On “Coast to Coast” last week host George Noory received a call from a woman in Arizona who wanted to report a strange phenomenon in the sky. Clearly terrified, she reported that the moon appeared to be bright orange, and that it seemed to have been projected skyward from some mysterious location on earth, like the Batman signal. Not only that, but she had observed on certain days that parts of the moon seemed to be hidden, and even disappeared altogether. Could George explain these strange occurrences? Noory, apparently not wanting to create a precedent by suggesting that some of his listeners might be less than completely sane, dryly suggested that the reason why she did not see the moon in Arizona was because Los Angeles “has it.” The caller must have found the gumption to make this report after the previous caller informed Noory that repeating that “I command thee” line from “The Exorcist” was one-hundred percent guaranteed to make a demon leave your presence; when Noory asked him if it would work on Lucifer, the caller confessed that he would have the shakes if he was in the same room with Mr. Big, but was confident that the line would work on him, too.

I just mention this because even though Noory surely knew these people probably should be on medication, and in at least the case of the woman did not even attempt to educate her or equally baffled listeners on basic planetary and lunar science; it was more important to maintain the illusion of the paranormal than lose this particular audience by debunking crazy talk by alleged adults. So to in the case of right-wing talk radio do we hear we hear strange phenomenon passing for fact. I heard on Andrew “The Judge” Napolitano’s on his radio show stating that we should not do anything to fix the health care system, because it would require raising taxes, and we can’t do that (because he says so). When the token caller of obvious reason and intelligence tried to explain to him why he thought reform was needed as well as additional taxes, “the judge” talked over him, cut him off, and without allowing him to make any statement that would contradict his version of the case, “the judge” dismissed the witness who was still trying to talk. It was too dangerous to allow his core audience to be infected with the disease of intelligent discussion on the issues.

Taxes continue to be an issue where little intelligence or common sense is to be found on the right. The only people who actually pay all of their taxes are the ones on the lower-end of the wage scale, because they are the least likely to itemize their tax returns, rather relying solely on the standard deduction. Corporations and higher income “earners” pay much less on average than the official tax rate. The fact is we wouldn’t need to raise taxes if we closed the loopholes and the off-shore tax havens; the effect of raising the rate to even 50 percent for corporations and the wealthiest Americans (without closing the loopholes) would do little more than oblige these recalcitrants to pay what they are supposed to be paying to begin with. One of these recalcitrants, Boeing, was given billions in tax breaks to keep a few thousand assembly jobs for the 787 in Washington state; it has shown its “appreciation” for the state’s fiscal generosity by cutting thousands more jobs since then.

It always amazes me when right-wingers talk about “facts,” because to them “facts” are nothing more than a predetermined set value that conforms to a rather narrow worldview, which views “change” as anathema to order along “natural” lines. “Nature,” of course, doesn’t always conform with order; as we have seen recently, Republicans can’t seem to find “order” for something as presumably sacred as marital vows.

With that in mind, Lt. Col. Ralph Peters “grasp” of the “facts” can at least be said to be rather less than Thom’s. I wish Thom had not let him get away with accusing him of not knowing the “facts,” or least not giving sufficient answer to that accusation. It is the Pentagon itself that reported that 40,000 members of military were listed as “deserters” since 2000, half in the Army. Although most deserted while still in the States, we can fairly presume why they did it. And although it is true that in the past military suicide rates were less than comparable civilian rates, the military suicide rate has risen dramatically in the past five years; this past January, the Army reported a record number of suicides in 2008, at a rate of 20.2 per 100,000—equal to the civilian rate. Army life has a certain amount of stability that civilian existence lacks, but the instability caused by repeated tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken a terrible toll.

Obviously, Peters, a Cold War novelist as well as a “commentator,” has fiction on the brain. Typical for a man who never engaged in actual combat (he served in military intelligence), he seems particularly thirsty for the blood of foreign and American soldiers alike. In an article ten years ago, he opined that “The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep the world safe for our economy and open to our cultural assault. To those ends, we will do a fair amount of killing.” Although Peters now has grown sour on Bush’s adventure in Iraq and Afghanistan, he still cannot curb his lust for war as a matter of principle, recently insisting that “if you can’t win it (a war) clean, win it dirty.”

re: Benazir Bhutto said Osama bin Laden was killed by Omar Sheikh

My initial response, which I haven't changed, was that Bhutto misspoke and David Frost (who was interviewing her) either didn't catch it or let it go as a misstatement.

Bhutto only said it once. I don't know of any reputable confirmation of the statement (some people call it a claim).

It's also possible that Bhutto believed that Omar Sheikh killed bin Laden, but then we don't know where she got her information from.

I think Bhutto probably meant to say that Omar Sheikh killed Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, a crime he confessed to and was convicted of in 2002. I did a little searching on the web and found that I’m not alone in saying that she probably meant to say Omar Sheikh killed Daniel Pearl. It was a well known case.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed later confessed to killing Pearl, but that was under torture. KSM confessed to almost everything including crushing my favorite cookies after he was tortured. (I do admit that I found my cookies were crushed.)

I often feel that we on the left, just like those on the right, have a tendency to jump to conclusions with very little verifying information; sometimes with none.

We also have a tendency to forget that people sometimes say something other than what they mean to say. We all do it. Sometimes we catch our misstatement and sometimes we don’t. Some right wingers love to point out that Barack Obama once said that he visited 57 states during the primaries. They ask how he can President if he doesn’t know how many states there are. Do you think he doesn’t know how many states there are? Isn’t it more likely that he misspoke rather than he doesn’t know how many states there are? If you’ve seen the clip, you see him pause after saying 50, and then he says 7 “with one more to go.” Don’t you think he meant to say 47 states with one more to go meaning the 48 contiguous states of the United States?

When we misspeak, we can understand that we made a mistake. When others misspeak, it might not even occur to us that that’s what happened, especially if the misstatement supports a line of thinking we hold. If the possibility that it was a misstatement is pointed out to us, we often reject it if we are emotionally committed to the implications the statement would have if true.

We have to try to keep our minds open. We have more than enough verifiable evidence to support the basis of our progressive views.

L. Grace,

I think you were responding to my post about the caller who said "your boy" rather than to something Richard wrote. I have searched this page over and over for "your boy" in Richard's comments and can't find it.

You're right that calling a black man "boy" is a long standing put down. If the caller had said, "that boy" I would have agreed with you. But "your boy" is a common catch phrase in American culture and it just means that you're asserting some kind of relationship between two people. The fact is, that "your boy" and "my boy" are used a lot in the black community.

In my experience, boy isn't used that much in reference to black men any more. When it is, it's used directly to them as a put down or it's used as "that boy". On the other hand, the phrase "white boy" is frequently used by people on the left (Mike Malloy, for example) and often as a put down.

I can't read the caller's mind. He may very well have racist feelings. But hearing the term "your boy" in the context we heard it doesn't give me enough information to accuse the caller of being a racist.

"Your boy" has a specific cultural meaning that is without racial connotation and the caller might have used it had John Edwards been president.

OK, flame me for it ... but I sometimes like Medved. I can't explain it but I can handle his arrogance.

But this Peters guy was just plain rude.

col Peters uses the same style that other right wing talkers use they try to talk down to you. just like medved does they try to show that you are angry

Check out this wiki entry on Ralph Peters
- - -
In a 2009 article for The Journal of International Security Affairs titled "Wishful Thinking and Indecisive Wars" [7] Peters' advocates the ruthless use of United States military power, declaring "If you cannot win clean, win dirty." Peters' also raises the controversial possibility of directing the United States military to attack journalists. Peters writes, "Although it seems unthinkable now, future wars may require censorship, news blackouts and, ultimately, military attacks on the partisan media."
- - - -
Of course, the usual caution with wikis should be considered but this guy seems like creepy dude.

Brian,

Yikes!

What a horrible interviewee!

I think this is the guy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Peters

He only made it to Lt. Colonel which, in my observation, is just high enough for military guys to THINK they are military experts.

I hate it when callers say, "Have you spent any time with soldiers? Then you should have no opinion" (or its variant, "Where you in the military?")

I know several Iraq vets and they are ALL against the war. But you don't need to be in the military to spot a bogus war.

BTW, this guy is very rude.

Richard,

Well, I have to credit you for being kind to that caller. Magnanimity is a virtue and I hope you are right about him. But I doubt it.

But we all know that calling African American men "boys" is a long standing racist put down.

The American government was specifically designed to provide a framework for and regulate business. Alexander Hamilton designed our nation’s manufacturing policy in 1791 and Congress adopted it the very next year. The program was designed to adequately fund America’s operations and almost immediately certain groups began working to disassemble it. In the last third of the 1800s and over the last thirty years, it was been completely disassembled largely through actions traceable to one political party and moneyed corporate interests. The process involved creating an economic system that finances government almost wholly upon labor rather than upon finance as the system was originally designed to be funded.

Additionally, the American government was specifically designed to provide a framework to allow folk, through collective action, to protect their rights and provide for their protection and welfare. As it was with the framers, my fundamental belief that life is a right retained to the owners of our government and it is solely the providence of those who own the right. As there is no life without health and health sources life, I include health and the care of health, individually and collectively, as a duty of the government. As I am responsible for my health, I will do as I see fit to protect it. The government, also, owes all of us a duty to mitigate harm to this most fundamental right ESPECIALLY harms due to its specific action or inaction.

Abraham Lincoln was absolutely correct in his First Annual Message to Congress (December 3, 1861) that: “Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." It is, also, important to note that labor flows directly from the life and health of the laborer. Every human desires the opportunity to work and succeed at work and reap the rewards of their labor. You deserve to work. This is not charity. There is more than enough work to fully employ you at a wage sufficient to your needs. Unfortunately the very same governmental action that destroyed our nation’s economic condition, damaged our healthcare system and limits your personal opportunity to contribute to your families support and our nation’s economy.

Finally and frankly, my god is a transcendent god and leaves the world of humans to the humans. It is our job, duty and obligation to manage our world to the best of our ability. Failure to do so is our personal failure in our responsibility to ourselves and our fellow humans. The single most effective and efficient thing we can do is control our government and direct it to our will.

the racist caller calling president Obama Thom's boy is an idiot . he will follow the right even when the right can care less for the middle class and poor he is blinded by his racism the folly people show in their lives. wake up white racist America,you are working against yourselves because of your hatred