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.

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.

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!

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 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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

2 Unrelated Items

I want to call to your attention something I read in the paper yesterday by Tom Teepen from Cox News Service. He says that a purge of U.S. attorneys began last December and is now up to 8. It sounds as if they are being fired for being incompetent, but they all recently had received good job reviews. [A little irony here that Bush and performance-related firings!] It seems as if a couple of these attorneys were handling corruption cases against high-ranking Republicans. The others were bucking Bush administration doctrine, for instance, recommending against capital punishment in iffy cases. A provision in the Patriot Act set US attorneys up for this fall. In the past, vacancies during a presidency could be filled either by temporary judicial appointment or by presidential nomination that would be Senate-reviewed. The Patriot Act was gimmicked so the president could dodge Congress and make indefinite appointments unilaterally! Wake up America!

The second odd thing was in the Washington Post today about Cheney giving the press an interview on the condition that he be quoted only as "a senior administration official". If the reporters would not agree, no information! The reporters got around it because he used the pronoun "I" throughout the interview, which they "kindly" used also! Does anyone other than me think Cheney is losing what little credibility he has left???