The Drunken Observer

The Lost Decade - The West's Obsession With The Middle East

2011-04-07T15:34:00.000-04:00

What the fuck are we doing? And by we, I mean the west. And by doing, I mean what the fuck are we doing in the Middle East? At all.

The war in Afghanistan is soon approaching its tenth anniversary, we don’t have a clear objective, we don’t have a clear plan, and we certainly don’t have anything that even vaguely resembles an exit strategy. They don’t even mention the fucking words “exit strategy” in relation to this war. I know a guy who took way too much LSD and now believes that he is a glass of orange juice and the rest of us are walking straws that are trying to drink him. And even he can’t imagine an exit strategy for this fucking war. Fine, I don’t actually know that guy, but the point remains.

The war in Iraq is officially over but there are still 50,000 American soldiers there. That’s twice the population of my home town. We are set to withdraw completely at the end of the year, but that’s pretty hard to take seriously when the Secretary of Fucking Defense is saying that we might just keep that 50,000 there a little bit longer. Back in the day, the Secretary of Defense was called the Secretary of War, which means that Gates is a foremost authority on areas concerning the wars. If you posses any ability to read between the lines, this is simply Gates preparing us for the likely event of staying in Iraq even longer. For what purpose? No one fucking knows.

And now we have this war in Libya. I don’t mean to sound like an anti-rebellion of an oppressive regime fuddy-duddy, but, don’t we already have two wars that we can’t afford? And how is bombing civilian populated areas going to aid in the pro-US sentiment of the Libyan population? This could lead to an increase in the anti-US sentiment and create a hot bed of insurgents. Where have I heard this before?

Then there’s the latest installment of the ever popular game show “Let’s Piss Of The Extremists” brought to you this time by Rev Terry Jones. I believe whole heartedly that this dickhead has every right to burn a Qu’Ran if that’s what he chooses to do. I also believe that if it wasn’t Terry Jones, these dickheads would simply find some other reason to be dickheads. Like they did with The Satanic Verses. Like they did with the Danish cartoons. Like they did to Theo van Gogh. Terry Jones does not have blood on his hands, but I think he has managed to reiterate an important point: the Middle East is a violent place.

Bare in mind, that it wasn’t just in any country that the violent responses to the Qu’Ran burning took place, but rather, Afghanistan. Yes, Afghanistan, where we have been fighting - both on the ground and in the hearts and minds of the population - for ten years. Our alleged allies. I.E., the war - both the physical and the war of ideas - simply is not working. Jesus, these assholes in the Department of Defense know how to waste a decade better than the Rolling Stones.

So, what the fuck are we doing further aggravating the people of the Middle East? The gigantic black elephant buried underneath the ground is oil. If you want to say any different, just answer this question: why has the United States not sent one troop to aid the rebels in combating the nearly seven year genocide of the Sudan but sent in troops to aid the rebels in Libya after only a matter of months?

You know what? Fuck the price of gasoline. The West needs to get out of the Middle East. Entirely. No troops. No weapons. And especially, no money. To any country in the Middle East. Including the nearly three billion dollars sent annually to the Middle Eastern irritant, Israel. Let’s face it, the Middle East hates having a gigantic Western occupation of one of its terotorries. And if you remove religion and the guilt from the holocaust from the equation, that’s all the modern state of Israel is. We can’t make them leave, but we certainly don’t have to keep funding them.

If we do this, the extremism will die down and the enlightenment of the Middle East will eventually come slowly but surely to the countries that have the Internet. And eventually, everyone will have the fucking Internet. Think I’m an idiot? Tell that to the Egyptians. The revolution did not need bombs. It did not need guns. It did not need United States forces. It needed to simply come from within. That takes time. Not just any kind of time, but, more specifically, the kind of time spent not worrying about getting blown up or someone that you love dying horrifically.

Worried about the price of gas? Sell your fucking SUV and become part of the solution to perfecting alternative energy sources. The most frustrating part of the energy debate is that we don’t even have to come up with new energy sources, we simply have to use them. I am sick and tired of watching the world try to commit suicide so that you can own a fucking hummer .

Is anybody in power going to listen to me? No. I’m not stupid. But I’m also not buying any argument that supports this clear pathway to destruction. Also, nobody cares enough to protest it. That’s because there is no draft. If there were, we would be out of the Middle East so fast it would trigger IEDs.

So, here’s the to-do list: cut off the middle east, don’t use oil, and for God’s sake, hug a Muslim. I’m sure they’d appreciate it.

60

2009-04-29T03:28:00.002-04:00

Arlen Specter has been one of my favorite Republicans for a long time. It's not just because of the issues that I agree with him upon such as abortion and increasing the federal minimum wage. There has also been a laundry list of things that I have disagreed with him upon - from gun control to the death penalty to his vote for the PATRIOT Act (yes, I know EVERYBODY but Russ Feingold voted for it, but, that doesn't make it right.).

The reason why I like Arlen Specter has to do with the fact that he has a history of when everybody in the room has reached a consensus of being the guy to go "hey, wait a second." It takes a lot of balls to be a moderate in the incredibly polarized political climate in which we live. There is honestly no political capital to be gained by it because you're always getting your ass kicked from both sides of the aisle. Don't get me wrong. Specter is far from perfect. He is, after all, a human being, and, more over, a politician. Just think about the way that he treated Jim Jeffords when Jeffords decided to leave the Republican Party.

Well, the universe has an odd way of balancing things out. If your girlfriend is always worried about you cheating, she is going to cheat on you. If your boss is always worried about you stealing money from the register, he is going to steal money from the company. And if a senator makes a huge ass out of himself when someone switches parties, he is going to eventually switch parties.

I'm currently a registered independent residing in New Jersey but I've always planned to move in to Philly when my lease is up on my apartment in the summer. When I settled down across the river, I wasn't sure if I was going to register as a Democrat, but, I was pretty sure that I was going to vote for Specter in the general election. The stimulus vote is what did it for me. It showed me that here was a guy that was interested in what was best for the country, regardless of how unpopular it would make him. I also felt that with a Republican party going increasingly rightward, that having a moderate in the mix was good for the country overall. (Because, let's face it - we're a two party system. And if there are going to be two parties - it's best if they're both sane.)

I'm still not sure if I will change my affiliation to Democrat, but, I'm sure now that I'm voting for Specter. Of course, being a Democrat does make him loose his appeal as being a calming influence to the conservative Republicans. But, being a Democrat in what is looking to be a 60 Democratic congress does mean that he will be a calming influence to an increasingly cocky Democratic government. Either way you look at it, Specter is useful in making sure that nobody gets too power crazy.

Hypocrisy, Thy Name Is Congess

2009-04-03T00:00:00.004-04:00

I would like to make a request that some of the money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act be used to measure the exact size of the House of Representatives collective testicular fortitude. I want this done, because the amount of balls it takes to regulate and demonize an industry while simultaneously shaking them down for more money than ever before is completely beyond my personal understanding.

I am, of course, referring to the House's passing of a bill that will that would grant unprecedented government regulation to the tobacco industry in the form of making tobacco directly controlled by the FDA a day after raising the cigarette tax by 2.5 times.

Listen, I know that smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States today. Here's the thing: so do all the smokers, and they don't care.

To the Congress and all other people who support this legislation, please understand that we are not living in the 1940's any longer - smoking is not allowed in most public places (which I support), cigarette ads are not allowed on TV or the radio (which I also support), vendors who are caught selling tobacco to minors are heavily fined ( which I ALSO support), and Joe Camel has gone the way of Crystal Pepsi (wondering what my opinion of that is? if you guessed 'I support it', you guessed correctly). It's time for anti-tobacco folks to realize that they've won, and that there is only so much you can do to protect people from themselves.

The thing is, I believe that those that voted for this bill know all that and are only passing this bill to score some brownie points with 'health conscience' voters.

If the industry is such a blight on society, why did the same congress that is hell bent on punishing it today, pass a bill yesterday to raise the federal cigarette tax from 39 cents to $1.01? In other words, if tobacco is such a problem, why do they want more money from its sale? And why is it the tobacco consumer - the person that congress is claiming to try to protect - the one footing the bill? Why not come up ways to have the tobacco producer pay more taxes? Now, I'm sure if that happened, the tobacco industry would of course find a way to work the cost of the tax hike into the product, but, one doesn't need a pair of x-ray goggles to see the blatant desire of the government to want a direct piece of the cigarette money action.

And isn't it odd that the same congress that wants to help poor people is introducing a tax that effects lower income Americans three times as much as upper income Americans? Whether the cigarette tax represents a truly regressive tax is up for debate, but, what is not up for debate is the fact that poor people smoke more than rich people and therefor will pay more than rich people for the cigarette tax.

If the government wants to get some more money by getting some of the action from a wealth producing industry, so be it. But, it is disingenuous to believe that this new bill to more heavily regulate the tobacco industry is anything more than a cynical way to pretend like they give a damn while at the same time creating a few more highly paid government jobs.

By the way, the new regulations will also help to cement the place of Phillip Morris as the head of the tobacco industry, which might explain why the company supports the bill.

Obama's Decision To Speak At Notre Dame Commencement Draws Controversery

2009-03-26T12:11:00.003-04:00

Whoever would have thunk it? A politician, someone who makes a living having opinions on big issues, would generate controversy when he decides to speak at a university whose religion typically holds the opposite opinion from him on a big issue?

Tired of me speaking in generalities? Fair enough. Obama has decided to speak at Notre Dame's commencement and the pro-life groups don't like it. Allow me to hold back my surprise.

Abortion opponents are planning on making there way from all across the country to display all kinds of graphic photographs in protest. Honestly, I can't believe that anybody would be shocked by the prospect. Protest groups go where they think they will generate the most media attention. When a popular president is involved, you can't get much better in terms of having the spot light.

For the record, I'm pro-choice. My reasons for this is my belief that because the fetus is not a viable, independent being, and that it lives only off of the woman, it is a part of the woman's body and therefor, the woman has the right to make choices about her own body. My own pro-choice beliefs do not impair me from seeing the other sides point of view, and they have a first amendment right to say their peace, even it is in a graphic and socially inappropriate manner.

Others, like, senior Billy Lyman, feel differently:

"Both my grandmothers are coming. They don't want to see that on their way into the ceremony. Nobody should be subjected to that on such a happy day. I'm really concerned the day is going to be marred."

Billy, I suggest you call a doctor and get a prescription for two testicles. Apply immediately and check on their progress often. Welcome to America, Billy, where people are going to say and do things that you don't like on a daily basis. And that includes the day that you go get that diploma. By the way, feeling as though any particular day has a set emotion attached to it (i.e. 'happy day') is rather sophomoric and intellectually devoid of the complex nature of this crazy planet of ours.

If the thought of a couple of disgusting photographs is going to ruin your day, then how is the fact that there are millions of people dying, starving, being raped, and tortured while you go out drinking with your buddies and tell them that you guys are always going to stay in touch sit with you, Billy? The assholes are going to do what they are going to do, and it is your job as a person, to do what you do regardless of how anybody else feels about it. This a major part of being an adult, and I'm rather surprised that nobody told you this in that fancy school of yours. I guess that's Catholic education for you.

And don't worry about your grandmothers, Billy. Both of them have been through a lot already. Hell, they fucked your grandfathers. They may have even had abortions themselves that they never told you about. If they were ever in the health field, they could have performed abortions. Even if that never happened, fact is, they have been through a lot, and they will be just as happy for you getting your diploma with or without a bunch of assholes waving around signs with pictures of dead babies.

WHAT?!

2009-03-04T01:30:00.002-05:00

Yes, somebody actually painted this. Yes, they showed it to somebody else, and, for whatever reason allowed the person that they showed it to to scan it.

Now, aside from the obvious and offensvie overtones that Obama somehow wants to turn the US into Mexico, what the fuck is actually doing on in this picture?

What's with all the underwear floating in the middle of nowhere? And underwear clad multi-racial models that a;; have white bodies?

If you were disgusted by this painting and are a glunty for punishment, go to badpaintingsofbarackobama.com.

(props to Andrew Sullivan for being the one to point me in to the webside)

Understanding The Newspaper Issue

2009-03-01T14:10:00.007-05:00

David Horsey has illustrated the real problem we face when it comes to how we get our news.

It is no secret that newspapers are going under.

I have heard people express no sympathy for that fact and say that it is simply a changing of the guard in the technology that we use because more people are getting their news from the Internet. Just as the printed word replaced the stone tablet, so will the electronic word replace the printed word, they say.

They're right of course. Such a changing of the guard is inevitable.

Just as the way we get music has been increasingly digitized and the CD falls more and more into obscurity, the same will become true with the printed newspaper as more people get their news from the Internet.

Here's the problem: the people that get us our information are loosing money, and therefor, their ability to obtain information for us.

Just as the music industry came up with iTunes in order to keep up its revenue in a world of changing technology, the news industry must come up with a solution to keep revenue flowing into their industry as well.

Perhaps paying a subscription fee for full online membership, coupled with a nominal fee per article for those that do not have such a membership .

Or maybe developing the "radio model" Jon Stewart proposed on The Daily Show by having the big linkers like The Huffington Post pay for the use of linking to articles by newspapers in the same way that radio stations have to pay for playing a particular song.

Or maybe still, a move to literal electronic newspapers made from increasingly cheaper material that could serve as our "iPods" in this model with websites like the New York Times Online serving as iTunes.

Whatever the solution, the news industry needs to start looking alive, get on its feet, and realize that it needs to adapt, just like other industries have before it, to the ever-changing world of technology.

To avoid the future portrayed in the cartoon, the industry needs to proactively stand to attention and not passively sit on its butt and whine.

I Still Hate Mitt Romney. And Now, Apparently, I Hate CPAC By Proxy

2009-03-01T00:29:00.004-05:00

Okay. So conservatives had their traditional CPAC conference today. The conference basically serves as a conservative pep talk, which many leaders would say is much needed for the ideology at this point as they currently wield no major power in Washington. More power to them, they have free speech too.

They, of course had a straw poll to see who the people at the conference would like to see as president in 2012. The leader?

Mitt. Romney.

It's important that I point out that the poll was by no means scientific, it was just of the people who attended CPAC, many candidates are quite clearly in the running as well, and Romney only got 20% of the vote. However, that 20% is still more than anybody else got, which makes him the winner of that poll, which means that he is starting to gain some ground in the Republicans party.

For those who don't know, I hate Mitt Romney, and have previously laid my argument as to why in the best and most even handed detail that I can muster for this pitiful excuse for a man that conservatives, for some mind-numbingly opaque reason, are beginning to embrace more.

Just today I stumbled across this clip from some time back. Mitt Romney is being asked by a man in a wheel chair who suffers from muscular dystrophy whether or not Romney would have him and his doctors arrested for medical marijuana. Romney coldly replies that he is against medical marijuana. That's it. No explanation of policy. No real sympathy for the man's condition. No thought as to what the question means. Just a cold, unsympathetic reply and then the cold shoulder as he walks away.

It is no secret that I am favor of legalizing marijuana. But, the medical marijuana debate is a completely different one than that of the recreational marijuana debate. It is completely possible for one to be against the recreational use of a drug while at the same time have an understanding and appreciation for its controlled and regulated medical benefits. Morphine comes to mind. Anti-depressants as well. Let's not leave out Vicodin. And a host of other very strong drugs that we keep legal under controlled circumstances so that they may be used for specific prescribed medical reasons.

Now, Romney may indeed see the benefits of the medical legalization of marijuana as being outweighed by what he would perceive as negative consequences in the form of setting a precedent for complete legalization. While I find that position to be completely missing the point of the specific medical marijuana issue, that doesn't mean that it is not possible to hold that view while still understanding that very sick people are made better by its use and they have a legitimate concern for being locked up for trying to remedy their sickness. Some empathy. Talking to guy about it in depth. Acting like a goddamned human being.

But, no. Not Mitt Romney.

I try my best to keep things pseudo rational here in this blog, as well as making sure that even while I am using profanity and humorous exaggerations that I still try to maintain an underlying logical argument based in fact and reason. Indulge me as I briefly abandon those principals:

Fuck Mitt Romney. Fuck him in his smug, arrogant, flip-flopping, cocky, 'I was apart of a racist organization as an adult but you can't have freedom without religion', politically opportunistic face. Fuck every hair on his egotistical, phony and abnormally large head.

If the only two viable candidates in an election were Mitt Romney or Paulie Shore, and Paulie Shore was running on a "putting puppies in a meat grinder" platform, I would still vote for Paulie Shore.

Getting back to reality:

I really hope that this CPAC straw poll does not turn out to be a good indication as to who will be the Republican nominee in 2012. Because honestly, if this guy ever becomes president, I think I will be forced to find myself a gigantic hole in the ground filled with adequate food and shelter for four years because I do not know if my fragile mind could handle one second of being a participant in a world where this asshole is the leader of the free world.

2009-02-27T09:08:00.003-05:00

See the photo above? Do you find it offensive? Well, what if I said somebody added the caption "no Easter Egg hunt at the White House this year"? And what if somebody recieved that in an email and then decided to forward that email along to their friends, one of them African-American? And what if that somebody were the mayor of his town?

You'd want him to resign. He should. He has.

Where the hell have people been? It is not news that this sterotype and others are offensive to African-Americans. Wake up people.

New Mexico Shuts Down Domestic Partnership Bill

2009-02-27T00:21:00.003-05:00

It would have allowed non-married couples, including the gay ones, to file as domestic partners, thus granting them some rights of marriage. But, since equality is such a horrible thing apparently, 25 New Mexico state senators (including ten members of the party that many Republican erroneously claim are for gay marriage) voted against the bill, thus defeating the 17 that voted correctly.

Shift To Civilian Justice System For Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri

2009-02-26T23:45:00.004-05:00

Breaking firmly away from the previous administration, the Obama Administration has announced that Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri will be tried in the civilian justice system as opposed to the military tribunal system. This is good, but, the justice system needs to ensure that no stone go left unturned in this trial and if al-Marri is found guilty, he needs to be punished to the full extent of the law.

Do not fuck this up, justice system.

Alright, The Senate Voted To Ban The Fairness Docrtrine, Can We Move On Already

2009-02-26T23:17:00.002-05:00

Ok. The Fairness Doctrine has come under a lot of scrutiny from many on the right, and the Senate has now okayed an amendment to ban it. The right and other opponets (the President, for example) were correct in opposing the Fairness Doctrine because it does supress free speech by allowing the government decide what is balanced politcal commentary.

The Fairness Doctrine, which was a practice in place (though never enforced) at the FCC some 20 years ago, stated that networks be required to show multiple sides to controversial political issues. The notion by some on the left (namely Douchbag, i mean Senator John Kerry, among others) to revive and enforce the practice has been a rallying cry on the right for some time now.

The Fairness Doctrine has been falsely accused of by the right as a measure to force equal time for all view points. While the Fairness Doctrine is in fact a naive and dangerous attack on the right to a free press (along with many of the practices of the FCC), it does not, in fact, require equal time, and, has not been proposed for legislation. It should never be enacted, but, fact is, nobody tried to enact it and it has been disingenuously used by the right as a scare tactic to make the public fear Democrats.

It seems to me a bit silly to shoot down something that never crept up in the first place, but, this legislation is still more important than any monkey legislation, so, let's just get on with it and send it to the House and call it a day, shall we?

61

2009-02-26T22:58:00.004-05:00

61. That is how many Senators voted for the bill to provide the citizens of Washington D.C. a right to a representative in congress. That means it passed.

It also means a whole lot of other things.

Among them a huge legal headache that could go to the Supreme Court, and might lead to an amendment to the Constitution somewhere down the line.

DC deserves to have representation. However, the Constitution also seems to say that this bill is is in direct conflict with the writers' idea of the Capital.

This is going to be a long journey, ladies and gentlemen. One wrought with false starts and huge amounts of back and forth. A first, incredibly shaky step.

But, a huge one nonetheless.

Letting The Families Decide

2009-02-26T22:35:00.003-05:00

As of today, the pentagon has lifted the ban on pictures of fallen soldiers returning from war. The new rule will be similar to the policy already in place at Arlington National Cemetery, allowing each individual family the decision on whether or not to let the media photograph their loved one's coffin returning from war.

The policy to not allow the media at Dover has been on the books since 1991, and the Bush administration had been a strong advocate for it. The lifting of it is certainly not without its opponents. But, Defense Secretary Gates hit the nail right on the head when he said:

"My conclusion was, we should not presume to make the decision for the families. We should actually let them make it,"

And the policy is certainly not without its logistical problems: as noted in the linked article, what happens when a plan with multiple dead soldiers is being flown in and the families of said soldiers hold conflicting wishes in regards to photography? It is a valid question, and the enactment of the policy needs to reflect individual family rights. Most likely this will have to take the form of separating the soldiers in such an occasion so that the photography-approved soldiers are taken out separately from the coffins carrying soldiers whose families disapproved of photography.

The policy needs to strike the correct balance between preserving the right of the press not to be infringed while at the same time recognizing wishes of all families. I do not envy the policy meetings on this matter.

Tuesday's Address To Congress

2009-02-26T00:43:00.002-05:00

If you haven't seen Obama's speech to a joint session of congress, do yourself a favor and watch it now.

I don't have a lot of time right now, but, a couple of quick points:

1. My personal favorite moment in this speech is when he says "Dropping out of High School is no longer an option. It's not only quitting on yourself, it's quitting on your country." I was so excited that I stood up and started to clap even though I was in an empty apartment. This little line really speaks to the integral cog in our society that is a good education while calling on young people to act responsibly for the good of their communities. This moment really echoed "Ask not what you're country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

2. I was disappointed with the lack of details in regards to the bank bail out. Yes, I get it, he would like to make sure that banks aren't buying jets with our money anymore...but, what else?

3. He gets a gold star for adding the costs of the wars to the budget ("We are a nation at war and we will no longer hide its price.")

4. Another gold star for listing his big three priorities (Energy, Education, Health Care) while citing the emphasise placed upon each of these in the ARRA and the Budget.

5. Cure for cancer in our lifetime? Did he just JFK ("we will put a man on the moon at the end of this decade") cancer? You're goddamned right he did.

6. As is well known, if charisma were an energy source, we could run this country on Barack Obama. That being said, I do think that this speech should have been a bit more policy heavy. I do think addressing a joint session of congress is the right time to get into that sort of thing. Don't get me wrong, he said a lot of things for which he can be held accountable. (Making it easier for 7 million students to get an education, rolling back the Bush tax cuts, appointing Joe Biden to make sure that every penny of the ARRA is spent wisely, and having the highest percentage of college grads by 2020) But, I really wish he would have gotten into the nitty-gritty details more. Such as where the first 100 million dollars are going from the ARRA, for example.

As far as Bobby Jindal's response? No need for a NorthEast liberal like myself to lambaste him, I'll let conservative columnist David Brooks do that.

Rubert Murdoch Apologizes For NY Post Cartoon

2009-02-24T12:44:00.005-05:00

Rupert Murdoch offers a more sincere apology than the original one given by the NY Post for the stimulus chimp cartoon:

"As the Chairman of the New York Post, I am ultimately responsible for what is printed in its pages. The buck stops with me.

Last week, we made a mistake. We ran a cartoon that offended many people. Today I want to personally apologize to any reader who felt offended, and even insulted.

Over the past couple of days, I have spoken to a number of people and I now better understand the hurt this cartoon has caused. At the same time, I have had conversations with Post editors about the situation and I can assure you - without a doubt - that the only intent of that cartoon was to mock a badly written piece of legislation. It was not meant to be racist, but unfortunately, it was interpreted by many as such.

We all hold the readers of the New York Post in high regard and I promise you that we will seek to be more attuned to the sensitivities of our community."

This is better than the half-assed apology that was originally given, as it actually recognizes that the Post made a mistake and that it was racial insensitive. But, I'm still not one percent satisfied, as he still doesn't go into WHY many people were offended, but, rather only states that they where offended. I doubt that we'll get another apology, but, we should. And this time, act like you were paying attention for the last 400 years.

Kellogg's Reputation Suffers

2009-02-24T12:08:00.002-05:00

So, the boycott of Kellogg's has actually made a dent:

"Out of the 5,600 company reputations Vanno monitors, Kellogg ranked ninth before it booted Phelps. Now it's ranked 83. Not even an industry-wide peanut scare inflicted as much damage on the food company's reputation."

Good show.

(props to Andrew Sullivan for posting this first)

Assemblyman Ammiano Introduces Bill To Legalize Marijuana

2009-02-24T11:23:00.003-05:00

Amidst a huge budget crisis in the state of California, Assemblyman Ammiano has introduced a bill to legalize, regulate, and tax marijuana. A move that he says could generate as much as $1bn for the state's suffering budget.

The bill will be in direct contradiction to federal law and will be advise California law enforcement to not follow the federal statute.

Let me be clear. I am for the legalization, regulation, and taxation of marijuana and am completely against the way that it is portrayed in the War On Drugs. I also find the fact that anybody could even think about locking somebody up, who's only crime was using marijuana, in the same facility as someone who molested a child, intellectually and morally bankrupt.

But, we've got to be careful with the whole states-making-laws-which-give-the-middle-finger-to-federal-statutes thing. Because, the federal law may also include things that you like. For example, Roe v Wade. Which North Dakota is now attempting to challenge by introducing a bill that calls an embryo a person.

Now, I'm not trying to say that everybody who is in favor of legalized marijuana is in favor of Roe v Wade. I have met plenty of people that would love to toke up in celebration if the court ruling were ever overturned. (Republican Party Leadership - if that surprises you, you need to go out and meet more members of your party.)

My point is, is that this whole thing brings up the fundamental argument of states' rights. Should we have a strong federal government that dictates certain fundamental laws or should we be giving more power to the states? Honestly, it depends on the law. In the case of marijuana, I believe that it should be left to the states to decide their own marijuana laws.

But, that's not the current federal law on the books, so, before California starts solving its budget crisis, it should make sure to get the current federal statute overturned. I'm not saying don't vote on the bill. Definitely vote on it. And I'm not saying don't pass the bill. Definitely pass it. What I'm saying is that the bill is not enough by itself, that it should be used as a means to challenge existing federal statutes.

The Washington Post's Bad Idea

2009-02-24T09:48:00.005-05:00

In an editorial, the Washington Post has defended Transportation Secretary Ray Lahood's proposal to replace the gas tax with a mileage tax ( a proposal that Press Secretary Robert Gibbs rightly, awesomely, and righteously shot down on behalf of Obama). Saying:

"As automobiles become more efficient and make use of new fuels, the gas tax -- which, we note here for the umpteenth time, should be raised -- will be less effective in capturing revenue. Mr. LaHood's comments reflected what many transportation experts and economists are coming to believe: A tax on vehicle miles traveled, or VMTs, is the most promising, fairest, most environmentally responsible replacement for the gas tax."

Environmentally responsible? Isn't having more fuel efficient cars environmentally responsible? Shouldn't people buying more fuel efficient cars be something that is encouraged, not something that is whined about? And isn't global warming caused by the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere? Car that gets 50mpg travels 50 miles = less carbon in the atmosphere (i.e. less global warming) than car that gets 8mpg traveling 50 miles. Why then, if we're being environmentally responsible, would we tax those two cars the same?

Y'know, it's times like these when certain environmentalists remind me of the fundamentalist Christians. Wait. Don't leave. Hear me out on this:

There several methods of birth control that are 99% effective. Wide spread education on these methods, along with information and education about STDs, is the best way to lower unwanted pregnancy, STDs, and abortion rates.

The fundamentalist Christian might throw abstinence only education in your face, which tells you that it doesn't freaking care how safe many of these methods of contraception are, that you shouldn't be having sex, that's that, and won't even teach you how to protect yourself.

Abstinence is the only 100% effective way to stay clear of STDs and pregnancy. Everyone knows this. But, everyone also knows that teenagers are going to have sex. Education in contraception and STDs is the best means of combating the epidemic of STDs and pregnancies in real world circumstances. The proponent of abstinence only education is shoving an ideal in your face without the slightest, remote clue, as to what is actually going on in the world.

What does all that have to do with environmentalism? (I know this post is about environmentalism, I didn't forget. Promise.)

What it has to do with it, is the fact that we are hearing that same factually bankrupt rhetoric wrapped in an environmental flag (100% biodegradable, of course). Where the proponent of Abstinence Only education has this logic: having sex causes pregnancy and STDs, therefor, the best course of action is to discourage sex. The proponent of taxing people for the miles they drive has this logic: driving causes global warming, therefor, the best course of action is to discourage driving.

But, you ask, what about the fuel efficient cars? The alternative fuels? Doesn't that also decrease global warming?

The proponent of taxing people per miles says: they shouldn't be driving of begin with, we need to discourage them from doing so.

Same failed logic. Just as people are going to have sex, people are going to drive. The best thing for us to do is to come up with alternative fuel sources and keep making more fuel efficient cars. If the revenue generated from the gas tax isn't bringing in the money that the government needs, wait for the economy to get a little better, than raise the gas tax.

Moving on though, how do our friends at the Washington Post propose we actually implement this new form of taxation?

"Most proposals require a GPS-like "mileage-counter" to be installed in vehicles. When drivers stop to fill up, a tax based on the miles they've driven would be added to their bill in place of a gas tax. The tax rate could be adjusted based on whether someone was driving in rush hour or off-peak times, on clogged freeways or less busy roads."

Great! Allow the government the ability to easily track all of my movements! This couldn't end badly at all, especially when we still have the Patriot Act on the books.

In all seriousness, what makes people think that letting the government track how much you drive, and when you drive with a "GPS-like" device does not yield them the ability to track down where you drive?

This means a lot to people like me who try desperately to cling to the tiny iota of privacy we are still allowed in this age, but the Washington Post seems to dismiss that as just paranoia:

"What, then, prevents the proposal from being taken more seriously? Some opponents fear that the government could use the mileage counters to monitor drivers. There's also criticism that the tax would unfairly burden less affluent motorists."

Dude! You're suggesting having the government track my movements in the name of your supposed "fair" form of taxation, and you dare to mock my question as to whether or not the government would abuse that power?

Damn all that, the Obama Administration was right on the money when it shot this ridiculous proposal to the ground. Let's come up with actual solutions, not preposterous environmentalist wet dreams.

Ali Reza Eshraghi: Talk To Ahmadinejad

2009-02-23T08:36:00.004-05:00

Considering the upcomming elections, in his Op-Ed in the New York Times, Ali Reza Eshraghi urges Obama to move quickly in talking with Ahmadinejad:

"Mr. Obama has expressed interest in engaging in dialogue with Iran, and there is no time to waste. Over the next few months he should initiate negotiations without preconditions and establish formal diplomatic ties with Iran. Mr. Ahmadinejad, for all his faults, has taken unprecedented steps to reach out to the United States. Iran’s next leader may not be able to do the same. Mr. Obama must seize the opportunity to shake the Iranian president’s outstretched hand."

Two Points:

1. I love the fact that in politics, things can change so quickly. During the last administration, this guy was seen as the devil. Now, we still don't like him, but, we're willing to talk.

2. While I second the motion that Obama needs to seize the oppurtunity, I have a feeling that we're probably not going to see anything on this until about April, what with all that's going on at hom.

No Apologies From Schwarzenegger For Rasing Taxes

2009-02-22T14:39:00.005-05:00

In his interview with George Stephanopoulos today Gov Schwarzenegger gave no apologies for raising taxes saying "You do the kind of things that are right for the people, that are right for the state, rather than what is right for your party. It was not right for my party. The Republicans, the party itself hates it, even though I had other Republicans vote right along on that budget. That's how we got it passed, because we need two-thirds of the votes in order to pass a budget. "

Also, Arnold had some kind words for the ARRA, saying this about Gov Sanford's (Republican, S.C.) objection to taking stimulus money:

"Well, Governor Sanford says that he does not want to take the money, the federal stimulus package money. And I want to say to him: I'll take it. I'm more than happy to take his money or any other governor in this country that doesn't want to take this money, I take it, because we in California can need it.

I think that it is a terrific package. I think that, if you ask 1,000 people for their opinion what is their ideal stimulus package, you will have a 1,000 different answers. So everyone's is a little different.

I think that he has done a great job. And I think California benefits tremendously from that $80 billion that is tax benefits there of around $35 billion. There's other advantages, $45 billion of monies that go to transportation, to education, to health care, and all those different areas.

And there's even some money in there that could benefit our -- our revenues or, I should say, our budget itself. We have a trigger language built in there so that, if some money comes to that, then we will reduce the cuts and we will increase the spending."

So, I hear Obama is looking for a new Commerce Secretary. Secretary Schwarzenegger doesn't sound like a bad idea to me. He supports the President's major policies, people love him, and Obama gets to have an unprecedented three members of the opposite party in his Cabinet.

WebsiteToWatch: MuzzleWatch

2009-02-22T12:39:00.004-05:00

Think that all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic?

Or, do you have personal grievances with many Israeli war policies, stand in solidarity with the Palestinians, support a Palestinian state, an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem, while at the same time reject much of the politics and rhetoric of the main-stream pro-Palestinian movement?

In either case, you need to get your but over to the Jewish Voice for Peace website, and then swing around and take a good long hard look at their blog MuzzleWatch. They represent an important voice of dissent and reason in the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian struggle for peace. Consider the following excerpt from a Febuary 18th post:

"On top the frank destruction visited upon Gaza by Israel (with full US support), Gaza residents also have to contend with another terrible burden of occupation – internecine warfare resulting from divide and conquer policies. Hamas both during and after the Israeli attack has been threatening, kidnapping, torturing and killing those it considers collaborators and/or supporters of Fatah as well as those who might, in any way dissent from/protest Hamas actions and policies. This has been documented in numerous places and shouldn’t come as a surprise. Individuals have been shot in the legs, multiple members of families have been shot in front of other family members, others have been tortured and then killed. There has been no obvious evidence of trials, reminiscent of Israeli summary executions of Palestinians (both Hamas and non-Hamas) in Gaza (using information supplied by Palestinian collaborators).

Fatah’s use of torture and arbitrary detention is equally well-documented. The Israeli military’s history of arbitrary detentions and torture of Palestinians, and its ongoing predilection for obliterating the infrastructure of Palestinian government, services, and commerce are just some of the complex elements of the larger story of occupation and the resulting chaos and repression that has fed this situation.

Israel’s policies of annihilation (of Hamas, of homes, of farms, of infrastructure..), far from having a moderating force, has fed extremism on both sides of the green line. An extremism that both the residents of southern Israel and the Palestinian people of Gaza are paying are paying a dear price for. (With the imprisoned Palestinians of Gaza experiencing far greater destruction and suffering)."

Holy shit! It looks like somebody finally talked to me like I was an adult about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict! Did you know that it is possible for both sides in a conflict to be acting in disgusting manners? If you listened to the typical back in forth in this discussion, you wouldn't think so.

Slashing Deficits

2009-02-22T11:57:00.003-05:00

Obama plans on slashing the Budget Deficit in half (that would be a total of $533bn) by the end of his first term. How's he proposing to do it? Mostly by cutting funding for the Iraq War, and by letting the Bush tax cuts run out in 2010.

Now, I am all for slashing deficits, and ending the Iraq War. But:

We're redeploying troops from Iraq to other parts of the world right now, namely Afghanistan. So, doesn't that mean, by definition, that funding for the Iraq War goes down because there are less troops to spend money on? And doesn't that also mean that the money that we were spending in Iraq would just be spent on Afghanistan? Or is the Administration not planing on having all of the troops in Iraq go to Afghanistan? In other words, allowing some amount of the Iraq troops to actually go home and send some of them to Afghanistan, thus providing a net-cut for overall war funding and providing a dent to the deficit?

One thing that better not be suggested is slashing funding for integral things such as body armor. I doubt Obama will do this, but, its up to us to hold him accountable.

Ultimately, I want Obama to end his first term by slashing the deficit, while saving the economy, while restoring our place in the world, and by doing an overhaul on Health Care. I want him to succeed. I do. I just have to wonder how he plans on doing all of this. I'll hear him out. We'll all here him out. If it sounds too crazy. Back to the drawing board.

BBC: Serbs Ordered To Pay For Mosques

2009-02-21T00:57:00.001-05:00

Justice may be slow, but, it can still arrive:

"Serb authorities in Bosnia-Hercegovina have been ordered to pay $42m (£26m) to local Muslims for the destruction of mosques during the Bosnian civil war."

FiveThirtyEight.com: Beer No Longer Recession Proof

2009-02-20T00:43:00.003-05:00

That's right. Beer. The drink that tons of people have been drinking for centuries...yeah, Nate Silver says it's not recession proof anymore.

Hopping The (Canadian) Border

2009-02-20T00:28:00.004-05:00

So, who ever thought that visiting with a foriegn leader that, if he could have voted in the election that brought you to power, most assurdly would have voted against you, would be awkward?

Well, me for one. Anyone else?

I agree with Joe Biden

2009-02-20T00:21:00.001-05:00

"Visiting the Central Intelligence Agency to swear in Leon E. Panetta as the agency’s 19th director, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. said Thursday that the Bush administration’s detention and interrogation policies “gave Al Qaeda a powerful recruiting tool.” "

A Nation Ran By Centrists

2009-02-20T00:17:00.003-05:00

This story coming out of the California legislative budget negotiations reaffirms my belief that when every thing is said in done, we are a nation that is ran by centrists.

The NY Post Apologizes....Sort Of

2009-02-19T23:52:00.003-05:00

Wanna read a half hearted apology that wreaks of political tone-deafness? Go ahead.

"It was meant to mock an ineptly written federal stimulus bill.

Period.

But it has been taken as something else - as a depiction of President Obama, as a thinly veiled expression of racism.

This most certainly was not its intent; to those who were offended by the image, we apologize."

So...who was supposed to be the monkey in the cartoon? I mean, the cartoon says "someone else" would have to write the next stimulus bill, implying that the monkey was a stand in for the author of the stimulus bill, whom, as far as the public is concerned, is Barack Obama. Thus, linking a black man to a monkey which is politically tone deaf. If this is what the NY Post has to offer in terms of insightful political commentary, color me unimpressed.

I'm not saying that they are no allowed to have a negative view on the stimulus package - of course they do. What I am saying, is that there are countless other ways to portray that without any implication of racism whatsoever. Why not simply depict Obama throwing a cartoon rendering of the bill labeled "Stimulus Package" on to cowering children labeled "Future Generations"? There you have your criticism, your snark, and absolutely no racism. Why link the stimulus package, something that is so heavily linked with the President, an African American, with one of the most offensive depictions of African Americans? It's as though the New York Post hasn't been paying any attention for, I don't, a handful of centuries.

But, if I thought that the actual apology was half hearted enough, the rest of the statement was really lackluster:

"However, there are some in the media and in public life who have had differences with The Post in the past - and they see the incident as an opportunity for payback.

To them, no apology is due.

Sometimes a cartoon is just a cartoon - even as the opportunists seek to make it something else."

Now, I'm not denying that the Post has enemies, some of which I am sure just wait for it to do something wrong so they can criticize. We all have enemies such as these. But, by addressing them in such a matter, it comes across as dismissive to legitimate complaints against the newspaper.

As you may have guessed, I am no fan of the Post in the first place, but, their handling of this issue has put there place on my shit list two notches above genital warts.

If You Haven't Seen This Yet...

2009-02-19T23:36:00.003-05:00

Check out T. Boone Pickens explaining his energy plan. We need to be focusing in on this, because, frankly, lowering our dependence on foreign oil is a national security issue. The more of an integral resource you take from foreign entities, the more you are in te pocket of those foreign entities.

As far as the green aspect of it, even if you don't believe in global warming (note: you really fucking should), you can't tell me that burning gasoline isn't dirty. I mean, leave a car on in your garage with the doors closed for a couple of hours and tell me that you'd like to go in there.

I know that the global warming thing is a politically charged issue(although it shouldn't be), but, the fact that gasoline is a dirty fuel that does damage to our surrounding enviroment is just base-level scientific fact.

The NY Post Owes Us All Apology

2009-02-19T00:02:00.003-05:00

The above cartoon appeared in yesterday's New York Post. Really. To be fair, this is in-part a reference to the woman mauled by chimp story. But, number one, the woman mauled by chimp story is not 1/1000th well known as the President and his stimulus package, and, number two, ANY and all references and comparisons of a black man to a monkey should be avoided by anybody that has been paying attention to one iota in this society for the last 400 years. The NY post should apologize for running this filth.

California State Legislature Budget Fight

2009-02-18T01:12:00.007-05:00

Democrats in the California legislature, along with Gov. Schwarzenegger are pushing for one more Republican vote to approve of a state budget that will raise taxes by over $14bn. The situation in California is getting desperate, and I'm disheartened to see such a clear example of the overwhelming financial crisis that we currently face, but, more then that, I'm starting to see something stirring in the water.

I have a feeling in my gut that we're not too far away from seeing Schwarzenegger leave the Republican party. Yeah, he stumped for Bush in 04 and McCain in 08, but take a look at where the guy actually stands on policy:

He's pro-choice. He set a cap on auto emissions. He's hard line about investing government money in infrastructure. He signed a letter of support for the ARRA. And now, he's fighting with members of his own party to raise taxes. It is quite clear to me, that even by blue state standards, this guy is starting to lean left.

Now, of course, his pro-death penalty, along with his huge stumping against the Dems in the last two presidential elections might make it hard for Arnold to start putting the D next to his name. I think it's more likely that he might just become an independent, a la Lincoln Chaffee, Jim Jeffords and Michael Bloomberg.

Think I'm crazy? Watch. This guy is starting to loose his footing in the modern Republican party. There's only so much more berating he's going to take before he falls back.

17,000 Troops To Afghanistan

2009-02-18T00:34:00.002-05:00

Obama approved the redeployment of 17,000 US troops to Afghanistan today.

A few quick thoughts:

1. As a general rule, it seems fucked up that we have a war going on in this country, and Obama has just gotten around to talking to the President of a country that he is about to send more troops into.

2. How committed is America to this war and what is the ultimate goal? Are we still looking for bin Laden? Are we trying to oust the Taliban once and for-all? If this is the case, we need to be really stepping up the idea war even more so then we are stepping up the gun war.

What I mean by this, is that unless there is a firm push by the administration to get Arab moderates on our side and to address the poverty of this region, then a war with the Taliban will be for not.

We should absolutely be fighting them with guns, but, if we do not fight them with ideas as well, then this war will go on forever.

3. There is talk of arming local tribs in order to combat the Taliban. I have to say, that we need to look very closely at the particular situations and at history before we pursue this line of combat.

Consider the timeline:

In the 40s, we were allies with Russia in order to overthrow Nazi Germany. We disagreed with the way the Russians handled their part of the spoils of that war and began to engage them in proxy wars by supporting assaults against their allies (a la Vietnam).

This trend continued into the 80s in Afghanistan, where we supported militant Islamic groups like Al Qaeda to oust the Russians.

And now we wish to arm tribes in order to get rid of the militant Islamic groups. I'm not saying that we do nothing, or even neccesarily that we don't do this tribal program.

However, we should consider how far the whole enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend thing should go, especially when history seems to show cases in which we gave aid and training to the future enemy.

I'm reminded of a story I heard of a child -

There was a city state that had a rat problem. So the monarch brought in cats to kill the rats. Then they had a cat problem.

So the monarch brought in dogs to scare away the cats. Then they had a dog problem.

So the monarch brought in elephants to scare away the dogs. Then they had an elephant problem.

What did the monarch bring in to scare away the elephants?

Mice.

Greenspan Has Something To Say

2009-02-18T00:22:00.001-05:00

And I really wish he's wrong about the depths of this whole recession thing.

Oh, Fuck Me

2009-02-17T21:14:00.001-05:00

It's going to take you guys a minute to wrap your mind around this one.

Letter From Obama

2009-02-17T21:11:00.004-05:00

If you're not on the mailing list, here's the letter that I and a shit load of other people got in our inbox about the ARRA:

Friend --

Today, I signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act into law.

This is a historic step -- the first of many as we work together to climb out of this crisis -- and I want to thank you for your resolve and your support.

You organized thousands of house meetings. You shared your ideas and personal stories. And you informed your friends and neighbors about the need for immediate action. You continue to be a powerful voice for change throughout the country.

The recovery plan will create or save 3.5 million jobs, provide tax cuts for working and middle-class families, and invest in health care and clean energy.

It's a bold plan to address a huge problem, and it will require my vigilance and yours to make sure it's done right.

I've assigned a team of managers to oversee the implementation of the recovery act. We are committed to making sure no dollar is wasted. But accountability begins with you.That's why my administration has created Recovery.gov, a new website where citizens can track every dollar spent and every job created. We'll invite you and your neighbors to weigh in with comments and questions.

Our progress will also be measured by the tens of thousands of personal stories submitted by people who are struggling to make ends meet. If you haven't already, you can read stories from families all across the country:http://my.barackobama.com/yourstories

Your stories are the heart of this recovery plan, and that's what I'll focus on every day as President.With your continued support, we'll emerge a stronger and more prosperous nation.

Thank you,

President Barack Obama

Andrew Sullivan Lets The Gop Have It

2009-02-16T00:25:00.001-05:00

"From the outset, the Republicans in Washington pored over the bill to find trivial issues to make hay with. They found some small funding for HIV and sexually transmitted diseases prevention; they jumped up and down about renovating the national mall; they went nuts over a proposal - wait for it - to make some government buildings more energy-efficient; they acted as if green research and federal funds for new school building were the equivalent of funding terrorism. And this after eight years in which they managed to turn a surplus into a trillion-dollar deficit and added a cool $32 trillion to the debt the next generation will have to pay for. Every now and again their chutzpah and narcissism take one’s breath away. But it’s all they seem to know."

Obama Declares Oklahoma County Hit By Tornadoes A Disaster Area

2009-02-15T23:58:00.002-05:00

Let us hope that this is the first in many many many steps away from the previous Administration when it comes to dealing with disasters.

Haaretz.com: US to participate in in preparations for Durban II meeting

2009-02-15T23:48:00.002-05:00

This is going to cause a huge fight in the Israel debate here at home. Trust me.

USA Today: Stimulus could mean top execs may have to return part of pay

2009-02-15T23:46:00.001-05:00

Good.

Historians Rank Presidents...

2009-02-15T23:43:00.002-05:00

...and Lincoln is at the top. He is often ranked high on such lists, but, I wonder if he didn't get some kind of a birthday bump as a result of us just celebrating his bicentennial.

Lindsey Graham Would Consider Nationalization Of Banks

2009-02-15T23:39:00.003-05:00

"This idea of nationalizing banks is not comfortable, but I think we have gotten so many toxic assets spread throughout the banking and financial community throughout the world that we're going to have to do something that no one ever envisioned a year ago, no one likes," Graham said. "But, to me, banking and housing are the root cause of this problem. And I'm very much afraid that any program to salvage the bank is going to require the government.."

For those who don't know, Lindsey Graham is a Republican with a capital 'R', and hearing him say something like that should make everyone - liberal and conservative - understand the depths of the finicial situation that we are in.

More Chávez To Come

2009-02-15T23:32:00.002-05:00

Okay. So, I say that I hope this douchebag Hugo Chávez does not get the term limits lifted, and what happens? He gets the freaking term limits lifted.

Okay, fate. I've got another one for ya: I really hope that I do not find a million dollars in unmarked bills on my way to work tomorrow.

Oh, it doesn't work like that?

Damn.

No Quick Fix

2009-02-15T23:26:00.003-05:00

The White House wishes to inform us that the ARRA will not be a quick fix. They're saying that while they believe that there will be immidiate postive results, it will take at least half the year for them to show up in statistics.

I've got to say, that while I find the stimulus neccesary, I've got my fingers crossed that it's going to work. We're talking about alot of freaking money here ($787bn is huge), and whether it works for good or ill, our grandchildren are going to be paying it off (before I get angry liberal comments: yes, I know that they will be paying of the Bush tax cuts and the Iraq war as well, and I am not, in the least changing any of my liberal positions, which you would know that I hold if you read this freaking thing), and the Administration better know what the fuck it's doing.

Here's to paying close attention.

Obama Forming Auto Task Force

2009-02-15T23:22:00.002-05:00

He's dropping the 'car czar' idea.

While we're own the topic of 'czars', why hasn't anybody ever suggested a 'poverty czar' or a 'homelessness czar'?

Doomsday Clock: 5 Minutes Till Midnight

2009-02-15T22:58:00.005-05:00

With the Watchmen movie coming out soon, I felt in the mood to talk about the Doomsday Clock.

Basically, the Doomsday Clock is essentially a rhetorical device used by the Bulletin Of Atomic Scientists to exemplify how close we are to "catastrophic destruction", which is represented by midnight.

They do not update often, as you can see by the chart.

As you can also see by the chart, as of 2007, we are 5 minutes to midnight. Hopefully, when they get to marking another time under the Obama Administration, we will be further away then that.

Why I'm A Card-carrying Member Of The ACLU

2009-02-15T20:12:00.003-05:00

I'm a card-carrying member of the ACLU because they send me emails like this to keep me abreast of what our government is doing:

"Dear ACLU Supporter,
Yesterday, ACLU lawyers encountered a recurring -- and troubling -- obstacle in our lawsuit seeking justice for torture victims caught up in the CIA’s extraordinary rendition program. But this time, the objections were not coming from the Bush administration.

To our surprise and disappointment, the new Justice Department urged a federal appeals court to dismiss our lawsuit charging a Boeing subsidiary with providing critical support for the CIA’s rendition program based on the same “state secrets” claim that the Bush administration had repeatedly invoked to avoid any judicial scrutiny of its actions. During the course of the argument, one judge asked twice if the change in administration had any bearing on the Justice Department’s position. The attorney for the government said that its position remained the same.

This isn’t the kind of change we need if we want an America we can be proud of again.

If the judges rule in the government’s favor, our clients -- who were tortured as part of the government’s rendition program -- will never get their day in court.

We’re still hoping the court will rule in our favor and allow our case to move forward. But, in the meantime, we must do everything we can to end the abuse of the “state secrets” doctrine both in the courts and on Capitol Hill.

Senators Kennedy, Leahy, Specter and Representative Nadler introduced legislation in 2008 to narrow the scope of the state secrets privilege -- and open the courthouse doors to people who have suffered real and legitimate harm by the government. Clearly, this legislation is needed now more than ever.

Send a message to these members of Congress to let them know you support the State Secrets Protection Act.

This crucial civil liberties bill recognizes the need to take precautions when it comes to national security. But, it also acknowledges that courts have been competently managing the balance between the security of classified information and the right to a fair trial in criminal cases for years. And, most important of all, it makes it much more difficult for the government to abuse the state secrets doctrine to escape accountability for illegal behavior.

We can’t allow any administration to invoke state secrets to hide a reprehensible history of torture, rendition and the most grievous human rights violations.

Send a message to support the State Secrets Protection Act.

Yesterday, the Obama administration had an opportunity to act on its condemnation of torture and rendition. But, instead, the Justice Department opted to stay the course.

Now, we must hope that the court will assert its independence, reject the government’s false claims of state secrets, and allow victims of torture and rendition their day in court.

Thanks for standing with us as we work to pursue justice on this critical civil liberties issue.

Sincerely,

Anthony D. Romero
Executive Director
ACLU

P.S. The ACLU has been working on this case for years. To learn more about rendition and the people impacted, watch our short video. "

Al Jazeera: Doha Talks 'close to Darfur deal'

2009-02-15T15:21:00.002-05:00

Peace: it's possible. But too fucking slow.

Protectionism: The Double Sided Sword

2009-02-15T15:00:00.003-05:00

Taking a look at the Indian Newspaper The Hindu's article, it is easy to see the world is in a frenzy over protectionism.

On the one hand, all members of all nations are concerned about loosing their jobs and want to keep them in their land.

On the other hand, it is impossible to get your goods into another country if they have protectionist policies, which means less jobs for your workforce, and if you adopt protectionist policies yourself, you're going to piss off the policy makers in the country that you want to buy your goods.

Holy hell, Batman! It looks like we're in for a headache.

Venezuelans Vote On Lifting Term Limits

2009-02-15T14:39:00.003-05:00

If this passes, Chávez could rule Venezuela long past his current term, which ends on 2013. Term limits, like most things, is a sticky issue.

In his book Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell talks at great length about the 10,000 hour rule. In short, he says that the way to achieve mastery in any field is to do a particular subject for 10,000 hours. (Full disclosure: I have not yet read the book by Gladwell, have every intention to do so and review it on this blog, and am taking my information by reading articles about the book and from interviews Gladwell did on the book.) If this is true, we are doing our leaders a disservice by imposing term limits on them.

On the other, very large hand, term limits help keep governments in line by not letting people get too comfortable.

Chávez in general makes me very nervous. As the article points out:

"The Spanish member of the European Parliament, Luis Herrero, was forced out of the country Friday night after he had publicly described Mr. Chávez as a “dictator” in criticism of the electoral process."

Which is why, I gotta say that I really hope this referendum does not pass and allow this dude a chance at more power.

Sharia, Sharia

2009-02-15T14:31:00.002-05:00

"Pakistan is to impose Islamic law in a vast region of the north-west called Malakand in an attempt to placate extremists, even as President Asif Zardari warns that they are "trying to take over the state".

Pakistani Taliban militants who are in control of the Swat valley in the region announced a ceasefire tonight, reacting to the government's agreement to bring in sharia courts."

UM.......

My brain just did a somersault, because this is such a ridiculously complicated issue. Basically, you don't want to treat all social conservatives as being extremists against the state, while trying to peacefully placate those that do, while also making sure that you don't placate them too much and toss freedom out the window.

Any thoughts? Commenting on this blog is completely open.

Thomas L. Friedman: Yes, They Could. So They Did.

2009-02-15T14:28:00.001-05:00

“Why did this tour happen?” asked Ringwald. “Why this mad, insane plan to travel across India in a caravan of solar electric cars and jatropha trucks with solar music, art, dance and a potent message for climate solutions? Well ... the world needs crazy ideas to change things, because the conventional way of thinking is not working anymore.”

Nutter Turns To Public For Advice On Budget

2009-02-15T13:45:00.005-05:00

"The severity of Philadelphia’s current fiscal crisis — the city faces a $1 billion deficit over five years — prompted Mayor Michael A. Nutter to arrange the meetings in an effort to win public support for what he says will be painful spending cuts or tax increases, or both."

I live in New Jersey, but, because I work in Philadelphia, I pay taxes to Philadelphia. Since I live in Jersey, I am not allowed to vote for Philadelphia government, thus partaking in a sort of taxation without representation type of thing.

As single guy who is lucky enough to (a) not only have a job but (b) have a job that is giving out massive amount of overtime, I personally have no qualms with paying more taxes to ensure that the city that I work in is providing needed services to its citizens. However, not everybody is as lucky as I am, so, we need to be very careful to not overburden the already suffering people of Philadelphia with too many taxes.

As someone who spends a lot of time driving around Phillie, I have to say that I am very distressed to hear talk of shutting down 23 libraries, when in order to get on 676-West, I pass by public parks that STILL have on Christmas lights that are sucking tax payer money whenever the sun goes down. Now, I'm not saying that taking down the Christmas lights is going to solve the City's budget problems. I'm just saying that having pretty lights is not as important as making sure that our children can spell l-i-g-h-t-s.

As far as building up revenue for the city, why don't they:

Install more cameras on traffic lights to catch people running reds. Trust me, they will pay for themselves shortly.
Start charging a nominal fee to see the Liberty Bell. Between 1-2 million people see the bell each year. There is currently no charge. If you slap a five dollar fee to that...you've just made 5-10 mil a year...not going to solve the crisis all by itself, but, it's a voluntary tax that is not going to piss people off and will allow you to build up some revenue. Now, I'm not going to claim to know the level of headache that that could cause from a governmental stand-point. Trying to charge money to see the Bell will probably involve talks by the Philadelphia government with the Federal Government and PA state government and enough red tape that you could go hide in it. But, maybe it could work. It's a voluntary tax, which conservatives like, and, it helps build up money for things like libraries, which liberals like.
Get the Eagles to pay the 8 mil that they owe to the City. They suck anyway.

I'm not trying to trivialize the crisis, and I agree that cuts should be made. But, cutting libraries in a city that suffers from under-education as it is? Cutting cops in a city that reduced it's murder rate last year with numbers in the 200s? If these cuts need to be made, they need to be made, but all options should be put on the table beforehand.

Global Warming Is....Sprinting?

2009-02-15T13:31:00.003-05:00

According to Christopher Field, founding director of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology at Stanford University - "We are basically looking now at a future climate that's beyond anything we've considered seriously in climate model simulations."

*my butt cheeks squeeze together at an alarmingly fast rate*

Me: Come on, Washington Post article, I'm sure it's not all that bad.

Washington Post Article: "Unexpectedly large amounts of carbon dioxide are being released into the atmosphere as the result of "feedback loops" that are speeding up natural processes. Prominent among these, evidence indicates, is a cycle in which higher temperatures are beginning to melt the arctic permafrost, which could release hundreds of billions of tons of carbon and methane into the atmosphere, said several scientists on a panel at the meeting

The permafrost holds 1 trillion tons of carbon, and as much as 10 percent of that could be released this century, Field said. Melting permafrost also releases methane, which is 25 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

"It's a vicious cycle of feedback where warming causes the release of carbon from permafrost, which causes more warming, which causes more release from permafrost," Field said."

Me: So...do I pee my pants now, or latter?

Looking Forward: DCCC Chairman Doesn't Predict A Third Wave In 2010

2009-02-15T13:14:00.002-05:00

"Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen said Friday that despite the party’s recent success, Democratic candidates may face a tough environment in 2010."

That's fine. That's Democracy. Majorities do not hold forever and it is generally healthy to keep the guy in the Executive Branch on his toes. It would be really cool though if the Republican party could run some moderates 2010 so that the entire Republican side show wasn't just ran by the types of folks that wish to fail the President's legislation before they even see it.

59

2009-02-15T12:18:00.006-05:00

59. That's how many Democratic senators there would be if Al Franken is seated. And that is exactly what the GOP does not want right now.

Seeing what the Obama Administration did with the ARRA, with only 57 Democrats (technically 55 ( Ted Kennedy was too sick to vote) plus 2 independents), the prospect of having 59 Democrats and only having to snag one GOP moderate to pass legislation is something that Senate Republicans are throwing their money at in hopes that it will go away.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Minority Leader John Boehner are among those that have donated the maximum amount of money to Norm Coleman to ensure that he can keep up the legal battle with Franken for as long as possible. But, I thought conservatives believed that you can't just throw money at problems and expect them to go away. Wouldn't the most ideologically pure form of action be a huge push to give Norm Coleman's lawyers a tax-cut? (Before I get angry comments for over-simplification - I'm joking.)

For my part, I'm of many minds on this. On one hand, I am liberal and I like Al Franken. On the other hand, I do not want ANY administration to have a rubber stamp congress. But, still, on the OTHER hand (yes, I have more than two - just go with it), the Republicans were being very resistant to a piece of legislation that truly attempted to reach across the aisle. I mean, for God's sake, forty percent of the bill is tax-cuts. Republicans like tax-cuts! When Republicans had control, Democrats helped them push through bills that were 100% tax-cuts with no reach across the ideological aisle.

Ultimately, I'm not going to cry for the Republicans if they get tied down ideologically for a little while. But, I'm also no going to cry and pitch a huge hissy fit if Norm Coleman does end up getting seated.

As for the Pink Elephant in the middle of this post, Ted Kennedy:

I am from Massachusetts originally, and he has served my home state for decades. I have my personal issues with him and his family, but, he has done a lot for Massachusetts and liberals in general. He's a sort of godfather to the modern liberal ideology if you will. But, he should resign, immediately if not sooner.

He had a seizure at an inaugural celebration that many said is going to be a regular occurrence. His health caused him to miss what is sure to be one of the biggest votes in the current administration. He is no longer able to do his job as a Senator, and by all accounts, is not going to be able to do so. He should resign so somebody else can pick up from where he left off. Gov. Deval Patrick will pick somebody right for the job, I am sure.

And, on the off chance that he resigns and his health becomes exponentially better, he will be able to get his Senate seat back so fast it will make head spins. But, the point is, the likelihood of that is becoming less and less each day. He and whoever is advising him needs to be responsible enough to know that, and he should step down.

Reuters: Obama to lift ban on stem cell research soon

2009-02-15T11:58:00.002-05:00

Looks like the scientific community is going to have at least two years to try to prove the naysayers of stem cell research wrong.

I say two because the midterm elections are up in 2010 and there's, and on the off chance that the Republican's take back control of one of the houses of congress, there could be potential legislation to try to reverse Obama's lifting of the ban. Of course, Obama would veto any such reversal and the Republicans would need an unlikely supermajority in order to over-ride his veto.

Realistically, it's going to take an anti-stem cell research President in order to reverse the ban. So, two years is worse case scenario, and the scientists are going to have at least four. In my view, it is very likely that they could have more time than that, but, it is obviously way too freaking early to call the 2012 election.

ARRA Passes

2009-02-14T00:22:00.004-05:00

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has passed both houses of congress in its final $787bn form. The linked article calls it a major victory for the Obama administration. I don't know if I would go as far as to call this a major victory.

It's a major piece of legislation for this administration, and his administration will most certainly in large part on what effects this bill will have on the economy and the federal budget, but, to use the words major victory when you had to fight with your own party to get the bill passed, and the only Republicans that you could get on board were three moderate (all pro-choice, all voted for the Lilly Ledbetter Act) Republicans from the North East, one of whom is a former Democrat, doesn't seem appropiate.

On the other hand, Obama did manage to a get a $787bn dollar bill through during the first month of his administration. Which is really hard when you consider how slowly congress likes to move when left to its own devices. And, when you consider the fact that there really aren't a whole lot of moderates left in the GOP, getting any of them is deserving of respect.

So, okay, it's a victory. I just don't like the major part.

Judd Gregg Is A Political Jelly Fish With No Real Principle

2009-02-13T00:18:00.003-05:00

Judd Gregg withdraws his name from being considered for Commerce Secretary, citing 'irresolvable conflicts' with the Administration as his reason.

Wait just a motherfuckin' second.

Does this motherfucker really expect me to believe that the reason why he doesn't want to be in a position of great influence, a position in which he would have the President's ear, is the fact that he has a strong opinion that rivals that of the President's? Isn't that a great reason to TAKE the position that was offered? I mean, I would JUMP at the chance to have a conservative President's ear. But, maybe that's just my fault for actually believing in the things that I say.

The real reason why Judd Gregg is withdrawing his name is as slimy as it is simple - it puts him in an uncomfortable position politically. It would have meant that he would be constantly ping-ponging back in forth to being at odds with his fellow members of the Administration and being at odds with his fellow Republicans.

But, Obama quite clearly did not care about Gregg being at ideological odds with the rest of the Administration. When you're a liberal Democrat nominating a conservative Republican, it means that you are willing and expecting sharp differences of opinion.

Obama was brave enough to nominate someone that pissed off a good portion of his base, in the name bi-partisanship and finding whom he felt was the best guy for the job. Judd Gregg was not brave enough to accept the appointment.

Judd Gregg;s move was one of cowardice, and any individual with principle should be disgusted.

39

2009-02-11T22:21:00.003-05:00

39. That is the percentage of Americans, according to a recent Gallup Poll, that currently believe in Darwin's theory of evolution. While I find how low that number is to be shocking, even more shocking is the fact that a near equal 36% of us have no opinion either way.

Firstly, if there be any doubts, I am in the above mentioned 39%.

Secondly, I must address the 36% percent that I mentioned - how do you not have an opinion? I mean, it's a widely talked about, highly researched topic of which there are strong communities on both sides, and of which there is a very clear line between not believing in and believing in. How do you not have an opinion on that?

The Gallup poll indicates a correlation to education here.

NOTE: It is bad science, bad politics, and generally, a bad act of humanity to assume, imply or state that correlation is equal causation. A correlation is when two traits have shown a statistical overlap. Causation is when one trait causes another.

Polls can show correlation. Only detailed and objective study can prove causation.

As an example, let's say that a poll comes out and shows that 90% of children that play video games for more than three hours a day have a GPA of 2.0 or less. Many media organizations would launch on a huge rant about how the video games CAUSED the bad grades, citing the poll as proof.

The problem is, the only thing that the poll proved was that children who get bad grades play a lot of video games. Maybe the children who get bad grades include a high percentage of kids who have problems paying attention and find video games to be one of the few things that they can pay attention too. You can't say one way or another until you have a more in depth study.

It will never, ever, be the intention of this blog to mislead with numbers in this type of morally defunct intellectual shorthand.

Among those with High School or less in education, 52% have no opinion. The higher the education level, the more that number goes down:

Only 30% of those with some college answered no opinion, 26% who were college grads, and 16% with postgraduate degrees. I would like to see a study into why this is.

Henrietta Hughes

2009-02-11T02:00:00.001-05:00

Oh, goddamn it. This story just turns me into a sissy.

Raising The Bar For Forensic Science

2009-02-11T01:49:00.003-05:00

"...a draft National Academy of Sciences report expected to be released this month concludes that crime labs often use shoddy scientific practices that should be upgraded and standardized. The academy, whose members and associates include nearly 200 Nobel laureates, is one of the world’s leading scientific organizations.

The New York Times reported Thursday that people who have seen the report say it concludes that crime evidence is often analyzed by poorly trained technicians who exaggerate the accuracy of their practices in court. The report, which Congress initiated in 2005, recommends that a federal agency be created to guarantee the independence of forensics examinations, a field now dominated by law enforcement agencies."

As the article points out, in the light of cases like that of Brandon Mayfield, who was wrongly arrested in connection to a terrorist attack due to faulty fingerprint work, this is huge.

I must say that I'm a little pissed off by the inclusion of this sentence in the article:

"The advantage of standardized forensic examinations is that they could reduce wrongful arrests and convictions. "

And the disadvantages? I mean, reducing wrongful arrests and convictions seems like the whole damn point of standardized forensic examinations.

Hey Liberals! Pay Attention!

2009-02-11T01:28:00.003-05:00

Hey liberals!

You know who you are.

You're the people who, like me, voted for Barack Obama.

Who, like me, support government intervention in business in order to ensure fairness to the American worker.

Who, like me, believe in tolerance of other life styles and cultures.

Who, like me, see war as something that is neccesary but a tool to use sparingly.

Who, unlike me, supported Israel's conduct in the January War against Hamas, and who used phrases like "that can't be true" when I accused Israel of war crimes in that conflict. And I've got something to tell you:

Amnesty International is on MY side.

To quote the article:

"Irene Khan, the secretary general of Amnesty International, said that researchers had found compelling evidence of war crimes and other violations of international law committed during the three weeks of fighting that ended Jan. 18"

Also of note, of course, is the body of the article which is about Israel's blocking of most aid going to Gaza. Here's the facts as the UN sees it:

1. It is trying to send relief to over 1 million people in Gaza daily.

2. Israel is only allowing one border crossing to open.

3. As a result, of no. 2, aid is only getting through to 30,000 people a day.

Hey liberals! You like the UN, don't ya? You like Amnesty International, don't ya?

Why don't you try listening to those two organizations in regards to the Israli-Palestinian conflict? Maybe we might actually be able to move forward with peace process if you, or at least somebody, did.

Reuters: Israeli divisions will make peacemaking harder

2009-02-11T01:22:00.002-05:00

If the title makes you sigh in hopelessness and frustration, what you should take to heart is this bit of truth that appears at the end of the article:

"You cannot change intra-Palestinian politics without a serious peace process that reinforces moderates. If you cannot satisfy the national aspiration of Palestinians soon, I think Hamas will be reinforced,"

CNN.com: Man arrested with rifle said he had delivery for Obama

2009-02-11T01:10:00.002-05:00

I'm ill that the threats against our new President are exponentially greater than that of any other President in recent memory. I'm very glad, however, that the police are doing their job and all of the people that have attempted to hurt Mr. Obama have been brought to justice.

In the future (be it 2012 or 2016) when President Obama is Ex-President Obama, the one thing I will be glad to be rid of is this constent heart burn that comes, at no fault of his own, from Obama being President.

This Is Where Economics Gets Confusing For Me

2009-02-11T01:01:00.003-05:00

So, the dollar is rising. That's a good thing, right? I mean, the currency being strong should be a good thing. But, the linked articles headline reads "Dollar, Yen Gain a Second Day on Concern U.S. Plan Insufficient" and the opening paragraph reads:

"The dollar and the yen rose for a second day against the euro on concern the U.S. government’s bank-rescue plan will fail to revive lending, boosting demand for the two currencies as a haven."

So...the dollar rose, which is a good thing, but, because there is demand for the currency (still a good thing) because investors feel like the Geithner hasn't come up with a strong plan to fix lending (bad thing).

I feel like an English speaking Blind man attempting to read French braille. Will somebody please please please explain to me why fear that the market will be fixed leads to a rise in the value of our currency?

Iran Declares Readiness To Talk

2009-02-10T20:59:00.004-05:00

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sent a signal yesterday that he is willing to talk to the US. This is going to be the beginning of a very long, often frustrating, often tedious journey, but, the fact that we Ahmadinejad saying things like "The Iranian people are ready to hold talks" is a step in the right direction.

The fact that Ahmadinejad ended that sentence with "but talks in a a fair atmosphere with mutual respect." signals that things are not going to be easy. But, we should have hope from that statement because he said mutual respect.

But, remember that this announcement came at a prade celebrating the overthrow of an American backed leader, and that the parade itself included 'death to America' signs, burning of American flags, and missles. In short, there is a metric ton of work to be done here, and I would not dare try to understate that.

But, a good first step is a good first step.

Truth Commision

2009-02-10T01:44:00.003-05:00

What's a Truth Commission? It's a proposed idea by Vt. Senator Patrick Leahy to "get to the bottom of what happened" in the Bush Administration. This seems reasonable to me, under the circumstances. Arlen Specter disagrees:

"If every administration started to re-examine what every prior administration did, there would be no end to it. This is not Latin America,"

Specter has a point in terms of setting a precedent, but, shouldn't there be a special exception in this case? Man, it would really be nice if we had a way of holding our leaders accountable while they were still in office so we wouldn't have to be stuck in such a moral quandry?

*the Constitution on my desk barks at me*

What was that, Constitution?

Oh, the Senate DOES have the power to investigate the executive branch? It's called the power of impeachment, you say?

Wow, it sure would have been really nice if they had done something like that when it was relevant.

Drugs Are Found To Block HIV in Monkeys

2009-02-10T01:32:00.002-05:00

"Two experiments in monkeys showed that antiretroviral (ARV) drugs, given by mouth or by vaginal gel, were highly effective in blocking infection by the virus that causes AIDS.

A third study, in 3,100 women in the United States and Africa, showed a small amount of protection from a vaginal gel that acts by binding up the AIDS virus and preventing it from invading cells."

If you follow AIDS research closely, you already know that many scientists trying to come up with an AIDS vaccine are begining to come to the conclusion that the very nature of the disease makes it vaccine proof.

It appears that other methods need to be used if we stand a chance of knocking this things back. These stuides are a good jump in a good direction.

Chris Brown: Singer, Dancer...and Douchebag?

2009-02-10T01:19:00.004-05:00

I try not to get into the celebrity bullshit too much, because, frankly, I don't care about who is fucking who, who is buying what or much of the other pointless drivel that relates to celebrities' personal lives. But, right now, this is about who's beating who.

According to allegations made by Chris Brown's girlfriend Rihanna, it is Chris beating her. The reason why I bring this up is because cases like this represent the real tear in the moral fabric of our celebrities and our most powerful. The moral tear is not as a result of embracing sex, homosexuality, or any of the other things that conservative critics say is damaging Hollywood.

The true moral tear is when celebrities are allowed to act in a disgusting fashion and get away with it. *cough* Michael Jackson *cough* I want to follow this case, because, I want their to be a full investigation in this matter, and, if Mr. Brown is in fact guilty, I want him punished to the full extent of the law, in a manner completely equal to his non-celebrity counter parts. If this is done, and I doubt it will be, it will send a clear message that celebrity does not give one carte blanche.

Court Orders California To Cut Prision Population

2009-02-10T00:49:00.003-05:00

55,000. That is the number of inmates that the California prison must reduce its prison system by, in order to provide a constitutional level of medical and mental health care, according to a tentative ruling by a three-judge federal panel.

The article goes on to say:

"Relying on expert testimony, the court ruled that the California prison system, the nation’s largest with more than 150,000 inmates, could reduce its population by shortening sentences, diverting nonviolent felons to county programs, giving inmates good behavior credits toward early release, and reforming parole, which they said would have no adverse impact on public safety. "

Notice something missing from the proposed list of ways to reform the system?

I'll give you a second.

Give up?

A close and rigorous look at California's three strikes laws. In light of this decision, the question needs to be raised as to whether the three strikes laws, which require mandatory minimum sentences of 25 to life on a criminals third offense - even if that offense is non-violent - are overcrowding the prison system.

I'm not going to say that I have a scientific study to link you too that proves that the three strikes laws of California are responsible for the current situation, because, I do not. I'm simply saying that it is possible, and the question needs to be asked, and cases need to be examined to find out if this is the case. If it is, a reform is in order.

Beyond that though, I have another thing in this article that it is of note. It is the fact, that, according to this federal panel, there is such a thing as a constitutional level of medical and mental health care to an inmate. Put that fact up to the conservative outcry against broad-range health coverage for citizens of this country and see if the world makes any sense to you.

As a society we can come off as a bit schizophrenic at times. When we ask for all of our citizens to have a viable chance at health care coverage, we are given the boogie-man of freeloaders, and are told that we must pull ourselves up by our bootstraps. With the same breath, we then turn around and see that criminals are given the right to free health care at our expense. I'm no fan of laziness myself, but it seems to be a more forgivable sin than murder, or rape, or robbery, or a number of other things that could put one in prison.

I'm not trying to say that inmates shouldn't get health coverage. I'm just saying that as a law abiding citizen, I should be entitled to the same rights as a criminal. It is, after all, my tax dollars paying for both things.

The District

2009-02-09T02:37:00.002-05:00

Ever wonder what the first 100 days of the Obama Administration would look like if they were a reality show on MTV? No? Well, me neither. But, Newsweek answered that un-asked question anyway. It's actually pretty funny.

Extraordinary Rendition Case

2009-02-09T00:00:00.002-05:00

We are about to see where the Obama team stands on torture. Let us hope that they pass this test.

Avigdor Lieberman Gains Ground In Israeli Election

2009-02-08T23:53:00.002-05:00

Avigdor Lieberman and his hardline Yisrael Beitenu (Israel Is Our Home) Party is gaining ground in pols for the Israeli election by taking away the third place slot from the Left-Wing Labor Party. As someone that is for peace in the region, I must borrow a phrase from our Jewish friends:

Oy, vei.

The Democrats Are Attacking Religion?

2009-02-08T23:15:00.003-05:00

I know I'm a few days late on this, but I just ran across this video of Senator Demint stating that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan discriminates against religion. The Senator states that the plan will ban any religous service in any building which uses the plan money. That apears not to be the case when actually looking at the language of the bill, that ultra-conservative website CNSNews quotes as it calls the language discriminatory:

According to the provision, none of funds of the $6 billion allotted to the renovation, modernization, or repair of college buildings may be used for facilities “(i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or school department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission.”

I have to join Christian Dem in NC in saying: Huh? How is not allowing $6bn in funds used from one particular bill for buildings used for secterian instruction, religious worship, or school department of divinity discriminatory?

If you take a look at the interview with Demint, you would think, because he says it, that once the money is used, that there will absolutely no prayer meetings allowed in college dorms that have used the money. This is straight up fear tactics and bullshit.

The actual language of the bill is just looking to not provide this particular $6bn to college churches. The Administration has absolutely no problem giving funding to religious organizations. It is just this $6bn dollars that it wishes to not give to renovate churches. To try to twist otherwise, is crazy.

Australia On Fire

2009-02-08T22:44:00.000-05:00

"This is of a level of horror that few of us anticipated. There are no words to describe it other than mass murder," Rudd told Australian television.

Aghanistan Is Tougher Than Iraq

2009-02-08T22:40:00.002-05:00

Great. We have a consensus between the generals on the ground and the officials in the new Administration - the conflict in Afghanistan is tougher than in Iraq.

Website To Watch: PolitiFact

2009-02-08T22:29:00.003-05:00

PolitiFact is my new favorite website. It is dedicated to holding our leaders accountable and to question the truthfulness of the things that they say. The website included the ongoing truth-o-metet, and the Obameter.

On the portion for the Obameter it says:

"I want you to hold your government accountable. I want you to hold me accountable." - Barack Obama

"Okay, we will." - PolitiFact

The Obameter labels Obamas promises in the following catagories: Promise Kept, Compromise, Promise Broken, Stalled, In The Works, and No Action.

It is a great tool and we should all use it.

The S Word

2009-02-08T18:16:00.003-05:00

Richard Shelby had this to say about the ARRA:

"We're going down a road where it's unchartered. We're going down a road to disaster. We've never seen this kind of spending - ever. And there's a lot more to come, There's got to be some other way better than what we're doing. Not the socialist way, but to try and get our free market working again."

And there it is, that word again: socialism.

Shelby is just another voice in the current conservative chorus to dismiss the ARRA and other economic policy endorsed by Obama as being 'socialism'. We heard it from John McCain and Sarah Palin on the campaign trail. And know we're hearing it from Shelby, and others.

What the rhetoric has always been missing is an idea of what socialism actually is. Government spending does not equal socialism. Liberalism does not equal socialism.

Socialism is about economic equality in the ultimate sense - it wishes to make everyone have the exact same finicial and social outcomes through direct government intervention. It wishes to make the government the sole producer of all goods.

Liberalism is about economic equality by providing a more level playing field.

The liberal takes a look at a world where all to often people are set back from reaching their full potential for a number of reasons - race, gender, religion, or the economic circumstance to which an individual is born - and sees government as being able to inact programs that melt away these harsh truths.

The socialist sees an inner-city youth selling drugs and killing people and says that at the root of these problems lies capitalism. The liberal sees the same youth and says that at the root of these problems lies a complex mix of torid histories that must be corrected primarily through government intervention.

The liberal does not wish to see a country or a world where everything is owned by the public as the socialist does. The liberal likes the fundemental idea of capitialism - that harder work and smart investing should yield better circumstances. We simply think that the worst circumstances shouldn't be as bad as they are.

The socialist wishes to get rid of the top. The liberal wishes to raise the bottom. Both of those views put us at odds with the conservatives, but that does not mean that we are the same.

Just as conservatives may sound the same as libetarians when discussing certain specific policies that relate to an on-going issue, such as gun control. If you get a conservative and a libetarian talking about the assault weapons ban, you may indeed get similar rhetoric about the Second Amendment and how the ban attacked a constitutional right to bare arms. What you may not here however, is that the conservative is in favor of other restrictions on guns, such as a gun licenses, while the libetarian vehemently opposes them on Second Amendment grounds.

Just as a libetarian platform on gun rights would have a very different look, feel and idealogy than a conservative platform on gun rights, the same is true for a socialist platform on economic recovery and a liberal platform on economic recovery.

If the socialists were really the ones writing this bill, you would see a broad-sweeping salary cap on all citizens. You would see it in the form of executive orders and a back-breaking tax of over 80% on the richest of us. You would see these taxes going to making sure all health care is absolutely free, that corporations are dissolved or melted directly into the government, that power plants are owned directly by the workers, and that it would be illegal to start a new corporation.

That's not what you're seeing in this bill. You are seeing a bill that is meant to ultimately strengthen the ideas of consumerism and capitalism by strengthening the poor and the middle class through government spending and targeted tax cuts. The ARRA is meant to ensure that more Americans are starting businesses so that more jobs are created and that people that are out of work can find work to reach their full potential.

It is completely disingenious to call these ideas socialist in nature, and it shows that the people saying these things have never talked to a socialist. Anyone who describes themselves at a socialist would call my ideas - those of economic equality through equal oppurtunity rather than equal results - naive.

To my conservative friends, I simply ask for you to be idealogically honest. To say that you disagree with government spending because you don't feel that it will stimulate the economy. Many have expressed those views in that language, and, while I disagree with them, I can at least say that they understand what is trying to be done with the ARRA. Those like Mr Shelby, who fling the S word around as a way of scarring people, are simply being dishonest and are not providing anything to the debate but vitriol, something that we really do not need right now.

Obama To Hold Press Confrence

2009-02-08T17:04:00.002-05:00

President Obama will be holding a prime time press confrence tomorrow. In it, Mr. Obama will be answering questions, unlike, y'know, that whole meet and greet thing.

I hope that the ARRA will not completely dominate the press confrence, and that there will be some time to discuss the issue presented during the meet and greet of lobbyists in the Obama White House.

As for the entire idea of a 'meet and greet' - I don't think that it is a positive thing for the President to try to be friends with the White House Press Corps. The media has a responsibility to report honestly on what happens in the White House and should not be distracted by the President 'dropping by to say hi'. The entire concept is very sleazy and I hope the Administration will not repeat the error.

Stimulus: The Journey Continues

2009-02-08T15:55:00.002-05:00

As the International Herald Tribune puts it, Obama 'rolls out his big guns on economy'. These so called 'big guns' are refering to a PR blits to get support from the American people so the American people will put the preasure on Congress to pass the plan.

The guns themselves? Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Lawrence Summers (director of President Barack Obama's National Economic Council) and, of course, Barack Obama himself.

It is crazy to me that we need these kinds of guns to get something like this passed. Even crazier is the fact that Lindsey Graham and his ilk are telling the Senate to slow down in the passage of this bill.

Where was this Lindsey Graham during the passage of the PATRIOT act which was introduced as a House bill on October 23, 2001, passed the house on October 24, 2001, Passed the Senate on October 25th, 2001, and signed into law on October 26, 2001?

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, in contrast, was introduced in the Senate on January 6, 2009. At this time it is Febuary 8th. The bill has already recieved 8.5 times more time in the Senate for the debate than the entire gestation period of the PATRIOT Act from concepcion to birth.

Consdier THAT when you hear about our Republican friends complaining about taking it slow.

Darfur, Continued

2009-02-07T01:59:00.004-05:00

Question: Will Obama act to end crisis in Darfur?

Answer: Of course, but not before he handles the economy and focuses attention on the Middle East for a while. Am I happy with that being the reality of the situation? No. But, fact of the matter is, that we are going to be unable to help Darfur if we do not fix the econoic crisis first.

This shouldn't even be an issue.

We should have already gone in there under the Bush Administration by now. Because of incompitence, however, that will have to be delayed/

Gaza

2009-02-07T01:51:00.002-05:00

Why is Israel deporting activists who are trying to give toys, food and medicine to needy Palestinians?

598,000

2009-02-07T01:44:00.001-05:00

598,000. That, in case you were wondring, is the number of jobs that America lost last month. And that, my friends, is why the Administration has two very solid legs to stand on when it says that we cannot delay in stimulus.

Following Mayfield

2009-02-07T01:39:00.002-05:00

"It really is important," he said Thursday morning outside Portland's Pioneer Courthouse. "I think the people who follow (this case) realize it's a whittling away of our civil liberties."

Brandon Mayfield is standing up to repeal unjust policy while too many of us are acting like the PATRIOT act disappeared on November 4. Cheers sir!

Thank You Subway

2009-02-07T01:23:00.002-05:00

While USA Swimming suspends him, Kellogg nulifies deals with him and the pundit class chastizes him, Michael Phelps still has friends. And those friends are named Subway.

In a statement Subway said "Like most Americans, and like Michael Phelps himself, we were disappointed in his behavior. Also like most Americans, we accept his apology. Moving forward, he remains in our plans."

Subway probably realized that pot smokers eat there products and a lot of us really do not give a hoot if Phelps is smoking pot or not.

I'm Disappointed With Myself For Writing About This

2009-02-07T01:11:00.002-05:00

Screw Nadya Suleman for irresponsibly having fourteen children when she has no way of taking care of them.

Screw her so-called 'friend' that donated the sperm for these rediculous acts of judgement.

Screw her doctor for going through with the procedure even though he knew that she had no way of taking care of them.

Screw the media for blowing this story up to gigantic proportions and leading us to believe that this is the biggest problem in the world.

But, ultimately, FUCK us for paying attention.

Toe To Toe

2009-02-07T00:52:00.003-05:00

Obama gave his most partisan speech as President Thursday, telling fellow Democrats that he's sick of hearing that the stimulus bill isn't a stimulus bill but rather a spending bill - "What do they think stimulus is? That's the whole point."

McCain fired back on the Senate floor Friday: “The whole point, Mr. President, is to enact tax cuts and spending measures that truly stimulate the economy...There are billions and tens of billions of dollars in this bill which will have no effect within three, four, five or more years, or ever. Or ever.”

And here I sound catch myself sounding like a fucking sports commentator because I happen to be unlucky enough to be entranced with the singal most vile form of mental professional wrestling - politics. Both sides are saying that they are perfectly willing to negotiate, just so long as the other guys see their side of it.

That being said, at the risk of sounding like a partisan hack, I'm ultimately on the Democrats side here. We really did try the whole tax-cuts-to-stimulate-the-economy thing for around eight years or so, and wound up here anyway. And, the Democrats have been pretty diplomatic with this whole stimulus package, not just in terms of listening to GOP spending warnings, but, also in terms of offering tax cuts.

The bill as it currently stands is about $780bn, and, if we are to take John Kerry at his word (in a perfect world, I'd rather not), the bill is now about 42% tax cuts. But, the rhetoric we're hearing from the GOP would not only make you think that there isn't one single tax cut in the whole damn bill, it would make you think that the entire bill could be renamed the "Abortions, Stem Cell Research, and Gay Marriages for Everybody Act".

Fact is, John McCain and his peers are acting like the Democrats aren't willing to make compromises, but, in point of fact, they have been. That is why, while I am ultimately disappointed in the theatrics from both sides, I have to go with the Dems on this. To go back to Playground Law, the GOP did, in fact, start it.

Loopholes

2009-02-06T22:27:00.003-05:00

So, I praised Obama for setting caps on executive pay to those comapnies that have recieved TARP money. I can't say that I'm surprised that there are loopholes, however.

If you are surprised by that fact, then maybe you should go take a nap. Fact is, no one executive order, bill, or senate vote will be able to stop the greedy from being greedy. The caps is a good start, however. It just needs to be backed by strong oversight from the Timothy Geithner and the Treasury Department, and good old fashioned public embarassment when the companies try to use the loopholes stated in the linked article.

No one ever said this was going to be easy....

Never A Truer Word

2009-02-06T01:24:00.000-05:00

"In recent days, there have been misguided criticisms of this plan that echo the failed theories that helped lead us into this crisis -- the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems; that we can meet our enormous tests with half-steps and piecemeal measures; that we can ignore fundamental challenges such as energy independence and the high cost of health care and still expect our economy and our country to thrive. "

Really?

2009-02-06T01:20:00.001-05:00

Yes we can... bicker over copyright, even when discussing a fuckin' campaign poster.

Trouble In Congo

2009-02-06T01:15:00.001-05:00

“The Rwandans who will attack us will die.”

Arrest Bashir

2009-02-06T01:07:00.002-05:00

"A senior Sudanese diplomat says the safety of United Nations' peacekeepers in his country will not be in jeopardy, if the International Criminal Court, or ICC, grants a request for an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir. A decision from the pre-trial judges at The Hague is expected later this month."

Let's hope that The Hague knows what the fuck they're doing. Bashir should be arrested. You should not be able to let genocide carry on in your country, and then dance when told to stop, and then expect to have any kind of freedom.

Journalists Booted Out Of Sudan

2009-02-06T01:00:00.001-05:00

Canada condemns journalists expulsion from Sudan. Glad to see Canada angry, and for the rght reasons.

People To Watch: Brandon Mayfield

2009-02-06T00:26:00.002-05:00

Brandon Mayfield was "Wrongly accused of having participated in the Madrid train bombings of 2004 that killed 191 people, the Portland attorney sued the government for their mistake. In 2006, he got an apology — and a $2 million settlement."

"Two years later, he's still in court, hoping to overturn two pillars of the USA Patriot Act that ensnared him years earlier."

Watch this case carefully. It took a short amount of time to put the PATRIOT Act on the books, but, it is going to take a slow and methodical series of lawsuits and new laws to repal it.

For Phelps Sake

2009-02-05T23:39:00.003-05:00

So, Usa Swimming has decided to suspend Michael Phelps for three months due to the whole picture-of-him-smoking pot controversy.

The linked article has two polling question in it. The first asks whether his suspension is fair. The second asks if children should still look up to him as a role model. To the first I say no.

As for the second:

How he chooses to pass the time between setting world records in his sport shouldn't be of much concern to anybody when those activites are non-violent and affect nobody else in any concievable way.

I mean, let's say he was pushing old ladies down the stairs, or, beating his girlfriend. It would be obvious in that case that Phelps is an awful human being, should be punished to the fullest extent of the law, and banned from his sport. But, all we have is a picture of him relaxing with a plant that he finds enjoyable to smoke.

Even if you think that smoking pot should remain a crime, it is still a non-violent one. No one would be suspending Michael Phelps if he was caught jay-walking, driving without a seatbelt, speeding, or failing to pay a parking ticket. Now seems a good time as any to point out that the first three things on the list claim many more lives than pot has, and thus, would be of more harm to youth if they tried to emulate him doing those things.

I don't think kids should smoke pot. I don't think they should drink either. If Phelps was caught getting wasted, how many people would be suspending him now?

My point is, that if you think for a second that a guy smoking marijuana is one of the worst things that children can see, I seriously question your priorities.

Faith-based Ambivilance

2009-02-05T21:06:00.003-05:00

Obama signed an executive order to expand US funding to faith-based organizations that provide social services.

And now, I become a frenzy of fucking ambivilance:

On one hand, I have had experiences that make me very weary of handing religious groups money.

When I was AmeriCorps*NCCC and hurricane Katrina came, my team was sent to a warehouse down in New Iberia, Louisiana which sorted through the goods donated from across the country. Our goal was to take the sundry donations (people gave everything from food to clothes to DVDs) and turn them into packages that would be of good use to the many shelters and food banks down there.

The warehouse was ran by a group of Seventh Day Adventists, most of whom had jobs and put in vacation time so that they could come down and help. They were commited, hard working, and friendly.

But, there was another side. We had an engaged couple who was with us for nearly all of the three weeks we were stationed there. They didn't take a lot of breaks like most people did and continued to stick around when we were strapped for volunteers. The guy was a preacher's son. The girl, a nonbeliever.

Putting in time that they were not obligated to put in, they wanted something very simple as an engaged couple - to sleep in the same bed. The director the Seventh Day Adventists appointed to run the warehouse wanted proof that they were in fact engaged. They showed the ring. Not good enough, he said. "Well, what do you want" they asked. Apparently the answer was for them to share seperate beds.

Still wanting to help out and willing to compromise, the couple began to set up a tent outside the warehouse so that they were not violating the warehouse rules. The director say this and immediately burst into the warehouse shouting "They're co-habitating out there! Co-habitation is not allowed!"

They were told that it was seperate beds if they were anywhere near the warehouse, or they would have to leave altogether. After being put through the ringer, they chose the latter, and the warehouse lost something that it desperately needed at the time - people.

I was filled with an unrelenting disgust knowing that we - all of us - were helping to pay for such lunancy with our tax dollars. You see, this was a project that was partly funded by FEMA, and the warehouse itself was the property of the state of Louisiana. To me, this action not only violated the fundemental principle of the seperation of church & state, but, also proved to be counterproductive to our goals of providing relief to the people effected by the flooding. Not only did we loose those two people, but, it also caused me and my fellow Corps Members to begin to harbor resentment for our current stewards.

But, on the other hand, recognizing that not many people really want to help our world right now, it is foolish to turn away or put down any group that is willing to help. The Seventh Day Adventists were crazy, but, unlike many of the people reading this post, they were willing to take time off of work to help those that were hurt by disaster.

In this selfish world, any act of selflessness needs to be rewarded and encouraged, not only by our government, but, by all of us. But, without direct and clear government oversight to these groups activities, the whole things falls to hell. If Obama wants to expand the initiative started by Bush in the name of helping people, I can't really argue with that. But, if he continues the policy of the previous administation that said that it was okay to hand the keys to the candy shop without any restriction of activities and practices, than I am going to have to call foul.

They'll Have To Get By With 500k

2009-02-04T23:21:00.003-05:00

Obama set restrictions on companies recieving TARP funds. The restrictions put a salary cap of $500,000 on companies recieving money from the government.

While there may be some that find the restrictions to be unreasonable, Obama hit the nail right on the head when he said people were sick and tired of companies comming "hat in hand when they were in trouble, even as they paid themselves customary lavish bonuses."

This is less about the actual dollars and cents of the matter than it is about setting the right tone. The tone I believe that the administration is trying to set here is one that says "we're bailing out your companies because our economy rests on them, not because we feel bad for you not being able to add a new golden vase to the living room of your second beach home".

But, when you do get down to the dollars issue, the $18bn dollars used to give Wall Street bonuses last year could have provided a little over half the revenue to fully plan the SCHIP bill Obama has recently signed into law.

Expanded Health Care For Kids

2009-02-04T22:37:00.000-05:00

Today, Obama signed a bill to expand the SCHIP program, a health care program for children. The bill will move to cover 4 million more children than are currently covered under the plan. That would extend the total number to 11 million, and would reduce the number of unindured children by about half over the next 4 1/2 years.

Is there a price tag? Yes. $33bn. Is there a plan to pay for it? Mostly. According to the linked article, most of the money will be acquired through raising the federal cigarette tax from 61 cents to $1 a pack.

I say mostly because that's what the article says. How much is mostly and where's the rest of the money comming from? I'll have to read the bill to answer those questions and I'll refrain from making guesses.

I will say, that since children's health care is a huge burden on families, this is a good measure to reduce the strain on members of the lower class. Why is the government worried about the lower class right now?

1. This is obviously a long standing Democratic issue.

2. We're paying for these kids one way or another. It's either through direct government intervention or through our premiums when they go to the ER.

3. Making the lower class not so low makes it easier for members of the lower class to eventually join the middle class, and, that does, in fact, strengthen the economy.

They will obviously have to wait on the larger goal of covering all citizens. But, as Obama said himself, this is a down payment.

I Hate Mitt Romney (And You Should Too)

2009-01-31T00:07:00.000-05:00

Today, Mitt "I hate him so much its hard to type right now" Romney criticized Barack Obama on abortion, saying that he answers to "the most extreme wing of the abortion lobby".

Now, besides the fact that that is simply not true, this statement really wouldn't bother me that much if it came from John McCain, any of the Bushes, Ron Paul, Bobby Jindal, or most other pro-life politicians. It wouldn't bother me, because I know that they actually disagree with the administration on the issue of abortion, and, while I disagree with their disagreement, I will never deny anyone the right to speak their mind. That's democracy and freedom of expression.

Anything Romney says is pure fuckin' politics in its most cynical, petulant and disgusting form. As the article that I have linked to rightly points out "Romney campaigned for governor of Democratic-leaning Massachusetts as a supporter of abortion rights — only to switch sides on that issue in time for the GOP presidential race."

But, I don't think that that statement properly paints Romney in the harsh super-villian tones to which his character truly belongs.

For my part, I lived in Massachusetts when Romney was elected governor, and, while I was too young to vote at the time, I most likely would have voted for him in that race. In a lot of ways Massachusetts is really a one party state - every single federal Represenative and Senator is a Democrat, and the Democrats hold a strong super-majority in the State House and Senate - and having Republican governors seemed like a good idea to a lot of us, as a way to provide some level of balance to the equation.

Romney ran as a typical Massachusetts Republican - a fiscal moderate who was going to help spend-crazy Democrats keep the budget in check, and who wasn't going to, despite his own personal beliefs, disrupt the status quo of a socially liberal state on such issues as abortion. The people of Massachusetts were familiar with the man from his 1994 campaign for Senator. He ran against a Kennedy in Massachusetts, so, of course, he lost, but it was well remembered and archieved that he said this when asked "If abortion is morally wrong, aren't you responsible for discouraging it?":

"One of the great things about our nation... is that we're each entitled to have strong personal beliefs, and we encourage other people to do the same. But as a nation, we recognize the right of all people to believe as they want and not to impose our beliefs on other people. I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years, that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law, and the right of a woman to make that choice, and my personal beliefs, like the personal beliefs of other people, should not be brought into a political campaign." (watch video)

And, when he was governor, Romney kept those principals - he never once proposed legislation to put restrictions on abortion in Massachusetts. Sure, he tried to get the death penalty to be re-instated, but, nobody could call Mitt Romney a true conservative with a straight face. We liked that about Romney - that's why he was elected.

And then came the 2004 presidential election. And, all of a sudden, Romney, a liberal Republican who got elected in one of the most left-wing states in the country, was a tow-the-party-line conservative that was bad mouthing Kerry and praising George Bush across the country. This is when my hatred for Romney began. This sort of behavior smelled of political tone-deafness to me at first - I thought: it is politcally stupid to bad mouth a favorite son from a state that YOU are the governor of.

But, time went by, and I began to think about it: Romney wasn't interested in running for re-election in Massachusetts. He was setting up a bid to run for president in 2008. Sure enough, when 2008 came around, Mr. Romney predictably ran for his party's nomination for president after four years of trying to shake of his liberal past.

His position on abortion that he heald since 1970? Conveniently dissolved by the time he ran for president. Think about that. A nuanced politcal belief that he - if we are to take him at his word - has heald for nearly half of his life, changed on a dime RIGHT BEFORE a series of elections to be the the head of his pro-life party. This bears the awful stench of hardlined political oppurtunism. I'm not saying that it is impossible to change your belief on complex issues throughout your life. I am saying, that if we look at the specific changes to Romney's beliefs, there is a clear path to the heart of the Republican base that simply has no unified narrative other than a major political election.

And now, while there is a major black hole in Republican leadership, Mitt Romney is at it again, trying to convince the Republican base that he's the man to stand up to Obama in 2012 by invoking the GOP chestnut of saying that even if the administration "will say nothing on behalf of the child waiting to be born, we must take the side of life,".

And while people of all political stripes are questioning the legality of Gitmo, while Judge Crawford says that we have tortured, while John McCain himself says he would have closed Gitmo as well, Romney is asking the hardcore partisan questions of "Will he send them to nations that will release them to kill Americans? Or will he send them to U.S. prisons to infect our own criminal population?"

It is obvious what he is doing here. He is trying to rally the Republican base, which, since the Republicans are not very popular or powerful right now, is something that's reserved for someone that is trying to gain the GOP nomination for President.

Conservatives, while I do not share their political beliefs, must understand that this man is not a man of any principal whatsoever. They must also understand, that in a political climate where there is very little GOP support from minorities, and where the next Republican candidate for President will be running against a black man , having a guy who, as an adult, was a part of the Mormon church when it was an openly rascist organization, and who protested against the sit-ins of the 60s (also as an adult) is an awful idea.

Hate Mitt Romney. Hate everything about the man. Hate his cynical, un-principaled, valueless political career and every slithering, slimy, monster of a policy that it has produced. Do it for your family. Do it for your country. This is something that all people, everywhere, should be able to agree upon.

Waste On Wall Street

2009-01-30T09:40:00.000-05:00

Obama struck the right tone yesterday when he gave Wall Street executives a stern tounge lashing for having given themselves some $18bn dollars in bonuses with taxpayer money.

It is of course refreshing to hear the President call these jerks out on the carpet, but, what's he gonna do after that?

I mean, he had a meeting with CEOs just the other day to discuss his Bail Out, why didn't he call them on the carpet then? But, beyond that, what is he prepared to do policy-wise? He's President now. He can start trying to do what Chris Dodd is trying to do - take back the bonuses.

It's great that he'll criticize them publicly, but, words not backed with decisive action are pretty meaningless.

My point? Liberals need to jump off this guy's dick for a minute and see what he's actually prepared to slap the CEOs with.