According to a Wall Street Journal poll, "1,008 adults, conducted Feb. 10-14, found that 51% Americans consider it 'a bad idea' to change Social Security by allowing workers to invest payroll taxes in the stock market, while 40% think it's a "good idea." That is essentially unchanged since January, despite Mr. Bush's attempt to drum up support for the idea in the State of the Union address and a cross-country tour. The margin of error is 3.1 percentage points." 60% of those say their position on the matter is "firm."
People are now finally amenable to my idea of removing the upper cap on Social Security taxes to fund the "crisis" by a 64%-32% margin. Why should Bill Gates pay less than one half of one 100th of a percent of his income and people earning minimum wage have pay much, much more than that (percentage wise)?
51% say the Iraqi election was legitimate...let's see what they think after Iraq turns into Iran, Jr. or there is a major civil war. Meanwhile, Bush is about where he was pre-9/11 50%. I still don't get how this guy won on some level.
Wednesday, February 16, 2005
the Net best thing
National Journal's Chuck Todd notes, "These 'netroot' groups will do the same for one or more of the candidates -- on both sides of the political spectrum -- in 2008. The netroot groups are as potentially powerful a base in a primary as labor and/or blacks for the Democrats. And this time, the media is going to take netroot groups more seriously, thereby increasing their influence in the next cycle." Todd points to Feingold, Gore, and Clark on the Democratic side and Brownback, Sanford & Schwarzenegger on the GOP side (as well as Thune and Toomey).
And given that Chris Bowers, Markos and other prominant bloggers' dream of Dean as DNC chair has come true, who will be the blogosphere's candidate in 2008?
Well according to a poll on MyDD, it's General Wesley Clark. This isn't a huge surprise since Clark was drafted over the internet and had the second best internet strategy going in 2004, raising tens of millions of dollars online, having his own MyDD/DailyKos style community (called ForClark), and generally a very enthusiastic level of support from bloggers everywhere, being the Deaniac's second choice mostly and the choice of internet folks who didn't jive with Dean like myself.
Feingold is a cool guy, and I liked him when I met him at a Matheson fundraiser in 2000. But he has a couple problems that will be hard to overcome: 1) he's short 2) he's a senator 3) he's jewish. Maybe Joe Lieberman made it ok for Jewish folks to run for the highest office in the land, but I still worry. The things he has going for him are 1) McCain/Campaign Finance Reform 2) no vote on the PATRIOT Act 3) he is from the swingable state of Wisconsin.
As for Gore, his biggest problem is 1) he's Al Gore, the most famous loser of our time 2) he's Al Gore, about as charasmatic as John Kerry [man, what is with Democratic primary voters? Why support such duds?] 3) He has gone off with the noisy but ineffectual MoveOn.org and become a screaming red faced banchee. Pluses, 1) he has a great accent that is coming back 2) When he trashes Bush, people listen 3) Hello, name recognition?
I don't want to go into all the same for the other side, other than Arnold has to get a consitutional amendment through before he can run for President or VP (plus, he is too far left on cultural issues to make it through the primary).
And given that Chris Bowers, Markos and other prominant bloggers' dream of Dean as DNC chair has come true, who will be the blogosphere's candidate in 2008?
Well according to a poll on MyDD, it's General Wesley Clark. This isn't a huge surprise since Clark was drafted over the internet and had the second best internet strategy going in 2004, raising tens of millions of dollars online, having his own MyDD/DailyKos style community (called ForClark), and generally a very enthusiastic level of support from bloggers everywhere, being the Deaniac's second choice mostly and the choice of internet folks who didn't jive with Dean like myself.
Feingold is a cool guy, and I liked him when I met him at a Matheson fundraiser in 2000. But he has a couple problems that will be hard to overcome: 1) he's short 2) he's a senator 3) he's jewish. Maybe Joe Lieberman made it ok for Jewish folks to run for the highest office in the land, but I still worry. The things he has going for him are 1) McCain/Campaign Finance Reform 2) no vote on the PATRIOT Act 3) he is from the swingable state of Wisconsin.
As for Gore, his biggest problem is 1) he's Al Gore, the most famous loser of our time 2) he's Al Gore, about as charasmatic as John Kerry [man, what is with Democratic primary voters? Why support such duds?] 3) He has gone off with the noisy but ineffectual MoveOn.org and become a screaming red faced banchee. Pluses, 1) he has a great accent that is coming back 2) When he trashes Bush, people listen 3) Hello, name recognition?
I don't want to go into all the same for the other side, other than Arnold has to get a consitutional amendment through before he can run for President or VP (plus, he is too far left on cultural issues to make it through the primary).
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
my fifteen minutes
This morning, I had my interview. Out of the 14 firms I applied to, it looks like this is the only one that wants to talk to me. Still, I am lucky and happy to have had it. It was a good idea to talk to this guy for a while during a on campus recruiting event and a good idea that I put my middle name (and my father's first name) on my resume, since the first question was "are you related to X from Y firm?" It was good to bring my transcripts and resume, because it showed that I had better grades in college and that college was Brown.
I tried to demonstate my knowledge of issues and the law and their firm and them personally. Hopefully, it worked.
Of course, everyone of my friends at law school came up and asked if I had an interview, and I did the same to people before and after. Everyone is a bit nervous about the whole situation and all have no idea what to expect. The interviews are so short (15 min.) and so high stress, combined with wearing suits and heals for girls.
Who knows...anyway, it is nice to have it over with and to have the opportunity to try to win them over. I figure it is hard to forget a 6'3" red head who is a flaming Democrat in a flaming GOP state. At least I stick out.
I tried to demonstate my knowledge of issues and the law and their firm and them personally. Hopefully, it worked.
Of course, everyone of my friends at law school came up and asked if I had an interview, and I did the same to people before and after. Everyone is a bit nervous about the whole situation and all have no idea what to expect. The interviews are so short (15 min.) and so high stress, combined with wearing suits and heals for girls.
Who knows...anyway, it is nice to have it over with and to have the opportunity to try to win them over. I figure it is hard to forget a 6'3" red head who is a flaming Democrat in a flaming GOP state. At least I stick out.
Monday, February 14, 2005
The fool and his money
Give to the DNC if you want. But don't give to it because of Howard Dean. A lot of Dean-o-philes have being pouring in money (about $100,000 via places like MyDD and DailyKos) to the committee over the weekend solely because the good doctor is now in charge.
The trouble is, Dean is now the chair of the entire big tent party. He can't and won't move the party ideologically. He might have some luck with some reforms, most of which will be giving some power back to the state parties. As far as consultants, he will not hire Shrum et al, but he will still hire the same old people that worked for his presidential campaign sans Trippi (I bet). I think will do a pretty job. I hope he keeps his word not to run for 2008. All democrats, even bitter Tim Roemer, should wish him well and good luck.
To Matt Stoller and Donnie's kids: good work, nice try, it might have happened but for Howard Dean. DFA was too big and established to counter with a overnight blog shop and personal connection. DNC members alright liked Howard since he gave his "Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party" speech as a candidate that launched him from obscurity to frontrunner in early 2003.
Happy Valentine's Day everyone. Even if no one got you flowers or candy or dinner or a card or whatever, remember: The Third Avenue loves you. In a Platonic way, but keep coming back and reading.
The trouble is, Dean is now the chair of the entire big tent party. He can't and won't move the party ideologically. He might have some luck with some reforms, most of which will be giving some power back to the state parties. As far as consultants, he will not hire Shrum et al, but he will still hire the same old people that worked for his presidential campaign sans Trippi (I bet). I think will do a pretty job. I hope he keeps his word not to run for 2008. All democrats, even bitter Tim Roemer, should wish him well and good luck.
To Matt Stoller and Donnie's kids: good work, nice try, it might have happened but for Howard Dean. DFA was too big and established to counter with a overnight blog shop and personal connection. DNC members alright liked Howard since he gave his "Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party" speech as a candidate that launched him from obscurity to frontrunner in early 2003.
Happy Valentine's Day everyone. Even if no one got you flowers or candy or dinner or a card or whatever, remember: The Third Avenue loves you. In a Platonic way, but keep coming back and reading.
Saturday, February 12, 2005
Clarke '08
As much as I like Wesley Clark, I think Richard Clarke would make an awesome presidential canididate. When he came out with his book and testified before the 9/11 commission, he blew everyone away with his story and the honesty of it all.
The Republican Noise Machine tried to drown him out and question his knowledge and motives, but they came off looking despirate and disjointed. Rice and Hadley (her deputy) had their hats handed to them on 60 minutes and in other forums where they were seriously questioned. The lies and incompetency of Rice and Hadley showed through, despite their denials.
It is too bad that Clarke foreswore working in another White House or running himself. Maybe we could draft him. Even though he is more like a old-fashioned George H.W. Bush-style Republican, I think those are the type of people Democrats need to win these days to recapture the presidency.
Remember his claim that he sent Condi a memo in January 2001 saying the terrorist are a real threat and this is what we need to do about them? And Condi claimed she got no such memo? Well the Times has the scoop on the now-declassified memo:
Exactly like told us in his book and testimony, and exactly opposite of Rice's claims, not even close:
"the months before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal aviation officials reviewed dozens of intelligence reports that warned about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, some of which specifically discussed airline hijackings and suicide operations." The article explained that the Federal Aviation Administration "received 52 intelligence reports" that mentioned Osama bin Laden or Al Qaeda prior to September 11, 2001, and that the FAA warned airports that if "the intent of the hijacker is not to exchange hostages for prisoners, but to commit suicide in a spectacular explosion, a domestic hijacking would probably be preferable."
Fifty-two? What was she doing when Clarke was banging down her door, Tenent's "hair was on fire" and the FAA had sent her 52 warnings, which included a method and other reports which said SOON in the summer of 2001...clearing brush with Dubya in Crawford? She did call him "my husband" once. Did she not want to hurt his feelings, interupt his runs, naps or solitare games? (he used to play the windows version as governor)
At least some of the blood from those 3,000 people who died on September 11 is on her hands (and Clarke's hands as he will admit). At the very least, GOPers have to admit that it is oftly coincidential that all these damaging things were blocked by the Bush administration until after the inauguration.
If only the American people had had all the facts in front of them, the entire senate intelligence committe report, the entire 9/11 report, all of Clarke's memos...I wonder if voters would have still felt that George W. Bush had/would keep them more safe than John Kerry.
The Republican Noise Machine tried to drown him out and question his knowledge and motives, but they came off looking despirate and disjointed. Rice and Hadley (her deputy) had their hats handed to them on 60 minutes and in other forums where they were seriously questioned. The lies and incompetency of Rice and Hadley showed through, despite their denials.
It is too bad that Clarke foreswore working in another White House or running himself. Maybe we could draft him. Even though he is more like a old-fashioned George H.W. Bush-style Republican, I think those are the type of people Democrats need to win these days to recapture the presidency.
Remember his claim that he sent Condi a memo in January 2001 saying the terrorist are a real threat and this is what we need to do about them? And Condi claimed she got no such memo? Well the Times has the scoop on the now-declassified memo:
The 13-page proposal presented to Dr. Rice by her top counterterrorism adviser, Richard A. Clarke, laid out ways to step up the fight against Al Qaeda, focusing on Osama bin Laden's headquarters in Afghanistan. The ideas included giving "massive support" to anti-Taliban groups "to keep Islamic extremist fighters tied down"; destroying terrorist training camps "while classes are in session" and then sending in teams to gather intelligence on terrorist cells; deploying armed drone aircraft against known terrorists; more aggressively tracking Qaeda money; and accelerating the F.B.I.'s translation and analysis of material from surveillance of terrorism suspects in American cities.
Exactly like told us in his book and testimony, and exactly opposite of Rice's claims, not even close:
"the months before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal aviation officials reviewed dozens of intelligence reports that warned about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, some of which specifically discussed airline hijackings and suicide operations." The article explained that the Federal Aviation Administration "received 52 intelligence reports" that mentioned Osama bin Laden or Al Qaeda prior to September 11, 2001, and that the FAA warned airports that if "the intent of the hijacker is not to exchange hostages for prisoners, but to commit suicide in a spectacular explosion, a domestic hijacking would probably be preferable."
Fifty-two? What was she doing when Clarke was banging down her door, Tenent's "hair was on fire" and the FAA had sent her 52 warnings, which included a method and other reports which said SOON in the summer of 2001...clearing brush with Dubya in Crawford? She did call him "my husband" once. Did she not want to hurt his feelings, interupt his runs, naps or solitare games? (he used to play the windows version as governor)
At least some of the blood from those 3,000 people who died on September 11 is on her hands (and Clarke's hands as he will admit). At the very least, GOPers have to admit that it is oftly coincidential that all these damaging things were blocked by the Bush administration until after the inauguration.
If only the American people had had all the facts in front of them, the entire senate intelligence committe report, the entire 9/11 report, all of Clarke's memos...I wonder if voters would have still felt that George W. Bush had/would keep them more safe than John Kerry.
Friday, February 11, 2005
glad to be in UT
Today I went to an ABA thing at the law school; they are having their convention here in SLC this weekend. Anyway, they were supposed to tell us tip on how to get our first job and we were supposed to schmooze with the panelists.
Instead, 90% were windbags reeling off their resume and how great thier firm is ("the first law office in France, the first law office in Russia...and that was in 1987, when we weren't even sure if it would [go capitalist]") Who cares? There is another reason not to go to NYC and deal with pompous blowhards who think they are God's gift to the law and to you.
There were some interesting people who told of their tale of cold calling and tiny salaries. The trouble is, I am not that extroverted and have trouble going donwtown to chat up a buttload of attorneys this weekend, or anyone for that matter. I prefer small groups, where I can find out what interests them and mention my one bit of knowledge on their area of expertise and ask smart sounding questions. But going up to people is the hardest thing to me. I am no Bill Clinton, I sweat just thinking about picking up a phone, let alone getting high on going into a room filled with people.
I got to talk to my hopefully supervising attorney this morning and am pumped to try to get a fellowship to reform our attrocious election laws. Wish me luck.
Instead, 90% were windbags reeling off their resume and how great thier firm is ("the first law office in France, the first law office in Russia...and that was in 1987, when we weren't even sure if it would [go capitalist]") Who cares? There is another reason not to go to NYC and deal with pompous blowhards who think they are God's gift to the law and to you.
There were some interesting people who told of their tale of cold calling and tiny salaries. The trouble is, I am not that extroverted and have trouble going donwtown to chat up a buttload of attorneys this weekend, or anyone for that matter. I prefer small groups, where I can find out what interests them and mention my one bit of knowledge on their area of expertise and ask smart sounding questions. But going up to people is the hardest thing to me. I am no Bill Clinton, I sweat just thinking about picking up a phone, let alone getting high on going into a room filled with people.
I got to talk to my hopefully supervising attorney this morning and am pumped to try to get a fellowship to reform our attrocious election laws. Wish me luck.
Thursday, February 10, 2005
Photo of the day
What happened to Al Franken? this morning I was so happy that he was running for Minn.'s senate seat and then he chickened out! Here's to you Al:
While you were sleeping...
Surprise! North Korea has nuclear weapons! Not surprised? Nor am I. They have been about a hairs breath from getting such weapons since 1994 at least, when Carter staved off a Clintonian military strike (AKA no ground troops) with an agreement that seemed to slow things down.
On Secretary of State Albright's exit in 2001, she warned the incoming Bush Administration that North Korea was probabbly the biggest threat to world peace and wanted nukes. So what did they do? Plotted to attack Iraq and ignored Korea until they jumped up and down in a meeting saying they had cheated on the 1994 agrement.
Did this sound the alarm bells? No, just a Condi Rice speech slamming the Clinton Administration for being soft on North Korea. Her solution? Just ignore them/refuse to talk with them until they give in to US demands and talk through China and with Japan and Russia (and the US and China). It also gave Bush the excuse to pump more money (at least 10 billion) down the toilet knows as Missle Defease.
The North Koreans starve their own people while building freeways for the Dear Leader's cars and nuclear weapons to threaten food support out of South Korea, Japan, and China. This guy is complete irrational, incompetant, and has built a cult around him filled with propaganda and lies...why does this sound familiar?
On Secretary of State Albright's exit in 2001, she warned the incoming Bush Administration that North Korea was probabbly the biggest threat to world peace and wanted nukes. So what did they do? Plotted to attack Iraq and ignored Korea until they jumped up and down in a meeting saying they had cheated on the 1994 agrement.
Did this sound the alarm bells? No, just a Condi Rice speech slamming the Clinton Administration for being soft on North Korea. Her solution? Just ignore them/refuse to talk with them until they give in to US demands and talk through China and with Japan and Russia (and the US and China). It also gave Bush the excuse to pump more money (at least 10 billion) down the toilet knows as Missle Defease.
The North Koreans starve their own people while building freeways for the Dear Leader's cars and nuclear weapons to threaten food support out of South Korea, Japan, and China. This guy is complete irrational, incompetant, and has built a cult around him filled with propaganda and lies...why does this sound familiar?
Wednesday, February 09, 2005
Real mature
This theory of mine that Republican elected officials and party operatives are fundamentally immature keeps getting backed up by events like this:
In Maryland, Governor Bob Ehrlich's longtime aide was caught spreading false rumors that (future Democratic gubinatorial candidate wannabe) Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley is having/had an extramarital affair. "I have always been faithful to my wife, from our first date to this date," O'Malley said.
Ehrlich, to his credit, fired that bum once it was obvious that his aide Joseph Steffen was the one doing the posting on conservative blogs and speading the rumors to TV stations, Annapolis lobbyists, etc. "Let me tell you, I don't put up with this, and I will not put up with this. Bottom line," Ehrlich said.
But was the whole thing sanctioned by Ehrlich anyway? "I began to suspect very strongly that it was something concerted and orchestrated and sustained," O'Malley said. "It became a drumbeat and then was relentless. And the common theme and language used to push it on Web sites and the like were some of the things about it that made me feel it was orchestrated." Steffen? "No Comment"
Until yesterday, the Post Steffen was the spokesman for the Insurance Administration and made $72,453.
During the GOP convention in NYC, a delegate sold purple band-aids to make fun of John Kerry's three purple hearts. Every state of the union shows GOPers either booing loudly, pouting, or cheering wildly, depending on who is president. And then of course when Democrats try to boo this year, Republicans throw a hissy fit.
They called Al Gore "Sore Loserman" in November/December 2000, but they were the ones whining on every corner with their "Brooks Brothers Riot" about how the votes shouldn't be counted and complaining all the way to the US Supreme Court. I could go on, but I need to go to class.
In Maryland, Governor Bob Ehrlich's longtime aide was caught spreading false rumors that (future Democratic gubinatorial candidate wannabe) Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley is having/had an extramarital affair. "I have always been faithful to my wife, from our first date to this date," O'Malley said.
Ehrlich, to his credit, fired that bum once it was obvious that his aide Joseph Steffen was the one doing the posting on conservative blogs and speading the rumors to TV stations, Annapolis lobbyists, etc. "Let me tell you, I don't put up with this, and I will not put up with this. Bottom line," Ehrlich said.
But was the whole thing sanctioned by Ehrlich anyway? "I began to suspect very strongly that it was something concerted and orchestrated and sustained," O'Malley said. "It became a drumbeat and then was relentless. And the common theme and language used to push it on Web sites and the like were some of the things about it that made me feel it was orchestrated." Steffen? "No Comment"
Steffen discussed the rumors on the conservative Web site FreeRepublic.com during the summer of 2004. He posted them under the name NCPAC, a reference to one of his early employers, the National Conservative Political Action Committee...."They call me the Prince of Darkness," Steffen said in the interview... Several of Steffen's co-workers said in interviews that he parachuted into agencies, set up an office with a statue of the grim reaper on his desk and began assembling lists of people who should be fired.
"I had been advised by my boss that he had a hit list," said Tom Burgess, a former state Department of Human Resources administrator who was fired after Ehrlich took office. "We were all very concerned about him."
Until yesterday, the Post Steffen was the spokesman for the Insurance Administration and made $72,453.
During the GOP convention in NYC, a delegate sold purple band-aids to make fun of John Kerry's three purple hearts. Every state of the union shows GOPers either booing loudly, pouting, or cheering wildly, depending on who is president. And then of course when Democrats try to boo this year, Republicans throw a hissy fit.
They called Al Gore "Sore Loserman" in November/December 2000, but they were the ones whining on every corner with their "Brooks Brothers Riot" about how the votes shouldn't be counted and complaining all the way to the US Supreme Court. I could go on, but I need to go to class.
Tuesday, February 08, 2005
that's why he said it
Remember back to the last SOTU? The one that nobody clapped at and even the GOP were wondering if they backed the wrong guy? George W. Bush talked about a fanatasy land he called "America" and some how manage to thrown in an attack on Major League Baseball and steriod use, which seemed like a cheap shot, equivant to saying "I am against these Catholic Priests who molest children."
Here's what Bush said last year: "The use of performance-enhancing drugs like steroids in baseball, football, and other sports ... sends the wrong message: that there are shortcuts to accomplishment, and that performance is more important than character." Takes one to know shortcuts to accomplishment, doesn't it?
But anyway back to the point. Today on Sportscenter, ESPN reported that ex-monster hitter Jose Canseco has a tell all book oh-so-subtley titled "Juiced" which recalls the days when he saw Mark McGuire shoot up, Jason Giambi shoot up, and the two shoot up each other (how cute), as well as Viarga spokesman and Texas Ranger Ralphio Palmero and MVP Ivan Rodregez. Then Canseco went on to say that Bush as the then-owner of the Texas Rangers knew or should have known this was happening.
Of course, they all deny it. But Steriod use was rampant in the MLB in the late 90s. Just like the stock market bubble and the resulting Enrons and WorldComs, everyone in the know could tell it was all too good to be true. But there was pressure to perform, and everyone with an interest looked the otherway.
There's no pretending anymore.
Here's what Bush said last year: "The use of performance-enhancing drugs like steroids in baseball, football, and other sports ... sends the wrong message: that there are shortcuts to accomplishment, and that performance is more important than character." Takes one to know shortcuts to accomplishment, doesn't it?
But anyway back to the point. Today on Sportscenter, ESPN reported that ex-monster hitter Jose Canseco has a tell all book oh-so-subtley titled "Juiced" which recalls the days when he saw Mark McGuire shoot up, Jason Giambi shoot up, and the two shoot up each other (how cute), as well as Viarga spokesman and Texas Ranger Ralphio Palmero and MVP Ivan Rodregez. Then Canseco went on to say that Bush as the then-owner of the Texas Rangers knew or should have known this was happening.
Of course, they all deny it. But Steriod use was rampant in the MLB in the late 90s. Just like the stock market bubble and the resulting Enrons and WorldComs, everyone in the know could tell it was all too good to be true. But there was pressure to perform, and everyone with an interest looked the otherway.
There's no pretending anymore.
Monday, February 07, 2005
A note on spelling
Dear Brian Watkins (and other annoyed readers),
I am deeply sorry that I continuously have typos, misspellings, and improper diction in my posts. The causal style in which I write leaves much room for error. I would like to claim that is this is purposeful style and that, like e.e. cummings, I am rebelling in my own small way against grammar and spelling.
Unfortunately, I merely sloppy and unskilled. Please read in missing words, read out misplaced words, homonyms, and the like. I devout much thought to my posts as to their subject matter and general flow, but very little time actually typing them. True, this is deeply unprofessional but then again I have yet to see a penny from my Google Ads in the corner. Writing daily about my thoughts, "adventures" and frustrations is a joy that I am happy to share with all of you, but my spelling and grammar is not something I intend to inflict on anyone.
Please take this long rambling post as an apology for transgressions past and present. Hopefully, in the future I can devote more time to reading them over and correcting. But in the meantime, drop the red pencil and let me know more privately so I can fix the mistake(s) that bother you. Thanks again.
I am deeply sorry that I continuously have typos, misspellings, and improper diction in my posts. The causal style in which I write leaves much room for error. I would like to claim that is this is purposeful style and that, like e.e. cummings, I am rebelling in my own small way against grammar and spelling.
Unfortunately, I merely sloppy and unskilled. Please read in missing words, read out misplaced words, homonyms, and the like. I devout much thought to my posts as to their subject matter and general flow, but very little time actually typing them. True, this is deeply unprofessional but then again I have yet to see a penny from my Google Ads in the corner. Writing daily about my thoughts, "adventures" and frustrations is a joy that I am happy to share with all of you, but my spelling and grammar is not something I intend to inflict on anyone.
Please take this long rambling post as an apology for transgressions past and present. Hopefully, in the future I can devote more time to reading them over and correcting. But in the meantime, drop the red pencil and let me know more privately so I can fix the mistake(s) that bother you. Thanks again.
Saturday, February 05, 2005
Postcards from different worlds
Last night, my fiancee and I went to Bountiful. This town is pretty homogeneous: over 95% white and probably at least as high percentage belong to the LDS faith.
We went up North to participate in student group that is designed primarily for spouses/partners who would like to get out and talk to adults everyonce in a while (read: stay-at-home moms). The ones there were 3Ls and gave us a snapshot of where we would be in two years. We talked, ate pizza and other snacks, played games and had a good time with nice people.
This are very conservative people. We played a comparison game called Apples-to-Apples. The word was "Trustworthy" and you were to choose among your cards of nouns which word you thought the judge would deem the most apt. Someone choose "Republicans," and my fiancee and I held back our shock and laughter given the record of lies by George W. Bush's administration and the homegrown version ex-SL Co. Mayor Nancy Workman, who is currently on trial for defrauding the county of money to pay her daughter for a do-nothing job.
The other one was a word somewhere between "evil" and "untrustworthy" (I can't remember the exact word) and someone chose "Hillary Rodham Clinton" as there card. Now some time HRC bothers me, but other than being ambitious and cut-throat, I can't think of many negative things about her...She had bad hair styles at times but she was hyperscrutinized. She is brilliant (probably smarter than Bill, and that is saying something), a good senator (in terms of getting stuff done and working with GOPers etc.), shying away from the spotlight that follows her around, and passionate about her causes.
This morning was completely the opposite politcally. Wellesley Professor (emeritus) Alan Schechter was speaking at an alumnae's house near us. Schechter was Hillary's mentor and got appointed to the Fulbright committee by Clinton. The man is from the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" but his wife was even more of an activist. Yet I had Wesley Clark in common with them. They had campaigned in Portsmouth while I was Derry last winter. We reminisced about how cold it was and talked about gearing up for Clark '08. In the crowd we had my contracts professor (class of '67), the dean of the law school/ Democratic gubenatorial candidate/husband of '76 alumna Robyn Matheson, lawyers, artists, PhD candidates and more prominant alumnae. A very powerful group of women assembled around Schechter and the muffins we bought from Costco.
Schechter talked about how we got to where we are today. His synopsis: we are in a backlash that started in the 1960s and 1970s where LBJ and the Warren/Marshall court changed the cultural landscape: allowing blacks to vote, women equal protection, abortion, banning the death penalty (and recently allowing gay marriage in places like SF and MA).
The Democratic majority from the '30s until '94 in Congress was a false, corrupt bargain between the "Solid South," filled with conservative (and racist) members/senators and the emerging coastal liberals. It was the Civil Rights act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965 (combined with the court rulings) that sealed the eventual fate of that Democratic party. Almost all of these same conservatives slowly, but surely joined the GOP starting with Goldwater, then Reagan and eventually Bush 43.
While Reagan played lipservice to the evangelicals, Bush 43 actually is a born-again, as is many in his staff. Schechter sees no hope of the GOP's strange marriage between Wall-Street Republicans and evangelicals because they are mutually dependent on each other to achieve their goals.
The White House, he said, is up for grabs, but the Congress is out of reach for the foreseeable future. He believes Hillary is susceptible to a Draft movement like Clark was and both have the same view of running for the presidency: that they would run if their country called them.
Like me, Schechter knew Kerry was a loser from the get-go because a) his lack of person magnetism needed to win over marginal voters b) his Vietnam history c) his ability to make every position seem two-faced and flip-floppy, even if he was consistent d) the fact that he was a senator for 20 years, and finally e) the fact that he represented Massachusetts. Thus, he liked Clark because he a) he charismatic (more than the the other candidates save Sharpton and Edwards) b) his clear pro-Vietnam history c) is lack of track record d) not a senator e) the fact that he was from flippable Arkansas. The idea was, with no voting history, Clark could be consistent and make up his positions as he went along. Of course, it didn't work out that way (see "Help, Mary!").
Clark learned from his mistakes, I believe, like Schetcher thinks that Dean learned from his. Schechter thinks that Dean will watch his mouth more and not try to change the party ideologically. But hopefully structurally Howard.
We went up North to participate in student group that is designed primarily for spouses/partners who would like to get out and talk to adults everyonce in a while (read: stay-at-home moms). The ones there were 3Ls and gave us a snapshot of where we would be in two years. We talked, ate pizza and other snacks, played games and had a good time with nice people.
This are very conservative people. We played a comparison game called Apples-to-Apples. The word was "Trustworthy" and you were to choose among your cards of nouns which word you thought the judge would deem the most apt. Someone choose "Republicans," and my fiancee and I held back our shock and laughter given the record of lies by George W. Bush's administration and the homegrown version ex-SL Co. Mayor Nancy Workman, who is currently on trial for defrauding the county of money to pay her daughter for a do-nothing job.
The other one was a word somewhere between "evil" and "untrustworthy" (I can't remember the exact word) and someone chose "Hillary Rodham Clinton" as there card. Now some time HRC bothers me, but other than being ambitious and cut-throat, I can't think of many negative things about her...She had bad hair styles at times but she was hyperscrutinized. She is brilliant (probably smarter than Bill, and that is saying something), a good senator (in terms of getting stuff done and working with GOPers etc.), shying away from the spotlight that follows her around, and passionate about her causes.
This morning was completely the opposite politcally. Wellesley Professor (emeritus) Alan Schechter was speaking at an alumnae's house near us. Schechter was Hillary's mentor and got appointed to the Fulbright committee by Clinton. The man is from the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" but his wife was even more of an activist. Yet I had Wesley Clark in common with them. They had campaigned in Portsmouth while I was Derry last winter. We reminisced about how cold it was and talked about gearing up for Clark '08. In the crowd we had my contracts professor (class of '67), the dean of the law school/ Democratic gubenatorial candidate/husband of '76 alumna Robyn Matheson, lawyers, artists, PhD candidates and more prominant alumnae. A very powerful group of women assembled around Schechter and the muffins we bought from Costco.
Schechter talked about how we got to where we are today. His synopsis: we are in a backlash that started in the 1960s and 1970s where LBJ and the Warren/Marshall court changed the cultural landscape: allowing blacks to vote, women equal protection, abortion, banning the death penalty (and recently allowing gay marriage in places like SF and MA).
The Democratic majority from the '30s until '94 in Congress was a false, corrupt bargain between the "Solid South," filled with conservative (and racist) members/senators and the emerging coastal liberals. It was the Civil Rights act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965 (combined with the court rulings) that sealed the eventual fate of that Democratic party. Almost all of these same conservatives slowly, but surely joined the GOP starting with Goldwater, then Reagan and eventually Bush 43.
While Reagan played lipservice to the evangelicals, Bush 43 actually is a born-again, as is many in his staff. Schechter sees no hope of the GOP's strange marriage between Wall-Street Republicans and evangelicals because they are mutually dependent on each other to achieve their goals.
The White House, he said, is up for grabs, but the Congress is out of reach for the foreseeable future. He believes Hillary is susceptible to a Draft movement like Clark was and both have the same view of running for the presidency: that they would run if their country called them.
Like me, Schechter knew Kerry was a loser from the get-go because a) his lack of person magnetism needed to win over marginal voters b) his Vietnam history c) his ability to make every position seem two-faced and flip-floppy, even if he was consistent d) the fact that he was a senator for 20 years, and finally e) the fact that he represented Massachusetts. Thus, he liked Clark because he a) he charismatic (more than the the other candidates save Sharpton and Edwards) b) his clear pro-Vietnam history c) is lack of track record d) not a senator e) the fact that he was from flippable Arkansas. The idea was, with no voting history, Clark could be consistent and make up his positions as he went along. Of course, it didn't work out that way (see "Help, Mary!").
Clark learned from his mistakes, I believe, like Schetcher thinks that Dean learned from his. Schechter thinks that Dean will watch his mouth more and not try to change the party ideologically. But hopefully structurally Howard.
Friday, February 04, 2005
The church's fingers
Today there is a story in the Salt Tribune which I doubt has a corresponding article in the Deseret News, which is owned by the LDS church (along with a couple radio stations and a local NBC affilate, which has correspondingly opted out of showing Saturday Night Live).
The Mormon church is the most powerful and influencial lobbyist on Salt Lake's Capital Hill. While that is not a shocking statement, the level of their power is unlike any other church in any other state. Bills are routinely nixed or boosted by the church's support and they are in many areas a de facto branch of state government, who's veto power kills stuff before they even get a committee vote.
This case revolves around charter schools, which I am mixed about. As with anything in education, it seem ideology drive the research and it is difficult to tell if progress is actually being made or if there is regressions.
The Salt Lake Arts Academy right now resides in the old main branch of the SL Library, but their lease is up this summer to make way for a cool new perminant exhibit called Leonardo. Academy officials and city representatives (city councilmembers, the mayor, state representatives and senators) want them to stay downtown so students would "take TRAX, use the city library and mix with the business crowd." The problem? "[S]tate law prohibits alcohol establishments from opening within 600 feet of parks, libraries or schools for kindergartners through 12th-graders...If local zoning allows, there's no state law against a school opening near a bar. But if the city, which does not allow schools downtown, were to change its zoning to allow them, it would prevent new bars and restaurants from opening - running counter to redevelopment efforts."
State Senator and democratic LG candidate (in 2000 and 2004) Karen Hale (who's also LDS) proposed a bill to exempt charter schools to get around such laws and let more than one bar exist on a block. But then word got out that the church didn't like it (and MADD too). And then Hale dropped it, but she wouldn't say that it was the church that made her do it, or MADD, but the writing is on the wall.
Constroversal mayor Rocky Anderson was pissed: "The church, like anybody else, certainly has a right to make its views known," Anderson said Thursday, but added: "It's the only organization, I think, that seems to automatically get its way among most elected officials."
Just two days ago, the mayor "held his last public forum on bridging the divide among Mormons and others and one theme was the alienation some non-Mormons feel when they believe Mormon values run the state. To heal, Anderson said it is 'crucial' to move away public officials allowing the church to 'control' public policy."
Some times it seems that church has too much power. Any group, when it has total control in an area tends to get tryannical, just look at the Democratic party in Massachusetts.
The Mormon church is the most powerful and influencial lobbyist on Salt Lake's Capital Hill. While that is not a shocking statement, the level of their power is unlike any other church in any other state. Bills are routinely nixed or boosted by the church's support and they are in many areas a de facto branch of state government, who's veto power kills stuff before they even get a committee vote.
This case revolves around charter schools, which I am mixed about. As with anything in education, it seem ideology drive the research and it is difficult to tell if progress is actually being made or if there is regressions.
The Salt Lake Arts Academy right now resides in the old main branch of the SL Library, but their lease is up this summer to make way for a cool new perminant exhibit called Leonardo. Academy officials and city representatives (city councilmembers, the mayor, state representatives and senators) want them to stay downtown so students would "take TRAX, use the city library and mix with the business crowd." The problem? "[S]tate law prohibits alcohol establishments from opening within 600 feet of parks, libraries or schools for kindergartners through 12th-graders...If local zoning allows, there's no state law against a school opening near a bar. But if the city, which does not allow schools downtown, were to change its zoning to allow them, it would prevent new bars and restaurants from opening - running counter to redevelopment efforts."
State Senator and democratic LG candidate (in 2000 and 2004) Karen Hale (who's also LDS) proposed a bill to exempt charter schools to get around such laws and let more than one bar exist on a block. But then word got out that the church didn't like it (and MADD too). And then Hale dropped it, but she wouldn't say that it was the church that made her do it, or MADD, but the writing is on the wall.
Constroversal mayor Rocky Anderson was pissed: "The church, like anybody else, certainly has a right to make its views known," Anderson said Thursday, but added: "It's the only organization, I think, that seems to automatically get its way among most elected officials."
Just two days ago, the mayor "held his last public forum on bridging the divide among Mormons and others and one theme was the alienation some non-Mormons feel when they believe Mormon values run the state. To heal, Anderson said it is 'crucial' to move away public officials allowing the church to 'control' public policy."
Some times it seems that church has too much power. Any group, when it has total control in an area tends to get tryannical, just look at the Democratic party in Massachusetts.
Thursday, February 03, 2005
Gonzales round-up
After an exciting and agressive debate on my comment board regarding the Torture Memo, we finially heard from people who had a say in the matter, our 100 US Senators. Armando and Kos have a nice handy sheet of Democrats who voted yea or nay or abstained.
I disagree with some of their conclusions and will make some of mine. First, lets go to the "yea" votes for Gonzales by Democrats (GOPers are irrelevant because they all voted with their president, even people like Linc Chafee who supposidly didn't even vote for Bush).
(1) Senator Ken Salazar (CO). His excuse? The "he's hispanic" argument/"American Dream" argument. Dick Durbin (IL) had a great rebuttal to the "American Dream" part:
(2) Senator Joseph Lieberman (CT).OK well Joe is like George Kastanza and always manages to stick his finger in the air, and feel it blowing the wrong way. He is after all, the sole member of the "loyal JOE-position." Sorry, couldn't resist another Joe joke, he brought this on himself.
(3) Senator Ben Nelson (NE). He is running for reelection in a hyper-Red state. His biggest competition (the Governor) is now the new Secretary of Agriculture. But then again, Martinez was Bush's HUD secretary and that didn't stop him from running for FL's open senate seat. Just what we need another Bush puppet in the senate. I feel bad for Ben Nelson because some other dude with the same last name is now also a senator (see below) and it must be really annoying, but it is no excuse to vote for torture.
(4) Senator Mary Landrieu (LA) I hear her kids are real brats and she won't control them on airplanes. So I guess she is really into torturing mild-mannered law-abiding citizens on their way from Washington DC to New Orleans, so why not Iraqis Afghans and various other Arabs?
(5) Senator Pryor (AR) He will be up for a tough bout in 2008, the only reason he won last time was the guy he ran against was a holier-than-thou type who was porking his staffer and then dumped his wife for the staffer (who was like 20 years younger than him too). Nevertheless, Pryor also won because people liked his Daddy and might have thought they were voting for him.
(6) Senator Bill Nelson (FL) Bill, the other senator named Nelson. Wasn't there a band named Nelson, with long WWE hair? Oh right, they sucked. He too is up for reelection like his twin from Nebraska. Florida has seemingly gone Red on us since 2000, and Nelson is the only statewide Democratic elected offical (the legislature and the House delegation has been nicely gerrymandered to ensure a GOP majority for the next decade). Translation: he is taking a dump in his pants, and doesn't want to seem like a wuss against those terrorists to people in Pensacola.
Phew...now on to the Nay or Abstained, with particular focus on our Red state Democratic senators.
Evan Bayh (D-IN) Running for President in 2008...good luck.
Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) one of those guys who nobody really knows what he does in the Senate, until now.
Robert Byrd (D-WV) the old man rules despite being ex-KKK.
Byron Dorgan (D-ND) He's got senority
Tom Harkin (D-IA) The last liberal of "the Heartland"
Tim Johnson (D-SD)it takes guts when you won by a few hundred votes...and your benefactor just lost by a few hundred.
Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) you go girl!
Harry Reid (D-NV) Minority Leader with cajoines
Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) Yes, that Rockefeller. The last of the Rockefeller Democrats.
Not present (fighting off Bush misinformation in their home states)
Max Baucus (D-MT) His wife hit someone over a bag of soil once, caused quite a stir in Washington society.
Kent Conrad (D-ND) I think I had an LSAT class with his daughter, she was nice to me.
And there you have it. Enjoy and have a great weekend.
I disagree with some of their conclusions and will make some of mine. First, lets go to the "yea" votes for Gonzales by Democrats (GOPers are irrelevant because they all voted with their president, even people like Linc Chafee who supposidly didn't even vote for Bush).
(1) Senator Ken Salazar (CO). His excuse? The "he's hispanic" argument/"American Dream" argument. Dick Durbin (IL) had a great rebuttal to the "American Dream" part:
I respect and admire Alberto Gonzales for his inspiring life story and the many obstacles he has overcome. Some of my colleagues suggested his life story embodies the American dream. But there is more to the American dream than overcoming difficult circumstances to obtain prominence and prosperity. We also must honor Fred Korematsu's dream that our country be true to the fundamental principle upon which it was founded: the rule of law...I cannot in good conscience vote to reward a man who ignored the rule of law and the demands of human decency and created the permissive environment that made Abu Ghraib possible....When the history of these times are recorded, I believe that Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo will join the names of infamous Japanese-American internment camps such as Manzanar, Heart Mountain, and Tule Lake where Fred Korematsu and over thousands of others were detained. I cannot in good conscience vote to make the author of such a terrible mistake the chief law enforcement officer of our great Nation and the guardian of our God-given and most cherished rights.As for the "he's hispanic and I'm hispanic" argument, I would hope this country has come far enough that you don't have to vote for someone just because you share their race/ethnicity if you are a minority Member/Senator. I think that is insulting to all Hispanics out there that people can't tell the difference between a Cuban-American who will do whatever this President wants him to do and a guy like Caesar Chavez.
(2) Senator Joseph Lieberman (CT).OK well Joe is like George Kastanza and always manages to stick his finger in the air, and feel it blowing the wrong way. He is after all, the sole member of the "loyal JOE-position." Sorry, couldn't resist another Joe joke, he brought this on himself.
(3) Senator Ben Nelson (NE). He is running for reelection in a hyper-Red state. His biggest competition (the Governor) is now the new Secretary of Agriculture. But then again, Martinez was Bush's HUD secretary and that didn't stop him from running for FL's open senate seat. Just what we need another Bush puppet in the senate. I feel bad for Ben Nelson because some other dude with the same last name is now also a senator (see below) and it must be really annoying, but it is no excuse to vote for torture.
(4) Senator Mary Landrieu (LA) I hear her kids are real brats and she won't control them on airplanes. So I guess she is really into torturing mild-mannered law-abiding citizens on their way from Washington DC to New Orleans, so why not Iraqis Afghans and various other Arabs?
(5) Senator Pryor (AR) He will be up for a tough bout in 2008, the only reason he won last time was the guy he ran against was a holier-than-thou type who was porking his staffer and then dumped his wife for the staffer (who was like 20 years younger than him too). Nevertheless, Pryor also won because people liked his Daddy and might have thought they were voting for him.
(6) Senator Bill Nelson (FL) Bill, the other senator named Nelson. Wasn't there a band named Nelson, with long WWE hair? Oh right, they sucked. He too is up for reelection like his twin from Nebraska. Florida has seemingly gone Red on us since 2000, and Nelson is the only statewide Democratic elected offical (the legislature and the House delegation has been nicely gerrymandered to ensure a GOP majority for the next decade). Translation: he is taking a dump in his pants, and doesn't want to seem like a wuss against those terrorists to people in Pensacola.
Phew...now on to the Nay or Abstained, with particular focus on our Red state Democratic senators.
Evan Bayh (D-IN) Running for President in 2008...good luck.
Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) one of those guys who nobody really knows what he does in the Senate, until now.
Robert Byrd (D-WV) the old man rules despite being ex-KKK.
Byron Dorgan (D-ND) He's got senority
Tom Harkin (D-IA) The last liberal of "the Heartland"
Tim Johnson (D-SD)it takes guts when you won by a few hundred votes...and your benefactor just lost by a few hundred.
Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) you go girl!
Harry Reid (D-NV) Minority Leader with cajoines
Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) Yes, that Rockefeller. The last of the Rockefeller Democrats.
Not present (fighting off Bush misinformation in their home states)
Max Baucus (D-MT) His wife hit someone over a bag of soil once, caused quite a stir in Washington society.
Kent Conrad (D-ND) I think I had an LSAT class with his daughter, she was nice to me.
And there you have it. Enjoy and have a great weekend.
A better way to spend SOTU night
Instead of watching a series of illogical reasoning for bad policies, deceptive use of numbers, and outright lies (along with mandatory juvenile boos and cheers), I went to CostCo last night. The workers there are always so happy, genuinely so, unlike the creeped out feeling you get at a Wal-Mart (where they speaking to you in code that they want out of this miserable existence).
After that, we went searching for dinner, as the hot dogs and pizza didn't seem like our cup of tea last night. In search of something "healthy" we went to Wild Oats, the blue state grocery store. And who did we see but local celebrity Bill Gephardt (not to be confused with Dick Gephardt, two time presidential loser and unemployed Cardinals fan.), the local TV channel's "consumer reports investigator." He looked pretty grumpy and tired gathering some food for the checkout counter, so I didn't bother him with some scam that had been pulled on me.
Ironically (not Atlantis Morrisette Ironic), we ended up eating at Taco Bell and Burger King. And although I regretted the feeling in my stomach while I tossed and turned, it was still better than watching the Bush's weltanshauung.
After that, we went searching for dinner, as the hot dogs and pizza didn't seem like our cup of tea last night. In search of something "healthy" we went to Wild Oats, the blue state grocery store. And who did we see but local celebrity Bill Gephardt (not to be confused with Dick Gephardt, two time presidential loser and unemployed Cardinals fan.), the local TV channel's "consumer reports investigator." He looked pretty grumpy and tired gathering some food for the checkout counter, so I didn't bother him with some scam that had been pulled on me.
Ironically (not Atlantis Morrisette Ironic), we ended up eating at Taco Bell and Burger King. And although I regretted the feeling in my stomach while I tossed and turned, it was still better than watching the Bush's weltanshauung.
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
The most depressing thing I've read...today
That great title is owned by a Newsweek article entitled Dream On America.
The basic gist of the article is that America is in decline. We have lost our moral compass, and the world no longer looks to us as a beacon of freedom. Our economy is not doing as well as the EU, our health care system ranks 37th best in the world (according to WHO), "behind Colombia (22nd) and Saudi Arabia (26th), and on a par with Cuba." The gulf between the rich and the poor in the US has widened faster than in EU countries. "In Sweden, you are three times more likely to rise out of the economic class into which you were born than you are in the U.S."
The same thing happened in South Africa, Kosovo, other African countries, and South America. They all prefer a European-style constitution over a American-style one.
The rest of the world is hating us more and more, and not just President Bush. "A plurality of voters (the average is 70 percent) in each of the 21 countries surveyed by the BBC oppose sending any troops to Iraq, including those in most of the countries that have done so. Only one third, disproportionately in the poorest and most dictatorial countries, would like to see American values spread in their country."
One of the main reasons I supported Wesley Clark and opposed George Bush this last election was that Clark understood the worldview, and Bush couldn't care less. Now I am not saying the UN or the EU or whatever gets to have "veto power" over US policy, but I am saying there are lots of good things that come out of listening to ones Allies seriously beyond good will: increased trading, more foreigners studying in our colleges and universities (they are now going to Europe more instead), increased military support for missions around the world, increased influence on the world stage, moral authority to push American Ideals and our version of Democracy. I am afraid that if we continue down this road of Bush-ism, in my lifetime we will see the US surpassed by China or the EU.
The basic gist of the article is that America is in decline. We have lost our moral compass, and the world no longer looks to us as a beacon of freedom. Our economy is not doing as well as the EU, our health care system ranks 37th best in the world (according to WHO), "behind Colombia (22nd) and Saudi Arabia (26th), and on a par with Cuba." The gulf between the rich and the poor in the US has widened faster than in EU countries. "In Sweden, you are three times more likely to rise out of the economic class into which you were born than you are in the U.S."
When the soviets withdrew from Central Europe, U.S. constitutional experts rushed in. They got a polite hearing, and were sent home. Jiri Pehe, adviser to former president Vaclav Havel, recalls the Czechs' firm decision to adopt a European-style parliamentary system with strict limits on campaigning. "For Europeans, money talks too much in American democracy. It's very prone to certain kinds of corruption, or at least influence from powerful lobbies," he says. "Europeans would not want to follow that route." They also sought to limit the dominance of television, unlike in American campaigns where, Pehe says, "TV debates and photogenic looks govern election victories."
The same thing happened in South Africa, Kosovo, other African countries, and South America. They all prefer a European-style constitution over a American-style one.
Much in American law and society troubles the world these days. Nearly all countries reject the United States' right to bear arms as a quirky and dangerous anachronism. They abhor the death penalty and demand broader privacy protections. Above all, once most foreign systems reach a reasonable level of affluence, they follow the Europeans in treating the provision of adequate social welfare is a basic right. All this, says Bruce Ackerman at Yale University Law School, contributes to the growing sense that American law, once the world standard, has become "provincial." The United States' refusal to apply the Geneva Conventions to certain terrorist suspects, to ratify global human-rights treaties such as the innocuous Convention on the Rights of the Child or to endorse the International Criminal Court (coupled with the abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo) only reinforces the conviction that America's Constitution and legal system are out of step with the rest of the world.
The rest of the world is hating us more and more, and not just President Bush. "A plurality of voters (the average is 70 percent) in each of the 21 countries surveyed by the BBC oppose sending any troops to Iraq, including those in most of the countries that have done so. Only one third, disproportionately in the poorest and most dictatorial countries, would like to see American values spread in their country."
One of the main reasons I supported Wesley Clark and opposed George Bush this last election was that Clark understood the worldview, and Bush couldn't care less. Now I am not saying the UN or the EU or whatever gets to have "veto power" over US policy, but I am saying there are lots of good things that come out of listening to ones Allies seriously beyond good will: increased trading, more foreigners studying in our colleges and universities (they are now going to Europe more instead), increased military support for missions around the world, increased influence on the world stage, moral authority to push American Ideals and our version of Democracy. I am afraid that if we continue down this road of Bush-ism, in my lifetime we will see the US surpassed by China or the EU.
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
Iraqification
I am so happy that the voting went off with nary a hitch this weekend. Too bad it will be a while before we know who won and at some will doubt the authenticity of the outcome given the low participation by Sunnis. The real winner will be Sistani in my boat, he will be the power broker not too far from the glare of the flashbulbs.
It is also unfortunate that we had to spend over $150 billion so that 26 million people would have the chance to vote. Is that really why we invaded the country, spent blood and treasure? I wonder if people really are aware of how much history repeats itself with the second Nixon Administration...I mean the second Bush Administration.
"United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout inSouth Vietnam[Iraq]'s presidential election despite a Vietcong [insurgent] terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting."
-- New York Times, September 4, 1967. Here's the PDF of the original article. Courtesy of Political Wire and DailyKos
It is also unfortunate that we had to spend over $150 billion so that 26 million people would have the chance to vote. Is that really why we invaded the country, spent blood and treasure? I wonder if people really are aware of how much history repeats itself with the second Nixon Administration...I mean the second Bush Administration.
"United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in
-- New York Times, September 4, 1967. Here's the PDF of the original article. Courtesy of Political Wire and DailyKos
Monday, January 31, 2005
site of the day
Hot or Not for US Senators!
via Political Wire
I don't know where these photos were dug up but they are hilarious and extremely unflatering for just about everyone of them.
Go ahead see how your senator ranks.
via Political Wire
I don't know where these photos were dug up but they are hilarious and extremely unflatering for just about everyone of them.
Go ahead see how your senator ranks.
much to do about nothing
Senator Hillary Clinton's speech over abortion have been labeled "triangulation" and an attempt to position herself for 2008.
In reality, this is the same position on reproductive choice that she's held since those halycon days of "It Takes a Village." Abortion, Clinton said, is "a sad, even tragic choice to many, many women," said Clinton. Then she went further: "There is no reason why government cannot do more to educate and inform and provide assistance so that the choice guaranteed under our constitution either does not ever have to be exercised or only in very rare circumstances."
The new twist, according to Slate's William Saletan is the idea of never.
My favorite quote of his? "Many profound things are at stake in the abortion debate. Afternoon delight isn't high on the list."
Anyway, this is the same old same old. Hand it to Hillary to have her "Sistah Soldier" moment in 2005 in front of the pro-choice crowd instead of in 2007 or 2008, if she really is running for president, which I doubt.
In reality, this is the same position on reproductive choice that she's held since those halycon days of "It Takes a Village." Abortion, Clinton said, is "a sad, even tragic choice to many, many women," said Clinton. Then she went further: "There is no reason why government cannot do more to educate and inform and provide assistance so that the choice guaranteed under our constitution either does not ever have to be exercised or only in very rare circumstances."
The new twist, according to Slate's William Saletan is the idea of never.
Once you embrace that truth—that the ideal number of abortions is zero—voters open their ears. They listen when you point out, as Clinton did, that the abortion rate fell drastically during her husband's presidency but has risen in more states than it has fallen under George W. Bush. I'm sure these trends have more to do with economics than morals, but that's the point. Once we agree that the goal is zero, we can stop asking which party yaps more about fighting abortion and start asking which party gets results.
My favorite quote of his? "Many profound things are at stake in the abortion debate. Afternoon delight isn't high on the list."
Anyway, this is the same old same old. Hand it to Hillary to have her "Sistah Soldier" moment in 2005 in front of the pro-choice crowd instead of in 2007 or 2008, if she really is running for president, which I doubt.
Sunday, January 30, 2005
don't fear the national ID
I don't get the liberatian fear of a national ID card. The ACLU has another one of their scare campaigns on the subject. Ellen from BOPNews and the Draft Clark movement is concerned about the issue.
Even if we were to make smart cards like PPI folks like Shane Ham want, I doubt we would ever get close to the ACLU 1984-esque ad. It makes sense to have one uniform ID across the US, instead of 50 different systems with varying degrees of security. It was find in the old days when people were just making fake IDs to buy beer before they turned 21 or work if they were illegal immigrants. But now terrorists could pick on a state were the standards are lax and make lots of IDs that won't be immediately recognizable. Futher, more security would help prevent identity theft, a rapidly growing crime in the information age.
Sure, at first the costs would be high to retool ever state, but the savings would be great. One swipe, and the bar tendor could know you are old enough to drink and who you say your are. We don't want criminals evading the law via changing IDs either. The government is too incompetant to compile that much data on the man in the ALCU pizza ad, nor would any Congress ever let them.
Companies already sell each other what magazines you read, what catalogues you order from what stuff you buy online to each other. So far, none of their targeted messaging has been effective on me. Maybe they base too much on the fact that I bought one philosophy book for college freshman year.
Just think, in nearly every other big, industrialized country, they have a national ID system and has anyone heard of the government listening in on people in those countries that don't have such a strong liberitarian past? Such fears are misplaced and while pure in motive, wasted in effort.
Even if we were to make smart cards like PPI folks like Shane Ham want, I doubt we would ever get close to the ACLU 1984-esque ad. It makes sense to have one uniform ID across the US, instead of 50 different systems with varying degrees of security. It was find in the old days when people were just making fake IDs to buy beer before they turned 21 or work if they were illegal immigrants. But now terrorists could pick on a state were the standards are lax and make lots of IDs that won't be immediately recognizable. Futher, more security would help prevent identity theft, a rapidly growing crime in the information age.
Sure, at first the costs would be high to retool ever state, but the savings would be great. One swipe, and the bar tendor could know you are old enough to drink and who you say your are. We don't want criminals evading the law via changing IDs either. The government is too incompetant to compile that much data on the man in the ALCU pizza ad, nor would any Congress ever let them.
Companies already sell each other what magazines you read, what catalogues you order from what stuff you buy online to each other. So far, none of their targeted messaging has been effective on me. Maybe they base too much on the fact that I bought one philosophy book for college freshman year.
Just think, in nearly every other big, industrialized country, they have a national ID system and has anyone heard of the government listening in on people in those countries that don't have such a strong liberitarian past? Such fears are misplaced and while pure in motive, wasted in effort.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
