Apparently, President Bush has enough free time (while the media focuses on the Democratic Catfight between Obama and Hillary) to attend a taping of Deal or No Deal. That's right, President Bush is spending time making guest appearances on crappy NBC luck-based game shows instead of - what's that thing he's supposed to do? - oh yeah, run the freaking country.
Bush must have an affinity for showbiz, first breaking out a little tap dance a few weeks ago, and now this. Who knows, this could be a good thing! Judging by last week's Clinton/Edwards/Obama threesome on The Colbert Report, it appears Presidential candidates make for good guest stars. In fact, this could be a great thing if Bush were to make a stop on, oh, I don't know... The Daily Show?
Monday, April 21, 2008
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
What's More Important--Being a Good Progressive or Being a Good Democrat?
I have to say that I'm more than a little intrigued by the prospective candidacy of Mayor Michael Bloomberg in the 2008 race for the presidency. Don't get me wrong---I'm still rockin' for Barack all day long, but Obama has a 1 in 3 chance to be the Democratic nominee at this point, if you believe in the current tiers of the race.
Here's what we as Democrats might be faced with next year:
Hillary Clinton vs Mike Bloomberg vs Any of the JackAss Repugs running. Obviously, none of us are going to run to the Dixipublicans, but we'll have a real dilemma in left vs center battle. And, in my view, our Democratic nominee would represent the center.
Bloomberg is pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, very green, anti-unilateralist, and sees politicians like himself as elected to solve problems---kinda like post-election Schwarzeneggar. And when we have people who run government believe in using the government to solve the nation's biggest problems---well, isn't that what progressives are all about?
Another thing to ponder---is it treasonous of me as not only a Dem voter but a local Dem officer to be having such blasphemous thoughts? I've been straight blue for as long as I can remember, but there's no doubt in my mind that I would cast a vote for Bloomberg over Clinton and others should they get the nomination, maybe even others considered more liberal than Bloomberg. I'm tired of the polarizing, and things need to get done. The planet is in crisis, and so is the nation's health. We need solutions. So, while I think Obama has the chance to be a generational leader, in the FDR/Kennedy tradition, I don't have that same belief about others.
Should I resign my position in the party now, or wait to see if BHO wins or not? In my heart, I'd like to think I know I'm progressive first, Dem second.
Here's what we as Democrats might be faced with next year:
Hillary Clinton vs Mike Bloomberg vs Any of the JackAss Repugs running. Obviously, none of us are going to run to the Dixipublicans, but we'll have a real dilemma in left vs center battle. And, in my view, our Democratic nominee would represent the center.
Bloomberg is pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, very green, anti-unilateralist, and sees politicians like himself as elected to solve problems---kinda like post-election Schwarzeneggar. And when we have people who run government believe in using the government to solve the nation's biggest problems---well, isn't that what progressives are all about?
Another thing to ponder---is it treasonous of me as not only a Dem voter but a local Dem officer to be having such blasphemous thoughts? I've been straight blue for as long as I can remember, but there's no doubt in my mind that I would cast a vote for Bloomberg over Clinton and others should they get the nomination, maybe even others considered more liberal than Bloomberg. I'm tired of the polarizing, and things need to get done. The planet is in crisis, and so is the nation's health. We need solutions. So, while I think Obama has the chance to be a generational leader, in the FDR/Kennedy tradition, I don't have that same belief about others.
Should I resign my position in the party now, or wait to see if BHO wins or not? In my heart, I'd like to think I know I'm progressive first, Dem second.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
More great polling for the Prez!
According to a USA Today/Gallup poll just released, a full 60% of Americans want to see a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. It's now confirmed that the President is warmongering against the wishes of a big majority of Americans. We can speculate no further. . .
Even more startlingly, the poll revealed a searing rejection of the "they'll follow us home" garbage that the Chimp and Penguin keep spewing at us. Only 22% (!!!!!!!!!!) buy the argument that our Iraqi occupation is preventing terrorist attacks on US soil.
Again, I say, who is this quarter of the country that seems to believe what these guys say, no matter what? All credibility they had when they entered office over six years ago is completely shot by all acceptable standards. The American people now see these guys for what they are: liars.
Impeach. Withdraw. Restore our country.
Obama 08
Even more startlingly, the poll revealed a searing rejection of the "they'll follow us home" garbage that the Chimp and Penguin keep spewing at us. Only 22% (!!!!!!!!!!) buy the argument that our Iraqi occupation is preventing terrorist attacks on US soil.
Again, I say, who is this quarter of the country that seems to believe what these guys say, no matter what? All credibility they had when they entered office over six years ago is completely shot by all acceptable standards. The American people now see these guys for what they are: liars.
Impeach. Withdraw. Restore our country.
Obama 08
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
28%
New polling at CNN indicates that President George W Bush (I can barely say that with a straight face any more) has reached an all-time low of 28% approval rating with the American people. The same poll said that a full 64% of Americans voiced their disappoval with him as well.
Has anybody looked at the definition for fascism on the right side of this blog? We now know who these 28% are---the "elites" with whom he shares an uneasy collaboration to take away civil liberties, human rights, and wage never-ending war.
Maybe the most shocking thing isn't that Bush has low ratings---it's that almost 30% of the people remain complicit with his dealings.
Has anybody looked at the definition for fascism on the right side of this blog? We now know who these 28% are---the "elites" with whom he shares an uneasy collaboration to take away civil liberties, human rights, and wage never-ending war.
Maybe the most shocking thing isn't that Bush has low ratings---it's that almost 30% of the people remain complicit with his dealings.
Green Genius
US Sen Barack Obama is taking control of the environmental issue at its very core---the manufacturing practices of US automakers. While we can talk all day about recycling and changing lightbulbs, the car manufacturers (30%) and power companies (40%) make up a full 70% of global warming-related activities.
Obama is showing strong, practical leadership in insisting that US automakers get in line with their European counterparts, and start making some headway on getting fuel efficiency standards on all US autos in the 40mpg + range in the coming years. He believes the federal government has two roles to play---first, obviously, by enacting and enforcing regulations on GM, Ford, and Daimler-Chrysler, but giving them tax incentives and employee healthcare benefits to spur the transition.
Obama's plan has been endorsed by the green giant of California, Arnold Schwarzeneggar, who has ignored his pals in the GOP in his quest to make California the greenest state. We've been spending all this time in the media trying to figure out Obama's racial identity, and I think we've discovered it---he's green.
Obama is showing strong, practical leadership in insisting that US automakers get in line with their European counterparts, and start making some headway on getting fuel efficiency standards on all US autos in the 40mpg + range in the coming years. He believes the federal government has two roles to play---first, obviously, by enacting and enforcing regulations on GM, Ford, and Daimler-Chrysler, but giving them tax incentives and employee healthcare benefits to spur the transition.
Obama's plan has been endorsed by the green giant of California, Arnold Schwarzeneggar, who has ignored his pals in the GOP in his quest to make California the greenest state. We've been spending all this time in the media trying to figure out Obama's racial identity, and I think we've discovered it---he's green.
Monday, May 7, 2007
Who's the flip-flopper now?
Just a little tidbit. I never really liked John Kerry, but this is just something I've made a connection between during my multiple debates with friends and even enemies throughout the past few days.
Back in '03/'04, Bush said we went to Iraq to remove the terrorist threat that Saddam Hussein posed to America and to the rest of the world. Now, in 2007, Bush says we cannot leave Iraq because it will create a safe haven from which terrorists can launch attacks on us.
So the original reason we were in Iraq is because Saddam Hussein posed a threat to America, and the reason we're still there is because the lack of Saddam Hussein poses a threat to America!?
It makes perfect sense.
Back in '03/'04, Bush said we went to Iraq to remove the terrorist threat that Saddam Hussein posed to America and to the rest of the world. Now, in 2007, Bush says we cannot leave Iraq because it will create a safe haven from which terrorists can launch attacks on us.
So the original reason we were in Iraq is because Saddam Hussein posed a threat to America, and the reason we're still there is because the lack of Saddam Hussein poses a threat to America!?
It makes perfect sense.
Evangelical=Hate?
Hmmm. . .very interesting. The usual suspects, including Focus on the Family's James Dobson, Andrea Laffterty ofTraditional Values Coalition, and Tony Perkins of the American Family Association are rallying their opposition---not to abortion rights, not to gay marriage or civil unions, but to hate crimes legislation! Imagine that, prominent Christians standing tall, standing together as the body of Christ. . .to hate!
New legislation, inspired by the murder of Matthew Shephard in Wyoming, seeks to give protected status to gay people in existing hate crime laws that already protect African-Americans and other minorities from horrible crimes of physical violence and mental and emotional intimidation and harassment. We have these laws on the books for a good reason, since these crimes go beyond the intial victim, creating communities of fear and intimidation among the larger minority communities the victims represent. And certainly, gays and lesbians fall into a group that is often targeted by hate criminals---people who hurt and kill others because they are different.
While these people have a constitutional right to believe what they want about different sexual orientations, it's disgraceful to the church and to Jesus Himself for them to oppose this legislation. All of the above claim, in their own words, that the legislation would make evangelical ministers targets for prosecution and incarceration because of their words from the pulpit. My question to them is, "Why are you fighting so hard for hate speech?" It also makes me wonder if they ARE ALREADY inciting violence, and if they are just admitting it.
It's really past time that Christians and lovers of this country and its civil rights stand up to these people. They don't speak for all Christians---they are a loud, obnoxious minority that must be defeated. From now on, any time I hear the word "evangelical," I'm thinking "hate." If that wasn't clear already, it is now. Thanks for letting us know where you REALLY stand on human rights.
New legislation, inspired by the murder of Matthew Shephard in Wyoming, seeks to give protected status to gay people in existing hate crime laws that already protect African-Americans and other minorities from horrible crimes of physical violence and mental and emotional intimidation and harassment. We have these laws on the books for a good reason, since these crimes go beyond the intial victim, creating communities of fear and intimidation among the larger minority communities the victims represent. And certainly, gays and lesbians fall into a group that is often targeted by hate criminals---people who hurt and kill others because they are different.
While these people have a constitutional right to believe what they want about different sexual orientations, it's disgraceful to the church and to Jesus Himself for them to oppose this legislation. All of the above claim, in their own words, that the legislation would make evangelical ministers targets for prosecution and incarceration because of their words from the pulpit. My question to them is, "Why are you fighting so hard for hate speech?" It also makes me wonder if they ARE ALREADY inciting violence, and if they are just admitting it.
It's really past time that Christians and lovers of this country and its civil rights stand up to these people. They don't speak for all Christians---they are a loud, obnoxious minority that must be defeated. From now on, any time I hear the word "evangelical," I'm thinking "hate." If that wasn't clear already, it is now. Thanks for letting us know where you REALLY stand on human rights.
My Thinking
I support John Edwards unwaveringly because of the following reasons.
A. Our country needs to heal. The way to do that is to have a compassionate leader who understands what that process involves. John and Elizabeth do understand.
B. I believe that poverty, real poverty is ahead for MOST of all America because of the Iraq fiasco, outsourcing, the wealth gap, the lack luster educational system that is teaching students to a test, not to possibility thinking, etc. a la Bush
C. Family values should be what we seek in a candidate. John & Elizabeth represent the highest standards of FAMILY FIRST. John built his parents a home, for heaven's sake!
D. John's views on ending the war NOW, his wide scope health care plan, his views on the environment, his work in fighting poverty, his fundamental values on education, religion, & his views on international inclusiveness by bringing other countries back to friendship with America are but a few reasons why I support his candidacy.
I think that a ticket with John as President and Bill Richardson as veep would be the strongest one Dems could hope for.
There! I have said it. Thanks for the inspiration to put my thinking on paper. Now to write that letter to the editor about the fowl and feathers representative we have in Congress from the 5th district.
Matilda
A. Our country needs to heal. The way to do that is to have a compassionate leader who understands what that process involves. John and Elizabeth do understand.
B. I believe that poverty, real poverty is ahead for MOST of all America because of the Iraq fiasco, outsourcing, the wealth gap, the lack luster educational system that is teaching students to a test, not to possibility thinking, etc. a la Bush
C. Family values should be what we seek in a candidate. John & Elizabeth represent the highest standards of FAMILY FIRST. John built his parents a home, for heaven's sake!
D. John's views on ending the war NOW, his wide scope health care plan, his views on the environment, his work in fighting poverty, his fundamental values on education, religion, & his views on international inclusiveness by bringing other countries back to friendship with America are but a few reasons why I support his candidacy.
I think that a ticket with John as President and Bill Richardson as veep would be the strongest one Dems could hope for.
There! I have said it. Thanks for the inspiration to put my thinking on paper. Now to write that letter to the editor about the fowl and feathers representative we have in Congress from the 5th district.
Matilda
9/11! 9/11! 9/11!
Dear Mr. President:
It's not enough for you to claim at the end of your veto that the legislative branch is acting unconstitutionally by doing its constitutional function, which is legislating (then again, nobody will EVER mistake you for a constitutional scholar now, will they?).
You always have to go that one step further, and shout "9/11! 9/11! 9/11!" like some child who's just stolen a pack of gum being dragged back into the store kicking and screaming by his mom, who wants him to return it and apologize. What's so beyond the pale here is that in repeating these lies, which makes you a war criminal, you are trying to now lie us out of the war that you lied us into?
We all know what you're doing here. You're delaying the inevitable. You want the Democrat who gets elected next year to start the withdrawal, just so you don't lose face during your term and your cronies can continue to profiteer in the meantime. Let me remind you of what's going on while you scream like a petulant child:
1---People are dying by the thousands.2---People are getting maimed for life by the tens of thousands.3---A middle-Eastern country lies in ruins, and the middle and upper classes, who could have rebuilt it, have fled, because they have the money to do so.4---A North American country, once a shining beacon to the world, is now the world's thug, prosecuting offensive, illegal wars and engaging in kidnapping and torture without due process, while covering up prisoner abuses and contriving military heroes from friendly fire accidents.
That is your legacy--death, destruction, and the ruin of democracy. And while your veto is constitutional in nature, your war crimes are most certainly not. This is the beginning of the end for you, Mr President.
It's not enough for you to claim at the end of your veto that the legislative branch is acting unconstitutionally by doing its constitutional function, which is legislating (then again, nobody will EVER mistake you for a constitutional scholar now, will they?).
You always have to go that one step further, and shout "9/11! 9/11! 9/11!" like some child who's just stolen a pack of gum being dragged back into the store kicking and screaming by his mom, who wants him to return it and apologize. What's so beyond the pale here is that in repeating these lies, which makes you a war criminal, you are trying to now lie us out of the war that you lied us into?
We all know what you're doing here. You're delaying the inevitable. You want the Democrat who gets elected next year to start the withdrawal, just so you don't lose face during your term and your cronies can continue to profiteer in the meantime. Let me remind you of what's going on while you scream like a petulant child:
1---People are dying by the thousands.2---People are getting maimed for life by the tens of thousands.3---A middle-Eastern country lies in ruins, and the middle and upper classes, who could have rebuilt it, have fled, because they have the money to do so.4---A North American country, once a shining beacon to the world, is now the world's thug, prosecuting offensive, illegal wars and engaging in kidnapping and torture without due process, while covering up prisoner abuses and contriving military heroes from friendly fire accidents.
That is your legacy--death, destruction, and the ruin of democracy. And while your veto is constitutional in nature, your war crimes are most certainly not. This is the beginning of the end for you, Mr President.
Mission Accomplished
Originally posted on May 1, 2007
Ah, it was only four years ago today that we saw you touch down on the deck of the aircraft carrier wearing the outfit that your costume-designer in chief, Karl Rove, adoringly said, "really accentuates your manhood."
And now to commemorate your pile of lies and your incompetent, unwinnable war, with its thousands of deaths and tens of thousands of missing limbs and gallons of blood, gather 'round your cronies---"Heckuva job, Halliburton! Heckuva job, Blackwater!"---and raise a glass. To quote Borat, your toast shall forever be, "May George Bush drink the blood of the women and children of Iraq!"
Impeach. Withdraw. Restore our country from the depths you've plunged it, where we devalue the lives and deaths of others, where we see human rights documents such as the Geneva Conventions as "quaint"---thanks, Alberto, heckuva job to you, too!---and torture away while whistling Dixie.
You've pissed on our military families and shat on the constitution. Heckuva job, Bushie. Heckuva, job. What a man.
We'll see the helicopters take what's left of the soldiers out in January 2009, at the end of what will forever be known as Vietnam II. It's one thing to be so freaking stupid as to repeat history, but it's another level of idiocy entirely to fabricate a situation so you can repeat it.
God help us.
Ah, it was only four years ago today that we saw you touch down on the deck of the aircraft carrier wearing the outfit that your costume-designer in chief, Karl Rove, adoringly said, "really accentuates your manhood."
And now to commemorate your pile of lies and your incompetent, unwinnable war, with its thousands of deaths and tens of thousands of missing limbs and gallons of blood, gather 'round your cronies---"Heckuva job, Halliburton! Heckuva job, Blackwater!"---and raise a glass. To quote Borat, your toast shall forever be, "May George Bush drink the blood of the women and children of Iraq!"
Impeach. Withdraw. Restore our country from the depths you've plunged it, where we devalue the lives and deaths of others, where we see human rights documents such as the Geneva Conventions as "quaint"---thanks, Alberto, heckuva job to you, too!---and torture away while whistling Dixie.
You've pissed on our military families and shat on the constitution. Heckuva job, Bushie. Heckuva, job. What a man.
We'll see the helicopters take what's left of the soldiers out in January 2009, at the end of what will forever be known as Vietnam II. It's one thing to be so freaking stupid as to repeat history, but it's another level of idiocy entirely to fabricate a situation so you can repeat it.
God help us.
Coming Out for Obama
I'm supporting Senator Obama for many reasons, but what put me over the top is his stand against and continued leadership in the US Senate regarding the Iraq War. I believe that the Iraq War is the greatest atrocity of a generation, in terms of what it has done to our military and their families, and, just as importantly, to the Iraqi people. I believe that George Bush and Dick Cheney fit the textbook definition of "war criminal," and many Democrats, fearing for their political lives four years ago, signed on as enablers of this awful, shambolic misadventure in American foreign policy. Among these enablers, unfortunately, were Hillary Clinton and John Edwards.
It's easy to dismiss Senator Clinton, because she's the consummate "finger-to-the-wind" politician, even more so than her husband, and she just joined the anti-war movement a few months ago. She expects us to forget what she has done---she didn't just vote for the resolution late in 2002, she was one of the staunchest hawks in a Congress that enabled Republicans to lay waste to our military and cause the deaths and maimings of over 30,000 American soldiers and tens of thousands (maybe even hundreds of thousands) of Iraqis.
Edwards is a little more difficult, but I must ultimately put him gently to the side as well. While he's still my "#2," assuming Gore doesn't take the plunge, saying you're sorry isn't enough. Edwards and Clinton are running all over the country saying things like "I'm accountable for my vote," or "I take responsibility for my vote." This is code language for "thanks for bringing that up, but let me dismiss that issue in one sentence."
True responsibility and true accountability often means that you face the rewards or consequences for your actions. And the consequence, for Sens Edwards and Clinton, is that they won't get my vote for President of the United States. When you see the carnage and waste (what EVIL profiteering we are seeing while Iraq burns and our own soldiers don't even have the boots and toiletries they need, much less body armor!), you have to remember that when these folks had their time in the hotseat, they wilted, either due to political calculation (Clinton) or just plain getting it wrong (Edwards, as he admits). While I admit that we can't know for sure how Obama would have voted as a US Senator had he been one at the time, we do know how Clinton and Edwards cast their respective lots.
So, while all the Dems would be a million times better than Bush, my choice is simple. While they all have great plans and records on the environment, healthcare, and helping the disenfranchised, not to mention women's reproductive rights and civil rights in general one, and only one, has an unblemished record of leadership on the number one issue in the realm of war and peace in our time---Barack Obama.
Even still, I love Edwards (and I really love the details of his plans for America), and I'll forgive him and give him my support if Obama fails in his run . But for now, I can forgive him and support somebody who's gotten this one right from the start. As angry as I've become about the war (see Anglico's blog about how Republicans treat the troops), I just can't support anybody in the primary who's got blood on his or her hands, even if it's just a small amount (Edwards) or covered with it (Clinton). I'm not trying to be vindictive---I love Edwards and can even bring myself to like Sen Clinton quite a bit sometimes, it's just how I'm making my choice.
It's easy to dismiss Senator Clinton, because she's the consummate "finger-to-the-wind" politician, even more so than her husband, and she just joined the anti-war movement a few months ago. She expects us to forget what she has done---she didn't just vote for the resolution late in 2002, she was one of the staunchest hawks in a Congress that enabled Republicans to lay waste to our military and cause the deaths and maimings of over 30,000 American soldiers and tens of thousands (maybe even hundreds of thousands) of Iraqis.
Edwards is a little more difficult, but I must ultimately put him gently to the side as well. While he's still my "#2," assuming Gore doesn't take the plunge, saying you're sorry isn't enough. Edwards and Clinton are running all over the country saying things like "I'm accountable for my vote," or "I take responsibility for my vote." This is code language for "thanks for bringing that up, but let me dismiss that issue in one sentence."
True responsibility and true accountability often means that you face the rewards or consequences for your actions. And the consequence, for Sens Edwards and Clinton, is that they won't get my vote for President of the United States. When you see the carnage and waste (what EVIL profiteering we are seeing while Iraq burns and our own soldiers don't even have the boots and toiletries they need, much less body armor!), you have to remember that when these folks had their time in the hotseat, they wilted, either due to political calculation (Clinton) or just plain getting it wrong (Edwards, as he admits). While I admit that we can't know for sure how Obama would have voted as a US Senator had he been one at the time, we do know how Clinton and Edwards cast their respective lots.
So, while all the Dems would be a million times better than Bush, my choice is simple. While they all have great plans and records on the environment, healthcare, and helping the disenfranchised, not to mention women's reproductive rights and civil rights in general one, and only one, has an unblemished record of leadership on the number one issue in the realm of war and peace in our time---Barack Obama.
Even still, I love Edwards (and I really love the details of his plans for America), and I'll forgive him and give him my support if Obama fails in his run . But for now, I can forgive him and support somebody who's gotten this one right from the start. As angry as I've become about the war (see Anglico's blog about how Republicans treat the troops), I just can't support anybody in the primary who's got blood on his or her hands, even if it's just a small amount (Edwards) or covered with it (Clinton). I'm not trying to be vindictive---I love Edwards and can even bring myself to like Sen Clinton quite a bit sometimes, it's just how I'm making my choice.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Two Things Brought Me Back to Life This Week
And they both came from the John Edwards camp. First, on Tuesday, Senator Edwards rolled out the most ambitious plan for cleaning up our environment and changing the way Americans consume the world's resources and pollute without end, in an effort to eliminate global warming-induced climate change. And he picked a great time to roll out his plan, as The People's Hero, Al Gore, was testifying before Congress. One redneck rep from Texas, upon hearing Gore's testimony, described it as "an all-out attack on fossil fuels and nuclear power." EXACTLY! I'M GLAD YOU GET IT, JERK! Check out the Edwards plan (I thought of calling it Gore Junior, but there's nothing junior or light about it at http://www.johnedwards.com/about/issues/energy/new-energy-economy/
But overshadowing Edwards' incredible plan for greening America, and rightfully so, was yesterday's horrific revelation that the Edwardses are dealing with a recurrence of Elizabeth's breast cancer. Knowing first-hand what it's like to live with a chronic illness, I think it's amazing that they are facing it with their heads held high, relying on the support of each other and the millions of us who wish them well. They are setting a great example for their children and for all of us.
But overshadowing Edwards' incredible plan for greening America, and rightfully so, was yesterday's horrific revelation that the Edwardses are dealing with a recurrence of Elizabeth's breast cancer. Knowing first-hand what it's like to live with a chronic illness, I think it's amazing that they are facing it with their heads held high, relying on the support of each other and the millions of us who wish them well. They are setting a great example for their children and for all of us.
Had to Take a Break
I had to take a break from writing these last several days, as I needed to attend to some non-political aspects in my life. During my silent time, I have just grown so sick about the brazen disregard for our Constitution and our country that the Bushies display on a daily basis.
It just seems like we're deluged with a new scandal every day, and scandals within scandals at that. A lot of people are saying this is what happens after you have one party in power for so long. I disagree with that---it's what happens when you have a party that doesn't believe in government in the first place running the show. I think a lot of folks thought that the Republicans would be constantly stripping away programs and handing tax cuts to the rich. Well, they did that (!) and they've also done something far worse, too.
They've systematically profiteered and politicized everything from foreign policy (Iraq) to catastrophe (Katrina) to protecting us domestically (awful homeland security bureaucracy, FDA run by anti-abortion zealots, and muzzling the science community in favor of religious bigots). It just makes you sick. I feel sometimes like I'm rummaging through a filthy dumpster when I read about my government.
And that's depressing.
It just seems like we're deluged with a new scandal every day, and scandals within scandals at that. A lot of people are saying this is what happens after you have one party in power for so long. I disagree with that---it's what happens when you have a party that doesn't believe in government in the first place running the show. I think a lot of folks thought that the Republicans would be constantly stripping away programs and handing tax cuts to the rich. Well, they did that (!) and they've also done something far worse, too.
They've systematically profiteered and politicized everything from foreign policy (Iraq) to catastrophe (Katrina) to protecting us domestically (awful homeland security bureaucracy, FDA run by anti-abortion zealots, and muzzling the science community in favor of religious bigots). It just makes you sick. I feel sometimes like I'm rummaging through a filthy dumpster when I read about my government.
And that's depressing.
Monday, March 12, 2007
Above the Law: The Attorney General?!
I know we're all feeling a little Bushwhacked after 6 long years of this guy and his horde of minions running the country, but did any of you get a load of the news out of the justice department late last week and over the weekend?
Democratic Senate leaders are calling for the resignation of Attorney General Alberto "Torture is A-Ok" Gonzalez. As if his reasoning that the Geneva Conventions is a pro-torture document wasn't enough reason to put him in jail, much less take him out of our GOVERNMENT, we now find that he's firing US attorneys under the direction of Karl Rove. Some might call it a "Plaming" of the justice department.
And we also found out that the FBI has been abusing the Patriot Act, needlessly accessing bank and phone records of thousands of Americans while they sleep the blissful sleep of the drugged and apathetic. If they fire US attorneys for not exercising their political will, we can only wonder what they are planning to do with our personal information. Who knew that when they came up with the term, "identity theft," they'd be talking about the action of a government bureau!
Democratic Senate leaders are calling for the resignation of Attorney General Alberto "Torture is A-Ok" Gonzalez. As if his reasoning that the Geneva Conventions is a pro-torture document wasn't enough reason to put him in jail, much less take him out of our GOVERNMENT, we now find that he's firing US attorneys under the direction of Karl Rove. Some might call it a "Plaming" of the justice department.
And we also found out that the FBI has been abusing the Patriot Act, needlessly accessing bank and phone records of thousands of Americans while they sleep the blissful sleep of the drugged and apathetic. If they fire US attorneys for not exercising their political will, we can only wonder what they are planning to do with our personal information. Who knew that when they came up with the term, "identity theft," they'd be talking about the action of a government bureau!
This Week's Open Thread---Your Pick for President, or Is It Too Early?
Is it too early to be picking a President? Should even those of us who think we know these folks sit back and listen before we leap?
Let's have your thoughts. . .have you picked somebody? Have you narrowed it down to a couple of people, at least?
Let's have your thoughts. . .have you picked somebody? Have you narrowed it down to a couple of people, at least?
Thursday, March 8, 2007
Let's Take Action!
Here's a copy of the body of an email I sent this morning to my state Senator:
I hope you are doing well as you take care of the people's business in Raleigh. I just wanted to drop you a line to see what your thoughts/feelings are about the measures that have been presented in the House and Senate that seek to amend the state constitution regarding marriage.
I find these measures troubling on many levels, as I am a concerned citizen, active in the community here, and I'm the new chair of precinct 82 for the Forsyth Democratic Party. Is there anything that you are doing to fight these mean-spirited measures that seek to enshrine discrimination into our state constitution? I know we already have a couple of laws on the books concerning this issue (an antiquated measure from the 19th century and a mean-spirited act from the mid 1990s), and, while I disagree with them, I respect them as the law of this state until a judge or panel of judges sees fit to show them for what they are----an unconstitutional tyranny of the majority.
The way I see it, the fundamentalist, anti-gay movement is seeking to empower their discrimination by removing any prospect for judicial review, and this is the very reason we have wise, elected represenatives in our republic to protect us from democratic referenda that will bring on majority tyranny on an easily misunderstood issue such as gay relationships. If we ran things this way throughout our history, I have no doubt in my mind that many of the constituents you and I now serve and represent in Precinct 82 might still be slaves, or, at least be subject to the whims of Jim Crow.
I'm not asking you to legalize gay marriage----that's a bigger job that will take years to solve, though judicial review and legislative compromise (see: New Jersey). I'm just asking you to protect our constitution from a fundamentalist assault.
Please let me know where you stand on these issues. I have supported you since I moved to your district from Greensboro three years ago, and I'll look forward to lending my help whenever I can.
Thanks, in advance, for taking time to respond to my concerns. I am not copying my state representative, Mr Folwell, as I know that he is one of those leading the charge to bash gay people with legislation. I sincerely hope you are acting as a counterweight to him.
I hope you are doing well as you take care of the people's business in Raleigh. I just wanted to drop you a line to see what your thoughts/feelings are about the measures that have been presented in the House and Senate that seek to amend the state constitution regarding marriage.
I find these measures troubling on many levels, as I am a concerned citizen, active in the community here, and I'm the new chair of precinct 82 for the Forsyth Democratic Party. Is there anything that you are doing to fight these mean-spirited measures that seek to enshrine discrimination into our state constitution? I know we already have a couple of laws on the books concerning this issue (an antiquated measure from the 19th century and a mean-spirited act from the mid 1990s), and, while I disagree with them, I respect them as the law of this state until a judge or panel of judges sees fit to show them for what they are----an unconstitutional tyranny of the majority.
The way I see it, the fundamentalist, anti-gay movement is seeking to empower their discrimination by removing any prospect for judicial review, and this is the very reason we have wise, elected represenatives in our republic to protect us from democratic referenda that will bring on majority tyranny on an easily misunderstood issue such as gay relationships. If we ran things this way throughout our history, I have no doubt in my mind that many of the constituents you and I now serve and represent in Precinct 82 might still be slaves, or, at least be subject to the whims of Jim Crow.
I'm not asking you to legalize gay marriage----that's a bigger job that will take years to solve, though judicial review and legislative compromise (see: New Jersey). I'm just asking you to protect our constitution from a fundamentalist assault.
Please let me know where you stand on these issues. I have supported you since I moved to your district from Greensboro three years ago, and I'll look forward to lending my help whenever I can.
Thanks, in advance, for taking time to respond to my concerns. I am not copying my state representative, Mr Folwell, as I know that he is one of those leading the charge to bash gay people with legislation. I sincerely hope you are acting as a counterweight to him.
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
GUILTY
Lewis Libby is GUILTY of obstruction of justice and lying to a fedeal grand jury in the Valerie Plame case. He is a symbol of the megalomaniacal thirst for power in the Cheney cabal of Bush's banana republic.
What a disgrace to our country, that they threaten our freedoms by outing secret agents for political tit-for-tat. What an absolute disgrace. And you know where the ultimate blame lies in this mess---with the people of the United States. All of this abuse of power started right after 9/11, yet they still let this corrupt group of crooks keep power in 2004.
You reap what you sow. Don't blame me---I voted for Kerry/Edwards. I have no claim on the Chimp and the Penguin. And I won't take responsibility for anything they do.
They're not fighting this war in my name. Not by a damn sight.
What a disgrace to our country, that they threaten our freedoms by outing secret agents for political tit-for-tat. What an absolute disgrace. And you know where the ultimate blame lies in this mess---with the people of the United States. All of this abuse of power started right after 9/11, yet they still let this corrupt group of crooks keep power in 2004.
You reap what you sow. Don't blame me---I voted for Kerry/Edwards. I have no claim on the Chimp and the Penguin. And I won't take responsibility for anything they do.
They're not fighting this war in my name. Not by a damn sight.
I Grant Thee Three Parties or More
Looking at the history of US from the perspective of the two party system, we see a continuous cycle of what would now be termed partisanship starting in the early days of the Union with the federalist v. anti-federalist debate. If only Aaron Burr could return to reiterate his point to the Hamiltons of today.
Just like in the days following the Battle Between Brothers, we see the ideas of polarization and profiteering not only alive but seemingly the proverbial petrol fueling the proliferation additional military conflict.
Both due to the polarity inherent in the two party system as well as the frequently played tactic of divide the populace on pet issues (from flag burning to fag weddings) to keep people from coming together on things that matter: such as enforcing anti-trust laws such as in the case of the ever centralized political propaganda machine (read: media).
So the question I pose is, why don't we have a functional multi-party system like our friends to the north in Canadia and so many other "civilized" nations do?
Money.
Funding seems to be the first likely requirement to democracizing our dualocracy. In a land where the government has only the resources entrusted to it via its population, we've seen little in the way of election finance reform let alone something as outlandish as election spending caps, however these are clear logical first steps to reigning in the Dogs of War on Everything not deemed expressly patriotic. This would also likely put the lobbying and campaign contribution systems out to pasture.
Imagine dems, repubs, libertarians, greenies, and other parties not only appearing on the ballot but also receiving equal time and exposure.
Got the picture? That's exactly why the two parties in power have worked hard (if not always together) passing the majority and the buck.
After VP Gore thankfully built the internet (perhaps as an arpnet consultant?), lil ole Vermont's former governor Dean is often credited with finding a way to use it to channel grass roots action. Do y'all see momentum via the Digital Age improving not only the number but the quality of candidates we're presented with? Or do you have other ideas for how to make lasting change starting with the paper trails?
Just like in the days following the Battle Between Brothers, we see the ideas of polarization and profiteering not only alive but seemingly the proverbial petrol fueling the proliferation additional military conflict.
Both due to the polarity inherent in the two party system as well as the frequently played tactic of divide the populace on pet issues (from flag burning to fag weddings) to keep people from coming together on things that matter: such as enforcing anti-trust laws such as in the case of the ever centralized political propaganda machine (read: media).
So the question I pose is, why don't we have a functional multi-party system like our friends to the north in Canadia and so many other "civilized" nations do?
Money.
Funding seems to be the first likely requirement to democracizing our dualocracy. In a land where the government has only the resources entrusted to it via its population, we've seen little in the way of election finance reform let alone something as outlandish as election spending caps, however these are clear logical first steps to reigning in the Dogs of War on Everything not deemed expressly patriotic. This would also likely put the lobbying and campaign contribution systems out to pasture.
Imagine dems, repubs, libertarians, greenies, and other parties not only appearing on the ballot but also receiving equal time and exposure.
Got the picture? That's exactly why the two parties in power have worked hard (if not always together) passing the majority and the buck.
After VP Gore thankfully built the internet (perhaps as an arpnet consultant?), lil ole Vermont's former governor Dean is often credited with finding a way to use it to channel grass roots action. Do y'all see momentum via the Digital Age improving not only the number but the quality of candidates we're presented with? Or do you have other ideas for how to make lasting change starting with the paper trails?
Monday, March 5, 2007
Another reason I'm proud to be a Democrat
Just this weekend, a good, dual illustration of why I'm proud to be a Democrat:
In Washington, conservatives gathered to hoot and laugh at a Democrat being the object of a homophobic slur.
While in Selma, Alabama, the leading contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination were competing to show who has taken the greatest stand for and has the greatest appreciation for the civil rights movement in their respective careers.
When we talk about character issues defining parties/candidates/campaigns, let it be said that the Democrats stand up for the least among us so that we are all better for it.
In Washington, conservatives gathered to hoot and laugh at a Democrat being the object of a homophobic slur.
While in Selma, Alabama, the leading contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination were competing to show who has taken the greatest stand for and has the greatest appreciation for the civil rights movement in their respective careers.
When we talk about character issues defining parties/candidates/campaigns, let it be said that the Democrats stand up for the least among us so that we are all better for it.
Saturday, March 3, 2007
Stand Up
I think it's great that Ann Coulter and the conservatives at this weekend's CPAC convention in Washington want to slur John Edwards with homophobic slurs and laugh about it. The HUGE irony here is that many at the convention are fretting over the slate of Republican presidential candidates lacking true Christian values.
I think it's great because it shows these people for what they really are----power-obsessed jerks who will summon up all measure of bile and hate just to win an election. A far cry from Jesus Christ's sermon on the mount, don't you think?
To Edwards's credit, his campaign has responded by using Coulter's slur to raise money. This morning on his website, they are trying to raise a little "Coulter Cash" to help end the culture of bigotry that folks like Coulter, Karl Rove and the men they serve----that's you, George W Bush---have created in this country. Inspirational leadership in response to the smallness of the right. I smell a big victory in 2008, which just might consign their anti-gay, anti-environment, anti-woman, anti-poor agenda to the dustbin of history.
I think it's great because it shows these people for what they really are----power-obsessed jerks who will summon up all measure of bile and hate just to win an election. A far cry from Jesus Christ's sermon on the mount, don't you think?
To Edwards's credit, his campaign has responded by using Coulter's slur to raise money. This morning on his website, they are trying to raise a little "Coulter Cash" to help end the culture of bigotry that folks like Coulter, Karl Rove and the men they serve----that's you, George W Bush---have created in this country. Inspirational leadership in response to the smallness of the right. I smell a big victory in 2008, which just might consign their anti-gay, anti-environment, anti-woman, anti-poor agenda to the dustbin of history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
