Swami Uptown Archive: June 2004

One former Halliburton subcontracting manager, Marie deYoung, said in her signed statement that she had seen "significant waste and overpricing." "Halliburton rarely collected adequate information from subcontractors to justify payment of invoices. When I attempted to properly verify invoice terms before setting up payment authorization, I was chastised," said deYoung, a former Army captain and chaplain who resigned from the company last month.

According to deYoung, Halliburton's financial staff lives at the five-star Kempinski Julai'a Hotel and Resort in Kuwait. "For a three-month period, the Kempinski hotel charged almost $1 million to house 100 Halliburton employees. By comparison, it costs less than $200,000 a year to lease tents that could house 400 soldiers. ... The military requested that Halliburton move into tents, but Halliburton refused."

Rosemary Breslin (1957-2004)
June 15, 2004 | 3:30 p.m.

Swami knows you don't make friends as a book-reviewer, but he loved Rosemary Breslin's book, "Not Exactly What I Had in Mind," when he read it seven years ago and he wrote a rave review and he and Rosemary became friends, and then Mrs. Uptown came into the picture, and we started spending time with Rosemary and her husband, Tony Dunne. And then Swami was able to steer some work Tony and Rosemary's way, and they won prizes, and everyone was just delighted to be alive and on the planet together.

Rosemary Breslin died yesterday, at 47. "Of that which cannot be said, nothing should be spoken," wrote the great philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, and that is how Swami feels today--he just can't talk about this.

But he can send you to this amazing woman's amazing book. Here is Swami's review, from way back when:

It's a little hard to type through the tears.

I picked up Rosemary Breslin's book, "Not Exactly What I Had in Mind," not knowing what I was getting into.

I sort of knew that it was about having this possibly fatal illness and getting married anyway.

I sort of knew she was the daughter of Jimmy Breslin, the New York columnist who has the finest instinct for recognizing the Real Deal and the greatest ability to turn a phrase in the business.

I sort of knew she married a guy named Tony Dunne, who is related to Dominick Dunne the writer and Griffin Dunne the actor-director-producer and John Gregory Dunne and Joan Didion, who need no introduction.

Dear friend, these facts were irrelevant--I was unprepared for this book.

And even though I'm going to tell you a bit about it, you'll be unprepared for it too.

Rosemary Breslin, the cover picture tells us, is an extremely attractive woman. But she was, for most of her young life, a particular kind of Manhattan screwup. Very bad with money, for one thing, and not quick to file her tax return. Before she met Tony Dunne, she hadn't gone on a date for three years--so long a dry spell that her father asked her, "You're not a dyke, are you?"

And, of course, there is the small matter of her disease: Her body is unable to manufacture mature red blood cells. It's like anemia--if you gave anemia the A-bomb.

When she meets Tony Dunne, Rosemary Breslin, age 33, is about to move out of an apartment she can't afford. For their first dinner, which she doesn't realize is a fix-up, she puts on a gray cashmere sweater that's so not-new she notices, reaching for the wine, that she can smell her body odor on it.

To tell you more would be to spoil your pleasure, but let me give you one hint. The first sentence of this book is: "I think I've found my husband's next wife." Nora Ephron would give a lot to write a sentence that fine. So, probably, would Jimmy Breslin. So would I. But I'm not sure that Nora or Jimmy or I could go through all that Rosemary Breslin has, and still have enough clarity and love to have written this book, one heartfelt, tragic and exquisitively funny sentence at a time.

Granted, you will weep as you read. And, if you have prayers, you'll pray that Rosemary Breslin gets to grow old with Tony Dunne. But those prayers and tears aren't really about her--they are, I think, about you, about me, about wanting to feel love that strongly even if you have to live in the shadow of death.

I can't think of a more important subject, or a more important book. Or, today, a person I admire more than Rosemary Breslin.

Homes for Our Troops is a newly launched initiative to build affordable housing for the 800+ members of our Armed Services who have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan with permanent disabilities. It's like Habit for Humanity--volunteer workers, donated materials--just for a very specific clientele.

This is a terrific idea--and especially important for handicapped Reservists, who do NOT get health insurance provided by the government.

This, for Swami, is what Spirituality is all about: identifying the good, then doing it. So please go to the site, spread the word, give some money--whatever you can do, do it.

And a big shout out to Jerry Gutekunst, the New Hampshire Volunteer Coordinator for "Homes for Our Troops" who brought this great cause to our attention.

Ron Reagan Jr. on Bush's "Faith"
June 14, 2004 | 1:00 p.m.

The Washington Monthly (scroll down) quotes Ronald Reagan Jr. comparing his father to George W. Bush:

Dad was also a deeply, unabashedly religious man. But he never made the fatal mistake of so many politicians, wearing his faith on his sleeve to gain political advantage. True, after he was shot and nearly killed early in his presidency, he came to believe that God had spared him in order that he might do good. But he accepted that as a responsibility, not a mandate. And there is a profound difference.

But the President's not a believer in that proposition. According to The National Catholic Reporter, during his June 4 visit with the Pope,

Bush asked the Vatican to push the American Catholic bishops to be more aggressive politically on family and life issues, especially a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

A Vatican official told National Catholic Reporter that in his meeting with Cardinal Angelo Sodano and other Vatican officials, Bush said, "Not all the American bishops are with me" on the cultural issues. The implication was that he hoped the Vatican would nudge them toward more explicit activism.

Other sources in the meeting said that while they could not recall the president's exact words, he did pledge aggressive efforts on the cultural front, especially the battle against gay marriage, and asked for the Vatican's help in encouraging the U.S. bishops to be more outspoken.

According to sources, Sodano did not respond to the request.

I guess on one level we can say we've come a long way since 1960 when John F. Kennedy had to foreswear that he'd follow the instructions of the Pope in his decisions of governance. Today we have a Protestant born-again who tries to enlist the Pope to intervene in an American election....

Presidents regularly meet with Popes. Certainly they talk about matters both political and moral, perhaps even theological. But is it the president's place to press the pope to sow religious divisions among American Catholics, a majority of whom seem uncomfortable with the efforts of some in the hierarchy to discipline pro-choice Catholic politicians? And, all that aside, is it proper for the president to enlist the Vatican as an arm of his political campaign?

l) Do you see the Vatican telling American bishops--who are well aware that many in their flock don't agree with the Vatican on "cultural" issues--to lay down the law on issues they have thus far successfully ducked?

2) And if the Bishops do as Bush hopes, do you see their congregations falling into lockstep and voting, like automatons, for Bush? Or do you see many Catholics--who ignore the Pope's dictates on birth control and abortion and so on, but somehow manage to continue to attend Mass and take Communion--finally deciding this is the time to head for the exit?

3) And what about all those "liberal" parishes that spend more energy helping the poor than thinking about the President--how might they react to the imposition of an agenda that's all about "againsts": against same-sex marriage, against stem-cell research, against abortion?

While Swami awaits Loose Canon's response, he looks at the bright side. How many Catholics are there who can't wait to pull the lever for a "born again" Protestant? And how many African-American churchgoers are there? Swami doesn't have the figures, but he'll bet there are more African-Americans on the voting rolls.

And that makes Swami think: Two can play...

Jesse Jackson! Paging Jesse Jackson! Would Jesse Jackson please come to the courtesy phone?

Who's More Catholic?
June 14, 2004 | 1:00 p.m.

President Bush craves American Catholic voters to do what the Pope tells them to. But if the way Catholic Senators vote is any indication, they don't listen to Rome. Nathan Newman reports:

Sen. Dick Durbin has released a survey of Catholic Senators that rates them in three categories: Pro-Life, Domestic Policy and Foreign Policy. Unsurprisingly, Democratic Senators do poorly on the pro-life rating, but the news is in the Domestic and Foreign Policy ratings. Using the stated legislative priorities of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), Durbin has ranked the Senators on Catholic positions from the minimum wage to the right to unionize on the domestic front to the Iraq War Resolution and Global AIDS funding on the international side. And some Catholic Republicans are way off the Church's legislative priorities.

Senator Sununu and Santorum received the lowest domestic ratings (23%) with Bunning and Santorum tied with the lowest ratings in foreign policy (6%). Other Catholic GOPers with notably low ratings were Senator Domenici (27% Domestic, 12% International) and Murkowski (33% Domestic, 7% International). Kerry had the highest domestic rating of any Catholic Senator (95%).

Of course, conservatives will say only the abortion issue counts. Now, many Catholic leaders may say it counts more-and Durbin gives it its own rating, but it should raise questions in some quarters-hint to the media-that additional stories on who is a "good Catholic" could be done.

He said that after he broke Abu Ghraib people are coming out of the woodwork to tell him this stuff. He said he had seen all the Abu Ghraib pictures. He said, "You haven't begun to see evil..." then trailed off. He said, "horrible things done to children of women prisoners, as the cameras run."

And it sure does seem those jerks are everywhere these days. Must be some historical thing, some end-of-an-era thing. Couldn't have anything to do with the folks behind the folks who run our government.

The Messiah Is Among Us (Just Ask Him)
June 11, 2004 | 4:15 p.m.

Two decades ago--directed by God, he said--Reverend Moon launched the Washington Times.

Later, Jesus, Confucius, the Buddha, and Muhammad showered Moon with hosannas.

Last March, Moon apparently told guests at a Washington party that Hitler and Stalin--once bad guys, now good guys after five decades in the Great Beyond--have, from their graves, added their names to his endorsement list. They call Moon "none other than humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent."

Swami's not bowing down to Reverend Moon until Ronald Reagan endorses him. How long do you think that will take--a week? Two?

Church Ladies in South Carolina
June 11, 2004 | 4:15 p.m.

Email from a Southern friend:

So the day before yesterday I went to vote for the Democratic Candidate, Inez Tannenbaum, who, hopefully, will take the slot of Senator Fritz Hollings next term. I showed up with my husband, the Well-Known Liberal. I showed up with my daughter. I showed up with my passport and checkbook and other various and sundry pieces of identification proving that I lived where I lived, and I was who I said I was.

The people before us proudly stated they were Republicans, and the two ladies behind the counter tittered and smiled, and let them go on through. The woman behind the counter is a member of my church, and she is also the mother of my brother's best friend. She sang in the choir with my mother. She's been to my house God knows how many times. The point is, she KNOWS me.

I handed her my passport (you must have the exact proof of identity to get a passport, just as you do to get a South Carolina Driver's License, which I had recently lost). She asked me for my driver's license. I explained it was lost. She refused to let me vote. She asked the person next to her if she was right, and that tittering fool said that she, indeed, was right--I could only vote with a South Carolina Driver's License or a South Carolina I.D.

Oh well, I don't expect this State, which has been Republican ever since Strom Thurmond started the Dixiecrats with his handstand Life Magazine cover and rotten ideas, and which now has begun subtly turning the blue South Carolina State Flag into a red one, to be anything but Republican.

But I can't help thinking...and so it begins.

Legalized Bigotry
June 11, 2004 | 4:15 p.m.

In your place of business, do you think you have the right to discriminate against or harass coworkers or customers simply because your religion teaches that they are evil or inferior?

If you're a doctor, health worker or police officer, do you think you have the right to look at an accident victim or about-to-pop pregnant woman and say, "Nah, my religion doesn't approve of her, so I'm not helping"?

If you agree you have such rights, you're going to love the Workplace Religious Freedom Act sponsored by our old friend Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA). (You remember Rick: the guy who saw a slippery slope from gay marriage to sex with dogs and kids and other stuff so disgusting they didn't even make the prisoners at Abu Ghraib do it. Not exactly a party animal--Swami sees no sodomy in Mrs. Santorum's past, present, and future--but Rick sure has a pornographer's imagination.)

You say: "This is a crackpot bill, sponsored by a crackpot."

Not so fast. Yeah, it's whack, but the crackpot is the third most powerful Republican in the Senate. Reagan II--ooops, President Bush--adores him. And Swami bets no priest denies him the blood and body of Christ.

Mary Walker on Torture and Jesus
June 11, 2004 | 4:15 p.m.

Mary Walker's not a household name (except in households like Swami's). But in case she shows up in a future edition of Trivial Pursuit, you might do well to recall that, as general counsel of our Air Force, she was one of the lawyers who wrote the memos explaining how Americans could torture prisoners without violating the Geneva Convention.

What's riveting about Attorney Walker is not how she helped devise this wickedly ingenious legal defense.

It's that she's a Christian who's a big believer in Living Her Faith--she's co-founder of a San Diego spinoff of the Campus Crusade for Christ.

Billmon thoughtfully juxtaposes her statements of faith with excerpts from the torture memoes.

Before Loose Canon jumps all over Swami, let us note, as Billmon reminds us, "We cynical lefties should remember that it was Christian soldiers who blew the whistle on Abu Ghraib, out of stricken consciences."

Still, Swami wonders about Christianity as practised in America: What, exactly, does "Christian Nation" mean? That is: What does it mean in action?

When Politics Happens to Good Churches
June 11, 2004 | 4:15 p.m.

Several readers have asked what happens to churches that violate their non-profit status by taking political positions or endorsing candidates.

They're not the only ones who wonder about that.

As it happens, Josh Marshall, of Talking Points Memo, gives us a chilling update:

Under current tax rules, clergy members are allowed to speak out on political issues and to lead nonpartisan voter registration drives. But the IRS can revoke a congregation's 501(c)3 tax-exempt status if it endorses candidates or engages in partisan politics.

The American Jobs Creation Act, introduced [last] Friday by House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.), is scheduled for markup Thursday and a vote on the House floor next week. The bill's main purpose is to cut the top corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 32 percent and provide other tax relief to businesses, in return for repealing subsidies that have triggered European sanctions on U.S. farmers and manufacturers.

But on page 378 of the bill is a provision entitled "Safe Harbor for Churches." It would allow clergy members to engage in political activity, including endorsing candidates, as long as they make clear that they are acting as private citizens and not on behalf of their religious organizations. They could not make partisan political statements in church publications, at church functions or using church funds.

The provision also would allow clergy members to commit three "unintentional violations" of the tax rules on political activity each year without risking the loss of tax-exempt status. After the first violation, the church, synagogue or mosque would have to pay corporate taxes on one week's worth of its annual revenue. For the second violation, the penalty would be taxation of 50 percent of the organization's annual revenue. The penalty for the third violation would be taxation.

You know, I thought I was reading a spiritual, uplifting, enlightening article! Silly me! It's an election year and the long-reaching tentacle of the Democratic Party even permeates here. Propaganda under the guise of spirituality..sickening. Personal attacks on the dead...abhorrent and so Democratic. Enough negativity to gag a maggot. But then, power to the Godless government is all that matters isn't it? "Swami"..disgusting. "1984" has arrived.

In this blog, I am examining how the spiritual plays out in the real world. Politicans who cloak themselves in religion--how do they behave? ARE they really "Christians"? That's what I'm looking at. So far, I'd say the "propaganda" is being put out by the people I write about. You are, in my view, essentially accusing me of writing about what's going on. You want politics to leave the blissfully pure spiritual home that is Beliefnet? Write President Bush.

Damn right I want you to leave your opinions out of a spiritual arena where folks go to get away from "the world" to "come apart" and be fed spiritually. We mortals are bombarded with politics all day long from (obviously) every arena. AND I do thank you for taking the time to respond.

What kind of creep would take pleasure in watching John Ashcroft, before Congress, refuse to produce documents that show how the White House understood our armed forces might torture prisoners--but that the President couldn't be held accountable?

Who enjoys Dennis Miller saying of the Abu Ghraib pictures, "I like to trade them with my friends"?

Who gets off on Ann Coulter, who denies the Bush administration misled us about the war, telling us: "You'd have to put liberals in Abu Ghraib to get them to tell the truth about what people [in the Bush administration] were saying before the war--and then the problem would be that most liberals would enjoy those activities"?

Who likes reading with fresh eyes how the Reagan team (scroll down) mocked gays and ignored AIDS in the early years of the Greatest President's term?

This is ugly stuff. Swami thinks you ought to know about it, so you can see the threat to truth and civility that these people represent.

But, like Swami's pen pal, many of you--maybe most of you--don't want to hear about it. You want "uplifting," and you'll want it even if you lose every civil liberty. Just give you sweet baby Jesus in a manger, a Heaven with a God in a robe and a white beard, and eternal life that you get without breaking a sweat.

Good luck with that!

Still, Swami feels your pain--hey, he shares it. So maybe we ought to try it your way for a while. In that spirit, readers who like outrage served up with humor should zoom over to The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

For the rest of you....

Tolstoy's Vision of God
June 10, 2004 | 2:00 p.m.

On this day in 1881, Count Leo Tolstoy donned his peasant coat and homemade bark shoes, gathered his walking staff and two bodyguards, and set out from his estate for the Optina Pustyn monastery...

The Education of the Virgin
June 10, 2004 | 2:00 p.m.

Take comfort in De La Tour's masterful portrait, from the collection of the Frick Museum in New York: De La Tour (Click to enlarge the image, or just look at enlarged image)

Father's Day Book Pick for the Christian Father
June 10, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

Her child's body was twitching, she was cold and unresponsive. Diagnosis: a tumor in the brain. A tumor pressing right against the brain stem of a 9-month-old baby. Heather Davis, an inveterate researcher, made sure her daughter had the best doctors in Los Angeles. Then she went right to the top of the chain of command--she got right with God. Read more about Baptism by Fire.

Swami: The Morning After
June 9, 2004 | 4:30 p.m.

The better to fulfill his duties to you and Beliefnet, Swami took the night flight home from San Diego, where it was cloudy and cool, to New York, where it feels like a hundred degrees. Now that he is here, Swami feels...unlike himself. All those smarties at the tech conference! Swami's brain is as overheated as the New York sidewalk today. He must drink some hot tea--yes, a hot drink can be very refreshing on a hot day--and take to his mat.

Tomorrow, the splenetic Swami you know and love (or loathe) shall return. And as for the national day of mourning for Ronald Reagan on Friday....Swami wouldn't dream of taking the day off.

Humor from...Bill Gates?
June 9, 2004 | 4:30 p.m.

Let's lighten the gloom, shall we? Maybe the best story Swami heard at the conference was told by the Microsoft co-founder. It's about legendary investor Warren Buffett. As Bill (like Gates and Uptown are on a first-name basis) told it: "I was at a dinner with Warren Buffett. The wine steward at the restaurant went on and on about the wine--how rare, how precious, how very very expensive. When he reached Buffett to pour some, Warren put his hand over the glass. 'No, thanks,' he said. 'I'll just take the money.'"

Reagan and The Rapture
June 9, 2004 | 4:30 p.m.

The Revealer reports:

He [Reagan] spoke often of his belief that the likely conflict with the Soviet Union (he called it "the Final Battle") had been foretold; that the Soviets were the satanic nation of Gog written about in the books of Ezekiel and Revelation...

As Reagan told People magazine on December 6, 1983, "theologians have been studying the ancient prophecies--what would portend the coming of Armageddon--and have said that never, in the time between the prophecies up until now, has there ever been a time in which so many of the prophecies are coming together. There have been times in the past when people thought the end of the world was coming, and so forth, but never anything like this."

Dear Mr. Ashcroft:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from talks on television, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them.

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing smell for the Lord - Leviticus 1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what to you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am not allowed to have contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual cleanliness - Leviticus 15:19-24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states she should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill her myself?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Leviticus 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

7. Leviticus 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair cut, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by the bible, in Leviticus 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Leviticus 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Leviticus 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton and polyester blend). He also tends to curse a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Leviticus 24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? Leviticus 20:14

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Mourning in America
June 8, 2004 | 1:00 p.m.

Swami wasn't planning to comment upon Ronald Reagan beyond the few lines he quoted about "heroes" yesterday. For one thing, Swami is at a conference 3,000 miles from home, and after long days of listening to smart people and nights of trying to sound like a smart person himself, he had hoped to share a few anecdotes and get to bed at a reasonable hour. For another, Swami has been too occupied to see or read almost anything about the national week of mourning for Reagan. And, finally, while Swami was--to say the least--no fan of the Reagan presidency, good manners hold him back from attacking anyone while the body is still cooling.

But even in a Four Seasons ballroom, with the likes of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs at the podium, it is impossible to ignore the national orgy of mourning for Reagan. Swami understands that much of it is less about Reagan--who has been "gone" for so long that a kind of national Alzheimer's has set in and even those who loved him really don't remember him clearly--than about the idea of Reagan. It's grief for "Morning in America": for the '40s-movie, white-picket-fence nation that Reagan evoked. No Britney Spears flaunting her young flesh in that culture. No crisis that the local minister or the friendly coach couldn't fix. And, thanks to the love and understanding of the right spouse, a happy ending every time.

That America never existed, but Swami's nostalgic for it too. We all miss childhood fables and stories with endings that wrap it all up in a bow. And we all crave meaning in our lives--the knowledge that we're important, if only in our neighborhood.

But Swami feels the blood rise when we get to the part of the national mourning that deals with Who Reagan Really Was and What Reagan Really Did. In a free moment, he snuck a look at Loose Canon and saw that Ms. Hays had compared George W. Bush (her contemporary hero) to Ronald Reagan (one of her all-time heroes): "...gracefully or not, he [Bush] speaks the same awkward truths that Reagan spoke so eloquently."

And so, setting manners aside for some collegial questioning, Swami must ask: What were these awkward truths, Ms. Hays? That for all our talk of freedom and fairness, we are a thug nation, incapable of telling the truth to ourselves about the ways we prey on the weak but cringe from the strong? That every chance a Republican President gets, he rigs the game so the rich--particularly his cronies--get richer? That our government doesn't give a fig about us, and that, in the worst possible sense of that phrase, we're "on our own"?

And that's just the softball stuff. Are you interested in the facts with a topspin of outrage and invective? Here we go...

Contrarian Takes on Reagan
June 8, 2004 | 1:00 p.m.

The most astonishing critique of Reagan and Reaganism came from Lee Atwater, who may have done more than anyone to get Reagan elected--and who was the first of the Reagan inner circle to die. On the way out, he had some second thoughts about what he'd done (courtesy of our pal The Rude Pundit--don't click if you're easily offended):

When Lee Atwater, mentor to Karl Rove and one of the gurus of Reagan and then Bush I's campaigns, was dying of brain cancer, he had such an epiphany about the world he helped to create. He called the umitigated greed of the Reagan/Bush era a "spiritual vacuum at the heart of American society, this tumor of the soul."

Reagan's own penchant for self-delusion has been widely documented. He frequently convinced himself of historical truths on the basis of old movies he half-recalled. He pretended to one White House visitor to have participated in the liberation of German concentration camps at the end of World War II though he hand never even gone overseas as a soldier. He entertained a strange fascination with the End of Days and was even known to speculate that they might take place during his presidency. He invented what he called "a verbal message" from the Pope in support of his Central American policies, which was news to everyone at the Vatican. He announced one day in 1985 that South Africa--though still ruled by the vicious apartheid regime of P.W. Botha--had somehow "eliminated the segregation that we once had in our own country." Such strange pronouncements by the president of the United States eventually grew to be considered so routine that rarely did anyone in the White House ever bother to correct them. The president simply had a penchant, one former senior adviser admitted, to "build these little worlds and live in them." One of his children added, "He makes things up and believes them." What is more astounding is the fact that he convinced other people to believe them too.

A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions tell me that's true, but the facts and evidence tell me it is not. As the Tower Board reported, what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages. This runs counter to my own beliefs, to administration policy, and to the original strategy we had in mind. There are reasons why it happened, but no excuses. It was a mistake.

To protect subordinates should they be charged with torture, the memo advised that Mr. Bush issue a "presidential directive or other writing" that could serve as evidence, since authority to set aside the laws is "inherent in the president."

So the right to set aside law is "inherent in the president". That claim alone should stop everyone in their tracks and prompt a serious consideration of the safety of the American republic under this president. It is the very definition of a constitutional monarchy, let alone a constitutional republic, that the law is superior to the executive, not the other way around. This is the essence of what the rule of law means--a government of laws, not men, and all that.

In shorthand: Clinton felt our pain (or has the good sense to pretend to). But we feel Bush's pain--whenever he's in crisis, he displaces his fears by freaking out the entire nation.

Swami won't be voting for Bush (that's not exactly news). But as Swami works day and night to bring this mendacious, spiritually bankrupt, would-be dictator from the Oval Office, he is acutely aware that only Bush is allowed to be a nasty SOB. If we kick at him, he'll try to hurt us--that's his pattern.

But if start connecting the dots, there's no need to kick him; sadly, our President is falling apart right in front of us. That strange performance on the White House lawn as he almost couldn't bring himself to announce George Tenet's "resignation"--that was telling. Then he zoomed off to Europe, where Mr. Punctual was late for everything. And then this, from last weekend's World War II ceremonies:

I saw Bush trying to sing the National Anthem...he didn't know the words!!! AND, AND...this was sweet!...the French set him up on CNN live so that as he read a speech, you could hear the announcer telling Bush what to say, then he'd repeat it, word for word, and in the same tone. It was a sight to behold...

So when you come to the part in your prayers when you list the folks who are special to you and much in need of help, please include the President. Starting tonight, on bended knee, Swami sure will.

Ronald Reagan
June 7, 2004 | 10:00 a.m.

Andrea (Galileo's student): "Unhappy is the land that has no heroes."

Galileo: "No Andrea, unhappy is the land that needs a hero."

George Bush: Blues Brother?
June 7, 2004 | 12:00 a.m.

Okay, Capitol Hill Blue is not the New York Times. But what if this stuff is even remotely true?

In meetings with top aides and administration officials, the President goes from quoting the Bible in one breath to obscene tantrums against the media, Democrats and others that he classifies as "enemies of the state."

In interviews with a number of White House staffers who were willing to talk off the record, a picture of an administration under siege has emerged, led by a man who declares his decisions to be "God's will" and then tells aides to "f--k over" anyone they consider to be an opponent of the administration.

One aide says the President actually described Tenet's decision [to resign] as "God's will."

God may also be the reason Attorney General John Ashcroft, the administration's lightning rod because of his questionable actions that critics argue threatens freedoms granted by the Constitution, remains part of the power elite. West Wing staffers call Bush and Ashcroft "the Blues Brothers" because "they're on a mission from God."

CALLER: Hi, thank you for taking my call. Here's my question. Other than who we vote for and keeping respect for everyone's beliefs, Bill, I'm wondering how you think we can work to restore a separation of church and state?

MAHER: Restore it, that's a good point. I think we have -- I hate to sound like a broken record. It has to take place at the top. When you have a president who is this openly religious and this openly contemptible, in contempt, rather, of the separation of church and state, I don't think anything is going to change until that changes.

This is a man who proudly says that Jesus picked him to be president. You said something about you have to respect people's beliefs. I know that's what we always hear, we have to respect. I'm sorry, I don't. I don't respect religion. I don't respect superstitious thinking, which is what religion is. I don't respect childish thinking, which is what religion is.

We talked about this before, this whole gay issue wouldn't even be an issue except it says it in the Bible. The Bible, that book that has people lived to be 900 years old and says the world is 6,000 years old, and that there are people who lived in a whale. That infallible work of genius and slavery is OK. You should stone a guy to death if he works on Sunday. That's the book that says, sorry no queers.

So I'm sorry, I don't respect people who believe in religion. I was religious when I was a kid. We all had dumb stuff drilled into our head. It doesn't mean when you get to be an adult you can't drill it out. I tell you something else they drilled into my head when I was a kid, mercury in my cavities. We found out later mercury is so bad we shouldn't even eat it when there is a trace of it in fish. But it was drilled into my teeth. So when I got older, I had it drilled out. You can do the same thing with religion.

As promised, his longer take on Father Joe.

What Gun Would Jesus Own?
June 4, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

Swami's informal poll of his fellow believers--Swami counts himself as a Jew/Buddhist/Hindu--has not turned up a single one who owns a gun. Swami thus concludes that Christians are the folks who own most of the guns in America. (Okay, plus atheists and agnostics and the occasional Scientologist.)

But Swami is weak on the New Testament. Can someone show him where Jesus says, "Forgive them, for they know not what they do"--and then blows a legion of Romans away?

Oh, right. Swami forgot. The Second Amendment--"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"--trumps the word of God.

But we won't debate that here, will we? Because everyone knows: You can't have a real conversation with anyone who holds the Second Amendment above God.

Not that there's need of a debate. Not when it's life-or-death. And so Swami wants your full attention here, because what Swami is about to tell you is truly a matter of life or death--maybe your life, maybe your kid's life.

There's a piece of mail going around. It's from Thomas Mauser, whose son was killed by an assault weapon at Columbine High.

You know about assault weapons? They can decimate a roomful of innocents in seconds. And you know the really cool thing about the gun that killed the Mauser kid? According to the manufacturer, it's "fingerprint resistant." Isn't that a feature every law-abiding citizen wants in his gun? Really, how can you get along without one of those babies?

Mauser writes his letter because the ban on assault weapons is about to expire. Everyone--from police chiefs on down--wants it extended. Only the National Rifle Association wants the ban to disappear. But you know George Bush and those Senators and Congressmen who take NRA money--they think the gun lobby just hangs the moon.

Mauser's letter follows. Whether you're a gun-owner or not, this is one gun control bill you should be able to support. And if you could share it with everyone in your online address book.....Swami would thank you a thousand times over. As would your loved ones.

Please Do This
June 4, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

Dear Friend,

Five years ago my 15-year-old son Daniel Mauser was one of 13 people killed at Columbine High School by two students. One of them used an illegal assault weapon. This summer, AK-47s, UZIs, and TEC-DC9s will be legal again unless we do something about it.

Using an exciting and unprecedented new Internet technology to grow an online petition, join me in my effort to see how many millions of names I can collect to deliver to President Bush. We will change the course of this country, create a lasting legacy for my son and other gun victims--and make America safer for you and your loved ones.

Here is how you can help:

Please sign this petition by cutting-and-pasting this message into e-mail and forwarding that e-mail to your family and friends. Make sure to add my e-mail address TOM@TOMSPETITION.ORG to your list of friends in the same forwarded e-mail (don't use bcc). This petition uses a new technology that allows you to see how many supporters you can reach through the power of "six degrees of separation."

Sending to TOM@TOMSPETITION.ORG confirms your participation and allows our petition software to map the growing support for our cause. We will immediately send you a link to your personal petition page, where you can see a real time map of your impact on this historic cause.

If each of us passes this message on to our friends and family this will be the fastest growing petition on the Internet ever! We will reach millions of people and force president Bush and Congress to extend the assault weapons ban.

For more information on how the petition technology maps your support, go to: tomspetition.org/info

Thank you,

Tom Mauser

On D-Day
June 4, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

Christopher Dickey looks back at World War II and what the great journalist Ernie Pyle learned about war ("Dead men by mass production--in one country after another--month after month and year after year. Dead men in winter and dead men in summer.")

And then he shifts to the present and quotes an e-mail from an American Lt. Col. in Iraq:

"The American soldier in Iraq is a fine human being," he writes. "Young men and women, a zillion miles from home, watching their friends die day after day, being mortared just like me, eating lousy food, baking in the unbelievable heat. Young men and women who are attending too many memorials and last roll calls. These young men and women suffer these indignities routinely and go out each day to help rebuild a school, build a water line, repair a bridge, fix the substations, install air conditioners in orphanages, the list goes on and on. These young men and women are heroes, not prison guards gone wild. They are the bravest most incredible people I have ever had the pleasure to know."

So Why Not Protect Them?
June 4, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

A while back, Swami wrote about a Florida community that collected Kevlar body armor so our soldiers in Iraq could line the inside of their Humvees. It was a popular compaign: 40 law enforcement agencies collected 1,200 pieces of Kevlar. A report on a blog (scroll down) takes the story from there:

Enter the U.S. Army, which was apparently embarrassed that the fact they still had our guys over there riding around in unarmored Hummers was getting lots of local media publicity, refused to accept the body armor (despite pleas from the local commander of the 351st, who wanted it), and publicly censured 1st Sgt. Chisholm for asking for it.

Our local red, white and blue congressman, Cliff Stearns, also joined in criticizing Sheriff Dean for butting in where he wasn't welcome.

The body armor is still sitting in a warehouse at the 351st's HQ in Ocala, and our guys in Iraq are still riding around in thin-skinned Humvees.

Maybe you'd like to write Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, about this. You don't need to do more than cut and paste the article--and ask, simply, WHY?

George & Ahmad, Sitting in a Tree,
K-i-s-s-i-n-g?
June 3, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

Ahmad Chalabi. Oh, dear. Swami hasn't dealt with this story yet, because--unlike the Bush Administration--he believes the accused are entitled to a presumption of innocence. It is not yet clear to Swami (though he is soooo tempted to believe this) that the Iraq war occurred because this one scoundrel, acting as an agent of Iran, gave the Bush Administration Iranian-invented "information" about Saddam's "weapons."

In other words (if true): Iran, which loathes the United States and Iraq, got one enemy to invade another.

But that's just the start of Chalabi's alleged perfidy. In addition to playing the Bush Administration--and, remember, he was our first choice to lead the new, "liberated" Iraq--he reportedly told the Iranians that we had cracked their intelligence code and were reading their dispatches.

(What is not in dispute: Just in the last few years, the United States has paid Chalabi at least $39 million--and that's a very lowball figure.)

If the allegations are true, this is a disaster that, in domestic terms, rivals the damage Abu Grahib did abroad. $200 billion spent, 800 lives lost, our economy disrupted, our credibility shot, our country divided--and all because the Bushies were so eager to go to war they were raw meat for any old ass-clown with a catchy story?

No wonder Swami hasn't discussed this until now--it's too depressing.

And Swami wouldn't be talking about it now if it weren't for the President's comment on Chalabi the other day.

Q: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Chalabi is an Iraqi leader that's fallen out of favor within your administration. I'm wondering if you feel that he provided any false information, or are you particularly--

THE PRESIDENT: Chalabi?

Q: Yes, with Chalabi.

THE PRESIDENT: My meetings with him were very brief. I mean, I think I met with him at the State of the Union and just kind of working through the rope line, and he might have come with a group of leaders. But I haven't had any extensive conversations with him.

As Stewart's guest, the New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, noted, "rope line" is not a term you use in daily speech. This wasn't a spontaneous answer--the White House knew the question was coming, and the President and his staffers worked up (and probably rehearsed) a response.

Fortunately, Washington Monthly looked up a Bush response to a question about Iraqi self-rule, from February 8, on Meet the Press.

Russert: If the Iraqis choose, however, an Islamic extremist regime, would you accept that, and would that be better for the United States than Saddam Hussein?

President Bush: They're not going to develop that. And the reason I can say that is because I'm very aware of this basic law they're writing. They're not going to develop that because right here in the Oval Office I sat down with Mr. Pachachi and Chalabi and al-Hakim, people from different parts of the country that have made the firm commitment, that they want a constitution eventually written that recognizes minority rights and freedom of religion.

1) The President lied. He knowingly, consciously lied about the extent of his relationship with Chalabi.

2) The President is so out-of-the-loop that he had no real relationship with the guy we wanted to run Iraq.

3) "Oh. Right. We did meet. I forgot. So what you gonna do--shoot me with Saddam's gun? That's what's wrong with the press. Always playing 'gotcha.'"

What gets your vote? (Or are there possibilities Swami hasn't considered?) Do let Swami know. And, while you're at it, you might like to write the President.

And Deliver Us Not Into Lap Dancers
June 3, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

You'd think England--which claims to value tradition in all things--would be the last country to tamper with the Bible.

Not so. Later this year, an updated version becomes available.

"Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death" is no longer.

Bring on: "Even if a full-scale violent confrontation breaks out, I will not be afraid, Lord."

The Church and Politics
June 3, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

A friend writes: "I wonder if you feel, as I do, that churches which dabble in politics should lose their tax exempt status."

Clearly, the Catholic church has no such fear (see yesterday's item about pro-choice Catholic politicians and their Communion problems).

But President Bush's hope of getting Pennsylvania churchgoers involved in his re-election campaign could create an IRS problem for Pennsylvania churches.

Separation of church and state? Respect for the law? Swami has to wonder: What's left for these guys to trash?

Swami's Catholic Problem (and Yours?)
June 2, 2004 | 2:00 p.m.

Yesterday Swami praised the Pope in advance for his much-anticipated excoriation of the United States war policy when he sits down for his visit with President Bush this week.

Today's a different story. Today, Swami has come to blast the Catholic church for inserting itself into our Presidential election.

Rick Hertzberg, in The New Yorker, lays the trouble out in short strokes:

Because Kerry opposes the recriminalization of abortion and supports stem-cell research to find treatments for such diseases as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, a bevy of bishops have all but called for his defeat. The archbishop of St. Louis has said he would refuse to let Kerry take Communion, the central sacrament of Catholic inclusion, and lesser bishops in Boston, New Orleans, and Portland, Oregon, have chimed in with similar sentiments. The bishop of Colorado Springs has gone further, declaring that anyone who votes for a candidate who favors abortion rights or stem-cell research (or gay marriage or assisted suicide) will be denied Communion in his diocese. Of course, there are still lots of bishops, probably a majority, who think that using the Eucharist as a political bludgeon is a bad idea. Cardinal Roger M. Mahony, of Los Angeles, to name one, has said that Kerry is welcome to take Communion in his diocese. There is plenty of disagreement within the Catholic Church and plenty of debate in the Catholic press.

Bush gave a speech yesterday--he called it "America's Compassion in Action"--in which he expounded on his affection for faith-based initiatives:

I'm proud to report that we've reached more than 10,000 faith-based and community groups with the message that we want your help, that the federal government now welcomes your work. And do not fear being discriminated against by the government.

Listen, I fully understand there are people in the faith community who have said, why do I want to interface with the federal government? (Laughter.) Why would I want to interface with a group of people that want to try to get me to not practice my faith? It's hard to be a faith-based program if you can't practice faith. And the message to you is we're changing the culture here in America. (Applause.)

For those who are disturbed by remarks like this, there was the usual disclaimer:

Look, I fully understand it's important to maintain the separation of church and state. We don't want the state to become the church, nor do we want the church to become the state. We're on common agreement there. But I do believe that groups should be allowed to access social service grants, so long as they don't proselytize, or exclude somebody simply because they don't share a certain faith. In other words, there's a way to accomplish the separation of church and state, and at the same time, accomplish the social objective of having America become a hopeful place, and a loving place.

Swami urges you to read the Russert-Pelosi dialogue in The Daily Howler (scroll down):

Howler's conclusion: "Somehow, Russert has come to think it's his job to make Democrats say nice things about Bush."

Today, Howler returns to this dust-up and nails what is--to Swami, at least--the Larger Issue:

Russert's questions had nothing to do with the actual merits of Pelosi's views; instead, he seemed to scold her for having expressed them. Such an attitude strangles democracy. When he appeared on 60 Minutes, General Zinni discussed such approaches:

ZINNI: Look, there is one, there's one statement that bothers me more than anything else, and that's the idea that when the troops are in combat, everybody has to shut up. Imagine if we put troops in combat with a faulty rifle, and that rifle was malfunctioning and troops were dying as a result; I can't think of anybody that would allow that to happen, that would not speak up. Well, what's the difference between that and a faulty plan and a faulty concept and strategy that's getting just as many troops killed and is leading down a path where we're not succeeding in accomplishing the mission that we've set out to do?

Zinni is the former commander of all U.S. troops in Iraq. But somehow Russert knew much better about the way the troops must be feeling. The GOP had been pushing this line, and Big Russ's obedient Buffalo boy knew he should peddle it too.

"He is a strong man," the U.S. president said. "He's got a huge presence and it's an honor to be with him. It truly is."

"He'll have something to say," Bush added. "Believe me, he'll use this as an opportunity to talk about a world problem or an issue, and he'll do it in a loving way. I mean he's the kind of person that makes you feel good."

The Church in the United States "is called to respond to the profound religious needs and aspirations of a society increasingly in danger of forgetting its spiritual roots and yielding to a purely materialistic and soulless vision of the world."

Who will do this work? "The lay faithful," the Pope said.

On the front page of last weekend's Tablet, England's oldest Catholic newspaper, was this: "The American President, George W. Bush, will be asked by the pope at their Vatican meeting on 4 June to stop basing his policies in the Middle East on the use of force, a leading curial cardinal said this week." According to Cardinal Pio Laghi, former papal nuncio to the United States and a frequent messenger between the Vatican and White House, the pope wants a multilateral peace-keeping force in Iraq, "one that is not under those who organized the war."

According to the cardinal, the pope intends to remind Bush that "the end never justifies the means, respect for life must always be honored and that struggle against terrorism does not justify giving up the principles of the state of law."

Letters, We Get Letters
June 1, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

Like any Internet shut-in with a book half-written, Swami loves mail. Especially mail from Beliefnet readers, many of whom have been lavish in their praise. Well, thanks, but you should know that Swami works in the shadow of a few giants in the blog trade. You like Swami? You'll love these guys (yes, sorry--all guys):

You and your blog read like neo-liberal fascism, and that's being polite. No, I won't go into anything personal about you, because it's all about you and what you extrapolate in your ridiculous blog. You really should get to know some of my left-wing wacko "Move On" members.

As for your hero, Kerry, I call him "Falstaff Kerry". But wait, you don't know what I'm talking about--your liberal education left out the classics in favor of dialectical materialism, diversity and the herd instinct.

Oh, and you took the weekend off from your blog to do what? Is your commune making tofu and granola this weekend? Nah, you're all too busy hanging out on the futons and air mattresses watching car races. Nevermind the servicebeings who fought and fight to keep your freedom of speech and other infrustructures.

Your blog is a filthy mud puddle on the Internet. Mud puddles dry up quickly...

Swami doesn't do parades, but he took Baby Uptown to the park quite early one morning--in a past life, Baby Uptown must have been a farmer, for she rises with the sun--and, after she'd finished with the slide and ladder, Swami led her to the war memorial. There, Swami took her hand and gently traced the names of some of the dead, hoping in some magical way the littlest Uptown could feel their sacrifice (and they, in some magical Heaven, could feel the life energy pounding in her veins).

And then Swami read a book. (See below.)

In short, a beautiful weekend. Swami hopes that his bilious correspondent set down his hatred long enough to enjoy it too.

Father Joe
June 1, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

"Father Joe" is the best selling book on Amazon. Swami is allergic to bestsellers, but he started this book in midafternoon and didn't get up until he'd inhaled all 271 pages. Inhaled, in part, because Swami was stunned that Tony Hendra is the author--Swami worked on several humor projects with Tony and is a big fan of "Ian Faith," the rock manager immortalized in the mockmentary "Spinal Tap." Inhaled, mostly, because Tony is very funny and Father Joe is very wise.

Basically, "Father Joe: The Man Who Saved My Soul" is a love story about a brilliant, troubled English kid and a Benedictine monk. No. Not what you're thinking. A love story, not a sex story. And the best kind of love story, too, because each gives all of what he's got to give--Tony is a warehouse of problems, worldliness and irony, Joe is all ears and a refusal to pass judgment. And in their decades of friendship, that dynamic never changes.

Swami will be reviewing this book elsewhere later this week--the link to that review will be posted here--so we won't belabor the plot now. Anyway, what Beliefnet readers may want to know is more of the "spiritual" wisdom that Father Joe dispenses. For instance:

"The only way to know God, the only way to know the other, is to listen. Listening is reaching out into that unknown other self, surmounting your walls and theirs; listening is the beginning of understanding, the first exercise of love."

"Feelings are a great gift, but they're treacherous if that's all we live for...Feelings trap us in the self. Doing a thing because you feel wonderful about it--even a work of charity--is in the end a selfish act. We perform the work not to feel wonderful but to know and love the other."

And this--one of Swami's favorite lines in the book--from Tony Hendra: "Unlike the pious, he didn't speak of Christ very much. But then, neither did Christ."

This is not a book the fire-and-brimstone crowd will welcome. It's too benign. Father Joe's God is too forgiving, too permissive, too willing to overlook a moment's indiscretion, too interested in the kind of long-term spiritual growth that comes from pouring love and more love on wounds. No, if you're gleefully counting down to the Rapture, this book isn't for you.

But if you're interested in spending some time with two fabulously interesting guys--one wise, one God's own fool--you want to get this book today. What will you come away with? That's your treat. But if Swami is typical, he heard Father Joe's message in the Eagles song, "Desperado" (he's been thinking a lot about that scene in "In America")--the last few lines, actually:

Desperado, why don't you come to your senses?
Come down from your fences, open the gate
It may be rainin', but there's a rainbow above you
You better let somebody love you, before it's too late.

If this last line is very much the story of your life--it is definitely the story of Swami's--"Father Joe" is essential reading.

Stem Cells, Anyone?
June 1, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

We all know what the True Believers think by now: using embryos for research is "murder."

But Swami challenges True Believers (and the unsure) to read Michael Kinsley's analysis: The False Controversy of Stem Cells.

If, after reading it, you still think it's "murder," please write in and school the Swami.

John Ashcroft: Liar or Idiot?
June 1, 2004 | 12:00 p.m.

From Terrorists on Ashcroft's 'Wanted List' Already in Jail:

At least two of the terrorists identified by John Ashcroft as part of an 'Al-Qaeda cell' that is waiting to attack America this summer are already in jail.

A respected website that holds databases on terror suspects lists Amer El-Maati as 'incarcerated'.

Likewise, Aafia Siddiqui, a female former MIT student, was arrested in Pakistan over a year ago, according to NBC.

The 'cell' that these individuals are said to belong to doesn't even exist. The Abu Hafs al Masri group was described by the Boston Globe as a 'phantom organization'. Their researchers could find no evidence that the group was real.