In the same breath, Bush speaks of a) working with Democrats, healing the nation, & reaching out to those that didn't vote for him; and b) spending "political capital" that he earned in the election due to "the people hav[ing] spoken".
Ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased to present an artist's rendition of Bush enacting the above two goals simultaneously:
Thank you. You're too kind.
Wed, Nov. 3rd, 2004, 11:52 am
America should be ashamed of itself.
Sat, Sep. 11th, 2004, 11:45 pm
Long time, no post.
I've been one busy bee lately at my new job. I haven't really been online much at all. Nor have I been keeping up on the news like I used to. That being said, the end of the world is nigh.A 2.5 mile mushroom cloud was reported in North Korea near the Chinese border.
Okay, so it isn't really
the end of the world. It's just some pretty fucked up news. Everybody already figured North Korea had the bomb anyways; I'm surprised at how shocked I am to hear a probable confirmation.
I have to ask myself though, what bothers me most about the situation?....
a) We started picking a fight with Iraq who at the time we knew Iraq might, maybe, kinda sorta could have had weapons of mass destruction related program activities; North Korea stood up and declared that they really did constitute a threat; we ignored them and invaded Iraq anyways.
b) North Korea is working on warheads/missiles that may or may not be able to reach Alaska/the US mainland. (Risk to us.)
c) They test flew a missile over Japan a few years back. They could hit other highly populated areas such as Seoul as well. (Risk to the Japanese and others/risk to us through the world's economy.)
d) I'm hearing about the story three days late by word of mouth, and the source for the information isn't the CIA, or Sandy Berger, Tom Ridge, or anyone who should be warning me- it's coming from a foreign news agency.
e) It's unconfirmed. I doubt a guy could light a cigarette in North Korea without the CIA knowing about it thanks to all the friggin' satellites we have and whatnot. Am I really supposed to believe that something as falsifiable as a hugeungous radiation-filled nuclear blast could possibly be confused with a fucking forest fire?! I remember when Pakistan tested their first nuke, I saw that shit on the evening news right away. I remember seeing satellites images from huge forests fires all over the world- from Florida to China. What gives?
I'm torn between the last two.
This all might just be a result of my not keeping up with shit, but I haven't heard word one about this from say, an elected (or appointed) official of any sort. This is all very unsettling. Anybody out there know anything?
passed the House today with a vote of 233 to 194
. What is H.R.3313? It is an attempt by (mostly) social conservative Republicans to "contain" homosexual marriage. See, gay folk are getting married in Massachusetts. Under the full faith & credit clause of the Constitution, marriages from one state must be respected in any other state. (As should drivers licenses and other contracts.) Under the Defense of Marriage Act (and several state laws such as California's Knight Initiative) states don't necessarily have
to recognize other states homosexual marriages. This undermines the FF&CC though. Obviously, it is only a matter of time before a gay, married couple moves from Massachusetts to say, California. Lawsuits will ensue. The FF&CC and the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment will come out on top, and recognition of homosexual marriages will be "forced upon" all fifty states. I know this; social conservatives know this- this is where H.R.3313 steps in.
H.R.3313 will ban the Supreme Court from hearing cases regarding the DoMA. To put it another way, the House of Representatives narrowly voted in the exact opposite of that whole "checks and balances" notion. The sheer gall of these representatives to try and strip jurisdiction of laws from the Supreme Court is nothing if not appalling. The slippery slope they risk of course, is that under their reasoning, Congress can now strip the Supreme Court of jurisdiction in any hot-button issue. How would these right-wingers feel if the Supreme Court was stripped of it's jurisdiction over gun laws? Or abortion? Or anything these fuckwit hypocrites disagree with? They'd decry how liberals had no respect for our system or Constitution. They'd say these people weren't fit to serve in Congress. They'd give ammo for Rush Limbaugh to bitch about for years to come. Truth be told though, they'd be right.
The issue has not yet come up in the Senate, and it certainly hasn't been signed into law yet. I don't really think it will be though. The Senate usually acts a little more responsibly than the House with regards to unconstitutional laws. (Thus the aforementioned slippery slope will likely never become a real risk.) Additionally, even if this thing were to pass both houses, and become law, it's plainly unconstitutional, as the Supreme Court's very existence (as spelled out in Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution) would be called into question. It would delay the inevitable acceptance of homosexual marriages, but would not prevent it. (You know, if it weren't such an important issue, I'd think of the social conservatives quest to kill gay marriage as somewhat quaint and Quixotic.)
The Washington Post has a good article on the situation here
. (registration is unfortunately required.)Current Music: The Simpsons- "Amendment to be"
Fri, Jul. 23rd, 2004, 09:48 pm
Before I get to my question, It's probably wise to make a disclaimer. This is a purely hypothetical question; I don't want any
politicians to get killed in any manner. I don't think the following is probable; I'm just curious.
That being said...
What would happen if Kerry died (by natural means or foul, it doesn't matter) before becoming the official Democratic nominee? I can think of four possibilities. A) His running mate (Edwards) takes the slot. B) The second place candidate (Dean, I would guess) takes the slot. C) Emergency election. D) Kerry's corpse runs, and Bush will risk getting beaten by a dead guy, much the way Ashcroft did.
Anybody have an educated take on what would occur at the convention? (Besides an overly long video-montage/eulogy, that is.) My guess is that since the delegates have final say, they would vote Edwards into the lead slot. They would rationalize it people wanted Kerry over Dean, and Kerry picked Edwards as his backup should the unthinkable happen. Additionally, an emergency popular vote is likely unfeasible, and running a corpse for president isn't a great strategy. The DNC would smooth out formalities with the various Secretaries of State later.
My guess sounds reasonable, but I'm curious to know if anybody knows for real what would happen. Is there any precedent for this sort of thing? Established rules? Anything?
On a more sardonic note, this is pretty funny
. Especially if you are into real time strategy games such as Starcraft.
Man do my feet hurt. Last night I decided to wear my brand-new, one day old pair of 20-hole Doc Martens to Clockwork
. Youch. I must be going soft or something; being coddled by jungle boots. I haven't broken in a new pair of Doc's since I was in high school. Hopefully, I'll have these fuckers
subjugated to my will
broken in by the time I go clubbing again.
Speaking of painful stuff, Open Secrets has this handy chart
showing political contributions by Enron execs. Youch. Or... it would be, "youch," IF THE FREAKIN' NEWS WOULD PUBLICIZED THIS SHIT BETTER!!! ARRRG! *phwew* Where was I? Oh yes. I've seen a blurb or two saying something along the lines of, "Dems say that Repubs are in bed with Enron execs; Repubs say that Ken Lay, et al have contributed to both parties; CNN has found that they contribute more to Repubs." Okay. That's factual and all, but holy jeebus, this should be a story in and of itself; not just some quick blurb! Where's the outrage, dammit? Where's the outcry? Why did it take so long to indict Ken Lay?
On a lighter note, I have definitive proof that Edwards is not
gay. Yes, yes, I know he has/had kids, and I know he's married, but with [only slightly photoshopped] images like the one on the right, there's a seed of doubt- hell, even Michael Jackson got married and had kids! So. I am happy to put this rumor to rest once and for all with this report
from CNN. The proof? Edwards takes his wife to frickin' Wendy's for their anniversary every year! Yes, the fast food chain. Only a straight man could come up with an idea as brilliant as that. Shit, I think I'll try that out sometime; it's bound to work great! I'll bet he gets his wife power tools for her birthday and then acts all surprised when she doesn't use them.
You know there are several update-worthy things going on in the world right now. Anti-gay marriage amendment failure
, weapons of mass murder
, Florida scrapping it's non-voter list
, Republican efforts to protect the DoMA from the Supreme Court (see gay marriage article), Coach Ditka running for the Senate
, etc. I'm in too damned good a mood to post about them right now though. I just got a bitchin' new job. I start on the 2nd, will get a buttload of benefits (comparatively), one and a half times the salary of my current occupation, and a normal freakin' work-week! Woo hoo!
So. In keeping with both the political theme of this blog, and
my sudden wealth of good vibes, I am happy to post the following stolen comic:
Arrg. I don't go in for that whole quiz, post, pass it on thing; this one is actually kinda interesting though. SelectSmart.com
has a nifty presidential candidate selector. It asks you a few weighted questions and shows you how well you match up with various candidates. I unchecked the boxes that disallow third party, unannounced, and withdrawn candidates. Here are my results.
1. Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%)
2. Cobb, David - Green Party (85%)
3. Nader, Ralph - Independent (79%)
4. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (72%)
5. Brown, Walt - Socialist Party (71%)
6. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (71%)
7. Kucinich, Rep. Dennis, OH - Democrat (70%)
8. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (66%)
9. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (66%)
10. Clark, Retired General Wesley K., AR - Democrat (64%)
11. Moseley-Braun, Former Senator Carol, IL - Democrat (62%)
12. Gephardt, Rep. Dick, MO - Democrat (56%)
13. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat (44%)
14. Lieberman, Senator Joe, CT - Democrat (42%)
15. Badnarik, Michael - Libertarian (32%)
16. Bush, President George W. - Republican (15%)
17. Hagelin, Dr. John - Natural Law (14%)
18. Peroutka, Michael - Constitution Party (12%)
Strange stuff, really. I'm glad I'm closer to Cobb than Nader, but yikes, that's a little close for comfort. It's a little odd to see Clark so low on my list; lower even than Kerry! Strange also, to see Sharpton so high on my list. Speaking of strange, I find it odd that LaRouche is even on
my list at all! (I'd totally vote for Lieberman over LaRouche.) It's nice to see Dean so high on my list-- NYAAAAAARRRRG! (Speaking of Dean, I've got to go catch up on his little debate with Nader...)
Anywho, if you want to take the test yourself, click here
When I was in high school, and even fairly recently, I would occasionally come across an apartment or office or even a school building with a sign hung on a fairly inconspicuous wall reading something to the extent of, "CAUTION: ASBESTOS- TRY NOT TO FUCKING BREATHE". It always struck my as funny that something that I'm told is extremely dangerous, such as asbestos would be present in a place as innocent and protected as a school. I would ask myself, "Why don't they do something about that?" Of course, I knew the answer- there wasn't enough cash, and politicians didn't give two shits about helping kids not get cancer.
Today, I saw this article:
"WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate's cloakrooms and press gallery reopened on Wednesday, a day after they had been closed because asbestos was detected in the adjacent Senate chamber... A piece of the fiber was discovered in the chamber's ventilation system Sunday night as work on an asbestos abatement project was ending..."
So... It's okay to leave asbestos in schools for years at a time (in an earthquake-prone region, mind you), but if traces of asbestos are found in or near where the rich and powerful hang out, we need to drop everything, close up shop, and nip this thing in the bud post-haste. Yeah. No money for schools and kids, but plenty for politicians. Now that's what I call good governance.
I'd like to take this moment to recommend a bold new policy on asbestos. I call it the Politician-Tied-to-a-Chair-Initiative. We tie one politician to a chair inside every asbestos riddled school; the school gets fixed quickly; we stick him in say, an asbestos riddled hospital; wash, rinse, repeat. Buildings get fixed, less kids get exposed to carcinogens, and politicians would finally be able to say that they are doing something for our kids in school. Everybody wins.
We could apply the Politician-Tied-to-a-Chair-Initiative policy to all manner of foreign and domestic problems. Environmental issues? Simply tie a politician to a chair next to a coal-burning plant in Texas; watch how air purity laws coincidentally pass. Too many jobs being out-sourced to China? Well, all you have to do is tie a politician to a chair inside a room filled with big, angry, formerly-union-employed machinists; problem (soon to be) solved. Humanitarian crisis in Sudan? Tie a politician to a chair in Darfur province and just see how quick those militias are put in check. The possibilities are nearly endless!
Tue, Jul. 6th, 2004, 08:02 pm
The New York Post, in all of it's ineffable wisdom, printed the headline to the right. Yay! That's some great journalism boys, keep up the good work.
How on earth did they make the call for Gephardt? I mean, honestly, I know he was on the "short-list" and all, but did anyone seriously think he was going to make the final cut? Let's just ignore for a moment that Edwards could be seen coming a mile away as the final pick. (He even looks
like a VP fer crissakes!) I could see how if one were to read into things a bit much, one might have called it for Vilsack, as he was on the short-list too, and he & Kerry did
just make a campaign stop together; but Gephardt?! He's an old Washington crony who would only appeal to labor unions and doesn't bring a damn thing else to the table with regards to winning the election. Sure he's well qualified for the gig, but he'd be more of a liability than he would be worth in the election.
Oh well. I'm sure the N.Y. Post has printed worse. They aren't exactly a shining beacon of excellence in journalism, after all.
Congrats to Edwards by the way. He's an excellent balance to Kerry. Blue-blood/populist; north-easterner/southerner; walking corpse/energetic speaker; old fart/youngish looking; Washington crony/fresh young face; etc, you get the point-- In fact, looking over this list I just wrote I have to wonder just how in the hell Edwards lost to an asshat like Kerry... (asshat/non-asshat- a perfect balance!)