I got picked to be a juror so I won't be posting for the next few days.
Everyone play nice while I'm gone.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Sunday, June 07, 2009
City Council Runoff
Up until today I had no idea who to vote for in the runoff for City Council District 8. The race is between Mike Berlanga, a CPA, and Reed Williams, a retired oil executive. I don't think I like either one.
On election day, I had voted for Berlanga on a whim only because one of his supporters was in the parking lot passing out literature with another guy supporting Julian Castro. The fact that they were together passing out literature made me think that maybe, just maybe Berlanga was a Democrat. And I just knew that Williams is a Republican.
But then the word came out after the general election that Berlanga is delinquent on paying his taxes. A CPA!!! And he can't pay his own taxes on time!!!
Well, that would have sealed it excpet that I really didn't want to put another Republican in office. I figure that Williams is probably like Carol Schubert who represented District 10 before challenging Phil Hardberger for mayor four years ago.
I thought, maybe if Berlanga is a Democrat I will just overlook this tax thing and vote for him anyway. But then in today's paper a story points out that both Berlanga and Williams are wealthy Republicans. Oh, joy.
So that pretty much sinks it for Berlanga. And also, the same story also said his excuse that he was protesting his taxes didn't bear out with the tax assessor's office which said that he is past the point of protesting and is just flat-out delinquent. So Berlanga is a Republican and won't pay his taxes, so screw him.
That means I'm stuck voting for Williams.
And if that wasn't bad enough, I get a phone call this evening with a message from Lyle Larson urging me to vote for Williams. Larson is the Republican who challenged my congressman Ciro Rodriguez in the last election. What are they trying to do? Rub dirt in my wound?? Do they want me to just stay home and skip this election!?! Sheesh!
Williams has also been endorsed by the Express-News which is practically the kiss of death in my book. The E-N has a policy of endorsing Republicans in almost every race.
Two years ago I had a city council representative - Art Hall - who I really liked. But then he had to step down because of our incredibly stupid term limits law and then I got stuck with Diane Cibrian who I can't stand. Fortunately, she left office early to run for mayor and lost badly.
Now I finally get to vote for somone without the moronic term limit restrictions and this is my choice. How depressing!
On election day, I had voted for Berlanga on a whim only because one of his supporters was in the parking lot passing out literature with another guy supporting Julian Castro. The fact that they were together passing out literature made me think that maybe, just maybe Berlanga was a Democrat. And I just knew that Williams is a Republican.
But then the word came out after the general election that Berlanga is delinquent on paying his taxes. A CPA!!! And he can't pay his own taxes on time!!!
Well, that would have sealed it excpet that I really didn't want to put another Republican in office. I figure that Williams is probably like Carol Schubert who represented District 10 before challenging Phil Hardberger for mayor four years ago.
I thought, maybe if Berlanga is a Democrat I will just overlook this tax thing and vote for him anyway. But then in today's paper a story points out that both Berlanga and Williams are wealthy Republicans. Oh, joy.
So that pretty much sinks it for Berlanga. And also, the same story also said his excuse that he was protesting his taxes didn't bear out with the tax assessor's office which said that he is past the point of protesting and is just flat-out delinquent. So Berlanga is a Republican and won't pay his taxes, so screw him.
That means I'm stuck voting for Williams.
And if that wasn't bad enough, I get a phone call this evening with a message from Lyle Larson urging me to vote for Williams. Larson is the Republican who challenged my congressman Ciro Rodriguez in the last election. What are they trying to do? Rub dirt in my wound?? Do they want me to just stay home and skip this election!?! Sheesh!
Williams has also been endorsed by the Express-News which is practically the kiss of death in my book. The E-N has a policy of endorsing Republicans in almost every race.
Two years ago I had a city council representative - Art Hall - who I really liked. But then he had to step down because of our incredibly stupid term limits law and then I got stuck with Diane Cibrian who I can't stand. Fortunately, she left office early to run for mayor and lost badly.
Now I finally get to vote for somone without the moronic term limit restrictions and this is my choice. How depressing!
Friday, June 05, 2009
A&M Chancellor disses A&M President
I’m not sure what is going on with this situation but I can already tell that I don’t like it.
The Chancellor of Texas A&M University System is apparently having a nasty fight with the new Texas A&M president, who just happens to be the first female and first Hispanic to ever serve in that position.
The chancellor is former Republican State Rep. Mike McKinney, who served for several years as chief of staff to Gov. Rick Perry before launching a new career as an academic administrator. The president of A&M is Elsa Murano, the former dean of Agriculture at A&M who was named president after Robert Gates left to become Secretary of Defense.
Now one year into her new job, Murano has apparently run afoul of McKinney and the Board of Regents.
Newsflash for Chancellor McKinney! If you are going to let personnel matters like this splash over into the media, you had better have more than a hand-written five-page review that looks like it was filled out at the last minute to back you up.
So the part of the evaluation where he was supposed to write out and explain all the poor scores he was giving her was left blank. What is he? A moron!?!? First off, I hate those kinds of stupid evaluations where they assign arbitrary numbers between 1 and 5 in cookie-cutter categories. I hate them. But the worst is getting a low score that is not explained. If McKinney couldn’t be bothered to explain his low scores in full and complete sentences then he is not doing HIS job as a manager.
This sounds to me like the “evaluation” was thrown together at the last minute as a CYA operation by the chancellor.
Murano, meanwhile, did take the time to type up a 10-page response to the poor evaluation and she makes several salient points about the sparcity of the review and its seperation from reality.
So what is it that Murano did or did not do to merit the wrath of the chancellor? That is not real clear. McKinney apparently scrawled a few comments on the review like
“Does good job on things she likes. Very poor on carrying out board system decisions with which she disagrees.”
So what does that mean? He doesn’t give any examples and no further explanation. Does he think the president is just supposed to roll over and acquiese to any decision by the board regardless of whether she agrees or not? Is the president just a functionary, a step-in-fetch-it for the chancellor and the regents? And when she didn’t immediately jump and say “How high” when he snapped his fingers, he is now ready to throw her out of office and absorb the position of president for himself?
I think McKinney has got some more explaining to do. Because right now I agree with the former speaker of the faculty senate:
The Chancellor of Texas A&M University System is apparently having a nasty fight with the new Texas A&M president, who just happens to be the first female and first Hispanic to ever serve in that position.
The chancellor is former Republican State Rep. Mike McKinney, who served for several years as chief of staff to Gov. Rick Perry before launching a new career as an academic administrator. The president of A&M is Elsa Murano, the former dean of Agriculture at A&M who was named president after Robert Gates left to become Secretary of Defense.
Now one year into her new job, Murano has apparently run afoul of McKinney and the Board of Regents.
Newsflash for Chancellor McKinney! If you are going to let personnel matters like this splash over into the media, you had better have more than a hand-written five-page review that looks like it was filled out at the last minute to back you up.
The five-page review - which was sent to the A&M system’s board of regents - was done by Texas A&M University System Chancellor Mike McKinney, who wrote that Murano “fails to assume responsibility for decisions” and criticized her for being “too slow” when it came to decisions.
It lacked specifics and was handwritten rather than typed. A page allowing for him to write down goals for the president, as well as a summary of her strengths and areas needing attention, was left blank...
So the part of the evaluation where he was supposed to write out and explain all the poor scores he was giving her was left blank. What is he? A moron!?!? First off, I hate those kinds of stupid evaluations where they assign arbitrary numbers between 1 and 5 in cookie-cutter categories. I hate them. But the worst is getting a low score that is not explained. If McKinney couldn’t be bothered to explain his low scores in full and complete sentences then he is not doing HIS job as a manager.
This sounds to me like the “evaluation” was thrown together at the last minute as a CYA operation by the chancellor.
Murano, meanwhile, did take the time to type up a 10-page response to the poor evaluation and she makes several salient points about the sparcity of the review and its seperation from reality.
“Given the complete disconnection between Dr. McKinney’s perception of my performance as president and all the evidence to the contrary, I can conclude that this review was not based on facts,” Murano wrote. “One need only consider that if it was an actual reflection of the job I have done as president, there would have been an incredible outcry from the entire university community.”
So what is it that Murano did or did not do to merit the wrath of the chancellor? That is not real clear. McKinney apparently scrawled a few comments on the review like
“Does good job on things she likes. Very poor on carrying out board system decisions with which she disagrees.”
So what does that mean? He doesn’t give any examples and no further explanation. Does he think the president is just supposed to roll over and acquiese to any decision by the board regardless of whether she agrees or not? Is the president just a functionary, a step-in-fetch-it for the chancellor and the regents? And when she didn’t immediately jump and say “How high” when he snapped his fingers, he is now ready to throw her out of office and absorb the position of president for himself?
I think McKinney has got some more explaining to do. Because right now I agree with the former speaker of the faculty senate:
“I’m just kind of shocked at the nature of the document,” said R. Douglas Slack, after reading the performance review. He is a former speaker of the faculty senate.
“It looked to be hastily done. It doesn’t look like something that was well thought-out. It’s a contrast to the president’s well thought-out response.”
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
More rightwing filth on the radio thanks to Cox Radio
Are there any syndicated right-wing radio yakkers that do not have an outlet in San Antonio now?
Clear Channel-owned WOAI 1200 gives us daily doses of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Dennis Miller along with locally based wingnut Joe Pags.
KLUP 930, owned by Salem Communications, a company based in California which purports to be a “Christian” broadcaster, gives us a whole slew of rightwing crazies including Bill Bennett, Mike Gallagher, Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, Hugh Hewitt and Tom Sullivan.
KTSA 550, owned by Border Media, has a host of local rightwingers including Trey Ware, Jack Riccardi and Kevin Wall and then fills out the rest of its schedule with syndicated rightwingers Neal Boortz, Mark Levin, Jim Bohannon and Bill O’Reilly.
And now, Cox Radio has decided to jump into the mix by flipping 106.7 from a hip-hop/urban format to another right-wing talk station featuring Erich “Mancow” Muller, Neal Boortz (again), Laura Ingraham (the first and only women, you will notice) and Michael Savage, among those announced so far. I listened to just a few minutes of this new station and it was making me ill with the mindless stream of blatant lies, smears and venom being directed at our government, our public schools our public officials and anyone who doesn’t share in their selfish, greedy, vindictive, neo-fascist philosophy.
Cox Radio claimed that they made the switch to save money because it allowed them to fire their local radio talent and use an all-syndicated format.
This is truly despicable. All of these stations now spew non-stop hatred, blatant lies and mass ignorance over the airwaves everyday. It is like having an open sewer pouring out filth from your radio 24 hours a day. The contempt that these people have for America is shocking. They hate the government. They resent paying taxes for any program that benefits anyone other than themselves. They are disdainful of our schools. They promote radical conspiracy theories and delight in tearing down the weakest segments of our society.
About a year ago or so, Clear Channel made a half-hearted attempt to put up a liberal talk radio station. But they put it on a very low-frequency network which was hard to hear (I would lose the station everytime I drove into the parking garage at my work) and their lineup featured most prominently - Phil Donahue. Golly gee!! And when it didn’t fare well, they just threw up their hands and said “See, we told you that liberal talk radio wouldn’t work.”
And even having this complete monopoly of the airwaves, rightwingers still play the victims and claim that any suggestion that the public airwaves are not being used fairly is censorship.
Clear Channel-owned WOAI 1200 gives us daily doses of Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Dennis Miller along with locally based wingnut Joe Pags.
KLUP 930, owned by Salem Communications, a company based in California which purports to be a “Christian” broadcaster, gives us a whole slew of rightwing crazies including Bill Bennett, Mike Gallagher, Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, Hugh Hewitt and Tom Sullivan.
KTSA 550, owned by Border Media, has a host of local rightwingers including Trey Ware, Jack Riccardi and Kevin Wall and then fills out the rest of its schedule with syndicated rightwingers Neal Boortz, Mark Levin, Jim Bohannon and Bill O’Reilly.
And now, Cox Radio has decided to jump into the mix by flipping 106.7 from a hip-hop/urban format to another right-wing talk station featuring Erich “Mancow” Muller, Neal Boortz (again), Laura Ingraham (the first and only women, you will notice) and Michael Savage, among those announced so far. I listened to just a few minutes of this new station and it was making me ill with the mindless stream of blatant lies, smears and venom being directed at our government, our public schools our public officials and anyone who doesn’t share in their selfish, greedy, vindictive, neo-fascist philosophy.
Cox Radio claimed that they made the switch to save money because it allowed them to fire their local radio talent and use an all-syndicated format.
This is truly despicable. All of these stations now spew non-stop hatred, blatant lies and mass ignorance over the airwaves everyday. It is like having an open sewer pouring out filth from your radio 24 hours a day. The contempt that these people have for America is shocking. They hate the government. They resent paying taxes for any program that benefits anyone other than themselves. They are disdainful of our schools. They promote radical conspiracy theories and delight in tearing down the weakest segments of our society.
About a year ago or so, Clear Channel made a half-hearted attempt to put up a liberal talk radio station. But they put it on a very low-frequency network which was hard to hear (I would lose the station everytime I drove into the parking garage at my work) and their lineup featured most prominently - Phil Donahue. Golly gee!! And when it didn’t fare well, they just threw up their hands and said “See, we told you that liberal talk radio wouldn’t work.”
And even having this complete monopoly of the airwaves, rightwingers still play the victims and claim that any suggestion that the public airwaves are not being used fairly is censorship.
Monday, June 01, 2009
Protestants on the Supreme Court
This is interesting. If she is confirmed, Sonia Sotomayor will be the sixth Catholic on the Supreme Court. She will join fellow Catholics Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, John Roberts, Clarence Thomas and Anthony Kennedy.
Two of the justices - Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer - are Jewish.
So that will leave just one sitting justice who is Protestant - John Paul Stevens, who also happens to be the oldest justice on the court at 89.
I’m sure that Protestants probably dominated the court for most of its existence, so it is pretty shocking to suddenly find out that there could soon be no Protestants at all on the the court.
I suppose it is kind of ironic that Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, who are both Protestants, chose Jewish (Clinton’s picks) and Catholic (Bush’s picks) justices for the Supreme Court. And now we have another Protestant president adding another Catholic.
I suppose this speaks well of our religious tolerance in America today. Or maybe it’s just indifference. But whatever it is, I’m glad that this is not considered a big issue today. But just wait until someone tries to put the first atheist or agnostic on the high court and then watch the fireworks go off.
Two of the justices - Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer - are Jewish.
So that will leave just one sitting justice who is Protestant - John Paul Stevens, who also happens to be the oldest justice on the court at 89.
I’m sure that Protestants probably dominated the court for most of its existence, so it is pretty shocking to suddenly find out that there could soon be no Protestants at all on the the court.
I suppose it is kind of ironic that Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, who are both Protestants, chose Jewish (Clinton’s picks) and Catholic (Bush’s picks) justices for the Supreme Court. And now we have another Protestant president adding another Catholic.
I suppose this speaks well of our religious tolerance in America today. Or maybe it’s just indifference. But whatever it is, I’m glad that this is not considered a big issue today. But just wait until someone tries to put the first atheist or agnostic on the high court and then watch the fireworks go off.
Who’s the first Hispanic on the Supreme Court?
You can’t tell me that this guy is supposed to be the first Hispanic to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.
Other than a Hispanic-sounding last name, there is nothing about Benjamin Nathan Cardoza that is even remotely Hispanic. The man was born and raised in New York City. His family had emigrated to the United States 100 years earlier --- from ENGLAND! Oh, but wait, you say, he has some ancestors who reportedly came from Portugal! Yes, that’s right. Portugal. That country next to Spain where they DON’T SPEAK SPANISH! That’s kind of a minimum requirement for being Hispanic, you know. Speaking Spanish. Cardoza couldn’t speak a lick of Spanish, but he did know Yiddish. You see, Cardoza’s ancestors who came from Portugal were part of a Jewish minority group that had settled there. He wasn’t even Catholic!!! Sheesh!
The final straw? If Cardoza was the first Hispanic on the Supreme Court, wouldn’t there at least be a school somewhere in Texas named after him? You would think there would be, but no. There are schools named after him in New York, but none in Texas.
So in my opinion, Sonia Sotomayor will most definitely be the first Hispanic to serve on the Supreme Court, without a doubt.
American Taliban strikes again
I can’t help but feel deeply disturbed and very angry over this latest instance of domestic terrorism courtesy of the American Taliban (aka Religious Right). The assassination of Dr. George Tiller was not an isolated instance carried out by a single person, but rather the culmination of a calculated and coordianted campaign by the religious right to vilify anybody associated with abortion and put them all under the threat of death before their fanatical, half-crazed minions.
There is not a great deal of difference in mindset between the anti-abortion fanatics who demand absolute subservience to their extremist views and the followers of Islamic radicalism who support the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
Ann has been all over this with some excellent links.
There is not a great deal of difference in mindset between the anti-abortion fanatics who demand absolute subservience to their extremist views and the followers of Islamic radicalism who support the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
Ann has been all over this with some excellent links.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Up, Up and Away
Pixar goes 10 for 10
How does Pixar do it? An amazing string of classic, critically-praised, hit films...
Toy Story - 1995
A Bug’s Life - 1998
Toy Story II - 1999
Monsters Inc. - 2001
Finding Nemo* - 2003
The Incredibles* - 2004
Cars - 2006
Ratatouille* - 2007
WALL-E* - 2008
Up - 2009
* Won Academy Award for Best Animated Feature
The Academy Awards didn’t not have a best animated feature category before 2001. That first year they passed over Monsters Inc. to give the first award to Shrek - which was a crime in my opinion.
The Academy messed up again in 2006 when they passed over Cars and gave the Oscar to Happy Feet.
How does Pixar do it? An amazing string of classic, critically-praised, hit films...
Toy Story - 1995
A Bug’s Life - 1998
Toy Story II - 1999
Monsters Inc. - 2001
Finding Nemo* - 2003
The Incredibles* - 2004
Cars - 2006
Ratatouille* - 2007
WALL-E* - 2008
Up - 2009
* Won Academy Award for Best Animated Feature
The Academy Awards didn’t not have a best animated feature category before 2001. That first year they passed over Monsters Inc. to give the first award to Shrek - which was a crime in my opinion.
The Academy messed up again in 2006 when they passed over Cars and gave the Oscar to Happy Feet.
A good day at the Texas Legislature
Texas Democratic Senators held together today and rejected the reappointment of rightwing lunatic Don McLeroy to be the chairman of the Texas State Board of Education. That is wonderful news for all of Texas’ school children. The bad news is that Rick Perry is still the governor and there is speculation that he will simply try and elevate the equally looney Cynthia Dunbar to the chairmanship now. But nevertheless, I am proud of the Texas Democrats for standing up for public education in our great state. As for the Republicans.... well, there is nothing I can say that is suitable to print on my blog.
In other good news, lawmakers were able to salvage the CHIP expansion legislation and the windstorm insurance legislation by adding them as amendments to House bills. Meanwhile the Republicans Voter ID bill that was the cause of the delays is now dead as is Jeff Wentworth’s criminally moronic guns in schools legislation. Thank GOD!
In other good news, lawmakers were able to salvage the CHIP expansion legislation and the windstorm insurance legislation by adding them as amendments to House bills. Meanwhile the Republicans Voter ID bill that was the cause of the delays is now dead as is Jeff Wentworth’s criminally moronic guns in schools legislation. Thank GOD!
Knocking down attacks on Sotomayor
While it seems clear that Sonia Sotomayor will sail through her confirmation hearings with little opposition, there will still be concerted efforts by some Republicans to tear down her nomination with the ultimate goal of trying to force President Obama to spend his political capital in her defense. And also as a fundraising tool to help motivate the Republican base, naturally.
To that end I expect we will see a lot of the same attacks repeated over and over again. So here are a few links to help counter some of those attacks.
About that out-of-context quote where she seems to say that Latina women are better at making decisions than white men: Conservative blogger Rod Dreher looked at the whole speech and determined that he was wrong to jump to that conclusion:
I was wrong about Sotomayor speech - Crunchy Con
As for the conservatives on the Supreme Court reversing some of her appeals court rulings: Rachel Maddow obliterates that one completely.
And the charges of being an “activist judge” are taken apart here.
An interesting side note, it turns out that Sotomayor is only the seventh person to be nominated to the Supreme Court by a Democratic President in last 57 years. By contrast, there have been 17 Supreme Court positions filled by Republican presidents during that same period. The current nine-member court has just two justices appointed by a Democrat.
To that end I expect we will see a lot of the same attacks repeated over and over again. So here are a few links to help counter some of those attacks.
About that out-of-context quote where she seems to say that Latina women are better at making decisions than white men: Conservative blogger Rod Dreher looked at the whole speech and determined that he was wrong to jump to that conclusion:
I was wrong about Sotomayor speech - Crunchy Con
As for the conservatives on the Supreme Court reversing some of her appeals court rulings: Rachel Maddow obliterates that one completely.
And the charges of being an “activist judge” are taken apart here.
An interesting side note, it turns out that Sotomayor is only the seventh person to be nominated to the Supreme Court by a Democratic President in last 57 years. By contrast, there have been 17 Supreme Court positions filled by Republican presidents during that same period. The current nine-member court has just two justices appointed by a Democrat.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
It’s all so clear now!
Thank you Congressman Culberson! It’s all so clear now.
Rep. Culberson Offers Incoherent And Illogical Stance On Gay Marriage
Rep. Culberson Offers Incoherent And Illogical Stance On Gay Marriage
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Obama picks Sotomayor
Obama picks Sotomayor for Supreme Court
WooHoo! What do you know? Obama took my advice!
This is great news if true because it puts a well qualified person on the Supreme Court while satisfying three key constituencies all at the same time: Women, Hispanics and Liberals.
WASHINGTON (AP) - Officials tell The Associated Press that President Barack Obama intends to nominate federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor (SUHN’-ya soh-toh-my-YOR’) as the first Hispanic to serve on the Supreme Court.
Sotomayor, 54, would succeed retiring Justice David Souter if confirmed by the Senate. The officials spoke to AP on condition of anonymity because Obama has not yet announced his decision.
WooHoo! What do you know? Obama took my advice!
This is great news if true because it puts a well qualified person on the Supreme Court while satisfying three key constituencies all at the same time: Women, Hispanics and Liberals.
Friday, May 22, 2009
Texas Lege update
The guns on campus bill in the Texas Lege was declared dead a while back when it failed to meet a key House deadline. And yet, it may have been brought back from the dead like Frankenstein’s monster thanks to a vote in the Senate. It is disheartening to think that 20 state senators kowtowed to the gun nut lobby and supported this monstrosity, but that just shows you the power that the extreme right-wing NRA has over the GOP today.
The bills seeming resurrection has local GOP blogger Andres excited and he is trying to drum up support for its passage. But House sponsor Joe Driver is quoted today saying the bill is on “life support.”
There was a good Letter to the Editor in the Express-News today that said it well:
It is inexcusable that lawmakers would allow private schools to opt out of this rule but not give public university officials the same option. I can tell you right now that I won’t be sending my kids to any school that allows non-law enforcement and security people to walk around with loaded guns.
In other news, the Lege will soon take up the reappointment of rightwing lunatic Don McLeroy to chair the State Board of Education. Hopefully, the Democrats in the Senate will stand up for public school children and face down the rightwing ayatollahs who want to turn our public schools into their version of the Taliban.
And speaking of the Religious Right, I just saw this interesting bit of news.
Imagine if a “liberal” university had decided to ban a student Republican organization. Imagine the hue and cry that would result. Will we hear any protests over this move?
Probably not. The “so-called Liberal Media” is too busy covering speeches by Dick Cheney; interviewing Newt Gingrich and following Sarah Palin’s every move to notice.
The bills seeming resurrection has local GOP blogger Andres excited and he is trying to drum up support for its passage. But House sponsor Joe Driver is quoted today saying the bill is on “life support.”
There was a good Letter to the Editor in the Express-News today that said it well:
Putting an unknown number of guns on Texas campuses defies common sense, yet (Sen. Jeff) Wentworth said: “I don’t want Texas college students picked off like sitting ducks by some deranged madman who comes on campus with a weapon.”
Here’s some news for Wentworth: Many Texans believe, as I do, that a person in the 21st century who thinks it is necessary to carry a loaded concealed weapon everywhere he goes is himself pretty “deranged.”
Bottom line: Go to college to teach and learn. Leave your guns at home.
It is inexcusable that lawmakers would allow private schools to opt out of this rule but not give public university officials the same option. I can tell you right now that I won’t be sending my kids to any school that allows non-law enforcement and security people to walk around with loaded guns.
In other news, the Lege will soon take up the reappointment of rightwing lunatic Don McLeroy to chair the State Board of Education. Hopefully, the Democrats in the Senate will stand up for public school children and face down the rightwing ayatollahs who want to turn our public schools into their version of the Taliban.
And speaking of the Religious Right, I just saw this interesting bit of news.
Imagine if a “liberal” university had decided to ban a student Republican organization. Imagine the hue and cry that would result. Will we hear any protests over this move?
Probably not. The “so-called Liberal Media” is too busy covering speeches by Dick Cheney; interviewing Newt Gingrich and following Sarah Palin’s every move to notice.
Local blogger update
Good news from my conservative blogging buddy Nick Marinelli. He is on the mend and could be up and walking again soon after losing part of his left leg. Nick has had some serious health problems recently stemming from kidney disease and diabetes.
Nick also has a good review of the new Star Trek movie.
Nick also has a good review of the new Star Trek movie.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Finding Beatles music
I’m back on a Beatles kick again. For about a year, I had almost no Beatles tunes on my iPod, having excised them to make room for newer music. I have one of the original iPods with just 4 GB of space. That’s room enough for about 1,000 songs, which is plenty, but when I fill it up with every Beatles song, every Bing Crosby song and all my jazz stuff it leaves little room for everything else.
So this week I redid my song list and put most of my Beatles music back on the iPod. I have what I consider to be most of the essential Beatles recordings on cd - Abbey Road, Sgt. Peppers, White Album, Revolver, Rubber Soul, Help!, Hard Day’s Night, Let It Be, Yellow Submarine, Magical Mystery Tour - and in addition I have all three volumes of the Beatles Anthology series and the two-disc Beatles Live at the BBC collection. But that still leaves out a lot of their early music including some of my favorite songs on the Rock & Roll Music compilation that got me hooked on the Beatles in the first place.
This is the track listing for Rock and Roll Music:
1. “Twist and Shout” (Medley-Russell)
2. “I Saw Her Standing There”
3. “You Can’t Do That”
4. “I Wanna Be Your Man”
5. “I Call Your Name”
6. “Boys” (Dixon-Farrell)
7. “Long Tall Sally” (Johnson/Penniman/Blackwell)
8. “Rock and Roll Music” (Berry)
9. “Slow Down” (Williams)
10. Medley: “Kansas City/Hey, Hey, Hey, Hey” (Leiber/Stoller)/(Penniman)
11. “Money (That’s What I Want)” (Bradford/Gordy)
12. “Bad Boy” (Williams)
13. “Matchbox” (Perkins)
14. “Roll Over Beethoven” (Berry)
15. “Dizzy Miss Lizzy” (Williams)
16. “Any Time at All”
17. “Drive My Car”
18. “Everybody’s Trying to Be My Baby” (Perkins)
19. “The Night Before”
20. “I’m Down”
21. “Revolution”
22. “Back in the U.S.S.R.”
23. “Helter Skelter”
24. “Taxman” (Harrison)
25. “Got to Get You into My Life”
26. “Hey Bulldog”
27. “Birthday”
28. “Get Back” (album version)
I have mentioned my facination with the Beatles before and particularly my introduction to the band through the Rock and Roll Music compilation. The songs are all fast-paced and upbeat and full of energy. Some of the best rock vocal performances of all time are here in my opinion - John Lennon on Twist and Shout and Slow Down - Paul McCartney on Long Tall Sally and I’m Down. And even the tunes sung by George and Ringo simply give John and Paul ample opportunity for excited screaming and background harmonies.
I wore that album out a long time ago and have been trying to replicate it ever since. Of course, being a cheapskate I didn’t want to spend $20 a pop buying the albums I would need to get all of those songs, so I have scoured the used cd bins at Half Price Books and searched online. Alas, Beatles recordings rarely show up in the used record shops and the songs are conspicuously unavailable on iTunes. Although many of the songs I needed are on the Anthology collection or the BBC Live series, they are alternate recordings and not the ones I remembered listening to over and over and over again.
So I finally decided to break it all down and see what I would need to buy to get the songs I wanted. As it turned out, I really only needed to to get two more albums - Please Please Me, the Beatles first album which has Twist and Shout and I Saw Her Standing There; and Past Masters Vol. 1 which collects all the songs that were issued as singles or EPs and never appeared on any of the Beatles’ albums. Using some Barnes and Nobles gift cards I got for Christmas, I was able to finally get the cds I needed. There are still a handful of songs I don’t have, but the alternate versions on the Anthology or BBC recordings are satisfactory for right now.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Why I’m not bothered by Obama’s recent “flip-flops”
President Obama has done a number of things recently that have alarmed and troubled many of his supporters on the left. He has opposed efforts to establish a “truth commission” that would delve into Bush administration abuses and alleged crimes surrounding the torture and detention of prisoners in our custody; he has changed his mind about releasing graphic photos of the mistreatment of prisoners under U.S. control; he has decided to restart the military tribunals at Guantanamo that he had earlier condemned under Bush/Cheney (albeit with better protections for the accused) and he has continued to prosecute the war in Afghanistan in an aggressive manner, even calling back a general to take charge who still has a cloud hanging over him from the scandal over the above-mentioned abuses.
I’m not going to defend all these decisions or say that they are the correct moves. They could very well prove to be mistakes on his part. I don’t know.
But what I find refreshing and reassuring about these moves is that it demonstrates that, unlike Bush, Obama is NOT an ideologue following an agenda chiseled in stone. What it shows me is that Obama is not so filled with self-assurance as Bush was that he cannot be persuaded to change his mind when presented with compelling evidence. I may not like all the decisions on their face, but I have to accept that he has a lot more information than I do.
Bush, as you may recall, never seemed to change his mind about anything. Commentators frequently acted like this was a good thing, but it clearly was not. Bush was a die-hard ideologue and a true believer in his own righteousness who lived inside a bubble of like-minded people providing continuous positive support and feedback. Bush never changed his mind because he rarely, if ever, was exposed to contrary or competing information and even if he was tended to disregard it as false or heretical.
Obama, on the other hand, is not afraid to engage people with differeing views and constantly strives to find common ground. I like the fact that his views are not set in stone and that he will make the best decision at the time based on the best possible information. I did not vote for Obama because I agreed with him on every single position and I do not expect that he will always do everything just the way I think he should. I voted for Obama because I respect his intellect and his judgement and I want him to use it while he is in office. If he makes some bad decisions and some mistakes, that is to be expected. He can also correct those mistakes more quickly if he is not locked into a misguided ideology.
People who supported Bush, however, did not want him making his own decisions. They wanted him to go strictly by the book - that being the wingnut playbook which has failed miserably everytime it has been enacted. And Bush did just what they wanted in spades. He followed their playbook to a T. Unfortunately for Bush, and all the rest of us as well, the playbook led us into our current economic disaster as well as our foreign policy quagmire. And even more unfortunately for Bush, he has now been abandoned by all the true believers who refuse to accept that their ideas don’t work and now claim that Bush was not a “true” conservative and did not follow their playbook faithfully enough.
I would much rather have a president who is willing to “flip-flop” on occasion rather than staying the course even when it means driving us over a cliff.
I’m not going to defend all these decisions or say that they are the correct moves. They could very well prove to be mistakes on his part. I don’t know.
But what I find refreshing and reassuring about these moves is that it demonstrates that, unlike Bush, Obama is NOT an ideologue following an agenda chiseled in stone. What it shows me is that Obama is not so filled with self-assurance as Bush was that he cannot be persuaded to change his mind when presented with compelling evidence. I may not like all the decisions on their face, but I have to accept that he has a lot more information than I do.
Bush, as you may recall, never seemed to change his mind about anything. Commentators frequently acted like this was a good thing, but it clearly was not. Bush was a die-hard ideologue and a true believer in his own righteousness who lived inside a bubble of like-minded people providing continuous positive support and feedback. Bush never changed his mind because he rarely, if ever, was exposed to contrary or competing information and even if he was tended to disregard it as false or heretical.
Obama, on the other hand, is not afraid to engage people with differeing views and constantly strives to find common ground. I like the fact that his views are not set in stone and that he will make the best decision at the time based on the best possible information. I did not vote for Obama because I agreed with him on every single position and I do not expect that he will always do everything just the way I think he should. I voted for Obama because I respect his intellect and his judgement and I want him to use it while he is in office. If he makes some bad decisions and some mistakes, that is to be expected. He can also correct those mistakes more quickly if he is not locked into a misguided ideology.
People who supported Bush, however, did not want him making his own decisions. They wanted him to go strictly by the book - that being the wingnut playbook which has failed miserably everytime it has been enacted. And Bush did just what they wanted in spades. He followed their playbook to a T. Unfortunately for Bush, and all the rest of us as well, the playbook led us into our current economic disaster as well as our foreign policy quagmire. And even more unfortunately for Bush, he has now been abandoned by all the true believers who refuse to accept that their ideas don’t work and now claim that Bush was not a “true” conservative and did not follow their playbook faithfully enough.
I would much rather have a president who is willing to “flip-flop” on occasion rather than staying the course even when it means driving us over a cliff.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Bad bills
A lot of bad bills bit the dust last night up in Austin and I couldn’t be happier.
I’m most especially happy to see the heinous “Guns and Campus” legislation get deep-sixed. I’m am terribly frustrated with Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, for sponsoring the Seante version of that bill. Wentworth is someone who I have long respected in spite of his being on the other side of the political aisle from myself. But this bill was too much. My wife teaches on a college campus and the last thing I want is for her to have to be in a classroom with a lot of stressed-out, gun-toting students.
I am also no fan of gambling because far from being a panacea of resources for cash-strapped governments, it tends to prey on the poor, the desperate and the downtrodden. And social problems aside, it does nothing to contribute to the economy other than suck up discretionary spending money that people might have used more beneficially elsewhere.
I once thought Texas was kind of backwards for having just a part-time Legislature that meets only every other year. But seeing the bad bills that come out of Austin these days, I am thankful that they don’t have more time to get stuff like this passed.
Casino gambling crapped out. Texas hold ’em had to fold ’em. Hands-free cell phones in cars crashed. And handguns on campus bit the bullet as the first major legislative deadline started killing bills.
All were pieces of House legislation that had to be debated by midnight Thursday or else hope of passage in this year’s legislative session vanished under House rules heading toward the June 1 closing.
I’m most especially happy to see the heinous “Guns and Campus” legislation get deep-sixed. I’m am terribly frustrated with Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, for sponsoring the Seante version of that bill. Wentworth is someone who I have long respected in spite of his being on the other side of the political aisle from myself. But this bill was too much. My wife teaches on a college campus and the last thing I want is for her to have to be in a classroom with a lot of stressed-out, gun-toting students.
I am also no fan of gambling because far from being a panacea of resources for cash-strapped governments, it tends to prey on the poor, the desperate and the downtrodden. And social problems aside, it does nothing to contribute to the economy other than suck up discretionary spending money that people might have used more beneficially elsewhere.
I once thought Texas was kind of backwards for having just a part-time Legislature that meets only every other year. But seeing the bad bills that come out of Austin these days, I am thankful that they don’t have more time to get stuff like this passed.
Being realistic, cold and clear-eyed
Steve Benen points to a comment on Andrew Sullivan’s site which does a good job of spelling out my take on the whole torture prosecutions debate:
I agree. Obama can’t allow his agenda to be sidetracked by the inevitable media circus that would result from launching such prosecutorial pursuits. I don’t care if Congress conducts its own investigations - which they are already doing - but Obama needs to keep his focus on the problems at hand. There will be plenty of time later to deal with this. Heck, we’re still deporting Nazis from WWII!
But the last thing I want is for Obama’s efforts to fix the economy to be impeded and have him not be able to accomplish the things he needs to do during his first term. The worst thing that could happen is to have Obama get bogged down in something like this, accomplish nothing and then we end up with a Republican Congress and President Mitt Romney in four years.
Imagine what such prosecutions would entail: years of courtroom drama, depositions, lawsuits and counter-suits; the long parade of powerful and high ranking ex- and current members of government, including a goodly number of Democrats, being called on the carpet and having to testify against one another; the enormous rancor and bitterness. This would be Watergate on steroids. And imagine the shot in the arm this would give the zombified Limbaugh Right.
The prosecutions you are asking for would simply swallow the Obama presidency whole. It is the kind of energy draining, oxygen consuming drama that is the nightmare of every president. It would come to define his presidency in the same way the Hostage Crisis defined Carter’s and there is zero chance he will opt for this.
President Obama is making a realistic, cold, clear-eyed cost-benefit analysis. This is the choice: Does he fix the economy, fix healthcare, get a handle on the two wars he’s dealing with, or does he prosecute Bush era war crimes? He has chosen his agenda and is asking us to choose that to.
I agree. Obama can’t allow his agenda to be sidetracked by the inevitable media circus that would result from launching such prosecutorial pursuits. I don’t care if Congress conducts its own investigations - which they are already doing - but Obama needs to keep his focus on the problems at hand. There will be plenty of time later to deal with this. Heck, we’re still deporting Nazis from WWII!
But the last thing I want is for Obama’s efforts to fix the economy to be impeded and have him not be able to accomplish the things he needs to do during his first term. The worst thing that could happen is to have Obama get bogged down in something like this, accomplish nothing and then we end up with a Republican Congress and President Mitt Romney in four years.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
New filibuster rules needed
Today the Republicans in the U.S. Senate managed to filibuster President Obama’s nominee for the No. 2 post at the U.S. Department of Interior. The nominee, David Hayes, previously served in the Clinton administration and is well qualified for the post. There is nothing controversial about him whatsoever. And yet, Republicans voted in lockstep to filibuster Hayes’ nomination because some Western state Republicans are upset with the Obama administration’s decision to cancel some oil and gas leases in Western states.
First off, this nonsense has got to stop. The filibuster was once a weapon of last resort for the minority party that would be trotted out only on very rare occasions. But in recent years, it has become common place to the point that every single vote in the Senate now has to be passed with a super-majority of 60 votes.
This just isn’t right. In fact, it is completely upside down. Let’s look at the vote on the Hayes nomination. It was 57 to 39 - thus Democrats were three votes short of breaking the filibuster - Ted Kennedy is out sick, John Kerry was attending a U.S. soldier’s funeral, and Al Franken is being blocked by sore loser Republicans in Minnesota.
But what about this 39 votes on the Republican side?!? They couldn’t come up with 41 votes in opposition? And yet they still succeeded in blocking the nomination?? How is that fair?
At a bare minimum the rules for filibusters should be changed to put the onus on the minority party to come up with 41 votes to support the filibuster, rather than always forcing the majority to line up 60 votes to knock it down. If the minority party can’t muster 41 votes on a cloture rule, the filibuster should be declared void and the nomination should immediately go to a full up-or-down vote. End of story.
It is simply unfair and undemocratic to do it any other way.
First off, this nonsense has got to stop. The filibuster was once a weapon of last resort for the minority party that would be trotted out only on very rare occasions. But in recent years, it has become common place to the point that every single vote in the Senate now has to be passed with a super-majority of 60 votes.
This just isn’t right. In fact, it is completely upside down. Let’s look at the vote on the Hayes nomination. It was 57 to 39 - thus Democrats were three votes short of breaking the filibuster - Ted Kennedy is out sick, John Kerry was attending a U.S. soldier’s funeral, and Al Franken is being blocked by sore loser Republicans in Minnesota.
But what about this 39 votes on the Republican side?!? They couldn’t come up with 41 votes in opposition? And yet they still succeeded in blocking the nomination?? How is that fair?
At a bare minimum the rules for filibusters should be changed to put the onus on the minority party to come up with 41 votes to support the filibuster, rather than always forcing the majority to line up 60 votes to knock it down. If the minority party can’t muster 41 votes on a cloture rule, the filibuster should be declared void and the nomination should immediately go to a full up-or-down vote. End of story.
It is simply unfair and undemocratic to do it any other way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)