Charles Barkley, Barack Obama, Indiana University Basketball, and the Ohio Primary.
I heard a news story this evening on the local news AND then replayed during the NBA All-Star festivities on TNT that focused on a unique political endorsement. Charles Barkley, former NBA great and frequent sociopolitical commentator, endorsed Senator Obama for president this weekend. Barkley, an admitted Republican and traditional Alabama gubanatorial wannabe, leaped to Obama's side of the aisle by calling him the best candidate for the job. Not only does this confuse many people (atleast me!) because of Barkley's consistent Republican roots, but also because he played NBA basketball in Arizona--home of Senator John McCain--for at least 8-10 years with additional stops in Philadelphia and Houston. Aside from merely refraining from endorsing any candidate at this point, Charles could have at least stopped at this point in the story...
I'm afraid that's not the case. Before we proceed with this analysis, let me first remind you that this is the same Charles Barkley that famously told the media years ago that he didn't want children to look up to him as a role model in his profession. I know for a fact that comments like that drove his Sports Illustrated for Kids trading card values down for years afterwards (actually I can't prove that statement, but it felt right.)
Here's the kicker, folks: Barkley continued to comment on the political atmosphere of the United States by referring to those that consider themselves "conservatives" to be in all actuality "fake Christians." Now, I have not had a chance to read the transcripts online, but the news is only covering those two tidbits of the situation---Charles endorses Obama, and Charles openly criticized conservatives for being "fake Christians." Let's just say that this small news story is not going away anytime soon. Follow-up note: Good luck securing the GOP nomination for the Alabama governorship in 2014, Charles... you just might need some of those conservative voters to cast a ballot in your party's primary. OUCH.
More on Obama:
Last week I had a conversation with a close friend about Barack Obama and the upcoming Ohio primary on March 4th. I have already mailed in my application for an absentee ballot and should be receiving my forms in the mail in the next few days. Until today, I was almost positive that I was going to stick with my decision to vote for Senator John Edwards in a defiant move to protest my lack of confidence and trust in the remaining two DNC candidates in the race. I still have some trust issues with Obama that relate to his policy formation and opinions (chiefly regarding health care and education), and have written Senator Clinton off completely at this point...BUT I spent some time reading some news articles about Obama's feelings regarding merit pay for teachers. In the earlier debates, Obama's opinions regarding merit pay were described as the traditional pay scale evaluation based primarily on proficiency scores. I have a problem with that system of assessment because it has the potential to drive away quality teachers from historically under-achieving or considerably poor school districts. That cycle, paired with already existing funding issues, could be the end of any level of remaining hope in those districts. However, based upon comments that Obama made to the NEA in July 2007 and other policy descriptions that I have been able to find, it seems as though the senator wants to work with professional teachers' unions and state school boards to design a system of merit pay that encourages teachers to excel in the classroom without any or all pay increments based on just proficiency testing. While I am not completely satisfied with this answer, I am happy that he understands that this is a complicated process and not just a flashy soundbyte for a debate response. I am still hesitant to throw my support to Senator Obama at this point, but I can tell you that I am leaning more in his direction at this point. I still have questions about his policy formation, and am worried that some of his advisors may not be 100% "Working-Family Friendly," but I do know that I am more confident in him at this point than Senator Clinton.
I guess I'll have to let you know how the ballot thing works out this upcoming week!
Indiana Hoosiers Basketball:
The Crimson and Cream knocked off #9 Michigan State tonight at Assembly Hall by a 20 point margin with looming NCAA investigations into Head Coach Calvin Sampson's recruiting process and overall credibility with the Infractions Committee, AND a first-half knee injury to PF D.J. White. This win allows IU to gain another quality win after a losing streak (3 out of last 6 games) and stay within 1 and a half games of Big 10 conference leader, Purdue, who comes to Bloomington on Tuesday for a show-down. Oh, and if Sampson is fired look for former BGSU head coach Dan Dakich to act as interim head coach for the Hoosiers. Neat-o mosquito.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Friday, February 08, 2008
In an effort to be consistent, here's another inconsistent thread.
Why do I always write on this for a week straight and then fade away into the busy, complicated night?
Since we last left off, Johnny Boy suspended his campaign in order to make way for a clearer path to party unity. Yep, that sure worked.... Super Tuesday results have left the DNC presidential snapshot almost as muddled as the day that Edwards threw his hat out of the ring. Now we get to listen to analysts and commentators argue the relative focus of the GOP in the midst of an approaching heavyweight showdown at the Denver convention.
Here's the problem... both of the DNC heavyweights are rather similar in their policy stances and committment to corporate donors. Sure, Hillary and Obama will vocally clash over health care projections (I actually have to side with Clinton on that argument) and initial Iraq war foresight (Obama wins that contest), but they really aren't that grand. In the year of the inevitable Democratic presidential succession, we have successfully shoved our inevitability down the garbage disposal (insert groaning chug of grinding disposal motor.)
Now, I do apologize for my resentment levels and many of my close politically active friends are quick to remind me that Edwards was not selected by enough primary voters to deserve a shot at representing our party in the general election...BUT I can't seem to get past the fact that this is probably how Kucinich, Dean, Dodd, Gravel, and Biden supporters feel on a regular basis. It's just a rude awakening that our primary electorate has been so swayed by non-traditional messengers in this primary match-up. And I personally feel saddened that so many local and national unions ran to the direct aid of Clinton and Obama when Edwards was, and still will be, the true voice of socioeconomic justice for working families in America.
Side notes:
*The Cleveland Browns have sent 6 players to the Pro Bowl in Honolulu, Hawaii, this weekend. For their glory and your reading adventure, here are their names and positions.... Please make a habit of looking for them on the field. They will be the ones doing awesome things with their respective talents (and wearing Orange helmets for the AFC roster, if that helps.)
QB Derek Anderson
WR Braylon Edwards
TE Kellen Winslow, Jr.
OT Joe Thomas
KR Josh Cribbs
LS Brian Pontbriand (LS stands for Long Snapper = Sweet.)
*Fmr. Gov. Mitt Romney (R-Massachusetts) suspended his race for the White House yesterday in an effort to allow the true conservative voice of the GOP to unify around Sen. John McCain. I looked at the numbers last night before bed, and even if Romney were to stay in the race and win every single contest from now until the convention--McCain would still have enough delegates to take the nomination (as long as he faired between 25-35% of the vote in each primary.) This slow chug to the finish line for McCain would do nothing for Romney so he actually benefits now from repairing a political image of unity and humility. Don't fret though; he still managed to insult Clinton and Obama as surrender artists in the face of global terrorism... jab jab sucker punch! If I were Clinton and Obama, I would respond if asked to comment on his remarks with, "Mitt Romney? I don't even think Republican conservatives know that guy."
*Finally, a very Happy Lent to all of my Catholic friends and Lent-observing non-Catholics... does that even happen? I went to Ash Wednesday for the first time in a few years and have made a committment to try Lent out again in my efforts to reconnect to the spiritual side of life. Awhile ago, I decided that faith was more of a personal part of my life than other social aspects. I would have no problem praying or contemplating spiritual issues, but without some type of social interaction, dialogue, or mutual discussion regarding related spiritual issues.... this idea of individual, quiet meditation and spiritual practice did dissipate to mere personal laziness, in my opinion. I'm sure others can stay on track of things a bit better than I with this approach, but I think that I really do need a youth group, Bible study, or worship service element in my life to keep me on-the-ball and thinking toward my own spiritual conclusions. So I am happy to admit that I've been to multiple faith-related events and activities just over the past 7-10 days and am looking forward to more in the future. Happy 1st Lenten Friday... put down that hamburger!
Why do I always write on this for a week straight and then fade away into the busy, complicated night?
Since we last left off, Johnny Boy suspended his campaign in order to make way for a clearer path to party unity. Yep, that sure worked.... Super Tuesday results have left the DNC presidential snapshot almost as muddled as the day that Edwards threw his hat out of the ring. Now we get to listen to analysts and commentators argue the relative focus of the GOP in the midst of an approaching heavyweight showdown at the Denver convention.
Here's the problem... both of the DNC heavyweights are rather similar in their policy stances and committment to corporate donors. Sure, Hillary and Obama will vocally clash over health care projections (I actually have to side with Clinton on that argument) and initial Iraq war foresight (Obama wins that contest), but they really aren't that grand. In the year of the inevitable Democratic presidential succession, we have successfully shoved our inevitability down the garbage disposal (insert groaning chug of grinding disposal motor.)
Now, I do apologize for my resentment levels and many of my close politically active friends are quick to remind me that Edwards was not selected by enough primary voters to deserve a shot at representing our party in the general election...BUT I can't seem to get past the fact that this is probably how Kucinich, Dean, Dodd, Gravel, and Biden supporters feel on a regular basis. It's just a rude awakening that our primary electorate has been so swayed by non-traditional messengers in this primary match-up. And I personally feel saddened that so many local and national unions ran to the direct aid of Clinton and Obama when Edwards was, and still will be, the true voice of socioeconomic justice for working families in America.
Side notes:
*The Cleveland Browns have sent 6 players to the Pro Bowl in Honolulu, Hawaii, this weekend. For their glory and your reading adventure, here are their names and positions.... Please make a habit of looking for them on the field. They will be the ones doing awesome things with their respective talents (and wearing Orange helmets for the AFC roster, if that helps.)
QB Derek Anderson
WR Braylon Edwards
TE Kellen Winslow, Jr.
OT Joe Thomas
KR Josh Cribbs
LS Brian Pontbriand (LS stands for Long Snapper = Sweet.)
*Fmr. Gov. Mitt Romney (R-Massachusetts) suspended his race for the White House yesterday in an effort to allow the true conservative voice of the GOP to unify around Sen. John McCain. I looked at the numbers last night before bed, and even if Romney were to stay in the race and win every single contest from now until the convention--McCain would still have enough delegates to take the nomination (as long as he faired between 25-35% of the vote in each primary.) This slow chug to the finish line for McCain would do nothing for Romney so he actually benefits now from repairing a political image of unity and humility. Don't fret though; he still managed to insult Clinton and Obama as surrender artists in the face of global terrorism... jab jab sucker punch! If I were Clinton and Obama, I would respond if asked to comment on his remarks with, "Mitt Romney? I don't even think Republican conservatives know that guy."
*Finally, a very Happy Lent to all of my Catholic friends and Lent-observing non-Catholics... does that even happen? I went to Ash Wednesday for the first time in a few years and have made a committment to try Lent out again in my efforts to reconnect to the spiritual side of life. Awhile ago, I decided that faith was more of a personal part of my life than other social aspects. I would have no problem praying or contemplating spiritual issues, but without some type of social interaction, dialogue, or mutual discussion regarding related spiritual issues.... this idea of individual, quiet meditation and spiritual practice did dissipate to mere personal laziness, in my opinion. I'm sure others can stay on track of things a bit better than I with this approach, but I think that I really do need a youth group, Bible study, or worship service element in my life to keep me on-the-ball and thinking toward my own spiritual conclusions. So I am happy to admit that I've been to multiple faith-related events and activities just over the past 7-10 days and am looking forward to more in the future. Happy 1st Lenten Friday... put down that hamburger!
Friday, January 18, 2008
This afternoon I received a text message from one of my good friends in Nebraska. He is a progressive Democrat that I often talk shop with, and I have been recently bullying him because he acted as a volunteer observer for the Obama camp in Iowa a few weeks back. Here is the text message:
"Do or die in NV and SC for John. If no wins, he must clear the way!"
Pretty simple and to the point, eh? Well, let me tell you that this really set me off. Ever since late December, I have listened from the Obamanians and Clintonites and their push-from-the-top message that has hinted to a speedy exit from Senator John Edwards in order to clear the way for progress. Most of these comments come from people that are merely drinking the Kool-Aid of the respective camps, and haven't actually worked for a campaign (or even phone-banked or canvassed for a cause in the past.) Aside from the casual idealists, I have also heard from seasoned veterans that have urged me to pass up my support for Edwards for a more level-headed approach. A more level-headed approach, in their opinion, would be to allow Obama and Clinton to slug it out in celebrity fashion with little damage to their messages--on a clear path toward a united front by the end of the spring going into the summer/fall convention cycle. Their voices of reason echo sentiment based upon an ideal opportunity to look united in the face of a weakened Bush Administration and a scattered Republican presence on the road to the White House.
Here are my thoughts:
Why should I, or anyone else, roll over for the Obama and Clinton machines? What is so special about their messages or their candidacy that takes away from a distinguished and still quite eligible candidate in Senator John Edwards? Do the thousands of votes, countless endorsements, and declared delegates---in the face of NO media coverage by the national outlets---mean anything to Democratic leadership and traditional campaign veterans?
Over the past 2.5 years, when these candidates were "honing" their message at the pulpits of the U.S. Senate, John Edwards was carrying his message of hope, hard work, and change to Americans in their communities. John was standing with striking and locked-out workers on picket lines across the country, helping raise funds for local poverty shelters, and establishing a national center for poverty research in North Carolina. Where were Senators Obama and Clinton? Aside from wining and dining with celebrities that lined their velvet pockets with future campaign funds, they were in the U.S. Senate (where they had pledged to the American people to stand up to the Bush White House and turn things around for the country.) Now, I do not want you to think I devalue the candidacy of Obama and Clinton because of their service as legislators, but I do seem to remember the Democratic-controlled House and Senate rolling over like weak puppies on the issue of continued funding to the Iraq blunder. I do not remember Obama and Clinton doing anything but give a strongly-worded speech against the process in the Senate chambers. No, they wouldn't dare stick their necks out too far right before the electoral process began. They went on record as being opposed to Bush recommendations, and then hurried to the airport to go raise money and give interviews to Rolling Stone, Vibe, People, etc.
I have heard Obama and Clinton both claim that they will be able to provide consistently strong leadership for the American people if they were President of the United States of America, but they ducked for cover when the opportunity arose in the U.S. Senate.
So, what do I suggest? I suggest that Senator John Edwards continues his fight to the White House. There have only been two Democratic processes so far, and John is still in this conversation of change. I want him to have the opportunity to force real conversation at the Democratic convention this fall, and hopefully force delegates to carefully consider their voting choices when the ballots circulate for roll call. A process like that is good for America, and the Democratic Party.
I want a President of the United States of America that truly understands the benefits of progressive social work in our local communities, wants to help the middle class family at tough times (not just when it is politically convenient), and has enough respect for global relations to stay involved in conversations abroad (even after he left the U.S. Senate to run for president in 2003-2004.) John Edwards is moderate voice for progressive change in the United States, and I will not waiver in my support for him. I only wish I had the time and money to work every single day for him on the trail.
"Do or die in NV and SC for John. If no wins, he must clear the way!"
Pretty simple and to the point, eh? Well, let me tell you that this really set me off. Ever since late December, I have listened from the Obamanians and Clintonites and their push-from-the-top message that has hinted to a speedy exit from Senator John Edwards in order to clear the way for progress. Most of these comments come from people that are merely drinking the Kool-Aid of the respective camps, and haven't actually worked for a campaign (or even phone-banked or canvassed for a cause in the past.) Aside from the casual idealists, I have also heard from seasoned veterans that have urged me to pass up my support for Edwards for a more level-headed approach. A more level-headed approach, in their opinion, would be to allow Obama and Clinton to slug it out in celebrity fashion with little damage to their messages--on a clear path toward a united front by the end of the spring going into the summer/fall convention cycle. Their voices of reason echo sentiment based upon an ideal opportunity to look united in the face of a weakened Bush Administration and a scattered Republican presence on the road to the White House.
Here are my thoughts:
Why should I, or anyone else, roll over for the Obama and Clinton machines? What is so special about their messages or their candidacy that takes away from a distinguished and still quite eligible candidate in Senator John Edwards? Do the thousands of votes, countless endorsements, and declared delegates---in the face of NO media coverage by the national outlets---mean anything to Democratic leadership and traditional campaign veterans?
Over the past 2.5 years, when these candidates were "honing" their message at the pulpits of the U.S. Senate, John Edwards was carrying his message of hope, hard work, and change to Americans in their communities. John was standing with striking and locked-out workers on picket lines across the country, helping raise funds for local poverty shelters, and establishing a national center for poverty research in North Carolina. Where were Senators Obama and Clinton? Aside from wining and dining with celebrities that lined their velvet pockets with future campaign funds, they were in the U.S. Senate (where they had pledged to the American people to stand up to the Bush White House and turn things around for the country.) Now, I do not want you to think I devalue the candidacy of Obama and Clinton because of their service as legislators, but I do seem to remember the Democratic-controlled House and Senate rolling over like weak puppies on the issue of continued funding to the Iraq blunder. I do not remember Obama and Clinton doing anything but give a strongly-worded speech against the process in the Senate chambers. No, they wouldn't dare stick their necks out too far right before the electoral process began. They went on record as being opposed to Bush recommendations, and then hurried to the airport to go raise money and give interviews to Rolling Stone, Vibe, People, etc.
I have heard Obama and Clinton both claim that they will be able to provide consistently strong leadership for the American people if they were President of the United States of America, but they ducked for cover when the opportunity arose in the U.S. Senate.
So, what do I suggest? I suggest that Senator John Edwards continues his fight to the White House. There have only been two Democratic processes so far, and John is still in this conversation of change. I want him to have the opportunity to force real conversation at the Democratic convention this fall, and hopefully force delegates to carefully consider their voting choices when the ballots circulate for roll call. A process like that is good for America, and the Democratic Party.
I want a President of the United States of America that truly understands the benefits of progressive social work in our local communities, wants to help the middle class family at tough times (not just when it is politically convenient), and has enough respect for global relations to stay involved in conversations abroad (even after he left the U.S. Senate to run for president in 2003-2004.) John Edwards is moderate voice for progressive change in the United States, and I will not waiver in my support for him. I only wish I had the time and money to work every single day for him on the trail.
Monday, January 07, 2008
Not very often do I get a decent, hearty chuckle out of a near-disaster story online. Upon returning from one of my classes this afternoon, I decided to check out the top stories on www.cleveland.com and I came upon an absolute gem...
Crack found in Davis-Besse pipe
Posted by John Funk January 07, 2008 14:37PM
I will not lie to you... it seems harmless enough when you consider that Davis-Besse is a nuclear reactor in the Greater Cleveland area (east of downtown near Perry.) However, at a quick glance, it is an amazing headline. Here is the link to the rest of the story if you actually do care about serious potential environmental disasters: http://blog.cleveland.com/plaindealer/2008/01/crack_found_in_davisbesse_pipe.html . I guess we can only hope for the best.
Next topic: Ohio State Buckeyes follow BGSU performance to round out a poor bowl season for teams I like (And the Cleveland Browns are on vacation already.) I'm calling it an evening around 10:45 p.m. with the Buckeyes down 31-10 in the 3rd quarter. Is it MLB spring training yet?
Good night all.... Don't forget to encourage some good-spirited, partisan bickering tomorrow on behalf of the New Hampshire primary!
Crack found in Davis-Besse pipe
Posted by John Funk January 07, 2008 14:37PM
I will not lie to you... it seems harmless enough when you consider that Davis-Besse is a nuclear reactor in the Greater Cleveland area (east of downtown near Perry.) However, at a quick glance, it is an amazing headline. Here is the link to the rest of the story if you actually do care about serious potential environmental disasters: http://blog.cleveland.com/plaindealer/2008/01/crack_found_in_davisbesse_pipe.html . I guess we can only hope for the best.
Next topic: Ohio State Buckeyes follow BGSU performance to round out a poor bowl season for teams I like (And the Cleveland Browns are on vacation already.) I'm calling it an evening around 10:45 p.m. with the Buckeyes down 31-10 in the 3rd quarter. Is it MLB spring training yet?
Good night all.... Don't forget to encourage some good-spirited, partisan bickering tomorrow on behalf of the New Hampshire primary!
Bowling Green State University Football.... A Season of Firsts!
A great headline if I might say so myself, but too bad it translates into a historical negative for the local recordbooks. ESPN.com claims that last night's 63-7 thumping by Tulsa over BGSU officially became the largest margin of victory by any Division-1A opponent in Bowl Game History. That's a factoid worth singing "Go Big Flag Guy" too! I should assume that Freddie and Frieda probably didn't get down to the Chicken Dance the entire 12-13 hour bus ride home from Mobile, Alabama last evening.
In other news.... Barack Obama reportedly opened up a 10 point lead in a recent CNN-USA Today New Hampshire poll. All of this since being neck-in-neck in a 33% standoff with H.R. Clinton mere days ago. This could be the first stages of an independent surge toward Obama in the Granite State, or merely another example of a shaky poll.... one destined to give tv commentators something to bloviate about for another 24 hours on cable television. The same poll showed the new gap being gently carved (if that's possible) out of H.R. Clinton and Johnny Boy's supporters. Let's hope this is just a bullshit sampling... Edwards needs a 1st or 2nd finish for my ramblings to actually offer a tangible hope for continued success.
Final note...For a candidate that stands 0% chance at becoming president in 2008, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson looked pretty sharpe at the most recent ABC News/Facebook (yeah, Facebook) New Hampshire debate. I really enjoyed his comments regarding the economy and education. While he wasn't the first to interject the specific comments regarding the issues, and his stances may be quite similar to those of Johnny Boy and others; he was the first to bring the issues up in the debate---which, to that point, had been a long and winding road of issues that I didn't want to spend a great deal of time upon.
Welcome Back to Reality... Classes and Work resume this morning. Ohio State vs. LSU tonight after night class.... the heart says "Go Buckeyes" but the statisticians don't exactly agree with me. We'll see... maybe the point disparity will wipe the Falcons out of the recordbooks after a one-day title position?
A great headline if I might say so myself, but too bad it translates into a historical negative for the local recordbooks. ESPN.com claims that last night's 63-7 thumping by Tulsa over BGSU officially became the largest margin of victory by any Division-1A opponent in Bowl Game History. That's a factoid worth singing "Go Big Flag Guy" too! I should assume that Freddie and Frieda probably didn't get down to the Chicken Dance the entire 12-13 hour bus ride home from Mobile, Alabama last evening.
In other news.... Barack Obama reportedly opened up a 10 point lead in a recent CNN-USA Today New Hampshire poll. All of this since being neck-in-neck in a 33% standoff with H.R. Clinton mere days ago. This could be the first stages of an independent surge toward Obama in the Granite State, or merely another example of a shaky poll.... one destined to give tv commentators something to bloviate about for another 24 hours on cable television. The same poll showed the new gap being gently carved (if that's possible) out of H.R. Clinton and Johnny Boy's supporters. Let's hope this is just a bullshit sampling... Edwards needs a 1st or 2nd finish for my ramblings to actually offer a tangible hope for continued success.
Final note...For a candidate that stands 0% chance at becoming president in 2008, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson looked pretty sharpe at the most recent ABC News/Facebook (yeah, Facebook) New Hampshire debate. I really enjoyed his comments regarding the economy and education. While he wasn't the first to interject the specific comments regarding the issues, and his stances may be quite similar to those of Johnny Boy and others; he was the first to bring the issues up in the debate---which, to that point, had been a long and winding road of issues that I didn't want to spend a great deal of time upon.
Welcome Back to Reality... Classes and Work resume this morning. Ohio State vs. LSU tonight after night class.... the heart says "Go Buckeyes" but the statisticians don't exactly agree with me. We'll see... maybe the point disparity will wipe the Falcons out of the recordbooks after a one-day title position?
Friday, January 04, 2008
Well.. that's why they leave storybook endings for storybooks. My dream of watching John Edwards board a plane from Des Moines to New Hampshire with a 5 point victory and a full head of steam might just live in one of those storybooks, BUT I can be rather satisfied with the results.
What does 2nd place in Iowa mean? Well, with regard to raw delegates and numbers, not much. There really isn't much difference between 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place ---about a one delegate differential in each dropping tier. But Edwards victory over the Clinton machine and his ability to compete with Obama mean that the little guy, the people's candidate, the man on a mission can still swing punches even if large corporate interests, individual donors with padded overseas bank accounts, and megastar talk show hosts don't keep his campaign fodder afloat.
Edwards should be able to convince a few more unions to come to his rescue--unions that were most definitely holding out to see if he was still legitimate from their past endorsement in 2003-2004. Additionally, Edwards will be able to recruit more volunteers, activists, small to medium level donations, and indirect surrogates because of this forced/gained respect in Iowa. That translates into more media coverage with a better spin. Instead of the down-and-out boy, Edwards is becoming the giant killer in much the same way that Huckabee is enjoying his new sound bytes. If Edwards can stay in the top 3 in New Hampshire and do well in Nevada and hold ground in South Carolina, then he still has a good chance of remaining a legitimate candidate going into the new "super dooper tuesday" in the first week of February.
Break out your bumper stickers, baby.... it's show time!
Sadly, Ohio has to wait until March to be a player in the primaries... but don't you worry, we'll make the difference again in November.
What does 2nd place in Iowa mean? Well, with regard to raw delegates and numbers, not much. There really isn't much difference between 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place ---about a one delegate differential in each dropping tier. But Edwards victory over the Clinton machine and his ability to compete with Obama mean that the little guy, the people's candidate, the man on a mission can still swing punches even if large corporate interests, individual donors with padded overseas bank accounts, and megastar talk show hosts don't keep his campaign fodder afloat.
Edwards should be able to convince a few more unions to come to his rescue--unions that were most definitely holding out to see if he was still legitimate from their past endorsement in 2003-2004. Additionally, Edwards will be able to recruit more volunteers, activists, small to medium level donations, and indirect surrogates because of this forced/gained respect in Iowa. That translates into more media coverage with a better spin. Instead of the down-and-out boy, Edwards is becoming the giant killer in much the same way that Huckabee is enjoying his new sound bytes. If Edwards can stay in the top 3 in New Hampshire and do well in Nevada and hold ground in South Carolina, then he still has a good chance of remaining a legitimate candidate going into the new "super dooper tuesday" in the first week of February.
Break out your bumper stickers, baby.... it's show time!
Sadly, Ohio has to wait until March to be a player in the primaries... but don't you worry, we'll make the difference again in November.
Thursday, January 03, 2008
On a snowy day such as this, I have two main topics to discuss:
1. The Iowa Caucaus this evening.
2. The continuing writers' strike.
Kick off your socks, kiddies... it's about to get wet.
1. Iowa -- The Hawkeye State. America's Almost Bread-Basket. Ethanol's Best Friend. Home of the first dramatic moves in any Democratic or Republican Presidential primary season. Usually Iowa doesn't get hot until 5-6 months before the initial caucaus, but in this case there have been political operatives on the ground working for candidates since 2004-2005. Until recently, I really never had a major problem with Iowa... I tended to take out my bigotry against homogenous, all-white populations picking the presidential candidates on the citizens of New Hampshire, BUT this year turned me around somewhat.
Typically, I have written Iowa off as a smaller jewel of the Midwest.... a political battleground that allowed real debate and discussion to translate into legitimate results. This year; however, proved to change my mind.
Around a week ago, Governor Ted Strickland (D-OH) criticized the Iowa caucaus as an inappropriate and inefficienct electoral process for beginning the primary process for both parties' presidential selections. These comments were given to the Columbus Dispatch in an interview, but soon were recopied and analyzed in papers across the country. Senator Clinton's staff was quick to point out that they disagreed with Governor Strickland's comments--most notably because Strickland serves as one of her endorsers and a campaign surrogate in and outside of Ohio. This quick band-aid action by Clinton goes a long way in proving the point that candidates will do just about anything to keep their image sparkling clean in Iowa before the caucauses.
Had Clinton ignored Strickland's comments or actually embraced them, she would have witnessed one of the greatest tailspins in political history; going from tied in first to dead last (yes, Dennis Kucinich would be more popular today in Iowa.) Iowans and New Hampshirites have become spoiled with their role of "initial deciders." Instead of using their processes to truly sort through the campaign messages to offer up to the rest of America the most credible and qualified candidates to choose from on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November every four years; these states have turned an American process into a localized, heavily-benefitting game show. At this point in Iowa, there is more out-of-state money and people flowing through the state's veins than actual corn oil on the local grocery shelves. Most Americans will never step foot in either Iowa or New Hampshire in their lifetimes, but will live every second of every day with a reality that is crafted in those small states every electoral cycle.
So today I leave New Hampshire out of the mix... we'll discuss her next week. Today, Iowa becomes my body of criticism. The Iowa caucauses take place this evening in scattered school buildings, town halls, and community centers across the state. Registered voters are courted by the political campaigns and parties themselves to show up and announce their reasons for support in front of their neighbors, co-workers, and friends. These voters are allowed to sway their support across party lines and change their mind right up to the moment that they declare their true support for a candidate. Both parties and all of the candidates explain to the media that they feel this is a true example of American politics because it allows a real discussion among voters in their local communities. It actually turns into a shouting match with quips from attack ads and memorized speaking points as cannon fodder. Supporters are courted by out-of-state campaign workers and all-but-bribed to show up and stand their ground for their candidate. Television interviews show that some of these voters will refuse to support a candidate if they haven't had a chance to shake his or her hand, or ask them a question directly before the caucaus begins. At the end of the night, the votes are tallied and the floors are swept and the candidates leave for New Hampshire----and Iowa goes back to not mattering much for another few years.
Why do I think that Iowa is truly uneffective? For the simple fact that SO much depends on this initial process and SO few Iowans actually get to participate. Since the caucaus process usually involves a one-to-two hour physical committment at a pre-determined meeting site, it makes it quite difficult for those that are sick, disabled, working an evening shift or second job, taking night classes, without transportation in poor weather, or at home taking care of children to participate in the process. Thousands of would-be caucaus goers are left out of the process because they can not show up and stay for its full length. That analysis is fully consumed in the true spirit of American political democracy isn't it? All Iowans are important to the parties and the candidates... BUT only the ones that can afford to show up and yell are the real power brokers in the process. Going back to Governor Strickland's comments, I believe that he was making a reference to these points.... that until every eligible Iowa voter has a real opportunity to participate in the electoral process (whether it be through mail-in ballot or a polling site with more flexible hours), the results will be skewed dramatically and the rest of the country will have to deal with its effects in a very dramatic and immediate fashion. So wave your flags tonight, Iowa... but make sure to remember who you are disenfranchising every single time you repeat this horridly inefficient and inappropriate process.
2. Most Americans probably cannot give you a full explanation to the writers' guild strike that is most definitely affecting the entertainment industry over the past two months, but I would assume that most comments that you will hear will point out a selfish tendency by the guild members.... leading to our inability to watch new episodes of our favorite tv shows when we get home from work at night. In fact, most reponses that I have heard from individuals under the age of 30 have said just that. Very rarely are we affected directly by striking workers that are banding together to collectively bargain for their wages and benefits. Sure we see 2 minute news stories about UAW workers that are outside auto manufacturing centers but we rarely see or feel those impacts like we do now. Spoiled, spoon-fed Americans are cranky because they can not see a full season of Grey's Anatomy or hear the cackle of Jay Leno's voice each and every night as they fall asleep in their recliners after dining on tv dinners.
But now, after the dawn of the New Year 2008.... there is much rejoicing because many major networks are sending their shows back on air without the union writers. Scabs or the lack of writers are putting these shows back into circulation.... AND I refuse to support these specific networks or shows.
I applaud David Letterman however because he went out of his way to make sure that a deal was struck between his production company and the writers' guild to allow his usual writers to return to the show with an approved contract renewal. Letterman knew that it was appropriate to take sincere steps to returning his show to broadcast. Earlier in his career he had done the opposite and it seems as though he learned from his mistakes. What I can not accept or tolerate are the other networks and/or shows that are moving forward with production without their guild writers. I refuse to watch any program that blatantly violates the picket line, and I encourage you to do the same. Before watching your favorite show, please check online to see if the guild writers have received a new contract (such in the Letterman case.)
Would you want someone to walk past you on the picket line, and not respect you enough as a person to look you in the eye and offer you respect as a person at the bargaining table? Hopefully we respect one another enough to do better than that.
Happy New Year 2008!
Today is the day that John Edwards makes history!
1. The Iowa Caucaus this evening.
2. The continuing writers' strike.
Kick off your socks, kiddies... it's about to get wet.
1. Iowa -- The Hawkeye State. America's Almost Bread-Basket. Ethanol's Best Friend. Home of the first dramatic moves in any Democratic or Republican Presidential primary season. Usually Iowa doesn't get hot until 5-6 months before the initial caucaus, but in this case there have been political operatives on the ground working for candidates since 2004-2005. Until recently, I really never had a major problem with Iowa... I tended to take out my bigotry against homogenous, all-white populations picking the presidential candidates on the citizens of New Hampshire, BUT this year turned me around somewhat.
Typically, I have written Iowa off as a smaller jewel of the Midwest.... a political battleground that allowed real debate and discussion to translate into legitimate results. This year; however, proved to change my mind.
Around a week ago, Governor Ted Strickland (D-OH) criticized the Iowa caucaus as an inappropriate and inefficienct electoral process for beginning the primary process for both parties' presidential selections. These comments were given to the Columbus Dispatch in an interview, but soon were recopied and analyzed in papers across the country. Senator Clinton's staff was quick to point out that they disagreed with Governor Strickland's comments--most notably because Strickland serves as one of her endorsers and a campaign surrogate in and outside of Ohio. This quick band-aid action by Clinton goes a long way in proving the point that candidates will do just about anything to keep their image sparkling clean in Iowa before the caucauses.
Had Clinton ignored Strickland's comments or actually embraced them, she would have witnessed one of the greatest tailspins in political history; going from tied in first to dead last (yes, Dennis Kucinich would be more popular today in Iowa.) Iowans and New Hampshirites have become spoiled with their role of "initial deciders." Instead of using their processes to truly sort through the campaign messages to offer up to the rest of America the most credible and qualified candidates to choose from on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November every four years; these states have turned an American process into a localized, heavily-benefitting game show. At this point in Iowa, there is more out-of-state money and people flowing through the state's veins than actual corn oil on the local grocery shelves. Most Americans will never step foot in either Iowa or New Hampshire in their lifetimes, but will live every second of every day with a reality that is crafted in those small states every electoral cycle.
So today I leave New Hampshire out of the mix... we'll discuss her next week. Today, Iowa becomes my body of criticism. The Iowa caucauses take place this evening in scattered school buildings, town halls, and community centers across the state. Registered voters are courted by the political campaigns and parties themselves to show up and announce their reasons for support in front of their neighbors, co-workers, and friends. These voters are allowed to sway their support across party lines and change their mind right up to the moment that they declare their true support for a candidate. Both parties and all of the candidates explain to the media that they feel this is a true example of American politics because it allows a real discussion among voters in their local communities. It actually turns into a shouting match with quips from attack ads and memorized speaking points as cannon fodder. Supporters are courted by out-of-state campaign workers and all-but-bribed to show up and stand their ground for their candidate. Television interviews show that some of these voters will refuse to support a candidate if they haven't had a chance to shake his or her hand, or ask them a question directly before the caucaus begins. At the end of the night, the votes are tallied and the floors are swept and the candidates leave for New Hampshire----and Iowa goes back to not mattering much for another few years.
Why do I think that Iowa is truly uneffective? For the simple fact that SO much depends on this initial process and SO few Iowans actually get to participate. Since the caucaus process usually involves a one-to-two hour physical committment at a pre-determined meeting site, it makes it quite difficult for those that are sick, disabled, working an evening shift or second job, taking night classes, without transportation in poor weather, or at home taking care of children to participate in the process. Thousands of would-be caucaus goers are left out of the process because they can not show up and stay for its full length. That analysis is fully consumed in the true spirit of American political democracy isn't it? All Iowans are important to the parties and the candidates... BUT only the ones that can afford to show up and yell are the real power brokers in the process. Going back to Governor Strickland's comments, I believe that he was making a reference to these points.... that until every eligible Iowa voter has a real opportunity to participate in the electoral process (whether it be through mail-in ballot or a polling site with more flexible hours), the results will be skewed dramatically and the rest of the country will have to deal with its effects in a very dramatic and immediate fashion. So wave your flags tonight, Iowa... but make sure to remember who you are disenfranchising every single time you repeat this horridly inefficient and inappropriate process.
2. Most Americans probably cannot give you a full explanation to the writers' guild strike that is most definitely affecting the entertainment industry over the past two months, but I would assume that most comments that you will hear will point out a selfish tendency by the guild members.... leading to our inability to watch new episodes of our favorite tv shows when we get home from work at night. In fact, most reponses that I have heard from individuals under the age of 30 have said just that. Very rarely are we affected directly by striking workers that are banding together to collectively bargain for their wages and benefits. Sure we see 2 minute news stories about UAW workers that are outside auto manufacturing centers but we rarely see or feel those impacts like we do now. Spoiled, spoon-fed Americans are cranky because they can not see a full season of Grey's Anatomy or hear the cackle of Jay Leno's voice each and every night as they fall asleep in their recliners after dining on tv dinners.
But now, after the dawn of the New Year 2008.... there is much rejoicing because many major networks are sending their shows back on air without the union writers. Scabs or the lack of writers are putting these shows back into circulation.... AND I refuse to support these specific networks or shows.
I applaud David Letterman however because he went out of his way to make sure that a deal was struck between his production company and the writers' guild to allow his usual writers to return to the show with an approved contract renewal. Letterman knew that it was appropriate to take sincere steps to returning his show to broadcast. Earlier in his career he had done the opposite and it seems as though he learned from his mistakes. What I can not accept or tolerate are the other networks and/or shows that are moving forward with production without their guild writers. I refuse to watch any program that blatantly violates the picket line, and I encourage you to do the same. Before watching your favorite show, please check online to see if the guild writers have received a new contract (such in the Letterman case.)
Would you want someone to walk past you on the picket line, and not respect you enough as a person to look you in the eye and offer you respect as a person at the bargaining table? Hopefully we respect one another enough to do better than that.
Happy New Year 2008!
Today is the day that John Edwards makes history!
Monday, December 31, 2007
I didn't expect to go to bed distraught, frustrated, and disappointed on December 30th, 2007. I usually reserve those emotions for the actual New Years Eve celebration most years. Last night; however, was a tough pill to swallow.
In retrospect, I really shouldn't be too upset. I was getting greedy.... The Indians in the ALCS, the Cavaliers in the NBA Finals..... The Browns making the Divisional Wild-Card Round after posting a rather average 10-6 record.... Yes, I wanted to be allowed to be greedy for once. The Cleveland Browns haven't had a similar record against opponents since I was 13 years ago! I think it was only natural for me to want to be greedy and selfish, along with a couple million other loyal Brownies fans. Well, at least I can hear somewhat positive talk radio now... of course the "wait till next year's" and "it's really a learning curve's" presented by callers and would-be self-annointed hero drive-time jocks will be in some vain---- going 10-6 rewards the Browns with an awkward draft status AND sets the team up for a reasonably difficult schedule for the 2008 campaign. Grrr.... you mean we can't play the 49ers, Rams, and Raiders every year? SHIT.
On the topic of 2008 campaigns, the countdown edges closer and closer to the Iowa showdown in 4 days. I am anxious to see the results, and I honestly think that the Edwards ground game can turn out some serious support at the local caucaus sites. Johnny Boy hasn't actually stopped campaigning in Iowa since 2004, and is probably going to give Hillary and Obama a run for their money. Aside from getting the primary season underway, I enjoy Iowa and New Hampshire because it gives the American people an opportunity to tell some candidates that they aren't worth a spit in the wind (Fred Thompson, Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich, etc.) when it comes to major electoral politics. Of course I have to hear from the super ideologues that groan that "America is dying when the smallest of candidates don't receive equal representation in the media or access to matching funding," but their groaning usually dies down when they realize that candidates' ideal candidates usually have ridiculously crazy plans about running the government when they're in office as president (Ron Paul)--NOTE: These people can't see the light at the end of the tunnel because they have similar plans that block their progress as well. You may be able to recognize some of these winners by their comments that hover around abolishing the IRS tax system, eliminating specific constitutional amendments, building large walls to physically separate the United States from Mexico, or nominating animals for higher office.
I guess that's what we get when we live in a democracy, right?
Wrong. We live in a republic. If there is one thing I teach my students someday; it will be that ultimate truth. I'm tired of hearing the "democracy wheel" from candidates. If we were so "democratic," I would be laying down the laws to affect my own life.
Wow, I'm all over the place this morning.
Happy New Year 2008! 2007, you sure were awkward. Leave that to teenagers.
In retrospect, I really shouldn't be too upset. I was getting greedy.... The Indians in the ALCS, the Cavaliers in the NBA Finals..... The Browns making the Divisional Wild-Card Round after posting a rather average 10-6 record.... Yes, I wanted to be allowed to be greedy for once. The Cleveland Browns haven't had a similar record against opponents since I was 13 years ago! I think it was only natural for me to want to be greedy and selfish, along with a couple million other loyal Brownies fans. Well, at least I can hear somewhat positive talk radio now... of course the "wait till next year's" and "it's really a learning curve's" presented by callers and would-be self-annointed hero drive-time jocks will be in some vain---- going 10-6 rewards the Browns with an awkward draft status AND sets the team up for a reasonably difficult schedule for the 2008 campaign. Grrr.... you mean we can't play the 49ers, Rams, and Raiders every year? SHIT.
On the topic of 2008 campaigns, the countdown edges closer and closer to the Iowa showdown in 4 days. I am anxious to see the results, and I honestly think that the Edwards ground game can turn out some serious support at the local caucaus sites. Johnny Boy hasn't actually stopped campaigning in Iowa since 2004, and is probably going to give Hillary and Obama a run for their money. Aside from getting the primary season underway, I enjoy Iowa and New Hampshire because it gives the American people an opportunity to tell some candidates that they aren't worth a spit in the wind (Fred Thompson, Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich, etc.) when it comes to major electoral politics. Of course I have to hear from the super ideologues that groan that "America is dying when the smallest of candidates don't receive equal representation in the media or access to matching funding," but their groaning usually dies down when they realize that candidates' ideal candidates usually have ridiculously crazy plans about running the government when they're in office as president (Ron Paul)--NOTE: These people can't see the light at the end of the tunnel because they have similar plans that block their progress as well. You may be able to recognize some of these winners by their comments that hover around abolishing the IRS tax system, eliminating specific constitutional amendments, building large walls to physically separate the United States from Mexico, or nominating animals for higher office.
I guess that's what we get when we live in a democracy, right?
Wrong. We live in a republic. If there is one thing I teach my students someday; it will be that ultimate truth. I'm tired of hearing the "democracy wheel" from candidates. If we were so "democratic," I would be laying down the laws to affect my own life.
Wow, I'm all over the place this morning.
Happy New Year 2008! 2007, you sure were awkward. Leave that to teenagers.
Sunday, December 30, 2007
So.... I guess one way to describe my absence would be to label it as a "hiatus?"
No new posts since June 2006.... wow!
Amidst the hub-bub of going back to school in the Fall of 2006, and my overall disappearance from electoral cycles (aside from casual voting); it would seem to the average passer-by that I had either died or suffered a catastrophic and disabling injury that prevented me from blogging. I guess it would sound too simple to merely say that I "forgot to write."
Alas, I have returned to my beloved html format. Thank you for waiting on me, blogspace. You knew I would return someday!
So where am I these days? Well, currently I'm at home in Van Wert County on "Winter Break." Yes, that's the same winter break that describes a vacation, and gap between semesters. I returned to school in August of 2006 at Bowling Green State University in order to answer a "higher calling." When you attempt to fulfill a personal goal of this nature and costly size, you tend to describe it in saintly terms when discussing the decision with relatives, close friends, and family. Trust me, the technique is far more successful when talking to strangers. Many of which are eager to knight you or award you their first-born daughter due to the chivalrous nature of leaving politics and all things political in order to become a "simple high school marm." OK, so I really never received any dowry bribes or lofty potential gifts of virgin brides.... But those would definitely have helped reinforce my decision to return to school.
I've found that school is more challenging this time around. I think a lot of that has to do with the circumstances that surround this attempt. I work 20-30 hours a week on campus and also volunteer as a live-in fraternity advisor--a job that on some days can either be extremely rewarding or damn near exhausting. My personal life is a wreck--you would not believe how difficult it is to find real individuals to relate to when you live in a house full of 18-21 year olds and walk around on a campus that spends more time discussing hook-ups, potential parties, and the mere idea of drama than classwork. Despite these hurdles, I have been able to find a small knit of individuals to call my "new" good friends. At this point in my life, I feel as though I have a "new" batch of these confidents every 4-5 years anyway.... so not much has truly changed. In my own mind, I relate the scenario to having shifted my "best friends' personas" from high school, college part 1, and so many of the campaigns to a new location. In a strange way, it resembles a scene out of Seinfeld. These new friends are my new parallel universe best friends. The spirit and final destination of most bonds and conversations are typical to what I would have experienced elsewhere with other "best friends;" just in a new lense for consumption and feedback. I am troubled however; with so many close friends from "here" and "there" and "don't forget him or her"----if I were to ever become engaged to be married, I would either have to take out a loan to include everyone in the bridal party or potentially offend half of these "best friends" in the process of descending numbers.
I guess we'll cross that bridge when we get there?
I believe 2025 would be appropriate.
Believe in yourself, and if you cannot with every waking moment... at least believe in Cleveland professional sports. They may let you down temporarily---but it sure feels elegant while you're there!
No new posts since June 2006.... wow!
Amidst the hub-bub of going back to school in the Fall of 2006, and my overall disappearance from electoral cycles (aside from casual voting); it would seem to the average passer-by that I had either died or suffered a catastrophic and disabling injury that prevented me from blogging. I guess it would sound too simple to merely say that I "forgot to write."
Alas, I have returned to my beloved html format. Thank you for waiting on me, blogspace. You knew I would return someday!
So where am I these days? Well, currently I'm at home in Van Wert County on "Winter Break." Yes, that's the same winter break that describes a vacation, and gap between semesters. I returned to school in August of 2006 at Bowling Green State University in order to answer a "higher calling." When you attempt to fulfill a personal goal of this nature and costly size, you tend to describe it in saintly terms when discussing the decision with relatives, close friends, and family. Trust me, the technique is far more successful when talking to strangers. Many of which are eager to knight you or award you their first-born daughter due to the chivalrous nature of leaving politics and all things political in order to become a "simple high school marm." OK, so I really never received any dowry bribes or lofty potential gifts of virgin brides.... But those would definitely have helped reinforce my decision to return to school.
I've found that school is more challenging this time around. I think a lot of that has to do with the circumstances that surround this attempt. I work 20-30 hours a week on campus and also volunteer as a live-in fraternity advisor--a job that on some days can either be extremely rewarding or damn near exhausting. My personal life is a wreck--you would not believe how difficult it is to find real individuals to relate to when you live in a house full of 18-21 year olds and walk around on a campus that spends more time discussing hook-ups, potential parties, and the mere idea of drama than classwork. Despite these hurdles, I have been able to find a small knit of individuals to call my "new" good friends. At this point in my life, I feel as though I have a "new" batch of these confidents every 4-5 years anyway.... so not much has truly changed. In my own mind, I relate the scenario to having shifted my "best friends' personas" from high school, college part 1, and so many of the campaigns to a new location. In a strange way, it resembles a scene out of Seinfeld. These new friends are my new parallel universe best friends. The spirit and final destination of most bonds and conversations are typical to what I would have experienced elsewhere with other "best friends;" just in a new lense for consumption and feedback. I am troubled however; with so many close friends from "here" and "there" and "don't forget him or her"----if I were to ever become engaged to be married, I would either have to take out a loan to include everyone in the bridal party or potentially offend half of these "best friends" in the process of descending numbers.
I guess we'll cross that bridge when we get there?
I believe 2025 would be appropriate.
Believe in yourself, and if you cannot with every waking moment... at least believe in Cleveland professional sports. They may let you down temporarily---but it sure feels elegant while you're there!
Monday, June 05, 2006
President Bush is, once again, on his gay marriage ban high-horse. He's so peace-minded.
Bush's poll numbers remain at an all-time low this week as he kicks off another stab at his gay marriage ban attempts in Congress. Sound familiar? Well it should because he did the same thing two years ago when he was running for re-election and his numbers were looking weak compared to John Kerry's.
See.... here's how it works. Bush's 25-29% approval rating doesn't reflect the loss of liberal and moderate voters because he never has had them in his "circle of trust." The lack of support is a direct result of a lack of conservative support. Whenever Bush's policies take a major downward spiral, he likes to suck up to extreme social conservatives ( I like to call them haters, personally) by throwing the gay marriage ban on the table and putting his personal endorsement behind it.
So, does this mean that there will be a gay marriage ban in the form of a constitutional amendment soon? Probably not. National polling shows that around 50% of the country is split on the issue in either direction.
So, why does the president and conservatively-controlled Congress make this failed push again? Well, it sure does sound good and look to folks that are your average run-of-the-mill, local haters. Oh, sorry.... social conservatives. See, they want to know that the man they elected twice as their president is actually doing work for them... instead of doing work for.... oil companies and weapons manufacturers?
Here's what I don't understand.
1) I've never met anyone.... gay or straight.... that has made the legal recognition of gay marriage their personal vandetta. The gay people that I have met tend to just want to be recognized as human beings, just like everyone else. I think the word I'm looking for is tolerance.
2) Funny thing that tolerance. After 9/11, we were asked to band together as a nation and go out of our way to let Muslim Americans know that we weren't judging them as terrorists. This was supposed to keep us safe and make an entire community of individuals feel safe amongst the rest of us. The call for tolerance was reiterated on a daily basis from the White House, and branch-off tolerance programs are still being taught in our local schools and organizations..... so we make sure not to judge people of different backgrounds as potential terrorists.
3) Should there be a program initiated whose goal is to make sure we don't judge some people as potential spawn of the devil? Because honestly, I think it's necessary right now. If you listen to the arguments of social conservatives that work each day and PRAY to God for help in banning gay marriages, gay civil unions, or any type of gay relationship.... they are basically saying that these people are confused individuals that are going against God, their country, and their immediate families. Furthermore, they argue that gay people want to get married in order to further their own ideological goals..... goals that would lead to the eventual moral decay of our country and the loss of all traditional values in America.
4) I'll end with this note. I've always thought that it was extremely ironic that the people that claim to be doing God's work in this process, are the ones that are actually being the cruelest each day. Intolerance and prejudice leads to persecution and discrimination..... these types of actions will lead to people getting hurt. And in this scenario, these feelings are being churned and agitated by President Bush for political gain. He wants his poll numbers up and his base of supporters up in arms for the 2006 mid-term elections.
So the next time you run into one of those Golden Rule, Bible beatin', never-miss-church folks out there.... ask them if they love all people like they were their own son or daughter, respect everyone as their neighbor and friend, OR if they have a survey that sorts out the gay from non-gay so that a proper plan of hatred action can be established.
I'm not perfect. I have personal prejudices that lead me to harbor bad feelings or judgements indirectly. I know that I can be better than that... and I try to be better at reducing these tendencies each day.... but blatantly working against people because of an inner intolerance and level of spite.... that does not help anyone.
Bush's poll numbers remain at an all-time low this week as he kicks off another stab at his gay marriage ban attempts in Congress. Sound familiar? Well it should because he did the same thing two years ago when he was running for re-election and his numbers were looking weak compared to John Kerry's.
See.... here's how it works. Bush's 25-29% approval rating doesn't reflect the loss of liberal and moderate voters because he never has had them in his "circle of trust." The lack of support is a direct result of a lack of conservative support. Whenever Bush's policies take a major downward spiral, he likes to suck up to extreme social conservatives ( I like to call them haters, personally) by throwing the gay marriage ban on the table and putting his personal endorsement behind it.
So, does this mean that there will be a gay marriage ban in the form of a constitutional amendment soon? Probably not. National polling shows that around 50% of the country is split on the issue in either direction.
So, why does the president and conservatively-controlled Congress make this failed push again? Well, it sure does sound good and look to folks that are your average run-of-the-mill, local haters. Oh, sorry.... social conservatives. See, they want to know that the man they elected twice as their president is actually doing work for them... instead of doing work for.... oil companies and weapons manufacturers?
Here's what I don't understand.
1) I've never met anyone.... gay or straight.... that has made the legal recognition of gay marriage their personal vandetta. The gay people that I have met tend to just want to be recognized as human beings, just like everyone else. I think the word I'm looking for is tolerance.
2) Funny thing that tolerance. After 9/11, we were asked to band together as a nation and go out of our way to let Muslim Americans know that we weren't judging them as terrorists. This was supposed to keep us safe and make an entire community of individuals feel safe amongst the rest of us. The call for tolerance was reiterated on a daily basis from the White House, and branch-off tolerance programs are still being taught in our local schools and organizations..... so we make sure not to judge people of different backgrounds as potential terrorists.
3) Should there be a program initiated whose goal is to make sure we don't judge some people as potential spawn of the devil? Because honestly, I think it's necessary right now. If you listen to the arguments of social conservatives that work each day and PRAY to God for help in banning gay marriages, gay civil unions, or any type of gay relationship.... they are basically saying that these people are confused individuals that are going against God, their country, and their immediate families. Furthermore, they argue that gay people want to get married in order to further their own ideological goals..... goals that would lead to the eventual moral decay of our country and the loss of all traditional values in America.
4) I'll end with this note. I've always thought that it was extremely ironic that the people that claim to be doing God's work in this process, are the ones that are actually being the cruelest each day. Intolerance and prejudice leads to persecution and discrimination..... these types of actions will lead to people getting hurt. And in this scenario, these feelings are being churned and agitated by President Bush for political gain. He wants his poll numbers up and his base of supporters up in arms for the 2006 mid-term elections.
So the next time you run into one of those Golden Rule, Bible beatin', never-miss-church folks out there.... ask them if they love all people like they were their own son or daughter, respect everyone as their neighbor and friend, OR if they have a survey that sorts out the gay from non-gay so that a proper plan of hatred action can be established.
I'm not perfect. I have personal prejudices that lead me to harbor bad feelings or judgements indirectly. I know that I can be better than that... and I try to be better at reducing these tendencies each day.... but blatantly working against people because of an inner intolerance and level of spite.... that does not help anyone.
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
Ok, so I know I haven't posted in awhile, and most of my friends and readers know that I have been away from the political world (at least in public) for the past 3 weeks or so...... BUT.... I am deciding to get back in the swing of things, even if I am not part of the campaign anymore. I read this article when I got home from the gym today, and I hope some of you get a healthy chuckle out of it. I will provide the link to the article as well.
Endorsements: In race for governorship, we can't support either Petro or Blackwell In the Republican primary for Ohio governor, we don't feel comfortable endorsing either candidate, Attorney General Jim Petro or Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell. Both men are far to the right of most Ohioans, and both have serious ethical problems.
2006-04-17 The Athens News (Athens, Ohio)
If we had to choose, we'd pick Petro, but it would be with our fingers pinched to our noses. One would have to be seriously jaded about Ohio politics to overlook his practice of steering state business to law firms that contributed to his campaign, and away from firms that didn't.
Moreover, his transition from a main-street, pro-choice Republican to one who toadies up to the extreme wing of his party has been a study in slick political opportunism.
Blackwell, though, beats Petro in both these areas. During his tenure as Ohio's chief election officer, he has repeatedly displayed indifference to his main duty to the state, in order to grind his own political ax.
During the presidential campaign, he co-chaired President Bush's re-election campaign in Ohio, and actively promoted the anti-gay "marriage amendment." Under Blackwell's watch during the 2004 presidential election, massive problems erupted at the polls around Ohio, with long lines and other problems preventing many citizens from casting their ballots.
In early April, Blackwell raised further questions about his ability to objectively serve Ohioans when he revealed that he had owned stock in Diebold, a voting-machine manufacturer. He owned the stock at the same time his office negotiated a deal that critics have said was an attempt to direct business to the company.
Repeatedly, we've seen Blackwell's ambition and ideology impact on his credibility as secretary of state. He has had his eyes set on the governor's office for many years, and will stop at nothing to play to his party's extreme-right base in Ohio.
This has resulted in his active courting of the religious right in the form of two politically active clergymen with large followings in Central Ohio. Under the guise of religion, these men have set out to rally support among their congregations for Blackwell's right-wing agenda, and by extension, his candidacy.
The latter is a violation of their tax-free status, and another reflection on Blackwell's indifference to his purportedly neutral role as head elections officer in Ohio.
His extremism is also amply displayed in his position on abortion and taxes.
On abortion, he supports a complete ban, even when the mother's life is at risk. It's beyond us how it can be considered "pro-life" to value the life of an unformed human, without consciousness, over that of a living and breathing human being, with all her connections to the world.
Not allowing exceptions for rape and incest, Petro's position, is similarly inhumane. Ohio doesn't need its top official following an extreme ideology held by only the most inflexible of the anti-abortion movement.
Likewise, Blackwell's anti-tax Tax and Expenditure Limitation Amendment, or TEL, which is on November's ballot, would destroy the ability of many of the state's school districts and local governments to serve and provide for their communities. It's a misguided and poorly written proposal that will send Ohio further into the Stone Age, and Blackwell is irresponsible for advocating it.
While current Republican Gov. Bob Taft has had problems with ethics and performance, one thing he's not is an ideologue. He has carried on the long tradition of Ohio's chief executive representing the state's mainstream, rather than the lunatic fringe of his party.
Petro, and certainly Blackwell, would end this tradition, and, just as disturbingly, come into office with serious ethical flaws. At least Taft was able to govern for several years before he ran afoul of ethics and the law. With Petro and Blackwell, Ohioans won't be able to say they weren't forewarned when ethical storm clouds appear.
For all these reasons, we can't support either candidate in the May primary, and don't expect to support whichever one survives his GOP primary fight in the November election.
http://www.athensnews.com/issue/article.php3?story_id=24176
Endorsements: In race for governorship, we can't support either Petro or Blackwell In the Republican primary for Ohio governor, we don't feel comfortable endorsing either candidate, Attorney General Jim Petro or Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell. Both men are far to the right of most Ohioans, and both have serious ethical problems.
2006-04-17 The Athens News (Athens, Ohio)
If we had to choose, we'd pick Petro, but it would be with our fingers pinched to our noses. One would have to be seriously jaded about Ohio politics to overlook his practice of steering state business to law firms that contributed to his campaign, and away from firms that didn't.
Moreover, his transition from a main-street, pro-choice Republican to one who toadies up to the extreme wing of his party has been a study in slick political opportunism.
Blackwell, though, beats Petro in both these areas. During his tenure as Ohio's chief election officer, he has repeatedly displayed indifference to his main duty to the state, in order to grind his own political ax.
During the presidential campaign, he co-chaired President Bush's re-election campaign in Ohio, and actively promoted the anti-gay "marriage amendment." Under Blackwell's watch during the 2004 presidential election, massive problems erupted at the polls around Ohio, with long lines and other problems preventing many citizens from casting their ballots.
In early April, Blackwell raised further questions about his ability to objectively serve Ohioans when he revealed that he had owned stock in Diebold, a voting-machine manufacturer. He owned the stock at the same time his office negotiated a deal that critics have said was an attempt to direct business to the company.
Repeatedly, we've seen Blackwell's ambition and ideology impact on his credibility as secretary of state. He has had his eyes set on the governor's office for many years, and will stop at nothing to play to his party's extreme-right base in Ohio.
This has resulted in his active courting of the religious right in the form of two politically active clergymen with large followings in Central Ohio. Under the guise of religion, these men have set out to rally support among their congregations for Blackwell's right-wing agenda, and by extension, his candidacy.
The latter is a violation of their tax-free status, and another reflection on Blackwell's indifference to his purportedly neutral role as head elections officer in Ohio.
His extremism is also amply displayed in his position on abortion and taxes.
On abortion, he supports a complete ban, even when the mother's life is at risk. It's beyond us how it can be considered "pro-life" to value the life of an unformed human, without consciousness, over that of a living and breathing human being, with all her connections to the world.
Not allowing exceptions for rape and incest, Petro's position, is similarly inhumane. Ohio doesn't need its top official following an extreme ideology held by only the most inflexible of the anti-abortion movement.
Likewise, Blackwell's anti-tax Tax and Expenditure Limitation Amendment, or TEL, which is on November's ballot, would destroy the ability of many of the state's school districts and local governments to serve and provide for their communities. It's a misguided and poorly written proposal that will send Ohio further into the Stone Age, and Blackwell is irresponsible for advocating it.
While current Republican Gov. Bob Taft has had problems with ethics and performance, one thing he's not is an ideologue. He has carried on the long tradition of Ohio's chief executive representing the state's mainstream, rather than the lunatic fringe of his party.
Petro, and certainly Blackwell, would end this tradition, and, just as disturbingly, come into office with serious ethical flaws. At least Taft was able to govern for several years before he ran afoul of ethics and the law. With Petro and Blackwell, Ohioans won't be able to say they weren't forewarned when ethical storm clouds appear.
For all these reasons, we can't support either candidate in the May primary, and don't expect to support whichever one survives his GOP primary fight in the November election.
http://www.athensnews.com/issue/article.php3?story_id=24176
Monday, March 20, 2006
On this very bright and sunny, cool but refreshing day in Cleveland, Ohio; our great city has the amazing opportunity and fantastic burden of hosting President George W. Bush today on the 3rd Anniversary of the Iraq War!
Now, I know you're all expecting to have a parade with streamers and firetrucks and kids with candy for this type of event, but George is actually just speaking to a crowd of probably-almost-completely supporters at the Cleveland City Club. Now, I want to point out that I enjoy attending City Club events as they offer an opportunity for average folks to purchase a ticket to eat a healthy, filling meal and then ask questions to the guest speaker following their remarks. However, I have a feeling that today's general audience won't be as aggressive with questions to the world leader at the "citadel of free speech."
For all of you that are interested in listening to El Presidente's remarks, I believe the City Club speeches and question/answer periods are broadcast live on Channel 5, but I may be mistaken by the channel number.... it's definitely one of the local stations. And then the cable access channel usually replays it constantly throughout the week.
Things to look out for in Bush's speech: 1) The number of time he mentions the words "freedom" and "democracy." 2) The number of ways that he can use metaphors to describe ways that we can all "stay the cause" in Iraq. 3) The ways that he demonstrates the personal sacrifice of local soldiers and Marines that were killed in Iraq; my favorite is when he points to a family in the crowd that is physically "staying the cause" as a personal ally in the war on terror with Bush. 4) The wildcard---making reference to someone that doubts his explanation for going to war or staying at war as a terrorist sympathizer or actual hater of freedom. This is worth the most amount of points, and will most likely be awarded to Sen. Russ Feingold this week by Dubbya.
Things to think about: Why is it that when we look at the thousands that died on September 11th, we are continually told that it was an unforgiveable tragedy.... but when we look at the thousands of American servicemen and women AND civilians that died in Iraq over the past 3 years, we are told that it's a sacrifice..... and why is that we never talk about the thousands of Iraqis that have died over the past 3 years during the "pursuit of freedom and democracy?" Should we define their deaths as tragedy or sacrifice? I'm awaiting a response today.... maybe it will come right? Probably not.
Remember folks...... this is an Iraqi process now.
Now, I know you're all expecting to have a parade with streamers and firetrucks and kids with candy for this type of event, but George is actually just speaking to a crowd of probably-almost-completely supporters at the Cleveland City Club. Now, I want to point out that I enjoy attending City Club events as they offer an opportunity for average folks to purchase a ticket to eat a healthy, filling meal and then ask questions to the guest speaker following their remarks. However, I have a feeling that today's general audience won't be as aggressive with questions to the world leader at the "citadel of free speech."
For all of you that are interested in listening to El Presidente's remarks, I believe the City Club speeches and question/answer periods are broadcast live on Channel 5, but I may be mistaken by the channel number.... it's definitely one of the local stations. And then the cable access channel usually replays it constantly throughout the week.
Things to look out for in Bush's speech: 1) The number of time he mentions the words "freedom" and "democracy." 2) The number of ways that he can use metaphors to describe ways that we can all "stay the cause" in Iraq. 3) The ways that he demonstrates the personal sacrifice of local soldiers and Marines that were killed in Iraq; my favorite is when he points to a family in the crowd that is physically "staying the cause" as a personal ally in the war on terror with Bush. 4) The wildcard---making reference to someone that doubts his explanation for going to war or staying at war as a terrorist sympathizer or actual hater of freedom. This is worth the most amount of points, and will most likely be awarded to Sen. Russ Feingold this week by Dubbya.
Things to think about: Why is it that when we look at the thousands that died on September 11th, we are continually told that it was an unforgiveable tragedy.... but when we look at the thousands of American servicemen and women AND civilians that died in Iraq over the past 3 years, we are told that it's a sacrifice..... and why is that we never talk about the thousands of Iraqis that have died over the past 3 years during the "pursuit of freedom and democracy?" Should we define their deaths as tragedy or sacrifice? I'm awaiting a response today.... maybe it will come right? Probably not.
Remember folks...... this is an Iraqi process now.
Friday, March 17, 2006
This was on this morning's Daily Kos and I just had to publish it on my blog because I want it to stay alive and in the media as long as possible. If you have a blog or site, please consider putting this up. It's hilarious during the first read, and then a bit scary to consider that it was actually said, all the other times you read it. On another note, Happy St. Patrick's Day to everyone! Enjoy the campaign festivities that will most notably include parades, mass, and countless invitations to green eggs and ham breakfasts, corned beef and cabbage luncheons, and pints of the good stuff for all of the afternoon and evening meals!
WWJD
by kos
Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 11:08:30 PM PDT
From Newsweek's Periscope:
"Right now, I wouldn't vote Democratic if Jesus Christ was running." Judy Deats, a Texas Republican, who is standing by Rep. Tom DeLay in his re-election bid despite the fact that his association with lobbyist Jack Abramoff has made him vulnerable to political opposition for the first time in more than 20 years.
I'm glad she realizes that Jesus would be a Democrat.
WWJD
by kos
Thu Mar 16, 2006 at 11:08:30 PM PDT
From Newsweek's Periscope:
"Right now, I wouldn't vote Democratic if Jesus Christ was running." Judy Deats, a Texas Republican, who is standing by Rep. Tom DeLay in his re-election bid despite the fact that his association with lobbyist Jack Abramoff has made him vulnerable to political opposition for the first time in more than 20 years.
I'm glad she realizes that Jesus would be a Democrat.
Monday, March 13, 2006
A poem from fellow staffer, Elizabeth Scott.
This should brighten your day.... even with all of the spring rain. At least it's "spring rain."
On the horizon stands a servant, so humble and kind
facing the horizon, learning from the lessons of the day he has left behind.
The burdens of others on his shoulders gather, neigh a grumble ever spoke
“Help those who can’t help themselves” are words guiding his path
Never a bribe taken, no ego to stroke.
This servant lives by example, inspiring the young, empowering the weak
Constantly fighting for the rightful inheritance of the mild and meek
Like a shepherd, he is no stranger to the wolves
Wool may decorate their fur, mild their tempers may be
Baited breath and fangs, however he will always see
His flock not bound by color; diligent is his fight and steady is his course
acceptance and tolerance his grace, strength and integrity his driving force
A white flag he has not, your tribulations he carries in tote
In he your voice will be found, in he your voice will be heard…all he requires is your vote.
I really enjoyed it, Elizabeth. I've dubbed her our campaign poet laureate. And now, some fresh news for your pleasure.
Buckeye State Blog directs us to a Suffolk University poll which shows Ted up 11 points (45-34) on Republican Attorney General Jim Petro and 18 points (48-30) on Republican Secretary of State Ken Blackwell in the governor’s race.
Ohioans are responding to Ted’s substantive, positive vision for Ohio’s future, and it’s showing in head-to-head matchups with the participants in the Shootout at the GOP Corral. This state is ready for solutions rather than criticisms, and Ted is the only candidate for governor offering those solutions.
Speaking of which, the Associated Press discusses state-level struggles to marry ethanol supply to ethanol demand. The bold Strickland vision for energy innovation and production, Powering Ohio’s Economy, tackles this issue head-on by providing tax-free investment in ethanol and alternative fuel infrastructure, marrying public investment to private ingenuity to make Ohio a leader in cost-efficient energy.
Don't get lazy, activists and supporters.... now is the time to step up our pace!
Happy Monday, everyone!
This should brighten your day.... even with all of the spring rain. At least it's "spring rain."
On the horizon stands a servant, so humble and kind
facing the horizon, learning from the lessons of the day he has left behind.
The burdens of others on his shoulders gather, neigh a grumble ever spoke
“Help those who can’t help themselves” are words guiding his path
Never a bribe taken, no ego to stroke.
This servant lives by example, inspiring the young, empowering the weak
Constantly fighting for the rightful inheritance of the mild and meek
Like a shepherd, he is no stranger to the wolves
Wool may decorate their fur, mild their tempers may be
Baited breath and fangs, however he will always see
His flock not bound by color; diligent is his fight and steady is his course
acceptance and tolerance his grace, strength and integrity his driving force
A white flag he has not, your tribulations he carries in tote
In he your voice will be found, in he your voice will be heard…all he requires is your vote.
I really enjoyed it, Elizabeth. I've dubbed her our campaign poet laureate. And now, some fresh news for your pleasure.
Buckeye State Blog directs us to a Suffolk University poll which shows Ted up 11 points (45-34) on Republican Attorney General Jim Petro and 18 points (48-30) on Republican Secretary of State Ken Blackwell in the governor’s race.
Ohioans are responding to Ted’s substantive, positive vision for Ohio’s future, and it’s showing in head-to-head matchups with the participants in the Shootout at the GOP Corral. This state is ready for solutions rather than criticisms, and Ted is the only candidate for governor offering those solutions.
Speaking of which, the Associated Press discusses state-level struggles to marry ethanol supply to ethanol demand. The bold Strickland vision for energy innovation and production, Powering Ohio’s Economy, tackles this issue head-on by providing tax-free investment in ethanol and alternative fuel infrastructure, marrying public investment to private ingenuity to make Ohio a leader in cost-efficient energy.
Don't get lazy, activists and supporters.... now is the time to step up our pace!
Happy Monday, everyone!
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
I wanted to take the time today to feature a new blog that is a rising star on the national blogosphere scene. DoubleSpeak with Matthew and Peter Slutsky is a great blog for progressive activists to read/listen to because it features a set of younger, twin brothers that have a background in grassroots politics AND because they try to keep things fast, funny, and informative. Their stated goals are to energize activists for the 2006 cycle and beyond, and have a good time doing it. While they never claim to have all of the answers, they do reach out to get a wide variety of opinions from national, state, and local political leaders and analysts. Aside from all of that, they include sophisticated humor and great background music tracks to keep the listener (when tuning in for their audio webcasts) comfortably attentive.
I do want to thank Mr. Kevin Cass for bringing this site to my attention even before it debuted earlier this month. Kevin, who I worked with in Virginia and who now works for the DNC in Montana, knew Peter Slutsky from the Far Northwest Kerry Team in 2004.
It's like they say in our community----field politics is a tight-knit group. And in this case, I'm only a few degrees away from this up and coming Kevin Bacon of national political media.
Check out the first audio podcast at their site: http://doublespeakshow.com/index.php
*Featuring Senator John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) as well as Iowa political insiders.
*And Bela Fleck and the Flecktones and The Brakes!
On a side note: Check out my other favorite national blog site, Daily Kos @ http://www.dailykos.com/
I do want to thank Mr. Kevin Cass for bringing this site to my attention even before it debuted earlier this month. Kevin, who I worked with in Virginia and who now works for the DNC in Montana, knew Peter Slutsky from the Far Northwest Kerry Team in 2004.
It's like they say in our community----field politics is a tight-knit group. And in this case, I'm only a few degrees away from this up and coming Kevin Bacon of national political media.
Check out the first audio podcast at their site: http://doublespeakshow.com/index.php
*Featuring Senator John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) as well as Iowa political insiders.
*And Bela Fleck and the Flecktones and The Brakes!
On a side note: Check out my other favorite national blog site, Daily Kos @ http://www.dailykos.com/
Saturday, January 07, 2006
Goodbye Tom DeLay.... Although I never liked you at all.....
You were the House Leader for the major-ity.
Even when you lied..... and broke all those laws...
You stood tall and smiled for the camer-a.
It seems to me you've lived your life like a major asshole...
Gone from smashin' bugs to ruinin' lives so fast....
I would have liked to see you as the minority leader
But instead you went and resigned....
Have fun in 2006, Tom DeLay. Thanks for being such an outstanding leader for the House GOP.
Alright. For this post I'm going to focus on some crazy things that I think have happened this past week in the media.
Pat Robertson--Last time we checked in, our boy Pat was recovering from the horrible media tumble he endured for going on a 2 week rant regarding the idea to assassinate another country's president. Then we had to watch and listen as he informed us that the state of Pennslyvania was going to suffer greatly at the hands of God (through Mother Nature) because of school board decisions and court rulings that reinforced the evolution theory (more like didn't recognize intelligent design theory as trump.) What could possibly be more telling of the 700 Club leader's flawed judgement this week?
Try this on for size----This week Pat Robertson told his audience that God had let Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon suffer a horrible stroke, which later had him tumble into a coma and experience tremendous blood loss, because of his recent policies in the Gaza Strip. You will remember that Sharon has caught a lot of heat lately from within the Jewish state because he withdrew Israeli forces and evicted Jewish settlers in the strip as a way to bring stability to the region and give Palestinians more recognition and respect. It was this move, Robertson claims, that led God to the decision to stroke the hell out of Sharon. Robertson's actual words were that God doesn't like people messing with His holy land, and that He doesn't approve of the Gaza Strip policy.
But get this..... God, the all powerful, all knowing, and very merciful..... ya, that one...... He goes out of his way to give people blood clots, strokes, and other ailments based on poor policy decisions? Pat, my boy, my question to you is this...... how is George W. Bush not in the hospital, based on this logic? Or why didn't God just kill Saddam Hussein so we could have prevented that whole Iraq war thing? I'm hoping that next week's 700 Club show gives us more explanation, or something.
NEXT topic: Virginia Tech's Marcus Vick, or rather Virginia Tech's former quarterback.
Ok, so most people are familiar with Michael Vick, star QB of the Atlanta Falcons and former QB for Virginia Tech. But you might not be totally aware that his little brother, Marcus, also went to Virginia Tech and played QB. You see, went is the appropriate verb in this instance because following a press conference two days ago, Marcus is somewhat retired from college football at the Hokie-land institution.
For the past three or four years now, the Hampton, Virginia native has struggled to apply football skills with real world knowledge and has strayed down the path of dangerous ways. After being suspended for violating team conduct, arrested for providing alcohol to minors, arrested for possession of illegal narcotics, and stuff like that....... Ole Marcus topped it all off with a granddaddy of a bowl performance against Louisville.
In a game that was filled with emotion and seemingly-endless rage amongst the players, Marcus joined in by adding to the frustration. After a play, he stomped on the leg of a Louisville defensive lineman that was laying on the ground. Now this was clearly an after-the-play, what-is-going-on-in-your-head situation because it was caught on film and was the talk of the sports community following the Hokie bowl win.
Marcus had the chance to apologize to the player on the field, after the game, and on the news but instead claimed that he already apologized to the player (who apparently never heard the apology?) Based on earlier negotiations with the university, Marcus had agreed that his next team offense would be his last, and therefore the 2nd coming of Michael Vick was released from his duties as a student-athlete for Virginia Tech.
Now, in a moment of truth where Marcus could be humble and apologetic, and actually refocus his attention to humanity, his education, and athletics---- he instead talked the talk and promised to look into going to the NFL. If God had a problem with Ariel Sharon, what does he have in store for a guy like Marcus Vick, or say the Minnesota Vikings party barge squad for example?
Vick should go to a Division I-AA, II, or III school so he doesn't have to sit out a year, so he can continue his education (one he atleast needs to major in humanities), and get some more football experience. I have a feeling that his hometown of Hampton could even find him a spot on their squad. Instead we'll probably see him drafted by Oakland or a team like the Browns and he'll struggle to find himself, his throwing arm, and his committment to be a nice guy. Maybe we'll see you at the bar sometime, Marcus..... should be a stompin' good time.
Pat Robertson--Last time we checked in, our boy Pat was recovering from the horrible media tumble he endured for going on a 2 week rant regarding the idea to assassinate another country's president. Then we had to watch and listen as he informed us that the state of Pennslyvania was going to suffer greatly at the hands of God (through Mother Nature) because of school board decisions and court rulings that reinforced the evolution theory (more like didn't recognize intelligent design theory as trump.) What could possibly be more telling of the 700 Club leader's flawed judgement this week?
Try this on for size----This week Pat Robertson told his audience that God had let Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon suffer a horrible stroke, which later had him tumble into a coma and experience tremendous blood loss, because of his recent policies in the Gaza Strip. You will remember that Sharon has caught a lot of heat lately from within the Jewish state because he withdrew Israeli forces and evicted Jewish settlers in the strip as a way to bring stability to the region and give Palestinians more recognition and respect. It was this move, Robertson claims, that led God to the decision to stroke the hell out of Sharon. Robertson's actual words were that God doesn't like people messing with His holy land, and that He doesn't approve of the Gaza Strip policy.
But get this..... God, the all powerful, all knowing, and very merciful..... ya, that one...... He goes out of his way to give people blood clots, strokes, and other ailments based on poor policy decisions? Pat, my boy, my question to you is this...... how is George W. Bush not in the hospital, based on this logic? Or why didn't God just kill Saddam Hussein so we could have prevented that whole Iraq war thing? I'm hoping that next week's 700 Club show gives us more explanation, or something.
NEXT topic: Virginia Tech's Marcus Vick, or rather Virginia Tech's former quarterback.
Ok, so most people are familiar with Michael Vick, star QB of the Atlanta Falcons and former QB for Virginia Tech. But you might not be totally aware that his little brother, Marcus, also went to Virginia Tech and played QB. You see, went is the appropriate verb in this instance because following a press conference two days ago, Marcus is somewhat retired from college football at the Hokie-land institution.
For the past three or four years now, the Hampton, Virginia native has struggled to apply football skills with real world knowledge and has strayed down the path of dangerous ways. After being suspended for violating team conduct, arrested for providing alcohol to minors, arrested for possession of illegal narcotics, and stuff like that....... Ole Marcus topped it all off with a granddaddy of a bowl performance against Louisville.
In a game that was filled with emotion and seemingly-endless rage amongst the players, Marcus joined in by adding to the frustration. After a play, he stomped on the leg of a Louisville defensive lineman that was laying on the ground. Now this was clearly an after-the-play, what-is-going-on-in-your-head situation because it was caught on film and was the talk of the sports community following the Hokie bowl win.
Marcus had the chance to apologize to the player on the field, after the game, and on the news but instead claimed that he already apologized to the player (who apparently never heard the apology?) Based on earlier negotiations with the university, Marcus had agreed that his next team offense would be his last, and therefore the 2nd coming of Michael Vick was released from his duties as a student-athlete for Virginia Tech.
Now, in a moment of truth where Marcus could be humble and apologetic, and actually refocus his attention to humanity, his education, and athletics---- he instead talked the talk and promised to look into going to the NFL. If God had a problem with Ariel Sharon, what does he have in store for a guy like Marcus Vick, or say the Minnesota Vikings party barge squad for example?
Vick should go to a Division I-AA, II, or III school so he doesn't have to sit out a year, so he can continue his education (one he atleast needs to major in humanities), and get some more football experience. I have a feeling that his hometown of Hampton could even find him a spot on their squad. Instead we'll probably see him drafted by Oakland or a team like the Browns and he'll struggle to find himself, his throwing arm, and his committment to be a nice guy. Maybe we'll see you at the bar sometime, Marcus..... should be a stompin' good time.
Sunday, December 25, 2005
I usually don't post more than once a day, or even that often but everyone should read an article that came out this morning in the Chicago Tribune by Steve Chapman. I'll bold my favorite remarks and even include his email address if you want to offer feedback. I was very surprised to see that a print journalist still cared enough about the real dream of America to publish a story with this kind of tone about our chief executive. You remember, of course that dissention does equate to treason or at least generic, domestic terrorism. This type of irresponsible, negative media does help the evil-doers win right? I might have to keep my browser set to follow Chapman's articles in the future. Ironically, I have been of the belief that not much could ever come out of Chicago. Perhaps Mr. Chapman is beginning to prove me wrong.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-0512250256dec25,1,3472167.column?coll=chi-news-col&ctrack=1&cset=true
Beyond the imperial presidency
Published December 25, 2005
President Bush is a bundle of paradoxes. He thinks the scope of the federal government should be limited but the powers of the president should not. He wants judges to interpret the Constitution as the framers did, but doesn't think he should be constrained by their intentions.He attacked Al Gore for trusting government instead of the people, but he insists anyone who wants to defeat terrorism must put absolute faith in the man at the helm of government.His conservative allies say Bush is acting to uphold the essential prerogatives of his office. Vice President Cheney says the administration's secret eavesdropping program is justified because "I believe in a strong, robust executive authority, and I think that the world we live in demands it."But the theory boils down to a consistent and self-serving formula: What's good for George W. Bush is good for America, and anything that weakens his power weakens the nation. To call this an imperial presidency is unfair to emperors.Even people who should be on Bush's side are getting queasy. David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, says in his efforts to enlarge executive authority, Bush "has gone too far."He's not the only one who feels that way. Consider the case of Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen arrested in 2002 on suspicion of plotting to set off a "dirty bomb." For three years, the administration said he posed such a grave threat that it had the right to detain him without trial as an enemy combatant. In September, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit agreed.But then, rather than risk a review of its policy by the Supreme Court, the administration abandoned its hard-won victory and indicted Padilla on comparatively minor criminal charges. When it asked the 4th Circuit Court for permission to transfer him from military custody to jail, though, the once-cooperative court flatly refused.In a decision last week, the judges expressed amazement that the administration suddenly would decide Padilla could be treated like a common purse snatcher--a reversal that, they said, comes "at substantial cost to the government's credibility." The court's meaning was plain: Either you were lying to us then, or you are lying to us now.If that's not enough to embarrass the president, the opinion was written by conservative darling J. Michael Luttig--who just a couple of months ago was on Bush's short list for the Supreme Court. For Luttig to question Bush's use of executive power is like Bill O'Reilly announcing that there's too much Christ in Christmas.This is hardly the only example of the president demanding powers he doesn't need. When American-born Saudi Yasser Hamdi was captured in Afghanistan, the administration also detained him as an enemy combatant rather than entrust him to the criminal justice system.But when the Supreme Court said he was entitled to a hearing where he could present evidence on his behalf, the administration decided that was way too much trouble. It freed him and put him on a plane back to Saudi Arabia, where he may plot jihad to his heart's content. Try to follow this logic: Hamdi was too dangerous to put on trial but not too dangerous to release.The disclosure that the president authorized secret and probably illegal monitoring of communications between people in the United States and people overseas again raises the question: Why?The government easily could have gotten search warrants to conduct electronic surveillance of anyone with the slightest possible connection to terrorists. The court that handles such requests hardly ever refuses. But Bush bridles at the notion that the president should ever have to ask permission of anyone.He claims he can ignore the law because Congress granted permission when it authorized him to use force against Al Qaeda. But we know that can't be true. Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales says the administration didn't ask for a revision of the law to give the president explicit power to order such wiretaps because Congress--a Republican Congress, mind you--wouldn't have agreed. So the administration decided: Who needs Congress?What we have now is not a robust executive but a reckless one. At times like this, it's apparent that Cheney and Bush want more power not because they need it to protect the nation, but because they want more power. Another paradox: In their conduct of the war on terror, they expect our trust, but they can't be bothered to earn it.----------E-mail: schapman@tribune.com.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-0512250256dec25,1,3472167.column?coll=chi-news-col&ctrack=1&cset=true
Beyond the imperial presidency
Published December 25, 2005
President Bush is a bundle of paradoxes. He thinks the scope of the federal government should be limited but the powers of the president should not. He wants judges to interpret the Constitution as the framers did, but doesn't think he should be constrained by their intentions.He attacked Al Gore for trusting government instead of the people, but he insists anyone who wants to defeat terrorism must put absolute faith in the man at the helm of government.His conservative allies say Bush is acting to uphold the essential prerogatives of his office. Vice President Cheney says the administration's secret eavesdropping program is justified because "I believe in a strong, robust executive authority, and I think that the world we live in demands it."But the theory boils down to a consistent and self-serving formula: What's good for George W. Bush is good for America, and anything that weakens his power weakens the nation. To call this an imperial presidency is unfair to emperors.Even people who should be on Bush's side are getting queasy. David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, says in his efforts to enlarge executive authority, Bush "has gone too far."He's not the only one who feels that way. Consider the case of Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen arrested in 2002 on suspicion of plotting to set off a "dirty bomb." For three years, the administration said he posed such a grave threat that it had the right to detain him without trial as an enemy combatant. In September, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit agreed.But then, rather than risk a review of its policy by the Supreme Court, the administration abandoned its hard-won victory and indicted Padilla on comparatively minor criminal charges. When it asked the 4th Circuit Court for permission to transfer him from military custody to jail, though, the once-cooperative court flatly refused.In a decision last week, the judges expressed amazement that the administration suddenly would decide Padilla could be treated like a common purse snatcher--a reversal that, they said, comes "at substantial cost to the government's credibility." The court's meaning was plain: Either you were lying to us then, or you are lying to us now.If that's not enough to embarrass the president, the opinion was written by conservative darling J. Michael Luttig--who just a couple of months ago was on Bush's short list for the Supreme Court. For Luttig to question Bush's use of executive power is like Bill O'Reilly announcing that there's too much Christ in Christmas.This is hardly the only example of the president demanding powers he doesn't need. When American-born Saudi Yasser Hamdi was captured in Afghanistan, the administration also detained him as an enemy combatant rather than entrust him to the criminal justice system.But when the Supreme Court said he was entitled to a hearing where he could present evidence on his behalf, the administration decided that was way too much trouble. It freed him and put him on a plane back to Saudi Arabia, where he may plot jihad to his heart's content. Try to follow this logic: Hamdi was too dangerous to put on trial but not too dangerous to release.The disclosure that the president authorized secret and probably illegal monitoring of communications between people in the United States and people overseas again raises the question: Why?The government easily could have gotten search warrants to conduct electronic surveillance of anyone with the slightest possible connection to terrorists. The court that handles such requests hardly ever refuses. But Bush bridles at the notion that the president should ever have to ask permission of anyone.He claims he can ignore the law because Congress granted permission when it authorized him to use force against Al Qaeda. But we know that can't be true. Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales says the administration didn't ask for a revision of the law to give the president explicit power to order such wiretaps because Congress--a Republican Congress, mind you--wouldn't have agreed. So the administration decided: Who needs Congress?What we have now is not a robust executive but a reckless one. At times like this, it's apparent that Cheney and Bush want more power not because they need it to protect the nation, but because they want more power. Another paradox: In their conduct of the war on terror, they expect our trust, but they can't be bothered to earn it.----------E-mail: schapman@tribune.com.
Went to the movies tonight with my family in the middle of a sloppy, Midwestern snow storm. I guess everyone got their white christmas in van wert county this year. If you get the chance or are looking for a fun movie to watch over the holidays, try out Fun with Dick and Jane. Not only was it a great comedy but it also poked fun at big CEO's and the trend of employee mistreatment and executive investment. Former employees are driven toward the criminal underworld in an attempt to pay their monthly bills and provide for their family while former company executives contine to live the big life during the depression of bankruptcy. There is even a short commentary with Dick's former CEO in which he explains that everyone in the company felt the stings of the bankruptcy; even he felt the cruel blow---having to sell one of his vacation homes, either the one at Jackson Hole or somewhere else, he couldn't remember at the time. My favorite scenes include the heroic ending for the former employees and their families, and a great sequence where Dick (Jim Carey) tries to get work at a big box store. When he interviews and does he drug test you can even notice a big anti-union poster in the employee break room. I had to laugh at that sight, and look forward to seeing who directed this film. Probably the greatest part of the movie is the final credit sequence where the special thanks are given to former executives (some currenty jailed or soon to be indicted) of companies like Enron, Worldcom, and Arthur Anderson. All in all, I was happy to see a decent remake of a great film AND have it close to home during the holiday season..... one that probably sees quite a few families pinching pennies and thinking about their financial future because of the continual trend of corporate neglect and mistreatment of their employees. I invite all of you to do your shopping and daily business at local mom-and-pop stores and corporations that actually care about their employees and see them as part of their bottom line just as much as cash flow.
Happy Holidays to you all.
On this day I would like to say Merry Christmas, Happy Hannakah, and soon to be Happy Kwanzaa I believe.
On a personal note, I think we should all say a little prayer for our president during the holiday season. May he clear his thoughts and open his mind and heart to the American people in 2006, rather than the corporate big wigs and fundamentalist thinkers.
Happy Holidays to you all.
On this day I would like to say Merry Christmas, Happy Hannakah, and soon to be Happy Kwanzaa I believe.
On a personal note, I think we should all say a little prayer for our president during the holiday season. May he clear his thoughts and open his mind and heart to the American people in 2006, rather than the corporate big wigs and fundamentalist thinkers.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Fun questions and thoughts to ponder during holiday times:
1) Ultra-conservatives are extremely worried with taxes. In fact most would argue that the only way to jumpstart our economy and give more fiscal autonomy to individual families would be to cut taxes as much as possible. At the same time, a large percentage of these advocates are also part of the same leadership that pushes pro-life measures as a top agenda item. Now... with less tax money coming into state and federal coffers for social programming and government assistance/services, and essentially more babies coming into the world if abortions are reduced or legally eliminated...... who takes care of the abandoned babies; oftentimes with handicapped conditions or exposures to drug addictions, diseases, or prematurity? I'm sure it's only a matter of personal or family responsibility right? After all the family has suffered because of liberal concepts and cable television programming right?
2) Why is it that ultra-conservatives can still find it in their heart of hearts to cut taxes or eliminate programs that assist people that are sick, elderly, or poor...... at the same time that they push to increase defense spending measures, foreign aid to "coalition of the willing" nation-states, and infrastructure/social welfalre programming in Iraq and Afghanistan? Does anyone actually know when the timetable is set for the GOP agenda to address American social needs? Right..... stupid for me to ask...... you can't set a timetable to address social issues because then poverty, unemployment, underemployment, non-health care coverage situations, disease, malnourishment, missed educational opportunities, etc. will be able to win in the long run. Real American patriots know better than to set time tables right?
3) Since when did God change the "Faith, but not faith alone can get you to heaven" policy to "just get born again, yo" policy? I mean, I know that the ultra-conservatives changed the way the Bible was read (which passages were stressed repetively and which became background noise) but was God in on this too? Just checking... the way I figure, I should have expected this right? The golden rule would be called the platinum or diamond rule if we were supposed to take it seriously right?
4) Isn't saying "happy holidays" actually implying that you are wishing someone a happy holy-day? I always said that to people instead of saying Merry Christmas because I never wanted to guess a stranger's religious background, and would rather take the chance that it was a friendly greeting for all than to single someone out or make them feel uncomfortable. I mean I understand traditions and all... and that the Christmas tree was actually a German tradition or something..... but can we honestly put everything off on traditions that old white men have written over the past 2000 years? Of course, this is America right?
5) At the beginning of every phone call that is long distance, I think I might say a fake code word or mystery phrase just in case the FBI, NSA, or CIA is tapping my phonecall without my permission, a judge's knowledge, or Congress' permission. For example, "Hello, Chuck.... the ice cream that you served on Valentine's Day gave the Queen of England the runs." My friend, Chuck, would then know to respond by saying "Thank you, James. It is good to know that the fair queen isn't moving slowly these days." We could then resume business as usual, however we would be making the operatives earn their tax-payer donated salary.
1) Ultra-conservatives are extremely worried with taxes. In fact most would argue that the only way to jumpstart our economy and give more fiscal autonomy to individual families would be to cut taxes as much as possible. At the same time, a large percentage of these advocates are also part of the same leadership that pushes pro-life measures as a top agenda item. Now... with less tax money coming into state and federal coffers for social programming and government assistance/services, and essentially more babies coming into the world if abortions are reduced or legally eliminated...... who takes care of the abandoned babies; oftentimes with handicapped conditions or exposures to drug addictions, diseases, or prematurity? I'm sure it's only a matter of personal or family responsibility right? After all the family has suffered because of liberal concepts and cable television programming right?
2) Why is it that ultra-conservatives can still find it in their heart of hearts to cut taxes or eliminate programs that assist people that are sick, elderly, or poor...... at the same time that they push to increase defense spending measures, foreign aid to "coalition of the willing" nation-states, and infrastructure/social welfalre programming in Iraq and Afghanistan? Does anyone actually know when the timetable is set for the GOP agenda to address American social needs? Right..... stupid for me to ask...... you can't set a timetable to address social issues because then poverty, unemployment, underemployment, non-health care coverage situations, disease, malnourishment, missed educational opportunities, etc. will be able to win in the long run. Real American patriots know better than to set time tables right?
3) Since when did God change the "Faith, but not faith alone can get you to heaven" policy to "just get born again, yo" policy? I mean, I know that the ultra-conservatives changed the way the Bible was read (which passages were stressed repetively and which became background noise) but was God in on this too? Just checking... the way I figure, I should have expected this right? The golden rule would be called the platinum or diamond rule if we were supposed to take it seriously right?
4) Isn't saying "happy holidays" actually implying that you are wishing someone a happy holy-day? I always said that to people instead of saying Merry Christmas because I never wanted to guess a stranger's religious background, and would rather take the chance that it was a friendly greeting for all than to single someone out or make them feel uncomfortable. I mean I understand traditions and all... and that the Christmas tree was actually a German tradition or something..... but can we honestly put everything off on traditions that old white men have written over the past 2000 years? Of course, this is America right?
5) At the beginning of every phone call that is long distance, I think I might say a fake code word or mystery phrase just in case the FBI, NSA, or CIA is tapping my phonecall without my permission, a judge's knowledge, or Congress' permission. For example, "Hello, Chuck.... the ice cream that you served on Valentine's Day gave the Queen of England the runs." My friend, Chuck, would then know to respond by saying "Thank you, James. It is good to know that the fair queen isn't moving slowly these days." We could then resume business as usual, however we would be making the operatives earn their tax-payer donated salary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
