DetestaBible Use!

I was prepared to discuss another topic for my next blog entry, but this one caught my eye. I wanted to address the death of little Shaniya Davis, the little missing girl that was recently found dead along a stretch of road.

I'm thinking of other little black girls, the First Children, Sasha and Malia. It seems that the enterprising minds of American capitalism have found a new way to make a buck and threaten President Obama and his family at the same time. We all know that the threats against the president is at an all time high, and that the Secret Service is overwhelmed by the number. And to make matters worse, I understand the agency is understaffed and underfunded.

Why this is so, is beyond me. The fallout that could occur if this nation's first black president, or the first family is intentionally hurt by an assassin's bullet, or a homegrown terrorist's bomb, could be catastrophic. It could set race relations back a number of years, and create a climate of distrust that could threaten the slight closing of the racial divide that the election of Obama has brought us, and, at worse, descend this nation into the unthinkable--a race war.

And I don't think that I'm overstating my case. It's how I see a probable outcome to such a horrible act. Given the insouciance of some in the media, more inclined to fuel the fire than put it out, each day we're brought closer to what could be our national Armageddon.

I've blogged about this before. It's not my purpose to dwell on the negative, but to raise the consciousness of us all to this potential threat.

Here's the latest. It seems that tee shirts and bumper stickers featuring Bible verse citations, following a request to pray for President Obama, is nothing more than a veiled threat against him and his family. The Christian Science Monitor covered the story and Rachel Maddow on her show highlighted it as well.

There’s a new slogan making its way onto car bumpers and across the Internet. It reads simply: “Pray for Obama: Psalm 109:8”
A nice sentiment?

Maybe not.

The psalm reads, “Let his days be few; and let another take his office.”

Presidential criticism through witty slogans is nothing new. Bumper stickers, t-shirts, and hats with “1/20/09” commemorated President Bush’s last day in office.

But the verse immediately following the psalm referenced is a bit more ominous: “Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.”

On the Rachel Maddow show in the segment, "While You Were Out," we have this. If you haven't seen this segment, it's rather long, and covers among other things, the furor that President Obama raised by bowing to the Japanese Emperor on his recent trip abroad. Maddow's guest during this segment sums up my feelings, and issues a chilling alarm.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Her guest appeals to those who voted for President Obama to take a stand and speak out, and to right-wing evangelicals to condemn the behavior behind the offensive slogans. I said this before. I think the president's supporters have been overly quiet, and have not rushed to his rescue during the months he has been under siege by the Right.

I find it perplexing. The president has made significant strides toward satisfying his campaign pledges, and has generally behaved as he promised, whether, at times, we find the pace of "change" slower than we'd like, or his efforts towards "bipartisanship" frustrating and overdone.

If you'd like to keep track of President Obama's campaign promises, those that he has kept, and how one site is rating them, consider the following link to PolitiFact.com. When you take into account that this is his first year, I would say that to date his achievements have been impressive, although, for many, disappointing.

President Obama has three more years to tackle and fulfill some of these promises. The sticking point, of course, is a Democrat party with too many Republicans calling themselves Democrats. What better way to sabotage your opponent's party than to enter his races, run, and win, and then vote with the opposing aisle, or frustrate the efforts of your perceived party. I swear, I believe some of this is going on. What think you?

Two "P's" In Search of a Pod

Carrie and Sarah are the darlings of the Republican party faithfuls, because they see them as the epitome of conservative values.

They are the poster children of a party desperate to validate its conservative ideology with a base that has in recent months seen many of its champions fall from grace--the victims of one sex scandal after another.

Carrie and Sarah are the antithesis of the Nicole Richie and Paris Hilton "Simple Life" exploits--sure of themselves, and assured that God is on their side, both wearing their conservatism as though it will never go out of fashion, enjoying the distinction that comes with knowing that the world's finest fashion designers had a hand in the design.

What no one will dare tell the two empress is that they have no clothes, and that their crown is constructed of tin foil.

Prejean has sex tapes in her recent past, and Palin a possible scandal, accused of using her considerable power as governor of Alaska in a failed attempt to effectuate the firing of her brother-in-law. One Walter Monegan, Public Safety Commissioner, claimed that he was fired because "he resisted pressure to fire a state trooper involved in a bitter divorce and custody battle with the governor's sister."

Party faithfuls have either been forgiving, or in denial, so eager are they to find someone, anyone, who can carry a conservative standard high enough to show it off to a world increasingly edging toward liberalism, and progressivism, and away from the conservative precepts upon which this country was built, as they would have us believe.

According to these conservatives, small government and laissez faire capitalism should be the backbone on our economy.

Even George Bush has begun to distance himself from the act that might have kept our economy out of the jaws of a recession when he authorized the first "bail-out," saying it went beyond his nature as a "free-market" advocate, and has established a center in his home state of Texas as a way to repudiate his act, and expiate his sin.

Yet, socialism has crept into our economy, spearheaded by social security and medicare. And what is more socialist than bankruptcy that allows others to potentially shoulder some of your entrepreneurial failure, or your failure as head of a household?

Rush Limbaugh, ever the "true believer" in Sarah Palin's credentials to lead this country, lauds her new book, by saying, "This woman, Governor Palin, clearly is jazzed by policy, particularly environmental policy and energy policy, as well as taxes and so forth."

Most critics of the book agree that Rush's remarks lack substance, and is so much puffery. Not the political stalwart she would have us believe, Palin quit the job of Alaska's governor. Some say because of the heat that was coming her way, enough to defrost Alaska, by overstepping her gubernatorial power, and some say to pursue money beyond the Klondike, just east of Alaska, in the lower 48, while her popularity is still red hot.

Rush's willingness to prop up Palin is little more than an attempt to put a "pretty face" on conservatism. He suggests: Palin success in life and in politics is owning to her adherence to conservative principles. If you wish to have a similar "good life," you owe it to yourself to emulate Palin.

Palin's book is not about a winner but a whiner. She blames every one but herself for the distortion of her image as a vice presidential candidate. It was the fault of McCain's staffers or the news media. She knows that she can go "rogue" as long as she has the unfailing backing of Rush Limbaugh, and his considerable blessing.

Prejean clock, on the other hand, may be losing time, rather than gaining. Her appearance on the venerable, avuncular, Larry King show, which turned sour, may be her undoing. She doesn't seem to have political ambitions, which is a good thing, and is clearly more intellectually shallow than Palin. She has a conservative fan base, but recent revelations about her sex-capades may erode a part of that base, making her a has-been, at least among her conservative fans, but, like Richie, and Hilton, she may find new ones among the progressives she loathe, if the sex tapes are released to the public.

Liberals-Progressives vs. Republicans-Conservatives

I left this post on another blog. I hate to let a post go to waste: It didn't receive that much attention on that blog, so I'm featuring it here. Besides, I'm a little overdue on updating my own blog.

I'm looking forward to Repubs taking back the White House and Congress.

I'm looking forward to giving them the liberal version of birthers, death panels, Town Hall madness, gun-toting, "don't tread on me" idiots, and frustrating every bill the Repubs try to pass by erecting a wall of obstructionism.

I'm looking forward to the liberal protests that will feature Republican elected officials as Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and painting their faces with some joker reference, and decrying the inhumanity of conservatism.

I'm looking forward to invading their conservative, Republican blogs and hurtling red-neck references, racist diatribe, and depicting the then president's kids and his wife in some disgusting, Photoshop pose.

As much as I'd like to see a tit for tat, it's not going to happen.

You know why?

And this is going to anger some of the Repubs that hang out here, and their conservative counterparts, regardless of political leaning, but liberals and progressives aren't closed minded enough, not hateful enough, not mean spirited enough, not cold hearted enough, not inhumane enough to do something that cold and calculating on a massive scale.

They're just not!

Liberals and progressives have evolved a little past their conservative brethren on the spectrum of human compassion, and "good will toward all men."

We're not called "bleeding heart liberals" for nothing. The term is used derisively, but it should be held up as a badge of honor.

Liberals care. Repubs and Conservatives don't. They couldn't give a good damn about their fellow man. And where such compassion seems to appear, it's a cover for advancing a conservative agenda at the expense of compassion. Liberals uphold the human element; Repubs uphold property, greed, and a "every man for himself" mindset.

Whether Repubs and conservatives are self-made, or suffer from some genetic flaw, science may some day determine.

But, for now, they're evolutionarily behind liberals and progressives, and only good for starting wars they don't complete, violating the Constitution they're sworn to uphold, spying on their fellow Americans against conscience and the prevailing law, resorting to torture against the collective wisdom of those who say it's counterproductive, overturning legislation and regulations designed to keep our economy healthy (and not a "dog eat dog" free market feeding frenzy), name calling, and allowing their greed to run amok, as they bring a robust economy to its knees, as they use business practices that reward reckless investing and adventurism, and not prudence, and falling back on "too big to fail" as their excuse to be bailed out of their financial woes, using the little guys' tax dollars.

"What if the woman had been black?"

I'll do my best to honor the restrictions on this story. Here's the caveat: "This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed." Pretty heavy restrictions, no. Now, I don't think you can copyright a headline, so I'm going to lead with it:

Woman Accused Of Spitting On Deputy
44-Year-Old Hurled Death Threats, Racial Slurs, Officials Say

Tantalizing stuff wouldn't you say. Go here to read the entire story, and please return to discuss it with me. I thought long and hard about an appropriate angle from which to present this story. The story is unusual primarily because of the racial angle, and the attempt at power usurpation, using a familiar nemesis of blacks, the dreaded, and feared KKK. At least, those are the emotions the woman hoped the very mentioning of the Ku Klux Klan would evoke for this black officer.

Apparently, it didn't work. She's in jail, with a hefty bail around her neck, and monetary leg irons in the amount of thousands of dollars restricting her movements. In short, she's not going anywhere, anytime, soon, unless her KKK father is one of those big bonus-receiving CEO's on Wall Street.

Okay, let's get the preliminaries out the way. The woman may be suffering from a mental illness, and missed her mandatory meds that's keeping her mentally balanced. Mental illness is not a subject I treat lightly. I've known several people over the years who have struggled with schizophrenia, and, without regular medical intervention, or treatment, could spend days, even weeks doing some rather bizarre things.

And her father could be an Imperial Wizard of the KKK. That would go a long way toward understanding the outrage she felt when ticketed by the black officer, and ultimately arrested by him. I suspect that it's the former, though, but one can never be sure. More information will have to come to light in the days ahead, before we can fully know the reason for her bizarre behavior.

But give this some thought: What if this caught on? The use of intimidation to stop blacks from acting, whether as officers of the law, or as potential candidates for local, state, or federal office.

How many blacks are now eager to run for the presidency witnessing the threats against President Obama and his family? Could this be one of the Republican's schemes: To discourage another black from seeking this nation's highest office again, unless he's Republican? Or to discourage President Obama from seeking a second term?

Colin Powell was this nation's first star-quality black to be considered a shoe-in for president. If not a sure bet, at least a candidate with a real chance: Both blacks and whites had mad respect for Powell (at least for a time). Black democrats would have embraced him, unlike many black Republicans, who attack President Obama with as much gusto, or more so, as any white Republican. Of course, they trumpet their reasons: He's for abortion; He's an empty suit (whatever than mean); He's the wrong black at the wrong time (He'll fail so miserably at the job, that a really qualified black, in the future, won't even be considered.) This call for a black presidential candidate to have the qualifications of God before he or she can run for this nation's highest office, is a little perplexing to me.

But it is part and parcel of the black American experience, and part of the pathology that says we've got to be better in every category to be taken seriously by whites, and, if we fail, we give them more ammunition to level against us, if and when we try again.

One writer sees it this way:

"It should be remembered that thirty years ago the mere suggestion of a black candidate running for the presidency would have made liberals wistful, moderates edgy, and conservatives heatedly indignant. Besides, the probability of a black president living out his term of office was as remote a possibility as a man walking from the earth to Pluto. It seems pragmatic to think that, under such glaring political and media scrutiny, every decision Powell made would be called into question. The president would spend more time defending old positions than creating new ones, as the sad case of former New York City Mayor David Dinkins immediately brings to mind. Perhaps Powell wanted to avoid such a fate, and who could blame him?"

This writer's assessment would be more true for President Obama, than for a President Powell. I don't believe that Powell would have met a similar fate: No Birthers, Tea Baggers (I understand Republicans find the term offensive, hence, the use), or health care reform, or verbally explosive Town Hall meetings, or gun-toting loonies, Hitler references, or "I want my country back" sad cases. And if Powell had been controversial in some way, Democrats wouldn't have attacked him with the same vitriol with which President Obama has been attacked, nor would his life be threatened to the same extent. Sure there would be some white supremacists who might attempt something, but that wouldn't be because of his politics, so much as for his race and his color.

Julie Hubbard, if a Republican, might have accepted Powell as president, but I'm thinking not. She was too quick to threaten the black officer with the vengeance of the KKK. And let's not forget all of the other things she did: cursed him, spat on him, and urinated in his squad car. This does not sound like a woman who would accept any black man as president, whether Republican or Democrat.

This is America, after all, and I'm always reversing these incidents. Many blacks do it. I'm no exception. I think I may blog about this one day, to examine why we do it. We're often called out for it. But that's too bad. We didn't create the propensity. It was foisted on us by too many white on black situations that left us scratching our collective heads: "What if the woman had been black, and she cursed a white officer, threatened him, used racial epithets, spat on him, and urinated in his squad car?"

I wonder if the parrot found in the back seat of Hubbard's car can be called as a witness? And if called, would he spill the beans, or should I say, the bird seeds?

HoneST: One in a Million

Honesty is dead. Well, maybe not dead, just on life support. Truth is debatable, but you'd think we'd get honesty right. Some people are as honest as their financial situation will allow. And if their income is in jeopardy, honesty suffers accordingly. That's one of the reasons, I proffer, why there's so much fanfare, and ballyhoo when honesty finally shows up (because of its rarity), but honesty is not all always welcomed or sought--especially where life and limb is at stake in a no-snitch environment.

In a world where compromise is expected, and a shaving of the facts becomes not only acceptable, but anticipated, and one's moral compass is adjusted to fit the situation, we hold up those few stalwarts who take a stand for the facts, and are willing to put honesty above the screeches of special interest. But not all of us are that frontline courageous, or that devoted to honesty, and the facts, to put these things ahead of money, fame, influence, power, or what have you.

I'm thinking of Olympia Snowe. I'm thinking of Jane Hall, now with CNN after more than a decade with Fox News, and who is one those featured in the video clip below. I'm thinking of the GOP. I'm thinking of Joe Lieberman. And I'm thinking of many, many, others.

Olympia Snowe has to date resisted supporting any Public Option proposal, even one that might feature a trigger.

Snowe gives the impression that she's for insurance reform, when in fact she's more likely to vote to give health insurers more money, and more members, than expand health care for Americans, or force the current health insurance system to be more responsive to the needs of its member. This is dishonest. It serves her interest more than it does the American people. Where there's no competition, free market forces can't drive costs down, and improve the health coverage people are currently receiving from their health insurers. Insurers have for years enjoyed anti-trust exemptions, an exclusion that's now under fire as congress seeks other ways to expand competition in the industry.

This, too, is the purpose of a public option, to provide competition where very little now exists.

In the video, Jane Hall admits that she left Fox News because of some of its excesses, but still supports the controversial news media. Now I wonder why?

Other news networks are rushing to Fox News' defense. Now, I wonder why? Rachel Maddow on MSNBC gives a cogent explanation as to how Fox News blurs the line between being an actual news outlet who supports a point of view and one that promotes a point of view:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

She admits that it's probably not illegal to use the public airwaves to promote a political ideology under the guise of a news organization, but news media that do so mustn't be shocked when they're treated as propagandist and provocateurs. The next video, if you haven't seen it, is a must see. It goes a long way toward understanding why I'm angry with Fox News, and why the president's security detail (the secret service) is working twice as hard to keep him safe.

It's this kind of claptrap that probably led to the death of Dr. Tiller at the hands of a crazed killer. No matter how you feel about abortion, killing abortion doctors is not the way to end the practice, provided you think it should be stopped. Yet, Bill O'Reilly occasionally attacked this doctor, and he didn't do it in a fair and balanced way to say the least. Do they ever live up to their motto over there at Fox News? The motto is dishonest, and misleading. I'm not surprised that Dr. Tiller is now dead, when you take into account our current climate of dishonesty, and the media's part in all of this.

For some at Fox News, I'm pretty sure that they're creating this climate of dishonesty, and potential danger for the president, Senator Reid, and Nancy Pelosi, strictly for the money, and not because of conviction. Were it not for greed, who, in their right mind, outside neo-Nazi's and the KKK, and similar groups would create and sponsor a climate that might rip the social fabric of this country. It's dishonesty that colors media discourse, and drives the various attacks against public officials. And as long as this climate is maintained and permitted, it's imperative that Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and those of his ilk are called out for it. People's lives hang in the balance.

The lives of our president and his family hang in the balance. Responsible people on the Left and the Right need to speak out against this assault upon the will of the American people. The last I checked, we're a nation of laws, not an oligarchy, nor ruled by one party, and one party only. We're a democracy. And that should say a lot. Where democracy is truly practiced, it's almost synonymous with freedom.

Joe Lieberman, after taking a million dollars from insurance companies over the years, threatens to give Republicans the filibuster margin they need to kill the public option provision in the health care reform bill. Using a series of ploys over the years, Lieberman continues to serve in congress as a senator, and his electorate continues to support his dishonesty. I'm hoping, this time, he's outfoxed himself by half.

So what is Fox News' crime? In its obsession to hike television ratings (think money and greed), and keep them high, they are endangering elected officials, providing fodder for fringe groups who would like nothing better than to return this country to the good ole days of Jim Crow, and worse, manufacturing news, not satisfied with just reporting it, and establishing and maintaining a climate which pits Americans against Americans, and thriving on the chaos that ensues.

I can assure you of one thing: Many black Americans will never forget how the first black president was treated by the Republican party and some in the media. It's reminiscent of the collective pain felt during the Civil Rights moment, and prior. If the GOP's new web site is an attempt to attract blacks to its party, it failed. More than a snazzy Web site is needed to bring blacks back under the tent. It's going to take honesty, the kind that Matthew Hoh recently exhibited. We'll settle for nothing less.

Are We Dreaming Or Is It Real? An American Report Card

More than two-thirds of African-Americans believe Martin Luther King Jr.'s vision for race relations has been fulfilled, a CNN poll found -- a figure up sharply from a survey in early 2008.

The CNN-Opinion Research Corp. survey was released Monday, a federal holiday honoring the slain civil rights leader and a day before Barack Obama is to be sworn in as the first black U.S. president.

The poll found 69 percent of blacks said King's vision has been fulfilled in the more than 45 years since his 1963 "I have a dream" speech -- roughly double the 34 percent who agreed with that assessment in a similar poll taken last March.

But whites remain less optimistic, the survey found.

"Whites don't feel the same way -- a majority of them say that the country has not yet fulfilled King's vision," CNN polling director Keating Holland said. However, the number of whites saying the dream has been fulfilled has also gone up since March, from 35 percent to 46 percent.

In the 1963 speech, delivered to a civil rights rally on the Mall in Washington, King said: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

"Has that dream been fulfilled? With the election of Barack Obama, two thirds of African-Americans believe it has," CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider said."

In light of this poll, I thought I would investigate the dream myself to see how close we've come to making it a general reality. I thought I would take it one dream at a time and do a kind of metric to see just who has it right, white or black, whether we've seen with Obama's ascension to the presidency, a realization of Dr. King's dream.

I won't be using any hard data, but will be relying on my own observations to reach whatever conclusion seems appropriate.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."

This is still a mix bag. Some places have extended equal protection under the law to the lesbian-gay community (permitting marriage), while some states have sought to thwart and suppress those efforts.

Although segregation exists in places, we still see too much de facto segregation to truly say that all men, including women are created equal, when women are still trying to get equal pay for equal work. All in all, I would give America a 'C' in it's efforts to realize this dream.

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood.

Given what little I could find on this subject, it appears that some hopeful signs are occurring on the horizon. Although many would concur that some progress has been made regrading this dream, I believe that I can safely assume that this part of Dr. King's dream hasn't been fully realized, so I would give Georgia a 'C+', fully aware that Georgia was a kind of barometer for racial progress during Dr. King's life.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a desert state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

Well, I don't have to research this dream, because if the state of Mississippi had been "transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice," it would have made the evening news, and we surely would be in the end-times, and, I might add respectfully, with the second coming right around the corner.

Is that cynical enough!

No, Dr. King's dream has not been fully realized in the state of Mississippi, and I give that state an 'F' in terms of realizing Dr. King's dream. Barack Obama did win Mississippi's Primary thanks to the black vote there, but he lost rather sizably in the presidential race, 56.4% for McCain to 42.8% for Obama. Now if anyone has evidence to support a higher grade, meet me after school, and we'll discuss in in my office.

I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I'll have to go with my gut here, and say that we're beginning to make some progress in realizing Dr. King's dream. The election of Barack Obama as this nation's first sitting president gives me some hope. I think that by and large this is a reality, but I'm only given the nation a 'B-' here, because we haven't seen a full-court press to up this grade beyond the election of President Obama. I want to see a little more progress before I'm willing to say this is a dream realized.

[I wrote this blog entry some months ago, prior to the Town Hall meetings, gun-toting demonstrators, Birthers, and Deathers, and those folks clamoring for a return to the past. You know who they are--the "I want my country back" crowd. Originally I gave this category a "B-" but with recent developments, I can barely manage a "C," but I'm still hopeful.]

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.

This is a dream not only for our nation, but for the world, and although I'm certain that we can give this nation and the world an 'F-' in this dream category, I'm still hopeful that someday--perhaps sooner, that later--we will rejoice at the realization of this dream for this nation and for all mankind.

So I would say that the whites overall have it right. Dr. King's dreams haven't been fully realized. There's still work to do. But I can also understand black folk's euphoria over the election of Barack Obama as this nation's first African American president, and see his election, if not the culmination of Dr. King's dreams, at least the beginning of them, and that's a good thing.

I would welcome your opinions as to whether Dr. King's 'Dream' has been realized, whether you think we're making progress, or believe that we still got a 'long row to hoe,' and a lot of 'water to carry' before we can say in the words of Dr. King:

This is our hope. This is the faith with which I return to the South. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

And Dr. King saw progress by the metric of freedom, for he knew where freedom was allowed to thrive, progress would follow. Where freedom was allowed to flourish, our differences wouldn't be as pronounced as those things that bound us together. He saw freedom as the grand leveler, the grand uniter, which this country had to embrace, if it wished to remain great and become even greater.

And if America is to be a great nation this must become true. So let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania!

"Sick Puppies"

It's often been noted how much whites love their pets, dogs in particular. I love dogs, but, like kids, I love them from a distance. I don't care for the daily walks so that they may relieve themselves while I walk behind with pooper-scooper in the ready, nor the daily grind of rearing kids that would challenge a Supernanny.

Just because whites love their dogs, doesn't mean that all uses of the word "dog" is flattering. There are some phrases that make you wonder just how much people love their dogs:

"Shoot him dead in the street like the dirty, low-down, dog he is," from a possible Western movie, to "She's a dog," when you wish to speak derogatorily of a woman's lack of feminine pulchritude.

So when you hear that Bush 41 refers to Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann as "sick puppies," as he responds to a question about media civility, or lack thereof, you've got to wonder if he got his cable channels straight, and really had Fox News in mind. Compared to Fox News' Glenn Beck, and Hannity, Countdown with Keith Olbermann and the Rachel Maddow Show are pussy cats, not puppies, next to the big dogs, the dobermans of Fox News.

At no time have their shows come close to spewing the vituperative venom against his son that spews from Fox's best when it comes to the denigration of liberals, and the besmirching of the president. Nothing the two MSNBC commentators have said over the years remotely justifies his attack, but we know President Obama has been called a "racist" by Beck, and is daily the object of Fox's derision and scorn.

Both Olbermann and Maddow responded to the ex-president. They did it with humor, a measure of stupefaction, and sincerity. Watch....

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

It all started out well, with an invitation to President Obama from Bush senior to the Bush Library and Texas A&M. In an open letter to the Aggie Family, Bush senior wrote the following:

To My Fellow Members of the Texas A&M Family:

Howdy! As you have probably heard, I have invited the 44th President of the United States of America to come visit the Bush Library and Texas A&M, and President Obama has graciously accepted.

Along with the administration, faculty, and so many of you, I am honored that The President, our President, is taking the time and making the effort to come to College Station on October 16th to talk about an issue that unites all Americans — namely, community service and its vast importance to our continued well-being as a Nation. Our country still faces many tough challenges, and the message that will come out of our Presidential Forum on Service, I hope, is that every American regardless of age has an important part to play in helping us overcome the obstacles to our common progress.

This is not about politics. This is about the importance of service to our communities and our country." Read more here.

What prompted the letter was how Barack Obama was received on a previous visit by some in the student body. The letter asked for civility. So it was strange that Bush 41 chose to use the occasion to be uncivil to Olbermann and Maddow.

Now I have to give George H.W. Bush his props. He did attack the GOP for attacking President Obama's choice for the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor:

"Former President George H.W. Bush stood up for his former judicial nominee Sonia Sotomayor Friday, telling CNN Anchor Robin Meade that GOP critics who called President Obama's Supreme Court pick a racist were off-base, and unfair.

'I don't know her that well but I think she's had a distinguished record on the bench and she should be entitled to fair hearings. Not - [it's] like the senator John Cornyn said it,' he told CNN. 'He may vote for it, he may not. But he's been backing away from these...backing off from those radical statements to describe her, to attribute things to her that may or may not be true.'"
Read more here.

And he had some pretty nice things to say about President Obama:

"Former President George H.W. Bush told CBS News that President Obama 'is entitled to civil treatment and intellectual honesty when it comes to critics.'"

Now some of this may be to soften President Obama's willingness to bring his son up on war crimes, and hold him judicially responsible for other possible unconstitutional acts, and to give others in his son's administration, such as Vice-President Cheney, a pass, and not prosecute for crimes he may have committed as he pursued a shadow government, and a proxy presidency.

It is written: "An attack is a cry for help." This unwarranted attack against two of MSNBC premier commentators can be described as such. I understand that Bush the elder wishes to protect his son, and his legacy, from adverse criticism, but I've never observed these two MSNBC pundits trading in lies and deceit. They pretty much document their positions, and often correct the so-called factual positions of their rivals, and are quick to own up, if they get it wrong.

Clearly Bush the elder wishes more for his son than his son's record warrants, and would that all people in the media accept his son's presidential policy decisions as unimpeachable. That's what fathers hope for, but that's unrealistic: his son did some God awful things while president, attacking a country that didn't attack us first, and waging a war against al-Qaeda in Iraq, when they were miles away in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

No, George H.W. Bush, Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann aren't the "sick puppies," your son, George Bush, and the people he surrounded himself with, are the "sick puppies."