Sunday, April 09, 2006

Weapons of Mass Corruption

Since all of the hubbub surrounding the release of the "Downing Street Memo" this summer, it has become clear to many that the case for Operation Iraqi Freedom was a forged one--based on both faulty and manipulated intelligence. This week, developments in the Valerie Plame leak investigation reveal that the case against the President and his administration has become all the more damning. Read the Washington Post story here.

These days, one cannot help but long for those White House lies that caused mere embarassment--and not the deaths of over 6,900 .


Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Fare Thee Well

Bush is finally starting to cave to months of GOP pressures to shake up his inner circle. Today, he accepted Andrew Card's resignation as Chief of Staff. Talk about a storm-worn ship limping back to port. Mr. Card is "returning to private life" after taking it heavily on Dubai Ports World and Hurricane Katrina, not to mention the four-letter-word problem in the Persian Gulf.

We raise our dry martini to you, Mr. Card. Welcome back to the sporting life. And yes, that tastefully arranged fruit basket is from the Democrats.

Thursday, March 23, 2006

The Haverford College Democrats have placed a series of flyers around campus, overtly critiquing Pat Buchanan’s coming appearance. We do not, as an organization, reject his right to speak. The First Amendment is smart; people draw strength and grow analytically when faced with oppositional viewpoints. Even silly things have the right to be uttered and countered. The ideological position of the College supports this, as it seeks to foster an environment of “trust, concern and respect” where a pluralism of ideas can engage in dialogue.

For dialogue to take place at all, we recognize that there must be basic rules. Free speech is not constituted either by yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theatre, nor by the use of language for violent ends. We recognize that dialogue no longer takes place when one party is silenced, dehumanized and denied agency. For the women, Jews, Blacks, homosexuals, immigrants and poor denied rights, enfranishment or agency under Buchanan’s politics, this is not a parlor debate. The ability to freely exchange speech requires that there is a basic equality amongst participants. We don’t believe that Buchanan respects or allows this equality.

There will be students who disagree with this critique, and it is their right to seek out Buchanan’s views and speak in their own voices, as long as they don’t violate the rights of others. We believe that the College, which institutionalizes equality and plurality, has an equal right not to pay someone to come to Haverford who is racist, xenophobic, misogynistic and anti-semitic. In politics, money speaks with the loudest voice of endorsement. We might tolerate the opponent, but that toleration does not require that we write her a check.

Pat Buchanan is not an opponent of this College because of his position as a conservative pundit in opposition to Haverford’s liberal majority. His historical use of hate speech, his bigoted remarks on a variety of subjects, and his violent revision of history—including the Holocaust—oppose him to all respectful dialogue. Haverford’s respect for freedom of speech means he ought to be allowed to speak; Haverford’s supposed respect for dignity and empowerment makes cutting him a check hypocritical and cowardly.

Pat Buchanan is coming to speak at 7:30 pm on Sunday, March 26th—anyone with an interest should attend. Haverford College has paid $20,000 to have him come, and we ought not waste such money through poor attendance.

-Emma Rodman

Friday, March 17, 2006


Recent polls indicate that Adrian Bleifuss Prados is widely perceived as the most youthful and virile member of the Haverford College Democrats. He also dances well and dresses with a certain panache.

-Emma Rodman

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Yesterday, Tom DeLay, the capo di tutti capi of the GOP mafia, won the congressional primary in his Texas district. It seems that a little money laundering won’t faze the Republicans of the Texas 22nd.

Mr. DeLay began his career as a pest exterminator in Sugar Land, TX. By all accounts, the residue of noxious fumes has followed him into his new vocation.

In other Texas news, Carole Keeton Strayhorn, the mother of Scott McClellan, is running for governor as an independent. Members of the White House press corps were surprised to learn that McClellan suckled at a human teat. According to the ancient Greeks, the President’s press secretary was born to the Gorgon Medusa.

-Adrian Bleifuss Prados

Monday, February 27, 2006

Crush on Buckley

William F. Buckley Jr., the grand old man of the Grand Old Party, is hardly a chearleader for Bush's policies in Iraq. In a recent piece for National Review, Buckley offered some sober thoughts on the situation in that unhappy country:

... One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed...

Our mission has failed because Iraqi animosities have proved uncontainable by an invading army of 130,000 Americans. The great human reserves that call for civil life haven't proved strong enough. No doubt they are latently there, but they have not been able to contend against the ice men who move about in the shadows with bombs and grenades and pistols...

The Iraqis we hear about are first indignant, and then infuriated, that
Americans aren't on the scene to protect them and to punish the aggressors. And so they join the clothing merchant who says that everything is the fault of the

Mr. Bush has a very difficult internal problem here because to make the kind of concession that is strategically appropriate requires a mitigation of policies he has several times affirmed in high-flown pronouncements. His challenge is to persuade himself that he can submit to a historical reality without forswearing basic commitments in foreign policy....

Why do I love Bill Buckley? The man is an unapologetic conservative - some of his editorials from the 1960s are rather embarrassing today. But Buckley has never been an apologist for any president or policy. He is committed to conservative political principles and not to the conservative political establishment. Personally, I always prefer an ideologue to a hack. Although he is no longer at the helm at National Review, his spirit still infuses the magazine, which is probably why NR is still so fun to read.

- Adrian Bleifuss Prados

Friday, February 24, 2006

The Birth of Beelzeblog

Newsflash: The Johnny-come-latelies at the Haverford College Republicans have launched a blog. Our Tory pals are committed to “combating the left on a hippy campus.” Local hippies, beatniks and bohemians of all stripes are reportedly heading for the hills.

As the Gipper would put it, it’s morning in Haverford. Old Glory flies a little brighter over Leeds Hall. There’s a wholesome smell in the air and a spring in the step of every young lass.

Marriage seems better defended, tough love has replaced the soft bigotry of low expectations and fetuses float happily in their embryonic fluids.

In short, the war is on.

- Adrian

Thursday, February 23, 2006

Looking After Rick

Rick Santorum, who earns a Senate salary of $162,000, has described himself as a man who lives “paycheck to paycheck,” often with the assistance of his parents “who are by no means wealthy.” However, the American Prospect has found that Santorum’s PAC regularly lists expenses including such "unorthodox items as dozens of trips to the Starbucks in Leesburg, a number of stops at fast-food joints, and purchases at Target, Wal-Mart, and a Giant supermarket in northern Virginia."

The mortgage on the Senator’s home in Shenstone Farms is currently financed by the Philadelphia Trust Company. A private bank that only loans to (very wealthy) “investment advisory clients whose portfolios we manage, oversee or administer.”

The Santorums do not have any investments managed by Philadelphia Trust, nor do they have the investment assets of $250,000 that would be the bank’s minimum threshold. Santorum has disclosed a mere $140,000 in liquid assets. Neither Santorum nor Philadelphia Trust will disclose the specific interest rate associated with the mortgage.

Curiously, the officers of the Trust are closely associated with the Pennsylvania Republican establishment and have given over $24,000 to Santorum’s PAC and campaign fund.

Any special or exceptional loan made to the Senator would be in violation of the Senate gift guidlines. A complaint has been filed with the Senate Ethics Committee over the Senator's unusual refinancing.

In other scummy news, Santorum’s Philadelphia-based charity, Operation Good Neighbor Foundation, has spent 57% of its budget on fundraising commissions, travel and other administrative expenses and only 36% in grants. The Foundation is not registered as an official charity, although it has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars more than the $25,000 that would legally require registration.

- Eli Fishburne

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Is it hot in here?

(Picked up from the NY Times via Wonkette.)

Ever wonder whose research informs Bush's climate change policies? Fred Barnes’ puff-portrait of President, Rebel in Chief, fills us in.

Fred Barnes recalls a visit to the White House last year by [science fiction novelist] Michael Crichton, whose 2004 best selling novel, "State of Fear," suggests that global warming is an unproven theory and an overstated threat.

Mr. Barnes, who describes Mr. Bush as "a dissenter on the theory of global warming," writes that the president "avidly read" the novel and met the author after Karl Rove, his chief political adviser, arranged it. He says Mr. Bush and his guest "talked for an hour and were in near-total agreement."
Farewell, icecaps.

-Adrian Bleifuss Prados

Monday, February 20, 2006

Golden Rule Democrats

Yesterday, on a brisk Sunday afternoon, about 120 people filled Thomas Great Hall over at Bryn Mawr College, and the campaigns of three state reps, two congressional candidates and one very jovial governer kicked off. Gov. Ed Rendell spoke very well, Lois Murphy and Joe Sestak gave resounding criticism of the status quo down in DC and the state representative candidates tried not to look too overwhelmed.

The Haverford College Democrats were there to provide sly, insightful and unheeded advice on speaking mannerisms, intonation, handling the press and presence on stage. (Any one remembering the Presidential Voice from last season's West Wing?) You know who else was there? The Associated Press. The Bi-College News. Various other propaganda machines. Emma Rodman (no, that's m-a-n) and Joe Ballou definetly have a picture with Lois coming out on the wires soon. And I am newly invigorated about the coming campaigns. Lois and Joe's races are important, and we're really going to be able to help them out.

In other news, something that Rendell said stuck with me: he called himself, and us, "Golden Rule Democrats". The moral and spiritual edge that the GOP seems to have culled isn't based in divine ordination or anything else insurmountable--as we're all aware, it is a P.R. game. I find the governor's reference to our compassion and social focus compelling, in the same way that I found his illustrative example awesome:

"They're so concerned with making sure that a fetus is carried to term. They call themselves pro-life. Well, where's the concern with the child's life when they vote against the WIC program that provides food to infants and small children? Where is the concern when they vote against funding pre-natal care for poor mothers?"


Friday, February 10, 2006

Scandalous! A Post in Three Parts

I. Jack Abramoff claims that the President, "saw me in almost a dozen settings, and joked with me about a bunch of things, including details of my kids." Although Abramoff was a well known Washington personality and a top fundraiser for Bush's reelection campaign, the President maintains that he cannot recall ever meeting the disgraced lobbyist.

II. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the VP's former chief of staff, has testified that his superiors approved the leaking of classified information to the press in 2003. Libby was on intimate terms with NY Times reporter Judy Miller, who faithfully reproduced the administration's misleading stories on the front page of that august newspaper.

III. Administration officials claim they were surprised to learn on Tuesday, August 30, that the levees of New Orleans had broken. A Congressional investigation has revealed that FEMA, then managed by Michael "Brownie" Brown, was aware of breaches on Monday morning and that officials of that agency sent urgent reports to the Department of Homeland Security headquarters on Monday evening.

-Adrian Bleifuss Prados

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

Tea Time!

High tea-it's high time.

The Haverford Dems are having their first event of the semester, a tea party extravagnaza attended by dignitaries, notables, accompanying paparazzi and fan frenzy. We'll be serving up tea and treats by yours truly. We'll be serving up impassioned rhetorical whirls and flourishes. We'll be welcoming Vice Admiral Joseph Sestak to speak, who is an astounding US Congressional candidate (think Harvard PhD. and former national security advisor). We'll be the kids you want to be hanging out with this Thursday the 9th at 10 pm in Sharpless Auditorium.

[I, Adrian Bleifuss Prados, have censored some of Emma's less judicious remarks]

... I might just throw everything into the Boston Harbor. Expect the channeling of Patrick Henry and the denunciation of colonialism.


Friday, February 03, 2006

The Eyebrow

As always, the State of the Union address was followed by a response from the opposition party. By any standard, 2005 was a tragicomical year for America. The GOP is in a politically precarious position and the Democratic rebuttal should have been a slam-dunk.

With this in mind, Virginia Governor Tim Kaine’s response can only be seen as a squandered opportunity. Kaine delivered a wooden and uninspiring speech, as full of vacuous generalities as the State of the Union itself. The governor’s references to his past as a missionary suggested a Democratic Party awkwardly trying to “get right” with God. Democrats certainly need to articulate their ideals to religious Americans, but if their appeals sound contrived, they will be rejected. Moreover, Kaine made only the vaguest references to the Federal Government’s inadequate response to Hurricane Katrina and the bungled reconstruction of Iraq - the two biggest stories of the year.

Viewers were also burdened with the sight of Kaine’s left eyebrow dancing wildly about his forehead. As the speech progressed the eyebrow reached new and baffling heights, nearly merging with the gubernatorial hairline. Later that night, the governor’s eyebrow drifted from his head entirely and floated away on the breeze.

The governor's eyebrow passing a weather balloon (courtesy U.S. Meteorological Survey)


Thursday, February 02, 2006

Iraqis: Capable of Answering Polls, Too

The Poll--for politicans, fingers licked and held to test the breeze, it is Shangri-la. For example: wonder why Bush stopped talking about Social Security "reform" in the middle of last year? Polls. The measurement of soft power and political capital, the aggregation of polling data. The tidiness of numbers. How to keep power, how to get power: what to do next.

Today, Haverford's student page linked to a poll taken of Iraqi citizens, which was conducted by an organization called "World Public Opinion." For all the U.S. hollering about staying the course in Iraq, something tells me that Iraqi citizens have a pretty fair idea of what's going on in their own country. In numbers: 47% of Iraqis support attacks on U.S. forces, while only 7% support attacks on the new Iraqi government. And 67% think security will increase if the U.S. leaves in 6 months. The fact is, the U.S. prescence in Iraq is catalyzing the violence. 70% of Iraqis want the U.S. to leave either in 6 months or gradually over the next two years.

The idea that we need to stay in Iraq until the security situation improves is tautological. We are the reason security has failed to materialize in the 3 years since invasion. Our continued prescence ignores reality. The poll is simple; it is summarized in attractive and easy-to-read colored charts, and it gives a clear directive:

Set a time-table; send the troops home.


Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Mourning the First Lady of Civil Rights

On April 4, 1968, The United States lost one of the greatest public servants to ever walk within our borders. The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was shot and killed outside of a Memphis hotel while attempting to organize a march in support of the city's sanitation union. When he died later that night at St. Joseph's hospital, the nation mourned the man who spearheaded the movement for racial equality in America. From his Montgomery Bus Boycott (with the recently departed Rosa Parks) to the famous March on Washington, Dr. King exposed and fought the injustices that ran deep in our country's history. And his words continue to mark that struggle today.

But important as his speeches and actions were, are, and will be, for the past 38 years, we have been fortunate enough to have a face to assign to his legacy. Coretta Scott King, the so-called first lady of the civil rights movement, has been at every memorial, every service, and has spoken from the very spot where her husband delivered the words of his immortal dream too long deferred.

It was not just her face that was important, however. Mrs. King was more than a living embodiment of her husband's legacy. She was a leader in her own right. When Dr. King died, she led 50,000 marchers through the streets of Memphis, and only two months later, she headed the Poor People's March to Washington, in support the underclass of all races. It was Coretta who ran the successful campaign for a national holiday in honor of her husband, and it was she who opened and ran the Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change--an organization which continues to fight for the racial justice that Dr. King so ardently sought.

Coretta Scott King died yesterday, on January 30, 2006. But the struggle that she and her husband initiated is far from complete. Too many blacks still suffer from the racism that exists in our neighborhoods and our Congress. Too many are still forced to attend under-funded and mostly segregated public schools. Too many still do not have adequate access to affordable healthcare. Today, when we look back on the legacy of both of the Kings, we must ask ourselves whether they "have not died in vain," whether we will continue to fight for the cause that they embodied.

Only then, only once we have completed the work that Dr. King began and that Mrs. King continued will we be able to realize the dream that Dr. King conceived of. Only then can we truly say of all Americans: "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

Coretta Scott King will be sorely missed.


Monday, January 30, 2006

Ethics Are Complicated

At the beginning of January, GOP "Superlobbyist" Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty to three federal felonies: fraud, tax evasion, and conspiracy to bribe public officials. Throughout Washington, the sound of feet running scared can be heard, as President Bush, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and the already beleagured Rep. Tom DeLay, among others, rush to return contributions from Abramoff.

Especially for the Bush Administration, Abramoff's contributions are going to serve as another political millstone around the neck of an already weary president. Bush has denied that Abramoff had extensive access to the White House, though he has declined to publically release records on the subject, despite pressure from GOP lawmakers to do so.

(In fact, Abramoff raised over $100,000 for the 2004 Bush-Cheney re-election campaign, earning himself the coveted title of "Bush Pioneer" for his skill. "Bundling", the campaign finance trick devised by White House insider Karl Rove to circumvent the 2002 McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance reform, is the subject for a whole other post.)

All I can say is that when two Republican congressmen appear on FOX News Sunday and call for the President to fully release the records of his dealings with Abramoff, ethics don't seem so complicated, after all. To use the words of Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Nebraska, on the subject:

“Get it out. Get it out. Come on.”


Chafee says NO!

Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, a Republican moderate and an early opponent of the Iraq war, has decided to oppose Samuel Alito’s confirmation.

"I am a pro-choice, pro-environment, pro-Bill of Rights Republican, and I will be voting against this nomination," said the senator.

However, Chafee opposes a Democratic filibuster and the confirmation is all but secure.

In a typical move, John Kerry (D-MA, loser) had called for a filibuster – from the comfort of a ski resort in the Swiss Alps.

And so it appears that Justices Scalia and Thomas will have a new confrere on the court. For this observer, the highlight of the confirmation process was clearly the teary flight of Martha-Ann. As Tina Fey faithfully reported:

"During Sen. Graham's apology, Martha-Ann Bomgardner, Alito's wife, was so overcome with emotion she broke down in tears and left the hearing. To get an abortion."


Saturday, January 28, 2006

Senate Race: Which way PA Democrats want to go

Although the Democratic Party has thrown its support behind Bob Casey, Jr., a man with a political history not to be laughed at, the Primary is still a few months away and his Democratic challengers for the nomination are not to be ignored either.

A new Zogby poll reveals that versus Sen. Santorum, the "family-values" Republican who has declared homosexuals to be in the same category as practicers of beastiality, Casey seems to do poorer than his challengers, Chuck Pennacchio and Alan Sandals.
Admittedly, Casey didn't respond to questions about his issues profile and it had to be constructed from public statements. But Casey does better among Republicans and worse among some of the key demographics Democrats need when the responders were given issues profiles of the field:

Rick Santorum (Republican)
On abortion – pro-life
On stem cell research – opposed
Accepts PAC money – yes
War in Iraq – it was the right thing to do
Troops in Iraq – stay the course
National Health Care – opposed
Raising the minimum wage – supports an increase of $1.10
NAFTA/CAFTA – supports CAFTA; opposed NAFTA
Alito confirmation to Supreme Court – supports confirmation

Bob Casey, Jr. (Democrat)
On abortion – pro-lfe
On stem cell research – opposed
Accepts PAC money – yes
War in Iraq – supported
Troops in Iraq – stay the course
National Health Care – opposed
Raising the minimum wage – supports
NAFTA/CAFTA – opposed both
Alito confirmation to Supreme Court – supports confirmation

Chuck Pennacchio (Democrat)
On abortion – pro-choice
On stem cell research – supports
Accepts PAC money – no
War in Iraq – opposed
Troops in Iraq – out as soon as safely possible
National Health Care – supports
Raising the minimum wage – supports living wage with different levels depending on where the worker lives
NAFTA/CAFTA – opposed both
Alito confirmation to Supreme Court – supports a filibuster

Alan Sandals (Democrat)
On abortion – pro-choice
On stem cell research – supports
Accepts PAC money – yes
War in Iraq – opposed
Troops in Iraq – out as soon as safely possible
National Health Care – supports
Raising the minimum wage – supports
NAFTA/CAFTA – opposed both
Alito confirmation to Supreme Court – supports a filibuster

John Featherman (Republican)
On abortion – pro-choice
On stem cell research – supports
Accepts PAC money – no
War in Iraq – did support, but not since no WMD found
Troops in Iraq – out as soon as safely possible
National Health Care – opposed
Raising the minimum wage – opposed
NAFTA/CAFTA – support both
Alito confirmation to Supreme Court – supports confirmation
The question seems to be where the party goes next. Towards the right, with an anti-choice candidate who has more in common with the Republican opponent than with the majority of the party, or towards the left, with pro-choice, progressive candidates who actually seem to be in line with the party platform.
Fighting Santorum will be hard, especially in an off-year election. Yet part of mid-terms elections is getting the party fired up over something, or more importantly, someone. Fortunately or not, this is a time when politics becomes about the struggle and not the solution. Casey is a smart man who will work hard on Capitol Hill. And Republican votes for Democrats are a nice cushion. But how much support liberals will be willing to give him remains a problem for him, especially in this part of the cycle.
Primaries are a chance for the party to show its true colours, to work for what it thinks it needs. They're also an opportunity for the members to show what they want. Pennsylvania Democrats are being given an incredible opportunity to choose between the liberal and moderate wings of their party and to send a message of what future it should have.


Thursday, January 26, 2006

Qualifications and Ideology

As the debate surrounding Judge Samuel Alito's appointment to the Supreme Court began to unfold on the Senate floor today, our esteemed President met with 54 of the Judge's former clerks to discuss his anticipated approval. And as he has since the process began, the President touted Alito's background. "There's no doubt about Judge Alito's qualifications, his intellect, or his complete dedication to our Constitution and laws," the President said. Then, he went on, "[Sam Alito] is exactly the kind of person Americans want on the Supreme Court." Nevertheless, in spite of the strong rhetoric that the president chose to employ, there exists a signifcant discontect between the first and second portions of his statement. Exclusively because Alito is intellectually qualified to sit on the Supreme Court does not mean that Americans necessarily want him there. Simply put, ideology matters--no matter how ardently the President may argue to the contrary.

In 1795, the first nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge John Rutledge, was blocked by a 14-10 vote in the Senate because he opposed the Jay Treaty--a Federalist-supported agreement with Great Britain. Nobody could question Rutledge's qualifications (he was, after all, chief justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court). He was opposed because of ideology, alone. Years later, the famed Robert Bork, in spite of his glowing qualifications as both a scholar and a judge, was opposed by 58 senators--one of whom was the current, Republican chair of the Senate judiciary committee, our local Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA). Finally, despite all of the clout surrounding Democratic filibusters, Republicans, during the Clinton Administration, used what is called the "blue slip procedure" to slow down and, effectively, block a host of "liberal" nominees. In 1997, as a result of these back-door Republican tactics, Clinton was forced to declare a "vacancy crisis" when one in ten seats of the federal judiciary were left vacant. When Clinton left office in 2001, 42 of his nominees remained unconfirmed--38 of whom never received a hearing. All of these nominees were blocked solely because of Republicans' opposition to their liberal ideology. They have some nerve, then, to criticize Democratic oppostion to Mr. Alito.

President Bush is right; Sam Alito is, without question, a qualified nominee. But his opposition to Roe v. Wade, his history on minority rights, and his theories on Executive authority should give us pause. And as history shows, those ideological reservations are grounds enough to oppose him.


Creeping Theocracy

"The only way to restore this republic our founders envisioned is to elevate honorable jurists like Samuel Alito," said Rick Santorum at Justice Sunday III, an event organized by the Family Research Council.

Santorum warned that liberals were "destroying traditional morality, creating a new moral code and prohibiting any dissent."

The Justice Sunday events have been rebuked by progressive religious leaders of all faiths. Read their statement here.

Anyone interested in destroying traditional morality or waging a war on Christmas should come to tonight's Democrats meeting (Campus Center 205, 10:00 PM).

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Scalito Rising

It seems that Arlen Specter's much-lauded commitment to women’s rights wasn’t worth all that.

Here are the C-SPAN numbers (based on declared intentions of senators):

Democrats voting "No":
Baucus (MT)Biden (DE)Boxer (CA)Clinton (NY) Dodd (CT)Durbin (IL)Feingold (WI)Feinstein (CA)Harkin (IA)Kennedy (MA)Kerry (MA)Kohl (WI)Leahy (VT)Mikulski (MD) Murray (WA) Nelson, Bill (FL) Obama (IL)Reed (RI) Reid, H. (NV)Salazar (CO)Schumer (NY)Stabenow (MI)Wyden (OR)

Democrats voting "Yes":
Nelson, Ben (NE)

Republicans voting "No": None so far.
Rogues, rascals and reprobates tremble!

The Haverford College Democrats have a weblog!

Like Pharos, the lighthouse of Alexandrian antiquity, this blog shall serve as a beacon, guiding the ships of liberty and justice through the storms of reaction and obscurantism.

Some links of interest: