Tuesday, November 06, 2007

Event: Vote Walling for Flint Mayor Today.

More from Blue Skies Falling here.

Complete coverage from the Flint Journal here.

Labels: EVENT, Flint, politics

Thursday, November 01, 2007

Event: Last Plug Post for Walling v. Williamson.

So here it is... I found out why the Uncommon Sense has been unavailable lately.

More importantly, here is a page with all Flint Journal coverage of the race. It includes footage of several ads and profiles of the candidates, as well as many months of coverage.

In sum, Walling is a qualified candidate; any inexperience he may have is trumped by the diversity and range of experiences he has had. But most importantly, it is his style leadership that sets him above Don Williamson. Dayne has worked in many capacities in which the viability of government is tied to creative and collective initiative. In fact, one of the best summations of this tactic, one essential to Flint, is the Flint Journal endorsement, published this morning:

Walling would lead Flint to a bright future:

As Flint's mayor, Don Williamson operates as a one-man band. Dayne Walling would conduct an orchestra.

If re-elected Tuesday for four more years, Williamson would continue as he has, leading a fragile island contentiously, accepting help grudgingly. Walling, on the other hand, would build a mountain of opportunity with an army of allies.

If this were the 1950s or 1960s, the more-than-adequate record Williamson has compiled on basic services would merit re-election. Even now, in challenging and changing times, Williamson would receive our endorsement if he were running against someone less promising.

Fortunately, Flint voters aren't faced with this choice. In Walling, they have a candidate with the intelligence, vision, and, most valuable, the personal skills to become a true leader if given a chance.

Flint must provide him this opportunity, for the city's, and indeed the entire region's, prospects in the globally competitive 21st century very likely depend on this outcome.

We don't make this assessment casually. While government performance is always important to a community's success, it never has been more crucial to the Flint area's well-being than now because of our insecure situation.

And Flint's mayor is key. He must be the maestro, the creative team-builder who makes everyone perform better.

The right person in such a role can inspire stunning achievement, as exemplified by former Lansing Mayor David Hollister, who turned a city on a downward track into an object of admiration. Flint needs a mayor of this caliber.

Yet Williamson deserves credit. He's paved hundreds of lane miles of streets, made the city cleaner, replaced scores of city vehicles, and, most importantly, kept the books in the black after a state-ordered city takeover ended eight months into his term.

However, most of the deficit prompting the receivership was eliminated before Williamson took power. Recall, too, how he shamefully clashed with a state-appointed manager responsible for much of the recovery because the mayor wasn't yet in charge.

It's that my-way-or-the-highway attitude, which Williamson has exhibited throughout his term, that makes nearly every progressive step a precarious journey.

Credible organizations and individuals with the best of intentions worry constantly that the mayor might erect a roadblock. In fact, much of the redevelopment downtown and accomplishments in various economic and neighborhood initiatives occurred because talented people maneuvered around the city administration, or had its late participation.

Residents might accept Williamson's wars with the City Council, but there's no excuse for holding up projects because of orneriness or professional mediocrity, which describes a good many of the people the mayor has brought to City Hall, often for political reasons.

Such personnel practices may not get noticed because of Williamson's visibly good job with the city's housekeeping, compared to the past. But he doesn't have the skilled staff for Flint to reel in the partnerships and resources essential for prosperity.

Williamson, 73, isn't good at building coalitions because he doesn't have much faith in people. "Greed, animosity and jealousy" are key human motivations he volunteered to The Journal's Editorial Board.

Walling's outlook is refreshingly different. He believes that the "better angels" in people can be inspired to follow a quality leader with a well-conceived program.

Walling's campaign reflects this philosophy: His idealism and character have attracted a diverse body of supporters impressed by his practical plans for Flint's physical, economic and social renewal -- spearheaded by a high-quality city government.

Equally important, they have to admire his down-to-earth way of dealing with people from all walks of life. Walling, 33, would attract powerful players to Flint's cause, not shove them away. The Rhodes Scholarship he won alone would open doors.

Walling's service with Washington, D.C.'s mayor, his agency experience in Minneapolis and a stint at the nationally acclaimed Genesee County Land Bank provide examples of good governance to follow.

Most of all, though, he would lead Flint in a way with which it is not familiar, but would grow fond of. He would pave a road to a future many doubt possible. Voters on Tuesday should put their faith in Dayne Walling by making him their next mayor.

Labels: EVENT, Flint, politics

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Event: All Walling / Williamson Posts.

Click on Labels "Flint" below.

From August through November, almost all of the posts on this label will deal with the Mayoral Race in Flint.

Labels: EVENT, Flint, politics

Event: Walling Gets a Wild Endorsement. Williamson Gets Schooled.

I know I've pointed out that Williamson has (debatably) taken the most influential endorsements in this race, but I am quite unexpectedly proven wrong.

The Flint Journal: Blistering radio ad targets mayor.

The ad doesn't pull any punches:

A new advertisement airing on several local radio stations says violent crime doubled in Flint under Williamson's watch, calls into question Williamson's values while noting he is a convicted felon, says two men in his administration have been accused of violence against women and says Williamson has been accused of sexual harassment and racial discrimination.

"If we live in one of the most violent cities in America, do you really feel confident knowing that your safety depends on Williamson's judgment?" the ad asks.

...

The advertisement is titled "King Kong" and it ends with the line "King Kong ain't got **** on me," a reference to the movie "Training Day."

The main character, played by Denzel Washington, a corrupt cop, says the line as a show of his power, but the community turns on him, and he is killed shortly thereafter.

---

But the ad itself isn't what extraordinary. It's that the ad is paid for by the Michigan Democratic Party.

[State Party Chairman] Brewer said the party "very much" wants challenger Dayne Walling elected.

"Dayne Walling is a Democrat. Don Williamson is not," he said.

...

"Talk is cheap. Actions speak louder than words, and by his actions, he's a Republican," Brewer said.

The Michigan branch is one of the most influential in the nation and in a study conducted following the 2004 Presidential Election, Flint voters came in ninth of over 300 cities by percent of votes cast for Kerry. When I said before that the UAW were the most-coveted endorsement that was, of course, because I assumed that the Democratic Party wouldn't be getting involved in an important non-partisan election.

Ultimately, though, it makes sense. Though Don Williamson has occasionally and conditionally professed to be a Democrat, he donated substantially to the Bush campaign and other Republicans, and his pre-political life was filled with unambiguous conservative endorsements and moments of union-bashing. Perhaps even more to the point, the Democratic Party recognizes a hazard to their viability in Williamson's ability to cripple dozens official municipal positions (all held by Democrats) serving one of their most reliable constituencies.

Let's be honest: the ad is nasty. One could lament that, or make the realpolitik observation that at least this means that weapons are drawn without Wallings having to slop around in the blood himself. Voting fairly reliably Democratic myself, however, I'm just glad to see the party flexing some muscle where a, underfunded fledgling candidate deserves and benefits from it. It's certainly a high stakes move for Michigan Democrats and drives the ball pretty hard into Williamson's court.

A tiny caveat: This could backfire. I'm just superstitious enough not to say how right now. But when the election has "cleared the air," I will. For the moment, though, I'm optimistic.

Labels: EVENT, Flint, politics

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Event: More Walling vs. Williamson.

This week's coverage of Dayne Walling vs. Don Williamson, courtesy of The Flint Journal:

Economy key part in race. Mostly interviews pared down to single-sentences, but if you read through to the end, the last paragraph-worth is devastating.

Q&A: Walling on Flint's economy and Q&A: Williamson on Flint's economy. These could have the most important and galvanizing moments of the campaign, since they deal with what is arguably Flint's most pressing issue. Unfortunately, because the questions are so generic and the responses so trunchated, nothing of substance is really said. Walling and Williamson have never sounded so similar as they do here.

Current, past City Council members back Walling. The full list is: Jim Ananich, Sheldon Neeley, Jackie Poplar, Carolyn Sims (from the current City Council); Ralph Arellano, Johnnie Coleman, Verdell Duncan, Josh Freeman, Mark Horrigan, Jack D. Minore, Lawrence B. Murphy, Matt Schlinker, Ed Taylor and Barry Williams (the former City Council). I have, and you probably do too, mixed feelings about many in this crowd. It is still a preponderant number, including more than a couple former Williamson supporters. In his campaign's rebuttal, Joe Conroy said "it's ironic that the mayor drove these people out of City Hall, because they were giving contracts away to their friends and overspending." The quote is a nice textbook definition of the pot calling the kettle black.

Labels: EVENT, Flint, politics

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Event: Don Williamson is Acting Like a Banana Republic Dictator... Once Again.

Just a few weeks to go until the election, and it looks like Walling has taken more endorsements, while Williamson has perhaps taken more influential endorsements.

---

As usual, though, Williamson is his own worst enemy. I don't know, for example, whether Sheldon Neeley's insisting on an apology in exchange for a lawsuit is really anything other than typical cloak-and-dagger Flint politics. Sheldon has always strongly opposed Wiliamson and, intentional or not, it is problematic to include him in campaign literature. Williamson ought to apologize. While the lawsuit has no legal basis, the threat was sufficient to get Neeley's complaint coverage in the Flint Journal. Again, Flint politics.

THIS, on the other hand, is much more serious. You should read the whole article, but in a nutshell Williamson paid an unspecified amount (the Walling campaign estimates $10,000) to send a statement by mail (with official city letterhead) to all Flint residents. The letter attempts to refute the Walling campaign's arguments on Williamson's budget, although this is more of a deliberate distortion than a rebuttal.

There are several valid grounds for complaint here.

Two are more or less incidental: First, why isn't the amount spent known (a problem that doesn't say much for the city's bookkeeping ability under Williamson's watch), and couldn't that money have been better spent elsewhere? Second, the letters don't address Walling's claims, and in fact, mischaracterize them. Walling has alleged that Williamson has allowed federal grants to expire, a fact that nobody has contested. The city's budget surplus, confirmed in the letter at $6.4 million, is also uncontested. It avoids an issue that Williamson cannot refute by attaching a complaint to Walling that his campaign has never made. So we have valid complaints that public money was poorly spent, and that it was actually wasted in that the letter did not resolve any outstanding issue.

A third complaint, however, is far from incidental. That is that Williamson is essentially laundering taxpayers' money in order to promote his campaign. Worse, by having Flint pay for his statement and using the city's letterhead, Williamson creates the appearance that the city itself, the very municipal structure he is contained within and theoretically beholden to, endorses his mayorality. This is illegal and despicable. It is not only a blatant act of political manipulation that would make a Chicago alderman blush, but it's a weird shadow of the one-party states and single-candidate ballots of the worst governments in the world: Belorussia, Iran, China, North Korea, oh, and if memory serves me, Burma.

This is not the first time Mr. Williamson has behaved in this way... in his first year as mayor he used the city seal in an ad for his wife's car dealership, and during her run for the state legislature, a park in the East Village was remarkably reconstructed days before she hosted a fundraising event there. Yet this present violation is more serious than these embarassing episodes of the past. By mobilizing the municipal government on behalf of his own campaign, Williamson seeks to illegally manipulate the election's outcome in his favor.

Lesson to be learned? Never trust a mayor who signs away on his own paycheck.

What to do in the meantime? Take it to court. Any Flint resident ought to be able to file suit, with consultation. This is a serious matter, and it should result in criminal charges.

---

On a last note, Andy Heller has been writing a streak of great columns lately. Check them out.

In All quiet on Flint mayoral election front, he actually quotes me from a comment I left on his blog, and I'm flattered, but that's not why I'm giving him props today. How could I say no to an idea like this?:

It's only a few weeks until the mayoral election. Flint, do you know where your Don is? Honest to gosh, where's he been? I see his campaign signs everywhere, so I know he's out there, but other than that, you'd hardly know an election was nigh. This last month is supposed to be the silly season. Where's the Don's customary announcement of some bizarro project that will turn Flint around -- like, say, turning Genesee Towers into the world's biggest haunted house or making the former Forest Park into a hunting preserve?

Labels: EVENT, Flint, politics

Tuesday, October 09, 2007

Event: Flint mayoral race update, 10/9/07.

From the Flint Journal:
Complete Coverage.
Recent posts: Share your thoughts, Top Pastors Endorse Williamson, Walling, Williamson to speak at Rotary, City of Flint lowers suplus estimate, Time is running out to register to vote, Chamber PAC to host candidates, Prized UAW endorsement goes to no one, Firefighters union backs Williamson, Mayor says city has jail money, Former Stanley aide heads Walling's north-end HQ, Court of public opinion: Lawsuit costs become election issue.

Also updates to the anti-Williamson blog Williamson Watch.

Meanwhile, the Uncommon Sense hasn't been updated since June. What gives? Their fortè is depth in political coverage that outer outlets cannot or will not provide. We need you, Uncommon Sense.

---

If you look at the headlines above, you might gather that this has been a bad week for Walling. The pastors' endorsement stings hard, and they have been some of the most decisive factors in recent elections. If anything, however, it points to what a close election this is likely to be. Without the UAW endorsement (which would count for much more than the AFL-CIO position), there's a vacuum in the race. There is a chance, of course, that influential individuals in the UAW will endorse a candidate (several already have, on both sides), but logistically speaking, it's hard to make any predictions. Walling's cooperation with former-mayor's Stanley's administration may help to offset the pastors' endorsement in the African American community. And that, itself, may damage Walling's standing in the white community, since there was nothing they ever came together on as strongly as opposition to Stanley. Aren't the messy memories of racial politics just lovely?

One interesting effect, incidently, is that this election could be less even along racial lines than any other in recent history. It may even polarize more by age and occupation than by race. We'll see.

The upshot, of course, is that if you can vote, you need to. This looks like it's going to be a very close race.

Labels: EVENT, Flint, politics

Thursday, October 04, 2007

Event: Beating an Undead Horse.

New York Times: Secret U.S. Endorsement of Severe Interrogations.

Yeah, I know that a subject so often repeated loses its viscerality.
I also know that a lack of progress or change inspires a feeling of futility.
And I know that the more drastic a comparison is, the more cliche and stale it seems.

Still, we have to recognize the importance of these things, no matter how frequent we hear it and how futile we might feel. Because they're still doing it. All of it. Secretly. Behind closed doors. In freezing, wet, clamorous rooms.

Significantly, one needn't fall back on a cliche likening this administration's "interpretation" of the law to a Soviet political purge. They've taken that step themselves:

With virtually no experience in interrogations, the C.I.A. had constructed its program in a few harried months by consulting Egyptian and Saudi intelligence officials and copying Soviet interrogation methods long used in training American servicemen to withstand capture. The agency officers questioning prisoners constantly sought advice from lawyers thousands of miles away.

It may be that the closest we ever get to a real sense of what the C.I.A. has been doing is this.

---

Here is, for your mollification, a list of Democrats who voted for the Military Commissions Act, a piece of legislation that allegedly "dealt" with these abominations once and for all, while quite capably taking the matter out of the hands of the U.S. Courts.

SENATE
Carper (D-DE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Stabenow (D-MI)

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Andrews
Barrows
Bean
Bishop (GA)
Boren
Boswell
Boyd
Brown
Chandler
Cramer
Cuellar
Davis (AL)
Davis (TN)
Edwards
Etheridge
Ford
Gordon
Herseth
Higgins
Holden
Marshall
Matheson
McIntyre
Moore
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Ross
Salazar
Scott (GA)
Spratt
Tanner
Taylor (MS)

May we never have to accuse anyone of waterboarding our captured troops. It will be a difficult argument to make.

Labels: civil rights, EVENT, politics, war

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Event: Food For Thought (When Hillary Lies)

I won't be able to post today or tomorrow (except this), so I leave you with this fascinating thought: Hillary Clinton lied at the Democratic Debate yesterday. Tim Russert asked her who she would root for in a World Series between the Chicago Cubs and the New York Yankees. She said:

"Well, I would have to alternate sides."

Besides providing ammo for a thousand jokes with that particular answer (and playing right into the hands of last-cycle Kerry detractors), I don't personally believe it. It might not help that Russert is asking her to choose between the two most odious teams in baseball, but it's an answer that disrespects and begs disrespect. Nothing is more unsightly in a baseball fan than playing the numbers of a teams' success (or in this case, the numbers of a teams' fans – both the Cubs and the Yanks are a doozy) like an auction for your support. That's why I saw a girl wearing a shirt saying "I was a Tigers fan before 2006," and felt like I ought to ask her how she felt about them in 2003. Anyway, this question ought to be a no-brainer for Hillary. The Cubs were the team she grew up with. The Yankees are the team of a place she has moved as a political expediency. The Yankees have won a billion times. The Cubs are fated to never win. I don't care how many times a Cubs fan puked on her teenage shoes on the Red Line; she's rooting for Chicago whether she admits it or not. Between this and her reluctance to back the UAW, my confidence is increasingly shaken.

If I can't trust her to be honest about baseball, can I trust her about anything?

Labels: baseball, EVENT, politics

Monday, September 24, 2007

Event: A Good Post Worth Reading.

Tom's on a roll this month. I always like his blogging, political and otherwise, but this month he's been even more prolific than usual. Last Friday he analyzed God and the religious right as suggested by Oklahoma State Senator Ernie Chambers:

Human beings tend to make Gods in our own image. We imagine Gods that reflect our hopes, our deepest yearnings, what we see as the best in ourselves.

So what does it tell you about the Religious Right when the God they imagine is a violent, vindictive, total shit?

Labels: civil liberties, civil rights, EVENT, politics

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Event: Walling / Williamson Crunch Time is Here.

Well, how disappointing.

In a move that may have been decisive, the AFL-CIO has formally endorsed Don Williamson. The Flint Journal article mentions allegations of bias; that the endorsement was very conveniently timed, given the renewal of key contracts. I don't know enough about the scene today to comment on the likelihood of that, but it's not necessary. It may be that ALF-CIO endorsed Williamson because he has set up a modest record of progress of painting over graffiti and repaving roads.

That's why this the endorsement so disappointing. "Modest progress" is insufficient for Flint's needs. Have the graffiti efforts made a real tangible effort in the quality of life? I doubt it. It could be fairly argued that violent crime has increased dramatically during the Williamson administration. Graffiti removal is a firstoff a matter of beautification, not crime control. I live in Brooklyn now, where every sidewalk, wall, and subway post is covered in graffiti, but the crime rate doesn't hold a candle to Flint's. While it's erroneous to think that graffiti is not related to the gang culture that thrives in Flint, it is certainly fair to say that graffiti cleanup has taken on an importance disproportionate to its actual benefits.

The road paving is another achievement that the Williamson administration loves to credit itself with. But it's quickly forgotten that most of that repaving happened through the use of state funds, and Williamson, given his constant feuds with the city council, local unions, and media outlets, can't possibly claim to have brought this home through any sort of diplomacy or negotiation.

Even if he somehow could assume credit for infrastructural improvments, does that really offset the $16 million in federal support Flint has lost under his watch? Remember that a few years ago, a debt of double that amount was sufficient to place Flint into state receivership and make local elections irrelevant. It also breaks down to $4 million a year, which is more than twice as expensive as maintaining an empty and derelict AutoWorld. Again, these are all funds that would have been earmarked for public housing, the schools, and public programs.

So I ask you, ALF-CIO members. Does this endorsement really make much sense?

Here's Winston Smith's manifesto on Williamson's record.

Here are my thoughts on Dayne Walling.

Here is Dayne Walling's website.

Labels: elections, EVENT, Flint, Michigan, politics

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Event: Please Help Shut This Discussion Down.

The objections are so facile that there is literally no support for them. The Times' own response clearly illustrates a defined policy and precedent.

The New York Times: Cheney Jumps Into Frey Over MoveOn Ad.

The Washington Post: MoveOn Fires Back at Giuliani.

FOX News: New York Times Gave MoveOn.com Discount for 'Betray Us' Ad.

The New York Post: TIMES GIVES LEFTIES A HEFY DISCOUNT FOR 'BETRAY US' AD.

It is worth noting that the last two sources are both owned by the same man who is now in command of the Wall Street Journal.

Labels: EVENT, media, politics

Monday, September 17, 2007

Event: California Republicans.

Last week, Tom, my godfather, posted a very interesting analysis of the dilemma facing California Republicans. While California is admittedly atypical, I still think that many of his observations could be extended to the nation at large:

The Republican party is imploding under the "breastplate of righteousness" it has donned at the behest of social conservatives, but because social conservatives dominate the Republican party and aren't going to give up control, I don't see an easy path out of the dilemma.

Labels: EVENT, other states, politics

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Event: Socialist Convention.

The Democratic Socialists of America are throwing a convention this November 9-11, in Atlanta of all places.

I wish I had more money, so that I could go.

I also wish they had better web design, so that I could read about the convention without feeling like I'm reading about a preschool Easter Egg hunt. That has to be the least flattering picture of Bernie Sanders ever.

Labels: civil liberties, diplomacy, economics, environment, EVENT, health care, politics, poverty, U.S.A., war

Monday, September 10, 2007

Event: Oh, Caucus.

The first batch of comments are better than the actual article. But you'll have to read the article to make sense of the comments. This was nice.

Labels: EVENT, politics, u.s. executive

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Event: If it looks like a rat*...

The New York Times Lede: Leaping to Seantor Craig's Defence.

*By "rat" I mean "hypocritical senator."

Labels: EVENT, politics, u.s. legislative, U.S.A.

Monday, August 13, 2007

Good riddance.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Karl Rove has left the building.

Labels: EVENT, politics, u.s. executive

Friday, August 10, 2007

Event: The Emphasis? Emphatic.

One of my perennial complaints against the Democratic Party at large is that they play a defensive game. Not in terms of their foreign policy, but in terms of their political strategy. They are too caught up in number crunching and trying to out-tough the Republicans to actually hold their ground against the Republicans in issues in which progressives have the advantage.

Not wanting to make the same mistake, and to be thereby hypocritical, I'm going to deal with something upfront, possibly over-reacting (after all, it seemed like a blogbomb, and I don't know if the guy's even going to come back and hear about how his comment was received), but at least I can make an articulated case for the political agenda that Blue Skies Falling has promoted from the beginning.

---

Today, on my post Freedom House Rankings I received the following comment from Chris whose blog is here. His comment ran as follows:

United States gets a top ranking. Yet this country continues to be demonized and called the evil empire. If people spent as much time trying to bring about freedom for others as the amount of time they do hating America, perhaps more people in this world would have a chance to live freer lives as they should.

I wrote the following back:

I don't usually delete comments, Chris, but your point only connects with the post by the barest thread. And your point is vague and generalizing and (most likely) simple Republican sloganeering. Though you can correct me if I'm wrong. And you don't offer any evidence to back your claim up.

Sometimes it's hard not to delete comments, but often it's very easy, becase when you post something as carelessly and hastily written as this, you're only making yourself look foolish.

Then I was worried that I might be sticking my foot down my throat. I went to Chris' blog, and after just a few minutes of scanning I found the following directed against that figurehead of irresponsible revolutionary action, Eddie Vedder:

Eddie seems to be of the All Things Bush Are Bad camp, the very same camp who would say, if they found out that they and Bush liked the same music, they'd say he listens to it the wrong way, the moron. This is the group of people who completely shun a Pro-Democracy In Iraq, Let The Troops Win The War point of view. This is the same group that wants a cowardly exit from Iraq, to let the Freedom Fighters win and for the illegally occupying U.S. troops to leave in shame. Shame! When Eddie brings this into a concert then it ruins it and it's dangerous 'cause it poisons the minds of impressionable listeners. Why should the U.S. pack and leave as quickly as possible? If it could happen in three days, wouldn't that be great, Eddie? Allow Iran to take over Iraq. Allow Iraq to become a Free Zone for al Qaida, to live and thrive and train and plan to kill me... and to kill you... and your family.

Now I don't want to be a total prick. To be fair, Chris does link to a large number of (seemingly) non-partisan charities; they're actually his most prominent links. His blog isn't strictly political, and I do think he's well intentioned. But I have to say that I really hate comments like his. I hate them. They're almost as bad as spam. They involve practically no effort to understand or respond to the subject posted, they offer almost nothing by way of a supportable argument or reasonable alternative, and ultimately, they're disrespectful. If I have the audacity to go onto a conservative blog (and I do sometimes) and send up some vibes against its author and readers, you sure as Hell better expect that I

1) understand the argument they're making and how mine applies,
2) have something worthwhile to say, and
3) say it respectfully.

So I don't feel too bad about calling Chris out today. He's basically just supplying me with straw men anyway. As for his comments, both in response to my post and on his own blog, it doesn't even really take much work.

I'd ask Chris first if he thought that Clinton was unreasonably and prejudicially attacked as a result of the Starr investigation. If he doesn't think so, then I think it's easy to prove a level of hypocrisy, since Clinton's tribulations were essentially confined to titillating scandal, whereas Bush has largely subverted the rule of law governing the Executive Branch. After all, Clinton didn't override judicial restraints on wiretaps, didn't flout congressional oversight, and he certainly didn't legalize torture. Which all ought to make Bush problematic to Chris, since he cares about the freedom and civil liberties of Iraqis.

With regards to people "hating America" (and I can only assume that Chris means his fellow Americans' "hate" for America) and the absurd argument supplied for staying in Iraq, I'm going to post, in its entirety, a speech Barack Obama had the foresight to write back in October, 2002. And no, I'm not saying this as a diehard Obama supporter. I haven't haven't decided yet who I support; I have reservations with all of our (nevertheless inordinately qualified (relative to Republican options)) Democratic candidates. Regardless, it's impressive that Obama could say in 2002 what some people are having a difficult time admitting today.

---

Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil. I don't oppose all wars.

My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain. I don't oppose all wars.

After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again. I don't oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism.

What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income - to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear - I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the middle east, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars.

So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the President today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings. You want a fight, President Bush?

Let's fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe. You want a fight, President Bush?

Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells. You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil. Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair. The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war.

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not -- we will not -- travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.

Labels: EVENT, politics, u.s. executive, war

Wednesday, August 08, 2007

Event: We have plenty to spare; we should give to the needy.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I want to direct you once more to Gemma's political project Balls to Congress. The site has run into some difficulties recently, and this is the perfect time to help. I recommend this service becaue, politically opinionated as we all are, this is a convenient way to be witty and noisy about it.

Labels: EVENT, politics

Tuesday, August 07, 2007

Event: Freedom House Rankings

The Freedom House has ranked nations as 'Free,' 'Partly Free,' and 'Not Free' according to their measure of political freedom and civil liberty. They are nonprofit and nonpartisan, but the Wikipedia article does note that there is a steady coming-and-going of U.S. government officials within their organization. What do you think?

Here are their 2006 lists. Any surprises?

Free

Andorra, Antigua & Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus (Greek), Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kiribati, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Monaco, Mongolia, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome & Principe, Senegal, Serbia, Serbia & Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & Grenadines, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Trinidad & Tobago, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Vanuatu.

Partly Free

Albania, Armenia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Comoros, Djibouti, East Timor, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, The, Georgia, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Liberia, Macedonia, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mauritania, Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Tonga, Turkey, Uganda, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia.

Not Free

Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bhutan, Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chad, China, Congo (Brazzaville), Congo (Kinshasa), Cote d'Ivorie, Cuba, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Guinea, Iran, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Laos, Libya, Maldives, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Zimbabwe.

Oh, yeah. Here's what they say about the United States.

Labels: civil liberties, EVENT, politics, U.S.A., World

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Event: Get the Balance Right.

by Depeche Mode:

There's more besides joyrides,
Bumblebee from Transformers.

a little house in the countryside.
Daily Kos: Wishing for Good, Accepting the Truth.

Understand, learn to demand,
Daily Freeman: Hinchey calls for Bush, Cheney to be Censured.

compromise, sometimes lie.
Daily Kos: Signed, Sealed, & Delivered.

 

Get the balance right.
New York Times: Violence Rages in Iraq as Sunni Bloc Leaves Cabinet.

 

Be responsible, respectable,
The Detroit Free Press: Detroit named No. 1 sports city.

Stable but gullible
The Economist: Kazakhstan turns the screw.

Concerned and caring, help the helpless
The Flint Journal: Resource Center's Sybyl Atwood dies at 72.

But always remain ultimately selfish
Andrew Heller: And so goeth the story all over again.

 

Get the balance right.
MSNBC: Mr. Mayor vs. Mr. Moore.

 

You think you've got a hold of it all.
The Detroit Free Press: GM sales down, but improves on retail side.

You haven't got a hold at all.
Daily Kos: Just Like Kansas.

When you reach the top, get ready to drop.
Pollster.com: Bush Approval from 1/1/2005 through 07/18/2007.

Prepare yourself for the fall.
The Onion: There's No Such Thing as Bad Publicity.

You're gonna fall
New York Times: Stocks Are Flat After Sell-Offs in Asia and Europe.

It's almost predictable.
Project Censored Media: The Media Can Legally Lie.

 

Don't take this way. Don't take that way.
Emperor Valens' legacy.

Straight down the middle until next Thursday.
The Democratic Party.

Push to the left, back to the right.
Daily Kos: Media Narrative: The Mainstream Is Now "The Left".

Twist and turn til you've got it right.
The Economist: China's Chicago.

 

Get the balance right
Lollapalooza.

Every week is epic.

Labels: civil liberties, Detroit, diplomacy, EVENT, Flint, health care, politics, war

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Event: Meanwhile, at the Slow Roast...

... the Democrats have turned up the temperature about one degree. At this rate, the Bush administration will be two years out of office before anyone's actually cooking.

Labels: congress, EVENT, politics

Friday, July 20, 2007

Event: The Pentagon vs. Senator Clinton.

You know, I think I've done a good job speaking my mind and separating my emotions... at least I've taken what provisions I'm able to. I'm as passionate as my friends and family, but I've always maintained that demographics and contexts have to be considered in any political discussion... that we cannot genuinely persuade someone unless we understand them. By that reasoning, any argument or bias that requires that half the population of Red States is irredeemably stupid or irredeemably selfish is not only unproductive, but smacks of arrogance. I've maintained that the Left is correct on most of these issues, but I've always thought that respect had to be maintained against all sorts of odds (and among all sorts of frustration) to make any progress.

But I'm angry about this.

I know, it's a strange time to start taking things personally, and there are probably more pressing issues for me to take personally. But I can't help the fact that it really pisses me off. Why this?

It's not what's said in these arguments/chastisements/evasions as much as what is lacking.

Whether it's the Bush administration or congressional Republicans or the Department of Defence or conservative bloggers, even amid the (too hard won) concessions that (duh!) Iraq is not going well, there is little or no talk of accountability. And an Undersecretary has the audacity to flame a member of the Armed Services Committee about "abandoning" allies in Vietnam, Somalia, and Iraq?!

No. 1. IF WE DIDN'T GET INTO UNNECESSARY, UNWINNABLE ADVENTURIST WARS IN THE FIRST PLACE, THEN "ABANDONING" ALLIES WOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE!

No. 2. WHEN IS A DECISION-MAKER GOING TO BE PUT ON TRIAL FOR THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF OUR ENGAGEMENT IN IRAQ? THE CASE CAN VALIDLY BE THE DELIBERATE MANIPULATION OF INFORMATION OR CRIMINAL NEGLECT, BUT IN EITHER CASE THERE ARE VIABLE LEGAL GROUNDS FOR ANY NUMBER OF PROSECUTIONS. CONGRESS IMPEACHED CLINTON OVER A PERJURY OF ELEVENTH-RATE NATIONAL RELEVANCE; WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO IMPEACH BUSH AND COMPANY OVER HIS FIRST-DEGREE SACRIFICE OF NATIONAL INTEREST AND ALL-OUT SABOTAGE OF OUR SYSTEM OF CHECKS-AND-BALANCES? THE PRO-DEATH-PENALTY REPUBLICANS RELIABLY NEGLECT THIS QUESTION OVER AND OVER.

WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR WHAT HAS HAPPENED?

WHEN IS IT GOING TO HAPPEN?

WHY ISN'T IT HAPPENING ALREADY?

No. 3. REPUBLICAN LEADERS: YOU HAVE MADE YOURSELF HYPOCRITICAL BY BOTH YOUR WORDS AND YOUR SILENCES. SHAME ON YOU.

DEMOCRATIC LEADERS: MAYBE YOU CAN'T PUSH AN IMPEACHMENT THROUGH CONGRESS, BUT THIS VOTER SURE AS HELL BETTER SEE YOU TRYING, OR YOUR PROGRESSIVE VOTERS WILL STOP REGRETTING VOTING FOR NADER IN '00 WHILE YOUR COVETED SWING VOTERS STICK BY THE PARTY THEY PERCEIVE AS HAVING A SPINE. I WILL BE SENDING MY VOTE TOWARD WHOEVER IS ABLE TO BRING THE FIGHT TO THIS PERSISTANTLY ONE-SIDED POLITICAL DIALOGUE.

---

I'm just saying.

It makes me literally want to scream sometimes.

Fortunately, this blog allows me to spare my neighbors.

Labels: Bush, congress, EVENT, politics