This last year had its mix of good and bad, great and horrible events. May the next year have more of the positive, less negative events. May wishes for a happy new year to all bring blessings.

Every word is meant sincerely, but sorry if this turned out looking like prose on a Hallmark card.

(Originally posted at; The Big World of Li'l Treva, The Latest Anti-Christ)

Of all the stupid rumors about Barak Obama that have circulated this country (i.e., He's a Muslem trying to turn America into a Muslem ruled state. He's Arab. He's Egyptian. He's going to raise common people's taxes.), I think the one alleging him to be The Anti-Christ is the most amusing of all. (However, the claims of him being Muslem, Arab and Egyptian were funny.) This, as well as, the others, indicate desperation on the part of people that make up and spread these fabrications. Such rumors are intended for gullible and ignorant members of America's voting population, the sort that believe rumors which are loosely based in scripture from the Christian bible. (Most often from the King James Version.)

Obama is not the first person accused of being The Anti-Christ. I recall when Bill Clinton was pinned with this label during the 2004 election season.

Was Al Gore, John Kerry, or any other Democratic presidential candidate for the 2000 and 2004 elections branded as The Anti-Christ during those election years? If not, I might know why.

George W. Bush (most likely with the aid of Karl Rove) knew how to work the fundamentalist "Christians" without relying on the age-old "anti-Christ" scare tactic to attract these people's money and other support. Bush used wedge issues like abortion, gay rights, including the controversy over gay marriage, to lure religious groups, particularly under the Christian banner, to support each of his presidential campaigns. He wore religion on his sleeve, passing himself off as the kind of guy that prays for divine guidance and frequently called Billy Graham for advice since he was a kid. Bush used his claims to faith in God and Jesus to attract mass support from so-called "Christian conservatives" for anything in his regime's agenda. He and his regime added the religious based manipulations to other things, like physical fear of terrorist attacks, and patriotic (or rather, nationalistic) fervor to convince scores of Americans to readily sacrifice themselves, or their loved ones (including their own adult children).That was enough for him to rally political support from the so-called Christian conservatives.

If anybody was being called The Anti-Christ during Bush's first term, it was Osama bin Laden. That didn't last long. Once Bush, Cheney, Rove, and their pals decided that bin Laden was no longer an important tool (except when they needed the recycled and other suspicious "videos", reportedly of Osama bin Laden for diversionary causes), Saddam Hussein became The Anti-Christ.

When I was a kid, right-wing extremists tried to convince young Christians and Christian parents to help ban rock-n-roll by implicating certain rock and rollers as The Anti-Christ. Did you know, Elvis Presley was The Anti- Christ? He was rumored to mesmerize women and teen girls, not just with his good looks and songs, but also with his gyrating pelvis.

In the 60's and 70's, John Lennon (Beatles) and Mick Jagger (Rolling Stones) were each accused of being The Anti-Christ. Little wonder with Lennon's social and political views, such as, his opposition to war, and Jagger's reportedly acid-trip inspired song, Sympathy for the Devil.

Ozzie Osborn, who openly described himself as a Satanist (before the luggage mix-up incident which reportedly changed his religion), was called The Anti-Christ. That was when right-wing extremists with a socio-political agenda set about their task of convincing concerned parents that Satanic cults were cropping up all over the country in every suburban and rural community, and every small town with a small-minded population. (Like the people of West Memphis, Tn.)

More believable: the John Birch Society warned that The Anti-Christ would rise among the political and geographic rulers of so-called communist countries (where socialism and bans on free enterprise were used as a tool for mass control). What made this more easily believed was that religious discussions, literature, practice, and institutions were banned by the governments of the U.S.S.R., the Republic of China, and Castro's Cuba. As I recall, such bans also existed in East Germany before the Berlin Wall was breached and destroyed.

Why Barak Obama? What did he do to inspire some covert group of religious propaganda to elect him as the latest accused anti-Christ?

Obama is probably the latest alleged anti-Christ for the same reason why President Bill Clinton was so accused. Talk of Clinton being The Anti-Christ seemed to circulate wildly around the time of the 1996 major US election season. His political enemies were calling him names like Slick Willie and Teflon Bill. No matter what, they couldn't seem to ruin his popularity among more than half of the US voting population. They had plenty of help from the so-called liberal media, which they condemned for not being severe enough on Clinton's image. Clinton was too resilient, and obviously more clever than his political enemies, until he testified in his own defense to the Grand Jury.

I've heard frequent remarks about Barak Obama's "Teflon-like" image. He's handling himself and his campaign quite well. He's consistently leading in polls which are intended to compare his popularity among US voters, to John Mc Cain's. In recent weeks, John Mc Cain's and Sarah Palin's popularity has waned, now that the newness surroundin Palin is wearing off, along with her "folksy" talk. Additionally, Mc Cain appears to attract a lot of supporters that strike many of us as being ripe candidates for psychiatric evaluation. They've been seen and heard on TV! One (crazy lady with messed up hair) was parodied on the prime time Thursday night SNL specials. This is causing desperation among partisan Republicans, especially since Bush's popularity dwindled lower than any US president's, even among the most mentally whacked, right-wing religious fanatics that had once held Bush as equal to Jesus.

One other thing: Obama is the son of a black man and he has a Muslem-sounding name, according to some hicks in Wood County, Texas. Since high-profile Republicans don't feel comfortable with openly stating that they don't want any president with anything, except an all Caucasian family history, they must find another reason to discourage more voters (namely Christians) that aren't hung-up on ethnic backgrounds and names.

It is pointless to attempt to reason with the kind of Americans that really believe all this talk of Obama being The Anti-Christ. If you've gotten to know any of these people very well, then you know that they are inclined to learn a lot of life lessons the hard way, regardless of how obviously foolish their choices tend to be. They forsake logic and truth for twisted perspectives and lies that sound "right" to them, because those lies and twisted perspectives reflect what these people want to be true. Many of them never really learn from the consequences caused by their poor choices, no matter how many rounds of cause-and-ill-effects they experience.

My way to handle this is to laugh and shake my head. If I say anything, it's, "So, this is the latest so-called anti-Christ. I wonder, who will be the next one."

I must share something I found at the Obama campaign group. It is a link to a site where we can access news and other information and offer suggestions to our next president, with a "suggestion box" where we're encouraged to share our ideas and experiences to further enable him to serve our country.

That site is change.gov.

Somebody at vox.com posted the link at the Obama group over there. I'm just passing the link on just in case somebody didn't know about it and considers it useful. I hope, you use it for its intended purpose and pass it on to others. Please encourage them to do the same.

I thought that efx2blogs was down, according to a source (community insider) that told me all-too familiar horror stories of instability and downtime. I finally got up the courage to come see for myself. After arriving, I was confronted with another familiar, but foreboding sight: That of SPAM droppings.

Well, I'm glad to see that efx2blogs hasn't completely vanished. Let's hope, there will be no need to add the word "yet" to the previous statement.

I started an account with vox:
http://liltreva.vox.com/ I still have my account at blogspot/blogger, but that one is in its usual mostly neglected state. I never felt comfy there. I made myself right at home at vox.com where I quickly found a lot of other efx2-ers and former modblog-ers over there.

My vox posts won't be so heavily based on political and social stuff as my blogs have been since 2003.

I've been working on the screenplay, techie scripts, storyboards and other fun stuff that goes into the production of a movie. It's MINE, but I'll be sharing the creative glory with actors and whatnot. It's still MINE!

Silliness aside, it's to be a comedy. I'm serious!

I can do comedy. Sort of. Just ask my closest friends. They'll tell ya. They'd better! They all owe me a few favors.

On the political side...

Don't you just lllllove those money-lending executives that get bailed out by tax payers, compliments of Congress and the Bush regime, then reap rewards for their rotten deeds in the form of bonus payoffs?

The FUCKERS!

I just watched an amazing video of stand-up comic George Carlin explaining what the real owners of this country don't want us to know.

-from the Los Angeles Times: A judge in Nevada has just ordered MSNBC to include Rep. Dennis Kucinich in Tuesday's Democratic Party presidential debate in Las Vegas or he will cancel the forum. Senior Clark County District Court Judge Charles Thompson vowed to issue an injunction halting the nationally televised debate if MSNBC failed to comply. Kucinich had filed a lawsuit seeking to be included just this morning. The judge ruled it was a matter of fairness and Nevada voters would benefit from hearing from more than just Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Barack Obama. Kucinich had been invited to participate in the 6 p.m. Pacific debate Tuesday, but that invitation was rescinded last week ... So set up a fourth podium. Andrew Malcolm, correspondent - The Los Angeles Times

I got word from the Kucinich campaign of the very possible likelihood that General Electric and perhaps other corporations will be dumping money into efforts to overturn Judge Thompson's ruling. It's a pity that justice must be purchased, which seriously burdens people that don't have billion dollar wells to stand up to that kind of money.

I ask the genuine patriots of our country to contribute to help us to defend this ruling from the corporations that don't want us to hear what Dennis Kucinich has to say. I realize, the judge's orders won't guarantee that Dennis will be treated any better than he was before.

Most contributors to Dennis Kucinich's fight for fair access to the debates and so-called "campaign news" coverage, as well as, to all primary ballots come from supporters that really can't afford the most basic living expenses. Please, don't let the burden be on low income and lower-middle-class voters to defend our right to fair and free access to current information on who is running for President, what they stand for, and what kind of background they have. It is unfortunate that many voters are under the false impression that only Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama and John Edwards are running on the Democratic Ballot. It is unfortunate that many voters assume that Ron Paul dropped out, because they don't see his name and picture in the Republican "reports." It is a shame that most voters don't know who is running as an alternative party candidate, because the corporate media controls information that most people turn to for their election-related news.

Please, help us fight for our democratic rights. The public owns the airwaves, not GE, Walt Disney Co., FOX, General Electric, Viacom, Clear Channel... Please Contribute to our cause.

Celebrity Candidates Pay for "News" and "Debate" Exposure?
By Treva L. Van Fossen
Sun. January 13, 2008

I've been trying my utmost to reach executives with NBC/MSNBC, according to jobs affiliated with program directing, producing, new, MSNBC investigates, etc. The best I got was a guy that claimed that he was only a technician.

So, I'm hitting my blogs and some choice forums to openly speculate what I think is happening with the exclusive treatment the corporate media is giving to specific candidates, who happen to have earned additional money beyond the teaser-donations offered by lobbyists that seek special favors in Washington D.C.

Here is what has been going through my mind:

I have detected an obvious lack of presidential primary campaign commercials on television this election season. This had me wondering if there is either a new law banning the practice, or if executives over corporate media, especially with national exposure, have been accepting campaign funds from candidates and party organizations (Like the DNC, DLC, RNC, and GOP) in exchange for what is passed off as political news coverage and debates. If certain pay-TV and network insiders are accepting campaign funds in exchange for providing advertisements on behalf of candidates, then what we see are commercial bits disguised as news reports and informercials disguised as debates.

Let's assume that my suspicions are accurate, or at least, close to the truth. Hypothetically, it might mean that some sources paid off the corporate media in exchange for amount of time and positive attention paid to each candidate, giving CEO (Clinton, Edwards and Obama) additional time for additional money. Maybe, Biden and Richardson could only afford to pay so much in exchange for the limelight with a set timer on it. (Cover-My-Arse Reminder: I am only speculating hypothetically, not out-right accusing, unless something stronger than circumstantial evidence can back up these probabilities.)

So, maybe the media threw out some freebies to a few candidates in each party to give the impression that its entertainers (which play the part of professional journalists) are trying to give fair time, even though one debate (On CNN) turned out to be the intended Hillary and Barak Show, with Edwards, Biden and Richardson in supportive roles to "weigh in" (as Wolfe Blitzer repeatedly said) on anything which kept the focus on Hillary and Barak.



This takes me back to that little video I watched of Hillary Clinton and John Edwards having that little conversation after a debate. It's the one where Hillary says to John that she wants certain candidates out of the debate. It is the one where she stated that she would have the party leaders do something about that, the one where she says, "Our guys should talk."

They might have received more back up after Dennis Kucinich answered the questions Wolfe Blitze asked all Democratic Party candidates in the CNN debate last November, would you support the Democratic nominee, no matter who it is. You may recall Dennis' answer, which began with, "Only if..."

Once Dennis expressed his reservations and terms, I'm certain they did not go over well at all with the brass at the DNC and the DLC. I can see those plutocrats contacting each other to say, "You know, it was bad enough that we didn't help to keep the little trouble maker out of the debates, because, God only knows, what will come out of his mouth next to piss off our corporate backers and cost us money on Wall Street. We'd better do as Hillary and John suggested and pay off our media friends to figure out a way to keep him off TV."

I would really like to have a look at where campaign funds for the celebrity candidates in both parties went. This includes any donations and personal member investments into the coffers of the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Leadership Council, The Republican National Committee and the Grand Old Party (GOP). Maybe, it's time to demand an investigation into this matter.

If you are, or were a supporter and volunteer for a candidate that was snubbed, like my candidate (Dennis Kucinich) has been by corporate media "news" on TV and in print, especially if your candidate was not permitted to appear in a televised "debate", feel free to openly speculate in such a way where you can legally cover your ass, as I have. If you would like to join me in chorus to demand an independent and impartial investigation, or class action law suits, then we might get results.

Feel free to pass this message on to any candidate that has been ignored by the "news" media, or any supporter that has invested dearly in that candidate's campaign. If the FCC isn't interested in doing its job, then we need to find other means to end biased media exposure of celebrity candidates with the money and the willingness to engage in anti-democratic back-door deals.

Best of Kucinich video

The following is a petition to remove Nancy Pelosi from her position as Speaker of the US House of Representatives. She is cited for her violations of laws, according to the US Constitution, for obstruction of justice for taking impeachment of Richard "Dick" Cheney off the table of the House.

This petition is introduced by US Congress member Wexler and provides a list with statutes and charges of their violations made by Nancy Pelosi.

Click here to replace Pelosi.

I have said before that Nancy Pelosi is not a credit to her gender. I never cheered, or celebrated her appointment. In fact, I wondered what she did to get it. For a woman to become a "first" in a male-dominated arena and be considered an example to follow and representative of women, she'd better fill that role well, lest she make it more difficult for the next woman to gain that seat.

I sure am hearing from a lot of jaded and long-time members of the Democratic Party. More and more of them are declaring that they realize, the party isn't representing what they wanted and believed. More are saying that they are leaving the party and pulling their support from it. Many of these people are Kucinich supporters that are open to voting their conscience where a lot of them have blindly voted along party lines for years.

Way to go! Democratic Party Puppeteers! If alienating your party's voters is what you wanted, then you're getting it. I understand why the Dem Party masters are salivating over the lack of enthusiasm for Republican candidates from Republican voters. Of course, these Democratic party controllers aren't thinking clearly, or they're holding out on knowledge of the obvious fact that Ron Paul (a libertarian Texan that is running on the Republican Party ticket) is attracting voters that are Republican, alternative party members, non-partisan and some registered Democrats.

I don't blame these people. I never forgot the years when I was learning why the Democrats were compromising and only giving crumbs to the burdened and humbled masses that turned to this party for help. I realized as a teenager that most politicians in the Democratic Party were occasionally throwing pacifiers our way while doing things which contradicted what the people really needed and wanted.

I started out like many others, blaming everything on those rigid and heartless Republican old farts and their younger apprentices. I can't speak for anybody else, but if ever I've been seriously confused, or was lying to myself, I eventually snap out of it.

You know, I really haven't ripped on the corporate candidates that are running on the Dem Party ticket. I refer to the candidates that get celebrity treatment of A List standards by the corporate media which has provided these candidates (and some Republicans) with an ongoing infomercial every time this mockery of an election is mentioned by entertainment industry insiders that pass themselves off as genuine journalists of the professional variety.

It is time that I did rip on those other candidates. To be sure, after one of them becomes the Democratic nominee, I won't spare them and devote my criticism to the Republican opponent. Nope. That's now how a truly patriotic American that appreciates and wants REAL DEMOCRACY behaves.

To hell with the DNC and the RNC! They exploit everything good about this country and destroy it.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...QJG80.html Dennis Denied Access to Texas Ballot Judge rules Kucinich can't be on Texas ballot 01/11/2008 Associated Press A federal judge says presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich can't be on the Texas ballot because he refused to sign a state Democratic Party pledge. Kucinich and supporter Willie Nelson had sued the party to try to get on the March 4 primary election ballot despite the refusal to sign part of the oath committing him to "fully support" the Democrat nominated for president. Judge Lee Yeakel ruled Friday in Austin that the courts should intervene sparingly in political party rulemaking. Kucinich's attorney, Donald McTigue, says a paramount issue for Kucinich is opposition to the war in Iraq. The congressman from Ohio does not want to support a candidate with differing views on the war, McTigue says.

Also, the DNC has been propagating a partisan loyalty pledge to coerce Democratic Party voters to abandon their right and democratic duty in favor of partisan loyalty. They followed their Republican leaders with this one. As you may recall, Republicans were doing this during and since the 2004 election season.

And some people wonder why I insist on voting my conscience.

The following is a message that I originally posted at my campaign blog in the Dennis4President community. I'm posting it here. It's unedited. Some things might appear a bit out of sequence and it is rather lengthy.

I opened with a suggestion for any one that did not have time to sit in front of their monitor to read it, or weren't up to reading a message that long, to copy it to read off line. That way, they can read it in doses, or at a more convenient time.

During the Dennis Kucinich campaign in 2003 we had a mascot. Our mascot was a horse that lived back in the days of the Great Depression (which lasted longer for most people, than the wealthy minority). The horse's legend was finally given its due with a book and a movie bearing his name in their titles, Sea Biscuit.

Sea Biscuit symbolized the "long shot" horse that raced from the back of the line to finish in First Place. Many Kucinich supporters expected our advocate/candidate to do the same in what is treated as a celebrity candidate horse race - the Presidential primary and final elections.

I made a point to watch Sea Biscuit and to read the book, just to find out why Kucinich supporters exclaimed, "Go! Sea Biscuit!"

Besides the obvious physical differences and such, I noticed another difference between Kucinich and Sea Biscuit.

Sea Biscuit's previous owner and trainer had trained this horse to lose to help other select horses win. They cashed in on this, the way plutocrats have worked through the media and our education system to train the majority of working class Americans to make certain types of decisions against our best interests. It was a way to enable schemers that worked through the government, economy, industries, and commerce to profit from the people's limitations, sacrifices and losses.

The turning point in Sea Biscuit's life as a race horse, as well as, that of his new rider and friend, trainer, and his owner, came when the trainer discovered similarities between Sea Biscuit and his rider and instinctively realized, the two were made for each other. It also came, because a group of people that had suffered losses and anguish found each other and then found their race horse - whose heart had been broken, side had been scarred, whose pain had evolved into rage and rebellion.

As Sea Biscuit and his rider (another long shot) were going through the process of de-programming their self-defeating conditioning to evolve above them, they made improvements that showed on the track. However, they weren't winning race after race during the early part of this transformation process. The horse, rider, trainer and owner kept trying no matter how much heckling they got from people that laughed at their small horse, large rider, and each one's reputation in the racing circles.

Then they won.

Each one won because, at least, one other person believed in them and cared. Each one won, because somebody believed that you don't throw a good horse away on account of something that works against him, or a couple of men, or a boy, or a woman.

Sea Biscuit's trainer and owner paid attention to what worked for the horse and his human friends and what was working against them. Losing a race provided them with the question, or obvious explanation of why the race was lost.

If we pay attention, we know what's working against us. We know that our opponents are cheating. We know that they lie. We know that they use the resources in their possession and control to rig the human race to the White House.

If our efforts to send Dennis Kucinich to the West Wing and Oval Office end contrary to our needs and desires, then we have now and the next four years to formulate a way of trying to break down the barriers and, just in case, to get around them. We must be smarter than our opponents. We must out-wit them.

When I get wind that certain entertainment industry insiders support Dennis Kucinich and share some of our values, or more, I wonder why they don't get together and tap into the wide-spread talented and skilled allies to create a new media that doesn't come off as a radical one, which Air America presents itself as FOX's polar opposite.

Humor is one way to influence people. It works best when something within it resonates sentiments that already exists in the majority of the audience members. Humor also has healing properties. It helps us to keep our sanity when we're under the type of stress that can weaken our will, attack our immune system, and drain us until we surrender.

We must not surrender!

I noticed, all the Democrats and some alternatives that decided to vote against Cheney and Bush by throwing their votes to John Kerry and his running-mate John Edwards. I remember how these people reacted after Election Day in November 2004, after Kerry and Edwards conceded to Bush and Cheney, despite obvious signs that the election was riddled with problems, which included evidence of fraud involving certain types of ballots and bags full of paper ballot stubs for the opti-scan ballots. The taste of defeat and the prospect of another four years of BushCo was bad enough. Kerry's and Edwards' decisions and conduct following the election and the electoral college was the acid poured on these voters' wounds.

For a very short time many of them were finally willing to open their eyes and ears to what we were saying all along. Some of us knew that these people, like most Americans, are slow learners and slow to make changes in their thought and behavior patterns, which have been conditioned in part by plutocratic influences that operate through the mass media.

The problem with our side is that some among us share a certain debilitating belief with most other Americans. This belief is that when the election results and the so-called winner are declared then we can all take our focus off the political and government "diversion" and back to narrowing it on our personal interests. If any one on our side has adopted this problem, then I'm here to tell you that this is part of why we aren't making much progress.

It took over 200 years for slaves and their descendants in this country to gain the same legal protections of rights, humane treatment and respect that were considered to be a birth right to most Euro-Americans. That American Revolution is just one cycle in a series of cycles which make up the unfinished American Revolution that began long before George Washington was declared the first US President.

Let us bear in mind that dark and gloomy times have given many people through the long stream of human generations plenty of reason to think that they would always be oppressed, hunted, attacked, tortured and killed.

Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and many others risked their lives standing up to "authorities" despite all efforts intended to convince them and their forces that since one side was well equipped and in control, the other was not, these people needed to give up, submit and accept the status quo as a way of life. These aforementioned leaders and scores of people that shared their spirit and dreams sacrificed dearly for the benefit of others.

They had plenty of reason to groan, "We're done. It's over. We lost. They won." They could have given up. Maybe, they would have lived to watch their kids grow and to play with their grandchildren had they given up, gone home and focused on their personal lives. I dare not even imagine what life would be like for all the people whose lives they touched had it not been for their determination and strength to keep moving on.

We can challenge the corporate media. We can expose the "news" for what it really is. We have the means to do it.

I have newspaper production under my belt. I can write fairly well. I love to dig for information, assess it, combine it, and form a synopsis of what I find. I am also very creative in other ways. I have been studying things which help me to think and imagine strategically. I have much to offer. I recognize this within myself.

Dennis has much to offer, as we know. So does his wife. They recognized this within themselves. Dennis took his basic experience and dreams to college to develop a sound foundation to build upon it in the direction he chose to take his life on behalf of others.

What about you? I do not want any one of you to tell me that you have no assets to offer. I guess, many of you have taken inventory of the resources you can offer. You might even find that you have more to offer than what meets the eyes.

Now, imagine we bring our talents, skills, knowledge and other resources and pool them together. Imagine, we develop various departments which can operate through a network.

Imagine what we can accomplish. If not this year, then by November 2012. If it means, we have no other option, but to push up a goal four more years ahead, let us avoid dooms-day projections that work like rain on a small camp fire.

United We Stand; Divided We fall.

Keep the faith.

Sincerely,

Treva L. Van Fossen.

It's been floating around the Internet, a test you take to see which candidate comes closest to reflecting your own ideals, desires and views where US government and public policies are concerned. I believe, it is restricted to candidates in the Democratic and Republican parties.

This might be helpful to all you undecided voters out there. It's also helpful in the event that the corporate media has convinced you to support a candidate with a track record and objectives that do not reflect your values.

http://www.dehp.net/candidate/

I'm curious to know how the test results turned out for you. Mine were right on: Dennis Kucinich. Same with my mom. However, if you'd rather keep it private, that's fine with me.

I have been developing my skills in 3D modeling to prepare for 3D animation. Also, I'm busy with the Kucinich campaign (especially now that the holiday season is finally over). Relative to the campaign activities, I have been engaged in some other activities to defend our democracy from the corporate media and the elitists that control the two major political parties here in the US. This has brought me in touch with supporters of other candidates that are being excluded in "news" and debates by one, or more Big Media corporation and the leaders of both major parties.

Sixty-year old John Nirenberg, "born in the midst of the Nirenberg Trials" that were intended to hold Nazi war criminals accountable for their crimes, wrote that he, "believed we Americans really were different and that we fought for a noble cause. I believed in the supremacy of freedom over fascism." His message reflects what hundreds of thousand of us Americans feel, what all Americans should feel. Perhaps, by reading his words, one might understand why he chose to March for Impeachment, and to march on behalf of any of us unable to join him. For details, go to March in My Name.

I suspected that the Des Moines Independent is a Gannet Inc. owned publication, but I wasn't sure about that until after I fired off a letter to the paper's publishing-editor Carolyn Washburn. I know a lot about Gannet Inc. I won't say what I intend to do with this information, as well as, more info I'm compiling. I know why Gannet Inc. executives do not want to provide fair opportunity for any political candidate and his, or her advocates to explain the candidate's record, position on issues and ideas if that candidate is an advocate for the very people corporations like Gannet Inc. and many of its most valued advertisers exploit and hurt.

My letter to Carolyn Washburn is in response to her decision to throw together a mock criteria list with the intention of adding "rules" that were deliberately included to keep, at least, one candidate from participating in that farce of a debate in Iowa.

To: Carolyn Washburn, Publisher/Editor of the Des Moines Register
From: Treva L. Van Fossen

Dear Ms. Washburn,

Please note: this letter will be publicized on the Internet. Perhaps, it will also be printed in bulk and circulated in your publishing area.

Do you have a problem with fair election coverage of all the candidates? Do you feel that you have executive privilege to deny any candidate fair opportunity to explain his record, position on issues,and ideas to voters during an election campaign? Do you believe that you are entitled to trample the right each voter has to fair exposure of every candidate, such as, during debates and through sources (like newspapers) which cover election campaigns and government activities?

Based upon your decision to ban US Congressman Dennis Kucinich (Ohio, Dem.) from the debate which your newspaper is sponsoring, the answer must be, "Yes," to all of the above questions.

I have examined the details of your reported "criteria" for candidates to meet if they wish to participate in the debate which your newspaper is sponsoring. I take issue with several items on your list. I wish to address two of them.

One item was the candidate's poll position.

You and I both know that a candidate's poll position is heavily determined by the amount of exposure that media resources, such as, the Des Moines Register, provide for each candidate. We both know that the candidate receiving the least amount of exposure in newspaper reports and televised reports on an election campaign will not do well in most polls (including fabricated ones offered by biased sources that can manipulate poll results). We both know that many media insiders pretend that they don't report on candidates which do poorly in polls, or in your case, exclude them from media-sponsored debates. We know that this "excuse" is used to explain why these sources refuse to offer information that can improve a candidate's position in public opinion polls.

This is just one sleazy tactic that I learned from "journalism professionals" at the newspaper where I worked for nearly eight years. I worked for one of the most powerful corporate media conglomerates in the world where I learned many of that corporation's dirty tricks, as well as, media strengths and weaknesses.

Another "requirement" in your criteria list: the stipulation of where the candidate's Iowa field director must operate. This is an elitist requirement. It smacks of discrimination of candidates that refuse to accept Big Business and Big Industry bribes (a.k.a., campaign donations) which come in the form of large sums, and scattered small sums from sources representing these industries, no matter how
discreetly.

Are any Big Business and Big Industry "donors" for celebrity candidates (Like Clinton, Obama, Edwards, and Biden) also most valued advertisers with your publication?

This country is supposed to be a democracy, not a plutocracy. Does someone need to explain this to you? Apparently, they do.


Your decision to create a way to knock Congressman Kucinich out of this debate has caused me to become very intrigued about your publication. Now, I am curious to learn whether, or not the Des Moines Register has its own production and circulation departments. I'd like to know how much you pay most production and circulation employees and what type of "benefits" your provide them (if any). I'm very interested in knowing if, or how often OSHA has cited and fined your publication for work-place hazards, especially in the production and circulation departments which I suspect you control, vicariously through lower-level management and supervisors.

I am interested in these things, because I believe that they will help me to determine some of the reasons why you don't want Iowa voters to learn about Dennis Kucinich's official record as it reflects his position on the issues and the ideas he has.

What will I do with this information?

I like to share. I like to teach. I like to encourage people to harness the power which knowledge brings.


Sincerely,

Treva L. Van Fossen.

Anti-democracy Big Media should regard this message as fair warning.

I followed the trail from the efx2blogs main page to Ladyoma's blog, where she referred her readers to this post on Jeep's blog to encourage us US Americans to petition against torture committed by US citizens representing our country. Please read Jeeps' post and follow the links to get involved. We have a moral obligation to aggressively oppose this practice.

Short jokes have been recycled for decades or longer. Some unimaginative moron attempts to give these jokes a fresh look and feel, but those of us that have heard the jokes since early childhood are not impressed.

Less impressive, the bigotry practiced at our expense. The unshakable reminder that some poorly groomed piano plucker added to our misery with a one hit wonder of a song he titled, "Short People."

Life as a short person is a struggle. It is not so much because of any challenges we face (and overcome) with physical objects, such as large and cumbersome items. No. The greatest challenge for us is in proving our capabilities and worth as human beings to all the size bigots in this world.

The short jokes don't hurt us. What hurts us is when we know that we're more than just capable of handling a particular job, but some ignorant people decide that we're unqualified, because of our size.

We spend our childhood and adolescence learning how to defend ourselves from the abuse we face with every big bully we meet. This might be a laughing matter to anybody that thinks it's funny when big bullies beat up, rob, verbally and otherwise humiliate their small victims, but only to people that never felt the pain. We are treated as if we should hate ourselves, as if we should feel horrible for being short.

We are constantly bombarded with messages that suggest, "You should not bother trying. Give up."

Dennis Kucinich is being increasingly attacked because he is short. His size as a political candidate is attracting the bigots in the Republican and the Democratic parties. Yeah, the bigots of the Democratic Party are coming out of the woodwork. What have I discovered?

Some of those bigots are among the various groups of "underdogs" that turned to the Democratic Party to help them defend their rights to freedom from discrimination, hate crimes, and verbal abuse. For all the efforts to keep these people from advancing at work, in the community and through our government offices, one would think that these people would have learned to have respect for the rights of short people.

One might think that Gays would understand how wrong it is to discriminate against a person for unfair reasons. Not so with some of the gay Democrats at Visible Vote 08, which is a civil activist blog site for gay voters. One might think, if this group of gays don't like the unfair stereotypes and false rumors spread about them, they'd at least set an example by not being just like their persecutors.

Oh no!

But they are represented by organized activist groups. That's why, a person could be sued, or fired from their job for making a slur, or being involved in blocking their advancement into jobs where they have merits just because of their sexual orientation.

I'm not kidding when I say that I have had it! It's time that short people get more organized. We need to fight back to end the discrimination that we've been enduring and fighting to overcome all along.

I'm not suggesting we start pressuring people to stop telling short jokes. They only make themselves look stupid when they tell those jokes in attempts to make us feel self-conscious and inferior. Besides, we're instantly forgiving when we're picked on in a friendly manner, where no harm is intended and none taken. But when people attack us for a size as one way to punish, or discourage us for gaining, or seeking a position in which we're fully qualified and capable of handling, we should not let them continue this.

That's what many corporate media insiders have done. Now, the Visible Vote 08 group for gay voters, is doing the same. Does it take law suits and boycotts to get their attention and end the abuse?

Maybe, it does.

Dr. Phil appeared on David Letterman's show just before the writers' strike began. Letterman presented a picture of Dennis Kucinich to invite Dr. Phil to play talk show shrink.

He brought up a statement Kucinich reportedly made about seeing a UFO. Dr. Phil's response suggested that he questioned Kucinich's sanity as he quipped that he would not want anyone like that in the White House.

Yes, Dr. Phil, who believes in God. I assume, if he believes in God, then he might believe in angels, in the existence of "the devil," or "Satan," and in mysterious realms commonly known as Heaven and Hell.

Dr. Phil's opinion of people that say they saw a UFO, or share a belief in the existence of life forms from other planets and universes reminds me of some views Atheists have shared about their opinion of people that believe in God, Heaven, Hell, Angels and so forth.

What would Atheists say about Dr. Phil's belief in God? They'd say that he believes in a mythical being that has not been scientifically proven to exist beyond all reasonable doubt. They'd say that he, as well as, others that believe in God, and in Heaven, Hell, Satan and angels, are delusional. They'd suggest that these people get a grip and face reality, as they perceive it.

Now, I am not an Atheist. Call me a nutty believer of a mythological figment of my imagination, but I believe in God. I sure hope, that doesn't keep me from achieving any of my goals. I hope, my belief in God doesn't make me the laughing stock of my country. If I believe in God (known by many names) and if I don't doubt the existence of other realms, such as, Heaven and Hell, then who am I to doubt the possibility of life forms in other parts of this mysterious and vast world beyond our galaxy and universe? Since humans, still quite limited in knowledge and full use of their brains, have figured out a way to travel beyond Earth, far be it from me to doubt that no one from other worlds might come check out our planet.

I found the following news report in a blog post authored by a fellow Kucinich supporter at the campaign site. (My source also has videos and other content):

From Reuters wire service: Former pilots and officials call for new U.S. UFO probe Mon Nov 12, 4:52 PM ET Democratic U.S. presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich may have been ridiculed for saying he had seen a UFO, but for some former military pilots and other observers, unidentified flying objects are no laughing matter. An international panel of two dozen former pilots and government officials called on the U.S. government on Monday to reopen its generation-old UFO investigation as a matter of safety and security given continuing reports about flying discs, glowing spheres and other strange sightings. "Especially after the attacks of 9/11, it is no longer satisfactory to ignore radar returns ... which cannot be associated with performances of existing aircraft and helicopters," they said in a statement released at a news conference. The panelists from seven countries, including former senior military officers, said they had each seen a UFO or conducted an official investigation into UFO phenomena. The subject of UFOs grabbed the spotlight in the U.S. presidential race last month when Kucinich, a member of Congress from Ohio, said during a televised debate with other Democratic candidates that he had seen one. Former presidents Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter are both reported to have claimed UFO sightings. Most turn out to be misidentified aircraft, satellites or meteors. A panelist who once worked for Britain's Ministry of Defense said 5 percent of incidents cannot be explained. But the sightings are often dismissed by authorities without proper investigations, UFO activists say. "It's a question of who you going to believe: your lying eyes or the government?" remarked John Callahan, a former Federal Aviation Administration investigator, who said the CIA in 1987 tried to hush up the sighting of a huge lighted ball four times the size of a jumbo jet in Alaska. The panel, organized by a group dedicated to winning credibility for the study of UFOs, urged Washington to resume UFO investigations through the U.S. Air Force or NASA. "It would certainly, I think, take a lot of angst out of this issue," said former Arizona Gov. Fife Symington, who said he was among hundreds who saw a delta-shaped craft with enormous lights silently traverse the sky near Phoenix in 1997. The Air Force investigated 12,618 UFO reports from 1947 to 1969 in what was known as Project Blue Book. Investigators concluded that the incidents posed no threat and there was no evidence of space aliens or a super technology in operation. "Since the termination of Project Blue Book, nothing has occurred that would support a resumption of UFO investigations," the Air Force said on its Web site. (Reporting by David Morgan; Editing by Joanne Kenen, David Alexander, Stuart Grudgings)

I am not finished with Dr. Phil.

MSNBC is polling people's views on whether, or not Bush should be impeached. You can access that poll at the following URL:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904