Pat Sajak, host of the hopelessly idiotic TV program Wheel of Fortune (of which I occasionally inadvertently see a few seconds because it comes on right after Jeopardy) posts on the hopelessly benighted National Review Online his view that public employees should not be allowed to vote.
Oh, and did I mention that Pat Sajak is a bigoted lunatic? His "logic" is so ridiculous it amazes me even the NR published it.
13 October 2010
Easy fulfillment of campaign promise: End DADT
I wrote to the White House today to urge the president to take a simple step that would fulfill one of his campaign promises easily and quickly: just order the DOJ not to appeal the injunction by Judge Phillips based on finding the military's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy unconstitutional.
There is no principled basis for the government to engage this legal fight. Atty. Gen. Brown and Gov. Schwarzenegger have given the president a model, in refusing to pursue an appeal of the ruling on Prop. 8 in California.
There is no principled basis for the government to engage this legal fight. Atty. Gen. Brown and Gov. Schwarzenegger have given the president a model, in refusing to pursue an appeal of the ruling on Prop. 8 in California.
12 October 2010
Truly, has it come to this? GOP candidate defends Nazis
That we're expected to sit there and listen to a Republican candidate for national office (Rich Iott, Congressional Candidate, Ohio) defend the friggin' Nazis? Specifically foreign volunteers to the Waffen SS? This is just too much. That this guy isn't disowned by that party forthwith speaks volumes for their toleration of the intolerable.
07 October 2010
California (Southern) Progressive Recommended Votes this November
Personal Endorsements. I have done my best to research sites like Calitics and others to determine the best choices for a Progressive California.
US Senate: Barbara Boxer
US Senate: Barbara Boxer
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Board of Eq., District 4 Jerome E. Horton U. S. Representative, 28th Howard Berman State Assembly 43rd Dist. Mike Gatto Judicial: Supreme Court CANTIL-SAKAUYE: NO CHIN: NO MORENO: YES Judicial: Court of Appeal These are based on reports of these judge's political leanings and positions. MALLANO: NO CHANEY: NO JOHNSON: YES ASHMANN: YES CROSKEY: YES SUZUKAWA: NO ARMSTRONG: NO COFFEE: YES PERREN: YES ZELON: YES JACKSON: NO BIGELOW: NO GRIMES: NO Judicial: LA Superior Court Office 28: Mark Ameli Office 117: Alan Scheider Office 136: No endorsement, only one candidate running L. A. County Assessor: John Y. Wong |
California Ballot Measures -- Recommendations
Yes on Prop 19: Legalize Marijuana - This vote is more symbolic than anything else because the Federal Govt. has so much control over drug laws and enforcement. Nonetheless, a yes vote could potentially bring in hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue and save additional millions currently tied up in enforcing our failed prohibition; help to reduce the number of people arrested for small drug possession, relieving our crowded prisons and unburdening law enforcement to go after tougher criminals and harsher crimes; and cut drug cartel profits by eliminating the marijuana black market in California, hindering their ability to work in the US. Even if all we're doing is expressing the will of the people of the State, it's worthwhile.
No on Prop 20: Extending redistricting commission to Congressional races - Would take power to draw Congressional districts away from the Legislature and give it to the commission created by Prop 11 in 2008, putting California’s congressional redistricting process out of step with the rest of the country.
Yes on Prop 21: State parks - Fully funds state parks and allows Californians with current vehicle registration to enter all parks for free, funded by an $18/year increase in vehicle registration fee.
No on Prop 22: Proposition to protect Community Redevelopment from redistribution of funds --Los Angeles Times: "It's hard to see why redevelopment agencies' ever-growing share of local property taxes (at 12% statewide by one estimate) is more worthy of protection than school budgets, worker training programs or any of the other public services coming under the knife. Nor does it make sense to force the Legislature to use the general fund instead of fuel tax revenue to pay off existing transportation bonds, as Proposition 22 would do."
No on Prop 23: Dirty energy proposition - Funded by Texas oil companies, Prop 23 would destroy our green jobs and clean energy economy by effectively repealing our Global Warming Solutions Act, which was supported even by Republican Gov. Schwarzenegger. This is a particularly egregious example of out of state corporations attempting to buy policy change through the initiative process and the Right Wing Supreme Court's removal of almost all restrictions on anonymous use of corporate money in elections.
Yes on Prop 24: Repeal of Corporate Tax Breaks --Ventura County Star: "The bottom line: A new tax loophole or two won’t spur businesses to launch major investments in California; businesses do so only reluctantly because of the regulatory stranglehold in the state. And further tax cuts and loss of revenue will worsen conditions in the Golden State, making this state less appealing to those who want to live, work and do business here."
Yes on Prop 25: Majority vote budget - Restores majority rule and democracy to the state legislature by eliminating the 2/3rds rule for budgets that have enabled conservatives to obstruct progressive priorities. This initiative, sponsored by George Lakoff, is an important first step towards restoring majority rule in California.
No on Prop 26: Polluter protection - Creates a new 2/3rds rule for fees that fund environmental protection and other programs, protecting polluters and making it nearly impossible to implement many of California’s environmental laws, including our global warming law.
Yes on Prop 27: Eliminates redistricting commission - Eliminates the redistricting commission created by Prop 11 in 2008 to redraw state legislative boundaries and returns the task to the state legislature’s redistricting committee.
Here's a link to the Courage Campaign's voter guide on the propositions.
No on Prop 20: Extending redistricting commission to Congressional races - Would take power to draw Congressional districts away from the Legislature and give it to the commission created by Prop 11 in 2008, putting California’s congressional redistricting process out of step with the rest of the country.
Yes on Prop 21: State parks - Fully funds state parks and allows Californians with current vehicle registration to enter all parks for free, funded by an $18/year increase in vehicle registration fee.
No on Prop 22: Proposition to protect Community Redevelopment from redistribution of funds --Los Angeles Times: "It's hard to see why redevelopment agencies' ever-growing share of local property taxes (at 12% statewide by one estimate) is more worthy of protection than school budgets, worker training programs or any of the other public services coming under the knife. Nor does it make sense to force the Legislature to use the general fund instead of fuel tax revenue to pay off existing transportation bonds, as Proposition 22 would do."
No on Prop 23: Dirty energy proposition - Funded by Texas oil companies, Prop 23 would destroy our green jobs and clean energy economy by effectively repealing our Global Warming Solutions Act, which was supported even by Republican Gov. Schwarzenegger. This is a particularly egregious example of out of state corporations attempting to buy policy change through the initiative process and the Right Wing Supreme Court's removal of almost all restrictions on anonymous use of corporate money in elections.
Yes on Prop 24: Repeal of Corporate Tax Breaks --Ventura County Star: "The bottom line: A new tax loophole or two won’t spur businesses to launch major investments in California; businesses do so only reluctantly because of the regulatory stranglehold in the state. And further tax cuts and loss of revenue will worsen conditions in the Golden State, making this state less appealing to those who want to live, work and do business here."
Yes on Prop 25: Majority vote budget - Restores majority rule and democracy to the state legislature by eliminating the 2/3rds rule for budgets that have enabled conservatives to obstruct progressive priorities. This initiative, sponsored by George Lakoff, is an important first step towards restoring majority rule in California.
No on Prop 26: Polluter protection - Creates a new 2/3rds rule for fees that fund environmental protection and other programs, protecting polluters and making it nearly impossible to implement many of California’s environmental laws, including our global warming law.
Yes on Prop 27: Eliminates redistricting commission - Eliminates the redistricting commission created by Prop 11 in 2008 to redraw state legislative boundaries and returns the task to the state legislature’s redistricting committee.
Here's a link to the Courage Campaign's voter guide on the propositions.
06 October 2010
End this Endless War
For the past several years, I, along with probably most progressives, have been focused on the damage done to our economy by financial deregulation and misconduct, but lately I'm coming more and more to see the most debilitating cancer on our country's politics and economy as the endless war. Not just Iraq (which it just isn't true is over) and Afghanistan, but the whole culture of American empire and projection of military power as a policy in its own right.
I believe it really is as stark as this: this must change, or we are doomed as a free society. We simply cannot muster the moral will or the resources to fix our economy, move forward to a post-oil energy system, or address the utter failure of the social contract which has manifested itself since 1980 (health care, full employment, infrastructure, energy independence, fostering a production economy... the list is long)... without first ending this culture of war as an end in itself. Even the financial debacle is, in my view, related: it is the failure of moral integrity as a nation which allowed it to happen.
Even apart from that, the cost of these wars is crippling us: some estimates put the total cost of Iraq and Afghanistan at over five trillion dollars, about half our national debt. And for the first time in history, we have in the last decade been waging these wars mostly off the books, essentially without paying for them at all, instead encumbering our nation with unsustainable debt. If moral argument doesn't carry the day, the economic argument is strong: we can no longer afford both guns and butter; but in the post Cold-war world the need for a vast military machine actually waging war just doesn't make sense anymore.
We must reestablish the principle that only Congress may declare war, and that war may not prosecuted without its authorization (meaning its express declaration of war). This is, in fact, the only reasonable interpretation of the black letter of the Constitution, but we've chosen to ignore that, as a people, for far too long. We must also make make clear to our elected representatives that they must never authorize sustained warfare except in the face of direct military threat. We cannot use the need for law enforcement as an excuse to wage war, and we cannot allow wars to be prosecuted for any policy purpose other than actual defense of our nation. And we must dismantle the Military/Industrial/Congressional complex that Gen. Eisenhower warned us about fifty years ago, and end, even more particularly, the culture of military contracts and privatization of military functions. The resources and jobs involved can be redirected towards creating a renewable energy economy, rebuilding and extending our transportation and other infrastructures, and creating a society that works for its people. These kinds of jobs create a much greater multiplier effect than military contracting does anyway.
We have been prosecuting war without either truth or just cause, for years on end, and as a consequence, the people do not trust the government, and the government does not tell the truth or even enforce its own laws and principles. It is very much analogous to a cancer: it infects and destroys everything in the body politic.
The prospect of change is incredibly daunting: wresting control from the warhawks, who have their hands in almost everything (including most politicians in both parties) will be a huge struggle. But, even more than the failures of the financial sector, I am more and more convinced that it is this culture of war for its own sake that is the primary factor destroying what's left of the essential idea of America, and bankrupting her both morally and economically.
If those of us who still love the real America, the America of the Constitutional Convention and the Bill of Rights, do not make the effort to force this rotten and evil system to change, we will reap the cruel and bitter harvest: the final end of liberal democracy as we had known it in our country. I just don't see how it can be any other way.
I believe it really is as stark as this: this must change, or we are doomed as a free society. We simply cannot muster the moral will or the resources to fix our economy, move forward to a post-oil energy system, or address the utter failure of the social contract which has manifested itself since 1980 (health care, full employment, infrastructure, energy independence, fostering a production economy... the list is long)... without first ending this culture of war as an end in itself. Even the financial debacle is, in my view, related: it is the failure of moral integrity as a nation which allowed it to happen.
Even apart from that, the cost of these wars is crippling us: some estimates put the total cost of Iraq and Afghanistan at over five trillion dollars, about half our national debt. And for the first time in history, we have in the last decade been waging these wars mostly off the books, essentially without paying for them at all, instead encumbering our nation with unsustainable debt. If moral argument doesn't carry the day, the economic argument is strong: we can no longer afford both guns and butter; but in the post Cold-war world the need for a vast military machine actually waging war just doesn't make sense anymore.
We must reestablish the principle that only Congress may declare war, and that war may not prosecuted without its authorization (meaning its express declaration of war). This is, in fact, the only reasonable interpretation of the black letter of the Constitution, but we've chosen to ignore that, as a people, for far too long. We must also make make clear to our elected representatives that they must never authorize sustained warfare except in the face of direct military threat. We cannot use the need for law enforcement as an excuse to wage war, and we cannot allow wars to be prosecuted for any policy purpose other than actual defense of our nation. And we must dismantle the Military/Industrial/Congressional complex that Gen. Eisenhower warned us about fifty years ago, and end, even more particularly, the culture of military contracts and privatization of military functions. The resources and jobs involved can be redirected towards creating a renewable energy economy, rebuilding and extending our transportation and other infrastructures, and creating a society that works for its people. These kinds of jobs create a much greater multiplier effect than military contracting does anyway.
We have been prosecuting war without either truth or just cause, for years on end, and as a consequence, the people do not trust the government, and the government does not tell the truth or even enforce its own laws and principles. It is very much analogous to a cancer: it infects and destroys everything in the body politic.
The prospect of change is incredibly daunting: wresting control from the warhawks, who have their hands in almost everything (including most politicians in both parties) will be a huge struggle. But, even more than the failures of the financial sector, I am more and more convinced that it is this culture of war for its own sake that is the primary factor destroying what's left of the essential idea of America, and bankrupting her both morally and economically.
If those of us who still love the real America, the America of the Constitutional Convention and the Bill of Rights, do not make the effort to force this rotten and evil system to change, we will reap the cruel and bitter harvest: the final end of liberal democracy as we had known it in our country. I just don't see how it can be any other way.
04 October 2010
DeMint: Sexually Active Unmarried Women And Gay Teachers Should Be Barred
Is this guy, whom the Party of No (Sense) treats as a big leader, for real?
So what are they supposed to do about it?
My reaction to news of the terrorism warnings to Americans in Europe is the same as Anne Applebaum's (in Slate): this does no good; short of just coming home, what are people supposed to do with these warnings?
Krugman points out a remarkable fact
"...every major contender for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination who isn’t currently holding office and isn’t named Mitt Romney is now a paid contributor to Fox News."
Me loving it
Even Rasmussen, a notoriously right-leaning polling org., finds Whitman now losing to Brown by 5 pts.
And TPM shows Boxer "surging."
At least our major candidates in California seem to be doing well.
Now let's hope the old saw about California being a harbinger for the rest of the nation holds true, and the electorate nationwide starts coming to its senses before it's too late, and ends up returning solid Democratic majorities to both houses of Congress.
UPDATE: And TPM's poll average on the generic congressional ballot, which had been as high as 10pt. spread in favor of the Party of No (Sense), is now down to ~2%.
CONCLUSION: We can win this, and it's past time to get serious about mobilizing the base.
And TPM shows Boxer "surging."
At least our major candidates in California seem to be doing well.
Now let's hope the old saw about California being a harbinger for the rest of the nation holds true, and the electorate nationwide starts coming to its senses before it's too late, and ends up returning solid Democratic majorities to both houses of Congress.
UPDATE: And TPM's poll average on the generic congressional ballot, which had been as high as 10pt. spread in favor of the Party of No (Sense), is now down to ~2%.
CONCLUSION: We can win this, and it's past time to get serious about mobilizing the base.
30 September 2010
Gliese 581 ... «Goldilocks» planet?
Washington Post reports on a recent announcement by Paul Butler of UC Santa Cruz of the "discovery" (in their data from 11 years of observing) of a «Goldilocks» planet in the Gliese 581 red dwarf system that's similar enough to Earth in both mass and amount of stellar radiation received to be potentially habitable... the first such planetary discovery since the first exoplanets were discovered in 1995.
Of course, it's far from identical to Earth. Gliese 581 is a pretty tiny star, giving off only about 1% of the energy of the Sun. This planet is almost certainly tidally locked, like the Moon vis-a-vis the Earth, so it will have peculiar climatic conditions, at minimum. News reports fail to mention also the possiblity of frequent (and probably fatal to nearby planetary life) stellar flares, which are very common in small red dwarf stars.
Still, it's encouraging that a planet with the right mass and distance to primary to have liquid water and other factors necessary for life has finally been found.
Incidentally, Wikipedia quotes an age of 7-11 billion years, significantly older than the solar system. (Time for evolution to have worked even if conditions weren't quite as optimal as here?) On the other hand, the proportion of metals in the stellar atmosphere is rather low, which is thought to hamper the development of life, and see Simon Conway Morris on the rather intractable problems of photosynthesis when the peak radiation from the primary is in the infrared, which is what you have here.
Gliese 581 is 20.3 l.y. distant, in Libra, and is classed as M3V, a bit larger than the median red dwarf type. The Wiki article says it's "thought to be too massive" to be a flare star, so the stellar flare caveat above may not apply.
Of course, it's far from identical to Earth. Gliese 581 is a pretty tiny star, giving off only about 1% of the energy of the Sun. This planet is almost certainly tidally locked, like the Moon vis-a-vis the Earth, so it will have peculiar climatic conditions, at minimum. News reports fail to mention also the possiblity of frequent (and probably fatal to nearby planetary life) stellar flares, which are very common in small red dwarf stars.
Still, it's encouraging that a planet with the right mass and distance to primary to have liquid water and other factors necessary for life has finally been found.
Incidentally, Wikipedia quotes an age of 7-11 billion years, significantly older than the solar system. (Time for evolution to have worked even if conditions weren't quite as optimal as here?) On the other hand, the proportion of metals in the stellar atmosphere is rather low, which is thought to hamper the development of life, and see Simon Conway Morris on the rather intractable problems of photosynthesis when the peak radiation from the primary is in the infrared, which is what you have here.
Gliese 581 is 20.3 l.y. distant, in Libra, and is classed as M3V, a bit larger than the median red dwarf type. The Wiki article says it's "thought to be too massive" to be a flare star, so the stellar flare caveat above may not apply.
29 September 2010
Third World America -- Huffington
It's fashionable in some circles to dis Arianna Huffington, but her book Third World America is a telling and well-thought out manifesto for what progressive politics really needs to focus on in the next few years. Here are a couple of samples:
In other words, in the absence of manufacturing, the only way to compete with Third World nations is to become a Third World nation, which is exactly what will happen if we allow our middle class to disappear....
'The financial sector,' wrote Martin Wolf of the Financial Times, 'seems to be a machine to transfer income and wealth from outsiders to insiders, while increasing the fragility of the economy as a whole.' When a chief economics commentator at the Financial Times is sounding like the second coming of Karl Marx, you know things have gotten way out of hand.
27 September 2010
Emanuel out -- good news
Although the timing is curious, and probably inauspicious, I can't but welcome the news of the departure of Rahm Emanuel, whom I believe has ill-served this president since taking office. Dare we hope that this signals a clear shift to a new strategy, such as even former Pres. Clinton has been advocating of late; of articulating a clear alternative message? I am completely certain that this, rather than "triangulation" or whatever you call it, is the way to win back Independents, minimize midterm losses, and set the stage for a big Democratic comeback in 2012.
Both Boxer and Brown finally shown winning
In the most depressing political season since 2004 if not 2002, this is a ray of sunshine:
The LA Times new poll numbers:
Boxer 51%, Fiorina 43%.
Brown 49%, Whitman 44%.
The LA Times new poll numbers:
Boxer 51%, Fiorina 43%.
Brown 49%, Whitman 44%.
10 September 2010
Thumbs up on Goolsbee
Although I would prefer someone with more solid progressive chops (would Jamie Galbraith take the job?), I am reasonably pleased with the appointment of Austan Goolsbee to replace Romer as chief WH economist. At least he's firmly opposed to extending the Bush tax cuts for the very richest Americans and in favor of robust financial reform.
09 September 2010
Yet another comment to the White House on Social Security / Medicare
If the president listens to this so-called budget/deficit commission's recommendations to cut social security and/or medicare, he can kiss reelection goodbye. A winning strategy for Democrats is NOT embracing Republican lies and disinformation, and adopting their policies: it is clearly articulating to the American people the progressive alternative.
Only ONE fix is needed for Social Security. Remove the cap on taxes from $106,000; tax all income.
The same fix will also apply to Medicare, plus one other; as part of further needed reform to health care across the board, reimbursement rates need to be controlled, and any participation by private insurers must be strictly limited to NONPROFIT entities.
Cuts to benefits, or raising eligibility requirements are NOT the answer and would be a TOTAL BETRAYAL of everything this president campaigned on and was elected to do.
Only ONE fix is needed for Social Security. Remove the cap on taxes from $106,000; tax all income.
The same fix will also apply to Medicare, plus one other; as part of further needed reform to health care across the board, reimbursement rates need to be controlled, and any participation by private insurers must be strictly limited to NONPROFIT entities.
Cuts to benefits, or raising eligibility requirements are NOT the answer and would be a TOTAL BETRAYAL of everything this president campaigned on and was elected to do.
07 September 2010
TNR editor Peretz: Muslims unworthy of 1st Amendment
OK, racist blowhard (and, incredibly enough, New Republic editor) Marty Peretz is a pretty easy target, but this is incredible.
Another Bad Sign: More Republican Policy Ideas from the Obama Administration
Now this is discouraging. Not only is the Obama administration's idea of job creating stimulus at this point more tax cuts for business (which have been shown to have less than a third of the "ripple effect" in an economy than direct spending on jobs programs or even just sending people money as tax rebates); we see here that now former Budget Director Orszag has floated a trial balloon in the Atlantic, saying that a "compromise" of extending the Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich for TWO YEARS would help the economy, but that after that, those big bad Republicans will just have to let them expire, unless, well, maybe another two years, or, whatever they want. OK, I'm paraphrasing. But talk about spineless. Or, more probably, in their pocket all along.
I'm sorry, but I just don't believe Orszag said this without the full vetting and approval of Rahm Emmanuel and the administration. This is the exact opposite of what they should be saying.
If Obama were even a tenth the progressive that FDR was, he'd say he will veto any extension of tax cuts for upper income Americans and veto any cuts to social security or medicare benefits for ordinary people. That's the absolute least he can do.
And they wonder why "the base," that they insult and ignore alternately, isn't enthusiastic going into the midterms. Give us something to hope for, some change we can believe in, damnit, not more Republican policies!
I keep hearing that Democrats shoot themselves in the foot when they criticize the administration, but it's just a fact that this administration has watered down every major progressive idea they talked about in the campaign. Obama has really painted himself into a corner. He's talked tough to Wall Street, then backed "reforms" that did very little; gaining no support from beleaguered and angry people hurt by the economy, AND gaining the enmity of Wall Street. Health Care Reform, while a good start, failed to really control the costs of health care, and it doesn't go into effect for years, so it scares people; and the public has turned against it; political negative. People are increasingly (and rightly) concerned about a failing war in Afghanistan, which is a sure-fire presidential popularity killer. It's a crying shame, but it's hard to avoid the conclusion that this presidency is failing.
I'm sorry, but I just don't believe Orszag said this without the full vetting and approval of Rahm Emmanuel and the administration. This is the exact opposite of what they should be saying.
If Obama were even a tenth the progressive that FDR was, he'd say he will veto any extension of tax cuts for upper income Americans and veto any cuts to social security or medicare benefits for ordinary people. That's the absolute least he can do.
And they wonder why "the base," that they insult and ignore alternately, isn't enthusiastic going into the midterms. Give us something to hope for, some change we can believe in, damnit, not more Republican policies!
I keep hearing that Democrats shoot themselves in the foot when they criticize the administration, but it's just a fact that this administration has watered down every major progressive idea they talked about in the campaign. Obama has really painted himself into a corner. He's talked tough to Wall Street, then backed "reforms" that did very little; gaining no support from beleaguered and angry people hurt by the economy, AND gaining the enmity of Wall Street. Health Care Reform, while a good start, failed to really control the costs of health care, and it doesn't go into effect for years, so it scares people; and the public has turned against it; political negative. People are increasingly (and rightly) concerned about a failing war in Afghanistan, which is a sure-fire presidential popularity killer. It's a crying shame, but it's hard to avoid the conclusion that this presidency is failing.
03 September 2010
Robert Reich: income inequality prevents recovery
Robert Reich's piece in today's New York Times is spot on, although I would have liked if he had discussed some models for how the U.S. could change its policies to achieve a better balance between investment opportunity and a stable, well-compensated, well-educated, and healthy population. Such as the way the recovery has taken place in Germany, and just what it is that's different about Germany's socioeconomic model that's made that possible.
We need to wake up in this country and realize that our political and economic systems, including our systems of compensating working people and providing social services to our population, are broken, and that there are models on the other side of the Atlantic that illustrate quite well the sorts of reforms we need to make.
We need to wake up in this country and realize that our political and economic systems, including our systems of compensating working people and providing social services to our population, are broken, and that there are models on the other side of the Atlantic that illustrate quite well the sorts of reforms we need to make.
A reminder to us older folks
At times like these, when the world seems old and her problems insuperable, we should remember that this is how it seems to us, who have lived in her for however many decades, and seen the same problems go unsolved so many times: to the young, however it has devolved, the world is new, and full of wonder, and nothing is beyond imagination.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
