That the advice often given in writing workshop: Write what you are afraid of. It is good advice because it allows you to get past your own fears and figure out what your truth is. It's hard to do, too. Follow me below the fold for a reflection on how to discuss what scares us collectively.

Validating my endorsement of his candidacy, Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich has both raised over 1 million dollars in the last quarter, possibly outraising the ethically challenged Senator Ted Stevens, but he has chosen to disclose every single one of his contributions, even the small-dollar ones (under $200) that don't require disclosure.

This isn't just disclosing it to the press - he's placed his FEC filing on the web, so anyone can go look at what he has done in this campaign.  And while you're at it, one can also look at his financial disclosures, showing exactly where his income and assets come from.

Very smart move, and a good faith effort at showing how the ethics of campaign finance really should be handled.

So, go ahead.  Donate to Mark Begich and any one else on my list for 2008.

Oh, and if you're wondering, my $15 donation to Mayor Begich appears on page 1,628 of the 2,163 page report.  I'm probably going to add to that later today.

In the introduction to The Ethics of Climate Change: Right and Wrong in a Warming World, James Garvey, Secretary of the Royal Institute of Philosophy (given that title you might expect him to be a white-haired old duffer, but in his photo he appears quite young, perhaps around 30] explains his motivation for writing it:

Science can give us a grip on the facts, but we need more than that if we want to act on the basis of those facts. The something more which is needed involves values. Climatologists can tell us what is happening to the planet and why it is happening, they can even say with some confidence what will happen in the years to come.  What we do about all of this, though, depends on what we think is right, what we value, what matters to us.  You can not find that sort of stuff in an ice core.  You have to think your way through it.

"Any of us could be the man who encounters his double." -- Friedrich Durrenmat (1)

Jane Mayer's new book, The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals (not due out in the bookstores until tomorrow), is already creating headlines and generating controversy. This article will examine the issues around U.S. torture practice, in light of new allegations in the book, and review an email conversation between myself and a prominent nationally-known psychologist whom Mayer says assisted in the planning of U.S. government torture.

Mindfulness meditation can provide a practical tool for busy legal professionals to quiet the mind, enhance clarity and professional effectiveness, and restore a more peaceful balance to their lives. This program will include meditation instruction and practice, and will explore the interplay between contemplative and legal practices and the role meditation can play in the professional and personal lives of lawyers, judges, law professors, law students, and other legal professionals. There will be periods of silent meditation, lectures, and group discussions concerning skills training and the ethical practice of law..

The Center for Contemplative in Society has offered retreats for legal professionals for ten years, offering annual retreats in California since 2004. We are pleased to return to the East Coast to present this special program.

This retreat is co-sponsored by the City University of New York School of Law.

September 11-14, 2008
(Thursday evening through Sunday afternoon)
Menla Mountain Center, Phoenicia, NY
4 hours of MCLE Credits

America, the only land where you can one week tell the country you will not under any circumstances sell, and then the next week, having held out for more money, DO IT!  Who am I kidding this is just corporate economics at its finest!

To the makers of Budweiser I say take down your commercials where to stake the reputation of your brand on heritage, tradition, and family ownership.

Are we at the point where all is fair in politics and you throw the kitchen sink at your opponent? Or are there certain lines we shouldn't cross when it comes to impugning your opponents character?

Let's cut to the chase:
McCain's personal life is garnering a share of the spotlight lately. If you are so inclined, you can read about it here.

So, here are the questions:

Do his personal peccadilloes directly effect his ability to serve in an elected capacity?

Or are they acceptable fodder for taking down an opponent?

Does it speak to character, or is it character assassination?

As liberals, we take pride in not only being the antithesis to the right wing, but we like to think of ourselves as better than our conservative counterparts. We value truth, compassion, and intellect. We believe in the right to an opinion and the freedom to express it. We revile the typical right win smear machine and their propaganda tactics. All in all we have a fairly noble view of ourselves.

But is it true?

Could it be that we are just the yin to their yang? Is it possible that we are not the better half, but just the other half? Is the blogosphere of the left just the liberal equivalence to the conservative propaganda machine? I believe the answer is no, we are better than that. But that doesn’t mean we don’t have to guard against our baser instincts and the temptation to fight fire with fire.

Today, Senator Obama spoke about his plan to bring money to faith-based programs. And while there is no doubt that many of these programs work and Obama would do a much more even-handed job of getting them money than Bush ever did, he also talked about faith and our obligations to help others. In that regard, Obama has set standards for himself to follow.

With all the recent distress over a couple of not-completely-progressive stances -- and the requisite not-more-more-dime comments, it's probably a good idea to step back for a moment for some perspective:

Barack Obama will be the most progressive president in the history of our great nations.

I'm not here to get into historical disputes about why, given the times, FDR or JFK or whoever may prove more progressive.  My point is that, on issue after issue, Obama will be the most progressive than any President before him.  By a long shot.

We know he's going to end the war in Iraq, restore habeas, reduce the influence of lobbyists, close Gitmo, engage in tough diplomacy with our enemies, appoint progressive judges, etc.  But this just scratches the surface.  Just a quick trip through some of Obama's issues pages reveals the breadth of progressive change that he wants to bring to American

Not everyone will read Dreams From my Father before they vote in November. But what if they could?

What if people who simply aren't inclined to buy the book, or who simply aren't readers, received the audiobook for free?

It's possible now, through BitTorrent, where anyone inclined to download it already can. But I'm interested in what people think about sharing the link to promote Obama's candidacy.

back in 1996, according to Elliot D. Cohen in a guest column at Buzzflash. And even though there were several eyewitnesses and numerous complaints to the Senate Ethics Committee, it was never investigated.

Fitting considering a conversation I just had the other day with a life-long Republican (he even served in the Ford administration). He said he was embarrassed for his party this year. Why? Because he's worked with McCain on several occassions and told me that everything you've heard about his temper is accurate. He told me that McCain should never set foot in the oval office.

Minority Leader John Boehner, the guy we all love around here. He supported pollution of the Earth, stood with the GOP House Caucus when Foley did bad, and supported sweatshop labor in his own country. What a lovable guy.

And today he supports immunity for illegal wiretapping.

But John Boehner didn't when he got wiretapped, and he believed in a right to sue. And did file lawsuit.

Lets flashback 10 years to 1998.

Is "stealing" for the sake of ideology justified in 'any' sense?

Most of us of any ideology would agree Robin Hood (or Zorro) was -- and is -- a Hero.

Are the students who boast about stealing from "non-unionized" stores justfied in that sense?

Is this a natural outgrowth of socialism, or misguided liberalism. What?

I couldn't believe what I was reading,kos.  The National Press Club is going to give a criminal, a character assisinator access to their stage on 18 June to smear a serving US Senator, and candidate for the Presidency of the United States, Senator Barack Obama?!  

THE National Press Club, are you kidding me?!  Deplorable.  My open letter as attached to the petition to rescind the invitation follows.

1330h 13 June Added > Colorado Warrant Link for Larry Sinclair.

The Republican party has been courting the Christian vote with their endless efforts to overturn Roe vs. Wade because some Christians believe life begins at conception, and therefore, abortion violates the commandment, "Thou Shalt Not Kill". Christians want to protect the souls of woman that get pregnant, but do not want the child, from eternal damnation. While I don’t personally believe that a loving god would send anyone to hell, this article isn’t about Christian theology. I also don’t really want to make this article about when life begins, nor do I want to debate if the woman’s right to choose should supercede the fetus’ right to life.  This article is instead intended to show that the Republicans are using Christians like pawns for their own political gain. That indeed, the Conservative movement is morally bankrupt.

Kudos to Senator Clinton for her most eloquent endorsement of Senator Obama, but I think there's a certain degree of the metaphorical Emperor's New Clothes going on here.  Don't get me wrong, I know we'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt and the ability to revive her image, but do not forget that Senator Clinton gave only one classy, inspiring speech out of a thousand that were dry, dull, unimaginative, and more than a few that were offensive to the her opponent, the party itself, and the American people.  That this speech happened to be her final official act and a marked change from her previous conduct in a grueling campaign should not supersede her previous acts.

Before anyone can label me as sexist, in saying this, let it be known that there are any number of female Senators, Representative, Governors, and elected representatives who I would gladly give my vote to if they ran for President.  

We all make mistakes. We ALL make predictions that wash out. No harm, no foul - just step up and admit it.

Jerome, it's time to eat your shoes.