by Rich Miles
Hey, I'm getting better! It's only been 6 1/2 months since I last posted this time. But enough of that, on with the business at hand:
Since I last posted, Barack Obama has been elected and inaugurated. George Bush proved me wrong by not trying to stay in office on some trumped-up emergency basis (and I've never been happier to be wrong), and the Republickin' party has remained its old, steadfast self by engaging in the same treasonous behavior it did before the election, continuing to obstruct the business of the people and do all they can to keep anyone - Democrats, mostly - from doing anything to serve the needs of the American people. And then, they blame everything on the Democrats.
But the really heinous part of this equation is that, with the exception of the President, the Democrats are doing remarkably little to thwart these efforts on the part of the Repugs.
I mean, do you understand it? I don't. All the Repugs seem to have to do is say "boo", and the Democrats will just back down. It was most evident in the recent negotiations for the Big Bailout plan, when people like Lindsay Graham and others made all sorts of accusations of being left out of the process, and instead of Harry Reid telling them what was true, which was in essence "go fuck yourselves", he bent over and greased up again, and gave the Repugs what they wanted. Or more or less so.
See, here's how it goes: the Repug leadership tells its guys when to jump and how high, and those ol' boys just DO IT!!! That's why NOT ONE House Repug voted for the recovery plan, and then they had the nerve to complain about being left out of the process! And don't you know Middle America (gor bless their little pointed heads) hears that, and says, "Yeah well our good ol' Repug boys put down them smartass Demmiecrat boys up in Washington, and didn't yield to them one time ever!"
But while not many middle Americans gave this much thought, the fact is, every single Repug who voted against the bill WAS TOLD TO DO SO BY THEIR PARTY LEADERSHIP!!None of them, not ONE, read the bill, and after careful consideration decided that it was a flawed bill, and their conscience would not let them vote "Aye". Lindsay Graham said that the bill "stinks the place out". Others said similarly over-the-top things. I mean, is this the behavior of an adult, a member of one of the supposed greatest deliberative bodies on the planet? Daddy tells you what to do, and you do it without question, without actually DOING any of that deliberating you're supposed to be famous for, just because to do so will defeat the evil Democratic president, will start him on the road to un-reelectability in 4 years. All they have to do is make him politically impotent for four years, and he won't be reelected, and we (the Repugs) will have another go at fucking up the country again!!! Isn't that exciting?
And no one - not even Pres. Obama, who was starting to look like he was not going to allow this kind of nonsense with his "are these people kidding?" remark a while back, called them on such ludicrous remarks.
When are we going to call these fools on their shitty behavior? When are we going to stand up in their faces, and say, "You're morons. Among other moronic behavior, you're accusing us of the exact same bad behavior that YOU committed for 8 years under Bush, and called it logic and party loyalty and probity. And it resulted in the country being more fucked up than it hsa been since the Depression!"
People are FED UP with this crap. I can only hope that the general intelligence of the American people has risen a bit, and more Americans are seeing this for what it is: obstructionism, pure and simple. Not obstructing for a reason, just - obstructing.
But frankly, I have little faith in the intelligence of the American people. It was a little better when they elected Obama by such a hefty margin, but now we're right back where we started from on 9/11 - scared little rabbits who will let the Repugs frighten us into doing their bidding.
Except that Obama is whuppin' them this time. He's just doing it so subtly and quietly that they don't see it for the ass-whuppin' it is. God grant that he remains able to pull the wool over their eyes for another 8 years.
Thanks for your time and attention. As always, I'll try to get back here a little sooner next time. I mean, you'd think I'd have plenty to say these days, wouldn't you?
Monday, February 16, 2009
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Have you filled up a Ford lately?
by Rich Miles
Wow!!! I'm going to have to disappear for 8 months more often! Since I posted the other day, I've received no fewer than 9 "Welcome Back!" messages, one of them from someone highly placed in the state Democratic Party, and one from someone I thought was very angry with me and wouldn't bother to say anything to me, much less anything of a welcoming nature. Thanks to all of you who had such kind things to say to me, and especially to you, Joe Sonka, who not only welcomed me back on MY blog, but did so on YOUR blog as well. It's nice to know people noticed!
Anyway, on to the topic at hand: the massive stupidity of the Ford Motor Co.
Recent news stories will tell us all that Ford has finally seen the light, and is going to stop making massively oversized, overpowered, gas-guzzling automotive monsters, and start making smaller cars that get better gas mileage - some models up to 40 mpg.
It's a good thing to read that. Ford has corporately contributed more to global warming and gas shortages than almost any other car company in the world, consistently year in and year out, and learning that they seem finally to have learned their lesson and are going to get with the program is good.
That's the SURFACE reality. But as you may suspect, I don't DO "surface".
Come with me back to late 1973-early 1974, when OPEC and their pals made their FIRST naked grab for power, or at least the first one I had ever had occasion to take notice of. I was in college back then, and driving 500 miles back and forth from school to home 6-8 times a year. I drove an Austin America which got perhaps 30-35 mpg, but even at that I was spending more than I had on gasoline.
Because, you see, gasoline had gone from about 25 cents a gallon (no, I am NOT insane, it really was that price) up to 43-50 cents a gallon in the space of about a month or two - an increase equivalent to going from $2.00 to $4.00 a gallon in relative terms - relative to its damage to my budget and yours in any case.
Well, there was panic, there was weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth across the nation, and over the course of the next few years, all sorts of things of a more or less salutary nature came to pass: President Carter, who came to office in January of 1977, signed an executive order lowering the speed limit on interstate highways nationwide to 55, thereby saving some-odd gazillions of gallons of fuel over the next several decades, not to mention tons of air pollution. Car companies (including Ford, I have to say in the interest of full disclosure and fairness) started making small, more or less fuel-efficient cars like the Pinto, the Vega, and others that I have mercifully forgotten. I say mercifully forgotten, because despite Detroit's efforts to cater to consumers who had started to notice that our cheap gas wasn't necessarily going to last forever, they never did do it quite right - it was sort of like they were creating stopgaps, because they anticipated that the demand for gas sippers was temporary, so they didn't have to do a particularly good job of making them because they were going to get to STOP making them in not too many years,
And to a certain degree, they were right in that assumption: here we are, 34 years or so later, and we've had 70+ mph speed limits for several years, the SUV has become the vehicle of choice for the affluent (and any of the rest of us who can afford it) despite its extremely low gas mileage, and while there are numerous high-mileage models from nearly as numerous auto makers, these are generally loss leaders, unless you're one of those tree-huggers who has ordered your Prius or something. In short, while we've known for years that we need to watch our mileage, we still (Americans at least - most of the rest of the world are smarter than us in this regard) loves us some SUVs, and some humongous Ballbuster sedans (with apologies to Hunter S. Thompson). Fuel efficiency bedamned, we were AMURRICANS, gawdammit, and we could suck up and burn as much fuel as we wanted to. And so, like the average dog, we did it cuz we could.
And to add insult to injury, we are also paying our tax dollars to companies like Ford and GM and Chrysler for keeping their factories open and their workers working, and their very poor corporate planners planning, whether any of this benefits the American people or not. Because the leaders of these companies can get the government to bail them out every few years, and give them tax breaks, and so on and so forth, so we don't have to pay the social costs of all those unemployed auto workers (witness the dead, stinking corpse that was Detroit.)
But it didn't have to be that way. We had plenty of advance warning. 34 years of advance warning, to be precise.
So for now, we can pretend that this whole fuel crisis sneaked up on us - there was nothing we could do, it just came out of nowhere, etc. etc - but those of us who either lived through it or have some sense of history know better: we had PLENTY of warning, and even heeded some of it for a minute or two.
So it only remains to be seen if this time, it will really stick.
I urge you to go to Europe, or Great Britain, or if you can't go because you haven't the money because of fuel prices and the costs of travel they cause, look at some pictures of their roads on BBC America or somewhere: over there, they got the message some years ago. Almost NO ONE drives a car with more than 4 cylinders, and they're pretty peppy little cars at that. Only the extremely wealthy drive gas-guzzlers, and on the average day of driving you probably won't see a half-dozen of them. And also, the air is cleaner. Surely that counts for something.
Do they pay more for fuel over there than we do over here? Damn right they do. But they also understand that they simply CANNOT drive gas guzzler cars, not only because of the cost of the fuel but because of the damage it does to their environment. So, just about everyone, or at least everyone like you and me, drives what we in America would call a "small car" or a "sub-compact" - because it makes sense. Because it's smart to do so. Because they're not stupid.
And because they're not Americans, who believe it is their god-given right to drive any great huge gas-gulping monster they wish.
One day, we here in America are going to have to join the rest of the world, and stop being so selfish. You think you'll live to see it?
I'm not sure I will.
Wow!!! I'm going to have to disappear for 8 months more often! Since I posted the other day, I've received no fewer than 9 "Welcome Back!" messages, one of them from someone highly placed in the state Democratic Party, and one from someone I thought was very angry with me and wouldn't bother to say anything to me, much less anything of a welcoming nature. Thanks to all of you who had such kind things to say to me, and especially to you, Joe Sonka, who not only welcomed me back on MY blog, but did so on YOUR blog as well. It's nice to know people noticed!
Anyway, on to the topic at hand: the massive stupidity of the Ford Motor Co.
Recent news stories will tell us all that Ford has finally seen the light, and is going to stop making massively oversized, overpowered, gas-guzzling automotive monsters, and start making smaller cars that get better gas mileage - some models up to 40 mpg.
It's a good thing to read that. Ford has corporately contributed more to global warming and gas shortages than almost any other car company in the world, consistently year in and year out, and learning that they seem finally to have learned their lesson and are going to get with the program is good.
That's the SURFACE reality. But as you may suspect, I don't DO "surface".
Come with me back to late 1973-early 1974, when OPEC and their pals made their FIRST naked grab for power, or at least the first one I had ever had occasion to take notice of. I was in college back then, and driving 500 miles back and forth from school to home 6-8 times a year. I drove an Austin America which got perhaps 30-35 mpg, but even at that I was spending more than I had on gasoline.
Because, you see, gasoline had gone from about 25 cents a gallon (no, I am NOT insane, it really was that price) up to 43-50 cents a gallon in the space of about a month or two - an increase equivalent to going from $2.00 to $4.00 a gallon in relative terms - relative to its damage to my budget and yours in any case.
Well, there was panic, there was weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth across the nation, and over the course of the next few years, all sorts of things of a more or less salutary nature came to pass: President Carter, who came to office in January of 1977, signed an executive order lowering the speed limit on interstate highways nationwide to 55, thereby saving some-odd gazillions of gallons of fuel over the next several decades, not to mention tons of air pollution. Car companies (including Ford, I have to say in the interest of full disclosure and fairness) started making small, more or less fuel-efficient cars like the Pinto, the Vega, and others that I have mercifully forgotten. I say mercifully forgotten, because despite Detroit's efforts to cater to consumers who had started to notice that our cheap gas wasn't necessarily going to last forever, they never did do it quite right - it was sort of like they were creating stopgaps, because they anticipated that the demand for gas sippers was temporary, so they didn't have to do a particularly good job of making them because they were going to get to STOP making them in not too many years,
And to a certain degree, they were right in that assumption: here we are, 34 years or so later, and we've had 70+ mph speed limits for several years, the SUV has become the vehicle of choice for the affluent (and any of the rest of us who can afford it) despite its extremely low gas mileage, and while there are numerous high-mileage models from nearly as numerous auto makers, these are generally loss leaders, unless you're one of those tree-huggers who has ordered your Prius or something. In short, while we've known for years that we need to watch our mileage, we still (Americans at least - most of the rest of the world are smarter than us in this regard) loves us some SUVs, and some humongous Ballbuster sedans (with apologies to Hunter S. Thompson). Fuel efficiency bedamned, we were AMURRICANS, gawdammit, and we could suck up and burn as much fuel as we wanted to. And so, like the average dog, we did it cuz we could.
And to add insult to injury, we are also paying our tax dollars to companies like Ford and GM and Chrysler for keeping their factories open and their workers working, and their very poor corporate planners planning, whether any of this benefits the American people or not. Because the leaders of these companies can get the government to bail them out every few years, and give them tax breaks, and so on and so forth, so we don't have to pay the social costs of all those unemployed auto workers (witness the dead, stinking corpse that was Detroit.)
But it didn't have to be that way. We had plenty of advance warning. 34 years of advance warning, to be precise.
So for now, we can pretend that this whole fuel crisis sneaked up on us - there was nothing we could do, it just came out of nowhere, etc. etc - but those of us who either lived through it or have some sense of history know better: we had PLENTY of warning, and even heeded some of it for a minute or two.
So it only remains to be seen if this time, it will really stick.
I urge you to go to Europe, or Great Britain, or if you can't go because you haven't the money because of fuel prices and the costs of travel they cause, look at some pictures of their roads on BBC America or somewhere: over there, they got the message some years ago. Almost NO ONE drives a car with more than 4 cylinders, and they're pretty peppy little cars at that. Only the extremely wealthy drive gas-guzzlers, and on the average day of driving you probably won't see a half-dozen of them. And also, the air is cleaner. Surely that counts for something.
Do they pay more for fuel over there than we do over here? Damn right they do. But they also understand that they simply CANNOT drive gas guzzler cars, not only because of the cost of the fuel but because of the damage it does to their environment. So, just about everyone, or at least everyone like you and me, drives what we in America would call a "small car" or a "sub-compact" - because it makes sense. Because it's smart to do so. Because they're not stupid.
And because they're not Americans, who believe it is their god-given right to drive any great huge gas-gulping monster they wish.
One day, we here in America are going to have to join the rest of the world, and stop being so selfish. You think you'll live to see it?
I'm not sure I will.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
The Return of the Native
Eight months! It's been eight months since I said anything on this site. I know there are damn few people who have been sitting on their hands waiting for my newest entry, but in any case I apologize for being away so long. I've been ill.
www.frontotemporallobedementia.blogspot.com in case you wish to know exactly HOW I was ill.
In any case, I just stopped by to express my regret that, in order to avoid voting for Mitch McConnell, something I would rather shit myself than do, I am going to have to vote for Bruce Lunsford instead. I suppose it's a sort of a commendation that Lunsford is marginally less unqualified to hold public office than McConnell, but it's a sad statement that such damning with faint praise can actually get one elected to the U.S. Senate these days. Or at least I hope it will - I may hate Lunsford, but I REALLY hate McConnell, and he just simply has to go. The contemplation of another six years of his lipless sneer and corporate welfare is just too much to consider.
That's all really - if you wish to know just HOW unfit for public office Lunsford is, google him, and read the stuff from the University of Wollongong in Australia. They've really done their homework on ol' Brucie, probably in large part because his first name is Bruce.
Nuff said. This is the epitome of the lesser of two evils. It's a close thing this time out. Good thing McMitch is such a total and unquestionable asshole and thief. And Republican.
I'll try really hard to be back here in less than another 8 months.
Oh, and P.S. Ron Lewis really IS a coward. He's dropped out of the race entirely - retired after 10 years in the House, because according to him it "wasn't fun any more". That's shorthand for "We couldn't run roughshod over the faces of the Democrats any more because we're in the minority now, and damned likely to be an even smaller minority after November 08. So I quit."
Puss. Just a total puss. Nothing else for it. I better not run into him in the Kroger's or anything. I may have to kick his ass just for the sheer bleeding hell of it.
And I'm a sick man...
www.frontotemporallobedementia.blogspot.com in case you wish to know exactly HOW I was ill.
In any case, I just stopped by to express my regret that, in order to avoid voting for Mitch McConnell, something I would rather shit myself than do, I am going to have to vote for Bruce Lunsford instead. I suppose it's a sort of a commendation that Lunsford is marginally less unqualified to hold public office than McConnell, but it's a sad statement that such damning with faint praise can actually get one elected to the U.S. Senate these days. Or at least I hope it will - I may hate Lunsford, but I REALLY hate McConnell, and he just simply has to go. The contemplation of another six years of his lipless sneer and corporate welfare is just too much to consider.
That's all really - if you wish to know just HOW unfit for public office Lunsford is, google him, and read the stuff from the University of Wollongong in Australia. They've really done their homework on ol' Brucie, probably in large part because his first name is Bruce.
Nuff said. This is the epitome of the lesser of two evils. It's a close thing this time out. Good thing McMitch is such a total and unquestionable asshole and thief. And Republican.
I'll try really hard to be back here in less than another 8 months.
Oh, and P.S. Ron Lewis really IS a coward. He's dropped out of the race entirely - retired after 10 years in the House, because according to him it "wasn't fun any more". That's shorthand for "We couldn't run roughshod over the faces of the Democrats any more because we're in the minority now, and damned likely to be an even smaller minority after November 08. So I quit."
Puss. Just a total puss. Nothing else for it. I better not run into him in the Kroger's or anything. I may have to kick his ass just for the sheer bleeding hell of it.
And I'm a sick man...
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
What IS it with Ron Lewis?
by Rich Miles
Wed. Nov 21, 2007
Though I'm originally a Louisville native, I've lived out here in Shelby County, Ron Lewis's congressional district, for more than 7 years now. That means I've had 4 chances to vote against Lewis, and I've taken every single one of those opportunities. Alas, we haven't been able to dislodge him yet, but hope still springs eternal in KY-2.
But there's something new in the air this year: Lewis actually seems to be trying to get re-elected (rather than merely trashing his opponent), for the first time since I've lived here at least. Let me explain why I say this:
In my 7 years as a KY-2 resident, I've written to Rep. Lewis probably 30 or 40 times on various issues. Added to that, I've signed an uncountable number of petitions that were delivered to Lewis among others.
In all those attempts to contact and/or express my opinion to Rep. Lewis, all I've ever received in return, before a few months ago, was a mass-mailed letter per contact, in almost every case a letter telling me that whatever I thought was wrong, and thanks very much for giving Rep. Lewis the opportunity to set me straight.
Well, that was then - when the Republicans arrogantly assumed they'd keep being re-elected for eternity - and this is now - when it's clear, at least in Kentucky, that Republicans not only CAN be, but ARE being soundly trounced at the ballot box.
So - Preacher Ron Lewis is actually making an effort, and has even learned a bit about technology. Here's how:
Since early August, I've received no fewer than 5 emails from Lewis's office, headered variously: Tired of High Gas Prices?, Of God and Country, Values in the Workplace, End Internet Taxes, and Honoring Veterans.
I also received, just yesterday as it happens, a 5X8 full-color postcard-style campaign literature piece. I hasten to point out that I am in NO way likely to be on any Repug mail or email lists, so these emes etc. were sent to the district at large when email addresses were available.
As a usually insatiably curious political junkie, I blush to admit that, after opening the first email and discovering its essentially electoral nature, I did not open the rest, nor did I give more than a cursory glance to the postcard.
But here's my point, regardless of the specific contents of any or all of these emails etc.: my and my fellow 2nd District voters' receipt of these emails and/or cards, coupled with the knowledge of Sen. McMitch's being the first senator up for re-election in 08 to hit the airwaves, in both men's cases even before they've been presented with bona fide opponents (Dr. Cassaro notwithstanding), says to me, not unreasonably I think, that the Republican candidates are reading the handwriting on the wall, and are scared spitless.
At least, I hope so. Certainly, they deserve to be scared.
So our job as Democratic operatives is to give them even more to be scared about, even more to spend their hard-earned campaign cash on, and even more reason to recognize that their arrogant, I-don't-care-what-the-people-think, Karl-Rove-and-Bush-are-GODS attitudes toward public service are kaput.
I for one cannot WAIT to see Lewis, McMitch, Bush et al. get their comeuppance, perhaps to run into them on the way to the SUI office, or behind the counter at a Mickey D's somewhere. From my admittedly subjective POV, it's long overdue, and a-comin' at them like a runaway train.
Crossposted at BluegrassRoots.org
Wed. Nov 21, 2007
Though I'm originally a Louisville native, I've lived out here in Shelby County, Ron Lewis's congressional district, for more than 7 years now. That means I've had 4 chances to vote against Lewis, and I've taken every single one of those opportunities. Alas, we haven't been able to dislodge him yet, but hope still springs eternal in KY-2.
But there's something new in the air this year: Lewis actually seems to be trying to get re-elected (rather than merely trashing his opponent), for the first time since I've lived here at least. Let me explain why I say this:
In my 7 years as a KY-2 resident, I've written to Rep. Lewis probably 30 or 40 times on various issues. Added to that, I've signed an uncountable number of petitions that were delivered to Lewis among others.
In all those attempts to contact and/or express my opinion to Rep. Lewis, all I've ever received in return, before a few months ago, was a mass-mailed letter per contact, in almost every case a letter telling me that whatever I thought was wrong, and thanks very much for giving Rep. Lewis the opportunity to set me straight.
Well, that was then - when the Republicans arrogantly assumed they'd keep being re-elected for eternity - and this is now - when it's clear, at least in Kentucky, that Republicans not only CAN be, but ARE being soundly trounced at the ballot box.
So - Preacher Ron Lewis is actually making an effort, and has even learned a bit about technology. Here's how:
Since early August, I've received no fewer than 5 emails from Lewis's office, headered variously: Tired of High Gas Prices?, Of God and Country, Values in the Workplace, End Internet Taxes, and Honoring Veterans.
I also received, just yesterday as it happens, a 5X8 full-color postcard-style campaign literature piece. I hasten to point out that I am in NO way likely to be on any Repug mail or email lists, so these emes etc. were sent to the district at large when email addresses were available.
As a usually insatiably curious political junkie, I blush to admit that, after opening the first email and discovering its essentially electoral nature, I did not open the rest, nor did I give more than a cursory glance to the postcard.
But here's my point, regardless of the specific contents of any or all of these emails etc.: my and my fellow 2nd District voters' receipt of these emails and/or cards, coupled with the knowledge of Sen. McMitch's being the first senator up for re-election in 08 to hit the airwaves, in both men's cases even before they've been presented with bona fide opponents (Dr. Cassaro notwithstanding), says to me, not unreasonably I think, that the Republican candidates are reading the handwriting on the wall, and are scared spitless.
At least, I hope so. Certainly, they deserve to be scared.
So our job as Democratic operatives is to give them even more to be scared about, even more to spend their hard-earned campaign cash on, and even more reason to recognize that their arrogant, I-don't-care-what-the-people-think, Karl-Rove-and-Bush-are-GODS attitudes toward public service are kaput.
I for one cannot WAIT to see Lewis, McMitch, Bush et al. get their comeuppance, perhaps to run into them on the way to the SUI office, or behind the counter at a Mickey D's somewhere. From my admittedly subjective POV, it's long overdue, and a-comin' at them like a runaway train.
Crossposted at BluegrassRoots.org
Friday, October 05, 2007
Message to Congress: Override the SCHIP Veto, or Disband and Go Home
by Rich Miles
October 5, 2007
In writing this article, I'm going to operate on the assumption that the reader is aware that George W. Bush has finally and unmistakably signaled his utter contempt for America and the American people by vetoing the recent bill, called the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which would call for an increase of approximately $20 to $23 billion dollars over 5 years. If you don't know the details, read here.
Now that we've all arrived on the same page, let me make my point unmistakably clear:
Congresspersons of both Houses and both parties, if you do not vote to override this veto, only the fourth of the Bushevik administration, but the third to assault the basic right to good health for some segment of Americans, you will forfeit any chance you ever had to rein in this Reign of Terror of a presidency.
You know - or you should know, Congressperson or Senator - that Bush's entire modus operandi is centered around power: the gaining of it and the keeping of it for Bush and for anyone he deems worthy, by any means whatever, fair or foul (usually foul), and so far, for more than 6 1/2 years, he has wielded it virtually unchecked on every matter in which he has sought to do so. His only defeats, few as they were, he and Karl Rove managed to spin into "I meant to do that" errorless errors.
The Republican-led Congress had no wish to pull him up short, because they were sharing in the spoils in various ways, not least by keeping their seats in the Congress. And now, the Democratic-led Congress remains SO very frightened that someone is going to call them weak that they ARE weak, and the country drifts rudderless except for a madman of a captain and his equally-or-more insane underlings, who seem collectively determined to lead the ship of state onto the treacherous rocks of a war with Iran, among many other completely ridiculous and ineffectual and sometimes dangerous initiatives.
And still, as has so often been the case, the will of the people is not only thwarted, it's never even addressed - simply ignored. 72% of polled Americans WANT this legislation. It's passed by Congress but vetoed by Bush. And unless the veto is overturned, Bush gets even more reinforcement for his belief that he is infallible. Because so far, as far as can be seen in any consequences for Bush in SIX AND A HALF YEARS, HE'S RIGHT!!!!
So to reach for some sort of overarching meaning here, let me say this:
I BEG you, Congress: override the SCHIP veto. If you don't yank the chain on this madman NOW, you will never have another chance. You can never be taken seriously as a deliberative body again, and no matter how many bills Bush may veto, you will not be able to assert yourselves, because you, members from BOTH parties, will have completely lost the confidence of the people of this country.
You're almost there now.
Override the veto, or pack up and go home. Nothing else for it, lads and lasses. Be useful in the restoration of the Republic, or just give up and accept your obsolescence and your lack of courage, and enjoy a few rounds of golf or something, maybe some shuffleboard.
I've always operated, and history bears it out, on the assumption that America will recover from almost any wound inflicted on it from within or without. This time I'm not so sure.
====================================================================
Monday, August 27, 2007
ATTN: Dems - Stop being such WUSSES!!!
by Rich Miles
Had a little conversation with some folks over at Salon.com the other day. Here's what they said:
Hey, Dems: Run against Bush -- and toughen up -- or lose in '08
And here's what I said in reply:
http://letters.salon.com/news/feature/2007/08/27/westen/permalink/ea4e004edf30a44c0665abfb58ecac6c.html
Had a little conversation with some folks over at Salon.com the other day. Here's what they said:
Hey, Dems: Run against Bush -- and toughen up -- or lose in '08
And here's what I said in reply:
Wow...so much to agree with
Let's start with this little gem:
Elections are won and lost on associations, and right now, unless there's another terrorist attack on our soil in the next 18 months, the connection to George Bush is going to be a tremendous liability for any candidate ...
What a sad state America has reached, when it's even conceivable that our government could do such a thing - create such an attack intentionally. But the trust is lost, for me at least, and it will be a long time coming back if ever. Thus I can't say with certainty that there's no way this could happen - and neither can any of you.
I have said for years that the reason, in a nutshell, that Dems keep losing is that they are too polite. It's a broad generalization, but I believe it's apt. We have for so long - I'm talking 40 years or more - tried not to stoop to the level of the Reps' nastiness, and in so doing have allowed the nastiness to go unanswered and thus to become part of the national meme. It's as if we thought that if we just ignored the ill-bred, rude little bastards long enough, that they would go away.
I think we see now, and have been seeing for at least as long as the Karl Rove era, how well that belief structure works.
Westen mentions Al Gore and the 2000 debates - specifically, I remember Bush trotting out that old "Gore claims to have invented the Internet" crapola, and Gore did not respond to it, except possibly with an audible sigh. Surely, said most Americans who saw it or heard about it, if it were untrue Gore wouldn't have allowed Bush to get away with saying it, right?
And thus, due to lack of response, that story became part of the national mythos, and for a fair whack of Americans, remains so to this day.
Westen offers a scenario for Obama in which he might get the Coulter beast off his back, and perhaps shame her into stopping the schoolyard mocking of his middle name - let me take it a step further, and posit that what *I* want, and what I sense quite a number of my leftish colleagues want, is a general sense of the Dem candidates and Members of both Houses of Congress to start standing up to the Rep slime machine, to start, in essence, saying "STFU" to quite a lot of the crap the R's are putting out. But they won't, except at a very low level and very VERY occasionally.
And THAT is what I'm sick of, THAT is why Congress's approval rating is lower even than Bush's - I am overweeningly weary of seeing my party's leaders TAKING THE SHIT LYING DOWN YET AGAIN.
In addition to the current batch of freshman Dems mentioned in this story, see also the actions of Rep. John Yarmuth (D-KY). He's not my congressman - I'm one district over and am stuck with Ron Lewis (R-Wingnuttia) - but I wish he were.
OK, to avoid going to book length, here's the story, Dems: good manners ain't gonna feed the bulldog.
I know it's arguable that the very qualities that caused you to choose to be a Dem to begin with might also be the very reasons that being tough in public discourse is so distasteful to you (and conversely, those qualities that make a person a Repug are exactly the ones that allow them to use such disgusting rhetoric etc. with no apparent pangs of conscience.)
But listen: if you get nothing else from this article, and my comment, and that of the others who are before and after me, get this:
You MUST learn to be sonsabitches when dealing with the Reps, or you will cease to exist as a political entity.
And so might America as a nation. Or at least as the nation we've thought we were for 200+ years.
We, the voters who put you there, have already given you permission to be SOB's. We can always fire you, as easily as we hired you, if you won't. November 08 ain't that far away.
And you know I ain't kiddin'.
Permalink to this Salon comment:http://letters.salon.com/news/feature/2007/08/27/westen/permalink/ea4e004edf30a44c0665abfb58ecac6c.html
Sunday, August 05, 2007
Don't Forget these names
by Rich Miles
August 5, 2007
UPDATE with names of Dem Senators below.
I'm not the only one posting this. That's a good thing. Here are the names of the 41 Democratic members of Congress and the 16 Dem senators who voted for the dismemberment of the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, also known as S.1927, the black-comedically named "Protect America Act of 2007."
All the congresspersons and several of the senators are up for re-election next year.
DO NOT FORGET THESE NAMES! FORGETTING IS WHAT THEY'RE COUNTING ON. NEVER MIND THE REPUBLICANS - WE EXPECT THEM TO BE TRAITORS TO AMERICA. JUST REMEMBER THESE DEMOCRATS.
BLUE DOGS BE DAMNED.
In Congress:
Jason Altmire (4th Pennsylvania)
John Barrow (12th Georgia) Blue Dog
Melissa Bean (8th Illinois) Blue Dog
Dan Boren (2nd Oklahoma) Blue Dog
Leonard Boswell (3rd Iowa)
Allen Boyd (2nd Florida) Blue Dog
Christopher Carney (10th Pennsylvania) Blue Dog
Ben Chandler (6th Kentucky) Blue Dog - this sonofabitch is from MY STATE. He's not going back to Congress in 2009. Count on it, Ben ol' son!
Rep. Jim Cooper (5th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Jim Costa (20th California) Blue Dog
Bud Cramer (5th Alabama) Blue Dog
Henry Cuellar (28th Texas)
Artur Davis (7th Alabama)
Lincoln Davis (4th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Joe Donnelly (2nd Indiana) Blue Dog
Chet Edwards (17th Texas)
Brad Ellsworth (8th Indiana) Blue Dog
Bob Etheridge (North Carolina)
Bart Gordon (6th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (South Dakota) Blue Dog
Brian Higgins (27th New York)
Baron Hill (9th Indiana) Blue Dog
Nick Lampson (23rd Texas) Blue Dog
Daniel Lipinski (3rd Illinois)
Jim Marshall (8th Georgia) Blue Dog
Jim Matheson (2nd Utah) Blue Dog
Mike McIntyre (7th North Carolina) Blue Dog
Charlie Melancon (3rd Louisiana) Blue Dog
Harry Mitchell (5th Arizona)
Colin Peterson (7th Minnesota) Blue Dog
Earl Pomeroy (North Dakota) Blue Dog
Ciro Rodriguez (23rd Texas) Blue Dog
Mike Ross (4th Arkansas) Blue Dog
John Salazar (3rd Colorado) Blue Dog
Heath Shuler (11th North Carolina) Blue Dog
Vic Snyder (2nd Arkansas)
Zachary Space (18th Ohio) Blue Dog
John Tanner (8th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Gene Taylor (4th Mississippi) Blue Dog
Timothy Walz (1st Minnesota)
Charles A. Wilson (6th Ohio) Blue Dog
In the Senate:
(The Senate vote was 60-28. Both parties had agreed to require 60 votes for passage. That means that any ONE Democratic Senator who voted Aye could have defeated this bill by voting Nay.)
I will post the names of the Senators who voted for this bill as soon as I can find them. Not sure why I'm having so much trouble finding them, since the Senate vote took place before the House vote and those were easy to find.
If you have them, post them or a link as a comment here, please. Thanks.
Roll Call vote #309, 110th Congress 1st Session, not available on THOMAS as of Sunday Aug. 5 at 5:00pm.
UPDATE: Found the Senate slugspawn: There are some REALLY disappointing names on this list:
US Senate: Evan Bayh (Indiana); Tom Carper (Delaware); Bob Casey (Pennsylvania); Kent Conrad (North Dakota); Dianne Feinstein (California); Daniel Inouye (Hawai‘i); Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota); Mary Landrieu (Louisiana); Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas); Claire McCaskill (Missouri); Barbara Mikulski (Maryland); Bill Nelson (Florida); Ben Nelson (Nebraska); Mark Pryor (Arkansas); Ken Salazar (Colorado); Jim Webb (Virginia).
August 5, 2007
UPDATE with names of Dem Senators below.
I'm not the only one posting this. That's a good thing. Here are the names of the 41 Democratic members of Congress and the 16 Dem senators who voted for the dismemberment of the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, also known as S.1927, the black-comedically named "Protect America Act of 2007."
All the congresspersons and several of the senators are up for re-election next year.
DO NOT FORGET THESE NAMES! FORGETTING IS WHAT THEY'RE COUNTING ON. NEVER MIND THE REPUBLICANS - WE EXPECT THEM TO BE TRAITORS TO AMERICA. JUST REMEMBER THESE DEMOCRATS.
BLUE DOGS BE DAMNED.
In Congress:
Jason Altmire (4th Pennsylvania)
John Barrow (12th Georgia) Blue Dog
Melissa Bean (8th Illinois) Blue Dog
Dan Boren (2nd Oklahoma) Blue Dog
Leonard Boswell (3rd Iowa)
Allen Boyd (2nd Florida) Blue Dog
Christopher Carney (10th Pennsylvania) Blue Dog
Ben Chandler (6th Kentucky) Blue Dog - this sonofabitch is from MY STATE. He's not going back to Congress in 2009. Count on it, Ben ol' son!
Rep. Jim Cooper (5th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Jim Costa (20th California) Blue Dog
Bud Cramer (5th Alabama) Blue Dog
Henry Cuellar (28th Texas)
Artur Davis (7th Alabama)
Lincoln Davis (4th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Joe Donnelly (2nd Indiana) Blue Dog
Chet Edwards (17th Texas)
Brad Ellsworth (8th Indiana) Blue Dog
Bob Etheridge (North Carolina)
Bart Gordon (6th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (South Dakota) Blue Dog
Brian Higgins (27th New York)
Baron Hill (9th Indiana) Blue Dog
Nick Lampson (23rd Texas) Blue Dog
Daniel Lipinski (3rd Illinois)
Jim Marshall (8th Georgia) Blue Dog
Jim Matheson (2nd Utah) Blue Dog
Mike McIntyre (7th North Carolina) Blue Dog
Charlie Melancon (3rd Louisiana) Blue Dog
Harry Mitchell (5th Arizona)
Colin Peterson (7th Minnesota) Blue Dog
Earl Pomeroy (North Dakota) Blue Dog
Ciro Rodriguez (23rd Texas) Blue Dog
Mike Ross (4th Arkansas) Blue Dog
John Salazar (3rd Colorado) Blue Dog
Heath Shuler (11th North Carolina) Blue Dog
Vic Snyder (2nd Arkansas)
Zachary Space (18th Ohio) Blue Dog
John Tanner (8th Tennessee) Blue Dog
Gene Taylor (4th Mississippi) Blue Dog
Timothy Walz (1st Minnesota)
Charles A. Wilson (6th Ohio) Blue Dog
In the Senate:
(The Senate vote was 60-28. Both parties had agreed to require 60 votes for passage. That means that any ONE Democratic Senator who voted Aye could have defeated this bill by voting Nay.)
I will post the names of the Senators who voted for this bill as soon as I can find them. Not sure why I'm having so much trouble finding them, since the Senate vote took place before the House vote and those were easy to find.
If you have them, post them or a link as a comment here, please. Thanks.
Roll Call vote #309, 110th Congress 1st Session, not available on THOMAS as of Sunday Aug. 5 at 5:00pm.
UPDATE: Found the Senate slugspawn: There are some REALLY disappointing names on this list:
US Senate: Evan Bayh (Indiana); Tom Carper (Delaware); Bob Casey (Pennsylvania); Kent Conrad (North Dakota); Dianne Feinstein (California); Daniel Inouye (Hawai‘i); Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota); Mary Landrieu (Louisiana); Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas); Claire McCaskill (Missouri); Barbara Mikulski (Maryland); Bill Nelson (Florida); Ben Nelson (Nebraska); Mark Pryor (Arkansas); Ken Salazar (Colorado); Jim Webb (Virginia).
Saturday, August 04, 2007
The Day Hope Dies and Despotism Thrives
by Rich Miles
Aug 4, 2007
Senate Gives in on Wiretapping. 16 Dems Go Along.
TWO UPDATES BELOW - Second update is to several links explaining this "legislation"
Was talking to a friend the other day, someone who, while of a progressive/liberal turn of mind, didn't USED to be very politically active.
Anyway, in the course of a conversation about how the Bushies seem dead set on world domination and fascism, she brought a tear to my eye with just one sentence.
She said, "I just get so tired of the bad guys winning all the time."
Even after the much-ballyhooed "November revolution" last year; even after the supposed "good guys" wrested control of not one but BOTH Houses of Congress from the forces of Darkness that had held sway over all for 6 years; even after it had started to appear that the People had awakened from their long slumber, and their elected representatives would live up to their obligation to serve those who elected them - even after all that, things like the top link keep happening.
Our alleged "good guys" keep knuckling under to the neocons. Even some of our totemic heroes, like Claire McCaskill and Jim Webb, voted FOR this extension of even greater tyranny to the Bush administration.
Got it? They made evil LEGAL. It used to be ILlegal, but they made it LEGAL. They did it just because the Bush center of evil told to them to.
So now, one has to ask:
What hope can there be? Who can we turn to now, when even those we elected to save America haven't the courage to stand up to this batch of unalloyed evil that is the Bush White House?
How can the good guys EVER win again?
Or perhaps the real question is - are there any good guys left?
UPDATE: The House of Representatives passed the bill.
They politicked it absolutely perfectly. Beat the ASSES of the Democrats, practically (and in 41 cases, actually) forced them each and severally to press that Yea button.
How long is this going to go on? How long is the minority going to keep calling the shots? This bill could have been defeated if all the Democrats had voted against it - but 41 so-called "librul Dems" voted FOR giving this corrupt and fascistic administration even MORE power to fuck us.
Could someone please tell me: why is this new law NOT the same thing as the White House saying, "We know Alberto Gonzales is a total toady and fuckup. So we're going to give him vast new powers to spy on the American people"?
I mean, is there any other way to interpret this? And is there any other way to see the whole episode than as another nail in the coffin of the U.S. Constitution?
UPDATE 2: Links to the shit that hit the fan:
More Surveillance: No, Don't Stop to Think
It's Official, We Are a Police State (written by a former citizen of the Soviet Union)
The Stench of Weakness Pervades our Capital this Weekend
There are or will be more...
Aug 4, 2007
Senate Gives in on Wiretapping. 16 Dems Go Along.
TWO UPDATES BELOW - Second update is to several links explaining this "legislation"
Was talking to a friend the other day, someone who, while of a progressive/liberal turn of mind, didn't USED to be very politically active.
Anyway, in the course of a conversation about how the Bushies seem dead set on world domination and fascism, she brought a tear to my eye with just one sentence.
She said, "I just get so tired of the bad guys winning all the time."
Even after the much-ballyhooed "November revolution" last year; even after the supposed "good guys" wrested control of not one but BOTH Houses of Congress from the forces of Darkness that had held sway over all for 6 years; even after it had started to appear that the People had awakened from their long slumber, and their elected representatives would live up to their obligation to serve those who elected them - even after all that, things like the top link keep happening.
Our alleged "good guys" keep knuckling under to the neocons. Even some of our totemic heroes, like Claire McCaskill and Jim Webb, voted FOR this extension of even greater tyranny to the Bush administration.
Got it? They made evil LEGAL. It used to be ILlegal, but they made it LEGAL. They did it just because the Bush center of evil told to them to.
So now, one has to ask:
What hope can there be? Who can we turn to now, when even those we elected to save America haven't the courage to stand up to this batch of unalloyed evil that is the Bush White House?
How can the good guys EVER win again?
Or perhaps the real question is - are there any good guys left?
UPDATE: The House of Representatives passed the bill.
They politicked it absolutely perfectly. Beat the ASSES of the Democrats, practically (and in 41 cases, actually) forced them each and severally to press that Yea button.
How long is this going to go on? How long is the minority going to keep calling the shots? This bill could have been defeated if all the Democrats had voted against it - but 41 so-called "librul Dems" voted FOR giving this corrupt and fascistic administration even MORE power to fuck us.
Could someone please tell me: why is this new law NOT the same thing as the White House saying, "We know Alberto Gonzales is a total toady and fuckup. So we're going to give him vast new powers to spy on the American people"?
I mean, is there any other way to interpret this? And is there any other way to see the whole episode than as another nail in the coffin of the U.S. Constitution?
UPDATE 2: Links to the shit that hit the fan:
More Surveillance: No, Don't Stop to Think
It's Official, We Are a Police State (written by a former citizen of the Soviet Union)
The Stench of Weakness Pervades our Capital this Weekend
There are or will be more...
Thursday, June 28, 2007
If at First you Don't Screw Up Badly Enough, Try Again
by Rich Miles
June 28, 2007
So here's what the WaPo enlightens us with this morning:
Bush Plans Envoy to Islamic Nations
Hmmm...this whole concept seems awfully familiar. Where have I heard of this before?
Oh yeah...Karen Hughes named to State Dept. job
I mean, you really gotta read this. It's the exact same idea, even in some parts the exact same words used in describing it. Almost 2 years ago.
They really do think we're this stupid. They're right a lot of time about a lot of the country, but still...it's galling.
What's really mystifying about this WaPo piece, though, is that the writer, Michael Fletcher, didn't know about Hughes' prior effort, or at the very most charitable, didn't find it worthy of mention.
Just as an idle guess, you s'pose the reason the first time out didn't take was that Bush sent a woman into one of the most sexually-segregated and gynephobic cultures on Earth? Never mind whether she had the smarts and the experience for such a mission (she didn't, but it had nothing to do with her gender) - why would you send someone as a supposed envoy for peace who would, by her mere appearance, inflame half of her audience and enrage the other half? Does that seem like a consideration worth taking? Or am I just being picky?
I'm just sayin', maybe that might have required a bit more thought in the first place?
Damn, I can't wait to be rid of these morons. January 09, c'mon!!!
June 28, 2007
So here's what the WaPo enlightens us with this morning:
Bush Plans Envoy to Islamic Nations
Hmmm...this whole concept seems awfully familiar. Where have I heard of this before?
Oh yeah...Karen Hughes named to State Dept. job
I mean, you really gotta read this. It's the exact same idea, even in some parts the exact same words used in describing it. Almost 2 years ago.
They really do think we're this stupid. They're right a lot of time about a lot of the country, but still...it's galling.
What's really mystifying about this WaPo piece, though, is that the writer, Michael Fletcher, didn't know about Hughes' prior effort, or at the very most charitable, didn't find it worthy of mention.
Just as an idle guess, you s'pose the reason the first time out didn't take was that Bush sent a woman into one of the most sexually-segregated and gynephobic cultures on Earth? Never mind whether she had the smarts and the experience for such a mission (she didn't, but it had nothing to do with her gender) - why would you send someone as a supposed envoy for peace who would, by her mere appearance, inflame half of her audience and enrage the other half? Does that seem like a consideration worth taking? Or am I just being picky?
I'm just sayin', maybe that might have required a bit more thought in the first place?
Damn, I can't wait to be rid of these morons. January 09, c'mon!!!
Friday, June 22, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
June 22, 2007
(Originally posted in a slightly edited form as a comment on BluegrassReport.org)
(Updates below 1 - 2)
Without further introduction, from today's WaPo on this matter:
...Vice President Cheney's office has refused to comply with an executive order governing the handling of classified information for the past four years and recently tried to abolish the office that sought to enforce those rules, according to documents released by a congressional committee yesterday.
Since 2003, the vice president's staff has not cooperated with an office at the National Archives and Records Administration charged with making sure the executive branch protects classified information. Cheney aides have not filed reports on their possession of classified data and at one point blocked an inspection of their office. After the Archives office pressed the matter, the documents say, Cheney's staff this year proposed eliminating it.
(emphasis added)
============================================
To all the right-wingnuts who visit and occasionally comment on this site:
Where do we go from here? I mean, is this just OK with you, that this sort of lawlessness in the highest offices of our land go not only unpunished but virtually unremarked for nearly FOUR YEARS?
Will Pres. Bush call Cheney down on this, and fire him if he refuses to comply? (See update #2 below for the answer.)
Will the Gonzales Justice Dept. cite him, and charge him if he refuses yet again to comply with the law?
Will the stacked, 5-4 in-favor-of-Bush-as-God Supreme Court find constitutional fault with his recalcitrance?
Or will the just-barely-Democratic Congress find the votes, or more to the point the political courage to impeach an Executive Branch official who flaunts the law in this way?
Where do we, the people, go for redress when our leaders are not only lawbreakers but flagrant and admitted lawbreakers, who protect each other at the grave expense of our democracy?
This is the box that the Bush administration has built for our country: they have so successfully loaded our government and our courts with their friends and fellow-travelers that there IS no redress. Cheney will almost certainly NOT be called to task for this unconscionable breaking of the law, and no one can do anything about it.
And some folks, mostly right-wing nutcases who seem incapable of seeing what damage is being done to America and Americans on a daily basis, but also a few people who see themselves as "thinkers", think that's just A-OK. They think it will never backfire on them, and that the government that takes their civil rights from them is "protecting" them by doing so. They never seem to imagine what it would be like if some of these "protections" were used against them.
And so our nation sinks ever lower into the pit of despotism, and there are still folks who cheer the descent and those who are taking us there.
Seriously, folks, you on the right who think all this is OK: do you really want this - lawbreakers in positions of power - to be America's message to the world?
Never mind, I fear your answer would only depress me further.
In closing, let me offer this from Salon's Glenn Greenwald. Yes, he's a liberal - but that doesn't make him wrong. At least not automatically. If you still think Bush is a strong and steadfast and righteous leader, read this, with at least a half-open mind. See if there isn't something you can learn from it.
A tragic legacy: How a good vs. evil mentality destroyed the Bush presidency
The America Bush has created is NOT the America I grew up in, and is most assuredly not the America I wish to die in.
UPDATE 1: Cheney DID NOT say he is No Longer a Member of the Executive Branch: The Real Story is Much Worse
UPDATE 2: Bush claims oversight exemption too