"The most basic liberal values are political equality and economic opportunity. Liberals uphold democracy as the only form of government that derives legitimacy from the consent of the governed, and they regard the freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights as essential to the expression of popular consent. Their commitment to an expanding democracy is what drives liberal advocacy on behalf of women, minorities, gays, immigrants, and other traditionally disenfranchised groups.
Liberals value the dynamism and creativity of democratic capitalism, but they also believe in strong, active government to protect the interests of society. They understand that markets function best when properly regulated, and they also know that unchecked concentrations of private power encourage environmental pollution, financial fraud, and labor exploitation. Liberals see a broad social interest in ensuring real opportunities and decent standards of living for everyone, while requiring basic responsibility from everyone.
Those who regard such ideals as naive today should remember that America in the 20th century was built on liberal policy, from the Progressive Era through the New Deal, the Fair Deal, the GI Bill, and the Great Society. The modern economy -- a private enterprise system that relies on government safeguards against depression and extreme poverty -- is the legacy of liberal leadership, from Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson to Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson. (And more recently Bill Clinton, who erased Republican deficits that were sending the economy into a spiral of recession and began to pay down the national debt.) Liberal policies made America the freest, wealthiest, most successful and most powerful nation in human history. Conservatism in power always threatens to undo that national progress, and is almost always frustrated by the innate decency and democratic instincts of the American people.
If Americans have a common fault, however, it's our tendency to suffer from historical amnesia. Too many of us have forgotten, or never learned, what kind of country America was under the conservative rule that preceded the century of liberal reform. And too many of us have no idea whose ideas and energy brought about the reforms we now take for granted.
If your workplace is safe; if your children go to school rather than being forced into labor; if you are paid a living wage, including overtime; if you enjoy a 40-hour week and you are allowed to join a union to protect your rights -- you can thank liberals. If your food is not poisoned and your water is drinkable -- you can thank liberals. If your parents are eligible for Medicare and Social Security, so they can grow old in dignity without bankrupting your family -- you can thank liberals. If our rivers are getting cleaner and our air isn't black with pollution; if our wilderness is protected and our countryside is still green -- you can thank liberals. If people of all races can share the same public facilities; if everyone has the right to vote; if couples fall in love and marry regardless of race; if we have finally begun to transcend a segregated society -- you can thank liberals. Progressive innovations like those and so many others were achieved by long, difficult struggles against entrenched power. What defined conservatism, and conservatives, was their opposition to every one of those advances. The country we know and love today was built by those victories for liberalism -- with the support of the American people.
Whether they now describe themselves as liberal or not, most Americans remain strongly progressive in their views about taxation, healthcare, education spending, Social Security, environmental protection, and corporate regulation. In fact, despite conservative political advances in recent decades, survey evidence gathered by pollsters of all persuasions suggests that Americans are still more liberal than conservative."
Fom Joe Conason's new book Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth. Buy it on Amazon
Ang,
who is a liberal through and through, and damn proud of it
Wednesday, August 20, 2003
From the introduction of "Big Lies"
"The most basic liberal values are political equality and economic opportunity. Liberals uphold democracy as the only form of government that derives legitimacy from the consent of the governed, and they regard the freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights as essential to the expression of popular consent. Their commitment to an expanding democracy is what drives liberal advocacy on behalf of women, minorities, gays, immigrants, and other traditionally disenfranchised groups.
Liberals value the dynamism and creativity of democratic capitalism, but they also believe in strong, active government to protect the interests of society. They understand that markets function best when properly regulated, and they also know that unchecked concentrations of private power encourage environmental pollution, financial fraud, and labor exploitation. Liberals see a broad social interest in ensuring real opportunities and decent standards of living for everyone, while requiring basic responsibility from everyone.
Those who regard such ideals as naive today should remember that America in the 20th century was built on liberal policy, from the Progressive Era through the New Deal, the Fair Deal, the GI Bill, and the Great Society. The modern economy -- a private enterprise system that relies on government safeguards against depression and extreme poverty -- is the legacy of liberal leadership, from Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson to Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson. (And more recently Bill Clinton, who erased Republican deficits that were sending the economy into a spiral of recession and began to pay down the national debt.) Liberal policies made America the freest, wealthiest, most successful and most powerful nation in human history. Conservatism in power always threatens to undo that national progress, and is almost always frustrated by the innate decency and democratic instincts of the American people.
If Americans have a common fault, however, it's our tendency to suffer from historical amnesia. Too many of us have forgotten, or never learned, what kind of country America was under the conservative rule that preceded the century of liberal reform. And too many of us have no idea whose ideas and energy brought about the reforms we now take for granted.
If your workplace is safe; if your children go to school rather than being forced into labor; if you are paid a living wage, including overtime; if you enjoy a 40-hour week and you are allowed to join a union to protect your rights -- you can thank liberals. If your food is not poisoned and your water is drinkable -- you can thank liberals. If your parents are eligible for Medicare and Social Security, so they can grow old in dignity without bankrupting your family -- you can thank liberals. If our rivers are getting cleaner and our air isn't black with pollution; if our wilderness is protected and our countryside is still green -- you can thank liberals. If people of all races can share the same public facilities; if everyone has the right to vote; if couples fall in love and marry regardless of race; if we have finally begun to transcend a segregated society -- you can thank liberals. Progressive innovations like those and so many others were achieved by long, difficult struggles against entrenched power. What defined conservatism, and conservatives, was their opposition to every one of those advances. The country we know and love today was built by those victories for liberalism -- with the support of the American people.
Whether they now describe themselves as liberal or not, most Americans remain strongly progressive in their views about taxation, healthcare, education spending, Social Security, environmental protection, and corporate regulation. In fact, despite conservative political advances in recent decades, survey evidence gathered by pollsters of all persuasions suggests that Americans are still more liberal than conservative."
Fom Joe Conason's new book Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth. Buy it on Amazon
Ang,
who is a liberal through and through, and damn proud of it
Liberals value the dynamism and creativity of democratic capitalism, but they also believe in strong, active government to protect the interests of society. They understand that markets function best when properly regulated, and they also know that unchecked concentrations of private power encourage environmental pollution, financial fraud, and labor exploitation. Liberals see a broad social interest in ensuring real opportunities and decent standards of living for everyone, while requiring basic responsibility from everyone.
Those who regard such ideals as naive today should remember that America in the 20th century was built on liberal policy, from the Progressive Era through the New Deal, the Fair Deal, the GI Bill, and the Great Society. The modern economy -- a private enterprise system that relies on government safeguards against depression and extreme poverty -- is the legacy of liberal leadership, from Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson to Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson. (And more recently Bill Clinton, who erased Republican deficits that were sending the economy into a spiral of recession and began to pay down the national debt.) Liberal policies made America the freest, wealthiest, most successful and most powerful nation in human history. Conservatism in power always threatens to undo that national progress, and is almost always frustrated by the innate decency and democratic instincts of the American people.
If Americans have a common fault, however, it's our tendency to suffer from historical amnesia. Too many of us have forgotten, or never learned, what kind of country America was under the conservative rule that preceded the century of liberal reform. And too many of us have no idea whose ideas and energy brought about the reforms we now take for granted.
If your workplace is safe; if your children go to school rather than being forced into labor; if you are paid a living wage, including overtime; if you enjoy a 40-hour week and you are allowed to join a union to protect your rights -- you can thank liberals. If your food is not poisoned and your water is drinkable -- you can thank liberals. If your parents are eligible for Medicare and Social Security, so they can grow old in dignity without bankrupting your family -- you can thank liberals. If our rivers are getting cleaner and our air isn't black with pollution; if our wilderness is protected and our countryside is still green -- you can thank liberals. If people of all races can share the same public facilities; if everyone has the right to vote; if couples fall in love and marry regardless of race; if we have finally begun to transcend a segregated society -- you can thank liberals. Progressive innovations like those and so many others were achieved by long, difficult struggles against entrenched power. What defined conservatism, and conservatives, was their opposition to every one of those advances. The country we know and love today was built by those victories for liberalism -- with the support of the American people.
Whether they now describe themselves as liberal or not, most Americans remain strongly progressive in their views about taxation, healthcare, education spending, Social Security, environmental protection, and corporate regulation. In fact, despite conservative political advances in recent decades, survey evidence gathered by pollsters of all persuasions suggests that Americans are still more liberal than conservative."
Fom Joe Conason's new book Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth. Buy it on Amazon
Ang,
who is a liberal through and through, and damn proud of it
From the introduction of "Big Lies"
"The most basic liberal values are political equality and economic opportunity. Liberals uphold democracy as the only form of government that derives legitimacy from the consent of the governed, and they regard the freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights as essential to the expression of popular consent. Their commitment to an expanding democracy is what drives liberal advocacy on behalf of women, minorities, gays, immigrants, and other traditionally disenfranchised groups.
Liberals value the dynamism and creativity of democratic capitalism, but they also believe in strong, active government to protect the interests of society. They understand that markets function best when properly regulated, and they also know that unchecked concentrations of private power encourage environmental pollution, financial fraud, and labor exploitation. Liberals see a broad social interest in ensuring real opportunities and decent standards of living for everyone, while requiring basic responsibility from everyone.
Those who regard such ideals as naive today should remember that America in the 20th century was built on liberal policy, from the Progressive Era through the New Deal, the Fair Deal, the GI Bill, and the Great Society. The modern economy -- a private enterprise system that relies on government safeguards against depression and extreme poverty -- is the legacy of liberal leadership, from Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson to Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson. (And more recently Bill Clinton, who erased Republican deficits that were sending the economy into a spiral of recession and began to pay down the national debt.) Liberal policies made America the freest, wealthiest, most successful and most powerful nation in human history. Conservatism in power always threatens to undo that national progress, and is almost always frustrated by the innate decency and democratic instincts of the American people.
If Americans have a common fault, however, it's our tendency to suffer from historical amnesia. Too many of us have forgotten, or never learned, what kind of country America was under the conservative rule that preceded the century of liberal reform. And too many of us have no idea whose ideas and energy brought about the reforms we now take for granted.
If your workplace is safe; if your children go to school rather than being forced into labor; if you are paid a living wage, including overtime; if you enjoy a 40-hour week and you are allowed to join a union to protect your rights -- you can thank liberals. If your food is not poisoned and your water is drinkable -- you can thank liberals. If your parents are eligible for Medicare and Social Security, so they can grow old in dignity without bankrupting your family -- you can thank liberals. If our rivers are getting cleaner and our air isn't black with pollution; if our wilderness is protected and our countryside is still green -- you can thank liberals. If people of all races can share the same public facilities; if everyone has the right to vote; if couples fall in love and marry regardless of race; if we have finally begun to transcend a segregated society -- you can thank liberals. Progressive innovations like those and so many others were achieved by long, difficult struggles against entrenched power. What defined conservatism, and conservatives, was their opposition to every one of those advances. The country we know and love today was built by those victories for liberalism -- with the support of the American people.
Whether they now describe themselves as liberal or not, most Americans remain strongly progressive in their views about taxation, healthcare, education spending, Social Security, environmental protection, and corporate regulation. In fact, despite conservative political advances in recent decades, survey evidence gathered by pollsters of all persuasions suggests that Americans are still more liberal than conservative."
Fom Joe Conason's new book Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth. Buy it on Amazon
Ang,
who is a liberal through and through, and damn proud of it
Liberals value the dynamism and creativity of democratic capitalism, but they also believe in strong, active government to protect the interests of society. They understand that markets function best when properly regulated, and they also know that unchecked concentrations of private power encourage environmental pollution, financial fraud, and labor exploitation. Liberals see a broad social interest in ensuring real opportunities and decent standards of living for everyone, while requiring basic responsibility from everyone.
Those who regard such ideals as naive today should remember that America in the 20th century was built on liberal policy, from the Progressive Era through the New Deal, the Fair Deal, the GI Bill, and the Great Society. The modern economy -- a private enterprise system that relies on government safeguards against depression and extreme poverty -- is the legacy of liberal leadership, from Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson to Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson. (And more recently Bill Clinton, who erased Republican deficits that were sending the economy into a spiral of recession and began to pay down the national debt.) Liberal policies made America the freest, wealthiest, most successful and most powerful nation in human history. Conservatism in power always threatens to undo that national progress, and is almost always frustrated by the innate decency and democratic instincts of the American people.
If Americans have a common fault, however, it's our tendency to suffer from historical amnesia. Too many of us have forgotten, or never learned, what kind of country America was under the conservative rule that preceded the century of liberal reform. And too many of us have no idea whose ideas and energy brought about the reforms we now take for granted.
If your workplace is safe; if your children go to school rather than being forced into labor; if you are paid a living wage, including overtime; if you enjoy a 40-hour week and you are allowed to join a union to protect your rights -- you can thank liberals. If your food is not poisoned and your water is drinkable -- you can thank liberals. If your parents are eligible for Medicare and Social Security, so they can grow old in dignity without bankrupting your family -- you can thank liberals. If our rivers are getting cleaner and our air isn't black with pollution; if our wilderness is protected and our countryside is still green -- you can thank liberals. If people of all races can share the same public facilities; if everyone has the right to vote; if couples fall in love and marry regardless of race; if we have finally begun to transcend a segregated society -- you can thank liberals. Progressive innovations like those and so many others were achieved by long, difficult struggles against entrenched power. What defined conservatism, and conservatives, was their opposition to every one of those advances. The country we know and love today was built by those victories for liberalism -- with the support of the American people.
Whether they now describe themselves as liberal or not, most Americans remain strongly progressive in their views about taxation, healthcare, education spending, Social Security, environmental protection, and corporate regulation. In fact, despite conservative political advances in recent decades, survey evidence gathered by pollsters of all persuasions suggests that Americans are still more liberal than conservative."
Fom Joe Conason's new book Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth. Buy it on Amazon
Ang,
who is a liberal through and through, and damn proud of it
Sunday, August 17, 2003
The CA Recall
The LA Times published a big spread comparing the leading candidates answers to a single issue - the increase in vehicle licensing. Under the current plan, approved by the legislature and signed by Gov. Davis, fees on vehicle licensing will triple. By doing so, $4 billion in revenues will be raised. This is a small but significant portion of the $35 billion deficit in the CA state budget.
Most candidates are running with this as their main issue - if elected, I will repeal the tripling of the fee. So the Times asked each campaign: Would you really repeal this law and, if "Yes", where are you going to raise the $4 billion in funds that this measure provides?
In other words - talk is cheap. How are *you* going to manage California's fiscal crisis?
Arnold the Actor did not even bother to reply. Yup, the big Rethuglican front-runner doesn't think he has to bother giving people real answers. Loser.
The Rethuglican morons who lost the last election still hold to the same line - cut services for poor people, let the infrastructure of the state go to hell, don't tax the rich. Simon will cut all state services across the board, and the others all claim they will find the money by cleaning up government fraud and abuse. OK, good enough. How are you going to fund the enforcement and investigative agencies needed to root out the "fraud"? How do you know there is $35 billion in fraud going on such that you can balance the budget just by getting rid of it? Aren't you really saying you intend to lay more state employees off, cut services to ordinary Californians, and then finger-point at Mexican migrant labor as the source of the state's woes? Like you Rethuglicans always do? Or will you admit your dirty secret - you will pass the SAME budget measures Gray Davis is trying to get passed, with the same taxes, except now your Rethuglican buddies in the legislature will vote yes instead of stonewalling? Liars.
Huffington and Camejo propose taxing wealthy Californians and/or corporations at a higher rate. Sounds good until you realize that you can't do either without getting a super-majority in the legislature - which is what is preventing Davis from getting moderate measure passed in the first palce. So, an 8.5 for social activism, a 0 for political reality. Also, taxing companies is a sticky wicket. Some have excess profits (Enron, anyone?) but often are not CA corporations, while small businesses are just getting by in the stagnant economy, and can't cough up more until the business environment gets better.
The only candidate who had an answer with any substance was Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante. He would exempt the first $20K value of a vehicle, so as not to unduly penalize low and moderate income citizens, which would cut the revenue by $2 billion. He would then increase the alcohol and cigarette tax to make up the amount lost by exempting the first $20K value of a car. These are measures that try to address conflicting class interests in the state (c'mon folks, this is a class war between the rich and the non-rich, complicated by the usual racist, homophobic, and religious hysteria that grips Central Valley Californians. Get a clue), and has a chance of being approved by the legislature.
The real problem is the super majority (2/3) required to pass the budget. It needs to be made a strong majority (55%, the same as school bond measures) which allows budgets to be passed but not rubber-stamped. Right now, a minority of legislators can hold the entire state hostage to their ideological posturing, circumventing reasonable majority rule.
Meanwhile, the 5th largest economy in the world (if California were a nation, not a state) is unable to provide social services or get the economic engine back up to speed. Think of it this way - had California not been so badly fucked over by George W. Bush's buddy Kenny Lay and the other "energy bidness" robber barons, the *world* economy would be much stronger, the national economy would probably be growing at a good clip, employment would be higher (though not back to Clinton-era levels), and individual families would not be struggling so hard to make ends meet. California would not have lost BILLIONS down that open rat hole.
It is the economy, stupid.
Ang
Saturday, August 16, 2003
FAIR AND BALANCED!
Argh! I missed the celebration of the offical "Fair and Balanced" day of blogging yesterday!
Form Joe Conason's blog on Salon: "In case you don't already know, Aug. 15 has been declared Fair and Balanced Day by freedom-loving bloggers everywhere, in response to the morally unfair and mentally unbalanced nuisance lawsuit brought by Fox News against Al Franken and his publisher."
I declare this LJ to be fair and blanced, particularly when compared to the crap that the right-wing fascist media in this country distributes. I am not in the pay of any political party, nor under the influence of religious superstition.
Ang
Form Joe Conason's blog on Salon: "In case you don't already know, Aug. 15 has been declared Fair and Balanced Day by freedom-loving bloggers everywhere, in response to the morally unfair and mentally unbalanced nuisance lawsuit brought by Fox News against Al Franken and his publisher."
I declare this LJ to be fair and blanced, particularly when compared to the crap that the right-wing fascist media in this country distributes. I am not in the pay of any political party, nor under the influence of religious superstition.
Ang
Friday, August 15, 2003
I Wonder
The snarfy Washington Post "journalist" who mocked Europeans for not being able "to take the heat" was so proud of his/her/their air conditioning and sealed buildings.
I wonder how many people in those kinds of buildings when the power went out across a huge chunk of the US yesterday were wishing they could open windows and turn on ceiling fans to keep cool. When my husband's building lost power last week, they had to leave because the temperatures rose to higher than the outside - no windows to open, no natural air currents.
And no power means no ice for your water, no way to run electric fans, and a whole host of other conveniences people take for granted.
The technologies that make living in hot, humid climates comfortable are heavily dependent upon large amounts of "cheap" energy.
Ang
I wonder how many people in those kinds of buildings when the power went out across a huge chunk of the US yesterday were wishing they could open windows and turn on ceiling fans to keep cool. When my husband's building lost power last week, they had to leave because the temperatures rose to higher than the outside - no windows to open, no natural air currents.
And no power means no ice for your water, no way to run electric fans, and a whole host of other conveniences people take for granted.
The technologies that make living in hot, humid climates comfortable are heavily dependent upon large amounts of "cheap" energy.
Ang
Thursday, August 14, 2003
Just Too Disgusting
The Washigton Post has an editorial making fun of the people in France who are dying becuse of the heat.
The bastard who wrote it is mocking Europeans for not having sealed buildings with air conditioning and saying that Americans can take high temperatures, what's wrong with those wussy Europeans?
Well, if the US had been suffering through a month of record temperatures with no rain, gee, we'd be in pretty bad shape ourselves, AC or no AC, don't you think?
Also, as usual, there is no mention of the fact that the oil, gas & coal burned in America to make our ACs run so nicely is demonstrably adding to the greenhouse effect - which is what is triggering weather abnormalities around the globe.
Yes, politics matter. It matters that we get politicians in office who do not believe it is their God-given, Xtian right to rape the earth and rob their neighbors and kill the heathens they can't convert.
Oh, and another soldier dead in Iraq, more civilians killed there, and still no end to the floundering malaise of joblessness in America.
Ang
The bastard who wrote it is mocking Europeans for not having sealed buildings with air conditioning and saying that Americans can take high temperatures, what's wrong with those wussy Europeans?
Well, if the US had been suffering through a month of record temperatures with no rain, gee, we'd be in pretty bad shape ourselves, AC or no AC, don't you think?
Also, as usual, there is no mention of the fact that the oil, gas & coal burned in America to make our ACs run so nicely is demonstrably adding to the greenhouse effect - which is what is triggering weather abnormalities around the globe.
Yes, politics matter. It matters that we get politicians in office who do not believe it is their God-given, Xtian right to rape the earth and rob their neighbors and kill the heathens they can't convert.
Oh, and another soldier dead in Iraq, more civilians killed there, and still no end to the floundering malaise of joblessness in America.
Ang
Saturday, August 09, 2003
Just a Thought
If the real backers of al-Quaeda are members of the Saudi royal family, and if the reason we can't *say* this officially and then open a can of Whup-Ass on them is because they control oil, doesn't it seem logical that the research and scientific might of America, not to mention the proper patriotic attitude, should be to go hammer and tongs at replacing oil as the primary energy source?
Oil Independence = National Security
Forget the Greens. This is a national security issue. Dependence on imported oil makes the US, Europe and Japan vulnerable because we can't afford to cut the Saudis off, declare them a pariah state, and let them rot in splendid isolation.
Oil Independence = National Security
Ang
Oil Independence = National Security
Forget the Greens. This is a national security issue. Dependence on imported oil makes the US, Europe and Japan vulnerable because we can't afford to cut the Saudis off, declare them a pariah state, and let them rot in splendid isolation.
Oil Independence = National Security
Ang
Thursday, August 07, 2003
What a Joke
So the Austrian weight-lifter is running for California governor.
What are the odds that he'll get it? Pretty good. The state is in hideous condition because of the Rethuglican fuck-over during the Enron price-gouging on energy, and what will happen? They will be rewarded with the governorship of the largest state because Ahn-nold will bring out stoopid people who just think it's cute to vote for the Terminator.
Just when I think the population is beginning to clue in to just how badly the Rethuglicans are screwing them, the public rejoices in the presence of another ass-hole fascist to vote for.
Ethical people will not use the bogus recall action to be rid of their political enemies, and the scum from the bottom of the sewage tank won't hesitate a second to use it at any opportunity. We have a "recall" process, people - it's called regular elections.
Diane Feinstein got it right when she said:
Additionally, it is now becoming apparent that there may well be dozens of candidates on the recall ballot, most of whom have no background or knowledge of the state’s enormous portfolio of issues -- whether it be the $99 billion budget, the numerous pieces of legislation awaiting signature or veto by the governor, or the thousands of pending appointments to critical judgeships and important state posts.
Indeed, few of these candidates know much about the law enforcement needs of the state or the security risks we face in the war against terror.
Few understand the myriad of challenges facing California’s public schools.
And, I would hazard a guess that if you asked these candidates what the Healthy Families program is, how it is funded, and how it benefits the state, the vast majority would have no idea what you are talking about. And that’s not to mention the enormously complicated Medicaid issues that face the state.
It matters who runs a bureaucracy. There are a lot of nuts and bolts to be managed. I'll take bland over incompetant, or fascistic, any day.
Ang
What are the odds that he'll get it? Pretty good. The state is in hideous condition because of the Rethuglican fuck-over during the Enron price-gouging on energy, and what will happen? They will be rewarded with the governorship of the largest state because Ahn-nold will bring out stoopid people who just think it's cute to vote for the Terminator.
Just when I think the population is beginning to clue in to just how badly the Rethuglicans are screwing them, the public rejoices in the presence of another ass-hole fascist to vote for.
Ethical people will not use the bogus recall action to be rid of their political enemies, and the scum from the bottom of the sewage tank won't hesitate a second to use it at any opportunity. We have a "recall" process, people - it's called regular elections.
Diane Feinstein got it right when she said:
Additionally, it is now becoming apparent that there may well be dozens of candidates on the recall ballot, most of whom have no background or knowledge of the state’s enormous portfolio of issues -- whether it be the $99 billion budget, the numerous pieces of legislation awaiting signature or veto by the governor, or the thousands of pending appointments to critical judgeships and important state posts.
Indeed, few of these candidates know much about the law enforcement needs of the state or the security risks we face in the war against terror.
Few understand the myriad of challenges facing California’s public schools.
And, I would hazard a guess that if you asked these candidates what the Healthy Families program is, how it is funded, and how it benefits the state, the vast majority would have no idea what you are talking about. And that’s not to mention the enormously complicated Medicaid issues that face the state.
It matters who runs a bureaucracy. There are a lot of nuts and bolts to be managed. I'll take bland over incompetant, or fascistic, any day.
Ang
Saturday, July 26, 2003
Mailer, again
Damn, this guy just gets better. In the most recent New York Review of Books online, there is an excellent exchange between Robert Tiersky and Norman Mailer on Mailer's previous article for NYRB, "White Man Unburdened."
The original article: The White Man Unburdened
The exchange about the article: Bush & Terror: An Exchange with Norman Mailer
Here are the last three paragrpah's of Mailer's reply, which may be some of the finest political writing about what is at stake to appear in print. The emphasis is mine:
"Maybe we will do well to learn to live with terrorism as a chronic condition, an ongoing upheaval to all sorts of good hopes, plans, and projects. All the same, until it reaches the numbers of our annual automobile accidents (more than 40,000 mortalities), can we recognize that there may be worse things in store for our Republic than projected weapons of mass destruction (which are, after all, never easy to deliver), and one of them is the shameless exploitation of American perception? A blinded democracy is soon on its knees begging for a leader to show the road.
At present, the specter of fascism settling upon us remains just that, an exaggeration, a specter, but will we escape it if we are struck by economic miseries? That is the time when we will need to be at our best rather than gulled in thought and dulled in language by our reigning Doctors of Advertising Sciences. Tiersky concludes his letter by suggesting that the real bottom line on the Bush administration, whatever its admitted low maneuvers, may be that it is still trying to do the job of searching genuinely to provide us with security.
The answer may be that there are more important things to safeguard. What does it profit us if we gain extreme security and lose our democracy? Not everyone in Iraq, after all, was getting their hands and/or their ears cut off by Saddam Hussein. In the middle of that society were hordes of Iraqis who had all the security they needed even if there was no freedom other than the full-fledged liberty offered by dictators to be free to speak with hyperbolic hosannas for the leader. So, yes, there are more important things to safeguard than security and one of them is to protect the much-beleaguered integrity of our democracy. The final question in these matters suggests itself. Can leaders who lie as a way of life protect any way of life?"
Precisely. At what cost "security"? What are we doing to ourselves as a people?
Ang
The original article: The White Man Unburdened
The exchange about the article: Bush & Terror: An Exchange with Norman Mailer
Here are the last three paragrpah's of Mailer's reply, which may be some of the finest political writing about what is at stake to appear in print. The emphasis is mine:
"Maybe we will do well to learn to live with terrorism as a chronic condition, an ongoing upheaval to all sorts of good hopes, plans, and projects. All the same, until it reaches the numbers of our annual automobile accidents (more than 40,000 mortalities), can we recognize that there may be worse things in store for our Republic than projected weapons of mass destruction (which are, after all, never easy to deliver), and one of them is the shameless exploitation of American perception? A blinded democracy is soon on its knees begging for a leader to show the road.
At present, the specter of fascism settling upon us remains just that, an exaggeration, a specter, but will we escape it if we are struck by economic miseries? That is the time when we will need to be at our best rather than gulled in thought and dulled in language by our reigning Doctors of Advertising Sciences. Tiersky concludes his letter by suggesting that the real bottom line on the Bush administration, whatever its admitted low maneuvers, may be that it is still trying to do the job of searching genuinely to provide us with security.
The answer may be that there are more important things to safeguard. What does it profit us if we gain extreme security and lose our democracy? Not everyone in Iraq, after all, was getting their hands and/or their ears cut off by Saddam Hussein. In the middle of that society were hordes of Iraqis who had all the security they needed even if there was no freedom other than the full-fledged liberty offered by dictators to be free to speak with hyperbolic hosannas for the leader. So, yes, there are more important things to safeguard than security and one of them is to protect the much-beleaguered integrity of our democracy. The final question in these matters suggests itself. Can leaders who lie as a way of life protect any way of life?"
Precisely. At what cost "security"? What are we doing to ourselves as a people?
Ang
Rethuglican Politics in CA
OK, George Bush's buddy Kenny DeLay conspired to game the energy market in California, throwing the state in fiscal crisis because of skyrocketing energy costs. There is reasonable evidence to show that this one company, Enron, messed up California's tech economy, which relies on electricity, so badly that the length, depth and tenacity of the national recession can be credited to it.
So, the Rethuglican energy whores fuck over the state (punishing it for so decisively rejecting Duhbya Shrub in the last election. You DO remember that the majority of voters nation-wide voted against him, don't you?) and ruin its economy for the next ten years. Now, they have the gall to fund outside pollsters & profiteers to scrounge a fraction of signatures to force a recall election on a legitimately elected leader (unlike their own bully-boy president).
Here's the fun part - because of the way California recall election laws stand, Issa, the guy who bank-rolled the recall effort, can be elected governor with FEWER VOTES than it took to force the recall! All he has to do is out-poll the rest of the four or five Rethuglicans who decide that for a few thousand signatures and $3,500 dollars (shit *I* could do that!) they wanna be Gov. A few hundred thousand voters out of millions can appoint this guy governor.
Yes, a simple majority of votes will throw Davis out, and a simple plurality of votes will bring Issa in. Democrats cannot risk running candidates for fear of legitimizing the recall. The number of signatures needed for recall is less than the core of Republican-only voters. This isn't a recall - it is the Republican party rallying its loyalists and taking advantage of convoluted election laws to force themselves on the state.
Welcome the Bush Dynasty's kinder, gentler America, where oppositional thinking is labeled traitorous, where money means more than the law, and where *your* sons and daughters will be marched off to far corners of the earth to be killed. Not their kids, of course.
Ang
So, the Rethuglican energy whores fuck over the state (punishing it for so decisively rejecting Duhbya Shrub in the last election. You DO remember that the majority of voters nation-wide voted against him, don't you?) and ruin its economy for the next ten years. Now, they have the gall to fund outside pollsters & profiteers to scrounge a fraction of signatures to force a recall election on a legitimately elected leader (unlike their own bully-boy president).
Here's the fun part - because of the way California recall election laws stand, Issa, the guy who bank-rolled the recall effort, can be elected governor with FEWER VOTES than it took to force the recall! All he has to do is out-poll the rest of the four or five Rethuglicans who decide that for a few thousand signatures and $3,500 dollars (shit *I* could do that!) they wanna be Gov. A few hundred thousand voters out of millions can appoint this guy governor.
Yes, a simple majority of votes will throw Davis out, and a simple plurality of votes will bring Issa in. Democrats cannot risk running candidates for fear of legitimizing the recall. The number of signatures needed for recall is less than the core of Republican-only voters. This isn't a recall - it is the Republican party rallying its loyalists and taking advantage of convoluted election laws to force themselves on the state.
Welcome the Bush Dynasty's kinder, gentler America, where oppositional thinking is labeled traitorous, where money means more than the law, and where *your* sons and daughters will be marched off to far corners of the earth to be killed. Not their kids, of course.
Ang
Thursday, July 24, 2003
Say "Hi" to Strom...
Uday and Qusay Hussein, it appears, are DEAD.
If this is true, the world is a better place. Hey, you two psychopathic murderers, be sure to say "Hi" to Strom Thrumond in Hell as you go by. You two are going to a deeper circle, so I doubt you'll have much time for a chat.
Of course, now we've had three retaliation killings by their supporters. Or was it by the shi'ite resistence? Angry Kurds? Free floating mercenaries?
I hope the news is true and they are dead. I also hope their father is already dead. Even so, there is still no valid justification for this war, there is something really grotesque about going after individuals to rub them out (that's the modus operandi of dictators against oposition), and the deaths of these two, no matter how deserved, does not replace a multi-national peace-keeping force to bring civil order back to the country.
That would be the only good outcome to theis whole mess.
Ang
If this is true, the world is a better place. Hey, you two psychopathic murderers, be sure to say "Hi" to Strom Thrumond in Hell as you go by. You two are going to a deeper circle, so I doubt you'll have much time for a chat.
Of course, now we've had three retaliation killings by their supporters. Or was it by the shi'ite resistence? Angry Kurds? Free floating mercenaries?
I hope the news is true and they are dead. I also hope their father is already dead. Even so, there is still no valid justification for this war, there is something really grotesque about going after individuals to rub them out (that's the modus operandi of dictators against oposition), and the deaths of these two, no matter how deserved, does not replace a multi-national peace-keeping force to bring civil order back to the country.
That would be the only good outcome to theis whole mess.
Ang
Sunday, July 13, 2003
But let's have perspective
What IS relevant is the continual lies of the US Administration about the justifications for the Iraq War.
Point blank - The Bush White House LIED (as in "knowingly told a falsehood that matters") about the threat that the Hussein regime posed to the US in particular and to the world in general. They lied and bullied and blustered their way into an invasion which has left Saddam Hussein's whereabouts unknown, hundreds of US troops dead, over a thousand more US service men and women significantly wounded, and MILLIONS (that's six, count 'em, six zeroes) of Iraqis dead, or wounded, or in danger of robbery, murder, disease, hunger and general suffering.
I am quite happy that Hussein is out of power. Miserable, butchering, torturing bastard. I sincerely and unrepentantly hope he is dead, and that he died a lingering, agonizing death, like so many of the people he ordered murdered suffered.
This does not change the fact that this war was conducted in violation of international law, that it was done based on lies, and that is is now costing lives every day because this adminsitration has NO PLAN for actually stabilizing and normalizing the country. Shit, we can't even do this in Afghanistan!
I am reading more and more reports of how badly our troops are being supported. How badly POWs are being treated. How high-handed the US command is being with local populations.
Nation-building is a long, thankless job under the best of conditions. It is what Iraq would have faced with the death of Hussein. But the Bush White House forced this war because they thought they could get a quick win and boost their polls. They honestly believed that Iraq would remain intact, they could kill Hussein, and then leave the Ba'athists in control. Easy win, score one for the Unelected Fraud!
But reality is a messy thing, and there are some predicaments Poppy Bush's friends and influence can't buy you out of.
It would be funny, the plan blowing up in the Chimp's face - except there are people suffering needlessly because of it. There are children missing homes, water, food, parents, limbs. There are service men and women who are maimed for life. There is a great and noble nation, beggared. There are angry people who see this and only wish to return the favor - pain, destruction, death.
Iraq needs the UN to come to its aid, to protect its resources and patrimony, and to honestly set it on the path to independent nationhood.
The US needs to get rid of the neo-fascists in the White House, and look to setting its own house in order.
Ang
Point blank - The Bush White House LIED (as in "knowingly told a falsehood that matters") about the threat that the Hussein regime posed to the US in particular and to the world in general. They lied and bullied and blustered their way into an invasion which has left Saddam Hussein's whereabouts unknown, hundreds of US troops dead, over a thousand more US service men and women significantly wounded, and MILLIONS (that's six, count 'em, six zeroes) of Iraqis dead, or wounded, or in danger of robbery, murder, disease, hunger and general suffering.
I am quite happy that Hussein is out of power. Miserable, butchering, torturing bastard. I sincerely and unrepentantly hope he is dead, and that he died a lingering, agonizing death, like so many of the people he ordered murdered suffered.
This does not change the fact that this war was conducted in violation of international law, that it was done based on lies, and that is is now costing lives every day because this adminsitration has NO PLAN for actually stabilizing and normalizing the country. Shit, we can't even do this in Afghanistan!
I am reading more and more reports of how badly our troops are being supported. How badly POWs are being treated. How high-handed the US command is being with local populations.
Nation-building is a long, thankless job under the best of conditions. It is what Iraq would have faced with the death of Hussein. But the Bush White House forced this war because they thought they could get a quick win and boost their polls. They honestly believed that Iraq would remain intact, they could kill Hussein, and then leave the Ba'athists in control. Easy win, score one for the Unelected Fraud!
But reality is a messy thing, and there are some predicaments Poppy Bush's friends and influence can't buy you out of.
It would be funny, the plan blowing up in the Chimp's face - except there are people suffering needlessly because of it. There are children missing homes, water, food, parents, limbs. There are service men and women who are maimed for life. There is a great and noble nation, beggared. There are angry people who see this and only wish to return the favor - pain, destruction, death.
Iraq needs the UN to come to its aid, to protect its resources and patrimony, and to honestly set it on the path to independent nationhood.
The US needs to get rid of the neo-fascists in the White House, and look to setting its own house in order.
Ang
Friday, July 11, 2003
Told You So
Waaaaay back In LJ posts from a few months ago, I talked about how the US military would trample the forces of Saddam Hussein, and that we would get bogged down in a ghastly mess (Quagmire is too polite a term for it, how 'bout fuck-up?). I also spoke about how the reasons given for the war were false - Iraq was NOT an immediate threat to us, there were no ties to al Qaida, etc.
I was right, as was every commentator who said the same thing. We were derided in various forums, threatened with violence and harm for "undermining the President", and generally treated as enemies. OK, answer me this - why are service men and women dying in Iraq? Why are they being shot, bombed, and grenaded? Why are Iraqis by the millions at risk for disease and death due to the destruction of the war?
Because Duh-bya Shrub wants to be Prezzie for another term. Because the rabid, neo-fascist (No, Virginia, they are not conservatives, they are fascists.) mob that terrorizes the Congress and the nation have not yet reduced us to the condition of Franco's Spain, or of Pinochet's Chile. Because the richest sliver of population in the world wants MORE, MORE, MORE. That is why soldiers and civilians are suffering in Iraq right now.
The major media are finally getting some balls back and are saying what the ordinary thinking person has been screaming since last year - This war is a PR campaign by Bush & Rove.
Oh, and in other news, more people lost their jobs last month. It's the economy, stupid.
Ang
Friday, July 04, 2003
The White Man Unburdened
I usually find Norman Mailer a very annoying author, but his recent article in The New York Review of Books is spot on. The closing paragraph is brilliant:
Democracy, more than any other political system, depends on a modicum of honesty. Ultimately, it is much at the mercy of a leader who has never been embarrassed by himself. What is to be said of a man who spent two years in the Air Force of the National Guard (as a way of not having to go to Vietnam) and proceeded—like many another spoiled and wealthy father's son—not to bother to show up for duty in his second year of service? Most of us have episodes in our youth that can cause us shame on reflection. It is a mark of maturation that we do not try to profit from our early lacks and vices but do our best to learn from them. Bush proceeded, however, to turn his declaration of the Iraqi campaign's end into a mighty fashion show. He chose—this overnight clone of Honest Abe—to arrive on the deck of the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln on an S-3B Viking jet that came in with a dramatic tail-hook landing. The carrier was easily within helicopter range of San Diego but G.W. would not have been able to show himself in flight regalia, and so would not have been able to demonstrate how well he wore the uniform he had not honored. Jack Kennedy, a war hero, was always in civvies while he was commander in chief. So was General Eisenhower. George W. Bush, who might, if he had been entirely on his own, have made a world-class male model (since he never takes an awkward photograph), proceeded to tote the flight helmet and sport the flight suit. There he was for the photo-op looking like one more great guy among the great guys. Let us hope that our democracy will survive these nonstop foulings of the nest.
For the full article: The White Man Unburdened
We are governed by a man who considers warfare a legitimate campaign ad. Who does not care that service men and women are dying because he lied about WMD. Who approves of tax exemptions for people who drive Humvees, while denying poor children a pittance.
Here's an interesting site:
Cost of War
It shows how much the Iraq war is costing us to the minutes - all based on government numbers - and then shows what else that budget could be covering.
The nation and the world are being ripped to shreds by this most Uncurious George, who thinks himself ordained by God to impose his whims and wants on all of us.
Ang
Democracy, more than any other political system, depends on a modicum of honesty. Ultimately, it is much at the mercy of a leader who has never been embarrassed by himself. What is to be said of a man who spent two years in the Air Force of the National Guard (as a way of not having to go to Vietnam) and proceeded—like many another spoiled and wealthy father's son—not to bother to show up for duty in his second year of service? Most of us have episodes in our youth that can cause us shame on reflection. It is a mark of maturation that we do not try to profit from our early lacks and vices but do our best to learn from them. Bush proceeded, however, to turn his declaration of the Iraqi campaign's end into a mighty fashion show. He chose—this overnight clone of Honest Abe—to arrive on the deck of the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln on an S-3B Viking jet that came in with a dramatic tail-hook landing. The carrier was easily within helicopter range of San Diego but G.W. would not have been able to show himself in flight regalia, and so would not have been able to demonstrate how well he wore the uniform he had not honored. Jack Kennedy, a war hero, was always in civvies while he was commander in chief. So was General Eisenhower. George W. Bush, who might, if he had been entirely on his own, have made a world-class male model (since he never takes an awkward photograph), proceeded to tote the flight helmet and sport the flight suit. There he was for the photo-op looking like one more great guy among the great guys. Let us hope that our democracy will survive these nonstop foulings of the nest.
For the full article: The White Man Unburdened
We are governed by a man who considers warfare a legitimate campaign ad. Who does not care that service men and women are dying because he lied about WMD. Who approves of tax exemptions for people who drive Humvees, while denying poor children a pittance.
Here's an interesting site:
Cost of War
It shows how much the Iraq war is costing us to the minutes - all based on government numbers - and then shows what else that budget could be covering.
The nation and the world are being ripped to shreds by this most Uncurious George, who thinks himself ordained by God to impose his whims and wants on all of us.
Ang
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)