building the margins
Friday, November 26, 2004
Friday - buy nothing, Saturday - buy local
Happy Buy Nothing Day! Check out Adbusters to learn how people around the world are celebrating non-consumerism today.
This week marked the kick-off for Portland's Think Local First campaign. Why not spend today relaxing with family and friends, and head to some local shops tomorrow to start your holiday shopping?
If you really want to make a difference, shopping at locally-owned businesses is the way to do it. The money you spend at a national chain store is a drop in a huge bucket, but every dollar spent at a small store is needed and appreciated.
I usually only buy gifts at local stores or at Saturday Market. And I try to buy items that were made in the US, rather than mass-produced in China. And I buy (or make) presents that I think friends or family will truly use and value, rather than things that will just fill up shelves or get sent to Goodwill.
We only vote every 2 or 4 years for our politicians, but we get to vote for local economics several times a day with each decision to purchase something.
¶ 1:05 AM 0 comments
Happy Buy Nothing Day! Check out Adbusters to learn how people around the world are celebrating non-consumerism today.
This week marked the kick-off for Portland's Think Local First campaign. Why not spend today relaxing with family and friends, and head to some local shops tomorrow to start your holiday shopping?
If you really want to make a difference, shopping at locally-owned businesses is the way to do it. The money you spend at a national chain store is a drop in a huge bucket, but every dollar spent at a small store is needed and appreciated.
I usually only buy gifts at local stores or at Saturday Market. And I try to buy items that were made in the US, rather than mass-produced in China. And I buy (or make) presents that I think friends or family will truly use and value, rather than things that will just fill up shelves or get sent to Goodwill.
We only vote every 2 or 4 years for our politicians, but we get to vote for local economics several times a day with each decision to purchase something.
¶ 1:05 AM 0 comments
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
oh, the irony of it all
Powell is busy threatening the Ukraine today, saying the election results may put a damper on US-Ukraine relations. According to a NY Times article:
Why is it that when fishy stuff happens in the Ukraine, the US and EU rush to declare foul, but no one seems to give a damn that we handed control of our elections to pro-Bu$h corporations such as Diebold?
¶ 11:04 AM 0 comments
Powell is busy threatening the Ukraine today, saying the election results may put a damper on US-Ukraine relations. According to a NY Times article:
The United States and the European Union had both urged Ukraine not to certify the result until the claims of fraud had been investigated.
Why is it that when fishy stuff happens in the Ukraine, the US and EU rush to declare foul, but no one seems to give a damn that we handed control of our elections to pro-Bu$h corporations such as Diebold?
¶ 11:04 AM 0 comments
government declares war on women
This is it, ladies - the war on our rights has clearly begun.
Congress has approved the spending bill which contained an anti-abortion clause. The full implications of this are not yet completely understood, but it makes it likely hospitals receiving federal funding can refuse to provide abortion services or even to refer women to potential providers. Insurance companies and health clinics are also included in this despicable attack on women's rights.
As an editorial in today's Boston Globe points out, doctors already have the right not to provide an abortion if they object - extending this to hospitals, clinics and insurance companies only serves to limit access to a medical procedure that is - at least for now - still legal in this country.
The anti-women, anti-choice Repugnicants just further slimed this country and our rights by attaching this rider onto the omnibus spending bill.
The party of moral cowardice obviously decided that they couldn't face actually bringing this up again as a proper bill and having a proper debate about its merits (especially since all prior attempts to do get it passed have failed), so they sneaked it right up the back door.
Ladies (and gentlemen), our government has just given us the clearest signal possible that it's going to be all-out warfare on our rights for the next 4 years while the travesty of what used to be a democracy languishes under King George's control.
It's not enough that our government is hurting millions of women abroad with the global gag rule... our elected leaders are obviously bringing the battle home. And make no mistake, it is a war on women, led by religious leaders such as Jerry Falwell who this week referred to the National Organization of Women as the "National Order of Witches".
By their words and actions this week, Falwell and many of our elected officials have demonstrated their disrespect for women and have spit upon our struggle against being treated as second class citizens in our own country.
Now is the time to get active... I'm planning to rejoin Planned Parenthood as a member (and maybe to give memberships to friends as Christmas gifts). I challenge all progressive women and men out there to do the same. It would be intolerably un-American to allow the government to control our bodies and our right to our health and liberty.
I also call on you to talk with all your Libertarian-leaning friends to point out this and other transgressions against Americans in this spending bill. Despite their lip service to smaller government, the Republicans are very clearly not the party that wants less government control over Americans.
Our government, with the blessing of religious freaks such as Falwell, is trying to get in your hospital room, into your tax returns, and into your bedrooms to make sure that you aren't exercising any legal freedoms that they don't agree with. That is not freedom - that is fascism.
And it won't stop with this spending bill.
¶ 10:28 AM 0 comments
This is it, ladies - the war on our rights has clearly begun.
Congress has approved the spending bill which contained an anti-abortion clause. The full implications of this are not yet completely understood, but it makes it likely hospitals receiving federal funding can refuse to provide abortion services or even to refer women to potential providers. Insurance companies and health clinics are also included in this despicable attack on women's rights.
As an editorial in today's Boston Globe points out, doctors already have the right not to provide an abortion if they object - extending this to hospitals, clinics and insurance companies only serves to limit access to a medical procedure that is - at least for now - still legal in this country.
The anti-women, anti-choice Repugnicants just further slimed this country and our rights by attaching this rider onto the omnibus spending bill.
The party of moral cowardice obviously decided that they couldn't face actually bringing this up again as a proper bill and having a proper debate about its merits (especially since all prior attempts to do get it passed have failed), so they sneaked it right up the back door.
Ladies (and gentlemen), our government has just given us the clearest signal possible that it's going to be all-out warfare on our rights for the next 4 years while the travesty of what used to be a democracy languishes under King George's control.
It's not enough that our government is hurting millions of women abroad with the global gag rule... our elected leaders are obviously bringing the battle home. And make no mistake, it is a war on women, led by religious leaders such as Jerry Falwell who this week referred to the National Organization of Women as the "National Order of Witches".
By their words and actions this week, Falwell and many of our elected officials have demonstrated their disrespect for women and have spit upon our struggle against being treated as second class citizens in our own country.
Now is the time to get active... I'm planning to rejoin Planned Parenthood as a member (and maybe to give memberships to friends as Christmas gifts). I challenge all progressive women and men out there to do the same. It would be intolerably un-American to allow the government to control our bodies and our right to our health and liberty.
I also call on you to talk with all your Libertarian-leaning friends to point out this and other transgressions against Americans in this spending bill. Despite their lip service to smaller government, the Republicans are very clearly not the party that wants less government control over Americans.
Our government, with the blessing of religious freaks such as Falwell, is trying to get in your hospital room, into your tax returns, and into your bedrooms to make sure that you aren't exercising any legal freedoms that they don't agree with. That is not freedom - that is fascism.
And it won't stop with this spending bill.
¶ 10:28 AM 0 comments
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
propaganda, funding for flowers and yachts, and underfunded mandates
The Blue Lemur has a post with photos about Clear Channel billboards in Florida with Bu$h and the words "our leader" on them.
Perhaps Bu$h has been chatting with Saddam about ways to saturate public streets with his image? Has anyone checked the new spending bill to see if it includes funding for a Bu$h statue?
The purchaser of one of the billboards is Charles Clayton, a Florida developer who is obviously doing quite well under the Bu$h administration, judging from the high-end nature of his construction business.
He also is apparently a proponent of government-sponsored wildflower research in Florida. I guess Florida isn't beautiful enough already - they had to sell license plates to raise money to plant some flowers.
(Perhaps because developers are tearing up the environment to put houses in places where only flowers and trees should grow? And then after the developers make their money selling houses in places where people shouldn't live, the government - meaning you and I - gets the bill for disaster relief.)
Hey, maybe Clayton will get the contract to refurbish the presidential yacht?
Yo, prez, what about a national license plate project to raise money for school funding since your new spending bill is still almost a billion dollars short on what you requested in your 2005 budget? Funny how Republican lawmakers couldn't come up with the missing 950 million or so for schools, especially given the fact that the spending bill totals about $388 billion?
Hey, I have an idea. Education is voluntary, right? Why not fund it through voluntary purchases of license plates. The plates could have a picture of Bu$h reading My Pet Goat while the Twin Towers burn in the background, thus meeting two goals - raise money for the mandated party's underfunded education mandates and keep terror in people's minds so they'll be too afraid to speak out against the ridiculousness of a government more willing to buy yachts than to adequately fund education.
Or how about this - why don't we just privatize education? Why bother with government-funded education at all? Why, it smacks of misguided commie-ism. I say, if people want their children should be educated, they should just pay for it themselves.
But I digress... (it's just that when I try hold the words "Bush" and "leader" in my mind at the same time, my mind wobbles.)
¶ 1:50 AM 0 comments
The Blue Lemur has a post with photos about Clear Channel billboards in Florida with Bu$h and the words "our leader" on them.
Perhaps Bu$h has been chatting with Saddam about ways to saturate public streets with his image? Has anyone checked the new spending bill to see if it includes funding for a Bu$h statue?
The purchaser of one of the billboards is Charles Clayton, a Florida developer who is obviously doing quite well under the Bu$h administration, judging from the high-end nature of his construction business.
He also is apparently a proponent of government-sponsored wildflower research in Florida. I guess Florida isn't beautiful enough already - they had to sell license plates to raise money to plant some flowers.
(Perhaps because developers are tearing up the environment to put houses in places where only flowers and trees should grow? And then after the developers make their money selling houses in places where people shouldn't live, the government - meaning you and I - gets the bill for disaster relief.)
Hey, maybe Clayton will get the contract to refurbish the presidential yacht?
Yo, prez, what about a national license plate project to raise money for school funding since your new spending bill is still almost a billion dollars short on what you requested in your 2005 budget? Funny how Republican lawmakers couldn't come up with the missing 950 million or so for schools, especially given the fact that the spending bill totals about $388 billion?
Hey, I have an idea. Education is voluntary, right? Why not fund it through voluntary purchases of license plates. The plates could have a picture of Bu$h reading My Pet Goat while the Twin Towers burn in the background, thus meeting two goals - raise money for the mandated party's underfunded education mandates and keep terror in people's minds so they'll be too afraid to speak out against the ridiculousness of a government more willing to buy yachts than to adequately fund education.
Or how about this - why don't we just privatize education? Why bother with government-funded education at all? Why, it smacks of misguided commie-ism. I say, if people want their children should be educated, they should just pay for it themselves.
But I digress... (it's just that when I try hold the words "Bush" and "leader" in my mind at the same time, my mind wobbles.)
¶ 1:50 AM 0 comments
Sunday, November 21, 2004
what a piece of work it is
The new spending bill passed by Congress yesterday includes money for a presidential yacht. (thank you to blahguy who found this posted on Eschaton today.)
I'm sure all the kids without health insurance and all the homeless people out there are very proud to live in such a great nation where a little boy can dream that he'll grow up and be president some day, and that a yacht comes with the job.
Good thing that the government raised the ceiling of the national debt by 8 billion dollars last week.
¶ 1:19 PM 0 comments
The new spending bill passed by Congress yesterday includes money for a presidential yacht. (thank you to blahguy who found this posted on Eschaton today.)
The Senate voted 65-30 for the legislation late on Saturday that sets aside funds for a range of priorities including a presidential yacht, foreign aid and energy. It is one of the final pieces of work for the 108th Congress and they may return to finish a spy agency overhaul before the end of the year.
I'm sure all the kids without health insurance and all the homeless people out there are very proud to live in such a great nation where a little boy can dream that he'll grow up and be president some day, and that a yacht comes with the job.
Good thing that the government raised the ceiling of the national debt by 8 billion dollars last week.
¶ 1:19 PM 0 comments
rural women: better start saving those metal coat hangers
The GOP has attached a rider to the spending bill which will changed policy so that hospitals and health care providers which received federal funding can opt out of talking with women about abortion options or providing abortion services.
What does this mean? Well, if you are a woman in a town with limited options for health care, your right to an abortion may just have been taken away.
Looks like Bu$h doesn't need to appoint any judges to limit women's rights to control their health and their bodies... he just had the legislative branches do it for him as part of a must-pass spending bill.
anybody got a coat hanger? we're gonna need 'em...
¶ 12:28 PM 0 comments
The GOP has attached a rider to the spending bill which will changed policy so that hospitals and health care providers which received federal funding can opt out of talking with women about abortion options or providing abortion services.
What does this mean? Well, if you are a woman in a town with limited options for health care, your right to an abortion may just have been taken away.
Looks like Bu$h doesn't need to appoint any judges to limit women's rights to control their health and their bodies... he just had the legislative branches do it for him as part of a must-pass spending bill.
anybody got a coat hanger? we're gonna need 'em...
¶ 12:28 PM 0 comments
Friday, November 19, 2004
mad cow, influence peddling, and lame farming
Apparently, the US Department of Ag must be conducting focus groups to determine the preferred age and origin of 3 cows which are currently being tested for Mad Cow Disease.
That is the conclusion I've come to after reading a Reuters article about the cattle industry and "best/worst mad cow scenarios."
Despite the fact that someone, somewhere must know the identity of these cows since they are being tested, no information has been forthcoming regarding the cows' age or location.
Personally, I haven't eaten hamburgers at McDonald's or any other national fast food chain since I read Fast Food Nation over 3 years ago. The only places I ever order hamburger is at Burgerville or at a McMenamin's restaurant since both use Oregon Country Beef. And when I buy beef, it's directly from the farmer who raised it.
Heck, since the US Department of Ag (or whoever is still responsible for food safety in this country) wants to be cagey about details regarding food they'd like me to consume, I figure it's in my best interest to be equally cagey about spending my money on products that are possibly unsafe to eat.
Especially when I consider that the cattle industry spends a lot of money trying to influence our government. And because so many officials in our government come from the companies they are charged with regulating.
And especially since most hamburger meat in this country is produced from corn-fed cattle, which is both unhealthy and not resource efficient (why grow grain to feed cattle, when cattle are meant to eat grass instead?)
¶ 7:03 PM 0 comments
Apparently, the US Department of Ag must be conducting focus groups to determine the preferred age and origin of 3 cows which are currently being tested for Mad Cow Disease.
That is the conclusion I've come to after reading a Reuters article about the cattle industry and "best/worst mad cow scenarios."
Despite the fact that someone, somewhere must know the identity of these cows since they are being tested, no information has been forthcoming regarding the cows' age or location.
Personally, I haven't eaten hamburgers at McDonald's or any other national fast food chain since I read Fast Food Nation over 3 years ago. The only places I ever order hamburger is at Burgerville or at a McMenamin's restaurant since both use Oregon Country Beef. And when I buy beef, it's directly from the farmer who raised it.
Heck, since the US Department of Ag (or whoever is still responsible for food safety in this country) wants to be cagey about details regarding food they'd like me to consume, I figure it's in my best interest to be equally cagey about spending my money on products that are possibly unsafe to eat.
Especially when I consider that the cattle industry spends a lot of money trying to influence our government. And because so many officials in our government come from the companies they are charged with regulating.
And especially since most hamburger meat in this country is produced from corn-fed cattle, which is both unhealthy and not resource efficient (why grow grain to feed cattle, when cattle are meant to eat grass instead?)
¶ 7:03 PM 0 comments
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
new template is here - please pardon the dust
ok, so now I'm really changing my blog template. Probably won't get the links back up for a day or two as time permits. If you have comments about the readability of the new template (which is what I was hoping to improve), feel free to comment!
update 11/21/04
been having some problems getting access to my posts so I'm seeing if I can get in this way.
¶ 1:35 PM 1 comments
ok, so now I'm really changing my blog template. Probably won't get the links back up for a day or two as time permits. If you have comments about the readability of the new template (which is what I was hoping to improve), feel free to comment!
update 11/21/04
been having some problems getting access to my posts so I'm seeing if I can get in this way.
¶ 1:35 PM 1 comments
Bush apparently unaware of existence of birth control
Scott McClellan fielded questions on November 15th regarding Bu$h's opinion of Roe V Wade.
Specifically, he was asked 7 times if W wants to overturn Roe v Wade. McClellan did his usual song and dance around the question as long as he could, and pointed out that the president is “taking practical steps” to reduce abortions, including banning partial-birth abortions, streamlining adoption, and supporting parental notification laws.
McClellan finally did agree that Bu$h just doesn't yet have enough support in Congress to toss Roe v Wade out the window, but he's working toward that goal.
The abortion issue is another example of Bu$h not understanding and addressing the underlying causes of a problem. His goal is not to reduce the need for abortion, but rather the overall number of abortions. He doesn't care about locking the barn door – he just wants to go after the horses that are already running free.
Look at his solutions: he either wants to legislate to make women jump through hoops (or maybe dig out their coat hangers) to make it more difficult to get access to safe abortions, or to "streamline" adoptions.
Encouraging women to give up their lives for 9 months in order to have a baby for someone else to raise? A wonderful selfless idea, but unless you put a woman up in Trump Towers for 9 months and take care of her family and make sure her 1-3 jobs are there when she returns, and provide the psychological counselling she'll need after giving up a baby she's just spent 9 months carrying, it's really not a “practical” or appealing option for most women. Is he planning to "streamline" pregnancy so that women won't be sick for 3 months, and will be able to do everything they normally can do?
No, these “practical” solutions are just ways for the sanctimonious to make it seem like they actually care about women and not that they are trying to cram the Constitution chock-full of religious dogma.
Why do adults choose to have abortions? Most often because pregancy was unplanned and the parents don't feel capable of supporting a baby financially. (Great article here about the book The Parent Trap which discussing the fact that having kids is the greatest indicator of banktruptcy.)
The 2 most “practical” steps the prez could take if he was serious about reducing the actual need for abortion are:
1) supporting cheap and accessible birth control for all women who want it.
2) reduce the economic burdens on lower and middle income families.
The first would reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies, and the second would make it more likely that families would feel that they can support a child.
But the prez's head-in-the-sand policies aren't focusing on these steps. I think it's because he doesn't really care about reducing the need for abortion – he just cares about appeasing his radical Christian base and legislating control over women's bodies.
Or maybe he's just trying to appease his own conscience about all the Iraqis who have gone to their graves due to his foreign policy. Heck, let's save the American embryos in exchange for all the Iraqi children (scroll down for photos) who have been killed. The longer the war keeps up, the more dead and wounded Iraqi children he'll have on his conscience.
¶ 10:50 AM 2 comments
Scott McClellan fielded questions on November 15th regarding Bu$h's opinion of Roe V Wade.
Specifically, he was asked 7 times if W wants to overturn Roe v Wade. McClellan did his usual song and dance around the question as long as he could, and pointed out that the president is “taking practical steps” to reduce abortions, including banning partial-birth abortions, streamlining adoption, and supporting parental notification laws.
McClellan finally did agree that Bu$h just doesn't yet have enough support in Congress to toss Roe v Wade out the window, but he's working toward that goal.
The abortion issue is another example of Bu$h not understanding and addressing the underlying causes of a problem. His goal is not to reduce the need for abortion, but rather the overall number of abortions. He doesn't care about locking the barn door – he just wants to go after the horses that are already running free.
Look at his solutions: he either wants to legislate to make women jump through hoops (or maybe dig out their coat hangers) to make it more difficult to get access to safe abortions, or to "streamline" adoptions.
Encouraging women to give up their lives for 9 months in order to have a baby for someone else to raise? A wonderful selfless idea, but unless you put a woman up in Trump Towers for 9 months and take care of her family and make sure her 1-3 jobs are there when she returns, and provide the psychological counselling she'll need after giving up a baby she's just spent 9 months carrying, it's really not a “practical” or appealing option for most women. Is he planning to "streamline" pregnancy so that women won't be sick for 3 months, and will be able to do everything they normally can do?
No, these “practical” solutions are just ways for the sanctimonious to make it seem like they actually care about women and not that they are trying to cram the Constitution chock-full of religious dogma.
Why do adults choose to have abortions? Most often because pregancy was unplanned and the parents don't feel capable of supporting a baby financially. (Great article here about the book The Parent Trap which discussing the fact that having kids is the greatest indicator of banktruptcy.)
The 2 most “practical” steps the prez could take if he was serious about reducing the actual need for abortion are:
1) supporting cheap and accessible birth control for all women who want it.
2) reduce the economic burdens on lower and middle income families.
The first would reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies, and the second would make it more likely that families would feel that they can support a child.
But the prez's head-in-the-sand policies aren't focusing on these steps. I think it's because he doesn't really care about reducing the need for abortion – he just cares about appeasing his radical Christian base and legislating control over women's bodies.
Or maybe he's just trying to appease his own conscience about all the Iraqis who have gone to their graves due to his foreign policy. Heck, let's save the American embryos in exchange for all the Iraqi children (scroll down for photos) who have been killed. The longer the war keeps up, the more dead and wounded Iraqi children he'll have on his conscience.
¶ 10:50 AM 2 comments
Saturday, November 13, 2004
rocket the vote
Naomi Klein has a good commentary in today's Guardian.
So now, hundred of Fallujans (or perhaps more - we don't know the casualty numbers thanks to our government's secrecy) are dying in order to bring peace enough for elections, when perhaps the peace that existed a year ago should have been enough. And still the January election results may favor an anti-American government, especially given the fact that Iraqis keep dying in the name of democracy.
Now, democracy would hopefully bring good changes to the Iraq, but it's one thing to rise up and fight for democracy - it's quite another for an outside country to come in and install it by force. But hey, god is on our side, right?
(The cynic in me says that first and foremost, democracy would create another market for American products and easier access to Iraqi oil. But that's not why we went to war. Right??)
¶ 5:35 PM 0 comments
Naomi Klein has a good commentary in today's Guardian.
On November 11 2003, Paul Bremer, then chief US envoy to Iraq, flew to Washington to meet George Bush. The two men were concerned that if they kept their promise to hold elections in Iraq within the coming months, the country would fall into the hands of insufficiently pro-American forces.That would defeat the purpose of the invasion, and it would threaten President Bush's re-election chances. At that meeting, a revised plan was hatched: elections would be delayed for more than a year, and in the meantime, Iraq's first "sovereign" government would be hand-picked by Washington. The plan would allow Mr Bush to claim progress on the campaign trail, while keeping Iraq safely under US control.
So now, hundred of Fallujans (or perhaps more - we don't know the casualty numbers thanks to our government's secrecy) are dying in order to bring peace enough for elections, when perhaps the peace that existed a year ago should have been enough. And still the January election results may favor an anti-American government, especially given the fact that Iraqis keep dying in the name of democracy.
Now, democracy would hopefully bring good changes to the Iraq, but it's one thing to rise up and fight for democracy - it's quite another for an outside country to come in and install it by force. But hey, god is on our side, right?
(The cynic in me says that first and foremost, democracy would create another market for American products and easier access to Iraqi oil. But that's not why we went to war. Right??)
¶ 5:35 PM 0 comments
Thursday, November 11, 2004
the mayor's race in San Diego, and a rant about 50-60 year old white men
In San Diego, the mayoral race is hanging in the balance. A write-in candidate - Donna Frye, a city councilperson - is narrowly ahead in the race.
A lawyer who worked on a ballot measure that Frye opposed has filed a court challenge arguing that there should be a re-vote without including Frye due to discrepanices in whether a write-in candidate is allowed in the general election.
The ballot measure Frye opposed - Proposition F - actually deals with mayoral power. It would shift more responsibility to the mayor and away from an unelected city manager.
Seems to be another example of politicians using lawyers to change election results that they don't like.
Also seems like another example of 50-60 year old white men trying to run - and ruin - everything. Now, this is certainly a generalization ( I do know a few 50-60 year old white men who don't annoy the shit out of me) but for the most part, this is my least favorite demographic as they think they know everything, they try to run everything, and they often look at women as though we are idiots who should just sit down and shut up (or fetch them their coffee).
As a women who is smarter than most of these men, I get extremely annoyed when I have to deal with them. In fact, it was one of the prime reasons why I chose self-employment a few years back - after a truly frustrating work experience during which a level of management was introduced right above me (and filled with a 55 year old white man who made my life miserable) I decided that I would never give control over my work life to anyone like that again.
And here I am, with the country run by annoying 50-60 year old white men who think they know how to run things yet just end up making half the country and much of the world angry at them for their arrogance. Sigh.
Right now in DC, many of these same white men are scheming to take control of the reproductive systems of all American women. Why do you think they want to make abortion and birth control illegal? Because then they can truly control women. Make no mistake, when Falwell talks about getting back to the "values" this country was founded on, he means to roll back the rights that women have gained, first and foremost the right to our own bodies.
And a mayoral race in San Diego, as well as all the bad-mouthing of Hillary Clinton by the evil right, are just symptoms of that particular brand of misogyny.
¶ 7:31 PM 1 comments
In San Diego, the mayoral race is hanging in the balance. A write-in candidate - Donna Frye, a city councilperson - is narrowly ahead in the race.
A lawyer who worked on a ballot measure that Frye opposed has filed a court challenge arguing that there should be a re-vote without including Frye due to discrepanices in whether a write-in candidate is allowed in the general election.
The ballot measure Frye opposed - Proposition F - actually deals with mayoral power. It would shift more responsibility to the mayor and away from an unelected city manager.
Seems to be another example of politicians using lawyers to change election results that they don't like.
Also seems like another example of 50-60 year old white men trying to run - and ruin - everything. Now, this is certainly a generalization ( I do know a few 50-60 year old white men who don't annoy the shit out of me) but for the most part, this is my least favorite demographic as they think they know everything, they try to run everything, and they often look at women as though we are idiots who should just sit down and shut up (or fetch them their coffee).
As a women who is smarter than most of these men, I get extremely annoyed when I have to deal with them. In fact, it was one of the prime reasons why I chose self-employment a few years back - after a truly frustrating work experience during which a level of management was introduced right above me (and filled with a 55 year old white man who made my life miserable) I decided that I would never give control over my work life to anyone like that again.
And here I am, with the country run by annoying 50-60 year old white men who think they know how to run things yet just end up making half the country and much of the world angry at them for their arrogance. Sigh.
Right now in DC, many of these same white men are scheming to take control of the reproductive systems of all American women. Why do you think they want to make abortion and birth control illegal? Because then they can truly control women. Make no mistake, when Falwell talks about getting back to the "values" this country was founded on, he means to roll back the rights that women have gained, first and foremost the right to our own bodies.
And a mayoral race in San Diego, as well as all the bad-mouthing of Hillary Clinton by the evil right, are just symptoms of that particular brand of misogyny.
¶ 7:31 PM 1 comments
Attorney General soon to be synonymous with torture
If you Google "alberto gonzales" and "torture," 6500 links come up.
Such a good message we are sending to the world... nominating someone who called the Geneva Conventions "quaint" to be the head of our justice system.
The man who is behind most of the bad decisions of this administration.
The man whose legal opinion probably paved the way for torture at Abu Ghraib and military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay.
The man who supports Dick Cheney's right to hold secret meetings with corporations in order to form energy policy, and who has been encouraging the president to assert executive privilege on several occasions.
The man whose former law firm represented Enron.
SLAM.
That was the sound of the door closing on our civil rights if he becomes AG.
¶ 11:05 AM 1 comments
If you Google "alberto gonzales" and "torture," 6500 links come up.
Such a good message we are sending to the world... nominating someone who called the Geneva Conventions "quaint" to be the head of our justice system.
The man who is behind most of the bad decisions of this administration.
The man whose legal opinion probably paved the way for torture at Abu Ghraib and military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay.
The man who supports Dick Cheney's right to hold secret meetings with corporations in order to form energy policy, and who has been encouraging the president to assert executive privilege on several occasions.
The man whose former law firm represented Enron.
SLAM.
That was the sound of the door closing on our civil rights if he becomes AG.
¶ 11:05 AM 1 comments
preparations for the coronation
Despite the fact that we are at war, elaborate preparations are being made for the Bush coronation/inauguration ceremony scheduled for January.
According to the Guardian,
On the plus side, if you manage to get a ticket and want to express your disapproval, you can always turn your back on the king.
¶ 10:59 AM 0 comments
Despite the fact that we are at war, elaborate preparations are being made for the Bush coronation/inauguration ceremony scheduled for January.
According to the Guardian,
With 21-gun salutes, fancy-dress balls and tighter-than-ever security, the day will resemble nothing so much as a coronation...Oh, yay. Our soldiers and thousands of Iraqi are dying at the pen of King George, but it's time to paaarrtaaay!
...there'll be nothing low key about the day - as was the case, for example, in 1945 when a war-weary Franklin D. Roosevelt was sworn in for his fourth term in a simple ceremony on the White House's South portico.
Just the opposite, in fact.
On the plus side, if you manage to get a ticket and want to express your disapproval, you can always turn your back on the king.
¶ 10:59 AM 0 comments
Iraqi citizens, aka collateral damage
Reuters is reporting today on the humanitarian crisis that is happening as a result of the fighting in Falluja.
Thousands of women, children and elderly people have gone several days without food or water, and many families are stuck within Falluja where the fighting continues. Numerous casualties have occurred because of lack of access to medical care.
¶ 10:51 AM 0 comments
Reuters is reporting today on the humanitarian crisis that is happening as a result of the fighting in Falluja.
Thousands of women, children and elderly people have gone several days without food or water, and many families are stuck within Falluja where the fighting continues. Numerous casualties have occurred because of lack of access to medical care.
¶ 10:51 AM 0 comments
Falwell declares war on gays and non-Christians; the Moral Crusade starts now
As part of the current American trend toward "moral values" such as bigotry, hate and fear, Jerry Fawell on Tuesday announced the formation of the Faith and Values Coalition.
In keeping with the apparent "morals mandate" that Mr. "All Forms of Payment Accepted" Falwell believes happened on November 2 (fraudulent exit polls be damned), he is banding together with other religious leaders to simultaneously protect the Constitution from radical judges, and to alter the Constitution to protect marriage from those nasty gay people.
According to Mr. Falwell, "America is worth saving. Our children and children's children will hold us accountable if we fail."
Mr. Falwell further noted that he plans to return America to roughly the year 1776, and that an effort to enlist Crusaders will shortly be underway in all 50 states.
He also plans to use his own newspaper to disseminate news to the faithful, in the hopes of drawing further wealth from the masses. The Liberty Journal is already encouraging Christians to forsake material comforts and fight to restore American to her former Puritanical self, and is holding out the carrot of eternity as a reward.
¶ 10:30 AM 0 comments
As part of the current American trend toward "moral values" such as bigotry, hate and fear, Jerry Fawell on Tuesday announced the formation of the Faith and Values Coalition.
In keeping with the apparent "morals mandate" that Mr. "All Forms of Payment Accepted" Falwell believes happened on November 2 (fraudulent exit polls be damned), he is banding together with other religious leaders to simultaneously protect the Constitution from radical judges, and to alter the Constitution to protect marriage from those nasty gay people.
According to Mr. Falwell, "America is worth saving. Our children and children's children will hold us accountable if we fail."
Mr. Falwell further noted that he plans to return America to roughly the year 1776, and that an effort to enlist Crusaders will shortly be underway in all 50 states.
He also plans to use his own newspaper to disseminate news to the faithful, in the hopes of drawing further wealth from the masses. The Liberty Journal is already encouraging Christians to forsake material comforts and fight to restore American to her former Puritanical self, and is holding out the carrot of eternity as a reward.
¶ 10:30 AM 0 comments
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
Texas Board of Ed: pro AIDS, pro teen pregnancy
The new health textbooks approved by the Texas Board of Education barely mention birth control... apparently they are hoping to either kill off the new generation of kids, or assuming that they will get their info from other sources. (After all, schools aren't really supposed to be educating the kids or anything.)
Not really so surprising from the state whose former governor supports the global gag rule.
I do think that encouraging abstinence among teens is a good idea, but I also think they should be taught about birth control and ways to prevent disease spread. Teens will still be having sex even if we discourage it. Shouldn't we give them the weapons that can protect them?
Of course, we do send our soldiers to war without proper equipment.
Hell, even in my Catholic high school the nun who taught us health ed showed us various forms of birth control. (She did try to make them seem as ridiculous as possible, but she lost some cred when she was unable to break the condom she described as flimsy.)
¶ 9:58 AM 1 comments
The new health textbooks approved by the Texas Board of Education barely mention birth control... apparently they are hoping to either kill off the new generation of kids, or assuming that they will get their info from other sources. (After all, schools aren't really supposed to be educating the kids or anything.)
Not really so surprising from the state whose former governor supports the global gag rule.
I do think that encouraging abstinence among teens is a good idea, but I also think they should be taught about birth control and ways to prevent disease spread. Teens will still be having sex even if we discourage it. Shouldn't we give them the weapons that can protect them?
Of course, we do send our soldiers to war without proper equipment.
Hell, even in my Catholic high school the nun who taught us health ed showed us various forms of birth control. (She did try to make them seem as ridiculous as possible, but she lost some cred when she was unable to break the condom she described as flimsy.)
¶ 9:58 AM 1 comments
it's morning in America - do you know where your birth control is?
Lovely. I just found a news article (thanks to Rising Hegemon) about pharmacists refusing to fill birth control prescriptions.
According to the article:
The article goes on to discuss proposed laws that would protect pharmicists who don't want to fill prescriptions on moral grounds.
After they stop selling prescription birth control, condoms and other bc, will we then have observers in our bedrooms making sure no one is pulling out early?
Or maybe they'll just take all the women and put us in pregnancy homes where they can make sure to keep us knocked up. (time to re-read the Handmaid's Tale, I think.)
But the kids probably still won't have health insurance.
¶ 9:45 AM 0 comments
Lovely. I just found a news article (thanks to Rising Hegemon) about pharmacists refusing to fill birth control prescriptions.
According to the article:
For a year, Julee Lacey stopped in a CVS pharmacy near her home in a Fort Worth suburb to get refills of her birth-control pills. Then one day last March, the pharmacist refused to fill Lacey's prescription because she did not believe in birth control.
"I was shocked," says Lacey, 33, who was not able to get her prescription until the next day and missed taking one of her pills. "Their job is not to regulate what people take or do. It's just to fill the prescription that was ordered by my physician."
The article goes on to discuss proposed laws that would protect pharmicists who don't want to fill prescriptions on moral grounds.
After they stop selling prescription birth control, condoms and other bc, will we then have observers in our bedrooms making sure no one is pulling out early?
Or maybe they'll just take all the women and put us in pregnancy homes where they can make sure to keep us knocked up. (time to re-read the Handmaid's Tale, I think.)
But the kids probably still won't have health insurance.
¶ 9:45 AM 0 comments
Monday, November 08, 2004
let go and let Bu$h
What is incredible to me is how some people bought Bu$h and Co.'s lines so deeply that to argue with them becomes almost heretical.
My own mom tonight said I was un-American - and I wasn't even saying anything very negative about Bush. I certainly wasn't making personal attacks - I merely said that I thought he hadn't done a very good job as president - since when is that un-American?
Somehow, Bush seems to have become nearly equated with a god (with God??) in the eyes of some of his followers (and I'm not talking about Christians or people of any particular religion). He can do no wrong, he has all the right answers, he should not be criticized, and anyone who criticizes him is unfaithful and heretical. The cult of Bu$h seems to be an as-yet underestimated (misunderestimated??!) cultural phenomenon.
Further examples of the Bu$h belief statements: Some day you'll understand that he is right; or, Bu$h isn't as negative as __________ (fill in the blank with the current American citizen as enemy the administration is trying to smear). Any attempt to argue with a non-believer that perhaps Cheney's Halliburton connections are somewhat dubiously ethical tend to be met with comments about Clinton. If you try to argue that a tawdry affair with an intern, while not especially moral, is nonetheless not quite as bad as making millions off of dead Iraqis in an unprovoked war, your patriotism gets questioned again. And on it goes.
I'm starting to realize that we lost last week because we were trying to confront faith with reason, which simply doesn't work for the true believers. People don't want to have their faith shaken. They want to believe that we are doing the right thing. They want to believe that America is a force for good in the world. They want to believe that our president is a plain-spoken man from Texas with our best interests at heart.
They did not want to hear us criticizing the Iraq war. They didn't want to hear Kerry criticizing Vietnam. They don't want to hear us fretting about election fraud or the Supreme Court or global warming or a draft. They want to believe that America always does what is right in the end, and that God acts through George W Bu$h, and that they were right to vote for him last week. They want people to get on with their lives, to "let go and let Bu$h", and to wake up in 4 years with a bright shiny new America filled with jobs, educated students, a mended Social Security program, and terrorists sitting with Martha in prison making doilies.
It's sort of like manifest destiny all over again, and they really want the 55 million of us (give or take 6 million) who are bitter at having to bow down before their god to just sit down and shut up or to leave them to their god and their country. If you don't have anything nice to say...
We may be part of the reality-based community, but reality, like global warming and evolution, is apparently something that many people in this country have yet to be convinced of. No matter how much evidence we show, many people just shut their eyes and cling to their faith. Unless and until we can provide them with a reality that can somehow be reconciled with their faith, I think we may continue losing elections to the faithful.
¶ 10:11 PM 0 comments
What is incredible to me is how some people bought Bu$h and Co.'s lines so deeply that to argue with them becomes almost heretical.
My own mom tonight said I was un-American - and I wasn't even saying anything very negative about Bush. I certainly wasn't making personal attacks - I merely said that I thought he hadn't done a very good job as president - since when is that un-American?
Somehow, Bush seems to have become nearly equated with a god (with God??) in the eyes of some of his followers (and I'm not talking about Christians or people of any particular religion). He can do no wrong, he has all the right answers, he should not be criticized, and anyone who criticizes him is unfaithful and heretical. The cult of Bu$h seems to be an as-yet underestimated (misunderestimated??!) cultural phenomenon.
Further examples of the Bu$h belief statements: Some day you'll understand that he is right; or, Bu$h isn't as negative as __________ (fill in the blank with the current American citizen as enemy the administration is trying to smear). Any attempt to argue with a non-believer that perhaps Cheney's Halliburton connections are somewhat dubiously ethical tend to be met with comments about Clinton. If you try to argue that a tawdry affair with an intern, while not especially moral, is nonetheless not quite as bad as making millions off of dead Iraqis in an unprovoked war, your patriotism gets questioned again. And on it goes.
I'm starting to realize that we lost last week because we were trying to confront faith with reason, which simply doesn't work for the true believers. People don't want to have their faith shaken. They want to believe that we are doing the right thing. They want to believe that America is a force for good in the world. They want to believe that our president is a plain-spoken man from Texas with our best interests at heart.
They did not want to hear us criticizing the Iraq war. They didn't want to hear Kerry criticizing Vietnam. They don't want to hear us fretting about election fraud or the Supreme Court or global warming or a draft. They want to believe that America always does what is right in the end, and that God acts through George W Bu$h, and that they were right to vote for him last week. They want people to get on with their lives, to "let go and let Bu$h", and to wake up in 4 years with a bright shiny new America filled with jobs, educated students, a mended Social Security program, and terrorists sitting with Martha in prison making doilies.
It's sort of like manifest destiny all over again, and they really want the 55 million of us (give or take 6 million) who are bitter at having to bow down before their god to just sit down and shut up or to leave them to their god and their country. If you don't have anything nice to say...
We may be part of the reality-based community, but reality, like global warming and evolution, is apparently something that many people in this country have yet to be convinced of. No matter how much evidence we show, many people just shut their eyes and cling to their faith. Unless and until we can provide them with a reality that can somehow be reconciled with their faith, I think we may continue losing elections to the faithful.
¶ 10:11 PM 0 comments
duping the devout is not Christian
...or so says Harley Sorenson at SFGate. He had a good commentary today about influencing the faithful through funds and other means...
¶ 9:30 PM 0 comments
...or so says Harley Sorenson at SFGate. He had a good commentary today about influencing the faithful through funds and other means...
¶ 9:30 PM 0 comments
Sunday, November 07, 2004
updating site...please bear with me
howdy friends and fellow e-people... I've grown weary of my blog template and will be updating the blog over the next few days. This will include adding more links to other blogs and other sites, and generally making the site easier to read (hopefully).
please stay with me! and if you have any suggestions, drop me a comment...
¶ 6:54 PM 0 comments
howdy friends and fellow e-people... I've grown weary of my blog template and will be updating the blog over the next few days. This will include adding more links to other blogs and other sites, and generally making the site easier to read (hopefully).
please stay with me! and if you have any suggestions, drop me a comment...
¶ 6:54 PM 0 comments
Friday, November 05, 2004
Diebold employees discussed "hiding" ballot receipts from voters
Below is an email between Diebold employees regarding voting machines for California from Feb of 2003.
¶ 4:40 PM 0 comments
Below is an email between Diebold employees regarding voting machines for California from Feb of 2003.
The new Secretary of State just announced that he supports touch screen
vendors being required to print a receipt. This has major implications for
our new unit. He is only convening a task force at this point, so we don't
know the answers to questions like:
We don't know whether the voter would be allowed to touch the receipt.
We dont' know whether the voter will be allowed to see the receipt.
If voters know that a printed receipt is there, I believe there will be
demand to see it. I am suggesting that R7 development and design folks
begin having some discussions on various scenarios of a printed ballot
receipt and how we could "hide" the receipt from the voter if necessary or
keep them from touching if it comes to that.
Clearly, we can't begin design on anything until we know the parameters. On
the other hand, we will be asked for input, and we should have some well
conceived input, vs. myself or frank or deborah speaking for development.
Yes, another bad idea, brought to you by our elected politicians.
SteveK
I found this at a mirror site via the Unknown News.
There are a ton of other emails and memos at the site.
The point of having printed ballots is two-fold:
1) so that a recount can be done
2) so that a voter can verify who they voted for
In places where they have computer voting, voters should get a printed
receipt that they can look at and then place in a box. There doesn't
need to be a confidentiality issue here...no name needs to be
associated with the receipt. There is a fraud issue involved with
voters not being able to be positive if their vote is counted
correctly, especially if exit polls differ greatly from the election
results.
Regardless of whether Tuesday's election results can be successfully
challenged, we need to scream for election reform in this country.
¶ 4:40 PM 0 comments
Thursday, November 04, 2004
the hijacking of morality
Give me a huge f*@(ing break. The Republicans and the media would love nothing more for us liberals to go slinking off with our tails between our legs feeling guiltily less moral than all the people who voted for Bu$h. But it's a bunch of bull.
Christian conservatives do not own the morality franchise. If they truly voted for Bu$h and Cheney thinking that they are somehow more moral than Kerry and Edwards, they are pathetically deluded.
The implication is that some of the conservatives voted for Bu$h because they were concerned about morality, and that liberals failed to vote for Bush because they are not concerned with morals.
Why did liberals vote for Kerry? They liked how he looked in windsurfing gear? No, we voted for Kerry because we believed that he is more moral than Bush.
We believe that he will not start wars unjustly and that he is less likely to lie to the American public about his reasons for starting wars.
We believe that Kerry is a practicing Catholic who voted against the late-term abortion law not because he supports late term abortions but because the law unconstitutionally did not allow for an exception for the mother's health.
We believe that Kerry is a smart and honest man who spoke truth to power in the 1970's and that he would not ask our soldiers to die for oil.
We believe that Kerry understands that global warming is a real problem and that he might have the moral courage to ask Americans to support better emissions standards.
What is the morality of Bush and Cheney?
Remaining on the payroll of a company that is benefitting enormously from the war on Iraq? Smearing the reputation of decorated veterans?
Running up the country's deficit to finance wars in which their corporate buddies are the only real winners?
Sneakily rolling back environmental regulations so that corporations might make a buck off our natural resources?
Sending troops off unproperly outfitted to fight in an unprovoked war?
Using fear and deceit to trick Americans into voting?
Using fraud at the polling places to insure a win?
Sending American soldiers into battle in Iraq after they pulled all the strings at their avail 30 years ago to avoid Vietnam?
Supporting a global gag rule and causing women to get horribly sick or die from botched abortions and unplanned pregnancies?
Disenfranching minority voters since they are the easiest targets?
Supporting the death penalty?
Spraying the food crops of Colombian farmers with chemicals as part of our drug war?
Trying to change the US constitution to outlaw certain families?
We cannot and will not let the conservatives dictate the morals of this country when they are so clearly inept at separating what is truly moral from what is bigotry, fear and greed disguised as morality.
If the Christian conservatives who voted for Bu$h were truly moral they would be less concerned with what Joe and Bob do in their bedroom and more concerned with the fact that there are homeless people on the streets in the wealthiest country in the world. They would support local stores rather than running to Walmart for cheap products made at slave wages in 3rd world countries. They would hold Bush accountable for all the Iraqi citizens who have been killed over the past 18 months. They would drive hybrid cars instead of SUVs. They would give a damn that millions of children in this country cannot afford access to healthcare. They would not pass laws restricting the rights of illegal immigrants to affordable healthcare. They would support the idea of the commons rather than demanding compensation from the government not to subdivide their land or destroy the wildlife on it. They would not simultaneously say that big government is bad while complaining about the roads they drive on or the size of their unemployment check.
The election wasn't lost because we are immoral but because the conservatives are terrified of freedom - ironically the same freedom that Bu$h claims will stop terrorism if only we can bomb enough countries into being free. They are terrified that Kerry might not legislate their religion into law in the name of morality. And they are terrified that they might be asked to pay a little more in taxes to support the people in this country who need a little extra help. In Bu$h, they have found a fellow hypocrite - someone who claims to have found Jesus but whose actions would make Jesus cringe.
That, to me, is terrifying.
¶ 8:20 PM 1 comments
Give me a huge f*@(ing break. The Republicans and the media would love nothing more for us liberals to go slinking off with our tails between our legs feeling guiltily less moral than all the people who voted for Bu$h. But it's a bunch of bull.
Christian conservatives do not own the morality franchise. If they truly voted for Bu$h and Cheney thinking that they are somehow more moral than Kerry and Edwards, they are pathetically deluded.
The implication is that some of the conservatives voted for Bu$h because they were concerned about morality, and that liberals failed to vote for Bush because they are not concerned with morals.
Why did liberals vote for Kerry? They liked how he looked in windsurfing gear? No, we voted for Kerry because we believed that he is more moral than Bush.
We believe that he will not start wars unjustly and that he is less likely to lie to the American public about his reasons for starting wars.
We believe that Kerry is a practicing Catholic who voted against the late-term abortion law not because he supports late term abortions but because the law unconstitutionally did not allow for an exception for the mother's health.
We believe that Kerry is a smart and honest man who spoke truth to power in the 1970's and that he would not ask our soldiers to die for oil.
We believe that Kerry understands that global warming is a real problem and that he might have the moral courage to ask Americans to support better emissions standards.
What is the morality of Bush and Cheney?
Remaining on the payroll of a company that is benefitting enormously from the war on Iraq? Smearing the reputation of decorated veterans?
Running up the country's deficit to finance wars in which their corporate buddies are the only real winners?
Sneakily rolling back environmental regulations so that corporations might make a buck off our natural resources?
Sending troops off unproperly outfitted to fight in an unprovoked war?
Using fear and deceit to trick Americans into voting?
Using fraud at the polling places to insure a win?
Sending American soldiers into battle in Iraq after they pulled all the strings at their avail 30 years ago to avoid Vietnam?
Supporting a global gag rule and causing women to get horribly sick or die from botched abortions and unplanned pregnancies?
Disenfranching minority voters since they are the easiest targets?
Supporting the death penalty?
Spraying the food crops of Colombian farmers with chemicals as part of our drug war?
Trying to change the US constitution to outlaw certain families?
We cannot and will not let the conservatives dictate the morals of this country when they are so clearly inept at separating what is truly moral from what is bigotry, fear and greed disguised as morality.
If the Christian conservatives who voted for Bu$h were truly moral they would be less concerned with what Joe and Bob do in their bedroom and more concerned with the fact that there are homeless people on the streets in the wealthiest country in the world. They would support local stores rather than running to Walmart for cheap products made at slave wages in 3rd world countries. They would hold Bush accountable for all the Iraqi citizens who have been killed over the past 18 months. They would drive hybrid cars instead of SUVs. They would give a damn that millions of children in this country cannot afford access to healthcare. They would not pass laws restricting the rights of illegal immigrants to affordable healthcare. They would support the idea of the commons rather than demanding compensation from the government not to subdivide their land or destroy the wildlife on it. They would not simultaneously say that big government is bad while complaining about the roads they drive on or the size of their unemployment check.
The election wasn't lost because we are immoral but because the conservatives are terrified of freedom - ironically the same freedom that Bu$h claims will stop terrorism if only we can bomb enough countries into being free. They are terrified that Kerry might not legislate their religion into law in the name of morality. And they are terrified that they might be asked to pay a little more in taxes to support the people in this country who need a little extra help. In Bu$h, they have found a fellow hypocrite - someone who claims to have found Jesus but whose actions would make Jesus cringe.
That, to me, is terrifying.
¶ 8:20 PM 1 comments
the will for change
Let's get one thing straight: George W Bu$h does not have a mandate. He won by 4 million votes. Nationally 58-60% of the population voted. Slightly over half voted for Bu$h, which means that about 30% of the country voted for him.
Out of that 30%, many voted for him based on his ability to successfully make them think that John Kerry is a flip-flopping, baby-killing traitor and that the war in Iraq was fought as part of the war on terrorism. So, at least some portion of the 30% of the country that voted for Bu$h did so based on propaganda and misinformation.
Just like during the run-up to his war on Iraq when he dismissed protesters as "focus groups", the president today dismissed at least half the country when he said "the people made it clear what they wanted". No, the 30% who voted for you made it clear that Rovian tactics worked. Mr. President, your ability to bamboozle the American public is unquestionable. Your ability to divide the country is staggering. Your ability to successfully run the country however, has yet to be proven.
None of this exonerates Democrats from being out of touch with what drives at least 30% of the population to the polls. We can't take back our government if we are only reacting to Rove's strategies or if we stay in our urban enclaves and bitch about the stupid people in the red regions (although it certainly feels good to do so).
Every single person who voted for Kerry needs to get out and start talking with people who voted for Bush. We are not outnumbered by much. And feeling smug and smarter than them certainly didn't work to bring us a new president. Obviously we need some different tactics. Maybe not this week, since we're very angry with those people. But we need to figure out what it takes to bring the people together, and I've always believed that the only way to do that is to get out there and talk to people who see things differently than we do.
One positive step you could do? Contact the Northwest Earth Institute (a local non-profit) about starting up a discussion course in your home, workplace or church. Invite your friends, but also your neighbors and co-workers. The discussion courses provide a way to think on your own beliefs and actions while discussing new ideas with other people in the group. It's not about consensus, it's about dialogue and reflection. And those are two things that we are desperately in need of now.
¶ 11:05 AM 0 comments
Let's get one thing straight: George W Bu$h does not have a mandate. He won by 4 million votes. Nationally 58-60% of the population voted. Slightly over half voted for Bu$h, which means that about 30% of the country voted for him.
Out of that 30%, many voted for him based on his ability to successfully make them think that John Kerry is a flip-flopping, baby-killing traitor and that the war in Iraq was fought as part of the war on terrorism. So, at least some portion of the 30% of the country that voted for Bu$h did so based on propaganda and misinformation.
Just like during the run-up to his war on Iraq when he dismissed protesters as "focus groups", the president today dismissed at least half the country when he said "the people made it clear what they wanted". No, the 30% who voted for you made it clear that Rovian tactics worked. Mr. President, your ability to bamboozle the American public is unquestionable. Your ability to divide the country is staggering. Your ability to successfully run the country however, has yet to be proven.
None of this exonerates Democrats from being out of touch with what drives at least 30% of the population to the polls. We can't take back our government if we are only reacting to Rove's strategies or if we stay in our urban enclaves and bitch about the stupid people in the red regions (although it certainly feels good to do so).
Every single person who voted for Kerry needs to get out and start talking with people who voted for Bush. We are not outnumbered by much. And feeling smug and smarter than them certainly didn't work to bring us a new president. Obviously we need some different tactics. Maybe not this week, since we're very angry with those people. But we need to figure out what it takes to bring the people together, and I've always believed that the only way to do that is to get out there and talk to people who see things differently than we do.
One positive step you could do? Contact the Northwest Earth Institute (a local non-profit) about starting up a discussion course in your home, workplace or church. Invite your friends, but also your neighbors and co-workers. The discussion courses provide a way to think on your own beliefs and actions while discussing new ideas with other people in the group. It's not about consensus, it's about dialogue and reflection. And those are two things that we are desperately in need of now.
¶ 11:05 AM 0 comments
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
e-voting and verifiability
Computer World has an article about the problems with voting on computers - both the accuracy issue and the lack of scalability.
Any lawyers out there in states with these machines who might want to look into the constitutionality of not being able to verify votes? Funny how the exit polls apparently were inaccurate in several of these states - just like in 2000 when exit polls reflected the problems with the "butterfly ballots".
Well, Diebold did promise to deliver...
At the very least, a paper receipt should be mandatory for any voting done on computers. Voters must be able to verify that their votes were cast for the correct person.
¶ 7:36 PM 0 comments
Computer World has an article about the problems with voting on computers - both the accuracy issue and the lack of scalability.
Any lawyers out there in states with these machines who might want to look into the constitutionality of not being able to verify votes? Funny how the exit polls apparently were inaccurate in several of these states - just like in 2000 when exit polls reflected the problems with the "butterfly ballots".
Well, Diebold did promise to deliver...
At the very least, a paper receipt should be mandatory for any voting done on computers. Voters must be able to verify that their votes were cast for the correct person.
¶ 7:36 PM 0 comments
100,000+ job cuts in US for second straight month
but hey, why let that nasty old reality stuff get in the way of celerbratin' fur the prezinet?
¶ 7:26 PM 0 comments
but hey, why let that nasty old reality stuff get in the way of celerbratin' fur the prezinet?
¶ 7:26 PM 0 comments
reality isn't working...anybody gotta wedge?
¶ 6:24 PM 0 comments
It should be clear by now that progressives cannot win the presidency by being reality-based. The reality-based appeal works only in isolated areas of the country with high population density. Reality-based campaigning draws in highly educated voters, voters who are likely to consult a wide variety of news sources inside and outside the US, and voters who tend to be swayed by demonstrable empirical evidence about the age and the current disposition of the planet and its resources. These voters are, however, a fringe element of the electorate that we must now cast aside.Thus wrote Michael Berube today on his blog. I recommend checking out the rest of this post and reading his blog regularly - his posts are highly entertaining.
¶ 6:24 PM 0 comments
man fails to convert lion
Apparently, the failure to grasp reality is not merely a current phenomenon in the US. Check out this article about a man in Taipei who tried to convert some lions to Christianity.
Well, if the Christians want to throw themselves at lions, who am I to criticize?
¶ 6:12 PM 0 comments
Apparently, the failure to grasp reality is not merely a current phenomenon in the US. Check out this article about a man in Taipei who tried to convert some lions to Christianity.
Well, if the Christians want to throw themselves at lions, who am I to criticize?
¶ 6:12 PM 0 comments
welcome to global warming
The quote above is from today's article in Sci-Tech Today.
Ironically, a benefit from global warming is increased access to some of the world's oil reserves. I can already hear the heads-in-the-sand crowd spinning this as "global warming is good because we'll have more oil".
I'm reconsidering my opposition to Hummers. Maybe given the election results, it's time that more liberals bought tanks to drive. And hey, greed is good, right? Half the country thinks so...
¶ 1:23 PM 0 comments
"A thaw of the Arctic icecap is accelerating because of global warming but nations in the region including the United States are deadlocked about how to stop it."
The quote above is from today's article in Sci-Tech Today.
Ironically, a benefit from global warming is increased access to some of the world's oil reserves. I can already hear the heads-in-the-sand crowd spinning this as "global warming is good because we'll have more oil".
I'm reconsidering my opposition to Hummers. Maybe given the election results, it's time that more liberals bought tanks to drive. And hey, greed is good, right? Half the country thinks so...
¶ 1:23 PM 0 comments
more "them" than "us"
So it was the "morality vote" that turned this election? The "moral" sheep in this country who believe every sperm is sacred but 100,000 Iraqis deserve to die so we can have cheap oil?
This is so disheartening. When the sheeps' kids get sent to fight in all of Bu$h's new wars, when they lose their jobs, when bin Laden strikes again, when peak oil hits, I will have no sympathy for anyone who voted for Bu$h.
Good commentary by Alterman here.
¶ 8:48 AM 4 comments
So it was the "morality vote" that turned this election? The "moral" sheep in this country who believe every sperm is sacred but 100,000 Iraqis deserve to die so we can have cheap oil?
This is so disheartening. When the sheeps' kids get sent to fight in all of Bu$h's new wars, when they lose their jobs, when bin Laden strikes again, when peak oil hits, I will have no sympathy for anyone who voted for Bu$h.
Good commentary by Alterman here.
¶ 8:48 AM 4 comments
Bu$h - historical analysis
The Left Coaster has a good commentary on why Bu$h may win the election, and what the consequences may be.
¶ 1:00 AM 0 comments
The Left Coaster has a good commentary on why Bu$h may win the election, and what the consequences may be.
¶ 1:00 AM 0 comments
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
bin Laden's plan is working
Bush has apparently fallen into bin Laden's plan to bankrupt the US, as the Guardian reported today.
Maybe four more years of republican incompetance is what we need for people to wake up.
¶ 10:45 PM 1 comments
Bush has apparently fallen into bin Laden's plan to bankrupt the US, as the Guardian reported today.
Maybe four more years of republican incompetance is what we need for people to wake up.
¶ 10:45 PM 1 comments
the cowardly cowboy might win
it's looking scarily like the man who lacked the balls to go to Vietnam (but has no problem sending our soldiers to fight his war for daddy) might retain his job, despite the fact that he has nothing to show for his last 4 years in office. (Except a ballooning debt, over a thousand American soldiers dead, over 100,000 Iraqis dead, and a deeply divided America.)
congratulations to all the people who voted for Bush. You all believe in hell, and that's where we're headed now that you've cast your votes for the liar in chief.
but as blahguy says, it's not over, baby... (and I hope he's right)
¶ 10:06 PM 0 comments
it's looking scarily like the man who lacked the balls to go to Vietnam (but has no problem sending our soldiers to fight his war for daddy) might retain his job, despite the fact that he has nothing to show for his last 4 years in office. (Except a ballooning debt, over a thousand American soldiers dead, over 100,000 Iraqis dead, and a deeply divided America.)
congratulations to all the people who voted for Bush. You all believe in hell, and that's where we're headed now that you've cast your votes for the liar in chief.
but as blahguy says, it's not over, baby... (and I hope he's right)
¶ 10:06 PM 0 comments
welcome to california (formerly known as Oregon)
it's looking like Measure 37 is passing... so much for Oregon being a wonderful place to live.
Now every greedy bastard who is looking out for number one can try to wring money from the state or can get permits to put in that subdivision, strip club or hog confinement farm.
whatever happened to the idea of the commons?
¶ 8:56 PM 0 comments
it's looking like Measure 37 is passing... so much for Oregon being a wonderful place to live.
Now every greedy bastard who is looking out for number one can try to wring money from the state or can get permits to put in that subdivision, strip club or hog confinement farm.
whatever happened to the idea of the commons?
¶ 8:56 PM 0 comments
how embarrassing
...and how sad that the bigotry, homophobia and hate of Measure 36 appear to have won out over tolerance, inclusion and love.
¶ 8:51 PM 0 comments
...and how sad that the bigotry, homophobia and hate of Measure 36 appear to have won out over tolerance, inclusion and love.
¶ 8:51 PM 0 comments
