. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
The day breaks sunny and nippy in San Francisco and the wind is already whipping around Polk Street, in front of City Hall and down past the Bill Graham Civic Auditorium as the first Project Homeless Connect volunteer coordinators enter the auditorium prior to 7 AM. Just before midnight, the news is that some 2200 homeless showed up for services today. Final tallies are not yet published.
The mission of Project Homeless ConnectTM (PHC) is to connect San Francisco's homeless with the system of care that will help them move off the streets and into housing.
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 1995 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 03:03:23 PDT
|
( - promoted by buhdydharma )
Crossposted at Daily Kos. Look in the Comments Section of Daily Kos for more cartoons on the economy and sports. Somehow, I couldn't fit them in the main text of the diary.
THE WEEK IN EDITORIAL CARTOONS
This weekly diary takes a look at the past week's important news stories from the perspective of our leading editorial cartoonists (including a few foreign ones) with analysis and commentary added in by me.
When evaluating a cartoon, ask yourself these questions:
1. Does a cartoon add to my existing knowledge base and help crystallize my thinking about the issue depicted?
2. Does the cartoonist have any obvious biases that distort reality?
3. Is the cartoonist reflecting prevailing public opinion or trying to shape it?
The answers will help determine the effectiveness of the cartoonist's message.
:: ::
Glenn Beck's Fear and Paranoia
Dave Granlund, Politicalcartoons.com
|
|
There's More...
:: (10
Comments, 3675 words in story)
|
|
Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 22:43:46 PDT
|
(noon. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
US President and Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama last winter signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, appropriating $1.5 billion for a Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-housing Program (HPRP). These monies are being distributed via a formula used for the Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG).
HUD, oversees the funding and serves as the hub for information on the program, And the National Alliance to End Homelessness (NAEH) is working alongside to ensure the successful implementation of HPRP.
This Sunday, BrokenRoots shines a light on HPRP: How's it doing so far? What are its guidelines and philosophy? Who's eligible and how is HPRP defining homelessness? And, perhaps more significantly, as the days grow shorter and the temps drop, what are YOU doing about the homeless crisis in your own backyard? We'll provide a few suggestions and solicit some ideas.
If it's Sunday, It's 'Homeless in America"
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 1463 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 14:44:57 PDT
|
|
Cross posted at Daily Kos
In an hastily-arranged press conference which just ended at the National Press Club, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele condemned the Nobel Committee for awarding the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama of the United States.
Steele offered the following remarks
Hajo de Reijger, Politicalcartoons.com (The Netherlands)
:: ::
"The Nobel Committee has done a great injustice to all peace-loving people around the world by prematurely awarding this prestigious award to someone who is totally undeserving of it. In fact, the person who is a deserving recipient was the 43rd President of the United States, George W. Bush. Remember him? His vision, governing philosophy, and far-reaching efforts to promote peace and cooperation amongst various nations should have resulted in him, and not Barack Obama, being selected for this international honor."
More of Chairman Steele's expanded remarks below the fold.
|
|
There's More...
:: (6
Comments, 609 words in story)
|
|
Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 03:37:44 PDT
|
|
Now, how often do you get the opportunity to use that headline?
I'm out of things to say. But I'm sure many people will do just fine.
UPDATE:
Consider this an open thread.
|
|
Discuss
:: (32
Comments)
|
|
Tue May 19, 2009 at 08:23:54 PDT
|
( - promoted by buhdydharma )
cross posted from The Dream Antilles
Aung San Suu Kyi
Evidently, the military junta running Myanmar (Burma) has decided to make life for Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been under house arrest for 13 of the past 19 years, even worse. Today was the second day of her trial. The New York Times reports:
|
|
There's More...
:: (15
Comments, 679 words in story)
|
|
Sun Mar 02, 2008 at 16:18:31 PST
|
 Nominate Pete Seeger for the Nobel Peace Prize
THE PETITION
Pete Seeger has been an ambassador for Peace and Social Justice over the course of his 87 year lifetime. As a prominent musician his songs, messages and performance style have worked to engage other people, particularly the youth, in causes to end the Vietnam war, ban nuclear weapons, work for international solidarity, and ecological responsibility. It is time that a cultural worker receives the recognition that this work has great influence and global reach, that it is not only a medium of entertainment but of education, compassion and action.
DESIRED OUTCOME
To persuade American Friends Service Committee to enter Pete Seeger as their nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize 2008
WHO WE NEED TO INFLUENCE
The Nobel Prize Committee of the Norwegian Parliament
HOW LONG WILL WE CAMPAIGN
As long as it takes
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 53 words in story)
|
|
Sun Oct 14, 2007 at 09:23:09 PDT
|
Crossposted at dailykos and Truth and Progress
The conventional wisdom that Gore "won't run" spread almost immedately, starting on the night BEFORE the Nobel Prize announcement. Interestingly enough, that opening salvo came not from the usual suspects on the Right, but from the Hillary camp, via an emissary by the name of Dan Gerstein, on Thursday's night's broadcast of MSNBC's Hardball). But could the facts be more inconvenient, hence more threatening, to all those now pushing the status quo?
|
|
There's More...
:: (26
Comments, 1699 words in story)
|
|
Sat Oct 13, 2007 at 17:00:00 PDT
|
|
Amidst all the excitement about Al Gore winning the Nobel Peace Prize, the questions and dreams about a possible presidential campaign, and the inevitable criticism from right wing cynics (demonstrating, once again, that they neither understand nor even like the concept of peace), let's not lose focus on what really matters. It is not about the man, it is about his cause; and he is the man he is because he puts the cause above any personal considerations, and whether or not he runs will undoubtedly be determined by his best assessment of whether it will be the best way to serve the cause! We need also keep that priority straight! The coming weeks are critical, and we can help!
Largely because of Al Gore and the IPCC, global warming and climate change have now come to be frontline political issues. Bush no longer ignores it, and now tries to spin it (the best he will ever do on any political issue), and Congress is finally crafting legislation to address it. For now, this is where we need focus.
Mark Hertsgaard, the environmental correspondent for The Nation, puts it directly:
Now that Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, will the US Congress take the IPCC's scientific advice on how to fight global warming? The IPCC holds that the world must reduce greenhouse gas emissions at least 80 percent by the year 2050. Few in Congress seem prepared to go that far, however. And judging from the discussion at a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill last week, even lawmakers who personally embrace the "gold standard" of 80 percent reductions are prepared to endorse a weaker measure in the name of getting some form of climate legislation moving in Congress.
If we take Al Gore seriously, and we take seriously his Nobel Prize, we need to immediately begin lobbying Congress to do the same. This is no time for the compromises that define the usual failures of our political system. With the issue in the headlines, we need let our Congressional representatives know that we are watching, and that we are expecting more than lip service.
The question is, what bill will reformers get behind? How ambitious will they be? Will they demand what the scientific community says is the minimum necessary to enable our civilization to (perhaps) avoid the worst future scenarios of global warming: deep cuts in emissions by 2020 on the way to 80-90 percent cuts by 2050? Or, in the name of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, will they favor a more modest and gradual approach?
The weak, ineffectual compromise approach is being championed by those champions of political weakness and ineffectual compromise, Senators John Warner (R-VA) and Joseph Lieberman (?-CT). Their bill would mandate emission reductions of 10 percent by 2020, and 70 percent by 2050. That they would, for some reason, decide on an approach that falls 10 percent short on such a critical goal says everything. It won't solve the problem, but it will make nice window dressing. It's not just embarrassing and absurd, it's dangerous!
Not only do these provisions fall short of the scientific standard; there is even less here than meets the eye. The bill, as described in briefings and press accounts, contains a number of loopholes, including provisions that (1) will give rather than sell greenhouse-gas-emissions permits to polluters, thus violating the "polluter pays" principle of environmental accounting, and (2) count so-called carbon offsets--that is, paying someone else to reduce emissions while continuing to emit oneself--as genuine reductions.
An alternative has been proposed by Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Bernard Sanders (I-VT), with a similar bill in the House being sponsored by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA). Their bills mandate the 80 percent reductions, on real terms, rather than with carbon offsets, and they make the polluters pay. Hertsgaard links to the World Resource Institute's comparison of these, and other, proposals.
Of course, only one of the bills is getting traction, on Congress.
According to sources speaking on background because of the confidential nature of the discussions, most Senate Democrats and many environmental and other public interest groups are preparing to support the Lieberman-Warner bill, despite misgivings about its shortcomings. .
While some in Congress apparently believe it is important to pass something, anything, environmental writer Bill McKibben disagrees. Since Bush is likely to veto even Warner-Lieberman, McKibben believes that even passing it will only serve to lower the bar, for the next Congress and the next president. It will make Warner-Lieberman appear to be the proper standard. Clearly, that would be unacceptable.
As McKibben explained to Hertsgaard, in a previous interview:
Since Bush is going to veto it anyway, there is no reason to make [a climate bill] less ambitious than what science requires. Climate change isn't like other issues. It doesn't do any good to split the difference to reach a deal everyone can live with. Climate change is about the laws of physics and chemistry, and they don't give.
We're all thrilled that Al Gore and the IPCC won the Nobel Peace Prize. It's time for us to help them leverage that prestige, by pressuring Congress to do what is right. Call your senators and congresspeople. Tell them that Warner-Lieberman is unacceptable, and that the only valid options are Boxer-Sanders and Waxman. We now have the political momentum. Let's not waste it!
|
|
Discuss
:: (27
Comments)
|
|
Fri Oct 12, 2007 at 22:29:01 PDT
|
I've been buzzing all day about Al Gore winning the Nobel prize!
I went to Google news and found he's been the Dominator today, but at the bottom I found Sri Chinmoy!
Al Gore / Nobel Prize 3,499 news articles
Obama v Clinton 344 news articles
Astronauts 1148
HIV drug 276
Armenia/Turkey Vote 2118
Putin v US / Nuclear treaty 1,350
Bhutto/Musharraf Powersharing 615
Latin American Free Trade 298
Sri Chinmoy Died 175
I have a tin box that I keep special things in and one of them is a little red heart pillow from Sri Chinmoy.
I got it from a Persian Sufi named Hossein Foruzani who got up to go for a 5 AM run along Lake Washington with Sri Chimnoy. I went to see Sri Chimnoy at Kane Hall, University of Washington. He was carried in on a pillow by his entourage, and played God-inspired flute and painted spontaneously.
 (inspired by Sri Chinmoy)
Forty-Six
My blue-red heart shall face ignorance-base,
My blue-red heart shall face.
My green-white life shall fly
in oneness-sky,
My green-white life shall fly.
Sri Chinmoy (divinely inspired poem)
I read about Sri Chimnoy in the New York Post, which if I'm not wrong is a tabloid, and also the New York Times.
More about the wierd Sri Chimnoy, from the New York Times:
. born in India
. used strenuous exercise and art to spread message of world harmony and inner piece
. died at a concert
. was able to power lift pickup trucks
. lifted Muhammad Ali and Sting
. said he drew 16 million "peace birds"
. slept only 90 minutes a day
. wrote 1500 books, 115,000 poems, 20,000 songs, 200,000 paintings, gave 800 peace concerts
. advocated seemingly impossible physical challenges
. was an inspiration for Olympic sprinter Carl Lewis
. was guru to John McLaughlin and Mahavishnu Orchestra (a name he came up with) as well as Roberta Flack!
. had more than 7000 disciples when he died
. came from Bangladesh to NYC and worked as a clerk at the Indian consulate
. swam the English channel
. ran a 3100 mile race every year
. began lifting weights after a knee injury and lifted schoolhouses, airplanes and pickup trucks
. He also lifted Jesse Jackson, Eddie Murphy, Susan Sarandon, Yoko Ono, Desmond Tutu and Richard Gere as well as 20 Nobel Laureates and a team of sumo wrestlers, not to mention Sid Caesar and a (reformed) headhunter from Bornea.
. He lifted a Democrat (Representative Gary Ackerman) and a Republican (Representative Benjamin Gilman) at the same time, possibly his most amazing feat.
. Condolence letters were sent by both Mikhail Gorbachev and Al Gore.
The Dark Side of Sri Chimnoy, from The New York Post:
. He was just a "creepy Queens guru"
. he ran a "cult"
. he cased "disturbing personality changes" in members
. he ordered dreamy-eyed female followers to engage in exploitive sexcapades
. he summoned them for extended sex romps
. he ordered them to have sex with other women while he watched
. he paid for one's abortion after he got her pregnant
. he was called "vindictive" by Carlos Santana, who jumped ship in 2000, and said, "He told all my friends not to call me ever again, because I was to drown in a dark sea of ignorance for leaving him."
. he brainwashed people, according to cult deprogrammer Rick Ross
. he had a disciple who drowned in his own bathtub trying to perfect a stunt to impress him for a circus
. he had followers who tried to get attention by breaking records such as for underwater juggling, piggyback riding and balancing a pool cue on one finger
. he airbrushed pictures to exaggerate his weight-lifting prowess, according to his former photographer
. He died while waiting to hear if he'd won the Nobel Peace Prize for his "ceaseless efforts" with the United Nations (Chinmoy led a meditation group at the U.N. building). He didn't.
 (photo by D. Grieser)
|
|
Discuss
:: (1
Comments)
|
|
Fri Oct 12, 2007 at 21:11:13 PDT
|
|
crossposted at Daily Kos and Truth & Progress
Earlier this evening, I watched Fox News' "All Star Panel" of talking heads. It included Fred Barnes, Mort Kondracke, and Nina Easton. The moderator, Brett Baier, highlighted some Fox poll which showed non-candidate Al Gore with about 10% support among Democratic voters, third behind Hillary and Obama. What's noteworthy is that the poll was taken on October 10, 2007 BNPP (Before the Nobel Peace Prize). But what really caught my attention was this insightful statement from Fred Barnes, who some of you may remember was once a liberal reporter for the Washington Star newspaper which went out of business in the early 1980's
"Al Gore has really debased the Nobel Peace Prize."
Which got me thinking. Are there other such examples of people really debasing their chosen professions and dishonoring respected institutions in recent history?
The answer below the fold.
|
|
There's More...
:: (15
Comments, 650 words in story)
|
|
Fri Oct 12, 2007 at 07:15:42 PDT
|
|
Crossposted at Daily Kos and Truth & Progress
Like most of you, my first thought this morning, when I opened my eyes, was "Did he win?" And I came straight here for the answer, only to find ecstatic confirmation in my first bleary glance at the Recommended list. Yes, friends, the dream is beginning to become true, thanks to him, and also thanks to all of you! This is a force 8 tremor on the political Richter scale. But until he announces, his "chances" of entering the race will be endlessly poo-poohed by every Beltway voice, from Right Wing pundits to establishment scribes claiming personal knowledge to unofficial spin easily traceable to the Hillary campaign (Dan Gerstein on Hardball last night, anyone?). But none of all that really matters.
|
|
There's More...
:: (38
Comments, 1018 words in story)
|
|
Thu Oct 11, 2007 at 06:00:00 PDT
|
|
According to the LiveScience.com story picked up by Yahoo!News, the website BetUS.com is taking bets as to who will win the Nobel Peace Prize. (LiveScience.com is a great website which I wholly recommend; BetUS.com is a subscription site I've never participated with.)
Al Gore is currently the favorite at 5:2.
Long shots paying at 100:1 right now include George W. Bush, Rush Limbaugh, and Tony Blair.
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 91 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reform Immigration -
March for America
Sunday, March 21
March on Washington
Saturday, March 20
|
