Over at Boots & Sabers they have been running a series of posts where people pick their favorite song by different bands. Today, they take it one step further with a deserted island post.
The game is that you are stuck on a deserted island with plenty of electricity and a good stereo system. In one version you are allowed to have three songs and only three songs. In another version you are allowed three albums - double albums allowed but no greatest hits compilations or box sets. And in a third version you are allowed the entire discography of three artists.
I decided to combine the three versions and make them cumulative so that I could get the most musical variety on my little island as possible.
Here was my answer:
The complete discographies of:
The Beatles
Bing Crosby
Duke Ellington
The Albums:
Exile on Main Street - The Rolling Stones
The Sun Sessions - Elvis Presley
Modern Sounds in Country Music - Ray Charles
Songs:
Like A Rolling Stone - Bob Dylan
Every Little Thing She Does Is Magic - The Police
The Sixth Symphony (Pastoral) - Beethoven
That still leaves out a lot, doesn’t it.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Warning shot
Jonathan Gurwitz can see what’s coming. The Republicans are heading for a major election defeat in November and the loss of former Speaker Dennis Hastert’s seat in what used to be a solidly Republican district in Illinois is just one indicator.
But Democrats still have a long primary fight ahead of them with the next big primary - Pennsylvania - nearly six weeks away. Obama won Mississippi handily - 61-39 percent - adding to his victory a few days earlier in Wyoming. That gave him enough delegates to wipe out any bump that Hillary saw out of her March 4 victories in Ohio and Texas.
There is no way at this point that Hillary can win this thing so it is not clear why she is staying in the race. But it will all be over in time and Democrats will unite behind their nominee just as the disgruntled Republicans have obediently kow-towed to John McCain.
But Democrats still have a long primary fight ahead of them with the next big primary - Pennsylvania - nearly six weeks away. Obama won Mississippi handily - 61-39 percent - adding to his victory a few days earlier in Wyoming. That gave him enough delegates to wipe out any bump that Hillary saw out of her March 4 victories in Ohio and Texas.
There is no way at this point that Hillary can win this thing so it is not clear why she is staying in the race. But it will all be over in time and Democrats will unite behind their nominee just as the disgruntled Republicans have obediently kow-towed to John McCain.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Dump Spitzer
What is he still doing in office?? Get the hell out! Resign now! He should have been out yesterday.
There is no way that New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer is going to survive this sex scandal. The fact that he used to be a prosecutor who aggressively went after people caught up in prostitution rings sends this case way off of the hypocricy scale. Democrats should not waste one ounce of political capital trying to defend his stupid ass. What an idiot! His political career is over, regardless of how the legal case plays out.
There are a lot of questions about how the Justice Department came to snare a Democratic governor. These should be pursued vigorously and exposed if it turns out the investigation was politically motivated. But that doesn’t mean Spitzer is going to get off the hook. His goose is cooked no matter what. He needs to clear out and make room for the Democratic Party’s next rising star - Lt. Gov. David Paterson. Paterson would not only become the fourth African-American governor in history, but he would also be the first one who is legally blind. What a great story! Dump Spitzer now and start promoting Paterson!
There is no way that New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer is going to survive this sex scandal. The fact that he used to be a prosecutor who aggressively went after people caught up in prostitution rings sends this case way off of the hypocricy scale. Democrats should not waste one ounce of political capital trying to defend his stupid ass. What an idiot! His political career is over, regardless of how the legal case plays out.
There are a lot of questions about how the Justice Department came to snare a Democratic governor. These should be pursued vigorously and exposed if it turns out the investigation was politically motivated. But that doesn’t mean Spitzer is going to get off the hook. His goose is cooked no matter what. He needs to clear out and make room for the Democratic Party’s next rising star - Lt. Gov. David Paterson. Paterson would not only become the fourth African-American governor in history, but he would also be the first one who is legally blind. What a great story! Dump Spitzer now and start promoting Paterson!
Monday, March 10, 2008
A question of experience
When they are not darkly alluding that Barack Obama is a terrorist sympathizer because of his middle name, they will attack him for his percieved lack of experience.
On that note, here is an interesting exercise on picking presidents based on experience:
There are many other examples like that where you can persuade people to pick Warren G. Harding over Franklin Roosevelt; or Millard Fillmore over John Adams.
Clearly, “experience” is almost a random factor when it comes to determining the success of a president. One of the most galling things about Hillary’s “threshhold” argument for being commander-in-chief is that her own husband would never have passed the test the way she is using it today.
Some people will argue that having too much experience is actually bad. They will point out that most presidents fare more poorly during their second term after gaining experience than they do during their first term. I don’t necessarily buy that argument. I just think that experience by itself is overrated. What matters most is what you do with the experience you have and not just the simple fact that you have it.
Some people can do a great deal with very little experience while others do almost nothing with lots of experience.
On that note, here is an interesting exercise on picking presidents based on experience:
Suppose you had to choose between two Presidential candidates, one of whom had spent 20 years in Congress plus had considerable other relevant experience and the other of whom had about half a dozen years in the Illinois state legislature and 2 years in Congress. Which one do you think would make a better President? If you chose #1, congratulations, you picked James Buchanan over Abraham Lincoln.
There are many other examples like that where you can persuade people to pick Warren G. Harding over Franklin Roosevelt; or Millard Fillmore over John Adams.
Clearly, “experience” is almost a random factor when it comes to determining the success of a president. One of the most galling things about Hillary’s “threshhold” argument for being commander-in-chief is that her own husband would never have passed the test the way she is using it today.
Some people will argue that having too much experience is actually bad. They will point out that most presidents fare more poorly during their second term after gaining experience than they do during their first term. I don’t necessarily buy that argument. I just think that experience by itself is overrated. What matters most is what you do with the experience you have and not just the simple fact that you have it.
Some people can do a great deal with very little experience while others do almost nothing with lots of experience.
Friday, March 07, 2008
Crossing the threshhold
For the last few days, Hillary Clinton has been pushing a new campaign theme where she claims to have “crossed a threshhold” for becoming Commander in Chief of our military, while implying that Barack Obama has not. The outrageous part is that each time she does this she assumes that Republican John McCain has crossed that threshhold as well. So, in effect, she is endorsing McCain’s bid for the presidency over Obama’s.
What is she thinking?!?
Hillary has crossed a threshhold alright! Right into Joe Lieberman territory. What’s next? Will she be making a nomination speech at the Republican National Convention this summer like Zell Miller did?
I’m not a Hillary basher by any measure. I’ve always admired and supported her in the past. But lately it is becoming extremely difficult for me to defend her actions to my friends. What is going on?
Hillary is not stupid. I know that she can count. I know that she can see the writing on the wall. As Jonathan Alter pointed out in Newsweek, she has no chance of catching up to Obama in the pledged delegate count at this point, even if she were to blow him out in every contest from here on out.
So what is her gameplan with this new line of attack? How does she expect to win over Democratic voters by praising John McCain? It’s nuts. Is she just being vindictive, with the idea that if she can’t win, then nobody can win?
What is she thinking?!?
Hillary has crossed a threshhold alright! Right into Joe Lieberman territory. What’s next? Will she be making a nomination speech at the Republican National Convention this summer like Zell Miller did?
I’m not a Hillary basher by any measure. I’ve always admired and supported her in the past. But lately it is becoming extremely difficult for me to defend her actions to my friends. What is going on?
Hillary is not stupid. I know that she can count. I know that she can see the writing on the wall. As Jonathan Alter pointed out in Newsweek, she has no chance of catching up to Obama in the pledged delegate count at this point, even if she were to blow him out in every contest from here on out.
So what is her gameplan with this new line of attack? How does she expect to win over Democratic voters by praising John McCain? It’s nuts. Is she just being vindictive, with the idea that if she can’t win, then nobody can win?
Thursday, March 06, 2008
District 23 challenger
It seems like just yesterday that I was celebrating Ciro Rodriguez’ victory over Henry Bonilla in the 23rd Congressional District.
Now, it’s time to gear up for the next challenge. Bexar County Commissioner Lyle Larson won the Republican primary the other day and will take on Ciro this fall. Larson handily defeated millionaire businessman Quico Canseco despite being outspent nearly 10-1.
I was glad to see Larson win, partly because I think he is not as noxious as Quico and partly because he does not have the personal wealth and financial resources at his disposal that Quico has.
Larson seems like a mainstream Republican who is not out on the wingnut fringe. But then, I thought the same thing about John Cornyn before he got elected to the Senate.
On his campaign website, Larson seems to downplay (or ignore) the more divisive issues on his website and promises to “bring fiscal discipline to Washington, D.C.,” secure our borders and care for our veterans. Hardly controversial ideas.
Still, Larson covers his right flank by declaring "I am pro life and I value the sanctity of every human life.” and "I believe in traditional marriage; a union between a man and a woman". But then he goes on to emphasize his support for adoptions programs which everybody supports.
But there are some worrisome areas on Larson’s “issues” page that voters should be aware of. He talks about Social Security in alarmist terms and hints that “tough decisions must be made” about the level of benefits younger generations will recieve.
And on taxes, Larson embraces the nutty “Fair Tax” scheme most recently promoted by Mike Huckabee that would eliminate the IRS and fund the entire U.S. government (inadequately) with a massive 36 percent sales tax on everything. The goofy idea was initially dreamed up by the Church of Scientology, and is now being endorsed by the rightwing fringe of the Republican Party.
One issue that Larson skirts on his web site, not surprisingly, is the Iraq War. But one can be assured that as the Republican candidate on the ballot with John McCain next fall, Larson will have no choice but to wear the Iraqi albatross around his neck.
This should be a good year for Democrats and Ciro should not have too much trouble getting re-elected after knocking off Bonilla by a 55-45 margin less than two years ago. But he needs to take the challenge from Larson very seriously with the understanding that Larson or someone like him will be back again and again trying to pry him out of this newly blue congressional district.
Now, it’s time to gear up for the next challenge. Bexar County Commissioner Lyle Larson won the Republican primary the other day and will take on Ciro this fall. Larson handily defeated millionaire businessman Quico Canseco despite being outspent nearly 10-1.
I was glad to see Larson win, partly because I think he is not as noxious as Quico and partly because he does not have the personal wealth and financial resources at his disposal that Quico has.
Larson seems like a mainstream Republican who is not out on the wingnut fringe. But then, I thought the same thing about John Cornyn before he got elected to the Senate.
On his campaign website, Larson seems to downplay (or ignore) the more divisive issues on his website and promises to “bring fiscal discipline to Washington, D.C.,” secure our borders and care for our veterans. Hardly controversial ideas.
Still, Larson covers his right flank by declaring "I am pro life and I value the sanctity of every human life.” and "I believe in traditional marriage; a union between a man and a woman". But then he goes on to emphasize his support for adoptions programs which everybody supports.
But there are some worrisome areas on Larson’s “issues” page that voters should be aware of. He talks about Social Security in alarmist terms and hints that “tough decisions must be made” about the level of benefits younger generations will recieve.
And on taxes, Larson embraces the nutty “Fair Tax” scheme most recently promoted by Mike Huckabee that would eliminate the IRS and fund the entire U.S. government (inadequately) with a massive 36 percent sales tax on everything. The goofy idea was initially dreamed up by the Church of Scientology, and is now being endorsed by the rightwing fringe of the Republican Party.
One issue that Larson skirts on his web site, not surprisingly, is the Iraq War. But one can be assured that as the Republican candidate on the ballot with John McCain next fall, Larson will have no choice but to wear the Iraqi albatross around his neck.
This should be a good year for Democrats and Ciro should not have too much trouble getting re-elected after knocking off Bonilla by a 55-45 margin less than two years ago. But he needs to take the challenge from Larson very seriously with the understanding that Larson or someone like him will be back again and again trying to pry him out of this newly blue congressional district.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
A muddled election
I am deeply disappointed in the elections results last night. I very much wanted to see Texas go for Obama.
We had a chance to pick the next president of the United States here in Texas the other day and we blew it.
The election results, which gave a slim popular vote victory to Hillary Clinton and a caucus-driven delegate victory to Barrack Obama, only served to muddle things up and send the whole campaign packing down the road for the next states to decide.
Hillary is claiming a huge victory for herself, which is understandable, but when the delegates are all counted and divvied up there is less there than meets the eye.
Hillary won big in Ohio and Rhode Island, but lost in Vermont. In Texas, she split the primary delegates and lost the caucus delegates. The final tally looks like she may end up with a net gain of two or three delegates, maybe.
In other words, she did nothing to make up the gap in pledged delegates between her and Obama which stands at something like 157.
So now, instead of bowing out of the race and allowing Democrats to regroup around their eventual nominee, we are going to continue the bloody fratricide to the delight of the Republicans for the next six weeks. Hillary’s only chance of winning the nomination will be to continue her negative campaigning and tear Obama to pieces before the Democratic convention this summer so that the super delegates will be more willing to abandon him and support her.
Lovely.
The part of John McCain will now be played by Hillary Clinton for the next six weeks. Meanwhile, McCain will have time to raise a huge warchest with which to beat Democrats over the head this fall.
I don’t know if I have the stomach to put up with this for another six weeks. Yech!
We had a chance to pick the next president of the United States here in Texas the other day and we blew it.
The election results, which gave a slim popular vote victory to Hillary Clinton and a caucus-driven delegate victory to Barrack Obama, only served to muddle things up and send the whole campaign packing down the road for the next states to decide.
Hillary is claiming a huge victory for herself, which is understandable, but when the delegates are all counted and divvied up there is less there than meets the eye.
Hillary won big in Ohio and Rhode Island, but lost in Vermont. In Texas, she split the primary delegates and lost the caucus delegates. The final tally looks like she may end up with a net gain of two or three delegates, maybe.
In other words, she did nothing to make up the gap in pledged delegates between her and Obama which stands at something like 157.
So now, instead of bowing out of the race and allowing Democrats to regroup around their eventual nominee, we are going to continue the bloody fratricide to the delight of the Republicans for the next six weeks. Hillary’s only chance of winning the nomination will be to continue her negative campaigning and tear Obama to pieces before the Democratic convention this summer so that the super delegates will be more willing to abandon him and support her.
Lovely.
The part of John McCain will now be played by Hillary Clinton for the next six weeks. Meanwhile, McCain will have time to raise a huge warchest with which to beat Democrats over the head this fall.
I don’t know if I have the stomach to put up with this for another six weeks. Yech!
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
E. Gary Gygax RIP
Gary Gygax, the creator of the Dungeons and Dragons role playing game, died today at age 69.
I actually got to meet Mr. Gygax back during the summer of 1983 and got his autograph when I attended the GenCon gaming convention in Lake Geneva, Wis. with my friend Jim Miller.
My friends and I were big into D&D when I was in high school. My friend Robert introduced me to the game when I was a freshman or sophomore and we played pretty regularly until we all left for college.
D&D has gotten a bad rap over the years from fundamentalist churches and that lame TV movie that starred Tom Hanks and so forth, but I have to say that for a kid growing up in small-town South Texas it was a godsend. Back before we had home computers and VCRs and cable TV, there just wasn’t much for young teens to do in the evenings. Rather than driving around town, cruising the local Dairy Queen, drinking beer and generally getting into trouble, my friends and I would gather at someone’s house, sit around a card table with a big bowl of popcorn and play D&D until late in the evening.
The game was complex and had lots of rules, but was otherwise very low-tech and required little more than the rule books, some pencils, paper and special dice. When we started, we didn’t even have dice and had to use little cardboard chits with numbers that we would keep in styrofoam cups. I remember when we finally got the special 20-sided, 12-sided and 8-sided dice it was very exciting. Back then, finding D&D games and accessories meant searching through the back corners of old hobby shops that mostly catered to people who built models and train sets. The closest one to us was in Kingsville more than 30 miles away.
Today, the game has been taken over by computers. Whereas it used to require gathering all your friends together to play a decent game, you can now play all by yourself in front of your computer, sometimes with other people half a wold away sitting in front of their computers. It’s just not the same.
I still have all my D&D books and stuff at home, packed away in a closet somewhere. Maybe when my kids are old enough and if they show any interest I might drag it all out and hopefully the magic will still work at that point. All it takes is a little imagination.
Monday, March 03, 2008
Hopes and fears
I got an email today from Move-On.org that said they had called more than 400,000 Texas voters over the weekend to urge them to vote for Barack Obama. If they called everyone of them a dozen times like they did me, that would be a lot of phone calls!
Seriously though, my phone was ringing off the hook all weekend by people calling on behalf of Obama. I never got any calls from anyone supporting Hillary. My wife assumed it was because I had given the Obama people my contact info when I dropped by their HQ last week to pick up a bumper sticker. But I didn’t tell them my name or anything. I just shook the guy’s hand and said thanks for the bumper sticker. So I assume they have my number from the Democractic Party which should be available to Hillary as well.
On a related topic, I was listening to the local wingnut radio station again last Friday and the locally-based host - Joe Pags - was having a “townhall meeting” on the air with representatives from the different political campaigns taking questions from a studio audience. What I thought was incredible is that they had a well-known educator and labor leader there to represent Hillary, a prominent local state representative to represent Obama, a local attorney speaking for Mike Huckabee, but nobody to represent John McCain! How could that be?? This was the rightwing radio station that airs non-stop rightwing hate radio day and night and they couldn’t get a McCain supporter to show up for their big election event? How pathetic!
And then I noticed that every single person in the audience asking questions throughout the show was an Obama supporter. Hilarious! I almost felt sorry for the host.
I’m now hearing that Obama will be back in San Antonio on Tuesday as the election results are coming in. If he doesn’t win, I will be sorely disappointed because it will mean six more weeks of Hillary continuing to tag team with John McCain in attacking Obama, even though she still won’t be able to catch up to him in the delegate vote. One prominent blogger has already speculated that the Hillary team might even work to defeat Obama in November so that they can be set to run for president again in 2012. I certainly hope that is wrong.
I think Obama will win in Texas, and if so Hillary should step down even if she pulls off a victory in Ohio. Ohio can be a face saver for Hillary, but it won’t be enough to keep her afloat for the rest of the campaign. Hillary blew this race on Super Tuesday when she decided to coast along on her victories in New York and California while overlooking the fact that Obama was sweeping the floor with her everywhere else.
Seriously though, my phone was ringing off the hook all weekend by people calling on behalf of Obama. I never got any calls from anyone supporting Hillary. My wife assumed it was because I had given the Obama people my contact info when I dropped by their HQ last week to pick up a bumper sticker. But I didn’t tell them my name or anything. I just shook the guy’s hand and said thanks for the bumper sticker. So I assume they have my number from the Democractic Party which should be available to Hillary as well.
On a related topic, I was listening to the local wingnut radio station again last Friday and the locally-based host - Joe Pags - was having a “townhall meeting” on the air with representatives from the different political campaigns taking questions from a studio audience. What I thought was incredible is that they had a well-known educator and labor leader there to represent Hillary, a prominent local state representative to represent Obama, a local attorney speaking for Mike Huckabee, but nobody to represent John McCain! How could that be?? This was the rightwing radio station that airs non-stop rightwing hate radio day and night and they couldn’t get a McCain supporter to show up for their big election event? How pathetic!
And then I noticed that every single person in the audience asking questions throughout the show was an Obama supporter. Hilarious! I almost felt sorry for the host.
I’m now hearing that Obama will be back in San Antonio on Tuesday as the election results are coming in. If he doesn’t win, I will be sorely disappointed because it will mean six more weeks of Hillary continuing to tag team with John McCain in attacking Obama, even though she still won’t be able to catch up to him in the delegate vote. One prominent blogger has already speculated that the Hillary team might even work to defeat Obama in November so that they can be set to run for president again in 2012. I certainly hope that is wrong.
I think Obama will win in Texas, and if so Hillary should step down even if she pulls off a victory in Ohio. Ohio can be a face saver for Hillary, but it won’t be enough to keep her afloat for the rest of the campaign. Hillary blew this race on Super Tuesday when she decided to coast along on her victories in New York and California while overlooking the fact that Obama was sweeping the floor with her everywhere else.
SAPBA Round-Up
Vince over at Capitol Annex has his weekly Texas Progressive Alliance Blog Round-Up for this past week.
As usual, Vince neglects to include any bloggers from San Antonio in his “round-up.”
So to make up for this regular oversight, I’ve decided to set up the informal San Antonio Progressive Bloggers Alliance Round-Up to highlight all the good bloggy stuff coming out of the Alamo City that is regularly ignored by our progressive brethrens in Austin, Houston and Dallas.
Peter at B&B was able to attend the Barack Obama rally in San Antonio on Friday and gives his thoughts here. He even provides some photos from his seat up in the nosebleed section.
Earlier, Peter, a native Chicagoan, had an excellent post about the similarities between the Obama campaign and that of the late Harold Washington, the former mayor of Chicago.
Over at Beginning To Wonder, AnnPW has a suggested theme song for the Obama campaign.
Donna at Happiness Anyway has a good post up about the astounding number of people we keep locked up in jail for non-violent crimes. It is a huge problem that flies below the radar screen for most people until one of their relatives gets caught up in the system.
Karen Zipdrive at Pulp Friction makes the excellent point that we would not bat an eye if John McCain were to pick a white male as his running mate. However, if Hillary Clinton were to pick a white woman for a VP or Barack Obama were to pick a black man, chaos and mayem would ensue. Go figure.
Dig ad veritas at Dig Deeper Texas is concerned that the harsh tone of the Democratic primary could hurt the winner’s chances in November.
And over at Agblogistan they are wondering if we will see any last minute surprise attacks thrown out just before the March 4 primary.
Finally, over at Rhetoric & Rhythm, Mike discusses the Hagee-Farrakhan double standard where Obama is forced to denounce a controversial black minister he has no connection to, while McCain openly embraces the endorsement of a controversial white pastor with no negative consequences.
Check back next week for more good stuff from the SAPBA!
As usual, Vince neglects to include any bloggers from San Antonio in his “round-up.”
So to make up for this regular oversight, I’ve decided to set up the informal San Antonio Progressive Bloggers Alliance Round-Up to highlight all the good bloggy stuff coming out of the Alamo City that is regularly ignored by our progressive brethrens in Austin, Houston and Dallas.
Peter at B&B was able to attend the Barack Obama rally in San Antonio on Friday and gives his thoughts here. He even provides some photos from his seat up in the nosebleed section.
Earlier, Peter, a native Chicagoan, had an excellent post about the similarities between the Obama campaign and that of the late Harold Washington, the former mayor of Chicago.
Over at Beginning To Wonder, AnnPW has a suggested theme song for the Obama campaign.
Donna at Happiness Anyway has a good post up about the astounding number of people we keep locked up in jail for non-violent crimes. It is a huge problem that flies below the radar screen for most people until one of their relatives gets caught up in the system.
Karen Zipdrive at Pulp Friction makes the excellent point that we would not bat an eye if John McCain were to pick a white male as his running mate. However, if Hillary Clinton were to pick a white woman for a VP or Barack Obama were to pick a black man, chaos and mayem would ensue. Go figure.
Dig ad veritas at Dig Deeper Texas is concerned that the harsh tone of the Democratic primary could hurt the winner’s chances in November.
And over at Agblogistan they are wondering if we will see any last minute surprise attacks thrown out just before the March 4 primary.
Finally, over at Rhetoric & Rhythm, Mike discusses the Hagee-Farrakhan double standard where Obama is forced to denounce a controversial black minister he has no connection to, while McCain openly embraces the endorsement of a controversial white pastor with no negative consequences.
Check back next week for more good stuff from the SAPBA!
Friday, February 29, 2008
That’s it?!?
John McCain’s campaign raised $12 million in February.
That may sound like a lot, and it is, but when you consider that Hillary Clinton raised $35 million and Barack Obama raised close to $50 million during the same time period, it’s chicken feed.
But this is consistent with how the entire election season has been going. Three to four times as many Democrats are turning out to vote in the primaries as Republicans. When McCain holds a campaign rally, he attracts just a fraction of the number that either Hillary or Obama attract.
Just imagine when the primary race is over and the Hillary people come on board with the Obama campaign (the most likely scenario). They are going to swamp the Republicans in November. Most of the Republican’s big money men know this and that is why they are keeping their wallets closed for this election. They don’t like to throw away their money on losing causes. And the Republican presidential campaign is a lost cause no matter who the nominee is.
That may sound like a lot, and it is, but when you consider that Hillary Clinton raised $35 million and Barack Obama raised close to $50 million during the same time period, it’s chicken feed.
But this is consistent with how the entire election season has been going. Three to four times as many Democrats are turning out to vote in the primaries as Republicans. When McCain holds a campaign rally, he attracts just a fraction of the number that either Hillary or Obama attract.
Just imagine when the primary race is over and the Hillary people come on board with the Obama campaign (the most likely scenario). They are going to swamp the Republicans in November. Most of the Republican’s big money men know this and that is why they are keeping their wallets closed for this election. They don’t like to throw away their money on losing causes. And the Republican presidential campaign is a lost cause no matter who the nominee is.
Whose side are they on??
One reason I’ll be glad when this primary campaign is over is to put an end to garbage like this. Why is Hillary cutting ads for John McCain? Sheesh!
I was thinking the same thing yesterday when I heard Hillary supporter Henry Cisneros on the logal wingnut radio station WOAI 1200 being interviewed by Joe Pags. Pags is one of those “John McCain is not conservative enough for me” nut jobs who will end up supporting McCain in the fall anyway. And here he was interviewing Cisneros and delighting in getting the former San Antonio mayor and HUD secretary to take cheap pot shots at Obama.
The only good things is that these “my opponent doesn’t have enough experience” attacks are largely ineffective. Otherwise, George W. Bush would never have been almost elected in 2000.
But when it comes to internal bickering, I don’t think Democrats can hold a candle to the kind of vicious dog-eat-dog battles that go on in the Republican primary. I heard a radio ad for Republican state Rep. Nathan Macias that made it sound like his Republican opponent is running on Ralph Nader’s Green Party ticket. The ad is mean and nasty and vicious, and then it has the audacity at the very end to accuse Macias’ opponent of “running a negative campaign.” Go figure.
And listening to Quico Canseco’s radio ads makes me hope Lyle Larson will pull off a victory despite being outspent nearly 10-1 in the race. Canseco is shamelessly and ignorantly demagouging over the illegal immigration issue. Not only do the demogouges make the illegal immigration issue into a bigger problem than it really is, but their proposed solution is fanciful nonsense that will only exacerbate the problem over the long run. You CANNOT deport 12 million people who are already here and have long ago enmeshed themselves into our society. Providing them with a means to obtain citizenship is not just doing them a favor (not to mention their children), it is doing society in general a favor. Giving them citizenship means they will be able to serve society as well as benefit from it.
I was thinking the same thing yesterday when I heard Hillary supporter Henry Cisneros on the logal wingnut radio station WOAI 1200 being interviewed by Joe Pags. Pags is one of those “John McCain is not conservative enough for me” nut jobs who will end up supporting McCain in the fall anyway. And here he was interviewing Cisneros and delighting in getting the former San Antonio mayor and HUD secretary to take cheap pot shots at Obama.
The only good things is that these “my opponent doesn’t have enough experience” attacks are largely ineffective. Otherwise, George W. Bush would never have been almost elected in 2000.
But when it comes to internal bickering, I don’t think Democrats can hold a candle to the kind of vicious dog-eat-dog battles that go on in the Republican primary. I heard a radio ad for Republican state Rep. Nathan Macias that made it sound like his Republican opponent is running on Ralph Nader’s Green Party ticket. The ad is mean and nasty and vicious, and then it has the audacity at the very end to accuse Macias’ opponent of “running a negative campaign.” Go figure.
And listening to Quico Canseco’s radio ads makes me hope Lyle Larson will pull off a victory despite being outspent nearly 10-1 in the race. Canseco is shamelessly and ignorantly demagouging over the illegal immigration issue. Not only do the demogouges make the illegal immigration issue into a bigger problem than it really is, but their proposed solution is fanciful nonsense that will only exacerbate the problem over the long run. You CANNOT deport 12 million people who are already here and have long ago enmeshed themselves into our society. Providing them with a means to obtain citizenship is not just doing them a favor (not to mention their children), it is doing society in general a favor. Giving them citizenship means they will be able to serve society as well as benefit from it.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
An endorsement (not)
I am constantly amazed that I actually have a U.S. Congressman representing me who I like and can support - Ciro Rodriguez. And a state senator too - Carlos Uresti.
But my state representative is a little rightwing toad by the name of Frank Corte Jr.
I just heard an ad for Corte today on the local wingnut radio station (WOAI) and it reminded me that he actually has a primary opponent this year, the equally loathsome and dumb as a brick Tony Kosub.
So I just wanted to take a minute to announce my endorsement of Tony Kosub in his bid to take down Corte Jr. in the Republican primary. Not because I want Kosub representing me any more than Corte Jr., but because on a tactical level it would be easier for a Democrat to run against Kosub in the fall. Kosub has not built up the name recognition, the campaign warchest or the legislative experience that Corte Jr. has. Therefore he would be easier to knock off in the general election, and, in the event that he does get into office, God forbid, he would be less effective and less able to screw things up.
But my state representative is a little rightwing toad by the name of Frank Corte Jr.
I just heard an ad for Corte today on the local wingnut radio station (WOAI) and it reminded me that he actually has a primary opponent this year, the equally loathsome and dumb as a brick Tony Kosub.
So I just wanted to take a minute to announce my endorsement of Tony Kosub in his bid to take down Corte Jr. in the Republican primary. Not because I want Kosub representing me any more than Corte Jr., but because on a tactical level it would be easier for a Democrat to run against Kosub in the fall. Kosub has not built up the name recognition, the campaign warchest or the legislative experience that Corte Jr. has. Therefore he would be easier to knock off in the general election, and, in the event that he does get into office, God forbid, he would be less effective and less able to screw things up.
The Hagee-Farrakhan double standard
Glenn Greenwald has another excellent post up today in which he calls attention to what I would call the Hagee-Farrakhan double standard in our political discourse.
John Hagee is the pastor of the 19,000-member Cornerstone Church which is just down the road from my house. The first thing you should know about Hagee is that he is a hypocrite. Like many religious right preachers, Hagee loudly denounces people who commit sexual infidelity (especially the homosexual kind) and says that “Christians... don’t get divorced...”
And yet, Hagee’s first marriage of 15 years ended in divorce in 1975 as a result of his own infidelity. Rather than acknowledge this, Hagee tries to cover it up today as he does on his web site where he claims that he and his current wife Diana “have five married children.”
But two of those children were actually with his first wife who has apparently been excised from his memory.
In addition to being an adulterer, Hagee reportedly rakes in millions of dollars each year through his tax-exempt television ministry.
But Hagee is most controversial when it comes to his extreme views on the Middle East. He is downright racist when it comes to Muslims in general and Palestinians in particular - having claimed that all “who live by the Koran have a scriptural mandate to kill Christians and Jews.”
Hagee also claims that there is a Biblical imperative for the U.S. to attack Iran and supports a pre-emptive strike on Iran as a first step toward fulfilling his twisted interpretations of Biblical prophesies.
But, as Greenwald notes, none of these extremist views have made Hagee (or Robertson or Falwell or Dobson) the kind of political pariah that Louis Farrakhan has become.
Farrakhan has made many controversial statements over the years that have been deemed both racist and anti-semitic. The difference that I can tell, however, is that today Farrakhan denies having said many of these things or simply does not say them anymore, whereas Hagee continues to make the same controversial statements again and again without consequence.
Thus we have the situation we saw just the other day where on the one hand Barack Obama is being hounded by Tim Russert to denounce Farrakhan despite never having sought his favor or endorsing his views; while at the same time John McCain is openly accepting the praise and endorsement of Hagee at his church in San Antonio.
A shameless double standard if ever there was one.
Why is Louis Farrakhan deemed by our political establishment to be so radioactive as to not be fit for good company -- black candidates are required to repudiate his support even when they haven't sought it and denounce his views even when they've never advocated anything close to those views -- but John Hagee is a perfectly acceptable figure whom mainstream GOP politicians are free to court without any consequences or media objections?
John Hagee is the pastor of the 19,000-member Cornerstone Church which is just down the road from my house. The first thing you should know about Hagee is that he is a hypocrite. Like many religious right preachers, Hagee loudly denounces people who commit sexual infidelity (especially the homosexual kind) and says that “Christians... don’t get divorced...”
And yet, Hagee’s first marriage of 15 years ended in divorce in 1975 as a result of his own infidelity. Rather than acknowledge this, Hagee tries to cover it up today as he does on his web site where he claims that he and his current wife Diana “have five married children.”
But two of those children were actually with his first wife who has apparently been excised from his memory.
In addition to being an adulterer, Hagee reportedly rakes in millions of dollars each year through his tax-exempt television ministry.
But Hagee is most controversial when it comes to his extreme views on the Middle East. He is downright racist when it comes to Muslims in general and Palestinians in particular - having claimed that all “who live by the Koran have a scriptural mandate to kill Christians and Jews.”
Hagee also claims that there is a Biblical imperative for the U.S. to attack Iran and supports a pre-emptive strike on Iran as a first step toward fulfilling his twisted interpretations of Biblical prophesies.
But, as Greenwald notes, none of these extremist views have made Hagee (or Robertson or Falwell or Dobson) the kind of political pariah that Louis Farrakhan has become.
Farrakhan has made many controversial statements over the years that have been deemed both racist and anti-semitic. The difference that I can tell, however, is that today Farrakhan denies having said many of these things or simply does not say them anymore, whereas Hagee continues to make the same controversial statements again and again without consequence.
Thus we have the situation we saw just the other day where on the one hand Barack Obama is being hounded by Tim Russert to denounce Farrakhan despite never having sought his favor or endorsing his views; while at the same time John McCain is openly accepting the praise and endorsement of Hagee at his church in San Antonio.
A shameless double standard if ever there was one.
Vote cast
I cast my vote yesterday. I went to an early voting site at the library nearest to my house. It was around 5 p.m. when I arrived and there actually was a bit of a line, but not too bad and I was in an out in about 10 minutes. I couldn’t find my current voters card, so I brought my old one that had expired in November and they were perfectly fine with that. That and my driver’s license was all I needed.
They gave me a slip of paper with my name on it that I can use to attend my precinct caucus meeting after the polls close next Tuesday. I may try to go just out of curiosity. I bet that it will be crowded.
This is only the second time I’ve been able to vote in a contested presidential primary in Texas. The first time was in 1988, and ironically I voted for a black man then too. Four years prior to that, I had cast my first vote ever for Ronald Reagan. But by 1988 I had done a complete about face. I voted for Jesse Jackson in the primary not because I thought he could actually win, but because I wanted to send a message that I wanted a strong liberal candidate. We ended up with Michael Dukakis instead, but I enthusiastically backed his campaign to the bitter end.
This time I was not sending a protest vote. Rather, I think my candidate will actually win.
A actually got to vote in one other contested presidential primary, but that was while I was living in Connecticut in 1992. I cast my vote for Bill Clinton that year largely because I had been so impressed after seeing him in person give a speech to the Middletown Chamber of Commerce. He ended up losing the Connecticut primary to Jerry Brown, but won the overall election nonetheless.
I also got to see Hillary Clinton speak at a campaign rally on the Yale University campus that year as well. We lived close to New Haven at the time. I remember being impressed by her as well. They made quite a team.
Hillary will be back in San Antonio this Friday for a campaign rally and so will Barack Obama. It will be ineresting to see who can draw the larger crowd, although I think it won’t be any contest.
They gave me a slip of paper with my name on it that I can use to attend my precinct caucus meeting after the polls close next Tuesday. I may try to go just out of curiosity. I bet that it will be crowded.
This is only the second time I’ve been able to vote in a contested presidential primary in Texas. The first time was in 1988, and ironically I voted for a black man then too. Four years prior to that, I had cast my first vote ever for Ronald Reagan. But by 1988 I had done a complete about face. I voted for Jesse Jackson in the primary not because I thought he could actually win, but because I wanted to send a message that I wanted a strong liberal candidate. We ended up with Michael Dukakis instead, but I enthusiastically backed his campaign to the bitter end.
This time I was not sending a protest vote. Rather, I think my candidate will actually win.
A actually got to vote in one other contested presidential primary, but that was while I was living in Connecticut in 1992. I cast my vote for Bill Clinton that year largely because I had been so impressed after seeing him in person give a speech to the Middletown Chamber of Commerce. He ended up losing the Connecticut primary to Jerry Brown, but won the overall election nonetheless.
I also got to see Hillary Clinton speak at a campaign rally on the Yale University campus that year as well. We lived close to New Haven at the time. I remember being impressed by her as well. They made quite a team.
Hillary will be back in San Antonio this Friday for a campaign rally and so will Barack Obama. It will be ineresting to see who can draw the larger crowd, although I think it won’t be any contest.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
William F. Buckley Jr. RIP
William F. Buckley Jr. was one of those conservatives for whom I had a great deal of respect. I admired his willingness to engage the other side in debate. His TV show Firing Line provided a national outlet for prominent liberals of that era such as Gore Vidal, John Kenneth Galbraith and Noam Chomsky to gain some badly needed exposure.
Conservative commentators today, by contrast, are much less educated and very much unwilling to engage the other side in a direct debate. Can you imagine Rush Limbaugh inviting someone like Chomsky or Vidal onto his radio show and actually allowing them to talk?
I saw Buckley in person once when I was at Texas A&M in the mid-1980s as part of a current affairs program at the university. It was a live debate between Buckley and Galbraith on the merits or demerits of Big, or as Galbraith corrected, Strong Government. At the time, I think I was siding with Buckley. I have long since switched to Galbraith.
When I lived in Connecticut, Buckley’s newspaper columns were widely distributed and I would read him every week. I remember my impression at the time was that he would cram as many big words as he could into each column and often times not come to any clear point.
In his later years, as the modern conservative movement was becoming more and more radicalized, he stayed grounded in the conservativism of the past. He was highly critical of President Bush and the war in Iraq and was thereafter largely sidelined by his ideological heirs.
Steroid obsession
Aaarrrrgggghhhhh!!!! Why is Henry Waxman still wasting time on this?
This is all “he said-she said” nonsense. They can’t prove squat! I hope that Mukasey throws this back in Waxman’s face and tells him to stick it in his ear.
I know that investigating all the myriad Bush scandals is not as glamorous as going after a baseball superstar, but I’d really appreciate it if Waxman would go back to doing his real job.
Congress asked the Justice Department to investigate whether Roger Clemens "committed perjury and made knowingly false statements" to a House committee.
This is all “he said-she said” nonsense. They can’t prove squat! I hope that Mukasey throws this back in Waxman’s face and tells him to stick it in his ear.
I know that investigating all the myriad Bush scandals is not as glamorous as going after a baseball superstar, but I’d really appreciate it if Waxman would go back to doing his real job.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Even temperment
One thing that has impressed me about Barack Obama lately is his even temperment. Nothing seems to ruffle his feathers or break his stride. He doesn’t raise his voice, he doesn’t get testy or perturbed. In fact, he seems to have handled all the pressures of the campaign amazingly well.
Glenn Greenwald has a good post about how Obama effectively handled a rightwing attack on his patriotism without getting defensive and agitated.
So far, this is one of the qualities I like best with Obama and it contrasts well right now with the shrill tone that Hillary Clinton has lately adopted as she desperately tries to salvage her presidential prospects.
Clinton’s “outrage” the other day over the content of some Obama campaign fliers was clearly a tactical effort on her part to try and link Obama to someone most Democrats despise - Karl Rove. You know that Clinton did not just pick up one of these flyers the other day and fly into a rage. Rather, there was probably a strategy session where they came up with the idea of trying to link Obama to Rove, followed by a search through the campaign literature for something that they could pretend to get upset about. It all came across as very fake and very staged. But the point was not to reach out to politically astute people, but rather those who don’t pay much attention to these things and would be more likely to be persuaded by such mock outrage.
Needless to say, I’ll be glad when this is all over and the Democrats can all kiss and make up and stop all the sniping and backstabbing.
Glenn Greenwald has a good post about how Obama effectively handled a rightwing attack on his patriotism without getting defensive and agitated.
So far, this is one of the qualities I like best with Obama and it contrasts well right now with the shrill tone that Hillary Clinton has lately adopted as she desperately tries to salvage her presidential prospects.
Clinton’s “outrage” the other day over the content of some Obama campaign fliers was clearly a tactical effort on her part to try and link Obama to someone most Democrats despise - Karl Rove. You know that Clinton did not just pick up one of these flyers the other day and fly into a rage. Rather, there was probably a strategy session where they came up with the idea of trying to link Obama to Rove, followed by a search through the campaign literature for something that they could pretend to get upset about. It all came across as very fake and very staged. But the point was not to reach out to politically astute people, but rather those who don’t pay much attention to these things and would be more likely to be persuaded by such mock outrage.
Needless to say, I’ll be glad when this is all over and the Democrats can all kiss and make up and stop all the sniping and backstabbing.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Running Mates
An interesting column today from George Will speculating about who John McCain is likely to tap as his VP choice. After briefly toying with and then dismissing the ideo of a woman (Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison) and a black man (Gen. Colin Powell), Will gives us a list of five or six WASPy males who are currently preening for the job.
Before reading the Will piece, I was prepared to make a bold prediction that McCain would try and exploit the Hispanic community’s reluctance to support Obama by picking a right-wing Hispanic as his running mate — someone like Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida.
But that didn’t seem to cross Will’s radar screen, so perhaps it is something McCain will not consider. Maybe they are afraid it would further enrage the anti-immigrant wingnut faction of the party.
Meanwhile, on the other side I have said before that Bill Richardson would be a smart choice for Obama and would go a long way at bridging the black-Hispanic gap that currently exists. But they may also decide that having one minority on the tickets is groundbreaking enough and play it safe by going with a white male. I hear that John Edwards is available.
Before reading the Will piece, I was prepared to make a bold prediction that McCain would try and exploit the Hispanic community’s reluctance to support Obama by picking a right-wing Hispanic as his running mate — someone like Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida.
But that didn’t seem to cross Will’s radar screen, so perhaps it is something McCain will not consider. Maybe they are afraid it would further enrage the anti-immigrant wingnut faction of the party.
Meanwhile, on the other side I have said before that Bill Richardson would be a smart choice for Obama and would go a long way at bridging the black-Hispanic gap that currently exists. But they may also decide that having one minority on the tickets is groundbreaking enough and play it safe by going with a white male. I hear that John Edwards is available.
Oscar impressions
Yawn! I wasn’t terribly interested in the Oscars this year. Once again, I have yet to see any of the major category nominees and it is unlikely that I will rush out and see them anytime soon. The only one I wouldn’t mind seeing sooner than later is Johnny Depp in “Sweeney Todd”.
I wouldn’t mind eventually seeing “No Country For Old Men” “There Will Be Blood” and “Michael Clayton”, but I’ve said the same thing in the past about other Oscar films that I have yet to see. I’ll probably never see “Atonement” or “Juno”.
The best film I saw all year (which I finally watched over the weekend) was the “Bourne Ultimatum”, which I was delighted to see win three Oscars, a sweep of every category it was nominated for. I was also happy that “Ratatouille” won for best animated film, although it should have been nominated for Best Picture as well.
But the Academy has even less respect for action/adventure movies than it does for comedies. Thus the past oversights for all time great films like Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark.
I thought the acting awards were fairly predictable except for Best Supporting Actress which I figured would go to Cate Blanchett. I was disappointed with the Oscar choice for Best Song going to some independent film no one has ever heard of and no one will ever see, passing over three Disney songs from “Enchanted”. I can pretty much guarantee that I will soon own a copy of “Enchanted” and know all those songs by heart, while I will probably never hear the other song again.
But that is what the Academy likes to do these days. Diss the big megaplex movies that most Americans get to see in favor of little known independents that you would be lucky to find at your local video store in a year. This somehow demonstrates the Academy’s superiority and elite tastes compared to the mongrel hordes who shell out most of the money that supports the industry in the first place.
If the Academy wants to honor these kinds of movies every year, then they should put their money where their mouths are and back these films from the get go. Give them enough financing to get better distribution and advertizing and marketing budgets so that people will actually have a chance to go see them during the year instead of only having a choice of films that the Academy typically turns its nose up to.
I wouldn’t mind eventually seeing “No Country For Old Men” “There Will Be Blood” and “Michael Clayton”, but I’ve said the same thing in the past about other Oscar films that I have yet to see. I’ll probably never see “Atonement” or “Juno”.
The best film I saw all year (which I finally watched over the weekend) was the “Bourne Ultimatum”, which I was delighted to see win three Oscars, a sweep of every category it was nominated for. I was also happy that “Ratatouille” won for best animated film, although it should have been nominated for Best Picture as well.
But the Academy has even less respect for action/adventure movies than it does for comedies. Thus the past oversights for all time great films like Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark.
I thought the acting awards were fairly predictable except for Best Supporting Actress which I figured would go to Cate Blanchett. I was disappointed with the Oscar choice for Best Song going to some independent film no one has ever heard of and no one will ever see, passing over three Disney songs from “Enchanted”. I can pretty much guarantee that I will soon own a copy of “Enchanted” and know all those songs by heart, while I will probably never hear the other song again.
But that is what the Academy likes to do these days. Diss the big megaplex movies that most Americans get to see in favor of little known independents that you would be lucky to find at your local video store in a year. This somehow demonstrates the Academy’s superiority and elite tastes compared to the mongrel hordes who shell out most of the money that supports the industry in the first place.
If the Academy wants to honor these kinds of movies every year, then they should put their money where their mouths are and back these films from the get go. Give them enough financing to get better distribution and advertizing and marketing budgets so that people will actually have a chance to go see them during the year instead of only having a choice of films that the Academy typically turns its nose up to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)