People in America, and around the world, were shocked about so many aspects of Katrina, including the spotlight it focused on some of America's dirty little secrets that the Bush Team would like to keep from public view.  Like race discrimination and poverty.  After all, America is the beacon of civil rights, democracy and the richest nation on earth.  Now, Bush Team has found an answer, at least to the pesky question of how to hide American poverty, just rename it.

In an unguarded moment, perhaps while lying in bed at night or contemplating the reflection in the mirror, you know who you are.  You know what you have endured and experienced, what you have done and considered doing, what you think and feel.  You know of the scars and mistakes and imperfections.  You know of the fears and doubts and urges.  They are your private demons.

Tell me, when you go out in the world or interact with others, do you fully reveal yourself for who you are or perceive yourself to be?  Do you expose your demons?  Or do you go undercover?  Do you assume a public persona to conceal, or even contain, the private one?  In reality, there are few among us who can assert with absolute honesty that they are entirely as they appear.  We all have something or other to hide.

We all wrestle with demons, in some measure.  We all have moments--some more than others, certainly--when a cartoon devil and angel perch upon our shoulders and vie for our attention, if not our soul.  With any luck, the devil is generally not too persuasive or alluring.  But what happens when the fiend is given some help, when someone joins in to fan the flames that are already perilously near?  Will such a convergence of malevolent forces merely hasten the inevitable fall or encourage an unnecessary plummet over the brink?

Regardless, when any one of us is wrestling with demons--whatever they may be--it hardly seems right or kind for others to urge them on.  And to profit from such seems particularly crass and immoral.  Consider what happened recently to Louis Conradt, Jr., as reported on November 7 by the Houston Chronicle:

Sen. Reid's reported intention to give Joe seniority in the Senate Democratic Caucus is wrong on so many levels.  It violates caucus rules, including precedent that when a Senator leaves the Democratic caucus, s/he loses past seniority when returning to the Senate caucus.  Of course, those Senators did not leave the caucus to campaign as an opposition party candidate. That brings up the Traficant case, where he was kicked out of the caucus for voting for a non-Democrat in a partisan election. Let's see, do you think Joe voted for himself or Lamont? One thing is clear. Joe is playing both parties against each other in order to obtain power as the swing vote in the closely divided Senate to make him the unilateral Decider of key issues. Given that neither party will have clear control of the Senate with or without Joe, both parties should just kick Joe out into the cold.

Someone wanted to contact me, and noted I have no contact information up.

There's a reason for that, as much as there's a reason I post under "scribe".

I like anonymity.

There was more than a little back and forth before the election on the mysterious decline in gas prices.  No-lead went from close to $3 down to close to $2, in the course of just a few months.  No new huge discoveries, no new technology making gas easier, cheaper or more abundant, no decline in demand.  No nothing.  Just cheaper.

Wow, Bush not only looked like a deer in the headlights, he started spilling some of the truth. He's sure going to regret admitting that he told a blatant lie to the country eight days ago about something as important as the wartime Sec of Defense just to get those pesky reporters to shut up and go on to the next question.

Then he admitted that he really thought the Rs were going to win last night. So he's in deep denial about two countries. Interesting. At least Iraq he has the excuse that he lives 8,000 miles away. But he's apparently not living in this country.

And how annoying for him to trot out that old yarn about how he was bipartisan in Texas, where all the Ds are as conservative as the Rs, so it's just a name-difference and they're all working for the same thing. He had the audacity to pretend that he tried the same in DC. He's the one who decided to put Rove in charge to run a scorched earth White House for six years. For the "values" and "accountability" party, he sure is pathetic at owning up to his own choices.

There's a lot to do.

Over in the main thread, BTD is noting, and properly condemning, Rahm Emmanuel's trying to yank the narrative toward sucking up to the K Street folks, stroking his ego, and lining his pockets.  People did not work so hard for crap of the variety he's spewing.

And, Rahm's bipartisanship is really the sprinkles on Sen. Tortureman's sundae of pimping himself out.  Useless, valueless, and deserving only of rejection.

So, a brief look around the news, to see where we have to go, now that the party's over (you don't think Rover and his lackeys are sleeping, do you?  They're busy trying to steal VA-SEN, MT-SEN, and all those House races which haven't been called yet*).

I'm just posting here a few of the really stupid events of the day, and invite quick updates in the comments.  Feel free to contribute.

A quick digression, first:

FWIW, German radio is doing a long piece on the elections - they're paying a lot of attention to WY ID and OH as exemplars of the state of the House races.

OK, back.

I hope to get married someday, or at least civil unionized. Lining up the husband may take awhile, but I'd sure be grateful to anyone who could help make it legal in the meantime.

Colorado is on the verge of legalizing civil unions--polls have it just about tied--and that's a huge breakthrough. We would be the first state in the union for voters to do it ourselves. That would cause big problems for James Dobson's "activist judges" crap. How amazing for Colorado, of all places, to be the breakthrough state.

I'm asking you to do two things--whether you live in Colorado or not:

There is a well-known bumper sticker, popular among educators and their supporters, that proclaims: If you can read this, thank a teacher.  Undoubtedly, the message is intended to highlight the important role played by these professionals and to suggest that a modicum of appreciation is their due.  That such a seemingly obvious sentiment required dissemination on the rear of vehicles speaks to the lack of respect and understanding educators are oddly afforded at times.  The same might be said of liberals--who perhaps ought be honored with a bumper sticker of their own: If you enjoy progress, thank a liberal.

This nation owes a great debt to its liberals.  A determined and visionary lot, they fought against the currents of history and around the obstacles of repression and disfavor to give birth to democracy and further advancements in liberty and equality.  Their achievements are many: the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the emancipation of the slaves, women's suffrage, social security, civil rights, et al.  Indeed, there is little in the way of social and political progress that cannot be credited to liberals.  Nevertheless, to some Americans, liberal is a dirty word, synonymous with heathen or fanatic and invoked with suspicion if not disdain.  Such disapprobation hardly seems deserved.

So said none other than uber-warmonger neo-con Andrew Sullivan, after Bushie reaffirmed his intention that Rummy and Deadeye would stay on for the full remainder of The Unit's term.

This is a long diary and it goes into terrain which should be speculative but, given the events we have to deal with every day, aren't.  "What do you do with a crazy President?"  has been the staple of Hollywood and pulp thriller novels for years, from "Nixon" to "Dave".  With differing results.

This is all the world needs. Bush Team wants to place a US General in charge of ALL UN peacekeeping missions. This would essentially make Mr. Preemptive, Unilateral Decider the Commander In Chief of worldwide military missions with an extra 95,000 soldiers (or UN peacekeepers) to manage "trouble spots from Lebanon to Sudan."