I’ve found a new, fun site for all you Progressives to play around with: it’s called the National Priorities Database, and it’s chock full of information you might want to know about.  For example, see the below study, which breaks out by Congressional district the costs of various programs:

National Priorities Project Database

$56.5 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% this year could be spent on the people of Congressional District 29 (Kuhl Jr.) instead. If that money were used to support state and local programs, the residents of Congressional District 29 (Kuhl Jr.) could have $219.6 million, which could provide:

National Priorities Project Database

Taxpayers in Congressional District 29 (Kuhl Jr.) will pay $1.1 million for the cost of war in Iraq. For the same amount of money, the following could have been provided:

My favourite part: this study itemizes the number of Port Container Inspectors that could have been hired for the price of each program. Nice stuff!

Technorati Tags: NY29, Taxation, Iraq, Finanace

powered by performancing firefox

In the midst of so many other problems and arguments, the Net Neutrality issue is slowly moving to the back-burner, even for those of us whose very voices depend on it.  Fortunately, not everyone has forgotten:

YouTube - Moyers on America “The Net at Risk” | PBS

The future of the Internet is up for grabs. Big corporations are lobbying Washington to turn the gateway to the Web into a toll road. Yet the public knows little about what’s happening behind closed doors where the future of democracy’s newest forum is being decided. If a few mega media giants own the content and control the delivery of radio, television, telephone services and the Internet, they’ll make a killing
and citizens will pay for it. In this clip from the upcoming PBS documentary “The Net at Risk” from Bill Moyers, airing on October 18 (check local listings), reporter Rick Karr looks at the issue of “net neutrality”- rules that the FCC eliminated, which allowed every American
and every company equal access to the Internet.

Technorati Tags: Net Neutrality, Internet, Freedom of Speech

powered by performancing firefox

RochesterTurning has been doing an outstanding job of covering the Foley story from a local perspective.  A local perspective in that Tom Reynolds has been fingered (pardon the unfortunate phrase) as one of the guys that was told about Foley’s shinanigans long before ABC News made it public, and he didn’t tell a sole except (according to him) Dennie Hastert.  RT’s Exile believes that Reynolds is getting thrown under the train:

rochesterturning.com: turning the tide upstate

But we’re not here to focus on blame. The Republicans will divvy that up among themselves as they see fit. I think that, quite possibly, Reynolds is being served up as a sacrifice to placate the political Gods. Here’s why I think they’re doing it and why I think they’re smart to do it:

Perhaps this is so, but what we all need to keep in mind here - what needs to be fresh in the minds of Americans whilst watching the pathetic display of Republicans blaming each other - is that when you see someone doing something illegal, you talk to a cop, not a coworker.  End of story.  I cannot emphasize this enough, nor imagine I would need to.

No matter how many people got told, every last one of them chose to deal with this issue politically rather than legally.  Every single one of them is guilty of the sin of commission, and that includes a Representative of New York, Tom Reynolds.  It’s fine when its a Congressman stealing from the till: slimy, yes, but predictable; in truth, such matters do need to be dealt with from within the Congress for legal reasons.  When its a Congressman engaging in statutory rape, it is not ok to simply find the next higher-up politician and hope you can spin things out of existence.  There are no statutory Congressional considerations, there is only the law and at least one abused kid.  You are playing with the lives not only of the kids involved, but of every other person that loves that kid, before or after the act.

Every single one of these Republicans proved that what we’ve been saying all along - what has been slowly eating away at our Constitution, our economy, our security and our nation’s soul - is altogether more real than we’d even suspected: it reveals that politics trump all other considerations including moral rectitude in this modern Republican Party.

Keep that in mind as you go to the polls.

Technorati Tags: Foley, Reynolds, Republicans, Sleaze

powered by performancing firefox

The Bush Administration has been so brazen in its attempts to skirt the law that it is now required of them to be even more brazen in defense of their actions, lest they be held to a full account.  So it is that Alberto Gonzales sits in a room full of lawyers and judges - including President Bush’s staunchest of Supreme Court allies, Clarence “C-Hair” Thomas - and declares himself Minister of Judicial Humility, even threatening disbarment of federal judges should those judges’ rulings fail to curry the favour of the Minister and his Master:

Gonzales Cautions Judges on Interfering - washingtonpost.com

“Respectfully, when courts issue decisions that overturn long-standing traditions or policies without proper support in text or precedent, they cannot _ and should not _ be shielded from criticism,” Gonzales said. “A proper sense of judicial humility requires judges to keep in mind the institutional limitations of the judiciary and the duties expressly assigned by the Constitution to the more politically accountable branches.”

Note if you will the entire lack of Executive humility referred to in this statement, nor is there an ounce of “institutional limitation” upon the president.  Note also that the word “Respectfully,” is merely a formality, not a thing meant to suggest any actual respect.  

Rather than discuss limitations to power respectfully, Alberto Gonzales - the chief lawman in this country- informs us that all that is required of us as a nation to uphold our venerated Constitution is the strict interpretation of Judicial limitations and duties, while turning a blind eye to the creative interpretations of Executive limitations and duties.

Interpretations that have rendered our president and his Executive Branch the sole “decider” of Constitutionality.  Interpretations that have rendered the Executive Branch as the watchful eyes and ears of American morality.  Interpretations which have allowed President Bush to declare all the world at war and all our personal effects the battleground.  Interpretations which are redefining the word “citizen” in this country and bring it dangerously close to “enemy combatant.”  

Interpretations which, even if we choke down the assurances that this administration feeds us - that they are only protecting us, that they need these things to make us safe, that we are doing the right thing when we accept their divine providence - even if we close our eyes and give them one more pass for the sake of Homeland Security, cannot possibly do less than open the door to some other, possibly more sinister, administration to snuff out the very democracy they claim to want to save.

These interpretations, we are told, are necessary.  And we are told, they are not interpretations, but rather “long-standing traditions or policies” which judges seeking to protect our rights will “overturn.”  Why, then, is all this such a surprise to the governed?

And what, then, of the consent of the governed?  Has this concept too become “quaint” and out of step with our modern society?  An overwhelming majority of us object to this administration’s policies, practices and abuses over the last six years, and above all other things, the Founding Fathers made clear that this trumps all other consideration.

As indeed it is doing even now.  Because as much as the administration would like this to be about renegade judges or terrorists hiding in our midst, the majority of American people have woken up to the realization that this is about us and who we are as a nation.  It is our will, not that of judges, being done at this very hour.  Torture, surveillance and warrantless imprisonment aren’t just things we dislike: they are things we’ve been taught since grade school are antithetical to the very idea of a United States of America.  They are things for which we used to scorn other countries, but now they are things that our Executive Branch happily colludes with other governments in, even to the point of dooming a citizen of one country to torture in a third country via prosecution in this country.  This administration does not simply condone torture, it is handmaiden to it.

We as citizens of this country have been taught too well for too long to have forgotten the lessons of what America is all about.  We will have it all back, soon, and the rantings of Alberto Gonzales are merely the keening of the stone before the dark tower falls, and the rulings of these so-called renegade judges, the crushing rumble of the battering rams.

Technorati Tags: Democracy, Bush, Gonzales, Constitution, Judges

powered by performancing firefox

Progressive pols, meet Progressive rock.  Kick back, relax, and smoke a bit of your favourite, then check out this video:

Premiata Forneria Marconi 1972 Feb. 8? TV Appearance ( PFM P.F.M. ) - Google Video

First, Flavio Premoli explains the various keyboards used in the band. Second, a performance of Dove…Quando…(Parte II). Thanks to Maclen for making this video available.

Technorati Tags: PFM, Premiata Forneria Marconi, Music, Progressive

powered by performancing firefox

The continuing saga of Jeanine Pirro’s tragic marriage and comic campaign is beginning to get filled in with the brownish-yellow colors of corruption.  Don’t miss the above-linked article, which links to a YouTube of Jeanine’s press conference.  RochesterTurning’s Exile on Ericcson St. does a nice job rounding up the news:

rochesterturning.com: turning the tide upstate

Republican Attorney General candidate Jeanine Pirro could write a book on the subject. Remember the 32 second pause in the speech she gave launching her failed bid to run for Senator? This seems to be even worse: Jeanine F. Pirro, the Republican candidate for New York attorney general, said this afternoon that last year she asked an old friend, former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard B. Kerik, to bug her family boat to determine if her husband was having an affair at a time when she was preparing to run for top political office.

“Hey!” you say, “I think I’ve hear of that Kerik feller somewhere!”  You’re right, you have: he’s the man once nominated for Secretary of Homeland Security in 2004 by George Bush, later withdrawing his nomination allegedly because of a problem with an illegal alien nanny.  Suddenly, that whole nanny excuse starts to look a tad crap-like, n’est-ce pas?

Steve Minarik (who is doubtless considering a less stressful position elsewhere, perhaps a career as a crab fisherman) weighed in with the “it’s a partisan attack!” mantra.  OK, perhaps that is so, but Pirro herself points out (by way of discrediting) that the alleged wiretapping happened a year ago.  She says, “well over a year ago,” but if she’s any kind of attorney, she has to know that a year’s worth of investigation is a drop in the bucket compared to some.  This happened right about in the correct pace for an investigation of this nature, I would think.

EOES recommends that perhaps Pirro drop out of the race and Kerik take her place as the ballsie move.  I agree that would be a show of force, but I’m thinking she needs to maybe get Kathrine Harris to drop out of her race and enter the fray as a running mate: the Deputy Attorney General.  First staff member to raise 1000$ gets to finish Candy’s water!

Technorati Tags: Pirro, Attorney General, Republicans

powered by performancing firefox

You probably haven’t heard much about the race for State’s Attorney General to replace Spitzer, except maybe for a few ads by Jeanine Piro wherein she claims to have “the same experience as Elliot Spitzer,” which one has to admit is both sad and depressing.  Then there’s Andrew Cuomo, whose claim to fame is being (at minimum, we presume) tolerated by the Clinton Administration as director of HUD.  But no endorsement from Clinton 1 nor Clinton 2, . . . not even Chelsea.  Yawn, press the lever for your favourite Party, and then leave the booth. . . .

Well, the only interesting thing to happen in this campaign just did: seems Jeanine’s under investigation for potential crimes while in the midst of a marital dispute a year ago, involving the discussion of investigating and wiretapping her husband whom she suspected of cheating and who already damaged her campaign by being in the pokey for other matters entirely.  Whew!  Got all that?  Thing is, she claims it’s politically motivated.  Daily Politics has an astute observation of the fall out:

Jeanine’s Presser | The Daily Politics

There’s some “this is actually good for Jeanine” spin circulating at the moment, along the lines of her being the victim, of women sympathizing with her wanting to track down her husband’s infidelity, with her having been very sympathetic at the press conference for which video should be popping up below shortly. But really, come on. The problem is that this is the only thing most New Yorkers know about her.

I’m going to assume for now that those “positive spinners” are men.  The kind of men who secretly think that women are wiretapping them, anyway.  Women I’ve known in my lifetime would not “sympathize” with a woman who’s having her jail-bird husband wiretapped, but then stays with him because “he’s a good father.”

She admits to having her husband followed, and talking about having him tapped, but not actually doing it.  OK, you’re free to insert your own “I did not inhale” joke here as you deem fit.  But seriously, she’s claiming that the political motivation of an attorney obsessed with their family (he investigated her husband, got that straight?) has prompted this investigation, and nothing illegal happened.  OK, . . . Fair enough.  We don’t have a clue what the actual facts are, yet.

But can you really claim the moral high ground when you, yourself conducted an investigation for which there was no evidence?  Does it not go to your temperament that you hired a private investigator to investigate such a husband as you have?

Whatever, I was going to vote the the Dem (whatever his name is, I’m not even interested enough to scroll to the top of this post).  Just an observation.

Technorati Tags: Pirro, Cuomo, Attorney General, Investigation

powered by performancing firefox

I really have to wonder what my nephew Zach would say to all this.  From KirstenMortensen.com, via a University of Chicago paper, an indepth discussion of b-movie biology and the problem of scale in those old horror movies:

KirstenMortensen.com » Blog Archive » Okay, sorry to have to break this to you

But B-movie biology just doesn’t hold up to the physics. The incredible shrinking man wouldn’t have had trouble wielding a needle to fight a spider. There’s no way Racquel could have manuevered her little ship in Fantastic Voyage. King Kong couldn’t have stood on his hind legs for long at all without exhausting himself. Mothra would be grounded on windy days. And on and on . . .

This is in fact a fascinating read, and you should really check it out if you value the old King Kong or Mothra monster movies.  For example, check out the section on Dr. Cyclops and the concepts of mass and terminal velocity.  The point of all this is to discuss the question of size and functionality of a given creature, and it gets very technical, but very interesting.  Happy reading!

Technorati Tags: Funny, Monster Movies

powered by performancing firefox

Eric Massa discusses the possibility of an October Surprise for the mid-terms coming up:

Daily Kos: NY-29: The October Surprise - Democrats and National Security

With respect to the “October Surprise,” the main piece of advice I have is that we don’t need to get too distracted trying to second guess what Karl Rove and his band of partisan liars and thugs have dreamed up to throw at us. Instead we need to get on the offensive, as described above, and use all the failures related to the War in Iraq as the center of our nationalization of the election.

I think perhaps Massa might agree with me on this, but let me take a moment to propose an alternate narative for the Bush Years and Electoral Genius: Bush is an idiot, he’s hired nothing but idiots, and it stands to reason that Karl Rove is . . . brace yourselves. . .  an idiot.  Seriously, I keep coming back to this theme, but no one listens.  Why do we so fear Karl Rove?  For what?  For playing dirty pool with John McCain in 2000?  Because he’s such a master of political maneuvering that he’s managed to get his man elected by two of the slimmest majorities in US electoral history?  And with more than a whiff of Republican electoral impropriety, at that?  For playing dirty pool with a CIA operative, getting caught and nearly (or, possibly in the near future) being jailed for it?  (by the way, whatever happened to Scooter Libby?  That’s a story that’s fallen entirely off the headlines).  Precisely what the hell did this guy do to deserve all this credit?

What was the October Surprise in the 2004 elections?  Do you even remember?  The closest it came was a message from bin-Laden.  You either have to accept that Karl Rove had nothing to do with that, or you have to suspect that the Bush Administration had something to do with 9-11, because no other conception of reality fits.  So I think we can discard the bin-Laden/Rove connection, barring future evidence to the contrary. 

No, mi amigos, there was no October Surprise.  The Dems just kept wincing, expecting the “inevitable” dastardly manuver that would overwhelm them, and it never came did it?  No, indeed, instead of an October Surprise, there was a January through November surprise, in that the Democrats seemed to pointedly refuse to launch anything approaching an adept campaign for president.  Surprise, surprise.

And frankly, I’ve not heard much from the National Dems to suggest that they’re doing much better for the mid-terms.  Everybody’s talking about the Dem’s nominally assured upset in November, but for all the email crappola I’m getting from the Dems, I’m astonished not to hear one word about Eric Massa.  I’ve heard he’s not exactly been showered with roses, and I suspect that is for a couple reasons:

One, he’s a recent defector from the Republican Party, and I think makes them a bit upset to see the former enemy running for a Dem seat.  I suppose that’s predictably egotistical enough, but the second reason is - I think - because Massa actually has a plan for Iraq, and it’s one that doesn’t make for easy bullet-point campaigning.  National Dems are so carefully picking through their options, looking for that Special Sauce recipe for electoral success, and I think in part because they’ve been just as fooled by the whole “Bush’s Brain” cannard.

Technorati Tags: Mid-Terms, Congress, Democrats, Rove

powered by performancing firefox

OK, so everyone’s making a big deal out of this whole thing that President Bush said on Wolf Blitzer’s CNN show.  For the record, here is what he said:

The Carpetbagger Report » Blog Archive » ‘Just a comma’

BUSH: Yes, you see — you see it on TV, and that’s the power of an enemy that is willing to kill innocent people. But there’s also an unbelievable will and resiliency by the Iraqi people…. Admittedly, it seems like a decade ago. I like to tell people when the final history is written on Iraq, it will look like just a comma because there is — my point is, there’s a strong will for democracy. (emphasis added)

The Left is having a field day with this.  In fact, everyone is.  They’re making a big deal out of it because they’re all too dense to see what Bush meant by it.  Allow me to illustrate.

Technorati Tags: Iraq, Bush, Comma, Funny

powered by performancing firefox