Watch Steph and friends do a wicked send-up of Bewitched. See it hear:
Stephanie as Edith Ann
Stephie Junior & Steph Senior (Steph's Mom)
If you are completely bored on this Saturday morning, why not do what I just did - waste 9 minutes and 40 seconds of your precious life watching this fascinating profile of Stephanie Miller circa 1998. It shows Stephanie when she did the drive-time show for KABC in Los Angeles. Yes Jim and Chris were part of the team back then, but Chris was apparently not an on-air executive producer, rather Steph had Faith Beth Lamont as her sidekick. If you really have nothing better to do - check out this video profile. Enjoy.
Judge Says Woman Must Be Paid Damages Based on 1868 Sioux Treaty
Stephanie appeared on Reliable Sources with Howard Kurtz on Sunday. March 15, 2009.
Rachel Maddow Joins the Women of The View
That would be Lt. Governor Mark Parkinson - the person who will succeed Governor Kathleen Sebelius as the next governor of Kansas. He is a Democrat, but you wouldn't know that by reading his biography on the Kansas government web site. In fact, his name was never mentioned in any report that I read today announcing Sebelius's nomination for the head of the Department of Health and Human Services. I had to do some hunting to discover the rules of succession in Kansas when a sitting governor vacates her seat, mid-term.
"It has a strong flavor of the Obama philosophy, which is tilting the playing field away from upper income and toward the rest of America,"
It is Sunday morning and I have braced myself in front of the TeeVee and am set to watch Grampy McSame as he tries, insanely in my humble opinion, to tear down Obama's Jobs Bill (AKA, Stimulus Package). He begins by claiming again to represent the people of Arizona (if you are being represented by John McCain, you must be either his wife or a member of her Country Club). He begins by criticizing the TARP - the scheme that he suspended his campaign to return to Washington D.C. to vote for. And the very same scheme that Bush/Cheney told Americans MUST be passed immediately or we would face very dire consequences. But now "[t]he current G.O.P. acts as if it -- and we -- have all the time in the world....If anything, the Republican Congressional leadership seems to be emulating John McCain's September stunt of ''suspending'' his campaign to ''fix'' the Wall Street meltdown. For all his bluster, McCain in the end had no fixes to offer and sat like a pet rock at the White House meeting on the crisis before capitulating to the bailout. His imitators likewise posture in public about their determination to take action, then do nothing while more and more Americans cry for help." (Frank Rich, NYTimes, February 1, 2009). Grampy knows that America is hurting and that we need jobs. McSame apparently objects to spending money when Democrats suggest that we spend money, NOT when Republicans suggest (it is their only suggestion) "tax cuts." Bob Schieffer mentions the timing issue - we need to do something, even if it's wrong. To this McSame falls back on the "this is not bi-partisan - it is just picking off a couple republicans." Schieffer asks the time-honored question "what is it you guys want?" McSame keeps harping on the fact that republicans have not been included in the drafting of the legislation, he never answered the question about what it would take to get him and other rethugs to vote for the damn bill.
Okay, okay, I understand that my role in the Obama Administration amounts to nothing more than a random, midnight blogger who is engaged in sending suggestions to Obama and his Cabinet Members, Congress people and other assorted colleagues. Just a few ideas of topics that I think that Obama should be paying attention to on the news front: 1) JOBS; 2) Afghanistan (I think that your hunch is correct - this will be the next place to blow); 3) Health Care; 4) Did I mention that people need JOBS? [As Thom Hartman says, "Why aren't we calling the Stimulus Bill, the Jobs Creation Bill or more simply, 'THE JOBS BILL'?"] I say, strip the bill down to the essential INFRASTRUCTURE JOBS that will put people to work ASAP: building bridges, upgrading schools, fixing roads, DOING THINGS that will not only put unemployed people to work, but will also result in good, tangible things that will benefit us all. Is it any wonder that the Republicans are reluctant to get behind this package? All the right-wing side of the aisle can seem to do is say an emphatic, "No!" Obama and his Democratic friends can always go back and float a "Tax-cut bill" sometime in the future - I don't think that those of us who voted for Obama expect him to fulfill all of his campaign promises in one sweeping piece of legislation.If people don't have jobs (i.e. a paycheck coming in on a regular basis), then they can't pay their mortgage or their bills, or buy food and gasoline, let alone Plasma TVs or even rent DVDs. So all the talk from the right-wing blowholes about addressing the home foreclosure situation is putting the cart before the horse - in other words, people need to WORK, so that they can pay their mortgages, or save enough to put a reasonable down payment on a house, and have income to make those payments each month once they qualify for a home loan.
Here a few ideas for making the "Jobs Bill" more effective and ready to go (from an e-mail that I received from CREDO):
--Get rid of a $2 billion provision for "clean coal" plants. Instead, invest this money in green infrastructure and alternative energy development.
--Invest in infrastructure, not tax cuts. Don't reward businesses that got us into this mess with tax cuts that won't create new jobs in the future.
--Reinstate the Medicaid Family Planning State Option. Funding state health care programs for women will protect jobs of health care workers and make sure women living in or on the edge of poverty get the care they need.
--Include meaningful bankruptcy reform. Bankruptcy judges should regain the ability to restructure mortgages (that is, lower the amount owed and the interest rate, reflecting the lower value of the house) so that borrowers can stay in their homes. Don't give Verizon $1.6 billion in tax cuts without generating a single new job. Money originally earmarked to encourage companies to bring high speed Internet to under served low-income and rural communities has turned into a billion dollar giveaway to big telecoms.
After two unexpected days off due to the slice (combination of sleet and ice, AKA freezing rain) that fell all day yesterday and is still on the ground today in Tulsa (and closed the University where I work), I decided it would be okay if I posted a second entry to my blog this week. It gave me a chance to listen to Stephanie Miller without interruption, and also gave me an opportunity to peruse the newly retooled web site of the Stephanie Miller Show, and set up my StephSpace page.
This unexpected break also provided me with a chance to blog about something that was reported on Monday that I would like to point out and on which I would like to congratulate the people of Bolivia: the successful installment of their new Constitution. The new Constitution of Bolivia seeks to de-colonize a country that has been occupied by people of European ancestry and whose Constitution served those European descendants (a minority of the population) for over four hundred years.
Key elements of proposed new Bolivian constitution
By the Associated Press – Sun Jan 25, 10:47 am ET
Key elements of the new constitution proposed by Bolivian President Evo Morales:
RE-ELECTION — Presidents can serve two consecutive five-year terms. Current constitution permits two terms, but not consecutive. Morales could thus remain in office through 2014.
INDIGENOUS RIGHTS — Recognizes self-determination of 36 distinct Indian "nations." Sets aside seats in Congress for minority indigenous groups but not for the Aymara and Quechua, who together represent the majority in Bolivia's western highlands.
LAND — Voters decide in the referendum whether future land ownership should be capped at 12,000 or 24,000 acres (5,000 or 10,000 hectares). Current holdings are grandfathered in. The state can seize land that doesn't perform a "social function" or was fraudulently obtained.
JUSTICE — Judges on Bolivia's highest court are elected rather than appointed by the president as current law provides. The state recognizes indigenous groups' practice of "community justice" based on traditional customs.
LOCAL AUTONOMY — Eastern lowland provinces are allowed to create state assemblies that control local issues, but not land reform or natural gas revenues. Indigenous groups are granted self-rule on traditional lands inside existing states. All autonomies have "equal rank."
NATURAL RESOURCES — The state controls all mineral and oil and gas reserves. Indigenous groups get control of all renewable resources on their land. Water is a fundamental human right that may not be controlled by private companies.
RELIGION — Both the Christian God and Pachamama, the Andean earth deity, are honored. Church and state are separate. Freedom of religion is guaranteed, and no mention is made of The Roman Catholic Church, a departure from the current constitution.
PRESS FREEDOM — Is guaranteed, though news media must "respect the principles of truth and responsibility."
HOMOSEXUALITY — Prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation but refers to marriage as "between a man and a woman."
Here it the full-text of the Constitucion Nueva del Estado Bolivia.
With the simple declarative sentence, "I won," President Barack Obama left no doubt who is now in charge of the show in Washington D.C. Elections have consequences was a remark made by John McCain during a debate in October of 2008. In a recent search on Westlaw the earliest record of this remark was in 1987 by Rep. Dick Gephart who said at a campaign stop at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa "In America, elections have consequences. If you voted for Ronald Reagan, you voted against your student loans. When you vote, you are not just voting for a candidate or a smile or a television commercial. You are voting for policies that affect your life. I'm not important. What is important is that you get involved. Get out and fight for somebody. Get involved in this election."
Obama's inaugural speech - CNN.com
I, along with millions of other Americans, am captivated by the historic moment that we have before us. The inauguration of the first president of color will take place in just two days. The expectations are incredibly high and these expectations have the hint of a set up, not just from the usual suspects - the right wing zealots who are waiting in the wings to knock this annointed man off his pedestal, but from more unexpected corners - namely those old Hillary supporters who have decided that since their candidate is not taking the oath of office, they are digging in their flats (sensible shoes ;), and choosing not to celebrate this astounding moment in our nation's history. It is such a shame that those who call themselves yellow dog Democrats will not be there to enjoy the fruits of the labor of millions of heretofore like-minded people. I wonder if those Democrats who have little positive to say about Obama, are not guilty of applying the phrase that Voltaire coined over 200 years ago. Are they making the perfect the enemy of the good? And by that I am NOT suggesting that Hillary Clinton was or is a perfect candidate. In fact, she was far from perfect. She mismanaged her money, her campaign staff and her entire campaign. You may wonder why I am fixated on Hillary Clinton, because she has obviously moved on. Then why, oh why, haven't her fans/groupies moved on, too? I don't know how many of you are out there, but I know that some of you who live within a Metro ride of the Mall in DC, are choosing not to bother to go down to see the historic occasion of the swearing in of the 44th president of the U.S.
2009 marks 150 years since the publication of Darwin's On The Origin of Species, and the 400th anniversary of Galileo's first use of a telescope to study the skies. M. Lee Allison, the state geologist of Arizona and director of the Arizona Geological Survey, is an organizer of a "Year of Science 2009," a celebration of scientific methods and discoveries.
From NPR's Talk of the Nation, January 2, 2009
As we bid a very fond adieu to the Bush/Cheney Head-Under-a-Bucket Club, and as we welcome in the Obama/Biden Science Club, we receive the added benefit of a renewed emphasis on real science, not the faux science of "abstinence only" sex education or "intelligent design" taught in lieu of evolution. We also welcome the roll-back of such ridiculous rules and regulations as 45 CFR Part 88 Ensuring That Department of Health and Human Services Funds Do Not Support Coercive or Discriminatory Policies or Practices in Violation of Federal Law; Final Rule [AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. ACTION: Final rule]. In summary, this rule allows every employee, from the receptionist who makes appointments to the physician overseeing an entire clinic to the pharmacist who fills prescriptions, to refuse to provide health care to a patient (9 times out of 10, a woman) to which they may have moral or religious objections. This includes many methods of birth control, including IUDs or the RU486 (the morning after pill) or any form of birth control if the patient cannot prove that she is married, never mind abortion which is the ultimate target of this onerous rule. Thankfully the Obama team has been keeping an eye on many of these last minute rules enacted by the Bush/Cheney administration and has plans to reverse them as soon as possible.
From global warming to reproductive rights to actual science being taught in schools, we can all look forward to a resurgence of real science returning to our lives. And I propose that it is not a moment too soon as states across the nation seek to inject "intelligent design" and "religious freedom" into school curriculum. For example, the "Religious Viewpoints Anti-Discrimination Act" a dangerous bill that was reintroduced by the now Republican-controlled legislature in Oklahoma is a case in point. All sound-minded Oklahomans are hoping that the replay of this horrible bill will meet the same fate as its first incarnation, that being a veto by Governor Henry. Lest you shrug off this as an anomaly unique to the reddest of the red states, please keep in mind that similar legislation has already passed in Texas. Louisiana, Mississippi, and Kentucky are all considering similar legislation. Furthering the assault on the separation of church and state is the ongoing "intelligent design controversy" a controversy only because some lame-brained zealots have confused science with religion. "Intelligent design" is nothing more than repackaged "creationism" and the insistence by the religious right that it be taught alongside evolution (a scientific tenet) makes a mockery of science education.
The above-mentioned examples are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg when it comes to the assault on science by the Bush/Cheney crime family. The blatant disregard for science can be found in the administration of the CDC (Center for Disease Control), OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration), EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). See An Assault on Public Protections: Regulatory Policy News in 2008 over at OMB Watch. I have barely touched on the foot-dragging for which the Bush administration has been responsible in the area of Global Warming. See US climate scientists pressured on climate change, 31 January 2007 by New Scientist Environment and Reuters
"We've developed this politicization of science. Public affairs offices should be staffed by professionals, not political appointees, or they become offices of propaganda. I shouldn't be required to parrot some company line. I should give the best information I have."
Dr. James Hansen, Head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, Part of The Earth Institute at Columbia University as quoted in House Panel Investigates Bush's Climate Science Manipulations
See: Politics and the Erosion of Federal Scientific Capacity: Restoring Scientific Integrity to Public Health Science This Article published in November 2007, Vol 97, No. 11 of the American Journal of Public Health 1939-1944 © 2007 American Public Health Association
COMMENTARY by Kathleen M. Rest, PhD, MPA and Michael H. Halpern, BA who are with the Union of Concerned Scientists, Cambridge, Mass.
See the review of the book The Republican War on Science By Chris Mooney.
For more evidence that the manipulation of scientific information in a variety of agencies has hampered our progress as a nation, see: Bush’s Agencies Of Mass Politicization.
Check out the National Center for Science Education: NCSE, a not-for-profit, membership organization providing information and resources for schools, parents and concerned citizens working to keep evolution in public school science education.
Post Script: If the president feels that it is incumbent on his administration to relieve those who object to normal portions of their job because of religious or moral concerns, then I have a serious question for him: I object to war and the senseless killing of innocent civilians on both moral and religious grounds, so following the logic of the Bush/Cheney administration, why should I have to pay for those actions that run so counter so to every fiber of my moral being? I don't expect an answer to this question, but I believe it is a legitimate question and one that I wish the current administration had considered when they came up with this ridiculous and dangerous rule.
A Few New Year's Resolutions Suggested for the Stephanie Miller Show Crew:
Well, you should all have recovered from your hang-overs by now and just about had your fill of college football (not yet? really, you need to get out more, imho :). My number one resolution this year is to blog less and live more. I am cutting way back on my cable TV subscription (No more MSNBC - buh-bye Rachel, and no more "Intervention"). So this is a fair warning to those of you who read this blog, there will be fewer postings in 2009, fewer rants and less raving about the political scene. This has little to do with the fact that this blogger expects to have much less to rant and rave on about under the Obama administration, although I fully expect that to be the case. Rather it is based on a determination that I am spending too much time in front of my computer. I have virtually quit reading books, except for the excruciatingly long waits in my doctors' offices.
