who dare to criticiae Israel or the Jews.  The other day it was the sainted Dhonig.  Today it's the blessed Nonpartisan.  Bigots all, in the land of Daily Kos.  I won't regret never seeing any of you at Daily Kos again.
You should have let those two bigots roll into oblivion.  Instead you uprated them.  So the warmongering goes on, led by the "Jews are never at fault for anything" cheerleaders, led by the Democrats, even by the socalled progressive Democrats.

copyright paul kane 2007 all rights reserved

------------------------------------------------------

It's something to ponder:  both the President and the Vice President insist that who consults with them as they make the decisions that affect all of us, is NONE OF OUR BUSINESS!

http://www.azstarnet.com/...

Now THAT alone is pretty startling, isn't it?  But here's the kicker:

in 1974, the man who was (arguably) the greatest architect of the 20th century died in a men's room in Penn Station.  His body lay unclaimed for three days in the morgue. 

Anyone who has been to Penn Station in New York City (ie half of America) must understand the sheer grotesque irony of that.  There cannot be a more irreverent, or even profane, place for an architect to die.  Not only does Penn Station defy any thought of architecture as an important human need, which makes it the ultimate abomination from the architectural point of view, but it is a desecration too, in that one of the most marvelous buildings ever built in New York City, Old  Penn station, was razed to make way for it.

For this picture of Old Penn Station, please to to Progressive Historians:

http://www.progressivehistorians.com...

http://www.nyc-archi...

http://www.imdb.com/...

Slowly - I think - the Progressive Community is learning to challenge right wing framing.  More and more, I think we all see that it's important not to call the "Estate Tax" a "Death Tax", for example.  Some frames we argue about, such as whether the violence in Iraq should be called the "Iraq War", the "Iraq Civil War" or the "Iraq Occupation" (I think we should call it either a civil war or an occupation, because to call it simply a war dignifies what was - in my opinion - a lawless and reckless invasion).

But there is one Frame that really sticks in my craw and that I think is far too widely accepted:  the idea that staff appointed, hired and administered by the Executive Branch serve "at the pleasure of the President."

Or, should I say, Pope Benedict?

For a while, being a Catholic,  I tried to get myself to call Ratzinger by the name he chose,  Pope Benedict.  But I've given up on it.  He's not a Pope to me anymore than Bush is a President to me.

Re. Bush:  not only did Bush lose the popular election in 2000, but he was (in my opinion) selected by the Supreme Court, effectively, when they stopped the Florida recount, and I regard that as illegal.  So does the Supreme Court!  They themselves stated that their decision on Bush v. Gore was not to be used as precedent!  That's the same as admitting that it was a bogus decision.

So what about Ratzinger?

When Lamont defeated Lieberman in the primary last year, I was elated.  I thought it marked a sea change in American politics.  And I'm still not at all convinced that it doesn't.  

When Lieberman ran as an Independent anyway, I thought the voters would reject the transparent willfulness of that move and elect Lamont.  When Lieberman won, easily, I told myself that it was an anomaly.  It was the pork power of the incumbent that the electorate couldn't resist.  And very likely, that was a lot of it.

But I'm now beginning to think that Lieberman, not suprisingly, I guess, had his finger on the American political pulse a lot better than I did.  And now maybe I'm getting the picture.

copyright paul kane 2007 all rights reserved

This picture was inspired by Dr. Doolittle's Pushmepullyou; however, I'm afraid it looks more like a Perot-saurus!

I find the idea of a Creation Museum historically interesting.  Anyone remember the Cardiff Giant?

In her biography of Scott Joplin, Dancing to a Black Man's Tune, Susan Curtis says:

power in society is maintained not only ...  through sheer force, but also through the construction of widely shared beliefs, codes and ideals that inscribe desired behavior that benefits those in power.  ...  Thus, the arena of culture is anything but nuetral and, in fact, represents one of the key locations for contest and debate that result in historical shifts.

For many artists, their role in culture entails creative, ethical and spiritual dilemmas.  While  some artists  undoubtedly never consider doing anything other than confirming hegemonic power (folks like John Wayne and Ronald Reagan come to mind, though ironically - or tellingly - even such artists have presented themselves as 'mavericks'),  I think that most artists  feel some  need to reform, or transform, society.  They create, at least in part, because they want to project their sense of what could be, or should be, for others to see or hear. 

copyright paul kane 2007 all rights reserved

Dems:  "How bad can it be?"

with their backs to the sun...they see only their shadows.

What is the sunlight to them, but a caster of shadows?

... all things move in half embrace; the desired and the dreaded, the repugnant and the cherished, the pursued and that which they would escape...

But you who walk facing the Sun, what can hold you?"

(very loosely quoted from Kahlil Gibran, The Prophet)

copyright paul kane 2007 all rights reserved

If you asked ten people "what was the key transitional moment in recent history", you would surely get ten different answers.  For me, it was the transition from Carter to Reagan, because of the different visions of community that they expressed/represented.  Reagan called his age of misrule  "Morning in America", But I see it as a time when America turned its back on the Sun, by which I mean,  faith in Community.

copyright paul kane 2007 all rights reserved

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I couldn't restrain the dark fascination yesterday:  I took a look at the Presidential site for speeches and such.  

I saw that W gave a commencement speech recently at Saint Vincent college.   I'm a Catholic.  I HAD to look at it.  My heart sank, though, to see it.  I guess if there's one thing the average Catholic hierarch can't resist, it's an opportunity to bestow honor upon the Author (Decider) of the Iraq Meatgrinder.   How they reconcile that with Catholic Just War theory...?  

Anyway, I looked at W's speech.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/...

design by Storm Bear

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Empire's folly:

copyright paul kane 2007 all rights reserved

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Although I do find inspiration in religious imagery, I don't think of this as specifically a religious image, despite its obvious Christian Crucifixion association.  One of the interesting things about most Christian images of the Crucifixion is that they are above all hierarchical.  I wanted to show the crucified one surrounded by fellow human beings, separated from him only by their uniform dress, possibly armor.

copyright paul kane 2007 all rights reserved

A nostalgic homage to Slim Pickens!

http://en.wikipedia.org/...

I used to be amazed that we can't just take the Constitution for granted in America today.   I was shocked to find out that many people seem to  view the Constitution as a recipe for making thier own favorite Society-cake.  They'd like to add and subtract ingredients, as they wish, if they can get enough folks to go along with them.  Fewer gays.  No right to privacy.  Lots of power for certain religious views.  Some people want to make the Society-cake an English speaking cake. There are a powerful few who want to make the cake a corporate cake, or a military/industrial cake, an imperial cake.  A lot of folks want the cake to be a religious cake.  

I think such cake makers know that they can't get what they want through amendments, so they try to stuff the court system with folks sharing their group-think.  They even seem to have the court system pretty well in hand, at this point.

So now I understand that the Constitution has to be fought for, and lost, or won, each and every generation.

Not too long ago, Petraeus said  something about Washington and Baghdad working on different senses of time.  On one level, I could understand that comment.  Many years ago, I spent a few days on  Navajo Reservation.  One of the things about that experience that struck me the most was that my inlaws seem to think about time differently.  For example, when we made plans to do something the "next day", we started out not at a specific time, but whenever folks showed up.  I don't know if that's how the Res was in general, or just how my inlaws were, but it was different from what I was used to growing up.

I thought about that old Midnight Oil song recently (here's a good video of it:  http://www.youtube.c...  ) and I felt compelled to make a drawing.  It seems to me that the smoke around us is becoming more and more acrid, but we continue on in dreamland.

copyright paul kane 2007  all rights reserved

I thought of these words by Emily Dickinson too:

The Whole of it came not at once-

'Twas Murder by degrees-

from The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson.

copyright paul kane 2007 all rights reserved

Vision of the future?

copyright paul kane 2007 all rights reserved