Five Brave Republicans

By now you've all read the news that the Veterans Job Corp bill failed to pass the US Senate yesterday by only two votes. You've probably also heard that this was a surprise, as it was purposely crafted to be bi-partisan and non-political, with input from Republicans as well as Democrats.

Whether the Republican change of heart was due, as they claim, to the bill's costs, or whether, as many believe, it was because they felt putting anybody to work (veteran or not) just before the election would help President Obama's re-election efforts, is not the point of this post.

While every other liberal bloggers is shaming the Republicans who contributed to the bill, only to vote against it, I'd like to take a few moments to thank the five Republican Senators who actually voted their conscience, and chose to help our veterans, and our country, and put policy above politics for at least this one issue.

They are: Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, each of Maine, Dean Heller of Nevada, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

Of course, some might say, it's easy to be brave if you're not running for re-election this year. Olympia Snowe is retiring from her Senate seat, so this may be one of her last votes ever, but she has many times demonstrated her independence from the Republican leadership. In fact, her frustration with the current Republican mind-set of destroying Obama before fixing America may be part of her decision to not seek re-election. I would like to thank Senator Snowe for her service to our country.

Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins are each in safe seats this year, so this vote may or may not come back to haunt them later. Even so, there are many more Republican Senators in safe seats (Senators face re-election every six years), why are there only two willing to vote for jobs for veterans? Safe or not, it takes courage to cross party lines these days.

Scott Brown and Dean Heller are each facing re-election this year, which makes their votes even more important. Brown is running in traditionally liberal Massachusetts against the nationally known (and funded) Elizabeth Warren. Some might dismiss this move as just playing to local biases, but considering that when Brown first entered the Senate (filling Ted Kennedy's old seat) it was feared he'd be the furthest right tea-bagger of them all, he still deserves to be thanked for this vote.

I know less about Heller, other than that he's a recent appointee now running for the first time to continue in the Senate. For a "new guy," who probably needs the help of the National RNC in his election, to buck the tide and go against the party is, to me, a positive sign of independence.

Okay, enough positivity and praising of Republicans. I will use this one paragraph to point out those who voted against this bill. Or, rather, one Republican Senator in particular. I find it dishonorable and disgusting (but not surprising) that "the mother of all mavericks," John McCain, is not on this list of those who put veterans above party. Shame on you, Senator McCain.

My Day With Newt

"I'm not a natural leader. I'm too intellectual; I'm too abstract; I think too much."

- Newton Leroy Gingrich

Poor Newt should have realized it was over last week when he was bit by penguin, but he's slow to process these things. You know, because he's an abstract intellectual and has to think things through. Even after losing five more primary contests yesterday, he's still officially in the race for another week, with plans to likely drop out on May 1. My guess is that he bet somebody that he'd make it through April.

But it reminds me of how, after he resigned the post of Speaker of the House in disgrace, in November 1998, following investigation into his ethics violations, he still hung around Congress another couple of months, clinging to his seat there till January 1999. And then all America figured that, like Dick Nixon, we wouldn't have Newt Gingrich to kick around anymore.

At the time, I was working for an organization called HandsNet. We were kind of like a nonprofit AOL for human services professionals. It was a fun and exciting time, and somewhere between surviving the Y2K scare of 1999 and not surviving the dot-com bust of 2001, my boss, Michael, and I were invited to participate in a forum on public policy and the Internet.

It was a fairly intimate group - no more than 100 people - assembled in a meeting room at San Jose's Fairmont Hotel, with tech execs, local politicians, and Michael and I representing the nonprofit ".org" space. We were taking our seats and looking over the agenda when a gnome-like little round man with sunken cheeks came waddling into the room with a small entourage. I turned to Michael and said, "Poor SOB has to go through life looking like Newt Gingrich." We each laughed.

Then the introductions started... Oops. It was Newt.

My memory of the day was that, much as I would have liked to confirm his evil bastardness with some heinous statement or another, he turned out to be a good participant. He did not try to dominate the conversation, and when in dialog with others he listened respectfully, and his responses showed that he heard the other person's points - even if he didn't agree.

At the end of the day I felt that his leaving Congress had humbled him. I also felt that I had gotten a glimpse of Professor Gingrich, and that he wasn't quite so bombastic and egotistical as Speaker Gingrich had been. His full political rehabilitation to where he would be considered by many to be a semi-plausible contender for the Republic Presidential nomination would take another decade. And, as we've seen, in that decade his arrogance was fully recovered as well.

I mentioned this meeting a couple of weeks ago, when I was catching up with Michael over lunch. He had no recollection of either the forum or of crossing paths with the former Speaker. So it goes.

And so we bid farewell to the 2012 Presidential campaign of Newt Gingrich. We'll miss him. Well, Michael won't, but somebody will, I'm sure.

Freedom of the Press? We're #47!

Media watchdog organization, Reporters Without Borders, has just released their World Press Freedom Index - a tracking of several indicators of press freedom - and the United Sates has fallen 27 points since their last survey; from #20 to #47. That puts us behind Slovakia, El Salvador, and Ghana, but still (slightly) ahead of Latvia and Haiti.

Much of the reason for the sharp drop this year is attributed to local over-reaction to the Occupy movement, with mayors and police chiefs nationwide having journalists carried away along with demonstrators. The great irony in all this is that American journalists now have greater freedom in covering protests overseas than they do at home.

But beyond last fall's local yahoos trying to make their city streets safe for holiday shoppers, the crackdown on a free press in America continued yesterday in Washington, DC, at a hearing of the House Science Committee, where Oscar-nominated documentary director, Josh Fox, was arrested for trying to film part of the hearing:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

As Fox says in this interview, "The First Amendment to the Constitution states explicitly 'Congress shall make no law... that infringes on the Freedom of the Press.'" Is Congress exempt from the Constitution now, or have we just decided that we no longer need a free press?

Two Week Warning - Get Out and Vote!

It's hard to believe two weeks from now, as I write, we'll be starting to see the mid-term election results coming in. Even harder to believe that I've blogged so little about this election (see It Ain't Over Till it's Over). It's not that I don't care, or that there's nothing to say; perhaps there's so much that it's overwhelming.

To recap for newer readers, I call myself "left-of-center, Independent." I left the Democratic party in disgust around late '94 or early '95. I was registered as Green for several years, but have most recently registered as "Decline to State." Simply put, I have always rejected the idea of voting for "the lesser of two evils" when there are multiple "3rd party" and independent options on the ballot.

But this year, much as I expected and hoped for more from President Obama and the great Democratic majorities in Congress, I am terrified of the possibility of the Republicans taking back either (or both) houses of Congress.

This year's Republican nominees are not the principled conservatives we debated with in the past. These are fringe candidates with dangerous ideas, not just to turn back the small progress the Democrats have made in the last 21 months, but to turn the clock back decades, if not centuries, on our fragile democracy.

These are candidates who want to repeal not only the new health care reforms, and the new student loan reforms, but who want to repeal Medicare and turn your Social Security over to the same Wall Street fat-cats who put us into our current economic mess. These are candidates who question whether the Voting Rights Act of 1964 went too far. They don't just question Roe v. Wade, they've vowed to ban all abortions, even in cases of rape and incest.

But I'm sure you've read all that, or seen it on TV or online. My only point here is if you're staring in disbelief at candidates like Christine O'Donnell or Carl Paladino, just imagine having to hear from them for the next two, or four, or six years, or more.

Maybe you're disappointed in the Democrats too. I know I'm sure as hell overdue for an economic recovery myself. The rebuilding of our future may still have a long way to go, but at least we've stopped digging the hole.

This year, this left-of-center independent is proudly voting a full Democratic ticket, and I'm encouraging everybody who's concerned for their future to do the same. The stakes are just too high to sit this one out.

It Ain't Over Till It's Over

With yesterday's dramatic ending to the 2010 primary election season, starring anti-masturbation activist Christine O'Donnell winning the Delaware GOP Senate nomination, and racist-sexist email comedian Carl Paladino winning the New York GOP Gubernatorial nomination, each over the "official" Republican party candidates for those offices, today's headlines are mostly of the Tea Party Victories that are expected to sweep US politics into a new era of populist know-nothing-ism come November.

As much as I fear some of these far-right xenophobic dilettantes actually being elected, I think the story line of this being a warning of what's to come in 2012's presidential race is a bit overblown.

Here's what the pundits are going off of:

• The president's party, historically, "always" looses seats in the first mid-term election.
• The majority party, historically, "always" looses seats when the economy is down.
• Trust in Washington is at "historic lows" (they say this, but I haven't actually seen polls going back very far to demonstrate just how historic these lows are).
• Turn-out in Republican primaries this year has been higher than in Democratic ones.

But let's look at things in the proper perspective.

• Despite the handful of high profile nut-cases winning Tea/Republican Party nominations this season, over 95% of Congressional incumbents seeking reelection won their primaries.
• Of course Republican primaries had higher turn-outs: they were the ones being contested by the Tea Party wing-nuts. Most of the Democrats had little serious competition to draw out voters.

And here's the big kicker of why 2010 does not guarantee a Tea Party Victory in 2012:

• They're winning this year by bringing out lots of first-time voters, and if there's one more "historically, always" we can add to our list, it's that first-time voters are typically one-time voters.

Yes, the Republicans will pick up several seats in Congress seven weeks from now, perhaps even capture a slim majority of one of the houses. And, yes, there will likely be some fresh new tea-stained faces among them. And, yes, they will cause plenty of trouble for the president. And, just as certainly, they will fail to completely destroy Washington.

While they will certainly have some successes, they will fail to eliminate the IRS, Social Security, and the Department of Education. They will not end the debate over gay marriage, put a stop to legal abortion, and effect the deportation of every Muslim and Latino. And when they fail to achieve all their goals (remember, it's all or nothing for these guys), their followers will turn on them and crawl back under the rocks where they've been hiding all along.

The Tea Party Movement may be big news today, but most polls show that they only represent about 19% of the electorate. If they're the only ones who show up on election day, they can win. But they cannot put together enough of a majority to govern. And I predict that these political neophytes will not have the stamina or the momentum to put Sarah Palin (or similar) in the White House in 2012.

At least, this is what I keep telling myself in order to get to sleep at night.

News Flash! Congress Still Has Power!

For the first time since G.W. Bush assumed the presidency (actually, for the first time since 1998), Congress has actually voted to over-ride a Presidential veto!

It wasn't anything dramatic, like ending a needless and illegal war, or providing health care to un-insured children, but it's a significant step never-the-less. The bill was the $23 billion water resources bill that Bush claimed was "filled with unnecessary projects."

"Unnecessary projects" like restoration efforts for a few communities that have been hit by hurricanes and building dams and sewage treatment facilities. You know, nothing that we need or rely on or anything.

Considering it's now been a full year since the public showed their dissatisfaction with the Bush administration by electing a new, Democratic controlled, Congress, it's about time they stood up to the President and did the right thing, despite his protests.

Has democracy returned to the land? Can we expect Congress to move on other issues where the public and the president are at odds?

Don't hold your breath. Unless you can figure out how to put $23 billion of local construction contracts into a bill to end the war, you'll never get enough Reps and Senators to sign on.

Carnival of the Decline of Democracy - Edition 2.20

Welcome to the Carnival of the Decline of Democracy, Edition 2.20 - Blogging 'till the secret police take us away.

Although I've been busy with other things (work?) and not able to post much, this has been a very blogworthy couple of weeks. Between the farce of Congressional outrage at MoveOn.org and the continued outrage of racism in Jena, LA, the demise of freedom and democracy has been apparent in every headline.

Let's see how our bloggers responded:

Ian Welsh presents MoveOn And the Kabuki Congress posted at The Agonist & Elyas Bakhtiari presents Congress betrays us posted at Ablogistan.

therapydoc presents The Jena 6, over a year later posted at Everyone Needs Therapy & Alex Landis presents The Jena 6: The 10 Reasons The Fit Hit The Shan posted at AlexLandis.com.

J.R. presents Your Government Lies to You posted at Harsh Realizations.

Barry Leiba presents Press coverage posted at Staring At Empty Pages.

Chani presents Are ideas dangerous? posted at Thailand Gal.

Hell's Handmaiden presents Blogs for Federal Deficits posted at hell's handmaiden.

vjack presents Army Violates Religious Freedom posted at Atheist Revolution.

I'll be back in two weeks (October 15) with the next edition of the Carnival of the Decline of Democracy - Submit Your Posts Here. More information on future carnivals can be found on our carnival home page.

That goofy Don Wildmon is at it again!

Well, I'm going to get hate mail! Whenever I pick on poor, little Donny Wildmon I get tons of email telling me how wrong I've got him, and what a swell guy Don is, and how all he really cares about is the kids.

So, when I finish this posting and call him a lying son of a bitch, whose hatred of anybody who disagrees with him is so deep that he'll stoop to the lowest point to defeat them, I'm going to get some hate mail.

Here's the latest from Wildmon's American Family Association. It's an Action Alert to Congress, "In Defense of Religious Freedom."

Be one of one million Americans willing to take a stand in defense of two of our most precious freedoms—freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Here’s why:

• A California lawsuit which is now headed to the U.S. Supreme Court would make the use of the words “natural family,” “marriage” and “union of a man and a woman” a “hate speech” crime in government workplaces. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has already ruled in favor of the plaintiffs.
• CNN and The Washington Post both reported that General Peter Pace, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff, was fired because of his publicly expressed moral opposition to homosexual behavior.
• A bill now before Congress (H.R. 1592 / S. 1105) would criminalize negative comments concerning homosexuality, such as calling the practice of homosexuality a sin from the pulpit, a “hate crime” punishable by a hefty fine and time in prison. This dangerous legislation would take away our freedom of speech and our freedom of religion.

...Please sign our petition and forward to other freedom-loving Americans.

Gosh, I'd sign the petition myself if it weren't for the fact that all three of their bullet points are outright fabricated, fictional, LIES!

• The court case referenced had nothing to do with "hate speech." It had to do with speech in the workplace, and an employers' "administrative interest" in dealing with non-work-related situations that distract employees from their work.
• General Pace was dismissed for a number of reasons, including his comments on homosexuals. But that was not the primary reason; that was because of the administration's bungling of the Iraq war. Remember the war?
• And, most importantly, the Hate Crimes Bill has absolutely nothing in it about Hate Speech. It only criminalizes the willful infliction of bodily injury on others.

Don Wildmon is not a loving person. He is not a good person. He is not looking out for anybody but himself and a narrow group of people who support him, and who he can control. And he doesn't even trust them to do what he asks without having to resort to lies to convince them.

Wildmon is nothing but a lying son of a bitch, whose hatred of anybody who disagrees with him is so deep that he'll stoop to the lowest point to defeat them.

Many thanks to the Snopes Urban Legend page for researching the facts on this one.

The Food Stamp Diet

There's a new diet sweeping the halls of Congress and many local legislatures throughout the U.S. this week. It's one loaded with fats and carbs, and probably won't help you lose anything but your appetite.

It's the Food Stamp Challenge, where elected representatives try to live on the approximately $3 per day that those on Food Stamps must live on. Big juicy steaks have been replaced with bologna sandwiches in the Capitol dining room, the Taco Bell Value Menu has become a favorite meal out, and for those Congressmen and women who've been willing to put their stomach where their mouth is, it's been a heck of a week.

From Representative Barbara Lee's Food Stamp Challenge diary:

It's hard to concentrate for any length of time on anything except food. I don't know how people with no money for decent meals do anything - study, work, exercise, read, have fun, etc. It's all about just making it through the day. ... (day three)

... This is such an unhealthy diet. I am trying to eat the most healthy food I can afford, but I have no problem imagining how someone eating like this could quickly develop diabetes or high cholesterol. And with all these carbs, I can see how easy it would be to gain a fair amount of weight. ... (day four)

Could you live on $3 per day? I'm pretty sure I couldn't. While typing this short blog entry I ate my breakfast of a Cliff bar and a Crystal Geyser Juice Squeeze, leaving me less than a dollar for the next 15 hours or so before I go back to bed.

Obviously, the members of Congress (and local officials) who are participating are doing this to raise awareness of the challenges that millions of Americans face in providing their family with food security, and to build support for the Farm Bill that includes an increase in federal support for the Food Stamp program.

Is your rep on the Food Stamp Diet? Do you think he or she should experience poverty first hand? Why not send them a note and suggest they get on board.

Carnival of the Decline of Democracy - Edition 2.4

Welcome to the Carnival of the Decline of Democracy, Edition 2.4 - Blogging 'till the secret police take us away. A day late, but every bit as fresh as usual.

D.A.N. presents Religion and Politics: Can We Actually Separate Church and State? posted at Sights & Sounds from the Fifth Column.

Mike Billy presents 15-Year-Old Girl Arrested For Sexually Abusing Herself posted at Reflections From A Rotting Nation.

Rey Thomas presents Bush Foreign Policy Under Seige posted at The Thomas Political Report.

DigitalRichDaily presents Unanswered Questions.

Dave Burdick presents Nonbinding?.

Steven Silvers presents If your advertising agency isn’t getting arrested, maybe they're not trying hard enough. posted at Scatterbox.

Avant News presents Virginia Boy Scouts Stumble on Cheney's Undisclosed Location.

The next edition of the Carnival will be posted on Monday, March 5th, 2007 with entries requested by Saturday, March 3rd, at midnight. Submit your blog post for the next edition of the carnival of the decline of democracy using our carnival submission form. More information on future carnivals can be found on our carnival home page.

Chavez, the Decider

In a stunning move, the Venezuelan Congress has moved to grant President Hugo Chavez nearly unlimited power to rule by decree. According to congressional Vice-President Roberto Hernandez:

"We in the National Assembly will not waver in granting President Chavez an enabling law so he can quickly and urgently set up the framework for resolving the grave problems we have."

First of all, how can any elected leader lay claim to that kind of power. And secondly, how could a democratically elected body such as a Congress willingly give up its power to such a controlling ruler?

I mean, really. That's not what modern nations do. That's not how civilized people behave. That's not what you'd ever see happen here in the...

Oh... Never mind.

In other news, all your innermost thoughts must now be approved a presidential appointee.

The State of the Union v. Oscar Nominations

Last night's State of the Union address began appropriately enough by marking the historic occasion of a President addressing a female Speaker of the House. From there it drifted into a feel-good, fact-less, national pep talk that could have originated from the middle of the road of any political party.

Bush has, apparently, just discovered that there are millions of Americans with no health coverage, and that health care costs have been destroying families and lives. Oh, and it seems that making a lot of pollution isn't very good for the environment either. But, by-golly-gosh, we're Americans and we work together to solve all of this, yes-siree!

The speech seemed to be nearly over by the time there was any mention that we might be in the midst of a quagmire. Excuse me, a war against evil. But we're just doing a swell job there, too, if we can just approach it with the same determination that's fixing all those domestic issues we just discussed.

All was swell, and without controversy, on the surface. Just don't scratch the surface too deep. For one thing (reports the Washington Post) Bush's description of "the enemy" was full of misdirection and outright lies. His blending of events and situations into one incohesive mass is typified is such quotes as "The Shia and Sunni extremists are different faces of the same totalitarian threat."

At one point, Bush catalogued what he described as advances in the quest for freedom in the Middle East during 2005 -- such as the departure of Syrian troops from Lebanon and elections in Iraq. Then, Bush asserted, "a thinking enemy watched all of these scenes, adjusted their tactics and in 2006 they struck back." But his description of the actions of "the enemy" tried to tie together a series of diplomatic and military setbacks that had virtually no connection to one another, from an attack on a Sunni mosque in Iraq to the assassination of Maronite Lebanese political figure.

Oh, and there were contradictions in his alternative energy plan too.

Meanwhile, the Oscar nominations (full list here) were all controversy on the surface, but logical and sound choices at the core. The big controversy is that Dreamgirls received the most nominations, over-all, but was snubbed in the Best Picture category.

This supposed snub is, presumably, a result of the latent racism of the Academy and Hollywood in general. Some of these racial snubs in the past may indeed have been unfair, this time, however, I don't buy it.

I loved Dreamgirls. I thought it was a wonderful movie, and certainly one of my favorites of the past year. The nominations it received were all well-deserved and I expect to see a few winners out of the group. But "best picture?" The performances (especially the supporting performances) were great. The art direction, production design, and music all worked together to bring the picture to life. But "best picture?"

I expected it to get a nomination in that category, because of all that went right with the film, but would have been disappointed if it won because of what went wrong. Mainly, the way the story fell apart at the end. Too many loose pieces and disjointed elements were conveniently washed away in order to bring all the characters into the big finale together.

And, as good as Beyonce and Jamie Foxx were, having a "supporting" cast (Jennifer Hudson and Eddie Murphy) that could out-sing, out-act, and consistently up-stage them also took it out of the running.

So, let's see... The State of the Union versus the Oscar Nominations... which was more exciting? The envelope please... And the award goes to... Oscar Nominations!

Carnival of the Decline of Democracy - 2.1

Happy New Year & Welcome to the Carnival of the Decline of Democracy, Edition 2.1 - Blogging 'till the secret police take us away.

Having taken a few weeks off for the holidays there were many, many, great blog entries in my in-box. It's always hard to narrow it down, but I think you'll enjoy and learn from what I've selected:

Justin Lowery presents US Policy: Self-Determination or Imperialism?

Bill Losapio presents The Source of the National Debt, Why It Will NEVER Be Paid, and Why the Federal Reserve Should Be Liquidated (part 1 of 2).

David Gross presents The Picket Line — Is there any hope for a People Power movement in the U.S.A.?

John presents Heroin Sheikh: US Overthrow Means More Opiates for the Masses.

Rey Thomas presents The Thomas Political Report: For Bush, Troop Surge Is Last, Best and Worst Hope.

J.C. Wilmore presents Why Republicans will be excluded from power in the 110th Congress.

Dana presents Testing and mind reading.

Charles Feldman presents U.S. Solves Housing Shortage - Puts Everyone Behind Bars.

The next edition of the Carnival will be posted on Monday, January 22nd, 2007 with entries requested by Saturday, January 20th, at midnight. Submit your blog post for the next edition of the carnival of the decline of democracy using our carnival submission form. More information on future carnivals can be found on our carnival home page.