30 May 2005

NIN

A rare weekend update - it's sunny outside, I've been drunk for five straight days, and am going to the Nationals game today to celebrate and memorialize our fallen heroes. But I thought you'd all like to see what has got me so excited at the moment. I never realized just how much I liked Trent Reznor and NIN. I mean, sure, "I want to fuck you like an animal" is a great line, and they've had some other good, fucked up songs. But this is awesome.
Nine Inch Nails dropped out of the MTV Movie Awards after clashing with the network over an image of President Bush the band planned as a performance backdrop.

The Bush image was to accompany the song "The Hand That Feeds," which obliquely criticizes the Iraq war. It includes the lyrics: "What if this whole crusade's a charade / And behind it all there's a price to be paid / For the blood on which we dine / Justified in the name of the holy and the divine."


Good for Reznor to say fuck you to MTV. If they want to keep the show out of the political realm that's fine, but they shouldn't expect everyone to play along with their rules.

The Foo Fighters will perform in place of the Trent Reznor-led band at the awards being taped June 4 in Los Angeles.


What's funny about that is that the Foo's performed during the Vote for Change tour.

And showing just how big his balls are:
Reznor said in a statement posted on the band's Web site Thursday that the image of the president would have been unaltered and "straightforward."

"Apparently, the image of our president is as offensive to MTV as it is to me," he said.


If you're curious, here's the entirety of the offensive lyrics.


you're keeping in step
in the line
got your chin held high and you feel just fine
because you do
what you're told
but inside your heart it is black and it's hollow and it's cold

just how deep do you believe?
will you bite the hand that feeds?
will you chew until it bleeds?
can you get up off your knees?
are you brave enough to see?
do you want to change it?

what if this whole crusade's
a charade
and behind it all there's a price to be paid
for the blood
on which we dine
justified in the name of the holy and the divine

just how deep do you believe?
will you bite the hand that feeds?
will you chew until it bleeds?
can you get up off your knees?
are you brave enough to see?
do you want to change it?

so naive
to keep holding on to what I want to believe
i can see
but i keep holding on and on and on and on

will you bite the hand that feeds you?
will you stay down on your knees?


Good stuff.

27 May 2005

Thune working against the Republican party?

From the Argus Leader

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said Thursday that he would vote against the nomination of John Bolton to be ambassador to the United Nations, hinting his vote is a protest against the Pentagon's recommendation to close Ellsworth Air Force Base.

But he did support his party on the vote that mattered most Thursday.

...

Thune said Thursday that saving Ellsworth is "inseparable from my work" in the Senate.

"It is part of the fabric of every day of our agenda and the things we are trying to accomplish here," Thune said Thursday. "It's something that has become a great preoccupation of mine now."

Asked whether his opposition to Bolton was because of his qualifications or the base-closing plan, Thune said dryly: "I'm concerned about our diplomatic posture as a nation, and I'm concerned about our defensive posture. These issues are not unrelated."


It's funny that he claims politics aren't involved in the base closure issue, yet he feels the need to get back at Bush politically -- if it had nothing to do with politics, why would he have to get back at Bush at all? Clearly those thousands of jobs that are being lost in SD due to a potential base closing weren't necessary, John. You fucking douchebag.

Harkin is awesome

From the Globe Gazette

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said Thursday that President George W. Bush's opposition to expanded federal support for stem cell research merely delays the inevitable — a point he made with an example from the civil-rights struggle.

Bush is "sort of our modern-day George Wallace, standing in the schoolhouse door," Harkin said in a conference call with reporters.

Wallace was the governor of Alabama who famously stood in the door of the University of Alabama in an attempt to stop two black students from registering.

"The fact is, that the walls of segregation were going to come tumbling down, we were going to move ahead with integration, and no matter what George Wallace did, it was going to happen. And I think it's the same way with President Bush," Harkin said.


Cheers to Harkin for calling out Bush on what he really is: a man so interested in stopping progress he will stand in th edoorway to make sure sick people can't get the access to the best possible health care they can receive.

24 May 2005

drive by proselythizing (sp?)

So my friend Erin and I went to 4 P's (an Irish bar) this evening for happy hour/dinner. We had a few beers, got our food, and noticed the place picking up, a nice crowd for a Tuesday night, and not a typical happy hour crowd of young professionals. All these people were wearing nametags, so we assumed that they were coming from one of the many conferences held daily in Washington DC....not quite.

Up to the stage walks a middle aged gentleman, who, it turns out, is a priest from Catholic University. As the priest (reverend, minister?) stood up there, Erin and I exchanged questioning glances, and then looked around again at the patrons in the bar. Upon closer examination, we noticed that the nametags all had, at the top, the words "Theology on Tap."

It sounds like a joke, really: Two Jews walk into a bar, a priest starts to give a sermon, and a crowd of Catholics stare at the Jews...

We listened as we finished our meal as the reverend spoke about Jesus and letting him into your life. He then introduced a newly ordained priest from Catholic, who began to give a sermon...at this point we had finished our meal, realized we were the only ones in the bar who didn't drop our heads down and pray when the reverend began a prayer, and pretty much got out of there.

Now, I am happy that "Theology on Tap" exists for those that want to partake in it. However, for future reference, 4 P's, please put a sign on your door or let me know when I walk in there that Jesus is at work. I will be happy to let those that want to listen to a sermon while drinking a Guinness to do so. I probably won't stay and watch, but I will happily respect the right of the Theologians to stay and listen. So, for not letting me know what was going on in there, 4P's, you get an F for customer service. But for promoting religion and making my world a happy place, you get a C (I don't really like happiness that much).

Nuclear option blown up

Well, a big FUCK YOU can be seen floating across the desk of James Dobson, Jerry Fallwell, and other religious right leaders last night and this morning. The moderates in the Senate apparently won out, as I had an inkling would happen. I didn't expect fourteen senators to sign on, thought it would be less, as I didn't realize that John Warner, that maverick from Virginia, and Robert Byrd, the crazy old cowboy from West Virginia, would sign on to stop the showdown from happening today on the floor.

Is it a good thing though? I'm not entirely sure. Ask me whether I'm happy that Owen and the other two judges are going to be confirmed, and I'll tell you definitely not. Ask me whether I'm happy Saad and Meyer are likely to be bottled up, and I'll tell you yes. However, the result of this remains to be seen. The majority reserves the right to 'pull the trigger' at any point they think the minority is being too loose with their use of the filibuster, while the minority makes no guarantee of endorsing any nominees. So basically we have an agreement where none of those signatories are exceedingly victorious nor have they lost that much. The Senate work continues (HA), and as Lindsey Graham, a man I have increasingly gained respect for (aside from McCain probably one of the only Republicans I can say that for) said, the Senate can now get back to the work of the American people. As much as I wanted to see Frist go down even harder (he's down, mark my words. The man will now receive no support from the Dobsons of the country, as he couldn't herd his party behind the religious right's agenda.), I am happy that we didn't lose more. Reid is touting this as a victory for us, and I'm not so sure he's wrong. He says the nuclear option is off the table, and that is the most important part. We reserve the right to filibuster a Supreme Court nomination, and as everyone realizes, that's what this is all about. Rehnquist will retire this summer, and I, for one, do not want to see another fucking Scalia on the court.

Once again, going back to another idea I and many people have written on: many of these so-called "activist judges" that Frist, conservative Republicans, and the demagogic Falwells and Dobsons of the world talk about have been appointed by REPUBLICAN presidents and confirmed by REPUBLICAN led Congresses. The conservative majority cannot function in power. They overreach their bounds, continue to grab undue power and influence, and cannot work for the good of the party. If the senators and reps worked half as hard towards the same goals as their party's interest groups did in electing them, I'd be a bit more worried. This is not to say that we Dems are any better. We are the kings of not working together. But when you own DC like the Republicans do right now, and you can't get things done, it's time to take a look at your leadership. Everyone's known Frist is a useless tool of the religious right, and now it's being made abundantly clear. Everyone knew DeLay was a piece of garbage criminal, and his increasing ethics issues and lack of support at home (he only won this past election with 55% support) are going to build up. The Republican party oversteps its bounds time and again, on such basic issues as right to privacy (Schiavo, Patriot Act), taxes (tax cuts in deficit periods...brilliant voodoo economic theory), war (nuff said) and civil rights and liberties (gay marriage).

The emerging democratic majority, the sleeping giant, awaits its turn.

19 May 2005

A random thought:

Isn't it weird how a party that claims to be "conservative" and is typically interested in maintaining the way things have been done wants to tear down senate rules that have been in place for several hundred years, And instead of sweeping changes to our health care, taxes and education systems for the benefit of the less priveleged, they claim they are making governemnt smaller -- small enough to fit only into your bedroom?

18 May 2005

Weiner and NYC Mayor

From the Hotline:

Rep. Anthony Weiner (D) has hired Dem strategist Michael Whouley, "a Boston-based consultant with a reputation as a field general rallying troubled campaigns." He is "credited" with helping John Kerry make his comeback to win the '04 IA caucuses, and with helping Al Gore win the '00 NH primary (Archibold, New York Times, 5/18).

The Crain's Insider reports that Weiner has raised thousands from "a long list of Chinese-Americans in Queens." Weiner has reported adding $500K to his coffers between 3/12 and 5/11 giving him an expected total of $2.1M. (5/18).


Good move by Weiner picking up Whouley. He is highly respected, and helped Kerry when Kerry needed serious help. Bloomberg's still got very low approval ratings, and there is room and time for Weiner to hop into this thing. Ferrer is done for, Sharpton won't endorse him, and there is no front-runner in this primary.

The Value of a Closer

With all the closers in baseball coming up injured as of late, (Troy Perival, Armando Benitez, Joe Borowski, Chin-hui Tsao, and Octavio Dotel just to name a few) I must now state how I really feel about the position. The closer position is the most grossly overrated position in baseball. A closer is not really as important as one tends to think. If you give up two runs during any part of the game you have given up those runs. The offenses are not competing against one another directly and it doesn’t matter when the runs are scored.

However, what the closer position does offer is the ability for small market teams to rack up Saves, an absolutely meaningless category. Like I said, if a guy holds a team to no runs in the 5th he gets no reward for his efforts; if he holds a team to no runs in the 9th he becomes invaluable. Smart teams in baseball, such as the Oakland A’s and the Minnesota Twins have realized this miss step by many GMs to overvalue saves. What these two teams have done is put a pitcher in the position and dubbed him with the name closer. They then have him pitch primarily in the final innings of games and he racks up saves. At the end of the season teams will trade away these stars with 40 saves at very high prices. The other team overvaluing this statistical category pays a high price for an average middle reliever who has a lot of saves. Examples include Jason Isringhausen, Eddie Guardado, LaTroy Hawkins. Dotel and Nathan are nothing more than the same thing (particularly Dotel).

17 May 2005

Back

Sorry for the lack of recent posts, but I had a busy weekend, and was in Atlantic City for work yesterday (tough, I know) - did get to gamble a bit, and lost at the Hold Em tables...dammit. Coworker was losing too, and as we were leaving I prodded him to play Roulette with his remaining funds. He bet on black three times in a row, ended up being up a fair amount...of course that's my luck. Always the bridesmaid, never the bride.

Anyway, this should be an interesting week. We've got more social security privatization hearings, an impending "showdown" over the nuclear option, and a fair amount of other things going on (Yankees haven't lost a game since I was at the A's-Yankees game Saturday before this one, the Nationals are on a three-game streak, the NBA playoffs are finally getting to some meaningful game 5's, the OC season finale (damn straight I watch the OC...the hot female index is off the charts)).

Back later (maybe) with some news.

13 May 2005

John Thune PT 2

So we've already got reactions and damage control from John Thune, professional penis hat (real headline: THUNE FAILS TO KEEP ELLSWORTH OFF LIST)

South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the Republican who defeated Minority Leader Tom Daschle by campaigning on his close ties to the White House, was dealt a political setback with the Pentagon's decision to close Ellsworth Air Force Base at Rapid City, S.D.

At the end of the heated campaign last fall, Daschle used Ellsworth as an example of his clout in Washington, claiming to have kept the base off the list during the last round of closures when Bill Clinton was president.

Thune's campaign countered that Daschle's role as leader of Bush's opposition would be a liability during the base closure process.

Thune, who was lobbied by Republicans at the highest level to challenge Daschle, said Friday that South Dakota did what it could to keep the base open.


The guy is beyond full of shit. He argues that he will keep the base open in his campaign due to his closeness to Bush, and what happens? Yet the man who had retained the base for the state gets voted out, the man on the other side of the argument, the man in the other party, and what happens?? THE BASE IS CLOSING

"The Ellsworth Task Force has done everything it can to date, and we will continue to do everything we can in the future," he said, referring to the Rapid City group that has lobbied Washington officials for the base. "I will help lead the fight in the Senate to delay this BRAC round."

He said last month that he gave the "full court press to inform and impress" the Pentagon. He said he used his position on the Senate Armed Services Committee to get questions on the record to Pentagon officials, has written numerous letters and talked to several Pentagon leaders in an effort to save the base.


It's nice to have a fall guy like John Thune in your pocket if you're Bush Co. No wonder Thune wants to get to the national stage so quick. He should be impeached as SD's senator. But fuck that, SD deserves him.

12 May 2005

BRAC

I'm getting this post in real quick, just in time to make a prediction:


Rumsfeld says base closures save money!
The nine-member base-closing commission, known as BRAC, is led by former Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony Principi.

It will review the Pentagon's recommendations and send them, along with any changes, to the White House by September 8.


Odds that Ellsworth AFB will be on the BRAC's base closure list: 3:2

I'll take bets. Anyone?



UPDATE!!! 5/13 9:49 AM

Hate to say I told you so, but according to highly reputable sources, Ellworth AFB is on the base closure list. John Thune, the man that said Tom f'n Daschle couldn't keep Ellsworth open as a member of the opposite party (even though he was on the goddamn base closure commission when he was SD's senator) has FAILED YET AGAIN. That's right, SD, you're God-fearing, abortion hating senator, who said being from the president's party would help save Ellsworth has FUCKED UP YET AGAIN. Good luck finding new jobs out there, SD residents. And to those of you that work(ED) on the base and voted for Thune - FUCK YOURSELVES. To those of you that work(ED) on the base and realized you had a good thing...I'm sincerely sorry, and wish you the best of luck finding employment. Try not to have it relate to anything John Thune has a hand in.

UPDATE 10:15 AM
John Thune, Professional Dick-Licker

Among the major closures is Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota, home to 29 B-1B bombers, half the nation's fleet of the aircraft, and the state's second largest employer. That would deal a potential political setback to Republican freshman Sen. John Thune, who had claimed he could protect the base if elected during his campaign to defeat former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle.

Jonathan “Michael” Bolton (the real no talent ass-clown)

The Bush administration and leaders in the Republican Senate have been outraged in the past month by Jonathan Bolton being held up in committee and not allowed a vote. GW nominated Mr. Bolton as the United States ambassador to the United Nations, the sole body unifying our governments and regulating global peace. After disturbing allegations of Bolton possessing less than superior diplomatic and communication skills, Democrats in the Senate demanded a hold be put on Bolton until further investigation could be performed.

In the past Bolton’s feelings of the UN and US diplomatic relations can be summed up in a couple short, self-amusing, quotes he enjoyed sharing with audiences:
"There is no such thing as the United Nations."

"If the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference."

He has been called by Carl W. Ford Jr., former chief of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, "a serial abuser" and "a quintessential kiss-up, kick-down sort of guy."
Bolton’s former boss former Secretary of State Colin Powell has not spoken out against Bolton, but has refused to indorse him for his position. Something James Baker, Lawrence Eagleburger, Alexander Haig, Henry Kissinger and George Shultz (all former Secretaries of State) have done. Unfortunately none of these men have ever worked with Bolton directly, and have no real knowledge of his skills as a diplomat.
Finally, after much resistance by conservatives, Democrats were allowed to hold an examination in committee pertaining to Bolton’s past and abilities. Now, after a month of debate the committee on foreign relations has decided to send Bolton to the floor for a vote without a positive or a negative endorsement.

Republican Senator from Ohio, George Voinovich, has even spoken out against Bolton’s nomination:
"It is my opinion that John Bolton is the poster child of what someone in the diplomatic corps should not be."


With all this information about Bolton’s abilities becoming apparent we would expect the White House to be following foreign relations committee member Sen. Voinovich’s lead and repeal the support of an unqualified candidate. Here is what Secretary of state Condi Rice had to say:

Yes, he's been critical of the United Nations from time to time, but in some ways that is a great benefit because at a time when the U.N. is undergoing a considerable discussion about reform, looking at what needs to be done, it's a good thing to have somebody who's thought both about the good and the bad at the U.N."


With quotes from Bolton like the ones above, it doesn’t seem to me that he has thought twice about the good of the UN. It definitely appears this man is not setting out with good diplomatic relations in mind. Or maybe I am misinterpreting the line about “losing 10 stories of the UN building.”

And what insightful words does our President have about his nomination to the worlds most important diplomatic body:

Bush said that Bolton was "blunt," but said he "can get the job done."


I am sure Senate Republican leaders at least are taking a rational approach to this mistake of a nomination:

Sen. Richard Lugar, the chairman of the committee, said that while Bolton's actions were "not always exemplary," evidence heard by the panel does not support a disqualification of the nominee.

"The end result is that many of the accusations have proven to be groundless or, at worst, overstated."

The man publicly said he doesn’t believe the UN exists. You can’t overstate that. Plus the fact he has a trail of colleagues that he has failed to get along with. That right there seems enough to disqualify a person from one of the most diplomatically sensitive positions in the world.
It seems republicans are again voting down party lines with their rubber stamp, and not voting for what is in the best interest of the nation. The parallels are too close to ignore when comparing this situation to the White House’s judicial nominations. Senate Democrats found 13 of GW’s judges to be outrageously wrong for a federal bench position, yet Republicans want to go so far as to change Senate rules in order to put these extremists in power. The future of the filibuster is hanging in the balance with Bill Frist demanding totalitarian control of the Senate. In order to protect the rights of the minority and allow Majority party mistakes to be controlled we cannot let the filibuster fall. The republicans of late have become a party gone mad with power, like a cheetah as it’s pace quickens they have become blind to the peripheral vision, and are making drastic mistakes.

11 May 2005

Gourmet Beef

Dating a medical student who is in the mist of studying microbiology one becomes quickly paranoid about what to eat and where to swim. You learn chlorine kills very little of what will actually kill you and all your food is a death trap. For instance, Taenia Saginata, Beef Tapeworm:
“A cow rancher arrives at the EW [emergency ward] terrified after discovering a worm-like structure protruding from his anus. After reassuring the man and taking a proper history and physical, the doctor examines a stool sample. As expected, the doctor finds rectangular proglottid segments with the naked eye and uses a low-power microscope to detect eggs… [doctor prescribes medicine]…The doctor also instructs the patient to avoid poorly cooked beef in the future.”


Now this is just 1 note card of 140. Fortunately for the rancher this disease did not prove fatal. But looking at the effects of even worse pathogens such as mad cow disease, a prion that is virtually undetectable until symptoms arise and basically without a cure, we find a much more frightening ending. Over the last year several outbreaks of mad cow disease surfaced over the Canadian Provinces (America Jr.), and meat from these ranches ended up in the US food circulation. This contamination hurt the beef industry all across America, and the pain continues to this day.

Knowledge that busses made in Hungry explode when they reach 50 miles per hour does not decrease the sale of Mack trucks. This is because buyers have labels telling them who built their automobile and where the vehicle was made.

Former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle and South Dakota Senator Tim Johnson both lead a fight to put labels on packaged meat describing at minimum their country of origin and with hopes of displaying the specific farms and slaughter houses the beef in package attended. Implementing these types of regulations on what we consume is strategic in keeping a solid agricultural industry as well as a healthy nation. However, with such logical steps toward National Defense (strengthening our agriculture and protecting the common health) these two senators found resistance with republicans calling on only unjust war and exorbitant military spending for national priorities. South Dakota being among the top beef states in the country one would expect that at least their republican senator to back this initiative. Even if the issue doesn’t directly favor big business and big oil it was a campaign promise, and a potentially big program for the state he is supposed to represent. While John Thune continues to take trips across the country at the expense of tax payers, (Alaska, California, Washington State, South Carolina, Georgia, Virginia, Colorado, and Tennessee (8 states in 6 weeks)) South Dakotans have given up hope on their freshman Senator Thune. They have decided to implement a Ranch of Origin labeling imposed by law enforcement. The program will allow consumers to search online back to where their beef was raised and slaughtered. This could possibly make SD beef into a gourmet commodity. However, full implementation is many years off due to the lack of federal government support from republican leaders’ and initiative by John Thune. It is too bad that Thune had other interests than his Job to worry about; otherwise his “connections” to the people in Washington would have gotten this done a long time ago. With Mad Cow disease becoming more prevalent and borders becoming weaker it is amazing Thune’s prioritizes were with taking vacations and raising money, rather than protecting America and representing South Dakota.

SD Gourmet Beef

And by the way, John has also refused to help keep Ellsworth Air Force Base open in Western South Dakota; thus giving the BRAC no resistance in closing the strategic B-1 Bomber fleet and 5,500 South Dakota jobs. I am glad we elected a guy who has the ear of the president and the hand of the Senate Majority Leader.

One of the longest running conservative platforms...

has always been to call liberals "tax-and-spend" and argue that they (conservatives) are for little people by always wanting to cut taxes, since individuals know how to spend their money better than the big, bad government. This always comes up, in any republican campaign, and there are often difficult issues countering the argument. People always want their money. I would love to not be taxed, and not worry about giving money to the government, but I understand the necessity of taxes for the purpose of supporting those in society that need a safety net, and for myself long into the future, when I would presumably benefit from the social programs that I contribute to as a worker.

My question is, how do we, as liberals, counter the anti-tax message of conservative republicans? We've already shown that Bush Co. is not fiscally conservative, but the message won't necessarily fit against a conservative that actually is fiscally responsible. Do we, as Democrats, try to reverse course and show how we, too, can be fiscally conservative? Do we propose pay as you go measures, and other sensible budgetary policies? Or do we continue to run as the party that is seen as the taxers, the people that want to increase the size of government for the purpose of helping the weak, the poor, the poverty-stricken, and ignore the claims of the conservatives that we want to tax, tax, tax?

What campaign measures, proposals, issues can we point to to show that we are fiscally responsible, that we want an "ownership society" wherein people save money and invest? I think that candidates that are, and have been, fiscally conservative (one Howard Dean comes to mind...) need to use this in the future. We need to stop running away from claims that we are tax-and-spend liberals, and show that the REPUBLICANS have been worse than we have been over the past 5, 6, 10 years, and that we are responsible with money, using it for the proper things, and not interested in tax cuts that only benefit the wealthy, those that don't need the money back. We are interested in maintaining a safety net, interested in helping out middle- and low-class workers by giving THEM money back, if we do cut taxes, if we can afford it, if we somehow are able to return to a budgetary surplus.

Just another day in the district

Working a block and a half from the Capitol has its advantages and disadvantages. Luckily enough, my building was not evacuated during today's scare. It seems that a plane was in the no-fly zone around the Capitol/White House area, and fighter jets fired warning shots to scare it off. I got to wondering what the contingency plan is if warning shots do not have their intended effect. how far away from our nation's symbolic center must a plane or any other foreign object be before fighter jets fire them down? A mile? Two? What kind of plan is in place to minimize collateral damage? We are, after all, in a city with many people, with many buildings, and many other important landmarks. A mile outside of the Capitol/White House in any direction does not ensure any type of safety for people on the ground or other buildings that may be unintended targets. ... Just a thought ...

Update: (2:50PM)
I guess others were wondering the same thing (NYT):

One tantalizing question is how close the Cessna might have come to being shot down. Mr. McClellan said there were "protocols in place" to fire at it, if necessary, "but I'm not sure it ever came to that point." Asked who had the authority to order that the plane be shot down, Mr. McClellan declined to be specific, except to say that President Bush was aware of the episode as it unfolded.

Pilots accidentally enter restricted airspace over Washington from time to time, generally without incident. But since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the prospect of an errant plane being shot down is not far-fetched. If, as Mr. McClellan said, the Cessna was within three miles of the White House today, it could easily have been within a minute or so's flying time of the mansion.

10 May 2005

George's foreign Affairs

After George Jr’s recent visit with the Russian President Vladimir Putin, I am reminded of his last stay with Mr. Putin; which at the time put a wonder into my skull, after reading this quote from GW in the New York Times about two months ago.
"Mr. Bush said in the grand setting of Concert Noble, a 19th century hall. 'We must always remind Russia, however, that our alliance stands for a free press, a vital opposition, the sharing of power and the rule of law - and the United States and all European countries should place democratic reform at the heart of their dialogue with Russia.'"


I find this funny for two distinct reasons:

1) The President is asking of Russia to obediently follow the US and Europe while the US deliberately went against the wishes of almost the entire world, which includes Europe and Russia (but as the President would sure like to remind you, "not every country was against us, Poland was with us too"), and attacked a foreign nation without any provocation.

2) This is the fact that originally struck my attention from the quote. The President demands that "our alliance stands for a free press." Once again I believe our President has forgotten about his party's reprimanding of his predecessor. I believe a few years ago a President was under heated scrutiny of sexual taboos. After finding nothing criminal it was agreed upon that that President had committed great atrocities by not leading by example for our children. With this criticism I ask GW why he has failed to do the same. He demands the "free press" but has paid and planted several reporters of high class news organizations to push his agenda. With this criticism I ask GW why he has failed as leader of the free world to bring diplomacy to even our allies, yet demand it of other nations. With this criticism I ask GW why he has, over a two week course in February, threatened seven different nations with his physical force, yet can't respect the ideas of the rest of the United Nations. Now I would ask what is harder to explain to your children, an Oral Sex reference completely unrelated to the duties of work and unqualified to be used as real news and merely reported for sensationalism, or explaining to your children what it means when your President is buying off the press, what it means when the leader of the free world is demanding through violent physical force a particular thought and philosophy on independent cultures and nations, what it means when the highest office in the land uses its physical might to manipulate those with less physical power. The nature of Bill Clinton's dumb mistakes were unknown by the children of our nation, and by involved parenting and media responsibility any relay of this information to innocent ears could have been avoided. George W. Bushes' acts not only have to be explained to small children they must be explained and rationalized to foreign lands, our political leaders, and all people of our country. George W. Bush has reversed our foreign relations progress decades with his mistakes.

We're like a team now

Welcome to Scott, my new Blogging contributor to UnemployedDemocrat. He is actually an unemployed democrat, although he is going to be joining the Peace Corps in Moldova next month. He will be an added member to the UD team, with his insightful commentary on many of the issues facing us today. Scott worked with me on the Daschle campaign, is from South Dakota (tell him you're sorry...), and has a hot girlfriend (hi Jamie).

Scott will be keeping his other blog Ballad of the Rising Sun open as well, so anything regarding his time in Moldova or the Peace Corps can be found there.

Thune v. Daschle

In a Roll Call retrospective of the top ten races in Senate history, here is their explanation of last year's race:

2004 South Dakota Senate race: Tom Daschle (D) vs. John Thune (R)

In the year following his 524-vote defeat at the hands of Sen. Tim Johnson (D), Thune was hounded about whether he would challenge Daschle.

By the time he finally entered the race in January 2004, Daschle had been on statewide television for six months touting his accomplishments for the state during his 18 years in the Senate.

Thune held his fire for several more months before beginning his own advertising effort. He believed that the primary reason for his loss in 2002 was the non-stop, 18-month campaign he and Johnson waged.

As expected, the race shattered all previous fundraising records in the state. Daschle brought in $20 million; Thune raised $16 million in just 10 months. Those totals don’t include the millions spent by independent groups seeking to influence the outcome.

Daschle struggled to differentiate himself from a national party decidedly more liberal than the average South Dakota voter. He was also hurt by the fact that he had not been seriously challenged since 1986.

Thune ran an ad late in the race that featured footage of Daschle saying he was a “D.C. resident” and defending the right of women to have abortions. This seemed to crystallize the choice for many voters.

Thune won by 2,000 votes — the first candidate to oust a Senate leader since 1952.


I've said it all before, so I don't need to go into how/why we lost. It makes me happy to see that something I worked on is one of the best senate races ever, even if I believe it appears there undeservedly so, as our opponent (and current Senator) Thune proves time and again to be an ineffective senator without any of South Dakota's values in hand. SD voters have reaped what they sowed in this one, folks.

Fantasy and reality

In reference to my posting about the ridiculous Texas cheerleading law passed last week (which made it into the Daily Show as one of their feature segments last night), someone wrote this. It makes me happy that someone would post a comment like this on my blog:

SteveBP said...

Are these Texas Nazis up to it again? These cheerleaders are just being progressive. Fifty years ago women were oppressed, and they led cheers wearing skirts that barely showed their calves. Now they're allowed (finally) to show breasts and have to get a bikini wax before each game. I feel especially bad for the transgendered persons who have to do a bit more waxing. I sure hope I'm around in the year 2050. The tickets to the high school football games may get to be $500, but I bet by then I'll be able to see a wide receiver take one up the middle - and I'm not talking about the football players. That's what I call progress. I just hope one of my great grand daughters will make the team (wink wink, nod nod.)
12:37 AM


Haha. He says they show their breasts and have to get bikini waxes before each game, and talks about transgendered persons having to get more waxing. I enjoy people like this, who make such absurd points that you can do nothing but laugh at them. They couldn't care less about the state of their child's school, fuck that, but instead are concerned with how much leg the cheerleaders show. Steve, why don't you tell me what about these cheerleaders acts is so 'sexually explicit' that we should legislate the vague concept of cheerleading? Steve, why don't you tell me how many transgendered cheerleaders have to shave? Steve, why don't you tell me what business our government has doing in this, and ignoring other, legitimate problems, such as the state of the school, funding the unfunded mandates of NCLB, and paying attention to health care? Why are you so concerned with the cheers of high school girls, but unconcerned with the education they receive? Holy Crusaders like yourself fail to see your own hipocrysy. You believe in limited government, but only if it's small enough to fit into your bedroom. You want judges that are not activists, but you fail to see that you conservatives have appointed most of the current federal judges (and the majority of SCOTUS judges) to the bench. You want up-or-down votes and a removal of the filibuster, but fail to remember the hundreds of times you've held up approvals during the past hundred years through filibuster or committee moves.

And to end it, you makes sure I realize your sarcasm, with a "(wink wink, nod nod.)" You are holier than I, SteveBP. Your holiness blinds me.

Ahhhh, SteveBP. The world really is passing you by, my friend. I bet you remember what it was like to get into a movie theater, buy a hot dog, and get on the bus back home, all for a quarter, and have money left over to buy a stick of gum. Those sure were the days, when women didn't have suffrage, blacks were segregated. The world was right.

Who's the boss star nearly dies in freak go-karting accident

Tony Danza is hurting (and not just financially)

Tony Danza got quite a scare when he and NASCAR star Rusty Wallace were racing go-karts during the taping of a segment for the nationally syndicated "The Tony Danza Show."

Danza was leading as they entered the final lap on West 66th Street Monday morning, the show said. After Wallace gave Danza's vehicle a little "bump and run," the 54-year-old talk-show host lost control of his go-kart, which flipped over.


The man with a sex move named after him (ask if you have never heard of it before), flipped over by some NASCAR punk?

Now, here is a fact you may not have known about Alyssa Milano's tv dad: Tony only accepts roles in television or movies wherein his characters name is Tony. Why? Because, the guy doesn't remember to respond to any other names. I kid you not.

Wallace, who rushed to Danza's side after the crash, said, "I thought I killed ya," to which Danza responded, "Yeah ... just before you retire, 'I killed Tony Danza.' "

More anti-Jesus people

It's unfortunate really. Hasn't the man faced enough oppression? I mean, if you believe that sort of thing.

Even Jesus Christ can't circumvent the rules for getting a driver's license in West Virginia.

Attempts to prove his name really is Christ have led the man born as Peter Robert Phillips Jr. through a lengthy legal battle and a recent victory in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.


As a Jew, I take no side in this argument, but I do believe that even Jesus should have to provide a proper birth certificate, one that states who his father really is.

But, apparently Jesus isn't too media-friendly. That's no way for a religious leader to act.

Any comment from the man in the middle of this legal tussle?

"Christ is not speaking to the press at this time," Pishevar said.

09 May 2005

NY

Went home over the weekend for mother's day and to hang out with friends. Took a Greyhound bus for the very first time ever. It was pretty interesting. There is a pretty distinct class difference with the people that end up taking a bus vs. atrain or plane. Not that it bothers me, because the bus cost about 1/7 of what a plane ticket would have cost, and about 1/5 of what a train would have been. The ride was decent, aside from hitting almost an hour of traffic right outside NYC on the way up. But, back in NY, had a good, relaxing time. Caught a Yankees-A's game, with Mussina finally pitching a good one (complete game shutout no less) after somehow managing to get lost going to the baseball stadium I've been to about 25 times and ending up having to traverse the Bronx, yet still making it into the stadium in time for the first pitch.

Had a nice mother's day, too, and even took my mother and grandmother to see a corny mother's day movie before catching a bus back down late last night.

All in all a good weekend - nice to get back home to NY every now and again, even though DC feels a lot more like home sometimes.

04 May 2005

"Bring It On" banned from Texas state.

Ok, not really...but this is silly.

The House, to the surprise of some representatives who heckled with pompoms and recorded fight songs, passed a bill Tuesday night calling on districts to act against any group performing "in an overtly sexually suggestive manner" at a school event.


Not only is this absurd, the Texas House could not even define "sexually suggestive" cheerleading behavior. They proposed to leave it up to the individual school districts. Don't these fucking lawmakers have important things to do...health care, education, crime...?

More NYC Mayor stuff...sue me, I'm a New Yorker

This is troubling.

Mayor Bloomberg got a big boost yesterday from across party lines: Sen. Chuck Schumer.

New York's senior senator, a Democrat, defended Bloomberg's record fighting for the city's fair share of federal dollars - undercutting a central campaign theme among the Democrats seeking to boot Bloomberg, a Republican, from City Hall.


I understand that Schumer and Bloomy have to work together, and that Schumer has some pretty strong ties to the Mayor:

Schumer's wife, Iris Weinshall, is Bloomberg's transportation commissioner, and Schumer's former spokesman, Stu Loeser, is now Bloomberg's campaign spokesman.


But this isn't helping. Bloomberg continues to campaign for national Republicans, and unless the man denounces his party and becomes a Democrat, we can't have national Democrats, even if they are friendly with the man, supporting Republican campaigns. Schumer, of everyone should know this, as he is the DSCC cahir, the main man responsible for raising money for Democratic candidates. And with Schumer's protege, Anthony Weiner, in the race, I simply can't understand the support he's giving to Bloomberg. To be sure, this falls well short of an endorsement, but not far enough for my liking.

03 May 2005

GPS tracking

Well, once again on the Florida front:

Spurred by the killing of a 9-year-old girl, Gov. Jeb Bush on Monday signed a law imposing tougher penalties on child molesters and requiring many of those released from prison to wear satellite tracking devices for the rest of their lives.


GPS devices worn around the ankles, so that the government can track them, even after they've completed their prison sentence. I'm all about being tough on crime, and I have no doubt that the Fla state legislature had the state's best intentions in mind. The law passed unanimously in both the House and Senate, and apparently there is some precedence for this type of punishment:

Lots of other states have minimum mandatory sentences for sex crimes against children. A number of states already require some form of lifetime supervision of sex offenders, including GPS tracking, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

However, Florida's new law may be the first requirement of lifetime GPS monitoring for an entire group of people who commit a certain crime, the NCSL said.

Florida's new law could also open the door to the death penalty for more killers, because it allows a defendant's status as a sexual predator to be considered as an aggravating factor during sentencing for a murder.


Registering sex offenders seems like a fair thing to do. I know that I would want to know if there was a registered offender living in my neighborhood, especially if I was a parent. Forcing GPS tracking on individuals, however, seems like a step that is going to open up some dangerous doors.

I have to come up with some more coherent thoughts on the larger issues around this, but 1984 immediately springs to mind...citizens have the right to privacy, and as far as I know, rehabilitated criminals are, in most states, returned their citizenship (not really sure how it is in Texas...Scott?) GPS tracking devices on these (rehabilitated) citizens, in my opinion, amounts to a violation of their privacy.

This type of law scares me, not really for what it is, but for what it could become.

Whoo hoo I am pure

I found out about this on Clean Cut Kid.

I am 1% Republican - what abou you?

02 May 2005


This is from the Daschle reunion party two Fridays ago. It's part of the Rapid City office (from l. Stephanie, me, part of Ben, Senator Daschle, Jessica, Scott, Jason and Ace). I particularly like that I'm holding a beer, and that the Senator is clearly only concerned with me being in the picture with him, as he's blocked Ben, my co-worker, from even being seen.  Posted by Hello

What's the Matter With Liberals?

A very interesting article by Frank Rich, entitled What's the Matter with Liberals?

Rich basically makes the point that the election of 2004 was won on the basis of culture wars. That the Republican party has feigned interest in the little guy, not through economic means, but through cultural. Whereas the working class person used to vote in droves for the liberal economic democrat, Republicans have shifted the focus nearly entirely off of those issues and onto the cultural ones: guns, God, and gays.

Rich doesn't let the Republicans have all the glory, however, he places more than enough blame on the Democrats, and especially the K Street lobbyists, whom he blames for allowing Kerry to lose his focus (not necessarily unintentionally) from bread and butter Democrat issues. Rich thinks that Kerry wanted to appeal to the business class, and accept their funds in order to be more competitive with Bush. However, he thinks that doing so was an unmitigable mistake, since liberal economic policy has been the major tenet of every Democrat's election over the past so-many years.

Rich also suggests that Bush's pandering to the working class on culture war issues has clearly been a ploy, as in the immediate days after the election, the focus shifted away from gay marriage and abortion, and onto Social Security and other issues that would not, in any way, help lower- and middle-income workers, but would instead help the Wall Street elite.

Perhaps Bush Co.'s greatest stunt has been the fleecing of the cultural war voters. By focusing so heavily on these issues in the 2004 election, Bush promised them something he knew that he would in no way fulfill. However, with a sinking economy and Mess-o-potamia in Iraq, this focus proved inevitable. A poorly run campaign and a shitty nominee for the Democrats only aided and abetted Bush Co.'s victory, but the voters now have had 100 days to see what they re-elected: a man only interested in lining the pockets of the rich, uninterested in the lower classes, uninterested in protecting the morality of our God-forsaken country, being arrested by the activist judges and gays.

Here are some excerpts from Rich's article, but I recommend reading it:

A newcomer to American politics, after observing this strategy in action in 2004, would have been justified in believing that the Democrats were the party in power, so complacent did they seem and so unwilling were they to criticize the actual occupant of the White House. Republicans, meanwhile, were playing another game entirely. The hallmark of a "backlash conservative" is that he or she approaches politics not as a defender of the existing order or as a genteel aristocrat but as an average working person offended by the arrogance of the (liberal) upper class. The sensibility was perfectly caught during the campaign by onetime Republican presidential candidate Gary Bauer, who explained it to The New York Times like this: "Joe Six-Pack doesn't understand why the world and his culture are changing and why he doesn't have a say in it."[3] These are powerful words, the sort of phrase that could once have been a slogan of the fighting, egalitarian left. Today, though, it was conservatives who claimed to be fighting for the little guy, assailing the powerful, and shrieking in outrage at the direction in which the world is irresistibly sliding.

The only centrism to be seen on the Republican side was the parade of GOP moderates across the stage of Madison Square Garden, an exercise clearly intended more to pacify and reassure the press than to win over actual voters. When the cameras were off, it was a completely different affair: what Karl Rove called a "mobilization election" in which victory would go to the party that best rallied its faithful.What this meant in practice was backlash all the way: an appeal to class resentment and cultural dread that was unprecedented in its breadth; ingenious state-level ballot initiatives on "values" questions that would energize voters; massive church-based get-out-the-vote efforts; and paranoid suggestions from all sides inviting voters to believe the worst about those tyrannical liberal snobs.

...

For the conservative rank and file, this election was to be the culture-war Armageddon, and they were battling for the Lord.

...

The backlash narrative is more powerful than mere facts, and according to this central mythology conservatives are always hardworking patriots who love their country and are persecuted for it, while liberals, who are either high-born weaklings or eggheads hypnotized by some fancy idea, are always ready to sell their nation out at a moment's notice.[7]

What makes national security such a winner for Republicans is that is dramatizes the same negative qualities of liberalism that we see in the so-called "values" issues, only much more forcefully. War casts in sharp relief the inauthenticity of the liberals, the insincerity of their patriotism, and their intellectual distance (always trying to "understand" the terrorists' motives) from the raw emotions felt by ordinary Americans—each quality an expression of the deracinated upper-classness that is thought to be the defining characteristic of liberalism.

Every hamlet seemed to have a son or daughter on duty in Iraq, and wartime loyalty to the commander in chief was in the air. Running through each of these issues was the sense that Bush was somehow more authentic than his challenger. In the city of Charleston, West Virginia, I was told by a conservative activist that

when you see those photos of [Bush] on his ranch down in Texas, with jeans and a cowboy hat, that's genuine. I was in Beckley when he was there a couple weeks ago, and that crowd, four thousand people, they loved the man. They loved the man. Personally... You can't manufacture that; you can't fake it. They love him. They connect with him, they think he understands them, and I think he does, too.

West Virginia had been carried by Bill Clinton, Michael Dukakis, and almost every other Democratic candidate going back to Franklin Roosevelt, but this time it went Republican by a convincing thirteen percentage points.

...

The illusion that George W. Bush "understands" the struggles of working-class people was only made possible by the unintentional assistance of the Democratic campaign. Once again, the "party of the people" chose to sacrifice the liberal economic policies that used to connect them to such voters on the altar of centrism. Advised by a legion of tired consultants, many of whom work as corporate lobbyists in off years, Kerry chose not to make much noise about corruption on Wall Street, or to expose the business practices of Wal-Mart, or to spend a lot of time talking about raising the minimum wage.[12]

...

Then, on the morning after the election, the country's liberals were astonished to hear that, according to exit polls, at least, "moral values" outranked all other issues in determining voters' choices.[16] Later on that same day, the reelected President Bush set out his legislative objectives for his second term. Making America a more moral country was not one of them. Instead, his goals were mainly economic, and they had precious little to do with helping out the working-class people who had stood by them: he would privatize Social Security once and for all and "reform" the federal tax code. "Another Winner Is Big Business," declared a headline in The Wall Street Journal on November 4, as businessmen everywhere celebrated the election results as a thumbs-up on outsourcing and continued deregulation.

OMG! LOL! I H8 U!

And then there's this.

With a silly name, OMG! How Generation Y Is Redefining Faith In The iPod Era argues that there is an increasing non-Christian majority emerging in the Generation Y (currently 18-25 year old) era. With Tivo's, iPods and other devices allowing us to program our own lives, we apparently also have the abiliy to program our own beliefs, more of which are seemingly secular (imagine that...religion and government...separate???)

Amongst their major findings:

1. Religious Identity: Religion plays a central role at a critical time in young people’s development, as they try to figure out who they are, religion helps not only to carve out the images they have of themselves, but also provides the social and political networks in which they make friends, find lovers, think about civic and political issues, and develop a political worldview. However, the relative priority of religion in young people’s lives varies and less religious youth are somewhat more directionless as they try to figure out who they are and what they should be doing with their lives.


Sounds about right...who isn't concerned with their spirituality in some way as a relatively young adult? However, it is not a 'primary' concern in a lot of ways, but is more something that is very personal, typically private, and something that is more of a journey, a search for fulfillment, much like many other aspects of life.

2. Religious Practice: It is difficult to catalog religious practice among young people, in part, because they are at the stage of their lives where they drop off from traditional religious involvement and, in part, because informal and non-traditional forms also play an important role in young people’s lives. Here we categorize Generation Y into three groups:

• The Godly (27%) for whom religion and God are a central part of their lives and are comfortable with traditional forms of religious practice;

• The God-less (27%) for whom religion plays little role, but who may have spiritual or ideological aspects to their religious identity;

• The Undecided, in the middle, (46%) who are uncertain, yet positive, about their religious identities and lean towards informal and expressive practices over the formal and institutional involvement.


This is something that makes me pretty happy. We always see polls and research suggesting that the US is one of the most 'religious' countries in the world, with Christianity leading the way. Here we see that the "God-less" equal to the "Godly." Now God-less in this instance does not refer to heathens, but instead those that have some form of 'relationship' with personal religion, but for whom religion is not something they're sure of. Additionally, the nearly 50% group of Undecideds, for whom formal/institutional involvement does not exist, yet they are involved informally. Why am I comforted by this? Because with the 'rise' of the Christian majority and the religious right, I fear for my civil liberties, civil rights, and for the current form of government we have, one where religion is supposed to be expressed in a government official's personal, private life, not in policy, politics and public. These statistics show a religious group of people that allow religion into their private lives. Does this mean they won't change as they get older? Clearly not, and that's one aspect of research this study doesn't take into account. What is the likelihood of these 18-25 year olds retaining their ability to maintain a religious identity outside of their political and policy beliefs?

3. Civic Participation: There is a strong and intimate relationship between religious faith and commitment and civic life. This study confirms that even among younger people, more religious youth are more likely to volunteer in both religious and non-religious venues than the less religious. As we see a decline in traditional denominational life, young people are finding other routes to participation in civic life as well. A near majority of the God-less, for example, participate in some form of civic activity, but only 5 percent do so through religious institutions.

Particular points of note in the report:

• Most diverse generation in history. Generation Y is the most diverse generation in the nation – only 61 percent call themselves white compared to 84 percent among Americans older than 65 years. Fueled by waves of new immigration and birthrates in immigrant communities, this generation is on the vanguard of transforming the nation, which will be majority non-white by mid-century. (page 8)

• Denominationalism on the decline and pluralism on the rise. The country remains majority Christian with a plurality belonging to Protestant denominations such as the Baptists or Methodists. There are important changes afoot, traditional denominationalism is on the decline and there is a concurrent rise in the number of people unwilling to align with a denomination. In fact, many young people cannot identify what faith tradition or denomination they belong to and fully 23 percent do not identify with any denomination at all. (page 9)


Pluralism! Whoo hoo!

• Faith expressed in highly personal, informal ways. While many young people continue
to attend worship services on a regular basis, just as many – if not more - practice their faith informally. Young people simply believe it is possible to be “religious” or “spiritual” without belonging to a church, synagogue or mosque. On a monthly basis, 68 percent talk about religion informally with friends; 64 percent of pray before meals and 55 percent read religious books, newspapers or magazines. (page 10)

• Social circles diverse. Regardless of religious tradition or intensity of religious commitment, youth are fully integrated into diverse social networks. While previous generations often lived in homogeneous religious communities, among Generation Y, only 7 percent of youth report that all of their friends are the same religion as themselves. Even the most religious youth maintain diverse networks of peers with only 9 percent of the Godly saying that all of their friends are the same religion. Among the God-less, at least half of their friends are not of the same religion. (page 12)

• Religious teens are more self-aware. Despite assumptions we might make about youth’s disengagement from faith and community life, religion remains a core component of young people’s identity. Moreover, religious youth have a distinctive worldview and approach to life; they are more connected to family and community, have higher self-esteem and a sense of self and hold more traditional views about family, sex, and marriage. (page 15)

• But STDs, jobs, grades come before God. Generation Y faces a distinct set of challenges as they negotiate their entry into adult life. Figuring out how to deal with sex and relationships, the changing economy and finding a good job and the desire to get a decent education, all compete with more intangible concerns. One’s relationship with God is lower on the list of things to worry about and plays a subtler role except for very religious youth. (page 16)

• Religious young people more active in politics, community. In this study, we find a strong relationship between religiosity and a broad range of volunteer activities with 79 percent of the most religious participating in volunteer activity in the last 12 months compared to 43 percent among the least religious. Religion is less closely tied to political and cultural involvement. (page 25)

• Generation Y is disengaged from politics. Politics falls on the bottom of the list of issues that young people worry or think about, though certain groups such as Jewish youth and African Americans take politics more seriously. There is clearly great potential political energy to be harnessed, as we saw in the 2004 Presidential election, but politics is not seen as particularly relevant to daily life. (page 26)


Jew power!!

• Progressive social views dominate. Generation Y is more liberal and progressive than older generations on social issues such as gay marriage and immigration. In fact, a majority favor gay marriage (53 percent) and women’s legal right to abortion (63 percent). For a group characterized by diversity and pluralism, the political divisiveness of cultural politics seems fairly irrelevant. (page 28)


This makes me happy. Again, while we still have no idea how these young adults will ultimately change their views as they age, progressive social views are awesome. More than half favoring gay marriage and over 60% supporting abortion rights? Wow. If only these people were to vote as much as the religious right... Hmmm....

Drop Dead Freddy

Freddy Ferrer is floundering

From the New York Daily News -

Mayor Bloomberg is a "patsy for the Republican Party," embattled Democratic mayoral candidate Fernando Ferrer charged in a TV interview that aired yesterday.

With his poll numbers falling 20 points in a hypothetical general election matchup with Bloomberg, Ferrer went on the attack, accusing the mayor of failing to get the city's fair share of federal dollars.

"Mike Bloomberg has given personally generously to Republican candidates and to the Republican national party and state party - so far, it has produced that much for New York City," said Ferrer, indicating zero with his fingers, during an interview on WABC-TV.


Now I don't particularly disagree with this assessment, but Ferrer is clearly in some shit. After his fallout from claiming that the Louima case wasn't a crime, Ferrer is falling. This is going to increase the vis and viability of the other Dem primary challengers, especially Anthony Weiner, whom I've previously posted on.

Oppositional party or just opposition?

Democrats Can’t Win When ‘No!’ Is Party’s Dominant Message:
From Roll Call -
Democrats can bask, if they wish, in President Bush’s gloomy poll ratings. But it’s hard to see how they will win the next election without a positive program. So far, from Social Security to energy to judicial nominations to House ethics, the Democratic position on the leading issues of the day is: “No!”


Agreed. To a certain extent, we are the party of opposition. We have oppositional views on many of the issues of the day, of the current agenda. However, in addition to opposing whatever the agenda item of the day may be from the White House, we also need to, at least at times, present options of our own. The problem with this in the past four years is that anything we've presented or worked on with the Republicans has either been turned down out of hand by the majority, or has been co-opted and maladjusted (NCLB) towards a total net result of failure for society. Why present our own options as the party in minority when it's going to result in harming us?

To answer that last question, one must look at the overall attitude of Democrats, or progressives. We as a people are working towards progress, and of getting things down. The status quo is a Republican, or conservative tenet. While Republicans are happy with where we are at, and what we've done, progressives are interested in moving forward, realizing that while what we've done may be good, there is always room for improvement. So while we may not get what we want out of the proposals, it is by our nature to suggest ideas and try to move public policy and not retain the status quo. I find it humorous anytime President Bush or the Republican members of Congress suggest that Democrats need to come to the table because they don't see a crisis (or problem) with Social Security - and that President Bush wants to make Social Security an issue of the Republican Party, taking it away from FDR and the Democrats (co-opting one of the Democratic Party's best governmental programs in our history). We, the Democratic Party, have a responsibility, and a desire to fix Social Security just as much, if not much moreso, than the Republican Party. We seek to deliver as comfortable a safety net for the poor, hope to increase the middle class, and help those trying to move up in society. Bush's suggested plan this past Thursday is both laughable and insulting. He wants to have it both ways, and his transparency is increasingly evident. Now he suggests that we should cut middle class benefits by up to 40% and retain benefits for the lowest class. While admirable that he suddenly is as compassionate towards those living in poverty, our middle class making an average salary depends on Social Security benefits and should not be cut. He will never accede to a reduction in his tax cuts, because that would be framed as a tax increase, and increasing the payroll wage limit (if eligible Social Security levels were increased by 40k$ to 130k$ from 90k$, Social Security would remain solvent with many billions of increased operating funds) would harm the Billionaires for Bush constituency our President has worked so hard to keep happy.

Weekend

Good weekend -

- saw 1 former roommate that's moved away

- apologized to 1 girl on behalf of my friend who, while drunk, threatened to 'fuck her up' if she bumped into him again

- started 1 fight with some douchebag in Mad Hatter's, but only because I had lots of friends around me

- went to 2 Nationals - Mets games, with the Nats winning one of them

- caught up on about 8 hours of tv (damn I love my Tivo), mostly episodes of Seinfeld and the Simpsons, along with the last few episodes of Contender, some Law and Order and some classic Saved by the Bell the College Years (gotta love Kelly Kapowski - someone buy me this)

- continued to dominate my roommate at FIFA - yeah that's right Matt.