I AM NOT YOU.

In a poll conducted by ABC in July, 2006, 83% of Americans identified themselves as Christians. 13% indicated they have “no religion.” That leaves just 4% for all non-Christian religions combined—Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and others.

It was not specified what percentage of the 4% were Jewish. But clearly, I am in the minority. Whether or not that counts as being among the “Chosen Few” is another matter altogether.

While nearly 40% of all the Jews in the world reside in the United States, they only make up a little over 2% of the population.

I know I am a minority. Perhaps a minority within a minority. But it hasn’t hit home with such bludgeoning force as when I hear some of the Republican Presidential candidates speak. Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry and especially Rick Santorum have continually referred to the America that the “founding fathers” created as based on Christianity. And, if they had their way, they would go on to define Christianity with the prefix, “fundamentalist.” This is just not true.

According to George Seldes’s The Great Quotations, (Secaucus, New Jersey Citadel Press, 1983), Thomas Jefferson wrote, in a letter to Horatio Spafford in 1814, “In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is easier to acquire wealth and power by this combination than by deserving them, and to effect this, they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes.”

In “Notes on the State of Virginia,” Jefferson said, “There is not one redeeming feature in our superstition of Christianity. It has made one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites” (quoted by newspaper columnist William Edelen, Politics and Religious Illiteracy, Truth Seeker, Vol. 121, No. 3, p. 33).

And it goes on. A little research reveals that, despite attempts at revising history in the matter of George Washington’s faith, he never received communion and indeed, was merely accompanying his wife when he attended church services. In fact, it was General Washington, as chief of American Armies, who visited the first synagogue in the United States (in Truro, Rhode Island) and issued a written proclamation, protecting the right for the Jewish Congregation to worship freely and without persecution. (“To bigotry, no sanction, to persecution, no assistance… ”)

In 1785, when the Commonwealth of Virginia was considering passage of a bill "establishing a provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion," James Madison wrote his famous "Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments" in which he presented fifteen reasons why government should not be come involved in the support of any religion.

There were Jews in America before there were founding fathers… even before the Mayflower. Joachim (Chaim) Gans arrived in Roanoke Island, North Carolina in 1585, as part of Sir Walther Raleigh’s expedition. Reportedly, there were Jews on Colombus’ expedition to the New World. The first Jewish community was set up in New Amsterdam (what is now New York… surprise!) in 1654.

Former Senator Rick Santorum is particularly troublesome to me. His campaign espouses “Faith, Family and Freedom.” His platform statement begins by stating, “Rick Santorum believes that to have a strong national economy, we must have strong families. America’s government must recognize this and help create a positive pro-family environment for our families, our communities and our businesses.” Under the sub-head of Champion of Faith & Families, “During his time in elected office, Rick Santorum fought for the preservation of the traditional American family and for the protection of the most vulnerable in our society. Rick was the author of legislation outlawing the heinous act known as partial-birth abortion and he championed the fight to pass the “Born Alive Infant Protection Act” and the “Unborn Victims of Violence Act.” He also authored legislation to advance adult stem cell research, so that ethical research could take place to fight debilitating diseases without the moral implications associated with embryonic stem cell research that destroys human life.”

"Please prevent me from taking control of myself."

Personally, I have issues with men dictating to women what they can and cannot do with their bodies. As much as I philosophically detest women like Phyllis Schafly, et. al., I do think she and her ilk are more qualified to speak of women’s rights and related decisions of what they can and cannot do with their bodies than I do a man—any man, including Rick Santorum.

What, precisely is the “traditional American Family?” Inadvertently, my mind always returns to a pivotal and socially accurate scene in the movie, “Annie Hall.” It shows the contrast between dinner at the Hall family table and that of the Singer’s. The Hall family’s dinner table is quiet—no talking, no noise other than the muted clatter of cutlery over each plate. The Singer family table, in their apartment under the roller coaster at Coney Island, is a cacophony of noise and activity—people screaming over one another, reaching over for serving plates, trying to be heard or at least seen.

A dirty comic and a clean comic.

And so it is with Jews and Gentiles. Lenny Bruce had related insight into why Jews are “dirty” comics and Christians are clean comics. The mores are not necessarily better or worse in one socio-religious group… they are different. One is, shall we say, more liberal than the other. Is a criterion of the traditional American family to “be fruitful and multiply?” Certainly, with dictates against birth control and abortion, one would think so. Evidently, having as many children as physiologically possible is also one of the criteria—physiologically possible, as in as long as the subjugated and called-upon wife’s uterus holds out. Having a gazillion children is not the exclusive domain of Christians. Orthodox Jews, for example, are encouraged to spread the religion through prolific procreation. But again, Jews—all Jews—make up a little more than 2% of the population. Their offspring are but a mere drop in the bucket. In the meantime, I haven't seen a TV reality show about a Jewish family with a dozen or so kids. I thought the Octo-Mom was bad (and, Lord knows, she is shamelessly bad), but the Duggars? 19 children. Or what is it they taunt America with? 19 and counting! Look at them, for Chrissake... patriotic lemmings.

How do they find time for music?

There was an old woman

who lived in a shoe

she had so many children

her uterus fell out

By the way, did I mention, my wife and I have no children?

The rewriting history to make the founding fathers fundamentalist Christians who envisioned the country they were creating to be a Christian one certainly should not be seen as racist. Indeed, of the 83% of Americans who claim to be Christian, there are many who are black and Hispanic. No, it seems, from all outward appearance, to be dogmatic exclusionism, if such a term exists. Certainly the term, “exceptionalism” exists, as former Senator Santorum uses it in the context of the country. Santorum, according to a piece on Slate in April, 2011, promotes “the belief that it (America) is a unique moral force in the world, promoting freedom and fighting evil…” His belief in American Exceptionalism is not an inference. He has stated it explicitly and has even used the term and concept in an exclusionary way when discussing the differences between him and President Obama. Evidently, the president does not share Santorum’s premise that America is exceptional and with that distinction must be the world’s bearer of morality and freedom. In essence, because of our place of power in the world, we have a responsibility to spread and maintain the Christian-based standard. It is important to state here that the term “Christian” that Santorum applies is not exactly the same as the poll used. The poll used “Christian” as a generic umbrella, under which Catholic, Baptist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Evangelicals, etc. And, despite the fact that the fundamentalists reject the notion that Mormons are Christians as see the sect as a “cult,” they are also included under the umbrella. Santorum and his ilk refer to Christianity in a much narrower, more subjective way. When he talks about faith and family, he does not call to attention the fact that he is a Roman Catholic. Indeed, he let’s others draw the conclusion that, in his heart, he is evangelical… that kind of Christian. It seems he doesn’t correct the misperception, either. From Huffington Post, January 11, 1012, “Rick Santorum may technically not call himself an evangelical but he is definitely one when it comes to social issues, so don't get too caught up in the title of ‘Roman Catholic,’” David Brody, chief political correspondent for Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network, wrote after the Iowa vote. “Santorum is an evangelical at heart.” Santorum’s stance on same-sex rights and marriage, birth control, abortion and teaching intelligent design” seem to blur the borders between Catholicism and Evangelicalism.

But, to get back to issue at hand: It is the Evangelical Christians who feel their God is a better God than other Christians’ God and certainly, better than the Jewish God. Their membership in the Judeo-Christian World is both tenuous and one of both convenience and selective benefit. At the core, Evangelicals believe first that they are exceptional and then the country their forefathers founded is exceptional. Ultimately, their validation is in their exclusivity.

I can simply not vote for Rick Santorum. I can support someone else, which goes without saying. But, the conversation has been raised, as have the implications. We know what America in general believes that all Muslims are terrorists. As for Jews, well, there are volumes written and spoken regarding anti-Semitism in America and the world. The crimes and the atrocities committed in the name of God are innumerable. And most of them have been justified, as they are today, in the name of “faith, family and freedom.”

* * *

And then, there is the other statistic. The big one. The one that started all the noise in the fall. The 1% and the 99%. The have’s and the have not’s. The millionaires and the rest of us.

“Corporations are people, my friends,” he said with that smarmy smile of his. Willard “Mitt” Romney. A man of the people… if the people you are referring to are filthy rich and have no idea what a gallon of gas costs or what house wine is.

President Barack Obama wrote a book called The Audacity of Hope. Romney is working on one simply called Audacity. The fact of the matter is, I do not begrudge Mitt for being stinking rich. Most presidents have been rich… or they got rich on the way to the office. I certainly don’t fault, say, Franklin Delano Roosevelt for being rich… because of what he did. In the same way, I cannot fault John, Robert or Edward M. Kennedy for their inherited wealth when all three brothers fought for equality and dignity for what used to be called the common man. Mitt Romney is out of touch and vows to remain so. This week, the topic of Mitt’s taxes came up. He said that he pays a tax rate of about 15%, which is a lot less than if it had been for earnings and wages and not investment dividends and gains. He also that he received money from speeches before announcing his candidacy for president last year, but “not very much.” Mitt considers $374,327.62 not very much money. AP reported, “That amount alone would place his income among the top 1% of all Americans… ”

And then there’s the man trying to wrest Mitt from his most-likely position: Newt Gingrich. Another man of the people. Yeah, right. Between the Tiffany’s account and Calista’s Greek Isle Cruise plot, Newt is bought and sold. Just ask Sheldon Adelson, eighth richest man in America and the bucks behind Newt’s Super PAC. He pretty much single handedly sported the bill for Newt’s anti-Mitt movie that, by the way, has been pretty badly reviewed. As an aside, I worked for Shelly Adelson when he was still a Democrat and couldn’t have card less about Israel. But that’s another story.

Watch the rich guy-- he's either going to pull out a .38 or his checkbook.

They, like Santorum, do not represent me. I guess I’ll stick with that “hopey-changey” stuff… for now.

Stand by the Man.

Year in Review

Hard to believe it’s been over 3 months since my last post. Time flies while global shit is hitting the fan. My absence has neither been due to a lack of subject matter nor a lack of interest in said. The fact that I couldn't get up for the game to rant about Greece or Syria, Hamas or Newt is testament to information/bullshit overload. I mean, what can you say when the quote/unquote objective report says it all. You don't have to read into it. The bizarre and If you have read any of my posts then you know one of my fall-back tenets is that I can’t make this stuff up. I am constantly finding myself in awe of the pitiful state of America’s politics and economics, which are inextricably connected.

My temptation is to not recount the events of the year. Unless the media and the government have completely seized your brain, you lived through the year and know what happened. I hate to dwell on the bad and the ugly, so I won’t. Like I say, you know what happened. I don’t have a top ten of news stories. I don’t have a top ten list at all. I didn’t see ten movies this year. The music I listen to is mostly ten years old and I barely watch commercial television. And not in that effete way, like I am above it all... I've just lost interest.

The bottom line is, I agree with Time magazine, who named the Occupy Movement as “person of the year.” I don’t particularly agree with the direction the movement took. I don’t think shutting down our ports. I watched the movement evolve into turning the consciousness into encampments for the homeless, although I do think it is high time there is attention given to the homeless problem. More than anything else , the movement brought attention to the disparities between the haves and have-nots in the country. Personally, I find the adulation that the unwashed masses show toward anything and everything that relates to wealth is grossly unhealthy. I can’t blame Robin Leach for doting on the Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous. Like Billy Joel sang, he didn’t start the fire. But things have gotten so far out of control.

Kim--Superstar

While Republican politicians and phony religious zealots preach family values, Kim Kardashian covers every tabloid and gossip rag in the country. In a country where half the children go to bed hungry, there is a certain level of obscenity when a talentless, pneumatic woman becomes a celebrity by allegedly being herself, along with the rest of her talent-deficient family. Where said woman gets married for $15 million, sells the rights to the event to People Magazine and separates from her new husband 72 days later. Basic math reveals that the amount of money spent could have put an average of 300 more teachers to work.

A convergence of collagen and cleavage.

Baby-dolls in public?

At the beginning of this past Christmas shopping season, one of the more popular viral videos showed a woman pepper-spraying other shoppers so she could get the latest gadget for her ADD addled, malnourished child. Last week, near-riots broke out as predominantly African-American shoppers literally fought to be among the first to buy a pair of $180.00 Air Jordans. They have bought the dream on layaway. The payments go on way past their misbegotten goal has been tarnished and torn.

Disillusioned words like bullets bark


As human gods aim for their mark


Make everything from toy guns that spark


To flesh-colored Christs that glow in the dark


It’s easy to see without looking too far


That not much is really sacred

It is sad and ugly to watch people shed their dignity like a slithering serpent crawling out of last season’s skin. How much proof does one need that our priorities have become so distorted and ultimately self-annihilating? Can I tell you something between just you and I? I used to go after that gold-toned brass ring. Hell, that was how I was brought up. I wanted the latest, newest, shiniest, coolest. But that drive has passed. It is not like I am not motivated. It is that my priorities have shifted. Last week, my wife and I went to a town in California’s central coastal region that has evolved into a wine growing Mecca. I literally got sick when I looked at the menu at a restaurant we went to with our friends. The prices were so stupid expensive, I had what could only be considered a panic attack. I just can’t do that anymore.

You say you’re sorry


For tellin’ stories


That you know

I believe are true


You say ya got some


Other kinda lover


And yes, I believe you do


You say my kisses are not like his


But this time I’m not gonna tell you why that is


I’m just gonna let you pass

Yes, and I’ll go last


Then time will tell who fell


And who’s been left behind


When you go your way and I go mine

Petra Ecclestone-- almost real

Ever read the New York Times Style section on Sundays? There lies the bastion of the idle rich for intelligent people to cluck their tongues at out loud but secretly envy. Have you ever heard of Petra Ecclestone? I never did until I read about her in said section of the “Old Gray Lady.” Now, there’s a piece of work. Admittedly not American, but included for buying a serious piece of it. She is 22 years-old, and, as far as I can figure, has never worked a day in her life. Well, that’s not really true nor fair. She has worked, as a model for Armani. But it is her diminutive father’s moolah that allowed her to buy Candy Spelling’s Holmby Hills estate for $35 million. She called the 57,000 square foot mansion a comfy little home.

The former Candy Spelling Residence... comfy

It is publicly known that she also has a $91 millon home in Chelsea, London for her five dogs. She reportedly has seven Rolex watches, each worth about $33,000 and ten Hermes Birkin handbags worth “upwards of $65,000.” And, how do you define obscene? How about this: in reaction to Paul McCartney’s proposal for meatless Mondays, Petra was quoted as saying, “I am not a veggie and I don't have much time for people like the McCartneys and Annie Lennox.” In all fairness to Ms. Ecclestone, she was launching her leather fashion line at the same time. Fashion line? Hmmm… makes me think of Paris Hilton and the Olsen twins.

Bernie Ecclestone, Petra Ecclestone, Slavica Ecclestone

A financial giant and human slug, with his wife and child

Where are your stilettos, Bernie?

I could never have imagined that an over-the-top Oliver Stone film (is that redundant?) would be so prescient. But the essence of his movie, Wall Street was right on. It hit the golden nail on the head. He pointed out, through the words of Gordon Gecko, that greed is actually not so good. That greed leads to really bad things.

* * *

Bottom line: if you want to find out what made the top ten lists, find it in the magazines and newspapers. Otherwise, cue up Blonde on Blonde, Beggar’s Banquet, Who’s Next and London's Calling, roll another joint and kick 2011 on down the road.

Thanks to Bob for the words, always.

The King's Speech and Mine-postscript

The Stuttering Foundation of America has gained a lot of traction with the movie, The King's Speech, and justifiably so. They are a wonderful organization focusing attention on a misunderstood and sometimes debilitating affliction. They raise awareness and urge those affected to seek help... any help is better than doing nothing.

As I wrote in the post, "The King's Speech and Mine (2/2011), I was a severe stutterer for the first 23 years of my life. I was fortunate enough to learn about and attend the Fluency Shaping Program at Hollins College, in Roanoke, Virginia. I will never say I was cured as no one is truly cured of stuttering, but when I arrived at the program, I was diagnosed as 33% fluent (which meant I couldn't be understood 2/3 of the time I spoke). When I left, I was 99% fluent. My life had changed. Literally.

The SFA ran a contest last month: What, if anything, are you doing differently since seeing "The King's Speech"?

This was my entry...

Let's see... I contacted some old acquaintances (pre-fluency) and, among other things, thanked them for their patience, friendship and understanding when I was at my worst, speech-wise. I put a call into Jane Fraser (Executive Director of SFA), who I have gotten to "know" over the years, but have never had the pleasure of actually meeting. I again offered my "pro-bono" services-- in the past, I have written and designed some ads for the SFA. I called Hollins to try to get in touch with some of the staff people who helped transform my life. And finally, I sat in with a monthly NSA support group meeting in Portland, Oregon and showed the attendees my "before and after" video from Hollins. For the most part, the people who were there were moderate stutterers--there was one man who was quite severe. What concerned me a bit is that, for the most part, the consensus among them was that I am "special" (because my speech improved so dramatically). I don't consider myself "special." I just took the Hollins Fluency Shaping Program as seriously as I could.

It's been over 38 years and I am, for all intents and purposes, fluent. As I have discussed with Jane, there are those who are almost contemptuous of the Hollins program and question their high success rate. I have always thought, if I can do it, anyone can do it. I also truly believe the line I wrote for one of the FSA ads: "There are many proven, effective ways to reduce stuttering. Doing nothing is not one of them."

CONVERGENCE

Image used for illustration only

Apologies to Ellie May Clampett

For 27 years, I read the Los Angeles Times. Stands to reason, since I was living in Los Angeles. For the last 5 or so of those years, my wife and I also got the New York Times delivered. To some, that would seem redundant. But we were informed. We moved to a little town in Oregon almost four years ago. We almost immediately subscribed to The Oregonian out of Porltand. Never mind that we live about an hour south of the "city." It was–and is–for all intents and purposes, the only choice we had. I'm not one of those people that can eat breakfast in front of a computer. Call me a Luddite. For that matter, call my wife a Luddite. We won't mind. I bought a book today, with a cover and paper pages. Imagine. But the point I am trying to make is that neither the LA Times nor the NY Times prepared me for The Oregonian. The paper is skimpy, and what seemingly little content it does have is filled to a great degree with small time crimes and white trash misdemeanors. For that matter, the Portland TV news also seems to occupy itself with the kinds of events and incidents that would never make it in a big city. Near drownings. One car accidents. And gang violence. I have said it before: if the Los Angeles Times covered gang-related crimes the way The Oregonian does, it would have the daily heft of the Manhattan phone book. And so, it is a convergence of a seemingly lack of editing and the contents itself.

I could have chosen almost any example. But the excerpted item from Tuesday's Oregonian particularly struck me. It should probably be read while throwing a shot of Elijah Craig down yer neck and listening to a raucous country song, (perhaps "Papa shot the Juke Box" by Mark Chesnutt)

* * *

Police arrested Sally Ann Lee, 57, on accusations of attempted murder. She allegedly fired a rifle about 8:00 pm at two people at Lee's U-Catch Trout Farm... about five miles from Vernonia.

Her brother, Tom Lee, 56, told 9-1-1 dispatchers his sister was drunk and armed. The dispatcher heard at least two shots during the call, and people were running for cover, Sheriff Jeff Dickerson said.

* * *

And don't you dare get me started on Salem's Statesman Journal.

Michele Bachmann scares me.

Michele Bachmann... scary.

And here I was thinking Rick Santorum (synonymous with sexual spooge) was going to be the fun/nutjob candidate on the right. But while Mrs. Palin is still creasing her butt on the fence, we have the irrepressible, always quotable and imminently laughable Michele Bachmann. This is not the first time I have written about her and I daresay as the campaign stumbles along, she will come up again. So while everyone is justifiably fretting over the debt ceiling negotiations, there is Mrs. Bachmann to offer, if nothing else a little comic relief in the midst of a national crisis.

The Republican party could not be more divided. Speaker of the house John Boehner is not only seeming to be moderate, he is also alone, swinging in the breeze. Traditional Republicans are pretty much keeping mum as the Tea Party is dictating unrealistic guidelines for the debt ceiling negotiations. They have soundly rejected Boehner’s proposal, saying it doesn’t cut enough. But Our Lady of the Land of Lakes takes it even further…

According to the AP, Mrs. Bachmann has “vowed to vote against any increase in the debt ceiling and called the deal being negotiated on Capitol Hill as one based on ‘illusory’ and ‘counterfeit’ savings. She said President Obama has misled the American people on when the government would run out of borrowing authority and has employed ‘scare tactics’ that have needlessly spooked Wall Street.”

Talk about scare tactics. If this is indicative of her thinking, the very idea, no matter how remote, of her becoming the leader of the country sends chills down my spine.

But wait, it gets better… in an article from USA Today, Mrs. Bachmann was quoted as saying that, “if (President) Obama raised the debt ceiling on his own, ‘he would effectively be a dictator.’

And, of course, Mrs. Bachmann concludes that at that point, President Obama would have to be overthrown.

Not wanting to be left out, obvious Tea Party nutjob, representative Tim Scott, who has been on the job about six months, but is clearly a constitutional scholar (NOT), said that any “unilateral” action could be grounds for impeachment.

Yeah, right.

Amy Winehouse: Back in Black

There are plenty of pictures of Amy Winehouse you can find on a Google image search that show her at her worst: cocaine hanging out of her nose, her eyes rolling up into her head, in various stages of dishevelment, inebriation and worse. Amy became a joke. A sick and sad joke. Clearly, the woman had demons. She also was surrounded by enablers and fools. Family members, boyfriends (and a husband), and toxic hangers-on. Her death yesterday at 27 years-old was probably inevitable, but that doesn't strip the story of the inherent sadness and tragedy. It would be one thing if Amy was a no-talent pop star. But she wasn't. She was immensely talented. Her brilliant Back to Black album is both a personal watershed work and an important piece of soul-pop. Without her, we would never have seen the likes of Duffy or Adele and others. It is, I suppose, difficult to separate the artist from the woman, her artistry from her public personae. I sincerely hope that she will be remembered not as fodder for the tabloids nor just for one song (Rehab), but for her talent and a promise never to be fulfilled. Time may help. Bottom line: her death is a terrible waste. Her talent will be missed. Ironically, she and I shared our birthday. Her death, for the moment, is, according to the London police, "unexplained."

Let Gary Haugen die.

"The law? The law's wrong."

Death-row convicted killer, Gary Haugen. Had a small victory today in his battle for the right to see his sentence carried out. He was able to fire his lawyers who have been publicly questioning his mental competence in his desire to see his sentence meted out. How incompetent is someone who would rather be put to death and spend the ret of his life locked up in a cell by himself with an hour or so a day outside? As I have written before, Mr. Haugen was tried in the beating murder of his ex-girlfriend’s mother. He was competent then to stand trial, and competent enough to be sentenced to life without chance of parole… until he, along with another inmate, crushed a third inmate’s skull and stabbed him 84 time. Again, he was competent to stand trial for the crime and competent to be sentence to death. Ah, but Oregon’s death penalty is hardly ever enforced. What Mr. Haugen is demanding is not beyond the realm of comprehension. It makes sense. He is clearly competent to have his sentence carried out.

It is of no small consolation to see that Oregon is not alone in the hypocrisy of having the death penalty on the books but makes every effort not to enforce it.

Not Ted Bundy

John Edward Duncan III was convicted in Idaho of kidnapping, torture and murder. He was sentenced to death. The 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has seen fit to request a competency hearing, to see if Mr. Duncan is competent to represent himself. The AP reported on Tuesday that “Duncan has been found competent by every court that has considered the issue that his three death sentences remain in place.” U.S. Attorney Wendy Olsen was quoted as saying the hearing was simply a procedural matter.

Mr. Duncan was sentenced to die in 2008 for kidnapping, torture and murdering a 9 year-old Coeur d’Alene boy in 2005. Prosecutors said that Duncan “snatched Dylan Groene and his 8 year-old sister from their Idaho home after killing their older brother, mother and mother’s fiancé. Duncan kept the children at a Montana campsite for weeks before killing Dylan and returning with Dylan’s sister to Coeur d’Alene, where he was arrested.

Now, maybe I have mistaken the law according to fictitious San Francisco inspector Harry Callahan, but if a scumbag pervert like Mr. Duncan is not competent to being put to death—according to the law of the land for his crimes then the law is wrong… and there is no reason for the death penalty, at least in Idaho and Oregon.

* * *

UPDATE: The Statesman Journal reported on Saturday, July 16. that the two attorneys that the judge agreed to remove from the Gary Haugen case have filed a petition asking the Oregon Supreme Court to rescind the order.

The attorneys had noted that they had "explained to the judge at Thursday's hearing that 'the court should make a decision based on the request of someone who has been determined to be delusional and incompetent by the only mental health professional to examine him following the issuance of the appellate judgement."

Hmmm. Does this sound like a delusional, incompetent individual?

"You have attorneys that have agendas that have so overpowered their ethical obligations and oaths that they're willing to sit there and just blatantly lie in the face of a presiding judge."